Video venues are flying off the ecclesial griddle like hot
cakes. Everyone seems to be doing it. Some with great success, if success is
primarily determined by increased attendance at the multi-site video venue
church. Many growing churches are getting behind this trend. Who knows if the
trend is here to stay or merely a flash in the pan? Regardless, I am convinced
that churches must carefully and prayerfully consider not only the short-term
but long-term practical and theological implications of launching a site where
the preacher is not present but projected.
Here are some of the major pros and cons of video venue
preaching. The question that must be asked and answered is, do the pros
outweigh the cons or vice versa?
Pros of Projection
-The most effective
preacher gets projected. Let’s face it, there are relatively few preachers
who hit the sermonic ball out of the park on a regular basis. And, there are
many who are mediocre at best. Why shouldn’t the church put her best foot
forward in order to impact more lives through preaching? So much is at stake. Seekers
who visit churches do not typically return a second time to hear irrelevant
sermons that seem disconnected from real life. An effective projected preacher
seems better than an ineffective present preacher.
-Video venue
preaching is efficient. It doesn’t take too much time or money to launch a
video venue. The main expense is renting a facility with seating capacity and
projection capability. While most video venues have a campus pastor/host who is
present, you don’t need a high quality and expensive communicator. That person
is projected. So, if you can rent a facility with projection and recruit a
campus host, you can launch a video venue site rather quickly. If efficiency is
what you’re looking for, the video venue is for you.
-Current culture is
enamored with the screen. Many North Americans spend countless hours each
week looking at a computer screen, TV screen, or big screen at the local movie
theatre. Simply put, people are used to the screen. A case could be made,
however, that people are sick of looking at screens and find a live performance
refreshing. But, apparently, many nominally churched and unchurched people feel
as though a projected preacher is safer than a present preacher.
Cons of Projection
-A projected preacher
proclaiming a God who “became flesh and dwelt among us” feels like a
contradiction. The incarnation of God in Christ is the central event of
Christianity. God came onto our turf as one of us to save us because he loves
us. He came to 1st century Jews as a 1st century Jew. He
was physically neck deep in the culture he was trying to reach. He preached
profoundly to people because he put himself in their sandals and walked where
they walked. “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us” (John
1:14a). God didn’t show up as a projection but as real presence. How can a Christian
preacher do anything less?
-A projected preacher
cannot preach a truly contextual sermon. Every congregational context is
different. The sermon developed for the mother church is not designed specifically
for the multi-site video venue, especially if those contexts are radically
different. The live “in the flesh” sermon I preach at a Caucasian church in an
affluent suburb of Dallas will not contextually connect via video to an African
American congregation in an impoverished urban area. Plus, the projected
preacher on video cannot adjust “on the fly” to congregational cues during the
preaching event. Can pastoral preaching really be done from a distance?
-Projecting one preacher
prevents others preachers from being developed. If we are concerned about
utilizing our best preacher, then video venue is the way to go. But, if we are
focused on developing the next generation of preachers, the video venue should
be avoided. The way to develop more and better preachers is to give them lots and
lots of opportunities to preach. If the resident preaching pro is the only one
preaching, the growth of potential preachers on the team will be stifled. In
the short run, projecting the best communicator seems wise, but it is disastrous
in the long run. When the elite projected preachers are gone who will replace
them? Under-developed preachers?
More pros and cons of video venue preaching could be listed,
so I welcome your response. Do you think the pros outweigh the cons or that the
cons outweigh the pros? Is video venue preaching driven by pragmatism or
theology? As I wrestle with these questions, I am genuinely interested in your perspective.
In fact, I need it.
