# Haggard on Oprah



## GTMOPC (Jan 28, 2009)

I just watched a portion of the Ted Haggard interview on Oprah. Did anyone see it? What did you think.

I guess it was mainly a PR tactic by Haggard to maybe regain some credibility. Oprah's motivation seemed to be either making Haggard look like a goof or more specifically using his failure as an opportunity to spit on Christianity. I don't think anything profound took place (in the portion I saw, the first 15 minutes) since I couldn't stomach the whole thing. 

Do you think his appearance on Oprah either helped or hurt the Gospel? Especially in Oprah's demographic (which I guess is mainly house wives, but must surely include a large percentage of new agers and gay or lesbian viewers these days).

[video=youtube;1XacVWNwX7k]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XacVWNwX7k[/video]


----------



## brandonadams (Jan 28, 2009)

I don't see how it could possibly help the gospel. And the repetition of the phrase "his fall from grace" that I have heard certainly harms the true grace of God.

Read this if you haven't
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/us/27haggard.html?hp=

It seems the HBO doc is going out of it's way to paint Haggard as a poor, helpless victim of the church who's life was ruined by people's reactions to his "preference."


----------



## GTMOPC (Jan 28, 2009)

brandonadams said:


> It seems the HBO doc is going out of it's way to paint Haggard as a poor, helpless victim of the church who's life was ruined by people's reactions to his "preference."



That encapsulates what I think the Oprah appearance did. in my opinion it made the Church look like an institution of hate mongers with serious intolerance issues. Poor Haggard was ousted for being who he was. There are sympathies for that storyline in communities that advocate such behavior. It just seems to further the worlds agenda of self deception with regard to sin. Vilify the Church and embrace the poor sinners who can't help who they are.


----------



## OPC'n (Jan 28, 2009)

No one can hurt the Gospel...they can only blaspheme God's name among the Gentiles.


----------



## Zenas (Jan 28, 2009)

I saw a commercial for it where Oprah asks "What was the worst part...being a hypocrite?!" in an accusatory tone.

Irony: Oprah is overweight, if not obese, and has consistently lectured people over weight issues. 

As if Oprah has any room to call others hypocrites.


----------



## Ivan (Jan 28, 2009)

Oprah had him on to support the homosexual agenda.


----------



## matthew11v25 (Jan 28, 2009)

is there any place to see the video? I can only find the trailer!


----------



## sotzo (Jan 28, 2009)

The irony to all of this is that if Haggard had been part of a church that practiced confessionalism, there would have been no surprises. A body of believers that come together and regularly, corporately confess their sins are not shocked by announcements such as Haggard's. Sure there is grief, but grief and repentance comprises the biblical model...versus Haggard's church where he was put on a pedestal for somehow being far from such "horrible sins". So, when he was found out, the repentance and grief that did come was met with an eye of skepticism since the whole enterprise was Haggard's morality rather than the gospel of grace. Additionally, the grief and repentance was almost completely muted by the words against homosexuality that Haggard had used on political platfoms.

The antidote for the skeptical eye of a watching world is a changed life marked by true repentance and resting in the resulting assurance of pardon. Conversely, fodder for a watching world (including prime time TV) is a man who falls from a pedestal that was made of toothpicks in the first place.

In that light, it is impotent American evangelicalism that is to blame and not Oprah.


----------



## Ivan (Jan 28, 2009)

sotzo said:


> The irony to all of this is that if Haggard had been part of a church that practiced confessionalism, there would have been no surprises.



I would hope so.


----------



## sotzo (Jan 28, 2009)

Ivan said:


> sotzo said:
> 
> 
> > The irony to all of this is that if Haggard had been part of a church that practiced confessionalism, there would have been no surprises.
> ...



That's not what I meant. What I meant to communicate, perhaps rather poorly, was that the fact of sin (even deep sin) is not earth shattering news where people are regularly confessing and understanding their need for Christ. This is in contradistinction to churches where sin is relegated to a past reality and sanctification is nearly complete. In the latter congregations, the realization of the depths to which sin can permeate creates a different shock factor than in the former.


----------



## Ivan (Jan 28, 2009)

sotzo said:


> Ivan said:
> 
> 
> > sotzo said:
> ...



Okay, I understand. And I think you're right about evangelicalism. However, at my church the subject of sin is preached and the need for confession and that we are in the process of sanctification. I'm not saying all Southern Baptist churches are that way, but mine is.

Maybe it has to do with that mean, old pastor we have!


----------



## Scott1 (Jan 29, 2009)

There is always a way back for repentant sinners in Christianity.

It does not mean the consequences are removed- God may allow those as the consequence of sin and disobedience, and they may even continue a lifetime though God forgives and restores.

To whom much is given, much is required. There is no quick way back especially for someone who has fallen from a high profile position of leadership in Christ's church. Someone whose scandalous sin and rebellion has caused great harm to many people.

God places and appoints those in leadership in His church, appoints authority to discipline in the church and establishes a pattern for such in Scripture.

I do not have sufficient information about this fellow to form an opinion as to what is happening here. I can only observe that a repentant sinner, Christian, who has fallen from grace does not appeal his case to nonbelievers that he should be restored to church office.


----------



## turmeric (Jan 29, 2009)

I was afraid the results would not be good when they sent him to perfectionist "rehab". This is sad! Did he officially "come out of the closet"?


----------



## py3ak (Jan 29, 2009)

I've seen several articles on the matter. One sadly concluded that Haggard still thinks it is he, rather than evangelicalism, that must change vis-a-vis homosexuality (which is the only, from my view, positive thing that has been said about him). But the best piece was this article in Slate from someone who knows Haggard.

Please note that Slate magazine is not known for its Biblical worldview or godly content, and that it is possible that there will be offensive ads for things like _The Reader_ on the site.


----------



## matt01 (Jan 29, 2009)

Thanks for the link to the _Slate_ article...



> Haggard has complained to some of his old friends, including me, that if he had been a CEO instead of the senior pastor of a church, he would have been back at work in one month. Haggard has complained...that New Life Church refused to do the main thing churches are designed to do: forgive.



Until he actually repents of his sins, he just needs to go away. He is doing no good for his cause, or the church. Here is some good advice for Haggard.



> One place to look is outside religious ministry and inside British politics, to the famous Profumo Affair. When popular politician John Profumo was caught with a prostitute in 1963, he resigned and withdrew completely from public life. For the rest of his days—he lived until 2006—he did the work of atonement, cleaning toilets, washing dishes, and working with alcoholics in London's East End. Profumo never published a memoir or even granted so much as an interview, even though he once acknowledged "deeply distressing inaccuracies" in reports of his affair.
> 
> Haggard can't enter a pulpit, and he shouldn't seek to be a spiritual leader, at least not for eons. He can enter a congregation somewhere, and if he wants to do that, he should, as a fellow traveler with other seekers. And that congregation should embrace him. That's what his spiritual restoration would look like.


----------



## LawrenceU (Jan 29, 2009)

Well said, Matt.


----------



## Southern Presbyterian (Jan 29, 2009)

Okay, at first glance I thought this heading of this thread said, "Haggard on Opry" and I was all ready to find a Youtube video of Merle preforming at the Grand Ole Opry stage back in the good old days. Oh well.


----------



## Reepicheep (Jan 30, 2009)

For the first time in my life (and hopefully the last) I watched an entire Oprah Winfrey show- the interview with Ted Haggard and wife.

Here are my observations:
1. Haggard never acknowledged homosexual practice to be a sin. I don't think he ever said the word "sin" at all. 
2. Haggard seemed to imply his worse offense was lying to his wife and congregation about his relationship with a male prostitute. He was clearly sorry for what he had done, but it was unclear what particular act he was most sorry for, if that makes sense.
3. Oprah desperately wanted Haggard to say homosexual urges are just a healthy part of who he is and he shouldn't deny them. He repeatidly whiffed on the opportunity to call his urges sinful. I appreciated his honesty about his urges and his efforts to combat them, but he really didn't say why he was combatting them.
4. Haggard never made reference to the vow of faithfulness he made to his wife regardless of what sinful urges he had (hetero or homo sexual). Another whiff.
5. Haggard said Jesus accepts everyone with no reference to what that "acceptance" looks like or "requires" in so far as repentance is concerned. Very nebulous on what the forgiveness of sins looks like through Christ.
6. Perhaps the biggest whiff occured when Oprah asked Haggards wife- "How could you forgive him"? Instead of a wonderful gospel moment that could have said- Oprah, I forgive Ted of his sin because Jesus has forgiven me of mine, she said something like "I just know this isn't the real Ted...he's a good person, etc." Sad whiff.
7. The only time Haggard spoke some kind of word against homosexual practice is when he said God's ideal is heterosexual monogomous marriage. But even here he was unclear about what such a view says about homosexual unions, etc. I just couldn't understand why he wasn't more clear.

I have a pastoral sense Ted Haggard has received so much pyscho-babblish "therapy" that he can't clearly identify the specific sins that he needs the grace of Repentance for. He seemed contrite, but confused about why he was feeling so guilty. I don't doubt his trust in Christ, I just think he has been beat down by the very theology he used to develop his huge church. 

Having said all this, I am mindful of Galatians 6 and my own need to be careful to promote restoration lest I also be tempted and fall.


----------



## Mayflower (Jan 30, 2009)

Does anyone knows a link (like youtube) were i can watch the entire Oprah Winfrey show with Haggerd ?


----------



## py3ak (Jan 30, 2009)

He did speak about sin in his interview with Larry King. He says he wishes he'd gone in for counseling years ago: he was surprised that his pious practices stirred sin up more(!). I think Luther could've told him that.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Jan 30, 2009)

py3ak said:


> He did speak about sin in his interview with Larry King. He says he wishes he'd gone in for counseling years ago: he was surprised that his pious practices stirred sin up more(!). I think Luther could've told him that.



Isn't that the irony of pietism?


----------



## MrMerlin777 (Jan 30, 2009)

Southern Presbyterian said:


> Okay, at first glance I thought this heading of this thread said, "Haggard on Opry" and I was all ready to find a Youtube video of Merle preforming at the Grand Ole Opry stage back in the good old days. Oh well.






I loves me some Merle Haggard.


----------



## PresbyDane (Jan 30, 2009)

py3ak said:


> He did speak about sin in his interview with Larry King. He says he wishes he'd gone in for counseling years ago: he was surprised that his pious practices stirred sin up more(!). I think Luther could've told him that.


----------



## Hamalas (Jan 30, 2009)

This whole situation is incredibly sad. Not only because of the harm that has come to him and his family, but also the harm that has been brought to the church.


----------

