ideas of salvation and redemption. Second, he observes that consumerism has increasingly built-in obsolescence to the products it sells. While this is clearly a requirement of keeping the marketplace alive, a consequence is to liberate the present from the past and the future ‘that might have impeached the concentration and spoiled the exhilaration of free choice’ (2007b, p. 84). Of course, the freedom to choose has increasingly become adopted as the defining characteristic of contemporary ethics. The third element of consumerism that he identifies flows on from this idea of free choice. In it he demonstrates how consumerism both appears to affirm choice while at the same time limiting it. Consumerism is a forced choice from the available options that have been provided. However, it is important to recognize that freedom is identified with choices made in private life.
Choosing . . . is not at issue, since this is what you must do, and can resist and avoid doing only at peril of exclusion. Nor are you free to influence the set of options available to choose from: there are no other options left as all realistic and advisable possibilities have been already preselected, pre-scripted and prescribed. (2007b, pp. 84–5)
Ethos and atmosphere
Commentators often talk about ‘the spirit of the age’, the overarching ‘feel’ of a particular point in history. The importance of such observations is that they identify the broad themes and sensibilities of time and place. They are significant for preachers in that they indicate where the gospel message has deep resonances with the surrounding culture and where, by contrast, it is profoundly counter-cultural. Where there is commonality between Christian discipleship and the context it inhabits, clearly it is right for the Church in general, and preachers in particular, to embrace it fully. Indeed, where contemporary culture is genuinely indifferent to biblical teaching and neither affirms nor contradicts it, it is wholly appropriate for our proclamation to inhabit that world too. It is only those things that are inimical to Christian faith that should be resisted.
So, what are the elements of the ethos and atmosphere of contemporary Britain that preachers have to have in mind? What are the broader trends in attitudes that impact the homiletical task? Perhaps the most critical for the pulpit is the suspicion of motives of those in authority and a tendency to entertain the most damning interpretation. This has been fed in no little part by the sceptical interrogation of those in positions of responsibility by certain sections of the media and catastrophic breaches of trust in public and commercial life. The Christian community has not been beyond this with abuses of position that range from the scandalous financial dealings of televangelists to the predatory abuse of paedophile priests.
This has left those in leadership in a much weakened position. Trust has to be earned rather than just given as a mark of deference. Leaders have to prove themselves to those they lead through their practice of leadership. If it is seen as manipulative, bullying or self-serving, what trust there is will quickly evaporate. Christian leadership should be open in style, consultative in process, transparent in practice and accountable.
A second identifiable trend is the evolution of ‘soft’ levels of commitment. Membership of political parties, trades unions and churches are at an all-time low. Only the National Trust seems to buck the trend, but even there it can be argued that there is a consumer dimension as members flock to historic buildings on the basis of the ‘free’ admission that membership brings.
People want to be selective in their participation. If they feel motivated they will join a demonstration, sign a petition or put on an event to raise money for ‘Children in Need’. However, they will not want to do it every week. Rather they choose to ‘dip in’ to things when they choose. Reality TV becomes the model of engagement, with a low-cost, low-commitment way to participate and play a part in influencing the outcome.
This ‘soft’ expression of commitment is also carried over to issues of social and political concern. There is no doubt that global warming, people trafficking, third world debt and issues of social justice register as high concerns in the public mind. However, the concern diminishes as it impacts personal preference and behaviour. BBC2’s Newsnight explored issues of sustainable lifestyles through its ‘Ethical Man’ feature in 2007–8. One of the sobering observations was the reluctance of members of the public to consider dropping their overseas holiday, even when the impact of the accompanying air flight wiped out all their other attempts to reduce their carbon footprint for the rest of the year.
Virtual relationships
There can be no doubting the fact that recent years have seen an explosion of communications technology and, through the World Wide Web, the growth of social networking. We are more connected now than at any other time in history: Facebook, Bebo, Twitter, Second Life, internet gaming, email, texting, the impact of technology in shaping how we communicate together is breathtaking. Yet how far is the quantity of communication representative of a depth of relationship? Is it legitimate to call a social network a community?
If ‘virtual reality’ is a computer-simulated environment that gives the impression of actually being somewhere where we are not, then there are virtual dimensions in our technologically generated communications and networking realities. While we might have a large number of ‘friends’ on Facebook, the capacity of any of us to hold and maintain relationships of substance remains the same as it always did.1 And face-to-face, real-time engagement is a non-negotiable part of that. Likewise, that Stephen Fry has 1.4 million followers on Twitter is merely confirmation of his popularity as a celebrity and his ability to maintain an interesting narrative in 140-character Tweets.
Of course, in so far as time is invested in maintaining our online presence and interaction, this erodes our available time for pursuing real-time relationships in real-time communities. Back in December 2009, the pop songstress Lily Allen spoke about her conversion to becoming a ‘neo-Luddite’.
So I put my BlackBerry, my laptop, my iPod in a box and that’s the end. I won’t use email, I play records on vinyl, I don’t blog. I’ve got more time, more privacy. We’ve ended up in this world of unreal communications and I don’t want that. I want real life back.2
Allen’s observations are not unique and express the sentiments of other commentators like Steve Tuttle of Newsweek and Virginia Heffernan of the New York Times.3
The consequence of the growth of virtual relationships is almost inevitably going to result in social atrophy. Our ability to form and develop substantial friendships and build those friendships into communities will be diminished.
Celebrity
In many ways the growth of celebrity in western cultures is a direct corollary of the rise and rise of entertainment as the basis of contemporary media. While societies have always had heroes, the basis of their acclaim was in their heroic exploits on the battlefield or in some other distinguished service or accomplishment in the wider life of the country. It has only been relatively recently that popular mass celebrity in its present-day form has emerged. First with the music halls and then the movies, sport and the broadcast media celebrity has grown. Fuelling its reach and cultural impact has been the growing amount of available leisure time and disposable income of an ever-increasing proportion of the population to access and consume celebrity.
Thus the culture of celebrity was born and established itself among us. The success of publications like Hello and OK magazines along with the gossip columns and 24-hour TV following their every move is indicative of how deeply embedded this has become within our society. The power of celebrity endorsement is not lost on organizations like the United Nations as they appoint high-profile figures as ‘Goodwill Ambassadors’ to increase publicity and interest in their good causes. The role of Bono and other musicians in the
