"That the nation, seeing that their temples are not destroyed, may remove error from their hearts." ~ St. Gregory the Great's letter to St. Mellitus on reconsecrating pagan temples as Christian churches, AD 601

Gloria Romanorum ^ | November 23, 2021 | Florentius

[Antoninus]

Some interesting excerpts from St. Bede the Venerable's 8th century Ecclesiastical History of the English Nation dealing with three interesting topics:

1.) Christian preservation of ancient architecture.

2.) Supplanting pagan festivals with Christian feast days.

3.) Reception of the Eucharist by those unworthy.

[Zionist Conspirator]

Meanwhile, the feast days actually commanded by the very Mouth of G-d are considered positively forbidden.

[Antoninus]

Catholic / Church history ping.

[wbarmy]

One of the things I tried to educate my children about. Passover, Feast of Tabernacles, Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), etc.

You can celebrate the new and show how the old pointed to the new. Per Augustine “In the Old Testament the New is concealed, in the New the Old is revealed.”

[GOP_Party_Animal]

I learned a few things listening to a Church historian the other day. Why is Christmas on December 25th? The calendar is off a few days from antiquity; Christmas was celebrated on the winter solstice (the shortest day of the year). Why then? For the Roman pagans of the time, it was near the celebration of Saturnalia, when a god lived with and took interest in humans. It was also near Sol Invictus, the celebration of the unconquerable sun. Both aligned with Christian theology.

[Antoninus]

I learned a few things listening to a Church historian the other day. Why is Christmas on December 25th?

Be careful when listening to contemporary Church historians. Some of them don't know what they're talking about.

"Eight Days Before the Kalends of January" ~ The Earliest Sources for the December 25 dating of Christmas

Sol Invictus and Christmas

[daniel1212]

"The second is also used by those of a Protestant persuasion who wish to prove that Catholicism (and Orthodoxy to a lesser extent) are little better than warmed-over paganism. "

Rather, that is much a polemical strawman, as while Catholicism (and Protestantism to much lesser degree) is guilty of attempting to Christianize distinctively pagan aspects, yet "copy cat" theories as regards doctrine are exposed as fallacious, and the main charge is that distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels). Which is simply the manifest reality.

"“Modern Christian holidays are nothing more than ancient pagan holidays with a Christian overlay.” "

More overreach, yet as one of your own confesses,

In a later age the worship of images was introduced [Note 11]. {371} 4. The principle of the distinction, by which these observances were pious in Christianity and superstitious in paganism, is implied in such passages of Tertullian, Lactantius, and others, as speak of evil spirits lurking under the pagan statues. It is intimated also by Origen, who, after saying that Scripture so strongly "forbids temples, altars, and images," that Christians are "ready to go to death, if necessary, rather than pollute their notion of the God of all by any such transgression," assigns as a reason "that, as far as possible, they might not fall into the notion that images were gods."

The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields; sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison [Note 17], are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church. {374} - An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, Chapter 8 ; http://www.newmanreader.org/works/development/chapter8.html

"Note that Gregory is not calling for Mellitus to take pagan festivals and simply rename them as Christian feasts. Rather, he is suggesting that new feasts be instituted on the date of a particular martyr’s birth or death, or the date upon which a church is consecrated. "

Meaning that Catholicism is guilty is essentially engaging in the same adoptive tactic of Israel of old, who, when not actually nationally engaging in idolatry, usually attempted to turn "high places" of pagan worship into venues of worship of Yaweh. But which, rather than destroying them as commanded, perpetuated the existence of these sanctified places, (1Kings 15:14; 2 Chronicles 33:17) - despite the command, "Thou shalt not plant thee a grove of any trees near unto the altar of the Lord thy God, which thou shalt make thee - (Deuteronomy 16:21) thereby easily enabling them to revert back to their original idolatrous purposes when Israel backslide once again. (1Kings 12:31; 13:33; 14:23; 2Kg.15:35; 16:4; 17:10-19, 31-34; 2 Chronicles 21:11; 28:4; Isaiah 57:5).

Likewise, the reason it is so hard to put Christ back into Christmas is because while celebrating events in the life of Christ as the Lord leads is honorable, as is showing His grace, yet the yearly annual and essentially required celebration that began with Catholicism and its religious syncretism (even if the Lord possibly was born in 12-25 and a pagan feast encompasses this, this celebration was a later development not seen in Scripture, and was part of Catholic accommodation of pagan celebrations) is not according to the New Testament in practice nor in principle.

And as observance of this is annual event a essentially required and which it is (about 48 weeks a year a pastor can preach whatever the Lord leads, but come December he better preach on Christmas themes without fail, while hardly anyone will find themselves attaining to an office in a church if they make it known they basically do not not this as a "holy celebration of obligation," much less with it tree that children knew before etc.) then it is a form of legalism, regardless of denials of this reality.

However, in a more complete revival then the high places were destroyed (2 Chronicles 17:6; 31:1; 34:3) consistent with such commands as Dt. 7:5. And the church began as a new creation, not a reformation and does not need help from distinctively pagan rituals or celebrations. And is called to put to death the flesh and the religion thereof, which includes man's ideas of accommodating culture in religious syncretism.

And in which believers are to worship in Spirit and in Truth under the New Covenant in which there is no liturgical calendar and the only day the NT church is recorded as specifically meeting on was the first day.

Thus, rather than being a "Grinch," Christians are free to worship the Lord, including celebrating the Lord's birth, any time, as the Lord leads (John 3:8; Rm. 8:12) as is the case in all areas of personal liberty, without compelling others to do the same, while observing the annual celebration that Catholicism began is not of the NT church but is essentially a affirmation of such.

Choose to be free.

[GOP_Party_Animal]

Well, that escalated quickly.

[Antoninus]

Well, that escalated quickly.

Not really. It's the same data-dump-style post built upon an absurd theory -- namely, that the 1st century Christian Church was somehow the same as one or several of the Protestant sects that emerged 1,500 years later. Meanwhile, the actual Church which existed for a millennium and a half, compiled the Sacred Scriptures, and preached the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the four corners of the globe, was somehow a crypto-pagan construct.

It's a ludicrous thesis, but that's what they're going with.

[Cronos]

Christians do celebrate - the Passover (in Aramaic, Pascha) which all Christians celebrate. The Jewish passover was a foreshadowing of the real thing, in which God delivered all people from death. In almost every language except English and German, the annual celebration of that event is called something like Pascha.

Yom Kippur - the day of atonement - isn’t kept as a separate observance by the Church because it was fulfilled in Christ. In commemorating Christ’s resurrection on Pascha and every Sunday, we celebrate not only atonement but life and union with God.

Then seven weeks later is the Feast of Weeks, which we call by its Greek name Pentecost. The Jewish feast celebrated the giving of the Mosaic law to the Jews; the fulfillment is in the establishment of the Church on Pentecost in Acts 2; rather than a law of bondage, on this day we celebrate the universal Gospel of freedom.

At the end of summer is Sukkoth, the harvest feast. This is the time when we celebrate Christ’s Transfiguration.

[Cronos]

With regards to #1 - the preservation of ancient architecture. This is not true always - as seen in Northern Europe or south-western India when the Portuguese came. However, in the main this is true for the Catholic/Orthodox/Coptic/Ethiopian church.

For the Anglicans - the dissolution of the monasteries let to destruction of centuries if not millenia old buildings.
For the Lutherans they do seem to have preserved the old
For the Swiss Calvinists they destroyed the old

[Cronos]

GOP_PA -- that, " For the Roman pagans of the time, it was near the celebration of Saturnalia, when a god lived with and took interest in humans. It was also near Sol Invictus, the celebration of the unconquerable sun. Both aligned with Christian theology. - is incorrect

Let me take first the bit about Saturnalia

Saturnalia was not celebrated on December 25th. It was, in fact, originally celebrated on December 17th. However, due to the holiday’s widespread popularity, by the first century BC, it was extended into seven days of celebration, starting on December 17th and culminating on December 23rd.

Caligula (ruled 37 – 41 AD) officially extended Saturnalia to five days of celebration, lasting from December 17th to December 21st.

by the time December 25th rolled around, Saturnalia was definitely already over. No one in ancient times ever thought Saturnalia was on December 25th.

Saturnalia was not a celebration of the winter solstice. In fact, at least on its original date of December 17th, it did not occur on the day of the solstice or even on a day that ancient Roman people believed was the solstice.

Saturnalia originated as a religious holiday in honor of the agricultural god Saturnus. The ancient Romans believed that, in very ancient times, before Iupiter became the king of the gods, the world had been ruled by Saturnus. They believed that the reign of Saturnus had been the “Golden Age” when all things were perfect. Saturnalia was seen as a temporary restoration of the rule of Saturnus, a time when the traditional rules and norms were reversed.

Saturnalia was bawdy, loud and MARDI-GRAS like, not Christmassy at all

The Roman winter solstice festival was not Saturnalia, but rather Brumalia. -- this was a relatively minor festival overshadowed by the earlier festival of Saturnalia.

If Christians had really chosen the date for Christmas based on the date of Saturnalia, we would be celebrating Christmas on December 17th, but instead we celebrate it on December 25th..

NEXT - about Sol Invictus

There is only one surviving ancient source that ever mentions the birth of Sol Invictus being celebrated on December 25th. - the Chronograph of 354, an ancient Roman calendar for the year 354 AD written by a Christian.

This is also the first source to mention Christmas being celebrated on December 25th. This means we actually don’t know which came first: the festival of Sol Invictus on December 25th or Christmas on December 25th.

FINALLY, to answer your first point Why is Christmas on December 25th?

Christians began celebrating Christmas on December 25th because they are known to have already believed that the Annunciation of Mary occurred on March 25th and December 25th is exactly nine months later.

[Elsie]

The second is also used by those of a Protestant persuasion who wish to prove that Catholicism (and Orthodoxy to a lesser extent) are little better than warmed-over paganism.

Let's all have a big fight on FR!

[Elsie]

The calendar is off a few days from antiquity; Christmas was celebrated on the winter solstice (the shortest day of the year).

So?

NOW the solstice is on December 22^nd!

(Shouldn't it be on January first?)

[Elsie]

You left out a LOT of RCC only stuff that now goes on in the ‘actual Church’.

[Elsie]

...they are known to have already believed that the Annunciation of Mary occurred on March 25th ...

Upon what evidence was this belief founded?

[Elsie]

... the Annunciation of Mary occurred ...

Yes; it did.

The angel told her what was going to happen in her life.

There was NOTHING Mary could have said or done to change it.

[Cronos]

Your comment is not relevant to the article nor the post.

GOP’s post was a common misconception linking Christmas to Saturnalia. It is not. The Christian origin of December 25 is related to the annunciation.

The discussion of that annunciation is for another time, another thread.

[Cronos]

From the earliest recorded history, the feast has been celebrated on March 25, commemorating both the belief that the spring equinox was not only the day of God’s act of Creation but also the beginning of Christ’s redemption of that same Creation.

All Christian antiquity held 25 March as the actual day of Jesus’ death. The opinion that the Incarnation also took place on that date is found in the pseudo-Cyprianic work “De Pascha Computus”, c. 240. It says that the coming of Jesus and his death must have coincided with the creation and fall of Adam. And since the world was created in spring, Christ was also conceived and died shortly after the equinox of spring. Similar calculations are found in the early and later Middle Ages, and to them, the dates of the feast of the Annunciation and of Christmas owe their origin. Consequently the ancient martyrologies assign to the 25th of March the creation of Adam and the crucifixion of Jesus;

[Elsie]

Your comment is not relevant to the article nor the post.

Yet you commented.

I wonder what I touched?