The Provincial Advisory
Committee (PAC) had its first meeting on 23 May 2012 and the Court of Appeal
granted the Appeal to the Complainant on 23 May 2014 that Ecclesiastical court
(E Court) is to be convened by the HOB and a copy of the recommendation by the
PAC to be released to the complainants. More
fairness has been brought into light. Exactly 2 years and what a coincidence on
the dates and surely God had affirmed the voice of the righteous is not to be
ignored and He is ALIVE giving HOPE to those who have been praying unceasingly.
What happened to the 3
bishops referred to as the House of Bishops “HOB” between year 2012 and now?
Had they been bought over by the generous love gifts of RM50,000 cash from the
Diocese of Sabah initiated by BAV? If their thinking were rational enough, that
amount of RM50,000 was only a small crumbs of BAV spent for his holidays to United
States, England with his wife and also the luxury cars Toyota Alphard, Honda CRV
he bought using the DOS’ money and not to mention the millions that went to
Thailand through Philip Lo’s personal account.
Yet, the Diocesan Treasurer Michael Tong had the face to lie through his
teeth to allow his relative Herbert Tong to declare in the thanksgiving service that the accounts of the Diocese
of Sabah were in order. How can we trust
him? He could not even tell the members how many signatories to the bank
accounts of the DOS when asked in the dialogue. If so he declared the accounts
in good order, why were the accounts since 2006 not being re-audited as
requested by the members? How to
convince the members there is no mishandling of money if everything else was
swept under the carpet with a convenient sweeping statement?
We have been reminded
constantly by BAV in his preaching about Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:3-4.
Why? BAV must have been bearing with the guilt from God on the messages but due
to greed for worldly processions and power it has been too difficult for him to
refuse and get on to the disobedience with God.
Time has come that the Lord
says it is Him who shall reign and rule the Church because the Church belongs
to the Lord. The church is not meant for those who want to abuse, corrupt and
being malicious. We hope the HOB will
fear God than man.
All these while HOB had
defended themselves desperately even to the extent of losing their status as a
non-legal entity in the earlier High Court session. All these were just to deny
their duty to convene E Court to put the Church of Jesus Christ back into the
right biblical perspective. Why were
they so foolish? Had the appellant and the church not bothered to appeal to put
right the status of the Diocese formed in the Province and the rightful duties of
the HOB under the constitution, the Provincial Diocese that has been built over
the past many years by the previous faithful bishops and clergies would have
been down to the history to carry its defunct duty as a non-legal entity. The
short term convenience for the current HOB was too great of the impact to its
long term effect of defunct status.
We hope the HOB will be more
serious in their biblical stand as the Head of the Diocese in the province. It would
be very foolish of them to appeal to the Federal Court to reinstate their non-legal
entity status of which they compromised and messed themselves up for the sake
of one sick man, the devil of all evils.
The whole world is watching how they handle and charge their spiritual
duties over this devil whom has been the complaint of many members with the
abuse of power, greed for money for personal gain, slander to those who serve
God faithfully, wicked to those who walk righteously and you can name all the unbiblical
acts.
When BAV was struck with cancer, was it not God has
spoken it is time for the Church to have a new leader? Leaders, awake and stop
sinning! God had spoken many times and to many different people Ezekiel 34 but
none has feared God. The HOB has been
too gentle and kind to the extent that God’s standard has been compromised. Why
had they allow BAV to rule and divide further when God has already spoken to us
so clearly a new Shepherd is to be appointed to lead the church?
“Ezekiel 34 :7 “Therefore, you shepherds,
hear the word of the Lord: 8 As
surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, because my
flock lacks a shepherd and so has been plundered and has become food for all
the wild animals, and because my shepherds did not search for my flock but
cared for themselves rather than for my flock, 9 therefore,
you shepherds, hear the word of the Lord: 10 This is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am against the shepherds and will hold them accountable for
my flock. I will remove them from tending the flock so that the shepherds can
no longer feed themselves. I will rescue my flock from their mouths, and it
will no longer be food for them.”
Many may have said, BAV
already struck with cancer, why are we not sparing him? Had he not become more vicious than ever after
he was struck with illness? People in general had been kind hearted towards him
despite he had gotten the best perceived treatment from Singapore all under the
expenses of the DOS yet not to the knowledge of many these could be sought after
from the local hospital as confirmed by a local oncologist. What more can we expect of BAV? Despite his illness, BAV had demoted certain
priests and demanded publicly certain pastors to resign. Who has called these clergies to ministries? Was
it BAV or God?
Do we still want this kind of
sick man to lead our Diocese? Rather, this sick man had disqualified himself physically
and spiritually as the leader of the Diocese.
Why is the HOB having so much difficulty to charge their responsibility over
him? Need not to be trial in the E court
he is already physically unfit to work as a person under the constitution. The whole Diocese has been divided because of
one selfish sick man. In order to avoid
further embarrassment, HOB should ask BAV to resign gracefully, surrender
himself unto God in total repentance, realign his spiritual intimacy again with
God and render apologies to all mankind he has ever offended, abused, slandered
and cursed. Only God will have the final
say if he is granted a second chance again.
From the beginning, the HOB should not even had tired to defend themselves using their non legal entity status then put up all the lies to say they are under the archbishop of Cantebury. We all know that was not factually correct. How their counsel managed to twist thru the facts? Whatever it is praise the Lord, God has redeemed us!
ReplyDeleteWe have gotten the PAC report as a public document from the High Court. The whole world judged the case. The real truth had been unfolded. The church has to go thru the refiner's fire.
If Dean Chak is smart enough, he should be as neutral as possible as he is a damn good actor all these while. If he still wants to play that kind of dirty politics in ASC all is to please his boss AV, Chak is basically not very smart then.
ReplyDeleteThe days are numbered as we can see the signs God is having the final say......
Beware as the war with satan and satanic agent goes on....
ReplyDeleteDo we know what is happening now as the appeal to the Federal Court is soon time barred?
E-Court? Bolly goes to jail? AVCF sets up his own province in Sabah without sanction from Archbishop of Canterbury if AVCF is not forced to resign? What is Archbishop of Canterbury doing? Anglican Province in SEA is a history now? The message of God is ending soon to bring Glory to himself in ADOS. Joshua 6013-8394513
On the 23rd of May, 2014, the Court of Appeal had ruled against the House of Bishops and demanded that the Ecclesiastical Court must be convened within 90 days to investigate Bishop Albert Vun for all the allegations that have been made against him.
ReplyDeleteChurch members are busy making their predictions about his future. A majority of them have optimistically prejudged the outcome of the investigation, that is, his position as the Bishop of the Anglican Diocese of Sabah would be defrocked.
A minority of them, however, have viewed the case in different ways. They opine that the House of Bishops, in order to absolve themselves of the responsibilities for setting up the E Court, had unabashedly declared themselves not a legal entity. Obviously, they have a shared interest in safeguarding their position and there is no reason that church members can trust any of those shameless bishops to give a just ruling.
Labelled as a miscreant, he is adept at lying and perplexing over the truth. Some members have expressed their concern that he will exert in his performance as a persecuted victim, aiming to sway the ignorant Chinese and BM congregation into believing that he is irresponsibly accused by a small number of trouble makers. If his motive is left unchecked, it may tend to polarize and paralyze the Diocese.
The PAC Report has proved beyond doubt that his conduct and unusual style of management is contrary to the established law and practice of the Diocese. However, instead of becoming more self-driven to abide by the law and to judge his own weaknesses, he chose to go further down the course of confrontation. There is a growing concern that his two assistants, with a view to jockeying for his favor, may provoke the BM members into violent action to sabotage the E Court. The setting up of an open E Court will definitely become a highly emotive issue.
It is an arduous task to restore law and order to the Diocese of Sabah. He is advised not to box himself into a dead-end alley; tendering his resignation is the only wise choice for him.
The Province has been contaminated by a group of casuists. It is too early at the moment to judge how the matter of the E. Court will develop hereafter.
This is happening at Kuching now..... HOB asked AV to meet with them. One of the matters discussed was to respond to the court of appeal decision..... AV was the mastermind in the defense all these while and if the HOB continues to listen to him.... they will be equal guilty. Only God can humble the proud and arrogant....
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
DeleteSo HOB is still so friendly to AVCF and how can HOB discipline AVCF. Still trying to play games in APSEA when it is so serious matter.
Are they all unfit to be servants of God and church leaders?
Both AV and Stephen Foo were in Kuching met up HOB at Kuching.
DeleteStephen Foo's advice to AV was why should AV resign. Quite sick to hear this statement coming from the DOS chancellor.
If HOB listen to these sort of ill advise, they will end up in the devil's den.
Hope this visit will be found in the Sunday bulletin or ADOS's magazine.
DeleteWhether APSEA listen to S Foo or not, all are fools and the destruction of APSEA is near. Lapok (???) sure in deep shit...
Is this what Anglicans near and far want to see the demise of APSEA because of one great sick sinner?
Let's do not speculate too much. Focus on what we need to do. Bind the strong hold. Pray and let God be God.
ReplyDeleteBAV thought he had won all these while by slamming people down but God has not forgotten the wickedness of man that destroyed His church. "The Spirit of Jezebel" as frequently quoted by BAV but unknowingly he was referring to himself. Who likes to rule and divide other than BAV? Despite he has been sick he still want to fight on. What is he up to?
That goes to show he has so much to sweep under the carpet.
Someone said, AV was very ill when he visited Kuching with Stephen Foo to meet the HOB. Did he pretend to be so ill that he could not even travel alone without a doctor to accompany?
ReplyDeleteThereafter, AV was so strong and mighty slamming people down at 45 anniversary of Christ Church Likas as most who attended that Sunday service had seen AV is in his normal being slamming people down.
A study of the Financial Report for the financial year ended 31 December 2013 has raised some questions about an item termed “waiver of liabilities” with a total amount of RM 69,120. 00.
ReplyDeleteChurch leaders, due to their refusal to be transparency in the financial matters, have compelled parishioners to develop a strong sense of duty. They are obliged to ferret out the truth about this “unusual item”, though, on the face of it, it did no harm to the Parish. Their doubts, categorized as Group A and B, are listed below.
Group A members:
1. What are the names of those creditors agreeing to write off our debts?
2. What are the reasons which caused them to do so?
3. What are the particulars of the expenditure?
4. For how long did the creditors exist in the ledgers?
Group B members:
They believe that the relevant entries were originally concocted to steal money from the church, just as what they did in CTK. Succumbed to the pressure from members and scared of being investigated, the errant leaders were forced to change their plan. “Waiver of liabilities” has thus become a tool to eradicate the evidence.
The Honorary Treasurer is under obligation to give a detailed explanation so as to clear the cloud of suspicion swirling around.
On last Sunday, our cancer-stricken Bishop surprisingly appeared in Christ Church and it was said the congregation there were deeply touched by his preaching.
ReplyDeleteInstead of talking about the “delicious food’ and the “fruit trees” as what he did in the past, this time he quoted two stories which seemed more relevant to the Bible teaching, that is “forgiveness”.
A brief description of his stories is given below:
1. About a priest and the attitude of congregation---
A priest was found having committed a very trivial mistake. Very much to his regret, he found himself not forgiven; instead, what faced him was a towering wave of criticism from the blog.
2. About the return of a prodigal son ( not the one mentioned in the Bible) ---
He stressed the difference between a Chinese and other races in the treatment of their prodigal son. A Chinese father will never accept a son for his misbehavior; however, other races do the contrary, they will always welcome their son no matter how serious the mistakes he had made.
Some questions from church members:
1. What did he imply?
2. Did he admit that he is wrong and ask for forgiveness from the congregation?
3. Can congregation use the Bible teaching to forgive him?
4. Does he genuinely grieve for his sin and ask God to remove it?
This greatest LIAR under the unrepentant Satanic proxy cannot be forgiven so simple as that as he has to pay back what he had taken together with his cronies worth tens of millions rgt and his same modus operandi has been the same since 1980s in Good Sam. Lapok is not a chinese. He is implying himself and APSEA but the only way to solve the shame and sham is for him to resign before the ADOS is destroyed also affecting APSEA.
DeleteThe ARK, built during Bishop Yong’s era, is a plan intended to take care of normal old folks and people with severe illness. All of them are required to pay a monthly fee of RM 1,300.00 per person. It is now under the management of our Dean’s Warden, the father of a “Muslim son”.
ReplyDeleteReliable sources revealed that he is using his influence to impose his “will” upon the non-Christian lodgers to pay an extra of RM100.00 a month unless they agree to convert to Christianity. The unjust use of power to deprive one’s right is not encouraged in our religion.
Administering to the needs of the old folks is his main duty; instead of applying force, he is advised to reflect Jesus’ love and touch them emotionally. Can he use pressure to convert his Muslim son to Christianity?
He needs to review his performance and contribution working as an administrator in the ARK. The imposition of an additional of RM 100 for non-Christian lodgers will undoubtedly place a huge financial burden on them.
He is working to conform to his master’s requirement; increasing the fee is his goal to gain favor. Engaging a man without Jesus’ love to manage the ARK is a great mistake to our Diocese.
ASC as the mother church 50 years earlier than the Diocese of Sabah is now eaten by AVCF as the rotten bishop.
ReplyDeleteASC is such rotten that it is a very sad precedent set that the accounts is still in the "boil" after the socalled illegal/ghost auditor had presented the socalled audited account as still far off from the true and fair. The predicament and the crisis can only be solved with the departure of AV & family, AV & cronies, AV and the stupd fools so that Anglican Sabah can be restored to proper order. I wish some responsible persons like the ex-acting Dean and the present Dean can be jailed, but hopefully not penalised heavy financially for all the illegal activities. Imagine, if ASC is a ROS body, the account not ready to be approved would be struck out. So God is still very kind to us to go the long journey to bring Glory to God but not the easy way hence a lot of sacrifice is still needed from the members .
APSEA has submitted Notice to the Court for leave to appeal in the Federal Court.
ReplyDeleteShould not Rosalind file a case to strike out the Notice for leave of appeal as it is meaningless to declare oneself as Non Legal Entity and yet can apply for further hearing. There is no other ground to appeal.
Also it was a "misjudgement" by the High Court to declare APSEA as non legal entity when APSEA has a valid Constitution which gives it its legal entity like Malaysia is governed by the Federal Constitution.
I believe Ronney submitted Res Judicata regard my case when it was not heard at all. So it is perjury on the part of Ronney to have misled the Court.
now that BAV is "dead", what is happening with the Appeal to the Federal Court if leave to appeal was granted?
ReplyDeleteanyone got any information?