1) I’m not a cell phone user or a texter. Do I get to ask questions during the sermon too?
2) Is there a caution to be seen when we watch the young man seated next to the young woman who’s speaking completely ignore the conversation in order to text something on his phone?
I’m inclined to brush off your first question, because the only non-texters in my life are my parents, who are both over 60. If I were in church with them, I could just text my mom’s question for her. But I think the implication of your question might extend from those who haven’t tried texting yet to those who can’t text because they can’t afford phones with texting capabilities. Would a poor person be comfortable in a church in which everyone has a smart phone? If not, we are departing from Wesley’s vision of ministering among the poor and creating ministries that are accessible to them. Perhaps a church that wanted to use texting during the sermon could get a bunch of cheap Go phones to loan to folks who might not have a phone, or who might have left their phones at home, or whose phones run out of battery.
As to your second question, of course people can ignore what’s going on and do all kinds of things on their smart phones. It happens all the time. I could sit in church and play Angry Birds for 90 minutes if I wanted to do that (my husband actually did play a game of Angry Birds in church once). We’re not going to stop people from using phones in distracting ways. But if people are going to be bringing their phones to church, why not invite them to use the phones constructively? At least that requires paying attention to the sermon.
Carolyn — I wasn’t thinking of why people might or might not text their questions, but that’s a good point too. My solution would be a little different than yours, in that people who didn’t have phones could just raise their hands and ask their questions.
Sure, they couldn’t be pre-screened like the texted questions are, but I got the impression from the story that’s mostly to weed out the teasing stuff, like asking the pastor about his haircut and such. They wouldn’t have the anonymity of the texters, but there again we set up an income barrier that only allows anonymity to people who can afford it. And even though I’m quite a few years off from 60-something, I’m not a smartphone user or a texter (my 77-year-old father, though, is).
And I guess my response to the question about encouraging people to use their phones constructively is another question: Why not encourage them to be present to the people actually with them without benefit of an electronic veil?
Been there. Like it. Wish more churches would do it. Requires a solid sermon to pull it off.
If they incorporated captioning into their video I might appreciate what they’re doing more! Grin.
Considering that yahoo gives instructions of exactly how to add captions, it’s a bit discouraging more people don’t.
Anyway, I am intrested in how it works out as I’m thinking of ways to work Twitter into classroom lectures and discussions.
I’ve always wanted to deliver a sermon in the format of Stephen Colbert’s “The Word.”
Two questions pop up for me:
1) I’m not a cell phone user or a texter. Do I get to ask questions during the sermon too?
2) Is there a caution to be seen when we watch the young man seated next to the young woman who’s speaking completely ignore the conversation in order to text something on his phone?
Brett,
I’m inclined to brush off your first question, because the only non-texters in my life are my parents, who are both over 60. If I were in church with them, I could just text my mom’s question for her. But I think the implication of your question might extend from those who haven’t tried texting yet to those who can’t text because they can’t afford phones with texting capabilities. Would a poor person be comfortable in a church in which everyone has a smart phone? If not, we are departing from Wesley’s vision of ministering among the poor and creating ministries that are accessible to them. Perhaps a church that wanted to use texting during the sermon could get a bunch of cheap Go phones to loan to folks who might not have a phone, or who might have left their phones at home, or whose phones run out of battery.
As to your second question, of course people can ignore what’s going on and do all kinds of things on their smart phones. It happens all the time. I could sit in church and play Angry Birds for 90 minutes if I wanted to do that (my husband actually did play a game of Angry Birds in church once). We’re not going to stop people from using phones in distracting ways. But if people are going to be bringing their phones to church, why not invite them to use the phones constructively? At least that requires paying attention to the sermon.
Carolyn — I wasn’t thinking of why people might or might not text their questions, but that’s a good point too. My solution would be a little different than yours, in that people who didn’t have phones could just raise their hands and ask their questions.
Sure, they couldn’t be pre-screened like the texted questions are, but I got the impression from the story that’s mostly to weed out the teasing stuff, like asking the pastor about his haircut and such. They wouldn’t have the anonymity of the texters, but there again we set up an income barrier that only allows anonymity to people who can afford it. And even though I’m quite a few years off from 60-something, I’m not a smartphone user or a texter (my 77-year-old father, though, is).
And I guess my response to the question about encouraging people to use their phones constructively is another question: Why not encourage them to be present to the people actually with them without benefit of an electronic veil?