All four candles are lit for the fourth Sunday in Advent. Tomorrow’s Christmas Day.
Happy Lille Julaften! It’s still December 23, here in central Minnesota: Lille Julaften, Little Christmas Eve, as my Scandinavian relatives put it, back in the day.
A Catholic Citizen in America is on UTC time, where it’s already Christmas Eve.
And the fourth Sunday in Advent, so those four candles in the upper right hand corner won’t stay lit long. I spent part of Saturday afternoon setting up a no-snow Christmas picture for that spot: and that’s a brief topic for another day.
The forecast says I’ll get rained on tomorrow morning. Not me, personally. Just that there’ll be rain when I go to Mass. Good news, it’ll have been above freezing all night, so streets and sidewalk won’t be skating rinks.
That’s about it, apart from wishing you a Merry Christmas, happy holiday, not-so-wintry winter solstice, and prevenient Happy New Year! (“Prevenient” is a word! 😉 Look it up!)
“A Christmas Sermon for Pagans”, C. S. Lewis, The Strand Magazine. (December 1946)
One, maybe two, articles by C. S. Lewis reappeared about a half-dozen years back.
Not that they’d been invisible. Collectors had the articles in their copies of The Strand Magazine, but “A Christmas Sermon for Pagans” and “Cricketer’s Progress” hadn’t made it into lists of work by Lewis.
Maybe it’s just one new ‘Lewis’ article. “Cricketer’s Progress: A Famous Reputation and What Became of It”, was written by a “Clive Hamilton”. Sure, Lewis published his first book under the Clive Hamilton pseudonym. But Lewis isn’t known as a sports journalist.1 And that’s another topic.
Anyway, I’ll be talking about “A Christmas Sermon for Pagans” this week. Or, rather, I’m sharing a few excerpts; and talking about whatever comes to mind.
“A Christmas Sermon for Pagans”: No Longer Forgotten
The Strand Magazine’s December, 1946, issue included an article by C. S. Lewis. Post-war paper rationing limited the size and physical quality of that issue.
That may be why almost everyone forgot about “A Christmas Sermon for Pagans”.
In any case, in 2014, someone found an English bookseller’s online ad for a first-edition C. S. Lewis article that wasn’t in Walter Hooper’s exhaustive “C.S.Lewis : A Companion and Guide” (1996).
Odds are that “A Christmas Sermon for Pagans” dropped off the radar because it had been published only once, on paper that was eminently biodegradable. And that the December, 1946, issue of The Strand Magazine’s had a limited print run — thanks to post-war regulations.
I figure there’s quite a story behind all that. But partly because it’s almost Christmas, I didn’t feel like jumping down that rabbit hole.
Instead, like I said, I’m sharing a few excerpts from “A Christmas Sermon for Pagans”.
And I recommend reading the whole thing — I found the complete text on Breathe, the blog of Crystal Kirgiss.2
“… ‘Objective’ Right or Wrong….”
Farming in the Middle Ages.
It’s been a while since I talked about natural law, ethical principles written into reality’s source code. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1954-1960)
It — and they — are the “‘Objective’ Right or Wrong” that Lewis talked about:
“…Now the real Pagan differed from the post-Christian in the following ways. Firstly, he was religious. From the Christian point of view he was indeed too religious by half. He was full of reverence. To him the earth was holy, the woods and waters were alive. His agriculture was a ritual as well as a technique. And secondly, he believed in what we now call an ‘Objective’ Right or Wrong. That is, he thought the distinction between pious and impious acts was something which existed independently of human opinions: something like the multiplication table which Man had not invented but had found to be true and which (like the multiplication table) he had better take notice of. The gods would punish him if he did not.
“To be sure, by Christian standards, his list of ‘Right’ or ‘Wrong’ acts was rather a muddled one. … but he also thought they would punish him for turning his face to the wrong point of the compass when he began ploughing. But though his code included some fantastic sins and duties, it got in most of the real ones. [emphasis mine]
This was written in 1946. But the idea that “right” and “wrong” is completely subjective was still taken quite seriously a couple decades later, when I was getting fed up with ranting radio preachers.
Folks who acted as if their personal taste in music, their version of American patriotism, and the unchanging will of God, were equally important — helped make the idea of objective right and wrong look silly. My opinion.
As I see it, driving on the right side of the road doesn’t make me morally superior to folks living in Australia.3 Thinking about it, I’ve never heard someone denounce left-hand traffic as “Satanic”: so I suppose some things are too silly for even the most daftly devout.
Fed up as I was with Bible-thumpers, I couldn’t take ‘everyone makes their own truth’ seriously; except maybe as an explanation for why some folks don’t like vanilla ice cream. How much that’s still in vogue, I don’t know.
It’s been decades since I heard an explicit assertion that we make up our own versions of what’s right and what’s wrong — and that this is right.
Maybe I haven’t been hanging out in the right echo chamber. Or maybe too many folks started thinking about the assertion’s implications.
At any rate, I like the “multiplication table” comparison Lewis made. Two times two equals four, no matter how I feel about it. And some things I can do are wrong, no matter what. Not all that many, and that’s yet another topic.
“…Nature is … A Kind of Machine for Us to Exploit…”
The Great Storm of 1703: bad news for England.
Again, Lewis wrote “A Christmas Sermon for Pagans” in 1946.
Western civilization, or at least the English-speaking part of it I rub shoulders with, has changed a bit over the last 77 years.
For example, there’s the way many of us now see nature. Which is a mix of good news and bad news.
Back to “A Christmas Sermon….”
“And this leads us to the third great difference between a Pagan and a post-Christian man. Believing in a real Right and Wrong means finding out that you are not very good. … When he asked himself what was wrong with the world he did not immediately reply, ‘the social system,’ or ‘our allies,’ or ‘education.’ It occurred to him that he himself might be one of the things that was wrong with the world. … And the Pagan dealt with this situation in a rather silly way. His religion was a mass of ceremonies (sacrifices, purifications, etc.) which were supposed to take away guilt. But they never quite succeeded. His conscience was not at ease.
“Now the post-Christian view which is gradually coming into existence—it is complete already in some people and still incomplete in others—is quite different. According to it Nature is not a live thing to be reverenced: it is a kind of machine for us to exploit. There is no objective Right or Wrong: each race or class can invent its own code or ‘ideology’ just as it pleases. And whatever may be amiss with the world, it is certainly not we, not the ordinary people; it is up to God (if, after all, He should happen to exist), or to Government or to Education, to give us what we want. They are the shop, we are the customers: and ‘the customer is always right.’…” (“C. S. Lewis: ‘A Christmas Sermon for Pagans’” (December 1946)) [emphasis mine]
I remember when seeing nature as “…not a live thing to be reverenced…” but “…a kind of machine for us to exploit…” was giving way to a less destructive attitude.
Since I think paying attention to long-term consequences makes sense, I see that as good news.
Replacing Industrial Age disdain for workers, wildlife, and other exploitable resources with a Hollywood version of what my ancestors believed?
“Jennifer Lawrence calls hurricanes ‘Mother Nature’s rage and wrath'” Christian Holub, Entertainment Weekly (September 8, 2017)
“Forget ‘saving the Earth’ – it’s an angry beast that we’ve awoken” Clive Hamilton, The Conversation (May 27, 2014)
The rekindled reverence for nature may have encouraged more careful use of resources. But I can’t see personifying nature as a good idea. Not when it’s sliding toward old-school nature worship.
On the other hand, maybe a factory reset is what it’ll take, for Western civilization to acknowledge that reality is real — whether we like it or not. I hope not. That sort of thing tends to be messy.4
An Uncomfortable Viewpoint
Lewis said that back when Roman roads were making regional trade easier, folks in my ancestral homelands knew that the world wasn’t working right. And they realized that the world’s problems were also theirs. The man behind the plow —
“…knew he had sinned. And the terrible thing was that he thought the gods made no difference between voluntary and involuntary sins. You might get into their bad books by mere accident, and once in, it was very hard to get out of them.…” (“C. S. Lewis: ‘A Christmas Sermon for Pagans’” (December 1946)) [emphasis mine]
It’s a distinctly uncomfortable viewpoint, not all that different from handcrafted Christianity knockoffs I’ve seen.
Syncretism, American spirituality, Voodoo, and arguably-subversive Spanish missions in the Americas5 — are yet again more topics, for another time. Other times, more likely.
“…Sing and Feast Because a God has Been Born….”
“Adoration of the Shepherds,” James Tissot. (ca. 1890)
Small wonder, then, that news of a man whose birth had been announced by otherworldly beings — who had defeated death — and who offered eternal life to those who accepted him — was seen as very good news, indeed.
“…All of the world (even in Japan, even in Russia) men and women will meet on December 25th to do what is a very old-fashioned and, if you like, a very Pagan thing—to sing and feast because a God has been born. You are uncertain whether it is more than a myth. Well if it is, then our last hope is gone. But is the opposite explanation not worth trying?…” (“C. S. Lewis: ‘A Christmas Sermon for Pagans’” (December 1946)) [emphasis mine]
Christmas Glitz, Glitter — and —
A Christmas tree in Tokyo: part of the annual Marunouchi Illumination. (December 23, 2006)
Two millennia after our Lord’s birth, it’s still good news.
Which may help explain why Christmas-themed winter solstice celebrations like the Marunouchi Illumination are so popular. I’ll grant that my native culture’s colorful traditions make for shopper-friendly displays.6
But glitz and glitter aren’t “the true meaning of Christmas”. Not for me. Although I enjoy seeing an extra helping of light and color during the darkest days of our year.
This is the season when I, we, celebrate the Son of God’s birth. As the angel said, that’s —
“…Good News of Great Joy….”
“The Angel and the Shepherds”, James Tissot. (ca. 1886-1894)
“The angel of the Lord appeared to them and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were struck with great fear.
“The angel said to them, ‘Do not be afraid; for behold, I proclaim to you good news of great joy that will be for all the people.
“For today in the city of David a savior has been born for you who is Messiah and Lord.
“And this will be a sign for you: you will find an infant wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger.’
“And suddenly there was a multitude of the heavenly host with the angel, praising God and saying:
“‘Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests.'” (Luke 2:9–14)
Two millennia later, that baby’s birth is still a big deal. A very big deal.
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. “He was in the beginning with God. “All things came to be through him, “and without him nothing came to be. What came to be “through him was life, and this life was the light of the human race; “the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.” (John 1:1–5) [emphasis mine]
I’ve talked about that, and related matters, before:
“Discovering ‘A Christmas Sermon for Pagans’“ Joel D. Heck, Christopher Marsh; VII: Journal of the Marion E. Wade Center, pp. 51-56; Marion E. Wade Center, Wheaton College Vol. 34 (2017) via JSTOR
3 Directional traffic — or — sometimes left is right:
You’ve seen “Like this” buttons at the end of these posts.
Now you can rate posts, too. I added Rate My Post Tuesday afternoon (December 19, 2023) — and don’t worry: I can’t get personal information when you click one of those stars.
Here’s what it looks like, at the bottom of a recent post.
“Pope Francis Allows Priests to Bless Same-Sex Couples” and other catchy headlines. (December 18, 2023)
Headlines are supposed to get attention. That’s what these did:
“Vatican approves blessings for same-sex couples in landmark ruling” (Reuters)
“Pope Francis Allows Priests to Bless Same-Sex Couples” (The New York Times)
“Vatican Issues Guidelines for Same-Sex Blessings” (The Wall Street Journal)
I’m not sure about “The ‘spirit’ of ‘Fiducia supllicans'” in The Pillar. Maybe it’s attention-grabbing for the publication’s demographic.
Anyway, what Pope Francis said — what he actually said, not what editors say he said — is not what I’m going to write about this week.
Important, Yes — Something I’ll do This Week, No
For one thing, I’ve talked about perceptions, popes, our current pope, and acting as if what I believe matters, before. Recently.
For another, Vatican News gives a pretty good overview about the current SHOCKING NEW UNPRECEDENTED DISRUPTIVE DECLARATION — or whatever the current adjustment of pastoral practice will be called.
I suspect we’ll get the usual fervently feverish screeds, denouncing what some reporter said the pope said.
And equally-imaginative ‘it’s about time’ declarations from daring defenders of creatively alternative lifestyles. Or whatever this month’s in-vogue term is. Followed in due course by laments that the Catholic Church doesn’t agree with everybody in the faculty lounge.
“Doctrinal declaration opens possibility to bless couples in irregular situations“ “With the Declaration ‘Fiducia supplicans’ issued by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, approved by Pope Francis, it will be possible to bless same-sex couples but without any type of ritualization or offering the impression of a marriage. The doctrine regarding marriage does not change, and the blessing does not signify approval of the union.”
Vatican News (December 18, 2023)
“When two people request a blessing, even if their situation as a couple is ‘irregular,’ it will be possible for the ordained minister to consent. However, this gesture of pastoral closeness must avoid any elements that remotely resemble a marriage rite.
If I see enough sound and fury in social media and my news feed, then maybe I’ll carefully read “Fiducia supplicans”, go over what the Church has been saying and — based on its two millennia track record — what I think it will continue saying.
I may read it anyway, since it’s a new Church document.
Besides, I occasionally talk about both why I see no point in complaining about the Catholic Church accepting imperfect people: and why I think some rules make sense.
Speaking of which, all those rules boil down to this: I should love God, love my neighbor, and see everybody as my neighbor. (Matthew 5:43–44, 22:36–40; Mark 12:28–31; Luke 6:31, 10:25–37; Catechism, 1789)
That’s everybody. Including that massive chunk of humanity who are not just like me. 😉
Allegedly-related posts, including a cursorily superficial look at why I’ve been out of step since my youth:
Something new each Saturday.
Life, the universe and my circumstances permitting. I'm focusing on 'family stories' at the moment. ("A Change of Pace: Family Stories" (11/23/2024))
I was born in 1951. I'm a husband, father and grandfather. One of the kids graduated from college in December, 2008, and is helping her husband run businesses and raise my granddaughter; another is a cartoonist and artist; #3 daughter is a writer; my son is developing a digital game with #3 and #1 daughters. I'm also a writer and artist.
I live in Minnesota, in America's Central Time Zone. This blog is on UTC/Greenwich time.
Support this Blog:
More Perspectives From the Catholic Laity:
Blog - David Torkington
Spiritual theologian, author and speaker, specializing in prayer, Christian spirituality and mystical theology [the kind that makes sense-BHG]
