SimChurch Review

An interesting read that had me vacillating between being intrigued by virtual church and
feeling like it wasn’t for me. I have to say on a formatting note, that the publisher’s use
of black pages with fine, white writing on them prior to a few of the chapters was a bad
move. It was very hard to read. Also, the footnotes in the last chapter are off. Instead of
starting at “1”, they start at “19”. Okay, now on with my thoughts about the content of
the book.

“…church tradition allows me to better understand and interpret the Bible” (p. 47).
I’m not so sure about that. Does your church tradition really help you to better
understand the Bible or does it help you to interpret scripture based on your tradition’s
foregone conclusions and presuppositions? Rather, I think it would be better to think
biblically versus through the lens of our particular denominations, both of which are not
always the same or compatible.

“Kung reminds us, “An ekklesia is not something that is formed and founded once
and for all and remains unchanged;” (p. 65).
Amen! Unfortunately, the reality is quite the opposite.

“But isn’t a church supposed to be more abut who and what and why than where?
Regardless of our opinions on virtual churches, we need to demote the power of the
“where” when it comes to being the church” (p. 68).
While this is true, we remain focused on placing such a great emphasis on our buildings
and property, which tends to get in the way of spreading the gospel. At least in the U.S.,
elaborate structures continue to be built and lots of effort is put into choosing and erecting
spaces that are non-religious so as not offend. In some ways, this is admirable, but often
these buildings become albatrosses. In this way, we’re not much different than our
culture. How many people moved into homes they couldn’t afford because they were
new, the latest and greatest in the housing market and their neighbors had moved and
raved about it. Now, look at the mess we’re in with foreclosed homes. Fads come and
fads go. I’m convinced that when the Spirit is in operation, it doesn’t much matter about
the building. People will be drawn to what is offered inside.

“Many Westerners hide behind middle-class prudence and acceptability” (p. 88).
“…when God wanted to reach the real world, he sent his Son (and Spirit) to be with
sinful people (Rom. 5:6). It’s only by being with people that we can change people”
(p. 164).
So true and this middle-class prudence creeps into the church and into all that we do such
that we are often unable or unwilling to reach beyond our middle-class values to reach
out to those not like us. Either that or we reach out with the goal being to make others
like us rather than like Christ.

“Everyone…sees the church through a cultural lens—or against someone else’s

cultural lens—more so than through God’s lens or a biblical lens. Until we come to
admit that we see the church through our limited, human perspective, and that
therefore how we do church originates more from our human ideas than from a
divine blueprint from heaven, we will never be able to do church in a way that is
more about God than about an organization of our own making” (p. 105-106).
Amen and amen! We have to get to a place that we question everything we do rather than
settling and assuming that it’s all pleasing to God. This ties in with our middle-class
acceptability. We assume that God must be for us, because after all, our way is the right
way to do church.

“…we do church…as a reaction against someone else’s style of doing church” (p.
106).
I recently came to this realization about our various philosophies and theologies. They’re
all a reaction against something or someone else.

“Should virtual-church proclamation be driven by the attention spans of

multitasking computer users?”
“Can the decentralized nature of the medium allow for a shorter message with
immediate small-group breakouts in the same service, which people would
participate in via avatar?” (p. 110).
First of all, no, do not let people’s attention spans totally dictate the message! While that
can be a consideration as it often is in “live” churches, it should not be the sole factor. I
remain convinced that a message inspired by the Holy Spirit will capture people and there
is the possibility of people forgetting about the time. Maybe the problem isn’t the
people’s attention span so much as the message itself.
As for the breakout sessions, we do that now at my church. We have what is called a
sermon discussion class and while it is mostly the “regulars”, we have quite lively,
sometimes contentious or controversial discussions that force people to think and grapple
with the message and its implication for their lives. So, I would highly recommend this.
It’s too easy for people to walk away from a message, whether virtual or live, with
questions or thoughts that are easily forgotten or dismissed because there’s no venue in
which to discuss them.

“…worship is an action—not just listening to cool music…” (p. 112).

This is something that has crept into “live” churches. It’s somehow become all about the
music; it seems to drive the service with people being more like spectators than
participants. We have neglected our responsibility of teaching people about worship and
leading them into the presence of God. The music may be cool, but does it speak to your
soul? Does it prepare your heart for the message? This is an area where we can’t afford
to emulate the world and make sure that we’ve got all this fancy packaging, yet when
people open it, they find fluff instead of substance.

“How, then, can or should virtual churches practice virtual Communion?”

“…a person may go to a popular church website to celebrate Communion not
realizing that they are the only one there at the time celebrating Communion” (p.
118).
“…we should judge different attempts at virtual Communion primarily on the
communion of the people… (p. 120).
Here the author offers up a different view of Communion. I see nothing wrong with
people observing alone since it is about the remembrance of our Lord and His sacrifice
for us. However, his point about the community and references to I Corinthians are
points to consider. In the Church, we tend to emphasize the personal over the corporate
and if we want people to feel a part of the body of Christ, that does include other people.
That is probably one of the bigger hurdles I see for the virtual church; overcoming the
“lone ranger” syndrome, which by the way is prevalent in “live” churches as well.
Community is one of the things all churches have to work on as our society becomes
more and more individualized.

“…we must continue to adapt our expressions of the church and its ordinances for
every circumstance in light of our divine mandate (Matt. 28:18-20) (p. 123).
Excellent point that I will use when next talking to someone lamenting over change in the
church. The methods may change, but the message remains the same even though it may
be delivered differently in light of our Lord’s mandate.

Virtual baptism
In the author’s discussion on virtual baptism, I wondered would people potentially be
fractured and see themselves as their avatar-self and their real self. I think in some ways,
it reminds me of playing with those little Fisher-Price people. I think this is why I have
some difficulty with virtual worship: it doesn’t feel like the real me or it “feels” like I’m
playing make-believe. However, the author made a good point earlier in the book about
the masks that we put on in “live” church, so in that sense, I guess there’s no difference. I
know the avatar is a representation, but I wonder about the tendency to either blur the
lines or fragment one’s self. I think virtual worship will appeal to certain types of people
and will not be for everyone. Those who already have experience in the virtual world
will probably have an easier time adapting than those of us who don’t.
In discussing outsourced baptism, I think the possibility is there that a person who is not
part of a “live” church will sacrifice community to be baptized with a group of strangers,
only to return to their virtual world. On the other hand, when Christ is present, a sense of
koinonia comes about even amongst strangers. Also, the baptizing church would have to
be willing to accept the recommendation of the candidate from the virtual church.

Testing the TOS

Upon visiting the Church of Fools site, it wasn’t clear to me if someone could create an
avatar free of church. I saw something listed about upgraded memberships that required
membership fees, but is all access subject to subscription fees? That to me would be
another downside. Right now, if someone decides to visit a church, there is no “entrance
fee” as it were. We still have bills to pay, but we don’t charge people. If this isn’t the
case with virtual churches, I think that would send the wrong message to people that they
have to pay to attend church.

“…Christians who fear change…will turn the virtual world over to its own devices,
and tens of millions of people—with no true ethical compass—will embrace greater
free agency and then write their own rules on what is right and what is wrong” (p.
164).
Much the way the Church has dealt or not dealt with other issues that are now an
accepted part of our society.

“Can virtual churches encourage people to participate in ministry? (p. 193)

“Will virtual churches change the way people participate in church? (p. 196)
I think it’s very possible for virtual churches to effect change in these areas. For one,
people who attend virtual churches won’t be bogged down in the politics that exist in
many local churches which often discourages people from getting involved. I’ve also
seen how in my own church, people respond to a compelling message and get busy doing
the work of the kingdom. I think a whole new world could potentially be opened up to
people. Instead of sitting around in “live” churches lamenting the state of things, people
will be empowered and emboldened to live the message. I’m convinced some people
walk away from the church because we’re often too caught up in our petty struggles,
when all these people want to do is be part of a living, breathing, active organization. I
don’t know too many people who don’t want to effect change. It’s just a question of
whether or not the group you’re a part of helps or hinders. People often become
disillusioned to find that what the church preaches is seemingly just talk as very little gets
done. Thus, the rise in popularity in humanitarian efforts by the likes of Bono and others.

Author’s footnote on cross-dressers

“…conventional wisdom about people who dress as a member of the opposite sex is
inaccurate and misleading. What we can agree on here is that, regardless of what
they choose to wear, they are people just like me and you. God is able to heal and
restore them, and God has a purpose for their lives” (p. 250-251).
So sad that he had to say this. It should be a foregone conclusion on the part of all
Christians that those different from us are in fact just like us. At the end of the day, they
are people in need of a savior just like I am. Of course, since we’re not there yet (we
probably never will be) this makes the author’s point that a virtual church may be just the
place for people who are not accepted in the “live” church.