[zeek]

Originally Posted by Dave

You bring up a very interesting thought. In the Cambridge Platform of 1648 (frequently cited in congregational churches even today) which was both a declaration of independence and an ecclesiastical constitution, adopted well over a century before the corresponding political documents that marked the founding of the US. The Platform established a non-hierarchical congregational polity, meaning that churches would be independent both of outside authority and of each other. The framers of the Platform continuously referenced the Bible as their authority, which makes the Bible a foundational document of the polity of many congregational faiths shaped by Puritanism. English Puritans had tried for decades before the "Great Migration" in 1620 to the US to reform the Church of England in the direction of a more personally experienced spirituality. It didn't work and they were persecuted and that is why they came to the states (New England) in 1620.

Without providing any further background regarding the Platform it is well to note that congregational Puritan churches were democratic in function. Their leaders were elected by the congregations and the congregations established a covenant with one another to "walk together".

A large part of the problem with the local churches was/is the process of establishing elders and the fact that essentially LCs eschewed the idea of democracy within their churches and they are not covenantal. I think this is bleeding over into the reason for some of those who have left, looking for a "leader" (e.g. Lee and now Cahn) who can tell them what to do rather than look to others for shared responsibilities within their churches. Those who continue in the LC have the same problem and, thus, the emergence of the Blended Brothers etc. Most churches today are not "democratic" and don't follow the Platform's outline of congregational processes e.g. Catholic, Anglicans, Local Churches of Witness Lee etc. Also, part of the reason that some people/churches don't like "democracy" is because it is messy and requires accountability and responsibility. Of course, it is not for everyone but I prefer it to a theocracy or a totalitarian form of government in our churches and in our country.

I thought in the beginning that the "local" churches were just that, local, but in fact they were tied into a controlling network and we were never "local".

Right. You shared with me about the ground of locality before I ever came to a meeting. I was excited about the possibility of Christian unity based on a simple New Testament principle. But I was in for disappointment after disappointment when the leaders from Witness Lee on down violated the principle at least as I understood it. Of course, there was never even pretense of democracy in the local churches. In The Elders' Management of the Church Witness Lee says,

Those elders who are the authority should also learn to fear the Lord, to be without preconceptions, prejudice, or bias, and to listen to this fellowship and to touch the brothers' feelings. After they have sensed the intention of the Holy Spirit, those who are the authority can make the decision and can announce that the matter should be taken care of in a certain way. If they do this, the result will not be democracy or autocracy, but will be something that issues from the Holy Spirit.

What prevents that from becoming autocracy in the name of the Holy Spirit? Nothing. In Leadership in the New Testament,Lee explains:

God's government is neither autocracy nor democracy, but theocracy. Autocracy is dictatorship, and democracy is government by the people. Humanly speaking, democracy is wonderful, but to bring democracy into the church brings in the opinions of the people. This is like the church in Laodicea in Revelation 3. The word Laodicea in Greek means "the opinion of the people." In the United States government, congressmen and senators represent the states to express the people's opinion. God's government in the church is not like this. God's government in the church is theocratic.

Theocracy is 100% spiritual according to Lee. It come totally through the elders with no voting, no representation and no checks or balances. Perhaps Lee learned to distrust democracy from Watchman Nee. In Collected Works of Watchman Nee, The (Set 3) Vol. 61: Matured Leadings in the Lord's Recovery (1) Nee teaches:

Today there are two kinds of systems in the world. One is capitalism, and the other is communism. Capitalism protects private ownership; everyone can accumulate wealth for himself. Communism practices the sharing of all things in common. No one has any private possessions, and everyone gives up everything for the good of the state. The communist way appears to be similar to the Christian way, but it does not have the life of God, and it is not easy to carry out this practice. D. M. Panton wrote about democracy and socialism in one of his expositional writings. In the image in Daniel, the ten toes are made of iron and clay. Panton interpreted the iron as referring to dictatorship which will "stiffen up" to become fascism. The clay refers to democracy which will degenerate into communism. Therefore, clay refers to the communist party today. Since the time of Martin Luther, the Brethren have been the champions of orthodox interpretations of the image in Daniel, telling us that iron refers to dictatorship while clay refers to democracy. Prior to the Brethren, interpretations on the iron and clay focused on the incompatibility of the mixture. Other teachers emphasized their interrelatedness. For example, G. H. Lang said that dictatorship brings in democracy, while democracy in turn creates dictatorship. The clay of democracy is too weak to meet the challenges of crises, and so power goes to the hand of a few or even one person. The result is a fascist dictatorship or communist autocracy. An example of the former is Napoleon during the French Revolution, and an example of the latter is the Soviet Union which evolved into communism from the instability of democracy. Mr. Panton is the first person to interpret clay to mean communism. Communism extols sharing all things in common. Karl Marx borrowed this concept from Acts. It would be a shame to Christians if one day the communists would turn around to teach Christians about sharing all things in common, selling everything and distributing to everyone according to his need. A proper Christian does not accumulate riches for himself; rather, he forsakes everything to take the Christian confession as his primary profession.

Nee's teaching on church government was similar to but less equivocal than Lee's. He states:

The way to conduct business in the church is not by dictatorship. Neither is it by representation or democracy. Decisions in the church are not arrived at through voting or the consensus of a few. Rather the responsible brothers make the decisions. But the responsible brothers must see to it that in spiritual matters, there is the order of spiritual leadership. In the church there is no democracy and there is no dictatorship. (Collected Works of Watchman Nee, The (Set 3) Vol. 62: Matured Leadings in the Lord's Recovery (2), Chapter 15, Section 4)

It's the responsible brothers that make the decisions. Sure their supposed to be guided by the spirit, but whether they are or not it's the responsible brothers who make the decisions.

In Life-Study of Revelation, Chapter 41, Section 4, Lee noted:

The entire world today is looking for a strong leader. Although this is the age of democracy, many are tired of the shortcomings of democracy and are looking for strong leadership.

Of course, he predicted that the world would find that leader in the Anti-Christ, but as far as the local churches were concerned, he tried to be that strong leader himself, with the help and guidance of the Holy Spirit, of course.