One of the things that started me questioning what was really going on was the “Sabbath paper”. Subsequent to that, I had 2 comments that were either removed or not published on the Inside United: Realtime blog, which got me scratching my head even harder.
You might recall one of them, but for the non-regular readers, here was the first one that was removed (somewhat from memory, seeing as it isn’t there any longer):
Are there no practicing Jews in Chile? If so, don’t any of them run daycare centers? if so, do they not keep the same holy days? Is there no legal precedent for this?
And,
You aren’t the only one whose comments are not showing up. I asked a simple question about legal precedence, and it seems to have been removed.
You know, such rebellious remarks simply have to be removed before anyone gets any ideas that thinking is allowed by its readers.
I wasn’t the only one, either, who questioned the whole “legal” situation in Chile. Arnold Mendez, Jr, on Facebook said his question about SDAs and Jews in Chile was also removed.
And, they wonder why we cannot trust the “official” sources? Well, duh!
So, I went on a vain search to try to find the answer. I say “vain” because I don’t speak a lick of Spanish, and even knowing what to look for was quite a challenge. It quickly became frustrating, and so I dropped it. I hoped that someone else who knew the culture and language would pick it up instead. But, it seemed that no one stepped forward.
That is, until recently. I can’t say I’m a big fan of James Malm or his site, The Shining Light Blog. However, he has hit the nail on the head on some of his speculations, even though he seems to exaggerate details at times. For example, he still uses the labels “conservative” and “liberal”, which I disagree with. You can look up the entire series I did on that and why I disagree with it. In Malm’s eyes, only 1/3rd of UCG ministers are “conservative” and 2/3rd are “liberal”. I would disagree, assuming I understand what he means by it. It’s a lot more like 50-50, although losing the L.A. brethren certainly throws the odds in favor of those who normally would support the current UCG leadership. Or, does it? After all, even moderates are becoming dismayed at their actions and lack of being able to communicate a real vision.
Another thing Malm posted lately was about one of the attempts at getting a resolution before the GCE. Personally, I think the COE will cook up some legal excuse to not allow it, just as they have the previous attempts. You don’t have to read the pro-COE Facebook page for long to see that legalistic suspicion is going to outweigh all other interests.
However, The Shining Light Blog has also recently posted this little gem near the bottom of the page (I have reposted it here because it is waaaay down his page, plus things have had a habit of disappearing on the Internet lately):
Hello James how are you doing? hope ok, now i have the information about how it WORKS for the schools here , for you to publish it and to send it to the Council of Elders, this information i found and it will give a clear statement of why the Council of Elders did not want to investigate and also why Mario Seigle does not want to let anyone investigate about their family, I send this info and i ask for you not to tell my identity yet , since the family here tend to use attorneys or false attorneys to torment or to oppress people that allow info of them to be known and they also harm you, and that will happen to me if they know and then i would not be able to continue investigating calmly, if my name is needed please let me know first , thank you for understanding, here is the information I got,
First of all the Roig Family said that they were obligated by the goverment to open their kindergarden and also the nursery after sundown and also in Holy Days of God during the weekend,
I went to JUNJI, www.junji.cl, this is the place that allows and controls the nurseries here, they know all the information about nurseries in Chile and they gave the following, I am sending you the information in spanish so if anyone wants to confirm the information they can, {text at the end of this section. James]
In this it says , that they are giving me information about schools that are hired by the goverment, it says that IT IS A VOLUNTARY WORK, and that the nurseries are not subsidized by the goverment, the MINISTRY OF EDUCATION ONLY SUBSIDIZES THE KINDERGARDEN SCHOOLS, AND IF THEY DO IT IS ONLY BY A VOLUNTARY REQUEST DECISION. Investigating this information i found after i prayed and asked God for the truth, that the Espinoza Roig family that are the owners put their school into a public webpage www.mercadopublico.cl on the internet offering their services so the goverment could hire them. This is a webpage that allows you to sell your institutions services to the goverment, AND AS I SAID IS NOT AN OBLIGATION, but because of the money the government pays it gets interesting to advertise for them to hire you.
Now they offered the services for themselves, and the contract says that it can be canceled at the request of the school Also they ASK FOR THEM TO WORK TILL 7:30 not just 6:00 as they said, so as you can see they said they were faithfull in Sabbath but it is a lie they knew about the laws since in the other paperwork they wrotte about the laws that regulate their supposed truth and also the contract as you will see is signed but the husband of Mercedes Roig, so they could have rejected to work for the goverment because they were the ones that looked for this type of work.
And even if it was truth THE BIBLE IS CLEAR DONT OBEY AN AUTHORITY IF THIS ONE IS NOT OBEYING GOD, WE HAVE TO SUBJECT TO AUTHORITY IF THEY DONT GO AGAINST GOD! They opened their school in 1997 as I know, also they have in their programs to celebrate a little of Christmas, and the goverment said that they don’t force anyone to celebrate anything. If you open a public School you inform the people the calendar of the school and explain that you close for 20 days and show the parents the days of the Holy Feasts and that on friday you close early and the parents decide wether is convinient for them to p-lace their children in this school. THIS WAS EXPLAINED TO ME BY THE GOVERMENT EDUCATION INSTITUTION ITSELF!!!!!
ONCE AGAIN THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT OBLIGATE THEM TO BE HIRED, AS YOU WILL SEE IN THE OTHER EMAIL IF ANYONE THINK I AM LYING THERE IS THE EMAIL FROM THE PERSON THAT GAVE ME THE INFORMATION.
Also attached i am sending for them to see it is not an invention there are the contracts and the payments of the amounts in money that the government pays the ROIG SPINOZ INSTITUTION. [I have not included these attachment which will be forwarded by request. James]
They are a private school that sold their services to the government and that want to make it like they are obligated. IT IS A LIE, I have investigated as God says in the Bible in
DEUTERONOMY 16: 18
. 19 Do not pervert justice or show partiality. Do not accept a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and twists the words of the innocent. 20 Follow justice and justice alone, so that you may live and possess the land the LORD your God is giving you.
DEUTERONOMY 17:4
2 If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the LORD gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the LORD your God in violation of his covenant, 3 and contrary to my command
4 and this has been brought to your attention, then you must investigate it thoroughly!!!! even if it was me that was in this position it has to be done, I am not saying this to destroy them but because they have deceived so many people this commandment has BEEN GIVEN TO YOUUU TO DO.
, this was supposed to be investigated by the council of Elders, they are also breaking God’s Law and allowing our crowns to be thrown in the trash because they want to defend Mario Seigle and his Family that are just wanting revenge it has been know about this and they were being corrected , I know we all make mistakes but this is so against God’s Law, they don´t care to lie and also the COE support this lies, if they would have come an investigate they would see the truth , but the ones that don’t obey God’s law HAVE BAD UNDERSTANDING, THIS IS BIBLICAL.
PSALMS 111:10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: a good understanding have all they that do his commandments: his praise endureth for ever.
I did this investigation since I need to be secure of where to stay in the Church, I follow God’s rules and this is the result, They lie to get their way and that is what i feel so bad , they never thought of me and my spiritual life and neither did they care about the rest of the people that are suffering, and that are deceived, Since the COE supported them on this we can clearly see that they as they said in the Sabbath Paper they do support people that lie and that break all rules possible in the Word of God including one of the most important The Sabbath and Gods Holy Feasts. Please check the information under.
Best Regards,
Government response messages
subjectRE: Consulta sobre colegios Subvencionados
mailed-byjunji.cldetails Nov 19 (9 days ago)
MAIL NO. 1 from ministry of Education JUNJI
Buenas Tardes, junto con saludarle, le informo que la subvención para los colegios privados es un trámite voluntario.
Pongo en su conocimiento que no existe subvención para Salas Cunas Particulares o privadas.TRANSLATION:
Good afternoon, I inform you that the subsidy for private schools is a voluntary process, I let you know that the is no subsidy for the Nurseries particular or private. The Roig Spinoz school is not public it is PRIVATE; SINCE IT IS PUBLISHED THAT THIS SCHOOL IS UNDER THEIR NAMES AND HAS THEIR OWN SOCIETY NAME.
El Ministerio de Educación subvenciona solamente los niveles de Pre kínder y Kínder
The ministry of Education subsidizes only the Kindergarten and Pre Kindergarten levels. And this only if the schools ask for it, IS NOT AN OBLIGATION.
.
Cordialmente,
MIRTHA RAMOS SANCHEZ
Educadora de Párvulos
Encargada del SIAC
Región Metropolitana
Alameda Nº 107, PISO 6º
Fono: 6545751 Fax: 6545235
Correo: mramos@junji.clMAIL No. MINISTRY OF EDUCATION JUNJI
Buenas Tarde, junto con saludarle, le informo que las Municipalidades no contratan los servicios de colegios particulares o privados.
La subvención de los niveles Prekinder o Kínder la solicitan en forma voluntaria, los dueños de los establecimientos, al Ministerio de Educación.
TRANSLATION
I inform you that that Municipalities DO NOT HIRE THE SERVICES OF THE PARTICULAR OR PRIVATE SCHOOLS. THE SUBSIDIZING OF THE KINDER AND PRE KINDER GARDEN SCHOOLS ARE REQUESTED VOLUNTARILY, THE OWNERS ARE THE ONES THAT REQUEST THIS SUBSIDY.
Cordialmente,
MIRTHA RAMOS SANCHEZ
Educadora de Párvulos
Encargada del SIAC
Región Metropolitana
Alameda Nº 107, PISO 6º
Fono: 6545751 Fax: 6545235
Correo: mramos@junji.COMMENT
The gist of this is that the family has every right to run their school any way they want; and is expected to meet certain standards, ONLY because they have requested a government subsidy. This is about getting the subsidy; it is about greed for lucre; it is not about government regulations or laws. Further we are to obey God rather than man in any case. Their request obligates them to remain open until 7:30 and not 6 PM as the family has stated.
To pollute the Sabbath for even 15 minutes is sin, to lie about it is to add sin to sin. Why were these people given Board seats and control over UCG in Chile BEFORE any investigation;? Why is the Council so adamantly opposed to an investigation? James
The bottom line continues to be a council and administration that are in effect telling their membership and ministers alike, “You cannot question us. Believe what we tell you. Submit or else. Ignore the man behind the curtain.”
Hi John What you call speculation is mostly information from sources within UCG. As for Liberal and Conservative I am useing these to refer to those who are willing to put loyalty to the administration over loyalty to doctrine, as opposed to those who are clinging to the traditional official teachings of the past. I am just coming to realize the political connotations of these words in the US, being from Canada. As for your comment on legal potentials you are right on the mark! This is set to hit the lawyers before it is over and much sooner than you might think. As for 50/50 it is my information that such is the case among the paid elders, while with the unpaid it is almost complete loyalty to the administration. Anyway this is certainly changing as the situation progresses. James Malm
I saw that also and assuming the information is authentic it opens up a whole can of worms. At best it seems the administration was making judgments based on intentionally withheld information. At worst they knew that the legal requirement argument was bogus and went along with it (it's bogus to begin with since that can't trump God's law.) because it involved a council member's family and then used the administrative version of excessive force to keep it quiet.
There's a lot I don't agree with James on but he has a knack for getting information that is on the whole accurate.
Books and articles have been written about how the Internet and blogs in particular have affected organizations' abilities to keep information quiet. What is happening in UCG could fit very well as a case study example. Without the Internet, it would be much easier for any organization to keep information from its employees and members.
I think the current Council majority and the administration are getting a lesson in Internet Information Flow 101.
The Internet has made the world a little different now than in 1987-1995.
To clarify, I was referring to a potential coming challenge to the legality of the petition for a Resolution and not to Latin America. I suspect that the Council will try to tie the possible ballot up for a long time in the courts. Isn't that the way these things work? If you can't beat it, tie it up in the courts forever. Now back to work!
Actually, if I recall correctly, UCG's Doctrinal Committee is currently investigating the Roig's situation. I would assume that, if the investigation is comprehensive and done correctly, this information would be procured by the committee.
Again, if I recall correctly, the Doctrinal Committee will be reporting their decision on this situation sometime in the next month (December), so I think it would be prudent of us all to wait for that information before assuming that UCG simply failed to either ascertain or report the truth.
>> I had 2 comments that were either removed or not published on the Inside United: Realtime blog <<
I now can confirm you don't have to be a "logged-in member" of RealTime to post a comment there. I successfully posted one (giggle) asking if the 11/20/10 split sermons would be "must-plays" in all UCG congregations.
Anonymous wrote: "I think it would be prudent of us all to wait for that information before assuming that UCG simply failed to either ascertain or report the truth."
I'm not sure what "UCG" did or did not do. After all, it is a divided organization at the moment.
It seems to more be certain parties within it that want to spin the information. The information directly contradicts that "Sabbath paper", and so was suppressed, IMO.
Even if the Roig situation is handled well and satisfactory to all, the current UCG leadership has a long way to go in order to re-establish credibility. They have mishandled too many issues too many times for it to be otherwise.
The Sabbath paper prejudged the conclusion. It essentially said the family was not violating the sabbath. The paper was put out under the auspices of the administration therefore it's completely appropriate to assume it speaks for UCG. Now if the doctrinal committee comes to a different conclusion that sets up an interesting confrontation.
Two thoughts on this.
Firstly, the person from Chile giving this information states that he went to the JUNJI site and that ‘they ASK FOR THEM TO WORK TILL 7:30 not just 6:00 as they said, so as you can see they said they were faithful in Sabbath but it is a lie.’
I think that you need to be careful before you accuse anyone of lying. I too went to the Junji site. I do not speak Spanish, but Google translate gives the following:-
‘Operation is from March to January, mostly in full-time (8:30 to 16:30 hours) Monday through Friday. In some cases the schedule is extended until 19:00 pm for the children of working mothers’
This is a bit different. 16.30 is given as the finishing time, but in SOME CASES it is extended to 19.30.
Some cases – so how do we know what time this particular school has been asked to work – how do we know that they may have agreed 18.00 in their particular case? Should we be calling them liars on the basis of the above statement?
A second thought – who is the employer in this instance? The JUNJI site says under ‘COST’ :-
‘All services provided by the National Board of Jardines Infantiles (JUNJI), whether in education, care and feeding, there is no cost to the user, since they are funded by the State of Chile.’
So parents using the school are not paying – the service is funded by the State of Chile.
It could be said that the state is in effect working as the employer of the school and staff for this part of the scheme. The staff would not be there, and the pupils would not be there, but for the funding of the state for this service. The state are in effect working as joint employers with the people running the school.
I am still thinking this part through, but could it not in effect be similar to businesses where the church member does not have a controlling interest in that part of the business?
In that sort of case, while the Christian would of course be required not to be working on the Sabbath, it would be legitimate for the business to be carried on, as the control of that aspect of the business is out of their hands – even if it is out of their hands because of voluntarily bringing in a non-church business partner, in this case the State of Chile. Just a thought.
I have forwarded the letter along with attachments including the actual cntracts to the Doctrinal Committe. They are now well aware that the matter merits a proper investigation.
Three members of the DC are traditionalists and one is "liberal" that makes for an interesting situation. The DC can only recommend and the full CoE must vote on the recommendations and decide whether the "clarification" should be presented to the GCE.
The regular CoE meetings also approve new ordinations. This meet might be very interesting.
@Questeruk: I don't necessarily agree with all of the author's commentary. I included it so no one would accuse me of selectively editing material.
What is shocking to me is the claim that "This day care program is strictly bound by the School Calendar and the decrees from the Department of Education that regulate our operations and establish that we can't close 'unless it is an emergency'…" in spite of evidence to the contrary.
Once again, how can anyone still be supportive of the "Sabbath paper"? Esp. even after it was withdrawn? It troubles me that anyone in their right mind would state in public, let along on Facebook, that the "Sabbath paper" was "not defective". Pure and simple, it was defective and has been shown to have been so over and over.
Guys, if you are in competetion with other schools and they do receive the subsidy, and you do not; you are priced out of the market. As to whether or not they are keeping the sabbath, isn't this a matter of interpretation? They do not work, but have employees that do. I do not see any deception.
Positive Dennis
@Positive Dennis: I have trouble understanding your reasoning. I will post more today, but for now let's say that is against what has previously been taught in UCG.
"But the seventh day [is] the sabbath of the LORD thy God: [in it] thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that [is] within thy gates:"
Note that even the foreigner residing on your property, probably as an employee, is to observe the Sabbath and rest. Even the cattle are to rest. In other words, everything and everyone under your authority is to rest.
How does hiring unbelievers to work on the Sabbath fit in with that, assuming you have total control of the company?
Questeruk wrote: "It could be said that the state is in effect working as the employer of the school and staff for this part of the scheme. The staff would not be there, and the pupils would not be there, but for the funding of the state for this service. The state are in effect working as joint employers with the people running the school."
I haven't been ignoring this part of what you said, but I wanted to think more about it. The problem I see is the same as an independent contractor. An independent contractor is "employed" by an entity to perform some work. However, the independent contractor has the option to engage in said work or not, accept or reject the contract, etc.
I keep coming back to "control". I cannot control what you do. If you hire me, the nature of the relationship obligates me to do my assigned duties when and how you wish. However, that doesn't give you the right to force me to work on the Sabbath. I can refuse. I am under my own control. I cannot force you not to hire someone else to do my work on the Sabbath, however.
However, an employer has more control. I can tell you to take the Sabbath off, for instance. I cannot keep you from working somewhere else (unless it is a competitor), but I can control what you do for me.
If I am an independent contractor, then I am legally self-employed. However, any contract "employs" me for a specific job. Yet, I am still under my rights as an employee to refuse to work on the Sabbath.
If I own a contracting company, then the company is an extension of myself. I have control over the company. Even if I sell services to the government, it is legally my company.
The only way around it, that I see, is if you are willing to give up some control of a company. If you cannot control it, then you can hardly be deemed liable, correct?
A public company, for example, is owned by the public and not you. It doesn't matter if you are president, CEO, CFO, or any other title you can think of, you are publicly owned. Your control is limited by choice. No matter how much stock you own, you are only a part owner.
I don't want to go into all the shades of ownership in-between. I just want to point out that you are expected to exert authority over what you can legitimately control, not what you cannot control.
That brings up something even more sticky, though, doesn't it?
The Bible commands us to put leaven out of our home in the spring. It is not to be found in our "borders". Some Jews have interpreted this very literally. "If, however, the Israelite had sold or given all his leaven to a non-Jew before Passover, it might be bought back and used by the Jew after Passover…" (Read more: http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=128&letter=L#ixzz16yWGyxXz). In other words, it is "sold" to a Gentile, and then "bought" back again after the Passover season, thus getting around the letter of the law of putting leaven out.
The intent is not there. It is not keeping it in the spirit of the Law. Neither is it if someone creates a company with unbelievers with the sole intent of getting around the Sabbath and holy days.
Of course, as in all matters of the heart, we have to be careful about trying to judge another person's intentions. Only God can look upon another's heart.
If you close on Saturday, in many business. you are out of business, it is that simple. If you refuse a subsidy from the government that everyone else is getting you are probably out of business as well. Sure there are elite private schools, but an average school will never be successful when its competitors are free, and in fact you pay taxes to your competitor to make that school free. How then do Christians schools survive? For the most part they are subsidized by the church that founded them. If you charge $4000 a year for a product your competitor provides for free you are out of business. I do not know what teh School In Chile charges, but without the subsidy they would charge more, and they would be out of business in weeks. John, have you ever made a payroll?
Positive Dennis
@Positive Dennis: No, I run a sole proprietorship. I don't know what "payroll" has to do with it, anyhow.
"If you close on Saturday, in many business. you are out of business, it is that simple."
So, that makes it OK? That sort of reasoning makes a mockery of those who died for keeping the Sabbath, don't you think?
John, If I thought it made a mockery, I would not have said it. As for making payroll, of course you do not know what it means because you do not have one. Yes there are a few business that can run without Saturday business, but they are small in number. In fact our society could not run if everyone followed your suggestions. For example, no sabbath keeper could run a hotel if one followed your ideas. My question for everyone is, if it is immoral to have a business that has Saturday work, why is it moral to patronize that business on Saturday? In other words why is it immoral to provide a service while it is moral to participate in the service? I suggest that everyone check out of thier hotel during the feast and sleep in thier cars.
@Positive Dennis: First off, thank you for clarifying. People, especially those who don't keep the Sabbath, do use the excuse, "Well, I'd be out of business if I closed on Saturday," when the reality is that they really do have a choice. However, your hotel example makes the statement a lot clearer.
Having said that, I would debate that "there are a few business[es] that can run without Saturday business, but they are small in number." In fact, most businesses are closed on Saturdays and Sundays alike. Hospitals, police stations, fire stations and national defense are about the only things that really need to be "open" on the weekend. Even large farms can run with reduced staff, don't you think? I question if that's really "open" or not, as agricultural needs are a little different.
Speaking of farms, if animals are supposed to be cared for, fed and given shelter on the Sabbath, don't you think human beings should be allowed to remain in their hotel rooms? Are you really resting if you're in your car? You either have already paid in advance or you will pay at the end of the stay, so it isn't like you are doing finances on the Sabbath. Some people even refuse maid service on the Sabbaths during the Feast. Then, there are those who'd rather not bother with it at all and camp during the Feast.
Personally speaking, I would have difficulty justifying running a hotel, at least for myself. It isn't even the physical necessities of the job, but the culture today is so far away from even considering the Sabbath as to make it severely difficult. I'm sure ancient Israel had inns to stay at, and of course we know Jesus was placed in a manger because the inn was full. So, it would appear to not have been a problem then, but the culture would have, at least at times, supported it more than it would today. However, if someone can handle that kind of stress of working around societal expectations, my hat's off to them!
Anonymous said: <>
=================================
Orthodox Jews own thriving businesses, and have done so for thousands of years, and they are closed from before sundown Friday and all through Saturday! 🙂