I've always called shopping malls America's Cathedrals. I'm glad to hear others see it, too.

"And perhaps more disturbing, are we unknowingly contributing to the problem by encouraging Christians to construct and express their identities via Christ-branded merchandise rather than through characters transformed to reflect the values of Christ himself?"

The American church has been seduced by the world, and hasn't come to realized that the seduction is killing us.
The clearest example of this is the current election. Listen to the divided house speak, because this is what they are saying:
One group of Christians looks to McCain because they wet themselves in fear of Obama's...well, take your pick of any irrational fear; and the other group of Christians look to Obama as their lone source of Hope as if Obama will deliver them to the land of milk and honey.
Both camps are pathetic, and their incessant fear-mongering depresses me to no end...a pox on both their political houses.
It is my opinion that no matter if it's consumerism or politics Christians WILL sell themselves cheaply to the lowest bidder offering unfillable promises, or spiritually meaningless trinkets.
We have collectively cheapen the message of G-d, and instead of pulling our collective act together in corporate repentance...bah, why bother...nobody cares.
Why should I.

The people I know who are so very concerned about the -isms on the radio and in the books tend not to preach the gospel to any of their neighbors. It's purely an academic exercise: "We first need to win the culture wars." And then they get involved in politics.

I know a lot of Apple evangelists (since I own a Mac myself) and really can't explain why people have no qualms about extolling the virtues of a machine—with no fear, or even contempt, of rejection!—yet won't extol the virtues of our Lord.

anybody else sense the irony of Skye writing for us on the dangers of consumerism and conspicuously product placing his new book?

I think people are attracted to the sense of community with Apple. If you own a mac (I do) you're part of the "club" of mac users, however the sense of belonging that I have in the context of a local church is much higher.

I still use PC. I used to used Mac back in the late 90's but our offices switched to PC. Since then, I haven't had the need functionally and how I use my laptop to switch back to Mac as my PC does everything I need. It is also has come light years in terms of look and feel since the late 90's.

Although what is interesting is that I now feel like a rebel because I have not switched to Mac and almost all my friends and office mates have. Perhaps PC is the new punk rock.

After talking with some of my Mac brothers and sisters, I have to disagree. I think you only feel it is a religion because you have bought into the deceptive teachings of Bill Gates (who is most likely the antichrist). :-)

Seriously though, I do love my Mac.

This is exactly why I can't stand Apple. Not only have they sold their soul to Madison avenue, now their entire marketing strategy is built on political smear campaign techniques.

I try to boycott any product that is sold using "cool" as a brainwashing technique. That goes for nike, pepsi, mac, and a million others.

They won't stop running these manipulative brand campaigns until people stop taking the bait. They won't stop negative political campaigns until they stop working. JUST SAY NO to spin! (isn't that ironic)

I am a definite believer in Jesus.

I also use a Mac as my primary tool. It's a joy to use. The enthusiasm of Mac people just is a reflection of our joy at using a tool that works so well.

As with anything, there are those who take their devotion to something into the realm of worship. Only Jesus is worthy of worship.

Glenn that's too funny-

"anybody else sense the irony of Skye writing for us on the dangers of consumerism and conspicuously product placing his new book?"

I'm sure glad Hybels/ Willow Creek is not into branding or consumerism, it might "reveal" lack of discipleship.

So in this article you admit that consumption is not wrong. Well, most of us need to have access to a computer regularly these days. When you go to buy a computer, you want to buy the one that works the best. It just so happens that you discover that the macbook is the best option for you. Are you suggesting this is some sort of religion? Did I miss something here? Should you decide on a machine that doesn't perform as well? Most people that I know who switch from PC to Mac do so because they have seen that Mac users have less headaches than do PC users, not because they want to join a religion.

A question this post raises for me: does the use of consumer branding in some areas of ministry (architecture, logos, websites, etc) impact all areas of ministry? In other words, can we choose to apply marketing tactics in some areas of ministry and expect other areas (like corporate worship for example) to remain unaffected?

it's funny you should raise this issue. i have a friend whose name is getting known in the software world, linda rising, who writes about software development and how it mirrors different things in humans - eg, her latest presentation at agile 2008 was its similarity to things that have been hardwired in us through human evolution (or creation - let's not start arguing too far off topic...). i sent her an email just this week and said her talk next year should be on sw development and religion, and how she should show jobs as the messiah (as skye notes in the article) and gates as the antichrist (as j.r. notes above)! i also noted how many 'hell' metaphors she could make, people being nailed to cross, projects left for dead but resurrected when all hope was gone, etc.

and, the metaphor of the apple...

too funny...

I find it funny that all the posts thus far have only reflected on the worthiness of Macs for worship. What about his point? Are we selling/creating an iconic brand in modern churches vs. sharing the Gospel of One who came to save us.

I'll try and answer the question a bit: in our local expression of believers most of us have rebelled against the cheap and easy (cheasy) t-shirt evangelism that has passed for faith in recent years. I'm not sure if that's out of an expression of love or just the fact that now that everyone is doing it it's no longer cool (probably the latter).

But here's the bigger conviction I took from the article: are we in the church planting/growth movement just creating a "brand" to be consumed? I'm afraid far too often we are. We brand everything...and it works. People know us by our logo--and identify with our common beliefs, habits, and convictions. We're substituting [Church Name] for Nike, Apple, etc. in their lives. And they are so use to branding that they take to it readily.

Is this a good thing? Lives are being transformed, folks are connecting and hearing the Gospel, but does the ends justify the means? Or are the means too often the end in and of themselves? Hmmm...I'll have to pray about that as we carry on.

BTW, as far as the book, I'm not buying...I've grown completely exhausted from the publishing house's demand of the next book we all "just have to read." Still, props to Skye for giving away a few thoughts for free, and our Living G_d for the inspiration and conviction. w00t, w00t!

Well said I join your side on consumerism's threat thanks for the excellent post!

Well, this would be news to my daughter who has been studying sound engineering for over three years, and whose industry standard is Mac.

We bought it for her because it was a tool of her trade. It continues to be the tool of her trade, not her religion or the focus of her worship.

Her Lord and Savior is all that.

I agree with Bil on this one. I think it is funny that people want to make Skye's post about Mac vs PC or "is it wrong to own a mac?" If you are walking away from this post asking that question, you are missing the point. The comparison is between how we "do church" and how Steve Jobs and crew "do marketing / branding."

I agree with many of the comments here. A lot of times, the marketing/branding approach to "doing church" just doesn't work as well as people think it does. There's a new book out by Washington Times religion reporter Julia Duin that explores why disgruntled Christians (particularly evangelicals) are "quitting church," fleeing from institutional megachurches to minichurches.

Church cannot be driven by technology and business models; people want something deeper. There's a new book out by Washington Times religion reporter that details why Christians are increasingly "quitting church," giving up on institutional religion, and it cites some interesting things about evangelicals:

http://www.bustedhalo.com/features/busted-review-quitting-church-why-the-faithful-are-fleeing-and-what-to-do-about-it-by-julia-duin/

So, what is next? Do you vilify Coke drinkers over Pepsi, or those who will only buy Toyota cars or Ford Trucks? A definition of religion that is so broad that it includes brand loyalty reduces the definition to nonsense.

Yes, I am a Mac user and I drive a Toyota truck--and will buy Toyotas and Macs again. More importantly, though, I am a Christian, not a cultist because I use a machine that happens to work far better than the alternatives out there. Also, Accordance is written for the Mac--for those of you who work with the original languages, I need say no more.

One more note, they say that misery loves company. Perhaps brother Skye is simply burdened by being chained to a PC and would like to see everyone else have as miserable a computer experience as he is having. ;-) Come to the light, my brother, come to the light! :-)

Blessings to those of you on both sides of the computer culture.

win

Hey friends,

Thanks for the good discussion. Let me answer a few questions floating around.

First, the issue (as I stated in the intro of the post) is not consuming products. I’m not anti-marketing or anti-capitalism or anti-consumption. And the issue is not whether or not you use a Mac. (For the record, I use a PC at work but have a Mac at home.) Branding goes far deeper than that. The problem is when one’s identity and sense of self is inexorably linked with a brand—any brand. For some it is Apple. For others it’s Chevy, or the Chicago Cubs, or Nike, or Harley Davidson… you pick. For my six-year-old daughter it’s Disney Princesses. Heaven help me.

What research has shown is that neurologically these brands have the potential to impact us in the same way as a religion—meaning they can give us a sense of identity, purpose, meaning, and fulfillment. (In the case of Apple, the bond of community is also key.) As a Christian I believe those things should come from Christ alone.

When you study the branding methodology being employed by marketers today, you quickly discover that they use strategies that target a person’s core identity and sense of meaning. In other words, they’re competing with Christ for the loyalty and affections of souls.

Clearly it’s possible to own a Mac, or wear Nikes, or ride a Harley and still be a faithful Christian. That’s not the point. The point is that we mustn’t allow these brands, or any brands, to occupy a place in our lives that rightful belongs to Christ. But we mustn’t be so naïve to think that the marketing powers behind these brands aren’t trying to do just that.

Skye: The issue seems to be what are LEGITIMATE forms of identity? I get along better with Baptists than Catholics. I drive a Honda, not an Escalade. I'm more at home with football fans than soccer fans. I prefer Dr. Pepper to Vitamin Water. I go to Toby Keith concerts, but not to 50 cent. I subscribe to American Heritage, not Wired. My inclinations align more Republican than Democrat. Those are all PARTS of who I am.

On a deeper level, I'm a follower of Christ. But aren't the more superficial parts of my identity still part of my identity?

While I'm a Christ-follower at the core, it's hard to deny that the sociological markers, while less eternal, are still meaningful categories. They do have their influence in this terrestrial existence.

Perhaps the Personal Branding issue isn't either/or but both/and. We're both spiritually marked and temporally marked. It's just that the Jesus mark is indelible; hopefully the other brands only last for a lifetime.

A few random thoughts:
- this is super important stuff for church leaders because it connects to the core of the gospel and what it means to be human.
-not enough church leaders pay attention to this kind of thing, so thanks of bringing it to our attention.
- The essence of a whole and healthy disciple is the degree at which they are engaged in their own faith, and the faith of others. A consumer gives away responsiblity. Branding it seems is the social object around which the transaction of responsibility is made.
hmmm.. more to think about.

Good thoughts, Jarrod. However what worries me is the mounting research that shows most self-identified "evangelicals" do not behave any differently than non-evangelicals. In other words, if we assume that people's choices and values are rooted to their core identity, then most "evangelicals" don't appear to have Christ as their core/eternal identity.

If that's the case, then what is at their core? What values do they live out? Where are these values coming from? The research in Buyology indicates that for some people, this core identity and the values associated with it come from consumer brands.

I really appreciate your observations, Skye. You make some excellent points here! I look forward to hearing more of your thoughts on what should be done by churches and Christians to counter this.

How would you suggest that this consumeristic, brand oriented mindset be challenged? What should the church do to avoid playing into it?

I hope you will be tackling these questions in your forthcoming book... Let me know if you will be distributing any preview copies, or chapter excerpts prior to the official release!

I think that America's 'leading churches' have already discovered the power of branding and have incorporated that into their church growth models.
The rise and rise of the multi-site church is the perfect interplay between faith & branding leading to franchising.

You first establish a fine model, with a marketable figure at the centre of it. Then you extend the brand through multi-site, then you franchise the brand through the market place and begin exporting your brand through international travel and through that medium which transcends distance: the Internet.

I write from Australia where I know of people who 'cyberchurch'. They cyber-commute to a church of choice in the USA. Brand loyalty has been established and it is starting to disconnect believers from local engagement.

Thanks for this terrific argument in favor of house churches.

Any institutional church is required to develop a brand to continue to be viable as a non-profit organization. In cases where multiple, distinct institutions exist in the same town (and on the same street), these churches inevitably become unwitting (or very witting) competitors. If a church isn't directly competing with another church, then it is competing with the litany of additional organizations that want you to join, become a member, get involved, and donate.

Contrast this with first-century churches, who met in homes and identified themselves by their city or the house in which they met. Mass-marketing was unnecessary and ill-fitting, because the local church was very simply a gathering of Christ-followers. Not a building, not a collection of programs, not a pastor/CEO's entrepreneurial agenda.