Abuse of the word Saint

[Chris Fleming]

This has probably being discussed by others but I'd like to point this out and think it deserves its own thread:

IMO, the most damaging thing LSM does is how it changes the word "saint". We all know this word means believers, Christians...the blood-bought redeemed the Lord Jesus Christ went to the cross for.

A conversation in a LC may go like this, I've personally heard this exact conversation more than once:

LC-er A: "Oh hey! How are you? Haven't seen you in a while."

LC-er B: "Yeah I was visiting family back home in [enter city here]."

LC-er A: "How many saints are meeting there?"

LC-er B: "About 50."

LC-er A: "Amennnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn!"

LC-er B: "Amennnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn!"


Do you see what they did right there? Do you see just how disgustingly divisive that is? I'm sure most here do but what they did was change the word Saint from a believer in Christ to....someone who meets with an LSM church. You mean to tell me that there are a sum total of just 50 Christians in that city?

Now the average person who goes there probably did this just by conditioned reflex and didn't have some nefarious motivation behind it. However, they ought to be able to recognize this and think for themselves, right? The culty, in-group vs out-group changes in speech that people adopt have no place in a church.

Same thing was said to me when I was excommunicated, that I am not allowed to talk to any saints. So you mean to tell me that I am forever not allowed to speak to any Christians? I really don't see how they can reason their way with some Olympic level mental gymnastics around this abuse--however it remains.

[TLFisher]

This has probably being discussed by others but I'd like to point this out and think it deserves its own thread:

IMO, the most damaging thing LSM does is how it changes the word "saint". We all know this word means believers, Christians...the blood-bought redeemed the Lord Jesus Christ went to the cross for.

To me the term saint is interchangeable when referring to brothers and sisters. Whether they're LSM/LC or not, it doesn't matter. They could be Baptist or any non-denominational and it's the same. The term saint=brother or sister.
If one goes on to say the term saint can only refer to those meeting in the LSM/LC, then you are doubting a believer's salvation outside this fellowship.

[OBW]

We have actually had this discussion before. But as with all older discussions, they disappear into the woodwork. Covering it again is always worthwhile.

In my case, most of my family remains in the LRC. So I hear it all the time. There is a particular sister that comes by my Dad's house a lot, so it often happens that when I visit she is there for at least a while. Several years back she made a reference to "the saints" in such a way that it was clearly meant as to be only a group in the LRC. So I made some kind of pretense question like "what group were they with" or something like that. And she knew what she had meant (and what I meant), and knew her use was actually divisive and/or sectarian. She did not admit that, but she did admit that all those who are Christian are saints. And to some degree I think she might have been a little more careful in some of that later on.

I think that some of the "powers that be" in the LRC really might argue that the term does not apply to those not joining in their group. But they probably would never actually say it. They know better. They do think more highly of themselves, but they know better than to take it that far.

The truth is that, when cornered, the rank and file do not actually think that they are saints and others are not. But they talk that way because that is how it is done. It is unintentionally divisive. A sense of superiority is created because they habitually use the term only for themselves. Not because they don't think the other Christians are also saints, but because they just don't think about them. When they say "saint," they are talking only about themselves.

And if they are only talking about themselves, then using "saints" is actually OK. The problem comes when they seldom, if ever, use the term with respect to any other Christians. And that means that they seldom, if ever, really think about any other Christians. Except as possibly "good material" to try to bring into the so-called "church life."

And there is another can of worms. What is "church life"? And everyone who has any connection with the church (the true church, not just some sect), has a "church life." But each such expression is not the same, or necessarily anything like what the LRC has.

So I would assert that there is no such thing as "the church life" if that is intended to designate a particular set of practices and experiences.

[countmeworthy]

We former LCrs and current LCrs know very well when the LC/LSM is talking to the 'saints' or about the 'saints', they are referring to the LSM SAINTS Period.

Oh sure. They readily will admit that all true believers are 'saints'. They HAVE TO! They have no choice but in their hearts, they believe that the LSM saints are above the believers outside the LSM compound.

For giggles, when I used to talk to my LSM friend, in referring to Paul, Peter or John or any believer in the Bible, I would say Saint Paul ______. Or In the book of Saint Peter, we read ______.
I would get a kick out of myself for talking about the books Saint Paul, Saint Peter, Saint Timothy, Saint Jude, Saint John etc... wrote. :D They never knew how to respond. :D

That said. I am grateful that we used the term so often among ourselves when I was in the LC because it truly made the word -saint- much more real in the present. It was not a historical word anymore or a process a dead believer (or rather dead Catholic) goes through in order to be canonized.

If any one organization has abused the word Saint it is the Roman Catholic Church! Far more worst than the LSM. That is partly the reason we never heard Lee ever refer to the apostles and discpiple of Christ Jesus as saints!

Yet they were and when they were alive, they addressed the church as saints. That is why we greeted one another in the meetings as 'saints': Praise the Lord saints!

Now because we used that word so freely, I am able to speak with confidence to my catholic friends who have been truly born again that they are saints. I show them in the Word. There is no hesitation in me.

Would I have that confidence to tell my born again friends they are saints had I not been in the LC ? I don't know. :scratchhead: I do hear it among the non LC Christian community not just to the extent the LC uses it.

So I am thankful that I was taught in the LC to be comfortable and confident using the word saint. It has served me well after umpteen years.

Blessings all,
Carol g

[Cal]

There is an innocent way to use "the saints" to refer to those in one's circle, in the same manner one might use "the guys." When you say, "I'm going to meet the guys and watch the game," you don't mean that men outside your circle aren't guys. It's just a term of endearment. "Saints" likewise started out as an affectionate way to refer to those Christians in the LC. I know of no other group that has this habit. It is sweet in a way and need not be insidious.

However, what's missing in the LC is the occasional (or even rare) reminder of, "Hey, we aren't the only saints. Remember that."

"Saint" isn't the only term abused like this in the LC. The exclusive use of universal terms like saint, church, church life, ministry, apostle, etc., are undeniable indicators of an exclusive mindset, all protests to the contrary notwithstanding.

[countmeworthy]

So Chris and all 'excommunicated' people from the LC/LSM. Do you think you are still considered a saint by the LC/LSM even though you are still walking with Christ, abiding in HIM ...just not abiding in the LC/LSM?

The RCC excommunicates many of its' members but the RCC members are not considered saints while alive. Sister Theresa, or Mother Theresa was not a canonized saint until after her death. I am not even sure if she has been canonized. Pope Paul John II is in the process of being canonized as a 'saint'. Maybe they both have already been 'legally' canonized by the RCC as saints. :scratchhead: don 't know...of course, it doesn't matter what their requirements for 'saints' are. Certainly they have not read the Word of God !!!

Well... no matter. Many people may have been excommunicated by the LSM but they have not been excommunicated from the KINGDOM of the Most High God! Your crowns are still awaiting you: The Crown of Life, the Crown of Rejoicing, the Incorruptible Crown, the Crown of Glory, and the Crown of Righteousness.

There are probably a whole lot of other crowns but these crowns are mentioned in (Revelation 2:10, 1 Thess 2:19, 1 Cor 9:25, 1 Peter 5:4, & 2 Timothy 4:8 -all KJV).

Blessings and Peace all!

Carol g

[aron]

Once I was travelling, and when I told a brother where I was from he said, "Oh, are there any saints there?" When I replied, "Yes, thousands of them" he kind of looked taken aback and said, "You know what I mean".

I looked right at him, kind of hard, and said, "No, I don't". Even then, when I was "positive", I wouldn't change the meaning of the word (as I understood it) to fit in with the convention of popular "local church" usage.

There were lots of annoying things in the local churches, like the weird lexicon of words with 'special meanings'. I especially didn't like how we ignored the poor with our gospel, fixating obsessively on "good material" (I was a little biased: I knew I was 'poor material'). And just where in the NT did you see "community saints", anyway?

But I soldiered on, because "It's the church", and I had sworn allegiance. But eventually the Spirit told me to leave. Hard to explain, but one day the Holy Spirit just said, "Go". So I left.

[countmeworthy]

Once I was travelling, and when I told a brother where I was from he said, "Oh, are there any saints there?" When I replied, "Yes, thousands of them"

:hysterical: :lol:

he kind of looked taken aback and said, "You know what I mean".
I looked right at him, kind of hard, and said, "No, I don't".
:whack: what knuckleheads!!

[Chris Fleming]

Once I was traveling, and when I told a brother where I was from he said, "Oh, are there any saints there?" When I replied, "Yes, thousands of them" he kind of looked taken aback and said, "You know what I mean".

I looked right at him, kind of hard, and said, "No, I don't". Even then, when I was "positive", I wouldn't change the meaning of the word (as I understood it) to fit in with the convention of popular "local church" usage.


Now THAT is what I'm talking about! Well done!

[Chris Fleming]

Indeed.

I was once given a spiral bound book of sorts, containing copied pages from various WL books talking about the "ground of the church". I don't know who put it together but I wanted to read it to see if there would be literally any mention acknowledging how other genuine Christians are actually saved even if they do not meet with the LSM churches.

I finally got a one-liner about half way through the thing.

In it was the typical circular reasoning--a person would apparently ask, "Witness Lee why do you call your church THE church?" WL would respond, because we are; if you were you would call yourself the church.

Oh boy. What stunning proof! Don't agree? You're in The Self!!!

No Sir, maybe others do not call themselves The Church (TM) because they are not arrogant, elitist and snobby.

I of course do not like taking all manner of names instead of Christ. That's why I do not meet in a denomination.

But saying you're The Church (trademarked) is one thing. Arrogantly abusing the word Saint is another. Really set me off when I was there, as I can't think of something more damaging and divisive as that and I can't imagine the Lord sanctioning this kind of thinking at all.

[TLFisher]

In it was the typical circular reasoning--a person would apparently ask, "Witness Lee why do you call your church THE church?" WL would respond, because we are; if you were you would call yourself the church.

Oh boy. What stunning proof! Don't agree? You're in The Self!!!

No Sir, maybe others do not call themselves The Church (TM) because they are not arrogant, elitist and snobby.

I of course do not like taking all manner of names instead of Christ. That's why I do not meet in a denomination.

But saying you're The Church (trademarked) is one thing. Arrogantly abusing the word Saint is another. Really set me off when I was there, as I can't think of something more damaging and divisive as that and I can't imagine the Lord sanctioning this kind of thinking at all.

It is far easier to regard your fellow believers inclusively as "saints" than to exclusively say "we are the church".
In the local churches, (not everyone has expressed this attitude, but I have heard it spoken enough to know) if you are not meeting with the local churches you are meeting in denominations. Even the local churches that have parted ways with LSM are labeled "rebel church". That is what one LC elder told me when I asked about Moses Lake.
Non-LSM/LC assemblies I have met with don't have that arrogance. There's more a sense the church being inclusive of all believers and not just those who define "church" as following publications of a particular Christian publisher.