I dunno...there are others who have nothing to do with Christianity who seem to be going OK. On a recent visit to Bhutan they seemed quite content with Bhuddism. Same in Mongolia...they were going OK.

Sellick has it right when he indicates that one has to believe. All over the world people believe in different things, and they all believe theirs is the right path to follow. And good on them. Whatever brings meaning and purpose to life is beneficial to a persons state of mind. I just get tired of endless moralising to the rest of us...be happy in your beliefs, but accept that others are happy with theirs and should be left to follow them. Who are we to tell others what they should believe...it smacks of arrogance to me.

And a word on the origin of the mid-winter festival, which christians chose to call Christmas. It is not the birth of Jesus...I don't think there is much evidence that he was born on Christmas...more like summer when the shepherds would be most likely out tending their flocks.

But...because there were already celebrations around this time. Mid-winter is a popular time for festicals, as is mid-summer. Feast of the Son of Isis, the Winter Solstice (Yule in northern Europe) and it was a convenient time which to have a celebration. It was Pope Julius the first who, in 350AD, decided that the birth of Jesus was to be celebrated on this day. He was a practical man, knowing that that he might be able to outcompete the other celebrations get more people converted to Christianity and stamp out the other festivals. As history shows, it was a masterly move.

Many Christmas symbols such as mistletoe, holly, and the Christmas tree, have their origins in pagan festivals rather than any real christian meaning. In fact trees were a problem to many fundamental christians who saw them as a pagan symbol.

Having said all this...Christmas is still a time when families can get together, irrespective of religion, and enjoy each others company and look forward to the coming year

When are we going to realise that the story of the Virgin Birth is all BS and that the Christian religion is based on belief rather than fact.

David

New depths of incoherence in this one, even for Peter. What does

"It is part of the economy of the human soul that we will say yes to something."

mean, for instance? (I say YES to cranberry sauce!)

"The point is made for all believers, that the Christ may be born in them through faith and that this engenders grace."

Then a lot of obstetricians are going to be in for a real shock...

Seriously, I hope this means something to Christians, because it means nothing to me. Arguing against it would be like trying to fight a jellyfish.

The fundamental human urge and need is not gross in its nature.
The fundamental human urge and need is not food, sex, power, things, or even physical survival.
The fundamental human urge and need is happiness---but not in the mere satisfaction-of-self sense.
The fundamental human urge and need is ECSTASY---or the free exercise of "self"-identity.

Therefore, true religion must retire to Light!

The heart must be permitted to achieve a universal feeling-ecstasy!

What would Happen if all of humankind were, now and forever hereafter, allowed complete, unobstructed, and Perfectly ecstatic access to Inherently egoless Truth Itself?

What would Happen if, instead of access merely to worldly or gross "realist", or exclusively exoteric, and traditionally "official" and anti-ecstatic, and anti-magical, and anti-metaphysical, and anti-Spiritual "ego"-truth and pseudo-Ultimacy, all of humankind were, from now on, allowed complete and unobstructed and Perfectly ecstatic access to Inherently egoless Truth Itself?

What would Happen if, from now on, the political, social, economic, and cultural totality of humankind were allowed to establish and perpetuate itself entirely and only on the Perfectly ecstatic basis of the Inherently egoless Truth That IS Reality Itself?

Both exoteric "religion" and secular materialism are magic-paranoid, and altogether, anti-ecstatic traditions, rooted in fear of the intrinsic magical power of existence-being.

Both, for many centuries now, have been actively (mis)-intructing and propagandistically coercing humankind to DISBELIEVE and to dissociate from ALL modes of association with magical, and metaphysical, and even Spiritual, and, in general, ecstasy-producing ideas and activities.

Peter, I was rather disappointed in this article.

“The appearance of the angel Gabriel… is a sign that we are here in the realm of legend dressed up as history.” A contentious statement for literalists. Yet I think rendered more contentious by taking an insertion a few centuries on as “gospel truth” and using it to underpin your article.

The recognition of Mary as theotokus is a two-edged sword: the use of this paradigm, once admitted, becomes somewhat dishonourable if the concept is proffered framed only by Christian theology. Indeed, the role of various women throughout pre-history and contemporary history at the time of the insertion of Mary into the texts, must be presented and entered into. It is central to the entire dispute regarding Mary’s role in current religious thought.

Similarly your comment on Luke 1:38 that “This is what the Church does. It ponders the word that is revealed to it.” Takes a huge leap from myth to divine word with no interim steps.

While still having no immutable idea of who wrote the gospels agreement that they were written at some time after the death of Jesus is by now pretty universally accepted, yes? No Boswell has yet been unearthed to provide us with verbatim quotes?

How then to give credence to the idea that the words of Mary, pregnant thirty odd years before the main action of the story begins, are anything more than an approximation, surmise, construct or poetic license?

While much has been made of the OT being the direct word of God by various religions, no-one has as yet claimed the gospels were written by anything other than human agency (or have they?). Where, at the time of the Marian inclusion, was anyone to be found who was witness to the annunciation?

I sincerely feel that your concept of the Marian doctrine and its importance to Catholicism is rather flawed.

Ps. As for “...we in the modern age, together with Henry Ford, believe that “history is bunk” “ I advise, as once before, a judicious and painful biting of the tongue!

Phil

I dunno either....after six months of cancer treatments. Belief systems are one thing, faith is another as many scholarly studies indicate. Following my fourth operation, which was significant, in the ICU the thought of friends praying for me was more powerful than any belief system. I was in a secular hospital but the nurses were mostly Catholic (I am Uniting but was raised Catholic). Lucky for me that in the wee hours of the night they helped allay fears with prayer. Hail Mary, full of grace, thank you for Jesus, and plase stay with me in the months ahead. Phil, may your faith be (re)born this Christmas. Thanks Peter, as always.