« Christian Saints vs. Cultural Celebrities | Main | Is Video Preaching on the Decline? »
December 19, 2011
Skye Jethani: The Wrong War on Christmas
How Christians went from opposing over-consumption at Christmas to demanding it be done in Christ's name alone.
A few years ago I was walking through Woodfield Mall, the largest one in Illinois, just before Christmas. I was disappointed to see that Santa’s grotto, where children waited in line for a brief one-on-one consultation with Mr. Claus, had been transformed into an enormous promotional display for the upcoming movie, Happy Feet.
Apparently the mall’s managers were not bothered that Santa was difficult to see among the huge images of computer generated penguins, and clearly nobody was disturbed by the geographic discrepancy–penguins only live at the South Pole and Santa resides at the North Pole. Sadder to me was the absence of the enormous Christmas tree that had stood at the center of the mall since my childhood. It appeared that Santa had sold his season, and his soul, to Warner Brothers Studios. I was, however, comforted by the irony of the scene–the character that had commercialized Christmas a century ago had fallen victim to his own devices.
Christians have always had a strained relationship with Saint Nick. Although his origins are rooted deeply in church lore, his association with the secularization of Christmas has made him a persona non grata in many churches and Christian communities. But many of us forget that Christmas itself is a holiday of dubious origin. For example, the Puritans were stridently opposed to the celebration of Christmas. They could find no biblical support for the holiday, and they believed (correctly) that it was originally a pagan festival now masquerading as Christian one. This view was widely held in America throughout the 19th Century. In 1855, newspapers in New York reported that Methodist, Baptist, and Presbyterian churches would be closed on Christmas Day because “they do not accept the day as a Holy One.” And by the 1860s only 18 states officially recognized the holiday.
Christmas only gained acceptance among a majority of Protestant Christians when it gained wide acceptance by the American public in general. And that can be attributed to the rise of Santa Claus in the secular pantheon. Old Saint Nick became a marketing juggernaut for retailers who by the 1920s had embraced Christmas as the premier season for shopping. Church leaders no longer objected to Christmas on the grounds that it was a pagan holiday. Instead their concerns shifted to the ungodly materialism and indulgence of desire they saw being promoted in the name of Christ.
The New York Times conducted a survey of Christmas sermons in 1931 and reported a common theme: “the suggestion that Christmas could not survive if Christ were thrust into the background by materialism.” Another popular sermon of the period railed that Advent had become little more than a “profit-seeking period.”
Sermons about the pagan origins of Christmas or the danger of rampant materialism in Christ’s name are unlikely to be heard today. In recent years the dominant message heard from the Christian community during the holiday season has been precisely the opposite. Today, it seems many Christians are offended when unchecked materialism in December is not explicitly associated with Christ. The irony.
Since 2005, Fox News has deployed its minions to wage their war on the “War on Christmas,” and the American Family Association has pushed for a boycott of stores for not using the words “Merry Christmas” in their seasonal marketing. Like many public institutions, some retailers opt to use the inclusive phrase “Happy Holidays” which these groups interpret as a slam to Jesus Christ- the real “reason for the season.”
It amazes me that in less than a century Christians have gone from opposing over-consumption at Christmas to demanding it be done in Christ’s name alone. The explanation may be in the numbers. Two-thirds of the U.S. economy is based on consumer spending, and 50-75 percent of most retailers annual profits are generated during December. This means the weeks before Christmas are the high holy days of consumerism. If Christians engaged the Advent season as they did in generations past, by modeling moderation and self-denial or by ignoring the holiday altogether, it would likely destroy (what remains of) the economy.
To ensure economic survival consumers are stirred into a buying frenzy every winter with the goal of making this year’s shopping season more prosperous than the previous. Santa Claus has been the mascot of this manipulation since the early 20th Century, but if more Consumer Christians have their way the season of shopping would be inaugurated by the appearance of Jesus Christ at the end of the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade instead.
Sadly, the “War on Christmas” and “Christmas Under Siege” campaigns pushed by some conservative Christians says more about the church’s captivity to consumerism than its commitment to the love of Christ and their neighbors.
Comments
Spot on, Skye. The other less subtle but also over-played mantra about Christmas is, "It's about family."
Oh, please.
Posted By: Wyatt | December 19, 2011 9:58 AM
So Skye, does this mean that your family will forgo any celebration of Christmas this year?
Also, what is the origin of the word 'Christmas'?
I'm not being sarcastic or catty, I truly would like to know.
Posted By: elegance | December 19, 2011 12:30 PM
Elegance,
My family will be celebrating Christmas. Unlike the Puritans, I'm not opposed to the holiday.
The word "Christmas" comes from Christ Mass..."Mass" being the common Roman Catholic word meaning the celebration of the Eucharist, or worship service. So, the Christ Mass was the service celebrating the birth of Christ.
Skye
Posted By: Skye Jethani | December 19, 2011 1:15 PM
As an addendum...Fox New's Christmas ornaments are labeled and sold with "Happy Holidays" as their logo.
Their pocketbook speaks more about what they believe than what their lips do.
Also, Christ Mass, aka. Christmas, a Catholic Celebration, was rendered an alternative to twelfth night, which was held in January, and considered more...um...riotous than the more subdued Mass.
The reason the Puritans had problems with it was because of the implied Catholicism (they were seriously anti-papists), Christ Mass, than it did with the paganistic undertones.
Christmas we know is actually a converted celebration from the myth/legend of Mithras who was considered born on Decemeber 25th, and was the patron god of the Roman Legionaries...if memory serves, I also think it is considered proto-zorastrianisitic as well...ah, my memory...oh well, I'm sure I'm skipping over a lot here.
Anyway, there is some speculation, and I haven't kept abreast of this so my memory is sketchy, is that Mithraic cult practices were the hobgoblin of the early church.
And quite possibly, the focus of early churches efforts to expel the "gnostic" sects who, in all intents and teachings, looked quite similar to Mithraic cult practices.
Anyway, don't know about the rest of you, but for me and my family, yeah, we know what it is, but for us we treat Christmas as an American cultural holiday rather than a "religious" one, and an opportunity to spend time with family and friends.
"Merry Christmas!"
Posted By: sheerahkahn | December 19, 2011 1:19 PM
I'm Canadian, and we have many of the same discussions up here. But, as I told my congregation at worship Sunday: no matter how we view it, we're not at Christmas, yet. We're still in the season of Advent. Christmas begins the 25, and continues until Epiphany (12 days later, just like the song.)
Last year, someone took me aside when I greeted my congregation with a cheery "Merry Christmas!" on January 2 and said "pastor..it's not Christmas anymore!"
I think you're unfortunately correct, that Christianity is more captive to consumerism than we would have ever imagined being.
Christmas does share Dec. 25 with other holidays as well (not just the ones from Rome which are still brought up), but that doesn't mean that it's not an appropriate date for the event. Too much emphasis is given to finding the 'correct' date for Christmas - a sign that we want the power that comes with knowledge others don't have - and takes focus away from celebrating the birth of a Saviour.
Posted By: Rev. Michael Macintyre | December 19, 2011 3:19 PM
Thank you for putting in words my struggle with this season.
Posted By: Andy B. | December 20, 2011 7:11 AM
Amen, Skye, Amen. I haven been shaking my head at this one for years. As a side point, what's wrong with "Happy Holidays" anyway? There's Thanksgiving, Hannukah, Kwanzai, Christmas and New Year's Day (I think in that order). Shouldn't a business serving all the public wish everyone good wishes at this time of year?
Posted By: Kevin | December 20, 2011 11:36 AM
"Too much emphasis is given to finding the 'correct' date for Christmas -"
The correct date for Christ Mass, aka, Christmas is Dec. 25th...but...
"a sign that we want the power that comes with knowledge others don't have -"
knowledge is power...for good or bad...that's a whole other question that must be explored. However...
"...and takes focus away from celebrating the birth of a Saviour."
When one is enslaved to the very argument you're arguing against...makes me wonder if you're aware of what you are, quite possibly unwittingly, arguing about?
Y'shua was not born in December...and for me, I was born in August, now if my family said, "oh hey (sheer) we're really not interested in WHEN you were born, so we're going to celebrate your birthday in March, okay, great, hey, thanks for all the fish, and have a great day!" I would be a bit miffed that no one really cared about me, my day, and when it should be celebrated.
So, if you're really interested in CELEBRATING Y'shua's birthday, then arguing that we shouldn't complain/argue about how we, humans, designated December 25th as the official day we all get sanctimonious about...perhaps we should just treat December 25th as what it should be...a cultural tradition that has nothing to do with Y'shua's birthday, but falls in line with his, "love one another" command.
AND WITH THAT we could decouple the "consumerism" from the "Christianity," and just make it a "Christian holiday" that has nothing to do with the birth of our savior and everything to do with loving one another as a faith.
And voila, we still have our yule-feel-good-tide jolly's, we still go to church, we sing, we love, we gift, we drink, we feast, we do our G-d proud!
Hmmm...well...that will probably not go over well with anyone...right, then...I'll just show myself out.
Posted By: sheerahkahn | December 20, 2011 11:45 AM
Skye, your article completely ignores the cultural context of the "war on Christmas." It's true that Christians aren't as worried about consumerism today. But the insistence that people say "Merry Christmas" is about asserting that we won't "play pretend" that we're all secularists. It's a reaction to the very public and very real pressure to keep one's faith entirely in the closet (unless of course one's faith is of a creedal variety other than Christianity).
Posted By: Ed | December 20, 2011 1:01 PM
Ed,
I don't think the "war on Christmas" is about Christians being forced to "play pretend" that we're all secularists. I can't think of anyone ever forcing, encouraging, or even suggesting that I not say "Merry Christmas." Just as I would never frown upon a Jew saying "Happy Hanukkah." Everyone ought to feel the freedom to express their own belief. And I've never like I couldn't say "Marry Christmas." Am I alone?
The war on Christmas isn't about getting Christians to say "Marry Christmas," it's about getting everyone else to say it.
Its not about shaming Christians who are pretending to be secular. It's shaming a secular culture to pretend to be Christian. The target of these campaigns isn't Christians who won't say "Marry Christmas," it's stores and organizations who are simply acknowledging the diversity of our culture...something many Christians are struggling to come to terms with.
Skye
Posted By: Ed | December 20, 2011 7:31 PM
I definitely see Skye's point. I was having fun laughing at the song "Have a Ramahanakwansmas" spoofing political correctness about the move to change publicly acknowledging "Christmas" to the more generic and inclusive "holidays" (to the tune of "Have a holly, jolly Christmas"). Then a comment made me realize that the song was indeed expressing the same victim mentality that ironically it is criticizing in the members of other faith communities (or their would-be pc supporters) supposedly wanting their piece of the holiday public- expression pie!
I don't think Christians concerned for the loss of a public voice for their faith are intending for that to support the runaway consumerism that has infected what was originally designated to be a sacred commemoration of the birth of the Savior of the world (the date chosen to overshadow pagan celebration of the "Invincible Sun" if some sources are correct). It is indeed another irony that this is the inadvertent reality. I think one of the surest ways to turn the focus on Christ at Christmas is for Christians to make it an occasion of worship.
Posted By: Karen | December 20, 2011 10:59 PM
Ed, do I think it's silly that PC Police go overboard on "separation" of church and state when it comes to public Christmas displays? Yes. And the public (many of them secular) have ridiculed the silly extremes. What I find completely insane is the American Family Association's "Naughty" or "Nice" list...basically calling for all Christians to boycott businesses that don't say "Merry Christmas". If they use "Season's Greetings" or "Happy Holidays" they are on the "Naughty" list. The AFA isn't even against the commercialization of Christmas...they just want it in the name of Christ. Have we all lost our marbles?
Posted By: Kevin | December 21, 2011 11:10 AM
While I agree with much of what you are saying, you lost me when you started using derogatory phrases such as minions and labels such as conservative Christians. People believe differently and have their reasons , and they deserve our respect. I myself am tired of the "war on Christmas" because I feel there are many more problems to be addressed in the name of Jesus in this world right now than whether we say Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays. As a follower of Christ, I can stop with the judgements and name calling of other people and have respectful conversations and bring to mind what is important to me about Christmas, rather than name-calling and labeling, which is what Jesus never did.
Posted By: Laurie | December 21, 2011 11:38 AM
Don't forget the other Christmas battle, Xmas! We were forever hearing from the professional Christians that society took the Christ out of Christmas. A lot less Heaven raising would be done if they simply realize that Christ in Christmas is being replaced by a cross, reminding us that Jesus came to die for us. But that's just me talking......
Posted By: Billy Hutchings | December 22, 2011 5:30 PM
Laurie,
I agree that name calling and labeling people doesn't always help. But sometimes it is necessary to get the attention of those to whom the labels are attributed. Didn't Jesus call the Pharisees "whitewashed tombs", and a "brood of vipers"? That sounds like name calling to me. And it described the Pharisees perfectly (and at times it describes me too, unfortunately).
Posted By: Mark | December 22, 2011 9:04 PM
Christmas was so awesome this year! New grand baby; precious family; sharing our day with someone who had no place to go; church; worshiping the Savior of the world. It just doesn't get any better in this life!
Posted By: elegance | December 26, 2011 11:18 AM
Thank you--my thoughts exactly! It's obvious that a Christmas reformation is needed, but just how and what. And I don' believe it should be as extreme as the Puritans. I find it curious that no one ever considers that Christmas and Hanukkah fall at the same time, and that Hanukkah does indeed point to the true Light--JESUS! So if we practiced Advent more in line with the spirit of Advent, Christmas more in line with Hanukkah, and kept our gift giving down to three gifts at the most, that might be a good beginning. I love the suggestion of the three gifts being in line with gold--something of great value, frankincense--something spiritual, and myrhh--something to adorn the body such as bodywash, hair ornaments or clothing. Or one of the gifts being something fun like an inexpensive toy. There's many things that could bring change towards a more godly celebration and one of them being more teaching from the pulpit! I hope to do just this at our church in 2012 because I do believe CHRIST's birth should be celebrated, but for His glory, not ours, and certainly not the economy's! Thank you again!
Posted By: Keli Burfield | December 27, 2011 6:01 PM
I think we, as Christians, would do better to focus on what Christmas means to us and stop worrying about what it means to non-Christians.
Posted By: Deof Movestofca | December 30, 2011 9:08 PM
Billy, you may not realize that "X" is an historic (as in early Church) Greek letter abbreviation for "Christ." Therefore, when Christians write Xmas, we *are* leaving the Christ in Christmas! More on that here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xmas
Posted By: Karen | January 2, 2012 12:41 PM
Post a comment: