Rethinking Facebook
It seems that there is starting to be a groundswell of, shall we say, “concern” around the use of Facebook. Most of this has to do with the privacy issues, but I think some of it also has to do with the independent spirit of those on the front edge of the Internet. Just as a backlash against Microsoft has led to the Linux/Firefox/OpenOffice user, I think we are starting to see a Facebook backlash. No one likes to be told what to do – the Internet was built on open standards and Facebook (just as Microsoft did) is trying to become the standard.
There are a range of reactions to the current situation from the “digital elite”. Some are canceling their accounts. Others giving up and opening up their privacy settings to be as public as possible. I personally have not taken any action – yet – but I am starting to understand the concerns.
We all will have to make our decisions about what we will do with our personal Facebook accounts. But a bigger question that concerns me much more is how churches and ministries respond. Many ministries (such as Lifechurch) have begun to heavily commit to using Facebook. I am working with two organizations right now who are considering heavy work inside of Facebook. I, myself, keep this blog as a page on Facebook. But if you do heavily use Facebook, what does that imply? If the “medium is the message”, are we then giving implicit approval to the use of Facebook and its terms of service? And if our use of Facebook encourages people to create accounts and/or begin using Facebook more, should that concern us?
So, will this all blow over? Just as Facebook was starting to be seen as more important than Google, will its decline begin? What do you think? What will your church or ministry do?
Lifechurch.tv lets us go “Behind the Curtain”
Starting this last weekend, Lifechurch.tv launched a series entitled “Behind the Curtain”. This series is going to give an “inside look” at Lifechurch to show us what they are doing and how they are making a difference. From their blog:
This weekend we launched Behind the Curtain, a new series where we’re looking beyond the weekend experience to see how the Church is making a difference around the world. We felt so passionate about sharing where God has been leading us during this season that we pressed the pause button on the series we had planned to do next, Five Easy Steps to Wreck Your Life. . . These are some of the ways that LifeChurch.tv is changing our methods, but not our message, to reach our culture.
As you may know, I am a big fan of Lifechurch, but also a critic. You can find my opinions about online church and Lifechurch.tv in general throughout this blog, but a good summary of my basic arguments is in this post.
The timing of this new series is interesting…with the Christian Web Conference coming up in a month and with its highlight being a debate on the use of the Internet to provide full church services – I wonder if Lifechurch is putting its arguments out there right now? It may just be coincidence, but it provides a great way to prepare for the conference!
What do you think? Can church be done in full online? Read the Lifechurch blog, read my posts, and then come to the Christian Web Conference to talk about it! Hope to see you there…
What you save them WITH is what you save them TO
Last week, I began a discussion about LifeChurch.tv and their implementation of an online “campus” for their church. That post grew out of ongoing discussions we are having in my Internet Ministry class at Biola, where my students are working to develop a philosophy of Internet ministry. In that post I discussed how skeptical I was about trying to do ALL facets of a church service online. Many churches will post audio and video of their services, but they do not even begin to claim that experiencing church through the website is the ideal experience. To be fair, LifeChurch is not the only church doing this, there are others. But they seem to be the most innovative and prominent of the bunch.
Now, before I go on, let me just stop and say that I think that LifeChurch is doing an absolutely amazing job of utilizing the latest technologies and working to understand their implications. From blogs to video to Twitter to Second Life, they have all of their bases covered. And I have no doubt that they are changing lives and impacting the world in a positive way for Christ. They are an absolutely amazing ministry. They now have thirteen physical campuses serving several different communities across the United States. Each location is unique, but yet united together through the transmission of the main message via satellite. As their “About” page says: “Through satellite broadcasts that enable all of our twelve locations to be connected as one, LifeChurch.tv is a multi-site church that transcends metropolitan regions.” Their innovation is not just with technology: they also make all of their media resources available to other churches to use, at no charge. This is truly an amazing ministry with amazing people that God is using for His glory.
I ended my post last time by asking the questions:
…isn’t an ‘incomplete’ Christian experience better than no Christian experience at all? There are many who would never go to “church” (or are unable to for some reason) but would be willing to attend a service online. Doesn’t that make it worth it?
These are probably some of the most compelling reasons to put church online. I know of several people who would never want to go into a church building with me, but would be willing to check out a service online. And I would feel very comfortable telling them about LifeChurch’s online campus. But I would also be sure to follow up with them and encourage them to become a part of a local church body (whether mine or another). This discussion was brought up in our class during a conversation with Matt Anderson, the author of a chapter in one of the books we are using in the course. When asked about this specific question (“what about those who would never go to church otherwise?”), he responded that he understood this line of thinking, but also cautioned: “what we save them with is what we save them to.” In other words, if someone gets saved via an online church they will also see that church as “normal” and will possibly never move beyond that church experience. Matt went on to state that Christianity is a physical religion: Jesus became man and interacted with us in the flesh. We are commanded to fellowship with each other. A Christian who “forsakes the assembly” is shortchanging themselves and disobeying God.
It comes down to this question: is a physical presence necessary in order for fellowship to happen? Shane Hipps, pastor and author of The Hidden Power of Electronic Culture, thinks so. In an interview I had with him for my class, he stated that for authentic community to happen, four components must exist: a shared history, permance, proximity, and a shared imagination of the future. He said that the Internet, primarily, can provide the last of the four, but is really limited in its ability to create the first three. He went on to say that “there is something energetically, spiritually that happens to a relationship when you are in the same room. And it’s fundamentally different than a disembodied relationship [via the Internet].”
Let me conclude by saying that I applaud what LifeChurch is doing overall. Their innovative work on the Internet is paving the way for other ministries to get online. Their willingness to share resources is inspiring. Where I differ with them (and other churches with Internet campuses) is their decision to try to implement the full church experience through their Internet campus. Online church services provide a valuable service to those unable to attend a physical church and to those who would never enter a church on their own accord. But these folks must be directed to find a local body of believers, real flesh and blood, and it must be made clear that the online church service is never to replace attending physically.
I know that there are those who disagree with me. This is the place for a healthy debate. My students are wrestling with this issue as well and all comments are welcome.
Should we do it all online?
As many of you know, I am teaching a course in Internet Ministry this semester at Biola University. Most of you reading this cannot attend this class, but have told me how interested you are in the topics of the course. In the spirit of Britain’s Open University and MIT’s Open Courseware, over the next few weeks, I will use this blog to share with you some of the highlights of the course and what the class is learning. As of today, the class has met two times and we have already had some good discussions regarding the role of the Internet in ministry.
Probably the most interesting topic so far is the debate on which areas of ministry can be performed effectively on the Internet. The first day of class we started defining the term “ministry”. By using the early church as described in the book of Acts as our example, we found many types of ministry performed: teaching, fellowship, communion, prayer, worship, ministering to the poor, evangelism, fasting, hospitality, and miracles. The discussion then led to the question: which of these areas of ministry can be done online? And the followup: which of these areas of ministry should be done online?
I asked my students to attend a church service at Lifechurch.tv between our first and second meetings. Lifechurch is a multi-site church that extensively uses the Internet as a means for ministry. They have even created an Internet “campus” which attempts to provide a complete church experience for those who “attend” one of the services. It was this Internet campus that I asked my students to attend. In class the next week, we recounted our experience there and compared it to our experience attending a church service physically. We reviewed the different activities performed in a church service, such as worship, taking offering, preaching, prayer, and fellowship. We all agreed that, from a technical perspective, Lifechurch does these quite well. For worship, they show their band playing, with the words to the songs appearing on the screen as they are being sung. At one point in the service, offering is taken where a short message on the importance of giving is presented and the opportunity to give is presented (though you can give at any time via the “donate” button at the top right of the screen). The Lifechurch pastor, Craig Groeschel, gave a Biblically-sound topical message in his latest series, called “True-ish”. Prayer happened throughout the service and at any point you could click “live prayer” to contact someone to pray with you. Finally, fellowship was provided through the “chat” window to the right of the screen (see image), where you could interact with each other in a text-based format. The chat window was lively and had quite varied topics going all throughout the service.
But after agreeing that the technical aspects of the service were well done, we started asking the harder questions. Was fellowship that was handled via “chat” sessions really fellowship? One of my students noted that true fellowship is not just getting together only during Sunday mornings for a conversation, but it is seeing the hurt in someone’s eyes as they are leaving the service or running into someone later in the week and talking about what they are doing. And what about worship? After agreeing that the music was quite moving and the musicians were talented, a student asked, “but did you find yourself singing along with it?” In other words, were you merely being entertained, or were your thoughts turned towards glorifying God?
As my students work towards their first assignment of developing a philosophy of Internet ministry, these are the types of questions that must be answered. What parts of ministry are better handled offline, in the physical world? How do you integrate the online and the offline? As you may be able to tell from this blog post, I have my reservations about what Lifechurch is doing with their Internet campus. Their commitment to giving someone 100% of the church experience online, without directing that person to a local Christian fellowship, in my opinion, shortchanges that person and does not give them the full Christian experience and, more importantly, leads them away from fulfilling their duties as a Christian.
“HOLD ON!”, you might say, “isn’t an ‘incomplete’ Christian experience better than no Christian experience at all?” There are many who would never go to “church” (or are unable to for some reason) but would be willing to attend a service online. Doesn’t that make it worth it? These are great questions that are difficult to answer. I will leave that for an upcoming post.
Search
Welcome to Lessons From Babel
This blog is where I share the latest thoughts on my research in the world of Internet ministry. Feel free to join the conversation by leaving a comment. For more information on what I am doing in 2010, see my first post of the year. To find out more about me, my company, and this web site, or to see what resources are available on this site, click on the images right below this.
- Dave Bourgeois
