How do Christians feel about the commercial/secular-isation of Christmas

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Christmas trees, Santa Claus, spending on presents. Obviously these are somewhat separate but related questions.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

With apologies to Stephen Colbert and Toby Keith:

I can't believe what Advent has come to today
All these Protestants and Wal-Marts trying to take it away
Ain't nobody still keeps Advent, if they even know the word
And I went to a Christmas party on December third...

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

I haven't felt in a loooong time.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

My parents always emphasized that Christmas was about Jesus and not Santa, and told me from a young age that Santa wasn't real.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

I generally hate that and I hated that even when I was not a Christian.

Well, I like presents, but in very small doses, and I consistently receive too many.

[Skill and Chance]

This is really something that happened in the pretty distant past (circa 1940-70, when most of the well known secular Christmas songs and movies were made) and has been complete for a while.  If anything it's starting to reverse now as observance of Christmas is dropping overall, incresing the influence of serious Christian believers on the holiday again. 

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

This is really something that happened in the pretty distant past (circa 1940-70, when most of the well known secular Christmas songs and movies were made) and has been complete for a while.  If anything it's starting to reverse now as observance of Christmas is dropping overall, incresing the influence of serious Christian believers on the holiday again. 

As someone with what used to be called "a sense of history" I would strongly dispute the idea that (for example) "Silver Bells" was written in the distant past, but other than that nitpick I agree with this.

[Skill and Chance]

This is really something that happened in the pretty distant past (circa 1940-70, when most of the well known secular Christmas songs and movies were made) and has been complete for a while.  If anything it's starting to reverse now as observance of Christmas is dropping overall, incresing the influence of serious Christian believers on the holiday again. 

As someone with what used to be called "a sense of history" I would strongly dispute the idea that (for example) "Silver Bells" was written in the distant past, but other than that nitpick I agree with this.

I see what you mean.  In the larger scope of history, you easily could argue that 1946-2019 was one social/political era.

[RINO Tom]

I have zero problem with it, and I see it as a positive.  Contrary to most Christians' beliefs, I'm sure, I see it as beneficial to Christianity for the holiday to remain as culturally relevant as possible.

[Skill and Chance]

I have zero problem with it, and I see it as a positive.  Contrary to most Christians' beliefs, I'm sure, I see it as beneficial to Christianity for the holiday to remain as culturally relevant as possible.

I think it's all fine as long as people aren't worshipping Santa.  It does provide a good insurance policy against Christmas ever falling into obscurity, which probably makes it easier to evangelize in the long run.

[RINO Tom]

I have zero problem with it, and I see it as a positive.  Contrary to most Christians' beliefs, I'm sure, I see it as beneficial to Christianity for the holiday to remain as culturally relevant as possible.

I think it's all fine as long as people aren't worshipping Santa.  It does provide a good insurance policy against Christmas ever falling into obscurity, which probably makes it easier to evangelize in the long run.

And I don't think that is happening at all, really.  "Religious Americans" (in quotes because it's a subjective label) will obviously continue to see the holiday as both cultural AND religious in nature, so the worst that can happen from my perspective is that a few people who are on the fence - likely younger and brought up in a more secular culture but still with some ancestral fondness for religion, like my 25-year old sister - end up in a church on Christmas Eve for "cultural reasons" and forge a reconnection.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I have zero problem with it, and I see it as a positive.  Contrary to most Christians' beliefs, I'm sure, I see it as beneficial to Christianity for the holiday to remain as culturally relevant as possible.

I think it's all fine as long as people aren't worshipping Santa.  It does provide a good insurance policy against Christmas ever falling into obscurity, which probably makes it easier to evangelize in the long run.

And I don't think that is happening at all, really.  "Religious Americans" (in quotes because it's a subjective label) will obviously continue to see the holiday as both cultural AND religious in nature, so the worst that can happen from my perspective is that a few people who are on the fence - likely younger and brought up in a more secular culture but still with some ancestral fondness for religion, like my 25-year old sister - end up in a church on Christmas Eve for "cultural reasons" and forge a reconnection.

     I hadn't thought of that, but it's actually a good point that it gets people going to church who otherwise wouldn't. All of the Christmas and Easter Christians would just be Easter Christians if the holiday weren't culturally relevant. Ofc going to church twice a year isn't good enough, but each time they do it, there's a chance that they will decide to make a more serious commitment.

[Skill and Chance]

I have zero problem with it, and I see it as a positive.  Contrary to most Christians' beliefs, I'm sure, I see it as beneficial to Christianity for the holiday to remain as culturally relevant as possible.

I think it's all fine as long as people aren't worshipping Santa.  It does provide a good insurance policy against Christmas ever falling into obscurity, which probably makes it easier to evangelize in the long run.

And I don't think that is happening at all, really.  "Religious Americans" (in quotes because it's a subjective label) will obviously continue to see the holiday as both cultural AND religious in nature, so the worst that can happen from my perspective is that a few people who are on the fence - likely younger and brought up in a more secular culture but still with some ancestral fondness for religion, like my 25-year old sister - end up in a church on Christmas Eve for "cultural reasons" and forge a reconnection.

     I hadn't thought of that, but it's actually a good point that it gets people going to church who otherwise wouldn't. All of the Christmas and Easter Christians would just be Easter Christians if the holiday weren't culturally relevant. Ofc going to church twice a year isn't good enough, but each time they do it, there's a chance that they will decide to make a more serious commitment.

On this note, it's interesting that Christmas ended up being more widely celebrated than Easter in the modern US.  That was definitely reversed in the first half of US history, with many believing Christians not observing Christmas (particularly in New England).  Now there's a meaningful group of non-Christians who observe Christmas but not Easter. 

[Associate Justice PiT]

I have zero problem with it, and I see it as a positive.  Contrary to most Christians' beliefs, I'm sure, I see it as beneficial to Christianity for the holiday to remain as culturally relevant as possible.

I think it's all fine as long as people aren't worshipping Santa.  It does provide a good insurance policy against Christmas ever falling into obscurity, which probably makes it easier to evangelize in the long run.

And I don't think that is happening at all, really.  "Religious Americans" (in quotes because it's a subjective label) will obviously continue to see the holiday as both cultural AND religious in nature, so the worst that can happen from my perspective is that a few people who are on the fence - likely younger and brought up in a more secular culture but still with some ancestral fondness for religion, like my 25-year old sister - end up in a church on Christmas Eve for "cultural reasons" and forge a reconnection.

     I hadn't thought of that, but it's actually a good point that it gets people going to church who otherwise wouldn't. All of the Christmas and Easter Christians would just be Easter Christians if the holiday weren't culturally relevant. Ofc going to church twice a year isn't good enough, but each time they do it, there's a chance that they will decide to make a more serious commitment.

On this note, it's interesting that Christmas ended up being more widely celebrated than Easter in the modern US.  That was definitely reversed in the first half of US history, with many believing Christians not observing Christmas (particularly in New England).  Now there's a meaningful group of non-Christians who observe Christmas but not Easter. 

     While I wasn't even culturally Christian growing up, as my mom consciously chose to raise me irreligious, I do think it is significant that I did not know until a few years ago that Easter was a Christian observance. American secular observance has de-Christianized Easter to an extent that it hasn't even done with Christmas. When I became a Christian, it was quite surprising to learn that not only is Easter an important event, but more important theologically than Christmas.