'War on Christmas' goes back many years

For some there is a fine line between respect and offense, when an absence of validation speaks louder than any unintended insult. A Latin maxim comes to mind:

“Expressio unius est exclusio alterius” — the expression of one thing is the exclusion of another. Or in the latest case, the absence of expression.

At first glance this may seem absurd. If I say I like cats, it doesn’t mean I hate dogs, but sometimes preference and passions cross swords. A simple red cup this season, sans festive images of years past, stirs accusation. Is Starbucks joining the “War on Christmas” because it left snowflakes and reindeer off red paper cups? Is Christmas, which has so dominated seasonal marketing and festivities for most of our young nation’s history, under attack?

If this kind of public recognition that religions and beliefs vary (including other centuries-old and pre-Christian winter holidays both religious and pagan) is a war, then it’s an old one.

It’s also commonly perceived, if declining. A 2013 survey by Public Policy Polling found fewer than half — 41 percent — of respondents agreed “a war on Christmas exists,” while 75 percent said they were not offended by the greeting “Happy Holidays.”

Compare that to a 2006 Chicago Tribune poll in which 68 percent of respondents agreed Christmas was under attack. The previous holiday shopping season, Target and WalMart decided to avoid the word “Christmas” in their holiday marketing (it didn’t last). A few years earlier Amazon got slammed for wishing users “Happy Holidays.” Other retailers have tried the same, acknowledging other traditions, sticking to the all-encompassing, or skipping it altogether.

Even with fair-minded intent, change is hard to swallow. When change involves religious sentiment, “fair” feels more like “fight.”

For hundreds of years, controversy — mostly in English-speaking nations — over holiday terminologies, acknowledgements, court cases, and restrictions has amounted to more than Grinchiness. Not mere political correctness, nor simply signs of increasing religious tolerance of different faiths.

Religious history is fraught with ire.

The front line of the War on Christmas was imported to the U.S. in the 1600s by English Puritans offended by yuletide festivities. Christmas was supposed to be solemn (and long had been), they said; anyway, traditions such as the tree had pagan origins. No merriment allowed.

They’d have liked those plain coffee cups.

By the Victorian Age, helped by Dickens with the wildly popular “A Christmas Carol,” seasonal family-centered revelry was revived. Christmas became an official American holiday in 1870. Yet the issue of proper acknowledgment has never been settled. Many Western traditions associated with Christmas have non-Christian origins; in these aspects the holiday has long been multicultural. Author C.S. Lewis noted the distinct differences between religious and secular observances of Christmas. Are wishes of “Happy Holidays” considered secular?

In 1921, Henry Ford (a notorious anti-Semite) wrote that efforts to suppress Christmas carols and religious demonstration in public school, in favor of less religion-specific traditions, showed “the venom of [their] attack.” Similar accusations were made against so-called Communists in the 1950s, whom pamphlets described as “weakening the pillar of religion in our country [by] the drive to take Christ out of Christmas.” According to a 2008 Christmas Eve article in Time magazine, blame has been ascribed not only to other religions and political parties (historically lumped in with issues such as abortion and drugs), but also to immigrants, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (they had a party called “Holiday Traditions”), and international organizations — both government and charitable.

Remember the controversy about “Xmas”? Doubtless it will revive, although historians’ revelation that “X” in official religious documents is an old symbol for — rather than attempt to replace — Christ certainly cooled the debate.

Starbucks cups are merely the latest in a long line of those accused of waging war on Christmas. They won’t be the last. A cup may be insignificant, but few subjects are held more dear, more close to the heart and more staunchly perceptually defended, than spiritual beliefs.

That’s beliefs plural, and there’s the mutual rub. To perceive that to express is not to exclude — there lies hope we can share a cup in peace.

Sholeh Patrick is a columnist for the Hagadone News Network. Contact her at Sholeh@cdapress.com.