|
What Religious Liberty?
|
Perplexing Christmas Questions We do not know what year Jesus was born but we are now certain that it was possibly 6 to 4 BC. How could Christ have been born from four to six years before Christ? The feast of Christmas is celebrated December 25 in the Western Church. What is the origin of that date? Christmas is also celebrated with exchanges of gifts, greenery in houses, singing, and special food. Why? These are perplexing questions to which you will not find completely satisfactory answers here (nor I suspect anywhere else). But let us see what answers there are. We know for certain that Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great on the authority of Matthew 2:1 and Luke 1:5. We know from other historical sources that Herod the Great ruled from 37 BC to 4 BC. If that is so then Jesus could have been born no later than 4 BC. Obviously the calculation of the year of his birth is incorrect. A monk named Dionysius (Dennis) Exiguus calculated it in the year 532 and numbered the years of the Christian era from that point. The practice became general in Christian countries by 1400. For reasons that need not concern us here Dennis missed by a minimum of four years. The result is that the third millenium has already begun although according to our present enumeration we still have two more years to go. Even though we know that Dionysius was in error, the numeration of the years is so well established that it would cause great historical confusion to correct it now. Besides, to what year would we correct it? We have no date for Jesus' birth. Why was the choice December 25? There are several theories from which I will list two. First, the conventional wisdom is that December 25 was selected because the Roman Emperor Aurelian in 274 established a feast throughout the empire in honor of the Birth of the Unconquered Sun (Natale solis invicti) to be celebrated December 25, the day of the winter solstice. This was an attempt on his part to unify and strengthen his vast empire around a monotheistic god that would be acceptable to all. Some theorists say that Christians transformed this feast into the feast of the birth of Jesus who was the "sun of justice" (see Malachi 3:20) and "the true light, which enlightens everyone" (see John 1:9). The purpose was to give Christians an alternative to the pagan feast. A second theory explains the choice of December 25 with no reference to pagan feasts, but to computations based on scripture. The anchor for this theory is based on the conception of John the Baptizer. This was supposed to have occurred during the feast of Booths during which his father Zechariah was ministering in the temple. This would have occurred during the month of tishri (corresponding to part of our September and October) at approximately the time of the autumn equinox, September 23. The date for his conception was supposed to be September 25. He would have been born nine months later near the time of the summer solstice or June 25. Luke tells us that the angel announced to Mary that she was to conceive and that her cousin Elizabeth, John's mother, was in her sixth month. That would have been March 25. Since Jesus was conceived on March 25 his birth would then have been nine months later on December 25. It is quite possible that Christians were guided by this sort of scriptural reckoning (however inappropriately used) in choosing a date for the birth of Jesus rather than reacting to pagan feasts. How did it happen that Christmas observances included exchange of gifts, introduction of greenery into homes, special music, and gift giving? These probably are the remnants of the year-end celebrations in honor of Saturn (the harvest god) and Mithras (the god of light) of which these revelries were a part. This part of our Christmas celebration is definitely pagan in origin. The Church took these pagan practices and baptized them, so to speak, by bending them to Christian interpretations. Thus the Christmas tree was the tree of life; the giving of gifts was in imitation of God who gave us the gift of his Son, etc. There is danger of reversion to the old pagan interpretation of Christmas. Many persons celebrate Christmas with no thought of Christ. This is true of Japan, for example, which is far from being a Christian country. Since the American occupation after World War II Christmas is widely celebrated there as a time of feasting, gift giving, and commerce. There is no question of putting Christ back into Christmas there because he was never in their Christmas observance. The Japanese imported only the trappings of the pagan festival without the Christian interpretation. The same can happen to us. All that people seem to need for a festival is a signal; it matters little to some what the signal may mean. We do not know what year Jesus was born or the date. But we do know that the event was the greatest that could occur in our universe. Christians should keep this feast with great joy but always with the realization that Jesus is the reason for the season. If we celebrate Christmas without a vital union with Jesus we might as well be celebrating Saturn or Mithras or even the birth of the sun. An enlightened observance of Christmas will be one that follows the "light of the world."
|
| |||||||||||||