Monday, November 27, 2006

On Societal Coarseness

First off, I must apologize to those one or two people that are actually reading my blog. Take my trip to Dallas, work, family coming into to town and Thanksgiving; throw them all into a week and voila, you have no posts for almost two weeks. Again, my apologies to the two people who were disappointed. Now, on to what you came for.

A rather disappointing trend I have noticed as of late is the general coarseness, crudeness and vulgarity of our modern society. Part of what inspired this post is I was having a discussion with a friend the other day and we were talking about how so much of the internet is crass and vulgar. It seems to be "successful", you have to be "shocking". Another part of what inspired this post is I was standing in the store the other day with my three young children and my wife. It was a small store; there was our family, two employees, a group of four twenty-somethings and a couple of other people. There, in the middle of the store, one of the twenty-somethings dropped an F-bomb, right out loud. No one even noticed. Me, I did a double-take. Come now. It’s bad enough to use that language in front of ladies, but my children? Really. Unfortunately, this seems to have become a pervasive problem in our society. Primetime television has no problem with “the B word”, SOB and innumerable other “lesser” swear words and profanities. Why has this become acceptable?

And it’s not just language. Sex sells. Nudity sells. Have you seen underwear commercials lately? There was a time such things were spoken of in hushed tones. Advertisements were discreet. Now, put the fliers in the Sunday paper. Splash them across the screen in primetime. Show the women prancing around the house in their underwear (Side note here. Who prances all over the house doing all kinds of stuff in nothing but your underwear?). Shoot, take products that aren’t even related to underwear and throw panties in there. Perhaps I’m just noticing things in the last few years as my kids get older, but it seems these things have changed. It seems I can’t even watch a ball game without scantily clad women acting suggestively in commercials (we’ll leave the cheerleaders and the excessive cleavage shots out for now). Now, I’m not a prude and I won’t deny that I “appreciate the female form” but I don’t need to be exposed to this on a constant basis and my kids surely don’t. But far from protecting our kids from these things, we embrace them. We wrap these things into our kid’s lives. May I point you to the Bratz?


Besides the materialism and shallowness that things like these obviously promote, hello, are you raising your daughter to be a hooker? Oh wait, perhaps it's a "Porn Star in Training". You've got to be kidding me. I can't imagine a parent anywhere who would be proud or even OK if there 30 year old daughter became a "Porn Star". People actually encourage that at a young age? And what of the skimpy girl's panties that have "yummy" printed on them (This I have seen with my own eyes in a national retailer). What? I don't want anything printed on my nine year olds underwear, much less a reference I'm not sure I completely understand and I certainly don't want her to understand. The sexualization of our children and of all of our society is indeed disturbing.

And there are other things too. For instance, what's up with all the tattoos and piercings? It seems you don't see a girl under the age of 30 these days without a tattoo somewhere. A quick side note here. The small of the back seems to be the location of choice. Setting aside the fact that that should be covered by a decent outfit, doesn't that seem incredibly painful? I cringe as I think about it. Perhaps I'm just a wimp; back on topic. Seems like most guys have at least one ear pierced, if not a tongue or, heaven forbid, some other area. There was a time that things like this were reserved for societal outcasts and oddballs. Today, they're mainstream. Now I'm not saying this is a horrible thing and will lead to the downfall of Western Civilization. But what ever happened to a sense of decorum? What happened to some semblance of class? Shoot, it's hard to find jeans that aren't "destroyed" anymore. Now I'm not saying we should all walk around in a suit and a tie, I mean, khakis and a button-up is about as dressed up as I like to get, but honestly, would it be that bad if people looked halfway decent before they walked out of the house? You know, put on jeans that don't have holes in them, shirts that aren't faded and without piercings sticking out of your body at all sorts of odd locations and angles. Perhaps I'm just a curmudgeon, but it really does seem to be getting out of hand.

What gets me is I'm not sure what's causing it all. I do have a theory though. Nothing's right or wrong. It's all about "expressing yourself" and "following your heart". People have no meaning in their life, so they look for meaning in fashion, sex, being "different" (even though they end up being just like everyone else). People have got to realize that your meaning and worth are not established on these physical trappings, but on something bigger, something outside yourself. The only place I see you can find meaning is in God.

Thursday, November 16, 2006

Texas, Here I Come

So tonight, I leave for Texas... I'm just going to be there two days for a meeting and then spending some time with my grandparents and (hopefully) cousins. I was born and raised in Texas for the first 8 years of my life. Once a Texan, always a Texan. Just for some reason, I'm not sure that I'm really a Texan. I'm not ready to call myself a Crucian, but I spent more of my "formative" years there than anywhere else. I haven't set foot in Texas in 4 1/2 years and I can't say, I "miss it". While I wouldn't mind living there, I don't know that it holds any more sway on me than any other place in the union. And I think I'd rather take my wife to St. Croix than Texas, because St. Croix "defines" me more. I know my family's liable to disown me if they read this, but hey... Personally, I consider myself a Floridian because that's where I live now. I guess I've never been tied to one location as much as most people are because I moved so much in life. If people ask me where I'm from, I'm just as likely to say Kentucky as Texas. Anybody else experienced this "locational identity" crisis, or is it just me? Anyway, I look forward to seeing my family and obtaining some precious chili (see previous post). I won't go so far as to say I'm "going home", but I'll borrow a line from the Backyardigans and say, "Texas, here I come."

The Finest Food Know to Man

Neighbor, How long has it been since you had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?
Well, that’s too long!

This evening, I leave for Texas on business. As part of my trip though, I'm picking up around 50 cans of the finest food know to man, Wolf Brand Chili. For some reason, Wolf Brand Chili (always referred to as, "Wolf Brand Chili", not Wolf Chili, not Chili. Wolf Brand Chili.) is not widely distributed outside of Texas. For those that have not had the pleasure of enjoying this delicacy, may I point you here. I have no idea why I was surprised this is offered on eBay, but I was... I can't wait to lug two suitcases full of canned goods through the DFW airport, but trust me, it'll be worth it...



Just Call Me Angel...

So I'm driving in to work this morning. It's that perfect time of day; 5:15 and dark. I'm awake, I'm alive, raring and ready to go and meet the world. I'm listening to Sirius 62, Classic Country. It's Johnny Cash, Merle Haggard, Waylon Jennings, back to back to back. I'm rocking out, singing along with every word; life is good. A minute later, I hear myself singing, "Just call me angel of the morning, just touch my cheek before you leave..." Juice Newton. Juice Newton?!? Yeah. All the "coolness" that I'd felt I possessed just moments before was gone in that brief instant. It was, shall we say, an uncomfortable moment... So I put in Gary Allan and made sure that wouldn't happen again...

By the way, for those who haven't checked out Gary's new CD Tough All Over, I would heartily recommend it. His song, Life Ain't Always Beautiful, could easily be one of my favorites of all time.

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

Glenn Beck Extremism Special

I know we're all busy and we already have our TV lineups cards filled out for each night of the week, but I would strongly encourage you to watch tomorrow's special on the Glenn Beck show. Glenn is doing a show on Islamic Extremism, using their speeches and videos. See what they say when they don't think we're listening. I've heard some of the translated speeches and videos and they're sad and disturbing. It's important that we know exactly what we're facing and the depth of their hatred. Please, take the time to check it out, it's running at 7:00PM EST and reairing at 9:00PM EST. TiVO, record, whatever; just please watch it...

Blog Changes

So I'm new to the whole blog thing. I'm feeling my way as I go, so last night I made some changes. Changed names, logo and I also added a RSS Feed. Be warned, the RSS Feed pulls up an advertisement every time your reader updates. I wouldn't pay the $5 a month to get rid of ads, so that's what you've got. Seems there's a common theme here. I wouldn't pay $5 a month, so I started a blog. I wouldn't pay $5 a month, so we've got ads in our RSS Readers. Well, the capitalist in me applauds the capitalist in them for wanting to make money. It also applauds me for not spending the money... If you have any trouble with the RSS Feed, let me know and I'll see if I can fix it.

My Comments on "'Consumer' Religion"

As promised, here are my thoughts on the article I posted yesterday. First some overall comments and then I’ll hit the highlights on some passages of particular interest.

I was discussing this article with the Preacher where I go to church and he thought it had a somewhat “anti-capitalism” feel to it. Personally, I didn’t get that at all. I got more that we need to be careful that: a) We don’t become “consumed with consumerism” and b) We don’t think religion is like picking a grocery store, done out of convenience and not on matters of principle.

a) As the prosperity of this nation has increased, we have become increasingly defined by our possessions. The “American Dream” is more and more defined as a certain level of “stuff” as opposed to doing better than previous generations, having a good family, etc. Some of you may have seen the story about the boy who used his dad’s credit card to fly to Cuba to live with his mother. http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20060927-1421-cubanboy.html Here’s what his dad had to say: “I'm hoping he will spend a couple of months there without his computer, plasma TV, iPod, and he'll want to come back,” Diaz told The Miami Herald. “My son likes the good things in life. He won't find that in Cuba.” The “good things in life” are his plasma TV and iPod? How empty and shallow his life must be. How shallow his father must be if he thinks those things will make his son come back. Unfortunately, I think this is an increasingly common perception; we are what we have. How futile and dangerous this is.

b) As Thomas Jefferson once said, “On matters of style, swim with the current, on matters of principle, stand like a rock.” It seems these days, it’s all about me. What makes me happy? How can I satisfy my immediate desire? And religion has become yet another place to find fulfillment. But it’s one of many, all equal and there are many variations, all equal. Moral relativism has invaded our churches and reduced their differences to a matter of style, nothing more than a personal preference.

Anyway, on with the highlights…

Margaret continued, "Faith Community has so much to offer our family, and I think it's really important to go someplace the boys like. When your kids are teenagers, you'll understand." Having played the evangelical trump card (the kids), Margaret sat back in her chair believing no further discussion was necessary.

It seems kids are the ultimate trump card in everything. “It’s for the children.” Don’t get me wrong, I’ve got three kids who I love to death, but your world does not and should not center on kids; especially in matters of right and wrong.

When we approach Christianity as consumers rather than seeing it as a comprehensive way of life, Christianity becomes just one more brand we consume along with Gap, Apple, and Starbucks to express our identity.

And the demotion of Jesus Christ from Lord to label means that to live as a Christian no longer carries an expectation of obedience and good works, but rather the perpetual consumption of Christian merchandise and experiences—music, books, t-shirts, jewelry.

Approaching Christianity as a brand (rather than a worldview) explains why the majority of people who identify themselves as born-again Christians live no differently than other Americans. According to George Barna, most churchgoers have not adopted a biblical worldview, they have simply added a Jesus fish to the bumper of their unregenerate consumer identities. As Mark Riddle observes, "Conversion in the U.S. seems to mean we've exchanged some of our shopping at Wal-Mart, Blockbuster, and Borders for the Christian bookstore down the street. We've taken our lack of purchasing control to God's store, where we buy our office supplies in Jesus' name."


I thought these three paragraphs were just great. Christianity has to be a life-changing thing to be real. It can’t just be “one more brand… to express our identity”. Couple that with the point the author is making about our unbridled restraint and how we think Christianity is something you purchase in a store, and I think it’s extra effective.

Being fully formed in a consumer worldview, Greg and Margaret intuitively accepted that the personal enrichment and fulfillment of desire is the highest good. As a result, they chose the church that best satisfied their family's preferences without bothering to consult their community, the Bible, or the Holy Spirit to gauge the legitimacy of those desires. After all, in consumerism a desire is never illegitimate, it is only unmet.

How many people believe that? “A desire is never illegitimate, it is only unmet.” Isn’t that what “believe in yourself”, “follow your heart” and all that drivel’s really saying? If you want it, you should have it. I’m not sure that’s ever an acceptable form of decision making, but it’s for sure not the way to go in religion.

This constant manufacturing of desires has created a culture of overindulgence. Obesity, sexual promiscuity, and skyrocketing credit card debt are just a few signs. Although lack of self-control has always plagued humanity, for the first time in history, an economic system has been created that relies on it. Now, if people began suppressing their desires and consuming only what they needed, our economy would collapse. To prevent this, satisfying personal desires has become sacrosanct.

I’m not sure I agree with much of the section preceding this paragraph, but it’s hard to argue with this. I would say the “constant manufacturing of desires” coupled with a loss of restraint due to the erosion of morals, is largely responsible for these things. As for the whole economic system, I would say that businesses are, and always have been, all about making money. That’s not a bad thing, just the way it is. It’s up to the consumer to rein in their consumption.

According to Finke and Stark, the American church adopted a consumer-driven model because the First Amendment prohibited state-sanctioned religion. Therefore, faith, like the buying of material goods, became a matter of personal choice. And "where religious affiliation is a matter of choice, religious organizations must compete for members and … the 'invisible hand' of the marketplace is as unforgiving of ineffective religious firms as it is of their commercial counterparts."

This explains why marketing strategies and secular business values are pervasive in today's ministry—we're in competition with other providers of identity and meaning for survival. We must convince a sustainable segment of the religious marketplace that our church is "relevant," "comfortable," or "exciting." (One billboard in my area proclaims, "Kids love our church. It's FUN!") And we must differentiate our church by providing more of the elements people want. After all, in a consumer culture, the customer is king.

Again, I go back to Jefferson. On matters of Principle, stand like a rock. Does truth exist or not? Can we customize truth to our liking? I believe the answer is a resounding, “No”. As such, we are competing, but we’re not marketing. We have one model to sell, no bells, no whistles, no special offers.

When I arrived at Starbucks to meet with Greg and Margaret, I first went to the counter to order a drink. The simple menu on the wall is deceptive. There was a time when ordering coffee meant regular or decaf, cream or sugar. Today, Starbucks provides literally 20,000 beverage permutations.

All right, it’s time for the partially pointless aside. I hate Starbucks. There are three choices when it comes to coffee: Decaf or Regular? Cream? Sugar? That’s it. No mas. You’re done. 20,000? Talk about a reason for societal collapse. Not to mention Starbucks gives 82% of their political contributions to liberal causes. Domino’s Pizza on the other hand? 93% to Republicans. Anybody in the mood for a 5-5-5 deal tonight?

At one church, upon arriving each family member can choose the worship setting that fits their personal desire. Simultaneously, grandma can sing hymns in the traditional service, mom and dad can enjoy coffee and bagels in the worship cafe, and the teenagers can lose their hearing in the rock venue. The value of shared experience and congregational unity is drowned out by consumerism's mantra of individual choice.

What about using the Gospel to attract people for a change? Paul said, “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.” (Rom. 1:16) Seems like Paul had a one size fits all solution.

Consumers demand options, but this poses a problem. Formation into the likeness of Christ is not accomplished by always getting what we want. In ages past, choice was not heralded as a Christian's right. In fact, relinquishing our choices by submitting to a spiritual mentor or community was prerequisite to growth in Christ. Believers were guided through formative and corrective disciplines—most being activities we would never choose if left to our desires. But surrendering control ensured we received what we needed to mature in Christ, not simply what we wanted.

“Formation into the likeness of Christ is not accomplished by always getting what we want.” How true is that? In fact, it’s the subrogation of our desires to those of God that make us in the image of Christ. How can we think that ignoring the Bible and elevating our choices to the highest good is what God would want?

Tragically, consumerism has led us to commodify parts of God's creation, too. Sexuality, for example, is commodified through pornography and prostitution. Human life is commodified when we begin thinking a person has a right to live only when wanted.

In our society the only value something or someone has is the value I give it. It should surprise no one that in our culture God also has no value apart from what he can do for me.


Great points. I can’t really add anything here, so I won’t.

Christian Smith, a leading sociologist of religion at the University of North Carolina, after five years of researching the spiritual lives of American teens, concluded that the faith of most teenagers, including those who attend evangelical churches, is MTD: Moralistic Therapeutic Deism. Smith explains:

"By 'moralistic' I mean being good and nice. … By 'therapeutic' I mean being primarily concerned with one's own happiness in contrast to focusing on glorifying God, learning obedience, or serving others. Finally, by 'deism' I mean a view of God as normally distant and not involved in one's life, except if one has a problem one needs God to solve. In other words, God functions as a combination divine butler and cosmic therapist."

Most teenagers hold this self-centered perception of God because it is the faith most American adults have as well. This god of consumerism shows no resemblance to the Consuming Fire described in Scripture. People may say they believe in Jesus, but the archaic Lord, who calls forth sacrifice, promises suffering in this life, and demands obedience for his glory, the one Barth described as "wholly other" is not what they have in mind. They're thinking of the Jesus that adorns t-shirts and SUV tailgates.


As always, we as humans are concerned with finding meaning in our life. This is just an attempt at finding meaning, without having to “inconvenience” ourselves by subjecting our will to that of God. If we can find the same meaning and benefit without making any sacrifices, why wouldn’t we? But the truth is we can’t.

The church does not exist to supply comfort, ease, and convenient services to religious consumers. And God is not a commodity that exists to make you feel better.

“Religion” is a way of life, not a consumer choice. It’s not about “feeling good about yourself” and satisfying a desire. It’s about completely subjecting your will to that of your Heavenly Father. We must never forget that and always pray as Christ did, “yet not as I will, but as You will."

Anyway, those are my thoughts. Anybody else have something?

Monday, November 13, 2006

"Consumer" Religion

I ran across this (rather long) article and found it rather interesting. I don't agree with all of the author's points, but I did find a number of them very insightful. I'll post my comments on it later, but here it is for your reading pleasure...
iChurch: All We Like Sheep
Is our insistence on choices leading us astray?
by Skye Jethani
I don't drink coffee but that hasn't stopped me from using the Starbucks across the street from my church as a second office. I sip my overpriced beverage in the armchair near the window. On this afternoon I was meeting Greg and Margaret—members of our church I'd worked with closely for the last few years.

"We've decided to leave Blanchard," Greg started. "For two months we've been church shopping." Church shopping—where did that dastardly term come from? I thought while gazing out the window at the swarm of suburbanites fluttering between The Gap, Banana Republic, Barnes & Noble, and Williams-Sonoma.

"We really love Blanchard," Margaret added to soften the blow. "It's been a great church for our family, with a wonderful children's program. Greg and I really like it, but our boys are teenagers now and they prefer the music at Faith Community*." I took a sip of my preferred drink—a tall, no whip, Tazo chai latte. Maybe I should have gotten the low cal, non-fat, grande Earl Grey, with Splenda.

Margaret continued, "Faith Community has so much to offer our family, and I think it's really important to go someplace the boys like. When your kids are teenagers, you'll understand." Having played the evangelical trump card (the kids), Margaret sat back in her chair believing no further discussion was necessary.

"What are you going to do when your boys leave home in a few years?" I asked.

"I'm not sure," said Greg. "Maybe we'll come back to Blanchard."

"I hope you don't," I replied, meaning no malice. I did, however, relish the stunned look on their faces, if just for a moment. "I hope that you commit yourselves so fully to Faith Community—building strong relationships, serving with your gifts, participating in its mission—that you could never see yourselves leaving that church. I really believe God grows us most when we are committed to a community."

For the next hour we had a difficult but edifying conversation about their decision to leave. Then I prayed for Greg and Margaret in the middle of Starbucks, and watched from my chair by the window as they drove away in their SUV, a chrome fish on the tailgate.

From Lord to Label
Christian critiques of consumerism usually focus on the dangers of idolatry—the temptation to make material goods the center of life rather than God. This, however, misses the real threat consumerism poses. As contingent beings, we must consume resources to survive. The problem is not consuming to live, but rather living to consume.

We find ourselves in a culture that defines our relationships by our purchases. As the philosopher Baudrillard explains, "Consumption is a system of meaning." We assign value to ourselves and others based on the goods we purchase. One's identity is now constructed by the clothes you wear, the vehicle you drive, the music on your iPod. In short, you are what you consume.

This explains why shopping is the number one leisure activity of Americans. It occupies a role in society that once belonged to religion—the power to give meaning and construct identity. Consumerism, as Pete Ward concludes, "represents an alternative source of meaning to the Christian gospel." No longer merely an economic system, consumerism has become the American worldview—the framework through which we interpret everything else, including God, the gospel, and church.

When we approach Christianity as consumers rather than seeing it as a comprehensive way of life, Christianity becomes just one more brand we consume along with Gap, Apple, and Starbucks to express our identity.

And the demotion of Jesus Christ from Lord to label means that to live as a Christian no longer carries an expectation of obedience and good works, but rather the perpetual consumption of Christian merchandise and experiences—music, books, t-shirts, jewelry.

Approaching Christianity as a brand (rather than a worldview) explains why the majority of people who identify themselves as born-again Christians live no differently than other Americans. According to George Barna, most churchgoers have not adopted a biblical worldview, they have simply added a Jesus fish to the bumper of their unregenerate consumer identities. As Mark Riddle observes, "Conversion in the U.S. seems to mean we've exchanged some of our shopping at Wal-Mart, Blockbuster, and Borders for the Christian bookstore down the street. We've taken our lack of purchasing control to God's store, where we buy our office supplies in Jesus' name."

I Can't Get No …
During my conversation with Greg and Margaret at Starbucks, I asked how they came to choose Faith Community as their new church. "Did you pray as a family about this decision?" No.

"Did you involve your small group or seek the wisdom of an elder in the decision?" No.

"Did you investigate the church's doctrine, history, or philosophy of ministry?" No.

"Did you base your decision on anything other than what you 'liked'?" No.

Believe it or not, Greg and Margaret are educated professionals capable of making intelligent decisions. How then do we make sense of their impulsive church shopping?

Being fully formed in a consumer worldview, Greg and Margaret intuitively accepted that the personal enrichment and fulfillment of desire is the highest good. As a result, they chose the church that best satisfied their family's preferences without bothering to consult their community, the Bible, or the Holy Spirit to gauge the legitimacy of those desires. After all, in consumerism a desire is never illegitimate, it is only unmet.

People have not always lived this way. Consumers, like the goods they buy, were made not born. The advent of mass production during the Industrial Revolution created previously unimaginable quantities of goods—far more than the market needed. Manufacturers suddenly needed a way to artificially increase demand for their products. Advertising was born.
Ads became the prophets of capitalism—turning the hearts of the people toward the goods they didn't know they needed. They subtly or overtly promised more comfort, status, success, happiness, and even sex to people who purchased their wares. In 1897 one newspaper reader said that in the past we "skipped ads unless some want compelled us to read, now we read to find out what we really want."

Today, according to The New York Times, each American is exposed to 3,500 desire-inducing advertisements every day promising us that satisfaction is just one more purchase away. Rodney Clapp writes, "The consumer is schooled in insatiability. He or she is never to be satisfied—at least not for long. The consumer is tutored that people basically consist of unmet needs that can be appeased by commodified goods and experiences."

This constant manufacturing of desires has created a culture of overindulgence. Obesity, sexual promiscuity, and skyrocketing credit card debt are just a few signs. Although lack of self-control has always plagued humanity, for the first time in history, an economic system has been created that relies on it. Now, if people began suppressing their desires and consuming only what they needed, our economy would collapse. To prevent this, satisfying personal desires has become sacrosanct.

During World War II, for example, the government severely restricted public consumption of certain goods needed for the war effort. Following 9/11, however, Americans were repeatedly told that to refrain from buying, traveling, and continuing our lifestyle was tantamount to "letting the terrorists win."

For consumers, fulfillment of desire is the highest good and final arbiter in making decisions—even deciding where to worship.

Kingdom Competition
It isn't difficult to see the incompatibility of consumerism with traditional Christianity. Scripture champions contentment and self-control, not endless pursuit of personal desire. Unfortunately, teaching and modeling these Christian values is not a high priority in most churches. In fact, many churches use the same techniques pioneered by consumerism to draw people through their doors.

Roger Finke and Rodney Stark, co-authors of The Churching of America, 1776-1990, argue that ministry in the U.S. is modeled primarily on capitalism, with pastors functioning as a church's sales force, and evangelism as its marketing strategy. Our indoctrination into this economic view of ministry may prevent us from recognizing how unprecedented it is in Christian history.

According to Finke and Stark, the American church adopted a consumer-driven model because the First Amendment prohibited state-sanctioned religion. Therefore, faith, like the buying of material goods, became a matter of personal choice. And "where religious affiliation is a matter of choice, religious organizations must compete for members and … the 'invisible hand' of the marketplace is as unforgiving of ineffective religious firms as it is of their commercial counterparts."

This explains why marketing strategies and secular business values are pervasive in today's ministry—we're in competition with other providers of identity and meaning for survival. We must convince a sustainable segment of the religious marketplace that our church is "relevant," "comfortable," or "exciting." (One billboard in my area proclaims, "Kids love our church. It's FUN!") And we must differentiate our church by providing more of the elements people want. After all, in a consumer culture, the customer is king.

When I arrived at Starbucks to meet with Greg and Margaret, I first went to the counter to order a drink. The simple menu on the wall is deceptive. There was a time when ordering coffee meant regular or decaf, cream or sugar. Today, Starbucks provides literally 20,000 beverage permutations.

While enjoying our drinks of choice, Greg and Margaret proceeded to explain how Faith Community Church had multiple services, including Saturday, so they could choose a time that fit their busy schedule. Blanchard only has three services—all on Sunday morning. The youth group had multiple worship teams for their son, a drummer, to play on. Ours only has one. And, because Faith Community was "way bigger" than Blanchard, it had more to offer Greg and Margaret too.

Ironically, they had come to Blanchard years earlier from a smaller church. What goes around comes around, I guess.

Decisions, Decisions
One of the core characteristics of consumerism is choice. With each new option, the shopper is better equipped to construct his unique identity. Customization, creating a product that conforms to my particular desires, has driven businesses to offer an ever-increasing number of choices. This trend is seen most clearly in the iPod. No longer is a listener required to buy an entire CD to enjoy just one song. You now have instant access to millions of songs, and download them individually for a personalized playlist. The demand for more choices also drives modern churches. The goal is to provide religious consumers with as many individualized choices as possible. The latest permutation is "video venues."

At one church, upon arriving each family member can choose the worship setting that fits their personal desire. Simultaneously, grandma can sing hymns in the traditional service, mom and dad can enjoy coffee and bagels in the worship cafe, and the teenagers can lose their hearing in the rock venue. The value of shared experience and congregational unity is drowned out by consumerism's mantra of individual choice.

"The inspiration for what this church is doing," one journalist reports, "comes from a place where freedom of choice and variety are celebrated: the American shopping mall." To which the pioneering pastor responds, "I am very comfortable with a consumer mindset and use that tool to help reach people."

To Meet, or to Discipline Desire?
Consumers demand options, but this poses a problem. Formation into the likeness of Christ is not accomplished by always getting what we want. In ages past, choice was not heralded as a Christian's right. In fact, relinquishing our choices by submitting to a spiritual mentor or community was prerequisite to growth in Christ. Believers were guided through formative and corrective disciplines—most being activities we would never choose if left to our desires. But surrendering control ensured we received what we needed to mature in Christ, not simply what we wanted.

In consumer Christianity, however, church leaders function as religious baristas, supplying spiritual goods for people to choose from based on their preferences. Our concern becomes not whether people are growing, but whether they are satisfied. An unhappy member, like an unhappy customer, will find satisfaction elsewhere. As one pastor enthusiastically said, "The problem with blended services is that half the people are happy half the time. With a video venue, you can say, 'If you don't like this service style, try another one!'"

Ironically, this demand for choice that has fueled the consumer church may ultimately be its undoing. According to George Barna's book, Revolution, 20 million Americans are no longer satisfied with the options available at institutional churches. Instead they're "choosing from a proliferation of options, weaving together a set of favored alternatives into a unique tapestry that constitutes the personal 'church' of the individual."

It's the logical conclusion of consumer Christianity: iChurch.

The new breed of Christian consumers, Barna's "revolutionaries," customize discipleship the way iPod users customize a playlist. They might find encouragement at a community support group, worship at a Third Day concert, listen to a podcast sermon, and read about the topic of the day at the Christian bookstore. While the church as we've known it fades into memory like vinyl LPs.

Divine ButlerUltimately, our greatest concern should not be consumerism's erosion of the church, but the commodification of God himself. Prior to the Industrial Revolution, most of the food, clothing, tools, and furniture people used was made at home or by someone nearby. Every item had a story and person attached to it that was known by its user. A rocking chair had value not only for its comfort, but because Uncle John made it.

Today, as I sit in my favorite armchair at Starbucks enjoying my tea, I have no idea who assembled the chair, who grew the tea leaves, who designed the cup—I barely know the guy with the nose ring behind the counter who poured the hot water. Consumerism has stripped the goods I use everyday from their context—they have no story or value apart from my consumption of them.

Tragically, consumerism has led us to commodify parts of God's creation, too. Sexuality, for example, is commodified through pornography and prostitution. Human life is commodified when we begin thinking a person has a right to live only when wanted.

In our society the only value something or someone has is the value I give it. It should surprise no one that in our culture God also has no value apart from what he can do for me.

Christian Smith, a leading sociologist of religion at the University of North Carolina, after five years of researching the spiritual lives of American teens, concluded that the faith of most teenagers, including those who attend evangelical churches, is MTD: Moralistic Therapeutic Deism. Smith explains:

"By 'moralistic' I mean being good and nice. … By 'therapeutic' I mean being primarily concerned with one's own happiness in contrast to focusing on glorifying God, learning obedience, or serving others. Finally, by 'deism' I mean a view of God as normally distant and not involved in one's life, except if one has a problem one needs God to solve. In other words, God functions as a combination divine butler and cosmic therapist."

Most teenagers hold this self-centered perception of God because it is the faith most American adults have as well. This god of consumerism shows no resemblance to the Consuming Fire described in Scripture. People may say they believe in Jesus, but the archaic Lord, who calls forth sacrifice, promises suffering in this life, and demands obedience for his glory, the one Barth described as "wholly other" is not what they have in mind. They're thinking of the Jesus that adorns t-shirts and SUV tailgates.

Any resentment I had toward Greg and Margaret quickly waned. Like many others at my church, they were simply doing what they had been formed to do. I may as well be angry at a fish for swimming. Immersed in a consumer culture, Greg and Margaret were simply living like consumers. The truth is I failed Greg and Margaret. I failed to teach them that the core values of consumerism are incongruent with the Christian life. That making choices to satisfy immediate personal desires is not the goal of life.

The church does not exist to supply comfort, ease, and convenient services to religious consumers. And God is not a commodity that exists to make you feel better.

Perhaps I failed Greg and Margaret because I was too busy being a spiritual barista, not a pastor protecting Greg and Margaret from the 3,500 wolves in sheep's clothing they encounter every day. Whatever the reason, because of my failure, that responsibility now rests with the leaders of Faith Community Church.
Skye Jethani is assistant teaching pastor at Blanchard Road Alliance Church in Wheaton, Illinois.

Saturday, November 11, 2006

Who's Smarter Now?

From the Air Force vs. Army game this past weekend.

Reflections on Elections

So here's why the Republicans lost this week. It's not because Americans rejected conservatism. It's because the Republicans didn't offer it... In fact, most of the Democrats that won ran as "Blue Dog" (read "Conservative") Democrats. America is still a conservative nation and wants conservative leadership. But honestly, do the Republicans offer that right now? On a lot of issues, no. Look at the money they're spending. Look at the prescription drugs program. Why haven't they fixed the border? I could go on and on, but I think you get the picture. As a result of this, the Conservative base had no real reason to turn out. And those "Independents" who did want to vote for Conservatives were just as likely to vote for the Blue Dogs as a Republican, mainly due to the Republicans lack of ability to accomplish some important things (immigration reform, social security reform, tort reform) as well as their lack of ability to communicate effectively on the important issues, mainly the so-called "War on Terror" and the war in Iraq.

Which brings me to my next point. As I said before, I was as close to a one issue voter this election as I've ever been. To me, the primary point of concern in this election was the war in Iraq and the war against Islamic Fascism. The Republicans (I'll lay this primarily at the feet of President Bush) have almost completely failed to communicate the critical nature of our mission in Iraq. Iraq is all about reshaping the Middle East and destabilizing Iran. President Ahmadinejad has said repeatedly that Iraq is the head of the Islamic Caliphate. Osama bin Laden has said that we are involved in World War III in Iraq. How can people say we need to get out of Iraq? If we did, as soon as we did, Iran and Syria would be all over that country and it would be worse off than it was before. And it's not as if we haven't accomplished a lot and are continuing to accomplish good things in Iraq. Go here to download a video about Iraq and what the media's not reporting: http://www.glennbeck.com/realstory/iraq-video.shtml. We must "stay the course" in Iraq, both for our future and theirs. We are involved in a holy war, even if it's not of our choosing.

Friday, November 10, 2006

Comments on Another Blog

Well, the whole inspiration for this blog (perhaps not the whole, but the primary impetus) was another blog my sister pointed me to and I wanted to leave comments on, but couldn't because I wouldn't pay $5 a month to "upgrade". So, while it may be starting in the middle, I'm going to post my response to another post here. If you're interested, here's the link: http://www.pleonast.com/user/miklm.

Anyway, the comments I wanted to post are as follows:

I’m new to the whole “blogging scene” so I may be breaking a few rules here, but bear with me please. By the way, I’m Caribbeangirl’s brother, for what that’s worth. I have a few comments on your post and some of the responses. Quite a few actually… I’d be happy to discuss things further or leave it altogether. I would have posted on your blog, but I’m not “Gold” and didn’t feel like paying the $5 a month to do that…

1. “Anybody but a Republican”, huh? So you voted FOR the party that advocates abortion and advancing the gay agenda? You voted FOR the party that advocates for a pull-out from Iraq leading to the further destabilization of an already destabilized and dangerous region? That’s interesting. Why? I can’t believe no one has asked that question in the comments yet, so I’ll be the first. To a point, I understand your frustration with the Republican Party. I too am frustrated. On many issues, they have sold out. Immigration and Prescription Drugs come to mind. However, the Democratic Party is as bad and worse on most issues. I can’t think of an issue where my stance is closer to that of the Democrats than the Republicans. And I’ll be honest with you; this election, I was pretty close to a one-issue voter. We must “stay the course” in Iraq. Osama bin Laden and President Ahmadinejad (of Iran) have made it very clear that Iraq is central to their plan for the worldwide Islamic Caliphate. May I remind you this is the guy who prayed for Armageddon on the floor of the UN? These people are actively working to bring about the “end of the world” as they understand it. They are preparing facilities right now for the return of the Mahdi (their version of the Messiah). It doesn’t matter whether you believe in this stuff or not; they do. We ARE involved in a Holy War, even if it’s not one of our choosing. For that reason, I can’t support the Democrats.

2. Item by item on your gay marriage points.
“Government should not legislate morality.”
So you support giving children access to pornography at any age?
So you support allowing abortions at any time for any reason?
So you support allowing polygamy, marriage to the household pet, etc?
And of course you support the legalization of prostitution and “recreational” drugs, right?

Of course the government legislates morality. I don’t see how the passage from Romans that was posted previously couldn’t apply here. If God appoints government as his minister, you don’t think he’d want them to minister with morality?

“Knee-jerk constitutional amendments are a very bad idea, and are very seldom beneficial.”
Isn’t this a knee-jerk reaction to a knee-jerk amendment? Just because something is “bad” some or even most of the time, doesn’t not mean it is always bad. I don’t know about you, but if there were a constitutional amendment to ban abortion, I don’t care if it was “knee-jerk” or not, I’d vote for it in a heart beat. Let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

“’Same sex marriage’ is not legal in TN now. We don't need language added to the constitution that is already handled by other legislation.”
The judiciary has demonstrated numerous times that it WILL legislate from the bench. The only way to keep existing laws from being struck down as unconstitutional is to add them to the constitution. It will be interesting to see how these [State Constitutional Amendments] stand up when they are appealed to the Supreme Court for conformance to the US Constitution, but it is at least an additional layer of protection. Especially with controversial and “hip” issues like gay marriage, the only protection we have is constitutional amendments. Existing laws have been demonstrated repeatedly to be inadequate.

“The amendment does nothing to "protect" existing marriage. Even if gay people were allowed to marry, it won't affect a straight marriage one bit. Over 50% of marriages end in divorce now already; its a misnomer to cast this initiative as ‘protecting families and marriage.’”
While it might be a BIT of a misnomer, I don’t really see it as inaccurate. Currently, marriage is basically defined by most common sense people as 1 man, 1 woman. There are those who would like to change that to 2 men; 2 women; 1 man, multiple women; 1 man, 1 dog; ad infinitum. So formally and legally defining the institution of marriage as 1 man, 1 woman, will protect marriage. How could it not? Do we need to strengthen marriage between 1 man and 1 woman? Yes. Does that mean we should allow further dilution in the process? Absurd. As for families, it does strengthen them. God has defined a family as 1 father, 1 mother and children. Legal marriage entitles a couple to a whole host of rights. Among those is the right to adopt children much easier. I realize this happens now, but it will become much more widespread if gay marriage is legalized. Not to mention, if you think the gay agenda in education is bad now, just wait till gay marriage is legalized and that becomes even more of an accepted lifestyle. Oh, and if you want to laugh at me for saying gay marriage opens the door for polygamy and other forms of marriage, don’t. What stops those people? Why don’t they have the same right to define marriage as they see fit? What legal standing do you have to deny them? None. The battle for cultural acceptance of polygamy has already started and will intensify in the near future. HBO started a series (http://www.hbo.com/biglove/) featuring a polygamous family and I would say within 5 years there will be at least one network show featuring such a relationship. The gay agenda was advanced in the same way. Remember all the controversy about Candice Bergen being an unwed mother on Murphy Brown? That was 1992, folks, 1992! Less than 15 years ago. Look how far we’ve come now. Gays were introduced into television shows and shown to be an “acceptable lifestyle choice”. If we cave on gay marriage now, we will have NO STANDING WHATSOEVER when polygamy and marrying nonhuman or inanimate objects comes up, and trust me, it will.

“Its restrictive legislation, and does not promote ‘life, liberty, and happiness’ for all citizens.”
I really think this is just a subset of #1. We have all kinds of “restrictive legislation” and I’m not in favor of getting rid of much of it.

Just a couple of other comments I wanted to respond to.

“ I think it is equally sinful of government to deprive someone of medical benefits because they are a homosexual... or worse, because their parents are homosexuals.”
What exactly does this mean? I’m totally lost on this one. How is the government depriving someone of medical benefits? Help me understand this, please. If you’re saying it’s a right to have medical insurance and somehow that’s a function of the government, I couldn’t disagree more…

“It is not the job of government to save souls.”
I don’t see how this law has anything to do with saving souls. I see it as protecting families and our society.

“And we will not save souls by alienating them and depriving them of their needs.”
How are we alienating them? Don’t you think we should tell them that their lifestyle is wrong?

“I don't think Christ would have denied someone of health insurance”
Is that really what this is all about? Wow… I always thought Christ had bigger fish to fry than health insurance…