Worshipping Michael
April 20, 2010
SAGE McLAUGHLIN WRITES:
This link about a New Age Michael Jackson mystery cult is not a parody, and while some people might find it funny- and really, I know why they would- it strikes me as extremely sad.
The author encourages readers to believe that “truth is a feeling” and that Michael Jackson is/was some sort of demi-god or spiritual avatar. Imagine the spiritual barrenness and desperation of the person who derives comfort from that. Consider the spiritual blight afflicting the society that produces such delusion.
Laura writes:
That’s chilling. Michael Jackson is reaching beyond the grave to continue his evil project of warping the weak, the foolish, the stupid, the sentimental, the young, and those impressionable enough to believe popularity is an indication of higher worth. He has entered the pantheon of celebrity demon-gods occupied by Elvis and Diana.
The author states she was a Lutheran, Quaker, Buddhist, Sufi, Taoist, Hindu and a Unitarian Universalist before directing her spiritual energies to Michael. She makes this statement on the difficulty followers have in accepting that they did not adequately defend this hideously corrupt, plastic, visibly hollow shell of a human being while he was still alive:
They are also having a hard time redeeming themselves, for themselves. They feel guilty for not being there and being steadfast when Michael most needed them to believe in him. So I have asked them: “What would it take for you to forgive yourself for your perceived abandonment of Michael Jackson in his greatest hour of need?” They seem to want a form of penance. They want to make this right with and for Michael.
Michael is both an inner force and a transcendent god, to whom atonement and sacrifice are due. The author’s aim is modest: “to simply change the world.” It’s interesting how she looks like a conventional middle class professional woman.
Laura adds:
It’s hard to imagine anyone falling for this and yet I guess I can see it. Images are spellbinding. People see Michael’s face over and over for years. He enters their psychic world and they can’t get him out and the simple fact that he is there leads them to think he is significant.
Jan writes:
I write in reference to your article entitled, “Worshipping Michael.” Please let me begin by denying that I worship Michael Jackson. It is, however, obvious that I see more in him than you do. For that, I will not apologize. I do not feel particularly “spiritually barren or desperate” because I choose to hear and to respond to uplifting messages encouraging self-reflection, healing the world, and showing compassion toward those less fortunate than myself. Nor will I apologize for not believing a media which spent the last 10 years of a fairly-judged and exonerated man’s life in belittling, degrading, negating, dehuman-izing, demonizing, and dismissing that man’s numerous contributions in the fields of music, film, performance, and philanthropy. Are you aware that Mr. Jackson gave over $300 million to 39 separate and distinct charities throughout his lifetime? Are you aware that he visited more orphanages and hospitals than he performed concerts throughout the world during his tours? Can you claim such an impact as a result of your footsteps?
The truth of Mr. Jackson’s impact is available with a little research and an open mind. He was neither “hideously corrupt, plastic, nor a visibly hollow shell of a human being.” I encourage you to be a little less judgmental of those things or people you obviously do not know anything about.
The author of the website you refer to does not “encourage readers to believe that truth is a feeling.” She does state that we will know truth through our feelings. There is a world of difference between the two statements. Please try to quote her correctly. Her statement is true. Each of us chooses our own truth. I have chosen mine. You have, apparently, chosen yours. Is there no absolute truth? Yes, there is. Its name is God and it is big enough to encompass all our truths with no particular favoritism.
I have not fallen victim to a demon-god. You have! The demon-god you, apparently, worship and support is the media and for that I am sorry; the evidence of that victimization is rife throughout the words of your article. (And since exactly when has Diana, “the People’s Princess” become a demon-god?)
I am neither “warped, weak, foolish, stupid, sentimental, young, nor impressionable enough to believe that popularity is an indication of higher worth.” Each of us on this planet is of inestimable value (yes, even Michael Jackson)!I must admit that I do take offense at being judged so harshly by people who do not know me. While I am not the author of the website your article refers to, I am a frequent visitor who does find solace in reading the articles and comments written there. I am a middle-aged, middle-class, professional woman and I will make no apology for finding comfort in reading uplifting and spiritually-oriented writings whose goal is “to simply change the world.” Let’s face it … the world we now inhabit is in dire need of fixing. If you are not being part of the solution, you are part of the problem.
Neither I nor the author of the website you refer to has any intention of trying to convince you of our point of view. Nor will we judge you as “less” for not sharing it. I would thank you to afford us the same privilege and dignity.
Laura writes:
First, let’s admit that we are both judgmental. You are judging critics of Jackson and say they are “degrading, negating, de-humanizing, demonizing and dismissing.” I said that Jackson preyed on the warped, the weak, the foolish, the stupid, the sentimental, the young and the impressionable. It’s not judgment itself that is the issue here, but radically different judgments. I do not know you or the other readers of the site and anything I say by way of judgment cannot be anything close to a complete view of you. For all I know, you may be a better person than I am in many ways, but on this very important matter of Michael Jackson’s significance and on the nature of God I believe you are wrong.
You say, “Each of us chooses our own truth. I have chosen mine. You have, apparently, chosen yours. Is there no absolute truth? Yes, there is. Its name is God and it is big enough to encompass all our truths with no particular favoritism.”
This is a contradictory statement. You say there are opposing truths and yet there is one, absolute truth. If God could encompass the idea that there is one God, a Personal and Infinite Being who demands exclusive love, and the idea that a human being could be revered in the way The Inner Michael site reveres Michael Jackson then God is not good because these views cancel each other. God must have no respect for truth if he encompasses both. If God does not uphold truth and is not good then He could not be the God I revere, in which case he does not encompass both of those truths. Do you see what I mean? God loves those people who hold the first view and those people who hold the second view but He cannot possibly grant these contradictory ideas equal esteem.
By the way, I have not gotten my opinion of Jackson from the media reports. I actually have read very few of them. Whether he was a child molester or not is not what determines my view. The way he mutilated his body and created a grotesque mockery of his masculinity are enough for me to call him corrupt. The sight of him fills me with horror. It’s one thing to dress up in a freakish way, but to actually submit to surgeries and drug treatments to transform your body into a theatrical statement is wilful self-destruction and that’s sinful.
His generosity to charities, in my opinion, does not absolve him of guilt for his influence on others, for his glorification of freakish sexuality.
I emphatically agree with you when you say, “Each of us on this planet is of inestimable value (yes, even Michael Jackson.)” The fact that every person is “of inestimable value” makes each person’s actions significant and worthy of judgment. Yes, even Michael Jackson’s. If I thought he was of no value and you were of no value, I would not judge him at all. I wouldn’t care.
Jane writes:
Jan wrote:
The author of the website you refer to does not “encourage readers to believe that truth is a feeling.” She does state that we will know truth through our feelings. There is a world of difference between the two statements. Please try to quote her correctly.
In fact, the website clearly states, “Truth is a feeling.” Not sure where she thought the misquote was. Perhaps her truth that she chose was that the website didn’t say exactly that.
This site also advises that to find your “inner michael” is to find the highest expression of what it means to be human. Another quote:
Whenever you do something generous, you donate, you volunteer, you pray or meditate, or you cry tears for the injustice, I ask you to do it in Michael’s name. (See Inner Michael entry: “Be the Change in Michael’s Name.”) Out loud or under your breath say “This I do for Michael.”
Call me judgmental, but this just sounds crazy to me. Actually it’s worse than crazy; it’s demonic. It is a gross parody of Christ, from praying in Michael’s name, to asking yourself the question “What would it take for you to forgive yourself for your perceived abandonment of Michael Jackson in his greatest hour of need?” Regardless of what Michael Jackson might have been in life, he has been turned into something far more sinister in death.
Jan writes:
Ever heard of dichotomy? Both truths true at the same time even though contradictory. Look it up.
I’m not going to get into a sparring match. My judgment of media intrusion is backed up by evidence. I would be happy to provide sources and a reading list, if you are interested.
I’m also not going to discuss Mr. Jackson’s appearance. His appearance was unique. Did he do it on purpose? You seem to think so, the fact that a skin pigmentation anamoly called vitiligo, a disease called Lupus, and reconstructive surgery to mitigate a serious burn injury notwithstanding. So he had a nose job. Big deal. What you see as horrifying others see as beautiful. No accounting for tastes.
Your personal view of God, too, I will not argue with. Mine may be different. So be it.
What I object to was your judgment of ME as a reader of a website without knowledge of who I am or how I got to be the me that responds to your article.
Brittany writes:
I have heard both sides of the story and I don’t believe Michael was a molestor. Michael was not evil, but just just a strange guy. He needed some help when he first started all those surgeries because he must have had serious issues to do that to himself. In my opinion, his upbringing on the road probably made him weird. It wasn’t just Michael some of the others were messed up too such as LaToya. Yes, Michael Jackson made some good music but he is not a god.
Lauren writes:
I am a resident of California and a practicing physician for over 23 years. I have been a wife and a housewife. I am a mother and a grandmother, raised in a large Catholic family, an independent voter, homeowner and consider myself open-minded, fair and well grounded.
I pretty much felt like you do for many years about Michael. Always loved the music as do my kids and grandkids. Had respect for the talent but not the man. I was aware of the media field day over him for many years, but didn’t think about it much. Until he died.
Belatedly, I decided to look at his life and history—to look behind the media input and see who he was, for myself. I was surprised, frankly, at my interest and I understand that this is an individual thing and a lot of people were and are not affected in this way. But I was.
I took some time and, thanks to the Internet, was able to go back 40 years and then move forward through his life. What I found was an extremely talented person who spent his life promoting humanitarian causes and backed it up with a fortune in donations. Michael carried the banner for environmental issues long before it was popular, he put himself in hospitals and orphanages to help children when he didn’t have to and he opened his home for years to disadvantaged and ill children. Music and dance and access to anyone, anywhere, allowed him to promote human empathy, action and care for our planet, and love for one another.
I can’t speak to the surgeries–I’m not a psychiatrist, but my considered opinion is childhood trauma, real physical ailments and eccentricities all were factors. The package may have been off putting to some, but the message never was. I guess I was able to see behind the face to the person underneath. To be honest, I found Michael to be a very attractive man through much of his life. And I’ll say this, if God’s love for us and his admonishment to us is to love one another, I’m open to whomever he asks to remind us of that. Michael wasn’t God for heavens sake, but if one was to look at the faces of people at his concerts; reactions that were universal and marvelous in their openness, one might see that as a response to a love wave that came through that man.
Spiritual, maybe. Powerful, for me it is. The whole experience has awakened a desire to make a positive difference in my own way. I’m motivated, involved and feel closer to the God I know because I am reminded by a slight, talented man who did his best with the gifts God gave him to move humanity along.
Thank you for sharing your opinions and for giving me the opportunity and desire, to share mine.
Jane writes:
I don’t think anyone would dispute that giving generously to charities and visiting orphanages is nice. I also concede that Michael Jackson’s music appealed to many people, although not all. However, this does not make him a “bodhisattva” or a divine messenger, as the author of the website in question would have her readers believe. It does not warrant praying to God in Michael’s name. This portrayal of Michael Jackson as some kind of suffering Christ substitute figure is an extraordinarily offensive case of celebrity worship taken to a perverse extreme.
Laura writes:
I do not doubt the emotion in Lauren’s experience. She has been moved by Michael Jackson’s story and his music. Others have been moved. But, as Jane said, let’s leave aside the conflicting accounts of his life, let’s even assume he was heroic and persecuted, and look at this “love wave.” The Inner Michael website is not simply refuting what it views to be malicious lies about Michael Jackson, it plainly states that Jackson is divine. The first words in the Welcome section of the blog are clear: “Michael wasn’t just the ‘Man in the Mirror;’ Michael was the Mirror.”
As for his charitable acts, the essence of charity is to seek no reward. Jackson did not discover charity. Many people give proportionately as much as Jackson did. I do not understand why he is owed special homage because of his gifts of money.
Lauren says, “if one was to look at the faces of people at his concerts; reactions that were universal and marvelous in their openness, one might see that as a response to a love wave that came through that man.”
If we are going to judge the worth of an experience by these criteria then alcoholic rapture is a holy state.
Paul writes:
I am not a fan of Michael Jackson’s music, but I did come across a video of a dance routine of his which accompanied one of his songs. It involved him grabbing his crotch and simulating masturbation. Apparently this was standard fare. I don’t see how millions of dollars channeled through his hands, wealth that existed in any case, made the world a better place. Dance acts like his made the world worse, base, degrading and corrupting. Lauren calls herself a Catholic. So am I, so am I. I am old enough to remember a time when it was inconceivable that one could ever be ashamed to call oneself Catholic. Michael Jackson’s influence was evil. At least I’m still not ashamed to say that.
