Coincidence of Catholic/Pagan Holidays

[Siobahn]

Help! I have a friend who thinks that the Catholic Church is the world’s biggest conspiracy. Most of what he says is so ignorant that I don’t give it much thought, however he brought up a “point” for lack of a better word that I wasn’t able to refute and was hoping that someone here could help.

He pointed out that the major Catholic Holidays directly coincide with pagan celebrations and since the pagan religion was around before Catholicism that the Church simply copied those dates to force conversions. He states that Jesus was not born on Dec 25 yet the Catholic Church faithfully celebrates every year.

I realize I am not going to be able to convert this guy or likely even reason with him. . .I am asking more for myself at this point that to give the info back to the friend.

Thanks for your help!

 

[Della]

To put it very briefly, the Church did indeed use the pagan holiday date for Christmas, but not so it could “force conversions.” Rather, Dec. 25th was the celebration of the days lengthening once again, which to the pagans meant that the sun god would bring light and warmth to the earth, once more. By co-opting this date, the Church made it the celebration of the Light of the World, Jesus Christ. It wasn’t done to force conversions, but rather to make it easier for Christians to celebrate alongside their pagan neighbors without raising suspicions that they, the Christians, were denigrating/not worshiping the sun god, which could get them killed. The only conspiracy was of the pagan officials against Christians.

Easter is the first Sunday following Passover, just as it was when Jesus celebrated it with his Apostles, so there is nothing pagan about that. Only the name Easter comes from a pagan source, but the holiday is based on the Jewish calendar not on any Roman god or goddess worship.

 

[Siobahn]

To put it very briefly, the Church did indeed use the pagan holiday date for Christmas, but not so it could “force conversions.” Rather, Dec. 25th was the celebration of the days lengthening once again, which to the pagans meant that the sun god would bring light and warmth to the earth, once more. By co-opting this date, the Church made it the celebration of the Light of the World, Jesus Christ. It wasn’t done to force conversions, but rather to make it easier for Christians to celebrate alongside their pagan neighbors without raising suspicions that they, the Christians, were denigrating/not worshiping the sun god, which could get them killed. The only conspiracy was of the pagan officials against Christians.

Easter is the first Sunday following Passover, just as it was when Jesus celebrated it with his Apostles, so there is nothing pagan about that. Only the name Easter comes from a pagan source, but the holiday is based on the Jewish calendar not on any Roman god or goddess worship.

Thanks Della for helping to clear that up for me!

 

[TobyLue]

Wedding rings were used by pagans so is it wrong to exchange wedding rings?
I believe that circumcision was a practice used by the Egyptians long before the Jews so is that wrong?
I think too that Hinduism is older than Christianity. They purify themselves by being submerged in the Ganges River, so does that make Baptism by immersion pagan?

Remember that God can make something good out of something bad. What are we celebrating during Christmas? Sure, there were winter pagan celebrations, but the Church in its wisdom, countered those pagan celebrations by introducing Christ. They were able to draw the pagans away from their celebrations and towards Jesus. Christ may or may not have been born on Dec. 25 but what is important is that Christ our messiah WAS BORN.
Be not overcome by evil, but OVERCOME EVIL BY GOOD. (Romans) So that is what Christmas has done. Regrettably there is a push by many and have succeeded in many places by taking Christ out of Christmas. See this for a more detailed answer by Mario Dirksen

 

[brotherhrolf]

I think your friend would have to give some examples. The only ones I can think of are Nov 1 - the feast of All Saints and Christmas.

The feast of All Saints falls on the same day as Samhain for the ancient Celts. Samhain honors those who have died before us. The official feast day of Nov. 1 was established by Pope Gregory IV (827-844 AD) as a means of consolidating the feast days of various martyrs and other saints. I can’t see how your friend could argue this point since the only surviving Celtic peoples in Europe at this time (Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Isle of Man, Cornwall, and Brittany) were all Christian and had been for some centuries.

Christmas falls on the date of the Roman celebration of Dies Natalis Invicti Solis (the day of the unconquered sun) which is the day when the day begins to get longer). For many of the eastern churches, Christmas is actually celebrated on January 6. Since Scripture does not give us a date for Our Lord’s birth, the image invoked by the lengthening of the day, the coming of the light, is pretty apt, don’t you think? And once again, the date for Christmas wasn’t firmly established until the early Middle Ages.
(Yes, I am aware of the Roman feast of Saturnalia the week before Christmas, Yule (again linked to the lengthening of the day), and the cult of Mithras - remember this was a soldier’s cult and would not have been pan-cultural).

He can make no claims about Ash Wednesday, the Easter Triduum, Pentecost, or Corpus Christi since these are not linked to any specific date but to Scripture. Christ the King is always the last Sunday of Ordinary Time before the Liturgical Year begins anew in Advent - again not linked to any specific date. Marian feast days are not linked to any pagan festivals of which I am aware either.

Could you give us some examples?

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Help! I have a friend who thinks that the Catholic Church is the world’s biggest conspiracy. Most of what he says is so ignorant that I don’t give it much thought, however he brought up a “point” for lack of a better word that I wasn’t able to refute and was hoping that someone here could help.

He pointed out that the major Catholic Holidays directly coincide with pagan celebrations and since the pagan religion was around before Catholicism that the Church simply copied those dates to force conversions. He states that Jesus was not born on Dec 25 yet the Catholic Church faithfully celebrates every year.

I realize I am not going to be able to convert this guy or likely even reason with him. . .I am asking more for myself at this point that to give the info back to the friend.

Thanks for your help!

1. Christians adopted pagan temples - and converted them to Christian uses.

One example: in the 4th century the temple of Jupiter in Damascus was converted into a church, & dedicated to St.John the Baptist (it is now a mosque)

1. They took over “pagan” sacred time - and imposed Christian feasts on it instead. The Feast of the Nativity is a case in point - Christians in Rome could hardly observe that feast, if they were also keeping the days of the Saturnalia, which ended on the 23th; or the feast of the Birthday of the Unconquered Sun, on the 25th. Presumably Christians in Rome after 336 (when the Nativity of Christ was first kept in Rome) first went to the Christian Liturgy, then to the pagan feast. Evidence, please ?

What better ways are there to squeeze a religion out of public consciousness, than by filling the space & time it uses with expressions of one’s own faith ? Not many.

This is not mixing Christianity with paganism - this is leaving paganism no space in time or place for public expression, by talking away its places & its times. How can it remain a public thing, when denied those ? This is evidence of the very reverse of mixing Christianity with paganism - & it fits with the fact of widespread Christian vandalism of pre-Christian places of worship (such as the destruction of the Serapeum (the temple of Serapis) in Egypt in 391).

The notion that Christians uncritically adopted paganism is simply ignorant.

It’s a big subject, but I hope this helps.

BTW - there are Biblical precedents for such behaviour: some of the OT feasts have pre-Israelite roots. Does your friend think only the Israelites had temples ? Or that only they had a priesthood, & animal sacrifices ?

For Christians to have points of resemblance with other sorts of religion, is not itself wrong - what is important is whether the similarities harm the Christian way. Of themselves, coincidences of language, time, space, & thought prove nothing. OTOH, if the complaint is that the Church is doing something not permmitted in the Bible - that is a distinct, though connected, issue. What needs to be made clear is what the reasons are for the objections - then we can have a reasonable discussion. ##

 

[Jaypeeto4]

The notion that the Catholic Church wholesale adopted pagan holidays and feasts, comes from two books,

1. THE TWO BABYLONS by Alexander Hislop
   and
2. BABYLON MYSTERY RELIGION, by Ralph Woodrow, which is a smaller summary of THE TWO BABYLONS.
   Both books are wildly popular among anti Catholics.

Ralph Woodrow, however, and to his great credit, has
re-researched the whole issue and come to entirely different conclusions. He has therefore PULLED “BABYLON MYSTERY RELIGION” off the market.
In it’s place, he has written a book denouncing and refuting this whole Catholic/Babylon nonsense.
It is called THE BABYLON CONNECTION ?
(The question mark is part of the title).
Though still written from a nonCatholic perspective, the new book is, on the whole, excellent.
You can get it from http:www.amazon.com
God bless,
Jaypeeto4 (aka Jaypeeto3)

 

[mlchance]

To put it very briefly, the Church did indeed use the pagan holiday date for Christmas…

That is quite debatable. For example, the usual pagan suspect actually didn’t use December 25 as a sacred date until nearly two centuries after the birth of the Church. So, then, who’s copying whom?

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Della]

That is quite debatable. For example, the usual pagan suspect actually didn’t use December 25 as a sacred date until nearly two centuries after the birth of the Church. So, then, who’s copying whom?

– Mark L. Chance.

From the Catholic Encyclopedia online: Christmas

Natalis Invicti. The well-known solar feast, however, of Natalis Invicti, celebrated on 25 December, has a strong claim on the responsibility for our December date. For the history of the solar cult, its position in the Roman Empire, and syncretism with Mithraism, see Cumont’s epoch-making “Textes et Monuments” etc., I, ii, 4, 6, p. 355. Mommsen (Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, 12, p. 338) has collected the evidence for the feast, which reached its climax of popularity under Aurelian in 274.

 

[auhsoj88]

Catholics celebrate the birth of Christ on 12/25, not that 12/25 is the actual birthday of Christ. Before the death and resurection Mary would have had to have said yes, and Christ our King born, so why not honor his birth??

In Christ!

 

[SPH1]

I’ve read information suggesting that Christmas’ date had little or nothing to do with pagan holidays, but rather had to do with birth/death of prophets. Cannot recall the details now.

Nevertheless, the Church is authorized by God to teach. The Church has full authority to create a liturgical calendar as an aid in teaching, and nothing this side of Heaven can challenge it.

Since you say you cannot convert or reason with this guy, then blow him away with this: The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors (or Christianity Before Christ). It “proves” that Christianity itself is a pagan clone!

infidels.org/library/historical/kersey_graves/16/index.html

 

[Liberian]

Heh, heh, this reminds me of the official Queen’s Birthday in England. It’s some time in the summer, when the weather is more conducive to outdoor celebrations. The date she was born on was actually some time in the winter, I think; it’s definitely NOT on the official Queen’s Birthday.

• Liberian

 

[mlchance]

From the Catholic Encyclopedia online: Christmas

Yes, I’ve read that. To be precise, Emperor Aurelian officially established worship of a Roman version of a sun god, under the name of Sol Invictus, as the principal cult of the empire on December 25, 274. He may have done so in response to Christians in the Empire already celebrating Christ’s birth on that day as a way of trying to undercut the Christian celebration.

The evidence on this point is too spotty for anyone to say for certain.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[FCEGM]

Yes, I’ve read that. To be precise, Emperor Aurelian officially established worship of a Roman version of a sun god, under the name of Sol Invictus, as the principal cult of the empire on December 25, 274. He may have done so in response to Christians in the Empire already celebrating Christ’s birth on that day as a way of trying to undercut the Christian celebration.

The evidence on this point is too spotty for anyone to say for certain.

– Mark L. Chance.

Mark, I remember reading a number of years ago an extensive (and online) article on this; are you familiar with it and where it could be located?

 

[Della]

Yes, I’ve read that. To be precise, Emperor Aurelian officially established worship of a Roman version of a sun god, under the name of Sol Invictus, as the principal cult of the empire on December 25, 274. He may have done so in response to Christians in the Empire already celebrating Christ’s birth on that day as a way of trying to undercut the Christian celebration.

The evidence on this point is too spotty for anyone to say for certain.

– Mark L. Chance.

Which is why the article says Dec. 25 has “a strong claim on the responsibility for our December date” compared to other dates mentioned in the overall article.

SPH1:

Nevertheless, the Church is authorized by God to teach. The Church has full authority to create a liturgical calendar as an aid in teaching, and nothing this side of Heaven can challenge it.

Quite right. However, the dates for celebrations of the Mass in honor of Christ or any of the saints is strictly a disciplinary matter and not a de fide issue, so it hardly matters one way or the other. The Magisterium could have placed the celebration of Christ’s nativity at any time it saw fit, which is what it did.

This does not at all mean that Dec. 25 couldn’t be Jesus’ actual birthdate, but if it were, I believe the Church would have made it clear that that was why the date was chosen instead of remaining silent on the issue, leaving it to future generations to try to puzzle it out. But, that’s just MHO.

 

[foolishmortal]

Was Christmas on Dec. 25th by the Julian calendar or by the Gregorian? When was the date established as Christ’s birthday? The Earth doesn’t bounce back a week or two after the Eastern Orthodox celebrate it. Someone’s off. Let’s not be so ashamed of the Bible, we believe godless archaeologists or Christian ones who are ashamed of what it says and goes on the former’s premises. I think it’s very likely Christ was born on the 25th of December, though I wish it were in Spring. It’s likely that the pagans, who also use astronomical signs, made up stories of their own, possibly borrowed from the Jews, whose faith preceded all others, by audible transmission. It’s likely the Jews wrote their history, later–possibly, as with the case of dogma, to dispute error.

Judaism would precede Hinduism, because God spoke to about everyone since Adam and Eve. Maybe Cain went out East and he or a descendant collaborated with demons to establish Hinduism (hey, moderators, before I get penalized for uncharitable remarks, I’m not the one who wrote “the gods of the Gentiles are demons”; the Bible books inspired by God said it).

Here’s what a non-member friend wrote about this thread.

Is Easter Pagan?

HYPERLINK “http://www.ralphwoodrow.org/books/pages/easter.html” ralphwoodrow.org/books/pages/easter.html
HYPERLINK “http://www.ralphwoodrow.org/articles/Xmas-Easter-Cross-Mar-07.pdf” ralphwoodrow.org/articles/Xmas-Easter-Cross-Mar-07.pdf

Watch this 10 min.video HYPERLINK “http://blip.tv/file/3729665” blip.tv/file/3729665

More on pagan festivals…
“Hislop similarly describes Easter as a modern counterpart to the ancient Babylonian solemnities surrounding the adoration of “Ishtar”.* In regard to the worship of Baal in ancient Britain, he states that ‘[Baal’s] consort Astarte was also adored by our ancestors, and that from Astarte, whose name in Nineveh was Ishtar, the religious solemnities of April, as now practised, are called by the name of Easter’.”

In response I quote from HYPERLINK “IQB: Easter and paganism” an article by James Akin, writing in The Nazareth Resource Library:
“The fact is that there are only two languages in which the name has any pagan associations whatsoever – English and German…
"In English, of course, the name is ‘Easter’ and in German ‘Ostern.’ These are related in name to a pagan spring festival, whose name, if you check a dictionary, was derived from the prehistoric West Germanic word akin to the Old English term east, which means, simply enough, ‘east,’ the direction of the rising sun. It has nothing to do, contrary to what you will hear from some anti-Easter-ites, with the goddess Ishtar.
"But in virtually every language except English and German, the name of Easter is derived from the Jewish word Pesach or ‘Passover.’ Thus in Greek the term for Easter is Pascha, in Latin the term is also Pascha. From there it passed into the Romance languages, and so in Spanish it is Pascua, in Italian it is Pasqua, in French it is Paques, and in Portugese it is Pascoa. It also passed into the non- romance languages, such as the Germanic languages Dutch, where it is Pasen* and Danish, where it is Paaske.
"Thus only in the highly Protestant countries of Germany (where the Reformation started) and England (where the intense persecution and martyrdom of Catholics was the harshest), does the term “Easter” have any pagan associations at all. So perhaps in these two Protestant countries paganism was not sufficiently stamped out to use the Judeo-Christian term for the celebration of Christ’s Resurrection that was used everywhere else in Europe.”

Also, I can’t help but wonder how Hislop would have referred to the days of the week without surreptitiously invoking such pagan deities as the Sun, the Moon, Tiws (the Germanic version of Mars, the god of war), Wodin/Odin/Mercury, Thor/Jupiter, Frigg (Odin’s wife/Venus), or Saturn.
Hislop criticises the “skilful adjustment of the calendar” that allowed Easter to take the place of solemnities.* However in fact, the date of Easter has nothing to do with paganism, but instead is based on Christ’s resurrection in its Jewish-Passover context. Since Passover was always on or after the first full moon after the Spring equinox, and since the Resurrection was the first Sunday after Passover, Easter is always the first Sunday after the first full moon after March 21 (historically, the Spring equinox).
Source: HYPERLINK “http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/mischedj/ct_babylon.html” homepages.paradise.net.nz/mischedj/ct_babylon.html

 

[inkaneer]

Help! I have a friend who thinks that the Catholic Church is the world’s biggest conspiracy. Most of what he says is so ignorant that I don’t give it much thought, however he brought up a “point” for lack of a better word that I wasn’t able to refute and was hoping that someone here could help.

He pointed out that the major Catholic Holidays directly coincide with pagan celebrations and since the pagan religion was around before Catholicism that the Church simply copied those dates to force conversions. He states that Jesus was not born on Dec 25 yet the Catholic Church faithfully celebrates every year.

I realize I am not going to be able to convert this guy or likely even reason with him. . .I am asking more for myself at this point that to give the info back to the friend.

To put it very briefly, the Church did indeed use the pagan holiday date for Christmas, but not so it could “force conversions.” Rather, Dec. 25th was the celebration of the days lengthening once again, which to the pagans meant that the sun god would bring light and warmth to the earth, once more. By co-opting this date, the Church made it the celebration of the Light of the World, Jesus Christ. It wasn’t done to force conversions, but rather to make it easier for Christians to celebrate alongside their pagan neighbors without raising suspicions that they, the Christians, were denigrating/not worshiping the sun god, which could get them killed. The only conspiracy was of the pagan officials against Christians.

Easter is the first Sunday following Passover, just as it was when Jesus celebrated it with his Apostles, so there is nothing pagan about that. Only the name Easter comes from a pagan source, but the holiday is based on the Jewish calendar not on any Roman god or goddess worship.

WHOA THERE. Back up. Don’t toss out Dec. 25th as the date of Christ’s birth so fast. There is evidence that supports that date. As for the idea that the church adopted pagan holidays did it ever occur to you that the pagan holidays were sort of a pre emptive strike by the forces of hell against the church so that it would appear that the church adopted these pagan celebrations. After all the pagan Egyptian magicians could perform the same as Moses. OR did you ever consider that the church, seeing that it was christianizing pagans christianized their celebrations also?

 

[drw72]

What about some of the customs or practices? The big ones being Christmas trees and eggs & rabbits during Easter.

 

[inkaneer]

What about some of the customs or practices? The big ones being Christmas trees and eggs & rabbits during Easter.

Let me ask you two questions.

No, 1 What did these customs mean in pagan terms ?

No. 2 Do they mean the same thing in christian terms?

 

[Mintaka]

There’s a lot of misinformation about Christmas trees, Easter eggs, etc.

There doesn’t seem to be any evidence that Christmas trees go back to pagan days. There used to be a lot of Germans giving credit to Martin Luther for everything, from Christmas trees to manger scenes, so calling everything pagan is sort of a backlash. If I recall correctly, the best research shows Christmas trees being pretty recent (ditto egg trees). They both may have come from the older custom of decorating wells and the trees that shaded them for various holidays. As it got more common to have a well dug near you instead of having to go a good way to fetch water, it was more fun to bring the tree inside. However, it may just be a sign that humans love decorating with greenery, and 18th and 19th century humans had more money and time to do it.

Easter eggs come from the Greek and Eastern European side of things, where red eggs are associated with many legends of Christ’s resurrection, His rising as the Sun of Justice, and of Herod or Pilate announcing that roosters will lay eggs before Christ is resurrected. But it’s probably just about fasting being over and people being able to eat eggs again (and the fact that dyeing eggs with onion skins is easy and fun, and you’ve got a lot of onion skins sitting around after eating veggies all Lent).

Rabbits are associated with Easter because they’re cheap meat to raise in a hutch, and you don’t have to wait till fall to slaughter the bunnies and lambs born in February that have been getting nice and fat all Lent. Once Lent is over, you want a roast lamb or a rabbit to break the fast, just like you want eggs. Yummmm.