Christmas is Pagan Argument

[Doom]

Because he thought it was true.

I think that's a necessary but not sufficient condition for preaching on a topic, though. "It's true and it helps to better illustrate the Gospel", maybe? I admit I'm biased but it's hard to see how "the origins of Christmas are actually pagan" does the latter.

Well, let's be serious for a second here, if that is the standard then the average Catholic hears at most 2-3 real homilies in his lifetime. The quality of preaching in general is really, really, really, really, really, really, really awful and has been for decades. I'm convinced most priests get up to the pulpit with no preparation and no idea what they are going to say and just ramble incoherently for 20 minutes and then sit down. That might sound like a rather uncharitable description, but it accurately reflects what happens in 99.9999999999% of homilies in the West today. The problem is so common that I can only conclude that seminaries must spend no time at all on the topic of homily preparation,

[Obi-Wan Kenobi]

I assure you that's not the case.

[Doom]

Then there is simply no excuse for the poor quality of preaching you normally get, you get a couple jokes, some apparently pointless anecdotes, and when it is over I almost never have any idea what point, if any, was made. Sometimes I feel saying "sit down I can ad lib a better sermon". Granted I am a professional public speaker and making up a lecture out of whole cloth is what I do best, but still.

[Stella]

St Patrick and what we were taught about his evangelising of Ireland for example, was a creation of the papacy of the time.

Wow. You must have sat through some really egregiously bad St. Patrick's Day homilies.

Well 'creation of the papacy' was a weird statement. But lets say allowed by the Church of the time. I'm referring to the legend that St Patrick drove the snakes out of Ireland (first officially referenced by St Columba in the 6th century). Or that he used the shamrock leaf as a teaching tool. Or that he lit the Pascal fire against the orders of the King that all sacred fires were to be extinguished until he lit his on that nominated pagan day.

These were all related to us as children in school and through the little childrens books about Saints.

Now the tales of St Christopher were even more astounding.

[Stella]

Then there is simply no excuse for the poor quality of preaching you normally get, you get a couple jokes, some apparently pointless anecdotes, and when it is over I almost never have any idea what point, if any, was made. Sometimes I feel saying "sit down I can ad lib a better sermon". Granted I am a professional public speaker and making up a lecture out of whole cloth is what I do best, but still.

I'm sure the children in Church would love your sermons, Doom.

[Doom]

Children? I was a professor in a university, and I almost always ad-libbed my lectures, although sometimes I prepared specific examples I wanted to demonstrate I never had any idea what exactly I was going to say, it was all made up on the spot. Speaking extemporaneously is loads of fun.

[peregrinator]

Because he thought it was true.

I think that's a necessary but not sufficient condition for preaching on a topic, though. "It's true and it helps to better illustrate the Gospel", maybe? I admit I'm biased but it's hard to see how "the origins of Christmas are actually pagan" does the latter.

Well, let's be serious for a second here, if that is the standard then the average Catholic hears at most 2-3 real homilies in his lifetime.

The "average Catholic" hardly ever goes to church!

Anyway, I don't think the overall quality of preaching is very good but there have been times that I've heard 2-3 good sermons in a weekend - the situation is not nearly as dire as you say (assuming you're not exaggerating for effect).

[gherkin]

St Patrick and what we were taught about his evangelising of Ireland for example, was a creation of the papacy of the time.

Wow. You must have sat through some really egregiously bad St. Patrick's Day homilies.

Well 'creation of the papacy' was a weird statement. But lets say allowed by the Church of the time. I'm referring to the legend that St Patrick drove the snakes out of Ireland (first officially referenced by St Columba in the 6th century). Or that he used the shamrock leaf as a teaching tool. Or that he lit the Pascal fire against the orders of the King that all sacred fires were to be extinguished until he lit his on that nominated pagan day.

These were all related to us as children in school and through the little childrens books about Saints.

These pious stories absolutely have their place and should definitely be taught to children as part of the overall story of St. Patrick. (The fact that we have no written references to some of them until later means nothing, by the way. Written records in those times were relatively scarce.) Some might say that the story of St. Francis and the wolf is a pious legend, but it certainly reveals a great deal about who St. Francis was and what he did, and its persistent acceptance in the Church is sufficient to render it part of his story.

Anyway, whether the peripheral stories about St. Patrick's actions are literally true or not, they've got nothing to do with the fact that St. Patrick was a very real person who very assuredly did evangelize Ireland.

[Doom]

St. Patrick wrote an autobiography, it is safe to assume that anything which is not in it is made up and fictional.

[Doom]

I think that's a necessary but not sufficient condition for preaching on a topic, though. "It's true and it helps to better illustrate the Gospel", maybe? I admit I'm biased but it's hard to see how "the origins of Christmas are actually pagan" does the latter.

Well, let's be serious for a second here, if that is the standard then the average Catholic hears at most 2-3 real homilies in his lifetime.

The "average Catholic" hardly ever goes to church!

Anyway, I don't think the overall quality of preaching is very good but there have been times that I've heard 2-3 good sermons in a weekend - the situation is not nearly as dire as you say (assuming you're not exaggerating for effect).

Yes, "2 or 3 times a lifetime" is hyperbolic, but, indeed, most homilies don't seem to have a point. Occasionally, I do hear a good one where the priest begins by connecting the OT reading and the Gospel reading (they are supposed to be connected, and usually the connection is obvious, but not always) and then discusses how to apply it to our lives, sometimes I even get a little bit of exegesis thrown in, such as "Jesus' suggestion to turn the other cheek refers to personal insults (a slap in the face is an insult and not a serious threat) but that doesn't mean you don't have a right to self-defense in the face of serious violence, and it certainly doesn't mean that you cannot act in defense of other people." But it is rare, like finding diamonds in a pile of rocks.

[Obi-Wan Kenobi]

I can't remember the title of the book, but there was a widely influential text that taught priests to preach badly, in much the way that Doom describes. Perhaps being taught badly is worse than not being taught at all.

[Obi-Wan Kenobi]

The problem with connecting the OT reading with the Gospel is that the OT is very context-dependent. Many readings, as we get them, consist of people with unpronounceable names doing puzzling things. It could easily take 15 minutes just to give that context, and few people will sit through a homily that long.

[gherkin]

St. Patrick wrote an autobiography, it is safe to assume that anything which is not in it is made up and fictional.

Obviously a joke, but it's worth noting that my copy of The Confession covers something like 70 pages, and it has large font on small pages. I'm not good at guessing, but maybe 20000 words? Maybe less. Probably a bit condensed, as autobiographies go.

[Doom]

The problem with connecting the OT reading with the Gospel is that the OT is very context-dependent. Many readings, as we get them, consist of people with unpronounceable names doing puzzling things. It could easily take 15 minutes just to give that context, and few people will sit through a homily that long.

Oh, I don't expect a Ph.D. dissertation, I have a library of literally dozens and dozens and dozens of volumes of Bible commentary, both on the entire Bible and on individual books, from a variety of perspectives, from historical-critical to Patristic. I own the complete Naravree Bible, both Old and New Testaments. I have about 30-40 volumes of the Anchor Bible series. I own several volumes of the "Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture" series currently being produced. I own both editions (1968 and 1985) of the Jerome Bible commentary and both editions (1953 and 1968) of The Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture. I own every volume of Ignatius Press commentary that has been published. I own the Oxford Bible Commentary, one massive volume on the entire Bible.

I do not think it would be boastful to say that my personal theological and biblical library dwarfs the library of the average parish priest, and given the poor quality formation that existed at least in past decades at many seminaries, are probably better quality texts. I could do the research on my own, and often already know the answers, or at least I know an answer. That isn't what I'm looking for.

I just want something practical, "here is what I think the gospel is trying to say, and here is how you can apply it to your life today." And it seems I get that so rarely. And I don't understand why, after a few years, when a priest has covered the entire 3-year cycle a couple of times, he should have an idea of what he is going to say, it is probably not the same thing every time, simply because his perspective changes, maybe he reads something that gives him additional insight, or he just doesn't want to repeat himself and wants to say something new. But often they seem completely unprepared, which baffles me.

Actually, with my vast library and resources, I have often thought I should try to find a way to make myself useful in something like CCD or RCIA, I don't want to be a teacher but I could be a researcher, looking up answers to questions, preparing for issues that might arise during class. In such contexts, people tend to ask difficult questions, and I can answer most of them, or at least I know how to look up the answer to a question I don't know.

[Tired]

Late to the discussion but there are 3 priests at the parish I normally attend. With Sunday Mass and holy days, I hear 55+ homilies a year, with a pretty good split from these 3 priests. I'd say their homily is VERY good 80%+ of the time. So it seems I'm either lucky or perhaps I don't know what a good homily is...

[Stella]

Father Ratzinger (Pope BXVI) once wrote a reflection at Christmas time which also referenced 'sol invictus' (the undefeated light).

https://catholicherald.co.uk/the-undefe ... christmas/

The world in which Christmas came was dominated by a feeling very similar to our own. It was a world in which Götterdämmerung was not a slogan but a real event. The old gods had suddenly become unreal. They did not exist any more. Man could no longer believe what had given meaning and support to life for generations. However, man cannot live without meaning, he needs it like his daily bread. So after the extinction of the old stars he had to keep looking for new lights. But where were they? A broad movement offered him, as a way out, the cult of the “undefeated light”, the sun, which travels its way over the earth day by day, strong and confident in victory, a visible god of this world, as it were. The 25th of December, located in the midst of the winter solstice days, would be annually commemorated as the birthday of the ever–reborn light, a bright promise that from all destructions a path leads to a new beginning.

The liturgy of the sun religion had thus very cleverly appropriated for itself the primeval human fear and primeval hope. The primitive man, who at one time experienced the coming of winter in the long nights of autumn with the ever diminishing power of the sun, had once again wondered with dread: does the golden sun really die? Will it return again? Or will it be defeated by the evil forces of the darkness, sometime, in this or one of the future years, and never return again? The annual winter solstice finally promised its ever renewed victory.

It is the festival that encompasses the hope, yes, the certainty of the indestructibility of the lights of this world.

The time when Roman emperors with their cult of the undefeated sun gave new faith to their subjects, new hope – a new meaning in the midst of the unstoppable demise of the old gods – coincided with the time when the Christian faith wooed the heart of the Greco-Roman people. The Christian found in the cult of the sun-god one of his most dangerous opponents. For this sign was far more visible and temptingly erected before the eyes of men than the sign of the Cross, in which the Christian announcement came. Nevertheless, Christianity’s invisible light prevailed over the visible message with which ancient paganism sought to assert itself.

The Christians very soon claimed December 25, the birthday of the undefeated light, and celebrated it as the birthday of Christ, in whom they had found the true light of the world. They said to the Gentiles: the sun is good, and we rejoice in its ever-new victory no less than you. But it has no power of its own. It can only be and only has power because God created it. So it manifests light to us from the true light, from God. And one must celebrate the true God, the source of all light, not his work, which would be powerless without him. That’s not all, not even the most important thing. For maybe you have not yet discovered that there is a darkness and cold coming from the darkened heart of man: hatred, injustice, cynical abuse of truth, cruelty and the dishonour of man … At this point it suddenly becomes apparent how exciting this is, how the Christian’s conversation with the Roman sun worshipper is at the same time the dialogue of the believer of today with his unbelieving brother, the incessant dialogue between faith and the world. True, the primitive fear that the sun would one day die does not move us any longer. Physics has long stifled such fears with the cool touch of its clear formulas. The primitive fear has gone – but has the fear disappeared completely? Or is man still a creature of fear, so much so that today’s philosophy refers to fear as the “basic existential” of man? What period of human history was more afraid of its own future than our own?

[Doom]

The fact that a Pope says that Christmas was derived from Sol Invictus doesn't make it historically true, you know that right?

The fact remains that before Constantine Sol Invictus was celebrated on October 18, not December 25. Moreover, there is no evidence it was ever a major feast. On the Roman calendar of 365 days, there were more than 300 feast days of one kind or another, most of them were about as important to them as Arbor Day is to us, and it would have been impossible for the Early Church to schedule any kind of Holy Day on a day which was not either on a Pagan holiday or within the same week as a pagan holiday. Look at December, there were feasts scheduled on December 15, 17, and 19. And that isn't even all the December holidays, but there was nothing scheduled for December 25.

[Obi-Wan Kenobi]

I bow to few in my respect for His late Holiness, but he did stumble every now and then, and this isn't exactly his field.

[Stella]

Another interesting homily by St Jerome who in the day was arguing for Christs birthday being 25 December. To those who say it was Epiphany ie 6th January he wrote.

Why am I saying all this? Because they say to us: This is where the apostles lived; this is where the tradition has been established. Now, we say that Christ was born today; on Epiphany, he was reborn. You who maintain he was born on Epiphany prove for us generation and regeneration. When did he receive baptism, unless you face the consequence that on the same day he was born and reborn? Even nature is in agreement with our claim, for the world itself bears witness to our statement. Up to this day, darkness increases; from this day on, it decreases; light increases, darkness decreases; the day waxes, error wanes; truth advances. For us today, the Sun of justice is born. In conclusion, consider another point. Between the Lord and John the Baptist, there are six months. If you study the nativity of John in relation to Christ's, you will see that they are six months apart.

So even back in the 4th century, the correlation between Christs birth and the nature of the winter solstice was recognised.

https://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2014/1 ... erome.html

[peregrinator]

It's true that Christ was born around the time of the solstice and St. Jerome attached a mystical meaning to this.