Witness Lee contra Sectarianism

[YP0534]

While looking for another quote, I came upon this.

Amazing.

Whatever happened to this teaching?

RECOGNIZING, RESPECTING,
AND REGARDING A CHURCH EVEN THOUGH IT
MAY NOT ACCEPT THE PRESENT NEW WAY

Any church which is a genuine local church standing on the ground of oneness and recognizing the other local churches as churches in one fellowship is a church, regardless of whether or not that church accepts the present new way. If a church chooses not to practice the new way, that church does not cease to be a church. To practice this would be sectarian. We do not practice this. We practice the all-inclusive church life.

We realize that if the Lord is to go on to make His recovery prevailing, there is no other way but this present move. However, if a church meeting properly would not take this present new way, then we still respect them as a proper church. We would still keep the fellowship with them, even though they do not feel the need of the new way. Even if they would oppose, we would not reject them. When they say that they are no longer a church in the recovery, then that is their cutting off the fellowship, not us. Do not cut off any church who would not be agreeable to the present new move. If a church opposes a little and yet still recognizes all the other churches on this globe for the fellowship in the Body, we would not only recognize but also respect and regard them as a genuine church among the many local churches. We not only like to, but we also will try our best to maintain proper fellowship with them. Do not be sectarian.

- Witness Lee, Elders' Training, Book 8

[Suannehill]

Well...what happened to this teaching is the Blended Spin!!!!!!!
The teaching was disappearing before Witness Lee passed...however, I did try to remind the locals of this and many other quotes. They heard NONE of them. All they knew was..."Well there IS such a thing as church law and ..."

That made it alright to do whatever they wanted. Blendeds recognized only new elders who support BB and "The Ministry" above all else. Elders who served 20-30 years did not exist.

[Toledo]

Originally Posted by YP0534

Whatever happened to this teaching?

Be careful. It almost sounds as though you are approving something WL wrote. That could get you into trouble...

Portions like that are the reason that I still appreciate Witness Lee's ministry, even though, as Suannehill points out, the current masters of LSM seem to ignore Lee's clear teachings with regard to oneness and receiving the saints.

[YP0534]

Originally Posted by Toledo

Be careful. It almost sounds as though you are approving something WL wrote. That could get you into trouble...

Portions like that are the reason that I still appreciate Witness Lee's ministry, even though, as Suannehill points out, the current masters of LSM seem to ignore Lee's clear teachings with regard to oneness and receiving the saints.

Oh, I'm careful. I have only (implicitly) noted an inconsistency between doctrine and practice.

I intentionally did not say Lee was right about anything.

After much consideration of the issue, I believe Elders' Training Books 7 and 8 represent the start of a dramatic decline in Lee's speaking. Not coincidentally, the text of the elders' allegiance letter is printed in Book 8. My impression is that this document represents the precise point where their sectarianism gave birth to denominationalism. Nonetheless, I have even found some nuggets in stuff spoken as late as 1996. It appears that in his latter days, Lee realized they had become a full-blown denomination, lamenting that all his efforts to institute his "new way" had not borne the intended fruit, but he no longer had any idea how to address the problems. I believe that was because he was never fully clear that he himself had helped produce the problems through his own efforts.

After hearing the recent piece on The Bible Answer Man broadcast, I'm thinking that passages like this one are possibly being read again, but that such teachings are now interpreted as a basis for moving closer to mainstream Christianity and accepting an honored position among the constellation of denominations.

I hear you, Toledo, but I'm the guy who has built much of his library by bidding on eBay over the last several years, presumably titles being sold off by saints who now reject Lee entirely. Some might say I'm actively looking for trouble via saved eBay searches.

[Suannehill]

Originally Posted by YP0534

...

I hear you, Toledo, but I'm the guy who has built much of his library by bidding on eBay over the last several years, presumably titles being sold off by saints who now reject Lee entirely. Some might say I'm actively looking for trouble via saved eBay searches.

Sooo,
You're the guy who got all of my stuff, eh?
I made the mistake of selling my original books and keeping newer copies...newer copies aren't the same.
Sue

[Toledo]

Originally Posted by YP0534

I hear you, Toledo, but I'm the guy who has built much of his library by bidding on eBay over the last several years, presumably titles being sold off by saints who now reject Lee entirely. Some might say I'm actively looking for trouble via saved eBay searches.

Yup, Ebay rocks as a source for Christian books. Norm is the one who turned me on to it.

I haven't really bid on much of WL's stuff on Ebay, though. I paid my "church tax" through the standing order for many years. I'm about four feet behind in my LSM reading. Some of my books still have the original rubber bands on them.

Rather I regularly search Ebay for low cost or out of print Christian books by many other authors.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Toledo

I haven't really bid on much of WL's stuff on Ebay, though. I paid my "church tax" through the standing order for many years. I'm about four feet behind in my LSM reading. Some of my books still have the original rubber bands on them.

I stopped paying the "church tax" after one of those "LSM masters" condemned us all for letting "dust accumulate" on our books.

"OK", I said to myself, "I'll fix you," and promptly canceled my DSO.

Being a pack rat, I would still lug all those books from home to home, were it not for the sovereign God who flooded my basement last year. Except for the blue and green volumes, the rest of the books "caught the dreaded mold."

[YP0534]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I stopped paying the "church tax" after one of those "LSM masters" condemned us all for letting "dust accumulate" on our books.

"OK", I said to myself, "I'll fix you," and promptly canceled my DSO.

Being a pack rat, I would still lug all those books from home to home, were it not for the sovereign God who flooded my basement last year. Except for the blue and green volumes, the rest of the books "caught the dreaded mold."

OK so I also still haven't cracked the spine for a few things that I bought 20+ years ago. Like "Truth Lessons". Blech. But I've really always treated most of it as reference material anyways. (Did they really expect me to read all of it?)

For the record, I've also been waiting for 20+ years for LSM to publish the last of the Conclusion messages, which trainings I attended! For some reason, they even published an incomplete set of hardback volumes, in green-books covers, but most of the ones I attended have only come out in paperback over the past couple of years and still only incompletely.

I can still vividly recall the little jingle that they made up at the time of those last messages:

The church is:

• consummated in enjoying the eternal and divine life of the processed and consummated Triune God
• consummated in experiencing the mingling of humanity with divinity in the dispensing of the unsearchable riches of the processed and consummated divine Trinity
• consummated in expressing the processed and consummated Triune God in His ultimate manifestation for eternity

Where did this stuff go?

The messages containing these words have been neglected for more than two decades now. I am mystified that LSM has not concluded "The Conclusion" after 20+ years.

There were probably hard words in there about receiving the believers and not being sectarian but I haven't been able to keep up with all of my notes after all this time so I can't double-check it any more as I had intended to do so long ago.

[YP0534]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Here is Whistler:

http://www.afaithfulword.org/quarantine/index.html

The audio and video files were both available again as of this date. (The video has multi-language over-dub of Chinese by default and you have to select the English from Audio and Language Tracks.) I thought there was a typo previously but the recordings appear to be nearly 5 hours in length! Ugh.


I'm only about 20 minutes into it so far but I was struck with one point already: What did the word "division" mean in the first-century context? In other words, the ones who Paul would accuse of this in his day: what exactly were they doing and with whom or to whom did they do it? It doesn't seem like a scenario directly parallel to Titus Chu's circumstance is part of the New Testament record. (I speak here as if the accusations against him are justified, although I do not believe it to be the actual case.)


I was also reminded in the speaking of the first 20 minutes that the word "rebellion" is not to be found in the New Testament for some reason.

[Indiana]

Whistler

I had not listened to these talks before (not due to lack of interest). Now I have done so, 2yrs + later.

I simply am in awe.

One precious brother after another speaking in such ignorance. Not necessarily ignorance about the brother they purposed to condemn; but ignorance about their own path.

And, what is that path? The path of a Super-Sect that they have all helped to create and endeavor to promote.

I mean, regardless of what is spoken about Titus, these brothers have serious issues. In other words, forget about Titus. His problems pale in comparison to those who have picked up the mantle to lead......

The letter from Titus that DT harped on is taken completely differently by many others who live outside of the obsessive mentality for a Man and a Ministry that DTow and his counterparts abide in.

DT actually reported Titus' going into China to care for many Chinese believers, without any spiritual acknowledgment or rejoicing that dear saints were taken care of by Titus. I simply have no place to put this. Dan had no rejoicing brothers and sisters! that Christ was preached and saints were cared for. His only concern was if Titus was in line with WL or not. What an Obsession!

These dear men conducting the Whistler Trial will be examined in the same way Witness Lee was examined for his book of fiction, i. e., FPR. Dear brothers and sisters, our brothers, who have served the churches well in certain respects for many years are totally obsessed. They are blinded. They have no idea what they are doing and have lost their way. Thus, they rely on the program. Brother Lee said… Brother Lee said……………

How ironic that Dan Towle would say at Whistler that in the Lord's recovery, "Truth must be king". Dan, you wouldn't know truth if it hit you upside the head - and it has done so numerous times. You spoke utter, complete, unadulterated nonsense at Whistler. What a shame that you have lain yourself down in a bed of lies again in a repeat performance from 1990!

You have misrepresented God and man one more time, and it is all on record.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Indiana

DT actually reported Titus' going into China to care for many Chinese believers, without any spiritual acknowledgment or rejoicing that dear saints were taken care of by Titus. I simply have no place to put this. Dan had no rejoicing brothers and sisters! that Christ was preached and saints were cared for. His only concern was if Titus was in line with WL or not. What an Obsession!

Indiana, this one is so simple:

WL told TC not to preach the gospel in China.

TC secretly went to China to preach the gospel.

The BB's found out and publicly disgraced TC for this, because he disobeyed WL.

How is this any different from the Sanhedrin forbidding Peter and John from preaching the Gospel? (see Acts 4.13-20)

Their response: "Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than God, you judge."

And so, we too must "judge."

[YP0534]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Indiana, this one is so simple:

WL told TC not to preach the gospel in China.

TC secretly went to China to preach the gospel.

The BB's found out and publicly disgraced TC for this, because he disobeyed WL.

How is this any different from the Sanhedrin forbidding Peter and John from preaching the Gospel? (see Acts 4.13-20)

Their response: "Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than God, you judge."

And so, we too must "judge."

Yeah?

Well what about TC's being picky about the hospitality, huh???

Isn't THAT grounds for "quarantine"???

People, he DIDN'T LIKE THE TOWELS!!!!

What more proof does one need?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Indiana

Whistler

DT actually reported Titus' going into China to care for many Chinese believers, without any spiritual acknowledgment or rejoicing that dear saints were taken care of by Titus. I simply have no place to put this. Dan had no rejoicing brothers and sisters! that Christ was preached and saints were cared for. His only concern was if Titus was in line with WL or not. What an Obsession!

Indiana, not to diminish Witness Lee's ministry while he was with us, but he's no longer with us. Brothers like Titus have their calling and commission before the Lord. It appears mainland China is a burden for Titus before the Lord. Who is man to say another cannot pursue a burden before the Lord. It's not much different from a dear brother who wanted to translate the Life-Studies into Farsi. Brothers with thie own ignorant perceptions put on hiatus and end to that burden. My point is when man tries to determine for others what one's burden should be in carrying out the Lord's ministry, ambition and self-serving motives become an obvious reality.
So Titus wanted to labor in China. Our brothers at LSM should have been supportive instead of verbally attacking his person. Is it really because of Witness Lee, or did our brothers at LSM perceive China as their own market to further the ministry of Witness Lee.

Terry

[YP0534]

I think it most likely that, as Lee himself never perceived his own sectarianism, devotees of his denomination are also unable to see it.

It is a difficult question and one I wrestled with at the very start of my Christian experience and attending the formal Local Church meetings.

The definition of the Local Church congregation as the single authentic instance of Christian assembly in every place, while clearly sectarian, proves to be a great hindrance to seeing that sectarianism clearly.

They surely are believers. Any group of believers meeting together anywhere freely calls themselves "a church." This group says we are surely "a church" and no one can deny that. They then further say that other places are in fact sectarian divisions and not "churches" at all. This seems easy enough to perceive. The syllogism concludes that "a church" which is not a "division" of one sort or another is "the church." By conveniently ignoring or explaining away all of the clear indicia that in fact they are also a division, they become trapped into believing that they are unable to meet apart from this one group.

The idea seems to me firmly rooted in the notion of "belonging" and founded upon a belief in a shared concept of "Universal Church." If we all agree on the big picture story, then we all belong to the same club wherever we live. You can generally disagree about minor issues as long as you have the same "Big Church" idea composed of similar "little churches" and this worked for awhile. The problem in the Local Church became irreversably manifest when the idea about "Big Church" subsumed every minor issue as well. Lee's declaration that they could by much effort bring the Lord back in 13 years was the major error of his entire life of teaching. You can't get the "Universal Church" built without knocking on doors in just the correct fashion, don't you know? Words about oneness relating to "Big Church" ideas were then exchanged for words about oneness in every little thing. You cannot be one in Christ without being one in HWMR became the lie. In fact, it becomes more than difficult to be one in Chirist if you ARE one in HWMR and such practices.

This is why they need to pay the price to buy the eyesalve.

[Indiana]

I shared a few days ago about the rhetoric of Brother Lee on keeping the oneness, as he assuaged the brothers in a pivotal elders' meeting. A short time after that meeting - maybe three months - he was a foreigner to that pivotal and assuaging speech about brothers being free to follow the New Testament constitution and that no one would bother them.

The following is from Deviating from the Path in the Lord's Recovery:

Appendix 1

Brother Lee Not Open to Opinion or Fellowship from the Brothers

One Accord for the Lord’s New Move
Elders Training, Book 7

In the beginning of the era of the new way, Brother Lee made it clear who was the leader among the churches in the recovery. There was to be "no uncertain sounding of the trumpet" for an army of followers to follow him as its unique leader.

He gave the following analogy: "The citizens of the United States may say many things to criticize the government and the commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces. But when you get into the army and become a soldier, you lose the right to say anything."

He continued, "you may be a member of a local church and yet have nothing to do with the ministry to fight the battle for the Lord's interest on the earth. All of you are the elders, the co-workers, and the apprentice elders, the leading ones, in the recovery. I am speaking to you all as the soldiers in the recovery, not to the citizens. I am speaking to the soldiers of the army. Are you going to remain in the army? You have to realize what the army is and what the army would do. The army has no capacity to take your opinion…” (pp. 80-81, ET 7)

1. Atlanta Elders Conference

John Ingalls relates an elders’ meeting in which Brother Lee told the brothers how he felt about them and their ability to fellowship with him. He essentially informed them that they were not qualified to raise questions with him or to criticize anything he did.

John Ingalls
In September Brother Lee had a conference in Atlanta with two elders’ meetings, one on Friday, September 16th, (1988) and the other on the Lord’s Day, September 18th. The second meeting was exceptional with brothers from all over the country attending. I would like to briefly describe it, noting a few significant things that were said, (I myself was not present but I received reports from a number of brothers concerning it.)

Brother Lee strongly vindicated the way he had taken against all criticisms. He drew a line; any who would not take this way, he said, are “dropouts”, and the Lord will have no mercy. Addressing the brothers, he said that none of them understood what he was doing. None knew what he was doing in Taipei; hence there was no one that he could fellowship with. When I went to Taipei, he said, “I did not fellowship with one person concerning what I was going to do.” He continued: “None of you is perfected. Who can say that he is perfected? So you are not qualified to criticize what I am doing. I didn’t include you in my fellowship – how can I? So let there be no more talk about anything I do. You criticize my young trainers in Taipei, telling me their mistakes, but I was doing everything; what they did was to carry out my burden.

Don Rutledge, an elder in Dallas before moving to North Carolina, told me, “That meeting was the most devastating and discouraging experience of all my time in the church.” What particularly bothered him was Brother Lee’s attitude toward the brothers. The atmosphere, he said, was heavy, oppressive, and abusive. (Reports came to my ears from a number of brothers who attended that meeting; all indicated something similar.) Brother Lee had wanted to have a time of fellowship with Don immediately following the session, but Don was so troubled and depressed that he told Brother Lee he had to go home. As he walked out the door, Titus Chu came up and said to Don, "I’m afraid this will make our situation worse. I hope not”.

[bookworm]

Originally Posted by Indiana

Don Rutledge, an elder in Dallas before moving to North Carolina, told me, “That meeting was the most devastating and discouraging experience of all my time in the church.” What particularly bothered him was Brother Lee’s attitude toward the brothers. The atmosphere, he said, was heavy, oppressive, and abusive. (Reports came to my ears from a number of brothers who attended that meeting; all indicated something similar.) Brother Lee had wanted to have a time of fellowship with Don immediately following the session, but Don was so troubled and depressed that he told Brother Lee he had to go home. As he walked out the door, Titus Chu came up and said to Don, "I’m afraid this will make our situation worse. I hope not”.

It has been a while since I have visited this forum. This recent thread is very insightful. It makes me wonder when we will have an opportunity to read the next chapter of the book Don Rutledge is writing. I truly hope all continues well with him in these days.

bookworm

[Indiana]

In Brother Lee’s pivotal speech of persuasion to the elders, he said, “As long as you do not do anything against our New Testament constitution, no one will bother you. Among us in the Lord’s recovery, there is nothing worth worrying about because basically we do not have any heresy or any kind of organizational control. Everyone in every church has the full freedom to go on.”

This is surely non-sectarian speech.

However, in between this speech and the Atlanta conference where Lee declared that the elders would be "dropouts" if they did not take the new way, the following took place.

More Fellowship With Brother Lee - August 25, 26, 1988

John Ingalls “On Thursday, August 25th, Brother Lee asked me to come to his home for further fellowship. He said then that he would ask Godfred and Al to come to his home the following day, Friday. It seemed strange to me that he would separate us, asking me to come on one day and them on another. But he said I could come too on Friday if I liked. On Thursday alone with me, Brother Lee asked me what changes I thought he should have. This greatly surprised me. Perhaps he was thinking of my fellowship with him on June 22nd, when I told him that if he did not have some change, it would be difficult for the churches to go on. I said, "Brother Lee, please give me a moment to collect my thoughts." I was concerned what I should say to him. Then I proceeded to mention a few of the concerns previously mentioned. Moreover, I tried to impress him that I never tried to use the term "autonomy" in all of my speaking. Throughout these months I had told him this several times. I stated that I was burdened to speak about local administration together with universal fellowship (as we have in our hymn, #824, authored by Brother Lee and translated from Chinese: Administration local, each answering to the Lord; Communion universal, upheld in one accord.) He responded, "that’s my teaching." I agreed that it was indeed his teaching. So what was wrong?

The next afternoon, Friday, August 26th, I joined Godfred and Al at Brother Lee’s home. Godfred spoke strongly, asking Brother Lee first if he had spoken anything against us recently. He replied that he had not. Then Godfred reasoned with him: How is it that you speak against autonomy, considering that a problem, but you will not deal with the problems that we brought to your attention. Godfred spoke earnestly and impressively. He said, "the center of the church should be Christ, but He has been replaced by you and your ministry." Brother Lee was touched by what Godfred said, and perhaps considering that what he had just alleged afforded some light for clearing up the problem, he said, "I like to hear that." I recall the scene vividly, and his words still echo in my ears. It seemed that this time Brother Lee appreciated the frank fellowship and was trying to warm up to us. But we could not seem to make any real progress. Brother Lee remarked that everything that had happened in Europe which had caused so great a problem between the churches and the Living Stream Ministry was just a misunderstanding. After the meeting Godfred told us that he wanted to leave the eldership and was fully disgusted with the whole situation.”

-Two days later, John and Godfred gave the 16 points fellowship to the church in Anaheim, for which they were later “stoned”, although that fellowship was right and according to the New Testament constitution and need in their church.

[Indiana]

What would indicate to us in the following example that Brother Lee was remotely concerned for "keeping the oneness of the Spirit in the uniting bond of peace?"

As was stated previously, “He let the violations of the oneness of the Body occur, and he did so “at any cost”, losing co-workers, churches, and saints. He was after a new way, new “elders”, and a new mentality in the “churches”, while he labeled those who raised challenging questions as slanderers, perverted ones, rebellious ones, and so forth. He showed little regard for keeping the oneness of the Body. He was “cleaning house” and starting something new."


For two years before the new way began in the churches, Brother Lee did not attend meetings of the church in Anaheim. He was “disappointed with the church”. He spoke of going to another locality to build up THAT church, not Anaheim, as a model for others to follow. He considered Seattle and other places. Yet, he was in the church in Anaheim and not attending meetings. During that time away, at any rate, he considered intently a new way for the churches to take. He was nearly eighty years old and very much concerned for his ministry and the future.

In October of 1984 he initiated a new way to be taken in the churches, with strong emphasis on his ministry and on himself as the unique leader in the recovery. It is that strong emphasis that became such a problem and cause for consideration that the church ground had changed, as serious local needs were ignored, while LSM prospered in gaining their objectives in localities.

The entity called Living Stream Ministry still looms large today. It surely is not limited to what Brother Lee stated were its limitations in Elders’ Training Book 9. He said it was “a little business office to serve my ministry for two things: to publish the messages in book form and to distribute these messages in both video and audio tapes. That is all the ministry office should do and nothing else.” He continued with a misleading word: “I did not have much time to check on everything related to the office in the past, but the ministry office has always had this specific function and no other function” (p. 61, ET Book 9). Actually, he had both the time and the knowledge of what his “little office” was doing in different localities and regions, because of contacts he had with such brothers as Bill Mallon and John So in the Southeast and in Europe, but he chose to ignore their pleas for his help in the midst of serious problems they were having with LSM. He also had the opportunity to understand more about what was happening in other localities had he been willing to listen. LSM was on the move into various localities according to plan.

Examples of Ignoring Local Needs

1. Ignoring LSM Sister’s Report (see appendix 1, third point)

As a sister working in the office of the Living Stream Ministry, the wife of former elder Ken Unger from Huntington Beach, wrote an eleven-page letter to Brother Lee expressing her concerns of the ill-treatment of the saints in different places at the hands of the LSM. She and her husband, in fact, went to Brother Lee to read him the letter, and as she began to read, Brother Lee cut her off soon after she started, and he took over and dominated the time, sharing his own burden about “the Lord’s move.” The same thing took place in a subsequent visit when Brother Lee stopped her before she could get through half a page. He, then, dominated the remainder of the time with his own burden concerning the progress of “the Lord’s move” on the earth, not showing interest in her fellowship. The sister had become quite disillusioned about the church and now about Brother Lee, and withdrew herself from the church and LSM permanently.

It was not that Brother Lee didn’t know what his representatives were doing in many places. He either knew or chose not to know. He knew that the function of his “little office” had grown enormously and that LSM was way beyond its bounds in their activities and disturbances in the churches in order to satisfy their objectives, and his. LSM had become far more than a publisher and distributor of books and tapes. (taken from Deviating from the Path)