In seeking fellowship, no one should have a definite opinion or preconception, claiming that our refusal to interact and work with other Christian groups is sectarian and wrong. This kind of speaking is wild and rough. If a person has the heart to seek oneness, we should ask him to forsake this kind of rude speaking and arrogant attitude. He should only seek the Lord with a pure conscience in regard to whether or not he should do a certain thing. He should not give us an opinionated answer with rough, wild words.
All of the above points were included in a letter sent to the responsible brothers in Hong Kong. The reason I wrote to Hong Kong in such a lengthy manner is that this brother was from Hong Kong. This follows the principle in Acts 15. When some from Jerusalem went to Antioch to teach different things, Paul and Barnabas went up to Jerusalem to solve the problem. Because it is inconvenient to get in and out of the country at present, I wrote the leading brothers a letter. I hope that this matter will be completely solved in Hong Kong and that we will all be clear in our concept. I hope that the brothers and sisters will not casually mention this matter again.
If they sense the peace to do so, I ask that the responsible ones read this letter to the elders and the full-time serving ones. I feel that I have a responsibility before the Lord but that I should do only this much. The remainder is others’ responsibility, not mine. Concerning this matter, we will have more in-depth fellowship at a later date.
After listening to this word of fellowship, the brothers and sisters should realize that this matter is not simple. It is most foolish for a person to make a hasty judgment concerning this matter. In the past thirty years a number of us, especially the serving ones, have been learning a serious lesson. Hence, I would like to fellowship with you regarding what we have learned and the help that we have received. While we have been laboring, we have also been studying the things in Christianity. This study is based upon the light of firm principles.
It may seem to some that Brother Watchman Nee did not have much contact with Christianity, but the truth is that every day he paid attention to what was going on in Christianity. He always watched objectively and wrote critiques. He was always observing and critiquing. For example, when a revival meeting occurred in a certain place, he would comment regarding who the speaker was at that meeting, what method was used, what the results were, what things God did therein, what the quality of preaching was, and what the fruit of the labor was. He studied very seriously, and nearly every valuable Christian publication was in his hand. If a person were to walk into Brother Nee’s room, he would see books lying everywhere and not in an orderly manner. Brother Nee read all the books. When he spoke on a certain truth, such as Matthew 5, he did not speak carelessly but checked all the expositions concerning Matthew 5 throughout the past two thousand years, keeping what was scriptural and dropping what was not scriptural. Today the great blessing he has left us with is that we accept everything that is proper, regardless of the sect from which it came. Now all these proper matters have become ours.
However, in Christianity the Baptists accept only the things of the Baptist denomination and reject everything else, the Presbyterians take only the things of the Presbyterian denomination and reject everything else, and the Lutherans care only for the things of the Lutheran denomination and reject everything else. Throughout the past two thousand years, only those people under the leading of Brother Nee have accepted everything proper. We are not proud, but it is the fact that all the good matters of the past two thousand years can be found among us.
When Brother T. Austin-Sparks came to visit us and heard us praying aloud all at the same time, he could not stand it. Nevertheless, when we study the book of Acts, we can see that the church in its initial stage also had such a practice. Chapter 4 says that the saints lifted up their voice in prayer and spoke the word of God with boldness (vv. 24, 31). This is undeniable. However, today some people cannot stand it when others pray aloud simultaneously. Neither can they tolerate it when people say Amen too frequently. A certain chapel in America set apart a section and called it the “amen corner.” When someone prayed, those sitting in the amen corner would say Amen together. Most of those in the congregation did not like to lift up their voice with one accord to say Amen, but at least some of them practiced this together. This cannot be manufactured, and it depends entirely upon people being moved by God. Hence, from the human perspective no one can limit others as to how they practice as long as there is a basis for it in the Scriptures.
In 1932 I visited a summer camp of the Baptist denomination and saw everyone sitting in deadness, praying with their heads bowed and their eyes closed. That was truly unbearable to me. Later, I fellowshipped about this with Brother Nee. He told me, “We cannot give God’s children a set way to pray. Who can say that it is right to pray while standing and that it is wrong to pray while sitting? Who can say that it is right to pray aloud and that it is wrong to pray silently?” In the same manner, today is it right to pray one by one but wrong to pray all at the same time? No one can say that it is right to preach one by one but that it is wrong to speak with one accord loudly. We will not be fully clear regarding these matters until the day we see the Lord.
Church history has shown that for the past two thousand years everyone has had certain limits and prejudices. Brother T. Austin-Sparks can be in the heavens while preaching, but when he hears the saints praying with one voice, he can no longer be in the heavens. Moreover, whenever the Brethren are mentioned, he cannot tolerate it. One day he asked us why we receive his ministry and also receive the books of those who oppose him. The fact is that we do not care who a person is. As long as he has something of value, we will receive it from him, including from those whom we condemn very much. As long as someone has something positive, we will receive it. For this reason, some have said that we are like the Pentecostals. What are we? We are all-inclusive in our receiving. We should not have an attitude that if some oppose and condemn us, we will reject everything they have. If we have this kind of attitude, we must ask, “Did not the Bible become fully recognized through the Catholic Church? If we reject the Catholic Church, do we also reject the Bible?”
Do not think that we have the intention to oppose Brother T. Austin-Sparks. We should not make such a simple distinction. Even if the apostle Paul were to come today, we would still need to discern what he preached. If it were not so, Paul would not have needed to quote the Scriptures. The reason he quoted the Scriptures was to gain man’s trust and to prove that his ministry was of God. Not only do we need to quote the Bible today, but Paul also needed to quote the Bible in his day. To exercise proper discernment is not that simple. We need to weigh every person, including the apostle Paul. The standard of our weighing is not merely in regard to whether or not a person is spiritual but in regard to whether or not he is according to God’s will.
Brother Nee once told me, “Brother Lee, I dare not claim that I have something, but there is one thing particular about me: I am good at critiquing. By means of a little analysis I can discern what is best.” Brother Nee learned this lesson over a period of thirty years, and he taught us to do the same. Hence, we too have learned this lesson. This is why, through a little analysis, we are able to discern whether or not a person is right. Because of this we are able to select the best things, while making it very difficult for the erroneous things to come in. For example, when Brother T. Austin-Sparks came to visit us this last time, he made up his mind to bring up the matter of brothers wearing military hats in the meeting hall. He felt that when the brothers in the military service put their hats on before stepping out of the meeting hall, they were lacking a spirit of respect. When a brother tried to explain the Chinese custom to him and show him that we did not violate the teaching in the Bible, Brother Sparks said, “The teachings in the Bible are above national customs.” He tried to use that one sentence to suppress us.
After hearing this word, I did not say anything, but neither could I accept it. Our eyes were very sharp and our sense was very keen concerning biblical teachings. We could not believe that Brother Sparks’s word was within the boundary of biblical teaching. It seemed that although the teaching in the Bible required “one meter,” his requirement was “one meter plus three centimeters.” Our judgment concerning such matters is exceedingly precise. The Bible says that a brother should not have his head covered when he prays and worships. However, since we had already announced that the meeting had ended, we had met the biblical requirement. The Bible does not have a requirement saying that brothers should not wear their hats after a meeting has been dismissed, or that they must wait until they step outside the meeting hall. Brother Sparks claimed that the biblical teaching was for a brother to wear his hat only after he steps outside the meeting hall.
Concerning the truth in the Bible, we have learned to not deviate at all. The Bible requires only that brothers not cover their heads while praying or preaching, and we obey it. The Bible does not have requirements concerning where brothers may or may not wear their hats. Hence, we have freedom in this respect. I am not condemning Brother Sparks. Even if the archangel Michael were to come and preach a message, we would still need to test him. I say strongly that even if Brother Nee were to say something, we would still need to seriously examine it. A person should correct another only according to the teaching in the Bible, not according to his feelings. If Brother Sparks were objective, he would have confessed, “Perhaps this is our custom and my personal feeling. It may not be the feeling of the East, and it is not the teaching in the Bible.” This is the right kind of attitude. However, he claimed that he made such a comment based upon the teaching in the Bible. This is absolutely inaccurate.
I use this matter as an illustration in order to demonstrate that our acceptance or rejection of certain matters is not that simple. Before we discussed a matter with Brother Sparks, we first analyzed the matter a great deal among ourselves. On the podium one morning, Brother Sparks said that we have made Christ a small Christ and the church a small church. He said such a word because we insist on the ground of the church. We questioned him in a serious way, saying, “The prophet Daniel and Madame Guyon were very spiritual, but where were they?” He was not able to give an answer. His spiritual ministry was very high, and we truly need the supply of this high ministry. However, his spiritual ministry and ours do not match. On that same day, I said to him, “Brother, we have had much fellowship with you, but there is one matter we cannot get through.” Brother Sparks asked humbly, “What is this one matter?” I said, “We insist on the ground of the church, but you reject it.” He said, “You and I have the same view.” Please forgive me to say, but his answer was not straightforward, but neither can it be compared to the hypocrisy of Peter and Barnabas.
In the past thirty years we have learned a serious lesson, that is, to have strict judgment concerning matters. We do not speak about a matter unless we are clear; hence, once we speak about a matter, we must be certain that there is no error. The more we discuss whether a matter is right or wrong, good or bad, the more we win the case.