Digital Ministry and IoT: Hybrid Liturgy, Sensors, and the Presence of Faith in Cyberspace
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
The transformation of church services into the digital realm has led to the emergence of hybrid liturgies that combine offline and cyberspace gatherings. This study designed and evaluated a privacy-by-design Internet of Things (IoT) architecture with edge processing to support pastoral decision-making based on non-intrusive participation metrics. Using a mixed-methods approach combined with Design Science Research, the study was conducted with two groups (intervention vs. comparison) over four weeks. Artifacts developed included the placement of environmental and occupancy sensors, the formulation of a Liturgical Participation Index (LIP) (vocal, kinesthetic, attentional, and communal dimensions), and a pastoral dashboard displaying only anonymized aggregates. Results showed an increase in LIP in the intervention group of Δ16 points (60→76) compared to the comparison group (Δ3 points), with the most significant increases in the vocal and communal dimensions. SUS scores were above the threshold of eligibility (≥68), and the perception of “faith presence” post-implementation was higher in the intervention group. In addition, the median CO₂lower at the intervention site, indicating greater environmental comfort and consistent with increased attention. These findings reinforce the concept of distributed sacramental presence, namely the presence of faith as heart-directed and bodily participation mediated by technology yet rooted in liturgical practice. This study recommends a phased implementation with low-risk sensors, sensor-aware liturgical cues, a streamlined dashboard, and strict consent and anonymization SOPs. Limitations include the four-week duration and aggregate sample size; further longitudinal research is recommended.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
[2] Berger, T. (2017). @Worship: Liturgical Practices in Digital Worlds. Routledge. Routledge+1
[3] Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. SSRN+1
[4] Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory (UTAUT2). MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. phpan.ndhu.edu.tw
[5] Brooke, J. (1996). SUS: A “quick and dirty” usability scale. In P. W. Jordan et al. (Eds.), Usability Evaluation in Industry (pp. 189–194). London: Taylor & Francis. (Reprint PDF). Digital Healthcare Research+1
[6] Shi, W., Cao, J., Zhang, Q., Li, Y., & Xu, L. (2016). Edge computing: Vision and challenges. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 3(5), 637–646. https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2016.2579198 Weisong Shi's Homepage+2cse.buffalo.edu+2
[7] ASHRAE. (2019). ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2019: Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality (and addenda). ASHRAE. ASHRAE+1
[8] Allen, J. G., MacNaughton, P., Satish, U., Santanam, S., Vallarino, J., & Spengler, J. D. (2016). Associations of cognitive function scores with CO₂, ventilation, and VOC exposures in office workers: A controlled exposure study. Environmental Health Perspectives, 124(6), 805–812. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1510037 Environmental Health Perspectives+1
[9] Pakpahan, B. J. (2024). Congregation members’ response to worship and fellowship in digital ministry: An HKBP case. HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies, 80(1). HTS Teologiese Studies
[10] Sihombing, A. A. (2023). Online Mass services during the pandemic: Catholic pastoral responses in Indonesia. Toronto Journal of Theology. UTP Publishing
[11] Tampubolon, M. (2023). Rethinking the use of technology and the online church for worship. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 7(5), 381–388. journal.lasigo.org
[12] Vigneault, P., et al. (2024). The link between acoustic characteristics of worship spaces and emotional experience. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 155(5), 3027–3043. AIP Publishing
[13] Autio, H., et al. (2021). Historically based room acoustic analysis and auralization of a medieval abbey church. Applied Sciences, 11(4), 1586. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11041586 MDPI
[14] Michels, D. H. (2020). Digital Faith: Law, Ethics, and Theology for the Online-Engaged Church. Schulich Law / Dalhousie (open manuscript). digitalcommons.schulichlaw.dal.ca
[15] Cavoukian, A. (2011). Privacy by Design: The 7 Foundational Principles (Guidance document). Information & Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. Simon Fraser University+1
[16] Al-Hashmi, S., et al. (2024). Digital sanctuary: Exploring security and privacy concerns among congregants. Journal of Media and Religion