The Change in Nature of the Lord's Recovery

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Indiana

When Witness Lee gave his Final Message he reflected on the past and mistakes that were made.
Although he would not be specific, he charged others to come together to learn from our past.

“This is a lesson for us all. The co-workers in different places need to learn; all responsible brothers in all localities need to learn. The eyes of the brothers and sisters all need to be opened. Too many things we need to learn. We have acted wrongly in the past, including me, I have to admit. I have had very painful repentance before the Lord. I am very sorry! I am sorry for the Body of Christ - not only for the brothers and sisters among us, but also for the ones in the denominations. You have to bring this message back and read it over and over again in mutual fellowship. Then you will see we were wrong before. To understand and analyze this needs a fair bit of effort. Again I say, a few of you must come together through pray-reading, studying, reciting, and prophesying. We must learn from our past mistakes to receive people according to God's Son...undeviating... not deviating a bit from the path.” (Chinese New Year Conference, 1997, W. Lee)

I wonder if he should have been specific, and maybe that would have not been so easily dismissed - it may have been more of a healing/correcting word if he had done that. But that did not seem to be his MO . . .

We do leadership classes and there's a case study where the leader clearly makes a mistake which causes several serious issues. One question we ask participants is whether the leader should apologize for their mistake, and the responses are often fairly divided. People saying they shouldn't apologize, frequently state their reasoning is that it would make the leader look weak and undermine their authority. It's actually the opposite for a variety of reasons.

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I wonder if he should have been specific, and maybe that would have not been so easily dismissed - it may have been more of a healing/correcting word if he had done that. But that did not seem to be his MO . . .

We do leadership classes and there's a case study where the leader clearly makes a mistake which causes several serious issues. One question we ask participants is whether the leader should apologize for their mistake, and the responses are often fairly divided. People saying they shouldn't apologize, frequently state their reasoning is that it would make the leader look weak and undermine their authority. It's actually the opposite for a variety of reasons.

Brother Lee did not explain what he was referring to because he would lose face, so he only left them "the CHARGE to learn," which was actually HIS responsibility to deal with also and make right in the Body, concerning a number of matters and people spanned over several decades.

Witness Lee left many brothers exasperated.


Bill Mallon Sums up the deviation and the "Change of Nature" in the recovery.

“You will never know how completely astonished, shocked, and
unnerved*we were when WL put more and more things under Philip Lee’s
responsibility. It was incredible and unbelievable from the get-go!”

“How could such a so-called man of the Spirit (WL) hand over a spiritual
work to a man of the flesh (PL)?!?!* It was repulsive, let alone*depressive. It
was once brought to my attention that Witness Lee appreciated Philip Lee
because this son of his turned*Witness Lee’s ministry and the LSM into a
money-making business.

“Witness Lee first got off-track when he deviated from his original principle. He said in the 1960s that the churches should not be for the ministry and should not build*up the ministry, but that the ministry should be for the churches and build up the churches.

This he reversed dramatically in 1974 when he moved to Anaheim for the purpose of centralizing*his ministry and decentralizing his focus on the churches. (1) At first his ministry was the center and he expected all the churches to strengthen, support, andgive allegiance to*it. (2) Later,*WL himself became the center, and everyone and all the churches were judged according to their*loyalty*to the "minister." (3) After this, WLexpected everyone to give allegiance and financial support to*the LSM bookroom, and
whoever failed to acknowledge and support the bookroom fell from his favor and were judged disloyal. (4) Finally,*WL's ministry deteriorated to an all-time low, to*a*hole below*the pit, when he gradually installed PL to be in charge of even the training,expecting all the churches to give their allegiance and loyalty to his son in (and of) the flesh.

“These were the heavy, unbearable*feelings in our hearts. As time went by, we tried to do something about it. But characteristically, when WL was approached about such matter, he was like*a little Chinese man who suddenly burst into a nine-foot intimidating giant.”
* * *
Bill had personally written three letters to Witness Lee “to politely, and yet, plainly, bring the troubling issues before him”.* Bill also conversed with him by phone, in his attempts to bring his attention to the serious problems incurred in the Southeast churches at the hands of Philip Lee and others representing LSM. Witness Lee did not listen, as was the testimony of many others especially during the late 1980s turmoil in the U. S.,*Europe, Taipei, and other Far East churches.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Ohio

In many matters, Lee hed totally "flip-flopped" during Ingalls' quarter century working often side-by-side with him. One can then legitimately ask whether Ingalls ever knew the "real Witness Lee." And for that matter, does anybody?

Actually Lee did not do a flip-flop, he simply reverted back to the kind of person and leader he was in Taiwan before he ever came to America. It is a historical fact, noted by many trustworthy personal witnesses, that Witness Lee was doing all the same things in the 50s-early 60s (in Taiwan/Asia) that he was doing in the mid-late 80s in America. He was hiring and firing elders and co-workers at his personal whim. He made demands that they be personally loyal to him, or be ostracized or cut-off from participating in the ministry. He had brothers spying against brothers and reporting back to him. He was extremely unethical and immoral in the handling of large amounts of church monies - sometimes using church funds to pay off personal/business debts incurred by him and his sons. He also betrayed many longtime brothers who had ministered among the churches.

THIS was the real Witness Lee that came to our country to "bring the Lord's Recovery to the top Christian country on earth". Maybe Lee did repent before he initiated the movement here in America, but the simple fact is that he had already disqualified himself from being an elder of a single local church, much, much less the leader and sole teacher of an entire Christian movement. My contention would be that if Witness Lee was honest about his past, and made steps of restitution and reconciliation to all the saints he had damaged in the Far East, maybe, just maybe, the Lord would have allowed him to minister among various Christian groups in North America....but not with a place of official leadership or influence - for he had forever disqualified himself from holding any church office.

Let me be clear - none of what I have written here detracts from or delegitimizes any of the experiences of Christ, genuine salvations or precious fellowship we had among us. The Local Church of Witness Lee was not the first Christian movement that God blessed and moved among them despite the immorality, sins and heresy of a leader, and it certainly won't be the last. Yet for those of us who have come to know the facts and reality of the past 50+ years of Local Church history, to cover up, or even to downplay, would be exposing the dear brothers and sisters still entrapped within the Local Church movement to further abuse and damage. May God have mercy.
-

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Actually Lee did not do a flip-flop, he simply reverted back to the kind of person and leader he was in Taiwan before he ever came to America.

I don't see the conflict here. No one is saying that WL did not repeat past failures. What we are providing for here are explanations to our readers which accommodate the testimonies of many leaders who have left the Recovery and recorded their stories, e.g. Al Knoch, Godfred O., Don Rutledge, John Ingalls, Albert Zehr, Bill Mallon, John So, etc.

They did not say that Lee's character had changed, but that the character of the Recovery had changed. They did not say that Lee's nature had changed, but that the nature of the Recovery had changed.

Understand? ¿Comprendes? Verstehst? Comprenez-vous?

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Ohio

What we are providing for here are explanations to our readers which accommodate the testimonies of many leaders who have left the Recovery and recorded their stories, e.g. Al Knoch, Godfred O., Don Rutledge, John Ingalls, Albert Zehr, Bill Mallon, John So, etc.

Well, I thought I might provide my own explanation. Is that ok with you, brother Ohio?

I'm very aware of the testimonies of all the brothers you have listed here. I actually heard some of the testimonies in their own living rooms, in person. But most of these testimonies were related to us over 30 years ago. (with the exception being Don Rutledge, who has commented on these matters in more recent years, right here on this forum) It is now 2020. I think we all have the great advantage of looking back in a more objective way, and with maybe a far different perspective. I can't be sure, but I believe the testimonies of some of these brothers would be very different today.

Anytime we are discussing "the nature of the Lord's Recovery", I think we are discussing something very subjective. First of all, this thing that many refer to as "the Lord's Recovery" is actually just the little Christian sect of The Local Church of Witness Lee. The whole notion that the Lord needs "a Recovery" is suspect at best, and is really just a man-made notion. It's not in the Bible. There is a vary good reason that many outsiders refer to the LC movement as "The Local Church of Witness Lee" - it is because the whole thing is, and always has been, a personality cult of sorts, based upon the person and work of Witness Lee. In my view, to speak of "the nature of the Lord's Recovery" apart from the nature, character and history of Witness Lee is an exercise in futility. Again, it may make us old guys feel a little better about ourselves, but it belies reality, and even the cold, hard facts of history.

I think if we take an objective look back at the history of the Local Church movement, at least since the move to Taiwan after the demise of Watchman Nee, the "nature" of the sect had changed and evolved many times. But there was always one main factor for the change - Witness Lee. His person, by which I mean his authority. His work, by which I mean his "ministry". We used to call these changes "flows". This flow, and that flow. With each flow there was a change in "the nature" of the movement. Sometimes it was a small change, sometimes it was a big change, but the change was always with the approval of, if not at the direction of, Witness Lee.

This is simply my perspective. This is simply my view. I do understand and fully appreciate that others here have a different perspective. Others have different views. And this is ok! In fact, I think it makes for a more interesting and lively discussions. Understand?
-

[Indiana]

Recovering a Pure Testimony of Jesus -1

Ron Kangas has been given a platform for speaking and representing leadership in the Local Churches under the ministry of Witness Lee. He shared in a conference meeting in 2019 about a prayer meeting in Anaheim where he stood up to share that he thought the Lord had something for the church to pray for, but that he didn’t know what it was. He asked for all to become calm and look to the Lord, as he had discerned that the prayers were missing the mark and the meeting needed help. A minute later a sister spoke out suggesting that they pray for the Boston area and that what had happened there “30 years ago” ought to be cleared up. This would indeed take them back to a calamitous time, infamous reporting, and the shroud of mystery still hanging over the mournful results.

That meeting got released, and the leadership taken by Ron to interrupt the meeting and re-route the saints to the heart of God is spiritually admirable. And, the saints’ cooperation to follow Ron's lead issued in life for the church, both in Anaheim and in the Boston area, which, I believe, issued in ongoing prayer and help and attention to the Boston area at that time and over the years since, till the time of this conference in Cambridge, Mass. with Ron speaking in 2019, saying also that he could see their growth compared to the previous year. And, this was pleasing for Ron to see! and for me to hear him share.

But I also would like to hear that the whole story was told, in order that a thorough and proper clearing of the past could take place to be fair and accurate regarding the saints in “former times” and also to properly inform those of today that churches can learn and know the truth. There are those who did not survive the wreckage of relationships in Boston, induced by the growing animosity between leaders in Anaheim and in the Boston area - It is a most sorrowful story and it needs to be told truthfully - “the times” are calling for it and so is God’s Throne of judgment.

The oil of exultant joy awaits those who dig down deep to the foundation of God’s Throne; that is, to righteousness and justice. This is what should prevail that Judgment could indeed begin in the House of God.

Brother Lee has a book out called Concerning the Lord’s Recovery. And, you find out fast in reading some of the pages what happens when God’s people get careless before Him. They lose their testimony and place they once occupied in honor, in purity, in recognition in respect. In a word - Witness Lee’s word-they can become “rotten.” And many did, in the Old Testament and in the New.

Preceding the New Way and LSM / Philip Lee corrupting activity in the late 80s, and just after lthe late 70s corrupting events with Philip Lee in major roles of devastation, W. Lee in 1983 thought he could say, “The Lord's recovery is really among us, and, although the scale is quite small, the standard of the character is higher than Christianity. In the Lord's recovery the high standard of the character must be kept and maintained. Some have checked with me asking, Do you mean that all the other Christians are rotten and that only the local church people are not rotten? I don't mean that. If any people have become rotten, they are no more in the reality of the Lord's recovery. Whatever and whoever is rotten is not in the recovery. The local churches are people who have been recovered out of their rottenness back to the pure church life. The local church is not a kind of organization or religious group. The local church is the pure church life as a pure testimony of Jesus. If we become rotten, we are no longer in the reality of the Lord's recovery.”

Witness Lee continues: “This is why in the New Testament the Apostle Paul would not tolerate any kind of immorality. In First Corinthians 5, Paul charged the church not to associate with that immoral person. The church as a pure testimony of Christ would not tolerate any impurity, any immorality. The church has to be pure. Once the church becomes rotten, it loses its nature and standing as the Lord's testimony.”


Those who stood against this corruption and divisive behavior at LSM were for the Lord’s testimony in reality. Those included John So in Germany, who, practically, disassociated with W. Lee and the toleration of sin at LSM. Those who partnered with the corrupted Office naturally became corrupted too. Kowtowing to Philip Lee was an abomination and incongruent with a pure testimony of Jesus - and was in line with the change in nature and standing as the Lord’s testimony.


Steve Isitt Sept 2020

Review of Concerning the Lord's Recovery
the most key pages are made available to read

https://www.google.com/books/edition...sec=frontcover

[Indiana]

Recovering a Pure Testimony of Jesus -2

The recent posts I put out are basically rendered of none effect at this point. I don’t think I should spend the time and energy to continue to where I was going.

But I would like to at least share this from Ron Kangas.

– Nov 2019 conf in greater Boston- This comes after he shared about the prayer for Boston and clearing up “what happened 30 years ago”.

“Now we know from our history that the Enemy has tried in all kinds of ways to shut the door…” - he is referring to the open door that “the Lord has given to “the recovered church,” meaning them.

“Publishing books full of lies, now you got social media, you can put anything out there and there are all kinds of actions, that triggers off all kinds of negativity…’shut all these doors and open the doors on the internet to hundreds of testimonies full of life and light. Full of testimony to know the Holy One who is absolutely for God....' ...Part of being an overcomer in Philadelphia....

So we are in the world, the Lord says, I' do not ask You to take them out of the world, but to keep them from the evil one'. He's trying to attack every level of leadership in the Lord's recovery. So the Enemy is trying to shut us down. Lord use the key ( key of David), shut him down, shut all of those doors, and open the door, even on the internet to hundreds of testimonies.

Good night dear saints!

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Well, I thought I might provide my own explanation. Is that ok with you, brother Ohio?

Why sure. It's your gig. I just wanted to differentiate between the Recovery and Lee.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Anytime we are discussing "the nature of the Lord's Recovery", I think we are discussing something very subjective. First of all, this thing that many refer to as "the Lord's Recovery" is actually just the little Christian sect of The Local Church of Witness Lee. The whole notion that the Lord needs "a Recovery" is suspect at best, and is really just a man-made notion. It's not in the Bible.

Agreed. Notice that I never refer to the movement as a whole as anything but the "recovery." Shame on you for calling it the "Lord's Recovery" and then walking it back.

There is a vary good reason that many outsiders refer to the LC movement as "The Local Church of Witness Lee" - it is because the whole thing is, and always has been, a personality cult of sorts, based upon the person and work of Witness Lee. In my view, to speak of "the nature of the Lord's Recovery" apart from the nature, character and history of Witness Lee is an exercise in futility. Again, it may make us old guys feel a little better about ourselves, but it belies reality, and even the cold, hard facts of history.

Since I have been exonerated from the bondage of the Recovery, I have many personal opinions. Imagine that! And my personal opinion is that it is helpful to our many readers to display how the Recovery has changed over time, independent of Lee himself. It answers nagging questions which I had, and which our readers may still have.

This is simply my perspective. This is simply my view. I do understand and fully appreciate that others here have a different perspective. Others have different views. And this is ok! In fact, I think it makes for a more interesting and lively discussions. Understand?

I appreciate your many views. They have helped me over the years. I have my views too. Usually our views coincide, occasionally they diverge. It creates lively discussion. Peace!

[UntoHim]

My dear brother Indiana, take heart. There is nothing that anyone can post here that would make your posts of none effect. My goodness, after all, you are posting this within your very own subforum "Writings and Concerns of Steve Isitt". Do you realize that you are the only active member of LocalChurchDiscussions who has his very own subforum? I set this subforum up because I think you have something very valuable for both current and former members of the Local Church. And nothing that any other member posts here can make your posts of none effect!

Please keep in mind that LocalChurchDiscussions does not mean LocalChurchAgreement. Just look at the recent back-and-forth between Ohio and I. The main message to take from all the recent postings here, I believe, is that we are all here for the truth. And we all desire that all concerned - both current and former Local Church members "come to the full knowledge of the truth". Without truth we don't have any light. Without light we will not have life. "In him was life, and the life was the light of men". In the Local Church we heard a lot about life. Life, life life! But the simple fact is that we cannot experience the life of God without God's truth, which is nothing more than, and nothing less than, God's light. The problem is that men love the darkness rather than the light. This is especially true of many religious men. And this is especially true of many Christian men who think that they have all the riches, all the truth and all the light. And this is especially true of us current and former Local Church brothers X 10. May God have mercy.
-