Thursday, August 21, 2014

6th Message to the Synod of Anglican Diocese of Sabah (ADOS) 2014 and Anglican members

6th Message to the Synod of Anglican Diocese of Sabah (ADOS) 2014 and Anglican members

Since May, 2014 God gave me a burden to make an impression on the Synod delegates to consider the interest of God’s church and His wealth for our blessing.  Needless for me to go through the crimes of AVCF now that he is sort of “disappear” from the ADOS.

In this message, I would remind the delegates to be always conscious of the interests of God in His church.

In this message it is focus on the assets of God especially the sale of church land in Likas of 13.86 acres for RM31m and the direction of ADOS now that there is no Vicar General or Bishop or Chairman of the Synod 2014.

Before I go into the matters of this 6th message, I would like to remind delegates of the Synod and members of the ADOS of my other five messages earlier since May, 2014.

1st Message - The sham of AVCF has been identified in Synod 2010 where the illegal project in the Kokol Prayer Summit was exposed.  [That was the start of BISHOPGATE].

2nd message - Delegates of Synod’s congress 2014, please prepare some motion of no confidence in Albert CF Vun (AVCF) Bishop of Sabah to stop BISHOPGATE once and for all. [Now obsolete with the “disappearance” of AVCF].

3rd Message -In the AGM 2008 of ASC I raised the issue of the kindergarten closure in 2006 one year after the AVCF became the Bishop and I mentioned about the factor "Islamic teaching".  [so this hearsay of AVCF then would never be established now].

4th message - I must say that if Synod delegates are not prepared to design motions for the betterment of ADOS, then members of any matured major parishes should be encouraged to do appropriate motions to get rid of the crisis in ADOS which I call BISHOPGATE.  [again this proposal is simply ignored].

5th Message - The Constitution of Diocese of Sabah states in Article IX (7)  - Procedure in the Diocesan Synod – “At each ordinary meeting of the Diocesan Synod, an honorary auditor shall be appointed  who shall remain in office until the conclusion of the ordinary meeting of the Diocesan Synod and shall be eligible for re-appointment.” [ the audited accounts cannot be approved for two reasons namely the accounts of 2010 and 2011 were not re-audited and accounts of 2012 and 2013 as audited are unconstitutional and nobody can over rule this].

So are we as Anglicans in the last seven or eight years better nourished in some ways of the glaring shortcomings?

Have we searched our souls as delegates of the Synod and members of the Anglican church for the glaring shortcomings?

Have we given back to God the unfortunate shortcomings we face as a challenge and the blessings that we have received as God is God and let God be God?

We are the ears, eyes, hands, feet of God to do His work and have we done our roles well especially in the sort of demeaning BISHOPGATE?

Whatever we have done we have now arrived in another milestone in our lives in Christ as delegates and members of the Anglican Church gather for another meaningful Synod in August/September, 2014.

I believe a lot of development in spiritual and secular matters have gone through the Synod and I am proposing that we reflect on two very important matters of the Anglican Church namely the appointment of the successor of Bishop Albert and the management of our assets also the God’s blessing.

We all desire and pray that God would deliver His new direction for the Anglican Church in Sabah and beyond.  God has also spoken through many of us as we have been struggling for the truth in the Anglican Diocese.  Many are of the opinion that we need to deal with the past in order that the future can be on solid grounds as the truth would set us free.

We are urged to be very conscious how we deal with the assets in our Church, which are also the properties of God. Aren’t we blessed to be self regulatory and can we abuse that divine privilege? Can we just dispose of such earthly blessing without the thought of the Biblical consequences of facing the wrath of God?  Once back in 2006, Albert Vun was preaching in the 10am English service in the Dewan Grace that his blessing was not for sale as someone would pay him for the blessing under the water for a special wedding ceremony in Sipadan Island?  So I was urged to interrupt why the church land of God is sold to the freemason.  The congregation was stunned for a few minutes.  What happened thereafter, it was in the hands of Albert.

Since the arrival of Albert in Kota Kinabalu as the Bishop many land transactions were done and also questioned.  One of the land deals was the bishop’s own family piece in Menggatal.

The other much bigger one was the CL land of 13.86 acres in Likas sold for RM31m.  I know this disposal approval was done through the Synod for a long time already.  With Albert’s prerogative approval or his often abuse thereof the deal could be called off as we can see now how we have missed out on the God’s blessing had we held on to the land for the good of all.

Going by the market value of scarce land in Kota Kinabalu in recent years, it had been that the price movement of the land in Kota Kinabalu had been like a “rocket”.  It has been reported that a piece of land of less than 5,000 sq feet in Signal hill in 2013 was sold for RM7 million making it about  RM1,400 per sq feet. Then a piece of shoplot in Gaya Street was reported sold for RM3m for less than 2,000 sq ft making it RM1,500 per sq feet.  Then in early August, 2014 a city empty lot of about 30,000 sq ft was sold for RM20m making it RM667 per sq ft.  The latest land sold in Luyang of 2.75 ac  was for RM41.5m making it to RM348 per sq ft.  So ADOS land of 13.86ac was sold for RM31m making it RM52 per sq ft in 2009.  So could value of the land in Kota Kinabalu had increased by more than 6 folds in less than 5 years?  Whose fault for the low price?

How could the Anglican church lose out so much or more than RM100m in the Likas land and yet it was claimed by the professional that it was worth it then?

It may be good to let bygone be bygone but God knows what has happened.

Had we kept the land in Likas, it could open up for another massive church there as Albert was so adamant to squeeze the Celebration Centre into the ASC ground.

So over now to the Synod if something can be done about the sale of Likas land which I consider on legal grounds that the transaction was illegal.  I hope some concerned lawyers would look into that deal.  It was a major subject matter of my Writ of Summon against Albert in mid 2012.  Maybe the Synod 2014 would move a motion to re-open that rotten deal as it was one of the causes for the start of BISHOPGATE.

The other is the appointment of the successor of Bishop for the Synod 2014’s approval.

It is indeed a wonder that since the “disappearance” of Albert on 15th July, 2014, the ADOS had been on “auto-pilot” as who could be dealing with the management of the ADOS.  According to the Diocese Constitution, the assistant bishops were appointed to assist the Bishop of Sabah and when the Bishop is no longer around, the assistant bishops become redundant.  The archdeacon could be next to run the ADOS but Albert played “dirty” to remove the Archdeacon when he was too ill to be the Bishop hence that action was null and void.  If we want to lay blame on that it is also the fault of the Archbishop of APSEA Bolly Lapok for the worst development in ADOS.

So without a leader in ADOS, who could be organising the event of Synod 2014? We don’t want all sort of illegalities to happen in ADOS any more after the APSEA was once ruled by the High Court as “non legal entity”.  Aren’t we told to submit to the authority on earth when we are a “non legal entity”? Are we hypocrites at the highest level too?

Actually when did AVCF “die”?  Who could have issued the Diocesan Bulletin in August 2014 when Albert “disappeared” on 15th July, 2014?  According to the Diocesan Bulletin Albert “died” many times earlier as the word “LATE” was used several times in several earlier church events.  So who authorized the publication of that “untimely and premature” Diocesan Bulletin?  Could it be Mary Vun? I am told many church members refused to take that Diocesan bulletin with the “dead” man’s message on the front page as if he was “living”. That message could have been in June’s unpublished edition.  Why not done? We also were told that Albert had two more months to live in October, 2013 but he survived much longer and then suddenly the “Obituary” on 15 July, 2014 after spending so much God’s money in “treatment”.  That Diocesan bulletin could wait for the successor to issue.  Nothing urgent about that when the June 2014’s edition was skipped giving away the secret of the known “disappearance”.  It is indeed God’s Will in the several “late” instances and the skipped June 2014’s edition that a “cultish” motive as established was exposed in the sort of legacy especially Albert was “preaching” in his own funeral and the Archbishop just allowed it to happen.  Was Albert truly serving God or self serving for his ego of doom upon litigation matters in the civil courts and Ecclesiastical court?  We have yet to see his full medical report, his death certificate, and his Will as his assets could include properties bought from God’s money treated as his ill gotten gains.

I hope the delegates of Synod and church members share this common burden rather than bear it in silence that a true and fresh beginning would come to His church in Kota Kinabalu and beyond.

As I had proposed before, a professional Commission of Truth and Reconstruction be set up to deal with the past, present and the future to do the needful for much had been exposed in recent years.  While Jesus Christ can clear the mess for us spiritually, the secular matters must be dealt with properly according to the law and the constitution to let the transition be a blessing to all.  Others are watching as how we handle the very unfortunate BISHOPGATE.  Only yesterday at a function, a non Christian childhood friend came to tell me what he knew Albert for his wayward character from young.  Don’t ADOS under new leader want to correct that and hold Albert fully responsible for the BISHOPGATE?

Don’t the Standing Committee since 2006 want to clear the blame of its failings?

Don’t the delegates of Synod – past and present – clear the “crocodile tears” for the members of the church for all those crimes of Albert?

We have still one week to pray for our new direction as to whether a full Report of the BISHOPGATE be released for public consumption when the full PAC report of APSEA in 2012 although ordered by the Court of Appeal is still hidden from the very much aggrieved members.

If we are embarrassed, then what would God declare?

Let Jesus Christ give us His special birthday gift on 23 August as I have spiritual and physical context to declare that when ASC is holding a PCC meeting on that day.

Be bold for Christ sake as to live is for Christ and to die is gain.  Be a majority for Christ.

Thank you for reading and reflect.

Joshua Y. C. Kong

For full details of BISHOPGATE, go to, and /

Wednesday, August 20, 2014

why AVCF never bother to do this???

NRD wants Church to come forward

 | August 21, 2014
Having bin or binti in the name is not the criterion for a MyKad holder to be listed as Islam in the document.
my-kad300KOTA KINABALU: The National Registration Department (NRD) Sabah wants the Borneo Evangelical Mission, or Sidang Injil Borneo (SIB), to come forward with the name list of the 162 Christian individuals who had allegedly been classified as Islam in their MyKad because of bin or binti in their names.
Sabah NRD Deputy Director Adrian Allan Richard, in making this call, said “we can retrieve the records, if they are unhappy with the process, and go through each case personally”.
The NRD has records from the 1970s which have been digitised by the system. Earlier records have apparently not been digitised.
According to Adrian, the NRD has no jurisdiction to decide on the religion of MyKad holders.
“We go by documents,” he said in a media statement. “We have to check the parent’s religion, marriage certificate and other records before we list an individual’s religion.”
Having a bin or binti in the name, continued Adrian, is not the criterion for a MyKad holder to be listed as Islam in the document.
He was commenting on the SIB President, Jerry Dusing’s claim last Thursday during a public prayer rally that the NRD had claimed that it had lost the files of the 162 bin and binti cases which were reportedly lodged two years ago.
Jerry also alleged that the classification of Christians as Islam in their MyKad’s has caused the holders many difficulties. These included entering into legal marriages, obtaining birth certificates and school registrations.
Adrian denied that technical glitches, as implied by Jerry in his statement, can thwart the process of correcting the MyKad. “If there was an administrative error, it can be rectified by the system by reference to documentary evidence,” he assured.
He cautioned that mixed marriages from different religions, illegitimate marriages, divorces, missing marriage certificates, among others, “can complicate individual cases”.
The bottom line is that whether there are technicalities or no technicalities; the law will dictate how each case would be governed in the end, he added without elaborating.
“The NRD has no business determining and dictating the religion of a MyKad holder,” is the consensus among lawyers in the know. “Why advise those who don’t want to be classified as Islam to go through the Syariah Court?” he further said.

Monday, August 11, 2014

why so much disquiet?

August 12, 2014 - 8:56 am joshuakong823
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
why so quiet or disquiet now?
With the focus of the case of “dead” Bav, what is next?
Is there leave to appeal to the Federal Court granted?
If not granted, then when can we read the full PAC report as the ruling of the Appeal allows that? Where is the full PAC report?

What happen to the E-C now?
If not done, we should pursue to file a case of Contempt of court against the Bolly and others.
The mess in the ADOS and BAV was perpetrated by HoBs using some out of context bible verses.
Now Bolly cannot find a VG in ADOS, hence the “Satan” is in control and the “head” of ADOS.

Sunday, August 3, 2014

Diocesan Bulletin of "LATE" avcf...

Your comment is awaiting moderation.
The publication of Diocesan Bulletin has given the signs of fake death in its delayed QUARTERLY publication March, June (did not come out) and why come out on 1st August? Also if your read the bulletin , you will see how many times LATE bishop came out and so when did AVCF died actually?

Also in his “suffering” sharing he tried to play out emotion to get people on boat to believe he really died.

Friday, August 1, 2014

Let Jesus Christ set free ADOS

Many are still in bondage of the evil of AVCF and let Jesus Christ set us FREE on His birthday.

Thursday, July 31, 2014

Old issue but still alive on ADOS accounts

July 21, 2013 - 1:27 pm curious
I am not an accountant and I am curious.If the previous accounts not audited,could the following year account be audited? Isn’t there a continuation from the preceding year?
  • Miaw SL
    let the Treaurer General, Michael Tong to answer. He is the most qualified accountant in Anglican church to answer this based on his professionalism.

    Michael Tong has definitely advised wrongly especially he did not comply with the Diocesan's Constitution to appoint an "HONORARY" AUDITOR for 2012, and 2013.
    Previously accounts 2010 and 2011 were promised by M Tong to be re-audited and affirmed by the HoBs led by Bolly, but not done, hence how can 2012 and 2013 be audited properly when the opening figures are incorrect.