Our Shared History

[Friedel]

WITNESS LEE AND T. AUSTIN-SPARKS (the 1950’s) (PART 1)

I am actually not following a proper sequence with these postings since I should probably spend some time on the early years in Taiwan first, from 1949 onwards until Witness Lee’s departure to the United States. But let us leave that for a next posting.

Before I move on to a very significant aspect, namely the relationship between Witness Lee and Theodore Austin-Sparks, I wish to clarify a very important point.

We all assume that the Local Church Movement was started by Watchman Nee in China and then carried to the free world by Witness Lee. I believe this assumption is wrong.

What had started under the leadership of Nee in China was a unique work. I believe God had sovereignly used Watchman Nee to spread the gospel throughout the Mainland. What happened after that, when Witness Lee started taking over things in Taiwan (facts I will prove), was a totally different and distinctly new movement. This is proved by the fact that many of those who had been part of Nee’s “Little Flock” movement in China steadfastly refused to be ever part of Witness Lee’s Local Church Movement.

I believe we do Watchman Nee’s memory a disservice by grouping him together with Witness Lee, when we speak of the Local Church Movement. Witness Lee had also coined a unique phrase for his own movement, The Recovery, a phrase Nee never used to describe his Little Flock Local Churches. Therefore, when I refer to the Local Church Movement, I expressly exclude Watchman Nee. It was solely a Lee thing.

When it suited Witness Lee, he liked using only those parts of any situation he truly liked, preferring to leave out the pieces he didn’t like, thereby creating a super clean image of himself. He was the great master builder of his own deception. Over the years, many of his disciples became disillusioned (or preoccupied, as Ned Nossaman so diplomatically described the “dissenters” in 1989). In this way, Witness Lee was very successful in dominating, intimidating and manipulating every one that did not agree with him even slightly and also every one that he considered a “threat” to his own, perceived empire.

There is no doubt in my mind that he had regarded T. Austin-Sparks as such a threat, like he had also regarded Stephen Kaung and others as such. It therefore remained for him to put them down by discrediting them and everything they stood for. However, Austin-Sparks was a particular thorn in Lee’s flesh, a major obstacle. (I was surprised that even after studying the history of events in Taiwan and how Witness Lee had there hijacked everything by using the trainees and the training to gain control, some would still deem him an honest workman, cutting straight the Word of the Truth.)

Over the years, I have often considered the petty story of Austin-Sparks who had printed an appreciation in his magazine for the Christmas cards sent to him, since Witness Lee liked repeating it. I must ask: so what? Those who had sent Austin-Sparks Christmas cards had obviously enjoyed his ministry. Why could he not graciously thank them for sending it? Did he consequently then embrace the practice of sending Christmas cards, not that it matters? (Remember, we did not celebrate Christmas in any way in the Local Church!)

I do not want to elaborate but I believe Witness Lee had raised this insignificant and trivial matter to the level of a major issue, like he succeeded in doing with so many other matters. Surely, this is unimportant and does not warrant our deliberation. For freedom Christ had set us free – free to not be occupied with such trifling matters.

This legalism cloaked in its artificial spirituality is too awful, like a slow but deadly poison! Did Witness Lee not spend nine years with the Brethren of Benjamin Newton before he came into contact with Watchman Nee? It is hard to let go of certain teachings and practices once they become ingrained into your being. I have often said during the past few years that by looking back over my own considerable experience with the Local Church, I now see that Witness Lee’s “Recovery” is merely Revived Exclusive Brethrenism, centering on his person and teachings.)

Before I embark on my “defense” of T. Austin-Sparks, let me hasten to add that Witness Lee allowed no one of his peers to share his limelight, for fear of them stealing his thunder. There are quite a number of examples, such as Stephen Kaung, T. Austin-Sparks, DeVern Fromke and others. The way he treated brothers like John Ingalls, Bill Mallon and the like during the “rebellion”, and Don Hardy and Terry Risenhoover before them, speaks of the same. Witness Lee simply did not have the capacity or the inclination to graciously love his peers and to benefit from their fellowship. In addition, this particularly reprehensible and intolerant characteristic he fostered in many in his inner circle, did he not? Has any of you not witnessed or experienced this same approach by some of the New Beacons in the “Recovery”?

T. Austin-Sparks had a very fruitful relationship with Watchman Nee when the two met in London in 1938. At the time Watchman Nee stayed in London for about six months. They had wonderful fellowship and Watchman Nee found in Austin-Sparks someone of true spirituality and one with a thorough understanding of the Cross. (It had been said that Witness Lee had learnt about the lessons of the Cross from Watchman Nee but he was unwilling to learn them himself, as illustrated by the methodical, fleshly way he dealt with everyone who did not agree with him – more often than not he merely resorted to evil speaking, slander, innuendo and misrepresentation to eliminate “opposition”. Of the simple principle of the “second mile” and the “undercoat also”, as taught by the Lord Jesus Himself, he evidently knew very little. He simply refused to turn the other cheek, taking all and sundry to court and fighting back like a bobcat.) Although Austin-Sparks and Nee disagreed on the legalistic practice of the so-called “local church ground” (which Watchman Nee had originally picked up from the Exclusive Brethren), it did not affect their mutually rewarding fellowship. Interestingly, Nee and Austin- Sparks after that never had any significant correspondence by letter and never saw each other again.

Upon his return to China, Watchman Nee had written T. Austin-Sparks, lamenting his desire to have someone with whom he could fellowship like the two of them had been able to. Regrettably, there was not one in China who could meet this need, contrary to the claims of Witness Lee that he was so very close to Watchman Nee. (I am quoting from page 148 of Against the Tide, by Angus Kinnear, the biography of Watchman Nee. It makes for compelling reading unlike Witness Lee’s terrible effort, The Seer of the Divine Revelation. I believe that Witness Lee had once claimed there were more than 50 factual errors in Kinnear’s book but he never listed the errors anywhere and this claim could well have been one of his multitudes of misrepresentations.) Incidentally, an elderly brother who had known both Watchman Nee and Witness Lee very well, states that Watchman Nee did in fact not trust Witness Lee before 1949. This brother was a very close young co-worker with Witness Lee in Taiwan until 1959.

(Part 2 to follow.)