Christmas without Christ? Huh?

[HoosierDaddy]

Well..it seems for many that the Christmas season is reserved for good will and charity....or a heightened sense of it. Perhaps as it should be,considering the celebrated birth of the greatest gift giver of all. However..those of little interest in that,undoubtly,will gloss over Christ's gift...to have more concern with any other good feeling kind acts. As well...many on the other side of the coin have little interest in the,once,pagan aspects incorporated in the Christmas celebration. Since that joy is about the birth of a non-pagan...what makes the dif. Others added Xmas..and that made little difference in the long run. Humankind seems forever hypicritical prone..but that's just a natural "given"...for good reason. However...preaching the need to accomadate everyone...but then noticing the opposite happening should be an eye opener to those who care. The idea of..keep your Christ at home,church or personal..not out here for promotion,seems the outcry. Christmas..or the celebration of the saviour's birth is replaced with what..then? Does it come down to a Santa's SaleABration exclusively? Not even the non "religious" being able to notice the nativity in the store or on the card to perhaps remember and realise what really matters in the hustle and bustle? No little kid to ask..."who's that little baby in the hay,Daddy?" Perhaps a special moment in time for those who do not go near a church or goodbook to remember that there is the possibility that it may not be a such fairytale at all. Our selfmade hustle and bustle may be the cruel illusion.
HD

 

[melankomas]

i expect one reason behind the reduction of winter holidays to a least common denominator has to do with the official observance. if christmas weren't an official sort of holiday, with mass business, bank, and government office closings, it would be more acceptable as a strictly religious day. if all religious holidays from all religions were to receive the official recognition enjoyed by december 25, it would also be more acceptable as a strictly religious holiday. many things would be left unaccomplished, however, so it's easier to leave the holiday season as it is, and remove religious aspects from the general observance, since adding these aspects back is easy enough for the individual who would like to celebrate the holiday religiously.

in response to the idea that non-christians should smilingly attend christmas parties, consider that a refusal to do so may come from a certain respect for the actual meaning behind the holiday. to give an example not related to holidays at all, consider the old version of the pledge of allegiance (for the united states). when i was a child, i refused to say the bit "under god". when i was reprimanded for this omission, i explained that as a united states citizen, pledging my allegiance was important to me. including "under god" invalidated the pledge in my case, as i had no god. it made my pledge as ridiculous as if i was pledging allegiance to a nation under a large pork chop. while it may have strengthened the pledge for some children, it rendered the same pledge meaningless for me. i served several detentions for this point of view. it was out of respect for both the meaning of the pledge, and for the gravity of the concept of a god, that i refused to combine the two when i didn't believe in the one. similarly, someone who does not attend a christmas party or accept a christmas gift may be doing so out of respect for christmas as a sacred day they have no business participating in.

 

[Doh!]

similarly, someone who does not attend a christmas party or accept a christmas gift may be doing so out of respect for christmas as a sacred day they have no business participating in.

Interesting observation, and I sort of fall into this category. I was raised Catholic but haven't been to church in 20 years. However, whenever there's a wedding or funeral in the family, it always includes a mass; with mass, comes communion. I never take communion but each time my still-practicing brother remarks, "You know, they have one for you, too." Um, actually, they don't. Because I no longer practice Catholicism, I'm not supposed to take communion.

Odd how I know the rules better than my faithful brother does...

 

[Weston]

Some points of history...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xmas

I know Wikipedia is not always the most trustworthy source, but Xmas is not an attempt to remove Christ from the holiday, but X is "Chi" in greek, the first letter in Christs' name.

Also- Elaine knows her history well! Many Christian holidays were selected around certain pagan dates, in order to subordinate them and rid them of their power. If Christians celebrated the same day that Pagans did, it became difficult to retain their original pagan meanings, thus the holidays were robbed of their primary pagan meanings. Christianity has done an excellent job of "draining" the pagan of its power and influence. Other than a (statistically tiny) few, there is not much real "Yule" celebration to speak of. No commercially viable "Yule" cards, etc. All Pagans have had to do is try to rediscover those holidays and reconstruct them, but in my opinion too much has been lost for it to ever regain its true form once more.

Genesis itself makes many Hebrew allusions to other Gods -- sea gods, Baal, etc. The account makes clear that the Hebrew God YHWH is above all these.

Lastly, I must put in a word of respect for LizzieMaine. I commend you on your desire not to participate in something you don't wish to do. What I do recommend, however, is that more secularists have the courage to not observe the holiday if they don't wish.

This may sound odd coming from a clergyman to be, but as a Christian, it is sometimes a difficult struggle to stick to your guns when confronted by society's ways. Why should secularists not embrace such a struggle also, and put away things they don't believe in? I fight to retain all the meaning of Christmas in my life, why should anyone in America not be afforded the right to disassociate from what they do not believe?

As someone else suggested, perhaps if the secularists would avoid the Holiday, it might regain some of its former meaning. But this is all conjecture. Carry on.

 

[Mike in Seattle]

I've been pretty angry with our library system the last couple of years. They've forbidden the library guilds, "friends of the library", whatever you want to call them from placing Christmas trees & decorationgs in the lobbies. It was a "giving tree" sort of thing - you pulled off a card, if you wished, listing a gift a child in need would like for the holidays, bought it & brought it back for the guild members to wrap up & distribute.

The head of the library system says it's a separation of church & government issue. She even went as far as to cancel the cocoa, cookies & "wear your jammies" reading of Polar Express (that famous religious story made into a film a few years ago) for the kids as well. Fine, if that's the way they want to be. When I called her office as well as branches to ask what the hours of all the branches would be on 12/25, I got "They're all closed. Don't you know it's Christmas?" and my response was, "I do...but do you?"

I ventured in to do one of my intro to computers classes for seniors shortly thereafter. In the lobby, where a Christmas tree & decorations are now forbidden, the display cases had displays on Hannukah, Ramadan and other celebrations from around the world, but absolutely no reference or mention of Christmas or Christianity. The explanation from staff was some people are offended by Christmas and Christianity. Fine, agreed...but if that's the excuse, why is it then OK to showcase other religions & their secular celebrations? What if I'm offended by that? Apparently...I can lump it. And there was protesting over the issue.

This year, our local branch is in the middle of a remodel project that has it closed until the new year. How interesting that the bond issue for doing this work was voted down, I believe, three or four times in recent annual elections. Suddenly they find the money so the building's pretty much off limited Halloween till New Years the year after big protests over a holiday double-standard...how convenient.

 

[jamespowers]

From Matthew -
5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

An interesting quote that makes my point completely. If Christmas bothers you then ignore it so the rest of us can enjoy it---rather than trying to water it down, bend the law to make it illegal or fill it with claptrap that has nothing to do with what it truly stands for.
If there was no assault on Christmas the organizations that are out there pointing out such things would have nothing to point out wouldn't they? Take this for example:

November 29, 2006

“BREAKFAST WITH SANTA” BANNED

Catholic League president Bill Donohue commented on the latest entry to the league’s “Christmas Watch” program:



“Every year the Sanfordville PTA in Warwick, New York does a Santa fundraiser at the local elementary school. Called ‘Breakfast with Santa,’ it draws hundreds of kids on a Saturday, all of whom come voluntarily. But because one anonymous bigot objected this year—citing religious discrimination—the event was reworked by school lawyers: there will now be a ‘Winter Wonderland Breakfast.’ Moreover, Santa will now have a partner: Frosty the Snowman has been ordered to join him.



“The bigot, of course, wants no compromise and wants Santa removed altogether. According to Darlene Baratto, who is in charge of the event, ‘We have a beautiful background people can have a picture in front of. That wasn’t good enough. We changed the name, colors, the background. Nothing made her happy. She was not open to anything. We’ll have 300 or so kids who are disappointed.’ Not to worry, school superintendent Dr. Frank Greenhall reassured everyone when he said, ‘If you make it an issue, the kids will make it an issue.’ Now how’s that for leadership? Just shut up and don’t tell the kids why ‘Breakfast with Santa’ has been censored and they won’t know the difference.



“There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution, of course, that bans ‘Breakfast with Santa’ from taking place in a public school. This has nothing to do with the law—it has everything to do with bowing to the pressure of bigots. This is the new utilitarianism: the greatest good for the least number of people. And it is just as immoral as its parent principle—the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

“The community newspaper, the Warwick Advertiser, has a moral obligation to out the person responsible for this exercise in tyranny. Just as residents need to know who the child abusers are in their neighborhood, they need to know who among them would abuse the rights of children to enjoy Santa


There are hundreds more cases like this that occur every year and this one had nothing to do with Christ or Christmas in a religious context. :eusa_doh:

Regards to all,

J

 

[jamespowers]

I've been pretty angry with our library system the last couple of years. They've forbidden the library guilds, "friends of the library", whatever you want to call them from placing Christmas trees & decorationgs in the lobbies. It was a "giving tree" sort of thing - you pulled off a card, if you wished, listing a gift a child in need would like for the holidays, bought it & brought it back for the guild members to wrap up & distribute.

The head of the library system says it's a separation of church & government issue. She even went as far as to cancel the cocoa, cookies & "wear your jammies" reading of Polar Express (that famous religious story made into a film a few years ago) for the kids as well. Fine, if that's the way they want to be. When I called her office as well as branches to ask what the hours of all the branches would be on 12/25, I got "They're all closed. Don't you know it's Christmas?" and my response was, "I do...but do you?"

I ventured in to do one of my intro to computers classes for seniors shortly thereafter. In the lobby, where a Christmas tree & decorations are now forbidden, the display cases had displays on Hannukah, Ramadan and other celebrations from around the world, but absolutely no reference or mention of Christmas or Christianity. The explanation from staff was some people are offended by Christmas and Christianity. Fine, agreed...but if that's the excuse, why is it then OK to showcase other religions & their secular celebrations? What if I'm offended by that? Apparently...I can lump it. And there was protesting over the issue.

This year, our local branch is in the middle of a remodel project that has it closed until the new year. How interesting that the bond issue for doing this work was voted down, I believe, three or four times in recent annual elections. Suddenly they find the money so the building's pretty much off limited Halloween till New Years the year after big protests over a holiday double-standard...how convenient.

Welcome to my every year out here. :eusa_doh:

Regards,

J

 

[LizzieMaine]

If it were kept as the quote from Dickens, I see no problem. It's the motives behind the seeming good will that is a concern. I don't doubt that there are still people who get together with purity of heart to spend time with family and friends and give gifts- but I think it's hypocritical of a society to dictate when to do it rather than have it continue year round.

Exactly the point I was trying to make. It's the *socially compulsory* nature of Christmas that sets me off -- I have no objection to anyone celebrating in any way that they see fit. But I do object to being coerced into joining in, especially in that passive-aggressive "oh don't be such a Scrooooooge" kind of way. If I don't want to give, say, my sister a gift because she's rude and insulting to me 364 days out of the year, I shouldn't be pressured to do so just "because it's Christmas," especially when I know she'll be complaining about how little I spent on her as soon as my back is turned. Not my idea of a goodwill-oriented celebration at all.

But on the other hand, I'm more than happy to drive 300 miles so my best friend won't be alone on Christmas Eve -- because *that* is the real meaning of the season to me, being with people you *want* to be with instead of those that social pressure *forces* you to be with.

 

[jamespowers]

But on the other hand, I'm more than happy to drive 300 miles so my best friend won't be alone on Christmas Eve -- because *that* is the real meaning of the season to me, being with people you *want* to be with instead of those that social pressure *forces* you to be with.

:eusa_clap My hat is off to you. A very good gesture for the season and one that will be appreciated in the way it was given. :eusa_clap

Regards,

J

 

[John in Covina]

Christmas is about the Christ, the Messiah.

I look for religious Christmas cards to send to those I will send Christmas cards to as a part of remembering what Christmas is all about.

Just as in "A Charlie Brown Christmas" it is Linus that reminds us what Christmas is about. The birth of a Savior promised by God. When you share that message, you share "The Good News" about Salvation.

I don't send these cards to rub anyone's nose in dirt but that they can be a reminder of God's love for us.

Now if you are offended by this, ask yourself, am I on John's Christmas Card List?

Merry Christmas!

 

[Mr. Lucky]

An interesting quote that makes my point completely. If Christmas bothers you then ignore it so the rest of us can enjoy it---rather than trying to water it down, bend the law to make it illegal or fill it with claptrap that has nothing to do with what it truly stands for.
If there was no assault on Christmas the organizations that are out there pointing out such things would have nothing to point out wouldn't they? Take this for example:

November 29, 2006

“BREAKFAST WITH SANTA” BANNED

Catholic League president Bill Donohue commented on the latest entry to the league’s “Christmas Watch” program:



“Every year the Sanfordville PTA in Warwick, New York does a Santa fundraiser at the local elementary school. Called ‘Breakfast with Santa,’ it draws hundreds of kids on a Saturday, all of whom come voluntarily. But because one anonymous bigot objected this year—citing religious discrimination—the event was reworked by school lawyers: there will now be a ‘Winter Wonderland Breakfast.’ Moreover, Santa will now have a partner: Frosty the Snowman has been ordered to join him.



“The bigot, of course, wants no compromise and wants Santa removed altogether. According to Darlene Baratto, who is in charge of the event, ‘We have a beautiful background people can have a picture in front of. That wasn’t good enough. We changed the name, colors, the background. Nothing made her happy. She was not open to anything. We’ll have 300 or so kids who are disappointed.’ Not to worry, school superintendent Dr. Frank Greenhall reassured everyone when he said, ‘If you make it an issue, the kids will make it an issue.’ Now how’s that for leadership? Just shut up and don’t tell the kids why ‘Breakfast with Santa’ has been censored and they won’t know the difference.



“There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution, of course, that bans ‘Breakfast with Santa’ from taking place in a public school. This has nothing to do with the law—it has everything to do with bowing to the pressure of bigots. This is the new utilitarianism: the greatest good for the least number of people. And it is just as immoral as its parent principle—the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

“The community newspaper, the Warwick Advertiser, has a moral obligation to out the person responsible for this exercise in tyranny. Just as residents need to know who the child abusers are in their neighborhood, they need to know who among them would abuse the rights of children to enjoy Santa


There are hundreds more cases like this that occur every year and this one had nothing to do with Christ or Christmas in a religious context. :eusa_doh:

Regards to all,

J

And for the one you post, here are nearly http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?toggle=1&ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp-t-501&p=breakfast+with+santa 2000 to the opposite, where Santa showed up without a problem.


Oh, and here's a city sponsored Nativity Scene.

Here's one in Salt Lake - http://www.flickr.com/photos/dolmanfamily/3124048/in/set-985223/

Another on the Commons in Boston - http://www.saralovering.com/gallery/2004/12/boston_common_n.php

And, finally, here's yet another, a live nativity walking through the city streets of Pittsburg - http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04343/423288.stm

And nobody is trying to water anything down - all people are trying to do, which also reflects the changing dynamic of our society, is to find their own place in the season of which we all cherish; each afforded to do so, by the nature of the libertys bestowed on us as Americans, as we choose. Where in the Bible, or the Constitution, does it say Christmas is ONLY for Christians? Where does it say that we can't celebrate the spirit of the holiday in any way we choose? And, lastly, where does it say that those that don't partake of the holiday, for whatever reason it may be, must adhere and be subjected to religious overtones and icons they don't believe in simply because someone else thinks their rights are more important simply because they ARE religious?

Hey, there's always whacko's bitching about something. But that is not proprietary to one side of any issue. They exist everywhere. Again, there's nothing worse than those that would have us believe that the exception IS the rule.

 

[jamespowers]

And I could go on for 2,000,000 on the other side. What difference would it make only to show that there are intolerant people? We sure don't have a nativity scene within 100 miles of me.
And no one is saying you have to celebrate anything, anyway or anyhow. It just is as it is. You are making that argument not me. I could care less what you do. What I care about is when you include everyone else but what is the reason for the season.
Here comes the vicious circle again. :deadhorse

Regards,

J

 

[Barry]

I suspect my perspective is different from others.

In 1940's my father attended US public schools. The instructor teaching his Latin class was Catholic. She incorporated Latin Catechisms into class. My grandfather who was an Orthodox Jew went in and complained. After the principal intervened it stopped. I suppose you could always be disingenuous and snicker and say "oh well... nobody asked your dad to believe them, heh heh heh." These types of incidents and incidents like them are what many non-Christians from my parent's generation experienced and it might explain why some people are uncomfortable (to say the least) about what is essentially the celebration of religious holidays by government institutions. Is requiring students in a public school to say Catechisms "the same" as requiring them to attend a "Christmas Pagent." Perhaps not. But to the non-Christian just how different is it?

And for the record: I am a librarian. If I were working in a US public library I would not incorporate a Hannukiah into any display. I would quit if I were asked to do that. The same goes for a Nativity Scene.

Barry

 

[HoosierDaddy]

December 25...Christmas. A date determined for recognition and celebration of the Christs birth. The name says it all. Do some want to change that to Religion Day?....possibly to just pile on to denigrate and starve the original purpose? Again...I don't even see that! Where are the added symbols or displays in department stores or public settings to make it the "All Religion season" rather than the "Christmas season". What is very evident are the objections of the few who are offended that "Christ"mas should be for Christ. Not only just for Christ..but even for Christ. Rather than a try to multiply..it seems an effort to deny. The idea..that not everyone believes in Jesus as the savior...so "Seasons Greetings' should suffice. Putting book stores and malls on guard and sensative to the reason for the season. When they dishonor Santa is when all hell will break loose! Wait a minute...they already made him an old drunken streetwise foul mouthed bum.
HD

 

[John in Covina]

Interesting about Latin Class, in this instance, the teacher was using for many people the only excercise of Latin one might actually hear in a regular setting. Did the catechism include parts of the mass? The reason I ask, is for some reason the Latin parts of the mass weren't regularly translated so it would be kind of nice to know what it meant.

In the class how many of the children were Catholic and how many were other Christian religions?
Did any one else object?

When does learning about another religion become proselytizing?


In the Constitution it lists we have Freedom of religion, but not freedom FROM religion.
Are we, here in a place where so many that when for religious freedom, finding the shut down of those freedoms?

At what point do you infringe on the rights of others, when you shut down involvement?

Do we use the percentages of the various religions to show what can be done which some call
"the Tyranny of the Majority".
OR do let the the smallest percentage rule what can or can't be done which is called
"the Tyranny of the Minority" ???

This is the deep end of the pool folks, and how do we proceed with out going political?

 

[scotrace]

.

We'll let you know if it oversteps.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Wow!..Very well said,John in Covinia!
:eusa_clap :eusa_clap :eusa_clap :eusa_clap

 

["Doc" Devereux]

When does learning about another religion become proselytizing?

When that religion forces itself upon me, rather than me voluntarily going to a place where my questions can be answered. When it knocks on the door of my private home and tries to convert me. When it gets out a megaphone and shouts at me while I walk through town. When it forms up in ranks and intimidates people into succumbing to its point of view through fear.

 

[Roger]

If it's about learning about different religions then there's nothing wrong with that. It is when government forces people to beleive a certain way or the official policy is to treat other religions in a subservient manner. Are Christians and Jews treated equally as Muslims in the Mid East? Are Christians treated the same as Jews in Israel? That is the big difference! When school children are forbidden from exchanging presents at school, learning about the Nativity or having a "Christmas Dance" but are required to don burkha's and read from the Koran so they "understand" Islam that is a huge show of hypocrisy. No one is being forced to attend a religious observance or required to believe a certain way when the words Merry Christmas are being used. But, they sure as hell are being forced to believe a certain way when told it's Winter Solctice Dance not Christmas Party.

 

[jamespowers]

[QUOTE="Doc" Devereux]When that religion forces itself upon me, rather than me voluntarily going to a place where my questions can be answered. When it knocks on the door of my private home and tries to convert me. When it gets out a megaphone and shouts at me while I walk through town. When it forms up in ranks and intimidates people into succumbing to its point of view through fear.[/QUOTE]


I guess Santa isn't going to come down your chimney this year then.
They knock on the door all the time here. I just don't answer.
Never heard of the megaphone thing. How about the guy with the sandwich board that says the world will end tomorrow? Does he count?
Forming ranks is something I haven't seen here either. [huh]

Regards,

J