Christmas

Jesus Christ.

It's not a first and last name, it's a name plus a title:  Jesus the Christ, or, Jesus the anointed one, the gifted one, the chosen one.  Something like that.

Putting the name and title together highlights the central problem facing Christians, which is the exact nature of this person.  It's a problem that has both been settled since the Council of Nicaea and that has been ongoing during the entire history of the Christian religion.

Many scholars have found it useful to discuss the "Jesus of history" and the "Christ of faith" - a distinction that, to borrow from Terry Pratchett, beautifully illustrates the nature of Jesus Christ while being 100% wrong in every way.  Every person approaches Jesus in this way, because even atheists and members of other religions are forced to deal with Jesus Christ at some level or another, and often will spend more time actually thinking about this that most Christians. 

This distinction is problematic if one focuses too much on one or the other, but it's useful to us when considering Christmas; especially with the campaign to "keep Christ in Christmas."

This campaign, along with virtually everything else that concerns American Christianity, completely misses the point.  It's not that the only 'war on Christmas' is the one being waged by conservative Christians themselves, or that spending time and money on self-righteous, overly-defensive and above all petty actions like hiring trucks to follow buses around Fort Worth is, especially at Christmas, going to send exactly the wrong message.

No, the problem here is that Christmas isn't about 'Christ' at all, but about Jesus.  If we strip away all the nonsense of the season we can see that it really is a remarkable story:  the Creator and Lord of the universe is so smitten with human beings, and so desperate because of their continued rejection of him, that he decides to take on a human body and live among us.  But it's not just an incarnation - Zeus did that whenever he was horny.  It's that this Almighty deity decided to enter the world as a helpless baby born to a poor woman belonging to a conquered people in a backwater town.  If we are to take seriously the idea that Jesus was a human, then the song Away in a Manger is wrong - he did cry.  He crapped in his pants, he screamed, he had runny noses, fell down, had wet dreams and ill-timed erections, had a crush on a girl or two.  Or maybe a boy.  And because I don't consider most childhood misbehavior to be sin, he probably got punished by his parents.

There's more to this story - the fact that the angels announced his birth to some poor shepherds in a field rather than the political or religious leaders of the day, the fact that his only gifts came from a group of non-Jewish, infidel astrologers.  In fact, it should make Christians really uncomfortable that not only do infidel astrologers have such a central part in the Christmas story, but also their astrology happened to be exactly right, the stars really did announce something on earth.

But the message of Christmas doesn't reach fruition until we consider that we are to imitate Jesus, to be like him.  Not the handsome man with the beautiful flowing hair, the ability to attract crowds, the one who always outwits his enemies, who can perform mighty deeds.  That's the Christ of our faith, and that guy too often ends up being whatever is convenient and comfortable for whoever is doing the believing.

The Christmas story instead paints a picture of a God who shows ultimate humility and sacrifice, who, as the Catholic liberation theologians say, has a preferential option for the poor.  We don't need to "keep Christ in Christmas."  We have too much of that already.  What we need to do is take a good, hard look at the Jesus who is really at the center of the Christmas story.  Inasmuch as anyone is humble, open, loving and willing to sacrifice for the sake of others, that person is keeping Jesus the Christ in Christmas, whatever they might or might not believe.

Merry Christmas.

Comments

[Burning Prairie]

That was beautiful. Thank you.

[MR Bill]

Amen.

[Sir Charles]

Stephen,

Great post. Those infidel kings, by the way, look suspicious to me. I personally would have frisked them before allowing any of their frankincense and myrrh near the little lord himself. (And of course only if in amounts of less than 2.5 oz.)

[oddjob]

Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

- Matthew 5:16 (King James Version)

[oddjob]

OT, but no better place to put it:

And now their true colors show (& they aren't red, white, & blue).

[MR Bill]

Oddjob, we knew they were bastards.

If Mitch McConnell, Jim DeMint, et. al., are willing to hold up START to keep DADT from passing, I say: let 'em.
Pass DADT, firm up key constituencies, and let them have the hissy in public. It means Democrats are going to have to yell and scream, not a given. But let the failure of START (endorsed by the Bush Foreign Policy team as well as anyone with pretensions of statesmanship on the Right, I mean, dang, even Ronnie would 'trust, but verify'..)be on their pointy heads.

[litbrit]

Sir C., touché!

I, too, thought this post was beautiful. Would that certain folks would take its point to heart.

[kathy a.]

local restaurant review, which oddly enough is on point.

[Corvus]

Just wanted to chime in with everybody else and say this post is awesome. Well done, Stephen.