Response from Sylvia Jeanes

Read this in 中文 & Bahasa Malaysia.

My dear friends,

Thank you very much for your most respectful, gracious,  insightful and well-balanced  replies to my letter.  I appreciated very much your interaction, and would like to listen more to you.  I would like to comment on a  few things.

You will notice there are no names in my letter.  So I am not criticizing anyone in particular, especially BAV.   I am merely pointing out in response to an earlier comment  which prompted me to write in the first place, that to a certain extent the situation we find ourselves in now has a great deal to do with the subtle emergence of false teaching in our diocese.  Of course it is linked also with the inevitable global age in which we live.  Thank you to “alternative” for pointing this out “we need to consistently update according to modernization”.  Agreed, but the message remains the same, is Jesus-centred, and the call is always to live under HIS Lordship.  After listening to a sermon on Sunday, ask the question “where was Jesus in that sermon?”” Jesus is the centre of the whole Bible, from Genesis to Revelation.  So he is also the centre, the finale, the main reference point, in every sermon.  If the sermon is merely ethical, moral, or theological, and Jesus is not central, as I used to tell my students at STS, I could have heard the same thing in the mosque.  We need to insist on Jesus-centred sermons.

To call Jesus LORD, is to live radically different from the world.   The sermon on the Mount helps us understand this.  When we look honestly at our lives, how different is our life from our non-Christians (not-yet Christians) around us, eg. there is nothing wrong with wealth, but what is our attitude to riches?  Jesus called the poor blessed, and pointed out how difficult it was for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. Hence, prosperity gospel is completely contrary to Jesus’ teaching.  I’m looking forward to the exposition of this heresy on the future blog.

Thank you to OSAnon for clarifying the difference between “worldly management systems” and “world management systems”.  That was right and helpful.  There is so much that is helpful from secular research, and we benefit to put it to good use. After all, all wisdom comes from the fount of Wisdom, even if it is not acknowledged as such.  (James 1:5)  The difference for a Christian is that he gives all glory to God and not to man.

Finally thank you to “worshipper” who rightly points out the early copying of the west in singing western hymns and so on.  One has only to look at our liturgy to see the quaint  English customs we still observe. eg. clergy swear allegiance to the “lord Bishop” of Sabah.  This is from England where there was as steep a hierarchy as in Chinese culture. Those on a higher level were called “lord” (tuan), but Jesus pointed out it will not be so among his disciples.    Likewise bowing to the altar is a hang-over from the doctrine of transubstantiation, where it was believed a real change took place in the bread and wine to become the actual body and blood of Christ.  Since the body of Christ is now on the altar one bows.  But the reformation rejected this teaching. The Anglican church is part of the reformation tradition, and so Anglicans should not bow to the altar.  Would that all confirmees could study some church history

From a missiological perspective, missionary recipient churches usually follow the beliefs and practices of the sending church as they are not encouraged to think through what could be their own expression of faith.  So  we older ones have come to love the old hymns.  Nothing wrong with that.   But like children growing up, there comes a time to realize one’s own identity and not be just a stereotype of the parents.  So I believe it is so too in the church.  Compare the church in Africa with its distinctly different music and African dance.  But I believe in Malaysia, we have not developed our Malaysian distinctive and are seen as foreign.  Some would like us to stay “foreign” of course.  This is their advantage but to our disadvantage!

None of my students are Christian.  They have a beautiful dance, clothes, and language.  Were  there ever to be a gathering of believers, I would talk to them about “how” to express worship to the true and living God.  I would certainly include the dance, the songs, and the language.  Worshipper asks “how can Sabahan and Malaysians express our worship in our own way?” A good question!    I think you “worshipper” can answer this better than me, but let me share one or two things I have tried which brought deep meaning to the worshippers.

1.  Once  I worked with a congregation that couldn’t sing.  I asked them how did they sing at their gatherings?  I asked them to put Christian words to their songs and bring their own instruments. Wow, they could sing after all.  Long ago I spoke at a women’s conference. We had a singing competition.  Most did the predicable thing, but one small group of illiterate women from a remote kampung sang a beautiful song about Jesus’s death for our salvation in the tune used to swing the baby in the sarung.  You could have heard a pin drop.   No one taught them how to do it. They did it out of a  heart filled with gratitude to God for His great love in sending Jesus.   .   I remember in the  70’s  when the revival began in the primary school, we had a scripture class.  We began with worship.  The children filled with the spirit sang the most beautiful songs of worship in their mother tongue. Look how congregations in the interior come alive when hymns are danced and sung to the sumazau music.

2.  I have dramatized the Bible readings.  Instead of the usual badly-read monologues from the reading desk which go over the heads of the half asleep congregations, we used dialogue and drama.  Likewise where there was a translation of the Scriptures into the majority group language in the congregation, one of the lessons was read in that language.  Pantuns and poetry were used.

3.  Testimonies can be given. When did we last hear an excited new believer tell how Jesus had changed their life?   How about a sermon given occasionally in the form of a interview, debate, or a symposium?

Look at the television.  What sort of things do people like?  how do they express themselves?  We can only hope for change as the laity speak out, and say what they want.  It is wrong to shut  up the people of God in the freezer and only allow the paid staff to perform.  As in the seventies, the frozen laity need to de-thaw.   To ban their involvement is to deny them expression of their gifts which are given to every member of the congregation.  I have lots of examples on this, but shall reserve them for another time.  The people of God together should engage in dialogue about these issues for the sake of a better future.

Heresy #2: Obsession with Mega Buildings

Read this in 中文 & Bahasa Malaysia.

There is a competition and obsession amongst pastors to build the mega churches. It may come from different denominations but the rhetoric is the same and it goes like this. “Half the urban population is under 30. They are swarmed by declining moral values, fast paced lifestyle and incredible demands of their time and priorities. To reach out to the next generation, we are building a 3000-seater church, equipped with media center, sports facilities, a training center. Let us sow into the next generation. Let’s give our best to honor God.”

Let us examine the obsession with building mega churches and lavish furnishing in the name of glorifying God. Let us put in biblical perspective. Where did this idea stem from?

It was King David who first thought of building a grand building for God, albeit in my opinion a conceited one despite his good intention. This is what David said:

2 Sam 7.1 Now when the king lived in his house and the LORD had given him rest from all his surrounding enemies, 2 the king said to Nathan the prophet, “See now, I dwell in a house of cedar, but the ark of God dwells in a tent.”

However, this is what the LORD said:

2Sam 7:5 “Go and tell my servant David, ‘Thus says the LORD: Would you build me a house to dwell in? 6 I have not lived in a house since the day I brought up the people of Israel from Egypt to this day, but I have been moving about in a tent for my dwelling. 7 In all places where I have moved with all the people of Israel, did I speak a word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd my people Israel, saying, “Why have you not built me a house of cedar?”’ 8 Now, therefore, thus you shall say to my servant David, ‘Thus says the LORD of hosts, I took you from the pasture, from following the sheep, that you should be prince over my people Israel.

It is clear The LORD has no desire or idea to have a “mega” building because it cannot add to His glory nor does it add to His enjoyment or satisfaction, for God is in Perfect existence. How can a building made by the created bring glory to the Creator? God eventually “ALLOWED” the building of the temple as a condescension to human needs and desire for a visible dwelling place for God. The proof is that God “ALLOWED” the temple to be destroyed by the Babylonians, and even the second temple built by Herod was destroyed by the Romans. The prophets and Jesus foretold the destruction. If these earthly monuments can in anywhere enhance or bring glory to God would He “ALLOWED” them to be destroyed? Just look at the incredibly beautiful and expensive churches in Europe and around the world, a large number of which have only a few worshipers, are they glorifying God or “mock” God because of the lack of worshipers? One very good example is the Methodist Central Hall in Birmingham, which was converted to a night club in 1991…I have been there, it saddens me to the core. It is a magnificent building, but does it glorify God or “mock” God?

Did the leaders and people who built those building not have zeal and passion? Were they not sold out for God and wanting only to glorify God? Did the people not give sacrificially and enthusiastically for the building? Were the people not absolutely sure that the building will serve the people and expand the Kingdom of God? Were they not thinking of the future generation when they built such a huge building? The answer all these questions is YES!But what a WASTE! How many lives could be touched, reached and helped with their sacrifice.

BAV and his like minded people is thinking exactly the same today! BAV argument goes like this: the buildings and facilities serve the people, I am passionate about loving and serving the people, so I must be passionate and committed to “serve” the building that serve the people. We must give sacrificially and invest sacrificially in building to serve the present and future generations, our children and youth. Sounds logical, sounds passionate and full of zeal, sounds like that is the only thing we should do, sounds charismatic and a man of faith and vision, sounds like a clarion call of God, sounds like trumpet and shofar. Is it? To me it sounds like the voice of SATAN all over again!

People of God, we need buildings not monuments, we need facilities not concert hall, we need transportation not luxury travel, we need office and communication equipments not the latest from Samsung or Apple, we need salary not profit sharing (bonus is profit sharing), we need pastors and friends not CEO (chief executive officer), COO (chief operating officer) or manager.

People who question the wisdom of building an expensive house of worship is often refuted with the story of Mary breaking the alabaster jar, pouring all the perfume on Jesus’ feet and washing it with her tears and hair. Judas pointed out the perfume, which is worth a year’s wages, could have been sold and given to the poor. “For God, nothing is too expensive,” the fundraising clergy would argue. Does God dwell in expensive buildings? The more lavish the building, the more it pleases God? If this were true, then God must detest house churches in China and church with mud floors in our Sabah interior!

The church and the people of God need to REFOCUS! Jesus said, (Luke 11:34) Your eye is the lamp of your body. When your eye is healthy, your whole body is full of light, but when it is bad, your body is full of darkness. Our eyes need to focus on the Lord Jesus, the source of light, so that the body of Christ, the church, may have light!

Thus says the Lord:

“Heaven is my throne,
and the earth is my footstool;
what is the house that you would build for me,
and what is the place of my rest?
All these things my hand has made,
and so all these things came to be,
declares the Lord.
But this is the one to whom I will look:
he who is humble and contrite in spirit
and trembles at my word. (Isaiah 66:1-2)

God desires to dwell in men and women who are humble, contrite in spirit and trembles at his Word–not in marbles, bricks, stones and concrete. We are the temple of the Holy Spirit. Are we fit for his dwelling?

A Letter from Sylvia Jeanes

Read this in 中文 & Bahasa Malaysia.

Dear blogmaster,

I welcome your efforts to address the  local heresies which have crept into our beloved Anglican church here in Sabah. It is true that the type of teaching that is received will be shown in subsequent behaviour.

A good thing about this blog is that it shows a church coming of age.  It shows that lay people are rising up to rightly question what had been traditionally  accepted in the past, that is attitudes and actions which in many cases are a transference from  natural religion, eg. consider “the holy man” idea in Buddhism, and Chinese religions.   As in today’s world, there is a new pursuit for truth, honesty and justice . The writing has displayed a humble, honest, mature and correct Biblical exegetically content.

Our diocese began with an Anglo-Catholic tradition in the 50’s and 60’s.  Very few knew what it was to be born again.  One just “followed the religion” (ikut ugama sahaja).  There were no parish halls, and what was important was attending mass.  Then change came in the seventies.  The nature of these changes and the history has been documented and our diocese became evangelical and Biblical.  A great number of Bibles in the three main languages were sold during this time and Christians devoured the text with great vigour.  I can testify to people who learned to read just so they could read the Bible, and this was the only book they owned.

Then in the late seventies,  God blew upon His church with His Holy Spirit. bringing accelerated growth, and new understanding about things spiritual, eg. healings, exorcisms, gifts, worship expression in tongues and prophecy and so on.  So far so good.  However  wherever there is such of movement of God’s Spirit, there is Satanic opposition and false teaching.. Look at the Acts of the Apostles.

In the nineties,  new things began to appear which were not scriptural.  For example:

Falling down backwards.  This was seen to be a great novelty and many of our Christians were taken in by this deceit.  As I read the Scriptures, those who “fell down”, i.e.. Ananias and Sapphira were dead. (Acts 5:5,10)  Conversely those who fell on their faces did so as worship  in the overwhelming presence of  the Lord.

Toronto blessing and the laughing phenomenon..  Some clergy pressed the Bishop to accept this teaching into the Diocese.  They were disappointed when thankfully it did not happen.  Eventually, the Toronto blessing fizzled out in disrepute.

Spiritual mapping.  a kind of Christian fung shui had people praying down lines of power from Mt Kinabalu to the city.   Again crowds of people were taken in by this novel idea.  No doubt the evangelists from abroad went laughing away with pots of money.  (2 Peter and Jude)

A lack of discernment  on demon possession as against psychological problems. Both exist, but there are not demons under every rock and tree root.   Demons were vomited into plastic bags, and this was seen as cure. This lack of discernment applied also to culture and the truth of the scriptures, so that beautiful clay pots were smashed simply because a dragon was depicted on them.

A misunderstanding of the gift of prophecy, so some saw themselves as prophets when in fact an intuitive person could say the same thing.  God was made to speak in faulty English!.  Recently we were asked to bring a lady’s prophecy to a prayer meeting following the election.   No mention was made of the Bible.  I would rather have brought Psalm 47 which reminds me of God’s sovereign rule over all the nations, including Malaysia.

Also an unbiblical understanding about the gift of  tongues.  Those who teach how to pray in tongues don’t know a gift cannot be taught.  They show no real understanding of 1 Corinthians 12-14.   Notice the famous chapter 13 about love is in the middle of Paul’s debate about tongues.

Your first correctly argued exposure of the heresy of  anointing of leaders leads me to point out another aberration that is the appointment of unqualified, unsuitable and unnatural leaders into interior churches from Telupid.  The traditional elders were exchanged for youth evangelists.  The elders were very hurt as they were ruthlessly pushed aside.  Such an action was not only disrespectful but totally disregarded the cultural context and structure of Kadazan Dusun society. My experience is mostly in the interior churches.

Leading of worship aped the west and was performance orientated.  One priest in a poor area boasted how they had just bought a set of drums.  How incongruent when many of the church members did not know where their next meal was coming from.  This was exacerbated by the confiscation of their communal lands  by rich and greedly oil-palm estate owners.  Rivers polluted, gardens taken, jungle cut down to make way for oil palms and all we could  do was purchase expensive music equipment, dance in ballet shoes and frilly white dresses,  and perform the same show that could be seen in New York and London. There was no move to think how worship should be expressed in local cultures, and Malaysian context.

Indeed these things break my heart   Why the church seems to be so paralyzed in the face of these grave injustices I do not know.  I feel this is no longer my beloved Anglican fellowship that I once treasured.

Much more could be said of the decline into a plethora of false teaching, such as prosperity gospel . and worldly management systems  I look forward to your blogspot to expose these false teachings later.

To be a Christian is to be a Christ-follower. Read the Gospels.   Look at Jesus.  How did He live?  what did He do?  What did He say?  This is how a Christian should speak and live.  Live that others may simply live.  Care for the marginalized, the poor, the oppressed, the animals, the environment and tell others about the way to know God who rules over all.   Be prepared to lay one’s life down if need be.

Sylvia Jeanes, Anglican Diocese of Sabah,

The church is not a club where the members pay up their dues and get the benefits including a burial plot.  The church is only  part of the kingdom of God.  Think of all the issues, people we sideline as having nothing to do with us.  They have everything to do with God. Read the  newspaper with a breaking heart.  More people should be in the political arena.  More involved in environmental issues, against cruelty to animals and so on. Why are Christians so noticeably absent from these areas.    Recently a lawyer rightly said  to me  “the trouble with you Christians is  you sing about God’s rule over the nation, but it stops at the door of the church”.   Oh dear, the church is sick indeed and does not attract those seeking God.  I call all Christians to ape Jesus, not the world.  We need to repent and follow Jesus.  Please continue  this clarion call to repentance that we might see tears of brokenness once again and the joy of renewal as we live the Jesus way.

Sylvia Jeanes

Sylvia left Australia in 1967 to serve the Lord in Borneo. During her 40-year tenure in the Anglican Diocese of Sabah, she served as a missionary, teacher, principal, trainer, pastor & Canon. She retired in 2006. Today she continues to teach part-time in Sabah Theological Seminary and minister to the poor and stateless. She holds a M. Min from Trinity Theological College, Singapore & M.A (Theology) from Moore Theological College, Australia. 

Heresy #1: Submit to the Lord’s Anointed

Read this in 中文 & Bahasa Malaysia.

The crisis in the Anglican Diocese of Sabah has exposed the abuse of power, mismanagement of funds and the manipulative political games of Bishop Albert Vun. Yet there is a deadlier and subtler danger looming large. Heresies.

Either by commission, omission or ignorance, our leaders have allowed heresies to take root and blossom in our Diocese. These false teachings will be exposed in a series of postings.

But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of truth will be blasphemed. And in their greed they will exploit you with false words. (2 Peter 2:1-3)

For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. (2 Tim 4:3-4)

The Bible warns us about false prophets and false teachers arising among us, our very own Christian community. We must be watchful for the seduction of false teachings. The Bible has stern warnings and grave punishments for false teachers.

Therefore thus says the Lord concerning the prophets who prophesy in my name although I did not send them, and who say, ‘Sword and famine shall not come upon this land’: By sword and famine those prophets shall be consumed. (Jeremiah 14:15)

The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. (2 Thessalonians 2:9-12)

Recently, a priest was teaching submission by quoting 2 Kings 22:1, the case of an 8-year-old king of Judah as an example. The story goes like this:

Josiah was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned thirty-one years in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Jedidah the daughter of Adaiah of Bozkath. The people of Israel submitted to this eight-year-old king because he was anointed by the Lord even though he was so young. The Lord blessed Israel during the reign of King Josiah. Therefore we must do the same with our anointed leader in order for God to bless our church. It is right to submit to an anointed leader.

Is this idea biblical? What the priest did not tell the congregation was the following verse, 2 Kings 22.2 And he did what was right in the eyes of the LORD and walked in all the way of David his father, and he did not turn aside to the right or to the left. That was the real reason why God blessed Israel under his rule. 

Take an example, 2 Kings 21.1 Manasseh was twelve years old when he began to reign, and he reigned fifty-five years in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Hephzibah. 2 And he did what was evil in the sight of the LORD, according to the despicable practices of the nations whom the LORD drove out before the people of Israel. 

Was Manasseh anointed? Yes he was. Did the people submit to him? Of course, he reigned for 55 years, one of the longest reigning kings of Judah. Did God bless him? In 2 Chro 33.10 The LORD spoke to Manasseh and to his people, but they paid no attention. 11 Therefore the LORD brought upon them the commanders of the army of the king of Assyria, who captured Manasseh with hooks and bound him with chains of bronze and brought him to Babylon. From this point on, the Kingdom of Judah never recovered and eventually exiled. So, what happen to the anointing of Manasseh?

There several problems with this heretic teaching of anointing:

1. Bishops & Priests are not Monarchs
It is out of context to equate submission to kings in the Old Testament to submission to spiritual leaders in the 21st century. We do not live in the age of kings and princes. Bishop, priest and pastors are not kings, though many of them in our Diocese behave like one. They are servants of the Lord and His people. The role of priests is to help people to worship and know God. The authority of spiritual leaders come from God and is given to them to proclaim the good news, bind the wounded and set the captives free. The authority is not theirs to keep, and does not belong to them. They certainly cannot use the authority to “lord over” the people.

[Jesus said,] “You know that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant,” (Mark 10: 42 & 43)

Jesus is our ONLY king. He is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords to whom every knee shall bow and every tongue confess–NOT our Bishops, priest and pastors.

2. Bishops & Priests are not Moses
Often the teaching of “anointed leader” involves referencing to Moses, especially when fundraising for a mega church project is nigh. The preachers see themselves in the mould of Moses or David. The teaching implies if they people failed to heed the vision of “Moses”, the faithless (those who question the viability of the project) and the rebellious (those who disagree with  the project) would die in the desert and miss out on the Promised Land (the mega project God purportedly wants us to build). Call upon God to raise up Joshua and Caleb (the younger members who usually say yes and rarely ask any questions) to arise in leadership (take over the PCC). This is the most oft used heretic teaching of Bishop Albert Vun and his cohorts.

The false teachers neglect to point out that in the OT, God pours out the Holy Spirit only to selected few through whom He speaks to his people: Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, the priests, judges, kings, prophets and even a donkey in one instance. It is absurd to equate present day bishops or priests with specific Bible personalities such as Moses whom the Bible says is the meekest man on earth. Who amongst us can come close to that?

Yet when Jesus dies, the veil in the Temple is torn. On Pentecost, God has poured out his spirit on all people: Jews and Gentiles, young and old, men and women, free men and slaves. Everyone who believes that Jesus is Lord and calls on His name is anointed with the Holy Spirit.

But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvellous light. (1 Peter 2:9)

From a selected few in the OT, every believer is anointed with the Holy Spirit in the New Testament. The idea of an extra “anointed leader” is not supported in NT. So why is it often implied and preached from the pulpit? It is to shore up the position, power and authority of the spiritual leaders.

And it is God who establishes us with you in Christ, and has anointed us, and who has also put his seal on us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee. (2 Cor 1:21 & 22)

I write these things to you about those who are trying to deceive you. But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie—just as it has taught you, abide in him. (1 John 2:26 & 27)

3. Bishops and Priests are not Infalliable
After King Saul is anointed he prophesies with the prophets, he wins victories after victories, he is successful. Yet the anointing is conditioned upon Saul keeping his covenant with God. When he disobeys God, the Holy Spirit deserts him and Saul is tormented by an evil spirit. Isn’t David anointed? Yet he commits adultery and murder. Isn’t Moses anointed? Yet he disobeys God and never enters the Promised Land. Clearly anointing does not make anyone infalliable. We are all sinners, fallen short of God’s glory.

In this crisis many have said, “The Bishop has probably done some wrongs but nevermind, let God deal with him.” There is a BIG difference between taking judgement into our own hands versus confronting the sins and sinner. Prophet Samuel rebukes Saul’s disobedience and prophesies that God has torn the kingdom from him. David confronts Saul about the King’s unjustified pursuit for his life. Yet how many amongst our clergy and leaders have rebuked and confronted BAV according to the Scripture? We have hoped the HoB and Bishop Moses Tay will be the Samuel of our crisis. Only God knows they have warned and corrected BAV to heed God’s laws.

My brothers and sisters, all of us who believe Jesus is our Saviour and confess He is Lord is anointed by the Holy Spirit. There is no biblical evidence to suggest this anointing is privileged to spiritual leaders only. Our Bishops and Priests are not monarchs or Moses and certainly not infalliable. They are servants of God here to dispense the grace of God. By all means love, respect and support them in all things biblical and honorable. Yet never allow anyone to subjugate your freewill or throw out discernment just because someone claims to be “anointed.”

Jesus is THE anointed one to whom every knee must bow. Nobody else.

2 Weeks Later

Read this in 中文 & Bahasa Malaysia.

Seventeen days had passed since the four emails were published in this blog. As expected, neither Bishop Albert Vun nor Dean Chak replied. If the emails were fabricated they would have come charging with a strong denial. So what are the repercussions of these emails?

1. The Church Lost Her Voice

All of us witnessed the fraud, manipulation, racism in the recent general election. Other religious bodies, churches and denominations can be a voice of conscience at this time. Our Diocese however cannot speak up against such darkness because she is mired in the same problems and lost trust of the people. So what is the use of salt when it losses it saltiness?Dean Chak had lost the ability to pray together with the choir before the service started–a cherished ASC tradition. The giving of ASC was around RM150,000 in April 2013, down from RM285,000 monthly average in 2011.

2. Blaming the Whistleblower

Dean Chak is playing the victim and blaming the whistleblower. His hypocrisy makes Chua Soi Lek looks like an angel. When a clandestine video proved his infidelity, the MCA politician resigned and took time to mend his marriage. Dean Chak on the other hand just ignore his immorality. What a sad day when a non-believing politician (a tax collector in New Testament context) has the conscience to do the right thing, while a senior priest donned in white robs does not. How long can Dean Chak continues to hide from church members? BAV’s priority, the tithing and offering of ASC, slides to RM150,000 in April, down from the RM285,000 average in 2011. ASC struggles to pay its assessment to the Diocese.Meanwhile, when confronted by church members Rev. Sim Ka Seng replied he did not follow Bishop Albert Vun’s instructions in the email.

3. Does HOB Still Have a Conscience?

It is a widely held view HOB will not act against another fellow Bishop. Bishop Moses Tay is not here to address the issues–which to many is clear cut–but to shore up support for BAV. It is unclear whether these emails will awake the conscience of HOB and open their eyes to see the real Bishop Albert Vun.The Management Letter was discredited and the PAC report deemed biased. Now we have heard from directly from the horse’s mouth. What HOB does next will tell us a lot about the Bishops in our province.

Another batch of emails will be revealed soon to show the masquerade at play at Wisma Anglican.

A Story…

A group of Christians, as they are leaving the church after Sunday service, see a man stabbing an old lady and then running away with her handbag. Some of the Christians, scream for help. One of them call for ambulance and another the police. At the same time, a few women kneel and pray. A doctor from the church tend to the old woman’s stab wound. Two young men from the group chase after the armed suspect, catch him and give him a good beat up before tying him up.

The two young men turn around and blast the women who pray for being too passive. Then those who scream for help accuse the young men for being too aggressive and “acting out of flesh”. The doctor blames those who call for the ambulance and police for not attending to the old lady’s fatal wound immediately. A big argument broke out amongst the Christians. Each insisting their response is the only right one, while lambasting the others for not doing the right thing or doing enough.

While they argue, the suspect escapes and the old lady dies.

An Open Letter

Read this in 中文 & Bahasa Malaysia.

The following is an open email sent last night to BMT, BAV and Chak, plus the 3 Bishops in the Provincial House of Bishops, and clergy of ADOS last night. 

Dear Bishop Moses Tay, Bishop Albert Vun and Dean Chak,

I am writing to seek your clarification to the revelation published here:

http://thetrutheng.com/2013/04/26/a-scandalous-plot-part-i/

http://thetrutheng.com/2013/04/27/a-scandalous-plot-part-ii/

Many questions are raised about your integrity, trustworthiness and moral standards. This blog has long been accused of being one sided. In the spirit of openness, I welcome you to challenge what is presented, argue your stand, clarify your position and point out any flaws.

Let’s engage the charges, issues and evidence before us. Bishop Albert Vun and Dean Chak, they are afterall, your words. I am please to publish your arguments/clarification verbatim on the blog as I did for Bishop Melter Tais’ apology last year. There is only one condition. You must not resort to name calling, spiritualizing the issues or issuing a simple denial as it is proven beyond reasonable doubt these are indeed your emails.

Dear Rev. Sim Ka Seng, Rev. Lin Khee Vun, Pastor Jemmie, Pastor Flora & Winston Nathaniel, you have been named co-conspirators in Bishop Albert Vun’s scheme to influence All Saints Cathedral’s AGM. You are welcome to defend yourself too.

Your response or refusal to respond will be reported back to the readers. I trust 72 hours is more than enough for you to respond, and believe you have the basic decency to be accountable to the members you lead.

This open email will be published on the blog.

A Scandalous Plot – Part II

This article is also published in 中文 & Bahasa Malaysia.

Last night we have seen Dean Chak Sen Fen’s emails to Bishop Albert Vun. The shocking revelation shows us there is another side to the neutral, honest, pious and humble facade Dean Chak works so hard to portray to members of All Saints Cathedral. He was away in the Holy Land while the AGM was set in motion. He appointed James Chhoa and PCC to revamp the voting system. For so long he appeared to be far away from the manipulation of the AGM many priests, pastors and ASC staff had been suspected of. Chak’s emails reveal hypocrisy, manipulation and dishonesty of the highest order. Who had thought the Dean of our Cathedral could stoop so low? Tonight, you will see someone went even lower.

Here are two emails from BAV.

02

04

The suspicion BAV runs the Diocese remotely during his sabbatical is proven by his own emails. Who is the real Dean of All Saints Cathedral? Who pulls the string at ASC? The answer is clear from the four emails published here.

This blog hereby:

  • charges Bishop Albert Vun and Dean Chak Sen Fen for dividing the church, pitting the one congregation against another.
  • charges BAV and Dean Chak for misleading BM, Chinese and 10:30am congregation that certain members are “troublemakers” when all BAV and Dean Chak wanted was total control of the PCC.
  • charges BAV and Dean Chak for manipulating the election by campaigning for their favoured candidates, abusing their authority as leaders, their time and resources in church employment to subvert the unity of the church and slander the reputation certain church members
  • charges BAV and Dean Chak for manipulation bordering WITCHCRAFT by advocating “pray and act forcefully”. Were you not forcing the hand of God and manipulating the will of the people to fit your agenda? Is God’s hand to short to help you BAV & Dean Chak that you have to resort to manipulation? Do you not trust the Holy Spirit to convict before people vote? Or do you think you know better than the Holy Spirit?
  • charges BAV and Dean Chak for reducing church leadership to a totally political one, forgetting the church is a spiritual entity, the Bride of Christ
  • charges BAV and Dean Chak for systematically removing church leaders who advocate transparency and accountability
  • charges BAV for coverups when he told his employees to “delete this email after reading it”
  • names Rev. Sim Ka Seng, Rev. Lin Khee Vun, Pastor Jemmie Pitah, Pastor Flora Chong as co-conspiritors in the plot to manipulate ASC’s AGM
  • charges BAV and Dean Chak for abusing their spiritual office by “guiding” the BM congregation how to vote instead of teaching them to seek the Holy Spirit’s conviction before they vote.
  • charges BAV and Dean Chak for demeaning the intellect of the BM congregation to suggest they need “guiding” on how to vote
  • charges BAV and Dean Chak for treating the BM, Chinese & 10:30am congregations as pawns in their quest for total control
  • charges BAV and Dean Chak for violating the sacredness and freewill of balloting, conducted in the house of God no less
  • charges BAV and Dean Chak for being HYPOCRITES. You have put control up an appearance of piety and detachment over the affairs of ASC yet on the contrary you have engineered the AGM cynically and behind-the-scene to fit your agenda
  • charges Dean Chak for being a puppet of BAV as it is proven that you are under the control of Bishop Albert Vun. We may have a different Dean but the SAME person is in charge of All Saints Cathedral
  • challenges BAV and Dean Chak to PROVE how some of the candidates have plans to control the finances of ASC, failing which BAV and Dean Chak should publish a public apology, nullify the election, and recall a fresh election of PCC

To the House of Bishop and Bishop Moses Tay, this is what your solution has brought us. May the blood be upon your heads. BAV has shown no desire for reconciliation and reform, only determination to systematically remove from leadership people who advocate transparency, accountability and reform.

Bishop Moses Tay, you have been suggesting to many people the PAC report and Management Letter were biased. Now read for yourself the very words of your beloved protege. They are not written by the PAC, honorary auditor or anyone else, but Bishop Albert Vun himself. Now tell us how this man is still fit to be a spiritual leader, let alone the Bishop of Sabah.

[Speaking to the Pharisees and scribes Jesus said,] You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’” And he called the people to him and said to them, “Hear and understand: it is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth; this defiles a person.” (Matthew 15: 7-11, ESV)

What has come out of the mouths of Bishop Albert Vun and Dean Chak Sen Fen?

In the meantime, when so many thousands of the people had gathered together that they were trampling one another, he began to say to his disciples first, “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. Nothing is covered up that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known. Therefore whatever you have said in the dark shall be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in private rooms shall be proclaimed on the housetops.” (Luke 12:1-3)

A Scandalous Plot – Part I

This article is also published in 中文 & Bahasa Malaysia.

Dean Chak Sen Fen’s appointment and the departure of Bishop Albert Vun, Philip Lo and Stella Lo from All Saints Cathedral brought an immediate truce. Many were hopeful this would free ASC from BAV’s meddling and manipulation, that Chak would gather the local leaders and together chart the way forward for ASC. The people wanted BAV to butt out of the day-to-day running of ASC and her direction. One of the biggest fracture points during BAV’s reign at ASC was the lack of boundaries between the Diocesan and ASC affairs. The two were one in many cases as BAV controlled both. ASC funds were lifted for Diocesan projects, rising Cathedral’s deficit further. The members also aspire to take ownership of ASC’s vision and direction once again, instead of being dictated by BAV’s whims, fancies and ego.

With Chak’s appointment as Dean, we hope to turn a new leaf at ASC. There are certainly reasons to be hopeful as Dean Chak was a humble, hardworking and honest clergy during his days at ASC many years ago. Early signs were good. Chak appointed James Chhoa and the PCC to improve the voting system for the AGM. Despite controversy of pastoral staff campaigning for certain candidates, Chak was spared from criticisms as he was away in the Holy Land until 3 days before the AGM.

It appears that BAV is out of the picture and Chak is steering ASC away from deception, manipulation & tyrannical era of his predecessor, ushering her into a new chapter where ASC will be led by transparency, accountability and teamwork.  This is the general perception of Chak.

At the Diocesan level, Bishop Moses Tay  is in town to facilitate the way forward. Hurting and frustrated members finally found a pair of listening ears from the Province, our first ever Archbishop no less. While his reasonings and theology is not easily understood, many reckon he is neutral and just. The medical doctor’s analytical skills can surely be counted upon to recognize the symptoms, identify the root cause and prescribe the right treatment. He assures everyone  he is neutral and he seeks God’s way forward. Hard not to believe a former Archbishop.

If you share such perception of Dean Chak and Bishop Moses Tay, then what you are about to read next will challenge and likely overturn those perceptions.

Thanks to an anonymous whistleblower, this blog has obtained copies of emails by BAV and Dean Chak.

Email from Dean Chak to Bishop Albert Vun

Dean Chak Sen Fen's email to Bishop Albert Vun

The authenticity of these emails is certain, however Dean Chak and Bishop Albert Vun are welcome to challenge it if they disagree. The repercussions of these correspondences is far reaching. Here are the vital issues and questions:

1. Dean Chak claims to know who Bishop Moses Tay has been meeting and BMT’s opinion of those he has met with.Weren’t the meetings of various members with Bishop Moses Tay private & confidential? Did Bishop Moses Tay breach confidentiality? Did Bishop Moses Tay allege James Chhoa, Clarence Fu and Rosalind Liew of planning to “dominate the PCC” of All Saints Cathedral? What did Bishop Moses Tay say that gives Dean Chak the impression they “began to see the dark side of this group”? To be fair, we have only read what Dean Chak claimed to have happened. Bishop Moses Tay deserves the opportunity to clarify. I cannot believe the former Archbishop and a representative from the Provincial House of Bishops can be so indiscreet, impartial and bias. So please do not jump into any conclusions until we hear from him. Bishop Moses Tay, this blog is happy to publish your clarification.

2. Dean Chak ONLY asked the BM and Chinese congregations to be proactive in the AGM. Why only these congregations? Isn’t he the Dean of all the congregations? Is he trying to pit the BM and Chinese congregations against the English congregation?

3. Dean Chak shared with BAV his plan to disqualify certain candidates via the final PCC meeting. While a clergy cannot be elected as a PCC member, Rev. Clarence Fu is no longer a Diocesan staff nor licensed to minister in ADOS. While he had resigned from the Diocese, his ordination as a priest is a lifelong calling; that is why he is still called Rev. Fu unless he is defrocked. The constitution is clear that Fu, as a member of ASC, is eligible to be elected as a PCC member just like any other ASC members. Dean Chak’s email showed his bias and perhaps a personal agenda. The more important question is how did so many in the Chinese congregation also shared Dean Chak’s doubt and bias against Rev. Fu’s eligibility? How did this doubt spread from a single email to so many?

4. As the Dean, all nomination forms come back to him. With this information, he engineered his staff’s brother to contest against the incumbent treasurer. This was done behind the veneer of piousness and appearance of impartiality. Will it be accurate to call this HYPOCRISY?

What was BAV’s response to Chak’s email? Was it true he manipulated the election? Who is in charge of ASC? The Dean or BAV?

What is hidden will soon be revealed. Find out tomorrow night, 8pm when A Scandalous Plot – Part II goes LIVE.

Bishop Albert Vun “LIKES” Barisan National

This report is available in 中文 & Bahasa Malaysia.

We “LIKE” a lot of things and people on Facebook: food, events, pictures, funny quotes and even political parties. Nothing wrong with that as we have the freedom of association. The church officially however should remain non-partisan. Council of Churches Malaysia (CCM) announced in the press a few days ago that the church would remain non-partisan and neutral during the campaign. Practical steps include not accepting donations from political parties or politicians, and abstain from attending any political events during the campaign period. It is important that the church not only say what is right, but do that is right. Yet when a bishop of a major denomination “LIKES” a political party on social media, does that breach the non-partisan pledge by CCM? Does that violate the spirit of non-partisanship? Is this wise? Everything is permissible, but is everything helpful? Well, he didn’t accept any donations. Neither did he attend a political event. What is your view on this issue? Please comment.

Last night Prime Minister Najib Razak said in an interview with Al Jazeera that he supports banning the use of “Allah” by non-Muslim. If the court agrees with the PM, all seminaries in Malaysia will have to destroy every book that use that word, along with countless BM Bibles. Our brothers and sisters will have to buy a new version of BM Bibles if the PM’s stand prevail in court. Our Bishop, as of 12 hours ago, announced to the world he “LIKED” the very political coalition that supports such a ban. Meanwhile Christian Federal of Malaysia (CFM) and CMM pointed out the contradiction of our PM who also signed a 10-point solution to resolve issues affecting Christians in 2011.

03

Break News, Friday 8pm

My brothers and sisters in Christ, this blog has obtained ironclad evidence of sins, manipulation & hypocrisy of the highest order committed by Bishop Albert Vun, Dean Chak Sen Fen and their cohorts. This is the BIGGEST exposé since the publishing of the Management Letter. It will be brought to you LIVE this Friday, 26 April, 8pm.

It will be published in BM, Chinese and English versions of this blog simultaneously. No longer can Bishop Albert Vun lie to BM and Chinese congregations and demonise the English congregations. We are one family and everyone, regardless of our skin colours and mother tongues, deserves the truth.

BM & Chinese Blogs

Happy to announce today The Truth blog is expanded to BM and Chinese versions as well. Truth must be proclaimed in the three major languages in Sabah so that lies, deceit, darkness can be exposed, and truth, information and righteousness accessible to all. “Prophets” had proclaimed the demise of the reformers following the AGM in Christ Church Likas & All Saints Cathedral. Yet, truth is like the rising sun, you can try to deny it, cover it, block it, ignore it for a little while but NOBODY can stop it from rising & shining upon the whole land. Do not lose hope. Do not give up. Do not stop trusting in our Abba Father.

“My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me. For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities. For when I am weak, then I am strong.” 2 Corinthians 12:9&10

Tonight, a MAJOR announcement will be made on the BM, Chinese and English blogs.