I think, in some ways, the move towards this is already happening. My gut tells me that we will also see a decline in the traditional mega-church, with the only ones being that large pursuing a live teaching, multi-site model.

I see this looking almost like the locavore movement...

While often times I question Rainer's research, especially regarding Millenial's (I am one myself and think his stuff is slightly skewed to upward moving anglo's, doesn't take subculture into account enough), I think this list was very good.I am a young clergy United Methodist who grew up as a preachers kid in a southern baptist mega-church. I feel he is understanding trends very well.

Perhaps the video venue going away is symbolic of the fact people want to be pastored...not necessarily taught. For a congregation to be of the size where this type of pastoral leadership is effective (at a distant, usually just in public), congregations need to be pretty big. Most of these video venues simply aren't the size for this to be a long sustaining leadership model. It works for awhile, but then people need those who teach them on Sunday morning to be the ones that deal with crisis and celebration with them. If a venue congregation is under 500, this should and is easily done by the teaching leader.

Venue teaching works well for branding, tribing and assembling people together..but I hesitate to call it pastoring.

Matt -

I appreciate your comments. You, however, are comparing different people. Sam Rainer did not write Millennials; it was written by Thom and Jess Rainer (i know; too many Rainers!). Also, I would be curious where you disagree with the research on the Millennials. The research method seems solid: adequate sample size; representative sample size; acceptable margin of error; and good quantitative and qualitative methods. There was good representation of both ethnic/racial groups and demographic/income groups. Definitely no skewing.

Thanks!

I think that as long as teaching = discipleship, video venues are destined to fail for all the reasons above. If a church truly embraces small groups as the disciple making mechanism, it absolutely can work. A single teaching pastor can't possibly disciple 500 people effectively. But 25 small groups (or 100) of 15-20 people can process and apply a single video teaching, encourage, hold accountable... i.e. disciple each other in community. Personal connection to the speaker is overrated, and generally not real for most people in a congregation of 250+

Jason, on the contrary, I fear that personal connection to the speaker is grossly UNDERRATED in our culture, much to the detriment of the church. It's not a question about whether or not a small group can process a single video teaching. The more fundamental question is--what is the Church commissioned to teach? If our teaching is simply a matter of transferring Biblical content from speaker to listener (as is probably assumed by the majority of Christian congregations), then sure, video teaching is a valid option.

But look closely at the Great Commission and ask yourself, WHAT is it that we are commanded to teach? Answer: We are to teach people TO DO everything Christ has commanded us. Biblical teaching is more than simply transferring content. Biblical teaching is highly practical. And it is highly relational, because in everything that we learn that is practical (e.g. riding a bike, driving a car, playing an instrument, etc.) someone has to be there with us, one-on-one, showing us how to take the theory and put it into practice.

Obviously, this works best in small groups, as you suggest. In fact, it is my conviction that preaching and teaching, though they overlap in many ways, are nevertheless distinct--with preaching best being done in the context of the congregation gathered for worship, and teaching best being done in the context of small groups. Now, videos and podcasts may have their uses in the context of small groups, but those uses must always be subordinate to the ministry of those God gifts in the small group to be teachers. Small group teachers are not simply to lead a discussion of a video of the "real" teacher. They are gifted by God to be the REAL, PRIMARY teachers of the group.

As with all questions of this nature, there is always a big difference between the ideal and reality. The "video preacher" model is not ideal, either biblically or practically, for all of the reasons mentioned above, and therefore should not be sustainable as Rainer suggests.

However, and I would add unfortunately, in the dysfunctional church of reality there will always be a place for those who wish to have a religious experience in terms that have little to do with the biblical ideal. Maybe I am overly cynical, but I can only foresee this increasing in the future, not decreasing. The technology will no doubt change, in which case the medium of video may fall into disuse, but something else just as impersonal will rise to take its place. I think we see this already happening with on-line chat room "churches" and other social media spirituality.

The only thing that surprises me is that we don't already have an iChurch app so that people can "worship" on their smartphones...

Bill, as always I appreciate your thoughtful comments. I'm with you that all real spiritual maturing involves learning to do what the Lord says (not just log the commandments as so much intellectual content), and that this is taught relationally, not from the video screen or even the pulpit per se!

This Christmas CBS will again air the special on the monastic communities of Mt. Athos in Greece. If you learn much about the history and practice of Christian monasticism (in its functional form--of course, there are also abuses)--especially as it developed and continues to be maintained in the Eastern Orthodox Church, this model of "spiritual father or mother/experienced mentor" actively and relationally counseling and discipling the less experienced monks/nuns (and also the Christian lay people from all walks of life who come to the monasteries for counsel, spiritual retreat, and confession) has a continuous succession throughout 2,000 years of Christian history (and before, i.e., Moses and Joshua, Jesus and the Twelve, Paul and Timothy, Barnabas and John Mark, etc.). One thing I notice in studying this biblical model and its form in historic EO monasticism, is that it is a *whole life* approach to discipleship, not a once a week small group activity.

Having experienced small group Bible studies for years (a very good thing--I'm not knocking this), I found the quality of discipleship in such a venue is predicated on the real spiritual maturity of the facilitator(s) and members. I am older and have been a consciously believing Christian from childhood. Most, if not all, of these small groups for me were an experience of the older children feeding the younger children (better than starving, but still not completely satisfying) and more ingestion of biblical data/content than actively learning (like learning to ride a bike) to practice the commandments of Christ. I found there are precious few real spiritual "fathers" and "mothers" around to nurture those older children (certainly not enough to head every small group). Eventually, I found myself mostly feeding others, but knowing deep in my heart that I was little more than a spiritual infant myself (in terms of the depths of Christian love and wisdom exemplified in Christ and those who have followed Him most closely throughout Christian history). I just had a lot of biblical head knowledge and a desire to nurture my own and other women's relationship with God.

Another complication was that my only experience of Christian groups consciously trying to have a spiritual "leader" get more deeply into holding those being discipled accountable in terms of practicing what they were learning ended up in gross abuse of spiritual power because the "leadership" did not have real inner spiritual discernment and understanding of the needs of his own soul and those of others, but instead was relying on outward ideological moral/behavioral "ideals" derived less from deep personal experience of Christ in the attempt to practice His teachings than an intellectual one-size-fits all construction of what that must mean based on the words of Scripture (or certain words of Scripture) and a capacity/desire to influence/manipulate others to perform! (Sorry for the long sentence--pant, pant, pant!)

I find your first couple of paragraphs really resonate with me, and I also think Sean's prediction about the "dysfunctional church of reality" (substituting technology for personal presence and the messiness of day-to-day relationships) is likely true (e.g., Brian Hardin's Daily Audio Bible online "community").

Good food for thought and discussion in this post.

As Gallup reported a few years ago: American's desire for good spiritual things is 3000 miles wide (i.e., across the entire nation), but 3 inches deep (i.e., too little personal discipline to expect the average American to act on his spiritual desires). It remains to be seen . . . but I'm hoping for the best, as always!

As a professional videographer, I'm a firm believer in the power of video to educate and inspire. However, I must agree with this author's perspective. The true power of video is not in video conferencing, but in thoughtful and artful use of the medium to tell a story. That's why I believe narrative & documentary short films are much better as a tool within a message rather than using video to deliver the entire message.

Not sure this is exactly a "bold prediction." I have yet to meet anyone who actually prefers video preaching, though I know of some that are willing to live with it.

I am personally not convinced that we can separate the teacher from the pastor for the local congregation who wants spiritual transformation to be central. Love and relationship play a key part in my own sermon planning, preparation and delivery. Whether or not my preaching is "video quality" (and I do hold to a strong value of excellence and honing the teaching gift), my people listen and respond to my preaching not so much because it's a polished package, but because they believe I love them, and I am authentically living out my own journey with them. Even so, I want to support my brothers and sisters engaged in video preaching ministry, watching to see what God wants to accomplish through this creativity and passion.

Video preaching may decline on the church big screen. However, I believe we are just seeing the beginning of using streaming video for interactive and connected outreach on the four smaller screens (tv, pc, mobile, tablet).

I'm a huge advocate of using technology in worship/church...but I couldn't agree more with this post.
I just hope it doesn't take a whole decade for us to see the decline.

I guess I'm ok with a few certain contexts using video-venues...but it being served up as model to the rest of church culture? (what you said about conference & published pastors dictating the trends for the rest of us)... that's what I have a problem with.

Thankful for this blog post.