Today’s Wall Street Journal takes on the ultra-secularist grinches who are “trying their best to strip from our public squares any hint of what most Americans will actually be celebrating come Christmas morn.” The latest tactic: renaming Christmas trees as “holiday trees.” Not having an established church is fine, and solidly grounded in the Constitution. But the matter has gone to absurd lengths. As the Journal says, “Somehow we doubt that this is what Thomas Jefferson had in mind with his wall of separation.”
The change in attitudes is remarkable, even in my relatively short lifetime. I’ve never been a big fan of Christmas trees. For various reasons there’s been a tree in my house a grand total of once in my adult life. Still, the change troubles me, and I was taken aback when a family member mentioned that she was going to buy a “holiday tree.”
And which holiday would that be, dear?
I am safe in assuming she has neither Kwanza nor Hanukkah in mind, leaving us with, yup, Christmas.
The Journal lays some of the blame for language-scrubbing at the feet of the Supreme Court, which has in recent years gotten into such debates as how many faux candy canes must be present to legitimize the display of a creche in a public square. But even more blame must be pinned to ordinary folks, who have been too willing to let the Supremes be, well, Supreme in matters of social morality and cultural expectations. While Christmas has religious origins, it is hardly a purely religious season. So calling simply using its name is hardly a threat to democracy.
Besides, the current fad of substituting “Holiday” for “Christmas” won’t last long. For as the Journal concludes, the secular-at-all-costs crowd won’t be happy in any case. The word “holiday” originates in the words “holy day.”
So before we are reduced to saying “Have a day,” say it loud and say it proud: Merry Christmas