think hard, think well

Even before the pandemic, “word” and “image” had been technologized with some extension of their reach—but with increasing fluidity, and at the cost of “presence,” which cannot be replicated. Technology makes us feel as though we can replicate presence, but it rather enables us to persist in practices that do not really satisfy or edify.

Note: This is part of a series of pieces providing a pastoral response to COVID and lockdowns in the church. Read more and subscribe here.

Note: This post is the fourth in a series, “Technologizing of Worship Before, During, and After COVID: Epistemology, Eschatology, and Presence,“ part of a larger project suggesting a pastoral response to COVID and lockdowns in the church. Read more and subscribe here.

Some might object to my strenuous insistence on the essentiality of in-person worship, on the grounds that Christians are obliged to respect civil authorities (Rom 13:1–7), and should be willing to lay down our rights for the sake of others (1 Cor 8:9–13). Throughout the pandemic, some churches have voluntarily stopped meeting for extended periods of time (here, here); others have defied civil authorities in order to stay open (here, here, here).

If the government says we may not meet or should not meet, mustn’t we take that into account? Don’t we as churches have Christian freedom not to meet for worship? While these considerations should not be blithely dismissed, such biblical texts and principles cannot faithfully be deployed as justification for suspending in-person worship (Heb 10:25).

I have to say that I have felt a bit isolated in the last year—not just because of physical isolation due to COVID restrictions, but also when it comes to thinking about appropriate Christian responses to our global situation.