Church 2.0

From the outside, it's easy to mistake Soulation.org as an apologetics blog. Some of this is self-inflicted; Dale & Jonalyn Fincher, the site's cofounders, often describe themselves as apologists. To be honest, I can't blame them. "Apologetics" is a label the broader faith community will accept. And (double bonus), it puts Dale in the same category as one of his heroes, C.S. Lewis.

But let's not judge this blog by its cover. It's way more than just a run-of-the-mill "convert the skeptics" site. If you ask me, Dale & Jonalyn have created a 21st-century church. They might take issue with that label, but they do agree with another label that struck me when I hung out with them in January: A spiritual Ellis Island. A place that welcomes spiritual immigrants.

Dale pointed out in our conversation that there's "so much confusion over what a 'church' is today." I think he's right. In the Winter 2013 issue of Leadership Journal I wrote about my friend Tim Schuster, pastor and co-founder of the innovative Midtown Church. Tim observed that when we say "church planting" what we often mean is "starting a worship service." Admittedly Soulation pushes—hard—on the boundaries of what we might think of as church, and, for good measure, pushes some serious buttons, too. (You thought GLBT issues were tough? Try counseling Christians with bondage fetishes.)

I imagine members of the earliest churches would have a hard time recognizing their 20th-century great, great grandchildren as "church." Sound systems? Movies? Chairs even! So I'm not surprised if 20th-century church folk might have a hard time recognizing the beta versions of 21st-century church. The Millennials among us might call this Church 2.0.

A church without walls—and without worship

The terms "ministry" and "parachurch" have become so broad as to be almost meaningless catch-all terms (sort of like, well, "church"). I love Tim Schuster's implicit challenge for ministers to look beyond worship services as we seek to understand what church really is. Indulge me for a moment as I geek out on a critical but underappreciated role of church that we've conveniently pushed into the catch-all ministry.

I think any basic, working definition of church must include the presence of a supportive, trustworthy ministry leader providing guidance and counsel through the rocky process of spiritual formation. While some non-negotiables of church such as baptism and the Lord's Supper aren't easily transferable to an online platform, if forging disciples through the fire of spiritual crisis isn't included in our definition of church, what is?

In traditional church paradigms, there is an asymmetry of power and information, even when we have best intentions in how we approach spiritual counseling and formation. I am not anonymous to the ministry leader (save perhaps in the case of contemporary Catholic confessionals). The ministry leader holds the imprimatur of power and authority. And there is a specific geographic place in which I will "be received" (whether I'm receiving comfort or castigation).

Look behind the cover of "apologetics" and it becomes clear that the primary purpose of Soulation is to provide a contemporized function for spiritual formation. They have done this by flipping the traditional church paradigm of spiritual counseling and formation on its head. Soulation accomplishes this by using chat rooms, an on-line capability more often associated with porn sites than ministries. They call their chat feature "Ask Live," made by appointment.

At Soulation, I hold the power, not the ministry leader. I decide if the discussion around my spiritual crisis is public, via Soulation's My Faith Hurdle—or if it's private, via Ask Live. I don't have to worry about whether the ministry leader will breach "pastor confidentiality," because I decide if I'll "attend" Soulation under my real name or an anonymous handle. And the "ministry leader"—one of the (currently) 18 spiritual advisers who form the backbone of the Soulation spiritual formation team—have no control. They will be named if I want them to be. Their thoughts and responses to me will be made public if I want them to be. Of course they control what they say—just not to whom they say or who else gets to see it.

This isn't the only "flip" compared to a more traditional church model. As Dale points out, "It changes the 'church' approach from passive (sitting in pews hearing the few) to active (all members of the body participating if they wish to). And the added advantage is that others get to listen in to hear their question batted around even if they never voiced it. This pulls people out of the shadows."

Obedience, meet permission

In his book You Lost Me, David Kinnaman makes a brief, but powerful, point. Many of yesterday's church leaders grew up in an "obedience model." It's a keen insight. By the way, David doesn't mean that the pastors or church leaders had to obey. They were obeyed—and my attendance at church was assumed. Without question there will be no questions!

But the world's gone all topsy-turvy since those days, hasn't it? We now live in a world grown permissive, both literally and figuratively. My work keeps me at the intersection of faith and business development, which, in turn, brings me into contact with hundreds of pastors and ministry leaders. Most pastors are having a hard time finding their way, because the compasses designed for an obedience world (i.e., they will come to us!) don't work in a permissive world (i.e., will they come to us?). A precious few, like the Finchers, demonstrate acumen in navigating the permissive world.

I wasn't surprised that David Kinnaman invited Jonalyn to be one of the speakers on part of the You Lost Me LIVE tour. It was there that I first met Jonalyn and Dale. But I really got to know them when they let me stay in their home.

Talking theology and spiritual formation for two days with them was mostly exhilarating, but also a bit exhausting. But learning about their model—how it likely represents part of the church of the future—was fascinating. Soulation represents a very safe, permissively anonymous "way station" for the churched, formerly churched and unchurched alike as they confront the hurdles that keep them from being fully present. The Finchers hope all of Soulation's audience will come to (or come back to) church—but that doesn't necessarily mean "20th-century church."

Dale mentioned to me, "We think the 'local church' as an organization is misapplied in biblical terms. Coming to Jesus, growing with him in community (online or physically) places you in the Church even if you don't attend a local assembly regularly. Church 2.0 requires this. It's something most people are not talking about, or thinking about, and it's hurting the larger effort of helping the group of Millennials that David Kinnaman calls "Exiles" in You Lost Me. If we can't agree that Soulation represents church itself, I sincerely hope we will all agree Soulation and its future progeny are the types of spiritual Ellis Islands the coming generations will need and expect as they decide whether to engage in the "country" we might call the church as a body.

Chris Kopka is helping launch an integrated business/ministry model around faith and finances with Brightpeak Financial. This is the first of a three part article by Chris on "Church 2.0." Stay tuned to Leadership Journal for Chris's companion pieces.