T. Austin Sparks Had the Sin of Silence on True Locality

Herald Hsu, deep inside, had the sin as T. Austin Sparks of marrying Nee to Lee

Because of the sin of coyness of T. Austin Spark's and lack of detail, he remained in generalizations and was of no help to Witness Lee’s legalizing locality on a modern day city basis. Because of this error on T. Austin Sparks side, in a sin of silence, he effectively had engaged in the same sin as Herald Hsu, in marrying Nee to Lee, not standing up for Watchman Nee's impeccable accuracy on the matter. There is a true locality in every local ground accessible area, that is obvious, otherwise we would have no space. True locality is smaller than a modern day city, since in a true locality everyone can walk to the assembly hall. You can’t do that in a city of millions of people. This was Witness Lee’s error, and it was also Sparks error, since he was unwilling to point this out, lost in his own generalizations which he gets carried away with and clouds his mind, losing the dissecting work like Watchman Nee. Watchman Nee on the other hand just stepped back from the whole mess and clarified it all in “Rethinking the Work”.

Can you seen in your spirit and your heart the misrepresentation of true locality? The flesh of men is trying to deny such a simple proof in the Word of God.

Herald Hsu says, “I didn't care about the whole household of God but only built up my denomination or Watchman Nee’s groups (or local churches).”

I believe Herald was immature and did not see what Watchman Nee was really doing. Herald needed to be like that 12 year old boy Jesus who we do not see again in the Bible until he was in his late twenties. I seem to have been immune from these problems myself in my life in Christ, instead just getting to know my Lord and Savior and things of God.

When I read Watchman Nee, what I receive is a precision instrument, like that of a knife, sharper than any two-edged sword, for Nee’s writings are so perfectly aligned with the Word of God. T. Austin Spark’s writings are different. They have less precision, but they have benefit also in that their generalities are a nice diversion from the pinpoint accuracy of Watchman Nee’s writings. Nee’s writings are intense. Spark’s writings are less intense but add to a nice rounding out of thought..

This is the reason in this ongoing argument between proper locality and no locality at all, Watchman Nee got it right, Witness Lee got it wrong, and Sparks was right that Witness Lee got it wrong, and you find no words from Sparks against Watchman Nee on locality.

Herald Hsu writes, “He especially got the local church - one locality, one church - teaching or method from the Exclusive Brethren in London, while he was with them in 1933. After that time, he practiced or carried on this method in China. Witness Lee was the strongest exponent of this teaching in the Far East, and later in the USA and elsewhere! Unfortunately, this teaching leads the people of God into legalism and exclusiveness. Legalism and exclusiveness are deadly to life in Christ! “As of things that are made” - Heb 12:27 refers to this kind of man-made legalism and exclusiveness. Please read TAS’s book "According to Christ".  Based on what he wrote, I think that Watchman Nee changed his position on this Locality teaching after 1951-1952. For example in a poem he wrote:”

Such a poem is consistent with all of Nee’s writings. Watchman Nee got the teaching in the Bible on proper locality based on the Holy Spirit and may have noticed it in the Brethren also. True locality simply says in an area, district of size for fellowship, local assembly may take place, and anything larger is not proper locality because it would then be susceptible to denominationalism. Herald is able to see that Witness Lee’s legalism and exclusivism is true, but he can not see Watchman Nee’s understanding of locality is real and from above.

In According to Christ, Sparks even admits, “What does the Church exist for? What do local churches exist for? There is only one answer. The existence and the function is to be an expression of Christ.” This is proof that Sparks also believed in proper locality. But as always Sparks deals in generalities and is less specific than Watchman Nee. Watchman Nee never left the principle of proper locality for since it is true, he could not leave it. There is a misconception of what locality is in Herald Hsu for it is not a legality, but a fact. In ever local area of local ground there is the church and that is the local church. Why argue against such simplicity?

Herald Hsu writes, “We five young people had not met TAS (T. Austin-Sparks) yet and the Holy Spirit had not yet opened the eyes of our hearts so we were all following Watchman Nee’s teaching and method and unconsciously fell into legalism (or dictatorship, which condemns others) and exclusiveness (egoism and monopoly). Later, Witness Lee sent each one of us to other places in Taiwan to work. We were called to build up the body of Christ in our mind, but in fact, we really built the New Denomination (the Local church) in our hearts. At that time, no preacher, no elder, or anybody gave us higher spiritual light. Watchman Nee’s teachings were the highest in our minds.”

The reason this occurred is because Herald misunderstood true locality as stated above. Herald admits he was under Witness Lee and that was the problem in legalizing true locality when Watchman Nee was imprisoned. Such legalizing of truths will naturally cause egoism, monopoly or dictatorship. But Watchman Nee never believed this. Always remember, Watchman Nee’s work was that of a little flock, not of the Witness Lee, “Local Church”. They are not the same thing at all, but it seems many, even close to Watchman Nee, did not understand these things, especially Herald Hsu.

What is always striking in all this is you never see anything T. Austin Sparks says against Watchman Nee on proper locality, but T. Austin Sparks does say words against Witness Lee and clan on legalized locality.

Herald Hsu said, “Later Christianity (including Roman Catholicism and all the denominations, crusades, organizations etc.) fell into the same terrible mistake! During 1949-1951 Watchman Nee’s groups in Shanghai fell into this mistake and the Lord allowed a great persecution which scattered the believers everywhere; Witness Lee also wanted to do the same thing in Taipei and in Los Angeles, but God allowed TAS's ministry to open the eyes of many people to see Christ in heaven (as our Heavenly Headquarters), so a lot of the believers went forth to Him, outside the camp (i.e. outside the New Denomination, or so called 'local churches'), bearing His reproach. This was the Divine Movement of the Holy Spirit. About this Divine Movement: there is no earthly address, no organization, no telephone number; not a club, not a crusade, not a TV Company etc...  This Divine Movement of the Holy Spirit is by way of the Cross to make Christ all and in all. (Please read TAS’s "Stephen - Thy Witness", and "According to Christ".)”

Though men may have fallen into such a mistake as they always do, there is no indication that Watchman Nee himself did. It is understood Watchman Nee backed away from such administrations and did not involve himself. If Witness Lee too upon himself this other course, that was his choice, and if men wished to follow him, that was their choice too. But we know even today the remnant of Watchman Nee’s little flock still remains having no association to the LSM-LEE-LC system. Even Herald admits this, “Witness Lee also wanted to do the same thing in….Los Angeles”, yet as we have come to see such was never Watchman Nee’s teaching. T. Austin Sparks does lose some credibility for not having made this distinction. T. Austin Sparks appears to be agreeing with Watchman Nee, though rightly disagreeing with Witness Lee. It is unfortunate Sparks was never able to come out and state openly this matter, clarifying the difference between proper locality and legalized locality.

Such is seen even in Herald’s own words – “The true definition of the Church (local or universal) is The corporate expression of Christ”. Here you have him agreeing that there is the local as well as the universal.

Herald Hsu said, “Before 1955, I understood that the church was a people who came out from the world and gathered together as a congregation, an organization, a Christian body, etc. according to Biblical methods or New Testament Church methods (especially one locality, one church). My mentality was that the church was a thing! Through TAS's ministry the Holy Spirit opened my eyes so that my mentality of the church was changed from seeing it as a thing to seeing a Living Person (i.e. the Living Christ Himself) which means people who are really born again by the Holy Spirit, (i.e. the living Christ is in them) and the Church is born. As they live out or manifest the Living Christ in their daily lives more and more, the real Church is increased more and more because the Church is measured by Christ!”

This is an example of Herald’s immaturity, for he would have known Watchman Nee never taught that proper locality is a thing. How odd a thing of Herald to say that he always thought the church was a thing and that he needed TAS to testify to this when it was already revealed in Watchman Nee’s writings and ministering what it is to be born again by the Holy Spirit. May I say frankly, I sense an agenda. Because of the immaturity of Herald, under Witness Lee (not under Watchman Nee) he suffered damage and need an explanation. The truth should be for him not that proper locality is false but that Witness Lee’s teaching on locality was false. Let us not be afraid of a simple concept as those within an area of “local ground” constitute the proper locality, and that anything larger is not true locality for it then becomes susceptible to denominationalism. As you begin to read Herald Hsu’s commentary, you find that he begins taking on the color of T. Austin Sparks, then you begin to see his agenda. Instead of dealing with this specificity of these words I have put forth in this very paragraph, instead you see him taking on the mind of T. Austin Sparks in stating things that are already obvious, but are not grounds in themselves to take away proper locality. How hard it is for man to accept a proper locality based on community and gathering in local assembly for fellowship. The matters of the cross and Christ were not taught to Watchman Nee from T. Austin Sparks, for such things were already well inwrought in Watchman Nee as evident by his earliest writings. That is why I find such writings strange, as false reasoning for the purpose of Herald Hsu, to deny proper locality. May I also say, frankly, the effort being put forth by Herald, in a long diatribe interspersed with much side commentary of Christ does little justice to his cause on the central issue which is proper locality being rejected. Really, then, to be in Christ is to recognize all things true of Christ and His way, which also includes not circumventing proper locality for denominations.

Herald Hsu says, “Any local church does not operate according to an earthly government’s definition of the boundaries, but needs to operate according to the Holy Spirit.”

Herald is agreeing with Watchman Nee.

Herald Hsu, “The great mistake of today’s Christianity is that the preachers search out a lot of examples of the early church and make a blueprint for all local churches (calling them "Church Truths" when, in fact, they are not Truths but Things.) The results produce denominations, sects, even cults, etc. and make a lot of legalists who condemn and judge others. Unfortunately Watchman Nee’s book “Rethinking of our mission”, was one of these kinds of blueprints and leads believers to exclusiveness.”

Rethinking the Work (CFP) is created to do the very thing that Herald wants to, which is to remove legalisms, denominations, sects, even cults. Due to Herald’s past immaturies, carried forward and caught up into Leeism, he misunderstood these things. When you come down to it, everything in “Rethinking the Work” was jus common sense. So you have to ask yourself, what is wrong with Herald, that he would misread such a book? I believe it is similar to others like the Pat Knapp who also misread Spiritual Authority, by Watchman Nee. The problem with such men in their reviews of these books is a common one. If Pat Knapp uses quotes of Watchman Nee but shows how agregiously he is willing to misread things, and so we can nip this misread in the but, and see the truth of his mistaken assumptions. But Herald Hsu has a different problem in that he speaks in generalities with no specificity. If he were to quote something or deal with some matter on some detail then we could see if what he says is true. But instead he takes on the characteristics of T. Austin Sparks, and speaks only in generalities, and that in itself is a form of passivity. I can not respond any further on the same level with a generality in explaining Herald’s misreading.

The reason why I enjoy Watchman Nee’s writings is because of the detail, while T. Austin Sparks has very little detail, and just generalizes away from detail. The Scriptures though have precise detail and that is what I love about God, that He would give us such detail. And I don’t know anyone better than Watchman Nee who is able to do that. In such detail I can’t see he even went into too much detail. It was just the accuracy and perfectedness of the Word of God.

There is a right way to be in all things in Christ, and we see this in “Rethinking the Work”. I can’t find a single mistake about it, yet it is accused. But the error is not shown and the unspecified generalities is of no help to Herald, for it makes him look foolish.

T. Austin Sparks again agrees with Watchman Nee, when Sparks said, “As an individual believer is the result of a begetting, a conception, a formation, a birth, and a likeness, so, in the New Testament, is a true local church.”

Sparks in fact is always agreeing with Watchman Nee, when Sparks said, “Every local church is independent and is directly controlled by the Lord Himself, not by any preacher or organization. “Christ walks in the midst of the seven golden lampstands” (Rev. 2:1).”

Herald Hsu writes, “We asked TAS in 1957, “What is wrong with not following the methods of Christianity and only following the Biblical examples?” TAS answered, “If the Holy Spirit leads you to follow some Biblical examples (Biblical examples are not perfect and are not laws), there is nothing wrong with that, but you don’t need to say so!” He meant that you don’t need to proclaim: 'this is the Church Truth and every church must go this way! Otherwise, you are not a church, but only a concubine'. This was Watchman Nee’s exposition on the Locality Law in Chinese; Witness Lee was the strongest exponent of this teaching in the Far East, and this teaching has now taken hold around the world. This teaching was, and still is, leading people to exclusiveness and division! Due to this concubine insult, all other Chinese Christian bodies from then to this day are speaking against Watchman Nee’s groups. We have mentioned Adam’s fall was because he stretched out his hand; this Locality Law leading to exclusiveness and division is also one of the falls due to man’s hand being stretched out! We need to be careful!”

Watchman Nee never had a locality law, and this was not his exposition. Witness Lee took what Watchman Nee said and made it into a Locality Law of Bible examples. I understand what is going on here, but how does one get across to another these errors in misreading Watchman Nee? Watchman Nee is sitting in jail in 1957 and he is being misrepresented already. Man’s flesh is unable to see this marriage of Witness Lee misusing Watchman Nee’s name. May I be completely frank, and say, misrepresenting another, bearing false witness against another, especially if they are in jail, is a sin. It is not clear T. Austin Sparks had achieved this sin, but neither has he made the distinction that I am aware of between Watchman Nee’s teaching of true locality and Witness Lee’s teaching. And because of this it is like a sin from silence. It can even be a pride, having known Watchman Nee, they must have conversed, and really T. Austin Sparks did not stand up for Watchman Nee, but in fact through such silence misrepresented him. Praise the Lord the little flock remained intact inspite of the new LSM-LEE-LC movement. An example in the Scriptures of true locality is seen in as simple a case as the church in Ephesus. It was not the church in Asia but only one of the churches in Asia.

What the Holy Spirit has led me to discern is such generalizing by T. Austin Sparks, thought at times can be helpful, it can also misrepresent, that is in the lack of detail, it loses its spiritual food and life.

Herald Hsu writes, “Today most of Christianity (including Catholics, all the denominations, clubs, pentecostals, Watchman Nee’s groups, independent churches, etc.) have followed the Holy Spirit and journeyed a few steps, but have stopped somewhere. We need to follow the Lamb (crucified with Christ) wherever He goes. As Paul at the end of his life said, "That I may know Him, and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, becoming conformed to His death!” May the Lord show mercy to us so that the eyes of our hearts are enlightened, and we really see the revelation of Jesus Christ and Him crucified and follow the Divine movement of the Holy Spirit, always going on: “journeyed and pitched, journeyed and pitched”, and entering into the fullness of Christ! Several of the points above were revealed to us by the Holy Spirit through TAS's ministry. Thanks be to the Lord! This is really the way to increase the measure of Christ and is higher spiritual light. We believe that the Holy Spirit will continue to lead Christians everywhere into a greater measure of Christ. And we do pray that you and I are really going to enter into the unsearchable riches of Christ.”

Watchman Nee never had a denomination. He had a name given to his work and writings and teachings in Christ which was called the Little Flock. Such a work was based on the cross and the Word and Christ, not the formation of denominations because no constituency of any of his Little Flock was to be based on anything larger than on true locality, that is, without a papacy or an organizational hierarchy. This is the true church. T. Austin Sparks in his own writings was never able to discern this distinction. So all he could do is rightly condemn Witness Lee. But as we have shown Witness Lee’s writings on locality are not the same as Watchman Nee’s.

T. Austin Sparks writes, “TAS said: "Yes. But what is Jerusalem's original ground?" Lee said: "It is where the Holy Spirit for the first time built the church on one locality, one church in Acts." Herald Hsu, “TAS immediately knew that was the teaching of Watchman Nee’s book "Rethinking of our Mission" (1939 published in Honor Oak), so he said”: "This is your interpretation! As far as I know the real Church Ground is not one locality, one church, but is Christ Himself!"  When I heard this it was a shock to me because I also held fast to Nee’s teaching at that time. It was really a great shake-up to me personally to realize that Jerusalem's original ground is not one locality, one church, but is Christ Himself!”

T. Austin Sparks is making himself look foolish because the obviously the true ground is Jesus Christ. It was when I began to read such responses by Sparks, that I knew Sparks was not understanding. What Sparks should have said in 1959, not to legalize true physical locality. That is all he had to say. The spiritual church is always within a locality. For wherever the church is there is a locality based on local ground. The ground is always there since men’s bodies are always in it. Instead T. Austin Sparks created problems on top of problems from his sin of silence. He answered Witness Lee incorrectly. He did not help Witness Lee’s legalizations. And he did not defend Watchman Nee’s clarity on proper locality. I call this the sin of silence.

Herald Hsu continues, “Then Witness Lee argued with TAS saying, "We say that the Church Ground is one locality one church, which means Unity in one city." TAS said: "If you mean that the Church Ground means Unity in one city, it means that you agree with my opinion, and disagree with yourselves! One locality or one church teaching or other teachings cannot bring Unity among Christians. Only Christ Himself can bring Christians true Unity, not only in one place, but also in other places! The truth is: Things divide; Christ unites!" When I heard this, it was a second shock to me; in fact, the Church Ground teaching collapsed within me and I totally abandoned that teaching from that moment. Witness Lee argued again, but TAS said, “If you follow the Holy Spirit's leading and do something according to the examples in the New Testament, that is good, but don’t say 'this is the only way'! The Holy Spirit is too big to comprehend.” (As I understand it he meant: Don’t say that other Christian bodies are all concubines and are not the Church.) Then TAS said: "There is no need to continue this kind of meeting!" And immediately the meeting ended! “

As you can see here Witness Lee is pushing for legalizing locality, and T. Austin Sparks is speaking against it, yet Sparks does not clarify what Watchman Nee teaches on true locality either. Sin of silence. T. Austin Sparks could have been of great help to wonderful depth of the Word of God taught by Watchman Nee, but he did not. I believe this was a form of self-exaltation on T. Austin Sparks part. His generalizations, therefore you can see, are not that much help to anyone. He needed to be more specific and detailed to be of help to show Witness Lee his error. So Herald misses the point of true locality forsaking it all together in this way. In frustration in Sparks own inability, he had to leave.

The next Monday morning, brother TAS continued his messages on  “The Persistent Purpose of God”. When he spoke (chapter nine, page 69 of the book by the same name) he said,  “We must be very careful not to make Christ, or His Church, smaller than it really is. We must not make Christ smaller than God has made Him. We may not make Him just our Christ, our little Christ, the Christ that belongs to us, the Christ of our particular locality!” 

Here we see he fullness of the evidence of T. Austin Sparks sin. He has just misrepresented true locality in the Word of God. He does not stand up for local ground, that is, where we can gather, communicate and fellowship and prevent denominationalism. Instead he belittles true locality as our particular locality. This is wrong. I have always known this pride in T. Austin Sparks. I do not believe Witness Lee was saved because of legalizing locality, but there is also something wrong with T. Austin Sparks in that he has this pride over others, not seeing as Watchman Nee saw that of the church of Ephesus, or the church in Jerusalem, or the church in Corinth, so on and so forth as Biblical cities, not modern day cities. Today a modern day city must be broken into many parts to consider a particular localities within it. For example I live in Sherwood Park, Alberta, Canada. But Sherwood Park has 50,000 people today. But this is still too big of a locality for I can not travel from one side of Sherwood Park to the other within a half an hour, a reasonable time. I am told that Jerusalem at the time of Christ had 40,000 people, but of all these people, only a small portion were Christians, but it was small enough in locality that it was considered a locality  both in people and space for local fellowship in assembly. Witness Lee does not propose this. He says locality is based on modern day cities. T. Austin Sparks does not deal with matter appropriately. If I were in such a meeting between Sparks and Lee I would have said all I said here and clarified the matter. It is unfortunate Sparks had this pride and Witness Lee had his own pride on the matter too.

Here is another example of no one willing to stand up for the truth. Herald writes, “1959 - In the sovereignty of God, 1959 was the beginning of a tragic and terrible year for Watchman Nee’s groups”.

This is a perfect example of T. Austin Sparks writes about a falling away. For still even by 1959 he does not speak up for the distinction of the spiritual truths in Watchman Nee’s writings on proper locality and that misuse of the unspiritual of misusing the spiritual. Even though Watchman Nee commended T. Austin Sparks, there remained a problem after Watchman Nee was jailed. Instead of Sparks standing up for the truth, he exalted himself with pride. For example, see here, Herald Hsu writes of what Witness Lee said -  “In 1934 Watchman Nee introduced TAS and spread his ministry to the whole of China!” Herald continues - We were all glad to hear that in 1955, which was the first time TAS visited the Far East.  Watchman Nee also referred to TAS as a spiritual man several times while he was in Shanghai in 1947. This meant that in effect, Witness Lee had stated that he would no longer work with spiritual people from 1959 onward”.

What can you take away from these statements except that Witness Lee had some impression that T. Austin Sparks somehow changed Watchman Nee, but that was never the case at all. T. Austin Sparks merely confirmed what Watchman Nee already knew as shown in his earliest writings before having ever met or read anything from T. Austin Sparks. These are merely Witness Lee’s shallow perceptions. And Herald Hsu has the same shallow reasoning, but not realizing that Watchman Nee only regards TAS as a spiritual man, but only later do we find out T. Austin Sparks error in not returning the favor of truth. Sparks let himself hang out on a limb of pride while Watchman Nee was living the rest of his life in jail. I have to say I have lost some respect for T. Austin Sparks in pondering this point. Never once do I see T. Austin Sparks stand up for the wonderful work in “Rethinking the Work”. Pride has even begotten the spiritual man. Mind you this is Henry Hsu making this claim about what Watchman Nee said of T. Austin Sparks. It is best Harold Hsu provide quotes, not his own opinion.

Herald has opinion further, “In fact, since 1961, Watchman Nee’s (including Witness Lee's) groups in Manila, and subsequently in Singapore, Bangkok, Hong Kong and Taiwan, all divided. Even today, forty years after this division, those who followed Nee’s Locality teaching and work, continue to divide and be exclusive! It’s a tragedy! In principle, those who followed Witness Lee’s co-workers and elders, including a lot of the second generation were, and are, really experiencing “going down to Sheol in mourning”.  Finally some of them separated from W. Lee! “

Here you see Herald making the distinction between Watchman Nee groups and Witness Lee groups. That is good. I am not following, myself Watchman Nee’s teaching on locality (small l), but I agree with Watchman Nee on proper locality. I am not exclusive, nor am I divided for I can fellowship in any locality, but the locality that I am in is the one I reside and for me it would be the local church of Glen Allan which is in a greater Sherwood Park, in Edmonton Alberta, in Canada, in North America in the western hemisphere, on earth in the our solar system in the milky way in the universe in God’s creation. Every time the Bible uses the term “the church” it is always the size of fellowship in terms of population and local ground and that is true locality. Sparks was wrong not to stand up for this point Watchman Nee made. This purpose of Herald to degrade true locality and belittle it as his authority, T. Austin Sparks does, is troubling to say the least -  source of found pride.

What is most disconcerting in all of this, is it seems no one is willing to write about these distinctions I have shown here. Is this really so hard a thing to understand? This may have helped Witness Lee back then. Sparks was not spiritual enough to convey such simplicity. Even a spiritual man, if Watchman Nee said this of Sparks, has some flesh he is still holding onto. This is was the flesh of Sparks and Harold, that they would not let God deliver them from.

Harold Hsu writes, “Because of TAS’s ministry, the Holy Spirit opened my eyes and I really began to see the revelation of Jesus Christ and Him crucified. My life has been changing and in a revolutionary way! Please study TAS's books and receive the revelation of God’s Son by the Holy Spirit! Then we can work together in that day with heavenly vision.”

Unfortunately the sad reality to this is that Harold Hsu had simply moved from one extreme to the other in a hostility of his own against true locality taught by Sparks. Yet all the while no one is listening to Watchman Nee on the matter in “Rethinking the Word”.

Witness Lee wrote “Thanks to God, in February 1997 at a special conference, our dear brother Witness Lee made a public repentance before he died:”

But the truth of the matter Witness Lee never repented for he still held onto false locality of modern-day cities as well as many other things like modalism calling God a person who is 3 Persons, and screaming violently and suing people for their faith.  

Harold, still confused about true locality writes - “Concerning the "Locality law", brother Sparks wrote to us in Manila from London on April 12, 1962:

"I can only take any position on what I believe to be fundamental. For me, the basis (or ground) of the Church is quite fundamental. I cannot accept that the basis is what is called "Locality". I believe that where Christ truly is, even if it be in only "two or three" there the Church is in effect. Christ is the "foundation" (or ground), and "other foundation can no man lay". But when I have said that, brother, I feel that you are, perhaps unconsciously, involved in the "Locality" position. Do you know that that is precisely and positively the teaching and position of the people called "Exclusive Brethren"? This teaching first went to Shanghai with the leading Exclusive Brethren who tried to capture the whole work of brother Nee. Brother Nee refused to be made an official part of that body, but the teaching got in, and has gone on ever since. When I came to Manila and Hong Kong I was very sorry to see that in both Assembly Halls there were for sale many of the books from the Stow Hill Bible Dept. in England. I feared that this would lead to both exclusiveness and division, and as late as last year one of the biggest divisions took place among them. Their whole church teaching is based upon this "Locality" law. (That is, the church ground.) Brother Lee is the strongest exponent of it in the Far East. I love brother Lee and will do all possible to avoid separation from him. We must all fight hard to prevent divisions, and our ground must be Christ in all His own... I shall continue to pray for you all, and that the Lord will get a great victory over all the evil powers which are working so hard to bring dishonour upon His name everywhere... Give my greetings to all the brothers and sisters.

Here we have it, the truth spoken so rarely, but finally revealed. T. Austin Sparks denies a local church like the local church of Corinthians or local church of Jerusalem or Ephesus, etc. Sparks said he denies “locality” and this is why he never spoke up for Watchman Nee in jail. This was an edge to T. Austin Sparks he could never let go. Not only was Witness Lee damaged goods, but so was T. Austin Sparks. Watchman Nee was the one of the three that held to spiritual truth of the local and the universal church in reality in his being. Where two or three are gathered together but this is not the same matter as a locality based on such a church as the church in Corinth or Smyrna, so on and so forth. Where one is spoken of based on local ground, the other is spoken of in terms of where  even 2 or 3 are gathered there is the church. The point of the local church is that anything larger is too large since it can be denominationalized. This is the essence of God’s protection in proper locality. That is why there was no church in Rome, only the Saints in Rome.  The ground of proper locality is spiritual and it is the basis of the ground of Christ for all truths are based on Christ. Any foundation larger than such a locality is laid by man for denominations. Watchman Nee was able to recognize the legalizing of locality of the exclusive brethren and it was for that reason Watchman Nee had to leave them. But T. Austin Sparks was never able to make this distinction. 

Though T. Austin Sparks was able to realize “Lee is the strongest exponent of it in the Far East”, Sparks was not able to distinguish a true locality that is non-legalized, that just exists, just as you or I would go walk over to our local church and fellowship in a locality. The pride of T. Austin Sparks never was able to make this distinction. I call this the silence of brother Sparks’ sin in telling the truth about Witness Lee but not distinguishing true spiritual locality based on local ground by Watchman Nee. Truly Watchman Nee’s authority on the matter was excellent for even T. Austin Sparks could not understand what Watchman Nee meant.

Harold now thinking he has hit the truth, has failed, “After forty years, the Holy Spirit has urged me to write down these facts.”

The truth of Harold’s mistaken assumption is making the same mistake T. Austin Spark’s has made. I believe the consequence of this mistake is continually denounce proper locality and allow for denominations to flourish beyond the size of a true locality. And that is exactly what we see happening today, so T. Austin Sparks were part of that problem, not part of God’s Word that had the solution that Watchman Nee has so well discerned.

My view is that it is of very low intelligence and unspiritual in T. Austin Sparks (and cohort Harold Hsu) to keep exalting Christ as the ground yet rejecting fellowship based on local ground getting together in a local church area. Such a simple statement yet it is the source of hostility shown in the words of T. Austin Sparks as well as Witness Lee. Why weren’t these guys listening to the Scriptures on locality as pointed out by Watchman Nee?

As my testimony I had wanted to read more of T. Austin Sparks, but by the way T. Austin Sparks handled this matter all these years, I have no interest. I actually don’t find T. Austin Sparks writings that deep. As I have said before they are very generalized and don’t go deep in my spirit because of such inordinate generalizing. I prefer more spiritual writings like Watchman Nee and Jessie-Penn Lewis.

There is the other matter of T. Austin Sparks always reflecting in himself resurrected life, you find, for it did not seem like he was a man of suffering so in part this is why he was unable to see the local church as based on local ground to prevent denominationalism of anything in a larger size. Instead he preferred to battle it out with Witness Lee, where both individuals are two extremists on the opposite end of the poll pulling back and forth. Truly Watchman Nee got it right. I really appreciate this.

When I pray upon these truths I believe the most deceptive statement made by Herald Hsu is in two phrases, “Watchman Nee groups” and “Biblical examples”. He is literally teaching that confusing and the mingling of a little flock in Christ with those who legalize locality not drawing a distinction between the two. This is wrong. The second error is to diminish or belittle, as T. Austin Sparks does, the church in Jerusalem or the church in Smyrna or the church in Galatia as merely Biblical examples instead of seeing not in a single one of these localites was the population beyond a few thousand believers within local ground for fellowship. None needed to walk miles to reach each other. So simple.

Troy Brooks