Listening to AM radio, I have heard a number of Christians complaining that Christmas is being co-opted into a secular holiday. Isn’t this stupid. There is nothing in Scriptures about Santa Claus, eggnog, and trees. Didn’t Christians co-opt a pagan holiday to create Christmas? Early Christians didn’t even celebrate Christmas. Why do some Christians choose to believe these pagan rituals are part of our Christian traditions?
Well, that’s what happens when you give government sanction to a purely religious matter – it becomes co-opted. If you want to keep your religion pure, maintain separation of church and state.
For all intents and purposes, there are really two Christmases: the religious observance that happens in Churches and homes, and the secular festival that starts *immediately * after Halloween. Your easily-offended AM Radio Christian buddies are just confusing the two.
I have no problem with the two Christmases. Christians need only remind themselves why it’s celebrated, and non-Christians need to stop the phony claims of offense at hearing the word “Christmas” or seeing the decorations of religious nature. It is law, after all, that Christmas is a national holiday.
If it’s the tolerant, progressive, liberal thought that demands the secularizing of Christmas (the removal of public nativities, not saying “Christmas”), where’s the tolerance for Christians’ being allowed to celebrate?
The winter solstice holiday was co-opted by the Church in, I believe, the 4th century. Before that, the birth of Jesus was celebrated at various times in various places. Remnants of pagan rituals and traditions are parts of Christmas celebrations in many countries, including ours. The season has always been a time of general hell raising, and as such has often been frowned on by the Christian establishment. AFAICT, what we celebrate as Christmas was essentially invented by Charles Dickens, Clement Moore (maybe), Thomas Nast, and Coca Cola.
But, as my son would say, it’s all good. I kind of like creches (as long as my tax dollars aren’t paying for them), and I love Christmas hymns and carols. The radio Christians can rant all they want; nobody’s going to mess with the retail spending orgy and drunken rout that is the true meaning of Christmas.
The Christianity I was raised in didn’t believe in Christmas or any other religious holidays. Yes, the ranks of the congregation swelled around Christmas and Easter, yes, the congregation accepted the increased contributions, but instead of the “on this day was born to us a Savior” sermon, ever year we got the “Christmas is a false holiday that the other, less worthy, non-Church-of-Christ ‘Christians’ came up with to speed them on their way to hell,” sermon. And yet my family still celebrated Christmas with a vengence–it’s my mother’s favorite holiday by far, and decorating is a full-time job for a couple of weeks a year. Go figure
I don’t recall hearing any demands lately for the secularization of Christmas; I suspect what you’re referring to is when people object to the encroachment of religious imagery on the public domain. Any tax-supported entity would do well to avoid even the impression of preferring one faith’s images and traditions over another’s.
For the record, nobody’s tried to keep *me * from celebrating Christmas in the religious sense.
I just heard about the Pricipal in TX who placed a moratorium on the colors red and green when putting up holiday decorations. I mean come on!!!. Are traffic lights going to be declared offensive now?
That’s the “demand” for secularism I was referring to - the refusal to allow any religious imagery. Get over it.
Why are red and green considered religious? They are symbols of Santa and mistletoe, of holly berries and trees. Not of Jesus Christ.
Frankly, I think the whole thing is getting out of hand. You don’t want religious overtones? Don’t call it Christmas, call it something else. I’ll continue to celebrate the Birth of Christ, and we’ll just respectfully agree to disagree.
My response to people who claim Christmas is over-commercialized is to gently remind them that, if it appears so to them, that’s because of their choices and the way they handle their faith. I don’t have my Christmas tree up yet, thanks to a mishap with a Christmas tree stand, and, for the first time in years, I don’t have an Advent wreath, but I’ll be rehearsing for my church’s Christmas pageant tonight and I’ve participated in other activities, including helping those who won’t be as well off this Christmas. The way I was raised, giving to others who can’t afford Christmas is as important apart of the holiday as any other secular aspect. I’ve done without a Christmas tree; I can’t picture Christmas without the tradition of “white gifts,” presents, sometimes even necessities, wrapped in white paper and brought to the church on Christmas Eve for those who’ll do without.
Perhaps one difference between me and the people who complain about the commercialization of Christmas is my denomination, the Episcopal Church, also acknowledges Advent, the four Sundays before Christmas, which is seen as a time of preparation for Christ’s birth. That preparation is reflected in the music, the sermons, and the lessons. Something major and joyful is coming! Some One important is coming! The preparations we are to make have nothing to do with braving the crowds at the local shopping mall. In fact, after my experience doing that last Saturday (it was necessary), I’d say braving the local shopping mall is detrimental to those preparations. I may be a member of a so-called “liberal denomination”, but I’m very aware of how important those spiritual preparations are to my faith and my Christmas.
A happy Advent to all of you, or at least all you Christians! Didn’t you hear?! Something Marvelous is due to happen soon!!!
CJ
Many Christians do in fact leave out or minimize things like Santa in their holiday, or else focus on him as St. Nicholas. I’ve known fundamentalists who do in fact see Trees and Santa as bad things.
But for the vast majority, the objection is not to the addition of secular elements (or those from other religions), but for efforts to **remove **the religious elements. Very few Christians would object to someone setting up a Christmas tree or a Menorah alongside the Nativity scene; where they get upset is when the Nativity scene is taken down. If a grade school teaches kids Kwanzaa songs, no problem. If a grade school forbids kids from singing “Silent Night” at the Christmas pagent, that is a problem.
For people who are not religious, the tendency is to view secularism as “neutral,” the default setting from which everything else deviates. People who are religious do not see it that way, and see the attempt to remove all religion from public life as the attempt to implicitly create the de facto dominance of a specific worldview.
Where’s the lack of tolerance for Christians being allowed to celebrate? No one is demanding that religious expression be removed from private property or private speech. If you have no problem with “two Christmases” then you have no problem with secularizing government sanctioned holiday displays by removing nativity scenes, etc. If some people prefer to say “Happy Holidays” it’s because they’re polite enough to understand that the people they’re addressing are not neccessarily Christian, not because they’re being forced to.
If that principal thinks that red and green are are Christian religious symbols, then damn straight he is wrong. Red and green, tannenbaums, and Santa Claus are secular symbols and are appropriate in public school for that reason. But for government institutions to display references to Jesus is inappropriate. Get over it.
The very fact that Christmas, by law, is a national Holiday, is a direct governmental reference to Jesus. Therefore, since acknowledged by the State, it is appropriate to feature icons of Jesus or other religous notions in whatever sensible place the locals feel is acceptible. Freedom of religion, not from religion.
I agree that no one is being prevented from enjoying and celebrating Christmas - but secularists sure do know how to suck the joy from the marrow of the season.
Excellent post! Except that Kwanzaa isn’t a religion or representative of any religion. Comparing Kwanzaa to Christmas is incorrect. Kwanzaa is more like Columbus day or 4ht of July-- the celebration of a particular culture.
The hypocracy in our case comes from the fact that Christmas is a federal holiday, and yet the government isn’t supposed to proomote the actual (religious) celebration in support of the holiday. Personally, I don’t see a big difference between having it as an official holiday, and putting a manger scene on the WH lawn. We don’t get Dec 25th off because it’s “Holiday”, we get it off becasue it’s “Christmas”. To be logically consistent, it should not be a federal holiday at all.
Of course, like most things, we reach a compromise. We decied it’s OK to have Dec 25th off, but we don’t allow the government to flagrantly push the religious aspect of that day on the ciitizens. And where we squablle is that different people disagree on what is “flagrant” and what is not. So it will be for the rest of our lives…
Not quite.
There are, in fact, NO national holidays in the US. There are “federal” holidays established for observance by the US Government, most of which are also observed by society at large. But each state and local government and school district and business can observe whatever holidays it wants.
Cite.
[QUOTE=Wrath]
The very fact that Christmas, by law, is a national Holiday, is a direct governmental reference to Jesus.
[quote]
The name “Christmas” presents a slight complication in embracing a completely secularized of the holiday, but then again it’s just a word and need not be taken any further than that in official references to the Dec 25th holiday.
Bollocks. What exactly does the law say? Just because Dec 25th is a designated a federal holiday it does not amount to official recognition of the divinity of Jesus and should not be used as a pretext to nullify Separation of Church and State.
They’re 2 sides of the same coin. Freedom of religion in the private sector, freedom from religion in the government (you know, the “Big” Government) sector.
How is that again? You cited a fringe example at a single school. What we’re mainly hearing is typical conservative alarmist whining–“They’re calling it ‘Holiday’! Bah humbug!”. The point is to make the holidays more inclusive, which can only help in the joy department.
I’m curious, squeels if you listen to national news regarding the joy suckage.
A quick google reveals this 2001 source:
•A Frederick County, Maryland, school employee was told by an administrator that employees would be banned from handing out Christmas cards in the school because cards with a Christian message “may not be a legally protected right on a public school campus.”
•A fourth-grader in Ephrata, Pennsylvania, was prohibited from handing out religious Christmas cards to classmates.
•Two middle school students in Rochester, Minnesota, were disciplined for wearing red and green scarves in a Christmas skit and for ending the skit by saying, “We hope you all have a merry Christmas.”
• Two ninth-graders in Plymouth, Massachusetts, were told they could not create Christmas cards that say “Merry Christmas” or depict a nativity scene.
•A teacher in Plymouth, Illinois, was warned by her principal not to read a book about Christmas to her second-grade students. The book was in the school’s library.
•The superintendent of the Silverton, Oregon, school district had students remove all “religious” holiday decorations from their lockers but allowed secular decorations.
•The county school board in Covington, Georgia, deleted the word “Christmas” from the school calendar after the American Civil Liberties Union threatened legal action.
•“We’re getting besieged,” said John Whitehead, president of the Rutherford Institute, a Charlottesville, Virginia-based organization that provides legal help in cases involving religious bias said his group has received at least 50 complaints or inquiries, including the above examples, about situations in which students or teachers were told that various Christmas decorations or messages were banned at their schools.
Not so fringe.
Redoing the top part of my post:
The name “Christmas” presents a slight complication in embracing a completely secularized version of the multi-faceted holiday season, but then again it’s just a word and need not be taken any further than that in official references to the Dec 25th holiday.
Bollocks, etc…
As I’ve said elsewhere, the folks mentioned in the OP consider anything less than a total theocracy to be “repression” of their religion, so it’s no wonder they see the slightest deviation from their ideal Christmas celebration as a threat.
Sounds fair to me, since I omit or minimize things like angels and mangers and saviors in my winter solstice holiday. See? We can learn to share after all! 