La Ley de Consulta Previa: ¿reconocimiento de derechos para algunos pueblos?

Having noted the views from the top leaders of the church, it is ideal now to look at what the laity interviewees suggested about their clergy in relation to the gospel of prosperity. From the interviews carried among the lay leaders from Parktown and Budiriro societies, three leaders affirmed that the prosperity gospel preached by clergy is not bad, rather it is biblical. But their reservations are found in the way it is done by some clergy. Laity1 (2017) confirms that:

…in my view, biblically, I think prosperity gospel has some element of truth in it here and there but to a very large extent in our environment it is being misused or abused rather. The abuse is taking people for granted to the extent that it is being used as a way of wooing or having bigger gatherings for one‘s intended ends.

During the same interviews, Laity 6 (2017) shares the same sentiments when she says,

My opinion on prosperity gospel is that this gospel is not bad at all because God did not create us to be poor but what happens when this gospel is preached is what sometimes is not good but I think the gospel itself is not bad but what we do makes the gospel to appear bad, it looks as if going to church has a motive to prosper and some clergy end up abusing members.

From the above, one deduces that these leaders affirming the preaching of prosperity but they are critical in how the preaching is done by some of the clergy in the MCZ. They indicated that the prosperity gospel is biblical and not bad, and when preached properly, it can grow the church. The feeling is that there is an element of abuse from the clergy who are advocates of this gospel, to the extent that they preach the gospel for self-aggrandisement. In the eyes of

155

the laity, the picture of church clergy has changed from the conventional anti-materialistic and heavenly persistent clergy who lives frugally, to the money-orientated and thrilling clergy who invest in money markets and accumulate sufficient riches to compete for listing among the world‘s richest business people (Magezi and Banda 2017: 2).

The lay leaders who are in support of the health and wealth gospel affirm that it is beneficial to the growth of the church in terms of numerical and financial growth. Laity 6 (2017) contends that:

…Prosperity gospel helps in the growth of the church financially because there is no way the church will function without money. Some use it as a tool to fundraise where if one gives to God, in turn that person will receive blessings, and since people want blessings from God, when the man of God says if you sow you shall reap and if you sow wind you shall reap whirlwind, so no one is prepared to reap whirlwind hence one will sacrifice whatever he or she has in order to get the blessings

A close analysis of the above statements from the lay leaders indicates that as much as there is financial growth through preaching prosperity, the clergy‘s message has to instil fear in the parishioners in order for them to give. The leaders clearly show that when the clergy says, if one sows wind he/she will reap whirlwind, the congregants will sacrifice the little they have to give to the church in anticipation of blessings. Furthermore, when interviewed, Laity 5 (2017) shows that he supports prosperity teaching from the clergy. He has assurance that members are benefiting when he said, ―people are receiving more blessings from our clergy‘s sermons and even from the way our clergy work especially when they visit people in their homes and in hospitals; some people say they were blessed when they were visited by the clergy, their problems were gone and sickness healed.‖ He confirms that clergy are providing healing to members through visitations in homes and in hospitals.

The intriguing question now is whether the blessings are realised from the one who gives out of fear? As shown above, as a result of fear of whirlwind, members sacrifice the little they have to give to the church. In as much as some leaders support the prosperity gospel, it is surprising that all the leaders agreed that with the ‗name it and claim it‘ gospel advanced from their clergy, they observed that the promises expected by the congregants are never fulfilled. This is despite the congregants naming what they wish to get from God in faith, using holy oil and anointed handkerchiefs, and buying anointed bricks and anointed oil in

156

anticipation of blessings from God. This is clearly shown in their statements during the interview when one said,

To be blunt and short, I think that will not benefit the members. I don‘t know, maybe it is in the mind of those intended to be beneficiaries but from my own experience I haven‘t seen anywhere where it has benefited, except like say from a Methodist perspective, let us say, if our minister says guys we want to roof this church if you put an asbestos you will be proud you have played your part but not how it is being done (Laity 1, 2017).

In supporting the above, Laity 6 (2017) suggests:

…we as Methodists, we are not into name and claim, but if you look at those who do that, they will only have people for a short period of time and those people are not their members but they are people looking for benefits. As Methodists we first of all want a person to receive Christ first and repent and know who God is, then the rest shall follow. I have never come across anyone who has named and even touched a vehicle who later confessed that things materialised, so I think as clergy, prophets and ministers, they need to tell people the truth and if people receive the truth it will set them free, unlike telling people lies. At the end of the day when one realises it is not true it will damage those people. Our mission is to heal so if we lie to people…, even Jesus himself while on earth he did not come for material things so since we believe in Christ who did not come for material things so as a church we need to remain focused and preach the true word of God and leave out materialistic gospel because material things are short lived. If one could not find the promised things it will be a problem.

The responses from the laity who are advocates of the health and wealth gospel has elements where they are in total agreement with their clergy but they also critique some activities which they feel are not authentic and in line with Methodism. In this regard, clergy do not have a blank cheque to do whatever they want but they are still responsible and accountable to the church and to God, and to remain true to their calling. The views from Magezi and Banda show that there is a clash between the conventional view of ministry as an act of sacrifice and the prosperity entrepreneurial idea of ministry as a way of economic prosperity for the welfare of the clergy. On the other hand, the biblical teachings and examples drawn from the Bible confirm clergy as having a right to economic survival from their labour in ministry. The same Bible has teachings and examples that forbid turning ministry into a conduit for amassing wealth (2017: 2).

157

The clergy however has a responsibility to empower congregants to respond to poverty meaningfully, especially in the Zimbabwean context that has seen poverty from generation to generation. To accomplish this, theological education needs internal transformation to be able to equip clergy to integrate and play an economic function that has the power to transform Christians to engage poverty decisively.