I was reading the Huffington Post today and came across a blog post by Andrew Copson, Chief Executive of the British Humanist Association, on the real meaning of Christmas:
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/andrew-copson/meaning-of-christmas_b_13653684.html?utm_hp_ref=uk
Apparently, a survey by YouGov has revealed that going to church at Christmas comes bottom of the list of most people's priorities, with spending time with friends and family, giving gifts and nice food and drink being the considered the most important things to do at Christmas. Copson argues that Christmas has no supernatural meaning and yet still fulfills an important human function. He also correctly points out that Christmas predates Christianity.
I have a lot of time for Humanists, who endeavour to live good and meaningful lives despite seeing no compelling evidence for the existence of God. They believe (if I've understood Humanism correctly) that human beings have enormous potential for good, and that this good must be harnessed for the benefit of our world. I can see how a Humanist Christmas could be a lovely thing, with a focus on having fun together and being generous toward each other. I guess I just have a lower view of human nature than humanists do. Oh dear, that sounds quite dark... To put it another way, I have a higher view of human brokenness than Humanists do.
Tonight we had a short reflective service, led beautifully by two women in our congregation, called 'Quiet Christmas'. It was particularly aimed at people who might be struggling at Christmas for whatever reason. There was a little music, some simple prayers, darkness, candlelight, and lots of silence. As an extrovert I usually struggle with silence, but I really enjoyed it tonight. It was restful. The simple liturgy led us to reflect on those things which are weighing us down, and to receive the hope of Christmas, that God is with us and will help us get through whatever we are facing.
I'm just not sure that Humanism has enough hope to offer. There are so many varieties of human misery that we cannot ease through human efforts. Medical science is a wonderful thing, but it has limits; we cannot raise the dead. We have counselling, psychotherapy and great drugs, but we cannot mend broken hearts. It is often said that there is an epidemic of loneliness in our society; I guess that is a problem we could do something about, and many do, including those who don't necessarily have any religious faith, but instinctively know that loving others is a good thing to do. But it takes a huge amount of energy - there is so much need around us. Personally my hope for the world comes from trusting in a God who supplies the energy I need to do the good he wants me to do, and who can do the things which are beyond human power.
I'm not sure the notion of a 'real meaning of Christmas' is very helpful: Christmas means different things to different people, and I have no desire to force a Christian Christmas on anyone. But the reality both Humanists and Christians (and probably most other people in the world) want to see - a world at peace - depends, for me, on the intervention of the divine Other. Which is not to say he doesn't have a part he wants me to play in bringing this reality about.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/andrew-copson/meaning-of-christmas_b_13653684.html?utm_hp_ref=uk
Apparently, a survey by YouGov has revealed that going to church at Christmas comes bottom of the list of most people's priorities, with spending time with friends and family, giving gifts and nice food and drink being the considered the most important things to do at Christmas. Copson argues that Christmas has no supernatural meaning and yet still fulfills an important human function. He also correctly points out that Christmas predates Christianity.
I have a lot of time for Humanists, who endeavour to live good and meaningful lives despite seeing no compelling evidence for the existence of God. They believe (if I've understood Humanism correctly) that human beings have enormous potential for good, and that this good must be harnessed for the benefit of our world. I can see how a Humanist Christmas could be a lovely thing, with a focus on having fun together and being generous toward each other. I guess I just have a lower view of human nature than humanists do. Oh dear, that sounds quite dark... To put it another way, I have a higher view of human brokenness than Humanists do.
Tonight we had a short reflective service, led beautifully by two women in our congregation, called 'Quiet Christmas'. It was particularly aimed at people who might be struggling at Christmas for whatever reason. There was a little music, some simple prayers, darkness, candlelight, and lots of silence. As an extrovert I usually struggle with silence, but I really enjoyed it tonight. It was restful. The simple liturgy led us to reflect on those things which are weighing us down, and to receive the hope of Christmas, that God is with us and will help us get through whatever we are facing.
I'm just not sure that Humanism has enough hope to offer. There are so many varieties of human misery that we cannot ease through human efforts. Medical science is a wonderful thing, but it has limits; we cannot raise the dead. We have counselling, psychotherapy and great drugs, but we cannot mend broken hearts. It is often said that there is an epidemic of loneliness in our society; I guess that is a problem we could do something about, and many do, including those who don't necessarily have any religious faith, but instinctively know that loving others is a good thing to do. But it takes a huge amount of energy - there is so much need around us. Personally my hope for the world comes from trusting in a God who supplies the energy I need to do the good he wants me to do, and who can do the things which are beyond human power.
I'm not sure the notion of a 'real meaning of Christmas' is very helpful: Christmas means different things to different people, and I have no desire to force a Christian Christmas on anyone. But the reality both Humanists and Christians (and probably most other people in the world) want to see - a world at peace - depends, for me, on the intervention of the divine Other. Which is not to say he doesn't have a part he wants me to play in bringing this reality about.
Comments
Post a Comment