I don't normally write in response to news or editorials because I normally don't get access to any news magazines until months later. But Anna Quindlen had an interesting point in her Jan 2 column in Newsweek.
One idea she touched on was that it is ridiculous to think that a religion that has lasted 2000 years is somehow at risk if it isn't acknowledged in an advertisement at OfficeMax. Actually I'd rather not have WalMart use "Merry Christmas" to sell plastic Santas or toys or loads of junk. I'd much rather have McDonalds sell us special holliday shakes and local bars have holiday specials. Does tooth rotting cans of Coke really need nativity-visiting polar bears on them? Does that really lead to a greater spiritual understanding - even by a postmodern definition?
Keeping Christ's name sacred has value. There's something to be said for the people who holiday is know Him being the ones who share His name. Wasn't that what "thou shall not take the Lord's name in vain" all about? Keep it separate and sacred. I know that some would take the view that any publicity is good publicty but does the King of Kings need greater name recognition or just greater understanding of what His name means?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Well, it really boils down to familiarity breeding contempt. So, we actually would want to "lose" the alleged "War on Christmas", to reestablish the uniqueness of Christian holidays.
Post a Comment