| Author |
Message |
    
Mustt_mustt
Citizen
Username: Mustt_mustt
Post Number: 233
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - 11:58 pm: | 
|
www.outlookindia.com
Counting Sheep?
The proselytising zeal of American missionaries knows no slack even in tsunami aid
SEEMA SIROHI
Are American Christian evangelists using the devastation wreaked by the tsunami to spread the word of God—their God? Disturbing stories from the region and fund-raising appeals from religious leaders in the US who want to "plant Christian principles as early as possible" in the orphans of Indonesia, Sri Lanka and India have raised profound questions about proselytisation of vulnerable people in times of tragedy. Some groups send help along with Bibles—in Bhojpuri—to increase the fold in affected countries, making it harder for others to provide relief. By lacing help with questions of faith, however delicately, evangelical groups can deepen religious faultlines at a time when talk of civilisational wars rages in e-chat rooms.
The controversy surfaced earlier this month when Vernon Brewer, president of the Virginia-based missionary group World Help, told journalists he wanted to airlift 300 'tsunami orphans' from Banda Aceh to raise them in a Christian children's home. He quickly retracted when the Indonesian government banned adoptions by non-Muslim groups. From India surfaced a story about Samanthapettai, a fishing village in Tamil Nadu hit by the tsunami, where some Christian missionaries reportedly refused to distribute biscuits and water unless the Hindu recipients agreed to change their faith. When TV reporters approached the nuns, they refused to comment and left.Local missionaries in India and other non-Christian countries are funded to a large extent by resource-rich American groups—powerful multi-million dollar corporations complete with TV channels and private planes. The websites, updated with fervent appeals for funds and tearful photos of tsunami survivors, are a window to their incredible organisation and explicit agendas for touching the "unreached people" or non-Christians with the hand of God. They look at India and Indonesia as "opportunities" for spreading the gospel. India is often described as a land of darkness, of idol worshippers and an area ripe for redemption.
World Help has printed 1,00,000 Bibles in Bhojpuri, a language it glibly assumes was hidden from evangelists. "Imagine a group of 90 million people who have never been able to read God's Word in their own language until just recently. What an incredible opportunity God is giving us to provide Bibles for the Bhojpuri for the very first time!" declares its mission statement. (Not quite an accurate claim: Bible work in Bhojpuri is nearly a century old in India, even older if you count work targeted at the diaspora.) Yet, the statement goes on: "Our strategy for the next seven years is to plant 1,00,000 organised churches and 1 million house churches in the least-reached area of the world...specifically in the North India(n) state of Uttar Pradesh." This January, World Help is sending a mission to India "where God is overcoming hundreds of years of false religions and idol worship. In...Allahabad alone, 40,000 new believers now meet weekly to worship the one true God."Another group, Samaritan's Purse, has also energised around the tsunami tragedy. Headed by Franklin Graham, son of presidential godman Billy Graham, this North Carolina-based group's helicopter is helping ferry victims from inaccessible areas. Graham, who appears on his website in a leather jacket more suited to Mick Jagger, called Islam an "evil and wicked" religion after the 9/11 attacks. While organising relief for the tsunami victims, Graham told The Baltimore Sun, "If we are going to depend on Muslims to go in and help Muslims, well, they aren't coming." He publicly hoped the victims and their kin "would come to know the God I know", which to some was an admission of the larger purpose. He has left for Indonesia with a planeload of relief supplies.Graham sees India as a "vast subcontinent" where Samaritan's Purse projects are "helping bring the gospel to thousands living in spiritual darkness". However, Don Norrington, a spokesman for Graham, told Outlook that proselytisation, which he called an "inflammatory word", was not the group's policy. Currently, it is working in partnership with local Indian affiliates to rebuild a fishing village. The strategy allows US groups to maintain a safe distance from "conversions" while local groups do the work. But the 2003 annual report of Samaritan's Purse announces that in India it "completed 10 church buildings, with another four under construction, and provided support for pastors, Bible schools, Christian schools and a daycare centre".
"(Such) proselytisation demeans conversion, for it uses helplessness to spread a religion," says Prof Ashutosh Varshney. Mission statements are generally explicit about their goals. Samaritan's Purse says it "serves the Church worldwide to promote the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ". The World Help website, which opens with a heart-wrenching photo of a crying Indian woman, lists its mission as "effective evangelism, discipleship, church planting, humanitarian aid, child sponsorship, leadership training and literature distribution". A specific appeal, scrubbed clean last week from the site, sought help to place Indonesian orphans so "their faith in Christ could become the foothold to reach the Aceh people"."This kind of proselytisation demeans the idea of religious conversion, for it uses helplessness to spread a religion," says Ashutosh Varshney, political science professor at Michigan University. "A genuine change in conviction remains the best basis for religious conversion and should not be stopped. Few people in abysmal distress can exercise sound judgement."John Hare, a professor at the Yale University's school of divinity, says in general Christian groups regard providing relief as part of Christian service. "They don't make a distinction between relief and spreading the gospel. But if they're using aid as leverage in acceptance of the gospel, it is inconsistent with what Christians believe," he said. Sid Balman, a spokesman for InterAction, a coalition of 160 US relief organisations which raised nearly $200 million for tsunami aid, said its charter doesn't prohibit proselytisation but does ask members to respect local norms and abide by laws. Asked how they monitored member groups, Balman said the "only way it would work is if someone complained", an unlikely prospect unless another organised religion gets into the act. At least 30 per cent of the groups in InterAction are faith-based, some Jewish and Muslim.When religious passions are high, it's important to analyse the role of all religious fundamentalists. While Muslim extremists are commonly denounced in the US media, Christian hardliners are rarely challenged. Leading evangelists routinely smear other religions, specially Islam, on mainstream networks and still receive grants from President George Bush. Jerry Falwell, founder of Moral Majority, called Prophet Mohammad "a terrorist" on CBS on October 6, 2002. The insult sparked a riot all the way out in Solapur, India, killing eight people and injuring 90 others.At a time when America is increasingly viewed as waging a war against the Muslim world, hateful speech and charity with an ambiguous agenda from zealous Christians can only add to the tension.
|
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 1942
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 10:51 am: |
|
I think it's time for a new word: propheteering.
You saw it here first, folks. 
The tsunami victims need evangelism about as much as they need an outbreak of typhoid. |
court07040
Citizen
Username: Court07040
Post Number: 184
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:07 am: |
|
The bottom line is that at least those christian churches are sending money and people are being helped. Would you prefer that they do nothing? |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 1944
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:14 am: |
|
No, I would not prefer that they do nothing. I would prefer that they help these people without using these horrific circumstances as an opportunity to convert them.
Duh. |
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 4273
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:21 am: |
|
Court 07040 misses the point.
There are a lot of faith-based aid groups which have been working in these parts of south Asia for decades, performing real charitable work, without taking advantage of the destitution of the people they are assisting. That's genuine charity, not the opportunistic activities of these latecomers.
And by the way, the work of the genuinely charitable Christian groups may be harmed, and their personnel could actually be endangered, by the antics of the aptly-named "propheteers". |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 4363
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:24 am: |
|
"not the opportunistic activities of these latecomers."
You mean the folks that came to the region AFTER the Tsunami?
|
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 4274
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:25 am: |
|
Not all of them, just the ones who came to take advantage of the situation, instead of simply to provide assistance. |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 4364
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:27 am: |
|
With all the horror there, this is just something that's not making the top 50 problems..
|
Robert Livingston
Citizen
Username: Rob_livingston
Post Number: 761
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:32 am: |
|
It's disgusting that groups would take advantage of the situation, but a much more real and pressing concern are poachers looking to kidnap children. Although his article doesn't deal with tsunami victims directly, a huge concern is that many displaced children will end up where Nicholas Kristof found these children in an article on child slavery/prostitution everyone should read, regardless of political preferences.
|
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 1946
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:49 am: |
|
Straw - I agree. But hey, the subject is being raised by newspapers in the region. And if the propheteers are withholding aid unless the victims convert -- and some groups have been accused of this -- then it becomes a very serious issue. |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 642
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:54 am: |
|
Straw,
quote:"not the opportunistic activities of these latecomers."
You mean the folks that came to the region AFTER the Tsunami?
No need to be obtuse. I'm sure you knew he meant those who had never performed charitable work there before, but saw an opportunity to take advantage of people's need for aid, and used that to proselytize.
If you were starving, and someone offered you food, but would only give it to you if you renounced your religion, how would you feel toward the offerer? |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 4365
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:58 am: |
|
Like I said, I don't see this being a serious issue. I don't mind discussing it, but it hardly concerns me. I just want to see people survive. That's my focus. |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 645
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 12:03 pm: |
|
But if they are given a choice between their religion and food, what kind of choice is that? And for those that are truly devout, it's no choice. They'll starve. Hardly surviving.
Why are there strings attached to survival? |
Dave
Moderator
Username: Dave
Post Number: 5106
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 12:05 pm: |
|
The missionaries going into the tsunami areas will be changed more during their visit than their intended audience.
http://www.uiowa.edu/~uiabroad/predeparture/PREPARErvrsecult_shock.html |
LilLB
Citizen
Username: Lillb
Post Number: 368
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 12:42 pm: |
|
First of all, I haven't read an article about this yet that actually can make this claim as fact (that missionaries were refusing bread to starving people if they didn't accept the Lord as their personal savior....) - it's all "reported" or "alleged". Perhaps I've missed it, but this seems like second-hand knowledge. However, I think it's likely that there are people out there who would do this, so for argument’s sake, let's assume it's true. It is clearly a despicable action on the part of the missionary to refuse to give assistance to people without conversion to the Christian faith, but the author is misguided in implying this is an "American" thing. Seems to me the author's purpose is to paint America as a Christian nation that wants to convert the world. Did I miss the part where the author talks about the more numerous faith-based charities that have been giving assistance without pressure to convert? The author is trying to paint a very specific view of Americans, not just Christian zealots. The whole "shipping orphans" thing is ludicrous, but we can clearly see that as being the act of a zealot, not American mission. Why wasn't the title of this article "The proselytising zeal of Christian missionaries knows no slack even in tsunami aid"? |
Ukealalio
Citizen
Username: Ukealalio
Post Number: 1771
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 12:52 pm: |
|
Well it's certainly not the Spanish Inquisition but it's wrong to withold help, unless you can convert someone. Charity and relief shouldn't come with a quid pro quo.
Religous proselytizing is a pet peave of mine. Some very rich religions and cultures were all but wiped out because certain groups truly thought "god was on there side". |
Michael Janay
Citizen
Username: Childprotect
Post Number: 1483
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 12:53 pm: |
|
The nuns that supposedly demanded conversion before giving food are not doing gods work, but the opposite.
These are people who are extermists of the same ilk as Islamic terrorists.
They should not be tolerated. Aid should be given with no strings attached. Period.
The groups giving out food and bibles on the other hand are fine. Why not try to comfort a hurting people with gods words. I have no problem with a group espousing religion while giving aid. |
Bobkat
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 7366
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 12:55 pm: |
|
All of the above is one of the reasons I am very uncomfortable with Bush's "faith based initiatives".
90% of religious based groups are going to play it straight. The other 10%.... |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 647
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 12:57 pm: |
|
MJ, I agree with that. I have no problem with offering religion. My only problem is when it is a requirement for aid.
LilLB - perhaps it was only American Christian missionaries, not Christian missionaries from other countries? You might not like the implication, but that's the way many people (not everyone) see us around the world - imposing, rather than offering. To them, it's more an American thing than a Christian thing. It's perception. Reality doen't really matter. |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 1950
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 12:57 pm: |
|
LilB - these activities (aid & religion, or neither) were reported in some newspapers. I recall M.J. or someone else posted a link on MOL to an article last week. (?) These are, unfortunately, not all unsubstantiated claims. |
Michael Janay
Citizen
Username: Childprotect
Post Number: 1485
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 1:09 pm: |
|
More people have been killed in the name of god than for anything else.
Hey, we've got a lot of religious nut jobs in ths country... but the nutjobs we've got are few, and they make the hardcore religious right (like Falwell etc) seem like the "Ethical Culture Society".
These nuns, if in fact they do exist, and if in fact they are American (neither of which has been substiantiated) are like the KKK- sure they exist, but they don't reflect the values of the religious community, no matter what they say.
And Bobkat, the ratio is probably more like 99-1. I don't like the Faith based initiative because I think it will do more harm to religion. Government will be able to dictate what religious groups can and can't do or say, or face the threat of losing funding. That to me is far more dangerous than having religious groups proseltyzing while on the government payroll. |
LilLB
Citizen
Username: Lillb
Post Number: 370
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 2:07 pm: |
|
notehead - I did read about this elsewhere, on CNN I think, but of course, I can't find it now. This story was posted on this board by Robert Livingston, but it also says "allegedly". That's my point -- no one, even reputable sources are reporting it as fact. So to base these statements about Americans seems irresponsible to me.
Rastro - To make the loose connection that it's American missionaries that are the only ones engaging in this behavior is pretty lame, don't you think? It's not a matter of whether I "like" what this person is saying or not. It's a matter of reporting responsibly. And...don't you think it could be writing like this that fuels the fire of anti-American sentiment, without being based on fact?
Don't get me wrong - I think that behavior shouldn't under any circumstances be condoned, but there's a hidden (or not so hidden) agenda on the part of the author -- that's really my main point (along with the fact that his/her assumption isn't based on fact). |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 653
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 2:27 pm: |
|
LilLB - I don't disagree that this kind of reporting fuels anti-American sentiment. Neither one of us knows whether this is an American-specific phenomenon or not. Nor do we know for a fact that his/her assumption isn't based on facts.
My point is simply this. The article reflects the view of America in much of the world. The accuracy is actually less important than that it was written. |
court07040
Citizen
Username: Court07040
Post Number: 186
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 2:29 pm: |
|
I'm so tired of the religion bashing on this board. There are so many generalizations made that just can't be substantiated. The people I know who actively practice a religion are good folks who are just trying to live the best life they can. They don't have any devious plans to take over the world or anything of the sort. It's fine if you don't practice any religion, but please stop judging everyone else who does. |
jonnyt
Citizen
Username: Jonnyt
Post Number: 151
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 2:31 pm: |
|
It's not the practicing that people have a problem with, it's the forcing of it down other people's throats by certain factions that causes concern |
Ukealalio
Citizen
Username: Ukealalio
Post Number: 1772
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 2:38 pm: |
|
court, who is bashing religion?, or judging everyone who does ?. This is about people who are offering help with strings attached. I don't find this to be the work of truly religous or spiritual people, I find this to be the work of a bunch of hypocrites.
Don't like my opinion ?, sorry, but don't accuse me of bashing religion. |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 654
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 2:39 pm: |
|
Court - I agree that in other threads there is too much generalized bashing of the religious right specifically, and religious folks in general. But this thread is not about that. This is about a group that is using a basic human need (food) as a tool to convert people.
No one is "judging everyone else who" practices religion. We're upset that a group seems to be giving people the choice of converting or starving. |
court07040
Citizen
Username: Court07040
Post Number: 187
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 3:03 pm: |
|
"90% of religious based groups are going to play it straight. The other 10%...."
"More people have been killed in the name of god than for anything else."
"Hey, we've got a lot of religious nut jobs in ths country"
Yeah, no bashing or generalizations being made on this thread at all...
|
LilLB
Citizen
Username: Lillb
Post Number: 373
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 3:03 pm: |
|
Court - I agree with the others who responded to your post. We're not bashing people who practice religion. How do you know that the participants on this thread (and other threads) aren't the very "good folks" you are talking about? |
mwoodwalk
Citizen
Username: Mwoodwalk
Post Number: 288
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 3:04 pm: |
|
I think this thread can be summed up neatly:
Conditioning aid on a profession of faith/conversion: bad
Handing out bibles with food and generally spreading the gospel through non-coercive means: good (or at least, acceptable).
|
Michael Janay
Citizen
Username: Childprotect
Post Number: 1492
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 3:12 pm: |
|
I'm not bashing religion.
I'm bashing religious extremism.
Extremism in any form is wrong.
We do have a lot of religious nutjobs in this country... watch an anti abortion protest, or the "god hates fags" morons that come out at just about every hate crime trial. Like I said before, these nutjobs make the conservative right look like the ultra-left.
There is a lot of religion bashing on MOL, but on this thread, there is hardly any of the norm. |
LilLB
Citizen
Username: Lillb
Post Number: 375
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 3:25 pm: |
|
court - there are a lot of religious nut jobs out there -- they're called extremists -- and it's not just a "Christian" phenomenon. C'mon - you can tell the difference between people who live their own lives in faith and those who force their faith on others, right? Those quotes you cite are a reflection of how people feel about zealots, not about people who practice religion. |
court07040
Citizen
Username: Court07040
Post Number: 188
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 3:29 pm: |
|
Thanks everyone. I'm gonna quit now lest I be accused of being a troll. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page