CHAPTER 1: 1492: The Seven Deadly Sins Tumble out of Europe

Human-Centered Belief Systems Versus God-Centered Christianity

THERE IS MUCH TRUTH IN THE ROMANTICIZERS' PORTRAYAL, despite differences from place to place and changes over time. Pre-Columbian societies were not homogeneous or static. Rich fishing societies along the Pacific coast of Canada, communal agricultural Pueblo villages on the upper Rio Grande, migratory buffalo-hunting Plains tribes, settled Mississippi Valley corn-growers, small scattered groups of hunters and gatherers north of the St. Lawrence, urbanized Aztec imperialists--these varied greatly one from the other. Also, one group might at times change the other. Some time before A.D. 1000, Mayan-speaking traders spread a Caddo cult to the Mississippian culture in the lower river valley and altered that culture's religious system.

Indigenous cultures did, however, share certain characteristics. Each used religion to locate "human life at the center of reality," with everything else "bounded and controllable by reference to that center." Each used a creation myth and anthropocentric gods to integrate a culture. The Pueblo conceived of the female god Iatiku as a helper who gave humans corn and assistance but made few demands on them. The Huron created two anthropocentric deities--Aataentsic, the mother of humanity, and Iouskeha, people's helper. Many oki, or "guardian spirits," assisted humans as well. In Incan and Aztec societies, human-created gods were more demanding. The Aztec god Huitzilopochtli demanded sacrificial victims. Therefore the Aztecs continually warred to secure captives for their sacrificial rites. Incan mythology also strongly drove the Incas to militaristic expansion. They believed that their rulers were immortal gods. When one died, his mummy was worshiped: he kept his palace, his possessions and his servants. Deprived of these, his "successor" had to conquer new territories to acquire palace, property and servants.⁹ Past human life became a "center of reality" as deceased kings kept on ruling.

These indigenous belief systems were constructed by humans to achieve human goals. In the case of the Incans, the goal was royal immortality. In Huron culture, commoners achieved their desires once a year in a dream-fulfillment festival called Ononharoia. More communal, the Pueblos sought the group's long-term good. Since humans had designed the belief system to meet human needs, rebellion was folly. It did occur, but rarely. Religion integrated indigenous societies and regulated every facet of daily life. It was "the one great force in behavior,"¹⁰ and it was all-pervasive. Many Native American peoples lived in a spirit-filled world in which trees, animals and landscapes had spiritual personalities. That encouraged proper care for the environment.

Note the contrast between these belief systems and Christianity, which is God's revelation to humanity, not a human construct. (Again, we cannot prove that here; we can only see if it helps us explain events.) By contrasting them, we are not denigrating indigenous cultures or saying that they were somehow less "advanced" than European ones. Many were complex, with sophisticated states conducting diplomacy and ruling vast areas and with complex economies and beautiful arts and crafts. Nor was Christianity a European invention that reflects credit on Europe. It was not invented by humans, nor was it primarily designed to meet human needs. Humanity is not its "center of reality." Because it is not anthropocentric, rebellion against its God is the normal human response to being replaced as the "center of reality." Already, in the Hebrew Testament, Yahweh announced that rebellion was his people's characteristic response:

     I reared children and brought them up, but they

        have rebelled against me.

     The ox knows his master,

        the donkey his owner's manger,

     but Israel does not know,

        my people do not understand.

Even when they claimed they were not rebelling, he knew they were:

     These people come near to me with their mouth

        and honor me with their lips,

     but their hearts are far from me.

        Their worship of me

     is made up only of rules taught by men.11

Running through Old and New Testaments is the stark reality that human rebellion produces a split between those who falsely claim to be his people and those who truly are his people. The latter characteristically obey him, but sometimes they rebel too.

That is not the case with human-centered belief systems. It makes no sense to speak of Hurons rebelling against Iouskeha, the helper of humans, or of false, professing Aztecs versus true Aztecs or of Pueblo who did not believe in Pueblo religion. The Pueblo did not think in terms of outward behavior versus inner attitudes. Religion was outward behavior. What were indigenous religions if not "rules taught by men"? What else was there?

Europeans, by contrast, were inextricably enmeshed in all these dichotomies, dilemmas and rebellions. Rather than being pious followers, God's dutiful schoolchildren living to teach others of him, they were often in active rebellion against the God they professed to obey. Their religion was not an integrated, harmonious human-centered belief system but a traveling argument between their God and them. Contrasting Aztec and Spanish religions, Tzvetan Todorov captures this truth: "The Spaniards' God is an auxiliary rather than a Lord, a being to be used rather than enjoyed." These conquerors' self-proclaimed goal was to advance their religion, but actually they used religion to conquer--"ends and means have changed places."¹²