Transparency

Is OCC transparent about its nature?

...and the differences between what American Evangelicals and the UK general public are told.


Here is a common criticism:

It is amazing to me that you think that OCC is somehow secret about its purpose.  In the third paragraph of the pamphlet that each person uses to put in the monetary donation and contains the stickers says the following:  " Most important, these shoe boxes provide opportunities for local believers to tell children about Jesus Christ through Gospel literature and evangelism programs."   These are the words of Franklin Graham.  There is a picture of Billy and Ruth Graham in the pamphlet, for goodness sake.  Does someone think Billy Graham has become a secularist?


My response

The leaflets in the UK are very different and have instead the simple statement:
"Meeting critical needs of victims of war, poverty, famine, and natural disaster while sharing the Good News of Jesus Christ."

There are no bible verses, pictures of the Grahams, and no statement that the shoeboxes are to be used as an evangelical tool. "Sharing the good news" is a recent addition to the UK leaflets following complaints in the national press that the leaflets were misleading and criticism of Samaritans Purse for this by the Charities Commission. "Sharing the good news" is stated as if it is something merely done alongside, not given as the purpose of the distribution, and neither is the extent of the evangelism hinted at, let alone understood in the UK. This sort of thing is often just taken as a euphemism anyway, for "doing good works" or "demonstrating Christian love through action" etc.

In the UK at least, many schools and individual parents have a long tradition of packing shoeboxes for OCC. It was only in recent years following complaints in the UK national press that Samaritan's purse have included the bare statement they do on the UK flyers. Those schools which traditionally packed for OCC had little idea initially and plenty have not noticed the change to include the "sharing the good news" statement. I know this for sure as from the responses when I pointed it out to my daughter's school, andfrom  the feedback from other parents who have done the same at their schools which supported OCC. Some schools just flatly refuse to believe that OCC proselytise at all (and we can't even get them to view Samaritan Purse's website - somehow they already "know" OCC do not proselytise and I am making this up apparently!)

Read to the end of the first page at my website  http://www.geocities.com/occcriticism/ - there I explained the following:

I also get plenty of emails from evangelicals who claim that OCC is quite transparent and everyone ought to know that they use the shoeboxes for evangelism. I point out to them that they are transparent in evangelical churches (chiefly in the USA) and with people who they think are sympathetic. In the UK national and local press they are more guarded, and often mislead people.

e.g.
    The Rev David Applin, chief executive of SPI, admits that a religious pamphlet - "The greatest gift of all" - is distributed with the boxes (though not inside them). But he denies that the appeal is evangelical. "The word evangelical has connotations and I prefer to think of us as a Christian group," he says, adding that he does not regard SPI as a missionary agency.
    ( http://society.guardian.co.uk/societyguardian/story/0,7843,861580,00.html )

    However Compare this with what Samaritan's Purse tell the faithful in their Newsletters and on fundamentalist church websites:

    From www.samaritanspurse.org/about/pdf/AR2003.pdf
    "We shared the Gospel with them and distributed Bibles," Victor said. "Each time we do a distribution, it begins with a testimony that Jesus loves you and died for you...Operation Christmas Child is one of the best evangelistic tools because it is a gift," ministry partner Victor Kulbich said. "It opens the door to telling about Jesus. "

If you've seen "The greatest gift of all" (see http://www.geocities.com/occcriticism/booklet.html) then it should be obvious that to deny its purpose is evangelical is completely dishonest!

Also contrast the following:

    "We're over there trying to help them, we're trying to make the quality of their lives better and we're not over there to convert them."  [Sean Campbell, executive director of Samaritan's Purse Canada.]

vs.

     The Christian organisation "Ministrywatch" http://www.ministrywatch.org/mw2.1/H_Home.asp contains the following statement at
    http://www.ministrywatch.org/mw2.1/F_SumRpt.asp?EIN=581437002

          The conversion of the lost is the ultimate and expressed goal of
          Samaritan's Purse. This fact distinguishes them from many other
          relief and development organizations, even some others which are
          Christian in name and in charter.

OCC is therefore not as open as many people believe. There are also plenty of people who neither know and even refuse to believe that OCC is an evangelical mission. 

During a 'phone call I made to a local OCC organiser, I was invited by her to go to one of the collection/packing points to see for myself a video of what goes on and "to see that no literature is put in the boxes" (I explained that I know no literature is put in the boxes - as it used to be - but that following complaints about this in the national press it is now handed out alongside the boxes (as if that makes a difference!)). I agreed to go to the collection/packing point and mentioned that I would also like to show a video of my own that shows the evangelism in action. I was then amazingly told that they are very busy and I couldn't go after all (that turn around is in the course of a single 'phone call!) The simple fact is that the organiser did not want what I know to be shown to the people she had packing the boxes. Why else would she invite me along to see her "proof" and then immediately change her mind when she realised I had material that showed otherwise? See how different it is in the UK? In America the people at the distribution centres know they are on an evangelical mission. In the UK they want the extent of the activities to be a secret! (In fact even in the USA this is sometimes the case - see the letter in blue at http://www.geocities.com/occcriticism/).

Regarding this, someone wrote:
It seems logically to me that the OCC personnel would not allow you to show materials over which they had no prior knowledge.  This was be the equivalent of allowing people to post materials on your website without the use of a moderator, or webmaster.

I think you should be alarmed that you have agreed that censoring information is a reasonable thing to do. (Note I wasn't even moderated - I was just refused to present anything, even in private!) I certainly don't do this on my website, rather I do allow people to post information on my website over which I have no prior knowledge. I have an open forum (look at the bottom of http://www.geocities.com/occcriticism/) where people can say what they like - I don't even comment on it!

When I was on the 'phone to the OCC organiser in question I read out to the material which disproved her claims that there was no active evangelism, and invited her to see more on my website. She didn't even ask to see the material in private (indeed I didn't even suggest that I would show it to her own group, I said that I had something to show her). She didn't even want to see it herself such is the self-deception about OCC. The material was even from the OCC website. Remember that she had challenged me to see material that "proved" I was wrong (a tepid UK video I had already seen) and when I demonstrated that I had material that proved there was active evangelism (and note I told her this was material she can get from the OCC website) she didn't want me to turn up!

Remember that the same literature is used by the UK and US distribution teams (see comments below) and that these misleading statements (given above) were from official Samaritan's Purse representatives, not just ordinary OCC workers.

Somebody wrote to me:
A booklet that tells a child why Christmas is celebrated in the first place, does not seem like an overly overt and oppressive Christian response.  

Have you read the booklet? See http://www.geocities.com/occcriticism/booklet.html where you will see that this is not just "telling a Child why Christmas is celebrated in the first place" but rather is a very overt attempt at conversion. It seems you too are either poorly informed (have you not read through my website?) or are being misled by OCC if you think they are not engaging in an overly overtly evangelical mission for religious conversion, or if you think the booklet is not an overly overt conversion attempt. Read the whole booklet at http://mostimportantstory.com/mi/read.html. How can either the booklet or the following not be construed as an overly overt and oppressive Christian response?

...regardless of their faith (or none), all children receiving shoeboxes are intended to be registered in advance, attend a Christian rally, and receive Christian literature again wherever the government allows it (http://www.pursestrings.ca/shoebox.htm ). There are also evangelical follow up meetings subsequent to the distributions.

...besides being given biblical literature translated into their native language, each child wishing to receive a box will attend a mandatory Christian 'rally' in which the word of the Lord is proclaimed, in every country where it is legal. Further, a majority of the boxes are distributed in communities that have a resident evangelical Christian pastor who can provide 'follow-up' ministering. This is gift-giving with strings attached."

"These gift filled shoeboxes provide powerful tools the local churches can use to evangelise people in its own community

There was tremendous pressure placed on children who received the shoeboxes (and their families) to convert to Christianity.  


So we have sinners prayers of conversion, pledge cards to evangelise friends, mandatory evangelical rallies, evangelical follow up and well organised local evangelism in conjunction with OCC.

Remember that these are just children, often as young as 4, and poorly educated with little opportunity of evaluating the evangelical claims and pressure put upon them. Such heavy handed evangelism of vulnerable children really should disturb everyone who is not an evangelical fundamentalist and strike even fundamentalists as overly overt. An acquaintance of mine who used to live in Africa and has witnessed the OCC distribution has even described the heavy handed evangelism as "sickening."

I am saddened that you felt as though you were misled at any point.  I am saddened that OCC has become a cause over which you feel you must object.

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. 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.


FAQ list | Home
Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1