S
Swiss_Guy
Guest
I guess Iâll become a heretic too.All of what you mentioned is mortally sinful and should be avoided at all costs.
Troll alert going off.![]()
I guess Iâll become a heretic too.All of what you mentioned is mortally sinful and should be avoided at all costs.
Troll alert going off.![]()
There are genuine battles worth joining for God and country, rather than taking on a popularized image of an actual saint, and mis-defining the term âblasphemy.âThis *must *be a joke. Santa? Blasphemous?! Really? No one can seriously believe that.
My friend, Iâll happily join you guys on the road to hersey!I guess Iâll become a heretic too.![]()
Iâm âbitterly clingingâ to my belief in Santa!There are genuine battles worth joining for God and country, rather than taking on a popularized image of an actual saint, and mis-defining the term âblasphemy.â
![]()
Love this statue. We have a copy of it in our living room every Christmas. Santa comes to my house every Christmas, and will continue to do so. My children also attend CCD classes, and see no dichotomy between Jesus and Santa. You can have both at Christmas, as long as you teach your children not to lose sight of the real reason for the Holy Day. I ask my children why Santa picked this very special night out of all the others to give gifts to the children of the worlds, and to them the answer is obvious - itâs because âChristmas is Jesusâs birthday.â They get it. Santa reinforces the importance of the birth of the Savior in a way that sinks into kids minds. It is our job as parents not to let Santa supplant the real meaning. But that does not necessarily require throwing out the idea of Santa Claus.I agree with the CCCâs definition of lying. However, here I think is the point of contention:
Most parents would never say they are intentionally deceiving their children. Yes, Santa Claus is not real. Neither is the Ugly Duckling, Snow White, Rumpelstiltskin, or (according to the notes in my New American Bible, so take it with a grain of salt) the Books of Tobit and Judith in the Bible.
BUT people tell their children these stories not because of the verity of the situation, but because of the underlying moral truth. Santa, for example, teaches us that generosity makes others feel good, and when we are generous, we feel pretty good, too. Also, we ought to behave, or else we will not be rewarded.
In the words of G.K. Chesterton, âFairy Tales are more than true; not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten.â
HOWEVER, given the special situation of Santa - in that heâs no longer just a mythical figure, but almost the central figure, tantamount to the Baby Jesus, of the non-Christian âWinter Holidayâ, I can certainly understand your and othersâ feelings. And Santa must be made the servant of the Baby Jesus. Something like this:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-q4wsqzr6n...FNyrE/s400/Santa+kneeling+over+baby+Jesus.jpg
I donât think it is sinful to tell children about Santa. But unless we relay it back to Jesus, it will be counterproductive to developing healthy Christian faith.
I also see nothing completely wrong with telling our children about Santa because, in a way - not the way atheists make it out to be, though - he is analogous to God.When we were young, we used to believe God really was a big, old man with a long white beard (as the atheists would make Him out to be). That was because we could not understand or accept God in His true form. Most of us still canât understand Godâs infinity or being outside of the universe. But we can accept it.
Yes, we could understand Saint Nicholas as he really is when we are children. But I donât think children much understand the wonder of Heaven, when candy and toys are so much more entertaining here and now, much less the power Saint Nicholas has when heâs not on Earth physically anymore.
Santa Claus, if we as Christians wield him properly, can segueway into Saint Nicholas, just as the âold guy in the cloudsâ can segue into the infinite, eternal, living God. We can use things that children grasp easier to lead them into deeper truths. It would also make the transition from âSanta is realâ to âWe lied to youâ much, much less jarring, and it still leaves the kids with something to believe in, that is real.
I do believe teaching kids Santa is real and then telling them he is not is a very bad idea, analogous to telling kids God is a big, powerful man in the sky and then telling us He doesnât exist.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_ClausI donât even have to go into the fact that most of the imagery surrounding Santa Claus is Pagan in origin. âŚ
someone is anti-Republican.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Claus
sj-r.com/top-stories/x1282421386/First-modern-Santa-being-re-created-at-presidential-museum
baic.house.gov/historical-essays/essay.html?intID=5&intSectionID=33
judiciary.house.gov/hearings/March2007/Tichenor070330.pdf
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Nast
Nastâs portrayal of the modern Santa Claus, rooted in Saint Nicholas, and his Germanic roots, existed to the favor of Union troops and therefore, bore a resemblance to Uncle Sam. Although, it was The Republican Party, that heralded abolition, many blacks left: when policies became racially opposed to blacks. Therefore, many blacks became Democrats. Through Abraham Lincolnâs era anti-Catholicism prevailed, âThe Bible Riotsâ, killing 20, and burning down more than 100 schools, and homes, in Philadelphia, PA â Republican Party bigotry â under ânativismâ in opposition to Catholicism. The Republican Party originated a number of secret societies, and conspiracy theories, in opposition to Catholicism. Santa Claus â based on Saint Nicholas â nonetheless opposed Catholicism to the favor of Nastâs Germanic Protestant views, portraying of course, Santa Claus as a Union member favoring hostility against Catholics. Santa Claus is more of Catholic origin; nonetheless, Santa Claus is a bigoted anti-Catholic Republican. That being said, it is in the past; additionally, the word âblasphemyâ with respect to Santa Claus, may be appropriate.
**Love this statue. We have a copy of it in our living room every Christmas. Santa comes to my house every Christmas, and will continue to do so. My children also attend CCD classes, and see no dichotomy between Jesus and Santa. You can have both at Christmas, as long as you teach your children not to lose sight of the real reason for the Holy Day. I ask my children why Santa picked this very special night out of all the others to give gifts to the children of the worlds, and to them the answer is obvious - itâs because âChristmas is Jesusâs birthday.â They get it. Santa reinforces the importance of the birth of the Savior in a way that sinks into kids minds. It is our job as parents not to let Santa supplant the real meaning. But that does not necessarily require throwing out the idea of Santa Claus.
Peace,
Robert
I can hear the Easter Bunny comingâŚ![]()
Excellent!!I can hear the Easter Bunny comingâŚ![]()
Wait, what?! A weather condition is mortally sinful? How again is taking a quiet stroll and listening to wildlife something that âshould be avoided at all costs?âAll of what you mentioned is mortally sinful and should be avoided at all costs.
Troll alert going off.![]()
UmâŚre-read my post. What I said was clearly tongue in cheek. I donât think any of it is mortally sinful.Wait, what?! A weather condition is mortally sinful? How again is taking a quiet stroll and listening to wildlife something that âshould be avoided at all costs?â
.
A flying broomstick does not exist!Despite all the anger on the part of people who see nothing wrong with Santa Claus, I still havenât seen a rational explanation for it.
Why is it acceptable to lie to children to get them to believe in certain kinds of magic, like elves and flying reindeer? Whatâs the difference between flying reindeer and, say, a flying broomstick?
This is just a socially acceptable form of lying to deceive children into believing in magic, all the while running the risk of overshadowing Christ.
So we have lying, magic, and materialism all rolled into one. Why defend this absurd tradition?
oh for heavenâs sake. must we always have blanket generalizations thrown at us with absolutely NOTHING to support them but a personâs use of rhetoric and thinly veiled hostility during a time that should be filled with goodwill?Despite all the anger on the part of people who see nothing wrong with Santa Claus, I still havenât seen a rational explanation for it.
Why is it acceptable to lie to children to get them to believe in certain kinds of magic, like elves and flying reindeer? Whatâs the difference between flying reindeer and, say, a flying broomstick?
This is just a socially acceptable form of lying to deceive children into believing in magic, all the while running the risk of overshadowing Christ.
So we have lying, magic, and materialism all rolled into one. Why defend this absurd tradition?
Thankfully, there is no such thing as an unforgiveable sin. Moreover, I have never claimed to judge the sins of another, merely pointed out the facts that Santa Claus is a lie, is âmagical,â and overshadows Christ. I donât see the good in it, nor have I seen so much as an attempt at a logical counter argument. The best the pro-Santa crowd can muster is a facile Santa Claus-magic and lies are OK. âNot really magic and lies at all. Not like those other magic and lies. Santa Claus is a good lie, right? Itâs good magic, not like that other magic, the bad kind.âoh for heavenâs sake. must we always have blanket generalizations thrown at us with absolutely NOTHING to support them but a personâs use of rhetoric and thinly veiled hostility during a time that should be filled with goodwill?
I must have missed the memo that said, "peace on earth to all of good will. . .unless of course they have at any point in time uttered the words âSanta Clausâ without following it with âThat wretched heretical conspiracy of evilâ in which case they have committed the unforgiveable sin. . .![]()