The post-pandemic economy in South Africa has exacerbated significant economic challenges, due to increasing unemployment, political corruption, inflation, and rising poverty, which have worsened the struggles of many (see Francis & Webster 2019:789–791; Arndt et al. 2020:16–22; van Papendorp, Packirisamy & Masike 2024:1-4). However, amid this turmoil, Christian megachurches (especially those promoting prosperity theology), have continued to flourish. Prominent South African pastors continue to espouse that financial success is a sign of divine favour, encouraging congregants to tithe faithfully, in (...) exchange for promised wealth (Barron 2022:88-94). Such doctrine aligns with broader religious narratives that intertwine material prosperity with inter alia spiritual blessings. Despite its increasing prevalence in the global South, most scholarly engagements with prosperity theology in South Africa have explored the topic through decolonial Afrocentric theological and ecclesiological lenses; often neglecting the socio-economic impact of whiteness in these post-colonial religious manifestations (Niemandt 2017:204-206; Andrew 2021:13-17; Adamo 2021:1-10; Barron 2022:88-100; Resane 2022:1-9; Khanyile 2023:101-125; Mkhize 2024:1-9). In contrast, this paper therefore adopts a critical religious studies perspective examining how mega-churches vis-à-vis “Big Religion,” through their commercialisation of the Bible, contribute to economic disparities in South Africa. This explores prosperity theology as a problematic religious ideology that reinforces economic inequity through promoting uncritical worldviews. By investigating case studies of influential South African mega-churches, this paper critiques the ways in which religion has become commodified: positioning ‘celebrity pastors’ as both spiritual, political, and financial influences. In addition to how the rise of 'big religion'—defined as the fusion of religion with commercial enterprise—poses significant challenges to extant socio-economic inequalities within the country, as it reinforces the theological legitimisation of wealth accumulation and a monopoly over status functions, at the expense of the working class. -/- . (shrink)

Feminism has been a good movement with the noble aim of freeing the world from the shackles of an evil superiority of men over women. The principal of feminism as a movement was political equality between men and women. In itself, it was a fair and just course such that it was inclusive of men as well, men were also part of the movement with no insults, threats, and hate speech. But in this technological era some impurities have also crept (...) into it. From the third wave of feminism which is also known as GRRRL feminism which turned the offensive names into jokes and somehow normal to be pronounced in public, things became no longer about equality and respect of humanity. As feminism grew, it became less critical and became more sensitive towards emotions and uncritical amassment of followers. To some extent, being critical about feminism is unacceptable because someone becomes quickly accused of being patriarchal and antifeminism. Indeed, patriarchy is a negative and destructive idea perpetrated by those who were suffering from “testosterone-power-syndrome”. But, when some thinkers like Valenti, Arndt, and Harrow have identified the syndrome and implemented some medication to it, others inject the other side with similarly fatal ideas. I call those ideas “Oestrogen-power-syndrome” because they make their victims think that with collapse of patriarchy, men should be disgraced and be made to feel not existentially necessary. Symptoms of this syndrome start from no more knowing that hating the other sex is wrong and should not be promoted. Writers like Annapuranny and Jansen even perpetrate non progressive talks like “what’s wrong with hating men”, “the world would be better off without men” and many phrases of such destructive nature. But the issue which this paper seeks to address is that there is no philosopher who has critically tackled this matter. In fact, some African philosophers rather reject the whole feminism movement as non-African. Using analytical framework, this research ventures into critical analysis of this issue of feminist extremism coupled with the silence of African philosophers. (shrink)