By LYN COCKBURN -- Winnipeg Sun
We're all trying too hard. Every year about this time three things happen. First, some nutcase in a city hall somewhere calls the city's official Christmas tree something like "The Large Green Bunch of Branches in the Corner Which We Hope Will Not Offend Anyone."
Second, various Christians leap about screaming that somebody somewhere is "taking Christ out of Christmas."
And third, various Jews, Buddhists, Muslims and Hindus politely point out that they don't give a damn if the rest of us call some damn tree a Christmas tree -- just so long, thank you very much, that they're not asked to change the name Hanukkah to something like "That Long Ago Little Skirmish in the Middle East" or that Ramadan not suddenly be changed in the public conscience to "That Entire Month When Some People Don't Eat From Sunup to Sundown."
In conjunction with No. 1 above, it must be noted that schools are particularly subject to this kind of idiocy. There's always a principal or a teacher or both who decide a Christmas tree which is called a Christmas tree will offend the students of various religions. These are the same teachers and principals who make sure all the kids learn about Hanukkah and Ramadan. They do this straight faced, without being able to spell irony, much less understand it.
Being brought up Protestant and having taught in a Catholic school attended by students from a variety of religious backgrounds, I know all of this is nuts. Jewish students could care less if the lovely tree in the corner is called a Christmas tree and, in my experience, Christian students are fascinated by Hanukkah. In fact, so ecumenical was this school in which I taught that a sister once invited me to accompany my class to mass.
"We let heretics attend, Lyn," she said with a straight face.
As for No. 2 -- humourless Christians ranting and roaring about Christ being taken out of Christmas because somebody wants to call it "That Tree Over There" -- it's not the symbols which keep Christ in Christmas, it 's the commitment, beliefs and faith of the followers of Christ which keeps the concept of Christianity in Christmas. It's a society hell bent on getting as many gifts as possible while drinking as much booze as possible which erodes the religious motivation behind the celebration of Christmas.
In other words, religious households will celebrate Christmas in a religious way, and secular households will not.
Perhaps that, right there, is as good a definition of democracy as any.
And, by the way, some of us have good reason for not being Christmas enthusiasts, reasons that have nothing to do with religion. Quite simply, we remember the Christmases of our childhood as times of family chaos, perhaps because tempers were lost, old grudges rediscovered and, in some tragic cases, booze became a vehicle for violence.
As for No. 3 -- let's listen to what our neighbours of other faiths -- or no faith at all -- are really saying.
For example, my good friends who happen to be recent immigrants from China quite like the concept of Christmas trees. They bought one last year. They call it a Christmas tree, they decorate it and think it's most attractive. Granted, they bought a plastic one so that it would last through our Christmas and right through their New Year which, last year, occurred, I believe, sometime in January. I'm not sure when it is this year but I am sure they'll leave their tree up until it's over.
I know I said there are only three points in this column. I lied.
While I apologize for bringing No. 4 up, somebody's got to do it. The Christmas tree has it's roots in paganism and wasn't even a part of Christmas tradition until Queen Victoria's husband, Albert, brought it to England in the 1800s. And according to eminent historians, Christ was born in the summer, not in winter, and certainly not on Dec. 25.
But never mind, a Christmas tree is still a Christmas tree, dammit.
But there is no Santa Claus.
