He was a delicous, uh, I mean great man!

Bozo Erectus

Master Baker
Joined
Jan 22, 2003
Messages
22,389
Eaten missionary's family head for Fiji

The residents of a Fiji village are preparing to apologise to the family of a English Christian missionary who was eaten by tribes people 136 years ago.


Cows, fine mats and 30 sperm whales' teeth are to be presented to Thomas Baker's descendants in the traditional ceremony on Thursday.

The inhabitants of Navatusila on the island of Viti Levu believe their village has been suffering bad luck ever since the cannibalism incident, and hope saying sorry will help their fortunes.

There are various stories as to why Thomas Baker was killed and cooked by the people of Navatusila on 21 July, 1867. Some say that he tried to take a comb out of the village chief's hair, or a hat from his head, without realising that touching a chief's head in Fiji is forbidden.


One things for sure, the descendants wont be touching anybodies head!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3263163.stm
 
I guess over-seasoning gives bad luck, besides gas ;)

One villager who took part in the feast was quoted in contemporary accounts as saying "we ate everything but his boots".
:lol:
 
Eeek!! Hmm.. 136 years ago... So they haven't won any lotteries for quite some then those pesky little people-eaters...
 
i hate missionaries, trying to change the ancient ways of those people... just like those people from Hari Krisna or those Mormons that always pop up at my front door, go bother someone else!!
 
Originally posted by cgannon64
Catholic missionaries were not treated kindly. You should hear some of the stuff the Iroquois (IIRC) did to them. :eek:

and you should hear of some of the things done in the name of catholiscism to have them deserve it...
 
Well, Xen, cannibalism was a very important part of their previouslt polytheistic faith :D
 
and you should hear of some of the things done in the name of catholiscism to have them deserve it...

Oh, don't get me started. :rolleyes: I'll keep my response brief:

By your logic, shouldn't all Germans be punished for Hitler? Or all Russians for Stalin?

:rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by cgannon64


By your logic, shouldn't all Germans be punished for Hitler? Or all Russians for Stalin?

:rolleyes:


Wrong. His logic would imply that it would be wrong for Germans to wave around Hitler signs.
 
Um...no. He said the missionaries deserved torture and death (one example I'll give - chewing off the guy's fingers) because of something their ancestors did. I would be using the same exact logic if I said that all Germans should be punished for the Nazi's actions, or if all Muslims should be punished for Al Qaeda's actions, etc.
 
My contention remains that if catholicism has comitted atrocities, publicly praising it is no different than public praising of Nazism.
 
Apology? Not good enough. Send a Royal Navy task force in and shell them.
 
My contention remains that if catholicism has comitted atrocities, publicly praising it is no different than public praising of Nazism.

It still doesn't make sense. I would agree if I said, "The Catholic Church has made no mistakes ever". In that case, it would be like publicly praising Nazism.

However, why is it wrong for me to be a Catholic just because people committed wrong, hypocritcal actions in that religion's name? If I acknowledge that they were stupid hypocrites, can't I still practice that religion?

EDIT: I love the comparison to Nazism BTW, that's like the golden standard for evil. In fact, it seems to be the golden standard of people trying to make an iffy comparison. They use the worst example to try to make the other one seem worse...
 
The perspective of my favorite American author, Mark Twain:

The first thing a missionary teaches the savage is indecency.
- Notebook, 1897

Indecency, vulgarity, obscenity--these are strictly confined to man; he invented them. Among the higher animals there is no trace of them. They hide nothing; they are not ashamed. Man, with his soiled mind, covers himself. He will not even enter a drawing room with his breast and back naked, so alive are he and his mates to indecent suggestion. Man is "The Animal that Laughs." But so does the monkey, as Mr. Darwin pointed out; and so does the Australian bird that is called the laughing jack-ass. No--Man is the Animal that Blushes. He is the only one that does it--or has occasion to.
- "The Lowest Animal"

Man is a Religious Animal. He is the only Religious Animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion--several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself and cuts his throat if his theology isn't straight. He has made a graveyard of the globe in trying his honest best to smooth his brother's path to happiness and heaven....The higher animals have no religion. And we are told that they are going to be left out in the Hereafter. I wonder why? It seems questionable taste.
- "The Lowest Animal"
 
maybe Thomas Bakers descendants should eat one of the Fijian's to even up the score?
 
Just like "Sitiveni Rabuka" means "compulsive coup practitioner"?
 
Originally posted by newfangle
My contention remains that if catholicism has comitted atrocities, publicly praising it is no different than public praising of Nazism.
This is an excellent line of reasoning! This establishes the basis for me to hereby demand that you and all other Canadians on this forum apologize for allowing Bryan Adams and Alanis Morrissette entry into the United States, much less the ability to make CD's!:rolleyes:

Enough of the sarcasm. My basic point is that you cannot hold all current members of a religion accountable for things done by some members of the religion in the past.
 
What you call this news? The worst isn't Fiji, it's Solomon Islands and Vanuatu. Vanuatu just stopped cannibalism in the beginning of the 20th century.
 
The only good thing to come out of missionaries is the missionary position.

And only that because it was invented as an insult. :D




/jk (ish)
 
Top Bottom