It's Monday, and I hope every one of you believers went to church yesterday. That got me to thinking. In 2020, COVID made its appearance, bringing radical shifts in everyday thinking. People still wear masks and distance themselves. Many continue to work from home because of COVID’s influence. Surveys suggest that around 20% of churchgoers now choose to watch services via live streaming rather than attend in person. And that’s where I stop and think, “Is that reasonable?”
The statistics on self‑professed Christians who “attend church” by watching a video reveal a mindset about the purpose of the church, and it’s not just a COVID‑era issue. For as long as I can remember, many people “attended church” by going to a Sunday service and then going home. So why not skip the “going” and stay home in these busy days?
So we have to ask: What is the purpose of the church?
First and foremost, the church is the gathering of God’s people, designed “for the praise of His glory” (Eph. 1:12). No question about it (1 Cor 10:31). The church is responsible for teaching sound doctrine and equipping believers (Eph. 4:11–12). That is, singing isn’t the main event. Neither are the sermons. Transformation is the point, supported by those—and more. And worship isn't a "Sunday morning" thing; it's everyday sacrificing of self (Rom 12:1).
The early church met daily for teaching, fellowship, breaking of bread, and prayer (Acts 2:42). Theirs was a spiritual family—sharing life, bearing burdens, and practicing love (Gal. 6:2; 1 Pet. 4:8). Paul says each believer is given a gift of the Spirit “for the common good” (1 Cor. 12:7). The author of Hebrews considers gathering mandatory for stimulating one another to love and encouraging one another (Heb. 10:23–25).
So I ask you: How can we attend a service, disappear, and call it “gathering” or “stimulating one another” to anything but selfish living? How much actual fellowship takes place in a typical church service? How much exercising of our gifts occurs in a Sunday morning service—especially one attended only online?
COVID was a bad thing, but worse than the illness is the mindset that remains. It has exposed an underlying problem in the church that existed long before COVID. We don’t have a robust notion of the purpose of the church, so we don’t mind staying home and watching from a distance—or "hit and run" attendance.
But the Bible represents God’s people as “the body of Christ” (1 Cor. 12:27; Rom. 12:5; Eph. 4:12; Col. 1:24). We are God’s adopted children (Rom. 8:15–17; Gal. 4:4–7; Eph. 1:5), a family. And the Great Commission wasn’t merely to make converts; it was to make disciples, “teaching them to observe all that I commanded you” (Matt. 28:18–20). That's a long-term, up-close-and-personal task.
The church is so much more than “a Sunday song and sermon,” and our failure to grasp that has done great harm to the body of Christ.
3 comments:
I agree with your larger premise. Humans were created for in person community, Zoom is a poor substitute for that in person community.
Yet, I think of our seniors who are unable to attend and how streaming allows them to continue to take part in at least some of the life of the church. Or I anticipate an upcoming surgery and the fact that I'll likely live stream until I can go in person.
I think that we would probably agree that the technology is not the problem and that there are some instances where it can be a good thing. I also think that we'd agree that the problem is in the hearts of those who use the tech as an excuse to be lazy.
The question seems to be "How does a church strongly encourage engagement and in person attendance, while simultaneously providing live streaming for those who have no other option?".
Yes, Craig, I had that thought in my mind, too. I understand that there are a few homebound who need something like it. Except ... there have ALWAYS been homebound people. How did they get by before live streaming? I would suggest that, in the past, real people went to see them and fellowship with them and we've allowed "live streaming" to take the place of that because we've largely forgotten what church is.
I'm not suggesting that live streaming can totally replace personal human interaction, or that it should. I am suggesting that it is a tool that many (my grandmother springs to mind) find to be very valuable. Granted her version of live streaming was to watch one of the local churches with a TV broadcast, but the point remains. That, plus home visits, allowed her to very much participate in the life of the church. The church I attend also puts a high value on both live streaming, and visiting those who are unable to leave their homes.
Like many things, it seems less about the technology than about the hearts of those who use the tech.
As noted in my question, "How does a church strongly encourage engagement and in person attendance while providing alternatives for those who are unable to attend?". Supplement, not replace.
Post a Comment