|
The basic Christian anti-Christmas argument runs something like this: since the commemoration of Christmas is not explicitly commanded by Scripture, its celebration is therefore forbidden. Furthermore, since certain aspects of the holiday might be traceable to pagan origins, the committed Christian is obligated to have no parts of them.
Both assumptions miss the mark.
First, just because something is not explicitly commanded by revelation does not by default mean the practice in question is thus forbidden. For example, there's nothing in the Bible about automobiles either, but that does not make them evil in and of themselves regardless of what Al Gore might tell us.
Relatedly, just because Christmas might have been introduced as a Christian alternative to Saturnalia does not mean one commits idolatry by participating. America's own representative democracy draws initial inspiration impart from ancient Greece and Rome refined by Christian sensibilities. Does that mean the believer sins each and every time they step into a voting booth?
In both the case of the automobile and the exercise of suffrage, the propriety of each is determined by the intentions of the individual wielding them. The same is true of Christmas.
Fundamentalist John R. Rice writes in Why I Love Christmas, "Why should any Christian be grieved if I especially think about the birth of Christ on December 25? Why should anybody grieve if I sing Christmas carols, if I have a celebration...? Do you think you would honor God more by having less Scripture, less song, less spirit of giving, less ... love for others?"
Seems Scripture bears out this perspective. Romans 14:5-6 reads, "One man regards one day above another, another regards everyday alike. Let each man be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord, he does not eat, and gives thanks to God (NASB)."
So if you want to sit around as a humbug, that's your business under the auspicious banner of Christian liberty; just don't require the rest of us to join in on your pity party.
Like all other good things in life, Christmas has no doubt been abused. But just because some churches treat their members like crud does not mean Sunday services ought to be prohibited everywhere else; even though some husbands and wives fight like cats and dogs that does not justify the abolition of marriage. Why not apply the same judicious spirit to Christmas as well?
As intense as this debate over a secondary issue may be, in a way the dispute simply manifests an erroneous approach to affairs portending repercussions more ominous than whether we ought hang the tinsel or string the lights this year. The underlying attitude enunciated by those opposed to the celebration of Christmas put our very rights as free men at stake.
The major thrust of this year's Christmas columns --- "Tis the Season (For Double Standards)" and "Termination Claus" --- focused upon the threat to individual liberties and America's national culture posed by the anti-yuletide pogrom rampaging in locations across the United States. Much to my surprise (more so this season than in year's past) a significant number of responses from within the Christian community criticized the commentaries in question for daring to raise concerns regarding current events and social policy in the first place.
A number display a disturbing "so what" attitude or reveal an appalling level of stupidity pertaining to the nature and operation of American sociopolitical institutions.
Regarding plans by the New York City public school system to open special prayer rooms for Muslims celebrating Ramadan while denying similar ecclesiastical concessions to Christian students, one response suggested this policy was wholly appropriate since Matthew 6:5-7 urges the Christian to earnestly pray in private rather than create a public spectacle. While this may be the theologically correct fashion through which to petition the Almighty, the reader's interpretation of the situation misses the point in that it's not the government's place to proscribe the proper ritual form for my prayers to take or to limit me from making a religious buffoon of myself. The issue at stake centers around the exercise of our rights as individuals.
Unfortunately, this is a matter this variety of Christian approaches in a lackadaisical fashion. Some responded to the concerns raised regarding the diminution of America's religious liberties with what amounted to a dismissive metaphorical yawn, noting that the Bible makes clear that persecution will ultimately befall those daring to stand for Christ's name.
Maybe so, but here in the United States, God in His grace, acting through the wisdom of the Founding Fathers, permitted the establishment of limited and correctable participatory political institutions allowing an engaged citizenry to hold the horrors of tyranny at bay.
Granted, the Bible warns conditions will wax worse and worse as this age continues to wind down. But do these students of prophecy ever stop and think such a decayed situation will be the result of Christians shirking their civic duty as salt and light?
It's unlikely these misguided souls longing for persecution to come upon them even know what that means or what it will entail. One critic expressed satisfaction in himself for avoiding contact with the media, even the Christian and conservative alternatives. One wonders how these Christians are capable of emulating the children of Issachar, who were commended in I Chronicles 12:32 for understanding the times, if they don't even scour available news sources for intelligence of events unfolding around them in the world today.
Some Christians throw a hissy fit if their employer requires them to work Sundays. Do they really think they could muster the courage to withstand more strident forms of opposition like that befalling believers in Sudan in the forms of slavery, mutilation, and even murder?
Isn't it in our best interests as a free people to delay these hardships as long as possible or by doing what's within the realm of legitimacy to mitigate the impact of these pending atrocities? After all, did not the Apostle Paul appeal to the authorities in Rome to ensure adherence to proper judicial procedure?
This call for civic noninvolvement exposes a profound failure in comprehending the way in which God set up human society and equipped individuals in unique ways to fulfill roles essential to its effective administration.
One reader responded, "I don't think we were ever instructed in Scripture to change society by involvement in politics. By fulfilling the great commission we are doing the will of the Lord Jesus Christ."
Christ did tell us that His kingdom is not of this world. As such, Christians must realize that under the current world situation mankind will never enjoy heaven on earth. However, that does not mean we are to role over and hand the whole show over to those fomenting the reprobate values that will drag the quality of our culture and standard of living down with them. After all, Luke 19:13 tells us, "Occupy till I come."
To limit the purpose of the Great Commission to simply making converts inappropriately curtails the impact of this divinely appointed task upon the world. A disciple is one who construes all of reality through the mold of a particular school of thought or belief. Conservative Presbyterians have been better overall, thank God, at realizing this than some of their Baptist or Nondenominational counterparts.
It must be pointed out that not everyone is called to be a pastor, evangelist, or missionary. So what if your talents lie elsewhere? Too bad. Your to keep your mouth shut and the contributions pouring into the collection plate according to the proponents of cultural disengagement.
But does not the beloved King James Version those espousing this line of argumentation love to flaunt as if the text provides justification lacking in other translations notes in I Corinthians 12:28 that God has specifically given the gift of government to some?
Romans 13:4 tells us, "For he [the ruler] is the minister of God." Who better than to administer the reins of government than someone who believes in the God who has allowed them to come to a position of authority. After all, we have seen the confusion unbelieving pastors have wrought in mainline denominations. Just think how much worse it will be when apostates hold sway over life and death.
Cal Thomas once noted no one is called to part time Christian service, with the need for believers trained in government, journalism, and mass communication as great --- if not more so --- than those schooled in more traditional approaches to missions and related theological vocations.
God must have thought it important to include as part of the Biblical record the events surrounding the birth of His Son Jesus Christ. Certainly even the stodgiest legalistic Scrooge can find something to celebrate about God entering the world in human form to show us His love and to take upon Himself the penalty for our own sin. Any Christian who cannot does not have a problem so much with a particular holiday per say as they may with God Himself.
Copyright 2002 by Frederick B. Meekins
For additional commentary by this author and links to stories around the Internet, please check out the following: The American WorldView Dispatch.
Published By Permission
|
