I completely agree with you here. There is a total and immense difference between fairy tale and deception. Parents do not need to build a magical pumpkin carriage and tell their kids there is a fairy godmother for the kids to enjoy "pretending" far more than they enjoy actualizing.

A great part of stimulating the imagination, is just that- imagination. Adults, not kids, have come to the conclusion that children need to be told it is true, in order to truly accept and enjoy the tale.

But, if we think hard enough, I think we can all agree that the fairy tales were so much more magical and enjoyable when they were not colliding with reality.

The child asks his parents "how does santa get down our chimney?" His parents make up a generally unsatisfying lie- and the child goes away with more frustration. His capacity for fantasy was actually disrupted. Since it has been brought into the world of gravity and space and time, he must logically find solutions to what his parents have told him are real.

But, then, when he retreats into his fairy stories, he never needs to ask how the pumpkin can become a carriage, or how the elves are immortal, or how dragons can spit fire. Why? Because the story comes with it's own logic,it's own structure of time and space which allows these things perfectly logically.

If Santa Clause were confined to a story, he would be a perfectly likable character. Because maybe the chimneys are larger in santa land, or he is able to morph into a tiny body, or he just "poof" appears beneath the chimneys. But when the child closes the book, the story closes with it, and the logical and vital leap is made from fantasy to reality.

In a Christmas that is already too commercialized, secular, connected to sex, entertainment, gambling and drinking, I find Santa to be just one more obstacle to people understanding the true nature of Advent and Christmas.

I'll pass on Santa.

I don't know about "unique". It's just a matter of mythology. When we read "Winnie-the-Pooh" or "Make Way for Ducklings" to our preschoolers, they don't know they're fiction. By the time they realize it, the deeper meanings of these stories are more apparent.

Also, I don't think you're a Biblical literalist. Are we "lying" when we tell the story of Adam and Eve? While our adult Bible study groups might whisper about its symbolic meaning, we certainly don't mention it to the kids. Are we "lying" when we say Jesus was born on December 25, when we know full well that date was chosen arbitrarily?

Are we "lying" when we say Jesus was born on December 25, when we know full well that date was chosen arbitrarily?

Well, I never say Jesus was born on December 25, so I don't think this or other other example really apply to me.

Rod Dreher suggests a similar debate today on his website Crunchy Con

blog.beliefnet.com/crunchycon/2007/12/to-santa-or-not-to-santa.html

Well, I never say Jesus was born on December 25, so I don't think this or other other example really apply to me.

You may not say it, but neither do I say that Santa is a myth -- it's lying by omission. We tell the children that Jesus was born at Christmas, and Christmas is Dec. 25; they connect the dots. My church pushes the "Jesus' birthday" meme, since that's easy for preschoolers to comprehend. I don't remember anyone ever telling the Sunday schoolers that Jesus might have been born at some other time of year.

You may not say it, but neither do I say that Santa is a myth -- it's lying by omission. We tell the children that Jesus was born at Christmas, and Christmas is Dec. 25; they connect the dots. My church pushes the "Jesus' birthday" meme, since that's easy for preschoolers to comprehend. I don't remember anyone ever telling the Sunday schoolers that Jesus might have been born at some other time of year.

Our Sunday Schools are different, then, and I do not lie by omission. We fully embrace what the day represents, and celebrate it as such. But we're also clear in saying it isn't literally (or at least we're not sure) the birthday of Christ.

Saint Nicholas has faithfully visited our house the night of Dec. 5 each year for over two decades. Eventually, the existence of his disciples was adverted to (the ones who actually deliver the gifts. Santa was always considered suspect by papa: he's always busy selling something.

I have to say. that Peter Pan site is one of the creepiest things I've seen in a while.

You may not say it, but neither do I say that Santa is a myth -- it's lying by omission. We tell the children that Jesus was born at Christmas, and Christmas is Dec. 25; they connect the dots. My church pushes the "Jesus' birthday" meme, since that's easy for preschoolers to comprehend. I don't remember anyone ever telling the Sunday schoolers that Jesus might have been born at some other time of year.

I think that the promotion of Santa involves more than "lying by omission." Children are not just left to assume that stories about him are true -- they are told that he actually exists. When children of a certain age question his existence, they are reassured that he is real. Parents leave presents under the tree that they claim are from Santa Claus, and they often even leave food for Santa and then eat it in order to make it look as though he had really been there. This isn't lying by omission -- it's an illusion sustained by the taking of very elaborate measures. Calling December 25 the birthday of Jesus, on the other hand (when people actually say that), is only misleading by oversimplification of the truth -- like any birthday, it is the day on which his birth is celebrated, but unlike ordinary birthdays, it is unknown whether it is actually the anniversary as Jesus' birth. For one of these, adults work hard to make kids believe something that we know is false, and for the other, they oversimplify the truth into something that probably is not completely true.