From The Atlantic:

America’s churches always reflect shifts in the broader culture, and Casa del Padre is no exception. The message that Jesus blesses believers with riches first showed up in the postwar years, at a time when Americans began to believe that greater comfort could be accessible to everyone, not just the landed class. But it really took off during the boom years of the 1990s, and has continued to spread ever since. This stitched-together, homegrown theology, known as the prosperity gospel, is not a clearly defined denomination, but a strain of belief that runs through the Pentecostal Church and a surprising number of mainstream evangelical churches, with varying degrees of intensity. In Garay’s church, God is the “Owner of All the Silver and Gold,” and with enough faith, any believer can access the inheritance. Money is not the dull stuff of hourly wages and bank-account statements, but a magical substance that comes as a gift from above.

Comments

Search

holmegm   |2009-11-11 12:12:14 Did Christianity cause the crash? Maybe ... Bono-style Christianity that pressured the banks to make all the subprime loans in the first place. Remember? "Redlining" - when the bankers were evil because they wouldn't loan to folks in the hood? Or have we always been at war with Eastasia?

holmegm   |2009-11-11 12:17:57 In any case, there are more players here than meets the eye.

OrionBlastar  - Plenty of blame to go around   |2009-11-11 22:14:03 the secular ACORN, Apollo Org, and others pressured banks to lend people who made $15,000 a year money for homes, and also lobbied members of congress to pass those laws. In fact that was one of Obama's projects in the 1990's when he was just getting into politics as a community organizer, and many community organizers pushed for it.

metallurge   |2009-11-12 00:58:01 To be honest, I don't think the fundamental problem with the economy lies with poor people getting mortgage loans they shouldn't. Mortgage lenders were not issuing loans to people who couldn't afford them because of the community reinvestment act. They issued subprime loans because they were able to immediately resell the loans and make a tidy sum, no questions asked. It is reasonable to expect, as a goal for society, that the majority of people should be able to afford to own a home. It would be a good thing for everyone if this were so.

SteveGus   |2009-11-11 14:56:52 If they were making a case for the idea that various forms of pop Christianity (more likely, moralistic cultural deism) kept people distracted with demonizing their neighbors, chasing folk devils, and elevated symbol over substance; and that the political distraction created by all of that "moral" and one-true-patriotism malarkey allowed the various miscreants who actually caused the crash carte blanche and immunity to oversight; --- that thesis, while an oversimplification, would at least be plausible. Yes, the culture of entitlement was also involved when it began to be applied to credit. But Pentecostalists? The prosperity gospel? Give me a break.

holmegm   |2009-11-11 13:15:40 article wrote: “They start wanting what’s considered the best and the most technologically advanced in this country,” Lin says. Garay’s church, it seems to me, teaches them that they deserve these things, so they go about getting them, with few resources and infinite adaptability. How is that any different ... OK, substitute "the government" for "Garay's church" above, and tell me how this is any different than the entitlement mentality in general.

emperorbma   |2009-11-11 13:19:49 Quote: Once, I asked Garay how you would know for certain if God had told you to buy a house, and he answered like a roulette dealer. “Ten Christians will say that God told them to buy a house. In nine of the cases, it will go bad. The 10th one is the real Christian.” And the other nine? “For them, there’s always another house.” Huh? So, let me get this straight... Christianity is owning a house? I never knew... I thought it had something to do with Christ having died for our sins or something.

shamrockshake   |2009-11-11 15:06:23 "Bono-style Christianity"? Huh? Yeah, bec banks never do ANYTHING wrong or self-serving...

holmegm  - re:   |2009-11-12 09:41:01 shamrockshake wrote: "Bono-style Christianity"? Huh? Yeah, bec banks never do ANYTHING wrong or self-serving... It was self-serving to make risky loans to high risk categories after being pressured for years to do so? The article leaves that whole piece of the history down the memory hole. Just for one section that stood out to me, the pressure groups wanted the banks to hire shifty characters - I mean, people more like the underserved clients - to make the subprime loans. But the article makes it sound like the banks just went out and hired these guys for no reason.

laika   |2009-11-14 20:56:06 holmegm wrote: It was self-serving to make risky loans to high risk categories after being pressured for years to do so? does becoming fabulously wealthy and coming out unscathed by making risky loans count as self-serving? it was great while it lasted. sure, some of the smaller players are complaining, but the risky loan game was a generator of great wealth for many, many of the bold and clever.

holmegm  - re:   |2009-11-16 14:11:36 laika wrote: it was great while it lasted. sure, some of the smaller players are complaining, but the risky loan game was a generator of great wealth for many, many of the bold and clever. Hmm. If taking a big risk paid off because, well, it paid off, then that should be fine. The rewards should be big for taking big risks. Since I don't think we can say at present that this is the general case for the subprime mortgage market, then it must be that those who made out big did so because of bailouts. So I'm not sure that pointing out how government had a hand in every stage of the fiasco is bolstering your case ;) E.g. Spruiell wrote: GMAC is in trouble primarily because of its ill-advised adventures in subprime mortgage lending. Its mortgage-banking arm has been losing over $1 billion a quarter for almost two years. Considered separately, GMAC’s mortgage business is no larger than several other mortgage lenders that have been allowed to fail. But GMAC’s connection to the auto industry makes it “systemically significant” in the eyes of the administration. As Brian A. Bethune, an economist at IHS Global Insight, told the New York Times, “Without GMAC, General Motors would probably not be able to survive.” The reverse is also true: If the government didn’t need to prop up General Motors, GMAC would probably be allowed to fail.

laika   |2009-11-16 15:12:28 holmegm wrote: So I'm not sure that pointing out how government had a hand in every stage of the fiasco is bolstering your case ;) point taken, but it remains that the risky loan stuff was an engine of fabulous wealth for many people, which addresses your question of whether or not if could be self-serving to make bad loans on a grand scale. i would answer yes, it could be self-serving for those who know how to work the system.

OrionBlastar  - Don't blame Christianity for this   |2009-11-11 22:35:24 the crash happened because most people weren't following Christianity and the rejection of materialism. It is because of the secularism of the USA, and the secular progressives pushing religion out of the public, and pushing materialism on everyone to buy buy buy all of the crap they can so that their businesses will make a lot of money. http://www.crown.org The above is the Christian way of living, not buying crap, and only buying what one needs to live and work. Everything else is unnecessary and unChristian, UnBuddhist, UnJewish, UnMuslim, UnAmerican, and stupid, wrong, uneconomical, and just plain evil. Do people really need to buy a million DVDs, CDs, video files, MP3s, toys, video games, and all sorts of other crap they can do without? Buy so much crap that they cannot afford house payments, and get into so much debt that they'll never be able to pay it off. SNL finally gets one right: http://www.commoncraft.com/friday-funny-snl-don... The US Economic crash was caused by the following: #1 People buys too much crap and going deep into debt and cannot afford house payments or car payments. #2 Political Groups pushing for mortgages for the poor, and cheating by saying a $15,000 a year person earns $45,000 in salary so the bank would loan them money. But it wasn't a fixed rate it was a variable rate that went up to 20% or higher. #3 People buying additional houses, and trying to turn around and flip the house to sell it for more later. Then failing to sell it. #4 Foreign trade bills that offshored labor and manufacturing to China, India, Russia, and other foreign nations. If the USA isn't making stuff in native soil and selling it, then the US economy is going to suffer. #5 Ponzi Schemes like Madoff had, and cooking the books by Mega Corporations like Enron, MCI, Sprint, Time Warner/AOL, etc. These scams took a lot of retirement, 401K, IRA, accounts and ruined them. #6 The Federal government being too restrictive on US businesses, forcing them to move overseas or to Europe to avoid the red tape and heavy taxes. As those business move, so do the jobs and benefits to the economy. #7 Both the Republicans and Democrats not being able to balance the budget since the Clinton years. Seriously why spend money you don't have? Why borrow trillions from China if you have no way to control spending so that you can pay it back? Pork still exists, they call it earmarks or "stimulus spending" now instead. #8 Banks, GM, Crystler, Fanny Mae, Freddy Mac, etc all big business and banks got bailouts, but the consumers didn't. This is still Supply-Side Theory and the Federal Government should have used Keynesian economics and given the people bailouts to save their houses and lively hoods. Why have Richfare that has been proven not to work, instead of Welfare in which the banks and car makers will get the money anyway from the consumers as they make house payments and car payments. #9 The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, we cannot afford them. With the money we spent on them we could have fixed the education system and provided health insurance for everyone. We cannot afford to get involved in any more wars. Withdraw troops from Europe and Japan, and let them build up their own military to patrol their boarders so US troops don't have to do it since WWII. Finish up the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and then downsize the military and don't plan any more wars, and let the rest of the world figure it out. Why should the USA be the world police when everyone hates us? Let the EU, Japan, China, Russia, etc be the world police for a while and see how they like it. #10 There is too much corruption in Wall Street and many corporations that needs major reform. There is also too much corruption in government and politics. We need to form a third political party that can challenge the main two parties to clean up the corruption and stop the pork spending and end lobbyists controlling votes and set term limits and limits to campaign contributions. Only then will you see an US Economy recovery. This is the REAL change we can believe in, and the real hope that we need.

PineHall  - Prosperity Gospel   |2009-11-12 09:53:26 Prosperity Gospel is NOT Christianity! It is false and leads people astray. This gets me angry. Rick Warren says it well: Quote: “This idea that God wants everybody to be wealthy? There is a word for that: baloney. It’s creating a false idol. You don’t measure your self-worth by your net worth. I can show you millions of faithful followers of Christ who live in poverty. Why isn’t everyone in the church a millionaire?”

OrionBlastar  - One cannot serve two masters   |2009-11-12 12:40:34 how can one serve God and money at the same time? That is why God doesn't want everyone to be rich, because then they will worship money instead of God.

PineHall  - Neither poverty nor riches   |2009-11-12 23:31:23 8 Keep falsehood and lies far from me; give me neither poverty nor riches, but give me only my daily bread. 9 Otherwise, I may have too much and disown you and say, 'Who is the LORD ?' Or I may become poor and steal,   and so dishonor the name of my God. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Pro...

laika   |2009-11-13 23:32:20 good find, holmegm! a very interesting and insightful article. after reading the entire piece, i doubt that the author seriously believes that the prosperity gospel branch of DIY Christianity caused our little bump in the road, but rather she used these churches to illustrate where we are as a nation because the PG rather handily sums it all up. it's really a case of religion chasing culture than the other way round.

PineHall  - Kissing Cousins   |2009-11-14 10:35:20 Quote: it's really a case of religion chasing culture than the other way round. I would say it is culture influencing religion.  Prosperity Gospel also sounds a lot Moralistic Therapeutic Deism. Though I doubt they are the same, I would say they are kissing cousins.

laika   |2009-11-14 20:41:36 i'm embarrassed to say that after decades of living among devotees of the Prosperity Gospel, i never made the obvious connection between it and gambling - your money has to actually be in play in order to win: the article wrote: I asked Garay why his parishioner Billy Gonzales, who earns barely $25,000 and has no money to fix his car, should donate 10 percent of his income. “Because it gives him a new mentality. It teaches him that money can breed more money, that you can have money in your pocket on Saturday morning even though you got paid Friday night. People who support the church week after week have a dedication. Those who just give $5 or $10 here and there, you’ll hear them have the same problems week after week.” Jackson Lears would add another explanation: tithing is like the moment the gambler lays his money down on the table—it “promises at least a fleeting opportunity to contact a realm where hope is alive,” he writes. Without it, there’s only the dull regularity of $2,000 a month and a dead car. i wonder if there's an addiction aspect to this?

holmegm  - re:   |2009-11-16 10:39:30 laika wrote: i wonder if there's an addiction aspect to this? I suspect you are right.

emperorbma   |2009-11-16 13:00:49 Except that addiction to gambling requires that there be a "small" chance of succeeding. If the probability of success really is 0, then nobody will bother with it. At least, so says the scientists who research that stuff...

grizzly   |2009-11-16 18:56:33 Except for the prosperity "gospel", the preachers are their own testimonials. "It worked for me!" which makes the odds appear to be greater than zero. Except that they're not playing the same game.

Only registered users can write comments!

Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.20

3.20 Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."