My Views and Stance on The Recovery

[OBW]

Originally Posted by alwayslearning

I agree. The idea that Christians are or should be a block politically flies in the face of on-the-ground reality. Some Christians act as if Jesus is a white suburbanite who votes Republican in every election and if you're a real Christian you would too. Reality is many sincere Christians vote Democrat, have nuanced views on complex social issues, etc.

But suppose Haggard was just a pastor who occasionally taught against homosexual behavior (or any other sin) while expounding Scripture and then it was found out he was engaging in such behavior himself. If he genuinely repents and ends the behavior how should the church relate to him thereafter?

How? Very differently than before. He should be welcomed back as a brother, just as Paul directed the Corinthians to welcome the brother who was excommunicated per the first letter.

But his position of ministry can never be the same. Maybe be part of a ministry to those struggle with their demons. Maybe become part of the Celebrate Recovery or other nuanced 12-step program for true Christian healing. But not as the head of a mega-church (or even a small church). His life is different.

I can't find verses to support my position, but it is how I piece the various texts on the subject together. And without something that definitively points me in a different direction, that is where I feel I must stand.

Or to rephrase, "it seems good to me and to the Holy Spirit (I think)." And just like the original version of that statement, it is subject to review and revisit.

[Cal]

I think if somebody has a fall like Haggard's, he or she needs to spend at least 10 years just being a servant, maybe longer. I agree, guys. This guy has no business pretending to be a minister right now. He should have humbled himself and gone to the desert to be a sheep herder for an expended period, serving humbly sweeping floors in a little church somewhere. I'm not saying penance. I'm saying proving himself. The guy has not been tested.

[countmeworthy]

Originally Posted by Igzy

I think if somebody has a fall like Haggard's, he or she needs to spend at least 10 years just being a servant, maybe longer. I agree, guys. This guy has no business pretending to be a minister right now. He should have humbled himself and gone to the desert to be a sheep herder for an expended period, serving humbly sweeping floors in a little church somewhere. I'm not saying penance. I'm saying proving himself. The guy has not been tested.

But if his associates welcomed him back because he has gone through therapy & 'cured'...and knows how to run a church business, then, "Welcome Back Kotter! We missed ya".

Isn't this what Lee did with Phillip & Timothy? (not sure about Timothy btw) Lee trusted Phillip with the church business 'cause he knew how to run it.

And thus my comment:

A close look at The LSM reveals it is no different than any other church organization.

Carol

[OBW]

And I still disagree with . . .

A close look at The LSM reveals it is no different than any other church organization.

. . . because it looks at the splashy errors that hit the news and banishes every other organization to the same status and fate.

But I see may church organizations, from small to large that are faithfully exhibiting their love of God and neighbor even as they hunger and thirst for righteousness.

It's the "any other" part of the statement that is problematic. When I see the results of a Ted Haggard, Jimmy Swaggert, Robert Tilton, Jim Bakker . . . and Lee and his miscreant sons . . . it hurts because those are not the norm. They are the exception. And they (excluding the LSM) got big enough to be observed in a big way. But the number of churches and their preachers, from very small to even other "megas," that are not like that screams at the injustice of calling them all "just like the LSM" or "just like Bakker" and his prosperity gospel ministry.

It just comes off (to me) sounding like Lee was right that everything in Christianity is terrible, and now we see that the LRC/LSM is too. They've got (drum roll, please) . . . clergy!! (and guess what, so does the LRC/LSM.) And rather than turning away from it and back to the way, we continue to follow his errors as we declare the LRC/LSM to just join the rest of Christianity in some quagmire.

Lee was a huckster. But we are still quoting his lyrics day after day. We declare that he was right about everything except his miscreant sons. We evidently want him to be right about everything, and when it turns out that his organization stinks, we declare that it is "just like every other church organization."

I'm offending plenty of people now. And there will be a few private push-backs (if history repeats itself).

But we know we are smarter and more spiritual than all those who went before us for the past 2,000 years. They all got it wrong (well, maybe except a very select few that virtually no one ever heard of) and we got it right.

Well, sort of. Right enough to create a fourth God. And learn how to walk in backward to cover the gross sins of our leaders.

Actually, the real error is that, despite the love we had (and still have) for one another, and the good times we had in the early days, the thing that was off track is more likely to have been the LRC than the bulk of Christianity. Might have even been more off than the RCC in some ways.

But we are still dissecting Christianity through the microscope Lee gave us as we allow specific miscreants — the exceptions — color the whole thing as "just like . . . ."

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

It's the "any other" part of the statement that is problematic. When I see the results of a Ted Haggard, Jimmy Swaggert, Robert Tilton, Jim Bakker . . . and Lee and his miscreant sons . . . it hurts because those are not the norm. They are the exception.

What is particularly disgusting to me transpired in the Spring of 1987. As all the bad press about Swaggert and Bakker was splashed across the daily headlines, I was en route to Taipei to participate in "God's up-to-date move on earth to evangelize the whole earth in the new way." The ugly scandals with Swaggert and Bakker served as the black backdrop for God's "holy, righteous, and shining work at LSM/FTTT." Or so I thought. And so I was told. Little did I know of Phillip Lee's hanky-panky at the same time!

At least Swaggert had the decency of finding a nondescript motel. Philip Lee was using the corner office at LSM headquarters.

[alwayslearning]

Originally Posted by Ohio

...I was en route to Taipei to participate in "God's up-to-date move on earth to evangelize the whole earth in the new way." The ugly scandals with Swaggert and Bakker served as the black backdrop for God's "holy, righteous, and shining work at LSM/FTTT." Or so I thought. And so I was told. Little did I know of Phillip Lee's hanky-panky at the same time!

The premise of the LC system requires a black backdrop. If Witness Lee cannot paint Christianity as the big bad whore then who needs the "The Recovery" - that remnant group of God's super special people who see the light while other Christians languish in darkness? But if you market yourself this way you also have to have a culture of cover-up to go along with it otherwise people will find out you're nothing special and you'll lose your main selling point.

Interestingly enough Lee never said the LC system, himself or Watchman Nee didn't have problems. What he did say is: he chose to ignore them or cover them up. He publicly promoted verbally and in print John So and John Ingalls as pillars in the church and said one their secrets of success was they ate the chicken (of his ministry) but ignored the bones. Until...the bones became so big they couldn't ignore them anymore because they were choking. And then Lee immediately changed his tune and said...they changed like Demas in the NT (2 Tim 4:10) i.e. the one who forsook Paul because he loved the world.

Put other way James Barber called Philip Lee and his antics the "fly in the ointment". Now most people would think: Let's just remove the fly from the ointment! Simple huh? But Lee's weird MO was: Let's merrily drink the ointment with the fly in it and never discuss the fly and the problems it creates.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by alwayslearning

Interestingly enough Lee never said the LC system, himself or Watchman Nee didn't have problems. What he did say is: he chose to ignore them or cover them up. He publicly promoted verbally and in print John So and John Ingalls as pillars in the church and said one their secrets of success was they ate the chicken (of his ministry) but ignored the bones. Until...the bones became so big they couldn't ignore them anymore because they were choking. And then Lee immediately changed his tune and said...they changed like Demas in the NT (2 Tim 4:10) i.e. the one who forsook Paul because he loved the world.

I heard that "eat the meat, not the feathers and bones" analogy for years, and as a guiding principle, I agree with it. Every minister is entitled to flaws, shortcomings ("warts" as ole Speakers Corner would say), and a bad kid, or two. If that's all there was, then this forum prolly would not exist, at least not for me.

But it never was about flaws and shortcomings. It was about covering up criminal activity. It was about lots of God's children getting hurt. It was about smearing the reputations of godly men who spoke their conscience on behalf of others, calling them rebellious lepers. What other ministries had regular "storms" like we had every 5 or 10 years since the beginning?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by alwayslearning

He publicly promoted verbally and in print John So and John Ingalls as pillars in the church and said one their secrets of success was they ate the chicken (of his ministry) but ignored the bones. Until...the bones became so big they couldn't ignore them anymore because they were choking. And then Lee immediately changed his tune

As easy as it was to applaud brothers in print, it was just as easy for LSM to edit their names out of print.