Article: Nee's ecclesiology

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by aron

Nee's ecclesiology is not followed by Lee's Local Church movement. Nee said there should be no "hidden strings" extra-locally. Tell that to the Christians on Campus groups, who say, "Oh, we are just Christians from various backgrounds, meeting as the church." Yeah, right - no hidden strings?

Actually, I think this is something Lee said (which makes it all the more ironic). This is what I found:

There may be a Christian group that has no particular name, no particular fellowship, and no particular teaching. Their fellowship is universal, not isolated, and they do not have a separate administration. Although they pass all these tests, do not be quick to say that they are a true local church. It is still possible that this group has a hidden connection with another organization. They are like a kite in the air: someone on the ground is holding the string. How high the kite flies does not depend upon the kite; it depends upon the one holding the string... One group said, “We are exactly the same as you. We have no particular name, particular teaching, or particular fellowship. Our fellowship is universal, and we do not insist upon having a separate administration.” When we heard this, we thought it was wonderful. However, we eventually learned that this group was connected to an organization in England. The kite was flying in China, but the one who held the string was in England.

Witness Lee, Young People's Training, 194-195

Notice the last sentence in the excerpt. Allow me to modify it. The kite was flying in (insert locality), but the one who held the string was in Anaheim. Lee's hypocrisy would be funny if it weren't so sad. The LC is probably one of the worst offenders when it comes to hidden connections. There's LSM, DCP, BFA, Christians on Campus, etc, etc. I guess if Lee spoke against hidden connections, that would mean LCers believe there are none in the LC, even if it is blatantly obvious. Oh well, some people are truly delusional.