Father Kang scam, wat do u guys tink?
-
When a politican is involved in such a scam, most likely he will be sacked or voluntarily leave office. What about a priest? Exocommunicate him? Is there a double standard?
Maybe not exocommunicate. Just strip him of his priestly office. Become a commoner.
PS: He wear white right? Follow the PAP rule lah - "better be whiter than white"
-
I think it should have been settled within the church and not in court. Other then that, I cant really comment because I think alot of the case rests on his motives. And we dont know his true motives do we? If he really meant for the money to be used for good, that is allow the homeless to stay in the apartments he bought or give it to a missionary group then it would be a good thing. But if that was what he intended, he would have told the truth. Its possible for christians to fall into sin even and especially for good christians. Those who does the most work for God are often the ones being tempted.
-
What you mean? This is a criminal case and the State should be involved.Originally posted by Guest009:I think it should have been settled within the church and not in court. -
Hmmm i think it's not up to ask to decide what punishment he should get. If he feels tt he's not worthy to be a priest anymore, he will automatically step down.Originally posted by Icemoon:When a politican is involved in such a scam, most likely he will be sacked or voluntarily leave office. What about a priest? Exocommunicate him? Is there a double standard?
Maybe not exocommunicate. Just strip him of his priestly office. Become a commoner.
PS: He wear white right? Follow the PAP rule lah - "better be whiter than white" 
-
I read somewhere in the Canon Law that anyone who usurps Church property is excommunicated. But it says that usurp is different from stealing. Anyone knows what this means?
-
This is where separation of church and state actually comes in. Matters of the church should be settled by the church and not by the state. The issue was really concering Father Kang, the church and the people whos money was taken. The Matthew 18 prinicple, settle the issue with the brother who sins against you, therefore the matter should have been settled within the groups of people I mentioned above.Originally posted by Icemoon:What you mean? This is a criminal case and the State should be involved. -
Ok, so he was punished by the Catholic Church also. Read http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/top/story/0,4136,58924-1082908740,00.html -
ON top of his jail sentence, he will also undergo spiritual counselling. But Father Joachim Kang will still be a priest though not allowed to perform the functions of a priest, such as conducting Mass and prayers.
How did the State come to know of the incident? Someone bao-toe?
Archbishop Nicholas Chia, head of the estimated 160,000-strong Catholic community here, announced the decision after Father Kang was sentenced to 7 1/2 years jail yesterday. -
Wat can a church do ? If things can only be settled inside the church, then I will apply to be a father as well. I will try to get my hand on as much fund as possible and when I was caught, I will refuse to hand in the money. If the church is not happy with me, then Sack me lah ! I will take the money and the church will not have any power to force the money out of me !
State and church seperated ? Does a priest have the power to commit crimes such as molesting little boys or raping just because he is in the church ? Why is it so difficult to understand tat molesting and cheating millions are both criminal acts. He has committed a criminal act, which is criminal breach of trust and tat is why the power of the state comes in. BTW he hand in the money only after he was put on trial.
Please take note tat father in catholic sense cannot hold property or cash themselves. The catholic group or something also acknowledge he has commmited wrong and deserve to be on trial. Do u think this group has made a bad decision or u have more internal information on him ? -
Do you know what Matthew 18 says? First settle it within yourselves, then with witnesses, then bring it to the church. In my opinion If that does not settle it, then go to court. No, the church should not be allowed to commit crimes. It is my opinion that church matters should be settled in church. Killing someone or raping someone is not a church matter. But the money is. It was a church member's donation to the church which was taken and by te church priest and used for his own benefit. He has commited a sin and even a crime, I am not saying he did not. But I do think that the group has made a mistake in handling the situation. A bad example would be if I gave my friend money because he said it is for charity organization, but he takes the money and uses it to buy a car for himself. The matter is really between me, him and the organization, not the government. By the way, all of the above is just my opinion.Originally posted by stupidissmart:Wat can a church do ? If things can only be settled inside the church, then I will apply to be a father as well. I will try to get my hand on as much fund as possible and when I was caught, I will refuse to hand in the money. If the church is not happy with me, then Sack me lah ! I will take the money and the church will not have any power to force the money out of me !
State and church seperated ? Does a priest have the power to commit crimes such as molesting little boys or raping just because he is in the church ? Why is it so difficult to understand tat molesting and cheating millions are both criminal acts. He has committed a criminal act, which is criminal breach of trust and tat is why the power of the state comes in. BTW he hand in the money only after he was put on trial.
Please take note tat father in catholic sense cannot hold property or cash themselves. The catholic group or something also acknowledge he has commmited wrong and deserve to be on trial. Do u think this group has made a bad decision or u have more internal information on him ? -
A bad example would be if I gave my friend money because he said it is for charity organization, but he takes the money and uses it to buy a car for himself. The matter is really between me, him and the organization, not the government.
So you're saying it should be a civil court case which the State is not involved by default lah. -
When you say father in catholic sense are you referring to the priest? A priest is allowed to own property and cash, if he does not take the vow of poverty. He is also allowed to invest in shares and property.Originally posted by stupidissmart:Please take note tat father in catholic sense cannot hold property or cash themselves. The catholic group or something also acknowledge he has commmited wrong and deserve to be on trial. Do u think this group has made a bad decision or u have more internal information on him ? -
Originally posted by Icemoon:
Yes and no. No because if he returns my money I can just forgive him and not go to court at all. Yes because, if I want my money back and he doesnt return my money after everything I've tried then it would be a civil court case. It is hard to say b/c it involves many "ifs" and "if nots". What i was trying to say was just that the church should have tried to handle the case instead of going to court and making such a big matter out of it. And also, I'm not saying to cover it up, its ok to expose the matter.
[b]A bad example would be if I gave my friend money because he said it is for charity organization, but he takes the money and uses it to buy a car for himself. The matter is really between me, him and the organization, not the government.
So you're saying it should be a civil court case which the State is not involved by default lah.[/b] -
What i was trying to say was just that the church should have tried to handle the case instead of going to court and making such a big matter out of it.
Can someone tell me how the case got to court? You said the church should have tried to handle the case, so the church knew about it before the case got to court? If not, then your reasoning doesn't apply. -
Do you know what Matthew 18 says? First settle it within yourselves, then with witnesses, then bring it to the church. In my opinion If that does not settle it, then go to court. No, the church should not be allowed to commit crimes. It is my opinion that church matters should be settled in church. Killing someone or raping someone is not a church matter. But the money is. It was a church member's donation to the church which was taken and by te church priest and used for his own benefit. He has commited a sin and even a crime, I am not saying he did not. But I do think that the group has made a mistake in handling the situation. A bad example would be if I gave my friend money because he said it is for charity organization, but he takes the money and uses it to buy a car for himself. The matter is really between me, him and the organization, not the government. By the way, all of the above is just my opinion.
If the person gives the money for charity, yet he use it for his own personal use, then it is already criminal breach of trust. Your example is simplifying the situation. There r probably hundred over people being cheated of the money, thousands of people tat cannot make use of this funds due to tis matter. He is guilty which there is no argument against it. There may be some individual who had also commited the same offense as this father as well. If we just cover it up and settle the problem within itself, and no punishment is meted out to this father, wat messages r u sending to the masses ? Try and cheat as much money as possible lah ! When u got caught u only need to pay back or something... If u never get caught u get to keep the money. Sounds to me like a win win situation...
Wat if the person refuse to hand back the cash or unable to return the cash ? Why is Gov involved ? Because they r the only one tat can mete out punishment. Do u think he should be punished ?
BTW using your logic, then raping and killing is also only between the victim and antagoniser. If the victim do not press charges, does tat means we should free the accused ? -
When you say father in catholic sense are you referring to the priest? A priest is allowed to own property and cash, if he does not take the vow of poverty. He is also allowed to invest in shares and property
R u talking about the priest in christian church or in catholic church ? I am talking about the catholic one. IMO Father Kang probably is no small fly and probably have taken the "vow of poverty". Anybody there to confirm ? -
Supposedly the church did not want to take it to court, but since it is classified as a criminal case, they have no choice but to go along with it. But it does seem as if someone ratted him out.
No one will ever know whether he did it with good or bad intentions, but I do think he believes that he hasn't done anything wrong. The only reason he agreed to plead guilty, in my opinion, is to spare the Catholic Church further embarrassment. And to prevent dragging other people - like the two 'nieces' - through the mud.
So I guess not having the chance to tell his side of the story is punishment too... -
Supposedly the church did not want to take it to court, but since it is classified as a criminal case, they have no choice but to go along with it. But it does seem as if someone ratted him out.
I don't know man... r father supposed to spend the money catholic given for the church on his 2 niece and himself for cruises ? Does he have to use the money secretly without conselling the catholic group ?
No one will ever know whether he did it with good or bad intentions, but I do think he believes that he hasn't done anything wrong. The only reason he agreed to plead guilty, in my opinion, is to spare the Catholic Church further embarrassment. And to prevent dragging other people - like the two 'nieces' - through the mud.
So I guess not having the chance to tell his side of the story is punishment too... -
If the victim of rape does not charge the rapist, then rapist remains innocent till proven guilty. If it's a friend of the victim who decides to call the police then the case will be investigated and if there is proof of rape then put the rapist in jail. In murder, since the person is dead, then the family gets to decide.
And I dont mean to cover it up as said in previous post. Since I belive the matter is a church matter, then the church should be the one giving the punishment. I'm not talking about civilian cases of embezzelment(sp?) Civilian cases should be handled in a different manner. Just like military cases are handled by military, then church cases handled by church.
And I am not trying to generalize criminal breach of trust. I am talking about this case and only this case. So even the rape, murder and other stuff does not really apply.
__________________________________________________
I believe the church knew about it first. If not, the person who charged Father Kang should have informed the church first. Father Kang belongs to the church so the church should have been first to know.
I don't know man... r father supposed to spend the money catholic given for the church on his 2 niece and himself for cruises ? Does he have to use the money secretly without conselling the catholic group
The money given to the church is not only spent on paying for bills and stuff. If he had gone on a cruise for evangelism with a group of evangelist or had brought a group on the cruise for a retreat. I dont think that is wrong. So his intention does count. But using the money secretly is a sign that his intention most likely were not good. -
Issit?Originally posted by Guest009:Since I belive the matter is a church matter, then the church should be the one giving the punishment. I'm not talking about civilian cases of embezzelment(sp?) Civilian cases should be handled in a different manner. Just like military cases are handled by military, then church cases handled by church.
I remember the LTC from Pasir Labar was charged for some bidding incident some time back, and he was charged in civilian court.
Military cases refer to really truly criminal cases like AWOL, insubordination etc. In the same light, church cases should refer to theological matters like heresy and doctrinal matters.
Oh yah, if a SAF soldier is charged in civilian court, will he still be punished by SAF? Double punishment. -
The newspapers say he didn't take that vow. Secular priests are not required to.Originally posted by stupidissmart:R u talking about the priest in christian church or in catholic church ? I am talking about the catholic one. IMO Father Kang probably is no small fly and probably have taken the "vow of poverty". Anybody there to confirm ? -
If the victim of rape does not charge the rapist, then rapist remains innocent till proven guilty. If it's a friend of the victim who decides to call the police then the case will be investigated and if there is proof of rape then put the rapist in jail. In murder, since the person is dead, then the family gets to decide.
I think your concept of law is pretty bad. If the court knows tat a person had rape a girl. If the girl change her mind or decide not to charge the guy anymore, tat is just too bad, rape is not compoundable. If a person is killed and die on the streets, then no matter wat the family say, the law is stil going to investigate and find the killer. Who say they get to decide ? If the law knows of such incidents happening, too bad nobody is going to stop the investigation or charging even if the victim want to stop it.And I dont mean to cover it up as said in previous post. Since I belive the matter is a church matter, then the church should be the one giving the punishment. I'm not talking about civilian cases of embezzelment(sp?) Civilian cases should be handled in a different manner. Just like military cases are handled by military, then church cases handled by church.
As replied by icemoon, offenses related to military then will it be linked to military court. Lets say a soldier kill another, do u think they will not get a cicilian hearing as well ? BTW military has special powers to punish the offender, wat powers do church have ? Conselling ?And I am not trying to generalize criminal breach of trust. I am talking about this case and only this case. So even the rape, murder and other stuff does not really apply.
The other cases r used as an example showing tat even if he is a church priest, he should not get extra priviledges and not get charged in a civilian court even if he break the law. Lets say NKF do this kinda of things too and, will u want the person who abuse the system be charged too ? Church father so wat ? They will not be punish if they break the law ? So should he be punish as any other citizen or church try to cover it up to save their face ?The money given to the church is not only spent on paying for bills and stuff. If he had gone on a cruise for evangelism with a group of evangelist or had brought a group on the cruise for a retreat. I dont think that is wrong. So his intention does count. But using the money secretly is a sign that his intention most likely were not good.
Yah right, There r at least hundreds of people in tat church and he use it for only him and another 2 person ? So he can divert the funds to only 2 person just because these 2 r a group of evangelist ? Then the father is "absolutely correct" in putting all the money under accounts of just these 2 "niece" while forsaking the res of the hundreds. Since u acknowledge he most likely has committed a crime, then why want to protect such a fellow ? -
no matter how he try to twist is.. i still dun see how he is acting in the best interest of the church by wasting money on that 2 old women...le.g how is the church benefit in his purchasing of rolex watches??? anyone can tell mi??
i think the most sick thing he did was still trying to hide behind his god after being caught red handed.. it's just like those JI guy doing bad deeds but claimed they did it for their god.... sighz..
BULLS.H.I.T
p.s. when he die, and face his god and we will see if he still say he did nothing wrong... -
at the end of the day, the case is already closed and he already pleaded guilty.. wats the problem?
he might still claim to have done no wrong and pleaded guilty to save church from embrassment etc is all bullshit lah. the church is already disgraced, he is shamed, yet still trys to act wif dignity.. I really dun give a fcuk, anyway, he's in jail now for his crimes, maybe his god will save him if he's really done nothing wrong. Else, jus accept the fact. -
I think your concept of law is pretty bad. If the court knows tat a person had rape a girl. If the girl change her mind or decide not to charge the guy anymore, tat is just too bad, rape is not compoundable. If a person is killed and die on the streets, then no matter wat the family say, the law is stil going to investigate and find the killer. Who say they get to decide ? If the law knows of such incidents happening, too bad nobody is going to stop the investigation or charging even if the victim want to stop it.
Why has the girl changed her mind? because it was somewhat her fault too? or maybe because part of the time she was willing? Or maybe she doesnt want people to know about it. I believe a person's welfare is more important then the law. If the rapist goes to jail, does the rape go away? IMO, its better to protect the victim in whatever way he/she decides instead of insisting on persecuting the offender. Murder is a little differnt just because the person is dead and cant made a decision. But if the victim can make his/her decision, she should have the final say.
As replied by icemoon, offenses related to military then will it be linked to military court. Lets say a soldier kill another, do u think they will not get a cicilian hearing as well ? BTW military has special powers to punish the offender, wat powers do church have ? Conselling ?
I dont know about singapore but usually when a soldier kills another soldier they have military court. Its true the the church in the present has no power. It used to have much more power in the past.
The other cases r used as an example showing tat even if he is a church priest, he should not get extra priviledges and not get charged in a civilian court even if he break the law. Lets say NKF do this kinda of things too and, will u want the person who abuse the system be charged too ? Church father so wat ? They will not be punish if they break the law ? So should he be punish as any other citizen or church try to cover it up to save their face ?
Every case must be looked at differently. The world isnt a computer system nor are people robots. He should be punished by in a church manner since he belongs to the church. Twice i have said not to cover it up. Reporting on an incident and blowing it into a major event is very different. I believe the case was blown big because he was a priest. Just like the Slim 10 case which was blown so big because of the artist involved. Many other civilians had cases relating to Slim10, and they were reported on, not put on the front page for many many days.
Yah right, There r at least hundreds of people in tat church and he use it for only him and another 2 person ? So he can divert the funds to only 2 person just because these 2 r a group of evangelist ? Then the father is "absolutely correct" in putting all the money under accounts of just these 2 "niece" while forsaking the res of the hundreds. Since u acknowledge he most likely has committed a crime, then why want to protect such a fellow ?
No, I said if it was for a group of people for a work of the church. People donate money for others to go on mission trips and stuff often. I dont think what he did is right. I am not protecting him, and I am angry too that a priest would do such a thing but my point is that intentions is very important. Example maybe being Robin Hood. He steals from the rich to give to the poor, its wrong just like anyone else who steals. But the punishment should be different, because the intentions are different.
And to the other person..
Its true that the case is over and done with. And I dont mean to insult anyone or be mean or to say the state has made a mistake. There isnt a problem I think, its just a friendly discussion/debate here. But I think that for things to improve, everyone should give their opinion. Its useless to sit around and complain about things. I am just giving my opinion, whether people agree with me or not does not matter. -
Why has the girl changed her mind? because it was somewhat her fault too? or maybe because part of the time she was willing? Or maybe she doesnt want people to know about it. I believe a person's welfare is more important then the law. If the rapist goes to jail, does the rape go away? IMO, its better to protect the victim in whatever way he/she decides instead of insisting on persecuting the offender. Murder is a little differnt just because the person is dead and cant made a decision. But if the victim can make his/her decision, she should have the final say.
Maybe the raper threathen the family with death ? Maybe the raper bribes the family so much tat she cannot pursue justice ? Tat is why it is called compoundable offence isn't it ? IMO, the second objective of law is to deter or prevent offender from committing the crime again. If the raper is successfuly charged and lock up, he is prevented from raping again. It also serves as a deterent to the rest of the public on the offense of raping. The victim cannot have a say whether she want to carry on the charge or not. She can be protected like covering her face during hearing and her name be censored from the press. If she refuse to cooperate she will be sue herself with obstruction to justice. Why tis is done is to make sure justice is serve to everyone fairly.I dont know about singapore but usually when a soldier kills another soldier they have military court. Its true the the church in the present has no power. It used to have much more power in the past.
They have a military court AND a civilian court. They get punish twice as mentioned by icemoon. Since the church have no powers now, then let someone (gov) with authority to punish the offender.Every case must be looked at differently. The world isnt a computer system nor are people robots. He should be punished by in a church manner since he belongs to the church. Twice i have said not to cover it up. Reporting on an incident and blowing it into a major event is very different. I believe the case was blown big because he was a priest. Just like the Slim 10 case which was blown so big because of the artist involved. Many other civilians had cases relating to Slim10, and they were reported on, not put on the front page for many many days.
So how do u propose to prevent a reporting or blowing up of the incident ? By covering up mah ! Wat other method r u going to use ? U also acknowledge tat the church have no powers now, HOW DO THEY PUNISH the offender ? R u sure the church can serve justice more efficiently or fairly than the legislative court ? Maybe another case of jesus will apears where he is falsely charged and punish ?No, I said if it was for a group of people for a work of the church. People donate money for others to go on mission trips and stuff often. I dont think what he did is right. I am not protecting him, and I am angry too that a priest would do such a thing but my point is that intentions is very important. Example maybe being Robin Hood. He steals from the rich to give to the poor, its wrong just like anyone else who steals. But the punishment should be different, because the intentions are different.
Wat do u think father kang intentions is then ?? Buying Rolex watches to 2 neice serve wat purpose ? Is he trying to act like robin hood at all ? The court of law do look into the motives behind a crime before meting judgement. Tat is call mitigation. The punishment is different if u steal money because u want to support a dying mother than going to casino to spend the money.