星期三, 3月 02, 2005

實情 - The True Account

多年前水流職事站如何處理所謂不跟隨水流的Rosemead召會,我們從得救所聽到的,都是說到這些聖徒,或教會,是何等的黑暗,分裂,屬撒但,.........已過這些教會或聖徒都沒有水流職事站的財力,可印製"小冊子"發送全球,但如今透過網際網路,主把所謂斗底下的實情,如今都擺在光中讓眾人評斷.

可惜的是,我只有英文版,若任何讀者有負擔,請自由為我們翻譯.

請按Comments進入全文, 或回應文章.

2 則留言:

Heshbon 提到...

The True Account

http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/DavidWang.htm

Exposing the Falsehood in the Publication entitled “A Clarifying Statement Concerning the Chinese Work in Southern California”.


By David Wang



“Therefore do not fear them; for nothing is covered which shall not be revealed, and hidden which shall not be made known. What I say unto you in the darkness, speak in the light; and what you hear in the ear, preach on the housetops. And do not fear those who kill the body but are not able to kill the soul; but fear rather Him Who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell Gehenna.” Matthew 10:26-28



On May 10, 1989 two brothers, David Dong and James Lee came to my home. They brought five copies of “A Clarifying Statement concerning the Chinese Work in Southern California” (hereafter referred to as “the statement”). Earlier, I read a pamphlet entitled “A Joint Statement by the Responsible Brothers of the Chinese Work in Southern California.” The contents of these two statements are similar. They address the events which occurred in the Church in Rosemead. The difference is that the new statement changed some parts and added more material. Also, eleven brothers signatures were added. (Thomas Hwang, Irvine; John Chow, Irvine; Abraham Ho, Cerritos; Gilbert Chang, Cerritos; William Yueh, Hacienda Heights; John Chang, Fullerton; Simon Yang, Huntington Beach; Philip Lin, Anaheim; Minoru Chen, Anaheim; David Dong, Monterey Park; and James Lee, San Gabriel.)



When I read the first statement, I did not feeling inwardly that I should do anything. After I finished reading this new statement, there was an urging from the Lord within me, causing deep feelings and touching words.



Almost two years have passed since various churches used the meeting hall of the Church in Rosemead to start the “door-knocking” training in the San Gabriel Valley area. The coordinating and serving brothers in the Church in Rosemead have not published anything to bring to the light the events which occurred. Also, many saints who were concerned about us hoped we would write something so that they would know the truth. Because the saints in many cities were not clear about the situation, rumors abounded. These events were of a negative nature and they involved problems with certain saints. If they were exposed, they would only bring out the worst and result in shame to the Lord’s name. It would be better if each of us would remain quiet before the Lord and let him illuminate and vindicate Himself. Because of this, we were silent toward the outside, hoping that in time these negative things would pass.



I have read carefully through these two statements. Instead of “clarifying” matters, they will cause those who do not know the facts but solely rely on these statements to have a mistaken impression of the Church in Rosemead. It will further destroy the fellowship among God’s children and divide God’s churches. The damage to the church will far exceed the damage brought on during the door-knocking movement.



I was personally involved in the events that occurred in the Church in Rosemead. If these misleading statements with partial truth are allowed to circulate among God’s children, if they are used as “standard answers” and I remain silent, an injustice would be done to the brothers and sisters in the Church in Rosemead. For this reason I feel the responsibility to bring out the truth in detail. After fellowship with the coordinating and serving brothers they all said, “Amen”, and they also felt that it was necessary to release the truth.



There were some truths in the statement. However, there were also many errors, twisting of facts, intentional covering up of truth, and lies. I want to start from the beginning, point by point to describe what actually happened. At the end, I will share my personal feelings before the Lord.



I. Page 2 of the statement – “1. In the San Gabriel Valley area where these events took place, only the Church in Rosemead had a meeting hall. So, it was decided that all the activities related to the door knocking “gospel festival”, including meetings and trainings be held in the Church in Rosemead. During the meeting, brother Wang expressed that he was happy to let the brothers use the meeting hall. He also expressed that the other elders would consent.”



True, it was agreed upon by John Kwan, Joseph Chu, and myself. But, during the ten days or so that followed, in dozens of big and small meetings, the brothers responsible for the door knocking training used many inflammatory remarks, revolutionary terms, and uttered nonsense. The damage they brought to the church was beyond our wildest dreams. Some of the trainers’ remarks were as follows:



· “Success of revolution depends on propaganda. To take the New Way we need to learn from the Communists in their propaganda techniques. The way of propaganda is through the clever use of our tongues.”



· “We need to learn from the Red Guards. Even, “we need to learn from Satan, for whenever God wants to do a work, Satan is always one step ahead.”



· “The New Way requires no prayers. The more you pray, the more confused you are. Just follow the instructions and do it. You’ll be all right.”



· “At the end of 1987, we’ll have ten new churches set up in the San Gabriel Valley to present to Brother Lee as a present to please him.” “Even though he says he does not want people to elevate him, actually in his heart he likes us to do it. Therefore, just go ahead and do it. This is the secret I have learned in the past years.”



· “We need to squeeze money out of brothers and sisters. For where their treasure is, there will their heart be also.”



Several saints who were originally from mainland China privately expressed that this kind of “leading” resembled the “Communists”. It brought them back to nightmare scenes of the past. One Lord’s Day morning after ten days of gospel “blitz” (a nazi term commonly used for door knocking), two men came to the meeting hall. They wanted to see the person in charge. First, they wanted to ascertain if there was indeed a church. Second, they wished to protest the disturbance the door knockers brought to their community. After I explained and apologized, they left. Later, I found out that one of the men had pulled out a gun and chased the door knockers from his home.



It is true, we opened the door and willingly let brothers use the meeting hall. Our initial intention was pure and simple: to spread the Gospel and lead people to salvation. But today after almost two years, my personal feeling is that we have let in the wolves, causing great damage to the church!



II. Page 3 of the statement – “3. It was decided that all the expenses relating to the gospel festival would come from the participating churches through their offerings. They would be passed on to the Church in Rosemead and be designated for the gospel festival. Brother Wang would personally handle the accounts for receipts and disbursements.”



This is an intentional covering up of the truth so that the readers would be led to believe that during that period, I was solely responsible for all the financial matters. The facts are as follows: At the time, myself, William Yeuh and Jacob Ho were responsible for the financial matters. Three of us were proposed by Minoru Chen and agreed upon by all. All of the expenditures, including those for the full-timers and their traveling expenses were approved, some by me, some by Jacob Ho. Those items with larger sums were co-approved by two of three. Copies of these documents are still on file in the Church in Rosemead. I did not handle the detailed accounts either. It was assigned to specific persons in the Church in Rosemead. Here, I would like to especially point out one thing that happened.



The planner of the door knocking training probably only had Witness Lee’s approval but did not present it to Philip Lee to secure his permission. Then one day in his office, Philip demanded to know who initiated this? Who gave permission? Who decided to have the offerings handled by the Church in Rosemead? Later, the planner confessed and repented to him. From then on, as it was announced in the meetings, the saints were to write their checks to “Living Stream Ministry” and designate the checks for the “Chinese Work”. After that, the Church in Rosemead was not involved in the matters of receiving and disbursing funds.



III. Page 3 – “On July 21, 1987, the Chinese-speaking brothers and sisters from Southern California held the first combined prayer meeting in Rosemead. There were one hundred sixty in attendance. The following week, it increased to one hundred ninety-eight”.



There is an error. The first combined prayer meeting was on July 14, not July 21. The attendance was one hundred sixty-five. One hundred ninety-eight came in the third week, not the second.



IV. Page 4 – “On August 28, 1987, the saints from other localities continued to arrive to participate in the activities. The gospel festival formally started the same night. In the first meeting, there were about four hundred fifty people.”



This is also an error. That night there were five hundred thirty in the meeting. In the young people’s room (via closed circuit TV) there were eighty- five. The total was six hundred fifteen.



V. Page 5 - “Because of the need, on the first Monday after the gospel festival (December 9, 1987) the brothers started the first home meeting training in Rosemead”.



Again an error. September 9 was a Wednesday, not Monday.



VI. Page 5 – “After a week, four brothers from the Church in Rosemead asked brother Wang to arrange for a meeting with Jacob Ho to fellowship regarding the cleaning of the meeting hall and repairing the damaged chairs. Brother Jacob Ho suggested that all the responsible ones from the Chinese-speaking meetings should meet, fellowship and resolve the matters”.



This is a twisting and purposely covering up the important facts, so that the reader would be misled to think: (1) cleaning the meeting hall and repairing the chairs were such minor matters. A few in the Church in Rosemead would capitalize on this matter and blow it out of proportion, causing problems and “resulting in discord among the saints, causing confusion and destroying oneness” (page 10 of the statement). Therefore, it was most unfortunate. (2) Jacob Ho’s proposal was right. Therefore, everything that happened in the Church in Rosemead was brought on by the saints themselves.



Here are the facts:



On the evening of September 16, 1987, after the church prayer meeting (that meeting was accused by some as a gathering to incite division), I remarked that because of the continuous use of the meeting hall for the training, there was continuous traffic day and night. It was a difficult job to keep the meeting hall clean, chairs arranged and the place kept safe. We needed to find a way for all to participate. Later three responsible brothers, Daniel Chu, Pang-Ho Chen and Albert Lee (not four) were compelled to seek fellowship with Jacob Ho. The reason they sought to have fellowship with Jacob Ho was because David Dong had returned from Chicago after the ten-day door knocking training to move his family here. At the same time, Jacob Ho was leading a group of young full-timers. Because he came to the meeting hall almost daily and he was more acquainted with the situation. We hoped to coordinate with him so that the responsibilities would not be solely borne by the saints in Rosemead.



When I called Jacob Ho, he very reluctantly agreed to meet and the time was set to have fellowship in the meeting hall on Saturday morning. Later he called to say that he did not have peace to meet with the other three brothers. He also said that if myself, Joseph Chu and John Kwan would like to meet instead, he was willing. I was puzzled by his uneasiness to meet with the other three brothers. I wondered if there were other hidden reasons. However, in order not to bring hardship on him, I cancelled the meeting originally scheduled for Saturday morning.



On the Lord’s day afternoon, Joseph Chu tried to reach me at the meeting hall. I was not there, but Jacob Ho happened to answer the phone. Joseph Chu took the opportunity to encourage Jacob Ho not to refuse fellowship with the brothers. If he was to continue in the area but was not willing to receive fellowship, there would be difficulties.



From the beginning of the door knocking movement, Joseph Chu did not agree with certain practices. On the one hand, his conscience did not allow him to follow blindly. On the other hand, he did not want to stop others from following. He felt the best way was to withdraw.



Several months before the door knocking training the English-speaking saints in the Church in Rosemead were led by John Kwan to go out door-knocking. Often, the Lord’s day meeting was cancelled. There were divisions and complaints everywhere.



Because of that, the Chinese-speaking saints were much more reserved concerning the New Way and door knocking. Many held the attitude of “wait and see”. That was why, during the ten-day door knocking training, many serving brothers and sisters from the church in Rosemead did not enthusiastically participate.



During that period, David Dong, Jacob Ho, and Aaron Lee paid two visits to Joseph Chu. Since they had known each other for years, Joseph Chu shared his feelings with these young co-workers. However, this fellowship later was used to secretly report on him.



After Jacob Ho refused to fellowship with the brothers, and while I was waiting for an opportunity to coordinate with the brothers holding the training in regards to cleaning the meeting hall and other services, I received an unexpected phone call from Taipei. Tuesday, September 22, 1987, from the telephone answering machine, I received a message from brother Witness Lee to call him in Taipei at 6:00 pm. At the time I had a feeling that the storms were gathering. Later it became very clear to me that “the authorities” had gathered enough information and had come to a decision to start taking action against those in the church in Rosemead who were not zealous for the New Way. Looking back today, their strategy was very obvious: first, to replace the eldership; second, to use the new elders to deal with the “disobedient” ones. That’s why the matter of fellowship with Jacob Ho concerning the meeting hall services took a new turn and became a step toward subsequent events.



VII. Page 6 – “Later, John Kwan called Witness Lee in Taipei, asking Francis Ball to return from Taipei to help administer the church…Shortly after, Witness Lee talked to David Wang over the phone, inquiring about Joseph Chu. David Wang said that he did not recall Witness Lee ever setting up Joseph Chu as an elder. Lee said, ‘Yes, I only arranged for Joseph Chu to be a co-worker. I hope he would continue as a co-worker and minister truth and life to the Church in Rosemead.’ The news that circulated that Witness Lee had terminated the eldership of Joseph Chu was inaccurate”.



This is confusing the facts on purpose, attempting to find a scapegoat, in order to mislead the reader into thinking:



(1) In the church in Rosemead there was an elder by the name of Francis Ball who was visiting Taipei. Since the Church in Rosemead now had problems, John Kwan quickly called Witness Lee in Taipei to send Francis Ball immediately to help take care of the church. Witness Lee because of his care for the church in Rosemead quickly agreed. (I had no idea that John Kwan made the phone call. Maybe it was one of those “private fellowships” which he often used as a reason. As to Francis Ball I have more to say later.)



(2) When Witness Lee talked to David Wang over the phone, he inquired about Joseph Chu. It was David Wang who had problems with Joseph Chu and brought up the matter questioning whether Joseph was even an elder. Witness Lee simply confirmed that Joseph Chu was only a co-worker, not an elder.



(3) Witness Lee cared for Joseph Chu very much even though he was not an elder. Witness Lee still hoped that he would continue, as a co-worker, to minister truth and life.



(4) Since both David Wang and Witness Lee denied that Joseph Chu was an elder, the news that was circulated about Witness Lee’s termination of Joseph Chu’s eldership was inaccurate.



The truth of the matter is: At 6:00 pm on Tuesday, September 22, 1987, I returned the phone call to Witness Lee. Right away Witness Lee asked, “David, could I ask you to tell me the entire matter concerning Joseph Chu?” To me, the question was not just unexpected, but too broad. I did not know where to start. I said, “Is it that you wish to know Joseph Chu’s attitude toward the New Way?” Witness Lee said, “O. K., let’s go ahead.”



Wang: “I feel that Joseph Chu had two problems with the New Way. First, that no one should bring the new ones to the church meetings (referring to the Lord’s Day meeting).”



Lee: “This is a wind from the devil. It is not my teaching … Who said that?…Whom did you hear it from?”



At his demand for an answer, I told him Andrew Yu said it. (As a matter of fact, this is Witness Lee’s own teaching. It is one of the important rules in practicing the New Way.) The reason I brought up Andrew Yu was because during the ten-day door knocking training Andrew Yu came to Rosemead and said it in the meeting. At this time, Witness Lee seemed to be taken by surprise. He paused for a while and the phone remained quiet. (Later, Andrew Yu called me. Then I found out that he was next to Witness Lee, listening to the entire conversation. He admitted that he had said it.) Then Witness Lee asked what was the second point Joseph Chu had problems with.



Wang: In order to release the spirit, it was necessary to raise both hands and jump on chairs.” (I meant the kind of teaching emphasized outward methods and neglected the reality in our spirit within, but Witness Lee interrupted me.)



Lee: Whose teaching is this? Who said it? This is not my teaching” (From his voice, he sounded very upset.)



Similarly under pressure, I told him Jacob Ho told people at Rosemead to do it. (Actually, Jacob Ho was not the only one.)



Lee: “What any co-worker says and does cannot represent me. Only what I said from my lips can represent me. What’s inside of me no one knows, only I myself do.”



Then he spent a great deal of time describing how he personally received a burden from the Lord, how the New Way is practiced, and so forth. At the end he said again, “If someone agrees (referring to the New Way), let him follow positively. If he opposes, it is a lack of wisdom.” Then the subject was returned to Joseph Chu.



Lee: “David, in your memory, do you recall if I ever set up Joseph Chu as an elder?”



Wang: “I remember when Joseph Chu first came to the United States, you asked him to go to Elden Hall (first meeting place of the Church in Los Angeles) to serve there.”



Lee: Yes, I was the one to ask him to go to Elden Hall. However, I asked him to go as a co-worker to help the saints in life and truth. Try to remember again. Did I ever set him up as an elder?”



Under his questioning, I said I did not remember. (It was the spring of 1977 when Joseph Chu came to Elden Hall to serve. At that time I was not yet entered into the coordination of the responsibility in the church. There was no way I could remember.)



Lee: “Yes, I remember, I did not. You asked Francis Ball to come to Rosemead to help. He is now in Southeast Asia. As soon as he returns to Taipei, I’ll ask him to go to Rosemead right away. As for now, the elders in the Church in Rosemead shall consist of you, John Kwan and Francis Ball, three of you. From now on, the matters for the church in Rosemead, you three decide. You don’t need to consult with Joseph Chu any more.” (When I heard this, I was stunned.)



After three day, on September 25, 1987, Francis Ball arrived in Rosemead.



At this point, I would like to share my feelings. Witness Lee totally ignored how Joseph Chu had coordinated with the brothers in the Church in Rosemead in the past ten years and denied his eldership in the church in Rosemead. This showed that he totally disregarded the feelings of the Church in Rosemead. Even if Joseph Chu is no longer an elder but a co-worker, concerning the church matters should not we consult with him anymore?



The fact is, ten years is not a short time. From the time in Elden Hall through moving to Rosemead, Joseph Chu followed the example of Paul as a “tent-maker”, supporting himself, his family and helping others, laboring to serve the church, longsuffering, shepherding God’s flock. He was not only gifted in the Word, but especially gifted in spiritual discernment. He not only ministered the Word in the church, but privately continued to care for and encourage the saints. For every decision in the church, whether it be minor or major, or setting up the serving ones, he always participated. He was always functioning as an elder in the church here. Witness Lee was not unaware of it. Now he had such a drastic change in attitude toward Joseph Chu, simply because Joseph Chu was not enthusiastic about the New Way. What is this? This is to set aside the dissenters.



VIII. Page 6 – “Francis Ball was an elder in the Church in San Bernardino. In January 1987, two elders in Rosemead, John Kwan and David Wang, requested Witness Lee to arrange for Francis Ball to come to Rosemead to strengthen the eldership there. After Witness Lee agreed on February 1, 1987, during a combined Lord’s table of the English-speaking and Chinese-speaking saints, John Kwan and David Wang formally announced it to the church”.



This is twisting the truth by using half the facts.



(1) Only John Kwan and David Wang were mentioned. Joseph Chu was deliberately left out. The reader would be led to think that Joseph Chu was not involved in the matter. The fact is, it was decide by three of us.



(2) The request to Witness Lee was made in January 1987. Witness Lee agreed immediately. Francis Ball was notified and was ready to move to Rosemead. There, on February 1, we formally announced him as an elder in Rosemead. The whole matter transpired in less than a month. This kind of inaccurate statement led the reader to think that since February 1, 1987, Francis Ball had been an elder in the Church in Rosemead. It tries to show that in September 1987, when Francis Ball came to Rosemead he was not “sent” but rather “returned” to Rosemead.



The truth is: The reason that three of us brothers had fellowship to consider inviting Francis Ball to Rosemead stemmed from the fact that since March 1986 Don Hardy was forced to leave the church in Rosemead for obscure reasons (more detail later). The English-speaking saints here needed help.



In June 1986 we brought this matter up. After fellowship and the decision, around July we asked John Kwan to ask Francis Ball privately if he had a burden to come. He expressed that no decision could be made until he had fellowship with Witness Lee.



In August 1986, Witness Lee held several conferences in Anaheim sharing about door knocking and home meetings. All of a sudden Witness Lee sarcastically said in one meeting, “the Church in Rosemead would even invite Francis Ball to be a pastor.” At this time, we found out Francis Ball had already talked to Witness Lee, but we still had not received a definite answer from Francis Ball whether or not he was coming to Rosemead.



In January 1987, we discussed the same matter again. Even though Witness Lee had consented, Francis Ball had to go to Taipei immediately to serve at the American school.

Having no timetable when to come back to the states, we arranged to have brother Francis and sister Martha meet with the saints in Rosemead on February 1, 1987.



Before the meeting on February 1, 1987, we four brothers (myself, Joseph Chu, John Kwan, Francis Ball) met at the elders’ room to pray. Francis Ball specifically asked the church not to announce his eldership till he came back from Taipei. So during that meeting brother and sister Ball were introduced to the church. No so-called “formal announcements were made by John Kwan and David Wang”. Afterwards, I checked with the leading one in the Church in San Bernardino regarding the living support of Francis Ball, and was told that Francis Ball is still an elder there, so they will continue to support his living.



In September 1987, Francis Ball came to Rosemead but he still would go back and forth to the Church in San Bernardino. He told me this matter to my face, so I clearly knew the situation. Up to this day, the Church in Rosemead has never formally announced Francis Ball’s eldership.



On September 25, 1987, Francis Ball came to Rosemead. That same night he and John Kwan came to my home. Through his notes from Taipei, Francis Ball told me and John Kwan what Witness Lee wanted Francis Ball to tell us:



(1) The accusation against Joseph Chu that as a result of several times of fellowship between local saints and Joseph Chu, many saints were influenced by him and not following the New Way.



(2) Witness Lee never appointed Joseph Chu as an elder.



(3) Repeated Witness Lee’s message about the New Way and its practices. If you agree, then you should pursue the New Way aggressively. Witness Lee would not tolerate any opposition.



(4) From now on, the elders of the Church in Rosemead are three: John Kwan, Francis Ball and David Wang.



On September 27, 1987, the whole church in Rosemead came together on the Lord’s Day. It was Francis Ball’s first meeting in Rosemead. He gave a message entitled, “Following a Man”. He said explicitly we have to follow Witness Lee – the Lord’s up-to-date ministry. After Francis Ball finished his message, Daniel Chu stood up and said, “Brothers and sisters, we can no longer keep silent, we can no longer go against our conscience. We have to rise up and speak.” A tremendous echo of ”Amens” was heard in the meeting. After the meeting, many saints surrounded Francis Ball and questioned him. On a Lord’s day approximately two to three weeks later, Francis Ball got even more bold to announce that only the Lord’s table meeting is a meeting of the church, all other meetings are ministry meetings. Some left the meetings and some contended with Francis Ball after they heard what he announced.



IX. On Page 6 the statement said, “October 1, 1987, Thursday, Lin Rang, Paul Wu and Titus Chu came to the United States from Taipei. The next night the leading ones of the Chinese-speaking meeting decided to have a special Lord’s day meeting in Anaheim on October 4. The three brothers from Taipei would share the practice and blessings of the New Way in Taipei. Saturday, Francis Ball tried several times to contact David Wang without success, so Francis Ball and John Kwan tentatively decided that the whole church should attend the special meeting in Anaheim. Then late at night, Saturday, Francis Ball finally got hold of David Wang on the phone and decided that Rosemead would have their regular meeting on Sunday, October 4. The saints would be free to attend either the meeting in Rosemead or in Anaheim. The rumor that Francis Ball locked up the door of the meeting hall and wanted to excommunicate a brother is not true.”



The above is a lie with the intention of covering up the facts. Until some saints called me, I did not know about the arrival of the three brothers from Taipei nor the decision to have the special meeting in Anaheim. They were asking whether there would be a meeting in Rosemead or if we were all to go to Anaheim. Then this matter was made known to me. I felt confused and wondered why this matter was kept secret. Because on the last Lord’s Day the church had announced a joint meeting in Rosemead with Alhambra. How come, all of a sudden, the meeting was changed to Anaheim? Who made the decision? After this whole matter was over, I heard that that special meeting was intended to be held at the meeting hall in Rosemead originally, but because of some unknown reasons, they could not make up their mind until the last moment. What were the other goals beside “share the practice and blessings of the New Way in Taipei”?



On October 3, Saturday evening, the young people had a meeting in the home of Daniel Chu. Midway through the meeting David Dong and Francis Ball suddenly appeared unannounced. After the meeting, Daniel Chu announced in Chinese that there would be a special meeting in Anaheim on Sunday, the next morning. Because the meeting had been announced on such short notice, there was no way to notify all the saints. Thus the saints were free to go to either the meeting in Rosemead or in Anaheim. The Church in Rosemead would still have a regular meeting. David Dong interpreted the above to Francis Ball and gave him the wrong impression, saying that Daniel Chu asked the saints not to go to Anaheim.



At 12:30 a. m. the same night, Francis Ball called me and complained that Daniel Chu was not an elder nor authorized by any elder. He asked why Daniel Chu dared to tell the saints not to go to Anaheim. To Francis Ball, this was an extremely serious matter. I asked him, Where are you now? He said that he is in the meeting hall. I told him that since it is so late, to wait until morning. Francis Ball replied, “No, I already had fellowship with Philip Lee and John Kwan and made the decision that we three (Francis Ball, John Kwan, and David Wang) should deal with Daniel Chu strongly and promptly. I said that in dealing with any matter, for the sake of fairness, we ought to hear the story from both sides. He answered, Let us call Daniel Chu right away, and ask him to come. Then I said, “it is almost 1:00 a. m., better wait till morning”. But, Francis Ball still insisted on dealing with Daniel Chu right away. He said that there was no need to hear Daniel Chu’s side since David Dong was a witness. Francis Ball also blamed me for not believing him. I said that my conscience would not allow me to deal with Daniel Chu without hearing his side. Then, the conversation stopped unhappily. This was not fellowship, but forcing to connive with what they had already decided to do. This is the first time I experienced such a thing in my church life and my spirit was already grieved.



After a short while, my phone rang again. It was brother Francis Ball again. He said tomorrow (actually today, Sunday, as it was already well-past 1:00 a. m.), the three brothers from Taipei would conduct a ministry meeting in Anaheim. All the churches in Southern California would go to Anaheim. So John Kwan and Francis Ball decided to padlock the meeting hall gate requiring the saints to go to Anaheim. I told him that I disagreed



Then Francis ball asked me, “Is the Rosemead church one with the ministry?” At this time, both of us raised up our voices and began to argue. I said that oneness is of the Spirit. If we are not one in the Spirit, there is no oneness even though we sit together. If we are one in the Spirit, even though physically we don’t go, we still are one. Based on our past experience, every time we locked up the meeting hall and went to Anaheim, there were still some saints who went to the hall as usual. And this conference was arranged in such a sudden way, there is no way to inform everybody. Even if we were able to inform every saint, because of long traveling distances, some still would want to meet in Rosemead. What should we do? Ask the saints to go home? Francis Ball said, “That is right. Just fit into the ministry’s leading to meet at home”. I suggested to give the saints freedom to go or to remain, just don’t try to stop the meeting at the hall, but Francis Ball disagreed.



So the phone conversation stopped gloomily. I was grieved to the uttermost. There was not the problem of right or wrong, wise or unwise in dealing with the church affairs. The problem was with his spirit. That was not the so-called “fellowship” either. It was something like prior to a certain meeting, he already made up a copy of resolution of that meeting and sent it to me and forced me to sign on that resolution.



After a while, the phone rang a third time. Francis Ball said that I should try my best to notify the saints to go to Anaheim. (The time was past 1:00 a. m., there was no way to notify the saints.) Rosemead would still have a meeting that Lord’s day. By this time I had nothing to say. I could not sleep the rest of the night. I cried before the Lord for the church, for the children of the Lord, and for the overall situation today. I just wept with extreme sorrow.



At 4:00 a. m. that day, there was a strong earthquake in the Rosemead area. The Lord spoke to me, His words strengthened me, and I renewed my consecration. Early in the morning, I went to the meeting hall to inspect for any damage. There I found Daniel Chu also there, so I asked him why he told the young people not to go to Anaheim. He denied saying such a thing and said that there were over forty saints at that meeting who can be his witnesses. Later on, I verified this with many saints who had been at that meeting that Daniel Chu was right. From that day on, I refused to have any more fellowship with Francis Ball. I also decide to withdraw from the eldership.



To deal with Daniel Chu and to lock the meeting hall were not coincidental events. Daniel Chu did not participate in the door knocking training. He was one of the three that sought fellowship with Jacob Ho. In addition to these, in that morning meeting, Francis Ball gave the message of “Following a Man”. Daniel Chu was also the first one to stand up to oppose him to his face in that meeting. No wonder he became a target for attack. It is a fact that the Church in Rosemead did not follow the leading of the ministry and ministry station in an absolute way. Francis Ball came to Rosemead with a special mission to put the church in proper order and to use any means to accomplish his mission. The October 1987 phone bill revealed that Francis Ball had talked to Philip Lee for eleven minutes at 12:25 a. m., October 4. That’s about the same time he called me to demand that I deal with Daniel Chu and lock up the meeting hall.



X. Page 6, “Next Lord’s Day, October 11, 1987, David Wang unexpectedly read a letter of his resignation from the eldership. In the letter, he also mentioned that Joseph Chu is no longer an elder.”



On October 11, I read the letter of resignation in the meeting, to declare my resignation from the eldership. The reason was not only that Joseph Chu was removed from the eldership, but also because of the following three points as the content of the letter:



(1) Don Hardy was forced to leave Rosemead. Up to now there has been no explanation. The sweet coordination and oneness was destroyed, and the church was damaged. (Don Hardy was one of the elders in Rosemead, and also served the Lord as a co-worker for over twenty years. In March 1986 he was forced to leave Rosemead by a five-man committee for an unknown reason. The five-man committee was set up as a result of John Kwan going to Anaheim to accuse Don Hardy. Afterwards, none of the five men would bear the responsibility to explain the matter to the Church in Rosemead.)



(2) Since the start of the so-called New Way and the System Reform, serious division and confusion occurred among the saints. This happened firstly among English-speaking saints, then among Chinese-speaking saints. Anyone who hoisted the emblem of the ministry could do whatever he pleased and the elders were rendered helpless.

(3) Because Joseph Chu was not enthused with the New Way, he was removed from the responsibility of the church affairs. The real shepherd of the flock of God was put aside. A man-pleaser was put in charge. My conscience could not go along with that. When Francis Ball first came to Rosemead, I intended to cooperate with him, but after a few weeks, it was clear to me from his actions and words that he did not come to shepherd the flock.



XI. Page 7 – “When Witness Lee heard about David Wang’s resignation, he called David Wang to ask him to remain. Witness Lee also asked David Wang to tell the church to correct the wording in his resignation letter which mentioned that Joseph Chu was no longer an elder. And also what Witness Lee had shared with David Wang over the phone regarding how Joseph Chu should continue to release the truth and supply life. David Wang consented but did not do so”.



The above is a lie. I did exactly what brother Witness Lee told me to do. There are tapes of the meeting to prove it. To say I agreed to do so and did not is a flagrant lie.



XII. Page 7 – “On October 18, 1987 (Lord’s Day), after the Lord’s table, the meeting was in chaos with a few saints accusing Francis Ball. On the next Lord’s Day, October 25, 1987, the meeting was even more chaotic. Some even tried to remove the elders and elect new ones”.



On page 12 – “In the Bible, in the history of the Lord’s recovery, we cannot find any truth or example that saints remove elders or elect elders”. On the same page, “The Church in Rosemead elected elders in the meeting. This kind of practice is totally against the Truth, and is unprecedented in the Lord’s recovery”.



The above sayings are deceptive and deceiving. Before I reveal the true picture. Let me insert a word. Within the booklet entitled “Clarifying Statement” a letter was enclosed. It stated in the letter, “In writing this ‘clarifying statement’ we have had much, much fellowship and have endeavored to find out the origin and the progress of the disturbance, hoping to precisely and accurately present the whole picture before the saints’ consciences”. If this is so, why are there so many errors and mistakes? Let me present to you more accurate information. To give you an example: the so-called election of the elders took place on November 1, and not October 25.



On November 1, 1987, the Chinese-speaking and English-speaking saints all met together. Before the meeting, Don Hardy had agreed with Francis Ball and John Kwan that Don Hardy would tell the whole church how the five-man committee carried out orders to remove him. He gave a detailed description of the course of events. In general, Don Hardy said that “Witness Lee and the “Ministry Station” were very unhappy with him and were waiting for an excuse to expel him. So when John Kwan went to Anaheim to accuse Don Hardy before some co-workers and elders, the opportunity had arrived. The matter was considered very serious and so, a five-man committee was set up using worldly methods to crush him. (this expression was used by Don himself) and to force him to walk away. They not only demanded him to give up the eldership, but also to stop serving the Lord. (Minoru Chen and Francis Ball were members of this five-man committee. The other three have already apologized to Don Hardy, one of them even tearfully apologized to the Church in Rosemead. Their names won’t be mentioned for the sake of gaining brothers. Up to now, John Kwan denies that he accused Don Hardy. He said he went to Anaheim just to seek private and personal fellowship.)



After Don Hardy’s fellowship, the facts were exposed and many saints started to speak. They felt that the church eldership system was intervened, and the sovereignty of local administration was destroyed. This kind of practice was not only contrary to the truth, but also unrighteous. John Kwan and Francis ball have to bear the actual responsibility for the “Don Hardy incident”. Saints rose up to rebuke John Kwan and Francis Ball and pointed out that John Kwan is the one who should resign from the eldership instead of Don Hardy. They also requested Francis Ball to leave Rosemead and take responsibility for the event. At this time, a brother who had been saved for two years, stood up and suggested electing elders by majority vote. While he was asking the saints to vote, by raising their hands, Daniel Chu stopped him and calmed him down. If the electing and changing of elders had been pre-arranged, why would Daniel Chu pull the new brother down? Who was elected and who was replaced? “The statement” repeatedly stressed this incident with the intention of creating confusion and damaging the image of the Church in Rosemead.



XIII. Page 7 – “On May 7, 1988, the board of trustees, acting on behalf of the Church in Rosemead, wrote a letter exposing Francis Ball and John Kwan. This letter demanded that these two brothers vacate the church premises before May 21, 1988, and forbade them to step onto the premises of the church. Should they not comply with this directive, the board will take appropriate measures to have them forcefully evicted.”





It was very unpleasant to require Francis Ball and John Kwan to leave. But to a discerned one who should ask the following question: “What was the reason that the saints in Rosemead took such a drastic action?” The statement never mentioned a word about such a crucial question. Only if such a thing happened in your own family could you realize our feeling at that time.



Frankly speaking, the root of the problem in today’s so-called local churches is that the leading ones have seriously deviated from the truth. Since February 1986, the movement started in the whole U.S.A. for all the elders to sign their names to a letter submitting absolutely to Witness Lee. From then on, it was to be under one leadership, one goal, one trumpet, one way and one ministry. Waves and waves of movements followed. This is what caused John Kwan and Francis Ball to show their absolute loyalty to Witness Lee. They lorded it over the saints. They did not shepherd the Church of God, but on the contrary, they used highhanded methods and did a lot of things to damage the church. The trustees of the Church in Rosemead wrote an eight-page letter to Francis Ball and a four-page letter to John Kwan. In these letters, we gave details, facts and evidences of all the things they had done unrighteously and contrary to the truth.



In summary, the reasons Francis Ball was asked to leave are as follows:



(1) At the beginning, we were expecting that he came here to help the local church, especially the English-speaking saints. If he would come to Rosemead with the burden to take care of the church and shepherd the saints, he should first of all visit the saints and spend time to observe the saints and to realize their situation and needs. He should meet with the serving ones and pray with them looking to the Lord for leading. Regrettably, he disappointed all the saints. The first Lord’s Day after his arrival, he gave a message on following a man, meaning to follow Witness Lee. Isn’t this the spirit of division and parties which we see in the Church in Corinth which resulted in the Apostle Paul’s condemnation? Due to Francis Ball’s message, anger was stirred up in the meeting. Most of the saints were already unhappy. He should have had some feelings about the reactions of the saints. The way Francis Ball delivered his message was not accidental or a mistake. After that, his behavior and actions proved his intentions. These included: contact with the ministry station in dealing with the so-called dissenters, locking up the meeting hall, and forcing the saints to go to Anaheim’s ministry meetings, to express his absolute oneness with “the ministry”. This is concrete evidence that Francis Ball came to Rosemead with the mission to force the church to submit to “The Ministry of Witness Lee” using highhanded tactics. It was not only against our intention to invite him to Rosemead, but also contrary to the vision which we have seen.



(2) After the incident of Don Hardy was exposed, much blame was put on Francis Ball because he was one of the five-man committee. As a matter of fact, at that time the saints lost their confidence in Francis Ball. If he was really concerned about the church and had some feeling for the saints, he should openly apologize, and voluntarily resign the eldership to show his responsibility and let the church have a chance to recover from the wound. He not only wouldn’t depart but seemed careless about the suffering and agonies of the saints. He acted as if nothing had happened, and continued to carry out his mission as usual. Was he a good shepherd led by the Lord, or a hired one



(3) We had patiently waited for six months hoping the situation would improve. But things developed in the opposite direction: the coordination was paralyzed. We had one church and yet two Lord’s tables with two breads. There was a deepening of mistrust among the saints. We realized that as long as Francis Ball stayed in Rosemead, the church had no way to simply follow the headship of Christ and the leading of the Holy Spirit. But to whom could we appeal?



(4) Under normal church conditions, the headship of Christ is respected; the apostle confirms the elders’ established by the Holy Spirit; the elders administrate the church. This is a glorious testimony. But if the condition is abnormal, and the headship of Christ is usurped, then the emphasis of “the Apostle’s authority” and “the elders position” is not only meaningless spiritually, but fall into the worldly principle and methods. The church is the church of the saints (1 Cor. 14:33).

When the church is being damaged, every member has a responsibility to rise up to protect the church. The board of trustees has an even greater responsibility. Even though not all the trustees were elders, starting from Elden Hall they all were bearing responsibility for the church. They were all clear about the church’s condition, and consecrated everything for the Lord’s testimony in this locality. When the church was manipulated to such an extent, it was the duty of the brothers to rise up and defend the church. In order to stop Francis Ball from continuing to do things that damaged the oneness of the church, he was asked to leave. Titus 3:10 says, “Reject a factious man after a first and second warning”.



Concerning brother John Kwan:



(1) It is unpardonable that John Kwan has not borne responsibility for the incident that forced Don Hardy out of the eldership by a five-man committee without any explanation. He claimed that he sought “personal fellowship” with the co-workers in Anaheim and did not have an accusation, which became a pretext to form a five-man committee. He could have stood up to clear up the matter and made an apology to the church if he had been utilized to cause damage to Don Hardy, the Church in Rosemead, and himself. If he had done so, I believe that the brothers would have excused him. Yet, he refuses to apologize and denies any wrongdoing. As a result of such incidents, the sweet coordination of the leading ones in the Church in Rosemead has been damaged and has never been restored.



(2) In the past period between late 1986 and early 1987 when door knocking was at its peak in many churches in the United States, John Kwan strongly promoted the door knocking movement in the English-speaking meetings in Rosemead. With charts of statistics, maps, and ‘The Mystery of Human Life”, etc. By canceling the Lord’s Day morning meetings, everyone was forced to go door knocking. After protests from some saints, those who did not participate in door knocking were allowed to remain in the meeting hall. They would pray-read the scripture verses used for the door knocking gatherings and home meetings. After several months, saints were murmuring everywhere. And meeting attendance decreased gradually. This was contrary to reports I heard that the English-speaking meeting in Rosemead was very successful in the door knocking and became a “model” for every church in the states. On one occasion, Witness Lee praised John Kwan in an elders meeting. That praise ruined him and caused him to strive for even more recognition. He was numb to the feeling of the wounded saints. The attendance in the English-speaking meeting that had been over one hundred decreased to thirty or forty. There were no new ones brought in. The damage to the Church in Rosemead became worse.



(3) Being an elder in our locality, it should have been John Kwan’s duty to feed the local flock. He should have considered the real situation and the need of the saints and to go on in the fellowship of the saints. He could have endeavored to keep the unity of the Spirit and to build up the church in peace. He could have ceased to jump into the “New Way”. John Kwan also had the responsibility to advise Francis Ball who, after arriving in Rosemead, took the risk and tyrannically carried out his mission without a clear understanding of the situation in our locality. This was opposite to what we had expected. John Kwan has no intention to repent for the damage caused to the Church in Rosemead by the dismissal of Don Hardy and the door knocking movement. Because of his lack of repentance, there is no chance for the brothers to forgive him. Furthermore, he has fully cooperated with Francis Ball and pressed on all the way. Before sending the two letters from the board of trustees, brother Abel Chu begged the brothers to give him one last chance to urge John Kwan to repent. One day Abel Chu spent about an hour during a lunch break to fellowship with John Kwan at a place near John Kwan’s office in Pasadena. Abel Chu’s exhortation had no effect. Finally, we decided that he would not repent and he has allowed the situation to drag on. To halt the departure of the saints and damage of the church, we had no choice except to send out the two letters that expelled John Kwan and Francis Ball. Letter to Francis



XIV. Finally, I would like to fellowship some of my personal feelings before the Lord.



(1) Most of the original saints in the Church in Rosemead moved here from Elden Hall of the Church in Los Angeles. In 1974, there were less than one hundred saints left in Elden Hall after the migration to Anaheim. They were greatly blessed by the Lord for the saints were in one accord. By January 1980 there were about two hundred saints. To meet the practical need, the Chinese-speaking meeting began on June 15, 1980. They started with sixty-eight in attendance. In April 1982, a parcel of land, where the meeting hall in Rosemead is now situated, was purchased. The construction of the meeting hall began in July 1983, and was completed in February 1984. The new meeting hall was officially used in March 1984. The attendance increased to two hundred fifty because the saints were in one accord in the gospel, coordination of service, and there was harmonious building up of the church. In 1985 we began outreach. On January 13, thirty saints from Rosemead began to meet in Hacienda Heights. On March 3, several saints from Rosemead went to meet in Torrance. On December 1, ninety plus saints originally from the Church in Rosemead began to meet in Alhambra and raised up the Lord’s testimony there. Brother Abraham Chang had personally reported to brother Witness Lee that he had never seen any church among the churches with as much blessing by the Lord as the Church in Rosemead for the genuine and sweet oneness and coordination there.



(2) The Church in Rosemead began to suffer these heavy trials in early 1986. This situation reflects that the relation between the work and the church is very abnormal. The matter in the Church in Rosemead is a typical “symptom” and just the tip of the iceberg. The ministry work is for the church. The church should not be for the ministry work. That is in accordance with the principle in the scriptures. Unfortunately, things have gone the wrong direction and men have tried their best to let the work control the churches. “Authority” has been emphasized. The saints are required to follow a person without any questions. This is definitely against the principle in the Bible. I absolutely believe that today there would not be the so-called “Rosemead Incident” if the abnormal situation never happened.



(3) I would like to say a few words to those eleven brothers who signed the pamphlet “Clarifying Statement”. It is possible that the “genealogy of Chang” may be written by the Lee family. As stated by Luke in the beginning of his gospel, “It seemed good for me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, …that you may know the truth concerning the things of which you have been informed”. Luke wrote his gospel, even though he wasn’t one of the original twelve disciples of the Lord and had not followed the Lord while he was on the earth. Brothers, I know your character because you have been my acquaintances for many years. I regret that you have signed a statement so full of mistakes, disguising the facts, concealing the real situation, and devising all kinds of falsehood. Are you clear about the real situation in the Church in Rosemead? Have you followed all things closely? Did you read the pamphlet “Clarifying Statement” carefully before signing your name? Do you dare to bare the responsibility in every point made in the statement? Is this the way you show that you are loyal to a certain person? Are you forced to submit to certain pressures? Are you willingly being utilized by someone? Why did you follow the footsteps of the 1986 five-man committee that was utilized to deal with Don Hardy and to cause the damage to both Don Hardy and the Church in Rosemead?



(4) In the past year, the Church in Rosemead has been peaceful. The saints have been very diligent in the Lord’s Word. In personal life or church life, we have learned to be under the headship of Christ. We have to be humble before the Lord, fear Him and trust Him in the days to come because the enemy continues to isolate and divide us.



(5) Hallelujah, thanks be to the Lord. I have said what He has directed me to say. I am very released and am enjoying the presence of the Holy Spirit. May the Lord grant every one of us a pure heart and a discerning spirit. May the Lord bless His people and His churches. I would like to close this writing with a hymn written by Watchman Nee.



Thy saving arm a refuge is,

My Savior God to me;

Thou as the Father keepeth them

Who put their trust in Thee.

The sheep and shepherd are of one,

The head and body same;

None e’er can pluck from out Thy hand

The child who trusts Thy Name



A thousand hands won’t hinder me,

Nor will ten thousand eyes;

The thorns upon the road but help

Me onward to the prize.

Arise my spirit and my heart,

And let the world go by;

The Lord of life will take me soon

To be with him on high.



The truth should triumph and be king,

And Freedom should be queen;

But falsehood, which has rampant run,

Head of the world is seen.

We ask thee, Truth, to quickly come

And bring Thy light from heav’n;

The foe be crushed and all Thy sons

Into Thy bosom giv’n.



Your brother in the Lord, David Wang

June 1989, Rosemead, California

Boaz 提到...

一九九○年代,香港教會離開李常受系統的宣言

  這是一份公開的文獻,歡迎針對其內容,理性思索「香港教會」為何會離開李常受的「聚會所」系統。

聯結如下:

http://blog.sina.com.tw/archive.php?blog_id=1961&md=entry&id=9649