"Early Nee" vs. "Later Nee"

[kisstheson]

Dear ones,

A very interesting side discussion began on the thread entitled "The Incompleteness of WL's Ministry". I certainly believe that this discussion merits a thread of its own. I will simply put forth the hypothesis that a close reading of The Collected Works of Watchman Nee reveals a discernable shift from the "early Nee" of the 1920's and 1930's to the "later Nee" of the late 1940's and early 1950's. May a profitable discussion concerning whether or not this hypothesis has any merit begin!

From UntoHim:

Anybody who has followed my little act over the years knows that I would consider the ministry of Witness Lee something far, far worse then "incomplete". Nevertheless, I will try to contain myself (just on this thread though )

Firstly, I think we should keep in mind who or what is the origin of this rather preposterous notion that any one man can have a "complete" ministry. For the purposes of our discussions, I think this notion could be traced directly to Watchman Nee.

From Ohio:

UntoHim, I really need some support from you to accept this thought. This is the opposite of my current understanding. Can you elaborate and support it?

Dear brother Ohio,

I believe that I can provide some support for what dear brother UntoHim has stated. I am fully aware that this is a very bitter pill to swallow, as WN is so highly regarded, both inside and outside the LC. I will do my best to "tread lightly"!

You are undoubtedly familiar with WN's famous message entitled "What Are We?" spoken in January of 1934. Much less familiar to most of us are two messages given by WN on April 12, 1948, entitled "God’s Work of Recovery (1)” and “God’s Work of Recovery (2)”. The first message is very much a late 1940’s version of “What Are We?” In fact this message, just like “What Are We?”, starts out by giving the history of “The Lord’s Recovery” from Martin Luther to the “present” day, mentioning all the intermediate stages that we are familiar with: the Mennonites, the early Baptists, Madame Guyon, Zinzendorf, Darby, the Keswick Convention, Jesse Penn-Lewis, TAS, etc. One big difference between “What Are We?” and the 1948 message is that "the present truth" being recovered has advanced from “Christ as Everything” in 1934 to “The Body Life” in 1948.

With this background in mind, please compare the following two sets of excerpts. Pay particular attention to WN’s shift in attitude on two fronts: Notice that he goes from stating in 1934 that “The Little Flock” in China is basically one move of the Lord among many other equals on the Earth, to the 1948 statement that “The Little Flock” is solely responsible for “The Lord’s Recovery”. Also notice that nowhere in the 1934 speaking is "the present truth" of "Christ as Everything" ever mentioned as being the final stage of recovery, whereas in the 1948 speaking "the present truth" of the Body life is seen as most likely being the “final stage” of recovery, with nothing more to be recovered.

From “What Are We?” in 1934:

“It was not until 1934 that we realized that the centrality of everything related to God is Christ. Christ is God’s centrality and God’s universality. All of God’s plan I related to Christ. This is the truth that God is pleased to reveal to us in these days. It is also the message that we preach during this conference. This is what God showed Brother Sparks also . . . One elderly pastor, Dr. F. B. Meyer, also saw this matter . . . We need to humble and prostrate ourselves, and to deny ourselves . . . Thank God that we can know God’s “present truth” . . . Today, this testimony can be found in America, England, France, Spain, Africa, and everywhere.”

From “God’ Work of Recovery (1)” in 1948:

“Today all the responsibility of the recovery is on our shoulders. All the questions related to the recovery have to do with us. God’s work in the world, and in China in particular, depends entirely on us. The responsibility has fallen on us . . . With each step that the Lord has taken in His recovery, the content of His recovery has become richer and richer. Today it seems as if there is nothing more to be recovered. The recovery has reached the stage of the Body. Perhaps this will be the last recovery. There may be other items of recovery, but as far as we know, when we reach the recovery of the coordination of the Body and the manifestation of authority, we have reached the final recovery.”