Peyote Religion • 75

I?~J®lr~IM~IL[ [ID lill:®IP~~ll~(G IID®®IM~1!® 1rOO~~IM~~lr®~~~OO~~IM1rIBY ~£1(~Q Will~~

There are two formidable challenges con-fronting peyotists. The first, the depletion of thewild populations of our sacrament peyote, andrelated conservation issues, will notbe discussed here. (Faith, Beliefand the Peyote Crisis, p. 83.)The second, making race acriterion for church mem-bership, is the focus ofthis essay.

As 2001 beganthere were in theUnited States 102 dif-ferent peyote-centeredchurches registeredwith the Texas Depart-ment of Public Safety.Membership in these 102Native American Church(NAC) Organizations has his-torically been multi-ethnic. I To-day membership in virtually all NACorganizations is still multi-ethnic and includes asignificant number of White, Black and Hispanicworshippers. In 1995 one NAC organization, theNative American Church of North America(NACNA), adopted a policy to restrict member-ship to persons with at least 25% Indian blood.This new NACNA policy is at variance with itshistoric open-door (non-racially restrictive) policy,is not typical of most other NAC organizations,and is, to some degree, an attempt to accommo-date Texas state law and its supporters (primarilyofficials in the DEA and the Justice Department).

Origins of the Peyote MeetingAnthropologists and American Indians have con-

cluded that the Lipan Apache were responsible forintroducing peyote meetings to the Comanche,Kiowa, and Kiowa-Apache. My opinion coincides

with that of Orner Stewart (1987, 50-52)~ with regard to Lipan peyote

meetings, we believe that Chris-tian ethics and doctrine,gained through contact withMexican Catholics, wereintegral to the liturgy fromthe beginning (i.e., be-tween 1770 and 1830).My observations of sacra-mental peyote use by theHuichol and my reading ofthe available evidence sug-gests that Lipan peyotists

eliminated dancing, blood-letting and alcoholic inebria-

tion; features common in pre-Christian peyote ceremonies. In do-

ing so, they established the peyote cer-emony that still exists today; a contemplative meet-ing for worship usually held inside a tepee.

In contrast to the militantly nativistic proponentsof the Ghost Dance, who hoped their ceremonywould make Anglos disappear forever (Slotkin1956a, 20; Stewart 1987,65-67), peyotists in Okla-homa were, by 1890, developing an Indian versionof Christianity that helped them adjust to the diffi-culties of life on reservations. Despite the infusionof Christian ethics and doctrine into the peyote reli-gion, peyotists were vigorously persecuted-with nolegal basis- as soon as U.S. government Indian

I. Multi-ethnic refers to particular individuals who can claim membership in more than one ethnic group, as described in U.S.Census forms. People such as Quanah Parker, whose mother was Anglo, and whose father was Comanche, would belong toboth ethnic groups. Multi-ethnic also refers to members of a congregation that include persons of Anglo, African American,Hispanic and Indian ancestry.

76 • Entheos Vol. 1,No.2, Winter 2001

"Among al/ my experiences on the peyoteroad, I consider the fol/owing the most im-pressive. At one of the meetings I wasinstructed by those who were further ad-vanced, and made this my chief desire. Iheld the sincere wish that I might receivesomething that could help me to under-stand the way more clearly. But it was anight of suffering for me. It seemed thataI/ my spiritual senses were dead, and,when morning came, I was much disap-pointed. I was strongly impressed to takea walk alone, and I seemed to be led by asubtle influence to a shady spot on thebank of the creek, where the root of a treecurled out, making a comfortable seat. Isat down to rest and to think; but as I at-tempted to recline in an easy position, Inoticed that I was completely hedged inby brambles and sharp thorns, so that,whatever way I turned, they would stickme unless I sat up strait. Then a voicespoke in my inner ear, saying, "What thinkyou? Do you expect to find the road toknowledge an easy one of pleasure andsensual satisfaction?" Then I sat upstraight and rested; and a cool breezestirred the leaves of the overhangingbranches. I became thirsty and wished fora drink, and there seemed to come intomy mouth cool, refreshing water. After Iwas rested and had started back, I no-ticed, as I was crossing the creek, a smallstone lying in the sand. I felt drawn to it,but reasoned thus: It is only a little iJI-shaped rock. But, as I hesitated, I becameinterested enough to pick it up, and I no-ticed its peculiar shape. Then, as in aquickly moving panorama, I saw in it theanswer to my prayer; and the voice,speaking within, said: "Wisdom is notfound in the way of pleasure; nor doesunderstanding come with feasting. Themind must be made earnest by sufferingin the path of duty; so, likewise, you mayfind your soul's desire - your God - whowill teach you al/ your soul craves toknow." -C.S. Simmons, 1913

agents (and non-Indian missionaries) heard they atepeyote. In order to protect their religious freedomunder the U.S. Constitution, peyotists began legallyincorporating as churches. The first two peyotechurches were incorporated in Oklahoma. Articlesof incorporation for both churches, the First BornChurch of Christ (inc. 1914) and the Native Ameri-can Church (inc. 1918), show they are explicitlyChristian (Stewart 1987,223-24). Peyote meetingsproliferated as the supply of peyote to Oklahomaincreased in the early 1880s, after the railroadreached Laredo, Texas.

There are many reasons why peyote becamepopular and meetings spread rapidly from Okla-homa. By 1890 ancient Indian ways of securing sub-sistence (such as bison hunting) had been obliter-ated. Banning native religions and confining Indi-ans to reservations controlled by Indian agentsmeant that Anglo missionaries could bully them intoabandoning tribal customs. During this painful andchaotic period, Indians were trapped and facing in-evitable change. Peyote was welcomed as a com-forter, hailed as a teacher of righteousness and pre-scribed as an antidote for the epidemic of alcohol-ism.

Many Roadmen including Quanah Parker, JohnWilson, John Rave, Albert Hensley, Sam Lone Bear,Jim Blue Bird and Jonathan Koshiway were zeal-ous in sharing their gospel of peyote and JesusChrist. Indians were ready to recei ve the peyote re-ligion; with English becoming a common intertriballanguage, they were hearing about the benefits ofpeyote meetings from members of various othertribes who were enrolled as fellow students inWhite-controlled boarding schools. Others beganparticipating in peyote meetings as a concomitantof business ties, inter-tribal marriages and visiting.By 1954 most peyotists, including the officers ofthe NACNA, practiced and professed a thoroughlyIndian version of Christianity (Slotkin 1956b;Stewart 1987,371). As indicated by the 102 differ-ent peyote churches registered today with the TexasDepartment of Public Safety, there is not now, norwas there ever, only one Native American Church.

Within these peyote congregations there is nosalaried clergy, no excommunication policy, nodogma, no uniform test for membership, and noschools for teaching their particular liturgy. The vari-

--Peyote Religion • 77

ous congregations share the conviction that peyote by each of them is the basis of today's two mostcontains a divine or Holy Spirit and they practice an prominent styles of worship: the Cross-Fire and Half-essentially identical liturgy. In each congregation Moon Fireplaces. They were both Christians, bothpeyote meetings are conducted by a Roadman (or had a mixture of Indian and European ancestry, andliturgical leader) at the request of individual mem- both conducted meetings attended by non-Indians.bers. In little more than a century, peyote churches Two white men associated with Parker became mem-have attracted mem- • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• bers of his congrega-bers from more than lilt would be as just to force Christians to aban- : tion. One of them, C.S.seventy tribes as well don those ordinances, like baptism and the • Simmons (19l3),as Hispanics, African- wrote the first lengthyAmericans and Ang- Lord's supper. .. as to ask the Indians to give insider's account of thelos. up the rites of the peyote road, which they peyote religion. John

The peyote reli- believe aid them in touching the higher pow- Wilson's meetingsgion in the U.S. differs ers and experiences. Happily, the constitution were regularly at-considerably from the of our country provides that a man must be tended by Hispanics,way in which peyote is Blacks and Whites.protected in his religious beliefs ... unless theyused among the According to OrnerHuichol. Deer hunting prove detrimental to others ... 11 - C. S. Simmons Stewart, a Black

symbolism is integral • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • peyote church flour-to the Huichol peyote pilgrimage and dance (see ished in Oklahoma in the 1890s and early 1900s andCoda pg. 81: Hunting for the Divine Deer's Heart). in 1990 he testified that there are still Black mem-Unlike the Huichol, American Indian peyotists have bers of the NAC in Oklahoma.given peyote a Christian significance (Smith and Stewart identifies several other non-IndianSnake 1996, 24-27, 167-173). The Huichol and peyotists active prior to 1960 and counts about 25members of other Mexican tribes that use peyote non-Indian anthropologists who have participated inhave not generally proselytized outside their own peyote churches. Prominent non-Indian anthropolo-tribe. Huichols living in traditional communities gists who were members of peyote congregationshave yet to accept Jesus as their personal savior. included Stewart, James Howard and George Mor-Unlike them, evangelistic Roadmen in the U.S. have gan. The most famous non-Indian anthropologistcreated a widespread pan-tribal and multi-ethnic who was also a member of a peyote church was J.network in about 130 years. Members of tribes that Sidney Slotkin. In 1954 Slotkin was elected a mem-were formerly enemies have become united by their ber of the Board of Directors of the NAC of thecommon faith in Jesus Christ and the peyote (or United States and continued as such after it was re-Holy) Spirit. Today's peyote religion is syncretistic, constituted as the NAC of North America. It is ofcombining native elements (e.g., tobacco, sage, eagle interest that even now, in Texas, the Secretary ofthebones and feathers) with Christian baptism, Bibli- NAC of the United States is Amada Cardenas, acal references, and often group recitation of the Mexican-American who is not a member of any fed-Lord's Prayer. Despite retention of many significant erally recognized tribe. Jack and Fran Warner ofaboriginal elements, the peyote meeting is essentially South Dakota are non-Indian members of a peyoteChristian. congregation in North Dakota. Their status as mem-

bers, and their first amendment right to use peyotewas upheld, despite their race, in a 1984 federal pros-ecution in Grand Forks, North Dakota.

Most people who are familiar with the SupremeCourt's 1990 decision in Employment Division ofOregon vs. Smith remember only the Klamath In-dian, Al Smith. They must be reminded that his non-Indian associate and co-defendant, Galen Black, also

Ethnic Composition of the NACIn addition to American Indians, Hispanics,

Whites and African Americans have always partici-pated in, and been members of, peyote churches. Thetwo best-known early evangelistic Roadmen wereJohn Wilson and Quanah Parker of Oklahoma. Thedistinctive format for the peyote meetings conducted

r--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------cc~~_78 • Entheos Vol. 1,No.2, Winter 2001

attended the same NAC in Oregon. In the most rel-evant federal case in which the ethnic compositionof the NAC was discussed, United States v. RobertL. Boyll, Judge Juan Burciaga firmly rejected thefederal government's attempt to establish race as acriterion for membership in a NAC. Several non-Indian members of various peyote churches testifiedin court that they regarded the defendant, RobertBoyll, as a bona fide member of the NAC.

Robert Pedro, of Cheyenne-Arapaho ancestry, isan enrolled member of the Cheyenne chapter of theNAC of Oklahoma. Pedro testified that his grand-parents taught him that the door is always open toall worshippers who come to their church services.Alden Naranjo, a member ofthe Southern Ute Tribeand a Roadman-member of the NAC in Colorado,declared that he and his ancestors have always ob-served an open-door policy toward members. Ac-cordingly he regards Robert Boyll as an NAC mem-ber, regardless of his race. Also testifying in the Boyllcase, Calvin Magpie, member ofthe Southern Chey-enne and Roadman in the NAC of Oklahoma, statedthat in that church (established in 1918) Whites haveheld and may still hold positions such as secretary,vice-president, treasurer and sergeant-at-arms. Hiselders taught him to abide by the open-door policywherein sincere worshippers of any "race" are freeto attend NAC services. He estimated that at someofthe church services he conducts, about half oftheparticipants are Anglos.

My participation in peyote meetings with the Ho-Chunk (or Winnebago) of Nebraska and withpeyotists in Maryland who were affiliated with vari-ous tribes leads me to conclude that non-Indians, in-cluding many whose spouses are Ho-Chunk, are fre-quently members or participants in peyote churches.Some of the Roadmen in whose meetings I partici-pated espoused the same open-door policy discussedabove. I concur with Stewart's conclusion: there aremany non-Indians who are married to Indians andwho have become full participants and devout fol-lowers of the peyote road. Moreover, there is now asignificant number of Anglos, such as Robert Boylland Jack Warner, (whose spouses are also non-Indi-ans) who participate fully in Native AmericanChurches. If being Indian were to be narrowly de-fined as having 25% Indian blood and being enrolledin a federally recognized tribe, the religious freedom

ofperhaps thousands of non-Indian participants andmembers in more than one hundred peyote congre-gations scattered throughout this nation could beabruptly and unjustly revoked.

Why has 25% Indian blood becomea legal issue?

Within our country's borders peyote only growsin an extremely limited area in southern Texas. Be-cause peyote can not be imported legally from Mexico(where it is illegal, with no exemption even for na-tives) insuring access to the peyote in Texas is vital tothe religious life of hundreds of thousands ofpeyotistsin North America. Shortly after the state of Texas out-lawed use or possession of peyote in 1967, its statelaw was challenged and found to be unconstitutionalby Federal District Court Judge Kazen. A large del-egation of officials of the NACNA negotiated a reso-lution with Texas legislators to grant an exemptionfor members of the Native American Church who haveat least 25% Indian blood (Stewart 1987, 246-47).While negotiating for this exemption, some Indianswere led to believe, by two white officials in Austin,that the exemption granted to Indians with at least25% Indian blood would be cancelled if Anglos startedusing peyote again (from an FBI interview by Spen-cer Hellekson dated 7-26-84). This racial bias imposedon peyotists by officials in Texas, after twenty-eightyears, became a membership standard for theNACNA. In 1995 I personally witnessed the NACNAamend its bylaws at its annual meeting on the Omahareservation in Nebraska to make the 25% Indian bloodquantum a requirement for its members.

As a result of this and other factors, the NACNAand the federal government are attempting torecharacterize what has always been a pan-tribal,multi-ethnic, syncretistic Christian religion as an ex-clusively "Native American," or "tribal-cultural" tra-dition, which it is not and never has been in this coun-try. The government and the NACNA are doing thisdespite the fact that the federal exemption for reli-gious peyote use makes no mention of race, and thefact that a Federal Judge in New Mexico in UnitedStates v. Boyll explicitly rejected the government'sargument that participation in the Native AmericanChurch could be segregated by race.

In determining who is an Indian, the federal gov-ernment has imposed the 25% blood quantum as athreshold for eligibility for federal benefits including

medical care, scholarships, etc. To be listed as an Indianon the roster of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), aperson must meet criteria imposed by the U.S. govern-ment. To qualify for Federally Recognized Indian en-rollment a person must have at least one parent who is aFederally Recognized enrollee in a specific Indian tribe(as created by the 1934 public law popularly known asthe Indian Reorganization Act [IRAD.That person mustalso meet the current minimum of 25% Indian bloodquantum (Wubekeniew 1995,345).

The NACNA has chosen to make its bylaws con-gruent with the BIA's definition of who is an Indian.The same premise is embedded in national legislationrelating explicitly to the protection of Native Americanreligious freedom, (i.e., Public Law 103-344 and its an-tecedent law, the 1978 American Indian Religious Free-dom Act). Federal laws that limit protection for reli-giously motivated peyote use to Native Americans con-trast with more inclusive, racially neutral guaranteesmanifested in our Constitution, in the Religious Free-dom Restoration Act and in the DEA exemption for re-ligious use of peyote.

A restriction ofthis religion to Native Americans ofa certain racial purity, and the concomitant propositionthat Indian religious freedom is not a constitutional guar-antee, but a function of the United States' trust respon-sibility, carries with it a significant threat to the future ofthe Native American Churches and many of their mem-bers. Many people have entered an NAC as a result ofbeing married to a Native American, or being the childof one parent who is federally recognized as a NativeAmerican. Many ofthese people would not meet the 25%Indian blood threshold requirement even though theirhusband, wife, father or mother would. Accordingly, ifsuch a restriction were imposed, some members of a fam-ily would be legally prevented from practicing the reli-gion of their spouse or parent. In addition, treating theexemption as a function of the government's trust re-sponsibility could well make the religion again subjectto the vicissitudes of tribal politics which have in thepast resulted in tribal bans on the religion, including aban enforced for many years on the Navajo reservation.I

f

I

I·I'I

2. In 1940 the Navajo tribal council passed a resolution makingpeyote illegal, declaring that it was harmful and was not part ofthe traditional Navajo religion. This Navajo prohibition againstpeyote was enforced, with the full consent of John Collier andsucceeding BIA Commissioners, until after the Navajo tribal coun-cil agreed (in March of 1967) to abide by the Bill of Rights of ourConstitution, thereby respecting our Constitution's first amend-ment free exercise of religion guarantee (Aberle 1982; Stewart1987,295-313).

-Peyote Religion • 79

'There will be a time... when youwill wish you had not entered theroad; we will call it the dark hour. Itseems to be the hour of your cruci-fixion - the Golgotha of your experi-ence and the time of your severetrial. But when it has passed, youwill see that you have gained muchand have lost only the dross anderror that were a hindrance to yourspiritual unfoldment. It is in this hourof trial and bifurcation that you standface to face with your brother; it'sthen that the secrets of your heartare known; your weapons of de-fense are broken and you feel thepresence of an impartial Judge.Even the sacred eagle's feathers lieprone upon the ground. 'Tis thenthat the Spirit speaks, and a sweet,consoling peace steals o'er yourheart. Then the members breakforth with the joyous song, Ya-na-ah-away, and it is sung with suchfervor and perfect unity that you arelifted up out of yourself into thatbond of brotherhood that knows norace or color...

"As morning approaches, theway becomes clearer and more en-joyable. The spritit of unity is morenoticeable. The songs are of a morecheerful character. At times evety-one joins in and they sing with thespirit and understanding. It is won-derful what harmony is producedand what psychological power ismanifested. The sick have beendoctored and feel better. The chiefhas tried to make everyone feelgood." - C.S. Simmons

~----------------------------------------------------------------------I 80· Enthew Vol.1,No.2, Winter2001

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

There areother reasons foragreeing withJudge Burciaga'sneutral, non-ra-cially restrictivereading of the1965 federal ex-emption for pey-otists at 21 C.F.R.1307.21 (see Ap-pendix pg. 82). Itis well known thata significant num-ber of Europeans who came to North America hadbeen incorporated into American Indian societies bycapture, marriage, and adoption. Some of their de-scendants may not even know (others may not wantto reveal publicly) that they are of less than 25%Indian blood. Verification of claims to have at least25% Indian blood would require applying proceduresbased on the latest medical technology and couldinvolve genetic testing. If the federal governmentmade such testing mandatory in an effort to deter-mine who is really an Indian, it is certain that a sig-nificant number of individuals currently enrolled asmembers of federally recognized tribes would notqualify. Any peyotists among them could thereby bedenied their religious freedom.

If enforced, this restriction would encourage orcompel members to violate their Christian ethic ofspiritual equality (Gal 3:28; Epistle of James Ch. 2)that, along with faith in the Creator who endowedus all with unalienable rights to life, liberty and thepursuit of happiness, forms the basis for the open-door policy described above. It would also preventreligious association with any non-Indians, such asRobert Boyll and many others, who are recognizedas full members of the NAC.

Furthermore, my observations of non-Indianswho have received the peyote communion at NACmeetings suggest that race is irrelevant in determin-ing the safety or legitimacy of the participation byparticular worshipers. Instead, it is the sincerity anddepth of one's faith in the divine spirit associatedwith peyote that furthers one's health and spiritualdevelopment. I agree with Judge Burciaga that thegovernment's prosecution of Boyll was "at best an

overreactiondriven by politi-cal passions or,at worst, influ-enced by reli-gious and racialinsensitivity, ifnot outright hos-tility."

It is possiblethat fear of beingdenied access topeyote in Texas(a fear perhaps

aided and abetted by certain state or national offi-cials) impels the NACNA to ban people it considersnon-Indians from its church services. Also, my per-sonal experiences incline me to believe that certainIndian members ofthe NACNA would have Whitesexcluded from participation on purely racial groundsbecause they have yet to overcome their resentmenttoward the White race in general.

On the other hand I have participated in peyotemeetings where Roadmen and other members whoseconduct is guided by Christ's teachings ask for for-giveness for their White brothers and sisters, evenfor members of the U.S. Supreme Court whose de-cision in Smith jeopardized their religious freedom.Their compassion, embodied in the open door policy,is evidence of the benevolent heart oftheir religion.

I remember many prayers said for me by NACmembers. One that I remember vividly was made inJesus' name for my asthmatic daughter by a youngComanche. My experiences of unity and benevo-lence in NAC meetings seem remarkably similar tothose of C.S. Simmons, who wrote, almost a cen-tury ago:

"The idea of the unity of the human race ••• is elucidatedin the medicine (peyote) meetings when its members arein the spirit ... and you may hear, as I have (ill answer to amental question): Now you know who we are. We are allof one race, the human race. I will never forget that ... acertain Indian whom I thought to be an enemy, or at leastprejudiced against me, prayed with greatest fervency andsincerity for my welfare. With voice trembling with emo-tion, he asked the Great Spirit to bless me with health andprosperity the same as his OWII people. When the medicinechief offers up a prayer .••he prays for you and your kiltthe same as he does for his own. "When we are able to open our hearts to the be-

"Many times I have asked the Indians to explain tome the peyote road, or even to teach me to sing theirsongs, and while they were willing to do so, they knowthat such knowledge does not come that way. Theyinvariably say, 'You ask the peyote, He tell you ... 'The road leads one tofind himself, and finding him-self, he finds his God from whom he was lost, andnow 'the lost isfound. ' The road leads to the divinitythat dwells in every soul, and, becoming acquaintedwith God, he is at peace. " - J. S. Simmons

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

=

nevolent heart ofthe Creator, we may acknowledgethat the mundane distinctions between Anglo, Afri-can American, Hispanic and American Indian aretruly insignificant. This for me is the Peyote Road.

Coda: Hunting for the Divine Deer's Heart(adapted from Fikes' essay in Smith & Snake, 1996.)

Anthropologists regard the Huichol peyote pilgrim-age and sacramental peyote use as the most ancient peyotereligious tradition surviving in North America. Theirpeyote rituals and pilgrimage are pre-Columbian, tribaland non-Christian.

Huichols revere Peyote as the heart, soul, and memoryof their Creator, Deer-Person. Huichol healers and sing-ers achieve such union with their Creator, as incarnatedin Peyote, that Peyote speaks through them, as here:

"If you come to know me intimately, you shall be likeme and feel like I do. Although you may not see me, Ishall always be your elder brother. I am called the flowerof Deer-Person. Have no fear, for I shall always be theflower of God."(Fikes 1993,235)

Deer-Person, the supreme teacher of the Huichol,teaches songs, reveals himselfto shamanic healers throughhis Peyote spirit, and punishes those who violate his moralprecepts. "It is because of the wisdom of Deer-Person,"we are told, "that shamans exist. That is how we Huicholsare able to diagnose diseases with our visionary abilityand soul, which are the eyes of Deer-Person. That is ourmethod of curing. "(Fikes 1993, 193)

Huichol Peyote rituals have profound roots in the ar-chaic hunter's view of the world. Huichols follow strictrules when they pilgrimage to collect the sacred plant inthe high desert nearly 400 kilometers northeast of theirhomeland. They publicly confess their sexual transgres-sions and abstain from sex and salt. They testify that theCreator was destined to take the form of deer and Peyote.Because Peyote embodies the spirit, and is the heart ofDeer-Person, they must hunt him with arrows. When theyeat his heart, incarnated in the Peyote actus, they eat itraw, honoring the precedent set by their elder brothers,the immortal wolves. To commemorate the wolves eatingthe deer raw, our Peyote hunters must do likewise whenthey eat his heart (peyote). As the deer escaped from theancestor-deities, he took the form of Peyote there inhuiricuta (the holyland where Peyote is collected). Peyotegrows in clusters which resemble the shape of a deer. Thatis why we shoot it with our arrows (Fikes 1993, 195).

Huichol religion parallels Christianity in that the Cre-ator, out of compassion for his people, subjects himself tothe limitations of this world. In Christianity he incarnateshimself as a man who dies but is resurrected to save hu-man beings; in Huicho1 belief he dies and is reborn in thePeyote plant to give his people wisdom. The Aztec arethe cultural cousins of the Huichol, and their word peyotlor peyut1 denotes the pericardium, the envelope or cover-ing of the heart. This corresponds strictly to the Huicholbelief that Peyote embodies the Creator's heart.

Peyote Religion • 81

About the Author:To obtain his doctorate in anthropology from the

University of Michigan Dr. Jay Fikes lived and did ayear's research with Huichols in Santa Catarina, the mosttraditional of all Huichol communities, and has recordedand translated from Huichol sacred songs and myths inwhich the origin, meaning and purpose of peyote areexplained. He has been a participant-observer at twopeyote dances tHiciiri Neixa) performed at two ceremo-nial centers (toquipa) and at several village (rancho) ritu-als in which peyote was consumed.

References ConsultedAberle, David F. The Peyote Religion among the Navajo.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982.Fikes, l.e. Carlos Castaneda, Academic Opportunism and

the Psychedelic Sixties. Victoria, B.C.: Millenia Press,1993.

--. Reuben Snake, Your Humble Serpent. Santa Fe, NM.:Clear Light Publishers, 1996.

LaBarre, Weston. The Peyote Cult (Fifth Edition). Norman,OK.: University of Oklahoma Press, 1989.

Lobo, S. and Talbot, S. Native American Voices: A Reader.New York: Addison Wesley Longman Educ. Publishers, 1998.

Prucha, F.P. Documents of United States Indian Policy (Seeond edition). University of Nebraska Press, 1990.

Simmons, l.S. The Peyote Road. Manuscript no. 2537, U.S.Bureau of American Ethnology, Washington, D.C.,1913.

Slotkin, l.S. The Peyote Religion: A Study in Indian-WhiteRelations. Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1956a.

--. The Peyote Way. Tomorrow: Quarterly Review ofPsychical Research 4 (3): p. 64-70, 1956b.

Smith, Huston and Snake, Reuben. One Nation Under God:The Triumph of the Native American Church. Santa Fe,NM.: Clear Light Publishers, 1996.

Steinmetz, P.B. Pipe, Bible, and Peyote among the OglalaLakota. Knoxville, Tenn.: University of Tennessee Press,1990.

Stewart, Orner e. Peyote Religion: A History. Norman, OK.:University of Oklahoma Press, 1987.

Wubekeniew. WeHave the Right to Exist. New York: BlackThistle Press, 1995.

Archival and legal material consulted:Texas Department of Public Safety: List of Native AmericanChurches on file as of February 6, 200 I.University of Colorado archives: various documents in the col-lected papers of James Slotkin and Omer Stewart.United States of America v. Robert Lawrence Boyl/. Memoran-dum Opinion and Order written by Judge Juan Burciaga, deposi-tions given at trial and various other documents associated withthis case.

United States of America vs. John D. Warner and FrancesWarner. Defendants' Brief in Support of Motions for Dismissalof the Indictment on First Amendment Grounds as Being Viola-tive of the Defendants' Rights Guaranteed Under the Free Exer-cise and Establishment Clauses of the First Amendment, and DueProcess and Equal Protection Under the Fifth Amendment. Inaddition I read the FBI interview transcripts, witness affidavitsand other documents pertaining to this trial including the Memo-randum Opinion and Order written by Judge Paul Benson.

82 • Entheos Vol.1,No.2, Winter2001

.-

Appendix: A Casefor Common SenseComments by Judge Burciaga, U.S. v. Boyll (NM, 1991)

THERE is a genius to our Constitution. Its genius is thatit speaks to the freedoms of the individual. It is this geniusthat brings the present matter before the Court. More specifi-cally, this matter concerns a freedom that was a natural ideawhose genesis was in the Plymouth Charter, and finds itspresent form in the First Amendment to the United StatesConstitution - the freedom of religion.

The Government's "war on drugs" has become a wild-fire that threatens to consume those fundamental rights ofthe individual deliberately enshrined in our Constitution.Ironically, as we celebrate the 200th anniversary of the Billof Rights, the tattered Fourth Amendment right to be freefrom unreasonable searches and seizures and the now frailFifth Amendment right against self-incrimination or depri-vation of liberty without due process have fallen as casual-ties in this "war on drugs." It was naive of this Court to hopethat this erosion of constitutional protections would stop atthe Fourth and Fifth Amendments. But today, the "war" tar-gets one of the most deeply held fundamental rights - theFirst Amendmentright to freely exercise one's religion.

To us in the Southwest, this freedom of religion has sin-gular significance because it affects diverse cultures. It is asmuch of us as the rain on our hair, the wind on the grass, andthe sun on our faces. It is so naturally a part of us that whenthe joy of this beautiful freedom sings in our souls, we find ithard to conceive that it could ever be imperiled. Yet, today,in this land of bright blue skies and yellow grass, of dustyprairies and beautiful mesas, and vistas of red earth with wallsof weathered rock,eroded by oceans oftime, the free spirit ofthe individual once again is threatened by the arrogance ofGovernment.

The issue presented is the recurring conflict between theNative American Church members' right to freely exercisetheir religion through the ceremonial use of peyote and theGovernment's efforts to eradicate illegal drugs. To the Gov-ernment, peyote is a dangerous hallucinogen. To Robert Boyll,peyote is both a sacrament and a deity essential to his reli-gion. But this matter concerns competing interests greaterthan those relating to this small, spineless cactus having psy-chedelic properties. It draws forth a troublesome constitu-tional conflict which arises from fundamentally differentperspectives of peyote.

In its "war" to free our society of the devastating effectsof drugs, the Government slights its duty to observe the fun-damental freedom of individuals to practice the religion oftheir choice, regardless of race. Simply put, the Court is facedwith the quintessential constitutional conflict between an in-alienable right upon which this country, was founded and theresponse by the Government to the swelling political pas-sions of the day. In this fray, the Court is compelled to halt

this menacing attack on our constitutional freedoms. (. ..)The Government's racially restrictive reading and appli-

cation of the exemption reveals a fundamental misunderstand-ing of the history and present structure of the Native Ameri-can Church. Indeed, the Drug Enforcement Administration'sown rationale acknowledges that the exemption is not basedon the racial makeup of the Native American Church mem-bership. See Olsen v. Drug Enforcement Admin., 878 F.2d1458,1465-1468 (D.C.Cir.1989)(final order of the Drug En-forcement Administration in connection with the exemptionmakes no mention of any distinction between Indian and non-Indian members of the Native American Church). While theremay exist some legitimate support for the argument that Con-gress never intended to extend the exemption to non-NativeAmerican Church members (see Peyote Way Church of God,Inc. v. Thornburgh, 922F.2d 1210 [5th Cir.1991]; NativeAmerican Church, 468 F. Supp. at 1249-51), the plain lan-guage of the exemption and the legislative history clearlysupport this Court's finding that Congress intended the ex-emption to apply to all members of the Native AmericanChurch, Indian and non-Indian alike.

The Court also finds persuasive Mr. Boyll's argument thatto construe the racially neutral language of the exemption"to provide only racially discriminatory protection wouldplace the exemption unnecessarily in direct conflict with thefirst amendment." Such a consequence would, at the veryleast, violate the canon of statutory construction that "fed-eral statutes are to be construed as to avoid serious doubts oftheir constitutionality." Int'l Ass 'n of Machinists v. Street,367U.S. 740, 749, 81 S.Ct. 1784, 1789-90,6 L.Ed.2d 1141(1961); see also Hooper v. California, 155 U.S. 648, 657, 15S.Ct. 207, 211, 39 L.Ed. 297 (1895); United States v. Secu-rity Industrial Bank, 459 U.S. 70, 78, 103 S.Ct. 407, 412,74L.Ed.2d 235 (1982). "This principle is fully applicable tocases such as the instant one, in which a ... constitutionallysuspect statutory interpretation is embodied in an adminis-trative regulation." Rust v. Sullivan, U.S., III S.Ct. 1759,1778, 114 L.Ed.2d 233 (1991) (Blackmun, J., dissenting).

The Court will next address the constitutional question ofwhether the indictment violates Mr. Boyll's First Amend-ment right to freely exercise his religion. It is disingenuousfor the Government to contend that its racially restrictive read-ing of 21 C.F.R. § 1307.31-which would restrict religiousfreedom through the imposition of a racial exclusion-doesnot give rise to valid constitutional concerns. Since the useof peyote by Native American Church members is the veryessence of their religious beliefs, the proposed racially re-strictive reading of 21 c.F.R. § 1307.31 would have the sureeffect of imposing a racial exclusion to membership in theNative American Church itself. To exclude individuals of aparticular race from being members of a recognized religiousfaith is offensive to the very heart of the First Amendment.