I grasped the sponge, water dripped down my wrist as I took aim. The man from the McGillicuddy Serious Party raised his voice and said “now throw!” The sponge flew through the air from my hand and struck Santa solidly on the chest soaking his red costume. Santa laughed and said “throw another one!”
It was my second year at university and the McGillicuddies were running their annual “throw a sponge at Santa” event. This was done ostensibly to protest materialistic consumerism of which they saw Santa as a modern icon. I was simply sick of the whole hypocritical façade that was Christmas. An event that for many, myself included, has deeply religious significance was being trivialised by a fat man in a red suit from the north-pole. It really irked me.
Years have passed since this event and with age comes (I hope) more reserve and wisdom. I have learned more about the cultural icon known as Santa and I have come to appreciate, at least from an historical perspective, why this icon exists. I agree that today the historical meaning of this icon has been forgotten. However I think that the solution to this forgetfulness is to re-awaken our cultural memory by addressing the theological and historical ignorance prevalent in our culture; attempts to cut ourselves off from the past even further are not the right approach.
The reference to Santa as an icon is apt because the original Santa, Nicholas of Myra, became an icon in religious art. In earlier times there was no printing press and illiteracy was widespread so vivid art became an important way of communicating a message. Characters had to be readily recognisable, in religious art Nicholas was represented by the figure of a man with a large white beard. Given that he was a Catholic bishop, he was portrayed in red robes. The figure of a white-bearded man in red robes became a symbol for an historical person, and the story of Nicholas was kept alive because of its immediate relevance for the present.
Nicholas of Myra was probably born between 260 and 280 AD in Petara (Turkey). He was raised a devout Christian and became Bishop of the nearby province of Myra. He lived through turbulent times. In the early 300’s the emperor Diocletian launched one of the most severe persecutions of Christians in history, many were killed, imprisoned and exiled. A few decades later the Roman Emperor Constantine announced he had converted to Christianity and the Roman Empire became officially Christian.
Nicholas lived through both events and while the facts are disputed, some records claim he attended the council of Nicaea which saw the hammering out of key Christian doctrines such as the trinity and incarnation. The creed of Nicaea is accepted by all major branches of Christianity today – whether orthodox, Catholic or Protestant. Nicholas was, like all human beings, flawed and at one stage is believed to have assaulted another bishop in a heated theological dispute. His flaws aside, his religious commitment clearly made an impression on his contemporaries. Nicholas was quite wealthy yet he gave his wealth away to assist impoverished children. He became known as a leader who generously gave to the poor and who sought and stood up for the welfare of children. He is believed to have intervened to save innocent people from execution. His acts served as role model for others and so his example was appropriated to future generations.
Much of the historical facts about Nicholas’ life have merged with legend which seems to have developed hundreds of years after the events in question. The Middle Ages saw the development of a particular literary genre know as hagiography. Hagiographies were biographies of the saints, people from the past whose character and devotion had been considered exemplary. Hagiographies retold the past in an idealised, exaggerated manner to inspire moral lessons on the part of the hearer, often mixing history with edifying legend to make the story memorable. These stories were usually highly stereotyped and often employed the same literary motifs and plots from one account to another. The point of such stories was not to get the historical facts correct in all their details but to ensure that the moral example of past saints was made vividly available to future generations. Nicholas’ life was no exception to this, much of what we know of him today comes from embellished hagiography.
Despite this there is one striking story about Nicholas which appears to be rooted in historical reality, even if the re-telling is somewhat stylised. It comes in at least three versions but all three agree in the essence and differ only on minor details. The story goes like this. A wealthy man in Myra fell into economic hard times and was unable to provide a dowry for his three daughters. In the culture of the time this meant that his daughters would have been unable to marry and would probably have been forced, by economic necessity, into either slavery or prostitution to provide for themselves. Nicholas, upon hearing of the family’s plight, secretly visited them in the night and tossed gold through the window of their house.
The details differ between accounts, in some accounts what was tossed were gold balls, as opposed to gold coins. In one version the gold is said to have landed in stockings left before the fire to dry. On some versions Nicholas came on three consecutive nights but in others the process was more staggered, with him coming only when the first girl was of marriageable age, then again when the second reached marriageable age with the process being repeated with the third daughter.
On the third occasion, the man, desirous of knowing who was sending the gifts waited up to discover who the mysterious stranger was. On one version of the story the father discovered that the giver is Nicholas who then refused to take credit, instead he suggested he was simply doing his duty before God. But in another version, Nicholas evaded detection by secretly dropping a sack of gold down the chimney. The point preserved in the tradition is that through his generosity and social concern, Nicholas saved three women from a dire path.
These stories were retold frequently throughout the Middle Ages to function as exemplars of virtuous living. Nicholas was held out as an example of generosity to the poor so as to inspire other people of means to do the same. Like many early church leaders, Nicholas was venerated in subsequent ages and was later canonised as a saint. Feasts were established in memory of him, where this story of his generosity to the poor was ceremonially remembered and re-enacted to reinforce the moral point of the story.
It is not hard for the astute reader to see the obvious origins of the Santa phenomena played out each Christmas. Here we have a man whose name, St Nicholas, has obvious linguistic affinity with Santa Claus. Nicholas was historically identified as a white-bearded man, who wore red robes, who secretly comes bearing gifts either via a chimney or by leaving them in stockings near the fireplace, left out while the house sleeps. We also have a tradition of feasting where this tale is remembered and ceremonially re-enacted. What is important to remember is that the function of such theatrics was to vividly reinforce in the hearer the important moral lesson of giving generously to those in need. This was the whole point of retelling and remembering the story.
Over time, traditions become repetitive and are simply repeated by rote. Unless they are cherished and re-appropriated by each generation, their significance can be lost. The fact that many contemporary New Zealanders have limited knowledge of history and that western culture, unlike other cultures, does not emphasis appropriating the lessons from the past, means that Santa has been transformed from an icon representing generosity into the cartoonish figure that, to so many of us, represents commercialism, consumerism and gluttony.
During an economic recession, many families stressfully ask how they are going to afford the gifts they are socially obliged to buy and the expensive feasts, traditional foods and decorations that goes with Santa. Many children learn the prudential value both of greed and being spoilt for one day a year. This is perhaps one of the biggest ironies of Christmas, as while we all feast and receive things we probably don’t need, women will roam the streets selling themselves as prostitutes, often out of economic necessity, and the poor around the world continue to be sold into slavery and enticed into sweat shops.
The solution to this irony is not to castigate Santa Claus (as I did many years ago with a wet sponge) but to recapture the lesson our forefathers carefully tried to reinforce through artwork, ceremony, ritual and legend. That those of us with wealth have an obligation to give and assist those facing destitution and hardship that is what God’s will for us is and doing this humbly represents the spirit of Christ. One way to do this is start reclaiming back into our culture the real story of Santa; the wealthy Bishop who, without pomp or ceremony, helped others out of poverty and was immortalised in legend as a result. That, instead of reindeers and bells, is worth preserving.
I write a monthly column for Investigate Magazine entitled “Contra Mundum.” This blog post was published in the Jan 11 issue and is reproduced here with permission. Contra Mundum is Latin for ‘against the world;’ the phrase is usually attributed to Athanasius who was exiled for defending Christian orthodoxy.
Letters to the editor should be sent to:
ed*******@in*****************.com
RELATED POSTS:
Contra Mundum: The Number of the Beast
Contra Mundum: Pluralism and Being Right
Contra Mundum: Abraham and Isaac and the Killing of Innocents
Contra Mundum: Selling Atheism
Contra Mundum: Did God Command Genocide in the Old Testament?
Contra Mundum: Fairies, Leprechauns, Golden Tea Cups & Spaghetti Monsters
Contra Mundum: Secularism and Public Life
Contra Mundum: Richard Dawkins and Open Mindedness
Contra Mundum: Slavery and the Old Testament
Contra Mundum: Secular Smoke Screens and Plato’s Euthyphro
Contra Mundum: What’s Wrong with Imposing your Beliefs onto Others?
Contra Mundum: God, Proof and Faith
Contra Mundum: “Bigoted Fundamentalist” as Orwellian Double-Speak
Contra Mundum: The Flat-Earth Myth
Contra Mundum: Confessions of an Anti-Choice Fanatic
Contra Mundum: The Judgmental Jesus
Tags: Contra Mundum · Investigate Magazine · McGillicuddy Serious Party · Nicholas of Myra · Santa37 Comments
A common objection to belief in the God of the Bible is that a good, kind, and loving deity would never command the wholesale slaughter of nations. In the tradition of his popular Is God a Moral Monster?, Paul Copan teams up with Matthew Flannagan to tackle some of the most confusing and uncomfortable passages of Scripture. Together they help the Christian and nonbeliever alike understand the biblical, theological, philosophical, and ethical implications of Old Testament warfare passages.
“The reference to Santa as an icon is apt because the original Santa, Nicholas of Myra”
Erm, so there was no earlier gift giver at this time of year ?
Gosh, these Christians invented every tradition. 🙂
For Paul Baird and anyone else who’s interested,
For more info on all things religious related to this time of year use this link:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/winter_solstice.htm
Finally, Merry Christmas to all, regardless of your perspective.
Finally (again) Seeing as my kids woke me up over an hour ago to show me what Santa had brought them, I decided to kill some time on the laptop!
Paul Bennett, as an ex-Pagan I knew most of the stuff listed on that website already, but thanks for posting the link.
No mention of Odin though ?
That said, my point was that it’s dangerous and presumptious to think that before the St Nicholas fable that gift giving in mid-winter did not happen, but it appears to be part of the ongoing overlaying of a Christian tradition on a prior non-Christian tradition.
So is it right to tell children that Santa exists, in effect to tell them an ongoing lie until they find out for themselves that it’s a lie?
Well done Matt and thankyou particularly for the last paragraph. It does us no harm to remember others less fortunate than ourselves at any time of year. Its good to know that the Santa story degenerate as it is now started out as a model of exemplary behaviour.
Yes Paul there have no doublt been other gift givers at this time, but they do not form part of our cultural heritage, in our culture at this time this is one major source of the tradition of gift giving at Christmas, the other being God giving the gift of His Son Jesus Christ.
May God bless you all and may you have a very merry Christmas.
Yes Virginia there is a Santa Claus
http://www.newseum.org/yesvirginia/
Paul, the post is clearly designed to explain the origin of Santa Claus (which means “Saint Nicholas”), not of December 25th festivities.
Jeremy wrote:
“Yes Paul there have no doubt been other gift givers at this time, but they do not form part of our cultural heritage, in our culture at this time this is one major source of the tradition of gift giving at Christmas, the other being God giving the gift of His Son Jesus Christ.”
That doesn’t address the issue that a small event in Turkey was able to spread across the whole of Chrisian world. I’m suggesting that it was a convenient Christian myth that could be overlaid on prior non-Christian rites and myths. Was it politics or peity ?
You may associate today (with NO HISTORIC evidence) with the birth of your God, many others do not.
Glenn wrote:
“Paul, the post is clearly designed to explain the origin of Santa Claus (which means “Saint Nicholas”), not of December 25th festivities.”
Yes, I knew that and that was what I was responding to.
“That those of us with wealth have an obligation to give and assist those facing destitution and hardship that is what God’s will for us is and doing this humbly represents the spirit of Christ”
If you have any spare change, here is a great place to spend it: http://www.gavialliance.org/
The first gift giver is of course God, not the pagans.
@ Glenn
Not sure which Paul you were responding to, but I posted my first comment in response to Paul Baird and his initial comment.
I’ve included another link to the same site that I used earlier to support the comment Paul Baird made with regard to the ongoing overlaying of a Christian tradition on a prior non-Christian tradition. In this case easter
http://www.religioustolerance.org/easter.htm
They may both be important dates to christians, but the reality is that they have a history and significance prior to the arrival of christ regardless of what you believe.
Here is another completely different take on the whole “Santa” thing:
http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com/2010/12/santa-lives.html
And continuing this theme, this is well worth a look:
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=852CB55CA84EBD1B
A doco from the history channel regarding all aspects of the origins of christmas
As far as Santa is concerned, Part 4 of the History Channel doco has the most pertinent information.
“You may associate today (with NO HISTORIC evidence) with the birth of your God, many others do not.”
I have got to say, “so what”
In our western cultural tradition Dec 25 is Christmas Day, yes it is an “official date” rather than the actual date just like “Queens Birthday”. We all know Jesus wasnt actually born on this date, so what.
Previous times and other cultures have and have not had celebrations at this time of year, again so what, what does it matter, is it relevant? I guess you dont have to take the holiday if you dont want to, you certainly are not obliged to wish Jesus happy birthday.
Neither is celebrating summer solstice forbidden to you if you so desire. I would be a little suprised to find that your family had preserved an ancient pagan tradition for the last 1600 years but i could be wrong.
Actually i think it would be nice if we celebrated Christmas mid winter, the holiday, feasting, family get together, general feel good atmosphere would make an uplifting contrast to the drearyness of midwinter. But the traditons were established before NZ was settled and are now fairly global.
What does it matter what others have done/do in other times and places. Even Christmas as we do it now isnt all that old. The Puritans broke the tradtion in the 1600s. One could argue its not an overlay of previous pagan traditon but one started post Puritan England..Also most Christians through history wouldnt recognise our current commercial orgy with the Christ Mass as they understood it, neither would any of the other traditions you refer to.
What we do no now is our tradtion, derived form the Christ Mass, held at a time of year when people in Northern hemisphere Europe needed cheering up. Some other cultures/religions have done things at the same time of year, some havent, some do now, some dont, so what.
“Was it politics or peity ?”
Depending on which instution of the Christ Mass you are talking about [ different rites hold Christ Mass at varying times], i suggest it was just clever and tactfull and realistic. Europe in the depths of winter is just cold wet and unpleasant and prior to modern infrastructure there was pretty much nothing to do and less opportunity to do it.
Stop complaining and have a happy holiday.
Jeremy wrote:
“In our western cultural tradition Dec 25 is Christmas Day, yes it is an “official date” rather than the actual date just like “Queens Birthday”. We all know Jesus wasnt actually born on this date, so what.”
So why call it Christmas ? Why the cultural imperialism ? The pseudo-persecution cult of Christians at this time of year is pitiful whereas in fact they’ve overwritten an older tradition and insist that everyone follows their path at tis time of year.
“Previous times and other cultures have and have not had celebrations at this time of year, again so what, what does it matter, is it relevant?”
Yes, because Christians insist that their faith is the fount of every bit of morality and tradition – it isn’t.
“I guess you dont have to take the holiday if you dont want to”
and there you go. It’s not YOUR holiday to give or take away.
“you certainly are not obliged to wish Jesus happy birthday”
I don’t, but alot of very polite middle class decent Christians are more insistant that I do.
“I would be a little suprised to find that your family had preserved an ancient pagan tradition for the last 1600 years but i could be wrong. ”
Maybe if we’d hijacked an earlier tradition and used force to persuade people we could have done just that too.
“Also most Christians through history wouldnt recognise our current commercial orgy with the Christ Mass as they understood it, neither would any of the other traditions you refer to.”
This would be the cultural imperialism of Christianity again. What we’re seeing is a return to the older tradition.
“This would be the cultural imperialism of Christianity again. What we’re seeing is a return to the older tradition.”
Are you seriously suggesting that any part of what is now known as Christmas in any way is a return to some “older ” tradition? That older traditions indulged in a commercial orgy?
Furthermore you would have to establish that these “older” traditions have any meaningful cultural links to our current society not just a concurrence of the date.
Also are you suggesting that you would have any reason to have a holiday at this time if it wasnt for Christmas? are you an adherent of a sun cult?
“So why call it Christmas ? Why the cultural imperialism ? The pseudo-persecution cult of Christians at this time of year is pitiful whereas in fact they’ve overwritten an older tradition and insist that everyone follows their path at tis time of year”
Because this holiday in this culture is just that a Christ Mass, ie a christian Holy Day.
However this is a free and democratic country, you are free to lobby for the removal of this holiday from the statute books.There is certainly no obligation for non-christians to recognise it as a Holy Day. You are equally free to to promote and lobby for state recognition of some day that is important to you, i wont be offended.
The question remains , why are you offended?
Echoing Glenn, this post is not an attempt to explain all Christmas traditions, it is limited to the an explanation of the origin of Saint Nicholas, aka, Santa Claus.
So is it right to tell children that Santa exists, in effect to tell them an ongoing lie until they find out for themselves that it’s a lie?
I don’t recall saying it was,
Nor do I recall making any claims about Dec 25, or there being no pagan ceremonies prior to this and so on. As Glenn said I was simply explaining the historical origins of Santa, that is St Nicholas of Myra, and the functions the hagiography around him played.
Paul Baird wrote
“The reference to Santa as an icon is apt because the original Santa, Nicholas of Myra”
Erm, so there was no earlier gift giver at this time of year ?
Gosh, these Christians invented every tradition. 🙂
This pretty evidently does not follow, I said Nicholas of Myra was the original historical person behind santa. How does this show there was no earlier gift givers in any other tradition.
Of course if you interpret what I said really uncharitably you might get this conclusion.
“So is it right to tell children that Santa exists, in effect to tell them an ongoing lie until they find out for themselves that it’s a lie?”
“I don’t recall saying it was”
—
No, you didn’t. I’m wondering if you have an opinion about this though. Some would argue philosophically that it’s wrong to tell the Santa lie (e.g. Edward Feser).
Not Ed, I am inclined to think that our duties regarding lying differs with children to some extent, in that paternalistic lies might be justified with children, but thats a different context here.
As to lies in this context, I am opposed to lying to children lies about santa. However, this does not mean one can’t play a of “game with them” in which santa is used, where the kids understand its a kind of game. Just as children might play star wars and in the game pretend to be Luke Skywalker and so on. In this context everyone knows its a kind of game you play and no one is seriously suggesting that in reality so and so is Luke skywalker.
Matt wrote:
“Of course if you interpret what I said really uncharitably you might get this conclusion.”
I don’t think that I was being uncharitable at all. It seems like a fair reading to me.
Jeremy wrote:
“Also are you suggesting that you would have any reason to have a holiday at this time if it wasnt for Christmas? are you an adherent of a sun cult?”
Erm there is that mid-winter solstice thing. Happens every year around this time. It marks the shortest day sort of thing. People might notice it and might want to mark it with a day off perhaps ? Maybe bake a cake or have a party ? Perhaps even continue partying until the turn of the calendar ? Mind you, I think we pretty much do that already. 🙂
“Because this holiday in this culture is just that a Christ Mass, ie a christian Holy Day.”
I think you’ll find that ‘Christmas’ is the generic term for the festive season, which Christians interpret as their specific term for a holy day although some Christians beg to differ. David Robertson likes to go by the name ‘weeflea’ and wrote The Dawkins Letters.
I call it Christmas and I celebrate Christmas, but I don’t think you’d recognise my Christmas as being the same as yours.
Paul –
“I think you’ll find that ‘Christmas’ is the generic term for the festive season, which Christians interpret as their specific term for a holy day”
Um, what? In an otherwise reasonable comment you suggest that Christmas is not a Christian term but just a generic word that Christians have adopted? Good grief….
Just do some checking:
SOURCE
Glenn wrote:
“Um, what? In an otherwise reasonable comment you suggest that Christmas is not a Christian term but just a generic word that Christians have adopted?”
No, Glenn, it’s become generic 🙂
That’s why saying “Merry Christmas” to people is not some unconscious admission that one is secretly a Christian, whatever Christians might wishfully think.
The same is true for Easter.
@Paul
Yes it may well have become generic, though this doesnt change its origins. Neither does it change the fact that it is part of our culture at this time specifically because of its christian origins.
Ancient sun cults do not have anything like the significant contribution to our culture that christianity has and still does.
Equally i find your mentioning them somewhat dishonest, since i would have thought that on atheism you wouldnt recognise the sun as god anymore than it recognises Yahweh.
Furthermore, St Nicholas day is on the 21st Dec, summer solstice on the 22nd Dec, and Christmas on the 25th Dec. If any pagan sun worshippers wish to celebrate solstice as a publically recognised holy day they are free to lobby the govt and seek public support. If atheist do not want 25th Dec legally recognised as a Christian Holy Day and therefore a public holiday they too are free to lobby for this. To be consistant they will need to provide a good reason as to why there should be a state sanctioned day off at this time of year.
I suggest you get over your dislike of Dec 25th as a Christian based holiday and instead be thankful you were born into a culture and time that accepts holidays etc as applicable to the masses, not just the privileged few.
“That’s why saying “Merry Christmas” to people is not some unconscious admission that one is secretly a Christian, whatever Christians might wishfully think.”
I have never met a Christian who thinks this wishfully or not.
OK Paul – So it’s not a generic term that Christians interpret as a Christian word. It’s a Christian word that some people interpret as generic. You had it backwards.
Glenn wrote:
“OK Paul – So it’s not a generic term that Christians interpret as a Christian word. It’s a Christian word that some people interpret as generic. You had it backwards.”
No, I think it’s a bit more open to discussion than that. Christians overlaid their ‘Christmas’ on top of whatever mid-winter celebration was around before they turned up.
It’s like saying that hoovering the carpets is different from vaccuuming the carpets. It isn’t, it’s just that some householders insist that what one is doing is ‘hoovering’ and get really upset at people who say that they are ‘dysoning’ the carpets.
Personally, I hoover and vaccuum with my Dyson.
Hope that helps.
@Paul
I think your position is ridiculous.
History travels through time in one direction only.
All our current laws, customs, populations, govts, etc replace what has gone before, how far do you want to regress?
What existed before the midwinter celebrations you claim Christianity displaced and what existed before that.
What about equatorial cultures who didnt have winter at all, or what of ancient summer solstice traditions here in the southern hemisphere. Should we reinstitute some Mayan or Aztec human sacrifices?
I dont know where you come from but maybe you should go back to your ancestral homeland and take your contemporary western cultural imperialism with you. Keep your materialistic money centred culture and leave us in peace and harmony with nature.
If you dont want to celebrate Christ Mass you dont have to, its that simple. Get over it.
“Christians overlaid their ‘Christmas’ on top of whatever mid-winter celebration was around before they turned up”
Paul – you and I were talking about the word Christmas, which has solely Christian origins.
Jeremy wrote:
“What existed before the midwinter celebrations you claim Christianity displaced and what existed before that.”
You’re missing the point – Christians insist that the festival we celebrate at this time of year is called Christmas, and furthermore that we should ALL celebrate the true meaning of Christmas, which is exclusively Christian. The fact that Christmas was placed where it is in the calendar was a very deliberate work of overwriting earlier competing festivals and beliefs is important.
Personally I couldn’t care less what it’s called, but I do care that Christians insist the term Christmas has a particular meaning and it’s use implies particular beliefs, even of those who do not follow the Christian faith.
Glenn wrote:
“Paul – you and I were talking about the word Christmas, which has solely Christian origins.”
and it is now generic in it’s meaning. Although there is probably a good historic argument that for non-Christians it was always generic.
“The fact that Christmas was placed where it is in the calendar was a very deliberate work of overwriting earlier competing festivals and beliefs is important.”
Sorry but rhubarb.
This may have been important in the Northern Hemishere in the old Roman Empire around 400AD it may even have still been important in some parts of norther europe in the late 800s but those competing festivals and beliefs have no significant connection to our culture here and now.
The true meaning of Christmas [Christ Mass] is exclusively christian, no other religions celebrate a Christ Mass.
Christmas as a state sanctioned public holiday is an historically very recent phenomenom that has not occurred throughout most of history.
As i have said before this is a democracy , you are free to lobby for a change in the legal status of Christmas, but if i was you i would get over this petty objection and enjoy living in a time and culture that provides holidays in law.
Jeremy wrote:
“Sorry but rhubarb.”
Well that’s me rebutted. 🙂
Yo Paul
If only i had known it would be so easy , just think of all the typing it would have saved 🙂
[…] POSTS: Contra Mundum: Is God a 21st Century Western Liberal? Contra Mundum: In Defence of Santa Contra Mundum: The Number of the Beast Contra Mundum: Pluralism and Being Right Contra Mundum: […]
[…] Teachings on Abuse, Divorce and Remarriage Contra Mundum: Is God a 21st Century Western Liberal? Contra Mundum: In Defence of Santa Contra Mundum: The Number of the Beast Contra Mundum: Pluralism and Being Right Contra Mundum: […]
[…] Teachings on Abuse, Divorce and Remarriage Contra Mundum: Is God a 21st Century Western Liberal? Contra Mundum: In Defence of Santa Contra Mundum: The Number of the Beast Contra Mundum: Pluralism and Being Right Contra Mundum: […]