Word Made Flesh: An Incarnational Theology of Communication
In the aftermath of the digital revolution, evangelization has become uniquely treacherous while remaining absolutely essential to the life of the Church. The unpredictable and ever-growing list of dangers encountered in the digital settings that define our generation—from known concerns related to mental and societal health[1] to emerging critiques of social algorithms’ impact on free will and identity[2]—should give us reason to pause. While they do not diminish the importance of engaging with the modern audience, they should compel us to alter our tactical approach.
Remember that the engagement we seek is not measured in views or clicks gained, but in lives changed. For the Catholic evangelist, no conversion metric is more important than the conversion of hearts, the salvation of souls. As Christians, we are called to actively participate in the redemption of all as God’s instruments. To accomplish this, we need to embrace a robust theology of communication that secures us to immutable principles—principles that flow from and point back to Christ. We need to articulate an incarnational framework for digital evangelization by exploring how God communicates with the Church and by examining the interconnected roles of the Trinity, Christocentrism, sacramentality, and relationship.
The State of Modern Evangelization
Present-day Christians find themselves in a precarious and paradoxical position, tasked with preserving the timeless Catholic faith in an unprecedented time—an unfamiliar reality that is both brought about and obscured by our ever more digitally augmented world. A plethora of social media platforms compete for our attention, each offering a new, shiny, digital version of the American dream. But the promises of community and connection run up against an uncomfortable reality. According to the National Center for Biotechnology Information, “A great percentage of youths in the population suffer from the adverse effects of internet addiction.”[3] This presents the Christian evangelist with another paradox: how can we reconcile the need to utilize a tool that we know can hurt us, the need to enter a digital environment we know is hurting others, with our call to evangelize?
Further complicating matters for the digital evangelist is the target audience, an increasingly disillusioned group of people who are themselves navigating their own sea of doubt.[4] Fueling this disillusionment is the underlying confusion that stems from society’s conflation of key concepts. Friendships are being redefined as “social connections,” in-person communities swapped out for discarnate “groups.” It is not just affecting youth, either: eight out of every ten adults say they use YouTube, and nearly seventy percent use Facebook.
On the one hand, internet technology has given rise to a new, global, digital economy, facilitating unprecedented access to life-saving information and unimaginable visibility into nearly every corner of the world. But with the good comes plenty of bad. According to a report by Acta Informatica Medica, “this rapid development of the internet has a detrimental impact in our life, which leads to various phenomena such as cyberbullying, cyber porn, cyber suicide, internet addiction, social isolation, cyber racism, etc.”[5]
Without properly grounding and orienting our journey in the divine, we risk having our evangelization efforts hijacked by this digital environment. When McLuhan warned his readers that “the medium is the message,” he was cautioning them about the risks of neglecting the extensive impact that media have on the messages we seek to convey through their use. We must probe the prevailing assumption that the media we deploy are just tools.
Tempting though it may be, when it comes to digital media, the tool cannot be separated from the environment. By using these digital tools, we enter into a new environment altogether. Moreover, most people now choose to spend more time in that online environment than they do in the public square, more time than they ever could spend in a physical place. “Worldwide, internet users spend an average of 400 minutes—nearly seven hours—a day online,” according to a recent study.[6] At this scale, we are no longer talking about a new set of tools, but a new way of life.
Trinitarian Origin and Purpose of Communication
Before we can know how to adapt our own communication, we must first understand how God communicates in and through the divine economy. At the heart of the word “communication” lies an emphasis on relationship. In English, the meaning is more limited, so I want to turn our attention to the Latin it borrows from: communicatio. In Latin, the term evokes an active participation in, partaking of, sharing and communing with something, with someone (“communicatio” relates to “communis,” which translates to “common”). This etymology highlights the relationship which is meant to motivate all communication and all evangelization—communion with God.
The Catechism describes the trinitarian source of this relationship beautifully:
The mystery of the Most Holy Trinity is the central mystery of Christian faith and life. It is the mystery of God in himself. It is therefore the source of all the other mysteries of faith, the light that enlightens them. It is the most fundamental and essential teaching in the “hierarchy of the truths of faith.” The whole history of salvation is identical with the history of the way and the means by which the one true God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, reveals himself to men “and reconciles and unites with himself those who turn away from sin” (CCC, §234).
As Christians who believe in the Triune God—upon whom all human communication ultimately depends—we believe in a God who not only creates by communicating, but One who exists in a state of perpetual communication. We do not communicate by accident. We communicate because we were designed to commune and create with God for eternity. That is the heavenly feast that awaits us; our task as evangelists, then, is to make sure everyone gets their invitation.
Thus, we see that incarnational communication, whether explicitly evangelistic or not, must be trinitarian.
Ratzinger’s Framework for Christocentric Reconstruction
This pursuit reinforces our trinitarian foundation for digital evangelization by providing a Christocentric template that is ideally suited for adaptation to our modern plight. In his masterful exposition of the Catholic faith, Ratzinger reassembles complex theology in order to convincingly articulate timeless truths anew. Driven to tackle the contemporary crisis of his time—which was characterized by a surge of doubt surrounded by a sea of skepticism[7]—he deftly reintroduces the Christian faith in a way that reinforces it as both fresh and unchanging.
By refocusing Christianity on the person of Christ, he offers novel theological and pedagogical insights. For we are not only followers of the Way but believers in the living Word, who was revealed in the flesh as Our Lord Jesus Christ. Our entry into the Church forges a covenantal relationship between us and Christ through the Holy Sacraments. Only with due consideration of this relational and sacramental foundation does the ever-new yet never-changing evangelistic paradox come into focus.
Ratzinger’s creative reassembly of Christianity shows us the way forward when approaching difficult conversations with our secular contemporaries by articulating the underlying theological and evangelistic principles at play and by showing how they interconnect. This shows us that, if we wish to present the faith to a modern audience, we should disassemble it into its core pieces. That puts us in a position to decide which pieces to “re-present” and which dots to reconnect in order to persuasively evangelize.
Thus, we see that incarnational communication, whether explicitly evangelistic or not, must be Christocentric.
The Sacraments as Tangible Means of Communication
Now armed with Ratzinger’s Christocentric system of reassembly and our observations about the role and nature of communication, we are ready to incorporate sacramental observations into our blueprints, which serve as both case study and model for our own digital applications. When viewed in terms of its divine origin and telos, sacramentality defines our existence. Indeed, sacramentality makes visible God’s intentionality.
The abstract and the allegorical only take us so far, however, so we will now turn our attention to concrete examples, not only of sacramentality broadly speaking but of sacramental communication, which is itself a communication of love through tangible action.
Holy Matrimony and the Eucharist are prime examples of incarnational communication because both explicitly point back to the Incarnation. More than that, they represent an elevation and redemption of imperfect media for divine intentions, thus serving as models for us to emulate as we seek to embody a sacramental approach to communication. Just as God’s seminal act of ἀγάπη was realized through the body of Jesus, so too must we demonstrate sacrificial and self-giving love through our bodies by “exist[ing] mutually ‘one for the other.’” This dialectic—with all its dangers and delights—is on full display in Holy Matrimony. Marriage serves not only as an analogical example of the divine act of unitive love, but as an anagogical way for humans to participate in the divine economy.
If by participating in Holy Matrimony, we join in God’s creation of the world, by partaking of the Holy Eucharist, we begin to become like God.[8] In the Eucharist, we begin to see the principles for sacramental communication come into focus. So, what does Communion specifically teach us about communication in the digital age? The Word is made flesh each and every day in Holy Communion.
This profound mystery, which St. John introduces in the first chapter of his Gospel, invites us to mystically participate in the Blessed Incarnation. As we seek to become “little Christs” to the world, we have the ability to invite Christ to dwell in us in a substantial way by receiving the Holy Eucharist. The Incarnation is among the most impactful examples of divine communication because it harmonizes the spiritual and the tangible, the heavenly and humanly, principle and practice. In addition to pointing us back to the Incarnation and Resurrection of our Lord, the Eucharist allows us to enter into the Gospel story by participating in a tangible and visible reminder of the spiritual and invisible reality that is occurring in tandem.
God sent his Son to commune with us so that we may be united as one. The Eucharist both represents and causes this reality. That is how symbols should be used to communicate the Truth of Jesus Christ’s life, death, and resurrection. When communicating the Gospel, we should use symbols to point to transcendent truths, to incarnational realities, to meanings beyond the things themselves—never symbols for symbols’ sake. So it is with digital media. The sacraments are our template for applying an incarnational evangelization framework to the digital landscape.
Thus, we see that incarnational communication, whether explicitly evangelistic or not, must be sacramental.
Navigating the Digital Sea of Darkness
In the face of the very real evils that have been created through and facilitated by digital media, Catholics can be tempted to denounce the entire technological development as intrinsically evil, to be avoided in absolute terms. While certain byproducts of digital technology deserve our disgust—pornography and dark web debauchery chief among them—a blanket condemnation of the internet’s (or social media’s) use is not only unwarranted but unacceptable to the modern Catholic evangelist. Disengagement is not an option.
The majority of evangelization occurs during the course of the day. Evangelization must take place throughout the ordinary interactions that occur throughout our day or it will not take place at all. And today, interacting online is ordinary. Christians are called to be in the world but not of it (John 17). For most of us, being in the world requires being online. This underscores why digital engagement—through the use of new media—is not merely a helpful tool but a necessary component of the Catholic evangelist’s apologia for the faith, adhering to the Church’s timely and unapologetic proclamation that “the question is no longer whether to engage with the digital world, but how.”[9]
In our use of new media, Catholic evangelists—as defenders of the Message—must be careful not to devalue the invaluable. God’s revelation is realized in Christ’s Incarnation, and “Humankind must have an extraordinary value in the eyes of God, if for his salvation the very Son of God became human.”[10] That is the ultimate basis for human communication. The novel technical form must not distract from the ubiquitous ontological reality underpinning it.
The call to evangelize is a call to communicate. By sharing the Gospel, Catholics communicate the message of hope and love that Jesus embodied and fulfilled. “The theology of communication is not merely Christianizing media-technology or scientific techniques, but rather an encounter with the living Christ,” theologian Christine Anne Mugridge explains in her interview on John Paul II’s theology of communication.[11]
In addition to being perpetually online, our audience faces a crisis of disenchantment with, disinterest in, and disintegration from not only the Catholic faith but faith itself. Pew’s shocking projections predict that the precipitous decline will continue its downward spiral:
These are the toxic fumes that have fueled the pandemic of disaffiliation we are now facing. It seems to me that the disillusionment mentioned before is as much about being disconnected from reality as it is about being disintegrated from religion.
A relational approach to communication is the remedy for the discarnate obfuscation of reality lurking in the shadows of digital communities. The internet promotes community while injecting distance between its members—which is as ironic as it is insidious. As alluring as digital delights can be, they pale in comparison to the treasures of authentic community. Digital media increases access to content, no doubt about it, but it also discourages vulnerability, sacrificing depth to breadth, community to information.
To reclaim human-first communication in a digital world, harnessing media’s power for good rather than letting interactions be shaped by its form, an intentional shift away from digital engagement as an end of itself is needed. Indeed, digital media—like all media—is best when it stays true to its purpose, when it remains the conduit it was designed to be, in service to communication rather than master of it. Returning to this purpose is how Catholics can harness digital technology in order to leverage the “intrinsic capacity of the means of social communication, [which] offers enormous possibilities.”[12] That is how Catholics should apply incarnational theology to digital communication. That is how we avoid falling into the “ever-widening chasm between the fantasy in terms of which the media induce us to live, and the reality of our existence as made in the image of God.”[13]
Thus, we see that incarnational communication, whether explicitly evangelistic or not, must be relational.
Becoming Living Sacraments of Grace
Evangelization is not merely outbound messaging but relational communication—in the fullest sense of the word, with all its emphasis on communion—so we must consider the state of the “nones” we engage with as well as the innate effects of our online surroundings. To use insider comms terminology, we must know our audience and the context before we can craft and deliver our messaging. After all, the perceived message is the received message in every practical sense. Online, the disparity between intention and perception continues to grow, creating a digital chasm of confusion in the middle. If we succumb to the temptation of letting “engagement” represent “communication,” we will lose our footing altogether and fall headlong into it. Digital communication is a powerful tool, but we cannot let any tool reshape reality.
The only way to simultaneously apply all these concepts is to embrace and embody an incarnational approach to evangelization, which not only speaks the truth in love but demonstrates that love in action. No better example of this exists than the Incarnation itself, when Christ, the living Word of God, became man in order to redeem the world. An incarnational focus aligns a Catholic theology of communication with digital evangelization strategies, bridging the gap between the object of evangelism and the means of engagement by binding them to the relationship that was immortalized on the Cross. In Christ, the ideal harmony between message and medium is on display because in him, “The Word became flesh” (John 1:14).
An emphasis on communion does not necessitate physical contact—just as writing a letter does not—but it does require an intentional orientation toward communion. Communion is the teleological function of all communication, as we have already seen. To abandon that design is to attempt to divorce the act of communication from the reasons we are compelled to communicate in the first place. An evangelist attempting such separation is no more stable than the contractor who decides to saw off the very beams supporting the structure they now stand on. Both facades will quickly crumble. Digital evangelization rooted in the incarnational propositions introduced here, however, has the strength to weather known and unknown storms alike.
Trinitarian, Christocentric, sacramental, and relational—these are pillars capable of supporting our platform for modern evangelization.
Conclusion
This incarnational theology of communication reveals the extent to which digital evangelization must insist on retaining its trinitarian, Christocentric, sacramental, and relational identity. Only by harmonizing these marks can we truly embody an incarnational theology of communication.
In choosing this sequence for our treatment of the attributes, we have in fact traced the sequence of events surrounding Christ’s own Incarnation. In addition to providing an appealing sense of symmetry, this order of operations is a logical way to establish our own framework for modern communication. The Incarnation is the primary medium that God chose to reveal himself to us, so it bears repeating in our own use of media.
As we seek to live out the Great Commission, we must cling to the idea that communication was never meant to be reduced to a mere exchange of info. Incarnational communication is not merely an act of doing, but a state of being. If “the medium is the message,” and evangelists are called to become living media for the Message, then we must conform our entire selves to Christ, converting our lives into sacraments of evangelization. Only then can we truly embody the incarnational theology of communication God has designed for us.
[1] Pew Research Center, “Psychological Stress and Social Media Use”; NIH, “The effect of psychiatric symptoms on the internet addiction disorder in Isfahan’s University students.”
[2] Burgis, “The Erosion of Free Will.”
[3] “The Effect of Psychiatric Symptoms on the Internet Addiction Disorder in Isfahan’s University Students.”
[4] Ratzinger, Introduction to Christianity.
[5] “Social and Psychological Effects of the Internet Use.”
[6] “Digital 2024: Global Overview Report.”
[7] Introduction to Christianity, 44.
[8] Athanasius, On the Incarnation.
[9] Towards Full Presence.
[10] Teachings for an Unbelieving World, 60.
[11] EWTN, Interview with Theologian Christine Anne Mugridge.
[12] “Social Communications in the Service of Responsible Human Freedom,” 4.
[13] Christ and the Media, 30.