WWW-Tech

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Surviving 2020: How many churches will die because of COVID-19 and 'worship shifting'?

, , , , , , , , , , ,
Surviving 2020: How many churches will die because of COVID-19 and 'worship shifting'?

Television professionals who survived the past decade have made their peace with terms like "binging" and "time-shifting."

But how, pray tell, can clergy embrace "worship-shifting"?

The coronavirus crisis has plunged pastors into digital technology while trying to replace analog community life with online worship, classes and fellowship forums. These changes have frustrated many, especially believers in ancient traditions built on rites requiring face-to-face contact. But many worshippers have welcomed online worship.

These changes have altered the "fundamental relationship that many young adults have with their churches," said David Kinnaman, president of the Barna Group, which does research with a variety of religious groups. "We're hearing about worship-shifting, as people use all the tech in their homes to fit services into their own schedules, just like everything else they watch on all those screens.

"This is another way people are using social media to renegotiate the role the church plays in the lives of their families."

The question religious leaders are asking, of course, is how many people will return to their pews when "normal" life returns. But it may be several years before high-risk older believers decide it's safe to return, even after vaccines become available. Younger members may keep watching their own local services, switch to high-profile digital flocks elsewhere or do both.

In talks with clients, Kinnaman said he is hearing denominational leaders and clergy say they believe that, in the next year or so, some churches will simply close their doors. Early in the pandemic the percentage of insiders telling Barna researchers they were "highly confident" their churches would survive was "in the high 70s," he said.

“Now it's in the 50s. … Most churches are doing OK, for now. But there's a segment that's really struggling and taking a hit, week after week."

After reviewing several kinds of research -- including patterns in finances and attendance -- Kinnaman sent a shockwave through social-media channels with his recent prediction that one in five churches will close in the next 18 months.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

New podcast: Yes, it will be big news if COVID-19 closes 20% of America's churches

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
New podcast: Yes, it will be big news if COVID-19 closes 20% of America's churches

This week’s “Crossroads” podcast — click here to tune that in — starts with a rather obvious question linked to the coronavirus crisis.

The question: Would it be a major news story if 20% or more of America’s religious congregations were forced to shut down during the next 12-18 months?

Clearly that would be a huge development in American life — not just on the religion-news beat. On top of that, it would be a story that would almost certainly unfold in every zip code in America. There would be newsworthy hooks at the local, regional and national levels.

What kinds of stories?

Hold that thought.

The hook for this week’s discussion was my latest “On Religion” column for the Universal syndicate, which grew out of recent comments by David Kinnaman, the leader of the Barna Group — which does polling and research with a variety of churches and denominations.

Here is a key passage:

The question religious leaders are asking, of course, is how many people will return to their pews when "normal" life returns. But it may be several years before high-risk older believers decide it's safe to return, even after vaccines become available. Younger members may keep watching their own local services, switch to high-profile digital flocks elsewhere or do both.

In talks with clients, Kinnaman said he is hearing denominational leaders and clergy say they believe that, in the next year or so, some churches will simply close their doors. Early in the pandemic the percentage of insiders telling Barna researchers they were "highly confident" their churches would survive was "in the high 70s," he said.

"Now it's in the 50s. … Most churches are doing OK, for now. But there's a segment that's really struggling and taking a hit, week after week."

After reviewing several kinds of research -- including patterns in finances and attendance -- Kinnaman sent a shockwave through social-media channels with his recent prediction that one in five churches will close in the next 18 months. In "mainline" churches, he is convinced this number will be one in three, in part because these rapidly aging Protestant denominations have lost millions of members -- some up to 50% -- since the 1960s.

These mainline churches are the “Seven Sisters” of progressive Protestantism. In descending order, by size, that would be the United Methodist Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), the Episcopal Church, the American Baptist Churches USA, the United Church of Christ and the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ).


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , ,

Question for 2020: Can Episcopal clergy consecrate bread and wine through the Internet?

, , , , , , , , ,
Question for 2020: Can Episcopal clergy consecrate bread and wine through the Internet?

In the late 1970s, the Episcopal Ad Project began releasing spots taking shots at television preachers and other trends in American evangelicalism.

One image showed a television serving as an altar, holding a priest's stole, a chalice and plate of Eucharistic hosts. The headline asked: "With all due regard to TV Christianity, have you ever seen a Sony that gives Holy Communion?"

Now some Anglicans are debating whether it's valid -- during the coronavirus crisis -- to celebrate "virtual Eucharists," with computers linking priests at altars and communicants with their own bread and wine at home.

In a recent House of Bishops meeting -- online, of course -- Episcopal Church leaders backed away from allowing what many call "Virtual Holy Eucharist."

Episcopal News Service said bishops met in private small groups to discuss if it's "theologically sound to allow Episcopalians to gather separately and receive Communion that has been consecrated by a priest remotely during an online service."

Experiments had already begun, in some Zip codes. In April, Bishop Jacob Owensby of the Diocese of Western Louisiana encouraged such rites among "Priests who have the technical know-how, the equipment and the inclination" to proceed.

People at home, he wrote, will "provide for themselves bread and wine (bread alone is also permissible) and place it on a table in front of them. The priest's consecration of elements in front of her or him extends to the bread and wine in each … household. The people will consume the consecrated elements."

Days later, after consulting with America's presiding bishop," Bishop Owensby rescinded those instructions. "I understand that virtual consecration of elements at a physical or geographical distance from the Altar exceeds the recognized bounds set by our rubrics and inscribed in our theology of the Eucharist," he wrote.

However, similar debates were already taking place among other Anglicans. In Australia, for example, Archbishop Glenn Davies of Sydney urged priests to be creative during this pandemic, while churches were being forced to shut their doors.

During a live-streamed rite, he wrote, parishioners "could participate in their own homes via the internet consuming their own bread and wine, in accordance with our Lord's command."


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Podcast: What did those Big Tech hearings have to do with religious life in America?

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

There have been some wild clashes between religious groups and the czars of the Big Tech institutions that have tremendous power in American public discourse. Certainly there have been more important skirmishes than Twitter shutting down that inspirational Tim Tebow mini-sermon the other day.

Many of my friends — as an Orthodox Christian layman — started paying close attention to this issue back in 2015 when a strategic set of cyber-lords informed these believers’ priests, all of a sudden, that they couldn’t put “Father” in front of their names on their Facebook pages.

This was part of a general policy about honorary titles of all kinds. But the title “Father” plays a different role in the lives of people in ancient Christian flocks. It’s not a professional title, it’s a sacramental title.

My own Orthodox godfather — the popular online scribe Father Stephen Freeman — responded by putting “(Father Stephen Freeman)” after his name. Other priests found clever ways to add their identity to the top of their Facebook pages. That, of course, doesn’t help people find their sites with searches for their actual names, including the word “Father.”

Like I said, there have been more consequential clashes between the Big Tech czars and religious believers, but that one was symbolic.

The key is that faith is part of daily life, for millions of folks. These days, social media software has a massive impact on how people live their lives. Thus, Big Tech is a powerful force in the lives of believers and their families. That’s why “Crossroads” host Todd Wilken and I talked about this week’s Big Tech Congressional hearings, during this week’s podcast (click here to tune that in).

So what were these hearings all about? Apparently, the answer to that question depended on one’s political ties. As I wrote the other day:

Democrats have their own reasons to be concerned about Big Tech, whose clout in the lives of modern Americans make the railroad tycoons of the Gilded Age look like minor-league players. These companies, after all, resemble digital public utilities more than mere Fortune 500 powerhouses.

Meanwhile, you know that — at some point — Republicans are going to roll out a long list of cases of viewpoint discrimination against cultural, moral, religious and — oh yeah — political conservatives.

So what happened, when the mainstream press covered the Hill showdown with the glowing digital images of Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, Google’s Sundar Pichai, Apple’s Tim Cook and Jeff Bezos of Amazon and The Washington Post?


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , ,

QAnon in pews: Two online conversations with evangelicals concerned about the surge

, , , , , , ,

Way too many churches have never been all that effective, when it comes to helping the faithful deal with the challenges of daily life in the modern world — especially those linked to technology and mass media.

Back when I was teaching at Denver Seminary, in the early 1990s, we were struggling to help future pastors and church leaders cope with cable television all of those TV screens in the typical family home.

Frankly, many people couldn’t grasp how this was linked to pastoral ministry and preaching. I kept asking: How do your people spend their time? Spend their money? Make their decisions? These questions are at the heart of discipleship and they point to the powerful role that mass media play in modern life.

Now there is the Internet. Those TVs still exist, but they are surrounded by dozens of other screens that serve as doors into cyberspace.

It appears that we may have a topic that has some — repeat “some” — church leaders concerned about all of those screens. They are beginning to hear from pastors who are concerned, scared even, about the rising presence of QAnon dogma in their pews. Many saw the important essay in The Atlantic that ran with this headline: “The Prophecies of Q — American conspiracy theories are entering a dangerous new phase.”

In an “On Religion” column about QAnon, I stressed that church leaders need to wake up and realize the role that mainstream and alternative news sources are playing in dividing their people — period.

The bottom line: Many newsrooms are producing slanted, advocacy journalism that millions of consumers consider a kind of “fake news.” This is pushing readers away from mainstream news and deep into online niches packed with folks pushing QAnon and other conspiracy theories. Thus, I wrote:

The question, as pandemic-weary Americans stagger into the 2020 elections, is how many believers in this voting bloc have allowed their anger about "fake news" to push them toward fringe conspiracy theories about the future of their nation.

Some of these theories involve billionaire Bill Gates and global coronavirus vaccine projects, the Antichrist's plans for 5G towers, Democrats in pedophile rings or all those mysterious "QAnon" messages. "Q" is an anonymous scribe whose disciples think is a retired U.S. intelligence leader or maybe even President Donald Trump.

The bitter online arguments sound like this: Are these conspiracies mere "fake news" or is an increasingly politicized American press — especially on politics and religion — hiding dangerous truths behind its own brand of "fake news"?

"A reflexive disregard of what are legitimate news sources can feed a penchant for conspiracy theories," said Ed Stetzer, executive director of the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College.

A few lines later, Stetzer added:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , ,

Got news? Some members of Class Of COVID-19 heard faith talk at commencement

, , , , , , , ,

The late spring is typically marked by graduation ceremonies, with schools across North America handing out their undergraduate degrees to students after four years of college. Like everything else in society that involves large gatherings, the global pandemic has forced many schools to either hold their ceremonies online or postpone them to a future date.

For the colleges and universities that did decide to hold ceremonies this month, the topic of God wasn’t far from the minds of some commencement speakers. It’s not surprising given how the contagion has led to the death of thousands of people around the world, forcing stores to shutter and in the process destroying economies.

Many institutions of higher education — especially Protestant and Catholic ones — have decided to postpone in-person graduation ceremonies to later this year in the hopes that coronavirus infections have either subsided or that a vaccine makes social distancing measures obsolete. Like classes that went online this spring, so did many commencement exercises. While it wasn’t the graduation ceremony many had expected, these remote ceremonies to honor seniors were seen as a necessary sendoff.

God and graduation isn’t a new thing, a topic highlighted by several speakers last year.

The son of a Pentecostal minister, Hollywood superstar Denzel Washington — speaking at Dillard University’s commencement in New Orleans in 2015 — famously said: “Number one: Put. God. First. Put God first in everything you do. Everything that you think you see in me. Everything that I’ve accomplished, everything that you think I have — and I have a few things. Everything that I have is by the grace of God. Understand that. It’s a gift.”

Below is a roundup of notable virtual commencement addresses that featured faith:

TOM HANKS (WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY)

Hollywood star Tom Hanks delivered a virtual commencement speech on May 2 during a surprise message to graduates of Wright State University in Dayton, Ohio.

The actor, who famously played the iconic Mister Rogers in the movie A Beautiful Day In The Neighborhood, was raised in Roman Catholic and Mormon household, and described himself as a “Bible-toting evangelical” during his teen-age years. Hanks, who became Greek Orthodox as an adult and attends church regularly, wasn’t afraid to use religious language in his message.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , ,

'Fake news' and the lure of conspiracy theories: Are evangelicals the only folks fooled?

, , , , , , , , ,
'Fake news' and the lure of conspiracy theories: Are evangelicals the only folks fooled?

A majority of evangelicals are worried about "fake news" and they also think mainstream journalists are part of the problem.

The question, as pandemic-weary Americans stagger into the 2020 elections, is how many believers in this voting bloc have allowed their anger about "fake news" to push them toward fringe conspiracy theories about the future of their nation.

Some of these theories involve billionaire Bill Gates and global coronavirus vaccine projects, the Antichrist's plans for 5G towers, Democrats in pedophile rings or all those mysterious "QAnon" messages. "Q" is an anonymous scribe whose disciples think is a retired U.S. intelligence leader or maybe even President Donald Trump.

The bitter online arguments sound like this: Are these conspiracies mere "fake news" or is an increasingly politicized American press -- especially on politics and religion -- hiding dangerous truths behind its own brand of "fake news"?

"A reflexive disregard of what are legitimate news sources can feed a penchant for conspiracy theories," said Ed Stetzer, executive director of the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College.

Many mainstream journalists do a fine job of covering the complex world of evangelicalism, stressed Stetzer, reached by email.

Nevertheless, he added: "I think that the bias of much of mainstream news has to be considered in this conversation. Many evangelicals have seen, over and over, news sources report on them irresponsibly, with bias, and -- at times -- with malice. When you see that enough, about people you know, there is a consequence. Regrettably, I don't think many in the mainstream news world are thinking, 'We should have done better.' "

It doesn't help that Americans disagree about the meaning of "fake news."


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Yahoo! podcast: Jon Ward offers lots of questions about evangelicals falling for QAnon

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

There is no “Crossroads” podcast during this short work week, but there is another GetReligion-related podcast for those with ears to hear.

Jon Ward, senior political correspondent for Yahoo! News, contacted me after seeing some of the social-media fallout from the recent trilogy of GetReligion posts about the Atlantic Monthly “Shadowland” project, especially the content about white evangelicals and the mysterious QAnon movement.

For those who missed them, those posts were: “The Atlantic probes QAnon sect and finds (#shocking) another evangelical-ish conspiracy,” “New podcast: The Atlantic needed to interview some evangelical leaders about QAnon heresy” and “Thinking about QAnon: Joe Carter sends strong warning to evangelicals about new heresy.”

If you have not followed his work over the years, Ward describes himself this way:

I write about politics, culture and religion. I'm pro-complexity, pro-nuance, and pro-context. I've covered two White Houses and two presidential elections. I'm the author of "Camelot's End," a book released in 2019 about the epic clash between Ted Kennedy and Jimmy Carter in 1980. I'm trying to understand how our politics is broken and how to fix it, and host a podcast on that topic called "The Long Game." I live in D.C. with my wife and our kids.

I ended up spending an hour-plus online with Ward, recording material for an episode of his “The Long Game” series.

The podcast that grew out of our conversation (“Religion reporter Terry Mattingly on White Evangelicals and the Qanon political cult”) in part of an effort by Ward to explore the broader world of conspiracy theory life, with some extra attention devoted to the anti-vaccine movement.

During our conversation, Ward noted that he grew up in evangelicalism (as did I, on the way to Eastern Orthodox Christianity). This entire discussion, he said, has reminded him of the famous book by historian Mark A. Noll entitled, “The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind”

Here is a key comment from Ward:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , ,

Thinking about QAnon: Joe Carter sends strong warning to evangelicals about new heresy

, , , , , , , , ,

This weekend’s think piece is, the final piece of a kind of evangelical-QAnon trilogy, in the wake of the must-read — even if you disagree with parts of it — “Shadowlands” package at The Atlantic Monthly.

By the way, I wonder if anyone in management at the Atlantic realized the religious implications that the term “Shadowland” would have for millions of C.S. Lewis readers. That’s the first thing I thought of when I saw the title. Just saying.

Early this week, I wrote a post about the “The Prophecies of Q” piece of the package and followed up with this week’s “Crossroads” podcast and post. In both, I argued that the Atlantic piece was essential reading — especially in terms of politics and technology. The religion angle — with QAnon as an essentially “evangelical” subculture — wasn’t as solid, in part because of next to zero input from evangelical leaders, including mainstream evangelical leaders, academics and writers who view QAnon as a dangerous heresy that catching on with some grassroots evangelicals. Thus, I argued:

It needed material drawn from major evangelical leaders who are concerned about QAnon and who can critique this trend, drawing on deep wells of evangelical history and doctrine. Baylor University historian Thomas Kidd leaps to mind, author of the recent book “Who Is an Evangelical? A History of a Movement in Crisis.” Or how about former GetReligionista Joe Carter of The Gospel Coalition? Karen Swallow Prior, now of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, is a well-known voice online.

Then again, Ed Stetzer — leader of the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College — has been writing about conspiracy thinking for several years now. Here is a chunk of a new piece, written with colleague Andrew MacDonald, at The Dallas Morning News. The headline: “Too many evangelical Christians fall for conspiracy theories online, and gullibility is not a virtue.”

The podcast post took a look at that Stetzer-MacDonald essay. Now, I would like to point readers toward a think piece at The Gospel Coalition by journalist Joe Carter (a former member of the GetReligion team). The headline: “The FAQs: What Christians Should Know About QAnon.”

Carter opens with one the key claims in the Atlantic piece: “To look at QAnon is to see not just a conspiracy theory but the birth of a new religion.” Carter then adds:


Please respect our Commenting Policy