After being present at an interview with Brandon, I don’t think that the original quote does the young man or the Church justice. In an interview, he said that the modern means of communication: Twitter, Facebook, blogs, websites, TV, radio, iPods, YouTube and whatever else is out there is used by millions of young people around the country as a quick way to access information. He also pointed out that this is the case for the younger generation, under 55. It is not the case for the entire population. He did mention that it’s a way of getting people’s attention, but it will never replace the live encounter in spiritual direction, religious education, conferences, youth and young adult groups, retreats, and participation in parish activities. My take is that these are means for marketing the Church and letting people know that she’s still there and is interested in them.
When he was asked about the work of groups like the Franciscans, Missionaries of Charity, Missionaries of the Poor, Dominicans, Poor Clares, and Benedictines who have a very small presence in cyber space, but have been more effective in reaching the common man than most bishops, he was very reasonable and explained that these communities and others like them target a population that is not found in cyberspace. It is important not to impose this form of communication on them, since they have no interest in reaching the people in cyberspace.
Franciscans, Missionaries of the Poor and Missionaries of Charity are the three fastest growing religious families in the Church today. But they don’t want to recruit from the Facebook, Twitter and Cyberspace crowd. Most of these folks are involved in the middle class. We want to recruit from those who are involved with the poor, unemployed, immigrant, drug addict, homeless, sick and abandoned, those in crisis pregnancies, the pro-life ministry, or street ministry. Even the MFVA recruit from the business class and the educated, because of their highly specialized ministry in communication. Brandon was quick to point out that this was not for these communities or those like them. The people they serve are not on social media and the men and women on social media are usually not the kind of men and women they want in their orders. For example, most of these communities maintain a website, but few of us have permission to interact with the laity in forums and blogs. For the most part, these communities don’t even have internet or computers in their houses. My own province started using email to send out our newsletter just a month ago. Yet, the province was established in 1975.
Brandon was very clear that there is a large group of people out there who do use these forms of communication and for whom contact through these forms would be helpful to remind them that the Church is present. He did not propose that the Church do anything fancy or elaborate either. He gave very simple and practical examples such as inviting people to different things, letting people know of services in the community, especially new ministries as they open up, keeping them informed and maybe a scriptural or other spiritual thought for the day.
In the interview, he admitted that when he wrote the book he had in mind one sector of the population, the sector that uses these means. He also had in mind one sector of the clergy, religious and lay volunteers, those who serve this sector. He does not impose this on ministries and religious communities who do not focus on the cyber population . These evangelists are already involved with a very large group of people not covered by cyber technology.
I believe that it is good for dioceses, religious superiors, bishops conferences and other resource and leadership groups to have websites where their members can go for information that will help their ministry and promote vocations. Facebook, Twitter, iPod and YouTube do not reach the population that many of us in ministry want to reach. I see these as a means of giving news flashes and bulletins of what’s coming and where to get more information.
The other issue that Brandon does not address in his book is time. I run the website for Respect Life Ministry in my Archdiocese, the blog for that ministry, the website for my community and my community’s blog. On top of that, I am Formation Director, Vocation Director, professor of Theology, and I run a ministry to Fathers in crisis pregnancies that serves about 500 fathers a year, more than one per day. I’m supposed to be present for four hours of the LOTH, daily mass, community meals, community recreation, lectio divina and community meetings. We have only one car. When that’s not available we walk or take the bus, which involves more time getting from point A to B. And I have cancer, so I have been relieved of other duties and cut back to these few things that I have mentioned to allow me to rest when I feel sick from the chemo or have to go to doctor’s appointments. Like me, there are many other priests, brothers, deacons and sisters who have a lot on their plate.
The social media requires time to do it right. The people who do it for the Vatican and the USCCB do nothing else during the day. Most are laymen. They get paid well to do this. We need to find these laymen and the funds. At the end of the day, they go home. Even the Holy Father works a four-hour day then retires to his private studies, writing and whatever else popes do when they’re not scheduled to meet diplomats or travel. This is not the schedule of the average bishop, priest, deacon, brother or sister. If you go to diocesan sites, many bishops do place at least a monthly message on their site, if not a weekly one.
We have to take Brandon’s message and apply it to those for whom he wrote it, but with great prudence.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
). You can feel free to evangelize by fax.
