As it seems we are entering into a new phase of dealing with the novel Coronavirus, new questions need to be answered even as old questions remain unanswered. Churches are developing plans to begin gathering together again. The way church leaders determine the prudence of holding worship in the church buildings cannot be the same way other organizations evaluate their next steps. The church has an opportunity to define what is essential about being a faith community and determine if there are different ways to live out those essentials. The dichotomy that I have observed is finding new socially distanced ways to do what has always been done vs. managing the risk of opening up sooner rather than later to get back to church as usual. I am suggesting another option; leveraging the continuing creativity of our faith communities to develop innovative ways to live out the essentials of the church.
Most of us have lived under some variety of stay-at-home orders for more than two months during the COVID-19 pandemic. Some have been more affected by these orders than others. I have been blessed with the ability to work from home during this period, which has sheltered me and my family from the difficulties that many others are enduring with the loss of jobs. I have been able to stay in contact with family and friends through technology, but many do not have the same luxury. I share my situation to say that I understand that there are many who are much more eager to end the various social distancing orders than I am due to the difference in our experiences. At the same time, I am someone who fits into the middle of the Venn Diagram memes going around social media which represents concern for the health, social, justice, and economic factors in play.
However one prioritizes the various concerns of enduring a pandemic, the fact is that many areas, including Indiana, are now progressing through a multi-phase process for “re-opening” and relaxing the social distancing mandates. We all have the responsibility to determine how we respond to the current realities in our communities as official policies are announced. Churches are one of the many organizations in the community that need to carefully navigate the tension on competing needs. The responsibilities and needs of the church are different than those of government and businesses, so it would not be prudent to simply apply the approach for one to all.
The essentials of business, government, and church are all quite different even if there is some broad categorical overlap. While each church has financial concerns that need to be managed, they are not the same as a business that needs to facilitate specific economic transactions. Indeed, the church provides necessary (spiritual) services, but these are not the same as public services for which communities rely on the government to fulfill. Identifying its essentials will aid in discerning the unique way forward for the church.
I do not claim to have the definitive definition of church, but it seems to me that a good place to start is with the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19-20). The church is outwardly oriented (“go”), to show others the way of Jesus (“make disciples”, “teach them”), uniting them to God and the Body of Christ through sacraments (“baptize”), in a life of worship (“in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”). These essentials have been practiced in many forms since the 1st Century. The church leaders of today are being tasked with writing the next chapter in this long history. If today’s church leaders are not bold enough to alter the comfortable pre-pandemic forms, they risk leaving the post-pandemic mission unfulfilled.
I have the privileged vantage point to see the ministry of many churches. Pastors and lay leadership are working hard to create new forms of ministry and learning new skills to meet the challenges of the moment. This has been hard work and holy work.
I am now seeing a transition from the work of stabilizing ministry in the midst of an unforeseen crisis to the next phases of enduring the consequences of a pandemic over the long term. One approach is that of higher caution, supported by using technology to continue the same basic pre-pandemic ministry models. For many churches this looks like permanent or long term plans for streaming live worship or distributing prerecorded services, moving Bible studies and small groups to video conferencing, phone trees to keep in touch with the less tech-savvy, and providing some regular devotions or teaching online. This approach funnels the current forms of church through technology and retains the focus on attracting people to one time/place/source for worship and discipleship using the current leadership. One of the challenges in this approach is maintaining these distanced relationships over a period of time. We are already hearing about video conferencing fatigue and I think it is likely that many of these technology based relationships will dissolve over time. Another challenge of this approach is being outward focused. Many churches are seeing increased engagement via social media. However, when the statistics are examined it often turns out that the raw numbers create the appearance of greater reach than is true. Even for those who are truly engaging the church for the first time via online options, many churches are not prepared to form lasting relationships with them through technology. The sacramental life of the church can also be difficult to facilitate with this approach.
Another approach I observe is one that places the priority in physically gathering together and accepting a higher rate of risk to the congregation. These churches are working hard on plans to minimize the risk of gathering together through social distancing requirements and robust cleaning procedures. One obvious challenge to this approach is that no matter what procedures are in place, larger gatherings are going to create more risk of infection. Secondly, these routines will be labour intensive, expensive, and hard to maintain in the long term. Third, there will be people who are not comfortable returning to large church gatherings for some time. It will be necessary to continue to keep these congregants connected and support their discipleship. This support might require a whole different set of ministry structures for a subset of the congregation. Lastly, we may encounter another period of stay-at-home orders in the future, which will require a shift back to the ministry practices of the current moment.
Both of the approaches above are the result of leadership wanting to meet the needs of the congregations and living God’s mission in the way they think is best. Yet, I believe both of these approaches are neglecting a rare opportunity. Creativity and innovation has been necessary to get through the initial phase of the crisis and prepare for the coming phases. I am suggesting that church leadership continue to be creative and innovative in taking a step beyond maintaining or returning to familiar norms. This is a time for new questions about living out the mission of the church, and listening for the needs that are emerging and the needs that have gone unnoticed or unaddressed for some time. There is an unusual openness and freedom to try truly new forms of ministry as we engage a (God willing) once in a lifetime event. There are three steps that churches can take right now to seize the moment.
The first step is to renew efforts for engaging the community. New needs are emerging and remaining needs are being amplified. A time of intentional listening is in order to discern where God is moving and calling the church to in the community. Who are the people that are hurting the most, but getting the least air time? Who are those trying to do good in this moment, but are facing increasing challenges? Who are lonely and disconnected? If you do not know, who does? The answers to these questions reveal opportunities for the church to make new relationships with people in the community by addressing current and ongoing needs. Part of the creative process will be to engage the community in new or modified ways to safely meet needs and build relationships.
Secondly, considering new forms of gathering is not only prudent, but will make the church (the Body gathered) more accessible and inviting to a larger demographic. Gathering in small groups in homes of congregants or available third spaces is a reduced health risk compared to large gatherings in enclosed sanctuaries. There is a large church in the Indiana Conference that has developed a plan to divide up the congregation into neighborhood based micro-churches until it is safe for the vast majority of the congregation to gather together. The church building, staff, and leadership will be used to equip, resource, and connect the ongoing ministry in the distributed congregation. Churches following this model could create a rotation to offer Communion at the various gatherings. This is only one example of new forms of gathering. Such a gathering structure is practical for this time, but it is also a system that can continue to support discipleship and mission after worship gatherings return to something like normal. There are certainly other creative ways to gather together in ways that have minimal risk of exposure and support a robust faith community. I am eager to see what innovations different congregations develop.
With new forms of gathering comes the need for matching new forms of worship and discipleship. Many of the innovations already implemented by churches to provide worship experiences, teaching, and connection can be deployed alongside new forms of gathering. One combination some churches are already deploying is encouraging the congregation to gather in smaller groups to watch the worship live stream or recorded services. There is an opportunity to take another step in this direction by exploring interactive forms of worship. This type of worship experience offers preaching and teaching along with immediate opportunities to process and discern application of the Gospel. Facebook groups and other similar technology can be used to continue those conversations to support and encourage perseverance in living out the preaching and teaching. These tools can also be used to connect with people encountered while engaging with the community, introducing them to life-giving participation in Chrisitian community. The variety of potential versions of this worship approach are nearly endless and will reflect the varied contexts of local congregations.
The approach that I have described above is not meant to replace worship gatherings of the whole congregation. We all share in the desire to be able to gather together in our church buildings with minimal risk to congregants. At the same time, the above approach is not meant to be a stop-gap measure to be discarded after we are able to gather together. The innovative forms which provide for the essentials of church will continue to be effective for discipleship and mission after the pandemic subsides. In fact, I believe these new forms are the first fruits of increasingly common and effective forms of church. Now is the time to hear a new word from God, learn new skills, and equip new leaders. The effort put into discernment, creativity, and innovation now will provide a foundation for continuing the mission Jesus has given the church in the emerging cultural context.