Zoom conventicle
Every Friday at noon about 15 men from Seattle’s First Covenant Church say “hello” to each other on Zoom. They gather to read, hear, discuss, and find meaning in biblical texts. A few participants informally call this a “Zoom conventicle.” The “Zoom” part is obvious, but the obscure term “conventicle” doesn’t indicate the gathering’s format, content, or purpose. The First Covenant Church newsletter labels it a “Men’s Bible Reading,” and most churches would call it a Bible Study. Today if some friends gathered on Zoom to read, hear, and discuss biblical texts, then could the term “conventicle” accurately describe that gathering, or is it just “in the tradition” of a conventicle?
As Pietisten’s readers will remember, small group gatherings were part of Pietism from its German origins, and were a central part of late nineteenth-century Swedish revivals. By then the 1726 “Conventicles Edict,” designed to discourage Bible study without approved pastoral leaders, was ignored by some Mission Friend Pietists. They read aloud the Bible, and sermons and commentary from Martin Luther, P. P. Waldenström, and C. O. Rosenius. Providing commentary was the role of the journal Pietisten. These Pietists, also called “läsare” or “readers,” shared their thoughts, opinions, and feelings about Bible passages and commentaries. That had previously not been the accepted approach for lay study of the Bible. In addition to reading the Bible, sermons, and commentaries, those who gathered in conventicles often had access to a colporteur, a traveling seller of biblical literature, and someone who likely had attended a colporteur school and had enough biblical knowledge to help a group understand a text. Today most Americans assume that any lay group can and should read and discuss the Bible, even without guidance from clergy. This is a very different time and place from when the term “conventicle” helped define the uniqueness of Mission Friends.
The Seattle First Covenant group started because some members realized that they had never read and discussed parts of the Bible, and certainly not in a group setting. Their numbers grew quickly, and then transitioned to Zoom during the pandemic. The group is not likely to return to meeting in person. Gathering from home has advantages—saving commuting time, lowering the carbon footprint, and including those who couldn’t otherwise attend. By reading the Bible together for several years the group has created a special (even sacred) virtual time and space. Members have learned to be respectful in listening and speaking. They have also come to know each other better than before, as discussing biblical texts can provide opportunities for very personal reflections.
This Seattle “conventicle” is intentionally neither a Bible study nor a book club. It does not have a teacher, but it does have a timekeeper. Neither homework nor preparation is expected or encouraged. Participants simply need to show up on their screens, and with a Bible. A book of the Bible is chosen by consensus, and then read slowly, usually one chapter a week. After someone reads the chapter aloud, then the others comment on what stood out (“I never noticed that before”), or they ask questions of the text. Different translations are compared. The focus is on the words in the text, rather than what isn’t there. While connections are sometimes made to other books of the Bible, the participants try to deal with the words in front of them. That is especially important when reading one of the gospels, as “gospel hopping” can alter the context and uniqueness of each gospel, and hence the meaning of a passage. North Park Seminary professor Klyne Snodgrass used to say to students: “These words were written ‘to them,’ but saved over the centuries ‘for us.’” All the words are read, including those that are baffling, archaic, or require a lot of work to understand. Sometimes reading all of the text challenges assumptions and recollections from upbringings. “Flannelgraph theology” doesn’t always align with what the text actually says.
Over time the group’s members have taught each other how to read the various kinds of biblical writing—prose, poetry, letters, and history. The intent is to understand both the text and its context in order to find meaning. What did those words mean to the people who heard them? What was the context of the writing, reading, and hearing, including to those who translated the words over the centuries? And what is the meaning of a text in a specific situation today? It is very helpful that several in the group are well-educated theologically: Steve Elde at North Park Seminary; George Scranton (who passed away last fall) at the Graduate Theological Union; and Darel Grothaus at the University of Chicago Divinity School. They aren’t colporteurs, but without their help in understanding a text and placing it in its context, then misunderstanding a passage could occur. The group reads and discusses a text, and tries to put it in its context, with the purpose of finding meaning—both for centuries ago, and now.
The Seattle group is probably not a “conventicle” as that term was historically understood, but stretching its meaning seems forgivable. Rather, it is in the tradition of a conventicle. What matters today is that hearing the Bible read, and discussing those words with others, has enabled some of the group to better understand Christianity and their own connection with it. That is hard to do and takes a lot of time. The help of a conventicle group is valuable.
Pietists talk about Christianity as something for their heads, hearts, and hands. Reading scripture aloud in a conventicle is for the head, but it could also impact hearts and hands. There is much in the Bible to puzzle over. It helps to have people in the group who are also baffled, or who can make comments that would not have otherwise been evident. The questions asked of the texts change over time. Reading together teaches everyone to not take words out of context, but rather to read the whole story and “scale up” in order to find meaning. Often the stories not only have profound meaning, but that meaning jumps across centuries and connects today in unexpected ways. The mystery of inspiration is hard to understand, including the process by which those words came to the present. Sometimes, because of insights resulting from reading in a group, the text connects on a surprising and deep level.
Bringing personal experience to hearing, discussing, and trying to understand the text models how to read scripture, and how to talk to each other in a group. Reading the Bible in a Zoom Conventicle teaches everyone to take turns, be patient, listen, and speak with some humility, all essential virtues of Pietists. Reading the Bible weekly, and over several years, means that members will read familiar and unfamiliar parts of the Bible. It is good to read those texts left out of the lectionary. It is good to hear texts that bracket familiar texts. This process of reading and hearing the whole book deepens our understanding of the entire Bible.
In contrast to today’s contentious politics, strident voices purporting to speak for others, and the arrogance of commingling power with debatable theological positions, the valuable alternative of reading, hearing, and discussing the Bible in a conventicle raise some questions. Why don’t more people in churches read the Bible in the manner of a modern-day conventicle? Isn’t reading the Bible in a conventicle a good foundation for being a Christian? Isn’t reading the Bible in a conventicle basic to integrating Christianity into one’s head, heart, and hands? And if more people read the Bible in the manner of a conventicle, then would there be less abrasion in many parts of life?
Each Friday at noon this little group gathers on Zoom. It would be good if more people formed their own Zoom Conventicles and read biblical texts. The effect might be as life-giving today as it was for Swedish Pietists over a century ago. Using the term “Zoom Conventicle” may not make sense, but what happens when reading, hearing, and discussing biblical texts in such a gathering certainly does.