Monday, December 18, 2006

Taking the Christ out of Christmas

I hear people complaining that "Christ is being taken out of Christmas." In fact, the Vatican, poor dears, have "accused some western countries of waging "a war against Christmas" by removing Christian values and symbols from the holiday."

So what? Christ was never in Christmas, except in fiction and by order of the Council of Trent.

Jesus wasn't even born in December: he was born in July*, which makes him a cancer -- just like religion.

'Christmas' was originally not a Christian festival at all, but the lusty pagan festival that became the Roman Saturnalia, celebrating the winter solstice. This was the time of year in the northern hemisphere (from whence these traditions started) when days stopped getting darker and darker, and started once again to lengthen. The end of the hardest part of the year was in sight (particularly important in northern climes where all-day darkness was the winter rule), food stocks would soon be replenished, and all this was something well worth celebrating with enthusiasm, and with relish -- and if those Norse sagas tell us anything, they tell us those pagans knew a thing or too about celebration!

Dark Age Christians couldn't put a stop to these lusty revels, so they hit upon a solution: first they stole them, and then they sanitised them. (Just think, the first 'Grinch Who Stole Christmas' was really a Pope!)

The best of Christmas is still very much pagan. The mistletoe, the trees, the presents; the drinking; the celebrations; the gift-giving; the trees and the decorations; the eating and the singing; the whole full-blooded, rip-roaring, free-wheeling, overwhelming, benevolent materialism of the holiday -- all of it all fun, and all of it fully, one-hundred percent pagan.

Says Leonard Peikoff in 'Why Christmas Should Be More Commercial', the festival is "an exuberant display of human ingenuity, capitalist productivity, and the enjoyment of life." I'll drink to all that, and then I'll come back right back up again for seconds. Ayn Rand sums it up for mine, rather more benevolently than my brief introduction might have led you to expect:
The secular meaning of the Christmas holiday is wider than the tenets of any particular religion: it is good will toward men—a frame of mind which is not the exclusive property (though it is supposed to be part, but is a largely unobserved part) of the Christian religion.

The charming aspect of Christmas is the fact that it expresses good will in a cheerful, happy, benevolent, non-sacrificial way. One says: ‘Merry Christmas’—not ‘Weep and Repent.’ And the good will is expressed in a material, earthly form—by giving presents to one’s friends, or by sending them cards in token of remembrance....

The best aspect of Christmas is the aspect usually decried by the mystics: the fact that Christmas has been commercialized. The gift-buying is good for business and good for the country’s economy; but, more importantly in this context, it stimulates an enormous outpouring of ingenuity in the creation of products devoted to a single purpose: to give men pleasure. And the street decoration put up by department stores and other institutions—the Christmas trees, the winking lights, the glittering colors—provide the city with a spectacular display, which only ‘commercial greed’ could afford to give us. One would have to be terribly depressed to resist the wonderful gaiety of that spectacle.
I wish you all a Merry Christmas, and a Salacious Saturnalia!

===============================
* Yes, this is simply a rhetorical flourish. Jesus' birth may have happened in March. Or in September -- or not at all -- but it certainly did not happen in December. More here.

RELATED: Religion, History

9 Comments:

Blogger Michael said...

Actually, Jesus was born in the spring under Aries.

Spring is the only time shepherds would have had their flocks outside at night. The rest of the year they would have been kept in pens to prevent wolves and foxes from killing stock. Only in Lambing time would they have had them in fields to prevent newborn lambs from being crushed.

Plus Jewish Kings aren't kings unless they're born around spring equinox.

And He is frequently referred to as the "Lamb" in bible.

12/18/2006 11:34:00 am  
Blogger Kane Bunce said...

Taking the Christ out of Christmas? Sounds good to me. I have been saying for a while now we should make Christmas more commercial not less.

I'll drink to all that, and then I'll come back right back up again for seconds.

Me too! Oh, and I'll come back for thirds.

12/18/2006 12:19:00 pm  
Blogger MikeE said...

"And He is frequently referred to as the "Lamb" in bible."

Perhaps we should take a more literal interpretation that mary was in fact impregnated by a holier than thou sheep.

12/18/2006 12:41:00 pm  
Anonymous Falafulu Fisi said...

MikeE said...
[interpretation that mary was in fact impregnated by ...]

By commonsense, I am sure that it was Joseph (husband) who impregnated Mary.

12/18/2006 01:05:00 pm  
Blogger PC said...

Both common sense and correct translation support you, FF.

As Dawkins notes in the link in the post above, the Virgin Birth myth came about from an incorrect translation by the author of the book of Matthew (whoever that was) of Isaiah's Hebrew.

Isaiah talked of Mary as a "young woman." The author of Matthew found it necessary to try and have his Messiah meet the scriptural standards set for Messiah-hood, but mistranslated Isaiah's "young woman" as "virgin." Thus began the nonsense.

If t'were truly a miracle, t'was one only of mistranslation.

12/18/2006 01:36:00 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Still waiting for you to take Islam apart. Like most PC commentators you hammer the Christians and ignore the Muslims

12/18/2006 05:33:00 pm  
Blogger PC said...

Anonymous (you courageous warrior you), I can assure you I'm an equal opportunity critic, as you may discover ifyou'd like to click that 'Religion' tag posted so tantalisingy at the foot of all those posts on religion, and check my archives to test my even-handedness on the matter.

Or maybe just try the archives under 'War.'

12/18/2006 05:43:00 pm  
Anonymous Sean said...

Anonymous said...

"Still waiting for you to take Islam apart. Like most PC commentators you hammer the Christians and ignore the Muslims"

That is hilarious. It was only a few months back when PC was been accused of being a Muslim basher!

Sean.

12/18/2006 06:25:00 pm  
Blogger Kane Bunce said...

That is hilarious. It was only a few months back when PC was been accused of being a Muslim basher!

Yeah, it seems the poor guy (is poor the right word? he has a very good house, as I learned at Bullshit and Jellybeans) can't seem to win either way!

12/19/2006 01:02:00 pm  

Post a Comment

Respond with a polite and intelligent comment. (Both will be applauded.)

Say what you mean, and mean what you say. (Do others the courtesy of being honest.)

Please put a name to your comments. (If you're prepared to give voice, then back it up with a name.)

And don't troll. Please. (Contemplate doing something more productive with your time, and ours.)

<< Home