Why was/are religious missionaries tolerated by their "host" countries?
March 3, 2018 10:36 AM   Subscribe

I'm reading Barbara Kingsolver's The Poisonwood Bible, which has me completely sucked in. I'm not very far along it it; about 17% in Kindle-speak. But it renews a question I've had for a long time: Why do/did many African countries and other places tolerate the invasion and intrusion of religious missionaries? I'm sure some were killed, but why weren't the rest run off, or banned from the area? (more below)

After all, weren't they essentially colonialist disrupters who were pushing a religious pyramid scheme? Plus, I don't get how missionaries could have gotten away with it so far into the 20th century, and even today!
(I'm NOT talking about Peace Corps types who dig wells, teach languages, and do their best to live like the local population.)
What's the deal?
posted by BostonTerrier to Society & Culture (9 answers total) 8 users marked this as a favorite
 
A lot of missionaries DID/do dig wells, teach everything from basics to midwifery and agriculture, build schools and hospitals and home, bring medicine and supplies. If nothing else, they bring a little money to put into the local economy, needing to buy daily supplies, sometimes domestic help.

But also, when you go into incredibly rural or impoverished areas, there's no resources to run them off with. Missionaries often happily buy into the local protection racket, whether that's organized crime or local government/law enforcement (which may also be the same as the local organized crime), and they're there to throw down turf wars with the local religious institutions so they're not generally afraid of that.

I grew up in Southern Baptist territory and the cash pipleine to missionaries was an important part of the ministry, what those missionaries were able to do with the money was often impressive, and at certain concentrations these groups have access to state and federal elected officials to get funds/grants/development resources sent their way with the idea that if you give incredibly impoverished people a slightly improved existence you get them into your heaven. That money is not unappreciated and not unneeded in a lot of those communities.

There are well-known (best known?) missionaries that seem to have a policy of absolutely not participating in any form of community-building, only proselytization, but they still have to eat and sleep somewhere and that's money in someone's pocket.
posted by Lyn Never at 10:51 AM on March 3, 2018 [10 favorites]


In addition to Lyn Never's points, missionaries also have quite a lot of clout in their home countries, especially the US. A country that refuses to grant visas to missionaries is going to be in a bit of trouble with the US, and that is a pretty difficult situation to be in.

Also, even the most isolated countries get quite a lot of soft power through supporting the religions of partner countries. Shamelessly name-dropping here, but I was once talking (in Seoul) to Kim Jong-Un's Russian interpreter who had been with him when he walked past a church in Moscow. Apparently Kim Jong-Un said "let's have one of these", and so they did.
posted by ambrosen at 11:10 AM on March 3, 2018 [3 favorites]


A lot of places that have missionaries also have cultures of welcoming guests. When missionaries came they didn’t necessarily know what would come of it. They just knew that when someone comes to your home/village/community you offer them food and drink.
posted by raccoon409 at 11:49 AM on March 3, 2018 [5 favorites]


If you read some of the diaries and memoirs of missionaries you may get a more comprehensive picture of the conditions they were operating under. In Yorubaland it's clear they were doing much needed humanitarian work as part of their mission. The area was riven by war and inequality (largely as a result of the slave trade: all of West Africa was completely destabilised) the missionaries, principled christian people, tried to mitigate some of it. People ended up bringing them orphans and vulnerable people to look after.

With the spread of colonialism also, what the missionaries offered - education - was extremely valuable in a monetary sense. Job opportunities opened up for those with some amount of western education, whether in new administration systems or as dependable domestic staff. Anyhow I can recommend Anna Hinderer's memoir, 17 Years in Yoruba Country, available on archive.org, for some insight. For a more recent take you could try Dearest Priscilla: Letters to the Wife of a Colonial Civil Servant which is entertaining and readable, and quite reflective about the changing role of colonial officers in the wake of burgeoning independence movements after the second world war. The sub-continent doesn't fit into this pattern though as a huge and hugely diverse, and hugely sophisticated, area where complex and brutal patterns of exploitation held sway for that much longer than in most African countries.

It's maybe difficult from our 2018 perspective to appreciate what a civilizing, benign influence the major world religions have been during a large part of their spread. They picked up converts because they offered something; LIFE WAS BETTER, or at the very least promised to be better, under their various dispensations. Particularly for say, poor people in the Roman Empire. I don't think acknowledging this takes anything away from the truth that colonialism and religion worked hand-in-hand to conquer and exploit other people's land.
posted by glasseyes at 1:16 PM on March 3, 2018 [5 favorites]


I'm not sure if 'the subcontinent' is used in America, I mean India/Pakistan/Bangladesh.

A subplot in Chinua Achebe's classic Things Fall Apart also gives some insight into why some traditional people might have chosen to follow the missionaries.
posted by glasseyes at 1:22 PM on March 3, 2018 [1 favorite]


Most current missionaries I have met/heard about are the "Peace Corps types who dig wells, teach languages, and do their best to live like the local population". It's actually kind of hard to be a missionary if you don't learn the language and don't live like the locals, if you think about it.

I think even when that is not/has not been the case, as others said above, the local culture is often just seeing the missionaries as foreign guests. Lots of times they don't get a chance to meet people from the west and are very curious.

I read Pearl S Buck's biography of her father, who was a missionary in China in early 20th century- it's very interesting (I think it's called "Fallen Angel"). Her father spoke Chinese well and traveled to rural areas where people had never seen a foreigner before. He was really tall and had red hair. People were shocked and curious, so they listened to him preach. Buck says that most Chinese people didn't see a conflict between their religion (Buddhism) and Christianity- they just figured they could do both. They didn't seem to take his preaching that seriously. BY the way, the Chinese government currently forbids missionaries for political reasons- so that's one place where it's no longer accepted.
posted by bearette at 6:14 PM on March 3, 2018 [1 favorite]


I went to a Baptist primary school. My teachers were missionaries between trips, mostly to Central and South America. Confirming what others have said above. They helped build the schools they taught in down there, as well as hospitals, helped vaccinate kids, and stuff like that. I mean, it's stuff that needs getting done.
posted by The Underpants Monster at 8:01 PM on March 3, 2018


Mmmm @bearette I have to disagree. I spent two years in Togo as Peace Corps volunteerand missionaries I met/heard of were
1. American Mormons living in a nice beach adjacent house between the capital and a seaside town. They were shocked that we lived “en brousse” (in the bush). I don’t think they were doing much of any social outreach or community building.
2. American mennonites who lived in a larger town but seems to really interact with the Togolese around them. They were working on translating the Bible into local languages
3. Togolese Jehovah’s witnesses. It was a weird feeling to open my host family’s door and get the same pamphlets (except they were in french) that I’ve been handed in America.
4. White American (Southern?) baptists who were connected to the baptist hospital. I think they were there as more of short term “medical missions” and maybe sometimes high school or college kids would come for the summer to do a Vacation Bible School type thing for the kids.

Of all those groups none of them were doing “Peace Corps type projects” in the sense that they didn’t
- learn local languages
Or
-stay for at least two years
Or
- get community imput on projects
Or
-didn’t live at the level of the community.

To be very clear Peace Corps forbids proselytizing during service. You can certainly attend whatever religious denomination you’d like but you may not try to convert others.

And absolutely the religious schools tend to offer better educational opportunities (though often at a great cost to local culture). My very Muslim host family in Senegal sent all of their kids to the Catholic schools because they thought they would have the best opportunities there.
posted by raccoon409 at 8:22 AM on March 4, 2018


Response by poster: Thanks everyone, for your eye-opening and jaw-dropping responses.

Things Fall Apart is now on my Kindle wishlist; thanks for bringing it to my attention!
posted by BostonTerrier at 1:42 PM on March 5, 2018


« Older Aging X-ennial seeks new electronic music.   |   Is it a bad idea to hand code a website in 2018? Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.