Elder Muller Kyaw, President of MYUM
Brother Memory Tun,. Secretary of MYUM
Brother Nang Do Dal , Treasurer of MYUM
Elder Kenneth H Suanzanang, Legal Director of MYUM
Respected Sirs,
I humbly inform about the
prevailing situations in the Adventist society in Upper Myanmar. We knew that
Mr. Saw Htoo Galae, a probationary worker of UMM from Mandalay, is sent to
Kalemyo to disturb and supervise all the prosecutions against the Annual Revival
Meeting of Conference churches as he had done to me in Pyin Oo Lwin on ATI
building.
PREVAILING SITUATIONS
Mr. Ngo Khaw Nang(Moe
Khaing), church pastor at Pinlon 8, Kalaymyo who claims himself as the Area
Controller and Circle Leader, in consultation with the said person prosecuted
Mr. Kai Za Dal and Kham Khen Pau for forgery at the Township Criminal Court of
Kalaymyo on March 26, 2007. Then as defendants we had and have to attend the
Court on March 29, 2007, April 5, 2007, April 11, April 26, 2007 and we do not
know how long we have to attend the court for that case.
Again Ngo Khaw Nang in
consultation with the said person and Gin Do Pau, church pastor of Pinlon 11,
Kalaymyo, and Lal Hmun Siama, pastor of Chanthagyi Village prosecuted against
eight people of Pinlon 11 SDA Conference supporters (including Kai Za Dal and
Kham Khen Pau) to the same court falsely for trespass, deviation of properties,
and frightening—such things we had never committed.
SHAMEFUL
The problem began with
Chanthagy SDA church where Lal Hmun Siama, the pastor repeatedly claims from
the sacred pulpit that all the properties of the local church, all the
offerings, and all authorities of the local church should be under his own
jurisdiction according to the letter of Pastor Kai Khan Khual, the Secretary of
Upper Myanmar Local Mission. Then the members are divided into two groups: the
mission supporters vs. Conference supporters by 33 vs. 93(4 households vs. 18
households).
After several disputes
about the hiding of record and offerings by the pastor, a member dragged Lal
Hmunsiama down from his speech. Then the pastor reported it to the Police and
demanded Five Million Kyat (US$ 5,000). But reconciliation was made by elders
of the conference supporters and had reluctantly paid Kyat 1,200,000(1.2
million local currency equivalents to US $ 1,200) in order to cool down the
dispute. Then the pastor captured all the keys of the church and ordered that
the conference supporters may only attend the church under the sole supervision
of him and he padlocked the church on January 30, 2007.
As the result, the
Conference group applied to local authorities that the two parties may have
separate hours of worship. The local authorities summoned the two groups for reconciliation,
but it was turned down by the pastor, Ngo Khaw Nang, and Gin Do Pau—pastors
from mission side—on February 4, 2007. Then the petition was referred to the
Township Council which in turn referred to the Local Council and authorized
accordingly with the petition made by conference groups.
But the Schedule of
separate worship hours for both were objected and the church building was
officially declared padlocked by Pr. Malsawma, the Circle Leader, Ngo Khaw
Nang, the authorized agent of the Local Mission and the Union and also the Area
Controller, and Gin Do Pau, the Area Controller on February 20, 2007. Then Ngo
Khaw Nang filed the case to the District Council and Township Council in which
he falsely accused Mr. Kai Za Dal and Kham Khen Pau to be the creator of
problem at Chanthagyi.
Then the EC of the Township
council after studying the pro and cons in accordance with the instruction of
the District Council, ordered the Local Council to confirm tlhe separate
worship schedule on April 5, 2007. Copies of the decision were given to the
persons concerned of both sides. After reading the decision the same group (
Ngo Khaw Nang, Lal Hmun Siama, Gin Do Pau, and Saw Htoo Galae) went to the
District office on Saturday, April; 7, 2007 and objected the decision but in
vain.
Such activities have
negative impacts on church members for future reunification. Suing and
prosecution against fellow Christians to the jurisdiction of non-Christian is
very very shameful and a disgracing of the Adventist 'Church. All these kinds
of actions were authorized and supported by the mission and the Union leaders
morally, physical, and financially from God's treasury. And also we know that
persecution had been used as a means of keeping the chu8rch pure. That is a
contrary to the teaching of the Bible ( I Cor 6:2-12 ) and to the SOP( Christ's
Object Lesson,
74:1) and also unchristian, uncivilized.
APPEAL
We would like to know how
long the higher levels of our church organization will continue authorizing and
supporting this kind of evil deeds at the cost of expending God's money instead
of using them for the advancement of the gospel. Is this the best diplomacy to
win back the one sided "disbanded". The existence of mission
supporters and conference supporters is better
justifiable than
prosecuting at the criminal courts since they are not against or rebelling God
and the church. But the worst of all is: direct and indirect involvement of the
leaders in such
prosecutions against their
fellow Christians (Adventists) before the criminal courts and stand to bear
false witnesses against their fellow Christians.
Therefore, I humbly request
your immediate intervention regarding these evil deeds so that the negative
impacts may not be contagious among Adventists in order for future
reconciliation and unification.
May God bless you.
Pr. Khamkhen
