Preface
Dear Ron and Kerry,
I am giving to you copies of a book that addresses your word in print concerning brother John Ingalls, written in 1989, called
A Response to Recent Accusations. I don’t know how much you are concerned about any mistake you might have made in representing brother John, but brothers, your mistakes are numerous. There is the need, therefore, to bring this to your attention and, possibly, to the saints’ attention. You said in the book,
"We wish to comment on two of John’s closing remarks. John says, 'if we have offended any of you saints, we ask you to please forgive us. We surely never intended to offend anyone of you.' On the one hand, offended saints should receive the grace to forgive from their hearts. To maintain a sweet, harmonious church life we need to forgive one another. On the other hand, John’s word 'If we have offended any of you saints' is somewhat disturbing for it is altogether too general and superficial and it displays a lack of consciousness of the grave offenses caused not only to saints but also to other churches. Certain things said and done in Anaheim since August 28, 1988, have caused damage and distress and should not be dealt with generally and superficially. There is the willingness to forgive but there should also be the willingness to repent."
Brothers, what I will be addressing in my book is what you did not address in yours. You gave a slanted version of “certain things said and done in Anaheim” that caused “damage and distress”. You did not give the full story of what took place there. You left out vital detail that would give the saints the whole picture, the true scenes of the major factors of “damage and distress” in Anaheim, and also in the recovery.
Although the truth of what happened in Anaheim remains hidden by the leadership, there are windows into the real situation. I would like to share about two such windows, as Philip Lin and Francis Ball allow some light to shine in on the subject.
Philip Lin Comment
Philip Lin, an Anaheim elder during the late eighties on the Chinese side, spoke honestly during the turmoil. A brother relates a time with him,
"I recall a leaders’ meeting before a Sunday morning meeting in Anaheim during the late eighties turmoil. A few of us younger brothers who were learning to serve in the church, helping the elders, etc. were there and had been involved in such meetings for quite some time. I had asked the question: "Why should we let two brothers [Brother Lee & his son] who don't even come to the meetings wreak havoc on a church of over 500 people? Let's just ignore them and go on." Just after I asked it, Philip Lin walked in late. He asked what the question was that was asked and Godfred replied, "It was a very good question, and told me to ask it again. So I did, and this was Philip Lin’s almost verbatim response:
"I know in my conscience you brothers are right according to the truth, but in my culture I must be loyal to Brother Lee." Of course he was not just referring to my question but to the overall situation, the 16 points the faithful elders had previously ministered, etc. Frankly, I appreciated and admired his honesty. It was so striking I still clearly remember it today."
Francis Ball Comment
The same brother relates a word from Francis,
In a leaders meeting held in Rosemead during the Pasadena conference, Brother Lee was complaining about how much the church in Anaheim was mistreating him and his son and how much he and his family were suffering because of the church in Anaheim. At the end they had a question period so I got up to ask a few questions, stating something like, "I just wanted to preface my questions with a remark to clarify this issue publicly before all the brothers here so there is no misunderstanding. In fact, it is not the church in Anaheim causing suffering to Brother Lee and his family but it is Brother Lee and his son Philip that is causing suffering to the church in Anaheim. Now I have a couple of questions... In the Genesis life-studies you [Brother Lee] claimed that John So was a pillar in the church, and we should follow his example. In the Timothy training you turned to John Ingalls and declared publicly that he was your Timothy. But now that they disagree with you and your son, instead of accepting their fellowship you attempt to discredit them before others and cut them off. How could a pillar and Timothy so easily be cut off? Why would you treat these brothers in such a fashion?” … Then immediately after my questions the so-called "question and answer fellowship" part of the meeting ended, and Francis jumped up to abruptly end the meeting, shamelessly declaring that he was
delighted to be an ostrich with his head in the sand. Shortly thereafter he was chosen as a replacement "elder" in Anaheim.
.
In other words, Ron and Kerry, there is another side of the story to the partial and superficial version put forth in your book and in other “official” writings and speakings of the church. It has been the habit, the practice, the tradition of our leadership in the recovery to be non-transparent concerning themselves and their failings. Blame is nearly always shifted to others; it is never placed on yourselves. In view of this, I urge you to read my book and consider what truly is an incredible “lack of consciousness of the grave offenses caused not only to saints but also to other churches”.
“There is the willingness to forgive but there should also be the willingness to repent”, so you have advised John Ingalls to do. Brothers, so I urge you to do.
This is not an attack, but an appeal to you to examine yourselves, for righteousness sake and for the good of all.
Yours in Christ Jesus our Lord,
Steve Isitt 2006