Tag Archives: roland poon

Love not rejoicing in wrongdoing but in the truth: Roland Poon ‘vindicated’

26 Monday Oct 2015

Posted by in C3 & Pringles Associations, CHC Scandal

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

, , , , ,

“[Love] does not rejoice at wrongdoing but rejoices with the truth…” 1 Corinthians 13:6

To understand Roland Poon’s involvement in the City Harvest scandal, we would encourage you to read old news articles about him here:

The Dawning Truth: Valid Claims Made By Mr Roland Poon In Old Articles

The Straits Times reports,

Former church member Roland Poon who alleged funds misuse ‘vindicated’, says daughter

SINGAPORE – The businessman who charged in 2003 that City Harvest Church (CHC) was paying for Ms Ho Yeow Sun’s music career is now vindicated, said his daughter.

Back then, businessman Roland Poon alleged that church funds were being misused to finance the music career of Ms Ho, the wife of CHC founder Kong Hee.

Mr Poon, 66, eventually retracted his statement and apologised, but his comments would set off a chain of events leading to the criminal charges, according to the prosecution.

On Wednesday, the six accused in the long-running CHC trial were found guilty of all charges.

Mr Poon’s daughter, Ms Sharon Poon, told The Straits Times after the verdict: “I feel happy for my father that he is now vindicated, and that after 10 years, we now know that what he did was right.”

She said Mr Poon had been concerned about the outcome of the case and was “waiting for this day to happen”, adding: “Now, he can sleep in peace.”

“He was brave enough to come out about it. Now, I hope that they can apologise to him, if they still have the heart,” she said.

Mr Poon declined to comment when contacted.

WHY IT MATTERS: The City Harvest Church case

http://static.movideo.com/flash/movideo_player.swf

During the trial, much of the spotlight was cast on the Crossover Project – a plan started in 2002 to evangelise to the “unchurched” and woo non-converts, in particular youth – through Ms Ho’s secular pop music.

The project started on a high, and Ms Ho later went on to produce five albums and perform in 80 concerts as part of a worldwide outreach tour between October 2003 and May 2004 that drew some 140,000 supporters.

However, controversy surrounding the project had begun to brew since January 2003, when Mr Poon flagged the possible misuse of funds.

The project’s costs increased dramatically when the decision was made to break into the United States market. Songwriter and producer Wyclef Jean was hired in 2006 to help Ms Ho.

Criticism surged again in 2007, after the release of Ms Ho’s English single China Wine. In the risque music video, marketed for its “Asian-Reggae” fusion sounds, she is seen dancing in a skimpy outfit.

“If Sun made it in the US, it would open a big door for our missions,” Kong had said during the trial.

However, the court also heard that church members were supposedly encouraged to divert their tithes and donations to music production company Xtron to fund the mounting expenses of Ms Ho’s US album. Kong was also accused by former CHC fund manager Chew Eng Han, one of the defendants, of spending church money to buy Ms Ho’s earlier Mandarin albums, thereby inflating sales figures.

Source: By Ng Huiwen, Former church member Roland Poon who alleged funds misuse ‘vindicated’, says daughter, Straits Times, http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/former-church-member-who-alleged-funds-misuse-vindicated-says-daughter, Published 12:04 AM SGT 22/10/2015. (Accessed 26/10/2015.)

To C3 Church Readers: A Summary Of The CHC Saga

20 Monday Jan 2014

Posted by in C3 & Pringles Associations

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

It is concerning that Phil Pringle is keeping his C3 Oxford Falls leaders and congregation and his entire network of C3 churches in his movement in the dark.

This article from the blog ‘Not Under The Table’ gives a great overview and catch up for those not yet up to date with the whole Kong Hee saga. If you are involved in a C3 Church, feel free to pass this article onto other C3 members so they can understand CHC’s situation.

The blog ‘Not Under The Table’ writes,

Why It Is NOT Unacceptable That the CHC Trial is Taking So Long…

Recently read about a blog article ranting about why the CHC trial is taking so long. I would like to offer my personal opinion why it is reasonable the trial is taking so long.

The author wrote:

“This whole trial that is already well known as the CHC saga, is amazingly soon entering into its 4th year of prosecutorial indictment, yet up to this point there is no clear sight of where this is going.”

I disagree – so far the DPP’s flow has been rather consistent – first to establish the conflicting relationship between Xtron and CHC in the first 2 tranches, and then to establish if the auditors were dealt with a sleight of hand to pass the audit without awareness of the underlying issues. Maybe we can consider that majority of the prosecution witnesses are loyal supporters of Kong Hee and CHC which they attend, and be surprised at their apparent amnesia. The DPP is indeed having a difficult task ahead.

It has so far been established in the first 2 tranches that:

1) church funds were used without member’s consent/knowledge to fund Sun Ho’s Hollywood project – it was a well established fact even before Asia Conference 2008 that Sun Ho’s singing career is funded out of “her own success” in album sale, not from the church. The leadership of CHC have reiterated this point many times, until the u-turn when they were charged.

2) church parties such as the senior pastor and the then management board have lied about the use of church funds via the media (papers/Roland Poon apology/numerous AGM/EOGM/etc)

The author wrote:

“For a nation known for its efficiency in civil service administration, it is unbelievable that this trial has taken unreasonably long to conclude. As it is today from the news we read, it is nowhere near a conclusive verdict, as it is reported that this famous church trial would stretch to as far as September 2014 at least. Friends and colleagues of mine interested in the case and with whom I chatted over the usual coffee or lunch, commented that no one knows for sure if this trial that is known to almost all of Singapore would even conclude by September 2014. Now this is of even greater concern for me.”

Again, if we understand what is happening, the delay is understandable, and here’s why:

1) The nation is indeed known for its efficiency in civil service administration. But we need to consider that there are 6 individuals under trial now (more may possibly be included as the trial progresses). Aligning the PTC dates to the schedule of the Judge, DPP and the defense lawyers is already a major challenge – the trail only started almost ONE YEAR after they were charged, with no less than 3 PTCs passing by. Do not be surprised this trial goes into 2015 (if we factor in the date for verdict and possible sentencing), and 2016 (for appeals and others)

2) As a reminder, refer to the details of the offenses given in the joint statement (https://www.charities.gov.sg/Documents/COC_Press_Statement_on_CHC__26_June_2012.pdf)

The document outlines deeds that were not even heard in court yet, such as:

a) Misrepresentation on the Use of the Charity’s Funds
b) Use of the Charity’s Funds to Fund the Project
c) Schemes to Avoid Disclosure on Related Party Transactions
d) Governance and Control Issues

The court is still scratching on the surface of the charges to lay a foundation to the saga with issues relating to Xtron Pte Ltd.

The author wrote:

“As a Christian & a keen observer of this trial that has great implications to the religious society of Singapore, I am worried that this long protracted trial that is apparently going to go on for even longer, has now given rise to more questions than the initial outrage over the news of the alleged fraud of these City Harvests Church leaders. I am pretty sure I would not be the only one with these questions in mind, as people from the professional marketplace have resonated with my observations as well. ” 

It has indeed given rise to more questions, as more things get revealed in court, just to name a few:

1) why did the senior pastor and its management board lie to its own members who contributed the funds if they had agreed to the strategy to be “covert” in their evangelistic outreach?

2) why did the senior pastor kong hee write a letter to the American producers to bad-mouth his good friend and a well-known Pnw leader Darlene Zschech, claiming that the gospel singer to be a threat to Sun Ho who sang songs like “China Wine” and “You Stupid”

3) Why does the leadership have to hide from it’s EMs the identity of the American record company that managed Sun Ho? (Tonos Entertainment which was defunct in 2003)

4) As revealed in the second tranche, why did 2 of the accused (John Lam and Tan Ye Peng) “take advantage” of auditor Foong Daw Chin by asking him to “pray together” with them but used the meeting to discuss matters related to the case and then recording his conversation? I mean, what do they have to fear if God is with them and they have done no wrong?

5) why the u-turn about the funding of Sun Ho’s Hollywood career? All along she was portrayed as the mascot and role model of the cultural mandate – being a “successful” pop star and funding her own businesses (e.g skin) and pop career out of her own successful earnings, not taking a single cent from the church. Now the entire story changed and suddenly her personal pop career became a project funded by the church.

The author wrote:

“First, the obvious, why is this trial taking so long? The uneasy part about this is that this first question actually leads to more questions following. For a start, I mean, if the criminal offences and charges against the CHC accused leaders were clear and well substantiated, why does it take so long to prove? Surely it does not take more than 3 years to prove if someone has stolen or pocketed money?

One of the longest court trials in the history of Singapore was the well-known insider trading criminal case trial of ex-Deputy Chairman of UOB Mr Allan Ng back in 1989 that was handled by then Deputy Prosecutor Glenn Knight. That trial took a total of 77 days and it was then a record and still is.”

So I say, why do you think the trial will be quick? The content of the charges and the trial relates to to events which took place up to 2010 and not beyond.  Based on that summarized annex alone, it should be up to the leaders to prove their innocent and have been above reproach in the things they do as religious leaders of the largest church in Singapore. Surely their claims of innocence contradicts the lies they openly told with the lack of accountability? Duh!

Mr Allan Ng’s case involves only ONE person – not 6 individuals each with the representation of a SC (with the exception of Kong Hee). If you look at it, 77 x 6 = ??

Don’t even try to imply that the wrongful prosecution of Alan Ng by then DPP Glen Knight is comparable to this case –  they are miles apart to draw a parallel.

The author wrote:

City Harvest Church leaders’ trial is already seen today as one of the longest running trials in Singapore history, and it might just be the record breaker of all time.  

Isn’t that what the leadership would wish for? To be top of everything? They have certainly took the world by storm and outdone their initial goals to take Asia by storm!

The author wrote:

The average Singaporean would question – why are we taking so much time with this and using up far more of our taxpayers’ money to administer and solve a case that is supposed to be solved maybe even a year or two ago? Honestly, if every criminal case that warrants judicial prosecution and court trial takes 4-5 years to close, would we be showing any efficiency in our civil service administration? Would it not reflect an inefficient (- a variant of wasted) use of taxpayers’ money by taking excessively long to solve a legal case?

Honestly, if they were innocent, and they were doing something good and honorable to their God, and have never misused a single cent, why bother to even engage SCs, and have to burden the members to provide for legal fund out of their pocket? IS not their financial burden heavy enough?

On the contrary, the government has the responsibility to ensure justice and order is maintained for the good of Singapore and her citizens, AT ALL COST. And it is precisely the government’s goal to provide a fair trial that they are now given their time and chance to defend – let’s hope the defense make it snappy by providing somesubstantial evidence to explain their deeds and innocence, rather than resort to theatrics and off-the-note recording of prosecution witness conversations as a means of defense. To that note, no taxpayer’s monies will be wasted in providing every Singaporean a fair trial. So please encourage them to save taxpayer’s money.

The author wrote:


Now all these beg even more questions for an average news reader.  Observers now are asking a little more seriously, does the Prosecution now even have a case or not? Based on media reports, it is starting to show that the Prosecution witnesses were not providing any strong evidences against the accused, with the witnesses often ended up contradicting themselves and some of the Prosecution’s own witnesses in fact turned out to be witnesses to testify that there could be no legal wrong or criminal breach of trust in the way the church’s funds were used.

I think this is subjective – many observers not from CHC knows that the 6 have no case based on common sense – a religious leader and his management board had to lie to fund his wife’s singing career in the pretext of evangelism, using the monies on extravagance. Again, if we look into who these prosecution witnesses are, we may understand their contradiction and selective amnesia. But anyway, like I have opined earlier, the DPP is still building their case, which looks strong compared to the defense who could only prove that the auditors were aware about the Xtron bonds. The defense at best are arguing on technicalities – honestly – does a work of God really need that?

The author wrote:


Then there is this huge unanswered question that stood out starkly – why are freewill church goers of CHC not allowed to raise their own freewill family church money to support their own pastors? With the hefty legal fees needed to engage such experienced Senior Counsels, it was told that many church members are willing to support their spiritual leaders financially because their church pastors and leaders are still dear to them, but even members of the public are asking why is there even such an arbitrary restriction by the Government (through the Commissioner of Charities) on a Church’s own members’ personal freedom to raise their own money and give out of their own pocket? As a Christian believer & Singapore citizen, I see in two angles, through the eyes of my Christian faith and the eyes of my citizenship rights under the Constitution of Singapore. And I must say I am deeply concerned and worried about this particular restriction on a Christian Church whose members are as much a human and a citizen as would any other Singaporean. To me it is already unconstitutional to put such an unlawful restriction on personal freedom to raise and donate money.

You may wish to refer to the Comissioner of Charity’s role to answer this question. They have a duty to protect the members of the public (church goers included). The DPM is very clear that this case do not involve City Harvest Church but only individuals who were charged for various offenses. I believe that the prohibition has to do with protecting the member’s money – refer to how the MPA were collected, thereby reducing the monies given to the church general and building fund for operations and building related purposes. Personal opinion to CHC members – do not give anything to the funds first – save it and give it as a lump sum until the verdict is given. Your stewardship of your money will find better use.

The author wrote:

As this CHC trial protracts further, I am especially worried about Singapore’s legal efficiencies and credibility of its legal applications.

It is understandable for someone involved with the 6 individuals and the church to be emotionally charged, but Singapore remains one of the legally efficient and credible countries in the world.

The author wrote:

I seriously hope to see an immediate change to the length at which this CHC trial takes to end, as it has become unacceptable to have the case taking that long to conclude, for reasons I have covered earlier. I also wish to see a clear demonstration that natural justice and moral justice are not put in jeopardy as the case unfolds in court. If the Prosecution truly does not have a case convincing enough to prove criminal wrongdoing, the judiciary should just not delay further the already protracted case but render a just verdict as it becomes due. Members of the City Harvest Church should also be allowed to raise money of their own as a sign of their own love and affection for their friends and leaders in need. For the Christians, the Church is a family. You don’t put a law to stop a family from loving each other and giving alms to support those in need. And that is just basic human right. And more than that, a family right.

The undergoing trial now is a demonstration of natural justice in place. As for moral justice, a good place to start will be for the leaders to address the lies and contradicting statements made to the members – every single one of it.

The country do not put a law to stop a family from loving each other and giving alms to support those in need; instead, the country legislates to protect a family loving each other and generous in their giving to those in need from individuals seeking to exploit their trust and generosity, wolves dressed up in sheep clothing.

Perhaps the witnesses called upon can help shorten the trial by remembering key information than transpired.

An overview about “Crossover Project”

For many CHC members who joined the church from 2004 onward, they may not be aware of some developments. Much of the corporate communication found in the internet today regarding “Crossover Project” were backdated or new info designed to provide consistency with the “stories” today. New info taken from past records will be released to address them as the trial progresses.

Generally, the Crossover comprises of two phases – Phase one began in 2002 and is primarily targeting Asian countries (Taiwan/HK/Malaysia/Singapore) with Sun With Love (2002) up to 2005. It was largely a success with many souls saved in Taiwan and Hong Kong, and resulted in a shift in the overall Christian population in those countries. Xtron at that point acts as Sun Ho’s agent, as well as master to the Expo lease (2005-2011). It was maintained that the funding for the project/humanitarian works came from the proceeds of Sun Ho’s mandarin album sales as well as sponsorship by Wahyu Hanafi. But now we know the sponsorship involves Xtron and Firna Glassware bonds.

Crossover phaase 2 comprises the foray into Hollywood and projects to the above-mentioned countries halted when Sun Ho changed her objective to penetrate the Hollywood market, supposedly “talent spotted” by an American Production company for USD5m contract (we know who the company is now, and who funded the shell company). Results of this come in the form of singles like China Wine, Fancy Free, You Stupid, etc. The ultimate objective is to penetrate China through her success in USA, which was deemed to be the strategic key China would open its door. Interestingly, many Taiwanese and Hong Kong artistes need not take that route to become big names in China. It is in this second phase that the much talked about Xtron bonds and relationship with CHC were the subject. Again, it was maintained that no church funds were ever used – that pop culture is strictly Sun’s personal project – you may cross reference to Kong Hee’s blog post titled “whole shallowness” as well as various public announcements he made.

Collectively, Crossover phase one and two were known as a part of the “Cultural Mandate” period which started in 2001/early 2002 by Pastor Kong Hee under the influence of Dr AR Bernard’s teaching on “Kristos Kai Kosmos”, and other notable preachers such as Phil Pringle and Ulf Ekman. The key thrust of Cultural Mandate is to influence society through being culturally relevant Christians in 7 key pillars of society: Religion, Family, Business, Education, Government, Arts and Entertainment and Media.

It is rather disappointing to learn that Cultural Mandate overlooked core basic Christian foundations such as honesty, faithfulness and accountability, choosing to use deception, misrepresentation, bullying (e.g. Roland Poon) and legalites as its key thrusts.

Group-Think at Work?

I’m trying to understand why people can act in such a way in the face of clearly established key facts, and I could only suspect group-think. It could also be the hold on religion – the fear of testifying against “God’s anointed”. But the bible clearly instructs all men to be a truthful and to judge those in the house. My opinion is that the judge and DPP will certainly need to understand the hold of the dynamics of religion and the culture within CHC to cut right through the cloud of fluff.

Source: By notunderthetable, Not Under The Table, Why It Is NOT Unacceptable That the CHC Trial is Taking So Long…, http://notunderthetable.blogspot.sg/2014/01/why-it-is-unacceptable-that-chc-trial.html, 19/01/2014. (Accessed 20/01/2014.)

The Dawning Truth: Valid Claims Made By Mr Roland Poon In Old Articles

02 Wednesday Oct 2013

Posted by in C3 & Pringles Associations

≈ 15 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Roland-Poon-Says-Sorry_CHC-16-08-2014Back in 2003, the controversial Roland Poon criticised CHC of mishandling church funds to finance Sun Ho’s music career. We have decided to publish these old news articles for our readers.

In 2003, The Straits Times reported the following,

‘I have done nothing wrong’

SINGAPORE  – pastor-turned-singer Ho Yeow Sun was in tears on the phone last Saturday morning.

The City Harvest Church leader sounded distraught on the line from Taipei, where she is promoting her second album, Sun*day.

Someone from her congregation in Singapore had just informed her that the weekend edition of Today had a Page 1 story in which some church members expressed uneasiness over City Harvest’s support of her pop career.

Her husband and church founder, Reverend Kong Hee, was described as giving updates of his wife’s singing and promotional activities during church service.

One church member was quoted as complaining: ‘Even before the name of God is glorified, the husband always praises her first and shows her video.’

The report also said there were suggestions that the church was being used to drum up votes for Ho at this Friday’s MTV Asia Awards.

Ho, 31, is one of five nominees vying for the Favourite Music Artist from Singapore award.

She is up against Urban Xchange, Stefanie Sun, A-do and Kit Chan.

Besides being asked to vote, a member said church-goers were asked to buy Sun*day, while another said the 13-year-old church was fast becoming a ‘personality cult thing’.

In between sobs, Ho told Life!: ‘I really don’t need this. At first, I was quite affected and wanted to give up everything and just go home.

‘Then I thought, ‘Hey, my conscience is clear, and I’ve not done anything wrong.’ So, I’ll still come back to sing during the show.’

Rev Kong told Life! on Saturday that there is nothing exceptional about rallying behind Ho.

‘It’s the same when we support and celebrate any member of our church who is making a significant difference in the marketplace,’ he said.

He cited the example of Ms Elim Chew, founder and owner of streetwear chain 77th Street who was named one of the Montblanc Businesswomen 2002. A year before that, she won the Most Promising Woman Entrepreneur award given out by the Association of Small and Medium Enterprises.

After her wins, the church invited Ms Chew to share with its flock her experience during a service. At the same time, a large screen projected newspaper clippings for all to see.

Rev Kong said that the church took this approach: When one member succeeds, everyone rejoices.

But City Harvest draws the line at hard sell, added a spokesman.

‘We did announce that Sun had been nominated and that members can vote for her if they want to. But it’s different from saying that we’re actively asking them to do it,’ she said.

Either way, Ho, whose first album, Sun With Love, in 2002, sold more than 100,000 copies, said she does not stand a chance of winning the MTV award.

‘I’m lucky enough to be nominated. How can I beat such strong contenders as Stefanie Sun and A-do? Stefanie won last year and I think she will win again this year,’ she said.

‘Anyway, what’s so wrong if my church members want to support me voluntarily?’

The spokesman also said that parishioners were not pressured to buy her two albums.

Other than putting up some publicity posters in church, ‘we just let them know that her albums are available and let them decide whether to buy them’, the spokesman said.

Of 10 City Harvest members contacted by Life!, eight said there was no compulsion for them to buy the albums or to vote for Ho.

Senior account executive Stella Gwee, 27, said the matter was one of interpretation.

‘It is true pastor Kong will share about what pastor Sun has been doing. But it depends on how people read that. We do not see her very much these days, so it is interesting to know what she is up to. We do not take it as a promotion of her CD per se,’ she said.

As for the few occasions when her music videos were screened in church, housewife Ivy Long, 31, and freelance educator Ng Chin Wei, 27, said that these were requests from members who did not have cable TV where the videos are aired more frequently.

In any event, senior programming executive Lynette Tan, 28, said that Ho does not gain from album sales because all proceeds go to charity.

That Ho does not pocket any of the takings was confirmed by a spokesman for her church.

But not everyone in City Harvest’s 14,000-strong congregation is comfortable with these explanations.

Businessman Roland Poon Swee Kay, 39, for one, had called up and written to The Straits Times last week about the alleged impropriety. He said mixing religion with secular matters was ‘unethical’.

Mr Poon, who has been attending City Harvest for six years, alleged that he was ‘encouraged’ by his cell group leader to buy both of her albums, and so he bought five of each at one go.

He also claimed that church funds were used for Ho’s publicity and promotional campaign.

He said the only reason he was staying on in the church was because he felt he had invested ‘too much money’ towards the $48.7 million used for the construction of the church building at Jurong West.

In response, Rev Kong said that not a single cent from church funds was used to buy or to promote Sun’s albums.

Integrity, he added, was a core value of the church.

‘As such, we always try to be as transparent as we can in all our activities. Our accounts are audited yearly by a public accounting firm,’ he said.

Source: By Samuel Lee, Additional reporting by Loh Hsiao Ying, ‘I have done nothing wrong’, The Straits Times, http://www.straitstimes.com/life/story/0,4386,167080,00.html, 20/01/2003. (Accessed articles and source information from various websites from 07/07/2013-02/10/2013.)

The Straits Times also reported the following in 2003,

Poon says sorry; pastor asks church to forgive

Businessman withdraws allegations about City Harvest Church and singer Ho Yeow Sun, and church prays to forgive him over the weekend.

The man who made allegations about City Harvest Church’s support of pastor-singer Ho Yeow Sun’s pop career has apologised publicly.

And in five sermons over the weekend, Ho’s husband, church founder and senior pastor Reverend Kong Hee, asked the congregation to forgive the man.

Two weeks ago, Mr Roland Poon Swee Kay contacted the press to complain about what he said were improper practices by Rev Kong and his wife.

Last Friday, the 53-year-old businessman issued four apologies in The Straits Times, Lianhe Zaobao, Lianhe Wanbao and Shin Min Daily News. A fifth apology appeared in The New Paper last Saturday.

In all, they cost $33,372.06. A source close to Mr Poon said yesterday that the amount was paid by an anonymous donor who knew of the businessman’s financial difficulties.

In the half-page apology in The Straits Times, Mr Poon, a member of the church, said he had fed false information to journalists from Life! and Today via e-mail and telephone conversations.

He also retracted all previous statements he had made regarding Rev Kong, Ho and the church.

Some of his earlier remarks were aired on Channel NewsAsia on Jan 17. This was followed by a Page 1 story in Today on Jan 18, which claimed that some church members had expressed uneasiness over City Harvest’s support of Ho’s pop career.

After reading the report, Ho, 31, who was then in Taiwan, broke down in tears.

In a Life! story published last Monday, she said that she had done nothing wrong.

Her husband also denied Mr Poon’s allegations. Rev Kong said that no church funds had been used for Ho’s pop career promotion, and that it was normal practice for the church to support and celebrate the secular success of its members.

The Chinese press also picked up the story.

Ho, who has been the church’s music pastor since 1993, launched her pop career last year.

Her first album, Sun With Love, sold more than 100,000 copies last year.

She recently launched her second work, Sun*day. All proceeds from both albums are pledged to charity.

She also sang at last Friday’s MTV Asia Awards, and was nominated for Favourite Artiste  – Singapore.

As a result of all the news, members of City Harvest, which is in Jurong West, say they have been under a lot of ‘unnecessary’ scrutiny.

UFM 1003 DJ Danny Yeo, 30, for one, said he had been bombarded with phone calls.

‘I tell people that I’m still attending City Harvest and that it takes more than reading headlines and newspapers to make a judgment about the church,’ he said.

Last Friday, Life! also published a response from the City Harvest management board.

The letter reiterated Rev Kong’s stand that no church funds were used to finance Ho’s pop career. It added that there was no hard-selling of her two CDs in the church and no question of a personality cult forming.

That Mr Poon’s retraction in The Straits Times appeared on the same day as the church’s reply has raised some eyebrows among observers.

However, Rev Kong and church board member Chew Eng Han explained yesterday that it was pure coincidence.

The board had already submitted its statement to the newspaper last Wednesday, before the church received a call from Mr Poon later that day.

‘He voluntarily met up with me and a few board members at Fullerton Hotel on Wednesday evening,’ said Mr Chew, 42, a general manager of an American bank.

‘There, he told us he realised his foolishness after reading the positive remarks from other members of the church in the Life! article last Monday.’

He added that Mr Poon’s turn-around came after the businessman telephoned Sri Lanka-based clergyman, Bishop Jebanayagam, for advice last week.

Mr Poon could not be reached for comment and has not been attending service since Jan 18.

A source close to him said that he had met the bishop during the latter’s visits over the past eight years.

Bishop Jebanayagam apparently told him to come clean with City Harvest if he wished to be truthful, and that he would be forgiven.

Together with Mr Chew, Mr Poon drafted the apology last Wednesday night, got it vetted by City Harvest’s lawyers last Thursday and submitted it for publication the same day.

Mr Chew said that Mr Poon also revealed that his quotes to Today were attributed to several church members, including two identified as ‘Mr Png’ and ‘Mr Lee’.

He had contacted The Straits Times variously as ‘Roland Poon’ and ‘Swee Kay’.

Mr Chew said: ‘We have already forgiven him and have also asked him to come back to church next week.’

Rev Kong asked his congregation, which numbers 14,000, during his five weekend services to forgive the businessman.

‘My wife and I have forgiven him and so has the church. We’re not going to single him out and he can remain anonymous. That’s the good thing about being in a big church,’ he said.

Still, he felt that the church’s credibility ?especially that of its community service here and in the region ?had been unfairly undermined by the episode.

Rev Kong also said his wife remained badly shattered.

He said: ‘All she has been saying since she came back from Taiwan last week for MTV is how all her hard work has been for nothing.

‘Her success, which has been achieved through her own talent and efforts, has been unfairly discredited by the false allegations. However, she believes that in time, the truth will dawn.’

Source: Samuel Lee, Poon says sorry; pastor asks church to forgive, The Straits Times, http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/life/story/0,4386,168507,00.html, 27/01/2003.

For more information, visit the National Library of Singapore: http://newspapers.nl.sg/Digitised/Article/straitstimes20030127-1.2.53.7.aspx

CHC Confessions & More Disturbing Allegations

28 Tuesday May 2013

Posted by in C3 & Pringles Associations

≈ 9 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

CHC Confessions is a Facebook Group that offers valuable insight to the culture and methodoligies of City Harvest Church cult. Their insider stories and experiences are revealing, sobering and disturbing. Visit the group here:

CHC Confessions

The group has caught the eye of ‘The Real Singapore’.

CHC CONFESSIONS: CHURCH FUNDS ALSO LIKELY TO HAVE PAID FOR KONG’S ENTOURAGE

A CHC member has revealed that Church funds could have been used to fund more than just Sun Ho’s Music Career. He alleges that funds were also likely to have been used for City College and O School, as well as paying for Kong Hee’s Entourage when he had international speaking engagements.

There have been a lot of concerns over the use of church funds by city harvest.

There has been much unhappiness over the abuse of church funds to buy a stake in suntec city. This is especially so when the money could be used to help the poor instead of enriching kong hee and his cronies. There have been many instances where ex-CHC have stepped forward to expose the church’s wrong doings.

Another courageous ex-CHC member has stepped forward to speak the truth.

I would like to invite all to discuss on the possible legal implications and social reprecussion of the abuse of church funds by Kong Hee and cronies. This is what the ex-CHC Member had to say:

1. Miss Ho Yeow Sun’s entourage includes two dancers. They can be seen dancing in Miss Ho’s recent music video, Fancy Free. These dancers are instructors of O School, which is funded by City College (that gets funds from City Harvest). These dance instructors are residing in the United States, residing in Miss Ho’s Los Angeles home. This brings to question if City Harvest is indirectly paying for Miss Ho’s dancers.

2. Xtron Productions have several employees who are board and executive members. Several on its payroll hold positions of leadership in the audio, lighting and media ministries. In November 2009, Rev. Kong Hee had a speaking engagement to Sacramento, California, several church employees (worship band, singers, and media personnel) were flown there with all expenses paid by the Church. In addition to that, Xtron employees were involved in the trip. If the speaking engagement was for the benefit of Rev. Kong, the question is, who pays for the cost to fly and accommodate his entourage?

It is known that Rev. Kong is not a salaried employee of City Harvest church. He relies on speaking engagement fees, love gifts and the royalties of his sermons and bible study material. However, how does the church draw the line between his personal speaking engagements and his service on behalf of the church? Also, why the need for Xtron employees to be part of the trip if this was promoted to church members as a missions trip? For many of Rev. Kong’s international speaking engagement, there is an employee from Xtron present to take photographs and record videos. Is City Harvest Church paying for the services or is the Reverend absorbing the costs?

….

May those who have read my comments and felt there is validity in it share the burden I have. I have been very careful in my choice of words and tone by which I make my comments. I could have given the names of the owners of Xtron Produtions, who are board and executive members. Unfortunately, my position does not permit or grant me the liberty to be a whistle blower.

Please understand that I am caught between a rock and a hard place. In 2003, when Roland Poon pointed out the church’s support of Miss Ho’s singing career, I witness the ugliness of hate. However, at the same time, I saw the pain in the eyes of church members who were deeply affected by the media slaughter of the church.

Over the course of days, I question if this was the right time to disclose the information that I have given. Why? Because many of the employees of Xtron, City College, Citycare, Little Big, O School, and along with the staff of City Harvest Church are fully aware of what goes on behind the scenes. Many have families with young children and mortgages and car payments to worry about. There are a large number of individuals dependent on how this system works. Sadly, it is snowballing into something monstrous.

From my heart,
Soren

Editor’s Note: This is a post made on Sg Forums a while ago, before the depth of the misuse of funds was known clearly. The point this writer makes about the pain of church followers seeing their funds misused is a good point. Many church members gave generously from their heart in the past and it is clearly painful for them to see their funds going to places they did not know or expect. Maybe some of the members now are still fooling themselves, and hoping, perhaps for their own funds’ sake, that Pastor Kong + Co are not guilty.

Source: CHC CONFESSIONS: CHURCH FUNDS ALSO LIKELY TO HAVE PAID FOR KONG’S ENTOURAGE,  The Real Singapore, http://therealsingapore.com/content/chc-confessions-church-funds-also-likely-have-paid-kongs-entourage. Accessed 27/2005/2013.