Why #socialmedia demands a revolution in #mission - a lecture sponsored by @youthscape and @stmellitus

This Monday I attended the 1st ever annual youthwork lecture sponsored by @Youthscape and @stmellitus .  It was held at  St. Mellitus College in Collingham Road, London SW5.  With a #SMCYS hashtag for tweets on the event its Eventbrite information was titled "The Stories In Which We Find Ourselves: Why social media demands a revolution in mission".

Free audio form the event is here.  The event was specifically aimed at those working with young people.  But the issues it raised on social media obviously have a wider application to all social media users the church engages with. The picture below is a mega summary of the points I took away. What follows after that is my take on the event in more detail - along with some of the slides shown and commentary provided by the speakers.  

As it happens the event coincided with some other events on similar topics this week:

- Monday's seminar in Oxford entitled Theological Futures: Digital and Ecological  - discussing issues like 'What is the nature of the “hope” that will be required for human beings to navigate the challenges posed to us by the contemporary ecological crisis? '

- Tuesday's #liedentity conference run by the Diocese of Gloucester with @BishGloucester- which addressed the growing issue of negative body image and the resulting mental and physical health difficulties especially for young people.

- Today's announcement that MPs on the Commons Science and Technology Committee are to investigate the impact of social media and screens on youth. "We want to determine the scale of the issues - separating out the understandable concerns from the hard evidence, and to identify what practical measures people are already taking to boost the benefits and blunt the potential harms. "

A BIT MORE DETAIL

Doors opened 6pm, nibbles and drinks were available and the event started at 6.30pm and finished 8.30pm.  



Introduction

After a brief series of plugs for St. Mellitus courses and some Youthscape research coming out next Monday St. Mellitus' Alice Smith @youthworkmum - their youth work tutor - 

introduced the event and its format. There were three parts to the lecture - a short overview of social media platforms, a longer reflection on the philosophical/theological issues surrounding social media, a third section on thoughts as to what this all meant for youth workers and a Q&A at the end. 




An overview of young people's use of social media

@lahnapottle - a specialist on 16-19 year olds from Youthscape - led this first session.  Lahna gave a quick overview of Snapchat, Instagram, Twitter, You Tube, WhatsApp, Facebook and music.ly .  Common features across many of these platforms were various filters for editing pictures to allow the "perfect" selfie to be posted. 

- Some like Snapchat and Instagram only kept pictures shared for a limited time before they were deleted and gone for ever, (although as I recall other apps/phones can capture smartphone screen images - so the auto-delete functionality doesn't guarantee pictures won't be stored elsewhere and shared later).  

- Snapchat's Streaks feature keeps track of the number of consecutive days of messaging between friends - so people refer to a "200 day streak" - and some young people use this measure to quantify how serious their friendships are.

- Youtube's autoplay feature starts up the next clip when the current one has finished.  So people can easily spend a lot of time on youtube watching clips served up to them by the sites' algorithms.  90% of 13-17yr olds use YouTube and the site has created a number of new stars.  Younger people watch more youtube than cable or TV.

- A current top 10 app for 11-13 year olds is Musical.ly on which you can film a lip sync video to share within the app.  The app has created a number of musical.ly lip synching stars.

- Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat users were 3-4 times more likely to come across cyber-bullying, (compared with twitter and you-tube users)

- Facebook and Instagram were the worst in terms of their impact on well-being and mental health.

Lahna had limited time to cover a vast subject.  So by necessity there must have been much she'd have liked to say but didn't have time for.  From my perspective I guess I'd add the following three points to her overview of social media apps ...

1) social media platforms are not neutral.  Of course they market themselves as a neutral platform that individuals can use to interact with others and express themselves.  But they are also businesses which promise advertisers, (and those seeking to influence elections), highly targetable options to get their message to the right people.  All of this functionality uses the data we reveal via our online interactions and which we often don't knowingly give specific and explicit permission to be used.  (Thus the well known social media quote - "If the product is free you are the product").

2) social media apps amplify our own unconscious bias.  They use algorithms to work out what we like and view and then serve up more of the same to us.  So they magnify our unconscious bias to follow and listen to those with views and tastes similar to our own.

3) the larger social media companies behave just like monopoly suppliers.  Their owners promote themselves as innovators and entrepreneurs facilitating a better and more informed world.  But as they become big capitalist businesses they tend to behave like a monopoly - creating expensive barriers to entry to markets and/or buying out any competitors before they become a threat.  So for example  - Facebook bought Instagram for $1 billion in 2012 and acquired WhatsApp in 2014 for $19 billion.



How can philosophy and theology help in understanding social media

Dr John McDade, ( former Principal of Heythrop College, University of London ), then talked through some of the philosophical and theological issues around social media. 

In doing so he shared various quotes from other thinkers on some of the deeper issues around understanding ourselves and our self image.  I've arranged some of John's insights around some themes that I discerned when reviewing his slides and points.  ( I make this point as John didn't explicitly have "headings" to sections of his lecture).


The modern world and Christianity

Towards the beginning of his lecture John made a comment something like "people don't want to feel about themselves the way they think Christianity will make them feel".  He also showed the quote below to make the point that the current pope - unlike the previous two - isn't fighting with modernity. 

Later on in the lecture one of his slides had the following quote "God is missing and is not missed" - and after that the slide made this point -  "Many people now live in a de-sacralised world in which God is not mentioned, but in which digital versions of reality are increasingly pervasive.  Are these related?"  

What I took from these points was that christians need to recognise that the world has changed and it won't be changing back to some fondly remembered arrangement in which traditional approaches to mission worked.  So if we want to engage with the world - mission - we need to change how we do that.

Humans - wonderfully made but imperfect

On one slide John wrote "The worship of false gods in which we invest our intention is only to be expected".  On another slide, (below), he reflected on humans' imperfections.

On the theme of idols his slides had several quotes ...

- "Recognising idols for what they are does not break their enchantment" WH Auden

- "A society whose members are helpless need idols" Erich Fromm

- "Man differs from the other animals in his greater aptitude for imitation" Aristotle

John summarised some of this on a slide which said that - for Girard - imitation is closely linked to desire, desire is linked to need (neglect), need drives us toward idols and unreality.

Believe in your Selfie - What I took from these points is that although made in the image of God humans are pre-disposed to replace God with idols - which they then try to imitate to feel needed. Social media is just the latest tool that allows us to replace God with idols. 

The impact of digital culture on the sense of self and the sense of God

Using a combination of slides and commentary John described how as a child he had played cowboys and Indians - and in that make believe world he had "killed" hundreds of Indians.  He pondered whether virtual/digital reality might infantilise us with its elements of play-acting (masquerade).  Pre social media this "playing" was evident in how pop-stars, (think Madonna or Bowie), reinvented themselves several times.  The arrival of social media created a way for more people to re-invent themselves in an imagined second self.

John quoted Pascal (1623-62) and his insights on :

- our dissatisfaction with our lives "we are not satisfied with the life we have in ourselves and our own being.  We want to lead an imaginary life in the eyes of others and so to make an impression"

- how imagination allows us to escape that dissatisfaction - "imagination is the dominant faculty in people, master of error and falsehood, all the more deceptive for not being invariably so"

He also quoted D Bromwich on the physical self, second self theme - "It is not enough for us to be real to ourselves within ourselves.  We want to be completely special, yet we want to be completely normal."

Briefly John also looked at the use of avatars in digital games and realities - how quickly people identified with their avatar and how some people thought that together - the physical and the digital  - "we make one complete person".

He also relayed a story from 2007 of a married couple who - separately - using false names in an online chat room   thought they had found their soulmate who they could pour their heart out to.

Sonia 27 ("Sweetie" in the chatroom) - "I was suddenly in love.  It was amazing, we seemed to be stuck in the same kind of miserable marriages"

So they arranged a physical date with each other - only to discover that the other person was in fact their current partner.  In 2007 they were getting divorced and accusing each other of being unfaithful.

Adnan 32 ("Prince of Joy" in the chatroom) - "I still find it hard to believe that Sweetie, who wrote such wonderful things, is actually the same women I married who has not said a nice word to me for years"

All of these observations led to some questions

and some observations ....

also ...

- what we attend to is what we worship,

- how do we help people develop a truthful sense of self?

And now for some theology

Across a number of slides John summarised James A Smith's "Desiring the kingdom; Worship, Worldview and cultural formation" and his four features of our nature ....

1. Humans are intentional creatures whose way of 'intending' [directing their focus and purpose] is LOVE or DESIRE.

2. This love (often unconscious and non-cognitive) is always aimed at some particular version of the good life.  (We aim always to flourish even though we make bad choices).

3. There are always sets of habits and dispositions that prime us to be oriented, and to act, in certain ways.  (What your body does your soul registers).

4. Affective, bodily means, such as bodily practices, routines and rituals, grab hold of the heart through the imagination and form the person.  (We always shape or condition ourselves: and the way we do this folds back on the way we are).  You are never without your conditioner!  We create a culture that express our nature, and in turn that nature comes back and re-models us.

So as John sees it - 

- Smith offers a perspective on the formation of identity that shifts the focus away from an issue of 'knowledge' (what I believe at the level of ideas) to one of 'affect' or 'affection' (what or whom do I love?)

- Generally religious people place too much emphasis on what people believe conceptually. 'Hope' is a more interesting opening on the human heart.

- What do the rituals of your body tell you to be?

- The task for humans is how to find our way to non-idolatrous worship.

- "These days, most people do not name as 'gods' the gods they worship" (N. Lash, Holiness, Speech and Silence 38).

- Love requires practice, and practices confirm and express love.  Smith thinks of two kinds of practices or habits

In more on thin practices John set out that ,,,

- Thin practices might have unintended consequences such as their effect on the way we think and feel.  We can be shaped by trivial matters.

- No practice is neutral - there is always some goal (human flourishing in some fashion) and there is always some effect.

- Is dependence on digital reality a 'thin' habit?  Or ....

On more detail on Thick habits John set out that ...

- Smith analyses and evaluates a range of activities as 'liturgies', 'rituals of worship'

- Liturgies are 'ritual practices that function as pedagogies of ultimate desire (87)
(Note: ped . a .go . gy  - n. 1) the art or profession of teaching, 2) preparatory training or instruction)

- There can be 'secular' activities that are in fact 'rituals of worship'

Thoughts as to what this all means for youth workers

In the final session @martinsaunders shared some thoughts on practical ideas from the various points and observation in the lecture.  He had four points:

Young people need space to find the real them ... without the filters that social media apps provide.  A chance to look at their "1st attempt selfie".  Of course for youth workers this equally challenges them to ask whether they have found the real me.

Teenagers find adventure and purpose in online communities ... and we need to help them accept the adventure of a radical Christian life.

The non-stop digital life is exhausting ... provide refuge experiences of meditation, fasting and silence to allow people to unhook and reflect.

The world of young people has changed ... we need to understand those changes to gain an insight into how young people experience life.


Related links
- a recent study on teens and social media

5 tips for #hristians in the #public square - inspired & taken from a @TheosThinkTank report

These ideas are taken from Doing good: a future for christianity in the 21st century published December 2016 - a 76 page Theos Thinktank publication. 

Uisng some of my own words and headlines and many from the report I've summarised below the points in it that struck me. 

Recent history & christianity

Over recent history there has been a decline in church attendance as the default identity for those born in the UK has moved from ‘Christian’ to ‘no religion’ (page 11).  




For the majority this loss of Christian identity has not been replaced with atheistic certainty but rather with a personalised spirituality.  The way forward for church is to engage with this deep-rooted human curiosity in ‘things eternal’ through the demonstration of love in ‘things temporal’.  

Some views of the church's past, present or future only describe it in numbers. They are detached from any sense of “life to the full” or of the true meaning of the Kingdom of God that Jesus came preaching (page 11).  

The one trend pertaining to Christianity in contemporary Britain that runs against this narrative of decline is that of ‘social action’.  Levels have risen considerably over the last ten years. There may be fewer people on pews but there are many more running luncheon clubs, and mums and toddlers’ groups, and foodbanks, and homeless charities, and debt advice centres, and drop-in centres, and the like. Christians are ‘doing good’ (page 12)

Doing God, Doing Good & Social Liturgy

The report suggests a view for the future for UK Christianity where "Doing God" is inextricably linked to the practice of "Doing Good" (page 10).  This is service as witness firmly rooted in and unashamed of its faith in Jesus Christ.  

This "Social Liturgy" is a way for Christians to demonstrate their faithfulness to the two greatest commandments – loving God and loving your neighbour – in a way that is both distinctive and inclusive (page 7).  

Social Liturgy is a deliberately unfamiliar phrase.  Leitourgia - the New Testament Greek word can be used to mean both priestly service within the Temple and public charitable activity.   So Social Liturgy is adopted to capture the idea of charitable public action that is also priestly, or directed immediately at the divine (page 12).  It is a simultaneous expression of love of God and of neighbour.  A way of worshipping God through finding and serving him in others. 

The phrase is not simply a return to the admirable but ultimately discredited methods of the social gospel movement of the past.  Social liturgy is just another way of worshipping God in public.  It is this kind of ‘Doing Good’ by which we will "Do God" in the 21st century (page 13)

God has offered every one of us a new start which requires us to show others that they are loved by God (page 11).  This 'Doing Good’ is about coming alongside other people, not as technocratic experts and still less as people whose own lives are fully sorted.  But rather as people who are themselves disciples, or ‘learners’ alert to their own fallibility and need for love and healing. It is not about delivering services but more about developing mutual service between persons, not ‘fixing’ poverty, or problems, or people, but building relationships of common care that recognise, humanise and heal (page 10).  

Christians don't have a monopoly on social action.  People engage in social action for any number of reasons: duty, enlightened self-interest, personal need, undiluted selflessness, and religious conviction. 

We need to guard against the deadening idea that all social action is - or should be - inspired by depersonalised and disinterested motivations, and which sees a ‘hidden agenda’ in anything that appears to deviate from this supposed norm.  All social action should ideally be authentic, true to its own motivations, and that is no less the case for "Social Liturgy". 

Social liturgy should be authentically Christian, marked, among other things, by commitment, love and recognition of the personal nature of all social encounters.  

Other Theos research has indicated that persistence, relationality and localised engagement are just three ways in which the authentically Christian nature of forms of social engagement can manifest itself.  Others – such as an emphasis on hospitality, or hopefulness, or unconditional acceptance – might also apply.  Just as those Christians and churches motivated to serve their communities will do so for authentic theological motivations, they will also need to do so in ways that embody – that really live out – those motivations (Chapter 3).

Dealing with the why questions - why do this - why do it this way?

Knowing the logic that underpins Social Liturgy and enabling that to inform what and how it is done, leads to the need for honest answers to others questions about ‘why are you doing this?’ and ‘why are you doing this in this way?

The answers are ones that are easier to get wrong than to get right. If Christians are doing this because of their Christian faith, they owe it to others to say so.  That, however, can easily send them across the spectrum into the other pitfall which is seeing the curious question as an invitation to deliver a sermon or apologetic lecture.  If there is real potential in the idea of Social Liturgy, there are also problems – or at least potential problems ..... proselytism, pluralism, public legitimacy and public reasoning.  

What follows are some thoughts on getting our answers right to the "why" questions and how they affect these 4 areas.

Proselytism - Some will argue that if Social Liturgy is seen as a future for the church doesn't that mean it is a merely a way of growing the church.  There are two responses to this accusation that bear careful repeating. 

Firstly such an approach is explicitly and repeatedly censured in Christian teaching. In the Sermon on the Mount, Christ is about as clear on the dynamics of gift and service as it is possible to be. Those who claim to follow him should not give with strings attached. Generosity should be generosity, not a covert exchange, whether for favours, social approval or converts.  

Should those engaged in Social Liturgy seek, then, to make ‘disciples’?   They should aim to do what it is there to do – help, heal, counsel, feed, clothe, etc. – and to be open about the theological reason behind it.  If that intrigues and engages people who then proceed to ask questions and enquire about Christianity – good: that is the right moment to respond intelligently and sensitively to any questions asked. If, conversely, it does not intrigue and engage people, who move on without ever wondering about Christianity – good: a genuine human need has still been served and a public good achieved. 

Pluralism - some will argue that in a religiously plural nation like the UK specifically religiously-inspired projects risk destabilising that pluralism and fracturing the concord that underpins any society that is criss-crossed by substantive differences.  

There have been many examples of how Christian public action has worked to calm, rather than provoke, community tensions.  The 2013 Theos report, Making Multiculturalism Work put further empirical evidence on the theoretical bones - “the central criterion for participation is that an organisation must show that it is willing and able to work with people from different backgrounds and perspectives”.

Public Legitimacy - some will argue that a church which is part of the establishment already - but only attracts 2% of people each Sunday - already has too much of a voice in the public square and indeed have forfeited their right to seriously shape our common life which properly should be the right of the other 98%.   

But of course there is no other 98%.  The fact that around 15 million adults call themselves Christians  - even if many rarely darken the door of a church is not immaterial and if it denotes anything it is surely that they have some kind of loose sympathy with the Christian worldview.   More importantly, however, the other 98%, or the other 60%, does not comprise a homogenous whole, whose view is coherent and consistent. 

For all that people formed by different cultural and ideological commitments will disagree about the nature (and even the existence) of a common good, the practical reality tends to be different. Few people actively think that it is wrong to visit the lonely, look after children, provide lunch clubs for the elderly, offer support to the bereaved, provide rehabilitation for addicts, steer drunks from the gutter, give up space for community ventures, support asylum seekers, and host foodbanks, jobs clubs, and debt advice centres. Such activities show a concrete commitment to the public good that you have to try very hard to deny.  

So on this logic, public legitimacy is at least informed by concrete commitment to a palpable public good. The answer to the question ‘why should we pay any (special) attention to what you say?’ lies not in the fact of establishment, nor in the fiction that the non-religious view is homogenous and represented by vocal secular groups. Instead the answer to the question should rest on the demonstrable fact of contributing to the public good. It is those who are doing good – irrespective of whether they are also doing God – who merit most attention in a plural public square such as ours.

Public Reasoning - some have a concern about religious reasoning in public life that draws on textual (e.g. the bible) or institutional (e.g. papal) authorities.  Put simply such authorities are'nt accepted by many others and tend to be unsupported by the evidence. .  Thus it is perfectly legitimate to offer explicitly religious reasons in presenting public justifications for laws or public policies.  Of course although legitimate this does not mean such justifications are necessarily sensible or advisable.  

But we also need to tackle the myth that there is some neutral and universally acceptable way of reasoning.  We all come from somewhere and in part that affects our reasoning. The reality is there is no ‘everyone’ from whom we should expect principled agreement concerning the foundations, logic and language of our argument. Liberal secularism, while priding itself on making space for pluralism, in fact contains unacknowledged exclusivist tendencies that work to close down legitimate diversity. 

In the public square we should expect dissensus rather than consensus, not least about debateable issues.  Public reasoning must pay due attention to the genuinely plural conceptual nature of the public square.  We should not expect agreement on key issues nor should we expect agreement on how to talk about them.  

Arguments need to be grounded in practices.  However just because an institution is delivering a palpable good through society doesn’t mean that its theoretical arguments on that particular topic should win through. ‘Doing Good’ is no substitute for serious arguments and clashing of ideas in the public square.  

Yet if all people are doing is arguing about issues they risk missing the reality of the lives and situations involved.  Arguments are about people and problems, and those arguments that are clearly built on concrete responses to genuine needs should have a particular legitimacy in public debate.

a theology of #church #leadership in 10 points

the 10 points are summarised from this 2014 Faith & Order Commission document - Senior Church Leadership - a resource for refection

1) God calls & redeems people to become a kingdom of priests, a holy nation (Exodus 19.6) & a light to the nations (Isaiah 49.6)

2) and the gifts of the spirit are given to the whole church (1 Corinthians 12.27–30; Ephesians 4.11–12)

3) so the primary exercise of leadership in the church is God’s. (1 Corinthians 12.4–6)

4) but God does call individuals to exercise leadership in and for the people of God

5) as a participation in God’s leadership of the whole people.

6) So the Lord of the Church calls both the church and its leaders to his service 

7) Entrusting both to bring God’s word and pastoral care to a world in need

8) Note that God’s interactions with the world are not confined to the church

9) and that church leadership is both local and at a trans-local level (Hebrews 13.7, 17, 24, 1 Peter 5.1–5, Acts 20.17-35)

10) and that the ethos of leadership in the church is as stewards (1 Corinthians 4.1, Luke 12.41–48) and pastors/shepherds (Ephesians 4.11, Luke 15.3-7, Matthew 18.10–14, John 21.15–17)

strategy - theology/thinking behind some of the various @c_of_e strategy

(ht microsoft clip art for the image)

This is the 7th weekly Wednesday post on #cofestrategy. It draws together the various info and links made available on "HQ" & diocese website about the theology/thinking behind their diocese strategy.

It is based on my review of the strategy documents on the CofE Diocese and  HQ websites as at May/June 2014.  Red coloured font ='s text I have inserted or summarised to aid understanding.

The 1st post in this series was Strategy Headline Statements – a summary of key words each diocese uses.

The 2nd post was Strategy Subject Checklist - a summary of key subjects covered by diocese strategy.

The 3rd post was on Strategy Measures -  a summary of those used by the various diocese strategy.

The 4th post was on Strategy Best Practice - 10 thoughts to ponder.

The 5th post was a Summary of each diocese strategy with links to key documents and websites

The 6th post was a Selection of the graphics & analogies used in some of the diocese strategy

The 7th post (this) was Theology/thinking behind some of the various cofe strategy - with links to documents

CofE - at the national level

GS Misc 995 - "the three areas of work- contributing to the common good, promoting spiritual and numerical growth and reimaging ministry are interconnected and mutually reinforcing. There is no hierarchy between them. Each is indispensible to the effective pursuit of the three objectives set out in the November Presidential Statement. All flow from faithful discipleship."

GS Misc 1025 -  "In relation to the local church, the national bodies of the Church of England have three main roles: to do nationally those things which can only be done effectively and are done most efficiently at national level; to find ways to support the dioceses and parishes in their work, and sometimes to give additional support to aspects of church life which are in danger of being marginalised. All three roles require different kinds of action to be taken."

"Mission Theology and Resources - "The Mission Theology Advisory Group (MTAG) creates mission resources for the whole Church, particularly aimed at reaching people whose spirituality is formed outside the Christian faith. Their resources, Sense Making Faith, Unreconciled? and the website www.spiritualjourneys.org.uk equip Christians to share their faith more effectively and enable spiritual seekers to meet their needs with Christian resources. MTAG‟s Dispossession Project at www.dispossessionproject.org encourages Christians to explore the relationship between mission and social justice (the links between pursuing the common good and going for growth)

GS Misc 1054 - this paper is mostly about the thinking behind the strategy and contains sections on the priority of making new disciples and how this matters because (paragraphs 3-27 of the paper): it is God's mission; it is a matter for all christian communities; it is vitally important; it is the heart of the issue.

GS1815 - this paper sets out some further thinking on possible emphases the 3 areas of work quoted from GS995 above. So, for example, under the the 1st - Contributing as the National Church to the common good - paragraphs 22 to 43 of the paper sets out possible emphases for the areas of work : countering attempts to marginalise Christianity and to treat religious faith more generally as a social problem; being more effective in telling its story; developing the Church’s distinctive contribution to the delivery of statutory education; building partnerships for social cohesion; promoting the wider community use of church buildings; maintaining an international vision.

From the spiritual journeys website - Mission is about finding out what God is doing and joining in. The mission of the Church is founded in hospitality, openness, welcome and reconciliation. Bible passages quoted are 
Matthew 28. 16-20 "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations ...."
John 21.15-17 "Feed my lambs ... Tend my sheep  ..... Feed my sheep"

Mark 16.14-20 "Go into all the world and ...."

Luke 24:44-49 "Repentance and forgiveness of sins is to be proclaimed in his name to all nations ...."

Birmingham - Transforming Church Theology behind Transforming Church: - 1)  The Missio Dei 2) Kingdom & Church; 3)Transformation; 4) Growth; 5) The Laos

Bristol - Releasing the Energy of the kingdom of God.  Theology behind the strategy - in a one page document.

Chelmsford - Transforming Presence - Theology behind the strategy - a bible study on Romans 12 v1 to 15 v13.

Chester - Growth Action Planning where each church decides its priorities - (source = website - as at 22/5/14.)

Ely - Imagining the Future This which includes some of the Theology behind this

Exeter - Mission Communities Diocesan mission plan which also includes some of the Theology behind the plan 

Leicester - Shaped by God - This document which also covers some of the theology behind this

Winchester - Living the Mission of Jesus -  This on the Rule of Life