My blog has moved! http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markdroberts/
|
 |
Twitter Feed for My Recent Blog Posts and Other Tweets |
My blog has moved! http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markdroberts/
|
A Case for Virtual Church
By Mark D. Roberts | Thursday, October 29, 2009
Part 4 of series: The Challenge and Opportunity of Virtual Church
Permalink for this post / Permalink for this series
In my last two posts I explained that virtual church, in my opinion, is “real” in many ways that count. Therefore it’s not crazy to consider the possibility that virtual church is something worth doing, at least by some folks who might be called to it. In this post I want to begin to make a case for virtual church.
This case rests on recognition of the extraordinary power of the Internet, both now and especially in the future. I expect that most of my blog readers would grant this premise, given the fact that you are reading these words because of the Internet. But, frankly, I think it’s easy for us to underestimate how the Internet is changing and will change our world, especially if you’re not heavily involved in social networking or virtual reality gaming.
Let me cite some of the claims made by Douglas Estes in SimChurch. These seem right to me, and I am inclined, at any rate, to trust Estes’ scholarship:
In 2007, the number of internet users passed one billion for the first time. While this is only a little more than 20 percent of the world’s population, at no other time in history since the time of Genesis has more than 20 percent of the world’s population been in direct communication with each other. (p. 18)
E-commerce has also kept up with the internet population boom; more than two trillion dollars changed hands over the internet in 2007. (p. 18)
To grasp the magnitude of what is happening, it is vital that we see the internet not as a technological tool but as a paradigm shift in the way the world interacts on a fundamental level. (p. 19)
[T]he internet is causing a paradigm shift a hundred times greater than that of the mobile phone. (p. 19). [MDR note: Mobile phones connected to the Internet are now stretching its reach and, for many, becoming the principal way they connect online. Photo: a cell phone from the 1980s. Times have changed.]
The future of the internet lies not in its being a tool for emailing others but in its being an immersive world where many people will spend as much time as they do in the real world. In the next few decades, the virtual world will equal or surpass the real world in its reach into and positioning in many aspects of our lives. For many people, the virtual world will be the world where they carry on more interactions and conduct more transactions than in the real world. It will be the place where they find love, soothe their feelings, make deals, and worship. (p. 20)
Of the one billion people online, an estimated seventy million are already regular participants in virtual worlds, and that number continues to grow dramatically. . . . And the sobering statistic: while no one knows exactly how much time residents spend in virtual worlds, a large percentage spend twenty or more hours per week, and many spend much, much more. (p. 20) [MDR note: At the moment, I don’t want to get bogged down in whether this is good or bad. I want simply to acknowledge that it is.]
For a growing number of people, especially individuals in the Millennial generation and beyond [born 1980 and after], virtual-world interactions can be far more authentic and less awkward than real-world relationships, and for many younger people, interacting in the virtual world is the preferred method for social networking. (p. 27)
The Christian church is engaging far less than 1 percent of the seventy million people who are active in the virtual world. This means the virtual world is by far the largest unreached people group on planet earth. (p. 29). [MDR note: This assumes that the church is not reaching these seventy million offline, an assumption that is surely not quite true.]
I’m not an expert in the sociology of technology, so I can’t demonstrate that what Estes has written is true. But from what I have read and from what I have observed, I think he basically correct. And this presents the church with a major challenge and opportunity: How are we going to reach the seventy million virtual earth-dwellers with the Gospel? How are we going to reach the multiple millions who will join the virtual world in the future?
Perhaps the most obvious answer to these questions is that the church, broadly defined, needs to be present in the virtual worlds. We Christians need to be with the people who spend so much of their lives there.
Now, I suppose one could object that virtual reality itself is so full of sin that no Christian should rightly go there. This would be like an argument against going to strip clubs to reach people who frequent them. Surely we need to reach the folks who spend a chunk of their lives in strip clubs, but, for the most part, we should do this in other venues. I would be surprised if many Christians would make the argument that we should have strip club churches to reach strip club patrons. But I would also be surprised if many Christians would make the argument that online virtual worlds are so much like strip clubs that Christians should simply avoid them.
From my perspective, by far the most powerful case for virtual church points to its evangelistic potential. Though Jesus probably didn’t imagine that the “all nations” of which Christians are to make disciples would someday include online virtual worlds, the inner logic of the Great Commission compels us to seriously consider how to reach potential disciples who “live” substantially in these worlds.
Topics: Virtual Church | 4 Comments »
Could Virtual Church Be Real Church? Section 2
By Mark D. Roberts | Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Part 3 of series: The Challenge and Opportunity of Virtual Church
Permalink for this post / Permalink for this series
In my last post I began to respond to those who might think that this whole conversation about the reality of virtual church is just plain ridiculous. “After all,” one might object, “how can ‘church’ that exists only in the electronic world of the Internet ever be real?” I began to answer this question by pointing to the fact that we Christians do believe in non-physical reality. Moreover, it seems to me that the question about whether virtual church is real or not is too simplistic. It could be real in some ways, but not in others.
This might sound odd, so let me provide a several thought experiments to illustrate my point. Let’s say that on a given Sunday I go to an in-the-flesh worship service at St. Mark Presbyterian in Boerne, Texas (my home church, in photo to right) in the morning, and then log in to a virtual church in the afternoon. Is there any way in which my afternoon experience could be at least as real, if not more real, than my morning experience? Perhaps.
Case #1
Suppose, for example, that we have a visiting preacher at St. Mark. This preacher turns out to be theologically bizarre and says things that simply aren’t true, such as: “Jesus didn’t rise from the dead.” (I have heard preachers say things like this, but not in my own church, thanks be to God.)
Then, in the afternoon, a virtual church preacher (representing some in-the-flesh human being who is providing the words via the Internet) offers a theologically solid sermon, proclaiming, among other things: “Jesus is risen!”
Question: Which sermon was more real, the in-the-flesh but theologically false sermon, or the virtual but theologically solid one? Perhaps it would be better to say that both were real in a way. One was real in a physical way, while the other portrayed spiritual reality more genuinely. Which sermon would you rather hear?
Case #2
Suppose I attend St. Mark Presbyterian on a Sunday morning. On my way into the sanctuary, I shake hands with an usher and receive a bulletin. In the passing of the peace segment I say “May the peace of Christ be with you” to a few folks. When the service is over, I avoid the fellowship hall with its tempting snacks and friendly conversation, instead making a beeline for my car. What I experienced was very much like what millions upon millions of Christian experience every week in their physical church. Surely this counts as real, yes? More real than virtual church? Maybe. Maybe not.
Suppose further that, in the evening, I attend a virtual church that includes a live discussion group (a chat room). In this group, which is not itself physical, real people communicate about real needs in their life. Though they are not together in the flesh, their sharing is heartfelt and genuine. The safety of physical distance actually allows some folks to be more honest than they might be in “real life.” In the end, we have a time of prayer together.
Was this real? Was it more or less real than my relatively shallow experience in the morning? Which experience of church was closer to the biblical ideal?
Case #3
Suppose when I attend St. Mark Presbyterian Church on a Sunday morning that several friends give me hugs. (I can always count on my Down Syndrome friend Adam to give me a big hug at church.) Then, in the afternoon, I visit a virtual church where characters on the screen hug my character.
Which hugs were more real? Which hugs would you prefer?
Summary
These three examples indicate, I think, that there are different kinds of reality operating when we talk about church. They also suggest that we should not too quickly dismiss the potential for virtual church to be real in certain ways, even in certain crucial ways, even if it will never be real physically. I would, for example, prefer the reality of a truthful virtual sermon over an in-the-flesh but false sermon. But I would not prefer the reality of a virtual hug over one that I can actually feel with my body and return with my own arms.
I’m reminded of an example I have used in my discussion of online church. When I was pastor of Irvine Presbyterian Church, I liked to meet personally with members of the congregation for conversation and prayer. Many people would come to my office and share their joys and struggles. But some folks, especially men, were reticent to come in for a personal visit. They preferred to email me. In many cases our email exchanges would involve quite deep and vulnerable sharing. Sometimes I would end one of my emails with a prayer. Sometimes, after engaging in tender sharing through email with some man, I would run into him on Sunday after church. There might be a moment of awkwardness, followed by a handshake and “Have a good week!”
So, what was more real? What was a more authentic experience of church? I would never say that our face-to-face interaction on Sunday wasn’t real, even though it was superficial. But I would say that, in many ways, our email conversation was more real and closer to what we’re supposed to experience in church.
Now I’ll lay some of my cards on the table right now and say that I would prefer face-to-face conversation that is also open and honest. Speaking for myself, I’m much more drawn to physical church than virtual church. But I’m also compelled to admit that sometimes relationships mediated through the Internet are deeper and truer than face-to-face relationships. And, given the fact that I believe the Holy Spirit can be present in a real though non-physical way, I’m open to the possibility of virtual church being real in ways that count, even though it can never be real in some ways that also count.
Topics: Virtual Church | 3 Comments »
Wit and Wisdom from Bill Swedberg
By Mark D. Roberts | Tuesday, October 27, 2009
If you read my blog yesterday, you saw my tribute to my father-in-law, Bill Swedberg. He died a couple of weeks ago. On Saturday I officiated at his memorial service. A few years Bill died, his daughter Debbie gave him a journal to record key aspects of his life. It was called A Father’s Legacy: Your Life Story in Your Own Words (J. Countryman/Nelson, 2000). Bill filled out many of the hundred plus pages, sharing stories of his life and observations on living.
I thought I’d pass on several of these with you. As you’ll quickly see, Bill was a man of few words. Yet in these words we find timeless wisdom, occasional humor, and deep faith.
Tell about a special outing you took with your dad. What makes this a poignant memory for you?
I loved to fish and hunt. My dad didn’t like either. He did take me deer hunting. He left me at a spot to with for deer. I’m not sure where he went. But I didn’t see him until it was time to go home.
What mischievous prank did you pull on someone? How did it affect you?
Halloween was the day for pranks. Tipping over outhouses was one I remember. I was in high school and I started to drive at age 14. I helped my folks in the furniture store we had. I used to help deliver furniture and run errands. We had a 37 Plymouth and a trailer. On Halloween with some of my friends we transported an outhouse to our high school and put it on the front lawn. It was quite the talk of the school.
What places in the world would you still like to visit? Why?
I’m 76. I’ve travelled over most of the U.S. and Europe. I’m content not to travel anymore.
Share some tips for a great vacation
Pick places you like to go . . . and go!
Share some of your insights for working well with others.
Listen, Listen, Listen.
What is the gutsiest thing you ever did in your life? Why did you do it?
Get married.
Record here your ideas on what it takes for a husband and wife to maintain a healthy marriage.
Communications and the love of God.
When did you become a Christian? How did your life change?
I became a Christian as a child but I didn’t grow until my experience in the front lines in combat in the army. God brought me home to serve him and I hope I will be at it until he takes me home.
If you served in the armed forces, describe how your time in the service affected your life. If you did not serve, how did this affect your life?
I was drafted into the army at age 18. It was in Dec and I was in the army in March. I spent one year training in the States, then I got on the Queen Mary and landed in Scotland. I trained and guarded troops until the invasion in June. I landed in France about two weeks after the invasion. Then after the break through we spearheaded a force in France with Patton. Then kept going until the surrender. Much happened and I was lucky to come home alive.
What is the most frightening thing that has ever happened to you? How did you handle the experience?
Being in combat in WWII. This experience developed my faith in God that is with me through my whole life. I think when we face death or hard times and look for God for help, it develops our faith.
How have your ideas about God changed from when you were young?
Each year I got closer to him. Experiences in the army. Seeing so much death helped me look at life as a day to day growth toward God and heaven.
Recall for me five of the most important lessons you have learned in life:
#1 - Live one day at a time.
#2 - Don’t worry about the future.
#3 – Seek God in all important decisions.[You’ll notice that Bill didn’t give five lessons. It was like him to be brief and to the point. Photo: my wife with her dad a few months before he died]
Share some principles from Scripture on which you have chosen to build your life.
Romans 8:28 – and we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to his purpose. This is my life’s Scripture.
What spiritual legacy would you like to leave for others?
A man who loved God, who loved to help people from the Lord Jesus Christ through his words and actions.
That is how Bill will be remembered!
Topics: Tributes | 3 Comments »
A Tribute to My Father-in-Law, Bill Swedberg
By Mark D. Roberts | Monday, October 26, 2009
Last Saturday I officiated at the memorial service for my father-in-law, Bill Swedberg. He died a couple of weeks ago at the age of 84, a victim of Parkinson’s Syndrome. The service was held at Forest Lawn Memorial Park in Glendale, California, where Bill’s wife is buried (and also my father and my maternal grandparents).
Bill was able to die at home, thanks to the commitment of his children, most of all his daughter, Debbie, who cared for him for years and oversaw and contributed to his professional care in the last, difficult months. Debbie gave her dad a huge gift. I know she received much in return from this dear man.
Bill’s last act on this earth was watching on television as his beloved L.A. Dodgers won the final game of the National League Division series, sweeping the St. Louis Cardinals. I expect that Bill died a happy man. And, by God’s grace, he did not have to witness the debacle of the Dodgers versus the Phillies in the National League Championship Series. (I’m assuming that, in Heaven, you don’t get to watch your favorite teams mess up big time.)
But Bill was a happy man for much more important reasons. He grew up in Wisconsin, then in Glendale, California. He fought in World War II, in Patton’s army, where he experienced the horrors of war as well as the trial of sleeping in a foxhole in sub-zero winter temperatures. Yet such trials didn’t break Bill’s spirit. Rather, they gave him the ability to appreciate life’s gifts and never to be upset by the pains of ordinary life. It if wasn’t World War II, it wasn’t worth getting too upset about. (Like many of his generation, Bill rarely spoke of his experiences in World War II. When I asked him some detailed questions, though, he was glad to share. He served in a reconnaissance unit in Patton’s army, regularly going behind enemy lines to report on their actions and configurations. Obviously, his life was often in danger, and he saw many fellow soldiers lose their lives.)
Bill’s greatest joy in life was his family, his wife, Marion, who beat him to Heaven by a couple of decades, his four children (including my wife, Linda), and his many grandchildren. He was also an extraordinarily faithful son and son-in-law, caring for his mother until her death at 100 and his mother-in-law during her last years. (Photo: Bill with his four children and one dog.)
Bill worked as an insurance agent, but he was never much of a salesman. What he loved was being with and caring for people. Selling insurance was simply a way to support his family while he served the people in his “book” of clients.
Bill was a faithful Christian. Late in life, as his body began to fail him, he talked with great anticipation of going to Heaven to be with the Lord (and his dear wife). In fact, I have never known someone more eager to leave this life behind because of his confidence in Christ.
Bill was an exceedingly kind man. He was always good to me, beginning with our first meeting. He graciously gave his consent to my wish to marry his daughter, and became a supportive father-in-law and loving grandfather. He always showed an interest in me and my work. He even tolerated my driving, which he considered to be way too fast. (I tend to drive a little faster than the speed limit. Bill may never have hit a speed limit in his driving life.) He would often say, “Pastors always are speeders.”
As I think about Bill’s life, I’m reminded of a passage from Paul’s letter to the Colossians: “As God’s chosen ones, holy and beloved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience” (Col 3:12). Bill Swedberg lived out these virtues more consistently than anyone I’ve known. This isn’t just a grieving son-in-law speaking or a preacher with a tendency to exaggerate. These words – “compassion, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience” – describe Bill to a T. I can’t think of a better tribute to offer him.
We who loved Bill will miss him. In truth, we began missing him a couple of years ago, when his disease slowly took him away from us. But we give thanks to God for his life well lived, as well as for his life everlasting with God.
Topics: Tributes | 4 Comments »
Sunday Inspiration from The High Calling
By Mark D. Roberts | Sunday, October 25, 2009
Has God Forgotten to Be Gracious?
Has God forgotten to be gracious?
Has he slammed the door on his compassion?
Psalm 77, written by Asaph, begins with a profound expression of anguish. The psalmist has found himself in a terribly difficult and painful situation. He has cried out to God, even shouting and praying all night. When he thinks of God, he moans with unfulfilled longing (77:1-3).
Then Asaph begins to ask questions that are stunning in their honesty: “Has the Lord rejected me forever? Will he never again be kind to me? Is his unfailing love gone forever? Have his promises permanently failed? Has God forgotten to be gracious? Has he slammed the door on his compassion?” (77:7-9). These six questions all can be answered by the simple word “No.” No, God has not rejected Asaph forever. No, God will not “never be kind” to him again. And so forth and so on. After all, when God revealed his essential nature and hallowed name to Israel, he made it clear that he is “The God of compassion and mercy! I am slow to anger and filled with unfailing love and faithfulness” (Exo 34:6). So why would Asaph wonder if God had forgotten to be gracious? And why would this question show up in the Psalms, the inspired word of God?
Psalm 77 models for us exceptional honesty in prayer. It shows us that God cares more about our openness with him than that we get all of our theology right when we talk with him. Oh, to be sure, orthodoxy matters a great deal. But sometimes our efforts to say all the right things in prayer compromises our genuineness. The Psalms in general, and Psalm 77 in particular, encourage us to pray with “no holds barred.” We don’t have to be afraid of asking God tough questions, or even of challenging his goodness. What God wants from us, is not all the right words, but us . . . our full, true selves. God wants relationship, not with some whitewashed image of ourselves, but with us.
When we pray honestly, holding nothing back, we enter into a deeper and truer relationship with the living God. In the context of this relationship we will discover, again and again, that God has not forgotten to be gracious. Yes, sometimes his grace seems strangely hidden. But we who know God through Christ can always be sure that nothing in all creation can separate us from God’s love and grace.
QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION: Have you ever prayed like Asaph in Psalm 77? When? What happened? Do you feel free to express what’s really going on inside of you in prayer? Why or why not?
PRAYER: Thank you, dear Father, for the example of Asaph. His honesty inspires me to tell you the truth, not only when I’m rejoicing, but also when I am hurting, worrying, or doubting.
Thank you, Lord Jesus, for being our great High Priest. You understand our weaknesses and temptations. Because of what you have done for us as Priest and Sacrifice, we have even greater reason to come before the Father with boldness, confident that we will find mercy and grace at his throne.
All praise be to you, Triune God, because you will never forget to be gracious! Hallelujah! Amen.
A P.S. from Mark
My book No Holds Barred: Wrestling With God in Prayer explores the themes of this reflection in much greater depth.
_________________________________________________
Would you like to receive a Daily Reflection like this one in your email inbox each morning?
Here’s how . . . .
This devotional comes from The High Calling of Our Daily Work (www.thehighcalling.org), a wonderful website about work and God. You can read my Daily Reflections there, or sign up to have them sent to your email inbox each day. This website contains lots of encouragement for people who are trying to live out their faith in the workplace.
Topics: Sunday Inspiration | No Comments »
Could Virtual Church Be Real Church?
By Mark D. Roberts | Friday, October 23, 2009
Part 2 of series: The Challenge and Opportunity of Virtual Church
Permalink for this post / Permalink for this series
Yesterday I began a blog series focusing on the challenge and opportunity of virtual church. This series will be, in part, a conversation with the book SimChurch: Being the Church in the Virtual World by Douglas Estes. Virtual church, as I mentioned yesterday, is not the same as what I’ve called online church: livestreaming worship services, chat room small groups, podcasting sermons, etc. Rather, virtual church purports to offer a full church experience that is not dependent on a physical church, but is meant to provide a stand-alone, genuine church experience in a virtual reality world of the Internet.
Now I’m sure some of my readers may be thinking that this is some sort of bad joke. “Who in their right mind,” you might ask, “would argue that virtual church could ever be real? Why even bother with such silliness?” I’ll admit that, at first glance, the notion of virtual church being real seems outlandish. We’re talking, after all, about something that exists only in bits and bytes, only in programs and pixels. In virtual church, there is no in-the-flesh preacher, choir, band, or congregation. No sanctuary or worship center or house church with a physical world address. No actual hand-shaking or holy-kissing or laying-on-of-hands in prayer. No real water used in baptism or real bread in communion. Why, therefore, would anyone entertain the thought that virtual church could be real?
This post could quickly get lost in a hopelessly complicated conversation about the nature of reality. I don’t want to do this. I’ll leave ontology for another time. But I do want to make a couple of related observations.
First, if you define reality in terms of physical presence in space, then, of course, virtual church isn’t real. But this definition of reality seems too narrow. Do my thoughts and feelings exist in space? No, but they are real. Does love exist in space? No, at least not the feelings of love. It’s difficult to say that thoughts and feelings exist in space unless you’re a die hard materialist, seeing everything in terms of configurations of brain molecules. Moreover, if you’re a Christian, then you surely acknowledge the reality of the Holy Spirit, a non-physical person of the Trinity. For a Christian, reality is clearly more than physical. We acknowledge and, indeed, celebrate the genuineness of non-physical, spiritual reality.
Second, it seems to me that talk of whether something is real or not is really too simple. In fact, there are different kinds and qualities of reality. There is physical reality and there is spiritual reality (which, by the way, I expect are not nearly as distinct as we might assume). There is fictional reality, such as Narnia, which can produce emotionally real feelings and intellectually real thoughts in readers and moviegoers who experience it. And then there’s the physical reality of New Zealand, parts of which look a whole lot like Narnai (and Middleearth, too). When somebody enters a virtual world online, it is real in a sense. In the flesh people watch real images on their computer screens. They feel real feelings. They think real thoughts. They make relationships that are variously real or fictional, depending on a wide variety of factors.
If you’ve read philosophical or psychological discussions of reality, you know that what I’m saying here is very simplistic (if not confused). But my point, simply, is that there are degrees and qualities of reality. Virtual church will never be real in the same way that St. Mark Presbyterian Church in Boerne, Texas (my home church) is real. But virtual church may be real in significant ways.
Thus, to deny the reality of virtual church is too simplistic. And to argue for the reality only of in-the-flesh church is also too simplistic. Part of what makes church real is the non-physical presence of the Holy Spirit. So I’m disinclined to get caught up in the argument about whether virtual church is real or not, as if there’s a singular nature of reality. Rather, I think we’d be well served to consider ways in which virtual church is real and ways in which it is not.
If what I’m saying here doesn’t make sense, I’ll provide several illustrations in my next post in this series.
Topics: Virtual Church | 3 Comments »
The Challenge of Virtual Church: Introduction
By Mark D. Roberts | Thursday, October 22, 2009
Part 1 of series: The Challenge and Opportunity of Virtual Church
Permalink for this post / Permalink for this series
A month ago I did a blog series on the topic: Is Online Church Really Church? Inspired by a conversation at the Christian Web Conference in Southern California, I wrestled with the notion of whether or not online church (livestreaming of worship services, chat room small groups, social networking, etc.) is church enough to be counted as real church. If you want my answer to that question, you’ll just have to visit the series. As is typical for me, my answers to most questions tend not to be in short, sound-bite form.
Shortly after I finished my series on online church, I became exposed to a book that appeared to be on the same topic. SimChurch: Being the Church in the Virtual World by Douglas Estes examines the relationship between church and the Internet. But, as it turns out, Estes and I were not talking about the same phenomena. Rather, he was focusing on virtual churches, that is, on so-called churches that exist, not in physical space, but rather in the electronic realm of the Internet.
I read SimChurch with great interest. (You can check out my brief review of this book and a Q&A with Douglas Estes here.) I was especially impressed by several aspects of this book and its author:
1. Estes explains virtual worlds and virtual churches with exceptional clarity. This is very helpful for those who, like me, know little about this subject.
2. Estes is a careful theologian with a solid biblical foundation.
3. Estes is not an ultra-cool virtual church guru with vast funds to play around with virtual church, but rather an in-the-flesh pastor of an in-the-flesh church of modest size and means.
4. Estes uses the topic of his book not only to talk about virtual church and its advantanges/disadvantages, but also to think creatively and critically about what it means to be church in the world of today and the future. In other words, Estes uses the reality of virtual church (pardon the pun) to deal with the theology of church, what scholars call ecclesiology.
And Douglas Estes is no mean theologian, by the way. On page 36 of his book, for example, he offers a brief definition of the church from a biblical perspective. These two paragraphs offer a superb summary of biblical teaching, one of the best I’ve ever read. You’ll find this sort of theological insight throughout SimChurch.
This book demonstrates one of the most significant challenges and opportunities presented by virtual church. It’s not the chance to create or utilize virtual church. Rather, it’s the occasion to think afresh about the church and what it means to be the church in this time of history. Even if you reject completely the validity or reality of virtual church, SimChurch will help you to think clearly about what the church of Jesus Christ is supposed to be. So I’m going to spend a few days reflecting on virtual church in light of Estes’s book.
I realize, however, that some of my readers will think I’ve lost my mind. You yourself might be wondering: “How, in heaven’s name, could virtual church be real church? Why waste your time – and ours – focusing on such a crazy idea?” I hope by the end of this series you’ll know the answer to these questions. But I’ll begin to address them in my next post, by looking at the question of how virtual church could, in any sense, be real.
Topics: Virtual Church | 3 Comments »
SimChurch: Being the Church in the Virtual World, by Douglas Estes
By Mark D. Roberts | Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Today this website is a “stop” on a blog tour for a new book, SimChurch: Being the Church in the Virtual World, by Douglas Estes (Zondervan, 2009). This book offers an in-depth analysis of so-called “virtual churches.” We’re not talking here about what I’ve called “online church,” namely, real world churches that use the Internet to livestream their worship services and foster various kinds of web-based community. Rather, SimChurch focuses on “churches” that exist in virtual worlds made possible by the Internet. It seeks to answer such questions as:
What does it mean to “do” church in the virtual world?
Are Internet campuses just niche ministries or the next step in the multisite revolution?
Will virtual churches be individualistic or actually encourage families to worship together?
Can a virtual church be a missional church?
Is it even possible or healthy to “be” the church in the virtual world?
I offered to be part of the SimChurch blog tour because I’m interested in the impact of the Internet upon the church and its mission. I must confess, however, that when it came time actually to read this book, I felt pretty cranky about having committed to do so. I was prepared to read some trendy, theologically-lightweight effort by some ultra-cool author with an utterly unrealistic and unbiblical view of the church and world. (Well, okay, I’m exaggerating a bit. But I was genuinely unhappy about having to read SimChurch.)
Then I began reading. My attitude quickly changed. First of all, I learned a lot from this book about virtual worlds on the Internet. I have not been into gaming or virtual reality programs such as SimCity. And I have never visited a virtual church (though I now intend to do so). Estes’s descriptions and explanations helped me to understand “worlds” that I had never explored.
Second, I soon discovered that the author of SimChurch is an articulate, thoughtful, theologically-probing pastor and scholar. His two-paragraph description of the church in the New Testament (p. 36), for example, is perhaps the best short piece I’ve ever read on this topic . . . and I’ve read plenty of brief definitions of the church, as you might imagine. Estes’s theological discussion is always responsible and engaging. I’m not at all sure I agree with him on many points. My personal jury is still out. But I am deeply appreciative of his careful, biblically-grounded effort.
I think SimChurch is a very important book. In fact, I’ve already recommended it to several friends and given copies to several of my colleagues. My reason for regarding this book so highly is not because I think virtual church is terrific. As I said, I’m still mulling this over. But SimChurch challenges Christian leaders to think carefully both about the Internet and its challenges/opportunities, and also about the Church. This book provides an excellent case study in ecclesiology. As you’ll see below, Douglas Estes thinks of his book in these terms as well.
I realize there are quite a few Christian leaders who are deeply concerned about the negative impact of the Internet on Christian fellowship and discipleship. If you’ve been reading my blog for a while, you know that I am sometimes one of these critics. But I also believe we need to think much harder about the relationship of the Internet and the church, and to do so in profoundly biblical terms. Whether you agree with Douglas Estes or not, he models the kind of theological reflection that is desperately needed in our day.
So, on to my question for Douglas Estes and his answer.
My Question for Douglas Estes
One of the things I so appreciate about you and your writing of this book is that you are not just some really cool virtual pastor with all sorts of technological resources at your disposal and few responsibilities outside of the virtual world. You are a pastor of a flesh-and-blood church. Moreover, your church isn’t a wealthy megachurch with vast resources to facilitate exploration of virtual church. As near as I can tell from your book and your church website, you are pastoring a church of moderate size and moderate resources. This gives you a lot of credibility in my book. Too often, it seems to me, the leading spokespeople for new waves of church life seem utterly disconnected from the reality of most churches, and thus their discussion is of limited value to ordinary churches and ordinary church leaders.
You make a strong case for the Church, broadly defined, to be present with people in virtual worlds. You spell out the vast opportunities in this endeavor. You mention at least some of the risks. You are clear that what you’re advocating goes far beyond having a church website and podcasting sermons, or even livestreaming worship services. Okay, I’m with you so far. But what would you recommend for the average leader of the average church? (By average I mean “ordinary,” not “of modest ability”!) As you know so well, the typical pastor already has more to do than is humanly possible, even with divine help. So what, if anything should that pastor do with the ideas in your book? What should leadership boards of average churches do? You talk about hiring iPastors (p. 178). That’s all well and good. But most churches I know have been laying off key staff people. My own church, for example, recently lost a children’s director and hasn’t been able to replace her for financial reasons. This is an essential position, but we’re not sure if and when we’ll be able to hire somebody. This is the reality in which most church leaders live these days, as I expect you know all too well. So, again, my question, phrased a little differently: What does your book have to offer to the typical leader (pastor, elder, deacon, etc.) of the typical church?
Douglas’s Answer
Many thanks for the comments and the question. To me, your question on the blog tour is probably the most important. First, for your readers, you’re correct in saying that I’m a normal pastor of a normal church with normal issues. Being in the San Francisco Bay area, we have tremendous struggles with reaching people, not to mention normal things most churches struggle with like having enough nursery workers or just paying our bills. The current economic downturn has been a killer for us, too. Since we have no suitable children or youth space (basically just a sanctuary), we were in the process of building an educational wing but that has been super-hard going in this climate and we’ll be lucky if we can afford the shell when (and if) we break ground later this year. As the pastor, I’m both chief cook and bottle washer. I say all this because I am keenly aware of the struggles of normal churches.
So what does my book have to offer the typical leader of the typical church? I believe it offers three things.
First, at the very minimum, I believe that my book will challenge its readers on what being and doing the church really means (in any place or medium). As I was writing SimChurch, I realized early on that this book either could be a fluffy, descriptive discussion of what’s going on right now with online churches or it could really try to break some new ground and get at the church in a whole new light—a light that would cause people to refresh their biblical understanding of church. SimChurch has only been out a month, and yet already there have been a few people who have come out saying “I’m not going to read the book because I don’t agree with it … the church is [insert some descriptors that have something to do with their feelings but no rooting in Scripture and little or no rooting in church tradition].” I intentionally wrote the book using the paradigm of virtual churches to challenge and refresh our view of the church. This was a sub-text, not the main idea, but my hope is that it will do just that.
Second, I believe SimChurch will start its readers dreaming about what God can do through them through the internet. As I was writing the book, a few of the tech-oriented folks in my church were like, “Pastor, what can we do to make our own virtual church?” I didn’t have an answer, and I still don’t (not fully, anyway). Like you, we also really want to hire a kid’s director or kid’s pastor way before an iPastor, too. But what it did was start us thinking about a whole lot of things. Dreaming about what bigger things God can do is always a good thing. Most of the greatest church and missionary movements in the history of the church started with dreamers dreaming of what could be. If I can encourage that, we might be on the verge of something important.
Third, I hope SimChurch will get the typical leader of the typical church to start laying the groundwork for the church of tomorrow, today. Here’s my fear: When you look at other revolutionary technologies in the 20th century, the church is either nowhere to be found or way, way behind. What if a group of average churches in LA had decided to open a movie studio in 1920? Or at least lay the groundwork for it? If there was an MGM with a C. S. Lewis approach to storytelling today, how different would our world be? So, while I recognize that the typical leader of the typical church may not be able to launch a virtual church today, they could lay the foundation today for what God can do through their ministry tomorrow. And this is just as important, by the way. The virtual world is still in its infancy; now is the time for the church to engage before it is too late.
To bring this all around, let me answer a question you didn’t ask: “As a pastor of a typical church, will I start a virtual church?” The honest answer is: “I don’t know. I know we want to. Probably one day. But I also know that the dreaming has caused us to start thinking more deeply about how to make our regular church a better church, too. So we are dreaming and laying the foundation for the next big thing God has in plan for us, preparing to be faithful to his call, and praying for whatever world it may lead us into.”
Conclusion
I want to close with a note about Douglas Estes. I have not met him, though I hope to do so someday. I checked out his bio at his website and found a couple of surprises. For one thing, Douglas earned an undergraduate degree in chemistry. He worked in the field of analytical chemistry and co-authored two winning NASA contract proposals. You don’t find that in the average pastoral bio. But I was even more impressed by the title of his first book: The Temporal Mechanics of the Fourth Gospel: A Theory of Hermeneutical Relativity in the Gospel of John (Brill, 2008). You don’t find that in the average pastoral bio, either. Don’t worry, though. SimChurch is an engaging read. You don’t need a degree in theology in order to understand it.
If you’re looking for more discussion of SimChurch, check out these stops on the blog tour:
BibleDude.net
Returned Sheep
The Digital Sanctuary
Church Relevance
Tall Skinny Kiwi
Captain’s Blog
At some point I hope to put up further thoughts about SimChurch and the ideas contained therein. For now, let me simply reiterate my appreciation for this book and my recommendation that you read it.
Disclosure: I did receive a complimentary, advance copy of SimChurch. Otherwise, I am not being compensated for this review. If you purchase a copy of this book by clicking on a link in this review, Amazon.com will credit about sixty cents to my Amazon Associate account, which I will donate to some Christian ministry.
Topics: Book Reviews | 2 Comments »
Introducing Patheos
By Mark D. Roberts | Tuesday, October 20, 2009
A few weeks ago, one of my colleagues at Foundations for Laity Renewal forwarded to me a news release about Patheos and its effort to increase meaningful dialogue among different religious traditions. Keith Mirrer, our Director of Communications, keeps abreast of religious news stories and forwards to me those that are relevant to my work. I was indeed impressed with the Patheos story. I had heard mention of this online effort, but had only a vague notion of its mission. The news release included this overview of Patheos:
Founded in 2008, Patheos.com is the premier online destination to engage in the global dialogue about religion and spirituality and to explore and experience the world’s beliefs. Patheos is designed to serve as a resource for those looking to learn more about different belief systems, as well as participate in productive, moderated discussions on some of today’s most talked about and debated topics.
Then, that very day, another of my colleagues in our Communications Department contacted me. Marcus Goodyear wanted me to know that Timothy Dalrymple, who works for Patheos, was interested in interviewing me. Timothy, who manages the Evangelical Portal of the Patheos site, attends Park Street Church in Boston, where I was to preach on Sunday, October 11th. He wondered if we might find time for a short interview.
And so we did. Between the first and second services, Tim and I found a quiet office. He asked me a number of questions on faith, doubt, the university, and faith in the workplace. I enjoyed our conversation, and left feeling even more impressed with Patheos than before. In this Internet-flattened world, we need places where people from different religious traditions can honestly and faithfully enter into dialogue. Moreover, speaking as a Christian, I believe that we who follow Jesus need places for serious conversation about our faith in relation to the real issues of our world. Genuine religious dialogue, by which I don’t mean the kind where everybody pretends that we all believe more-or-less the same thing, is essential for the health of our world. I also happen to believe that the Christian faith will be well-served in an open, truthful conversation.
I have now spent a good chunk of time browsing the Patheos site. I’m impressed with the quality and relevance of the conversation. For example, today their “Public Square” conversation focuses on religion and sports. You’ll find a wide range of contributions, all of which are thoughtful and readable.
I heard today that a part of my interview with Timothy Dalrymple is now up on the Patheos site. It’s called “Finding Life in Student Life.” You can check it out here. And, no, I was not intentionally making funny faces for the camera. That’s just how I look online.
Be sure to check out other features of the Patheos website. It’s really quite impressive, and well worth your time and effort. For example, I was fascinated by the content in the Muslim portal.
Kudos to the Patheos people for an excellent effort. And thanks to Tim Dalrymple for the privilege of contributing to this website.
Topics: Internet | 5 Comments »
Final Views of New England
By Mark D. Roberts | Monday, October 19, 2009
Before I return to my usual blogging routine, I thought I’d post three more photos of New England, from my trip there a couple of weeks ago.
First, the statue of Paul Revere, with the Old North Church in the background. A visit to these national monuments is worthwhile, not only because of their historical significance, but also because you’ll get to stroll through Boston’s North End. On some of the small streets in this part of the city, you can almost imagine that you’re in an Italian village. Plus, the smell of food cooking in the North End is unbelievable. Don’t visit this area if you’re not prepared to eat!
Second, the Charles River from the Boston side, with MIT (in Cambridge) toward the right, and Boston University in the background.
Finally, my wife and I enjoying the Atlantic ocean from a bench in Rockport, Massachusetts. Not bad at all!
Topics: Photos of Fun Places | 1 Comment »
Sunday Inspiration from The High Calling
By Mark D. Roberts | Sunday, October 18, 2009
Drinking the Cup of Judgment
For the LORD holds a cup in his hand that is full of foaming wine mixed with spices.
He pours out the wine in judgment, and all the wicked must drink it, draining it to the dregs.
In Psalm 75:8, the image of a cup filled with wine represents the coming judgment of God. In a time known to God alone, he will judge the wicked (75:2), giving them their due. Those who have defiantly rejected God will drink the wine of his judgment, draining the glass to the very bottom.
This passage in Psalm 75 helps us understand the ministry of Jesus. When James and John asked Jesus if they could share in his kingly glory, he responded by saying, “You don’t know what you are asking! Are you able to drink from the bitter cup of suffering I am about to drink?” (Mark 10:38). Jesus would drink the cup of God’s judgment, taking upon himself the penalty for human sin. Yet, in the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus wrestled with this very calling: “ ‘Abba, Father,’ he cried out, ‘everything is possible for you. Please take this cup of suffering away from me. Yet I want your will to be done, not mine’ ” (Mark 14:36). In faithfulness to the will of the Father, Jesus chose to drink the cup of judgment, to bear the weight of our sin.
Thus, we do not have to fear the cup of God’s wrath. In fact, Jesus offers us the cup of the new covenant in his blood (Luke 22:20). Through the sacrifice of Jesus—his act of drinking the cup— we are forgiven, if we put our trust in him. Therefore, the next time you receive Communion, remember that Jesus drank the cup of judgment so that you might savor the cup of salvation.
QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION: Do you ever think of Jesus as taking upon himself God’s judgment for your sin? What difference does it make in your life that Jesus drank the cup of judgment for you?
PRAYER: O Lord Jesus, as I reflect upon what you have done for me, my heart is filled with humble gratitude. You drank, not just the cup of judgment, but my cup of judgment. You took upon yourself the just penalty for my sin. How grateful I am for your amazing grace!
Now you offer me, not the cup of suffering, but rather the cup of salvation. In your blood I am forgiven. I have no need to fear the judgment of God because you have taken it, giving me your own relationship with the Father in return. Thank you, dear Lord, for this rich and life-changing gift!
All praise be to you, Lord Jesus, my Savior, Savior of the world! Amen.
_________________________________________________
Would you like to receive a Daily Reflection like this one in your email inbox each morning?
Here’s how . . . .
This devotional comes from The High Calling of Our Daily Work (www.thehighcalling.org), a wonderful website about work and God. You can read my Daily Reflections there, or sign up to have them sent to your email inbox each day. This website contains lots of encouragement for people who are trying to live out their faith in the workplace.
Topics: Sunday Inspiration | No Comments »
Views of Harvard
By Mark D. Roberts | Friday, October 16, 2009
During my trip to New England last week, I was able to visit Harvard University. I had not been back to my alma mater since my final graduation there in 1992. Of course I enjoyed plenty of nostalgia, which I generously shared with my wife. I thought I’d share a bit with you, through some pictures.
Photo below: Harvard Square, with my freshman dorm in the background. I was on the first floor of Straus Hall, with my bedroom window facing Harvard Square. Quite an experience for a formerly suburban Californian!
Photo below: The Charles River, with Harvard houses (dorms) in the background. During my freshman year, my job was washing dishes in Dunster House, the building with the white tower and red dome.
Photo below: The steeple of the Memorial Church in Harvard Yard. I heard some fascinating sermons there, some of which were right on. Others pressed the edge of acceptability, while some plummeted over that edge. One Palm Sunday, a visiting preacher’s point was the “Jesus was a turkey” because he let people think he was the king. That wasn’t the set up to something more. It was the point. Oh well . . . .
Harvard, as you may or may not know, was founded for the purpose of training people for Christian ministry. Among the college’s founding precepts you find this statement:
Let every Student be plainly instructed, and earnestly pressed to consider well, the maine end of his life and studies is, to know God and Jesus Christ which is eternal life (John 17:3) and therefore to lay Christ in the bottome, as the only foundation of all sound knowledge and Learning. And seeing the Lord only giveth wisedome, Let every one seriously set himself by prayer in secret to seeke it of him (Prov. 2:3).
Thought the university seems to have lost sight of this goal, I’m pleased to report that many students and faculty at Harvard continue to uphold it. Thanks be to God!
Topics: Vacation | 1 Comment »
Park Street Church in Boston
By Mark D. Roberts | Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Last weekend I had the privilege of preaching at Park Street Church in downtown Boston. Park St. is celebrating its bicentennial this year. That’s right, 200 years! They’ve had a bunch of guest preachers, including me.
I thought I’d share some pictures of this amazing church (by which I mean the people, not just the building). If you’re not familiar with Park St., check out their website. Better yet, if you’re in the Boston area, be sure to check out the church.
First, the church building at sunset. As you can see, it’s right in the heart of the city of Boston.
Second photo: The church at night from my hotel room.
Third and final photo: My favorite sign inside Park St. Church. You don’t see this sort of thing very often where I come from.
Topics: Church Life | 2 Comments »
Scenes from Rockport, Massachusetts
By Mark D. Roberts | Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Here are a few photos from one of my favorite places in the world, Rockport, Massachusetts. The red fishing shack in the center of these photos is Motif #1, one of the most photographed, painted, and drawn structures in the world. This is actually the second Motif #1, since the original was destroyed in the Blizzard of 1978, which I had the pleasure of experiencing while in college.
Even the overcast day couldn’t take away from the beauty and quaintness of Rockport.
Topics: Vacation | No Comments »
The Office, the Wedding, and the Power of the Internet
By Mark D. Roberts | Monday, October 12, 2009
Warning: The Office spoilers ahead.
If you have doubted the power of the Internet to impact culture, consider last week’s big event on The Office. After seasons of waiting, Pam and Jim finally got married. The “Niagara” episode offered its usual dosage of off-the-wall humor, plus some tender moments.
But one of the most clever and, for me, surprising scenes came right at the end. Pam, John, and their wedding party gathered in Spruce Avenue Presbyterian Church. Three cheers for the Presbyterians! (Note: This is a fictitious church. There are five Presbyterian churches in Niagara Falls, New York, but none named “Spruce Avenue.”) That Pam and John got married in a Presbyterian church was not a the surprise, however. (By the way, the actress who plays Pam, Jenna Fischer, is good friends with Angela Kinsey, the actress who plays Angela Martin on The Office. Angela Kinsey attends Bel-Air Presbyterian Church in Los Angeles.)
Rather, the surprise came as the organist was about to play the processional music. On cue, she stopped playing. Dwight raced to the pulpit to turn on his iPod. All of a sudden the rock song “Forever” by Chris Brown began to play, and the wedding party started dancing forward as the processional, much to the bemused disgust of Pam and Jim, who had apparently asked that this song not be used in their wedding.
It was a funny scene. But it was much funnier and more striking if you knew the backstory. On June 20, 2009, Jill Peterson and Kevin Heinz got married in Christ Lutheran Church, in St. Paul, Minnesota. They and their wedding party danced forward for the processional, using Chris Brown’s “Forever.” Someone videoed the event. On July 19, 2009, somebody uploaded the video to YouTube so that Jill’s father could share it with relatives. Here’s the video. It’s well worth watching if you haven’t seen it.
Here’s a link to the imitation of this video on The Office.
The video went immediately viral. A week after being posted, it had 6.6 million views on YouTube. As of a few days ago, it has over 26,000,000 views on YouTube, not counting the large number of views on copies of the video. My guess is that, after last weeks’s episode of The Office, the original video will get millions of new viewers.
So here’s what impresses me about the power of the Internet. Think about it. Less than three months ago, somebody put up a video of a small wedding featuring two ordinary and relatively unknown people. Last week, one of the most popular television programs imitated the opening moments of the wedding, and millions upon millions of viewers got the joke. Never before in the history of the world could something like this have happened. It’s rather stunning, if you stop and think about it. (Photo: a scene from the processional of The Office.)
By the way, Jill and Kevin decided to capitalize upon their new-found fame by encouraging people to give to the Wellstone Institute, a progressive institute with a particular focus on preventing domestic violence. Way to go, Jill and Kevin! This is ironic, of course, because Chris Brown, who recorded the song “Forever,” recently and famously pled guilty to assaulting his former girlfriend, Rihanna. Jill and Kevin do not mention this situtation explicitly on their website, but they do say this about the utterly unexpected response to their wedding video: “We hope to direct this positivity to a good cause. Due to the circumstances surrounding the song in our wedding video, we have chosen the Sheila Wellstone Institute. Sheila Wellstone was an advocate, organizer, and national champion in the effort to end domestic violence in our communities.”
Topics: Cultural Commentary, Internet | 2 Comments »