The Church Service That Stole Christmas
I remember being a kid when Christmas fell on a Sunday. It was 1977 and Santa brought me a glow-in-the-dark sword that resembled what the world just learned was a lightsaber. But I had to wait through the longest church service of my almost six year life to play with it. This year I am faced with the same dilemma but this time as a parent. And ironically, lightsabers are again a hot toy for the year.
If we are going to be attending the Christmas Eve service, it just doesn’t sound that tempting to, at best “change”, at worst “ruin” the tradition that our family knows as the one day in the year that we celebrate Christmas. Our family likes to take our time with Christmas. We stretch out finding what Santa brought, opening stockings, eating breakfast, opening gifts, snacking all day, reading the account of Christ’s birth, visiting with family, and just relaxing together over the course of the entire day.
If we go to church, do we rush everyone out past the tree in the morning (imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth) and then start Christmas when we get back to the house at about 11:30 — about the time everyone is hungry for lunch and then when the kids would be in need of a nap (imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth)? Or do we wake our non-morning kids up at 6:00 am (imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth) to start Christmas and then have to drag them away to start getting dressed for church (imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth)?
Below is an article that seems to present the idea of “canceling” church on Christmas day as the ultimate low of consumerism’s effect on our culture. Am I copping out? Are they being legalistic? Am I alone in my feelings about the one day of Christmas being different than the other 50 something Sundays in the year?
Read full article: Some Megachurches Closing for Christmas.
December 7th, 2005 at 10:19 pm
I think Wells (the first guy quoted) takes an uncharitable view of the motivation of the churches that opt for a Christmas Eve service and don’t force church-goers to have to choose between their family time on Christmas morning and a church service.
If a church meets Saturday evening for a Christmas Eve service, why would it be wrong to forgo the meeting less than 18 hours later on Sunday morning?
December 7th, 2005 at 11:33 pm
Why would a church not have a service on a Sunday morning, regardless of the potential for attendance? Each family should make a decision that they are comfortable with, knowing that nobody will make a decision that everyone agrees with. If you choose to spend Christmas morning with your family - man that is fantastic - becuase knowing you, David, you will spend your time with your family worshipping the newborn King (and, no, I don’t mean you’ll have some singing and a sermon…..) and not cuddling up with all the material gifts - right?
So - those that don’t think it is ideal to come to church on Sunday morning - should feel no pressure to attend.
But - I would ask why in the world would the church cancel a Sunday worship service, simply because it falls on Christmas day?
December 8th, 2005 at 7:17 am
I admit I was a little stung by the news that we would be having church services on Christmas morning. But it’s forced me to go back to a fundamental question: why do we meet for worship on Sunday at all?
It’s because one Sunday, 30-something years after the shepherds and wise men and angels had their 15 minutes of fame, the baby they heralded rose from the grave. Without Easter, there’s no Christmas. Worship on Sunday is a commemoration of Christ’s resurrection, so arguably, Sunday is more important than Christmas.
That’s no slam-dunk, though; for one thing, it doesn’t mean we have to go to church to worship. If we awoke to a foot of snow on Christmas (how cool would that be!) we would cancel church in a heartbeat - Sunday or not. Does that mean the weather trumps Jesus? Of course not. There’s “weather” of a different kind among people who worship in the same body of believers, and people who live under the same roof have their own “climate” to consider.
So where do I fall? I’ll be in church. For the first time in my life, I’ll be somewhere other than in front of a tree ripping the wrapping paper off a lightsaber or socks or soap-on-a-rope.
Instead, I’ll be dealing with children (wailing and gnashing their teeth) who would rather not go to church under those circumstances.
I’ll be dealing with my visiting family members, who gave me the tradition I grew up with and will doubtless feel belittled by my “holier-than-thou” church attendance.
I’ll probably be distracted from pure worship while at church, with my mind darting back and forth between the celebration of Christ’s resurrection and the commotion around Christ’s birth.
(As an aside… isn’t this interesting: at the time, his birth was virtually unnoticed by men, but his death and resurrection took place in a storm of activity; today, it’s the other way around.)
So I’ll just have to work a little (maybe a lot) harder to make it “feel like Christmas.” But know I’m wondering if that “feeling” is helping or hurting my worship of the newborn King…
December 8th, 2005 at 7:22 am
It’s not simply because it falls on Christmas day. It is also because you are holding a Saturday night service that week.
And I’m not saying that a church shouldn’t hold a service on Christmas Eve and again on Christmas morning if that’s what that church wants to do, but I can see good reason for not doing that.
December 8th, 2005 at 8:58 am
I’d like to drop my usual “absolute” and walk away on this issue, but I can’t. I can see both sides in my growing phlegmatism.
On the pro-cancel side, I have already felt the administrative effects of having a Christmas Eve and Christmas Day service. It’s been hard to get volunteers. Afterall, who wants to show up at church at 8 AM on Christmas morning? Not planning would obviously be easier on me. Then there are family traditions, which for me are shot due to my sister-in-law and niece’s travel on Christmas day, that families hold dearly (actually we haven’t had a routine Chapman or Schultz Christmas in over 10 years given travel, births, war, etc… Each years celebration is different).
On the other pro-keep hand, is it truly that much work to get a family to church on a day already set aside for it? Do family traditions trump Jesus’ birthday? Has church become such a production we can’t imagine it done simply and effectively? And Christmas Eve, taking 45 minutes (plus travel) to recognize the coming of our King isn’t a sacrifice, by no means. As John said, attending these services are never mandatory. But what a great way to set a precedent for your children, “Celebrating the birth of Jesus with our church family is more important than you opening gifts right away. Let’s all go to church and worship Jesus together.”
I understand the mega church reasoning. The beautiful thing is, I don’t attend a mega church!
December 8th, 2005 at 4:19 pm
I think everyone is picking up on the tension. It’s so easy to feel like a “bad Christian” not to go to Sunday service on Chirstmas day. But I don’t feel compelled to go to church on Christmas if it falls on a Thursday. And I don’t feel compelled to go to church if we happen to have an extraordinary engagement on a Sunday (Vacation, Breakfast with the President, you get the idea) as our faith isn’t based on church attendance. I think Christmas (viewed tradtionally) can classify as an extraordinary event but not going to church on a Sunday that happens to be Christmas (viewed religiously) makes you feel like you’re compromising your priorities.
Like Kevin mentioned, it takes people/volunteers for churches to function. Then there is the assumption that it’s Jesus’ birthday so if there is going to be a service then it has to be a big to-do. Assuming most of the church will essentially be on vacation that day the next logical step is to cancel service. Unlike a mega-church, there isn’t much anonymity in smaller churches. Maybe if churches planned on a “small” church service that day then people that are the usual volunteers (like myself) wouldn’t feel so much pressure. I currently imagine some people showing up for church and proceeding with “a big to-do” as best they can but thinking that it would have been better if the non-committed Christians hadn’t stayed at home and ruined Jesus’ birthday party for everyone else.
For example, “we were gonna have a full band but Dave didn’t show so no drums” or “there was gonna be breakfast food available but Susan, the imaginary head of the hospitality team, decided to stay at home with her family.”
December 9th, 2005 at 9:03 am
I would guess that you can call what we are having this coming Sunday - a small service. I don’t think that we are planning a big-to-do - actually I think it is going to be no different from a planning perspective than any other Sunday - with the exception that there will be many folks that are not participating and therefore it will be done on a smaller scale.
I see the reasoning for not having a service on Christmas Day - I just don’t agree with that reasoning. However, just as I won’t go around beating those that baptize infants on the head - I won’t go around beating folks up who don’t come to church on Christmas Day. I wish they would, but I find them no less spiritual or ‘committed to the church’ than others.
I will end with a psycho babble motto that has served me well, if someone ‘feels less spiritual’ because they choose not to go to church on a Sunday because it happens to be Christmas day - that feeling is the responsibility of the one who feels it. No one is making them feel that way, they are choosing to feel that way. If conviction indicates that the wiser choice is to stay home with family and friends, then that is the choice to make, regardless of how someone feels.
Merry Christmas!
December 9th, 2005 at 9:51 am
John, I generally agree-it’s a personal choice and one should follow his conscience. And if you cancel the service, you are denying those who would prefer to meet from doing so.
But wouldn’t the same logic apply to the snow condition? If some people decide to put their safety ahead of the weekly assembly, shouldn’t that be a personal decision and not made for the whole church?
The problem is that by staying open during hazardous weather, the church puts people in a moral dilemma: do I endanger my family, or do I put my personal safety and comfort aside and show my commitment to Christ by braving the trip? You can see where this can go… “Is it too much to ask to ask for people to put chains on their tires? Jesus was more inconvenienced than that for you! Think of what the martyrs went through! Such compromise!”
My main beef is with the folks who self-righteously bash the churches who disagree with them on this issue. I think we’ve got bigger fish to fry.
December 9th, 2005 at 10:44 am
John your psycho-babble motto is true as I am trying to define what my true convictions are in this disputable matter. I am asking myself, how much is self-imposed pressure/guilt (as Eric so accurately defined) and how much is true conviction? Given the options, can I be at peace with whatever it is I choose?
Thank you for your graciousness as I am trying to figure this out.
December 9th, 2005 at 2:10 pm
Taking up Eric’s point… there is a practical case to be made in favor of omni-mega-humongo-churches waving off Christmas day services - it takes HUGE numbers of people to run those operations.
Given the likelihood that large numbers of those “essential workers” (volunteers for the most part) are going to be out of town or otherwise unavailable, one could make the argument that it would be foolish to try to pull it off with a smaller second- or third-string team.
Now whether a church should escalate the size and scope of its programming to the point where it needs that kind of infrastructure… well… that’s a different question entirely.
December 9th, 2005 at 11:34 pm
Eric - when I posted my original thoughts on the subject - I remembered that last January we cancelled church one Sunday because of ice - so your argument made it into my brain, albeit briefly, prior to the posting.
The reason that I didn’t go further with it is that I couldn’t find an adequate parallel between the potential for death as a member’s car wrapped itself around a tree after sliding 1100 feet on an icy road and the inconvenience of attending church at a time when families generally gather to open presents.
Believe me, I am beating up no one - and I want no one to feel guilty about deciding to stay home on Christmas. I have never been one to concern myself too much with what others think of the decisions I make - so I try not to put too much actual or implied pressure on anyone for the choices they make. I think in the scope of things you are exactly right, we have much bigger fish to fry. I mean, heck, I’ve skipped church before because I stayed up too late the night before - shame on anyone who thinks any less of me for that !!!! :^)
Perhaps it gets back to the purpose of the church (see Hugh’s posts - and a quote from someone at Willow Creek or Saddle Back in the yahoo article). Either church is to magnify and glorify Christ as a body of His followers - or it is simply a place that all the lost can come to hear some degree of the gospel. I would submit it is the former.
And whether one considers it good or bad, one of the conventions that the church has chosen is to regularly assemble on Sundays for a time of worship and fellowship.
There is much love to go around for all of you guys - and if’n I don’t see you on Christmas Day - I won’t think less of any of you - as a matter of fact, I will think all the more because I know that none of you take this issue lightly.
Coolio.