Steve Charleston (Choctaw) was consecrated as the sixth bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Alaska in 1991. He has served as the national director of American Indian/Native Alaskan ministries for the Episcopal Church and as director of the Dakota Leadership Program, a training program for native church leaders in the Dioceses of North and South Dakota. Most recently, Charleston was associate professor of systematic theology at Luther Northwestern Theological Seminary in St. Paul, Minnesota, and priest at Holy Trinity/St. Anskar Episcopal Church in Minneapolis. This essay was originally published in Lift Every Voice (Harper and Row, 1990), an anthology of multicultural and liberationist methodologies in Christian theology. Charleston begins with his own struggle as a native Christian in order to ground his theological proposals in personal experience. Arguing that interpreting native religious traditions as an alternative Old Testament can be a useful strategy, both for affirming native Christian identity and for establishing the native Christian presence in the 'theological supermarket,' he develops this idea further by pointing out a number of theological and cultural parallels between native people and ancient Israel. Charleston concludes by emphasizing-and modeling-the power of prophetic critique in religious discourse.
CONTEXT AND COMMITMENTI come from Oklahoma. I was born in the southern part of the state in a small town called Duncan. My grandfather and great-grandfather were Presbyterian ministers. Like most people in our tribe, the Choctaw Nation, they were Presbyterians who preached and sang in Choctaw. My own family was tied up with the oil fields. We moved out of Duncan and went up to Oklahoma City as the jobs changed. That means that I experienced a number of different churches. I was baptized a Southern Baptist, but I've known everything from Roman Catholic to Unitarian to the Baha'i faith. I think that's partly because Oklahoma Indian life can be so eclectic. There are dozens of tribes to go along with dozens of churches. Things are very mixed in Oklahoma. It's a cultural patchwork quilt laid down over ranch land, red dirt, and eastern timberland. I've inherited some of that mixture and it's followed me around wherever I've gone. I am an Indian. I am a Christian. Being both hasn't always been easy Like many other Native People, I've known my share of confusion, frustration, anger, and struggle. But I've also known a lot of hope, joy, and visions. So the two balance each other out. Today I feel comfortable talking about Christianity as a faith that emerges from Native America. I came to that feeling after many years of travel through different Native communities. I would credit a great many Native men, women, and children (Traditional, Christian, and a little of both) as being my real teachers. They helped me to grow up and find the sense of spiritual balance that I think is central to life. Of course, keeping the balance takes a lifetime, but at least I have a place to stand.
The place I stand is in the original covenant God gave to Native America. I believe with all my heart that God's revelation to Native People is second to none. God spoke to generations of Native People over centuries of our spiritual development. We need to pay attention to that voice, to be respectful of the covenant, and to be unafraid to lift up the new covenant as the fulfillment of the ancient promise made to the Native People of North America. That means not seeing Jesus as a white plastic messiah taken off the dashboard of a car and dipped in brown to make things look more Indian, but as a living Christ that arises from the Native covenant and speaks with the authority and authenticity of Native America.
I have been talking about what I call a Native People's Christian theology for over fifteen years. I started when I was one of only four Native People in seminary and I am still doing it today. So I feel a deep commitment to this new theology. I want to do all that I can to help bring Native People together. That means healing the false divisions brought into our tribes by Western colonialism. It means helping Native People who think of themselves as being either Traditional or Christian find a common ground, a common center. In time, it will mean carrying the voice of Native America around the world to join with millions of other Christians in a second reformation. I may not be around for that time, but I want to help make it happen by proclaiming the indigenous theology of this continent.
That brings me full circle, because I also believe that theology is autobiography If we are really honest about all of this, about all of the millions of words we produce each year on theology, we have to admit that when we start out trying to talk about God, we usually wind up talking about ourselves—at least, between the lines. So, I think you can read Oklahoma in what I have to say; and Presbyterian preachers baptizing Native People in the river, and Choctaw camp meetings, and some struggle to be made whole. I also hope that you can hear commitment, energy, and strength, and that you recognize the power of God to help and to heal and a messiah who is changing the world.
CONSTRUCTIONImagine a supermarket-not one of the small local convenience stores, but a really big supermarket, the kind of place with aisle after aisle of things from which to choose. The shelves are loaded. There are hundreds of different brands. There are different departments or sections. The merchandise is carefully organized to make shopping easier. This is a real American store, a place that testifies to our abundance and our right to choose for ourselves.
Now imagine that instead of groceries, this supermarket sells theologies. As you roll your cart along the aisles, what do you see? Dozens of different brands-a theology for every taste. There is a department for basic Western theologies, the old standbys. There are sections reserved for feminist theology, for Black theology, for liberation theology There are shelves for African theology and Asian theology There is even a gourmet section for New Age theologies. At first glance, it seems that this supermarket has a Christian theology from every culture and community Almost. But not quite. Something is missing. As strange as it may seem, the Great American Religious Supermarket is incomplete. It has some shelves that are standing empty Go down the aisles and try to find the section for a Native People's Christian theology It isn't there. Look for a department called Native American or American Indian Christian theology Still not there. The fact is, in all of the abundance of Christian theologies flooding the religious marketplace in contemporary America, one is conspicuous by its absence. There is no strong presence of Native American Christians in the theological marketplace.
Why? That's the simple but profound question that needs to be answered. Why have Native People not entered visibly into the Christian debate? Why is there no quickly recognizable Christian theology from Native America? Why not several brands for Native Americans to choose from? Why not a whole shelf of theologies from Native Christian theologians? Is it because they are content to let others do the talking for them? Or are there other reasons that need to be examined, understood, proclaimed?
"Conspicuous by their absence." That's the phrase I used and I wonder if you caught it? There is an irony in using those words, because I doubt if Native People have really been conspicuous by their absence. I doubt it, because I have rarely heard the question "Why?" asked before. Not too many Christians seem troubled by the absence of a Native People's Christian theology. I think if we are honest with one another, we will admit that most religious shoppers have gone down the aisles and never even noticed that Native People were missing. They assumed that the supermarket was complete as new products arrive daily, old products are repackaged-new and improved theologies, special sales on hot items. in all of the abundance, in all of the excitement, I don't believe many people have noticed a few empty shelves. This fact alone raises another question. Why have so very few people questioned the absence of Native Americans? Given the proliferation of theologies from many racial, cultural, ethnic, and economic communities, given the rise of theologies from the feminist community, given the increased awareness on the part of consumers of theology-why has the absence of Native People's theology gone unnoticed?
If we tackle that question first, we may find that we are starting to uncover some clues to the more fundamental reasons for Native America's silence in the Christian debate. Many people may have overlooked the absence of a Native People's Christian theology because they assumed it was covered by the supermarket sections reserved for spirituality. I think that's a fair guess. After all, there are many shelves these days loaded with works on Native American spiritually. Some are historical, others are anthropological or biographical; some are journalistic accounts by white authors who went to live with the Indians and returned to share the exotic secrets they discovered. In fact, there has been something of a minor gold rush in Native American "spirituality," with lots of people writing about it. What is described as Native American spirituality crops up in all kinds of places, especially in the gourmet section of the theological supermarket. In a style not too far removed from the 1960s and early 1970s, it has become chic to be Indian again, or, at least, to know an Indian, particularly if that Indian is a medicine person. It's romantic, earthy, "creation-centered."
The Native spirituality craze, therefore, may account for the neglect of a Native People's Christian theology. Well-intentioned shoppers may have simply thought that this talk about spirituality was the voice of Native America in the religious dialogue. And up to a point, they're right. Traditional Native spirituality does represent a major and crucial voice for Native People. It is a voice that has frequently been misquoted, distorted, or co-opted, but it's a voice nonetheless. I am certainly not prepared to argue against a legitimate role for that spirituality In fact, I am going to argue that this spirituality is something extremely central to Native America, and to the Christ, and faith. Still, the spirituality section alone does not complete the supermarket. It is still not an expression of a Native Christian viewpoint. As good (or bad) as these works may be at articulating Native tradition, they do not offer a clear voice for Native American Christianity They are not a Native People's Christian theology Instead they are the source for materials for that theology-they are reference points, or commentaries.
THE OLD TESTAMENT OF NATIVE AMERICASo far, we've said that the answer to why most people have ignored the absence of a Native People's Christian theology is because they thought they were getting it through Native "spirituality." But that still doesn't explain why the theology itself is missing. Now, we have a clue to follow. What would happen if instead of speaking about Native American spirituality we began speaking of an Old Testament of Native America? What would that do for us?
Well, first of all, it would give us a new vocabulary in dealing with what we've been describing as Native spirituality. For example, a great many of those books in the supermarket would become Old Testament commentaries. They would be books about the source material of Native America's Old Testament. Books about the traditions of Old Testament times, about the culture of Old Testament times, about the personalities of Old Testament times, and the theology of Old Testament times. We might start treating them more seriously and critically, since they would be describing the foundational theology for a contemporary Christian theology They would have to be weighed and judged on a much finer scale than we have become accustomed to. The authors of these books would begin to seem like Old Testament scholars, not hack writers. Their standard of scholarship would be open to public inspection and criticism. Tossing off a book about "living with an Indian medicine woman" might not qualify as research so easily anymore. We would want to know how accurate the work was. How genuine. How consistent with any tradition. If Ralph Nader were a theologian, he would be proud of us for our new sense of comparison shopping.
What about the Old Testament scholars themselves? Who would they be? My own guess is that the gold rush would be over. Instead of Western writers hacking away at Native spirituality, we would begin to see the emergence of more theologians from within the Native community itself. That might not be as romantic, exotic, or exciting as what we've been used to, but I expect it would be a great deal more valuable. Native American women and men could finally speak for themselves, not as gurus for Western theological science fiction, but as reputable scholars for an Old Testament tradition. Their voices would be clear and distinct. They would be listened to seriously. These speakers would not necessarily be Christian, but they would be treated with respect by the Christian community, just as Jewish scholars are respected. Their contribution to the larger interfaith dialogue would be profound. It would change us. It would open us up to a whole new dimension in theological exploration.
As a result, attitudes toward Native People and their Tradition would alter. Naming that Tradition an "Old Testament" is a powerful statement of recognition for Native America. It says that Native People are not just historical curiosities, footnotes for Western colonial expansion, but the living members of a world-class religious heritage. Since the first Western missionary or anthropologist walked into a Native community, the Tradition of Native America has been called everything but an Old Testament. It has been named by others. It has been named by the West, not the People themselves. It has been called "superstition," "tribal religion," "nature worship," "animism," "shamanism," "primitive," "Stone Age," "savage," "spirituality," anything and everything, but never an Old Testament. The namers themselves have had mixed motives, some innocent, some racist, some just ignorant. But the results have been the same: the names attached to the Old Testament of Native America have consigned that Tradition to the backwaters of serious Christian scholarship. Native American spiritual tradition has been considered the proper study of historians, ethnologists, anthropologists, or even the gourmet writers of the New Age, but not for most Christian theologians. There is a big difference for Western theologians between a "spirituality" and a "theology," just as there is between a "tradition" and the "Old Testament." By claiming the right to name the Tradition an Old Testament, Native America would be walking into the private club of Christian theology, even if that means coming uninvited.
Finally, shifting our vocabulary to Old Testament language gives us an answer to that original question: Why hasn't there been a Native People's Christian theology? The whole purpose of such a theology would be to talk about the New Testament. It would be the Native perspective on Jesus and the gospels, on Paul, eschatology, redemption, salvation, sin, resurrection, community, grace, love, and God. To truly be a "Christian" theology, it would have to cover the whole range of ideas that form the Christian understanding of the New Testament. It would also have to be directly related to what we have always called the "Old Testament," i.e., the Old Testament of Israel. You can't have one without the other.
And there's the problem-you can't have a "new" testament if you don't have an "old" testament. Christians have invented those adjectives to distinguish between the original covenant relationship between God and the people and the "new" relationship established through the person of Jesus as the Christ. For Western People those distinctions work. For Native People they don't work.
Why? Because Native People also have an "old" testament. They have their own original covenant relationship with the Creator and their own original understanding of God prior to the birth of a Christ. It is a Tradition that has evolved over centuries. It tells of the active, living, revealing presence of God in relation to Native People through generations of Native life and experience. It asserts that God was not an absentee landlord for North America.
God was here, on this continent among this people, in covenant, in relation, in life. Like Israel itself, Native America proclaims that God is a God of all times and of all places and of all peoples. Consequently, the "old" testament of Native America becomes tremendously important. It is the living memory, the living tradition of a people's special encounter with the Creator of life.
So what are Native People supposed to do with that memory when they pick up the New Testament? Forget it? Pretend it doesn't matter? Assume that millions of their ancestors were just ignorant savages who didn't have any ideas about the reality of God in their lives? Was God just kidding around? Was the Creator passing off disinformation onto Native America? Was it just a joke?
It should be painfully obvious that Native People have only one choice to make. To erase the collective memory of Native America would not only be a crime against humanity, but a macabre theological position that would so limit the nature of God as to cease to be Christian. Or Jewish. God is the God of all time, of all space, of all people. Moreover, God relates to humanity through love, not through disinformation. When God spoke to Native America, it wasn't a joke. It wasn't primitive. It wasn't Stone Age. It wasn't nature worship. It wasn't superstition. It was the call of God to all people to draw near, to listen, to believe, and to love. Did Native America hear this call? Yes. Did Native America encounter God? Yes. Did Native America remember that encounter and try to explain it to their children? Yes. Did they always get it right? No. Like any human community, Native America is finite and fallible. Its "old" testament is full of mistakes, false starts, guesses, hopes, dreams, wishes, just like any other Old Testament. And yet it is also full of truth, prophecy and promise. It reveals something genuine and precious. It tells us a little more about the Creator we call God.
When Native People were denied access to that religious legacy, when they were told that their Old Testament was nothing more than a grab bag of primitive superstitions, when they were forbidden to share the memory with their own children, when they were commanded to undergo spiritual amnesia, to lose their memories, to go blank, to forget their own story and let others do the naming for them, it was exactly at this moment that any "new" Testament was jerked away from them. We need to press this point again; you cannot have a "new" testament if you do not have an "old" testament. You cannot fulfill what you do not have. The shelves are empty of a Native People's Christian theology because the theologians who would fill them have been brainwashed. They have been told to be content with another People's story, and to forget their own. They have been reduced to silence. It is the silence of any man or woman who cannot remember their own name. Who cannot remember where they came from. Who cannot remember having a family. Who cannot remember having a home. It is a silence of terror and of dread. An insane silence. A silence of isolation. The silence of a People who have been exiled from the love of their God.
THE TRIBE OF ISRAEL/THE TRIBE OF AMERICAThe reason for proclaiming an Old Testament of Native America is to break the silence. It is my intention to be a Christian theologian. To be a Native Christian theologian. But I cannot do that if I am not allowed to name myself. To name my tradition, and to use it. I cannot write about the Jesus of the gospels or the letters of Paul if I don't interpret them through the truths as I try to understand it. That means the truth of the original covenant that God maintained with Israel, the truth of the witness of Jesus as the Christ as upheld in the "new" covenant, and the truth of the covenant between God and the Native People as revealed in the ancient testimony of Native America. Like any theologian from any community that retains its memory of God through tradition, I have to work with at least three primary sources; the Old Testament of Israel, the New Testament of the Christian scriptures, and the Old Testament of my own People. The three are integral. They cannot be separated.
I am very aware of the negative reaction this proclamation can produce among Christians, Jews, and Native People themselves. The words "old" and "new" testaments account for part of that reaction. The words certainly are not accurate, nor do they promote interfaith understanding. The term Old Testament is too pejorative it leaves the impression that it is something we can dismiss, something that has been replaced, something secondary. I know that within the Jewish community there is a strong reaction when Christians describe the Bible in this way And yet, I feel bound by the words, as they have become a shorthand for signifying distinctions. At least for now. At least until people begin to accept the Native Old Testament for what it is. Then in a few years' time, we can bypass the words "Old Testament of Native America" and begin to speak of the Native Covenant.
Until that time, I want to push for recognition of a Native American Old Testament, even if it evokes a strong reaction from all directions. To be honest, because it evokes a strong reaction. The kind of silence I describe is not going to be broken by whispers, but by shouts. Therefore, I announce the Old Testament of Native America and invite others to do the same. Even if the language is imprecise, it is familiar language. It sends a clear message. It makes Christians, Jews, and Native People uncomfortable.
The discomfort arises because all of us have been conditioned to think of the Old Testament. Good, bad, or indifferent; we all know what we mean. We say the Old Testament and we know that we are referring to the first thirty-nine books of the Bible. That's the Christian position, of course, but it is understood by both Native People and the Jewish community when Christians use the term in conversation or discourse. We all assume that there is only one Old Testament, just as Christians assert that there is only one New Testament. Challenging that assumption makes people nervous. To use the term Old Testament conventionally seems to question the validity of the traditional canon.
It also opens a closetful of theological and doctrinal issues. Can there be more than one "Old Testament"? If so, then what is the relationship between them? What is their relationship to the "New Testament"? Does one supplant the other? Where is the final claim on truth? Can the Christ be said to fulfill other Old Testaments? Wouldn't that be heresy at best and syncretism at worst? I doubt that I will be able to answer all of these questions here, anymore than I may be able to reassure all concerned that the Old Testament of Native America is a valid idea. Still, I think there are some basic points that may prove to be helpful.
First, my own awareness of a Native American Old Testament began growing while I was sitting in an introductory Old Testament class during my first year of seminary The professor described what was unique about the religious worldview of ancient Israel. He said that Israel, unlike its neighbors, had a special understanding of the relationship between God and humanity This was the covenant between a single God and a particular People. It involved the promise of a homeland. It was sustained by the personal involvement of God in history It was communicated through the prophets and the law. It made Israel a nation. It brought them together as a People.
It was the most simple, important understanding of the Old Testament that we share as Christians. And yet, during that lecture, I couldn't help but make a list of comparisons in my mind. Each time the professor mentioned some aspect of the Old Testament story that was "unique" to early Israel, I was reminded of my own Tradition and People. To help you understand what I mean, I include the basic elements of that list here in abbreviated form:
God is one.God created all that exists.
God is a God of human history
God is a God of all time and space.
God is a God of all People.
God establishes a covenant relationship with the People.
God gives the People a "promised land."
The People are stewards of this land for God.
God gives the People a Law or way of life.
The People worship God in sacred spaces.
God raises up prophets and charismatic leaders.
God speaks through dreams and visions.
The People maintain a seasonal cycle of worship.
The People believe God will deliver them from their suffering.
God can become incarnate on earth.
These points highlight the fact that the religious worldviews of ancient Israel and ancient Native America have much in common. This is not to say that their understandings were identical. There are many variations on the theme not only between the two communities, but within them as well. What is striking, however, is that for many key concepts the two traditions run parallel. Like Israel, Native America believed in the oneness of God; it saw God as the Creator of all existences it knew that God was active and alive in the history of humanity; it remembered that the land had been given to the people in trust from God. Native People accepted the revelation from God as it was given to them through prophets and charismatic leaders; they recognized sacred ground and holy places in their worship; they maintained a seasonal liturgical calendar; they had a highly developed belief in the incarnational presence of God and expected that presence to be revealed in times of strife or disaster. Is it strange, therefore, that Native Americans would consider themselves to be in a covenant relationship to their Creator or that they would think of themselves as a People "chosen" by God? Take the names which the People used for themselves in their own languages and you get a clear sense of this: in the tribal languages, the many nations of Native America announced their identity as "The People" or "The Human Beings." Moreover, they tied this identity to the land given to them by God. It was this land-based covenant that gave them their identity as "The People," as the community special to a loving God.
Comparisons, of course, and especially sketchy ones, don't "prove" any claim to an Old Testament for Native America. I don't intend for them to. Their function is only to illustrate the depth of the Native Tradition itself. Talking about an Old Testament which emerges from the genius of Native America is not a wild leap into the unknown. There are sound theological reasons for taking the Native heritage seriously. It embodies the collective memory of an encounter with God that should cause any theologian to stop and think. As with Israel, this memory was transmitted through all of those channels that make up any Old Testament-through stories, histories, poetry music, sacraments, liturgies, prophecies, proverbs, visions, and laws. The mighty acts of God in North America were witnessed and remembered. They were interpreted and passed on. Taken all together, they constitute an original, unique, and profound covenant between God and humanity
If this is true then we are confronted with a problem. Suppose that we do allow Native People to claim an "Old Testament" status for their Tradition. Then what do we do with the Old Testament? What is the relationship between the two? What is the relationship to the "New" Testament?
An immediate answer is that we will have to be more concise when we speak of the original covenant with ancient Israel. We won't be able to use that word the in quite the same way As Christians, we're going to have to make some elbow room at the table for other "old testaments." Not only from Native America, but from Africa, Asia, and Latin America as well. That's another door opening up in Christianity and I doubt that anyone is going to be able to close it again. The fact is, Christians must permit the same right for other peoples that they have claimed for themselves. God was as present among the tribes of Africa as God was present among the tribes of America, as God was present among the tribes of Israel. Consequently, we must be cautious about saying that God was "unique" to any one people; God was in a special relationship to different tribes or in a particular relationship with them, but never in an exclusive relationship that shut out the rest of humanity
This understanding broadens our dialogue about the connections between old testaments. It allows us to say that while there was nothing "unique" about God's relationship to either Native America or ancient Israel, there are elements to both that were special or particular. Obviously, for Christians, the concern focuses on christology. As a theologian of Native America, I can feel comfortable (not to mention orthodox) in saying that it was into the Old Testament People of Israel that God chose to become incarnate. Consequently, the story of this community becomes of primary importance to me. I need to honor, as well as understand, the Old Testament of Israel as the traditional culture into which God came as a person. In this way, the Old Testament of the Hebrew People remains central to my faith as a Christian and vital to my reading of the Christian scriptures.
At the same time, I can stand on my own Old Testament Tradition and let it speak to me just as clearly about the person, nature, and purpose of the Christ. I maintain that this Christ fulfills both Old Testaments. In the Pauline sense, I can assert that while as a man Jesus was a Jew, as the risen Christ, he is a Navajo. Or a Kiowa. Or a Choctaw. Or any other tribe. The Christ does not violate my own Old Testament. The coming of the Christ does not erase the memory banks of Native America or force me to throw away centuries of God's revealing acts among my People. But let me be careful about this. I am not glossing over the Old Testament of Native America with the Western whitewash of a theology that gives out a few quick platitudes about the "Christ of all cultures." When I speak of a fulfillment of Native America's Old Testament, I mean just that-a Christ that emerges from within the Native Tradition itself; that speaks of, by, and for that Tradition; that participates in that Tradition; that lives in that Tradition. Grounded in the Old Testament of Native America, it is the right of Native People to claim fulfillment of Christ in their own way and in their own language. I am not looking simply to paint the statues brown and keep the Western cultural prejudices intact. I am announcing the privilege of my own People to interpret the Christian canon in the tight of Israel's experience, but also in the light of their own experience. Whether this interpretation is compatible with Western opinions is open for discussion.
The Old Testament of Native America, therefore, does not replace the Old Testament of Israel. It stands beside it. The Native People's claim to truth is not a competition with other traditions. The answer to the question about the relationship between the two Old Testaments is this: they do not cancel one another out (anymore than they are cancelled out by the New Testament); rather they complement each other. I firmly believe that if the Christian faith is ever to take root in the soil of Native America, both testaments will be needed. Native People can read through the New Testament from both perspectives and see the gospel far more clearly for themselves. In turn, the gospel can speak to the Tradition with far more clarity. And here's a critical point: when we talk about the "fulfillment" of the Old Testament by Christ, we are describing the dual role of Christ in both confirming and correcting a People's memory. There was much in the memory of Israel that Jesus confirmed; there was also a great deal that he sought to correct. The same applies to the Old Testament memory of Native America. There is much that the Christ confirms and much that stands corrected. No Old Testament has a monopoly on perfection. The two traditions stand side-by-side under the fulfillment of Christ. As Native People begin to actively use their own Old Testament in reading the Christian scriptures they will find strengths that were missing from the experience of Israel, just as they will find weaknesses that need to be changed.
In the end, the naming of an Old Testament of Native America should not be cause for alarm among any group or People. It is not a threat, but a hope. Our knowledge of God will not be diminished by this act of a People to regain their memory, but enhanced. The testimony of Israel will remain central to all Christians, Western and Native alike. The Tradition of Native People will be as changed by the gospel of Christ as it changes our understanding of that gospel. Native People will discover that they can read and understand both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible with a much clearer vision. Suddenly, they will start to make sense. Not the sense of the West perhaps, the imported versions of truth handed down from a community that fears it has lost its own Old Testament, but the common sense of any People that remembers, that recounts, that reasons, that reveals, and that responds. The "old" and the "new" will merge. They will enter deeply into the Kivas and Lodges of Native America and come back out stronger than we ever dreamed possible.
THE SECOND REFORMATIONIn the next century, the Christian church is going to experience a second major reformation. It will be far more powerful than the one we knew in sixteenth-century Europe. For one thing, it will be international, not just regional. It will cross over not only denominational lines, but also over lines of color, class, gender, and age. It will be more important than the last reformation because it will change the way people think and feel about themselves. While the West will participate in this reformation, it will not play a dominant role. The leaders of the coming reformation will be women. They will be from Africa, Asia, Latin America, and Native America. They are being born right now.
One of the guiding theologies of the second reformation will be the Christian theology of Native America. The emergence of that theology is already taking place, although not too many people have noticed. In the centers of Western religious power, the revolution occurring in Native America is far too distant and obscure to be disturbing. It only shows up occasionally for example, at meetings to discuss "Indian ministries," at conferences on racism or spirituality and in books like this one.
The Native People's Christian theology is being overlooked, because it is being born in silence. That silence is so strong, so pervasive, so smothering that even the shout of a human voice cannot escape it. Not alone. But with each day that passes, more and more voices are beginning to take up the cry In little backwater reservation chapels. In urban slums. In Arizona and Alaska and Minnesota and California and Manitoba. In sweat lodges and camp meetings. In Christian homes and Traditional homes. In Cheyenne homes and Mohawk homes. In Tribes all across Native America.
Native People are shouting into the silence of Western colonialism. They are shouting their names. They are saying that they are still the Tribe of the Human Beings. The Memory is coming back and with it the voice of a whole nation. Against that kind of power, no silence will long endure.
The midwife to the Native Reformation is the Old Testament of Native America. It is going to give birth to a cry of freedom. Old divisions between the People will be healed. The Traditional and the Christian People will once again become whole. The spiritual center of the Tribe will be regained and the People will unite as a family once more. With their combined strength they will begin to reclaim their rightful Tradition. it will not be "old." It will not be "new." It will be alive—right here and right now.
In the next century, the Old Testament of Native America is going to be fulfilled.
Reprinted in Native and Christian (James Treat, ed. Routledge, 1996.