Well, I'm sure everyone out there would have heard about the case the Commercial Affairs Department, with input from the Commissioner of Charities, opened against City Harvest Church and several of its board members.

I'm not in the position to comment on the specific facts of the case as the investigation is on-going (no one knows for sure what and who's involved), and thus what's been making rounds in the blogosphere is mostly based on here-say and speculation. Of course with a bit of drama added in as well.

What I'm dismayed is not with the church itself, but the way in which other Christians have taken this opportunity to attack CHC in this time of uncertainty. What's with alleged New Creation members posting online videos slamming Pst Kong and the church as well as the flames from members of other denominations. The Catholic Church - an otherwise major player, on the other hand, has been rather silent about the issue. In fact, many of the critics and detractors come from members of other denominations who sincerely believe that the church is a 'cult' and is 'inherently evil and destructive' and thinks that 'they deserve it'.

The basis for them saying so probably lies in the difference in doctrine, the glamor and glitz surrounding the senior pastor and his wife, and the wealth and sheer membership that smaller churches can only dream of having. Faced with all this, they resort to labeling all church-goers as 'blind sheep being 'led to their destruction'. I just want to query - It is a well known fact that the other denominations disagree with one another on basis of scripture and rituals as well; why have they not stirred up debate on these issues? Is it because they are part of an international organisation which sees no need to engage in theological discussions with other denominations as they are already contented with the status quo? If so, its no wonder they eye upstart charismatic churches with no set international leadership and direction with suspicion and will gladly see them get into hot soup with the authorities.

And when these congregations get too big and influential, they become ever looming threats to other smaller churches. I have not as of yet seen any marked backlash against NCC's teachings (granted that there's room for controversy in what they preach as well) and to the contrary they are able to peddle their products in secular bookstores such as Popular for quite some time now. Given that their senior pastor also enjoys a luxurious lifestyle and also has a mega new development in progress to boot, I cannot see why anyone has not attempted to question or check their finances.

What's etched in the public's minds about CHC is its phenomenal success in winning over impressionable teens as well as the vast amounts it collects via tithes and offerings. However, many do not realize that other churches evangelize amongst students as well (albeit on a much smaller scale yet through similar camps and cell gatherings) and also have substantial donations as well. What sets CHC apart from the rest is both the size of the congregation and its reserves. By extension, the more clout and members it has, the more they are able to call in foreign preachers of substantial pedigree to the pulpit and win over even more people.

And as this congregation grows to levels unseen before for a Singaporean church, things will inevitable get messy. To cope with the transformation from a simple humble gathering for tens of people to the thousands that throng the church halls each weekend requires much logistics and support services. And the church will inevitable want to keep all the money it spends on these 'within the family' - or simply put it, in ventures run by members of the church. Controversy will arise however when the directors of these companies that provide services to CHC sit on the church's board as well - A conflict of interest hence ensues. And with this in mind any transaction between the church and the companies involved will likely raise eyebrows as to whether there is a 'misappropriation of funds' or a 'criminal breach of trust' when donors' monies are concerned, which is a chargeable offence under the Penal Code as follows.

Chapter XVII of the Penal Code
Criminal breach of trust �
Criminal breach of trust is committed by a person who, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property, dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his or her own use that property, or dishonestly uses or disposes of that property in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he or she has made touching the discharge of such trust, or wilfully suffers any other person to do so. For instance, A, a warehouse-keeper, commits breach of trust if he dishonestly sells furniture belonging to Z who, intending to go on a journey, has entrusted the goods to A under a contract that it shall be returned on payment of a stipulated sum for warehouse room. The penalty is imprisonment for up to three years, or a fine, or both.

Many CHC members have pointed out in the aftermath of this news that their donations are given out of goodwill and that when giving, the donor is well aware that the money will be used by the church in any way that is prudent to their mission, and the fulfillment of the 'Cultural Mandate'.

Even so, many are rubbing their hands in glee at the expected destruction of the church from within with them 'lost sheep' scattering.. hopefully into their churches, which is pretty absurd to say the least. As of now since the facts of the case remain unknown to the general public, it would be unwise to speculate on the outcome of the investigation. No doubt however that this media barrage has lent much ammunition the the detractors of CHC, which is a pity indeed as some churches and members are now more focused on barracking City Harvest instead of winning the genuinely lost out in the streets and also strengthening their own congregations.

What's important in conclusion is that no matter which denomination (accepted by the mainstream) one belongs to, we are still Christians nonetheless, believing in the same God. Which denomination one chooses to side with is a matter of personal choice - and leaders of different denoms should seek instead towards understanding and reconciliation (which many are doing admirably). And if the two churches have a rivalry of bad blood they might as well mind their own businesses and focus on what God wanted them to do in the ending verses of first four books of the New Testament, instead of following what Man himself thinks he should do.

Once again, if the doctrine of CHC is really as unfounded and unnatural as some detractors claim it is, why would so many prominent intellectuals within the Christian community in SG make appearances at the services and even present a speech or two? And why again is it a member of the National Council of Churches and be allowed to participate in inter-denominational events such as the recently concluded 'Global Day of Prayer' and the annual 'Festival of Praise' which other mega-churches do not subscribe to?

This investigation is merely an inquiry to check out any financial irregularities between CHC and companies which their stakeholders have a stake in, especially board members, that could have occurred as a result of a conflict of interest. Also they are responding to claims that the church has pumped money into these companies (and as a result, they say, the money is not being used to further the cause of the church and God) to the benefit of certain individuals. What is certain however is that this whole saga is by no means an attack by the authorities on the church itself, which many out there prefer to see it as following the case of Ren Ci and the Venerable Ming Yi.

All Christians should instead join hands in praying for the investigations to produce an unbiased verdict and also for greater transparency in all our churches as an important step towards winning the public over to our cause. The ultimate loser in the squabble between churches are not the churches themselves, but Christianity in Singapore. Just imagine, what would the public think about your religion if all the dirty laundry is aired in public? Not very favorably I imagine. And this is what all of us should aim to avoid.

Sorry, you do not have permission to comment.

If you are a member, try logging in again or accessing this page here.