[Indiana]

Originally Posted by Indiana

WITNESS LEE: In Feb 1986 I called an urgent elders’ training in which I stressed the one accord, and I made my teaching very clear. I said that being in the army is different from being a citizen. Not everyone in a country is in the army. Gideon eventually only had 300 who became his army (Judg. 7:7). I went to Taipei in 1984 because I was burdened for an army to be raised up who would practice the God-ordained way, but I did not have the intention or the expectation for all the saints in the recovery to be the same.

Really?!

Again, not telling the whole story.

WL claims he had no intention or expectancy that all the saints be the same. He also claims that what he meant by one accord was misunderstood by some (p. 4, The Problems Causing Turmoil 1993).

Actually, the steps he took and the impression he gave in his speaking early on in the new way gave every indication that he wanted the churches and saints to be the same. And, they could begin by getting rid of the one-man speaking concept in all the localities and come under his universal leadership and blue print he set forth for the churches to follow.

One of many examples to give about his pursuit to produce cookie-cutter churches and saints was shown in Elders’ Training Book 7. It is not that people misunderstood what he said about the one accord and being the same, it is in print.

"If you expect to have one accord in any kind of society, group, or movement, you need the same kind of thinking that comes out of the same kind of knowledge. The Soc***ist party stresses soc***ism. Any political party has its own “ism”. They stress their “ism” in order to have a party, to have what we call the one accord. Without the one accord, no party could accomplish anything. Any society, group, or movement needs this one accord that comes out of the same kind of thought, the same kind of knowledge” (One Accord For The Lord’s Move, W. L., pp. 97, 99-100).

And, at an important juncture his intention and expectation was reflected in a letter of agreement drawn up by two close listeners to the heart of brother Lee during intense elders’ training meetings held in Feb 1986.


Dear Brother Lee:

After hearing your fellowship in this elders’ training, we all agree to have a new start in the Lord's recovery. For this, we all agree to be in one accord and to carry out this new move of the Lord solely through prayer, the Spirit, and the Word. We further agree to practice the recovery one in: teaching, practice, thinking, speaking, essence, appearance, and expression. We repudiate all differences among the churches, and all indifference toward the ministry, the ministry office, and the other churches. We agree that the church in our place be identical with all the local churches throughout the earth. We also agree to follow your leading as the one who has brought us God's New Testament economy and has led us into its practice. We agree that this leading is indispensable to our oneness and acknowledge the one trumpet in the Lord's ministry and the one wise master builder among us…." - (1986 letter of agreement by 400+ brothers)


One accord, as in a political movement, was encouraged as was the elders’ handing the reins of leadership over to a universal leader for his planned and orchestrated movement. He would lead the churches and do so by his ministry, that is, “by the apostles’ teaching”, as he put it. Here is a paradox: Oneness with the ministry was gained at the price of division in the church. For some to “sail on” in one accord was to provide the fertile bed of discord among the rest -- the believers, the members of the Body of Christ meeting as the church in their locality”.


The work and the church were being mixed during the late eighties turmoil, and much damage occurred in the recovery. It was not until this point that brother Lee was prompted to give the following word of generality to all the elders and co-workers. This was a pivotal time in local church history. Although his words had changed, the tone and direction of the churches had been set and the minds had galvanized among leaders according to their new way training under Witness Lee.

He shared,

"As long as you do not do anything against our New Testament constitution, no one will bother you. Among us in the Lord’s recovery, there is nothing worth worrying about because basically we do not have any heresy or any kind of organizational control. Everyone in every church has the full freedom to go on. I hope that we would be so faithful and loyal to the Lord’s recovery. We should mean business with the Lord that the Lord’s recovery will be prevailing and even flourishing on this earth for the Lord’s purpose.

Concerning practices among us, such as head covering, baptism, or preaching the gospel, we should let these things be as they are among the saints. If some of the sisters want to wear a head covering, let them do it. If others do not, give them the liberty. We should have this attitude with all the practices in the church life that are outside our common faith. If some feel that they are burdened to visit people for the gospel, let them do it. Those saints who are burdened to visit people for the gospel should not insist on this practice. We should try to avoid different kinds of terms, slogans, and sayings, and try to do our best to keep the oneness in the Lord’s recovery. We must avoid anything that damages the freedom of the saints or the oneness of the Body of Christ.

It is altogether wise and profitable that we do not expect all the churches to be the same. This is impossible. Even twelve brothers within a local church cannot be the same in everything…."


John Ingalls on Pivotal Elders’ Training Fellowship
During the Summer Training in Anaheim in July 1988

"In his second message of the elders’ meetings, Brother Lee spoke concerning our going on. After all our sessions and hours of fellowship with Brother Lee, we had hoped that he would take steps to clear up a number of things publicly. This was surely an excellent opportunity, a perfect forum, and an appropriate time. He did give a few principles for our going on which would be helpful if practiced. He did say, "It is altogether wise and profitable that we do not expect all the churches to be the same," and, "Do not talk about who is for this or who is for that…We should not label ourselves or label others." We were thankful to hear these comments and urgings. But we were deeply disappointed that he did not go much further. What he should have cleared up he covered up, e.g., problems regarding the LSM office and the FTTT training in Taipei. We hoped he would have repented for some things that had caused many problems, not just for allowing saints from the U.S. to attend the training in Taiwan. We surely would have respected him had he done this, and the situation could have been altogether different than it turned out.

"the close of Brother Lee’s second message, Dick Taylor (of Long Beach) and Frank Scavo (of Irvine) asked questions which Brother Lee attempted to answer. Dick’s question was quite appropriate and fit our situation. It was as follows: 'Many times you reach a point in your experience where you have genuine concerns. How can you fellowship about these concerns without being considered as negative and thereby causing another problem? This is a concern to me and this is related to the freedom of seeking the Lord and the truth.' In Brother Lee’s response he said that if you have a genuine concern for anyone in regard to the Lord’s recovery you should go to him alone without talking to anyone else. Any "pre-talk", he said, opens the door for the devil to come in. Now this may be true in many cases, but in our history of contacting Brother Lee over our concerns we felt we could not and should not do that. Since the issues were so momentous we needed fellowship for a clearer understanding and preparation for visiting him. In fact, Brother Lee and brothers around him have also had a lot of consultation among themselves regarding concerns for other brothers before going to them. I know because I myself participated in such discussions.

"Brother Lee’s attitude while speaking was gentle and persuasive; he was seeking in this way to reconcile all the brothers and to set a course that would calm any fears or anxieties and eliminate any problems. Many were very happy with his fellowship; I was not at all happy or at peace.

"During these elders’ meetings I sat next to an elder who had spoken with me a few times previously and was very sympathetic with our concerns, having much the same concerns himself. We agreed to meet together for some fellowship that evening over dinner. This we did, and as we ate we conversed about Brother Lee’s messages that day and their impact on the situation in general. The brother felt happy and said to me, "John, I think this is the best we can expect from Brother Lee. Be thankful." I tried to be; I tried to take his view. But in the depths of my being there was a nagging disappointment. Nothing had been dealt with. No wrongs had been righted. The root was not touched. The question loomed before us, What shall we do now? I knew I had to be true to my conscience and the truth I had seen."