Pop Culture and Intergenerational Solidarity in Congregations

Transcription

1 Pop Culture and Intergenerational Solidarity in Congregations Presented at the Religion and Pop Culture Conference of the Canadian Centre for Scholarship and the Christian Faith, Concordia University of Edmonton, AB May 2, 2015 INTRODUCTION In this paper, I will briefly explore the historical development of the close-knit relationship between pop culture and youth culture that has emerged within North American society in the last seventy years and its impact on intergenerational dynamics. The focus will then turn to an examination of the impact that the relationship between youth culture and pop culture has had upon intergenerational life within the church specifically. As we will see, both the dynamics of pop culture and the postures that the church has adopted in responding to it have complicated the church s effectiveness in fulfilling its intergenerational mandate. I will conclude by offering a modest proposal regarding how the generations shared experience in the world of pop culture could serve as a platform for the strengthening of intergenerational solidarity in the church. THE EVOLVING YOUTH CULTURE Over the last seventy years, several successive generations of North American youth have participated in an evolving youth culture. Amid the flourishing post-wwii years of the 1940s and 50s, for the first time a distinct youth culture began to emerge. 1 While the term teens had been employed in the English language dating back to the 1600s, the 1940s marked the first time in history that this term was used to describe young people as a distinct cultural group. 2 In a way that had not been true in previous generations, the school environment became the centre of the teen social universe, 3 and the period of adolescence basically came to serve as an incubator for the emergence of a distinct youth culture. Because of this emerging emphasis on adolescents as a distinct social group and because the teens of the 40s and 50s possessed economic power that set them apart from previous generations, marketers began to devote focused attention to the teens of that era. As Palladino describes it, Now advertisers began to address high school students as teenagers on the prowl for a good time, 1 In the decades leading up to the 1940s, a number of developments set the stage for what would emerge during this period, including the establishment of child labour laws, the discovery of adolescence as a stage of human development, and the emergence of film and radio technologies during the 1920s. 2 T. Hine, The Rise and Fall of the American Teenager (New York: Avon Books, 1999) 8 3 B. Schneider & D Stevenson, The Ambitious Generation (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1999) 5-6 1

2 not earnest adolescents in training for adulthood...advertisers were beginning to identify and create a specialized teenage market. 4 This marketing craze was fuelled by the emergence of the television, which provided a medium by which advertisers could reach their youth market and promote a youth culture. In turn, teenagers were enabled to develop their own tastes in music, clothes, cars, and movies. 5 As Palladino expresses, once they had money of their own to spend, and products to spend it on, their world and that of their parents would never be quite the same again. 6 In short, the teens of that era became the first generation of participants in a widespread youth culture and the first generation of avid consumers of pop culture. Though several generations have arrived on the scene since that time, the basic pattern that began to emerge during the 1940s and 1950s has remained essentially intact. Throughout the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, the social construct of adolescence has continued to evolve. 7 Over time, this period of life has continued to become less about the intentional preparation of young people for adult life and more an extended incubation period for the formation of youth culture. 8 In essence, the members of each rising generation have been granted this period as a time to adopt, as Milson describes it, their own style of living. 9 Malan Nel depicts this youth culture dynamic in these words: According to your rules we are not allowed this or that therefore, in the meantime, we do it like this: our language, our values, our fashions, our terms, our religion. 10 By devoting their formative years to differentiating themselves from the adult population in this way, the members of each generation forge an enduring sense of their own distinctive generational identity. 11 Pop culture serves as a key resource available for rising generations to employ as they do so. It is important to note that pretty much everyone under the age of eighty-five in other words, virtually all living generations today have been shaped to a large degree by the givenness of this experience of adolescence. It has largely provided the only version of reality that these 4 G. Palladino, Teenagers: An American History (New York: Basic Books, 1996) 53 5 Schneider & Stevenson, 16 6 Palladino, 46 7 A. Williams & J. F. Nussbaum, Intergenerational Communication Across the Life Span (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, 2001) 30 8 F. Matthews-Green, Against Eternal Youth, First Things 155 (2005) 11; J. M. Twenge, Generation Me (New York: Free Press, 2006) 97 9 F. Milson, Youth in a Changing Society (Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1972) M. Nel, Youth Ministry: An Inclusive Congregational Approach (Clubview, South Africa: Design Books, 2000) In fact, much is now being written about the impact of extended adolescence, which gives rise to peeroriented urban tribes of twentysomethings who remain immersed together in a world largely dominated by pop culture. 2

3 generations have known. For these generations, pop culture has played an important role in the process of generational identity formation. Of course, pop culture certainly has not been the only or perhaps even the primary force shaping these generations sense of their distinctive identities. Each generation can point to pivotal shaping events and realities that were significant in influencing their generational consciousness. We can think, for example, of the impact of 9/11, the emergence of postmodernism, or the expansion of the global information society. However, pop culture has supplied the vocabulary that each generation employs in describing its experience. Pop culture also provides key markers shared reference points for the collective memory of a generation. These become part of the cultural default settings to which we refer back over the course of our lives. In a very real sense, pop culture both reflects and shapes a generation s unique peer personality, that generational style composed of similar patterns of belief, values, behaviour, and ways of expressing social identity. 12 To get some insight into what is being described here, once could simply compare the lyrics of The Who s 1965 hit, My Generation, with the lyrics of Limp Bizkit s 2000 release by the same name. Over the last several decades, youth culture has continued to evolve. In fact, there is a sense in which virtually all of society has become a youth culture in which we partake together in key pop cultural experiences. In addition, whereas it once was possible to speak fairly meaningfully of a singular youth culture, youth culture has become wildly complex, providing teens with a diverse range of angles through which to connect with pop cultural. However, even in the midst of these changes, it remains the case that, as a result of their common age location in history 13 and the common social location experienced during adolescence, 14 a generation s shared encounter with significant pop cultural influences does contribute to its development of a distinct generational peer personality. The evolving relationship between youth culture, pop culture, and generational identity formation has contributed to the situation in which we now find ourselves, one in which we are surrounded by people of other generations who bear the imprint of different cultural preferences and cultural reference points than those that have been meaningful to us. A recent study by Twenge, the most substantial longitudinal examination of American generational differences in 12 J. W. Carroll & W. C Roof, Bridging Divided Worlds: Generational Cultures in Congregations (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002) 6 13 W. Strauss & N. Howe, Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069 (New York: William Morrow, 1992) K. Mannheim, The Problem of Generations, in Altbach, P. G. & Laufer, R. S. (1972) 106, 113 3

4 recent decades, explicitly confirms the assertion that these differences between generations are quite real, and fairly profound. 15 This reality can be deeply challenging to us. We do not always know fully what to think of one another or how to relate to each other. Unfortunately, television and other couriers of pop culture often end up simply reinforcing our stereotypes of one another. 16 While pop culture is not to blame for the complex generational situation in which we find ourselves today, it has certainly been a contributing factor. THE EROSION OF INTERGENERATIONAL SOLIDARITY IN CONGREGATIONS Over the course of the historical period under consideration here, the church has felt the impact of the changing cultural patterns evident among adolescents. With the growth of the 1940s and 1950s youth culture, the approaches to youth ministry that had been employed to address the spiritual development of previous generation were largely perceived to be inadequate in meeting the needs of young people. 17 As a result, a dramatic philosophical shift began to occur in the world of youth ministry. According to British scholar Pete Ward, Young Life, Youth for Christ, and similar organizations founded during this period represented a new pattern based on entertainment and the understanding that ministry among young people must find a way to reach them within their own cultural world. 18 Whereas previous approaches had structured youth ministry around adult understandings and priorities, the entertainment model radically changed this. 19 One of the most compelling recent studies of this trend in youth ministry is Thomas Bergler s The Juvenilization of American Christianity. 20 Bergler suggests that the church basically responded to the changes happening in youth culture by replicating the incubator experience of adolescence and by striving to harness the trends happening within the broader youth culture for its own objectives of evangelism and discipleship. By Bergler s account, this approach to youth ministry often siloed youth from the rest of the congregation and immersed them in ministry environments saturated with elements reflecting the pop culture of the day. Bergler notes that this approach to youth ministry has remained predominant throughout much of the intervening years between the 1940s and today. 15 Twenge, 9; cf. E. H. Hammett & J. R. Pierce, Reaching People under 40 While Keeping People over 60: Being Church for All Generations (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2007) Williams & Nussbaum, B. Wolfe, A Short History of Youth Ministry ( 2004) 18 P. Ward, Colonising the Adult Church: Our Part in the Spread of Consumerism and Commercialisation. (Youth Specialities, 2005; ww.youthspecialties.com/freeresources/articles/pastpresentfuture/colonising.php.) 19 Ibid. 20 T. E. Bergler, The Juvenilization of American Christianity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012) 4

5 We now can look back on this period and recognize that the result of this model, in many cases, has been a pervasive sense of distance or disconnect between youth and the adult congregations. 21 Perhaps unsurprisingly, significant numbers of youth and young adults who were formed in this approach to ministry in recent decades have struggled to make the transition to become fullfledged adult participants in their congregations. The forms and practices of big church, as it is known in some contexts, have seemed foreign, boring, or even irrelevant to many. This has led to the emergence of several discernable trends within local congregations. First, some young people have sought to remain connected to their churches and, in doing so, have added to the church s complex generational mix by their very presence. In a religious climate charged with consumerist values, these members of rising generations bring their own preferences and expectations with them into the life of the adult congregation, as other recent generations have done before them. According to Gil Rendle as a result of the distinct values and preferences they bring into the life of congregations, members of the contemporary generations function much like distinct pure markets, a term from the world of media studies that describes segmented and targeted groups of consumers with a shared identification by age, gender, race, socioeconomic standing. 22 Rendle notes that this poses significant challenges because most established congregations are not pure market organizations. Rather, congregations have been caught in the awkward position of being impure markets in a time when people have come to expect that attention will be given to their differences. 23 In some congregational contexts, this has led to tension and, at times, outright conflict between generations. Sadly, generational groups within congregations can move all too quickly toward judgmental and defensive positions and end up engaging in win/lose struggles over their differences. 24 In recent decades, the worship war has been one of the focal points of this 21 This is illustrated by an extensive study conducted by Merton Strommen and his colleagues among Lutheran youth in the early 1970s. This study revealed a significant distinction between youth whose cultural identity was chiefly peer-oriented and those who possessed a more broadly-oriented, intergenerational sense of cultural identity. While those who were broadly-oriented tended to take signals from people of all ages, peer-oriented youth felt more alienated and critical of their churches [M. P. Strommen et al, A Study of Generations. (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1972)]. 22 G. Rendle, The Multigenerational Congregation: Meeting the Leadership Challenge (Bethesda, MD: Alban Institute, 2002) 19. Rendle adds that we are actively encouraged by the media and advertising industries to see ourselves as a part of the specific image tribe or primary media community to which we most naturally belong. 23 Ibid., 20, Ibid., 109 5

6 struggle within the church, as generations have battled over the right to tailor the corporate worship gathering to their particular style and musical tastes. 25 Second, in an effort to avoid this sort of intergenerational conflict, many churches have created what Craig Van Gelder describes as generational, multicongregational congregations that segment the population around particular age groups. 26 This has become a widespread phenomenon. As Holly Allen observes, Though church leaders endorse intergenerational approaches in theory, in practice American mainline and evangelical churches generally conduct many of their services and activities in age-segregated settings. 27 Third, in many churches, the members of younger generations have simply chosen to exit quietly. Drury explains that these young adults are not very good revolutionaries, so it s unlikely they ll lead a revolution and take over...like their parents did. 28 Many churches are not experiencing intergenerational tension today precisely because they no longer have younger adults who are engaged enough to care. As Hammett and Pierce note, Sadly, in many churches nearly everyone under forty has given up being actively involved in the church. 29 Some of these young adults have walked away from the church altogether in disillusionment. Others have chosen to move to congregations that more closely reflect their experience and tastes. Charles Foster suggests that this is perhaps to be expected; as he expresses, Is it any surprise then that young adults socialized into the value structures and practices of parachurch youth organizations should if they are interested be attracted to congregations with worship and fellowship patterns like those they knew as adolescents? 30 As we contemplate these patterns, the reflections of Hammett and Pierce nicely capture the challenges that the current generational landscape poses for congregational life today: [W]hat pleases one generation often doesn t satisfy the next generation, much less the third, fourth, or fifth.generations have different preferences for how they worship, learn, lead, 25 L. E. Schaller, Discontinuity and Hope: Radical Change and the Path to the Future. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1999) 17, C. Van Gelder, The Ministry of the Missional Church: A Community Led by the Spirit (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2007) Allen, H. C Bringing the Generations Together: Support from Learning Theory, Christian Education Journal 3/2/ (2005) K. Drury, Boomer Nursing Homes (accessed ) 29 Hammett and Pierce, Charles R. Foster. From Generation to Generation (Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2012) 71 6

7 relate, do ministry, and interact with one another. They have different personal preferences and lifestyles, styles of music, and attire. 31 To describe the impact that these changes have had on the church, it is helpful to employ the category of intergenerational solidarity. Social scientists have advanced the concept of solidarity to describe the glue by which group cohesiveness is maintained within a given community or group. 32 Solidarity is strengthened through interaction (the degree of contact and interconnectedness), activity (the breadth of activities in which group members engage together), sentiment (the degree of mutual affection between group members), and norms (shared standards regarding membership and interaction). 33 Based on what we have seen here, it seems reasonable to assert that the changes occurring in recent decades have contributed to the erosion of intergenerational solidarity within congregations. The bonds of togetherness, mutual affection, and shared standards have been weakened. While this is not solely, or surely even primarily, attributable to the influence of pop culture, the role that it has played in shaping the consciousness and modes of expression of each generation has certainly contributed to the situation many congregations face today. STRENGTHENING INTERGENERATIONAL SOLIDARITY IN THE CHURCH The constraints of this paper do not permit us to name all of the specific ways in which this erosion of intergenerational solidarity is injurious to the life of congregations. However, perhaps the following quote from Harkness will provide some sense of the magnitude of what this change represents: Ever since the development of Christian faith communities in the post-pentecost era of Christianity, there has been a consciousness that such communities need to encourage and embody a genuine intergenerationalism. 34 Clearly, the patterns that have taken shape in recent decades constitute a significant departure from the historic character of the church. In short, there has been an intergenerational disruption of the unity and continuity that the church is intended to experience, which compromises all of the benefits that this unity and continuity is intended to hold for the church and the world. 31 Hammett and Pierce, R. E. L. Roberts, L. N. Richards, & V. L. Bengston, Intergenerational Solidarity in Families: Untangling the Ties that Bind, in Pfeifer, S. B. & Sussman, M. B. 1991, Ibid., A. G. Harkness, Intergenerational Education for an Intergenerational Church?, Religious Education 93/4 (1998) 431 7

8 Many congregations today are troubled by this reality and desire to find meaningful ways to reweave the fabric of intergenerational life. 35 Over time, a handful of proposals have been put forth regarding how to accomplish this. It is important to acknowledge that there are no quick fixes or easy answers. In reality, the fundamental ingredient that is most likely to enable intergenerational solidarity to be strengthened is for members of the various generations to come together to engage in communication with one another, to grow in their understanding and appreciation of one another, and to consider their shared identity as people of faith. Fortunately, some great models for this have been put forth in recent years. For example, James Gambone has written All Are Welcome: A Primer for Intentional Intergenerational Ministry and Dialogue, in which he provides instructions about how to conduct scenario-based intergenerational discussions. 36 John Roberto has worked with a handful of colleagues to outline an approach to intergenerational learning gatherings based upon doctrinal themes or key events in the church calendar. 37 Drawing upon insights from these helpful models, it would be interesting to contemplate the prospect that pop culture, rather than merely being something that complicates intergenerational relations in the church, could actually provide an optional basis for intergenerational dialogue. We can be sentimentally attached to the pop cultural experiences with which we most closely identify and can also be judgemental toward those that bear meaning for other generations. Nonetheless, if we can transcend these potential hang-ups pop cultural artifacts do provide a concrete reference point around which members of various generations could gather to engage in discussion. With this in mind, imagine this for a moment: People of various generations within the congregation are welcomed warmly to an evening gathering and invited to sit with people of other generations around tables In their efforts to address these issues, some churches err by beginning with a focus on the point of greatest risk, which in most cases is the Sunday morning service. As Anderson suggests, Sunday morning assemblies are the most sacred time and the most sensitive place and thus should be least tampered with. [L. Anderson, Navigating the Winds of Change (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1994) 150]. It is advisable that churches begin elsewhere in developing opportunities for the generations to cultivate strengthened solidarity. 36 J. Gambone, All Are Welcome: A Primer for Intentional Intergenerational Ministry and Dialogue (Crystal Bay, MN: Elder Eye Press, 1998) 37 A. Amidei, J. Hermaut, & J. Roberto, Generations Together (Naugatuck, CT: LifelongFaith Associates, 2014) is one good example of the resources being developed by this team. M. Martineau, J. Weber, & L. Kehrwald, Intergenerational Faith Formation (New London, CT: Twenty Third Publications, 2008) is another resource in this same vein. 38 WonSuk James Roh, referencing King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, emphasizes the importance of the round table as an image of equality in intergenerational dialogue. This is a helpful perspective. W. J. Roh, The Church Round Table as Communication Model for Intergenerational Conflict, Asia Journal of Theology,

9 As this 90-minute gathering begins, participants are encouraged to be open and respectful to one another and to approach the evening s discussion with a posture of willingness to learn about others who are present, about the differences between themselves and others, and about previously unexplored points of commonality. 39 After the topic for the evening (e.g., love, commitment, or justice) is introduced, a series of three-to-four presenters representing different generations take turns introducing songs related to the evening s theme. This is a song that they feel has somehow significantly influenced their generation s consciousness on the theme or that perhaps reflects how their generation understands it. A portion of the song is played with the lyrics available in print for everyone. After this, the presenter takes a few minutes to offer a brief explanation of the song s significance from his or her generational standpoint, as well as his or her own assessment of the song s message as a person of faith. This clearly takes careful preparation and coordination in advance. After the songs have been introduced, the evening turns toward facilitated table discussion. Here are some questions that could be posed for discussion: o In what ways are the messages of these songs similar? How are they different? o Which of these songs do you personally connect with most? Why? Which do find most difficult to connect with? Why? o After reading a designated passage of scripture together, tables are encouraged to discuss the following: How would you compare or contrast the messages of these songs with what this scripture passage says? What does this mean for how we live out this theme as people of faith? As the gathering nears its conclusion, those present engage in large group reflection on what was experienced around the tables. The evening concludes with a prayer expressing thanksgiving and shared commitment to continuing to learn how to live as the church together Of course, it likely will be essential to prepare generations to come together in this way. There are some wonderful resources that can help people of different generations prepare to enter into intentional dialogue together, including the Gambone text mentioned above. Another helpful resource is M. O. Hawkins, F. A. McGuire, & K. F. Backman, Preparing Participants for Intergenerational Interaction (New York: Hawthorn Press, 1999) 40 On other occasions, a similar pattern could be employed with video clips from movies that have played a significant role in the experience of each generation. 9

10 This is merely an imaginative proposal. It is interesting to consider its potential benefits. Intentional intergenerational dialogue gatherings like this could enable the members of various generations to spend time together, to gain greater understanding of each other, and to move beyond their stereotypes of one another. As they listen to one another s stories and insights, it could help them to grow in respect and positive regard for one another. Furthermore, it could help them talk openly about their shared identity as people of faith and to identify values they share in common, even if points of difference also emerge. Pop culture has been played a significant role within the life of the generations living today. It is something that we have in common, yet which also separates us in some significant ways. Churches must discover how to transcend the fear and misunderstanding that sometimes exists between members of different generations. Intentional intergenerational gatherings that enable us to approach pop culture creatively as a positive resource, rather than merely as a problem, can help us to overcome the experience of separation and strengthen the bonds of intergenerational solidarity within congregations Individuals interested in exploring these themes more are welcome to have a look at my University of Pretoria PhD dissertation, Intergenerational Reconciliation and Justice as Essential Dimensions of Missional Renewal in the Post-Modern Transition, which is available online at the following link: 10

11 BIBLIOGRAPHY Allen, H. C Bringing the Generations Together: Support from Learning Theory, Christian Education Journal 3/2/2: Altbach, P. G. & Laufer, R. S The New Pilgrims: Youth Protest In Transition. New York: David McKay Company, Inc. Amidei, A., Hermaut, J. & Roberto, J Generations Together. Naugatuck, CT: LifelongFaith Associates. Anderson, L Navigating the Winds of Change: How to Manage Change in the Church. New York: Simon and Schuster. Bergler, T. E The Juvenilization of American Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012 Carroll, J. W. & Roof, W. C Bridging Divided Worlds: Generational Cultures in Congregations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Drury, K Boomer Nursing Homes Foster, C. R From Generation to Generation. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books. Gambone, J. V All Are Welcome: A Primer for Intentional Intergenerational Ministry and Dialogue. Crystal Bay, MN: Elder Eye Press. Hammet, E. H.& Pierce, J. R Reaching People under 40 While Keeping People over 60: Being Church for All Generations. St. Louis: Chalice Press. Harkness, A. G Intergenerational Education for an Intergenerational Church?, Religious Education 93/4: Hine, T The Rise and Fall of the American Teenager. New York: Avon Books, Inc. Howe, N. & Strauss, W Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation. New York: Vintage Books. Mannheim, K The Problem of Generations, in Altbach, P. G. & Laufer, R. S. 1972: Martineau, M., Weber, J. & Kehrwald, L Intergenerational Faith Formation. New London, CT: Twenty Third Publications. Matthews-Green, F Against Eternal Youth, First Things 155:9-11. Milson, F Youth in a Changing Society. Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Nel, M Youth Ministry: An Inclusive Congregational Approach. Clubview, South Africa: Design Books. Newman, S., et al Intergenerational Programs: Past, Present, and Future. Washington, D.C.: Taylor and Francis. Palladino, G Teenagers: An American History. New York: Basic Books. Rendle, G The Multigenerational Congregation: Meeting the Leadership Challenge. Bethesda, MD: Alban Institute. Roberts, R. E. L., Richards, L. N., & Bengston, V. L Intergenerational Solidarity in Families: Untangling the Ties that Bind, in Pfeifer, S. B. & Sussman, M. B. 1991: Roh, W. J. The Church Round Table as Communication Model for Intergenerational Conflict, Asia Journal of Theology, Schaller, L. E Discontinuity and Hope: Radical Change and the Path to the Future. Nashville: Abingdon Press. Schneider, B. and Stevenson, D The Ambitious Generation: America's Teenagers, Motivated but Directionless. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 11

12 Strauss, W. & Howe, N Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584 to New York: William Morrow. Strommen, M. P. et al A Study of Generations. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House. Twenge, J. M Generation Me: Why Today s Young Americans are More Confident, Assertive, Entitled And More Miserable than Ever Before. New York: Free Press. Van Gelder, C The Ministry of the Missional Church: A Community Led by the Spirit. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House. Ward, P Colonising the Adult Church: Our Part in the Spread of Consumerism and Commercialisation. Watters, E Urban Tribes. New York: Bloomsbury. Williams, A. & Nussbaum, J. F Intergenerational Communication Across the Life Span. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Wolfe, B A Short History of Youth Ministry. 12