ANWR, Oil Development and Indigenous People

I don't know why, but I am still constantly amazed at how short sighted, narrow minded, selfish and ethnocentric (or perhaps just uninformed) some people are. For instance, I listened to a long diatribe yesterday from media propagandist Glenn Beck concerning the renewed pressure to drill in the Alaska National Wildlife Reserve. His basic and somewhat cartoonish thesis was,

"Screw the caribou and polar bears- let's start drilling now."

The thing is- there are several things, including the PEOPLE that live near these areas, that do not seem to be a part of public debate or consciousness on this topic at all. I believe that by any standard of spirituality or ethics this is WRONG- especially if one wears the name Christian. Christ instructed us to "love our neighbors as ourselves". Considering that, consider this:

Summary:

ANWR and Indigenous People While oil development in ANWR would provide valuable revenue for some Native Americans, such as the Inupiat, it would have potentially disastrous impacts on other Native Americans, in particular the members of the Gwich'in Nation who live near ANWR. As they have for thousands of years, the Gwich'in depend on the Porcupine caribou herd for food, clothing, and tools. The caribou are central to their spiritual life. Oil development in the 1002 area of ANWR, the calving grounds of the Porcupine herd, would likely reduce the size of the herd and alter its annual migration patterns. This would, in turn, threaten the very survival of the Gwich'in culture.
Please pray that our neighbors and Native brothers will not be forgotten and run over in the name of "progress". May God's hand be upon them and protect and keep them and may "our people" be true and just representatives of our Lord in our dealings with them.

Indigenous People

The Gwich'in of northern Canada and Alaska have lived in their Arctic homeland
since the last ice age. The Gwich'in are caribou people. There is direct archaeological
evidence that the Gwich'in have depended upon the Porcupine Caribou Herd for at
least 12,000 years. They still depend upon the caribou for their subsistence needs as
well as their cultural survival. They are firmly opposed to oil exploration or
development in the herd's calving grounds on the coastal plain of the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge. The Gwich'in have fought for permanent protection of the calving
grounds for more than a decade.
The calving grounds are a sacred place for the Gwich'in
"The calving grounds are on lands in Alaska, but it is our children who will
be affected by what happens there."
- Liz Hansen, Gwich'in elder from Old Crow, Yukon
"If the oil companies go into the calving grounds, it would be like drilling in
a hospital nursery. That's how we feel about it. We will do everything that
we can, everything in our power to prevent that, because it means our life."
- Norma Kassi, Gwich'in spokeswoman from Old Crow
"Our right to continue to live our traditions and to depend on the caribou
like we do is our constitutional right as Americans, it is our inherent right
as indigenous people, and our essential human right to our own means of
subsistence."
- Faith Gimmell, Gwich'in spokeswoman from Arctic Village, Alaska.

The Porcupine Caribou Herd

The 130,000-member Porcupine Caribou Herd has used the coastal plain of the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as its core calving area for tens of thousands of
years. Each year the female caribou travel to the coastal plan to give birth. 40,000
calves are born each year during a two-week period at the beginning of June. A
healthy calf-survival rate is critical to the continued survival of the herd. Biologists
say that the coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge is a "critical habitat:"


The coastal plain contains the nutritious plants that the caribou need after a
long winter during the vulnerable first few weeks of a calf's life, the coastal
plain has fewer predators than do the mountains to the south
on the coastal plain the caribou find areas to get relief from insects -
mosquitoes suck up to a quart of blood a week from a single caribou and
disrupt feeding patterns
Oil Development and Caribou
Caribou biologists tell us that caribou during the calving and post-calving periods do
not become acclimatized to the activity associated with oil development. If oil
development is allowed in the calving grounds, the pregnant females would be
forced to give birth in the mountains to the south where calf survival rates would
likely plummet. Oil wells and pipelines would also restrict caribou migration.
In summary, state-of-the-art technology has not prevented displacement of
calving from even the newer oilfields on the North Slope, and no proven
technology exists that would ensure unrestricted passage through an
oilfield of the large mid-summer aggregations of Porcupine Caribou.
Considering the high degree of uncertainty regarding mitigation of oilfield
impacts on caribou, ensuring the integrity of the calving grounds and early
summer range of the Porcupine Caribou Herd is a compelling reason for
applying the most precautionary management to the Arctic Refuge coastal
plain. The Porcupine Herd is an international resource too important to
risk.
- excerpt from a letter from 13 caribou biologists from Alaska and Canada
"America's Serengeti"
The wildlife spectacle of the Arctic Refuge is much more than caribou. Polar bears,
grizzlies, wolverines, musk oxen and wolves are just a few of the 200 animal species
that use the coastal plain. It is also nesting and staging habitat for millions of
migratory birds. Some 125 bird species migrate to the coastal plain from four
continents, every province in Canada and every state in the US. In the offshore
waters, endangered bowhead whales, belugas and three species of seal rear their
young.
Moreover, the Arctic Refuge's coastal plain is a rare example of an
ecosystem where ecological and cultural processes continue to interact
much as they have for thousands of years . . . Five decades of biological
study and scientific research have confirmed that the coastal plain of the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge forms a vital component of the biological
diversity of the Refuge and merits the same kind of permanent safeguards
and precautionary management as the rest of this original conservation
unit . . .
- excerpt from a letter from an international group of more than 240
scientists
What the oil companies don't say
development means hundreds of miles of roads and pipelines and dozens of oil
fields
caribou, musk oxen, polar bears, migratory birds and other wildlife would be
harmed by oil development
there would be chronic oil and chemical spills (there are an average of more
than 400 spills per year in the Alaskan Arctic oil fields already under
development)
oil development in the Refuge would accelerate the negative impacts of climate
change
95% of Alaska's Arctic coastal plain is already open for oil development
Geological Survey scientists predict less than a 6-month supply of oil for the US
increasing the fuel efficiency of cars and light trucks by 2-3 mpg would save
more oil than could ever be found under the calving grounds
oil development would destroy the coastal plains' wilderness value forever
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, Here is a reply I got, I want to share it and my response to it mostly to clarify my meanings and their source of inspiration:

Subject: RE: ANWR, Oil Development and Indigenous People
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008

Scott,

http://www.cfif.org/htdocs/freedomline/current/in_our_opinion/caribou_con_in_search_of_anwr_truth.htm

http://www.justaverageamerican.com/the-truth-about-anwr/

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06142008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/a_fine_place_to_drill_115429.htm

This in about 2 minutes of research. I’m sure you’ve spent much more time than that on this topic. I’m also sure you could provide hundreds of links to blogs denouncing domestic oil exploration as: unethical, greedy, heartless, un-Christian, and more…

If there is a grain of truth to the first link above, which there appears to be, then should this “tribe” be renamed as hypocrites? Before you pray Scott…maybe you should remember that we are not tribes within a tribe. We are Americans. If there is a tribe, that should be the only one. If some of the articles above are correct, most of the Gwich’in tribe would be Canadien.

I had a very long reply typed out Scott…I deleted it all. For one reason: “I believe that by any standard of spirituality or ethics this is WRONG- especially if one wears the name Christian” What gives Scott Starr the right to judge others? Why is it un-Christian to have a belief that is opposite of yours?

Gotta go

My Reply:

Subject: RE: ANWR, Oil Development and Indigenous People
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008

Before I look at all the links- the quote, including a releveant part you excluded, you supplied was "...including the PEOPLE that live near these areas, that do not seem to be a part of public debate or consciousness on this topic at all. I believe that by any standard of spirituality or ethics this is WRONG- especially if one wears the name Christian."

The meaning was that the exclusion of the fact that there are people that live there who will pay the price for the equlibrium of their area being upset from the public consciousness and debate on the topic, or excluding elements of the issue- especially when it is done willfully and not out of ignorance is wrongful.

I did not condemn or judge anyone including Mr. Beck, who NEVER mentioned the fact that there are ANY people up there who are part of the issue. I made a moral statement. What is different about saying something like that from saying, "Homosexuality and same sex marriage are wrong"?

I don't need a "right to judge" on this- because I am not judging- I made a statement, from discernment, about morality and/or ethical standards that is not only biblical but nearly universal- at least among the sections of humanity that have any conscience remaining. I see it as no more judgmental than saying people should not abuse their children or use drugs. I believe that people should not abuse their children or use drugs- some people evidently believe that these things are ok... so am I really judging somebody for believing something opposite of what I believe? I think not. If one cannot make a statement about principles or practices that they discern as wrong being wrong- then there's a lot of people in politics and in the news commentary business and that have opinions that are in deep trouble- And we'd better strike the word hypocrites from our discourse and vocabulary- because its use means one is judging- and in fact may be applying to others a standard that is not being applied to themselves- which is ironically and maybe paradoxically (especially paradoxically or self contradictory the way you used it) what the word means .

The only other thing in your reply that is a concern to me is this; We are Americans. If there is a tribe, that should be the only one. If some of the articles above are correct, most of the Gwich’in tribe would be Canadien."

I am not sure what you are implying- but it seems that you're saying Americans are the only people worth our consideration on moral or ethical questions like this? Since they are Canadians- should we disregard them along with the caribou and the bears? Well, if there is a tribe- Human should be that tribe. That's biblical and I would certainly challenge you to come up with any of Christ's teachings that would dispute that- considering he taught us to love our neighbors and enemies as well.

I love ya man, just be careful about this kind of approach to things- this kind of attitude, as I have addressed on other topics in the past, is one reason that much of the rest of the world has much distaste for Americans- and "We" end up paying for that in blood and treasure as well as spiritually. God does not show favoritism- is not pro- American and not a nationalist or he also cares about Canadians and Indians, his creation, etc.

The scriptures are emphatic and replete with teaching that presents God as not judging or treating man, any man, with respect of persons. In other words, God is just and equitable in his dealings with man- Romans 2 speaks directly to your concerns about judging- but is also emphatic about applying standards universally. Maybe that's a problem for us both- for you with regards to American nationalism and me with regards to Indigenous people. But, I have no illusions that Indians are above reproach- all I have done is insist that the fact that they are there and they should be considered- and that their rights should be respected. I also have not said that ANWR should not be drilled- but that several things should be considered carefully and looked as part of the equation before acting and if and when the drilling is done. At least in my own view thats a perfectly sound position. Anyhow, look at Romans 2 and pay special attention to verse 11:

1You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? 4Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance? 5But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. 6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."^[a] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11For God does not show favoritism.

12All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.

Acts 10:34-35
34 Then Peter began to speak: "I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism 35 but accepts men from every nation who fear him and do what is right.

Collossians 3:25

25 Anyone who does wrong will be repaid for his wrong, and there is no favoritism.

1st Peter 1:13-25

Be Holy

13Therefore, prepare your minds for action; be self-controlled; set your hope fully on the grace to be given you when Jesus Christ is revealed. 14As obedient children, do not conform to the evil desires you had when you lived in ignorance. 15But just as he who called you is holy, so be holy in all you do; 16for it is written: "Be holy, because I am holy."^[a] 17Since you call on a Father who judges each man's work impartially, live your lives as strangers here in reverent fear. 18For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, 19but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. 20He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake. 21Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God.
22Now that you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth so that you have sincere love for your brothers, love one another deeply, from the heart.^[b] 23For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God. 24For,
"All men are like grass,
and all their glory is like the flowers of the field;
the grass withers and the flowers fall,
25but the word of the Lord stands forever."^[c] And this is the word that was preached to you.
Footnotes:

1. 1 Peter 1:16 Lev. 11:44,45; 19:2; 20:7
2. 1 Peter 1:22 Some early manuscripts from a pure heart
3. 1 Peter 1:25 Isaiah 40:6-8

Love ya man.

Subject: RE: ANWR, Oil Development and Indigenous People
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 19:47:25 -0500

You’re right, I did a very poor job of expressing myself. Here’s the deal Scott…over the years you have championed the plight of Native Americans. In and of itself, this is fine…all people are worthy of a Champion. But, a few points from my perspective…

1) When do ‘Native Americans’ become plain old Americans? Why does there need to be a distinction? Why is their plight sadder than that of poor black Americans shooting each other in the ‘hoods? Or poor white Americans in the hills of Kentucky or West Virginia? Or red-skinned ‘Native’ Americans living in poverty due to alcohol abuse? This list is almost endless, even when only considering needy Americans. You make my point in a way, only you put it in a better perspective. We are of the HUMAN race. But as a people we are Americans. I made the statement in regards to Canadian Indians because a large part of that particular tribe lives in Canada and would be unaffected by ANWR.

2) Well….forget number 2. The truth is, I just don’t have the energy for this type of debate right now Scott.

Let me instead try to summarize my feelings. I don’t understand what is sacred about a patch of ground in Northern Alaska. I don’t understand why it is important to protect a very small number of peoples’ ability to hunt caribou. It is after all 2008…there are several ways to put dinner on the table. I don’t understand why we cannot, as a people (remember, American people), be as self-reliant as possible in regards to our own energy needs. Why should we not look for any way possible to reduce oil purchases from countries that view us as heretics and the enemy?

I agree with many of your perspectives Scott. But evaluate your own post below. Why are billions of barrels of oil denied to OTHER Americans to protect this tribe? And for that matter, protect them from what? Do the research and see how many times this same tribe leased their own land for oil exploration. Or tried to and failed. They just don’t seem to be victims here. Their plight looks more to be sour grapes at their own poor political and financial decisions in the past.

In regards to my statement on judging others and hypocrisy…does this shed a better light on why I would be a tad perturbed? Why are we calling into account a Christian’s standard of morals or ethics in regards to this issue??? There are Christians dying for the cause of Jesus every day. We should be championing those suffering in the Sudan. These are the issues of our world. I know I will sound callous, but I don’t care about the caribou. Nor do I care if German Americans can get German beer. Or if Japanese Americans have trouble finding good sushi. Whimsical, but you get my point. The world around us changes. That happens in every country, to every native tribe.

Ok, off to supper.

Love you too

My reply:

These are good questions. One thing I have learned to do is view these kinds of things- especially among friends- not as debates but rather as discussions or dialogs. That is difficult I know even among the best of friends- especially when you factor in people's passion for the subjects. But, its doable. If you can think of it that way it doesn't seem so urgent to go back and forth and takes a lot less energy.

I don't wanna write something long here- but do want to make a few comments.

First I read all the links you sent. The first one is easily the most well written and objective. I wouldn't say its perfectly objective or flawless- but the case is well presented.

There are a few things you stated that you don't understand that I can give some insight into- maybe even without being long winded- like that part about sacred. I won't go into the religious aspects as of yet. But let me comment about the question " When do ‘Native Americans’ become plain old Americans?"

What you have to grasp first is that despite the matter of national citizenship their is still a strong cultural distinction betweeen the traditional views of tribes (at least in the ideal expression of culture) and mainstream American culture. In many ways these differences are irreconciliable.
It is much the same way between Christian culture and the mainstream collectivist culture. For Christian culture to be absorbed into mainstream culture would mean the death of Christianity- at least authentic Christianity- which as I have admonished is actually dangerously near. So, at the bottom, certain aspects of Native culture cannot be absorbed without the all out cultural death of Native identity. I am not sure how nuanced your thinking on this is- but the call for becoming a plain old American is in many ways a call for the complete assimilation of one culture into another. To answer your question of when this will happen- I will say not within our lifetimes our within the next few generations.
If you ask why there needs to be a persistent, separate Native identity at all- I would answer because Indian culture (again in its ideal form) is not compartmentalized, separating the spiritual life from the corporate community life as mainstream American life mostly is. Indian culture (ideally) is holistic and spiritual and its values inseparable from its citizenship in the U.S. or otherwise. Indians, or Idigenous North American Peoples, are in a unique position where they are at once full American citizens and yet are members of two distinct cultures that overlap somewhat in areas and not at all in others- again much the same as Christian culture (is supposed to be- ideally).

To wrap this up I will give an example from a recent "discussion". The quotations were put around the word discussion because the person I was "discussing" with became quite upset about my refusal to give in to his reasoning and considered it an argument when I did not consider it one because I was not nearly so emotionally charged up as he was and was merely stating my point of view. He told me I was a racist in fact- which after he calmed down and actually listened he admitted was wrong.

He asked me whether I would rather be viewed as a man or as an Indian man. I explained that this was a fallacious question- and not so much a question as a gambit or mechanism by which he was leading me to a syllogism or logical trap. He vehemently insisted that I MUST answer the question as man or Indian man. So, with the qualification that this was a fallacious question I answered indian man. That was when I became a racist in his view. But, by much persistence and patience I explained as I did above that such distinctions cannot and should not be made. To demonstrate, I asked him if he'd rather be considered as just a man or as a Christian man. After he calmed down enough- he admitted that he understood what I was saying and understood that you can't just force this false dichotomy or false separation on people. I am not just a man, just an American or just a Cherokee or just a Christian or child of God- I am simultaneously all of these and all of these bring a certain set of propisitions and considerations to the table- and none of these can be separated out without dehumanizing me and/or robbing me of part of my identity. Some would call this take on things multiculturalism and call it a curse. To that I would say that giving something a politically charged label and dubbing it as a negative does not by any means close the subject or the debate- its an oversimplification which is the tool of all propagandists.

That's already more than I intended to say. But, to conclude for now, let me say that acknowledging the rights or the problems that would be caused for some people in the vicinity of ANWR by the drilling enterprises is not showing favoritism for the few over the many. Niether does it show inequality. Equality and assimilation are not the same thing. Lastly, if you separate the caribou and other wildlife in the equation out and isolate them like you suggest it is much easier not to care about them I admit. But, as stated in my initial message you cannot really do that- they are part of an ecosystem and part and parcel to the human equation. If you say you don't care about them- you are really saying you don't care about the people or the big picture either. I would not saddle you with that accusation, because i know you better than that- but would admonish you to choose words carefully.

One more thing, concerning your thoughts about the importance of missionary work- consider this article i found about missionary work among the Gwich'iin.

source: http://www.restoringeden.org/campaigns/ANWR/threereasonsprotectANWR

Three reasons why all Christians should support protecting the Arctic Refuge

By Peter Illyn, March 15, 2005

As a minister in an evangelical Christian stewardship ministry, I believe the current push to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to industrial oil drilling is an enormous mistake.

The problem is not that the benefits would be so small – an estimated six-month supply of oil. The bigger issue is our responsibility before God to steward a unique natural and national treasure and our ability to exercise some self- control. The Refuge must be protected for three sets of reasons: biological, moral and symbolic.

The Arctic Refuge is a place of biological wonder. All throughout the Alaska and Canada boreal forest, during the same week in the spring, scattered groups of caribou hear the identical inner voice and know that "it is the time." The pregnant mothers stop eating, silently raise their heads toward the north, and with a slow, steady walk embark on an arduous journey. During their six-week pilgrimage to the herd's birthing grounds on the Refuge, the caribou initially are in groups of five, then ten, then hundreds, until they reach hundreds of thousands.

The caribou, dutiful to some unseen force, are drawn like iron shavings to a magnet. They struggle through deep snow over steep mountain glaciers and then swim across swollen rivers of ice. Many die, yet the caribou keep walking--steadfast, faithful, obedient to the spark of God within them. Two months later, when the caribou finally reach the refuge, they collectively give birth to their calves. Within a week the Refuge is full of moon-eyed calves, running and pronging in the meadow, overcome with a bliss rooted in the simple joy of life.

In all this, I cannot help but see the hand of God, the hand of a Creator who calls all creation to fruitfulness and then gives each species some wonderful form of divine providence to make that fruitfulness possible. Migration is one of nature's ways to be obedient to the wisdom of God. Be it a monarch butterfly's paper-thin wings struggling for 3,000 miles to reach a grove of trees in Mexico or the songbirds at my backyard feeder, migration is a species' sacred expression of honoring God's goodness, wisdom and providence.

If we saw the earth from God's perspective--in both time and scope-- we would see a constant motion of seasons, colors, tides, swirling clouds and flowing rivers. We would see migrations: salmon and whales, terns and geese, butterflies and hummingbirds, and caribou.

The wild instinct to migrate is evidence that God loves all of creation--not just humanity. Migrations should make us humble and small in spirit. Protecting the migrations of our fellow creatures is a test of our stewardship, our faithfulness, our willingness to think long-term and to be other-minded. It is a test of who and what we serve--for it was Jesus who stated, "You cannot serve both God and Money."

Drilling for oil in the Arctic Refuge is at heart a moral question. Are we willing to risk unraveling the caribou migration--the last great mammal migration left on the earth? Is this really our best thinking? Is it wise, faithful and prudent? Is it good stewardship? Or is it proof that we as a nation have become so short-sighted, mean-spirited, and self-centered that we no longer have boundaries that we are unwilling to cross; that nothing is off limits anymore?

The oil industry promises that this time there will be little environmental damage, but there is no evidence to back their claim. Instead, what you see in other fields in Alaska is ongoing pollution, including an oil spill virtually every day. If we allow drilling in the Refuge, there will be no going back.

Judeo-Christian theology defines holy as something set aside either by God for a divine purpose, or by humans, for service to God. It is time to consider the Arctic Refuge as a holy place as the Gwich'in people of the Arctic long have. They call the Refuge Iizhik Gwats'an Gwandaii Goodlit, or the Sacred Place Where Life Begins. The caribou's birthing grounds are such a consecrated place that it is taboo for a Gwich'in to ever set foot there. For thousands of years, the Gwich'in people have seen themselves as stewards of the caribou, dependent upon them for food, clothing, tools and shelter. Theirs is still a culture where prosperity is measured by ways other than money and possessions.

The general public may see the Gwich'in struggle to protect the Refuge as a simple human rights concern--and it is that. But there's more to the story. Over 100 years ago, Hudson Stuck, a mountain- climbing missionary on a dogsled journey in Alaska, shared his faith with the Gwich'in people. They converted to Christianity―and their faith remains vibrant and strong today. Last year I had the privilege of speaking at numerous evangelical Christian colleges with the Rev. Trimble Gilbert, an Anglican priest, customary chief and tribal elder of the Gwich'in people. At age 70, he talks about his years growing-up, remembering how he would awaken in his tent to mornings as cold as 70 below zero and snowshoe to the prayer tent, where the whole clan would gather for daily prayers before heading out to hunt and fish.

Rev. Trimble had a simple message for the college-aged Christians: "Remember that we Gwich'in are your family in Christ." The Gwich'in are asking the United States, as a nation founded on Christian values, not to desecrate their sacred lands. They are also asking the Christian church to stand with them, to raise its voice, to "speak out for those who cannot speak for themselves" (Proverbs 31:8) as advocates for their people and for the caribou they depend upon.

Last, whether we drill for oil in the Refuge will indicate symbolically who we are and what we value as a nation. If we allow the desecration of this place--set aside by God and held sacred by the native people--just to make a quick profit, then we must face our failed faithfulness as stewards of God's creation. Every addict believes that the painless solution to his or her craving is to increase the supply of their obsession, though that may wreak great devastation on his family. In our automobile-dependent culture, have we, like the drug addict, lost such self-control that we are willing to harm a place of biological wonder and our caribou-dependent brothers and sisters in the faith who live there?

Christians in many states are struggling with debates over creationism-versus-evolution in the public schools. Following the 2004 election our new Congress is more reactive to conservative Christian values than ever before, yet ironically the Refuge is now under its greatest attack.

Where is the rest of the church's voice on issues of stewardship and human justice? Our silence is deafening. If we drill in the Arctic Refuge, this place of God’s wonder, then we are truly trading the sacred for the propane (pun sadly intended).

But... what about the dinosaurs?

video- Walking In Your Footsteps by The Police

I am a Christian. I am a blogger. I am someone who grapples with life's larger questions on a moment to moment basis. In cruising around the Internet and monitoring the ongoing debate between Christians of differing theological interpretations and Christians and scientists and/or Christians and atheists there is one persistent question that just keeps popping up. How old is the earth? some Christian literalists seem to believe that if they don't do the math just a certain way and give in to the notion that the earth is only about 4-6 thousand years old that they are somehow being heretical... disrespecting God and rejecting his Holy Word, the Bible.

Well, I tell you right now that I am a Christian who believes the Bible and I find the notion that the earth is less than ten thousand years old... well... not very believable. To be fair, I don't necessarily believe that the earth as we know it is hundreds of millions of years old either.

As for the Christian "literalists", the literalism seems to be one of convenience... after all the Bible also says to love your enemies and those whom may not agree with you. I know very few Christians who pay much attention to that passage- let alone do intellectual gymnastics to realize and/or internalize it in their everyday lives. "Conservative" and liberal Christians do not even speak civilly to one another for the most part let alone to unbelievers and the lost. I digress.

I don't think that the account of origins as it is given in Genesis is meant to be an encyclopedia like telling of exactly what, when and how things began. Neither is it a totally figurative allegory. The plain fact of the matter is that it only tells us about God as Creator and the original purposes and intentions for mankind. It also tells about the entry of evil into the world and sets the stage for the battle of evermore between the Spirit of Truth and the Father of Lies.
You can take those items to the bank. As far as the exact chronology or timeline... who knows?
Anyone that claims they do know is mightily conceited. The bible does NOT give us that information.

Science gives us a spotty, incomplete and often biased opinion on these matters as well. The academic system works a lot like the media, organized religion or any other institution... anomalous evidence and/or dissenting opinion is squelched as much as possible in the interests of the corporate survival of the institution. Objectivity and truth often take a back seat to the god of money and agenda.

Let me just say this by way of offering my own thoughts on how old the earth might be. I have been to a place where on a raggedy, rocky knoll in Utah, near the Dinosaur National Monument there is a giant fossilized squid. My rational mind tells me that this as well as the rest of the fossil record and all the fossil fuels under the ground did not form in 6,000 years or less. In fact, I find such an idea absurd. I could be wrong of course. Yet, I find this idea almost as absurd as the idea that all the harmony, complexity, order, life and intelligence in the cosmos just happened by sheer mathematical chance and accident... but not quite. If one then insists that life and such came from God- this of course leads to the question of where God came from if there be such a thing. Once again, no man can really answer questions like that. I suppose theorizing on it is a worthy enough enterprise.

But, a lot of people... indigenous people Like Native Americans and/or Christians un-indoctrinated or unaffected by the western mindset and the desire to categorize, master and explain everything surrender questions and desires concerning exactly when, where and why. Instead they worry themselves with another question... perhaps the only one that really matters after all...HOW or WHAT is the right way to live... or what is one's proper relationship to all things? I stand with those who grapple mostly with that question. Now, as a Christian let me say this... those answers can be found in Christ and I believe nowhere else. That is the only reason I am still a Christian. Believe me I know what a monumental task it is to try and convince someone of this if they do not first accept the Bible as a reliable source of information. The truth is no person can ever talk somebody into something they do not want to be true. Real understanding of these matters comes by spiritual means... in fact they are considered as a gift.
Again... if one does not allow for spiritual reality, then there is no sense trying to speak spiritual language to one who does not or will not hear it.

Well... I started writing this with but one question to pose and then got into the stream of consciousness. Anyway.... how old do you think the earth is? Maybe the better question is... does it really matter to how you will live your life?

My Calling to Preach Christ to American Indians

I recently attended the World Missions Workshop at Oklahoma Christian University as I mentioned in the previous post. There I met some good folks and heard many inspiring things. I have exchanged e-mail with a few of the presenters that spoke at the conference now. I expressed my desire to do missions work and plant Churches of Christ among Native American Indians to someone I met there who in turn asked me about my personal history, my family heritage and my desire to reach Indians for Christ. Here is the response I wrote to him, I want to share it with the world:

Well, This is a long story, but I will tell it and tell it as concisely as possible so that you'll understand my motivations concerning Indians. I am from the suburbs of Oklahoma City, Del City to be specific. I grew up there and now live right next door in Midwest City. I am a life long member of the Del City Church of Christ. I did spend about 12 years in Texas, 3 in Waco and then 9 in Dallas.

I graduated High School way back in 1982 in Del City. I then spent two years at Oklahoma Christian and then moved on to Oklahoma State and OU. My field of study was in Media, Journalism and Radio Television and Film.
I never did get a four year degree. I ended up getting a two year technical degree at Texas State Technical College in Waco. I have many unused college credits and am working on getting into a degree completion program asap. From there I want to get further education in theology and ministry. I had run out of time and money in about 1987 and had entered the work force. In 1987 I lost my support system. My mother and father divorced in 1987 after 29 years of marriage and my maternal grandparents which had lived nearby and always been supportive fell into very poor health and died. All this had a devastating effect on me.

I will return to that, but first let me lay a little background. Before that turn of events my relationship to the lord had been touch and go for quite a while. In high school I was a football player and typical jock. I had discovered beer drinking and women. I carried this affliction with me to OC and with me everywhere for years.
One reason this happened was because I had never been comfortable with the conception of God that I had been raised on.

For starters, I am half Cherokee. Thus, the official version of American history I was presented with at school and even church did not match the political, cultural history of the American Indian as I knew it as a tribal member. At school I was told all about the glory of the U.S. and manifest destiny. At church I was told how God adored the US and had blessed its Christian forefathers and "gifted" them with this land. As a Cherokee I was taught about the other side of the story...The Trail of Tears and the treaty breaking mendacity and graft of these allegedly Christian forefathers. When I visited my Cherokee kin folks I saw the poverty, bitterness, heartbreak and ongoing oppression. It was very difficult for me to understand how God could allegedly condone this situation. I myself harbored confusion, bitterness and rebellion over this. I had also developed a taste for alcohol to fill in the void, so when life got tougher and more disappointing... I drank more. Substance eventually became a real problem.

As I was saying, the Christian God I had been raised on and learned about in school did not hold all that much attraction for me. As I am sure you know, the Church of Christ has in the past been known for its legalism, ultra conservatism and intolerance. In Del City where I grew up there was at the time one the largest Southern Baptist Churches in the country. If you'll remember, the early eighties saw the rise of the Christian Right and the "reconstructionists" as a political movement with the Southern Baptists leading the charge. As a Cherokee, this reminded me a little bit too much of the politics and policies that led to the near genocide of my Native ancestors. Its also worth mentioning that there is a large Air Force base nearby Del City. As you know, the rise of the "reconstructionist" movement in the Church and American politics and the pro-military-industrial- complex mindset of the Christian-right political movement has gone hand in hand for quite some time now. Add to all that the constant tension between the Church of Christ I attended and the local Southern Baptist crowd and it was a recipe that I was simply not interested in imbibing in. Nowadays, in the toxic political environment that has grown out of all this, when I discuss these matters I am typically labeled as a liberal. I find this ridiculous. The truth is that I am so gospel oriented and biblically orthodox and conservative that people simply think I am liberal because I dare to challenge some of the notions of the so called "Conservatives" that have held sway for 25 plus years now. Enough about that. Simply put, the labels don't fit.

It was my Cherokee grandfather that eventually pointed me back to Christ- believe it or not. I had always known him as a full blooded, traditional minded Indian. He was also an alcoholic that was abusive to his family and my father in the past. He had also been a "Medicine Man" since the 1940's. Before, he would never set foot in a "White man's Church".

By 1989 my life was out of control and I was exceedingly unhappy. I was estranged from God because of the dynamics and events I wrote about above. Yet, my conscience kept pointing me back to God and telling me I was missing something about Christ and the Church. Then the paranormal activity began. For the sake of brevity I won't go into all that- but let's just say some things started happening around me that I did not understand. I eventually learned that it wasn't just going on around me, but also other members of my family. It wasn't my imagination. I finally decided to go and talk to my Cherokee grandfather that I had not seen in five years. I knew that he was a Medicine Man and supposedly a spiritual leader that was supposed to know about all this paranormal stuff. I told him stories and poured my heart out to him...looking for answers...looking perhaps for the back door to Christianity and the doorway to Native spirituality. When I was done talking I just looked him in the eye with one question burning on the tip of my tongue.

"What do you know about the spirit world?" was that question.

Before I even asked, he reached into a drawer beside him and pulled out a worn out copy of the Bible. He held it up and said, "The answer to every question and concern you have is in this book."

That is NOT what I expected to hear. So began my journey back to Christ and my education in spiritual warfare. Reaching my present state of mind, spiritual understanding and relationship with the Triune God has been a long process fraught with many trials and personal weaknesses, but by now, I can keep it to myself no more.

My grandfather went on to tell me how this transformation had come about in him. Due to the years of hard drinking he had had an aneurysm in his esophagus. When it bursted, he had died.. or had one of those near death type experiences. He had been "dead" for several minutes. When he recovered and was aware after a time he asked to see my dad and his half brother, my uncle. Both of them have their own stories and had become Christians many years before. Grandfather told his sons that he wanted to hear more about this Jesus because he had just met him. He said Jesus had told him that he was very sorry about the plight of the Cherokee and all the other Native races... that this had NOT been the will of the Father. He went on to tell him about how Indian people had always known the Father and been loved by him but that now they must "Come through me" to the father.
Grandfather was basically given the same message as in John 14:6-7

"I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7 If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him."

Grandfather was further told to return to his life and begin to teach other Indians about Him. He was given some tasks to perform and told to instruct his people that they did not have to stop being Indians to follow him and to pray in the name of Christ from now on. I know this is a bit of a fantastic story, but, I have to acknowledge the profound transformation in my grandfather and the results it produced.

And so it began. When my grandfather began to carry out what he had been told, so began the spiritual warfare. This explained the "paranormal" activity that had been going on. Simply put, the forces of darkness seen and unseen did not want this change to occur. As I now understand it, the reasons are clear for this dynamic. When everyday, pew sitting, material thinking Christians begin to see the world again through spiritual eyes like the typical Indian does... like Paul talks about in Ephesians chapter 6, in the context of Christian discipleship, they'll be stomping all over the works of darkness and reaching the unreached like never before. The forces of darkness of course do NOT want this to happen. Unfortunately, the Church of Christ does not have much of a body of teaching about spiritual warfare. It should. My desire to evangelize Indians is wound up in these things and this is why I have the motivation, love and concern to reach out to them.

I find the message of incarnational ministry and its implications very attractive.

I know how far fetched some of this sounds. I have never been entirely comfortable sharing these things in a Church of Christ context because of the heritage of legalism in that group. After all, where I was raised we were so "conservative" it was essentially taught that even the Southern Baptists were Hellbound for their doctrinal liberalism. Can you imagine the amount of prayer and study I have had to engage in to reconcile all these things without falling into syncretism or extra biblical doctrine? By now I have my own body of experiences and insights on spiritual reality and the nature of God and Christ. I have to be able to share these things and talk about them comfortably and have mentors to carry out the calling I have.

I would be glad to hear your thoughts and/or advice.

U.N. Declares Rights for Native Peoples

Native Leaders Half-Heartedly Embrace ‘Historic’ Declaration
By Diego Cevallos

MEXICO CITY, Sep 14 (IPS) - While governments and the representatives of international agencies celebrated the approval of the Universal Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples after more than two decades of negotiations, some native leaders and experts in Latin America were less enthusiastic.

In their criticism of the document, indigenous leaders Manuel Castro of Ecuador and Luis Andrade of Colombia, as well as the former director of the Inter-American Indigenous Institute, José del Val, pointed out to IPS that it is non-binding, and that parts of it were negotiated with little participation by the representatives of its presumptive beneficiaries.

A slightly different stance was taken by the spokesman for the Rigoberto Menchú Foundation, Elmer Erazo, who said the Declaration could be considered a stride forward "to the extent that indigenous people make use of it."

But, he told IPS, "it's nothing to jump up and down about."

The Declaration was adopted Thursday by majority vote in the United Nations General Assembly. Only four countries -- the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand -- voted against it, while Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burundi, Colombia, Georgia, Kenya, Nigeria, Russia, Samoa and Ukraine abstained.

The 12-page Declaration states that indigenous peoples have the right "to autonomy or self-government in matters relating to their internal and local affairs".

It also says native peoples have the right to maintain their cultures and to not be displaced from their land, and urges states to indemnify them when their land or resources are used or damaged without their consent.

Bolivian President Evo Morales, who is himself an Aymara Indian, said he was pleased with the approval of the Declaration, and added that "These standards will help ensure that everyone has the same rights and that we will stop being marginalised."

Morales called on his indigenous sisters and brothers to take part in a world summit on Oct. 10-11 to celebrate and analyse the implications and repercussions of the Declaration.

Others, however, see less reason to celebrate.

"Twenty years of debate to produce this document, and we end up with a non-binding declaration that does not force governments to do anything; this is a disgrace," said Castro, spokesman for the influential Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador (CONAIE).

For his part, Andrade, president of the National Indigenous Organisation of Colombia (ONIC), said the new instrument "is like saying yes, but no," since it is non-binding. In his view, many governments signed the document "just for the sake of image."

With respect to the fact that Colombia abstained from voting -- the only Latin American country to do so -- Andrade said "it showed that the administration (of right-wing President Álvaro Uribe) threatens the right of indigenous people and is their enemy."

Del Val, the former director of the Inter-American Indigenous Institute, said the Declaration should be taken "as an ethical and moral reference point for indigenous peoples, but nothing more than that."

"It is a non-binding, very general declaration full of vague terms and tricky wording," said del Val, who is the head of the Mexico Multicultural Nation University Programme (PUMC) at the Autonomous National University of Mexico.

"Many governments signed it as a formality, just to get it out of the way," he said.

Erazo, of the Menchú Foundation, which is headed by Guatemalan indigenous leader and Nobel Peace laureate Rigoberta Menchú, agrees that the Declaration has no teeth.

He recommended, however, seeing it "as a weapon to be used by the people."

According to signatory governments and U.N. authorities, including Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, the Declaration is a triumph for the world’s 270 million aboriginal people. "This marks a historic moment when member states and indigenous peoples reconciled with their painful histories," said Ban.

But CONAIE’s Castro saw such reactions as overblown. "In our view, there is no significant gain, if we also take into account that we were not well-represented in the negotiations and that very few indigenous people are even aware of the existence of this document."

"There are a number of laws and agreements that talk about our rights; this is just one more that is on its way to becoming dead letter," he said.

Native leaders from the region, some of whom were not widely accepted or considered highly representative, took part in the negotiations at different points.

"We participated in some debates, but we have to say truthfully that the level of representation of most indigenous peoples was extremely low," said Andrade.

According to government statistics, there are 38.5 million indigenous people in the Americas. However, that figure is seen by many experts as too low.

What there is no discrepancy over is the fact that indigenous people are the most vulnerable social group in the region, suffering the highest levels of poverty, and the most limited access to health care, education, decent housing and an adequate diet.

But in recent years, some indigenous groups in Latin America have become more organised and gained influence and political power, especially in countries like Ecuador and Bolivia.

Indigenous movements played a key role, for example, in toppling presidents Jamil Mahuad, in January 2000 in Ecuador, and Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada, in October 2003 in Bolivia. In addition, Bolivia now has its first-ever indigenous president, who took office in early 2006. (END/2007)

Spirituality As A Way of Life, Not "Religion"

1 Corinthians 2:14-15

14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment.

That means we are supposed to discern of all things- hold to that which is good and true and beautiful and helpful and throw out the rest. On that note... here is useful information:

Native American Religious and Cultural Freedom: an Introductory Essay (2005)
© Michael D. McNally

Full article found HERE.

Excerpt:

B. "Way of Life, not Religion"

In all their diversity, people from different Native nations hasten to point out that their respective languages include no word for “religion”, and maintain an emphatic distinction between ways of life in which economy, politics, medicine, art, agriculture, etc., are ideally integrated into a spiritually-informed whole. As Native communities try to continue their traditions in the context of a modern American society that conceives of these as discrete segments of human thought and activity, it has not been easy for Native communities to accomplish this kind of integration. Nor has it been easy to to persuade others of, for example, the spiritual importance of what could be construed as an economic activity, such as fishing or whaling.

I believe that Christianity is supposed to be a holistic spiritual relationship rather than a religion per se.

Native American / Christian Spiritual Warfare

Linked HERE is a page and program that is running a spiritual warfare boot camp that I am very interested in attending.

The curriculum is as listed below:

An Issue of War-The Nature of Spiritual Dynamics on Earth
Overcoming the Greek Mindset/Greek and Hebrew Biblical Word Search
God’s Order in Our Life-Healing Our Personal Wounds
Spiritual Mapping-God’s Geography
Dominion-Spiritual Implications of Weather/Wind
Water Spirits and the Realm of the Deep
Incarnational Intercession
Kingdom-Bringing Through the Exercise of Righteousness, Justice, Mercy, Prayer and Fasting.
Cherokee History-Woodland Tribal Culture, Tribal Government
Treaties Present and Past
Tribal Casinos-How To Pray Over Tribal Land
Cherokee Prophecies

Needless to say these topics are right in line with some of the experience, knowledge and wisdom that I already have some understanding of. Note that I am not claiming to be anything but exposed to some of these concepts- the dynamics and understanding of the reality that goes with them. These are topics that I have been working towards opening up about every since I began writing about my testimony in the early nineties. This is where I have been subtly coaxing them that know me towards for many moons. These are topics that are ponderous, deep and carry a heavy responsibility and an inherent admonition to caution. Still, I am willing to engage on these things at a certain level with those who have questions or comments. In Indian communities these things are simply not discussed publicly. That is why I inserted the caveat "to a certain level". My willingness to engage on this to ANY degree is dictated by the security of life in Christ as well as the desire to develop right relationship with the right people.

This is a door that I have been reluctant to open for a long time. The time has come.

Traditional [Native American] Indian Medicine and Christian Spiritual Healing

1 Corinthians 2:14-15

14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment.

That means we are supposed to discern of all things- hold to that which is good and true and beautiful and helpful and throw out the rest. On that note... here is useful information:

Traditional [Native American] Indian Medicine
Treatment of Chronic Illness:

Development of an integrated program with conventional medicine and evaluation of effectiveness

By Lewis Mehl-Madrona, M.D., Ph.D.

---

Lewis E. Mehl-Madrona, M.D., Ph.D.

1990 North Kolb Road
Tucson, AZ 85715
Phone: 520-304-6898
Fax: 520-621-3249
Email: mehlmadrona@aol.com

[ Other Pages on Lewis Mehl-Madrona ]

FULL ARTICLE HERE

Summary :

Increasingly, traditional Native American healing practices are being requested by Native Americans and non-Natives alike. A series of meetings among traditional Native American healers and the author resulted in a dialogue between the Native American world view and that of biomedicine. Recommendations arose for how treatment should proceed in the modern world and how best to introduce interested non-Natives to Native American healing practices. An approach was developed for bridging cultures to facilitate the interaction of non-Natives with traditional healers.

One hundred sixteen patients were treated in this manner by the author in conjunction with traditional Native American healers. More than 80% of patients showed significant, persisting benefits of a time-intensive treatment program. A comparison group of patients derived from the author's emergency room patients showed significantly lower rates of improvement. The author suggests that an intensive treatment experience (inspired by Native American practices) over 7-10 days for treating chronic physical illness achieves both health benefits and improved cost utility.

The treatment philosophy underlying this approach and communicated by the traditional healers is best described as general systems theory, or that of dynamic energy systems. Within this theoretical framework, physical illness can be treated by counseling and ceremony, since illness is viewed as simultaneously spiritual, mental, and physical. Because of the interaction and hierarchical embeddedness of these levels, intervention at any one level should affect any other.

Reults excerpts:

2. Healing takes place within the context of a relationship. The healers recognized that the quality of their relationship with the sick person was important in helping that person to find wellness. The better the relationship, the more likely was success. They recognized the relationship as a kind of container or vessel for the baking of the cake. "You wouldn't put cake mix in the oven by just pouring it over the bottom," one said. "You have to put it in something. Some kind of a bowl." The relationship was the bowl in which the cake baked.

3. Acheiving an energy of activation is necessary. While the traditionals believed that healing takes time, they also believed that the time should be intensive. Water doesn't boil until it's very hot, they said. The medical practitioners likened this concept to catalysis and the energy of activation.

In both organic and biological chemistry, an energy of activation is required to initiate a reaction. Once inititated that reaction may proceed irreversibly to completion. Without sufficient energy of activation, the reaction never occurs. A minimal level of energy (usually heat) is needed to transform the internal arrangements of molecules. Traditional healers said that weekly or even daily hour-long sessions with a patient would not be sufficient to inititate healing (change on a physical level or, in the biochemical metaphor, to "rearrange the molecules"). The question of "how many hours over what period of time are necesary to produce change?" is rarely addressed in psychotherapy practice. The weekly visit has become normative. Even in intensive psychotherapy when patients are seen once daily, the question of "what would happen if we 'raised the heat?'" is rarely addressed.

The Native American healers told us that they typically worked with the client until the job was done. They typically treated one client at a time, and some clients traveled great distances to see them. Sometimes they traveled far to see a patient, and needed to put in maximum effort over a short period of time. Partly because of long distances travelled, they would concentrate their work over a number of days with multiple hours being spent each day. When they felt progress had been made, the client would be sent home with instructions to return at a later date for further treatment, and often with specific instructions for tasks to complete during the interval between treatment.

4. Biological systems behave similarly across hierarchical levels. There is isomorphism of principles. The traditional medicine people told us that nature is the same at every level. The same principles that guides the movement of the stars and the sun work within the body. As a group we returned to the biochemical metaphor. The traditional healers quickly agreed that psychotherapeutic or psychophysiological change should behave just like change biochemical systems. We found ourselves discussing reaction kinetics, which asks basic questions about the amount of materials that must be present for a reaction to occur, the amount of energy that is required to start and to maintain a reaction (and sometimes to reverse it), what catalysts are required to facilitate the reaction, what enzymes are necessary, etc. For example, outside the human body considerable heat (thousands of degrees) is necessary to melt iron. Inside the body the process takes place at 37 degrees. Because of catalysts within the body, a minimum level of energy is needed to begin the change process which is then maintained with less energy. They idea emerged for the biomedical practitioners to try an intensive week of 6 contact hours per day to start a change process.

5. The distractions of modern life "inactivate" catalysts for change. Most traditional therapies stress the need for self-contemplation. With adequate time, skills, and emphasis upon self-exploration and discovery much of modern psychophysiological therapy might be unnecessary. The traditionals believed that the modern world complicated and vitiated our ability to heal ourselves by distracting us from our study of ourselves. Television wastes vital hours which can be used for healing. Reading can both enlighten and deaden. (The great novel brings us face to face with the human condition and our own similarities with the protagonists about which we must reflect; popular novels may repeat trite plots with minimum character development.) Newspapers fill the mind with only slightly relevant information. The more tabloid, the more useless. Running to friends, relatives, or movies can fill waking hours with activity as avoidance. The quest to avoid boredom provides the raw material for many advertising campaigns. This quest also avoids self-discovery. Without external distractions, consciousness turns inward for it must direct itself somewhere. Therapy is harder in proportion to the number of competing distractions. Weekly outpatient therapy is particular difficult since the therapist must compete with so many more pleasurable or obsessional distractions to the process of self-discovery. Our traditionals believed in removing their patients from the distractions of modern life and working with them in an environment of peace and quiet. This was usually done within the client's home or within the medicine person's home. Nevertheless, they advocated an intentional avoidance of newspapers, radios, televisions, magazines, telephones, computer games, and the myriad of other distractions available to modern people.

Our traditionals believed that catalysts on the organismic level corresponding to biochemical catalysts on the molecular level arose from self-exploration and developing an awareness of emotional states. Knowledge of personal misery fosters an inclination to do something about it. Excessive business or exhaustion can prevent reaching a level of emotional awareness from which change can occur.

___________________________________________________

S. Starr says,

Native American healing methodologies have a long history of effectiveness. I do not find the Native understanding of holistic, quantum healing to be much different than the spiritual Christian approach. Right off, critics and skeptics will be quick to point out the lack of evidence of miraculous healings. I would submit that this dilemma actually comes down to understanding what constitutes a miracle. The problem with the reductionist approach of the Western mindset, which has come to define what science is, is that it assumes that all levels of reality function like a logical, preditctable, reproducable mechanism or machine. Something then , is only considered valid by this mindset when it falls within the parameters of consistent reproduction in a lab or lab like setting. This sort of mindset is not apparent with true spiritual people whether they are Christains, American Indians or any other grouping. Most Western minded Christians consider themselves to be spiritual people- but rather they are not.
Western minded Christains seemingly have no problem accepting the creation story from the Bible or many other grand tales of the Bible as literal. Yet, they seem a bit shy and stop short of contemplating what these tales might actually imply about the spiritual reality that their everyday physical lives exists within. The Church, such as it is called, has made certain compromises with what they collectively agree upon as science. These compromises impinge upon eternal, supernatural thinking.
As to the point of lack of evidence of miraculous healing- I would humbly submit that often what is considered supernatural is often only natural. What is natural is "supernatural". It is a miracle afterall that anything exists at all. That atoms are formed and cling together one upon the other to make matter is a miracle . Needless to say, matter being organized into living consciousness is miraculous even if- and especially if- you believe that sub-atomic particles organized themselves into consciousness by sheer, mathematical, random chance over a long enough period of time.

Simply put, the common definition of a miracle is the breakage of the laws of nature or physics. I am simply suggesting that often what we think the "laws" of the universe are and what they actually are - do not match. Also, there are limitations to spiritual healing in the physical realm just as there are limits to physical medicine, limits to time and space and comprehension.
Spirtual people operate on spiritual discernment combined with logic and reason as opposed to logic and/or reason alone. The Western reductionist cosmological view and the spiritual view of reality seem to be out of two entirely different conceptions of reality. Ultimately I believe this dichotomy is a false dichotomy. The Western mind believes it can define the ultimate reality as it would explain the workings of a machine. Perhaps that could be so- but first that mindset will have to get outside the self imposed box of "emprical rationality only" and reconsider what a machine actually is and what this reality actually is. Wkipedia has this defintion of EMPIRICAL:

"A central concept in science and the scientific method is that all evidence must be empirical, or empirically based, that is, dependent on evidence or consequences that are observable by the senses. Empirical data is data that is produced by experiment or observation.^[1] It is usually differentiated from the philosophic usage of empiricism by the use of the adjective "empirical" or the adverb "empirically." "Empirical" as an adjective or adverb is used in conjunction with both the natural and social sciences, and refers to the use of working hypotheses that are testable using observation or experiment. In this sense of the word, scientific statements are subject to and derived from our experiences or observations.

Spirtual people should avoid compromising and allowing a Western/scientific mindset to influence their definitons of ultimate reality. They should get out of that self imposed box of perception inasmuch as they are able. Spiritual people should consider their holistic- spiritual experience and observation as part of the "empirical" process. You ask how to ascertain of the spiritual? Its simple really... start by starting. Try. Open up and try. Be honest and patient with the results and keep trying. The rest will take care of itself. Just remember its all predicated on developing right relationship with all things. Developing right relationship may take some longer than others. It comes down to proper discernment and the proper combination and application of freewill , willpower, intention and unselfishness. You will quickly realize that you can not do this on your own and so your realitonship or lack thereof with God will commence. There is no formula- either "magic" or "scientific". Just try. Then keep trying. Then try some more. Whaddya have to lose really outside of that box you live in now?