Quote:
In 1989, a Chinese-American minister named Witness Lee (Li Changshou) founded a school that is now one of the largest post-graduate theological institutions in the United States.
...
For instance, at one point, Lee argued that “Actually, according to God’s New Testament economy, there should not be any organization in the church. The church is not an organization but an organism.” He went on to explain his understanding of the difference between the two: “An organism is an entity entirely of life. Nothing in our body is produced by organization. In contrast, in an organization nothing is living; every piece is dead. Everything in an organization is a human work arranged by human hands.”
|
It's a bit interesting (and indeed ironic) that this attempt to legitimize WL would do so by making an appeal to the FTTA. The excerpts that I quoted show the hypocrisy in this kind of argument. On the one hand, the author argues that WL was never a prominent or well-accepted leader in U.S. Christianity because he opposed traditional institutions. We've all heard that kind of argument before. As we know, WL went on to form an institution of his own, the FTTA. For the author to then claim that WL, the opposer of institutions and organization, should be recognized for his legacy, an institution called the FTTA, that argument is just completely absurd.
Of course, Chang tries to downplay the idea that the FTTA is an institution, but any objective person knows that simply isn't the case. People don't just end up there because they feel to go. They are pressured over time and make to feel it is the only reasonable thing to do with one's life. Those who don't go are made to feel like outcasts. Particularly when I attended SoCal college conferences, the brothers giving the conferences always seemed to make time make a sales pitch to get soon-to-be graduates to attend the FTTA. In contrast to any claims in this paper, the FTTA employs aggressive outreach tactics and increasing enrollment is no small matter.
I get the impression that in recent years, the LC has been seeking to plant members in the world of academia to act as apologists for WL. It appears that Chang is one such person. I take no issue with anyone attempting to present academic research or discussion on Nee/Lee or the LC. But if people want to do that, they should consider all the facts, such as the tumultuous context under which the FTTA was started. Just as much as WL's legacy is hundreds of college graduates, eager to attend the FTT, WL's legacy is also that of purging even his most adamant supporters. So many who once greatly appreciated Lee have since packed their bags and moved on. That is the other side to WL's legacy, the legacy which the LC will never be able to reconcile it with.