However, there is a big problem. Perhaps you and I would like to come together for the proper building up of the church, but so many brothers and sisters do not like to come together. They still like to stay in the Catholic church, in the denominations, or in the free groups. What shall we do? Shall we go to their different places and join them? If we do, there will be no possibility for the proper building on the ground of unity. We must still come together to be the local church. Some say that a local church must include all the saints in that city. We absolutely agree with this. But they go on to say that since we only have a small number, not including all the saints in that city, how can we call ourselves the local church? If this were the case, there would be no possibility of having the local church because so many real Christians in every city will never agree to meet in this way.
Let me illustrate in this way. Suppose there is a large family by the name of Smith with thirty-six members, and they all become scattered individually into so many places and into so many things. One day, two of the thirty-six become saved, begin to consider the poor situation of their family, and realize that they must come together to be the Smith family. Following this they come to the third brother and tell him about the Lord Jesus, and ask him to come home to be the family with them. Eventually five come back home, but thirty-one remain scattered. Now, is it too much for these five to say that they are the Smith family? I would say that it is not too much. Yes, the Smith family should be composed of thirty-six people, but all of them would not come back. Only five, by the mercy of the Lord, would come back. If they do not call themselves the Smith family, what should they call themselves? Should they call themselves the Smith fellowship, the Smith Center, or the Smith Bible study? It is absolutely right for them to call themselves the Smith family because they are the Smith family. They do miss so many of their folks, but they are still the Smith family.
Today is a day of confusion. I would like to be kind to everyone, but I do have a burden from the Lord. If I were afraid that I would offend someone, I could not be faithful to the Lord’s burden. I must speak the truth. The sky must be cleared. If you are the Smith family then you must simply call yourselves the Smith family. If you do not like the Smith family, just say that you do not like it. Be honest and frank and faithful.
Since 1962, a strong testimony of the local churches has been raised up by the Lord, starting from Los Angeles. In the first few years people did not agree with it and did not pay much attention to it. After so many years, not only were many more churches raised up, but many books were published. Therefore, the term “local church” has become popular. Twelve years ago it was opposed, but in the last five years so many so-called free groups have begun to call themselves the local church. Recently the churches had some migrations to several cities, and from two of these cities we received letters warning us not to come because there was a local church there already. They said that they were the local church, and that they would not have fellowship with all the other local churches. And they did not! But they claimed to be the local church in those cities.
In a situation of this nature, there is the need of clear discernment. According to the Bible, the Body of Christ is universally one, comprising all the saints and all the local churches. All the local churches, regardless of whether they are in this city, in this country, or in other countries, are the one Body of Christ. It is absolutely right to say that all the local churches are independent of one another. But this independence should be in administration, not in fellowship. In administration, all the local churches have their own jurisdiction, but in fellowship they must still be one. All the local churches throughout the whole world should be one in fellowship. Suppose there is a so-called local church in Atlanta. On the one hand they claim to be the local church there, but on the other hand they would not open to the other local churches in order to have fellowship. What sort of local church is this? Immediately that church becomes a local sect. A local church is one that is open to all the saints in that locality and open to all the other local churches. If there is a so-called local church that would not have fellowship with the other local churches, that is not a local church, but a repetition of the history of fallen Christianity. In refusing fellowship, this so-called local church becomes a local sect.
The first local church in the U. S. was raised up in Los Angeles in 1962. If anyone truly means business with the Lord for the proper unity, they will have no problem in having fellowship with the church in Los Angeles. If they will not fellowship with the church in Los Angeles, but hold a certain kind of concept that keeps them separated, they have lost the proper ground and have become sectarian. They are the same as the other free groups, because they will not recognize the other local churches. Ever since 1962, wherever a local church was raised up, if those saints did mean business with the Lord, they were happy to fellowship with the church in Los Angeles and the other local churches. This is in order to keep the proper unity among the Body of Christ. If any group refuses to fellowship with the other local churches, they have lost the ground of unity and have become sectarian. They are not a local church but a local sect.