Land Acknowledgment for Lake Nokomis Lutheran
We acknowledge that Lake Nokomis Lutheran Church is located on ancestral land of the sovereign Dakota Nation, stolen through dishonest dealings and broken treaties. We honor as truth that this land was, is, and will always be sacred to the Dakota people and integral to their identity and spirituality.
With gratitude for the many ways that we continue to benefit from the wisdom and work of the Dakota people and those with whom they shared this land, we acknowledge the complicity of Christian churches in past and present injustices. These harmful acts range from genocide, ethnic cleansing, forced assimilation, and unjust exile to ongoing practices that oppress and marginalize Indigenous people.
We commit to continued learning and truth-telling. And we commit to taking action, led by our Native relatives, that leads to justice for Indigenous people—in our community and beyond.
Questions & Answers – Listening and Learning Session Feedback
Q: Why say that the land was stolen?
A: There is a long, documented history of what amounted to land theft by the federal government—from dishonest dealings designed to ensure that treaties would be signed to refusal to void the treaty and renegotiate when treaty provisions were not honored.
The Treaties of 1851 signed at Traverse des Sioux and Mendota are considered to be the most outrageous: Dakota people sold most of their remaining land to the U.S. in exchange for $3,750,000 (estimated at 12 cents per acre), to be paid over decades. Little of the agreed-upon payment was ever received.
Also, a treaty article allowing Native retention of a 20 mile-wide strip spanning the Minnesota River was unilaterally removed by the U.S. Senate when presented for approval. Fear and threats to withhold rations guaranteed by prior treaties were just two of the tactics employed by colonial negotiators to force Dakota leaders to sign newly presented treaties. Following the U.S.-Dakota War of 1862, a federal law was passed, revoking all treaties between the U.S. and the Dakota.
Learn more about treaty history at the Mni Sota Makoce Honor Tax website: https://www.mnhonortax.org/context
Q: What other Native people shared the land?
A: Anishinaabe (Ojibwe) and Ho-Chunk people shared the land with the Dakota historically. Today, Minnesota is home to the governments of eleven tribal nations, as well as a resilient and robust urban Native American community made up of citizens of tribal nations across the country.
Q: Why use strong language like genocide, ethnic cleansing, and forced assimilation?
Ethnic cleansing and unjust exile: Minnesota leaders wanted the Dakota removed permanently from our state—and passed legislation codifying that wish in 1863. Elders, women and children were forced into a concentration camp at Fort Snelling in 1862-63, being made to walk 150 miles. Those that survived the experience then faced expulsion to Nebraska. Native women have also been subjected to involuntary sterilization.
Forced assimilation: Native boarding schools are just one example. Under threat of untenable consequences, children were separated from their families, not allowed to speak their language or practice their culture. Many students were subjected to abuse and violence. The Pipestone Indian School alone operated from 1893-1953, impacting multiple generations—a form of cultural genocide.
Q: What ‘ongoing practices’ is the statement referring to?
A: Examples include disproportionate rates of poverty, homelessness, incarceration and poor health outcomes in the Indigenous population; underfunding of tribal and reservation resource programs; and prioritizing profit and pipelines over Native water and climate concerns. Another marginalizing practice is failure of lawmakers and law enforcement authorities to devote sufficient attention to the issue of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women, Girls and Relatives (MMIWGR).
Q: How are Christian churches said to be complicit in the harms identified?
A: Christian Church complicity dates back to the Doctrine of Discovery, based upon a series of papal bulls issued from Rome. The 1455 papal bull, for example, granted Spain and Portugal the authority to seize lands and subjugate people in Africa and the "New World," as long as people on the lands were not Christian. Many Natives were murdered or enslaved as a result.
A more recent example: U.S. Catholic Church and Protestant denominations operated more than 150 residential boarding schools between the 19th and 20th centuries. The schools continued to operate into the 1970s. These churches put the national goal of assimilation ahead of their responsibilities as Christians.
Q: Should we be more specific about actions we’ll take beyond adopting a land acknowledgment?
A: Think of this statement as a work in progress. It can evolve over time, especially as progress is made on action plans.
The land acknowledgment does not replace the need for action by individual faith communities and together as New Branches.
Q: What resources were used to draft the statement?
A: Multiple resources were consulted, including the Minnesota Historical Society, Native Governance Center, Native theologians including Dr. Kelly Sherman-Conroy (Oglala Dakota Nation), and land acknowledgments created by other faith communities and organizations.
We acknowledge that Lake Nokomis Lutheran Church is located on ancestral land of the sovereign Dakota Nation, stolen through dishonest dealings and broken treaties. We honor as truth that this land was, is, and will always be sacred to the Dakota people and integral to their identity and spirituality.
With gratitude for the many ways that we continue to benefit from the wisdom and work of the Dakota people and those with whom they shared this land, we acknowledge the complicity of Christian churches in past and present injustices. These harmful acts range from genocide, ethnic cleansing, forced assimilation, and unjust exile to ongoing practices that oppress and marginalize Indigenous people.
We commit to continued learning and truth-telling. And we commit to taking action, led by our Native relatives, that leads to justice for Indigenous people—in our community and beyond.
Questions & Answers – Listening and Learning Session Feedback
Q: Why say that the land was stolen?
A: There is a long, documented history of what amounted to land theft by the federal government—from dishonest dealings designed to ensure that treaties would be signed to refusal to void the treaty and renegotiate when treaty provisions were not honored.
The Treaties of 1851 signed at Traverse des Sioux and Mendota are considered to be the most outrageous: Dakota people sold most of their remaining land to the U.S. in exchange for $3,750,000 (estimated at 12 cents per acre), to be paid over decades. Little of the agreed-upon payment was ever received.
Also, a treaty article allowing Native retention of a 20 mile-wide strip spanning the Minnesota River was unilaterally removed by the U.S. Senate when presented for approval. Fear and threats to withhold rations guaranteed by prior treaties were just two of the tactics employed by colonial negotiators to force Dakota leaders to sign newly presented treaties. Following the U.S.-Dakota War of 1862, a federal law was passed, revoking all treaties between the U.S. and the Dakota.
Learn more about treaty history at the Mni Sota Makoce Honor Tax website: https://www.mnhonortax.org/context
Q: What other Native people shared the land?
A: Anishinaabe (Ojibwe) and Ho-Chunk people shared the land with the Dakota historically. Today, Minnesota is home to the governments of eleven tribal nations, as well as a resilient and robust urban Native American community made up of citizens of tribal nations across the country.
Q: Why use strong language like genocide, ethnic cleansing, and forced assimilation?
- The Native resources the drafting team consulted said it’s important to use direct and appropriate language that doesn’t sugarcoat harms done. This is truth-telling that can be difficult to hear.
Ethnic cleansing and unjust exile: Minnesota leaders wanted the Dakota removed permanently from our state—and passed legislation codifying that wish in 1863. Elders, women and children were forced into a concentration camp at Fort Snelling in 1862-63, being made to walk 150 miles. Those that survived the experience then faced expulsion to Nebraska. Native women have also been subjected to involuntary sterilization.
Forced assimilation: Native boarding schools are just one example. Under threat of untenable consequences, children were separated from their families, not allowed to speak their language or practice their culture. Many students were subjected to abuse and violence. The Pipestone Indian School alone operated from 1893-1953, impacting multiple generations—a form of cultural genocide.
Q: What ‘ongoing practices’ is the statement referring to?
A: Examples include disproportionate rates of poverty, homelessness, incarceration and poor health outcomes in the Indigenous population; underfunding of tribal and reservation resource programs; and prioritizing profit and pipelines over Native water and climate concerns. Another marginalizing practice is failure of lawmakers and law enforcement authorities to devote sufficient attention to the issue of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women, Girls and Relatives (MMIWGR).
Q: How are Christian churches said to be complicit in the harms identified?
A: Christian Church complicity dates back to the Doctrine of Discovery, based upon a series of papal bulls issued from Rome. The 1455 papal bull, for example, granted Spain and Portugal the authority to seize lands and subjugate people in Africa and the "New World," as long as people on the lands were not Christian. Many Natives were murdered or enslaved as a result.
A more recent example: U.S. Catholic Church and Protestant denominations operated more than 150 residential boarding schools between the 19th and 20th centuries. The schools continued to operate into the 1970s. These churches put the national goal of assimilation ahead of their responsibilities as Christians.
Q: Should we be more specific about actions we’ll take beyond adopting a land acknowledgment?
A: Think of this statement as a work in progress. It can evolve over time, especially as progress is made on action plans.
The land acknowledgment does not replace the need for action by individual faith communities and together as New Branches.
Q: What resources were used to draft the statement?
A: Multiple resources were consulted, including the Minnesota Historical Society, Native Governance Center, Native theologians including Dr. Kelly Sherman-Conroy (Oglala Dakota Nation), and land acknowledgments created by other faith communities and organizations.