{"title":"The Church and techno-theology: a paradigm shift of theology and theological practice to overcome technological disruptions","authors":"Godspower Ugboh","doi":"10.1108/jeet-02-2023-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nFirst, this paper aims to identify and discuss the paradoxical relationship between theology and technology. Second, it also demonstrates the urgency of the digitalization of the Church ministry. Third, this paper offers an understanding of technology and theology through the missional perspective of the Church. Fourth, this paper asks the following questions: (1) Can the Church innovate ways of using technology while maintaining the social aspect of the organism? (2) Can organizations migrate to digital technology with adequate technology/human interface to engage innovations? (3) How can organizations renew their products via technological platforms? (4) From a socio-technical perspective on the digital era, can the Church keep abreast of its workforce in a way that provides adequate participative opportunities? and finally, this paper further interacts with views on the paradigm shift of practical theology and techno-theological practice and possible inclusion in the theology vocabularies of the Church.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nA thorough search on the subject of techno-theology (TTheo) reveals that there are no scholarly works that offer a conceptual understanding of TTheo. However, TTheo derives an interdisciplinary definition from innovative leadership, socio-religious transformation, transformational leadership, anthropological studies, strategic leadership (and authentic leader AL), scenario thinking/planning, technological disruptions, digital transformation and Church sustainability. There are multiple inferences in the literature on the advantages and disadvantages of technology in human relations (Banks et al., 2016; Dyer, 2011).\n\n\nFindings\nInnovation is open-ended. It can take place anywhere and anytime. All it requires are human entities who are creative enough to respond appropriately. The author agrees with Goldsmith that innovation is not limited to a single aspect of any system (Goldsmith et al., 2010, p. xxiv). Innovation can occur anywhere, and there is no limit to it. The only hindrance to innovation is the lack of creative leaders, creative agents of change and an enabling environment to foster change (Teece, 2018, 2010; Bounfour, 2016; Hanna, 2016). While technological innovation is a good development, other factors drive innovation. Technological innovation is not an end by itself. It is a means to an end. And it cannot stand in isolation from other factors that support it. It competes with some external factors which can sustain it or obstruct it.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThis paper used the traditional (or narrative), meta-analysis and meta-synthesis methods of literature reviews to study scenario thinking, system thinking, planning and TTheo principles to find a suitable space to redefine and reconstruct the Church’s ministry engagement in a technologically avowed age. This paper is not a technology text, nor does it pose to answer technology questions. Instead, it focuses on the role of technology in Christian ministry.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThis paper recommended that the Church redefines its digital transformation perspective by adopting a TTheo that embraces digital materials and hybrid technology in its ministry engagement across the board. This paper further interacts with views on the paradigm shift of practical theology and techno-theological practice and possible inclusion in the theology vocabularies of the Church.\n\n\nSocial implications\nTechnology shapes human interactions in a sociopolitical, socioreligious and sociocultural environment (Dyer, 2011; Postman, 2021; McLauhan, 1994, p. 7). As a community of faith, the Church is a segment of the broader cultural environment with a cross-section of people from various works of life and opinions. Language, customs and practice differ significantly from others in every environment. Hence, each setting is unique in multiple ways (Teece, 2018, 2010). The world continues to experience developments in many areas. Due to the symbiotic nature of humans and the environment, cross-breeding and cross-fertilization of ideas are inevitable. As one organization reacts to its unique existence, it indirectly or directly affects another. Hence, while growth may be relative, its impacts are overtly universal.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe term “Techno-theology” is a newcomer in the theological circle. Hence, there are practically little or minimal literature on this subject area. In this paper, the author has written the original concept of the subject matter (TTheo). This paper is part of the ground-breaking research the author is conducting on “Techno-theology.” The author’s PhD research proposal was approved in December 2022. The author’s research focuses on the subject matter of this paper (TTheo). The author also looks forward to leading a deeper conversation among scholars.\n","PeriodicalId":229407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Ethics in Entrepreneurship and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Ethics in Entrepreneurship and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jeet-02-2023-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
First, this paper aims to identify and discuss the paradoxical relationship between theology and technology. Second, it also demonstrates the urgency of the digitalization of the Church ministry. Third, this paper offers an understanding of technology and theology through the missional perspective of the Church. Fourth, this paper asks the following questions: (1) Can the Church innovate ways of using technology while maintaining the social aspect of the organism? (2) Can organizations migrate to digital technology with adequate technology/human interface to engage innovations? (3) How can organizations renew their products via technological platforms? (4) From a socio-technical perspective on the digital era, can the Church keep abreast of its workforce in a way that provides adequate participative opportunities? and finally, this paper further interacts with views on the paradigm shift of practical theology and techno-theological practice and possible inclusion in the theology vocabularies of the Church.
Design/methodology/approach
A thorough search on the subject of techno-theology (TTheo) reveals that there are no scholarly works that offer a conceptual understanding of TTheo. However, TTheo derives an interdisciplinary definition from innovative leadership, socio-religious transformation, transformational leadership, anthropological studies, strategic leadership (and authentic leader AL), scenario thinking/planning, technological disruptions, digital transformation and Church sustainability. There are multiple inferences in the literature on the advantages and disadvantages of technology in human relations (Banks et al., 2016; Dyer, 2011).
Findings
Innovation is open-ended. It can take place anywhere and anytime. All it requires are human entities who are creative enough to respond appropriately. The author agrees with Goldsmith that innovation is not limited to a single aspect of any system (Goldsmith et al., 2010, p. xxiv). Innovation can occur anywhere, and there is no limit to it. The only hindrance to innovation is the lack of creative leaders, creative agents of change and an enabling environment to foster change (Teece, 2018, 2010; Bounfour, 2016; Hanna, 2016). While technological innovation is a good development, other factors drive innovation. Technological innovation is not an end by itself. It is a means to an end. And it cannot stand in isolation from other factors that support it. It competes with some external factors which can sustain it or obstruct it.
Research limitations/implications
This paper used the traditional (or narrative), meta-analysis and meta-synthesis methods of literature reviews to study scenario thinking, system thinking, planning and TTheo principles to find a suitable space to redefine and reconstruct the Church’s ministry engagement in a technologically avowed age. This paper is not a technology text, nor does it pose to answer technology questions. Instead, it focuses on the role of technology in Christian ministry.
Practical implications
This paper recommended that the Church redefines its digital transformation perspective by adopting a TTheo that embraces digital materials and hybrid technology in its ministry engagement across the board. This paper further interacts with views on the paradigm shift of practical theology and techno-theological practice and possible inclusion in the theology vocabularies of the Church.
Social implications
Technology shapes human interactions in a sociopolitical, socioreligious and sociocultural environment (Dyer, 2011; Postman, 2021; McLauhan, 1994, p. 7). As a community of faith, the Church is a segment of the broader cultural environment with a cross-section of people from various works of life and opinions. Language, customs and practice differ significantly from others in every environment. Hence, each setting is unique in multiple ways (Teece, 2018, 2010). The world continues to experience developments in many areas. Due to the symbiotic nature of humans and the environment, cross-breeding and cross-fertilization of ideas are inevitable. As one organization reacts to its unique existence, it indirectly or directly affects another. Hence, while growth may be relative, its impacts are overtly universal.
Originality/value
The term “Techno-theology” is a newcomer in the theological circle. Hence, there are practically little or minimal literature on this subject area. In this paper, the author has written the original concept of the subject matter (TTheo). This paper is part of the ground-breaking research the author is conducting on “Techno-theology.” The author’s PhD research proposal was approved in December 2022. The author’s research focuses on the subject matter of this paper (TTheo). The author also looks forward to leading a deeper conversation among scholars.
首先,本文旨在识别和讨论神学与技术之间的矛盾关系。其次,这也表明了教会事工数字化的紧迫性。第三,本文透过教会的宣教视角,提供对科技与神学的理解。第四,本文提出了以下问题:(1)教会能否在保持有机体的社会方面的同时创新使用技术的方式?(2)组织能否迁移到具有足够技术/人机界面的数字技术以参与创新?(3)组织如何通过技术平台更新产品?(4)从数字时代的社会技术角度来看,教会能否以提供充分参与机会的方式与员工保持同步?最后,本文进一步与实践神学和技术神学实践的范式转变以及可能被纳入教会神学词汇的观点相互作用。设计/方法论/方法对技术神学(TTheo)这一主题的彻底搜索表明,没有学术著作提供对TTheo的概念性理解。然而,TTheo从创新领导力、社会宗教转型、变革型领导力、人类学研究、战略领导力(和真正的领导者AL)、情景思维/规划、技术中断、数字化转型和教会可持续性等方面得出了跨学科的定义。关于技术在人际关系中的利弊,文献中有多种推论(Banks et al., 2016;戴尔,2011)。创新是无止境的。它可以随时随地发生。它所需要的只是人类实体,他们有足够的创造力来做出适当的反应。作者同意Goldsmith的观点,即创新并不局限于任何系统的单一方面(Goldsmith et al., 2010, p. xxiv)。创新可以发生在任何地方,并且没有限制。创新的唯一障碍是缺乏创造性的领导者、变革的创造性推动者和促进变革的有利环境(Teece, 2018, 2010;Bounfour, 2016;汉娜,2016)。虽然技术创新是一个良好的发展,但其他因素推动了创新。技术创新本身并不是目的。它是达到目的的一种手段。它也不能脱离支持它的其他因素而孤立存在。它与一些外部因素竞争,这些外部因素可以维持或阻碍它。本文运用文献综述的传统(或叙事)、元分析和元综合方法,研究情景思维、系统思维、规划和TTheo原则,为在技术公开的时代重新定义和重构教会的事工参与寻找合适的空间。本文不是技术文本,也不回答技术问题。相反,它侧重于技术在基督教事工中的作用。实际意义本文建议教会重新定义其数字化转型视角,在其全面的事工参与中采用包含数字材料和混合技术的TTheo。本文进一步与实践神学和技术神学实践的范式转变以及可能纳入教会神学词汇的观点相互作用。社会影响技术在社会政治、社会宗教和社会文化环境中塑造人类互动(Dyer, 2011;邮差,2021;麦克劳汉,1994年,第7页)。作为一个信仰社区,教会是更广泛的文化环境的一部分,它是来自不同工作和观点的人的横截面。在任何环境中,语言、习俗和实践都与他人有很大的不同。因此,每个设置在多个方面都是独特的(Teece, 2018, 2010)。世界在许多领域继续经历发展。由于人类与环境的共生性质,思想的杂交和交叉受精是不可避免的。当一个组织对其独特的存在作出反应时,它间接或直接地影响到另一个组织。因此,尽管增长可能是相对的,但其影响显然是普遍的。原创性/价值“技术神学”一词是神学圈中的一个新人。因此,关于这个主题领域的文献很少或很少。在本文中,作者写了原创的主题概念(TTheo)。本文是作者对“技术神学”开创性研究的一部分。作者博士研究计划于2022年12月获批。作者的研究重点是本文的主题(TTheo)。作者也期待着引领学者之间更深入的对话。