Reinstating the Local Church

A Missiological Reflection

The Issue
The local church is the bedrock of every evangelistic work of the body of Christ; every other structure within the church organizational chart should serve the missional purpose and interest of the local community of believers. Church leadership of the higher echelons have always reiterated that church authority resides in the local church, but this assertion has proven to be largely in theory, its praxis is insignificantly implemented. More so, the quality of authority residing in the local church has always been questioned, especially when expression of such authority contravenes the interests of higher church entities.
Administrative functions have been effectively shared in the organogram of church administration, but the missional roles have not been effectively managed. The thesis of this reflection is that the local church is best situated to drive church evangelism.

The Contextualization Argument
The local church holds membership and is the primary springboard for nurture and church growth. The context of the local church, in view of its environment, determines its missional approaches. No two local contexts are the same. And given that the gospel is contextual, it is almost certain that one missional model will not suit differing contexts. Therefore, every local church reserves the missional wisdom to determine a workable approach. But this can only be done when the local church is reinstated to its appropriate position, especially, in deciding what missional approaches work for it.

The Organogramic Tension
Higher church entities have in the past formulated evangelistic plans for the local church, and its application to local contexts has not always succeeded. Many local churches cannot implement their specific strategic plans consequent on the constantly-competing plans from the higher church entities. And almost always local churches are mandated to abandon their local plans (evangelistic ones too) in order to accommodate such plans. The local church is almost reduced to a consumerist entity, consuming programs and plans designed for, in, and by other incompatible contexts. The local pastor’s capacities remain very less innovative since he only has to administer already-made contents. How would it be if local members conceptualize, devise, strategize, and implement missional efforts in their contexts?
 

Missional Reflections
I. The higher entities should serve the interest of the local church. The procedural curve that moves the evangelistic agenda, methods, and contents from the higher entities to the local church is at its peak, and no meaningful innovative and faithful contextualization of the gospel can be achieved until a reverse curve is drawn. This means that the local church draws up missional plans and shares with the higher church entities, who in turn provide expert guidance and supervision. But the local church makes the agenda in this case, deciding what approach and content work for it at a specific point in time.

II. This approach harnesses the giftedness of local members. The spoon-feeding method of church administration stifles effectiveness from top-down. The local church is the springboard for effective Christian mission because local members understand their environment better than anyone else. The history of Christian missions suggests that the success of foreign missionaries was not without the indispensable roles of indigenous converts, who in turn led their kinsmen to the faith. Let local members apply their strategic evangelistic plans to their localities and let higher church entities supervise and guide the application. With this approach, atrophying local churches would revive. Let a local church draw its own road map, that church will be busy and growing, without missing its missional direction.

III. Higher church entities should encourage local long-term strategic plans. Rather than consuming uncontextualized imported approaches and contents and foisting same on local churches, higher church entities (local conferences and unions especially) should encourage local churches to develop and implement long-term strategic missional and specific plans. This might involve the retention of pastors for the duration of the strategic plan. Let a new pastor start with a new strategic plan or continue an existing one. The erratic transfers of local church pastors has proven counter-productive, especially when there isn’t any crucial reason for moving them.

IV. Local churches can be involved in the process of engaging a new pastor. Missional mishaps occur when incompatible pastors and local churches are coerced to coexist. Not every pastor suits every church. Higher church entities employ, but local churches understand their terrain better than anyone else. What if local churches were asked the kind of pastors that would suit their contexts? Contextualization in assigning pastors to local churches is as important as contextualizing the gospel in that church. If the pastor doesn’t understand the mission plans and approaches of a church, he cannot succeed. If higher church entities expect church growth exponentially, mission should be the chief criterion in assigning pastors, not political expediency.

V. Reinstating local churches means reinstating small groups. Healthy church growth is almost impossible without small groups. Consumerism nauseates any local church that abandons or under-utilizes the small group ministry. Small group ministry ensures the local church pastor isn’t engaging paid hours in extra-ecclesiastical activities, because he would be always engaged in training small group leaders and facilitators. To solve the burgeoning pastoral ineffectiveness, let higher church entities assign pastors with a prime responsibility of training members as disciple makers. Mega and public evangelistic campaigns make local churches and pastors seasonal gospel workers, who retire after each outing. But the small group ministry keeps the pastors innovative and members active.
 

Concluding Thoughts
The local church has been losing its effectiveness overtime. The over centralization of authority in the higher church entities has bred a loss of pastoral purpose. Pastors are becoming less attuned to pastoral duties at the local church level and are developing undue proclivity for duties at the higher church entities’ level. This begs the urgent reinstatement of the local church. The local church is where people enter and leave the church. The local church is where church leaders are prepared. The local church is where every financial support extended to the higher church entities is systemized. The higher church entities should work for the local church, not the down-up movement. Every higher church entity exists for the nourishment of the local church, not the other way round. The local church is the church, every higher church entity is an entity of the local church. The church didn’t begin with a local conference, union, division, or General Conference, it began with the local church.
Now during this pandemic that has engulfed the world, the role of the local church has become very crucial. Using the available technological tools to reach members and minister to them can be done skillfully by a vibrant and thriving local church. Reinstating the local church is the best form of empowering members for effective mission. The pandemic, a situation that has caused the delay of large gatherings like the General Conference session, should teach us the priceless lesson of narrowing down our resources to smaller church units. It is possible that the future might not be very favorable for larger church entities. If the Christian church began with house churches, it would not be preposterous to assume that the finishing phase of the gospel work could trickle down to activities run by local church units, perhaps even by small groups. Let the local church be reinstated today, and the church will grow tomorrow!

- article by John Okpechi