SAMOA'S PRE-COLONIAL DEMOCRACY: Makai Council consists of Legislature, Judiciary & Executive with CHECKS & BALANCES.And so the following exchange ensued.
Preface
Mr. Ale’s beliefs and opinions are, to me at least, quite unorthodox considering, first, the conscious and subconscious collective mind of the Samoans which is imbued with Christian doctrines and teachings. Ale, on the other hand, seems to abhor anything palagi (European) including "European Christianity" (his term), but quite adamant in elevating the Samoan lore, myths, culture and traditions -- to the extreme, I might add. And it was/is startling, if not shocking, for me to find that there seems to be quite a number of those who are proponents of such a credo. Anyway, here’s the exchange. I will continue to add any relevant posts and information as they are posted and become available. Keep checking back.
LETALU:
Talofa Uso. Malo lava. I beg to differ a bit.
Inasmuch as I want to be totally convinced of your take and interpretation in trying to dovetail our village fono’s configuration and functions into a strictly western/palagi democratic paradigm (legislative, judicial, executive separation of powers), I think it’s a far-fetched proposition at best and a forced imposition at worst. Surprisingly, I too subscribe to the comparison albeit partially and with reservations and misgivings, if not guided skepticism.
For one, it’s a difficult and impossible task to assign the tripartite branches/roles to one and the same group or body. In this case the village fono, which would have to be divided into three separate but coequal entities with its own powers in order to conform and comply with the western democratic model as you theorized. Otherwise the singular fono (matai council) will be hard pressed to effectively implement any system of checks and balances against itself.
Two, while voting is the standard means and mechanism to arrive at decisions in a western democratic system, our traditional “makai council” rules by consensus. For example, judges vote in their court decisions while matais compromise, concur and consent in theirs. Voting is also used in elections and passing legislation in the western democracy. Consensus, again, is the traditional Samoan norm. Interestingly enough, consensus is still used today in some electoral districts where a candidate “runs unopposed” in the elections — like your friend (or frienemy??..LOL!!) STui ... oi ma Leala fo’i
The district matais appoint their sui (representative) by consensus or maliega ‘au faatasi.
Ia fai aku ai fo’i...hahaa
Manuia le weekend ma le alo atu i le Sapati.
Alooooha!!!
‘ALE:
Malo le soifua. Sorry for the delayed response; went to a wedding all day yesterday. I think you have a good point. But as I have always maintained there's nothing new in the metaphorical "Light" (16-18th century) in the universal coming of the European in slave trading, colonization, and mission enterprising, Democracy included. You are talking about Democracy as a political ideology, its place, and functionality in State institutions. The European does not have the exclusive right to Democracy as a political idea. First, Democracy as an idea had existed long before anyone in the world knew there was a European in the world. There was no Europe at the time. Samoa for instance, our ancestors of antiquity called it, "sailiga tofa/soalaupule/talanoaga." In contrast, the European institution of nation-state you are talking about did not exist until 1648 with the introduction of the Treaty of Westphalia. Second, as a matai, I have had personal experience with the functionality of Democracy as we put it, soalaupule, in Village Fono as Judiciary, Legislature, and Executive fully equipped with Checks and Balances. No, I'm not trying to Europeanised our own decision-making process. As I maintained Democracy was already thriving in Samoa before the European enlightenment in the 16-18th century. Finally, I suggest we look at the principal players in our Creation Story as another good example of successful Democracy at work. The orderly structure of the universe that now sustains us and Humanity. We cannot honestly define ourselves as indigenous people through the prism of European or Western education in State and Church. My view Uso. Alofa atu.
LETALU:
Malo lava brother, or is it “brah” where you live? Yesterday being Sunday I had some other commitments hence the delay in my response. Thank you for responding though. In our other exchanges elsewhere before this, I had learned and captured a caricature of yourself and your beliefs and philosophies. Very interesting to say the least. I had therefore formed an impression about yourself as more of an “ideologue” compared to my being more of a pragmatist; we could not be more dissimilar and incompatible in our views and ideas. Take that for what it's worth. But I hope to expound on it in the text of this rebuttal.
So let me start by referring to a title of a popular book back in the 1980’s called “All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten.” As eye-catching as the title is/was, the book still conjures up both curiosity and skepticism. At the outset, it presents more questions than answers. Simply, I see it as an oversimplified approach to life’s issues. It’s similar to your approach of using the Samoan canvas, exclusively, to paint the picture of your worldview.
You seem to have this notion of the Samoan culture and history being independent, self-contained and autonomous and totally isolated from other peoples and societies. In that case, we will be hard-pressed to explain many other discoveries, inventions and contributions by other peoples and races using our Samoan prism. Moreover, with the so-called culture concept being a social phenomenon and therefore continually evolving and changing, it’s almost impossible to claim an absolute and irrefutable “incident or incidents” as being “the genuine and immutable Samoan culture”. The “culture of the 1600’s, 1700’s, etc. etc. are all different. It’s an ever-changing thing. So what we claim to be the “Samoan culture” of 1960’s is not necessarily the same as in the 1990’s including the locale, as in country, or even a village. You’ll be surprised that many villages in Samoa have different “cultures” -- their tu ma agaifanua.
The ultimate question is “What exactly is Samoan culture?” -- is it the niu (young coconut) or the soda pop used for the sua? Is it the povi, pua’a or pusa ‘apa or whatever we used before these were introduced for the sua taute? I fully understand the “sui faiga ae le suia faavae” maxim, but that’s beside the point of our conversation, again going back to the idea/ideal vs.real concept.
One of the best examples is our written language which is a product of the changes and evolution of culture especially within a more “global” context. In what “idea” or “form” was our written language in before the Europeans -- if we ever had one? Care to speculate? Furthermore, I’m sure you’re using Western grammatical rules and concepts (verbs, nouns, etc.) to teach your Samoan classes and explain your lectures. What same or similar concepts did we have of these linguistic fundamentals before the Europeans? That would be a great undertaking for you, writing a book on Samoan grammar in the 1200’s. I would be the first person to order a copy on Amazon...hahaa.
At worst, uso, with the approach that you advocate, is that we can become ethnocentrists bordering on being racial supremacists, the very “sin” of which many of us accuse the palagis and other foreigners. It’s also therefore possible that we, as Samoans, can dismiss anything universal to mankind and that everything is proprietarily claimed and owned by tagata Samoa. That will be an insurmountable task considering the global nature of the world today. Notwithstanding, we cannot continue to dwell or live in the past.
The other part of your approach that is intellectually offensive if not blatantly dishonest, at least to me, is your attempt at funneling everything down to a simple, if not a terribly naive view of things using the Samoa prism -- re: the “Kindergarten” book approach. It’s an approach that can be interpreted and advanced by the “nothing new under the sun” aphorism. It’s almost akin to using the principle of “ideas” and “forms” of the ancient Greeks to explain and summarize most aspects and principles of life. Incidentally, such a notion often leads to the age-old debate of whether the idea or the tangible object is prior. Re: Plato’s Cave Allegory.
Anyway, back to your original quote and my response. Being the pragmatist that I am (at least more often than not), the Democratic context -- mental, abstract and otherwise -- in which you’re presenting the quote is the Western/European context. Cleisthenes and other Athenians would be offended.. Lol! Anyone reading the comment would immediately place it against the European backdrop because many do not know or accept that the Samoans practiced Democracy long before the Greeks introduced it. Soalaupule, yes, I’ll give you that. But just as you claim that the Europeans don’t have “exclusive right to Democracy”, some will argue that Samoans don’t have exclusive right to "sailiga tofa/soalaupule/talanoaga" either. Relatedly, however, terms such as “faatauagai” and “faatauagai tutusa” as native coinages, have recently come into our vernacular as feeble attempts to explain the “checks and balances” and “co-equal” concepts.
Ia ua lava ia lea kalagoa, malo le faasoa ia ke oe le makai Samoa, se’i o’u alu e fai la’u supo moa. Manuia le aso ma le vaiaso i le feagai ai ma galuega.
‘ALE:
Malo lava le soifua i lau susuga Letalu. Fa'afetai mo le finagalo fa'aalia. I respect your opinion of which you are entitled to. It's very important for you to understand something about us, tagata Samoa. We look back, in order to understand world history and our faia as a people so we may find our rightful place in the universe, as we walk forward. Samoan culture is universal uso. It is a spiritual way of life centered around the Sun of God, the universal Deity of antiquity, and our ancestral parental progenitor, according to our Creation Story. As for our language, it was a symbolic representation in allegories, proverbs, stories, and rituals. The fine mat and coconut's place in sua fa'atamalii, as you point is a good example. The coconut symbolizes Love, the 1830 mind of the Christian God of papalagi. As I said, nothing new to our ancestors. Sua fa'atamalii is the highest form of honor in Samoan culture. Led by the niu, its presentation is highligted by the finest of family fine mats, ie tele/ie o le malo. The fine mat is also called, pulou o le ola, when presented in the public apology ritual of Ifoga. To understand the spiritual truth and wisdom of our ancestors' uso, one has to understand the symbolism in nature, cosmology, and chiefly language and cultural rituals of our culture. Samoan Culture preceded the Written Word of European God, as the source of wisdom. So to understand the soda in closing uso, you have to understand the original, the coconut, the symbol of Love a universal idea. It is a better source of meaning, peace and wisdom going forward uso. Alofa atu.
LETALU:
Toe faatalofa atu uso. Faafetai fo’i mo le faasoaina o manatu ma mafaufauga. The respect for difference of opinions that you mentioned is well-taken, mutual and reciprocal. I understand and respect your devotion and loyalty to our Samoan culture and traditional/primitive religiosity. I, too, have a degree of affinity and respect for our culture, notably those things that are praiseworthy, good and noble. That said, I have seen cases where our cultural practices and protocols have been abused and used for personal gain, selfish goals and means to corrupt ends.
LETALU:
Talofa Uso. Malo lava. I beg to differ a bit.
Inasmuch as I want to be totally convinced of your take and interpretation in trying to dovetail our village fono’s configuration and functions into a strictly western/palagi democratic paradigm (legislative, judicial, executive separation of powers), I think it’s a far-fetched proposition at best and a forced imposition at worst. Surprisingly, I too subscribe to the comparison albeit partially and with reservations and misgivings, if not guided skepticism.
For one, it’s a difficult and impossible task to assign the tripartite branches/roles to one and the same group or body. In this case the village fono, which would have to be divided into three separate but coequal entities with its own powers in order to conform and comply with the western democratic model as you theorized. Otherwise the singular fono (matai council) will be hard pressed to effectively implement any system of checks and balances against itself.
Two, while voting is the standard means and mechanism to arrive at decisions in a western democratic system, our traditional “makai council” rules by consensus. For example, judges vote in their court decisions while matais compromise, concur and consent in theirs. Voting is also used in elections and passing legislation in the western democracy. Consensus, again, is the traditional Samoan norm. Interestingly enough, consensus is still used today in some electoral districts where a candidate “runs unopposed” in the elections — like your friend (or frienemy??..LOL!!) STui ... oi ma Leala fo’i
The district matais appoint their sui (representative) by consensus or maliega ‘au faatasi.Ia fai aku ai fo’i...hahaa
Manuia le weekend ma le alo atu i le Sapati.
Alooooha!!!
‘ALE:
Malo le soifua. Sorry for the delayed response; went to a wedding all day yesterday. I think you have a good point. But as I have always maintained there's nothing new in the metaphorical "Light" (16-18th century) in the universal coming of the European in slave trading, colonization, and mission enterprising, Democracy included. You are talking about Democracy as a political ideology, its place, and functionality in State institutions. The European does not have the exclusive right to Democracy as a political idea. First, Democracy as an idea had existed long before anyone in the world knew there was a European in the world. There was no Europe at the time. Samoa for instance, our ancestors of antiquity called it, "sailiga tofa/soalaupule/talanoaga." In contrast, the European institution of nation-state you are talking about did not exist until 1648 with the introduction of the Treaty of Westphalia. Second, as a matai, I have had personal experience with the functionality of Democracy as we put it, soalaupule, in Village Fono as Judiciary, Legislature, and Executive fully equipped with Checks and Balances. No, I'm not trying to Europeanised our own decision-making process. As I maintained Democracy was already thriving in Samoa before the European enlightenment in the 16-18th century. Finally, I suggest we look at the principal players in our Creation Story as another good example of successful Democracy at work. The orderly structure of the universe that now sustains us and Humanity. We cannot honestly define ourselves as indigenous people through the prism of European or Western education in State and Church. My view Uso. Alofa atu.
LETALU:
Malo lava brother, or is it “brah” where you live? Yesterday being Sunday I had some other commitments hence the delay in my response. Thank you for responding though. In our other exchanges elsewhere before this, I had learned and captured a caricature of yourself and your beliefs and philosophies. Very interesting to say the least. I had therefore formed an impression about yourself as more of an “ideologue” compared to my being more of a pragmatist; we could not be more dissimilar and incompatible in our views and ideas. Take that for what it's worth. But I hope to expound on it in the text of this rebuttal.
So let me start by referring to a title of a popular book back in the 1980’s called “All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten.” As eye-catching as the title is/was, the book still conjures up both curiosity and skepticism. At the outset, it presents more questions than answers. Simply, I see it as an oversimplified approach to life’s issues. It’s similar to your approach of using the Samoan canvas, exclusively, to paint the picture of your worldview.
You seem to have this notion of the Samoan culture and history being independent, self-contained and autonomous and totally isolated from other peoples and societies. In that case, we will be hard-pressed to explain many other discoveries, inventions and contributions by other peoples and races using our Samoan prism. Moreover, with the so-called culture concept being a social phenomenon and therefore continually evolving and changing, it’s almost impossible to claim an absolute and irrefutable “incident or incidents” as being “the genuine and immutable Samoan culture”. The “culture of the 1600’s, 1700’s, etc. etc. are all different. It’s an ever-changing thing. So what we claim to be the “Samoan culture” of 1960’s is not necessarily the same as in the 1990’s including the locale, as in country, or even a village. You’ll be surprised that many villages in Samoa have different “cultures” -- their tu ma agaifanua.
The ultimate question is “What exactly is Samoan culture?” -- is it the niu (young coconut) or the soda pop used for the sua? Is it the povi, pua’a or pusa ‘apa or whatever we used before these were introduced for the sua taute? I fully understand the “sui faiga ae le suia faavae” maxim, but that’s beside the point of our conversation, again going back to the idea/ideal vs.real concept.
One of the best examples is our written language which is a product of the changes and evolution of culture especially within a more “global” context. In what “idea” or “form” was our written language in before the Europeans -- if we ever had one? Care to speculate? Furthermore, I’m sure you’re using Western grammatical rules and concepts (verbs, nouns, etc.) to teach your Samoan classes and explain your lectures. What same or similar concepts did we have of these linguistic fundamentals before the Europeans? That would be a great undertaking for you, writing a book on Samoan grammar in the 1200’s. I would be the first person to order a copy on Amazon...hahaa.
At worst, uso, with the approach that you advocate, is that we can become ethnocentrists bordering on being racial supremacists, the very “sin” of which many of us accuse the palagis and other foreigners. It’s also therefore possible that we, as Samoans, can dismiss anything universal to mankind and that everything is proprietarily claimed and owned by tagata Samoa. That will be an insurmountable task considering the global nature of the world today. Notwithstanding, we cannot continue to dwell or live in the past.
The other part of your approach that is intellectually offensive if not blatantly dishonest, at least to me, is your attempt at funneling everything down to a simple, if not a terribly naive view of things using the Samoa prism -- re: the “Kindergarten” book approach. It’s an approach that can be interpreted and advanced by the “nothing new under the sun” aphorism. It’s almost akin to using the principle of “ideas” and “forms” of the ancient Greeks to explain and summarize most aspects and principles of life. Incidentally, such a notion often leads to the age-old debate of whether the idea or the tangible object is prior. Re: Plato’s Cave Allegory.
Anyway, back to your original quote and my response. Being the pragmatist that I am (at least more often than not), the Democratic context -- mental, abstract and otherwise -- in which you’re presenting the quote is the Western/European context. Cleisthenes and other Athenians would be offended.. Lol! Anyone reading the comment would immediately place it against the European backdrop because many do not know or accept that the Samoans practiced Democracy long before the Greeks introduced it. Soalaupule, yes, I’ll give you that. But just as you claim that the Europeans don’t have “exclusive right to Democracy”, some will argue that Samoans don’t have exclusive right to "sailiga tofa/soalaupule/talanoaga" either. Relatedly, however, terms such as “faatauagai” and “faatauagai tutusa” as native coinages, have recently come into our vernacular as feeble attempts to explain the “checks and balances” and “co-equal” concepts.
Ia ua lava ia lea kalagoa, malo le faasoa ia ke oe le makai Samoa, se’i o’u alu e fai la’u supo moa. Manuia le aso ma le vaiaso i le feagai ai ma galuega.
‘ALE:
Malo lava le soifua i lau susuga Letalu. Fa'afetai mo le finagalo fa'aalia. I respect your opinion of which you are entitled to. It's very important for you to understand something about us, tagata Samoa. We look back, in order to understand world history and our faia as a people so we may find our rightful place in the universe, as we walk forward. Samoan culture is universal uso. It is a spiritual way of life centered around the Sun of God, the universal Deity of antiquity, and our ancestral parental progenitor, according to our Creation Story. As for our language, it was a symbolic representation in allegories, proverbs, stories, and rituals. The fine mat and coconut's place in sua fa'atamalii, as you point is a good example. The coconut symbolizes Love, the 1830 mind of the Christian God of papalagi. As I said, nothing new to our ancestors. Sua fa'atamalii is the highest form of honor in Samoan culture. Led by the niu, its presentation is highligted by the finest of family fine mats, ie tele/ie o le malo. The fine mat is also called, pulou o le ola, when presented in the public apology ritual of Ifoga. To understand the spiritual truth and wisdom of our ancestors' uso, one has to understand the symbolism in nature, cosmology, and chiefly language and cultural rituals of our culture. Samoan Culture preceded the Written Word of European God, as the source of wisdom. So to understand the soda in closing uso, you have to understand the original, the coconut, the symbol of Love a universal idea. It is a better source of meaning, peace and wisdom going forward uso. Alofa atu.
LETALU:
Toe faatalofa atu uso. Faafetai fo’i mo le faasoaina o manatu ma mafaufauga. The respect for difference of opinions that you mentioned is well-taken, mutual and reciprocal. I understand and respect your devotion and loyalty to our Samoan culture and traditional/primitive religiosity. I, too, have a degree of affinity and respect for our culture, notably those things that are praiseworthy, good and noble. That said, I have seen cases where our cultural practices and protocols have been abused and used for personal gain, selfish goals and means to corrupt ends.
Like you, I do believe that our Samoan culture has been predestined and tailored for our people and has its unique role and part to play in the bigger and more inclusive scheme of things in the universe. But the same can be said about other ethnicities and their cultures as well. For that reason, as one of many, I would disagree with your belief that the Samoan culture is universal. And notably in the context of the general definition of culture as “the customs, arts, social institutions, and achievements of a particular nation, [or] people....”
But if you’re connoting the word “culture” to refer to the basic universal principles and human values, or to reflect Mahatma Ghandi’s definition*, then you have a point, however, in that case, ALL cultures, not just Samoan, are universal which can be a convenient harbinger to the “brotherhood of man” concept.
But I have some pressing questions and inquiries regarding your unorthodox (for lack of a better word) beliefs, especially in this period of the post-contact years. I hope you’ll excuse my inquisitiveness and for being uncultured (pun intended ..lol) in your persuasion.
Let me preface my questions/inquiries this way: I grew up in Samoa as a young boy, knowing, understanding and witnessing the Christian zeitgeist in the lives of the people. Practically, everyone was a Christian. It continues unabashedly to this day. Jesus Christ has completely usurped the people’s traditional atuas. Christianity is indubitably the lifeblood of the Samoans. Politically, it has been written into the country’s supreme law - the Constitution - practically as a state religion.
So here are the questions:
1. With such an omnipresence and pervasiveness of the Christian doctrine in Samoa, how did you end up with such a revolutionary dogma? (i.e. of elevating Tagaloa and other “myths” to a status of preference?)
2. Do I sense a feeling of anti-imperialism and/or post-colonial protests embedded therein - if not as prime movers?
3. How successful are your beliefs at home (in Samoa)?
4. Did/Do you have so-called pioneers or mentors? If it’s not you, who is considered the “founder”?
5. Can a person be both a Christian and an “Aleist” ?
And finally, doesn’t the fact that culture is fickle, mutable and impermanent give you a sense of liability and instability in what you’re espousing and advocating?
Again, hope you’ll excuse my prodding.
Ia manuia le aso. Alofa atu fo’i.
——————
*A nation’s culture resides in the hearts and in the soul of its people.
But if you’re connoting the word “culture” to refer to the basic universal principles and human values, or to reflect Mahatma Ghandi’s definition*, then you have a point, however, in that case, ALL cultures, not just Samoan, are universal which can be a convenient harbinger to the “brotherhood of man” concept.
But I have some pressing questions and inquiries regarding your unorthodox (for lack of a better word) beliefs, especially in this period of the post-contact years. I hope you’ll excuse my inquisitiveness and for being uncultured (pun intended ..lol) in your persuasion.
Let me preface my questions/inquiries this way: I grew up in Samoa as a young boy, knowing, understanding and witnessing the Christian zeitgeist in the lives of the people. Practically, everyone was a Christian. It continues unabashedly to this day. Jesus Christ has completely usurped the people’s traditional atuas. Christianity is indubitably the lifeblood of the Samoans. Politically, it has been written into the country’s supreme law - the Constitution - practically as a state religion.
So here are the questions:
1. With such an omnipresence and pervasiveness of the Christian doctrine in Samoa, how did you end up with such a revolutionary dogma? (i.e. of elevating Tagaloa and other “myths” to a status of preference?)
2. Do I sense a feeling of anti-imperialism and/or post-colonial protests embedded therein - if not as prime movers?
3. How successful are your beliefs at home (in Samoa)?
4. Did/Do you have so-called pioneers or mentors? If it’s not you, who is considered the “founder”?
5. Can a person be both a Christian and an “Aleist” ?
And finally, doesn’t the fact that culture is fickle, mutable and impermanent give you a sense of liability and instability in what you’re espousing and advocating?
Again, hope you’ll excuse my prodding.
Ia manuia le aso. Alofa atu fo’i.
——————
*A nation’s culture resides in the hearts and in the soul of its people.
'ALE:
The elements that went into the making of European Christianity are universal elements of pagan (non European) cultures. For instance, Trinity, Virgin Birth, Good & Evil, Noah's Flood etc.
In another subthread of the main post, Mr. Ale posted this to another responder, and wanted me to switch over to it so he won't have to "repeat himself". Meanwhile the conversation gradually shifted to the subject of religion.
'ALE
I'm talking about historical truth in cultural imperialism and colonization of not only our indigenous concept of God but the image of God as well. Being as I said, misappropriated or more directly, a big lie. Historically, God Jesus Christ is not white as far as race is concerned. As for Eve in the Cristian Story, she is being made subordinate and inferior as weak and seductive. The woman is the embodiment of evil. This is in complete opposite to our ancestral view of the Samoan woman as goddess, a carrier and giver of human life. My understanding.LETALU
First, uso, let me assure you that there is a more pure and correct “branch” of Christianity in existence today. It’s founded on original doctrines which have been restored and that will support if not confirm and validate some of your beliefs. More on that later.
I’m going to let the cat out of the bag, so to speak. As part of a heavy load in my writing schedule and adventure, especially during some down time, I work on a treatise (for a Samoan audience) titled “E Lē Matavalea Atamu.” (re: popular lyrics “Atamu lou matavalea, ae le se’i su’esu’e pea ....”) which aims at expounding and correcting some errors in how Adam and Eve have been denigrated and vilified as portrayed and propagated by many, if not all, mainstream Christian churches. So my main goal in such an undertaking, is to dispel the myth and charge, especially for the Samoans, that Adam and Eve were stupid, careless and “evil” frustrating God’s initial plan by partaking of the fruit, and as a direct result, Christ enters the picture as “Plan B”. Christian churches now are debating the “Plan B” subject/belief.
The Church of Jesus Christ, on the other hand, has been unchanging, unabashed and unapologetic for its doctrine of The Fall from the beginning. It is in stark contrast to the rest of Christiandom’s.
The mainstream churches’ position is that Adam and Eve were guilty of the so-called “original sin” and St. Augustine seems to have been the original and main advocate of the erroneous belief that the Fall had stained all mankind and all had “come short of the glory of God.” In addition, he believed that man is therefore born sullied with the stain of Adam’s “sin” and which has later become the reason and excuse for baptizing babies/infants in many churches.
Conversely, according to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, of which I, Ms. Tafua and many of your FB friends are members, the Fall was an integral and necessary part of God’s plan for us, His children. And Adam was NOT deceived (1 Timothy 2:14 KJV) or matavalea. He did it knowingly and so he partook “that man may be” (Book of Mormon). In the same Timothy scripture, as well, the word “transgression” is used, which is what we believe to be Adam and Eve’s infraction - not a sin. There is a difference. And so in the context of the LDS version of The Fall, Adam and Eve are esteemed, revered and honored - not cursed and reviled. We also do not believe in the so-called Triune God (The Holy Trinity). Moreover, we don’t practice infant baptism, because little children are pure and are “alive in Christ”. There is an age of accountability though which is eight.
And so I therefore don’t necessarily blame your seeming resort to some alternative truths. At the same time, I would hate to see your slippage further down the slope from the Truth that’s in Jesus Christ, thus your denouncement and castigation of Christianity, to be a result of the distortion and misrepresentation of some of the basic doctrines in mainstream churches, if not only being “kept from the truth because [you] know not where to find it.” (D&C 123:12).
Finding THE Truth, uso, is only a prayer away. And no one can ever stray too far from the influences of the Holy Ghost as the testifier of Truth. Being a member of The Church of Jesus Christ, also, does not mean that one can completely renounce their culture. If anything, it only makes one’s culture even more meaningful and complimentary to the culture of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
For example, the aiga concept — immediate and extended — of the Samoans, and all races for that matter, is the Church’s most “basic unit”. We believe that aiga’s are, and can be, forever, when they are sealed in temples by the proper authority of the priesthood. As Samoans, having strong family bonds and ties, the belief that those family associations can be eternal is, and should be, priceless and indispensable.
Declaration belongs to a witness; Conversion belongs to the Spirit.
'ALE
First, uso, let me assure you that there is a more pure and correct “branch” of Christianity in existence today. It’s founded on original doctrines which have been restored and that will support if not confirm and validate some of your beliefs. More on that later.
I’m going to let the cat out of the bag, so to speak. As part of a heavy load in my writing schedule and adventure, especially during some down time, I work on a treatise (for a Samoan audience) titled “E Lē Matavalea Atamu.” (re: popular lyrics “Atamu lou matavalea, ae le se’i su’esu’e pea ....”) which aims at expounding and correcting some errors in how Adam and Eve have been denigrated and vilified as portrayed and propagated by many, if not all, mainstream Christian churches. So my main goal in such an undertaking, is to dispel the myth and charge, especially for the Samoans, that Adam and Eve were stupid, careless and “evil” frustrating God’s initial plan by partaking of the fruit, and as a direct result, Christ enters the picture as “Plan B”. Christian churches now are debating the “Plan B” subject/belief.
The Church of Jesus Christ, on the other hand, has been unchanging, unabashed and unapologetic for its doctrine of The Fall from the beginning. It is in stark contrast to the rest of Christiandom’s.
The mainstream churches’ position is that Adam and Eve were guilty of the so-called “original sin” and St. Augustine seems to have been the original and main advocate of the erroneous belief that the Fall had stained all mankind and all had “come short of the glory of God.” In addition, he believed that man is therefore born sullied with the stain of Adam’s “sin” and which has later become the reason and excuse for baptizing babies/infants in many churches.
Conversely, according to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, of which I, Ms. Tafua and many of your FB friends are members, the Fall was an integral and necessary part of God’s plan for us, His children. And Adam was NOT deceived (1 Timothy 2:14 KJV) or matavalea. He did it knowingly and so he partook “that man may be” (Book of Mormon). In the same Timothy scripture, as well, the word “transgression” is used, which is what we believe to be Adam and Eve’s infraction - not a sin. There is a difference. And so in the context of the LDS version of The Fall, Adam and Eve are esteemed, revered and honored - not cursed and reviled. We also do not believe in the so-called Triune God (The Holy Trinity). Moreover, we don’t practice infant baptism, because little children are pure and are “alive in Christ”. There is an age of accountability though which is eight.
And so I therefore don’t necessarily blame your seeming resort to some alternative truths. At the same time, I would hate to see your slippage further down the slope from the Truth that’s in Jesus Christ, thus your denouncement and castigation of Christianity, to be a result of the distortion and misrepresentation of some of the basic doctrines in mainstream churches, if not only being “kept from the truth because [you] know not where to find it.” (D&C 123:12).
Finding THE Truth, uso, is only a prayer away. And no one can ever stray too far from the influences of the Holy Ghost as the testifier of Truth. Being a member of The Church of Jesus Christ, also, does not mean that one can completely renounce their culture. If anything, it only makes one’s culture even more meaningful and complimentary to the culture of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
For example, the aiga concept — immediate and extended — of the Samoans, and all races for that matter, is the Church’s most “basic unit”. We believe that aiga’s are, and can be, forever, when they are sealed in temples by the proper authority of the priesthood. As Samoans, having strong family bonds and ties, the belief that those family associations can be eternal is, and should be, priceless and indispensable.
Declaration belongs to a witness; Conversion belongs to the Spirit.
'ALE
Manaia lau fagogo ..hh
LETALU
(Note: There were a couple of other methods/approaches I contemplated using to counter Mr. Ale's short sarcastic and offensive response above. But I decided on the one used here, employing his "fagogo" reference as the subtext.)
Many years passed and the king and queen bore a son. They named him Aristotle. He grew up to be a wise man. As a young man, he would often go to the agora, a public square, to share and exchange some new stories and philosophies. Some attendants and bystanders complained because the stories were too profound and mostly esoteric - hard to understand. Others dismiss them as plain bedtime stories (fagogo). Aristotle then rebuked them and said:
“Sole, oukou ia e faasea, faalogo mai. “It is the mark of an educated mind to entertain a thought without accepting it.” A kou fia faalogologo i gi fagogo, then go to the raconteurs at Delphi ae aua le omai i le mea e iai kama makukua. O fagogo o mea a kamaiki.
Koe gogofo, gogofo, le kupu ma le masiofo, koe fagau another son, they named him Paulo. He was a spiritual man, e ‘ese fo’i si aga faukua. Fai laga kusi, ave i le ‘au pa’ia i Korinito. He told them:
“For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”Sa tau le malamalama le ‘au kuoli a Corinth i kala a Paulo. Fai aku loa Paulo, vaai oukou, i se faaupuga faigofie, o le kagaka, a’o kamaikiki ma pepe meamea, e ‘ave iai le susu, e le avea iai gi mea’ai malo, e faakali se’i makua. Kalu ai o oukou o kamaiki laiki (ae maise i le kou knowledge of things and Christ), ia e avaku gai maka’upu e fekaui ma oukou, pei o fagogo. Se’i kou makukua ia ga avaku lea o gi novels kou ke faikau ai. Luelue mai ulu o le gu’u o Korinito.
Koe gogofo, gogofo, le kupu ma le masiofo, koe fagau leisi fo’i la pepe kama, faaigoa ia Makaio. Ola ifo fo’i Makaio e ‘ese fo’i gai oga uiga. E ku’u sa’o lava aga faamakalaga i kagaka, pei e fai kala o’o. He did not mince words. One day he told his fellow teachers of the gospel to be careful and choose their audience carefully aua o isi, e fai aku le kala, ae la lava e faakaligakuli ma pei e fia popoko, ma le fia faalogo. So Makaio said, listen you teachers of the gospel and sages:
“Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet….”FaaSamoa mai ma le kama o Makaio, “O loga uiga, ‘aua le maimau kou pegiga i ‘ulī.” Faalogo aku Makaio o faapea mai le ‘au Samoa sa iai: “Aue! .. ‘Aue!"
...e faia pea (to be continued)
