The Great Halloween Debate

I guess one way to know that you’re getting older is when you tend end your conversations with the phrase, “Things sure aren’t like they used to be?”  I find myself saying that a lot lately, usually surrounding more of the mundane aspects of life.  Take Halloween for instance.  I remember when (another catch phrase for “fuddy duddys in training” I’m afraid), Halloween was a harmless little holiday that encouraged little kids to use their imaginations in deciding “what they were going to be” and to work diligently in creating their costumes, often with the odds and ends that their moms had lying around the house.

From my kindergarten year in 1968 through second grade in 1970 my school, in a small city in southwest Indiana actually allowed Halloween parties and costumes at school.  In kindergarten I went as the television character, The Flying Nun.  My mother still talks about the momentary panic that set in when she tried to figure out how she was going to fashion the “wing-like” hat for that outfit.  But I have to give her “mad props”; using only a white cardboard box and a healthy dose of motherly ingenuity, “Moms” pulled it off.  In first grade I went as a witch, ironically both the school Halloween party and the one sponsored by my Sunday School at our local Missionary Baptist Church (where I ironically won “Prettiest Costume” probably because my witchy ensemble was accessorized with a pair of my grandmother’s elbow length black silk gloves).  Finally, in second grade I went as Frito-Lay’s animated corn chip spokesperson, “The Frito Bandito.”  But by third grade in 1971, both the “Frito Bandito” and Halloween costumes at school had apparently both been deemed too politically incorrect to continue in polite society and were both unceremoniously banned for life.

Nearly 40 years later the “Great Halloween Debate” continues, with Evangelical Christians of the Pat Robertson variety, predicting dire consequences for Christians who allow their children to participate in Halloween activities.  In a 2009 Huffington Post article, Robertson charged that even the candy was “evil” because it had been “dedicated and prayed over by witches.”  Seriously, Pat?  Really?

But to be fair, I think the folks on the “pro-Halloween” side of the controversy may be going a little overboard as well.  “Back in the day” I can remember my sisters and me making our costumes out of clothes from our “dress up” box and handcrafted accessories.  My mother could work absolute magic with a cardboard box.  In addition to my “Flying Nun” headgear I recall her making a surprisingly realistic “cardboard sword” to complete my little sister’s swashbuckling pirate costume.  But today, Halloween decorations appear in the stores just after the 4^th of July and seasonally operated “Halloween Stores” open for business.  Despite the still flagging U.S. economy, iCharts.net indicates that American consumers have spent $1.8 billion dollars on Halloween candy, $1.6 billion on decorations and a whopping $2 billion on costumes (for adults, children, and pets combined).  That’s nearly $5.5 billion for a minor, one day celebration.  Are any of these Halloween “holiday shoppers” are among the same group that is complaining bitterly about President Obama’s pricey stimulus plan?  Why throw money around on trifles like improving the highways, preventing the failure of the auto industry and financial institutions when we could be spending our money on all manner of inflatable lawn decorations and tons o’ fun-sized Three Musketeers bars?

Both sides need to take a step back and “get a grip”, quite frankly.  To Evangelicals of the extreme variety I would ask them to consider perhaps doing a bit of research, from a variety of sources regarding the origins of Halloween.  For example, ChurchYear.Net features an article indicating that All Hallows Eve first gained popularity as a prelude to a decidedly religious holiday known as All Saints Day where Christians feasted in order to pay homage to all of their Saints and Martyrs (sort of like the modern day consolidation of Washington’s Birthday and Lincoln’s Birthday into the more generic “President’s Day”).  The website asserts that, “Many customs of Halloween reflect the Christian belief that on the feast’s vigil we mock evil, because as Christians, it holds no real power over us.”  So, if there is any validity in that definition wouldn’t it make sense for Christians to embrace Halloween activities as a sort of “take that Satan!” kind of thing?

And to the big spending Halloween enthusiasts I would say, “Have fun, show a little restraint.” If you’ve been laid off since November of 2008, your 401K is in the tank and your house is about to be foreclosed upon you do not need a mechanical zombie on your front porch and a Halloween light display choreographed to spooky music playing outside your house (and running up your utility bills in the process) for the entire month of October. 

Personally, I don’t think that Halloween represents either the downfall of human kind but neither should it be treated like a “high holy day” rivaling Christmas, Passover, Ramadan or any other religious celebration (unless perhaps you are a follower of Wicca but that’s a whole ‘nother topic!  Halloween doesn’t have to represent yet another “great divide in our society” as long as people on all sides just use a little more common sense.

References

About the solemnity of All Saints

http://www.churchyear.net/allsaints.html

Leo, A. & McGlynn, K. (2009). Christian Broadcasting Network warns against “demonic” Halloween candy.  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/29/christian-broadcasting-ne_n_338738.html

http://www.icharts.net/myicharts/app?service=external&sp=Y3vRzytD&page=TeamChartDetail

Why Are Some Christians So "Un-Christlike"?

Remember the firestorm that Dixie Chicks lead singer Natalie Maines caused about seven years back when she spoke out against the war in Iraq and ended by saying that she was “ashamed that the President of the United States was from Texas”?  The remark generated so much controversy that it nearly ended the group’s career.  While I was never a huge Dixie Chicks fan I couldn’t help but feel some empathy for Maines. Being a Texan is important to her; it is a proud part of her heritage.  When former President George W. Bush called for the American invasion of Iraq on what turned out to be less than reliable intelligence information there were a lot of Americans who were doubtful about that course of action.  It wouldn’t be surprising that one “proud and loyal Texan” would be embarrassed when another self-described “proud and loyal Texan” initiated an act that would ultimately draw the contempt of a large majority of the civilized world.

I find myself with similar feelings when I listen to members of the self-dubbed “religious right” opposing everything from abortion to gay marriage to the Islamic Center and mosque in New York City.  Having been a committed Christian for more than 30 years my faith represents a huge facet of my life.  But when other so-called Christians seem to use religion as a club which to beat up those with whom they disagree I tend to be ashamed to share the Christianity label with them as well.

When I was a kid in Sunday school I remember being taught that the definition of a Christian was “one who was committed to being like Christ.”  The recurring theme was that Jesus came to Earth to lead a “model life”, to show human beings “how it was done” so that by accepting Him we could ultimately receive all the blessings that God had planned for mankind (before Adam and Eve screwed it up).  But somehow, I think I missed the Bible stories about how Jesus thought it was ok to bomb abortion clinics or the parables about bashing gays and denying them their civil rights or the sermons about how everyone in America is entitled to freedom of religion unless that religion just happens to be anything besides Christianity.  I must have been sick or sleeping in or on vacation on those Sundays because I just don’t remember any of those lessons at all.

My recollection of learning to be “Christlike” is more in line with some information I found on the All About Following Jesus website.  The behavior of Jesus described here is marked by humility (Philippians 2: 5 -8), service (Matthew 20:28), a desire to glorify God (I Corinthians 10:31), a commitment to prayer (Mark 1:35) and a willingness to sacrifice (John 2:2).  I just can’t seem to reconcile angry protestors who seek to shout down anyone who disagrees with them with the picture of humility.  The “I’m right; you’re wrong so just sit down and shut up” mentality just doesn’t seem to mesh with Jesus’ assertion that “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth” (Matthew 5:5).  And just how, exactly does hurling crude insults at homosexuals “glorify God”?  And for the Tea Party members who want lower taxes and fewer government supports for the poor, where is the spirit of sacrifice?

Personally, I think that people who attempt to condemn others in the name of Christianity are missing the point.  Aligning ourselves with Christ does not give us license to sit in harsh judgment of others.  In Romans 3:22 – 23 (NIV) Paul writes, “This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”.  The real charge in Christianity is to address the areas in our own lives where we have “sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”  I would hazard a guess that if all Christians committed ourselves to that task we would all have far less time available for sneering at the perceived shortcomings of everyone else.     

 

Playing Nicely

Since making the switch from cable to satellite TV a few months ago I’ve discovered that watching the Documentary Channel is one of my new guilty pleasures.  Last night I checked out:  Al Franken:  God Spoke, a somewhat rambling 2006 documentary highlighting Franken’s short-lived foray into the world of talk radio through the now defunct Air America Radio program and his support of the Kerry/Edwards campaign in 2004.  While the film itself was unfortunately about as successful as both Air America Radio and the Kerry/Edwards campaign, Franken’s run-ins with conservative arch-rivals Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly proved to be some of the most entertaining, although inherently depressing parts of the film.

Back in 2004 I was a single working mom with a thirteen year old son and I must confess that I was far less cognizant of the political climate during that period than I am today.  As a lifelong Democrat, I voted (rather unenthusiastically I’m afraid) for John Kerry but was not otherwise very politically involved or aware.  Al Franken was familiar to me only as a figure from his Saturday Night Live days; Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity were completely unknown to me and Bill O’Reilly was a television personality with whom I was vaguely familiar but completely unimpressed.  O’Reilly simply struck me as a slightly more refined Rush Limbaugh type character that just didn’t seem worth my time.  So, the bitter feud and resulting lawsuit between O’Reilly and Franken revealed in the film was news to me.

But as I watched the confrontations between Franken, Coulter, Hannity and O’Reilly and thought about the polarization in our country that has only intensified during the past decade I was struck not so much by the merits of the arguments put forth by both the political left and right but rather by the shear mean spiritedness of the debates.  Rather than simply being individuals with differing points of view the confrontations had the tone of attacks that were unnecessarily personal.

Sadly, this seems to be the norm in our society today and perhaps it is time for those of us who are bothered by the growing incivility around us to take a stand.  When I was growing up my little sister and I went through a phase where we absolutely hated each other.  We were total opposites who couldn’t agree on anything. But never, in a million years would our parents have ever put up with the sniping and name calling that plays out on political television talk shows and radio programs every day.  Whenever our childhood disagreements became just a little too personal mom was always quick to rein us in with the firm admonishment to “play nicely.”

While the need to “bite my tongue” and refrain from calling my sister a “great, big stupid head” (the ultimate in insults among “tween” girls in the 1970s) at the dinner table was maddeningly frustrating at the time I am grateful now for my mother’s strict enforcement of the “play nicely” rule.  Heaven knows I have sat through any number of corporate presentations where the “You’re a great big stupid head” comment would not have been unjustified.  But had I not learned to contain those urges early on I can’t imagine that my career would have advanced very far.

Passionate beliefs are a wonderful thing.  Lively debates can keep our intellects sharp and our senses keen.  But isn’t there a way to disagree without being intentionally disagreeable?  What will it take to get back to “playing nicely”?