CHRISTMAS CELEBRATION

 

My dear Molly and I grew up in entirely different home backgrounds. Although she was one of three girls, since the other girls were considerably older, she was almost an only child. I had seven brothers and four sisters. Molly's father placed great emphasis on Christmas. When I married into that family, I thoroughly enjoyed the celebration at Molly's home. My parents paid very little attention to Christmas. We usually had more oranges, apples and candy, but there were no presents for the simple reason my parents could not afford them. We performed our chores on the farm on Christmas day just as we did on every other day. My greatest joy at Christmas was the school vacation.

 

But neither Molly's parents nor mine ever believed that Christmas had anything to do with Christ's birth. Both sets of parents taught their children that Christmas was a manmade holiday—not some kind of sacred celebration. My dear wife loved the Christmas holidays—not because they had any spiritual significance—but because our families could get together for fun, food and fellowship. She taught children in Bible classes that Christmas had nothing to do with Christianity. Our sons grew up knowing that Christmas is not a biblical concept. Their mother and I made sure they understood that truth.

 

As I said, Molly loved the Christmas holidays—and not just because it was Christmas—when we could be together as a family. About a month or so before she died on October 12, 2002, she said, "I just want to live through another Christmas." Tragically, for her husband, sons, grandchildren, other family members and friends, she did not make it to Christmas that year. Although Christmas as a sacred occasion means absolutely nothing to me, I grieve that Molly did not live to see another family gathering at Christmas.

 

So why am I discussing the theme, "Christmas Celebration?" Faithful churches of Christ have never emphasized Christ's birth on December 25th. My family has never stressed Christmas as a holy day. We never use the expression, "Christ is the reason for the season," because that simply is not true. If you want to believe that, you have the freedom in our country to believe whatever you choose to believe. But there is not a person on earth who can find scriptural authority for celebrating our Lord's birthday on December 25th or on any other day. Should we not as Christians have biblical authority for all we do in the work and worship of the church?

 

While I do not accept Christmas as a holy day, I am disturbed at what American judges are doing about Christmas. Occasionally, I watch John Gibson, anchor of Fox News Channel's The Big Story. John Gibson is a former anchor and reporter for NBC News, CNBC, and MSNBC. He is also the author of  Hating Americaa book that every American should read, that is, if you are truly concerned about the future of our nation. Gibson points out that many prominent people, including some of our leaders, actually hate the freedoms we enjoy.   Some of those people, like Michael Moore, would rob us of the freedoms our Constitution guarantees all of us.

 

John Gibson's latest book has the title, The War on Christmas: How the Liberal Plot to Ban the Sacred Christian Holiday is Worse Than You Thought (New York: Sentinel, 2005). Although I have great respect for John Gibson, the expression, "sacred Christian holiday," has absolutely no basis in scripture.   Gibson's book on Christmas demonstrates conclusively that some liberal judges, politicians and members of the anti-American Uncivil Liberties Union would remove all religious symbols and practices from "the public square," to use Richard John Neuhaus's very meaningful and accurate term. I shall give you abundant evidence from Gibson's book that the enemies of Christianity will never be satisfied until Christianity is in the closet to stay.

 

          The sad truth is: Ridiculous organizations like the ACLU, People for the American Way, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and similar groups apparently have no objection to anyone's saying, "Happy Hanukkah," or "Have a great Ramadan" or "Enjoy Kwanzaa," but they blow a fuse when someone in a public place says, "Merry Christmas." It would be almost impossible to discover a more stupid approach to our freedoms than that. Even a child ought to know that our Constitution does not forbid anyone's saying, "Merry Christmas."

 

John Gibson documents dozens and dozens of examples of attempts by liberal judges to eliminate any reference to Christmas or to other religious symbols. Gibson mentions a speech Aaron Brown made at the University of Washington in April 2005. He said to his audience: "[Fox News Channel's] Bill" O'Reilly did about two weeks on taking the Christ out of Christmas." I cannot quote verbatim the vulgar language Aaron Brown used, but in substance he asked, "Who is worrying about that" (p. xvii of the Introduction)? Aaron Brown demonstrates conclusively why many in the news media are completely out of touch with most Americans. If Brown does not know that millions of Americans are offended by liberal judges' and the media's attacks on Christmas, he needs to be picking cotton rather than being a reporter on television. Do not liberal judges and media personnel care about the beliefs and feelings of the majority of Americans?

 

Did you know that 80,000 British citizens live in Dubai, United Arab Emirates? In a letter to the Times of London, Chris Moran says that shopping centers are filled w7ith Christmas merchandise. The children in the shopping malls visit Santa just as children do in the United States. John Gibson quotes Chris Moran as saying, "Hotels hold tree-lighting ceremonies and carol services by swimming pools, and holidaymakers stand amazed when Santa rides into town on a camel, handing out gifts." United Arab Emirates is an Arab country where Muslim law prevails. Chris Moran concludes his letter with these terse words: "Bah humbug to the ignorant council killjoys who obviously have no understanding of what it really means to have faith; we in the United Arab Emirates are having a very happy Christmas" (p. xix of the Introduction).

 

The ACLU warned Newton County (Covington, GA) not to use the word "Christmas on the school calendar, as they had done in past years." Whether the school board members even believed in Christmas had nothing to do with the situation. Using the word "Christmas" was simply a way of identifying the holiday period. Craig Goodmark, a member of the ACLU, "explained that this was an establishment of religion or in a government entity that would be illegal. It would be violative of the First Amendment. It would coerce these children to participate in a Christmas holiday. It would be an affirmative act of the government to prefer one religion over the other, which would be illegal" (pp. 1-5).

 

Would the ACLU object if a school had a celebration of Hanukkah or Kwanzaa or some other religious holiday? Would they oppose our having a May Day to honor Karl Marx and Communism? The Communist Manifesto, Mein Kampf, witchcraft materials, books about Native Americans and similar materials can be read in public schools and placed in the schools' libraries. Dances celebrating cultures of pagan nations are permissible, but any reference to Christianity is a subject for lawsuits. Schools are strapped for cash. They do not want to have to defend themselves against radical groups like the wicked ACLU and antichristian groups like Americans United for Separation of Church and State. So in most cases they cave in to the intimidation of the ACLU.

 

John Gibson cites a Fox News poll that 96% of Americans celebrate Christmas— 96%. Do we not have enough courage to challenge the radical views and actions of the ACLU and other ungodly organizations? Must we bow down to those who would rob us of our religious freedom? The American Constitution does not forbid schools having Christmas on their calendars. Americans are free—whether in the public schools or elsewhere—to say "Merry Christmas," to sing Christmas carols, to have Santa Claus in their school activities, to have and to decorate Christmas trees. But if the ACLU has its way, those privileges will soon be history. They may even try to remove Christmas trees from you home, unless you have the shades pulled down.

 

Mustang, Oklahoma, is a bedroom community of Oklahoma City. Mustang has about seventy-five hundred students in its school system. Gibson says that Mustang has about twenty churches and no mosques or synagogues. The superintendent of schools, Carl Springer, would not permit a school production that included a nativity scene. "Adding insult to injury, the Kwanzaa and Hanukkah aspects of the Christmas pageant were to remain." The attorneys for the school district warned against having a Christmas pageant. The Mustang school district, like most school districts in America, needed more money. The school board proposed a bond issue to raise the money. The citizens rejected the bond issue because they were still angry with the school superintendent for not allowing the Christmas pageant. John Gibson comments: "No Christmas, no bonds" (pp. 21-25).

 

Most Americans probably believe—as I do—that the state of Texas is religiously and politically conservative. I have preached in meetings in Texas and spoken on lectureships at Denton and at Fort Worth. I have found Texas people to be open, honest and friendly. So what I am about to say must not be construed as an attack on the good people of Texas. In the winter of 2001, the Thomas Elementary School in Plano was making plans for its traditional Christmas party. The school had previously decided not to avoid using the word "Christmas" for the winter break. The officials were concerned that someone might be offended by using the word "Christmas." The students at the school often exchanged small gifts at their annual winter party. One of the students wrote on her present: "Jesus is the reason for the season." Teachers were urged to question their students to make sure no religious messages were included in their packages. If there were any religious messages on their packages, the students were not permitted to give their presents to other students. John Gibson writes: "One student was not allowed to tell another student of his or her religious beliefs in the Plano school" (pp. 55-58)."

 

Before I go further in providing examples from John Gibson's book, I need to review what the courts of our land have ruled on some of the controversies surrounding religion in our public schools. Matthew Staver is the president and general counsel of Liberty Counsel, an organization that defends American citizens against attacks by the ACLU, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and similar ridiculous organizations. Matthew Staver's book, Eternal Vigilance: Knowing and Protecting Your Religious Freedom (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2005), reviews court cases that affect our religious rights in America. Staver says the courts require that "religious symbols on public property" be in close proximity "with non-religious symbols," such as, a Christmas tree or a Santa Claus or a deer. “The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 1980 that a school Christmas program may include religious carols so long as they are presented 'in a prudent and objective manner and as a traditional part of the cultural and religious heritage of a particular holiday'" (p. 166). The law does not forbid a teacher's having a nativity scene in her classroom so long as secular symbols are displayed in the same context. Students are allowed to discuss their views on religious subjects, both orally and in written work. In Bergen v. Rensselaer Central School Corporation, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled: "It is only when individuals seek to observe their religion in ways that unduly involve the government that their expressive rights may be circumscribed" (p. 97). Teachers and public school officials violate the Establishment Clause when they promote their views of religion.

 

All Americans who are concerned about the government's encroachment on their rights should have Staver's book. Let us return now to the situation in Plano, Texas. John Gibson says that "one student was not allowed to tell another student of his or her religious beliefs in the Plano schools" (p. 58). Matthew Staver shows conclusively that such restrictions on students' speech are contrary to court rulings. He observes: "It is clear that the mere fact that student speech occurs on school property does not make it government supported" (p. 98). Students are not acting as government agents, as teachers and administrators would be under similar circumstances.

 

The students in the Plano schools were allowed to bring supplies and food to the winter party. But "they were instructed that they should only bring white napkins, white paper plates and cups, and cakes and cupcakes should only be frosted in white. The rule was 'white only.' Red and green, the colors of Christmas, were not allowed" (p. 58). I grew up in the public schools in Middle Tennessee. I taught in the public schools at Benton, Kentucky. My sons attended the public schools in Dalton, Georgia. If any of these schools had suggested what the Plano schools have demanded, they would have been ridiculed out of existence. The administrators might have been fired for such stupid behavior. I cannot believe that men and women who are educated enough to operate schools would have so little common sense. John Gibson correctly affirms: "The Plano Independent School District was out of step with the Constitution of the United States as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States" (p. 59). John is absolutely correct.

 

There is much more in Gibson's book that all Americans should know, but time will not allow me to discuss it today. Instead, I shall refer to an article in USA TODAY (December 1, 2005). While I was preparing this transcript for our radio programs, I encountered an article by Emily Bazar. She wrote an article with the title, "Trimming 'Christmas' from trees stirs debate." Bazar points out that city halls and public parks across our country are erecting stories-high evergreen trees. She says they look and smell like Christmas trees, but in some places like Chicago, Reno and Prairie Village, Kansas, they are holiday trees. Millions of Americans are complaining about the onslaught against what they consider symbols of Christianity. Matthew Staver, whose book I have already mentioned, said: calling the Christmas tree a "holiday tree" is "like calling the Menorah a candlestick. It's wrong. It's offensive. And it disenfranchises a large segment of the community." Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, affirmed that using the term "Christmas tree" excludes people of other faiths and backgrounds (p. 3-A).

 

I have furnished this information for you today to alert you to the vicious attacks against Christianity. No, I do not believe Christmas has anything to do with Christianity. But there are millions of people—both in the United States and abroad— who believe Christmas is a sacred day Christians should observe. As I explained in the beginning of our lesson today, I do not accept that view. I know there is not one word in scripture that authorizes people to set aside December 25th as the birthday of Christ. We do not know when he was bom. If God had wanted Christians to honor Christ's birthday, he surely would have given us commandments for such worship. The Bible does not authorize setting aside any day for worship, except the first day of the week. That was not the day he was born, but the day he was raised from the dead.

 

But if we allow the ACLU and other anti-American groups to prevent our having a Christmas tree or singing Christmas carols, will the next step be trying to remove "In God we trust" from our money and one nation "under God" from our Pledge of Allegiance to our flag? Come to think of it, the radical elements in our country are already trying desperately to remove God and religious symbols for every phase of American life. Tragically, because many of us have not enlisted in the fight against those who would remove Christianity from our country, radical elements are succeeding beyond what many Americans ever dreamed could happen in America.

 

The United States is the freest country on the face of God's earth. But if the ACLU, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, People of the American Way and similar groups have their way, you may be permitted to worship in a church building and in your own home, that is, if you keep the doors tightly closed and do not  attempt to convert others to your beliefs. But every public manifestation of your faith will be forbidden. I urge you to remember: silence can be sinful.

 

Winford Claiborne

The International Gospel Hour

P.O. Box 118

Fayetteville, TN 37334

 

Back to Home Page

Back to Transcripts Titles