As a dedicated secular humanist, I must regretfully acknowledge that the War on Christmas has not been going well. Some would use the word “quagmire,” and urge a phased redeployment to other fronts, like Easter and Mardi Gras. Others argue that we simply need more boots on the ground, and that our allies, such as the ACLU, have not been fielding sufficient troops. I say we have only ourselves to blame, and that – however noble our intentions – we haven’t been putting up much of a fight.
Take me, for example. I had big plans for the season: I was going to spray paint the local church crèches with atheist graffiti, sue my town over the lights on Main Street, let termites loose on the mega-tree at Rockefeller Center, and start rumors about an E. Coli infestation of the nation’s fruitcake supply. But here it is, December already, and I’ve done nothing to rate a mention on Bill O’Reilly’s show or even a mild rebuke from the Pope, who, apparently oblivious to the anti-Christmas threat, spent last week cozying up with Muslims in Turkey.
What’s my excuse? Well, Christmas of course. There are those catalogues, which usually get recycled directly from the mail box, to study. Menus to plan. Should we do the Cuban-style roast pork or a re-run of the Thanksgiving turkey? Cards to buy and address: How will the pretty Virgin and baby go over with my Wiccan friends? Then there’s the annual fight over the tree: Can it be multi-colored and gaudy, as I prefer, or all-white, as certain puritanical in-laws insist? And toys, toys, toys. I spent yesterday searching for obscure members of the Dora the Explorer tribe: What’s with this pre-
Christmas shortage of Dora’s monkey sidekick, Boots?
Let’s face it: Christmas is not the exclusive property of those who think God came to earth 2000 years ago as a baby in Bethlehem. I caught the Christmas bug from my parents, who were militant atheists of the Richard Dawkins ilk. I celebrated it with my first husband, the son of Jewish atheists. True, we tried Chanukah too one year, but it bombed with the kids. What’s a little Chanukah gelt compared to a floor-full of presents? My second husband, who had been inadvertently converted to atheism by the nuns at Catholic school, was the worst. We fought over whether to measure the extent of our excess by the volume of presents under the tree or their weight as determined by the bathroom scale.
How Christian is Christmas anyway? The tree and the wreathes descend from pagan, tree-worshipping, Druidism. The December date for the holiday probably comes from the Roman Saturnalia, a pre-existing blow-out featuring feasting and role-inversion (masters had to wait on slaves.) Even if you fixate on Jesus, he was a pretty ecumenical guy—a Jew who invented Christianity and is also much honored by Muslims. And who would be grinch-like enough not to welcome a baby whose mission was to bring world peace? Hell, I’m such a baby freak I think any baby, anywhere, any time, should be a cause for major celebration.
At the post office last week, where I was stocking up on stamps for the above-mentioned cards, I struggled over the seasonal options: Chanukah, Kwanza, Eid (the post-Ramadan Muslim holiday), or a traditional Virgin and Child. “You should get a sheet of each,” the postmistress helpfully suggested, “More and more people are doing that.” So I did, and I now declare the war is over – the War on Christmas anyway.
Well, if you change your mind, there's always http://www.xmasresistance.org/
Posted by: Anarcissie | December 06, 2006 at 07:20 PM
Yeah, I've kinda given up, too. I'm Jewish, and I don't even correct people anymore when they cheerily bid me a "Merry Christmas!" How could I be such a Grinch? If every Christian wants to believe that the entire Western world is Gentile at Christmas time, who I am to destroy their illusion?
Posted by: Rhea | December 07, 2006 at 07:25 AM
Yeah, I was successful at avoiding the Dreaded Holiday for about 6 years but I cant take the criticism that comes from not participating. I am a wimp.
Posted by: That Girl | December 07, 2006 at 09:06 AM
Christmas is an American holiday, to celebrate abundance, and it's fun. I'm Jewish but I love to see the decorations and hear the carols. How can anyone feel insulted by it? I agree with Barbara E. 100% on this.
On the other hand:
"a baby whose mission was to bring world peace"
I just have to point out that statement is utterly false. Jesus did not have a mission to improve the world, and he had nothing against war. He just wasn't a military leader (who knows, maybe if he didn't get himself crucified he would have armed his followers, like a real messiah).
Where do progressives get the idea that Jesus was a pacifist? Or that he wanted to improve the financial status of the poor?
Pictures of Jesus show him glowing and hugging little children. But according to the bible he was quite an angry meanie, like all the other prophets of Yahweh. And he was a teacher of mysticism, not a social activist.
Posted by: realpc | December 07, 2006 at 04:35 PM
Realpc wants to know where progressives get the idea that Jesus was a pacifist or that he wanted to improve the financial status of the poor.
From Matthew 25 (NIV):
34"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'
37"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
And from Matthew 26:
50b Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him. 51With that, one of Jesus' companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear.
52"Put your sword back in its place," Jesus said to him, "for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.
Jesus said "let the little children come to me" and blessed them. He saved his "meanie" act not for the poor and outcast and despised, like the woman at the well or the woman caught in adultery or the tax collectors, but for the respected religious hypocrites of his day, like the Pharisees and Sadducees and priests and teachers of the law.
One of Paul's epistles talks about remembering the poor. James' epistle chastises those who would forget the poor or discriminate against them.
Posted by: Melanie N. Lee | December 07, 2006 at 05:36 PM
Jesus and his followers are a curious lot. Jesus says "Blessed are the peacemakers" and his followers say "God is pro-war." Or at least some of them do, and many others go along with it. Somebody's got something mixed up somewhere.
One of the functions of Christmas, like many other Christian religious exercises, seems to be to neutralize the Jesus of difficult moral teachings, and assert the magical-doll Jesus who requires only belief, like Peter Pan or the Tooth Fairy. But far be it from me to interfere with anybody's shopping and consuming orgy. If that's what you like, go to it.
Posted by: Anarcissie | December 07, 2006 at 06:26 PM
Jesus said a lot of things, most of them incomprehensible even to his contemporary followers. You can select and distort and make it seem like Jesus was a socialist pacifist. But if you look at the whole of his teaching that is not the message.
The message of Christianity is similar to Buddhism -- attachment to things of this world prevents salvation.
Jesus did not care about social status on earth, because it would not matter in the kingdom of heaven, and actually would be reversed.
I guess I can see why progressive secular humanists are confused about Christianity, given the ambiguity and contradictions of the gospels.
Posted by: realpc | December 08, 2006 at 04:42 AM
ah, my favorite Christmas comment. (I've decided that I can certainly feel respectful enough of any other ethnic holiday - that I no longer feel shy about wishing anyone anywhere a Merry Christmas! What does it matter if they haven't got a clue about the deeper meanings? The smile on my face and its genuine warmth gets the message across, and in the spirit of the holiday, I think that's all that really matters.)
The western world loves Scrooge. Every year, like scroogie-junkies, we tune in and watch him transform all over again - while Mrs, Dilbert runs screaming from the sight, and we chuckle with such supreme satisfaction at the sudden joy come into his life - for all the right reasons. Why not?
But did you ever stop to consider a little sideshow going on here? The old coot has been saved, of sorts. A re-birth, as it were. Lucky him.
We just can't help it (in his words.) We just can't help responding to this miraculous explosion of the man's humanity. Wonderful stuff.
We're in fact, so overwhelmed by the immensity of it - that we can conveniently forget one nagging little detail...
The man still has his money! (now isn't that just an amazing trick.)
All that horrible gawd-awful stuff he did his whole professional life to amass such a pile, and now he gets to "buy" happiness. It's a powerful opiate, what?
I wonder if Mr. Dickens ever speculated on this after he had penned the tale.
Posted by: JP Merzetti | December 08, 2006 at 08:05 AM
And yes the early Christians were communists, in that they lived together in communes and shared. The same is true of nuns and monks today. And yes Jesus did express scorn for material wealth, and compassion for the poor.
But it still is a mistake when progressives point to Christianity as justification for socialism. Christian ideals were never meant as a strategy for running an economic or political system. Do you want our society to be run like a monastery?
Monks and nuns voluntarily renounce worldly success and devote their lives to worship. That's great for those who choose it, but do you expect everyone to choose that life? And if we all chose to be nuns or monks, what kind of society would we create? How would it survive, without any defense against external enemies or internal criminals?
A typical progessive answer might be that there would be no need for defense if everyone practiced the Christian, or progressive, ideals of self-denial and self-sacrifice. But is that really what we want? Even if it were somehow possible to convince everyone that worldly success is evil, do we really want to be a society of monks?
We know that some people are natural monks, but that others are natural warriors, merchants, artists, inventors, scientists, etc. Do we want to force everyone into one role? It would not be possible even if it were desirable.
Jesus wanted his followers to be self-denying mystics. Of course, because that's what they came to him to learn. They did not come to learn banking or military strategy, because he was not that kind of teacher.
Jesus did not know everything, and citing Jesus as the ultimate authority on life, politics and economics makes no sense.
Yes of course most people are too worldly and too selfish. That's the nature of life -- there will always be greed, laziness, selfishness, anger, violence, etc., and society will always struggle with human weakness.
Posted by: realpc | December 08, 2006 at 08:13 AM
Realpc,
"And if we all chose to be nuns or monks, what kind of society would we create? How would it survive, without any defense against external enemies or internal criminals?"
Christian Shaolin, anyone?
The Eternal Squire
Posted by: The Eternal Squire | December 08, 2006 at 08:51 AM
realpc: '... I guess I can see why progressive secular humanists are confused about Christianity, given the ambiguity and contradictions of the gospels....'
If the Gospels (and related materials) are ambiguous and contradictory, then you don't know whether you or the so-called progressive secular humanists have it right. In fact, it seems likely that no one has it right, because there isn't any way of getting reliable meaning out of ambiguity and contradiction.
However, I find Jesus pretty plain-spoken a lot of the time. That plain-spoken Jesus is largely avoided like the plague. Instead we have Saturnalia once a year and some of us have a magic doll to play with. As Jesus said, 'The Son of Man hath not where to lay his head.'
I agree that Jesus was not a socialist, however. Socialism is an idea which could arise only after capitalism and industrialism. It is pretty hard to make someone from 2000 years ago fit into modern categories of political ideology.
Posted by: Anarcissie | December 08, 2006 at 09:10 AM
realpc,
can you quote me some passages from the Bible indicating that Jesus was a real meanie? If I recall correctly he only got angry once. You should be very careful about what you say. If you don't know the facts then perhaps you should keep your ignorant comments to yourself. If you are not a Christian that is fine, but do not make false statements. When you do that no one believes anything else that you say.
Posted by: A Canadian | December 08, 2006 at 02:05 PM
Anarcisse,
True followers of Jesus are not pro-War. The ones that are only "claim" to be Christians. I have read several comments where people say that we should be careful not to put all Jews or Muslims in one basket, but it seems to be o.k. to do that to Christians. Totally hypocritical in my opinion!
Posted by: A Canadian | December 08, 2006 at 02:09 PM
Not only do I believe we would be better off morally if we adopted a more ascetic lifestyle as a people, but I am aware that our survival as a species is contingent on it.
Speaking for myself as a member of an average American family with kids, this holiday is causing me untold amounts of stress at a time of year when I can ill afford it, financially or emotionally. Traditional Chinese medicine, which has been around a little bit longer than us, holds that we should curtail activity according to natural rhythms of daylight and warmth. Instead we're supposed to burn the candle at both ends and indebt ourselves or else we're weird. I just paid off the bills from "back to school" (which I do mid-October, rather than when the marketers tell me to do it). You mean that another compulsory shopping season is alrady upon us? The only time we have discretionary income on this scale is tax-refund time. Instead once again I'll sit around at Christmas while kids rip open gifts too numerous to even appreciate contemplating the interest charges I'll be paying for the next three months until my refund check comes through. I love Thanksgiving, hate Christmas. Bah humbug!
Posted by: lc2 | December 08, 2006 at 03:41 PM
Canadian,
I think you're the one who didn't read it. Jesus warns and threatens everyone about hell, many times. Most of the Old Testament prophets were extremely angry, and Jesus was similar. I don't see anything wrong with that. But the feminized sweetly smiling Jesus we see everywhere does not accurately portray his personality.
Posted by: realpc | December 08, 2006 at 06:22 PM
I just want everyone to know that I have finally consumated a complicated deal involving Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, Buddha, an elaborately designed candle-holding device (this was VERY confusing) & several other seasonal plenepotentiaries to equip all future Holiday Gift-Giving Devices (HGGDs) with our new PRAM-MIRV delivery system.
This is a truly global effort and cause for joy and celebration everywhere unless you happen to be a pundit of some sort. Our delivery system, alas, is a bit crude, and it can't tell the difference between a liberal, a conservative, a libertarian, a socialist, a communist, a neocon, a radical femnist, a radical masculinist, am Islamofascist, or Kenny.
We were working hard on that last bit, but R&D was cut at the last minute.
So if you're in Colorado and your name is Kenny, well, we will graciously accpet any & all verbal abuse from all non-liberal, conservative, libertarian, socialist, neocon, radical feminist/masculinist, Islamofascists & Kennys.
You may even scream at us and describe us in terms that suggest that we are perhaps not the legitimate sons of our fathers.
We feel very badly that our $(983.6 billion dollar AAS (Anti-Agenda System) failed so miserably. Those of you who have not been converted to smoking craters during this happy time are welcome to weigh in with suggestions on improvements for future weapons systems.
We're pretty sure that Basques, Estonians, Semnioles & Jews with naturally curly hair will survive the holidays.
If you have concerns or suggestions remember that our door is always open and that your suggestions will be taken on board.
We thank you for your support.
Posted by: Graham Strouse | December 09, 2006 at 12:45 AM
A Canadian: 'True followers of Jesus are not pro-War. The ones that are only "claim" to be Christians. ...'
I am not qualified to determine who is a real Christian and who isn't; I have to take people at their word. The strongest predictor of how a person will vote, of what politics the person will support, is religious affiliation. Christians are largely pro-war; others are not. Three out of four Evangelical Christians supported Bush in 2004, after it was well known that Bush had lied about Iraq and started a war of choice, in short that he was a war criminal by the standards of the Nuremberg Trials. "God is Pro-War" is the title of an article by Jerry Falwell which you can easily find through Google.
Of course, you can say that the Evangelicals are a minority. But where is the majority, then? Except for a radical few like Pax Christi and the Quakers, they are either passive or side with the Right. As the founder of their religion said, "Ye shall know them by their fruits."
Posted by: Anarcissie | December 09, 2006 at 03:59 PM
Realpc: At the risk of beating the horse I thought we killed in another thread, Jesus's true identity as a mystic or whatever is irrelevant since the vast majority of his modern-day followers see him differently. Christianity in the U.S. has long had a life of its own and its adherents seem largely disinterested in their prophet's essential message, whatever you think it is. Thus Dorothy Day types and Jerry Falwell types are equally "correct." Why do you feel the need to chastise believers of any political persuasion? You are not going to convince them that Jesus was a mystic whose message is only vaguely transferable to a modern context unless they give up suv's or lattes or college degrees. Clearly the vast majority of Christians or Jesus admirers feel that they are doing his bidding. At least take the time to expose the religious right's hypocrises if you're going to scold the left for holding up Jesus as an example. Otherwise it just looks like you're taking the opportunity to mock the left. The right is equally deserving of ridicule in this respect.
Posted by: lc2 | December 09, 2006 at 05:23 PM
Oh ho. Jesus has been feminized! Long hair! Robes! Messages of kindness and mercy! Well, that can't be tolerated! No wonder the churches are full of women instead of he-men.Thanks for the enlightenment, P.C.
So: happy holidays to everyone. Kick back, enjoy your friends, whatever you like to do.
I am going to have a wonderful Christmas made richer by the spectacle of Republican defeat and Democratic ascendance.
Peace on earth!
Posted by: Hattie | December 10, 2006 at 02:53 PM
Just one question,
Just what is this particular topic supposed to serve in terms of improving the plight of UP members?
I wish Barbara would keep striking while the iron was hot, and focus on organizing instead of discussing softer topics like this one.
The Eternal Squire
Posted by: The Eternal Squire | December 10, 2006 at 07:47 PM
"At least take the time to expose the religious right's hypocrises if you're going to scold the left for holding up Jesus as an example. "
lc2,
Both are equally ridiculous and close-minded. I can't convince extreme leftists of anything, but with extreme rightists I don't even try. I am an advocate for balance and sensible holistic centrism, not for one fixed ideology or another.
Why do I try to reason with far leftists but not far rightists? Partly because I analyzed and questioned conventional conservative values when I was young and I'm not in that phase anymore. And it's easier to demolish the childish religious ideas people learned in Sunday school. Leftist ideas are more likely to be acquired in college, so there is more of an intellectual challenge in debating them.
Posted by: realpc | December 11, 2006 at 11:40 AM
In ancient times, on the shortest day of the year, people celebrated the birth of the new sun, because the days would now get longer, and spring would soon come.
Now its the birth of the Son.
Whatever...bring on the cookies!
Posted by: Kelley Bell | December 13, 2006 at 04:50 AM
Eternal Squire: go to uniteprofessionals.org for the hot economic stuff. Here, I reserve the right to get into anything.
Posted by: Barbara E | December 14, 2006 at 08:15 AM
I was raised by atheists (I'm third-generation on my mother's side). I once asked my dad why we celebrated christmas if we didn't believe in christ. His answer: "We celebrate Halloween and we don't believe in ghosts; why give up a perfectly good holiday?" I'm 48, and I've never heard a better answer.
Still, I hate the trappings--especially the damned music. Four servings of "Frosty the Snowman" in one day are more than any person should have to bear.
Posted by: narya | December 15, 2006 at 08:23 PM
"Eternal Squire: go to uniteprofessionals.org for the hot economic stuff."
That would be http://www.unitedprofessionals.org
Posted by: Kristjan Wager | December 16, 2006 at 03:35 AM