DaRK PaRTY ReVIEW
::Literate Blather::
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Under God's Right Arm: Christma$ a$ a Chri$tian
By Rev. Colson Crosslick

I often hear Christians complain about the alleged “commercialization” of Christmas – as if giving gifts to your loved ones was some kind of high crime. These ridiculous complaints are usually accompanied by a pining for a simpler Christmas – one based on goodwill, friendship, and family.

Forgive me for rolling my eyes in utter disgust.

Christians obviously forget that Christmas marks the birthday of Jesus Christ and that on this remarkable day he was visited by the Three Kings (also called the Maji) who were bearing gifts! To set the record straight: here is the passage from Matthew 2:10-11

“When they saw the star, they were overjoyed. On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasures and presented him with gifts of gold and of incense and of myrrh.”

As you can see the Maji honored Jesus by delivering to him a stack of goodies (myrrh, by the way, is a fancy way of saying “perfume”). Why? Because it was his birthday and who goes to a birthday party without a gift? A rude person for one (or Nathan Lane)!

It is unfortunate that recently many Christians have been conned by the far radical leftwing of the Democratic Party into believing that Christmas has become a day of crass commercialization and materialism.

Little do they realize is that it was always so!

If you are familiar with the tale of Jesus’ birth as related in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke then you would know that gift giving is a crucial component of this most Christian of holidays. Giving a gift to a loved one on Christmas is a traditional way to celebrate the holiday – it isn’t being greedy or commercial. It’s being Christian.

Was the baby Jesus being a greedy pig for accepting the wonderfully scented perfume from the Three Kings? Of course not! He happily accepted the gift and was probably the best smelling kid in Bethlehem!

So it is curious that some Christian sects have fallen into this trap and spend too many cycles decrying Santa Claus and the idea of buying presents at Christmas. They obviously don’t know their history or their Bibles.

The pseudo-Christian cult of Jehovah’s Witnesses are the most outspoken critics of Christmas and refuse to celebrate the holiday – which is akin to slapping the baby Jesus in the face! But then again Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that 144,000 people will be saved during the coming Armageddon (despite the fact that there are more than 16 million Jehovah’s Witnesses worldwide – so there’s going to be some mighty disappointed JWs when the end of days comes!).

There’s another reason to buy gifts at Christmas as well – and that doesn’t have anything to do with being Christian, but has to do with being a red-blooded American. Retailers across this great country depend on Christmas sales to meet their numbers. A solid selling season during Christmas is what often puts these enormous conglomerates in the black for the year.

Do you want to see Wal-Mart go out of business? Do you want to see Best Buy with plywood across its display windows? Do you want Sears to move to another town? Well then you need to do your patriotic duty and buy, buy, buy during the Christmas season. This is what keeps our American economy humming along! We have the best stuff in the world – and this is part of what makes us a mighty nation.

So as you can see buying gifts for friends and family at Christmas makes you a stronger Christian by connecting you with the true spirit of Jesus and it also enables you to make the United States an economic powerhouse.

So don’t just buy your father one gift – buy him two! Buy stocking stuffers! Give gifts to the mailman and the babysitter (and your local pastor)! Forget about budgets and use your credit cards if necessary!

Remember – it is the Christian and American thing to do!


(The Rev. Colson Crosslick is pastor of the Pretty Good Shepherd Church in Ripsaw, Arkansas. He often goes over his credit card limit when buying lots and lots of Christmas gifts for his family and friends. He also writes the regularly appearing column Under God's Right Arm for DaRK PaRTY.)


Read the Good Reverend's thoughts about Halloween here



Labels: , , ,


Stumble Upon Toolbar StumbleUpon | Digg! Digg | del.icio.us | Reddit | Technorati Technorati | E-mail a Link E-mail
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Essay: A Question of God
On the surface, the question of God is an enormous one.

“Does God exist?”

But in reality the answer is quite simple: No.

It’s a matter of probability. There is no scientific evidence – not one iota – that there exists in the universe an omnipotent, omniscient being that can read the thoughts and direct the actions of every living being.

"When did I realize I was God? Well, I was praying and I suddenly realized I was talking to myself."
- Peter O'Toole
Pascal’s Wager
One is tempted to fall back on Blaise Pascal’s wager in this situation. The mathematician said that the chances for God’s existence were slim, but the penalty for guessing wrong was significant. If you believe in God and are right, you are rewarded with everlasting bliss. Contrast that with not believing in God and being right. The reward is a dirt nap. Wrong, however, and one faces eternal damnation.

So, according to Pascal, it’s better to believe. But Pascal may have been being facetious because can you really fake belief in God?

“Pascal’s wager could only ever be an argument for feigning belief in God,” Biologist Richard Dawkins writes in his book “The God Delusion.” “And the God you claim to believe in better not be the omniscient kind or he’d see through the deception.”

Coming to the realization that I’m an atheist was not an easy path. I’ve struggled with the idea of God and religion since I was a boy. I was raised Catholic – with all the trappings, ceremonies, and solemn mysteries of faith (as well as the not so subtle threats not to wander off the reservation or face dire consequences).

"I'm not normally a religious man, but if you're up there, save me, Superman!"
- Homer Simpson
I’ve flirted with church attendance throughout my adult life – going to Catholic masses and even a period where I went to a Congregationalist church. But the bouts of faith never took. Organized religion always falls back on tired religious platitudes, the contradictions and downright silliness of the Bible (not to mention the outright cruelty), and the bizarre absolutism of church canon (is it really wrong to never to have an abortion?).

In the end, I fell back on wondering why the most powerful being in the universe would care if I ate a hamburger on Fridays during Lent.

Science vs. Faith
It also comes down to science. At one time, Christians insisted that God placed the Earth at the center of the universe and that the sun, the planets, and everything else revolved around it. Christians persecuted scientists who dared to suggest otherwise – calling it an attack on religion and God. We now know that the Earth is but a tiny satellite in the far corner of the universe – revolving around the sun. Christians had to reluctantly adjust. And despite, mounds of scientific evidence that man (and all life on earth) evolved through natural selection – fundamental Christians continue to fight the obvious.

Christians (and I don’t mean to pick on Christianity, but it’s the religion I’m most familiar with) continue to explain any gap in science with one answer: God. Until, that is, science finally fills the gap with a more logical explanation. Then they scurry back to another gap. Unfortunately for religion – the gaps are getting fewer and harder to find.

"The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible."
- Oscar Wilde

As human knowledge progresses (chemists are now trying to create life in the laboratory – and eventually they probably will) it begins to be clear that belief in an omnipotent, omniscient being who controls the universe like some enormous puppet master is rather archaic. Religion appears to be a leftover remnant of our primitive past when lightning and thunder were God’s wrath rather than a naturally occurring weather pattern.

Long Odds
Fundamental Christians argue for a “designer” theory; that the universe is too complicated to have randomly occurred. But everything is random. Take a look around you. What were the improbable odds that the coffee cup on your desk would have ended up there? A thousand years ago your own birth was an improbable equation. Think of all the events that had to line up to make it happen and how the odds improved each time the event before it occurred. Then, finally, your parents are born and all that had to happen was the long-shot of them meeting, falling in love, and reproducing (and the one sperm among the millions that was you had to win the race).

The fact that any of us are living – is an astronomical ridiculous mathematical improbability. But those long odds are true about everything in existence.

Darwin’s theory of natural selection will also remind us that moles, lily pads, elephants, and redwood trees didn’t just “occur.” It was a long, slow process of evolution where the hardiest, most beneficial traits survived. Moles and redwood trees didn’t just “occur” they were slowly and painstakingly created over millions of years.

Celebration of Death
There’s also another factor. Call it the gut check. If the average religious person (and 73 percent of Americans believe in God, according to Harris Poll taken in October, 2006) truly believed in God and an afterlife, wouldn’t that belief manifest itself in the way we view death? Americans view death as sorrowful and the prospect of it scares most people.

"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
- Waiter Rant
But why is this? If heaven exists – wouldn’t death be cause for celebration? Wouldn’t we look forward to our deaths? Wouldn’t we envy those who died before us because they are with God and in heaven with all of our ancestors? The answer, of course, is that most people – deep down – understand the contradictions and improbability of the existence of God – especially one who reads our thoughts and intervenes in our actions sporadically and without design.

The idea of no God, however, frightens most people. But it shouldn’t. Life is just as precious without a supreme being. You are still you. The people in your life still exist and our societies will continue to function and run and thrive. The control, however, belongs to us.

Labels: , , ,


Stumble Upon Toolbar StumbleUpon | Digg! Digg | del.icio.us | Reddit | Technorati Technorati | E-mail a Link E-mail
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Monday, May 22, 2006
Essay: Fiction and the Catholic Church

I held out for as long as I could. But I finally read The Da Vinci Code, mostly on a beach. The book still smells like coconut suntan lotion and there are oily stains on many of the pages, which I believe were the direct result of eating an entire bag of Cape Cod potato chips sometime during the middle of the novel. But that’s the type of book Dan Brown wrote – a page-turner you can read on beach between dips in the ocean and naps on a blanket. A book where you don’t really mind getting food stains on.

Steinbeck and Faulkner have little to fear. The Da Vinci Code isn’t about to replace The Sound and the Fury (#6) or The Grapes of Wrath (#10) from the Modern Library’s List of 100 Best Novels. The Da Vinci Code is a plot-driven thriller with conventional twists and turns – with some high-minded lectures on art history, architecture, and religion thrown in. Some of the lectures were quite enjoyable and had me reaching for my art history encyclopedia. But the characters were wooden, underdeveloped, and strictly included to drive the action. I enjoyed it, but in the end I prefer my thrillers more hardboiled (hello, Michael Connelly and Robert Crais). I read Brown and moved on to the next book on my stack.

Until, that is, the Roman Catholics and the Christian fundamentalists got their panties in a bunch. I remember strolling through a book store in Kendall Square in Cambridge and coming across The Truth Behind the Da Vinci Code: A Challenging Response to the Bestselling Novel by Richard Abanes. (Abanes is a devout Christian who has also inked a book questioning the morality in Lord of the Rings, the Harry Potter novels, and the Chronicles of Narnia – you get the picture).

I remember thinking: “But the book is a novel.” Fiction. Which the literate way publishers, writers, librarians, and academics say: make-believe. Can someone please alert Abanes and the dozens of other “authors” with books debunking the Brown’s novel that it actually features an albino assassin? Could we not have aimed our energies at debunking Mitch Albom’s The Five People You Meet in Heaven? (I would have paid for that.)


With the movie adaptation recently released we have gems like this one from the Washington Post: " 'The Da Vinci Code' gratuitously insults Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church," said Vincent Nichols, the Roman Catholic archbishop of Birmingham, England. "It deliberately presents fiction as fact."

Read that last sentence again: “It deliberately presents fiction as fact.” I suppose one could make the same argument about the Bible, but I also know you can make that argument about every single novel ever written. Nichols also claims Brown’s book is an insult to Jesus. Isn’t this the same Catholic church that deliberately covered up and is now being forced to pay out hundreds of millions of dollars to the victims of an epidemic of pedophilia among the clergy? One wonders if Nichols thinks that’s an insult to Jesus. Maybe he should spend less time reading mystery novels and more time reviewing the Ten Commandments.

Here’s another quote from the same Post article: “In France, Monsignor Jean-Michel di Falco Leandri, bishop of the Hautes-Alpes region, said he saw the film Friday and found it a "grotesque" portrayal of history and Christian belief.” Does anyone really get their history from novels? Would any serious historian turn to Michael Shaara’s The Killer Angels as a go-to reference on Civil War history? One can argue that a novel can put history in context – breath some life into it, but not many people would claim a novel can or should replace a history book.

It’s unfortunate that the wealthiest, most powerful church in the world feels threatened by the equivalent of a dime-store paperback. The church should focus on more important things: like feeding the poor, paying off child abuse victims, and filling out the paperwork on Mel Gibson's sainthood. What’s next, the pope declaring Dan Brown an infidel and putting a price on his head? If so, I suggest Brown contact Salman Rushdie for his list of suitable hiding spots.


Labels: , , ,


Stumble Upon Toolbar StumbleUpon | Digg! Digg | del.icio.us | Reddit | Technorati Technorati | E-mail a Link E-mail
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
The Template is generated via PsycHo and is Licensed.