Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
Let's be honest, the Recovery under Nee and Lee had their ways, and it was generally unique among Christian gatherings. There were many positive things to applaud, and speaking in the meetings by all the members was one of them. It was not "the" way of ways, but it was "a" way with both pluses and minuses.
|
And with this I can agree.
And while it does not make many of the pluses invalid, I keep noting to myself that most of them somehow play into the American mentality of self-sufficiency. "I can speak." "I have the spirit and need no teacher"
(besides Lee). We like freedom. We have a culture that doesn't like bosses even though most of us have them. We don't want to need someone else to feed us right thinking. But most of us think what someone else says we should think. We may choose which person we will follow. But we follow.
It does not make anything about the perceived pluses of the LRC bad. Just provides a different view. They were what we wanted at the time. We wanted anything different from what we had. Such an open forum kind of system was just about as different as you could get.
Some people were finding it by getting in charismatic things — even within the context of their existing "traditions" in many cases.
In hindsight, I wonder if the extreme "difference" of the meeting style was (intentionally or unintentionally) responsible for our missing the early signs of wandering off of the reservation of orthodox sanity. Not saying "orthodox" on every side issue. Just the big things that we were fed that should have set off red flags and warning sirens.