Christians - Missionaries are good or bad?

Question

Lets give you a real life situation.

In Australia, after the European colonization was in full throttle, the Australia government along with Christian missionaries set up several churches and missionary camps out in rural and outback Australia.

These were to supposedly help and convert Aboriginal children of half-Indigenous and half-European decent to learn the ways of God. In many cases, the mother of the child was Aboriginal and the half-white/half-black children were nicknamed "Half castes".

So, when this "protectionism act" was enforced, Aboriginal children form the ages of 3 to around 16 were taking away from their families (many forcefully) and shoved in these camps, usually without any friends or relatives.

In these camps the conditions were substantial and they were taught by mostly nuns about Christianity. Those who were the oldest and the "whitest" were sent into jobs to serve as caretakers for European farms and properties for the rest of their life...

In these jobs they were hardly ever paid and it was basically slavery.

Along with this fact, many of the younger generations lost their indigenous heritage, language and culture and were both socially, mentally challenged about their history and fitting into normal society.

Many turned to drugs/alcohol provided by the Europeans that they were not used to and many died at any early age or killed themselves.

They basically lost all their cultural heritage.

Aboriginal heritage had lasted around 40,000 years up until that point, and it is basically wiped out by the influence of the "stolen generation".

Many of the stolen children never regained contact with their families to this day.

This happened from the 1930's up until the 1970's, so the impacts are still very obvious today...

So, do you really think that missionary action was for the benefit of the children, or for the people preaching? Were the missionaries just basically spreading the word of God to save themselves and not others?

Is it really worth ruining a whole generation and culture over religion?

Rance D - Are you suggesting to simply ignore all the injustice that has occurred in the past?

And you didn't answer my question either.

Is missionary action for the good of the people being converted, or the people who are converting them? Is it good or bad?

"This is the thing, the real point- NO church should ever allow itself to be used by any government."

The laws and government have always been deeply intertwined with religion and faith (Christianity in this case). You cannot separate the two and merely blame the government - you know that is the truth.

Answer 1

Many more things have been done in Jesus' name that did not coincide with His instruction and example than those things done that have coincided. To believe that Jesus is responsible when one of us does something "in His name" that's irresponsible, arrogant, or dangerous is simply naive.

If you own a contracting business (we'll call it Company X) and you go out and build 50 houses, then I go out...and in the name of "Company X", tear them all down, does that mean you (Company X) are responsible? Of course not.

Christians who fall short of providing the "perfect" example of Christ are all of us (that's why we need Him.) Christianity (like any viewpoint) has its novices, and even its mavericks. But doing something idiotic "in Jesus' name" in no way implies ownership to Christ.

(Also...remember the European "version" of "Christianity" is, in large part, exactly why the United States of America began.
Know that even the purest of teaching and instruction can be corrupted by man' own vanity, in his quest for whatever it is that has garnered his attention.)

Answer 2

I think something like this really has to be examined objectively on a case by case basis, in order to determine whether missionary work is a good thing or a bad thing.

This is my honest answer.

To expand on that, it's true that some missionaries have done the indigenous peoples of various areas a horrible disservice. On the other hand, it's ALSO true that many missionaries have done a lot of good.

I support missionaries whose primary goal is to bring literacy, medicine, and water to people who otherwise wouldn't have them. Sharing the gospel is only secondary to these things. It's by feeding and educating people that missionaries do good.

For example: My church supports a mission in Poland known by the name of Elim. This mission donates clothes to the poorest in the community, has provided jobs for many people in the area, feeds the poorest in the community (one hot meal, every day)(that's really all they can afford), provides shelter for anyone who needs it (the restored palace the mission is based out of can house lots of families), and donates to the orphanage in the area. They also help sponsor adoption of orphans. THIS is the kind of thing I whole-heartedly support.

Are all missions/missionaries like this? No. But many of them are.

Answer 3

This is the thing, the real point- NO church should ever allow itself to be used by any government.
When they do, they STOP being a church, or doing work for God, and instead become agents of whatever government.
The church was used to achieve what the government wanted.

Answer 4

You know, this same thing happened to my ancestors. Young Native children were taken from their families and sent to the east to learn to be good Christians and good citizens.
One of my relatives, Rose, was caught while trying to swim across the Yellowstone River trying to escape.
She ran away several times, and after her education, she worked as a nanny at a rich couple's house.
When she got older, she was shipped back to the reservation, where she married and had a family of her own.

After all was said and done, she was glad she got the education, because in comparison to those who managed to escape the hands of their abductors, her life was better.
She and her husband (who also was sent to school) were better educated, held better jobs and most of their children went to college.

Answer 5

Why do so many people tend to take the WORST example of things and then hold it up a standard for every case? If I found a bad father who brutally abused his children should I hold that up as an example as to why there should be no fathers? Of course not...but this is exactly what you are trying to do...isn't it?

Answer 6

In my opinion, bad. And this is a particularly horrible example that you highlight. It is amazing to me how many horrible acts have been justified by religion--inquisition, witch trials, wars, slavery, mistreatment of women, etc.

Answer 7

They're generally good, but you have to make sure to use enough seasoning, and take care not to undercook.

Answer 8

is it fair to judge a whole culture or religion for the actions of a few generations?????? that should be the question.....