THE OPEN SOURCE COMMUNITY, THE CHURCH, AND FINDING “ANOTHER WAY”
Photo by Yeo Khee on Unsplash.
Imagine a Linux-loving, Bitcoin advocating, “none” (1) husband and his wife, an adult convert to Christianity, and a postulant in the Episcopal Church to boot, taking a long drive up the rainy New England coast in the midst of a pandemic. They need a break from home quarantine. So they opt for a few hours of … car quarantine. On the ride, after two podcast episodes and compartmentalized conversations about their “his and hers” interests of technology and theology, she poses the question, “So what would an open-source church look like?”
(For those who aren’t familiar, open source is the philosophy/system/community/movement behind projects such as the online encyclopedia Wikipedia, the operating system Linux, and the cryptocurrency Bitcoin, among many others.)
As they drove and talked, and drove and talked, they were surprised to discover a myriad of fascinating intersections between her experience in the Episcopal Church and his experience with the open-source community. Their conversation bridged the gap between these two usually-siloed interests, and hinted at the possibilities that might arise from exchanges of wisdom and coalition building.
Both are countercultural missions that are not focused on profit.
Chris: The open source community values transparency, personal choice, privacy, and communal contribution. Instead of focusing on turning a profit, like your average tech companies, the mission behind open source projects is to further technology without compromising these values. Open source projects offer an alternative to mainstream practices where a centralized force can easily get away with limiting personal choice and privacy.
For example, you can purchase the popular Amazon Echo, but even with the privacy settings fully engaged, Amazon stores recordings from your private in-home conversations. You get the convenience of Alexa, but Amazon gets to own audio of your personal life. (2) Since only Amazon can view the code that makes Alexa run, a lot of people found this out the hard way. (3) In contrast, the open source equivalent of such a product would allow code-savvy users to “look under the hood,” identify exactly where any privacy weaknesses exist, and post their unbiased findings for the rest of us.
The business model of open source projects is also countercultural. Open source projects release their core content—whether that’s software, a banking system, or Wikipedia articles—free of charge. While a project may have a limited number of paid staff funded by users’ donations, much of the labor going into projects is being done at home by community members who write code, edit articles, etc.
AJ: Besides the deeply countercultural ideology that dismisses power, wealth, and idolatry and embraces forgiveness, selflessness and justice, the Episcopal tradition in particular encourages us to deeply examine our faith by asking questions, discussing doubts, and learning about scripture’s historical context, knowing that ultimately it will strengthen the security of our relationship with God.
To make a tenuous comparison, the “content” of the Church is also free of charge. More important than making scripture accessible, and not charging a cover fee for worship services, a core tenant of our faith is that grace is freely given and cannot be earned. Volunteer labor, AKA ministry, is key and, as we’re all reminded ad nauseam during pledge drive/stewardship season, individual churches pay their bills with our gifted donations.
Both are structured systems that value communal input.
Chris: Many people outside the open source community assume it’s a chaotic free-for-all when, in fact, strict structures and protocols do exist. Disputed information in a Wikipedia article is flagged by a reader, evaluated by editors, and removed if necessary. In software projects, such as Linux operating systems or the Tor browser, users share new pieces of code they think would improve the project, but that code isn’t incorporated into the official project until it’s reached a consensus with the project developers.
AJ: Here I can’t help but think of Book of Common Prayer revisions. The Presiding Bishop doesn’t wake up one morning and declare it’s only Rite I from now on. Changes to liturgy are proposed by laity and clergy, but nothing happens until a formal consensus is reached. (4) Similar to software projects, a person is welcome to use whatever liturgy they’d like at home, but it’s not used by the whole community until it’s withstood a (sometimes painstakingly slow) review by community leaders.
Content, not sparkly personalities, is key to maintaining long-term stability (and outlasting the charlatans.)
Chris: The cryptocurrency Bitcoin (think: a purely digital currency, no bills or coins) was created by one person (circa 2009 amid the bank bailouts) who used the alias “Satoshi Nakamodo,” and has not come forward to claim their fame (or their 10 $billion fortune!). Since their disappearance, the organization is guided by what are called core developers. Because Bitcoin offers unprecedented levels of security and privacy, and circumnavigates the often inflated, frequently “bailed out” traditional banking systems, the project speaks for itself without a slick celebrity figure at its helm. Compromised spinoffs to Bitcoin have popped up, but investigative users are quick to call out charlatans.
AJ: Jesus’ ministry and in-person teachings spanned a mere four years, but its anti-establishment and life-enriching message has lasted almost two millennia. Unfortunately, individual members of the Church have been corrupting the teachings of Jesus for just as long. Charlatans teach the prosperity gospel and proclaim that God wants them to have a private jet. Abusive clergy take advantage of the vulnerable. And don’t even get me started on the Spanish Inquisition or the Crusades. Taking a cue from the open source community, we can prioritize the regular practice of thoroughly examining our “code.” Are we living into the Baptismal Covenant? The Sermon the Mount? The Great Commandment?
Many people just need an easy-to-use app (i.e., accessible theology) and that’s okay.
Chris: Besides a few diehards, most members of the open source community use both open source and mainstream technology without judgement. For example, if you support and use the Tor browser (unique for not sharing your personal data with companies and the government), you’re not a traitor for also loving the video editing software on your mainstream MacBook. Living intentionally requires making intentional choices, not following a purist code of conduct.
AJ: Sometimes in the Church we mistakenly get competitive over who is leading a more devout life. Is it clergy and monastics, who have taken vows? Or is it lay ministers, who are doing just as much work without any of the prestige? Or is it the guy who rarely attends services but leads a faithful AA group? No Christian is expected to practice every spiritual discipline. Whether you’re writing a systemic theology dissertation, fasting on silent retreat, or singing “Jesus loves me, this I know” with your child each night, you’re living intentionally as a disciple of Jesus.
Finding another way.
Chris describes members in the open source community as united and driven to further its ideals. Whether one is a managing project developer or code contributor, a financial donor, or simply a single user, he sees one common thread that ties the community together: “They’ve realized there is something else—that there is another way.” These individuals feel liberated by the realization that they don’t have to contribute to a bank whose business practices they don’t agree with, that they can guard the privacy of their family’s data, and that instead of being just another faceless consumer, they can be a contributing community member.
I can also appreciate the desire to opt out of mass-marketed, corruption-driven systems, and am quite aware that intentional actions are needed to do so: Getting baptized at age 33 was an uncomfortable state of affairs for me. It felt like there was a bright red line between rational people and people who participated in rituals, and I was opting to step over that line into inconvenient territory. What yanked my soul over was the promise of “another way”—the option to live in community with other people also trying to “opt-out” of the greedy, unforgiving, polarized systems offered to us.
For members of both the open source community and the Church, the feeling of liberation that comes from naming and pushing back against oppressive systems is a truly motivating force. Identifying this as a shared motivation is a powerful place for dialogue to start. Glad to be healthy and out of the house the day of our drive, Chris and I allowed each other to evangelize for our seemingly dissimilar causes, and as a result generated a space that hinted at the potential to shatter stereotypes, foster grace, share wisdom, and on some level, unite coalitions of resistance.
Not bad for just another Saturday in quarantine.
shorturl.at/dwOQZ
shorturl.at/dwOQZ
shorturl.at/bgFQU
shorturl.at/erDL9
