When I came to faith at age 19, I learned to ignore my ethnic heritage because I was told it was "of the flesh." My experience is consistent with the colonial history of those living in a land where the dominant culture is associated with one particular faith tradition. Because Euro-Americans contextualized their Christian faith so well (see, for example, the White Jesus on the wall of First Church of Anytown, USA), Euro-Americans became confused over what was faith and what was culture.
The resulting enmeshment of Christianity and Euro-American civilization was the decision that all native religious ceremonies and many cultural practices be outlawed. For almost 100 years, in the name of progress, Native children were forced into government-sponsored, denominationally run boarding schools where many were abused physically, sexually, emotionally and spiritually, and where many of them died. The rallying cry to civilize/Christianize Indigenous children was "kill the Indian, save the child."
Even today, most mission-sending agencies don't deal with cultural distinctions well. Often, everything that does not fit into Euro-American ideas of "Christian culture" is seen as suspect, or even branded "demonic." This confusion was passed on to our Indian people and as a result, most Indigenous churches simply began to mimic the Euro-American cultural standard. It was a poor imitation of a bad model.
If most Americans knew the depths of degradation Native people have gone through at the hands of the U.S. Government and the Church, they would be in profound disbelief that any Indian would ever become a Christian. The disbelief, in fact, runs on both sides; some American aboriginals today view Native Christians as traitors.
But then there is the other reality of Indian life: Indians are normally forgiving people and many really like Jesus in spite of the kind of Christianity presented to them. Authentic traditional elders I knew years ago -- the real elders of the people -- were tolerant and kind to everyone. They knew there was only one God the Creator, call him what you will, to hear our prayers. These elders were often much better at the practice of Christian life, even without formal Christian training and dogma, than the missionaries who tried to convert them.
The missionaries did a real number on Native Americans by preventing us from expressing our devotion to Jesus through our own cultures. Those who condemned our cultures simply taught us to hate ourselves and, in the end, to hate God for making us Indian. Unfortunately they were reflecting the ethnocentric and racist cultural standard of their day. Clearly, not all missionaries were evil. There have always been a few people of faith who thought and acted in ways ahead of their time.
Back in the mid-1980s, I spent three years in seminary trying to find alternative, non-oppressive models of faith to share among Native Americans. Fortunately, in my own denomination's archives I came across 12 boxes of original journals and letters from a missionary named Evan Jones (1821-1871) and his Cherokee co-worker, Jesse Bushyhead. I found in this team, which later included Jones' son John, an understanding of how Jesus could be expressed contextually through Indian culture.
Over the past 25 years of culturally contextual ministry among our Indian people, my wife and I have applied many of the things we discovered. Regrettably, erroneous assumptions about our Indigenous cultures still exist today. Like the proverbial "ducks out of water," Native Christians captured by a Western worldview are against the use of any form of Native American cultural expressions of faith. On the other hand, those who reclaim a vision of Christ in our culture celebrate joy and homecoming.
Ministries like ours have suffered difficult persecution from all sides; bullets (both metaphorical and real) from the dominant culture and "arrows" from our own people. Fortunately, we have found collaboration and partnership with a larger group of Native North Americans known as NAIITS (North American Institute for Indigenous Theological Studies). We feel if Jesus cannot be expressed equally in and through every culture on earth, then we are presenting a foreign religion, not Jesus.
After centuries of tragedy, America's aboriginals have a gift to offer the West. As First Nations people learn to deconstruct the Western worldview and bring our own unique perspective to the table, we find stark differences between Indigenous and Western faith systems. The upshot being that a rigid Western worldview is essentially at odds with the shalom-kingdom teachings of Jesus and, the parallel construct of the harmony way found among Indigenous peoples.
Colonialism is, in part, about power and conformity to a set of beliefs. The gospel is about living out love and giving away power, especially among the poor and marginalized. The Spirit of God affirms our unique giftedness. The spirit of empire conforms us into a particular external image. The Western worldview left unchecked, may eventually destroy the earth. Helping others to see shalom through the lens of an Indigenous worldview will not only help heal our past, it can heal our planet.
Follow Rev. Dr. Randy S. Woodley on Twitter: www.twitter.com/randywoodley7
I find it odd that the word "Indian" is still used in US media to refer to First Nations. The use of the term has been mostly expunged from Canadian media except for reference to people who come from India which is accurate. I see the use of the term "Indian" and its northern counter part "Eskimo" (which in Canada has almost the same impact as the 'N' word in the US) as a way of shushing different voices and to lump a diverse group of people into a label. Therefore, the term First Nations is descriptive, non-derogatory and historically significant. Within that term we can hear the voices of diversity and the many languages, cultures and faith.
As one with Irish-Norman-United Empire Loyalist ancestry I can enjoy my faith and heritage without need or expectation that someone else will abandon theirs. As one who lives in a city of immense diversity, I can also appreciate someone else's faith and culture whether it be Ojibwa, Cree, Blackfoot, Haida, Slavey or Mi'kmaq. In discussions and expressions of faith, there is such richness in mingling rather than erasing experience and practice.
What did the rest was a bunch of greedy ******s that didn't like Indians being between them and a bunch of gold.
I think what you are saying is very admirable. It seems that you have chosen to accept history as the incredibly horrible aspects of human nature that they are, instead of blaming certain religions on the hurt. You have chosen to find the actual incentive and meaning behind Christianity, and to not let the past prevent you from sharing this faith.
I actually have never understood why there are certain expectations within the church on "how" to worship, and it is awesome that you have chosen to not lose any of yourself – neither your religion nor your culture.
I love your determination to not lose this part of yourself, and also your bravery to openly talk about your faith despite the intense and varying feelings on it within communities.
Keep on spreading kindness to others! Hope you are successful on your journey.
And because something is western its bad? Christianity,
western or non-western has a very rich diverse history and it doesn’t need to
be boiled down to a single event just to support anti-Christian hate speech. It’s
just like the islamophobes try to boil down Islam to September eleventh.
Christianity imposed by force isn't Christianity.
Love attracts people to Christianity.
Just like you can't force somebody to love you, it's free will of choice, so you can't force somebody into true Christianity.
That's what America started by Christians, is all about, free will, choice, and freedom.
It's the sensationalistic stories reported in the media that's not the norm.
How is it possible in free America, that a few Christians would try to force Christianity on Indians by force??
I can see a few bad apples that the author pointed out, but how can that be systematic?
Specifically, spell out how force was imposed? Was it Federal policy backed by arms?
Considering that Federal policy is freedom of religion.
You're trying to view the past through the comparatively tolerant lens of today. Look US Indian boarding school policy (yes it was imposed) and the ban of native religion on various reservations, backed up by arms (see: Ghost Dance, just to start with).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_boarding_schools
In the year 1700 it is estimated that our populations were somewhere between 18 to 122 million on this continent. By the year 1900 there was 238,000 of us left and of the 238,000, one hundred thousand of our children had been forcibly removed from their homes and taken away to a boarding school. The main objective of the boarding schools were to "kill the Indian, but save the man."
The reservation system and Carlisle Indian School became the model for Hitler's concentration camps and his brown youth corpe training. When the U.S. made complaint Hitler responded by saying the U.S. had no right to chastise him because the U.S. had already done to the Indian population what he was doing to the Jews.
I am a nationally known Native historian and activist. My wife and I have traveled the U.S. as presenters under the title "Dawnland Native Ministries." If you type my name into your computer search engine some references should appear.