M. Stephan Choe (Bochum), 21. Febr. 2001
I want to report here on my previous attempts to persuade personal discussions with Father Abraham Lee to reform. I will also report on the many conversations with M. Kaleb Hong (Heidelberg), although one can already find out in my earlier presentation "Cause, Course and Perspective of the UBF Germany Reform Movement" of Dec. 22, 2000, how the talks of the five Senior Leader of the UBF Germany since his years, especially last year, had run over the need of reform problems. My open letter to Father Abraham Lee and Isaac Lee may serve as additions.
Since his years there have been intensive discussions and fierce arguments about the problems that need to be reformed among the Five, because after the leadership meeting in Cologne they spent an extra night there and had time to talk about God's work. If an unjust action was committed by M. Samuel Lee, as in the deposition of M. Peter Chang (Columbus, USA) or James Kim (Toledo), there were tough clashes between the Five. Father Abraham Lee and Kaleb Hong were like a "sworn" party for M. Samuel Lee. M. Isaac Lee and I tried in vain to convince her of the injustice of M. Samuel Lee.
Of course, the Five also talked about planning the works of God in Germany. Again and again I have suggested in vain to make binding decisions through discussions. But Father Abraham Lee refused, reserving the sole decision authority for himself. That's why I asked him a few times what sense this regular meeting would have. He did not answer. He usually talked like this when talking to the Five: he heard the opinions of others, but made it unclear at the end of the conversation what had actually been decided. Later, he himself determined and said: He had determined himself, because the opinions of the 4 leaders were different. Or he said to the protester, "That was just your opinion. Others felt differently. "
Once - that was about 5 years ago - Father Abraham Lee agreed because of the urgency of all four senior leaders, of course, too. M. Kaleb Hong to make the statutes of the UBF Germany and to form a decision-making body. M. Kaleb Hong was commissioned by P. Abraham Lee to write the draft of the statutes. But he did not because P. Abraham Lee did not want this. However, M. Kaleb Hong said on June 26 last year in the center of Cologne in the talks of the 6 leaders (ie, the 5 senior leaders and M. Paulus Kwon), he would not have written the statutes out of laziness !! So listen! I had at the youth conference of 25.-27. April 2000 in the youth hostel in Winterberg Siegerland as a preacher to Jak. 1 participated. M. Kaleb Hong, M. Isaac and I shared the same room. One night I was with M. Caleb 3 clock hard to midnight until midnight. The main difference of opinion was that he claimed to obey the leader. He called M. Abraham Moses Ju in Bonn as a model of devotion and obedience, because he commutes for almost 10 years between the job in Frankfurt and Bonn. I meant: you have to help the leader according to the truth of God. The commuting of Abraham Moses Ju was exaggerated. But the next day I and M. Kaleb Hong agreed in a brief conversation in the room that we should persuade Father Abraham to make the statutes. M. Kaleb Hong was actually in charge of the statutes and organization of the administration. He finally obeyed the leader almost completely.
The conversation of the Five on May 27, 2000 in Cologne showed only once again how immovable the fixed thought-building of P. Abraham or Kaleb Hong was. They claimed that while God's servant is imperfect, one ought absolutely to obey his guidance.
Father Abraham Lee warned about this time again, directly and indirectly, before the free exchange of views of several employees. He said that if you had any suggestions for reform, you should talk to him personally. So far, however, he had ignored the opinions of individual leaders for reform or for clarifying the injustice of the leadership only as the opinion of one or two.
Through the endless conversations and repeated futile attempts to reform through personal talks with Father Abraham Lee and overcome the injustice of leadership, the reform leaders came to realize that as many employees as possible should now open their mouths and express their opinions the reform finally happens. That was one reason for the reform movement in Germany.
Father Abraham Lee, and of course M. Kaleb Hong, intentionally declared only myself and M. Isaac Lee guilty after the beginning of the German reform movement, but the other reformers as innocent, unsuspecting followers of myself and Isaac Lee. See Abraham Lee's letter to us both of Dec. 20, 2000. Apparently M. Abraham Lee took over the tactics of M. Samuel Lee. M. Samuel Lee did not engage in talks with Korea's reformed heroes. However, he deliberately attacked his "subordinate" people as the main culprit to make him tired of Hirte Caleb Chung. Because M. Samuel Lee reserves the power to decide for himself, the Reforhirs of Korea have tried to speak directly with him. But he avoided the conversation.
M. Abraham Lee has not, ever since his punishment until today, petitioned Isaac Lee for talks. He had me through his "subordinate" staff again and again to talk, to "penance" or to "yielding" in the essential reform issues challenge. He apparently wanted to make me or Isaac Lee tired. He has not sent any answer to my open letter to him. M. Kaleb Hong or others eagerly defended M. Abraham Lee. But M. Abraham Lee may respond in his own name or explain what he himself should explain or answer, and not by any other person, be it M. Kaleb Hong or Mark Kum. He had finally announced the punishment in his name and written the letter of Dec. 20, 2000 also in his name.
In July, before M. Isaac visited Lee M. Kaleb Hong at the youth meeting in Heidelberg, M. Kaleb Hong called me and suggested that he - but not as a representative of M. Abraham Lee - speak with me. I explained to him something like this: "So far, we have spoken so many times in an infinite number of hours, and we have hardly any significant results. Now I see little sense to speak with you personally. Instead, we need to talk as much as possible with many leaders, or arrange for talks with representatives to resolve the key issues. "
P. Abraham Lee had promised at the meeting of the Six Leaders on June 26, 2000, all reform proposals after the summer conference of 10-13. Aug 2000. However, after the conference, three days before the first meeting in Rehe on Sept. 6, 2000, he promised to punish me and Isaac Lee by e-mail without being allowed to attend the meeting without a notice of resignation. M. Kaleb Hong and Peter Chang had M. Wesley Song (Heidelberg) and Stephanus Park (Bonn) each come to the meeting, although they are not leaders. The two then stood together with M. Markus Kum at the entrance of the conference room and tried to prevent me (and Isaac Lee) from entering the hall.
Around mid-November 2000, M. Kaleb Hong called me and suggested that I speak with him personally. He said he was not the representative of Father Abraham Lee. I explained to him that if he is not a representative of P. Abraham Lee, there is little point in talking to him. I suggested that he meet M. Andreas Ahn, who is the representative of the reformers. He did not want to meet him.
At the beginning of December 2000, the German reformers had asked M. Abraham Lee in writing to withdraw the sanction by the end of January 2001, to make three-year treasury reports from tithes from all over Germany to Cologne and to clearly state his willingness to reform. The reformers would all come to the ladder meeting.
I met on December 13, 2000 M. Abraham Lee in Cologne. At the beginning of the interview, I asked him, "How are you going to start to solve the crisis?" He clearly stated that his opinion was unchanged from the beginning of the reform movement: I and Isaac would have to repent and not cause trouble. Otherwise there would be no point in keeping the meeting together. But I suggested to him: 4 representatives each of the reformers and 4 representatives of him sitting together to talk at the table. He sent after a few days a letter dated Dec. 20, 2000 to me and Isaac Lee. It contained almost everything he said to me on December 13th.
M. Markus Kum sent on January 29, 2001 a letter to the reform leaders together with the one-year cash report of tithes. Which issues are reported there! For many years there has been a suggestion at the board meeting, either from M. Paulus Kwon or from another, to support the travel expenses of the financially weak student leaders to the board meeting. M. Abraham Lee had repeatedly refused.
Mark Kum wrote in the second half of his letter: "I hope that we will endure each other well and, in spite of our weaknesses and sins, come together and serve for the discipleship work. Let us pray for Father Abraham Lee, who is currently studying Hebrews. I'm sure he's ready to serve the discipleship work with each one of you. Each of us is a living stone for God's house, which is well edifyingly necessary. That's why we should just come together and share our opinions and pray together for the discipleship work. "
Because M. Mark wrote: "I am sure that he (M. Abraham Lee) is ready to serve the discipleship work with each of you," the reformers wanted to know exactly if M. Abraham Lee is indeed ready to reform and take back the punitive measures wants, so that everyone could come to the meeting. Therefore, at the beginning of February, the reformers wrote a letter to M. Abraham Lee asking him to say in his name by 15 February whether he would withdraw the sanction and other reformists' light demands they made in their previous letter Wanted to meet him. But until today there is no answer.
The reformers now want to move forward with the reform. We want to make concrete draft reforms. Anyone can suggest or design. You can read the rough planning of the drafts on ubf2000.de in the minutes of the reform meeting in January. We will hear the broadest possible opinions from many, according to the draft. But we need God's wisdom, his guidance and his blessing. Pray kneeling to God for us.
Comments
Post a Comment