I’ve been studying online communities for quite some time now and after having had to manage and “create” a number of them I’ve learned a thing or two.
When it comes to online community, especially in light of ministry and the Church, it can be a bit difficult to find a place to start, especially if you’re creating something like an “Online Campus” or “Online Ministry.”
Sometimes it’s best to just start with some assumptions and work from the ground up. That’s what I did when we started developing the Online Community strategy at North Point Ministries and how we began to dialogue about online small group development.
We started out simply.
Here are 13 “core” assumptions that have helped me dialogue and navigate the varied waters around developing online community in the christian context:
13 Core Assumptions
This is somewhat of a “working” list and I’ve already changed a few since I started a year ago.
Please remember that this is in the context of online technology, online community development, and the Church!
- Community supersedes proximity.
- Technology and community are not mutually exclusive.
- Community does take place in disembodied ways that is not as likely in embodied interaction (i.e. written interaction).
- Community does take place in embodied ways that are impossible in disembodied interaction (i.e.a hug).
- Disembodied community can never replace embodied and vice versa.
- Embodied community is preferable to disembodied community.
- Technology can enhance community among existing relationships.
- Technology can initiate connection and facilitate community among those who do not know each other (ii.e. connection).
- Technology does not operate in a one-size-fits-all fashion.
- The Church will never lead technologically.
- Technology can keep people connected when they are apart.
- Technology can reunite people who have lost relationship or contact.
- Technology can help people better manage and stay connected to multiple relationships
I know that many of these can (and will) change depending on one’s theological position but we tried to keep it as theologically-agnostic (is that possible?).
Bill (once a sailor) says
Hi John,
1,2, 7, 8 and 12-13 resonate most with me. I also agree the church will never lead technologically, even with YOUR best efforts, but keep trying, OK?
Thanks for this…I always find your info helpful, if sometime a little out in left field (when you’re teasing, a little bit.)
Bill
John Saddington says
😉
Justin Piercy says
Awesome insights John!
John Dyer says
Love it.
John Saddington says
i heart u.
kylan says
Great stuff! I think church leadership often looks at technology and fails to see its value. This list shows how they can work hand-in-hand. #3-#6 are particularly insightful.
Nick Shoemaker says
Noice list man. 🙂
I paused at #10.
I get that these are assumptions/rough-drafts/not-concrete. And, I know you’ve said similar things before, but why won’t the Church lead technologically? Is it not our place or is it just not possible?
PhillipGibb says
Somewhere between money and the lack of innovation.
Technology can be expensive, even I feel like a jack rabbit in a shoebox because of that.
And we seem to wait for the the world to come up with something that we can use or we react to something.
But this is a post on community,
and my thought is that Technology can empower and facilitate community – it just does not necessarily make it.
John Saddington says
yes!
Gabe Hoffman says
I guess he’d still have to define lead perhaps. I mean lifechurch comes to mind, their Bible apps have always been out day one, and better than everyone’s. And I know that churches are leading the way with streaming video in someway (like on mobile). But then they didn’t invent the iphone or the web streaming technology. So I think they can lead in the adoption and use of available technologies, but won’t/can’t lead in developing technologies, perhaps is what he means?
I worked at intel, and we worked on stuff that didn’t exist yet, the bleeding edge, and when I started to work for the church I had shift my horizon line from that far edge of what’s coming and can be dreamed, to the much more real edge of what is commercially available, or about to be. And I’m content to call that innovating and pushing the envelope, just not the same way. At a place like intel their boundaries have to do with costs and how small you can make things, everyone has boundaries, I think pushing on them should be considered leading.
Paul Andrew says
I think it’s a great article, with lots of important insights. I definitely would differ on the assumption that the church will “never lead” in this area though. Personally I believe for a renaissance-style return of the church to lead in many fields of life as it did during those years when it lead in everything from science and education to art and music. I agree that it currently follows, but I hope to see it rise to lead in this important field too.
John Saddington says
i think there is a model historically of that being true. i could go into greater detail… probably a post.
Brian Barela says
thanks john. helpful list.
Jim Gray says
hmmm…stuff to think about…hmmm….
Danny Bixby says
Great list.
Especially #10. Though it seems to be the one getting the most push-back so far.
I’d have to agree with it (#10) whole heartedly. No matter what shining example of the church we can point to and talk about how it’s “leading” with technology, it’s because we’re ignoring all of the non-church entities that are miles out in front of it.
Bruce says
I guess he’d still have to define lead perhaps. I mean lifechurch comes to mind, their Bible apps have always been out day one, and better than everyone’s. And I know that churches are leading the way with streaming video in someway (like on mobile). But then they didn’t invent the iphone or the web streaming technology. So I think they can lead in the adoption and use of available technologies, but won’t/can’t lead in developing technologies, perhaps is what he means?
I worked at intel, and we worked on stuff that didn’t exist yet, the bleeding edge, and when I started to work for the church I had shift my horizon line from that far edge of what’s coming and can be dreamed, to the much more real edge of what is commercially available, or about to be. And I’m content to call that innovating and pushing the envelope, just not the same way. At a place like intel their boundaries have to do with costs and how small you can make things, everyone has boundaries, I think pushing on them should be considered leading.