Andrew Careaga has written two books, E-vangelism and eMinistry discussing the church's use of the internet in ministry. He will be speaking at Search Party 2002 next May and has a lot to say about using the Net to develop community, evangelize, and disciple. To begin the conversation about the use of the internet in the church, Rob recently did a phone interview with Andrew. We hope you enjoy it!
Rob: Just to kick into this thing, then... First question I had - The forward of your book, e-Ministry has a pretty huge endorsement from Leonard Sweet, and I quote: "Its a world wide web world and there is no better [advocate] than Andrew Careaga. If the archangel, Gabriel, came down and told us about a new church for a new world, I can't imagine how he would've said it any differently. To which I say, "Wow!".
Andrew: Yeah, that's what I said too.....
So, I guess the question, then, is how did you get you get to this place in your journey and what in the heck fuels you to be pouring all of your efforts into this virtual area of cyberspace ministry?
Sure. Well, first of all, I'm not pouring all of my efforts into it, but I have invested a significant amount of time into the whole area of cyber-ministry. I got interested in it as a novice computer user back in the early '90's and discovering on my own some discussions about religion online. And I found out that a lot of people were really spending time there having some interesting conversations about theology, religion, beliefs, philosophy, and related subjects, and that it was going largely ignored by a lot of people in ministry at that time. Simply because, I think for the most part, churches in general and church leaders in general were not aware of this venue where the conversation was happening. It just wasn't on their radar screen, and it still isn't for many.
Yeah, absolutely. I'm amazed by how many people kind of look at you cross-eyed.
Right. So I got interested in this as a novice computer user. I also was a freelance writer and explored this as a possible topic for some articles. I did write an article on internet evangelism, and also one on pastors in cyberspace for a couple of different magazines early on. The article on internet evangelism spurred me on to look at that in a broader sense and that is what birthed the first book, E-vangelism. That was sort of a hybrid book. I'm not sure I would do it the same way today. I tried to write kind of write a how-to manual as well as provide some sort of survey of what was going on out there online, what Christians and churches were already doing on the internet to share the Gospel. So I sort of combined those two ideas into the book to provide not only a how-to but also a look as to what was going on. And I guess a third point was to help people understand that there was a legitimate need in cyberspace to reach the lost.
So, in this new book, e-Ministry, who do you view writing it to? And - maybe you've already answered the other question - why?
The audience for this book is the church in general with a specific emphasis on those involved in ministry, whether it is youth ministry, generation X ministry, or postmodern ministry, or just ministry in general. I think the people that seem to grasp the ideas are the "youngers", the younger generations, the "natives" as Len Sweet calls them rather than the "immigrants", people like me who are too old and haven't really grown up with the computer and the internet, but have had to sort of learn as we go along. So I guess I'm writing to a bit of a younger audience than myself. But I'm hoping I can bridge a bit of the generational gap there. Also, - I guess I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth here because I do want.......
Well, its definitely a wake-up call. It sounds like everything in the book is speaking to the immigrants, as it were, and saying you'd better wake up here.....
Well, that's definitely true and I guess one of the things that I hope to accomplish is to help to wake up some people who are established and haven't even considered this as a possibility. I hope that's happening. It seems that it has been more well received, though, by the natives - the ones I have spoken to anyway.
Right. You end up preaching to the choir.
Yeah, to some extent, but maybe we can use this information as ammunition to continue to try to convert the others.
Well, its kind of like best practices in business. You never know where the information is going to filter to in the future. Somebody will pick the book up two years from now and, granted, they will be behind the curve, but it can be an aid to help them catch up.
Exactly. That's a good point.
Let me ask you this... We use a term that I heard first from Bob Roberts, a pastor in Texas, and he coined the phrase "glocal". Global plus local equals glocal ministry. And you say that cyberspace can link the local church to the world in new and exciting ways. Do you see this as merely a web presence or more of a new type of collaboration of churches globally? What are you seeing there?
Well, its definitely much more than a web presence and I think that too often we confine our thoughts about the internet to the world wide web. 'Oh, let's put up a web page and we'll be doing ministry on the internet'. That's not it at all. The internet is such a new, interactive, two-way communications medium and also a community that we need to understand: it is like the global marketplaces of old where travelers would come and visit and talk about their journeys and so forth. Its a place where people are having conversations and discussions.
What a great picture.
I can't take credit for that picture, unfortunately. That was something that Christopher Locke and some others wrote in a book called the Clue Train Manifesto where they come up with 95 theses. The very first thesis is that markets are conversations. I fully agree with that idea. I actually had that idea, but I just didn't articulate it that well in my original thinking. I have always viewed the internet as online marketplace, a global marketplace. One in which the church needs to be very prevalent. We have to go beyond the idea that we can put up a website and we'll be present in cyberspace. The web is still, by and large, a passive medium in many ways. We still have to wait for someone to stumble across our site. With churches, the sites are designed for members or other Christians and not necessarily for people who are out there seeking spiritual guidance, but perhaps not interested in traditional church.
That's endemic of the four-wall mentality. It bleeds right to the website.
That's exactly right. So, I think the church needs to be more be more active in using the interactive part of the internet to engage in conversations whether that's through forums or through chat, instant messaging and so forth. I really think we're going to see more happening with instant messaging and interactive conversations online. Now that can happen through the web, and it is happening through the web quite a bit, but it means that we're going to have to do more than just develop a passive website that simply lists our times of service and so forth.
Well, its a commitment of time and resources.
That's exactly right. And one reason I think much of the success that's happening with the church [on the internet] really isn't with the institutional church but with individual Christians who are just going out onto internet relay chat or some other network and having discussions with people and sharing their faith with individuals. But really, I think a lot of that is ignored or the church is simply unaware of it.
That segues well into the next question which is in regards to "digital discipleship", a term that you use in your book. Can you define that for us? Is anyone really running with that ball? And apart from that, what are the possibilities you see for that?
Well, I think if we try to understand what discipleship means, a lot of times we look at it in the context of what churches do with discipleship and whether anyone's really running with the ball in churches. Sometimes I wonder if, really, we're as effective at discipleship in our traditional church world as we could be.
Its very difficult to quantify. There's many challenges in the online world and one is that there is a layer removed in terms of having some sort of accountability with people because you can choose to turn off your computer at any time and you can choose to stay out of touch with people and we are still separated by distance as well as other things. So those can be seen as barriers to discipleship. At the same time, the whole issue of anonymity can also be seen as an advantage sometimes in sharing the faith or connecting with people.
Right. I'm not asking you for anything, so I can speak validly into your life because you're not attending a service in a building and fearing that I'm going to ask for money or something.
Right. We haven't figured out a way to pass a collection plate in a chat room yet. But once we do, though, look out! But you're exactly right. There is a tendency for walls to break down. People tend to be more honest, perhaps. I go back to Leonard Sweet's whole idea of the double-ring where you have [two] opposing, seemingly contradictive things hanging in the balance. At one time you can have more honesty online, but at the same time people are freer to play with the personalities and, perhaps, adopt a different persona online simply because of that anonymity. So, sometimes you're not really sure who you're dealing with or what you're dealing with, so it requires discernment, I believe. And we do need to be discerning online.
Well, it sounds like the right place to be. I've often thought that when you're at the right place in the Kingdom, you're in the center point between two places of tension.
That's correct. I like that.
Sovereignty of God and free will of man, for example. Let me ask you this.... You say there's a new kind of church emerging to attend. Some people would have a real problem describing a chat room as a church service and its participation as attendance. We tend to think of face-to-face contact. If we're an "immigrant", we tend to think of roll call. But you call this the "church of the disembodied". The house church movement in America never really took off, at least not yet. It almost sounds like you're skipping past that and describing a computer monitor church.
Yeah. I guess it depends on how we are defining church. I like Bob Roberts definition of "glocal". Both global and local becoming glocal. I think one thing the internet does and the whole idea of the "congregation of the disembodied" is that it gives us an opportunity to expand our idea of church. I am, by no means, advocating that people drop out of their local church. In fact, I would hope that by participating in an online church, or meeting, if you prefer that term, that it can strengthen involvement in the local church. One analogy that I like to use is that of the flight simulator for pilots. Of course, before they get into an aircraft and pilot it, they practice on a flight simulator quite a bit. I think for young people who are growing up in this medium of a simulated environment, a chat room could be considered a church simulator, perhaps, or an evangelism simulator. People could go online and practice evangelism methods in chat rooms, an environment that is perhaps safer, less threatening than face to face and could use that to hone their skills of witnessing and could take what their learning in the virtual environment and using it in the real, in the material world.
Getting back to the first part of your comment. It sounded to me like you were talking about someone journeying in their faith. And maybe my mind was running ahead, but until that last statement I was actually thinking of the non-Christian experimenting, moving forward. And that fits so well with all of the verbiage in these discussions about the move from propositional acceptance to a journey, experiential, interactive truth. Coming to truth more slowly and by experience, so that would fit really well.
Right, and I think one of the huge advantages of the internet is the fact that it does foster a sense of community among many people. Now, there are some people who would have a problem with that idea too, the idea of a virtual community.
But for a native, its almost not virtual, its natural.
Right. And there are some natives, many I would contend, that have many they would consider to be close friends whom they have never met face to face.
I noticed that in the acknowledgements in your book. You mentioned some people that you had never met, but acknowledged as contributing to your book.
Yes, and there are many. I did a survey as part of this book and for an article I did for Group magazine. Its by no means a scientific survey. I was contacting young people who were involved in discussion forums on Usenet. I was trying to contact online Christians who were active in an online forum. One of the questions I would ask them is about how many friends they had online or did they consider them to be close friends or acquaintances or so forth, even though they had never met them face to face.
In your mind, does the new millennia simply tool the church up with a new outreach mechanisms, broadening what some would call outreach programs or do you see it more as a new age that represents a need for the church to more completely retool?
That's a good question. I think it represents both. I think it certainly is an outreach opportunity, but I think it is something that will affect the church in the future. Something that I did try to articulate in the book was that, if we are going to be relevant to the lives of the people we are here to serve, we have to understand how they think, how they receive information, how they process information, etc. The internet is dramatically affecting that. When you think about a teenager who comes home from school and gets online and has seven or eight different instant messaging screens open on her computer, she's processing information in a very non-linear fashion. I've tried to have conversations online. About three or four is the most I can muster and even then, its just a little too confusing for me. Its just a different way of processing information and that does get back to the shift you were referring to: being less focused on the traditional apologetic approach, the foundational truth, step-by-step, four spiritual laws type of approach. Looking more at relational evangelism and developing relationships. Again, the internet is a powerful tool, I believe, for developing relationships. Many people go online because they crave relationships and crave intimacy, frankly, and that's why some of the cyber-sex sites are so popular. So those are some of the things the church has to acknowledge.
I'm speaking in general terms about the church - I don't think we've done very a good job recognizing the impact of the internet on people's lives. I think it is more deeply engrained in people's lives than we realize sometimes. And people use it in different ways. Some of the "immigrants" may use it more for a research tool or as a communications tool whereas "natives" may use it more as a tool for building community.
Its interesting you say that. Advocates for small group ministries say you can't be a church that has small groups, you have to be a church of small groups. The same here. Not a church with a web presence, but a church that's on the web. Its more indigenously ingrained in it.
What would you say the ideal or "nirvana" web-based church or church ministry... What does that look like to you?
I think it would probably be one in which people were actively involved in having these conversations with people who are on the internet, people who are part of this internet culture. So that really means becoming indigenous, becoming part of the cyber-culture. Getting into it, not just as a church, but as people. Jesus came, was incarnated, became like one of us and came to reach us in that way. It scares people sometimes to hear me talk like this. It scares myself sometimes. But to think of the online culture as an actual world, a place where people are present. A place that is inhabited and a place where we need to be Christ incarnate, even though we are disembodied. I guess you can't really be incarnate, if you take my phrase literally, but we certainly can be present and be involved. I think we need to move beyond that whole idea that if you just put up a website, they will come.
We need to be involved in conversations going on online. That might mean getting our hands dirty a little bit when we go out there. Talking to people and talking about issues that are relevant to cyber-culture that may not be relevant to our traditional church culture. For example, everybody has a hobby. Whether you ride Harley's or something, there is a discussion group out there in which you can participate. You might be rubbing elbows with Hell's Angels, but online you might have a better chance of striking up a conversation about spiritual matters than you might have in a face to face conversation. That's just one example of how we might need to get in there and get our hands dirty and be relevant to the culture.
I think we need to look at creating websites that aren't so much focused on "here's our church", "here's our service times", and so forth. Again, looking at the people who are online and what they're looking for, is that important to them? A lot of times I think we're creating a website to please ourselves or please our board, but not really the people we hope to reach. So I guess "doing church" on the internet is going to require a big change in the way that we do church. We're going to have to look at things differently than we have in the past. Is my purpose for being online to attract more members to increase giving, or am I out here to really engage the culture?
I see a lot of this. Its striking at the power-base in a very real way, a very tangible way. It strikes against the power-base of the current church culture.
A gentleman was speaking at an educational conference once about the power of the internet. He had a great quote. He said, "We're in the middle of a revolution, and in revolutions, kings lose their heads. We need to think like a peasant." And I think the church really needs to think like a peasant instead of like a king and in a lot of ways, that's much different than what we've done.
Even though you can get on Media Metrics and see that the top websites that are gaining all of the hits are the big corporate sites, AOL, MSN, and all of those, the peasants, I think, still have the advantage online because it does provide opportunities for connecting with one another and communicating. And also, when you look at AOL, how did they build their fortune? It was based on chat rooms, essentially. That's how they got their start and that's where they built from. And that's connecting people, one with another.
