It’s been nearly nine years since former Newsweek religion editor Lisa Miller warned that advances in technology could demolish the 2000-year-old Christian Church. The advent of Bible apps for tablets and smartphones, Miller argued, amounted to a “new crisis for organized religion” whereby “believers can bypass constraining religious structures – otherwise known as “church” – in favor of a more individual connection with God.”
Prophetic predictions of the demise of the Christian Church have almost become a tradition among religious writers. As with the others, Miller’s has amounted to naught.
Instead of having a completely negative effect on the Christian religion, technology has become an empowerment tool for both pastors and parishioners. Online versions of the Bible are one factor people point to when citing reasons for increased engagement with the Good Book. But on the other side of the pulpit, technology is now empowering pastors to minister more effectively.
According to a Barna Group survey, 97 percent of pastors now use the Internet to find information compared with 78 percent in 2000. Thirty-nine percent of pastors said they had a spiritual or religious experience via the Internet while only 15 percent said the same in 2000. The only surveyed function of technology that did not grow among pastors over the same period was using the Internet to play video games. As it turns out, your pastor isn’t playing Minecraft when he or she should be preparing a sermon.
The survey also showed that pastors are warming to the idea that it is “theologically acceptable for a church to provide faith assistance or religious experiences through the internet.” Eighty-seven percent of pastors polled said they agree with that statement. Only 8 percent of pastors considered websites and Internet activities to be a distraction and more than half said the Internet “is a powerful tool for effective ministry.”
“Most church leaders realize the potential for continued connection with members and visitors alike through the Internet—from podcasts, to social media, to blogs, to sermon discussion questions and even community prayer requests,” said Roxanne Stone, a Vice-President at Barna Group. “No matter the church’s size, location or demographic, the Internet has become and will continue to be a vital tool for connection, outreach and even spiritual formation.”
Websites, in particular, have proven to be a powerful tool for churches and ministries. It increases their ability to collect charitable donations for critical community ministry projects and has provided a low-pressure way to connect with potential converts. Of the 1.6 million conversions recorded by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association (BGEA) in 2014, only 15,000 did so in person. In less than four years, BGEA has recorded more than five million conversions online. And according to BGEA’s Internet evangelism director–yes, that’s a thing–more than 20,000 individuals view a “gospel presentation” per day via their sites.
BGEA isn’t the only one pursuing evangelism online. Global Outreach Media, originally launched as part of Campus Crusade for Christ (now Cru), recorded more than 30 million conversions online in 2014. One can assume that some of these conversions do not lead to long-term commitments to the Christian faith. But if only a tiny percentage of BGEA and Global Outreach’s are legitimate, these numbers are still significant.
But technology’s effect on spirituality and ministry is not all positive. Technology can shift ministers’ attention from substance to style as they become concerned about logos and websites and the fonts and backgrounds projected on worship screens. Technology makes it easier for ministry leaders and parishioners to access spiritually damaging materials, such as pornography and half-baked theological ideas. And, as I’ve argued elsewhere, I think the advent of fully online church “campuses” is a net negative.
Stone acknowledges technology’s potential to replace many of the local church’s functions in believer’s lives and, in so doing, will require ministry leaders to assess and emphasize the aspects of church that can’t be replaced by the Internet.
“You can hear a great sermon or your favorite worship music or even share a sense of community with like-minded believers online,” she said. “So what does the physical church offer that the Internet can’t? You can’t take communion online. You can’t physically serve others together online. You can post your #ashtag picture, but you can’t have those ashes administered online. In a virtual age, it will be important for churches to place a renewed emphasis on those tangible, corporal activities as a significant reason to come to church.”
Lisa Miller was partially correct. Technology does have a shadow side and could very well weaken organized religion if not properly stewarded. But it has not proven thus far to be the usher of doomsday Miller predicted. So long as the Internet remains less powerful than “the gates of hell,” we should expect the Church to persevere.
Like most advances in human knowledge, technology comes to us as a mixed bag with the message: “handle with care.”
Author’s note: The Barna data cited above included telephone surveys of pastors in two nationwide studies conducted by Barna Group among a nationally representative sample of senior pastors of Protestant churches.
A state appellate court has declined to overturn the conviction and five-year prison sentence of Crystal Mason, a Tarrant County woman who cast a provisional ballot in the 2016 election while on supervised release for a federal conviction.
A three-judge panel of the Fort Worth appeals court on Thursday affirmed a trial court’s judgment of illegal voting, a second-degree state felony. Her lawyersindicated they will seek a review of the case by the full state 2nd District Court of Appeals.
Mason’s case dates to 2016, when she submitted a provisional ballot for the 2016 presidential election on the advice of a poll worker. A month later, she learned that her ballot had been rejected, and a few months after that, she was arrested. Because she was on supervised release, prosecutors argued, she had knowingly violated a law that prohibits felons from voting before completing their sentences. Mason insisted she had no idea officials considered her ineligible — and would never have risked her freedom if she had.
Her vote was never counted.
Her appeal turned on narrow legal questions — did a person vote (illegally or otherwise) if her vote didn’t count? — but her cause has put Mason at the center of a battle over the vote and the safe harbor provisional ballots are intended to provide.
Created in 2002, provisional ballots are meant to allow people to record their votes even amid questions about eligibility. Tens of thousands of provisional ballots are cast in large elections, and most are rejected.
In Tarrant County, where Mason lives, nearly 4,500 provisional ballots were cast in 2016, and 3,990 were rejected — but only she faced criminal prosecution. In fact, Mason’s lawyer told a three-judge panel in North Texas last September, hers is the first known instance of an individual facing criminal charges for casting a ballot that ultimately didn’t count.
“These are difficult times for me, but I have faith that with the help of my family and God, right will prevail,” Mason said in a statement released Friday by her lawyers. “A punishment of five years in jail for doing what I thought was my civic duty, and just as I was getting my family’s life together, is not simply unfair, it’s a tragedy.”
Prosecutors have insisted they’re not criminalizing individuals who merely vote by mistake and say that Mason’s case is about intent. Her conviction hinged on an affidavit she signed before casting her provisional ballot.
At her trial, the judge convicted her of voting illegally after a poll worker testified he had watched Mason read, and run her finger along, each line of an affidavit that required individuals to swear that “if a felon, I have completed all my punishment including any term of incarceration, parole, supervision, period of probation, or I have been pardoned.” Mason said she did not read that side of the paper.
Mason was still under supervised release for a federal conviction. She was indicted in 2011 for helping clients at her tax preparation business falsify expenses and claim improper exemptions to lower their tax bills.
Her lawyers argue that the law is murky. Texas law allows convicted felons to vote once they’ve completed their “sentence,” including any “parole or supervision.” But it’s not clear that federal “supervised release” lines up with “supervision” under that law, Mason’s lawyers argue.
The three-judge panel did not see any ambiguity. “The fact that she did not know she was legally ineligible to vote was irrelevant to her prosecution,” Justice Wade Birdwell wrote in the court’s opinion. “The State needed only to prove that she voted while knowing of the existence of the condition that made her ineligible.”
“The decision to prosecute is, in most cases, beyond this court’s capacity to review,” the opinion said. “Likewise, ours is not to question an unambiguous statute’s wisdom but rather to apply it as written.”
Such a one is like a tree planted by water-streams
That brings forth its fruit in season
And those whose leaf does not wither
Whatever this one does prospers.
Is this the doctrine of some strange Asian religion? The teachings of some self-proclaimed guru? You might be surprised to learn that this description of the power of meditation comes from Psalm 1 in the Hebrew Scriptures and is attributed to Israel’s great King David.
What compelled David to devote himself to meditative practice? Finding his personal life in turmoil, David sought, as many people of all faiths do today, a sense of peace and an enhanced ability to cope with troubles. Initial meditative or contemplative sessions often bring this kind of relief.
Even at the very beginning stages, most meditators discover a sense of something beyond mere respite. They find, as the Prophet Elijah did in the cave at Sinai, that”a still, small voice “speaks to them. It is a voice that seems to transcend religious differences.
The writer and former Taoist monk Deng Ming-Dao likens the meditative experience to a cave: “In a cave all outer sounds are smothered by rock and earth, but this makes the sounds of one’s own heartbeat and breath audible. In the same way, contemplative stillness turns us away from everyday clamor but allows us to hear the subtle in our own lives.” When I began experimenting with meditation as a teenager, I was typically ambivalent. Meditation felt good, but it was also very hard to remain attentive and undistracted. In fact, I gave it up for years. Unlike David, who turned to meditation after suffering rejection and betrayal, I was not broken or desperate enough to keep to a practice. Only after studying and contemplating religious scriptures and gaining a stronger connection to the extraordinary world of spirit did I resume a regular practice.
The Rig Veda, one of Hinduism’s sacred texts, paints a picture of the human metaphysical condition-some would say dilemma-in the story of two birds. The dearest of friends, the birds sit on branches of the same tree. One is incessantly occupied with pecking and eating the fruits dangling there. By these acts of destruction and consumption, the bird participates in the process of dying and living. The other bird simply witnesses and contemplates, uninvolved and unconcerned with consequences. Our nature is, like the first bird, taken up with the business of survival and material concerns. Yet, our nature is also spiritual; like the other bird, we must be in a different place to realize it.
Meditation removes us from the momentary, anxious world where we normally live and brings us to the timeless, serene world of the divinely empowered. Historically this experience was reserved for a select few-shamans, royalty, priestesses and priests, prophets, and acknowledged religious leaders.
Today, it is an open possibility. Meditation books and classes abound, and the Internet buzzes with discussion groups. People can choose from a variety of meditation instructions from Aboriginal to Zen. Dhyani Ywahoo, a Cherokee”wisdom-keeper “who teaches Native American and Buddhist meditation, extracts the essence: “Meditation practice … creates a still pool upon which your nature is reflected. As you continue, the emotions race less and less and the mind becomes transparent. Then begin to clarify channels within … that the sacred wisdom fire may manifest. Whether we refer to the inclusiveness of mind as Great Spirit, Buddha-mind, Christ-mind, Allah, or by another name, essentially there is one truth underlying … the undescribable.” This is the transformative potential of meditative practice. It centers the body in a state of restfulness and acceptance. It provides a breathing space from emotional disturbance. It allows goodwill and love to dwell again in our hearts. It clears the mind and opens receptive channels to universal wisdom and illumination.
The power of meditation is, blessedly, cumulative. Later in his life, David testified to this in Psalm 119, proclaiming: “O, how I love your teaching! … I know more … for your ways are my meditation.”
Just last week, it seemed OK to have lunch out or maybe meet up with friends for a game of pickup soccer.
Now, in the fast-moving world of the coronavirus response, that’s no longer the case. More and better social distancing is required. But what’s still acceptable?
We reached out to public health experts, who, admittedly, vary in their recommendations. But their main message remains: The better individuals are now at social distancing to slow transmission of the virus, the better off we’ll all be eventually.
Already, California has told people 65 and older to stay at home. In the San Francisco Bay Area, where community spread is a growing concern, just about everyone else has been ordered to do so, too. California is also among the states that have ordered restaurants, gyms and other facilities to close. And the Trump administration has instructed Americans to avoid gatherings of more than 10 people for the next 15 days and avoid sit-down meals in bars, restaurants and food courts. More restrictions from states, localities and the federal government could follow.
In the coming days, those rules and recommendations may expand as federal, state and local health officials weigh conditions on the ground. So what to do now?
“We ought to make risk-based decisions,” said Dr. Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association.
Expect change. Maybe daily. But also take a deep breath. Some things are still all right.
“At the end of the day, we have to take care of our kids, our family, we have to eat,” said Benjamin. “What people ought to do is think about how best to reduce risk and do as many less risky things as they can.”
So what about walking around the neighborhood?
“Yes, but not in groups,” said Benjamin, who added that he would wave at his neighbors while out for a stroll but “would not have a long conversation.”
If you do chat outside, maintain 6 feet of separation.
Dinner parties? Food for those shut in their homes?
“Inviting people over depends on whether or not they have symptoms, whether they have traveled overseas,” Benjamin suggested. “I would not have a BBQ on my deck with a bunch of people.”
If you bring food to a shut-in or a neighbor, “leave it on the porch,” he said, and always, always make sure you wash your hands before preparing the meal.
In a blog post titled “Social distancing: This is not a snow day,” Dr. Asaf Bitton, an assistant professor at the T.H. Chan School of Public Health at Harvard, takes a hard line, recommending no play dates or sleepovers for children. No sharing of toys with other families. Even playing outside with other kids is a no-go “if that means direct physical contact” such as in basketball or soccer.
Limit trips to stores. Cooking food at home, he wrote, is less risky than takeout. Don’t have other families over for dinner.
School closings won’t slow transmission if parents allow close play dates, or even activity on playgrounds, said Elizabeth Stuart, a professor of mental health, biostatistics and health policy at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, in an interview with KHN.
Playgrounds are a problem because they put children, and their watching parents, in close proximity. There is also a chance the virus could remain on surfaces.
But some people need more flexible guidelines, especially those with young children or those who can’t work from home, such as health care workers.
For them, a “closed-network strategy” might work, Stuart, two epidemiologists and a health policy expert wrote in a piece that ran in USA Today.
That means a small, trusted circle can continue to interact while creating social distance from outsiders. If any member of an individual family within that circle, however, exhibits symptoms, the entire family should isolate — and let everyone else in their circle know.
“The ideal situation is everyone stays home, but that’s just not a reality for a lot of people,” Stuart said in an interview with KHN.
She said friends have asked what to do in specific situations, such as deciding whether a teenager should babysit for another family.
The key, she said, “is to think of the number of unique people you come in contact with.”
Each case involves a judgment call — and an element of risk. Maybe two families share child care, or a teenager babysits for one family. But the teen does not sit for 10 families, she said.
Bitton, in his column, took a tougher stance.
“Even if you choose only one friend to have over, you are creating new links and possibilities for the type of transmission that all of our school/work/public event closures are trying to prevent,” he wrote.
Do get outside every day, he wrote, as “it will be important during these strange times,” but “stay physically away from others.”
Marcus Plescia, the chief medical officer for the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, agreed.
“We encourage people to go out and exercise, but in a solitary way. Your pickup soccer game, because of a lot of close contact, no. But maybe tennis because there’s a big distance from you and another player,” he said.
Maintain that 6-foot distance, whether outside or if you invite someone into your home, he said. If people come over, wipe down surfaces after they leave. And always wash your hands.
These recommendations — and the stricter ones being imposed in some cities, like San Francisco — are vitally important, Plescia said.
“Social distancing works. If we do it, we can keep the spread from going up. We can get ahead of this and slow it down,” he said.
My United Methodist church, along with many other churches of all denominations, announced it would be closing its doors for at least a month, maybe two. I felt such a loss. Yes, I know people are going to church everywhere nowadays — in movie theaters, houses, cafes, etc. But for me, going to church is where I visit my second family unplugged. It’s a refuge from all the crazy that comes my way from 9-5 p.m., Monday through Friday. This past weekend, my church tried online streaming of the service for the first time. Keep in mind that our congregation is a tad on the older end — READ: Lots of grey hair. Yeah, it was…okay. I suggested to my mom, who is among the decision-makers of what to do, that they consider entirely rethinking how they reach out to people online. You can’t just throw a camera up and do what you’ve always done. The experience needs to be more personal — or at least tailored to the digital audience. That got me thinking. Which churches do that well? Where can any of us go on Sunday, or any day of the week, to get our worship on during this Coronavirus pandemic? The Urban Faith team asked friends, family, and Facebook members. Below are 10 great options that were recommended by our online community. Some are Black churches, others are mixed. Get your praise on and take a moment to offer up prayers for those who are sick and suffering.
