Abstract:

The emergence and subsequent implementation of online social media has transformed many church communities. The utilization of social media has impacted how churches communicate by enabling broad communications and has contributed to the reshaping of community engagement and faith practice in an online social media context.

Introduction

The Internet and online digital technology revolutionized the world when made available to the public in the “1990s providing new opportunities with the continued evolution of the Internet” (Balleste, 2021. p. 40) and by “1995 the Internet and the World Wide Web were established phenomena.”[1] During this time the emergence and development of online social media arose with “sixdegrees.com as the first true social media networking site. It was launched in 1997 with most of the features that would come to characterize such sites where: members could create profiles for themselves, maintain lists of friends, and contact one another through the site’s private messaging system”[2] herein a new era had begun for one to engage in relationship via social media. Today social media estimates of active users indicate there are approximately “three hundred million users on Snapchat, three hundred thirty-five million on Twitter, one billion on Instagram and more than two billion on Facebook, almost everyone everywhere is on social media” (Kim, 2020, p. 20). Prior to the emergence of online social media, for centuries church communities would traditionally meet in person, in a physical location, or church organisational building that was regarded as their place of worship, in which to share faith and engage in social community.

The traditional church worship practice of meeting in person all changed dramatically in early 2020 when the global covid pandemic sent shock waves through church communities and places of worship, wherein “Covid-19 interrupted the ability of congregants to attend church in person and challenged churches to revamp the delivery of their preaching and teaching styles” (Kennett et al., 2020, p. 82). This worldwide global pandemic was a major catalyst that initiated significant change and transformation, churches and places of worship were placed in lock down, were restricted from meeting in person and consequently “in March 2020, most churches rushed not only to be online but also to create as much of an online presence as possible and encourage any and all online engagement” (White, 2023, p. 107). During this time, church organisational operations and places of worship were in a state of flux trying to set up and transition to an all online engagement, together with initiatives to rebrand identity and establish an online presence. Consequently large numbers of communities transitioned to an online social media virtual church context, with reports from “Lifeway Research that found, 45 percent of Americans say they watched a church service online during the Covid-19 pandemic, including many who said they didn’t normally attend in person.” Herein we see the transformative results of social media use by churches in their transition to an online virtual church community. The author Delanty describes the online “virtual community as one of the best examples we have of communication communities” (Delanty, 2018, p. 137) hence the issue of communication plays a major role in the transformation experienced by church communities. It is the communications afforded by social media via online virtual church communities that has facilitated a wider communication reach to extend to a global congregational audience. As stated by “Scott McConnell, executive director of Lifeway Research, he notes, ‘A form of communication that was not even used by most churches before the pandemic has now reached almost half of Americans’” (White, 2023, p. 107). A highlight of this research is the issue of the online church service as a form of communication wherein prior to 2020 was somewhat underutilised by churches even though the internet and online social media had been available to the public in the 1990’s. In 2020 and beyond, we see the results of a large percentage of community population that has transitioned from worship practice in person to an online virtual community that utilizes internet social media to engage in an online virtual place of worship.

Delanty identifies the key features of sharing and social networking as forming part of an online virtual community by stating that “one aim of the virtual community is the sharing of information, but it also has a more general function, as in the case of social networking sites such as Facebook. In such cases, the virtual community interacts with an already established community” (Delanty, 2018, p. 138). In part, it is true that for some churches the virtual community interacts in sharing and socially networking with an already established community, however the argument against this view is that not all church community members have the means, resources, access and ability (i.e. elderly, children, the poor and impoverished) to join and belong to an online virtual church community, therefore this cohort of community is significantly isolated, estranged and excluded from the sharing and social media networking experience. In this regard, churches that have transitioned to operating in an online social media context, experience a negative outcome at the expense of the exclusion of several vulnerable community groups, with such transformation to social media impacting upon church fundamentals to morally support “the poor and persons in need.”[3] Then there are geographically remote and isolated cohort of communities that benefit greatly from being able to join a virtual church community via social media, the writer Horsfield comments on the “flurry of new religious movements, most of which have been facilitated by and operate within the networking capacities of the internet and social media, which have enabled the congregating of people of like minds who previously would have remained isolated” (Horsfield, 2015, p. 270). This is a positive outcome for churches that have implemented online social media and are being transformed by extension of wider congregational online attendance.

In the Australian/Southeast Asia context, we find positive results of transformation where Hillsong Church have experienced substantial growth due to their use of going live on social media. The Hillsong “2019 annual report boasted a live attendance of 47,000 across Hillsong Churches in Australia and Bali. In 2020, during lockdowns, Hillsong moved online and grew exponentially, with 786,214 people reported to be ‘watching live’ by the end of March 2020.”^[4] The broadcasting feature to communicate live programs, has no doubt, had a transformational impact upon church communities. The author Klaver identifies Hillsong Church as a prime example of a successful church that has grown as a result of the implementation of online social media, Klaver states “megachurch networks are supported by extensive online media practices in the form of videos, blogs, live streaming and continuous updates of the church, pastors, and other leaders through social media: Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Periscope are accessible 24/7” (Klaver, 2015, p. 422). It is this latter point of communication and accessible contact 24/7 that is monumental to the transformation experienced by churches. Church communities no longer need to wait to attend their weekend church service, prayer meeting or bible study group in person, as these church programs are being made available via online social media with online attendance becoming popular practice amongst church members. In 2019 the Top 3 Online Churches that operate an online campus via social media have an average online weekly attendance as follows: “Life Church 70,000; Church of the Highlands 40,000; Northpoint Community Church 39,000.”[5] Understandably, this type of church attendance would be very difficult to accommodate and maintain long term within a traditional church building setting and allow pastoral staff to effectively minister in person to such large congregations. Interestingly, the aspect of being transformed through the use of social media is the blending and, in some cases, blurring of networked publics and publics, Papacharissi comments in this regard: “As social network sites and other genres of social media become increasingly widespread, the distinctions between networked publics and publics will become increasingly blurry. Thus, the dynamics mapped out here will not simply be constrained to the domain of the digital world, but will be part of everyday life” (Papacharissi, 2011, p. 55). Where publics exist in both the physical space of church buildings and also in the digital spaces of online social media, we find that Papacharissi highlights the complexities and blurring of networked publics and publics that finds its way into the everyday life, which is a new found way where church organisations can better care for larger congregations and is a transformative aspect impacting upon church communities daily.

Thus far, we have seen that the implementation and usage of online social media has had a transformative affect upon church community organisations in the areas of: wider communication, global audience reach, online growth, vulnerable community group exclusion, sharing information to remote persons and continuous communication of church content available online 24/7.         

Interestingly, a significant standpoint against transformation of churches by the impact of social media is that following the Covid-19 lockdowns, “sadly, not all churches seized the cultural moment. Instead, once they reopened, some churches greatly diminished, if not ended, their online presence, discouraged anything digital as not being real church, and even shamed people for not attending in person” (White, 2023, p. 108). The issue of communication is of high priority for churches, which is followed closely by the need for real meaningful community engagement and “belonging to the church” (Hill, 2020, p. 17). The author Delanty describes “virtual community are no less real, than traditional or other kinds of community, and that their distinctive nature consists in their ability to make communication the essential feature of belonging” (Delanty, 2018, p. 201). Therefore, church communities that have chosen to make online social media communication an essential part of their religious practice, in order to be more real, stay frequently connected and foster meaningful belonging, bring about change and transformation to the church community. This transformation appears to redefine what being real and belonging means to church communities on social media for religious practice. In this regard, the author White shares, that “the changes in our world are about more than just digital interactions. They are about how the digital revolution has changed what being in community even means” (White, 2023, p. 147).  As we are challenged with what being in community means in the world of social media, the author Lindsay describes that there is a shaping taking place amongst church leaders and their congregations, “social networks, such as Facebook and Twitter, are increasingly shaping how houses of worship and clergy are connecting with people inside and outside their congregations” (Lindsay, 2011, p. 1). The increased shaping and development in how churches engage in social media networks, will naturally by default, affect the shaping of what being in community means and bring about change and transformation to the church organisation.

Opposing views to the online social media church attendance verses in person church attendance, exists where some “people still prefer the local offline church: the sensory contact with other people, joint celebrations, sacraments and the more stable nature of a meeting in church at a particular time and place” (Harwig, 2018, p. 30). Traditionally, attending church in person meant physically entering into a sacred space for worship with a sense of reverence and awe. It is this loss of intimate in person spiritual experience that hinders transformation in the online space of social media. Hampton et al, comment that the online mobility of the internet has had a liberating impact wherein “community was not necessarily lost or saved as a result of the transformations that came with mobility (Webber 1963; Wellman 1979). Mobility has liberated people from the dense bonds of traditional community” (Hampton, et al., 2018, p. 647). It is the online social media church having internet mobility, that appears to have negatively impacted upon the sensory experiences of church traditions, the writer Kim stresses that there are sensory losses in the failure of in person church attendance and states, “in the digital age, we’re in danger of losing the art of gathering in our churches. In the name of relevance and in our attempts to meet people where they are, many churches are recklessly leaning into online platforms to bring us together” (Kim, 2020, p. 109). There could be some merit to Kim’s view in regard to the relevance and recklessness of churches which ultimately will impact church health and growth, as the recent research indicates that “protestant churches are almost evenly split between those that have grown within the past two years and those that are plateaued or declining, according to an Exponential Study by Lifeway Research.”[6] Church growth is typically an indicator of success in communication of the church mandate, however according to this research not all churches are experiencing growth, nor has it been identified that those who are experiencing growth, plateau or decline, is the result of implementing online social media.  

Hampton et al. are of the opinion that social media is reshaping community and there is a blending or combining of social media and in-person engagement, which is the current status for many churches that are developing a hybrid church model, they state:

“The fundamental nature of community is indeed changing as social media melds with in-person connectivity. Recent technological changes are again reshaping the structure of community – not withering it. Social media is fostering networked, supportive, persistent, and pervasive community relationships. Hence, there is a need to understand what kinds of relations flourish and what communities do – and do not do – in this emerging restructuring” (Hampton et al., 2018, p. 649).

It is a transformative emerging and restructuring that is being explored by churches that are consequently developing societal communities that offer new types of interaction by social media. Rheingold states that “rather than complement existing relationships, the Internet offers a new and fundamentally different level of interaction” (Delanty, 2018, p. 137). In opposition to the first portion of Rheingold’s view, online church social media has significantly complimented existing church community relationships and is supported by the current research that indicates that 80% of churches now offer a hybrid mix in church services, the Hartford Institute reports, “even after almost every church was back to meeting in person, Hartford Institute for Religion Research found in 2021 that eight in ten US churches were continuing to provide hybrid services, offering both in-person and online options” (White, 2023, p. 108). However, in agreement with the second portion of Rheingold statement, a new and fundamentally different level of interaction has evolved with the incorporation of internet based social media within a new found hybrid model of doing church, this in itself is a result of significant transformation from implementation of online social media amongst churches. The writer Nieuhof aptly describes this new form of interaction of online social media use by stating that: “the hybrid-church model will simply become church. In other words, hosting church online and in person is just how you do church to reach the next generation. People have lived in the slipstream of digital and in-real-life for well over a decade now, and church leaders will realize that church online is both a necessity and an opportunity” (White, 2023, p. 109).

Conclusion

To conclude, this paper has identified that church communities are being transformed by embracing the implementation of online social media that has facilitated broad communications, expansion of audience, assisted the sharing of content with continuous accessibility and connectivity. The impacts of transformation upon engagement with the vulnerable, remote communities and persons that prefer the sensory experience and traditional in person church practices have been identified together views of resistance to the online social media church model. Importantly, the transformative effect still continues to be developed today in the realm of the online social media church and the physical church resulting in a hybrid church mix of in person and social media communities that supplements the needs of both the online church and traditional church.

References

Balleste, R. (2015). Internet Governance : Origins, Current Issues, and Future Possibilities, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Incorporated.

Delanty, G. (2003). Virtual Community: Belonging as communication. In Community (1st ed., pp. 167–185). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315011417-10

Hampton, K. N., & Wellman, B. (2018). Lost and Saved . . . Again: The Moral Panic about the Loss of Community Takes Hold of Social Media. Contemporary Sociology, 47(6), 643–651.

Harwig, C., Roeland, J., & Stoffels, H. (2018). Click to Connect: Participation and Meaning in an Online Church. https://doi.org/10.1163/22144471-00501004

Hill, M. (2020). A place to belong : learning to love the local church. Crossway.

Horsfield, P. (2015). From Jesus to the Internet : A History of Christianity and Media, John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.

Kennett, B., Schmidt, D., & Schultz, S. (2020). The impact of Covid-19 on the mission of the church. Lutheran Theological Journal, 54(2), 82-83.

Kim, Jay Y. (2020). Analog Church : Why We Need Real People, Places, and Things in the Digital Age, InterVarsity Press.

Klaver, M. (2015). Media Technology Creating “Sermonic Events.” The Hillsong Megachurch Network. CrossCurrents, 65(4), 422–433. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26606042

Meikle, G. (Ed.). (2018). The Routledge Companion to Media and Activism (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315475059

N., & Wellman, B. (2018). Lost and Saved . . . Again: The Moral Panic about the Loss of Community Takes Hold of Social Media. Contemporary Sociology, 47(6), 643–651.

Papacharissi, Z. (2011). A networked self : identity, community, and culture on social network sites. Routledge.

Papacharissi, Z., & Trevey, M. T. (2018). Affective Publics and Windows of Opportunity: Social media and the potential for social change. In G. Meikle (Ed.), The Routledge companion to media and activism (1st., p. 1 online resource (xvi, 419 pages.)). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315475059

White, J. E. (2023). Hybrid Church : Rethinking the Church for a Post-Christian Digital Age, Zondervan.

Roach, J. R. (1991, Jun 30). Social Justice: Reviving the Common Good. Catholic Woman, 17, 3. https://www.proquest.com/magazines/social-justice-reviving-common-good/docview/220856056/se-2

Social media helping many places of worship deepen bonds of community. (2011). The Commercial Appeal. Washington: Tribune Content Agency LLC, McClatchy – Tribune Business News, 2011-03-19

https://www.scienceandmediamuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/short-history-internet

https://www.Britannica.com https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-media

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2023/06/02/use-of-apps-and-websites-in-religious-life

https://theconversation.com/were-told-pentecostal-churches-like-hillsong-are-growing-in-australia-but-theyre-not-anymore-is-there-a-gender-problem-199413

https://www.capterra.com/resources/the-5-biggest-online-churches

---

[1] https://www.scienceandmediamuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/short-history-internet

[2] https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-media

[3] Roach, J. R. (1991, Jun 30). Social Justice: Reviving the Common Good. Catholic Woman, 17, 3. https://www.proquest.com/magazines/social-justice-reviving-common-good/docview/220856056/se-2

[4] https://theconversation.com/were-told-pentecostal-churches-like-hillsong-are-growing-in-australia-but-theyre-not-anymore-is-there-a-gender-problem-199413

[5] https://www.capterra.com/resources/the-5-biggest-online-churches/

[6] https://research.lifeway.com/2025/03/18/half-of-churches-experiencing-post-pandemic-attendance-growth/