I rather over rambled on this one and ran out of energy writing it but have at it is, it makes the basic point. I apologise.
The conquered Son
The first thing that is usually said again Christmas is that it is a based on a pagan festival which is a difficult line for true critical though on both sides of the debate. There is no doubt that Christmas is set on the same day as Dies Natalis Solis Invicti, the birthday of the unconquerable sun, the festival of Invictus Sol the Roman god of the sub.
The early Church was birthed in a deeply multicultural society, with the Greco-Roman pantheon including the Emperor himself was worshiped and a mix of odd philosophies mixed in alongside, probably with other imported gods from the other territories conquered by rome and those worshiped by traveling merchants.
The Jews were unique in that they got a whole day off a week, even for religious days (bar perhaps festivals) pagans didn't. For this gentile cultures considered Jews lazy. The appropriations of dates and beginning to worship on Sunday (literally the venerable day of the sun) wasn't out of having extra days off to worship on but instead out of ideology.
It seems no coincidence that Christianity appropriated both Sunday and the festival of the sun.
Jesus rose from the dead on a Sunday and thus it was made the Lord's day and in turn this could have made Sunday a reasonable target but moving the sabbath to a sunday was an odd move which is still controversial amongst the various denominations. Personally as far as I can tell the sabbath isn't meant to be kept anymore as the laws of the Mosaic covenant don't apply to gentiles but if I were to keep it, I'd keep it on a Saturday.
Once the day of the sun was appropriated, it only made sense then to appropriate the festival of the unconquered sun.
Furthermore by appropriating an already existing festival is a way of eliminating a previously existing religion is a good way of sublimating the entire religion itself. By supplanting and removing the other religion it removes competition, it is a clearly effective strategic move but I question the morality of such acts.
Jew in the old testament had great issues with idolatry, something that hasn't really changed even for modern Christians. Methods of worship were sometimes appropriated from other religions, such as worshiping in the high places; though the ideal was there, God still found it offencive, though there could be implied usage of other idolatry there. As such I consider the appropriation of other festivals dangerous. Eitherway 'Invictus' Sol is an almost forgotten god.
The other argument for using the day of the Dies Natalis Solis Invicti is the following passage:
“Surely the day is coming; it will burn like a furnace. All the arrogant and every evildoer will be stubble, and the day that is coming will set them on fire,” says the Lord Almighty. “Not a root or a branch will be left to them. But for you who revere my name, the sun of righteousness will rise with healing in its rays. And you will go out and frolic like well-fed calves. Then you will trample on the wicked; they will be ashes under the soles of your feet on the day when I act,”
I find this idea weird as God has many different titles and Jesus also has many, so the choice of this one is curious. I personally feel this is a post event justification of the event but that speculation.
The links between the old pagan and Christmas is a constant thawn in our sides with the rise of militant atheism, and with postmodern thought and pagan beliefs returning, accusations of appropriation or worse continuing old traditions. That we are some kind of rehash of the old.
Secondary pagan appropriation
As with all human celebrations we have always mixed older pagan traditions with pretty much everything else, for example the court wizard isn't a myth, John Dee for example was court magician to Queen Elizabeth the first; given the absolute chaos of the founding of the Church of England and the persecution of one side or the other depending of the monarch at the time, somehow the Queen still had a sorcerer...
So let's get on with what we have done to the modern celebration:
Well the most easily remembered is the use of mistletoe; it was started if memory serves by oxford students who read that mistletoe was considered a symbol of fertility by the druids. Students being students, or perhaps more importantly 'boys being boys' they hung it up and kissed girls under it to bring 'fertility'... we all know what they meant...
Christmas trees are a mess, not because they are purely pagan but Jews also used them to. The exact history is unclear; some claim the originated in Alcobaça Monastery which is references a Christmas branch in a text, which is the earliest known reference to it:
"Note on how to put the Christmas branch, scilicet: On the Christmas eve, you will look for a large Branch of green laurel, and you shall reap many red oranges, and place them on the branches that come of the laurel, specifically as you have seen, and in every orange you shall put a candle, and hang the Branch by a rope in the pole, which shall be by the candle of the high altar."
This quote was nabbed from wikipedia, just because this is the earliest citation doesn't mean it is the origin however.
I'm personally more swayed by the legend regarding St Boniface, he was a missionary who traveled to Germany to convert native pagans. As did many cultures of the time, the locals in one particular village had a sacred tree, perhaps a lightning tree (a tree struck by lightning). Its is speculated if this tree was a fir or not. The exact details are lost to history but its alleged that human sacrifice was practiced there and due to context the worship of Thor.
Some versions of the tale say wind blew it down as a miracle but the version I heard is that he cut it down, which is supported by a letter from him to the pope. In some version it is merely the fact he cut down the tree without being smote by Thor which is why the people turned to God, other versions say that when the tree fell it revealed a new pure tree behind it making the use of trees somehow equally pure, or some other sign.
I suspect that the origin is probably pagan but the history is beyond guessing at.
Wassailing and perhaps carol singing also have pagan roots, well wassailing is outright pagan but carol singing and candles are alleged to be linked to be a tradition of scaring away evil. I can't lie, carol singers would probably scare me to so it probably would do the trick. Eitherway both traditions are nearly dead, and carol singing in its modern form doesn't really resemble the original of going from house to house. Its more just singing hymns on the spot in open places and trying not to freeze.
The general bringing of greenery into the house as well as candles is very much a human trait, to bring in symbols of life in a time of darkness. There are no doubt links to pagan practices or atleast folkloric practices but I think its also part of human nature,
The reindeer in the room
Children stop reading.
In many ways Santa is perhaps the greatest threat to Christmas that exists. He is named vaguely for St. Nicholas who dropped a few coins down chimneys of the a few needy but otherwise not linked. His current incarnation is more linked to traditions of Odin but in the colours of Coca Cola after a particularly successful advertising campaign.
Santa has become more symbolic of Christmas that Christ and perhaps worse, in making our children believe in a myth linked to Christianity which they eventually realise was false, why would they believe the gospel?
In Santa we sell ourselves short and corrupt our credibility.
The new religion
I could argue any of these points to argue against Christmas but I won't, there is a far easier argument against it.
Consumerism.
Now all people consider are gifts, but they aren't even gifts anymore. They are now social obligations of ever increasing costs. The expectations of others is now the judgement of goodness, not the morality of the bible.
If we were merely below it, it wouldn't matter but this culture of greed and expectations are now the religion of Christmas.
I don't dislike the idea of gift giving but we have perverted the whole system.
Our festival has become corrupt, and I can't see how the church can escape this, it's better to my mind to give up and let the atheist keep Christmas, and let us work on a more devout and humble Christmas.
Theophany
Epiphany, little Christmas or twelfth night (the twelfth day of Christmas) was originally celebrated far more fervently than Christmas. This might seem odd to us but celebrating on the day the magi visited Christ, is the day Jesus first touched the lives of gentiles.
It was also celebrated by Christians in the east, who celebrated it as the day Jesus was baptized. This was day of the start of his ministry in the world.
Personally I would see the return to this celebration or something similar but even this isn't fully avoiding of pagan allegations, so starting from scratch would be wiser.
Comments