The History of Christmas in America

An Ancient Holiday

The middle of winter has long been a time of celebration around the world. Centuries before the arrival of the man called Jesus, early Europeans celebrated light and birth in the darkest days of winter. Many peoples rejoiced during the winter solstice, when the worst of the winter was behind them and they could look forward to longer days and extended hours of sunlight.

In Scandinavia, the Norse celebrated Yule from December 21, the winter solstice, through January. In recognition of the return of the sun, fathers and sons would bring home large logs, which they would set on fire. The people would feast until the log burned out, which could take as many as 12 days. The Norse believed that each spark from the fire represented a new pig or calf that would be born during the coming year.

The end of December was a perfect time for celebration in most areas of Europe. At that time of year, most cattle were slaughtered so they would not have to be fed during the winter. For many, it was the only time of year when they had a supply of fresh meat. In addition, most wine and beer made during the year was finally fermented and ready for drinking.

In Germany, people honored the pagan god Oden during the mid-winter holiday. Germans were terrified of Oden, as they believed he made nocturnal flights through the sky to observe his people, and then decide who would prosper or perish. Because of his presence, many people chose to stay inside.

In Rome, where winters were not as harsh as those in the far north, Saturnalia—a holiday in honor of Saturn, the god of agriculture—was celebrated. Beginning in the week leading up to the winter solstice and continuing for a full month, Saturnalia was a hedonistic time, when food and drink were plentiful and the normal Roman social order was turned upside down. For a month, slaves would become masters. Peasants were in command of the city. Business and schools were closed so that everyone could join in the fun.

Also around the time of the winter solstice, Romans observed Juvenalia, a feast honoring the children of Rome. In addition, members of the upper classes often celebrated the birthday of Mithra, the god of the unconquerable sun, on December 25. It was believed that Mithra, an infant god, was born of a rock. For some Romans, Mithra's birthday was the most sacred day of the year.

In the early years of Christianity, Easter was the main holiday; the birth of Jesus was not celebrated. In the fourth century, church officials decided to institute the birth of Jesus as a holiday. Unfortunately, the Bible does not mention date for his birth (a fact Puritans later pointed out in order to deny the legitimacy of the celebration). Although some evidence suggests that his birth may have occurred in the spring (why would shepherds be herding in the middle of winter?), Pope Julius I chose December 25. It is commonly believed that the church chose this date in an effort to adopt and absorb the traditions of the pagan Saturnalia festival. First called the Feast of the Nativity, the custom spread to Egypt by 432 and to England by the end of the sixth century. By the end of the eighth century, the celebration of Christmas had spread all the way to Scandinavia. Today, in the Greek and Russian orthodox churches, Christmas is celebrated 13 days after the 25th, which is also referred to as the Epiphany or Three Kings Day. This is the day it is believed that the three wise men finally found Jesus in the manger.

By holding Christmas at the same time as traditional winter solstice festivals, church leaders increased the chances that Christmas would be popularly embraced, but gave up the ability to dictate how it was celebrated. By the Middle Ages, Christianity had, for the most part, replaced pagan religion. On Christmas, believers attended church, then celebrated raucously in a drunken, carnival-like atmosphere similar to today's Mardi Gras. Each year, a beggar or student would be crowned the "lord of misrule" and eager celebrants played the part of his subjects. The poor would go to the houses of the rich and demand their best food and drink. If owners failed to comply, their visitors would most likely terrorize them with mischief. Christmas became the time of year when the upper classes could repay their real or imagined "debt" to society by entertaining less fortunate citizens.

In the early 17th century, a wave of religious reform changed the way Christmas was celebrated in Europe. When Oliver Cromwell and his Puritan forces took over England in 1645, they vowed to rid England of decadence and, as part of their effort, cancelled Christmas. By popular demand, Charles II was restored to the throne and, with him, came the return of the popular holiday.

The pilgrims, English separatists that came to America in 1620, were even more orthodox in their Puritan beliefs than Cromwell. As a result, Christmas was not a holiday in early America. From 1659 to 1681, the celebration of Christmas was actually outlawed in Boston. Anyone exhibiting the Christmas spirit was fined five shillings. By contrast, in the Jamestown settlement, Captain John Smith reported that Christmas was enjoyed by all and passed without incident.

After the American Revolution, English customs fell out of favor, including Christmas. In fact, Congress was in session on December 25, 1789, the first Christmas under America's new constitution. Christmas wasn't declared a federal holiday until June 26, 1870.

It wasn't until the 19th century that Americans began to embrace Christmas. Americans re-invented Christmas, and changed it from a raucous carnival holiday into a family-centered day of peace and nostalgia. But what about the 1800s peaked American interest in the holiday?

The early 19th century was a period of class conflict and turmoil. During this time, unemployment was high and gang rioting by the disenchanted classes often occurred during the Christmas season. In 1828, the New York city council instituted the city's first police force in response to a Christmas riot. This catalyzed certain members of the upper classes to begin to change the way Christmas was celebrated in America.

In 1819, best-selling author Washington Irving wrote The Sketchbook of Geoffrey Crayon, gent., a series of stories about the celebration of Christmas in an English manor house. The sketches feature a squire who invited the peasants into his home for the holiday. In contrast to the problems faced in American society, the two groups mingled effortlessly. In Irving's mind, Christmas should be a peaceful, warm-hearted holiday bringing groups together across lines of wealth or social status. Irving's fictitious celebrants enjoyed "ancient customs," including the crowning of a Lord of Misrule. Irving's book, however, was not based on any holiday celebration he had attended – in fact, many historians say that Irving's account actually "invented" tradition by implying that it described the true customs of the season.

Also around this time, English author Charles Dickens created the classic holiday tale, A Christmas Carol. The story's message-the importance of charity and good will towards all humankind-struck a powerful chord in the United States and England and showed members of Victorian society the benefits of celebrating the holiday.

The family was also becoming less disciplined and more sensitive to the emotional needs of children during the early 1800s. Christmas provided families with a day when they could lavish attention-and gifts-on their children without appearing to "spoil" them.

As Americans began to embrace Christmas as a perfect family holiday, old customs were unearthed. People looked toward recent immigrants and Catholic and Episcopalian churches to see how the day should be celebrated. In the next 100 years, Americans built a Christmas tradition all their own that included pieces of many other customs, including decorating trees, sending holiday cards, and gift-giving.

Although most families quickly bought into the idea that they were celebrating Christmas how it had been done for centuries, Americans had really re-invented a holiday to fill the cultural needs of a growing nation.

First of all, it is ODIN not ODEN. Secondly, the honoring of Odin was a mid summer celebration and not a mid-winter celebration, and this nonsense about nocturnal flights to observe people and deciding who would prosper or perish is baloney. I cannot find any such reference to Odin.

Odin, Oden or Woden seem to be common usages referring to the same figure. The author may be referring to the Wild Hunt :

Seeing the Wild Hunt was thought to presage some catastrophe such as war or plague, or at best the death of the one who witnessed it. Mortals getting in the path of or following the Hunt could be kidnapped and brought to the land of the dead. A girl who saw Wild Edric's Ride was warned by her father to put her apron over her head to avoid the sight. Others believed that people's spirits could be pulled away during their sleep to join the cavalcade.

I agree though that the author should have footnoted.

There’s every reason to believe that Christ was born at the time of Tabernacles. That would place his CONCEPTION at roughly the time of the current Christmas. It would also mean that the early Christians were celebrating the INCARNATION (rightfully)... the coming of the light into the world....at about the end of our Julian year.

That's the belief of my synagogue: It wasn't some clandestine conspiracy to sneak paganism into the Church, but rather a "natural" evolution due to the following factors:

1) The Jews came under heavy persecution after 70 and 135 AD. The Christians were already under heavy persecution due to refusing to worship the emperor; most didn't want to also be persecuted for a people that they were not at that point on the best of terms with. As a result, many (not all--the debate was ongoing into the 4th century) ceased to keep the "Jewish" parts of the Torah, like Sabbath and the feasts, wearing tzitzit, etc.
2) There was a pre-existing Greek/Roman holiday at the time of the winter solstice that they wanted to provide an alternative to, much like many churches today try to provide "fall festivals" in place of Halloween.
3) Yeshua's conception date enabled the connection between His incarnation and this time of year.

Mind you, several pagan elements--e.g., mistletoe, the tree, etc.--did slip in, but one can reasonably argue that they were "repurposed" by Christianity, symbols of fertility and life subordinated to the Lord of Life who triumphed over the grave.

My issue with celebrating Christmas over Sukkot is not one primarily built on Christian adaptations of one's pre-existing culture. One of the things that I greatly admire about Paul was his ability to present a Semetic religion to a Hellenistic culture by using the latter's philosophies, idioms, and cultural elements as bridging points. However, I think we all agree that it is possible to go too far in trying to bridge the gap: Relics, "mysteries" that the laity cannot be given, and saint-veneration, for example.

Which category does Christmas fall into? Your mileage may vary.

No, my chief concerns are simple: Observing repurposed holidays in place of keeping the Biblical Feasts a) disconnects one from the richest parts of Christianity's Jewish heritage, and b) creates a wall of human tradition between Gentile and Jew.

Having said that, I wish my Sunday brethren a very Merry Christmas, and if you hear me singing, "O Tammuz-tree, O Tammuz-tree" (as I do every year when my parents ask me to haul the Christmas tree out of the basement for them), rest assured I'm just giving you a friendly hard time.

On a more light note, the reason that I wasn't on FR yesterday despite taking it off for my birthday: On December 17th, I proposed marriage to Sara, my girlfriend these last two years. She accepted. I also asked her little girl, Leah, to be my daughter. She also accepted. It was the best birthday present I've ever gotten.

Now, where's that fatted calf? ;^)

Shalom!

No, my chief concerns are simple: Observing repurposed holidays in place of keeping the Biblical Feasts a) disconnects one from the richest parts of Christianity's Jewish heritage, and b) creates a wall of human tradition between Gentile and Jew.

Well said and I agree with the majority of the points in your post. But I draw a distinction between Jewish heritage as opposed to Israelite heritage. I'm not sure of your congregation or your beliefs so this may not apply, but sometimes messianics get distracted by the ceremony of the Jewish traditions (as opposed to biblical precepts) involved in messianic judaism.

For example we have a guy attending our church that used to belong to a messianic congregation in the area. I guess they had a tradition of marching the torah around the room and kissing it if I understood him correctly. To him this tradition crossed the line of non-biblical tradition and was dangerously close to idol worship.

Oh and congratulation on your upcoming marriage and fatherhood... :-)

Ah, yes, presenting the Torah. Yeah, we do that. However, the idea isn't to kiss the Torah so much as it is to symbolically bring the Word of God to our lips (cf. Psa. 119:103, Ezk. 3, Rev. 11). We also make it a point of explaining exactly what we're doing every time just so that no body mistakes it for idolatry.

Too many Messianic synagogues try to follow the rabbis by rote without understanding their origins, reasons, meanings, etc. The rabbis themselves condemn those who recite rabbinic rulings by rote without understanding the hows and whys. Others reject the rabbis altogether; that, to me, is just throwing out the baby with the bathwater. After all, we'd lose half the symbolism of the Passover and how it relates to Yeshua if we didn't follow the rabbinic traditions. It's also not entirely Biblical, since it was the expectation of Yeshua and His Apostles that Jewish believers would continue to follow the traditions and the authority of the rabbis where they did not conflict with the New Covenant (Mat. 23:2, Acts 21:21ff). As with so many things in life, God has called us to walk the narrow road between two extremes.

I said "Jewish" instead of "Israelite" because the latter's meaning has become so bastardized within the Church as to lose meaning altogether. Some claim to replace the Jews as the new, "spiritual" Israel. Some claim that they can trace their lineage from the North Kingdom. Rather than argue with people about the definition of "Israel," I just say "Jew" as Paul and others do in Scripture.

A person of Gentile background (which can have distant Jewish/Israelite blood or not) is adopted into Israel by fealty to Israel's King, but he does not have to become Jewish by circumcision or culture. The Torah provides a framework within which many cultures can be adapted. I see no reason why a Jew should have to have an American Christian culture any more than I think Chinese Christians should. There is room for an infinite number of cultural traditions within Torah.

However, if one is going to claim to be a Messianic synagogue or to follow Messianic Judaism, one needs to carefully choose which battles to fight with the Jewish community.

Shalom.

I don't want to seem nitpicky on this because I value your contributions and insight so please don't take it the wrong way but isn't this exactly the rationale that Roman Catholics use for utilizing icons in worship services? Not that I'm comparing the two but do you see the point?

After all, we'd lose half the symbolism of the Passover and how it relates to Yeshua if we didn't follow the rabbinic traditions. It's also not entirely Biblical, since it was the expectation of Yeshua and His Apostles that Jewish believers would continue to follow the traditions and the authority of the rabbis where they did not conflict with the New Covenant (Mat. 23:2, Acts 21:21ff)

There are many more scriptural references to Jewish tradition being "bad", then there are to them being "good". For example Matthew 15 and Mark 7 as well as Colossians 2. In Galatians Paul says:

Gal 1:14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

He then goes on to talk about he didn't go and consult with Jewish Christians before spreading the gospel to gentiles. I think this is an indication that Paul evaluated ALL tradition in light of scripture or what Christ had taught instead of turning to the opinions or traditions of others.

A person of Gentile background (which can have distant Jewish/Israelite blood or not) is adopted into Israel by fealty to Israel's King, but he does not have to become Jewish by circumcision or culture. The Torah provides a framework within which many cultures can be adapted. I see no reason why a Jew should have to have an American Christian culture any more than I think Chinese Christians should. There is room for an infinite number of cultural traditions within Torah.

I would agree with this to a certain extent. I just think you have to be very careful about traditions and be constantly contrasting and comparing them to what's written and preserved in scripture. I think scripture is vague on tradition exactly because God knew that traditions and cultures would change and have the potential to corrupt his word. So he left us with all he intended to. Now certainly all worship organizations have traditions of worship or else worship would be chaotic! But these traditions should generally be of form rather than function.

I understand why from an external perspective, the two could be confused. However, the argument breaks down on two fronts: 1) God forbids making icons for use in worship--He did not forbid the Torah. 2) Kissing may be interpreted as worship of a sort, but we bring the Word to our lips every time we eat the Lord's Supper/Passover. Does that make the matzah and wine icons?

There are many more scriptural references to Jewish tradition being "bad", then there are to them being "good".

Not really. The "bad" traditional arguments are of two sort:

1) Traditions that negated Scripture, and
2) Traditions that had been elevated to Scripture.

The first sort are pretty easy to spot and need little elaboration here. Suffice to say that the biggest example are the rabbinic prohibitions specifically designed to prevent Jews from associating too closely with even God-fearing Gentiles. That's why, while I keep kosher (Biblical) and separate my meat and dairy (arguably Biblical; not where I'm going to spend my ammo with the Jewish community in any case), I could never keep the full range of kashrut laws, since they were specifically created with the intent of avoiding eating with Gentiles.

The second is pretty easy to avoid: Don't tell someone who isn't following an extra-Biblical tradition that they are sinning. Two of the big examples in Yeshua's ministry were the more finicky rules regarding Sabbath and the ritual washing of hands. In both cases, Yeshua pointed out that not keeping someone's extra-Biblical tradition is not sin in and of itself, as I might point out to some of my Sunday brethren on a variety of issues.

I've written a longish article here that explains the approach we take to tradition, and also demonstrates that Yeshua was not opposed to it at all--in its proper place. I need to write another one soon defending the Pharisees from the more malign stereotypes foisted on them.

I think this is an indication that Paul evaluated ALL tradition in light of scripture or what Christ had taught instead of turning to the opinions or traditions of others.

Absolutely true--he evaluated all tradition in light of the Word. He didn't toss it all out and start from scratch, or else he would have been lying when he claimed to still be a Pharisee at his appearance before the Sanhedrin.

But these traditions should generally be of form rather than function.

I think I agree, but please elaborate on what you mean by this. Also, if you could answer a question for me, do you keep the tradition of the Afikomen at Passover?

Shalom.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.