In Support of Online Gatherings

 

Are churches, when they switch to online services and temporarily suspend in-person services for safety reasons really giving little attention or respect to gathering? At the time the Letter to the Hebrews was written, the only way that a group of people could gather was in the same room or place. In the twenty-first century a group of people can gather online while being in different rooms or places. In both instances they come together. They see each other and they hear each other. They may not smell each other, feel each other’s body warmth, touch each other, or observe each other’s body language. Yet they can still communicate with each other. 

Arguably the reason that the author of Hebrews in urging those to whom he was writing to not neglect gathering was so that they would communicate with each other and build up each other’s faith. One can do this in an online group as well as in an in-person group. With the internet one does not have to occupy the same room. 

Those who insist that the gathering must be in-person are adding to what the author of Hebrews wrote. He says nothing about gathering in the same room or place. Now he admittedly may not have been able to conceive of any other way of gathering but that limitation does not rule out online gatherings. His main concern was that their faith would grow weak because they were making no effort to encourage each other and to reinforce and strength each other’s faith.

The author of the Hebrews opted for one of the few other ways that people could communicate with each other during his time. But since most people were illiterate, someone who was able to read the letter was needed to read it to those to whom it was addressed.

Unlike the author of Hebrews God is not limited. God exists outside of time and the past, present, and future are one to God. God knew that human beings would gather in more than one way and God inspired the writing of the letter.

A related question is whether a group of people gathered online can exercise the ministry of presence to each other. The ministry of presence can be defined as ministering to others through our presence with them at a particular time. Our presence offers them encouragement and support. 

Being present can be defined as being in view or at hand. We are available to offer a reassuring smile or a comforting word. We are also available to give a hug or to hand a tissue. When people come together online, they are able to exercise a ministry of presence to each other but it is more limited than one they can offer each other if they gathered in person. However, they are able to exercise a ministry of presence. They can be seen and heard. 

In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic people who come together in person can exercise only a limited ministry of presence to each other if they are taking safety measures to protect themselves and each other from the virus. If they are wearing face masks, the masks will hide the lower half of their face, making offering a reassuring smile difficult. If they are avoiding personal contact and sitting at least six feet apart, they would not be able to give a hug or to hand a tissue. The only thing that they can offer is a reassuring word and their physical presence. 

Someone can be physical present in a room with someone else and not be “present” to the other person. Their presence in the room does not benefit the other person as a familiar face might. On the other hand, we can benefit from seeing a familiar face on a computer monitor screen or flat wall screen and hearing a familiar voice.

Can a church service or a Bible lesson livestreamed online or pre-recorded and then streamed online or broadcast on the radio or TV be regarded as a gathering of the church? If the church service or Bible lesson is streamed or broadcast at a certain time and on a certain day and the people regularly come together to view or hear it in their homes or wherever they are, this coming together for this purpose may regarded in a very broad sense as a gathering. But because those coming together for the same purpose are not visible to each other and do not interact with each other I would be inclined to view such an assembling of people as a quasi-gathering. However, if they interact with each other through chat, I would be inclined to view it as more in the nature of a “real” gathering. 

I have put real in quotation marks for a reason. I do not want to suggest that there is only one way to gather and if we do not come together in that way, we are not the gathered church. A too precise a definition can be misleading.

Before the Scottish Episcopal Church was recognized a ecclesial body whose members might legally assemble together for worship and instruction in groups of more than four people, it was banned from holding such gatherings under the laws of the United Kingdom due the refusal of its bishops to swear allegiance to the reigning monarch. They were non-jurors who argued that, having sworn allegiance to the Stuart monarchy, they could not renounce their allegiance to that monarchy and swear allegiance to the House of Hanover. As a result, any gathering of more than four members of the Scottish Episcopal Church was regarded as potentially seditious and was prohibited under the laws of the kingdom. 

The Scottish Episcopalians found away around that ban. For their church services they would assemble in the same house or building but in separate rooms. In this way they complied with the letter of the law while at the same time meeting for worship and instruction. Openings were constructed in the walls separating the rooms so that the members of the congregation could hear the priest and the parish clerk and each other.

According to one theory that has gained currency in recent times the Scottish Episcopal churches ceased to exist during that time because their congregations were unable to meet together in one room. This theory is predicated on the ahistorical notion that in New Testament times the entire church gathered in one place at the same time for worship and instruction and therefore if these conditions are not met, the church is not the church. It is something else. 

Those who subscribe to this theory argue on the basis of what Paul wrote the Corinthian church about some members waiting for the other members to arrive before beginning the Lord’s Supper that Paul is saying the entire church must be present in order for the church to be the church. Those who subscribe to the theory do not take into consideration the realities of life in the ancient world more than they do the realities of life in the present-day world. 

The church in New Testament times was made up of slaves as well as freemen. In the ancient world slaves were the property of their master and were required to do their master’s bidding. The were not able to come and go as they pleased. If their master set them to a task, they were expected to complete it. 

If a particular church was made up of slaves and freeman, the likelihood was that some of tis slave members would not have been able to have attended its gatherings all of the time. It is safe to conclude that Paul in giving instructions to the Corinthian church understood that. Some of its free members may have been prevented at times from attending the church’s gatherings due to sickness or other reasons. Are we to conclude on the basis of this theory that on these occasions the church was not the church? 

If we pursue this reasoning to its logical conclusion, the church in many places has enjoyed an only intermittent existence throughout history and enjoys such an existence today. This theory unchurches the church for a large part of its history.

The church is more than a group of people meeting together in the same place at the same time. It has a supernatural existence as well as a physical one. Its members are united by the Holy Spirit to the Lord Jesus Christ and to each other. Even though a member of the church is absent from one of its gatherings, that member is still a part of the church. Even if the whole church does not meet in the same place at the same time, it is still the church. 

A church’s gatherings may be described as an outward sign of an inward reality. They are not, however, a perfect sign of that reality. The sign and the reality should not be confused.

The aforementioned theory has gained currency due in part to the fear that churchgoers who have migrated to online services may not return to in-person services. It is also an over-reaction to the multisite movement as well as the online church. It has largely gained adherents among Reformed Baptists. Adherents of this theory also argue on its basis that a church should have only one service on Sundays and not multiple services. They also reject the sharing of a building by two or more churches, arguing that every church should have its own building.

If the church is to fulfill Jesus’ commission to make disciples of all people groups, it needs to have online services as well as in-person services, online small groups as well as in-person small groups, services at different times on Sunday, and service at different times on days other than Sunday. Small groups off campus as well as on campus, and small groups on different days at different times. It needs to move its congregation out of the building into the community. It needs to share its building with other churches seeking to reach and engage the unchurched. It also needs to be leery of theorists who would tie the hands and feet of the church with baseless assumptions.