As most of you will know, there is a Liturgy Facebook Page associated with this website. But you do not “join” such a page, you “like” the page; you can also “follow” the page.
Church has, in the past, tended to talk of a believe-belong-behave approach to being a Christian. But, in a world where “join” has moved to “like”, what might “belong” look like?
We have long used “join” metaphors for baptism, for example. What happens when we use “like” metaphors instead for baptism? What happens when we use “follow” metaphors instead for baptism?
It is very noticeable when church uses web 1.0 approaches in a web 2.0 world.
Web 1.0 was pyramidal, a top-down approach. In web 1.0, the vast majority of people simply acted as consumers of or reactors to what was produced for them. Web 2.0 is about participation, equality, it is interactive; social media is the model…
For the meeting of General Synod Te Hinota Whanui there is a closed Hinota Whanui group. The preferences are set so that only admins can post; others can comment on the post. For the Liturgy Page the settings are such that anyone can post to the page’s timeline. For the church’s facebook page only admins can post.
Young people think and act in a web 2.0/social media culture. Older people think and act in a web 1.0 culture. Older people tend to organise gatherings well ahead – with venue and time and protocols; younger people often have no idea what they will do later in the day until texts are sent around, or facebook is updated, and suddenly there is a group organised and an activity is underway.
Church runs very much in the former, 1.0, model. Is this a reason why young people may not be proportionally present? A lot of what I see in church attempts to “attract young people” may be cosmetic changes, the equivalent of tarting up an image on a static, web 1.0 page…
What might church in the latter model look like? What might worship in the latter model look like? What might liturgy in the latter model look like?
What might church look like in a facebook world?