There’s nothing Christian about Christmas – or so some would have you believe.
— God (@TheTweetOfGod) October 31, 2013
Burnett, frankly, is trying too hard; at least the Big Bang Theory tends to be genuinely funny. Both, however, have the same implication: that clever people should be able to see that Christmas is a joke, a succession of silly appropriations that undermine its credibility to represent anything real.
I never quite know what to make of these observations. Is it meant to undermine Christianity that Christmas has changed throughout history? If so, I could add to the litany of ridiculous trivialities that turkeys are not native to the Middle East, or that Saint Nicholas seems quite unlikely to have been a resident of the North Pole or to have even seen a reindeer.
The facetious commentary notwithstanding, however, there is a nugget of relevance to these criticisms of Christmas. It could be seen as problematic for Christianity that cultural syncretism is undeniably a feature of the Christmas festivities. The criticisms do raise at least raise the question of how many cultural traditions can swamp Christmas before it loses its Christian identity.
The Catholic Encyclopaedia (published in 1907, freely available online, still a fantastic resource) notes that Christmas was not listed among the earliest Christian celebrations at all. The earliest evidence of any feast it finds in Alexandria around 200 AD. In the fourth century childhood feasts (celebrating Jesus) seem to have become popular in Jerusalem, but in January. It seems a reasonably fair assumption that in the Roman Empire the old Saturnalia festival was appropriated by Christianity when the latter became the new state religion in the late fourth century.
So it was that within a few hundred years, a celebration of the birth of Christ went from not being a Christian festival at all to being a state sponsored festival appropriating many pre-existing traditions. Christmas from its very origins has been something of a development and a hybrid. It has continued in that vein ever since, adding new cultural traditions in each new society in which it manifests itself.
Interesting as that might be to an anthropologist, all these cultural and traditional aspects are no more than superficial trappings. The precise dating of Christmas is no more important than whether the disciples ever sat down for turkey and sprouts. It’s not really a ‘birthday’ that matters so much as the recognition of the far more fundamental point of the incarnation.
It is in many ways the most radical of Christian claims: that the transcendent, omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient God became incarnate as a helpless baby for the sake of humanity. It is an astonishing claim and one that is evidently worthy of commemoration and awe. It is a theological claim that has been made consistently and celebrated in all Christian worship. It’s the reason the religion is called ‘Christianity’ at all, a recognition of the astonishing role of Christ, God Incarnate. There is nothing pagan, or Norse, or Roman about that claim. It is simply Christian.
So yes, Christmas as a festival is an innovation that borrows liberally from many cultures – but only for the sake of commemorating a truth that is uniquely and fundamentally Christian. The appropriation is for the sake of expressing the fundamental claim of Christianity, not for concealing it – hence the choice of such traditions that represent gift giving, bringing people together, love and family (all good Christian themes), but not all of the rather messy Saturnalia rituals like sacrificing goats. No matter how many other traditions go into it Christmas is and always has been Christian.
Ben Ryan is a research intern at Theos and has recently completed an MSc in European Studies at the LSE.
Image from wikipedia available in the public domain.
