Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
Whenever I considered how difficult (well nigh impossible) it would be for one large modern city to contain just one church and be administered by just one presbytery, I was always pointed to Taipei, as working proof that the one city, one church model was extremely applicable and workable in our day. Not only so, but the explosive and vibrant economy of Taiwan was living proof of the Lord's blessing on "the ministry."
Since I had never been there, and who was I to question the blessing of God, I stopped questioning and started "believing." Then, to my surprise, I learned in the mid-80's that Taipei was dead, aging, lifeless, and in great need of a training to overhaul the church there. Also, in one meeting, the existing eldership was replaced by 80 young serving ones.
Obviously the "model" had not worked out very well. In fact, it appeared a dismal failure, in need of a "laboratory" to try to find something, anything, some new thing to help out. They had been doing all the "right things" for decades, and look what happened to them.
This is why I have become a little weary when anyone claims to have a "better mousetrap." Sure it's easy to condemn apparent shortcomings in the whole of Christendom. Condemnation is easy to teach and easy to learn, just ask a recovering "judgaholic." I would estimate that up to eighty percent of the "sales job" for "one city - one church" came not from the Bible, but from the elitist and exclusive desire to be "God's best."
|
Dear Ohio,
In my brief history of the early local churches in the USA, I had a few paragraphs on myths and endless genealogies. During the middle ages there was a type of historical writing called a hagiography. It was about real events and persons but either with a highly romanticized exaggerated wonderful spin or it was the worst possible negative spin and both were woefully short of real details but rife with bias and agenda. A scholar must sort through what is history and what is hagiography. We have the same issue with the LSM/LC and Watchman Nee and Witness Lee. Sometime during a visit to the snow country in the GLA, while we are sitting before a roaring fire roasting chestnuts, I will relate to you some of my unique discoveries while digging in the library stacks at SMU in Dallas. Or perhaps when you are here and we are relaxing on the beach watching the silhouettes of the dolphins against the horizon as they swim and leap through the wind and surf, then we can have our discussion of church history … naw, no way!!! The North Carolina beach is too beautiful and relaxing to spoil it with some volume of forgotten lore.
My romanticized notion of Taiwan was burst in 1967. It seems they had a very good beginning. Then a storm came due to financial matters, TA Sparks’ visit and then WL expelled his five close co-workers. Then came the bad business venture.
Witness Lee then returned in 1967 with 141 USA saints. We had a very good time together. I saw meetings not too different than what you might see in a gospel preaching church in the USA. I had many conversations with Taiwan brothers and learned of many problems they had experienced in their short history.
I happened to be there again in the spring of 1986. They were starting their big change and new way. There was very little to see or positive reports to give. Their spiritual level was lower than in 1967.
Please consider this word from an old salt. Beware of positive or negative hagiography. Oops, sorry!!!
In the past, on this forum and the other, when I offered a little word of wisdom or discernment I was thoroughly put in my place since I am a former local church elder. I and Toledo must never offer any semblance of admonishing or warning since we are forever polluted by our past association. So please all posters just ignore this post if you so desire. I do not wish to stir up trouble as I did in the past. If you need to vent against a former elder please do so by the PM and spare the other posters.
Hope, Don Rutledge