Thursday, December 08, 2005
The "Christmas" Controversy
THE “CHRISTMAS” CONTROVERSY
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard
So now President Bush is being attacked by the conservative, evangelical right wing for sending out Christmas cards which say, “Happy Holidays.” He is pilloried as representing himself as a born again, practicing Christian and then betraying that model by capitulating to the secular infidels espousing a generic non-Christmas holiday. His greeting card is defended by those who regularly remind us that we are a diverse society, and that any greeting (oral or printed) which recognizes any element of the religion attributed to some 95% in our society is improper and incorrect by definition.
The American Family Association has been promoting a boycott of Target stores for using “holidays” versus “Christmas” in its advertising and store greetings. (Target denies this.) Bill O’Reilly, who has a campaign defending Christmas, has listed retailers on his website who use “holidays” in their materials or greetings and questions their worthiness for shoppers. (Fox has had to change its own website language to conform to O’Reilly’s code.) In opposing the “professional atheists” and “Christian haters,” the defenders of Christmas find themselves allied with strange bedfellows, the retailers and businesses that profit from the commercialization of Christmas.
Christmas has a bizarre history in this country. Puritans in Massachusetts considered Christmas as an objectionable pagan festival. Failing to find December 25 in their bible, they forbade its observance originally in 1620, and from 1659 to 1681 they had a secular law making the observance of Christmas a crime. (This is a prime example of the need to keep church and state separate.) In 1827 an Episcopal bishop complained Christmas was a day of drinking and swearing, while as late as 1857 Baptist, Methodist, and Presbyterian churches were reported by New York newspapers as not observing Christmas. However, by the 20th century Christmas was espoused as a religious holiday by Christians. The principal problem for churches became the commercialization of the season. Not only ministers decried this, but in 1965 the dialogue of “A Charlie Brown Christmas” has Lucy voicing that Christmas “is a big commercial racket.”
Neither is the objection to secular observance of a religious holiday a new phenomenon – “a liberal plot.” In 1906 some 20,000 Jewish students boycotted the elementary schools of New York City objecting to the singing of Christmas hymns. In 1946 the Rabbinical Assembly of America denounced such forced participation of Jewish students as “an infringement on their American rights.” For decades some businesses, colleges, schools, and secular groups have employed neutral terms such as “winter breaks” and “Season’s Greetings” out of sensitivity to those of other faiths. Sensitivity and courtesy in this respect is not a new phenomenon historically, and it is not out of place today.
Most of us do not choose our Christmas greetings with either political correctness or religion in mind. We want one that looks pretty and expresses our sentiments. It is our right as individuals to choose our greetings, and if we offend it is our own responsibility. However, in defense of Mr. Bush, a card representing the office of the President of the United States should not be religiously doctrinaire. Further, it is probably better that all such greetings from governmental offices and public institutions be kept secular in nature. A business enterprise which caters to people from all religious faiths might be well advised to exercise care in choosing greetings.
With all that said, it should be noted that this is another of those areas where all forms of extremism should be rejected. We must be more tolerant of differences. We must cease our “slash and burn” rhetoric and combative style. This writer remembers well the resonating greeting to customers of his hometown Jewish department store owner/boss, “Merry Christmas!” While devout in his own religion, that good man exemplified the generous, giving spirit of Christmas as much or more than anyone.
It is time that sensible people take note that Christmas is both a Christian commemoration and a holiday of the broader American and world cultures. Accoutrements have grown up around the holiday that have little to do with religion, but it is still Christmas.
This writer sees little possible harm in either the greeting “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Holidays.” He believes objections to any of these, or to the prime artistic and historical music literature of the season, to be nit picking and serve only to alienate and inflame. But it still behooves those supposed 95% who recognize a religious base for Christmas to be courteous and sensitive to differing beliefs of others. There is no excuse for boorishness or riding roughshod over the feelings of other Americans.
Some might just say outright, “Things have gone too danged far, and we are not going to be a constant battleground for a bunch of loonies at both extremes! We’ve had enough of this! Cut it out!” Now, that is being a militant moderate!
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard
So now President Bush is being attacked by the conservative, evangelical right wing for sending out Christmas cards which say, “Happy Holidays.” He is pilloried as representing himself as a born again, practicing Christian and then betraying that model by capitulating to the secular infidels espousing a generic non-Christmas holiday. His greeting card is defended by those who regularly remind us that we are a diverse society, and that any greeting (oral or printed) which recognizes any element of the religion attributed to some 95% in our society is improper and incorrect by definition.
The American Family Association has been promoting a boycott of Target stores for using “holidays” versus “Christmas” in its advertising and store greetings. (Target denies this.) Bill O’Reilly, who has a campaign defending Christmas, has listed retailers on his website who use “holidays” in their materials or greetings and questions their worthiness for shoppers. (Fox has had to change its own website language to conform to O’Reilly’s code.) In opposing the “professional atheists” and “Christian haters,” the defenders of Christmas find themselves allied with strange bedfellows, the retailers and businesses that profit from the commercialization of Christmas.
Christmas has a bizarre history in this country. Puritans in Massachusetts considered Christmas as an objectionable pagan festival. Failing to find December 25 in their bible, they forbade its observance originally in 1620, and from 1659 to 1681 they had a secular law making the observance of Christmas a crime. (This is a prime example of the need to keep church and state separate.) In 1827 an Episcopal bishop complained Christmas was a day of drinking and swearing, while as late as 1857 Baptist, Methodist, and Presbyterian churches were reported by New York newspapers as not observing Christmas. However, by the 20th century Christmas was espoused as a religious holiday by Christians. The principal problem for churches became the commercialization of the season. Not only ministers decried this, but in 1965 the dialogue of “A Charlie Brown Christmas” has Lucy voicing that Christmas “is a big commercial racket.”
Neither is the objection to secular observance of a religious holiday a new phenomenon – “a liberal plot.” In 1906 some 20,000 Jewish students boycotted the elementary schools of New York City objecting to the singing of Christmas hymns. In 1946 the Rabbinical Assembly of America denounced such forced participation of Jewish students as “an infringement on their American rights.” For decades some businesses, colleges, schools, and secular groups have employed neutral terms such as “winter breaks” and “Season’s Greetings” out of sensitivity to those of other faiths. Sensitivity and courtesy in this respect is not a new phenomenon historically, and it is not out of place today.
Most of us do not choose our Christmas greetings with either political correctness or religion in mind. We want one that looks pretty and expresses our sentiments. It is our right as individuals to choose our greetings, and if we offend it is our own responsibility. However, in defense of Mr. Bush, a card representing the office of the President of the United States should not be religiously doctrinaire. Further, it is probably better that all such greetings from governmental offices and public institutions be kept secular in nature. A business enterprise which caters to people from all religious faiths might be well advised to exercise care in choosing greetings.
With all that said, it should be noted that this is another of those areas where all forms of extremism should be rejected. We must be more tolerant of differences. We must cease our “slash and burn” rhetoric and combative style. This writer remembers well the resonating greeting to customers of his hometown Jewish department store owner/boss, “Merry Christmas!” While devout in his own religion, that good man exemplified the generous, giving spirit of Christmas as much or more than anyone.
It is time that sensible people take note that Christmas is both a Christian commemoration and a holiday of the broader American and world cultures. Accoutrements have grown up around the holiday that have little to do with religion, but it is still Christmas.
This writer sees little possible harm in either the greeting “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Holidays.” He believes objections to any of these, or to the prime artistic and historical music literature of the season, to be nit picking and serve only to alienate and inflame. But it still behooves those supposed 95% who recognize a religious base for Christmas to be courteous and sensitive to differing beliefs of others. There is no excuse for boorishness or riding roughshod over the feelings of other Americans.
Some might just say outright, “Things have gone too danged far, and we are not going to be a constant battleground for a bunch of loonies at both extremes! We’ve had enough of this! Cut it out!” Now, that is being a militant moderate!
