Non-essential church

[Theophilos]

[video][/video]

[video][/video]

[RZehr]

The problem is that with Zoom and drive in church, it seems to betray a broken understanding of what church actually really entails. It is an attempt to retain the intellectual transfer of spiritual data, enabling sermons to be preached. It probably dovetails decently with how some people approach church already, which is go, observe, but limited personal interaction with other members. As soon as the service is done, bolt for the exit. For these folks, Zoom and drive in is fundamentally not that much different, and probably better, that having TV church. To these christians, the insistence on meeting in person seems unnecessary and we should settle for digital.

However, we should and need to interact. We need to look each other in the eye occasionally. We need to connect at a higher level than just listening to the same thing at the same time. Things such as greeting and feet washing and communion are really gutted when the church is not in assembly. At our church, communion attendance is tied to membership. If you neglect it a few times, you are gone. Church is about worshiping corporately and being brothers and sisters. The family of God. Meeting in the house of God. Not to interpret that 100% literally or be to brittle about it, but it really does describe a way of operation that is not really designed to be mashed into Zoom or drive throughs.
We are told to visit those in prison. Why? Why not just write letter and Zoom? Because God knows we need more than that.

[Theophilos]

Good point. That's why some smaller Churches in some regions of Canada are now having secret meetings at homes, with all precautions typical for Christians in persecuted countries. It is interesting that in some languages the Last supper (in the New Testament) is called Secret Supper. So Christians now have to have secret suppers. Because the neighbours are encouraged to snatch (to be truly vigilant and concerned citizens) on people and report them as 'violators of health orders'.

[JimFoxvog]

However, we should and need to interact. We need to look each other in the eye occasionally. We need to connect at a higher level than just listening to the same thing at the same time.

At our Zoom church meeting, there is an extended time of sharing for prayer requests. We get to "see" the person sharing better than if they were across the aisle. There is feedback and interaction easier than sitting in pews all facing the same way. In our previous Mennonite church we sat in a circle; that was better.

[RZehr]

However, we should and need to interact. We need to look each other in the eye occasionally. We need to connect at a higher level than just listening to the same thing at the same time.

At our Zoom church meeting, there is an extended time of sharing for prayer requests. We get to "see" the person sharing better than if they were across the aisle. There is feedback and interaction easier than sitting in pews all facing the same way. In our previous Mennonite church we sat in a circle; that was better.

And is it more effective than sitting in your circle? We also sit in circles for certain meetings.
We sit in pews for church service, most of our personal connecting is done before or after the service.

I’m not totally against Zoom. But to suggest it is anywhere close to equal to meeting in person is to suppose that social media is equal to real life. Nothing like meeting in person to really communicate. Media is great for temporary facades and fakery. Body language is useful.

I get that you are probably only promoting Zoom from a COVID standpoint. And not necessarily saying that meeting in person is a thing of the past or not necessary or better. And I too believe we are at a time in history that some temporary modification was/is in order. But for the same reasons churches have met in person in the past, we should not use COVID to throw out all that knowledge about meeting.

[barnhart]

Unfortunately, the position Alberta, California, New York City, and other places have taken is that church absolutely is banned - regardless of if masks are worn, distancing is practiced, and so on...

Still meeting regularly, including singing, legally, here in NYC.

The why did the Supreme Court have to rule last week to allow Catholic masses and Orthodox synagogues to meet?

I would assume they have no intention of respecting occupancy restrictions. We do. The storefront churches are in operation as well.

[Ernie]

Still meeting regularly, including singing, legally, here in NYC.

The why did the Supreme Court have to rule last week to allow Catholic masses and Orthodox synagogues to meet?

They had huge buildings but were only allowed 10 or 25 persons during red phases. It made no sense, especially when other large buildings were allowed more occupants.

The courts said that restrictions should be based on size of building not on number of persons, especially if the organizations are following all the health orders and more besides.

[Josh]

Still meeting regularly, including singing, legally, here in NYC.

The why did the Supreme Court have to rule last week to allow Catholic masses and Orthodox synagogues to meet?

They had huge buildings but were only allowed 10 or 25 persons during red phases. It made no sense, especially when other large buildings were allowed more occupants.

The courts said that restrictions should be based on size of building not on number of persons, especially if the organizations are following all the health orders and more besides.

It made plenty of sense if one believes that the governor and mayor of NY and NYC have a desire to shut down religious services and break apart religious communities.

[Ernie]

It made plenty of sense if one believes that the governor and mayor of NY and NYC have a desire to shut down religious services and break apart religious communities.

Yeah... I don't believe that.
I believe every governor is trying to get their state back to having large religious gatherings again.
The governors just have different ways of going about it. Some want to build herd immunity and suffer the consequences and the others want to wait for a vaccine and suffer a different set of consequences.

[barnhart]

I believe every governor is trying to get their state back to having large religious gatherings again.
The governors just have different ways of going about it. Some want to build herd immunity and suffer the consequences and the others want to wait for a vaccine and suffer a different set of consequences.

Yes. Irritating religious communities does them no good in terms of re election or a governing mandate.