USA Today has an article about Oprah Winfrey titled, “The divine Miss Winfrey?” which caught my eye. Anything that Oprah says or does seems to be important to people so I had to read it. I’ve taken parts of the article and will comment on them below.
She’s no longer just a successful talk-show host worth $1.4 billion, according to Forbes’ most recent estimate. Over the past year, Winfrey, 52, has emerged as a spiritual leader for the new millennium, a moral voice of authority for the nation.
I find it fascinating that she’s considered a “moral voice of authority for the nation” by some because her lifestyle is anything but moral. I’m not sure how Oprah having sex outside of marriage or advocating that women do not marry is moral. Oprah also pushes homosexuality, which also isn’t moral. So despite these two facts and I’m sure there are more, Oprah is not a moral authority. She is in actuality a moral failure.
The article then has a poll question which asks, “Is Oprah Winfrey a spiritual leader for the new millenium?” and at the time of this writing the results say that 15% say yes , while the overwhelming majority of 85% say no. There have been 2772 votes at this time.
The article goes on to say,
“She’s a really hip and materialistic Mother Teresa,” says Kathryn Lofton, a professor at Reed College in Portland, Ore., who has written two papers analyzing the religious aspects of Winfrey. “Oprah has emerged as a symbolic figurehead of spirituality.”
What an insult to Mother Teresa! Ms. Lofton obviously has no respect for the late Mother because if she did she wouldn’t be comparing the amoral Oprah to the wonderful saint that Mother Teresa was. I find her comparison sickening.
Lofton goes on to say,
“Although the concept of the Rev. Oprah has been building through the years, never was it more evident than this season of her talk show, during which she conducted the public flogging of author James Frey. Feeling stung and embarrassed after endorsing his memoir about addiction, … , which turned out to include exaggerations and falsehoods, Winfrey had Frey on the show to do an about-face.
“I left the impression that the truth is not important,” she said on the show. “I am deeply sorry about that because that is not what I believe.”
It was a watershed Winfrey moment, showing herself as not only a talk-show host with whom you don’t want to mess, but also someone who is fully aware of the power of her own image. Think back: She appeared in New Orleans to take on the government after Hurricane Katrina hit last August, and she sent a message to us all about civil rights as she stood by the casket of Coretta Scott King in February. Last week, she shed a tear with Teri Hatcher over sexual abuse memories, and she jumped on the Darfur bandwagon, encouraging viewers to support refugees there.
“She’s a moral monitor, using herself as the template against which she measures the decency of a nation,” Lofton says.
What I find interesting about the previous observations is that there is nothing new or spectacular about this. Oprah was duped by a guest she believed in and in order to make it right she had him on to confront him about his lies. The use of the word flogging is an extreme because Oprah did not “flog” him. She confronted him directly and made her point. James Frey is a publicity whore and a weakling who did have the stomach to stand up to her directly, so he took it. He’s not a fool – after all she made him a lot of money.
As for Katrina, it’s sad that I have to point out the obvious, but Internet bloggers did more to help the victims of Katrina than Oprah did. There were many who had an issue with the government and we told them so. As for the whole civil right thing, Oprah is the queen of remembrance and of course she isn’t going to let an opportunity to preach blackness and glory in the achievement of her foremother. That’s nothing new. And on the issue of Darfur, once again I have to say that Oprah has come to the bandwagon late and yet seems to get the credit for bringing awareness to something that not only have Christians been doing for years and years, but also Internet bloggers.
Let us not forget that in every single case the Church has taken the lead on these moral issues – because ultimately they are spiritual issues and we are commanded to be there to love our neighbor. Oprah seems to just jump in when it’s convenient for her.
This next clip from the article is scary…
In a November poll conducted at Beliefnet.com, a site that looks at how religions and spirituality intersect with popular culture, 33% of 6,600 respondents said Winfrey has had “a more profound impact” on their spiritual lives than their clergypersons.
This just goes to show that at least 1/3 of people who attend church care more about what Oprah says than what is being taught in their churches. Scary.
This is also highly insulting,
“Marcia Nelson says that it’s not going too far to call her a spiritual leader. “I’ve said to a number of people — she’s today’s Billy Graham.”
And if this doesn’t prove how unlike Billy Graham she is then I do not know what will. Oprah is not about Jesus Christ and she is all about her.
By the late ’90s, Winfrey’s focus was Change Your Life TV, and a New Age message was more prevalent. She preached making the message of her life — take responsibility, and greatness will follow — the substance of the show. Keep a personal journal, purchase self-indulgent gifts, take time for you — because you deserve it. The notes rang true to millions of viewers.
I wonder if Oprah has ever read the passage of Scripture that asks, “What shall it profit a man if he gains the whole world, yet loses his soul?” – I think she should, and I think the gullible followers of hers should also. She is not divine, never has been and never will be. She is in dire need of salvation through the grace of Jesus Christ and definitely needs to get her morals in order. She is not a role model for me and shouldn’t be for you either.
