I’m working out some ideas here, so I’d love to hear what others think about this. I recently was appointed the director of a national effort of the collegiate ministry I work with that we describe as a “digital first” effort to encourage and engage aspiring scholars who want to link their faith and academic life. It has me thinking about the place of online media in forming communities around similar interests; in this case around faithful Christian presence in the university world and what that looks like.
Much has been made of the movement of people from “on-the-ground” communities in particular places to online, or what some would call, virtual communities. Many think these online communities are poor substitutes for “on the ground” community, which for some is real community. Church attendance dwindling? Blame it on the internet. That sort of thing. Inevitably, online forms are opposed to “on the ground” forms, and labelled inferior.
A book I’ve been reading recently, Ecologies of Faith in a Digital Age has me re-examining assumptions. One of the most startling insights for me came from their attention to the letters of the Apostle Paul. Paul, like all of us, could only be in one place at a time. Over the course of his life, his travels took him from modern day Syria through Asia Minor and Greece, to Rome, and perhaps onward to Spain. He wrote to groups of believers where he had started churches (in Galatia, Corinth, Ephesus, Thesalonica, and Philippi, and to groups he had never visited (in Colossae and Rome). Twenty-eight percent of the New Testament consists of Paul’s letters and he wasn’t the only letter writer! What is striking is that Paul both seeks to communicate spiritual truth and instruction with those he is not with, but also assumes deep friendships and collaboration. He describes the Philippians as “partners with” him (synkoinonia) and the Romans as people he “longs to see.”
I wonder if Paul would have been a blogger today. Or would he have used podcasts to stay in touch with and instruct those he was away from for whom he cared? Maybe they would have used video conferencing or Facebook groups (I’m not sure he would have used Twitter–have you seen some of his sentences, particularly in Greek!). Then Paul would come visit, or perhaps gather leaders from many places at a single location for a conference
I wonder if a better way to think about these things is to see face to face and remote communication as complementary means of sustaining community and maintaining the values and mission we are engaged in together. Rather than either-or, there is a both-and engagement that is rich and substantive and two-way or even networked, whether we are together or not.
There are educators I know who have taught both in the classroom and online, and often have found the online interactions superior in terms of thoughtfulness of responses, and the engagement of quieter students who may not speak up in classes. Much hinges in how you set up what the book I mentioned earlier calls the “ecology” of a given context. While social media is justly vilified for echo chambers, bullying, and toxic discourse, I’ve also seen online contexts where differing perspectives are aired with both candor and mutual respect, and where people extend genuine and deep care for each other on and offline.
Finally, I’m struck that what makes this work, for Paul, and for us, is genuine affection and deep regard, even love. for those one is interacting remotely with. I’ve received many warm and thoughtful online messages. I remember those messages when I see the people who have written them, and it strengthens the bonds we share.
It is true that all forms of communication with those remote from us cannot easily convey all that we would be able to express verbally and non-verbally face to face. Actually, it makes me more intentional, more thoughtful. It makes me think and work harder, and read and listen more carefully. To write a response, particularly if it is not a tweet, requires more deliberation than off-the-cuff statements.
Yes, my hunch is that Paul would have written a blog. What do you think?
I tend to agree, Bob. Paul would most likely have used whatever resources were available to him. I don’t know if he’d have blogged, specifically, but I see no reason to think he wouldn’t avail himself of the internet if it had been an option.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I love the notion of Paul the blogger. I do think it’s important to note, however, that Paul’s communications in Scripture are directed at communities of people living out their faith together in person, well except for the bits where he relays messages to specific people. I think we have to be careful in this digital age to approach communication similarly. I agree that sometimes the protection of physical isolation may encourage deeper, more thoughtful conversation, but I think it’s crucial to our mental and emotional well being to also meet together with others in physical space.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Totally agree!
LikeLike
You write, “Paul, like all of us, could only be in one place at a time.” Some commentators speak of Paul’s epistolary work as practicing the art of apostolic presence. Of course, he had one “on-the-ground” link that bloggers lack: These letters would have been sent by the hand of someone who delivered, probably read aloud, and maybe even expounded upon what he wrote.
But yes, I think Paul would have been a prolific blogger if prison authorities had allowed him internet access. I do imagine imperial authorities might have wondered about the idea of allowing this fellow who “stirred up trouble throughout the empire” any such access.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’ve thought about those who delivered the letters as well.
LikeLike
Maybe I’ll read your blog and explain it where I attend Sunday.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That would work!
LikeLiked by 1 person