Immediately after Thanksgiving in California, my wife started pointing at stuff and saying, 'I see the war against Christmas has started'. She likes sarcasm, does my wife.
Just to add a little irony, anyone like to guess the dedication of the parish church in Spalding?
Are you saying that the church's patron owns a red-nosed reindeer called Rudolph?!
The patrons, or the patron saint? My understanding is that the patrons are a group of wealthy Lincolnshire landowners and other members of the great and the good. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a reindeer among their various holdings. Red nose, on the other hand...
I should add that myself and my sister were always aware that Santa was not 'real', but discouraged from disclosing this to other children. For myself (and you can call me a shit, I don't care) the knowledge that I was in possession of information that most other children my own age were not, more than compensated...
Yep that's what we did with ours. They are not traumatised as a result just recognise that we don't tell porkies to big up Christmas. It's more than enough already.
I should add that myself and my sister were always aware that Santa was not 'real', but discouraged from disclosing this to other children. For myself (and you can call me a shit, I don't care) the knowledge that I was in possession of information that most other children my own age were not, more than compensated...
Yep that's what we did with ours. They are not traumatised as a result just recognise that we don't tell porkies to big up Christmas. It's more than enough already.
The issue is not not telling children about Father Christmas; it's about crassly breaking the news to children who do believe in him that he doesn't exist.
For the record we didn't tell ours he was real. We just didn't explicitly say he wasn't. We did put forward questions like how they thought he got round everyone so quickly to try to get them working it out for themselves.
I don't believe that Grandad comes back every Christmas as a robin, but I'd be very careful how - and if - I addressed that belief to people to whom it's important.
The issue is not not telling children about Father Christmas; it's about crassly breaking the news to children who do believe in him that he doesn't exist.
Yes, and which I've tried to say here at least twice!
The issue is not not telling children about Father Christmas; it's about crassly breaking the news to children who do believe in him that he doesn't exist.
Yes, and which I've tried to say here at least twice!
I know; it was my original point. Not everyone seems to get it.
For the record we didn't tell ours he was real. We just didn't explicitly say he wasn't. We did put forward questions like how they thought he got round everyone so quickly to try to get them working it out for themselves.
We did the same. We always had a big party on Christmas Eve when they were little. Adult friends made a lot of ‘looking for Santa’ but we didn’t and we never once said he was real - and they never asked us outright.
@Mark Betts whether or not St Nicholas existed, or how true the stories are that are attributed to him isn't really relevant to this. As far as I'm aware, it's never been suggested that he lived in the Arctic, had a grotto, was assisted by elves or travelled through the air on a sleigh pulled by reindeer.....
This is the children's' fairy-tale/bedtime story part. I can't see the harm for children - you might as well ban all fairy stories - it is verging on the Puritan side (option 2 for wrecking Christmas).
Supposing you were reading "Snow White and the Seven Dwarves" to a four-year-old, you wouldn't say, "Now I want you to be clear that this story is entirely fictional, and has no basis in historical reality or scientific enquiry," would you?
My children frequently asked if stories were true. Knowing that they were just fantasy had no impact on their enjoyment of them.
The patrons, or the patron saint? My understanding is that the patrons are a group of wealthy Lincolnshire landowners and other members of the great and the good. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a reindeer among their various holdings. Red nose, on the other hand...
The patrons are Feoffees (i.e. trustees) of the living, their responsibility includes managing the resources to pay a stipend to the vicar, and for other purposes of the church in the parish, and their names can be found on the Charity Commission website.
Whether they are wealthy landowners or members of the great and the good, I can’t tell.
Supposing you were reading "Snow White and the Seven Dwarves" to a four-year-old, you wouldn't say, "Now I want you to be clear that this story is entirely fictional, and has no basis in historical reality or scientific enquiry," would you?
Well if we have to ban everything that could potentially traumatise the children, all fairytales must go - heaven knows how shocked the children will be when they grow up and bump into reality after we have ensured they don't get to think about anything bad ever happening anywhere, but nevertheless, Snow White's days must obviously come to an end.
Sarcasm on/Childhood will be so much fun when we have arranged all the necessary protection, never allowing children to use their imaginations (what if they imagine a nasty bad thing, no no, they might be traumatised) - if they are passionate about a sport, that will have to go as well, what the team they support lose - no, best not risk the trauma. What an excellent, well functioning world we could make happen. /Sarcasm off
And there would be the problem with smashing a chocolate Santa in a primary school - the attack on their exercise of their imaginations.
No problem if this had been done as an exercise against consumerism, or even rising obesity rates, and presented to an older group of people, or a group of adult atheists (who think there is something rational about beating chocolate with a hammer, but each to their own).
When I was just a wee 5th Mary, I believed in Santa but I always assumed he worked FOR Jesus. I wrote Santa a letter and was happy to receive gifts from him, even when he got a few details wrong. I would always include in my night time prayers, a special thanks to Santa. My mother was Irish/German Catholic and my sisters and I were raised as Catholic but we never had any problem with Santa, the Easter Bunny, or Halloween. I suppose my mother was more liberal, in her way.
It's fine to deceive children when they're young, God know I was deceived, and then returned the favour to my parents when I was teenager. Additionally you're supposed to tell your children that you hope they have kids just like themselves. If I ever get be a grandparent we're smoking cigars, lighting firecrackers from the glowing end before we flush them down the toilet. And yes, you should try this at home if it's not actually you who holds the lease or the mortgage.
It's fine to deceive children when they're young, God know I was deceived, and then returned the favour to my parents when I was teenager. Additionally you're supposed to tell your children that you hope they have kids just like themselves. If I ever get be a grandparent we're smoking cigars, lighting firecrackers from the glowing end before we flush them down the toilet. And yes, you should try this at home if it's not actually you who holds the lease or the mortgage.
"Deceive" is a strong word and rather shifts the whole argument. But you are not "deceiving" them, you are just telling them a popular story. I see no-one's mentioned "Black Pete" yet (probably just as well)……….Oops, I just did - sorry!
One of the lessons life seems to insist on teaching¹, repeatedly², is that when anyone tells you something - they do so for a reason. Their reasons are not necessarily aligned with our own best interests. As fully-functional sentient beings, we are responsible for vetting things other people tell us for veracity before we assume that they are. Until we do that, it is perfectly functional to treat the information as simply "something X told me".
¹ I attempt to deceive my children regularly, with the express purpose of having them adept at questioning what they are told both directly and with research.
How can she be so sure? How do we know that Santa isn't rude and grumpy, and that all this Ho-ho-hoing is a bit of an act? Perhaps Raymond Briggs was right: https://tinyurl.com/ycy6zlhg
This both frightens and saddens me, that well meaning adults sanctioned, even encouraged, violence as a means of addresssing difference of belief. The visual of young children being "invited" to come forward, take up the hammer and smash that chocolate "idol" brings forth thoughts of various repressive regimes of the past. Perhaps the organizers were not aware of this, perhaps they unwittingly perpetuated the prevailing culture that might makes right, in religion, politices, finances, sex..... sad, sad, sad...... And all this in the name of Jesus who told his disciples to put up their swords, and later told the women to weep, for themselves and their children. And weep we must, I think, at this event.
This both frightens and saddens me, that well meaning adults sanctioned, even encouraged, violence as a means of addresssing difference of belief. The visual of young children being "invited" to come forward, take up the hammer and smash that chocolate "idol" brings forth thoughts of various repressive regimes of the past. Perhaps the organizers were not aware of this, perhaps they unwittingly perpetuated the prevailing culture that might makes right, in religion, politices, finances, sex..... sad, sad, sad...... And all this in the name of Jesus who told his disciples to put up their swords, and later told the women to weep, for themselves and their children. And weep we must, I think, at this event.
on the list of fucked up things believers have done in the name of their "loving" god, this ranks fairly well down it. Still fucked up, though.
And all this in the name of Jesus who told his disciples to put up their swords, and later told the women to weep, for themselves and their children. And weep we must, I think, at this event.
He did also point out that that people would claim to be acting in His name, when they really were not.
I didn't read beyond the title. LGBT grooming. Not sure how it good be a problem. I'm certain our dog wouldn't care who grooms her, I don't think most dogs care, they just like love and affection, which is something humans have in common with them. She likes to be patted by everyone, gets a big doggy grin on her face, wags tail like crazy. It's almost Jesusly. The only thing is that if you stop, she will bump your hand with her nose to encourage you to start again. That's definitely Jesusly: getting nudged to do something Which can eventually get annoying. But it can be solved if you throw a ball or, even better, a plush toy. I don't think Jesus falls for that trick. We should all aspire to be more god dog like.
And I see the Church of England is showing its usual dynamic approach to taking responsibility for stuff ...
The Reverend Huw Thomas, the Diocese of Sheffield's director of education, said the views were "personal" ones.
"These views are not shared by the Diocese of Sheffield and the language used is regrettable," he said.
How on earth can they be 'personal' views if he's published them in his capacity of vicar in the parish magazine of the parish where he is the incumbent?
If in the middle of a departmental meeting my boss says 'In my personal opinion, you are a prick', is that OK because he's just expressing a personal opinion and not company policy?
I didn't read beyond the title. LGBT grooming. Not sure how it good be a problem. I'm certain our dog wouldn't care who grooms her, I don't think most dogs care, they just like love and affection, which is something humans have in common with them. She likes to be patted by everyone, gets a big doggy grin on her face, wags tail like crazy. It's almost Jesusly. The only thing is that if you stop, she will bump your hand with her nose to encourage you to start again. That's definitely Jesusly: getting nudged to do something Which can eventually get annoying. But it can be solved if you throw a ball or, even better, a plush toy. I don't think Jesus falls for that trick. We should all aspire to be more god dog like.
If in the middle of a departmental meeting my boss says 'In my personal opinion, you are a prick', is that OK because he's just expressing a personal opinion and not company policy?
Yes, actually. Assuming of course that in his capacity as manager he doesn’t treat you any differently than any of his other staff.
I mean, you could potentially make a claim of harassment against him for saying it, but it would be on the same basis that you could make the same claim against any other coworker who called you a prick.
I don't know if my mother ever read Tolkien. She did like "A Wrinkle In Time" by Madeline Engle. And she was very much into the mysticism of William Blake. She had a regal-looking stuffed tiger named William Blake...
I didn't read beyond the title. LGBT grooming. Not sure how it good be a problem. I'm certain our dog wouldn't care who grooms her, I don't think most dogs care, they just like love and affection, which is something humans have in common with them. She likes to be patted by everyone, gets a big doggy grin on her face, wags tail like crazy. It's almost Jesusly. The only thing is that if you stop, she will bump your hand with her nose to encourage you to start again. That's definitely Jesusly: getting nudged to do something Which can eventually get annoying. But it can be solved if you throw a ball or, even better, a plush toy. I don't think Jesus falls for that trick. We should all aspire to be more god dog like.
You have a Golden retreiver or Labrador.
Klingon War Dog actually. Was left in a box in a ditch somewhere north of us at -35°C, emaciated, frostbitten, dehydrated. Very skittish and shy. The cat parented her, we spent a lot of time socializing her and she became a Very Brave Klingon War Dog, a loving one who definitely knows who her pack is and that we help her to be brave. (Breed indeterminate.)
If in the middle of a departmental meeting my boss says 'In my personal opinion, you are a prick', is that OK because he's just expressing a personal opinion and not company policy?
Yes, actually. Assuming of course that in his capacity as manager he doesn’t treat you any differently than any of his other staff.
I mean, you could potentially make a claim of harassment against him for saying it, but it would be on the same basis that you could make the same claim against any other coworker who called you a prick.
Well, either way, it wouldn't be a valid defence to harassment to say 'well it's just a personal opinion'. They could say something like 'there's a culture of insult humour on the team and Ricardus knows this perfectly well', i.e. in context it was acceptable.
This is what I find disingenuous about the diocesan response. If they think the mad vicar's pronouncements fall within the spectrum of acceptable Anglican views, then say so. If they don't, then slap him down. But saying it was just a personal view, when he spread it across three pages of his church's parish magazine, is just mealy-mouthed avoidance of responsibility.
That is the thing: a personal view expressed to me that I am a prick - even within the context of a large work meeting - is tricky. But at least I would have the opportunity to respond. And there are processes by which I could complain, if I felt it was detrimental (i.e. taken seriously).
This was public, in the newspapers. If my manager wrote in a newspaper, or even a User Group meeting, that I was a prick, that would be seriously unprofessional, as he would be representing the company and giving the companies perspective. A vicar speaking to the press is presenting the view of the organisation. If the organisation disagrees, they hsould take action.
Klingon War Dog actually. Was left in a box in a ditch somewhere north of us at -35°C, emaciated, frostbitten, dehydrated. Very skittish and shy. The cat parented her, we spent a lot of time socializing her and she became a Very Brave Klingon War Dog, a loving one who definitely knows who her pack is and that we help her to be brave. (Breed indeterminate.)
What a pleasure to read this....a hug to Klingon War Dog from me please, and treats to you all for rescuing her.
These decorative collectibles are an attractive way to blend the tradition of Santa with the truth of Christ, and keep Christ the center of Christmas.
I'm not sure how much I ever believed in Santa; but, on some level, I may. (Given that I take a "don't know" attitude towards most things.) Years ago, I got myself a similar ornament at a local Christmas store. I like it very much.
Pssst...if I were to go to the North Pole, I wouldn't expect to see Santa...but I would look, just in case...
While the chocolate smashing was a bit extreme, and the comment about St. Nicholas just plain wrong, the reactions to this make it seem that Santafarianism is an actual religion for some people. If the kid doesn't believe in Santa, so what? Does the mom in question actually believe in Santa? Wouldn't it be better to, you know, explain that the gifts actually came from her?
We took our children to see Santa in his Grotty Grotto one year, one of them was pre school. It was only a short time into the visit when one of them cried out, "It's Grandad." My father was playing the role.
They worked it out for themselves and were not disappointed to know he wasn't real.
Alan Garner used "real spells" in his books he'd researched in the British Library. He was always very careful not to write them out in full just in case someone read them out loud. Just in case.
Alan Garner used "real spells" in his books he'd researched in the British Library. He was always very careful not to write them out in full just in case someone read them out loud. Just in case.
Which is odd because his mythology is a weird anachronistic mix of Celtic, Anglo-Saxon and (as I recall) even Manx. Most 'real spells' are rather boring - spells to get chickens laying, cure toothache and avoid the machinations of witches. Actual demon summoning stuff is usually made up out of whole cloth by people wanting to try that sort of thing.
Alan Garner used "real spells" in his books he'd researched in the British Library. He was always very careful not to write them out in full just in case someone read them out loud. Just in case.
Which is odd because his mythology is a weird anachronistic mix of Celtic, Anglo-Saxon and (as I recall) even Manx. Most 'real spells' are rather boring - spells to get chickens laying, cure toothache and avoid the machinations of witches. Actual demon summoning stuff is usually made up out of whole cloth by people wanting to try that sort of thing.
I can't remember where I read it - it was either in an interview in Books for Keeps (journal for children's librarians) or an introduction to one of his books - a billion years ago.
He said it was for authenticity as made up spells in books just sounded crap ...
No doubt the school library in question has worse material, but Harry Potter is an easy, well known target ... Bet the Priest has never either read any of the books or seen the films.
Comments
The patrons, or the patron saint? My understanding is that the patrons are a group of wealthy Lincolnshire landowners and other members of the great and the good. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a reindeer among their various holdings. Red nose, on the other hand...
Yep that's what we did with ours. They are not traumatised as a result just recognise that we don't tell porkies to big up Christmas. It's more than enough already.
The issue is not not telling children about Father Christmas; it's about crassly breaking the news to children who do believe in him that he doesn't exist.
For the record we didn't tell ours he was real. We just didn't explicitly say he wasn't. We did put forward questions like how they thought he got round everyone so quickly to try to get them working it out for themselves.
I don't believe that Grandad comes back every Christmas as a robin, but I'd be very careful how - and if - I addressed that belief to people to whom it's important.
I know; it was my original point. Not everyone seems to get it.
We did the same. We always had a big party on Christmas Eve when they were little. Adult friends made a lot of ‘looking for Santa’ but we didn’t and we never once said he was real - and they never asked us outright.
My children frequently asked if stories were true. Knowing that they were just fantasy had no impact on their enjoyment of them.
Whether they are wealthy landowners or members of the great and the good, I can’t tell.
Well if we have to ban everything that could potentially traumatise the children, all fairytales must go - heaven knows how shocked the children will be when they grow up and bump into reality after we have ensured they don't get to think about anything bad ever happening anywhere, but nevertheless, Snow White's days must obviously come to an end.
Sarcasm on/Childhood will be so much fun when we have arranged all the necessary protection, never allowing children to use their imaginations (what if they imagine a nasty bad thing, no no, they might be traumatised) - if they are passionate about a sport, that will have to go as well, what the team they support lose - no, best not risk the trauma. What an excellent, well functioning world we could make happen. /Sarcasm off
And there would be the problem with smashing a chocolate Santa in a primary school - the attack on their exercise of their imaginations.
No problem if this had been done as an exercise against consumerism, or even rising obesity rates, and presented to an older group of people, or a group of adult atheists (who think there is something rational about beating chocolate with a hammer, but each to their own).
"Deceive" is a strong word and rather shifts the whole argument. But you are not "deceiving" them, you are just telling them a popular story. I see no-one's mentioned "Black Pete" yet (probably just as well)……….Oops, I just did - sorry!
¹ I attempt to deceive my children regularly, with the express purpose of having them adept at questioning what they are told both directly and with research.
² Also, it's funny³.
³ To me.
I particularly liked the bit at the bottom about the mother who
He did also point out that that people would claim to be acting in His name, when they really were not.
I didn't read beyond the title. LGBT grooming. Not sure how it good be a problem. I'm certain our dog wouldn't care who grooms her, I don't think most dogs care, they just like love and affection, which is something humans have in common with them. She likes to be patted by everyone, gets a big doggy grin on her face, wags tail like crazy. It's almost Jesusly. The only thing is that if you stop, she will bump your hand with her nose to encourage you to start again. That's definitely Jesusly: getting nudged to do something Which can eventually get annoying. But it can be solved if you throw a ball or, even better, a plush toy. I don't think Jesus falls for that trick. We should all aspire to be more god dog like.
And I see the Church of England is showing its usual dynamic approach to taking responsibility for stuff ...
How on earth can they be 'personal' views if he's published them in his capacity of vicar in the parish magazine of the parish where he is the incumbent?
If in the middle of a departmental meeting my boss says 'In my personal opinion, you are a prick', is that OK because he's just expressing a personal opinion and not company policy?
You have a Golden retreiver or Labrador.
Yes, actually. Assuming of course that in his capacity as manager he doesn’t treat you any differently than any of his other staff.
I mean, you could potentially make a claim of harassment against him for saying it, but it would be on the same basis that you could make the same claim against any other coworker who called you a prick.
Klingon War Dog actually. Was left in a box in a ditch somewhere north of us at -35°C, emaciated, frostbitten, dehydrated. Very skittish and shy. The cat parented her, we spent a lot of time socializing her and she became a Very Brave Klingon War Dog, a loving one who definitely knows who her pack is and that we help her to be brave. (Breed indeterminate.)
Well, either way, it wouldn't be a valid defence to harassment to say 'well it's just a personal opinion'. They could say something like 'there's a culture of insult humour on the team and Ricardus knows this perfectly well', i.e. in context it was acceptable.
This is what I find disingenuous about the diocesan response. If they think the mad vicar's pronouncements fall within the spectrum of acceptable Anglican views, then say so. If they don't, then slap him down. But saying it was just a personal view, when he spread it across three pages of his church's parish magazine, is just mealy-mouthed avoidance of responsibility.
This was public, in the newspapers. If my manager wrote in a newspaper, or even a User Group meeting, that I was a prick, that would be seriously unprofessional, as he would be representing the company and giving the companies perspective. A vicar speaking to the press is presenting the view of the organisation. If the organisation disagrees, they hsould take action.
What a pleasure to read this....a hug to Klingon War Dog from me please, and treats to you all for rescuing her.
Kneeling Santa Ornament (Catholic Company, but there are many versions from many vendors). It's Santa kneeling by the manger that holds baby Jesus.
From the product description:
I'm not sure how much I ever believed in Santa; but, on some level, I may. (Given that I take a "don't know" attitude towards most things.) Years ago, I got myself a similar ornament at a local Christmas store. I like it very much.
Pssst...if I were to go to the North Pole, I wouldn't expect to see Santa...but I would look, just in case...
That's climate change for you!
We took our children to see Santa in his Grotty Grotto one year, one of them was pre school. It was only a short time into the visit when one of them cried out, "It's Grandad." My father was playing the role.
They worked it out for themselves and were not disappointed to know he wasn't real.
Aside over, back to the discussion.
Alan Garner used "real spells" in his books he'd researched in the British Library. He was always very careful not to write them out in full just in case someone read them out loud. Just in case.
Which is odd because his mythology is a weird anachronistic mix of Celtic, Anglo-Saxon and (as I recall) even Manx. Most 'real spells' are rather boring - spells to get chickens laying, cure toothache and avoid the machinations of witches. Actual demon summoning stuff is usually made up out of whole cloth by people wanting to try that sort of thing.
I can't remember where I read it - it was either in an interview in Books for Keeps (journal for children's librarians) or an introduction to one of his books - a billion years ago.
He said it was for authenticity as made up spells in books just sounded crap ...
No doubt the school library in question has worse material, but Harry Potter is an easy, well known target ... Bet the Priest has never either read any of the books or seen the films.