God's economy vs Deputy authority

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Agreed. It's interesting how Lee insulated himself. He accused others of not being "perfected". Obviously that is true, because no one except God is perfect. Lee forgot to mention that he wasn't perfect as well (he did say that at the end of his life, but very generically). Of course in the LC, no one would dare to question something like that.

First let's talk about what it is to be "perfected". In the Local Churches, it's supposed to have "positive" implications. In plain English for everyone to understand, it is to verbally abuse with the expectation the recipient of your "perfecting" work will be submissive. In normal Christian fellowship brothers are spoken to as men and treated as men. In normal Christian fellowship the LC concept of "perfecting" will result in a Matthew 18:15 fellowship. Being raised in the local churches occasionally my dad would take me aside and say, "be constructive and not destructive". That being said, as an adult I tend to view myself as a nice brother with a very bad temper. I'm sure there are other brothers with my temperament who wouldn't take kindly to the LC concept of "perfecting" (verbal abuse).

When Witness Lee had his memorial service, it was video recorded and at least replayed in the locality I met with. I recall the brothers speaking regarding Witness Lee as "being perfected". Perhaps due the "shouting from the rooftops" we have been doing on this forum currently and previously on thebereans.net, the brothers have reversed their stance. At least Ron Kangas has in his visits to the NW. I have listened to Ron backtracking saying Witness Lee did make mistakes. It's much more changing their tune, than questioning what was previously uttered.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Terry

I have listened to Ron backtracking saying Witness Lee did make mistakes...

I'd be interested in hearing RK or BP utter those 4 words in sequence: "Witness Lee made mistakes". How might they frame that idea, to allow the least damage? They'd surely be wary of opening the door to examining "the apostle" WL the way that the so-called apostle examined everything else. At best I'd expect a generic statement that admits the possibility of imperfection, without any expectation to look further.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by aron

I'd be interested in hearing RK or BP utter those 4 words in sequence: "Witness Lee made mistakes". How might they frame that idea, to allow the least damage? They'd surely be wary of opening the door to examining "the apostle" WL the way that the so-called apostle examined everything else. At best I'd expect a generic statement that admits the possibility of imperfection, without any expectation to look further.

The blendeds might be willing to admit that Lee made mistakes, however, they would likely turn right back around and question our motives in asking them to admit that. All we are doing here is to offer criticism where it is due (as they do also attempt to do in their A&C journal). When they criticize, it's all fun and games. If it's directed at them or the LC, they immediately assume ulterior motives. But as was just discussed in a different thread, if the critique leads to the conclusion that their so-called "recovery" is actually degraded, then that is the worst publicity possible for them. In that respect, it's understandable why they are so afraid.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Freedom

The blendeds might be willing to admit that Lee made mistakes, however, they would likely turn right back around and question our motives in asking them to admit that.

Or they just might say, sure brother Lee has made mistakes. Nobody's perfect.
Yet that is quite the reversal what was being spoken by the blendeds when brother Lee passed away in 1997....that being, he was perfected.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Terry

Or they just might say, sure brother Lee has made mistakes. Nobody's perfect.
Yet that is quite the reversal what was being spoken by the blendeds when brother Lee passed away in 1997....that being, he was perfected.

The LC strategy is that they pay lip service what everyone wants to hear, that is, that no one is perfect, but their action speak otherwise. Just try telling a LC leader that he's wrong and see what happens.

Consider the following two statements Philip Lin made in Sacrifice and Sail On:

When I wrote this book, I was very cautious and faithful. The Holy Spirit strictly controlled me not to mold Witness Lee into a so-called “perfect person.”...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The project was completed in June 1976, then he taught us what kind of furniture to buy and where to put it. Sometimes we tried to be smart in placing furniture, bookshelves, wall paintings, and hanging scrolls. When he came to check what we did, he would find something inappropriate, then he would correct us by way of educating us. I remember one day after we hung a wall painting, he came and looked at it, and he felt that the height was wrong. Then he corrected us and taught us, and he said that when hanging a wall painting the focus point of the object should be about ten to fifteen degrees above the slant line of sight . When we followed his instructions, we always found that his way was just right...

At the beginning of his book, Philip Lin states that he won't be portraying Lee as being "perfect". Maybe that is meant to get everyone to let their guard down. Then later on in the book there is his description regarding Lee's absolute authority in regards to even the small things like arranging furniture and hanging pictures. Does that present a view of "imperfect Lee" or "always-right deputy-authority Lee"? They can pay lip service to whatever they want, but I think it's pretty clear how they regard Lee.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Then later on in the book there is his description regarding Lee's absolute authority in regards to even the small things like arranging furniture and hanging pictures. Does that present a view of "imperfect Lee" or "always-right deputy-authority Lee"?

Just as I would tend to take a carpenter as an authority in remodeling work, it could be Lee had a hidden skill as an interior designer. If that's the case, I would say Lee was an authority in furniture arrangement and hanging pictures.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Terry

Just as I would tend to take a carpenter as an authority in remodeling work, it could be Lee had a hidden skill as an interior designer. If that's the case, I would say Lee was an authority in furniture arrangement and hanging pictures.

If Lee's apprentices weren't allowed even the freedom to hang a picture on their own, it is indicative of a extremely high level of control. As a side note, it seems that Lee was thought to be an expert on every matter including interior decorating and running businesses. It's no wonder mottos came about such as: "We don’t even need to think; we just do what we are told." In this kind of setting, how could Lee have been viewed as anything less than perfect? In Lin's own words "we always found that his way was just right." No matter what any LCers admit about Lee making mistakes, that is not how he is really viewed. He is viewed on the level of a deity, an infallible god-man.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Freedom

At the beginning of his book, Philip Lin states that he won't be portraying Lee as being "perfect". Maybe that is meant to get everyone to let their guard down. Then later on in the book there is his description regarding Lee's absolute authority in regards to even the small things like arranging furniture and hanging pictures. Does that present a view of "imperfect Lee" or "always-right deputy-authority Lee"? They can pay lip service to whatever they want, but I think it's pretty clear how they regard Lee.

The Blendeds were in a conundrum at Lee's passing, with the "raptured or martyred" theory. Watchman Nee of course was martyred (in Blended lore) so he made the grade. Fully sanctified, Body Soul and Spirit. But what of Lee? Not raptured, or martyred? 1,000 years in a holding room? A big problem in this culture if your leader isn't up to God's standard. Lee being held as "perfected" was a way around that. Then he wouldn't need a "summer school" to finish the transformation process. Therefore according to his acolytes he'd run his course, and a crown of glory surely waited for him.

In this mindset, if the Deputy God (DG) is at imperfect, then the whole system, the whole conceptual edifice of God's current move and speaking may be threatened. The fabled 'God's New Move' might really be an old move of men, with a coat of white paint. Therefore Lee, by position as DG, simply had to be supreme everything. Recognition of imperfection anywhere could threaten the perception of functional perfection everywhere: teachings, interpretations, and leadings.

Viewing the Asian-centric cultural imperative, it seems that authority of the Maximum Leader must be unchallenged for social harmony to prevail. Whether it was the Emperor of the Han dynasty, or Chairman Mao of the Red Guards, or the apostle of the age, the humble bondslave of Christ Witness Lee, the DG must always be right - the good of the Collective (read: the church) demands it. For example, even 40 years after his death, if you criticize Chairman Mao publicly you'll lose your job in the PRC. Social order demands the exaltation and perfection of the DG; here, scripture must yield to culture, even in the supposedly normal, biblical church life.