Is the prosperity gospel all that?

In her book "Blessed," Kate Bowler provides a good ... but not fantasic, overview of the history of the success gospel, prosperity gospel, or whatever you'll call it. Below is an expanded version of a recent Goodreads review.

Blessed: A History of the American Prosperity Gospel by Kate Bowler
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Bowler gets five stars for personal research, 4.5 for some of her conclusions, and 3.5 for not drawing further conclusions in some areas or asking further questions. And now, with further reading, she gets 2.5 stars, as I've seen on her website, her other book and more, for the degree she believes in at least the healing portion of the prosperity gospel and doesn't disclose that. So, my overall rating, originally four stars, is reduced to three.

The biggest best part of the book is her tracing the roots of the prosperity gospel and noting its multidenominational background. Most of its preachers are not mainline protestants, but many of them are also not explicitly pentecostal or even explicitly charismatic.

Second biggest part is noting the emphasis on health and related issues along with wealth.

Third biggest is tracing that part as an earlier part, and its connections to Christian fringes like the Divine Science movement of the late 19th century and the New Thought of the early 20th, that included places like Unity.

Fourth is noting its greater racial cross-pollination than much of Christianity while showing it still has flaws.

Fifth is the data she has collected behind all this.

==

Where it falls short?

First, with its "name it and claim it" and "power of the spoken word" background, she never asks why so many of these preachers still use KJV English. Or why they use the word "Jehovah," which doesn't exist in Hebrew and is a made-up English (and somewhat, other western languages) conglomeration.

Second, although its prosperity angle is different, it's not charismatic, and it has no paid parish ministry, as I see it, Mormonism is a part of the prosperity gospel, too, with the same ultimate Second Great Awakening roots as the rest of the movement. Nowhere mentioned.

Third, something also nowhere mentioned, and not a church, but yes, a religious movement in my mind, in its language and federal court rulings? The 12-step movement. Again, like Mormons, no paid leadership outside of HQ, and not charismatic. But, New Thought leaders, Emmet Fox above all, were highly cited by many early AA pioneers. And, after the initial "inventory," AA and NA's idea of a daily inventory for good things as well as bad at least somewhat parallels name it and claim it.

==

And, now that Googling has led me to her book on battling Stage 4 colon cancer, the 1- and 2-star reviews of it kind of explain why she didn't bring a broader perspective to this book, as good as it is. https://www.amazon.com/Everything-Hap...


View all my reviews

==

Added to that initial review here:

A NYT column, and knowing her country of origin, leads me to see her as a kinder, gentler Canadian evangelical protestant.

Also, she says that black prosperity churches, knowing they're battling uphill, seem to do more than white prosperity churches about helping members actually do things like start small businesses.

Which itself is ... interesting.

New research says people who attend prosperity churches are actually LESS likely to be entrepreneurs than the general American public.

First, the study researched more than 1,000 people, so it doesn't have small sample size issues. So, let's call it legit.

Second, it notes that men overall in America are more entrepreneurial than women. But, in prosperity churches, it's more even. Since these churches are below the US average, I presume that means men in prosperity churches have fallen in entrepreneurial spirit. And, the study's authors explicitly admit they're not sure if prosperity teachings and entrepreneurialism are more connected among minorities than whites, the same, or less connected.

But at least they're asking questions that Kate Bowler didn't, or didn't get others to ask.

==

Note: A publicist, or something, for Bowler, did her best job in defending Bowler in an email while noting (natch) that she has a new book coming out.

==

New update, 2021. First, contra defenders of Wiki, it's kind of laughable that its entry for Bowler can't tell you for sure the year of her birth. BUT! She still gets an entry! Second, it's laughable and sad that she's got a teaching gig at Duke. And, barf me, her website has her connected with Adam Grant, offering blessings and more.