Two aspects of the church are that it is universal and local. The basic constituent of the church is a matter of the mingling of God and man, but the existence and expression of the church are related to its universal and local aspects. In itself the church is not local but universal. In the universe there is only one church, just as there is only one Christ. In the universe there is only one Head, Christ, and there is only one Body, the church.
We should never think of the church as being something local. In itself the church is not local but altogether universal. Although the church is universal, the expression of the church in this age is local. It is expressed in locality after locality. This is similar to the moon. Even though there is only one moon, it appears where we are, and it also appears in other places. There is only one moon, but it appears in numerous places. Hence, in regard to the organization of the church, we must see that the church has a universal aspect as well as a local aspect.
Universally the church is the church, whereas locally a church is a local expression of the universal church. The local expression of the church is the representation of the church in a locality. The local expression of the church is the representation of the church in a particular locality at a particular time. In other words, the church is fully represented by its expression in a particular locality. Hence, the Bible speaks of the church as being uniquely one (Eph. 1:22b-23), yet it also speaks of numerous churches. For example, it speaks of seven churches in Asia (Rev. 1:4). Church refers to the church’s universal aspect, whereas churches refers to the local aspect. With respect to the church being universal, there is only one church; with respect to its local expression, there are tens of thousands of churches. If we do not have a clear understanding of the universal and local aspects of the church, we will encounter many problems.
The Roman Catholic Church has wrongly applied the terms catholic and universal. It applies the universal aspect of the church to the local expression of the church. This is wrong. The word catholic can be rendered “universal” or “unified.” However, the local expression of the church cannot be universalized or unified. Instead, the church is expressed in locality after locality. For example, in the New Testament the church was expressed as the church in Jerusalem, the church in Antioch, and the church in Ephesus. Today it is expressed in other cities, such as the church in Taipei and the church in London. All these local expressions of the church should not be unified. Once there is unification, an organization that is wrong will be produced. The Roman Catholic Church attempts to unify the local expressions of the church. This is erroneous.
The Roman Catholic Church is not entirely heretical. It contains a certain amount of truth; however, it mixes the truth, the fine flour, with leaven (Matt. 13:33; Rev. 2:18-29). Fine flour signifies the truth, whereas leaven signifies heresies. The Roman Catholic Church does have a basis for its application of the universal aspect of the truth. Its mistake, however, is that it extends the application of the universal nature of the church to the church’s local expressions. The universality of the church should not be organizationally applied to the local expressions of the church. The universality of the church refers to the church itself, not to its expressions. If the universality of the church is applied to its local expressions, the church will become a catholic, or unified, church, that is, the Roman Catholic Church. The result of such unification is the papal city of the Roman Catholic Church, today’s Vatican, the Holy See. Today tens of thousands of Catholic groups and organizations exist in different localities throughout the world. They have been unified and made subject to the rule of the Vatican. This is a huge error and is absolutely not according to the universal aspect of the church. The result of such unification is that the church loses her local expression, her direct fellowship with the Head, and the freedom of the Spirit to be expressed locally.
In view of the two aspects of the church, we cannot but say that the church is one. Since it is one, should the church in Tainan and the church in Taipei be separated? If they are separated, how could they be one? Should the church in Tainan then control the church in Taipei, or should the church in Taipei control the church in Tainan? This question is the reason that the Roman Catholic Church came into existence. The unification of the churches produced an organization that included many churches of different ranks and levels. Churches on a lower level were under the control of churches on a higher level. As a result of the development of this system of hierarchy, the Vatican came into existence. The error of the Roman Catholic Church lies in its neglect of the independence of the local churches in regard to the church’s local expression. This is to say that the Roman Catholic Church confuses the universal nature of the church with its local expression. This is truly a serious problem.
When we come to the matter of the organization of the church, we must know the basic constituents of the church. Then we need to know the two basic aspects of the church. On one hand, the church is uniquely one, but on the other hand, in regard to its expression, there are tens of thousands of churches. In other words, the church is universal, but its expression is local. In the Bible God did not place one local church above another local church; neither did God choose one church to be the center and headquarters of the local churches. The church in Jerusalem was not the headquarters, nor did the church in Antioch become the headquarters of the churches among the Gentiles.
In the Bible there is no evidence of a superior church, or of a headquarters. Even in the most degraded stage of the church, that is, in Revelation when the Lord wrote the seven epistles to the seven local churches, He still addressed all the churches on the same level. Some Christians have portrayed the seven churches in Asia as seven lamps on a single lampstand. According to their understanding, the lampstand is the headquarters, and the seven lamps are seven sub-churches. Not only is such a portrayal inaccurate, the implication is also wrong. The seven epistles in Revelation present seven golden lampstands. This indicates that the Lord considers each church to be on the same level. Moreover, each church was accountable to the Lord directly, and not one was accountable to another. Every church has the same standing before the Lord, and no church is above another. The church in Ephesus was not accountable to the church in Smyrna, and the church in Smyrna did not control the church in Pergamos. Moreover, the church in Pergamos was not above the church in Thyatira. No church controlled another.
I am concerned that many of the newly saved brothers and sisters may hold a wrong concept, considering the church in Taipei to be the headquarters among us. The church in Taipei is a large local church, but it is not the headquarters. In the Bible there is no concept of the church having a headquarters. We cannot use the universal aspect of the church as a basis for the unification of the local churches. This is erroneous. In regard to the church itself, it is one; but in regard to its local expression, there are tens of thousands of churches. We must uphold both aspects of the church; otherwise, we will encounter problems.
Not only have the Roman Catholic Church and the Greek Orthodox Church committed this great error, but the Protestant churches have also been deeply influenced by the practice of having a headquarters with each group having its respective headquarters. This practice causes the churches to lose their local expression. It is acceptable for a large local church to assist a smaller local church, but it is wrong for the larger local church to assume a higher position than that of the smaller local church and to take control of it.