Virtual Ecclesiology & Sacramental Praxis
by Clementine Wehe
It is no mystery that the technology around us shapes our imagination and the way we live. The adoption of contemporary technologies is by no means foreign in Evangelical circles and in the past Christians have readily adopted new media, specifically for evangelistic purposes. The medium of virtual reality is one of many media that has been brought to the attention of Christians for theological evaluation. Due in part to its history of failed implementation, there exists heightened controversy as to whether or not the fundamental practices of Christian church gatherings can take place to its fullest extent, and with theological integrity, within the bounds of virtual reality.
Through careful and intentional research, it is apparent that virtual reality churches are only compatible with congregations who hold a ‘virtual’ view of the Protestant sacraments, that is Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Conversely, congregations who affirm the incarnate presence of Christ in Protestant sacramental praxis, by nature, cannot adopt the form of virtual reality as a means for church bodies to gather.
Breaking Ground
For some, this discussion around virtual reality and Christianity is immediately dismissed as a work of bad science fiction. This simply is not the case.An ideological commonality I have noted between those who express this belief is the sentiment that virtual reality simply cannot resemble the physical world, that is, it will never “feel real.” Per this preliminary discussion and in order to continue on to what follows, it is necessary that the notion be disassembled altogether.
The foundational driving force of my research was my interaction with virtual reality (VR) for the first time in The Anne Frank House VR Experience with the Oculus Rift VR headset. Contrary to my preconceived framework of VR as being cartoonish and even satirical, the Anne Frank House was stunningly realistic and surprisingly immersive. The realism in this demonstration is due to ray tracing, a sophisticated rendering technique used to produce hyperrealistic virtual lighting patterns. I was undeniably immersed within minutes.
A recent article published by The European Journal of Neuroscience details the nature of VR’s immersive nature as an engagement of the brain’s motor cortex as it creates stimulation similar to that of a “real life” experience. The journal conducted an experiment that combined the infamous rubber hand illusion and virtual reality to best demonstrate this adoptive phenomena. The startling conclusion points to how easily the brain adapts to illusory technologies.
Facebook, with a platform that reaches to over 2 billion people worldwide, announced in March 2019 of an official integration of Oculus VR technology into their user interface in order “to give people the tools to feel connected [and safe] anytime, anywhere.” The introduction of this immersive technology into a 2 billion person community will not only create capital incentive to develop VR technological excellence, but it will also fundamentally alter how users participate in Zuckerberg’s vision of an exponentially growing global community. In light, the projected total-adoption of VR technology by the average consumer in the next decade may not seem so extreme.
In 2018, Cubic Motion released Siren, the “highest-fidelity digital human created to date.” The company describes Siren as a conglomeration of real-time facial recognition programs and has announced VR integrations with a number of partners who, from gaming platforms to artificial intelligence systems, span across many applied interfaces. This creates a way forward for a world of hyperrealistic avatar creations, settings, and interactions. In addition to the hyperrealism of systems like Siren, the integration of contemporary developments in haptic sensory technology, including Tesla’s full-body haptic suit, make for daunting strides towards an uncanny virtual experience.
Anne Frank House
Most intriguing, however, are the advances in contemporary neurotechnology. For the last two years, Elon Musk’s Neuralink Corporation has been developing implantable brain-machine interfaces (BMIs), a mechanism intended to bridge neurological connection between the human brain and computers through a system comprised of thousands of microscopic electrical probes that are fed into the brain. Stephen Shankland’s article on particular nature of Neuralink’s BMI was very helpful. The primary motivation of Neuralink’s developments are to address the medical concern around patients with neurological injuries and brain defects such as paraplegia or epilepsy. The secondary and inevitable outcome of this technology, as Musk notes, will be a “digital superintelligence layer” that effectively gives us the option to merge with Artificial Intelligence and to interact in virtual spaces. The system has been subsequently successful in testing on animals, as already “a monkey has been able to control a computer with his brain.” Musk announced this July in a 2019 press conference that the company will be undertaking human test subjects in the new year.
In our lifetime, while it is unlikely that Tesla products will be in the hands of the common consumer or that whole communities will have readily merged with artificial superintelligence, the indication of a tending shift towards experiential virtual technology is nearly indisputable. Christians would be naive to claim immutability against the repercussions of VR technology entering into the public sphere. A theological perspective must be formed regarding how (or if) virtual reality can be a place where churches congregate, as the sole objection that virtual reality does not “feel real” will no longer be viable.
Why Churches Gather
It is important to understand the nature of the church gathering when engaging in discourse around where it can or cannot exist. Liturgies shape culture. There are three distinctive and overarching qualities that are imperative to maintaining the life and health of church gatherings. The first is an element of knowing and being known by others. Second, is the preaching of the Word and communal worship. Third is the administration of the sacraments.
Implications
The first two characteristics, as the gap of technological excellence continues to diminish, will be able to be replicated in VR to where it is perceptually indistinguishable from the average Evangelical church that ordinarily operates in physical reality.
The degree to which the sacramental elements are in proximity to the physical world is paramount in the deliberation of their legitimacy in the virtual world. Stance on sacramental praxis adequately serves as the the deciding factor between those in favor or against adopting virtual reality as ecclesial fabric as it is a definitely asks the deliberator if physical space is needed in order for the rite to be actuated.
On May 19, 2019 a video was released by YouTuber Syrmor of a real-life pastor, Bishop DJ Soto, baptizing Jewish YouTube journalist Drumsy in virtual reality. Even more extravagant is the avatar Drumsy chose to be portrayed as – a curvaceous anime girl. It would be a far reaching assumption to say he chose this character with innocent intentions. Drumsy also has a video documenting his own baptism, though in a much more satirical and mocking tone.
Haptic Gloves, sensory technology
DJ Soto pastors the first established virtual reality church, which is rightfully called “VR Church.” The other avatars present at the baptism (Winnie the Pooh, Spongebob, and other anthropomorphic characters..) were members of VR Church. In a matter of six months, Syrmor’s video of Drumsy’s virtual baptism has received over one million views and nearly 4,000 comments. It is apparent that the release of this video is what brought discussion on the validity of VR sacraments, and consequently validity of VR churches, into more mainstream circles.
Certainly, one can point out many issues. Easily the most frustrating is the portrayal of baptism as merely a novelty. Soto was very well-intending at the time of the baptism and later in response to Drumsy’s video, he comments on how disappointing it was to see an important moment portrayed so condescendingly. Nonetheless, it is important to not immediately disregard the entirety of virtual sacramental praxis on the account of an ill-intending YouTuber. Instead, it is likely that for many, the practice of baptism in virtual reality would have been widely more accepted if the depiction of the events were less absurd, less surreal, more accurate to physical reality, and more technically excellent. Had the virtual avatars been perfect, hyperreal representatives of the humans they portrayed; had the virtual space in which they occupied been more familiar and accurate to the physical world in which we daily interact; had the virtual baptismal waters been perceptually indistinguishable from the lukewarm water found in physical sanctuaries; had we been better convinced of a virtual experience that it was on par with a physical experience — then perhaps a baptism performed in virtual reality would be more appropriate. How then might prejudice against VR baptisms be any different from prejudice against a worship service performed poorly? How might we respond?
What we think about the material of the sacraments is important because what we decide will direct the trajectory of ecclesial formation. Virtual reality churches are only compatible with congregations who hold to a “virtual” view of the Protestant sacraments. Bishop DJ Soto and his congregation at VR Church affirm what I have termed as “virtual sacramentology.”
DJ Soto’s Virtual Ecclesia
In the summer of 2016, DJ Soto delivered a sermon in virtual reality for the first time. Shortly after, Soto began regularly preaching in VR which led to a small gathering of people who would come to listen. Wired Magazine wrote a fascinating article on Soto’s vision and the events that led to VR Church’s creation in 2017. In tandem with my visit to the Anne Frank House, I was able to visit Bishop Soto’s VR Church in at a virtual building called Church World Mega Church. This is one of the many worlds that has been created to host Sunday morning services. Additionally, I was also able to join the church’s group message on Discord, as well as have a few interactions with Bishop Soto through online dialogue and attendance of VR Church’s services in virtual reality.
“We are one church in many metaverses.”
BISHOP DJ SOTO
Through my observation and interaction with group-chats, service attendance, and hours of VR Church’s YouTube content, I was able to assemble the fundamental functions and practices, “liturgies,” of VR Church as to why they gather. The corresponding order of the topics is important, as the group identity has formed around a unique approach to “knowing and being known” which lends itself to their expressions of preaching, worship, and the sacraments.
An important distinction Bishop Soto makes is between the “virtual world” and the “real world,” and by consequence the “virtual church” and the “real church.” In a recent interview Soto clarifies that the exclusion of virtual reality from the “real world” is a misnomer, as “what we experience in VR is very real.” Instead, the distinction between the two realities are terms of “virtual” and “physical.”
Soto references the verse found in Matthew 18, “For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them,” to explain that the presence of Christ in a church gathering is not limited by bodily space. Instead the words “where” and “there,” ought to be held as loose interpretations, and not only in terms of physical space. Thus, rather than being a church made up of physical bodies, VR Church is not limited by the bounds of space, and exists as “one church in many metaverses.” This is the starting point.
Knowing and Being Known
The opening lines on VR Church’s website state their main purpose, “VR Church exists entirely in VR to celebrate God’s love for the world. Everyone is invited to VR Church. It doesn’t matter if you believe in God or not.” Soto notes that many of his regular community attendees are either atheist or agnostic who would otherwise never step foot inside a church in the physical world. Additionally, many of the people in his virtual congregation are ones who have been rejected by the physical church and who have developed a bitter disposition towards Christianity. A significant tenant of VR Church’s beliefs is to empowering the Christ seeker as well as the Christ-follower to discover their “God-given destiny.” This pursuit of self-discovery, self-knowing, and identity-forming seems to be in direct response to “hateful religion” (a phrase frequently used by Soto), or the intensely dogmatic Christianity understood by greater American culture as a community who “hates black people,” is “afraid of the gays,” who attribute mental illness to “a lack of faith,” and is 81% of whom comprised of Donald’s Christian voter base. It is right to acknowledge these as sweeping generalizations, however one must recognize the consequential draw towards VR Church: its overwhelming inclusivity.
VR Bible Study, @djsoto
Soto’s champion phrase in regards intimacy in VR is that “with anonymity comes greater authenticity.” Much like a Catholic confessional, Bishop Soto has noted likely hundreds of times where strangers will approach him in virtual reality with struggles of mental illness and thoughts of suicide, sexual sin, loneliness, physical aliments, and existential contemplations of one’s purpose in the world. However, VR Church goes beyond the confession booth and pursues greater intimacy through weekly Bible studies, casual hangouts, and prayer meetings. With the steady technological progression towards a more lifelike and immersive virtual experience, face-to-face interactions between members of a virtual community are likely to be unlike anything in contemporary VR technology.
Preaching and Worship
I attended a live church service at VR Church through an interactive streaming channel on the church’s website. A video was recorded and posted on YouTube of the exact service I attended, which went over Acts 8.
Apart from the various extravagant worlds that serve as the places of virtual church gatherings, the structure and format of VR Church’s services are very similar to many contemporary Evangelical services I have attended in my time as a Christian. Simple motifs present themselves through out the duration of the service: a countdown timer at the front-center stage to gauge the time for social interaction before the service begins, followed by a warm welcome and announcements from the pastor or clergy, followed by a time of musical worship, followed by a sermon (powerpoint slides and all), followed by further announcements, and concluded with prayer. Evidently, VR Church seems to follow the basic liturgical skeleton of the typical Sunday morning.
The content of VR Church’s sermons varies in hermeneutic and preaching style depending on who is giving the message. While Bishop Soto has a more eisegetical method to biblical exposition, guest speakers such as Dr. Chris Rappazini, a current associate professor at Moody Bible Institute, deliver sermons with a more testimonial approach. For worship, VR Church primarily pulls from an evolving playlist of songs whose corresponding videos are played for the congregation to watch, listen, and meditate upon. From time to time, the church will also have a live performance from a member of the congregation to lead in a time of communal worship.
Sacraments
The first baptism to take place in virtual reality was by Bishop Soto of Alina, a woman who was diagnosed with a series of auto-immune diseases that prevent her from leaving the confines of her home. Alina is now on the Leadership board at VR Church and serves as a Pastor and Elder. In her personal baptism testimonial she exclaims,
“It absolutely felt real… my emotions were exactly as they would be [outside of virtual reality]: excited, so excited, so happy… it was the single-most amazing thing I’ve done.”
– Pastor Alina
In addition to virtual baptisms, I was shocked to find that VR Church has conducted virtual communion services as well. The congregants were invited to have the elements in their physical homes take them together in virtual reality. Alternatively members of the congregation could interact with virtual elements. This practice is similar to the televangelists inviting viewers to take communion with them on television, though the taking of communion in virtual reality differs in its immersive, collaborative, and personable nature.
Snapshot of Discord Chat, VR Church Communion Service
“We invited people to bring bread and wine/juice irl or they could interact with the elements in VR.”
– Bishop DJ Soto
The practice of virtual baptism or virtual communion must not be simply dismissed, but rather should be understood a proper outflowing of prescribed theology. Upon dialoguing with Bishop Soto on the topic of VR baptism, he commented that “We view baptism as symbolic… so we believe that that VR baptisms are spiritual… the chemical composite of water does [nothing] literal.” This sentiment concerning the sacraments is a common thread in much of Evangelical thought. For many Christian traditions, the significance in observing the sacraments lies not in presence of Christ being bound to physical bread, wine, or baptismal water. Rather, it is to say God’s presence interacts with the elements as symbols as they evoke communal remembrance. The simultaneous remembrance among Christian individuals through partaking in rich symbols creates a shared binding and communal memory of a non-physical event, an event that is cognitive by nature. Contrary to sacramental practices that place the presence of Christ in the material elements themselves, the act of remembrance through the power of the Holy Spirit is not bound to physical spaces. Charles Price writes on the topic in respect to the Lord’s Supper,
Christ [is] truly present, by the power of God, when a Christian congregation remember[s] with solemn intensity those events which happened in the upper room in Jerusalem, “in the night in which he was betrayed.”
– Charles Price, “Liturgy for Living”
Virtual reality is a highly-mediated technology, and therefore the nature of the sacraments, baptism specifically, in this virtual context must also be heavily mediated. A hyper-symbolic view of baptism works well within this context, as the only necessary components are non-physical ones: the presence of God conveyed by (though not bodily bound to) the symbol and the shared memory of the observance. For a church that gathers around shared belief and intangible observances, a physical gathering would not be necessary and a virtual gathering would suffice. This hyper-symbolic approach to the sacraments is what I have prescribed as “virtual sacramentology.” This is the held belief that the sacramental acts of baptism and The Lord’s Supper are purely symbolic, and are not actualized by physical space or physical elements. It is only a virtual sacramentology that can consistently work within the bounds of a virtual ecclesia. However, congregations who affirm the incarnate presence of Christ in Protestant sacramental praxis, by nature, cannot adopt the form of virtual reality as a means for church bodies to gather.
A Theology of the Incarnate Ecclesia
Contrary to a virtual ecclesia, an incarnate ecclesia orients itself to an incarnate sacramentology. To hold an incarnate sacramentology is to hold an incarnate Christology. It is the virtual ecclesia inverted, as it first considers the sacraments, who consider the incarnate Christ, from which practices of preaching and worship assemble, and around which the incarnate church gathers.
If the church seeks to orient themselves around an incarnate Christ, it necessitates they hold to an incarnate view of the sacraments. The etymological breakdown of “sacrament” is based in two root words, sacrō and mysterion, which translates to “hallowed” or “sacred mystery.” The nature of the incarnate sacrament is this: divine and mysterious. St. Augustine describes the sacraments as “outward signs” of an invisible reality, specifically a grace that is imparted and instituted to us by Jesus Christ. Dr. Marcus Johnson calls Christ the perfect and quintessential sacrament, as He is the “image of the invisible God.” Christ Himself embodies this characterization of sacrament in that He, being the same substance as the living God, homoousios, came in bodily form to testify to the unseen One who sent Him. Jesus is the bodily image of the invisible God. It is only through Christ that the invisible God is revealed, for “no one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.” Christ, The Ultimate Sacrament, exists incarnate and sacramental praxis ought to follow. Just as Jesus is inextricably bound to the invisible God, so also is the visible sign of the sacramental elements of bread, wine, and baptismal waters really and substantially tied to the presence of Christ. A holy mystery. Jesus does not shy away from this tension while in the upper room,
Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.
Again, Christ leans into the tension when speaking to Nicodemus alluding to baptism as a means of rebirth through water and the Spirit. This passage is deeply reminiscent of the first chapter of John, and Genesis 1.
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
A virtual reality church cannot be oriented around an incarnate Christ. Virtual reality as a mediated technology can only emit a mediated sacramental practice and therefore only administer a incomplete and insufficient version of Christ, simply a remnants of His presence.
Bibliography
“Alina’s Virtual Reality Baptism Story.” YouTube, YouTube, 30 May 2018, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fLjxjgD9Bo.
Anne Frank House. “Anne Frank House VR Trailer.” YouTube, YouTube, 12 June 2018, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCFUuyi-lIc.
“AR/VR: Creating the Future of Personal and Shared Reality.” Facebook Research, https://research.fb.com/category/augmented-reality-virtual-reality/.
Bassolino, M et al. “Non-invasive brain stimulation of motor cortex induces embodiment when integrated with virtual reality feedback.” The European journal of neuroscience vol. 47,7 (2018): 790-799. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/ejn.13871
BBC. “The Rubber Hand Illusion – Horizon: Is Seeing Believing?” YouTube, YouTube, 15 Oct. 2010, https://youtu.be/sxwn1w7MJvk?t=12.
“BibleGateway.” BibleGateway.com: A Searchable Online Bible in over 150 Versions and 50 Languages., https://www.biblegateway.com/.
Cortese, Michellee, and Andrea Zeller. “Designing Safe Spaces for Virtual Reality.” Facebook Research, https://research.fb.com/publications/designing-safe-spaces-for-virtual-reality/.
Cubic Motion. “Siren.” YouTube, YouTube, 31 Mar. 2018, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIFiftCLQsc.
Cubic Motion. “Siren.” Cubic Motion, 2018, https://cubicmotion.com/case-studies/siren/.
Drumsy. “I Got A Real Priest To Baptize Me In Virtual Reality.” YouTube, YouTube, 19 May 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh65Fj4lmRg
Johnson, Marcus P. One with Christ: An Evangelical Theology of Salvation., 2013. Print.
Nguyen, Thong. “Can Virtual Reality Change Your Mind?” YouTube, TEDxMinneapolis, 21 Nov. 2018, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFHj8OVC1_s.
Price, Charles P, and Louis Weil. “Liturgy for Living.” Harrisburg, PA: Morehouse Pub, 2000. Print.
SmarterEveryDay. “A Real Life Haptic Glove (Ready Player One Technology Today).” YouTube, YouTube, 1 Mar. 2018, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OK2y4Z5IkZ0&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR0X7pPH_8C2XVGYp0o2OWTeAj–23OygDm-mUompNLlBK19pnrLgRXgMAw.
Syrmor. “Real Pastor In Virtual Reality Baptizes An Anime Girl.” YouTube, YouTube, 19 May 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_88DBmdnNA.
VR Church, https://www.vrchurch.org/.
VR Church. “Acts 8 | VR Church in VRChat.” YouTube, YouTube, 29 Oct. 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_S7B2JvWYmI.