Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
The conflict of interest exists in the Recovery because of their rule that the most senior worker (Titus Chu in the GLA) directs all the movements of the other workers...The churches learned this the hard way. They had no claim to the worker's time or service. He could be ordered to leave for the weekend with just a moment's notice. Neither could the worker have the liberty to follow the Lord directly. His movements must be initiated by headquarters.
|
This way of doing things was set up by Watchman Nee. His model was: the work is regional and has a center and the church is local and has no center. In his book
The Normal Christian Church Life he indicated that coworkers could be considered as apostles with authority in the work and this authority included appointing elders. But workers had no authority in church administration - this was the sphere of the elders. Once appointed the workers needed to leave them alone and let them do their jobs locally.
But problem arose because:
1. Some coworkers were also elders and
2. When coworkers who were not elders were in their "home church" what was their function i.e. when they were not traveling etc. They had authority in the work but none in the church.
What now? How did everything and everyone fit together?
To address this he wrote
Further Talks on the Church Life and tried to find a way to make it work. I appreciate his efforts but IMHO trying to find a quick and easy tidy model from the early NT church is a futile exercise. A lot was going on back then and they were figuring it out as they went along with no intention that it would be an ironclad model for future generations.
Anyway obviously Nee's model didn't work if Witness Lee is any indication of it's fruit. Under him the work was not regional it was global. His practice in the Far East and elsewhere is that he ruled the work and the work ruled the churches. Period. Titus Chu in the GLA is just a miniature of that modus operanti.