Christianity Start‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 January 2019 and 6 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Xhunterxc, Msmith29 (article contribs).

In tagging this article for speedy deletion, Jsfouche indicated that this article " does not expand upon, detail or improve information within the existing article(s) on the subject", namely Colonialism, Age of Discovery, and Catholic Church and the Age of Discovery.

This may be true at the moment since those are the articles from which the initial text of the article was taken but it is intended that this situation will be only temporary.

However, my plan for this article is broader than the current text might imply. The motivation for this article came from work at Christianity and violence. The purpose of this article is to focus more closely on the charge that Christian missionaries were effectively agents of the European colonial powers and did great harm to the indigenous peoples. (NB: I am intending neither a POV attack on Christian missionaries nor an apologetic supporting them. I intend an NPOV treatment that presents both the charge and the defense. For an example of my commitment to NPOV, see my recent work on Christianity and violence.)

I have started by copying text from the articles on Colonialism, Age of Discovery, and Catholic Church and the Age of Discovery because those are articles that I was familiar with, having worked at one time or another on all three of them.

However, Christian missionaries during the colonial era were both Catholic and Protestant. Also, the colonial era encompassed a greater time span than just the Age of Discovery. Most notably, there is a vast history of missionaries in colonial Africa.

Most importantly, however, is the fact that Colonialism and Age of Discovery focus on a more general political history of the topics and not on the religious aspect. The role of Christian missionaries gets scant treatment in those two articles. This article will provide a way to focus more specifically on the impact of Christian missionaries (both positive and negative) on colonized peoples.

--Richard S (talk) 06:43, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References to publications by Heather Sharkey do not link to her publications — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter.edelsten (talk • contribs) 21:46, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bevans, Steven. "Christian Complicity in Colonialism/ Globalism"

This link leads to a PDF excerpt of a book by a member of The missionary congregation of the Society of the Divine World and the book is directed at Christian missionaries. The link to the full book leads to a 404 look. This represents significant bias, which is apparent in the content of the article. The text in the article that cites the above source is:

>This was not all bad — oftentimes missionaries and church leaders were heroic defenders of the rights of indigenous peoples.

Further, there are unsourced claims that represent a bias as well:

>At first, many colonial assaults received church sanctions, but there were also leaders of the church who opposed the injustice against for example the native Americans and later also for the African slaves, and sent reports home about atrocities in the Congo Free State. Even though the missionaries distanced themselves from the violence of colonial governments, the work was characterized by an 'imperialist worldview'. New research shows that, contrary to popular postcolonial ideas that most contacts with the western world during colonialism were negative, Christian missionaries were catalysts for democratic reforms and education that currently is taken for granted. About half of the variety of democracy levels in Africa, Asia and Latin America today can be explained by protestant missionary work according to Robert Woodbury.

Only the last sentence is verified by the source.

I'd like to see this article deleted. Newheartrestart (talk) 23:53, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An article without a definition of the scope int he lead, and with extended quotes in the lead, is not B or C-class. Maybe WP:BLOWUP would be best... Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:40, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with WP:BLOWUP. Important topic, but current form of article lacks focus, direction, editing, and citations. GottaShowMe (talk) 08:25, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I struggle to understand how Korea fits into the subject of this article.

The early Christianization of Korea was a primarily grassroots and indigenous-led movement. It originated from the work of Korean scholars, not foreign missionaries. (See Korean_Martyrs and Christianity in Korea.) Korean scholars learned about Christian theology from Catholic texts imported from China. Some scholars found the Catholic teachings compelling and decided to convert. They also shared these teachings with other Koreans. There were thousands of practicing Christians in Korea before the first missionary (a Chinese priest, not a Westerner) set foot in Korea.

This is neither an example of Western colonial pressure to convert nor that of strong foreign missionary influence (Western or otherwise). It is not inherently colonialist if members of a society choose to integrate beliefs of foreign origin into their own lives.

Similarly to Christian colonialism in Japan, China and Korea, Christian missionaries were resisted and, if over-persistent, executed (Saint Adalbert, Saint Bruno). This served as an excuse for full-scale military invasion, looting, ethnic cleansing, enslavement, cultural and religious destruction, Christianization and suppression of information.

Christian missionaries in Korea were eventually met with force and became Korean martyrs, which became pretext for French campaign against Korea. Donghak and Donghak Peasant Revolution was a Korean reaction against Christianization attempts.

This narrative depicts Western missionaries as the impetus for religious persecution of Christians in Korea. The persecution of Christians in Korea predates Western missionary involvement by at least half a century. According to the French campaign against Korea article, the first Western missionaries did not arrive until the mid-19th century. The execution of nine French missionaries alongside thousands of Korean Christians in the latter half of the 19th century may have provided "justification" for an unsuccessful punitive exhibition by French colonial forces. However, this colonial excursion remains a relatively minor footnote of the history of Christianity in Korea and the history of colonialism in Korea. The article ignores the influence and self-determination of indigenous Korean Christians by over-emphasizing the role of the West. If anything, the actions of colonial Japan played a much larger role than colonial France by opening up isolationist Korea to the West. This allowed a large influx of American missionaries into Korea in the latter quarter of the 19th century. However, Japan was not a Christian nation nor was it directly tied to Western missionary efforts.

The article also mentions the Presbyterian roots of Kim Il-sung, without explaining how it connects to colonialism. It seems like a dangling piece of trivia.

--GottaShowMe (talk) 06:50, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you are questioning the Wikipedia article on French-Korean conflict, you should discuss there. It clearly states:

The French campaign against Korea was an 1866 punitive expedition undertaken by the Second French Empire in retaliation for the earlier Korean execution of seven French Catholic missionaries.

1. There is a scientifically proven pattern of Christian missionaries (especially Jesuits) cultivating foreign elites. In China the connection seems to have persisted, by accident or not, via family ties, from 16th century all the way to the 20th. Is that a conjecture? No, because Jesuits went on missions in couples and sent regular written reports which are deposited in their archive in Rome to this day. There is ample scientific research around this topic in the Chinese and Japanese contexts, not to mention other parts of the world. The early Korean converts you are mentioning were elites, since they are reported (should we believe the likely biased Christian sources) to have converted by reading Christian books (at the time only elites read). Interestingly, this would imply that Protestant Christianity (which does not require priest to intermediate the faithful-God relationship) was a better fit to Koreans even at that time, even though the missionaries were Catholic.

Should we believe Kim Il-sung is part of the global pattern or a unique outlier? Since Christianity mutated into secular but similarly expansionist, universalist, proselytizing and west-serving ideologies such as liberalism, communism, socialism etc. (substantial body of scientific material on this spanning more than a century in the west and I believe Asia), it seems Kim Il-sung fits the pattern. Thus he is justly mentioned. Perhaps the section should be expanded to clarify the connection, specifically declared concern for the poor that both Christianity and communism share.

2. Should we ascribe agency to Koreans when some of them chose to willingly adopt a foreign ideology, whether it’s Christianity or Communism? The historical and global pattern of Christianity is clear about where agency lies in Christianity and whose interests in serves. The agency is not with the believers - in fact Christians are encouraged to pass their agency to their god (to be “guided“ by him).

The very term “religion”, which is of Christian origin, etymologically derives from “binding, obligation”, a concept similar to other monotheistic faiths of Middle Eastern origin, specifically Judaism and Islam. In contrast, some other major religions profess to cultivate personal agency, such as Zen Buddhism.

It could be argued that non-western believers have even less agency than western believers who are at least enjoying the benefits of western colonialism which Koreans do not.

Interestingly Christianity needed to make very political adaptations in Korea to compete with homebred ideas - Koreans are generally protestants and thus have a modicum or formal financial and political independence from Vatican. This is not too different from the concessions Christianity is making to the PRC government. So Christianity in Korea seems to have had to “loosen the bonds” to make headway.

3. Would you argue that Korea is the only country in East Asia not to have experienced an interplay between Christianity and Colonialism despite being a country divided between the South, underwritten by security guarantee from Christian United States, and the North, ruled by Christian-derived Communist regime founded by a person born to a ranking (not lay) Christian family?

So far you only seem to be disputing the fact that the French interplayed with Christianity in attempt to colonize Korea. We have a regional and global pattern established over a vast period of time. If you are able to provide references that prove there was no such interplay (uniquely in Korea), I will consider conceding.