I’m sitting in my office am I am overwhelmed by the reality that yesterday I was given the green light for the vision I have been working on the last few months for the Gateway Church Internet Campus. It was cool to dream big about what we could potentially do, but now the reality that we have to now pull this pipe dream off is quite daunting.
The question that the Deltron Echo team is asking and working through is:
What if we had no ingrained concept of what a church service is, go to a building – hear some songs – listen to a talking head – walk out, what would an experience look like that is targeted at Internet Citizens?
Up until now most of the models that we have seen for online church are basically a re-broadcast of a traditionally programmed worship gathering with a few social interaction widgets thrown in. Nothing wrong with that and in fact we are seeing some incredible fruit come out of these experiences, but we have an opportunity here that I have yet to see taken by the online church movement.
Right now we have an opportunity to re-define what a worship gathering is, yet all we have really done is wedge the some old church service into the internet. I will admit that I have a chronic desire to question and change everything even just to see if there is a better way, so maybe I’m alone in my feelings when I say, I think we can do better.
So I ask again:
What if we had no ingrained concept of what a church service is, go to a building – hear some songs – listen to a talking head – walk out, what would an experience look like that is targeted at Internet Citizens?
[Image from DCAA]
Matt Laswell says
I would suggest asking a different question: What is it that makes a church a church? That is, what is the small and irreducible list of things that are essential to being the the community of Jesus in the world, without which we have missed the mark. Without clarity on this question, I don't belive it's possible to answer other questions adequately.
Vince says
@matt // you’re right. But i’m operating under the assumption that it’s understood by church crunch readers.
Josh Wagner says
Man, that's a great question. I think if we'd answer that right, we'd open up a whole new kind of church!
My guess is that it would be something more constant than a single service. The web is getting more real-time and persistent. So, something more like an open chat room than a timed service. People show up when they are online and share experiences, share concerns, etc. I think music would be less important (unless the web can handle really high quality video or 3d stuff that John talked about before), Also, there would probably be meetups around the area for physical relationships. Maybe some "pastor" or leader would have a blog or homepage to give guidance and teaching.
Ok. I think my brainstorming is tapped out. Never thought of this before…
Bonnie says
Matt, you raise an interesting point. I recently looked at the Greek word “Sunago”, which appears in the phrase, “gather together in My name” in Matt. 18:20 (NKJV). Strong’s says Sunago means “to gather together, to gather; to draw together, collect; of a net in which they are caught”. This seems to be more about relationships than a building. (I also think the “net” part is pretty cool.)
Vince, I personally think you are off to a good start. I’m a former systems analyst who landed on the cutting edge of multimedia training from laserdisc days to web-based training. (Yeah, I’m pretty old. Even speak COBOL.) I have a lot of experience moving things to different platforms. Computers redefined the way information flowed through companies. Whether it was a paper-based accounting system or a stand-up training class, one of the most difficult things I had to get clients to accept is that changing to a new platform shouldn’t change your core content, but if they insisted the new system be constrained to the old platform, they were doomed from the start. I see churches making the same mistake.
As to your question, what would the experience look like? I suggest you focus on 3 things:
1. A core principle in web development is, “Content is king”. But many churches haven’t gotten the message. Studies have revealed that spirituality is a primary reason for going to the Internet. Where do we want people to get answers? Wikipedia? Blogs by theologians debating the fine points of Calvinism? A forum of church members tearing each other up? The unchurched and dechurched won’t find answers on most church websites unless they are patient enough to listen to sermon videos that are poorly titled and tagged, if tagged at all.
I’m not suggesting that every church have a wiki anyone can update. But I suggest there should be some statement of faith (preferably called something else) and some Google-friendly, basic biblical truth on every church site. Ideally there will also be a summary of the main points of the latest sermons with comments turned on, moderated, and questions answered. I really think it’s a waste of time to put sermon videos online, without linking them to a summary, with good SEO. Maybe not a waste for new parents, nursery workers or people traveling. But that’s not evangelism.
If you start with what you want people to find on your site, and throw out all of your assumptions about what it *should* look like, the content will lead you halfway home.
2. I mentioned comments. In research for PrayerWEBS, I visited many church websites. It doesn’t take long to find out that most churches either fear or do not understand that Web 2.0 is about the conversation.
This is revolutionizing the way companies are using the web. Why? Because their customers forced them into it. The customers were talking in forums they not only didn’t host, they didn’t even visit until the WSJ called for comments. (Tara Hunt, Paul Gillin and David Meerman Scott all have excellent books on this.)
The churches that fear controversial comments are missing opportunities to engage the commenters in constructive dialog. A good response that is biblically sound gives the world a chance to see grace in action. And it just might help the commenter find the grace they desperately need.
3. The Whuffie Factor. This is the title of Tara Hunt’s book. She’s a down-to-earth, self-proclaimed agnostic, so don’t look for examples of churches here. But she has a great handle on the social currency called Whuffie, how to lose it, how to get it, how to keep it.
I think all 3 are essential for the Internet Citizens. Many are Millennials: “Give me content, or don’t waste my time. Talk to me, or I know you don’t really care what I think. And if you don’t know what you’re doing, you’re irrelevant. I’m going elsewhere.” And of course they are leaving many churches in droves.
Keep up the great work, Vince. And thanks for allowing us to be part of your conversation.
NicCharalambous says
What a great and much needed set of points about the shortcomings of most church web strategies. more power to you.
Bonnie says
That should have been “Don’t just talk to me, listen to me also, or I will know you don’t really care what I think.” Saw it just as I hit .
klreed189 says
Great question. One that is very hard to answer because it has been pounded into my head of what church is and what it should look like.
I would say if we had no concept of church and were experiencing it for the first time it would look like a AA or other support group meeting. A place of freedom where everyone knows that the person to the right and left of them is so screwed up this is their last hope and people are honest with their sinfulness.
No music to hide behind, no sermon to sit there and shake your head in agreement, just you and a bunch of sinners talking about loving a perfect and gracious God. That is one place that I would love to be apart of.
duregger says
woooo!
like it. a convergence of messy lives coming together to encourage and send back out into this big and soiled world!
Bonnie says
@klreed189, Amen!
NicCharalambous says
Vince: this is the million dollar question. But it's going to take a brave church to pour lots of resources into creating a completely separate experience when there's no proven audience. If evangelism is the key — and not serving church members — we HAVE to explore this from the creative standpoint AND the message, but it feels like this may be an uphill battle for a while.
vince says
challenge accepted…
Barry Smith says
Part 1 – I am working on this as well… however, I am pretty much targeting those who do not know Jesus… more than the average 'church' which typically has a majority of people that are already converted. I see the 'show' or 'service' or 'video' or 'communication piece' as being very biblical and very engaging. To 'reach out' to those on the web, you'll have to be quick. I don't like that – but it's true. The general thought (I've heard) is about 2-3 minutes is the most people will listen. I think 'church' online is a little different – but i doubt you'll get 30 minutes out of someone… even if they 'want' to be a part.
Barry Smith says
Part 2 – It seems to me that 10-13 minutes is going to be a sweet spot in communicating the gospel. I am working on it being a bit more entertaining (I know, I know – many Christians will freak out on that one). That's why it's a church for the unchurched. It's a way to get people connected to the message… to draw them in… to reach them for Christ… and to begin the process of discipleship – hopefully with a face to face connection for the most effectiveness.
I will be watching you my friend. Craig Whitney sent me – by the way. 🙂
josephscottjr says
Do not let the form, good or bad, become the focal point. Whatever model you choose, darkness will one day pervert it. For now, it is your faith in God. Let that be enough to set the course.
Note: I am a Pastor, Computer Analyst and Attorney.
Blessing
Pastor Joseph Scott Jr.