Saturday, April 19, 2014

335. Like father like son in thieving..

http://thetrutheng.com/2014/03/26/final-words/comment-page-1/#comment-10722

  1. 14k Missing
    RM14,000 was found missing from Christ The King’s coffers when the auditor examined the accounts a few weeks ago. The missing money was traced to 7 forged bank deposit slips that span several months in 2013. It appeared someone who was supposed to deposit the money to the bank on behalf of the church had forged the slips, stolen the money, and returned to the church office with forged bank deposit slips. Only church employees including the priest in-charge handle bank deposits from the weekly Sunday collection.
    Another interesting fact is that on the months the money was stolen and bank deposit slips forged, the monthly bank statement was also missing from the church’s mailbox. Proper documentation of the money was not followed. Those who counted money on Sundays, signed over the counted funds to the office. However, the paper trail abruptly ended there. There was no record of who deposited the money to the bank even though this is required as part of the standard operating procedure.
    It’s been over two weeks since it the church found out about this. The PCC had spoken to the church employees but nobody has come forward to take responsibilities. Some suspect the bank to be culpable. The fact remains the money is stolen either by church employees or the bank. The church did not volunteer any information about the theft. When queried during the AGM, the new priest in-charge Rev. Lau Ay Kuen mentioned it hastily.
    This is not a crime of impulse. Whoever that had stolen the church’s money, planned this meticulously, stealing not one time, but seven times from the church. Many worrying questions remain unanswered:
    1. The RM14k stolen came from money given by the people. This is public, not personal money. The PCC and priest has a fiduciary duty to inform the people. Why hasn’t the leadership inform the church? 

    2. Why did the church fail to record who deposited money to the bank? Why is this standard operating procedure not followed?

    3. Who is responsible to ensure the SOP is followed? How could this be allowed to lapse for several months?

    4. Is there a time frame for the internal investigation? If the church’s investigation cannot solve this crime, what is the next course of action?

    5. Why is the church investigating a criminal offense (theft, forgery)? Does CTK has the abilities and competency in criminal investigation?
    The church failure to be forthcoming with information gives the impression of a cover up. Just tell us what you know, and what you don’t know but don’t withhold information from us. If this crime is an inside job, the church has the responsibility to deal with sin seriously and swiftly. Friendship with sin is enmity with God.
    • Appalling
      In this case, even the priest-charge who was pastoring the church then has to be investigated! Who? Rev Timothy Sng? If the biggest boss can do any he likes with the church money without accountability, why do we doubt the priests under him would not follow his path and his way?
  2. Chiak Lui
    I just wonder how low do they want to stand . 14 k is just small sum compares to BAV’s , uncounted millions . Even just a so called Sipitang land “miss understanding” cost us 200k. Wondering if CTK member can make police report if the church is reluctant to do so.
    • joshuakong823
      Your comment is awaiting moderation.
      Compile all the documents and we can go make a Police Report. If the bank is involved, then the bank has to return the money and the story ends. If not blame ourselves for the NATO.

Monday, April 14, 2014

334- Complaint against Diocesan Chancellor



The President,                                                                             14/4/14
Sabah Law Association,
Kota Kinabalu.  

Dear Sir,
Re:  Complaint against Datuk Stephen Foo Kiat Shin on professional grounds

I am lodging a complaint to you on the performance of Datuk Stephen Foo Kiat Shin as the Diocesan Chancellor of the Anglican Diocese of Sabah appointed since August, 2008.

I am attaching some samples of public documents of his performance in various avenues such as the AGM & EGM [“JK-A1” to “JK-A5”], the local press [“JK-B1” to “JK-B10”], the Standing Committee of Anglican Diocese of Sabah [“JK-C1” to “JK-C7”] plus an item posted in a blog [“JK-D1”].

His position as the Diocesan Chancellor as a Diocesan officer is defined in Article XVII of the Constitution of Diocese of Sabah as “The Diocesan Chancellor shall be appointed by the Bishop and shall hold office at his pleasure.  He shall be a qualified lawyer and shall be the legal adviser for the Bishop and the Diocese.” Diocese of Sabah is just defined as an area.  The Diocesan Chancellor is not defined as member of the Standing Committee of the Diocese but I believe he is in the Standing Committee as an appointee of the Bishop under Article X 2 (h).  As a legal adviser for the Bishop and the Diocese, I believe he must be seen to be independent in the Diocese and not act for the Bishop’s interest (personal and otherwise) only where a conflict might prevail

Briefly about Stephen’s unethical performance, he is seen to be bias towards the Bishop in most matters especially in the press (several items attached), he has been seen to have performed poorly in AGMs with bias interpretations and views and EGM where he even condoned an item (not stipulated in the Notice of the Agenda) added on at the end of the EGM; his much questioned behaviour at the Standing Committee’s in several deals plus acting as an Advocate for the Bishop (whilst a legal adviser) in an alleged “Court Action” against me as posted by an anonymous contributor.  Further illustrations of such unethical, conflicting and controversial actions at times would be presented in Appendix A.

The impact of Stephen’s unethical performance and misleading views has done much damage to the affairs of Anglicans in Sabah especially All Saints’ Cathedral where his views are sought. His fitness as an Advocate and Solicitor is very much questioned.

The documents I attached here are all public items and I am prepared to present an Affidavit if deemed necessary when the case goes forward to the hearing proper of the SLA. 

Please acknowledge this submission to you and hoping to hear from you of the appropriate action by the Association.  Thank you.

Yours faithfully,

Joshua Y. C. Kong

Wednesday, April 9, 2014

333. The verse for the season until AVCF is gone

joshuakong823
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
A voice in the wilderness,
You can remain in the wilderness as ADOS is going that way.
The verse now is 1 Corint 5:12 – expel the wicked man amongst us.

http://thetrutheng.com/2014/03/26/final-words/comment-page-1/#comment-10531

Sunday, April 6, 2014

332- some issues for ASC & ADOS



Biblical speaking Diocesan Assessment is an abomination of the verse “Bring your tithe to the storehouse of God” as the clergy and Bishop always preach in prosperity gospel.  ADOS is not the storehouse of God as it is not a church which has siphoned off God’s money for some personal agenda.  To me this verse in the universal Bible means the whole earth as the storehouse not only any church and why only Christians have to treat God with respect.  All human being have to treat God our creator nicely.  It is timely that ADOS and ASC being the mother church has to address the Diocesan Assessment when the Bishop is not attached to any local church to earn his keep as any clergy. So we sow and reap the whirl wind.  .

    

AGM is the best forum or venue to put to rest the Anglican Crisis which I call BISHOPGATE since it surfaced in 2011, the Golden Jubilee year of ASC.

Bulletins and pulpits messages are all one way only.

All my three motions whether to be voted on or not are for the purpose of putting to rest BISHOPGATE for the good of all especially Christians and the public at large.

As the mother church ASC must go back to basic namely – the object of ASC.

Do you know the object of ASC?  Do we fulfill the object of ASC?

The objects of the Parish are in Article II of the ASC Constitutions namewly:-

(a)    To proclaim the gospel

(b)    To minister to the parishioners

(c)    To promote Christian fellowship, and

(d)    To promote any other activities for the advancement of the Kingdom of God.

In recent years, ASC has largely failed in its objects.

Instead of proclaiming the gospel, many verses in Bible are quoted for personal agenda of the leadership like the tithing and gospel of prosperity (which I will go into later under the Diocesan Assessment) and the recent ‘washing of feet” for deceitful feel good;   I heard numerous complaints of the lack of ministering to the parishioners and instead there is an agenda to divide the congregations to fight against one another especially in the last AGM’s elections of PCC;  How can ASC ever promote Christian fellowship when all the dirt of the Bishop or Bishopgate are exposed in the blogs and other Christians denominations are blaming Anglicans of disrepute or shame to Christianity;  if we cannot promote Christians fellowship, how can we promote any other activities for the advancement of the Kingdom of God?  Also the NGO as proposed by me on the resolution of Bishopgate would be the vehicle for external outreach apart for internal fellowship.



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

Dean Chak what is the point of you staying on after your undesirable activities too many in a few months already exposed and the EGM’s rejection of item 7 is deemed to have rejected you, and so for the sake of the Anglican church, Rev Moses Chin be in your place now for a new beginning.

If my three motions were rejected because of the intervention of the Bishop, Bishop has already been rejected and should leave it to the members to decide.  The EGM’s rejection of item 8 is deemed to have limited the power of the Bishop as far as ASC is concerned.

He was also voted out as the acting Dean in 2012’s AGM but he stayed on till December, 2012 and ASC has enough of him “screaming” and all those matters raised in the PAC reports etc. 

You want to reject my 3 motions but go the press recently trying win with falsehood.
  

ASC – comments on AGM 2014



1.  With the financial statement in hard copy for All Saints’ Cathedral 2013, the Dean & Honorary Treasurer made a declaration be it statutory or otherwise “We, the undersigned hereby declare that the accompanying Unaudited financial statements as present on Page C are to the best of our knowledge  and understanding, correctly represent a true and fair view of the state of financial affairs of the Parish of All Saints’ Cathedral, Kota Kinabalu [no year?] ending 31st December, 2013.  The statement of Honorary Treasurer is undated.



2.  It is no April Fool as I write it on 1st April, 2014.  There is no excuse for such blunder of a false declaration to mislead others by a licenced Solicitor and a qualified accountant and possibly a member of MIA should be aware of what he should have declared and the consequence thereof.  Great damages done in all aspects.



  1. The report was made available one week before the AGM on 6th April, 2014 from 3pm.  {if this report was presented one hour before AGM, it is impossible to present this paper).
  2.  So God has finally spoken on ADOS vis-à-vis ASC on such triple whammies namely no auditor is available,  the Dean and Honorary Treasurer made FALSE declaration and the Balance Sheet was not balance – all appearing on the first three pages of the Financial Report (hard copy).

4.1  AVCF as Bishop cum acting Dean of ASC sowed for 6 years and reaps abundant shit (too much to write here) in God’s Church and not Albert’s church..



  1. I do not think there is a need to query or raise comments an unaudited account when the Balance Sheet does not balance which is another grave error if you read the declaration in the first paragraph..

       

ASC AGM  matters 2014



Bishop’s treatment



Bishop’s testimony and Thanksgiving in ADOS Bulletin of December, 2013, I quote “The Standing Committee has decided to cover all my treatment expense according to our present policy.”

The Honorary Secretary of the Standing committee in an attachment to the ASC Sunday bulletin wrote on 11 November, 2013 and quote “The existing policy of the Diocese on medical claims by any of our ministry staff is for the Diocese to pay 50% of the medical claims while the remaining balance 50% shall be borne by the local  parish where he/she is at the material  time posted.



He secretary further wrote “that Bishop Albert’s medical expenses will be drawn from Diocese Medical Fund.”



I believe Bishop’s statement is at variance with the statement of the Honorary Secretary.



Bishop’s testimony and thanksgiving also stated that some people had given him substantial funds to meet his medical treatment in Singapore.  Please confirm that Bishop had passed on the contribution to the Diocese Medical Fund since the Diocese will be responsible for the cost of treatments in Singapore or elsewhere. I hope the Auditor of the ADOS would scrutise this fund properly and that the Bishop’s treatment costs would be paid on his claims and full medical report. 



I also find it odd that the Bishop wrote “I am trusting the Lord wholeheartedly for the Lord to answer our prayers”  and yet he doubted the Lord but trusted medicine and the doctors.



Synod Delegates



Why are we not electing Synod delegates from this AGM?

I think it is reported that the Honorary Secretary had written to all parishes to elect Synod Delegates to the biennial Synod Conference due in August/September 2014.



The Bishop had also written to the parishes to ask the PCC to nominate Synod delegates to the Synod Conference.



So who is right?  If it is the duty of the AGM to elect the Synod delegates why is it this is not done here?



                                                                          

Parish Meeting in Constitution of Diocese of Sabah’s Article 1 (Definitions)  clause 8 means Annual General Meeting of the Parish..

Article XXIII 3 (a) The Lay representatives and alternative Lay Representatives shall be elected at a Parochial Meeting held before each ordinary meeting of the /diocese synod.  Here the Parochial meeting is the AGM not PCC meeting and so ASC had been in error or violation of the Constitution.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      









Celebration Centre



What is the latest for the Celebration Centre?  How much had been collected and then used for that but nothing to see on the ground?  On paper, where is the report on this ? 

If there is no report, that is already embezzlement.



Allah



ASC must make a stand on this word “Allah”. Irrespective of the Court decision, the stance by some people is that if the word is used in church, you are all Muslims like it or not? No wonder, we are in such a mess now.



Newspaper’s  Reports



Since 2012, ASC has been featured in the Daily Express as follows:-



  1. Article titled  “Bishop under probe” on 17th  July, 2012 and the reply  in a letter forum titled “Claim made in report was false” on 21st July, 2012 both were damaging to ASC and ADOS.
  2.  Article “Suit against Anglican bishop dismissed” Daily Express dated 6th March, 2014 with my name mentioned without consent.
  3. Letter “Church members divided over stand of Anglican archbishop” Daily Express dated 16th March, 2014 using the word “muslim”.



My comments are as follows:-



If some people are against going to the Civil Court, then why go to the public court in the Newspapers?   Why cannot we resolve it in ASC being the mother church?



AGM 2012, 2013



Many questions and comments on ASC had not been responded.  AGM is the only forum left to get answers while the bulletins and the pulpit only one way traffic and so how to clear all doubt if AGMs are also abused by the leadership.



EGM 2014



What is the status of the 6 items passed at the EGM held recently? 



Membership



  1. The status of the updating of the list of membership closed on 5th April, 2014?  What do you intend to do with those who had yet to respond to the updating?
  2. For the purpose of today AGM, what is the list to be used – old or new?
  3. Why are so many members are without the NRIC numbers especially for the Bahasa Malaysia congregation?



Minutes of AGM



The attendance of the members at the AGM should be recorded. 

Tuesday, April 1, 2014

330. ASC AGM Account for 2013



ASC – comments on AGM 2014

1.  With the financial statement in hard copy for All Saints’ Cathedral 2013, the Dean & Honorary Treasurer made a declaration be it statutory or otherwise “We, the undersigned hereby declare that the accompanying Unaudited financial statements as present on Page C are to the best of our knowledge  and understanding, correctly represent a true and fair view of the state of financial affairs of the Parish of All Saints’ Cathedral, Kota Kinabalu [no year?] ending 31st December, 2013.  The statement of Honorary Treasurer is undated.

2.  It is no April Fool as I write it on 1st April, 2014.  There is no excuse for such blunder of a false declaration to mislead others by a licenced Solicitor and a qualified accountant and possibly a member of MIA should be aware of what he should have declared and the consequence thereof.  Great damages done in all aspects.

  1. The report was made available one week before the AGM on 6th April, 2014 from 3pm.  {if this report was presented one hour before AGM, it is impossible to present this paper).
  2.  So God has finally spoken on ADOS vis-à-vis ASC on such triple whammies namely no auditor is available,  the Dean and Honorary Treasurer made FALSE declaration and the Balance Sheet was not balance – all appearing on the first three pages of the Financial Report (hard copy).
4.1  AVCF as Bishop cum acting Dean of ASC sowed for 6 years and reaps abundant shit (too much to write here) in God’s Church and not Albert’s church..

  1. I do not think there is a need to query or raise comments an unaudited account when the Balance Sheet does not balance which is another grave error if you read the declaration in the first paragraph..

5.   Nevertheless, I would ask for more information such as follows:-

[I am doing here because if there is time to ask all the questions at the AGM,  there would not adequate and proper answers as the Balance Sheet is awry.]

5.1.    Page C1  - Statement of Income & Expenditure for the MONTH [not YEAR] ended..
5.1.1        Tithes and offering was given as RM2,116,704.72 but the bulletin  gives a figure of RM 2,083, 681 with a discrepancy of  RM33,000 and which one is the reliable one?
5.1.2        Pastor Apartment Rental of RM27,000 and what is this payment represent?
5.1.3        Diocesan Funds, there was a budget for RM300,000 and why only RM55,516 was received?  Is there any reason for such treatment?
5.1.4        I do not see any income/re-imbursements to ASC  for events held by ADOS in ASC’s premises where costs/overheads are involved.  Please provide a lists of the events so held in 2013.  ASC has to pay ADOS for the renting of the premises in Wisma Anglican and so it is fair that ADOS too have to re-imburse ASC for overheads etc.  Some events organized by ADOS are fees paying ones paid to ADOS or direct to external organisers.
6.     Page C2 – Balance Sheet
6.1  The fatal mistake of unbalance Balance Sheet would take weeks if not months to rectify as the whole year accounts would need to checked thoroughly.

7.                  Page C3 -  Cash flow statement
.7.1      With the questioned Balance Sheet, the statement need to be re-done.   

  1. Page C 4 -Notes to the Financial Statements Note 1 – tithes & Offerings
8.1    I believe the monthly figures published in the Sunday Bulletin have discrepancies in the accounts.  Why?  (also refer to 5.1.1 above).  See some examples below:-
Months
Bulletin
Account
Months
Bulletin
Account
February
RM184,329.00
Rm187,334.15
October
RM135,001.00
RM142,956.45
June
RM200,623.00
RM205,893.00
December
RM180,778.00
RM181,893.35                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
July
RM148,123.00
RM155,168.57




8.2    Note 3 – Special Services Collection

8.2.1        ASAA Apprecia A for RM120,000.  What is this item actually?              

  1. Page C – 5 Note 5 Human Resources
9.1  Cleaner & guards salaries / allowance   -RM122,513.28.  Please provide details.

9.2      Note 7 – General Utilities
9.2.1        Rental of office Wisma Anglican for RM42,000 and 2012 was  RM66,320 .  Why there is a much decrease in 2013 by RM23,000+?  
9.3      Repair & Maintenance
9.3.1        General Insurance for RM14,317.86.  Please give break down of this expense.
  1. Page C – 6  Note 9

10.1  Other: sale of book/bible  for RM3,040.20 – please provide breakdowns.  And no sales recorded in the Revenue side, why?
10.2   Note 10 – Vehcile – Repair & Maintenance RM41,164.31.  Please provide details.
11.  Page C – 7   Note 14 Hospitality & Refreshment
11.1  Sunday Breakfast  RM11,327.95 -  Where is the revenue for this item?

11.2      Note 16 – Administration Expenses
11.2.1    DBKK Assessment : Deanery  Why no payment?

  1.  Page C – 8    Note 19  Fixed Assets
12.1    Disposal/ Written off  Land & Building  - RM43,152;  General Equipment RM6,896.  Details of these items.
  1. Page C – 9  Provision for current year assessment
13.1    Pastors reimbursement , why is the actual for 2013 is RM99,000?  Please provide details as the budget was only RM33,000. 

This comment paper is not exhaustive but done with thanksgivings to God.

Prepared by Joshua Y. C. Kong    1st April, 2014
                                                                                                                                 

Sunday, March 30, 2014

329. Support the 3 motion at ASC AGM on 6/4/14

Joshua Kong's photo.











Rejection of my 3 motions in unconstitutional

1.      Who chair the meeting on the 3 motions?

2.      Whether the motions come before the members who are technically the part owners (part builders) of the ASC with Christ and yet only one questioned person has the say.

3.      Look closely with the Cathedral Chapter and the whole affairs of appointing Rev Chak as Dean needs to be investigated.

4.      Whether the 3 motions come before the members at the AGM, God already judged the Acting Dean Vun, Dean Chak in the following key ways:-

4.1 Acting Dean Vun in AGM 2012 as voted out by two third but stayed on to appoint another failed Dean in personal vendetta as proven by emails between them.

4.2  Dean Chak was rejected when the Item 7 of the amendment at  the EGM of 8th February, 2014 failed to be approved.  Deemed a vote of no confidence in Dean.

4.3  Bishop was also rejected in item 8 the amendment at the EGM of 8th February, 2014 failed to be approved.  Deemed a vote of no confidence in Bishop as far as ASC is concerned.

4.4 Now another key Judgement on ASC and ADOS and because of the illegal Synod in 2012 and the auditor was under attack for the management letter and now the missing re-audit accounts of 2010 and 2011, and with that we have no auditor for ASC accounts.  Also this is the direct impact of the manipulated election of PCC members held under Dean Chak in AGM 2013.

4.5 Dean Chak failed to deal with my many questions raised at AGM 2013.

5.  With the rejection of my 3 motions as unconstitutional, Dean Chak has to go.




1.      That the present Dean Chak Sen Fen of All Saints’ Cathedral be replaced as soon as possible with a qualified ordained priest with the appropriate ethic of fairness and justice and his term is not to be renewed.

Some of the rational items are printed already but I am not to repeat them here.

The short term of one year and four months are no excuse for Dean Chak for the performance already evaluated in AGM 2013 and EGM 2014.

It is a deception that it is the Bishop’s prerogative to appoint the dean if only you read the Article XIII Cathedral Chapter of the Constitution of Diocese of Sabah  properly and in the clause 2 “The Dean shall be appointed by the Bishop with the concurrence of the majority of the Cathedral Chapter and shall act as Chairman of the Cathedral Chapter”.

Question here in the selection process for Dean Chak, how many candidates were shortlisted at one and same time?

At the EGM 2014, the rejection of Amendment 7 means no confidence in the Dean Chak and rejection of Amendment 8 means no confidence in the Bishop to meddle in the affairs of ASC as we had enough of him since 2005 till 2012.

We want a Man of God to truly do God’s work in ASC and NOT man of the Bishop to do his bidding making the previous acting Dean still in FULL control in  ASC when the ex acting Dean for his own sins were voted out in AGM 2012 by a big majority.  Even then he took eight months to do enough damage and resigned and replaced by Dean Chak after he had earlier over-stayed his term in dual roles making regular “fictitious” claims that no one was qualified or suitable to be appointed Dean.

We all can feel, see, experience the deep rooted disarray arising from the foot prints of Bishop in Dean Chak.  Why the Budgeted Diocesan Fund of RM300,000 for 2013 was “withdrawn” indicating loss of confidence in Dean Chak?

Dean Chak’s dismal performance is evident by declining revenue and Sunday attendance.  There was still a massive deficit for 2013 if not for the amount received from ASAA of RM120,000 and forced massive cuts in expenditures.      

Since we have totally lost the confidence in the Bishop to administer the ADOS, the Bishop had lost all credibility to have appointed Dean Chak or appoint any future Dean.

ASC belongs to the members and does not belong to the Dean or Bishop, the members should decide that Dean Chak has to go soonest like the previous acting Dean was given the marching order in AGM 2012.  Should Dean Chak resigns now or the vacancy falls vacant, the Bishop Albert cannot be the acting Dean as he had been a violator of all the Constitutions as per PAC reports already made public.










  1. That the new Dean of All Saints’ Cathedral should be Rev Moses Chin.

The All Saints’ Cathedral belongs to all members – past, present and future – hence we are the masters of the ASC and we have the right to choose the Dean given the prevailing deep rotted disarray in ADOS vis-a-vis. 

Rev Moses Chin should be installed as the new Dean immediately.

Article XIII Cathedral Chapter of the Constitution of Diocese of Sabah  properly and in the clause 2 “The Dean shall be appointed by the Bishop with the concurrence of the majority of the Cathedral Chapter and shall act as Chairman of the Cathedral Chapter” can be a RED HERRING as far as Bishop Albert is concerned as the PAC Reports have revealed.

In Bishop Albert’s Affidavit in Opposition dated 30th July, 2012 to my Writ against him, he stated what the Constitution of the Diocese of Sabah in Article VI under section 2(a) that his role is Faith and Order.   Similarly in the Cathedral Chapter the Bishop cannot alone appoint the Dean.

The Internal Auditor could not appointed on the day of AGM 2013 as the auditor should have started its duty from that day.  Till 30th March 2014 when the accounts was presented unaudited, it is the adverse symptom of Dean Chak and his predecessor in another episode of deep rotted disarray.  The numbers of important queries since 2010, 2011 and 2012 reflected that audit work was lacking in compliance with the accounting principles and standards and the ASC Constitutions.

I strongly believe if Rev Moses Chin is installed as New Dean, there would not be problem to get a credible auditor paid or unpaid.

ASC needs a new beginning to put the house in order.

I urge all members here support this motion.







3.  ASC to give its consent/recognizance to enable members of ASC to set up a body under the Society Act 1966 and the Regulations of Societies 1984 of Malaysia (name to be selected later) for the purpose of all members of All Saints’ Cathedral to look after the secular or non spiritual interests of the Cathedral.

We have to find solution to the Anglican crisis which I call BISHOPGATE which must be ended sooner and to rebuild the Anglican fellowship in the Anglican church we need to have a framework within and without the church proper where the clergy (all levels) and laity can meet common interest and that is where an NGO to be formed under the Society Act 1966 and Regulations of Societies 1984.

We start this NGO with ASC. If it is intended to be for the whole Anglican communion in Sabah as a society with many branches and initiated by All Saints’ Cathedral being the mother church, I would call that “ Sabah Anglicans Fellowship Entity” or SAFE an attractive and meaningful name.  If it is only for ASC, then we have to select a name.

We all know that SAFE can do much to revive Anglicanism as we have known it for 100 years except from 2006.  Now we have grown much bigger hence we need SAFE to be safe to conserve Anglicanism.

SAFE can be the natural check and balance for all Anglican churches, the Parochial Church Council, the Standing Committee and the Synod in all the secular affairs of the Anglican system.  We will see how SAFE in its objects would be part and parcel of the Anglican system to enable everyone would be in contributory pose for the greater Anglican design.

SAFE can function like any other NGO in complimentary and sharing role to the Anglican church like making public policies, fund raising, networking, care for members and non members alike in the society at large where the Anglican church has been weak.  The possibilities are endless and also expand God’s kingdom on earth in the least travelled sectors so far.

We have some internal groups but unregistered and only function within the walls of the Anglican church.

SAFE would also be our Face in the community and would become a household name if we make it work efficiently and effectively.

We don’t need the approval of the Bishop for SAFE as the Anglican church belong to all members and I go through the ASC AGM as an appropriate approach or platform for the sake of courtesy and to formalize it  as the seed comes from ASC.
So members are urged to support this motion.