I don’t want to get caught up in the whole “Christmas Wars”
thing. I don’t want to be painted as some flag-waving, well-groomed nut who is
convinced that the “secular media” and others have waged a war on Christmas.
Nor do I want to be seen as some dirty, earthy, angry, vegan hippie who wants
to be sure that everyone is miserable and no one can publically celebrate any
holiday whatsoever. I don’t want to be painted or placed in either corner. I
generally try to avoid the conversation because I see both sides as nuts.
Yet while strolling down Main Street (yes, I really did
stroll down Main Street) I saw the following in front of Town Hall:
I know they will put up a menorah when Hanukkah starts, so I
am not going to get all in a huff that other religions are being neglected
(although I didn’t see anything for Ramadan). Personally, I don’t care that
there is going to be a manger scene in front of Town Hall. I don’t care because
of in the context of Town Hall I do not see the manger scene (or the menorah,
or anything else) as a religious symbol.
The reason I don’t care is because the institution of Town
Hall and the politicians of East Greenwich do not have the depth or history to
make religious/theological claims. It is not a Christian institution (while
there may be Christians working there). Nothing is placed in front of Town Hall
for Easter, or Pentecost (the other two of the big three holidays). Nor have I noticed
any wide observance of Lent, All Saints Day, or any other day on the religious calendar.
It is an institution that does not have a religious voice. So when a manger
scene is placed in front of the hall I see it as an empty symbol speaking to a
desire to placate a number of people and maybe to celebrate with them; probably
more of the former than the latter. For me it is the same when a box store
wishes me “Merry Christmas,” an insurance company sends me a card, or when
David Bowie sings “the little drummer boy.” These are empty gestures (to be
fair, I don’t know if Mr. Bowie is a Christian, so I will withhold his
condemnation – aren’t I generous?). These are a cultural symbols and a sign of
the Town recognizing that a lot of people are celebrating Christmas as well as
Hanukkah. I would rather the picture be of Santa, but again I’m not going to
complain.
Now if the manger scene is in front of a church that is a
different story because I assume they understand the significance of the birth
of Christ. But it is very possible I am giving many churches more credit than I
should.
2 comments:
I'm glad you withdrew your attack on David Bowie; them's fightin' words.
Seriously though, I most appreciate your comment "It is an institution that does not have a religious voice." I wonder if part of the church's historical decline in community engagement and importance has to do with an underlying (and faulty) assumption that everyone has the right to make religious proclamations.
When the church fights the religious proclamations of non-religious institutions, we tacitly affirm that they possess a religious voice. Doing so undermines the strength of our own voice and of religious proclamations in general.
mlstrickland - I think you are bringing up a very interesting point about grammar and community. Religious communities speak we a certain grammar and non-religious institutions speak with a very different grammar. If we are true to our grammar than a conversation will be very difficult to have. I think you are right that religious institutions give up a lot by allowing non-religious institutions to have a religious voice of sorts. This is a problem.
Yet how can we have a conversation? Who is to give up ground and to what extent? Good thoughts!
Post a Comment