You must be looking for it. I look for it and don’t see it.
Not necessarily - I don’t live in a Bible Belt area at all , but I see lots of angel tree toppers ,radio stations/store music/the music at neighborhood holiday events all include religious songs (although I wouldn’t call most of them hymns) along with secular Christmas songs and winter songs that don’t actually mention Christmas. There are plenty of angels and manger scenes in front yards or windows ( my favorites are where the Three Wise Men are played by Santa, the Grinch and Frosty), and there are always billboards/signs about “Jesus is the reason for the season” and “Say Merry Christmas”, not to mention all people saying those things on neighborhood Facebook pages.
Ditto. Friends, acquaintances, inlaws.
I also know it from a great deal of what I read, written by people I don’t have direct acquaintance with.
Capitalize, please.
It’s quite possible to overdo either of those things, in such a fashion as to cause problems for the neighbors.
I live in rural New York State; in the Finger Lakes. You can see that if you click on my avatar.
And I see and hear that stuff all over the place.
Yup. And the menorah and the Virgin and Child are religious. The generic winter scene, and to some extent the Santa Claus one, are there for people who don’t want to use religious stamps.
True for a lot of Christians, though not all of them. So what? That doesn’t mean they’re not celebrating a religious holiday. Nor does it mean that they’re celebrating two utterly distinct observances, one of them religious and the other secular.
Religion imbues what would otherwise be secular behavior. For some people, it imbues every activity of their daily lives. For others, it does so only when the activities are part of a specific religious celebration. But in neither case is religion kept in a separate compartment, walled apart from anything else that they do.
I will give you not “utterly” distinct, but yes, they are celebrating two different holidays. Often quite distinct in their time-slicing - their Midnight Mass is religious, their present exchange is entirely secular, etc. They’re not thinking of Mammon in the pew, but neither are they thinking of Jesus while they put up their plastic Rudolph on the roof.
No, the secular infests previously religious behaviour. Which only a part of Christmas was in any case, other parts having always been secular.
That’s the thing, though. It’s not Christians vs. everyone else. If that were the case, I would just assume we were blind to how religious the holiday is to outsiders. But Christmas is celebrated by atheists, and very heavily so. They can be the most enthusiastic about it.
That’s what seems odd. If other groups can celebrate Christmas without any religious trappings, it seems odd that some groups say that this is impossible. It starts to feel more like the secular or Christian nature of the celebration isn’t the point, and that it’s the origin that matters. Or even possibly the name, since it has “Christ” in it.
Don’t get me wrong. I would never tell anyone what they should or shouldn’t celebrate. I’m not even going to say that any group is wrong. I’m just pointing out why it seems a bit odd. When atheist are okay with it, we usually assume it is not really religious anymore. I mean, I don’t think @MrDibble is Christian, though he can correct me if I’m wrong.
It’s also hard for me as a Christian when I would have no problem joining in any other celebration, even a more explicitly religious one, as long as I was invited to do so. I have to assume it’s a minority vs. majority thing.
I see it in Chicago, as well.
Sorry, I didn’t mean the “early Christians” in the technical sense of pre-Roman adoption of Christianity, just “a lot earlier than now”. I didn’t realize it was as far back as 300AD, but that definitely qualifies.
And “superimposing Christian values” on what might otherwise be just a seasonal celebration was my point. There’s always been an element of “superimposing Christian values” in “Christmas”, and there still is, and that’s why non-Christians in America are sensitive to it, imho.
Nope.
Either of those things can happen.
Both of them can be happening at the same time, with different people.
But if what you’re claiming is that adding what were originally secular elements, and/or elements of different religion(s), to a religious celebration automatically makes it not a religious celebration: no, that isn’t true.
Nobody’s saying that.
What we’re saying, and I repeat myself (and others), is that the fact that some people celebrate Christmas as a secular holiday does not make the entire holiday non-religious.
Some atheists. Not all atheists.
And some will show up at a family celebration in order to be with family, even though they’re not celebrating the same thing.
– hey, let’s get some music into this discussion:
Not atheists, but to the point:
I’m not so sure. I think there are a significant number of Christians who don’t distinguish between religious and secular Christmas but see it all as a way of celebrating the birth of Christ. And when they’re giving presents or decorating a tree or even putting up a plastic Rudolph, they at least have in the back of their mind that Jesus is the reason for the season.
It’s kind of like celebrating a person’s birthday by going out to eat, or going out partying, or bringing treats to the office. There’s nothing inherently birthday-ish, nor anything specific to the person whose birthday it is, in any of those activities. And it’s possible to participate in them without caring about or even knowing the person whose birthday it is—some people just like free treats. But for those who do care about the person and about celebrating their birthday, those activities are part of how they do it.
I’m going to say that exchanging presents is viewed both as a Christian spirit of giving, and as copying the wise men who gave gifts to the baby Jesus. And that the Grinch is a story that is likewise Christian-adjacent (not just Christmas, but Christian). The lights – I’ll go with “it’s dark, and lights are nice in midwinter”. I think that’s secular, except for the Christmas connotations.
I note that in my town, the town used to have lights on most of the main streets, and a Christmas tree in front of town hall. An Orthodox Jewish group challenged the tree, but not the lights, on the grounds that the town was favoring one religion over others. We still have lots of winter lights. But now the lawn in front of town hall has a skimpy little tree, an enormous menorah, and a large Crescent whose meaning is obscure to me, other than “we want to acknowledge Muslims”. The tree and the menorah are actually about the same size, but since their “normal” sizes are quite difference, they look dumb together.
But either a court agreed with the challenge, or the town was afraid of the fallout (I didn’t follow it that closely). Let’s just say that my in my non-Bible-belt town, a Christmas tree is now officially seen as favoring Christians.
Yep.
No. I’m claiming that adding an overwhelming amount of secular elements (and secularizing religious ones) makes it not a religious celebration.
If I had the stance you’re strawmanning for me there, then I would feel that Easter was also secular, but I don’t.
I don’t think that many, really. I base that on observation of Christians I know - the ones who are all “Jesus is the reason” are also not the ones to go all-in on the secular aspects, and vice-versa.
I see it somewhat differently. I see that, by the time Christmas was celebrated in the US nationally (the Puritans were holdouts), there was no “superimposing Christian values” involved. There was nothing to superimpose those values on, as all celebrations except those of minority cultures were by default Christian. The superimposition happened more than a thousand years ago.
I believe that those who find the mixed secular and Christian holiday oppressive aren’t generally celebrating a holiday at all at those times – Chanukah being a pretty minor deal except in countries where it is trying to compete with Christmas – they are just feeling the effect being non-Christians living in what is the most actively Christian of the wealthy nations.
@MrDibble , I think you ought to step back and listen to the lived experience on minorities in the US.
The minorities comparing the slave experience to tree trinkets, and making sneering “Christsplaining” remarks? Maybe that kind of respect has to be earned…or at least not squandered upfront.
Well, that’s dumb. The only thing that’s Christian about a tree is the fact that it was popularized in a Christian country (Germany, and then England via German-ancestry monarchs). It’s about as Christian as the Krampus. But we humans rarely let facts get in the way of our decisions.
I’m going to suggest that Jews have suffered more than “tree trinkets” at the hands of Christendom. And yes, that IS relevant background to how people feel about the whole thing.
I agree it was dumb. And sort of bizarre, since the town has a lot more people who celebrate lunar New year, which is a real holiday that sort of kind of coincides with “the Christmas season”, than it has anyone who celebrates any Muslim holidays, especially Muslim holidays near Christmas. We have lots of east Asians, and only a few Muslims. I joked that the pagans should lobby for a large phallus on the town lawn. And hey, I’d be happy if the town did something for Diwali (we do have a significant Indian minority.)
But that’s what happened.
This is very true, but I wasn’t gonna let MrDibble draw me into an Oppression Olympics competition.
American United for Separation of Church and State have battled repeatedly over the years about the so-called War on Christmas. It’s blog search function is not very good, but you’ll see dozens of examples of the ways Christians try to force Christmas into the public sphere and insisting that the holiday is a religious one. You can try to argue that the “War” is simply a fundraising ploy but the statements made by the groups promoting Christmas would belie that.
Who the hell is doing that?
It is Christian now because it’s been absorbed by a Christian religious ritual. The origin of it doesn’t control its modern meaning.
You might as well say that a cross can’t be Christian because its origins are specifically non-Christian Roman.