The megachurches' dilemma: God or Mammon?

When Jesus said, “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else, he will hold to the one, and despise the other, Ye cannot serve God and mammon," maybe that scripture needs a modern megachurch update?

Don’t look at me as if I am spewing heresy, read the papers today: “Half of 10 bigger charities here have business units” or “New Creation Church says it never meant to go into business.” 

Alas, it used to be a cocktail mix of religion and politics - or theocracy. Now, it‘s a molotov cocktail mix of religion and big businesses - or theo-entreprenocracy. 

ST further reports that “the New Creation subsidiary, Rock Productions, partnered property giant CapitaLand to develop The Star, a shopping mall cum performing arts centre in Buona Vista that also provides its place of worship. New Creation was the second largest charity by donations collected last year, bagging $122 million.”

Next comes City Harvest Church. The church, ”which collected $29 million last year in donations, owns Urban Property Investments (UPI), a vehicle for its investments in Suntec Singapore, where it holds its services.”

That’s not all. 

“City Harvest's business subsidiary, UPI, is incorporated in the British Virgin Islands (BVI). The church also has a Singapore-incorporated subsidiary, Kosmos Global Private, an investment holding firm that holds Web news provider City News and the Ink Room (Bookstore).”

And here’s a word or two from CHC. ”A church spokesman told ST that it was advised by its law firm to incorporate UPI as a foreign company in the BVI, as the consortium investing in Suntec is a foreign BVI company.”

At third place is FCBC. “Faith Community Baptist's business subsidiaries include Gateway Entertainment, which produces magic shows such as those put on by senior pastor Lawrence Khong and his daughter, Priscilla, and Gateway Theatre, in Bukit Merah, where it holds its services on weekends. The church collected $26 million in donations last year.”

Mind you, those are the headlines for the three business-arms of the megachurches, and Mathew 6:24 (the scripture I started with about serving two masters) takes on a different perspective when churches are run on both God and a dash of mammon on the side. 

And while the root of evil is the love of money, maybe the root of financial prudence is all about managing wealth, growing it to hundreds of millions, and keeping it safe in one’s shiny coffer?

I guess gone are the days where pastor shepherds their flocks with a long wooden stick with a crook at its end. FYI, that crook is for catching straying sheep. It is also used to defend the sheep from predator, prowling lions that roar.

Nowadays, the catch from the shepherd’s crook comes in a peculiar angle. 

And if NCC and CHC 2.0 are taken as the beaten pathway for the body of Christ of the future, then should pastors of other churches struggling with bleeding and disillusioned membership adopt a pastorprenuership stand, and focus more on growing their ”Sovereign Wealth Funds” by forming joint partnership with multimillion-dollar businesses? I mean, why focus only on the Rock of Christ when you can grow so much more in numbers when you also conscientiously build on the Rock of Earthly Productions? 

In any event, you can’t beat them. You just can’t. I know it is not about competition, yet most times, it is really about stultification - that is, standing in dumbfounded awe. This bewilderment is largely about how the megachurches and its theology have changed so much and so fast in the era of prosperity, post-modernism and the cult of personality to becoming indistinguishable from the methodologies of the world.  

Their numbers and faithful devotion have reached the worldly stratospheres of redefined churchanity. 

And if we often sing this familiar chorus that with Christ in the vessel we can smile at the storm, then for these glittering megachurches, that hymn comes with a modern twist: With wealth in the vessel (or church coffers), you can create the storm, that is, the storm of publicity, attraction, bewilderment, emotionalism, spiritualism, and seeker-sensitive sensationalism.

What further adds to the complication are the loans and business losses. 

City Harvest alone has on its books “a shareholder loan of $27 million that was interest-free, unsecured and had no fixed terms of repayment.” 

The spokesman for CHC clarified that “a shareholder loan is unlike a bank loan in that it is financing provided to a company by its shareholder.” 

Now, if you missed that, it is a clarification that turns all the tithers and offerers of the megachurch into shareholders of a largely business consideration in the context of what is supposed to be a body of Christ, with the latter as her chief cornerstone. 

Be that as it may, here’s a forewarning by NUS associate professor Mak Yuen Teen: “But there are concerns about a charity extending such loans, which creates risk for the charity as the loan may not be repaid.” 

What’s more, considering CHC’s shadowy past involving six convictions for the largest case concering the misuse of charity funds, the opacity persists with CHC’s BVI (British Virgin Islands). 

SIT’s Professor Ho Yew Kee “pointed out that the BVI is a tax haven and it is very hard to obtain the financial records of companies there, as BVI "has few tax treaties with other nations, thus protecting the financial privacy of bank account holders””. So much for full disclosure and transparency. But, having said all that, trying to shed some light into the darkness of mammon's adulteration, does her members really care? Mm...

Now comes the losses...

FCBC subsidiary, Gateway Entertainment, lost “between about $50,000 and $3.7 million a year between 2014 and 2017.” 

And NCC’s Rock Productions takes the cake here when it comes to losses. It “was in the red for the five years” and “lost between $12 million and $17 million between 2013 and 2017, after deducting for tax from continuing operations. Its total loss for that five years amounted to about $74 million.”

And after digesting all that, my question is this as I end: -

“With loans with no fixed period of repayment, with losses in the millions, with reserves reaching more than half a billion, and with many congregants struggling to make ends meet and entrusting their time, service and hard-earned money to the church, are there real/potential risk of conflicts between the pastoral leadership and their congregation, between the mandate of heaven and the mammon on earth, between the great commission and the great attraction, between one’s focus on Calvary and one’s focus on the profit margin, and between a broken soul denying all before his beloved Saviour and a camel going through the eye of a needle?”

Ps: Sorry to put you churchgoer through a morning of thought-provoking reflection. My intention is never to dampen your faith, but to hopefully deepen it. Have a blessed morning. 

A God for the Poor.

A God for the poor?

I always wonder, is there a God for the poor? By poor, I mean those who struggle with minimum wage. They come in all roles conceivable - that is, husbands, fathers or mothers who are largely making ends meet. They also struggle with their mortgages and kids' education expenses. They have little savings because they do not earn enough. Most times, they get exploited and are taken advantage of. They live from hand to mouth.

Is there a God for them? Is there a God for their children who have to depend on hands-me-down, skip lunches as they barely have enough for meals, and work part-time as they study to support their family? 

I write this because I often hear televangelists telling their congregation that following Jesus’ footsteps means expecting great things, mainly endless material blessings. 

Mind you, the Duplantis, Osteens, Roberts, Tiltons and Copelands of the mega-prosperity gospel have all happily jumped into the hundredfold bandwagon to equate faith with fortune, belief with blessings and devotion with possessions. 

It is often said that believing in God comes easy when success shadows the believers, especially for those who come to their wealth via family inheritance. 

For those who are successful, God can’t help but seem closer, more real, more tangible, and this reminds me of the Bible study session conducted by Eleanor (Michelle Yeoh) in opening scenes of the movie Crazy Rich Asians in the comfort of her multimillion-dollar mansion.

And how often does one hear this from the rich and prosperous exuding much envied humbleness: “God is blessing me. I am nobody without Him. All I have is His, my possessions, my promotion and my wealth. I wouldn’t be here without His strength, His guide and His help. I am just a servant, a humble steward. I own nothing. Indeed, all is His.”

But, what does a believer who has little (the poor) have to say then? He can’t claim prosperity the way the rich and prosperous can so humbly disclaim with infectious modesty. He has nothing to his name. He is more worried about how he is going to pay the bills, hold down a job, and save enough for the near future. 

Well, at this juncture, I want to add that it is almost second nature for the already prosperous to tell them that if they truly believe, their time too will come. In other words, they can be equally rich too. 

But good intention aside, that kind of name-it-and-claim-it gospel might just turn out to be the glittering hundredfold bandwagon sailing pass the rest of the struggling world as they trumpet the prosperity gospel from their first class seats. Can you then blame the poor for thinking that maybe God has forgotten them?

So, what is the everyday reality? 

At some point, we have to come to accept that, for every person who succeeds, there will be dozens who do not make it. The ratio matches the leadership, that is, one leader or employer to hundreds of workers - give or take. It is never the reverse. The system we have to contend with is invariably skewed that way. 

It is a socioeconomic pyramid with the handful at the top and a very broad base at the bottom. This is the way it is even if there is high social mobility, and this explains why Jesus said that the poor, we will always have with us. Although he meant it another way, the identification in the majority is just about accurate throughout history. And most of them will leave this earth the same way they came.

So, where does that leave the poor then? While there is a God for the prosperous (so claims the prosperity gospel), do we have a God for the poor, the struggling, the deprived and the disadvantaged for all their life? 

My thoughts on all this came to an illuminating point when I met a client this week. He came to me because his wife was seeking for a divorce. It was a long 27-yr-old marriage with two young adult daughters doing reasonably well academically. 

They were also reasonably well off running two businesses earning a high monthly income. They in fact have two properties, though mortgaged, but were worth quite a lot in the market. At one point, he even told me that they once owned two luxury cars and were living large. 

But he told me that things went downhill when he lost big in the stock market. After that, he met with a tragic road accident when he rear-ended another vehicle. He was hospitalised for months and could no longer run his business as before due to his serious injuries. He now earns close to minimum wage and is struggling to make ends meet with a divorce to worry about. 

I am not here to write about the divorce because there are many factors involved in a marriage of 27 years, but what he shared was that he found his faith after he met with the accident. He told me that he thought he was going to die, but he miraculously came back to life. He said that God gave him a second chance and he has learnt his lesson. He is now a devout believer but he has little to his name - contrasting with what he once had before. 

At this point, he admitted to me that he was nevertheless happy. Despite everything, he has found a certain reassurance, clarity and hope in his life. It was not something that he had when he had money. In fact, he told me that his happiest days were when his wife and him were struggling to make ends meet when they first got married living in a small rental flat. 

I said that that was ironic and he nodded. He recalled a time when he was travelling in his luxury car with his two daughters arguing behind, and across the road, he saw a family with kids crowding at the back of an open lorry, laughing as they were sharing heartily. 

This encounter kept me thinking about the God that the poor has - like the client of mine. It is a God who is different in form and substance from the way the prosperity gospel has painted or airbrushed him. 

I felt that the greatest misconception is to equate God with prosperity as if such blessings is the only aim of His redemptive plan for His people. 

We often make God into our own cultural image because we want to make him the reason for our prosperity. Somehow, that adds a certain sacred and religious glow to our status. We therefore sell God in a way that fits our image of what we want him to be. This misattribution gives us a sense of control, entitlement and uniqueness (or specialness). 

Now, let me be clear to say that I am not saying that prosperity and godliness are incompatible. What I am saying is that godliness is much more than prosperity, even at times, to the exclusion of it. For the greatest amongst us is often the least amongst us. The disciples of Christ come to mind here, right?

In other words, it is not necessary the case that you are rich, therefore you are godly, and you are poor and you are (so-called) god-less. Most times, I dare say that God is the least concerned with your financial status because His blessing is about a life that bears fruit, and the fruit is never one-dimensional, that is, material success. 

So is there a God for the poor? Of course there is, just as there is a God for the rich. More relevantly, He is the God of the harvest and in the harvest field of redemption, we all stand equal before Him, the rich and the poor. For at the end of the day, the ones who are truly rich are those who unfailingly strive in their lifetime to bring the fruit of the Spirit in their life to full bloom. Amen.

Kong Hee and the final sale of Sentosa Cove.

It was news no less...

Kong Hee had managed to sell his Sentosa Cove penthouse, but it was at a loss of over $2m. 

It reports that “the 5,242 sq ft waterway-facing unit at The Oceanfront changed hands in April for $6.7 millions, a loss of over $2 million” for the former pastor and his investor, one Indonesian tycoon Wahju Hanafi. 

FYI, they purchased the luxury property in 2007 for a price of $9.33 million and each paid monthly installment of $17,000 to service it.

And it was sold to a Kenyan diplomat one Neal Manilal Chandaria, “whose family is in the process of moving in.” 

The diplomat had viewed the property four times and said that “it was a good opportunity” to buy it at that competitive price. 

It is also quite ironic that Kong Hee was arrested at his Sentosa Cove penthouse in 2012 and is currently serving a jail term of 3.5 years. 

I know by all counts, I should have let dead dogs lie. This is an unfortunate part of the fall of a megachurch leader, and I have written much about it. 

But this post is not so much about Kong Hee. I should know better to leave a man on the road to certain redemption out of it. He is dealt with in his own way and that is how it should remain. 

My morning reflection is however about religion and it rides on what Kong Hee once said when he first put up his property for sale in 2015. 

He clarified that the Sentosa Cove penthouse was just a “temporary home” and he denied at that time that he was “living the high life”.

If you wonder why some may accuse him of living the high life, here is a brief description of amenities that the penthouse has: -

“The 11th-storey penthouse comes with a private lift, four bedrooms, an entertainment room and a jacuzzi. Its crown jewel is a high rooftop infinity pool that overlooks the upmarket One Degree 15 Marina Club, offering views of luxury yachts entering the marina and the city’s skyline and fireworks during festivities.”

Lesson? One, and it comes in the form of this question: “Should pastors live the high life?”

Now, I am not going to put a spin to defend what Kong Hee said. 

By all counts, having a private lift to your exclusive 11th-storey penthouse and a high rooftop infinity pool that overlooks the marina horizon of luxury yachts is deemed as living the high life.

Of course, in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. So in the land where every HDB home owner has an infinity pool and a private lift, the high life has to mean more than just one private lift and one infinity pool. 

But it is not the case here. And I guess one can say that Abraham and King David lived in like manner, that is, the so-called “high life.” And it is called the high life because one lives in luxury and wealth the majority can only dream about. 

Whether it is a case of material blessings from God or the entrepreneurial efforts of a man or woman, or even both, I would not be qualified to be a judge of it as the mysterious ways of omnipotence and/or the random element of fortunity are too complex for me to even take a stab at it. 

But, be that as it may, I still come back to the same question I started my lesson with: “Should pastors live the high life?”

And to be fair to Kong Hee, he did not start out that way. When they married in 1992, their home was a $127k five-room HDB flat in Tampines. Then, they upgraded to a million-dollar Horizon Towers unit in River Valley. 

In 2010, the family moved into a $2.6 million condo unit in The Suites at Central in Devonshire Road. And from there, it was Sentosa Cove penthouse, amongst other properties. 

I believe their upgrades matched the rapid grow of their megachurch and the funds they had received from the thousands of willing churchgoers. 

And this is where I will try to answer that question: “Should pastors live the high life?”

The conventional answer is, “Where your heart is, there you will find your treasure.” 

For the rich secularist, he or she is not ashamed to declare that their heart is to make money. That is what they aim to achieve when they set up companies, invent new products and invest in properties. All entrepreneurs have to watch their profit margin. Their business rise and fall based on it. That is their raison d'etre.

What about pastors then? Isn’t it possible for him to live the high life and still be faithful to his high calling? Can’t his heart be in his high calling and not in his high living? 

More relevantly, what does Jesus mean when he said, “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”?

Can a pastor still serve God and only God while he lives the high life? 

In my view, Jesus saw what is coming when the accumulation of one risks the dilution of another. At some point, using money as a means to a godly end risks risking the end for that means and making that means its own end. 

As Christians, we are called to always guard our own hearts. But that guarding risks becoming overladen when we take in too much and grow beyond the capacity our heart can take and guard. 

That is why only absolute power does the greatest damage and the love of money corrupts even the most sincerest of hearts. 

And Jesus’ warning comes at the opportune time when he said that we cannot serve two masters not because we can’t organizationally manage it, but because our heart risks being overwhelmed by the misattribution, the distractions and the unwieldy grandeur of it all. 

That is, I feel, why Jesus rejected the kingdom of this world for the kingdom of the heart even if it means just sharing an intimate relationship with twelve for three short years and not seventeen thousands or more than thirty thousands for one’s lifetime. 

His is a church not primarily on quantification but transformation with time and personal devotion, that is, heart-to-heart, and not one to a few thousands of hearts. 

So, should pastors live the high life? 

Well, my answer is that there is something more than meets the eye about Jesus’ forewarning and the risky incompatibility of God and money. 

Ultimately, it is still about individual accountability. 

But, it invariably gets harder to give a proper account as a mortal accumulates in excess, wields almost unquestioned power and receives the raging adulation of thousands. Cheerz.

Self-righteousness vs true religion.

When Joseph Prince (JP) preached about righteousness, to declare it, and all things shall be added, that is, you name it, car, finances and house, it kept me thinking about the righteousness that humans proclaim directly upon themselves. 

More relevantly, I ask: What makes a man good and a man evil? What makes him sacrifice for another and what makes him abuse another? How is JP's teaching on righteousness translated or applied in our everyday living? 

But first, let's see what has fixated the World of late.

In the midst of the World Cup 2018 in Russia, what has truly captured the World's attention is the rescue of the 12 boys and their coach in Chiang Rai. 

So far, eight of the boys have been rescued, leaving four boys and their coach. It is said that their coach is weak because he has been feeding his boys leaving little for himself. 

Leaders from all over the world, from all religions and races, including international football superstars at the World Cup, are praying for them, praying for the rescue efforts, and praying for their safety. 

Even Elon Musk has offered to help and the FIFA has promised them (once rescued) a front row seat in the finals of the World Cup 2018. 

All in all, the world is holding her breath for the boys and their coach, and we stand deeply inspired by the dedication and devotion of the Navy Seal divers and rescuers who literally put themselves on the line.

Let's return to JP. 

He preached that it is not about doing right so much as it is about believing right. 

Once you believe it, declare it, internalise it, and live it, you reap big. You reap houses, cars and financial wealth. Your life will be abundantly blessed with longevity and prosperity. 

In fact, at one point, JP even applied Matthew 6:33's "seek ye first and all these things will be added unto you" to a Christian's self-declared righteous life and claimed that such a believer will become no different from a prosperity magnet wherein he will have more wealth than he can ever imagined. 

The thing about JP is that his message is simply irresistible. I would call him the prince of correlations, that is, if you declare it, you are. If you claim it, you have. If you believe it, you're there. If you confess it (righteousness), you never even were (that is, sin-less). And if you name it, it's yours. 

This brings me to Saman Gunan. His name is less familiar to us than his action. Saman lost consciousness on his way out of the Tham Luang cave complex, where he had been delivering air tanks. 

The deputy governor of Chiang Rai said: "His job was to deliver oxygen. He did not have enough on his way back." 

Saman sadly died and his partner had to retrieve his body out of the cave. 

This reminded me of James 1:27 about true religion. 

It reads: "What God the Father considers to be pure and genuine religion is this: to take care of orphans and widows in their suffering and to keep oneself from being corrupted by the world."

This scripture is comprehensive in its simplicity. It is about actions and not just beliefs. It is about sacrifices and not just declarations. It is about "orphans and widows" and not just being a magnet for prosperity. And it is about keeping oneself from being corrupted by the world and not believing oneself to be elevated by the world to great riches. 

To me, the boys and their coach are crying for help. They are the "orphans and widows" of this world. They are pleading for a good samaritan to walk their way, stop and tend to their wounds, provide them a resting inn to heal, and see to it that they are provided for thereafter. 

That's what people like Saman are doing, even giving their life, time and efforts for the boys. 

For me, that's true religion in demonstrable acts. That goes beyond just believing, to giving, to persisting, to sacrificing, and to delivering. 

With that, I return to JP's declaration of righteousness as I end here. 

JP once said that God doesn't want us to "dissipate" our faith by having faith in a house, a big car or financial successes. He preached that every morning, just declare His righteousness on our life and "all good things will be added unto us".

At one point, he even said that that's the essence of the gospel, a gospel according to Joseph Prince, who is veritably the prince of gracious correlations. 

Personally, I can see how helpful (to a certain extent) JP's message could be for those who are obsessed with sins, repentance and confession. 

It is said that Martin Luther entered the confessional with such annoying frequency to confess every trivial sin conceivable that one of the priesthood had to rebuke him by pleading with him to really kill someone, and then return to confess the sin for absolution. 

Maybe JP's message would be an antidote for believers like that? 

But as a whole, JP's message does not stop there. That is what makes it uncanny. He goes further to promise a form of prosperity that I am concerned may work against the human message of grace at Calvary. 

His slant is always about the reward of righteousness and it is always about material, tangible rewards. His calling card is bigger houses and cars, and greater wealth. The depth of his message on radical grace is about the depth of being prosperous.

It is seldom about the house of mourning, but a house full with riches. It is seldom about the road to Calvary, but about reaping it in with abundant successes. 

And it is seldom about doing the right thing, making the right choices about it and sacrificing at the expense of one's comfort, gain and convenience, but about right believing, right proclaiming and right receiving.

I believe there is a place for such teaching (to some extent), but in the real world, where people like Saman whose sacrifices come closest to what the scripture would call a pure heart and the true religion, I am afraid that JP's self-declared righteousness runs the risk of being more self-serving than self-denying, and more self-enriching than self-sacrificing. 

Alas, most times, the number does not endorse the message. The lamentable reality is that, the number merely endorses the number. Cheerz.