Top 7 Myths about Christmas

All info per Jimmy Akin. Pay particular attention to the Christmas trees and pagan holiday myths.

It is unfortunate that Christmas--the commemoration of our Savior's birth--is marred by so much misinformation and misunderstanding. Too often our ideas about Christmas are influenced more by images from Christmas cards or even from sources hostile to Christianity. Here are seven ideas about Christmas which range from the unsubstantiated to the flat out false.

	Jesus Was Born in a Barn People often infer this from the fact that Luke 2:7 says that Mary laid the baby Jesus in a manger. In our culture we find mangers in stables or barns, and people make the inference from that. But at the time animals were often sheltered in caves, and there is a very strong tradition that dates at least to the 100s, that Jesus was born in a cave. Today the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem is built over such a cave, which is next to the one that the biblical scholar St. Jerome dwelt in during the 300s. In his writings, Jerome points to evidence that the cave under the Church of the Nativity was, in fact, where Jesus was born.
	There Were Three Wise Men The account of the wise men, or magi (who were not kings, by the way), is recorded in Matthew 2, but it does not say anywhere that there were three wise men. This number is probably inferred from the fact that three gifts are mentioned: gold, frankincense, and myrrh. But we really don't know much about the size or composition of the magi's caravan. The odds are that, for such rich and visiting dignitaries, the caravan was more than three people and, in addition to the magi, included quite a number of other people, including servants and guards.
	The Wise Men Arrived the Same Night Again, the images on Christmas cards haunt us by depicting the magi arriving on the night of Jesus' birth. We know that they associated the rising of the star of Bethlehem with Jesus' birth, and the trip from their distant homeland would have been too long to make in a single night. Matthew 2:10 records that by this point the holy family was living in a house (although it could have been a house combined with the grotto of the Nativity, for homes were often combined with caves). Most fundamentally, Matthew 2:16 indicates that Herod sought to kill all the boys two years old and under, based on the time he learned from the magi, so they may have showed up as much as two years later (although Herod may also have padded the figure just to be "safe").
	December 25th Can't Be the Birth of Christ Because Sheep Aren't Pastured in the Winter It is often argued that Jesus couldn't have been born December 25th because Luke 2:8 records that there were shepherds pasturing their flocks, and this doesn't happen in the area in winter. But it does. Bethlehem is below the snow line, sheep have fleece to keep them warm, and even today sheep are pastured in the Shepherds' Field near Bethlehem at this very time of year.
	Christmas Trees Are Forbidden by the Old Testament Some Fundamentalists argue that Jeremiah 10 condemns having Christmas trees as a pagan practice. This would be odd, since Jeremiah wrote centuries before the birth of Christ and thus before the celebration of Christmas. A careful reading of the passage, though, shows that Jeremiah isn't talking about ornamented holiday trees at all. He's talking about idols. That's why he points out that after a tree is cut down and a workman goes to work on it that it cannot speak, that it cannot move on its own and must be carried, that we should not be afraid of it, and that it has power to do neither evil or good to us. Jeremiah is pointing out the limitations of dead idols, not Christmas trees.
	Christmas Is Based on a Pagan Holiday Sometimes Fundamentalists, secularists, and pagans argue that Christmas is just a pagan holiday that has been "baptized" by the Church. Accounts differ as to which one. Sometimes it is claimed that Christmas is based on Saturnalia or the birth of Sol Invictus ("the unconquerable sun"). But Saturnalia wasn't celebrated on December 25th. It ran from December 17th to the 23rd. It was over and done with before the 25th. We do have records that suggest some pagans celebrated the birth of Sol Invictus on December 25th, but the first such record dates from the year A.D. 354 (on what is known as the Calendar of Filocalus or the Chronology of 354). The trouble is, even this source isn't fully explicit. It just says that December 25 was celebrated as the Natalis Invicti or the "Birthday of the Unconquerable One," without saying who that is. We also know that some Christians had been identifying December 25th as Jesus' birthday at least a century and a half before this time. Around A.D. 206, St. Hippolytus of Rome wrote in his Commentary on Daniel that: "The first coming of our Lord, that in the flesh, in which he was born at Bethlehem, took place eight days before the kalends of January." In ancient Roman time reckoning, the kalends was the first day of the month, and if you count back eight days from January 1, you arrive at December 25. It's true that we don't know for sure when Jesus was born, and early Christian writers proposed a variety of dates for his birth, including December 25th.  But what is remarkable, in light of modern claims, is that when they write about Christ's birth they never say things like, "Let's schedule his birthday here so that we can convert a bunch of pagans" or "Let's put it here so that we can subvert this pagan holiday." When they propose dates for his birth, they use arguments to support their view, and they honestly believe that he was born on the dates they propose.
	It Would Matter If Christmas Were Connected with a Pagan Holiday Even if early Christians had scheduled the commemoration of Christ's birth to subvert a pagan holiday, so what? How does that taint the celebration of Christmas today--by people who have never even heard of these pagan holidays? Aren't they honestly celebrating Christ's birth, regardless of the precise day on which it happened? Further, isn't subverting a pagan holiday a good thing? Don't many Protestant groups celebrate October 31 not as Halloween (which they wrongly perceive as pagan) but as "Reformation Day" or "Harvest Festival"? Helping people wean themselves off of pagan practices by providing a wholesome, alternative celebration would seem to be a good thing rather than a bad thing. Still, there's no evidence that this is what early Christians were doing with Christmas, and in fact the evidence is against it.

English school bans 13 year old from wearing crucifix

Another example of religious discrimination against Catholics while allowing other religions to do as they wish.

See the full article here.

Teachers demanded Samantha Devine remove her chain and tiny crucifix despite allowing Muslim and Sikh pupils to wear symbols of their religion.
Her family have vowed to fight the decision "all the way" claiming it discriminates against Christians.

The school apparently allows people of other faiths to wear religious items and even lets kids get away with non-religious items.

In the latest clash, 13-year-old Samantha was left in tears after her form teacher told her she must remove her tiny half-inch crucifix and chain.
But her furious family yesterday pointed out the school - Robert Napier in Gillingham, Kent - allows Muslim pupils to wear headscarves and Sikh students to come to lessons with turbans and bangles.
Samantha even claims staff routinely fail to crack down on youngsters wearing non-religious jewelery, including large necklaces and earrings.

It seems a double standard is in place.

The 13-year-old, who wants to be a vet and has been getting A and B grades in her exams, added: "Other religions can show their beliefs by wearing bracelets or turbans, so why can I not wear a cross to show my devotion to God?

But Mr Devine said: "I have seen other religous pupils at the school who are not part of the Christian fath, but they are allowed to wear their religious garments and symbols without being questioned.
"So why should my daughter be told to remove a cross which means a lot to her from around her neck?"
"People in this country are too scared to say anything against other faiths because they don't want to be accused of discrimination. But it's acceptable to discriminate against Catholics.

The Church, Gender Roles, and Feminism

Many people will attack the Church on the idea that she is an archaic and out-dated old relic of a time-gone-by whose chief offense is being anti-woman. This charge is far from the truth. It's not like we're advocating the requirement of wearing veils or wives walking ten paces behind their husbands or not speaking unless spoken to! If the Church is so anti-woman, then why is Mary so highly venerated as first among saints? The Church celebrates women frequently. The problem that opponents of the Church have is that they aren't looking at women the same way.


Let's face it. Women and men are different. God created Man and Woman, separate and distinct, but both human and both capable of the love and salvation of Christ. Some of these differences are (obviously) physiological, some emotional and mental. But those differences lend themselves to complementariness! What one lacks the other has in spades. Granted there is a wide spectrum and much overlap, but you get the point. Someone has to harvest the wheat and someone has to thresh it or no one's going to eat.

In the second creation narrative, through the symbolism of the woman's creation from the man's rib, Scripture shows that humanity is not complete until woman is created (cf Gen 2:18-24). . . . . "Created together, man and woman are willed by God one for the other" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 371). Woman's presentation as a "help similar to him" (Gen 2:18) does not mean that woman is man's servant — "help" does not equal "servant"; the Psalmist says to God: "You are my help" (Ps 70:6; cf 115:9-11; 118:7; 146:5). Rather, the expression means that woman is worthy of collaborating with man because she is his perfect correspondence. Woman is another type of "I" in a common humanity, constituted in perfect equality of dignity by man and woman. — Pope John Paul II, General Audience, "Woman as Masterpiece of God's Creation," November 24, 1999

The Church celebrates femininity. John Paul II wrote much about it (see in particular Evangelium Vitae). Radical Feminists celebrate women being masculine. See the difference? Radical Feminists want women and men to be the same, and in so doing, deride what is feminine. Now I'm not talking about social justice here. Obviously equal pay for equal work and suffrage and the like are commendable and necessary. But this radical feminism scoffs at child-birth, breastfeeding, stay-at-home moms, being a loving wife, modesty, sexual fidelity, etc.

So who is really in favor of femininity? Sociologically making women into men hurts women. It objectifies them. The sexual revolution has done more to hurt women than any other movement in civilized society before it because it essentially advocates the objectification of women into sexual objects instead of people who are mothers and daughters who deserve to be respected and whose image and dignity protected.

In transforming the culture so that it supports life, women occupy a place, in thought and action, which is unique and decisive. It depends on them to promote a ‘new feminism’ which rejects the temptation of imitating models of ‘male domination’, in order to acknowledge and affirm the true genius of women in every aspect of the life of society, and overcome all discrimination, violence and exploitation. — Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae, par. 99 (1997)

Bringing Up Geeks

This is a great little book being featured in some women's groups lately. It gives good advice to raising your kids to be polite, respectful, cooperative, engaged, and not easily distracted by today's secular appeal. Fantastic commentary on the sexualization of girls and the lure of technology and its effect of turning kids off to interaction with family and others. One negative is that the author tends to draw predominately from her own experience and children which gives the reader a sense of "this lady's kids are perfect and annoying." However, the valuable (if somewhat obvious) information contained within more than makes up for any distraction.

You can purchase the book here at the Vernacular Catholic store.

President Obama Prayed In School

I found it interesting that President Obama ended his speech to American students today with "God bless you" and "God bless America."
I thought we had a separation of Church and State.
I thought prayer wasn't allowed in public school.
Uh-oh! :)

Legal Religious Discrimination

According to this article from the Associated Press, Oregon has a law that forbids public school teachers from wearing religious clothing. A law that was backed by the Ku Klux Klan to keep Catholics out of schools.

Oregon's law, originally aimed at priest collars and nun habits, survived a legal challenge in the 1980s by a Sikh convert who wanted to wear her turban in the classroom and was recently upheld by the state's Legislature.

Now, Oregon is supposed to be all liberal and progressive, but apparently not when it comes to the religious. Oh, that's right, progressive means getting rid of that old out-dated belief in God. Nonetheless, Gov. Kulongoski did sign the Workplace Religious Freedom Act in July that allows workers to wear religious clothing on the job. So what gives? Well, bet you can guess who is behind this:

the did law did not change the ban for teachers enacted in the 1920s, after that portion was opposed by the Oregon chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union on the grounds that impressionable children should not feel indoctrinated by their teachers.

Congratulations, ACLU, you agree with the KKK! Apparently the ACLU is only interested in protecting the civil liberties of certain Americans in this case, namely the irreligious. And what liberty is that, exactly? The liberty to not look at the way someone dresses?

Mona Elgindy, a Muslim law student at Loyola University in Chicago (A Jesuit Catholic school) and a former teacher, wrote a paper on the issue of religious clothing laws. She points out that it's not the students or parents that invoke the laws but that "the recent legal history has been created by teachers trying to keep their jobs after administrators confronted them."

Rajdeep Singh Jolly, legal director for the Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund, has asked the Justice Department to investigate. He suggests "the best way to deal with any problem involving religion in classrooms is to discipline teachers if they try to proselytize students or advocate favoring a particular religion, not for the way they dress."

"I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect that teachers will not talk about their religion in the classroom," Jolly said.

But when it comes to a Sikh turban or other clothing, he asked: "Why should I have to surrender something that is such an integral part of my life in order to pursue a career? It just doesn't make sense."

But that's exactly what proponents of these laws want the religious to do - give up their religious beliefs for secularism.

Penn and Teller Talk Bullsh*t

Penn and Teller's program, Bullsh*t, on Showtime (owned by CBS), spent its season finale blatantly spewing ignorance, bigotry, and outright lies about the Catholic Church. Catholic League president Bill Donohue has this to say:

Go to our website at www.catholicleague.org and click on the Penn & Teller video. There you will be able to see in its entirety the vile August 27 episode of their Showtime program. The mass mailing of the DVD to religious and lay leaders across the United States begins today and will continue until completed.

It is important that CBS, which owns Showtime, hears from you about this unprecedented attack. I spoke to a high-ranking CBS official on Monday about this, and though he was genuinely concerned and very professional in his response, it is still important that all CBS officials be sent the message: Enough is Enough—show Penn & Teller the gate.

Contact CBS rep Nancy Tellem at nancy.tellem@tvc.cbs.com.

-Or-

Mr. Leslie Moonves

Chairman of CBS

7800 Beverly Blvd., Rm. 23

Los Angeles, CA 90036-2112

Just imagine what would happen in the media and in the public if this were any group other than Catholics.

You Have To Be A Real Man If You Want To Become A Priest

The quote from the title is by John Cardinal O'Connor, and he couldn't be more right. In today's society it seems that the definition of what a man is or should be is in direct conflict with what God wants men to be. Real men know sacrifice and humility and devotion and kindness and respect. This is the year of the priest. Let's pray for our priests and pray for our young men to discern their vocation, to listen for the call, and answer it if it comes.
Here's a great video for nypriest.com created by Grassroots Films (the company behind the fantastic Fishers Of Men).

A Word on Senator Kennedy and American Catholics

We all struggle with sin. The difference is when someone consistently and obstinately, with a full consent of the will, advocates those things that are directly contradictory to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. Not only that, but when one uses one's status in society to advocate that which is in direct opposition to the Church's message. Many American Catholics find themselves in a situation similar to Senator Kennedy, namely that they do not believe all that the Church teaches. Let me be the first to say "that's okay" on some things. But there are other things that cannot, will not, and should not change. They're just not up for discussion because they are inherently evil and the Bride of Christ just isn't into Evil.

Abortion and embryonic stem-cell research are, of course, the front runners in the list of evils I'm talking about here. This isn't about a woman's right or privacy. This is about killing. Whether you think women should be priests or nuns should wear habits or the priest should face versus populum are not issues of life and death. None of the excuses that "pro-choice" advocates give for allowing abortion trump the fact that an innocent human being dies in the process (and a second human being is put in danger).

The most tragic thing about Senator Kennedy's death is not the grief of his loved ones at his passing but the fact that he never publicly denounced his previous positions on abortion and embryonic stem-cell research. Thousands of American Catholics can point to him, and others like him in positions of power who call themselves Catholics and advocate otherwise, as a justification for their own beliefs. This is a great disservice not only to the Church but to those individuals who use pro-choice Catholic politicians to prop up their own misguided opinions.

Kennedy advocated for signature Catholic causes, such as help for the poor, health care and immigration reform, and opposition to the Iraq war. Working at social justice is very admirable but is ultimately not enough. In these issues he did much good but left much to be desired in his work for the justice of the weakest and most innocent among us. So let us pray for this man, let us pray for each other and for the Church, but we should not exalt him like some modern-day martyr. Let us grieve for the pain his family must be feeling, but most importantly let us use his death as a talking point on these contradictions between his Faith and his politics to illustrate why his politics were wrong. Let us hope that on his death-bed he remembered his words from 1971 (before Roe V. Wade and before his political party was influenced more by NARAL and "Feminist" organizations instead of pro-life Southerners and pro-life Catholics) in his letter to Catholic League member Tom Dennelly:

While the deep concern of a woman bearing an unwanted child merits consideration and sympathy, it is my personal feeling that the legalization of abortion on demand is not in accordance with the value which our civilization places on human life. Wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which must be recognized—the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grow old.

...[O]nce life has begun, no matter at what stage of growth, it is my belief that termination should not be decided merely by desire.

When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception.

Catholic Church's Woes In Asia

Looks like Asia is actually having similar issues as America. Most notably inter-faith marriages, the secularization of society, fewer children, and materialistic tendencies.

MANILA (AFP) – Mixed marriages, dwindling entrants to the priesthood and violence against its members are among problems facing the Catholic church in Asia, bishops said at a conference here Saturday.

Inter-religious marriages have helped the number of Catholics to fall even further, Philippine Archbishop Orlando Quevedo told a meeting of the Federation of Asian Bishops Conferences (FABC) being held Manila this weekend.

Catholics who marry outside the church in countries where they were part of a minority often converted to their spouse's religion, said Quevedo, secretary-general of the FABC.

Many bishops also said there was difficulty attracting young men to the priesthood because of poverty and the secularisation of society.

Poverty meant that many parents found it "a big sacrifice to give up their young son" to a seminary, Pakistani Archbishop John Saldanha said.

"More girls are joining the convents now than the boys entering the seminaries," he added.

"The number of vocations is going down. The Christian families have fewer children and the reason is secularisation of the society," Cardinal Oswald Gracias of India said.

Hong Kong Bishop John Tong said "materialistic tendencies" were also an obstacle, but remarked that there had been an increase in the territory's seminarians, to 15 this year from 10 last year.

Sources who asked not to be identified also said that the bishops discussed the issue of Asian governments who did not do enough to protect Christian minorities under attack in their countries.

Quevedo said the FABC was preparing a document that "will mention endemic corruption in countries in Asia, not just the Philippines but corruption in most of the governments of Asia."

The FABC represents dioceses from across Asia, including Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Korea, Laos, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Myanmar, Pakistan, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam.

Let's not forget the outright hostility that many Asian governments hold towards Christianity in general and Catholicism specifically. Attacks in these countries don't just come from non-Christian citizens, it comes from the State itself. Whether the atheistic government of China or the blasphemy laws in Pakistan.

Original link here.