To have written to the school about the Christmas shoebox scheme?

[gastrognome]

Just had a look through the leaflet sent home from DD1's school about the Christmas shoebox scheme that they are involved in.

Turns out the organisation adds religious literature to the boxes before they are distributed.

I love the idea of filling and sending a Christmas shoebox for somebody less privileged than us, but I really don't like the fact that these schemes are used as a means to evangelise. Of course Christmas is by its very nature a Christian festival but I don't think that it's right to "spread the word" by stealth.

So I just wrote to DD's school and suggested that next year they look for a similar scheme that isn't so evangelical in nature. I said I'd be happy to help research any organisations they could work with.

Do any others feel the same way, or have I turned into Scrooge?

"I get our village Church newsletter through my door every month, I also get Jehovah's Witnesses putting things through my letterbox all the time. I don't have to read it, I don't have to believe it"

this isn't the same thing at all. if this was just a christian charity going round the countries putting leaflets in people's hands then it would be comparable.

this is different, this is a charity, asking people in this country to spend money on gifts and transport to provide them with a 'way in' to these poor countries so they can deliver their message. if you want to deliver your message, fine, do it, but dont link that in with giving a present to a child in poverty a child should not have to accept christian literature as a condition of recieving a gift. the gift should be just that, a gift and nothing else.

deliver your christian message separately.

QuickLookBusy - the point is that collecting boxes of low value stuff bought at retail price all over the US and Europe shipping and distributing them to children in other countries (where you can also buy hats, toothbrushes crayons and the like, if that is what is needed...) just isn't a good idea.

If it was then Oxfam, Christian Aid, CAFOD, Save The Children Fund etc... would all be doing it (it is clearly popular with donors).

The question is not whether a Christmas shoe box should be associated with religion. The question is whether a school should choose for its xmas charity a missionary/evangelical organisation or a humanitarian charity (whether secular or religious). I think most people would agree that it is better for schools to support humanitarian charities and for missionary work to be left to people who choose to support that kind of thing through their churches.

But if you start off with the idea of shoeboxes then you can't give to serious humanitarian charities, because they aren't in the business of handing out boxes of tat.

We've just had one from nursery but after reading about SP I don't think I'll bother this time. I think the OP was right to raise concerns in a polite letter, I had no idea when we participated a few years back.

But it's ok to evangelise about any other topic you feel strongly about!?

Using that 'E' word to illustrate that certain people on here beat down others in a very patronising way, while wittering on about pro-choice, etc.

I know who I mean, sorry to go off topic, but fed up with the same names cropping up on these threads to put down those they see as beneath them, or stupid, or ill -informed.

[angry.

I find this really distasteful. How grateful these poor children should be for a box of pound land toys & primark clothes! They should be glad to be indoctrinated for such riches.

I think there is a massive difference between children here who get free healthcare and education getting a glow from thinking they are helping someone less fortunate and a child with nothing receiving a lecture along with a cheap gift. Sorry to the parents whose children 'love' putting a gift together but to me it seems so patronising. A gift given with conditions isn't a gift is it? It sounds like a religious version of a timeshare hard sell to me.

I'm sure there's a million other projects the school could support that aren't dodgy so I think you're right to suggest some OP. Good luck :)

I disagree with the evangelism aspect so don't do the boxes, but I would like to clarify this sort of comment "the man behind Operation Christmas Child is the son of Billy Graham, who in case you don't know is anti-Semitic, advocated the use of nuclear weapons in Vietnam..."

OCC was started in Wrexham by Dave Cook in 1990 when he and some friends started a campaign to take clothes, medical supplies and equipment, etc. to Romania after the collapse of the Ceausescu regime.

In 1995 they became affiliated to Samaritan's purse and Mr Cook (who no longer works with OCC) has been quoted as tactfully saying that the evangelism has been developed "maybe a bit too much" (Davies, G., Real Wrexham, 1997).

A lot of schools do the boxes here in Wrexham, not least because of the local connection, even though the Wrexham depot has long been closed.

The original intention and campaign was worthwhile and I just wanted to flag up a bit of the background.

Sorry for the essay .

But Funtime - OOC is now affiliated with the american aspect

I don't know what you mean knickers but I see you are angry. Like I said before people will not see eye to eye on this if their stance on evangelism is widely different. Some people feel it is a demand made upon them by the faith they hold to spread the word and others find it disrespectful to attempt to convert people who hold other faiths. Along the lines: my faith is better than yours.

Here the bigger problem for me is that a child's willingness to help other children is used as an enabling tool for attempted evangelism - without often the knowlege of the parent whose dc is making the box. This doesn't seem right to me. If a church with strong evangelical leanings, missionary zeal choses to do this, the people involved know what they are doing and support this. The picture is a bit different.

As far as reception on the ground, however, I still feel the same about not personally liking the evangelism in leaflets attached to the gifts. Send the gifts, tell them it is a Christian organisation sending them. Up to there I am ok with it. Include a disciple programme for dc and leaflets and so forth, I no longer like it personally.

In the UK most schools have non-Christian pupils and so I don't think a non-faith school is really being wise to send shoeboxes through this particular organisation OCC

You can have another view and stay on the thread and talk about it . Why not?

I'm sorry I haven't had time to read all of this thread, but if you want a shoebox scheme which doesn't add any literature you could try Link Romania.

For what it's worth I live and work in one of the countries they send to and we distribute up to 7000 boxes for them. Yes, they are a Christian charity but the boxes are given freely with no strings attached and we work very hard to make sure they go to people who really need them.

As to the efficiency of sending boxes, yes there might be more cost effective ways of helping people, but the families that we give the boxes to are truely delighted with what they receive and it gives them hope that the rest of the world hasn't forgotten them.

There are a lot of children in this country that would be grateful for a few poundland toys and some primark clothes.

Lets keep our charity donations in this country.

Just an idea!

But Funtime - OOC is now affiliated with the american aspect

Yes, which is why I no longer do the boxes, as I've said. Around here 'Operation Christmas Child' still means the original charity and campaign and the Samaritan's purse aspect doesn't seem to have sunk in really . It was a big thing in the early years and people were proud that something local was helping people further afield.

Why they got into to bed with SP I don't know, hopefully it was with good (but naive) intentions but I just find it sad that the phrase 'Operation Christmas Child' is now guaranteed to cause a bunfight because SP were allowed to keep the name .

I don't really have a point, I suppose, but I do wish that they'd just drop OCC bit. I'm an atheist and have no problem with Christian groups trying to do some good, but SP makes me really queasy .

it was interesting to know that about how it started out. I wasn't aware of it before you posted

Funtime - I'm sorry if I've offended you, I have no beef whatever with the original campaign, other than I don't think sending shoe boxes half way round the world is a good idea.

I have a massive beef with the evangelising aspect of it. And the fact it's sold to kids in schools in such a cynical way and the kids aren't told the full facts. And the leaflet that is given out (that you stick the age on the box iykwim?) totally downplays the evangelical aspect and it's in tiny tiny writing.

pipkins

Christmas is not really a Christian festival, historically it's pagan 25th December was celebrated as the birthday of the sun (or sun god or something) before Jesus was born (and he wasn't born on 25th December, it was September I think).

There are quite a few theories on why the date was chosen, but it is generally accepted that it was not not the actual date of Jesus' birth as that's not exactly known. Just like Easter is a celebration of rememberance not the actual date of death/resurrection etc.

However, it has been adopted as a Christian festival and it means something to millions of people around the world to give thanks to the son of God who came to earth to atone for our sins.

We celebrate Christmas but I know the what it actually is so we don't promote the Christian version of it in our house, in fact we aren't religious at all so there is never any reference to the Christian version of Christmas.

But I still think that, as long as the boxes reach who they are intended to reach, then giving a gift to children who may have nothing is very worthwhile. It may just be a gesture but then it can be argued that any gesture is surely better than no gesture at all.

I don't go to church but I still think that if a church is helping people more unfortunate then that is a good thing.

No offense taken Fluffy , I have as much of a problem with the evangelising aspect as you. I refuse to do them and, as ds1 is in Reception, I'm going to have to have some kind of explantion ready which will can be understood by a 5 year old who is convinced that god exists because 'we have service (assembly) and Mrs X tells us about god' (bog standard infant school).

Perhaps you could make a physical donation to a UK or European charity, and give some money to an overseas one instead?

exexpat you are assuming I don't do that. I do.

Thousands and thousands of these boxes are sent every year. I just really hope that every single one of those people who decides not to do it anymore, because of the religious aspect, do something else for a child abroad instead.

This has made me think about the shoe-box scheme that my child's school does, as I would not be happy about the evangelising element. So I checked, and they use a locally set-up charity, Love In a Box, who send to Romania, Moldova, Ukraine, often to orphanages. It is a Christian charity but there's no mention of leaflets.

www.msrm.org.uk/fund.html

It may not be the most efficient way of sending help to those who need it, but for children it's a fairlt good direct way of mkaing them think about others. Maybe schools should just check carefully which precise scheme they use. ( or parents could direct them! :o)

Just stepped out for a while and came back to lots of posts! Very interesting to read all sides of the argument.

Handmini, you asked So what are the "right" ways to spread the Christian message Gastrognome? Only in open discussion groups with educated people, all sides of faiths and arguments being represented?

I think that the evangelisation of children, through the giving of material goods such as boxes of toys, is probably not the right way, no. As for the right way, I'll have to give that some more thought as I'm really not sure!

But I'm really glad I posted this as it's convinced me to look into local charities/refuges and find out what they might need for their own operations.

I also think that the point raised by quite a few people is very valid - it's a shame the 2.50 or 5 euro donations don't go towards vaccinations, HIV treatment or other long term aid rather than shipping boxes around the world.

What this thread does demonstrate is that, for a lot of people, charity giving is about making themselves feel good. No wonder scams like OCC carry on with the shoebox method.

Vaccines that could save a child?s life 'cost just £2.50

And, yes. SGB. Charity is about making the giver feel good about giving. But it should still be worthwhile.

Save the Children are doing a great campaign at the moment with ideas for individuals and organisations to raise money.

Solid I expect making themselves feel good would be a very natural response, after doing something for someone else.
However, there must be other reasons why peopke choose to give to charity, as lots of other activities make people feel good too. People are choosing to donate to charity, they could just go and have a piece of cake, chat to a friend, go for a run, if they only wanted to feel good.

The dc's previous school did a shoebox scheme (not sure which one)and w edid not participate as it clearly stated in the information leaflet that a Christian bible story was included with the box - which I didn' think was appropriate.
Their new school does the Backpack Project linked to above which is similar to the shoebox idea (you fill an old backpack instead) buit as far as I can see (and I scoure dtheir website for hours!) despite being a Catholic organisation they do not include any religious leaflet with the backpacks.
The Backpack project is part of Mary's Meals which works to enusre that all children in poor countries where they operate get one meal a day (at school) which seems to me to be a good idea.