Years of being away from home during the Christmas season have taught me to appreciate the continuity of traditions that are shared across America. I’ve learned to appreciate Christmas lights hung hastily along roof ledges, grade school pageants, watching It’s a Wonderful Life on TV, and the skirmishes in the War on Christmas.
While this last tradition is the newest, it’s already firmly established across the nation. My generation and those that have followed have never heard a “Season’s Greetings” that wasn’t followed by a season of protest. Yet every year I’m baffled by the animosity toward Christmas symbolism. The same secularists who think that playing Grand Theft Auto: Vice City while listening to gansta rap has no affect on children act as if hearing “Merry Christmas” will turn little Johnny into a Pat Robertson clone.
Try as I might, I can’t comprehend what could cause such a reaction. What is it about seeing a plastic baby Jesus lying in a manger on the public square that inspires such passionate outrage? Are they afraid it will lead to intolerance, religious bigotry, or—even worse—voting Republican?
Almost as peculiar is the counter-reaction of my fellow Christians. Tales of religious persecution told by returning missionaries lead to earnest prayers and the passing of the offering plate for a religious freedom fund. But an announcement by a senior deacon that the ACLU has caused the cancellation of the Christmas pageant will have the senior ladies auxiliary ready to march on Washington.
Naturally, we have an obligation to defend important cultural traditions. But could we be taking it too seriously? We act as if the struggle over holiday symbols will inevitably lead to intolerance of religion (“First they came for the plastic magi, and I did not speak out . . .”) or that the slightest retreat will lead to the cancellation of Christmas. While we must always be on guard to protect our most cherished freedoms, we could use a little more discernment in choosing our battles. We must prayerfully choose both our campaigns and the rhetoric we employ. (The way we invoke the slippery-slope you’d we think conservative Christians lived on the north face of Everest.) After all, not everything worth fighting for is necessarily worth the fight.
Perhaps we should let the forces of secularism have this one, let them win this skirmish. After all, wasn’t it Jesus who said, ”and if any one would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well.” When some group sues to remove the Christmas tree let’s give them the nativity scene as well. When the secularists fight to stop the Christmas pageant let’s let them have the caroling too. Let them have X-mas and maybe then we can finally show them Christ.
December 14th, 2009 | 9:47 am
Please remind me: Who was it that said ‘If the world hated me it will hate you also’?
A deep meditation on the Nativity sermons of Leo the Great is a wonderful antidote to 21st century blather!
December 14th, 2009 | 10:34 am
Two thoughts:
1) You write, “Naturally, we have an obligation to defend important cultural traditions.” I would like to point out that Christmas is not a cultural tradition but a religious tradition. Christ+Mass=Christmas.
2) You write, “After all, not everything worth fighting for is necessarily worth the fight.” This sounds like an oxymoron to me but rather than delve into it, let me say that religious freedom is worth the fight. Jesus’s exhortations to give up the cloak and turn the other cheek have very little to do with passivity. Consider the context. A poor peasant is face-to-face with a Roman solder who strikes him on the face or demands the clothes that will keep him warm. To submit is not simply to give in but is, in fact, active non-violent resistance.
But American Christians find themselves in a very different political situation. In first-century Palestine under the Romans, Jews/Christians did not have a constitutional right to religious freedom, but we do. If we want to keep our freedoms, we have to fight for them. Wasn’t it Chesterton who said that a tired democracy ends up in despotism?
December 14th, 2009 | 2:21 pm
It seems to me that we have practiced conceding the stage to the opponents of Christianity far too much. As a result, the impression that our religion is a spent force is ever present emboldening its enemies to such a degree that they feel free to remove a simple Christmas greeting from the market place. I can’t remember a time when playing the part of a doormat did anything to strengthen faith or self-respect. After all, who is being intolerant, those who merely want to celebrate the traditions of their faith or those who demand that they be forbidden to do so publicly ?
December 14th, 2009 | 4:17 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by First Things, Rev. John M. Taggatz. Rev. John M. Taggatz said: RT @ROFTERS: Let ‘Em Have X-Mas http://bit.ly/4PZmF4 [...]
December 14th, 2009 | 5:22 pm
You should always differentiate between “public” and “government”. I know “public” can mean “government”, but most people don’t. Saying “you can’t put that nativity set on the court house lawn” is much much different than “you can’t put that nativity set on your lawn”.
And the whole “Merry Christmas” versus “Happy Holidays” “war” is a non-issue. If a clerk at a private store doesn’t want to try to guess your religion before greeting you, who cares?
December 14th, 2009 | 7:26 pm
Thanks for the beautiful thoughts on the subject. Please keep up the good work!
Last year I had written on the same subject, which can be read at: http://bangladeshcanadaandbeyond.blogspot.com/2008/12/merry-christmas-or-happy-holiday.html
May God bless you.
December 15th, 2009 | 7:36 am
This is an uncharacteristically jumbled posting, unrealistic and self-contradictory in certain ways. I suggest you delete it.
December 15th, 2009 | 10:34 pm
I think the plastic Jesus (and the real Jesus) was lying in a manger, not laying in one.
December 19th, 2009 | 11:23 am
Sometimes, I think, Joe C. makes no sense at all.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact