Pillar and Append Ice Submission Final 2012 Final

11 SEPTEMBER 2012
SUBMISSION TO THE FIJI CONSTITUTION COMMISSION 2012
Prepared and submitted by AMBASSADOR SIR JAMES MICHAEL AH KOY, KBE
CONTENTS:
PILLARS OF THE PEOPLES CHARTER OF CHANGE AND THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTION PAGE 3
CHART PAGES 16, 17
APPENDIX 1: SECULAR STATE OR CHRISTIAN STATE? PAGE 18
APPENDIX 2: TIMELINE PAGE 40
BIBLIOGRAPHY PAGE 56
SUBMISSION BY AMBASSADOR SIR JAMES MICHAEL AH KOY TO THE FIJI CONSTITUTION COMMISSION 11 SEPTEMBER 2012
THE PEOPLES CHARTER FOR CHANGE AND THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTION

Mr Chairman of the Constitutional Commission, Professor Yash Ghai, Madame Dr Taufa Vakatale (congratulations on being accorded a PhD from the University of St Andrews), Professor Satendra Nandan, Professor Christina Murray, and Ms Penelope Moore. Im delighted to be here today to present what I believe should be considered for Constitutional inclusion as you deliberate and cogitate over the many submissions and statements that you have, and will receive for the new Constitution, and which you intend to evaluate, compile into a new constitution, and recommend for ratification. I wish to declare my belief in the importance of a constitutional democratic government. I believe it is important to have a national constitution which is both a legal and a political document. A constitution which is the supreme law of the state, which distinguishes and separates power from authority (might from right) in the organisation of the state, and which imposes limits on the exercise of both power and authority thereby enhancing the freedoms of individuals and groups 1 which make up our nation . As well as the need for having such a constitution, I also believe in the value of constitutionalism that is, in having a spirit of acceptance and an educated culture among the people in regard to the abiding legitimacy of the new constitution, under God, so that in future, politics does not overthrow the 2 supreme law as it has on three previous occasions . Hence, the work which you have of creating a new and lasting constitution is not something I under-rate. For a nation to have its fourth constitution in as many decades is testimony to both the failure of our past and to the significance of what your Commission recommends and drafts for our future. I believe you will, through erudition and constitution-making, and by your personal experience, give us a lasting and abiding constitution.
A useful discussion of the legal and political functions of constitutions may be found in Professor Hugh Emy, The Constitution: the Basis of Power in Emy 1978:1-33. Emy rightly cautions that a constitution is not like a manual which one opens at a given page to find the answer to a certain problem (ibid, page 9).
2
Constitutionalism is well argued for in Emy 1978:10ff. For dissenting views, see Tinder 1974:107-112.
My submission is made recognising the need, not just for a legal document that rightly sets out key institutional arrangements for the nation, but one that finds support in the spirit of the people, one that settles on fundamentals which we, the citizens of Fiji may all agree with, one that has a universal meta-constitutional 3 reality to give it abiding legitimacy, and one that is coup-proof (as it were) . Otherwise, we may be back at this kind of process and forum in a few years time. I believe that the Peoples Charter for Change, Peace and Progress offers hope in this direction and represents the kind of constitutionalism that, I believe, we should work toward for ratification of this proposed new national document. Let me now refer to the many key constitutional principles that have been enumerated and detailed as Pillars 1-11 in The Peoples Charter for Change, Peace and Progress, dated 15 December 2008. As the Commission will be familiar with that document, and as I generally agree wholeheartedly with the Pillars, but not all of the principles as contained therein, I do not feel it necessary to review them in detail. Thus, I shall simply asseverate here in summary form the Pillars and my support for them - in reverse order beginning with Pillar 11. My reasons for treating them in this order will become apparent in due course. Now allow me to succinctly put them as follows: PILLAR 11: ENHANCING GLOBAL INTEGRATION AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS As outlined in the Charter (page 38), I support Pillar 11. PILLAR 10: IMPROVING HEALTH SERVICE DELIVERY As outlined in the Charter (page 37), I support Pillar 10.
By this I do not mean to be naive or absolute. Professor M.M Goldsmith rightly points out that No political institutions can guarantee that no inefficient, unjust or harmful policies will ever be enacted or that no unjust actions will ever be undertaken (Goldsmith, Allegiance, in King 1978:251). Rather, a just constitution provides (in the words of philosopher, John Rawls), an imperfect procedural justice by procedures devised to exclude unjust results and promote just ones (Goldsmith ibid).
PILLAR 9: MAKING FIJI A KNOWLEDGE-BASED SOCIETY As outlined in the Charter (pages 35,36), I support Pillar 9. PILLAR 8: REDUCING POVERTY TO A NEGLIGIBLE LEVEL BY 2015 As outlined in the Charter (pages 32,33), I support Pillar 8. PILLAR 7: ESTABLISHING AN INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT STRUCTURE AT THE DIVISIONAL LEVEL As outlined in the Charter (pages 31,32), I support Pillar 7. PILLAR 6: MAKING MORE LAND AVAILABLE FOR PRODUCTIVE AND SOCIAL PURPOSES As outlined in the Charter (pages 27-29), I support Pillar 6. PILLAR 5: ACHIEVING HIGHER ECONOMIC GROWTH WHILE ENSURING SUSTAINABILITY As outlined in the Charter (pages 25,26), I support Pillar 5. PILLAR 4: ENHANCING PUBLIC SECTOR EFFICIENCY, PERFORMANCE EFFECTIVENESS AND SERVICE DELIVERY As outlined in the Charter (pages 23,24), I support Pillar 4. PILLAR 3: ENSURING EFFECTIVE, ENLIGHTENED AND ACCOUNTABLE LEADERSHIP As outlined in the Charter (pages 20-22), I support Pillar 3. PILLAR 2: DEVLOPING A COMMON NATIONAL IDENTITY AND BUILDING SOCIAL COHESION As outlined in the Charter (pages 17-19), I support Pillar 2.
PILLAR 1: ENSURING SUSTAINABLE DEMOCRACY AND GOOD AND JUST GOVERNANCE I support many, but not all, of the principles in this Pillar (see Charter pages 11-16),
AS FOLLOWS Let me now elaborate, ELABORATION OF PILLAR 1-4 PRINCIPLES:

Many of the specific principles and issues found in Pillars 1 to 4, in particular, were noted in the press recently (The Fiji Sun, 10 August, 2012, page 8). These were taken from the Principles and Values statement found in the Constitution Commission pamphlet that has been distributed to the public. These are worthy of brief elaboration. In sum: A common and equal citizenry; Secular state The removal of systemic corruption; An independent judiciary; Elimination of discrimination; Good and transparent governance; Social justice; One person, one vote, one value; Elimination of ethnic voting; Proportional representation Voting age of 18.
UNEQUIVOCAL ACCEPTANCE:
My support for most of the key principles of Pillars 1-4 and the Principle and Values statement is summarized as follows: A common and equal citizenry as noted in Pillars 1 and 2; I support this principle. While there can be no escaping the fact of natural inequalities among humankind that is, that we are born with varying innate capacities (height, strength, eyesight, mental potential etc, etc); in varying social contexts (richer or poorer neighbourhoods, higher or lower castes, upper and lower classes etc, etc); and therefore with correspondingly different life-chances,
life-style opportunities, life expectancies, and other social privileges and outcomes we are nevertheless all born essentially equal, morally equal, and equal in dignity and worth. From a Christian point of view, we are also equal subjects before the mercy, grace and love of God. Because of this, we ought therefore, be subject to the equality of treatment before human law, and subject to equality of citizenship in human constitutional and conventional terms. The removal of systemic corruption as noted in Pillar 3;
I support this principle. Speaking from a Christian perspective for the 76 years of my life, humankind is equally corrupted - there being, as Scripture puts it, none righteous, no not one (Psalms 14:3; 53:3; Romans 3:10) and death being the ultimate sovereign equalizer of all of us. But systemic corruption which comes into play when humans combine together to take joint, institutional, organizational, or collective action for self-interest, must be rooted out and obliterated from our presence as far as possible, and as continually as we can, as we strive for perfecting society. As Proverbs puts it, the king establishes the land by justice, not corruption, for he who receives a bribe overthrows it (Proverbs 29:4). An independent judiciary as noted in Pillar 1; I support this principle. As the preceding point argues, there is no more fundamental Biblical principle than justice. God and his government are defined by it, humans are enjoined to pursue it, and ultimately humankind must stand before Gods righteous judgement to give an account of themselves (2 Corinthians 5:10). Justice that all are required to pursue is not some abstract legal ideal, but consistent with morality and the natural rights (justice in the soul to borrow from Plato) of humankind. Correspondingly, justice in society (following Plato again, who speaks of justice) being beyond price, above suspicion of bias and self-interest, and equally applied to all, and (following Aristotle who speaks of justice) being fair and proportionate in its treatment. That kind of justice is best reposed in an independent judiciary and I believe one which is particularly separate and independent of the legislature and the executive. Elimination of discrimination as noted in Pillars 1 and 2; I support this principle. Humankind is naturally discriminating. Our survival depends upon it. A good decision, policy, and action, are like good platforms rightly discriminated in favour of poorly made decisions, ill-conceived policies,
irrational actions and bad platforms. Humans further discriminate among themselves as the situation may dictate - as in preferring certain sartorial habits and fashions (the way we dress), our friends, smarter intelligences, quicker athletic reflexes, stronger guards, taller basketballers, etc, etc. We may even discriminate legitimately within social and cultural spheres of sovereignty. For example, a Muslim, a Hindu or Christian school in our nation has the right to discriminate between employees in respect of certain subjects in relation to the teaching of their faith. But discrimination which is based on racial, religious and gender criteria, in matters where such criteria are irrelevant, is not to be tolerated. In such circumstances such as positions of authority in certain areas of state - our duty is to impartiality. As the Bible puts it, God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34; Romans 2:11; James 2:1-13), thus Bible-believers more than most are obliged to display the same impartiality in their dealings with each other. Good and transparent governance as noted in Pillars 1 and 4; I support this principle. The legitimacy of any government depends on whether it is good, is seen to be good, and can be evaluated as such (i.e. is transparently good). Governance entails policy decision-making, and policy administration. In both respects, our politicians and public servants must be diligent in their work, accountable to their publics, anonymous in their activities, neutral in their considerations, objective in their assessments, fair and impartial in their treatments, and committed to truth above all else. As the Book of Proverbs warn, many seek the rulers favour, but justice comes from the Lord, and if a ruler pays attention to lies, all his servants become wicked (Proverbs 29:26,12). A merit-based system (meritocracy) in our democracy is the best guarantee of good and transparent government. Social justice (not cited in any Pillar, but noted in the Charters Preface and as an addendum to Pillar 8; I support this principle. Justice in the Bible is real and found in relationships and therefore fundamentally social rather than individual. It is not an amorphous abstraction. Biblical justice is about the standing that humankind has, or can have before the Almighty, Holy God. In human affairs, Biblical justice is therefore what transpires in relationships between privileged and underprivileged, between haves and have-nots, between rich and poor, between the powerful and the powerless, between elites and less, the under-represented, between races, between men and women, young and old, and so on. Social justice aims to
give what is fair to those to whom it is due. As the Scriptures say: if and when you shall love your neighbour as yourself, you do well (James 2:8). One person, one vote, one value as noted in Pillar 1; I support this principle. I have served in both Houses of Parliament, the House of Representatives and the Senate and also on many government statutory boards and government corporations. Parliamentary representation is at the heart of the Christian gospel: Jesus is presented as humanitys representative and in Him we live, move and have our being, and are saved (Acts 17:28; Ephesians 1). Representative government is at the heart of democracy and its salvation. And equality of a unit and its corresponding voting value is fundamental to fair and just representation. In the UN General Assembly, the unit is one nation, one vote, one value. In upper houses of parliament, it may be one geographical province or people, one vote, one value. In lower houses of parliament, the unit is one person, one vote, one value. Because just representation itself rests on some form of majoritarianism (e.g. obtaining 50% plus one vote in order to pass legislation and thereby rule effectively), it is essential that the principle for Fijis lower house of representatives of one person, one vote, one value be adhered to. Elimination of ethnic voting as noted in Pillars 1 and 2; I support this principle. Biblical Christianity admits that from the beginning of time to its conclusion, tribes, nations, ethno-racial groupings are a fact of life. The Bible nowhere teaches one world, one race. Rather, people-groups as genetic pools and socio-cultural realities will persist until and beyond the present epoch turns into eternity (at the Second Advent, as in the Book of Revelation, the 66th and final book of the Bible). But in Fijis special case, ethno-racial groupings and attitudes have dangerously threatened social order. An ethnic, racial or communal voting system was thereby preferred in the past to offset the needs of the racial composition of the nation against the outcome of purely democratic representation. This system, though logically justifiable, not merely accommodated, but in fact encouraged ethno-racial, xenophobic relations between our different peoples to the detriment of a national unity and inhibited the growth of unifying sentiments among us. It is time to tear down the walls of ethnic voting. Voting age of 18 as noted in Pillars 1 and 2. I support this principle. When does a person in Fiji possess wisdom-maturity and judgement-ability? When does civic responsibility and rational-capacity come of
age among us? Can we say for sure? Have our sociologists and psychologists conducted simple sample tests to see? Is testing itself a reliable indicator for deciding on suffrage? Is ones political IQ (for want of a better term) relevant to whether one should have a say in national affairs? Democracy is on these terms a rough guide of the the will of the people, but it is the best one we have at our disposal. Voting age is therefore a matter of faith, an act of faith. The reduction of voting age to 18 year olds rests on more general evidence than compared with our/my generation, todays 18 year-olds are more literate, better educated, more informed of public affairs, and more interested in global and local political issues than we were. On the other hand one could question their maturity with sexually transmitted diseases and crime rates soaring among them, not just in Fiji, but around the world - as prophesied in the Bible for this time of history (see Matthew 24:3-12; 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12). More cogently, the question of the right voting age is decided at the intersection of: the age at which one is deemed adult in the eyes of criminal law; the age at which parental permission is no longer required for marriage; the age at which (in Protestant Christian communities) alcohol may be publicly consumed legally; the age at which a drivers license is grantable; the age at which conscription for military service is deemed acceptable; the age at which compulsory education stops for children; the age at which hitting a child in discipline is no longer deemed appropriate; the age at which public office may be held by citizens; the demographic bulge in a population (implying the age groups of those most affected by politics) and so on. Taking these kinds of factors into account, different societies therefore arrive at their suffrage differently in different eras. For example, in England in the 1920s, the minimum voting age was set at 30; in Australia since 1973, it has been 18. For Fiji, the time is ripe and right for the voting age to be set at 18.
UNEQUIVOCAL REJECTION:
Proportional representation as noted in Pillars 1 and 2; I do not support this principle of Pillars I and 2. I prefer the simpler method of First-Past-The-Post as adopted in most of the worlds oldest democracies (such as the U.K and U.S.) by the worlds largest democracies (such as for Indias lower house), and by 43 of 193 U.N. countries, including the emerging nations of Africa and Asia. Proportional Representation is cumbersome, confusing, is inexplicable to most ordinary voters, and therefore is not suited to Fijis political culture. To understand the PR system an ordinary voter almost requires a degree in political science. As voting is a potentially explosive action in our context, I would suggest strongly that we go the way of first-past-the-post to avert the wrangling that is normal between party stalwarts at the voting booths and sheds at election time.
10
GRAVE MISAPPREHENSION:
While my support for many of the foregoing principles (with the exception of the latter relating to the electoral system) is sanguine, one of the Charters proposals as found in Pillar 1 gives grounds for misapprehension: that of the proposal to ensure a separation between religion and state (see page 15, of the Peoples Charter). In the newspaper (see Fiji Sun, 10 August, 2012, page 8), this point is urged for Fiji to be a secular state. Fiji a secular state If a secular state means that the state does not interfere at any time with the practice of religion4 and specifically with Biblical and Christ-like principles, as should be the case, and these principles are not negated or enforced upon the populace at any time in the future, then I am for a secular state. But regrettably, this is not the case, as is proven in history and is evident from a casual perusal of the daily news media: secular states wherever they are found, do interfere with the private religious practices of their citizens. (See Appendix 1 page 18 of this submission for my elaboration on this point). Thus, it is my considered opinion and view that the notion of the secular state for Fiji and the idea of separation of religion and state, are misconceived. Accepting the liberal-utilitarian view of the state that its primary purpose and orientation is to promote the highest possible development of all the capacities of personality 5 in all its members ; that parliamentary democracy is the best form of 6 representation of the will of the people ; and that sovereignty is limited to the 7 political sphere by God , I propose that if Fiji is to be constitutionally named, then
4
See e.g. Wikipedia secular state, and Fiji Sun, 6 September 2012, page 2.
These are the words of Sir Ernest Barker [1874-1960], the first Professor of Political Science at Cambridge (192839) in King, 1978:114. See also his essay The Study of Political Science, and Professor J.C. Rees, Interpreting the Constitution, in King, 1978. Utilitarianism owes its best expression to Jeremy Bentham [1748-1832] and his greatest happiness for the greatest number principle as the basis for judging right action, see Bronowski and Mazlish, 1963, pages 480-502. Theories of representation have been well hammered out in political history, suffice to say here that it was th Locke-inspired 18 century English Whigs who argued that parliament, not a single monarch, chief or dictator, which should be the locus of representation and that representatives as such were autonomously delegated th rather than mandated deputies of the people. In the 19 century the liberalism of John Stuart Mill [1806-1873] crowned this idea of representation and it has prevailed universally since see Professor A.M. Birch, The Nature and Functions of Representation, in King 1978: 265-278, for a useful overview.
7 6
See Professor Isaiah Berlin, Two Concepts of Liberty in King, 1978: especially pages 150-154.
11
it be named a Christian state rather than a new-fangled secular state. If the choice is to be between secular and Christian, then by virtue of our heritage and practice, a Christian state is the proper appellation for our great nation (see the Chart, pages 16, 17 of this submission). This is a state where Biblical, Christ-like and God-like principles are valued and this is what we have evolved to, by history and by conviction8. To be sure, a Christian state does not mean a Methodist state, does not mean a Catholic state, does not mean an Adventist state, does not mean a Mormon state, nor any other denominational state. It means a state where Biblical and Christ-like principles are followed and practiced, and where other religions and any other form of belief and worship are also free to practice. This is no less than what pertains today and is where conscience predominates. There should be no confusion about this9. In our first 1970 Constitution, Fiji was given the status of being a sovereign democratic State and the preamble twice acknowledged our reverence to God in the context of unshakeable human rights and freedoms for all. In our second 1990 Constitution, we were accorded the status of being a sovereign democratic republic and Christianity was accorded affirmation and respect as the historic and dominant religion of the iTaukei Fijian people along with guarantees for freedom of religion, freedom of conscience, and freedom of expression to all ethnicities, philosophies and religions in Fiji. These clauses were explicitly provisioned in the rights contained in that document. In the 1997 Constitution, reference to Christianity was removed from the document but included and highlighted in the constitution decree by then President, Ratu Sir K.K.T. Mara. The statement that religion and the state are separate was contained in the constitution itself in a clause that further acknowledged worship and reverence for God as the source of good government and leadership. I submit that the time for a more explicit declaration of our national status as a Christian state is called for and that the relevant preamble to the proposed constitution should read: Fiji is to be a sovereign democratic Christian state
The contemporary English, Christian state apologist, Stephen Perks, notes rightly that to argue that the state must be Christian, that is, that it must honour Christ by administering justice according to his revealed law, is not to argue that it must force people to worship God or that they will be forced to practice the Christian faith (1998:71,84). Rather, it is evident from the Bible that no one will be forced to believe or confess Christ against his will, and for a Christian state to exact such confessions is apostasy from the Word of God and contrary to the will of Christ. No Christian state has the right or authority to do this (1998:84).
9 8
Unfortunately, confusion persists on this matter as is evident in Fiji Sun, 5 September 2012, frontpage report, headlined Catholics say no Christian state where a church spokesman mistakenly argues that a Christian state would enslave people in a particular denomination, whereas secular states do not. No evidence for either of these claims is provided. See Appendix 1, pages 16 and 17.
12
My reasons for this conclusion are discussed in full in the Appendix Secular State or Christian State? page 18 of this submission; also refer to the accompanying summary Chart, pages 16, 17. In short this kind of state cannot constitutionally permit any particular denomination, such as Catholicism, Methodism or Ahmadiyya Islam or any other sect, to be established as the religion of the state. A Christian state does not and cannot ever mean Fiji submitting to denominational establishment or to religious prejudice10. Rather, the nomenclature of Fiji being a sovereign democratic Christian state fits with honouring our heritage; expressing the character of the principles of rights, liberties and ethics derived historically from the Bible and from Christ-like principles which already underlie our national ethos; and summarising the predominant religious beliefs and orientation of our iTaukei people. Moreover, it augurs well for shutting down temptations to engage further in coup culture. Fijis post-Independence history of flirting with political secularism has been an unmitigated disaster. Our constitutional status as a quasi-secular state during this time has seen us dogged with four coups, and what is now aptly called, coup culture. Since 1970, a generation of our people has grown up knowing nothing but political instability, military takeover, domination by elites, economic decline, international sanctions, and international pariah status. We have seen and experienced social and moral decay, and crime and corruption, on 11 an unprecedented scale . One of the key objectives of the Peoples Charter is to rid Fiji forever of the coup culture - refer to pages 11, 12, 15, 38. That is laudable and what the nation needs. My submission to this august Commission argues that in order to achieve the goal of the Peoples Charter in relation to ridding the nation of coup culture, we need to secure Fijis future by re-designating our national constitutional status as a sovereign democratic Christian state. Secularism robs the Creator God from his sovereign and rightful position and puts the sovereignty of the state in His place.
NATIONAL SECURITY:
I support the principle and position that Fiji must always have a constitutionally prescribed and named security force comprising police, army and navy with all of its various branches and divisions.
10
For a Christian state, the words of philosopher, Immanuel Kant [1724-1804], are indeed apt: Nobody may compel me to be happy in his own way (cited by Berlin in King, 1978:132).
11
See Ambassador Sir James Ah Koy KBE, Timeline, Supplement to the New Fijian Translation English-Fijian Parallel Bible, Suva: Ah Koy Christian Trust, 2012 as found on page 40 of this submission.
13
Fiji has been blessed to inherit from our former colonial masters, Britain, a military that is well trained in warfare and security, and it is my contention that the military should never be disbanded12. Peace-keeping around the world is big business and has been a major foreign-exchange earner for Fiji and our military should be maintained for this purpose as well. The military should be upgraded specifically to assist and complement our police force in maintaining peace and order and internal security in this nation, for guarding against external threats to national security especially from terrorism, and for maintaining its prestige in international peace-keeping and especially for the U.N. Because of Fijis open door policy in welcoming tourists from all corners of the world, to protect them and bolster our Number One export and foreign exchange earnings, we need to upgrade and maintain always our security forces the police, army, and navy. This will require constant upgrading in surveillance and modern technological equipment and up-skilling and thereby requires a yearly national budget commensurate to these needs. Under no circumstance should the military be a law unto itself, but must take its cue and orders from a legitimately elected government.
CONCLUSION:
In conclusion, let me affirm categorically to this learned Commission that I am a practicing Christian all of my 76 years of living in Fiji, and am central to the production and delivery of the New Fijian Translation of the Bible [NFTB version] in the Bauan dialect to every iTaukei where possible. This is the first new translation in 175 years, the first being undertaken in 1836 by missionary, David Cargill. It would be remiss of me if I did not submit this presentation in defense of my belief in the efficacy of the Christian ethos for the nation at this time. It would, in fact, be unforgivably negligent and willfully uncaring of me not to submit this. My underlying assumptions are Biblically-based and developed from the ancient but common view of prophets and writers, as well as of the Lord Jesus Christ himself, who saw the entire human project in cosmic terms. That is, that we are caught up in a spiritual struggle between good and evil, for the planet and for the souls of humanity. This battle is between Lucifer, the author of coups, and our Lord Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God. This struggle began in the heavenly realm (Isaiah 14; Ezekiel 28; Revelation 12) but was never meant to incubate into
The location of Fiji as the hub of the Pacific makes our forces critical to the security of the region as well as the nation.
12
14
sin and rebellion, as was evidenced also in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3) and planet Earth has been in rebellion ever since, and will conclude with the return of our Lord Jesus Christ (Luke 10:18; Revelation 20:1-15). Our first understanding must be to see things in the spiritual realm rather than in temporal terms. This is the first record of a coup and rebellion. It was perpetrated in heaven and its consequences have been felt on earth ever since. We see it continuing all around the world at this time in history as predicted and known in Biblical Prophecy as the end time. Moreover, my submission is unusual in this regard and I would like to remind the Commission that the viewpoint on the Christian state in particular, is not one 13 unique to iTaukei Christian Fijians either . Rather, the ideas in support of the Christian state have an ancient history and are subscribed to, in one form or other, by local and international contemporary scholars, politicians and citizens alike (See Appendix 1 on page 18 of this submission), as well as by more than 14 twenty nations on the planet . Before I conclude, may I ask the committee to read, at your leisure, the appendices closely, as they will help to give you a better appreciation of what I am trying to convey to you learned people. I thank you Mr Chairman and your fellow commissioners for giving me this hearing. THANK YOU, VINAKA VAKA LEVU, DHANYAVAD.
Ambassador Sir James Michael Ah Koy, KBE.
13 I make this submission cognizant of the recent past political history of this notion - of its propagation - as coming predominantly from within Methodism in Fiji. For examples of this perspective, see Dean and Ritova, 1988; Bush, 1999; Williams 2008; and Tomlinson, 2009. But I am not and never have been a Methodist. Indeed, my own past denominational background has been Roman Catholicism and Seventh-day Adventism. Today I worship with the Assemblies of God, not as an adherent or member, but as a baptized, free-thinking Christian and independent Bible believer. My submission is not to be construed as representing their official position in any way. 14
See Wikipedia under state religion for a useful country-by-country list and brief elaboration of their respective constitutional relationships to Christianity, or to a particular Christian denomination.
15
CHART:
FIJI AS A SOVEREIGN DEMOCRATIC CHRISTIAN STATE:
THE RULE OF GOD IN FIJI (as is)
FAMILY VUVALE TOTATOKA MATAQALI YAVUSA YASANA [Other ethnicities and their groupings]
CULTURE HISTORY CUSTOM TRADITION VANUA Multi-culture
RELIGION CHURCH [All denominations] SYNAGOGUE MOSQUE TEMPLE LOTU Other belief systems [as people choose]
STATE POLITY LEGISLATURE EXECUTIVE All levels of government JUDICIARY MATANITU
ECONOMY TRADE UNIONS BUSINESS COMMERCE EDUCATION [at all levels]
SOCIETY ALL SOCIAL GROUPS POLITICAL PARTIES
16
CHART (continued):
FIJI AS A SECULAR STATE:
THE RULE OF THE STATE [THE STATE AS GOD] (the state as proposed)-
FAMILY VUVALE TOKATOKA MATAQALI YAVUSA YASANA [Other ethnicities and their groupings]
CULTURE HISTORY CUSTOM TRADITION VANUA Multi-culture
RELIGION CHURCH [All denominations] SYNAGOGUE MOSQUE TEMPLE LOTU Other belief systems [as the state decides]
ECONOMY TRADE UNIONS BUSINESS COMMERCE EDUCATION [At all levels]
SOCIETY ALL SOCIAL GROUPS POLITICAL PARTIES
17
APPENDIX 1:
SECULAR STATE OR A SOVEREIGN DEMOCRATIC CHRISTIAN STATE? Ambassador Sir James Ah Koy, KBE August 2012
A SECULAR STATE? The word secular derives from the Latin saeculum or saecularis and promotes the vision of a state whose focus and orientation is to this present world, a state which finds itself unbound by any authority above and beyond this present world, 15 and a state, which is thereby unaccountable to God . This is unacceptable for Biblically-informed believers and has never been true 17 of the way in which government by the state has been justified in Fiji .
16
Secular states derive their ethos from secularism, which, as aptly defined by Catholic Father Gerard Beigel, proclaims that the world we live in is all there isthere is no God, or if there is, He is too far beyond our understanding to be of any relevance to human life today (1999). When applied to states, Stephen Perks says, to put it bluntly, and in Biblical terminology, the secular state is not a non-religious state, it is an idolatrous state (1998:27 emphasis his). Contemporary Christian political scientist, David Koyzis, puts it just as strongly: Secularism may be described as an idolatry which as its name indicates, worships some created thing, or more than one thing, within the saeculum the present age (2003:32). Koyzis argues further secularism is a religion, whose principal tenet is a belief in human autonomy (2003:33). The American Roman Catholic Bishops 1947 Statement defines secularism as an unacceptable view of life that limits itself not to the material in exclusion of the spiritual, but to the human here and now in exclusion of man's relation to God here and hereafter. The Bishops further assert that secularism, or the practical exclusion of God from human thinking and living, is at the root of the world's travail today (1947). Calvinist scholar, R. J. Rushdoony [1916-2001], asserts that: The secular state insists on the priority of the temporal as against the eternal (in Dooyeweerd 1968:xi). He points out that originally the state was the religious ordering of society not a secular apparatus for governance as is often claimed. Moreover, it was to be both the total order and the sovereign order. In short, the state as sovereign is simply the state as god and this again is an ancient pagan political concept (in Dooyeweerd 1968:vii,ix). Rushdoony notes further: For the secular state, the determination of time and history is from within history, not from the triune God and his eternal decree (Dooyeweerd 1968:xii). See also Alan Storkey, 2005:123, on this. The Christian apologist, Pascal, defended the Biblical and Christocentric basis of the religion against theism and deism and other related forms as follows: All our happiness, our strength, our life, our light, our hope is in Jesus Christ. Outside of him there is nothing but incomprehensibility and confusion (from Pensees cited in van Prinsterer 1975:20,21). This means, as European Parliamentarian, H.F.R. Catherwood, puts it, Christ is the ultimate authority first in the Bible, before church tradition or denominationalism: for the last word we must always go back to what God himself has said in the Bible (1969:179).
17 16
15
Rushdoony rightly concludes that because of the states appropriation to itself powers of religion, and of sovereignty over the secular order, the conflict of the modern state with Biblical Christianity is inescapable (in Dooyeweerd 1968:xii).
18
The Bible asserts the world and all that is in it, is His, Gods . That means there is no sacred-secular distinction with respect to the God-given human task of 19 exercising political governance . The world may be corrupted by sin, but it still belongs to God. It is Gods by right of creation, and by redemption (salvation), and is under His dominion and providence. The state is under the authority of God as His arrangement in this world and is appointed by Him for this world, for 20 the purpose of enforcing order and justice among humanity . Under the providence of God, the state has its place for administration of justice and civil order in relation to how we exercise our many responsibilities in the present 21 world . But the authority which the state and its functionaries exercise is not 22 supreme, it is given by God . Individuals exercising the powers of the state are 23 ultimately responsible to God for the decisions they make . Similarly, when the state itself moves beyond its sphere exceeding the authority which divine providence has accorded it, demanding the ultimate allegiance of its subjects and imposing on them its own religion or system of values (such as secularism), the state, like individuals, may become a demonic power in this
18
18
Koyzis: Our world belongs to God Christians believe that God is sovereign this sovereignty has implications for the whole of our present life (2003:189).
American evangelical scholars, Linder and Pierard say this: The sacred-secular antithesis so popular among conservative Christians has no foundation in the Word of God (1973:35). Koyzis: For the biblically astute Christian there are no sacred and secular occupations, only obedient and disobedient ones. The obedient farmer or carpenter is as much in full-time Christian service as the pastor or missionary. The same can be said of the civil magistrate (2003:190).
19 20
Justice among humanity is not reducible to the justice of humans. As the ancient Cicero put it, the most foolish notion of all is the belief that everything is just which is decreed in the institutions and laws of nations (in van Prinsterer 1975:55). Rather, as contemporary British economic sociologist, Alan Storkey says, Christianity asks of all rulers Do you act in justice and truthfulness?(2005:121) He asserts: Christianity seeks for the reform of state law in the light of Gospel principles (2005:180). See also Archie Penner, 1959:118. Storkey on this point rightly speaks of two essential moves in constitutionalism no one rules above or beyond the reach of God; the second being that no one is above the law (2005:184ff)
21
Catherwood (1969): State and Church were instituted for different objects. The State has been ordained by God to promote and secure the outward order and good of human society. Without civil order or government in some shape or other human society could not exist at all. But the Church has been instituted by God to advance and uphold the work of Gods grace on the earth and to promote the spiritual interests of the Christian community. The one is meant primarily to serve the temporal good of man, the other to advance mans spiritual well-being.
22
As Alan Storkey acutely points out, the structure of political offense to God is that of asking rulers to submit to God rather than be self-referencing because ultimately the gentle rule of God pulls down all kinds of existing powers and structures that glory in themselves (2005:117). This particularly pertinent to the role of law in the administration of justice. Storkey (2005:177ff ) has a helpful discussion of the secondary role of state law in relation to the primacy of Gods law. Ultimately, as the New Testament puts it, we must obey God rather than man.
23
19
world. It forgets that in this temporal age, the state, as well as individuals, and religion itself, is also subject to the lordship of Jesus Christ for he is Lord of all, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to him (1 Peter 24 3:22) . For in him, we live, and move, and have our being (Acts 17:28). In him, all things were created in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or authorities or powers (i.e. 25 governments) (Colossians 1: 16) . In other words, the entire creation, the galaxies and universes, known and unknown as well as their boundaries, are products of the Almighty Creator. Indeed, the final limits of the state and its powers were set by Christ himself when he was raised from the dead and made to sit in heavenly places far above all rule and authority and power and 26 dominion . In sum: the state is, in this Biblical view, always religious, not secular. It is of course, of this world, but not secular and can never be, because it is a divinely 27 ordained institution, not a law unto itself . Gods primary assignment to the state, to all states, everywhere, in all epochs, is to provide law, order, justice and the opportunity for their citizens to pursue individual happiness within their 28 geographically delineated segment of the planet . State administration of justice, law, and civil order, is therefore always subject to Gods administration of 29 his justice . Thus, to paraphrase the Lords words (from Mark 2:27): The state
24
Describing the elevation of the state (in the place of monarchs and without reference to God) in revolutionary France as occurring by the absoluteness of popular sovereignty, Dutch politician and historian, Groen van Prinsterer [1801-1876] notes that general regularisation, centralisation and codification became the order of the day. Despotism, unlawful and odious when exercised in ones own name, now masqueraded as duty and benevolence practised in the name of liberty and enlightenment for the sake of the common good (1973:34). See also Hershberger, 1958:389. See also Matthew 28 and Luke 4 in this regard.
25
Ephesians 1. van Prinsterers incisive [1847] comment regarding revolutionary France has a universal bite that is still relevant to the present: The common foundation of all rights and duties lies in the sovereignty of God. When that Sovereignty is lost, when God is denied or banished to heaven because his kingdom is not of this world, what then becomes of the fountain of authority, of law, of every sacred and dutiful relation in state, society and family? (1975:41). See also Guy Hershberger, 1958:392.
27
26
Early American president, John Quincy Adams [1735-1826], was of the view that state sovereignty was a grossly immoral and dishonest doctrine that had no place in the American republic (cited in Dooyeweerd 1968:ix,x). Linder and Pierard, 1973:22.
th
28
29
Against this order, 18 century American revolutionary, Thomas Paine, promoted a universal deism that elevated reason above faith and which would lead inevitably he argued to what he called an age of reason which would, free of religious superstitions, lead to the pure unmixed and unadulterated belief of one God and no more (cited in Hamburger, 2002:60,61).
20
was made for man, not man for the state . Man was made for God. For 31 Christians, God rules, politicians merely serve . From a Christian perspective, a secular state is therefore problematic on a number of related fronts and these are summarized here: Because advocates of the secular state are nave about the premises of their own foundations, secular states are inherently unstable with risky, even devastating, consequences. Because they naively ignore their own religious basis and because they try to suppress the natural religious disposition, as well as the historical heritage of their citizens, such secularised states have inevitably dissolved into being 32 religious ones . Post-Enlightenment France declared itself secular and revolutionists tried to enforce their religion of humanity the basis of secular33 humanism on citizens, but outward compliance brought inner resistance . This too was the situation in the Soviet Union when it tried to dethrone the various religions of the people and in its place, put a common secular-atheism as the
30
British Marxist sociologist, Ralph Miliband [1924-94] who is the father of the current British Labour Party leader, well makes the point of the ubiquitous character of the now dominating state: More than ever before, men now live in the shadow of the state. What they want to achieve, individually or in groups, now mainly depends on the states sanction and support they must ever more directly seek to influence and shape the states power and purpose or try and appropriate it altogether. It is for the states attention, or for its control, that men compete This why, as social beings, they are also political animals, whether they know it or not. It is possible not to be interested in what the state does; but it is not possible to be unaffected by it (1973:3). In this, Miliband sounds like a faint echo of van Prinsterers [1847] comment on Rousseaus prescription for revolutionary France: What is the relationship between the citizen and the state? Utter subordination and passivity (1975:49). Van Prinsterer acutely observes that where Hobbes gave sovereignty to the ruler, Rousseau gave it to the people. Both are th denials of the sovereignty of God. See also Storkey 2005:126; Linder and Pierard, 1973:22. In much of the 20 century, the spectre of an overarching secular super-state formed the stuff of apocalyptic fiction beginning with H.G. Wellss The Sleeper Awakes (published in 1900); Jack Londons The Iron Heel (in 1909); Hilaire Bellocs The Servile State (in 1911); Yvgeny Zamyatins We (1923); Aldous Huxleys Brave New World (in 1930); and George Orwells 1984 (in 1948). The genre has a Biblical primogenitor in the Book of Revelations cast of beasts. Hollywood has since taken on the genre.
31
30
Storkey 2005:115.
32
Dooyeweerd (1986): It is a totalitarian fantasy to assume that the state, like a modern Leviathan, can make all these power-types subservient to its political purposes, that it can absorb them within its own sphere of power, yet permit them to retain their distinctive character.
French Enlightenment philosophes were not greatly excited or particularly absorbed by the idea of secularism, although Marquis de Condorcet [1743-1794] did promote the idea of separation thus: the interests of princes was not to seek to regulate religion, but to separate religion from the state (cited in Hamburger 2002:59,60). As Dooyeweerd further points out: Humanism secularised the message of Christian freedom and of creation (1968:22). For van Prinsterer, The defining feature of the [French] Revolution is its hatred of the Gospel, its antiChristian nature (1975:29).
33
21
officially sanctioned state belief-system. It never worked. Adolf Hitler attempted to replace German religions with a common secular-Nazism as the official religious ideology of the state. It failed miserably. Elsewhere, secularcommunism was trumpeted as the answer to democracy and as the real solution to giving power to the people in China, for example, the growth of Islam and the re-growth of suppressed Christianity give lie to the intentions of this ideological mammoth. In Yugoslavia, a post WW2 secular-nationalism was tried by General Tito to remove the peculiar ethno-religious differences among his population it crumbled into a genocidal mess because the natural instinct of people was/and always will be to define their own conceptions of the state according to their historical heritage, cultures and traditions. These would not and cannot be denied. Secular states have never lasted, and cannot last. The lessons of history show them to be unstable socially engineered experiments 34 with potentially devastating consequences . The idea of a secular state has had no place in Fijis original heritage
Fijis religious and deeper political heritage is one of conversion and appropriation. Original Fijians gave up their heathen and pagan practices such as demonic-worship and devilry, cannibalism, child sacrifice, and bride-strangling, to become civilised by Biblically-informed values, principles, ethics, morals and practices. These were conveyed to them by Christian traders, missionaries and 35 colonial administrators . They were taught to them through church 36 establishments, and colonial administration, and schools . They were displayed
34
French priest and political writer, Lamennais [1782-1854] long ago cautioned that one of the most dangerous follies of our age is the delusion that a state can be constituted, or a society formed, from one day to the next, in the same way that a factory is erected. Societies are not made; they are the work of nature and time acting in concert. Men want to create everything in an instant When they began the overthrow they doubted nothing because they knew nothing; afterwards they think they all (in van Prinsterer 1975:45). As Perks concludes: The evidence of history is that such secular states are worse, not better than Christian states (1998:37).
With Fiji, as with Europe, the birth of a nation often coincided with the transition from paganism to Christianity (Mellor 2004:115). A.B. Brewster [1854-1937], a provincial government administrator in Fiji at the end of the 19th century, regretted the fact that when the newly converted backslid from Christianity they threw off the cloth and would revert to growing their hair (1922: 67). As American scholar, Martha Kaplan, observed: Cutting their hair and putting on the clothes of Wesleyanism were the outward signs of Fijian conversion, implying, as Europeans believed, the acceptance of European God and rule (Kaplan 1988: 111).
35
Cakobau [1815-1883] converted in 1854 by all accounts, a genuine voluntary decision and consequently acquired British support for his claim to the title of Tui Viti - King of Fiji. He thereby ensured Fijis future as a Christian and British state. Along with other chiefs and leaders who ceded Fiji to Britain as a colony in 1874, Cakobau did so expressly for the promotion of civilisation and Christianity as well as for increasing trade and industry (Garrett 1982: 279). Fijis first resident governor, Sir Arthur Gordon, consequently lamented that the political significance of Wesleyanism in organising and subduing Fiji had not been fully appreciated (Legge 1958: 25 cf. Kaplan 1988: 110).
36
22
before them by example. Original Fijians volunteered their pre-state tribalism to the welfare of their trading, mission and colonial benefactors because they 37 perceived a superior system of life which they desired . They converted to Christianity and appropriated British administration for themselves for the very 38 purposes of Christianising their culture and organising their state . They were not interested in secularizing their state, in replacing one form of idolatry or devil-worship for another. The heritage of Fiji is, therefore, of a people thoroughly committed to Christianity and for a Christianised, even explicitly, 39 Christian state (under the British model) . Thus, the better option for Fijis future is to honour its heritage, reject alien notions of secularism, and to constitutionally define ourselves as the Christian state that we presently are, but which has never been constitutionally acknowledged.
A CHRISTIAN STATE
A Christian state would not mean - as is already the case in Fiji - compulsory state-enforced adherence to the Christian religion, neither would it mean superior rights and privileges accruing to Christian adherents at the expense of
For accounts of Christian missions in Fiji, see Scarr 1984; Garrett 1982; Gravelle 1981; Schutz 1977; Morrell 1960; Brewster 1922; Deane 1921; Thomson 1908/1968; Webb 1890; Williams 1858/1982; Hunt 1846; Lyth 18361842. As one mission tract put it: Let the gospel enter this open door, and the scene shall be changed (in Calvert 1870: 246).
37
This was accomplished from the top-down as pioneer, Reverend Thomas Williams [1815-1891] put it (1858: 36). Martha Kaplan (1988: 107) observed later that: The European purpose in Fiji was to impose order from above ... Planters sought to put wild nature to economic use, missionaries to lead the heathen to God, and colonial administrators to raise savages to civilisation. Pioneer missionary, William Cross, understood the hierarchical nature of the indigenous social structure and the value of converting Fiji from the top down - he spent his efforts trying to convert the Tui Nayau; Tanoa, the Tui Bau; his son Seru; and the Roko Tui Dreketi of Rewa. He failed with all of them. Cross then tried out his evangelism on Viwa chiefs but was no more effective among them than he had been among the chiefs of Rewa, Bau and Lau (see Garrett 1982). Crosss fellow missionary and superior, David Cargill argued: we are fully convinced that not many Fijians will embrace Christianity until some chief leads the way (in Schutz 1977: 94).
38 39 In Fiji, as in Europe, not until Christianity arrived did people progress toward their rights, morality, enlightenment, and material prosperity - Christian civilization as Cahill pit it, is the only civilization suited to mans nature (1932:1). As noted by historians and even in the confession of past American Presidents, it is difficult to oppose the verdict of Pope Pius X [in 1905]: The civilization of the world is Christian civilisation (cited in Cahill 1932:1). As the greatest missionary to Fiji, John Hunt, put it: True civilisation cannot be separated from true conversion to Christianity (1846: 26; cf Calvert 1870: 556). Colonial secretary John Thurston similarly declared, that worship of ancestral spirits was not only inconsistent with the worship of the true God, it was also inconsistent with the order and good government of the country established by the Queen (in Kaplan 1988: 114). R. Vernon was also of the opinion that the civilisation of the nation without Christianity could never have been attained (1890: 5).
23
other beliefs, nor would it deprive or deny any the right to freedom of worship be 40 it a group, individual, or institution . Tolerance as Perks puts it, is a Christian virtue not a secularist bequest41. Hence, as the great Irish Jesuit educator, Cahill, rightly and succinctly defined it, the Christian state is one in which the laws and administration as well as the organized activities and general outlook of the citizens are in accordance with Christian principles. As Cahill assessed it, These principles in so far as they are applicable to social and public life, are practically 42 identical with the dictates of the natural law . This is as good a prescription for our nations future as can be found.
SEPARATING CHURCH AND STATE?

What about the separation of church from (secular) state it may be asked? Isnt this a better course to follow? Yes, but separating church from state is not the same thing as separating religion from the state. As will be shortly apparent, the first is possible; the latter is both impossible and undesirable. I reiterate that this submission is not for a particular church to dictate to the state, but that Christian religious principles as a generic whole, be considered in the constitutional conception and the administrative conduct of the state. It is worth noting here then, that the term secular, and the very idea of separating church from state, are themselves theories and realities proclaimed from within Christian states! They grew out of nations where the dominant culture was one of a state-ethos in which the Christian religion was already 43 established . The idea of separation is implied in Jesus words that we render to Caesar the things that are Caesars and to God the things that are Gods (Mark 12:17).
In using this phrase, Christian state, I acknowledge that it in the Fiji context, has been stigmatized by obfuscation and superficial consideration - see for example, Casimira, 2002; Fiji Sun, 5 September 2012.
40 41
Perks, 1998:96.
Cahill: A Christian State is one in which the laws and administration as well as the organized activities and general outlook of the citizens are in accordance with Christian principles. These principles in so far as they are applicable to social and public life, are practically identical with the dictates of the natural law (1932:xv).
43
42
It was the 16th century Anglican theologian and scholar, Richard Hooker [1555-1600], who in 1590 first coined the term walles [sic] of separation to describe the position held by Radical Protestant Dissenters (cited in Hamburger 2002:36). Hooker is best known for his Erastianism (after Thomas Erastus [1524-1583]) which supported the development of the secular state through its teaching that the state supersedes the church especially in ecclesiastical matters.
24
Leaving aside whether Jesus may in fact have been suggesting that nothing, in cosmic terms, is Caesars, the generally accepted dualism of this passage was made emphatic centuries later by the first Christian emperor, Constantine. At the Nicene Council [325 CE], convened at his orders, he told church leaders: you are bishops whose jurisdiction is within the church; I am also a bishop, ordained by God to overlook those outside the church44. In the late fifth century CE, Pope Gelasius the First (ruling from 492-496 CE) not only spelled the idea of separation out more explicitly, he tipped the balance of power his way. As he advised Emperor Anastasius:
There are two powers, august emperor, by which this world is ruled from the beginning: the consecrated authority of the bishops, and the royal power. In these matters the priests bear the heavier burden although in your office [you] are the ruler of the human race, nevertheless you devoutly bow your head before those who are leaders in things divine.
Signalling how problematic church-state relations would become, Anastasius hit back with his own advice to Gelasisuss later successor, Pope Hormisdas (who ruled from 514-523) saying: You may thwart me, reverend sir, you may insult me, but you may not command me45. In the 16th century CE, this Constantinian tension was clarified and harmonized by the German Protestant reformer, Martin Luther, who proclaimed the doctrine of two [conceptual] kingdoms civil and spiritual, or temporal and eternal but 46 that the temporal government is a divine order too, like the church . His Swiss colleague, John Calvin, similarly differentiated between the civil polity and the spiritual polity and argued even more explicitly that civil government has the duty of rightly establishing [the Christian] religion and that its appointed 47 end is to cherish and protect the outward worship of God .
44
Quoted by early Christian philosopher, Eusebius [260-339 CE], and cited in M.J. Cohen and John Major, 2004:91. Quoted by Catholic historian, H.W. Crocker III, 2001:103.
45
See contemporary American legal historian, Philip Hamburger (2002:22,23). This was the basis for the sacred and secular distinction, upon which Protestants later formulated their separation of church and state thesis.
47
46
Catherwood (1969) notes: Luther, Zwingli and Calvin all maintained the necessity of a connection between Church and State. Those who did not were considered extremists, especially after the Peasants War in Germany. But in the seventeenth century the religious wars had done such damage that Christians began to feel for a less rigid identification of the interests of Church and State. In Britain it was Cromwell who, when he had defeated the Erastian party in England [see footnote 40 of this submission] and the Presbyterian party in both England and Scotland, first introduced the concept of religious liberty. He not only gave liberty among Christians but also admitted Jews to England for the first time for many centuries. His message to the Scottish Presbyterians is a
25
Catholic Cardinal, William Allen, similarly conceded that church and state are joined though not confounded but this distinction is no argument that the church and the Commonwealth are always separate and independent the one 48 from the other . In the 18th century, British Anglican scholar, Hadrian a Saravia (a translator of the King James Version of the Bible), argued that both church and state are derived from both one and the same Author and again, that the authority of both are 49 drawn from the same Head . These then, very briefly, are the roots of the idea of secular and of 50 separation . Given this differentiation, what then is to be the proper mode of distinction, collaboration, alliance and establishment between Christianity and the state?51 To repeat again in this regard, constitutional establishment of a Christian state would not mean the imposed or forced establishment of a particular church/denomination as it has in centuries past in the religious wars of Europe, the supposed divine right of kings and queens, the Spanish Inquisition, the reign 52 of Bloody Mary, and the like . Nor should it imply a theocracy. Rather, it will
classic. He said I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken. After Cromwells death, Charles II and his brother James II attempted to turn the clock back but they were not successful and James II lost his crown in the revolution of 1688 to the Protestant champion William of Orange.
48
Hamburger, 2002:37,38.
49
Since the Middle Ages, the distinction between the temporal and the spiritual were, in Mellors judgement, understood to have a productively interactive relationship (2004:116).
50 Differentiation never meant separation originally, but eventually, in the American experience, it came to this. Radical Protestant dissenters first stressed separation of the elect from the remnant; then separation of themselves from mainstream Protestantism (e.g. Congregationalists); then separation of themselves from the world at large, as argued by Roger Williams [in 1644]. Separationism was championed in the American colonies in th the mid-17 century by Roger Williams who himself was not only habitually separating (as habitual schismatics do) from established congregations, but, Williams argued, the elect, true Christians, are not bound to rules made by the non-elect. Curiously, he has become the most quoted source for the uncritically received wall of separation argument. But his thesis was purely separation for the purpose of religious purity: that is, by separation of church and state he meant to get the state - which is worldly and corrupt - out of the church and to stop it dictating to the church (see Hamburger, 2002).
His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, commented on the importance of this issue when he observed that the Christian position is, at odds with totalitarian secularism which holds the view that the world belongs exclusively to the state and that the church has its own sphere which lies beyond the boundaries, so to speak, of the world. Rather, a His Holiness argues, the Christian view conflicts with that interpretation because for the church, the world is both a task and a challenge (2005:135).
51
26
refer to the constitutional recognition of the values and principles of the Christian 53 religion per se, in the fabric and business of the state - and nothing more . A Christian state cannot be intrusive or coercive because Christians over the past 1700 years of their own experience of attempting and then resisting coercive religion, have come to the Lockean conclusion that the politics of Jesus does not seek to control peoples responses. Rather, religion works by consent, by the 54 persuasive osmosis of the Holy Spirit - or it cannot work at all . Indeed, at the very outset of the Christianisation of the world, the first Christian Roman emperor, Constantine, and General Licinius, formulated the Edict of Milan (in 313CE) guaranteeing, among other things, that:
Christians and non-Christians alike should be allowed to keep the faith of their own religious beliefs and worship that we have also conceded to other religions the right of open and free observance of their worship that each one may have the free opportunity to worship as he pleases; this regulation is made that we may not seem to detract from any dignity or any religion [online edition; emphasis mine].
To repeat, while we may presently differentiate between civil and ecclesiastical jurisdictions, the two are practically interwoven, for in every society, religion serves civil objectives and has civil benefits government relies upon ethics and morality for public order, the public obtains its ethics and morality from 55 religion . This is particularly true of the United States which is often alleged as
In this regard, the insertion of the American First Amendment Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion was aimed at keeping denominationalism in its place; i.e. that no single denomination should enjoy a civil-supported advantage over any other (see Hamburger, 2002). John Locke [1632-1704], was the philosopher of rights, equality, democracy, liberty of conscience, toleration, and the pursuit of happiness. His Two Treatises on Government [1689/90] is classic. His words were plagiarized almost verbatim into the American Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. Locke insisted on the conceptual distinction between church and state, and the need for a conceptual wall of separation, but that every civil society must at times restrict opinions contrary to human society or to those morals which are necessary to the preservation of civil society (cited in Hamburger, 2002:53,54).
52 53
As Dooyeweerd argues, properly understood, Christianity does not place a temporal church/institute above the state (1968:10). As Dooyeweerd shows, past conceptions of the Christian state were corrupted by Aristotelian notions of state-religions as absolutist powers in place of God. Denominational establishments as state-churches suffer from the same heretical misconception (Dooyeweerd 1968). Storkey, 2005:115; 164ff.
54
Jesus said his kingdom is not of this world (in John 18:36) and while his kingdom comprises people who are to be separate from the world, they are to nevertheless live in and participate in the conduct of the affairs of the world this has been the majority view of the Christian church from its inception. In the case of nation-states with Christian heritages, there can be no censure against the engagement of Christians and pastors in politics. Deriving from Dutch economist and parliamentarian, Bob Goudzwaard (1972:27), Christians should not use the state to impose the gospel on others even if that were possible but rather from our understanding of the gospel, we seek to perfect the state. Following contemporary historian, John Bossy, it is certain that: Historically, the highest Christian calling has been the nurturing of the social miracle where salvation and social solidarity are inseparably
55
27
the bastion of separation of religion and state and which is mistakenly seen as a 56 uniformly secular state . Distinction, but not separation, has been well acknowledged ever since the idea of separating church and state was first mooted there in the 16th century, was subsequently formulated by Thomas Jefferson and his heirs the 18th century, and espoused by separationists 57 subsequently .
linked (Bossy 1985; see also Mellor 2005:115). Third century CE Christian philosopher, Origen [185-254], was one of the first to see this: men of God are assuredly the salt of the earth; they preserve the order of the world (Hamburger:394). Linder and Pierard note: The world may be tainted by sin, but it still belongs to God. It is his by right of creation and is under his dominion and providence Christians have been placed in the world to minister to it they like salt preserve the world from the decay which is the result of evil (1973:33,34). Catherwood, argued to try to improve society is not worldliness, but love and to wash your hands of the world is not love but worldliness (cited in Linder and Pierard 1973:34). Koyzis similarly argues: Every time a believer says that religion and politics do not mix or that we should concentrate on saving souls and leave the affairs of the world alone, she is implicitly denying the cosmic scope of Christs redemption and thereby diminishing Gods sovereignty (2003:190). Linder and Pierard righty observe that: If Christians refuse to become politically involved, the state will be deprived of the services of a large body of citizens whose personal relationship with the Creator gives them a profound sense of concern for the needs of their fellow men (1973:23). These authors assert that: Applying Christian principles to the contemporary world will make it a better place for all people to live, and we encourage young Christians to devote themselves to this task (1973:24). Caesar can serve in the church and church members may serve in Caesars palace, as it were as Joseph and Daniel did in Old Testament times. One may be both a servant of Christ and a subject of the Commonwealth as many soldiers were in the New Testament epoch. In the 18th century, the Virginian Baptist dissenter, John Leland [in 1792] made the good argument that to declare [clergymen] ineligible [to hold state office] when their neighbours prefer them to any others, is depriving them of the liberty of free citizens, and those who prefer them, the freedom of choice (in Hamburger 2002:84,85). More specifically, about four hundred years ago, Anglican scholar, Hadrian a Saravia [1532-1612] argued that church ministers had as much right as anyone else in the society to participate in politics (Hamburger 2002:33). More recently, American senator and educator, Mark Hatfield [1922-2011], commented that for the Christian man to reason that God does not want him in politics because there are too many evil men in government is as insensitive as for a Christian doctor to turn his back on an epidemic because there are too many germs there (cited in Linder and Pierard 1973:39).
56
In relation to the United States, sociologist, John Wilson, rightly observes that clearly, the principle of separation of church and state in the United States is not a simple one and has not been a constant or settled aspect of social life, rather, the wall between the two has constantly been raised and lowered (1978:194, 195). Indeed, he says, despite the constitutional separation of church and state, the links between them are very close and often contradictory (1978:196). Wilson shows that in the United States, in relation to its First Amendment that allegedly separates church and state, the state cannot achieve its purposes without violating these principles at least in part (ibid). More generally, H.F.R. Catherwood makes the salient point: Secular states of western society at least are still drawing very heavily and deeply on the moral capital of Christianity. All seems well while this goes on. But as soon as someone calls the bluff, there will be trouble. It would be a bold man indeed to say that western society had any ideology as strong and positive as Christianity from which it was replenishing its moral capital. It would be an even bolder man who would confidently predict that western society will hold together without any replenishment (1969).
Virginias General Association of Separate Baptists [1783] was possibly the first organized group (and Christians) to go on record and vote for separation (Hamburger 2002:58). Separationism was thereby taken up by anti-cleric liberals (like Jefferson and Madison), and anti-Catholic Protestants (like Seventh-day Adventists, Nativist American movements, Jewish lobbies, and Freemasons). Separationism was also championed by Unitarian theistic humanists organizing themselves as the Free Religion Association [1866], under Francis Abbots Index magazine [1870] and eventually as the National Liberal League [1876]. Their particular target was the National Reform Association [1863] which aimed at insertion of a pro-Christianity establishment clause in the Constitution. The Liberals (as Abbots group was nicknamed) countered with their own secular amendment clause into the
57
28
So that we are not ignorant of how this so-called doctrine of separation of church and state was conceived in the United States, the following examples of sentiments from some leading American churchmen and Presidents of the past should dispel the mistake of it being understood in contemporary secularist 58 terms as if rooted in the disestablishment of Christianity itself . It was not even separationists conceded that. For example, Bostons Reverend William Balch (in 1749) put it this way:
Without religion, tis hard to say what foundation there could be for any mutual trust and confidence among men as is necessary to the support of government, the very being of society. Without supposing each other under the influence of this principle, everyman might too justly be in perpetual fear of every other, who should be stronger or more subtle than himself But when we take into account our general acknowledgement of God the face of the moral world is changed: society becomes practicable, and government a blessing. Where religious principles prevail, rulers may govern with security to themselves, and benefit to the people59.
Connecticuts Reverend Timothy Stone (in 1792):

Religion and civil government are not one and the same thing and the church hath right rights with which the latter may not intermeddle [yet] there are many ways in which civil government may give countenance, encouragement, and even support to religion, without invading the prerogatives of the Most High or the sacred rights of conscience: and in doing of which, it ay not only show its friendly regard to Christianity, but derive important advantages to itself60.
Lutheran scholar, Philip Schaff (in 1854):

It is by no means to be thought that the separation of church and state there is a separation of Christianity by the nation The nation therefore is still Christian, though it refuse to be governed in this deepest concern of the mind, by the temporal power61.
Constitution to forever dis-privilege the Christian religion and eventually abolish organized religion altogether (Hamburger 2002:290-92). The NLL eventually split into spiritualists, freethinkers, atheists and others with some forming the American Secular Union [1885]. Then began the rewriting American history and American church history as if the separation of church and state was an original Founding Pilgrim Fathers obsession it wasnt of course (see Hamburger 2002:342ff). Baptists particularly gave themselves credit for separation as if it was their idea. SDAs too reinterpreted American history this way, by blurring the various orientations and fine distinctions of the past into a single uniform idea of separation (Hamburger 2002:358).
58
See Wilson 1978; Chalfant, Beckley and Palmer 1994; Albanese 2007 - for useful historical perspectives of America as birthed in Christian values, and as an attempted embodiment of the Protestant code. Hamburger, 2002:70. Hamburger, 2002:72,73. Hamburger, 2002:273.
59
60
61
29
Congregationalist, Rev. Richard Gleason (in 1874):

Every civil government must unavoidably have a religion of some kind the question is not what governments ought to do, but what they cannot avoid doing and that is avoid their foundations upon some embodiment of ethical relations, some ground of moral principles, their spiritual basis. Hence, if you thrust forth Christianity from its recognized administration in your government, then what religion will you put in its place?62
Congregationalist scholar, Jeremiah Diman (in 1876):

The mere government may be secular, but the state is built on everlasting moral foundations we can never emancipate ourselves from the restraints and obligations of Christian civilization; they are a part of our history, they are inwrought into our being, we cannot destroy them without destroying our identity as a people!63
Indeed, as these sentiments exemplify, there are various direct and indirect ways by which the institutions of the Christian religion are recognized in the Constitutions and laws of the United States thus giving lie to any claim that in relation to that country, there is made by the nation the entire separation of 64 religion from the state . The first president of the United States of America [from 1789-1797], George Washington, made this point, declaring:
It is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits and humbly implore his protection and favour .
65
Washington went further, noting that: of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports, and that It is impossible to govern the world without God and the Bible66.
62
Hamburger, 2002:274 Hamburger, 2002:274
63
These are the words of American Presbyterian writer and preacher and past president of Miami University, Rev. Erasmus MacMaster [in 1856] (cited in Hamburger 2002:270).
65
64
This, and subsequent American presidential quotes are taken from Keefauver, 2003. Keefauver, 2003:5.
66
30
The second president of the United States [1797-1801], John Adams, advised Americans of the newly liberated republic to observe a national day of solemn humiliation, fasting and prayer forerunner to the American Thanksgiving
that the citizens on that day abstain as far as may be from their secular occupations, devote the time to the sacred duties of religion in public and private; that call to mind our numerous offenses against the Most High God, confess them before Him with sincerest penitence, implore his pardoning mercy, through the Great Mediator and Redeemer, for our past transgressions, and that through the grace of His Holy Spirit we may be disposed and enabled to yield a more suitable obedience to His righteous requisitions in time to come67.
The third president of the United States [1801-1809], Thomas Jefferson, made this assessment of the status and role of the Bible for politics:
The studious perusal of the Sacred Volume will make better citizens, better fathers, better husbands The Bible makes the best people in the world68.
Jeffersons verdict of Christian morality was this: Of all systems of morality, ancient or modern none appear so pure as that of Jesus. Moreover, Jefferson argued that The reason that Christianity is the best friend of government is because Christianity is the only religion that changes the heart69. The fourth president of the United States [1809-1817], James Madison, like John Adams before him, proclaimed a national (Thanksgiving) day of public humiliation and prayer was to be set apart for the devout purposes of rendering the Sovereign of the Universe and Benefactor of Mankind, the public homage due to His holy attributes70. The sixth president of the United States [1825-29], John Quincy Adams the son of the second American president, John Adams had this to say about the impact of Christianity on the world:
It is not slight testimonial both to the merit and worth of Christianity that in all ages since its promulgation the great mass of those who have risen to eminence by their profound wisdom and integrity have recognized and reverenced Jesus of Nazareth as the Son of the living God71.
67 68
Keefauver, 2003:10. Keefauver, 2003:16. 69 Keefauver, 2003:17. 70 Keefauver, 2003:19,20. 71 Keefauver, 2003:33.
31
The seventh president of the United States [1829-1837], Andrew Jackson, affirmed: The Bible is the Rock on which this Republic rests. In words that were later echoed by Andrew Johnson, Americas 17th president, Jackson declared:
Let us look forward to the time when we can take the flag of our country and nail below the Cross and there let it wave as it waved in olden times, and let us gather around it and inscribe for our motto Liberty and Union, one and inseparable now and forever and exclaim: Christ first, our country next!72.
John Tyler, the 10th president of the United States [1841-1845], wrote:
When a Christian people feel themselves to be overtaken by a great public calamity, it becomes them to humble themselves under the dispensation of Divine Providence to recognize His righteous government over the children of men to acknowledge His goodness in time past, as well as their own unworthiness and to supplicate His merciful protection for the future73.
Zachary Taylor, the 12th president of the Unites States [1849-1850] reminded his nation to invoke a continuance of the same protecting care which has led us from small beginnings to the eminence we this day occupy74. Millard Fillmore, 13th president of the United States [1850-1853], confessed as follows: I rely upon Him who holds in His hands the destinies of nations to endow me with the requisite strength for the task of government and gave his praise and devout thanks to the Great Ruler of nations for his multiplied blessings75. Franklin Pierce, 14th president of the United States [1853-1857], advised that he did not not let the foundation of our hope rest upon mans wisdom but that he could express no better hope for [his] country than that the kind Providence which smiled upon our fathers may enable their children to preserve the blessings they have inherited76. The 16th president of the American republic [1861-1865], Abraham Lincoln, proclaimed:
Today I leave you; I go to assume a task more difficult than that which devolved upon General Washington. Unless the great God who assisted him shall be with and aid me, I
72 73
Keefauver, 2003:36. Keefauver, 2003:43. 74 Keefauver, 2003:51. 75 Keefauver, 2003:53. 76 Keefauver, 2003:58.
32
must fail. But if the same omniscient mind and the same Almighty arm that directed and protected him shall guide and support me, I shall not fail I shall succeed77.
In words reminiscent of Washington, Lincoln also declared:

It is the duty of nations as well as of men to own their dependence upon the overruling power of God; to confess their sins and transgressions in humble sorrow, yet with assured hope that genuine repentance will lead to mercy and pardon; and to recognize the sublime truth announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history that those nations only are blessed, whose God is the Lord78.
Ulysses Grant, the 18th president of the United Sates [1869-1877], was open about his faith announcing:
I believe in the Holy Scriptures and whoso lives by them will be benefited thereby. Men may differ as to the interpretation, which is human, but the Scriptures are mans best guide79.
Rutherford Hayes, the 19th president of the American republic [1877-1881] similarly announced his faith, but in even more explicit terms: I am a firm believer in the Divine teachings, perfect example, and atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ80. James Garfield, the 20th president of the American republic [1881], announced to his nation: Fellow citizens, God reigns and the government at Washington still lives81. Grover Cleveland, who was both the 22nd [1885-1889] and 24th president [18931897] of the republic, declared that it was Almighty God who presides over the destiny of nations, and that when it came to Christianity:
All must admit that the reception of the teachings of Christ results in the purest patriotism, in the most scrupulous fidelity to public trust, and in the best type of citizenship82.
Cleveland reminded his people of the connection between God and government in terms of accountability:
77 78
Keefauver, 2003:65. Keefauver, 2003:66. 79 Keefauver, 2003:73 80 Keefauver, 2003:77 81 Keefauver, 2003:81 82 Keefauver, 2003:88
33
Those who manage the affairs of government are reminded that the law of God demands that they should be courageously true to the interests of the people, and that the Ruler of the Universe will require of them a strict account of their stewardship83.
Further, President Cleveland concluded:

The teachings of both human and Divine law thus merging into one word, duty, form the only union of church and state that a civil and religious government can recognise84.
Benjamin Harrison, the 23rd president of the United States [1889-1893] declared that since:
God has placed upon our [nations] head a diadem and has laid at our feet power and wealth beyond definition and calculation we must not forget that we take these gifts upon the condition that justice and mercy shall hold the reins of power85.
William McKinley, the 25th president of the United States [1897-1901], observed that:
There is no currency in this world that passes at such a premium anywhere as good Christian character. The time has gone by when the young man or the young woman in the United States has to apologise for being a follower of Christ. No cause but one could have brought together so many people, and that is the cause of our Master86.
Theodore Roosevelt, Americas 26th president [1901-1909] noted:

A great democracy like ours, a democracy based upon the principles of orderly liberty can be perpetuated only if in the heart of ordinary citizens there dwells a keen sense of righteousness and justice. We should earnestly pray that this spirit may grow in the heart of all of us.
William Taft, the 27th president of the United States [1909-1913] declared:
No man can study the movement of modern civilization from an impartial standpoint and not realize that Christianity and the spread of Christianity are the basis of hope of modern civilization in the growth of popular self-government.
Taft was forthright, asserting further:

Christianity is pure democracy. It is equality of man before God the equality of man before the law, which is, as I understand it, the most God-like manifestation that man has been able to make87.
83 84
Ibid. Ibid. 85 Keefauver, 2003:93. 86 Keefauver, 2003:96. 87 Keefauver, 2003:103.
34
The 29th president of the United States [1913-1921], Woodrow Wilson, had this to say about the political importance of ones national heritage:
A nation which does not remember what it was yesterday, does know what it is today, nor what it is trying to do. We are trying to do a futile thing if we do not know where we came from or what we have been88.
And in this regard, President Wilson, concluded: America was born a Christian nation. Moreover, America was born he declared, to exemplify the devotion to the elements of righteousness which are derived from the revelations of Holy Scripture89. Calvin Coolidge Americas 30th president [1923-1929], declared in his inaugural address that: The higher state to which she [the United States] seeks the allegiance of all mankind is not of human, but of divine origin and that she cherishes no purpose save to merit the favour of Almighty God. As President Coolidge put it, God rules and from Bethlehem and the Springfields, He sends them forth, His own, to do His work90. Against the rising tide of global secularism and communism, the 31st president of the United States [1929-1933], Herbert Hoover, declared that:
Democracy is the outgrowth of the religious conviction of the sacredness of every human life. On its religious side its highest embodiment is the Bible, on the political side, the Constitution91.
Franklin D. Roosevelt, the 32nd president of the United States [1933-1945], observed that:
We cannot read the history of our rise and development as a nation without reckoning with the place the Bible has occupied in shaping the advances of the Republic. Where we have been the truest and most consistent in obeying its precepts, we have attained the greatest measure of contentment and prosperity92.
Harry Truman, Americas 33rd president [1945-1953], took this view of Biblical morality:
88 89
Keefauver, 2003:108. Keefauver, 2003:108. 90 Keefauver, 2003:115,117,118. 91 Keefauver, 2003:122. 92 Keefauver, 2003:127.
35
The fundamental basis of this nation[s laws was given to Moses on the Mount. The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings we get from Exodus and Saint Matthew, from Isaiah and Saint Paul93.
Truman went on to assert that I dont think we emphasise that enough these days. Moreover, he was convinced that:
If we dont have a proper fundamental moral background, we will finally end up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the State!94
The 34th American president [1953-1961], Dwight Eisenhower, said this about the Bible: The Bible is endorsed by the ages. Our civilization is built upon its words95. Finally, Gerald Ford, Americas 38th president [1974-1977], noted that:
Without God there could be no American form of government, nor an American way of life. Recognition of the Supreme Being is the first the most basic expression of Americanism. Thus the Founding Fathers of America saw it and thus with Gods help, it will continue to be96.
In the foregoing schedule, nothing should be understood as suggesting that the United States has behaved or conforms in a perfect manner corresponding to particular standards of Christianity. Rather, while practicing the separation of church and state, the United States has nevertheless oriented itself to meeting 97 the ideals of Christianity itself .
FIJI AS A SOVEREIGN DEMOCRATIC CHRISTIAN STATE

In our case, Christianity is similarly woven into the being of the iTaukei people of 98 Fiji . It is the majority religion of these Fijian people by their consent, not by
93 94
Keefauver, 2003:130. Keefauver, 2003:130. 95 Keefauver, 2003:134. 96 Keefauver, 2003:150.

97
Republicanism, following Jefferson, adopted the view that official religion would not interfere with official politics, but politics would be religious and, as Philip Hamburger insightfully concludes, by separating clerical religion from politics, Republicans made American politics more directly religious (Hamburger 2002:143). Influential American 19 century clergyman and university professor, Jeremiah Diman [1831-1881], may well have referred to Fiji as much as his own people, when he said: The life of a nation, like the life of an individual, forms an indivisible whole we cannot at moment be spiritual beings and at the next released from spiritual restraints (cited in Hamburger 2002:274). The 19th century French historian, Fustel de Coulanges [1830-1889],
th
98
36
coercion. It is secularism, not Christianity, which imposes itself by coercion. When self-defined secular states require their population to be secular or non-religious in their politics, they are often blind to the fact that they are requiring their citizens to adopt a state-enforced belief about politics which arises from a 99 religious albeit non-Christian - commitment . As in France and the United States recently, secularism and its secular-state proponents seek to privilege itself by prohibiting the free expression of ones religious symbols in public spaces. Christian crosses, Islamic moons, Jewish stars and the like are all banned in public 100 areas . In Germany, ritual infant circumcision dating back to Gods instruction to Abraham is now being prohibited among Jews and Muslims and other practitioners. In the United Kingdom, four Christians have had to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights on grounds of alleged religious discrimination by their respective employers and a compliant state101. But the oppressive domination of secularism is not just a Christian complaint - in Turkey, Egypt and other nations of the so-called Arab spring Muslim citizens are overthrowing the yoke of decades of secularism imposed on them by secular demagogues and dictators. In all of these cases, populations are being, and have been, regulated by the state as if it, the state, is beyond the authority of God. While secular states impose secularism on people, a future Christian state (as noted in the foregoing) could never impose the Christian religion on others. Apart from the state bearing in nominal constitutional terms, their shared name, it would not, in practical and substantive terms, seek special rights or privileges for Christians over others. To do so would be un-Christian as John Locke and Soren
rightly observed that: the past never completely dies for man and that take him at any epoch, and he is the product, the epitome of all epochs (1956:14). Following both Fustel and his greatest pupil, the French sociologist, Emile Durkheim [1858-1917], Mellor rightly concludes that: We cannot even begin to understand the present if we sever its connection to the past (Mellor 2004:111; cf Durkheim 1912/2001). German social theorist, Max Weber [1864-1920] made similar reference to the ghost of dead religious beliefs that prowl about in our lives (1958:181,182). Catherwood makes the point that: Christians liberty is limited by the divine law. Conscience, although it is the supreme law to the individual man, is still under the law of God. Conscience must also be limited under Gods law by the need to maintain civil order in society. Faced with a wave of disruptive protest on grounds of conscience, the secular State has no general principles on which it can base an argument with the protestors. If the protests become too disruptive, it can only resort, in the end, to force, and the toleration it grants in theory comes to an abrupt end in practice (1969).
99
The claim of secular states to tolerate all religions while having no religion itself is thus a hollow one. Van Prinsterer long ago pointed out the logical absurdity of this position in that by claiming to do this, the state shall command reverence for its own moral precepts for politics and morality and ban any religion which refuses to bow before the ideal (1975:59).
101
100
See for example, BBC News [online], 4 September 2012, Christians Take Beliefs to European Court of Human Rights; BBC World Service, Heart and Soul, The Bosporus; Jim Skillen, Watch Turkey, Root and Branch, Centre for Public Justice, 21 May 2007.
37
Kierkegaard have variously pointed out . That would deny their very definition 103 as a Christian state would not tolerate religious intolerance . It would advance the gospel by means and resources of the state, but rather advances the cause, institutions, and processes of the state through the principles of the gospel. The gentle politics of Jesus is not jammed upon us either as individuals or in groups. But because God rules, no human institution, constitution or authority can claim 104 totality of domination over us . Moreover, in that, unforced consent, freedom of expression, and freedom of worship were all established by Christians in various epochs and 105 106 circumstances . We have every reason to be proud of this heritage . In fact, far from considering the adoption of secular status, Fiji should be named 107 for the Christian state that inheres us . With respect to the rights granted to other religions and ethno-cultural minorities, nothing will change in practical terms from the system as it already is. Rights and liberties accorded over time to our various minorities will remain guaranteed - as they are and have been - not merely by international covenants and obligations, but by our Christian beliefs which predate, and foreshadowed these international agreements and concords. That is to say, Fijian people did not come to respect the religious rights and liberties of others because they were made to by signing off on secular international accords, but because they were long converted to the Christian
102
102
Storkey (2005:164ff) reminds us: Faith cannot be coerced. If it is, it is not faith (2005:166). For Locke, see Bronowski and Mazlish, 1963; Raphael, 1976; Popkin and Stroll, 1969. For Kierkegaard, see Roubiczek (1964: 55ff) and Ellman and Feidelson, 1965, particularly pages 685-944 sections on Self-realisation, Existence and Faith.
Catherwood (1969) rightly reminds us that: Toleration is an issue upon which Christians must always be alert. It does not come naturally to man. It comes with difficulty even to Christians. Protestants had to wait for a century after the Reformation before the principle became established and even then they had to fight continually to see that it was maintained. This fight is still on. It may be that an Ecumenical movement will be tolerant of all who remain outside it but my guess is that if it is accorded an official position then there will be official pressure for conformity to it and the battle for toleration may have to be fought all over again. For this we need Christians in the State as well as Christians in the Church.
104
103
Storkey, 2005:115. Storkey, 2005:164ff.
105
106
One may concur with the sentiment of the American, Reverend Ezra Gannett who [in 1842] confessed it is not a national Christianity, but a Christian nation which I desire to see (in Hamburger 2002:270). There is no reason to suggest that such as nation would necessarily be dictatorial, a Leviathan in the Hobbesian sense see Bronowski and Mazlish, 1963; Raphael 1976; for a good summary of Thomas Hobbes [1588-1679] and his Leviathan state.
One must keep in mind that Christianity was fundamental to the history of the formation of the concept of the nation per se. (Mellor 2004:115).
107
38
ethic which already respected the rights and liberties of others. Neither will the iTaukei people need to be persuaded to respect the religious rights and ethnocultural liberties of others because they will need secularism (as some imply). That is nave and ill-conceived. Because we are Christians, the iTaukei respect the rights of liberties of others. That respect stems from our recognition and belief that it is God, not the state, and certainly not any Johnny-come-lately secular 108 state, which gives life in its entirety its meaning and purpose . Finally, the desire to define Fiji as a Christian state is not new. As recently as the last constitution review process of 1995, the proposal for a Christian state was 109 tabled by many representative groups and individuals from across the nation . Committing to it now will not simply recognize and honour that long-held conviction in the nation, but be a faithful confession to the reality behind it. It will bring consistency and alignment between what is in our hearts, and how we are to be publicly defined.
108
As Storkey puts it, Jesus refuses the state or ruler the possibility of defining the meaning of life (2005:125). Jesus said render to Caesar things that are his and to God, things that are his. We are to give Caesar not only our taxes, but surrender even our lives if that is want he wants; we give God our allegiance, never Caesar. God rules, politicians serve (see also Koyzis, 2003).
Many Fijians from all walks of life felt a strong duty to institutionalise Christianity as Fijis constitutional status in the submissions to the 1995 Commission (whose final report led to the 1997 Constitution). Major and minor submissions came from: the Viti Civil Servants Association; Adi Samanunu; SVT Womens Caucus; Kalabu Christian Womens Group; Mrs Aliti Ufiamorat; the Taukei Movement; Simione Celua; the Nausori Provincial Council; Isikeli Naiova; the Macuata Provincial Council; Vueti Logayau; Emosi Lawelevu; Viliame Seitoro; the Nationalist Party; Ratu Josaia Tunaosara; Apaitia Seru and Ah Koy joint submission; Methodist Church; the SVT; Lautoka Handicraft Sellers; the Rewa Provincial Council; Tovata Womens Group; Serua Provincial Council; Josaia Vakalala; and, Christian Womens Power of Prayer.
109
39
APPENDIX 2:
TIMELINE Ambassador Sir James Ah Koy KBE

Gods immutable sovereignty: Acknowledgement of Gods immutable sovereignty must be the end-point, the objective, of all human activity. This thought is beautifully expressed in 1 Chronicles 29:11 Yours O Lord is the greatness, The power and the glory, the victory and the majesty; For all that is in heaven and in the earth is Yours; Yours is the kingdom, O Lord, And You are exalted as head over all [NKJV]. Or as the great Fijian chief, Cakobau, once confessed: Lord, life and death are in thy hands, Thou alone rulest. But who is this sovereign God of whom the Biblical King David and the Fijian King Cakobau spoke? The first three of the Ten Commandments in Exodus 20:1-7 tell us: [1] Then God spoke all these words, saying, [2] I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. [3] You shall have no other gods before Me. [4] You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. [5] You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me, [6] But showing lovingkindness to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments. [7] You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain. [Exodus 20:1-7, NASB]. The first three commands, as in Exodus 20: 1-7, deal with our personal and national, bedrock and inviolate relationship with our sovereign God as a Liberator God (verse 2) and a Jealous God (verse 5). While these first three commands draw attention to our vertical duties Godward, the remaining seven commands deal with our duties to our neighbour on the horizontal plane.
40
Biblical declarations carry with them a set of corresponding duties not just for 110 individuals, but for the nation . In grammatical terms, this indicative definition (of God) carries with it a set of imperatives (for us). Thus verses 3, 4, 5, and 7 spell out things we must thereby do in response to the declaration of what kind of a God it is whom we serve and worship. That is, because our sovereign God is our liberator from slavery, we must therefore reject: polytheism (verse 3 - we must have no other gods); polymorphism (verse 4 - we must not make graven-image representations of God), and polyonymism (verse 7 - we must not attribute names for God other than those he has given in Scripture to himself). The first three commands thereby emphasise the importance of right allegiance and nomenclature (v.3), right symbolism (v.4), and right language and the appropriateness of the terms to be used (v.7) when worshipping God. This latter point is emphasized elsewhere in Scripture, particularly in the New Testament sayings of Jesus and Paul. For example Every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgement (Matthew 12:36). Na veivosa taucoko e tukuna na tamata, ena soli tukutuku kina ena siga ni veilewai (Maciu 12:36). For by your words you shall be justified, and by your words you shall be condemned (Matthew 12:37). Ni nomu vosa ga o na vakadonui kina, se o na nona totogi mate ena vuku ni vosa o vosataka (Maciu 12:37). Out of the same mouth proceed blessing and cursing. My brethren these things ought not be so (James 3:10). E dua ga na gusu sa lako tiko mai kina na vosa vinaka kei na vosa ca. Oi kemudou na wekaqu sa sega ni vinaka na veika vaka oqo (Semesa 3:10). Bless and do not curse (Romans 12:14). Dou vosa vakavinaka vei ira kakua ni rukaka (Roma 12:14). What all this means in the Fijian context is this: the compound-noun, kalougata snake-god - is unacceptable for Christian usage as it constitutes a plain violation of these first three principles of the Decalogue. The Fijian words we have hitherto used to invoke Christian and Divine blessings cannot be, and should
110
It is important to grasp the Biblical principle of the subordination of the individual to the corporate whole. As Bible scholar, John Ferguson, points out: Yahweh is primarily the God of Israel and only secondarily the God of individual Israelites (1973:71). As he acutely puts it, there is individualism, but it is always seen against the backcloth of incorporation (ibid). Ferguson therefore observes that the Old Testament is a political book and that unless specifically noted, the you addressed is the whole Hebrew people (1973:73). In relation to the Ten Commandments, he says we are used to thinking of these as ethical injunctions to individuals, but they are not (that primarily), but rather a summary of a code of behavior for a nation (1973:75).
41
never have been, put in terms that derive from the snake-god, the curse-word kalougata. That much is clear. Moreover, the three commands (of Ten) outline the curse (verse 5) or punishment (verse 7) that attach to those generations (i.e. the third and fourth as per verse 5) which deliberately or inadvertently practice a sustained violation of them. Disobedience on these matters is seen by God as hatred of him (verse 5) by those generations. Those who, on the other hand, observe the commands are rewarded with lovingkindness (verse 6). The people of Fiji must heed this message now. We must repent of our use of the snake-god, curse-word kalougata (and its derivatives), and give our God the honour and sovereignty he deserves by repudiating the use of the offending 111 words in everyday language and expunge it from our written lexicon . That is the objective of the New Fijian Translation of the Bible (NFTB) which is free to the Fijian-speaking people. It was commissioned with that purpose and it is my belief that until this is achieved, our nation, though seemingly blessed in many ways, stands under the Divine cloud of a curse and punishment as 112 promised in Exodus 20:5,7 . The aim of the Timeline (below) is to explain in summary form to readers (1) how the nation came to adopt the mistaken snake-god curse word in our Christian discourse; (2) what its several curse-punishment effects on us have been; (3) and how they may be lifted. The Timeline dates the various translations of the Bible into Fijian, from the period 1836-2011, accounting for the implementation of the kalougata curse on the iTaukei Fijian race of man, and ends with the birth-commissioning of the NFTB in the official Bauan dialect and rid of the offensive words.
111
The objectionable dimension of the kalougata mistranslation may further be seen when Genesis 3:15 is compared with Matthew 5:3ff. Genesis 3:15 holds the first Biblical prophecy of a Saviour and coming Messiah. It is uttered by God himself in the Garden of Eden just after our original ancestral couple, Adam and Eve, sinned. God tells Eve that the promised Seed will come from her and crush the head of the snake, Satan (who is ultimately responsible for sin and death entering the universe, and whose temptation led to the downfall of the human race). Yet, in missionary translations of the Bible (from 1836 to the present), Jesus, in Matthew 5s Beatitudes, is translated as blessing the people in the name of the snake-god, kalougata! Jesus who was sent to destroy the snake-god, is interpreted there as blessing in the name of the snake-god a horrible contradiction that must not be left to stand and which is corrected in the NFTB.
112
Please note that I assert that it is the nation corporately, not the individual specifically, that is under a curse. This is consistent with the Biblical principle of incorporation [alluded to in footnote 106 above]. As Ferguson puts it: Individuals [in the Bible] may, of course, show righteousness and unrighteousness, but their offenses are seen as corporate (1973:74). Moreover, personal offence leads to political disaster and while it is true, the individual stands responsible for his own sin, we cannot escape the corporate and political element (ibid).
42
TIMELINE: DATE 1836 THE KALOUGATA WORD APPEARS AND LEXICALLY USURPS THE SUPREME SOVEREIGNTY OF THE GOD OF HEAVEN, ISRAEL AND FIJI 1838 WORK Portions of the Gospel of Matthew are translated by pioneer Methodist missionaries, William Cross and David Cargill, into the Lakeba Fijian dialect and are printed in Tonga. The word, kalougata literally snake-god (see alongside the dates 1850, 1935 and 1941) is curiously translated as the Fijian word for blessing and is believed to appear in the anglicized Fijian lexicon for the first time in 1836. By comparison, the neighbouring Tongan (and Polynesian) word for blessing tapuaki bears no connotation of a snake-god.
The first printing press arrives in Fiji and is installed at Lakeba by missionaries. The complete Gospel of Mark containing the kalougata curse word is the first literature printed in the Fijian language in Fiji. This is undertaken by missionaries at Lakeba. Portions of the Book of Genesis containing the kalougata curse word are translated by pioneer missionary, William Cross, into the Bauan Fijian dialect (see below) and printed at Rewa.
1839
1841
1843
The dialect chosen by missionaries to be the standard for future Bible translations into Fijian is referred to as Bauan, but is, in fact, a mix of various dialects and foreign influences. David Cargill, pioneer missionary and linguist who introduced the curse word kalougata, and its derivatives, into the Fijian lexicon through his translations of various portions of the Bible, dies of an overdose of laudanum (a derivative of heroin) in Tonga, 25 April (1843).
43
1846
The Gospel of Matthew and the Book of Acts are translated into Fijian by missionary, John Hunt, and 2000 copies are printed and circulated. They contain the word kalougata. 1000 copies of the complete Fijian New Testament (Vei Yalayalati Vou) are printed at Viwa. The word kalougata as in the Beatitudes of Matthew 5:3-10 and Luke 6:20-22 is employed throughout. All books except for the Gospel of John (which is translated by missionary, John Watsford) are translated by missionary, John Hunt, and his Fijian assistant, Noa Koroivugona. The word kalougata (literally, snake-god) appears in the first Fijian dictionary, which is compiled by missionary, David Hazlewood. The word is defined as a powerful god. For the word gata (by itself), two meanings are given: one is of sharp in relation to topography; the other, is that it is a word used when addressing a heathen deity. The translation of the entire Bible into Fijian, incorporating the word kalougata, and its derivatives, is completed, printed and circulated by the hierocracy of the missionaryled Methodist Church. The British and Foreign Bible Society prints missionary, John Hunts Fijian Bible containing the word kalougata, and its derivatives, in London. A revised edition of the Fijian Bible containing the word kalougata is printed missionary, Richard Lyth, worked on the Old Testament; missionary, James Calvert, worked on the New Testament. Missionary educator, Frederick Langham revises the New Testament translation and uses the word kalougata; his work is printed by the British and Foreign Bible Society in London. Langhams completely revised Fijian Bible using the word kalougata, and its derivatives, is printed by the British and Foreign Bible Society in London. It is the sole Bible available in the Fijian language for 175 years until the New Fijian
44
1847
1850
1856
1864
1884
1899
1902
Translation Bible [NFTB] arrives in November 2010 [see below]. Langhams standard, signals that the word kalougata has been firmly established in Fijian liturgy as orthodox. 1935 Catholic Marist missionary, Jean-Marie Neyret, completes his Fiji-English and English-Fijian Dictionary defining the term, kalougata, as a mode of heathen worship rendered to a deified snake - see Degei, in a cave in the Kauvadra mountain range. Eyres Fiji-English and English-Fijian Dictionary states the fact that Degei was worshipped under the form of a snake in a cave at Kauvadra. Neyrets Fiji-English and English-Fijian Dictionary defines the term, Kauvadra, as being the name of the mountains where Fijians first settled. It was one of the abodes for departed spirits. Degei the god-ancestor was worshipped in a cave at Kauvadra under the form of a snake. 1836-1936 One hundred years since the kalougata word, and its derivatives, appears. The generations of this period are exempted from the kalougata curse, as promised by the God of heaven in Exodus 20:1-5. Fijian as a language is effectively banned from use in Fijis schools and public life at the encouragement of Governor Sir Arthur Murchison Fletcher. Itaukei Fijians now outnumbered by all other races combined. This is a curse upon the indigenous people. 1941 Anglican scholar, Arthur Capell, publishes the New Fijian Dictionary defining kalougata as both sharp and the snakegod, Degei. Fiji attains independence and the 1970 Constitution is proclaimed.
1936
1970 October
45
1986
One hundred and fifty years since the kalougata word, and its derivatives, first appeared in the Fijian Biblical lexicon. This marks the completion of the first two Biblical generations (75 years as per Psalm 90:10) who are exempted from the curse of Exodus 20:1-5. Indigenous iTaukei Fijians born from this time forward constitute the first generation to be born under the kalougata curse according to Exodus 20:1-5. That is, they are the third generation since 1836 when the kalougata word first appeared and was misapplied to the God of heaven, Israel and Fiji, in both the written and spoken Fijian lexicon. Fijis period of grace from the effects of the kalougata curse (as per Exodus 20:1-5) are now completed; an epoch of national decline marked by political instability, social unrest, moral declension and economic hardship may be expected to afflict Fiji henceforth (as it did Israel in Biblical times of spiritual unfaithfulness).
1987 May
First Fiji coup the Rabuka coup overthrows the Bavadraled Labour government and evidences the first effects of the curse of Exodus 20:1-5 on national-political affairs. Indian Fijians attacked by rampaging indigenous Taukei Movement activists; The Great Council of Chiefs [BLV] resolves to support Rabuka coup. International sanctions against Fiji put in place henceforth.
THE KALOUGATA CURSEPUNISHMENT BEGINS AND EVIDENCE OF IT SURFACES IN OUR NATIONAL & INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL LIFE
1987 September
Second Fiji coup evidences the effects of the curse of Exodus 20:1-5 on national-political affairs this Rabuka republican coup revokes the 1970 Constitution (see
46
below). iTaukei Movement activists again rampage through Suva streets. 1987 October Fiji declared a republic, thereby formally and decisively ending ties with the British Crown which constitutionally defined Fiji since colonization in 1874. Further curses befall the nation when Fiji is expelled from the Commonwealth and is suspended from trading with the EEC; this especially affects our leading export industry, sugar, and foreign exchange earnings. 1988 June Arms smuggled into Fiji earlier in the year are recovered by Mara-Rabuka-led government; Rewa high chief, Ratu Mosese Tuisawau, charged with conspiracy as a result. Methodist Church activists protest the ending of Sunday (Sabbath) Decrees by erecting roadblocks 150 church members arrested. Just one year after Fijis first two coups, national Gross Domestic Investment (GDI) is recorded at 12% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) down from 34% five years earlier. Itaukei political unity threatened by proposal for a fourth confederacy based in the West. Fiji is cursed by the beginning of a mass exodus of FijiIndians as a result of the 1987 coup; brain-drain overseas is already evident negatively affecting the economy resulting in a loss of trained citizens and of Indian monetary capital. 1989 February A nationalist clique within the Fiji Methodist Church coups the churchs president, Reverend Josateki Koroi.
1988 December
1989 January
1990 July
A new Fiji Constitution (since 1970), entrenching iTaukei parliamentary superiority, is promulgated; Indian Fijians protest.
47
1994 January 1995 July
Itaukei Fijian political unity is split through the formation of the FAP by dissidents from the Rabuka-led SVT. USP academic points to Fiji as violence-prone society. Methodist Church taken to court over corruption allegations.
1996
In the ten years since the kalougata curse commenced, 5,100 Indian Fijian professionals have emigrated from Fiji 21 percent of whom were architects, engineers, and related technicians; 15 percent were accountants; 31 percent were teachers; 12 percent were medical, dental, veterinary, and related workers; and 21 percent came from other professional categories. Fijis third constitution since Independence in 1970 is passed by both houses of Parliament. Itaukei Fijian political unity is again split through the formation of PANU by western Viti Levu chiefs and supporters. Fijis first Indian PM is elected taking control of government out of iTaukei Fijian hands. Itaukei public servants violate their oaths by destroying public records; iTaukei ethno-nationalists incite protests and public demonstrations against incoming government.
1997 May 1998 April
1999 May
1999 March 2000 April
Itaukei Fijian unity splits again with the formation of the VLV Party by politicised Methodists. Mohammed Apisai Tora revives the political Taukei Movement.
2000 May
Third Fiji coup evidences the effects of the curse of Exodus 20:1-5 on national-political affairs the Speight coup overthrows Fijis first Indian-led government and briefly restores indigenous iTaukei Fijian control.
48
2000 June 2000 July
Fiji is again cursed by being suspended from the Commonwealth. Soldiers supporting Speight coup in gunfire exchanges and Kalabu School showdown with Military loyal to Bainimarama. An army mutiny (see below) is attempted against military leader, Bainimarama, but he is protected and is to be instrumental in challenging the Fiji Methodist Church hierocracy (see April 2009). The iTaukei Fijian-dominated SDL Party is formed by SVT and VLV dissidents further splintering indigenous unity. Itaukei Fijian political unity is split further through the formation of the CAMV by SDL dissidents. 2000 Coup leader, George Speight, is convicted of treason and receives death sentence which is subsequently commuted to life imprisonment. Fifteen soldiers of the disbanded Counter-Revolutionary Warfare Unit are convicted of mutiny relating to the 2000 Coup. Economic cost of coups to the nation since 1986 conservatively estimated at U.S.$4.3billion-plus to date. Real wages of average workers have fallen by more than 15% since curse began in 1987.
2000 November
2001 May 2001 June 2002 February
2002 November
2003
2004 August
High chief and Vice-President of Fiji, Ratu Jope Seniloli, along with four others is convicted of offences relating to the 2000 coup. High chief of Naitasiri, Ratu Inoke Takiveikata, is convicted of inciting mutiny against Bainimarama. Fiji Vice-President, Seniloli, is found guilty of treason in relation to the Speight coup of 2000 and is incarcerated for
49
2004 November 2004 August
life, but later reprieved. 2005 April Four iTaukei chiefs including former Minister for Lands, Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu, are convicted for unlawful assembly at Sukanaivalu Barracks in Labasa during 2000 coup.
While serving as a senator, Ambassador Sir James Michael Koy, KBE formulates his thesis on kalougata as a curse (not a blessing) based on his understanding of Exodus 20:1-5. Sir THE James notes the rapid deterioration of things relative to KALOUGATA iTaukei: lackadaisical attitude to commitments; unrelaibility; WORD & ITS failing prowess in sport; loss of peacekeeping duties for CURSEFijian soldiers and the resultant loss of the number one PUNISHMENT foreign exchange earnings; national spiritual, economic, EFFECTS ARE social, physical and political declension evident (see daily FIRST newspapers); moral turpitude increase in sodomy HIGHLIGHTED IN (homosexuality and lesbianism), fathers sodomising sons, PARLIAMENT & incest, grandfathers abusing grand-daughters and grandTHE PRESS nieces, AIDS proliferation, rise in crime (especially murders and robberies), self-destructive incest swear words become a self-fulfilling prophecy, jails are filled with iTaukei Fijians, etc. Especially note that it is young, iTaukei Fijians born since 1986 who are cursed and adversely affected by all of these sins. 2005 May Four more 2000 Coup iTaukei supporters, including former head of Fiji Intelligence Service, Metuisela Mua, are convicted for their central roles in its enactment. 2005 June 2005 October 2000 Coup prosecutor, Peter Ridgeway, expelled from Fiji by SDL government. The Fiji Bible Society rejects the offer by (senator) Ambassador Sir James Michael Ah Koy, KBE to reprint free, 5000 existing Fijian Bibles without the kalougata word and its derivatives as found in 200 places in the text, but with acceptable substitute words such as kalouvinaka. Ambassador Sir James Michael Ah Koy, KBE makes a clarion call regarding his kalougata thesis, with references to it from his earlier Senate speeches, on the front-page of the Fiji Daily Post newspaper (11/10/2005).
50
2006 January 2006 December
Another attempted mutiny at QEB Military barracks fails.
Fourth Fiji coup evidences the effects of the curse of Exodus 20:1-5 on national-political affairs the Bainimarama military coup is undertaken to clean up perceived corruption. A State of Emergency is imposed and rule is by Decrees as the Bainimarama government comes to power by the permissive will of God. The Bose Levu Vakaturaga [the Great Council of Chiefs] is suspended by President in line with wishes of the Military Government with a view to its permanent abolition. New Zealand High Commissioner, Michael Green, is expelled from Fiji on grounds of political interference. The New Fijian Translation of the Bible [NFTB] featuring the removal of the word kalougata, and its derivatives, from the translated text, is commissioned by Ambassador Sir James Michael Ah Koy, KBE and funded by the Ah Koy Christian Trust & the James Michael Ah Koy Trust. It is translated by Bauan pastors, Reverend Penisoni Seru and Reverend Samisoni Seru, singularly in the modern Bauan dialect, and edited by a representative Christian panel. Six High Court judges resign from service citing political interference in their commissions. Eleven arrested in a failed plot to assassinate Bainimarama and other Cabinet members of the Military Government. Estimated 40% of Fijis population is living below the official Poverty Line up more than 25% since 1986. Australian publisher of The Fiji Sun deported for political interference. Australian publisher of The Fiji Times newspaper deported for political interference.
2007 April
2007 June 2007 July
2007 October 2007 November 2008
2008 February 2008 May
51
2008 December 2009 January 2009 April
New Zealand High Commissioner ejected for political interference. Second Australian publisher of The Fiji Times deported due to political interference. The entire Fiji judiciary is sacked. The Fiji Methodist Church hierocracy is forbidden by the Military Government from their convening church conference on charges of political interference.
2009 May 2009 July 2009 September
Fiji is suspended from the Pacific Island Forum.
Twenty-seven Methodist Church hierocrats detained and charged for meeting illegally. Fiji is yet again suspended from the Commonwealth, invoking international disfavour, anathema, and pariah status; EEC suspends trading relations with Fiji affecting key exports, such as sugar, fisheries etc. This is more evidence of the curse of Exodus 20:1-5 befalling the nation. Australian High Commissioner, James Batley, ejected due to political interference. New Zealand High Commissioner ejected for political interference.
2009 November
2010 January
The Methodist Church hierocracy is again forbidden by the Military Government from convening their church conference - this time, until 2014. Further evidence of the curse of Exodus 20:1-5 is the loss to indigenous iTaukei Fijians of their international and historic nomenclature and identity as Fijian when the Military Government and Cabinet approve a decree for all Fiji citizens to be called Fijian and formerly named indigenous Fijians to be called iTaukei - effective 16 July 2010.
2010 June
52
2010 July 2010 November THE FIRST FIJIAN BIBLES THAT ARE FREE OF THE KALOUGATA WORD BECOME FREELY AVAILABLE TO FIJIANS AND MARKS THE LIFTING OF THE CURSE 2011 January
Second Australian High Commissioner, Sarah Roberts, ejected. 5000 copies of the Standard first edition of the New Fijian Translation Bible [NFTB] distinguished by its removal of the word kalougata from its lexicon are received and circulated in Fiji, free to indigenous Fijians. This marks the uplifting of the kalougata curse and the beginning of the healing process (as per 2 Chronicles 7:14) on the Fijian race of man after 175 years of trans-generational domination of the iTaukei psyche by the snake-god. The kalouvinaka healing process is now becoming evident (for example, the many development projects in various Fiji villages and rural and urban areas undertaken by the Bainimarama Military Government). Despite the sanctions imposed on the nation, Fiji is gaining international acceptance and recognition by many foreign states. 10,000 Standard second edition copies of the New Fijian Translation Bible [NFTB] printed, and received and circulated free in Fiji. The Methodist Church hierocracy is forbidden for the third consecutive year by the Military Government of convening the church conference. Nearly 6000 Standard second edition copies of the NFTB are received and circulated free in Fiji. 21,000 Pocket and 6000 Parallel editions of the New Fijian Translation Bible [NFTB] are commissioned and ordered for delivery in September 2012.
2011 August
2011 September
2011 October
The curse hits where it is most painfully felt to the iTaukei: rugby, and especially Sevens. The Itaukei Fijians suffer a cataclysmic disaster in its humiliating 2011 Rugby World Cup campaign: Fiji v South Africa 3-49 (17/9); Fiji v Samoa 727 (25/9); Fiji v Wales 0-66 (2/10).
53
2012 June
Three versions of the NFTB are in publication: The NFTB Standard Fijian Bible; The NFTB Pocket Fijian Bible; and the NFTB English-Fijian Parallel Bible. A new NFT King James English version is commissioned for completion in October 2012. Reverend Tuikilakila Waqairatu elected president of the Methodict Church in Fiji and Rotuma. This augurs well for the Methodist chuch hierocracy and for rapprochement between Chritian denominational churches and for a Christian state in Fiji. 6000 Parallel edition and 31,000 Pocket edition of the NFTB to arrive in Fiji for distribution. In the spirit of Ezekiel 45:17 It shall be the princes part to make atonement for the house of Israel [NKJV] Ambassador Sir James Ah Koy, KBE appeals to political and Christian church iTaukei leaders for a National iTaukei Day of Atonement to confess the kalougata curse introduced in 1836 when the word kalougata and its derivatives were first erroneously used in the translation of the first Fijian Bible to mean blessing, and to petition the God of heaven, Israel and Fiji for its repeal, and for reconciliation, for the healing of the Fijian (iTaukei) race of man as promised in 2 Chronicles 7:14 If my people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land [NKJV].
2012 August
2012 October PERSONAL PLEA:
STATEMENT TO INVOKE A BLESSING :
It is my sincere belief that the use of the word kalougata and its derivatives by Fijians in their daily conversations and interactions to invoke a blessing is erroneous and should be completely abandoned and rejected, and that the word kalouvinaka and its derivatives should be used in its place - then watch the blessings happen in your life personally, your family and on our beloved country, Fiji!
54
CONCLUSION: It is the honour and magnificent obsession of the Ah Koy Christian Trust and the James Michael Ah Koy Trust to provide any one of two formats of the new NFTB (New Fijian Translation Bible), the NFT Standard and the NFT Pocket Bibles in the Bauan dialect, free to any iTaukei who wants one. The other two formats, the NFT English-Fijian Parallel, and the NFT King James Bibles, will be printed for distribution throughout Fiji.
55
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ALBANESE, Catherine, America Religions and Religion, Fourth edition, U.S.: Thomson Wadsworth, 2007 ALLEN, Percy (ed.), Cyclopaedia of Fiji, Suva: Fiji Museum/Oceania 1907/1984. ANNUAL STATEMENT OF THE BISHOPS OF THE UNITED STATES, On Secularism, Our Bishops Speak, U.S.: Bruce Publishing Company, pp. 137-145, 14 November 1947. BAVOU, Jovesa, History of the Beginning in Martha Kaplan, Land and Sea and the New White Men: A reconsideration of the Fijian Tuka, Phd Thesis, University of Chicago, 1988. BEIGEL, Father Gerard, The Challenge of Secularism, in The California Mission, San Jose, California, Nov/Dec 1999. BERGENDORF, Conrad, The Church of the Lutheran Reformation, St. Louis: Concordia, 1967. Bible as Poetry, The, New Testament, Australia: Media Edition, Downloaded 2009. BOSSY, J., Christianity in the West 1400-1700, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985. BREWSTER, A. B., The Hill Tribes of Fiji, London: Seeley Service & Co., 1922. BRONOWSKI, J., and Bruce Mazlish, The Western Intellectual Tradition, U.K.: Pelican, 1963. BULLOCK, J. Malcolm, An Aberdeen Graduate as Pioneer in Fiji, in Aberdeen University Review, June 1921. BUSH, Joseph, Claiming a Christian State Where None Exists: Church and State in the Republic of Fiji, Pacifica 12: February 1999. CALVERT, James, Missionary Labours Among The Cannibals, volume 2 of Fiji and the Fijians, with Thomas Williams, edited by George Stringer Rowe, 3rd ed., London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1870. CAPELL, Arthur, New Fijian Dictionary, Sydney: Australasian Medical Association) 1941. CARGILL, David, Memoirs of Mrs. Margaret Cargill, Wife of Rev. David Cargill, A.M., Wesleyan Missionary, Including Notices of the Progress of Christianity in Tonga and Feejee by her Husband, London: John Mason, 1841. CASIMIRA, Aisake, A Fundamentalist Christian State? The Fiji Times, 30 November 2002. CATHERWOOD, H.F.R., The Christian Citizen, London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1969. CHALFANT, H. Paul, Robert E. Beckley and C. Eddie Palmer, Religion in Contemporary Society, Third edition, Illinois: Peacock Publishers, 1994. CLAMMER, John, Colonialism and the Perception of Tradition in Fiji in T. Asad, Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter, London: Ithaca, 1973. CLIFFORD, James, The Predicament of Culture, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1988. CLUNIE, Fergus, Yalo i Viti, Shades of Fiji: A Fiji Museum Catalogue, Suva: Fiji Museum, 1986. COHEN, M.J., and John Major, History in Quotations, U.K.: Cassell, 2004. Constitution, The, of Fiji, 6 October 1970. Constitution of the Sovereign Democratic Republic of Fiji, 25 July 1990. Constitution (Amendment) Act 1997 of the Republic of the Fiji IsIands, 25 July 1997.
56
CROCKER III, H.W., Triumph, New York: Three Rivers Press, 2001 De COULANGES, Fustel, The Ancient City: A Study on the Religion, Laws and Institutions of Greece and Rome, New York: Doubleday, 1956. DEAN, Eddie, & RITOVA, Stan, Rabuka No Other Way, Sydney: Doubleday, 1988. DEANE, (Rev.) Wallace, (Principal, Teachers Training College Davuilevu Fiji) Fijian Society - or the Sociology and Psychology of the Fijians, London: Macmillan & Co., 1921. DERRICK, R. A., A History of Fiji, Suva: Government Printing and Stationery Department, 1946. DOOYEWEERD, Herman, edited by D.F.M. Strauss, The Crisis in Humanist Political Theory, Grand Rapids: Paideia Press, 2010. DOOYEWEERD, Herman, translated by John Kraay, The Christian Idea of the State, New Jersey: Craig Press, 1968. DOOYEWEERD, Herman, translated by Magnus Verbrugge, A Christian Theory of Social Institutions, California: Paideia Press, 1986. DURKHEIM, Emile, The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life (1912), translated by Carol Cosman, New York: Oxford University Press, 2001. EARLE, Timothy, The Evolution of Chiefdoms, in Current Anthropology, 30: 1, February 1989. EBRECHT, Paul G., Politics and Government, St Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1965. ELIADE, Mircea, Cargo Cults and Cosmic Regeneration in Sylvia Thrupp (ed.), Millenial Dreams in Action, New York: Schocken Books, 1970. ELIADE, Mircea, From Primitives to Zen, London: Collins 1977. ELIADE, Mircea, Occultism, Witchcraft and Cultural Fashions Essays in Comparative Religion, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1976. ELIADE, Mircea, The Sacred and the Profane The Nature of Religion, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1959. ELLMAN, Richard, and Charles Feidelson jr, The Modern Tradition, New York: Oxford University Press, 1965. Encyclopedia Britannica; Encyclopedia Americana; New World Encyclopedia. EMY, Hugh, The Politics of Australian Democracy, Melbourne: Macmillan, 1978 ERNST, Manfred, Winds of Change: Rapidly Growing Religious Groups in the Pacific Islands, Suva: Pacific Conference of Churches, 1994. FERGUSON, John, The Politics of Love, Greenwood, South Carolina: Attic Press, undated/(1973). FRANCE, Peter, The Kaunitoni Migration Notes on the Genesis of a Fijian Tradition in Barrie McDonald, Essays From The Journal of Pacific History, [no listed publisher], 1979. FRANCE, Peter, The Charter of the Land, Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1969. FRANCE, Peter, The Kaunitoni Migration Notes on the Genesis of a Fijian Tradition in Barrie McDonald, Essays From The Journal of Pacific History, [no listed publisher], 1979. GARRETT, John, To Live Among The Stars - Christian Origins in Oceania, Suva: WCC Publications, 1982.
57
GERAGHTY, Paul, The Ivolavosa and the Codification of Fijian, in Directions: Journal of Educational Studies, Volume 27, Number 1. GOUDZWAARD, Bob, A Christian Political Option, translated by Herman Praamsma, Toronto, Canada: Wedge Publishing Foundation, 1972. GRAVELLE, Kim, Fijis Times A History of Fiji In Three Parts, Suva: Fiji Times and Herald, 1981. GRIMM, Harold J., The Reformation Era 1500-1650, New York: Macmillan, 1954. HAMBURGER, Philip, Separation of Church and State, Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2002. HASTINGS, A., The Construction of Nationhood, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. HAZLEWOOD, David, A Feejeean and English Dictionary, Viwa, Wesleyan Missin Press 1850. HAZLEWOOD, David, A Feejeean and English Dictionary, Second edition edited by James Calvert, 1872. HERSHBERGER, Guy Franklin, The Way of the Cross in Human Relations, Pennsylvania: Herald Press, 1958. Holy Bible, The 1611 King James Authorised Version; 1971 New American Standard Bible; 2004 New King James Version; 2011 New Fijian Translation Bible - Standard. HUNT, Rev. J. Missionary to Feejee, Memoir of the Rev. William Cross, Wesleyan Missionary to the Friendly Islands with a Short Notice of the Early History of the Missions, London: John Mason, 1846. KAPLAN, Martha, Land and Sea and the New White Men: A reconsideration of the Fijian Tuka, Phd Thesis, University of Chicago, 1988. KAPLAN, Martha, The Dangerous and Disaffected Native in Fiji: British Colonial Constructions of the Tuka Movement in Social Analysis, No. 26, December 1989. KASPER, Wolfgang, BENNETT, Jeff, BLANDY, Richard, Fiji Opportunity from Adversity, St. Leonards, N.S.W.: The Centre for Independent Studies, 1988. KEEFAUVER, Larry (editor), From the Oval Office Prayers of the Presidents, Florida: Bridge-Logos, 2003. KING, Martin Luther, The Trumpet of Conscience, London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1968. KING, Preston, editor, The Study of Politics, U.K.: Frank Cass, 1978. KOYZIS, David T., Political Visions and Illusions a survey and Christian critique of contemporary ideologies , Illinois: InterVarsity press, 2003. KURTZ, Lester R., Gods in the Global Village the Worlds Religions in Sociological Perspective, California: Pine Forge Press, 1995. LAL, Brij V., Ganesh CHAND, & Vijay NAIDU, (editors), 1987 Fiji Twenty Years On, Lautoka, Fiji Institute of Applied Studies, 2008 LEGGE, J. D., Britain in Fiji 1850 - 1880, London: Macmillan, 1958. Legislative Council, Fiji Council Paper No. 27, Native Lands Commission, 1914. LESTER, R. H., Kava Drinking in Viti Levu, Fiji, Thesis for a Diploma in Anthropology, University of Sydney, Sydney: Australasian Medical Publishing Co. Ltd, 1942. LINDER, Robert, and Richard Pierard, Politics - a Case for Christian Action, Illinois: InterVarsity, 1973. LUCY, Richard, The Pieces of Politics, 2nd ed., Melbourne: Macmillan, 1979.
58
LYTH, Richard Burdsall, The Journal of Richard Burdsall Lyth, Wesleyan Missionary to the Friendly Islands 18361842, Microfilm Pacific Collection, University of the South Pacific Library. MacNAUGHT, T. J., The Fijian Colonial Experience, Canberra: ANU Press, 1982. MacNAUGHT, Timothy, The Man From Ra: Apolosi Nawai in Deryck Scarr (ed.), Pacific Portraits, Canberra: ANU Press, 1979. MacNAUGHT, Timothy, The Subjugation of the Highlands of Viti Levu, Fiji, unpublished B.A. Thesis, Sydney: Macquarie University, 1971. MADRAIWIWI, Ratu Joni, (Roko Tui Ra & Bua) letter Jan. 13, 1908 to Talai ni Korana Vale Tabacakacaka i Taukei Suva; including attached: Kai Vatukaloko. [see Minute Papers listed below] MANDELBAUM, Michael, The Ideas that Conquered the World Peace, Democracy, and Free Markets in the Twenty-First Century, New York: Public Affairs, 2003. MANN, Cecil W., Religion and Symbolism in Fiji, in The Journal of General Psychology 1940:23, pp169-184. McGRATH, Alister, In the Beginning The Story of the King James Bible and How it Changed a Nation, a Language, and a Culture, New York: Anchor, 2002. MELLOR, Phillip A., Religion, Realism and Social Theory Making Sense of Society, London: Sage, 2004. MILIBAND, Ralph, The State in Capitalist Society, London: Quartet Books, 1973. MILNER, G.B., Fijian Grammar, Suva: Government Printers, 1956. MORRELL, W. P., Britain in the Pacific Islands, London: Oxford University Press, 1960. MORRELL, W. P., Britain in the Pacific Islands, London: Oxford University Press, 1960. NATION, John, Customs of Respect, Canberra: ANU Development Studies Centre, 1978. NEYRET, Jean-Marie, Fijian-English and English-Fijian Dictionary Volume 1, Cawaci, National Archives of Fiji, 1935. NICOLSON, Adam, Gods Secretaries The Making of the King James Bible, U.S.: Harper Collins, 2003. NORMAN, E. R., Church and Society in England 1770 - 1970 A Historical Study, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976. PENNER, Archie, The Christian, The State, and the New Testament, Manitoba, Canada: D.W. Friesen and Sons, 1959. PERKS, Stephen, A Defence of the Christian State, Taunton, England: The Kuyper Foundation, 1998. PETERSON, Houston, A Treasury of the Worlds greatest Speeches, New York: Simon and Schuster, 1965. POPE, JOHN PAUL II, Memory and Identity, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 2005. POPKIN, Richard H., Avrum Stroll and A.V. Kelly, Philosophy Made Simple, London: W.H. Allen, 1969. POPKIN, Richard H., The Philosophy of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, New York: The Free Press, 1966. RAPHAEL, Problems in Political Philosophy, rev. ed, London: Macmillan, 1976. RAVUVU, Asesela D., The Fijian Ethos, Suva: Institute of Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific 1987. RAVUVU, Asesela D., The Fijian Ethos, Suva: Institute of Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific 1987.
59
RAVUVU, Asesela, Vaka I Taukei: The Fijian Way of Life, Suva: Institute of Pacific Studies of the University of the South Pacific, 1983. REEVES, Sir Paul, Tomasi Rayalu Vakatora and Brij Vilash Lal, The Fiji Islands: Towards a United Future: Report of the Fiji Constitution Review Commission, Parliamentary Paper No. 34 of 1996, Suva: Government Printer. ROBERTSON, Robbie, The 2006 Election: The End of Communalism in Crosbie Walsh, Fiji: an Encyclopaedic Atlas, Suva: University of the South Pacific, 2006. ROTH, G. K., Fijian Way Of Life, Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1953/1973. ROUBICZEK, Paul, Existentialism, London: Cambridge University Press, 1964. ROUTLEDGE, David, Matanitu: The Struggle for Power in Early Fiji, Suva: Institute of Pacific Studies, 1985. ROWE, George Stringer, The Life of John Hunt, Missionary to the Cannibals in Fiji, London: T. Woolmer, 1859. RUNNER, H. Evan, Scriptural Religion and Political Task, Toronto, Canada: Wedge Publishing Foundation, 1974. SAHLINS, Marshall D., Moala: Culture and Nature on a Fijian Island, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1962. SAHLINS, Marshall, Poor Man, Rich Man, Big-Man, Chief: Political Types in Melanesia and Polynesia, in Thomas Harding & Ben Wallace (eds.), Cultures of the Pacific, New York: Free Press, 1970. SAHLINS, Marshall, The Stranger-King, or Dumezil among the Fijians in The Journal of Pacific History, Vol. 16, 1981. SAHLINS, Marshall, Tribesmen, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1968. SCARR, Deryck, Fiji: A Short History, Sydney: George Allen & Unwin, 1984. SCARR, Deryck, Ratu Sukuna Soldier, Statesman, Man of Two Worlds, London: Macmillan, 1980. SCHUTZ, Albert J., The Diaries and Correspondence of David Cargill 1832 - 1843, Canberra: ANU Press, 1977. SCHUTZ, Albert J., The Fijian Language, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1985. STORKEY, Alan, Jesus and Politics Confronting the Powers, Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005. SUTHERLAND, William, The Tuka Religion in Transactions of the Fijian Society, 1908/1910, National Archives of Fiji, Suva, Fiji. TAWNEY, R. H., Religion and the Rise of Capitalism, London: Penguin, 1938/1990. The Missionary Book, The Religious Tract Society, London: undated. The Peoples Charter for Change, Peace and Progress, Government of Fiji, 15 December 2008. THOMAS, Nicholas, Sanitation and Seeing: The Creation of State Power in Early Colonial Fiji, in Comparative Studies in Society and History, Volume 32, No. 1, January 1990. THOMPSON, E. P., The Making of the English Working Class, London: Pelican, 1968. THOMSON, Basil, The Fijians A Study of the Decay of Custom, London: Dawsons, 1908/1968. THURSTON, J. B., Memorandum Upon the Native Ownership of Land in Fiji April 6, 1874, Pacific Collection, University of the South Pacific. TINDER, Glenn, Political Thinking the Perennial Questions, Boston: Little Brown and Company, 1974.
60
TOCH, Hans, The Social Psychology of Social Movements, Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1965. TOMLINSON, Matt, In Gods Image the Metaculture of Fijian Christianity, Berkley: University of California Press, 2009. TORA, Veramu, Yaqona in Fiji in Pacific Rituals Living or Dying?, [compilation], Suva: Institute of Pacific Studies of the University of the South Pacific in association with the Pacific Theological College, 1986. TROMPF, Gary W., Macrohistory and Acculturation: Between Myth and History in Modern Melanesian Adjustments and Ancient Gnosticism in Comparative Studies in Society and History, Volume 31, No. 4, October 1989. Van PRINSTERER, G. Groen, Unbelief and Revolution, Lecture 11, Amsterdam: The Groen van Prinsterer Fund, 1973. Van PRINSTERER, G. Groen, Unbelief and Revolution, Lectures 8 and 9, Amsterdam: The Groen van Prinsterer Fund, 1975. Veiyalyalati Vou, John Hunt translation of the New Testament, Fiji, 1847. VERNON, R., James Calvert: From Dark to Dawn in Fiji, London: S. W. Partridge & Co., undated 1890? WALSH, Crosbie, Fiji: an Encyclopaedic Atlas, Suva: University of the South Pacific, 2006. WALTER, Michael, An Examination of Hierarchical Notions in Fijian Society: A Test Case for the Applicability of the term `Chief in Oceania, 49: 4, 1978/1979. WARNER, Wellman J., The Wesleyan Movement in the Industrial Revolution, New York: Russell & Russell, 1930/1967. WATERHOUSE, Joseph, The King and people of Fiji (Containing a life of Thakombau; with notices of The Fijians, Their Manners, Customs, and Superstitions Previous to the Great Reformation of 1854), London: Paternoster Row, 1866. WEARMOUTH, Robert F., Methodism and the Common People of the Eighteenth Century, London: The Epworth Press, 1945. WEBB, (Rev.) Arthur J., Observations on the Hill Tribes of Navitilevu, Fiji, [unplaced], Australia & New Zealand Association for the Advancement of Science, 1890. WEBER, Max, Ancient Judaism, New York: The Free Press, 1952. WEBER, Max, Economy and Society, New York: Bedminster, 1968. WEBER, Max, Essays in Sociology, New York: Oxford University Press, 1946. WEBER, Max, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, London: Counterpoint, 1958/1985. WEBER, Max, The Sociology of Religion, Boston: Beacon, 1922/1963. WEBER, Max, The Theory of Social and Economic Organisation, New York: The Free Press, 1964. WILLIAMS, Beverley, The Advent of Methodism and the I Taukei: the Methodist Church in Fijian Nation-Making, M.A Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Australia: La Trobe University, 2008. WILLIAMS, (Rev.) Thomas, Fiji and the Fijians 2 vols., Suva: Fiji Museum, 1858/1982. WILSON, Bryan R., Magic and the Millennium, London: Heinemann, 1973.
61
WILSON, John, Religion in American Society the Effective Presence, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1978. YINGER, J. Milton, Religion in the Struggle for Power, New York: Russell & Russell, 1961.
WEBSITES:
http://www.aid.govt.nz/programmes/ http://www.migrationinformation.org/ http://epress.anu.edu.au/coup_coup/ http://en.wikipedia.org Many online news websites also consulted.
62

Pillar and Append Ice Submission Final 2012 Final

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pillar and Append Ice Submission Final 2012 Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

11 SEPTEMBER 2012

SUBMISSION TO THE FIJI CONSTITUTION COMMISSION 2012

Prepared and submitted by AMBASSADOR SIR JAMES MICHAEL AH KOY, KBE

CHART PAGES 16, 17

APPENDIX 1: SECULAR STATE OR CHRISTIAN STATE? PAGE 18

APPENDIX 2: TIMELINE PAGE 40

THE PEOPLES CHARTER FOR CHANGE AND THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTION

AS FOLLOWS Let me now elaborate, ELABORATION OF PILLAR 1-4 PRINCIPLES:

Ambassador Sir James Michael Ah Koy, KBE.

FIJI AS A SOVEREIGN DEMOCRATIC CHRISTIAN STATE:

THE RULE OF GOD IN FIJI (as is)

CULTURE HISTORY CUSTOM TRADITION VANUA Multi-culture

STATE POLITY LEGISLATURE EXECUTIVE All levels of government JUDICIARY MATANITU

ECONOMY TRADE UNIONS BUSINESS COMMERCE EDUCATION [at all levels]

SOCIETY ALL SOCIAL GROUPS POLITICAL PARTIES

FIJI AS A SECULAR STATE:

CULTURE HISTORY CUSTOM TRADITION VANUA Multi-culture

ECONOMY TRADE UNIONS BUSINESS COMMERCE EDUCATION [At all levels]

SOCIETY ALL SOCIAL GROUPS POLITICAL PARTIES

SEPARATING CHURCH AND STATE?

Connecticuts Reverend Timothy Stone (in 1792):

Lutheran scholar, Philip Schaff (in 1854):

Congregationalist, Rev. Richard Gleason (in 1874):

Congregationalist scholar, Jeremiah Diman (in 1876):

Hamburger, 2002:274 Hamburger, 2002:274

In words reminiscent of Washington, Lincoln also declared:

Further, President Cleveland concluded:

Theodore Roosevelt, Americas 26th president [1901-1909] noted:

Taft was forthright, asserting further:

Ibid. Ibid. 85 Keefauver, 2003:93. 86 Keefauver, 2003:96. 87 Keefauver, 2003:103.

FIJI AS A SOVEREIGN DEMOCRATIC CHRISTIAN STATE

Keefauver, 2003:130. Keefauver, 2003:130. 95 Keefauver, 2003:134. 96 Keefauver, 2003:150.

Storkey, 2005:115. Storkey, 2005:164ff.

TIMELINE Ambassador Sir James Ah Koy KBE

1994 January 1995 July

1997 May 1998 April

1999 March 2000 April

2000 June 2000 July

2001 May 2001 June 2002 February

2004 November 2004 August

2006 January 2006 December

Another attempted mutiny at QEB Military barracks fails.

2007 June 2007 July

2007 October 2007 November 2008

2008 February 2008 May

2008 December 2009 January 2009 April

2009 May 2009 July 2009 September

Fiji is suspended from the Pacific Island Forum.

2012 October PERSONAL PLEA:

STATEMENT TO INVOKE A BLESSING :

You might also like