« Faith and Doubt |
Main
| The future and purpose of Christian blogging »
What shall we do with Halloween?
Tim Challies has written a piece on Halloween reminiscent of an article I read a couple years ago by John Fischer called Home for Halloween.
An excerpt from Challies’ post:
Perhaps the greatest fallacy Christians believe about Halloween is that by refusing to participate in the day we are somehow taking a stand against Satan. And second to that, is that participation in the day is an endorsement of Satan and his evil holidays. The truth is that Halloween is not much different from any other day in this world where, at least for the time being, every day is Satan's day and a celebration of him and his power. Another member of the Discussion List wrote the following. "Yeah... I've heard all of the 'pagan' reasons Christians should avoid Halloween. The question is whether we are actually particpating in Samhain when we participate in Halloween? Who or what makes the 'Witch's League of Public Awareness' the definers of what Halloween is, either now or historically? Such a connection between Samhain and my daughter as a ladybug or my son as a Bengals Boy is highly dubious."
I agree that October 31st, in and of itself, is no different than any other day of the year, but it does not follow that the celebration and practice of Halloween traditions and customs are no different from any other traditions or customs. Challies’ article also makes no case for the claim that the connection between Samhain and present-day trick-or-treating is “highly dubious.” If it weren’t for the ancient pagan customs, we clearly would not have our present-day ones.
I posted a response to Fischer’s article last October. I’ve since revised my position a bit, though my original concerns remain. The following is content from last year’s post, including text from a letter I sent to Mr. Fischer that I have gone through and revised.
Fischer claims it is a mistake for Christians to “boycott” Halloween because they cannot engage their neighbors by avoiding them at this time. However, I think there are two ways to look at this. I’m not sure it can definitively be said that participation in trick-or-treating represents being “in but not of the world.” Fischer goes so far as to say that by turning off the lights or going to an “alternative” celebration, one could be “lending credibility to the devil by denouncing Halloween as Satan’s day when most of those around us see it as nothing more than a day to dress up and have fun.” While many may view the day in this way, this does not change the origins of the practice and the obvious questionable associations the holiday has.
Dear Mr. Fischer,
I recently read your column, “Home for Halloween,” on the Breakpoint website. I applaud you for tackling the subject and agree that “what we do October 31st is a microcosm for our positioning in the world as Christians.” But I question your ideas as to how we should position ourselves.
While it is true that “morally neutral” social events, such as wedding parties, can be participated in either for God’s glory or against, I’m not convinced that trick-or-treating, in and of itself, is morally neutral, given its origins. An event’s moral neutrality is not guaranteed by its being “cultural” or “traditional," now or ever.
What, exactly, does modern-day Halloween celebrate? I’m not so sure that the answer is “mere neighborliness and fun.” In my view, Halloween cannot be disassociated from its pagan origins and trappings, and to attempt to do so may be irresponsible. Also irresponsible is the rationalization that it’s OK to participate because “it’s fun and everyone else does.” Halloween customs unfortunately come with a lot of baggage.
Perhaps it is not appropriate to practice a such questionable tradition and indoctrinate our children into it. Can we truly serve God by participating in a ritual (trick-or-treating) that has its origins in superstitious interactions with the dead and the appeasement of spirits that may be evil? Many people are confused or deceived about spirituality and the spiritual realm. Acceptance of a holiday that more or less validates spiritism may represent a capitulation to the occult and does not necessarily serve to educate about spiritual truth, even if it is participated in a way that does not overtly celebrate evil influence. Scripture exhorts us to be wary lest our actions cause another to stumble (Romans 15). This may be one of the most compelling arguments against participation in Halloween.
I’ve considered the view that friendly, hospitable, “good”-costumed participation in trick-or-treating that disregards the origin of the practice actually redeems it, and this view has much to commend it. But I can’t yet get past the fact that the syncretism involved lacks clarity, and is lent tacit endorsement via participation.
I don’t know that it necessarily serves God to have children knock at doors to mock-threaten the inhabitants, even if it IS done all in good fun. The influence of evil inherent in the practice, due to its origins, is not necessarily negated. There are certainly other ways to spread good will and be neighborly that don’t include sending children around the neighborhood to entertain and collect candy. (Kids don’t need the candy either :-) ) Why rely on Halloween as an excuse to interact with the neighbors? Why wait for Halloween to interact with the neighbors?
The custom of wearing costumes for trick-or-treat is rooted in superstition and caprice. While I believe it’s possible and even necessary to redeem pagan customs, I’m not sure that our custom of trick-or-treating redeems this one. Of course it’s fun to dress up, but dress-up should be a natural part of every child’s home play. Why over-emphasize it on all-Hallows-eve, after dark, to the accompaniment of orange holiday lights, symbols of death, hanging sheet ghosts, spider-web drapery, and stick-on witches?
Why inundate impressionable minds with darkly suggestive imagery, or participate in an activity that could lead to spiritual confusion down the road? Why risk taking advantage of innocence? A parent should discuss Halloween with his/her children, no question, but not necessarily while encouraging participation. Might not a parent be sending mixed messages? Even if a child is able to screen out all the “evil” stuff as nonsense, or else as just being “there” but having no power, he or she is still in essence paying tribute to an ancient pagan belief simply by acting it out.
Regarding Fischer’s statement about Satan, why should we not give Satan credit for Halloween's origins? He certainly deserves it. Satan is real and still has plenty of credibility as far as responsibility for spiritual confusion goes. Why else would we need God? Satan is the Great Pretender, the Great Deceiver. If he can fool innocent, unsuspecting people into thinking that scariness and trickiness and superstition and greed and masquerade are “fun,” then he surely is winning the battle. It is not true that if someone just ignores the “bad” stuff, it won’t hurt them or anyone else. Satan makes the bad look good. Or the good look bad. Or tries to convince us that there is no “bad” at all.
Scripture says we should avoid all forms of evil (I Thessalonians 5:22) and guard ourselves from idols (I John 5:21). This does not mean we have to pull the shades and sit, quivering and praying, in the dark recesses of our home on Halloween night...but perhaps it should!
Conscientious objection to Halloween is not necessarily an act of hiding. There may be an element of self-protection (as well as protection of the children entrusted to us) involved, but does not John 17:15 itself address this issue? A refusal to participate in Halloween activities need not be equated with a “removal of oneself from the world” any more than a refusal to participate in any unhealthy activity is. John 17:15 says, “...protect them from the evil one.” Is it always possible to do this while participating in Halloween? Would it be permissible to go to a South Pacific island as a missionary and participate in a ritual head-hunting dance, if only in a token way, yet not do the actual head hunting? I would think it best to sit out the dance as well.
I think it could be wishful thinking to say that we can “redeem” Halloween by trick-or-treating in good will. It may not be expressive of good will toward those who do not understand the truth of spiritual matters. Again, aren’t we endorsing the holiday itself by participating in it? The only alternative to non-participation is to hand out leaflets containing the history of Halloween (with appropriate verses of Scripture, plus a candy bar) or tracts to trick-or-treaters...but whether or not that is neighborly is a debate in itself. Yes, hospitality is a good thing, a requirement, even, yet I don’t think it follows that we must be hospitable to that which we don’t support, or attempt to hijack it. This is why many Christians opt to turn off the porch lights and have a family night instead. Or go to a harvest celebration.
I’m sure plenty of non-believers trick-or-treat in “good will” the same as believers do. What then can a believing trick-or-treater do to distinguish him- or herself from a non-believer? It’s probably not enough to just be friendly and wear a non-threatening costume. A child could dress in an angel costume and offer tracts instead of an empty treat bag, but again, a perhaps confusing way to get the message out.
Why not celebrate the harvest season instead? Why not hold an All Saints Day celebration? These things are certainly far worthier of honor and celebration than ancient pagan superstition. Let’s overcome evil with good in a substantial way!
(If we could remove all the trappings of Halloween from the practice of trick-or-treating and send kids dressed up in “clean” costumes around the neighborhood bearing gifts to give or exchange, and change the name, and choose some other day to celebrate it, then we might have a community service opportunity!)
Note: I have no problem with differences of opinion on this issue. I realize that elements of strong vs. weak faith may enter in as well. The case for hospitality is well-taken, yet I cannot figure out how to separate it from tacit endorsement of a superstitious tradition that may wreak spiritual havoc in the hearts and minds of some, or at least yield confusion or temptation, via the seeds planted.
addendum: I am getting a clearer picture now of what's behind the debate: I was not aware that the pagan roots of Halloween are actually seriously disputed. (Sheesh, where have I been??) I have, however, been aware of the view offered by The Dane, i.e., that the roots are in no way related to present-day celebration of Halloween in America. It is his view that I've been essentially disputing. But the former issue does lend a different twist to the debate, obviously, because it involves truth, or lack thereof, of "facts" behind the decisions we make. This is a matter I will look into.
After walking this a.m., I was thinkig about the thoughts behind some of the yard decorations I saw. Maybe they were along these lines: "Gee, let's put some fake human skulls on stakes as lights. While we're at it, let's pretend we have people buried in the yard. Even better, we can make it look like the corpses are escaping their graves. That will be so cool."
I know some people do it in jest, but it's a gruesome thing to pretend.
W/regard to the practice of Halloween, we usually do costumes at our church's fall fest, though I sometimes wonder if the resources ($ & man hours) couldn't be better spent.
I don't get worked up about it. When the kids ask why we don't decorate for Halloween, I tell them I don't want to glorify evil things. There's no positive spin to put on a fake human skull in the yard. Even as a home schooler, the anatomy unti wouldn't require it to be displayed in the yard on a stake.
I think your allusion to Romans 14 is highly appropriate, here. Regardless of whether we consider our position to be that of the one with weaker or stronger faith, the command to refrain from judging one another and let love be the motivation and determiner of all that we do, applies in either case.
The other important thing Paul addresses in that chapter is that whatever we decide about the matter it must come from faith and not simply a wishy washy conformance to whatever influences are strongest.
I disapprove of many things about Halloween as it is celebrated now, but there’s a lot I have no trouble with. Indeed, I am completely in favour of claiming it back (yet again!) from the pagans. If a modern Halloween custom celebrates evil and promotes sin, it should be rejected. But celebrating All Hallows Eve is certainly on my calendar. Costumes, traditional foods, trick-or-treating (without the tricks), bobbing for apples, jack-o-lanterns, et cetera. Even some imagery of the dead is appropriate – the reason for the feast of All Hallows is the remembrance of the saints who have gone before us, and also a reminder of our own mortality. Think of the portrayals of the Repentant Magdalen contemplating a skull, or the martyrs – much more relevant than typical mass-produced Halloween decorations. (And of course, Catholics should participate in the Mass on All Hallows itself – it is in fact a Holy Day of Obligation.)
Also, we shouldn’t ever let ourselves be intimidated by what pagans say. It is important to remember a few things. We worship the God who created heaven and earth and all things seen and unseen. At best, they might unknowingly and (very) imperfectly worship the Unknown God, but otherwise they worship His creatures and their own fancies. Furthermore, a great many modern pagans are quite ignorant of history – religious, cultural and otherwise. Much of what they say about Halloween and other ‘pagan’ holidays and customs is wrong or very confused. A remarkable amount of ‘pagan’ stuff out there is actually paganized Christian stuff and/or stuff known only from Christian sources. They often claim it is originally pagan, but this is sometimes blatantly false, and at best it is true in an attenuated and very short-sighted sense. To quote from one of my all-time favourite rants on the subject of paganism (the author is discussing the Winter Solstice / Christmas as an example, but the argument can be generalised easily):
“The Church is not playing second fiddle to a pre-existing custom by celebrating the birth of the Immortal, Invincible Son of God in place of the sol invictus. She doesn't ‘appropriate’ naturalistic imagery to ‘appeal’ to paganism. She does something bolder, and much more frustrating to the pagan: She claims to be the original and exclusive owner of the basis of all naturalistic religion. She affirms that the mysteries of nature point to the Creator, and His plan. Christ alone is the truest, most complete meaning of the Light in Darkness. He signals the beginning of our Spiritual Springtime. To go further and to be even more audacious (why not? The Fathers certainly were): He's the whole reason we have Winter and Spring in the first place! Thus, it's only right to take advantage of a human institution centered around the rebirth of the light and turn it back toward the Ultimate Meaning to which this compelling natural phenomenon was supposed to point.
“Personal moral worth, the trajectory of salvation history, and the role of nature in our spiritual life are all affirmed in the Catholic worldview more deeply than the pagan, which merely allegorizes the meteorological fact that it's going to get brighter and warmer now, so we can all be happy because the unchanging cycles of nature inevitably favor our creature comforts once more. From the Catholic perspective, the pagan ‘spirituality’ of nature is that of a child: aware of the existence of signs, but ignorant of their referent. It knows individual letters, but does not grasp the meaning of words.”
I'm pretty much an anti-Halloween person--mainly because even as a child it felt rather like begging and frankly, we were very good at it (causing all number of guilt feelings even while we consumed piles of candy). The history of the thing plays in there as well. Despite all of that, I do find the notion of turning it on its head and bearing gifts to the neighbors quite intriguing. I may need to rethink
Bonnie,
My sentiments EXACTLY!!!!!
I'm not real crazy about "Halloween alternatives" that churches put on, because my problem isn't so much with what goes on (most "alternatives" are done because of safety reasons) but with the actual celebration of the day itself.
I AM fine with harvest parties at churches, provided they are done on a different day, not as an alternative to trick-or-treating.
I'm so with ya - you are right on the money!
Bonnie, I find your arguments very compelling! How ever do you find the time to home school, make wonderful pictures and formulate great arguments!?
To my way of thinking Roman Catholics would have a hard time with not particpating in Halloween while they venerate relics. It seems to me that the logic wouldn't follow.
Laura's idea of taking small gifts around to people in the neighborhood is quite intreguing.
I do like and appreciate the idea of honoring all the saints and martyrs that have gone before us. They were great thinkers that fought tooth and nail for orthodoxy against all manner of heresy. It is on their shoulders that we are able to stand and hopefully further their work.
May God grant us mercy and the grace to find His way that we may faithfully follow that way He has set before us.
Thanks for the comments, everyone.
Lee Anne, thanks for the link. I am not familiar with Ransom Ministries, but can say that at first glance I see some statements that are simply not true. The pagan rituals most certainly predate Christianity; early Popes tried to Christianize pagan traditions (and the pagans themselves :-) ) by incorporating them (“redeeming” them) into Christian practice. Christmas and Easter are examples of this as well as All Hallow’s Eve.
I can’t find my bio of Martin Luther at the moment, but question whether he “picked the date with care” (Oct. 31st) to nail his 95 theses to the gate. Even if he did, I am not sure that has any relevance to current practice of Halloween.
Trick-or-treating certainly did not originate as “something fun for kids to do.” There were various practices, apparently, involving adults more than children, one of which consisted of representing the dead in costume so they wouldn’t be recognized.
I also do not find any Scriptural support for mockery as a legitimate practice, even if it be of Satan. Nor am I aware that Halloween is generally understood to be a mockery of Satan. Gargoyles were not for the purpose of mockery; they were for the purpose of scaring away demons. Whether or nor that was superstition in itself is a topic I won’t get into :-).
Anyway, we can’t make the history of Halloween go away. There are all sorts of cultural practices and options that present themselves to us, down to the kinds of houses we live in, the clothes we wear, the food we eat, the hours we work, etc. etc. etc. that have both a history and a present place and meaning. I think that as persons accountable to a loving God, we must assess our practices in Truth as best as we are able. Much cultural practice is unavoidable but all is tied to morality in one way or another and therefore we owe it to God to examine the things we do in this light.
Debra - great comment on acting out of faith. Thank you for the reminder!
Atlantic - awesome quote! I am going to copy that. Just last week I was in a similar discussion. Someone was talking of how surprised and excited he was to see Christian themes in "battle star galactica". If we all came from Adam and Eve, then the true religion of the true God was the first one, and all others are twists on that. We ought not be surprised when pagan things echo Christian themes.
Bonnie, how do you find time to do all this stuff?
This post intrigued me since I just heard John Fischer mention this topic at a local event. You raise concerns I didn't consider before. I wish I could give some sort of thoughtful response (I appreciate yours), but I'm just chewing on it for now.
peace,
Christie
I agree with Bonnie that the article at the Ransom Fellowship is factually flawed. Right at the beginning the author states, “assuming there ever was any such thing as Druidism, which is actually a myth concocted in the 19th century by neo-pagans”. Julius Caesar, Tacitus, Strabo, Pliny, Diodorus Siculus and other Classical writers amply attest to the existence of druids amongst the pre-Christian Celts. He clearly has no idea of the history of any of this, and little interest.
The suggestion that trick-or-treating “doubtless” originated as “a fun thing for kids to do” shows not only an ignorance of history, it shows absolutely no historical imagination whatsoever. Let’s take this custom – going from house to house asking for treats – as an example. (AFAIK, dressing up in costumes is a custom from other holidays that became attached to Halloween very recently – I don’t remember how or exactly when – 19th century I think).
The fact of the matter is that we don’t know for sure exactly how going from house to house asking for treats originated. IIRC, the earliest historical references in Europe to something like this are medieval – and in the past thousand years it has been associated with many holidays, not just All Hallows Eve – but given the nature of the historical record, it probably did exist before then, and yes, probably there was something like it in pre-Christian times. I think it’s very likely that in every human culture that (a) has differing levels of wealth and (b) in which ‘poor’ still means at best an uncertain or barely adequate food supply, then there will be social charitable events sometimes including food and probably often associated with holidays or other religious events. Not only would abolishing such practices completely mess up the economic and social fabric of a pre-modern community, it would be abolishing material acts of charity.
The question is what an act means and in what context it takes place. It’s like eating – all humans eat, religious ritual involving eating is common, such rituals are known to have existed in pre-Christian religions and they exist in pagan religions today. Does this mean that Christian communion is derived from pagan practices? No! Indeed, if we fall into this fallacy that if something Christian resembles something pagan then it is derived from paganism and should be rejected, then we Christians are in serious apologetics trouble with our story of a dying and resurrected god.
You know, it occurs to me that by the sort of criteria often used when claiming to find illicit ‘pagan’ practices in Christianity, any “harvest festival” alternative to Halloween must be pagan too – after all, pagans had and have harvest festivals. If anything, a ‘harvest festival’ could well be more pagan than All Hallows, since by focussing on harvest one would be putting the cycles of nature at the heart of the holiday rather than any Christian meaning. :)
Indeed, if we fall into this fallacy that if something Christian resembles something pagan then it is derived from paganism and should be rejected, then we Christians are in serious apologetics trouble with our story of a dying and resurrected god......If anything, a ‘harvest festival’ could well be more pagan than All Hallows, since by focussing on harvest one would be putting the cycles of nature at the heart of the holiday rather than any Christian meaning
Very interesting points to consider.
Interesting discussion, you all. (As to how I find time to do this, well...I can’t keep this pace up for long!).
Atlantic, I own a book on the origins of Halloween that I can’t locate, and most available online resources are probably not terribly reliable. However, I think it’s safe to say that though the information we have on pagan practices that influence our present-day Halloween customs is spotty, this does not mean that “we don’t really know” enough to draw some reliable conclusions. Nor does this lack of clarity negate what is clear.
(Perhaps the word “pagan” itself is not the best one to use; it can have various shades of meaning.)
While I would wholeheartedly agree about reclaiming credit for naturalistic occurrences for God, the trouble is that various peoples (pagans? heathens?) were concocting unique practices toward the end of giving credit and credence to false gods. It’s one thing to change attribution of a particular naturalistic thing; it’s another to have a practice or ritual set up for the sole purpose of giving deference and attributing power to something, or, more specifically, for appeasing, bribing, scaring, etc. This is the difference I am trying to point out. You cannot sacrifice a cat to God (well, you can, but I don't think He'd be impressed). You cannot honor Satan in God’s name. God is not mocked. My issue with the “pagan” influence of Halloween has to do with superstitious relationship to false gods and the dead, as I mentioned in the post. The practices of costuming and trick-or-treating did arise from this.
There is true belief, and there is erroneous belief. The Egyptians, while they believed in an afterlife, had some erroneous beliefs. The Bible is pretty clear that there are certain things that are true, and certain things that aren’t. There are certain things that are good, and certain things that are abominable. We have no need to be “hospitable” to the spirits of the dead coming back for an evening on Halloween because, um, dead spirits don’t come back. Demons, however, still roam the earth. The pagans who left out cakes for their deceased family members had a dependent relationship upon the occult side of the spiritual realm. Some traditions apparently had a fearful relationship; some did not. Either way, they had a romance with something false. Deuteronomy 18 speaks very strongly against magical arts and spiritism. Deference to the dead as if they can guide us (divination) is “detestable” to the Lord.
In what I am saying about Halloween, I am sharing my heart and conscience on the matter. I remember how Halloween affected me in my youth and, while I’m sure I’m a unique bird in many ways, am certainly not the only human being on the face of the earth with susceptibility to the occult. It is real. Demonic influence is real. Superstition is real. I just don’t see the point in supporting any of this, whether symbolically, obliquely, indirectly, or whatever.
It’s not a matter of “making a statement.” Perhaps any choice of upright behavior makes a statement, yet that’s not the point; the point is to honor God. If some people don’t understand, is one obligated to compromise merely because someone doesn’t understand? Why not have whoever doesn’t understand over for dinner and offer to explain at that time? That's true hospitality.
Thanks to you all for engaging this topic :-)
Would it be permissible to go to a South Pacific island as a missionary and participate in a ritual head-hunting dance
Which South Pacific Island? I don't know of any that have a ritual head-hunting dance. Is there one you have in mind?
I really respect both viewpoints and decisions of conscience on this matter. There is merit to both as they apply to individual experience and understanding. And it is good to share our views and understandings, in a loving attempt to elevate, edify and understand one another. The difficulty lies in each person accepting the decisions of another without judgement or defensiveness.
Paul's guidelines regarding food sacrificied to idols in 1 Cor.8 & 10 could be applied here. But it is in Romans 14 that he addresses these matters of conscience most directly: "Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind...v.5" "He who eats, eats to the Lord and gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God...v. 6" "But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean...v. 14" "Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. v. 16" "It is better not to ...do anything..that will cause your brother to fall..V.21" and lastly: "So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. But the man who doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin. v.22-23"
Now I realize that the problem is that we cannot always agree on what are matters of conscience and what things are just flat out wrong. But, after reading all Paul has to say on these things, when I see earnest believers who love God above all else, prayerfully seeking to honor God, coming to different conclusions on a matter, I accept that as something for which each Believer is allowed to "to stand or fall" before his Master."
"...and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand." Romans 14:4
Catez, not any more, probably, I don't know for sure. That was just an example to illustrate a point. I know Vanuatu did have such practices even into the last century. There certainly are many tribal customs still in practice today that a missionary would do well not to participate in.
Debra, your last comment is a good closer (not that I'm discouraging anyone else from commenting!) in that it's a great summary on the matter. Thank you! Allow me to add that, while we have Romans 14 for guidance, we also have Romans 15.
I think we all ought to be free to express opinions, and hopefully they will be taken at face value. Responsibility to be loving does lie on both ends; i.e., the expressor ought to present his/her opinion without mockery or condemnation, and there is also responsibility on the hearer to own his/her response. At the same time, defense of a position is wholly appropriate, else there is no need for apologetics :-) I tend to try a little too hard to be understood sometimes if it seems like I'm not. Forgive me :-)
I also believe that, myself included, we all may have our sacred cows of one kind or another, and that sometimes pleas for allowance in matters of conscience may actually be attempts to protect sacred cows. I am not directly accusing anyone of this!!! I am merely offering it as food for thought.
Blessings, guys.
Catez, not any more, probably, I don't know for sure. That was just an example to illustrate a point.
Ok. Seeing as I live in the South Pacific, and people from several different Pacific Islands live here... Thing is, Pacific Islanders go out to other countries as missionaries these days. I personally know some who have.
I should add that I see the particular point you were making. I recall reading something years ago about a tribe in Papua New Guinea but my memory is dim.
The whole question of cultural participation is interesting.
To my way of thinking Roman Catholics would have a hard time with not particpating in Halloween while they venerate relics. It seems to me that the logic wouldn't follow.
Uh... as a Catholic I'd like to understand "your way of thinking." How does the veneration of holy relics have anything to do with Halloween?
The church celebrates All Saints Day. It's on the liturgical calendar.
I don't follow Brian's logic either, but All Saints (or the fourth Sunday in October) is a feast on which relics have traditionally been venerated - it's certainly a very fitting day for it!
I had a longer comment cooking about other issues we've been discussing and I'm trying to decide whether or not to finish it. Am I boring everyone, rabbiting on and on about the connections or lack thereof between All Hallows and paganism?
Does not the veneration of relics, read bones, and the collection of bones and skulls, at least in churches in Europe as well as the attribution of miracles to spirits have a close relation to the acknowledgement of the spiritworld and the power of spirits from beyond the grave? And does this not draw our full attention way from the Holy Sovreign God that created the Universe and all that is in it who has stated repeatedly that He is a jealous God? Where and how is one to draw the line between "good spirits" and "bad spirits" or "holy spirits" and "demonic spirits"?
Don't get me wrong if my logic is faulty please, really, please correct me.
“Does not the veneration of relics, read bones and the collection of bones and skulls, at least in churches in Europe”
Well, it’s more extensive than bones and Europe, but let’s go on…
“as well as the attribution of miracles to spirits have a close relation to the acknowledgement of the spiritworld and the power of spirits from beyond the grave?”
The existence of spirits and therefore of a supernatural realm is Scriptural fact.
“And does this not draw our full attention way from the Holy Sovreign God that created the Universe and all that is in it who has stated repeatedly that He is a jealous God?”
Not at all! The relics of saints are from God and point to God. Scripture tells us, for example, of miracles via Elisha’s bones and Paul’s handkerchiefs – such things are ordained by God to add to His glory.
“Where and how is one to draw the line between "good spirits" and "bad spirits" or "holy spirits" and "demonic spirits"?”
Well, you can start with the Bible. God is a spirit and is good and holy. Satan is a spirit and is bad. The spirits of the saints are holy. Those of demons are, well, demonic.
But this all seems rather tenuously linked to your statement “Roman Catholics would have a hard time with not participating in Halloween while they venerate relics”. As both Elena and I mentioned, we are bound to attend the All Saints Mass on November 1, and the veneration of relics is traditional (though not required) on this day. If that’s all you mean by “participating in Halloween” then I follow your logic perfectly. But it doesn’t follow that Catholics would have a hard time not participating in Halloween if by that you mean dressing up and going trick-or-treating, for example. So I suppose my question to you is, just what do you mean by “participating in Halloween”?
The controversy over icons (relics, etc.) has been around since before the Roman church had much of its power. It's an interesting study -
as far as the icons pointing to God - all you have to do is read the stories of the icon and try to figure out where God is...like so
And this is where the story of Perpetual Help really becomes the story of the people; the thousands of Redemptorists and their disciples who have promoted devotion to Mary of Perpetual Help and the missions who have come to know and love her as their perpetual help.
I've beens studying the "Iconoclasm Controversy" and the subject of icons has been around since before the Roman church had much power.
As far a who the relics and icons point to, read the stories of the icons and figure out where God is.
And this is where the story of Perpetual Help really becomes the story of the people; the thousands of Redemptorists and their disciples who have promoted devotion to Mary of Perpetual Help and the missions who have come to know and love her as their perpetual help.
Icons and relics aren't necessarily the same thing Ellen.
You neglected to supply a link to your quote, but I suppose what you are trying to get at is that anyting that points to Mary could not possibly be pointing to God. Catholics know that isn't so.
Happy All Saints Day! : )
Atlantic,
Dressing children in costumes to gather candy is not what I meant by participating in Halloween.
Some would argue, and I think Bonnie's arguements are very compelling, that Halloween can historically be shown as favoring, shall we say, less charitible spirits and that the negative spiritual world is for some reason closer on this day than on other days. Don't know if I buy into that completly.
What we Christian's make of the day can send messages that may not be so innocent as we would like them to be.
For me, I'm not exactly sure what to make of the day.
Thanks for the conversation and debate.
but I suppose what you are trying to get at is that anyting that points to Mary could not possibly be pointing to God. Catholics know that isn't so.
Yes, I suppose a Catholic would.
Blessings to All the Saints, today! To my Catholic and Protestant brothers and sisters, to those who celebrate this day (and yesterday) and those who don't, to Calvinists and Arminians and everything in between--to all those who love the Lord---greetings, love and blessings!
Actually, I've never celebrated All Saint's Day before--but the name of the day and this discussion just inspired me to take a moment to celebrate the glorious Body of Christ. He who binds us together is so much greater than any of the things that separate us.
Bonnie, just a better-late-than-never comment. My view is not that the (what I still believe to be pagan) origins of Halloween don't have any affect on the current celebration of the holiday. My position is that the celebration can take on similar form and function as the original holiday, BUT that it need not. You seem to have read my post on the matter, so I probably don't need to restate my comparison between the Christian celebration of other holidays with foul roots (e.g., Christmas, Easter, and the Fourth of July). In any case, just wanted to make that clarification.
A friend and I have been having a discussion...
CAN we get away from the pagan roots?
I sat in class on Monday night next to one of the Village people, near a vampire, pirate, devil, axe murderer and harem girl.
On the way home from class, there were a lot of people still out - and most of the later night wanderers wore costumes based in the pagan roots. It gets very hard to justify how we're not participating in the pagan holiday, when we're out walking next to those who are..
Just a thought - I really am still on the fence.
Still it doesn't have to be like that. I host an annual party and have had people dress as Winnie-the-Pooh, Edward Munch's "The Scream," a Barrel of Monkeys, a mechanic, a girlscout, France, a cat, a bottle of Easy Cheese, Star Wars characters, a mad scientist, and asparagus. Hardly things with pagan roots.
I just saw this article online and could not resist posting something about it here. This is from an extract from John Zmirak's just-published A Bad Catholic's Guide to Good Living. Here are some ideas for celebrating Halloween that have not yet been mentioned in this thread:
"Some Catholics in America have reacted against the paganizing trend by abandoning Halloween altogether. Influenced by their Evangelical neighbors, they're giving up on the hard work their ancestors did to harness the coolest parts of paganism and put them to work, and we think that's a shame. Others try to sanitize the day by dressing their kids up as saints and angels. This works pretty well for some of the girls, and the boys under 5, but after that it gets old mighty quick. The only way to keep such a party interesting is to dress the boys as soldier saints, warrior archangels such as St. Michael, or the Angel of Death sent by God throughout the Old Testament to smite the Egyptians. Or else-and here's an idea we're really proud of—to let the kids play out the martyrdom scenes of the early Church, with the more outgoing boys done up as Roman soldiers, lions, and dragons—whose job it is ravage and slaughter the girls, dressed up as virgin martyrs. Get enough Roman helmets, fresh white togas, and fake blood packets, and you can make Halloween mighty interesting to the most jaded American boy. (Get plenty of plastic swords.)
"For impressionable adults, however, such doings might come across as kinky. (Do you really want to watch your wife "devoured" by your accountant, dressed as a lion?²) So we'd like to offer our idea for celebrating Halloween which is both spooky and meaningful—and unforgettably delicious. We call it our 'Halloween Purgatory Soiree.'"
http://www.godspy.com/reviews/Celebrating-All-Hallows-Eve-The-Seven-Deadly-Courses-by-John-Zmirak.cfm
That's hilarious! Thanks for sharing.
