Quote:
Originally Posted by aron
The retained cultural dynamic also explains how he could be a mild, self-effacing person at times, as well as a fierce autocrat at others. Both personas were for "the building of the body", as he saw it, but it was a "body" seen through a cultural lens - his cultural lens. And WL's view of human relationships, i.e. reciprocal behavior patterns, established over time by mutual agreement, was likewise colored by culturally-derived values.
Until you get this, he appears either enigmatic (non-comprehensible) or one just writes him off as a fraud, a phony. Probably WL felt he was being real and genuine (as did many close associates) because they understood the norms that consistently were expressed. To others, this "nice little man" suddenly and inexplicably became a tyrant.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by aron
When WL said, "People change", he also could refer to definitions, or usage, which also changes over time. "Fellowship" could mean one thing at one time, and something else later. The idea that "We talked" could at one point be expressed by the word 'fellowship', and later, the phrase "I told him/her/them what to do" could also be expressed by the word 'fellowship'. So the meaning could have changed, and Sandee found out too late.
In a group like this, a word or phrase has whatever meaning the Maximum Leader wants it to have at that time. In some sense it's complicated, as words shift meanings, unexpectedly. On the other hand it's simple: things mean whatever the Maximum Leader says they mean today. When the wind shifts, you don't want to be on the wrong side of the new meaning.
|
For me personally, I could not understand who Lee really was. While an insider, for years I heard the accolades of this wonderfully matured god-man and MOTA. Then I read the numerous accounts of those well-respected brothers who were cast-offs during some past "storm." It left me continually wondering who was the "real Lee." Which side was telling the truth.
While reading numerous histories of J.N.Darby and the Plymouth Brethren in those months preceeding the GLA quarantines, it dawned on me that both sides were true about both Darby, Lee, and probably Nee. They all were marvelously gifted and talented ministers with serious flaws, the most notable of which were their obsessions for power, control, and glory -- all the necessary ingredients for megalomania. When it comes to natural gifts and talents, all three of them probably rivaled the Apostle Paul. Us lowly peons have difficulty even grasping some of the abilities they possessed.
The Apostle Paul, however, was established by the Head of the body as a pattern for us, particularly in how he treated his fellow workers, the elders, and the saints in general. Never once did the scriptures hint that Paul bullied, belittled, shamed, or humiliated others for personal gain. Paul neither exalted himself, nor beat others down who were simply speaking their conscience. Yes, there are times when Paul was fighting the good fight, but that only served to protect the church and the truth from falsehood.
Very rarely in LC history do we hear of Darby, Lee, or Nee being tough on sisters. The stories of Sandee Rapoport and Jane Anderson seem to be the exception. Lee always saved his nasty side for any and all potential rivals. Titus Chu was the same way, so charming towards the sisters, yet so demeaning towards the gifted brothers. The explanation for this anomaly has to be Max R.'s exposure of Phillip Lee. Sandee R. was simply collateral for the bigger battle. Jane Anderson was simply a copycat crime; Benson Phillips in Texas practicing to be the next Maximum Brother. He as much said the same from the training podium upon hearing that
Thread of Gold was published.