[UntoHim]

From:a http://www.standforthetestimony.org/

These churches originally stood for the testimony of Christ. We came together simply as Christians, in the oneness of the Body of Christ, rather than on the basis of some teaching, practice, or person.

..and made oneness with themselves and the Living Stream Ministry, rather than oneness with Christ, the basis for our fellowship.

From an email announcing the existence of the website:

…Negatively, this is to expose the evil work the Blended Brothers did in subverting the stand of the churches, and in usurping the ministry of Witness Lee.

First of all let me say that I sincerely appreciate and even laud David Canfield’s writings over the past number of years. I think he has gone about his business with a genuine Christiant heart and attitude, and having this kind of heart and attitude leaves room for the Lord to enlighten minds and soften hearts. When considering these deeply held understandings and beliefs, and cherished views of persons and places, it is so very easy for one to leave love behind, and plow forward, becoming “a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal”. I know this has always been a constant danger here on these open forums out here in cyperspace. I pray often that the Lord would keep this understanding before us all as we consider and dialog regarding the teachings, practices and history of Witness Lee and the Local Church Movement.

I have often said something to the effect that “the further one gets away from the ministry of Witness Lee and the Local Church, the worse they look”. This has certainly been my personal experience, and I have seen the same among many other former LC members as well. We see this same dynamic at work in the writings of John Myer (http://www.assemblylife.com/) His book, A Future and A Hope, is basically a journal in which Myer lets us all in on his personal experience and observations as he and those around him have made their way through the uncertain waters of leaving a Movement which has controlled and even dominated their lives, both personal and corporate, for decades. And no matter how you view some of his conclusions, one thing is for certain, the further he got away from his Local Church connections – physical, emotional and spiritual – the more acute and crystal clear his criticisms of the Movement became. (Sorry brother John, I calls them as I sees them)

Now back to concerns of David Canfield. Unless I am misreading and/or misunderstanding Canfield, he seems to be of the mind that the Local Church Movement, at it’s onset here in America and until Lee’s death, was everything that Witness Lee and his followers have claimed it to be – A true and genuine “recovery” back to the teachings and practices of the original New Testament apostles and local churches. And at some point, most especially after the passing of Lee, Canfield posits that the “The Recovery” has degraded and “left their original standing, as they began to focus more and more on Witness Lee and his ministry”. Canfield, in the email announcing the website, makes no bones about his ultimate intentions: “this is to expose the evil work the Blended Brothers did in subverting the stand of the churches, and in usurping the ministry of Witness Lee”.

There is lot’s to consider and respond to here…. too much to address properly in one post, so I will just start with a premise that most current LC members, and many former members, hold dear to – that the “original standing” of The Local Church Movement, and the ministry of Witness Lee, was something totally altruistic, pure and biblical….that it was a genuine continuation of a “recovery” which can be traced back to Martin Luther and the Reformers. Of course the major cog in this continuation, insofar as Lee and his followers are concerned, is Watchman Nee. This line of thinking presupposes that Nee himself is to be considered along the same lines (literally) as Martin Luther – a supposition that, aside from Witness Lee and some other of Nee’s earlier followers, would be considered as preposterous by the vast majority of contemporary Christians, probably even those of Mainland China. This is not to say that Nee is not held is high esteem among many contemporary Christians (especially those in Asia/China), but few outside the Local Church Movement/LSM would assert that Nee is anything more than a genuine teacher/preacher of the Gospel, and a genuine apostle/church planter raised up by God Himself for the people of his beloved country of China.

Next up at bat… Canfield’s assertion that Local Churchers/LSM have “left their original standing, as they began to focus more and more on Witness Lee and his ministry”.