http://root48.wordpress.com/2008/03/18/oprahtology/
Just read an article by Warren Smith. Although he seems to struggle with fundamentalist paranoia, he offered many great insights into how Oprah may be shaping the spirituality of the western world.
For better or for worse, Oprah is a key figure in shaping western culture - what she is saying on spiritual things is bound to set in. The church needs to be aware of these changes in the audience they too hope to reach.
Oprah's has recently offered A Course in Miracles via Oprah and Friends XM Radio. Those who finish the course of 365 daily soundbites will have a heavy dose of a spiritual worldviews in which there is no sin, no evil, no devil, and that God is "in" everyone and everything. For example, Lesson #29 asks you to go through your day affirming that "God is in everything I see." Lesson #61 tells each person to repeat the affirmation "I am the light of the world." Lesson #70 teaches the student to say and believe "My salvation comes from me."
Advocates of A Course in Miracles say it is quickly becoming the New Age Bible. The teachings have a blatantly universalism bent on Christianity. The course originated with Helen Schucman, was reinvented by Marianne Williamson, and was elevated to a New York Times bestseller and beyond by Oprah.
Other teachings within their literature include:
- "There is no sin. . . "
- A "slain Christ has no meaning."
- "The journey to the cross should be the last ‘useless journey."
- "Do not make the pathetic error of ‘clinging to the old rugged cross.'"
- "The Name of Jesus Christ as such is but a symbol... It is a symbol that is safely used as a replacement for the many names of all the gods to which you pray."
- "God is in everything I see."
- "The recognition of God is the recognition of yourself."
- "The oneness of the Creator and the creation is your wholeness, your sanity and your limitless power."
- "The Atonement is the final lesson he [man] need learn, for it teaches him that, never having sinned, he has no need of salvation."
I believe evangelical conversations going forward will need to incorporate more New Age terminology. Our message does not change, but we run the risk of being unintelligible if we don't use words that are in vogue amongst spiritual seekers. Talk about their Creator, ask when they have experienced God inside of the them, how are they seeking to restore oness with God and the world? Oprahtology is more widespread amongst those we seek to influence than our Christian subculture cares to recognize.
Comments
The only real danger of the Oprah view is that it is deceitful and leads to hell.
I agree that our conversations must be "intelligible" - that's how Jesus taught abot the Kingdom. He came and put on flesh so that we could "see God."
I appreciated your post.
This is very interesting. I do agree that Oprah is a very significant disseminator of pop-spirituality. Oprah has surrounded herself with a range of givers of spiritual input - including a number of Christians of various hues. I agree with you about learning the language of our neighbour. The challenge is not in using the language but in communicating clearly the points of Christ's message which don't give people "what their itching ears want to hear". Listening to religious spokespersons over the years I have noticed that Jewish Rabbi's often seem to have a knack of communicating unfashionable points of view in ways that make sense and are accessible to a contemporary audience.
It's also worth distinguishing between being understandable and being acceptable. Being good at listening, affirming and disagreeing, I think depends to a large extent on our willingness to be authentic to ourselves. We need to seek acceptance through genuine relationship rather than through making our message "acceptable".
The other end of the stick is the example of Jesus' use of stories and parables. They were often conversation-stoppers, understandable only to those who wanted to "get" what he was saying. In that sense we have some special skills to hone as Christian teachers. The imperative there is to "stop making sense".
I believe it's the willingness to do that which demarks a message from a pop-message!