Podcasting can give us an opportunity to reach people that may never step inside our churches.

Thanks for your comment Josh. Yes, I agree that podcasting is a valuable tool for outreach.

My hesitation revolves more around what we are podcasting rather than podcasting itself. If we are podcasting (or videocasting, etc.) our regular gatherings of believers AND this leads to a situation in which believers think that participating in those gatherings is optional (because “I can watch or listen to what I miss"), then I think our tool has created a larger problem.

If we use podcasting (or videocasting, etc.) to memorialize the spontaneous life of the church, and then use that as a tool for outreach, then we don’t run that same risk. And I also tend to believe that the spontaneous life of the church is much more attractive to unbelievers than at least some of our regular gatherings, but that’s a different issue. <grin>

If we are going to podcast our actual services, then I think at the very least, we need to emphasize strongly that the gathering of believers is not something to be watched or listened to (much of the problem here is our paradigm of what a church “service” should look like), but something which individual believers are meant to participate in. ("What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one of you has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation.")

If we are careful to teach each other about the true nature of our gatherings, then we as believers won’t be as tempted to think of them as something to be watched or listened to. That might mitigate the issue of people not bothering to be a part of the gathering because they can always access the podcast (or videocast) later.

Or perhaps we should be thinking about preparing different presentations/messages/etc. specifically for podcasting/videocasting. I think that would be much more in line, for example, with Mark Batterson’s comparison of podcasting to Wesley’s field preaching. That might be more effective in reaching those people who you talk about (who won’t set foot in the church) than our actual services.

Obviously, I don’t have all of the answers. Just trying to explore the most strategic use of current technology.

Thanks again for your input - I really appreciate it.

Hey, Frank. Good article, and thought provoking. Here are my thoughts: I would be wary of *real time* streaming of a church service because of the precise, if unintential, message it sends, which you mentioned. If you can’t make it to the service, attend online. On the other hand, do we feel the same way about churches who broadcast their services on the public access channels?

Yet, some kind of internet archive of messages provides opportunities for shut-ins and displaced (out of state, on vacation, folks who’ve moved), as well as an opportunity for the completely unchurched to hear the Word and witness the community in action. This hesitancy to put our messages online seems to stem from a conservative mindset: that we must somehow *conserve* our membership and prevent attrition like the NFL does by blacking out local area broadcasts in cities where major games are played. Yet, the people who would seriously substitute online attendance for in-the-flesh attendance are somehow already not getting the message. These same people are probably not tithing. They probably are not volunteering for service in the church. They likely are not involved in mentoring or discipling others.

In what way are these hangers-on actually participating in community?

So, I wouldn’t worry about podcasting or archiving messages online somehow weakening church membershp. On the contrary, in fact. What would be more compelling than to build a community of believers that are vibrantly participating in every aspect of church life?

Besides, these wwere not the concerns of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul the Apostle, James, and others who wrote the New Testament. It’s far more valuable to get the message out there were others can receive it than worry about the marginal folks who will rely on it for their entire sustenance. If that had been the original NT writer’s concern, they would have not written their letters and histories: they would’ve relited entirely on oral tradition.

Speaking of oral tradition: I suspect that podcasting, itself, is reviving a modern-day sort of oral tradition. There’s nothing like actually hearing the Word. Hearing a powerful message is transformative in a way that merely reading it is not.

And as a two-hour a day commuter, I really appreciate the wealth of sermon MP3 resources I can now find online. It’s made my day and mindset so much better.

Regards,

Rich.