The so-called hybrid church has been described as the coming together of the church’s online presence and offline/physical gatherings (see the work of Pete Philips). If you are a fan of fantasy fiction like me, you will not be surprised to find that hybrids emerge at a critical point of change in the story to be stronger and more enduring over time in popular stories. In a similar way, hybridity promises to bring the church to a more enduring and balanced integral mission, or a stronger holistic ministry for God’s people. Let's explore this further.
The church has always been hybrid
Spread across the Roman Empire, the early church is held together closely as a network of scattered communities through an ancient form of ‘virtual’ ministry. We have here a number of local churches who would never see each other in person. But they are closely linked to one another as letters from the Apostles were circulated and read from one church to another.
We would see this, for example, between the believers at Colossae and Laodicea with Paul's letters. Two congregations that were instructed to swap epistles and benefit from what the Apostle had to say to each of them (see Colossians 4:16). Scholars of antiquity note that in the ancient world, this was a pioneering and innovative use of epistles as a medium of instruction for religious communities.
This is what helped create and spread the early church as an interconnected network of believers. Yes, in flesh and blood gatherings, but also simultaneously mediated by the technology available to them—ink and parchment. This is really not so different from how the church today is held closely together in bytes and pixels mediated via Zoom and WiFi. It may not be a physical fellowship in the sense of being in the same room breathing the same air but it is definitely no less real as a fellowship meeting if experienced in digital spaces via a shared screen.
We need to shift our thinking from looking at communications technologies as merely tools that we use, and see them as environments that we inhabit.
We need to shift our thinking from looking at communications technologies, whether ancient epistles or social networking apps, as merely tools that we use, and see them as environments that we inhabit. For example, it is said that social media is a language, but it is also a landscape. Today, it is both what people communicate with and it is where people interact.
There is no question, therefore, of whether the church should go digital or not, or if it should continue being digital following something like the global pandemic which forced churches to adapt and go online. A more interesting question is how this digital space shall shape the usual spaces of dwelling and ways of gathering as a community into the future—that is, in-person, face-to-face, solo to on site, groups to onsite, and/or a mix of everything. Which brings me to my next point.
The pandemic experience led to more hybridity
What is developed for a digital space is indigenous, unique to that sphere.
Even prior to the pandemic, churches explored using digital technology to supplement their ministry. But for the churches who have experienced meeting, gathering, and doing ministry almost entirely online, there are already realizations that this new frontier comes with opportunities that are unique to itself. New experiences can be created that are deeply formative but difficult to recreate (and perhaps should not be) within church buildings or where people gather in the same room. In effect, what is developed for a digital space is indigenous, unique to that sphere.
A clear case, for example, is how my own local church holds online gatherings that include our members who are now residing in different parts of the world. Being a church in a small town, which has moved online with participants from across the globe, our Sunday worship time, Bible studies, prayer meetings, discipleship training, among other activities, have transcended the borders of our geographical location.
At the height of the pandemic, when a number of our members contracted the virus and needed to be quarantined at home, they were still able to join the church gatherings and it served as their lifeline, lessening the toll of isolation. Nowadays, we are exploring using other platforms that provide a different way of having candid and interactive conversations online, like the the audio-only social networking app Clubhouse.
Those mentioned above are just some of the means available to building online and hybrid communities that are not supposed to be replicated, much less compared, to what can be done in purely in-person gatherings.
Now that the lock-down era is over and the restrictions on physical public gatherings have lifted, worship halls have opened and people are meeting again face-to-face, breathing the same air. But the experience of being together with people who are not able to be in the same building can be sorely missed.
Should we just stop and drop the amazing experience that we had as a digital church? Hopefully not. Let's consider continuing it as integral to how we can be the church and use it as a feature to build stronger faith community—a community that is part of a wider society, which continues to blend real and digital lives into hybrid realities as we move further away from the pandemic.
Hybridity is key to a more holistic church
While we may be tempted to discuss digital church only in terms of Sunday worship services and other aspects of liturgy, it is important to stress that this a sure-fire way to miss the point of Hebrews 10:24-25,
“And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, 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.”
My reading of that passage is that the point of making sure God’s people get to meet together, whether face-to-face or online, is for encouraging and stirring up one another towards loving our neighbors and doing good in the world. Digital congregations are meant to engage in missions both online and offline.
While more than a few have feared that a locked-up church shall also mean restrictions on missions and ministry work, there is data that tells us otherwise. Consider for example, the research released by the Asia Evangelical Alliance (AEA). It features a national survey conducted in Indonesia at the height of the pandemic.
The findings showed that 64% of churches were quickly able to adjust and adapt to the digital shift. When pastors were asked whether they thought their church members had grown spiritually during the pandemic, almost half said “yes.” Fewer than 20% said the spirituality of their church members was declining. What does this spiritual growth lead to? Here is the more interesting part of the research:
- 94.78% of churches organized relief projects for the needy. Of these, 22.1% targeted their own members. The rest demonstrated care for the needy outside of their circle of the fellowship.
- Almost half of the churches surveyed built bridges of collaboration with non-Christian religious entities in organizing interfaith relief projects.
- 56.3% of churches acknowledged the importance of other social institutions in helping the community during the pandemic by financially supporting institutions such as hospitals, clinics, schools, and other community networks.
The research concluded with these words:
“Before the pandemic, most churches carried out more than 85% of their church activities inside the church walls. During the pandemic, when no gathering is allowed at the church building, the church has been ‘doing church’ outside the wall—in homes, in the midst of the community, among the needy.”
I am convinced that a quick embrace of digital technologies and inhabiting online platforms have been key in allowing churches to keep themselves connected while continuing to participate in the purposes of God in their societies despite all the restrictions laid down in the face of a global pandemic.
Whether churches should look at that experience as one of exile that finally ended, an exodus that happily happened, or a type of Easter moment that saw a dying church resurrected to new life, remains to be seen. But this is a question I am curious to discover an answer for. Only time will reveal it.
Originally published on Rei Lemuel Crizaldo's blog, half-meant. Republished with permission.
Rei Lemuel Crizaldo is the Coordinator of the World Evangelical Alliance Theological Commission, a member of the Younger Leader Generation (YLG) of the Lausanne Movement, advocacy coordinator for Micah Global’s national expression in the Philippines, and a regional coordinator for Tearfund’s theology network in East and Southeast Asia. He is a thinker, communicator, and teacher, whose writing and active online engagement brings together people reflecting on contextual theology, holistic ministry, and the impact of digitality.
