This story is cross-posted on Shanghaiist.

Evangelist Luis Palau preaching to the crowds

We’ve known it for a while now — China is destined to be home to the world’s largest Christian population. And if evangelists like Luis Palau have their way, gospel rallies and healing crusades in tents, megachurches and stadiums will become a reality before you know it. This month in Hangzhou, Palau, widely touted as America’s greatest evangelist after Billy Graham, will be preaching in a massive rally that is expected to draw up to 20,000. Christian Post reports:

American evangelist Luis Palau will preach to an overflow crowd of up to 20,000 people at a megachurch in mainland China this month.

Registered church Chong Yi in the eastern city of Hangzhou will host the evangelist for the March 20 event.

Chong Yi Church is designed to seat only about 5,400 people, but senior pastor Joseph Gu said he believes they can fit 10,000 people into the various buildings on the church property, said Fred Conklin, a full-time volunteer with the Luis Palau Association who is handling the ministry’s China relations, to The Christian Post.

Pastor Gu also plans to put loud speakers with screens outdoors and fit another 10,000 on the church property, if weather permits, so that a total of up to 20,000 people can hear Palau preach.

This will not be Luis Palau’s first time in China. He has been here for years now, working hard to sweeten the ground. According to Christian Post, Palau met with China’s house church leaders as early as 2004 to seek their “advice on how to best carry out his ministry goals in China”. The house church leaders refused to accept Palau’s invitation to join him in activities with the registered churches and since then there has been little contact between Palau and underground leaders as the evangelist began to focus his energy on developing relations with the government-approved Three Self Patriotic Movement instead. It didn’t take long before Palau began preaching in state-sanctioned churches around China, all with the approval of government officials. In 2006, Palau cowrote a book entitled ‘Riverside Talks: A Friendly Dialogue Between an Atheist and a Christian’ with former spokesman for China’s State Council Information Office and atheist Zhao Qizheng. The next year, Palau is said to have preached to 8,000 people at Chong Yi church, out of which 800 “responded to Palau’s invitation to accept Jesus”.

Luis Palau’s proximity to government officials in charge of regulating religious affairs has not been without controversy. When former president George Bush visited the Gangwashi Church in Beijing in 2005, Palau was invited along. At the church service, Palau was reported to have told journalists that “some reports of religious persecution are unjustified”, much to the consternation of local house church leaders who say countless pastors and believers remain in prison today for their faith. These statements caused a huge ruckus back home in the United States and Palau eventually issued a statement expressing regret for his over-optimisim in China’s religious freedom.

While Palau’s friendly relations with the Chinese government have given him access to places where no other foreign evangelist has been, his goal, according to Christian Post, “is to be able to hold an open-air festival in China”, but each time he has raised this to government officials here, they have “politely but firmly denied his request”.

Another famed evangelist with friends in high places here is Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham (and a good friend of Palau’s). In 2008, we told you of a China Daily report quoting Franklin Graham as saying that he “hopes to do more for China” through his international Christian relief organization Samaritan’s Purse. Shortly after this, the Sichuan earthquake struck and Graham was quick to put his money where his mouth was by donating a whopping RMB2 million, or US$285,000, towards relief efforts.

For more on Christianity in China, please click here.

After amassing 15,000 views, Rony Tan’s ex-gay testimony with Cheryl Bachelor which I put up on Vimeo has now been taken down. Apparently what Rony Tan said was too hateful for even Vimeo. Here’s the email I received from them:

YOUR VIDEO HAS BEEN REMOVED

Dear Kenneth Tan:

Your video ‘What Pastor Rony Tan of Lighthouse Evangelism thinks about gays and lesbians(9337605)’ has been removed for violating the Upload Rules of Vimeo.com:
Vimeo does not allow videos that harass, incite hatred or depict excessive violence.

If you believe this was an error, please reply to this email in a civil manner with your reasoning (”I see other people do it” is not a valid reason).

Regards,
Vimeo

I’ll be contesting Vimeo’s decision of course but in the meanwhile if anyone’s looking for the video, it is available on Youtube in nine short clips starting with this one.

Well I didn’t say so. The prophet Ezekiel did:

“Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.” [Ezekiel 16:49]

Sometimes the Bible can speak in such clear terms and we still miss it all.
And to think I learnt this from a journalist and not a preacher.
I am learning something new everyday.

The apology note has already been taken down from its website and guess who’s speaking at Lighthouse next?

Inspired by Blogpastor, I too want to trot out my hypothetical what-if:

Let’s just suppose some very public person — an eminent scholar, a famous actor, or a popular singer — came out to the public with details of sex abuse in a Catholic school when he was a child, and then devoted another 80 minutes to make the point that all Christians are paedophiles. Videos of the speech spread like wildfire on the internet and this ignites a firestorm of controversy in Singapore.

Would not Christians at once cry foul? Would not the ISD act at once against this person?

Or would we all be laughing it off and telling Christians to grow a thicker hide because this was obviously a mad man talking?

So I’ve been reading page after page after page of comments on blogs, forums and bulletin boards trying to see what people are saying about Rony Tan vs Gays and everywhere I go, I see self-professed Christians taking upon themselves the divine role of apologist for Rony Tan in a massive, uncoordinated astroturfing campaign.

Many of these people will do one or more of the following:
1. Tell you “But he said nothing wrong, what” — followed by some ridiculous projectioning of Rony Tan as some kind of modern-day Elijah who’s warning people of their sin because he loves them. (Except, as I said many times before, nobody’s feeling his “love”)
2. Throw you heaps of Bible verses. Any attempt to engage these guys in a discussion that doesn’t involve the Bible is futile. Because they just will not listen to you. And because they really believe the state should run on Biblical principles (ie.,  anything that doesn’t fall in line with *their* interpretation of such principles should be BANNED).
3. Obsess over anal sex — how dirty, evil, unnatural or sinful it is — and I mean OBSESS.

I have something to say to all these people:
SHAME ON YOU. YOU KNOW NOT WHAT MANNER OF SPIRIT YOU ARE OF.

How, oh how, does one go about justifying, ignoring, downplaying, covering up Rony Tan’s out-of-this-world lies that gays = paedophiles = bestialists and claim to have the Spirit of God in his heart?

For those of you who say Rony Tan was well within his religious rights to say what he said, I now ask you: Rony Tan also sincerely believes that other religions are of the devil. Should he be also allowed to preach this on the grounds of religious freedom?

Religious rights cannot, should not and must not be unlimited and unfettered. If not, all hell would break loose and you would have faith leaders inciting followers to kill non-believers in the name of God — as has happened in the Middle East and in developed Western nations.

Spin it whichever way you will, but what Rony Tan said was NOT right. And if the man is not going to own up to it, then the least that his fellow-believers could do is to disavow themselves from his statements.

Also read:
Pastor Rony: “I’ve said nothing wrong, you know.”
“I’ve said nothing wrong, you know” Ctd

Here’s Christian Post’s report of that fateful miracle service [mirrored] on 2 March 2009. The title truly deserves an “Epic WTF Award”. Christian Post has since removed the story from its website but I think it’s good that we archive this. Can there be any misunderstanding or misinterpreting of what Rony Tan said that evening at all?

Pastor Explores Paedophilic Roots of Homosexuality
by Edmond Chua

Is homosexuality an inborn genetic trait or is it an acquired behaviour? Proponents of homosexuality would seek to prove that it is nature while its opponents try to show that it is nurture.

Stepping into the fray, independent church Lighthouse Evangelism has dedicated a miracle service to the subject the video of which was recently uploaded on the church’s newly revamped website.

In his introduction LE’s Senior Pastor Rony Tan showed that homosexual behaviour could have been acquired as a result of child molestation, in addition to other causes – mostly relational – including abusiveness of parents sharing the same sex as the person in question.

For example, there could be those who as little children were sexually attacked by paedophiles thus confusing boys about what they should feel toward other males since their first sexual encounter and during their formative years was with a man, and in the case of the part-time LE staff, an ex-lesbian, who shared her testimony, developing in girls a repulsion and disgust toward males in general.

That said, the pastor emphasised that barring a very small percentage of the homosexual population all homosexuals are so by “acquired taste”, stating that many of the homosexuals are adults who turned to homosexuality only after marriage and having children.

“The homosexual urge could be developed especially when a person is very lonely and very disturbed and very confused,” he said, calling such cases perversions.

The well-known regional faith healer also warned against indifference to trends of homosexuality such as barrenness and a downward slide into different forms of bestiality.

“I tell you it is abnormal and if we don’t warn people against it then there will be more homosexuals,” he said. “Many of these people will be not all of them of course but many of these people will be harassing and seducing young boys and they in turn will become homosexuals because of confused sex orientation at such a very early age and very soon half the world is homosexual meaning that half the world will be barren. It’s a serious problem. Proper sex means life, it propagates life. Lesbianism and homosexuality simply mean death, barrenness.

“I want to declare to you two men or two women cannot make a family. That’s impossible, cannot be regarded as a family. You see man’s heart is so wicked that if you allow that next time people will get married to a monkey and they want rights they want to apply HDB flat with a donkey or a monkey or a dog.”

The mega-church founder also made it clear that while there would be some “loud-mouthed homosexuals” most of them are not fighting for rights as homosexuals but admit that homosexuality is an abnormality. And he urged those with such tendencies to be prayerful, revisit and examine their past and seek the Lord for a miraculous healing to set them free.

Outspoken opponent of homosexuality Church Of Our Saviour Senior Pastor Rev Canon Derek Hong ran a sermon series on the topic during the period of parliamentary discussion in which he clarified that homosexuality is viewed as a sin according to the Bible, highlighted that change is possible for homosexuals and showed through two live testimonies of his congregants that the behaviour could have developed due to the abusiveness of the parent with the same sex as the child and the indifference and absenteeism of the other parent.

And, oh, before we forget — Rony Tan still maintains that he said nothing wrong at all.

So what are the key Christian bloggers in Singapore saying about Rony Tan vs Gays?

As it turns out, pretty much zilch. zero. nada.

Over the last few days, I’ve been diligently looking into what they’ve been saying, and here’s the summary of my findings. Please feel free to point out to me any other important blogger I left out (NOTE: I have only included overtly Christian Blogs here, not just any blogger who happens to be Christian):

• IRRELIGIOUS (Terence Lee, journalism student at NTU, attends City Harvest Church) — one blogpost exploring the emotional outburst of reactions to Rony Tan vs Buddhists/Taoists. Another on the point-by-point rebuttal by the NUS Buddhist Society. Total silence on Rony Tan vs Gays. (UPDATE: Terence has a great new post entitled City Harvesters, it’s time to question)
• SZE ZENG (student at Trinity Theological College) — one post exploring what Rony Tan vs Buddhists means for Singapore; one post complaining that SG Daily had misrepresented the earlier story (a bit duh); one post exploring what Singaporeans think of the ISD; one post on the four types of Christians in “public theology”; one post reflecting on the response by the NUS Buddhist Society; one post exploring interfaith relations within his own family (I enjoyed this one); Total silence on Rony Tan vs Gays.
• ANDREW ONG (another City Harvester) — one post on his learning points from Rony Tan vs Buddhists. Total silence on Rony Tan vs Gays.
• THE LOGICAL CHRISTIAN (Stanley Wong, attends New Creation Church) —  this guy appears to be totally oblivious to the Rony Tan saga because he’s too busy trying to explain that his church isn’t a cult and defending the theological views of his pastor Joseph Prince.
• STILLHAVENTFOUND (another New Creation Church devotee) — another busy apologist for the theology (or perceived lack thereof) of his church (seriously what’s up with New Creation?). Likewise, total silence on the Rony Tan saga.
• SKILLFUL SHEPHERDS (Timothy P, youth pastor at Woodlands Evangelical Free Church) — one blogpost on Channel News Asia’s report on Rony Tan’s “inappropriate and unacceptable” comments against Buddhism and Taoism. Total silence on Rony Tan vs Gays.
• GIVE ME THIS MOUNTAIN (Chua Seng Lee, formerly a pastor with Faith Community Baptist Church, now with World Revival Prayer Fellowship) — total silence on the Rony Tan saga though I did find this interesting link of a letter written by a “concerned Christian” to the Archbishop John Chew lamenting over the “massacre of Christians” that she witnessed at the Aware EGM. John Chew was in the news recently imploring Anglicans to unite against “alternative values” like homosexuality. He’s also the president of the NCCS but he too has been silent on Rony Tan vs Gays.
• BLOGPASTOR (Kenny Chee, senior pastor of World Revival Prayer Fellowship) — one post exploring the need for Christians to have a “loving and respectful witness” (in response to Rony Tan vs Buddhists); and a second one asking what would have happened if Rony Tan were Richard Dawkins. Of all the above bloggers, he comes closest to touching on Rony Tan vs Gays but even he has to tiptoe around the issue by saying “Hopefully one day the issues raised by the Pastor Rony Tan’s webcast on Buddhism and homosexuality can be intellectually dissected and discussed and everybody, Christians and Buddhists and gays, can get enlightened in the process, or at least have their say.” No censure of Rony Tan’s assertion that gays are paedophiles and zoophiles as in the case of Yang Tuck Yoong.
• KONG HEE (senior pastor of City Harvest Church) — total silence on Rony Tan. Not kosher for him to be censuring the senior pastor of another megachurch I guess.

So as you can see, we’ve got lay members, theological students, pastors, senior pastors above. Put them all together and you find that the silence is very deafening, especially when you take into account how the rest of the Singapore blogosphere is abuzz with Rony Tan. This is what befuddles and troubles me so much.

I do understand the dilemma that some of these guys find themselves in. On the one hand, they are of the conviction that homosexuality is sinful (I’m not challenging this) and on the other, they are profoundly embarrassed by Rony Tan’s frivolous slander against gays. I understand this, I do.

But seriously, how can anyone be SILENT or NEUTRAL with the assertion that gay people are paedophiles and bestialists?

Tan Tarn How, policy researcher in the Institute of Policy Studies, tells TODAY:

“I don’t think you should have complete freedom of speech on Internet, even though it is very hard to police. The existence of these things (hate videos and speech) is problematic. But if its roundly condemn by society, especially institutions and opinion leaders, there is a vaccine against the virus of hate speech. The opinion of society is very critical, not just of individuals but opinion leaders and institutions. Unfortunately, it seems churches are keeping silent on this. This has become Buddhist criticising Christians, but rather should be Christians criticising this pastor. This would be a more potent weapon against such talk. It is a failure that media do not go out and talk to churches and seek their responses. Of course, the Buddhists will be angry.

I want to another point. Unfortunately, it seems to get the small guys and let the opinion leaders relatively free with an apology. The right approach is, if he is an opinion leader, he ought to be more severely dealt with than if he is just a small individual. The opinion leader has more influence. I think the pastor is let off too lightly.” [Emphasis mine; read more of Tan Tarn How's views here and here.]

The above interview was given by Tan Tarn How to TODAY in the wake of the first part of the Rony Tan saga (featuring the anti-Buddhism/Taoism remarks) but I think what he said applies to the Rony Tan vs Gays incident too — the churches are way too silent.

It is time for moderate Christians to stand up and disavow themselves from all the infactual insults made by Rony Tan against the Buddhist, Taoist and gay people of Singapore. Then and only then can the healing begin.

In Singapore’s fight against terror, moderate Muslims were encouraged to speak up and distance themselves from the likes of Osama bin Laden and Jemaah Islamiyah. That has proven to work very well (I think).

Of course I’m not saying here that Rony Tan is like Osama or JI, but the principle remains the same — when a small group of people hijack the faith and make the headlines for all the wrong sorts of reasons, then it’s time for the silent majority to speak up and say, “We do not accept this. This sort of behaviour is incompatible with our faith.”

That time has come. Will they?