Publication Work in The Lord's Recovery aka The One Publication

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Drake

Drake> "No, it doesn't, Trapped"

The One Publication document quoted in the base note does not say anything about what the churches are restricted in reading.

No sir.

Trapped, let's examine in detail the full paragraph you quoted from to see if there is anything in that paragraph that says that. In other words, let's put that sentence above in context:

"But being restricted in the one publication does not mean, and has never meant, that individual churches are not free to produce and distribute materials for their local needs. We have always had publications like this among us, and there have generally been no problems related to these. Songbooks, local tracts, church meeting outlines, testimonies, etc., have long been produced among us without controversy. These are actually not part of the one publication among us in that they do not involve all the churches. These are publications that address local needs. Problems can be caused, however, when these local and non-permanent publications gain larger geographical status. Further, it is particularly problematic when new technologies, such as the Internet, are used to distribute these local publications. The elders should take special care to assure that what is produced for their local churches remains a local matter. Otherwise, damage may result. Although technologies now exist that permit the easy dissemination of material, we should not use these technologies at the risk of causing confusion among the saints and of damaging the one accord among the churches. The elders and saints everywhere should exercise the same caution that Brother Lee spoke of when he testified concerning the one publication in mainland China: all the saints and all the churches everywhere should similarly be restricted in one publication in the Lord’s recovery."

Trapped, in this paragraph you cited as proof that the local churches are restricted in what they can read yet there is not one statement, or a shred of a statement, not a hint, not a suggestion, not an implication, nor an innuendo... that they are being asked or told to only read Watchman Nee and Witness Lee. Rather, this paragraph, and the sentence that you lifted from this paragraph are speaking about restrictions in publication, producing a publication, disseminating publication, etc. and the reference to local churches is all about the publications they produce for local needs. That is why there is no contradiction with what Brother Lee said in the same document that whether one reads the ministry or not is up to them. That is why there is no contradiction when Brother Lee said whether one reads his writings or not does not determine whether they are a genuine local church. The One Publication document addresses publication, and it addresses the very real problem of some brothers claiming to be part of the ministry but driving their own agenda and publishing their teachings under the umbrella of the ministry. Those brothers have the right to publish their own stuff, but not under the banner of being a part of or the successor to the one ministry by their own self-ascribed determination. That would be an "uncertain sounding of the trumpet" just to close the loop on that bit.

Furthermore, you may compare in the same document what is meant by "the same caution that Brother Lee spoke of when he testified concerning the one publication in mainland China". Again, in that historical account there is nothing about what the churches in China were restricted in reading. No, it was about restriction in publication, that is, Brother Lee would not venture out on his own and publish something that Brother Nee did not review and approve of as part of that ministry. That is the example given as like for like.... that is, as it was in mainland China, where brothers could produce something as part of that ministry, at least one brother, Witness Lee, would not publish something on his own without consulting and gaining the approval of Brother Nee. As it was there, concerning how things were published so it will be here.

Hope that helps.

Drake

Drake,

Um......if the One Pub restricts what is published........that restricts what is available to be read. If I cannot publish a book, then no one can read that book.

From the One Pub: "...the ministry materials of Brother Lee and Brother Nee. These are the materials that have been used regularly in the church life in the Lord’s recovery, and these constitute the one publication among us today."

"Used" means "read", Drake. If the one publication is what is regularly read by all the saints and all the churches, and everyone else is to be restricted in NOT publishing.......then all the saints and churches are left to only read Nee and Lee. Don't take that to mean that I'm saying they can't read whatever they want in their own home; I've already covered that. I am talking about on a widespread shared scale, not individuals.

Drake, I am not unsympathetic to LSMs concerns over what may have been legitimate problems caused by DYL, etc, although I do not know many of the gory details of the whole situation. I personally cannot fault LSM or those affiliated for putting out a statement "discrediting" anyone who tries to put out publications that falsely claim they are a continued representation of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee's ministry. If WL did not "appoint" someone as a continuation of his own personal ministry (and my personal belief is that he did not) then, of course, it is not okay for anyone to publish as if they are such a continuation. If I wrote a bestseller and someone else wrote a sequel to it and tried to pass off that I had designated them to do so when I didn't, I would have a problem. Given that LSM's stated purpose is to publish WN and WL, and that purpose hasn't changed, it follows that anyone else, DYL or otherwise, is not part of their publication.

But unfortunately, the One Pub failed miserably, and I mean miserably, at getting that point across, if indeed that is the point.

I'd like to propose a revised version of the Publication Work in the Lord's Recovery. It's not perfect or all-encompassing, but here goes:

----
There are some brothers among us who are putting out their own publications under the claim that they are a continuation of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee's ministry. This is a false claim. Before his passing, brother Lee did not appoint any brother as his continuation and did not authorize further publication of his ministry by any person or entity besides LSM. LSM is the sole publisher of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee's books, and any material published by other saints are not LSM publications.

While we all have a basic right to publish, anyone among us who publishes should not do so claiming affiliation with LSM, Watchman Nee, or Witness Lee as part of their publication. In addition, they should not use any such affiliation as a basis for promotion of their own work. Portions or excerpts of brother Nee or Lee's ministry may not be quoted or referenced without receiving explicit written permission from LSM to do so, and should only be done in a manner consistent with existing copyright laws. Furthermore, any saint who publishes should find an independent publishing company to do so.

As with any spiritual nourishment we take in, each saint should discern for themselves the benefit and truth found in any published work. Any Christian publication, whether put out by LSM, by a saint in the Lord's recovery, or by another Christian author, should be held to the light of the truth in the word. The credence given to any publication should be based on the light received, its accuracy according to the truth, and whether it brings you to know and love the Lord Jesus in a deeper way. The publication of divine truths is a serious and weighty matter. We recommend that any saint desiring to publish should not do so lightly or without much prayer before the Lord and fellowship with other believers.
----

While they certainly can make clear that anyone who publishes is not part of the one publication, the co-workers have no business restricting anyone from publishing if they are led by the Lord to publish, or restricting the scope of that publication. Claiming that this restriction is to be "governed by the higher vision of serving under the cross" is a shocking disrespect to the cross of Christ. If the One Pub is a reaction to DYL, it is quite a simple task to get that point across, given the brainpower behind who was probably involved in writing it, but somehow, that group of brilliant, eloquent, educated men couldn't do it.

Trapped

P.S. Ohio's points are excellent and I'd love to elaborate there too but am short on time. But goodness......if someone in a locality produces a tract that preaches the good news of the gospel, is the wide-eyed warning that "damage may result" if that tract is used in other churches really warranted? Why would something used locally that is spiritually beneficial to one locality suddenly become damaging when passed around to others? It's just ludicrous.

Also for anyone to sweepingly claim that other's publications contain "no new light or life supply" is just.......arrogance to the max. Argh!

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Trapped

..if the One Pub restricts what is published........that restricts what is available to be read. If I cannot publish a book, then no one can read that book.
These are the materials that have been used regularly in the church life in the Lord’s recovery, and these constitute the one publication among us today."
"Used" means "read", Drake.

Yes, to most people, restricting what is published is tantamount to restricting what is read. And yes, to anyone not from Planet Lee, "used" does mean "read". But for followers of Witness Lee, and his Swiss cheese logic, up can also be down, square pegs can fit into round holes and "do what I say, not what I do" is the order of the day.

"One publication among us today" may seem somewhat innocuous to the uninformed, but in the Local Church of Witness Lee it is well-understood and taken as seriously as a heart attack. There is a very good reason why Lee is to be considered as "The One Minister with The One Ministry for The Age"...because that's exactly how he presented himself when he was alive, and this is how he is presented by The Blended Brothers "among us today".
-

[awareness]

Of course One Publication is a joke. Anyone can publish. But it's not a joke in the the recovery movement. It means only LSM publications can be used and read in the LC.

Like the Watchtower to the JW's ... and the book of Mormon to the LDS.

[Weighingin]

Originally Posted by awareness

Of course One Publication is a joke. Anyone can publish. But it's not a joke in the the recovery movement. It means only LSM publications can be used and read in the LC.

Like the Watchtower to the JW's ... and the book of Mormon to the LDS.

Looking at that writing years ago, I got the impression there's only one publication and if you want to write something, you must clear it with the LSM.
It seems we all understand that you can't publish something attributing that it is the LSM without consultation with them.
But since this is considered the ministry of the age, God's authority comes from he who can interpret the word, etc, any other publishing can be considered
competition with the one ministry based on ambition.
I have a compound question, did Titus and Dong just publish under their own name or did they claim it was with the LSM or "the one ministry of the age."
Any Christian should be able to write and publish, as long as proper accreditation is given to any sources. It seems the issues came up as to how they were promoted and distributed.
On a side note, I've tried numerous times to access that "One Publication" site, it still is "403."

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Weighingin

I have a compound question, did Titus and Dong just publish under their own name or did they claim it was with the LSM or "the one ministry of the age."

Of course they published their own books, and never claimed their books were LSM.

But that never was the point. The POINT is control. Control of the LC's. Both Lee and the Blendeds viewed these two as rivals to their control, and thus must be eliminated! Regardless of collateral.

Funny thing is that both Titus and Dong did the same thing in their regions. They permitted no rivals either.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Weighingin

But since this is considered the ministry of the age, God's authority comes from he who can interpret the word, etc,"

This is interesting - "since this is considered the ministry of the age, God's authority comes from he who can interpret the word". Only the ministry of the age has the authority to interpret scripture. But I think of 1 Corinthians 14 as a contrast to this position.

26 What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up. 27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, two—or at the most three—should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. 28 If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and to God.

29 Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 30 And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31 For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. 32 The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. 33 For God is not a God of disorder but of peace—as in all the congregations of the Lord’s people. 34 Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. 35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

36 Or did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? 37 If anyone thinks they are a prophet or otherwise gifted by the Spirit, let them acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command. 38 But if anyone ignores this, they will themselves be ignored. 39 Therefore, my brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40 But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.

The LSM said that anyone exercising a revelation or a tongue or an interpretation outside of the prompting of the "ministry of the age" would bring in confusion. But Paul doesn't show this in 1 Cor 14: rather, everyone can prophesy, everyone can get revelation or tongue or interpretation. (and I don't differentiate between interpreting tongues as Paul presents it, and interpreting scripture, and [for that matter] having 'revelation'. They all require an independent action of the Holy Spirit in the believer). Each one, independently, in sequence, in good order. The Spirit of Christ reigns.

If "each of you" are doing this at the assembly level, as Paul suggests, and someone mis-aims, then the error will eventually be manifest by its fruit, and turned away (ignored, rejected) in the assemblies. There's a protection in the multiplicity of functions, expressions, disseminations. By contrast, if anyone holds themselves over the flock as a (super)apostle, and claim for their personal ministry all revelation, all tongue, all interpretation, then who else can function? And if they err, who can restrain them?

But the NT says, "each of you" has an interpretation - whether the effect of your interpretation travels or disseminates beyond the boundaries of the local assembly is the purview of the Holy Spirit, not an earthly HQ. Anaheim (for instance) doesn't control the Holy Spirit of God, nor are they the only ones obedient to the direct leading of Holy Spirit. The "ministry of the age" concept essentially shuts down the operation of the Holy Spirit, because then "each of you" only get the revelation, tongue or interpretation indirectly, from the ministry. With the ministry of the age, if anyone else functions, they're deemed competition.

Does 1 Cor 14 suggest any of this? I think not - rather its opposite.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Of course One Publication is a joke. Anyone can publish. But it's not a joke in the the recovery movement. It means only LSM publications can be used and read in the LC.

Like the Watchtower to the JW's ... and the book of Mormon to the LDS.

One characteristic of abusive sects or cults is to fetter the children of God and rob them of their liberties in Christ. Jesus came to set us free, as the Good Shepherd sets the sheep free.

In the apostolic age, it was the Judaizers who attempted to bring the liberated believers into bondage. During the Dark Ages it was the Roman Pope who did the same. Today it is insular and exclusive sects who do the same.

I grew up with the Catholic Missal. It defined the Lord's Day service for every parish on earth. Now the LC's have the Holy Word for Morning Revival published by LSM. It does the same thing.

Hi Drake, please show us one collection of churches (ie denomination) in history which has used a One Publication Policy and remained healthy in the faith. Every single one, including the Plymouth brethren, has used this policy to its own demise.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Trapped

I'd like to propose a revised version of the Publication Work in the Lord's Recovery. It's not perfect or all-encompassing, but here goes:

Trapped, Your suggestion makes some good sense, which of course means its logic will be lost on some of the very ones you are trying to convince.

Here's the thing. Any Christian group has the right to set up rules for its members. We can argue whether those rules are right or wrong in the broad sense, but that is different from arguing whether the group itself can hold such rules.

For example, a group might have a rule that men wear ties and women wear dresses to meetings. We can argue whether that in general is a "good" rule or not, but in the end you have to concede if a group wants to have such a rule that's its business.

The "Lord's Recovery" obviously has some rules that most would find odd, and we might even be able to mount arguments as to why the LR should not have such rules, but in the end its their call. The beauty of that is, if you don't want to be a member of the LR, then don't. There are plenty of groups. The vast majority of Christian groups understand this. They believe in their particular vision, but allow others the freedom to disagree with them.

Not the LR, however. They just don't think their way is better. They think all other ways are invalid and you are evil for following them. They are not content just to have their own group and follow the Lord according to their own consciences, they want to compel the consciences of others to remain in their group, to the point of grievously unethical spiritual intimidation. As Ohio said, it's about control. This is plain evil, and this is where sheep dogs like myself feel to step in.

So trying to reform the LR without addressing their core problem of serious spiritual abuse is, I'm afraid, a waste of time. If they are not going to see the problem of their major abuses they certainly are not going to see the problem with their minor ones. If they aren't bashful about threatening members with 1000 years in outer darkness for leaving God's unique move on earth and his one true ministry, aka their little sect, do you really think they are going to give a rat's rear end whether they shouldn't restrict their members from publishing?

So, in general, if you like the LR, join up and follow their rules. If you don't like the LR, then leave without a giving a second thought to their stupid threats. But don't expect them to change anything as long as their attitude is that by definition they can do no wrong. By all means warn others, but don't expect to be able to change the LR.

[Ohio]

Years ago someone commented about my former LC minister Dr. Philip Comfort saying, "perhaps our hearts in the churches needs to be enlarged." I immediately had to get a hold on my anger. After a bit, I commented, "the church loved Phil, it was the heart of TC that needed to be enlarged."

For years I heard LC teachings about trusting the Lord. Ministers were to be patterns for the church. When it comes to the ministry at LSM, there is no such thing as trusting the Lord. For decades they have operated according to fleshly wisdom, and sometimes they just employed the flesh without any wisdom at all. Just open to any of Paul's writings, and you will see endless details of healthy patterns of ministry long rejected by those at LSM. Their One Publication Policy is just the tip of the iceberg.

For example. Paul rebuked Peter (Gal 2.11) publicly in Antioch over discarded Kosher law, yet Peter later extolled "beloved brother" Paul's writings as the scripture itself. (II Peter 3.15-16) Compare this to Lee. When John Ingalls approached him privately a dozen times about his fleshly son Philip, Lee turned on him publicly to smear his reputation. Compare this also to the Blendeds. When Midwest brothers addressed their controlling ways, they quarantined them in return.

Our real pattern -- Paul -- was honest and humble, these guys are dishonest and arrogant.

[ZNPaaneah]

The bottom line is that LSM has the right to tell people whether or not they can speak (publish) in the name of LSM. They don't have the right to tell us whether or not we can speak (publish) in the name of Jesus. Their attempt to do so is weak, beggarly, and usurps the Lord's authority. Only a fool would would agree to submit themselves to this ordinance. The only one that can forbid us to speak in the name of Jesus is the Spirit (Acts 16:6).

However, if you read Acts that attempt to forbid the apostles to speak in the name of Jesus is common (Acts 4:17, 5:28), nothing new about what LSM is doing. If you want to speak the word of God you need a backbone, can't be a reed bending in the wind.

[Trapped]

While I don't disagree with the spirit of the concept that any Christian group has a right to set rules and regulations for its members, in the LCs many of the "rules" are not expressed outright, nor are they revealed up front. Many are set not in writing but through glances, looks, insinuations, comments, implications. No one coming into the church is given a list of rules that lets them know up front:

1. Don't grow a beard.
2. Jeans are rebellious.
3. Movies are evil.
4. Department stores are of the devil.
5. Don't have friends.
6. We only read one Bible version around here.
7. If you share from another Christian author too many times.....look out.
8. If you try to write something and publish it - you will be seen as a rival and are by default dead meat.
9. IF YOU GO TO ANY OTHER CHURCH YOU ARE DIVISIVE AND GOD WILL PROBABLY SEND AN ASTEROID TO CRUSH YOUR SINFUL BEING (just look at John Doe and the mac truck incident.......)

Sign here! ______________________________

No one would ever join if they knew up front what they were getting into.

If to be a member of the church you have to waive personal publication rights in deference to LSM's publication work or get quarantined......then the local churches have no leg to stand on when they try to deny people's claims that they are LSM churches. They just don't.

They can dance around all they want, but the more they write in defense of all this the worse it is. The letters they wrote to DYL speak of "rivalry"......where does any Christian group manufacture the concept of rivalry to begin with?!?! And it's all over mortal human's publications. And many go down tooth and nail defending this stuff.

I wish I could find it again, but one letter started out with a thick paragraph denigrating all other non-LC churches, and there was this one sentence that made it so crystal clear that the co-workers view "the Lord's recovery" as "the Body of Christ". Not a part of it, but THE. The sentence was full of "ones", as in "the one Body of Christ as built up by the one ministry in the one recovery work as produced by the one publication of the one minister of the age" or something like that. I was so deflated reading it.

Something I can't wrap my head around though, is that even now, I know of new ones who have "touched the church" who say very explicitly that the Lord told them to come there. Even they were prominent people in their former church, and yet the Lord led them to the local church to be a no one. And yet others like me are dissatisfied there and have lost decades of a happy life from warped misrepresentations of God and need years to recover from being there. Who can ever know what the Lord is doing.

P.S. I understand that TC and DYL apparently turned exclusionary themselves; I'm not defending what they did or really making any commentary there since I don't know the full story. The whole structure of the local churches is wrong since they are based around a man, which inherently lends itself to this kind of thing. I am fine to say that many churches were raised up by Witness Lee, that is undeniable. But the continued force-fed diet and control of all the LCs is not good. The LCs disguise this under the guise of "fellowship among the churches" but it seems to me the emphasis should be much more on fellowship among the members of the church in a given city rather than fellowship among churches in many different cities.

By this I mean they should emphasize the fellowship of the TRUE church in Anaheim (all the believers in Anaheim, regardless of where they meet or what they call themselves) rather than a tiny portion of the church in Anaheim (the LC) fellowshipping with a tiny portion of the (LC) church in Boston fellowshipping with a tiny portion of the (LC) church in Seattle, etc.. The LC's always denigrate other churches coming together as "shaking hands over the fence", but the LC's don't see that they've replaced their own fences with 20-foot cinder block walls and turrets and machine guns and a moat and drawbridge. It's asinine.

One time I talked to an elder about this very thing, and he tried to speak up how the churches emphasize "oneness". I said, "okay, but wouldn't you call it an internal oneness while we are still separated from all the other believers?" His response was, "Yes, well, you go talk to any of those other pastors out there and they don't even know the name of the pastor in the next town over!" I realized I wasn't dealing with someone with two feet on the ground. Who cares if they know the name of the pastor in the next town over? I'm more than willing to bet they know the names of other pastors in their own town, and probably are friends with them, and ask advice and have them over for lunch, which is more than we can say! The local churches are the most egregious neglecters of the actual church in their own city.

Sorry, went off topic there, that gets into the ground rather than the publication....it's all connected but I'll stop there.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Trapped

No one would ever join if they knew up front what they were getting into.

Children in "local church" families don't have choice: they're born and they're inside, at least temporarily. Those who joined 35 or 50 years ago didn't know any better. The history of control was hidden, many practices were disguised. "Oh, we just love Jesus". Then little by little "restrictions" got introduced into the programme.

Today with the internet and those who've come forward, it's clearer what one's getting into. Steve Isitt has published his investigation, Jane Anderson has told her story, John Ingalls' STTIL is available. (Note that Steve I. asked LSM leaders for permission to publish his story, they denied him the right, and 'marked' him for even asking [even tho WL had publicly requested that someone find the 'lost' ones!]).

Originally Posted by Trapped

Something I can't wrap my head around though, is that even now, I know of new ones who have "touched the church" who say very explicitly that the Lord told them to come there. Even they were prominent people in their former church, and yet the Lord led them to the local church to be a no one..

There's an interesting phenomenon in the "local churches" where they say, "Oh, you have to get the vision" of some idea or concept. Whether of the Body or the Ministry or the Church or the One New Man or God's Oracle or whatever the label is this week. The idea is that there needs to be some inner surrender (unquestioning acceptance - again, think of an infant vis-a-vis parents) and subsequent behavioural transformation that enables one to overcome the natural barriers of reticence. Somehow the human will has to be weakened.

Of course there is biblical basis for all of that. Verses abound. But what happens is that the process of surrender, obedience, and transformation gets hijacked by unscrupulous ones, wolves in sheep's clothing. It's a widespread phenomenon in religion, not limited to this group. The subjects think they're surrendering to God but they're not. They're rather surrendering to a group with its customs and peculiar relations. That is their "subjective Christ".

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Trapped

Sorry, went off topic there, that gets into the ground rather than the publication....it's all connected but I'll stop there.

The one publication is just another symptom of an extremely warped attitude.

The staunch LCers are convinced they are right. You are not going to change their minds. But your happiness or freedom should not depend on that.

I understand your frustration at wasted time. But don't waste more time trying to figure out why other people are crazy, you have enough on your plate just managing your own life. At some point you have to say "Thanks, but this is not for me," and move on. Church membership is NOT like a marriage. If our consciences are offended, we CAN vote with our feet. The LC has NO monopoly on anything. Either you believe that, or you don't. And if you don't, move on.

The bottom line is that the rest of your life starts today. I realize that separating from such a long commitment is not easy, and that you need a process of talking things out and working through it, and this board is great for that.

But you must realize you are not going to reform the LC. And for some questions you are not going to get answers for a long time. Don't waste more time in a whirlpool. By all means take advantage of these board discussions to work through things, but realize that the important thing now is fixing your life, not the LC. Take positive steps for the time you have remaining, and like the Lord did, leave their "house" to them and move on.

You might start by changing your name from "Trapped" to "Freed." Because if you believe you are trapped, you are. And if you believe you are free, you are.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Igzy

I understand your frustration at wasted time. But don't waste more time trying to figure out why other people are crazy, you have enough on your plate just managing your own life. At some point you have to say "Thanks, but this is not for me," and move on.

I respectfully disagree on two fronts. First, one must figure out what happened to truly move on. It's like a relationship - the danger is that you break off an abusive one & simply enter another. When I left the LC I went into a group where women were literally "silent in the church", because Paul had said this. Headcoverings were likewise mandatory. They didn't take a name or register with the government because, "Its not in the Bible". And they were arguably more controlling than the LC. They micromanaged lives and families with black-and-white verses.

Second, as you begin to figure things out to your own satisfaction you can help others who may be struggling with the same issues & questions. That way one's experiences are used by God to serve others (help them break off controlling and manipulative relationships). The issue proves the process - one's proved free by helping others along the path. Look at Jesus' words to Peter in Luke 22:32. See also Psa 51:12,13 - one's journey back to light is not for oneself but for others, else it's for naught.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Igzy

But you must realize you are not going to reform the LC.

I became convinced of this fact after reading Plymouth Brethren History.

They were our spiritual forebears. They also had the ground of oneness, all the riches, the MOTA Oracle, condemnation of all others, etc. . . All of the same ingredients of arrogant pride now infecting LSM. Did they ever change? No! Never! Nada! As they say.

Actually the only glimmer of hope that existed in that system was excommunication. Complete and thorough. Still, many of the excommunicated stayed in a morphed version of those who excommunicated them. Like those in the Gospels at Jesus' time, your greatest hope was in being thrown out of the synagogue.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Trapped

I'm saying they can't read whatever they want in their own home; I've already covered that. I am talking about on a widespread shared scale, not individuals.

Okay Trapped. Thanks for the clarification. Appreciate that, yet you are also aware that is a minority viewpoint in this forum. Since we agree on the freedom to read personally whatever we want then we can move forward in our conversation.

Originally Posted by Trapped

... I personally cannot fault LSM or those affiliated for putting out a statement "discrediting" anyone who tries to put out publications that falsely claim they are a continued representation of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee's ministry. If WL did not "appoint" someone as a continuation of his own personal ministry (and my personal belief is that he did not) then, of course, it is not okay for anyone to publish as if they are such a continuation. If I wrote a bestseller and someone else wrote a sequel to it and tried to pass off that I had designated them to do so when I didn't, I would have a problem. Given that LSM's stated purpose is to publish WN and WL, and that purpose hasn't changed, it follows that anyone else, DYL or otherwise, is not part of their publication.

Right! This is the key point of the One Publication document.

Originally Posted by Trapped

While they certainly can make clear that anyone who publishes is not part of the one publication, the co-workers have no business restricting anyone from publishing if they are led by the Lord to publish, or restricting the scope of that publication.

Yes, again. That was stated clearly in the One Publication document.... unless you mean that any one should be able to send their personal ministry to the local churches and no one will object. Then we still have a disagreement.

Originally Posted by Trapped

Claiming that this restriction is to be "governed by the higher vision of serving under the cross" is a shocking disrespect to the cross of Christ. If the One Pub is a reaction to DYL, it is quite a simple task to get that point across, given the brainpower behind who was probably involved in writing it, but somehow, that group of brilliant, eloquent, educated men couldn't do it.

Setting aside the snarky aspects of your point above I believe you brought up an important matter. All believers should be "governed by the higher vision of serving under the cross", shouldn't they? Since you object to the statement being made and characterize it as a "shocking disrespect to the cross of Christ" then please eleborate.... Are we not called to live a crucified life in personal things and in our service to the Lord? Practically speaking, shouldn't every post published in this forum be governed by the higher vision of serving under the cross? If not that, then what? And if you agree, then what specifically is it to serve under the cross of Christ? Why shouldn't what serving ones publish, here or everywhere, be fully under the governing vision of the cross of Christ?

Thanks,
Drake

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Drake

Right! This is the key point of the One Publication document.

Protecting their name may be the key point to you, but it is certainly not the key objection.

“I never published anything by myself. I always mailed my manuscript to the Gospel Room, which was under Brother Nee and his helper. It was up to their discernment whether my manuscript should be published or not.” Post #1 — Publication work in the Lord’s recovery, Being restricted in one publication.

“It bothers me that some brothers among us still put out publications. According to my truthful observation there is no new light or life supply there. They may contain some biblical doctrines, but any point of life or light has been adopted from the publications of Living Stream Ministry. There is nearly no item of life or light that has not been covered by our publications. Based upon this fact, what is the need for these brothers to put out their publications?” Post #1 — Publication work in the Lord’s recovery, Being restricted in one publication.

The objection that I have is that LSM wants to stop anyone else from doing what they are doing. That was a major justification for the discipline on Titus Chu. That is why they warn the saints away from forums like this. That is why WL said it bothered him that saints put out publications. If WL can speak for the Lord why would he try to stop others speaking for the Lord?

[Drake]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Protecting their name may be the key point to you, but it is certainly not the key objection.

ZNP,

"Protecting their name" is not the key point, ....really not even a meaningful point in my view.

Drake

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

ZNP,

"Protecting their name" is not the key point, ....really not even a meaningful point in my view.

Drake

Hardly.

"Protecting their name" is not the key point, it's the only point.

WL and the Blendeds have repeatedly sacrificed people and principle in order to protect their names.

LSM has become little more than a ruthless business, wining and dining shady Hank Hanegraaff for publishing favorable reports, and throwing the Cleveland brothers under the bus for publishing unfavorable reports.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Drake

ZNP,

"Protecting their name" is not the key point, ....really not even a meaningful point in my view.

Drake

Unless I have misread LSM's documentation on the "One Publication" you cannot claim to submit to this doctrine without vetting anything you publish with them.

Now they may not take issue with some very minor publications that are distributed locally, but they would certainly take issue with anything posted on this forum since it is extra local.

Since I only recognize 1 mediator between God and Man, the man Jesus Christ, I am not willing to submit to this beggarly rule.

Since you have already stated for the record that you are not vetting your posts through LSM I cannot understand how you can defend this doctrine if you don't actually submit to it.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Unless I have misread LSM's documentation on the "One Publication" you cannot claim to submit to this doctrine without vetting anything you publish with them.

Now they may not take issue with some very minor publications that are distributed locally, but they would certainly take issue with anything posted on this forum since it is extra local.

Since I only recognize 1 mediator between God and Man, the man Jesus Christ, I am not willing to submit to this beggarly rule.

Since you have already stated for the record that you are not vetting your posts through LSM I cannot understand how you can defend this doctrine if you don't actually submit to it.

Yes, you have misread or misapplied the "One Publication" and I have provided my viewpoint on that through my personal correspondences with Trapped posted in this forum.

There are no LSM police running around trying to control people, telling them what they can read or whether or not they can publish (Titus Chu publishes and sells books yet today....doesn't he?). That would be pointless and impossible to execute even if they were so inclined (which they are not). Yet, the bigger issue is that unless a serving one is under the governing vision of the cross there will be problems. It seems like a simple matter about publishing something but then just a little deviation in one's service opens the door to manifold problems. If God's enemy were blatant then believers would not fall for his wiles. But he is subtle and so creates a small opening, like a crack in the wall, that later turns into something that a Mack truck can be driven through.

Then you end up with a situation like this:

"Today there are churches which are still passing through turmoil because of the influence of Titus Chu and certain divisive workers under his leadership. These workers have deviated from the central lane of God's economy in their teaching and actions. They have propagated unprincipled attacks on the co-workers in the Lord's recovery and Living Stream Ministry via Web sites and anonymous spam e-mails disseminated worldwide. Their speaking is unhealthy, full of revilings and destructive words, leading those who follow these dissenting ones into division and worldliness."

So, personally, I appreciate that there are brother's who are mindful of the ministry in the Lord's recovery they have been entrusted with and will address potential issues head on. That's a good and responsible thing to do.

Drake

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Drake

So, personally, I appreciate that there are brother's who are mindful of the ministry in the Lord's recovery they have been entrusted with and will address potential issues head on. That's a good and responsible thing to do.

LSM has the right to define the terms of association with them.

They have no right to condemn anyone for choosing not to do so. Whether blatantly or by implying they have left the "central lane of God's economy," which is just BS and double-talk designed to intimidate, anyway.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Drake

Yes, you have misread or misapplied the "One Publication" and I have provided my viewpoint on that though my personal correspondences with Trapped posted in this forum.

There are no LSM police running around trying to control people, telling them what they can read or whether or not they can publish (Titus Chu publishes and sells books yet today....doesn't he?). That would be pointless and impossible to execute even if they were so inclined (which they are not).

Let's not conflate the issue, I have not said one word about LSM controlling what you can read. I am not aware of what Titus is doing today, however I am aware that he was disciplined by the Blended brothers for "not being absolute for the ministry of WL and WN" and for "publishing" outside of their control.

Originally Posted by Drake

Yet, the bigger issue is that unless a serving one is under the governing vision of the cross there will be problems. It seems like a simple matter about publishing something but then just a little deviation in one's service opens the door to manifold problems. If God's enemy were blatant then believers would not fall for his wiles. But he is subtle and so creates a small opening, like a crack in the wall, that later turns into something that a Mack truck can be driven through.

Then you end up with a situation like this:

"Today there are churches which are still passing through turmoil because of the influence of Titus Chu and certain divisive workers under his leadership. These workers have deviated from the central lane of God's economy in their teaching and actions. They have propagated unprincipled attacks on the co-workers in the Lord's recovery and Living Stream Ministry via Web sites and anonymous spam e-mails disseminated worldwide. Their speaking is unhealthy, full of revilings and destructive words, leading those who follow these dissenting ones into division and worldliness."

So, personally, I appreciate that there are brother's who are mindful of the ministry in the Lord's recovery they have been entrusted with and will address potential issues head on. That's a good and responsible thing to do.

Drake

Still don't understand the bigger issue. Is it that there are those who are "propagating unprincipled attacks on the co-workers in the Lord's recovery"?

If that is the "bigger issue" then this doctrine is stupider and more ridiculous than I even imagined. The Lord said "[It is] sufficient for the disciple that he should become as his teacher, and the bondman as his lord. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more those of his household?"

If you are a disciple of the Lord it comes with the territory. If you don't realize that then you are a fool or a pretend disciple.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

There are no LSM police running around trying to control people, telling them what they can read or whether or not they can publish (Titus Chu publishes and sells books yet today....doesn't he?). That would be pointless and impossible to execute even if they were so inclined (which they are not). Yet, the bigger issue is that unless a serving one is under the governing vision of the cross there will be problems. It seems like a simple matter about publishing something but then just a little deviation in one's service opens the door to manifold problems. It seems like a simple matter about publishing something but then just a little deviation in one's service opens the door to manifold problems. If God's enemy were blatant then believers would not fall for his wiles. But he is subtle and so creates a small opening, like a crack in the wall, that later turns into something that a Mack truck can be driven through.

Then you end up with a situation like this: "Today there are churches which are still passing through turmoil because of the influence of Titus Chu and certain divisive workers under his leadership. These workers have deviated from the central lane of God's economy in their teaching and actions. They have propagated unprincipled attacks on the co-workers in the Lord's recovery and Living Stream Ministry via Web sites and anonymous spam e-mails disseminated worldwide. Their speaking is unhealthy, full of revilings and destructive words, leading those who follow these dissenting ones into division and worldliness."

This is laughable. Or perhaps I should be crying.

And Mr. Drake who are these "brothers" who alone can judge whether Titus Chu is a "serving one under the governing vision of the cross?" Their chief condemnation of Titus Chu at the Whistler Kangaroo Court was that he visited and ministered in China after WL told him not to. Ought not TC have the right to obey God, and not man? (Acts 4.19; 5.29)

Would these ones be the Blended Bosses at LSM? Those same ones who protected Philip Lee, a known abusive sexual predator operating under the protections of his father? Those same ones who launched a slanderous smear campaign against the men of God who tried to protect the saints, brothers like John Ingalls, John So, Bill Mallon, etc?

Do you expect us to believe these Blended Bosses at LSM -- BP, RK, MC -- are uniquely able to discern who is "serving one under the governing vision of the cross?" Unbelievable!

Let me suggest that Drake's "crack in the wall" metaphor, the so-called "deviation," actually refers to the failed and errant teachings at LSM. Look, for example, at the situation in China. First LSM claimed 10 million followers in China, called "Shouters". Then they disowned them all when abnormalities arose, so-called "Mack Trucks," which sullied LSM's pristine reputation. Instead of ministering to these new-borns, they try to stop ministers like TC, who was born in China, from returning to help their fledgling faith. One day LSM will be judged for this. They abandoned these young ones, and prevented others from helping them. True modern day Pharisees. (Mt 23.13)

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Drake

Yes, again. That was stated clearly in the One Publication document.... unless you mean that any one should be able to send their personal ministry to the local churches and no one will object. Then we still have a disagreement.

Who has the right to try to stop someone from sending his publications to a local church for possible use? Answer: No one.

This is the root of the problem: LSM or the Blendeds or whomever have no right to try to stop people from publishing, nor do they have a right to try to stop people from distributing those publications to whomever they wish. Ministries do not own churches, they do not own people, and they certainly have no right to try to restrict people from what they should have the freedom to do.

Here's basically what the One Publication means in reality. LSM says essentially:

If you want to be associated with LSM, then you are going to do what we say. If you don't do what we say we are going to discredit you and say you are no longer part of the glorious "Lord's Recovery" and not even a legitimate church, and any other condemnation we can think of to try to intimidate you.

As if anyone should give a hoot whether they are part of this imaginary thing called "the Lord's Recovery," or whether LSM thinks they are a church or not. But that's the "game of thrones" LSM is playing. It's all intimidation based on a non-existent entity called the "Lord's Recovery." No church, whether ever associated with LSM or not, is under any obligation to respect it. That's true of any other ministry or movement which takes that tack.

It's all a game of intimidation based on lies. It's ridiculous. It's flat wrong.