Our family has a tradition of watching “A Charlie Brown Christmas” before bed on Christmas Eve. The endearing story ends with Linus finally satisfying Charlie Brown’s frustrating pursuit of the true meaning of Christmas. His answer is a recitation from Luke 2 proclaiming the birth of Jesus and ending with the climactic promise, “Peace on earth, goodwill toward men.”

Linus’ childlike monologue will land differently this year, for war, rather than peace, is raging in the very location of that original promise. And it is not just the Israel/Hamas conflict that mocks Christmas hope. Any honest assessment of our world tragically leaves us with violence on earth and hatred toward men.

Does Christmas possess the resources to deliver the world it promises? Perhaps you are skeptical, but consider the ineptitude of our own attempts to manufacture peace on earth.

Typically, humanity has sought to accomplish peace in one of two ways: separation or toleration. Historically, separation has been the norm. I gather with my tribe, you gather with yours, and for the sake of mutual self-interest, we will agree to leave each other alone. But history has proven peace through tribalism is never accomplished. Inevitably, tribal supremacy becomes the greater goal, and the stronger tribe dominates the weaker. But even if it did work, are we really going to relegate our vision of peace to a form of segregation?

The more modern and popular option is not separation but toleration. Toleration rightly renounces the divisions of separation, asking all to submit to a mutual spirit of acceptance. On the surface, this sounds noble, but the problem is that for tolerance to be accomplished, all are forced into an intolerant social order dictated by predominately white Western ideals. Consider, for example, the famous “coexist” bumper sticker spelled out by the symbols of the world’s major religions. The dilemma behind the well-intended messaging is that it is asking every person represented on the sticker to disavow their deeply held beliefs in order to conform to the ironically dogmatic progressive creed of inclusion.

Peace through separation is only peace with those like us. Peace through toleration is only peace with those who agree with us. In this way, both end up echoing the prophet Jeremiah’s lament, “Peace, peace, when there is no peace.”

Is there any hope for peace on earth? I suggest we not give up on the original Christmas promise. Admittedly, Christians have not always been good stewards of the Christmas message, but in its purest form, Christmas offers the resources to cultivate the peace we find so elusive. The concluding promise of peace on earth is preceded by a remarkable announcement, “Unto you is born this day a Savior.”

We who vainly seek to resolve our strife instead need a Savior to do it for us. And Christmas is the good news that this Savior has come with a counterintuitive ambition that will remedy our world. In short, Jesus was born to love his enemies. Even more than his birth, Jesus has died for his enemies. The death of Jesus reconciles the previously irreconcilable divide between sinners and their God. And the beneficiaries of Jesus’ saving peace are commissioned with the simple command to go forth and do likewise.

We who were once at enmity with God but, through the death of our Savior, are now at peace with God are now under the obligation of radical love. After all, if Jesus can love me unto death, then who is beyond my love? No one. Unlike separation, I am obligated to love those unlike me. Unlike toleration, I am obligated to love those who disagree with me. The meaning of Christmas is that I am not exempt from the Savior’s love; thus, none are exempt from my love, even my very enemies.

“That’s what Christmas is all about, Charlie Brown.” -Linus

– The Rev. Robert Cunningham is the founder and director of Christ for Kentucky. You can follow him on Twitter @RobertC4KY and send questions and comments to assistant@christforky.org.