In a couple of previous posts I began my “out loud” reflections on The Church Virtual, the concept of Christians gathered in Covenant Community not face-to-face in a specific geographic location, but in virtual communities like those now developing in a Web 2.0 world.  I opened this line of thought back in early March and posted some preliminary development of it about a month later.  Since April I have been doing some serious theological reading and thinking on this idea, but then I went to General Assembly…

I’ll return to that in a minute.  But since April I have been trying to form a framework or grid to help me think about, or “measure” or “test” how the church as virtual community would exist or function.  I am trying to be careful not to unduly constrain thinking about the Church Virtual, while still trying to have something solid on which to hang the thinking.

So let me throw out there the basic outline for thinking about this.  For me one of the most basic measures of the church is from Chapter 18 of the Scots Confession, the “notes of the true kirk (church):”

This is a start, but as the following lines in the confession indicate it applies to specific or particular churches.  The virtual community usually does not pretend to take on the role of a particular church, but rather a fellowship or community of believers that guides and supports across geographical boundaries.

My second guide for the Church is the six “Great Ends of the Church:”

• the proclamation of the gospel for the salvation of humankind;
• the shelter, nurture, and spiritual fellowship of the children of God;
• the maintenance of divine worship;
• the preservation of the truth;
• the promotion of social righteousness;
• and the exhibition of the Kingdom of Heaven to the world

Not that the notes of the true church should be disregarded, but this gives a little more to work with for on-line community.

Now, I am going to try to tackle, or at least poke on, all nine of these points in one post or another as I get time to convert my random musings into coherent, or at least less random, reflections.  But even as I put this one together I struggled with some overlap between various of these concepts.  And I decided “live with it.”  So here it goes…

Maybe the most obvious and natural way that the on-line community relates to these various points is in the category of “shelter, nurture, and spiritual fellowship of the children of God.”  For example, different blogs fill different niches in cyberspace and many do not have the explicit intent of fostering “fellowship.”  I know that I personally don’t write this blog to be “warm and fuzzy” and there are a bunch that I read which are the same way.  But even while reading more scholarly posts about the emergent church, or global economics, or ecclesiology, if you read the blog regularly you get a sense of the person behind the blog and do develop an emotional connection.

Getting a sense of the person behind the blog is easier when the blog author does mix in the personal news and comments with the other items and for those bloggers who post almost exclusively their personal journeys the connection is easier.

OK, so there is a one-way connection there?  Does that make it part of the virtual covenant community?  I think it is in a qualified sense.

Anytime we care about, and especially pray for, another Christian, whether they know it or not, that interaction is mediated by the Holy Spirit which formed the covenant community to begin with.  Because God is involved we were linked as Christian brothers and sisters to begin with even before we began reading each others blogs.  The sharing in the virtual community did not establish the connection, it “realized” it.  But while the implicit connection is present in the existing relationship established by divine facilities, to live into that community we need to have some two-way interaction.  While the obvious source of interaction in these cases is the comments section at the end of the blog (one of the reasons that I and others have noted the inability to comment on the blog of the Moderator of the Church of Scotland), I would argue that since God is the creator of the covenant community and the Holy Spirit empowers it, that responding back with prayer is another valid response to blog posts that establishes us in the two-way divinely-mediated relationship.

And there are cases where it seems the authors are, by design, trying to facilitate Christian community on the web.  In my reading through blogs I have found a few of these that have really touched me and in which I have felt the presence of the Holy Spirit.  One is a blog by Kristin called “Barefoot and Laughing” where she is chronicling her journey with cancer and treatment.  There are other blogs and web sites where people are sharing this journey, but something about Kristin’s writing, her transparency and honesty in this journey reached out and grabbed me.  Check out the posts I’m Scared and Crucible.  Your mileage may vary.  But I hold this up as an example of very real and intimate writing that draws us into community with one another, even if our only response is to lift the person up in prayer.

Another blog that I regularly read is “journalling” by Liz, a minister in Scotland.  In each of these brief posts, all illustrated with a single photograph, she shares with us a little bit of each day and a spiritual insight.  Again, you may prefer something different, but I look forward to reading each installment and following the twists and turns of her call and ministry.

A final example is “Our Table Must Be Full” by Carl Mazza.  As one of the candidates for Moderator of the General Assembly Carl was writing blog posts about his ministry as his time and circumstances permitted.  What was most touching about these entries was that they were usually not about him but were wonderful stories about individuals he met in his ministry to the homeless.  Once I got a chance to meet and hear him at GA it was very quickly clear that the blog entries were just as much about who Carl is and his enormous heart for those people in difficult circumstances that he ministers to.  With the conclusion of GA I do hope that Carl continues sharing these stories with us.

I hold these up as examples of blogs through which I find myself much more connected with the Christian community around the world, ones where we do participate in the “shelter, nurture, and spiritual fellowship of the children of God.”  I would guess that if you are a regular blog reader you have your own. (And note the overlap here because these blogs can sometimes include “proclamation of the Gospel” and “exhibition of the Kingdom of Heaven.”)

The question is frequently raised as to whether there are limits to how open, transparent, and honest one should be in their blogging.  In an ideal world there would be no limits, but in this fallen world not everyone is part of the covenant community, and even those of us who are can take things the wrong way sometimes and the blogging can impede the spiritual fellowship.  This is probably more often the case when you are blogging about others rather than just about yourself.

In my reading, Mark Smith over at Mark Time is at the forefront of thinking this through.  Through his hard experience of trying to be open and honest in the virtual community he has offended and hurt some in his particular church.  As a result of that, and in consultation with his pastor, he is leading the charge on a scripturally-based foundation for what is and is not appropriate sharing in the virtual community.  Thanks Mark for taking that on.  It is interesting to note that this has overlaps with other of my nine thinking points, maybe particularly “ecclesiastical discipline
uprightly ministered.”  And as you can probably surmise by how he got in trouble, he is another blogger who shares the twists, turns, joys, and disappointments of his life with us regular readers of his blog.

So this brings me to General Assembly and my experience there.  Having established certain relationships in the virtual community I was amazed by the added dimension to the relationship when there was the opportunity to meet my “imaginary friends” (as we were calling each other) in a face-to-face setting.  My EP has as a constant theme the vision of gathering at the table, with the various sacrament, meal, and discussion implications.  This was truly the case for me in meeting several of those that I had known only through their blogs and podcasts.  Having known them from their virtual persona the element of in-person contact seemed considerably more significant.

As Christians this should not surprise us.  In his earthly ministry Jesus was about human contact:  Touching those he healed, taking time for the less important in society, sharing a meal with outcasts and sinners.  In fact, while I believe that Jesus was capable of doing most, if not all, healings from a remote location he almost always did them in contact or close proximity to the individual.  Only in the case of the centurion’s servant can I think of “action at a distance” when the centurion tells Jesus he understands orders given and obeyed. [Matt. 8:5-13]

So while the advent of Web 2.0 has enhanced ministry and fellowship opportunities in the virtual community, I have so far come to the conclusion that it is a tool that can initiate, enhance, and maintain our spiritual fellowship, but I don’t see the Church Virtual as a total replacement for “the shelter, nurture, and spiritual fellowship of the children of God” within the particular church.