The ground of the church should not be merely local; it should also be universal. Locally, the ground of the church is the ground of locality; universally, the ground of the church is the genuine oneness. Christ has only one Body. The oneness of Christ’s Body is the universal ground of the church.
Suppose all the local churches in Korea are one with each other, but are not one with the churches in other continents. If this were the case, the churches in Korea may have the local ground, the ground of locality, but they would not have the universal ground, the ground of the oneness of the Body. In the entire universe Christ has only one Body. All the local churches in the six continents—in North America, in South America, in Europe, in Africa, in Australia, and in Asia—are one Body. This is the universal ground of the genuine oneness.
The churches in England may say to the churches in Germany, “We are the churches in England and you are the churches in Germany; therefore, don’t bother us.” Locally they may be right, but universally they are wrong. They may keep the local oneness, but they destroy the universal oneness. Locally the ground of the church is the ground of locality, and universally the ground of the church is the oneness of the universal Body of Christ. Hence, there is the local aspect of oneness, and there is also the universal aspect of oneness.
I hope that the young sisters will be clear about this and that they will teach their children, “Children, from my youth I have learned that the church should be one in two aspects: one in its locality, and one in the universe.” The church is one locally based upon its locality, the city, and it is one universally based upon the one Body of Christ. This local and universal oneness is the genuine ground of the church.
At this point we need to consider another two items related to the proper practice of the church life: the local administration and the universal fellowship. In the proper church life, the administration of the church is local, but the fellowship of the church is universal.
The administration of each local church is separate from the administrations of all other local churches. Furthermore, the administrations of all the local churches are on an equal level. In administration, no church is higher than another church, and no church is lower. In a country or nation there are different levels of government. The highest is the central government, and under the central government are the provincial, or state, governments and the city governments. This kind of government with different levels may be likened to a pyramid. The central government is the highest level, and the provincial and city governments are on lower levels.
But in the proper church life there is not such a thing. All the local churches are on one level. In the Roman Catholic Church, the highest level of administration is in the Vatican. The Pope is at the top, and around him are the cardinals. The Pope exercises control over Roman Catholics in all the nations. All over the earth he has a number of archbishops. Under the archbishops there are the bishops, and under the bishops are the priests. This kind of governmental organization is a religious hierarchy. Such a hierarchy should be condemned. In the proper practice of the church life, all the churches on the whole earth are on one level. On the top there is only one throne, the throne of the Head, Christ, in the heavens. Only the Head is on the throne. Under the Head, all the churches are on the same level.
Suppose the church in Seoul is the largest local church in Korea. Would it be right for the church in Seoul to control all the other churches in Korea? Suppose the church in Pusan is the second largest church in Korea. Would it be proper for the church in Pusan to be under the church in Seoul? Then, suppose there is a smaller church in the vicinity of Pusan. Would it be right for the church in Seoul, as the largest church, to control the church in Pusan, and for the church in Pusan to control the smaller church in the same vicinity? In answer to such questions, I must say strongly that this kind of hierarchy and control is absolutely wrong.
In reference to the administration of the local churches, I have used two adjectives: separate and equal. The administration of the church in Seoul is separate from the administrations in Pusan and Geochang. The administrations of these churches are separate and equal. Even the administration of the smallest local church in Korea is equal with the administration of the church in Seoul. If I were an elder in the church in Seoul, I might consider that, since the church in Seoul is the largest, I should exercise some control over the smaller churches. The elders of the smaller churches may also consider that, since the church in Seoul is the largest and the oldest, they should surely submit to the elders in Seoul. In human eyes this may seem right, but in the practice of the proper church life, it is absolutely wrong.
Every local church has its own administration, and this administration is separate from all the others. It is also equal with all the others. Although the church in Seoul has been in existence for a number of years, and a much smaller church may have come into existence only two days ago, the administrations of these two churches are separate and on the same level. The administration of the church is local. No church, regardless of how large and mature it may be, should control another church.