![](\"https:\/\/media.giphy.com\/media\/Z2wIChL3BV9swNtA3e\/giphy.gif\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\u201cI don\u2019t want to sell anything, buy anything, or process anything as a career. \u00a0I don\u2019t want to sell anything bought <\/strong>or<\/strong> processed, or buy anything sold or processed, or process anything sold, bought, or processed, or repair anything sold, bought, or processed.\u00a0 You know, as a career, I don\u2019t want to do that.\u201d<\/strong>[1]<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0 Lloyd Dobler<\/strong><\/p>\n We are approaching the 33rd<\/sup> anniversary of the release of Say Anything<\/em>, the iconic romantic film that tells the story of a mismatched couple. Lloyd Dobler is questioned by his girlfriend\u2019s father to share his career aspirations.\u00a0 Often Dobler\u2019s quote is interpreted from a Protestant and consumer driven work ethic outlook; Dobler is seen as lacking ambition for not wanting to participate in a productive manner in society.\u00a0 However, 33 years later Dobler\u2019s worldview is more deeply appreciated by those who seek to find space and meaning within the \u201cvoluntary simplicity movement\u201d[2]<\/a> as well as Millennials who are leading the \u201cunconsumed lifestyle\u201d.[3]<\/a><\/p>\n Being Lloyd Dobler came to mind as I dug into Vincent Miller\u2019s Consuming Religion: Christian Faith and Practice in a Consumer Culture.<\/em> Miller is a Professor of Systematic and Philosophical Theology at Dayton University.\u00a0 His focus in Consuming Religion<\/em> is unpacking the disconnect humans have between their religious beliefs and their practices while living in a consumer culture.\u00a0 Although Miller teaches theology, and admits that theologians are silent on this important cultural issue of consumerism and commodification of religion, he also confesses he \u201cwould not offer a thick theological narrative in order to focus on the habits of interpretation with which contemporary believers receive such narratives\u201d.[4]<\/a> Indeed he spends a great deal of energy addressing the sociology of a worldview lived in practice that is in contrast to the Lloyd Dobler\u2019s in today\u2019s capitalistic economy.<\/p>\n I appreciate Miller\u2019s foundation, that the ethos of a consumer culture has infiltrated the Christian faith and practice. This reality is what informs my own NPO for my Doctorate project. However, I found myself pushing back on Miller\u2019s argument that cultural\/religious appropriation of rituals and symbols are the process in which commodification of culture\/religion happen.[5]<\/a> He implies that this act dehumanizes\/desymbolizes into abstraction and weakens value.[6]<\/a>\u00a0 On one hand I agree that marketing of rituals and symbols feeds consumer buy-in.\u00a0 On the other, Miller avoids talking theological or Biblically about the ways in which Jesus appropriates, or in positive language, adapts, integrates and transforms rituals, symbols and teachings (i.e. seder becomes communion, altar becomes table, bread and wine become body and blood).[7]<\/a> Another issue I get itchy on is Miller\u2019s black and white approach to this subject that avoids emphasis of one\u2019s responsibility of being intentional in choices and practices.[8]<\/a> I imagine Friedman would have a sentence or two to say about the need for accountability in this toxic consumer system.<\/p>\n Jason Clark reminded us on Monday of the important practice of engaging theologically regarding our leadership.\u00a0 For me – implicit in that charge – is to think theologically about the books we consume that inform our identity of leadership.\u00a0 It is why I found it ironic that Miller addresses the narrative of commodification of religion without diving into the theological ramifications of living of the world instead of in the world.\u00a0 Miller recounts beautifully the story of DJ musician Moby and his creative process that appropriates music from other cultures. Although Miller doesn\u2019t seem keen on the commodification, he gives a nod to Moby as a \u201cquasi-clerical figure\u201d.[9]<\/a> As Miller makes this argument, I cannot help but ask Miller, \u201cWhat do you think pastors do every time they stand in the pulpit to speak proclamation?\u201d<\/p>\n Being in the world and acknowledging that God is the creator of all, it seems unrealistic for us as disciples and theologians to avoid contextualizing our faith.\u00a0 Jason Clark noted in his dissertation, \u201cI have demonstrated that, for Evangelicals, retreating from the world, embracing natural theology, and liberally dissolving the distinctiveness of faith, are similarly not acceptable.\u201d[10]<\/a> This reality of both\/and ought to inform how I teach and lead in a Christian parish.\u00a0 Being able to theologically contextualize all that God offers in space and time through adaptation, integration and transformation of rituals, symbols, teachings, and culture is an important tool for my toolbox.\u00a0 This also informs how I hear this quote from Frederick Buechner \u201cThe place God calls you to is the place where your deep gladness and the world\u2019s deep hunger meet\u201d[11]<\/a> pushing the bounds of commodification by inviting intertwining of desire, poiesis and praxis.<\/p>\n \u201c\u201cKnowing what we ought to love is not enough to form us rightly, because we imagine what we love first, where imagination is cognitive, but is not \u201cintellection\u201d. Being able to imagine the Kingdom of God is different to being able to know about it. This means that we act in the world \u201cmore like characters in a drama than as soldiers dutifully following a command\u201d.\u00a0 The stories that captivate and form me are \u2018understood\u2019 at a gut level.\u201d\u201d[12]<\/a> Being responsible for what we love, what we have passion for impacts what practices we live.\u00a0 This reality informs our living out our faith with authenticity inf the face of a commodified consumer culture.\u00a0 Perhaps we can enjoy being Lloyd Dobler who chooses the power of being in relationship with another human instead of driven to be productive.<\/p>\n \u201cWhat I really want to do with my life – what I want to do for a living – is I want to be with your daughter. I’m good at it.\u201d[13]<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Lloyd Dobler<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n [1]<\/a> Crowe, C. (Directors). (1989).\u00a0Say Anything<\/em>\u00a0[Film]. Gracie Films, 20th Century.<\/p>\n [2]<\/a> Miller, Vincent J. 2005. Consuming Religion: Christian Faith and Practice in a Consumer Culture<\/em>. New York: Continuum. Page 2.<\/p>\n [3]<\/a> https:\/\/www.pointbleudesign.com\/blog\/the-decline-of-consumerism-and-how-brands-are-coping-with-it\/<\/p>\n [4]<\/a> Miller, Vincent J. 2005. Consuming Religion: Christian Faith and Practice in a Consumer Culture<\/em>. New York: Continuum. Page 226.<\/p>\n [5]<\/a> Ibid. Page 4-5<\/p>\n [6]<\/a> Ibid. Page71-72.<\/p>\n [7]<\/a> https:\/\/cardinalscholar.bsu.edu\/bitstream\/handle\/123456789\/202388\/Parallel%20Teachings_WolfeG.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y<\/p>\n [8]<\/a> Miller, Vincent J. 2005. Consuming Religion: Christian Faith and Practice in a Consumer Culture<\/em>. New York: Continuum.\u00a0 \u00a0In Miller\u2019s introduction he talks about the Tibetan Prayer flags and the questions that are raised for him regarding his own faith symbols.\u00a0 He says\u201d They compete on common ground where they are all gauged in terms of their visual impact rather than the tradition practices associated with each.\u201d He speaks in generalizations that assume a lot of individuals who may be in a similar quandary. Miller does not speak to the theological act of accountability. It also seems to speak to a shallow understanding of how big God is.<\/p>\n [9]<\/a> Ibid.\u00a0 Page 77<\/p>\n [10]<\/a> Clark, Jason Paul. n.d. Evangelism and Capitalism: A Reparative Account and Diagnosis of Pathogeneses in the Relationship<\/em>, Page 202.<\/p>\n [11]<\/a> Buechner, Frederick. 1993. Wishful Thinking: A Seeker\u2019s ABC<\/em>. Revised, Expanded ed. edition. San Francisco, Calif.: HarperOne.<\/p>\n