An Intro and a Few Questions

[VolkHenry]

Hello,

I've been following the ministries of brother Nee and Lee for well over 13 years or so now. However, I've never been associated with the LC, as there's never been any assemblies near where I've lived. I was raised in the Pentecostal movement and, while I'm no longer Pentecostal per say, I'm still a Wesleyan-Arminian evangelical. Brother Nee's writings were/are very popular in the circles I grew up in, and he's still popular among revivalist Wesleyan-Arminian evangelicals.

I've observed and followed the tensions within the LC now for roughly 8-9 years now. At one time, I would've loved to have been part of an WL-LC assembly. However, now my feelings are changed. I don't doubt that there are healthy churches in the LC, but it seems like (institutional) problems abound—of course, every Christian group has its own problems. No church is perfect. It seems to me that the issues in the LC stem from a cult of personality around Lee, and contradictions in the in the LC's ecclesiology as it's understood vs how it's lived out.

Concerning this latter point, it's make a lot of sense to me why Brother Nee developed his ecclesiology in manner he did, given his historical context. In that period of China's history, the mission field was ripe for God's work. Brothers and sisters from every denomination and missionary society were in the country to evangelize the Chinese people. Innevitably, this led to conflicts between ministries within differing denominations and their converts. It seems to me that Brother Nee's doctrine of "locality" circumvented these organizational differences and allowed believers to unite around what he saw was the biblical principle. Likewise, his promotion of lay eldership vs an ordained pastorate, seems to have been influenced by this same context. Lee further elaborated on Nee's ideas, and created a denominational model based on these two ideas. Nee's model seemed to have more of an organic character, whereas Lee's is highly institutional. At least, this is what I see as an outsider.

I bring up these points, because as an outsider, I have some questions about LC ecclesiology. 1.) It seems as though the LC has become merely another institutionalized denomination among others. The primary dividing ground for denominational fellowship is the doctrine of locality. As I understand the model, each local church is (supposedly) autonomous and they are solely united by maintaining fellowship with one another (as in Baptist ecclesiology). However, it appears the leadership of the "Blended Brothers" and LSM have become a centralized authority for the LC, replacing the autonomous nature of the assemblies. (As I understand it, LSM's involvement is more direct than let's say the Southern Baptist Convention, where the leaders only have authority over mission boards and denominational organizations, not over the churches themselves). 2.) Elders in the LC are actually pastors (in function, not in name), ironically despite WN and WL's opposition to pastoral model. 3.) Aside the doctrine of "locality," the LC essentially holds to a Baptist ecclesiology with it's insistence on the autonomy of the local church and plural eldership.

Would you agree with this assessment? Where am I correct, where am I incorrect? Having not actually been in the LC, I would love to get an insider's opinion on my take.

Also, after realizing some of the more problematic aspects of Lee's teaching (more so, his practice), I have really come to really appreciate the work and ministry of Brother Stephen Kaung. His doctrine and spirit seem to be much more in line with Brother Nee. Are there assemblies associated with Brother Kaung? If so, how to they differ from WL's local churches?

I am prayerfully considering planting a small assembly where I live (once the pandemic subsides), where believers can come together in a simple way. While I support LMS by buying the occasional book—I would not want to be in this kind of fellowship with them—based on what I've read. Just from listening to messages over the years, I have a feeling that any assemblies in fellowship with Brother Kaung would be much healthier.

[Robert]

Hello,
I've been following the ministries of brother Nee and Lee for well over 13 years or so now. However, I've never been associated with the LC, as there's never been any assemblies near where I've lived. I was raised in the Pentecostal movement and, while I'm no longer Pentecostal per say, I'm still a Wesleyan-Arminian evangelical. Brother Nee's writings were/are very popular in the circles I grew up in, and he's still popular among revivalist Wesleyan-Arminian evangelicals.
I've observed and followed the tensions within the LC now for roughly 8-9 years now. At one time, I would've loved to have been part of an WL-LC assembly.


Hello!
Can You describe me :
1. How You was "following ministry"?
2. What does it mean to You to be "part of WL-LC assembly"?
3. How You " observed and followed the tensions"?
I would like to learn more about what You are looking for? Some words are contradictory for me. That is why I would like to know what You exactly mean by them.

[VolkHenry]

Robert,

Certainly. So I followed the ministry by reading the Revery Version, reading books from WN and WL, and listening to the life study programs (I still do all these things). From my perspective, to be a part of a LC assembly means to attend services, fellowship regularly with the brothers and sisters, and be an active member. By observing the tensions, I read a lot about the struggles in the LC—controversies, excommunications, etc.

[Sons to Glory!]

Concerning this latter point, it's make a lot of sense to me why Brother Nee developed his ecclesiology in manner he did, given his historical context. In that period of China's history, the mission field was ripe for God's work. Brothers and sisters from every denomination and missionary society were in the country to evangelize the Chinese people. Innevitably, this led to conflicts between ministries within differing denominations and their converts. It seems to me that Brother Nee's doctrine of "locality" circumvented these organizational differences and allowed believers to unite around what he saw was the biblical principle. Likewise, his promotion of lay eldership vs an ordained pastorate, seems to have been influenced by this same context. Lee further elaborated on Nee's ideas, and created a denominational model based on these two ideas. Nee's model seemed to have more of an organic character, whereas Lee's is highly institutional. At least, this is what I see as an outsider.

I bring up these points, because as an outsider, I have some questions about LC ecclesiology. 1.) It seems as though the LC has become merely another institutionalized denomination among others. The primary dividing ground for denominational fellowship is the doctrine of locality. As I understand the model, each local church is (supposedly) autonomous and they are solely united by maintaining fellowship with one another (as in Baptist ecclesiology). However, it appears the leadership of the "Blended Brothers" and LSM have become a centralized authority for the LC, replacing the autonomous nature of the assemblies. (As I understand it, LSM's involvement is more direct than let's say the Southern Baptist Convention, where the leaders only have authority over mission boards and denominational organizations, not over the churches themselves). 2.) Elders in the LC are actually pastors (in function, not in name), ironically despite WN and WL's opposition to pastoral model. 3.) Aside the doctrine of "locality," the LC essentially holds to a Baptist ecclesiology with it's insistence on the autonomy of the local church and plural eldership.

Would you agree with this assessment? Where am I correct, where am I incorrect? Having not actually been in the LC, I would love to get an insider's opinion on my take.

Welcome to the forum! You hit on a key point I think, regarding the ministry. What I'm seeing these days is humans get all caught up in this ministry or that ministry, so that the ministry is what is their oneness, not Christ. So if you don't agree with a ministry or the minister, then you are not one and are out. This is what pervades Christianity today. The flesh likes to grab hold of some teaching or practice.

As Christians, the life in us has long yearned for true oneness in the body of Christ. As you point out, Nee probably saw the "ground of oneness" for the LC as being that way. But as soon as we substitute anything as a way, we loose focus of the true Way, Christ alone. The LC got all focused on this doctrine and on the WL ministry, which became a supplanting centralized authority (which is what typically tends to happen). So I think you are accurate in your views of the LC.

However, the LC does promote a very needful practice - the open meeting format which encourages the participation and sharing from all. And in a home gathering, this is much more possible than it is today in most larger church/ministry-based gatherings. Seeing what I'm seeing now, I'm beginning to think a pure way to meet is a home ekklesia gathering, that is apart from any church ministry and unequivocally receives all believers, regardless of where they're from, doctrines they hold, or practices they are fond of.

[aron]

Concerning this latter point, it's make a lot of sense to me why Brother Nee developed his ecclesiology in manner he did, given his historical context. In that period of China's history, the mission field was ripe for God's work. Brothers and sisters from every denomination and missionary society were in the country to evangelize the Chinese people... which led to conflicts between ministries within differing denominations and their converts. It seems to me that Brother Nee's doctrine of "locality" circumvented these organizational differences and allowed believers to unite around what he saw was the biblical principle....

I think that what you see here is about 20% of it. The other 80% is what was happening around Nee, in the larger society, that formed his view, and made it so successful. The easiest way for me to explain what I mean is to recommend reading about the Boxer Rebellion. Western-oriented Chinese Christians were horribly persecuted, even murdered. I think both Nee and Lee had immediate family affected.

Hatred of the "running dogs of the West" bled over to Christianity. Once Nee was able to separate the two, the "local model" took off. Interestingly, Nee did an about-face 15 years later, and declared that he had "recovered" (nyuk-nyuk) the Jerusalem Principle, where all churches had to pledge allegiance to HQ. He was in Shanghai, in the Shanghai Christian Assembly there and controlling the "churches" and "regions" and "work" from that point. At that point, in the LC (as I knew them under Lee) people stressed the "body" and the "vision of the ministry" etc to get you to kow-tow to HQ.

So the whole thing, to me, is bait-and-switch. First sell localism, to separate the believers from any other affiliation. Then, centralism, to get the scattered assemblies to affiliate with your ministry.

Now, I have been on the forum here for some years, and may be biased. Also I don't pretend a scholarly or overly informed view. But this is what I have seen and currently reflect on.

Thanks for posting. God bless your journey.

[Robert]

I agree with Sons of glory and Aron.
Thanks for response but actually You confirmed that I understood properly. You are simply freshman drawn by this vision in LC.
The main problems starts actually here! We were not drawn to Christ Himself but to this glorious vision that we can meet on local ground over division taking care of oneness!
I do recommend to separate "symbolism" and "interesting things" from real spiritual food. Try to put RV Bible aside and read clear word of God.
Their Bible is nothing else but indoctrinating tool to spread their teaching.
I was there over 20 years.
Ok. Let me give You an example of telephone network.
You have to think what You need, what you receive and what they offer You.
Let's say this network is "church". You and me and all christians need some fellowship and group of brothers and sisters.
Some networks also offers newest and best model of phone device ( smartphone). They say You can pay some rate for 12 or 24 months. Cost of it is bigger, but they say it is small cost per month so You will not have pain in pocket.
Satan did not deceived Eve showing bad and rotten fruit but nice and tasty.
Telephone network do not sell oldest model but newest!
Baptism is not modern anymore! Charismatics are not so cool as last decades. Later came vision of oneness and Glorious Local Churches.
But we stand all the time next the same tree!
So what I did was: I learned what we actually need and Who can satisfy my needs.It is good to know meaning of parts of temple. It is good to know this or that. But why to buy this smartphone together with subscription?
The main thing in marketing is to convince client that he need Your product. Later make him dependent from supplier.
They use obvious and very great idea of oneness ( which is spontaneous result of living with God), later they give you hundreds symbols and good interesting things in one pack, and You do not know even when, You are addicted from being in the "only save place, ark, which is Local Church".
Now I see this clearly but I was inside really believing that obvious heresies.
I can testify here: God is able to unveil Him by any Bible. God wants to have personal relationship with You.
From my side I can only encourage You to reject all this ministry and RV bible with footnotes. Read Bible with Holly Spirit.
Home gathering are biblical. Do not establish anything but pray first. Let the Lord establish everything. Pray for saint in Your city. Invite believers. Be open, do not expect anything. Be more focused on today. If Lord give me another day will be good. If God will give us opportunity to meet next week would be good. Pay more attention to every day leading. In Bible we see many obvious things. I can write many pages from last readings. I enjoyed today greetings from Paul in last chapter in I Cor. Eccclesia in homes. Read and read and then You will see what we should pay attention to. How many times Jesus was teaching about "churches". What was His teaching abut it actually?
How saint got know each other at that time? By simply gospel, real Christ life in them? Or simply flesh desire belonging to some society?
I am sure, that born again brother or sister will see the same picture in the Bible.
If we will really take only Word of God, more than half of questions and problems will disappear!
All this teaching comes from false idea that we can make some pattern and put hands to God's work using flesh, mobbing, fear. Waist of time.
Reject all. I I have rotten fruit in half I do throw it away. Bad tree and bad fruit. Stay away from ministry and programmed people.
And last thing: to know who is Antichrist it is sufficient to know who is Christ !
All this ministry is doing job for You! What was Pauls ministry? How he was working, what doing, how convincing? Learn from him.

[Robert]

Search also other threads here. Saints really have good conclusions.

[Robert]

"My sheep know my voice".
Even there is a fogg of teaching, misunderstanding and many human voices, we should learn Lord Jesus' voice.
This is what he meant.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Coq_grSFlNs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e45dVgWgV64

[Nell]

Welcome to the forum! You hit on a key point I think, regarding the ministry. What I'm seeing these days is humans get all caught up in this ministry or that ministry, so that the ministry is what is their oneness, not Christ. So if you don't agree with a ministry or the minister, then you are not one and are out. This is what pervades Christianity today. The flesh likes to grab hold of some teaching or practice.

As Christians, the life in us has long yearned for true oneness in the body of Christ. As you point out, Nee probably saw the "ground of oneness" for the LC as being that way. But as soon as we substitute anything as a way, we loose focus of the true Way, Christ alone. The LC got all focused on this doctrine and on the WL ministry, which became a supplanting centralized authority (which is what typically tends to happen). So I think you are accurate in your views of the LC.

However, the LC does promote a very needful practice - the open meeting format which encourages the participation and sharing from all. And in a home gathering, this is much more possible than it is today in most larger church/ministry-based gatherings. Seeing what I'm seeing now, I'm beginning to think a pure way to meet is a home ekklesia gathering, that is apart from any church ministry and unequivocally receives all believers, regardless of where they're from, doctrines they hold, or practices they are fond of.

STG,

However, the LC does promote a very needful practice - the open meeting format which encourages the participation and sharing from all.

When I began meeting with the LC, those gathered were free to stand and speak from what was revealed to them by the Holy Spirit during the meeting, or from their/our experiences of Jesus during the week.

The last meeting I attended, members were lined up at a microphone and were instructed to ONLY speak from Witness Lee's pre-recorded "ministry". If members strayed from this and began to speak from the Spirit, or spoke too long, there was a pianist who played the "gong" chord and the speaker had to sit down. What was once based on the speaking of the Holy Spirit has devolved into something other than an "open meeting format".

Your statement:
As Christians, the life in us has long yearned for true oneness in the body of Christ.
is not entirely "true". I have no such "yearning". I never heard of such until I started meeting with the LC under the ministry of Witness Lee. I have also not heard of such since I stopped meeting there. In fact, "true" oneness in the body of Christ has been accomplished, once for all.

1 Corinthians 12:12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.

Witness Lee's version of the "true oneness in the body of Christ" is more akin to "sameness" among those who follow Witness Lee. Witness Lee's "ministry" has ignored the facts of scripture in the work of Christ on the cross. Witness Lee's ministry is full of the, so called, "fresh, up to date, speaking" which ended at his death in 1997. In putting forth a contrived need for "true oneness" Lee implies that he, himself, knows what "true oneness" looks like, and that said "oneness" is defined by him. Lee's "oneness" is, as stated above, is more accurately defined as "sameness".

Scripturally, I do not find "true oneness". I do find standing firm in the present, once for all, accomplished work of Christ.

Ephesians 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;

Romans 12:4 For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office:

Romans 12:5 So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

1 Corinthians 10:17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

This verse brings an interesting question. The loaf we share at the Lord's Table, does it not really represent one body?

1 Corinthians 12:12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.

The body IS one, not "will be ONE" when the "true oneness" is achieved by whatever means determined by men.

1 Corinthians 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

1 Corinthians 12:14 For the body is not one member, but many.

1 Corinthians 12:18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.

1 Corinthians 12:20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.

Nell

[Awoken]

Nell, I'm interested in knowing your (or any other believers') thoughts about "the body", actually. What exactly does it mean that we are Christ's body, and how can we be His body without being part of God, somehow? How do we adhere to Scriptural principal regarding the body of Christ without devolving into some kind of "little gods" scenario or something bordering heresy?

Hopefully this isn't usurping the thread, just seems like a natural place to ask these questions, as I've been feeling confused about them for the past several days.

[Sons to Glory!]

STG,

However, the LC does promote a very needful practice - the open meeting format which encourages the participation and sharing from all.

When I began meeting with the LC, those gathered were free to stand and speak from what was revealed to them by the Holy Spirit during the meeting, or from their/our experiences of Jesus during the week.

The last meeting I attended, members were lined up at a microphone and were instructed to ONLY speak from Witness Lee's pre-recorded "ministry". If members strayed from this and began to speak from the Spirit, or spoke too long, there was a pianist who played the "gong" chord and the speaker had to sit down. What was once based on the speaking of the Holy Spirit has devolved into something other than an "open meeting format".

Your statement:
As Christians, the life in us has long yearned for true oneness in the body of Christ.
is not entirely "true". I have no such "yearning". I never heard of such until I started meeting with the LC under the ministry of Witness Lee. I have also not heard of such since I stopped meeting there. In fact, "true" oneness in the body of Christ has been accomplished, once for all.

You are exactly right right, in my opinion, concerning your observation of current LC gatherings. I had a very similar experience the last time I went to a LC meeting about 10 years ago In Tacoma WA. While it was participatory and different ones spoke, the speaking was all around WL and his writings. It became very apparent to me that while there was freedom to stand up and speak out, the speaking itself was highly regulated. This was a HUGE contrast for me, for while we have open meetings in Scottsdale, people here are completely free to share their personal walk with Christ, and anything they were inspired by or even a trial they are going through. I was saddened by the restrictions to their freedom I saw in Tacoma that day . . .

Regarding oneness, you are again correct and those are wonderful verses you posted about our oneness in Christ. To the eye, the church may look a mess, just like to the eye individuals may look a mess. But, the fact is He has done it and is building His ekklesia, against which the gates of hades will not prevail! And as long as we focus on Christ alone, we are in the reality of this oneness. It's only when we focus on something else, like a ministry or practice, that we depart in our thinking or practice from Him who is our true oneness.

[Sons to Glory!]

Nell, I'm interested in knowing your (or any other believers') thoughts about "the body", actually. What exactly does it mean that we are Christ's body, and how can we be His body without being part of God, somehow? How do we adhere to Scriptural principal regarding the body of Christ without devolving into some kind of "little gods" scenario or something bordering heresy?

Hopefully this isn't usurping the thread, just seems like a natural place to ask these questions, as I've been feeling confused about them for the past several days.We've certainly had this discussion before. I think the most recent one was a short one I started last August, that didn't get a lot of traction. That may be because we've already had a good deal of discussion on the topic, but your thoughts are certainly welcome! (and is probably a better place to discuss than on this intro thread)

THREAD: "What is the Church really?" (http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showthread.php?t=6651)

To me, really seeing the ekklesia is a matter of revelation, because it is a great mystery hidden by God, and only revealed in Spirit. Personally, I believe most of Christianity does not see a very high revelation of who we are in Christ, and what He is really building here - a habitation of God. That is no slam, it's just that it is a spiritual revelation that we can study until our gray matter evaporates and we still won't see it - only God can reveal this.

From what I've gathered on here, the general consensus is that WL went too far into extra-biblical teachings regarding who we are, and I agree. However, that does not diminish how lofty and grand the teachings are in the New Testament concerning what His ekklesia truly is! Personally I see that while WL went too far - saying we are becoming God, but not part of the Godhead - most of what I hear in Christendom sells the vision of the church far short.

[Robert]

Nell, I'm interested in knowing your (or any other believers') thoughts about "the body", actually. What exactly does it mean that we are Christ's body, and how can we be His body without being part of God, somehow? How do we adhere to Scriptural principal regarding the body of Christ without devolving into some kind of "little gods" scenario or something bordering heresy?

Hopefully this isn't usurping the thread, just seems like a natural place to ask these questions, as I've been feeling confused about them for the past several days.
I am one of "any other believer".
1. Christ's body means: You have head and rest of body. Jesus is head of spiritual body. John 3:3-8 ; Rom 8:12-17 ;I Cor 3:1 ;6:17; 12:13 ; 15:45 ; II Cor 3:3 ;
2. We can not be part of Body of Christ without being born again from God. Obvious.
3. There is no Scriptural principal regarding Body of Christ. What is principal about being brother of Christ? Child of God? All this pictures are given to us to be more understood. You have one head and this head is center of Your human being. This head coordinate rest of Your Body. This is principle You ask for? My Jesus is the same Jesus for all. The problem is, when we take some verses in our earthly mind.
3.a/ There is only one and unshaken reality. Little gods? Only certain man is responsible for what is "litle god" for him. If I stand next to statue of "holly Marry" which is considered as god does it mean that it is god in my heart? No!
On other hand, Yo can feel that for some saints W lee is like an idol. Mediator, apostle and littl god. Thye glorify him to the attermost and are ready to break up fellowship with you if you do not adore him as they do.
There is no simply and easy solution or advise. Read Bible. there are answers.

Look at this clip and follow after Francis Chan. If You know Bible very well, and know LSM You will find that Francis is at same place as WL in 40' and 50' last century.
Oneness is only result of our new life given by God. My kids can do nothing to make us family or more family or super family. Family is just family! So next question is who is my brother and sister? How to recognize them?
There is only one way: in our spirit. You have unique confirmation. When there is no distinction what is flesh, soul and spirit, then we can follow our opinion and preferences. Our "me, my and I" will be on first place.
There is no need to learn what is fals. If You know original source, God, Lord Jesus and His voice, then any other voice will be strange for You.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dc71USCZgsM&t=768s

[Robert]

Nell, I'm interested in knowing your (or any other believers') thoughts about "the body", actually. What exactly does it mean that we are Christ's body, and how can we be His body without being part of God, somehow? How do we adhere to Scriptural principal regarding the body of Christ without devolving into some kind of "little gods" scenario or something bordering heresy?

Hopefully this isn't usurping the thread, just seems like a natural place to ask these questions, as I've been feeling confused about them for the past several days.

I am one of "any other believer".
Look at this clip and follow after Francis Chan. If You know Bible very well, and know LSM You will find that Francis is at same place as WL in 40' and 50' last century.
Oneness is only result of our new life given by God. My kids can do nothing to make us family or more family or super family. Family is just family! So next question is who is my brother and sister? How to recognize them?
There is only one way: in our spirit. You have unique confirmation. When there is no distinction what is flesh, soul and spirit, then we can follow our opinion and preferences. Our "me, my and I" will be on first place.
There is no need to learn what is fals. If You know origin souurse, God, Lord Jesus and His voice, then any other voice will be strange for You.

[Sons to Glory!]

Look at this clip and follow after Francis Chan. If You know Bible very well, and know LSM You will find that Francis is at same place as WL in 40' and 50' last century.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dc71USCZgsM&t=768sRobert - Nell: Maybe these posts regarding Francis Chan could be moved over to the "New Book by Henry Hon" thread, as Francis is a big advocate of the home ekklesia like Henry is. It's a good discussion, but don't know it fits in this introduction thread.

[Robert]

Robert - Nell: Maybe these posts regarding Francis Chan could be moved over to the "New Book by Henry Hon" thread, as Francis is a big advocate of the home ekklesia like Henry is. It's a good discussion, but don't know it fits in this introduction thread.

I do not know Henry Hon his books and all other connections.
I am living human. Brother of other christians born again.
If this is the point just to make catalogue of "fitting" threads, then I will rethink what I am doing actually here and who is who.
Volk Henry introduced him self describing etc. Then others request. Some thoughts and questions comes out.
Wow! I have really hide my self In Him.

God bless you all!
I hope to see You at that day. Almighty God also calculated my activity here for few day. It was good experience.

[Awoken]

Robert - Nell: Maybe these posts regarding Francis Chan could be moved over to the "New Book by Henry Hon" thread, as Francis is a big advocate of the home ekklesia like Henry is. It's a good discussion, but don't know it fits in this introduction thread.

I watched this clip and don't really see anything wrong with what Chan is saying here... and spiritually I don't feel troubled by his emotion. In some clips he goes a little overboard.

Honestly I'm not even sure I really feel troubled by that clip that was singled out in the other thread I started. I feel like a lot of the people picking FC's words apart are religious/doctrinally-focused types. Like maybe the kinds of folks Jesus came and condemned for being focused on their rules and regulations instead of on Him... but what do I know, anyway. I'm starting to think, not much of anything at all. :xx:

Anyway, sorry for the de-rail.

[Sons to Glory!]

I watched this clip and don't really see anything wrong with what Chan is saying here... and spiritually I don't feel troubled by his emotion. In some clips he goes a little overboard.

Honestly I'm not even sure I really feel troubled by that clip that was singled out in the other thread I started. I feel like a lot of the people picking FC's words apart are religious/doctrinally-focused types. Like maybe the kinds of folks Jesus came and condemned for being focused on their rules and regulations instead of on Him... but what do I know, anyway. I'm starting to think, not much of anything at all. :xx:

Anyway, sorry for the de-rail.Francis' speaking is good, I think. I'm actually trying to connect with him for a particular reason related to the home gatherings . . . BTW: I started another thread devoted just to the whole house church thing, in case you or anyone wants to comment there - so as not tie-up this introduction thread.