Rejoice in the Lord
always: and again I say, Rejoice. –
Phil. 4:4
In
an earlier essay I debunked the neo-Cromwellian, hyper-Protestant
claim that Christmas is actually a pagan holiday and demonstrated that it is of
Christian origin. It is the celebration
of the birth of Jesus Christ, which early Church Fathers had calculated to have
fallen on the twenty-fifth of December at least a century before the events –
the legalization of Christianity, the conversion of Constantine the Great, the
making Christianity the official religion of Rome – that the hyper-Protestants
believe initiated the syncretism that in their view corrupted Christianity with
paganism, and, indeed, before there was even any pagan significance to the date
of the twenty-fifth of December. I also
demonstrated that the information that St. Luke provides us about the timing of
the birth of Christ in his Gospel – the Annunciation took place in the sixth
month of St. Elizabeth’s pregnancy with John the Baptist, which pregnancy began
shortly after St. Zechariah was visited by Gabriel in the Temple, which most
likely occurred during the week of Yom Kippur if not the exact day – supports
the placing of Christ’s birth in December-January. The exact process by which the Church
Fathers calculated more specific dates is not clear, although the date of the
Annunciation seems to have been calculated first and some theorize that it had
to do with the idea that Christ was conceived on the same day He died. That the Church Fathers were looking for
dates when the Jewish holy days that the events in St. Luke’s chronology fell
on or around – Passover for the Annunciation, Hanukkah for the Nativity –
matched up with the events on the solar calendar that they approximate (the
spring equinox and winter solstice) is perhaps a likelier explanation than the
influence of the Jewish concept of “integral age”. The twenty-fifth of March and December would
not line up with the precise date of the solar events by our calculations today,
but these were calculated differently back then. Looking for such convergence does not
indicate a pagan influence. That the
sun, moon, and stars were placed in the firmament for “signs, and for seasons,
and for days, and years” by God Himself is asserted in the first chapter of the
Bible (Gen. 1:14).
Having debunked the hyper-Protestant claims about the date
of Christmas, let us turn to their claims about the manner in which it is
celebrated. In one sense they seem to
be on firmer ground here. Every place in
which Christmas is celebrated has its local customs as to how it is celebrated
and many of these seem to have been adopted from traditions that were around
before the area was evangelized.
Nevertheless, this hardly makes Christmas “pagan”.
The sort of things we are talking about here are the
accidents of Christmas, not its essence.
What makes Christmas Christmas, is not the goose or turkey and pudding,
the gift-giving, the holly and mistletoe, the stockings and Yule log, the
wreathes and wassail, or any such thing.
It is the Christmas story, which comes directly from Sacred Writ, the
early chapters of the Gospels of both SS Matthew and Luke. Many of the most beloved of Christmas carols
either retell the Christmas story in verse or proclaim the theological
significance of the events narrated in the story or both. I am not talking about “Jingle Bells” and
“Frosty the Snowman”, obviously, but carols like Charles Wesley and George
Whitefield’s “Hark the Herald Angels Sing”, Dr. Martin Luther’s “Silent Night,
Holy Night”, and “Adeste Fidelis” and its English translation “O Come All Ye
Faithful”. The very name of the
holiday speaks of Christians celebrating the Nativity of Christ by
participating in the Holy Sacrament.
Christmas is a contraction of “Christ’s mass”. Hyper-Protestants will no doubt read every
last bit of Romanist doctrine regarding transubstantiation into the word “mass”
but this word, taken from the Latin words used to dismiss (another word that we
get from the same Latin source) the congregation at the end of the service,
simply means a liturgical service in which the Eucharist is celebrated. Things are defined by their essence, not
their accidents. Christmas is defined
by the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ, not by the decorations, food,
and merry-making.
That having been said, if our hyper-Protestant friends
persist in objecting some of the food and drink, gifts and games, and
decorations having had roots in pre-Christian traditions, then the manner in
which these came to be incorporated into the celebration of Christmas needs to
be pointed out to them. This is because
hyper-Protestantism is based upon the idea that everything in the
pre-Reformation Christian tradition that the hyper-Protestants object to, which
is basically everything for which they cannot find an exact Scripture verse
either authorizing or commanding it, is something that was imposed upon the
unsuspecting Christian laity by an evil clergy out to rob them of their
Christian liberty. This is precisely
the opposite of how elements from pre-Christian winter festivals became a part
of Christmas celebrations. It was the
people who brought these sorts of things into Christmas, not the Church that
imposed them upon the people. If
anything, the Church may have initially tried to dissuade the people from doing
this, but tolerated and eventually accepted it on the grounds that these sort
of things are not intrinsically pagan, are minor matters, and that what
Scripture does not prohibit it permits (the hyper-Protestants operate on the
reverse of this, John Calvin’s regulative principle, that what Scripture does
not permit it prohibits, which is clearly far less compatible with the Pauline
doctrine of Christian liberty).
One of the silliest examples of hyper-Protestant opposition
to Christmas traditions with pre-Christian origins has to do with the Christmas
tree. A Christmas tree is an evergreen
tree – spruce, pine or the like – that people set up in their homes, usually in
the living room, and decorate with stars, angels, tinsel, candles or electric
lights, and other ornaments, and under which they place the presents to be
opened at Christmas. It is a relatively
recent addition to Christmas traditions and appears to be of Germanic
origin. Dr. Luther is known to have
decorated Christmas trees with candles and some have attributed the start of
the tradition to him, others trace it back to the pre-Christian Germanic
traditions of Yule. Either way, some
hyper-Protestants maintain that it is explicitly condemned in the prophecy of Jeremiah
in the Old Testament. They are
referring to a passage found at the beginning of the tenth chapter of Jeremiah -
specifically the third and fourth verses.
Here are those verses:
For the customs of the
people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the
hands of the workman, with the axe.
They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and
with hammers, that it move not.
Now, the hyper-Protestants who interpret these verses as
referring to Christmas trees, might have a point if the people who put up
Christmas trees erected altars in front of the Christmas trees, offered
sacrifices to them and burned incense to them, prayed to them, trusted them to
deliver them from their enemies, and did any of that sort of thing. I don’t know of anyone who does this sort of
thing with his Christmas tree, nor do I know of anyone who knows somebody else
who does.
The entire passage in which these verses are found – the
first sixteen verses of the chapter, make it abundantly clear that what is
being talked about is not a custom of erecting a tree and decorating it for
festive purposes, but the making of an idol.
Consider the verse that immediately follows the ones quoted above:
They are upright as
the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot
go. Be not afraid of them; for they
cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.
When Jeremiah talks about how they “are upright as the palm
tree, but speak not” this very similar to the places in which the Psalmist says
of idols “they have mouths, but they speak not” (115:5, 135:16), and when he adds
“they must needs be borne, because they cannot go” this brings to mind the verse
that says “feet have they, but they walk not” (115:7). There would have been no need to point anything
in this verse out if the decoration of trees for festive purposes were the
custom being condemned here. If that is
what the prophet had in mind, those to whom he was addressing the prophecy could
have legitimately come back with “Well duh, what’s your point?” Jeremiah is speaking of images that the
heathen make and worship instead of the True and Living God. In this case they are carved from wood
and plated with gold and silver. The
folly of placing faith in the works of men’s own hands, that cannot use the
anthropomorphic features they are given by their crafters, and which cannot
save their worshippers as the True and Living God can, is the point of all of
this.
Anyone seeking a present day equivalent of what Jeremiah was
speaking about in the tenth chapter of his book of prophecy may find one in the
practice of the many who put their faith in their savings accounts, government
social programs, or modern technology for their safety, security, and the
solution to their problems. This is far
closer to what Jeremiah was condemning than the practice of decorating trees to
celebrate Christmas. Idolatry is giving
to that which is created, especially the work of man’s own hands, that which
belongs only to the Creator. Decorating
a Christmas tree may superficially resemble what Jeremiah was talking about in
the third and fourth verses of his tenth chapter if the context is ignored but
the resemblance is only superficial.
The hyper-Protestants who think that Christmas trees are
condemned by Jeremiah are being incredibly silly indeed. They have allowed their hatred of the
pre-Reformation Christian tradition, the pre-Reformation Church, and anything
they associate with these, such as the celebration of Christ’s birth, to blind
them to the obvious meaning of passages like Jeremiah 10:3-4 so that they can
twist these verses into condemnations of entirely innocent things like
Christmas trees that are part of a holy festival that brings joy to people’s
hearts.
H. L. Mencken once said that Puritanism “is the haunting
fear that someone, somewhere, is happy”.
We are in the third week of Advent, which began with the Sunday that is
customarily called Gaudete Sunday. Gaudete
is the plural imperative of a Latin verb that means “to rejoice” and thus is a
command to rejoice. The commandment to
“rejoice” is repeated over and over again throughout the Scriptures. Deut. 32:43; 1 Chr. 16:10, 31; Psalm 2:11, 5:11,
32:12, 33:1; Rom. 12:15, 15:10; Phil. 2:18, 4:4 are but a few examples. The last mentioned of these, quoted as the
epigraph of this essay, is the traditional Introit for the third Sunday of
Advent, which is the origin of its name.
God is the Author of joy. It
would be unseasonably uncharitable to speculate as to where Puritanism – the
original name for hyper-Protestantism in the English-speaking world- gets the aversion
to human joy, happiness, and merry-making that is prominently on display in its
condemnation of everything associated with these things in Christian festivals
and traditions as “pagan”, but this, at least, is clear - it does not come from
God.
Few Christmas traditions have unambiguously pagan antecedents. Mistletoe is one that does but I don't think I've seen mistletoe once in 47 years.
ReplyDeleteGermanic paganism revered broadleaf trees like oak and yule not evergreens. The irminsul was an oak I believe. Christmas trees may have come from medieval depictions of the tree of knowledge if good and evil and early Christmas trees were decorated with fruit and wafers resembling the eucharist.
Once again you call Protestant some Puritan trick, as if Anglo~Catholics had the answer and Via Media was real.
ReplyDelete