Posts
Not too long ago I received an email from a friend that he had composed on his iPhone. Shortly, he is in line to get the new iPhone 4 http://www.apple.com/iphone/?cid=wwa-naus-seg-iphone10-016&cp=www-seg-iphone10-brand&sr=sem . Immediately I was reminded of something - I don't have an iPhone and I would love to have one. However, the reason for my wanting an iPhone is purely for the image of it. I am not a mac user and I have no interest in the iPhone other than the fact that there is a certain image that comes with people who own and use the iPhone.
This got me to thinking, "Do we do this with media in our churches?" There are so many times I see churches who use certain technologies and use them purely because there is a belief that if they have it, it will make them more relevant. On the contrary, technology is all about our context. We do not need to implement technologies to engineer credibility, we need to add technologies as the cultural soup of our context desires it.
It isn't the iPhone that makes me desire it, it is how my friend is able to use it - the way that he is able to become more efficient because of it. The same technology in the hand of someone else could be very clunky and become a hindrance to them.
Technology is an advancement only when it is needed and relevant to the context.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hey Jeremy-
ReplyDeleteThis reminds me a lot of Shirky's phrase on the cover of his book - "Revolution doesn't happen when society adopts new technology, it happens when society adopts new behaviors". Bringing in media tools does not make us successful. Just because we have a sound system that can be heard 7 blocks away or a TV screen that covers half the sanctuary's wall, doesn't mean the people will come or that the Good News will be spread. Ministry occurs through avenues, but by followers of Jesus, not by social media tools. Build it and they will come does not apply to ministry. Reading the audience, understanding the culture and focusing on the living Gospel will reach people for Christ.
Thanks
Nate
If you wanted to test the relevancy of an iPhone without the commitment, you could try out an iPod touch. It will do most of the same stuff with hardly any of the cost. As a new tech adopter, I go pretty hard with my new toys to see if they will in fact, benefit me in a way that it consistent with my values.
ReplyDeleteI think you are correct in pointing out that the "if you build it, they will come" mentality does not always work. I currently work in a church context that is almost devoid of any kind of technology. I'm trying to observe the context in a deeper way so that I can name a purpose for introducing the technology. If we build it for the parish and it is not used, it will feel like a waste of time and energy!
ReplyDeleteYou wrote: "We do not need to implement technologies to engineer credibility, we need to add technologies as the cultural soup of our context desires it." Yes, but that's part of the dilemma, right? Because the very things that are what determine "authority, authenticity, and agency" are shifting. And for some people, you don't have much credibility unless you're present in a specific medium - -and for others, simply being in that medium erodes your credibility. it's a difficult conundrum.
ReplyDeleteBut how does one go about re-thinking a particular context and the use of technology? I remeber reading Rick Warren's book on the Purpose Driven Church and of the many inetersting comments, his view of "failure" was a good thing to keep in mind. Like regular life events, we do learn more from failures than from successes. But how often in a church setting do we allow failures to hinder our ability to grow in a different/new direction? Will our context allow faithful experimentation with new technologies or does the fear of failure or the 'we tried that once and it didn't work' stand in the way of trying?Just as we discovered in this class, just get out there and try it, learn from our failures as well as from each other.
ReplyDeleteSo do you still want an iphone after the latest problems? Even with all the new problems? This is sort of the whole if the jones have it I want it first mentality I see everyday. I have helped manypeople who went through bankruptcy just because of this problem. The church is not saved from this same problem. I have watched three churches that are contemplating closing their doors who just 10 years ago under went huge fellowship expansions. Their thought was if we build it they will come, and the fact is that is what the other churches in the area were doing. Duplication of services is more pertinent to the church world then just the fact of keeping up with the Jones's. When it appears a church should be looking into the World and seeking out needs, it has in the past looked to duplicate itself. Duplication for the sake of duplication is wrong, and jsut because something works for one church does not mean it will work for all. I am preparing for another outdoor church service tomorrow and I will say that what we do would not work in down town Chicago. Or maybe it would? Truthfully I would say no, because the people who attend are people who like bugs, sun, wind, rain, and the great outdoors. We even had a flock of ducks fly through the tent last year during the offering.
ReplyDelete