Is There A “Universal” Church?
In Christian parlance there are often two ways of talking about the church; the distinction is made between the “local” and “universal” church, or you might have heard it said the difference between the lowercase “c” church and uppercase “C” church. How are we to understand these distinctions? Is there right now a “universal” church?
I can say pretty confidently that I would never have questioned this doctrine unless I attended a Landmark Baptist church. One of their doctrinal distinctives is denying that a “universal” church exists currently today. I found it an odd position, but as I studied it more I myself became convinced of this. We will examine a few things. First, what is “the church?” Secondly, according to this definition, does the “universal church” exist today? And lastly, what role, if any, does the local church play as a typological representation of this “universal church?”
What is the Church?
The Greek word “eklektos” translates to “the called out ones” or “elect” which are those whom God has granted mercy to through His Son Jesus Christ. The word “church” in Greek is “ekklessia” which means “an assembly.” These two terms are rough synonyms; this data gives a definition of “church.”
Church (n): An assembly of called out ones.
Do local, visible bodies of churches exist today? They do, and using this definition can help us to correct many previsions today of the church. Viewing the church as a place for evangelism doesn’t do justice to what the New Testament writers had in mind. The church itself is to be a place for edification of the saints and not a place to share the Gospel every week. Understand me, I am not saying we shouldn’t share the Gospel in or out of church; but the goal of the church is to help believers (the elect) move from milk to solid food (Heb 5:14, 6:1–3). The role of the pastor is to guide God’s people to a greater and deeper understanding of the Word.
Does the Universal Church Exist Today?
The question then becomes: Where does the “universal church” gather? I do believe that the “universal church” will exist, but it currently does not exist in its eschatological fullness. John, in his apocalyptic vision, sees the gathering of the universal church.
After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could count, from every nation and all tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, and palm branches were in their hands; and they cry out with a loud voice, saying, “Salvation to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.“
Revelation 7:9–10 (cf. Rev 5:9)
The 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith (which is a Baptist re-write of the Westminster standards) defines the universal church (from chapter 26).
The catholic or universal church, which (with respect to the internal work of the Spirit and truth of grace) may be called invisible, consists of the whole number of the elect, that have been, are, or shall be gathered into one, under Christ, the head thereof; and is the spouse, the body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.
This definition is one used to say that the whole number of elect currently on the earth compose a “universal church.” While the elect currently alive are a member of the universal church that does not mean that the universal church exists today. Only in heaven will the full number of the elect be assembled before the Lamb. As the definition states above: Is the church ever “invisible?”
The New Testament does give a local definition of church (Mat 18:17; Acts 5:11, 8:1, 3, 12:1, 5; 13:1; 14:23, 27; 15:3, 4, 22; 18:22; 20:17; Romans 16:1, 5, 23; 1 Cor 1:2, 4:17, 5:12, 6:4, 11:18, 22, 12:28, 14:4, 5, 12, 19, 23, 28, 35, 15:9, 16:19; 2 Cor 1:1; Gal 1:13; Eph 3:10, 21; Phi 3:6, 4:15; Col 1:25, 4:15, 16; 1 The 1:1; 2 The 1:1; 1 Tim 3:5, 7, 15, 5:16; Phm 1:2; Jam 5:14; 3 Joh 1:6, 9–10; Rev 2:1, 8, 12, 18, 3:1, 7, 14), and there are also references to a “corporate” definition of church (Mat 16:18; Acts 9:31, 11:22; 20:28; 1 Cor 10:32; Eph 1:22, 5:23–25, 27, 29, 32; Col 1:18, 24; Heb 12:23). This “corporate church” or body is the one in which “Christ…gave Himself up for her” (Eph 5:25); Jesus is also the “head of the body, the church” (Col 1:18); the church is a “bride adorned for her husband” (Rev 21:2); and the universal church will be the final and true Israel (Rom 2:28–29, 4:13; Gal 3:29, 6:16; Phil 3:3).
Even though it might only be semantics, I feel more comfortable in talking about the “Body of Christ” which is the elect currently alive on this earth and not the “universal church” which is a title is reserved only for the eschaton. The Southern Baptist Faith and Message gives the best definition: “The New Testament speaks also of the church [in contrast to the local church] as the body of Christ which includes all of the redeemed of all the ages, believers from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation.”
The Local Church As A Typological Representation of the Universal Church
We should realize that even though typology consists mostly from the Old Testament types/shadows as correlated to New Testament realities that this typology can also exist in the New Testament. This is clear in how we understand the relationship of the local to the eventual universal church. When we go to church, we are getting a taste of what the universal assembly of believers will look like. But unlike many churches today they will not be factionalized into Korean, White, Arab, etc. churches. The universal church will be a multicultural event (Rev 5:9, 7:9).
May we use such an understanding that the universal church will be a time of worship to Christ the Lord for all eternity to give life to our worship in visible churches today. And we also need to keep in mind that the local church should be actively mobilizing its members to go to the unreached nations to gather more sheep for the final meeting of the true, universal church in the eschaton.
since when is a xanga comment any replacement for a good ol’fashioned phone call? oh wait, i guess that’s just how us “arkansans” are used to doing it. my bad.
p.s. i just read this post on “is there a universal church?”. insighful and good. but you think too much. take a time out or something. take a vacation to conway again. ;)
I am with you on this one!
But I don’t see how substituting “body of Christ” solves the problem. Col. 1:18 seems to equate “body of Christ” with “church.” So I would call each local church a separate body of Christ that has eyes and feet (different people) like in 1 Cor.
I would say Universal church = Bride of Christ and is future. Local church = body of Christ and is present. Thoughts?
You got me on this one Christine. You’re right that the Colossians passage does make “body of Christ” synonymous with the “universal church.” I wouldn’t call each local congregation of believers an “arm” or “foot” as I think that relates to individual believer’s roles in the “body.”
I think it’s fair to say that a local church is an expression of the body of Christ, and Christ is indeed the Head of the body. But that doesn’t mean that the “body” is yet complete. It’s like we don’t have all the organs yet until Rev 5:9.
You had good thoughts, and I need to think more on this.
I really liked your statement “The church itself is to be a place for edification of the saints and not a place to share the Gospel every week. Understand me, I am not saying we shouldnâ??t share the Gospel in or out of church; but the goal of the church is to help believers (the elect) move from milk to solid food (Heb 5:14, 6:1–3). The role of the pastor is to guide Godâ??s people to a greater and deeper understanding of the Word.” I believe that the current “seeker sensitive” approach to church denies the power of God’s Word to draw people in (vs. a particular type of music or worship style) and leaves the body of believers with a watered down understanding of the Word. You can look at all the uproar in the church over The DaVinci Code and see that even the pastors were not confident that their membership was well enough grounded in the Word to see it for what it was…a work of fiction.
In regards to the whole issue of the “Universal Church”, can you fill me in…is there any referance to a “Universal Church” in scripture? Are there any references besides “eklektos” or â??ekklessiaâ? or “the body of Christ” to refer to the believers? I was under the impression that the term “Universal Church” was coined by the Catholics and will quite possibly be the designation for the false “One World Religion” that is to come. Therefore, it would be very helpful for me to know if there is actually a biblical referance to this.
That said, I would tend to agree with The Church being described as it was in the London Baptist Confession of Faith when they said that it “consists of the whole number of the elect, that have been, are, or shall be gathered into one, under Christ, the head thereof; and is the spouse, the body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.” Christ has been working through the elect throughout time, and though there will be small groups of local believers gathering together for fellowship and to grow in the Word, I believe that we are all part of the whole; past, present and future.
Kari,
I agree with your sentiments. The “universal” idea is Catholic in origin, but I think there will be a universal gathering of the elect in heaven such as mentioned in your LBC quote.
The Biblical references for the Church as a mystical body containing the elect throughout all ages are numerous (Mat 16:18; Acts 9:31, 11:22; 20:28; 1 Cor 10:32; Eph 1:22, 5:23–25, 27, 29, 32; Col 1:18, 24; Heb 12:23). I just think it’s fallacious to talk about a “now” universal church, because where is this universal gathering of believers? Well, John sees it only in heaven (Rev 5:9, 7:9).