Some mega churches affect students adversely

[Altivo]

saw this on ST webby....

 

http://www.straitstimes.com/ST%2BForum/Sto...ory_159276.html

 

Some mega churches affect students adversely

 

I READ with deep interest the article, 'Drawing the line between Caesar and God' (ST, Aug 2).

The objection of one of the large independent churches in Singapore to complying with provisions in the draft code of governance for charities would logically provoke concern about its financial transparency. This is especially so as these are 'rich' churches, judging by their well-equipped premises and set-up. These circumstances bring to light another concern. Some of these 'mega churches' have relentless recruitment activities in many schools and junior colleges.

 

My friends and I have loved ones whose lives and attitude have changed after they joined these churches. They lose interest in schoolwork to the point of academic failure. Family time is curtailed drastically, and they stop attending family functions. Parental objections are ignored, family squabbles ensue and family harmony is disrupted. It's heartbreaking. It is like we have lost our children.

 

I write this not to impugn any religion, but to warn against the abuse of religion. Having had such traumatic experiences, I cannot remain silent. I hope this letter will serve as a warning to parents regarding such youth activities that may destroy their personal lives and family harmony.

 

 

Dr Lee Bee Wah

[Boyboy]

Here is the ST article referred to in the letter

 

Drawing the line between Caesar and God

Andy Ho, Senior Writer

927 words

2 August 2007

Straits Times

English

© 2007 Singapore Press Holdings Limited

 

A LOCAL church has objected to certain provisions in the draft code of governance for charities now under public consultation through August. Though compliance is not mandatory, charities that don't must explain why they can't or won't.

 

The senior pastor of the 15,000-strong, non-denominational New Creation Church is both its chief executive and chairman of its six-member board. The code, however, requires the two positions to be separate. The church argues that its senior pastor is 'ordained by God to lead the church (so) he is the best person to guide the board' as well.

 

The Government has intervened in church matters before - but always without entangling in religious doctrine. For example, in 1990, a Mandai church schism saw the authorities granting one side an injunction to restrain the pastor from touching church monies. To date, however, the Government has never imposed secular rules that tell a church how its lines of authority (financial or otherwise) are to be drawn, which is clearly a doctrinal matter.

 

Until now.

 

Introduced to prevent another National Kidney Foundation (NKF) debacle, the code is likely to impact independent churches the most. This is because the traditional denominations - the Catholic, Methodist, Anglican, Presbyterian, and Lutheran churches - already have hierarchical structures in place that provide oversight of church matters, finances included. By contrast, independent set-ups - especially the mega-churches which have huge weekly collections - may be run by charismatic pastors who tend to have a free hand.

 

The former chief executive of the National Kidney Foundation, T. T. Durai, too had a largely free hand. Are the mega-churches no different then from the old NKF?

 

Appearances, however, may not be everything.

 

The Pope lives regally, something Catholics are not only aware of but quite happy with too. The Vatican Palace is a series of palaces with some 1,400 rooms and 12,000 windows. Within the grounds, the pontiff's private housing comprises seven big rooms, a large dining room, a study, a roof garden, a chapel and quarters for his domestic staff. In 1978, Pope John Paul I revealed publicly that 'my toilet (has) a solid gold lever edged with diamonds'.

 

Too grand? To his flock, however, the pontiff is the Vicar of Christ on earth, so he should live in a manner commensurate with his exalted office.

 

Though the charismatic pastor of an independent church may have just two decades behind him compared to the two millennia behind the Pope's office, his followers might - rightly or wrongly - also hold him in special regard.

 

To his congregation, he could well be much more than a mere administrator. If believers regard him as somehow spiritually superior - and thus worthy of a life of (some) luxury - then church monies used accordingly are arguably serving some religious purpose.

 

Without also inquiring into religious doctrine, the Government cannot presume that lavishness in religious settings is always contrary to donor intent.

 

Yes, donor-believers must be able to seek redress if the leader solicits money for missionary work but then spends it on a Porsche, say. The crux of the matter is for the Government to determine donor intent and expectation - but only if asked.

 

When asked, the Government should be able to step in to enforce a religiously neutral law - that of (an implied) contract between donor and church leadership concerning how donations are to be used. In practice, the Government would ascertain factually in each case as to how the faithful expected donations to be used and what the leadership solicited the funds for.

 

If a contributor asks the secular authorities to investigate, the Government may inquire into whether worshippers knew their pastor lived lavishly, say, but not if it is doctrinally acceptable for him to do so.

 

I personally think it is not, but that is between me and my church, not the Government.

 

In most cases, it is unlikely for followers to be unaware but, if they are, the Government may scrutinise the books to weed out any misrepresentation.

 

Or, consider the $45 million and 270kg of gold donated to build an opulent temple in Chinatown that houses a Buddha tooth relic that some now say actually came from a herbivore. Should a donor sue the temple authorities, say, the Government may then inquire into whether people were duped by looking at what the implied contract was.

 

If the monks involved had made, in good faith, the case for a temple to house what they honestly believed to be a genuine relic, which worshippers agreed was desirable, no further investigation is merited. The implicit contract is not broken just because the tooth is now of questionable provenance.

 

What the Government definitely cannot inquire into is whether Buddhist doctrine holds that any tooth can be a proxy for the real thing. The secular authorities have no expertise to assess this and should not be getting entangled with doctrine.

 

Yet entanglement is precisely that which would result if secular authorities imposed a rule which challenges clergy authority within religious organisations. Specifically, requiring that a charity's chief executive not also sit as board chairman could very well be meddling with clergy authority and subjecting religious doctrine to secular oversight.

 

If so, religious organisations must be a priori exceptions to the rule. They may comply but they should not have to. May Caesar refrain from instructing believers how to render unto God what they believe is His alone.

 

[email protected]

[Altivo]

thanks bro... i was searching for it.

[DarkLord]

Wow.. Too she never mentioned the church name? Maybe it's because she's too buzy working to care about her children..

[Boyboy]

purely looking at financial side, i feel that as long as the church does not solicit from public (like charity orgs do), they should not be subject to such rulings

 

for the forum letter by lee bee wah, balance is the key.

 

some pple spend too much time on computer games, clubbing, or even exercise.

 

church is another avenue.

 

basically, it's not right to overdo ANYTHING to the point that u neglect what's important in life (to Christians, yes, God is impt, but so is family..)

[Boyboy]

np

 

i was intrigued by the forum posting u copied.. so i had to look for it, might as well post here. i got access to certain database . but anyone with ST online subscription (waste of $$$ IMHO) can access it also

[Altivo]

haha... anyway, i was thinking the church should be one of the usual suspects...

[Boyboy]

i'm sure many churches could have such pple. but they shd be a minority.

 

perhaps there are some churches which do not look out for those who neglect their family affairs. never question why some member can spend so much time serving. maybe running away from family problems (which only makes things worse)

 

another issue. many non-christians just dun like the fact that their loved ones are staunch christians. so they just wanna make noise. this is another possibility

[Vidz]

read this on the papers and was trying to looking for this article...

Thanks!

 

 

just felt the fourm writer has a rather biased view, due to personal experiences probably. Anyway the orginal article is about financial matters with quite a balanced view, which the forum writer failed miserably.

 

I don know any school in Singapore allows "recruitment activities", much less relentless.

[Dankoo]

Dr Lee is quite known in the medical field...anyway I do agree that what is important is how these youth should be taught on time management. At times, it is more of wanting to fit in...you dont want to be left out of the grp so they will try as much to be at every activities that the church have...a balance view is to look at maybe the family unit is not strong..thus church activities is a form of escapism....

[Turbine]

Sounds no diff from joining a gangster.

Just that the other doesn't involve gang fights, it legal and accepted by the society.

[Vidz]

Didnt know she is a high-flyer... maybe she should spend more time at home with her kids instead... Ya, "Lost Children" are not the fault of society or church, in this case, but parents...

[Damienic]

School do not allow 'recruitment activities' but apparently some of such activities are going on 'discreetly' without the management of school knowing..this is wat I heard from some friends...can't name the church here, of cos for obvious reasons..

[Zanter]

I guess when u have kids U'd find out that kids dont always listen to their parents & parents do not have much control over what their kids do.

 

Some churches brainwash their followers. I have had friends who'se churches even dictate who can be their friends or who they can even date. If they have marital disputes they will places cameras all over their home to record what is being said etc.

 

Its not easy to decern whether a church is true to the teachings of Christ or just out to promote its own self interest. To know whether the tree is good or rotten, you have to see what kind of fruit it bears .:)

[Altivo]

also the mindset....

 

generally, for our generation, we look upon religion as an avenue for guidance and peace. Now, i dare to say most (not all) youngsters look upon religion as a fad... their motives for going to church are to make frds lah, beo chio girls etc....

 

What kind of worship is that?? Sounds more like whoreship ...

[Myturbo]

bro altivo, shame on you to speak this way

[Altivo]

er... wat did i say wrong? Pls tell me

[Weichien]

u did that right.

that's why you know so well.