Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake
Cite one example where I defended Philip Lee.
|
I don't think the big issue here is defending Philip Lee, but defending Witness Lee. How can anyone defend what happened? How can anyone defend what WL did in putting his admittedly "unspiritual" son (WL said, "I can hire an unspiritual person as my personal chef to cook in my kitchen") in a position to damage the saints and the churches?
Even if PL had not molested the sisters, and/or if other "unspiritual" son TL's Daystar didn't lose the saints' money, it's still a case of a minister putting his family's interests, and personal interests, above the church. Period. WL taught against this repeatedly, and urged all to consider the Body and be restricted by this consideration. But he didn't do it.
How can anyone defend this?
And in an atmosphere such as found in the LC, how can anyone object to things that are amiss? Those who tried got smeared in the book Fermentation of the Present Rebellion. Their persons and motives were attacked in print.
How can anyone correct errors in such an atmosphere? You either defend or you are complicit in silence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Indiana
Bill Mallon, a former prominent elder tried, but in futility, to voice his concerns for what he saw happening at LSM and in the recovery.
He said in 2006, “You will never know how completely astonished, shocked, and unnerved we were when WL put more and more things under Philip Lee’s responsibility. It was incredible and unbelievable from the get-go!”
|
WL taught so much and spoke so much on knowing the Body and caring for the Body. But in promoting and caring for the selfish interests of sons PL and TL he showed no care for the Body. How can anyone defend this?