[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by NeitherFirstnorLast

Note: "We have earnestly sought a personal audience with Witness Lee in order that our understanding of his teachings and practices might once and for all be substantiated or corrected (DCP claims this was never done). Before the initial printing of The God-Men by (SCP), a certified letter requesting an appointment with Lee and with two LC representatives was sent to Lee's home. The receipt was returned to our office, bearing Mrs. Lee's signature, but with no reply. After a reasonable wait, we sent Lee a telegram, again urging him to respond to our invitation to dialogue. We received no response."

"...Researcher Neil Duddy went twice to Local Church headquarters in Anaheim, California, and spoke with Lee's two chief apologists. At the close of the second session... Duddy was told that Lee, for reasons of principle, does not respond to criticisms or questions from outsiders. LC executive Ronald R. Kangas was not inclined even to tell Lee that an SCP researcher had visited their headquarters.... the disposition of the LC toward such interaction was epitomized by Kangas's response to a question about Lee's extensive use of allegory "You're not spiritual. You don't understand"."

"The LC and Witness Lee were invited to read our revised manuscript and were given the prerogative of attaching a five page response to appear as an Appendix. Lee expressed his refusal to accept our offer in a certified letter dated May 22, 1979."

From what we have read here already, we see strong refutation (and presumably, physical evidence IE certified letters and telegrams) that DCP's story about "The authors and publishers ignor(ing) appeals from the Christians meeting in the local churches... & unsuccessfully "pleading" with the authors and publishers of these books" must be called into serious question. The burden of proof here in on the plaintiff - what evidence are they able to provide to refute SCP and prove that such appeals and pleadings took place?

The emphasis of this post is not about the book, but to show a track record of how outsiders and insiders too are responded to when asking questions or addressing issues.

http://static.harvesthousepublishers..._Lawsuit_3.pdf

In a news release dated June 20, 2003, Local Church spokesman Dan Towle stated, ―Harvest House Publishers and its authors chose to ignore our year–long efforts to resolve this issue.‖42 And on their website www.contendingforthefaith.org, in an article titled ―Facts about Pending Litigation with Harvest House Publishers and Authors,‖ The Local Church claims Harvest House Publishers and authors Ankerberg and Weldon ―utterly disregard[ed their] letters‖ and that there was an ―aggressive refusal to give timely consideration‖ to their appeals.

These allegations are seriously misrepresentative, for in fact, every letter from The Local Church received a timely and courteous response from Harvest House and Ankerberg and Weldon. For the sake of setting the record straight, here is a detailed chronology of what happened:

January 11, 2001—The Local Church Writes to Harvest House: The Local Church sent their first letter of complaint, which was only one page long, general in nature, and did not point to the specific problems they alleged were in the Encyclopedia. In a clear reference to a previous lawsuit filed by some Local Churches, they closed their letter with these words: ―We hope you know that this kind of writing has been ruled as libelous concerning us in the past.‖

January 19, 2001—Harvest House and Authors Respond to The Local Church: Because of The Local Church‘s reference to libel, and because of Harvest House‘s desire to maintain the highest of integrity in any matter in which libel might possibly be involved, Harvest House answered through one of its attorneys and asked for ―written information‖ that would help us to evaluate The Local Church‘s concerns and provide them ―with a meaningful response.‖ Response time: 8 days.

May 16, 2001—The Local Church Writes to Harvest House: Surprisingly, The Local Church took almost four months to respond to Harvest House‘s January 19 letter. In this one–page letter The Local Church indicated a desire to meet to discuss the book, but again, never provided specific explanations that would help Harvest House and the authors to know which statements in the Encyclopedia were allegedly problematic. In the letter, The Local Church referred to ―preparing to answer‖ via lawyers, and cited a 1985 lawsuit filed by the Local Churches. (In that suit, The Local Church obtained a default judgment—a judgment in which the losing party ―defaults,‖ or is unable to or does not defend itself. The ministry that The Local Church sued had to declare bankruptcy because it could no longer afford the cost of defending itself.)

Continued in Next Post