Critics, Advocates, and Critical Friends

From the early days of the Internet revolution to today, said Campbell, critics and enthusiasts have been quick to voice their opinions. "Anytime you have a new technology, its advocates are usually the early innovators and those with a vested interested in the technology; they're the ones who are going to say it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. After they have had their say, the pendulum swings to the side and you have the critics. After that, the pendulum tends to swing to the middle and we end up with 'critical friends,' those who see the negative side of the technology but also its potentials and try to hold those two sides in balance."

One of the earlier critics of religion online was Tal Brooke, a Christian countercult leader, who argued in his 1997 book Virtual Gods that when human relationships are mediated over the Internet, they become false. That same year, however, UK-based futurist Patrick Dixon wrote in his book CyberChurch that online religion is a vibrant expression of the body of Christ. And shortly thereafter, Christian philosopher Douglas Groothuis came out with what Campbell calls a middle-of-the-road approach in his book The Soul in Cyberspace: "He sees the technology as a positive thing, but asks, 'Where is it going to lead us?'"

These cycles of advocacy and criticism continue to play out as new technologies emerge, said Campbell. "Those three voices will always be there in any discussion of church and culture or religion and technology," said Campbell. "That's important to keep in mind when one particular voice becomes very loud."

The pressing questions now are somewhat different. Skeptics are concerned about increasing screen time for people who already spend many hours in front of TVs or computers; in an age when Internet addiction disorder (IAD) may soon be part of the 2012 issue of the authoritative Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), this seems particularly relevant. Others continue to question the authenticity of online relationships. Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson, for example, wrote in October 2007 that friendships formed on Facebook, MySpace, or other social networking sites represent a "rejection of modesty—of restraint and inhibition. People end up treating their own lives as the media treats Paris Hilton's, shining a public spotlight on the most intimate details. . . . It does not seem consistent with building friendship, which involves a gradual accumulation of trust, leading to self-revelation and intimacy." Meanwhile, the technologically enthusiastic continue to tout the personally gratifying, world-changing power of new online tools and concepts.

But a number of institutions have also risen to consider the positives and negatives in a balanced way, including the Texas-based Leadership Network, Gospel Communication Network's Internet Ministry Conference, and Synagogue 3000, which considers some of these issues in a Jewish context. As such institutions and initiatives proliferate and strengthen, so the voice of critical friends may win the day. In the meantime, a balanced view of the plusses and minuses of new technologies can be found only by visiting many sources to weigh differing points of view.

As religion online heads towards its fourth decade, the questions about where religion is going online are becoming more sophisticated. In an earlier stage, said Campbell, "There was an attitude of 'If we build it, they will come.'" Now, there is a more integrated approach, as people become more familiar with what technology can and can't do. Said Campbell, "It's not just about experimenting online, but about how can we really connect the online and offline experiences?"