I’ll be honest: I’ve visited a few of these “online churches.” The main reason is that I find my local churches to be of abysmally poor quality. If I hear one more sermon that uses last week’s football game as a jumping-off point for the sermon…And then there’s the local pastor who is enamored by “The Purpose Driven Life.” He used Warren’s book as a text for the sermon one Sunday instead (yes, instead) of the bible (I complained to him and was told that he has to reach out to the unchurched). Law and Gospel sermons? As they say in the movies: fuhgeddaboutit!
Online churches are misnamed. A website that offers some devotional resources (prayers, meditations, the scripture for the day, etc., all placed on a graphically rich webpage that utilizes photographs of real church interiors) can be useful–but it’s certainly not church: no community, no sacrament, no personal relationships (sorry, anyone whom you only know via the net does not count. Get sick sometime and see if your online Christian buddy in Japan hops on a plane to visit you in your hospital in Orlando, Florida).
That being said, I do wish there were more online sites for Lutherans. And the LCMS needs more iphone apps. When will the BOC and prayers be available as an app? And try to find a church calendar!

McCain: We offer the BOC and Treasury of Daily Prayer in Kindle formats. Just download the Amazon Kindle app and you are good to go. You do not have to own a Kindle to use the Amazon Kindle titles.

When “church” in the Reformed / American Evangelical congregations consists of a Bible study, prayer, and singing along to rock songs about one’s faith… then sure, you can do that from home.

Problem is maybe we need to start calling things for what they are. That service at the local non-denom building very well may not be Church insofar as they lack the marks of the Church.

In this day and age though, I think much more could be done as far as building that community that meets on Sunday throughout the week via the internet. If I had more tech savvy congregation members, I’d probably be doing an online Bible Study (and I’m ok with not wrestling with my CMS each week and doing the old fashioned face to face kind).

One last thought. I would not discount relationships made over the internet. Over the years I have developed a number of friendships with people that I have yet to meet. In fact, while they don’t hop on planes, when I’m sick or just in need of encouragement from friends, these are often some of the first to send an email, leave a voice message, etc. While certainly this isn’t the same as a friend that’s there right beside you, it’s darn near close.

I never thought of looking for the BOC via the Kindle app. Will do. Thanks for the tip.

I’m not sure I agree completely here. I think that, the goal of online churches should be to ultimately bring people together (physically, in this case) – however, I’m not really following the logic of how these online churches fall outside of our definition of “the church.” Granted, at the very foundation, you could say “wherever two or more are gathered…” – and then you could debate if an online event constitutes being “gathered together” – but to say that church is simply “No Supper No Church” I think goes a bit far. I think that this would be for a couple reasons: 1) Technically speaking, that would mean if we’re in a church that does no celebrate the Lord’s Supper every week, those off-weeks are not “Church?” 2) Why can’t the Lord’s Supper be done virtually? Again, I’d like to set aside the argument of “being physically together” to share the meal because that’s another debate – but if each person has a cup of wine and a wafer – and the words of institution are said, how does this make it invalid? At the sem we’re taught that the sacraments (like baptism and the Lord’s Supper) aren’t invalid based on the faith of the person saying the words – and it’s not like there is a distance limit between the person speaking the words and the physical elements.

I hope this isn’t coming off as flippant or disrespectful – I’m seriously interested in this issue and think it should be discussed. I think that the individuality of our culture is getting a bit out of hand and we would be best served having worship together and a greater sense of the “community of believers.” But I also know that, as Christians, we must be IN the world and not OF the world – so I’m tending to think online church is an interesting way to engage people where they are but always trying to shepherd them into something that’s more than just sitting at a computer.

I am uneasy with the idea of online Church. Virtual anything is not the real thing. God’s presence is mediated to our benefit. The presence of other believers being ‘mediated’ via a computer is not something I am convinced is a viable substitute for face to face interaction.

Seems a little gnostic to me. “All the substance and none of the physical.”

I too did not know that the Treasury of Daily Prayer was available for my Kindle. How does that work on Kindle for flipping to different sections as one does with the hard copy? Just go to different chapters and scroll?

Thanks,
Don Kirchner

THough these virtual churches certainly aren’t church, they do present an opportunity to dialogue about our faith with those who might not ever want to darken the door of a real church. What goes on outside of the Divine Service is much more flexible and can afford us many interesting opportunities to to bring God’s grace to others.

Sean McCoy :
2) Why can’t the Lord’s Supper be done virtually? Again, I’d like to set aside the argument of “being physically together” to share the meal because that’s another debate – but if each person has a cup of wine and a wafer – and the words of institution are said, how does this make it invalid?

The word “this” in the Verba is a demonstrative pronoun. It refers to something evident to both speaker and hearer — and in the context of the words of consecration, also *present* to both.

We also understand that when Jesus said, “Do this” he didn’t mean, “Try to see how far you can get from the way I’m doing things and still find a way to call it valid.”

Yes, the power of the Sacrament is in the Word of God, and the power of the Word is not limited by distance. But the institution of the Sacrament itself tells us that we only work with what is physically present. “Virtual” celebration of the Sacrament – whose wonder and beauty lie in its making the intangible tangible – is pretty much a contradiction in terms and a (theo)logical impossibility.

I hope these quick (and sleepy) thoughts help answer your question.

@Jeff Samelson
I’m not sure I follow the “this” argument. If the “this” you are referring to is the “Do this” – I agree that it’s a demonstrative pronoun – but it is also a singular (at least the one in Luke) – which would then make it only “singular and near the speaker”

I don’t think I worded correctly what I had in my mind as far as virtual word and sacrament. What I envisioned was this: each person having their own physical elements in front of them (bread and wine) and each person saying the words of institution together. So the only “virtual” part is that each person is at a different location. In that case, you have many cases of making the intangible tangible. That is how I saw it.

But even still – if only one person said the words of institution over a video chat – I’m still not sold on that being a theological impossibility. It sounds like the argument on theological impossibility is being made on your interpretation of how far we are supposed to emulate the exact proceedings at the Lord’s Supper. This is kind of like the debate over wine vs. grape juice. How close do we need to have it for it to be ok (which usually then focus on our understanding and not on the power of God).

I’m trying not to be the type of person to say “With God – anything’s possible!” and then use it to justify any sort of deviation from the norm – but in this case – I just don’t see how the Word applied to the physical elements, even if at a distance makes a theological impossibility.

With regards to “virtual” Lord’s Suppers, the problem is there’s nothing virtual about it. Not only is Christ’s true Body and Blood given, but it is given not just to the individual, but to the entire ecclesia (congregation). There is a reason why Christ uses the 2nd person, plural, imperative in “take eat.” We see this in St. Paul’s gloss on our Lord’s Words in 1 Corinthians 10, the cup (singular) is shared as is the bread that is broken (note in the words of institution, it is a single cup that is blessed and already broken bread).

Additionally it is the role of the pastor to be the steward of the mysteries of God. He is to welcome to the table those who have been examined and absolved and he is to exclude those who would receive our Lord’s Body and Blood improperly or inappropriately.

As Lutherans we recognize that not only does the Lord’s Supper have symbolic significance, but that what is received is more than a mere symbol. This meal actually does something and it is God’s work. Thus it really isn’t a matter of possibility/impossibility, but appropriateness and faithfulness to the gift that we have been given.

I’m reminded of something that Rich Mullins said at his concerts. He’d ask the crowd, “Are you ready to worship?” Inevitably the crowd would cheer back in the affirmative. He’d respond, “Then go to church.” Same thing applies. Want Christ’s Body and Blood for the forgiveness of your sins? Then go to church.

@Rev. Matthew Lorfeld
This adds another area of discussion into the mix that, as I see it, only complicates the matter.

So in ecclesia/congregation and your later comment “Go to church” – then the only place where worship and the Lord’s Supper can be celebrated is at church (ie: the building). In this hypothetical online setting – you are suggesting that there is no church there because the people are not gathered together. This then opens up the whole “what do you mean by church” discussion – is it the entire collection of believers – is it the localized gathering in a physical location? I would say that church is wherever two or more are gathered in His name. And by that definition, church should be able to happen anywhere – not just inside the confines of a brick and mortar location.

And I realize that, for good order and all of the various ways of explaining it, we, the LCMS have the pastor as the one who does the public ministry. I get that. However – what you said about being the steward of the table and inviting/excluding – how is it different to have a pastor on one side of the screen inviting and “communing” somebody who should otherwise be excluded from having a pastor face to face with somebody unknowingly communing somebody who should be exlcuded? I tend to err on the side of grace on that one.

Again, I go back to some of the original thoughts I had about this. The American sense of individualism isn’t the greatest thing when it comes to church – and we should be fostering a sense of community. But to just clamp down on an online church (and in this case, the main point was “No supper No church – which I still don’t fully agree with) and say there is no way you are getting the forgiveness of sins through it because you can’t have a pastor lay a wafer in your palm and give you a small plastic cup – that seems unnecessarily exclusive and potentially harmful. Take away all this discussion about having virtual communion – let’s say you have a service online with communion – with corporate confession and everything. Would you say that forgiveness of sins is not there? If we hold one online service sans communion one week and one local service with communion another week, according to the original premise of this thread, we would have only had “church” once in two weeks. That is the main point of contention that I have.

Again – I hope this isn’t coming across as combative – totally not my intent if it is. I am a seminary student who cares deeply for Christ’s church and very concerned with the decline of churches not just in our synod but everywhere. I am just wanting to explore this issue from as many different sides as possible.

It is probably the tech inside of me, but I think this is cool! I used Second Life a long time ago and did a little research about Universities that were using it. The college I work at investigated possibly using Second Life, but that idea ended up going no where.

From my research on it a while back, I found Second Life hard to follow when too many people are around. The technology continually improves though. The other problem is the cost to have “land” for your church, university, or whatever else you want to put on there. Of course with any online chat type program you are also going to have issues with software and users.

I will definitely be downloading Second Life and researching the churches on it. I do agree that this is not to be a replacement for going to a physical church. I believe this would be cool for Bible studies and message readings though, during hours that churches do not normally meet. Of course, this could cause people not to get involved in local Bible study groups. It seems there could be positive and negative effects.

I think it would be cool to have an LCMS or Lutheran online beta church and see what happens.

Goodness, I’d never heard of communion in the context of a virtual church. Which laypeople are actually asking for and desiring this, and for what reasons?

I wouldn’t have problems with a virtual Daily Office but a virtual Divine Service is too problematic. And what would a virtual Baptism be like? An online pastor saying “I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” while someone else sprinkles the water – or even while someone baptizes himself or herself? Sponsors or witnesses watching from webcams? A baptismal certificate automatically printed like instant verification of automobile insurance?

Patrick, thank you for pointing me in the direction of this conversation. Nice meeting you today at church on SL.

While I’m sure that it’s important to discuss whether church online is really church or not, I wonder if the better question to ask might be – is our Lord Jesus able to accomplish his mission of drawing people to Himself and changing their lives in an “online” setting. After spending the last 2 1/2 years serving in a church on Second Life, I am happy to say that the answer to that question is an emphatic YES!

I agree that being a part of a local church is the better choice for most. Yet the truth is that for various reasons, thousands each week turn to the Internet in order to find answers about God. As servants of Christ, should we not do our best to try to meet this need?

Many of the people I meet in Second Life are dealing with physical and/or emotional issues that make attending a local church difficult. For them, online church is a real blessing, as well as others who want to explore a relationship with Jesus and His followers in a setting that they perceive is safe to do so. I praise God for being there online to meet these people where they are.

Blessings, Gracie Karas in Second Life

@Rev. Allen Yount
If we ever get so isolated from one another that this becomes acceptable, it will be time to turn out the lights and declare “game over.”

@Rev. Allen Yount
What parts of the Divine Service would be problematic?

As for the baptism issue – this is an interesting one as well. I suppose I could see two sides of that one.

One view would be that, how it was instituted (one person applying water on the other) would seem to indicate that online would not work. But then you go back into arguing with Baptists over whether or not you must be fully immersed (arguing from the point of doing it correctly the way it was first done).

The other view would seem to not discount an online way of doing it, since the power of baptism lies in the water and the word – not in the one doing the baptism. I recall a heated discussion in Systems III about if you were in a raft in the middle of an ocean with an atheist – would you be truly baptized if he baptized you. The answer was yes, because it had nothing to do with the faith of the one baptizing – it was all about water being applied with the Word. So in this case, no matter who was applying the water – so long as you had those elements, does this mean that the person didn’t receive a “valid” baptism?

As per the issue of sponsors and certificates – I think that is confusing our human traditions with the divine element. We certainly don’t need sponsors or certificates. I personally like the idea of having sponsors and something to hold onto to signify that wonderful event, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say that the presence or absence of those have any impact on the validity of a baptism.

Hello everyone, I’m just a teenager so i’m not sure if you guys will agree with my oppion on Online churches but i’m just gonna put it out there for you to think about. I thought you guys could use another perspective on the matter. Well i have grown up in church my whole life and the subject of online churches has just recently came to me. I personally think that the only purpose for an online church should be to provide you with a sermon you missed that sunday you couldn’t make it to church. I have always been taught that the church is the people. People who have come together to encourage each other and help one another grow closer to God. virtual churches alone do not supply the essential needs to help you grow in your relationship with God. One thing a REAL church brings to you that online churches dont, if true friends. People you can meet anytime to talk to, or hang out with. Friends are around a lot and can keep you accounted for. If you are just virtually friends with someone then you dont REALLY know what they are like. They may not even really be who you think you are talking to. I have been going to the same church since kindergarden and now im a junior. two of my best friends got involved at my church when they were in elementary school with me and we grew up together. They are a big part of how i got through middle school and some of high school. Together we grew closer to God. They kept me ont he right path everytime i started to grow close to the world. We went through middle and high school without ever Cursing, drinking, doing drugs, having sex, or any earthly thing a normal kid would do. We didnt have much peer pressure BECAUSE we had each other to talk to. It really makes a difference to be there. Also, another thing “real” church has that virtual churches dont is people who are older and more wiser then me to help me get throuh hard times. At my church, i have plenty of people who have been through the same things i go through as a teen, that i could go to and talk to about my problems. I can share anything with them and not worry about being judged. They with tell me what they would do in my situation, then we pray about it. IT really makes a difference to be around people you can trust and live life with them instead of just talkign to them online.