From Reflection to Reflection:

by Andrew Sutherland, ‘20

Having just come through the Christmas season, most of us have seen at least one depiction of the Nativity, those familiar gures gathered around the infant Jesus, swaddled and laying in a manger. The act of nestling the new-born Messiah in a feeding trough seems like a desperate act of necessity, yet it also places the Christchild at the centre of our relationship with technologies, both familiar and unfamiliar. The manger might be a simple technological tool, almost unrecognizable as such next to the complexities of modern computers and communication systems. Yet it, like an iPhone or a digital projector, is a technology. Dr. Craig M. Gay denes technology as “the systematic application of [human] knowledge, methods, and tools to various practical tasks.” This robust denition covers a wide range of human behaviours which seek to make our work more ecient, our communication more eective, and our time less mired in repetitive tasks. Our desire for technological solutions to the challenges of life pushes us towards the automation and mechanization that continue to transform most sectors of the economy around us, a process which has only gained speed and momentum in recent centuries. Yet the onrushing current of technological development and its eects on how we see and interact with the world ought to give us reason to pause as Christian leaders. To what degree do we as the body of Christ merely reect the technologically-driven culture around us. How easily should we rest in the cradle of the modern technological mindset? As Gay writes, the modern technological worldview that surrounds us is rooted in historical factors that have contributed to the way in which we inherently see the world today. The world appears to us as a series of components to be identied, broken down, and used for our selfdetermined purposes. Consequently, we see only a world of resources; natural resources, economic resources, human resources. We are trained to think as problem solvers, identifying rst problems and then solutions, and then leveraging the resources around us to achieve our desired results. Is it possible that this kind of self-centred way of seeing the world might infect how we also see God? Could spending the majority of our weeks in workplaces that reduce employees down to interchangeable functionaries with limited individual value aect the way we gather on Sunday for worship, or how we ourselves work together? Alternatively, could the way we live in community in the church oer a better, more accurate narrative of what it means to be human than the automated systems and digital advertising that icker across our screens? We often evaluate new technologies by asking one or more of the following questions. Can we aord the investment? Does it suit our tastes? Are we out-oftouch if we don’t adopt it? Does it help us to meet our goals? As we seek how to best follow God in a culture that relentlessly chases the next big thing, I would humbly oer two reective questions to consider. First, does the technology in question help us to better honor God’s creative majesty by taking our focus o of ourselves and placing it on him and his desires for us? Secondly, does the technology in question help us to better follow Christ’s obedient humanity, marked by compassion, authenticity, vulnerability, and seless love? These open us up to reecting on culture, rather than just reecting it. help us to better follow Christ’s obedient

Consider a proposal to replace traditional hymnals with a projection system. In considering how this aects our relationship with God in worship, one might investigate the eects of shifting from individually-held books to a single communal screen. The conclusions we draw might reveal our views concerning the nature and importance of unity in worship. Or perhaps a community might wrestle with replacing one binding (and bound) canon of hymns with the exibility and need for discernment that come with being able to project any desired lyric. Which option reects Christ more clearly?

It is entirely possible, perhaps even guaranteed, that two congregations may arrive at dierent answers to these questions. And in their dierent contexts, each might make a dierent choice that responds faithfully to the Spirit’s leading. Yet what remains constant is the need for faith communities to discern how technologies around and within our congregations shape our perspectives and attitudes concerning God and others. As we have these conversations, we might begin to oer the people around us an approach to technology that centres us, once again, on the Messiah’s presence.