Abstract
During the pandemic, many church leaders had to learn to manage a digital divide present within their congregations, which they were not aware of. This article explores the nature and traits of the digital divide many American churches encountered during this pandemic, based on a study of focus groups involving 478 church leaders from Indiana. This study identifies four specific challenges they faced in adopting digital media and adapting their services to the online environment, revealed by this digital divide. Specifically, this article explores the lack of internet accessibility digital literacy, generational gaps in digital knowledge, and dealing with in and dividuals who were resistant to change digital media, who could be described as exhibiting technological hesitancy or digital reluctance. These challenges are looked at through the lens of digital justice and argue the digital divide realized within churches during the Covid-19 pandemic has theological implications.
Introduction
Much has been written over the past few years on different challenges American churches have faced during the Covid-19 global pandemic, from dealing with changing health & safety protocols and debates over masking to the unique role technology played in helping churches during this time. However, one related area that has received little attention is how numerous churches lacked basic access to digital technology and internet connectivity in early 2020, which significantly affected their ability to adapt to required changes in modes of practice. For the first time, many religious congregations encountered the reality of the “digital divide” as they struggled to figure out how to get online, embrace technology, and stay connected for the sake of sustaining congregational connections.
The digital divide is a word used to describe the inequities that different social groups face when they lack access to digital technologies and network infrastructure. At its most basic level, the digital divide is used to differentiate those “with and without access to ict s,” or information communication technologies such as computers and the internet.1 The term draws attention to the fact that some groups in society lack technological resources, preventing them from engaging with key information, opportunities, and basic services that the majority groups take for granted. While in America it is often assumed access to the internet is widespread and easily available to all, this is not always the case. Many churches quickly realized this in early 2020, when it became clear that their only option for sustained interactions during the pandemic required a computer and an internet media connection, which they either did not have or it was too slow to stream video.
This article explores how churches experienced and dealt with the effects of the digital divide during the covid-19 pandemic, and the ways that these challenges raise important theological conversations about justice and equity in an information age. It was not until early 2020 that many churches encountered the realities of the digital divide for the first time. When congregations realized that digital technology, connectivity, and the option of online worship services offered the only immediate alternative to in-person services that were suspended because of social distancing and public gathering restrictions, they faced the reality of what it meant to have little or no access to the internet. Here, we explore both the practical challenges the lack of digital resources created, as well as the mindsets and attitudes of congregations that supported and led to this lack of technology engagement and preparedness.
This article draws on findings from a larger research project called the “Tech in Churches during covid-19 project,” funded by the Lilly Endowment, which investigates how 2700 churches in Indiana used, reacted to, and viewed technology between the 2020 to 2022 covid-19 global pandemic. This project studies the technological choices and decision-making processes of a diverse group of religious congregations based in the American Midwest, which were able to purchase digital media resources with the help of the “Connect Through Tech” (ctt) grant program run by the Center for Congregations in Indianapolis, Indiana. Through this program, religious congregations in Indiana were able to apply for up to $5000 to purchase technologies that would assist them with moving their traditional services online. The Tech in Churches project studies how these technologies were used, the challenges leaders encountered with digital media and online services, their perceived impact of these new forms of online ministry, and how these encounters altered churches’ views of technology both in the short term and the long term.
In 2020, churches quickly realized their previous negative, cautious, or ambivalent views about digital media combined with not having access to core digital technologies and/or weak local computer networks meant they had to navigate a digital divide on top of other structural and resource challenges at this time. Many congregations, for the first time, realized how living with diminished access to network resources, infrastructure, and knowledge could and would directly impact their religious work and ministry.
rq1: What did the digital divide look like in churches studied?
rq2: What could be the long-term implications of failing to address digital divides in churches?
Using these questions as guides, this article begins by identifying the common conditions and challenges related to the digital divide that the congregations in this study encountered. Besides the standard trio of digital divide traits – namely, deficits in (1) infrastructure, (2) technology, and (3) training – many churches in this research experienced a unique ideological factor that exacerbated their already challenging lack of digital resources. This fourth factor can be described as “digital reluctance” (Campbell & Jordan, 2022) or technological hesitancy, in which some church leaders encountered active push-back from their congregations for suggesting digital solutions to meeting in person. This resistance towards technology was expressed by both leaders and members towards online worship, including generational hesitancy around technology and pastoral reluctance to change. This leads to a discussion of how such response, not only influenced church views and adoption of technology during the pandemic, but what the long-term implication of the digital divide and digital resistance might be for the congregation in the future to come.
Defining the Digital Divide
The digital divide is a term commonly used to describe the gap between digital “haves” and “have-nots.” In other words, the term describes the dissonance between those who have easy access to digital information via computers, smartphones, and the internet, and those who do not have such access.3 More specifically, Hargittai (2003) defines the digital divide as “The gap between those who have access to digital technologies and those who do not, understood in binary terms distinguishing the ‘haves’ and the ‘have nots.’”4 Digital divides are caused by different issues, including limited sustainable communication infrastructure, the high cost of technology, deficits in local computer networks, or even gaps in knowledge about digital media. One major contributor to this digital divide is differential household incomes. Pew Research Center shows that 41% of lower-income adults do not own a computer. By contrast, 63% of higher-income American adults report having broadband service, a phone, a computer, and a tablet.5 Major research concerns related to the digital divide, have to do with digital accessibility, skills, and literacy.
The covid-19 pandemic created unique challenges for people as social distancing and public lockdowns went into effect. An estimated half of the entire world’s population was put on lockdown.6 For businesses, schools, churches, and organizations, digital technology was often the inevitable alternative to in-person gatherings. These “alternatives” often meant using the internet for live streaming, homework, telehealth, and social gatherings. A recent Pew Research Center study7 estimated that during the pandemic, 90% of Americans reported the internet as “essential.” This rapid and unexpected shift online highlighted the disparity that the digital divide creates. For example, researchers reported that individuals living below the poverty line, and with strained internet access, found challenges when work and education environments required telecommuting,8 and smaller, less lucrative businesses found it difficult to adapt to pandemic restrictions when they were unable to afford the technology required to move online.9 Many groups experienced a lack of “tech readiness”10 during the pandemic, with churches and religious congregations representing one such group that struggled with the required technology adaptation.
Churches and the Digital Divide
Even before the pandemic, little research had been done on church experiences of the digital divide, or strategies used by religious groups to address lacking digital access and underdeveloped technological infrastructure. Research that has touched on issues of the digital divide and religious congregations has primarily focused on individuals’ levels of religiosity often being negatively associated with Internet access and engagement. For example, Dilmaghani11 in her study of internet access in Canada, including a large set of demographic characteristics (i.e., age, ethnicity, education, etc.), found that religiosity was negatively associated with internet access and usage. In other words, the more religious an individual is, the less likely an individual is to use the internet, especially for social networking.
Frost and Youngblood12 similarly saw a correlation that showed the smaller and more conservative the religious congregations, the less likely they were to engage with digital media for spiritual purposes. Both studies suggest a negative correlation between religious groups and their digital engagement and/or literacy.
The concern that religious groups were ill-disposed or ill-equipped to handle the forced digital transition they faced in 2020 has been reiterated in research. For example, scholars working with data from the National Congregations Study from 2018–2019 found that there were “…stark inequalities in levels of preparedness among congregations based on race, class, size, urban/rural location, religious tradition, and the age of congregations’ parishioners.”13 Kołodziejska’s study of the preparedness of Seventh-Day Adventist churches in Europe for the technological requirements of the pandemic similarly found that “…the pandemic has opened up new possibilities of participation, but also increased the chances of digital divides and exclusions.”14 However, none of this previous work has offered a clear set of criteria, which outlines what the digital divide specifically looks like in churches, or what factors promote this condition. The purpose of this article is to identify and discuss common features of the digital divide found in churches during the covid-19 pandemic.
Digital Divide as a Theological Concern
The digital divide can be seen as an area of theological concern, because it represents a calls to live out justice and act in fairness, as expressed by scriptural mandates such as Micah 6:8. A number of high-profile ecumenical and Christian organizations have made this connection and have highlighted the importance of Christians being involved in the diminishing of the digital divide in the 21st century. For example, the World Council of Churches (wcc) in its 2002 report on the World Summit on Sustainable Development, stressed that the key to a contemporary vision of the Christian community must be sufficiency where “…there is enough for all and all have enough.”15 In a world where information communication technologies drive access to core educational and work opportunities, they argue that working towards fair and equitable access to communication infrastructure must be seen as a part of the Christian call for social justice in an information-based society. Over the last three decades, the wcc has served as a strong advocate for the narrowing of the digital divide within developing countries and economies, especially where Christian communities are present. As they argue, “Relationships of justice and sufficiency produce a high degree of […] spiritual fulfillment that stands in marked contrast to the spiritual poverty of compulsive consumerism that is so much a part of many contemporary societies.”16 Here, they suggest manifesting justice is an important aspect of the Christian life, and cultures that manifest unjust relationships and spaces point to a spiritually poor society. This is echoed in their recent statement on “New and Emerging Technologies, Ethical Challenges” where the wcc again stressed the need for communities of faith to draw attention to “digital divides” which “often reflect entrenched forms of discrimination” in society. So, fairness and equity of information access are framed as religious concerns. As they state, “It underlines that we are called to participate in God’s mission to ensure that all may have life and have it abundantly (John 10:10), also in the digital sphere.”17
This understanding that Christian communities are called to work towards media literacy and digital access, as an expression of the call to enact justice, is also seen in the mission of the World Association of Christian Communication (wacc). Since the 1960s, the wacc has focused on advocacy, activism, and resources related to a call for open and equal “communication for all.”18 In the 1990s, they moved much of their attention to working towards promoting digital literacy and equity as a basic human right. Through what they call their “digital communication rights” initiative, the wacc stresses that “The use of digital platforms must occur within a framework of rights that help generate genuine opportunities for free and informed participation to promote truly sustainable development” within all countries around the world.”19 They support this claim by pointing to the guiding principles of their organization which sees communication as a God-given calling and responsibility. wacc frames the act of communication as a “spiritual exercise” which “builds and shapes communities” and requires Christians to engage in acts of work that “affirms justice and challenges injustice” when it is created by communication medium and structures.20
When we bridge digital divides, we enter more fully into just and equitable relationships. Accessible and affordable digital communication for all is an expression of solidarity, a way to live out the biblical preferential option for the poor. We must place those who are digitally marginalized and disempowered at the heart of all our prayers, discernment, and theological reflections about digital divides in a global society.21
As the new global economy takes shape, the Church is concerned “that the winner in this process will be humanity as a whole” and not just “a wealthy elite that controls science, technology and the planet’s resources.”26
Overall, this Catholic theology of communication stresses that media and the internet are tools that God allowed to be created for the betterment of humanity by creating more equitable flows of information and helping build healthy human relations and opportunities to support the Church’s mission. This framing of the digital divide as a matter of human respect, and the advocacy of digital justice as part of the Christian call to treat others with equity and inclusion, offers us a platform for considering how the digital divide experience of churches during the Covid-19 pandemic can be seen as a theological concern.
Churches and the Pandemic
While many researchers of churches and religious congregations have focused on issues related to how they used technology during the pandemic, these explorations have generally focused on a limited number of issues. Most work has documented the process that churches underwent when it was perceived that moving online was a requirement for churches to stay functional during the pandemic. There was some debate about whether large or small churches fared better during this digital transition of getting their services online.27 Scholars did explore the common challenges that churches attempting to use digital media encountered, especially when trying to reach certain groups such as the elderly28 or those in rural locations.29 While both populations often struggle with technology access and are commonly identified as user groups susceptible to the conditions of the digital divide, this term was not raised in these studies.
Other studies of churches’ use of technology during the pandemic discussed how the shift from traditional to online church highlighted certain inequities. For example, how class entitlement or social status affected Church’s abilities to make the digital shift,30 or how pre-pandemic pastoral training in technology provided a notable advantage to some churches shifting online.31 Przywara and colleagues (2021) demonstrated that churches in Europe, which had previously invested time and resources into broadcast technology and websites or had clergy with training in digital literacy and technology before the pandemic, seemed to also adapt to the church digital transition seamlessly. Yet this still begs the question: what other factors influence church movements online or can be seen as markers of the church digital divide during the pandemic?
Methodology
As noted in the introduction, this article uses data collected by the authors in conjunction with the Center for Congregations (CfC) in Indianapolis during 2020–2021. Approximately 2700 congregations in the state of Indiana participated in the CfC’s “Connect Through Tech” grant program. This program provided churches with grants of up to $5000 to purchase technology, such as digital equipment to live-stream or record church services, for the move from traditional to online forms of worship during the pandemic.
This article specifically draws on data collected from 50 focus groups, conducted by the Center for Congregations and funded by the Lilly Endowment in Indianapolis. These focus group sessions, called “Tech Talks,” took place via Zoom and were designed to let grantees reflect on their church’s experience of implementing new technology. Tech Talks were led by CfC staff members who invited church leaders, volunteers, or staff members who oversaw the operation and management of the church’s digital media and technology for congregations to take part. Participation was voluntary and typically two to eight individuals took part in each of these online conversations, led by two staff members from the CfC. Altogether, 478 individuals attended these 50 Tech Talks. Representatives from smaller (under 100 members) and rural grant-receiving congregations were pastors, while those from urban and mid-to-larger congregations were an even split between those on the pastoral staff and church volunteers.
Each Tech Talk lasted one hour and consisted of introductions, questions about congregational tech usage during the pandemic, and a Q&A discussion at the end of the session. The Q&A time allowed participants to ask staff questions about the best practices regarding technology implementation. Staff members organized each Tech Talk session around a set of four questions:
- 1)Who are the people that make the technology decisions within the church?
- 2)What challenges has the church faced?
- 3)What unexpected successes has the church seen?
- 4)What does the future hold?
Members of the research team worked in collaboration with the Center for Congregations to collect data for this research project. Permission was obtained by the team, both from the Center and the team’s University Institutional Review Board (irb), to use notes taken by the Center’s staff from these sessions as well as to participate in them. No names of individuals and churches were collected as part of these observations and notes were taken, instead, they were referred to by their position within the churches and the size of the church they represented.
What barriers did respondents identify as present within their congregations related to technology use, acceptance, and decision-making during the pandemic?
We recognize that the sample used offers certain opportunities and creates certain limitations. Drawing partially on secondary data collected by the Center, meant relying on other individual notes and interpretations of respondents’ words. Our analysis was also limited by the pre-set questions and themes covered within the Tech Talk session. Therefore, we drew our primary conclusions and claims from the 20 focus group sessions team members were a part of. Notes taken by Center staff during the initial 30 focus groups were used to compare and confirm our insights and conclusions. Thus, direct quotes used and numerical claims made in this article are based on Tech Talks taking place in the spring of 2021.
After collating and reviewing research notes, the team performed a thematic analysis, specifically grouping together specific challenges named regarding the use and implementation of technology. A list of all barriers or challenges named by respondents was collected and then grouped under similar themes. Through this process, six common barriers or challenges encountered by leaders related to technology were identified: (1) lack of knowledge about technology, (2) insufficient tech skills, (3) lack of familiarity with technology due to limited experiences or training, (4) inadequate access to technology, (5) congregational resistance to technology, and (6) technology decision-making requiring work or leadership traits outside their pastoral experience. By looking closely at the quotes and stories linked to each of these barriers, three overarching themes emerged. Highlighting concerns about (a) lacking technology skills, (b) leadership traits or characteristics needed to make technology decisions, and (c) digital media access and resistance. Each of these themes became the basis of a 3–5 page “Tech Trend Paper” produced by the research team that briefly explored these concerns (which can be found online at https://www.techinchurches.org/reports). Initial findings related to leaders’ reported concerns about congregational digital literacy, access, and comfort were reported in Tech Trend Paper 3 entitled “The Digital Divide, Digital Reluctance, and Impact upon Pandemic Churches (Campbell & Jordan, 2022). In this article, we look at these issues of digital access and resistance in greater detail through the lens of the digital divide and the idea of digital justice, discussed in the literature review. Challenges noted by church leaders in the focus groups – related to lack of digital literacy, access, and understanding within the congregation – echo the types of deficiencies often raised in discourse about the digital divide.32 In the sections that follow, we detail how leaders navigated this “digital divide” that many did not realize was present in their churches at the beginning of the pandemic and their responses to the challenges and disadvantages it created for them. We also explore the theme of digital resistance, which influenced a church’s speed, ease, and ability to move worship services online and get members to engage with this new mode of worship.33
The Digital Divide within Pandemic Churches: Technological Obstacles
Churches in this study often exhibited features of the digital divide, such as dealing with insufficient communication infrastructure, connecting technologies, or digital training. Such setbacks, especially in the early days of the pandemic, influenced the digital transition of congregations online, including having to deal with insufficient communication infrastructure, connecting technologies, or digital training. Here, we explore themes related to the lack of digital infrastructure and barriers to technological entry encountered by congregations. While there were unique aspects of the digital divide within each church related to its demographics and culture, they typically share several factors. As our research identified, the top three digital divide obstacles that leaders faced when forced to move church services online included issues related to the church’s accessibility to internet infrastructure, knowledge, and training.
Accessibility to the Internet
Throughout the multiple focus group sessions, church leaders often stressed that connectivity challenges to the internet in their geographical location or place of worship was an obstacle that furthered the digital divide. Unfortunately, more than a third of church leaders (those in 8 of the 20 focus groups attended by the researchers) seemed unaware that poor connectivity would be an issue until they attempted to move church services online. One church leader discovered in 2020 that when the pandemic forced his church to go digital, he found the church was “… in need of a stronger internet signal.” He elaborated that when they added the needed “…speed to the internet” to run the online services, it resulted in another cost they had not anticipated or budgeted for. Another leader described their church’s internet access inadequacies as beyond and insufficient, “…a foundational issue in the digital age for many of the underserved congregations.”
Dealing with inadequate internet access meant creative problem-solving. Some pastors were “…producing their sermons out of their homes until the internet speed could be made efficient enough in the church building for live streaming.” Another respondent stated they “…want to get away from using members’ items.” Churches trying to quickly move online in early 2020 were often faced with the reality that current access or local internet provider options were not adequate to support the tech solutions they had imagined or planned for. At least twenty respondents directly reported that it was not until after they had purchased expensive digital technologies like iPads or digital cameras that they then had to come up with more funds to pay for new routers, modems, or higher-speed internet connections to use the digital media purchased. As one pastor noted from the first Sunday they attempted to live stream their service, “…internet [at the church] is always a problem,” as they found their newly installed Wi-Fi modem did not appear adequate or stable enough to stream their services without at least cutting out a few times during the service. He said that his congregations even came to expect this for the first 6 months of their online service. The lack of stable connectivity meant many pastors reported working and recording their services at home from home connection due to the poor internet access at the sanctuary.
Lacking Technical Knowledge and Digital Training
While the digital divide is often described as individuals who do not have access to certain digital technologies or platforms, this is not the only limitation that can create a division between those who do and, do not have digital access. A frequent frustration for many church leaders throughout the pandemic, voiced by our study respondents, and closely connected to church’s lack of internet access or poor connectivity, was how leaders felt unprepared for the quick technology decision-making required in the early months of the pandemic. Respondents in about two-thirds of the Tech Talk sessions attended by the team (13 of 20) reported they felt they did not have adequate technical knowledge or experience to lean on when they were faced with technology decisions such as what equipment to buy or what options were even available for doing services online. Most of these leaders and pastors leaned heavily on younger staff, volunteers running the soundboard, and those in their church with technology backgrounds to help them make these decisions. However, sometimes those that they perceived as tech professionals, were still not well equipped to help them make tech decisions.
One church leader explained, “…I’m a retired electrical engineer, so I’ve spent my entire career working with tech – but not video. I didn’t even know how to turn the camera on. I spent a lot of time on YouTube trying to learn.” Another pastor described talking to the youth leader for advice, which led him to purchase an expensive camera that was supposed to automatically stream content online, but he could never figure out how to properly use it. Yet another leader described how he called together the tech team of his church, consisting of three volunteers who ran the sound system and PowerPoint projection during services, for advice. He quickly realized they had no more idea than he did about what digital camera to buy and if it would even be compatible with the current sound deck and the 12-year-old computer they had. This lack of knowledge, experience, and transferable skills needed for digital media decision-making was a common theme amongst our respondents, noted especially in older pastors (approximately aged 55+). We found employment background or education did not seem to matter, if individuals did not have experience in the digital field, they were often felt confused or directionless when forced online.
This demonstrates that lacking knowledge and/or training about the internet, digital technologies, and social media platforms, created a huge disadvantage and a stumbling block for church leaders and decision-makers. Less than ten pastors in the tech sessions reported having any previous media or tech training, and none reported that media literacy or training was part of their preparation for ministry.
In general, because church leaders did not have a strategy in place for dealing with these issues, it seemed that most embraced a trial-and-error problem-solving outlook. First, they took on issues of technology access and resources by outsourcing it to other members of staff or volunteers when they could. When that was not an option, they went for an experimental or “let’s try and see if it works” approach, depending on advice from other ministers, tech businesses, or YouTube videos to determine what resources to purchase and how to get services online.
However, this did not mean that creating a plan and structure for live streaming services meant they successfully solved their access issues. Some church leaders in this study shared that they continue to face digital divide stumbling blocks, especially with internet connectivity. Yet despite these challenges, many pastors reported that they saw notable benefits in running digital services, despite continuing to struggle with practical issues of the digital divide within their church. But not all aspects of the digital divide pastors encountered during the pandemic match the classic definition of lack in technology access, training, and understanding.
In this next section, we explore two unique facets of the pandemic church’s digital divide–technological hesitancy and digital resistance – which are rooted in ideological concerns rather than resource deficiencies.
Technological Hesitancy and Digital Resistance as Barriers to Digital Justice
Church leaders, after they had worked hard to get the technology resources and skills they needed to move their services online, often had to deal with a secondary concern. Even when it seemed the digital divide could be practically bridged, especially through the ctt grant program, the pastor often faced hesitancy and resistance from its members and other leaders regarding running digital services. Here, we explore how a lack of technological knowledge, digital media skills, and personal insecurities about using technology within the congregation often elicited two different responses. The first is technological hesitancy which created a generational digital divide in some churches. The second was digital resistance when church leaders were reluctant to embrace technology.
Technological Hesitancy and the Generational Digital Divide in Churches
Technological hesitancy is a term we use to refer to the doubt, uncertainty, or slowness of some individuals’ in making decisions about technology. This hesitancy does not always lead to full resistance or rejection of technology, but it does highlight the fact that certain individuals expressed fear and indecision about whether to use digital tools or embrace technological solutions. Expressions of technological hesitancy were clear in leaders’ descriptions of certain portions of their congregation during the Tech Talks, especially for elder congregational members.
One obstacle many churches faced in moving their churches online was a notable generational digital divide between some church members. Alhatou (2021) explains that a generational digital divide results when a younger generation that has achieved digital literacy and grown up in a world pervasive with technology seeks to advocate for technology to an older generation introduced to digital technology later in life.34 Church leaders described the generational digital divide of older congregants not using or knowing how to use many digital devices as an obstacle, in contrast to younger congregants who have grown up utilizing technology daily.
Age was a notable factor influencing adaptability to technology; church leaders often said it difficult to convince their senior-aged (55+) congregants to try a digitally mediated form of worship, or to see it as a positive option when traditional services were not an option during the pandemic. Many leaders reported that they felt elderly congregants did not have the desire, refused to learn how to use these new technologies, and/or frequently lacked digital media access. They contrasted this with younger Millennial congregants who seemed to have, as one pastor reported a “…sixth sense about the technology.”
Over half of the respondents acknowledged that the decision to digital media for worship services often meant that they at least initially exclude some of their members from this gathering, especially older individuals who were either unfamiliar with technology or had limited access to devices and the internet. This was cited as an additional reason some leaders were hesitant to continue with online services once the pandemic restrictions would be lifted. One respondent stated, “…when your average [members’] age is 70 years old, it’s hard to make changes. Technology can be seen as a threat, not an opportunity.”
Other leaders shared that they saw this generational divide when they asked for people’s initial response to the idea of doing church online. They reported that younger members, who were more familiar with and adept at utilizing technology, were typically their most vocal supporters early on. However, older members, who were typically less engaged with technology, feared the move online. Common concerns raised by senior congregants were the loss of true community and intimate connections with other congregants when services were offered completely online. Another concern was that restructuring the services to be able to take place online would change fundamental parts of the liturgy or create a program more geared towards contemporary than traditional worship.
The whole concept of Sunday is shifting and changing in terms of family and connecting with their faith. A lot of young families were not coming back right away. I wonder if there are pushes and pulls; now that it’s available online, they are watching it (services) later in the day online. It’s just part of the shift now in the Christian faith, we’ve got to figure out how to reach them, or we’re going to miss a generation.
How to effectively assist and encourage some church members to be open to embrace church service online, remained a challenge for some churches throughout the first year of the pandemic. Overall, technological hesitancy drew pastors’ attention for the first time to a two-fold generational digital divide they saw emerging in their churches. First, leaders were concerned about elderly members’ ability and/or willingness to participate in digital services. Second, they worried about missing a personal connection with younger congregants by continuing digital worship services as they developed new forms of religious engagement during the pandemic.
The Digital Reluctance of Church Leaders
Digital Reluctance refers to the opposition towards or unwillingness to engage with digital resources, especially when they are present, accessible, and offer a viable solution to an immediate problem. This reluctance to use technology when it is available and actively trying to dissuade others from its use, was a problem encountered in some congregations and voiced by both leaders and specific church populations. By “digital reluctance,” we mean when individuals, organizations, businesses, or in this case, churches, have the means and opportunity to utilize technology and digital services, yet they resist going digital through their words and actions.35 We suggest this is a unique factor contributing to the digital divide in some churches during the pandemic, because it raises important issues of inclusion and exclusion within a networked, information-based culture. This reluctance of a single person or small group of individuals to use technology, which results in restricted or the full denial of technological access to others who wish to engage with the resources and opportunities it provides, we believe is an issue of digital justice, and argument explored at the end of this article.
Half of the respondents in the Tech Talks (10 of 20 sessions) described senior church leaders as not only voicing reluctance towards their church investing in technology, but also actively advocating against this, at least for the first few months of the pandemic. Sometimes this unwillingness to consider technological solutions when social distancing measures were in effect, carried over from their critical or anti-technology positions held prior to the pandemic. For others, this reluctance was first noted when they or other members suggested to create a digital worship opportunity during the pandemic. This lack of enthusiasm for going digital was often rooted in church leaders’ lack of experience with technology or familiarity with digital platforms. This reluctance was often manifested by leaders arguing the church could not afford the associated costs or staff did not have the time required to learn and implement the new technology. This was often a cloak for their true resistance. In Tech Trend Paper 2,36 an aversion or “resistance to change” was one of the notable traits many pastors had to wrestle with during the pandemic. Humans, by nature, are often apprehensive about changes occurring in their environment that require involuntary adaptation.37 Church leaders must undergo and implement many social, cultural, and organizational shifts in their church. Therefore, it is not surprising technology and the option of online services represented just one more daunting thing leaders were being required to learn and adapt to, generating digital reluctance within congregations. One church leader stated that they felt forced to constantly adapt, which was exhausting. “I feel the need to move beyond just being on Facebook. I need to connect with those for whom Facebook and the internet are hard to access. And I need to learn different platforms.” Even amid the changes, church staff and pastoral leadership were forced to consider alternate modes of connection to reach the “…hard to reach.” Often, selecting and using a certain digital platform meant making a choice that excluded some from online engagement. Some congregants might have a computer, but not a smartphone, or vice versa, so building services in one digital space meant relying on certain resources that many congregants did not have or have access to. This made digital design choices challenging and stressful for leaders.
When leaders reflected on this difficulty to adapt to the new technological requirements, they noted that it is often the response of the more historical mainline and liturgical churches. This was described as having an “old school mentality,” where understandings of church worship focus solely on events occurring within the church’s walls. For example, one respondent recalled that their church leadership “never had an interest in going online” and that their pastor was “very anti-tech.” Another church leader echoed the first, stating that they “came kicking and screaming into technology.” Another added, “if it’s not broken, don’t fix it,” suggesting a strong resistance to trying new ways of performing worship.
For example, one pastor in this study described a group of people within his congregation who were without computers or the internet and “proud of it.” Congregants who took pride in being technology-free or resistant posed a challenge for many church leaders attempting to introduce online service, and they became just another factor that made the covid-19 pandemic even more of a challenge for churches. Pastors, staff, volunteers, and leaders had to navigate not only the challenges that came naturally with the pandemic’s guidelines, but also church members who were not interested in utilizing technology.
Others stated that their reluctance toward technology stemmed from a lack of time to learn new digital technology prior to the pandemic. This heightened their unwillingness to initially consider utilizing digital media to do their services online, and often prevented congregations from transitioning to digital churches sooner. One pastor recalled his own reluctance to go digital, saying, “[one congregant] asked about Facebooking our service, and I said, that’s the stupidest idea!” The pastor then shared that he informed the congregant that he did not have the time to add a digital service, but encouraged them to take it on. The pastor stated, “now he’s heading up a ministry in our church!” Many church leaders admitted their personal reluctance towards investing in and utilizing technology was a primary reason why their churches strongly felt the digital divide once the covid-19 restrictions forced their services online.
The fact that some church leaders and older members held an understandable uneasiness towards technology at the beginning of the pandemic can be explained, in many cases, as related to a fear of change, because they did not have access to or skills in using digital tools. While this could be described as less of an issue in access, and more of an attitude of hesitancy or resistance, such issues still generated or reinforced a digital divide within numerous congregations. Technology haves and have-nots were reframed as digital media users and non-users, often conflicting with one another.
The Implications of the Digital Divide for Churches in the Future
This article suggests churches encountered both typical and unique manifestations of the digital divide during the pandemic, which could be viewed as either barriers or opportunities. For example, the presence of a generational tech divide within churches by leaders could be seen as a reason to resist rather than embrace technology. On the flip-side, it could be framed youth to re-engage young people in the church, especially in congregations that have seen declining involvement in their church pre-pandemic. One senior pastor stated that acknowledging and embracing the forced digital transition of the church, created unexpected opportunities for young people to become more connected to the church again. They explained, “Tech savviness is something that young people are on already. This might be a new way to bring that generation back to the church.” He further suggested that if technology was viewed to connect the generations, with youth service as tech mentors to the older generation, digital media could become a bridge rather than a stumbling block for congregations.
This points to this study’s second research question, about considering the implications of the “digital divide” for churches. For one, it requires church leaders and pastors to think in new, innovative, technologically progressive ways. This requires skills such as flexibility and creativity, so that a church adapt during periods of restrictions and social distancing. Specifically, churches need this creativity and flexibility to learn ways to compromise, bridge the digital gap, and reach people who are not as prone to understanding or utilizing technology. It could be argued that the digital divide, to some extent, relies on the growth or movement toward being a “young-friendly church.” The presence of young people and families is often cited as a positive indicator of church health and sustainability, as one day they will become “the church.” Church leaders also often reported relying on tech-savvy youth and members to help them adjust to the pandemic digital shift. They also began to see the adoption of technology as a way to bring back their youth to their church. One church leader explained this as “…finding people in the congregation who are willing to engage this and learn about it, use the equipment, and put it to good use. What about my two congregations working together and learning from each other? But it seems they want to do their own little thing in their own little box.” Another related implication of the digital divide is a forced recognition that leaders and members alike may need to branch out, in ways that many did during the pandemic, and learn, grow, and become proficient in digital media. We found most churches (as noted in 15 of the 20 Tech Talk Sessions) relied heavily on volunteers to help run technology, and take up new tech skills to do live streaming and keep the church online.
Another implication is that while the digital divide was erased within some churches during the pandemic due to the technological investments made, future removal of digital resources and offerings could not only allow it to return but also create long-term detriment. One church leader described how as soon as service went online, they saw an uptick in visitors tuning in to Sunday service. However, because there were also some core members missing, they wondered if going digital was worth it. They explained, “The early adoption of Zoom and learning to do that technology stuff has had amazing responses for us, big numbers watching (online). But as soon as we live again and continued doing so, we noticed a bunch of folks has not shown up yet, their participation has shifted to watching (online).” This means some people have not, and may not come back to in-person service. Thus, halting online worship options, could cut a certain number of their members off from worship attendance, or cause them to go elsewhere. In this study, some churches did not maintain the same level and frequency of live streaming their services as they did when the pandemic began, resulting in an exclusion of both established and new members who had grown to rely on it.
Addressing the Digital Divide in Pandemic Churches as an Act of Digital Justice
This leads us to a discussion of how bridging the digital divide in churches during the pandemic, connects to the idea of enacting digital justice. The digital transitions of churches during the pandemic required them to establish reliable internet access, acquire and learn to use new technologies, and create a team or infrastructure that could support the running of online services. This work, related to churches moving their services online, meant a large investment was made not only in terms of time and dollars churches spent, but in the creation of platforms and tools that enabled members to engage with the church in new ways. While this is often framed simply as a pragmatic response to the pandemic, being an attempt to overcome local health and safety regulations and social distancing policies in place, we argue the creation of an online church option can also be seen as an act of digital justice. This work created a space where people were able to be present, safe, and able to engage in the church community, to at least some extent. There are of course social and relational that this article explores. limitations to the experience of online that this article explores. church, which is beyond the scope. Yet, it can be argued that the digital option created and offered by many churches for the first time, enabled new populations with digital access to new opportunities for religious engagement. While research has shown digital media is not always a democratic or unbiased space,38 this research demonstrated that churches opening their doors to digital opportunities meant some inequities that prevented people from safely gathering were removed. This means online services during the pandemic created a space for digital equity and justice, to be manifest in these conditions.
One question raised by this research is, what will and is happening to this digital opportunity, as many churches are moving out of the pandemic and away from online services This study’s respondents were mixed in their post-pandemic plans for digital worship. In 12 of the 20 focus groups, leaders explicitly stated they planned to continue online services or live streaming options beyond the pandemic, while the others were unsure of the decision, even in late 2021. Of those yet undecided (leaders in 8 of the 20 groups), all articulate it was pressure from the technologically hesitant and/or the digital reluctance of senior leaders that made them indecisive. Here we see that individuals choosing to advocate for a congregational digital divide, has the potential to strongly influence the future access of others to digital worship.
This points to the need for more research to be done in the post-pandemic years about the church’s digital divide. While many of the practical or fundamental barriers to digital access have been removed within churches, a notable ideological barrier that could limit future accessibility to church, not just for, those who prefer online worship options but those who for geographic, work, or health reasons, have come to depend on digital options for church engagement still exists.
Digital communication amplifies existing injustices, mirroring online the inequity and oppression we find offline. But injustices can also be created – especially when people get left behind, as digital struggles were communication becomes more and more essential to life in the 21st century […] By learning, questioning, organizing, and acting we can work for digital justice and the flourishing of all.
Conclusion & Implications
Ultimately, the covid-19 pandemic created an awareness of a digital divide seen between congregations that lacked access to the internet, the shifting times between generations, and how a general reluctance to invest in technology prior to the pandemic was a setback when they were required to move online. For some churches, markers of the digital divide still exist, such as continued with limited or poor access to the internet due to local infrastructure or high costs for access. Despite these challenges, churches that willing and to move to digital worship services, also noted some surprising and unique benefits from their willingness to navigate these digital divides. As we noted in our first report, “When Pastors Put on ‘the ‘Tech Hat’: How Churches Digitized During Covid-19,” leaders felt that through online services they could reach more people and welcome more visitors than they had before the pandemic.39 They also reported reconnecting with members who had relocated to other parts of the country or world, such as those in college military service or doing missionary work abroad.
Furthermore, several church leaders felt that, they could better connect with homebound members online and offer them a new sense of community and social connection, which they had not been able to prior to the pandemic forcing services online. Other pastors shared that they quickly realized elderly members were eager to learn how to use the new technology so they could engage online. This desire of seniors to cross the digital divide was motivated by the hope of staying connected with their church, friends, and families during the pandemic. Also, many younger congregants who struggled to find their place prior to covid-19 were able to use their technological skills to volunteer and assist older members in using the new technology and software. This unplanned partnership with technology further helped churches address the generational digital divide they were faced with early in the pandemic.
Yet, more than online worship serving as a pragmatic response to gathering restrictions or being continued as a convenience for members, the future of online worship and accessibility can be framed in terms of digital justice. It can be seen as a wise investment in already present technological resources and system of operations, through which much investment is made. It can be presented as an option that brings the church access to new populations, while bridging the gap for those who are unable, due to either short or long-term constraints, to attend face-to-face service. We suggest that catering primarily to the concerns of those in congregations who are digitally reluctant or adverse to change, is a biased and potentially unjust response when considering the broader implications and potential impact of the church. While the question, “What will Church look like from here on out?” remains, one thing is certain: the awareness of the digital divide within churches and willingness to develop strategies to overcome it will require that leaders move past their congregations and technological hesitancy, while considering church online as a long-term strategy.
Acknowledgements
This research was sponsored by the Lilly Endowment and in conjunction with the Center for Congregations in Indianapolis, Indiana.
Neil Selwyn. “Reconsidering political and popular understandings of the digital divide.” New Media & Society, vol. 6, no. 3 (2004): 341–362.
Heidi A. Campbell and Mandy Jordan, “The digital divide, digital reluctance and its impact on pandemic churches.” OakTrust Repository, 2022.
Jan Van Dijk, “Digital divide research, achievements, and shortcomings,” Poetics, 34, no. 4–5 (2006): 221–235.
Esther Hargittai, “The digital divide and what to do about it.” In D. Jones (Ed.). New Economy Handbook. Elsevier Science (2006), 822.
Emily A. Vogels, “Digital divide persists even as Americans with lower incomes make gains in tech adoption,” Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/06/22/digital-divide-persists-even-as-americans-with-lower-incomes-make-gains-in-tech-adoption/.
Alasdair Sandford, “Coronavirus: Half of humanity now on lockdown as 90 countries call for confinement.” EuroNews (2020). https://www.euronews.com/2020/04/02/coronavirus-in-europe-spain-s-death-toll-hits-10-000-after-record-950-new-deaths-in-24-hou.
Selwyn, N. (2004). Reconsidering Political and Popular Understandings of the Digital Divide. New Media & Society, 6(3), 341–362. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444804042519.
John B. Horrigan, “The numbers behind the broadband ‘homework gap.’ Pew Research Center (2015). https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/04/20/the-numbers-behind-the-broadband-homework-gap/.
European Investment Bank, “Digitalisation in Europe” (2021–2022). https://www.eib.org/en/publications/digitalisation-in-europe-2021–2022.
Colleen McClain, Emily A. Vogels, Andrew Perrin, Stella Sechopoulos, and Lee Rainie. “The internet and the pandemic.” (2021).
Maryam Dilmaghan, “Religiosity and the digital divide in Canada,” The Communication Review, vol. 21, no. 3. (2018): 181–211. 10.1080/10714421.2018.1468184.
Jonathon K. Frost and Norman E. Youngblood, “Online Religion and Religion Online: Reform Judaism and Web-Based Communication,” Journal of Media and Religion, vol. 13, no. 2 (2014): 49–66. 10.1080/15348423.2014.909190.
Anna Holleman, Joseph Roso, and Mark Chaves, Religious Congregations’ Technological and Financial Capacities on the Eve of the covid-19 Pandemic. Rev Relig Res vol. 64, (2022): 163–188 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13644-021-00477-8.
Marta Kolodziejska, “What can the covid-19 pandemic tell us about the connection between media and religion? The case of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church in Poland.” Zeitschrift fur Religion, Gesellschaft und Politik (2021): 7–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41682-021-00091-z.
World Council of Churches, “New and Emerging Technologies,” Ethical Challenge Statement (2022). URL: https://www.oikoumene.org/resources/documents/new-and-emerging-technologies-ethical-challenges-statement.
Ibid.
wcc (2022).
World Association of Christian Communication, “Digital Communication Rights” (2022). URL: https://waccglobal.org/our-work/digital-communication-rights/.
Ibid.
Pontifical Council for Social Communication, “Communio et Progressio” (1971). https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/pccs/documents/rc_pc_pccs_doc_23051971_communio_en.html.
Ibid, 11.
Ibid, 12.
Pontifical Council for Social Communication, Ethics in Internet, 2002, p. 10.
Ibid.
Barbara Przywara et al., “Online Live Stream Broadcasting of the Holy Mass during the covid-19 Pandemic in Poland as an Example of the Mediatisation of Religion: Empirical Studies in the Field of Mass Media Studies and Pastoral Theology,” Religions, vol. 12 (2021): 261. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel12040261.
Marta Kolodziejska, “What can the covid-19 pandemic tell us about the connection between media and religion? The case of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church in Poland,” Zeitschrift fur Religion, Gesellschaft und Politik (2021): 7–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41682-021-00091-z.
Andrew Village and Leslie J. Francis, “Wellbeing and perceptions of receiving support among Church of England clergy during the 2020 Covid-19 pandemic,” Mental health, religion & culture, vol. 24 (2021): 463–477. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2021.1906214.
Lene Kühle and Tina L. Larsen, “’Forced’ Online Religion: Religious Minority and Majority Communities’ Media Usage during the covid-19 Lockdown,” Religions, vol. 12 (2021): 496.
Barbara Przywara et al., “Online live stream broadcasting,” Religions (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/rel12040261.
Fei Li, “Disconnected in a pandemic: covid-19 outcomes and the digital divide in the United States,” Health & Place, vol. 77 (2022): 102867.
Abel V. Alvarez Jr., “Rethinking the digital divide in the time of crisis.” Globus Journal of Progressive Education, vol. 11, no. 1 (2021): 26–28.
Sara Alhatou, “The generational digital divide the gap that is occurring between the current younger generation who has technological expertise and older generations (65+) in Europe. Https://maps.arcgis.com/stories/1f36520f12254547b9784db982fd0583.
Heidi A. Campbell and Mandy Jordan, “The digital divide, digital reluctance and its impact on pandemic churches, OakTrust Repository (2022): from https://oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/handle/1969.1/195938.
Heidi A. Campbell and Sophia A. Osteen, “Embracing pastoral entrepreneurship during the pandemic: Traits needed to be an effective digital pastor. OakTrust Repository (2022). Available electronically from: https://oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/handle/1969.1/195453.
Manuela Pardo del Val and Clara Martinez Fuentes, “Resistance to change: a literature review and empirical study,” Management decision, vol. 41, no. 2 (2003): 148–155.
Esther Hargittai, “The Digital Divide,” In D. Jones (Ed.). New Economy Handbook. Elsevier Science (2003).
Campbell & Osteen, 2021.