The Controversial Metachurch: Fighting the Wrong Battle

I’ve said a lot of controversial statements in my life surrounding church and technology. Comes with the territory. Truthfully, I’ve seen probably 10x negative feedback on the idea of a metachurch compared to anything I’ve said before. That being said:

To be honest, there are some decent arguments against metachurch, primarily being: we don’t know the mental health impact of living virtual lives. ( Whether or not the church is in the metaverse space, this is still a problem by the way. I’d rather work to solve the problem than ignore the problem, but that’s just my opinion. ) But for the few valid arguments I’ve heard, the majority of arguments are grounded in bad theology and misunderstanding of the technology.

I shouldn’t make fun. Forgive me. If nothing else, people are passionate on this topic. I would argue, that in 2022, their passions are misaimed. For a hot second here let’s stop and take the church in the metaverse off the table. Maybe in 2022, the majority of our churches should not focus on launching churches in the metaverse.

We’ve talked about this before. Just like buildings are a tool, and digital is a tool… the metaverse is also a tool. Your church needs to decide how it is going to utilize the metaverse tool. Questions you should be asking yourself:

As controversial as #3 exists, I’m not sure the ecclesiology of the meta church, or even digital-only churches, can really be resolved in 2022. I’ve actually had pastors and scholars tell me that the ecclesiology of a metachurch may take 30 years to develop. We may not even get a solid answer on this until 2050! Why? Because while God is the same yesterday, today and forever… culture changes. As culture changes, so does our strategy. Church, historically, has been adverse to cultural change. Just look at how quickly churches are pushing for butts in seats again, post-COVID. This is actually why the Helen Keller quote rings true: The heretical struggles of today will be orthodoxy tomorrow. (Churches will struggle to be on the bleeding edge. Ecclesiological conversations are almost always reactionary instead of assuming the best and being proactive.)

So passionate metachurch supporters out there wanting to die on the battlefield of metachurch ecclesiology… trust me, don’t die on that hill. That is not today’s battle. As fun and frustrating as the meta ecclesiology conversation is, the meta as a mission field is far more beneficial for today. Tell the stories of the life change from the meta mission field. Celebrate the disciple-making and releasing that’s happening utilizing meta tools and resources. Because while people can argue ecclesiology all day long, they will never be able to argue what God is doing through you personally and those you’re reaching in the metaverse.

Naysayers of the Church in the Metaverse: take a moment. Breathe. Redirect your passions against the Church in the Metaverse and focus that intensity on reaching people in the Meta Mission Field. Maybe the time in the Meta Mission Field will give you a better understanding of the meta ecclesiology. As an aside, Church, maybe give some grace and understanding to those people, those missionaries, those churches that are experimenting in the metaverse. Lets pray that they are successful in better understanding the metaverse today, so we can effectively reach the people that our buildings are not reaching.