In Search of Peace: A Challenge from Four Non-white North American Mennonites

Editorial Introduction

The pamphlet reproduced below was first published by the U.S. Mennonite Central Committee Peace Section in 1976. Collecting papers from a 1974 conference at Koinonia Mennonite Church in Clinton, Oklahoma, In Search of Peace: A Challenge from Four Non-white North American Mennonites was a challenging document when it was first published, and it remains so today. The brief chapters below, which readers can navigate to using the table of contents links, will be relevant for historians who concern themselves with Mennonite life in North America during the 1970s, for Mennonite theologians who are search for anti-racist resources in the tradition, and for peace workers and advocates who are interested in the history of Mennonite activism, especially in relation to the Mennonite Central Committee’s Minority Ministries Council.

In a letter from the MCC Canada offices in Winnipeg, Daniel Zehr, director of Peace and Social Concerns, recommends the pamphlet, warning that “To the extent that we white Mennonites have unwittingly or consciously become part of the oppressor, much of what is written here will be disquieting.” My hope in preparing this online edition is that by making its contents accessible this text can resume its disquieting task of unsettling the social and epistemic violence of white supremacy – especially following the Trump administration’s egregious “Executive Order on Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping” of September 22, 2020.

Brief Outline

The Preface by Hubert Schwartzentruber sets the stage for the pamphlet by pointing to the framing idea of the conference from which the contributions are drawn: “Peace is meaningless unless we work to end the reasons for violence.” His closing line ought to resonate even more deeply during this unprecedented year of protest against police violence: “Until there is justice there will be no peace.” Chapter 1 then provides “A Native American View” of peace and justice from Lawrence H. Hart, in which the author argues for a de-mythologizing revision of white history to account for the peace work of American Indians – a task that Hart has since undertaken in his work through the Cheyenne Cultural Center.[1] Following Hart’s call to active peacemaking, Chapter 2 offers “An Afro American View” by Tony Brown. Brown too calls for active peacemaking, while speaking against the racism of the American military and calling for critical peace education against the appeal of the military life. The “Chicano View” provided by Lupe De Leon, Jr. in Chapter 3 further resists American imperialism and militarism, calling members of historic peace churches to “go beyond mere humanistic values and incorporate the values of ‘carnalismo’ into our ethics.” Lastly, Chapter 4 by editor Emma LaRocque outlines “Dynamics of Oppression,” clearly presenting the complex problems of oppression, colonization, and suffering in terms that would have been – and may yet be – accessible to a wide readership of both laypeople and academics. My hope in providing this digital edition is that its contents would be read and considered again today, just as MCC and the authors hoped in the 1970s.

Editorial Note

The following is a faithful copy of the original pamphlet. I have preserved the spelling and paragraphing of the original, and indicated pagination in square brackets where the first number refers to the page that has ended and the second refers to the page that follows (excluding blank pages like page 4). I have corrected only a few typos (‘acheive’, ‘succesful’, ‘agressively’, ‘suffiency’) and I have retained the use of underlining that appears in the original. I am happy to provide a PDF scan of the document for anyone who is interested. With the exception of the bibliographical entries, I have also silently updated the spelling of the editor’s name to accord with how it appears on her current faculty profile (which in the document reads ‘Emma LaRoque’). I have also provided a few footnotes with references to sources used in the text, as well as slightly updated contributor bio notes below. Lastly, I would like to thank Joel Nofziger for his editorial efforts, and Laura Kalmar from MCC Canada for permission to reprint this resource.

Bio Notes

Dr. Emma LaRocque (now professor in the Department of Native Studies at the University of Manitoba).

Hubert Schwartzentruber (served with his wife June Schwartzentruber at Bethesda Mennonite Church in St. Louis, and then on the Mennonite Board of Congregational Ministries).

Lawrence H. Hart (a traditional peace chief of the Cheyenne Nation and founder of the Cheyenne Cultural Center in Clinton, Oklahoma).

Tony Brown (a baritone singer and peace advocate who teaches at Hesston College and directs the Peacing It Together program).

Lupe De Leon, Jr. (a Mennonite minister and Chicano activist, former co-executive secretary of the Minority Ministries Council, a project within the Mennonite Board of Missions until 1973).

In Search of Peace

A Challenge from Four Non-white North American Mennonites

Emma LaRocque, Editor.

Originally published in 1976 by the Mennonite Central Committee Peace Section (U.S.).

2020 online edition prepared by Maxwell Kennel (PHD Candidate, McMaster University).


Part I. Peacemaking From My Perspective

Preface by Hubert Schwartzentruber

Chapter 1. A Native American View by Lawrence H. Hart

Chapter 2. An Afro American View by Tony Brown

Chapter 3. A Chicano View by Lupe De Leon, Jr.

Part II. Responding to Oppression

Chapter 4. Dynamics of Oppression by Emma LaRocque

Questions for Discussion




Koinonia Mennonite Church in Clinton, Oklahoma was the setting on November 22-24, 1974 where this booklet originated. On that occasion more than 25 persons from throughout the United States and Puerto Rico gathered to examine the nature and the meaning of the gospel as it relates to nonviolence and peace making in minority communities. “Peace is meaningless” they said, “unless we work to end the reasons for violence.” These essays are windows into the souls of four of the participants. The four writers have been active throughout the church in sharing their convictions for biblical justice and peace.

For many years as a pastor in an inner city I struggled to make an attempt to bring good news of peace and justice to a community that was a victim of many years of oppression. The altar calls I frequently gave were not only for the community to join the church but for the church to join the community. Wherever there are struggles for survival with dignity there the church must minister. The writers of these pages are calling the church to repentance and a renewed commitment to social justice. The prophet Isaiah proclaimed that with the pouring out of the Spirit of God justice will take place and the effect of justice and righteousness will be peace. Until the dual system of justice Lawrence Hart refers to gives way to one equitable system of justice there will be no peace. Until we take Tony Brown seriously and move the church beyond mere tokenism there will be no peace. We [1/2] can become much more effective peacemakers after listening to Emma LaRocque by understanding what the violence of oppression will do to the human spirit.

Dom Helder Camara in a recent visit to the United States said:

“I never tire of repeating that in all countries, in all races, in all religions, in all human groups there exist small but solid groups dedicated to the promotion of liberty and justice for all. Who made these groups to spring up throughout the world? Some individuals? Some institutions? Only the Spirit of God was able to make this happen! And the God of love without a hint of hate, the God of the humble with only poor resources will use the weak instruments to raise up a union of the dispossessed from rich and poor countries. For there is an overwhelming hunger for justice as the supreme condition for peace. The God of the weak, of the small, of the poor, will work the marvel of making force give way to weakness.”[2]

My personal acquaintance with the writers has been a well-spring of inspiration. I am looking forward to the day when the Spirit of God will move God’s people as a mighty floodwall across all the land, armed with a burning passion for righteousness and justice. These few pages may help to spark that movement.

This material could be a valuable resource to supplement a series of Bible studies on peace and justice. It should be made available to all youth who are anticipating entering the armed forces. I would encourage every pastor to preach at least one sermon on justice in the next six months, making use of this material, as well as considering inviting one of the writers to be a guest in the congregation. The serious reader who wishes to devote more attention to this concern will find the short [2/3] bibliography very helpful. For additional resources and help in planning for peace education emphasis the following agencies are available to assist you:

1. Mennonite Central Committee, Peace Section, 21 South 12th Street, Akron, PA 17501

2. Commission on Peace and Social Concerns, General Conference Mennonite Church, Box 347, Newton, KS 67114

3. Commission on Peace and Social Concerns, Mennonite Board of Congregational Ministries, Box 1245, Elkhart, IN 46514

Until there is justice there will be no peace.

–Hubert Schwartzentruber

Associate Secretary

Mennonite Board of Congregational Ministries

August 16, 1976.

Chapter 1

Peacemaking From My Perspective

by Lawrence H. Hart

 “Nothing lives long but the earth and the mountains.”

Chief White Antelope

This was a death song. Chief White Antelope, a Cheyenne Chief, who was in the same band with Black Kettle, sang his song as he stood in front of a village of Cheyenne people near Sand Creek (Eastern Colorado) on the morning of November 27, 1864. Behind him was the camp of Black Kettle. Before him in a charge formation were a number of Colorado troops, as well as regular United States troops, under the command of Col. J. M. Chivington.

Death was for the Indian people, under certain circumstances, an honorable end. To die in a hunt was honorable. To die in a battle was honorable. To die rather than take up arms was honorable as it was for White Antelope. He offered no resistance as the most atrocious massacre ever committed in this country began to unfold. Chief White Antelope, a Peace Chief, together with Black Kettle, another Peace Chief, did not go back on his word. He had given his word to live in peace and rather than go against his word, Chief White Antelope died in an honorable way. He offered no resistance.

I wish to make several points pertaining to peacemaking from my perspective. The first major point is that there needs to be a demythologizing [5/6] of history in the area of White-Indian relations There is a myth of history for instance that the Cheyenne, as well as other Indians, were warlike and cruel and that therefore as savages they needed to be exterminated from the face of the earth. I can only point to the number of treaties that the Cheyenne made with the United States government. Here is a list of those many treaties and one agreement.


July 6, 1825    7 Statute 255

September 17, 185      11 Statute 749

February 18, 1861       12 Statute 1163

October 14, 1865        14 Statute 703

October 17, 1865        14 Statute 713

October 28, 1867        15 Statute 593

May 10, 1868  15 Statute 655


(Exact date unknown) 1890    25 Statute 1022

This 1890 treaty is perhaps the only one which has never been broken. It was made to acknowledge the supremacy of the United States over the Cheyenne people. Many of the other treaties that were made were broken. The treaties were usually amended by the United States. Senate, who had treaty-making powers, and the amendments were always made with out any consent on the part of the signatories of these treaties. The point I wish to bring out as you look at this list is that we as a people were interested in peacemaking in the yesteryear, but that generally it was to no avail. Another point I wish to make is that there were many people in our tribe who were not warlike but who sought to live at peace with all of God’s creation. It is a myth that Indians were savages. There were many who advocated peace and there were many like White Antelope who died rather than break their word. [6/7] Their word was to live at peace. The death song of White Antelope is remarkable. It is similar to the first two verses of Psalm 90.[3] The Psalmist refers to the transitory state of man, the mountains and the earth. Other details need to be known to further demythologize history. For example, White Antelope was a Peace Chief while Col. J. M. Chivington was an ordained minister of the Gospel. The idea that the church was interested in peace is a myth. The church rather freely acquiesced to the mood of the country and sanctioned governmental policy. White Antelope died wearing a Peace Medal, much like the one I have on.

It is very difficult to recite this kind of history without becoming angry. It becomes even more difficult for me as I seek to be a peacemaker in our day knowing that my own grandmother’s folks were among the few survivors of Sand Creek. There must be a purpose for me to be a third generation survivor of Sand Creek. I personally am led to believe that my purpose in life, as it was the purpose of White Antelope, is to be a peacemaker:

It does some good to rewrite history and to know the truth of what really occurred. But there should be a larger purpose than just this. And I suggest that it is for us to use history in a positive way. I hope that some day this kind of history, of peace efforts made on the part of Indian people in the face of deliberate genocide, can be used in peace education. This kind of history for Indian people could serve as a curriculum for peace education, hopefully to have Indian young people become peacemakers in our world today.

Indian young people today are attracted by those who are advocates for justice. Too often, however, those individuals and those organizations who gain notoriety as advocates for justice will use violence to achieve their end. All of us need to be aware that in peacemaking one does not gain notoriety if peacemaking efforts are based on the Biblical context. Jesus speaks of peacemakers in [7/8] his Sermon on the Mount. “Blessed are the Peacemakers, for they shall be called the sons of God.” (Matthew 5:9) Jesus identifies the peacemakers no differently than he identifies the others throughout the Beatitudes. “The meek, the victims of persecution, the pure in heart, the seekers of righteousness, those who mourn … all these are people who have no notoriety. Therefore to be a peacemaker, in my perspective, is to be one who gains no recognition.

Let us come now to my second major point. It is a myth that there are no peacemaking efforts on the part of the Indian Christians today. Peacemaking efforts are being made. There are already various individuals, various groups of Christians who seek to be peacemakers in our world today. The fact that we never hear about them simply means that they are truly the Sons of God and they gain no notoriety for their efforts.

Let me cite an example of peacemaking efforts on the part of Indian people, some of whom are in the audience. The example is relatively new for the story is not yet complete. I am Project Director for an organization called the Committee of Concern. It is a non-profit corporation and it serves as an advocate organization for youth and adults in trouble, Our organization works with juvenile offenders, adult misdemeanant offenders and adult Indian inmates who are incarcerated in penal institutions as a result of felony convictions. All of us who work day after day with the law enforcement officers and the judiciary have long since discovered the biggest myth in our present day world. That myth is “equal justice for all.” I need not cite any examples for as minority people you know that there is a dual system of justice.

One of the greatest tragedies that we face as Indian people is that we are divided. We are divided at the local community level. We are divided at the tribal level. We are divided on the inter-tribal level and we are split up nationwide. There [8/9] are many reasons for this. Some are justified and legitimate and others are not.

When one seeks to be a peacemaker, one must begin at the local level and that is exactly what the recent efforts have been all about. Not long ago there was some difficulty in one of the Indian communities. It centered around young people who became involved in a very serious altercation. It was Indian vs. Indian. One victim of this altercation ended up in the hospital. Almost immediately efforts were made to have the District Attorney file assault and battery charges against the group of youths who were responsible. Immediately families began to line up behind the two groups and soon the community was totally divided into factions. It became worse when someone sought revenge. Counter charges were contemplated and contacts were made with the Sheriff as well as the District Attorney. Our organization was aware of the nature and extent of this problem. Our workers met with the District Attorney as well as the judge. As an organization we have brought stability into many communities and the powers-that-be often call upon us to resolve conflicts. Two fellows from our staff made very serious efforts to restore order out of the chaotic situation. They made personal contacts in each of the homes that were involved. That covered virtually every Indian home in that community. They made strong efforts to have this conflict resolved outside the court. They stressed to the people that they had to live together and that any efforts for personal revenge would only further damage their relationships. Their efforts were truly peacemaking efforts. But they were successful only until their efforts were thwarted by an “outsider” from a local university. For reasons unknown to me, this man, who is white, took sides in this community problem and only further inflamed the situation. Fortunately the District Attorney and the Judge postponed the court appearance to another date with the sole purpose of giving our staff more time for peacemaking [9/10] efforts. The “outsider” had damaged reconciliation efforts but he had gained his notoriety.

One of the strategies which we have developed as we seek to be advocates of people in trouble is to impact various systems. Our strategy is not to do away with a system or an institution no matter how oppressive it may be. Our strategy is to impact that system or that institution to bring about a change. It takes time and it takes a lot of patience but we have found that this strategy is, in the long run, the best. If our strategy to bring about change included the use of violence we would not achieve as much. It didn’t take overnight for the systems and institutions in this local area to look upon us and to call upon us to help in any given tense situation. Peacemaking between Indian groups and between Indians and non-Indians is a very difficult task. If I would have any suggestions to make for current peacemaking efforts, my suggestion would be training. We need training in the area of conflict management. We need training in nonviolent confrontation tactics.

All of us are aware that there are many Christians in our world today who justify the use of violence. The classical reference is in Jesus’ cleansing of the temple. (Matthew 21:21, 23) The argument is that Jesus used violence in cleansing the temple of the money changers and the traders and their wares. I look upon that story from a different perspective. I see the temple as an institution which served a definite, useful and positive purpose for people. Jesus does not do away with that institution simply because there were those who used it to oppress others. I think there is a strategy here for peacemakers.

We now need to address ourselves to the Doctrine of Nonresistance. As those who are a part of the Mennonite Church we need to take a serious look at the Anabaptist view of the Church. That would include the Doctrine of Nonresistance. It is my understanding that there has not been an [10/11] Indian who has followed this doctrine completely. I may be wrong. I do know there have been individual Indians as well as Indian members of a particular tribe, notable the Hopi, who have refused any participation in war. I would assume that their reasons for refusal to be a part of the military is based on long peaceful traditions which are distinctly and traditionally Indian.

Most Indian people, particularly members of the Plains tribes, still view military service as a functional substitute for the male societies of the past. Many young men are still inclined to enter military service, often for personal reasons. Also, it is still expected of them by the Indian community Service in the military presumably gives an individual some self-identity as well as recognition from his tribe. The military also serves as a means for developing or gaining a skill which one might use upon returning to civilian life. In recent years however, questions have been raised by many Indian people as to whether the military really gives one a sense of self-worth as well as tribal recognition. One of the reasons may be that the military no longer is a good viable option as I have just illustrated. Fortunately, there are many young people who are gaining skills and who have developed a sense of self-identity and self-worth without any military involvement. A part of the concern toward the military can be seen in a profile of a local misdemeanant offender.

The misdemeanant offender is Indian. His average age is 30.5, his average grade level is the 10th grade and his major misdemeanant offense is public intoxication. In a few months of working with misdemeanant offenders we discover that many of them had prior military service. Recently, of 75 active cases, 52 had served time in the military. Significantly at least 25 of these fought in the front lines, if indeed there were any front lines, in Vietnam. And of the 52, 27 received dishonorable discharges. These statistics point out two things: [11/12] One, Indians (as well as other minority people) are used by the military for the front line duty. Secondly, many of them in spite of meritorious service are discharged less than honorable. These young men who went into the military to gain self-identity, self-worth and acceptance by the tribe and by society are now clientele in a misdemeanant offender rehabilitation program. It is a myth that the military develops good character.

Peacemaking on the Indian scene is complex. On the local level now we are seeking justice for some Indian people who hunted wild turkey on Indian land and who were caught by the game ranger and charged with illegal hunting. In New York a group of Indian people who want to live at peace and harmony with nature and man are now being threatened by the white community who live in fear because they have a myth about Indian people. The question we need to ask ourselves as we look at these situations of injustice and strife is what do we do as Christians? What is our response if we are truly peacemakers? Fortunately in these two situations concerned people who can be labeled as peacemakers are involved directly. On the local situation our organization is again the prime group that will coordinate the testing of this case. We believe that under treaty obligations and under the law Indian people have the freedom to hunt game on their own land without interference from the State. In the New York situation, which is becoming increasingly difficult, the Mennonite Central Committee has been involved for a number of months.

Emigration is not an option. Why should we flee our own country to escape injustice, oppression or persecution? Whatever our position, what ever our stance, it must be active. We must be peacemakers making peace!

November 23, 1974.

Lawrence Hart is a Southern Cheyenne Mennonite living in Clinton, Oklahoma. [12/13]

Chapter 2

Peacemaking From My Perspective

by Tony Brown

The whole area of peace, or peacemaking, is one which I feel very deeply about, and is one which lies at the heart of the Christian message. If we know something of the way of Jesus we know He is the way of peace and He demonstrates this again and again. We hear Jesus say in Matthew 5:43, 44,”You have heard that it was said, love your friends and hate your enemies, but now I tell you love your enemies,” or in John 18:36 Jesus says, “My kingdom does not belong to this world, if my kingdom belonged to this world, my followers would fight.” This by no means should leave the impression that Jesus did not fight. He fought to bring wholeness into the world, He fought to bring justice and He fought to bring a new order. The ingredient which undergirded the peaceful way of Jesus was His love for mankind. We as a church are taught in 1 Peter 3:19 to love one another and not to pay back evil with evil or cursing with cursing. Instead pay back with a blessing. And so in our ability to care for those who are broken we demonstrate the way of peace. This must be my way as a person committed to the Jesus way. I must be anointed just as Jesus was by the Spirit to preach the good news to the poor, to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to set free those who are oppressed.

This kind of commitment affects our life choices; It becomes an integral part of our life system and [13/14] has a profound effect on every aspect of our lives as we seek to be reconcilers in an unreconciling world. We need to develop a Jesus consciousness and in that process discover Jesus’ attempt to say yes to the hurting, yes to the afflicted, yes to the bruised and broken and the oppressed. The development of a Jesus consciousness urges us to concern ourselves with amnesty, the military, the draft, the nature of the church, economic oppression, civil rights and other issues which have religious and ethical implications.

For the Christian and particularly the minority person, the military is one issue which must be given high priority, particularly when they are aggressively being sought after to fill the places left by the white middle class since the development of the voluntary army, … . The military has glamorized the armed forces to make it look like one big vacation and a way to procure upward mobility. On the surface this certainly appeals to minority persons and understandably so. During the Vietnam War many white middle class Americans marched on Washington and took a strong stand in opposition of this nonsensical war. Currently, since the development of a voluntary army, they have the option to remain in the larger society, find economic success and find their own way in the world. This option is not nearly as viable for the minority person who is the recipient of racism and non-preferential treatment. For us the way is hard and the options are few. This factor, as well as the irresponsible glamorizing and deceitful promises which the military contends, does little to help minority people. The military slogans, “join the army–see the world,” “join the army–get an education,” and other such slogans need to be interpreted adequately by those of us who are in the know. The early influence that ROTC[4] has on high school students is devastating. It indoctrinates youth into a military pattern of thinking and acting. It stresses immediate and [14/15] unquestioning obedience to authority. It teaches high school students how to kill with pistols and rifles. It promotes acceptance of a hierarchial: structure by rank. Their aim is to get youth involved in their program anywhere from age four teen on and hopefully to encourage them to consider a military career.

Our job then is to make minority people aware of the realities of the military. Minority youth need to hear about the Black navy officer who resigned from his post because of the following reasons:

  1. Unreasonable long hours with no over time pay
  2. No black officers (aboard ship)
  3. Deceptive recruiting practices
  4. No night time differential pay
  5. Extensive socio-economic class distinction between officers and enlisted personnel
  6. Abusive attitudes of high pay grade personnel toward low pay grade personnel
  7. No equal opportunity for women
  8. Poor living conditions on board ship
  9. Numerous examples of personal humiliation among sisters and brothers of color

Minority youth considering the military need to know that:

  1. Minority men make up 50% of military stockades
  2. Minority vets have an unemployment rate of twice that of white veterans
  3. Minority G.I.’s make up a very high per centage of those in the lowest military jobs
  4. Minority G.I.’s receive a disproportionately high percentage of less than honorable discharges

Recognition of these facts will hopefully help us [15/16] to develop strategies to provide alternatives for persons who see no other way to go. I think of a recent minority graduate from Goshen College who upon graduation could find no job. His attempts to find jobs even at some of the church agencies, were fruitless. This particular student has many gifts and was capable of doing good in many different areas, but the church had nothing to offer. This student considered very strongly the possibility of joining the military because of his somewhat desperate situation. After a year’s time had elapsed, this young man found a job and luckily escaped the military.

This is just one example of a minority Mennonite considering the draft out of desperation. Hubert Schwartzentruber states, “As a church we are encouraging pastors to counsel youth in minority communities to refrain from going to the military. I think that it is right and we should continue to do that. If we continue to do that, then we must develop options that give more benefits than the military offers.”

The church has for too long given more attention to white youth in terms of counseling, spending time and money to help them work on their specific problems relative to the military. The time has come for the larger church to take responsibility for ALL its members. The time has come for the church to see its minority brothers and sisters as ones with full legitimate status in the church, taking the minority point of view seriously.

Through the media, be it church media or otherwise, educational programs must be established that catch young people where they are, helping them to understand the problems involved in joining the military. The time has come for the church to develop written literature that is easily understood, which states the church’s position on the military and explains the voluntary Army recruitment procedures as they effect minority Mennonites. [16/17]

The time has come for the church to provide more seminars in the different church districts so that we can sensitize both youth and parents on this subject. The church must take responsibility in providing options to the military; options that help minority persons become eco nomically established, which help them get started in a career or which help them to continue their education at the college or graduate level. This kind of involvement by the church is necessary for the church to move beyond mere tokenism.

Hubert Brown,[5] Executive Director of Student Services, states that the redistribution of wealth and equalization of power is the ultimate goal in the quest for economic justice and I would add that it is also the way to peace.

We see this illustrated in the early church as recorded in Acts 2:44-47. “And all the believers met together constantly and shared everything with each other, selling their possessions and dividing with those in need. They worshipped together regularly at the Temple each day, met in small groups in homes for communion, and shared their meals with great joy and thankfulness praising God.”

This is the consciousness which needs to be reestablished in the church today. The church must engage itself in the needs of the poor. Delton Franz states in his book Let My People Choose that the church could do much to stimulate business and industry to use its resources and open its doors for opportunity to the oppressed.[6] He cites that efforts could begin in many Mennonite communities where church members are heavily represented. He states, making reference to the white church, “If we are serious about applying our Christianity to the needs of fellowmen, we ought also to share from the storehouse of blessings and opportunity which exists within our own front yard,” He names a number of businesses and industries owned and operated by Mennonites and suggests that a task force be organized to recruit persons who are in need of [17/18] work. This kind of option could possibly train minority youth to learn certain trades and develop skills. Perhaps they could begin in an internship capacity and in this way be given the opportunity to have more choice in determining their future.

This is our mandate; may we as minority persons catch this vision and spread this word of peace throughout the church.

December, 1974

Tony Brown is a black Mennonite living in Akron, Pennsylvania. [18/19]

Chapter 3

Peacemaking From My Perspective

by Lupe De Leon, Jr.

Survival is the keyword in the barrios and it’s survival at any cost in the majority of the cases. While as persons of Spanish-speaking descent we adhere to a sociological style that carries responsibility beyond the immediate family, nevertheless we are as guilty as any other ethnic or racial group in not being “Good Samaritans” in cases “that are none of our business.” We are a very humanitarian people. We are a hospitable people. We are a brave and courageous people. We are also by nature of the need for survival a very violent people. Our national, family or personal pride dare not be insulted without serious repercussions. It is within the context of these statements that I will attempt to see how the Mexican Americans and other Hispanos search for peace.

Many in the barrios, associate PEACE with the demonstrations of the 60’s. Many see peace in terms of the opposite of WAR. We talk about being in a time of peace since our brothers, sons, cousins, fathers, etc., are not fighting in Vietnam.

LA RAZA (the race) must survive the vicious conditions and circumstances that keep “carnales”, Incarcerated in the barrios and fields. In the decade of the 60’s there were many overtly violent [19/20] demonstrations and confrontations. In the small towns and big cities we had the school “blow outs” — students walking out of school to protest the insensitivity of the educational system to their history, tradition and language. Cesar Chavez and the campesinos gained national and international attention as they were beaten, harassed and incarcerated for their beliefs. Reies Lopez Tijerina became a national Chicano leader with the land.” grants issue and the Tierra Amarilla courthouse raid. Jose Angel Gutierrez gave the Chicanos a platform via Mexican American Youth Organization. Rudolfo “Corky” Gonzales, a prominent Chicano Democrat, left the democratic camp and became a spokesperson for urban Chicanos. Many others could be mentioned.” Suffice it to say these leaders were involved in open and sometimes violent confrontation in their quest for justice for Chicanos in the educational field, in the agricultural field, in the question of the land grants and the complex urban lifestyles.

Some gains were made as a consequence of these confrontations. Some peace has been achieved. But as is the case with war there were also many casualties. This is an example of how peace is brought about in our communities. It is either this or continuous oppression and racist left unchallenged and unchecked.

Our communities do not have a peace tradition. Our churches do not adhere to the peace doctrine, Of course they teach that we are to love one another that we should not kill as according to the Ten Commandments, etc. But when Uncle Sam calls we must obey our government for it is an institution for our own good. How then can we be peacemakers in this setting? “¡NO ES FACIL!”[7]

The violence “within” our communities is ever present and continues to overwhelm us. It is standard procedure for a person to be shot or stabbed and not want to bring charges against his assailant, We might be led to believe that the person wants to [20/21] forget the incident and let bygones be bygones. Nothing could be farther from the truth! The injured party will see to it (as soon as he recuperates) that his assailant is taken care of in proper time and style. Vengeance! That’s the word for it.

Our youth, particularly the young men, learn to survive on the streets. The Army or Marines then make them an “offer they can’t refuse” and so the cycle sets in from unorganized street violence to sophisticated U.S. Government supported training in violence. The only employers who will seriously consider employing our young men are the Army and Marines.

To keep our young boys off the streets the local Boys Clubs of America and YMCA sponsor Golden Gloves competitions. Then we cheer and holler as young boys try to beat each other’s brains out. This is the violent condition of our communities.

As if this were not enough — we now have street-front Karate studios springing out all over our barrios. (Oh! And let us not forget that some public schools are now teaching martial arts.) And many high schools have Jr. ROTC as part of their program. Their shiny helmets and crisp uniforms really are attractive! Our young boys, instead of being challenged to enter the other various educational fields, i.e., engineering, architecture, medicine, law, etc., are being “trained” at a very early age in violence. So the question remains — how can we learn to be peacemakers or follow Jesus when the deck has been dealt and we are up against a royal flush?

The majority of us believe that war is wrong. I think the majority of us would agree that we ought to “do good to those that persecute and despise us.” We would all agree that we ought to all “walk the second mile” and be on the lookout for situations in which we can be “Good Samaritans” (Christians). If we believe this, why do we so often do the [21/22] opposite of that which we say we believe? Is it that “the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak?”

I bring these thoughts out only to point out that we cannot “blame” all that is happening to our youth on the system. We must rise up and take a stand against all that is happening in our communities, against all that exploits our people. We must rid the barrios of drugs and all that paraphernalia. We must clean up the “joints” that cater to the delinquency of our youth, i.e., pool halls, x-rated movie houses, taverns, etc. The members of the Christian community cannot act as if they are not touched … or it may be that their children will some day be prime candidates for these places and vices. We cannot blame the school and government. We must join “La Causa” as did Tijerian, Chavez, Gutierrez, Gonzales and many, many others.

“Corky” Gonzales led a significant Chicano delegation during the Chicano Moratorium. El Periodista, Ruben Salazar of Los Angeles died during the Moratorium. Salazar died innocently and yet he died for La Causa. Can we who supposedly believe in nonviolence not from a humanistic point of view, but rather a theological perspective, sit idly by and remain silent and criticize? “¡DE NINGUNA MANERA!”[8]

The great Cuban leader Jose Marti once said, “Those who do not have the courage to sacrifice themselves should at least have the modesty of remaining silent before those who sacrifice themselves.” And so if we are to be peacemakers we must exert ourselves in finding alternatives that are applicable to our culture and tradition within the philosophy of Jesus the peacemaker.

As we struggle to survive against all the oppressive forces (that hold a royal flush) who invite us to negotiate a deal that will bring about our liberation, we must “deal with the man” with integrity for justice and equality “para todos” (for everyone). [22/23]

As we try a process of “concientizacion” within our communities and barrios we must convince our “folks” that it isn’t cowardly or non-patriotic not to be a soldier. We must find alternatives that will help our youth stay in school either in higher learning or in vocational schools. The young men should not feel trapped into joining the Army or Marines or anything of the kind. This will promote learning and jobs never before available for our “Carnales.”

To go a step further, we as followers of Christ and in particular those of us who are members of a historic PEACE church, must go beyond mere humanistic values and incorporate the values of “carnalismo” into our ethics.

If we could succeed in convincing some of our own brothers and sisters of those great truths, we have begun our task. The most serious question before us are why did several young men from the Latino Mennonite Church die in the Vietnam conflict? Why have several others died violent deaths on the streets? Why is Karate such a big thing? Why must we fight? Why must we die before our time? I am sure that our Puerto Rican, Indian and Black brothers and sisters have asked themselves some of these questions, because Indians and Blacks dies alongside of their Chicano and Puerto Rican brothers and sisters.

We are at war in our barrios. Our enemy doesn’t always face us with a 38 Smith and Wesson or a “riot control” scatter gun. Sometimes our enemy comes in a leisure suit with liberal “jive talk.” At other times our enemy comes to us in the form of religion. Other times it comes to us in the form of a defeatist attitude. I say as does Cesar Chavez, “Si Se Puede!” (If it can be done), and as Jose Angel Gutierrez, “If you are not going to help just don’t get in the way!” Let us unite to do “nuestra cosa” (our thing). Let us follow our Master and Liberator Jesus. Let us with all our “Machismo” integrity be peacemakers.

April, 1976

Lupe De Leon, Jr. is a Chicano Mennonite living in Elkhart, Indiana. [23/24]

Chapter 4

Dynamics of Oppression

by Emma LaRocque

Over the last ten years or so, the word “oppression” and the phrase “oppressed peoples” have been thrown around a lot. Professors, preachers, social reformers, marxists and so forth have all used this expression, especially in reference to Blacks, Latinos or Indians. Despite the popularity of the word it is probably a fair guess to say that not many people have ever sat down to think through the meaning of oppression. What is it? How does it work? What happens to those who are oppressed? And as Christian minority people what should our response be to oppression?

Before I try to speak to those questions, let me emphasize that it is not my intent to make anyone feel guilty. Nor is it my intent to harangue or holler at the white man. Mere feelings of guilt do not solve anything; they only purge the conscience for a day. My concern is not şo much who the oppressor is, but rather, what does oppression do to people. What are the dynamics of oppression?

So, what is oppression? First of all, let me make a distinction between general, personal human suffering and oppressive suffering. General suffering seems to be an inevitable lot for all human beings. Every person — sometime or another in his or her life — suffers from loneliness, broken relationships, separation from loved ones, fear of death [24/25] and various other anxieties. Personal suffering is individual in nature.

Oppression, on the other hand, is a special sort of suffering, and it is group stuff in nature. It is when one group dominates another group. It is when that dominant group imposes its values, its traditions, its educational biases, and its economic and political systems over another group. It is a power-powerlessness relationship. And from my context this is the sort of relationship that has gone on and continues to go on between the white society and Indian peoples (as well as other minority groups) today.

Oppression is a process, and as such It has a beginning. The beginning is often physical in nature. Historically, oppression usually begins when peoples are invaded, uprooted, absorbed or transported from their homeland. For example, Euro-American oppression of North American Indians really began in 1492 and reached its peak in the mid 1800’s. My generation is still feeling the vibrations from all of this. Oppression recycles itself from generation to generation.

And of course, oppression of Black peoples began when they were uprooted and transported as slaves to all corners of the earth. Mexican Americans began their journey of oppression in the United States when the Border States — Texas, New Mexico, California, Arizona — passed Into the control of the United States in the 1800’s.

Puerto Ricans have suffered oppression as immigrants to New York City and elsewhere.

And at one time Anabaptist believers went through an excruciating amount of persecution from the sixteenth century on because of their religious beliefs.

Physical oppression usually results in horrible physical conditions. Any form of invasion brings death, disease and consequently, depopulation. As damaging as the physical part of oppression is, it is even more devastating on a psychological and [25/26] moral level. The cruelest thing that oppression does to people is that it demoralizes them. Another word for oppression can be demoralization. The process of demoralization has a dominoe-effect, and goes something like the following: When a people are invaded or uprooted, traditions (stability) are either destroyed or extensively changed. This means the disintegration of a culture which leads to instability, insecurity and hostility. It means losing a culture’s livelihood which is really losing self-sufficiency, and consequently, independence. “Lost as well are traditional outlets for self expression and self-actualization which are necessary for a people to have positive self-concepts” (Emma LaRocque, DEFEATHERING THE INDIAN, p. 36).[9] Many side-effects happen when a people lose their independence, Self-confidence and self-respect go too, The loss of self-confidence is when a people no longer believe in their ability to survive as a people.

Being part of a demoralized group also means being accustomed to taking a back seat. When I was in grade five the School Board decided to make us change schools in the middle of winter without any warning and without consultation with our parents. This meant leaving a small, mostly Metis school for a large, predominantly white school. Because of poor vision I was used to sitting in front rows, so I sat in the front row on the first day of my new school. It took only one class session to drive me to the back rows! The white children made sure I stayed with the “Indian row.” Back seats do not have to be legislated. Discrimination is so powerful it does not even need laws to express itself. This is not to minimize the ugliness of Jim Crow laws, but it must be said that informal segregation is hardly any less destructive.

Stereotypes are another thing that an oppressed group tangles with everyday. At least two things need to be exposed about stereotypes: First is that the oppressor needs them, the other is that the [26/27] oppressed people end up believing in them.

The oppressor needs stereotypes because generalizations provide easy answers, justify hostilities and ease guilt. It is never easy for any oppressor to admit responsibility for the suffering of other people. He would rather blame the suffering on superficial and misleading “answers” like laziness, drunkenness and stupidity. The oppressor fails (or refuses) to see that schools, history books, Hollywood, economic systems, law and courts and even churches contribute to oppression. Too often white people from the dominant society believe too easily in the justness of their systems.

The worst thing, however, about stereotypes is that the oppressed group believes in them! If one is persistently told he is lazy or drunken he might become just that. Or if one is expected to do poorly in school then it is easy to live down to such low expectations. In 1970, 80% of the Mexican Americans interviewed in Los Angeles and Texas agreed with the stereotype that they were more emotional and less progressive than Anglo Americans. Similarly, many Indians belittle themselves.

So when we have lost our Independence and self confidence, when we are forced to take back seats, and when we believe the stereotypes, we obviously cannot feel too good about ourselves. In response to all this, we’ve gone through many phases. As a child I learned quickly that I was hurting because I was Indian and brown. So I washed my face and arms a lot hoping my brownness would wash away! Many women in our communities curled their hair and bleached their faces with white powder. And while Indians curled their hair to look more Anglo, Blacks tried to straighten theirs!

Some of us almost passed as whites — but none of us can ever hide from our deepest selves. So we got angry. At first we could express our anger only at each other in our homes and communities. Just as a child kicks his innocent puppy after a powerless fight with a teacher, I (along with many minority [27/28] kids across North America) came home from school and took out my frustrations on my family.

These days we have spilled out our violence into the streets. But this violence has not come cold from the clear blue sky. Violence cannot be contained in ghettoes, barrios and tar-paper shacks. We have come full circle: Oppression is violence; it begins in violence, recycles itself in violence, and reaps violence.

It has been so easy to condemn physical violence, so easy to get uptight about the destruction of property and gadgets. It has been particularly difficult for pacifists to understand the violence, and equally difficult for them to perceive that minority peoples are violated everyday of their lives — either in the legal sphere, welfare system, the military recruitment or educational institutions. May I suggest that before we pacifists (minority or otherwise) can ever condemn violence we must work at eliminating the root causes of violence. Our primary concern should not be avoidance of violence or of the “world” but rather we must be continually and actively in search of peace.

How are the Christians, especially the Christian minority peoples, to react to oppression? Well, first of all, oppression is a psychological, socio-economic fact. It has a persistent tendency to perpetuate itself. We cannot pray it away without working at it. Neither can we simply sing it away. We couldn’t even fight it away with violence. Violence reaps violence. We must try to understand the process of oppression so that we can better understand where we have been, why we have been there, and what we can do and have done about it in our respective cultural contexts.

Secondly, we must help the larger society understand itself; particularly, we must help our white Christian Mennonite brothers and sisters not only to understand us, but more importantly to understand themselves. It is imperative that they reassess the roles they play in the various [28/29] oppressive institutions in the white society. They, along with us, must continually be alert as to where the church is really at in this complex area of oppression.

Those of us who belong to minority groups must also remember that we are potential oppressors. As we trace our respective histories we too can find moments in which we have been the oppressors. Since no one group of peoples can boast of ethical perfection, perhaps the task that is ahead for us is to tap the compassion in our oppressors and to remind us that the pendulum of power swings back and forth at unexpected times.

A word must be said about suffering — any form of suffering. In the secular world the era of the hippies in the 1960’s brought many changes. The intent of the young hippies was to shed their middle-class, suburban and often affluent ways of life. Ironically, one of the results of this rebellion against riches was an implicit glorification of poverty. And let me emphasize now that I consider poverty as one of the worst forms of oppression in modern society. At about the same time as the hippie era, the white Mennonite and other Christian groups revived a theology called “the simple lifestyle.” Patched-up faded blue jeans, plaid shirts and long hair became very popular in many Mennonite institutions. Vegetarianism also came with it. Perhaps unknown to these young enthusiasts, their “simple lifestyle” was also an implicit glorification of poverty.

The above observations are not meant to put down the hippies or the young white Mennonites. Many good and necessary things have taken place from the voluntary poverty movements of the 1960’s. I only point these out to say that the glorification of poverty and other forms of suffering is nothing new in the church. Historically, missionaries and priests have gone all around the world preaching to the missionized (and usually non-white) peoples that their suffering would be rewarded in heaven. [29/30] Similarly, white Christian masters would tell their slaves that slavery was a “Divine Appointment.”

This kind of preaching must be considered sociologically and theologically. Any theology that makes heaven out of oppression has a powerful Impact upon the oppressed people. On the socio-economic level it discourages the oppressed from actively working against poverty or any other form of oppression. As a child I remember someone telling me that people (us) who suffered on earth would get out of hell or purgatory faster than those who were presently well-off. And who wants to stay in purgatory?

Perhaps the most tragic thing about glorifying oppression is that poor people have often been made to believe that God willed them to be poor. And please note that those missionaries and priests who have spread this kind of “gospel” have not exactly been under oppression. It is simply not theologically correct to preach that God wants any group to be poor or under oppression … especially when the preachers are part of the oppressive system!

There is nothing in the Bible that says God wills oppression for any group of people. There is nothing holy about oppression itself. It will take no one to heaven. Neither will it erase social or personal sins. Indeed, the story of Exodus is the story of God leading the Israelites out of slavery and oppression! And the story of Jesus is the story that brings physical healing and spiritual freedom.

It is true that down the ages people who chose to follow God have suffered. And it is true that Jesus is best understood as the Suffering Servant, The reason that God’s people have suffered is not because God automatically wills oppression but because God wills faithfulness; and faithfulness has resulted in suffering because the larger world has always failed to appreciate the values of peace and justice of God’s followers.

Summarily then, just because people suffer does not mean they belong to God. People belong to God [30/31] only as long as they are faithful to God. Jesus on the Cross was genuine only because in life and ministry he was faithful to God in the form of a servant. He chose to be a servant; he was not forced to be a slave by people who claimed to be followers of God.

Faithfulness to God means we work for healing and preach freedom. It does not mean we preach that any old suffering is a doorway to heaven. And we certainly do not preach that slavery (any form of bondage) is a “Divine Appointment!” Faithfulness to: God means we preach and live out faithfulness to God; it does not mean we preach and live out oppression. While obedience to God may bring forms of suffering, it does not have to.

As long as the slaves believed that their enslavement was a “Divine Appointment” how could they strive for freedom? Today, as long as minority peoples hear that their suffering is a step-ladder to heaven, how can they hope for alternatives? A mere “simple lifestyle” is no fire insurance against the wrath of God. And there is a world of difference between voluntary poverty and choiceless oppression.

As Christians — missionaries and minority peoples — we must give up this myth of suffering. It has excused the slave masters and discouraged oppressed peoples from seeking freedom. Rather, we must begin afresh where Jesus began his ministry:

The spirit of the Lord is upon me because he has anointed me; he has sent me to announce good news to the poor, to proclaim release for prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind; to let the broken victims go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour. (Luke 4:18, NEB)

April, 1976

Emma LaRocque is a Metis Mennonite from northeastern Alberta. [31/32]

Questions for Discussion

1. All oppression has a beginning. It is a process. Discuss the things/factors/happenings in cultures/individuals that lead to oppression.

(Factors such as combat or invasion; hunger, disease and pestilence. If discussed within specific cultural groups then leader can probe for specifics, i.e. Mennonites persecuted; Blacks geographically relocated; Indians invaded and disease brought; Latin peoples invaded, etc.)

2. More damaging than the actual loss of population to an oppressed group is usually their loss of self-confidence. What happens to a people when they lose the confidence in their ability to survive?

(Social pathology usually sets in such as alcohol, violence, fear (sometimes expressed in witch-hunting, religious fanaticism, withdrawal), and disunity.)

3. The most effective weapon the oppressor uses against an already beaten and broken people is to attack persistently the moral value of their heritage and culture. Discuss some of the ways the present oppressor(s) use to de moralize minority peoples.

 (1. Here many things can be looked at, 1.e., media such as movies, ads. 2. School curriculum, especially history books and how they portray (or leave out completely) minority peoples. 3. Funding and how that is used as a DIVIDE AND RULE weapon. 4. Complete and unquestioned faith in technology and corporate capitalism and how that denies other values, etc.) [33/34]\

4. Discuss the differences between oppression and discrimination. (i.e., oppression is a corporate process which is comprehensive in nature. Discrimination happens specifically and in isolated cases.)

5. The route to renaissance of an oppressed group usually takes two divergent directions:

  1. Assimilate into the oppressor’s culture (“progressive”)
  2. Preserve the old ways: (“conservative”)

With this in view, discuss the following quotation: The dilemma faced by all oppressed or under-developed societies is “how to imitate superior alien customs while reasserting the integrity of the ancient way of life.”[10]

5a. Or is it possible to take an alternative road besides a hardline “progressive” or “conservative” one? What could this alternative road be?

6. What are the signs of resistance and rebellion to the oppressor? (It isn’t necessarily physical or militant.)

7. A popular saying says, “If you can’t beat ‘em, join’ ‘em.” Must oppressed people become like the oppressor in order “to win”?

8. Who is the oppressor? Is it always white people? Or does oppression exist as long as two different cultures meet/clash?

8a. “Do individuals oppress (perhaps they discriminate?)? Or is it systems (i.e., judicial, church Institutions, education system, welfare) that oppress?

9. How does the church help society in being the oppressor? [34/35]

(Discuss Sunday School pictures, European songs, European architecture, types of sermons, accepting technological values and work ethic without question, being isolated front questions of power and politics, using languages no one understands, assuming to have “the answer” without hearing the questions, not being prophetic or angry enough when it sees oppression, etc.)

10. How could the church help the oppressed?

(More Cross-Cultural Conventions? Funding? Educating the oppressor? Speaking to centers of economic power and politics? Demonstrating? Self-help programs? New Sunday School materials? etc.)

11. Religion has always played an important role for oppressed peoples. How? (i.e., soothing, escaping)

11a. Religion has also been an effective weapon for the oppressor. How? (It pacifies and there fore keeps people from rebelling.)

12. Any old religious conversion is not necessarily “good enough for Moses, it’s good enough for me.” What do we mean when we talk of religious conversion “within the cultural context?”

13. It seems that God’s history of salvation included liberation from oppression. God helped Moses lead His people from political slavery. Jesus proclaimed “liberty to the captives” in Luke 4:18. What could salvation/liberation mean today for minority peoples?

14. What can an individual young (Christian) minority person do today in response to a history of oppression?



Bennett, Lerone. Before the Mayflower (1964).

Huges, Langston. (ed.) The Poetry of the Negroe.

King, Martin. Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community? (1967).

Malcolm X, The Autobiography of Malcolm X (1965).

Oliver, Paul. Conversations with the Blues (1965)

Olsen, Jack. The Black Athlete: A Shameful Story (1968).

Scherer, Lester B. Slavery and the Churches in Early America, 1619-1819. (1975).

Skinner, Tom. How Black is the Gospel? (1970).

Spanish Americans


Dunne, John Gregory. Delano: The Story of the California Grape Strike (1967) paperback $1.95.

Gomes, R., (ed.) The Changing Mexican-American (1972).

Ludwig, Ed./Santibanez, James. The Chicanos (1972).

Matthiesson, Peter. Sal Si Peudes: Cesar Chavez and the New American Revolution (1969).

Moquin, Wayne, Van Doren, Charles. A Documentary History of the Mexican Americans (1971)

Ortego, Philip D. We are Chicanos (1973) (An anthology of Mexican-American literature).

Simmen, Edward (ed.) Pain and Promise: The Chicano Today (1972).

Puerto Ricans

Babin, Maria Teresa, The Puerto Ricans’ Spirit (1971).

Francesco Cordusco/Eugene Buchioni. The Puerto Rican Experience (1973).

Holsinger, Justus (1950’s), Serving Rural Puerto Rico. [37/38]



Beaver, R. Pierce. Church, State and the American Indians (1966).

Brown, Dee. Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee (1971),

*Deloria, vine, Jr. Custer Died for your Sins (1969).

_______________. The Indian Affair (1974).

_______________. God Is Red (1975).

*Dockstader, Frederick J. Indian Art in North America (1961).

Steiner, Stan. The New Indians (1968).

Vogel, Virgil. This Country was Ours (1972).


Campbell, Maria. Halfbreed. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart Ltd., (1973). (autobiography)

*Cardinal, Harold. The Unjust Society (1969).

*George, Chief Dan. My Heart Soars, Toronto: Clarke, Irwin and Company Ltd. (1974). (prose and poetry)

*LaRoque, Emma. Defeathering the Indian. Agincourt (Ontario): Book Society of Canada, (1975). (stereotypes in education)

McLuhan, T.C. Touch the Earth, Toronto: New Press, 1971. (Indian oratory, past and present)

*Asterisk designates Indian/Métis authorship


Allport, Gordon, The Nature of Prejudice (1954).

Bartel, Lois. A New Vision: A Study In White Racism. Scottdale: Mennonite Publishing House; and Newton: Faith and Life Press, (1973) (useful for Sunday school).

Buswell, James O, The Church, Segregation and Scripture (1964). [38/39]

Mays, Benjamin. Seeking to be Christian in Race : Relations. (1957) (paperback. 84 p. Useful for Sunday school discussion).

Reist, Benjamin. Theology in Red, White and Black (1975).

Schwartz, Barry/Disch, Robert. White Racism (1970).


[1] See also Lawrence H. Hart, “Cheyenne Way of Peace and Justice: The Post Lewis and Clark Period to Oklahoma Statehood” American Indian Law Review 28.1 (2003). -Ed.

[2] I am unable to find the source of this quotation. -Ed.

[3] Psalm 90:1-2 reads: “Lord, you have been our dwelling place in all generations. Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever you had formed the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God.” (NRSV) -Ed.

[4] The Reserve Officer Training Corps provides college and university training for officers of the US Military. -Ed.

[5] Hubert L. Brown – author of Black and Mennonite: A Search for Identity [John F. Funk Lectures no. 7] (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1976) – was Executive Director of Student Services for the Mennonite Board of Missions.

[6] Delton Franz, Let My People Choose: Christian Choice Regarding Poverty, Affluence, Standard of Living (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1969). Cf. Richard D. Thiessen, “Franz, Delton Willis (1932-2006).” Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online. July 2008. Web. 25 Sep 2020.,_Delton_Willis_(1932-2006)&oldid=141823. -Ed.

[7] “It’s not easy!” -Ed.

[8] “No way!” -Ed.

[9] Emma LaRoque, Defeathering the Indian (Agincourt, ON: Book Society of Canada, 1975), 36. -Ed.

[10] Anthony Wallace, The Death and Rebirth of the Seneca (New York: Vintage, 1972), 184. Original 1969. -Ed.

2 thoughts on “In Search of Peace: A Challenge from Four Non-white North American Mennonites

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.