How Megachurches Further Political Agendas
Megachurches and their systems have proliferated in size and influence over the last decade. Hillsong Church, for example, has expanded to 23 countries and enjoyed tens of millions of tax-free revenue. Replicas of the Hillsong brand are present in New Zealand—with the likes of LIFE, Arise and C3 similarly following suit. The megachurch structure has spread globally, much like a McDonalds franchise. These megachurch franchises use familiar flavourings of music, concert like services, and charismatic leaders to ‘market’ and ‘sell’ their profitable ‘ideas.’ Although Christianity has long boasted the spread of its ‘ideas,’ something about this strain of mega church is jarringly intertwined with politics.
Australia and the United States, where these forms of megachurch Christianity grew, have quite a different relationship between politics and religion compared to Aotearoa New Zealand. It is important for us to learn from these other contexts as they reveal how embedded the ideas of a megachurch can become within our political institutions.
Megachurches have the public support of not only celebrities but also political leaders. Former Australian prime minister Scott Morrison and his wife attended and prayed at the 2019 Hillsong Global conference in front of 20,000 people. Brian Houston (former lead pastor of Hillsong) was invited to the White House to pray for Donald Trump at the end of 2019 and a photo of the pair was tweeted to the White House’s 19.4 million followers. The New Testament teaches about giving to the poor, serving, and attaining social justice. However, the political leaders who megachurches advertise their relationships with are those which favour the free market, less social service expenditure, and promote individualism. This begs the question—as megachurches spread across borders, what ideas are they taking with them that are informing our political institutions?
Why are ideas so important?
Political theorists Béland and Cox explain how ideas play an active role in decision making. An idea is simply a thought. It shapes our belief systems and identities depending on which ideas we let develop. These identities are what continue to influence the way we digest new ideas that we are presented with in the world. Churches, and therefore megachurches, heavily influence one’s identity and core beliefs through its delivery of ideas.
Despite the clear separation of church and state in many modern liberal democracies, the church’s desire to have political power remains. Megachurches impact personal identities which influence voting behaviour. Political parties, in turn, are aware that large followers constitute more voters so are interested in piggy backing off these ideas. Megachurches often support patriarchal conservative ideas such as the recent overturning of Roe v. Wade in the United States. Hence, Trump and Morrison can benefit greatly from the support of these churches in furthering their own agenda.
How do megachurches aid political agenda?
Megachurches are often captivating. Their emotionally provocative music, their charismatic leaders, and their ‘extra’ approach to lighting and technology draws people in. When they attract followers, they provide easy to digest, black and white theology. These black and white ideas tend to centre on moral issues where the answer is clear cut—no to abortion, no to euthanasia, and no to same-sex marriage. The New Testament teaching around equality and justice are less easily moulded into strong dichotomies, and do not adhere to the same ‘black and white boundaries’ that are so easily digested. There is also a strong schema of ‘us’ versus ‘them’ in the language used which creates a cultural war between the members of the church and the secular world.
In the secular world, right-wing conservatives follow a similar schema of ‘us’ versus ‘them’ on the delivery of moral issues, facilitating ‘black and white’ thinking. They have strong boundaries on moral issues which have often remained unchanged overtime. If megachurches approach these issues with yes/no policies, it is clear why people of faith would align their political identities with parties that also apply this same yes/no policy. It may be interesting to note what schemas are used within the next election campaign here in Aotearoa. Perhaps it would uncover which groups, and whether they are religious groups, are being targeted with which election promise.
Whiteness and wealth
It is not only ideas around social issues that the megachurch promotes but ideas around leadership. It is no surprise that megachurch leadership are disproportionately white, wealthy and male. Social dominance orientation (SDO) measures the extent to which people desire social hierarchy and the domination of ‘in-groups’—white, male, cisgender, and heterosexual peoples. A study of 245 students from the University of Carolina revealed that participants with higher SDO (more desire for social hierarchy), were Republican voters, white, and scored higher in religiosity compared to those with lower SDO. Interestingly, another study found that Black people who were part of megachurches were also more likely to vote Republican, reinforcing ideas that would not necessarily progress their racial group.
Megachurch movements are led by charismatic, white, cisgender, heterosexual, and male leaders such as Brian Houston, Carl Lentz (Hillsong New York), or Joel Osteen (Lakewood Church) who fall into these social ‘in-groups.’ Not only are churches promoting hard boundary stances on moral issues, but they are also reinforcing social ‘in-groups.’ Scott Morrison looks and sounds like Brian Houston which psychologically draws churchgoers into voting for political leaders that look like their church leaders. For marginalised groups within these megachurches, they are subconsciously fed the narrative that ‘godliness’ and ‘success’ are constituted to the ‘white man’ and so, they may come to believe this and vote for those who look the same.
Prosperity gospel
The prosperity gospel encourages the rituals of offerings and gifts to the churches, by promising God’s favour in return. The success of this is very visible with leaders such as Benny Hinn who travels in private jets, Hillsong pastors who are covered in designer clothing, and John Cameron who has more than $6 million of property under his name. The prosperity ideology aligns with and reinforces individualism, which is the basis of conservatism.
The prosperity gospel, although Americanised, has migrated transnationally with the megachurch system. Its growth has encompassed followers who are not only wealthy, or who we traditionally perceive as conservative right-wing members. A study based on post-colonial Africa revealed how the prosperity gospel offered an opportunity for those who struggled financially. Rather than acclimatising to a liberation theory, which acknowledged the poor, it spiritualised money and in doing so took control of those without means. There is clearly an epistemological connection between colonialism and the globalisation of the prosperity gospel. In the US, an empirical study found that Black Americans were most likely to adhere to the prosperity gospel, followed by Hispanic and then white evangelical Christians. The captivation this ideology has on minority groups is greatly opportunistic for conservatives, who often struggle to engage with these groups. It also means that these groups are potentially reinforcing the same system that is oppressing them.
—
Ideas are important. Megachurches are franchising like wildfire, taking with them not only their way of doing ‘church’ but also their ideas. They influence our beliefs which then become embedded into our political institutions, our policies, and our ideas of leadership. Their ideas seem to hold hands with a form of conservatism which political parties are aware of and use. The way megachurches structure their black and white theology, their idea of leadership, and their obsession of money (unbeknownst to many of its members) is inherently political.
We must meet these ideas with scepticism— the church and the state are not as separate as we are led to believe.
~
Shalomy Sathiyaraj is a writer, surrogacy researcher, and megachurch survivor.