CCC – A Matter Of Concern?

While the whole church waits in prayerful anticipation of a conclusion to the 15-month saga which has caused much hurt, confusion, strife and division in Calvary Church, another threat looms in the horizon. This is the financial disaster that can erupt in the event of a failure of the Calvary Convention Centre (CCC).

In the report of our Church Auditors contained in our 2008 Calvary Church Annual Report, our auditors have highlighted their concern over the CCC under “Emphasis of Matter”. Their report states:-

“Without qualifying our opinion, we draw attention to the Note 1(a) to the financial statements. The Church has contracted capital expenditures of RM80,955,054 in respect of Calvary Convention Centre as at 31 December 2008, and as at that date, the balance of the Church’s fixed deposits is RM19,596,603. The ability of the Church to meet its liabilities is dependent on the availability of external funds and continue contribution from the members to provide adequate funds for the Church to meet its liabilities when they fall due.”

No one can really fault the auditors for voicing their concern. This statement is very much in line with accounting standards and the code of corporate governance and transparency. Nevertheless, it is also a timely warning for the members to take heed of.

The CCC has been fraught with controversies right from the beginning. If the members recall, the project was supposed to cost only RM50 million excluding land cost. From the initial project budget of RM50 million, it has quickly ballooned to RM150 million.

When it was first announced that the church was spending RM35 million to purchase the 4.9 acre land in Bukit Jalil, it had caused a flurry of, albeit, relatively silent protests from the members. It was a hefty price to pay for a small piece of land especially when it was during a time of economic slowdown when property prices were going a-begging.

The subsequent appointment of Ken Yeang, a freemason to design the CCC was another controversy. Despite being informed of this fact by a few members and also Dr Lum, SP and the Deacons continued with the award to Ken Yeang.

The approval for the initial construction budget of RM50 million was again controversial. During that unforgettable AGM, members were asked to stand to give praise to God after a presentation of the CCC. As soon as the members stood to their feet and began praising God, SP quickly announced that he took it that their standing up was indicative of their support and approval for the project. That ‘sleight of hand’ maneuver did not go well with the members.

At the last year’s AGM, the members were told that construction cost and material costs had escalated greatly and to keep within the RM100 million construction budget, they will only build the sanctuary fully and leave the rest of the building as “shell and core” (bare cement rendered without finishes or electrical installations) which will be un-useable for the time being. In essence, it meant that the eventual cost after full completion of the whole project will be higher than RM150 million. The budget for furnishing the sanctuary and AV equipment remain at RM50 million. Subsequently, the Board of Deacons granted a RM80 million construction contract to Nam Fatt Bhd, a listed construction company with a poor balance sheet which is a risk to begin with.

The concern now highlighted by the auditors is real. The church does not have enough money to pay for the construction. Even with the RM35 million loan provided by Alliance Bank, there remains a big shortfall. Of course, the church leaders will ask, where is our faith? But apart from faith, God has also given us wisdom to plan and to make wise decisions.

One reader commented that there has been no work done at the CCC site in the last 4 weeks that he has driven by. Could it be that the contractor has abandoned the project? Is CCC on the verge of failing?

With the controversies and concerns the CCC has caused, there arise one question that begs a serious answer. Is CCC a vision from God or is it the vision and ambition of a man?

If CCC is God’s vision, why would God want a freemason, Ken Yeang to design His house? The Deacons may argue that actually it was Ken Yeang’s assistants who did much of the designing work and that the assistants are not freemasons. This is childish argument because it will still be recognized as a Ken Yeang design. Ken Yeang, at the onset, had told the members that he plans to put CCC on the world map with its iconic design. He made no effort to hide his ambition to gain international fame through this project. Naturally, if that happens, it will also bring great fame to SP. How can such ambitions for self-glory be in line with God’s will?

If CCC is God's vision, why does He want a design for His Temple, which resembles a cobra head and an outline that resembles a pharaoh’s coffin? See photos below.

If CCC is God’s vision, why was there a need to apply for approval under the guise of building a convention centre and not a church, for fear of not getting approval from the authorities? If indeed it is the will of God, nothing can stop the project even if the church came out upfront and tell the authorities that CCC is a church. This fact was highlighted by a ruling political party member in his blog where he alleged (mistakenly, of course) that our church banner at the CCC site displaying the words "Adanya Harapan....There is Hope" is linked to the Opposition Leader, who has used the tagline "Harapan" in his political propaganda.

If CCC is God's vision, why was there a need to keep feeding members with half-truths about the actual costing and be evasive when questioned during AGMs and EGMs? Surely God will want the leaders to be truthful and transparent in everything.

If CCC is God’s vision, why does the pastors and deacons need to think of all kinds of ways to get the members to give? Why do they need to encourage the members to sell paper bricks to non-members and non-Christian friends? Everything on earth belongs to Him. Our God is a rich God; He does not need to beg. He can open the windows of heaven and pour His blessings on the CCC that we have to tell the members to stop giving because we have more than enough. Why is this not happening? SP and his Pastors and Deacons can point their fingers at the TTG group but the TTG group certainly cannot thwart the will of God.

So is CCC God’s vision or man’s vision? God’s vision will always materialize, man’s vision will always fail.

Take Calvaryland, for example. This project costs the church RM10 million for the land and buildings and today it houses only 6 residents. For the same amount, the church could have bought at least 30 houses and cater to hundreds of orphans and homeless. The wanton waste of money for the Calvaryland cannot possibly be the will of God. So is Calvaryland God’s vision or man’s vision?

The 2nd example is the vision for a 5,000 seating church in Sri Hartamas many years ago. After much time and effort spent, even with visiting pastors having poured oil onto the land to anoint and make claim on it, yet nothing materialized. So was that God’s vision or man’s vision?

The 3rd example is the vision for a 3,000 seating sanctuary at our present DH site, with provisions to increase to 5,000 seating. Because of that vision, the church embarked on buying up many of the neighboring houses. Now, the church is trying to sell those houses to pay for CCC and in this time of economic downturn, it will likely be at a loss. So was that God’s vision or man’s vision?

With so much controversy concerning the CCC and with hind knowledge of SP’s misadventures with his visions, how then can the members be certain that CCC is indeed God’s vision. Because if it is not so, it will spell financial disaster for the church. Not only can the church lose the CCC land but the bank (if the church defaults in repayment) will also auction off the DH properties which are charged to the bank in respect of the CCC loan.

The current saga will not destroy Calvary Church but the CCC will, if it is not God’s will and God's vision.

[click picture to enlarge]

Resolutions To Be Tabled At AGM On 19 June

IMPORTANT NOTE!
We notice that readers are referring to the Resolutions listed by us here as resolution No. 4 or 10 and so on. Please remember that the numbering has been assigned by us here for easy reading and may be totally different on AGM day in terms of sequence. For example, the resolution No.10 on review of membership may be the 2nd (or 4th or 7th etc) resolution to be tabled by the BOD at the AGM. Therefore, please pay close attention to the resolution being tabled during the AGM and vote wisely. Do not expect the Resolutions to be numbered as listed here in CT.

********************************************************

Finally the BOD has decided to table all the Resolutions submitted by members. Below are the summary of 7 resolutions proposed by some concerned members, 3 resolutions by other members and 1 resolution by the Board of Deacons which will be tabled at the coming AGM on 19 June 2009.

1. PROPOSED RESOLUTION ON VOTING PROCESS OF THE AGM

Whereas, it is paramount that members be able to make decisions at this AGM without fear or favour;

Whereas, any allegation of improper voting processes may undermine the results of this AGM and should thus be avoided;

Therefore, RESOLVED,
that all resolutions of this AGM be voted on by secret ballot.

Rationale for this resolution:
Members at the AGM must be given the full right to exercise their votes without fear or favour. Making members stand up to vote exposes members to unfair and unjustifiable scrutiny. Moreover the leadership must have the opportunity to know the true feeling and decision of the congregation. This can only be achieved through voting by secret ballot.


2. PROPOSED RESOLUTION ON CHAIRMANSHIP OF THE AGM

Whereas, Rule IX(3) of the Church Constitution states as follows:
The Senior Pastor shall be the Chairman at all General Meetings. If at any such meeting the Senior Pastor is not able to be present, the Secretary of the Board of Deacons shall act as the Chairman of the Meeting.
In the case where the Senior Pastor is unwilling or where he deems it not conducive or inappropriate to perform his duty as Chairman, he may appoint a representative to act in his place. The representative must hold credentials with the Assemblies of God. If the Senior Pastor does not appoint a representative then the Executive Council of the Assemblies of God of Malaysia shall, upon the invitation of the Secretary of the Board of Deacons, appoint one of its Executive members to preside at such General Meeting.

Whereas, any allegations of conflict of interests during the AGM may arise from Senior Pastor chairing the AGM, thus undermining the proceedings and which must therefore be avoided;

Therefore, RESOLVED,
that one of the Associate Pastors of the Church be appointed for the purposes of chairing this AGM.

Rationale for this resolution:
Senior Pastor is no longer able to chair the AGM with impartiality and independence. He has vested interest in each and every decision to be made at the AGM. As such the AGM must be chaired by another person who holds credential with the AOG.


3. INTERVENTION OF AOG GENERAL COUNCIL

Whereas the Church is in a state of disunity and the continuing division for more than a year has rendered the Church unable to function as the Lord intends.

IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED THAT:
1) pursuant to Rule XIII (2) of the Church Constitution, the General Council of the Assemblies of God of Malaysia be requested to appoint a caretaker committee composed of such Voting members of the Church and representatives from the General council as it deems fit. The caretaker committee shall be charged with the responsibility of managing the Church and its activities until the Church is deemed capable of managing its own affairs, and

2) pursuant to Rule XIII (1) of the Church Constitution, the Church Secretary shall minute and convey this decision to the General Council of the Assemblies of God of Malaysia forthwith.

Rationale for the resolution:
The conflict and division has gone on long enough. The pain and the hurt keep intensifying. Calvary Church needs healing and reconciliation and we need it now. The problems are unlikely to be resolved with the present leadership and the existing division.

Over the one year the division has gone deeper and wider. Instead of healing and reconciliation, each general meeting of members aggravated the situation even further, e.g. the EGM on 4th April 2009. If we allow the problems to persist unresolved, the situation will grow increasingly worse. We need outside intervention; someone with the necessary spiritual authority and seen to be adequately independent by both sides of the divide and with the necessary skills and expertise to help us resolve our problems. We need the General Council to step in immediately.

Our constitution provides for it. The intervention of the General Council would stop the escalating tension and division in the Church and would provide the opportunity for healing and reconciliation under an independent party. The General Council has the spiritual authority.


4. RATIFICATION OF SENIOR PASTOR’S REAPPPOINTMENT

Whereas Rule XI(1)(a) of the Constitution states, “The Senior Pastor shall be appointed by the Board of Deacons. The appointment shall be ratified by a two-thirds majority vote of the Voting members present at a General Meeting properly convened for that purpose. The appointment shall only be subject to a re-election at the request of the Board of Deacons or not less than two-thirds of the Voting members.”

Whereas it is the intention and spirit of Rule XI(1)(a) that the Senior Pastor enjoys wide support and acceptability by the members of the Church.

Whereas Section 2 of the Calvary Church Staff Handbook states that all the staff of the Church are classified into 3 categories, namely, Pastoral and Ministerial Staff, Office Staff and General/Technical Staff. The position of Senior Pastor falls within the category of “Pastoral and Ministerial Staff”, as it is also stated that “Senior Pastor heads the pastoral team (pastoral and ministerial team) comprising staff categories such as Senior Associate Pastors, Associate Pastors, Assistant Pastors and Ministerial Staff.”

Whereas Section 11 (1) of the Calvary Church Staff Handbook states that the Retirement Age of all Church Staff, with the exception of Pastors, will be 55 years of age. Section 11 (2) further states that the Retirement Age for Pastors will be 60 years of age.

Whereas Rev Prince Guneratnam had retired upon reaching the age of 60 years and had been reappointed by the Board of Deacons as Senior Pastor for an extended period. Such reappointment pursuant to Rule XI(1)(a) of the Constitution would be subject to ratification by not less than two-thirds of the Voting members present at a General Meeting.

Resolution
“It is hereby resolved that the reappointment of Rev Prince Guneratnam, upon his retirement, as Senior Pastor of Calvary Church, Kuala Lumpur, by the Board of Deacons be ratified by two-thirds of the voting members present at this AGM pursuant to Rule XI(1)(a) of the Constitution.”

Rationale for this resolution:
It is of utmost importance that the senior pastor enjoys the full support of the congregation. Therefore his reappointment must be put to the vote. An endorsement by at least two-thirds of the voting membership would indicate that he still enjoys the support he needs to continue as senior pastor. Failure to garner two-thirds of the votes would indicate the loss of confidence in the senior pastor.

CT Comments
This is the most controversial resolution. If less than two-thirds of the members vote in favour of this resolution, then SP has to leave. Do not be surprised if the pastors and deacons start warning members not to touch God’s anointed and quote scriptures, taken out of context, to frighten members. Remember that ALL Born Again, Bible-believing Christians are also anointed by God. The deacons had ‘shed first blood’ by terminating Dr Lum, a member/deacon anointed by God and this disqualifies them from preaching this.

There are many perspectives to this concept of “Touch Not God’s anointed”. Click on links in blue to read.

a) The NECF article “Touch Not the Lord’s Anointed!” at http://www.necf.org.my/newsmaster.cfm?&menuid=2&action=view&retrieveid=1044,

b) “Touch not my anointed” at http://www.letusreason.org/Pent47.htm,

c) “How to fire your Pastor” at http://www.founders.org/journal/fj51/editorial.html,

d) “The Untouchables: Are God's Anointed Beyond Criticism?” at http://www.equip.org/articles/the-untouchables-are-god-s-anointed-beyond-criticism-,

e) “Touch not the Lord’s Anointed?” at http://www.christian-parents.net/Church/YC102_Touch_Not_Annointed.htm.

If SP is confident in his spirit that he is still God’s anointed to lead Calvary, then he should be able to sleep easy in the next 2 weeks. If he and the pastors and deacons are not able to rest in the Lord, then they ought to examine themselves because nothing the members do can thwart the will of God.


5. CONSTITUTION REVIEW COMMITTEE

Whereas a Constitution Review Committee had been established by the Board of Deacons to review the existing constitution, its composition is deemed to be unrepresentative and not adequately independent; plus its scope is limited.

Whereas the existing Church Constitution, incorporating Rules, By-Laws and Tenets of Faith amended in 1985 is no longer adequate for the present-day running of the Church and had to be updated and expanded, that there is a need for a new independent Constitution Review Committee to be established.

Therefore: RESOLVED
that the present Constitution Review Committee to be dismissed and a new Constitution Review Committee to be established to review the existing Church Constitution and to make recommendations to the members at General Meeting for amendments, additions and deletions to the Constitution for the improvements of Church organization structure, church governance, accountability and transparency, operational efficiencies and to safeguard the assets of the Church.

The Committee shall report its proposals and recommendations to the members at a General Meeting within 91 days from this AGM.

The Committee shall comprise 7 members nominated and elected at this AGM from among the members of the Church. The 7 members shall not include deacons, pastors and staff of the Church. A member of the Committee shall be elected from among themselves by a simple majority vote to be the Chairman of the Committee and he shall have a casting vote in the event of equality of votes. The Committee shall determine its own terms of reference, time-table and work reporting procedures and processes.

Notwithstanding the provisions of the existing Constitution granting the Senior Pastor the right to be an ex-officio member of all committees in the Church, the Senior Pastor shall not be a member of this committee.

Rationale for this resolution:
After almost 9 months there is no evidence of the effectiveness of the Board appointed committee. The committee must have the skills and competency and the independence to do a fair and balanced job. They must not be seen to be protecting the status quo. To go forward the constitution must be reviewed and amended such that the work and ministries of the Church can proceed efficiently and effectively whilst giving substance to the fact that we are a congregational church. The constitution must have adequate checks and balances to provide for good church governance. The separation of powers and improvements in the system of internal control would help protect the leadership from unwise decisions and practices. As such a new committee must be elected by the AGM.


6. TRUTH COMMITTEE

Whereas many questions had been raised about the finance and accounts of the Church and its components arising from inadequate accountability and transparency, there is a need for a Truth Committee to be established.

RESOLVED:
“Resolved that a Truth Committee be established by this Annual General Meeting to review the financial statements, accounts and accounting records including but not limited to minutes, vouchers, band statements, documents of ownership, correspondence and reports of the Church, its Missions Department, the extended ministries, auxiliary ministries, outreaches and all other components related to, principally financed by, or controlled or managed by Calvary Church or its personnel including Calvary International Ministry and Care Relief and Development Agency (CARED).

In carrying out its work, the Committee shall have the full power of the Board of Deacons as conferred by the Church Constitution including the power to appoint outside professionals to assist in its work.

The Committee shall report its findings and recommendations to the members at a General Meeting within 91 days from this AGM.

The Committee shall comprise 7 members nominated and elected at this AGM from among the members of the Church. The 7 members shall not include deacons, pastors and staff of the Church. A member of the Committee shall be elected from among themselves by a simple majority vote to be the Chairman of the Committee and he/she shall have a casting vote in the event of equality of votes. The Committee shall determine its own terms of reference, time-table and work and reporting procedures and processes.

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Church Constitution granting the Senior Pastor the right to be an ex-officio member of all committees in the Church, the Senior Pastor shall not be a member of this committee.”

Rationale for this resolution:
All these months the Board had managed the information flow to the members; starting with the so-called reports from the forensic accountant and the criminal lawyer. Even the report from the church auditors on the special audit was controlled by the Board. We need an independent committee to look into all the alleged irregularities and come out with a complete and independent report to the members.


7. REMOVAL OF DR LUM FROM CHURCH MEMBERSHIP TO BE DECLARED NULL AND VOID

Whereas Rule VIII(1) of the Church Constitution states, “The Right to discipline Church members shall vest in the Board of Deacons (BOD). The names of those who walk disorderly and depart from the stated Tenets of Faith and are unrepentant of unscriptural conduct such as sexual immorality and fraud, etc. shall be removed from the Church Membership Roll, by a two-thirds majority vote of the Board of Deacons with the counsel of the Church Elders.”

Whereas, the BOD has BREACHED and FAILED to comply to the said Rule VIII, Item 1.:-
I) The rule consist of three elements to be satisfied conjunctively in order for a member to be validly removed vis-à-vis
i) walk disorderly; and
ii) depart from the stated Tenets of Faith and
iii) unrepentant of unscriptural conduct

II) The rule also requires the decision of the BOD to be made together WITH the counsel of the Church Elders.

Whereas, the BOD has BREACHED and FAILED to comply with the Rules of Natural Justice in removing Dr Lum from membership.

Whereas, members are concerned that the BOD appears to sanction the use of their non-compliance of the Rules; and unreasonable interpretation of the Rules and questionable methods in the removal of its members.

IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED THAT:
i) the decision made by the Board of Deacons on 19th March 2009 in removing Dr.Lum Siew Heng’s name from the Church Membership Roll to be declared NULL and VOID; and
ii) the Church Constitution to be amended to include detailed provisions on disciplinary committee, functions and procedures.

Rationale for this resolution:
The process leading to the removal of Dr Lum from church membership was against the rules of natural justice primarily because the Panel of Inquiry was not independent or impartial. He was not allowed proper representation and the findings of the Panel were not proper as the Board of Deacons had earlier already indicated that they had decided to remove him from membership, even way before the Panel was formed. Therefore the decision of the Board must be declared to be null and void by the members at the AGM.


8. RESOLUTION IN RESPECT OF FOUR INTERNET BLOGS
(submitted by other members, no rationale provided)

Whereas, there have been articles and comments written on the various blogs which are disrespectful of our leaders, pastors, members and worshippers and/or causes divisions amongst our members.

Whereas, we feel that the continued publication of our church matters on the public domain is totally unacceptable.

We, the members therefore RESOLVE:
(a) That the following blogs, CALVARY TODAY, BERITA CALVARY,CALVARY KINI and CALVARY UNITY be closed within 3 days from 19th June 2009 i.e. by 22 June 2009.

b) That failure to close the said blogs by 22 June 2009 be deemed as contravening the wishes of the Church members and leadership of our elected leaders and that the Board of Deacons do investigate and take firm disciplinary actions against person(s) connected in anyway whatsoever to the blog that remains open.

c) That any member found disseminating slanderous and untrue information about the church through public domain be subject to disciplinary action from the Board of Deacons.


9. ANOTHER RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO THE FOUR BLOGS
(submitted by other members, no rational provided)

Whereas, the existence of these blogs are unacceptable.

Whereas, it is also acknowledge that there is a need for members to have a platform to discuss, debate and deliberate various issues within a private environment that will not impede the propagation of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Whereas, it is essential that deacons open an appropriate channel for such discussions by setting up an official private blog for Calvary Church members or enabling comments within http://www.calvary.org.my/ or something similar.

We, the members therefore RESOLVE:
I) That the following blogs, CALVARY TODAY, BERITA CALVARY, CALVARY KINI and CALVARY UNITY be closed within 5 days of this General Meeting, held on 19th June 2009

II) That the process of the closure be as follows:
To cease posting new articles immediately after this General Meeting
To disable comments in the blogs immediately after this General Meeting
To delete the blog in its entirety by 24 June 2009

III) That except as resolved above, no new blogs that discuss or invite discussion on matters that pertains to Calvary Church be set up in the public domain.

IV) That the Board of Deacons immediately creates a platform for real-time discussion of church matter within a member-only environment.

CT Comments
The 4 blogs do not belong to Calvary Church and therefore, technically, the members are NOT in a position to vote on the above 2 similar resolutions. Conducting a vote on this matter is similar to asking the members to vote to shut down the New Straits Times or the Star.

It is strange that the proposers included Berita Calvary in this resolution. Berita Calvary does not discuss our church issues, it only publishes inspirational articles and testimonies meant to edify the body of Christ. Why would they want to close a blog that builds faith in God and propagates the gospel?

The proposal that the Board of Deacons establish a blog or discussion forum for members to voice their comments is good provided that we have a Board which is independent, mature, open to criticisms and willing to listen to the members, otherwise it will be a failure. These 2 resolutions are also barking at the wrong tree. The blogs exist because of the unresolved saga in Calvary Church. Once the church issues are resolved, the blogs will die a natural death.


10. RESOLUTION ON REVIEW OF MEMBERSHIP ROLLS
(submitted by other members, no rationale provided)

Whereas, it is known that there are many Voting Members who have openly declared that they will not contribute or are currently not contributing to Calvary Church by:-

a. Not attending Sunday Services, Friday Night Prayer meetings and Life Groups; and /or
b. Not giving Tithes, Faith Promises or Offerings; and/or
c. Actively involved in ministry

However, these persons still retain full privileges as Voting Members

We hereby RESOLVE;
That the Board of Deacons do re-examine the membership roll and review the status of those Voting Members who are not contributing to the church.

CT Comments
This resolution, if approved, will result in easily more than 80% of the church members getting sacked. Most of the members attend 1 or 2 out of the 3 meetings mentioned and this will disqualify them to be members based on the above criteria which requires members to attend all 3 meetings.

On financial giving, many members pay tithes and faith promise pledges without stating their names on the envelopes and nobody puts in their offerings with their names written on the ringgit notes. It is therefore, impossible for the deacons to determine who gives and who does not. This criteria will disqualify the poor members, the housewives who have no income, students, maids and poor foreign workers. Is this what our church wants – kick out the poor and minister only to the rich?

Money should never be the yardstick for church membership for any true Christian church.. We cannot imagine any Calvarite supporting a ‘worldly materialistic’ resolution like this. It is shocking that someone would even propose a resolution like this.

On ministry involvement, there is no clear definition of what is meant by “involvement”. In Calvary, members are handpicked for the main ministries. No member can walk up to the pastors and volunteer to serve communion, for example. This criteria is too ambiguous and difficult for any Board of Deacons to establish.


11. Proposed amendment to Church Constitution RULE XII: FINANCIAL PROVISIONS, Item 3a, 3b and 3c. (submitted by Board of Deacons)

It is hereby resolved that RULE XII: FINANCIAL PROVISIONS, Item 3a, 3b and 3c be amended by deleting Items 3a, 3b and 3c and substituting the same with the following:-

a. External Auditors shall be nominated by the Board of Deacons and shall be elected at a General Meeting by a simple majority vote.

b. The Board of Deacons is authorized to fix their remuneration.

c. The External Auditors shall be approved audit firms pursuant to the Companies Act 1965. The assignment partner of the firm shall not be a member of Calvary Church.

d. The External Auditors shall not hold office for more than five consecutive years unless otherwise approved at the Annual General Meeting.e. The External Auditors shall be required to audit the annual accounts of
(i) The Church
(ii) Missions Department
(iii) Individual Extended Ministries
(iv) Any other ministries as determined by the Board of Deacons and issue their report to be received at the Annual General Meeting.

f. The External Auditors may also be required by the Board of deacons to audit the accounts of the Church for any period within their tenure of office at any date, and to make a report to the Board of Deacons.

CT Comments
This resolution seeks to amend the above section in the Constitution to allow the appointment of external auditors to audit our Church accounts.
This resolution is a revised version of the resolution which was tabled at the recent EGM that was rejected by members. This new revised version is more or less, in line with the changes proposed by the TTG group. We are of the opinion that it should be supported by members.

A Member’s Perspective of the Small Group Meetings

Below is a personal thought by Liza which is adapted and revised from a letter she wrote to Pastor Steven on 4 June 2009 in response to his invitation to attend the small group meetings.

On Wednesday 27 MAY 2009 morning, I received a call from Pas Steven and the following is the gist of it:

“ hi, liza, this is Pastor Steven, I supposed you know about the church having small groups meeting to explain the situation happening in the church… to clarify allegations…and allow members to ask questions and to know any concerns they may have…
DO YOU WANT TO ATTEND? ”

The telephone call wasn’t a surprise—it had been speculated for few weeks amongst those who have attended because many had asked the “Presenters” at the different sessions, if the CC ‘leadership’/BOD would invite the “branded” TTG members--i.e. ANY concerned members who have been identified to be supporting the Truth, Transparency & Good Governance Cause.

DO I?
I said, I’d think about it.

So, this question has been on my mind since. I thought deeply and, carefully pondered over the entire events leading to this most unusual “meeting”. Then, I found myself asking the following questions, probably like many who are close to this saga would have asked too:

1. Why would the PG & BOD & Assoc Pastors go to this length to break-up members,--(who are carefully selected and sieved to be in the ‘right-mix’ of mind set for each session) and then confined them in small groups, to explain?

How can it be beneficial when every session (between 50-80 sessions?) differs because the different Presenters/facilitators said different things and respond with their personal and subjective answers to every question asked, every concern raised, every doubt expressed from the floor?

How can truth be established by the mere showing of some ‘selected’ documents and photographs of a cleaned-up storeroom , taken after Adeline Koh has moved out, and the presentation of a bias crafted script by specially selected members, some of whom are too new to know the roots of the church and the issues that have its origin decades ago?

Besides, for every reason /justification cited, they open-up more areas for TTG to disprove otherwise. Every seemingly clever move the BOD has made, only served to deepen and worsen and the crisis and exposed their bad faith.

2. This method employed is a complete departure of what the BOD has assured they would do in The Way Forward. (Since they didn’t say “promised”, so no one can hold them to it, I supposed, but where is the SINCERITY? )

Honestly, does this latest ‘Move’ show genuine intent to resolve the Crisis? Or Are they all out to discredit the TTG CAUSE, although the events and the discoveries unfolded to-date revealed beyond any shadow of doubt, truth, transparency & good governance have been lacking and ignored by those vested with power and authority in the Stewardship of CC?

I) IS THERE ANYTHING ENLIGHTHENING in Part 1, 2 & 3?

I got to read ( from CT) the Scripted response for Part1,2 &3 which is attributed as: “Address from “CC’s Perspectives” -- This is NO ownership at all! I’m sure it is so worded not without carefully deliberation among PG /BOD & Assoc Pas, for obvious reasons:

i) those were just “perspectives” hence not Absolute Truth…they were not even ‘Answers’! So, this would leave room for interpretation to defend their ‘perspectives’ when the TRUTH confronts them, as it surely will.

ii) Using “CC’s perspectives” they hid under the cover of Calvary Church. NO ONE among them, not even PG himself as the SP & Chairman of BOD have the courage to take responsibility & accountability for every word, decision and action stated in Part 1,2 & 3.

So, is there credibility to the “perspectives” and those behind it?

The CC perspectives were nothing more than justification and rationale. For all intents and purposes, they DO NOT tackle the REAL serious issues confronting the entire leadership (PG, BOD /Assoc pas) and its administration at large.

Rather, it seems, its true objective is to counter genuine concerns of abuses and improprieties discovered by concerned members of TTG, perhaps hoping the simplistic and shallow retort would sway unsuspecting layman’s mind. Their explanations parroted by facilitators appointed by them, who have NO full grasp of all the issues of the CRISIS and its dire consequences in its present state, is most disturbing.

While it cannot be discounted some may be convinced by what were presented, the fact remains that all those responses in Part 1,2 &3 showed one thing:
The actions and decisions of PG & BOD in question were done in bad faith and intent. Just one of the many examples came to mind to substantiate this, is the claim of “ministering” to 10,200 people (!) It’s obvious the word ‘ministering’ was carefully chosen with an intent to give a false impression of its actual congregation size. (the made-up breakdown given, is most embarrassing to say the least). Another example is the CARE belonging to Missions and then the setting-up of CARED under CIM!

These examples, precisely underscore the fact that PG , BOD, Assoc Pas consistently choose to twist and turn , misrepresent and mislead the Congregation on a host of matters, even when the truth stares in their faces.


II) PG and BOD’s RHETORIC —WHAT ELSE IS NEW?

1. I have raised questions at AGM and also written letter after letter on the key issues confronting CC over the past 6 years, yet, typically what I got was an acknowledgement of receipt, ‘concerns noted’ and a courteous meeting which eventually amounted to nothing. (And I hasten to add, I am not alone, as many has even gone before me, including former deacons)

2. I have also gone to see a Deacon 07/08 on numerous occasions expressing my concerns over disturbing practices by associates with matters of criminality, wrongful action, improper conduct or abuses of power of PG & BOD, but was met with an indifferent attitude, closed mind and defensive stance, which left me disheartened--but fortunately, more determined to press on as God enabled me.

3. On 31 May 2008, (over a year!) The delegation comprising of myself, KC Lim, Lim Siew Chyuan and LF Teng, met formally with the Board of Deacons to discuss the following:

· Review of the Church Constitution
· Matters pertaining to Church accounts
· Transparency issues and governance
· Calvary Land – Current status and future plans
· Calvary Convention Centre
· Calvary International Ministry
· Senior Pastor’s Leadership Issues and Concerns

All present, including Rev. Peter Ong, were each given a hard copy of these 7 issues, compiled as a Memorandum with many proposals and solutions. The BOD had assured the delegation of follow-up dialogue and action, but these were all spoken in vain. Instead, they went on to undermine and discredit our sincere efforts, culminating to the present crisis.

Not only there was no Godly fear to correct what have gone wrong by doing the JUST thing, they also did not heed the outcry of concerned members’ demand for accountability and responsibility.

MORE UNANSWERED QUESTIONS

Only PG/ BOD and Assoc.Pastors. themselves know WHY they not only REFUSED to come to terms with the reality of the crisis, but instead go to great length to use legal, the Pulpit, and divisive means to ‘quash’ TRUTH which can never be buried, or shut the LIGHT which can never be extinguished.

The MAN HOURS for this small meeting campaign alone [approx total of members, associate members & entire CC Staff: 1,800 x 4 hours (average per session)= 7,200 Hours! as well as all the preparation and meetings of ‘leaders’ for CIM’S defense, EGM, Workshops and over 14 months of politicking etc, etc, have robbed resources of time, money and effort which could have been directed for proper and meaningful use in the Harvest field.

So, would I want to attend? NO. Thank you.

I shall, however, be at the AGM, the right forum for Q & A, where, hopefully, every member will be allowed to speak openly, and for PG/BOD/Assoc. Pastors to address all and sundries as a congregation.

Foot Note: For a 48 year old church , with a congregation of approx 3,000, and 1,738 actual Membership, it’s high time (long, long overdue) for our high salaried SP and Assoc. Pastors to take a HARD look at themselves and ask honestly if indeed their ministry is of KINGDOM’S SUBSTANCE or merely worldly GLOSS & GLITZ?

STOP IT!!!

That was the strong 2-word warning from Rev Dikran Salbashian in his sermon yesterday at Calvary Church’s Sunday morning services.

Preaching from 1 Corinthians 3, where Apostle Paul taught on the subject of divisions in the Church, Rev Dikran warned against rumour-mongering, gossiping and quarrelling in the Church. He lashed out at gatherings and meetings where the prayers said and agenda were nothing more than gossip in disguise.

This is indeed a timely and apt message to our Pastors and Deacons who have been feverishly conducting countless small group meetings for invited church members in the last few weeks (and more in the next 2 weeks) which have caused much confusion, strife and division in our already embattled and hurting church. These meetings have resulted in even more gossip circulating around.

The meetings have also caused problems among some husbands and wives who were invited to attend the meetings separately at different times, for reasons best known to our Pastors and Deacons. Some interpreted it to be an attempt by the church to ‘divide and conquer’ the minds and opinions of the members even between husbands and wives.

Adding to the confusion, in one of the meetings, a lay leader (nominated for deaconship), a Deacon and a Pastor gave 3 different answers to 1 question by a member. So not only are the members confused, our leaders themselves are equally confused if not more confused than the members.

These meetings were designed with a single agenda which is to explain our Pastors and Deacons’ side of the story to the many ethical, moral and legal issues raised by our ex-deacon, Dr Lum in his private resignation letter to Senior Pastor. Most of these issues which were actually disclosures of weak governance, poor stewardship, wrong-doings, misuse of funds and abuses of position and power in our Church, were also subsequently highlighted in Dr Lum’s interview on CalvaryToday (http://calvarytoday.blogspot.com/).

These small group meetings by our Pastors and Deacons are the only meetings currently being organized and held in our church for the members. The TTG group, on the other hand, has not held any meeting for the members since the last one on 26 July 2008, almost a year ago. Obviously, Rev Dikran’s message must be directed (under the direction of the Holy Spirit) to our Pastors and Deacons.

As far as the TTG group is concerned, both sides of the story to the issues raised by Dr Lum have already been made known to the members. Our Pastors and Deacons already had the opportunity to present the findings of the Auditors on some of the issues at the recent EGM on 4 April 2009. Dr Lum has already been unfairly and arbitrarily sacked as a member of the Church after refusing to subject himself to a Kangaroo Court set up by the Deacons. He no longer has any more avenue to speak. There is no need to further “bury” him. There is, therefore, no need to hold these small group meetings to explain the same issues.

Although Dr Lum was denied the opportunity to defend himself at the recent EGM, the TTG group has already concluded that it is best to leave the issues to rest as continued fighting over these issues will not benefit anyone but only serve to create more strife and division among the members.

And although the TTG group has submitted a resolution to be tabled at the coming AGM for the reinstatement of Dr Lum’s membership because it is the right thing to do, they will not be distracted from the actual issues which can destroy our Church.

The issues facing our Church are the lack of transparency and truth, poor governance and bad stewardship. Dr Lum’s issues have highlighted and emphasized the need for greater transparency, truth, better governance and good stewardship. These ARE the Real Issues! These issues are what the whole Church should focus on. Bro Hong Meng had earlier written an article highlighting some of the real issues that should be addressed by the Church Leadership but sadly, in all their actions and meetings so far, they have avoided addressing the real issues of Truth, Transparency and Godly Governance in Calvary Church. (Read Bro HM's article entitled "What is it all about?" at http://calvarytoday.blogspot.com/2009/04/what-is-it-all-about.html).

So, dear Pastors and Deacons, please STOP IT now!