Taking a look around

1. In this paper, I will seek to describe how popular culture has shaped “reality”- the lives, hopes and desires of the youth at Arcadia Presbyterian Church. Expectations for the future, love, happiness, spirituality, and even “maleness” and “femaleness” will be examined both in a local way (Southern California) as well as a specific focus at APC. Southern California, as the chief exporter of popular culture in the U.S. presents youth with a uniquely difficult situation to live in. In short, this section will ask the question : “what lies or myths have youth bought into about life or themselves?”

2. After identifying the ways that popular culture influences the minds of our youth, I will look to Cobb to identify what the Christian community might say in response to this confusion and despair that many young people find themselves in. Here I will discuss aspects of culture like hyper-reality, human nature, and salvation according to Cobb, and look at how the Church might want to react to the warping of reality.

3. In the final section, I will seek to look at ways that the church can address the issue of “reality” as shaped by popular culture in the lives of youth. Specifically, I want to discuss how the body of Christ can redeem negative aspects of culture for the benefit and health of our youth. Ultimately, my aim will be to point to the “ultimate reality” that is found in Christ. The focus for this section will fall into three main categories, possible solutions for:
A) The Church community
B) Locally in Southern California
c) In “Global” youth culture

“I’m glad that he pointed out how different AA actually is; AA is nothing less than old fashioned Christian repentance placed in 12 steps, and is something churches need to encourage, not discourage.”

I really appreciate the fact that Michael mentioned AA in his post this week. I’ve been thinking for some time about why AA works so well. How can it be that a total stranger could come into a new place with new people, sit down, and share about their entire disturbing past and their hopes for redemption? And perhaps more troubling, why can’t we find this honesty in many of our churches? Shouldn’t the Church be more like an AA meeting, where openness and humility are the markers of the community? Why are people more willing to share at an AA meeting than in a Church service. I agree with Michael, the Church needs to encourage this sort of thing, and perhaps even adopt some of the aspects of AA that have made it so effective at changing lives.

It was incredible to read this chapter and identity how strong a desire most people have for redemption. Whether it comes through “ecstatic aids” like drugs, sex or athletics”, or through icons, advertising, music or film, we want to know that “our sinful ways can be redeemed, that obstacles to our happiness can be overcome and that we can enjoy more fulfilling lives” (261)

Especially interesting in this chapter was the comparison between certain “ecstatic experiences” and the formal worship services of the Church. Church as we know it offers very little in terms of “release and liberation” (230) when compared to activities like getting a promotion, going into nature, having sex, or winning the lottery. Perhaps this can be a wakeup call for the Church, to understand that people are seeking a participatory experience and not merely a bland spectatorism. In a world that so seeks salvation, what if we could wake people up to the unparalleled salvific aspects of the Gospel in a new way?

In his discussion of the “transcendental” model, Bevans explains that this model aims at a fundamental switch in how we come to find reality. With this model, reality comes not through a “conviction that reality is out there” (104), but that humans are integral in “determining reality’s basic shape. This model starts with the individual’s spiritual experience but cannot be accomplished fully without community.

“Finally, since it is so hard to be an authentic believer and an authentic human bring, it might seem that a theology that depends on these criteria would never get started” (108)

I find myself agreeing with Bevans on this issue. In a model that depends more on an “authentic” human experience than even scripture, might we be setting ourselves up for a phony faith, a façade of authenticity. If we cannot easily be real as believers, how can we build a faith founded solely on our flawed perceptions of reality?