Annual Christmas grumble

[nickyboy]

Sooner the build up starts the better. Novermber is a crap month, all dark and rubbish weather. Bring it on...ho, ho, ho

 

[Markymark]

...and, of course, the religious reason is why we celebrate Christmas (the clue's in the name). It might not be the reason we have a party in mid-winter. There's a decent article looking reasonably dispassionately at the historical evidence and squishing this suggestion:



here: https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org...w-testament/how-december-25-became-christmas/

TL;DR? The feast of the nativity on December 25th is well attested at a time when Christianity wouldn't have wanted to associate itself with an existing solstice festival, whose date is apparently less well attested. An alternative explanation to do with celebrating the birth 9 months after the conception exists and is more credible given what we know about the mind of late antiquity.

And you've cherry-picked the least favourable statistic - 60% assert a Christian identity, and as anyone associated with Christianity will tell you going to church is not the marker of a Christian identity these days (if it ever was). Oh, and "many hundred" is 300 at most - Christmas (as I said, the clue's in the name) is a Christian festival whose date was settled by the early 4th century CE. Midwinter parties no doubt go back a lot further, and many of the traditions now associated with Christmas have no doubt been borrowed, but Christmas (the clue's in the name) is inescapably Christian.

I know what it is called now. Like I say, superimposed by the church. We now have a muddle in the same way was we have Easter Resurrection mixed with eggs, bunnies and other fertility iconography from long before. They were reasonably successful in rebranding it and making the name stick but lots of elements from prior remain. Does that mean the church version of the story is the 'real' reason? No. Are we deviating from the 'true meaning'? Depending on which 'true meaning' you like, yes or no. Are we celebrating Christmas? Yes. Is everyone celebrating the birth of Jesus? Nope. Who is right? Depends on how far back you want to go.

 

[srw]

going to church is not the marker of a Christian identity these days (if it ever was)

Because I find this sort of question quite interesting I've dug up a statistic from the 1851 census reported in wikipedia and elsewhere - there was a church attendance of just under 11 million out of a population of nearly 18 million, at a time when just about everyone had a Christian identity. Take out those people who attended more than once and you realise that "church attendance" is the wrong statistic to use.

Depends on how far back you want to go.

And also depends on what claims are being made. Claims that Christmas was superimposed by the church on pre-existing pagan midwinter festivals simply don't stack up when you examine the historical evidence.

 

[MikeG]

It's not even past Remembrance Sunday and already it's all Christmas in the shops..........

I've spotted your problem. Avoid shops. Problem solved.

 

[User482]

Because I find this sort of question quite interesting I've dug up a statistic from the 1851 census reported in wikipedia and elsewhere - there was a church attendance of just under 11 million out of a population of nearly 18 million, at a time when just about everyone had a Christian identity. Take out those people who attended more than once and you realise that "church attendance" is the wrong statistic to use.

That depends on what you're trying to show, doesn't it? Ticking a box on the census, because you prefer it to the other options, doesn't sound like the strongest expression of Christian identity.

 

[MikeG]

......And you've cherry-picked the least favourable statistic - 60% assert a Christian identity.........

Nope. British Social Attitudes Survey. More than half (53%) have no religion. That comparable figure in 1983 was 31%, so the change is rapid (which partly explains the results from the last census which was nearly 7 years ago).

Incidentally, only 3% of under 24's self-identify as Anglican (C of E and off-shoots).

 

[Fab Foodie]

Why no white Christmas's any more?

There’s a bad joke there somewhere...

 

[srw]

That depends on what you're trying to show, doesn't it? Ticking a box on the census, because you prefer it to the other options, doesn't sound like the strongest expression of Christian identity.

Of course. I'm merely trying to show that focussing on the tiny proportion of the population who attend church regularly also doesn't give a good idea as to the religious feelings of the nation. @MikeG has (slightly) misreported a different statistic - on religious affiliation. The question asked was "'Do you regard yourself as belonging to any particular religion" (my bold). Which again isn't quite the same as believing in it, or viewing it as an important part of your culutural heritage.

However you look at it, Christianity is the dominant religion in the UK. And it's not all that difficult to find surveys demonstrating that belief in something beyond humanity is still very common in the UK (for instance https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/02/12/third-british-adults-dont-believe-higher-power/ - only 33% explicitly don't believe, and 53% do)

 

[MikeG]

........ @MikeG has (slightly) misreported a different statistic - on religious affiliation..........

I mis-reported nothing (and I'm afraid the BSAS trumps a Yougov poll). "53% have no religion" is not a misrepresentation of anything. If you are going to make accusations, at least have to courtesy to be explicit about the supposed error.

 

[srw]

I mis-reported nothing (and I'm afraid the BSAS trumps a Yougov poll). "53% have no religion" is not a misrepresentation of anything. If you are going to make accusations, at least have to courtesy to be explicit about the supposed error.

I was explicit. The question wasn't "Do you have a religion?", it was, as I said, "Do you regard yourself as belonging to a religion?". It's correct to say that the survey (conducted using the same methods as the BSAS, incidentally), found that 53% regarded themselves as not belonging to a religion. It's not correct to say that 53% have no religion, because you can have religion without belonging to a religion.

 

[BoldonLad]

Speaking as one of the 33%, it appears the "Christianity" is beginning to evaporate from this thread.

 

[Beebo]

I enjoy Christmas. I am quite capable of avoiding all the nonsense until a couple of weeks before when I get into the family nostalgic fun.
I also understand that businesses rely very heavily on Christmas for their annual profits. They would find some other way of taking your money if Christmas didn’t exist.
Don’t succumb to the marketing nonsense. As adults we should be able to filter out what we don’t want.

 

[MiK1138]

Why no white Christmas's any more?

Bleeding Brexit Innit

 

[User482]

Of course. I'm merely trying to show that focussing on the tiny proportion of the population who attend church regularly also doesn't give a good idea as to the religious feelings of the nation. @MikeG has (slightly) misreported a different statistic - on religious affiliation. The question asked was "'Do you regard yourself as belonging to any particular religion" (my bold). Which again isn't quite the same as believing in it, or viewing it as an important part of your culutural heritage.

However you look at it, Christianity is the dominant religion in the UK. And it's not all that difficult to find surveys demonstrating that belief in something beyond humanity is still very common in the UK (for instance https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/02/12/third-british-adults-dont-believe-higher-power/ - only 33% explicitly don't believe, and 53% do)

I'm not convinced that a mild preference for some vague notion of Christian identity is evidence of much at all, beyond an understandable desire to belong. Certainly, it's not a reliable guide to the "religious feelings of the nation", and it feels like you might be framing the discussion in a way that allows you to cherry pick a favourable statistic.

Leaving aside for a moment debates about semantics and absolute numbers, the thing that struck me most from @MikeG post was the rapid decline in a relatively short period of time.

 

[srw]

you might be framing the discussion in a way that allows you to cherry pick a favourable statistic.

Unlike, say @Markymark?

Here's the mid-term trend from the BSAS (it's an old graph because wikipedia's not updated it recently):

To be honest, I'm less bothered about numbers, and more interested in the fact that bad history, and bad interpretation of statistics now appears to be an accepted line of argument. I'm also interested because there's a particular strand of atheism which seems to be incredibly defensive at the same time as being actively proselytising. It's particularly interesting because it's often found amongst socially liberal, egalitarian, broadly left-wing people - who share many of the same outlooks on what is good for society as a very large and important strand of thinking among people with religious belief.