Any reader following these Pages is aware that there is an emphasis on understanding both Common Grace and Divine Grace. Common Grace is best understood as that found by all persons in the order of human beings in nature that God assists in nature’s context, without the necessity of acknowledging the redemptive plan of God, or even that God exists. It is likely that the most common context is that there is God somewhere, but that God is not usually taken as personal and identifiable. Following available literature, we feel that most persons believe in a generic god. By reason of his creation gesture, God is involved in the functioning of that creation no matter how prodigal it is or may become. To abandon it would deliver it to usurpers who would mongrelize it. Secular persons, high minded in respect for the good of mankind, can approach closely to the management of their lives in the context of secularism or humanism as God would have nature, including mankind, managed and presented. As healthful as that is for earth, it has little to do with the Divine Grace that deals with issues of acceptance into God’s kingdom, redemptive process, hope for immortality, and righteousness to service that is reflective of God’s work and empathy.
To illustrate the point, we will use the celebrity theme for this date. I have known celebrities, and have counseled persons related to celebrities. I have tracked the literature of some celebrities and the religions of some. One of my students was a son of a movie/TV celebrity at the time (now 91) still referred to as an active person in the industry. Another was a friend of mine in high school and the best friend of the young lady I was dating. She wafted through a celebrity period. This narrative can be expanded. For my purpose I will walk through my understanding of the religion of Oprah Winfrey as I have deciphered it from her statements on television, but especially in her writings and influence in America and the world. As a presenter of Common Grace, I have not found from a celebrity, anyone who has used it much better than Winfrey. She affirms strongly her beliefs in decency, in right, in doing good things for others, in holding a high moral standard, in issues of equality related to race, gender, or nationality. She has fostered publicity about moral and social problems and means to address them. She moves to make known the practices and rules for good health. There is a kind of self-deprecation which is a factor of humility that is attractive to her objectives. She has built, with an enormous fortune, a staff that she insists must carry out her objectives to serve the needs she observes and means to do something good. I find only a little to fault her in her social and personal objectives. She ascribes her life and good works to God, and openly quotes Scripture as vital to her personal approach to life. One wonders how her known story could be faulted.
The page she wrote for her magazine on the arrival of her sixtieth birthday summarizes her feelings about her life, success, future to old age, and dependence upon spiritual enlightenment. (O, January, 2014, page 134) She refers to her youthful years related to Christian experiences, including reference to the Holy Ghost (Spirit), and appreciation she feels for life afforded to her. All of this is warming, rings a bell of integrity, and offers proper credit to God. Here, she is touching on Divine Grace, but it is muffled in the non-identification of God. Only in that identification does Divine Grace begin to give hope, to identification with the personal God, in the name of Jesus Christ. She writes: This I also know for sure God – however you define or refer to Him, Her, or It is for us. She then follows-up making insightful statements for the achievement of Common Grace. The moment we refer to God in the feminine word, or the neuter we have moved away from identity. The masculine word He did not mean male in the human sense, but gave the generative meaning for God and humanity. God has no sexual identification. He is a Spirit. God is not understood in language games of nouns/pronouns. In part we are helped by identifying with Jesus Christ, the literal representation of God. In him we find an identifiable, personal God offering more than Common Grace. My hunch is that Winfrey believes that, but it is not clear in her statements. One can believe in Common Grace, and not be a Christian. Eclectics often do that, but their approval of some factors in other religions loses support from many biblical believers. *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020