FREEDOM, LAW, AND PROPHECY: A Brief History of Native American Religious Resistance

Abstract

In August 1978, the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA) was passed by Congress as a guarantee of constitutional protection of First Amendment rights for Native Americans. This act was passed as an attempt to redress past wrongs by the federal government or its agents. That history of legal suppression was due to "the lack of a clear, comprehensive and consistent Federal policy [which] has often resulted in the abridgement ofreligious freedom for traditional American Indians." The summary text of this act' states: Henceforth it shall be the policy of the United States to protect and preserve for American Indians their inherent right of freedom to believe, express, and exercise the traditional religions of the American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, and Native Hawaiians, including but not limited to access to sacred sites, use and possession of sacred objects and freedom to worship through ceremonials and traditional rites. It is perhaps hard for those unfamiliar with the history of Native American religious oppression to realize that in our own lifetimes it continues to be difficult or impossible for Native Americans to freely practice their religions. The suppression of those practices has been pervasive to such a degree that AIRFA has proven to be insufficient to grant the freedom that many Native Americans feel is necessary for the complete affirmation of their respective religious identities. What is the background that necessitated AIRFA and what directions have issues of religious affirmation taken since this act became law? Perhaps the most suppressive laws regarding religious freedom were those promulgated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs for the Indian Courts, known as the Indian Religious Crimes Code. These laws were first developed in 1883 by Secretary of the Interior Henry Teller as a means to prohibit Native American ceremonial activity under pain of imprisonment. Teller's general guidelines to all Indian agents ordered them to discontinue dances and feasts as well as instructing them to take steps with regard to all medicine. men, "who are always found in the anti-progressive party . . to compel these impostors to abandon this deception and discontinue their practices, which are not only without benefit to them but positively injurious to them."2 Religious offenses on the reservations were later codified by the CommisLee Irwin is an Associate Professor of Religious Studies at the College of Charleston in South Carolina.