Many Christians have accepted uncritically the idea that Christian holidays, notably Christmas and Easter, were added into the calendar hundreds of years after the life and ministry of Christ and were lifted from pagan celebrations which fell on the same dates. This is a theory of “co-opting,” whereby something is taken over and invested with new meaning. The problem is that vestiges of the old always remain, so these celebrations cannot be fully Christian and might be more than a little pagan. Some Christian groups and Christian heresies have latched onto this. Jehovah's Witnesses prominently refuse to celebrate Christmas or Easter and use the celebration of these holidays by orthodox Christians as evidence they are more biblical (which has no little irony considering they had to produce their own Bible version to promote their false teachings).
Thankfully, we don't have to defend the pagan origins of Christmas and Easter, as they were demonstrably not taken from pagan holidays, but represented the actual practice of the Church from as far back as we can tell. The impetus for this is fairly plain. Christmas and Easter are celebrations of real events, and not just any events, but the two most significant events in Christianity, and even more, the world. Real events happen on a calendar. So just like the Israelites celebrated their calendar tied to actual events, Christians did the same. God never commanded his people to celebrate those two days, but it was natural for them and flowed from celebrating redemptive history in the Old Testament. They are joyful remembrances of biblical events.
But, if they represented ancient practice, why did the Puritans frown so much on Christmas? The fact is, Christmas had fallen on hard times. The celebration of Christmas in the 17th century was mostly isolated among Catholics and Anglicans. For most it was a night of drinking and debauchery. When Charles I was executed and the Puritan dictator Oliver Cromwell took over England, one of his first acts was banning the celebration of Christmas. English Christmas was riotous, but it was loved by many of the people. When the rule passed from Oliver to his son, Richard, people asked him to restore the celebration of Christmas, which he refused. Charles II promised to restore Christmas if the monarchy were restored. Christmas was at least one of the reasons Puritan rule in England was overthrown.
This was not the Christmas we know now, but was largely a night of carousing by men, often of the working classes, hitting the streets and demanding food and drink from wealthier folk. The song, “We Wish You a Merry Christmas,” might not be as old as the 17th century, but surely represents the sentiment with the demand for “figgy pudding” and an implied threat of “we won't leave until we get some.” Ace Collins writes, “in many areas of London, Christmas was a day when women and children feared to venture into the streets.”
Christmas, at least in the English-speaking world, was not a time of faith and family for about two hundred years. Starting with the Continental Congress in 1789, Congress met on Christmas Day for 67 years. When laws against the celebration of Christmas began to be ignored in American cities, Christmas again became a time of drunkenness and rioting. In 1828 the City Council of New York had a special session and formed a Christmas police force to deal with the disturbances.
In Germany, however, Christmas had evolved into a religious holiday where families celebrated the birth of Christ. Homes were decorated. Special treats were made. It became a day precious to children. In 1840, Queen Victoria married the German Prince Albert and Germany's traditions entered British culture. Albert transformed the way the royal family celebrated Christmas, which quickly worked its way through English society. This changed the form of Christmas, but what changed the heart of how the English viewed Christmas came three years later.
Charles Dickens was a 19th English author who wrote prodigiously and had a heart for the poor and orphans. He latched on quickly to the transformation of Christmas from a dangerously drunken night to a time of faith and charity. He was a Christian, and though his theology was pretty lacking, his compassion was heartfelt. In 1843 he published his short novel, A Christmas Carol, which could be described a bit as a moralistic Gothic horror tale. Many people miss the point of his novel today and assume that “Scrooge” was a cheating, dishonest businessman who became rich by extorting others and taking advantage of his employee. This is a completely mistaken understanding. Scrooge is scrupulously honest and hardworking. He is just as miserly in his own life as in the lives of his employees. He works exactly the same long hours as his employee. In the background of his life, he has forgotten the importance of relationships and become consumed with work.
His ghostly visitors allow him to see the things he has forgotten and the barrenness of his life in the present. His employee, Cratchett, has loving relationships and talks well of his boss, even when it isn't particularly deserved. The final blow comes when the Ghost of Christmas Future shows Scrooge the grave of Little Timmy, and stunningly pins Timmy's death on Scrooge. Scrooge didn't do anything to cause or hasten Timmy's death, he simply neglected, somehow, to prevent it. Scrooge is not guilty of defrauding anyone; he's guilty of a lack of compassion and generosity. And his miserliness has made him miserable as well. Certainly, Christ's words on this were known to Dickens. Paul, when talking to the Ephesian elders, whom he would never see again, said, “I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, 'It is more blessed to give than to receive'” (Acts 20:35). The story struck home, hard. Christmas was quickly and radically transformed. It could have been accidental - just Dickens jumping on the cultural bandwagon at the right time - but I suspect some intentionality was at work.
In 1850, Dickens published a short story titled, “A Christmas Tree.” The story is set as the reminiscing of an old man about Christmases past. The old man glories in the decorations, the treats, and the toys that he enjoyed as a child with the Christmas tree at the center of the room and the experience. Page after page he goes on with vivid descriptions of the ornaments on the tree, decorations in the home, and food they enjoyed. The Christmas Tree itself speaks at the end of the tale, “This, in commemoration of the law of love and kindness, mercy and compassion. This in remembrance of Me!”
The curious thing about this “tale,” is that it is completely fiction. Dickens himself didn't grow up with a Christmas like that. No one in England had a Christmas like that if they grew up in his day. He was creating an idea of Christmas by pitching it as something older and developed, but it was rather new. The celebration of Christmas itself is as old as the Church, but giving a clear way to anchor the celebration of Christ's birth with kindness towards children and compassion for the poor inoculated the festival from many of its worst features. Ironically, many of the practices that we bemoan at times, such as gift-giving, are not actually a departure from a “true Christmas celebration,” but were part of drawing it back more towards Christ (not that we don't tend to devolve into worldliness!). And it seems, that for Dickens, that was the point.
- Yours in Christ Our Savior,
Travis Hutchinson, Interim Pastor of Youth & Families
(A popular history of Christmas as a celebration can be found in Ace Collins's book The Stories Behind the Great Traditions of Christmas. Collins is occasionally not terribly careful with his historiography, but he gets the main story right.)
