Talk:Missionary

message: "They were successful in obtaining several thousand converts to the faith, but adoption of European culture was slow, retarding acceptance of the new converts as real Christians." Huh? What does European culture have to do with being real Christians? -phma
:: Christianity in its most famous current form (Catholics and Protestants) originates from Europe? Duh.
: The editor doesn't acknowledge that missions often had non-imperialistic motivations, even if the arrival of missionaries was always a harbinger of imperialistic expansion during the colonial period.  The paragraph is dealing with complex and controversial material.  It would take great skill to treat the topic in a "neutral" way (so, I'm leaving it alone). Mkmcconn
:: Expanding the Kingdom of God is not considered imperialist? Heilme 05:38, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: European culture vs. Christians

message: I don't really agree with this sentence from the article: "Often, missionaries are fluent in the language they study at the end of the six-week period." From what I understand, LDS missionaries are given a set of common phrases to learn as well as basic syntax for the foreign language, but I don't think they are often fluent in the language by the time they arrive at their destination. Many say they are completely lost for the first few weeks while learning the new language. After they are immersed in it, however, they learn it more quickly. I may be wrong, however, so please correct me if I'm wrong. I served a domestic mission, so I didn't go through the foreign-language training. —Frecklefoot 15:40, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The official MTC website says that foreign-speaking missionaries are trained for 8 to 10 weeks,  and I was there for 9 weeks learning Spanish, so I made the change. —Hawryluka 15:57, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Mormon missionaries fluent

message: I was searching for Missions which took me to "ambigous" page about all kinds of "missions"
I clicked on Mission (Christian) [one of the links] and that brought me to a page of the same name.  It only contained a short 2 sentence blurb and no links (stub) to something as full as what I found in Missionary!  I don't remember how I got to Missionary but that page has everything on it!
I copied the Christian Missions section to "Mission (Christian)" but I didn't want to remove so much from Missionary without some comments from others.
Does this make sence?
Strbenjr
:Sorry it's taken so long to respond, but people will be more inclined to answer, Strbenjr, if you sign your posts.  You can do this ny using 3 or 4 tildes, e.g. ~~~~.  The latter version signs your post and adds a time stamp--three tildes signs with no timestamp.  The 4 tilde version is preferred by most.
:Next, what do you want to do?  Create a seperate article for Christian missions? If there is a seperate article with Christian mission information in it, it should be deleted and any links to it redirected to the Christian section of this article.  This article isn't big enough to be split up into seperate articles yet. — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:04, Aug 6, 2004 (UTC)
::I remember coming back a few times but didn't see a response until now.  Sorry I didn't leave a Signature but I am glad to know how to do that now.
::Obviously I made the change that I was asking about.  I also changed references from other pages so they don't go to the old stubs and other places when they are obviously refering to religous missions.
::Strbenjr 00:55, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Searching problem 

message: The external links to individual missionaries doesn't seem appropriate here. I suppose it could have value as an "example" of what missionaries are like, but it also could just be something to tag on somebody's "friend from church." Worth keeping? Deadsalmon 23:30, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Individual missionaries 

message: Isn't that how Buddhism originally expanded. (Missions to Southeast Asia, Sri Lanka, Japan, Korea, China, Tibet, etc.) 12.220.47.145 01:08, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Buddhist missionaries

message: I trained in a modern Catholic missionary college- so I at least have  a grasp of modern (ecumenical) theory of missions. I'm working through the article to knock it into better shape. Might take a couple of weeks to reference it properly.
I don't think we should get too distracted by the JW + Mormon argument either. If they are classified as "other" (as I have done) this neither declares them to be non-Christian (which offends LDS believers) nor riles Catholics, Anglicans and other mainline Protestants.
I've now added and wiki'd the LMS and CMS (both very significant organisations the article had missed.
cheers
Cor Unum 12:11, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Missionary

message: I've deleted  some of the half-thought through stuff in this article, trying to make it more from an NPOV. Trying to make it more complete. I'm going to take some of the the Jehovah's Witness stuff (there's too much detail here) and move it onto the JW organisational page. After looking at the JW organisational page, this stuff only repeats what on there, so I have removed it and left the link to the main JW article.
Cor Unum 04:31, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Getting Bold

message: I've added one obvious omission now and referenced it to other articles.
Cor Unum 05:49, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Added Orthodox missionaries

message: I've made heading changes other might have a dfifferent view on- but here are my reasons. I have changed "Evangelical Missions" to Evangelical church missions". This is becuase the prior heading implied that Roman Catholic, Orthodox and other groups were not "Evangelical" (literally Gospel driven); but they do consider themselves to be so. The other change I have made is to put JW's and LDS's into "Other groups that identify as Christian" (their own heading). There is hot dispute among mainline churches as to whether these groups are legitimately to be identified as Christian - owing to key doctrinal disagreements concerning the Trinity and Revelation. I am trying to leave the heading open enough, but not too open (since both groups consider themselves Christian, and indeed churches) while, for example, the Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans, Baptists and the Catholics see them as (absolutely) outside the boundaries of normative Christian doctrine. But then again, the Catholics, technicially, do not consider members of the Salvation Army as fully Christian because they are not baptized (the Sallies are bemused by this view - if not somewhat offended). How should wiki deal with issues like this? Should any group who self-identifies as Christian simply be accorded the name? Is this a matter of referencing and footnoting?
I'm interested in comments on this- particularly from LDS or JW scholars. How should wiki deal with these sorts of major disagreements in a neutral and appropriate way? 
cheers
Cor Unum 00:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Appropriate denominational Headings

message: Including "Missionary Position" in "See Also" seems to me to be unnecessary.  It is unlikely people will be visiting the "Missionary" page to find out about sex positions.  Also, surely it is a slang term only used by a certain sub-section of society... if a person was seriously interested in studying it there would probably be a more technical term that would be used.
The term "Missionary position" is also loaded ideologically, in that it is an attempt to sideline what is normal as if it were only used be a certain fundemantalist, or even extreme group in society.  It is likely there is no term necessary for this normative position, and it would only be deviations that would require distinctive terms.
Thoughts?User:A.J.Chesswas 11:49, 18 August 2006 (NZST)
agreed. It should'nt be there. --The Fear 21:10, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Missionary Position"

message: Since most of the "Jewish missions" section is about how Judaism does not have missions, shouldn't the title be renamed? Mo-Al 17:36, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Jewish missions"? 

message: This article has way too many external links.  I'm removing some.  If some of them are actually of importance and qualify under WP:EL, feel free to re-add. -- Anaraug 08:37, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Per [[WP:EL]] 

message: I've added the POV tag to the controversy section because the text itself — I'm not talking about the stuff from the anti-missionary sites, which should be included and which we expect to be POV — appears to be taking a strongly anti-missionary stand.  Let's not have a section that attacks missionaries in its own text, especially as seen in the last few paragraphs.  Nyttend 19:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The last few paragraphs?  You mean the ones with the new views of the Catholic Church?  Everyone knows the side of fundamentalists of whatever faith that missionarizing is good.  There is another side though that is rarely seen or heard about except in on the websites of countries on the receiving end of these evangelizings.  That side needs and deserves to be told as well. These people have some stong feelings about what is going on in their countries and it's apparent that wrongs are being committed against them.  One of the last paragraphs gives a positive side too so I don't think it's being unfair.  Lets not cave in to censorship under a false guise.  66.14.116.114 20:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh dear. I think the criticisms need citations to stand as they are at the very least. I'm not silly enough to say missionary activity was an simply an altruistic move to bring the Gospel; but on the other hand, from my POV citations and facts are needed where anti-missionary critisism is made. Cor Unum 10:24, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The controversy section is very well cited.  I see though where you, Njamesdebien/Cor Unum decided to actually ADD and CHANGE words in quoted text as in this instance and here and here.  That would be a no-no.  You also complain about a lack of citation while simultaneously removing them as here.  And you added "(Citaition [sic] needed)" at the end of a sentence where the citation was clearly evident.  Then 222.150.4.246 finished the hatchet job by simply deleting the whole thing. 4.246.201.195 06:48, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV of controversy section 

message: I've had another go at improving the NPOV on this article- despite numerpous reversions by editors without usernames.Cor Unum 07:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: Now that (hopefully) the recent vandalism of the article is over, I am repairing the article re: First, in the interest of balance I am reinstituting a pro-missionary paragraph of Irishbrutha's which had valid cites.  I moved an anti-missionary paragraph out of the "Christian counter-claims" section and put it at the bottom of the first section with the rest.  I also placed the controversy section at the bottom of the section on Christian missionaries (below the Jehovah's Witness and Mormon sections) and removed the "Other religious missionary movements" subheading since Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons consider themselves Christian as well. 4.246.207.64 15:36, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Repairing Article

message: I noticed that the text on Christian missionaries dominates this article and was going to propose spinning off much of that text to a separate article.  However, I just noticed that a separate article (Mission (Christian)) already exists which contains much of the content in this article on Christian missionaries.  The two articles are thus content forks of each other.  
I would suggest that most of the text in this article about Christian missions and missionaries be moved to Mission (Christian) with only a summary left here in this article.  That would restore the balance between Christian missionaries and those of other religions in this article while allowing Mission (Christian) to focus on the content which is specifically about Christian missions and missionaries.
--Richard 16:33, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relationship of this article to [[Mission (Christian)]] 

message: In any article- but especially in a controversial one like this- it is important to properly site all sources.  Please include author, title, location, publishing house/scholarly press/journal, and year. Rudy Breteler (talk) 01:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Proper Citations

message: Is there nothing on criticism of proselytization? Surely there's plenty on this? Lihaas (talk) 20:54, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: World Mission Day is a feast day in the Roman Catholic Church, which could be mentioned if a sufficent amount of infirmation were gathered. ADM (talk) 14:24, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: World Mission Day

message: This article reads like an advert for the work of missionaries. It's written from the standpoint that religious belief has a "natural" right to exist and to be foisted upon others.
No mention is made that what is being "sold" is only belief. Concepts that have absolutely no more weight, value or substance than the ones they are trying to replace.
I draw your attention to the allegory of the cave. This article assumes the legitimacy of "missionary" when none has been forthcoming.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.194.204 (talk) 10:03, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the article at present still looks very POV.  Criticism of interfaith missionary work is a legitimate topic for this article per WP:NPOV.  If anyone wants to add such a section, with referenced facts, it would improve the article.   Please bear in mind that the purpose of the article is not to endorse any view of missions, including a critical view; the goal is to provide factual information and references for further research.  Regards, PhilipR (talk) 19:27, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  NEUTRALITY 

message: Islamic_missions cite note 26 --89.176.227.251 (talk) 11:51, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some unfuctional ref link in Islamic sections 

message: This section appears to be intrisically incomplete. I suggest deleting the whole section and replacing with a link to list of Christian missionaries and perhaps List of Da'is and one or two other lists from other faiths if they exist. Existing info can be transferred to that list. Thoughts? WotherspoonSmith (talk) 13:10, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of missionaries section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Missionary. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150714050619/http://www.lausanne.org/Brix?pageID=12722 to http://www.lausanne.org/Brix?pageID=12722
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150715220516/http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=960&wit_id=2719 to http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=960&wit_id=2719
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:21, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Substituted at 00:12, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Missionary. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060902144551/http://research.yale.edu:8084/missionperiodicals/viewdetail.jsp?id=328 to http://research.yale.edu:8084/missionperiodicals/viewdetail.jsp?id=328
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060622220846/http://jaihoon.com/watan/indarbmappilacommunity.htm to http://www.jaihoon.com/watan/indarbmappilacommunity.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060616161452/http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/031215/15terror.htm to http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/031215/15terror.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/SM_tsn/ch4s8.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://military.hawarey.org/military_english.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/SM_tsn/ch4s8.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927043152/http://www.manipuronline.com/Features/August2002/manipurimuslimfoundation15_2.htm to http://www.manipuronline.com/Features/August2002/manipurimuslimfoundation15_2.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151016090221/http://lib-nt2.hkbu.edu.hk/cil-image/theses/abstracts/b15564174a.pdf to http://lib-nt2.hkbu.edu.hk/cil-image/theses/abstracts/b15564174a.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:14, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Missionary. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120204054940/http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/facts-and-stats to http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/facts-and-stats
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150924022707/http://www.globalbuddhism.org/2/obadia012.html to http://www.globalbuddhism.org/2/obadia012.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111004225048/http://gurudwara.net/ to http://www.gurudwara.net/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:53, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Plz 117.223.87.102 (talk) 05:25, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What did the missionary group aimed on 

message: This is an inappropriate article for Wikipedia, the the extent that it should be considered for deletion. Missionaries export religion and culture, which by no means is innately venerable conduct; rather, it is devastating, and homogenizing. This entire article — barring some sparse mention — omits critical review, and instead narcissistically extols the supposed virtues of "bringing Christianity to brown people."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Commando303 (talk • contribs) 16:30, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propaganda: Consider for Deletion