Miracles for Sale.

Having watched  'Miracles for Sale' as dispassionately as possible, I felt it was important to respond to the producers of this programme. The presentation of Christian values was muddled and inaccurately expressed.  I felt the need to raise the flag for clear understanding of Christian doctrine. We can't leave doctrinal matters in the hands of secular media to explain what they neither understand, nor believe in.

I did receive a considered response from Channel 4, but since I don't have their permission, I have not published it here.

 Rev Duncan Curry

Letters to Channel 4 from Duncan:

Letter 1:

Dear Sirs,

This programme is in bad taste for a number of reasons.

People who clearly had no faith or belief were filmed praying for others who clearly had faith. The man impersonating 'Pastor James Collins' was placed in a very insidious position and before God both he and Derren Brown put themselves at grave risk. 'God is not mocked.' Gal 6:7.

This was not responsible television. The screening date was also offensive on Easter Monday.

Finally, the programmes 'findings' is not news to Spirit filled, Bible believing Christians who would readily acknowledge the heretical teachings of the prosperity gospel.

Jesus Christ does heal today. This has nothing to do with the person praying and everything to the Almighty God we have.  This has been and is the quiet discovery of the Christian church for the past two thousand years.

Derren Brown showed a muddled view of basic Christian doctrine. Reinhard Bonnke, Benny Hinn and Maurice Cerullo would not describe themselves as ‘faith healers’. They are Christian ministers with a healing ministry. They give glory to God for healing. They would not claim it is anything to do with them.

Frankly, this kind of television is a disgrace to serious documentary film making. Simply, it lacked editorial integrity and pursued the same kind of sensationalism it purported to expose.

Yours Sincerely,

Rev Duncan Curry

Letter 2:

28^th April, 2011

Dear Veronica,

Thank you for your prompt and thoughtful reply.

By and large, I would agree that the programme was not anti-Christian.

However, your methodology was decidedly dubious. To impersonate a pastor in and of itself is offensive. Herein, is the mockery. Herein, you play with serious spiritual issues that you don’t understand. You are not merely messing with people, you are messing with God. By making this a matter for televised entertainment, you are presenting God in a very casual way and as I have already quoted: ‘God is not mocked.’ Gal 6:7

Most pastors are sincere people with a serious calling upon their lives. It is an offense to impersonate a doctor, a policeman, a judge. It is an offense to God to impersonate his chosen leaders. The person doing this was not a pastor. It was clear that he had some moral doubts about what he was doing. Would you haven take similar liberties with an Immam? Would you have entered a mosque with a hidden camera?

It was relief to see that the team stepped back from involving the Christian P.R. company. The moral contradictions of their position were becoming obvious to them at that point.

I’m more disappointed by the standards of production really than I am offended. Your programme showed a profound lack of understanding of some basic Christian values. Did you have any Christians working on the production team?

Ann Widdecombe, in contrast did a much better job for the BBC with her programme: Is there a future for Christianity? Though perhaps a little less dramatic, the programme served the public’s understanding of faith and its issues far better and the BBC maintained its integrity.

Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.

Kind regards

Rev Duncan Curry