Interesting talk about Nee/Lee/Local Church Movement by Mike Sullivan

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by aron

Nee's so-called recovered church life was a fig leaf over a power play. Once you see this, they'll have no power over you, and cannot harm you.

I just had a chance to listen to the recording. It seems to be an accurate assessment of Nee’s life and legacy. More importantly, I appreciate the honesty regarding some of Nee’s missteps, especially since it seems it was spoken to an audience who might have an affinity for Nee’s books.

Is there anything inherently wrong with appreciating Nee or recommending him? I don't think so, but at the same time, the element of his positive influence is not so cut and dry. As aron points out, there are at least some indications that Nee was after power. Do we know that was the case for certain? Of course not, but based on the various accounts I have read, speculation about his motives seems to be fair game, and it would even cause me to be weary of his teachings that are seemingly beneficial or positive.

The elements of Nee’s influence that people will always point to are things such as his focus on the inward aspect of Christian life, attempting to practice some kind of supposed early church model, or the rejection of the clergy laity system. And all of such things might seem like valid points that he made, but it's interesting to consider just where such an emphasis lead.

Just look at the LCM. A focus on the “inner life” turned into something esoteric, a weird type of subjectivity. The focus on a supposed early church model lead to an aggressive form of sectarianism. The rejection of traditional leadership structures became a void waiting to be filled by authoritarian leaders. In essence, what I am trying to say is that Nee’s emphasis on things seemingly ‘missed’ by other Christians metastasized into something far worse than any supposed mediocre state it was meant to rectify.

The LCM is the best example of what kind of fruit was produced. Most certainly, some type of positive legacy can be attributed to Nee in China. But the other side to that legacy is Lee and the LCM. I’m not so sure that these aspects of his legacy can be clearly distinguished from one another. As such, I find it hard to attribute Nee as being a person of influence.