Taiwan a "Missionary Graveyard"

Here is what I recall from chats with other returned missionaries at BYU circa 1990-91.

My friends who served missions in Mexico, Central America, and South America generally reported converting dozens of people during their two year stints, maybe 20 or 30 people per missionary. Activity rates were also much higher.

In Western Europe, most of my contemporaries coverted one or no converts. Very rarely did I hear about two or three conversions through one missionary there.

In North America, it was about three or four per missionary, but guys who served in places like Norcal, NYC, and Chicago reported fewer.

i should make it clear that i have not said that one culture is better than another, or that one religion is better than another. what i DID say, and what i still believe, is that missionary work, and let’s keep it to the stricter meaning of evangelism that brings the Christian ethos to a remote culture that did not have such exposure beforehand, often results in the rapid death of the religion of that culture, and thereby leads to the death of that culture’s underpinnings, and thus the ‘death’ of the original culture. the fact that some of you may see it as evolution or change is not convincing me that the original culture is not killed off by the missionary work. ergo, cultural genocide. you may reject the word ‘genocide’ as loaded and overly emotive, but i do see in these actions a disrespect of the original culture by the missionaries, and a concerted and active plan to dissuade them of their beliefs looks like cultural genocide to me.

if this happens slowly, by exposure and by adoption from within, especially where the influence of the outside culture is limited and not enforced by any form of compunction, then that’s cultural progression.

this cultural genocide may certainly result in a cessation of reprehensible practices such as infanticide, human sacrifice, etc, but it still means the loss of some of the cultural diversity of humanity.

and No, i have not been PAWN3D by fortigurn. we have had a discussion, he has presented some facts and some theories and some alternate ways of looking at the same set of circumstances from a different mindset, some of which i have accepted, some of which i reject, and the only person who thinks he has WON anything is okami. i don’t believe that fortigurn looks at life in those terms. and besides, what kind of a useless term is PAWN3d anyway?

as an australian, i do feel this is particularly relevant to the plight of the aborigines there. it must be incredibly difficult to have one’s belief set turned completely upside down, and the evidence of the fact that this is extremely damaging to them is writ large in the the lives of aborigines in australia today, both those in remote communities and those in the cities. there is unfortunately very little middle ground accessible to them.

Fringe benefits, or not.

The real reason (or perhaps outcome) so many come to Mormon missionary work in Taiwan it to learn Chinese language so they can go on to bigger and better things in the business world.

So many friends and business people I know only ended up doing the business they are doing as a direct result of their Mormon missionary time in Taiwan.

  1. Go be a mormon missionary in Taiwan.
  2. Get a great job in some position requiring the skills you learned as a missionary.

Donald Trump could not think up a better business plan.

I though it might be helpful to some of you to know something about how the Mormon missionary program teaching its missionaries to proselyte.

I am not trying to be an apologist for a church and a religion I don’t believe in, but I think some of you don’t really understand what goes on inside the Mormon missionary organization, or what missionaries are asked to do.

To wit, there is a Mormon missionary lesson, part of a series of lessons that are tantamount to courses in benign sales tactics (e.g. building relationships of trust, resolving concerns, following up), that focuses on “Inviting.” We were never told to use pressure tactics, to threaten with things like “join or go to hell,” or to manipulate people. We were told to teach principles, bear witness to their truth if appropriate, and then invite people to hear more or make a commitment of some sort (e.g. going to church, reading a part of the Book of Mormon, etc.).

We were encouraged to put a higher priority on working through member referrals than on talking to people on the street or knocking on their doors. In some missions, there is no stranger soliciting going on at all–all of the work is done through referrals. In Taiwan, we didn’t have many members, so we would often knock on doors or talk to people in parks or train stations.

My personal approach was to give each prospect who was willing to listen to my sales pitch about a minute to hear my invitation and think about whether or not he/she was interested. If there was no apparent interest, I moved on. Most guys were like me, some quite a bit softer (i.e. never really bringing up religion unless asked about it). I rarely encountered a Mormon missionary who used firebrand warning-type missionary tactics.

A few weeks ago, I met a few elders at a traffic light. We had a nice chat and, when they found out I’m not a member any more, one of them asked very politely why that was so. I told him I preferred not to get into it, that it wasn’t a good use of our time, and he and his companion were fine with that.

I’m sure some of you have met Mormon missionaries who were pushy, but I think it would be wise of you to recognize that they weren’t trained to behave that way, and most of them aren’t that way when they proselyte.

Tomas wrote: [quote]I’m sure some of you have met Mormon missionaries who were pushy, but I think it would be wise of you to recognize that they weren’t trained to behave that way, and most of them aren’t that way when they proselyte.[/quote]
Most of them seem like nice chaps, and I always wave and greet them when passing paths. I also often stop and have a chap with them. Actually, they seldom talk religion with me. They seem happy to be speaking in English and to a non-Mormon.

Did you convert anyone? Apologies if you’d rather not get into that.

[quote=“almas john”][quote]I’m sure some of you have met Mormon missionaries who were pushy, but I think it would be wise of you to recognize that they weren’t trained to behave that way, and most of them aren’t that way when they proselyte.[/quote]Tomas wrote:
Most of them seem like nice chaps, and I always wave and greet them when passing paths. I also often stop and have a chap with them. Actually, they seldom talk religion with me. They sare happy to be speaking in English and to a non-Mormon.[/quote]

All the Mormons I’ve met have been nice, friendly, and not at all pushy. I seem to recall one pair actually asking me if I was interested in hearing the good word or something like that, and a friendly ‘no thanks’ was enough. Most seem happy just to say hi to another Westerner.

i ride a bicycle almost every day, through the city, and often come across a pair stopped at traffic lights. i have had a good chat a few times when we have talked about many things, mostly bikes and the weather…

i have sometimes been tempted to offer a hand with bike maintenance, though i have normally limited that to simply recommend a good chain lube. i have no quibbles with most of them i have met here. the ones in Australia i have met have seemed a lot more pushy. i remember some particularly aggressive ones at Sydney Uni in the 80s, but they definitely had their vocal opponents there.

Lycra-clad marsupial wrote: [quote]i ride a bicycle almost every day, through the city, and often come across a pair stopped at traffic lights. I have had a good chat a few times when we have talked about many things, mostly bikes and the weather…

I have sometimes been tempted to offer a hand with bike maintenance, though I have normally limited that to simply recommend a good chain lube.[/quote]

Sounds pretty dodgy. You’re cruising around, tempted to lay a hand on these young men, and suggesting lubricants! :laughing:
So, has anyone actually met Mrs. Marsupial

Not for the first six months. Then we had three baptisms during the six months I was in Yuanlin. Two of the guys I worked with in Yuanlin joined within about a year of my leaving Yuanlin, and a young fellow I met in Taidong during my first six months joined during my second year in Taiwan. For my last nine months (take away the two months in the missionary training center, and you’re in Taiwan for ten months, and I went home a month early after several weeks of severe asthma attacks), there was only one more who joined. So that’s either four or seven, depending on how you count.

The all-time record holder for number of conversions was this humble, smart guy from Utah named Elder C. He stayed in ZuoYing for more than a year, and had a baptism every month. I think his total number of converts was 14.

I think I may have contacted around 20,000 people, which which maybe 2% were interested in the discussions (a set of six 3 hour presentations taught by the missionaries to “investigators”). Most people drop out after two or three discussions, so I might have taught about 800 or 900 discussions during the 21 months I worked in TW as a missionary.

Dear god! Things are wilder than I thought down there in the sticks! :astonished:

Is it a young chap? Could be situation normal, albeit deeply offensive to us outside the cult.

HG

well, i COULD use my super mod powers to edit all that chap/chat nonsense out of existence, but you guys deserve the brownie points for being so observant. and the t and the p keys are nowhere near each other, so i guess i have to admit defeat on that one.

anyway, chaps are cool. arseless chaps on mormons is very oxford street. and they would go well with some of sandman’s boots.

The missionaries don’t get to pick where they’re sent. But yeah, one of the main effects of missionary work is to educate the missionaries.

I recently saw an estimate in a book called “Democracy’s Dharma” (about religion in Taiwan post-martial law) which estimated the Christian population at 7% and falling (due to competition from Buddhism and to a lesser extent, folk Taoism).

Such growth as does occur, often comes from small-scale, local-led groups like the charismatics or “house churches.” (I live across the street from a branch of Watchman Ni and Witness Lee…or is it Witless Ni and Watchman Ni? Anyway, those guys.)

Missionary churches tend to do best in regions that are already Christian, such as Latin America or Russia. Sub-Saharan Africa is a noteable exception, and a big success story for 19th century missionaries. And India has a big enough population that almost anybody can come up with an extra million or so followers!

I’m surprised the snake-handling churches haven’t done better here. I mean, Taiwan already has the snake-handling thing at Snake Alley, the self-flagellators, and all that. Seems like a perfect place for those churches to expand.

C’mon, Forti, you’re totally full of it, on many levels. The inquisition long predates the Spanish inquisition or the witch hunts of the middle ages – it was aimed at heresies of all kinds and it was murderous, intolerant, and brutal. Look up the Albigensian Crusade and the Cathars, for starters.

languedoc-france.info/1209_inquisition.htm

Of course, by focusing on witches, Forti has also neglected the Inquisition’s persecution of the Jews…

As far as missionary work…

The real issue is not that impact with culture A changes culture B, so it is OK for local peoples to become Christian because they also encounter change when they encounter development or cultural mixing. That is wrong in two important ways:

  1. there is no actual gain from becoming Christian but there is from having access to clean water or medical care. Switching from local nonsense to global nonsense is not a gain. Jesus is just as non-existent as Ngai or Guanyin.

  2. it is not the avowed goal of the development types to stamp out every culture on earth and replace them with Developmentalism, the way it is the avowed goal of Christianity to instantiate itself in every mind on earth and destroy every other form of thought and belief. There is a fundamental difference between development that is committed to tolerance and growth however often it may screw up, and between Christian missionary work that is totalizing and universalizing in its destructiveness, whatever local good may be done or however nice individual Christians may be.

Michael

[quote=“Vorkosigan”]C’mon, Forti, you’re totally full of it, on many levels. The inquisition long predates the Spanish inquisition or the witch hunts of the middle ages – it was aimed at heresies of all kinds and it was murderous, intolerant, and brutal. Look up the Albigensian Crusade and the Cathars, for starters.

languedoc-france.info/1209_inquisition.htm[/quote]

I haven’t denied the many evils of the Inquisition. But it was the Spanish Inquisition which was particularly under view. Toe Tag wrote ‘The Spanish Inquisition’. Not ‘The Inquisition’.

No I haven’t. I actually made specific mention of the evils of the Spanish Inquisition, including its persecution of heresy and its use of torture and execution:

I focused on witches because I was replying to a previous poster who had said that the courts of the Spanish Inquisition were known to be more just than the secular courts. When it came to witchcraft, they were. I provided abundant evidence for this.

Step one to full intellectual involvement in the discussion, read the posts properly. I would have expected better of you.

[quote]As far as missionary work…

The real issue is not that impact with culture A changes culture B, so it is OK for local peoples to become Christian because they also encounter change when they encounter development or cultural mixing.[/quote]

I didn’t see anyone make this argument, but let’s see where you take this anyway.

[quote]That is wrong in two important ways:

  1. there is no actual gain from becoming Christian but there is from having access to clean water or medical care. Switching from local nonsense to global nonsense is not a gain. Jesus is just as non-existent as Ngai or Guanyin.[/quote]

Ok, this doesn’t actually explain why local people becoming Christian is any different to changing from culture A to culture B. Access to clean water or medical care are not changes in culture. Name one culture which specifically avoids clean water, or medical care.

Yes, well I think we both know that’s not true, since it is the avowed goal of certain of the ‘development types’. Hence the endless pathetic fiddling around in places like Africa, and the hilarious attempts to ‘democratize’ nations which were much better off before countries such as the US stamped all over them with clumsy leaden feet.

You’re talking about one strand of Christianity, which is popular in (you guessed it), the US. I think you’re as well aware as I am that Christian Dominionism is a natural product of secular US imperialist culture. And I’m well aware of the irony of imperialist minded secularists moralising on this issue. You want the world to be dominated by your brand of culture, so you’re no different to them.

We’ve already differentiated between tolerant and intolerant missionaries. You’re a bit behind the thread.

We’ve already differentiated between tolerant and intolerant missionaries. You’re a bit behind the thread.[/quote]

Ummm…no. There is no difference between “tolerant” and “intolerant” missionaries. They are the same: totally intolerant, working to bring a forth a world in which Christianity is instantiated in every mind on earth. Some might be nice, some might be nasty, but the global project is exactly the same.

And the idea that Dominionism is some development of secular imperialist culture is the funniest idea, ever. Absolutely priceless. As are the hacks on US imperialism – exactly the same set of tactics as any 50 center out defending Beijing’s authoritarianism. All authority-worshipers are same…

Michael

Vorkosigan, this was a very poor show from someone of your stature and standing in the Internet infidel community. Not only did you manage to misread and misrepresent my posts, you offered no apology for having done so and totally avoided engaging with any part of my reply. Your post below is a carbon copy of the standard simple minded ‘Haw haw!’ posts made by Fundamentalists daily on IIDB. That should concern you.

There is a difference between tolerant and intolerant missionaries. You’ve just described the intolerant ones. Not all missionaries are ‘working to bring a forth a world in which Christianity is instantiated in every mind on earth’.

It wouldn’t be so funny if you actually chose to look at the facts. The fact that you’re not aware (or in denial), of how religious beliefs are shaped by their surrounding character is bad enough, but the fact that you’re unaware (or in denial), of how various forms of Christian belief (such as Dominionism), have their roots in US secular culture is even worse.

Secular culture invariably influences religious beliefs such as Christianity. Look at the evangelical feminist movement. It’s a product of secular culture. Look at the evangelical homosexual movement. It’s a product of secular culture. Look at the evangelical humanist movement. It’s a product of secular culture. Look at the evangelical prosperity gospel movement. It’s a product of secular culture. The Christian Dominionism movement is likewise a product of secular culture. It’s right wing in its political orientation, and emerged during the height of the Cold War as one of the many symptoms of that madness.

I mentioned the US as one of a number of nations guilty of imperialism:

I used the US as one example, but I did not confine my criticism of imperialism to the US. You should really read my posts with more care. Attempting to dismiss my point as simply a prejudiced attack on the US is an argumentative fallacy. You’re attempting to play the man, not the ball. I note you didn’t actually respond to the argument.

I am not an authority worshiper. I have no more time for Beijing’s authoritarianism than any one else’s (including that of the US). You would know that if you had read any of my posts on the subject on this forum. My posts on the Chinese government are without fail attacks on its many vices, its authoritarianism foremost among them.

It’s ironic that you make an explicit defense of US imperialism even as you accuse me of being an authority worshiper.

There is a difference between tolerant and intolerant missionaries. You’ve just described the intolerant ones. Not all missionaries are ‘working to bring a forth a world in which Christianity is instantiated in every mind on earth’.[/quote]

For pete’s sake, Fort. What do you think the missionary project is all about? It is irrelevant how individual missionaries regard their work, it is all the same program: to make everyone a Christian. Not every American soldier in Iraq regards himself as working for US imperialism, either. So d you think we should distinguish between the various beliefs of the soldiers as they go about remaking Iraq?

Fort, the Christian Dominionist movement is a product of trends latent in Christianity that predate the Cold War. The current version of right-wing theology that has such a great if hidden influence on US Christianity appeared during the Cold War, but arguments for theocratic rule go back, well, forever, in Christianity.

There wasn’t any argument. We weren’t talking about US imperialism. You introduced it, 50 center style, to move the conversation in another direction. Congrats, it worked.

I already know that, Fort. Every Christian I know rejects the authoritarianism of Beijing. So what? Every fascist I know rejects Communist authoritarianism. Every Muslim I know rejects Communist authoritarianism. And? This makes Christianity or Facism or Islam less authority-centered because…?

There’s no defense of US imperialism in my post.

Vorkosigan