Challenging Ed Marks regarding apology letter to Phillip Lee

I am going to be meeting and eating with one of the signatories of the letter from the Anaheim elders apologizing to Phillip Lee. Can someone please provide me with a copy of that letter on this site so that I can ask this brother to explain his side of this.

Thanks

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I am going to be meeting and eating with one of the signatories of the letter from the Anaheim elders apologizing to Phillip Lee. Can someone please provide me with a copy of that letter on this site so that I can ask this brother to explain his side of this.

Thanks

I found the letter at this link: http://www.unfaithfulwitness.org/PhilipLeeLetter.pdf

Originally Posted by Freedom

I found the letter at this link: http://www.unfaithfulwitness.org/PhilipLeeLetter.pdf

Thank you, I printed out a copy of the letter and gave it to Ed.

I ate dinner at the church in NY tonight along with Ed Marks. I knew Ed from Houston, we were both in the church in Houston in 1978-1980, then we both went to Irving together during the construction of the meeting hall there. All in all we were together for 4 1/2 years. 3 years in Houston and 1 1/2 years in Irving. While in Houston Ed gave me his car.

So when I heard he was going to be here I wanted to get his side of the story about the letter he signed apologizing to Phillip Lee. I met Phillip Lee while in Irving. He invited me and about 12 other brothers to go for "fellowship". We sat and watched him eat lobster at a very expensive Chinese restaurant. When I returned to the worksite I realized he needed the 12 of us so that he could expense the trip as "fellowship with the workers on the Irving hall". It was very clear to me that PL was a lascivious, gluttonous, deceitful man.

So I asked Ed what his side of the story was concerning this letter. He told me that there is always another side. I told him surely you can tell me now what it is, that was 30 years ago. He said that he was "a monkey" and held his hands to his eyes and then his ears. I told him I would never assume that, I reminded him that he was mentored by Dirk Engels and George Farmer. I told him those brothers were serious brothers. He told me that PL "had gone to be with the Lord". I said that I was not there to speak negatively of PL, rather I wanted to hear his side of why he signed that letter. He said he didn't know anything. I told him that one of the sisters that was abused by PL had come to Houston, he had to have known, this wasn't the first time it happened, John Ingalls and the other brothers had excommunicated him after warning him. He said that "Witness Lee was very happy with that letter."

Shortly after this Dennis Cooley, a brother who has been in the leadership of the church in NY for about 20 years and a brother I know very well (I lived with his brother in a brother's house in Odessa Texas) pulled me aside. He was angry that I talked to Ed. I told him I've known Ed since he first came into the church life and I wanted to ask him a question and this is the first time I have seen him since this event happened. He wanted to know if I had some kind of agenda to disrupt the meeting, I told him I had no idea that Ed was coming until yesterday when it was announced in the meeting (I had just happened to visit, the first time in about 10 years). Dennis said that Ed doesn't want to deal with this now. I said this has been 30 years, when are you going to deal with it? I can understand 3 months after the event you don't want to deal with it because you don't have all the facts, but at some point you have to deal with it. Dennis asked that I leave and not attend the fellowship, so I left.

I understand that you cannot judge someone for a mistake they made the moment they make the mistake, but at some point it is time to say "I made a mistake". The Lord Jesus died on the cross to deal with sin. He treats the matter of dealing with sin very seriously. For Ed, or the elders in Anaheim, or for the leaders in the Lord's Recovery to pretend that they can ignore sin, pretend they don't see it, pretend they don't hear it is an insult to the Lord Jesus. Surely God the father will not wink at this sin.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Thank you, I printed out a copy of the letter and gave it to Ed...

Thank you for taking the time to share this. It really does provide some valuable insight. Like you said, after 30 years, there is no reason why leaders couldn’t answer to their past actions, whether it’s in defense or to repent. For Ed Marks to admit that he was just “a monkey”, that he “didn’t know anything”, and that “Witness Lee was very happy with the letter” is all I needed to hear. That is neither a defense of nor a repentance for his actions. It’s Ed saying that he doesn’t care, that making WL happy was more important than anything else. His response really says it all about what took place and the attitudes that leaders maintain to this day.

When I re-read the letter yesterday, I couldn’t help but notice the dates – 1993 being when the “unsigned” letter went out and 1996 when the final signed copy was written. If all of the “replacement elders” felt PL’s excommunication wasn’t “justified or proper”, then why did they wait so many years to overturn it? They became elders in 89/90, so it took three years and then another three years to create a final letter. Anyways, it seems unlikely that the letter was anything they initiated, otherwise there would have been no reason to wait so long. As far as I’m concerned there was likely someone pressuring them (WL???), and if nothing else, that letter was written to make WL happy.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Shortly after this Dennis Cooley, a brother who has been in the leadership of the church in NY for about 20 years and a brother I know very well (I lived with his brother in a brother's house in Odessa Texas) pulled me aside. He was angry that I talked to Ed. I told him I've known Ed since he first came into the church life and I wanted to ask him a question and this is the first time I have seen him since this event happened. He wanted to know if I had some kind of agenda to disrupt the meeting, I told him I had no idea that Ed was coming until yesterday when it was announced in the meeting (I had just happened to visit, the first time in about 10 years). Dennis said that Ed doesn't want to deal with this now. I said this has been 30 years, when are you going to deal with it? I can understand 3 months after the event you don't want to deal with it because you don't have all the facts, but at some point you have to deal with it. Dennis asked that I leave and not attend the fellowship, so I left.

This is the general attitude. There's a period of time the brothers don't want to talk about it and after that time passes it's considered ancient history. Let the past be in the past.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

So I asked Ed what his side of the story was concerning this letter. He told me that there is always another side. I told him surely you can tell me now what it is, that was 30 years ago. He said that he was "a monkey" and held his hands to his eyes and then his ears. I told him I would never assume that, I reminded him that he was mentored by Dirk Engels and George Farmer. I told him those brothers were serious brothers. He told me that PL "had gone to be with the Lord". I said that I was not there to speak negatively of PL, rather I wanted to hear his side of why he signed that letter. He said he didn't know anything. I told him that one of the sisters that was abused by PL had come to Houston, he had to have known, this wasn't the first time it happened, John Ingalls and the other brothers had excommunicated him after warning him.

‘Now if a person sins after he hears a public adjuration to testify when he is a witness, whether he has seen or otherwise known, if he does not tell it, then he will bear his guilt.

Leviticus 5:1 is not saying we should be like monkeys; "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil". In the church, there's no place for politics.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Terry

‘Now if a person sins after he hears a public adjuration to testify when he is a witness, whether he has seen or otherwise known, if he does not tell it, then he will bear his guilt.

Leviticus 5:1 is not saying we should be like monkeys; "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil". In the church, there's no place for politics.

Part of being a good leader is making responsible decisions and living up to the consequences of those decisions. Most people understand that leaders will make mistakes along the way. I believe that all leaders, especially church leaders, should be willing to stand behind their decisions and own up to their mistakes.

With that in mind, I must say that I find Ed’s response unacceptable. As an elder of the church in Anaheim, he signed a letter concerning matters that were no small issue. Thus, his signature is not something that he or anyone else should take lightly. I do not consider it unreasonable at all to ask for an explanation regarding his signature on the letter to PL.

Even 30 years later, he should still be willing to either stand behind his decision or admit to making a mistake. That’s part of being an accountable leader. If he truly believes that his signature was justified, then there is no reason why he couldn’t argue his case. Likewise, if he feels that his signature was a mistake, there is no reason why he couldn’t come forth and admit that. For him, as a prominent LC leader to admit to just being “a monkey” is unacceptable. His response should be of concern to any LC member who sees him as a leader worth following. I don’t find anything admirable in leaders who boast about being able to see no evil, hear no evil or speak no evil.

Originally Posted by Freedom

Part of being a good leader is making responsible decisions and living up to the consequences of those decisions. Most people understand that leaders will make mistakes along the way. I believe that all leaders, especially church leaders, should be willing to stand behind their decisions and own up to their mistakes.

With that in mind, I must say that I find Ed’s response unacceptable. As an elder of the church in Anaheim, he signed a letter concerning matters that were no small issue. Thus, his signature is not something that he or anyone else should take lightly. I do not consider it unreasonable at all to ask for an explanation regarding his signature on the letter to PL.

Even 30 years later, he should still be willing to either stand behind his decision or admit to making a mistake. That’s part of being an accountable leader. If he truly believes that his signature was justified, then there is no reason why he couldn’t argue his case. Likewise, if he feels that his signature was a mistake, there is no reason why he couldn’t come forth and admit that. For him, as a prominent LC leader to admit to just being “a monkey” is unacceptable. His response should be of concern to any LC member who sees him as a leader worth following. I don’t find anything admirable in leaders who boast about being able to see no evil, hear no evil or speak no evil.

Matt 18:1-4

I think it is very difficult for many of those on these forums to put themselves into Ed's shoes. How difficult it must be to replace JI. When you are a new Christian life is simple, right is right, wrong is wrong. But when you become a "leader", especially in someplace under the microscope like Anaheim you have to weigh every single word, action, deed. It is as though your Christian walk now requires a Phd in calculus. You have to weigh the impact of every word, the unintended consequences, how will this be perceived, etc. And you need a second degree in the intricacies of the the byzantine world you now find yourself in, perhaps a Francis Ball to guide you through the mine field.

But in reality we all have these experiences, to one degree or another. We are faced with deciding what to do, and it can be totally exhausting. At one point in our life we may have thought how smart we were to have arrived at this exalted position, but now later on it just seems exhausting. Because you can't please everyone is going to always be true.

How do you know what the right path is? In my experience whenever I think of taking the cross it always causes me to sweat blood. The Lord actually told me in July that I needed to return to the LC meeting, and I have been sweating bullets of blood ever since. It took me three months to comply. I went many other places until I finally felt cornered and had to comply. The cross is a simple choice, a terrifying choice, but simple. And why would the Lord want me to return if not that He cares about Ed's salvation? The Lord gave me a chance to repay my debt to Ed. Praise Him.

On the other hand there are fancy calculations and mind blowing logic that can justify taking any other path. And even though those calculations always result in this bizarre calculus where certain interests that you never ever considered when you were just a babe in Christ now get taken out to infinity whereas the concerns for the "lost sheep" is run to 0. How to justify that? Something about the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few, kind of like Noah building a boat. If we don't build this boat everyone dies, but if we do at least some survive. If we save just 1 it is infinitely better than 0. The little innocent babes in the church don't understand this, they don't understand the grief that these elders and leaders take, the inward struggle, the pain, all "for the greater good".

And you hear from so many different voices. In my experience the words from the Lord are rebuking, they wound the soul, yet somehow I love them because I know they are faithful and that He is the one I can trust. All the other voices are telling me how I don't have to go to the cross, I don't have to have this happen, think of the pain you would cause your mother, and to others you care about, etc.

But when you do choose the cross it is as though someone flipped the switch. All those who spoke so kindly are now gnashing on you, skinning you alive, screaming for blood while within you just feel wonderful. A great sense of peace. A great sense of clarity comes over you, then you realize hey, don't cry for me, this judgment you see me enduring it is coming on all of us. It is so much better to embrace it, choose it, what better place to meet the Lord than on Golgotha? And, whereas before all you felt was shame, now you sense glory. To choose to take the path to the cross is something that separates the genuine believers from all the posers.

I realize that when Ed says "there is always another side" this is what he is referring to and I also realize that when the Lord said "unless you become as children" this is what He was referring to.

The Christian life is simple, terrifying, but simple. Right is right, wrong is wrong, and in the end the only one we are accountable to is the Lord Jesus. The only one we will have to answer to is the Lord Jesus. If you want to be a servant of Christ you won't be able to be a person who pleases man. It is a simple choice. You can take the path that listens to those who will promise you the world in exchange for your soul, or you can take the path of the one who paid the ultimate price to save your soul.