“The American Dream” as defined by James Truslow Adams in 1931 is a national ethos of the United States in which freedom includes the opportunity for prosperity and success, and an upward social mobility achieved through hard work. Truslow states "life should be worse and poorer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement" regardless of social class or circumstances of birth. The idea of the American Dream is rooted in the United States Declaration of Independence which proclaims that "all men are created equal" and that they are "endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights" including "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." The American Dream is viewed by many Americans as not only an American pursuit, but also many Americans, most especially those citizens that identify themselves as Christians see this pursuit as a Christian right of passage. In the catechesis of Christian language the American dream has become synonymous with the being a Christian. In the minds of many Americans the American Dream is a Christian reward to faithfulness.
The proliferation of the American dream through the vehicle of the “Prosperity Gospel” is a cause for the continuance of poverty in America. In this writing I plan to discuss the origins of the American, the canonizing of the American dream in scripture, and the growth of the Prosperity Gospel as an answer to the rising poverty rate in this country. ORIGINS OF THE AMERICAN DREAM

In researching this project one of the reoccurring themes that I came across was the subject of “Recovering the American Dream.” Authors from all over the publication spectrum have sought to bring clarity to the subject of recovering the American Dream. In fact, a brief internet search turned up more than over 700 book titles on the this one topic. The term “American” and “Dream” are inextricably linked. They have been intrinsically woven into the fabric of the doctrine of the United States that insomuch as they have become a part of America’s embedded theology. This term shares the characteristics of other embedded theologies in that the meaning is rarely questioned and the unquestioned meaning is widely shared by everyone to be understood. When people say the American Dream it is understood to be life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Or does it? Presently, it is widely understood that the American Dream is a pursuit of riches; the upward matriculation from rich to poor through a system of meritocracy that is egalitarian system that truly allows this upward mobility to occur. The belief is so entrenched in the fabric of what it means to be American, that people who are impoverished will vote against policies that are for the poor simply because believe these policies will have a profound affect on them in the future.
Shockingly, the term “American Dream” is a relatively new term. In fact, James Truslow Adams the author accredited with coining the phrase initially didn’t think that the term would merit the three dollar payment for the cost of his book. Jim Cullen in his book “The American Dream a short history of an Idea that Shaped a Nation” writes:
“Adams, author of a series of popular books on American history was seeking to broaden his literary horizons. A man with elite blood lines dating back to the seventeenth century when one of his ancestors came to Virginia as indentured servant and ended up in the landowning class, Adams, born in 1878 had nevertheless grown up under relatively modest circumstances. Adams wanted to write a once volume history of the United States for the general reader, and his publisher, Little Brown agreed. As he noted in the preface, there was no shortage of such books. What he wanted to contribute was broad interpretive sensibility that emphasized important historical themes. For Adams, no theme was more important than what he called that American dream of better, richer, and happier life for all our of citizens of every rank, which is the greatest contribution we have made to the thought and welfare of the world. That dream of hope has been present since we became and independent nation, each generation has seen an uprising of ordinary Americans to save that dream from the forces which appeared to be overwhelming it.”
While Adams may have the coined the phrase of the American Dream, it is apparent that the notion of the Dream was a prevalent long before the term was engrained in the oral culture of American society. The roots of the American Dream is evident even in the composition of the Declaration of Independence. Written in 1776, Cullen suggests that the Declaration of Independence is directly worded to invoke a spirit of the anything is possible at any moment. He states: “ Maybe saying that the Declaration is central in contemporary American life seems odd, since a few of us have actually read the entire document. And those of us who have can’t help but notice that this manifesto, like so much else about American Revolution, is remote, even tedious.” The Key to the Declaration the part that survives in collective memory and which underwrites the American Dream, is the opening clauses of the second paragraph: ‘We hold these Truths to be self evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit, of Happiness.”
The interpretation of the ideals of the Declaration of Independence has had many far- reaching effects. These effects have been oppressive and liberating. It has been the source of depressions, bankruptcies, and wars. It has also been the driving force behind civil rights, human rights, and poor people’s campaigns. Martin Luther King Jr. in his famous “I have a dream” speech in the March on Washington saw the American as one that included people of all races. King’s idea of the American dream was for a nation allegedly built on the fabric of liberty and justice. This American Dream sought a nation that would be bold enought to abolish unjust laws and practices. In the Jim Crow south, King witnessed the horrors of the people who were being excluded from the American dream. White only businesses, segregated restrooms and schools prompted King to courageously fight for the guaranteed inalienable rights of every human. It was King’s “revision” of the American dream that has to be included this section about the origin of American dream. King’s inclusion marks a major milestone in the proliferation of the American Dream. King’s revision of the American dream represents a monumental shift in which many African Americans, and other non-white Americans begin to articulate themselves as American and as result worthy of inclusion to the American dream. For centuries people had a desire for liberation and those pursuits recorded in the Declaration of Independence, but these contexts were often ascribed from the position of those who wanted to reclaim agency lost from their native lands. For example Marcus Garvey sought for African Americans to return back to Africa. Elijah Muhammad and the Nation of Islam saw African Americans as a separatist sect of people who did not need to integrate. King’s position on redefining the American Dream, constitutes a shift in which the American Dream is fulfilled in the lives of all its citizens. His definition relies heavily on the equality motif in the document and not as others who were solely focused on the pursuit of dreams motif in the Declaration of Independence. Cullen writes that equality must play a role in everyday life. He states:
“The American Dream depends on equality. At some visceral level, virtually all of us need to believe that equality is one of the core values of everyday American life, that its promises extend to everyone. If they don’t, then not everybody is eligible for the American Dream-and one of the principal attractions of the American Dream, and its major underpinning is that everyone is eligible: this has been the benchmark, commonsense notion of what equality has meant for quite some time. That the circumstance of everyday life routinely belie this belief is hardly a problem as long as the principle of the equality is affirmed. ”
In many respects the American Dream is a dream that is based upon – a Dream. The dream that equality for all actually exists. The belief in the Dream of equality is the catalyst in which the American Dream begins to take shape. Cullen adds:
“ The notion that everyone has the hypothetical possibility of being equal in public life is a standard we consider practical, as opposed to equality of condition, which we typically do not. We can accept, even savor, all kinds of inequalities as long as we can imagine different outcomes-that can earn a million dollars (if your’re lucky); that there’s no obvious external barrier forcibly preventing a Latina Child from attending an Ivy League university (if her test scores are good enough); that you too can hire jury consultants in your murder trial (if you’re rich and or famous); and so on. This allows us to believe a reasonably fair country that bears some relationship to its founding ideals –in this case, that ‘all people are created equal’ as usefully ambiguous as the phrase is and gives us the hope that our own dreams are not impossibly out of reach.”

The idea of the American dream has been present in the culture of the United States for quite some time. The phrasing of the term in the 1930’s gave shape to the concretizing of this idea as authentically American, but it was not the coining alone that gave the “American Dream” its well-known and highly publicized status that it enjoys today. For the American dream to go from a hypothetical possibility to an inalienable right it would need more than just a catch phrase. It needed a counterpart. It needed a partner that was internationally known, nationally recognized and locally accepted. It needed a partner that would allow its ideals and practices(no matte how unjust) through the ears and into the hearts of every American. The American Dream needed a partner would that could validate its claims about justice, equality, and meritocracy without questioning the validity of its claims. The partner needed to have a good reputation. The partner needed to have to have the respect of the people. Lastly and most importantly, this partner needed to be powerful. The partner’s power had to be a silent a power as well. Meaning, it could make a recommendation and people would believe that this was the best decision possible. The American dream would find this partner in the Christian Church. Through the Christian Church the American Dream would be canonized through scripture and become synonymous with the “so called” Plan of God’s people. The American Dream and The Church Wyndy Corbin in an article in April 2005 article of Cross currents magazine examines the relationship between the conflation of the American Dream with American evangelicalism as it impacts the ethics of evangelism. She asserts that one of the missional objectives for evangelicals is to reclaim America as a “Christian nation.” In doing so many Americans have confused the American Dream as an idea that is authentically Christian. She states:
“The story of the American dream in many ways merges with the story of American evangelicalism, since consistent with the American ethos, it (evangelicalism) offers a kind of spiritual upward mobility, a chance to improve your lot in the next world and also (according to the promises of some preachers) in this world as well. The history of evangelicalism has some roots in the American story of democracy, laissez faire capitalism, and personal freedom. It is conflated with the freedom to pursue one’s material dreams and religious preferences, the attainments of which are seen as blessings from God and evidence of moral worth.”

Once religion enters into this already abstract equation built on the foundation of dreams, it takes away personal, social, and governmental responsibility. In the latter, the government is now free to excuse itself from practices and policies that foster a culture of poverty. Debt, the over taxation of the poor, social programs, are no longer questioned as ethical problems of government. When religion and the American Dream are shared processes the average citizen sees them not as unethical government practices they become dismissed as God’s wrath. Through the proliferation of the Christian church power structures are able to escape responsibility under the auspices that the practices that benefit a few and oppress the masses are somehow the working and the desire of God.
Socially, the ideas of blessings and success have become synonymous. If someone has a number of material possessions then they are receiving the favorable blessings of God. If someone does not have these blessings, then somehow God is not pleased with the lifestyle of these individuals. This metanarrative is one of the primary means that is used by the evangelical church of integrating the American dream into a providence of God. Corbin states: “One of the key ideas in the symbol of the American Dream is the promise of success through hard work and reward. Success is most often measured in materialistic terms by the accumulation of wealth. If there is one prevailing ideology of the American Dream, it is that “anyone can make it if they just work hard enough. First, evangelical ethics tends to accept the principles of laissez capitalism as either value free and or morally good. They say that God is in favor freedom, property ownership, competition, diligence, work and acquisition. All of this is taught in the word of God.” Once success and failure become the production of God, then the equation then becomes simple. If a person wants to extract him or herself from poverty then, they only have to be willing to work. In this equation the only responsibility is personal responsibility. The prevailing thought is that people change society, not that changed societies change people. This system voids itself of the problematic formation of the equation itself. Meaning what is missing in this equation is that if hard work equals success, then what is the explanation for those who have never worked hard, but yet enjoy all the spoils of success? Moreover, it also avoids the fact that in this system of meritocracy others on the basis of race, class, and gender some will experience a more fluid upward mobility than others. Wendy Corbin elaborates this point by citing the work of Christian Smith in his book American Evangelism: Embattled and Thriving by stating:

“This personal influence strategy exacts a cost. It tends to render evangelical rather blind to supraindividual social structures, aggregate effects, power dynamics, and institutional systems which profoundly shape human consciousness, experience and life-chances. Because evangelicals employ the personal influence strategy, it serves to obscure the, the effect of forces outside themselves on their interpersonal relationships, along with their capacity to comprehend adequately how the social world actually works and to formulate relevant and responsive solutions to complex social economic, political and cultural problems.

Since these problematic equations are ignored the Christian Church can operate in a vacuum where issues of social justice doesn’t matter, and the poor are blamed for their condition and their own circumstances. With these mitigating factors omitted power structures become free to go unchallenged and uncontested while the “so called” Christian Church leads others to believe that their success and failure rests solely in their ability to work tirelessly. As a result, the “working class” believers are prone to blame themselves when the systems of merits fail. They create intangible merits that encourages them to keep working all the while but not experiencing any personal gains. Karen Bloomquist takes up these intangible gains in her article Toward a Theological Engagement with Working-Class Experience as thus: “They (working class) create badges of dignity that those in authority cannot destroy through family, home, and doing a good job. This works insofar as they believe they are engaged problems of self and meaningful actions that transcend the realm of domination. But the promise doesn’t deliver as expected. The privatization undergirding it leads to disappointment and despair.”

After the disappointment and despair the Christian working class worker will often seek refuge. This place of refuge is often found in the Christian church. The despair and anguish of the working without results causes the member to critically reflect on the questions of: Is it me? Or is it God? In a number of Christian churches (not all) the answer is often given that the problem is not with God, the systems that created the despair, but most importantly the problem lies with and within the individual. The individual is relegated to a privatization of their own despair. There is no communal response to poverty, injustice, and oppression. The answers become simple with no nuances. You sinned, God is displeased, so as a matter of consequence blessings are now being withheld. It is as a result of this dilemma that the “so called” American Dream, now partnered with the so called Christian Church, needed one more partner. This partner needed to bring legitimacy to the Christian church. The church had made promises on the basis of its reputation. People believed on the basis of that reputation. They worked hard on the basis of the reputation of what the church told them. After double shifts, multiple jobs, stiff backs, worn out hands, and swollen feet many were now questioning the Christian witness. Is it possible that hard work was not the key component? Could there be something else? Questions such as these are the primary motivations for a third partner. The Church needed more tangible evidence that through Christianity the system of meritocracy was divine. This new partner needed to be a results driven partner with a key emphasis on hope and instant gratification. This partner had to be able to link perceived blessings to God’s providence. This partner much like Rod Tidwell in the movie Jerry McGuire needed to “show people the money”. This ideal partner to fulfill this role was the “Prosperity Gospel.” ProsperityGospel and Poverty
In his Book Watch This! The Ethics and Aesthetics of Black Televangelism author Jonathon Walton says that the Prosperity Gospel arrives out of the Word of Faith theological formation. This faith formula involves positive confession theology, and the prosperity gospel. The prosperity gospel perspective arrives from the post-World War World War II charismatic revivals. In the Word of Faith movement scriptures are viewed as contractual agreements between the believer and God. In the Word of Faith tradition believers are enticed into Christian service with God with a series of beliefs that embody a traditional “If and “Then” hypothetical equation. If a person gives, then God will give more. If a person trusts God with their money, then God will trust them with God’s money. The materialistic nature of the American dream, and the promises of the Evangelical Christian church meet in perfect harmony in the hallowed theology of the Word of Faith movement. One of key identifiers of this movement is the “name it and claim it exercise.” In this exercise believers who are “spiritually mature enough” (If you are spiritually mature enough, then this will work for you) are able to name what they want from God, and receive from God what they ask for in God’s name. It is in this theological formation that the “Prosperity Gospel” is identified. Jonathon Walton defines the movement as such: The prosperity Gospel affirms that God desires everyone to live a life of heath and wealth. Faith teachings reject traditional notions of Jesus as poor. The prosperity gospel teaches that Jesus was financially prosperous and that he desires the same for all believers. Two things are important to note concerning the prosperity gospel, First the prosperity asserts that everyone has the capacity to be a millionaire and never get sick. Second, at the core of the prosperity gospel is the capacity to transcend the world’s systems. Through faith and positive confession believers are able to reach as state of metaphysical physicality. As a result of this metaphysical physicality believers are able to reach a state of metaphysical existence in a physical world. Meaning, those people who are spiritually mature enough to exist in this reality will never be poor, nor will they ever become sick. Prosperity gospel provides the perfect partnership for a legitimization of capitalism and the providential pursuit of the American Dream. Prosperity Gospel’s inclusion of the addendum of spiritual maturity, gives all its believers another intangible merit to achieve while providing a failsafe for spiritual fatigue. The ability to name and claim future provides a intangible sense of instant gratification while keeping the focus on the hard work it takes to reach a place of spiritual maturity. Partnering with the prosperity gospel allows for unjust social practices and policies to exist. Walton explains that the prosperity gospel is not concerned with social justice primarily because social programs and resources cannot help people who are not spiritually mature enough to accept the blessings that come from God. He explains: Since Faith teachers interpret literally the biblical text “as a man thinketh so is he,” social programs and resources cannot help people who are not ‘walking in their anointing’ To overcome negative social conditions such as racism, sexism, and classism is to overcome the internal negative mind-set that unleashes these ‘isms’ in the world.’ In prosperity gospel, these unjust practices are unleashed by the power of negative thinking. The biggest adversary of the believer is what is spoken from the tongue. Likewise, the biggest proponent of the believer is what is spoken from the tongue. Since this belief is present, social programs can be transformed by simply a mature belief and a firm word from the mouth of one mature believer. This power is amplified once it is spoken from a community of believers, but it does not need a community for this transformation to take place. Prosperity gospel places the primary agency to the tongue and the faith of the individual believer. This individual aspect operates as a tool of docility for those in power structures. With the masses focused on individual merits, and spiritual maturity for personal gain, challenging social mores becomes not an action of God, but an action against God.
In prosperity Gospel God is not concerned with speaking truths to power, but rather God is primarily concerned that you are financially stable, debt free, and an entrepreneur. In contrast to liberation theology, God’s primary concern is not with the poor, but God’s concern is the wealth of everyone. Being poor is then a condition of the lazy, and spiritually immature. Simply put- If you are poor, then it is your fault. This is the language of capitalism. This is the language that undergirds the pursuit of the American Dream. It is this language that influences decisions that people make about public policy, politicians, and personal interests. In an article entitled “ Capitalism, Immigration, and Prosperity Gospel, author Daisy Machado says that Capitalism in the United States through belief systems such as these has benefitted from this ideology.
“In reality capitalism in the United States is deeply entrenched ideology (belief system) that has survived and benefitted from slavery, immigrant labor, and other forms of exploitation. Social scientists have also shown that there is a relationship between a belief system and how people make decisions. Because systems of belief help us to interpret the world around us, they shape our perceptions as well as the decisions we as individual as nations make.”

With this being the language that proponents of prosperity gospel are privy to then it becomes virtually impossible for individuals in prosperity Gospel to ever fully remove themselves from an impoverished existence. Prosperity gospel for its poor proponents serves as an opiate for continued poverty. It does not provide the agency or the upward mobility out of an impoverished state. In fact, much in conjunction with the American Dream, prosperity gospel is the perfect vehicle for a continuance of the status quo. When the poor believe that the future is in what they can speak or believe with a mature faith, then they operate in the present as if the future is in the present. Prosperity gospel is predicated on speaking the future in the present. This is why poor people will vote against social programs like Medicaid, Medicare, and social security. Much like the Parousia, they believe that wealth, riches, and financial security can happen at any moment. As result they will reject and sabotage progress in present as a selfish sacrifice for an impending future. The American dream and prosperity gospel make for perfect bedfellows because they both give participants a mythical goal in the form of providence with no tangible tools of achievement. They support a failed system of meritocracy, and when participants are left in despair, both the American Dream and Prosperity Gospel absolve themselves of any wrongdoing by placing the responsibility in the hands of the individuals. For instance, when Robert Tilton former prosperity pastor of the Word of Faith ministries in Carrollton Texas was indicted for extortion because he had “In the name of God” promised fortune and fame to many members of his congregation, Tilton’s unforgettable response was “Don’t blame me, blame God!”
Finally, the only question that remains is what can be done? Is there any hope for people trapped in a capitalistic construction of an illusive impossible dream that uses the vehicle of a brain numbing religious machine to sanctify and concretize its message? The answer to that question is not a resounding yes, but a slight maybe. Maybe is an appropriate response because the answer depends on whether or not what is “truth” to the believer can be redefined. Cornell West in his book Prophesy Deliverances says that the truth for Christians cannot be intellectually grasped. The truth can only be existentially appropriated. He states that this truth is found in Jesus Christ. He states:
If there is any test for the truth of particular Christian descriptions, it is their capacity to facilitate the existential appropriation of Jesus Christ. This means any ‘true’ Christian description makes the reality of Jesus Christ available, that it encourages the putting oneself on the line in negation of what is and the transformation of prevailing realities, of going to the edge of life’s abyss and finding out whether the reality of Jesus Christ-though understood through one’s finite Christian description-yields life sustenance, self formation, self maturation, and social amelioration.

If as believers we can summon the courage to redefine what is truth, then we can there is much transformation that can occur, but if we cannot then we will be forever relegated to naming, claiming, and chasing illusive dreams that only become reality for the one percent.

Bibliography
Bloomquist, Karen L. "Toward a theological engagement with working-class experience." Word & World 2, no. 3 (June 1, 1982): 270-276.

Corbin-Reuschling, Wyndy. "The impact of the American dream on evangelical ethics." Cross Currents 55, no. 3 (September 1, 2005): 340-350.

Cullen, Jim “The American Dream: A Short History of an Idea That Shaped a Nation.” Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003

Machado, Daisy L. 2010. "Capitalism, immigration, and the prosperity gospel." Anglican Theological Review 92, no. 4: 723-730.

Walton, Jonathan L. Watch this! the ethics and aesthestics of black televangelism. New York: New York Univ Pr, 2009.

West, Cornel. 1982. Prophesy Deliverance: An Afro-American Revolutionary Christianity. Westminster Pr, 1982.