Focus on the Family has issued its yearly list of retailers that pay proper respect to "Christmas." I put Christmas in scare quotes because the retailers that gain FoF's approval aren't putting up Advent wreaths or holding discussions on the significance of studying Mark's Little Apocalypse in the weeks leading up to the Church's celebration of the birth of Jesus. No, they're decorating in red and green and candy canes and letting/forcing their employees to say "Merry Christmas" once everyone's credit cards are approved.
I generally don't mind the neo-pagan and secular myths of Christmas; my children believe in both jolly Santa Claus and holy St. Nicholas. Even the commercialism doesn't bother me too much, because it's the one time of year that people are buying things intended for someone else. I'm the kind of person that can be brought to tears by Christmas carols, and God help all of us if I'm supposed to read Luke's version of Jesus's birth.
But my love of Christmas is under fire because of Bill O'Reilly's cynical creation of the War on Christmas and people's willingness to turn what should be a chance for Christians to show how loving and compassionate they are into yet another opportunity for belligerent whining about non-existant persecution and intentional alienation of anyone who doesn't want to spend Christmas impotently fuming about "liberals."
It's that anger and misplaced sense of entitlement that is so contrary to the "true meaning of Christmas," not commercialism or any other standard target. Jesus was an illegitimate child born to backward hicks who didn't have the intellectual wherewithal to plan ahead enough to get a room on a trip they knew they had to take. After 2,000 years we've apparently lost the ability to be shocked that Jesus was born in a stable to an unwed teenaged girl. That's too bad, because whether one believes that the story of the birth of Jesus is a historical event or a fable created by ancient Christians, there is a specific message we're supposed to receive from it. And if someone thinks that it has anything to do with complaining about salesclerks' winter vocabulary, they're not getting the message.
And curiously, a sort of neopagan tale of ghosts and redemption has become the tale that sets out 'The Spirit of Christmas' as we have come to know it. Dickens' A Christmas Carolis the nonBiblical Christmas story, that only dimly touches the Nativity, setting up instead a crippled son of a poor clerk to be his object of pilgrimage. The bounty of Christmas Present is the archetype of Christmas excess, just as Scrooge has a life beyond the holidays as a symbol of miserliness.
Dickens told in several public readings of the Carol of Scots political economist, who scorned the holidays until he read this book, and then decided it was 'utilitarian' to keep Christmas...
Posted by: MR Bill | November 17, 2008 at 02:55 PM
Here's an interesting exercise: compare this post to Lisa's on the same topic from last year. Come on, Cogbloggers, where's your message discipline?
Posted by: Ursula | November 17, 2008 at 04:32 PM
Ursula,
We have no message discipline. It's one of our charms. Or so we'd like to think.
Posted by: Sir Charles | November 17, 2008 at 05:00 PM
I agree about this "It's that anger and misplaced sense of entitlement that is so contrary to the "true meaning of Christmas," not commercialism or any other standard target. "
Posted by: busby seo test | November 17, 2008 at 08:25 PM
Lisa and I both agree that O'Reilly's War on Christmas is stupid. So, you know, there's that.
I'm just impressed that Ursula knows this blog so well.
Posted by: Stephen | November 17, 2008 at 08:33 PM
Interesting about Dickens! Also notice how the two huddled children named Ignorance and Want are left out of certain film versions. Maybe they'd thought these spooky orphans would scare the young American audiences? Or a vast right wing conspiracy?
Posted by: DaisyDeadhead | November 17, 2008 at 08:34 PM
Seems like we have a reasonable amount of message discipline to me--what Lisa was saying last year was simply that there is nothing wrong with saying "Merry Christmas" and celebrating the many beautiful things that go on at this time of the year--the gorgeous classical music, the joy of decorating trees with antique ornaments you've had since childhood, the Nutcracker ballet. She pointed out that even as an atheist, she continues to view Christmas as a tradition, as a time to be with family and revel in the sights and smells that go along with that tradition, including saying "Merry Christmas!" (I mean, when else do Americans use the word merry?)
We're of the same mind in our house, where R is the atheist, I am the pantheist/Universalist/something-ist, the boys are the boys, and everyone adores Christmas and its merry assault on all five senses.
Oh, and speaking of Focus on the Family, did you hear they have recently had to initiate some big layoffs--more than 20% of their workforce in Colorado--now that they've shot their wad (so to speak) helping to fund the Prop 8 push in California? Hey, nothing says Christian charity like firing people right before Christmas.
Posted by: litbrit | November 17, 2008 at 09:55 PM
P.S. Charles Dickens is a personal hero of mine. Definitely one of my Fantasy Dinner Party guests.
Posted by: litbrit | November 17, 2008 at 09:57 PM
I, too, am a proud member of the atheist-Merry Christmas club.
I was in NYC yesterday and horrified to hear Christmas music in a store. Can't we at least enjoy overeating on Thankgiving before we turn to spending money we don't have on things we don't need.
Posted by: Sir Charles | November 17, 2008 at 10:17 PM
Thiering?
Posted by: ballgame | November 18, 2008 at 01:45 AM
Thiering?
No, merely that Jesus was born to parents not yet married, something that was more of a scandal back then than it is now.
Theories about strong links between the Essenes and early Christianity aren't credible. Qumran is a lot more important to us than it ever was to its contemporaries.
Posted by: Stephen | November 18, 2008 at 08:44 AM
Stephen,
What can I say, I'm a fan. Of course I don't expect message discipline from the blog as a whole; still, this post strikes me as much more in keeping with the holiday spirit than that one did. (/troll)
Posted by: Ursula | November 18, 2008 at 03:56 PM
who didn't have the intellectual wherewithal to plan ahead enough to get a room on a trip they knew they had to take.
Maybe they didn't have the financial wherewithal for their intellectual wherewithal to make any difference.
Posted by: oddjob | November 18, 2008 at 11:44 PM
(None of which is to say I disagree in any way with the gist of your post, because the gist is totally spot on!)
Posted by: oddjob | November 18, 2008 at 11:45 PM
Maybe they didn't have the financial wherewithal for their intellectual wherewithal to make any difference.
Ah, but was there financial wherewithal-less-ness due to their lack of intellectual wherewithal? Hmmmm?
Posted by: Stephen | November 18, 2008 at 11:59 PM
but was there financial wherewithal-less-ness due to their lack of intellectual wherewithal? Hmmmm?
Different time and place, one I suspect was far, far more governed by traditions than the one in which we live now, no? If so, a working class poor tradesman such as Joseph would have remained a working class poor tradesman if that's what he was born to, wouldn't he have?
Posted by: oddjob | November 19, 2008 at 12:03 AM
The bounty of Christmas Present is the archetype of Christmas excess, just as Scrooge has a life beyond the holidays as a symbol of miserliness.
Absolutely true, but only because what we borrow we borrow without the message of that ghost. What I most love about that ghost is its wisdom, not its excess. This is the ghost who heartily, happily, openly, and very warmly welcomes Scrooge, even as he openly scorns Scrooge and treats him wholly as what he is, a pathetic object worthy of nothing but the most pitiable contempt.
Don't forget the end of that episode, where the ghost parts his robe and shows Scrooge the two orphans he harbors within..........
Posted by: oddjob | November 19, 2008 at 12:08 AM
She pointed out that even as an atheist, she continues to view Christmas as a tradition, as a time to be with family and revel in the sights and smells that go along with that tradition, including saying "Merry Christmas!" (I mean, when else do Americans use the word merry?)
I'm sure this is why the courts have never had a problem with "Christmas" being a "national holiday". There's absolutely no question this holiday has not only a religious aspect, but also a totally secular cultural aspect, and that the cultural aspect remains regardless of how one feels, or what one does, about the holiday's religious aspects.
Posted by: oddjob | November 19, 2008 at 12:14 AM