The Church Plays the Role as Salt and Light

The issue of the RM1.75 million grants to four Methodist Churches in Sibu during the recent Sibu by-election has resulted in much discussion among both Christians and non-Christians. Methodist Church Executive Council Bishop Rev. Hwa Yung has admitted that they were now caught in a dilemma.

What shall they do with the money then? To take the money, the Church is seen as accepting bribes. To return it, the Church is seen as taking sides to the Oppositions. There were members in the four Churches made complaints that they were not consulted when the leadership made the decision of taking the money.

I was reminded of a story in the Bible which we could draw some parallels – the betrayal of Jesus by Judas. Jesus, while on earth, was not only proclaiming the Gospel of Salvation but making an effort to eradicate the unjust rule by the Roman Government. He was bold to confront the strong and mighty that the deprived and the oppressed were delivered! In fact, from the works of Jesus, he was seen as one of the most outstanding Revolutionist in his era.

Judas betrayed Jesus

But somehow Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples who had been living with him for three years and a half, had become a stumbling block to him. He betrayed Jesus to the Jewish Council for a bribe of 30 pieces of silver. Nevertheless the mission of Jesus triumphed and for 2000 years His followers have been continuing in their struggle fighting for a fair, just and righteous society.

But somehow the conscience of Judas pricked him. He was remorseful about his sinful act. At least Judas had changed his mind over his wrong deed. He brought back the 30 pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders, saying, “I have sinned by betraying innocent blood.” Nevertheless, despite making such a right move, it did not save him. He committed suicide. In fact he could have just turned to the Lord for forgiveness. What a tragic end for the story!

It is true that the grants were the taxpayers’ money. It is also true that this was not the first time the government has given such grants. And it is also true that most of the money for religious bodies is usually given to one particular religious community, with relatively much smaller proportions given to other communities.

However, regarding to “the government is trying to right a past wrong”, I beg to differ from this thought. Firstly, the Government was very hasty in making the move and it was a last minute one to beat the deadline of by-election campaign. Secondly, why was there no Church being benefited in the Ulu Selangor by-election which took place two weeks before the Sibu one? The answer is not hard to perceive. Because more than 50% of the voters there in Sibu were Christians! And added to that, news revealed that most of them were standing on the side of DAP, the rival contester. There is nothing wrong to ponder for a while, “What if there was no by-election in Sibu, would the grants being offered?”

The four Churches did put up an advertisement for acknowledging the grants taken. The leadership felt justified claiming that Christians should always be grateful for goodness received. By doing so the Churches should not claim that they were non-partisan. In future should the Church advertise again when a rich member gives a big offering to the Church? Did not the leadership know that the advertisement would have some impact on the Christians in their choice of support? By doing so the leadership cannot claim that the grants were unconditional. Now only the Holy Spirit could check the motive behind the move. Taking the grants and moved against the will of the Church people for a fair election is equivalent to betraying them.

This is a proof that why is it so important that the Church do not comply in vote-buying election campaign tactic. The receiver is slave to the giver.

I think the four Methodist Churches should open the time to their members for a dialogue. The leadership should listen to their opinions. An unwise move will cause a split among the flocks.

Christian community affected as a whole

Christians, be aware! What has transpired to the four Churches should not be seen as an isolated case. We should see a large picture that it is affecting the Christian community in the country as a whole. The brethrens in Sibu are not alone. All Christians are members of one body, that is, Jesus Christ.

Jesus said that Christians are the salt of the earth, and the light of the world. But many of us are unable to handle these roles well. We are especially prone to fall when Mammon (money) comes by the way. Remember that greed was the cause of downfall for our ancestors. The Snake challenged Eve, “…. you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” (Genesis 3:5). It was a greed for power! Greed also caused his honor as an Archangel for Lucifer who claimed that “I will make myself as the Most High!” Again the greed for power! And he revolted against Yahweh, and consequently God cast him down from Heaven and thence he lived miserably as Satan the Devil!

RM1.75 million was a lot of money. I am sure that not many Churches have ever received such a lump sum in one go! I do not dare to judge that the taking of the grants was a result of greed. But I would visualize that out of the blues such a lump sum was granted, the matter of “right and wrong” would slip one’s mind unaware! Excitement would overshadow conscience. Lo and behold, the excitement was only short-lived when rumors and criticism flew all over the air. Suddenly the recipients realized that they were caught in a dilemma.

I mentioned that taking the grants does affect the Christian community as a whole. The way we react to an offer speaks a clear message. Most Churches are in need of funds, for sure. But we must always see the whole picture by putting ourselves in the shoes of Jesus. “What would Jesus do?” ask we! If we divert our attention from the Lord, “self” will take over. We will behave as people who are without divine faith. We will act as an opportunist. We will begin to thank and praise God that luckily a by-election was taking place at our home. “This is chance in a life-time”, shouts we, “let’s grab it!”

Thus we could be blinded by sudden gain and do not see that we Christians are indeed the salt of the earth and light of the world. The world is tasteless, so let us give it some taste! The world is dark, so let us shed some light over it.

Over the past 47 years (for East Malaysia) or 53 years (for West Malaysia), vote-buying have been the practice by the ruling coalition Barisan Nasional (BN). BN has been abusing the treasury funds for its political campaign. If the Christians agreed that the practice was an unfair electoral game, do we still condone such malpractice? Instead of putting in an effort to correct the wrong, we participated in it.

Discouraging the Church from participating in malpractices does not mean rejecting the kindness of the Government. We need to convey to the Government a message. We tell them Malaysia need to move on to greater maturity. If we aspired to squeeze into the row of an Advance Nation in the year 2020, then we must first start off with a fair and transparent Electoral System

Asking the Church to reject the “grants during the election periods only” is a move to put this kind of abuse to an end. If there are more and more people say “NO” to it, we will only see hope to the dawning of a Better Malaysia sooner. By then, both the Ruling and Opposition Coalitions will win their votes through Good Report Cards and Convincing Election Manifestos. Very soon Malaysia will regain her identity as a Rainbow Nation. No matter what race and what religions you belonged, you only belonged to the citizenship of Malaysia. This is truly 1Malaysia! Amen.

Being opening in the discussion on the matter has an advantage that the BN Government will be careful next time during the elections that Churches would not be easily tempted by sweeties. I would suggest to the Government to start drawing up a system in allocating funds to Churches.

Lastly, as regard to Metro Tabernacle which received the RM500,000.00 in contribution after the Church suffered arson, the incident was an entire different matter. The Church should be happy to take the money. In this case, a mishap suddenly took place, and the Government was genuine to chip in the money to help cover the loss. Thank you, Mr. Najib Razak our Prime Minister for that.

Euro Crisis to Set One World Currency?

Revelation 13: 11-18

11Then I saw another beast rising out of the earth. It had two horns like a lamb and it spoke like a dragon. 12It exercises all the authority of the first beast in its presence, and makes the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose mortal wound was healed. 13It performs great signs, even making fire come down from heaven to earth in front of people, 14and by the signs that it is allowed to work in the presence of the beast it deceives those who dwell on earth, telling them to make an image for the beast that was wounded by the sword and yet lived. 15And it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast, so that the image of the beast might even speak and might cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain. 16Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave,to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, 17so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name. 18This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666.
---------------------------------------
Friday, May 28, 2010 – by Staff Report

Source: http://www.thedailybell.com/1084/Euro-Crisis-to-Set-One-World-Currency.html
Is Europe heading for a meltdown? ... This financial crisis is worse than the sub-prime crash of 2008 because the sums are so much bigger and it is governments that are in dire straits. Edmund Conway explains the dangers. Mervyn King, the Bank of England Governor, summed it up best: "Dealing with a banking crisis was difficult enough," he said the other week, "but at least there were public-sector balance sheets on to which the problems could be moved. Once you move into sovereign debt, there is no answer; there's no backstop." In other words, were this a computer game, the politicians would be down to their last life. Any mistake now and it really is Game Over. Or to pick a slightly more traditional game, it is rather like a session of pass-the-parcel which is fast approaching the end of the line. – UK Telegraph

Dominant Social Theme: The wise men of Brussels and the courageous citizens of the EU will muddle through.

Free-Market Analysis: As the money crisis seems to grow worse in Europe, we have begun to wonder if there are parallels to the 1907 financial panic in the United States that gave rise to the Federal Reserve. The dominant social theme way back then (assuming an active power elite, and we do) was along the lines of "The US banking system is too fragmented and a lender of last resort is badly needed." JP Morgan assembled his rich friends in the library of his exquisite New York mansion and bailed out the market, but only six years later, the Federal Reserve was born, the bastard child of false market-insolvency rumors and a knobby-nosed father (Morgan, himself).

There is, in fact, still speculation today that Morgan's camp planted the initial rumors of instability that swept the market and triggered the crash of 1907. Why on earth would he do such a thing? To generate the eventual result: the creation of the Federal Reserve and its passage by the US Congress. This is one perspective, anyway, the "paranoid one" that you will not find in most mainstream history books or college texts.

Back to our larger theme. We have written in the past (see – IMF Plotting Gold Backed SDRs) that we did not see how on earth the power elite was going to get from fairly abstract monetary concepts like SDRs to an actual worldwide consensus for a more globalized currency (and a global warming – "carbon" – currency seems, as well, to be a non-starter, at least currently). In fact, we have speculated that the elite could decide on a gradualist approach, setting up a thesis/antithesis dialectic between global money and regional money to move the conversation gradually in the direction of a worldwide currency. But perhaps there is a faster way. Let us see ...

The European financial crisis started with Greece and, it's true, Greece's problems are moderate ones for the EU given its size and amount of debt. But this crisis has not been resolved despite the supposed US$1 trillion that has been set aside to discourage "wrong way" speculation in Greek debt. We saw yesterday that the larger market was up because of statements from Chinese leaders that they were not going to sell euros and were perhaps to continue to be a net purchaser. So this is what market confidence has come to: China, a rigid, neo-communist state with a raging property inflation problem is seen by "the market" as a lynchpin of the Western capitalist system. What a hoot. You can't make this stuff up.

Anyway, from our perspective, a hypothetical path to a world currency (with some speed) would involve certain very specific elements. It would include, obviously, a very serious sovereign wealth crisis spreading from country to country thoughout at least the Southern half of Europe. This crisis, hypothetically, would be averted by heroic Brussels bureaucrats but not before a significant amount of financial pain was inflicted – good and hard as H. L. Mencken might say. It might even involve the dissolution of the euro and the shrinking of the EU itself. But the pay-off for the power elite would be the ability to float a scenario that proposes a worldwide currency to avert additional difficulties going forward. Here's some more from the article excerpted above:

Strip away the details – the breakdown of the euro, the crumbling of the Spanish banking system to take just two – and what you are left with is the next leg of a global financial crisis. Politicians temporarily "solved" the sub-prime crisis of 2007 and 2008 by nationalising billions of pounds' worth of bank debt. While this helped reinject a little confidence into markets, the real upshot was merely to transfer that debt on to public-sector balance sheets.

This kind of card-shuffle trick has a long-established pedigree: after the dotcom bust, Alan Greenspan slashed US interest rates to (then) unprecedented lows, which helped dull the pain, but only at the cost of generating the housing bubble that fed sub-prime. It is not so different to the Ponzi scheme carried out by Bernard Madoff, except that unlike his hedge fund fraud, this one is being carried out in full public view.

The problem is that this has to stop somewhere, and that gasping noise over the past couple of weeks is the sound of millions of investors realising, all at once, that the music might have stopped. Having leapt back into the market in 2009 and fuelled the biggest stock-market leap since the recovery from the Wall Street Crash in the early 1930s, investors have suddenly deserted. London's FTSE 100 has lost 15 per cent of its value in little more than a month. The mayhem on European bourses is even worse, while on Wall Street the Dow Jones teeters on the brink of the talismanic 10,000 level.

It is obvious that the sovereign crisis can inflict considerable pain. And it seems to have just begun. Yet perhaps our scenario is too simplistic, too conspiratorial. We ourselves have maintained that the problems with the EU and the euro are probably in excess of whatever the elite had expected – and they did expect a crisis of this sort, one that was supposed to drive the EU into a closer political union. The idea, however, that the power elite could engage in cold-blooded manipulations of whole countries is fairly difficult to countenance. On the other hand, there are historical speculations that JP Morgan, at the height of his wealth, controlled in some sense up to half of the profitable enterprises in the United States. Wealth can be concentrated and great wealth begets wealth, especially because the current fiat money system that tends to collapse the middle class.

Assume somehow that the unrolling sovereign crisis is indeed a prelude to a fear-based promotion seeking a worldwide currency (and perhaps some sort of worldwide central bank to go along with it) and one begins to see the outlines of an especially audacious dominant social theme. Perhaps this theme would be buttressed with other fear-based promotions – local and regional wars, even confrontations that utilize small nuclear devices.

We're just speculating here, of course, for our window on power elite activities extends only to a modest comprehension of how elite promotions might operate. Yet even in stating this, we should also point out that these themes are promoted by a vast array of institutions – media properties, think tanks, NGOs and assorted non-profits, not to mention governmental entities. To accept the idea of dominant social themes is to accept that the elite has tremendous influence worldwide and especially in the West. We're past that point of course. We do accept it.

We would also point out that to try to force the issue now of a truly global currency would be audacious in the extreme. Citizens of the Anglo-American axis are up in arms over the poor economy and Europe is smoldering as well. Never has a sociopolitical awakening swept the West as it has now – courtesy of the Internet and its continual truth-telling. There is more and more anger over central banking, the West's serial wars, the over-taxation and the general dysfunction of regulatory democracy.

Does what we have proposed skirt the fringes of reality? If the powers-that-be were ready to tolerate a protracted series of sovereign crises in Europe – and it may be there is not much more to arrange -- alongside perhaps some unsettling wars, it might be possible to traumatize citizens of the West enough to make them amenable to global solution. This solution in our estimation might include the return to some sort of gold standard, but unfortunately not a market-based one. The elite would try to insist on a standard that it could in a sense control and continually manage – at least in our opinion.

Conclusion: All this is no doubt far fetched. But the Panic of 1907 and the subsequent erection of the Federal Reserve – if one accepts the relationship between the two – provides us with a template for the same sort of manipulation on a bigger scale (assuming one believes in the possibility of JP Morgan's market manipulations). However it is also true that this article itself is evidence of the difficulties that the elite would face in implementing the kind of program we have suggested. After all, if we are able to anticipate it, it has occurred to others as well. This is perhaps the elite's biggest challenge in the era of the Internet. It is most difficult to promote an audience, if it comes to that, aware of your intentions and the permutations of your strategies.

卫理公会对补选拨款左右为难，交诗巫四间堂会决定如何使用

针对前基督教联合会主席吴吉平批评4家诗巫卫理公会，在补选时 接受政府175万拨款的言论，马来西亚卫理公会会长理事会今日承 认，陷入微妙的两难之中，不过仍尊重4间堂会领袖的权利，由他们决定如何使用拨款。

理事会主席华勇在一篇文告中表示，会长理事会已于2010年5月25日开会讨论政府拨款一事，并会进一步在下一次总议会理事会详细讨论。


接受政府拨款是公民权利

他表示，首先，为发展宗教而拨款给宗教团体，跟拨款给其他好像学校等团体一样，都是政府应尽的责任，接收这样的拨款也是公民的权利。

“总言之，政府所拨出的钱实际上就是纳税人的钱。我们国内的问题的确是，拨给宗教团体的钱大多数都给了某一种宗教群体，给其他的就相对很少。就这一次拨给几间堂会的钱来看，政府可以说是在尝试更正过去的错失。”

“此外必须指出的是，政府并不是第一次拨出此类款项，而得着拨款的也不只是我们的教会，还有其他宗教团体也得着类似拨款。”

拒绝拨款恐被误为偏袒民联

不过，他承认这次拨款的问题是出于时间的选择，因为钱是在一场势均力敌的补选前夕拨出，因此给人一种操纵性和令人质疑的印象，也有人因此呼吁堂会把收到的钱归还政府。

“基督教会关心的是道德与法治。虽然如此，教会并不能在政党政治上偏帮一方，理由有很多，包括教会在政治分界的两方都有基督徒。此外，教会也要提防给人一 种印象，以为是给在朝或在野的政党利用了。”

“基于这个理由，此时拒绝接受政府拨款不一定是一个解决方案，因为人家会误释为拒绝政府偏袒反对阵线。很清楚的，我们陷在了加在我们身上微妙的两难之 中。”

吁会友勿再评论免事情闹大

他表示，马来西亚卫理公会尊重这四间堂会领袖的权利，按各自情况决定如何使用所拨之款。同时，包括会督及全体会长在内的总议会理事会，将与该堂会共同寻求 明智的处理方案。

“我们要在此向本会所有牧师和会友们呼吁，勿评论此事，以免把事情闹得过大。反之，让我们留心我们的主耶苏在马太福音5章16节所说的话，特别是在我们目 前的状况中显为重要的‘你们的光也当这样照在人前，叫他们看见你们的好行为，便将荣耀归给你们在天上的父’。当我们真正的如此生活时，我们就可以深远的满 足了我们的四年主题，‘宣扬圣经神圣，更新转化国家了’。”

来源：http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/133015

我们不需要请有钱人来帮助上帝！

作者：钱进逸

关于诗巫教会受质疑接受贿选，让我发表一些个人看法：

政府的钱就是人民的钱，人民与教会接受政府拨款是理所当然的。

但在选举或补选的期间便大为不同，因为在理论上选举代表人民在选择谁将成为政府，所以选举期间原本的政府就没有运作政府资源与拨款的权力。

这就如同在婚礼期间，牧师未宣告：“我奉圣父、圣子与圣灵的名，宣布你们为夫妻，上帝所配合的，人不能分开。”以前，这对男女不应该行房的道理一样，因为两人未具有夫妻合法行房的身 份。我非常欣赏卫理公会规定属下牧师不可为未婚成孕的新人举行婚礼的规定。

但我国的体制不完整，选举与补选间， 原本的政府往往大笔拨款来助选。我期待教会是领导民众改变不完美体制的动力，是社会改革的动力，不是由不完美的社会与体制使唤。

因此，作为卫理公会会友，我认为，卫理公会受款时应该说明：“谢谢首相的拨款，但我们认为这笔钱应该在选举后才拨较恰当，因为我们认为选举 期间原本的政府就没有运作政府资源与拨款的权力，无论这笔钱是来自民联州政府或国阵联邦政府。”

如此一来，便不 会有会督所说的“收被误为接受贿选，拒绝被视为支持在野党”的困境。

再者，我们即使教会崇拜奉献期间，卫理公会 也先说明：未洗礼或不明白奉献意义者，请不要奉献。我们在教会内处理奉献与金钱有如此严谨的态度，在处理来自教会外的拨款，岂非也具有同样严谨审核的态 度？

我们期待卫理公会有事后反省的态度，给广大群众展现教会不同的光盐气度，而非为了面子发如此的文告，将责任 推给“收被误为接受贿选，拒绝被视为支持在野党”！


想一想：唐崇荣牧师曾说：事奉了这么多 年，他从来没有向有钱人要一分钱，因为：我们不需要请有钱人（包括信徒或非信徒）来帮助上帝！

来源：http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/132918

Church is non-partisan, but we will keep the money

Bishop Hwa Yung
May 28, 10
3:03pm

Many of our church members are aware of the reports in the media that the government made grants to four Methodist churches in Sibu, on the eve of the recent parliamentary by-election. The Council of Presidents discussed this matter at its May 25 meeting.

Pending fuller deliberations on the matter by the General Conference Executive Council at its upcoming meeting, we wish to issue a pastoral letter stating the following:

1. First, the giving of grants to religious bodies for the advancement of religion, as well as to other bodies like schools, etc, is a government responsibility. To receive such is a citizen's right. After all, the money given is actually taxpayers' money.

Indeed the problem in our country is that most of the money for religious bodies is usually given to one particular religious community, with relatively much smaller proportions given to other communities. In so far as the money was given to the churches this time round, it can be said that the government is trying to right a past wrong.

Moreover, it should be pointed out that this is not the first time the government has given such grants. Further, our churches are not the only recipients. Other religious groups also received similar grants.

2. However, as the public at large has pointed out, the problem with the grants made in this instance is that of timing! They were given on the eve of a closely fought by-election and therefore perceived to be manipulative and highly questionable. Some people have therefore urged the churches involved to return the money.

3. The Christian church is concerned about morality and politics. Nonetheless, it cannot take sides in party politics for various reasons, including the fact that there are Christians on both sides of the political divide.

Furthermore, the church must also guard against being perceived as being used as a tool by political parties, whether those in government or those in opposition. In light of the above, rejecting the grants given by the government in this instance is not necessarily the solution, because it could be misinterpreted as a rejection of the government in favour of the opposition.

Clearly we are caught in a delicate dilemma, which has been forced upon us.

4. The Methodist Church in Malaysia respects the right of the leadership of the four churches to decide on what to do with the grants given, in accordance with the conditions pertaining to them. At the same time, the General Conference Executive Council, which includes the bishop and all the presidents, will work with the churches concerned to resolve the matter wisely.

5. Meanwhile, we would like to urge all our pastors and members to refrain from making any comments on the matter so that it does not get blown out of proportion. Instead, let us take seriously the words of our Lord Jesus in Mat 5:16, which is particularly significant in our present context.

'In the same way, let your light shine before all men, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.'

When we truly live in this manner, we will go a long way to fulfil our Quadrennium theme, 'Spreading Scriptural Holiness, Transforming the Nation.' May the peace of the Lord be with all of you!

The writer is chairman of the Methodish Church's Council of Presidents.

Source: http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/132989

Sibu result reflects growing Christian vote

By Debra Chong

May 28, 2010

DAP made a special appeal to the Christian voters in Sibu. — file pic

KUALA LUMPUR, May 28 — DAP’s surprise win in the recent Sibu by-election was the latest message being sent to the Najib administration that it needs to buckle down and deal with the “Allah” issue sooner rather than later.

The party made a special appeal to the Christian voters, citing the need to prevent Putrajaya from regulating the ways and language of worship for non-Muslims, after a landmark court ruling on Dec 31 that allowed the word “Allah” to be used by all.

The rise in a conscious Christian vote came after churches in Muslim-majority Malaysia reported a growth spurt, and leading the pack was the 82-year-old Sidang Injil Borneo (SIB), an evangelical movement that worships mainly in Bahasa Malaysia, the national language.

An SIB churchgoer reads from a Bahasa Malaysia Bible, which contains the word “Allah”. — Picture by Choo Choy May

Its sphere of influence is growing fast, particularly among the Orang Asli tribes in the Malay peninsula, said the Christian Federation of Malaysia (CFM), an umbrella body that represents voices from both the orthodox churches and evangelical groups.

CFM general secretary Tan Kong Beng credits SIB’s growing appeal to “cultural affinities” between the local indigenous community and those from the Borneo interior.

First set up in Sarawak in 1928 and regarded as a relatively young church, the SIB has been making inroads into Peninsular Malaysia in the last two decades.

Some 30 SIB congregations have been set up in the peninsula to date, with more on the way.

Tan sees the SIB evangelists from Sabah and Sarawak to be more empathetic with the Orang Asli groups and so better able to build a closer rapport with the locals.

“Urban West Malaysians are very different from the Orang Asli,” Tan told The Malaysian Insider.

He explained that English — commonly used in the city and town churches — proved a challenge to those living in the rural areas.

The Bumiputera generally speak in their own native tongues, or the national language with outsiders, he said.

The SIB congregation in Shah Alam consists mainly of youths from Sabah and Sarawak. — Picture by Choo Choy May

The SIB community in neighbouring Shah Alam have been making regular visits to a remote Orang Asli village the next state over for the past few months, its pastor Richard Samporoh told The Malaysian Insider.

The church has a dedicated Orang Asli ministry, made up mainly of young working adults and university students who visit the tribespeople and provide a range of social-welfare services, such as basic health checks and free tuition classes, making the indigenous more receptive towards the church.

But even as the church expands, so have its problems.

SIB church leaders from both sides of the South China Sea complained of the home ministry’s increasingly heavy-handed treatment towards the church and its members, prompting them to file several lawsuits against the government.

Earlier this year, a group of Orang Asli Christians in Pahang sued the government for refusing to supply water and electricity to their village church.

The Jahut from Kampung Kubang Pasu lost the case at the Temerloh High Court but were appealing the decision.

Next week, the High Court here will attend to a suit filed by Sarawakian SIB member, Jill Ireland Lawrence Bill, who sued the home ministry for seizing her personal religious books and CDs, allegedly because they contained the word “Allah”, which may “confuse” Muslims.

Pastor Jerry Dusing, who heads the Sabah SIB, said the confiscation of Christian books remains a problem in Malaysia.

He, too, has filed a similar suit against the government for confiscating an imported shipment of Malay Bibles three years ago. The court will hear his case later next month.

Samporoh conducts worship in Bahasa Malaysia. — Picture by Choo Choy May

Pastor Danil Raut, president of SIB Semenanjung, related that the indigenous tribes in Sabah and Sarawak have been using the controversial “A” word in their worship since before Independence.

His fellow SIB member, Alfred Tais, who also sits on the National Evangelical Christian Fellowship (NECF) committee, explained that the Bumiputera Christians were upset because they perceived the government’s restrictive policies as a violation of the Federal Constitution and the terms laid out in the agreements for the Borneo states to join the peninsula to form Malaysia.

The ruling Barisan Nasional government had tried to play down the issue, only to have it backfire on them, as seen by the way Sibu — where over half the electorate were Christian — voted earlier this month.

The secular DAP, which had been placed as the underdog in that by-election, had mounted an aggressive campaign, arguing the right of non-Muslims to use the “A” word.

“We’re not creating it to be a hot topic but… we can’t control public sentiment,” Dusing told The Malaysian Insider just before the polls, highlighting Sibu’s extraordinarily large Christian voter population.

“To us it is a hindrance to be able to practise our religion freely. The Christian community is concerned that our Bible is placed under internal security. Books that teach positive religious values placed under restrictions.

“We hope the government will take a sensible attitude towards this problem,” he said.

Source: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/sibu-result-reflects-growing-christian-vote/

凯撒与上帝

【乱石崩云／唐南发专栏】1999年烈火莫熄风起云涌的时候，前基督教联合会主席吴 吉平毅然投身反对运动，抗衡马哈迪扭曲司法、打压政敌的不公义行为。

吴吉平的做法得不到基督教界的认同，批评他“把政治带入教会”的领 袖不在少数。倏忽十载，其中虽有挫折与低潮，吴吉平对公正运动却始终不离不弃；尽管经历了308的政治大海啸，让人民公正党顿时奇货可居，吴吉平身为领袖 之一，依然保持一贯低调的方式，只在必要的时候发言，证明了他当年的政治选择决非投机之举。

有人担心教会政治化，固然可以理解，但邀请国阵 领袖出席圣诞节活动、配合马华公会举办“爱国祈祷大会”、甚至由部长为基督教的大会主持开、闭幕仪式等，难道就不会把宗教政治化？

教会倾向和执政党联系

正如我所观察到的，308大选以前，黄燕燕和伯纳东博（Bernard Giluk Dompok）普遍被主流教会视为基督徒参政的“榜样”；308大选之后，随着民联执政霹雳州和雪兰莪州，信仰基督的倪可敏、倪可汉和郭素沁（天主教徒） 等在野党领袖也就不再是“敏感人物”了。

无论我国的基督教界怎么辩驳，以往种种的事迹证明教会领袖鉴于“政治 正确”的考量，倾向和执政党保持联系是铁一般的事实。比较不为人注意的，是这个现象其实和马来西亚独特的政治生态密不可分。

马来西亚的基督 教纵使宗派各异，大致上都从属福音派，除了某些特定仪式或传统，基本信仰没有太大差别，都专注于传扬福音。思维稍微广阔的，尚纳入社会关怀性质的工作，但 分享教义和见证依然是重点。也因为这样，往往被人视为“内向的教会”（inward-looking church）。

帝国主义盛行的时 代，欧洲和北美洲不少基督教宗派也派遣宣教士到世界各地传扬福音，建立教会。当中固然存在具有“文明教化”（mission civilisatrice）思维者，但更多的教会为了福音能够深入民间，在马来亚创办了医院和母语学校，造福社会和人群。

为了方便统治， 英国殖民政府不鼓励宗教团体涉及政治；而以白人为首的教会在异乡和异族间工作，也同政治斗争保持一定距离，以便发展并巩固宗教、医疗及教育事业。

宗教团体与国阵交好

独立以前，殖民政府形同马来亚、新加坡、砂拉越和北婆罗洲教会的守护人；独立以后，教会面对无神论者主 导的马来亚共产党地下抗争、回教党在半岛东部和北部持续扩张的影响力，以及宗主国已然离去的现实环境，联盟/国阵(尤其是马华公会)于是成为教会的自然伙 伴，加以靠拢是理性的选择。

更重要的，作为庞大的执政集团，联盟/国阵无论在政策制定与资源分 配方面都占尽先机，缺乏任何足以与之抗衡的世俗政治力量，教会与其“交好”是再自然不过的事。而且这个现象并不局限于基督教，回教以外的其他宗教也不例 外。

譬如马华公会近年就很重视佛教界，在日益回教化的环境中，黄家定、黄家泉和翁诗杰都极尽所能突出本身的佛教背景，似乎如此就能化解马哈 迪当年武断宣布马来西亚为回教国的宪法危机。

国内宗教的版图分布和强势的政府主导之外，1969年的513事件被执政者充分利用，违反人权 的法律逐一出台以防止民众质疑巫统的马来人议程，导致任何同宗教与种族有关的议题皆变得极度敏感。在回教徒占多数的国家，基督教会不得不谨言慎行，对政治 更退避三舍。

对于1987年10月的茅草行动中蒙难的在野党和华教人士，大家耳熟能详。可是又有多少人知道其中有位名为Poh Boon Sing的基督徒也无辜遭殃呢？不知道是情有可原的，因为教会普遍上对这个历史事件保持沉默，而这位基督徒后来当了牧师，全职牧养教会，从此不问政事。

反思信仰与政治的关联

308大选之后，不少年轻的基督徒开始反思政治的意涵，以及教会如何看待政治。他们不再满足于“为执 政掌权者祷告”或“记得履行公民投票的义务”等样板式的讲台教导，而渴望教会领袖能够提供更切合当下政治局势发展的信息。

教会如果要对年轻 的会众发挥更大的影响，就不能继续自我设限，视反对政治为畏途。

耶稣基督本身就是异议份子，其一生都在与政治体制抗衡。希律王要追杀他，犹 太教的宗教领袖也把他看作威胁，两者都欲除之而后快，以免他颠覆当时的政体和宗教层级（religious hierarchy）。

换句话 说，靠拢权势——无论国阵或民联——来求存从来就不是耶稣的本意。对遭受资本主义体制压迫的拉丁美洲信徒而言，耶稣是革命者；对经历过种族隔离政策的南非 基督徒，耶稣是黑人。耶稣的“颠覆性”，是坚定他们信仰的源头。

这不意味着教会必须凡事都与政府作对，但面对种种的压迫与滥权，基督徒选择 沉默只会遭致他人无积极意义的嘲笑，再多的信仰见证也不能改变外界负面的看法。 【参见：教会语言与思想枷锁：续谈基督 教徒的政教矛盾】

我反对政教合一，也相信耶稣的国不属这世界，但这不应该是基督徒对政治噤声的理由。“惟愿公平如大水滚滚， 使公义如江河滔滔”，以及“行公义、好怜悯、存谦卑的心与上帝同行”，都是基督徒在不公义的体制中无畏无惧发声的基础。

教会不应畏讲真话

随着国家日益回教化，教会的不安与日俱增。虽然偶尔敢于表达对回教党的不满，面对巫统的霸权却束手无策。 毕竟从殖民地时代开始，教会就没有反对政权的习惯和传统。一旦有人尝试打破这个局面（例如吴吉平），教会领袖担心受波及，乃迫不及待地划清界限。

因此，诗巫卫理公会的领袖驳斥吴吉平的文章，完全是 意料中事。但指吴吉平“嚣张、口出狂言”，则未免言过其实。读了后者文章的人都会同意，其文笔谨慎持 平，而且极具说服力，没有丝毫挑衅的成份。

事实上，教会如果在真理上站得稳，应当理直气壮地告诉纳吉：“合理与合法的拨款，无任欢迎，但不 应该在竞选期间，因为这是违反选举法令的行为，我们不能陷你于不义。”

而纳吉如果真是开明与公正的首相，也必会明白并尊重教会的立场。何来 难为之处？

一个信靠全能上帝的人，不应该会担心讲了真话而得罪政府或政党。如果潘 霍华牧师（右图）勇于为信仰而殉道，我国教会领袖在必要时候向国阵或民联政府表达异议，又有何难？马来西亚当下的政局，难道会比纳粹德国更险峻？

很 显然，不少人敬畏上帝，但更害怕政府。得罪前者，大可祷告祈求饶恕；开罪后者，只怕连身家利益都要失去。

然而，基督徒不准备随时失去这一 切，又岂能得着所渴望的生命？（路加福音17：33）

唐南发是时事评论人，毕业于英国伦敦大学国际政治系硕士班。

读者来函 [2]

教会岂可沦为政权工具? 作者／Chopin 2010年05月28日 11:05 am 这事件发生的时机实在不容他们狡辩为只是一笔普通拨款，这很明显的这是一笔政治拨款（坦白点说就是贿选）。首先国阵选择在补选的竞选期如此高调拨款给这四 间诗巫教会，分明是收买诗巫人心的一着，因为诗巫有大量的卫理基督徒选民。不然他们为何不在乌雪或全国各地拨款给教会呢？ 如果这四间教会 只是默默地接收“拨款”那或许还能说的过去。但四教会收到款项后竟然在报章上登广告感谢国阵政府，在补选的敏感期里这只能解读为一项配合国阵的竞选策略的 举动。 教会领袖想辩解登广告为感恩之举，试问登广告感谢别人奉献是教会的一般做法吗？如果不是，为何单单国阵能获得如此厚待？教会此举与 那些自甘向强权卑恭屈膝涂脂抹粉的团体有何分被别？登广告的效果是突出他们感谢上帝还是感谢国阵，会否影响选民的投票倾向？教会领袖在作出这个决定时动机 是否纯正无可指责，有没有对大局仔细衡量过？ 如果有一天政府要教会选择向政权下跪，或面临关闭；这些教会领袖会如何取舍？ 提 醒东西马各教会： 1．教会是上帝设立的。教会的存废只仰赖上帝，不仰赖政权。 2．上帝从不缺钱，不须向富人或强权乞求施舍奉献。 3． 一个人不能事奉两个主；不是恶这个，爱那个，就是重这个，轻那个。你们不能又事奉神，又事奉玛门（玛门：财利的意思）。（马太福音6：24） 4． 上帝是行公义、好怜悯的，他对教会的期望也是如此。教会切忌成为多行不义者的帮凶。 二战时的德国教会，还有启示录里七间教会中大部分的下 场如何，堪为殷鉴。

正确的宗教守则 作者／evo7kei 2010年05月28日 11:05 am 我虽身为佛教徒，从信徒直到现在成为佛教道场的义工工作人员都不曾放弃关心马来西亚的动向。 在 道场义务工作的经验，也让我更有信心想要协助马来西亚成为一个更公平和廉洁的国家。如果首相纳吉不以身作则，反而鼓励你用贿赂的方式来达到目的，根本就是 把真理颠倒。所有马来西亚人民的宗教信仰都被巫统的烂人来管理和摆布，我是不会妥协的。 唐南发和吴吉平的看法是超越宗教，并对国家社会怀 有关怀和为人民服务。不管我们是什么宗教教派也好，我们的信仰是不可以被烂纳吉来搞砸的。保持坚定和正确的宗教价值观都是我们信徒应该做的。如果还以什么 烂理由来支持错误的行为，那我觉得这宗教领导人也不配称职。 宗教人员应该要怀有服务和教育大众的态度，对抗不公义的事本就义不容辞。就拿 两则真实个案来告诉大家，中国佛教“弘一大师”在二战期间救国救民的精神，发挥慈悲心并与日军对抗。台湾佛光山“星云大师”也因为民进党陈水扁的腐败，在 2008年召回所有在海外的弟子回台湾投票并让民进党败选。 最后，我希望我们的国家所有不同宗教领导人会发起一个很强烈的信息给信徒，宗 教也可以让腐败的BN领导人下台！还有自称自己是虔诚的“佛教徒”的黄家定，黄家泉和马华的领导人，省点吧！我绝不容许佛教名义给你们搞到这样，回家忏悔 并隐退吧（虽然你们捐钱也弥补不了你们的罪业）。 来源：http://www.merdekareview.com/news/n/13534.html

制度化拨款给基督教会

我国宪法明言每个公民拥有宗教自由。首相纳吉的“一个马来西亚”理念，乃包含各族和各宗教共创 国家。首相对回教以外的宗教，显得开明。他出席宗教庆典，包括今天到十五碑锡兰佛寺出席卫塞节庆祝活动。作为一个基督徒，我希望政府能够设定完善制度拨款 给宗教团体、包括基督教会。

首先，须知在不少先进国，它们藉著给予基督教会优惠和恩惠，社会的罪恶和问题也相应地降低。在 这些国家，最受欢迎的移民和工作申请者就是牧师。因为它们知道这些人士是来帮助稳定社会问题的。或许 读者以为它们都是基督教国家，所以没甚么大惊小怪！不，全世界最大的回教国家印尼，除了极端的亚齐省和苏拉威西省外，其实对回教以外的宗教相当开放。基督 教会容易获得政府拨地建教堂。如果你是外国牧师在印尼表明身份的话，当地人包括回教徒都会尊敬你。

目前我国的罪案率很高，这些问题乃骨牌效应地造成各种社会问题。我国的警察人数以人口比例高居 国际前几名，但政府仍然说需要增加警察的人数，这只能治標不能治本。要社会良好，必须从教育著手。基督教会就可以扮演一个良好的角色，因为教会陶冶信徒成 为好公民。

基督徒都是提倡和平者，並且他们的圣经教导信徒必须为国家的和谐及掌权者祷告。当他们能够为这 些事项祷告时，很自然的也会以行动表现为一个爱国者。教会传教是一回事，但它们贡献社会不等於只为了传教，它们都是为缔造一个美好的国家而努力。

基督教会的共同点就是积极地参与社会事工，包括戒毒所、孤儿院、老人院、单亲妈妈收容所等。它 们大多数都是由教会承担一切开销的，其他没有开设这些事工的教会往往也会奉献资助它们。不过事工也会遇到经费不足的阻碍，结果一些宏图大计必须列入等候名 单。必须提出的一点是，那些曾经申请政府资助的事工，到后来大多数放弃靠政府，因为政府插手在行政里，导致事工不进反退。

2007年，格那拉再也前国会议员卢诚国曾通知一些教会领袖，每个基督教戒毒所可以获得政府每 年2000令吉拨款。但却因不是一种制度，结果不了了之。

我国的天主教和基督教的教会数目不少，若要达到拨款给每间教会將消耗国库大笔金钱，那是不实际 的。我作这样的建议：既然天主教有自己的总会，及基督教有不同宗派的总会，譬如神召会、卫理公会、圣公会、浸信会、信义会等，政府 可每年制度化拨一笔款项 给各总会。因为各总会清楚知道自己属下各堂会的需要，就把款项进行內部份配。若各宗派有社会事工的话，应增加若干比率拨款。

教会面对重大的问题之一是建堂，我们希望政府尽可能拨地给教堂。即使教会自费买地，也难获得政 府批准建堂，希望政府放宽通融批准。至於建造教堂或购买建筑物供崇拜所，政府可通过总会的申请，无论建筑物大小，一律给一个固定数目。至於教会的门牌税和 地税，把它们降低到每年一令吉象徵式的收费。

也在《星洲日报》刊登：http://opinions.sinchew-i.com/node/14883

教会应打击“选举才拨款”的买票做法 - 回应四所诗巫卫理公会

吴吉平发表了一篇题为“我们不接受这种钱”文章后，蒙《当今大马》报道一篇关于一些卫理公会领袖们的回应言论（教会拒退还诗巫“糖果拨款”，反呛吴吉平嚣张且自鸣清高 http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/132778）。我这里要提出我的见解。

这几个教会领袖们无须质疑吴吉平以什么身分发言，因为整篇文章里，他只是以一个卫理公会的一个会友身分自居。除此，吴吉平已经辞去教会领导层以及公正党的理事会的职位。他现在只以一个关心国家状况的身分前提下，针对国阵和民联不当做法给予批判。

卫理公会领袖们对吴吉平的言论，加上了无的放矢的批评。吴吉平根本没有讲政府的这笔拨款是肮脏的，结果领袖提出关于会友的奉献乃无从晓得是否干不干净来让教会决定取舍的言论。

吴吉平的主要中心内容是呼吁人民，包括教会，抗拒选举时才临时拨款的动作。他这样的呼吁何错之有？马来西亚的选民，经过了47年（东马）或53年（西马）的选举制度，这种临选举才来拨款博得选票的国阵手法，为什么我们不能变得更成熟去思考它？为什么我们不尝试抗拒这种不公平竞争的拉票做法？

如果越来越多的选民拒绝这种“糖果买票”的动作，竞选者就只好以政绩和竞选宣言来取胜。结果，选民才是做王者，没有一方可以夸张必胜。这样也会使一党独大的情况消失在大马的政坛里，久而久之两线制将会形成。

领袖说教会都是以正常程序申请而获批准，没有涉及任何交易或附带条件。我认为教会应该让人们知道这几项的申请真相，它们是在补还未出现选前或补选期间申请的？若是前者，为何这么巧现在获得批准？若是后者，为何中央政府忽然这么高效率，因为鲜少听过政府批准拨款给教会的。

另外，领袖也应该交代收到款项后为什么打广告感谢国阵政府？之前不是说无条件的吗？那么教会其实没有必要打广告宣告天下。这种打广告的事件，是否一种双方彼此的默契？教会做事情不是向来不宣扬的吗？对啊，教会要感恩是圣经的教训，不过，何须打锣打鼓让诗巫的选民知道教会得到政府的恩惠？教会需要钱，这笔广告费其实应该留下来会有更大的用途呀！

所以，人在江湖，身不由主！受人恩惠，总必定欠人一笔人情债的！除非你不收，收了就要报答恩主。这就吴吉平所谓的为何拒绝选举时的糖果拨款的理由。既然领袖宣称打广告是为了表示感恩一事，相信基督徒质疑是否真言也不会得到答案。不过主耶稣是最后的审判官，只有他监察人心，他知道真相。

教会应该成为明灯照耀

作者：求真

看了官佰永教会领袖的反驳吴吉平弟兄的呼吁后，我心里很为信仰的破裂难过，以下是我尝试综合补选、拨款与 信仰的立场提出个人意见，希望更多教会领袖关注参与讨论：我们的信仰如何建立在基督耶稣的真理与基础上。

根据 《当今大马》新闻报导“教会拒退还诗巫“糖果拨 款”反呛吴吉平嚣张且自鸣清高” （http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/132778），我特别节录这段比较触动我信仰思绪的谈话。

“官佰永也辩称，若因为补 选而获得更多拨款，也可视为是上帝所赐的特别契机，过后再按教会需要，加几倍赐福教会，让教会恩上加恩。”

基 督徒们，上帝的恩典怎么可以是非不分，建立在别人的贫穷、落后与痛苦上的？就算是没有基督信仰的人，他们也会按着民主、公平、道德观念上衡量大选与补选应 该不应该收受礼物与金钱。

但是作为正信的基督徒，有十字架的恩典与真理的基督教会，公然把影响选民投票的金钱当 着上帝所赐。做为当地教会与地方领袖（基督徒应该在属灵与世俗的责任上让人认识我们是跟随基督耶稣的门徒）竟然看不到收取了补选期间的金钱带来的效应？对 许多知识与政治水平一般的人来说是可能拨款代表善政、代表政府体贴人民，这样可以让许多选民对投票有完全相反的认识。这一票可能就是因为教会有拨款而看不 到，许多人的痛苦、水灾等等民生问题，而这原本就不应该在补选才大发热心的！

当这位教会领袖借用安华也鼓励人民 收取国阵的金钱与拨款来说明吴吉平弟兄嚣张，正好说明了，这位教会执事主席，根本分不清安华或民联要求民众接受国阵各种各样的金钱或物质，是要人民认清这 些东西原本就属于人民的，别忘了，民联领袖呼吁人民在国阵领袖主动给予，不但要加倍的索取，还不要忘记把票投给能够为人民做事的民联或人民心目中真正为民 服务的候选人。这里的意义是，当没有任何法律或执法单位命令国阵停止，在选举期间以金钱、物质等等来利诱人民的选票，民联领袖就必须教育人民选票是投给真 正用心经营政治的人民领袖。作为教会领袖的官佰永弟兄，不可能没有属灵的眼光与耶稣基督的公义来看待，民主选举必须在公平、透明化与符合人民需求的最基本 的公平平台。

一旦教会在补选期间接受一笔的金钱，不管在什么用途都不会荣耀上帝，因为这样的举动有几个层面招致 对自己教会牧者的羞辱。

1.如果教会领袖非常肯定诗巫选区的5万4695选民都能够分辨接受国阵的礼物、拨款是 与没有接受是没有分别的，那么教会在这时候接受国阵的拨款是否是基督教会的好见证？上帝要我们行公义、好怜悯存谦卑的心与上帝同行（弥6：8）。那些没有 接到拨款的群众与没有投票资格的他们是否因此没有得到官弟兄说的上帝的所赐，还是国阵领袖这样做根本扭曲了选举应该以政策、辩论及实事求是的选举态度来公 平竞争？

2.如果教会认为在补选期间接受拨款没有影响选举公平，为什么不能在选举后才接受拨款？教会的举动是否 已经失去做人民老板（选民决定候选议员命运）的尊严？作为地上的基督徒我们有比没有信仰的人更大的属灵透视力与社会责任感。就算我们有些人不能同意民联的 政策或作风，也应该让人民可以公平、透明度的选出真正的人民代议士，这样的道理不可能教会领袖比其他人更不懂的。

3. 教会怎么解释耶稣说的怜悯人的人有福了，因为他们必蒙怜悯？到底教会该与（怜悯）更多没有得到基本照顾的诗巫人民同在，还是先领取拨款？在这补选期间，最 重要的难道不是让人民充分的善用民主投票权来争取福利与国家（诗巫是国会选区）的政策能够平等对待全国人民？教会不是要教育人民做一个有尊严的人，做一个 讨上帝喜悦有尊严有担当的人吗？教会不是要以圣经真理教导社区人民关于怎么让上帝国度行在地上如同天上吗？

到底 我们基督徒怎么思想，如果社区人民连基本的公共设施都不足，连西马的一般记者都洒泪当场。请问基督的教会如何形容上帝的国就在苦难的人民中间？拥有设备齐 全及漂亮教堂的教会与信徒及领袖们，是否把握机会教育或帮助软弱的人民善用公民权利来争取现在中产阶级基督社群所拥有比基本人权更好的祝福？

最后关于教会领袖退休后应该尊重现任领袖的说法，我个人不敢苟同。我们相信教会遴选领袖都必须经过迫切的祷告、信徒的见 证、领袖的德行、教会连接祷告与信仰认知的接纳等等过程。因此教会领袖退休只是上帝兴起新的领袖，不表示过去的领袖就不能在信仰或属灵事工上给予教会劝告 与提醒。我认为用一般世界的领袖任免来看待属灵领袖的看法是不符合圣经一贯教导，同时不懂得感恩上帝，因为那些在上帝面前为义而说话的神的仆人使女。

政治认识方面，大家政见可能不尽相同，但是却不能对信仰的核心价值与感恩的对象有如此大的分歧。我想在信仰的认知上首 先我们感恩的是上帝的创造、耶稣基督的救恩与圣灵的感动。在这拨款事情上教会所做的已经是理亏，怎么还先感恩予不尊重选民的国阵，这不是本末倒置吗？

来源：http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/132852

教会拒退还诗巫“糖果拨款”，反呛吴吉平嚣张且自鸣清高

前基督教联合会主席吴吉平批评4家诗巫卫理公会，在补选时接受政府175万拨款的言论，掀起教会的反弹， 其中一个教会更反批吴吉平嚣张及自鸣清高。

吴吉平也是公正党纪律委员会成员，他日前发表一篇《我们不接受这种钱》（http://www.malaysiakini.com/columns/132736），呼吁诗巫的4所教 会秉持基督教精神，拒绝国阵在诗巫补选期间派发的“糖果拨款”。

经过部落格及网络媒体的广泛转载后，其中一家受 惠教会的负责人挺身反击吴吉平的言论。

质疑民联执政百姓受苦
卫理公会新安堂执事会主席官佰永在一篇文告中指出，吴吉平不应如此嚣张，口出狂言，要教会把款项退回给政府。

他质疑，若这是民联领袖的处事风范，未上台就如此，那天若有机会上台执政，老百姓岂不是要受尽苦头。

“吴吉平身为一个教会领袖，尚未向教会了解真相，只凭自已的想像及猜测，就如此批判教会，攻击教会无良知。他这种自鸣清高成何体统? ”

为登报道谢的举动辩护
官佰永也是诗巫卫理福善社社长，他表示，教会是否可以接受政府的拨款见仁见智，但政府的钱绝对干净，因为这都是人民的税收所得，更何况教会都 是以正常程序申请而获批准，没有涉及任何交易或附带条件。

至于在领受了款项后在报章刊登致谢，官佰永辩称，这也 完全符合信仰的教导，以体现感恩的行为。

指补选拨款是上帝契机
他也辩称，若因为补选而获得更多拨款，也可视为是上帝所赐的特别契机，过后再按教会需要，加几倍赐福教会，让教会恩上 加恩。

“若因为政府拨款就该退还，那么许多基督徒的有功人士，因为受政府肯定推荐受封勋衍，是否也要退还？”

“或教会所收的奉献款项，是否都要经过严格的审查，必须确定奉献者都是干净才可接收？”

“有些基督徒因为靠关系及政商勾结，在赚钱后捐给教会，教会是否也当退回？这些人的标准该由谁来评价？”

质疑吴吉平发言的身份
官佰永强调，本身 绝对认同吴吉平所说，即政府应建立良好制度给予各团体协助，拒绝拜票性的拨款。

不过，他反呛吴吉平，在批评政府 的同时，试问民联的政策是什么？

他也质疑吴吉平是以哪一个身份发言。他说，若吴吉平是以前基督教联合会主席的身 份发言，那就应该了解，一个领袖卸任之后，就不应再代表该组织发言。

“否则他的言论不但不具代表性，也是对该组 织现有领袖的不敬。”

“若吴吉平是以公正党纪律委员会成员的身份发言，那其言论就更无意义，因他已被自己的政治 思想及理念所影响，被自己的政治议程所渗透。更何况政治人物，包括该党精神领袖安华都不反对团体向政府要求拨款。”

来源：http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/132778

我们不接受这种钱

作者：吴吉平

姑勿论诗巫国会 议席补选的结果如何，报导所述投票日前夕颁发一百七十五万马币“特别拨款” 给四个卫理公会的事，作为一个卫理公会的会友，我感到非常不安，我相信许多基督徒也与 我有同感。

当权的，无论任何政党， 落到要在选举期间大抛“特殊拨款”给选区内各领域，博 取选民支持以增加票数始终是令人困扰的。这 种最后一分钟的努力，尝试让人以为是同情和关注某个特定群体选民的行为简直不诚实、虚伪和伪善。真有诚意的执政者会有一个既定的制度衡量问 题和各个选民的需要，并有足够的预算，井然有序、透明、公平和有效地分配，并计划如何解决当地的问题。竞选活动进行时，大笔的公款 能突然变出来供运用，人民的需要突然会引起当权者的特别关注令人匪夷所思。

宗教群体，穆斯 林或非穆斯林面对的困境、需求和须关注的问题是大家有目共睹的。若有诚意、公正并妥善地处理，它们不会成为选举的课题。同样道理，某 个族群面对的困境或多年未解决的民生问题和威胁如水灾、道路情况等也就不会被提出来。因此，最后一分钟“选举糖果”和“特别拨款”意味着当局默认缺乏正确和诚实的规划和实 施。

除此之外，在投 票日前夕提供“特殊拨款”给四个诗巫卫理教会尤其教我耿耿于怀。我是基督徒，更是卫理公会的会员，该宗派远在国家 未独立之前已经在各个领域包括透过教育服务人民，尤其显著的是女性教育的推广，我的母亲就是其中一位受惠者。

我感到很痛心， 也十分关注针对这“特殊拨款”的言论。发言者不仅关心诗巫和马来西亚，也关心这令人哗然的一幕可能影响教会的良好声 誉。以下是一 些评论：

Jin Chuah：令人担心的地方是一百七十五万马币的拨款分发给诗巫四间卫理教会可能造成尚未投票的基督徒不露面。

陈：上帝在看着诗巫，但他对国阵的糖果无可奈 何。

阿邦阿 迪：就 像我昨晚说，上帝让钱给比下去了。而卫理公会领了这笔国阵的贿赂再次证明，比起钱，上帝算不得什么。你们这班民联家伙，你们只会等奇迹出现。那么，今天发生的奇迹是$$$$$$。金钱会说话，金钱会走动...。

Fairplay Lee：所有的基督徒弟兄姐妹不要受骗，醒觉起来 投票支持正义和求圣灵引导。

失望：联邦基金调拨一百七十五万至四教堂不是从 国阵袋子拿出来的，它原本就是人民的钱。你们不要以为钱来得迟。投票前想想诗巫子民。

阿卡：圣诞老人把数以百万计的钱给教会，每 个贫穷的伊班人只得六百令吉 。下一轮也许每个伊班人可以获得六千令吉，每间教会六百令吉。不知道牧师们会不会因这百万的金钱 败坏？

Kumar. Pg：一百七十五万的贿金，基督徒是不是把宗教操守当掉给巫统了？

阿尼尔：如果你问我，我不认为诗巫教会 应该在竞选期间接受这笔拨款，即使他们的追随者仍然可以自由投票，要知道这是贿选，无论是收买的一方和被收买的都要负责（虽 然人们可以体谅那些迫切需要钱的人的状 况）。但我不认为教会正处在这种水深火热中。他们蒙召要持守一个更高的标准，为他人树立榜样，拒绝任何形式的腐败。 这样可以教训那些行贿的：有些东西金钱是买不到的。

灯光投射之下无 论是对是错，不分宗派，将会影响整个马来西亚的基督教会。马来西亚人都在注视着我们，或开声或静默，等着看我们在这种情况下怎么办。他 们在等待一个明确的立场。这事发生在诗巫，但其后果会影响极其深远。它甚至不只是关乎基督教社区本身，而是影响我国的选举进行方式以 及在选举期间，并甚至其它时候人民的言行。

我谨呼吁在这次 事件直接涉及的教会： 如果这一切报道是错误的，根本没有发生这样的事，请站出来直言。如果这是真的，他们给了，你们也 拿了，全数退回给他们。 我们不接受这种钱。教会穷就穷吧（如教堂老鼠），但如《箴言》告诉我们，贫穷但快乐因为 问心无愧。

我也诚恳地呼吁 所有马来西亚教会，通过马来西亚基督教协会（CFM）：请让我们向国家和世界发出一个明确，不含糊和永不更改的信息 。作为公民和纳税人，我们应有这权利实践和 遵行我们的宗教信念，以和平和有秩序的方式，享有我们应该得到的合理资源分配。我们欢迎任何当政者，在恰当的时候以开明的态度与我 们坐下来商讨，了解我们的宗教和我们这社群的需要，还有我们关切的崇拜场所、丧葬地点和马来文圣经问题，以及我们将如何继续透过社会 关怀，服务全体有需要的马来西亚人。 公平地提供我们应得的设施和资源，但请不要在补选前夕给我们 “特别拨款”。我们不接受这种钱。不必 了，谢谢你们，不要在这种情况下。

不然的话，我们 所发出给政府，无论是现任或将来的，无论是国阵或民联的信息将是那以基督为名的教会将会在这样的情况下接受这种钱：“你们出价吧，我们可以收这 样的拨款。我们鼓励参加竞选各造用金钱赢取选票，有出更高价的吗？”

基督的教会向所 有的人宣扬在一切事上维持基督的道德价值观和标准。基督信仰的标准既然这么崇高，教会就必须持守自己所标榜的标准。

我们侍奉的是那复活的救主，他降世在卑微的马房中，因为他的父母租不到一间旅店的房子。让我们忠于我们的呼召。

来源：http://ongohing.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/we-dont-take-such-money/ （刊登于2010年5月17日）

原著：We Don’t Take Such Money

Writer: Goh Keat Peng

此文获得作者授权翻译

译者：何雪卿

注：受惠的四所卫 理公会是：

En Tao Methodist Church,
RM500,000
Tien Tao Methodist Church, RM500,000
Sing Ang Tong Methodist Church RM400,000
Hwai Ang Tong Methodist Church RM350,000

Christians to Unite for Global Day of Prayer

In Malaysia, the Global Day of Prayer (GDOP)is held at Selangor Shah Alam Indoor Stadium on 23rd May at 6.30 p.m. The coordiator National Evangelical Christian Fellowship (NECF) distributed 12,000 tickets to various Churches. Although admission to the event is free, those interested need to obtain tickets for security purposes.

In Malaysia, the GDOP only started in 2006 among the evangelical Churches and each year it was hosted by different Churches, hence only a limited number of people could be present. This year the NECF has brought the event to a larger venue.

In conjunction with the event, NECF has invited the Election Commission to participate in voters registration.

---------------------------------------------------

Thursday, 20 May 2010 02:36 PM
EDT Adrienne S. Gaines News - Featured News

Hundreds of thousands of Christians worldwide are expected to participate in the 10th annual Global Day of Prayer being held Sunday.

Founder Graham Power will host a large-scale gathering at the Newlands Rugby Stadium in Cape Town, South Africa, where the first Global Day of Prayer was held in 2001.

"People just have such an expectation," Power told Charisma. "I have such an expectation that God is going to do something really dynamic."

The event is inspired by 2 Chronicles 7:14—"If My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land"—and is expected to have participation from every nation.

Participants will pray about the global HIV/AIDS pandemic, crime and government corruption, among other things. But Power said uniting the world in prayer is just the first part of a plan God showed him in a series of visions.

The second aspect-promoting integrity among Christians in church, business and political leadership-will officially kick off Sunday via a Web site dubbed UnashamedlyEthical.com (http://www.unashamedlyethical.com/Home/default.asp).

The "waves" of awakening will lead to a revival "bigger and greater than what we have ever yet seen," said Power, who discusses the history of the global prayer day in his book, Not by Might, Nor by Power (Creation House). "I don't know what God's timing is, but He has shown that Africa would be a light to the world, as crazy as that sounds. ... I am very expectant that there's going to be something very dynamic that will develop from here."

The global prayer day will be preceded by 10 days of continuous prayer, and a three-day conference featuring Michael W. Smith and international prayer leaders such as Harvest Evangelism founder Ed Silvoso and Generals International co-founder Cindy Jacobs began Wednesday in Cape Town.

The South Africa Global Day of Prayer gathering will be broadcast live on GOD TV.

Source: http://www.charismamag.com/index.php/news/28286-christians-to-unite-for-global-day-of-prayer

In God We Trust of In Government We Trust?

At Sibu Parliamentary Seat by-election, PM Najib made a grant of RM1.75 million to four Methodist Churches, they were:
En Tao Methodist Church, RM500,000
Tien Tao Methodist Church, RM500,000
Sing Ang Tong Methodist Church RM400,000
Hwai Ang Tong Methodist Church RM350,000

Prime Minister Najib was desperate to clean-sweep all by-elections when he made his way to campaign personally. He just had a good time in USA meeting with President Barack Obama. So sailing on that glory he campaigned confidently in Ulu Selangor. BN won by a majority of 1725 votes. But it was not Barisan Nasional's "excellent" policies that resulted in the victory. Instead it was money politics. It was estimated that he pumped into the constituency a hefty RM170 million. Many of the BN promises are yet to fulfill.

With the victory in Ulu Selangor, he was convinced that the bribery-election is always a magic that worked and would work again, this time round, in Sibu. He found out that more than half of the voters in Sibu were Christians. He also found out that the Christians were inclined to support DAP.

So Najib resorted to please the Christians, especially the Chinese Christians. And he made a grant of RM1.7 million to 4 Methodist Churches. I was disappointed that the Churches accepted the money!

Our Constitution guarantees freedom of religion for all citizens. As such, the government is obliged to be fair in making grants to all religious bodies. Sad to say that it was not true. Churches in Malaysia are self-survived! Some Churches did sometimes receive grants from the Government, but it was only a handful of them.

Why were the 4 Methodist Churches given the grant out of the blues? The money was not a regular allocation. It happened, simply because a by-election was taking place at the town where the Churches were located. So Najib's message had an implication - Isn't the BN Government cared for the Churches? So please vote BN as a returned favor. Or if you don't feel comfortable to reject us, don't vote, just stay at home. Yes, the grants were not money from UMNO or BN. They were taken from the treasury.

It was absolutely wrong to use public funds to achieve a party's goal. I hope that Christians in future elections will go to the poll to vote for justice. We should not be moved with sweet goodies along the way, be they from BN or Pakatan Rakyat (PR). We pray for the dawning of a better Malaysia which is free from corruption, injustice, rotten judiciary, racial prejudice, religious prejudice, manipulations of Government Institutions like the Police Force and Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission.

Accepting the money would mean that our God no more important. We don't want to inherit the spirit of Esau. Esau sold his first-born right with a mere bowl of red bean soup. Should Churches sell away our right to vote for a better future for our next generations with earthly bribes?

Christians, just ask ourselves, do we practice "In God We Trust" or "In Government We Trust"? If we put our faith in the earthly institutions, God won't work! I know that many Churches need a lot of funds to run their institutions. Nevertheless we should always turn our eyes upon Jesus Christ. I pray that Christians will not depart from faith in God. Sometimes it can happen even through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared.

We Don't Take Such Money

by Goh Keat Peng

Regardless of the results of the Sibu parliamentary by-elections, the reported “special grants” of RM1.75 million to four Methodist churches on the eve of polling day is very troubling to me as a Christian who attends a Methodist church and I am sure to many other Christians.

It is always troubling when a sitting government, regardless of which party, has to resort to dishing out “special grants” to various sections of the constituency involved in an election for the sole purpose of increasing their votability. Such last-minute attempts to be seen as being sympathetic to the concerns and needs of specific sectors of voters is dishonest, insincere and hypocritical. A sitting government which is genuinely sincere would have had a system in place to gauge issues and needs of the respective voters and to have an orderly, transparent, fair and effective way of allocating adequate budget and plans to resolve problems on the ground. It is difficult to see how large sums of public money could suddenly become available or that the people’s needs could suddenly catch the eyes of the powers that be only when election campaigns are on.

The issues, needs and concerns faced by religious communities, Muslim as well as non-Muslim, are there for all to see. If sincerely, fairly and properly dealt with, they would not become election issues. Likewise, issues facing particular ethnic communities or perennial problems and threats such as floods, road conditions, etc. Therefore, last minute “election goodies” and “special grants” are tacit admissions of lack of proper and honest planning and implementation on the part of a sitting government.

Apart from all this, the matter of offering “special grants” to the four Methodist churches in Sibu on the eve of polling day is especially troubling to me on account of the fact that I am a Christian and a member of the Methodist Church, a denomination which among other things have served the people of this country well before its independence in various social fields including education and especially the education of women one of whom was my own mother.

I was saddened and very concerned about comments that were made regarding these “special grants” by concerned citizens who not only care about Sibu and Malaysia but also about the possibility of how this blatantly desperate episode could also affect the churches’ good name. Here are a few samples of such comments:

Jin Chuah: The worry part is RM1.75 million of Federal
allocation has channeled into 4 Methodist churches in
Sibu resulting those christians who yet to cast their votes
may not turn up.

Tan: god is watching SIBU”, but he is helpless with BN’s goodies.

Abang Adek: Like I said last night, God is nothing compared to money. And the Methodist Churches who took the bribes from the BN only prove again to all, that God is nothing compared to money. You PR guys only hope in miracles. Well, the miracle happening today is the miracle of $$$$$$. Money talks, Money walks…

Fairplay Lee: All christian brothers and sisters do not be cheated and wake up and vote for justice and be guided by the holy spirit.

Disappointed: the RM1.75 million Federal Fund channelled to 4 churches is not BN pocket money but rightfully the rakyat’s money. Dont u think the money comes a bit too late. Think Sibuan b4 casting yr votes.

Aca: santa… gives millions to churches and only RM600 per head to poor Ibans. Next round maybe Ibans get RM6,000 per head and RM600 per church. Wonder whether the pastors can be corrupted by the millions?

Kumar. Pg: Dengan rasuah sebanyak RM1.75m,
adakah orang kristian akan meyerahkan maruah
ugama mereka kepada UMNO?

Anil: If you ask me, I don’t think the churches in Sibu should
have accepted those grants during the election campaign period -
even if their followers can still vote as they please. After all, this is
vote-buying and both the buyer and the recipient need to be
responsible (though one can understand the circumstances of those
who desperately need the money). But I don’t think the churches are
in such desperation. They are called to uphold a higher standard and
should set an example to others by rejecting corruption in all its forms.
It would also be a telling lesson to those who offer them the money -
that there are some things that money just cannot buy.

The spot light rightly or wrongly is therefore very much on the Christian Church in Malaysia regardless of denomination or communion. Malaysians are watching us and wondering aloud or silently, waiting to see what we will do under these circumstances, waiting for a clear word from us. This happened in Sibu but its ramifications will be much wider in scope and depth. It is not even just to do with the Christian community as such but how elections are conducted in the country and how we conduct ourselves during elections and at other times.

I respectfully appeal to the churches directly involved in this episode:
If it isn’t true and it didn’t happen, then please say so.
If it is true, offered and received, give it all back.
WE DON’T WANT SUCH MONEY. Let the church be poor (as a church mouse) but
as the Book of Proverbs say, poor but happy keeping a clear conscience.

I also respectfully appeal to all Malaysian churches through the Christian Federation of Malaysia:
Please let us send a clear, unmistakeable and irrevocable message to the country and the world. As citizens and tax-payers we deserve to practise and observe our religious faith in peaceful and orderly fashion and we should get reasonable amounts of resources to enable us to do so. Any sitting government is welcome to sit down with us, discuss and understand in a timely and civil way our religion and our community’s needs and concerns regarding places of worship, burial grounds and our bibles in Bahasa Malaysia as well as how we will continue to serve all Malaysians in need through our social services. Provide the facilities and resources justly due to us but please don’t give us “special grants” only at the eve of by-elections. WE DON’T TAKE SUCH MONEY. No, thank you. Never under such circumstances.

Otherwise, we will be sending the message to the government, present or future, BN or PR, that the church which bears the name of Christ is ever willing to take money under such circumstances: “Make us an offer, we are open to such funding. We encourage electioneering where money is utilised as a means to win votes. Is there a higher bid?”

The Christian Church preaches moral values and standards in all things to all people. It wants to take the moral high ground. It must therefore be subjected to the same high moral standards which it espouses.

We serve a risen saviour whose birth in human form was in a humble manger because there was no room in the inn for his parents. Let us stay true to our calling.

Source: http://ongohing.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/we-dont-take-such-money/

马来西亚重拾彩虹国家的特性

今天是513的41周年，这是种族暴动的一天。

这个日期没有什么好纪念的。作为一个基督徒，我为马来西亚求平安。

马来西亚在种族和谐这件事情上，向来都是一个模范国家。但今天它需要主赐予新的触摸。它在1950和60年代曾经是和谐的，直至1969你5月13日。冲突中这个多元种族国家被划上一条疤痕。从此每个种族开始与其他种族保持一段距离。

纵然是种族的差异，我们仍然活在合一里。这样的就是一个彩虹国家的特性。我们必须奋斗把马来西亚带到一个新尺度里。不但要带回已经消逝的荣耀时光，当时不同种族一起吃饭，玩耍及做工，也要差遣人民往普天下去促进和谐。

我们要看到国家所有的财富都公平的在国人当中彼此分享。我们要祝福每个在国内外的人士。在这篇文章里我提供两张今天日历的照片。巧合的，在日历的右边有一则箴言（下图）如此说：“家贫思良妻，国乱思忠臣。”我相信神让我发现此箴言是有一个目的的。在创世以前神已经把它放在此日历上了！

所以现在你看到祈求让好领袖兴起来治理国家是何等重要吗？我们需要那些他们的心是向着国家的领袖，而不是那些是向着私利的领袖。这些就是那些要看到一个更好的马来西亚实现的人士。

Malaysia to Regain the Identity of a Rainbow Nation

Today is the 41st Anniversary of May 13. It was a day of Racial Riots.

There is nothing worth to commemorate on this date. As a Christian I would pray for the peace in Malaysia.

Malaysia was used to be a model country in racial harmony. But today she needs a fresh touch by the Lord. It used to be harmonious in the 1950s and 60s until May 13 in 1969. The conflict marked a scar in this multiracial country. Thence each race began to keep a distance from the other.

Despite of ethnic diversity we could live in unity. Such is an identity of Rainbow Nation. We must struggle to bring Malaysia into a new dimension. Not only to bring back the departed glorious days, when different races ate, played and worked together, but to also mobilize people into the world to promote harmony.

We would want to see all wealth of the country is equally shared among the people in the country. We want to bless everyone both at home and abroad.

In this posting, I have included 2 photos on today's calendar. Coincidentally on the right side of the calendar (se pic below) was a Chinese proverb which reads "Jia pin si liang qi, Guo luan si zhong chen." The first sentence means "When the household is in poverty, you will think of a good wife. And the second one means "When the nation is in havoc, you will think of good officials." I believed God has a purpose to allow me discovered the proverb. Before the foundation of the world God has already put it on this calendar!

So can you see now that it is crucial to pray for good leaders to rise up to govern the nation? We need leaders who have a heart for the country instead of selfish gain. These are the people who would want to see a better Malaysia coming to pass.

张天赐最难做

“赌球合法化”经常在世界杯足球赛开跑前出现传言，但这次是真的了。执照是交给陈志远的成功集团，由成功多多博彩业进行交易。

回教禁止教徒赌博，政府即以只在680个多多博彩站的200多个非回教徒城镇站为由合法化赌球。

近几年，政府持续让几家博彩业增加开彩次数，已经受到人民非议。现在又增加一项赌博的“便利”，将使国家制造许多社会问题。当赌徒满身债时，将导致家破人亡。有不少却选择偷盗，抢劫，欺诈等伤人行为。总之，大家或许都听过不少赌博造成的祸害吧？

自从马华公会由张天赐担任投诉部主管以来，他拼力打击大耳窿，解决因借高利贷而衍生的家庭问题。每逢世界杯足球赛是少不了他的声音的，因为许多人向阿隆借贷赌球而身陷绝境。

张天赐大力抨击赌球行为，但这次世界杯可难为他了！以前没合法管道赌球，现在人们光明正大赌球，肯定不少会冒险向阿隆借贷的。张天赐怎样抨击赌球？他们的确向合法管道买的呀！那么他要抨击赌球，也必须一并抨击政府批准赌球合法化呀！

另者，政府只批准在非回教徒的城镇才有赌球站，难免带有讽刺性。回教徒不可以赌球，难道让非回教徒赌球就应该吗？其实批准博彩业开彩增加天数，已经剥削了人民的生活素质。华人俗语说：“十赌九输”，只有极少人靠赌发达，即那些所谓中了积宝者。

国阵在3.08圣洁大选受挫，下届大选能否收复江山乃未知数。不过，增加博彩业开彩和赌球合法化肯定会被民联用作课题来争取回教徒的票。国阵政府为了从赌博业增加国库税收想必得不偿失呢！赌球合法化是内阁的决定，即等于马华也认同，这项课题看来也成为马华在下届大选的棘手课题。