When Speaking of Ecclesiology...Remember the Context

The language of the Church exists in two locations: 1) within the established contexts; and 2) within the pioneer fields. One is the language of age-related maturity, structure, great organization, highly educated leadership, and comes with time. The other is the language of new believers who recently self-identified as a local church. While the latter group does not know the difference between Genesis and Jonah, they are regenerate, baptized, and have agreed to live out the Kingdom Ethic locally and globally. They are the local expression of the universal Body of Christ; they just don't look cool by established Church standards.Though the language of the Church is to have variation in both of these locations, such does not occur often. The Church in the more mature setting ends up establishing a cultural standard of success. This is often communicated through the writings of church leaders who came to faith and experienced much sanctification in the established Church context. These authors often forget that the language of the Church is to exist in two locations. Such variation is not a postmodern approach to ecclesiology. While the biblical requirements for a local church to exist at any time, place, or among any people is a universal constant, many authors often forget this truth--expecting all churches to manifest characteristics of much older churches (without considering the church in a pioneer context).Roland Allen observed this problem in the early twentieth century. Anglican theologians were writing books on ecclesiology for the Church in the established contexts. Educators, priests, and missionaries would read such writings and respond with the expectation that such ecclesiological development must be in place before the Church could be a healthy church in the pioneer fields. What people failed to realize was that such writings were only possible after centuries of sanctification in the West. Few were willing to extend such grace to the Majority World Churches. Cultural preferences for what constituted a healthy, local church won out over biblical prescriptions.This matter was clearly felt in the realm of the Lord's Supper. Anglican ecclesiology advocated that only the ordained could officiate Communion. Allen, in his unpublished work The Ministry of Expansion (which I plan to publish in the year), noted that not only was such a practice unbiblical and culturally defined, but inappropriate for the Church in the pioneer lands. A day might come when the cultural expectations of Anglican theologians would be applied to the new churches in Asia and Africa, but for now, he noted, the Spirit had graced the new churches with all they needed to observe the Table. Literacy, education, and the traditional route to ordination would likely happen later.In biblical hermeneutics, we often say context is king. The location of the verse, in the passage, in the book, in the Bible, must be taken into consideration for understanding. In a similar fashion, context is a critical factor when it comes to certain elements of ecclesiology. What is often culturally expected where the Church exists with much age is actually a hindrance to both sanctification and multiplication in pioneer contexts. There are things we do as The Church at Brook Hills (beneficial in our context) that would not be beneficial to a newly planted church among Saudis in Saudi Arabia and among Saudis in Los Angeles.Biblical ecclesiology always trumps cultural or denominational ecclesiology. Such is a key to healthy Great Commission activity. Whenever we read books on ecclesiology written by biblically sound authors, attend their conferences, or sit in their classes, we must always ask the following questions:

1. Is their primary audience the Church in a well-developed context or the Church in a pioneer area?
2. How much of the practical implications of this teaching is expected for an established Church as opposed to a local church that was birthed from the harvest last month?
3. Where does the teacher's cultural or denominational expectations shape the ecclesiology, going beyond the biblical prescriptions?

And here is a bonus thought:  What happens when we recognize that the established Church context and pioneer context can co-exist within the same geographical setting--such as North America, and the rest of the West? Remember, context has more to do with culture than geography.