Happy Holidays from a Merry Christian
December 12th, 2005 | by Scott |I could let it bother me that some have resorted to the use of “Happy Holidays” rather than “Merry Christmas.”
I could let it bother me that corporations don’t automatically rush to worship the way I do or embrace the same ideals that I hold dear.
And I do understand why so many Christians are upset.
But this Christmas season there is so much more for me to be bothered by. Each Sunday I assemble with my brothers and sisters to commemorate the death, burial and resurrection of my Lord and Savior and so many in this world fail to even notice.
No, many people ignore Jesus each and every day. Why should one more day make that much of a difference?
And besides, that is their right, the benefit of being a free moral agent. They have the right to choose to follow Jesus or whomever they deem worthy of their devotion.
How would it be this Christmas (or holiday) season if, rather than boycotting Target or Wal-Mart, we as Christians embodied the reason for this season?
What if we were the incarnation of the Christ child in the hearts and lives of people?
What if we gave more and expected less?
What if we adopted families that were without this Christmas and infused them with the hope of salvation and the joy of Christmas fellowship?
What if we stopped criticizing the poor for failing to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and offered them a hand?
What if we spent less time spewing rhetoric and more time whispering grace?
What if we wept over EVERY life lost in war, not just the ones who wear our uniforms?
What if reached out in love to the hungry, the poor, the homosexual, those different from us and offered them hope, peace and reconciliation?
What if WE were Jesus in America?
What if we, as Christians, lived our lives in such a way that it would be impossible for anyone to deny the importance of Christmas?
What if we gave them infinite reasons to appreciate Jesus by the way we live our lives?
What if we were known as loving, grace-filled, tolerant souls who truly care about others, willing to meet them where they are and develop relationships with them that embody the person of Jesus?
You see, Jesus came to be God with us. He came into a sin-filled world to be hope and light, salt and solace. He did not come clutching a protest sign.
He did not come to organize a boycott.
He was not incarnate in efforts to incite.
He was not born as a talk-show host but as a child, innocent, meek and mild.
He did not come to instigate.
No, He came to change lives.
And He calls us to do the same.
Not through coercion. Not through crying “persecution” anytime someone disagrees with us or fails to look at things through evangelical eyes.
He calls us to go. Love our enemies, pray for those who “persecute” us.
Let’s make the reason for the season undeniable.
Understand this, it is not the world’s responsibility to come to our point of view on matters such as this.
It is our responsibility to take to the world the hope that is bound in Christmas.
You want Christmas acknowledge and embraced?
Be as Christ.
20 Responses to “Happy Holidays from a Merry Christian”
By Doug Freeman on Dec 12, 2005 | Reply
Excellent, well written and to the point. You do a great job of getting our attention. Keep it up and we love you all.
By Chris Campbell on Dec 13, 2005 | Reply
Preach it, brother! And I will NEVER boycott Wal-Mart!!!
By Tracy on Dec 13, 2005 | Reply
I don’t think I will ever boycott Walmart, but I would like to not feel guilty for shopping there.
By MamaQ on Dec 13, 2005 | Reply
OK, for real, I posted a reponse to this like six hours ago and it ain’t here. Sigh.
Anyway, I loved this. Well said, rational and coming from a responsible, thoughtful place. My only quibble is that I like to think Christ did come to instigate, but not in the sense of civil unrest. I think he was trying to instigate the examination of conscience, each person’s individual reckoning with God.
Oh, and Wal-Mart should be destroyed.
By Doug Freeman on Dec 13, 2005 | Reply
If you hate Wal-Mart that much then i suggest you stop shopping there. Destroying them is not the answer.
By George on Dec 13, 2005 | Reply
Scott,
Well said and I am so impressed at your ability to express thought that have plagued my Christian experience. So much of my early Church of Christ experience was so exclusive and damning that I have little regard for the denomination today. I have studied extensively the debates of the 1830’s and forward and regret the divisions that resulted from such. In your short message you take it all back to the teachings of Jesus. Thank you for that and I embrace your thoughts.
George
By George on Dec 13, 2005 | Reply
Well, I saw a typo and was wanting to correct it but cannot figure out how! You need to know that Ashley and Julia have sent this post to many people. Again, thank you for your wisdom.
By George on Dec 13, 2005 | Reply
Doug aka Dad,
I have to step in here for a moment to take up for MamaQ’s basic premise. I don’t feel destruction was her intent as much as a need for Wal-Mart to return to the core values upon which it was founded.
The Wal-Mart we knew that was founded by Sam Walton in Bentonville ceased to exist a number of years ago. Now we have a company that uses sweat shops aroungd the world, snubs U.S. trade laws and denies basic benefits to employees.
I will be more than happy to provide specific documentation.
I think a boycott of Wal-Mart is a good thing!
George
By MamaQ on Dec 13, 2005 | Reply
Doug,
I mean destroy them in the capitalistic sense, which is what they understand. Not in the villagers-with-torches sense. No, I don’t shop there.
By MamaQ on Dec 13, 2005 | Reply
And you know what, George, you make a good point. Thank you!
Wal-Mart itself seems to me the ultimate embodiment of all the negatives “Wal-Mart” now represents: The American dream turned into a soulless commercial enterprise. I can’t reconcile what I’ve heard about Sam Walton, his belief system and his desire to IMPROVE the lives of American consumers and worker with the company I see today.
And that’s just sad. So yeah, destroy Wal-Mart.
By scott on Dec 13, 2005 | Reply
Dude, I leave for a few hours and things get exciting. I admit I’m still up in the air on the Wal-Mart issue. I plan on watching the new documentary at some point.
George, I believe you are right. Wal-Mart today is a far cry from what it once was. But there is so much about corporate America that vexes me.
Thanks for the kind words. Pass it on to anyone who will be blessed by it.
Mama, do they have Wal-Marts in Jersey?
By Doug Freeman on Dec 13, 2005 | Reply
Oh; well, it looks like its going to be a Wal-Mart christmas. Millions of people are supporting them as their source of purchasing their goods. How many people would be out of work if no
Wal-Mart existed? We in Arkansas have benefitted greatly by being the state where it all begin, so i am a supporter of all the good they do regardless of how other people feel.
By scott on Dec 13, 2005 | Reply
Wal-Mart is where we buy most of our groceries.
By Lachen on Dec 14, 2005 | Reply
I love Wal Mart and I love Jesus. Not in that order.
I have to agree with the commenter who pointed out the Jesus DID come to instigate, confront, rabble rouse, and boldly proclaim the truth amidst so much distortion. He turned over tables in the temple and set the “righteous” on their ears. He changed EVERYTHING. Where there was missing the mark (sin) there was Jesus - standing against it. And managing to love those who sinned as he condemned their failures. It is that last little bit that trips up up so often and distracts us from the message of hope He brings to a lost and forsaken world.
That said, I think your post seeks to illustrate one of my favorite quotes from St. Francis of Assisi:
“Preach the Gospel. And if neccesary, use words.”
By scott on Dec 14, 2005 | Reply
Going back to Mama’s comment she is right Christ did come to instigate. But she also points out the important distinction I was trying to make. In the context of social and civil dissent, Christ was largely silent. He did cleanse the temple. He did incite the religious leaders of His day. Yet He did little to inflame the existing social structure.
Where we in the church often go so wrong is in the idea that Christ treated non-followers equally as he did the “religious.” He didn’t.
He was more patient with the unbeliever than the legalist. He did not condemn the sinner as much as embrace them offering hope.
By boycotting stores that say “Happy Holidays” aren’t we creating a legalistic litmus-test that fails to communicate love?
Jesus did not come to instigate that. So, in context, my original remark stands.
By Jason Bybee on Dec 14, 2005 | Reply
I understand completely what you’re saying about Jesus not coming to instigate dissent. Instigate something within the hearts of men, yes; instiage civil discord and boycotting, no way. Perhaps the better word is “incite”, which you used in your post. Jesus came to instigate a cosmic movement within humanity, not to incite a war of righteous indignation. Just my thoughts. Great post, by the way.
By Lachen on Dec 14, 2005 | Reply
This topic has been hard for me to escape in conversations both in “real” life and online. You too, or is it only here?
**”Where we in the church often go so wrong is in the idea that Christ treated non-followers equally as he did the “religious.” He didn’t. He was more patient with the unbeliever than the legalist. He did not condemn the sinner as much as embrace them offering hope.”**
Because the “legalists” claimed piety born of their own perfection in “earning” God’s favor above and beyond those they judged as beneath them, Christ condemned and challenged them. Rightfully.
But I take issue with the statement that Christ treated people differently - I don’t find that evidenced. Certainly, His words and actions are meted on individual basis, but Christs’ message, love, and treatment is unyeilding and unflavored for His audience.
**”By boycotting stores that say “Happy Holidays” aren’t we creating a legalistic litmus-test that fails to communicate love?”**
I do think it runs the risk of failing to communicate love. I don’t see the creation of either a litmus test or a legalistic endeavor.
There is a balance to be achieved. Christians must love our neighbors as ourselves while never participating or subsidizing the denial of Christ and Emmanuel - God With Us - in expression or truth, which I find at the heart of this boycott fuss for most of the proponents.
But in the meantime, I’ll stand up for Jesus till the end of my days.
I doubt malicious intent lies at the crux of the decision to deny CHRISTMAS from a store, school, public building, or park. Just the familiar PC brigade at work toward the ultimate goal of removing Christ from the public realm. And thereby restricting His presence in the lives of Americans.
As best they can, anyway. We all know who eventually wins this battle.
Do we genuinely mean, “Thy Kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven”? If we do, does not the act of doing business with any store that discourages acknowledge the birth of our Savior seem at the least, counterproducive, and at the worst, hypocritical?
For some, it does. And I wholeheartedly support their passion for the Christ, finding it sad for any fellow Christian to consider that passion legalism.
Scott, those of us who care about this societal trend differently that you are not legalists, but grace-filled and loving Christians with broken hearts for our Lord and the nation whose soul is hardening. I say this as one who is not personally Even as I am not personally participating in this boycott and am headed out to Target this afternoon. Need anything?
By scott on Dec 14, 2005 | Reply
Sure He afforded the same love and mercy to everyone regardless of who they were but His response to the woman at the well who was genuinely seeking was markedly different than his response to the money changers in the temple.
My initial point stands irregardless of our positions on discipleship: we must live our lives in such a way that people find the meaning of Christmas undeniable.
I guess we’ll just agree to disagree, right?
By Lachen on Dec 14, 2005 | Reply
I 100% totally agree with what you just wrote. God meets people where they ARE. And one of our biggest failings as Christians and the macro “church” is that we seem to require people to come to us, meet our standards BEFORE we mirror Christ.
Interesting little bit of warped reasoning that is…
By MamaQ on Dec 15, 2005 | Reply
Lachen, here’s where your mind and mine diverge — you wrote:
But beyond that, the two statments you make are NOT a cause and effect. Even if Christ WERE removed entirely from “public” life, that certainly does not restrict His presence in the lives of Americans — unless you consider Target part of your personal “life” space.
“…the ultimate goal of removing Christ from the public realm. And thereby restricting His presence in the lives of Americans.”
Beside the fact that I don’t believe there is some larger societal mission underway to “remove Christ from the public realm,” but you probably knew that.
Two cents from New Jersey.