The Economic gap between the Pulpit and the Pews speaks Volumes.

By McPius Ssekatawa S

One of the greatest absurdities of our time is the fact that religion is being equated to looting. Religious skeptics and some ex-devotees have translated religion as a means of manipulation and material accumulation, coupled with the indoctrination of unquestionable beliefs.

At the heart of this thought is how many vocal and famous religious ministers accumulate abnormal wealth, yet on the other hand, their most ardent followers dwindle into unbearable destitution. This way, one notices a huge disparity in the status class of the ministers and their followers. How best can we term this? Is it an effect of fabricated manipulation or a divine plan?

Looking at this fact in depth, I remembered the intriguing question my classmate asked during a lecture. “Why is it that the most faithful and religious Christians live a miserable life?” asked the young man. I think his expectation was that since the faithful follow the same path as their ministers, there should be a very thin line between their status quos. That could be the right thought—the same deity we serve wishes us well. Probably we never know that spiritual equality means all followers being broke apart from the pastor. Sincerely speaking, what kind of cherished faith gives its most devout faithful to misery?

Like the young man, many people live with doubts when they see their ministers live a lavish and extravagant life. To some extent, I have firm belief in their stand. It beats human understanding when the man who preaches moderation lives in extravagance. I understand how much hurt followers get when they see their ministers travel in a fleet of cars like a president of the States. The church minister changes his wardrobe expensively, as if he were a star from Hollywood. It is like some church ministers are secretly competing in a divine show that we the followers are not aware of. You wonder whether the church is shepherded by a politician, one who preaches water but takes wine. It is in such moments that the pulpits are excessively rich, and the pews are poor.

We need to make this point clear. No one is against comfortable living, and obviously, all of us wish ourselves the same. For ministers to live well, it does not mean that they should live as if they inherited all the riches of King David and Solomon’s treasury. This is not a move to dislodge ministers from their good lives. A “man of Gad,” as many are referred to, should live well. However, sometimes their lifestyle necessitates deep introspection and auditing. Courtesy would call for contemplation of the image left in the minds of their followers—followers who unquestionably accept the gospel of moderation, evangelical poverty and self-denial of worldly possessions. This is where the faithful get hardship; the summon is about frugality, yet the preacher’s shoes cost more than your child’s tuition. Who has the humility of accepting the preaching of self-denial when the preacher is a total contradiction to his message?

At times, “do as I say but not as I do” never works. We get back to the question of moral authority. Does it really sound right when the so-called man of God lives luxuriously in a territory of paupers?

The consequence of such extraordinarily shining lifestyles is clear: it is a perfect expose of the gist of religion to negative critiques and unfair scrutiny. The matter worsens when the grieving followers offer donations for a genuine cause, and in return, they receive zero accountability for no work done. This incident is one of the many where the religious dilute their gospel message. Consequently, the preaching fails to germinate, but the skepticism among their followers multiplies at a critical speed. Such actions give opponents a strong basis for rightful criticism.

Continuing this thought, such lavish ministers create the bad semblance of religion being a business. We have heard on many occasions how people criticize their ministers. This is so bizarre. One ardent follower amused me one time. “My church is going overboard these days,” she said. “Collections are becoming endless and rampant, from fundraisers for church construction to collecting money for the pastor’s car.” In situations where the summon focuses on fundraising for the pastor’s car more than touching the desolate soul, it becomes clear where priorities lie. Such practices of self-entitlement are the principal problem. You wonder whether the God we serve favors some at the expense of others, making matters worse, using lamenting hands to satiate the entitled. We should not be surprised when they begin preaching about business seminars on divine resource management.

Such practices necessitate critical reforms. Prudence would call for a lifestyle change. The flock may not have the boldness to summon their shepherds’ lifestyles. However, this puts the credibility of the religious at stake. Aggravating the matter is the fact that the religious are seen as role models-icons of integrity. If those we hold in high esteem live by such double standards, then to whom shall we look up? You see, sometimes living exemplary gets hard when you drive a car whose cost is more than the congregation’s annual net income. I really do not know how some lavish ministers feel standing in front of their destitute congregations.

In addition, the mindset some flocks have that faith is the sole source of their welfare needs some rectification. Religious leaders ought to educate their followers about the limits of divine intervention. It is an interplay between human efforts and divine involvement. How can we begin dreaming about divine intervention when we have taken no personal steps? This is the erroneous mindset that some devotees hold—that religion or faith is the sole proprietor of their welfare—a mindset that is very incorrect. Gone are the days when Manna could fall from the skies. Today, it is a serious matter of toiling, as prayer alone has an extremely low chance of earning one a VIP section.

In light of this, the bottom line is clear. In matters pertinent to religion or faith, we need to have the guidance of reason. The gravest mistake some followers make is sidelining reason to the detriment of their faith, rendering it blind. Have we pondered the detriment of blindly following without reasoning? Another tragedy comes when either party chooses to apply one of the two notions. The church leader is using reason manipulatively, and on the other hand, the flock is applying sharp and blind faith to their disadvantage. Blind faith has the capacity to fill the pews and seats. On the other hand, reason will help the pews seat full wallets. Short of this, cults spring up, exploitation of the flock begins, and everything turns upside down.

Hitherto, what is the ideal way of restoring the integrity of religion amidst such contradictions? Despite all the shortcomings of human nature, religion remains a necessary part of humanity. It is a sense of purpose, of meaning, a guide to moral perfection, and an activism for social justice. It is not looting, nor is it plundering. Equating it to such vicious actions because of individuals who are tied to faith is missing a point. The pulpits should rectify their lifestyle. The pews should guide their faith with the aid of rationality. The gap in question will narrow if reason and faith move into mutual existence.