The Asian Mind/The Western Mind

[UntoHim]

Drake, my friend, you are still dodging the crux of the matter.

You have called aron's claims "outrageous". What is outrageous is your dismissive and back-handed comment about him being a "credible resource anecdotally". "Anecdotally"? For years you have played the "bitter ex member" card again and again and again. It's your answer for every claim and challenge against Witness Lee and the religion he invented. (and no, you haven't used this exact term...yet...but your headed that way...you always do)

Look, I personally couldn't care less about quanxi or the quanxi network...it's TMI to me. (I'm not dissing aron...just starting from here to make a point) Most of us don't need any in-depth studies about Asian cultural norms to know for a fact that the Local Church of Witness Lee is steeped in Chinese/Asian culture and has been since the beginnings. Insiders know this. Many outsiders know this. Even you're buddy Hank Hanegraaff called the Local Church "a Chinese interpretation of Christianity" (paraphrase). I believe this is really all that aron is saying. Sure, he is embellishing, which is a totally legitimate argumentative tool as far as I'm concerned (after all, it's pretty much all that Witness Lee ever did!)

So you admit that Lee and the movement are affected by Asian culture. Good. So what's the problem?
-

[Drake]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Drake, my friend, you are still dodging the crux of the matter. ....
....So you admit that Lee and the movement are affected by Asian culture. Good. So what's the problem?

Ok. Here is the problem, UntoHim, since you asked.

aron has a free reign in this forum to leverage stereotypes about Asian culture because Brother Lee was Chinese by birth. He gets a free pass, he gets kudos, the crowd roars its approval. Good for him, he has his audience. This isn't his first rodeo act.

However, I am almost a 95% confident that if he were using, in a similar fashion, common stereotypes about African Americans or Latinos or Jews that you would exercise more guidance over him or anyone else who did that. It is not just negative stereotypes that impugn a persons character or motives. Any stereotype about Asians or otherwise can be used in a negative way. Aron is not lightheartedly talking about eating sea cucumbers. nor is he valuing diversity of cultures, and I'm not asking him to,, or you or anyone else to either ..... but in how he uses Asian and Chinese culture to make his points in this forum.. well, the subtlety is not lost.... at least on me

Drake

[aron]

Originally Posted by Drake

aron has a free reign in this forum to leverage stereotypes about Asian culture because Brother Lee was Chinese by birth.

I'm not against Chinese culture, and apologize for occasionally being too caustic in my remarks. I'm rather trying to note the abject failure of taking Chinese (descriptive) culture and making it a universal (prescriptive) culture. If this culture gave a one-for-one analog of heaven that would be one thing, but it doesn't. . . it's a product of the fall, same as any other. And the issue, in the case of the LC, is tragically clear. Earlier I used the word "nutty" to describe what I see. I don't mean Chinese culture is nutty, but that universal imposition of Chinese cultural norms is nutty. The results speak for themselves.

Originally Posted by Trapped

I realized when at least half of the church in any given locality is female, how can their specific needs be met when no female can be in any position of responsibility and none of their words, feelings, or sense carries any weight in any matters concerning the church being fellowshipped?

For instance, how do they feel when reading about Ruth Lee in the LSM tome on Nee ("A Seer of the Divine Revelation"), that she exercised considerable editorial power in Nee's publication work for decades, while knowing that they'd be denied the same opportunity today simply because they're female? How do they feel about this glaring discrepancy with teaching and actual practice? Or have their feelings been conditioned or programmed away (i.e. 'training')? And what happens to your walk with the Lord when your conscience is so compromised?

Originally Posted by Ohio

Regarding Chinese customs, there is a reason that Chinese dynasties went back 5 millennia. No other culture on earth has the ingredients which would allow this to happen. We could make a case for the "Nee dynasty" in China, and the "Lee dynasty" in Taiwan and the US. This whole MOTA characterization is both a guise and a proof of this.

In the Nee dynasty, Ruth Lee could exercise strong editorial duties because her skill set served Nee's purpose. In the Lee dynasty, Ruth Lee (or any other woman) could never do this because "women can't teach - the Bible says so". And we all pretend not to notice the glaring discrepancy between Lee's teaching and Nee's experience. Same goes for Barber, Guyon, Penn-Lewis, MacDonough, Fischbacher, etc. . . my point has been, who would want to be conditioned or programmed (e.g., "Full-Time Training") by such a group?

[Drake]

Originally Posted by aron

I'm not against Chinese culture, and apologize for occasionally being too caustic in my remarks. I'm rather trying to note the abject failure of taking Chinese (descriptive) culture and making it a universal (prescriptive) culture. If this culture gave a one-for-one analog of heaven that would be one thing, but it doesn't. . . it's a product of the fall, same as any other. And the issue, in the case of the LC, is tragically clear. Earlier I used the word "nutty" to describe what I see. I don't mean Chinese culture is nutty, but that universal imposition of Chinese cultural norms is nutty.

First, let’s get something out of the way....I’m not defending Chinese culture. Nor, do I disagree that culture presents problems in the churches. It does by replacing Christ and the experience of Christ. Culture also frustrates the testimony of the one new man. In the churches this issue goes back 2000 years. Though it may be traced back to the Edenic fall, it passes through the fall at Babel. Therefore, if your contention was culture is a problem in the churches and we must guard against it, lest it become a substitute for Christ, lest it damage the testimony that Christ is all and in all, then I would have agreed.

But, that is not what you are saying or implying.

What you said by way of example of Asian culture in the churches, something you “witnessed” firsthand between WL and TC, is that abuse and mistreatment by leaders results in compliance by subordinates. I said that was outrageous. There is no credible evidence that such a behavior is unique to Asian culture nor is it a practice or norm in the local churches. If you detected anything of deference between Brother Lee and Brother Titus it based on the latter regarding the former as a spiritual father. That is not Asian, that is New Testament (1 Corinthians 4:15). Neither is it abuse and mistreatment for a spiritual father to speak frankly to a spiritual son and shepherd him. My birth father said things to me that he never said to my friends. He also disciplined me out of love. That is neither abuse or mistreatment. In defense of your argument you cited, I suppose as proof that Asian culture has unique things in it, the “lose face” concept. Well, no one in any culture likes to lose face so that does not add any credibility to your argument. Every culture has certain characteristics, that is what makes them distinct, and those cultural things can be a frustration to the Lord. Being cognizant of them helps us to drop them in practice to be one with other members in the Body though they be of a different background and to take Christ in every situation.

Now, you suggested as a result of your constructs discussed above, now shown to be misguided and erroneous all, that the local churches are culturally Asian or Chinese. First, the ecclesiology of the local churches is not from China, it is from the New Testament. Second, the center is Christ and the mission is the building of the Body that Christ may be all and in all. That is not Asian. The practices are not Chinese either, they are lifted from the New Testament too. Imagine that. If you disagree with any of that then you could make your case from the Bible because that is their source. As you consider that, consider this as well. Are Protestant Christians following German culture because Luther was born German? Are the truths in the Bible revealed to the Brethren based on British culture? Is the practice of meeting in brotherly love Moravian? Throughout history God has moved through men and women with varied backgrounds and cultures to accomplish His purpose as He wills.

I would be glad to debate each and any of those with you. Instead you take the anecdotal path which goes something like this..... Asians abuse and mistreat others to gain their compliance, Brother Lee was Asian and was Brother Titus, Titus was compliant so he must have been abused and mistreated by Brother Lee. Brother Lee was born Chinese so as the leader in the Lords recovery he imposed his culture on the local churches, for proof see the Titus compliance example. What was really Chinese culture was presented as divine and so the local churches are really just Chinese culture masquerading as a Christian group. Oh, and just be clear, I also have nothing against Asians or Chinese.

Feel free to clarify if I missed something but that is what I hear you say.

Drake

[aron]

Originally Posted by Drake

What you said by way of example of Asian culture in the churches, something you “witnessed” firsthand between WL and TC, is that abuse and mistreatment by leaders results in compliance by subordinates. I said that was outrageous. There is no credible evidence that such a behavior is unique to Asian culture nor is it a practice or norm in the local churches. If you detected anything of deference between Brother Lee and Brother Titus it based on the latter regarding the former as a spiritual father.

Ohio made a comment based on much observation of Chu vis-à-vis leaders in Anaheim, starting with Lee and continuing after. I said the pattern he witnessed (abuse, followed by either compliance or 'rebellion') was shaped by Asian culture. I had experienced watching Chu 'lose face' with Lee and surmised that what I had seen and what Ohio was testifying were similar. I had one independent data point, he had numerous.

Here is what I witnessed: in a meeting, the "senior brothers" sat in a section to Witness Lee's left. (probably some were on his right as well, but I remember my strong impression was that the more "august" members of Lee's cohort were on his left). Lee was holding forth on "the new way" how to gain and shepherd new ones, and suddenly he stopped, looked toward his left, and said sharply, "Brother Titus, is this how it's being done in Cleveland?"

Chu stood up solemnly, looked straight ahead, and said, "I am ashamed to admit that this is not how it's being done in Cleveland", then stiffly sat down. Lee turned back and continued his message.

To me that looked like public shaming and quasi-formal or ritualistic 'losing face'. Maybe your conclusions are different. You can couch it in as many spiritual platitudes as you want. "Building the Body" and "brotherly love" and "shepherding". I saw what I saw, and have my opinion. You have yours.

[Drake]

-2 aron

Right. You are drawing a conclusion from a single personal data point as you say. All other data points are hearsay, not firsthand, at least from your perspective.

Shaming must be part of American culture too because I saw on more than one occasion managers challenge their subordinates in public whether they had accomplished their goals. That wasn’t hearsay either, I really saw it firsthand.

But wait, on another occasion I witnessed a manager criticize his employee publicly... they were Italian so shaming must be Italian...

Shaming must be part of German culture too because history shows.... etc, etc,

I saw a Brit once....

Well, you get the picture.

Drake

[Ohio]

So you justify Lee's bad behavior claiming that he is just like everybody else.

For good reasons like this, Truthseeker should not attend the FTT!

.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

There is no credible evidence that such a behavior is unique to Asian culture nor is it a practice or norm in the local churches. If you detected anything of deference between Brother Lee and Brother Titus it based on the latter regarding the former as a spiritual father. That is not Asian, that is New Testament (1 Corinthians 4:15). Neither is it abuse and mistreatment for a spiritual father to speak frankly to a spiritual son and shepherd him. My birth father said things to me that he never said to my friends. He also disciplined me out of love. That is neither abuse or mistreatment.

What kind of father, spiritual or biological, would use public shaming and humiliation to "discipline" his son?

That is not Asian, German, or American -- that is just wrong! Let's call it what it really is -- the Bully Pulpit.

Regardless of how Drake likes to spin this, LC leaders (from M.E. Barber to Nee to Lee to TC to whoever) regularly used public shaming for one reason -- to continually remind their followers who is in charge. It's goal, pure and simple, is the maintenance of power. That may be fine, even necessary, in the military, but has no place in the church, which is His body.

Jesus Himself, when He saw this behavior among His disciples, nipped it in the bud. He warned them that they should never "rule as the Gentiles do." (Matt 20.25; Mark 10.42; Luke 22.25) The LCM not only did not get this memo, they built it up into their definitive practice.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

What kind of father, spiritual or biological, would use public shaming and humiliation to "discipline" his son?

That is not Asian, German, or American -- that is just wrong! Let's call it what it really is -- the Bully Pulpit.

Regardless of how Drake likes to spin this, LC leaders (from M.E. Barber to Nee to Lee to TC to whoever) regularly used public shaming for one reason -- to continually remind their followers who is in charge. It's goal, pure and simple, is the maintenance of power. That may be fine, even necessary, in the military, but has no place in the church, which is His body.

Jesus Himself, when He saw this behavior among His disciples, nipped it in the bud. He warned them that they should never "rule as the Gentiles do." (Matt 20.25; Mark 10.42; Luke 22.25) The LCM not only did not get this memo, they built it up into their definitive practice.

I too strongly question the use of public shaming. What is its intended purpose - to build up the person in love? If so, this is hard to see what are the loving results from using this method. Rather, it appears like a public trial, where the one admonishing pretty much becomes judge, jury and executioner.

During leadership training, we tell our business clients, "Praise in public; Discipline (these days we actually say "coach") in private." To do otherwise is a fear based tactic which will likely just produce short-term results. Disciplining in public does little more than build the ego at the expense of the other person - again, short term thinking. Definitely NOT the servant leadership model we see in Christ!

I was speaking with a brother over dinner last night about how Bill Freeman received the boot from the LC. I was told that in 1986 he was called to southern Cal and given a chair in the middle of the room, where he was ringed by a large group of elders. They proceeded to accuse him of various things. According to what I heard he didn't reply much. Right after that, he left the LC, and a few years later the Scottsdale church was formed.

I suppose in this instance it was not one person acting as judge, jury and executioner - but was WL actually orchestrating the whole thing?

(I'm not sure what the accusations were about, but I suppose they were around two main things: Bill's ministry being independent of LSM, and possibly also around his wife's "nonproductive" activities. I plan to ask about this tomorrow and will report - unless someone already knows the answer . . .)

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I too strongly question the use of public shaming. What is its intended purpose - to build up the person in love? If so, this is hard to see what are the loving results from using this method. Rather, it appears like a public trial, where the one admonishing pretty much becomes judge, jury and executioner.

Read this story carefully by a long-time former elder and co-worker Don Rutledge, who posted as Hope. (Btw, John So was a gifted brother who migrated to Germany, which became very fruitful for TLR until they discovered corruption at LSM.) Notice the short-term "gain" and long-term "loss."

I have little doubt that [James Barber] would have supported the quarantine [of Titus Chu.] He was not bound by conscience to any of the brothers. For example, around 1978, he threw John So and I under the bus.

Here is the story. The LSM office had seemly come out of nowhere and began setting the direction for the individual local churches. This was raising some alarm bells. The booklet, "The Beliefs and Practices" was announced after a morning training session. John So and I had scheduled a lunch that day. We both had gotten a copy and were very troubled by several matters. Not the content, but the authorship, "The Co-Workers of the Lord's Recovery." Here was an entity and group of which we had never heard. To us, the Lord's recovery was a spiritual activity originated in the third heavens at the throne of God rather than some group or organization on earth. Also who are these seemingly self anointed emissaries? In addition, we were not happy that the brothers and sisters could just hand someone an official publication, as was promoted with the announcement of the booklet, rather than being ready to give an answer for the hope that is within them. In addition, how could you not say that we now had a head quarters which could speak for all the so called Local churches?

As we spoke and walked to the diner, other brothers began to join us, kind of like Luke chapter 24. Francis Ball, Ned Nossaman, and James Barber were with us. I am pretty sure that Dick Taylor was also there. They all agreed that they had a bothering. Francis as an elder in Anaheim prayed with WL before every meeting. He proposed that he set up a private fellowship with him after the evening session. We all agreed. James was in total agreement with John and me and expressed his desire to be in that meeting and to express his concerns to WL.

Right after the meeting James informed John So and I that WL was very upset. Francis had tipped off James. WL did not want to have a quiet private talk but chose to dress the two of us down in the hall for all to see. As soon as the meeting was over, we two were marched to the front. Chairs were rearranged. John and I set by ourselves facing WL and about 50 brothers including James Barber who set behind WL in support of him. Scores of the attendance milled around the little court room and became an audience. WL never asked us to open our concerns but immediately launched into a tirade against us and issued a general warning that if we continued to question what the office and the ministry was doing we would cause a lot of damage to the saints and we would damage ourselves. I can never forget the glare of despising we got from Ron Kangas as WL continued for about 10 minutes with the rebuke. Then he dismissed the meeting and we all went home. Was I ever in shock!!! So was John So. I was taking hospitality with Ned. On the ride home he laughed and laughed. He said this regularly happened to the elders in Orange County California.

James had that sheep eating dog look while WL defended the booklet, the LSM and warned John and I to keep silent. After that night, there were no more auras around the WL coordination for me. I determined I would never be bullied again. I still held to the vision of Christ as Life and the Oneness of the Body of Christ is a vital matter, but the personality cult was broken for me. I did backslide and allowed myself to get drawn into the lawsuit for a while. But I never jumped again when WL or one of his cadre yelled frog. I never again promoted the activities from Anaheim as something all the members in Dallas should plunge into. We begin to shepherd the church according to the need of the members. I decided to take what was helpful and leave alone what was some wild hare. Shortly after this I learned of the secret bank account of WL and LSM being run by Benson and an elder in Dallas. Yet it still took several years for my direction and loyalties to change. Whoa I am getting way ahead of myself.

But dj, I am pretty sure that James valued the favor of WL more that his relationship to John Ingalls and Bill Mallon and for sure Titus did not mean anything to him.

Hope

This story happened in the mid-to-late 70's. Anyone who reads that booklet knows it is all PR "spin."

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I too strongly question the use of public shaming. What is its intended purpose - to build up the person in love? If so, this is hard to see what are the loving results from using this method. Rather, it appears like a public trial, where the one admonishing pretty much becomes judge, jury and executioner.

During leadership training, we tell our business clients, "Praise in public; Discipline (these days we actually say "coach") in private." To do otherwise is a fear based tactic which will likely just produce short-term results. Disciplining in public does little more than build the ego at the expense of the other person - again, short term thinking. Definitely NOT the servant leadership model we see in Christ!

StG,

Couple of points on the above.

First, were you ever in a meeting with Brother Lee? Training or conference or conversed with him around a table in a small group or spoke with the man one on one? If not, then do not believe everything you hear in this forum. There is another side. I have had those opportunities and the Witness Lee in this forum is not the Witness Lee I had the pleasure to know. If Brother Lee was anywhere near like the monster folks paint him as in this forum then no one would be there.

But, I want to challenge your idea about public confrontation. Not shaming but challenging. Not purposely embarrassing someone for the sake of embarrassment but that all may learn. I will use myself as an example. A most valuable lesson and teaching I learned was from a public question and answer.. in this case, it was an exchange between Brother Lee and yours truly. It was at least as direct as the incident mentioned between Brother Lee and Brother Titus. He asked a question in a meeting and I offered an answer..... the answer was the wrong one and I knew it as soon as it left my lips. Also, at that very moment the Light went on and I had the Lord's shining. There was a little more public exchange but here is what I will share with you. I have had many wonderful experiences of Christ in my christian life and most of them in the local churches....and some of them, that one in particular, came out from a direct and frank public exchange. I am certain others learned from it, but none as much as I. And I treasure the experience of Christ I gained from it.

Immediately following this I had a discussion of a personal nature with Brother Lee.... and I can testify that he was most gracious and caring and a offered sincere and heartfelt counsel.

Yet, what does the Bible show about this? Was the Lord direct with his disciples, with Peter when he called him Satan? Was Paul too confrontational with Peter when he separated himself from the Gentiles? Was Paul shaming others in his letters to the churches, calling out certain brothers for their divisive thinking, doctrine, or practice? I do not say Paul was uncivil, slanderous, or reviling. He was civil, frank, direct, even when he administered discipline to members of a local church. In fact, I think to be silent when we should speak is playing politics and it is not Christ.

Drake

[aron]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I too strongly question the use of public shaming. What is its intended purpose - to build up the person in love? If so, this is hard to see what are the loving results from using this method. Rather, it appears like a public trial, where the one admonishing pretty much becomes judge, jury and executioner..

A whle back on this forum we were discussing the trial of Watchman Nee in the PRC. A young woman had been in the court room, and heard Nee confess to the charges, get sentenced, and hauled off to prison. The young woman later emigrated and wrote a book about her experiences in the Nee church, including the trial and what she saw and heard.

https://www.amazon.com/My-Unforgetta...e+memories+hsu

The comments on this forum were mostly like, "See! He confessed! Guilty!" My reply was, "How many trials in the PRC in the 1950s did you see someone plead not guilty, mount a defense, and get exonerated and walk free? How many?" I couldn't find any. I did some searches on the PRC criminal system... there, it's like this: the "State" is right, you're a "criminal" and are wrong. End of story. You wouldn't be accused if you weren't guilty!

My point was, and remains, that in Chinese culture that's considered "due process"; those who fight the system get worse punishment, so why fight? It's how social order is maintained. Do we in the west agree? No, but it certainly is effective. So Witness Lee was acting according to type when he summarily 'executed' some of his LC members for 'crimes' real and imagined. Matthew 18:15-20 wasn't thought of - his family or business was at stake and suddenly he was acting like a typical Chinese businessman. That fit his "normal Christian church life" model (and yes I'm punning by quoting the title of Nee's book).

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I was speaking with a brother over dinner last night about how Bill Freeman received the boot from the LC. I was told that in 1986 he was called to southern Cal and given a chair in the middle of the room, where he was ringed by a large group of elders. They proceeded to accuse him of various things. According to what I heard he didn't reply much. . .

There are quite a bunch of stories like this. The one Ohio quoted in post #55. Jane Anderson's testimony. The Rappaports. John Ingalls. Then we see the pattern repeated with Titus Chu and his underlings, with Dong Yu Lan and his followers. There's a trend here, repeated over decades, and it has clear cultural components. To those who behave like this, it's considered normal. This is why the LC is becoming increasingly Chinese: it meets their cultural expectations.