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?
Tags: blogosphere, Christianism, Lighthouse Evangelism, Rony Tan, Singapore
Dear Kenneth,
Thank you for highlighting my blog and I’m glad you enjoyed the discussion on Buddhism on my blog.
Allow me to share the two reasons why I still have not post anything over Rony Tan’s comment on homosexuality:
1) I do not know much about homosexuality to comment on it. I bet you noticed that I blogged about Buddhism because I have affinity with it. Hence, I only comment on stuffs that I have valid and adequate knowledge about.
2) After posting some of those recent blog posts, my leisure time in the past two weeks is taken up to reply to comments. I didn’t have extra time to research into homosexuality issue (which is very broad and extensive, hence draining). Can’t juggle too much things with the only two hands that I have.
[...] Rony Recants - Kennethism: The churches are silent, Ctd [Thanks Kenneth] - Irreligious: City Harvesters, it’s time to question - The Temasek Review: [...]
Hi Sze Zeng: Thanks for dropping by and leaving me a comment. I want you to know I’m not starting a witchhunt or anything here. I am just trying to understand why the churches are silent when such lies have been propagated by a supposed man of God.
I am heartened that you agree that the homosexuality issue needs to be researched into before one preaches about it, and I hope you will get to it some day.
We seriously can’t have men talking out of their asses from the pulpit on this subject. It does the church a great disservice. It sets the witness of the church back by ten thousand miles.
Maybe when your generation starts to lead our local churches here the gay community will have less reason to see Christians as being “against” them.
And by the way, people, the word “Ctd” in the title means “CONTINUED” =)
I suppose one must be sympathetic that it will involve a lot of agony, and possibly the loss of one’s entire circles, for a Christian to come out and blog about something all his partners….frown upon. Should he/she come out and blog to condemn homosexuality, then people like us are invited in. So perhaps they just wish to be out of it.
Having said that, and glancing through these blogs, I do get another very disturbing feeling.
While people like Terence Lee openly condemned Rony Tan, most of the rest appear to stand on a sort of…. he was speaking the truth, just that his presentation was wrong. The moral of the lesson to them, and incidentally akin to what pastors like YTY are saying, is, you are speaking the truth, just be more tactful about it in the future.
Which is frightening. Because remember that Rony Tan himself confessed that he was ignorant about Buddhism. So presentation aside, how could the content be truth? A man was caught openly lying, he admitted it, but yet a community worships it as truth. Why? Because of a matter of pride from a Christian identity? Because some phrases in the Bible could be very loosely interpreted to support Rony Tan? Or just blind loyalty?
This is turn opens up a huge bee farm. In a time of conflict, would these Christians remember themselves as Singaporeans or Christians? Which comes first? Or can it come together?
@Mythbuster:
Agreed.
The unfortunate thing about the fundamentalist, literalist, exclusivist, dichotomist worldview of the evangelical world today and the divisiveness of the issue of homosexuality is such that if any Christian leader comes out and appears to have a slightly more compassionate stance towards gay people, he at once is taken as a heretic.
Here’s a must-watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s30ZKjNfRlU
Hi Kenneth, I do not write or comment on matters I have not seen, heard or read myself. My position on homosexuality is conservative and similar to the National Council of Churches in Singapore. My first post was about the Buddhism video, which I managed to watch in full. My second was to look at how the law would treat someone like Richard Dawkins, if he were the ones making the comments instead of Rony Tan.
I cannot speak for all pastors, but the blogs of different pastors serve different purposes. Some are devotional, some are personal, some just talk about church life, some are theological. Few are activist, most avoid controversy.
@Blogpastor:
Thanks for dropping by and leaving me a comment. I appreciate it =)
Though I must say I find it hard to believe that you haven’t seen, heard or read about the Rony Tan vs Gays issue. The news has been all over Singapore and you alluded to it in your blogpost.
Also: How is Rony Tan vs Gays more controversial than Rony Tan vs Buddhists that you feel it’s okay to comment on one issue and not the other?
I can only take the silence of the churches to mean that they actually agree with Rony Tan that gays are paedophiles and bestialists, scums of the earth, unworthy of any human dignity. That really is the message that they’re sending out to the world.
Once again, as I said to Sze Zeng, I didn’t write this blogpost to single you guys out. The exercise was done to feel the pulse of the Singapore Christian blogosphere. Unfortunately when I went in there, all I found was silence.
They said nothing because they had agreed with it. No point even for more liberal churches to comment on Pastor Rony.
I hate to break it to you, Kenneth, but guys like Sze Zeng and Blogpastor agree with Rony Tan deep down inside. And yes, that includes the paedophile/zoophile bit. Their silence says it all.
Yet a lot of these folks are their own pitfalls.
In every such debate, they defend themselves with the so-called, moderate Christian argument. I.E. not every Christian is like that etc etc. Something which any decent person, including gay activists, agree.
Yet, they lavish statements condemning the entire homosexual population. They agree with these. They support the statements, when they can’t even determine how many homosexuals there are in the world. (And how many are in their clergies).
Insightful, don’t you think?
Kenneth,
I think you’ve come out too strongly here - and a bit ignorant too. From what you wrote about my blog, I don’t even think you’ve read much from it. Some quick points:
1) I’ve been extremely outspoken about the homosexual issue. Read my posts on AWARE, Free Community Church and homosexuality in general. I’m with the gay community on many issues - as many who’ve read my blog know. But sorry, you don’t win many people over by a post like yours. I’d like to see the Christian community more loving and less militant against gays. But the same goes for the gay community. No point writing a post like what you did and attacking different blogs, especially those more on your side than not.
“I am just trying to understand why the churches are silent when such lies have been propagated by a supposed man of God.”
Well, your post wasn’t that of “trying to understand”.
2) I think you’re taking a cheap shot at New Creation Church. That’s not even the point here, so why bring it up? And if you even know NCC, the church adopts a very different view from Church of Our Saviour and Cornerstone Community Church. At least that ought to be recognized and commended. I also liked what Pastor Kong Hee from City Harvest said last time regarding the AWARE issue: “But how are they going to encounter that (the love of Jesus Christ) if gays and lesbians perceive the Church as hostile toward their community?…I want City Harvest Church to focus on the issue of salvation, not sexual orientation.” Singling out New Creation and City Harvest without even acknowledging that they adopt a different attitude from most Churches is being at best ignorant, and at worst unfair.
And if you’ve read Pastor Chua Seng Lee’s blog, he hasn’t even written for months! An unfair singling out.
3) Bloggers have different reasons for not writing about the issue. For me, I’ve been thinking a lot about it and thought of writing a post in future. I don’t write often - as you can see. I’ve also commented on Blogpastor’s blog on the issue and I generally don’t blog on many current events - many bloggers do so and I don’t see the need to repeat the same things other Christians (not necessarily those bloggers above) have written. So there’s no need to rush to reach unnecessary conclusions.
Gentle lamb is wrong for saying that those who have said nothing agrees with Pastor Rony Tan. I don’t.
4) Thank you for thinking of me as a key Christian blogger. I don’t think of myself as such, nor am I writing my blog with the thought in mind that I have the power to influence many. If you’ve gone through my website (not just the blog section), you’ll see my writings full of social justice issues. By me not addressing the issue doesn’t mean a thing. I actually saw Rony Tan’s youtube with the lesbian a while back before this whole controversy. To me, it was just typical of the majority of Christians. Pure stupidity.
Kenneth, I’ve responded strongly because I think your post has been unfair. Not just to me, but to others here. Read my blog on homosexual issues and you’ll know I’m more on your side. But there’s no point writing a post like this. Your post is full of unnecessary (and ignorant) rhetoric that just provokes. I long for the day that Christians would show more love, understanding and acceptance to homosexuals. But this post doesn’t bring us further along that path.
I’m all for coming together to talk things over and hear each side out. In fact, I’ve been trying to get Blogpastor to come up with some monthly theological discussions, bringing different sides together and learning from one another - face to face. And I’d love to see such a meeting actually happen where we can discuss homosexual issues. No, not with the big shots, just with us humble bloggers. Blogpastor, what say you?
Hi Kenneth, I came to know about your blog entry from Andrew Ong. Interesting observation you made here, but maybe I can give a more journalistic perspective to it.
Actually, I wasn’t thinking consciously debating about whether to write on Rony’s comments on gays, but I think when it comes down to it, what Rony Tan said isn’t new at all. Given the amount of gay-bashing that is already happening, what Rony Tan adds doesn’t seem so significant.
His comments on Buddhists, on the other hand, is somewhat more shocking, because religious leaders rarely ridicule other religions so openly on the Internet. Call it a sad state of affairs if you like, but I guess people are too used to Christians gay-bashing in Singapore.
Also, you must consider the fact that his comments were made BEFORE his rant on Buddhism, which diminishes its news worthiness further. It would be news if he made such comments AFTER though.
Lastly, I think my views on homosexuality have been articulated in previous posts, written during the AWARE saga. I have written an article for TOC on the topic as well. I condemn all forms of gay-bashing and discrimination. As for my stance on homosexuality, I am currently undecided. As somebody else mentioned, this is a complex topic that requires much research, and I don’t think I am an authority in this area. This means that I don’t really see myself as a gay activist in that sense.
Oh by the way, Kong Hee’s a busy man la. He hasn’t been blogging for quite some time.
Terence said…
Actually, I wasn’t thinking consciously debating about whether to write on Rony’s comments on gays, but I think when it comes down to it, what Rony Tan said isn’t new at all. Given the amount of gay-bashing that is already happening, what Rony Tan adds doesn’t seem so significant.
————————————————————–
Sorry but wrong is still wrong IMHO…
A hypothetical scenario - you see a group of guys ragging someone and you join in - after all, going by your own logic, what is one more guy ragging that person right?
But does that make the ragging right in the first place?
Or are you trying to say that the 1000th guy doing it isn’t as guilty or culpable as the 1st guy?
Dear Stillhaventfound:
Firstly, I don’t speak of course for this blog owner, but I will readily acknowledge that NCC and CHC have displayed a surprising amount of responsibility and restrain during all the Christianity related events of recent years. In my personal opinion, NCC and CHC possess the strongest influence and I am, and still is, pleasantly surprised that no attempt was made to join into the frays of Christian Post, The Thios etc.
Yet at the same time, you should consider what Gentle Lamb’s statement really encompasses.
The Pentecostal activists in Singapore put at their forefront two weapons. Namely: 1) We represent the silent MAJORITY of Singapore i.e. we are the moral vanguards. 2) We speak for the WHOLE Christian community.
These have been repeated again and again till ad nauseam, including on public platforms. The strategy behind, naturally, is that they do not expect any Singapore congregation to openly refute them. Correspondingly, silence equates support in a flimsy logical manner. And they are empowered to develop their positions further.
I am sure you realize this yourself.
I am sure too, you realize that with the horrors depicted by Rony Tan, Thio Li Ann, Edmond Chua, Derek Hong etc, which all focus on establishing paranoia, the possibility of talk and engagement becomes further and further. How many has the courage to present themselves at a meeting table, when they could immediately be identified as potential criminals? (Check out Rony’s latest implication of this) How do you carry out a discussion, when the first statement of the other party is, “I am a Christian. My Book said this. It is truth. I will consider NOTHING else.”
@Stillhaventfound:
Thanks for dropping by. I’m sorry if I’ve touched a raw nerve.
You are well in your rights to call me ignorant, and I make no claims to be a know-it-all. But you don’t have the monopoly on the truth either.
I am well aware of the diversity of opinion within the Christian community, and by no means am I suggesting that Christians are all of one mind.
I have also read all your posts on homosexuality and the docmentation of your experiences with Free Community Church (and that was way before this Rony Tan incident blew up). I commend you for your inquiring spirit and open mind and I wish more Christians were the same.
But this post wasn’t about the doctrinal stands of Christian bloggers in Singapore with regards to homosexuality. My survey was to capture a snapshot of what Singapore Christian bloggers are talking about in the aftermath of the Rony Tan incident.
Both Sze Zeng and BlogPastor have given their reasons for not talking more about the issue. Sure, individual bloggers can all give reasons why they are silent on the issue, but when one takes a more macroscopic look at the Singapore Christian blogosphere, the silence you find is very unsettling.
You dismiss Rony Tan’s statements as “pure stupidity” “typical of the majority of Christians”, and hence unworthy of your attention.
Terence deems it as not so newsworthy because “people are too used to Christians gay-bashing in Singapore”.
In the words of Rony Tan himself, ‘A wrong is a wrong and must be rectified, not justified.’ Lies like his need to be roundly condemned by the Christian community, not covered up and swept under the carpet.
It is most unfortunate that Christian leaders have not spoken up on this issue. And neither has the NCCS. Can you blame anyone for thinking that Christians really agree with Rony Tan? Can you?
@Terence:
Thanks also for dropping by with your comment.
I myself have been in journalism and public relations for years, but thanks for your perspective.
Just one more thing that I didn’t mention above: Where did you get that Rony Tan’s comments on homosexuality came before the comments on Buddhism/Taoism? And if so, why is this less newsworthy just because they came before?
We are talking about comments made by Rony Tan that have JUST come under the radar of the media spotlight. Should they not all be given a good public airing and discussed equally?
I personally would have thought it’s more shocking to attack people on the basis of who they are rather than what they choose to believe in.
And yes, I have read your posts during the AWARE saga. Thank you for all the great work that you’re doing at TOC. I assure you they have not gone unnoticed. Though I’ve also been wondering why TOC has been silent on Rony Tan vs Gays too? (you don’t have to answer on their behalf)
The last line in your comment really made me smile btw. I don’t think anyone is expecting you to be a ‘gay activist’. I don’t even see myself as an ‘activist’. Commentator perhaps, activist no.
Another blogger. A young boy who went to some church talk and learnt (in his words) about homosexuality.
http://www.kennethcyc.blogspot.com/
Strange that with the plethora of scientific and statistical information about, people view such talks as authoritative sources.
Hi Kennethism,
Firstly i like to thank Q for visiting my Blog, as i thought not much people got visit it…
I found out that u talk about this whole topic, through YOH Twitter, maybe i share what i learn as Christian and what been taught to us.
Firstly a base understanding is God Love the World John 3:16. that most of the people who have hear about Jesus’s story. And how does it link to Homosexuality.
from my understanding of the Gospel, God don’t choose who to like and who he dislike but God love every one of us. And that mean GAY and so on….
But as true believer of Christ, we should be impacting the world about his teaching and to live life to the fullness just like Jesus that show us.
God didn’t Force us to do thing that against our own WILL. But he chooses to give us a chance to lets us repent and seek him for forgiven…
That why to me… I believe, WE should give Homosexuality a chance to redeem themself and Changes to lead back a life that plan by God.
But is not by what we share and commented/Order them to change but is them who’s Willing to seek help and Willing to walk side by side with God and his People who can guide them and encourage them.
If People who need to seek help, May Find the person list below.
MR Shawn Tay from Church of Our Saviour (S’pore)
OR
Miss Sandra Moo (not sure where she from)
Both Are Guest Speaker of the Day for My church – Topic talk (Straight Talk about Homosexuality)
It’s a workshop host to impact knowledge to our Church Leadership to Understanding or help others who is facing this problem. As Homosexuality is a one of the rising Case in Singapore, That need to look into it.
Hope u guys can understand my sharing here. As my English is not that good.
No One is Perfect in this World.
And this brought up to term:
Imperfect Human = imperfect LOVE
Perfect God = Perfect LOVE
Best Regerds,
Kenneth Chia
PolyDiNs - DI2
Hope Church Singapore.