CrossCurrents A Catholic Reflects on Faith in Our Times
Bernard
F. Swain, Ph.D. www.CrossCurrents.us
Holidays and Holydays
Thirty years ago I was only a kid,
fresh out of school and just starting out in parish work, a field few lay
people had entered before then. But I
was already upset by the way our culture had co-opted Christmas, and in 1975 I
wrote an open letter to all my parish volunteers entitled ÒShould We Give Christmas
Back to the Pagans?Ó
Every year since then the coming of
Christmas has stirred up strong feelings, and this year is no exception, but
thereÕs been a change. Before, many Americans indulged in a massive orgy of
buying while others pleaded for Americans to Òput Christ back in Christmas.Ó
This year, more than ever, IÕve witnessed
the emergence of a third group who actually oppose publicly observing Christmas
on religious grounds, and prefer a generic Òholiday.Ó
As I watch these three contending camps,
the first thing I notice is that many people belong to more than one camp at
once. The second thing I notice is that, one way or another, they are all
finally wrong.
The first crowd uses the generic Òholiday
seasonÓ (now stretching from Labor Day to ValentineÕs) mainly to celebrate
excess and material consumption, totally hijacking a minor Christmas custom
(gift-giving) to create capitalismÕs highest holy day. I remember, my first
year in parish work, being shocked that kids expected color TVs for Christmas.
Now we see companies peddling gift cruises and cars to the tune of ÒHappy Honda
DaysÓ! WeÕve arrived at the point where our national economy depends on an
unholy trinity of (1) military expenditures, (2) deficit spending, and (3) Christmas
shopping. Does anyone really believe this is a legitimate legacy of JesusÕ
birth day?
Then there's the ÒChrist back in
ChristmasÓ group, who struggle to keep spiritual matters at the seasonÕs
center. They have a point—Christmas can only be authentic as a primarily
spiritual event—but too often they distort the truth to get what they
want. We hear people proclaim, ÒChristmas is for childrenÓ as they defend
protecting their kids from the truth about Santa. We hear people touting the
true meaning of ChristmasÓ with explanations like ÒItÕs all about giving, and
being kind, and remembering those in need.Ó We hear some people beg us to
remember Òthe reason for the seasonÓ but say nothing about our bursting
prisons, our state-sponsored killing, and our chronic dependence on war.
They seem to have forgotten that the
Christmas story contains its own clear message: ÒPeace on Earth. Good will to
all.Ó How can we escape the irony that, after 20 centuries of Christians
celebrating Jesus' birth as the Prince of Peace, our world is deadlier than
ever? The Christmas challenge is not for children, nor for gift-givers—it
is for the peace-makers that the grown-up Jesus called ÒBlessed.Ó
And now we see those other people who
defend a generic "holiday season" not because they are secularizers
who prefer the material over the spiritual, but because they find
"Christmas" too narrowly Christian in a religiously pluralist
society. Avoiding "Merry Christmas" then becomes a test of interfaith sensitivity, and "Happy
Holidays" becomes the all-purpose mantra of multicultural festivity. Some
even claim that insisting on "Merry Christmas" betrays an underlying
anti-Semitism, resentful of an imagined Jewish arrogance that would deny
Christians their feast day.
Such talk now provokes what one journalist
called the Òin-your-face-Merry-ChristmasÓ reaction: We were here first (i.e., before Jews, Muslims, and humanists),
Christmas is essential to a Christian America, and you have no right to remove
it. Like it or leave.
The trouble with this should be obvious:
the spiritual founders of America, the Puritans, rejected Christmas as a threat
to Christian devotion to Sunday as the Sabbath Day, forbade its celebration in
colonial Massachusetts, and punished anyone who took the day off for family or
worship. THEY were here first! So
those insisting on ÒChristmasÓ are themselves imposing a change away from
AmericaÕs historic and cultural roots. The Òwe were here firstÓ argument is
simply not true.
On the other hand, I canÕt see whatÕs
gained by melting all winter feasts into a generic ÒHoliday SeasonÓ (Does this
include Òfestovus,Ó the Seinfeld showÕs feast day invented Òfor the rest of
usÓ?). HarvardÕs William Hutchinson (the Òdean of American religious
historiansÓ who died this week) was right to argue that pluralism cannot mean a
Òno-brand-namesÓ approach to religious beliefs and feasts:
It doesnÕt make sense for a pluralist,
who presumably agrees everyone should have a right to convictions (even
absolute ones) to the turn around and deny such a right to himself or herself.
So it really doesnÕt make sense to say that a pluralist can't hold strong
convictions.
Some who favor generic language argue
that, after all, ÒholidayÓ means Òholyday.Ó But then why not say ÒHappy
Holydays?Ó That at least has the advantage of retaining the religious
dimension.
Besides, the word ÒholidayÓ also refers to
legally designated national observances, usually paid days off from work. And
that reminds us of a perfectly legitimate reason for using ÒMerry ChristmasÓ in
public: namely, because ÒChristmasÓ is the name of the legal holiday designated
for December 25! It has no other name. It is as legitimate to use that name as
it is to say ÒThanksgivingÓ or ÒNew YearÕs DayÓ (which, by the way, is also a
holyday, but unlike Christmas, the holiday and holyday have different names).
Or do people really propose turning Christmas into our only Òno-nameÓ holiday
of the year?
Three things strike me about the state of
Christmas in America.
(1) The obsession with big buying and its
implication that spending proves love are a true, growing, annual offense to
Christian faith.
(2) The true meaning of Christmas is the
Peace on Earth promised by JesusÕ birth. Serious Christians will want to
celebrate that promise but also humbly reflect on the sad fact that the
Christmas promise of Peace remains unfulfilled after 100 Christian generations.
(3) Observing ÒChristmasÓ rather than some
generic Òholiday seasonÓ does not violate the spirit of a multi-cultural,
religiously pluralistic culture. But when only one religionÕs holyday is privileged as a legal holiday, we should not be surprised if others resent it.
Perhaps, if we Christians really want to
restore ChristmasÕs true meaning and resist the materialistic frenzy that has
become the Capitalist Christmas, we should stress the message of Peace and
propose an end to Christian privilege by naming different holidays for each
traditionÕs winter festival—or else by having no holiday at all!
© Bernard F. Swain PhD 2005
Send Your Comments and Questions to bfswain@juno.com
Dr. SwainÕs
opinions do not represent the views of this parish or any other official body.
Bernie Swain has
devoted more than 30 years to adult spiritual formation in dioceses in the US,
Canada, and France. Since 1991 he has maintained a private practice as trainer,
teacher, and consultant to leaders in parishes and other religious
organizations. He holds degrees in theology and political science from Holy
Cross, Harvard, The University of Paris, and The University of Chicago.
His writings include Liberating
Leadership (Harper & Row,
1986) and more than 200 articles in periodicals such as The National Catholic
Reporter, Commonweal, The Miami Herald, The Catholic Free Press, The Pilot,
Harvard Theological Review, and
Liturgy.
A lifelong layperson,
he lives in Boston with his wife and three children. Visit his website at:
CrossCurrents
Is a weekly subscription
service for parish websites.
Individual Subscriptions
are also available.
For Information, contact bfswain@juno or call 617-282-0183