The Southern Baptist church I am undercover in has been fond of
participating in Operation
Christmas Child, a yearly campaign by Samaritan’s Purse, a charitable
organization started by Franklin Graham, the son of legendary Protestant
evangelist Billy Graham, who was an influential leader in US Christianity at
the height of his career.
Operation Christmas Child is a campaign that encourages Protestant churches
around the
They distribute information about what to include in the boxes,
and what not to, and get a church in each local area to act as the local
receiving and distribution center, gathering the boxes from local churches as
they are dropped off, and coordinating the transport of them to Samaritan’s
Purse.
One interesting aspect of this campaign is if someone doesn’t have the
time to pack and donate a box to them, they can donate a set amount of money to
“sponsor” a box, to cover the average cost of Samaritan’s Purse employees and
volunteers to build one themselves, and send it off in the name of that person.
Before the church service, they played the normal promotional
video clips for OCC, showing the children receiving the gifts, and what it
takes to get the gifts to some locations, such as donkeys carrying into
villages in the mountainous areas of Pakistan
The video said that toys wear out, and “if that is all we give
them, then we have given them
nothing”, then the video carries on about how these gifts bring the
“eternal gift” to them, a chance to “accept Jesus Christ as their savior”.
This really annoyed me, this is often the attitude that
fundamentalists have when it comes to giving aid, whether in their home
country, or elsewhere, that carrying out charitable aid is not done simply for
the purpose of helping your fellow human beings live a better life, it’s done
solely for the purpose of getting access to people to try to convert them.
Carrying out charitable work solely to help people is seen as kind of pointless
and ineffective.
In some cases, listening to the attempts
at conversion isn’t even voluntary. Some religiously run homeless shelters in
US cities actually make attending church services mandatory for those who need to stay in their
shelters. One shelter in
In the case of Operation Christmas Child, I
find their attitude not only repulsive, but highly ironic since it’s lead by an
organization (Samaritan’s Purse) that takes it’s name from the famous “Good
Samartian” parable that Jesus told his followers.
In the story, the Samaritan man never expected anything from
the man whose life he saved, and never tried to convert the man, who was
Jewish, to his way of thinking, even though the two men would
have had different opinions about religion. If the man in Jesus’ fictional
story (which he used as an example for how people should act towards others)
didn’t try to convert the man he helped, then why should an organization that
takes it’s name from this story try to do exactly that? Why can’t helping
others just be done for the purpose of helping others?
Our old church did this too. I kind of liked the idea of sending the gifts, but we got so much literature from the organization to our home address around Christmas time (nice glossy, expensive looking catalogs) that I figured much of the monetary gifts were being squandered on that.
ReplyDeleteI've never seen the magazines from them before, I guess that's because my family never sent in a box to them (maybe once you donate once, then you end up on a mailing list).
DeleteI think even if I were still Christian, the proselytizing going on would still bother me. Charity should be charity, nothing more. If they want to set up churches at the same time, and help local missionaries, then fine, but view that as a very secondary effect of the work.
Let the people come to you, if they want to ask about your faith, fine, be open with them, but they shouldn't go out of their way to convert people when they do charity work.
I guess I feel that charity should be charity, and missions should be missions.
We did do this a couple of times and I figured we got on a mailing list.
DeleteI guess I feel that charity should be charity, and missions should be missions.
I agree, but I figure that many groups see missions and charity as all rolled into one. I mean, if you believe in ECT, then what better charity could there be than trying to keep people from it?
I've been trying to look up "ECT", the only references I am finding are about Electro Shock Therapy.
Deleteeternal conscious torment in hell
DeleteAh, I had never heard it put that way, but yes, you would consider yourself a cruel person if you didn't try to spare a few people from that.
DeleteI had seen a video sometime ago of Penn Jillette, who is rather outspoken about being a libertarian and an atheist, he said he considers it a compliment whenever someone tries to convert him, if someone sincerely believes in hell, he believed that it showed that the person cared about him, because they sincerely wanted to keep him from going to hell, which they felt he was bound for.
I've seen that, too. He really has a point.
DeleteYears ago, friends told me about Operation Christmas Child, and I was under the impression that it just sent shoeboxes full of goodies to children in difficult parts of the world. Thinking the project was innocent, I submitted a few shoeboxes full of supplies and toys. Later, when I read the fine print, I was stunned to discover that Samaritan's Purse was including proselytization materials in the boxes, as you said. I immediately stopped donating boxes.
ReplyDeleteThis disgusts me. It's bad enough that Samaritan's Purse proselytizes to impressionable children, but proselytizing to children who might be traumatized (and therefore more vulnerable) because of dire poverty, war, or famine is unethical. Instead of using my money to buy things for OCC shoeboxes, I'll be donating that money to principled charities instead.
It's similar to fundies preying on people at funerals, getting the minister to give an appeal to convert, exploiting the vulnerable.
DeleteOCC went to my partnering orphanage in Cambodia. I don't know what was said because I wasn't there. But it's worth pointing out a few things.
ReplyDelete1) This is the orphanage where the kids have nothing. Literally nothing. Every child has lice. They are malnourished. They kids don't even have an extra pair of clothes. Helping them out has been nearly impossible because the head of the orphanage (a local guy NOT westerner) is not wise with money. Bottom line: truly helping them will never be an option. A one time gift is about all that works, or spending time with them. So I honestly I thank OCC for what they did.
2) Obviously money goes further if we give money directly to the humanitarian workers to buy. Like waaaaaaaaaaaaay cheaper. Plus it's easier for us to buy what they need. For example, it's too hot in Cambodia for socks. In the jungle, our kids don't know what to do with a stuffed animal because animals are what you eat. Kids have to carry babies on their backs by the time they are 6. The jungle kids have no interests in dolls or stuffed animals. But then this remote village where I lived in the mountains, we couldn't buy socks there, yet had to have them for boots because the mud was too thick for flip flips. Where I lived 70 miles from there up until a few months ago, I never used socks. As you can see, what the kids needs vary so much that people who fill up the boxes are stabbing in the dark. However, I've never met kids who don't cherish paper and school supplies. Pretty much people can't go wrong there.
One of my friends refused to receive boxes from the US. She said, "Give me the money, and we'll buy." But here's the problem. Westerners won't send money. A pastor can get a congregation to send 200 boxes. But if a pastor asks everyone to donate $30, only a handful will respond. That is EXACTLY why we have boxes. Not because the missionaries prefer boxes. Not because the locals prefer boxes. But because that's how we get people to give.
3) Obviously I'm not a big fan of evangelism. I will also say as one who lived in an area with a lot of missionaries, that missionaries evangelize 99% less than they tell their western churches. In fact, I could count the number of missionaries that I've seen evangelize on my hand, of course the IFB missionary being one of them. Yet everyone goes back to their home churches in the west and acts like they evangelize because western churches would stop giving without it.
4) The secularists are not even remotely trying to take the place of where the evangelicals have gone wrong. If they don't like OCC, what are they doing instead? Usually the secular people tell me about a local western charity they are doing instead. I've got nothing against local charities. Nothing at all. But they can't ask me as a western missionary to stop working with or even thanking evangelicals for donating boxes for foreign aid until they step into their shoes. There are some organizations out there in my area, the UN, several animal rescue places in SE Asia, and a few non-religious organizations. There are also plenty of Christians who have fonded non-religious organizations. So of course, this isn't a sweeping problem. Yet it remains true that the evangelicals have their hands in more areas.
5) I say this as one who would gladly work with a secular organization if I found one. I get tired of working with Christians because I'm expected to go to church and this and that. But you know what? I haven't found one that suits me.
I hadn't considered any of this. Thank you for sharing these insights! As someone who's been around the globe, your insights are helpful.
DeleteA lot of what you are saying sounds like the frustration of the blogger Jamie the Very Worst Missionary, have you ever heard of her blog? (She's on the blog roll on the right side of the page).
DeleteShe's talked about much of the same things, people only wanting to send gifts instead of money, short term teams coming in, and looking down upon the local people, and having a smug, self satisfied attitude about it. She said that when short term teams come in during the summer, they all want to do VBS, so some missionaries would actually do VBS every week all summer long, just to pacify them and make them feel good, lol.
I didn't know that missionaries typically did less converting thanthey would like their sponsors to believe they do. As for secular charities, they may not have been in the towns that you were in, but there are plenty out there, Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders, etc.
6) Every time a short term missions team comes in, the local missionaries cringe when the short-termers want to preach, expect us to translate for them, and then go back home and tell the number of people they "saved" on their two week trip after we've been the one visiting their village every week for two years. Oh, gosh, don't get me started. Of course, the locals stepped forward and faked a salvation because they didn't want to offend the western guests. They don't try to impress us because we're friends. So yes, I've yet to meet a local longterm missionary who agrees with the way the short term missionaries behave, but the problem is, the short termers come from our churches back home. When the pastors daughter is on the team, what do you do? Oh, seriously, this problem is the frustration of so many long term missionaries. As the local missionaires say to the short-term missions team, "You think you're a hero because the kids got to hear you talk in a foreign language, sing VBS songs that aren't in their language, and watch you paint the house they didn't want painted." A few months ago I was asked to check the grammar of a track for a short term team. Not only was the content awful (said they were going to hell), but whoever had written it had literally just translated what from the English word-for-word into the local language (I'm sure they told their translator to do this; how absurd.The languages are so completely different that rephrasing is imperative. Yes, some meaning will be lost in translation, but oh, well.). Long term missionaries know better. If you tell a Buddhists (not a western Buddhist; one over there) that Jesus came to give eternal life, they will ignore because Buddhists are trying to break the cycle of eternal life. If you tell them they are going to hell, that's nonsense because they believe hell is in the heart.
ReplyDelete7) Bottom line: when OCC says they are evangelizing the kids, I have my doubts. Either they are doing it like the short term teams and the locals are mocking them, or they are pretending they are evangelizing a lot more than they do just to get needed funds.
8) I still like OCC for what they've done. Gosh, I saw so much desperation overseas. What am I supposed to do? Run them off?
9) We started doing outreach for the elderly in this village. Probably the most negelected and starved people I've ever seen in my entire life.They told us, "people have come and given boxes to all the children but left us out." So that's something to think about too.
10) That said, then last Christmas the elderly asked my friend for coats. It made me upset because somebody must be selling the other ones we gave them. That's always the hardest part, and I came back last winter burned out for this reason. The secular people in the US always tell me it's better to come up with longer term solutions. I agree. But until they've spent time there, it's hard for them to understand how difficult long term solutions can be.
11) In other words, please understand none of this is easy. There is no easy answers.
So yea, the part that I questioned OCC the most of first was the content of the boxes. A stuffed animal is literally completely useless in the jungle. I'm sure some parts of the world the kids love them. Westerners in general get too obssessed with toys. But when you are hungry and stay busy all the time, toys just aren't important.
ReplyDeleteWow, I really enjoyed your take on this as someone who has been there. I have never been a missionary in any sense.
DeleteVery interesting Lana, thanks for sharing
DeleteI think a lot of charities lack understanding of the word altruism, and unfortunately until that happens a lot of charities will keep wanting something in return which defies the point of giving in the first place.
ReplyDeleteInteresting post Sheldon.
My sister-in-law runs and hides (literally) when she sees someone looking like a missionary (---no don't ask me how she knows the difference...)
ReplyDeleteI agree with Lana that gifts of paper, pens, pencils, erasures, sharpeners, coloring materials like paints or crayons and notebooks are most prized by the kids. These children are really thirsty for learning.
I disagree that long term solutions are difficult. They do take more commitment than the artificial evangelizing that these christian missionaries do---but solutions are available and applied.---the starting point begins by listening to the community...really hear their voices.....and it must be undertaken as an interfaith/multifaith activity rather than Christian evangelizing.
Much of western missionary activity (abroad) is condescending/contemptuous---it is not built on a wish to help a brother/sister in humanity but on a feel-good "savior complex".
They also use unethical/immoral practices for (artificial) conversion. (coercion and deception) and this degrades all Christianity.
On a positive note---there are Christian Churches that genuinely care for the less- advantaged. In the West, Muslim youths are teaming up with these churches to provide help and support. (Charity is one of the 5 pillars of Islam---it is a duty of every Muslim. (zakat) However, we Muslims, are not always efficient in seeing to it that the charity actually reaches those in need in the community.)
Personally, I think that this type of multifaith (including non-faith) activity can pool resources together more efficiently---for example, Lana mentioned Buddhists---charity (merit-making) is very important in Buddhism and the Temples have their own resources to help the communities......
CM
"Much of western missionary activity (abroad) is condescending/contemptuous---it is not built on a wish to help a brother/sister in humanity but on a feel-good "savior complex". "
DeleteI've heard that actually, that the westerners often look down upon the locals instead of trying to truly understand the culture, and who the people are that they are ministering to.
Understanding the culture---a "savior" needs a "victim" to save. This meta-narrative (or culture) is based on the presumption that only the savior/hero has the capacity "to save" and the victim does not. (if the "victim" had the power to rescue themselves, there would be no need for a "savior")
ReplyDeleteAnother danger of this meta-narrative is the assumption that the way/method/solution of the savior/hero is the "right way" (and perhaps only way) of rescuing the "helpless victim". (these presumptions are not exclusive to the west/westerner)
Such a perspective can ignore the resourcefulness, the autonomy and dignity of the supposed "victim" and thereby impose a flawed solution that serves only as a "band-aid" or, in some cases, creates harm.
This feel-good narrative that underlies the concept of "charity" needs to be changed---we are not saviors rescuing helpless victims rather, we are brothers/sisters in humanity sharing our efforts to find solutions to human problems.
CM