You sure? That article is rather long and includes the fact that the birth of Jesus was, at one time or place or another, indicated for every single month in the year. It also notes that some of the logic used to get to a December date arose with calendar games that put the Annunciation in March and that there was a strong element aiming for January 6 and January 8.
Since, of the dozens of proposed dates, three strong contenders (the Priest duty of Zachary, the idea that Jesus was conceived and died on the same day of the year (March 25), and the similarities of the dates already proposed for the birth of Jesus and the birth of Mithra), all placed the birth of Jesus near the feast of Sol Natalis Invicti, the original claim that the selection of the December 25 date was the “crass commercial move by the Church to co-opt the far more ancient Winter Solstice celebration” first described, here, is not accurate. In fact, the feast of Sol Invicti was not really very ancient, the cult of Mithra coming to Rome at almost the same time as the cult of Jesus. Once one community of Christians settled on December 25, it then took over 100 years more (the duration of the fourth century and into the fifth) before the date was settled throughout most of the other Christian communities.
That the final date agreed upon (in those communities where it was agreed upon) was December 25 is almost certainly not mere coincidence, but there were a number of coincidences that preceded that decision that led to the fortuitous selection of that date. It was not simply a matter of a council or a pope making a declaration "Let’s take their feast away from them.
I am also not claiming that the church never “stole” feasts. Valentine’s day was pretty clearly taken, almost wholly into the church from the pre-Christian celebration, with the church assigning a like-named Christian martyr to maintain the tradition. I am simply noting that there were other factors involved in the selection of Christmas Day, and that some of them were coincidences.
I think we’re in complete agreement. I have seen people argue (not you) that I should embrace the non-religious symbols of Christmas, because to do otherwise is being a Scrooge. I object to that, as I think most people here would do the same.
There is a premise in this thread that there is a secular Christmas and a religious Christmas. From my perspective, there really is only one Christmas, and all of its trappings have religious overtones. I can’t really get past that.
However (and I can’t explain this) I love good Christmas music. Go figure?!
To me the holiday is ‘vaguely’ religious; there are elements that are very religious (the nativity, songs referring to ‘Him’), elements that are ‘somewhat’ religious (candles, candy canes, maybe trees?), and bits that are pretty much secular (santa, reindeer, snowmen). The name of this holiday itself is about 70% religious. I am very, very weary of the pious bits of the holiday and avoid them where possible, however I am highly enamored of 1) gifts, 2) days off, and 3) lots of unhealthy food. So I would never ditch the whole thing. I don’t pretend that there’s not a distasteful aura of christianity pervading the event; there is, and always will be. I just play up what I like and try and mentally edit out the parts I don’t care for.
I think we are in agreement, as well. No reason for ANYONE to embrace the non-religious aspects of Christmas, as far as I’m concerned. From a religious standpoint, it would probably be deeper & more meaningful if you cut out the tree & the piles of presents. From a non-religious standpoint, it doesn’t really mean anything, anyway!
I think they are so intertwined now, that what I said above is probably heresy to some folks, so I don’t blame you.
Hey, good music is good music. Some of the religious Christmas music is truly beautiful from a musical standpoint, and if you can at least appreciate the religious sentiment (if not necessarily agree with it), I can see where you could really enjoy some of it. In my mind, that’s just appreciating another culture, and not being close-minded to it because you don’t happen to be a part of that culture. That’s something to be admired, and we should all try a little harder to do it, IMO!
We do this every year and most years the OP never quite gets it. By coming forth and saying “C’mon, it’s OK to celebrate Christmas. What’s the harm?” you’re saying “Go ahead and conform, you Jews and Muslims and whatnot. Subsume yourself to the greater society. It doesn’t matter that you’re different…far more important that you join the rest of us in our practices. Because, for some reason, it bugs me that you don’t. Somehow, I feel lessened that you’re living your life your way.”
Allow me to sum up an appropriate response:
“Fuck that.”
You want a group that all behaves similarly I’ve got a dreidel for you, children.
I’m about the most secular Jew the world has ever given birth to. I’m not religious, my wife’s a shikse, my kids are blissfully non-religious (though learning) and it still irritates the fuck out of me when someone comes along and says that I should be like them because it doesn’t matter that much, does it?
In short, do what you will. But don’t EVER tell me to do what you will.
That really and truly wasn’t what I was thinking. I thought that it would be good if Christmas was open to everyone and everyone realized that fact.
The benefits would be:
Non-Christians wouldn’t have to fudge and justify why they are celebrating pieces of it.
Christians wouldn’t have to hear non-Christian groups claim that public Christmas trees and such are a violation of Church and State.
Recognize that the real-world Christmas celebration and the Christian idea of Christmas aren’t that intertwined for most people and can be practiced separately.
I am a Libertarian. I am not really asking anyone to do anything. It just seems obvious that Christmas at this point should be open to anyone that wants to participate in any way no matter how big or small.
Anyone else hearing MST3K’s “Merry Christmas (If That’s Okay)” in their head?
If there’s one point we’d like to make
In this little holiday song
It’s that Christmas comes just once a year
So for a few days for crying out loud
Can’t we all just get along?
From the perspective that I have no problem with Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Wiccans, Atheists, and followers of the Sub-Genius indulging themselves in whatever way they choose, I can go along with that. I see no reason for Christians to get pissy and claim that other folks are, somehow, “stealing” or “violating” Christmas when they celebrate the vacation time, the family gatherings, the sharing of presents, or the feasts while paying absolutely no attention to the Nativity story.
On the other hand, anyone who attempts to “expand” Christmas to include people who would rather avoid the religious connections by avoiding all the other trappings of the feast are simply not going to be successful. There are going to be too many people who have either bad memories of past Christmases or bad memories of (or bad ongoing experiences with) Christians who are going to be upset by what they perceive as a coercive action to force everyone to pretend that they are Christian for a few weeks.
We would be better off encouraging Christians to put more emphasis into the religious aspects of their own personal celebrations while simultaneously urging them to simply leave everyone else alone.
Maybe it’s just the pedant in me, but IMO people can do any type of celebrations they want around the end of December, but they shouldn’t label these things as “Christmas” celebrations if they aren’t even nominally Christian. In other words, put up a wreath, deck out your house with colored lights, and even exchange gifts if you want to, but don’t call them Christmas wreaths, lights, or presents if you’re not Christian. At least if/when the early Christians co-opted the Winter Solstice, they put their own names and religious meanings into the traditions they adapted – why don’t non-Christian groups just do a version of that today if they want something to celebrate this time of year? Arguably, we’ve already seen that with Hannukah and (maybe?) Kwanzaa. Heck, I’m sure the atheists could come up with some reasons to celebrate in December if they wanted to…
Personally, I’d feel more comfortable with that than just declaring that Christmas doesn’t have to have any religious meaning to it at all and that anyone can celebrate it, no matter what their faith. I think there is still a religious component to Christmas for most people who celebrate it – more, at least, than most people in this thread seem to acknowledge. Granted, that religious component may be buried under the mounds of commercialism, but I still think it’s there. And if I’m right about that (unproveable though the assertion is), isn’t essentially declaring Christmas a secular holiday pretty insulting? Or at the very least presumptuous?
I had this thought when I saw some decals that my brother put on the back of his truck. They look pretty much like round Christmas tree ornaments, and they say: “Merry Christmas. It’s worth saying.” (Of course, the “Christ” part is highlighted.)
Now, my brother and I function best when we don’t get into discussion of controversial issues (he hit me over the head when I was little because I used my allowance to buy the soundtrack album from “Saturday Night Fever”). So I didn’t ask him about the decals on his truck. But my thoughts were like yours. What if you didn’t say it? What if nobody said it to you? Would it mean something different to you? What if Bill O’Reilly and everyone else turned around tomorrow and told you that you should convert to Judaism, and get decals for the truck that say “The dreidel. It’s worth playing with.”
In many ways, I see the motivation to make others say the words the right way, acknowledge the “reason for the season,” and celebrate the proper way as the same motivation that made him hit me over the head for buying a disco record. Other people doing different things may mean that you are doing things wrong, and that’s just kind of scary.
Yes, because there aren’t any black Xtians in America. We’re all pagans of one stripe or another, or atheists who would do Madalyn Murray-O’hair proud.
I’m not saying that the Church “stole” any pre-Christian holidays. But there was a conscious decision to time the celebration of Christ’s birth when people were already celebrating.
No one’s opinion about the validity of my choices will ever affect whether I put up a tree, or snowflakes, or listen to Christmas music. If you want to talk about presumption, it’s the idea that it’s anyone’s business, ever.
I understand your point, but I interpreted Shagnasty’s Op as inviting people to feel free to celebrate the portions of Christmas they want to without guilt. I am a church disliking agnostic; however, I still really enjoy Christmas. I especially enjoy the Tree, the lights, the big family get-together, the kids opening presents and the Menorah lighting. (My Wife is Jewish and non-temple going but without the disgust for her faith of birth that I have of mine).
I had a few years where I did give up the tree and everything else but I missed it and enjoyed it too much. I think Shag is just trying to tell us that he thinks it is okay to enjoy whatever portion of Christmas you want. I think my wife only really enjoys the music. She would be content with no tree and Chinese food and a movie. (I understand that was her family tradition).
On the other hand, my MIL really enjoyed helping to decorate the Christmas tree the few times she was over for it. My FIL really enjoyed the three years where he came to my family’s Christmas feast. A huge, long, massive 7-10 course Italian Christmas meal without any religious overtones.
Jim (Did I mention I love my family and how easily we accept new members? We have many non-related family members that join us for all occasions.)
You can only “invite” people to do things if you have control over it in the first place. I can invite someone to my house. I can’t invite someone to your house. If the OP isn’t the source of the feelings, he can’t eradicate them.
Shagnasty, I think there’s an implicit assumption both here and in your OP that non-christians want to celebrate Christmas, but don’t because they think Christians don’t want them to, or that it was inappropriate. I think this is incorrect. I don’t think Jews, Muslims, whoever, are figuratively standing around, waiting for someone to invite them to the party. My wife and I are nonreligious, but from Christian backgrounds, so we do Christmas. If I was from a different background, where we didn’t celebrate Christmas, I doubt if I would want to start now. I’d feel like I was selling myself out.
This is kind of my take on it, too. I am a practicing Christian. I celebrate Christmas as a holiday and as a holy day and am consciously trying to make it a (for me) more meaningful religious holiday, less about shopping and eating. But I know if I were Jewish I wouldn’t be celebrating Christmas, and I wouldn’t be standing around wishing I could. If I were not Christian, I would not want to do things that made me feel like I was “pretending” to be something I wasn’t. If I were an atheist, then anything but the most secular trappings of the holidays would probably make me feel inauthentic – and lonely, frankly – all those people having fun I can’t bring myself to have. No thanks.
I’m not making any judgments on people of any faith or no faith who pick and choose holiday participation in the way that feels right and best to them. But some people aren’t on the other side of the Christmas fence because the gate is locked; some people are on the other side of the fence because they don’t want to be on this side.
This is just a message board. None of our debates or polls have much effect on what people will actually do. What Exit is correct on what I meant. I am just expressing a belief that Christmas doesnt have to be and isn’t really all that Christian and people at both ends of the extremes don’t need to treat it like it. People can celebrate it or not celebrate it as they choose. Of course this view is already technically true, my OP is just a response to any types of arguments that people use to exclude themselves or others based on religion alone.
I object to that, as I think most people here would do the same.