26 June 2009

A Teen Driven Culture

We live in a teen driven culture. You might add in college students and single folks up to age 25 or so, but the majority of our culture, in terms of entertainment, in terms of marketing, is focused on that 10-12 year span from 13-25. The marketing trends cycle to try to appeal to teens, and the focus is upon flash and upon what is new.

I am newly moved out of that demographic (relatively speaking), and so I see more and more how things are aimed at folks other than me. Marketing is what appeals to the teens of a given time - at my time it was grunge influenced, then later there was the "extreme". . . sorry, the "EXTREME!!!!!" phase. Whatever it is now just makes me feel old - it's all texty and i-phoney and such (gads, if this is what I sound like at 31. . .)

Here is the problem. We know that the Church is to shape the culture, but sadly, our culture is impacting the Church - not so much in the fact that we hit the latest fad - not that we've moved from the "EXTREME" to trying to affect technology - but rather that the folks who try to set the agendas for the Church have adopted the idea that we need to cater to the hot demographic in order to be relevant. That the Church must pander to consumers, all for the sake of Christ.

Which, when you think about it, is the true and universal "teen" culture. Think on the horrid awkwardness that was (or is) high school. You don't know what to do, you don't really know who you are, there is such pressure to fit in, to have people like you, to be seen as popular, the rejection of things associated with your parents to distinguish yourself as a new adult (and more of the time an unwise rejection). It's an utter mess - pray for your high schoolers!

But now consider how the religious growth gurus and leaders approach issues in the Church. It is reserved? Is is based upon serious and deft study of the Word? Or do the ideas flitter and change - just like a teen who doesn't know what to do? Are plans for change and improvement made - or are random plans just cast out with a "well, what do you guys think, will this work!" Do we remain who we are, or are we worried about how our church is different? Are we more worried about being faithful, or about being the growing, faithful church? Do we cherish the things that have made us to grow, or do we toss away what we have received as worthless - because we are a new thing, not our parents' (or grandfathers', if you prefer) church. We are being run by a much of middle aged suits who think like teens.

I think St. Paul would encourage us to give up our "teenish" ways.

6 comments:

WM Cwirla said...

"You don't know what to do, you don't really know who you are, there is such pressure to fit in, to have people like you, to be seen as popular, the rejection of things associated with your parents to distinguish yourself..."

Sounds like an average day of parish ministry in the LCMS. You might be on to something here.

Rev. Wright II said...

Pastor Brown,
I agree that you are on to something. In the congregation I serve, I have not had one high schooler suggest that we change the way of worship so it will include this or that new thing. It seems to be the middle-agers who suggest these things under the guise of if we do this new uplifting thing then the youth will come. This is the magic bullet idea. If we just do this new thing that ALL the other churches are doing, then all our youth problems will be solved. It is my humble opinion that our youth are entertained enough in the world and we as the Church should be different from the world we live in because we have something different to give them, Christ our Lord as His gifts.
Thanks for the good post!

Drew Lomax said...

Rev. Wright II,

"In the congregation I serve, I have not had one high schooler suggest that we change the way of worship so it will include this or that new thing. It seems to be the middle-agers who suggest these things under the guise of if we do this new uplifting thing then the youth will come."

How true!

Now this is nothing but anecdotal and subjective evidence in nature, but, when I was a teen in the church (I'm the same age as Pr. Brown)I always expected church to be, well, church. Something traditional, something boring (at least those were my thoughts at the time), yet, I never expected it to be "MTV-meets pop-psychology-meets the Gospel" (but only if there's time to fit in that Gospel thingy; forget about the law altogether). I expected it to be something different from pop-culture. So, when these trendy cultural intrusions were ever tried, it seemed so tedious and condescending. Like they were dumbing something down to make the content more relevant to me, when I was more than capable of understanding it the way it was to be best presented in the first place. I remember usually feeling embarrassed for them, and wondering how they couldn't see their own transparent folly like my friends and I could. Sadly, we would usually scoff our youth group leader behind their backs.

It's true that this is more of a phenomenon that lies with a segment of the boomer generation. When the Jesus People movement met the traditional church and began to influence it during the 70's, that is when you began to see this happy-clappy nonsense enter in. The relevance of the Gospel was traded for the relevance of pop-culture, so as to have the youth hopefully attracted to the church.

What's sad about that last sentence is that I can think of nothing more relevant to all people at all times than the Gospel. It's as serious, no, it's more serious than being diagnosed with a benign cancer on the verge of becoming malignant. At any moment of the day or night God could demand our lives from us, therefore, the message of Christ and Him crucified is relevant at each and every moment. There is no time for these "anything-to-get-them-in-the-door" tactics that change according to the current cultural zeitgeist.

Drew

University Lutheran said...

Interesting post,
As someone who ministers to college students - I can see your frustration with much of the pandering to a demographic that I too have recently moved out of. I think we saw many of the foibles of this pandering pointed out to us in the recent rise and fall of what called itself the "Emerging" movement. (Which was very much older people saying "this is what teens/younger people want" than it was the demographic speaking for itself.

However, I think it may not serve us well to completely ignore "all things texty and iphoney". I mean, you are writing on a blog after all. Should we stop our use of technological innovations in the mid to late 90's because that's when we ceased being young?

Unfortunately, that is so often the other side of the coin in these "we should retain what we've been given" arguments - it is far less often truly being worried about what has been handed down to us and is far too often being unsettled by our circumstances.

Perhaps the question is less *if* we should retain what we have been given, but *how* (which makes for a much more proactive conversation in general).

in Christ,
jWinters.com

Rev. Eric J Brown said...

There is obvious a bit of irony in what wrote being on a blog =o) And I am not anti-technology (although, right now I just like my cell phone to be a phone - but I live in the middle of Oklahoma, I don't want to shell out an extra $50 a month for internet on my phone when 50% of the time I don't get simple reception at home) -- but rather technology shouldn't be the "selling point" - it should simply be a tool.

And to that end, my kids at college can (and do) pull my sermons off of my website on to their eye-pods. =o) But we shouldn't think the tools end up drawing people to the Church - rather that which the tools communicate does the work.

casa da poesia said...

"sangham saranam gacchami"...for you!