Whistleblower

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by kumbaya

I'm glad the others recommended "Speaking the Truth in Love," I was going to suggest that. It really helped me. Even then, you'll have to dig a little deeper because John Ingalls refrains from mentioning the specific details of the grave offenses by Philip Lee. He also (and someone please offer an explanation to why if you know!) doesn't mention that the "brother" being excommunicated that the elders were undecided about- was PL.

He mentions the "grave offenses" by PL, but he's very careful not to go into the details. Obviously, we know they were serious in nature due to the fact that excommunication was on the table....

I'm just saying this to encourage you to read ALL the accounts, testimonies, and personal experiences that so many people have to offer before making a judgement. It's been a hard thing for me to do and I'm still coming to terms with the idea that the local church isn't what I thought it was.

Kumbaya, few comments here.

This post shows you have studied LC history well.

John Ingalls' account STTIL is absolutely trustworthy in every detail.

John's reluctance to expose some of the worst details PROVES that he never harbored any ill will towards Witness Lee or LSM. It also PROVES that everything written by Lee and LSM about him and others like So, Mallon, and Fung was all lies. History shows us conclusively that there never was a conspiracy to destroy Lee or LSM. What we were told about Ingalls et. al. in meetings and in the book Fermentation... was all lies.

Why? Simple. To preserve the pristine image of WL. In order to do that, he and all his accomplices at LSM had to destroy the reputations of the whistleblowers.

[kumbaya]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Kumbaya, few comments here.

This post shows you have studied LC history well.

John Ingalls' account STTIL is absolutely trustworthy in every detail.

John's reluctance to expose some of the worst details PROVES that he never harbored any ill will towards Witness Lee or LSM. It also PROVES that everything written by Lee and LSM about him and others like So, Mallon, and Fung was all lies. History shows us conclusively that there never was a conspiracy to destroy Lee or LSM. What we were told about Ingalls et. al. in meetings and in the book Fermentation... was all lies.

Why? Simple. To preserve the pristine image of WL. In order to do that, he and all his accomplices at LSM had to destroy the reputations of the whistleblowers.

I’ve spent a lot of time reading things but there’s still so much. I went from trying to prove that this was really a site just to attack and wanting to feel like it was all lies to the realization that these are people that have been hurt, like me, by the LC. Maybe not intentionally, but the mental and spiritual damage is there. I’ll be ok- but it’s important to recognize that you probably have some flawed mentalities and ways of thinking after being in such a totalist mindset, Christian or not!

I believe John Ingalls account is factual- if anything just bc I feel his spirit. And I did respect the fact that he didn’t go into the details of Philip Lee’s behavior- even though I wanted to know! You can tell he was following his conscience on that.

I just had an experience with a family member today where I realized even with the “hard evidence” of WL himself admitting that the church in Boston loaned money to his businesses and also LSM loaned money to them (basically incriminating himself), that they can’t hear it. The response was, “I’m sorry you feel that way.” It’s so incredibly frustrating. Of course, when this many people give the same account, there has to be something there! But the recording of WL is ACTUAL PROOF of illegal activity. Unless you want to claim that someone was impersonating him- I don’t see how you can overlook it!

It just made me realize the blinders that are on them.

For me, if WL had come out and apologized for the whole Daystar thing, took responsibly, and repented- that would be different. My issue with it is more the cover up, the attacks on other brothers, the lack of accountability. His response was that of a guilty person. An innocent person is an open book, ready to prove their innocence. I feel like I can rightly assume that given the decades this scandal has been covered up- if the local church leaders could prove it didn’t happen, they would! Instead, there are RECORDINGS and numerous testimonies. Which, by the way, testimonies are admissible in a court of law- yet members in the LC are told (I believe it’s from the book the “overcomers”) that anyone who says anything “negative” (with no definition on what that even means and no verses justifying this statement), is a “wrong” person. You should stay away from this “wrong” person, or you will be contaminated.

Can you believe the blatant cult mentality there? I’ll have to find the quote- I’m not exaggerating. So, what we have is a system of zero accountability, no clear picture on what it means to be negative or a wrong person- just a picture full of fear....Ultimately, no one wants to be “negative” so to call out bad behavior might make you that, make you a “wrong person,” and make other people stay away from you.

It’s apparently working-most people in my locality have started to distance themselves-even my fam.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by kumbaya

Which, by the way, testimonies are admissible in a court of law- yet members in the LC are told (I believe it’s from the book the “overcomers”) that anyone who says anything “negative” (with no definition on what that even means and no verses justifying this statement), is a “wrong” person. You should stay away from this “wrong” person, or you will be contaminated.

Can you believe the blatant cult mentality there? I’ll have to find the quote- I’m not exaggerating. So, what we have is a system of zero accountability, no clear picture on what it means to be negative or a wrong person- just a picture full of fear....Ultimately, no one wants to be “negative” so to call out bad behavior might make you that, make you a “wrong person,” and make other people stay away from you.

It’s apparently working-most people in my locality have started to distance themselves-even my fam.

This turning away is to exercise to quarantine the divisive, sectarian ones in order to protect the saints from being contaminated. The divisive ones are very contagious. Anyone who contacts them will be "infected." This would not be good for them or for others. (Elders' Training, Book 10: The Eldership and the God-Ordained Way (2), Chapter 5, Section 3)

If we realize that one who is near us is "dying" or is spreading death, we must keep ourselves away. Otherwise, if we remain near such a person, we will be contaminated by the germs of death. (Elders' Training, Book 10: The Eldership and the God-Ordained Way (2), Chapter 6, Section 13)

[aron]

Originally Posted by kumbaya

For me, if WL had come out and apologized for the whole Daystar thing, took responsibly, and repented- that would be different. My issue with it is more the cover up, the attacks on other brothers, the lack of accountability. His response was that of a guilty person. An innocent person is an open book, ready to prove their innocence. I feel like I can rightly assume that given the decades this scandal has been covered up- if the local church leaders could prove it didn’t happen, they would! Instead, there are RECORDINGS and numerous testimonies. Which, by the way, testimonies are admissible in a court of law- yet members in the LC are told (I believe it’s from the book the “overcomers”) that anyone who says anything “negative” (with no definition on what that even means and no verses justifying this statement), is a “wrong” person. You should stay away from this “wrong” person, or you will be contaminated.

Can you believe the blatant cult mentality there? I’ll have to find the quote- I’m not exaggerating. So, what we have is a system of zero accountability, no clear picture on what it means to be negative or a wrong person- just a picture full of fear....Ultimately, no one wants to be “negative” so to call out bad behavior might make you that, make you a “wrong person,” and make other people stay away from you.

It’s apparently working-most people in my locality have started to distance themselves-even my fam.

Two points:

1. The holding power of the guanxi network is fear: if you break the web of reciprocal obligations you are O.U.T. out. There is no forgiveness, no reconciliation. It's not very Christian but it's very effective!! Who ever crossed LSM leadership and got back into the network? Nobody.

2. Suppose Daystar had been a successful business, and returned a profit to its investors. It still would be wrong, because Lee used the pulpit to dun the flock for $$ for his family business. Suppose Philip had not been caught repeatedly molesting the help (even tho they were adults, because of the power disparity I don't see it as "consensual"). Suppose Philip had just been a rough unspiritual guy who was installed as 'the Office'?

John So, Manila 1990 "At that time my understanding of the office of Witness Lee, the business office of Witness Lee, was exactly what Witness Lee publicly proclaimed it to be. “It is an office to take care of his tapes, to take care of printing books, and to take care of distributing books to serve all the churches.” That was my understanding. That was really my understanding. And for some reason, there was a lot of problem in Anaheim in the home office of the Living Stream in Anaheim. And it was really at that time not so nice. The fellowship there between the churches in Orange County and the office was not very nice, and I happened to be in one of the meetings, that must be in 1982, and Witness Lee was sharing quite strongly to all the serving ones, especially regarding the Chinese work and the serving ones in the LSM office. And obviously there was a conflict between the office, which is brother Lee’s office, which is also brother Lee’s son, and many serving ones there. And brother Lee again emphasized in those meetings—He said, “Should my private cook in my house also be a spiritual person? What if I hire an unbeliever to print books, this is my business office. My printer doesn’t have to be a spiritual person. And I do have the right to hire my son to be manager of my office to take care of this business for me.” I fully agreed. At that time, I really said, “Fair enough, fair enough.”

My point is that this is still wrong. But nobody could say anything - the culture wouldn't allow it. The mantra was, we are "one", and must be "one" with leadership. This is the problem with the "oneness" church - there's no way to correct any all-too-human faults. And then when it blows up, everyone asks, "Gee, what just happened?"

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by aron

And brother Lee again emphasized in those meetings—He said, “Should my private cook in my house also be a spiritual person? What if I hire an unbeliever to print books, this is my business office. My printer doesn’t have to be a spiritual person. And I do have the right to hire my son to be manager of my office to take care of this business for me.” I fully agreed. At that time, I really said, “Fair enough, fair enough.”[/COLOR]

My point is that this is still wrong. But nobody could say anything - the culture wouldn't allow it. The mantra was, we are "one", and must be "one" with leadership. This is the problem with the "oneness" church - there's no way to correct any all-too-human faults. And then when it blows up, everyone asks, "Gee, what just happened?"

I would not have agreed. He said he was an apostle and prophet of God. He said he was a servant of God. If he had told me that this was his ministry, his office and it didn't belong to God I would never have served LSM.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I would not have agreed. He said he was an apostle and prophet of God. He said he was a servant of God. If he had told me that this was his ministry, his office and it didn't belong to God I would never have served LSM.

No one would have, because we were all persuaded it was a Levitical Service on the highest plane.

Many were asked, "why waste your time in some remote local church, when you could serve at LSM, building the body and preparing the Bride.

[Nell]

How is it possible, knowing what we know now, that testimony has been made public about Watchman Nee's immorality, that nothing changes? Then in 1978, via Max Rapoport, Philip Lee's immorality was made public, and again in 1987-88 via John Ingalls, Philip Lee's immorality was again brought to public attention. But nothing changes.Today we have first hand accounts posted on this forum by women who were abused by men in the Local Church. How is it possible that the LC rocks on in gross sin, offending the Body of Christ in the worse possible way. How is it possible that such sin continues and nothing changes?

The biggest horror to me is that Witness Lee is STILL idolized, and credited as the "Minister of the Age" and other such nonsense. What hypocrisy! Whatever growth that actually occurs in the Local Churches likely has nothing to do with "the ministry" of Witness Lee, but more to do with God's mercy on his people.

Then we have Lee’s perhaps greatest failure: his sons. He knew his sons were predators. He knew they abused the Lord's children. He knew it, but rather than deal with it, he covered their sin. Then pressured other men in the Local Church to do the same. Some of these men are leaders still in "office" today. They were rewarded with longevity in the LSM "office." How are these men not as repulsed and disgusted as John Ingalls described in, Speaking the Truth in Love? Ray and Benson cited the "ground of locality" teaching as reason not to deal with Philip. What do you think of the "ground of locality" teaching now?

Now sexual immorality in the Local Church has become sin as a way of life and perhaps is the "best kept secret." What do you think of the "Cover the Brothers" teaching now? We know that Benson and Ray pressured 3 Texas elders to "cover" immorality of BenM. Then, a few years later BenM seduced his brother's wife, divorced his own wife, and married his brother's wife. All under cover of Lee, Benson and Ray.

Where is the "Lord's blessing" now? You can't "cover sin" and expect the Lord to bless your meeting together. This immoral behavior is a mockery to the Lord's name, and to the Lord's Body. It's also a mockery of God's holiness, God's righteousness and God's Word.

You can't have it both ways.

Nell

[TLFisher]

All indications is wanting it both ways. At least there is no initiative nor desire for righteousness.
Here are some of the phrases I've heard over the years in the local churches regarding immorality:

• rumors
• I don't want to hear about it
• Just go on positively
• God sees no iniquity is Israel

Bottom line, "cover the brothers" is just as important as "deputy authority", "the ground of locality", etc in the local churches. Division is produced

[Steel]

Originally Posted by Nell

Now sexual immorality in the Local Church has become sin as a way of life and perhaps is the "best kept secret."..." Nell

Really, UntoHim...

You block me for posting too much and being aggressive... But allow Nell to post this unmitigated lie... Judging all who meet as the Local Chruch as holding to sexual immorality as their way of life.

Have you no sense of basic decency.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Nell

Now sexual immorality in the Local Church has become sin as a way of life and perhaps is the "best kept secret." What do you think of the "Cover the Brothers" teaching now? We know that Benson and Ray pressured 3 Texas elders to "cover" immorality of BenM. Then, a few years later BenM seduced his brother's wife, divorced his own wife, and married his brother's wife. All under cover of Lee, Benson and Ray.

I knew BenM during this time and then one day he simply disappeared from the church meeting without me hearing a word (I had moved to Odessa).

But I was clueless to his immorality, I was clueless to what was taking place in Anaheim and I would consider it very reasonable if the vast majority of saints at that time were "clueless".

I don't know where you get this idea of sexual immorality becoming a way of life in the Local Church. It certainly was not my experience.