Heavy Christmas emphasis at non-religious pre-school, WWYD?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Christ. Anything else attached to this religious holiday is a tradition or clever marketing. There is nothing wrong with appreciating some of the traditions, music, decor associated with Christmas, but it really doesn't change the fact that it is about the birth of Jesus. Jesus was born way before Santa Claus or Christmas trees were even ideas in someone's head. If you celebrate Christmas that you are celebrating the birth of Christ.
As for the OPs dilemma. If the school made claims about holidays and they are not standing behind them, the OP should bring it to their attention.

If you are religious and Christian, then yes, you are. If not, you might just be celebrating a fun time of year.

"Ahem - really? You really want to go down that path? Christmas is a bastardization of the Pagan Winter Solstice, right down to the date - the lights, and many of the traditions pre-date Christianity. That we now call it Christmas because millions of Christians celebrate it as such does not mean that people who do not believe that Jesus was the lord and savior cannot enjoy the festivities as much as the fervent evangelical. The people who want to "Keep the Christ in Christmas" are just as bogus as the people who don't want Christmas celebrated anywhere but a Christian hurch. And you're both relatively Scroogish. It's fun, and happy, and bright, and keeps the winter darkness and dreariness away for a few weeks, which I am sure that we could all benefit from.

Well said, PP.

The birth of Jesus was given this date as an "in your face" to the pagAns and their idol worshiping ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DD is at a preschool that is not affiliated with any religion, and yet there seems to be an emphasis on Christmas. She is learning songs such as-the 12 nights of Christmas, and reading Christmas related books at story time. Not to mention the teachers discussing Christmas trees with the kids (asking if they have them yet, how big they are, etc.). We are not christian nor do we celebrate Christmas. I am not looking for equal time for my religion, I would prefer the learning be non-religious.

I do not want to make waves with the school as I believe this is the way things have been done over the last x number of years, yet I really don't want DD learning about Christmas at school. So, what to do?

It would be hard for her to selectively participate in activities and I do not want her to feel singled out in any way. I'm guessing that my only option may be to take her out of school for December--not that much time since 2 weeks of December the school is closed for winter recess.

Has anyone else dealt with this situation?

OP - if you are still reading this thread...it actually sounds like it really more of the secular side of Christmas that was emphasised - Christmas related books like Rudolph or books on the 3 Wise Men? Songs like Silent Night or Jolly St. Nick? Does having your DD exposed to the secular side of Christmas bother you? Whether it does or not, it's reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
yup. all non-christians celebrating the "secularism" of christmas are really celebrating the commerce/capitalism that engulfed it. christmas is the celebration of jesus' birth. if they want to pretend it's not i feel sorry for them. i would never dare to celebrate hannuka (sp) just for the beauty of the menorah. i wonder what kind of sense it makes. i feel like laughing!!!

Why not celebrate Chanukah? (Jesus did, you know!)

If you are an observant Christian, you are under no obligation to celebrate the Jewish holidays, but you certainly can remember the heros of the Chanukah story, the Macabees, and light the Menorah in remembrance of this time!

The only celebrations Jesus asked us to keep are the communion and the baptism. Easter; Christmas itself is a stretch. The funny thing is that people with no knowledge think that a tree with lights, an old guy with red clothing and a deer with a red nose are christian symbols of Christmas. Do I cry or laugh?

[Anonymous]

I don't find it offensive at all. I enjoy seeing Christmas trees and wreaths and all the outdoor lights. I don't mind if my children learn about Christmas. The only thing that crosses the line for me is teaching kids about Jesus in a school that is supposedly not religious.

[Anonymous]

OP here. I haven't read through the whole thread but I decided to leave my child in the class for the month. I'm using it as an opportunity to talk with my child about the differences in people and how we all have our own beliefs and traditions. I don't think she would really miss out if I did take her out but I just don't have the time to plan meaningful things for her to do for 2 weeks (I WOH) and I didn't want her stuck home with her younger siblings. She will not be returning to the school next year and I do not plan to send her siblings there, so it's really just an issue for a short period of time. I will mention something to the director at the end of the school year though, just so she knows how some family(ies) could be offended. I know at least one other parent was surprised by the songs.

[Anonymous]

OP I think it is great that you are using this as an opportunity to teach. I think it is important for children to realize that every family is different and that we should all learn about others beliefs.

The Christmas season is a magical time for children and I am sure the school is just trying its best to harness it. I agree with the posters that say if they are not mentioning the birth of Christ then they are not trying to push the beliefs of a particular religion. The truth is that this country loves Christmas, it is a fun time of year and a way for us to celebrate our families. Many of my friends who are not Christian celebrate the holiday year after year with a tree, lights and presents because it provides some excitement to a very long dreary winter season.

I think sometimes we need to take a step back and realize that not everything has to be about religion or politics. You can find a way to celebrate the holiday season that is apporpriate for your family without making it religious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, We're as non-Christian as we come. But we celebrate a holiday that shall-not-be-called-Christmas-on-this-board with Santa and the Tree and the stockings etc. etc. It's fun for kids. My secular preschool, run by a Hindu couple, does the jingle bells and rudolph stuff, doesn't bother me.

I teach my child that this time of year has long been celebrated in many cultures, the Jesus stuff is just what Christians have added on to it. Your child probably won't get a whole lot about Jesus from the school - they probably know that would upset their non-christian patrons.

I would let it go.

Wow - way to give your child incorrect information!

How can you say that? What do you know about the history of the winter solstice world wide? Human history stretches back a lot longer than 2000 years. The solstice was celebrated BEFORE it became Christmas.

[Anonymous]

Considering that this thread has detoured a bit into the question of whether Christmas developed from pagan celebrations (namely the solstice) , some readers might find this recent scholarly article of interest. The author writing in the Biblical Archaelogy Review suggests that the 25th of December was chosen for reasons wholly unrelated to the pagan celebrations.

http://www.bib-arch.org/e-features/christmas.asp

A quick summary if you aren't interested in wading through it. First, the early Christians settled on Dec. 25th in 200 AD, which was a time of persecution, when pagan practices weren't particularly "popular" among the Chrisitans. (It wasn't until the time of Constantine (who was a convert and ended the persecution), over 100 years later, that Christians actively adapted pagan practices, festivals, etc. With the persecution over, I suppose one could say this was a time of evangelization of the pagans). Second, the author suggests that the date of Christmas in December was chosen for theological reasons relating to the date of the crucifixion. He gives historical evidence for that date being March 25th. There is a theological view that suggests the date of crucifixion and the date of conception were the same. So, if Jesus was conceived on March 25th, his birthdate would be nine months later, on December 25th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Considering that this thread has detoured a bit into the question of whether Christmas developed from pagan celebrations (namely the solstice) , some readers might find this recent scholarly article of interest. The author writing in the Biblical Archaelogy Review suggests that the 25th of December was chosen for reasons wholly unrelated to the pagan celebrations.

http://www.bib-arch.org/e-features/christmas.asp

A quick summary if you aren't interested in wading through it. First, the early Christians settled on Dec. 25th in 200 AD, which was a time of persecution, when pagan practices weren't particularly "popular" among the Chrisitans. (It wasn't until the time of Constantine (who was a convert and ended the persecution), over 100 years later, that Christians actively adapted pagan practices, festivals, etc. With the persecution over, I suppose one could say this was a time of evangelization of the pagans). Second, the author suggests that the date of Christmas in December was chosen for theological reasons relating to the date of the crucifixion. He gives historical evidence for that date being March 25th. There is a theological view that suggests the date of crucifixion and the date of conception were the same. So, if Jesus was conceived on March 25th, his birthdate would be nine months later, on December 25th.

Snicker. No agenda here, in this "scholarly" journal that attempts to tie the science of archaeology to the bible. Next you'll be quoting authoritative sources like Reader's Digest and the National Enquirer.

[Anonymous]

The author of that article has a Ph.D. from the University of Notre Dame, is a professor at an Anglican college in Australia and has published a book with Oxford University Press. I stand by my description of his article as “scholarly”.

[Anonymous]

Regardless of WHY the Christians decided to have Christmas on 12/25, that doesn't change the fact that Christmas is, by some amazing coincidence, held on or near the astronomical solstice. And at some point, many pagan things like mistletoe and Yule logs bizarrely got incorporated into Christmas.

So the solstice came first, and Christmas was added onto the date later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Considering that this thread has detoured a bit into the question of whether Christmas developed from pagan celebrations (namely the solstice) , some readers might find this recent scholarly article of interest. The author writing in the Biblical Archaelogy Review suggests that the 25th of December was chosen for reasons wholly unrelated to the pagan celebrations.

http://www.bib-arch.org/e-features/christmas.asp

A quick summary if you aren't interested in wading through it. First, the early Christians settled on Dec. 25th in 200 AD, which was a time of persecution, when pagan practices weren't particularly "popular" among the Chrisitans. (It wasn't until the time of Constantine (who was a convert and ended the persecution), over 100 years later, that Christians actively adapted pagan practices, festivals, etc. With the persecution over, I suppose one could say this was a time of evangelization of the pagans). Second, the author suggests that the date of Christmas in December was chosen for theological reasons relating to the date of the crucifixion. He gives historical evidence for that date being March 25th. There is a theological view that suggests the date of crucifixion and the date of conception were the same. So, if Jesus was conceived on March 25th, his birthdate would be nine months later, on December 25th.

Snicker. No agenda here, in this "scholarly" journal that attempts to tie the science of archaeology to the bible. Next you'll be quoting authoritative sources like Reader's Digest and the National Enquirer.

PP, actually the archaeology has quite a tight tie with the bible, just not in this part of the world. Visit the Middle East, and go to some of the archaeological sites there. Take the bible with you, and for some of these sites it would be better than any lonely planet travel guide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He gives historical evidence for that date being March 25th. There is a theological view that suggests the date of crucifixion and the date of conception were the same. So, if Jesus was conceived on March 25th, his birthdate would be nine months later, on December 25th.

Just an FYI, if Jesus was conceived on March 25, Mary's due date would have been December 16. I just tried the ivillage due date calculator. The first day of a pregnancy is not the date of conception, it is actually two weeks prior (they always assume in this basic calculation that the mother ovulates 14 days after the first day of her last period).

[Anonymous]

Anyone else think it is hilarious that the abreviation used in the title is a varient on WWJD?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He gives historical evidence for that date being March 25th. There is a theological view that suggests the date of crucifixion and the date of conception were the same. So, if Jesus was conceived on March 25th, his birthdate would be nine months later, on December 25th.

Just an FYI, if Jesus was conceived on March 25, Mary's due date would have been December 16. I just tried the ivillage due date calculator. The first day of a pregnancy is not the date of conception, it is actually two weeks prior (they always assume in this basic calculation that the mother ovulates 14 days after the first day of her last period).

I had to read this twice to be sure that you really, truly, did indeed put Jesus' mother's "conception" date into the iVillage due date calculator. And analyzed it.

This is, hands-down, the best post I have ever read on DCUM.