In its infancy

In talking about unity and diversity and inclusion within the church, I was inspired by a thought: any way you slice it, an orange is an orange. Wedges or slices or segments, they are still orange. Blend them with vanilla yogurt in a smoothie, open a carton of OJ, add sugar and water for orangeade--still orange. They smell like orange, they taste like orange, they have orange integrity, if you will. So should the church. As we move from a modern way of doing church into whatever the future holds (my contention is that postmodernism is a phase, but who knows what's next?), I'm curious to see how we'll slice the orange that is our faith, and what the finished product will be. Any way you slice it, an orange is an orange. Thanks to the folks who have read this site and posted comments; you are all a big help! Come back and see how it's going as I transition this blog to a survey of a few online church presences and hopefully come out with a successful look at postmodern ecclesiologies from a practical perspective. Coming soon: Interviews with: * Amy Forbus, Digital Community Builder at the United Methodist Reporter and my blogging consultant * Jay Voorhees, UM pastor and preacher at Church of Fools, an online worship experiment of Ship of Fools and the Methodist Church in Great Britain * Jacqui King, pastor and planter of Nu Faith Community UMC, a new brick and mortar church and online church *Phil Wyman, pastor of The Gathering in Salem, Mass, and a pioneer in ministry to the Wiccan and neo-Pagan communities there (this interview will not take place until after Nov. 12; please check back to see it!) Reviews of some online ministry presences with an eye towards how they help people make and maintain connections to the church and to Christ

Through a glass dimly

Wondering what "church" might look like in 50 years. Will we be inclusive to the degree that the Bible is irrelevant, or only one of many sacred texts? Will we all look the same, or will each church be an independent free-standing body, where ecumenism becomes cooperation across congregations, rather than across denominations? I realize the church doesn't look like an whole orange now; we are split into segments...but what will a post-modern church look like? Will there be segments and slices, or will it be more like extra pulpy orange juice or a creamsicle?

Troublesome words

Having an issue in some conversations I've been having about postmodern ministry. It seems that we can't agree on our vocabulary, and so we're spending some time arguing about words that could be spend really exploring how we might be about ministry and relationship-building in postmodern culture. An example: in talking about the emerging church and the concern that some parts of the movement are focusing on relationships to the exclusion of doctrine, we realized we don't agree on the meaning of the word "doctrine". I guess maybe I've sort of reappropriated it for myself to mean the foundational teachings that invite us into relationship with God and others, and help us to live in community. Some of my peers reject "doctrine" as a narrowly defined, rigid, and exclusive set of rules that no longer have any real meaning. We've spent most of the conversation this week disagreeing when we mean to agree, I think, that narrow doctrinalism is bad, and something we reject. But I've had a hard time agreeing that all doctrine should be rejected, due to my own definition. And I've been told that insisting on knowing what things mean is "modern" thinking, not postmodern...well, so be it. Anyone out there have a term you'd like to get rid of, or redefine? Hit me in the comments and let me know!

Church of Fools, part 1

Church of Fools was a 3 month experiment conducted by Ship of Fools and the Methodist Church of Great Britain in 2004 with an eye to what online worship services might look like. After three months (plus a couple extra, due to its success) of online interactive worship, visits from various trolls (disruptive visitors), and an appearance by Satan, the experiment came to an end, at least in part. The website is still up, and the 3D bandwidth-hogging format has been changed to a less-interactive single-visitor format...but visitors still come in to pray, to be silent, and to meditate. The original creator of Church of Fools has moved to St. Pixels online church community. Jay Voorhees, a UM pastor outside Nashville TN, was a part of Church of Fools, and is my first victim, I mean, interview subject. Jay: Let me give a little background to set the stage. I was not in on the original planning for Church of Fools (COF) but was rather brought in a bit later, however I have had enough conversations with some of the founding team to give at least some information on the formation of the site. Anne: I think first off, I want to know how Ship of Fools got involved in the online church idea. Was it just for the sheer fun of it, or was there a desire to see how people might respond? How did you get involved with Church of Fools? Jay: As I am sure you know, the Ship of Fools was an online community focused around a set of bulletin boards that attempted to deal with issues of faith in a fresh way. The Ship itself took a satirical approach to the things of the church, reflecting especially the sense of humor of its founders, who maintained a traditional British sense of humor. I had been involved on the periphery of this conversation at the bequest of one of my parishioners, a man who soon became a moderator on the boards, and was involved in the earliest days of the COF project. Part of the impetus for COF arose from a group of active chat rooms at the Ship. These rooms involved some fairly serious theological discussions, and there was a feeling among some that they would be enhanced by a visually oriented chat space. As a first step the Ship did a small experiment with an online space that was (I think) based on Noah’s Ark. When response to that was positive, there was a movement by many to enter into an experiment with an online church. The Ship founders approached the Methodist Church of Great Britain about entering into a partnership on the project, and the Methodist Church provided much of the funding for what was to be a three month experiment, which then extended out after the rousing success of the project to five or six months. I became involved in the COF project at the invitation of my parishioner, and after participating in that space for a while, was asked to become one of the regular “Reverends” on the site to moderate conversations, lead worship, and generally be present. Anne: What are your thoughts about online worship settings? Do they work? What was the best thing about Church of Fools? Jay: Honestly, for me, the online worship was forced. Frankly a text based environment, even in a virtual world, doesn’t allow for the flow of thought and the expression of emotion that is necessary for heartfelt worship. On the other hand, many of the leaders and regular participants at COF had history in the Anglican tradition, and I think maintained a sense of the holy in our regular observance of morning and evening prayer. What works in maintaining these worship services is the daily discipline of gathering with others (albeit online) to focus intentionally on God. I also believe that these “services” provided an entry point back into the church for a group of persons who had been alienated by the church in the past but wished to reconnect. Coming online allowed them a safe space to dip their toes back into the water, ultimately leading some to reconnect with churches in the “real world.” What become probably the most important aspect of the SOF project was the community that arose from the online conversations between the services. People somehow found ways to bond in this online space, creating relationships of importance. Obviously, they were limited in their scope, but for many they remained very important in their lives. Anne: One of the hopes for Church of Fools was that the online community would lead to people wanting to connect with conventional churches. How did that work out? Jay: There really was no way to measure how many folks ended up connecting to conventional churches. Anecdotally, there were several (10 or so) folks who claimed that they had been away from church for many years and this project was leading them back into the practices of prayer, and considering reconnecting with “real” churches. However, there is no firm data beyond those conversations to support any claim that this directly led folks into relationships with conventional churches. Anne: What did the Church of Fools project team hope to come out of it? How did that work out for them? Did you yourself have any different hopes? Jay: I’m not sure anyone had clearly defined goals as to what would be the final outcome. It was an experiment to simply see what would happen. What happened was that a large number of folks showed up, more than anticipated. It also demonstrated the problems and limitations of online communities in that it is much easier for those inclined to come and disrupt what others are doing. My own hopes related to entering into deep conversations with persons seeking to understand God at a deeper level. That certainly happened and I think were valuable. Anne: Is the Methodist Church across the big water still interested in the project? Are there plans to move back to 3D and a more interactive experience? Jay: I’m not sure about the desire of The Methodist Church of Great Britain to remain connected to the project, although they have generally been willing to think outside the box. The COF project ended due to funding issues as maintaining a 3D environment requires a bunch of bandwidth. The leaders at the Ship unfortunately entered into a deal with the software developers which make resuming COF (or St. Pixel’s as it’s called now) at its previous level impossible due to licensing fees. At the same time, the COF ran into the same problems that traditional churches experience – differing visions among the leaders, and the stresses of identifying the commonalities of a community. There was (and continues to be) a group in the US that is proposing an alternative vision of the COF project, recognizing that COF maintained a more British feel and background and that there might be a need for a more Americanized expression. However they have been unable to find a suitable 3D environment and I am doubtful that they will get that project to happen. Anne: How would you define “postmodern”? What would you consider to be hallmarks of postmodern ministry? Does Church of Fools meet your criteria? Are there other online “churches” that you’re interested in (and what are they)? Jay: Wow, that’s a loaded question. I frankly don’t like the descriptor of “postmodern” in talking about church today for I think that there are many factors and descriptors to describe the cultural shift we find ourselves in. Postmodernism for me is the challenging of the assumptions of modernity, especially pushing against the reliance on scientific truth as the only form of truth, and taxonomic character of modern society (that is, the desire in modernity to created categories with fairly rigid boundaries). Modernity seems to me to loosely be focused on the activity of the left side of the brain – analysis, rationality, logic. On the other hand, postmodernity lifts up creativity and flexibility as values to be pursued. There is a discomfort among postmoderns with rigid categories of truth, and a recognition that scientific definitions of truth may not be the only way to define truth. Postmodern people tend to value authenticity, communal connection, and are comfortable with paradox. At the same time, I would suggest that post-colonialism is also an important factor in culture today. Post-colonialism is the movement from the centralized authority of those “in the know” to a more distributed notion of power and knowledge, with the understanding that power and authority should arise from within a community rather than be imposed by outside forces. In many ways, the rise of open source software (with the connections of “open source” to other areas of life, including church) is an example of a post-colonial mentality. It is the belief that there is power when the end users own what they are using rather than having someone determine what’s best for them. Postmodern/Post-Colonial/Emerging ministry is characterized by many things, but the quick and dirty answer would be an emphasis on shared power within a communal context, a willingness to ask difficult questions of church traditions and the scriptures, a valuing of experience as a valid revelation of God’s presence and activity in the world, leading to a more interactive form of worship. COF met many of those markers, however the tension in the community arose in the nature of communal leadership. The founders of the Ship of Fools, especially the primary leader Simon, was unable to recognize that he no longer “owned” the COF once the community began to gel in that space. Like most web site operators, he assumed that he was in control because he maintained the site. However, once a community began to be formed there, it was clear that the postmodern folks there believed that their input was important if not crucial to the success and operation of the COF. Simon and the other Ship leaders struggled to realize that the communal dynamics had changed and that authority was seen not in titles or roles, but in the interactions with the shared community. I am unaware of other online churches and have not attempted to be in contact with them.

Some Reflections on Online Community via Blogging

Soon, I hope to hear from Amy Forbus, Digital Community Builder for the UMPortal, on blogging and varied other subjects. In the meantime, here are some of my own thoughts. I started blogging in January 2007, so I can hardly consider myself an expert, and I'm not one to worry about who is reading my blog. At first, it was sort of a novel way to keep a journal, which I've never been good at doing for longer than whatever crisis I was journaling about lasted. This time, though, I've layered on some other experiences and kinds of meaning (to me at least), that have made it a much more successful attempt at journal-keeping than in the past. I intentionally named it Telling Stories and Learning Faith, hoping to emphasize both my desire to become a better storyteller and narrative theologian and also my sense that while I may be going on to perfection, I'm nowhere near there yet. I meant it to be a place to post whatever writing I do, and perhaps encourage me to do more, and initially to be a forum where I could express myself honestly and openly, without having to censor myself too much. That focus quickly shifted as my senior pastor and I thought about how the blog might let me be more transparent to our congregation, and I began not only to publish my weekly newsletter articles in the blog but also to censor myself a little more often and be a little more moderate in how I express my frustrations. As a very open person, that's occasionally difficult for me, but down the line, I found other arenas for that type of expression as well. In the first couple of months, I felt all alone in the blogosphere. I would occasionally get email or verbal feedback from a parishioner about something I had written and very rarely a comment from someone I didn't know who had stumbled on to my blog. I learned to use the "next blog" button at the top of the Blogger page to surf through randomly selected blogs, and discovered that I really am not interested in much of the content out there. As a free blog provider, Blogger hosts many blogs with commercial and "adult" content I'm not interested in. But one day, I stumbled on to the RevGalBlogPals site...I've honestly forgotten if I was chasing a link from a comment someone left me, or blogsurfing through random blogs, or possibly someone had mentioned the webring to me. At RevGalBlogPals, I found content for and by clergywomen, many of whom had experiences in ministry similar to mine, and others whose lives and settings were completely different. My connection with RGBP is two-fold: I'm now a member of the webring, so more people may stumble onto my blog through another RGBP member, and also there are a variety of weekly and monthly features through which we interact on the blog. The Friday Five, a "get-to-know-you" weekly event, is my favorite weekly web ritual. Each week a RGBP member posts 5 questions for visitors to answer on their own sites, and then refer to their post in the comments on RGBP. I have grown to look forward to the exercise both as a means of stimulating me to write something each week and as a way to connect with peers I might never meet in person. Through the Friday Five and reading others' responses, I have developed a list of blogs I check on a regular basis. Among them are The Best Dog Ever (yep, purportedly written by a dog), Catz and Best of (yep, by a cat--there's an informal RevGalPetPal network, too), Abbey of the Arts (and a bi-weekly poetry challenge I have added to my blog/writing discipline), and freshly ground and freshly brewed, although there are many others. In addition to the RBGP Friday Five, I check in on Tuesdays for Lectionary Leanings as the RevGals discuss the week's lectionary texts, on Wednesdays for the Wednesday Festival, where site visitors are encouraged to visit blogs having particularly interesting content, from a great recipe to a prayer concern to a project, and on Thursdays for the advice column, Ask the Matriarchs, where we can all join in to share our experiences and counsel when one is facing a difficult situation. I have also been invited to share in a joint blog kept for and by other UM clergywomen looking for a sounding board and a sense of connection. I did not anticipate finding a sense of community in any way when I began blogging. It started as a selfish exercise: I wanted a place that would be my own for reflecting on what was happening in my life and for writing a bit, so that one day I might be able to figure out what I want to write (I feel that as a sense of calling, not as strong as my call to pastor, but certainly strong and persistent). It became, however, a place to make connections: a fellow blogger from Tennessee offered me company and a seat at his Emergent cohort meeting when I was in TN helping care for my sick mother-in-law. Another blogger who is currently in Iraq with the military has stumbled upon the RevGalBlogPals, and finds himself asking questions as he reads our posts: questions about faith, about the Bible, about grace and Jesus Christ. I never anticipated that I could feel a sense of relationship, at many different levels, as I sat in my office typing on a keyboard. It's been a surprise, a welcome one, and a gift as well. cross-posted on Telling Stories and Learning Faith

Preliminary Thoughts on Church of Fools and St. Pixels

(see Interview with Jay Voorhees) I'm not surprised the Church of Fools experiment did not continue. It wasn't really constructed such that results could be tracked, and I'm not sure there were any real clear expectations to begin with. This creates a real disincentive for the funding body to keep paying for the bandwidth it took to run it. However, there are some long term benefits and some positive ideas that have come from Church of Fools. As Jay said, anecdotal evidence suggests that a few people found a connection through COF that hopefully motivated them to seek a relationship with a "real world" church. In addition, in reading the comments on the website, even the current 2D single-user interface has provided some meaningful space for connecting with God through prayer. The 3D St. Pixels environment seems clunky and antiquated compared to Second Life, and no wonder: it's 3 years old, which is centuries in Internet years. Text-based worship experiences there seem forced and a bit hard to follow; on occasion there are more comments than one can make sense of, and sometimes they just don't seem to make sense. I did not feel like a part of the community, but rather like a voyeur with many choices as to who I might be peeping at. In other words, it felt like a group of people each having individual experiences rather than a shared experience. These are churches online in the sense that they are intentional spaces where Christian worship may take place, but there does not seem to be meaningful deeper relationships. Everything that happens appears to happen in public space, making the worship service into an interactive performance rather than an encounter with God and others that has the power to transform lives. There is no meaningful missional emphasis, and I am finding it difficult to imagine how one might form truly incarnational relationships without some flesh-and-blood meetings. On the other hand, they made us of the technology of their time to attempt to reach a new field for evangelism. One could wish for some user data to know whether they were attracting those who were already meaningfully connected to church or those who find themselves somehow alienated from brick and mortar churches.