Mike's musings

Hi Mike,

Ersz here. What an absolytely wonderful and engaging discourse on the our venture into the brave new world that is Second Life. I think you have captured who we are and the spirit with which we approach what we do admirably. It would be good to read more from you via the Anglican blog as well 8)).
 

Great paper Mike.

What drives my involvement is the desire to engage with our culture. This sounds rather trite! But the twist is creating something today that engages tomorrow. As the virtual interface grows, so we grow with it.

Rather than the usual approach of cautious late adoption my vision is to be right there at the edge.

And why not? We the church have a powerful story to tell, whatever the setting.

Also reading your paper reminded me of the healthy growth we have been experiencing..

You recorded we had 39 members in the Facebook group, now 50 and that the Anglican Group in SL was 276, which is now 361!

Thanks for your involvement mate.

Rev Mark (Arkin)
 

Thanks Mike
Well worth handing your essay on to our ordination training group here in Christchurch, NZ.
 

Thank you Mike for sharing this with us. You provide a good introduction to the history of the Anglicans in Second Life (AISL)Cathedral as well as to some of the theological issues that arise from the endeavour.

I came to Second Life with the intention of exploring the viability of a fresh expression of church within this context. It has been a great joy to see the Cathedral grow and flourish as a base ecclesial community, and, even as a Methodist, to be a part of that community.

I think you have captured the sense of a mixed community there well. The Leadership should be commended in their success: remaining distinctly Anglican and serving the needs of such a variety of people is a real challenge. I believe the missio Dei, as evidenced in Scripture, does not address any of humanity in a generic de-contextualised form. Whether it is Jesus portrayed as the Messiah, the Lord or the logos; whether God's redemptive activity comes in terms of the new birth to Nicodemus, the kingdom of God in the Synoptics, justification by faith to the Romans and Galatians, or the superior sacrifice to the Hebrews; whether it speaks exodus for slaves, a warning and call to repentance for idolaters and perpetrators of injustice, or the demand to give up riches to the rich young ruler, the gospel addresses concrete situations and human needs.

Faith discourse takes the form of a personal relationship, and for this to be authentic, it must be truly mutual. The people who find their way to the Cathedral may or may not have experienced God, and may or may not have an expression of that experience. Significant dialogue is necessary for us to engage these people in ministry and mission. The Cathedral's history has demonstrated an acute awareness that, as the first step, Christians seeking to minister in this new frontier must immerse themselves in the reality of the other. From the side of the other, openness to relationship is naturally essential. Only when there is authentic relationship does the possibility exist that we may communicate the Good News we have experienced and heard in Jesus Christ.

This relational demand of faith is then surprisingly consistent with some interpretations of the phenomena of social networking. Moving away from the individuality of modernity (based on the famous ‘I think, therefore I am’ of Descartes), these interpretations argue that to be, is to be in relationship. The missio Dei demands incarnational ministry: we must know people, know and experience their context, encounter their struggles and live with them in their joys. Only then are we in a place to make a proclamation of significance that names the evangelion as revealed in Jesus Christ.

I think this is the heart of what it means to be a fresh expression of church within Second Life. So, therefore, my only point of slight divergence with you is your concern that the absence of the Sacraments leads you to consider that the Cathedral is not a "full" expression of church. As someone heavily involved with ecumenical dialogue on a variety of levels, a definition of church that insists on the inclusion of sacraments is problemmatical to some denominations, such as the Salvation Army, and even between churches whose concept of the sacraments and what makes them valid are radically different. Even within Anglican spirituality, as important as they are to self-identity, are not these rites secondary in terms of what it means to be the Body of Christ? Sacramental rites point to a deep reality which, when lived out, can make even online churches 'sacramental' communities.

I agree that more discussion is needed on this and other questions raised. Nevertheless, the AISL Cathedral powerfully demonstrates that incarnational church is both possible in theory and attractive to a growing number of people in practice within virtual worlds such as Second Life.

Regards,

Revd Gareth Edwards
(Gareth Janus)
 

Thanks indeed, Mike, a lovely read.
I'd have to agree with Gareth here regarding the sacraments. Many churches - including Anglican and Catholic - have specific guidelines regarding the elements - for Anglicans, the 1662 BCP stipulation regarding the host is it "shall suffice that the Bread be such as is usual to be eaten; but the best and purest Wheat Bread that conveniently may be gotten." Catholics are particularly strict regarding the host, and recently a communion has been declared invalid by the Catholic church since the host involved contained no wheat. There is also enough conflict in the church already regarding the "reality" of the elements, and I think that SL bread would be quite a slap in the face to those who believe in transsubstantiation, for obvious reasons. The appropriate type of blessing in SL is simply a blessing - without invoking specific sacraments.

I also have reservations regarding the Cathedral a "full expression of the church." I would take the position that it would be best for the Cathedral to aim to be the fullest authentic expression of the church as is possible in the medium in which it exists, while recognizing its limitations, and encouraging its individual members to overcome those limitations.

Concretely, this means: we are not a "real", bricks-and-mortar, in-the-flesh church, and we encourage all SL'ers who are not full participants in an RL church to find meaningful fellowship in an RL church - even if it means sacrificing some or all time spent in the SL church. With this added to the charter, I believe many who are currently opposed to the idea of an SL church would understand better what it is we intend to do - i.e., we do not wish to replace the function of the RL church - to the contrary, we wish to be a conduit to the RL church for those who, for a period of time, for whatever reason, are not members of RL churches, or who are not finding sufficient fellowship in RL churches.

Naturally, we also don't want to "kick people out" when they have found RL churches, but rather recognize the SL cathedral as a particular type of ministry similar to participation in a parachurch organization.

Perhaps a study could be done of the tensions between other parachurch organizations and "real" churches, to shed light on the specific issues of being a "virtual church" - a church in some respects, but then in others, not. This would not only have the benefit of assuaging fears of the RL churches, but our own pro-active attitude at discovering the challenges of working in this kind of ministry would also allow us to profit from the wisdom and experiences of others working in churches that diverge from the traditional church model - inspiring new ideas, and preventing mistakes in ministry.