Saturday, May 31, 2014

3rd OPEN LETTER to Synod - Kindergarten closure at ASC.


3rd OPEN letter to Synod of ADOS.
All Saints’ Cathedral’s kindergarten and Islamic teaching
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".


AVCF as acting dean/chairman replied that he never said anything or wrote anything about the implication of Islam. He asked me to prove it then and of course I could not get the proof after the lapse of time there and then as it was an ad hoc question/comment. 


Today, searching through some documents, I found the Sunday Bulletin of ASC dated 19 November, 2006.


Message from the Dean when AVCF is the acting dean

Quote: “ Besides the above overall reasons, the following are surrounding factors that convince us that this the right thing to do:

1.      The government has given notice that there will be increasing control over kindergarten including the eventual inclusion of Islam teaching.



So now I have proven that AVCF had written it and even spoken about it in the pulpit.


I wonder why the government should interfere anything under the roof of a Christian movement like the oldest one in Anglicanism.

Did AVCF create this “hearsay” to justify the closure of Kindergarten to allow his wife as unqualified educator to be made the Principal of the maiden All Saints Anglican Academy (ASAA) to command a very big salary until it was intolerable for AVCF to face the many questions asked at ASC AGM and transferred it under the ADOS instantly benefited from the financial injection by ASC since 2007 to 2010 worth up to a RM1m inclusive of RM167,000 as grant to ASAA from ASC in 2010.  That was a day light robbery of the greatest thief AVCF of ASC fund as no subsequent adjustment to the Diocesan Assessment.


The appointment of his wife as an unqualified principal of ASAA was an issue raised at the public dialogue with Anglicans in KK at ASC on 16th October, 2012.  Soon his wife resigned as Principal and then believed to be appointed as administrator.

The government being sensitive to religious matters had given ADOS a free hand to run the Church with as little interference as possible except the word “Allah”.


When we lodge Police reports against AVCF and others, the Police would take a back seat as they believe the internal matters including alleged embezzlement, corruption, abuses of power, “money laundering” should be resolved internally, hence AVCF takes advantage of this outlook to exploit ADOS and others for his personal gains via Criminal breach of trust.


So it is the script written by AVCF to close down kindergarten using the wild allegation of “Islamic teaching” and whenever we want to discuss it he would just push it away by denial.


It further gives strong ground that the kindergarten was closed suddenly to make way for the ASAA with flimsy excuses.


If the Police is not to be involved in Police Reports against AVCF and ADOS, then ADOS and ASC would become “shrines” of massive crimes of AVCF and his gang as AVCF once wrote after visiting Jerusalem with lots of “shrines” or “monuments. Very sad days ahead.


Thank God, the Appeal Court had finally intervened by giving the most deserving Judgement All Saints deserve nevertheless from the “pagan” Judges.


The massive crimes of AVCF and his gang must be stopped.


Now the last frontier is the Synod of ADOS to act on the great slide into alleged crimes of all sorts. There are cases where Synods  of other Anglican communities had taken fraudulent Bishops to the civil, criminal and corruption Courts for proper trials.



Joshua Y. C. Kong  - seeing, hearing, proving is natural.  31st May, 2014

Friday, May 30, 2014

2nd OPEN LETTER to Synod of Anglican Diocese Of Sabah (ADOS).




2nd OPEN LETTER to Synod of Anglican Diocese Of Sabah (ADOS).

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.

God is God of ORDER.  AVCF since 2006 –elected /selected/appointed by the Archbishop Yong Ping Chung at the Synod’s Congress 2005.

The votes were never disclosed for the four candidates or nominees in September, 2005.

AVCF took office in 2006 after a very stormy evening for the Installation.  It should have been cancelled as God spoke from heaven with the storm. Why was it not done?  So today we see the storm in ADOS and All Saints’ Cathedral brewing since 2006 with ASC ground flooded several times in recent years.  God had spoken so many times. God had again spoken again on 1st April, 2012 ASC AGM when the Chairman AVCF was missing and NOT an April fool except a bias fool also the Diocesan Chancellor,.hence it was the day I decided to lodge Police Report and then launched the Civil Suit against the Bishop of Sabah.  God again spoke when AVCF defiled the Court Order to launch the ground breaking of the House of Celebration (now inactive) on July 24, 2012.  The service of Court order on 23rd July, 2012 was God’s timing and not any body’s else timing as it was delayed until 23rd July, 2012 for the service to the very reluctant AVCF.  Since then there had been many other signs for the removal of AVCF and with the latest belated Appeal Court’s ruling on 23rd May, 2014 already made known to most people.

Was not what AVCF’s claim of ill health and that he could live a few months since end of 2013 without an official Medical Report as one of the infamous “trick” of AVCF in his script for self pity and also from God for his negative credibility is confirmed?

So some people may ask who am I to raise such an issue?  I am nobody as perceived but God knows what I have done for his church.  It was rumoured in early 1980s, ASC was “dead” physically or spiritually.  Then when I returned to ASC in 1988, All Saints came to life again and for this you can ask certain persons who were present at the re-convened Prayer meeting in the ASC and from then on Prayer meetings were revived for a long time hence the revival of ASC till 2005/2006 nevertheless there was some interruption to revival by Herbert Tong. 

Then you must also ask who is AVCF?  He is known for all his strings of misdeeds as exposed in several blogs.  He is ‘naked” to God and so he is so visibly “naked” to the church members.  Although he may have been an ordained priest since the early 1980s, his evil deed in Good Samaritan Church, Penampang has been exposed in the TheTruth blogs by a key witness.   So every one should now know who is this man AVCF.  He is famous for personal attacks and blame his grievous demeanour on others around him.
Now his misdeeds had been exposed in the PAC Report albeit in limited volume.  Soon with the Appeal Court’s Judgement, we should be very fed up with all those alleged crimes of AVCF in much greater details.  Lets cry out to God as why are many people “dithering” to act despite God has spoken many times?

Please remember the following matters that had been reported in Synod in 2010 and 2012 of the contagious behaviour of AVCF trying his evil ways to sway some people:-

In Synod 2010, Mr Andrew Liew was scolded and seriously personally attacked for bringing up the illegal Kokol Prayer Summit which was consecrated to God.  AVCF went off tangent of the agenda of the Synod congress by repeated squabbles against the whistleblower including his personal life – very sad – but did any delegate (except  Ir. TF Lee) come on the side of the whistleblower to stop AVCF’s verbal animosity. So there was so much disorder in what was supposedly a godly God’s event for the ADOS.  So many delegates dared to sit through that obviously forgot their role in Synod to bless God but none of that happened and AVCF was worshipped as God or Satan?

In Synod 2012, AVCF shed CROCODILE? tears and embraced? Dr. James Chhoa pretending to ask forgiveness? as it was in Good Samaritan Church in 1985/1986.  Was there real forgiveness –asking and giving?  Did AVCF deserve any forgiveness in the name of God? The socalled forgiveness was sorely abused by AVCF as he had forgotten about it when Dr. James Chhoa and his wife Gillian were not re-appointed as lay readers in 2014 with the licences not renewed by the evil man AVCF.  The evil work was also part and parcel of the satanic posture of AVCF ganging up with the new Dean Chak (CSF), AVCF had earlier appointed in late 2012.  Who do we wrong now?  Wrong both AVCF and CSF?

In Synod 2012, everything was illegal abinito and how can important motions be prepared at the venue and seconded at the meeting and then approved by the delegates without dissent?  How can the audited accounts in great mess by approved when the details of the management letter was not tabled?  The honorary audited signed a QUALIFIED report and why the treasurer cover up it without showing the management letter of the auditor?  After that the auditor was subject to personal attacks.

So I would urge the delegates of Synod 2014, submit early and even now any suitable motion to remove AVCF.  Every shortcomings and crimes in ADOS are the work of AVCF- period.

All Saints at ASC by secret ballot had already removed the recalcitrant acting Dean at AGM 2012. 

So it is now the holy and pressing duty of the delegates of Synod 2014 to do likewise – remove AVCF as bishop before more and more terrifying damages done to the Christian communities in Sabah.

I have always tried to move motions affected the ADOS at the level of ASC but always rejected for the prerogative of AVCF. 

So the Synod can do it now as it is the highest administrative and policy level in ADOS but the daily management duty is carried out by the Standing Committee on behalf of the Synod.

My fellow Christians in Synod of ADOS, when Stand Com is very rotten and at most times “eunuch” giving way to AVCF in the wrong context as already confirmed, SYNOD must act NOW to bring back the ORDER of God in ADOS and ASC.

Be POSITIVE, be PRO-ACTIVE, stand up for Jesus Christ now.

No more ‘pagan’ Judge or Judges for ADOS and solve it within by removing hypocrite and demonic AVCF and his gang (also known).  Then other processes can follow.

Let God be God and there is none other.  PUSH for total change in ADOS.

Joshua Y. C. Kong      trying best to revive Christ’s church for all.  31 May, 2014

 Go there for more : http://bishopgateinanglicansabah.blogspot.com/

Thursday, May 29, 2014

339. OPEN LETTER to Synod of Anglican Diocese Of Sabah (ADOS)


joshuakong823
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
If indeed the bias HoBs and the E-Courts ruled in favour to AVCF as it is in the mind of some people, what would happen to those who had presented their evidence in sworn affidavits as narrated in the documents published here? So it would seem endless woes.


The Synod in 2010's Congress was ill prepared to send the AVCF away despite he was scolding Mr Andrew Liew for his appropriate comment of the illegal Kokol Prayer Summit and so ADOS missed a chance to 'get well".
Then Synod in 2012's Congress was so messy after ordaining an unqualified Priest against much protest a day earlier.  That Congress was illegal from the beginning with proper notice of the Congress, with a detailed Agenda, without any legal motions, without the account properly audited and subject a management report by the honorary auditors, and finally the illegal motions were prepared by Rev Kenneth - once the Diocesan Chancellor - on the spot to camouflage the alleged crimes of AVCF with a deceptive message of support from the Synod delegates who knew nothing of the alleged crimes of AVCF as the PAC Report was delayed in release just after the said Synod.  
So Synod 2014, the delegates must nail AVCF to finally close the chapter of sham and shame of AVCF internally without seeing more dirt in the Federal Court if that appeal is allowed before "pagan" Judges.  
The Synod by now should be fully awake and aware on BISHOPGATE.  Joshua  





OPEN LETTER to Synod of Anglican Diocese Of Sabah (ADOS)

The sham of AVCF has been identified in Synod 2010 where the illegal project in the Kokol Prayer Summit was exposed.  That could have triggered the initiation to remove the AVCF as the Bishop almost instantly with the motion to force him to resign or failing that further action could have been initiated by the synod to move another POSITIVE motion in 2012 when the crisis of ADOS which I called BISHOPGATE had taken central stage to remove AVCF by any means.



My court case against AVCF was started in late June 2012, and the Synod 2012 was in August/September 2012 where I was “condemned” for the civil action for bringing AVCF to the “pagan” Judge.  Synod 2012 was itself an illegal exercise. 



Now a lot of filthy water of AVCF had passed under the bridge BISHOPGATE culminating in the latest Appeal Court’s Judgement by three “pagan” Judges that Bolly Lapok set up the Ecclesiastical Court or E-C within 90 days and he releases the full Report of the Provincial Advisory Committee’s (PAC) including the recommendation report for public consummation.



I think the members of the Synod do not understand the power of Synod.  The bishop of Sabah was technically elected or selected at the Synod hence it should have the capability to remove the appointment made at the Synod.



The Synod of ADOS had missed the chance of removing the bishop with a vote of no confidence in AVCF in 2010, then 2012, and now in Synod 2014 should take positive action by a motion to punish AVCF for all the alleged crimes in ADOS and beyond.



Without a thorough review and audit of all the Synod’s accounts since 2006 under AVCF, it is meaningless or even frightful to allow AVCF to stay in office.



Now it is indeed very painful for HoBs of APSEA to face the wrath of the consequence of the civil court’s Judgement and the whole Anglican Communion near and far face the shame in the eyes of the public.  Much of the dirty linen already washed in the public domain.



Since Synod 2014 is still within the 90 days of Appeal Court’s ruling, it is now the paramount duty of the Synod 2014 to act as it is likely ADOS would be without a Bishop proper in August/September 2014.   [The case against the Archbishop sought 30 days for the E-C to be set up but the Appeal Court ruled 90 days.]



So Synod must take the cue now and even start the motion to remove AVCF as the Bishop earlier.



It is now our duty to put our house ADOS in working order.  God has spoken many times.



Joshua Y. C. Kong      30 May, 2014


  

Saturday, May 24, 2014

338. Good riddance ???


 July 9, 2014 - 5:18 am joshuakong823
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
APSEA has submitted Notice to the Court for leave to appeal in the Federal Court.
Should not Rosalind file a case to strike out the Notice for leave of appeal as it is meaningless to declare oneself as Non Legal Entity and yet can apply for further hearing. There is no other ground to appeal.
Also it was a “misjudgement” by the High Court to declare APSEA as non legal entity when APSEA has a valid Constitution which gives it its legal entity like Malaysia is governed by the Federal Constitution.
I believe Ronney submitted Res Judicata regard my case when it was not heard at all. So it is perjury on the part of Ronney to have misled the Court.
APSEA also had applied for 21 days from the day it filed notice to submit the paper, which I believe was to be for the purpose of Synod as 90 days would be outside the ruling by the Appeal Court to have convened and settled the Ecclesiastical Court.


Finally on 20 June, 2014, Ronney filed the notice for leave to appeal to the Federal Court.

I don't know on what ground the appeal is based.  If it is on the non legal entity, how can APSEA go on to appeal?
 APSEA is founded on a Constitution which gives its legal entity like Malaysia is governed by its Federal Constitution.

So Rosalind should file a case to strike out the notice based on wasting time and money as AVCF just want pass by Synod in Aug/Sep 2014 to play dirty at the Synod.  Joshua


Do we know what is happening now as the appeal to the Federal Court is soon time barred?
E-Court?  Bolly goes to jail?  AVCF sets up his own province in Sabah without sanction from Archbishop of Canterbury if AVCF is not forced to resign?  What is Archbishop of Canterbury doing?  Anglican Province in SEA is a history now? The message of God is ending soon. Joshua




I think Bolly is retiring as his term of Archbishop of APSEA of 4 years  is ending.  So if Bolly retires, then who would be the Archbishop?  Is it Bishop of Malaya?  But if Bolly does not retires before the 90 days for the E-Court to be established, and he fails to convene it with all the obstacles in his path, then what is next?  Joshua




Where would the E-Court be established or sitting if it is ever to be held?  Kuching or Kota Kinabalu?
Have we considered the costs to be involved?  How long would the E-Court be sitting?  Who would be panel of Judges?  If it is by the 3 bishops and some selected clergy and laity, I strongly believe it is a gone case as far as the decision to be made by this panel likely all the AVCF men except that all the dirty linen would be washed "clean" or "cleaner" with HoBs washing powder at the E-Court for the public to imagine.  Also the two bishops namely the Singapore and Kuching are going to be buddies to AVCF, leaving the odd one out and on that count with the weight in favour of the HoBs, AVCF would likely escape the appropriate punishment.  What kind of impact on the likely judgement that would  be swayed by the clergy and laity as these selected or appointed ones would be just sitters like those in the Synod's biennal General Assembly.  So why should we have this kind of questioned scenario?  The Bishops have gone so far as laughing stock and nothing is going to embarrass them any longer if they just choose to be continued laughing stock.  So it is going to be messier.  It was already very messy even with washing of feet (AVCF had no part in this) and that was the "evil" practice of two non Anglicans to shame the Anglicans in none other Moses Tay and Herbert Tong and soon God would know how to deal with them to shame Christians with falsehood.  Joshua







joshuakong823

Your comment is awaiting moderation.
All Saints Cathedral members,
Please don’t be lulled by this sudden victory in the Appeal Court and we do not know it is already appealed to Federal Court but a lot of work need to be done and more work in evidence if the E-Court is suddenly convened to "out-play" or thwart those persons involved with the complaints and the PAC investigation with unprepareness as most people are busy with own life. Also as it is a new maiden case in E-Court, we do not know what to expect? So we need to get ready with all the “bullets” to give no change for AVCF to escape the final episode with the finality that is fatal indeed.




What actually happened to the High Court judge who declared APSEA as non legal entity.  We all know that the three Christian missions Anglican, RC and Basel had the concession to be self regulatory.  If APSEA with a Provincial Constitution all rectified by the four Anglican regional bodies namely Singapore, West Malaysia/Malaya, Kuching/Sarawak, and Sabah and had been functioning until AVCF played it up, has become non legal entity, then Malaysia (Federal Constitution), Sarawak, Sabah all have their own Constitution should also be non legal entities but Malaysia is a legal entityIf Constitution is an issue Ronny Cham should have filed a case to the HighCourt for this ruling separately.  It is a deception of RC to have not acted on it.  Also how did the judge Azahari know anything about my very complicated case which was simply ruled on locus standi status without a trial proper and yet RES JUDICATA was raised in the High Court in the APSEA case.  All miscarriage of Justice and can I blame Ronny Cham, Stephen Foo and others especially the news article by Stephen in Daily Express by an anonymous writer on 6th March, 2014   Joshua












joshuakong823

Your comment is awaiting moderation.
RC and AVCF have been lulled by two wins when AVCF and RC did not real win my case against AVCF in substance. It is obvious Bolly had possibly delegated the case of EC to avcf and washed his hands and that may now land Bolly to prison for contempt of Court. Should RC be the counsel of Bolly or the watching brief for AVCF? Can RC put the two identities of Bolly and AVCF together hence he could not know where the two reside together? Is it God’s will that RC be confused by such a simple question to expose his “evil” deed for moral victory as he was called in my case by the Judge in December, 2012? Joshua


Are these great jokes of ILLUMINATI?

Where does you client reside?  A question Ronny Cham cannot answer???why?? Did he represent AVCF?
If RC represents AVCF, he should be removed from SLA/ Court official.

Three great Muslim judges telling Bolly Lapok what to do or he will end up in prison soon.

 





http://thetrutheng.com/2014/05/25/appeal-court-ordered-hob-to-convene-ecclesiastical-court/comment-page-1/#comment-11343












joshuakong823

Your comment is awaiting moderation.
HOB of APSEA and Bolly was so happy that it was ruled “non legal entity” as Stephen Foo was so happy to tell the world and brought in the Res Judicata as an ingredient to shame himself when he knew that my case in High Court was never heard properly except struck out. Enough is enough. Maybe now Bolly is prepared to go to the “prison” to shame others who brought him to civil court as the strategy of AVCF to kill two birds in the ongoing crisis with avcf outside the “prison”…hahaha…Bolly serves well.



How do you see this Appeal Court’s Judgement?

I wish the legal expert would tell us of the consequences of the Appeal Court’s Judgement at the Kota Kinabalu Court House by All Saints’ Cathedral “not disgruntled” but concerned key parishioners against the HoBs of Anglican Province of South East Asia (APSEA) and the Archbishop Bolly Lapok now the Respondents. (I hope this status is right).



The Appeal Court under the Chairperson Justice Datuk Rohana bte Yusof sat in Kota Kinabalu on 23rd May, 2014 and ruled in favour of the Appellant against the Respondent on two decisions namely demand by the Appellant for the total release of the socalled “confidential” Provincial Advisory Council (PAC) full report submitted to the Respondent sometimes in August, 2012 and to proceed to set up the Ecclesiastical Court (EC) to try Bishop Albert Vun for all the alleged crimes as earlier investigated by the Provincial Advisory Council both within the next 30 days.



Whether the Respondent can appeal to the Federal Court within the next 30 days is doubtful as the Appeal Court did not grant such an Appeal on 23rd May, 2014 in the afternoon.  There was no official stay of execution hence the Respondent must comply with the rulings of the Appeal Court.



With this Judgement, what Stephen Foo wrote in Daily Express of 6th March, 2014 look indeed very “childish” and a “mockery” of the Judiciary and possibly an ingredient for the subjudice of the High Court decision which ruled the Defendants then as non legal

entity.



I think many would like to know how it is now a case to “punish” Albert Vun in the pipeline with the EC.  Many would also doubt that the Respondent would indeed proceed to try Albert Vun given the precedence so far exercised by the Respondent with great disappointment in the unjustified departure of the Constitution of the APSEA.



What is now your take on the consequences in the next 30 days?



Indeed it is an open wound now as the church had submitted itself to the “pagan” Judges which Albert Vun was totally against it.  Would the open wound deteriorate into a bigger wound with all its contagious implications should the case proceed to the Federal Court to be again before more “pagan” Judges?



What would the wise biblical Solomon think of this Judgement?  What would Jesus think of such decision? I strongly believe that the latest Judgement as very fair and restore whatever that had been amiss at the High Court under several Judges as changed. We have a learned honourable Judge with the name of Rohana Yusof meaning it is likely the decision of the Spirit of God as in Roh and Joseph who had saved the Christian church.



So has God spoken for the aggrieved parishioners who had gone all out to bring Justice of God back to the Anglican church and many parishioners of the other Christian denominations have been closely watching this development in the context of evangelism for Christ.



With this latest decision, there was no element of Res Judicata as so clearly stated by Stephen Foo to fool others.



What is now in your minds now?



What are the opportunities for the Respondent to escape taking action against Albert Vun?  The doors are now locked against Bolly Lapok and Albert Vun with the latest decisions in the absence of a further appeal.



Did the Appeal Court consider that this is an internal matter and must be resolved internally and the idea of non legal entity should not arise?  The church leaders irrespective of their positions and status must be dealt with in the Provincial Constitution. So it is now at the feet of the Respondent not to abscond his responsibilities as so clearly stipulated in the Provincial Constitution to which all the Bishops have pledged sincerely to that.



Now non legal entity is irrelevant, and the Respondent must act against Albert Vun accordingly.  If the respondent or Bolly Lapok remains adamant “neutral”, prison maybe waiting for him as it would be contempt of court. Would Bolly Lapok resign now to avoid such possible path?  Would Albert Vun resign to avoid EC?  Would the Province be dismantled now for the stubbornness all round?



Keep on praying, keep on watching, keep on sounding out for the crimes against God should face the appropriate ending.



Thank you for reading and your comments are welcome.



Joshua Y. C. Kong     24 May, 2014

Thursday, May 22, 2014

337. Appeal Hearing in KK Friday 23rd May

update: Apology for the wrong info posted earlier as I was not in Court. Appeal won and anything thereafter is up to the respondent in the next 30 days.

Now why AVCF does not stop Bolly Lapok to present his appeal to the pagan judges?  Last time, when I brought the case to the High Court in July 2012, AVCF wrote in the bulletin that Christians should not bring issues before the pagan Judge when the Judge was an Anglican in Lee Hien Cheong.  Now APSEA really before pagan judges several times already, and AVCF is so happy that the case is going to the Federal Court.  AVCF & Bolly must resign now.




Very demonic now that some of the people do not want to advocate civil action according to the Bible for same people but this case is going all the way to the highest court and so double talks but guilty people.

So who call the shots ? Lawyers? AVCF and Bolly are irrelevant in APSEA.



Appeal won and awarded cost RM30k and stay of execution pending appeal to the Federal Court by the respondent APSEA.


4.  Before Judge Rohana Bte Yusof
S-02(IM)-405- 03/2014  ROSALIND LIEW FUI LEE (Shelley Yap)   THE HOUSE OF BISHOP OF THE PROVINCE OF

THE ANGLICAN CHURCH IN SOUTH EAST ASIA (Ronny Cham & Co.)

MAH.TINGGI KOTA KINABALU : BKI24-170/8-2013

YA TUAN AZAHARI KAMAL BIN RAMLI 

as per court document/record






http://thetrutheng.com/2014/05/16/court-of-appeal-hearing-next-week/#comments






joshuakong823

Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Where (which court building?) and when (9am?) or afternoon is the Appeal in KK to be heard?