The First Christmas

For the first time in many years I attended a Christmas Eve worship service not as a professional functionary but rather as a worshiper—a layperson as it were. I must admit that it felt somewhat strange to sit out amongst the congregation with no responsibilities and with nothing to do. Deep down I expected to hear a voice say to me: “Get up and go say a prayer!” But no voice was heard. I was off the hook for sure.

So I entered into the flow of worship, along with about 2500 other worshipers. The church we attended was one of the megachurches near our new home. It was definitely conservatively Evangelical with hip looking musicians pumping out rock versions of Christmas tunes. If I recall we sang about four songs standing and one sitting. We did sing Silent Night.

Then in the middle of the service, just prior to the sermon, ushers passed out two little disposable plastic cups. One contained grape juice and the other an almost microscopic size piece of hard bread. We were told to drink from the cup and eat the tiny piece of bread. Yes there were some “holy” words spoken but for the life of me I cannot remember what was said. I turned to my wife and asked: “Did we just celebrated the Eucharist?” She whispered back: “Now don’t be critical.”

Then the message, which was communicated quite well with enough humor to hold our interest and just enough seriousness to make it pass as a bonafide Evangelical sermon. It wasn’t bad. The pastor came across as being approachable and was confidently passionate in what he believed. “I probably would enjoy having lunch with this guy” I thought to myself, “and talk to him about why we had Communion in the middle of worship.”

So what did he believe? Well he believed that Jesus’ whole purpose for being born was to become our “personal” Savior. He made this very clear. In other words, the main reason God sent Jesus into this world was to provide us with a personal Savior who would give anyone who believes in him everlasting life. That’s the real big gift of Christmas and “it’s the reason for the season” so they say.

Now who would argue with such an explanation for the meaning of Jesus’ birth? Certainly there is truth in this understanding of why Jesus was born. But I wonder if this emphasis on the so-called “personal Savior” theme reflects our own cultural traditions of consumerism and individualism more than the Gospel traditions handed down to us in Matthew and Luke in the New Testament?

In other words, when we hear the Christmas story repeated each year in churches across America what do we actually hear? Does the story actually reflect the original purpose of Matthew and Luke in their telling of the birth of Jesus or does it reflect our own obsession with consumerism and individualism in this country? I suspect it is the latter.

Do we realize that the original stories of Jesus’ birth in Matthew and Luke were actually stories subverting the Empire of Rome (Matthew) and the way poor, marginalized people, and women were being treated in Jesus’ time (Luke)? Do we realize that the only two birth stories in the New Testament are vastly different from one another and each was intended to address the political and social issues of the time? Would it be too much to ask American Christians to look into the historical context in which Matthew and Luke were written and ask a really important question: “How did those first Christians understand the Christmas stories in Matthew and Luke?”

Yes Jesus is the Savior of the world, but he is much more than just my personal Savior whom I can possess for myself (consumerism). There is no danger or risk in this insipid understanding of the Gospel. Jesus said: “Follow me!” But his command was not to follow him into heaven once this life is finished, but rather to follow him into this dangerous and hostile world as his disciples. By following him it is implied that one will live as Jesus lived and taught, which often stood opposed to the standard ways in which the world operates.

I would like to recommend to you a great little book entitled The First Christmas: What the Gospel’s Really Teach About Jesus’ Birth by Marcus J. Borg and John Dominic Crossan. I guarantee you that once you read this explanation of the original Christmas Story you will never hear that story in the same way again—ever!

Snobbery, Buffoonery, and the Third Way

I have never warmed to elitism, whether it is religious, political, or social. There is just something about the elitist spirit that is a big turn off for me. People who are born well to do or religious folks who are well educated or those living in well maintained gated communities have no good reason to be elitists. As the old saying goes: “We all put on our jeans one leg at a time.”

Elitism smacks of privilege and an I-am-better-than-you, I-know-more-than-you attitude. There’s a word in the American lexicon for such an attitude: Snobbery.

On the other hand I also disdain the dumb-it-down, black-and-white philosophy of Joe Six Pack and his beer drinking bubbas. People who live in this arena of life always appear so cocksure of their worldview (as if they know something educated folks don’t know). One knows precisely where one stands because the big issues in life are not nuanced but are clearly defined in either/or categories.

There’s a word in the American lexicon for this way of thinking as well: Buffoonery.

Okay, I admit that I may have just offended a lot of people but please know that I’m not suggesting all educated well-to-do people are snobs, nor am I suggesting that all uneducated not-so-well-off people are buffoons. That would be a serious mistake on my part and could quite easily place me squarely in the snobbish category.

Look, there are some really bright people who act like buffoons and there are some really not-so-smart people whose common sense makes up for their lack of raw intelligence—and their good folks to boot. Such is the irony of life in America these days. But there is a dark side to this irony: There are really smart people today who are duping many Americans with a buffoon-like ideology based on an either/or view of reality. Yes elitists think in either/or categories too.

It’s a dumb it down form of political problem solving that appeals to those who cannot or choose not to see complexity and nuance as major components of the hot button issues we face today.

No, life is not black and white and there are no easy answers that are going to solve all the problematic issues of the day: Issues such as immigration, the threat of ISIS, gun control, abortion, and homeland security. Any one of these issues is multidimensional and multifaceted.

For example, we may all agree that immigration is problematic (some more than for others) but the answer to the dilemma is not building literal walls to keep illegals out of the country, nor is it feasible to open up the borders and allow anyone who chooses to walk in and set up shop. Such dualism divides rather than unites us towards the Common Good.
Nor can we resolve the ISIS problem by carpet-bombing them and thus killing innocent civilians. We also cannot ignore the threat ISIS presents the United States by simply sticking our head in the sand. Neither of these dualistic impulses will work.

Shutting down all abortion or defunding Family Planning will not solve the moral dilemma this issue creates for us, nor is lifting all restrictions on abortions an acceptable moral solution. So we have a conundrum that is not going to be solved with either/or thinking. There are just too many factors involved in this issue that must be considered.

We cannot solve gun violence in this country by taking away everyone’s guns (which isn’t likely to happen). We once attempted to deal with alcoholism by making the sale and use of alcohol illegal (which is similar to wanting to take people’s guns from them) and we all know where that led us. Nor can we cave in to second amendment hardliners’ threats and bullying whenever it is suggested that there must be effective gun control legislation passed in this country.

Regardless of where one stands on this issue no one is going to convince me that one’s right to own a gun is more sacred than the protection of innocent lives, especially our school children. Yet the solution may not be as simple as removing all guns from our society anymore than removing any and all restrictions on guns sales and gun use. This kind of dualistic problem solving is self-defeating in my estimation. There is common ground in this debate beyond digging in our heels to protect our preferred position on the issue.

Let us reason together in this season of sound bites and over used political clichés as we find ourselves choosing up sides in each of these hot potato issues. Let us tone down the inflammatory rhetoric often used by politicians and activists alike. These difficult issues are not going to be solved (if ever completely solved) by shouting at our opponents, or resorting to name-calling, or by scapegoating, or by demonizing those who do not share our views or political affiliation. Blaming our social ills on the Liberals or the Conservatives no longer is helpful—it simply does not work. It’s old school that is ineffective.

Let us practice the third way of reasoned debate, of a thoughtful exchange of ideas, and a mature approach to problem solving as we work together for the Common Good. Let us attempt to work on one of our most harmful addictions as a human race: The addiction of being right!