A quote for the day:  ”It must be an odd feeling to be thankful to nobody in particular. Christians in public institutions often see this odd thing happening on Thanksgiving Day. Everyone in the institution seems to be thankful ‘in general.’ It’s very strange. It’s a little like being married in general.”
–Cornelius Plantinga, Jr.

Advent is the name given to the period of preparation leading up to Christmas.  It begins on the 4th Sunday before Christmas and ends on Christmas Eve.  In churches that use a formal liturgical church calendar, Advent is the beginning of the Christian year because the Church begins with Christ. The word “Advent” comes from the Latin word adventus, meaning “coming.”  It is a celebration of Christ’s first coming, and at the same time a preparation for His return.

Beginning in the 4th century, Advent was a time for fasting and self-reflection similar to Lent.  Gradually this aspect of Advent has been dropped, although the Roman Catholic Church and the more liturgical Protestant churches  still encourage solemnity and discourage too much festivity.  Believers from the ancient church would be shocked at our lack of seriousness during the days leading up to Christmas.  We may think that they were too austere, but we could benefit from more time spent in spiritual reflection and confession of our sins.

The season of Advent is also about hope.  We look back on the longing of the OT saints for the coming of the promised Messiah, and we look forward to Christ’s return.  It is in times of suffering and turmoil that hope is most important.  If our hope is based only on our own abilities and resources we are bound to be disappointed.  But if our hope is in God we can remain confident through the storm.  When we feel overwhelmed by the difficulties of life and the evil in the world we can join creation in groaning for Christ’s return (Rom. 8:18-25).

Even before Thanksgiving, preparations for Christmas are all around us, but nearly all of them have nothing to do with the birth of our Savior.  What does Black Friday have to do with Jesus? Even most Christians give little thought to spiritual preparation for the celebration of Christ’s birth.  We have to get our shopping done and send our Christmas cards like everyone else.  C.S. Lewis has written a wonderful essay contrasting Christmas and Xmas (or Crissmas and Exmas as he puts it), which he describes as two entirely different holidays celebrated on the same day. I encourage you to read it and reflect on the difference between the two.

For further reading:

• The Season of Advent by Dennis Bratcher (Christian Research Institute)
• Happy(?) Advent – ChristianHistory.net
• Wikipedia article on Advent

I am beginning a new series on holidays, focusing especially on Christian holidays.  This will give me the opportunity to explore the origins of some of our major holidays and share reflections on them from a Christian perspective.  Learning about the historical background behind some of our holidays can help us understand the origins of some of our holiday customs and provide perspective to evaluate our holiday practices.

Our English word “holiday” comes from “holy day.”  In medieval Europe the primary occasions for taking time off work and celebrating were religious festivals.  Many of our major holidays have a Christian origin, but they have also incorporated elements from pagan practices.  For example, the date on which we celebrate Christ’s birth just “happens” to coincide with a pagan Roman festival. Was that a brilliant evangelistic move or dangerous compromise with the world?  It’s not always easy to make that determination, but I hope that you will carefully consider both possibilities.

I will begin this series with Advent, because according to the traditional liturgical calendar used in the Western church Advent is the beginning of the Christian year.  The “Western church” refers to Catholics and Protestants in distinction from Eastern Orthodox churches which follow a different calendar.  Obviously the terms “east” and “west” here are used from a European perspective.

In the early church, the most important Christian festival was Easter.  Christmas began to receive more attention somewhat later, and these two major holidays along with the periods leading up to them formed the most important portions of the Christian year. In addition to these, early Christians began to honor martyrs by holding a feast on the day of their death. Churches that follow the liturgical calendar often use a lectionary, which is a list of Scripture passages to be read each Sunday.

Some Protestant churches follow the liturgical calendar, although they don’t recognize nearly as many saints days as the Catholic church.  Some Protestant churches recognize only Christmas and Easter, while others also include Advent and Lent. Since none of these things are commanded in Scripture we have the freedom to shape our practice according to biblical principles to edify the church.

For further reading:

• Seasons of the Christian Church (Nazarene perspective)
• The Liturgical Year (Wikipedia)
• The history of the Christian year (Catholic perspective, the first few sections are helpful)

I have been following the health care reform debate, and there is an important point that is not being discussed.  According to the reports, the proposed health care legislation requires insurance companies to take anyone, without considering pre-existing conditions, and it forbids them from charging people with health problems more than anyone else.  The goal of helping those who are currently “uninsurable” to get medical insurance is a wonderful, and we need to address this problem.  But what about the other consequences of such a policy?

I am not an economist, but wouldn’t that have the effect of significantly increasing the insurance premiums for all of us?  If insurance companies are required to accept a new group of people with serious medical problems then they will have to pay out a lot of money.  To get that money, they will need to raise rates.  Since they can’t charge sick people more (a good thing), they will have to raise the rates on everyone.  Is there anything wrong with my logic here?

The rhetoric is that the main problem is the “insane profits” of the insurance companies.  So I guess that the assumption is that the insurance companies can absorb the increased cost without raising rates.  But publicly traded companies are required to report their profits, and last year health insurers posted a 2.2% profit.  I’m not sure that 2.2%qualifies as an “insane” profit.  It’s always good to check the facts.

I read an article last week that stated that there were several states that already have established the above policy.  I wish I could find that article again, but I can’t.  As I recall, it said that for a 30 year old male non-smoker in one state the insurance premium would be something under $300.  For an identical man in a neighboring state with this policy the premium would be over $700!  That isn’t a projection, it is the fact right now.  Again, I’m sorry that I can’t find that article right now, but I thought that this is something that should be brought to our attention.

Someone needs to look into this.  If it is true that some states already have this policy, there should be a detailed comparison of health insurance rates in those states as compared to neighboring states.  It could give us a good idea of what might happen nationally.  Why isn’t anyone looking into this?

If the rates on private health insurance rise substantially, then the taxpayer subsidized government option will be too much of a bargain to pass up.  If larger companies are eventually allowed to offer the government insurance to their employees, why would they offer anything else?  In such an environment, how could the private insurance companies even survive?  Those who are on the suspicious side might see this as a deliberate plan to move us to a “single payer system” (i.e. government run health care).  What do you think?