This paper argues that American evangelical opposition to Witness Lee’s (1905–1997) ministry in the 1960s–70s stemmed not only from theological differences but also from a complex interplay of racialized and immigrant fears, Cold War politics, and theological insularity toward non-Western Christianity. By labeling Lee’s teachings—particularly his emphasis on Christian deification (theōsis)—as “cultic” rather than engaging their theological roots, evangelical counter-cult apologetics reinforced a pattern of misrepresentation that persists today. Despite later re-evaluations by some evangelical institutions, these accusations continue to shape contemporary perceptions. Through a historical, sociopolitical, and ecclesial analysis of American evangelicalism (Kidd 2019; Noll 2019; Granquist 2025), this paper reconsiders evangelical engagement with global Christianity through Nicene ecumenism, advocating for greater recognition of non-Western Christian contributions.
The reception of Lee’s ministry among American evangelicals was marked by both intrigue and opposition. Lee, a Chinese Christian leader who co-labored with Watchman Nee (1903–1972) and profoundly influenced the Global South, immigrated from Taiwan to the U.S. in 1962, introducing teachings on the Trinity, salvation, and church practice. While some evangelicals embraced his ministry, counter-cult apologetics labeled his ministry and churches associated as “cultic,” leading to misrepresentation, legal disputes, and public accusations. This paper examines the opposition Lee faced in the 1960s–70s through a socio-ecclesial lens, highlighting the patristic ecumenicalism and affirmation of deification underpinning Nicene.
The Nicene Fathers, particularly Athanasius of Alexandria, understood salvation as deification (Inc. 54.3), using it to refute Arianism (Contra Arianos 1.39) and shape Nicene Trinitarianism and Christology, demonstrating its foundational nature to ecumenical orthodoxy, not merely as an Eastern Orthodox idea. Though largely overlooked in Western Protestant traditions, deification has gained renewed attention as a core feature of biblical soteriology (Blackwell 2016; Gorman 2018). In the 1970s, Lee presented deification as the transformative goal of salvation, yet evangelicals unfamiliar with its patristic roots dismissed it as “cultic,” associating it as “Eastern religions” (Duddy 1977; Sparks 1979; Martin 1980). Though some evangelical institutions later disavowed their past evaluations (Fuller 2006; CRI 2009), these half-century-old claims persist in print and online (Copan 2024; Reardon 2025).
The first part of this paper explores how theology, mixed with racial and immigration-related anxieties, contributed to evangelical opposition to Lee. His articulation of coinherence (perichoresis) within the Trinity and other ecclesial practices was further misread through Western theological frameworks, reinforcing fears of an “Eastern pagan-like religion.” The second part examines how, despite shifts in evangelicalism, counter-cult rhetoric and perceptions remain largely unchallenged and are further amplified through social media uncritically. This situation raises broader questions about engaging non-Western Christian traditions and embracing Nicene ecumenism—uniting believers around essential truths rather than dividing over race, place of origin, or secondary doctrines.
By revisiting Lee’s reception as a case study, this paper calls for a reconsideration of American evangelicals’ engagement with non-Western traditions as part of Christ’s universal body through Nicene ecumenism while maintaining essential truths. This study contributes to discussions on race, immigration, theology, and evangelical identity, advocating for a contemporary embodiment of the Nicene spirit of ecumenism in today’s global Christian discourse.