In Defence of Christmas

It's the time of the year when the value of Christmas is debated. So here is my oar, stuck in.

Because of Xmas some families come together and unite at least once a year, despite the possible fraughtfulness and insincerity.

Television schedules tend to be more focused in terms of 'quality' content (though quality is a relative word of course). This may be debatable.

When the institution of the birthday seems in decline, it remains an opportunity for people to give to one another, something they might not otherwise do.

You don’t have to buy ANY of the stuff the corporate advertising machine suggests you have to. You can simply enjoy the sight of street Christmas lighting while it lasts.

You get time off from work, for no reason, for doing nothing. If you are not self-employed, you will even get paid for this.

Even people who don’t drink much get drunk, which must be good for their spirits. People can get fat with a good conscience, too.

People look after the homeless slightly better than normally.

You can wear cracker crowns and be reassured, once again, that the jokes from crackers still haven’t improved.

You can give roof and shelter to a tree. Even though you have to uproot it first, which is a bit of a bummer for the tree, I suppose.

It snows, sometimes.

It is a good and reasonable thing, in my opinion, to celebrate the birth and incarnation of the second person of the Trinity, in the person of Joshua BarJoseph

Yes, Joshua (Jesus, if you want to be Greek about it) probably wasn’t born in December. But who knows when he was (March/September?). One might as well associate his birth with the return of the sun, post winter solstice. Yes, Christianity stole and transformed Pagan sites and festivals. But at least it kept the memory of them alive in doing so. Depaganisation might have been even worse. Think John Calvin from the start.