Blessings and Blisters
by Heather Koerner on 11/11/2009 at 12:49 PM
USA Today is talking about the new trend of "virtual church." In an article titled, "Internet believers: Pastors open online churches," Rachel Zoll writes:
The World Wide Web has become the hottest place to build a church. A growing number of congregations are creating Internet offshoots that go far beyond streaming weekly services.
The sites are fully interactive, with a dedicated Internet pastor, live chat in an online "lobby," Bible study, one-on-one prayer through IM and communion. (Viewers use their own bread and wine or water from home.) On one site, viewers can click on a tab during worship to accept Christ as their savior. Flamingo Road Church, based in Cooper City, Fla., twice conducted long-distance baptisms through the Internet.
Zoll writes that advocates feel that the internet is "just another neighborhood where real relationships can be built" and that they feel "a religious duty to harness this new way for reaching the spiritually lost."
"We live in a day and age and a culture where people go to school online, bank online, date online and do other things online," said Kurt Ervin, who oversees the Internet campus for Central Christian Church, based in Henderson, Nev. "Why not create a platform for them to go to church online?"
Still, the author writes, "the staunchest critics say that true Christian community ultimately requires in-person interaction."
One of those critics is Mark Olson who, over at Evangel, lists three features of worship that virtual churches lack, and why we should be concerned about them.
- Sacrifice. Olson writes, "The service is our offering to God and part of that sacrifice to God is of our time and our presence. Reducing that sacrifice to sitting before your computer screen in your proverbial pajamas certainly severely diminishes if not eliminates the sacrifice involved."
- Holiness. "For myself, I fail to see how participation and contact with the Holy can be done by wire."
- Contact with the liturgy and with the community. "We have 5 senses. A virtual service may serve, poorly, two (hearing and sight) ... man, created in the image of God is not purely rational and the organism and the meat of us is part of that image."
I think Olson makes some good points. For me lately, though, I've found the importance of the side-by-side church in its messiness.
My church and I are just going through a rough period right now. We're disagreeing on decisions. We're on different pages on program priorities. We're, too often, misunderstanding each others intentions and motives. And, sometimes, we're just annoying each other.
So much so that a few times in the past year I've wondered where that church that I have loved and treasured so much for the last seven years has gone.
It hasn't been fun or easy. But it has forced me to ask some tough questions. Could it be that God is allowing this time to work out my sanctification? Have I taken for granted the easier times? Am I just too spoiled to stick with it during the "bear with one another" times? Is there some serious selfishness that needs shaving off of me that only reveals its head during frustration?
I don't know all the answers, of course. I just know that when I rub shoulders with my fellow believers I have gotten both blessings and blisters -- and it could be that God is using both to mold me.
It seems a bit strange to me that I would come to treasure my church for the, shall I say, just "yuck" that we're going through. Stranger still that I would argue for the side-by-side church because of the "yuck" we have to go through sometimes. Still, I know, that online I can be polished and edited and not be bothered. But it's the bothering me -- it's the blisters -- that God is using the most right now. And I don't get that virtually.
1. Michelle (of Kansas) said the following at 2:07 PM on Nov 11:
Getting hugs from people at church and hearing the voices of people worshiping God are just two reasons that I love going to a church offline. An "online church" should only serve to enhance a person's spiritual life, and offer guidance in a Christian's life. You know, like what Boundless does. :) It should not replace the church body itself.
2. Dani said the following at 2:37 PM on Nov 11:
Another thing missing from an online church is the authority of the men in leadership. How can your pastors and elders truly get to know you through an online forum? The first and most basic part of church discipline is sitting under the preaching of the word -- how can your pastor hold you accountable when your X miles away and can very easily turn off your computer and walk away? Yes, I can walk out of service anytime I want, but I have pastors, elders, and their wives who will follow up with me and find out what's up.
There may be situations where an online church is the best someone can get (if you're in a remote area, or disabled, or homebound for other reasons). But it breaks my heart to think that a Christian would willingly reject the love, support, and yes, discomfort that are all wrapped up in the local church.
3. Sara said the following at 7:26 PM on Nov 11:
Although I am a firm believer that all Churches should take advantage of the internet by building a website and such, I do not think Online Churches are a valid replacement for in-person fellowship.
I love the internet. I have made friends from all over the world through the web, and through online games, plus I know people who have met their spouses through various games online. BUT, I totally agree with the post and how it discusses the senses. God equipped us with more than eyes and ears for a reason... why not let all our senses be part of the worship?
Plus, unless these people are VERY liberal about communion, how can they get it online? I mean, I am all for the idea of every meal being like a communion with God, but I don't think most people treat meals like that.
4. Vanessa said the following at 9:22 PM on Nov 11:
I've recently begun attending a church that has an "online campus" and I have used it a few times. Sometimes it's been when I wanted to go to a service, but something came up to where I could not and I'm really glad that I didn't have to miss the message because God's really been speaking to me lately through the messages at my new church.
It also has been wonderful to be able to share the link with friends and family who either don't go to church or who are curious about the type of church I attend. Some people wouldn't set foot in a church, but would agree to watch it online...and God can work in their lives through that, healing them to where they can maybe have faith in a body of believers again.
I'm of the agreement that unless you are a shut-in, you should find a church and join it physically. I love that even though I attend a very large church, there are small groups and so much community within the larger group. I also think that the interactive chats that go along with the sermons are so much better than just watching it on TV or listening to a radio broadcast. Broadcasting online is just the next step after radio and television. It's how our generation is receiving information...with my dad's generation, it was TV...with my grandfather's generation it was radio. The world wide web is my generation's "TV" or "radio."
In a world where many brick and mortar businesses are closing down in favor of online models, news outlets are utilizing Twitter and Facebook along with RSS to get the word out, and more and more newspapers have drastically reduced circulation due to online content...it's not a bad thing to have Christian content readily accessible. I don't think it's going to make church-going Christians STOP going to church just to watch it online. If even one person begins a walk with God as a result of watching a church service online; I think that's worth it, don't you?
5. Eddie Ssemakula said the following at 12:34 AM on Nov 12:
Great idea,this generation is a wired one.We cant neglect online outreach
Just a suggestion though,these online churches should add the "poke" application on their pages.
It doesn't hurt poking your worship leader abit :)
6. Keith said the following at 8:26 AM on Nov 12:
There is another problem with "online" churches: The digital divide. Many poor people can't access the internet. If the only way they can access a church is online, then many people will be unable to access a church.
7. Jo said the following at 6:13 AM on Nov 15:
My general view is that it's good for churches to use the internet in creative ways to enhance what they're already doing: making sermons available online, reaching out to more people, and providing various resources - but I do agree that if you can get to church you absolutely should. The internet is not a replacement for real life worship and community.
With that in mind I think an online church might provide help for some people who are housebound - BUT the danger is that it replaces proper old fashioned pastoral care, where church leaders or other believers actually visit those people, making an active effort to value them, support them and include them in the community. If a church thinks it's enough to offer online community to those who can't get to a service, that church is wrong. Online community should always be an addition, not a substitute.
So in short I think it's a great thing if used properly. But if used lazily as a replacement for real life fellowship, it's a huge huge problem.
8. a sassy sister said the following at 8:15 AM on Nov 16:
Jo:
I agree...I really think it all comes down to motive and purposes.