Pr. Suak Khaw Ngin’s letter to Thang Khan Dal

Pr. Suak Khaw Ngin’s letter to Thang Khan Dal

Dear Daltawng & family:

This is the answers of your questions “basic problem statements and questions regarding Seventh-day Adventist Mission and Myanmar Adventist Conference.” Since MAC/MUC is not legally organized organization and it is already disbanded from the fellowship of world sisterhood of churches, and the whole plan is started and executed by themselves against several warnings from higher authorities, it is not needed to reply your letter from church leaders at any level. But, because of my sincere loved to you cause me to drop this letter.

I found out that all our conflicts are rooted in our unmet needs of individual. I believe some of these needs can only be met by God alone. So, restoring our broken relationship is an important step to recover the lost status in the church. The Bible says sin, including unresolved conflict, blocks our fellowship with God and keep our prayers from being answered (1 Peter 3:7) besides making us miserable. This text reminded us: “To worry yourself to death with resentment would be a foolish, senseless thing to do, and you are only hurting yourself with your anger.” (Job 5:2).

And we are much focus on our feelings, not the facts. We begin with the solutions, not with sympathy. The Scripture teaches us that feelings are not always true or logical. In fact, resentment makes us act and think in foolish ways. “When my thoughts were bitter and my feelings were hurt, I was as stupid as an animal” (Psalm 73:21, 22). You know that we are human beings and could have mistakes. If you always focus on our mistakes only, how can you find reconciliation? Therefore, my prayer for you is “the insults of those who insulted you fall on me, and you can safely re-fellowship with the church again. Let us talk together only for the future and build understanding between us. For the sake of fellowship, let us destroy our arsenal of condemning, belittling, labeling, insulting, condescending, and being sarcastic. Let’s remember this text: “A man’s wisdom gives him patience; it is to his glory to overlook an offense” (Proverbs 19”11).

We all know that it is unrealistic to expect everyone to agree about everything. But we can have a loving relationship even when we are unable to resolve our differences. The diamond looks different from different angles, and so the same with our conference movement. God expects unity, not uniformity, and we can walk arm-in-arm without seeing eye-to-eye on every issue. This doesn’t mean we give up on finding a solution. We may need to continue discussing and even debating - but let us do it in a spirit of harmony. Let’s bury the hatchet, not necessarily the issue.

Dear brothers and sisters, we know that nothing on earth is more valuable to God than his Church. He paid the price for it, and he wants to protect from damage that is caused by division, conflict and discord. It is yours and my job to protect the unity of the Church. Paul said, “Make every effort to keep the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace” (Ephesians 4:3). Because we are sinners, we hurt each others, sometimes intentionally and sometimes unintentionally. May be we are disillusioned with the church for conflict, hurt, hypocrisy, neglect, pettiness, legalism and other mistakes. Brothers and sisters, rather than being shocked and surprised, we must remember that the church is made up of real sinners, including ourselves. But instead of leaving the church, we need to stay and work it out if at all possible. I am pleading all of you (members of MAC/MUC) with love and explaining what you have not understand the conference issue is targeting. This letter is not an official opinion of the Myanmar Union Mission of Seventh-day Adventists Church. NB: (The italics are your questions)

“The process and procedure used to choose the nominating committee members on December 10-14, 2001 in Myanmar Union Mission session and the subsequent election procedures used on January 9-12, 2002 in Upper Myanmar Mission session and December 29-31, 2003 mid-term review were not done in accordance with SSD Working Policy”

1. If so, what went wrong? Describe what and how was the wrong procedure used?

2. If so, describe what was/were the right procedure(s) that should have been used in this session?

3. There must have been concrete reason(s) why they Myanmar Union Mission session used a procedure(s) that had never been used in Myanmar Union Mission before. Without cause and reason, the procedure(s) of election would not be altered abruptly. Please fully explain the reasons.

4. If so, why was there no strong objection made right there before the confirmation of the election result by the delegates?

Answer for No. 1-4. According to the first letter (dated: 20/11/2002), election procedure was not the main agenda. They mentioned two main agendas: Conference and Education problem (ATI). In that letter, they also printed out the draft copy for Tithe Receipt form. This indicated that they have already planned to take up the UMM administration through withholding tithe and offerings.

In the second letter (28/11/2002), they announced the formation of new organization with its new leaders and their plan for withholding tithe and offerings. With the third letter (7/1/2003), they began to defy the action of UMM: The celebration of Zomi SDA Golden Jubilee on 2003. They took a rival action as follows: to celebrate Zomi Golden Jubilee in 2004. When we studied the contents of the above three letters, there was no hint to say that election procedure of 2001 was the main agenda for conference status.

In their first official letter to the Southern Asia-Pacific Division on January 7, 2003 which was signed by Kai Za Dal, he listed down six reasons but the words “election procedure” was not mentioned. Because CPC was not a legal organization in the church administration, Elder Bocala, the president of SSD replied their letter to the UMM president on March 6, 2003 as follows: “Let me say that the local church should not hold the tithe. And they are not authorized to use it for any purpose….This is clear in the Church Manual. Any church that does not follow the Church Manual is doing an act of separating from the Seventh-day Adventist Church.…If there is that feeling they want to do what they want and not following the Church Manual and the Church policy that disqualifies them to be conference. The number one qualification of conference status is the maturity of the constituency.”

If it was the main agenda in that time, they will include in their first official letter to SSD president. Therefore, your questions No 1 to 4 are not needed to answer by the SSD/ MYUM/ UMM, because 2001 election of MYUM was chair by Elder Bocala himself. Again, when I study some letters of your group, I found out some significance hidden agenda: “Unfortunately the gap remains unabridged and became widen that the crisis became more intensified under the new leadership of the Union because of their refusal to fulfill their own promises (June, July, September, and November) at the session of MYUM (Dec. 2-5, 2003) and their denial to comply with the SSD Policy regarding the election in UMM session Dec. 29-31, 2003.”--Sangchia, Disbandment of Conference Promoters; see also in Kai Za Dal letter to SSD, Feb. 24, 2004.

While you are accusing the MYUM/ UMM leaders as “not follow the SSD policy regarding the election,” why did you attempt to direct your votes as a unit against the SDA’s Church Manual, p. 159, 2005 edition), and secure some promises for election purpose? (See in Kai Za Dal’s letter to SSD, Feb. 24, 2004). Who is not following the SSD policy? According to your statements and my observation, the union and you are in the same boat - you both failed before the policy. If your agreements were come true, the election will be fair; but now, the election was not in your favor and therefore the election was not fair and biased. You accused your partners when your partners failed to fulfill his parts.

5. Was the procedure used only for the Upper Myanmar Mission election and not for the other three missions?

That election procedure was used for all Missions and no problem was arise in other missions.

6. If the same procedure was used in the election processes for all the four missions and the Yangon attached District, what are the reasons for some of the UMM members to disagree to the procedure used while the other missions had no complaint about it?

The reasons for the UMM members to disagree to the procedure used were

(a) A failure of re-election in the president post,

(b) His supporters sympathized on him for his failure,

(c) His supporters failed to manipulate the UMM administration

7. Why no effort was exerted by the Union Administration to have a re-election to correct the apparent irregularity in the election process when there were complaints?

Is there any re-election in other parts of the Divisions and even in the General Conference? Here is the counsel from the Church Manual, “The decisions and votes of the committee are not to be controlled or influenced by any church, group, or individual” (p. 150, 2005 edition). Mrs. White counsel to the Church is: “private independence and private judgment must not be stubbornly maintained, but surrendered. Never should a laborer regard as a virtue the persistent maintenance of his position of independence, contrary to the decision of the general body.”—Testimonies for the Church, vol. 9, p. 260.

MAC leaders said, “…Therefore, the elected officers in Myanmar Union Mission and Upper Myanmar Mission are not legitimate elected officers of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Myanmar. We don’t recognized the Union and UMM leaders as legitimate leaders because of the improper election procedure used. Therefore, they are not worthy of tithe money and other offerings and should not be paid to the mission under such leadership.”

8. Is the statement above an acceptable argument? State your position.

If they are true and genuine Adventists, the above statements should not come out from their hearts. These statements indicated that they are immature in spiritual matters and are not ready for conference status. For the requirement of conference status is: “Employees and Church membership in the Mission shall give evidence of their confidence and respect for duly appointed leadership and committee and show willingness to work in harmony with the policies and plans of the denomination” --SSD Working Policy, (B 10-05, N0. 2)

“Those who hold responsible positions in the church may have faults in common with other people and may err in their decisions; but notwithstanding this, the church of Christ on earth has given to them an authority that cannot be lightly esteemed” --Ellen White, Testimonies for the Church, vol. 4, p. 17).

Here is Jesus’ example for us: “He attacked no national abuses, nor condemned the national enemies. He did not interfere with the authority or administration of those in power.” –The Desire of Ages, p, 509.

9. Who vested the authority to the MAC/MUC to recognize or not to recognize the Union and UMM elected leaders?

No one vested the authority to the Myanmar Adventist Conference (MAC) or Myanmar Union Conference of Seventh-day Adventists (MUC) to recognize or not to recognize the church leadership, but they themselves vested it blatantly because they are self-appointed organization against the Church legal organization (Church Manual, p. 190, 2005 edition). Their demands are unlikely to bring good results to the church and the people. Moreover, it is not a legally formed organization, so it has no rights to make such a demand and a decree.

10. What makes the MAC/MUC leaders worthy or not worthy to collect and use tithe and offerings from the true Seventh-day Adventist believers?

11. Do the SSD working policy and Church Manual permit the withholding of tithe and offerings for any reasons of any kind of disagreement and dissatisfaction including the election process and its result?

Answers for No. 10 & 11. Concerning MAC/MUC and the tithe and offerings: MAC/MUC statements are as follows: “The Conference group wants to support the mission of the SDA Church with their means. They are ready to submit their tithe and offerings to the SSD. The conference welcomes and will work with SSD especially to control the tithe and offerings. They requested the SSD to make a special arrangement for the same.” --Sangchia, Ibid. “On 18 Nov. 2003, for implementation of mutual agreement with MYUM to hand over tithe on certain conditions… No representative of UMM/ MYUM” --Kai Za Dal’s letter to SSD, (Feb. 24, 2004).

This is very easy if you are regular and good standing members of Seventh-day Adventists Church. If you accepted the Church Manual and the Working Policy of SSD” as mentioned by Kai Za Dal, on March 14, 2006, please follow the instructions of the manual:

(1) The tithe is the Lord’s and is to be brought to the Mission treasury through the

church in which the person’s membership is held.” (Church Manual, p, 163, 2005

edition)

(2) Tithe is not used by the local church but is remitted to the mission treasurer. Thus

the tithe from all the churches flows into the mission treasury,…to the Union, to the

Division or GC.” (Ibid.)

(3) SSD Working Policy, V-a 10 05 “The recognized conference/ Mission receives from

Churches and individuals within its territory 100 percent of the tithe receipts.” The Division has no policy of special arrangement for tithe and offerings within its territory. (Emphasis supplied)

(4) SSD Working Policy, V 12 05 “Only recognized Conference/ Mission organizations

are authorized to make allocation from the tithe funds.” (Emphasis supplied)

(5) Elder Bocala’s guideline was very clear for us: “The local church should not hold the

tithe.” (March 6, 2003)

(6) Retired Minister V Rualchhinna’s appeal was more clearer for us “not to allow the

Lord’s money gets into the place which is not yet authorized by the mission authorities.”

(April 28, 2003)

If you follow the above SDA Church Manual and SSD Working Policy, you should remit your tithe to your respective churches where your name is recorded. None can have direct contact with the Union, Division, and General Conference without the involvement of your Mission office.

And in the same time, you have no authority to withhold and disbursed tithe and offerings. In doing this way, you are separating yourselves from the main SDA church and its fellowship. Division leaders warned you over and over again not to do such things, and not to organize a new organization and hire worker for any purposes. You did not heed their counsels, and policies and principles were thrown overboard in the scramble to get elected or to achieve your personal goals.

12. We know that the election processes in the sessions in MYUM and UMM were not done in accordance with SSD working policy but the Division or Union officers presided the sessions. Again, we know that the MAC/MUC has no mandate to operate as a separate entity and was not organized in accordance with SSD working policy and there were no representation from the Union or Division neither in the establishment of MAC/MUC or in the election of its leaders. Under this circumstance,

(a) What is the best way to rectify the problem and solve misunderstanding in Myanmar base on SSD working policy?

First, remember the messages of Jesus: to separate the thing of God and the thing of Ceasar, and then, follow all counsels from Southern Asia-Pacific Division leaders as follows:

“There should be No such thing as Conference Planning Committee. If UMM is interested to apply for conference status, the application should come from the UMM executive committee and not other committee.” (Dr. Ng, June 5, 2003)

“I have instructed you (Kai Za Dal) to disband this committee (CPC/MAC/MUC) because it is not authorized by the constituency of the mission and not recognized by the Union…You must first fall in line with the provisions of the GC working policy. And the first and foremost is that you should return all the tithe and offerings into the properly recognized organization.” (Gulfan, March 5, 2004)

(b) Give your suggestion for how MYUM, UMM and MAC/MUC to be reunited within the working policy of the worldwide Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Since MAC/MUC is not legally formed organization, and it is already disbanded from the fellowship of world sisterhood of churches, and it is not recognized by the Union, Division, and the General Conference; henceforth as a group it has no rights in the church. It is also formed contrary with the Church Manual and policy, and is a rival administration with the duly appointed/elected Mission administration. Therefore, as a group, it has no rights to make such a demand for reunification with the mission. However, everyone who is willing to join the church has a right of reinstatement. He/she must have real repentance and amendment of his/her life, and it is clear that the member will fully submit to church order and discipline. Then, their readmission to church membership is normally preceded by rebaptism” --Church Manual, p. 189, 2005 edition.

(c) Enumerate the proper steps CPC/MAC/MUC had ever taken to achieve a true SDA Conference status in accordance with SSD working policy since 2002.

>“You must first heal the rift among yourselves and work together before you will be

able to really come up to the fulfillment of your dream” (Gulfan)

>To dissolve the CPC/MAC/MUC, and then

>Fully submit to Church order and discipline, and then

>Have confidence and respect for duly elected Mission and Union leadership, and then

>Show willingness to work in harmony with policies and plans of the denomination,

(B10-05, No. 2)

>Fully support the local mission drive for conference status, (B-a 10 10),

>Return tithe and offerings to duly recognized mission organization,

>To discontinue all educational institutions operating against the policy,

. >Enter into the Church as the Church Manual specification

(d) Is it an acceptable reason and sufficient cause for true Seventh-day Adventists to establish a new or separate organization and appoint its own officers and executive committee members in rebellion against the worldwide SDA Church?

(e) Can this act of organizing a new group without the representation and approval of the Division be regarded as an act of insubordination and rebellion against the worldwide SDA church under the SSD working policy?

Answers for d & e: Are there two administrations in any level of Seventh-day Adventist organization? If so, it is an act of rebellion against the church. It is really an act of insubordination and rebellion against the administration of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

“We belong to a world church. And we are a united church. Nobody should make an organization not approved by the higher organization. And we have a church policy to follow for the unity of the world church. If anyone will organize any institution, union, not sanctioned by the higher organization, and not respecting the policy of the church; that is an off shoot. That is illegal. The Division and the General Conference will not recognize” --Bocala, April 23, 2003.

“I have instructed you (Kai Za Dal) to disband this committee-Conference Planning Committee”--Gulfan, (March 15, 2004).

13. The Seventh-day Adventist Church is a worldwide Christian organization.

(a) How can a group or an organization which was disbanded because of refusing to cooperate with and listen to the higher organization be accepted and be apart of the worldwide SDA Church organization again?

As a group, such organization could not be accepted in worldwide SDA church. If individually want to be part of the church, they should follow the steps in 12/c.

(b) Can a disbanded group or organization have a direct or indirect organizational connection with another SDA Division or with the General Conference?

Anyone who is in under censorship can not have a direct or indirect connection with another SDA church, Union, or Division. “No church shall receive into membership a person who is under the CENSURE of another church. Such a course condones the offense for which another church has applied discipline”--Church Manual, p. 190, 2005 edition.

“Such reinstatement should preferably be in the church from which the member was dismissed….the church where the person is requesting reinstatement must seek information from the former church as to the reasons for which the person was removed from church membership” --Ibid. p. 189. Therefore, a disbanded group can not have a direct or indirect connection with another SDA Division or with the General Conference.

14. Is it fair for the SDA Mission Church to disfellowship a member or to disband churches for the continual refusal to cooperate with and support SDA Mission, Union, and Division, and its leadership and for supporting MAC which is not organized or recognized by the Division?

Why not? For safeguarding the unity of the church, the church has taken an action upon the off shoot and rebellious group. “No servant can serve two masters” (Luke 16:13). “A house divided against a house falls” (Luke 11:17).

15. If the General Conference and Southern Asia-Pacific Division of Seventh-day Adventists do not recognize Myanmar Adventist Conference (MAC), and if any one who knowingly continue to support such an organization which disregards the authority of the worldwide SDA church organization, can he/she be a true Seventh-day Adventist Church member?

This kind of thinking is not reasonable in the SDA church. “It is the purpose of God that His children shall blend in unity. Do they not expect to live together in the same heaven? . . . Those who refuse to work in harmony greatly dishonor God.”—Testimonies, vol. 8, p. 240. The church should discourage every action that would threaten harmony among its members and should consistently encourage unity”--The Church Manual, p. 190, 2005 edition.

16. Do you think MAC/MUC truly wants to get a true SDA Conference in accordance with SSD Working policy or does it simply want only to manipulate the mission administration by electing officers of their own choice and when they failed, they began to rebel against the mission and formed their own organization?

If the MAC/MUC truly wants to get a true SDA Conference in accordance with SSD working policy, they will heed the counsel given by Elder Gulfan, SSD President. But now, all their actions indicated that they simply wanted to manipulate the mission administration by electing officers of their own choice.

17. What is the property right of the SDA Mission or SDA conference on its properties under the UMM, MYUM, Division, and Adventist Management policy?

According to the Church Manual, p. 214, 2005 edition, all properties are owned by the Mission.

18. Church members built churches and schools with their sweats, labors, and monies. When separation comes due to undesired problems, can the church properties be own based on the number of membership or are there any specific ownership right specified in the Seventh-day Adventist Church Manual or in the Division working policy in the case of disbandment and expulsion?

19. Are there any right for a disbanded group or organization to claim ownership to part of the Seventh-day Adventist church and school properties under the working policy of the worldwide SDA Church so that it can continue to occupy and control over some of the properties of the Seventh-day Adventist church such as church buildings and schools?

Answers for No. 18& 19. According to the Church Manual, p. 214, 2005 edition, and SSD Working Policy (S-a 60 05), this group have no right at all for claiming ownership for church properties. S-a 60 25 – “If and when an individual’s name is used to register property or properties owned by the church or other legal associations of the church, the individual shall be required to execute the following documents:

1. A declaration of Trust declaring that the property held in his/her name does not belong to him/her but to the church which is the beneficial owner.”

20. Can the people who refuse to listen and give no respect to the guidance of the Division or General Conference be regarded as spiritual mature Seventh-day Adventist church members?

Their negligent of the counsel of SSD is the sign of their immaturity. GC/SSD Working Policy stated: “Employees and church membership in the mission/field shall give evidence of their confidence and respect for duly appointed leadership and committees and show willingness to work in harmony with the policies and plans of the denomination” (B 10 05, No. 2)

21. Can’t the church authority “let the wheat and the weeds both grow together until harvest” (Matt. 13:30). Yes or No. Why and why not?

This principle can not apply in this kind of behavior because it will destroy the unity and harmony of the church. Their act of withholding the tithe and offerings, forming a new and separate organization, electing new leadership against duly elected leadership of the mission are an act of open rebellion. Therefore, these open sins should be dealt before contagious to the other body.

22. Though there were many misunderstanding, if a worker is too eager to disfellowship a church member and to disband churches, would he be a good and true spiritual leader of God’s SDA Church? On the other hand, if a layman or a church doesn’t care to be disfellowship or disbanded by the SDA church, would he/she be a true SDA who loves and shares the same fundamental beliefs of the worldwide SDA Church?

No worker is too eager to remove a church member or to disband church/churches. No one is perfect to be a pastor/leader, but God gives the responsibility and the authority to maintain the unity of the church. And the Bible gives pastors very specific instructions on how to deal with divisive people in the church. They are to avoid arguing, gently teach the opposition while praying they will change, plead for harmony and unity, rebuke those who are disrespectful of leadership, and lastly, take an action and remove divisive people from the church if they ignore two warnings (Titus 3:10, 11).

For CPC/MAC, they received several warnings from church leaders as follows:

(a) 2003 January, Muller Kyaw, secretary of MYUM; Kenneth Suanzanang, president of UMM, and Kai Khan Khual, Director of Stewardship Department from UMM met with leaders and members.

(b) 2003 January last week, Tin Tun, President of MYUM and Min Lwin, UMM Treasurer met again with them.

(c) 29 April 2003, Secretary of SSD, Dr Ng came to Pyinoolwin and discussed the issue with 13 pro-conference leaders.

(d) 23 Sept 2003, President of SSD, Elder Gulfan came to Kalaymyo and met with all church members including leaders from both side.

(e) On January 1, 2004, the UMM administration has taken an action to urge the CPC to dissolve their new organization within ninety days.

(f) On 5 March 2004, SSD president instructed Kai Za Dal to disband the CPC. But, no one heeded these counsels, and then UMM executive committee took steps to deal with these divisive people as follows:

(g) The UMM administration has taken a vote to declare that the CPC or (UMC/MAC/MUC) is illegal organization in the church and declared publicly on April 19, 2004 (UMM EC 2004-017).

(i) Then, the first road map for dealing this defection group was drawn as follows:

UMM EC 2004-018 (19 April 2004)

Whereas, CPC/MAC/MUC movement is in conflict with the church and cause disunity in the church, therefore, it is voted

(a) To terminate mission workers who are involving in that movement,

(b) To recommend each of the local church to discipline its members who are insisted involving in that movement,

(c) To list names of faithful members of the local churches where discipline can not be done, and the mission representatives will take actions.

Concerning those who continually resisted the pleading of the leaders, the UMM called a special committee on 4 May 2004, and drawn a second road map as follows:

UMM EC 2004-040 Disbanded Churches

(a) Rejecting to inline with the mission administration policy,

(b) Refusal to operate in harmony with the church policy,

(c) Withholding their tithe and offerings,

(d) Forming self-appointed organization,

(e) Adhering to take part in a disloyal movement/organization,

(f) Persistent refusal to recognize properly constituted church authority.

In removing and disbandment of churches, all church leaders strictly followed the instruction of UMM Executive Committee and there was not in any particular hurry steps. “If a layman or a church doesn’t care to be removed or disbanded by the church,” the church could not take further than steps to settle the problems; and at the same time, he/she or that church could not have a voice in the church also. Instead of humbling themselves and saying their opinionated arguments, they are indeed far from the fellowship of the church and even from the conference status.

23. As a true Seventh-day Adventist Church member which organization should one support, MYUM and other missions in Myanmar Union Mission or Myanmar Adventist Conference to be a part of the worldwide SDA Church?

How can a disbanded church from the fellowship of world sisterhood of SDA churches be a part of the worldwide SDA Church? If they are really willing to be a part of the worldwide SDA Church again, they should dismantle or dissolve their organization and seek reconciliation with the church administrators. As your negotiation group has said, by humble obedience and subordinating to higher organization of the Seventh-day Adventist Church is the first pre-requisite qualification for reunification. I hope that this will take place soon after you all have read my long letter. May God bless you all.

Abbreviations

UMM Upper Myanmar Mission

MYUM Myanmar Union Mission

CPC Conference Planning Committee

MAC Myanmar Adventist Conference

MUC Myanmar Union Conference of Seventh-day Adventists (latest news)

SSD Southern Asia-Pacific Division