Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Gervase
Date: 15 Oct 01 - 07:28 AM

Some years ago I lived next to a college which trained missionaries for overseas work and I got to know some of those studying there.
Without exception they were incredibly nice people; drawn by a vocation and fired by a fervent if naive view that they were going out into the world to do good.
Some even accepted that they were embarking on a life of risk, and that there was a chance, albeit slim, that they may have to suffer for their faith and possibly even die (from disease and as collateral damage in internecine struggles and feuds if not directly targeted as Christians).
Their conviction and their faith were, possibly, little different to those that drive a suicide bomber, although naturally the would-be missionaries would recoil in horror at the thought of any physical coercion of converts (unlike organisations like the New Tribes Mission, which has perpetrated some foul deeds in the Amazon Basin).
To the college's credit, anyone accepted for missionary training had to have a skill which would demonstrably benefit the communities to which they'd be travelling - resulting in a lot of medics, engineers and teachers passing through.
To its discredit, however, was the evangelical ethos - the assumption, as has been mentioned earlier, of the superiority of their belief systems.
But maybe that's my problem - I have nothing against the propagation of essential truths and the expansion of the Englightenment, but I'm only interested in facts, science and rational humanitarianism. For someone to try to propagate a 'faith'; a core of beliefs which cannot be proven and which will not demonstrably improve the lot of the converted is, to me, pernicious.
By all means go overseas to teach, to cure and to build, but please don't ram an alien belief system down people's throats.
Maybe any religion that feels the need to proseletyse can't be too confident about itself. If your belief system is any good, surely the world will beat a path to your door to adopt it.
But maybe that's the rational humanist in me talking and trolling. As the saying goes, some of my best friends are Christians :^)

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: John Hardly
Date: 15 Oct 01 - 08:42 AM

"This remark makes me wince as it illustrates the very problem with the sort of missionary work that I've been discussing. The American Indian religions must not have been all they are cracked up to be if they couldn't withstand Christianity?

The religions of many of the American Indian cultures are what are termed "syncretic." They absorb what works from other belief systems they encounter. They are, however, based on the land from which the people live on (autochthonous) and utilize the world around them as dynamic expressions of the truth as they know it. Religions serve, in the most basic of functions, in teaching people how to get along in a society. In the world where they live. They have components that deal with "others" and with the environment and with "self.""

See, this is my assertion. If they depend on an unchanging world around them for the survival of their religion, they will necessarily fail…..as I said, if not by Christian influence, by some other influence that does function better in a changing world. The environment, both physical and intellectual, stands still for no one. That's my point.

"A big problem I see with the Industrial religions (called thus because though they appear to be the opposite of science, they are in fact hand-in-hand with science, unlike the religions of the low-tech New World) is their unrootedness. They also originated in an autochthonous place, but on another continent in another environment. In a desert, in the case of Christianity. Harsh social attitudes necessary to survive in the desert may be what contributes to the aggressiveness of this transplanted believe system. It has acted as a weed on this continent, beneficial at times, totally destructive at other times. But in no way should the indigenous beliefs be considered inferior, destined to fail anyway when one considers the firepower to which they were subjected along WITH Christianity."

And this statement is indicative of the point I made----that this discussion dismisses prior to the argument, the possibility that revelatory religions might be based on an objective truth. It also make assertions about the nature of religions in general that exceed the scope of a forum discussion to properly hash out—in short though, I respectfully do not agree with them. We accept everyday that something may be both true and unproveable. We dismiss this notion when we talk about religion…..probably because that possibility makes us too uncomfortable to think about.

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 15 Oct 01 - 12:38 PM

Damn, this is good writing. Thoughtful points articulately presented....although I agree with the folks who think the header could have been a little less flammable. great thread.

Rick

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 15 Oct 01 - 12:58 PM

Webster's definition of terrorism.

Terrorism. 1795: The systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.

This, I believe, is an adequate definition of terrorism in any context. This does not make religious zealotry terrorism. But terror may be a means of coercion, used by religous zealots. For instance the bombing of abortion clinics here in North America. No one in thier right mind with the least understanding of Christ's message would condone these actions. But they are done in his name. It is not religion which makes these people kill. It is something else.

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Dicho (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 Oct 01 - 01:37 PM

In my post to Paddymac's heading, I used the term strikalight, having in mind the bundle containing fire-making materials carried by Indians and early settlers alike. The initial post did seem to be one asking for opinions; it struck a light with me because of my dislike of proselytizers ("propagators of the faith"). Not only history but the present illustrates the harm they can do, albeit unknowingly. I did not mean to denigrate anyone's personal beliefs, only the overt propagation of those beliefs, usually in conjunction with a pressuring society. Some missionaries I consider harmless, among them the young men of the LDS who, however much I dislike their purpose, are well-educated, polite, and, until they develop a thick hide, embarassed at approaching people who are emphatic in their response. Priests and nuns have been killed in Latin America for espousing the needs of their native parishioners (there is tentative peace in Guatemala and Chiapas but the problems are not being addressed in any meaningful way). Medical missionaries, especially those like the eye surgeons working with the Seventh Day Adventists, I applaud.
Here in Canada, many young Indians were sent to church schools, abetted by the government, to learn the faith and customs of the white man, and to get a smattering of "education." Unfortunately, they learned just enough to turn them away from their parents and tribal elders and toward a white society that did not, and does not, want them. The education was sufficient only for the most menial of jobs. A considerable number of young boys were sexually assaulted by their teachers and administrators. Many ended up on skid row or in jails, an extremely disproportionate number in relation to whites. The schools are mostly closed today, but the legacy goes on. Assaulted former pupils are suing the churches, to the point that church administrators are asking for government protection from the suits because they would be bankrupted. Little was, and is being done to improve the reserves, the suicide rate is high and drug use incapacitates many, housing and services are inadequate, schools are inadequate and literacy low. The prayers of the natives to the white man's God, as well as to their own Gods, go unanswered. This is not history, it is current. Similar situations exist in the plains states. The pueblos and the nations of the United States southwest are making strides, but not much has happened yet in the plains and forests of the north.
It is these current situations that mostly "struck a light" with me; although, much interested in history, I have cited examples from the past as well.
I repeat again, I am not attacking anyone's personal faith- only the unthinking and forceful propagation of that faith. I apologise to those I may have offended, it was not my purpose.

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: GUEST,Still River Sage
Date: 15 Oct 01 - 04:48 PM

John Hardly wrote See, this is my assertion. If they depend on an unchanging world around them for the survival of their religion, they will necessarily fail…..as I said, if not by Christian influence, by some other influence that does function better in a changing world. The environment, both physical and intellectual, stands still for no one. That's my point.

I said nothing about the natural world being "unchanging." As an evironmental philosopher, I would be the LAST person to make that assertion. The syncretic impulse I discussed earlier is what allows the flexibility to live in a world with a spirituality based on the natural world and to absorb useful elements of other cultures as they pass by. To put it bluntly, this is the original "shit happens" kind of world view. Evil exists, one must learn to live with it. And these tribes have, by and large, done just that. But not on their own terms. Disease, warfare (of which they were not innocent, I don't make that claim, either), but on a European scale, and interference with the cultural teachings were more than many tribes could swallow.

Additionally, Mr. Hardly said . . .this discussion dismisses prior to the argument, the possibility that revelatory religions might be based on an objective truth. Yes, that is true. My non-christian, not-quite-atheist roots are showing. My a priori assumption is bolstered by an a posteriori examination of history. He also said We accept everyday that something may be both true and unproveable. We dismiss this notion when we talk about religion…..probably because that possibility makes us too uncomfortable to think about. We clearly will not agree on this point. It doesn't make me uncomfortable to think about it, I dismiss big organized religion in general as a male-dominated power game. Man did make god in his own image. I don't, however, dismiss the personal strength that individuals who have given it a lot of thought obtain from it.

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 15 Oct 01 - 05:32 PM

This thread is hard to wade through. So much information.

Terror means inflicting fear on others through violence. Some missionaries have done that, some didn't. Auto-da-fe's, Crusades, early cultures such as the Langadoc, Wicca, many middle European early religions, Goddess based religions, holy wars,collapse of the Ottoman Empire, persecution of early Christians.....all religious terrorism. It has happened through missionary zeal. It has also not happened.

I disagree that religion has not caused damage to the Native American. They were considered heathens by the white man based on scriptural asssumptions. The buffalo hunt was a kind of terrorism against the Native Americans. Religion did have something to do with that, not just the inecession of the railroad. We saw lynching in the South based on the idea that there was a scriptural basis for the preservation of slavery. In a sense, the whole Civil Rights struggle was waged against a kind of terrorism.

The idea of a missionary assumes a kind of superior position in trying to save another's soul may not be terrorism but it is arrogant and insulting. It can lead to terrorism but it is not always.

The idea that some fundamentalist Christians have that Jewish people can't go to Heaven could be construed as a kind of psychological terrorism. Terrorism doesn't always have to contain the extermination of unbelievers. Sometimes, it can be intimidation.

Frank

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: mousethief
Date: 15 Oct 01 - 05:38 PM

What I'm getting at is this - the most effective missionaries I have ever seen, and seen in action, simply live among the people they are witnessing to, helping them when they can and living a righteous life. Eventually, people come to THEM to learn more about this wonderful religion.

This is how St. Nina ("Equal to the Apostles") "evangelized" the nation of Georgia in the 9th century, and how St. Herman "evangelized" the natives on Spruce Island, Alaska in the 19th.

I hope one wouldn't say that the Russians gained nothing in professing Christianity in the 10th century, nor that their culture was disappeared or subverted to that of the Byzantines. The history of the Russian nation belies such a belief.

In contrast the most strident "evangelists" in the 20th century were the Marxist-Leninists. Now there is evangelism by terrorism. Literally.

Alex

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: katlaughing
Date: 15 Oct 01 - 06:04 PM

This comes from one of my favourite people, the Dalai Lama, and seems appropriate to post here. I receive a weekly quote from him by email:

"No religion basically believes that material progress alone is sufficient for humankind. All religions believe in forces beyond material progress. All agree that it is very important and worthwhile to make a strong effort to serve human society.

"To do this, it is important that we understand each other. In the past, due to narrow-mindedness and other factors, there has sometimes been discord between religious groups. This should not happen again. If we look deeply into the value of a religion in the context of the worldwide situation, we can easily transcend these unfortunate happenings. For, there are many areas of common ground on which we can have harmony. Let us just be side by side- helping, respecting, and understanding each other- in common effort to serve humankind. The aim of human society must be the compassionate betterment of human beings."-

His Holiness the Dalai Lama, from "Kindness, Clarity, and Insight", published by Snow Lion

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Oct 01 - 07:02 PM

Amen to that, Kat. The Dalai Lama is one of my favorite people, too.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: toadfrog
Date: 15 Oct 01 - 10:14 PM

Basically, the problem with labeling missionary activity as an evil is that it assumes, without stating, that the religion being taught is not a good in itself. And regardless of whether I personally think religion is good, that is an assumption many religious people do not accept. So that asking such people whether missionaries are "terrorists" is akin to trolling.

So I ask this. Just suppose it is true that missionary activities disrupt peoples' cultures and cause suffering on earth. And also suppose (just for argument's sake) that the absence of missionary activity will condemn all those people to eternal damnation. Now, based on these assumptions, are missionaries "terrorists"?

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 15 Oct 01 - 10:36 PM

Joe has put up a stoic defence as usual. But I would urge him to read "Religion and the Rise of Capitalism" by Richard Tawney. Its argument that the world's religions have in significant degree been shaped to address vested interests is so persuasive as to be almost irrefutable.

Joe's particular religion owes its survival and wide propagation largely to the fact that it was adopted as the state religion of the Roman empire, Constantine seeing its unique intolerance of other religions as a useful device for building cohesion across the empire. (The state's role in developing its new religion, to mutual benefit, is first documented in chapters 15 and 16 of Gibbon's "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.")

Later, the church was to amass fabulous wealth by putting a price on salvation and selling indulgences - a monstrous example of religion being shaped purely to feed vested interests. No wonder some were diffident when papal infallibility was voted in, in 1870 (it applied retrospectively of course, Joe - not just to subsequent ex cathedra papal pronouncements.)

I am frankly amazed that Joe can write: "I strongly support the Catholic Church's ...uneasiness with warfare and with capitalism." This of a church that makes Rupert Murdoch a papal knight!

Never mind the barbarity of the crusades, or the iniquities inflicted on South America under the Spanish conquest, or Rome's deep unease at the spread of demmocratic governance 100 years ago. Or its hostility to tolerance and freedom of expression, as in Pius IX's "syllabus of errors" published around 1865.

It's enough to remember how the Vatican sided with United States interests against its own clerics on the ground in El Salvador. Or Rome's pathological hostility to communism (the only possible excuse for Pacelli throwing in his lot with Hitler - in defiance of brave archbishops in Germany and Austria - long before going on to become the famously spineless Pious XII).

The Vatican's capitalist sympathies have been stalwartly upheld by the present Pope, whose meddling in eastern Europe has been thrown back in his face. (In open and fair elections in Poland a few weeks ago, the former communists got 45 per cent of the vote and are back in government, while the western/Vatican construct Solidarity didn't win a single seat.) To say nothing of the corruption and scandals involving Bank Ambrosiano, Roberto Calvi, etc, that preceded his accession. Unease with capitalism???

Some church. Its shortcomings are not merely "newsworthy" Joe, they are shameful in an institution that puts itself next to god; presumes to hear the confessions of lesser mortals; and to absolve us of our sins, blah, blah, blah.

Briefly on a wider note, it is now well documented (from their own correspendence, among other sources) that many if not most of the 19th Century missionaries in Africa and India, including probably the best-known, Livingstone, saw their work as opening up new markets for British trade. Persuading "savages" to wear shoes (cue Bata) meant breaking down their cultural values, and pushing Christianity up their noses was as good a way as any to do it.

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 15 Oct 01 - 10:39 PM

Geez, toadfrog, now who's trolling?! That question of yours is tantamount to using the word in the definition. Accepting your argument would trump our own. Can't do it.

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: toadfrog
Date: 15 Oct 01 - 10:50 PM

Stilly River: I don't really understand what you are asking. Are you saying, "of course all religions are false, all reasonable people think that"? Maybe I would agree with that. But there are people who don't. Some of them are Mudcats. Do you have anything to say to them? Or are they just beyond the pale?

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 15 Oct 01 - 11:29 PM

Toadfrog said And also suppose (just for argument's sake) that the absence of missionary activity will condemn all those people to eternal damnation. Now, based on these assumptions, are missionaries "terrorists"?

You misconstrue. My complaint is merely rhetorical. I am pointing out that if anyone who disagrees with you regarding religion, particularly the "eternal damnation" stuff, accepts this premise (for the sake of argument) on the terms that you've stated above, they've lost the argument before they utter one word.

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Haruo
Date: 15 Oct 01 - 11:33 PM

Without missionaries Buddhism would never have penetrated the Tibetan plateau. And then where would the Dalai Lama be? (I like the guy, too.)

Liland

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: toadfrog
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 01:01 AM

Liland: Good question! I'll bite - where would he be??

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 03:22 AM

Fionn, you're absolutely right. I've read most of what you said from the same critical perspective - in the pages of Catholic publications. If it were the Vatican I were defending, I'd have to back down and agree with your perspective completely. The Vatican has all the politics and intrigue and corruption that you'll find in any political organization on earth - and the Vatican may well be the oldest political organization on earth. If the Vatican were the sum and substance of my faith, I'd be truly miserable. Politics isn't pretty - and the Vatican is very political. Still, you need the politics to give the organization structure and keep it going.

I've lived in the United States for all but two of my 53 years, and I like it very much here. I guess I could say that for about ten years of my lifetime, I was proud of the people leading my country. I suppose that about the same is true for my church. I swore I'd move to Canada if Ronald Reagan were elected, but I didn't - and the country survived his reign. I get frustrated as hell with Pope John Paul II's stodgy conservatism - but I have to say I think he's a good man. The only popes I was proud of were John Paul I and John XXIII.

If you judge an organization by its leadership, you will most likely have a very negative view of that organization. Generally, leaders are not nice people, and it's quite often that they're less than amazingly intelligent. Leadership is only one facet of an organization or a community. Leadership is essential for any organization, but it is usually not the essence of an organization - and maybe "organism" would be a more descriptive word than organization. Along with a history of political intrigue, the Catholic Church has a strong intellectual backbone; a deep, widespread spirituality; and a tradition of altruism and charity. Rome has very little to do with the intellectual, spiritual, and charitable essence of the Catholic Church. Oh, yes, we have some right-wing kooks who won't lift a finger without permission from Rome - but every organization has right-wing kooks. In the life of a normal Catholic parish, Rome is hardly ever even mentioned.

So yeah, Fionn, the Vatican stinks. It's every bit as political and corrupt and full of intrigue as Washington, D.C. I suppose it would be nice if it were otherwise, but that's not the nature of organizational leadership. the U.S. can't get along without Washington, and the Catholic Church can't get along without the Vatican - but Washington is not the essence of the U.S., and the Vatican is not the essence of the Catholic Church. I'm fascinated with the politics of both organizations and I follow their politics closely - but I've learned not to take the politics too seriously.

-Joe Offer-

By the way, Papal Knights serve two functions in the Catholic Church:

1. they donate lots of money
2. they get to wear silly-looking costumes

If the Pope made Rupert Murdoch a papal knight, it's no big deal.

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: mousethief
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 12:00 PM

I have one historical bone to pick with Fionn:

In open and fair elections in Poland a few weeks ago, the former communists got 45 per cent of the vote and are back in government, while the western/Vatican construct Solidarity didn't win a single seat

Solidarity was largely home grown. Whereas communism was imported, immediately from Russia, but ultimately from England and Germany. Marx was not Polish. Lenin learned much of his Marxism in Switzerland.

Alex

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Ebbie
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 12:23 PM

Joe O, that was an excellent presentation! As a non-Catholic with many Roman Catholic friends, I had wondered at times how they reconcile the Church's political history with their own beliefs. You have broadened my understanding. Thank you.

Ebbie

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 12:49 PM

Hi paddymac, great thread.

Missionaries are not terrorists, IMO, but they do spread evil. Evil, in my definition, is anything that blocks the good that humans can do. Terrorism is the use of violence (either threatened or enacted) to accomplish political ends. It is evil to tell people what in the supernatural is "true" and what is not. It is evil to tell people to depend on an intermediary (priest, pope, imam, or anyone) when trying to figure out their conscience. It is evil to plan for the afterlife and neglect the present life. It is evil to build a beautiful cathedral as long as schools and hospitals are ugly. It is evil to pray when work could accomplish something. It is evil to tell people about Heaven and Hell but not about basic biology. But it isn't terrorism unless you terrify people - even Hell & Brimstone preachers don't fall under that heading, they may be getting their church donations by threatening future punishment but not by meting it out in the present and they saying I did it for the children, or something. For Fallwell to be a terrorist he'd have to tell people to bomb abortion clinics, or something... Wait.. OK, they are terrorists when they preach violence for political ends, even if that end is just getting their particular myths into the supposedly secular legal system. But if all they are preaching is religion, they may be evil, but they are not terrorists. If they crusade against the other religions, they can become such only too easily.

(Mrr, DARFC)

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 01:47 PM

St. Peter's Basilica in Rome is one of the largest and most beautiful churches in the world. There's an inscription in huge letters above the entrance. You'd think it would be an inspiring scripture passage, or sometime in homage to St. Peter, or maybe the name of the church. Nope. The inscription says the building was erected during the reign of Pius V, Pontifex Maximus (Supreme Pontiff). Pius V (1504-1572) became pope in 1566, just after the Council of Trent, and he implemented a number of reforms to correct the worst of the abuses that had triggered the Reformation. He also got his name plastered on buildings all over Rome. You'll see his name in Rome more than you'll see the name of Richard Daly in Chicago. And yes, I believe you'll see his name on some beautiful schools and hospitals.

The opulence of Puis V's buildings made me uneasy when I visited Rome. Still, I love architecture almost as much as I love music, and a lover of architecture can't help but be in awe in Rome. I didn't get any spiritual inspiration from Rome at all, but my Italian-American friend Bill was in ecstasy. So, should Pius have spent all that money on all those buildings? Should anybody spend money on frivolous things like art and music? I dunno - but I'm sure glad we have them. I'm sure those buildings kept the Bernini kids in diapers for generations. Opulent buildings may seem wasteful, but their construction provides jobs and the natural resources used in construction are quite plentiful.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 03:41 PM

Webeter says terrorism is coersion through terror. The type of terror is not specified and I don't think think it has to be, if you frighten someone to the point of terror to bend them to your will then you are a terrorist. By that definition, perhaps some catholic educators have beeen terrorist? I wouldn't know. But that is not what missionaries do. Perhaps a small number have used terror as a technique. But most use bribery ("Listen to me and I'll give your village medical care or water") or they just set a good example and preach. It has been an interesting discussion, but certianly the answer to the original question is "No".

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: GUEST,Paul
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 04:07 PM

As someone who has embraced the Lord Jesus Christ as his lord and Savior I find this thread appalling. I have spent the last decade of my life supporting efforts at enlightening heathens throughout the world about God's love and the benefits of adopting civilized mannerisms. People who go about in various stages of nudity, and who cohabitate without the blessings of the church need spiritual guidance. Your efforts to criticize the efforts of God's workers is as good as sentencing millions to eternal damnation.

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 04:29 PM

Gee, Paul, that's almost the same thing Sister Mary Conscience said to us in Catholic grammar school in the 1950's, when she collected our dimes so we could adopt "pagan babies." I'm glad many churches have changed in the last 50 years. Generally, they approach people of other faiths and cultures with much more respect than they used to - and with much less paternalism.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: GUEST,Paul
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 04:47 PM

The last thing that people who worship cows, rocks, etc. need is respect. They must be firmly guided onto the proper path. God has given us the inspiration and the means to provide that guidance. When they are fully clothed and are kneeling before the altar of Christ, then they will be worthy of the respect of the civilized nations. Those who provide this guidance need your prayers and monetary support instead of smug comments. But then again, I am probably dealing with people who wish to have "In God we trust" removed from our currency.

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: MMario
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 04:52 PM

Paul - first, it is not the altar of Christ - it is God's altar - there is a difference you know.

secondly - I don't remember where in the bible it says anything about being fully clothed. In fact - nakedness and innocence are often related.

thirdly - you are descending to personal insults - without even knowning the people whom you are addressing.

This is suppossed to put a good face on Christian mission? Methinks you are shooting yourself in the foot.

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: katlaughing
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 04:55 PM

I'll bet you'd love to lock away homosexuals, paint the letter "A" on the dresses of unmarried women who have sex, and keep your women barefoot and pregnant, too. Want to bring back whipping posts?

The days of the old patriachal church are gone. Your intolerance is offensive and archaic. What arrogance to believe such as you've posted. The type of coercion you seem to advocate borders on terrorism, imo.

And, yes, I for one, would like to see our money changed, without that particular phrase, but it is not something I obsess over, nor would even work towards getting done.

kat-pantheist

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 05:05 PM

Well, actually, I think that Paul is engaging in an age-old religious tradition known as trolling, seeking to satisfy his primal, sexually-deprived craving for attention.
...But don't tell Paul I said that. I probably shouldn't have responded to him in the first place, but he reminded me of all the fun we had telling exaggerated war stories about the nuns.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Dicho (Frank Staplin)
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 06:37 PM

As well as folk music, I am a lover of late renaissance polyphony. Much of the music and art before 1800 is religion-based because that's where the money was. I have a low regard for Pope Marcellus because he changed the direction of choral music away from polyphony toward the simpler form of Bach and the Baroque masters. He objected to polyphonic masses because they required professional singers and the parishioners could not understand the lyrics. This has nothing to do with the subject of this thread, but I excuse myself because others are wandering as well.
Getting back to the subject, I reiterate my dislike of proselytizing missionaries, but I appreciate much that those interested only in helping people have done. This thread should be concerned with missionaries, not the right to practice the religion of your choice. Are missionaries terrorists? I think not; misguided but not terrorists and useful if they help but do not force their beliefs on those they help. Posts like Paul's may change my mind, however. He is as frightening as the current local bishop and his crew who suggested excommunication for one of our local representatives in Parliament (Canada) because he supports a woman's right to choose and was the marshall of the local gay parade.
Wandering again, Joe's mention of the stories about nuns reminds me of the irreverance (downright blasphemous!) shown by some students towards the teaching nuns and priests in my home town, which was largely Catholic when I was young. Some of the teachers were threatening and strict, but terrorists? No. One had terrific aim with an ink well when he was provoked. I also remember the young apprentice Franciscans (forget what they were called) who went over the wall at night to partake of the pleasures indulged in by we heathens and protestants.

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: katlaughing
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 07:17 PM

That must've been quite a sight, Dicho!

Joe, I had considered the possibility and I think you are right. Nonetheless, it is also true that there are people who believe as Guest, Paul has posted.

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 08:23 PM

Ah, yes, nun stories. We used to sing,

Give a yell, give a cheer,
For the nuns who make the beer,
In the basement of St. Rita's School
(tune: Caisson Song)

Word has it that the convent had been a speakesay until the parish bought it out....
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: GUEST,Tahoe
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 08:27 PM

I just don't understand why religions have to recruit. "The conversion of a savage to Christianity IS the conversion of Christianity to savagery" George Bernard Shaw...Androcles..

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 08:45 PM

Maybe recruiting isn't an accurate term for all missionaries, Tahoe. Many religious people feel their faith obliges to serve their fellow human beings. I think the best of the missionaries are doing just that nowadays - with no preaching, and no strings attached. That's certainly the case with most of the missionaries I've known myself. They spend their time solving human problems and serving human needs, not preaching. A close friend of mine spent five years as a Maryknoll missionary in Thailand - he served in an office that worked to combat prostitution and the sex trade in Southeast Asia.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: GUEST,Tahoe
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 09:06 PM

But then they should label themselves aid workers or relief workers and not missionaries. They may start out serving there fellow man w/ food, shelter, schooling etc... but it's religion (and I think conversion) that drives them. It seems to be a numbers game w/ Mormonism and Catholisism et al. It may be good intentioned but the ultimate goal is numbers, $$ and people.... Jehovas Witness used to visit my grandparents years ago. They would sit and talk to them for hours (my G'parents were lonely. After about a year or so and many turn downs to join their faith they abruptly stopped showing up. They weren't a friend. They realized it was a waste of time trying to recruit and bailed..People in need be it food, schooling or just conversation are prey for ANY religios recruitment. And I think it's sad...

Vaya Con Dios

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 16 Oct 01 - 09:37 PM

Can't believe anyone fell for the Paul thing. Hello? Paul??? As in, St. Paul, one of the most difficult Biblical writers to swallow?

~S~

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Oct 01 - 09:03 AM

WYSIWYG wins the gold star for smarts. Actually, I agree wholeheartedly with most of the comments in this thread. I was just curious as to how folks here would react to a hardcore fundamentalist.

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: John Hardly
Date: 17 Oct 01 - 09:10 AM

Those were not the words of a "hardcore fundamentalist".

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 17 Oct 01 - 09:29 AM

I thought it was a sin to swallow, WYSIWYG! LOL!

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 17 Oct 01 - 09:30 AM

In every thread like this I can recall, the good discussion has eventually wandered off the track to less-amicable grief.

Sometimes the things you have read need to be processed and absorbed...

Sometimes the feelings get hooked and the resulting frustration can limit the good you might have gotten out of it.

Sometimes it's good to say to yourself, "This was.... all right. Maybe it was enough, for now."

This has been.... all right. It's enough, for now, for me.

~S~

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 17 Oct 01 - 09:42 AM

Well, I didn't, Mrrzy! *G*

~S~

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 17 Oct 01 - 10:48 AM

Fair play, Joe - that was a cracking response to my post. And I take A;ex's point, but only up to a point. There is surely a distinction between an idea (eg communism) and a specific, funded organisation (eg Solidarity).

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: katlaughing
Date: 17 Oct 01 - 11:46 AM

So, Susan and Guest, facetious Paul, are we supposed to feel like fools now? Do you feel all better, having a good gloat? Was mucking up a good thread really necessary?

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: Dicho (Frank Staplin)
Date: 17 Oct 01 - 01:33 PM

The problem is that there are too many real people like Paul's invention out there. They must be taken seriously.

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: GUEST,Paul
Date: 17 Oct 01 - 01:51 PM

Katlaughing,

Some might argue that your thread is mucking up a good music site, but I won't go there. Rather, think of Paul as providing valuable insight into the dynamics alluded to by dicho. And try to relax bit.....

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 17 Oct 01 - 02:25 PM

No, Kat, I wasn't gloating, really... I am sorry it seemed that way, and if I pushed your button I am very glad you hollered. I think I may have been trying to point out that some of the really excellent thinking had gotten overwhelmed enough that something obvious had snuck past you (plural). And that the person who had posted in such a fashion as to push those buttons had gotten over on you (singular) again-- and I don't like it when people bait you that way. I was inviting you (plural) to notice, with me, that you are smarter than that. *G*

Dang English. (The language, not the people.)

~Susan

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: John Hardly
Date: 17 Oct 01 - 02:27 PM

here's the Paul I know;

1 Corinthians 13

1] If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.

2] If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.

3] If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames,[2] but have not love, I gain nothing.

4] Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.

5] It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.

6] Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.

7] It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

8] Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away.

9] For we know in part and we prophesy in part,

10] but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears.

11] When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.

12] Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

13] And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.


Hard to do....not hard for me to swallow.

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: katlaughing
Date: 17 Oct 01 - 03:59 PM

Dicho, agreed.

Not my thread, Guest, Paul. Don't tell me what to do.

Susan, thanks, but it did sound like a holier-than-thou gloat. Let's let it go, now, okay?

Thanks, John, great quotes and ideals.

kat

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 17 Oct 01 - 04:03 PM

Kat, if you are determined to mis-characerize what I have in my heart, and then tell me to drop it when I tell you what IS actually in my heart, it's not going to further any understanding.

~S~

Subject: RE: Missionaries also a breed of terrorists?
From: GUEST,Paul
Date: 17 Oct 01 - 04:29 PM

Katty,

It may not be YOUR thread, but given the possessive manner in which you referred to it, i felt quite accurate in my response. And I will not try to TELL you what to do, but I would politely suggest that you get that Xanax prescription re-filled.