The Unimpeachable Kong Hee - a reply to Calvin Ho.

One of the Executive Members of City Harvest Church, Calvin Ho, has finally spoken (or written). Not surprisingly, he stands firm on the side of Kong Hee and Sun Ho. He is asking for “the establishment to demonstrate sound moral judgment and consistency of its acts” because he “can no longer see this unprecedentedly protracted court case go so wrong in the eyes of (his) conscience, and so unjustified in so many aspects, and to-date still delivers an awful lack of convincing balance of sound, good-conscience judgment.” Underscore “awful”.

Calvin then went on to “call out the obvious that is so wrong, in the whole scheme of things, and with a beholding of the state of affairs in this country (he) observe(s), as a total human-citizen-Christian-CHC Executive Member observer.”

He then posed five questions  in his letter and I have added my thoughts to them– as usual. Here goes.

First, he asked, “where is the legal basis for CBT when there is no personal gain or benefit?” I will respectfully leave this part in the ably hands of the Court of Three Judges because as a Christian, my concern has always been with the spiritual and moral responsibility, stewardship and accountability of the CHC’s leadership before any dissected legal culpability of the collective six.

On this note, what is therefore not denied (and can’t be denied) is that Kong Hee’s stewardship has fallen way below what is expected of a leader, especially a church. The laundry list starts with shifting blame instead of bearing them, lying to the Church about his wife’s singing success and album sales, shamelessly touting her as the next “Whitney Houston,” living off the millions in extravagance while the poor and struggling in his Church live in modest accommodation, some even just scraping by, splurging on his wife quite mindlessly on a pretense of questionable evangelism resulting in money that could be used for other more worthy, effective and proven evangelistic causes (and definitely less controversial), and failing to make full and frank disclosure as the trustee, shepherd and professed lover of the Church about the Crossover Project where millions of hard-earned member’s money were spent.

I can go on about China Wine and the perversion of the gospel (which was met with disapproval from other church leaders), but I think you get the drift.

Where is then the responsibility and accountability in all this? Where is the stewardship and shepherdship of God’s people and their money? I can understand that one needs to readily forgive his or her pastor, he is just a man after all, but how do you even start the forgiveness, reconciliation and healing process when the church leaders admit to nothing, deflect all blame to his subordinates, and rally a defence (not legal mind you) to insulate himself (and herself) from any wrongdoing? I know one should not be ashamed of the gospel of Christ, but shouldn’t one be ashamed of the gospel of lies?

Maybe, Calvin can answer all that with his clear-eyed conscience?

Second, “who is the State Prosecution to tell the Church, its members and its leaders if they should or should not direct their building fund money to invest in a Crossover love outreach mission, if their Church Constitution already empowers the Management Board and leaders to do so?” Calvin then talked about the lack of transparency in the many Town Councils’ alleged investments in “risky collapsing Lehman Brothers stocks during the 2008 subprime crisis period, and why they are allowed to divert large funds to invest in such instruments, and lost millions?”

Here, I am reminded of the verses that say, “In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Judges 17:6)  and 
”there is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.”(Proverbs 14:12). 

Let admit it, it’s just a matter of time anyway. Being right at most times is a psychological sentence that locks one in a self-assuring mental prison of self-belief and self-invulnerability. The forces that gather once a man or woman thinks he is right and unimpeachable, even infallible of the ex cathedra kind, are self-reinforcing, and the resilience that is built up by the deluded will resist even the plainest of common sense, the sharpest of wits, and the sincerest of persuasion. And to the deceived, the many numbers that checked their brains out at the door, it is strangely the coldest comfort that they are readily prepared to embrace because form always supersedes substance, convenience is preferred to character, and groupthink prevails over critical individual reflection.

Thirdly, Calvin asked these series of questions, and this has to be quoted verbatim so as to not dilute its biting irony, “If the six charged and accused CHC leaders were swindlers and cheated of the Church members of their hard earned money, then why not haul all the 500 Executive Members to come testify and witness? Why were no victims called to testify? Why has even no Church Management Board Members been called to testify?”

Well, in the light of what has happened, and putting aside Mr Poon and the price he had paid before he was vindicated (and with no apology forthcoming mind you) and considering that the attendance of CHC had been slashed by almost half since the start of this fiasco, is CHC really a victimless church? Is Calvin speaking for the whole church or the members past who had left and present, that is, is he speaking for those who have donated and will still donate to CHC with glee or those who had given and then left in disgust because they felt betrayed and fleeced?

Of course, Calvin can argue that we are talking about legal wrong here to fit the crime charged. But in cases like this, where I am talking about how my Savior will go out of his way to look for that one stray sheep out of the 99, can we honestly say that CHC under Kong Hee’s and Sun Ho’s leadership has suffered no real loss? One really has to define loss and let’s not be flippant or legalistic about it.

Alas, I believe victimhood is a state of mind, that is, it is a mind-over-matter thing. Yes, you heard the jingle right, “If you don’t mind it, it don’t matter.” That is why I guess Calvin boldly wrote this, “How could you so neglect people like me who is an Executive Member for almost 15 years (in my estimation of years) as witness, and I am just one of the hundreds?”

I have no doubt that Calvin, being a “total human-citizen-Christian-CHC Executive Member observer,” will stand up for Kong Hee and Sun Ho – even if they ask him to sell his house, car and the shirt on his back for even more dubious and controversial projects as long as it is all carried out in the pristine name of evangelism. Again, I reiterate that it is not about what Kong Hee was being legally charged for. It is however about the spiritual and moral responsibility placed under his charge. Has he lived up to it? Does he need to reflect more about it, and not whitewash himself more on the international and local stage?

Fourthly, and this is disturbingly strange because Calvin went on to say that “every year we see government ministries having endless cases of lapses amounting to millions of dollars unaccounted for properly and all you need is one Cabinet minister to stand up in public to declare all these lapses were not result of dishonesty but genuine human errors, with media splashing all over echoing such positive statement, and then the case is closed with no one daring to question publicly otherwise,” then he tried to marry that whole mouthful with this “incompatible bride”, “now, not that I claim there is dishonesty there (???), but what I am saying is – who is going to investigate? (for no dishonesty?) Are we sure no one is having private gain? Why not the State Prosecution haul up all these offenders and grill them in court to find out as much as they grill the six CHC accused leaders?”

Is he for real? Is he treading in the rapid waters of defamatory undertows? Was this expressly or tacitly approved by Kong Hee? Or did Kong Hee secretly desire for this to be published without thinking about its negative consequences?

At this moment, I really don’t know whether he is helping Kong Hee’s cause or is he digging it deeper into the abyss of guilt for him both in the physical realm and the social media platform? You be the judge.

Finally, he repeated the so-called injustices by writing, “What is clear is there is no wrongful gain to any of the six accused leaders of CHC, as convincingly established by the defense counsels, yet the Prosecution, riding on the loud speaker engine of the state media, kept making loud, high sounding, sensationalized quotes such as “Lies! Falsehood!” - which are all so readily lapped up by the public as juicy news-bites.”

This is how Calvin ended, “I hope the establishment could make a convincing deliberation to end this unworthy protracted longest court case history in Singapore, where the Prosecution could go as far as the letter simply because the Church was parked under the Charity code of conduct.

It is time for a national rethink perhaps to separate religious organizations from the Charities. The Church is not a charity, period. It is caught in the Achilles heel for law argument sake simply because of the Charity code, but it is definitely a law argument without sound conscience or proper moral reasoning.”

Calvin, I know you are focusing on the legal aspect of the comparison between charity and church. However, here is my one-paragraph reply that is directed at the total forest of things, that is, the bigger picture on church leadership, and not just on a few trees of legal argument. Ready?

“The Church is definitely not a charity period, because it is much more than a charity. It goes beyond the standards and codes of conduct expected of a charity, which governs her effectiveness, transparency, openness, and accountability. The Church is all that and much more. The Church is ordained by God, led by His Spirit, and has Jesus as her reigning head. The Church is not called to be followers of men, however promising they appear to be on stage, but of the Crucified and Risen Christ. The Church is redeemed by His blood and is counted righteous by that one sacrifice surpassing all sacrifices of old. Jesus paid the ultimate price and we as his redeemed think, do, act and respond in all ways and manners that accord unreserved glory, honor and praise to His name. We are not perfect but in Him, we have our being, our salvation, our hope, our joy, our faith, our love and our peace. We do fall sometimes, but what sets us apart is that we admit to it, repent from it and turn from our wicked ways. Love is not blind Calvin, but it bears the Cross, pays the price and gives of Himself to and for the Church. Love conquers all, yes, but first, you must allow it to conquer you and all your worldly desires (and blind ambition and allegiance). So, you are right, Calvin, the Church is not a charity period. But it is a place where hearts are transformed, spirits are lifted, souls are encouraged, our flesh is crucified, lives are born again, love reigns, leaders sacrifice, leaders take responsibility, leaders shoulder the blame, leaders lift Jesus high and not themselves or their wife, and leaders do as they say and say as they do. In the foxhole of church leadership, the leader is the last to leave. Jesus set the example for the Church, and we are called to follow that example. And He stayed behind in the foxhole called Calvary, and he never left. Jesus has called us to live simply since this world is not our home – lest we mistake its possession for our possession. We are warned not to let the love of money (or the idolatry of spouse) cause our downfall. We are called to be beyond reproach as leaders and not to drag the Church through a legal entanglement that lasted for five years all for a so-called evangelistic project that is highly questionable, deeply disturbing, undeniably self-glorifying, wholly unproven and plainly arbitrary. Where is the Crossover now, the seedy gyration, Calvin? Aren’t the gallivanting couple going back to the good old fashioned evangelism – the way Jesus did it? We are reminded that we are in the world but not of the world, and definitely not become the world in order to save the world. We are called to always turn our eyes upon Jesus and the things of the world will go strangely dim, and not turn our eyes upon prosperity, membership expansion, multisensory programs, worldly identification and consummation, indulgent living, and promoting a culture of secrecy that is controlled by one, and allow the high calling and the glorified name of Jesus to go insidiously dim.”

Calvin, I know you love your pastor. I know you wish him well. I know you may see all this as worldly persecution. But put all that aside, reflecting for yourself, away from the mesmerizing crowd and culture, do you think Kong Hee and Sun Ho have nothing to apologize for, nothing that they have done, judged, said, and thought wrong that they should be responsible and accountable for?

Leaving legal aside, is Kong Hee “morally blameless” for the lies, deception, arbitrariness, obsession and misappropriation? Is he strategically reserving an apology to an opportune time because it is inconvenient and inappropriate to do so before the trial ends then and before the appeal concludes now?

Bro, is there a rightful time to take responsibility for a wrongful crime (or moral wrong)?

I hope that in the same way that I have deeply reflected and replied to what you have written, you would do the same for mine. For it is undeniable that all 500 of you will unquestionably stand up for Kong Hee, but will you stand up for what is right? Cheerz.

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 I've learned from the Eng Han-Kong Hee fallout.

Eng Han once said this about the whole CHC saga: "I bear no grudge in my heart". I guess he does not see the point. Although he started in earnest, somewhere down the road he went in with eyes open and put all that he had, money and time, with the Church. For about eighteen years, he gave his all to the ministry, to CHC, and most of all, to Kong Hee. 

In fact, Judge See, in delivering his sentence, had described Kong Hee as “the mastermind behind the conspiracy to cause wrongful loss to the church.” He said that “it was from him that the other accused persons sought approval and guidance." Along side Kong Hee, Judge See singled out Chew as his closest ally. He even called them "kindred spirits" who "fuelled each other's drive, one as a spiritual leader and the other as a finance expert".

Eng Han once lamented in an interview late last year that “It seems like I’ve got so many enemies. So many battles, I’ve got to fight so many people”, and I guess like Judas, he currently stands alone in Hakeldama, that is, the bloody acre. However, Eng Han also said that, “these days, strangers do come up to him to wish him well. One even paid for his meal at a Japanese restaurant and left him two Bible verses for encouragement.” They appreciated his courage to speak up against the leadership of the church he once sworn allegiance to.

He ended the interview by saying that once this whole saga is over, he plans to write a book about his experiences and hopefully, someone will buy the rights to make a movie out of it. "It will make a good movie," Chew said with a smile. 

Well, movie or not, I have learned from Eng Han that no leadership is perfect – not even by a long shot. It is a lesson that needed reminding because we are all looking to pin our hopes and dreams on a shooting star, or in this case, a leader of promise. It is second nature to us and we often pay a high price for it. 

It is thus pure foolishness to put our faith in the leadership of man. When Jesus said upon this rock he will build his church, he was not referring to Peter as the rock, but himself. It was Petra – the Rock of Ages - that the church will be built upon and not on man’s rules, regulation, and practices. Neither will man’s vision, 5-year expansion plan, itinerant music band nor evangelistic program be the church’s cornerstone. 

Needless to say, we are all fallible, and not even Kong Hee, Joseph Prince or Joel Osteen would dispute that. When it comes to leading the church, no one runs it better than the guided spirit of God. It is not by might, nor power, or if I may add, charisma, eloquence or church size, but by the spirit of the Lord. That’s the incontrovertible truth. However, we all know that our daily reality is often far remove from this truth.

After the sentence in November, Kong Hee went before a cheering crowd of worshippers in his Church and said: "My family and I, we are fine. We are just living each day by faith…I know that this is a painful time, not just for us... but also for everyone associated to this ministry. As this court trial has come to a close, I pray that all the pain and turmoil for you will come to an end." 

I guess it was just too little and too late for Kong Hee when he had by sheer obstinacy dragged the church through a 2-year investigation and a grueling 3-year trial where all the dirty linens were hanged out in public for everyone’s bewilderment and bemusement. Alas, Chew may just be on the money about making a local movie with all the shocks and suspense of the Korean hit drama, Descendants of the Sun.

Nevertheless, the plight of Eng Han has taught me that as a church grows in size, money and complexity, it runs the real risk of falling into the same trap that any secular organization faces, that is, the obsession of control. Especially for a non-denominational, independent megachurch with no affiliations and open hierarchical accountability, the issue of keeping it all within the founder’s tight rein becomes an unspoken ironclad rule. As the church expands, the leadership digs themselves deeper into its foundation and becomes indispensable. With such secured indispensability, the accompanied expansion makes the leadership even more indispensable as people rush in just to marvel at the cause célèbre. 

This insidious loop reinforces itself as the administration grows, the money pours in, and people attract more people. This is also where the cult of personality becomes deeply entrenched and the infallibility of the leadership is covertly presumed, corporately accepted and closely defended. 

By such time, when everything that the church plans practically revolves around the celebrity-like leadership, it would be almost heretic (or mutiny) for anyone to suggest that anything that proceeds from the founder’s lips is not also from same lips of the divine himself. There will therefore come a time when the will of man becomes indistinguishable from the presumed will of God. Who is to question the authority when the authority establishes itself as the authority?

But as I have said before, it is sheer foolishness to put our faith in the leadership of man. And Eng Han learned that lesson the hard and painful way. The Rock of Ages upon which the church is built on is often bypassed for another man-made rock located nearby, which is more visible, more convenient, and more tangible. When it comes to scouring for church leadership, some of us inevitably go for the lowest hanging fruit. The Catholic Church had in fact over the centuries built their doctrines and practices on far shakier foundation - anything but the Rock of Ages. By the looks of things, the Protestant Reformation has changed little of that.

The truth is that human leadership is always liable to fall, fail, distraction, self-delusion, self-perpetuation and derailment. What we need is more accountability, checks and balances, greater discernment, an open heart to accept diversity of views, even if the view clashes with the vision of the leadership, and the humility and courage to review, reevaluate and reverse the plans. The last thing the church needs is a leadership that is self-referential, accountable only to itself, manipulative and dictatorial, and directly instilling fear in her members only to ensure that they either shape up or ship out. Eng Han experienced that ultimatum personally, and most viscerally.

In the book The Emotionally Healthy Church by pastor Peter Scazzero, he urges us to learn to accept the following realities concerning the fallibility of human leadership:- 

“You can be a dynamic, gifted speaker for God in public  and be an unloving spouse and parent at home.

You can function as a church board member or pastor and be unteachable, insecure, and defensive.

You can memorize entire books of the New Testament and still be unaware of your depression and anger, even displacing it on other people.

You can fast and pray a half day a week for years as a spiritual discipline and constantly be critical of others, justifying it as discernment.

You can lead hundred of people in a Christian ministry while driven by a deep personal need to compensate for a nagging sense of failure.

You can pray for deliverance from the demonic realm when in reality you are simply avoiding conflict, repeating an unhealthy pattern of behavior traced back to the home in which you grew up.

You can be outwardly cooperative at church but unconsciously try to undercut or defeat your supervisor by coming habitually late, constantly forgetting meetings, withdrawing and becoming apathetic, or ignoring the real issue behind why you are hurt and angry.”

And in Eng Han’s case, you can be a leader of one of the fastest growing churches, leading at the forefront of evangelism with spectacular programs, vibrant ministry and receiving unquestioned worldwide adoration, but at the same time, you refuse to accept responsibility, face the music, own up to your mistakes, apologize to those you have left out in the cold and who had given the best years of their life for you (and their hard earned savings), and deal with and admit to your brokenness instead of anaesthetizing it for a last-minute sprint before September comes to garner even more attention and adulation to yourself.

The list can go on. But the point is that we are all work in progress as long as we are still on this side of heaven. And for those who refuse to admit to that, or refuse to accept responsibility for their failings, they might just become stumbling blocks for those who are trying to progress in their own faith journey. Cheerz.

God or money.

Kong Hee fronted the Home Section this morning (17 Nov 2015) with this caption, “Prosecution calls for stiff sentences.” Notwithstanding only three charges, compared to others who are convicted of 6, the prosecution is asking for 11 to 12 years for the leader of the pack (similar to all except John Lam – 8-9 yrs, and Sharon Tan – 5-6 yrs) DJ See, in his written judgment, “pointed to Kong as the key man behind the scandal, writing that the charismatic church pastor had acted consciously and dishonestly.” It is reported that “for the moment, only King and Chew have indicated that they are likely to appeal.”

At this juncture, I recalled an article in the new paper one week ago. It was about “love gifts” that went into the secret account of the leaders of CHC. It was called MPA for “Multi-purpose account”. MPA was set up in 2006 and was closed in 2010. Over that period of time, a select group of donors gave S$2.8 million to the couple, namely, Sun Ho and Kong Hee. It was reported that a major part of the money was spent on Sun Ho’s salaries, bonuses and royalties. On top of that, her hair and makeup and medical bills alone came up to about S$240,000 in 2009. Airfares, hotel and travel insurances nearly topped S$200,000 in 2009. And consultancy fees was about half a million.

One mother of three, who contributed to MPA, came forward to defend her actions and the couple: “I made the decision that it was okay, because this is my money and I know where I want it to go. I gave with my free will. No one forced me to do it.” She continued, “Think about this as though you are contributing to your boss’ birthday and you can give however much you want. Someone sets up a birthday fund for the office and the money is put in there. Eventually, whether the money is spent on the birthday cake or the decorations is besides the point. I just know that I gave the money away as a birthday present and I trust the person to handle it.” Mm…with S$2.8 million over about three years, the lucky recipient could very well celebrate her birthday everyday.

Lesson? “God or money”, that’s what I learn this morning. If there is a final distillation of it all, a convergence of some sort, a crossroad where all the lessons coincide, it is one that goes beyond the love of money as the root of all evil. I think you don't really need to love it to nurture its virgin root. Sometimes, you just need to have absolute control of it and the heart will waver, the soul lust, and the spirit limp. It is said that if you give a beggar a horse, he will ride his way to hell. Same here. If you give a mega-church pastor untrammelled control, with only self (and wife) acting as the oversight, he will then ride his way to his own unmaking. Alas, God does not need to let us be tempted beyond what we can bear, we ourselves sometimes do a better job at it.

Here, I am reminded of Jesus’ admonishment in Matthew 6:24: "No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money."

If we put aside the recent conviction, and the judge's statement that Kong Hee “acted consciously and dishonestly”, we are left with a lot of money in the absolute control of two fallible and highly vulnerable persons wildly adored by thousands, and who are living rather large and extravagantly. I feel that the lethal mix of money, control and adulation is dangerously combustible. Imagine a wild river of kerosene and a lighted match floating precariously on top of it - a chain explosion is just a split second away.

You can see how the issue here goes beyond whether the devotee is serving one master or the other. Sadly, it is more about using one master to serve the other, that is, using religion as a means to secure personal fortune and fame as its end. And in a situation where the flush of easy money meets the rush of endless human ambition and appetites, the real crossover happening right under one’s nose is to turn one's hatred for the world into an unwitting accomplice with the world – good intention notwithstanding. (It is ironic that it is called the Crossover, because it seems more like a crossover with no plans to turn back).

But the charade does not end there. Here is where the cover-up goes full throttle. It is also where self-deception takes on a sanctimonious moonshine. Kong Hee claimed in the earlier article that "it's a freewill giving...we didn't force them...We do not use it in a cavalier fashion." (I guess what is modesty to Donald Trump is cavalier to Kong Hee).

However, in the same breath, when Chew accused Kong Hee of defrauding his goodwill donors, including Chew himself, by "hiding the royalties and the salaries and the bonuses (amounting to $450k)...so that they would be emotionally led to contribute more," Kong Hee's only explanation was that "he did not have a chance to check with his wife whether she was comfortable revealing her salaries and royalties." He further said: "We do not have a culture in CHC, as in many companies, that we keep our income as confidential."

It is hard to believe that Kong Hee was sincere with that explanation. Is he accountable to God as His faithful steward or to the comfort level of his wife? Or, is he a trustee of the Church money or a protector of his wife’s feeling? (reminds me of Adam taking the fruit because he could not resist Eve’s persuasion). More relevantly, Is his Church no different from secular companies where the worldly culture was to keep all income confidential or is his Church the body of Christ where truth and integrity reign at all costs?

I recall George Washington once said that it is better to offer no excuse (at all) than a bad one. I guess serving one master would require one to betray the other. This betrayal is subtle and it happens over time. It is also highly resistant to correction. Indeed, to err is human, and to admit and learn from it, for some, is simply preposterous.

One former Chaplain’s words ought to shed some light on the whole prosperity gospel saga: “Jesus Christ said more about money than any other single thing because, when it comes to a man’s real nature, money is of first importance. Money is an exact index to a man’s true character. All through Scripture there is an intimate correlation between the development of a man’s character and how he handles his money.” I guess where one’s treasure is, there his heart will be.

In the end, Kong Hee and his wife are no different from the many fallen leaders before them. His followers would really want to believe that they are different, but sadly, they are not. The reality about us has not changed since time immemorial. But the human fantasy about it keeps changing its script – hoping that this time, it would be different.

The issue with us is that we are all looking for a hero – someone for whom we can emulate on a moral and spiritual high ground. As such, we will always hitch our dreams to a bright, dazzling, high-in-the-sky…falling comet. Alas, no matter how much we rewrite the script, this overriding fact remains: We are only human; none is exempted. We can’t pretend to be what we are not. Given the same circumstances, the same temptations, the same level of adulation, and the same deluded sense of invulnerability developed over time and feted by such mindless adulation, we are all inescapably fallible. We will ride our way to perdition. And to believe otherwise is the greatest lie of mankind.

Let me end here with this tale about being human.

“A man travels many miles to consult the wisest guru in the land. When he arrives, he asks the wise man: “Oh wise guru, what is the secret of a happy life?”

“Good judgment,” says the guru.

“But oh, wise guru,” says the man, “how do I achieve good judgment?”

“Bad judgment,” says the guru.”

And until we admit and learn from our bad judgments, we will always be condemned to live a life piling them up, even unknowingly (until it is too late). Cheerz.