• No One Way

    No One Way

    Yesterday (on Easter), I woke up (on purpose) before 5am. I had decided to experience Tampa Underground’s Easter gathering. Tampa Underground is a hub-and-spoke model of church, in particular microsites. There is a governing center (the hub) with a whole bunch of committed satellite sites (the spokes). It is different than the American standard model of denominations in that each microsite is very particular and small on purpose. This is in contrast to many American churches that are small and particular by chance, atrophy, directionlessness, or some leader issues.

    Yet, the hub-and-spoke model created a very different (historically) expression of an Easter service. We were (predominately) on Zoom. Due to Zoom limitations, some people were watching on Facebook. What made this interesting is that there were people from Ireland, the Philippines, France, and the USA all leading different aspects of this worship gathering. Imagine that! An international/intercultural Easter gathering! Talk about turning the world’s systems upside down!

    If there is one thing that church online does better than the physical gathering on Sundays (or whatever day your church gathers), is the ability to gather from around the globe. There is a special power when people outside of your immediate world speak into your life.

    The standard model of church is able to do this, but the protection of one’s local context (often out of unrecognized fear) creates an atmosphere where this is much harder. The advantage of the hub-and-spoke model is an automatic decentralization that really allows for such a creative and expressive Easter (or any church) gathering.

    So, while much of the church is still trying to figure out what the digital means for their local expression, there also needs to be a shift into thing what we can do with this technology. This time is a challenge. This time is also an opportunity!

  • Now What?

    Now What?

    One of the biggest (and most valid) critiques of doing church online (or, as in the current COVID situation, only online) is the lack of connection. We humans are made for connection. Understand that this is coming from an introvert. I too need connection. There is something about physical connection. There is this matter of being present with one another that often defies logic.

    Many people of the more digital persuasion are not persuaded by this undefinable need. Some people dismiss the “digitarati” as broken or emotionally-stunted people. Some may be that way. Most, however, are driven by numbers not undefinables, or so they think. Honestly, numbers are good. Those that often dismiss the digitarati don’t connect the numbers to the people.

    There is the historical people are not numbers. They aren’t. They are people with stories. However, numbers represent people, people who have stories. Numbers can and do tell stories, too. They tell the story of people and their history. Numbers should be paid attention to.

    What does that have to do with, “now what?”

    There are lots of numbers watching church online right now. That cannot be enough. There are usually a lot of numbers watching football, soccer, basketball, hockey. Numbers can do many things. And they are lacking…and so is online church.

    Yes, online church is the wave of the future. Okay, it was. It is now the present. Our next steps, and I know mine, is how we move to discipleship and spiritual growth. Really, much of online church is what already happens in the so-called \”real\” physical church…audiences and consumers.

    Even some of the younger people of the church do not find this online expression to be very satisfying. That’s actually a good thing. In a day and age where there is great concern regarding disconnection, that the technology-embedded generations recognize a difference is a good thing!

    The reality is that all of us are looking at ways to develop and maintain community while we are physically distanced. Small groups online is the way we are going to all have to go, and it will not be the most comfortable or the most incarnation we think or feel it ought to be. That\’s okay.

    Online church services and online small groups may online be for a short time. It also may be for a long time. We don’t know. There are currently denominations/traditions/regions/local churches that have chosen, for example, to not celebrate the Eucharist together. There are others who are bending their theology to allow some sort of communal Eucharist celebration. There are others who have no theological issue with online communion at all. Most of the longtime online churches have that theological perspective.

    This is a time of learning. What needs to be done to be the church? What does it mean to be part of the church when we are distant?

    One of the things that this is teaching us is that how poor our Bible teaching has been. It’s probably better to say, how poorly have we empowered and encouraged people to pursue Christ through reading the Bible in discernment on their own. We have, it seems, overly centralized God’s word. For those who object to the term “self-feeding”, I do agree to an extent. Yet, this shows why it is so important to create some form of “self-feeding”.

    Without decentralization, we would have never been gifted Paul’s words. Think on that for a moment. When Paul wrote he was away from (or never even met) the churches he wrote to. This isn’t that new.

    In the American Western Frontier (from the 19th century) there were the Methodist Circuit Riders. They existed because the people were disconnected from one another. They went around to deliver the Word of God and the Eucharist, and to baptize. What has been utterly fascinating is how much the American Church has forgotten that. The Church of the Nazarene came from much of that, as many of our churches are in very rural areas, which is odd having been started on the streets of Los Angeles in the “wrong” side of town.

    Perhaps, we have lost what it means to be connected. This might also be an echo what the USA is experiencing in its current cultural and political climate. We are disconnected from one another, even in our own neighborhoods. Perhaps the greatest lesson we are learning in the current COVID situation is that we are disconnected and we don’t know how to be connected.

  • Tech Glitch

    Tech Glitch

    Everything’s been working, and then suddenly there’s a problem. Sound familiar?

    For those of us who do not do online church as profession (i.e., full-time paid), we often have to fit online in. In addition, while churches are learning about online (COVID-19 being the biggest full-blown panic instigator), they may not have all the pieces in place needed for that professional presentation we all desire to have (and compare ourselves to).

    Take this past Sunday (15 March 2020). We didn’t have house sound. House sound has always been a problem for my online mix, as I’m in the house and miss a lot (no separate soundboard). The sound should have been perfect!

    It wasn’t. Instead of having the perfect sound, we had this weird warble. It was awful. Really, really awful. The primary guess is that it was an input that doesn’t cause us problems that did now because there was nothing to mask it, or something else changed. There were a couple proposed items, which I will be working on.

    Long way of saying, I’m not a professional. Just like a lot of other people, I’m learning along the way. I have to fit this into the rest of my life. So, it will be frustrating and heart-wrenching. That’s the reality.

    If you had a great first launch…AWESOME! I’m really glad! If you didn’t, I understand completely.

  • Measuring Up

    Measuring Up

    We all compare ourselves to others. Churches compare themselves to other churches. Pastors compare themselves to other pastors. Online streamers compare themselves to online streamers. There is some good in that, as long as one is looking for a goal and to learn. The problem lies in looking at the current state as if your current state is similar. It isn’t.

    The COVID-19 virus currently sweeping the world (whether physically or mentally/emotionally) is shining the light back upon this for me, especially for those who are finding themselves in the middle of trying to do something with which they are unfamiliar and unprepared.

    There are a number of easy ways to get online streaming started. However, your first run will probably be a bit rough. It might even be awful. That’s okay. In many ways, just to be clear, I’m preaching to myself as much as I am speaking to you. I mentally rip apart each of the streams I do with what I did badly. As long as I don’t tear myself down and learn from it, and improve, that’s fine. It should be the same with you.

    A lot of small (i.e., don’t have muchany “spare” money) churches are going to be live streaming this weekend. They will be doing it on a shoestring or zero budget. It’s also likely that those further along the streaming road will criticize the shortcomings of the stream. It’s quite possible that congregants, too, will be unhappy and complain. Not only are the congregants unable to go to church, now they have to watch this “awful” thing on their phone, computer, or TV.

    The sad reality is that many churches (including my own) will be compared to “professional” setups that (frankly) most churches just can’t afford, or would even want to. The big “professional” setups cost a huge amount of money. This is not to say that the “professional” setups are wrong, they just aren’t the calling of most churches.

    Ultimately, give yourself grace to do this. While broadcasting online really isn’t that new, churches (even those who are “professional”) are still learning exactly what it means to be “church online”. Don’t think you need to be up to speed this Sunday.

  • Leadership Pipelines for Digital and Physical

    So it takes lots of different forms and much of that has to do with the context that they’re in. In some cases they’re in persecuted places where, they have to function in underground, which causes them to be forced to be small and reproducing, which we’ve found actually works better from a gospel saturation standpoint and a leadership development standpoint and amassing large gatherings that are more difficult to replicate and tend to, I mean, they all have all the different expressions have their own strength and weakness. But one of the weaknesses of a larger gathering is the leadership development pipeline tends to weaken and the gospel saturation in a given area tends to weaken, versus other expressions or other forms.

    Jason Morris via Reed, Jeff. “PODCAST 050: Biblical Function of a Digital-Only Church, Part 1.” PODCAST 050: Biblical Function of a Digital-Only Church, Part 1, TheChurch.Digital, 24 Feb. 2020

    Jason’s words really struck me. Jason’s perception that leadership pipelines (or development) weakens in larger organizations seems counterintuitive.

    I’m not sure I fully agree with him on this, as house churches and even digital churches only can have additional leaders if those leaders are part of the community.

    Digital, though, does tend to gather folks who in physical space might not meet leadership criteria for physical, while they do meet leadership criteria digitally. I’m sure this doesn’t make sense to a lot of people, especially those in physical space leadership.

    Digital lends itself to a flatter or distributed leadership/service structure. Not always, nor is it necessarily clean. Often digital leadership is pretty messy, in fact.

    What digital does allow is to “take it with us.” Digital breaks the boundaries and barriers of physical space, allowing greater creativity and operations.

    Jason’s point, in particular, is the church in persecuted areas (or, as my denomination calls such places, Creative Access Areas). Digital truly does free them to not be in physical proximity in large groups, yet still create a form of synergy.

    While we in the US are not in a persecuted area (despite claims to the contrary), digital experiences in the persecuted areas ought to be viewed as learning opportunities for us. That the church continues to grow in those persecuted areas should cause us to see how what works there might work here, while not elevating our physical mentality to a point of arrogance.

    Part of the struggle is the concept of saturation.

    I once attended a church planting conference where the leader taught that 3 churches (of the same tradition) showed a greater tendency of synergy. I can buy into that, but with a caveat.

    Our denomination, for example, has a number of churches in Seattle, yet the synergy isn’t there. Will it get there? Not really sure. But is shows that synergy is not automatic. People have to work at synergy.

    While Jason delivered an accurate picture of what he is seeing, this does not guarantee its replication. Part of that is the underlying culture of the area. Another is a perceived need to be connected to be effective and discipled. These are not strengths in the current US context.

    I will agree with digital naysayers that digital is not a panacea. I will agree with the digital champions that digital is a tool, a tool for the Gospel that we ignore, disparage, and diminish at the risk of failing the mission that Jesus gave his church.

  • Digital as AntiFragile

    Digital as AntiFragile

    In his book, Rings of Fire, Leonard Sweet writes (pg 13):

    In the language of Nassim Nicholas Taleb, we must learn to be an Antifragile Church that can embrace vulnerability and weakness and celebrate the positivity of stress. To be “antifragile” is to trust the order behind the chaos, to flourish from random environments rather than established settings, and not to be afraid of antifragile preaching that can take place outside the normal patterns (systems) of church. YouTube, Facebook, podcasts, and other digital formats (screens) are a few antifragile ways to preach in a hostile culture.

    I was recently involved in a conversation which talked about how the “local” church must/should remain local, and yet understand that the moment they go online, their online expression (in whatever form) is no longer local. This is incredibly important to understand, as we now have a unique freedom to speak the truth about Jesus Christ in a way that a greater proportion of people will not feel threatened by it.

    The internet has been a great source of bad, honestly, no matter how much we might “love” it. It can—which is the point of this site—also reach the world for the Gospel. Roads can be bad, as bad drivers (or even good drivers under bad circumstances) can kill a person with a bad decision. We’re not talking about banning roads. The internet can bring a lot of evil and corruption right into our pockets. If we ignore that power, however, do we really want to look a Jesus and say, “sorry, I was too concerned with what might have happened, to care that I could have shared about your grace, love and mercy.” That’s not a conversation I want to have.

  • Digital is #IRL

    Digital is #IRL

    Back in January, I had posted a comment on Online + Digital Church Leaders (Facebook ⧉) regarding the language used in the context of physical and digital expressions of church.

    I realized that it might be time to adjust some language. If we really are going to believe that digital community can (and does) happen, then perhaps we ought to drop In Real Life (IRL). We all (I think) believe that the digital expression of church is valid. Therefore we ought to not diminish it by using IRL, as it implies that online isn’t real. I understand that this is a cultural thing. However, as we train our leaders and churches about digital church, we shouldn’t even inadvertently reinforce the bias against digital expressions.

    If you are not familiar with #IRL it is the abbreviation for “in real life”. It is used in online and SMS messaging to indicate that something is happening outside of the digital realm. The problem is, especially when considering online church and discipleship, is this constant comparison of digital to “real”. We all do understand some of the “false” digital life pieces, much of which revolves around games. Yet, at the same time, we understand just how real the digital is with concerns about “flame-wars” and cyber-bullying. There is a constant tug between the “unreal” part of digital life and the “real” part.

    My role as Online Campus Paster at Generations Community Church has forced a lot of this to the fore in my mind and heart. I’m not much of a gamer…okay, I’m not a gamer at all. Like many, the extent of my “gaming” are those mobile games. My interest wanes pretty quickly, as I am just not willing to invest that much time into any of it. Many people view games as fake or false, and thus “not real.” It’s then easy to put any such digital “thing” in the “not real” category.

    Part, maybe even most, of it is this concept/perception that if the flesh can’t be touched, then it is not “real”. There is this idea back from the old days of the internet, that everyone behind a screen is just a persona. That just isn’t true. Is there some of that? Absolutely! There is just as much of that in the world of “touching flesh”. In fact, there might even be more. What if the digital does a better job of separating our personas from our true and deep selves?

    Someone (I’ll give credit if I can figure out who) recently noted that the Roman Catholic church has had a practice of anonymity when it comes to confession. There was no question as to the integrity of what was confessed, though the confessor’s integrity in pursuing confession could be different. Yet, somehow we have this mindset that everything else must be “in the flesh” to be real.

  • Counting Online Worshippers

    Counting Online Worshippers

    In February 2019, the general SDMI (Sunday School and Discipleship Ministries International) board sent out a directive for counting online worshipers.

    The criteria for online attendance should address these items: personal identification, minimum duration, opportunity for participation, follow-up from host congregation.

    Churches may include in their regular worship attendance the number of confirmed devices or individuals who have:

    1. remained connected during at least 50% or 30 minutes of the streamed gathering or recorded content
    2. engaged the broadcasting church by:
      • Online registration or identification
      • Provided an opportunity for personal participation or communication (Chat rooms, submission of prayer requests, etc.)
    3. received weekly personal contact/follow-up by a designated individual from the hosting congregation

    Church should indicate on-campus and on-line attendance separately when reporting monthly worship attendance.

    Churches should take care to actively engage online participants in the same manner they do those present at their physical gatherings. Intentional efforts should be made to enter them into discipleship processes and, where possible, move them from the digital gathering to the physical gathering of the local congregation.

    Based on observed (and sometimes confessed) behavior, I wonder what would happen were we to apply the same requirements of those who visited physically.

    Let’s take item 1 regarding remaining connected. How many people are really and truly connected at our physical services? I have spoken to many who are flat-out are disengaged during the singing of worship songs. I have known others who have calculated the average amount of singing and will show up at the service at that average time, trying to minimize (or eliminated) any presence during the singing. Yes, these can be exceptions, however, with what we know about attention spans, it really shouldn’t be that much of a surprise that people aren’t engaged for the full service when physically present at them.

    Item 2 is actually quite interesting. In my short experience, by this measure, most people seem to be “engaged” (again, as defined by item 2). This item is different insofar as being an “opportunity” not necessarily an action. As for saying “I’m here”, that is one of the beauties of online, is that the church’s capability to “prove” attendance is actually part of many platforms. However, connection cards—whether digital or physical—are really only somewhat successful.

    It is, though, really Item 3 that is the most significant. This item would fall under the area called life groups (or discipleship groups or small groups or…). Most churches, that I am aware of, know that this particular subsection of the church is vital to both the health of the larger congregation, the church as a whole, and the growth of individuals toward a fuller expression of Jesus Christ.

    This is probably part of the Church of the Nazarene’s Wesleyan heritage that creates a focus on this. However, it’s this heritage that also, sadly, displays the shortcomings of the current Western church culture at large. The “official” metric for Sunday School (the Church of the Nazarene term for all things not Sunday service) would be quite interesting were we only able to include those that attended both a Sunday Service and a life group of some sort. Many church’s official attendance would be significantly reduced.

    Now, to be honest, that may not be a bad thing. Imagine if the reported metric was attendance and it only counted for those who did both? How would the church (digital or physical) change its behavior? That is an interesting thought experiment itself.

Verified by MonsterInsights