Actually, if you read Revelation 2 & 3, you will see though there is a singular church, that singular church is comprised of many local churches; to say that a certain church is responsible for certain actions is not incorrect at all:
This is what I'm saying. You can't blame just one church for the actions of Christianity. (Well, you can, but it would be a lie.)
even Jesus addressed singular, localized churches -- was Jesus rejecting "Christianity" when He did this? I think not.
Woah, and they say we don't know Scripture.
Psst: Jesus never addressed any "singular, localized churches." Such were not in existence before his ascension to heaven.
Perhaps you meant PAUL? (See, I've joked that some evangelicals raise Paul above Jesus, but you're the first person I've met who actually confused the two!)
Paul addressed singular churches. No, that is not a rejection of Christianity. I never said addressing a local church was a rejection of Christianity.
Paul never addressed the church at Rome and said, "Wow, you should see those stupid people in Corinth, they have no clue what they are doing, they're just wrong."
But this is exactly what anyone does when they attack any denomination.
Paul addressed specific problems to the specific places they needed addressing. He didn't accuse any church of being not a church ... he simply corrected them where they needed it. As should we.