The many faces of Sun Ho.

These are the many faces of Sun Ho.

Since City Harvest Church was founded in 1989, she has taken on many roles, titles and names. As the co-founder, she was also her pastor. Subsequently, she stepped down as a pastor to pursue her singing career by relocating to Taiwan.

Recently, with the leadership vacuum urgently needed to be filled after the conviction in November last year, she was re-ordained as CHC’s pastor. The hand that ordained her was none other than her husband's, who is the lead accused in a trial that lasted 142 days for criminal breach of trust and fraudulent misappropriation.

Kong Hee prayed this over her: "I pray when she speaks, fire will come out of her belly." He then asked the congregation to "continue to pray for Sun and our new generation leadership team, as they work together for CHC 2.0!"

Her public persona did not end there. There was a time when Sun Ho achieved much success in her singing career. She stayed on top of music charts with her hit song "Lonely Travel". She scored internationally with five Mandarin Albums under the auspice of Warner Music Taiwan. From 2003 to 2006, she released five English songs which reached the top of the dance club charts of Billboard Magazine and London-based Music Week. She also collaborated with top music producers like David Foster and broke into Hollywood with her debut American single "Where Did Love Go".

Sun Ho had numerous firsts too. In 2003, she became the first Asian pop singer in Hollywood Film Festival. He was the only Chinese singer to be invited to the 46th Annual Grammy Award 2004 and in 2007, she was invited to the MTV Europe Awards.

If there were ever a church leader who was actively participating in the worldly glamor/stardom scene, soaking up the fame, riches and attention with panache, it had to be Sun Ho.

Unlike many Christian singers who have drawn the line when it comes to mixing Christian beliefs with worldly culture, Sun Ho threw herself into it with flair and relish. This intermingling or cross-pollination came to the fore with her collaboration with writer/producer Wyclef Jean on the controversial "China Wine".

This is a difficult wine to swallow for Christians. It reeks more than it uplifts. It smacks of everything that grates on the sensibility of an earnest believer. The video is anything but edifying. The sexually suggestive dance moves, glossolalia-like lyrics and fornication-themed narrative are a direct affront to all the enduring values that were portrayed at Calvary. Forget about crucifying the flesh, suffering for Christ, denying oneself, bearing the Cross and being persecuted for righteousness' sake. With China Wine, the wine of the spirit has undergone a worldly fermentation to become a symbol of decadence, debauchery, sordidness and lewdness.

And here is where Sun Ho had reinvented herself with the many faces she project for the public to cringe, twitch and marvel at. At the same time that she projected the image of a wanton and loose geisha in China Wine, she was also a globetrotting celebrity leading a team to raise funds for victims of natural disasters.

She helped to build medical clinics and orphanages in Indonesia, China and Sri Lanka. In 2002, she was awarded "The Outstanding Young Person Award" and the next year, she was voted "The Outstanding Young Person of the World Award." She also donated her royalties to build schools in Chongqing, Guizhou and Henan.

In 2008, she was appointed the Music Ambassador for the Beijing Olympics. And to add to her multiple public portfolios, Sun Ho is also a businesswoman who had set up boutiques in 2006 and 2007 to market and sell American labeled apparels and accessories.

With the notoriety she had gained from China Wine, she layered it with the popularity that came with doing charity work. This is definitely one personality you can't pin down. But whether you like her or not, controversies and praises doggedly shadow her wherever she goes. And the last public stunt that shot her to stardom of an unnerving kind was the 2010 investigation, leading to a trial that lasted for three years and concluding with convictions, sentences and appeals of all accused. The outcome of the appeal is in a few days' time.

In the trial, revelations of her extravagant lifestyle shocked the church and public, causing thousands to leave the church and the faith. Her upscale LA mansion, where she rented to film her music videos, costs the church $28k a month. She (and her husband) took in S$1.4 million from 2006 to 2009 as payment for her music artiste salary, royalties and bonuses, and her personal expenses came easily up to half a million. She also lives in an apartment in Singapore that runs up to the millions.

Further, it was revealed that her husband had misled the church he professed to have loved with sham bonds, sham companies and sham announcements of inflated album sales when there was clearly a massive deficit. 

All this was done just so that the Crossover Project could have some semblance of authenticity, credibility and success. If it were truly God’s ordained plan, then one has to wonder, why all the surreptitiousness, subterfuge and sophistry? Why is CHC’s culture “mired in secrecy”? Why not just come clean and be honest with their congregation since the members have come forward during the trial claiming that they would have given freely to the pastoral couple regardless of how the money was to be used? (I call it the blankcheque faith).

These are questions that have divided believers with her supporters claiming that she is going through persecution for her faith and her detractors claiming that she is using church funds to realize her teenage dream of becoming an international pop star with the tag-along goal of evangelism to boot.

So, these are the many faces of Sun Ho, and her singing-cum-pastoral ministry over the last three decades, which she had started when she was only 20 years old, has been a rather complicated, stigmatized and belabored one. She is therefore anything but an open book. And with her husband firmly controlling the purse-string of the church and ordaining her recently to lead CHC 2.0, the beloved couple have violated the one cardinal rule of accountability and leadership ethics to their congregation, and that is, conflict of interests.

Alas, from one pastor to another, let me briefly introduce Pastor Eugene H. Petersen before I end. I have read his memoir entitled “The Pastor” and I have to say that he is a man who had lived an understated life as a pastor (he’s retired), but with overwhelming impact nevertheless on the people he met and ministered to.

Pastor Petersen discreetly stayed out of the limelight. He didn’t pursue or court the world in order to change it. On the contrary, he pursued the lover of his soul in order to change the world.

His ministry did not operate on a shock-and-awe basis, borrowing the world stage to introduce one’s savior to a besotted crowd who cares more about the one on stage strutting her stuff than the one she apparently urges all to exalt.

The danger of Sun Ho’s modus operandi is that it is a case of competing visibility (by crowd perception) where God and the earthly star are both exalted. As such, the devotion and worship are mixed and shared, and often muddled. Take the earthly star away and you can rest assured that many will fall away too. It is unfortunately a case of evangelism by personality and not so much by sacrifice and humility.

I guess that is why Jesus did not come in golden robe and heavenly chariots, with his angels making advance booking in the most luxurious palatial room in the Roman province, and waiting to be served by a coterie of indentured servants. He also did not fill up the grand amphitheaters and hippodromes with cheering crowd and amaze them with supernatural stunts and manifestations.

Jesus came almost anonymously, spent decades in the humblest abode, intermingled with the disenfranchised, dispossessed and disadvantaged, taught and served twelve social misfits, traveled from one place to another with no permanent residence (or “church”) to call home, left all finances to His heavenly Father, performed miracles without drawing attention to himself, consciously sought only to glorify the one who had sent him, and with nothing and in blood he came, he left in the same way, that is, in blood, in gore and with nothing to his name.

Jesus dispossessed himself in order to possess all. He denied himself in order to save all. And he led with a servant heart in order to transform all. He did not court the world so as to do his Father’s will. He courted his Father’s will so as to change the world.

RT Kendall once said that we often see the dove coming down from heaven (Matthew 3:16) and miss the Son standing before us. With the controversies that have dogged Sun Ho’s life and ministry, I wonder, did we miss the Son for the dove? Or worse, conveniently assume that the Son and the dove are interchangeable. Cheerz.

What if God ruled the World?

It’s the midweek and this thought kept me churning: What if God gets elected by a landslide and form the government for the next 4 or 5 years? How would He then run the country? I guess this is no different from some Christians asking what-would-Jesus-do when seeking his guidance at the crossroads of their life. But my point stretches it further. It is a thought experiment beyond the nationwide scale.  It is trying to imagine how God as a leader would govern the country. A foolhardy imagination?

Well, I can now hear the resounding gripes of atheists and theists alike. They will find this thought experiment an exercise in sheer futility since perfection is unattainable and a perfect ruler would be totally incompatible with a hopelessly self-serving and imperfect world. A perfect world only exists in Plato’s metaphysical Forms or Socrates’ indefinable absolutes and not in this corrupt world we live in. And history has shown that theology and politics make quarrelsome, even combustible, bedfellows – to put it mildly.

I hear them. I understand where they are coming from. I know this imagination of mine sounds silly. But to be frank, when have imaginations of the wildest, weirdest kind ever been stopped by naysayers? And what harm is there to throw some ideas out there just for some metaphorical milking; even for ideas that are crazy at first and subsequent conceptions?

So, undaunted and foolhardy, I took my midweek musing out for a mental stroll and I let go of the lease for some free-range roaming. I guess it would be a short walk in the wilderness of crazy and my guiding theme is: How would God govern a country?

First, he will have to choose the cabinet, that is, a group of able and trusted ministers to assist him. Of course, he can ably rule alone, or rule by threes. Nothing has stopped them three from running the universe (or multiverses) since the beginning of time right? But since God governing the country would mean that he has to put on flesh and confine himself to the rules of human government, I can expect God to be leading with a human team. I call it understated leadership.

Now, I wonder, what would be his criteria for selection? How would he choose the right people for the job? By strict meritocracy? By some form of nepotistic favoritism? By a system of patronages? By some America’s-Got-Talent contest or Survivor-like fight to the end? Or a little of each with emphasis on merits for some vital positions? Mm…being all wise and all-knowing, I trust his criteria would lean towards meritocracy. And being fair and honest, God would surely avoid the slippery slope of favoritism, patronage and even pageantry competition. His government will no doubt be whiter than white. That’s a given.

But make no mistake about it, the meritocracy of the omniscience would be substantially different from the meritocracy of the world. While LKY did not have the benefit of foresight or hindsight (and the powers of divinity), God has (isn’t that stating the obvious?) and his cabinet team would not be selected based only on academic results. God would throw the meritocratic net much wider and deeper. If Jesus selecting the twelve disciples were of any indication, I think God would choose only the best with character, wit and wisdom to boot – academic results or grades notwithstanding.

You see, all of Jesus’ disciples - bar one - had proven themselves with their lives in dedication to the Great Commission and I would expect nothing less from God in selecting his cabinet. He would have the benefit of the end in mind with everyone of the candidates. For this reason, he would have the perfect human team – so to speak.

With the perfect team assembled, I guess the work is half done. The second task at hand is to choose a political ideology – recall being confined in the flesh? And I wonder, what would God go for or ride on? Would he choose the default position of democracy with market-driven capitalism as its prodigal companion? Surely the end of history would be a sound guide here right (obviously not)? Or, would he throw into the mix some socialism to make sure the lower rung of society are provided for? Basic Income for the underclass or the lumpen-precariat? Mm…maybe, he would be more radical and surprise all with the application of pure communism (for lack of a better political ideology) as the guiding principle of government? God knows that an equal and classless society would surely ensure his electorate are kept happy for a long time to come. No Matthew effect here where the rich gets richer, but instead, the Post-Upper-room effect where everyone sold everything they possessed in order to share with all.

And what Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot could not achieve in their decades of brutal dictatorship, God being perfect would have no problem pulling it all off with flying colors. And if the early days of the church after the upper-room experience were anything to go by, then I guess building up a community-nation with one heart and soul where ownership is based on common stewardship and every fruits of production is distributed fairly according to one’s need would be the ideal political ideology. Surely, that which could not be achieved by man would easily be delivered with cherries on top by God and his elected team in government.

Now, with the leadership, the team and the ideology completely aligned, I guess the last task for God is the relations with his neighbors, that is, foreign policy. How would God as the head of a nation deal with other countries? How would he and his team conduct themselves at regional and law conferences, trade unions, economic blocks, international meetings, strategic military alliances, the UN, the world bank, the IMF and other related international bodies?

Well, I guess my imagination would be stretched to breaking point here. The world is too complicated, culturally diverse, politically divided, and economically differentiated for one nation’s leader – however perfect - to handle, manage and influence with lasting impact within such a short term in office (assuming it is a limited term premiership).

Or maybe I am wrong. I may have - with apology -underestimated the Creator of the Universe. Surely, God being God is not without resources, strategies, resolutions, ideas, influences and affluence at his timely, swift and effective disposal, right (even in human flesh)? If he is the beginning and the end, the Alpha and the Omega, then whatever transpires in the middle is needless to say within his sovereign will, control and power. I guess his character, virtue and sheer charisma would shine through and impress every leader he meets locally and abroad, and they would in turn be transformed by the encounter. Although I can’t guarantee that they - with their God-given freewill – would not rebel against his gestures of goodwill, diplomacy and brilliant statecraftmanship, I can be sure that meeting God in any context would be life-transforming, and enduringly so.

But then, if Jesus’ experiences on earth two thousand years ago were of any indication, God would have friends and foes alike. Some would want to die for him while others would rather he did not exist. Some would stand firm and fight in his name while others would blaspheme him. And some would remain faithful to the end while others would betray him for silver, gold or bit coins. This is all part and parcel of dirty politics and fallen humanity – divinity or otherwise.

Yet, notwithstanding all that, I have no doubt that God would excel in the end. My faith can’t be misplaced because he is God after all. And at the end of his term, I am confident that God and his handpicked government of the widest and most diverse credentials will be vindicated and the result will be unbelievably great. I trust the people will be blessed by his leadership and peace will reign for as long as he rules. Leaders of all lands will instantly grow fond of him and show him the respect that he deserves. The net result will be undeniably positive. And historians will remember his leadership as one of ensuing wisdom, peace and prosperity. It would in fact be emulated by generations of leaders after him. Surely, it would be a resounding success.

And I am sure you - the reader – would have seen it all coming, right? It is a no-brainer. The endgame is predictable. God and the perfection of government – that’s how it would end. And herein ends my unfettered imagination. Cheerz.

PM Lee's three wishes.

It is easy to see why PM Lee had to complete the National Day Rally speech. He needed to finish what he had started. It is not called a rally speech for nothing and his persistence rallied not just the people back after a brief reception, but it also rallied their hearts.

It has become a nationwide shock when the sequence of events at 9:20 pm were a trip over his words, an eerie silence, a body slant, a flurry of aides rushing to the stage, an audible gasp, an advised intermission, and an early reception.

The whole nation practically kept vigil for one hour, waiting and praying for news of PM Lee's condition. Social media went wild with speculation. And assurances were issued to calm the crowd.

But he fought back. PM Lee stumbled because of exhaustion. And at 10:40 pm he returned and said, "I've never had so many doctors look at me all at once. They think I'm all right but anyway I'm going to have a full check-up after this. But before that I'd like to finish my speech."

Ironically, that was the highlight yesterday - not so much the speech. Yet, it spoke volume. It lifted hearts.

PM Lee said, "Our politics must unite the country and uphold our multiracial society." And when he walked back on stage, for that brief moment, he united the nation - both in speech and action.

Lesson? Just one.

Just before he completed his speech, PM Lee mentioned about a divine encounter. He said that he was once asked about what he'd wish for if God had granted him three wishes. This is what he said yesterday.

For his first wish, PM Lee would ask to be blessed with divine discontentment. He hopes to look for ways to improve, to progress. He doesn't want to be satisfied with the status quo and rest on his laurels. On the contrary, he wants to be driven to do better, to do more for Singapore.

His second wish was to ask God to grant him the wisdom to count his blessings. He wants to be reminded of how far we as a nation have come and how blessed we have been. The journey itself has been an inspiration and the distance covered thus far is our source of pride and encouragement.

I guess being able to count our blessings is to be grateful always so that we will not take anything for granted. And it also gives us a perspective to embrace the progress we have fought so hard for as one united people regardless of race, language and religion.

PM Lee concluded by saying that with these two wishes fulfilled, he doesn't need a third wish. The two wishes would be enough. With divine discontentment and the wisdom to count one's blessings, a third wish would serve no purpose. He said that no material wealth or riches can take their place.

He explained that wealth can be squandered, but with a spirit to always desire to improve and a heart of thanksgiving, Singaporeans will then be able to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation for generations to come.

Somehow, his two wishes kind of remind me of this Reinhold Niebuhr's quote: "God, give us grace to accept with serenity the things that cannot be changed, Courage to change the things that should be changed, and wisdom to distinguish the one from the other."

With a little imagination, his first wish about divine discontentment is the courage to change part and his second wish about counting one's blessings is the serenity to accept part. And his decline of a third wish fits reassuringly in the part about the wisdom to know the difference (about what truly matters in life and what doesn't). Cheerz.

My mortality for His eternity.

A FB friend of mine (whom I have not met, but have grown to respect for his wisdom) commented on one of my Facebook’s post about “Preparing for bereavement” by Gary Hayden, a philosophy and science writer.

Gary wrote that article in Straits Times recently and he talked about our mortality and how can we prepare for it. He concluded with the advice of living our life to the fullest by minimizing regrets.

However, the point of this post is what this friend of mine commented about what CS Lewis said in the article. This is what he wrote:-

“Mr Gary Hayden quoted CS Lewis that "... there is nothing we can do with suffering except to suffer it." This is like saying: there is nothing one can do with the bully except to be bullied." I am using a parallel argument to refute an argument.

Suffering ends instantly for one who understands the nature of suffering. Similarly, by simple deliberations, it is possible to make pain not to be pain. Search for a machine will be futile and in any case unnecessary. It is also possible to be completely be free of fear, all fears including the primal fear of death.

But to progress in any direction one must first accept the possibility. Without that first step of acceptance, journey ends without even beginning. Cheers.”

This is my reply to my dear friend.

“Thanks Sir for your input. I understand where you are coming from. The extinguishment of all material attachments is the true reality (goal) of humanity. At the risk of oversimplification, the worldly desire is the poison and its eradication is the solution.

But let's pause for thought there. I have read A Grief Observed by CS Lewis (even wrote about it in my blog). In fact, CS Lewis used another name to disguise the authorship when he submitted the manuscript to the publisher. His identity was only revealed after his death.

He did this because he felt deeply that the book challenged all his preconceived and idealistic pronouncements about the faith. And for a moment, in the eye of the storm, he lost his apologetic mantle, resilience and persuasiveness (at least it seems that way) which he excelled so well in with the scores of books he had written about defending the faith.

The point is this, sir: He loved Joy. He wrote that she complete him. Notwithstanding her previous marriage and 2 sons, he found in her a love that stands closest to the love he has found and experienced in God. They were in fact inseparable. Two peas in a love pod. She encouraged him, inspired him and transformed him.

After her death of bone cancer (a short relationship of five years I think), he took her two sons in and treated them as his very own. In all his pain and sorrow, he somehow blamed God for misleading him up the garden path of hope and then, squashing it with one cancer diagnosis after another. Underscore "somehow".

CS Lewis once said that "death of a beloved is an amputation." He did not say "like an amputation". It's neither a metaphor or analogy - its viscerally real to him. He was not mincing his words here. It is not an armchair philosophizing, like what I do most times bro. It’s real. It’s pain. It’s amputation.

So when he said (as you quoted), "there is nothing we can do with suffering except to suffer it," CS Lewis, a triple first student and a literary genius cum author, who was a formidable apologist himself, was not mincing his words either. He felt it, fought it, but for a period of the trial of his life, he succumbed to it.

He wrote this, "We were promised sufferings. They were part of the program. We were even told, "Blessed are they that mourn," and I accept it. I've got nothing that I hadn't bargained for. Of course it is different when the thing happens to oneself, not to others, and in reality, not imagination."

Sir, some pain practically robs away a part of you and it is undeniable, inexpressible and simply overwhelming. The deeper the love, the deeper the pain. Mind you, this is not material attachment. Neither is this desire so defined that clogs up the soul. On the contrary, I believe this is the part of us that makes us human. It is what defines our core, our spiritual genome, the singularity of our conscience.

By the way, I have a loved one who is suffering and I can feel (but a fraction of course) the pain in his beloved’s eyes. Generally reticent and quiet, she took everything in by braving it all one step and one day at a time. But I can sense the seams coming apart on some days. You see sir, both are devout believers, but at such times, faith can be seen as a luxury and reality, a stoic torturer.

But the pain for CS Lewis was not all bad. He wrote that “God has not been trying an experiment on my faith or love in order to find out their quality. He knew it already. It was I who didn’t. In this trial He makes us occupy the dock, the witness box, and the bench all at once. He always knew that my temple was a house of cards. His only way of making me realize the fact was to know it down.”

CS Lewis grew stronger in the faith and understanding after Joy's departure. You can say that he lived out the cold bowel of his writings, every vowel of it that is. And he passed away soon after his beloved's demise, but his belief stood firm (and inspired many). He was better for it (so to speak) because he confronted (unavoidable) pain, consorted with it for a while due to the fragility of humanity, but he broke away from it for the unsurpassed eternity that lies before him. It is one eternal desire he wishes never to extinguish.

Let me end my friend with the endearing apologist’s own words: “You never know how much you really believe anything until its truth of falsehood becomes a matter of life and death to you. It is easy to say you believe a rope to be strong and sound as long as you are merely using it to cord a box. But suppose you had to hang by that rope over a precipice. Wouldn’t you then first discover how much you really trust it?”

Indeed, CS Lewis tested his rope. And it stood the test of time, pain, grief, trials and even death. Cheerz.”

A Letter of Appeal to Kong Hee before his Appeal

My earnest plea to Pastor Kong Hee is one made before the outcome of his court appeal, which is in about 12 days’ time. It is unrelated to his court appeal. It has nothing to do with whether his court appeal is dismissed, allowed or the sentence is enhanced, reduced or, god forbid, the case is ordered back for a re-trial on some evidential issues. It also has nothing to do with theological legitimacy, kingdom expansion, the will of God, or the apology God once allegedly extended to him. Neither does it have anything to do with misrepresentation, fraud and dishonesty as he was so charged.

The prosecution may have found him to be a liar and the Court may have deemed him guilty beyond all reasonable doubts of all charges after examining the evidence in a trial that had lasted for 142 days (over more than 2 years), but this has nothing to do with why I am appealing to Pastor Kong Hee in this post.

Likewise, the church of about 17,000 may find him to be blameless, faultless, betrayed by the people he trusted, scapegoated for whatever reasons, or suffering for the sake of the gospel. They may therefore still believe in him with all their heart that he is innocent. Or they may dismiss, downplay, and trivialize his stage antics and misguided ambition in the Crossover project as part and parcel of leadership imperfections, acceptable deviation or expected prosecution for obeying God and not men.

But no, all that is not why I am making this appeal to him before the Court appeal in about two weeks’ time.

On the contrary, I’m making this appeal from one human being to another stripped of all the trappings and layers of leadership attention, celebrity attraction and congregational adoration. It is an appeal for the members who have left his church because I have read some testimonies of people who felt betrayed and lost. It is also an appeal for the ex-members who have given much of their time, money and effort to his firebrand leadership, but have nevertheless felt that they have been misled, misinformed and misguided.

And more importantly, it is for the members who have left the faith in disappointment and disillusionment because of the embarrassing revelations in the prolonged trial concerning cover-ups, backdating, cowardice, finger-pointing, blame-shifting, leadership's wilful ignorance, fake album sales announcements, false impressions given on stage, extravagant lifestyle, personal splurging and bingeing, and the crossover project that has been quietly buried, side-lined and forgotten without any accountability, explanation and apology. One has to wonder, where has all the money gone to?

Even for some who are still in his church, this appeal is for them too (and I believe they exist in quiet protest). I make this appeal for the silent minority in his church, for those who do not wish to rock the boat, but still feel something's amiss in the leadership. I make it for them who thinks Pastor Kong Hee has exceeded his authority and overreached his divine mandate. I guess I have covered enough ground, and I have to say that this is of course unsolicited representation, that is, no one has personally asked me to write this appeal on their behalf. I did it on my own accord. I did it because I feel it is the right thing to do.

Now, I have to be clear here that even if his court appeal is successful this September, and the conviction below is reversed for whatever reason, I do not think he is absolved for his leadership lapses. He may be eloquent, efficient, diligent and charismatic on stage, in evangelistic circles, and with his church members, but if the 5-year legal saga is anything to go by, he has yet to accept any responsibility for what he had done. His three bows on stage before a crowd of witnesses were not about accepting responsibility, but deflecting it.

Pastor Kong Hee believed he was just acting out the will of the Father as his sovereign Lord in the same way that the other co-accused believed that they were just acting out his instructions as the spiritual leader of the Church. This is at the very least a case of the blind leading the blind with unintended consequences, and at its very worst, a case of what DJ See had described as "the accused persons (choosing) to engage in covert operations and conspiratorial cover-ups" with "cover stories and clever round-trips concealing their unlawful conduct" in a "conspiracy to misuse CHC's funds, which included siphoning off large amounts from the Building Funds for Sun Ho's music career."

But my appeal to Pastor Kong Hee doesn't even ask of him to admit to all that. I am not asking that he come clean and plead guilty to the charges against him, thereby dropping his appeal -  for I earnestly believe that every man is entitled to his own defence and the pursuit of justice as he deems fit.

However, my appeal is for him to drop all pretences and spiritual high-wiring act of evangelistic and leadership performances and admit to how he had failed the church – and mind you, not what the church have to go through these past few years because he is bearing the cross for Christ.

If his failures - which is only human - is not apparent by now, then let me spell them out here in brief. It is a failure of leading the church into disrepute by pursuing a project of highly questionable worldly means to achieve a highly unsustainable evangelistic end in spite of one disapprobation after another, starting with Poon (who had paid dearly for being an honest, God-fearing whistle-blower) and ending with the shameless 142-day trial.

It is a failure of deliberately engineering an oppressive culture within the church that places more emphasis on securing funds from all and sundry at all costs and regardless of financial status quo and means just so that he can pour most of the funds into his wife's music career and lavish lifestyle in a pretentious and disingenuous bid to win souls for God.

It is a failure of the highest integrity of a shepherd leadership who instead of readily shielding, protecting, guiding and nurturing his sheep at his own costs, inconvenience and personal sacrifices, he cowardly disassociates, disregards and disowns his very own like his ex-confidante Chew Eng Han just so that he could hide his wrongdoings, deny his improper financial association with the crossover project as his and his wife’s brainchild, and wash his hands over the whole prosecutorial affair as Pontius Pilate did with Jesus.

It is also a failure for somehow allowing the church under his watch to be embroiled in an ongoing lawsuit in the high court against his ex-fund manager, Chew, for the return of $21 million of church funds allegedly being used as an investment in Chew's company, which also included $4.6 million in interest, the same of which is wholly denied by Chew who "insists that the church had used his firm as a vehicle to lend out money. He also claims that a personal guarantee he had signed for the investments was just to "comfort" the CHC board, and he was promised that it would not be enforced."

Here, one has to wonder, how on earth did so much of church money get into the hands of the sole director of a financial firm, and for what purpose? Alas, no Christian within the church wants to question about this because his leadership is deemed by them to be beyond reproach and indispensable. More like a law unto oneself.

Now, all these are clearly failures of his leadership that brings the name of Christ into disrepute and shame, and yet he adds more shame to it by claiming no wrong, denying any oversight, carrying on his pastoral leadership as if he was and has always been right, and worse, seeking spiritual impunity and legitimacy by asserting that he is doing all these by the seal, power and authority of God Himself.

Alas, even if you love the guy for his dedication and commitment to the ministry as professed by him, you ought to at the very least be discerning enough to sense that something is seriously amiss in his leadership right? I mean, I am not even appealing to Pastor Kong Hee to admit to the charges pending appeal, but I am simply appealing to him to come clean with his failings as a leader as listed above (though not exhaustive).

And to come clean with all that, and especially to apologise to those who had either left the church or the faith as a whole because of the legal grind he had put the church through, is at the very least the most Christian thing to do for a layman - what's more a leader.

So, let me end with this: I appeal to Pastor Kong Hee - before and regardless of the outcome of his court appeal - to do the right thing and the right thing, if he doesn't know it by now, is not always the most popular thing to do. And in this case, the right thing to do is also known as bearing the Cross where it truly counts. Cheerz.