http://blog.ted.com/2009/11/how_the_interne_1.php

First, I think you’re right in that all churches contend with something lost and something gained, as you put it. We are certainly in agreement on that point. As I understand a community like Koinonia through what Kimberly has shared, I don’t have any interest in belittling the experience of those in that community. In the abstract, I still hold to my position but if I were speaking with a member of Kimberly’s community face to face and they were to describe for me their positive experience, I wouldn’t be inclined to diminish that experience. I’d be happy they found a venue that they are excited about.

But I guess I’d say this: if a virtual church is not, in the end, continually encouraging their members to eventually seek out a “first life” church community to be a part of, I’d be hard pressed to be excited about or supportive of that community calling itself a church. I recognize that for some, at certain stages of their journey, they are not ready to reenter a brick and mortar church community. A community like Koinonia provides a beautiful setting for them to feel loved by others and by God. I imagine it gives them a safe haven from the rejection and pain from previous church experiences and that is nothing but a very beautiful process. But if a virtual church becomes forever your default community and you never are able to reenter a local community, I think that has the likely potential to breed a dangerous individualism that is often difficult to reverse out of. To exclude categorically an ongoing physical presence with your church community for me is stretching not only the concept of “church” to far, but even stretching definition of “community” too far as well.

But I will certainly accept your advice and be more careful with how I discuss the topic. I’ve really appreciated this back and forth and it’s certainly helped me shape my thoughts on the matter.

There is something gained and something lost even in going between a house church and a mega church. Both of those happen to share in common the “first life physicality” you might say, but I’d hate to start setting arbitrary, non-biblical criteria for what does and does not constitute the church. There are a few standards for “church” in acts that I suspect very few churches you or I have attended meet–especially physical brick and mortar ones in the US. But I’ve yet to come across a biblical criteria for church that Second Life isn’t capable of meeting.

You may not lose much sleep if we call our virtual churches as such, but I do lose some sleep when people start denying their status. I also lose sleep when Evangelicals tell my female minister friends that they aren’t “real” ministers, or when people tell my emergent friends they aren’t “real” Christians. It’s easy to make these denials carelessly when you are in a position of power–when no one questions your own church as “real.”

I’d urge to you to be careful in your public words, and while I can certainly understand expressing doubt about virtual churches, I’d at least be very hesitant to deny their validity outright and with such finality–because you might be denying God. Humility is a better posture for exploring the truth of something than arrogance.

On that note, I’ll give you this: Virtual churches are different. They certainly have their own pitfalls and challenges and weaknesses–I think you’re hitting on some of them. But all churches do, and I, for one, will try very hard not to tell you that your church isn’t a church just because it fails in some area where mine thrives.

I think we just see it differently. Like I said, your efforts in SL are valid and valuable to an extent that I’m sure I’m not even aware of. It sounds to me like Koinonia is a kind of safety net online community for those who simply can’t find a community that accepts them or that they can accept. As a white heterosexual male, I don’t pretend to understand the hurt and frustration that any kind of minority experiences in church communities.

But I think we can agree that the couple you married are better off actually being together in first life rather than just carrying on their relationships via SL? I guess that’s my point. Our most important, transformative relationships take place in an ongoing series of embodied, face to face, first life encounters . That’s why virtual marriage seems like such a incomplete concept. In the end, I’m not going to lose sleep as a result of your calling your SL community “church,” but I wonder if you and the folks in your community are willing to concede that while there is a valuable thing happening among you in SL, you’re foster a willingness to give up on lots that first life community has to offer.

Peace,
Zach

By just visiting our web site you can not even begin to understand the interactive and immersive experience of our community. Until you have spent time as a avatar, walking around our house of worship, talking to the people who gather, attend a worship you have no idea what so ever of what we are about. We are far more than webmd which is primarily a one way transmission of information that people can access without actually encountering another human being in real time (much like a podcast in fact). In our community there are real people, present in real time with whom you can interact, pray, cry, laugh and play.

To your questions:

I do in fact visit real hospitals – where people who have been coming to Koinonia for years find themselves in such a room in first life with no family or community that cares to take the time to visit them. They have a family online that loves them very much, and with a laptop on the stark tray in the stark room we can come to them.

I do in fact conduct very real weddings – in fact one just this past Saturday. Two people who met initially through the ministry of Koinonia in Second Life, grew to know and love one another, began meeting in first life (they live across the US continent from one another) and last week one coast moved to the other so they could be together from this time onward. Because SL was the way they met and fell in love, and because these two people are females and there are very few states (not the one in which they live) that recognize the legality of their union they chose the most meaningful, and for them the most holy, venue to proclaim their covenantal vows before the community that has been loving them for over a year. For them was was important was the pastor that has been a part of their lives blessed their commitment – and so it was and so it will be again if the occasion arises.

Being a seminary graduate who has completed a full unit of CPE and having at least three clergy with whom I can talk about cases I do indeed counsel people who seek my care. I do a bit of triage as it were and when the case presents more than I am qualified to handle I refer them to other agencies (if they will even tell me where they live). The type of care I offer is not meant to be a replacement for the kind of care very broken lives need, but finding a person who can offer a faithful, skilled and loving ear on behalf of the church has made the difference in many lives I assure you.

For many of the people that I serve choosing a first life congregation is not an option. They have made it abundantly clear that they have been outright denied access to the Body of Christ more than a few times in more than a few brick and mortar “churches”.

And finally, this is a frontier with people living very real lives for what ever reasons – shut ins with family gone or unconcerned, living in intolerant communities if they are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered. Perhaps they have turrets syndrome and have been asked to stay away from church because it “disturbs” the other worshipers. Much damage has been and is being done by “churches” out there and I understand one aspect of my calling to be a church for those who need it when all others have failed them.

Your sister in Christ,
Kimberly