Christian Identity, or Can Baby Jesus Get Some Love?

The survey results look promising on first glance. Ninety percent (90%) of churches will hold services on Christmas day. Anytime you get 90% of any group doing a good thing or what they ought to be doing or at least not doing a bad thing, it seems like a victory. If 90% of students completed high school, the country would marvel. But, of course, I wouldn't be writing this if I thought it was really a good thing. The numbers mask an amazing presumption and perhaps some confusion in the group that carried out the poll: the research arm of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Christmas is a Christian holiday. It just is. Talk about all the Saturnalia and pagan syncretism you like, talk about substituting one pagan holiday for a Christian one, talk about borrowed symbols and commericalism, talk all you want about it; at its core, theologically (for Christians), Christmas is the coming of Messiah, and therefore, a religious high, holy day. It's a celebration day, much like Easter (another holiday about which I'm weary of hearing stories of syncretism. One thing is clear, however it started, the Christian narrative won.), not a fast day like Good Friday. It is, by my estimation, the second most important day on the church calendar, following Easter, of course.

Can you imagine a research team sending out an email to pastors asking if they plan to have service on Easter Sunday? No. Not going to happen. Easter is always a Sunday, and it's explicitly religious, and churches church on that day. The assumption is that churches will meet on Easter Sunday. So why isn't it the same assumption for Christmas when it falls on a Sunday? Shouldn't that be cause for additional excitement? The research team knows something about American Christianity, it seems, because only 90% of churches that call themselves Christian are meeting this Sunday. May I ask what the other ten are doing?

I'm also weary of hearing about how they shouldn't be holding services so as to go out into the world and feed and clothe the poor or some other noble endeavor. Jesus said the poor will be with us always not as permission to ignore them, and in the context of the passage, he is certainly indicating that a prioritization must happen that doesn't ignore the poor but that also doesn't prevent the Church from churching. It's the same principle as Sabbath; there are six days to feed and clothe the world. Give God the seventh. That being answered...

In addition to the 10% of churches who seem to have forgotten that Christmas is a day of religious observance (War on Christmas rhetoric notwithstanding), there are those uncounted Christians who won't show up to their churches that are holding service on Sunday. Yes, some are out of town, some have relatives in town, some are ill, and some are working, but the overwhelming majority are placing the cultural celebration ahead of the religious observance. Some well-meaning but clearly confused pastors are offering a Christmas Eve worship alternative, because they want to observe the holiday, and let's be honest, it's the last "Sunday" offering of 2011. Why are those Christians not attending church on Christmas?

I have no answer, except to suggest that almost all American forms of Christianity are first cultural and secondly theological. By cultural here I don't mean style of music or mega vs. small or white vs. black or even patriotic vs. non-sectarian. I mean that Americans are largely shaped by consumerism, individualism, and materialism, the three idols of the market that serve to make all of us mini-narcissists. The Church calendar exists to break a narrative of Christian identity and formation into manageable chunks. The story is told across 52 weeks with the high points receiving special designation: Advent, Christmas, Epiphany, Lent, Holy Week, Good Friday, Easter, Pentecost. In each chapter, the Church is reminded who she is and the Christian is invited to participate in a formative story, the story of being Christian in the world. It is this narrative that combats the idols of the market, and it is this narrative that is losing.

Not surprisingly, Easter continues to be well-attended, because the primary theological assumption most American Christians seem to make is also narcissitic: Jesus died for my sins and then rose from the dead. The first part of the clause is the most important, and Christians celebrate Easter because the resurrection is the guarantor of the truth of the first part. Even on this most festive of days, the idols of the market win. The hidden assumption behind all this church planning is that church is for the people. Catholic priests know better. They will say the Mass this Sunday even if no one shows. Why? Because the liturgy, the work of the people, is God-directed. Church, theologically, is only tangentially for the people; its primary purpose is worship, thanksgiving, celebration, and praise, not the edification of the body. There are six days for edification; the seventh belongs to God.

Comments

[April]

Hmmm, I dont know. I mean, when I was in church leadership, I was all militant about coming to church on Christmas, of course. But from my perspective now - and I don't have the time to write this all out as I should, but the bottom line - if "only" 90% are having services, and Jewish folks put up Christmas trees, and my Hindu housemates know the words to "Silent Night"? - I don't think it's a holiday Christians "own." As you point out - they never did, it's a cultural appropriation, a theology that was, so long ago, imposed on a pagan celebration - but they don't now, either. And it goes to the central point that religion is so much more than theology. It's culture, too, and a host of other things. The interaction of all the elements makes each incarnation of a particular "theology" what it is. Personally, I find it interesting (and at isolated times, beautiful.) Also, I like the idea that, at the heart of the whole thing, is a simple celebration of the solstice - recognizing the light is coming back :)

[Greg Horton]

April, I've been thinking about some of that too. I just emailed a pastor friend that the difference between legalism and identity formation is a treacherous one to navigate. I remember the militant feelings when I was in ministry too, but I'm not working toward that here. Rather, I assume Christians want to act like Christians. It's the anabaptist influence on me, I supposed. So, for people serious about identity formation, what the culture does with their holiday is moot; they will participate in the story. It's possible to have both, but the narrative has to come before the cultural practices.

[April]

That's a good way to put it - the navigation between legalism and identity formation. It's interesting that you bring up your anabaptist influence. As I've been pondering this (while desperately practicing, trying to cram music for my Christmas Eve gig) I've been wondering if "liturgy is god-directed" works here - that's more for Catholics and high church types. For Baptists (and anabaptists, I'd presume) - a liturgical gathering is more like a voluntary association meeting, coming together to "remember" something but necessarily participate in the reality of it - if I am remembering correctly? (Which, in my mind, is where their theology poses both some serious problems AND has some potential benefits for the whole concept of "identity formation.")

[Greg Horton]

The model is clearly broken when a liturgical gathering is for the people rather than by the people. This is partly (almost wholly) a product of the Protestant Reformation's elevation of the sermon to the central place of worship. It was a matter of time before people thought of church as for instruction rather than liturgy. For anabaptists, the participation is embodied; that's the appeal for identity formation. It's pointless to discuss Jesus' work without discussing his ethics, and to embrace him as an anthropological model means that we embrace both the work and the ethic, so that we don't just do as he did, but how he did as well.

[Phil]

Where does watching Midnight Mass from Rome on TV with a glass of Moscato in hand fall along this line?

I think realpolitik is in play for a lot of people. I'd bet that 10% is rural churches where the pastor is due to be at his mother-in-law's all day.

[Mike McVey]

As part of the 10% that will not be having services, it is mostly because our church rarely has services on Sundays. Our worship service is Wednesday evenings. Obviously, our church is probably an exception to the rest of the 10%, but just wanted to pass it along.

[Greg Horton]

Mike, understood. I'm sure there are legit exceptions

Sent from my iPhone

[David T.]

For most of the American church, the birth of Christ is only important because it meant Christ could die on the cross. Viewed from this angle, it makes sense why Christmas would be a lesser holiday. Heck, the music special in my fundamentalist church this past Sunday was a song all about how wonderful Jesus didn't stay a baby because He had to die for us. ARRGGGHHHH!!!!!