If you want to read my column (hi, mom!) this month, you'll first have to do some homework. I'd like you to flip around the magazine you hold in your hands and take a look at the illustrations, from the cover to the back. I'll wait …
… Ah, you're back.
So, what do you think? What did you think of Julie Todaro's contribution on page 31? Isn't it absolutely brilliant? Right next to it is Alexa Thomson-McWilliams' artwork. There is something wonderful happening in those two drawings. These two smart 10-year-old girls have done it without a lick of ideology or superiority. They've brilliantly captured Christmas.
(Because I have to: my daughter's drawing on this page makes the same point. It is a stable scene with an angel and a reindeer hovering above, showering blessings.)
These girls have encapsulated Christmas into one image — and they aren't alone. Look at any of the illustrations. Ama Ampofo (Benediction, page 51) is of Ghanaian descent, but her imagery is completely Canadian. (Not a lot of pine forests in Ghana; of course, candy cane horsey angels are universal.) Or go to page 21: the mixed media wreath, which effortlessly blends classic iconography with a decidedly modern twist. The past, the present, yesterday, today, theology, culture — all smushed into one image.
Staying on the same page: I know ministers are overbusy this time of year, may I suggest that for one of your sermons you put Baillie Ferguson's work up on a board at the front of the sanctuary. What more is there to say? It's all there — with God (in blue) above the neo-classical scene. Or Bethany Morton's (on the cover). Bringing another baby to the manger is nothing short of brilliant. Again, another sermon.
But, have I got it wrong? Candy canes, Santa, Christmas tree and stables. Are these signs of the end times; the apocalypse comes not with a bang but with a whimper? (I have to declare my bias: I mistrust teddy bears ever since the Care Bears.) Do candy cane horsey angels diminish the manger scene? Is this the triumph of materialism over spirituality? Is the game lost?
My daughter's knowledge of theology is weak; her formal education has been limited to public school. So, when she conflates reindeer with angels, I really should take the blame. I have failed as a parent to properly instruct her. But, perhaps she's being ironic. Perhaps her drawing is a post-post-modern critique of Christmas.
Or perhaps it's a Spongian approach to Christmas, clear cutting the encrusted icons. This is what post-post-post-modernist apologetics might look like.
Or, conversely, does this iconography tell us that these children get it? That the stable is the base, is at the heart of things, and because of the stable, precisely due to the manger, there is joy in the world? That instead of the end, this is the beginning of time? The kids see things for what they are; they aren't afraid of the world, or of popular culture. They aren't afraid of Santa, aren't worried that he will gobble up their faith. They recognize that Santa is a metaphor for happiness which exists only because the manger exists.
And, isn't that just wonderful!
