Santa Is not the Son of God

By Brian Wagner
Tis the season to be jolly! "Deck the Halls," Rudolph, fa la la la la, and Ralphie from A Christmas Story. Or is it Jesus, the manger, and three foreigners with odd spices and a brick of gold?
The difference between the two groups is actually quite important. Every year, as Christmas approaches, the media reports on the ongoing battle between traditionalists who want to maintain Christmas symbols in schools and public squares, and those who argue that such displays constitute a state endorsement of religion. Clearly, if a nativity scene is installed in the school gym, that constitutes a violation of the separation of church and state. But if Santa and his reindeer sit around the Christmas tree at the White House, has a violation occurred?
While Santa and the ornament-bedecked evergreen tree are centuries-old traditions of Christmas, which translates as "mass of Christ," today they are not primarily religious symbols. The Winter Solstice festival was celebrated on Dec. 25 long before Christian leaders decided to alter Jesus's birth certificate-no one really had a clue as to the day on which he was born. The Winter Solstice, far from buying into any modern religion, was a pagan celebration of the rebirth of the sun as it "returned" to Earth after reaching the farthest point of its orbit.
Much as Christian leaders artificially melded the Winter Solstice and Christ's birth long ago, today our secular Christmas holiday celebrations coexist with the celebration of Jesus's birth.
The adoption of the pine tree, an ancient symbol of rebirth, as a symbol of Christmas, was not a religious decision. Its history is shrouded by time, but all accounts point to the modern role of the Christmas tree as spontaneously developing in Germany, outside of the religious spectrum. Around 1650, Lutheran theologian Johann Dannhauer described "the Christmas or fir tree, which people set up in their houses, hang with dolls and sweets, and afterwards shake and deflower ... Whence comes this custom I know not; it is child's play."
While I attended a Presbyterian church for a decade, today I find myself completely detached from any religion. Yet, unlike my discomfort with school prayers or the invocation of God by public officials, I have never had any objections to Santa Claus in the public square. It is understandable to me why Jews, atheists, or Muslims object to a nativity scene. But the correlation created between the manger and Santa by dint of their being celebrated on the same day does not mean that they are irrevocably linked in the public consciousness.
Many of the trappings of a modern Christmas celebration-cards, candies, gifts, and decorations-are not grounded in Christian customs. They were indeed a response to a custom promulgated by Christians, but the meaning and significance of any event can change over time. Any religious meaning the Christmas tree and St. Nicholas had has faded, leaving in its place a dualistic celebration of Christianity and the secular winter holiday.
The divide between religious and secular symbolism can also be seen in the two bodies of holiday music that exist. On the one hand, there is "Away in a Manger" and "We Three Kings." On the other, there is "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer" and "Jingle Bells." There is absolutely no connection between the types of songs, except one thing: Dec. 25.
We don't live in a Christian nation; we can't pretend otherwise. But we don't need to dissimulate in order to support public displays of Christmas trees and reindeer. Instead, we need to understand and respect the dual nature of our Christmas celebrations and realize that while the manger has no place in state-run public spaces, other nations that have proportionately smaller Christian populations, including India, have in fact adopted Christmas as a secular national holiday.
Remember, without the Jewish songwriter Irving Berlin, we'd have a very hard time enjoying this year's "White Christmas."