What made you previously think OCC were not an evangelical operation?

--
Regards,

OCC critic
www.geocities.com/occcriticism

India can be a difficult mission field. Many states have anti-conversion laws that make it hard for Christians to work. But Operation Christmas Child breaks down barriers and provides a way to reach the children.

I have heard that sometimes these schemes get horrifically tainted once the gift giving is done and the photo-op is over. Several reports from people who have been directly involved with charities in poor nation like Romania and Haiti have mentioned that these gifts have been removed from the child in question and sold on the black market (crime, drugs, desperation or plain out and out greed). There have been reports also of orphanages that charitable good will has re-decorated and re-fitted with equipment, toys etc. being stripped by hard bitten locals desperate and resentful that so much wealth has been bestowed on these poor wretches.

These charities if their heads were in the right place would seek to reduce the poverty level in those nations rather than pile up conspicuous piles in places where the recipients can't defend it from a desperately impoverished people.

 

--
Regards,

OCC critic
www.geocities.com/occcriticism
 

Hello Herb,

You wrote:

I don't really see
OCC's claim that boxes are packed by people who love Jesus as being a false claim.

Hello Herb,

You didn't address my points - i.e. I showed that OCC claims the boxes originate from Christians, whereas they often do not, even to the extent that OCC representatives pressurise people to play down the extent of the evangelism and to sign up that they are Christians, even if they are not!

So is it true or is it not true to state that the boxes are "sent from Christian Children who wanted to share God's love" if in many cases they are not? Your claim that since it is (mostly) Christian adults who repack/inspect the boxes this is equivalent to saying they have come from Christian children is just as dishonest.

Your point about "reaching people" did not address what we were talking about:
i.e.

1. Is it Christian or moral to use presents as bait for evangelism?
2. Why do you think that Christian Aid or Oxfam or other such charities ( e.g. Red Cross) must "interfere with Government" to help alleviate poverty?
   

You can easily see that the evangelising leaflets are used by OCC by going to the "who is using" page http://mostimportantstory.com/mi/who.html at the WorldServe Ministries site.

OCC are well aware that there are numerous websites, schools, organisations and individuals critical of them, and if you read the FAQ at http://www.samaritanspurse.uk.com/occ/FAQ_leaflet.pdf that mentions this and attempts to play this down then you might be excused for thinking they are not evangelical at all!

It is not just me. Numerous individuals, schools and organisations have objected to and withdrawn support from OCC once they learnt of their nature. The most vigorous opponents of OCC have actually been Christian ministers (see the Guardian articles via my website).

OCC has been criticised by the Charities Commission, and schools in the UK have been alerted to check out them out carefully before deciding to take part by the Standing Advisory Councils for Religious Education. Many schools have withdrawn support (and have even expressed alarm) when they have investigated OCC. OXFAM, DHL, the South Wales fire Service, the England Revenue and the Co-Op have all also withdrawn their support. I am not aware of any other evangelical organisation or charities that have received such criticism. This should set up alarm bells for you that there is something wrong with OCC that other religious charitable organisations are not being criticised for.

If you write to OCC please will you forward any response you get back to me.


--
Regards,

OCC critic
www.geocities.com/occcriticism

Hello Herb,

Still, you didn't address my points - i.e. I showed that OCC claims the boxes originate from Christians, whereas they often do not, even to the extent that OCC representatives pressurise people to play down the extent of the evangelism and to sign up that they are Christians, even if they are not!

I gave you proof of this and you have ignored it. Why is that? Will you address that point? If OCC state that something they know is not true is true then are they being truthful?

Also is it true or is it not true to state that the boxes are "sent from Christian Children who wanted to share God's love" if in many cases they are not? Your claim that since it is (mostly) Christian adults who repack/inspect the boxes (and your new claim that just because OCC is a Christian organisation) that this is equivalent to saying they have come from Christian children is just as dishonest.

A generalisation is not an answer - can you address this exact question?

If this doesn't make you feel uneasy then imagine that this was a Muslim organisation holding Islamic rallies telling vulnerable poorly educated children that gifts sent by Muslims, Christians, Hindus, agnostics etc. were all sent by people who have submitted to Allah, and the local Mosques held well organised and intensive follow up meetings to cement this evangelism, and what is more a good proportion of the people who contributed to the shoeboxes read the literature poorly enough (partly because in some countries the flyers only gave vague allusions to any religious message) to think that this was merely a toy charity. Would you claim that for this organisation to state that the presents were sent by Muslim children who wanted others to know Allah was a fair and accurate statement?

Jesus himself
frequently fed people and then preached to them.  Probably a lot of the people
just wanted the free food.

Your point about "reaching people" did not address what we were talking about:
i.e.

1. Is it Christian or moral to use presents as bait for evangelism?
2. Why do you think that Christian Aid or Oxfam or other such charities ( e.g. Red Cross) must "interfere with Government" to help alleviate poverty?

I note that you have switched tack. Initially you objected to other charities because they would "interfere with the government" to help alleviate poverty. Your actual words were:

Of course it would be ideal to reduce the poverty levels in these nations, but
that would usually take some form of interfering with the government of these
countries.

You have not yet explained how Christian Aid, Oxfam the Red Cross (or even the Tear Fund which is evangelical) must "interfere with Government" to help alleviate poverty. Now you are claiming that your objection is that other charities are not evangelical. You have also claimed that hearing about Jesus is "economic help." How is this? Rather Jesus encouraged people to give their possessions away. You had also previously stated that the poor will always be with us. I get the impression you are grabbing at anything you can think of to prevent admitting that OCC are unethical.

If you are interested in evangelism, maybe you should be straight about it, rather than using toys as deception and an organisation the frequently plays down its purpose. I hear from many people who had no idea what OCC was about until they were directed by sites like mine to read the evangelising leaflet and subsequently have stopped taking part. How does that reflect on Christian honesty and being upfront? This may be honest evangelism to you, but the reality is it is the spread of fundamentalism to vulnerable children by dishonest means.

Why do you think OCC has been criticised by Christian ministers?

--
Regards,

OCC critic
www.geocities.com/occcriticism

Hello Herb,

The first direct question rephrased is:

1.  OCC often downplay their evangelism. Is that ethical?

The proofs for this (all available on my website) are:

1. The letter in blue near the bottom of http://www.geocities.com/occcriticism/ (make sure you read that letter).
2. The fact that Franklin Graham himself describes OCC as a "tool" to "open the doors to telling about Jesus." i.e . He doesn't just evangelise (I don't criticise evangelists in general on my site) rather he uses toys to entice children to evangelical events and to accept evangelical literature.
   
3. The UK and Canadian branches downplay the evangelical nature of OCC and give little hint of the actual content of the material they distribute. This is borne out by the fact that many groups who have participated in OCC have done so without knowing this was an evangelical mission (something Americans who write to me are flabbergasted at, because they have not seen the UK recruiting leaflets). These are people who have stopped doing it and expressed horror at the fact that they had unknowingly taken part in a form of evangelism they do not agree with.
   
4. These people who have unwittingly taken part against their wishes because they were not properly informed are often not Christians (indeed there was much anger from Muslim groups when they found out what OCC was after they had been packing boxes for their children's schools). However OCC claim that the boxes were sent by Christian children in the West when they are aware that this is frequently not the case. Indeed, as you saw in the letter in blue they even will deliberately downplay the evangelism so that they will get more people to pack boxes. I have had first had experience of this when I tackled OCC in my local press. However when I wrote to OCC under the guise of an evangelical supporter they were quite upfront about their evangelism.
5. In the UK leaflet they describe the literature they hand out as "a booklet of bible stories" whereas the truth is it is a carefully crafted conversion attempt aimed at children.
6. When I and (independently) the General Adviser for  Religious Education and  SACRE (the Standing Advisory Councils for Religious Education) wrote to OCC for details of the booklet distributed to children I was sent a few pages of the general bible stories (see http://www.geocities.com/occcriticism/booklet.html) and the General Adviser for RE and SACRE was sent one page of the bible stories in Rumanian! No details or hints were given of the conversion pages, or even a link to the booklet on the web. Even the OCC websites don't link to http://mostimportantstory.com/mi/read.html. I had to pose as an evangelical supporter and write to the head office before I found out enough about the booklet to track down the URL above.
   

See how you get on with that and then I will attempt to rephrase the remaining questions from my previous email if you have trouble answering the rest.

You may like to note the pertinent email I had today from another Christian quoted below. (Also note I regularly receive emails like this, but I felt this was particularly poignant as it arrived at the same day as yours):

I totally agree with your suggestion that OCC is not transparent. I am a member of a Church which has supported OCC for several years, despite preaching that as Christians we should share God's love with those who are interested and not pressure anyone. I protested that OCC has ulterior motives which I disagree with, and the Church PCC told me that there is no evangelism involved!! OCC represents that the 'gifts' are for Children who are too deprived to get Christmas presents, our vicar stated 'some of these children don't even know it's Christmas'. Well, obviously, if they are Hindu or Muslim. To cynically and aggressively target deprived and ill-educated children in this way is totally the opposite of what Christianity should be about.

So either "no evangelism is involved" in which case, according to your first email you could not contribute in a clear conscience:
i.e.

I was worried that OCC was NOT spreading the gospel.  Your
complaints reassures me that they are.  Now I can contribute to their efforts
with a clear conscience.

--
Regards,

OCC critic
www.geocities.com/occcriticism