Sharlet on the Email, and Haggard.

Jeff Sharlet recently sent me the following. He discusses the Ted Haggard email/memo and his feelings regarding some of the discussion in the media that appeared in the wake of his piece in Harpers. (feel free to comment here, or email me. Left or right I am pro-discussion, and not opposed to publishing a post from either side.)

One thing that especially bothered me about the memo was that it seemed to correspond so precisely with how [removed] represented herself in church, in my article. [removed] likes to dance, and she believes in demons. I asked her if Ted approved of her ideas; she said he'd come to her small group and practiced "deliverance" (demon fighting) with them. I asked Ted whether it was possible for small groups to veer into heresy, and he said it was not -- the chain of authority insured that everyone stays orthodox.

Anyway, I liked [removed], even if she, no doubt, no longer likes me (she wasn't too keen on liberal media). She is, at the end of the day, passionate and beautiful in her worship. She should not have been made to feel weird.

Ted assumes I was making fun of charismatic worship. I don't know why. The best things about New Life are the fog machines and the glow strings and the jumping. That stuff's fun. Ted also assumes, elsewhere, that it was entirely new to me. It is not. I'm the author of a book, Killing the Buddha: A Heretic's Bible, for which I spent a year visiting churches around the country. It's worth noting that some prominent Christian conservatives had high praise for the book, including Lauren Winner in Newsday. (Killing the Buddha, as you [Non-Prophet] probably know, is a Zen idea).

To the Colorado Springs Gazette, Ted described me as "totally secular," although he knew I am not. At my first introduction, I mentioned our mutual acquaintance, Patton Dodd, an evangelical writer whom I've published and worked with on KillingTheBuddha.com and TheRevealer.org, because I find a lot of truth in his work. Ted, at one point, asked me what my religious background is. I said, accurately, that I spend a lot of time in churches and other religious places, but that for now my religious practice is in trying to understand how other people understand God. I also mentioned to Ted that I'd come to this work, in part, through my study of a group of theologians under the banner of Radical Orthodoxy, who argue -- persuasively, in my view -- that secularism, as such, makes sense only in the context of theology.

This is hardly "totally secular." Yet Ted used that phrase as a slur.

[update] New piece about the harpers article is here.

Comments

[darksandal]

What’s most baffling to me about New Life’s varying responses to Jeff Sharlet’s article is the fact that, from my perspective, it was quite flattering. Sure, it’s done with the broad strokes of an outsider, but Haggard’s email would seem to indicate that they were, and are, somewhat embarrassed at the way they saw themselves in the mirror of the national media. Nevertheless, having worked as a journalist, I can testify that no matter what you write – even if it’s an outright blowjob – your subject will likely feel betrayed by you on some level merely for failing to portray them exactly as they have imagined themselves. It’s a lesson in, yes, relativism. Sharlet has an interesting take on this kind of betrayal here

If New Life is truly a church of God, then it doesn’t have anything to hide and it shouldn’t need to present itself to the media as anything other than what it is. Sadly, for all of us, no matter what face we show to the world, there will always be angles from which it will always be (backhand on the forehead) terribly unflattering. New Life has several choices where the media is concerned: get over it and let their blemishes show (all-out honesty), a makeover (spin), or all-out lockdown-and-ignore (the “Maria Callas” option). But when you’re as big and powerful as New Life has become, the media ain’t gonna go away barring a fascist takeover of the government (dare we mention it?). And the latter two options will, inevitably, lead to even more speculation that you’re hiding something. Especially when they find your ideology and politics to be partisan. Sorry, that’s the way it is.

[Josh Narins]

A lot of people assumed the woman [removed] was not a representative parishioner.

Ever seen ChurchLite? I'm strictly atheist. I sometimes joke and say Orthodox, Fundamentalist, Born-Again Atheist.

There may be a problem or two bigger than religion in the world, but probably not three. And the neat part about ending all religions is 1. you get to be anti-christ for seven years, ruling the world, 2. a certain lasting fame, and 3. it removes a darkness which clouds people's minds.

If these nuts spent half as much time studying the real world as the world of thousands of years ago, we might have a chance! (Not that the study of history is bad, but you have to read all of history, not one tribe's biassed version of one set of very localized events)

[John-Paul Pagano]

Non-Prophetizz0r,

I think you will be amused by this!

[wob]

hey JP, one of your favorite colored red friends, Pete, pointed that out in his blog a while ago. Good stuff.

Which is an interesting question, where does NLC stand on same sex issues?

[Will Brenard]

Same sex couples have very simply been possessed by gay sex demons. It is not their fault. It easily fixed. They should seek the council of James Dobson.

[modern_thinker]

I just read Mr. Sharlet's Harper's article "Soldiers for Christ" and was struck by the tie-ins to the current scandal. The article relates how Ted Haggard "staked out gay bars.." while fighting that invisible fight against evil and so on. Next the article mentions how the church was once in a strip mall that included a massage parlor. Finally, the article mentions some prayer warrior who had visions about Ted Haggerdy on bended knee fighting the baddies of the Lord of the Rings. When the man is asked who Balfar/Balgar? the big baddie is, the man says that this demon is "inside Ted" inside us all.

This last piece is oddly prophetic. The first two parts about the gay bars and proximity to massage parlors makes me wonders if that is where Ted first got tempted and first fell into those sins. My point being that all men, no matter their vocation, are open to the temptations of the flesh -- especially in situations where the man in question has no oversight or accountability, as the young Ted Haggard had back then.

Comments?