Two long years ago Jordon Cooper wrote a piece for Next-Wave entitled “Blogging: Advice for Church Websites.” At the time blogs, although ancient in the ever-evolving space of the digerati, were relatively new to church culture. While Jordon's article was aimed at churches, if church websites in 2004 are any indication, they did not take his advice. A broader culture, however, particularly that collectively labeled as the “emergent church,” has seen a rapid adoption of personal publishing technologies over the course of the last two years.

Now the blogging landscape has changed—blogs, and the technologies attached to them, are simply a part of a larger category known as “social software.” The important aspect of blogging was never the technology itself but the paradigms it released into the mainstream—of conversation, of community, of digitally enabling and growing social networks that already exist...like church.

Measured by the amount of money and media thrown at Friendster, Orkut, and their ilk, there must be something to this next generation of social software tools. The curious thing about these products is their ruggedly individualistic approach to community building. The initiators in this space have made a mistake common among technologists—that of seeing the software as a panacea instead of as a tool that empowers and enables what is already taking place.

Social technologies could benefit the church, and vice versa, in both quantifiable and immeasurable ways, but the church—like any other established social structure—must take a few things into account in order to see these results:

1. Intelligence. Most businesses have a Chief Technology Officer, so why not churches? Of course churches are not primarily businesses, but all organizations have the same issues in managing their material and intangible infrastructures, and technology is an integral part of addressing those issues (and often also an issue itself). Churches are rich, diverse pools of raw data, social networking, and distributed resources. Technology exists to enable and facilitate all of these from an organizational perspective.
   
   
2. Nuance. Current social technologies have no built-in way to meaningfully differentiate between my church and my soccer team, because they were built with me, not the communities I'm a part of now or the groups that might form through the use of the technology, at the center. More importantly, there is no way for me to differentiate myself to my church as opposed to my soccer team. We behave and present ourselves in subtly important ways as we move throughout our social circles, and these nuances need to be represented in our social software.
   
   
3. Purpose. Friendster has received millions of dollars from venture capitalists for being a tool used primarily for the arrangement of sexual rendezvous. What church wants to be associated with that meme? Because most social software is general and individualistic, it is not seen as a valid community-building solution for those in the community-building business. Turn the tables and set out to create meaningful, digitally relevant spaces that enhance and grow your church.
   
   
4. Commitment. Most organizations like to assign technology projects—particularly those exploring new space—to one individual and hope for the best. The results are often less than striking. Software is a tool, not a magic pill, and deploying and using a tool so that it works for a group of people requires time and resources. Don't think in terms of, “We're going to use this software and XYZ is going to happen.” Think, “We want to achieve XYZ and this software is going to help us do that.”

Imagine your church community where:

• the book and media library was the collective library of all its members
  
  
• the collective data of ideas and thoughts from the community's bloggers, writers, thinkers, speakers—all the experts in their field—was available and usable
  
  
• small community gatherings were not isolated events but an integrated experience that drew from all other small groups past and present
  
  
• information about the community's movement throughout the city was instantly available and broadcast to subscribers, in their chosen medium
  
  
• small groups, mission trips, seminars, and communion dinners would form—and be enabled—not through the strained efforts of a single leader or spokesperson, but automatically, organically, and collectively through the people that would naturally be the most committed and contributive

...then you might imagine a church that exists not only as a subculture or a school, but once again within the social fabric of our societies—a space of influence, a chosen place to be.

on this side of the faith divide, there is http://www.missionster.net and www.christianster.com
--djchuang ( djchuang at despammed dot com ) on 8/12/2004; 7:03:54 PM

I am hoping to convince our church that it would be worthwhile and fun to recreate our website using a blog paradigm.

I am also surprised that there is no version of friendster that would help people find matches with churches based on questionnaires (practical questions and theological questions) that both the church and potential visitors would answer. the closest thing I have come to is
findaflock.com

Sarah
--Sarah ( theheidts at aya dot yale dot edu ) on 7/31/2004; 10:08:50 PM

Thanks for the positive feedback!

Just as an append to this article, I can be found at Integration Research and danielsjourney.com/design, or by email: daniel at integrationresearch.org
--Daniel ( daniel at integrationresearch dot org ) on 6/6/2004; 4:01:07 PM

I agree totally with the concept of using the internet as a social space where the church can meet and interact organically with itself and others outside its virtual "walls". I am currently trying to construct a web site for my group - ARC Caribbean - with just those things you listed in your article in mind.

I'm aiming for a place where our members can interact with each other via forums, blogging etc, have a central hub to exchange internal info, etc., but still be a place welcoming to others - especially nonbelievers who may have heard about our group and want to learn more about us.

Right now, I'm in the early stages, where I am trying to come up with a usable web site that looks appealing before filling it with the details. Your article resonates with me - I have printed it out along with other articles about social computing that I have collected as I have continued my research.
--Robert ( bajanpoet at hotmail dot com ) on 6/6/2004; 2:13:45 PM