Just to start things off, from Merrriam-Webster:
“Consumerism- 1) the promotion of the consumer’s interests, 2) the theory that an increasing consumption of goods is economically desirable; a preoccupation with and an inclination toward the buying of consumer goods.”
So consumeristic Christianity might be seen as- 1) the promotion of the believer’s interests, 2) the theory that an increasing consumption of Christian related products and services is (theologically?) desirable; a preoccupation with and an inclination toward the buying of Christian products and services.

Rick, do you think it would be consumerist for a church to say “we’re here for you”?

I think Rick has given us a good start to a definition of “Consumerist Christianity.” Consumerism is deeply inter-twined with individualism. Consumerist Christianity is thus driven by an individualist narrative — i.e., what serves ME best? — and the Gospel is reduced to a religious product which is effective for my own personal salvation (versus the redemption of all creation).
This consumerist version of our faith leads to detrimental practices like church-shopping.
Hope this is not out of place here, but we are hosting a conference on exactly this topic in Indianapolis on Nov 13-14.
Through the Consuming Fire:
Economic Faithfulness in an Age of Consumerism
Speakers include: Shane Claiborne, Kelly Johnson (U of Dayton), Will Samson, David Fitch, Ragan Sutterfield and more…
Conference website: http://englewoodcc.com/consumingfire/

“we’re here for you” is consumerist in my opinion. It says, “come to us, we have what you need (to consume). The church should say, “we’re every you need us to be.”

Scot, I think so.
Wouldn’t the Church through the ages instead say, “we’re here with you?”

Here’s my problem. I understand the concept of geographic parishes. If you live on this side of the street you go to St. So-and-So. If you live on the other side of the street you go to St. Such-and-Such, period end of discussion. Questions of “fit” have precisely zero role in the conversation.
This cannot be right. Well, maybe it’s right but I don’t think so.
I also understand the concept of looking high and low trying to find the church that is the best fit *for you* — and that doesn’t seem right either.
I figure the truth is somewhere in the middle, but don’t know how to wrap my mind around it.

Scot —
I’ll take a stab at the question you posed to Rick…
Yes, I think so… especially because of the singular/plural ambiguity of you in English… The church does not exist for humanity, but rather for God. Maybe I’m reading too much into your question, but that statement seemingly shifts the fundamental narrative from God’s redemption of creation to individual narratives to which the church then becomes the servant.
To say “we’re here for you” is a very different thing than to say the less-problematic “We love you” or “We care for you”…
Chris

I’d say that a consumerist Christianity is both exchange and results oriented. For example:
1. A person believes that certain behaviors will ensure their “salvation” or will enable them to reap certain “blessings” in their lives.
2. A person believes that by reading certain books or listening to certain teachers that they will advance spiritually.
3. The notion that spiritual gifting or fruit is in direct proportion to what one does, reads, or listens to.
4. The expectation that attending the “right” church will cause individual growth.
5. The notion that “service” will result in an elimination or reduction of “problems”, impulses, or behaviors.

It seems to me that one of the biggest proofs of consumerism is the incessant search to create programs ad nauseum to “meet needs”. Churches in my area (south Texas) tend to act as if they are in competition with one another for the local sheep. The sheep have a punch list of “ministries” that they “need” in order to consider membership, so churches scramble to meet those needs in order to bring in the sheep. A lot of resources go into addressing this issue and it has not been my experience that it is a good thing.

Consumeristic Christianity for me is at least on one level protectionism. The exchange concept of faith eliminates the risk of being hurt or betrayed or rejected. Services render for fee paid – i.e. offering gives the illusion of a clean exschange. There is a minimal amount of personal investment or relationship. It is also very contract oriented, as long you provide “A” I will provide “B”. When one party or another stops, no harm – no foul, the relationship ends, and you go looking for the next provider.
As for what we ought to be saying to one another and in our circles, not so much we are here for you or with you, but in the lines of God, I will never leave you or forsake you.

Scot-
“…do you think it would be consumerist for a church to say “we’re here for you”?”
Not necessarily. It would depend on what the church meant, and it would depend on what the reader(s) took that to mean. Does it mean “we’re here for you” in support, encouragement, and growth in the faith (especially love God, love others); or does “here for you” mean you can be the focus of attention and use our services and products to get more of your own self-focused interests?
In a consumeristic society, such a phrase might draw in unchurched people who have that consumerism mindset. Now that might be seen as a good thing- trying to reach people.
Unfortunately, it also could be further promoting that troubling mindset. I have seen Skye indicate that he is particularly concerned about that consumerism worldview in contrast to a Kingdom worldview.
I think that tension of attractional and missional is part of the problem. Where do draw the lines in attracting people in their context, equipping people to mature in the faith, and promoting a missional mindset?
I currently attend a church that has a Starbuck’s in it. That may help draw people in and make them feel more comfortable, but I struggle with whether it is also sending the wrong message- no matter what is preached in a sermon.

“do you think it would be consumerist for a church to say “we’re here for you”?”
It does seem consumerist to me. Surely it’s more helpful to say we’re here for each other (eg Rom 12:4-5). That way the focus moves from me (and what I think I need) to others and what I can give.

I think the heart of consumerism is to take one’s desires as fixed, and the church (or somebody else) having an obligation to meet them. Whereas Christianity is about getting new desires, with the church having a role in shaping them and then (and only then) in meeting them.

I haven’t read Skye’s book so I’m just going to respond to the question and thread. It seems that the basic stance of the gospel is that we MUST sense a need and respond to God’s infinite capacity to meet that need. The problem of Israel was not sin as such. God knew they would sin, thus the whole sacrificial system. Jesus bursts on the scene and His message seems to be that need (mourning, weakness, poverty) is the very thing that render us able to receive grace. So the message, ‘we are here for you’ doesn’t, in itself strike me as consumeristic. We are consumers, contingent and needy beings from creation. There’s a lot to say here but that’s a little bit of a different perspective.
One other point…things that don’t look at all consumeristic (e.g. I was a missionary in the Middle East) can (and in my case did) have an element of what I’d identify as consumerism. My motives were mixed. There was a part of me that was attempting to experience life and gain worth through service and to put God in a place to have to bless me.
I guess our motives (individually and collectively) are always mixed.

Just hearing the term Consumerist Christianity and knowing nothing about it, I would say it has to do with how we have assimilated the world’s understanding of marketing into our churches.
It would have something to do with the way we present our churches to the public using modern means (ie. internet, commercials, TV shows, videos, etc.) and how we have gotten away from one on one relational modes of leading people into a relationship with Jesus.
It would also have something to do with how we market faith to Christians. Christian bookstores with their myriad of materials and music have become multi-million dollar businesses. Pastors and teachers are now expected to be best selling authors as well as church leaders. Musical artists have to have a certain amount of marketable charisma and good looks to make it in Christian music (find an “unatractive” artist if you can).
I think it might be that we have stopped presenting our faith as what it is and have tried to package it as what we think we can sell to the public.
When we do that is it really our faith anymore? or is it a watered down imitation?

This discussion dovetails with a discussion at my blog Monday about the distinction between “self-interest” and “selfishness” in economic discussions (they are not synonymous). I went through the gospel Matthew and found dozens of statements like the following three by Jesus.
Matt 6:14-15
14 For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you; 15 but if you do not forgive others, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
It is in your self-interest to forgive because you will get whatever you dish out.
Matt 11:28-30
28 “Come to me, all you that are weary and are carrying heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”
It is in your self-interest to lean on Jesus because your burden will be lighter.
Matt 19:29-30
29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or fields, for my name’s sake, will receive a hundredfold, and will inherit eternal life. 30 But many who are first will be last, and the last will be first.
It is in your-self interest to forsake all and follow Jesus because you will be richly rewarded.
Is Jesus teaching a consumerist gospel?

Consumerist and the spiritual disciplines go together. Spiritual disciplines(from Williard and Foster) are a response to Christians not living the life. My neighbors don’t let their people go to school past the eighth grade, because they feel to do so is a response to pride. They practice many other forms of asceticism in the name of humility. However, you can physically feel their pietism when you walk among them. You can see them look at outsiders as aliens.
I personally feel the old notion of “means of grace” is more profitable spiritually. But I will acknowledge that a long term diet of this makes people look more like the culture around them.
Why do we need to throw a blacklight on the congregation to examine where Jesus is being honored in our hearts? I’m asking, does this also come from a form of pietism?

“We’re here for you…” If I were to say “I’m here for you” to someone, would anyone think that was out of place? I don’t think so.
So if a group of people come together with that same heart attitude and say that “we’re here for you,” is that out of place? It even adds the vaunted communal element rather than individualism. We, the church, who have been touched by God’s grace and are in the process of being transformed should exist for others and can usually only touch one person at a time thus the validity of “you.”
“Consumer Christianity” as many others have said is all about ME. There is no place for God, the gospel, Scripture, truth or community because it is about ME. Yet I don’t think that there is really any guaranteed markers of what this looks like because it is ultimately a heart attitude that we bring from the world, flesh and Satan. “If you love the world, love for the Father is not in you.”

I would agree with Michael’s comment – the church has been profoundly affected by the commercial/marketing industry in America. Gift stores, the CCM industry, a plethora of Bibles targeted for every conceivable group, Testamints, etc., etc. You name it we have learned to sell it. Can God use it? Sure He can. Has it been a healthy things for the church? I am much more pessimistic about that.

Michael,
He is if you only look at those verses and ignore the rest
I think consumerist Christianity is at play whenever people describe their faith primarily in terms of how comforting it is. Faith in God can be a great comfort during troubling times, and it is good to be (and to feel) reconciled to God and at peace with yourself. But our faith is also a great challenge to us, or it should be. When we pick up on only one half of Abraham’s call (I will bless you) and not the second half (and make you a blessing), we are stuck in consumerist Christianity.

Greetings:
Our church has been under a teaching concerning “old” vs “new”covenant. As our pastor pointed out, you get a “gray area” between the two and to me anyway, you get an atmpsphere ripe for consumer Christianity.I agree with everything that has been said but would like to offer something else.
To win more and more consumers, some churches have stripped away anything that would offend anyone, simply to gain more members (consumers). This could mean watered down messages, shortened prayer and/or service times, etc. ANYTHING that would be offensive to anyone would be removed to promote more consumers of what was going on in that particular church. This would also include, as mentioned above, the series or punchlist of ministries or “programs” that are in place.
What happened to the fact that we are supposed to be walking in new covenant? How about the fact that Christ himself commanded us to go and preach the good news, heal the sick and do greater works than he did? What about the fact that we are born again and have become new creatures. We WERE born of sin but as new creatures will not die as sinners. If we are new creatures, aren’t we supposed to rely on Jesus and not consumerism? People, especially in this day need real Christianity and not programs. They need to see Christ in us.

#8 above has me thinking about this question also in terms of marketing Jesus and the church. Christian publishers often seek what will sell rather than what will truly edify the church (though it’s not necessarily an either/or). We have Christian t-shirts with silly slogans, Testamints (for your unholy breath), gold and silver Christian jewlery. Study Bibles are tailor-made to fit every imaginable demographic, sometimes with an author’s name on the cover in larger print than the word “Bible.” The consumerist tendency in the church has created a hugh market that depends on Christians spending money that could otherwise be used to care for the poor, spread the good news, etc. Should we be worried? Would Jesus flip over our tables?

It would be a consumerist Christianity church it it said,
“You’re here for us.”

Wow. What a fantastic, multifaceted topic. I’ll have to add this book to my Wish List.
You ask some good questions, Scot. The discussion has served as a reminder for me to consider the log sticking out of my own eye before going after everyone else’s specks.
For me, the biggest red flag for Christian consumerism would be when God wants whatever we want. God wants me to get this new car. God wants me to go to the Bahamas for vacation. God wants me to get a book deal. God wants me to have a better job. God wants So-and-So to get elected. God wants us to have stainless steel kitchen appliances.
Playing the God card cuts us off from the wisdom and advice of our brothers and sisters, and from the possibility that we may be wrong. So I think sometimes Christian consumerism hides behind “God wants me to have [fill in the blank]” because we feel we have compensated for our greed by spiritualizing it.
It seems to me that Jesus treated wealth as being neutral AT BEST and a temptation/stumbling block at worst. Perhaps if pastors and church leaders did not refer to new sound systems/kitchens/parking lots as “blessings,” we would have a healthier perspective on the potential pitfalls of believing that God is in the business of giving us lots of stuff.

A second thought on this could also be that we as Christians have become consumers of church. We have simply gotten to the place where the ‘McDonaldization’ of faith has truly taken place and we go to church to pick up a few spiritual songs, a good word and a couple of handshakes on the way out.
If this is the case, the issue of the disciplines, which I missed earlier as part of the discussion, would come into play. Obviously if all we want is bare minimum Christianity, then the disciplines of faith are buzz words for things we don’t really do but really like to talk about in the right company.
Sounds a little depressing doesn’t it?

I think it’s right to say there’s an issue, so don’t think that I’m countering the fact that consumerism is a reality that has to be addressed. However…
Paul wrote, in 1 Corinthians, “My speech and my proclamation were not with plausible words of wisdom, but with a demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith might rest not on human wisdom but on the power of God.”
Seems like all Evangelicalism is these days is “plausible words of wisdom”. Where’s the power? Where’s the life? It’s there, I’ve heard the stories too, but for so many people all it is is words–words on a Sunday morning that little spreads into the week, and not because they’re terrible, greedy people. Because they attended church for a very long time and there’s just no there there.
The situation is a lot like the one restaurant in town that dishes up overcooked hamburgers that started as rancid meat, served with burnt fries. The manager says it’s the only food in town, so eat it. People who don’t know better eat it. Other places open up, who serve nutritious meals, healthy and varied that suit people’s differing tastes. The owner of the first restaurant decries the consumerism of the people, for abandoning the traditions of the one-time only restaurant, all while still serving up those mangy meals.
I remember reading the early church fathers when I was young, in college, and getting really mad at the Evangelical churches of my growing up who taught me all kinds of stuff, but never the depth and meat of the Christian faith. It was like I discovered a hidden mansion behind a small door of the trailer I called my home.
More, there’s different kinds of consumerism. And pastors have their own pretty strong kind. Only it’s called leadership development, and leadership training, or vision casting, or whatever. Emphasize and promote up the most naturally talented, the folks who can fill the plate the most, the people who love sales and have a happy smile and warm handshake. Make them elders or put them in other leadership roles. Confuse business acumen for spiritual maturity. Go to where the best ministries are happening because of a “call” from God. Have a new, quite expensive church building because that’s a “vision” for your community. Surround yourself with the best sorts of people, the grandest kind of building, the most dynamic “happening” ministry all while decrying the consumerism of hoi polloi.

When we focus on what the Gospel “gives” us and neglect how we participate in it, then it has become consumerist.

I think it was Eddie Gibbs who once noted that for many churches, and pastors, the great bulk of the people who attend are primarily important only as much as they fill the plate.
“You’re here for me,” is a very, very common sentiment, though not often consciously realized, by far too many pastors.

Consumer Christianity is a religion that claims that the customer (seeker, congregant, member, attendee, . . . etc) is king, the customer is therefore the object of worship. The Church must supply whatever the customer wants. in Christianity, the Triune God is King; and the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are worshipped.

I think C. S. Lewis said it best: consumerism is a focus on “second things.” If you seek “second things” first, you lose both the first things and the second things. If you seek the “first things” first, you will have both the “first things” and the “second things”. Anything that isn’t first thing isn’t God.
Consumerism is a focus on second things.

I would say that Consumerist Christianity is the nature and practice (and even beliefs) of the Church are significantly shaped (or dictated) by the individual and collective choices of the Christians involved. It functions on the assumption that meeting desires and/or perceived “needs” of people to attract their involvement is a necessary, effective and acceptable way of propagating the faith. While the specific expression of Consumerist Christianity is shaped contextually, it generally promises (either explicitly or implicitly) a reduction/removal of suffering here and now, while offering “happiness” through increasing material wealth and/or physical well being.
Just a few thoughts.
Peace,
Jamie

Seems to me that consumerist Christianity, by definition, places the consumer and his/her undisciplined (re: culturally shaped) needs at the center rather than the will/intentions of God. Several years ago I dedicated a year sabbatical to the study of consumerism, especially the notion of “need.” I found that “need” occurs more often than not in one of three forms: (1) biologically based need (things we must have to survive…e.g. food, water, sleep, etc (2) needs that the experts said we had (c.f. Maslow, Glasser, etc.) and (3) “felt needs”, which in a capitalist system are seen to be determined by the consumer.
With regard to group 2…psychologists etc. debate which list of needs is the “correct one”. (there are several lists) I suggested in the summary of my research that the “spoils go to the victor”…i.e. if I can tell you without question what your human needs are then I can also tell you how best to meet them and I can sell my insights to the highest bidder.
With regard to group 3…”felt needs” are the brainchild of a market driven economy…Marketers want us to have an infinitely mulitplied list of needs because more needs = more sales. (After all, these are NEEDS by definition are those things that must be filled if you are to survive and thrive
My good friend, Phil Kenneson, used to say: “The church does not exist to meet people’s needs; the church exists to help us understand what our legitimate needs are.”
No list from group 2 (psychologists) contained our need for forgiveness or redemption. And, given the selfish presuppositions of group 3 (market-driven), such ‘needs’ may not even be considered…they are up to the “consumer’.
I would suggest that if we will give ourselves to “helping God get what God is after” (or give ourselves to “thy kingdom come, thy will be done”) the needs of people will be met. But, if we give ourselves to meeting the needs of people as determined by people (whether experts or consumers) we may both miss the real needs of people and will most assuredly miss joining God in realizing God’s intentions, God’s kingdom.

Hmmm… Hard question to answer.
It appears that one would need to define ‘consumerist’ and ‘Christian Faith’. It’s my experience that ‘consumerist’ is the system of ‘buying’ and ‘selling’. Where one is sold on a certain product/church experience and then invests in that product.
The problem with seperating that ‘system’ from the Christian faith is that the people become confused with seperating their own experiences with the true nature of what a church is. Technically throughout history consumerists have been coming to church for various reasons. It’s not necessarily new, just more blatent.
The church is meant to ‘draw’ people in, ideally to experience/ have a relationship with the divine. Where this goes wrong is when a faith community is focused on the consumers rather than their ‘call’ to be light.
How does one honestly realize this? I believe most religions have a consumerist mentality because of human nature. What made Christianity different when it started 2,000 years ago was that they were living in community and were centered on a genuin God who did change lives.
So consumerist Christianity will never go away. But God is real and can work with anything…

Two thoughts, nay, three:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9dvVp0Nxjo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4QFKS4LzS4
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGEmlPjgjVI

Many commenters have already given good working definitions of what consumerist Christianity is, so I won’t try to add to them. However, I’d like to add an extra dimension: consumerism is such a powerful, all-pervading, defining force in Western society that most of us Christians are unaware of the extent to which it often infiltrates and distorts our every belief and practice. It’s therefore very difficult for us to objectively identify the effects of consumerism on our lifestyle and faith. It’s insidious.
The antidote? The gospel. I’m increasingly convinced that the failure of many (most?) churches to clearly and consistently preach the gospel is one of the key factors in people living a diluted, consumerised form of Christianity ??you could say “having a form of godliness but lacking the power thereof” ? which ultimately has no roots and collapses when tough times come.
Funnily enough, Jared Wilson posted a short video of Matt Chandler talking about this very issue over on his blog today. Have a look ? it’s worth it: http://gospeldrivenchurch.blogspot.com/2009/08/when-you-assume-gospel-you-adopt.html

You all are making some really good observations and comments. Thanks for starting the conversation, Scot.
In my own understanding of Consumer Christianity there are a few things that should be defined. First, there is a significant difference between “consumption” (a behavior) and “consumerism” (a worldview). We often get these two confused and start condemning people for consumption, a necessary although often abused activity of all living creatures. You can read more about the distinction here:
http://www.skyejethani.com/consumption-versus-consumerism/356/
I also see Consumer Christianity, and the worldview of Consumerism upon which it is built, as having three principles…the unholy trinity of Consumerism:
1. Commodification: A product/person/god has no intrinsic worth. Its value is found not in what it is, but it what it can be exchanged for. (Think about how this applies to our relationships, sexuality, work, and even worship.)
2. Alienation: Separating a product/person/god from the story that gives it meaning and context. It exists simply to satisfy my need/desire. (Could this explain the decline in biblical literacy?)
3. Branding: Identity is an external construct that is primarily about perception rather than a product/person/god’s actual substance. (How does this impact discipleship or lack of it? Being Christian in our culture no longer carries an expectation of internal transformation, but external conformity to a sub-culture.)
This doesn’t answer Scot’s original question, but I hope it adds more material for debate into the conversation.
Blessings,
Skye

Scot, read this book earlier in the year and it is truly excellent and prophetic. What’s consumerism? A promise that says ‘This is where you will find happiness and meaning and pleasure?. At heart therefore it it idolatry. Alan Storky puts it ‘Consumption is … the healer, the entertainer, the lover, the spiritual, the feeder and the consolation. It is the chief rival to God in our culture.?
I’d love to hear folks thoughts on how to be counter-cultural in a consumer culture. How effectively are churches being counter-cultural here or have we so bought into consumerism that we have little to say ..?

From what Skye says, Storky’s quote would be better starting with ‘Consumerism ..’ not ‘Consumption’!

So I still haven’t seen any response to my #16.
Jesus clearly, unabashedly, and constantly casts his invitations and directives with the inclusion of an answer to the question, “What’s in it for me?” Why is Jesus not preaching a consumerist gospel?

Christianity becomes consumeristic when it turns the spiritual life completely inward as opposed to promoting a life lived poured out for others.

#20 Travis #38
I missed #20. (But you don’t count. )
The covenant perspective is a good one. It indeed contains two parts. And isn’t one legitimate part, “What’s in it for me?”

Michael (#16),
I’ll respond to your very valid question. I think you’re right. Jesus does frequently appeal to our self-interests. Consider the parable of the treasure hidden in the field, or the pearl of great price…they both are stories of people giving up a little to gain a whole lot more.
Here’s the rub…Jesus promises INFINITE gratification while Consumerism promises INSTANT gratification. (Chapter 6 of The Divine Commodity unpacks this much more.) The Christian life is one of following in the steps of Jesus from the garden, to the cross, and out of the tomb. There is a call to die to self before the new life and infinite satisfaction is experienced. Consumer Christianity does not carry a message of personal sacrifice, only a message of the immediate satisfaction of one’s felt-needs.

Michael,
In response to your #16, I would add that by Skye’s standards (which are the underlying terms for this conversation) the dialogues you are referring to seem to be under the categories of persuasion and subversion. Jesus is trying to get people to extend their view of self-interest, by moving their thinking about what is most close and intimate (their own wellbeing) to what is harder to comprehend and reconcile (the wellbeing of others). It’s a rhetorical strategy to describe the Kingdom worldview in terms that make it easy for a follower to begin examining themselves and their supposed “interests”. By Skye’s definition (commodification, alienation, branding), I don’t see a consumerist gospel there, do you?

#42
I think you have nailed the differences.
“There is a call to die to self before the new life and infinite satisfaction is experienced.”
But note that there is something in it for me. What I’m driving at is that both genuine Christianity and consumer Christianity have in common: An answer to the “What’s in it for me?” question. Yet, I sense that some here would say that that is not valid to ask this question. True?
(And for the record, I’m not laying all my cards on the table yet. I’m trying to see how others process the point I’m making.)

I know I’m in a consumerist church when:
I feel uncomfortably pressured to spend–for the “right” coat for my five yo, for the “right” house, for the “right” car and for the Disney World vacation.
When family events are priced to make a profit for the church — and are promoted to the kids in Sunday School, with no thought of families who can’t afford it.
When the pastor courts the wealthier church members for donations.
When the appearance of the church takes up too much time, money and energy.
When money is seen as a mark of God’s favor.

Michael,
I’m stating the obvious, but when you’re in love — with the church, with your beloved, the new baby, Jesus, God– you want to do anything for the beloved. What’s in it for you is being in presence of the beloved, protecting the beloved, doing the will of the beloved. So “what’s in it for me” in the crassest sense is a secondary concern. Most of us would give up consumer goods to be with the one(s) we love.

Here’s an instance where I’ve known it when I’ve seen it (or in this case, heard it):
My local Christian radio station plays messages (ads) for its underwriters, including churches. One such ad from a local church featured recorded answers from various members of this church to the question: “Why do you attend __________ church?” The answers ranged from “the preaching is right from the word of God, just like it should be” to “the children’s program is awesome”, etc. Not one response was anything like “because I really feel this is where God has led me to be.”
The ad gave the very clear impression that the decision about which church one should join was entirely a matter of how the would-be-congregant viewed the value and correctness of the religious goods and serviced provided by this church vis a vis other local churches. I wish I could say this is the only such ad I’ve heard.
Now, I’m fine with a church giving information about what it does as a body and how. But the ad actually raised a theological issue (namely, how does one make a decision about which church to attend) and gave the unqualified impression that one should make the decision as a consumer, as if God wouldn’t exercise any leadership at all on the issue, except to align with the market analysis and self-interest of the consumer. Calling to a particular group of people wasn’t even mentioned. Are only staff people called to churches? Do congregants just choose like choosing which bread to buy? Would God sometimes lead a person to join a church not because of what the would-be congregant could see that it had, but what because of what (or whom) God saw that the church and congregant needed?

JMorrow #42
Here are my thoughts.
God created us as reflective beings with volition. We experience our lives as subjects who act. What determines what actions we will take is the values we hold and our understanding of what is true. We will always choose what we think is in our self-interest based on values and truth. We can?t do otherwise. Any attempt to act against your self-interest simply means your perception of what is in your self-interest has changed, otherwise you would not be taking the new action.
The issue is not self-interest, or trying to meet our needs. The issue is the values we hold and our understanding of what is true. A friend at my blog asked:
?Would you say to your spouse, ?I?m in this relationship because I want something from you and I?m willing to give something in return to get it?? Are our relationships merely transactions??
My response is that I love my wife. Because of that, I see her joy and well-being as the most important thing to me. Because these are the most important things to me it is in my self-interest to seek her joy and well being. Other-centeredness and self-interest become one.
Where this leads is that my self-interest, the interest of others, and God?s interest all become one in the Kingdom of God. I have to be self-interested because I am a self and it is for myself that I am responsible. But self-interest, other?s interest and God?s interest ceases to be a win lose proposition. It becomes a win-win-win proposition with a multiplicative effect.
Therefore, Jesus routinely appeals to our self-interest (what we think we need) but transforms the engine of values and truth on which our self-interest runs.
Martin Luther King has sermon base on Mark 10, where James and John ask for the highest positions in heaven. King notes Jesus remarkable response. He doesn?t rebuke their ambition. Instead, he says. ?You want the highest positions? Go for it! They aren?t mine to give but here is how it?s done. You excel at put ting everyone else ahead of yourself. Now get out there in front and lead the band.? Jesus appeals to their self-interest but turns their values and truth upside down and inside out.

Patrick-
“At heart therefore it it idolatry.”
I think you are right. Consumerism elevates self, instant gratification, comfort, etc… to the position of an idol.
T-
“gave the unqualified impression that one should make the decision as a consumer, as if God wouldn’t exercise any leadership at all on the issue, except to align with the market analysis and self-interest of the consumer.”
Just to throw out the question, but cannot God use those methods to lead someone? Would He be any less present?

Rick,
Of course God can and does use our desires and our own evaluations to lead us, and so does Satan. To equate God’s leading with those things, or to act like those things are all there is, is what happens in a consumeristic version of Christianity. God’s calling and direction can’t be dismissed or, worse, equated with our preferences or our value judgments.
As my ultimate reason, do I go join/leave a church because it has/lacks the best __________, or because God has lead me to join with this group for his purposes (for me and others, with information that goes way beyond my perception)?

Scot – please give us your thoughts as well as posting questions for us to discuss. That’s part of what makes this blog worthwhile.

Michael@48,
Excellent.
Dana

toddh, I don’t do that always because it can tend to shut down conversation or it reshapes it. I’m keen on listening.
In my view, it is an “easier” explanation of what’s going on than capable of proof. In other words, one can “explain” discreet behaviors as “consumption” easier than one can show that it is about consumption in a negative sense. It reminds at times of those who explain a football game as an Ersatz church service. Sounds interesting except that most of it is lost on those who are actually there.

Having said that, I’m certain there’s something to this whole approach to modern issues. The mentality of going to “get” and the approach of “keeping the customer happy” are indicative of the problem. And, focusing all the time on pragmatics, best practices, techniques, etc, indicate consumerism.
How for instance does one distinguish the so-called entertainment element of church services from the art work in medieval European cathedrals?

# 36
Still think that it would be constructive and helpful (here or at another time) to have some discussion beyond identifying the problem to how Christians can respond as a ‘colony of the kingdom’ to the western god of consumerism …

Patrick, as I read Skye’s book he’s onto more than just the materialism of the West but onto the inner fabric of Christianity, aka evangelicalism esp, having become reshaped by consumerism so that gospel, church, preaching — the whole thing — has become consumeristic.
Thought?

Seems like “me and Jesus” contemporary worship music can be another symptom of this. What can be more satisfying (and less challenging) to the modern individual consumer of religious services than “You are MY Jesus and you love ME”?
I agree with Patrick #55 that it is important to go beyond diagnosis and discuss how to be countercultural in our consumer culture. Wish I had some ideas to share but nothing specific comes to mind.

I reckon he’s saying very important things (and of course he’s not the first) and saying them really well. And saying something prophetic won’t win popularity contests or mean lots of people listen!
I wouldn’t go so far as to say ‘the whole thing’ – that’s too sweeping and could end up in judgementalism or even self-loathing. There is, in my opinion, too much church bashing around. God knows our hearts and his Spirit is working in his church.
But I do think we need more prophetic voices on consumerism because it is the poisoned air we in the west breath and it has deeply penetrated the church, and I’m no different. its symptoms have been described in this discussion – selfism, narcissistic worship, individualism, little sacrificial concern for the poor etc. ‘Turbo-capitalism’ has left us with no unease over our super-wealth, no limits to our endless pursuit of wants, no boundaries to our over-production and over-consumption. And too easily we don’t even see this because it is ‘normal’ to us. It is not seen in the church as a ‘spiritual’ issue – it’s just the way things are.
I reckon one of the best things we can do is look, listen and learn from brothers and sisters in the majority world. The average Christian in the world is very very poor – what have they to teach us? Apparently one of the most quoted verses in Asia / Africa after the Tsunami a few years ago was James 4:13-15 – not a text that is too central to a lot of western evangelicalism?
‘Now listen, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business and make money.” Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. Instead, you ought to say, “If it is the Lord’s will, we will live and do this or that.”

I think consumerist Christianity is best described as the mindset that the church, God and all things Christians exist to serve the person and when a felt need is not met then somehow the church, God and Christianity has let the person down. They are then justified to move on to the next church, spiritual fad, etc. to get their needs met. Consumer Christians generally feel entitled to whine and complain about that which doesn’t meet their needs or live up to their standards. Somehow, individual standards are elevated above God’s standard. I guess you could say consumerist Christianity makes a god out felt needs and whatever doesn’t meet those needs can be down away with, disregarded or manipulated into the likeness of what I want.

Wonderful discussion.
Thank-you Scott for launching it and for all the insightful comments and questions.
Boy, it makes me realize how important definitions and distinctions are in these conversations and so the question – what is consumerist Christianity hinges on what is a consumer?
I have a few brief thoughts.
Like pornography vs. nudity in art – I’m not sure I can define pornography but I think I recognize it when I see it. I feel the same about consumerism. Hard to define, but there are times when I see something and it just feels – yup, this is it.
Also – to be a consumer, isn’t that woven in to the fabric of what it means to be a human being. We are hungry for what we do not have, so we consume what we hunger for. So maybe a question is – is there a disordered consumerism and a re-ordered consumerism? (a la Naugle) Our immortal or eternal longings drive us for fulfillment. Our needs drive us as well. I just have to ask – is it ordered or disordered? Is it being satisfied in healthy or unhealthy ways?
I know the mega-church of modernity (of which I serve at one) has certainly fallen into the consumerist mode of functioning and providing programs that meet that need. I also think the emergent church has its own consumerist issues as well (since they are also working with human beings), it is just that they are offering a different product, package, experience, personality that is of interest and is attractive to emerging audiences, whereas moderns had a different set of desired products.
For me it is not that the modern church was consumerist and the postmodern church is not. In fact, if Mark Sayers is right, the postmodern is the quintessential “ultra modern” when it comes to consumerism. They are more consumerist, not less. (At least that is what I read in Sayers, The Trouble With Paris.)
Back to Naugle. If our loves are disordered, then consumerism of a materialistic and hedonistic variety, both in products and experiences will be endemic and unhealthy in one’s life, or the life of a community, whether religious or secular.
-bkr-

#60 Brian
Great post. You express many of my concerns.

I?m going to stick my neck out a little more. I don?t believe there is such a thing as consumerism. I have yet to meet anyone who gets satisfaction from consuming something. Consumption is a means to end. That is to say, things we consume are means to end of a reality we are trying to produce for ourselves.
My theology friends tend to think of the world as a set of fixed resources. Everything economic is in terms of distribution and consumption. Production is thoroughly overlooked.
Human beings are creators in the image of God. We transform matter, energy, and data from less useful purposes into more useful purposes. An exchange economy allows each of us to specialize at producing one thing well and then trading (in modern times through a monetary system) for the things others have produced more efficiently and with better quality than we could.
Consumption is not the center of the economic universe. Production is. Each of us is engaged in a life-long project to produce a home and place for ourselves in the world. How we define that project defines what we will consume. Change how people define what they are trying to produce and you will change what they consume. As a congregation, the question should be what production projects are we trying to promote and equip?
If anything, we don’t have consumerism problem, we have a productionism problem.

#62
As a follow up, I think it is instructive note the first two things Cain does upon being banished from God’s presence. He produces a son and he produces a city. He settles in the of Nod, which means “wandering.” And that is metaphorically the mission of fallen humanity … to produce a home and community apart from God in the land of wandering.

Here’s a question. Can I oppose consumerism in my church without becoming the sort of consumer I am bemoaning?
If I complain about consumerist “me and Jesus” worship music in my church, am I speaking prophetically against consumerism? Or am I expressing my own preference for the type of worship service I would prefer to be consuming? When does rejection of “consumerism” become another consumer choice?
I suppose one could enter an infinite regress of analyzing motives that can never be 100% pure …

There’s this church in Texas, mega-variety, that was seriously (and I mean seriously) considering putting a Coca-Cola logo on their Sunday Worship program cover. Does that count…?

#64 AHH
“When does rejection of “consumerism” become another consumer choice?”
Bingo!

If I hear correctly what the last few comments have been referring to, I agree we need to separate the abuse of consumption from the need for consumption. As well, I agree that we need to avoid easy, stock answers to problems that are clearly out there in the Church and Society. Yet, can’t we just call a spade a spade instead of equivocating ourselves into doing nothing about it.
Yes of course rejecting “consumerism” is a choice, among others. But the abuse of consumption can and should be named. The term consumerism comes from observation and experience. When I think of other “isms” that have become a part of our societal vocabulary: racism, sexism, classism, I see them as abuses of our collective recognition of difference and our attempts to ascertain the relative importance of those differences. While the terms can be much abused, they have usefulness in identifying areas that need our attention.
The same function can be served in naming consumerism. The roots of abused consumption are in misplaced desires, but even as we attend to properly placing those desires we must also address the pattern of stewardship that is affected by our misplaced desires. This is not an either/or process, why should we make thus? We must attend to the motivations of the Church as an organization and as members, but we must at the same time address how we apportion our time, language, energy and resources. If the term “consumerism” can serve as a warning for us in the Church to examine how our lives are reflecting Kingdom values or not, then the term is not in vain as I see it.

#67 JMorrow
I fully agree that we have people who have no sense of what the Kingdom of God is and go shopping for something that will give them a sense of transcendence, community, or whatever their looking for. I also fully agree that there are churches who cater to these “needs” as a way of building institutions and filling coffers. What I’m questioning is whether consumerism is the right word to capture the dynamics of what is happening.
Sometimes we can learn about something by naming its antithesis. What word describes the antithesis of consumerism?

Michael @ 63,
Are we supposed to be emulating Cain?
I agree that there is an appropriate “what’s in it for me?” But the answer is usually “lots of work”. We are blessed instrumentally. That’s why we need to be part of the mutually-submitting church community to fulfill God’s purposes, because otherwise we’d burn out.

“Are we supposed to be emulating Cain?”
My point was that we are creators made in the image of the creator. We build worlds. We fill the earth and bring all things to their fullness. That was God’s mission for us as Eikons.
Even cast out of God’s presence, Cain has to build a world. It is ontological. He can’t help it. But he does so in isolation from God and the shared community of others. Everything becomes distorted. He seeks immortality through false means.
What I’m suggesting is that we choose between being Eikons or Cain. Consumerism is about people consuming for consuming’s sake. They are consuming to build a home in the land of wandering. Churches that are engaged in consumerism aren’t interested directly in consumption. They are interested in building a community in the land of wandering. Consumption is a secondary issue.
I’m going to do a post about this at my blog on Friday.

In my Trueman Christian background, all the OTHER churches were worldly or used man’s methods. Never mind that our church had a parking lot, drywall, a sign and bulletins – man’s methods all. A lot of effort was expended on detecting and/or rooting out worldliness.
The balance for me came in realizing that we are pilgrims in this world. We interact with it as wisely as possible, with a citizenship not from here.
It would be possible for someone to be a sort of anti-fundamentalist who swaps “worldly” or “consumerist”. I believe the balance would be the same: live wisely “in, not of.” As Michael says, we are consumers in a consumerist culture. Remembering that just as the charge to avoid being worldly has merit, so the charge to avoid consumerism is in some way an alert not to blindly and conveniently create a syncretism with “the world”.
Not in any way accusing Skye of being this anti-fundamentalist. Just anecdotally connecting with a pattern that has somewhat of a symmetrical deja vu.

Michael #62
Think you make an important point here. Consumerism does not make people happy, thus it is a belief system or a myth. As we seek to do the impossible and make it a reality, we create a society that keeps producing, producing and producing- hoping to find that things which will prove the myth true and bring us happiness. In that sense, I do believe in such a thing as consumerism only insofar as it is an idea, an ideal being pursued, NOT a reality being achieved. Am I understanding you or missing the point completely?
Peace,
Jamie

Jamie #72
I think you got part of what I’m getting. The attempt to construct our world apart from God is futile. But notice my verb …. “construct” not “consume.”
Consume is verb. It needs a subject and an object. We are the subject. I’m suggesting that the generic act of consuming is not what hooks us. Consumption is always in relation to an object. But even the object we consume is not the end of the story. We consume the objects we do because of underlying understanding of truth and our values.
So, I have a value that I should always feel good about self. That is the world I’m working to create. A church offers an “I’m okay, You’re Okay” retreat. I go and consume that retreat, not because the act of consuming brings me joy but because consumption of this particular object, the retreat, helps me build my world. Therefore, the issue is not consumerism as such. The bottom line is my world building agenda. Does that make sense?

#73
And let me add that the church that offered the retreat is also in its own world building project that is disconnected from the Kingdom (based on whatever values.) The church is the subject offering something for consumption. But its mission is not just to get people to consume. They want people to consume in a way that builds their world (more cash, greater solidarity, new members, etc.) So the transaction is not about the consumption. It is about the church and me engaging in mutual exchange toward our world building projects. That something was consumed is peripheral.