Regardless of the results of the Sibu parliamentary by-elections, the reported “special grants” of RM1.75 million to four Methodist churches on the eve of polling day is very troubling to me as a Christian who attends a Methodist church and I am sure to many other Christians.
It is always troubling when a sitting government, regardless of which party, has to resort to dishing out “special grants” to various sections of the constituency involved in an election for the sole purpose of increasing their votability. Such last-minute attempts to be seen as being sympathetic to the concerns and needs of specific sectors of voters is dishonest, insincere and hypocritical. A sitting government which is genuinely sincere would have had a system in place to gauge issues and needs of the respective voters and to have an orderly, transparent, fair and effective way of allocating adequate budget and plans to resolve problems on the ground. It is difficult to see how large sums of public money could suddenly become available or that the people’s needs could suddenly catch the eyes of the powers that be only when election campaigns are on.
The issues, needs and concerns faced by religious communities, Muslim as well as non-Muslim, are there for all to see. If sincerely, fairly and properly dealt with, they would not become election issues. Likewise, issues facing particular ethnic communities or perennial problems and threats such as floods, road conditions, etc. Therefore, last minute “election goodies” and “special grants” are tacit admissions of lack of proper and honest planning and implementation on the part of a sitting government.
Apart from all this, the matter of offering “special grants” to the four Methodist churches in Sibu on the eve of polling day is especially troubling to me on account of the fact that I am a Christian and a member of the Methodist Church, a denomination which among other things have served the people of this country well before its independence in various social fields including education and especially the education of women one of whom was my own mother.
I was saddened and very concerned about comments that were made regarding these “special grants” by concerned citizens who not only care about Sibu and Malaysia but also about the possibility of how this blatantly desperate episode could also affect the churches’ good name. Here are a few samples of such comments:
Jin Chuah: The worry part is RM1.75 million of Federal allocation has channeled into 4 Methodist churches in Sibu resulting those christians who yet to cast their votes may not turn up.
Tan: god is watching SIBU, but he is helpless with BN’s goodies.
Abang Adek: Like I said last night, God is nothing compared to money. And the Methodist Churches who took the bribes from the BN only prove again to all, that God is nothing compared to money. You PR guys only hope in miracles. Well, the miracle happening today is the miracle of $$$$$$. Money talks, Money walks…
Fairplay Lee: All christian brothers and sisters do not be cheated and wake up and vote for justice and be guided by the holy spirit.
Disappointed: the RM1.75 million Federal Fund channelled to 4 churches is not BN pocket money but rightfully the rakyat’s money. Dont u think the money comes a bit too late. Think Sibuan b4 casting yr votes.
Aca: santa gives millions to churches and only RM600 per head to poor Ibans. Next round maybe Ibans get RM6,000 per head and RM600 per church. Wonder whether the pastors can be corrupted by the millions?
Kumar. Pg: Dengan rasuah sebanyak RM1.75m, adakah orang kristian akan meyerahkan maruah ugama mereka kepada UMNO?
Anil: If you ask me, I don’t think the churches in Sibu should have accepted those grants during the election campaign period – even if their followers can still vote as they please. After all, this is vote-buying and both the buyer and the recipient need to be responsible (though one can understand the circumstances of those who desperately need the money). But I don’t think the churches are in such desperation. They are called to uphold a higher standard and should set an example to others by rejecting corruption in all its forms. It would also be a telling lesson to those who offer them the money – that there are some things that money just cannot buy.
The spotlight rightly or wrongly is therefore very much on the Christian Church in Malaysia regardless of denomination or communion. Malaysians are watching us and wondering aloud or silently, waiting to see what we will do under these circumstances, waiting for a clear word from us. This happened in Sibu but its ramifications will be much wider in scope and depth. It is not even just to do with the Christian community as such but how elections are conducted in the country and how we conduct ourselves during elections and at other times.
I respectfully appeal to the churches directly involved in this episode:
If it isn’t true and it didn’t happen, then please say so.
If it is true, offered and received, give it all back.
WE DON’T WANT SUCH MONEY. Let the church be poor (as a church mouse) but
as the Book of Proverbs say, poor but happy keeping a clear conscience.
I also respectfully appeal to all Malaysian churches through the Christian Federation of Malaysia:
Please let us send a clear, unmistakeable and irrevocable message to the country and the world. As citizens and tax-payers we deserve to practise and observe our religious faith in peaceful and orderly fashion and we should get reasonable amounts of resources to enable us to do so. Any sitting government is welcome to sit down with us, discuss and understand in a timely and civil way our religion and our community’s needs and concerns regarding places of worship, burial grounds and our bibles in Bahasa Malaysia as well as how we will continue to serve all Malaysians in need through our social services. Provide the facilities and resources justly due to us but please don’t give us “special grants” only at the eve of by-elections. WE DON’T TAKE SUCH MONEY. No, thank you. Never under such circumstances.
Otherwise, we will be sending the message to the government, present or future, BN or PR, that the church which bears the name of Christ is ever willing to take money under such circumstances: “Make us an offer, we are open to such funding. We encourage electioneering where money is utilised as a means to win votes. Is there a higher bid?”
The Christian Church preaches moral values and standards in all things to all people. It wants to take the moral high ground. It must therefore be subjected to the same high moral standards which it espouses.
We serve a risen saviour whose birth in human form was in a humble manger because there was no room in the inn for his parents. Let us stay true to our calling.
May 17th, 2010 at 4:31 pm
I am troubled by this. Chinese schools fell for it…18million. But churches really need to maintain some kind of dignity and message that we depend on God for our provisions.
I have trouble with some Christians who have thinking that “Money flow from non-Christians to Christians is glorious to God”… I can accept that God provides for Christians through many ways…but this statement seems to me that the focus was on the MONEY not on the NON-Christians…whose souls…are still unsaved. It seems more biblical that we Christians should be sacrificial to bless others rather than the other way round.
May 18th, 2010 at 4:35 pm
Ethics are always tricky. What are the options?
1. Churches should never accept money BEFORE an election (then what about after an election? but wouldn’t a bribe still be a bribe?). things get a little tricky here because what if a church member who’s an MP gives a huge donation, say, 2 weeks before the elections?
2. Churches should never accept *substantial* amounts of money before an election (how much is ‘substantial’?)
3. Churches should never accept any money from political parties. Period. (hmm, separation of Church and State, eh?)
4. Churches should never accept any ‘gift’ (of any sort) from political parties. (kinda harsh…then again, we need to be careful)
5. Churches should never do anything which suggests corruption or being complicit etc. (but alas this is too broad)
My take is, yes, given the ‘climate’ it’s probably best to give the money back and have nothing to do with it. Yet let’s not pretend this is some kind of ethically absolute decision. Whilst many may disagree, I think some churches are perfectly within their rights to ACCEPT the money (kinda like the ‘food 4 idols’ and ‘weaker christians’ debate a’la 1Cor10 and Rom14?).
Also, it may help to rethink the notion of bribery.
BN wanted to win the elections. And so they used a cash incentive. How far removed is this from a party which promises ‘development and prosperity’ to a community “should we win” the election? In the latter case, jobs and ‘national wealth’ are promised. In the former case, cold hard cash is offered. Why is one a bribe and the other not? In that case, if Citibank gives cash rebates for its services and UOB doesn’t, is Citibank bribing us? And thus should good Christians reject the Citi (which never sleeps)?
May 18th, 2010 at 4:37 pm
I think these 4 well-established Chinese churches should show the government what to do by passing on the entire sum of the “donation” to other churches in rural needy communities especially those for bumi Christians.
May 18th, 2010 at 4:39 pm
As a Sarawakian Christian, I am outraged by this post. In fact, outraged is an understatement. I am beside myself with rage.
I am beside myself with rage because the author IMMEDIATELY assumed that the ONLY moral choice is by not accepting the money. The author then proceeded to say that it is better for the Church to be as ‘poor as a church mouse’ than to accept the money. This he can utter, while living in the comforts of West Malaysia and the privilege of constant Internet access.
Not ONCE was consideration given to the circumstances of Christians or the churches in Sarawak which received the money. I would presume that even if the churches were in dire need of help, the West Malaysian Christians would make no effort whatsoever to raise the millions that they would be receiving. Instead, West Malaysian Christians are content to merely strut in, impose their political beliefs on East Malaysian Christians, dictate our choices, and tell us that we East Malaysian Christians should accept this because it is “all for our own good”.
If this were not a Christian weblog, I’d be swearing to the high heavens.
Nor would it occur to the writer that if he was writing from the comforts of an Internet access to the Micah Mandate, then he was more than double the times wealthier than the average Sarawakian Christian. Granted, I do not know the circumstances of the churches in Sibu to know if they need the money, or if their congregants are of the upper, middle, or lower classes of the Sarawakian income bracket — the lower income meaning getting less than RM 500 a month, RM 400 if lucky.
Consider this: the same concern, the same OUTRAGE, was never raised when Metro Tabernacle received its own millions from the Prime Minister. It is only an OUTRAGE when it reaches East Malaysians, people whom the author has probably very little familiarity with, because it just might risk the potential of hijacking the vote.
Furthermore, as a member of the Methodist denomination himself, he should know that these kind of actions are not his to deal with. Whether the churches of Sarawak should refuse financial donations to the church falls under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of the respective denomination, and that Bishop is in turn answerable to the Bishop of Southeast Asia. To by-pass this method in hopes of creating mass outrage among largely WEST MALAYSIAN readers is an utter contempt of the autonomy of East Malaysian churches, and furthermore contempt for their right to make their own decisions. If the author were concerned, contact the respective denominational hierarchy in charge of East Malaysia, or at least South East Asia.
When we demand that other Christians adhere to the political choices of other Christians (usually, those who have the privilege of influence) in order to prove their ‘Christianity’ or adherence to Christian values, then where do we stop? Why not just declare “vote for this political party, or don’t consider yourself a Christian”?
Who is the writer to tell these churches that they shouldn’t accept the money? How could the writer be so arrogant to assume that the ONLY morally right thing to do is to reject the money?
Finally, the author needs to know what ‘unpacking privilege’ means. It is NEVER right for a West Malaysian Christian to dictate to an East Malaysian Christian what their moral or political choices are. Ultimately, Sarawak is MY home, not yours. It is MY moral decision to accept or reject assistance if the Prime Minister comes to my door and throws money my direction. When I go to the ballots, the choice is make is MINE. The people who will experience the aftereffects of my political decisions are MY PEOPLE.
You, as a (wealthy) West Malaysian, have no right to dictate to an East Malaysian on how they ought to respond to politics or how they should run their churches. If it bothered you so much, write to the Bishop, not to the Micah Mandate.
May 18th, 2010 at 6:00 pm
I don’t feel there’s anything wrong in accepting the money……. it’s money from the government. Churches regardless of those in east or west malaysia have always faced difficulties in applying for $ from the government. Therefore, if the government wants to give, why should churches reject? Regardless of the outcome of the election, the government has to keep its promises to the rakyat.
No matter whom the Christians vote for, it is the rights of the churches to accept the $. To put it simple, that’s taxpayers’ $ for the benefit of all rakyat in Malaysia.
May 18th, 2010 at 9:18 pm
I can identify with megabigblur’s and catalina’s responses to the issue of 4 big Sibu churches and the offer of govt grants near election time. My responses are:
1. Those 4 churches probably do not need the funds urgently i.e. because of need for basic amenities to live daily. Therefore, they could have said “No thanks”, full stop, since it was at a wrong timing, even if they had applied for grants a long time ago. I would give them the benefit of the doubt that the local church leaders may have been so shocked that they did not know what to do and rejoiced in receiving such a gift. When others react to this news, they began to think…a little too late but not without hope of redemption.
*** The good that may emerge from the bad mistake: church leaders must from now study the Bible as well as read the news, put on their thinking caps (God’s gifts to humans) and be aware of the outside society’s condition so that they will be more prepared for interaction with politicians, etc., as fellow 1Malaysian citizens, not as fellow politicians.
2. As Megabigblur ssuggested, return the $. But Catalina could see things from both East and West Malaysian view points because she grew up in the East and now is in the West. There are genuine needs in the rural poor that are beyond our middle-class West Malaysians’ imagination. I know a bit as I have travelled and visited long houses in e.g. the Kapit of 1960. Methodist missionaries launched the then Methodist Hospital but in the 1970’s, the Methodists had to hand it over to the Govt. because they could not run it well. So, was that wrong? I recently visited the same hospital and it still exists.
Suggestion:
If the 4 churches have banked in the cheques, please, for the Lord’s sake, either return them to the govt (which may not be such a good idea as it may again go to hands which you disagree with) or better still, make it known publicly that you will give all the $ money to the poorest of the poor…and do it.
If they do not know where to find the poorest of the poor, write to social work centres e.g. MCARE or Nur Salaam.
May 18th, 2010 at 10:23 pm
leebeeteik:
Your comment still doesn’t solve the issue.
What I object to is this extremely contemptuous moralizing that comes from an ‘outsider’ of a community. Neither the decision to donate to the rural poor, nor the decision to return the money, nor the decision to keep the money, is a moral one if it is made due to external pressure.
Ultimately, do West Malaysian Christians trust that East Malaysian Christians can make their own moral decisions?
If that is not the case, then the best thing to do would be to contact the bishop of the diocese and raise the concern that political parties may be manipulating churches and its congregants for political mileage, and that this trend should be limited. If the issue is huge enough, contact the bishop of the diocese of Southeast Asia, or whatever equivalent in the Methodist denomination.
The majority of readers of the Micah Mandate are urban West Malaysians. It is completely unjust that this article should try to provoke group outrage among this audience and try to mob-pressure these churches to return the money — in accordance to largely West Malaysian political conviction.
As an East Malaysian, I am extremely sensitive to any form of West Malaysian imposing on our politics. We in East Malaysia have a ton of issues to deal with locally and our politicians and parties are extremely different in makeup. Perhaps one may not recognize the difference this makes, but it would be if you were an East Malaysian church which suddenly discovered that you were the recipient of a lot of money from the Prime Minister.
May 18th, 2010 at 10:46 pm
I am sorry, Catalina. But what if the recipients of the huge some of $ does not really need it from the govt. i.e. they are relatively rich churches? I dont think the issue keat peng and others reaise is about making decisions for or judging our East Malaysian friends. To me, it is about becoming a stumbling block to the genuine development of the whole of Malaysia, even if money was received for good use because the timing was inappropriate. Therefore, unless it is in an emergency situation and there is no one else to help, such money is not to be received. It can be legitimately provided in other ways. That is where faith in Jesus comes in… This is not a personal issue.
May 19th, 2010 at 9:41 am
leebeeteik:
My stance would remain the same even if the churches were swimming with money.
It is not right for another Christian to tell other churches, especially in another church as distant as those in Sibu, how they ought to manage their finances and from whom they ought to receive their finances.
It is especially wrong if other Christians are doing it for the purpose of non-Christian issues, ie. political.
To resort to online means, especially to a largely urban West Malaysian audience, is coercing East Malaysians to comply with the political values of West Malaysians. Of course, to you it may seem as if the issue should be universal. But it does not seem to me. As Alwyn has pointed out, if you think that this is wrong, then what about other things that Christians — East or West Malaysian — resort to?
Is it morally wrong for churches to receive corporate sponsorship? Is it morally wrong if churches receive money from people who may have gained it from criminal means?
At an individual level, do you think that I, being a Bumiputra, am morally wrong for receiving the benefits of being one? Do you think that in the three and a half years of service at the University of Malaya, when I was the recipient of massive bonuses from the government prior to the General Elections, I was morally wrong?
Furthermore, to insinuate that Christians in East Malaysia are somehow lacking in faith because they may have accepted the money is absolutely condescending. When have matters of Gospel truth become issues of secular political football? Or rather, when did political statements become an article of faith?
This is why God invented church hierarchies (which both the Old Testament and Christian history attests to), and as a Methodist Mr. Goh would understand the concept of apostolic succession, which the Methodist denomination practices. The bishop of whatever diocese is in charge of the administrative matters of that particular diocese. If Mr. Goh was concerned about political parties resorting to bribing churches in hopes of appealing to their congregation, then he should have rightly raised it through the already existing channels — CCM, for example — who can then communicate with the relevant church hierarchy in the jurisdiction.
Instead, by resorting to blogosphere outrage, you have an audience of largely West Malaysian Christians imposing and dictating their political opinions on East Malaysian Christians. Of course West Malaysian Christians would see it as outrage — most West Malaysian Christians are staunch pro-Opposition supporters! What difference is there between pro-Opposition West Malaysian Christians and the Umno government at a Federal level?
—————————–
In addition:
Speaking as an East Malaysian living in Kuala Lumpur, I can tell you 100% that if I were in East Malaysia, I would receive the money, but if I were in West Malaysia, I probably wouldn’t. In West Malaysia, the relationship between the voting populace and the parties in power at Federal level is direct.
But as an East Malaysian voter, I am always voting for two governments — state and Federal. Us in East Malaysia do not regard Umno, etc. as ‘our’ parties, but parties that form central government whom we have little influence over. Regardless of our representation in Parliament, our relationship with West Malaysia has often been drawn along the relationship of colonizer and colonized.
If the colonizer (ie. Federal government) ‘turun padang’ and offers us money, projects, etc., we are not likely to see it as a party bribing for votes as much as it is the act of central government paying the (occasional) attention to us. To refuse the donation would also imply rudeness towards Federal government. Accepting the money is not a political act, refusing it is. And in a Sarawakian context, the way politics plays out is incredibly different from the way it is played out in West Malaysia.
As a resident of West Malaysia, I am left-leaning. As a voter in East Malaysia, I am centrist. This is how different the political patterns in Sarawak are compared to that of West Malaysia. As a Sarawakian, I may feel strongly for matters at a Federal level, but the government I vote for, the land I belong to, the people I answer to, and the home that I am responsible for is not a homogenous Malaysia (almost always drawn on West Malaysian values), but Sarawak. My government is not Umno. My government is PBB. When I cross the Barisan logo, it is not Najib I am voting for, it is Taib.
What does this have to do with accepting money from political parties in by-elections? Plenty — if you see the Prime Minister giving money as a bribe from a political party (Umno) then you would think it unethical, but if you see the Prime Minister as a representative of Federal government, then you are less likely to see it that way. A West Malaysian would almost certainly look at this in the former, but an East Malaysian is not as likely.
The fact that a West Malaysian would assume that the political patterns — and morally appropriate reactions — of East Malaysia should be identical to that in West Malaysia is abhorrent. No concern was made to listen to the voices of East Malaysians, specifically East Malaysians living in Sibu or who attend or are in charge of these churches.
As an East Malaysian, I do not accept this kind of absolutist moral stance. As an East Malaysian, I assert that the churches have the right to receive or accept the money. As an East Malaysian, I refuse the grounds that being a Christian means having to subscribe to a homogenous political opinion — a homogenous political opinion ALWAYS drawn on West Malaysian values.
When West Malaysian churches received assistance from Muslim NGOs, some of whom were involved in the same anti-Christian rhetoric that resulted in the attacks, I consider it morally repugnant. These Muslim NGOs were looking for a way to escape the responsibility of spreading anti-Christian sentiment, and the churches allowed them to do so. I could have said that these churches lacked faith in God for not trusting God to protect their church buildings. I didn’t. I do not have the arrogance to go around and tell people what their moral choices ought to be. I wish I did.
May 19th, 2010 at 2:39 pm
I have posted a blog of about 900 words titled “A Letter to Each of the 4 Churches in Sibu” which I invite you to read. This is how my blog ends:
“So, leaders and members of each of the four churches in Sibu, the world is watching and waiting for your response. Here are some questions to help you think this through and frame your response:
1.What is the purpose and total cost of the project for which you requested public funds?
2.When and to whom did you first submit the request for funds?
3.What responses did you get? When and from whom?
4.How many times did you follow-up? Who was present and what actions were agreed?
5.What did you actually receive “from a representative of the DPM” last week?
6.How much notice did you receive before meeting the “representative of the DPM”?
7.What conditions are attached to the funds you received?
8.If you had declined to receive the funds last week, what do you think would have been the result?
9.Have you previously received public funds for church projects? When and how much?
10.What representations/protests have you ever made about the local/state or federal governments?
11.How much does your congregation give (just to) to your church every year?
12.How have you been praying for your projects and what do you think has been God’s response?
Brethren, I too have been involved in church building projects. I know the holy aspirations, the humbling rebuffs and the hurtful questions. I write not to criticize or to condemn but to promote Christian virtue and offer Christian sympathy.
If the Lord writes us a letter as He did to the seven churches in the book of Revelation (1:4 – 3:22), what would He say?”
May 19th, 2010 at 6:37 pm
Rama Ramanathan:
This is another reason why I have come to hate West Malaysian political activists with an intense passion. I have personally resolved to NOT vote in the upcoming Sarawakian elections, because I absolutely REFUSE to capitulate to another colonizing force from West Malaysia.
If my voting for an opposition party member to protest the injustice of current government members is a vote for this kind of privileged, self-serving, demanding and completely non-understanding ‘activists’ who refuse to respect the political decisions of East Malaysians to run their own churches and thus, run their own state, then I refuse to vote.
If you cannot trust us to run our own churches, do you trust us to run our own state? If you cannot trust us to run our own state, do you even trust us to run our own lives?
Rama Ramanathan, not ONCE did you bother to check what the churches in Sibu were like. If you looked at the names, and if you knew the nature of churches in East Malaysia, you would know immediately that the churches are CHINESE SPEAKING churches.
The Christians whom you choose to attack via an online means (a weblog) have NO MEANS to defend themselves. From what I know of, most Methodists in Sarawak are Foochow. Most of them are also of an older generation. The bigger churches with young people who MIGHT be proficient in English are all Evangelicals or non-denominational churches.
However, West Malaysian Christians, in this case, have seen absolutely nothing wrong in parading the financial decisions of these Christians in East Malaysia on the Internet, and demanding that these Christians ‘answer’ them, when there is a high likelihood that these Christians CANNOT even answer them.
I ask again: has ANYONE bothered to contact the Bishop? Did anyone bother to write a letter to the church pastors? Or are these people just interested in shamefacing other Christians because they made political decisions that were not in line with their own political conviction?
West Malaysians almost never listen to East Malaysians. All they want from East Malaysians is for East Malaysians to support their political causes. They will listen to us only so far as they can gain something from us. While I am aware that Christians are not exempt from committing crimes of privilege — in fact, Christians are among the worst, often blatantly indulging in sexist, homophobic, and racist jokes among other Christians –I am utterly disappointed and disgusted that this attitude is displayed so casually among Christians in a public space as the Internet.
I remember something my priest said to me which makes a lot of sense. “It is always easier to see the sin of someone else than to see your own”.
“I write not to criticize or to condemn but to promote Christian virtue and offer Christian sympathy.”
Which you do by sitting in front of your computer, typing in English, addressing a largely West Malaysian and English speaking audience.
If you cared so much, again, as I say — write to the Bishop.
May 19th, 2010 at 7:06 pm
I would also like to ask this:
1. Did anyone think that there would have been a better alternative to address the accusation that the churches were receiving ‘bribe money’?
2. Did anyone bother to think of the churches themselves, before imposing their own experience on the churches?
3. Did anyone check to find out if the church leadership and members could actually ‘defend’ themselves on the Internet? A quick read on the article on The Malaysian Insider tells me, a Sarawakian, that these are congregations very likely unable to communicate fluently in English and probably old (thus not on the Internet often if at all).
A quick read on the article on The Malaysian Insider also tells us that these monetary aid was money requested by these churches and applied by them before — they were only granted shortly before the elections.
4. We know through Scripture that it is explicitly stated that Christians should resolve matters peacefully amongst themselves before taking a fellow Christian to court, on account of the fact that their behaviour made poor witnesses of Christ. Did anyone consider the consequences of dragging the internal affairs of churches — especially with regards to a church’s finances — into a space as public as the Internet?
Do you know what this honestly looks like?
It looks as if a bunch of outraged West Malaysian Christians have chosen to drag into public another Christian merely ACCUSED of accepting bribery, and then demanding that they confess their sins and make penance in the same public space, when:
a. Accepting the money was never considered a wrongdoing before.
b. No respect for the other brother or sister was given. No respect was given to the leaders whom God chose to lead them — a simple e-mail, phone call, or letter to the pastor or bishop overseeing these churches would have sufficed.
c. This does not even consider the fact that no investigation was done on the background of these churches and their congregation. It seemed that no one had even bothered to find out if the church congregation was even proficient in English!
If my understanding of the situation as a Sarawakian is correct, then West Malaysian English-speaking Christians have taken rumours from the public at face value, and then chose to heckle these largely Chinese-speaking Christians who may or may not have done what they are being accused of.
And even if they have, what is wrong with it? No one sent a memo to these churches to reject financial assistance from political figures. In my time in West Malaysia I have seen politicians invited to churches, *as politicians*.
Is the acceptable moral conduct of churches in Malaysia subject to the opinions of the mob?
May 19th, 2010 at 9:10 pm
Even if this website does not lead to what now seems unfair pressure on the 4 Sibu churches to confess in public, among God’s children of various backgrounds, we have been reminded of something beautiful, something Catalina has sincerely shared with readers. This may be summed up in the Lord’s new commandment given to us in John 13:34…
“Love one another as I have loved you so that the world may know that your are my disciples”.
Therefore, I agree with her that “thought-to-be-dirty or dirty linen” could be better discussed in the privacy of loving human relationships.
How would Mr Goh feel if he were in the shoes of the leaders of the 4 churches? Publicly condemned without trial…something many of the moral protesters want to eliminate anyway? Could not Mr Goh have talked with the people in charge of the 4 churches 1st and let them respond as and when they deem fit if they see it fit to respond publicly at all?
Shalom
May 20th, 2010 at 1:07 pm
Catalina,
Yes, it’s easy to see the speck in another’s eye and miss the log in ours.
I am sorry you thought I attacked EM brethren, some of whom sit beside me during church services in KL and whose parents attend Chinese churches.
My response would have been the same if the hotspot was Hulu Klang,
and the same if the people involved were Tamils not fluent in English.
I do not reject as “colonizing” any influences which come from outside my own homeland. For this reason, I support missionaries in foreign lands, one of whom is EM. I am grateful to Jews, Greeks and others.
Sexist, homophobic, racist? Not sure if you meant that for me . . .
Rumours? The news reports have not been denied even by the DPM.
I am glad you are in touch with the bishop – I don’t know how to contact him/her. I hope you will communicate my questions to the bishop.
In any situation I appreciate all the help I can get; I think he will too.
[I assume he considers this "a situation" as do some EM friends here.]
Shalom
May 21st, 2010 at 7:15 pm
Rama Ramanathan:
I do not understand what you mean when you can’t contact the Bishop. It took me less than five minutes of Googling for me to find the main page of the entire Methodist denomination in Malaysia. There are links to the details of every Methodist church in Sibu, regardless of conference, and they come complete with contact information (phone numbers, even!).
What I object is not that this is a ‘situation’, what I object to was the way in which the ‘situation’ has been handled by Christians, especially Christians who claim to speak for justice. I do not check The Micah Mandate regularly, and I found out about this via forwards on Facebook.
There are plenty of reasons to be wary about the kind of power the Internet can wield. I will be writing to The Micah Mandate to explain why I was so upset at this article and the reactions of Christians here.
May 21st, 2010 at 7:30 pm
lee bee teik:
Thank you for speaking up. I have decided to write to The Micah Mandate.
It was wrong of me to be so overwhelmed by anger that I saw some offence in the article and some reactions here when there was none intended. At the time I was experiencing severe disillusion when (obviously West Malaysian) Pakatan Rakyat supporters on Facebook were blatantly using the Sibu by-election results as an arsenal in their own political debates. Some of my anger had overlapped into this issue.
The issue of an East-West Malaysian readership and value system is relevant, but I failed in explaining why it was so. Hopefully I will be able to clear things up in the very near future.
May 21st, 2010 at 9:40 pm
Thank you, brohers and sisters. I know that by His enabling,
“The people who know their God will stand firm and take action.”
and
“The gentle shall inherit the earth…”
May 22nd, 2010 at 8:24 am
Catalina,
Thank you. I used the link you provided and did as you recommended.
My navigation of the site/s did not succeed in locating contact information in English for each of the Methodis churches in Sibu.
I did send a link to my article to two email addresses I found on the websites. I also sent my article as an attachment to one of the addresses.
In both emails I included this statement “Most who read my article think I am sympathetic to the Sibu churches.”
Thank you for providing some of the rationale for your response. I look forward to gaining a better understanding of the depth of your passion.
Shalom
Shalom
May 31st, 2010 at 10:40 pm
i,m a dayak but 4me the real concern is how to prevent a fellow kristian convert 2 islam .i already saw many of this happen throught marriage among dayak and malay.