As churches continue to wrestle with life as we (in the UK at least) move forward, looking beyond the Covid-19 pandemic, much of the narrative I hear still seems to be focused on returning to patterns not unlike life before March 2020.
There is still much use of "going back" language, and for many leaders a desire to return to full rooms, or the nearest equivalent as soon as we can. Maybe because that feels like a form of validation, maybe because it is what we know.
Linked to that is the rush to move in to streaming, acknowledging that not everyone will return, at least immediately, "in person".
But I'm not sure streaming is the answer. To do it well is costly, both in terms of tech and equipment and people resources. I have seen too many poor quality streamed services! Plus it fails to recognise that what works for an online audience may not be the same as what works for those in the room. The danger is that those in the room end up watching what is effectively a recording or broadcast, or that those online feel like voyeurs, "look what you're missing out on....".
Streaming may fail to take into account the power of gathering and room for spontaneity in a gathered service, which may not be appropriate or translate online. Plus an enthusiastic but not always "on it" worship group may not be an issue for those in the room, but may be quite grating for those watching!
At the same time what works online may not connect with those in the room. Of course it is possible to do this well, and some, mainly larger churches, do.
But I wonder if there is another way: perhaps a separate online offering? Perhaps realising the missional potential of both online and in-person without comprising either? I guess every context is different and every church has different resources.
I wonder if the rush to stream need to be re-considered for some contexts
Comments
Post a Comment