In Defense of the Online Church

A priori argumentation assumes definitions and therefore can be somewhat dissatisfying. Certain presuppositions anchor the propositions and if interpreted in the manner they are presented become a compelling foundation but if interpreted differently from the intention of the arguer create a dissonance that destroys the entire framework of the argument. In short, if I didn't believe it, to begin with, it'll hardly convince me to believe it after the fact.

I, not unlike many of you I'm sure, have read a litany of articles both short and long, weighty and light, humorous and stern, from the young and the old, from the conservative to the perhaps less so on the weaknesses and difficulties of doing church in an online format. I italicize because I feel no matter how strongly these well-meaning authors distance themselves from that concept, they ultimately fall prey to the underlying implications. At the end of reading each one, I am left with that a priori taste in my mouth. A fundamental proposition to everyone's argument is "gathering cannot be done virtually" and then they proceed to show that the church must gather. That being a local church is being a local gathering. That oversight of the Elders must be in person. That the sacraments are inherently physical and must meet certain parameters to be legitimate, including personal presence. All of which are compelling arguments if "gathering cannot be done virtually."

I finish these articles and immediately feel the urge to call the author and ask, "why?" Their explanations in the articles themselves range from "there's something missing" to "of course we know it's not the same" which serves perfectly well for convincing someone who already agrees with them. Hardly airtight logic or Theological proof. More personal conversations typically end up with me being kindly referred to as a "semantic" and the same general "feeling" of something missing, something unachievable in a virtual setting, being the shifting sand of a foundation for the argument. Thinking about it has finally burst into writing, so I present my defense of the Online Church.

What is gathering? Mirriam-Webster defines it by linking to two other words: Assembly and Meeting. Assembly uses gathering in its definition so that's not necessarily that helpful but its "a company of persons gathered for deliberation and legislation, worship, or entertainment." In this definition, common intent is the key to an assembly. Meeting adds an element: "an act or process of coming together." So that implies movement from not together to together. In both of these cases, physical presence is not specified. A virtual gathering can be both intentional and moves from not together (video call not connected) to together. A common proof text is Hebrews 10:25 (ESV) "not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near." I'm no Greek scholar but I can look things up with the best of them, that is ἐπισυναγωγὴν and is translated "assembly" by the KJV and other times "assembling together" and according to Bible Hub has an implication of a complete group. Again, maybe physically is assumed but an ancient near-eastern thinker wouldn't even be able to conceive of a virtual gathering so the absence of an insistence on physical presence is not evidence for either concept. 

Commands to the church in Scripture are given to individual groups with the ultimate result of being instructional, binding, edifying, and directed towards the rest of the Body in the Universal sense. I in no way deny the logistical and Theological importance of the local assembly. Each autonomous unit is a relationship-center of believers who worship, serve, and minister through the structure and agency of the local body. So, what does attending church physically provide that attending it virtually does not? I'd contend nothing of spiritual importance. It can provide a sense of separation from the day-to-day which could enhance the ability of a worshipper to "get in the frame of mind" to worship. Which is all well and good, as long as we don't lose the fact that we should be always be worshipping! We fall into the trap of compartmentalizing our lives and then when circumstances mash our neatly sorted divisions together we get out of sorts. Maybe this is just the kickstart the American church needs to remember our responsibilities as worshippers don't begin and end on Sundays?

What about the ordinances? Can someone be Baptized virtually? It would certainly be odd. Picture it, the Pastor on one screen, the convert on another, the Pastor recites his favorite Baptismal passage as the convert submerges in his bathtub. Not a particularly convenient or effective ceremony, but is it wrong? If the convert is following Christ's example, the process is observed in as public a setting as a local church assembly (not that public really), and its purpose is to identify with Christ and join the local membership I see no reason it could not be called a Baptism. It is reasonable to argue that the individual cannot Baptize himself, but is it really the being physically submerged into the water that makes it Baptism? Immersion is by definition submersion, I don't suggest the modality isn't important but it derives its importance from its meaning - not its meaning from its form. Hence in extreme circumstances, full immersion may not be entirely necessary while preserving the intent and message of the act of obedience. As such, in an extreme circumstance that prevents physical presence, Baptism is not such a rigid physical ritual to be impossible.

How about the Lord's Supper? Can the Eucharist be observed virtually? This, to me, is much easier to answer. Of course, it can. Generally, I'd say the Lord's Supper is designed to represent the unity of the body both in the identification as recipients of Christ's atoning sacrifice and in the longing for His imminent coming and the Marriage Feast celebration. What about physically being in a room changes the experience of the Lord's Supper? Are the nursery workers no longer members of the Body? If it is a physical manifestation of grace and the elements must be blessed by the ordained clergy and each member must take a piece of the same loaf and a sip from the same cup to physically receive a spiritual blessing than sure, can't be done virtually. St. Bernard's can't hold Mass virtually, or at least shouldn't by their own rules. But the benefits of The Lord's Supper are not given to me by the elements or the Pastors or the holding hands and singing Blessed Be the Tie That Binds. All of those things are physical representations of spiritual benefits, representations that can be replicated in a virtual setting.

Is physical church attendance preferable? Certainly! I enjoy physical presence more than virtual presence. I am less distracted and forced to prepare physically and mentally to a higher degree to be in another person's presence. However, with time and adjustment, if the current way of life continues or gets worse this will change. We will grow more comfortable in the virtual space and the negatives will fade. Ultimately, the outcry against virtual church smacks of sacramentalism and closes off local churches from a modality of ministry that could be explored. Perhaps the best thing that could come of this difficult time would be an expansion of The Church's presence in the online world. We live in the digital age and the Church is called to minister to people where they are.