My Testimony

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

The Local Church program is one of silence and intimidation. And the women have it worst of all, by an exponential factor.

One thing to consider, and even publicly consider in front of your husband, is why did the 'recovery' movement so prominently include women in its formative years, while today, 100 years later, no woman can function at all?

Madame Guyon, Dora Yu, Peace Wang, Ruth Lee, Margaret Barber, Miss Groves (Barber's peer), Jessie Penn-Lewis, Mary McDonough (tripartite man): all of these women played formative roles in the lives of Nee and Lee as they grew. Yet today none of them would be allowed to give a Lord's Day talk, or even teach privately.

If you ask your husband this, not in the way of confrontation or antagonism, but in a genuine quest to find an answer, he may consider. I mean, what is the answer, here? Maybe there is a good one, that I haven't come up with yet. Possible.

Just asking questions, gently and genuinely and openly, is a good start. Your husband has a logical mind, designed by God. The reflexive, don't-think-don't-ask program of the LC has suppressed it, but it is merely latent. Begin to gently poke it and it will emerge like a small green sprout in the sun.

Happy new year. May it be the year of many small beginnings. Zechariah 4:10 (NLT)

[New Beginnings]

Originally Posted by aron

One thing to consider, and even publicly consider in front of your husband, is why did the 'recovery' movement so prominently include women in its formative years, while today, 100 years later, no woman can function at all?

Madame Guyon, Dora Yu, Peace Wang, Ruth Lee, Margaret Barber, Miss Groves (Barber's peer), Jessie Penn-Lewis, Mary McDonough (tripartite man): all of these women played formative roles in the lives of Nee and Lee as they grew. Yet today none of them would be allowed to give a Lord's Day talk, or even teach privately.

If you ask your husband this, not in the way of confrontation or antagonism, but in a genuine quest to find an answer, he may consider. I mean, what is the answer, here? Maybe there is a good one, that I haven't come up with yet. Possible.

Just asking questions, gently and genuinely and openly, is a good start. Your husband has a logical mind, designed by God. The reflexive, don't-think-don't-ask program of the LC has suppressed it, but it is merely latent. Begin to gently poke it and it will emerge like a small green sprout in the sun.

Happy new year. May it be the year of many small beginnings. Zechariah 4:10 (NLT)

Forgive me for my bitterness and brutal honesty, it is bound to show through from time to time.

I know what my husband thinks of women. He learned it from his father and it was reaffirmed by the LC. I have no desire to ask him that question at the moment.

In an attempted to end on a positive note, I will say that I hope with all my heart that the Lord does save my husband for the sake of my children.

[New Beginnings]

I’m feeling thoughtful today. My bitterness had a sobering effect and my hope bubble is slowly floating back down to earth.

There is a fine line between guidance and manipulation. This leads to another fine line between submissive versus victim. Leading even further into darkness, is the inability to distinguish pain versus pleasure. Ultimately it comes down to Love versus Fear.

In reality, love is the opposite of fear. Only perfect love can cast out all fear.

When we were told to “drop our concepts and get out of our mind,” and when we were told to “die to our fallen self” to gain the Lord, we lose touch with our discerning hearts. If we simply live in denial of all the pain and fear in our lives, believing that it will all just float away and we will be in the “heavenlies,” then one day we will awake in an abysmal pit of despair.

I think I can finally say that I am thankful for my experience in the LC and my painful marriage. I needed to feel the deepest pain and fear before I could know what love is.

[aron]

Originally Posted by New Beginnings

Forgive me for my bitterness and brutal honesty, it is bound to show through from time to time.

I know what my husband thinks of women. He learned it from his father and it was reaffirmed by the LC. I have no desire to ask him that question at the moment.

Okay. But this thread has 600+ views over 10 days, if I can trust the little counter thingy... so beyond the 10 regulars on this site we can assume maybe several dozen other readers. So we can ask ourselves out loud, and allow anyone to answer, either privately or on this forum:

"Why is it that women were so instrumental in the formative years of the 'recovery' movement, but today are forbidden from exercising their God-given talents in any meaningful way?"

Yes they are probably inherently more sensitive vessels (generally speaking), and somewhat weaker physically (generally speaking) but what makes them functionally void, today? And why were they prominently functioning in God's 'recovery' move, 140, 100, and 85 years ago?

To me this leads to a logical conundrum. If women were not supposed to teach, then Nee's ministry, based so heavily on Guyon and Penn-Lewis and Barber and Yu and Wang and others, absorbed their repressed hysteria (or whatever disqualifies them), and was inherently unstable, and commensurately invalid. But if it was legitimate for them to lay the foundation-stones of Nee's programme, then why were they subsequently forbidden from going on, in any way, shape or form?

You then have the apparent incongruity of building monuments to the prophets that you stone to death, today. A Dora Yu or a Peace Wang or Ruth Lee wouldn't last one week in the system Witness Lee made; if they had any talents, and any burden, they'd be blasted for drawing others after themselves, for rebellion, etc etc. And this has continued with Maximum Brothers like BP and RK, who've done nothing but exhibit disdain for the spiritual capacity of LC sisters. I could give you quotes but won't bother.

So, can sisters function in any meaningful capacity? If no, then Watchman Nee's ministry is probably illigitimate. If yes, then what happened? Answers, please - surely one of our dozens of readers can help solve this puzzle.

[Ohio]

When we were told to “drop our concepts and get out of our mind,” and when we were told to “die to our fallen self” to gain the Lord, we lose touch with our discerning hearts. If we simply live in denial of all the pain and fear in our lives, believing that it will all just float away and we will be in the “heavenlies,” then one day we will awake in an abysmal pit of despair.

This may work for LC elders who signed up for the program, but no marital relationship can operate this way. Were these part of your marriage vows? This nonsense may operate in meetings where attendance is optional, but there is no way on earth that a marriage can exist following LC/LSM rules of behavior.

Should you sit on separate sides of the room like the meetings under Nee? What if you took your credit card clothes shopping and "got out of your mind" when selecting a wardrobe for you and the children? What if you "drop your concepts" when it came to preparing healthy meals for dinner?

I believe that when we “die to our fallen self,” often we must speak up against wrong and unhealthy things. Perhaps my questions expose how stupid and manipulative these sayings are by Lee. He himself never lived by them, in fact, when it came to his family, apparently there were few rules at all.

[New Beginnings]

Originally Posted by aron

So, can sisters function in any meaningful capacity? If no, then Watchman Nee's ministry is probably illigitimate. If yes, then what happened? Answers, please - surely one of our dozens of readers can help solve this puzzle.

Actually, I'd love to hear from our readers as well. Enlighten me.

But I do have something to say about this.

I believe that it is very true when they say that there is nothing more dangerous than a thoughtful, spiritual sister; dangerous to those who seek power and corruption that is.

I am truly grateful for all the courageous women who have gone before me and for the enlightened men who loved them. They have inspired me to find courage, seek truth, and love deeply.

And I have to add, in my opinion, what is even more dangerous than a thinking, spiritual women is a thinking, spiritual women who can write.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by New Beginnings

And I have to add, in my opinion, what is even more dangerous than a thinking, spiritual women is a thinking, spiritual women who can write.

Occasionally we have had pro-LSM-ers come to this site and begin to challenge the posters here. I think they are shocked at the responses. Their manipulations don't work here.

Of all the times I sat in meetings and watched precious brothers get shamed and humiliated for no legitimate reason, never once did another brother come to their side. To this day I still hate the fact that I also laughed when another brother was "getting it."

Have you ever read Jane Anderson's opening chapter of her book, Thread of Gold? That was a real eye-opener to me. She was shamed, abused, and humiliated, and went into decades of depression until she began to speak up and write. Perhaps you could contact her on her website above. Her story is powerful indeed. She posts as Thankful Jane on this forum, but doesn't post here as often as she once did. She has helped many sisters like yourself.

'And I have to add, in my opinion, what is even more dangerous than a thinking, spiritual women is a thinking, spiritual women who can write.'
"YES", sister to sister.
'Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.'
'Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.'
'Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.'
'Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of them is forgotten before God? But even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not therefore: ye are of more value than many sparrows.'
'Also I say unto you, Whosoever shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God:
But he that denieth me before men shall be denied before the angels of God.
And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.
And when they bring you unto the synagogues, and unto magistrates, and powers, take ye no thought how or what thing ye shall answer, or what ye shall say:
For the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what ye ought to say.'

What is even more dangerous than a thinking, spiritual women is a thinking, spiritual women who can write what Jesus said.

Dear sister, (painful).. below is what you were looking for:
'And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD.' Leviticus 18;21
An abomination that men of the (idolatry) land have done is what men of '..this blending organisation....' are doing? (sons and daughters) pass thro' the fire to 'M??A' and proclaim 'I am god' (profane the name of God).

Jesus Lord and Christ, my saviour, shed His blood for me and my children. Lord save me and my children from the abominations.
And Only one is the 'father'; that is our father which is in heaven.

And forgive me sister New beginnings, I'm exhausted. I'll continue to write all that Jesus said in the bible. Meanwhile I anticipate I won't be posting on forums.
The Lord be with you always. Amen.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

And forgive me sister New beginnings, I'm exhausted. I'll continue to write all that Jesus said in the bible. Meanwhile I anticipate I won't be posting on forums.

The Lord be with you always. Amen.

Spiritual sisters who can write are just presenting subjective assessments, no more real than anyone else's. But they're no less real than Witness Lee's subjective impressions, which I believe is what scares the blendeds to death. If word got out, and sisters started to think, and feel, and give vent to their impressions, what might follow that? The cataclysm - the deluge! The abyss!

No, light. They're afraid of the light. Because then, in the outpoured light, their own subjective impressions would be exposed for what they really are. No better than anyone else's.

[New Beginnings]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Of all the times I sat in meetings and watched precious brothers get shamed and humiliated for no legitimate reason, never once did another brother come to their side. To this day I still hate the fact that I also laughed when another brother was "getting it."

Thinking back over the 10 year friendships I had with the LC sisters, I realize they never showed genuine concern for me. Of course I never told them about my abusive home. I was too scared to speak. But I now know that my abuse was written all over my face, the way I spoke and the things I would say.

After coming together with a group non-LC Christian women just four months ago and seeing them regularly, I am beginning to learn what compassion looks like. They took one look at me and knew that I needed love. They were kind and patient with me and gently helped me begin to see the truth in my reality.

[aron]

Originally Posted by New Beginnings

Thinking back over the 10 year friendships I had with the LC sisters, I realize they never showed genuine concern for me. Of course I never told them about my abusive home. I was too scared to speak. But I now know that my abuse was written all over my face, the way I spoke and the things I would say..

They were forbidden to show compassion, or care. If they did, they'd be noted as deviants. No; to survive the LC system, you go to meetings, mouth platitudes, and go home. In the LC, shepherding and care is when you convince someone else to go to a meeting.

Originally Posted by aron

can sisters function in any meaningful capacity? If no, then Watchman Nee's ministry is probably illigitimate. If yes, then what happened? Answers, please - surely one of our dozens of readers can help solve this puzzle.

In message 12 of the recent training, Ron Kangas noted what he called the "odd spirituality" of sisters who tried to share their experiences of Christ in the meetings. I guess Jessie Penn-Lewis was exempt?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Della

In message 12 of the recent training, Ron Kangas noted what he called the "odd spirituality" of sisters who tried to share their experiences of Christ in the meetings. I guess Jessie Penn-Lewis was exempt?

In my view, there is nothing but odd spirituality in all the Recovery, including Kangas himself.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

In my view, there is nothing but odd spirituality in all the Recovery, including Kangas himself.

Or Miss Emily Fisbacher? Taught Nee charismatic / pentecostal practices. Was her spirituality odd, or no? If no, why then categorically judge, today? And if yes, then maybe that explains all the odd spirituality seen in the LC.

And why is Ron's subjective assessment of women taken quietly by the masses as equivalent to objective reality itself?

[Ohio]

If it weren’t for my mother coming and taking me to the hospital, I may not be here writing today. I was hospitalized for five days.

So sad to read this sister.

I encourage you to make Psalm 23 a part of your mind/thinking. Don't just memorize it, make it as real to you as your own address.

The last couple years have been difficult for me too, sometimes feeling even despair, so I put this Psalm in my wallet, on my wall, on my desk. Sometimes things got so difficult that even my memory failed me, so I forced my eyes to look at these verses of hope.

P.S. Please no more detailed info like "it's snowing," ages of your children, nothing to locate your city, etc. It's for your own good. LSM monitors these forums regularly. They have too many spies watching too few people. But do keep writing.

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

Or Miss Emily Fisbacher? Introduced Watchman Nee to charismatic / pentecostal practices. Was hers also an odd spirituality, or no?

Sorry, that was Elizabeth Fischbacher. Of many things, a scholar I am not.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Della

In message 12 of the recent training, Ron Kangas noted what he called the "odd spirituality" of sisters who tried to share their experiences of Christ in the meetings. I guess Jessie Penn-Lewis was exempt?

Btw, the Great Lakes Area under Titus Chu had much more respect for the sisters and their portion of Christ.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Della

In message 12 of the recent training, Ron Kangas noted what he called the "odd spirituality" of sisters who tried to share their experiences of Christ in the meetings. I guess Jessie Penn-Lewis was exempt?

In retrospect, I tend to generalize sisters as being Christ-centered who see no practical application in the LSM publications. Whereas brothers tend to be ministry-centered who see LSM publications as essential for their Christian daily living. As a result sisters may have the thought with publications being a type of sandbox for the brothers.
In localities I have met with I've observed sisters who would be present for the Lord's Table, but when the prophesying meeting began, conspicuously absent. In the Local church from 30 years ago, I benefited more from testimonies given by sisters. As it provided a picture to me as a new believer what it was to experience Christ.
In my honest opinion I believe Ron's characterization of "odd spirituality" of sisters is because it's apart from the LSM publications. In the local churches there's become an inability to receive anything not of the ministry. The reaction may be described as "deer in the headlights" followed by confusion how does this relate to the ministry?

[aron]

Originally Posted by Terry

In the local churches there's become an inability to receive anything not of the ministry. The reaction may be described as "deer in the headlights" followed by confusion how does this relate to the ministry?

If any experience isn't somehow mediated or groomed by the ministry, it's regarded with suspicion. Independence, and/or rebellion are sure to follow.

Apropos of nothing, I work in a highly technical field, and the two most relentlessly rational and highly logical people I ever met were both women. And it was no contest.

[HERn]

Originally Posted by Della

In message 12 of the recent training, Ron Kangas noted what he called the "odd spirituality" of sisters who tried to share their experiences of Christ in the meetings. I guess Jessie Penn-Lewis was exempt?

I seem to recall that in almost every sermon by RK there was some disparaging remark made about an anonymous brother or sister; one was something like the brother was ostentatious, the sister was a butterfly, the elder was like a sumo wrestler on the front row. The effect was to cause me to start reviewing the saints in my locality to try and identify the offender. This seems to be a pattern with RK and I think it is close to stirring up contention and judgement. How is this part of the so-called "God's Economy"? Oh, my bad...junior MOTAs get a free pass.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by HERn

I seem to recall that in almost every sermon by RK there was some disparaging remark made about an anonymous brother or sister; one was something like the brother was ostentatious, the sister was a butterfly, the elder was like a sumo wrestler on the front row. The effect was to cause me to start reviewing the saints in my locality to try and identify the offender. This seems to be a pattern with RK and I think it is close to stirring up contention and judgement. How is this part of the so-called "God's Economy"? Oh, my bad...junior MOTAs get a free pass.

I have noticed the same thing about RK. I have heard many messages where he referred to some anonymous person or situation that maybe somehow in his mind had become a big issue. I don't get it, because when people hear that, they naturally want to hear more details. Is he trying to stir up curiosity?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Freedom

I have noticed the same thing about RK. I have heard many messages where he referred to some anonymous person or situation that maybe somehow in his mind had become a big issue. I don't get it, because when people hear that, they naturally want to hear more details. Is he trying to stir up curiosity?

Specifically regarding Steve Isitt, I told him last night what Ron did in Ecuador on the positive side is to give Steve free advertisement to the South American brothers in attendance. Not everyone is going to take Ron's speaking as gospel. Some who have intellect will want to know "the rest of the story".

[aron]

Originally Posted by Freedom

I have noticed the same thing about RK. I have heard many messages where he referred to some anonymous person or situation that maybe somehow in his mind had become a big issue. I don't get it...

It's a power thing. I get to slap you but you can't slap me back. It's how they reinforce the social structure; otherwise known as "good odor in the church". Or, flavor; depending on how one characterises their subjective assessment.