When the news broke, and everyone was hard on him, I felt sympathy.
You see, I know what it is to be a hypocrite. I know what it is to say one thing and do another. I know I have it within me to completely disgrace the name of Christ with my failure. It frightens me.
I took it as a reminder of the need for accountability. I took it as a reminder that, no matter where God may take us, we are still able to completely fall.
I felt bad for him. You see, I get this guy. I know what it is to preach louder against the things that I hate about myself. That is why, even when comedians ran over him, like this (or, if you like jerks, this), or this especially funny one, I tried to reflect on how hard it would be to hate oneself as much as he must have.
Then he asked for money again.
This man had a $700,000 home in Colorado, an $135,000 severance package from the church he ‘faithfully served’ (being paid by them to get rub downs from a gay prostitute while they put him up in a hotel to work on his book), and continuing book royalties. Yet, he had the audacity to send out a plea for support from other Christians while he and his wife went to University of Phoenix.
Didn’t this guy understand that those outside the Christian community are already skeptical of the way churches ask for money? Didn’t he realize that his hypocrisy would cause many outside the community to suspect he was only in it for the money? How could he have the balls to ask for money?
This leads me to my question. When, if ever, is it acceptable to write someone off as a crook that faked it? Is it possible that we can say that, at least from every observable angle, this man was a fraud? Do we have an obligation to quit calling him a fallen brother and label him a crooked peddler? Will this protect the name of Christ?
Make no mistake. I see the struggle with making this assertion. I recognize that if Christ weren’t willing to associate with hypocrites, I would be out. At some point, though, I think we must be willing to call it as we see it. I think this man was a crook. I think he used the gospel to get rich and famous. At least according to anything I can see—and as much as it sickens me to say it, realizing the darkness of my own heart—I must say I think Ted Haggard was not a fallen brother with a dark side, but a crook.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
I remember a few years back when Ted Haggard "fell," and all this came to the top of the news. Like you, I felt sympathy for the man. But with these recent scenarios, I am certainly prone to go with you James and say that he sounds pretty crookish to me. However, I also remember reading a (resignation?) letter that Mrs. Haggard (Ted's Wife) wrote to their Church while all this stuff was going down... and it was such an inspiring letter of grace and forgiveness and support of her husband, that I would be pretty shocked if Mrs. Haggard were a crook, too. Perhaps she truly of the faith, and her husband is not?
Post a Comment