Recent letters to the editor in the Dec. 30 and Jan. 6 The Lincoln County News contain emotionally charged brouhahas about whether to “keep Christ out of Christmas” (H. Falconer) or “keep Christ in Christmas” (M. Bourland and R. Crabtree). Their thoughts on the subject are interesting, provocative and sometimes absurd.
In his letter, Falconer raises many thorny theological issues, all worth wrestling with: A benevolent, loving God, is apparently indifferent to human suffering, for God allows natural disasters (to say nothing of war) which bring death, disease and devastation.
Falconer also is disturbed by the dubiousness of biblical miracles (from turning water to wine, to the virgin birth and resurrections). He is also disturbed by biblical inaccuracies (date of Jesus’ birth) and mistranslations of the text.
However, none of these issues is directly related to his proposal: take Christ out of Christmas. Further, the issues around God’s apparent irresponsibility and as well as the untrustworthiness of New Testament records, from the Christian perspective, are moot problems. They are not of primary significance. I shall return to that notion later.
I shall limit my comments to Falconer’s proposal.
At its core, the Christian church is based on Jesus Christ. According to Christian theology, the birth of Christ in the first century was a decisive act of Divine Love in human history. Jesus Christ is the founder and the foundation of the church. One can no more take Christ out of Christmas than one can take Moses out of Judaism or Muhammad out of Islam.
For the Christian, Jesus’ birth is celebrated on Christmas Day as it has for over 2000 years. That celebration is all about the person who gave to the world peace, joy, love, kindness – all those good and beautiful things that Harold Falconer so correctly and generously wants available to all people of all faiths. However, Falconer also says that joy and good cheer, “festivities and camaraderie” that get the rest of us through the tough winter months, are denied to those people who do not belong to or do not believe in the Christian faith.
If I read Falconer correctly, he suggests that the denial and the exclusion arise from the too Christ-centered Christmas services. He says, “Let’s keep Christ out of Christmas and maintain it as a time when a people of all faiths can come together in peace, harmony and brotherhood [sic]…”
Wouldn’t the YMCA, the Town Hall, or the Lincoln Academy gym work just as well? Each of those institutions would be unencumbered by Christian theology and all its trappings. Further, there are other choices available: non Christ-centered churches, synagogues, mosques and meeting houses.
To return to the notion of the primary Christian significance:
Jesus Christ of the New Testament is a definite human being in our actual history, in history we remember and live in as it shapes our present faith and our action in the world. He is the same man, whether he appears as a man of flesh and blood, or as the Risen Christ. He is never to be confused with Socrates or Plato or Confucius or Muhammad; or with Amos or Isaiah.
The significant point, then, is that Jesus is the new law; he is the teacher of the truth about God. For the Christian he is the living presence, the revelation of that truth. It is all the same person. It is that person whose life, ministry, death and resurrection is celebrated all along in the life of the church, and whose birth is celebrated with profound seriousness, gratitude and joy at Christmas.
It is only fair to add, that it is impossible to adequately state by means of concepts and propositions a principle that presents itself in the form of a living human being. That is confusing.
Nonetheless, despite the confusion and inadequacy of language to describe God’s most decisive act of love – God in Christ, Christ in God, and Christ within us – we can honor the various interpretations of Jesus: the man who emphasized the new law, or Grace, the Jesus of history, or the Risen Lord.
Regardless of our church affiliation, regardless of what troubles us about Christianity – biblical history, stories or records, we can honor his Love and his Peace, the key to his ethics, and to a new moral order for the world. (Illuminated in the parables of Jesus.)
I agree with Harold Falconer that one must not see different religious views from our own as wrong. However, holding firm to one’s traditional believes, ceremonies and celebrations such as Christ’s-mass or Hanukkah or Ramadan is not to deny access or to negate another’s faith.
Finally, we must continue to honor and to speak to our theological and political differences, as well as our feats and our doubts. Most of all, we must have the courage of our confusion. (Never mind our convictions.)
No, the church is not “clinging recklessly” (Falconer’s words) to its Christian tradition of celebrating Christmas. No, the church is not denying anyone Christ’s peace, love, or joy. Rather, informed by an understanding of biblical history, theology and faith, the church (the people of God) is simply in its own way celebrating the Good News. All are welcome to join in that celebration.
The whole world thanks you, Dr. Falconer, for reminding us that we can still speak out and not be stoned to death, hanged, or shot for it.
