When I was younger, Santa Clause often took big hits from pulpits. After all, it went, Santa represented everything wrong about a secularized Christmas--greedy kids wanting gifts, the commercialization of the holiday, and the eclipse of all things Christ. But what if the Santa of pop culture was based on a real person? And what if that person happened to be devout believer who loved all things Christ?
Let me introduce you to the real Saint Nicholas.
Like much of early church history, many details are lost to us about Nicholas’ life. Nevertheless, our best guess is that Nicholas was born around AD 280 in Asia Minor. We do not know the circumstances surrounding his conversion, but he eventually became the church bishop in Myra (the modern city of Kale in Turkey). Not long after he died, Nicholas was an incredibly popular figure. Some of the stories about him are legendary. But there is also much to commend him as a fellow believer.
Nicholas was born into a wealthy family. And after losing his parents at a young age, he decided to contribute his inheritance to the Church and the needs of others. That spirit of generosity is most famously recounted in the life of three sisters. Such was their desperation in poverty that they were about to turn to a life of prostitution. However, one day Nicholas slipped three small sacks of gold into their window, giving them a dowry and a future as wives. This certainly helped inspire the traditions of the modern man in red.
Nicholas was also well-known for his commitment to Christ. Under two Roman emperors he endured persecution and imprisonment for the gospel. However, the historical Nicholas may be most famous for his defense of the deity of Christ at the Council of Nicaea. The debate at that Council came down to a single letter--the Greek iota, or i in English. Whether or not that i was included in a theological word, determined if Christ is of the same substance as God, making him divine. A small, but loud number of voices were claiming Christ was not divine and it was causing a divide in the Church. This divide provoked the calling of the council of church leaders to discuss the issue.
The main voice of the Christ-is-not-divine camp was a church leader named Arius. For years, he said that Christ was not eternal. He was a being created by God through whom the universe was made. Thus, Jesus was not of the same but of a "different substance"--homoiousios-- with the Father. Not only does the Scripture not teach this, but it ended up draining any real sense of love from the Father for the Son.
The church leaders gathered at Nicaea eventually affirmed that the Scripture teach, and thus the Church should confess, that the Son is “of one being"--homoousios--with the Father. More specifically, they confessed that while the Father and the Son (and the Spirit!) are distinct persons, they are inherently the same Being, sharing the same divine nature. Heady stuff, but essential Christian belief that has direct implications for the gospel itself (cf. Rom 3:21-26).
Nicholas was unwavering in his affirmation of Christ's divine nature. He saw clearly the heretical errors of the Arians (the followers of Arius) and its implications. In fact, he was so zealous for Christ's glory as the divine Son of God, it was reported that when he first saw Arius at Nicaea, he slapped him across the face for blasphemy! For this, he was removed from the assembly. Though he later repented and was able to return. But the event lives on in memes like this today:
For all of these reasons and more, Nicholas became incredibly popular. Just a few centuries later a church was named after him. A few more centuries later and his relics were the source envy among the European churches. Everywhere he was hailed as a true example of godliness. Eventually, the tradition began of giving gifts in his name around the anniversary of his death on December 6. During the Reformation, Luther's alternative was to given gifts in the name of Christ since the Christchild himself was the greatest gift given to men. A generation later, the Puritan reformers banned Christmas (no one can be right all the time). But it was the Dutch who held onto the traditions of Christmas gift-giving and Saint Nicholas.
Those traditions have continued to grow up around this interesting man from the early church. Over time, the Dutch Sint Nicolaas (Saint Nicholas) became Sinterklaas, which became Santa Claus in English. And our modern day myth became fully formed after "Twas the Night Before Christmas" was published in 1832.
So, what should we say to these things? First, there is clearly a difference between the modern Santa Claus and the historical Saint Nicholas. Like anything else in the world, there is a danger that Santa could overtake an emphasis on Christ at Christmas. But he doesn't have to. In fact, knowing the history behind him can even be leveraged for gospel conversations with friends and coworkers. "Yeah, I like Santa, but I love the real St. Nicholas. Do you know anything about him?"
More importantly, remember what words matter. How we speak of Christ and the Triune God makes a difference. Sloppy words leads to sloppy theology. And, at worst, sloppy theology leads to a loss of the gospel and the salvation it brings. Theological precision isn't just for eggheads in seminary. It's for every day believers who long to honor God with right thinking about who he has revealed himself to be. And that right thinking will lead to deeper worship, which in turn, will lead to more joyful obedience.
Finally, be thankful that men and women such as Nicholas are part of our spiritual heritage. Be thankful that men and women loved Christ enough to give away fortunes and show compassion on the poor and needy. Be thankful that men and women were passionate for Christ's glory and stood fast against false doctrine, even when many were being swayed. They are an example to follow.
Further Reading:
Steven Nichols, For Us and For Our Salvation
Michael Reeves, Rejoicing in Christ
Comments