This year it will be my first Christmas as an official ‘out of the closet’ non-Christian.
Which changes things.
Do I go to Church on Christmas day?
What do I think about the nativity story?
Do I celebrate Christmas at all, on what grounds?
I’ll answer these in reverse order.
1. Do I celebrate Christmas?
Yes, I think so. Firstly there is this:
But also because there is much to celebrate about Christmas apart from the Christian religious elements. As a Christian in churches I would hear it said that Christmas was becoming ever more about the celebration, or food, or presents, or drink, or family and less about the true meaning of Christmas – the birth of Christ.
But this is quite misleading. Christmas as a holiday and a celebration has been overlaid on top of the pagan winter solstice celebration and many of these traditions can still be seen in our current interpretation of Christmas; the feasting, gift-giving, candles etc. So I have no problem with my participation here. I am basically participating in a winter get-together, feast and gift-giving the same as you are but if you want to add your religious beliefs on top of that, that’s fine with me.
2. The nativity story.
Again, as a story I have no problem with the nativity either. We have a lovely nativity book that I will have no problem reading to my Daughter as I did last year. It has nice little fluffy textured bits and it has animals, a baby, stars and the moon – pretty much my daughter’s favourite things. A story is a story.
The problem I have is parading it as a real event with all the historic trimmings. Even to the converted within the confines of the Church. Because even if Christianity is true (quite possible) the nativity story as told through scripture is almost certainly not. And church leaders surely know this, don’t they? The two accounts in Luke and Matthew tell different stories for a start. It is not quite a hands-down conspiracy but some amount of adaptation and elaboration has been conducted before the Bible has ‘gone to press’ to shoehorn the Old Testament prophecies in and so that the story sits on a more elaborate and ‘pre-destined’ backdrop.
The nativity issues:
• There was no census. There is no historical account of it – which is pretty much the long-term goal when conducting a census.
• So no reason for Mary & Joseph to travel to Bethlehem from their home in Nazareth. Even if there was a census of which there is no historical record there would be no reason to return to the land of Josephs Fathers – that is not how a census works, that is just called ‘going home’.
• If there is no Bethlehem that puts the whole ‘Inn and manger’ thing into question – if Mary and Joseph were still at home, why nip out to the shed to have a baby? Serious question.
• Also, there was no ‘killing of the innocents’ as recorded in Matthew. Historically it doesn’t figure, and it would have surely? It could have happened but on a very small scale of a dozen or so children so was not deemed important enough. But I was always under the impression that it was a great deal of children because “[Herod] killed all the male children in Bethlehem and in all that region who were two years old or under” sounds like a lot of Children. I didn’t realise that 2000 years ago the great civilised city of Bethlehem was neither great, civilised, nor a city.
• Jesus is said to be of the ‘line of David’ through his father’s (Joseph’s) heritage. But Joseph was not Jesus father.
A few things to ponder. If this much of the story was – at best sensationalised, at worst fabricated – what can we know about it? What can we pin our hopes, dreams and beliefs on if not the story of the virgin birth of Jesus?
None of the above points disprove the central messages of Christianity, I should add. That is not my intention here. But a respectful and yet critical approach should be adopted when a story with so much gravitas is shown to have serious flaws. The points made above are all fairly arbitrary really and are certainly mundane in light of the more miraculous aspects. So the central messages of the Christian faith all remain intact but the dubious historical backdrop that has been painted in sheds a shadow over the more miraculous claims. If the location was fabricated – why not the Virgin Birth?
Jesus was born of a virgin the story tells us. By the will of God. To be God on earth, the saviour of the world, for all mankind and for eternity. And this is believed wholeheartedly, affecting the decisions and judgements of individuals and nations alike for centuries. Unquestioningly (faith is a virtue). Based on a story that has a great deal made up. This quote maybe says it more concisely.
“Which is more likely: that the whole natural order is suspended, or that a Jewish minx should tell a lie?” ~ David Hume
So, I do not have a problem with the nativity story, as a story. I don’t have a problem for someone to say that they believe the central message of the story is true. either. As that is a matter of faith.
But the approach taken from the pulpit is dishonest, especially when it comes to how the story is portrayed to children. You must be clear about these things with children – what is fact, what is a matter of faith and what is plain fiction. Church leaders surely know where these distinctions lie but do not readily pass them on to their congregation. And when it comes to children especially, that is dishonest.
I have to tell my daughter that the stories she reads in books or sees in videos are not real, she needs this distinction to be made. It must be vocalised, not left unsaid. Otherwise her world would be a very strange place to her; talking animals, floating babies and when you sleep you’re transported to the exceptionally odd world of ‘In the Night Garden’.
I have never heard a historic assessment of the story from the pulpit. Ever.
3. Do I go to church on Christmas Day?
I have done so every previous Christmas of my life. Not missed a single one. Even last year when I was no longer going to Church and I was pretty sure my faith was all but gone.
If I do not go this year it will be my first ever Christmas that I have not gone to Church on Christmas day.
I am struggling with this. My other-half says that it is to some extent a British tradition and she is in favour of it. Also her family, at whose house we will be this year and which has both believers and non-believers in it, all go to church on Christmas day.
I would be a bit of a wet lemon and would be putting on quite a show if I was not to go along; I would have to feel quite strongly about it. But of course I do feel quite strongly. I have invested 15 years and all my hopes and dreams, desires and decisions into Christianity. Feeling a tiny bit awkward for one hour on one day of the year hardly comes close.
I think I won’t go. Why would I go? Genuine question.
What does it have going for it, or for me?
Shones says:
Starting with the generally undisputed premise that Christmas as a winter solstice festival was hijacked by the Christian Church, which I don’t actually think many Christians would disagree with because I don’t think it has ever been proven that Jesus was born on 25th December.
The winter solstice festival has looked different across cultures and time but generally involves feasting, joy, music, rituals, celebrating the triumph of light over darkness etc. The basic premise and common theme is people coming together as a community and universal family. Celebration is difficult to achieve alone.
In the UK (and western world) this community celebration has taken the form of attending church, where people can share a common message of peace, hope and joy in the parish church, surrounded by what would have been a community of fellow believers. There is no reason really why this community celebration should have to take place in a church or place of Christian worship, but in a way, only those with a religious agenda, would open their doors to those of all faiths and none, rich, poor and marginalised, at a time when it is generally accepted that everything else can close down for the day. Whilst those of faith argue about the ‘true’ meaning of Christmas, the fact is that they are exploiting a cultural celebration to meditate on what they see as one of the profound mysteries and miracles of their belief system. Which means that religious Christmas is ‘opt-in’. No one has really tried to have a non-religious community gathering on Christmas Day, the secular option is to celebrate only your family and friends to the exclusion of the childless, the widowed and the lonely. This is no more in the spirit of a winter solstice festival celebration than an exclusively Christian celebration. Also, the vicar and the church don’t get anything from people attending church to celebrate a secular Christmas (unless you contribute to the collection) as they will measure their “success” by regular church-goers.
So my argument would be that by not attending church on Christmas Day, particularly when you know you would be attending with others who do not see the act as a religious one you are opting out of Christmas altogether and choosing to be the humbug who sits at home alone rather than celebrating life with family and community. You are possibly also injecting some disharmony into the day as you will be questioned about your non-participation in family tradition and some people might feel hurt by your attitude and actions, for reasons completely unconnected with your rejection of Christianity. You are also sending a confusing message to your daughters about what is important at Christmas – celebration or representation of your views. Surely the point is that the Church hijacked a community celebration to make it about personal belief. So by prioritizing your personal belief over a communal celebration you are as bad as they are? What if in 10 years time your daughter decides she doesn’t believe in eating meat and insists on spending the whole of Christmas Day shut in her bedroom because the rest of you are eating meat? That would detract from the enjoyment and celebration of Christmas by all of you without assisting either of you in your causes for meat or against meat and to the meat-producers it’s irrelevant to them whether a non-meat eater spends Christmas day at the dinner table eating tofu or in a huff in her bedroom. I could see why you might choose not to go if everyone else who is going is going purely and specifically to celebrate the virgin birth of Jesus Christ because by doing that you would be promoting personal belief over celebration, but I don’t see why you would choose not to go when the general priority is to celebrate togetherness with the family and wider community, time off from work and routine, a chance to indulge in British Christmas music, and other secular Christmas values.
Nov 22, 2011, 10:17 pmadmin says:
Thanks Sheona,
I agree with the first 2 paras, but I disagree with so much of the last one that I wonder if you have the wrong end of the stick. I am not sitting out Christmas altogether, I am comfortable with the celebration (as stated in point 1) and the ‘other secular Christmas values’, I am thinking about sitting out church on Christmas Day only.
But you make some good points:
“You are possibly also injecting some disharmony […] for reasons completely unconnected with your rejection of Christianity.”
It would only inject some disharmony if there is an assumption that everyone is going to go – but yes, breaking that assumption may cause disharmony and that disharmony may not be worth breaking at a time of celebration. I have to genuinely consider that.
But the assumption that a person who has committed the majority of their life and life decisions to a faith that they do not now have would want to skip along to that very institution on the grounds that it is just a quaint tradition is odd. It means more to me than that.
So my decision is completely connected to my rejection of Christianity; there is no other reason. I have no problem with the building, the décor, the people and lets face it the Christmas Day service hardly preaches fire and brimstone, but the attendance itself, the biblical readings, the nativity, the prayers and parading of questionable history as historical-fact is the problem.
“…the Church hijacked a community celebration to make it about personal belief. So by prioritizing your personal belief over a communal celebration you are as bad as they are?”
I don’t think it can be distilled like that. I am taking part in the celebration but rejecting the hijack itself. If I knew the service would have a few yule-tidy songs, some poems about snow that never appears and afterwards everyone had a mug of mulled-wine, I’d be there! But it’s not and I am not asking it to be that. It can be Christian to the max, it can tell the story of the virgin birth, the journey to Bethlehem and the beginning of a life that will go on to transform and ultimately save the world. But I don’t believe that – it would be dishonest of me to attend.
On the meat illustration. Again this asks me – ‘Is it worth it? Do I feel strongly enough about my convictions to forgo the good, community, togetherness that the church offers on Christmas day?” – I’m not 100% sure to be honest.
But if my daughter decided that she didn’t want to come on a family trip to the zoo because she wanted to stay at home and play a jigsaw, that would not be ok.
But if she did not want to go because she has thought about Zoos and doesn’t agree with them on principle – I would have to concede, she has good grounds to feel that and my opinions on Zoos being different does not override hers.
The same with the meat illustration. In all there cases (Zoo, meat, Church) there would need to be a concession from someone for togetherness and principles to co-exist. I am offering one the best I can; I quietly sit out the Christmas service, no fuss or bother. Take a turn around the square. Take some Christmas day photos.
I think that I think it is worth it.
Nov 22, 2011, 11:42 pmShones says:
Ok, I have two further points.
Firstly, in relation to the meat/church thing I think we’re talking cross purposes. My point is not so much a persons right to take a stand but the effect on others. So of course it’s ok not to eat meat or believe in zoos. But if you had a big family trip to the zoo planned and someone opted out because they didn’t believe in zoos it would affect others. A sibling might be upset because they were excited about spending time with their sibling. Grandma might be upset because she wanted to treat all her grandchildren to a day out. Mum might be upset because everyone else is there and someone is missing from the photos. And you’d need to organise a babysitter for the zoo protester. It’s not about WHAT you’re doing but WHO you’re doing it with.
Secondly, I’m not sure how many liberal middle-of-the-road Church of Scotland ministers actually believe the christmas story as a literal interpretation. Why don’t you suggest yuletide songs and snow poems, they might be up for it. Ring the changes from babies in mangers!
The thing is as well,I feel like if you were to apply the WWJD question to it, that Jesus would tell you not to go…
Nov 22, 2011, 12:04 amKackie says:
Everyone, it seems, sees church on Xmas day as fulfilling a different need. For me it is more a community focal point then anything religious.providing some sort of local get together.
Nov 22, 2011, 12:28 pmadmin says:
Kackie, I agree, but for me I don’t see it as fulfilling any need except that of the desires of others for me to be there. Which is one I need to weigh up against my own principles.
Shones: I’m interested in what your thoughts are on it. I think I’ve made my point clear and been honest with my responses – the best suggestion I can come to is that I quietly sit out the service while respecting those who want to go.
Can I ask what are your thoughts on engaging with the Church in general and at Christmas time? Do you think my principles are worth the possibility of upsetting the cart for? Or am I being selfish?
Nov 22, 2011, 1:20 pmWhat do you think I should do?
Kackie says:
Is this q for both of us?
If it is….I think that as you have fully expressed and explained your belief and view point then it could be considered churlish not to go. It is such a personal thing though, you cNt really advise someone what to do. Maybe as my family never went, for community or religious purposes, it would not be such a sticking point for me. If you were in another country on a feast day, you may go to a religious service there as part of tradition and to be a good guest (altho obvs you wouldn’t subscribe to the beliefs)
Nov 22, 2011, 8:44 pmadmin says:
So it would be churlish not to go? Because everyone knows that I am against it? I think I’ve gone mad or done a really poor job of explaining myself here.
I like your ‘other country on feast day’ illustration though. I would go to that and take part even if it had religious under(or over)tones. Because as you say I wouldn’t subscribe to the beliefs, I would be unconnected to the religiosity. I think what makes this different, and where I have possibly lost you both, is that I feel strongly about the Christmas religiosity – I have previously been an ‘all in’ Christian. It is more than a little difficult to now see it as a quaint ceremony or tradition when I know it used to consume me. Does that make a difference?
I don’t simply no longer subscribe to it – it is much more personal than that.
Nov 22, 2011, 11:09 pmShones says:
My gut reaction is that prioritising personal conviction over other people’s feelings is one of the characteristics of the Church that I despise the most. Martyrdom is inherantly selfish. So I’d say go if not going will upset anyone.
However, I do appreciate that you maybe need a christmas away from church. Especially as otherwise you will have this dilemma every year (and it will only become more awkward as the children grown up and start asking awkward questions). So I think the question is whether you can “quietly” sit out of this part of christmas and avoid a “noisy” sit out which could be unpleasant as people will see you actively reject their views and feelings.
Why don’t you approach your mother-in-law (who I’m guessing might be the person who might mind the most) and say you aren’t that bothered about going to church and would it make her morning more relaxing if you stayed at home and peeled carrots and basted the turkey instead. That way, although you’re not participating in one hour of the communal celebration you will be doing a good deed that will help everyone enjoy the celebration more. If that doesn’t work you do also have a 12 week old, dynamite excuse for staying home!
Do you think you would be happy if you just didn’t go to church or do you want to take a stand and be seen not to go to church?
Nov 22, 2011, 1:00 amadmin says:
I have to say, I am very surprised by both reactions. But perhaps you are right.
I would not however expect the same of others.
I wouldnt expect a person who was against the captivity of animals to accompany me to the zoo.
I wouldnt expect a Feminist to accompany me to the strip club – at fear of offending me.
I wouldnt expect an ex-white supremacist to accompany me to a rally.
And I wouldnt be offended because I would realise it was not a personal slight but a difference of opinion.
Nov 22, 2011, 9:25 amPerhaps it is because religion is much more personal that it feels different – more offensive?
Shones says:
Those last points are interestIng because, yes, these types of “non-believers” would not be expected to attend the “believers” activities.
However, I’m not sure how much the situations can be equated:-
1. They presume that a virulently “anti” stance has already been made known by the non-believer to the believer so that the believers expectations have been reduced already, or in the case of the strip club the gender of the invitee might have precluded the invitation. This assumes noisy protest on the part of the non believer or in the case of white supremacy non membership of a minority group. In the same way that a muslim sonin law would not be exepcted to attend. Have you taken steps to reduce your inlaws expectations?
2. Even if you have the fact that others share your beliefs puts your stance in direct conflict with theirs because they have reconciled their non-belief with attending church at Christmas.
3. The latter two are in categories that I would deem to be minority activities anyway, so those believers would already not expect non-believers to attend. I think this would apply to Sunday morning church-going, which is a minority activity in UK, but I think Christmas Church would not quite be deemed to be so minority that any believer could reasonably expect all non-believers to be offended at the prospect of attending. Secularism is taking over Christmas but the religious myths will persist for while longer.
4. I think you are correct when you identify the ” personal ” element of religion as being important. There would be consequences for participating in all of the above activities; with the first two you would be paying an entrance fee and financially assisting the provision of something you disagree with, with the latter you would be providing public political support to a cause you don’ t believe in. I just don’ t see the potential effects of Christmas churchgoing if you don’t contribute to the collection because as I’ve said before I think the church are dismissive of Christmas churchgoing numbers.
Also you might recognise intellectual difference of opinion but someone who really believed in zoos, strip clubs or white supremacy could easily take it personally and be hurt.
Perhaps I’m basing this too much on philosophical ideas about causing least harm and choosing your battles?
Nov 22, 2011, 9:47 amShones says:
I think what in effect I’m saying is that you need to become a Muslim or Jew because atheism/agnosticism is not enough of an excuse not to go to church at Christmas without causing offence..not sure what I really think of this, it’s quite a sad state of affairs in society…
Nov 22, 2011, 1:01 pmShones says:
Do you know, I might take some of my comments back…was actually at church (of a hardline evangelical type) with a friend this weekend. They talked as if people who go to church because of tradition are ripe for the picking for conversion. They are holding 4 carol services and encouraging people to bring people who want to come because its christmas and its traditional (what everyone seems to miss is that a half hour gospel presentation mid-service is NOT traditional)
I think perhaps our difference of opinion comes from raised in completely different types of church. I was raised in a very liberal theist CofS where it was pretty bad form to talk about anyone being converted because all types of religion are equally valid.
We can agree to disagree. Happy Christmas.
Nov 22, 2011, 11:05 pmadmin says:
Thanks for all that Sheona, it’s been good to think a bit more about my objections, reasons and possibly causing offence.
Yes, different church background could be a factor in our difference of opinion. But what you said about a ‘virulently “anti” stance’ resonated with me and I think it helped me to think about what exactly is my ‘problem’ here.
You are right; the examples are different because I am not virulently anti-Christianity. I am sympathetic to belief in God and especially sympathetic to those who believe. But it amounts to the same thing because I AM virulently anti MY involvement with it – this is because I was passionately on-board with Christianity for the majority of 15 years from age 10-25 and it was more than a background or liberal belief. The way I see it is that I was the victim of a great deception from those closest to me which informed, influenced and affected every area of my life over this time, this is not a good thing. So my un-belief is very personal to me.
That’s why I am more than a little reluctant to go along with any charade of belief, let alone standing in support of it on Christmas Day.
I hope that clears it up some.
Nov 22, 2011, 1:17 pmShones says:
interesting contribution to the argument here http://m.guardian.co.uk/ms/p/gnm/op/sNJJNAtm9WqH9CuuCukyCgg/view.m?id=15&gid=commentisfree%2F2011%2Fdec%2F22%2Fthank-god-for-churches&cat=commentisfree
Nov 22, 2011, 10:57 pm