Laestadianism and Sami Culture

I recently had an email exchange with Nathan Muus of BÁIKI, The International Sámi Journal, and he gave me permission to post the following:

Yes my friend grew up in, and still is involved in the Firstborn . . . some of my ancestors participated in "like minded" religious movements in the 19th century in Norway. Home meetings, lay pastors, singing hymns with a one string instrument, suspicion of the Swedish/Norwegian state church and not wanting to pledge allegience to the king- the Laestedian movement was one of a number of such movements, not alone. People forget that.

However, the Laestedian movement was Sami led, and there are a number of "positives" to the movement at the time. Some of them are reflected in the Kautokeino revolt, which was Laestedian led also. Sami men were going to the city markets with a year worth of hides, crafts, goods to sell/trade. They were returning back to camp with nothing, no money, drunk..so is said. They were sold alcohol and cheated, taken advantage of. Sami languages were considered worthless, so was Finnish somewhat, by the way. The state church service was in Swedish, or Norwegian, with Latin flourishes. Laestedius deemed that Sami and Finnish were worthy languages to preach in. He deemed that simple was good, hence many people in a village dressing alike in traditional Sami clothing was ok. A simple Sami home or tent, not extravegantly adorned, was normal and was uplifted. I can understand why the movement had such a pull. The Sami traditional spiritual world had been battered for some centuries. This movement gave people an outlet.

I continue to be saddened that denial of Sami cultural heritage/identity today is still there. And I do know it is there. Yet some of the same people will often in their own ways, keep their Sami spirit and identity. I do not for a minute believe academically or otherwise, that traditional Sami spiritual beliefs and practices all were wiped out and went away. Evidence points otherwise to that. However, perhaps some people cannot reconcile the two religious worldviews well, hence continuing denial.

Popular misconceptions do not help either, ie."witches drum"; since when were those using a Sami drum a European style witch? The colonizers had many things wrong. Unfortunately some/a lot of that got transmitted into the various Lutheran church movements also. It's up to all of us to help sort it out. Blessings on your journey! Nathan

You may want to read this fascinating exploration of the impact of Laestadianism on Sami culture. (Among other things, it includes details about "Lapp Mary" that are new to me.)

Does Laestadianism keep Sami culture alive in some way? If so, how?

Laestadius, the Musical (I kid you not)

Wait no longer, music-loving Laestadians (current and former alike). There is now a musical, or "uupera"about our man Lars Levi. It is written by Bengt Pohjanen, who has extended a personal invitation to extoot readers:

"I have just written a libretto for a musical or folkopera about Laestadius. It will be performed on that place i Kengis (south of Pajala) where Laestadius worked. The famous composer, Kaj Chydenius i Helsinki, will compose the music. So I think that this event could be of interest for many in Ex-toots."

Ok, I'm going! "Stranger in a Strange Land" will be there, too. We'll probably aim for a show the last weekend of June.

Give it some thought . . . and if you'll be my translator, I'll buy your theatre ticket.

What is the OALC?

I've closed comments on the previous thread so we can focus our attention on one topic for awhile. It seemed best to choose a Laestadian-related topic (hang in there, philosophers, your time will come). I implore all of you to be respectful and deal with specifics, not generalities, To start things off, here is a history of the OALC that "LLReader" has been supplying.

(If you have an unanswered question from the previous thread, please post it again.)


From "A Godly Heritage" (written by six theologians, historians, and such, along with two pastors of Apostolic Lutheran Churches):

The OALC was founded in 1903 in Calumet and has stayed separate from the other groups since then. There have been no major spits in this group, and the Heidemen, ALC, and all the other splinter groups have nothing to do with the OALC, since they split off in 1903. It's the biggest Apostolic group -- having around 10,000 members.

The OALC book ("History of Living Christianity" written by a committee of OALC members in 1974) says that Andrew Brenner, a Finn from Hammerfest, Norway was the first in the US to preach the true word. He arrived in Calumet around 1867. He sent a ticket to his friend Solomen Korteniemi to come help spread the word -- big trouble followed! In 1872 the first Apostolic congregation was formed, called the Solomon Korteniemi Lutheran Society.


There was so much fighting going on that the Elders sent Henry Parkajoki and Aapo Tapani to Calumet to calm things down. Arguing increased, so in 1877 John Takkinen and Frans Niska from Oulu, Finland were sent. Takkinen was a force to be reckoned with, it was said he ruled with an iron hand, just as Korteniemi was doing. Both had fiery tempers and from what I can understand, much of the dissension in the Apostolic congregation was as much a result of these two personalities as anything else.


Takkinen's side accused Korteniemi of drinking and spreading lies. In 1879 the church name was changed from "Solomon Korteniemi Lutheran Society" to "Finnish Apostolic Lutheran Congregation". Takkinen became part of a publishing company around 1880, and produced an Aapinen in which the words "descended into hell in Gethsemane" were inserted. That made people mad, saying things like, "Who does he think he is? Even Luther hadn't changed any words in the Apostles Creed." (I understand that today the only group that uses the altered creed is the OALC in America. It isn't used in Finland.)


The Elders continued to send other preachers to try to reconcile the Apostolics. Some of the preachers who were sent were Henry Berg, John Mullo, Peter Stolberg, Eliel Juola, and John Rovanpaa. These men were all considered by Takkinen's followers as false teachers. Takkinen was voted out of the Apostolic Lutheran Church on Pine Street. He and his group built a new church in 1892 and called it the "Finnish Laestadian Lutheran Sunday School and Mission Society". John Raattamaa was still the leader of the Apostolics in Scandinavia. He wrote to Takkinen and advised him to change the name to the Old Finnish Apostolic Lutheran Congregation (later tweaked to Old Apostolic Lutheran Church)---and tra-la the OALC was born.)


Under Takkinen's leadership the services were simplified. They quit standing for the Apostles Creed and kneeling during the general confession of sins, which had been done by the congregation in unison. Organs were no longer used, and taking oaths and making the sign of the cross at baptisms was eliminated. An alter railing was added for communion. The ministers didn't wear vestments. The service usually was two hours long, with hymn singing and mostly preaching.

Getting Philosophical

Thanks to our anonymous Spinoza / Einstein quoter (please send me an email, by the way, I have a question for you), here is a new topic in the heavyweight category. Enjoy or ignore, as you please. Don't feel obligated to comment on topic, but if you have wrestled these guys, please share your experience. (And if you enjoy this kind of thing, check out this interesting review of a book about religion by an atheist.

Our quoter's post:

"Nobody, certainly, will deny that the idea of the existence of an omnipotent, just and omnibeneficent personal God is able to accord man solace, help, and guidance; also, by virtue of its simplicity it is accessible to the most undeveloped mind. But, on the other hand, there are decisive weaknesses attached to this idea in itself, which have been painfully felt since the beginning of history. That is, if this being is omnipotent then every occurrence, including every human action, every human thought, and every human feeling and aspiration is also His work; how is it possible to think of holding men responsible for their deeds and thoughts before such an almighty Being? In giving out punishment and rewards He would to a certain extent be passing judgment on Himself. How can this be combined with the goodness and righteousness ascribed to Him?"

And, Einstein replied to a man asking him whether he believed in the God of Spinoza:

"I can't answer with a simple yes or no. I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many different languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see a universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza's pantheism, but admire even more his contributions to modern thought because he is the first philosopher to deal with the soul and the body as one, not two separate things."

Background:

"Baruch Spinoza was a 17th century Dutch philosopher of Jewish heritage whose major work entitled Ethics that began with words, "By God, I mean a being absolutely infinite — that is, a substance consisting in infinite attributes, of which each expresses eternal and infinite essentiality." Spinoza later continued, "Whatever is, is in God, and without God nothing can be, or be conceived."

Einstein first discovered Spinoza while working in the Bern patent office and, throughout the rest of his life, he referred to Spinoza's guiding determinism in which nature operates according to immutable laws of cause and effect. When asked by a rabbi from New York in 1929 if he believed in God, Einstein sent this message by telegram: "I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings."

How to Plan Your Funeral

Do you have a funeral plan? Do you think it would help your loved ones if they knew your preferences?

Marian's death has inspired me to think about these things. While not legally binding, a funeral plan might be helpful to my loved ones when I am whisked away. If nothing else, it will leave them no doubts as to my preferences, even if they choose to disregard them.

This website offers assistance.

For starters, I'd prefer to have my body donated to science and then cremated, with the ashes dispersed in some location near a big rock or tree stump, on which the kids can sit and reflect on our life together. The woods, the lake, the shore, the mountain, the San Juans . . . all good. If they like, they can plant a tree to remind them of the web of life in which we are all suspended (our family's penchant for commemorative planting has overwhelmed our city lot, so they would need to find another bit of earth).

Family viewing is okay, but I do not want my body and its "state of grace" (actually said by some to be discernable in one's final facial expression, no kidding) to be objects of curiousity and gossip in a church I didn't attend. This could conceivably come to pass if my husband were to die with me. I would hope better sense would prevail.

Our kids are not old enough to plan it, but a "celebration of life" is what I would want for their sake, among people who know and love us. With flowers -- peonies if they are in season, but anything fragrant will do -- and music. Lots of music, of all kinds, preferably live. Bizet's "Au Fond du Temple Saint" and "I'll Fly Away" (by Alison Krauss and Gillian Welch).

And you?