How Unitarians and Universalists
Saved Christmas

A sermon delivered at the Unitarian Universalist Congregation (Blacksburg, VA), December 11, 2005, by the Reverend Christine Brownlie.

When I was in the fourth grade, I led a revolt over the celebration of the winter holidays in my school. No, this was not a battle over the name given to the decorated evergreen tree that stood outside the principal’s office. It was a Christmas tree, but our holiday party didn’t include more than a passing nod to Christmas.

Because the majority of the students in my school were Jewish, our winter holiday party focused on the story and customs of Hanukah. We would hear the story of the valiant Maccabees and their guerrilla war against the wicked Seleucid governor, Antiochus Epiphanes, who demanded that the Jews turn away from their god and take up the worship and customs of the gentiles. We learned the dreidel song and watched as a classmate kindled the candles of the menorah.

All of this was fine with me. But I thought we should also learn about Christmas. So I persuaded a couple of my Sunday school friends to join me, and we paid a call to our rather astonished principal, Mrs. Harm. She agreed that we could make a presentation on Christmas at our fourth grade party and that our mothers could supply appropriate treats if they were willing. This worked out so well that the following year the PTA suggested that all classrooms have inclusive holiday parties. That was my first battle for Christmas.

Last week I entered the latest battle over Christmas with a letter to the Roanoke Times. This time the issue had to do with what to call the decorated tree that stands in the town park or the local department store. In my letter I expressed my bewilderment over this issue: asking why Christians were defending the pagan tradition of a decorated tree that had been added to a re-framed pagan holiday. What’s more, I have a hard time with the idea that the merchants and marketing folks should be the public keepers of the “true spirit” of the holidays.

In all the heat and smoke of the current brouhaha, we have forgotten that the battles over Christmas have been going on for centuries. The leaders of the Christian Church were divided over this celebration for a very long time. Way back in the 1600s, Oliver Cromwell of England and John Calvin, the governor of Geneva Switzerland, outlawed Christmas celebrations. Other reformation leaders didn’t go that far, but they condemned the holiday from their pulpits because of the gluttony, drunkenness, and other sins that were rapidly becoming the essence of the day.

Their negative view of Christmas was shared in certain regions of our country as well. In 1659, the General Court of Massachusetts enacted a law making any observance other than a church service on December 25 a punishable offense. Preacher Cotton Mather warned that those who celebrated Christmas did so at their own peril. This day, he said, should be one of fasting and repentance. Hanging a simple wreath on the door could be cause for a hefty fine. No doubt, a few brave souls kept their accustomed Christmas celebrations, but it was behind shuttered windows and locked doors. No wonder that Santa had to enter the house through the chimney!

Those who lived in the Southern and Mid-Atlantic colonies ignored the objections and prohibitions of the Puritans. They kept Christmas not as a day of reverence, but as a day of fun. The Southern tobacco and cotton growers danced and drank and partied. They enjoyed the celebration of “misrule.” Men and women wore each other’s clothing. Servants became masters for a day and ruled over their “betters.” Historic records show that the result of all this hilarity was a rise in out-of wedlock pregnancy, hasty marriages, and an annual baby boom in September and October — nine months after Christmas.

These regional and religious differences mean that there was no such thing as a traditional American Christmas. People kept the traditions of their country of origin or followed the teachings of their church. For many years, the working class people saw Christmas as just another day of drudgery and hard work. The factories, shops, and other businesses were open as usual. Most people didn’t have the time or inclination to pay much attention to the holiday.

But within a very few years, that would change. In the rapidly growing cities of America it was the lowly newsboys who began some interesting new customs to mark the celebration of Jesus’ birth. Some of the boys began to solicit Christmas tips from their customers, taking their cue from the traditional begging by children that was customary in England They quickly realized that there was money to be had on this holiday and some enterprising young men formed gangs known as “Antiks.” They would roam the streets, singing and carrying on, stopping now and then to invade the homes of wealthier citizens. Once inside, they demanded money in exchange for entertainment — usually a short and somewhat bawdy skit.

If the Antics were disappointed in their unwilling host’s offerings of money, drink, and food, they would express their displeasure by breaking the windows, pulling the latches and hinges off the doors, or frightening the children and the ladies of the household. If rival gangs met on the street, a bloody fight would break out, endangering anyone who had the misfortune of getting caught up in the melee. Christmas was turning into a dangerous and destructive free-for-all.

Once again, clergymen and public officials complained about the degenerate tone of the holiday and tried to suppress — or at least tone down — the rowdiness associated with Christmas. Their efforts met with little success and once more there was talk of banning the holiday. This time, a few clergymen and other respectable citizens stood up for a new improved Christmas, and saved the day.

It’s ironic that the civic and religions leaders who took up the banner of Christmas were the theological descendants of the anti-Christmas Puritans and Pilgrims. You might be very surprised to learn that some of these men and women who came to the defense of the holiday were our pwn Universalist and Unitarian forbearers. Their approach civilized and reframed the celebration of Jesus’ birth and connected important virtues to pagan symbols that were commonly observed.

The Universalists of New England were among those who had always celebrated the holiday. Many Universalists lived in rural areas or small fishing communities. They felt a close connection with forces of nature and with the simple story of a holy child born in a stable. Decorations from nature were enjoyed for their earthly beauty, and a special meal was a welcome treat in the bitter New England winter at at time when life was slow and drab.

The busy city of Boston was home to a large and influential community of Universalists. This congregation took the lead and in 1789 held the first Christmas Day service in the city. Over the next few years, this group continued to be a strong and vocal advocate for a more respectable and family oriented celebration of Christmas.

The Unitarians, a more prosperous and perhaps influential group, joined the Universalists in the campaign for Christmas. This was not because Unitarians believed that December 25^th was Jesus’ actual birthday, nor did they believe that Jesus was a divine being or God Incarnate. They saw Jesus as a unique and important teacher whose birth should be honored, but there was much more that motivated their interest in the holiday.

The Unitarians were very attracted to the new “cult of domesticity” that was a hot new trend of the time. This new concept of family emphasized the importance of tender, intimate feelings between husband and wife, between parent and child, and among siblings. This concept encouraged the careful nurturing of children’s minds and spirits. Discipline was to be instructive, not harsh, The home was seen as a sanctuary from the stress and demands of commerce.

The Unitarian effort to save, or perhaps reclaim Christmas was two-fold: The first effort was to heighten the religious overtones of the day by holding religious services on Christmas day. The second was to urge the banks, shops, other businesses, and even schools to close for the day — something that had never been done before — so that the family could spend the day together.

Today this “day off” is universal, and we feel sorry for those who have to work on Christmas day because of the nature of their work. But in the mid 1800s when this idea was first introduced, it was a point of controversy. Some argued that a day off was likely to become a day of drinking and idleness — back to the bad old days. The clergy and others said that was all the more reason to close the bars, open the churches, and remind people of the “reason for the season.”

The effort to get people to attend church services floundered after a couple of years. I guess like many of us, they good people of Boston preferred to stay home and have a leisurely morning with the family. The idea of shifting Christmas celebrations out of the street and into the home was more successful. But even the best of ideas can bring about unexpected consequences.

The focus on family and the exchange of gifts was blamed for increasing the greediness of the children who began to demand the expensive gifts for the holiday In his book, The Battle for Christmas, Stephan Nissenbaum draws on the letters of three generation of women of the Sedgewich family. This was a well-to-do Unitarian clan living in Massachusetts in the middle and late 1800’s. In their letters to friends and distant relative, the women lamented the difficulties of finding just the right gift, of the toys that were quickly broken, the frustration of gifts lost in the mail, and the childish greed inspired by too many gifts.

Just a few years later, a letter printed in a Boston Unitarian magazine warned parents that merchants were playing on the selfishness of children and the poor judgment of their parents. Others complained that the merchants were using the sentimentality of Christmas to encourage people to spend too much money. The familiar lament was that Christmas was becoming too commercial! Once again, Unitarians tried to rescue Christmas — this time with an unlikely solution: the Christmas tree.

For me, and perhaps for many of you, the Christmas tree is a symbol of the materialism and greed that plagues the Christmas celebration of our day. But to the Unitarians of the pre-Civil War era, the Christmas tree represented just the opposite. It embodied the charm of the home-produced holiday and the feeling of magic that came from the legends and stories of Santa Claus and the simple presents he brought for the children.

Charles Follen, a Unitarian minister and professor of German, is credited with bringing the custom of the decorated and lighted Christmas tree to New England. Follen actually premiered his tree on New Year’s Day, so that his great friend Harriet Martineau, a British Unitarian who was traveling in this country , could be present for the unveiling of the family’s first tree and write about the occasion. Her charming account of this novel addition to the Follen family Christmas was included in her book about her visit to America. The book was very popular and within a very few years, the Christmas trees became an integral part of the American holiday.

Gifts for the children were hung on the tree by their parents. Santa was not yet part of the celebration. These were to be simple items, often hand-made. Children were encouraged to make special gifts for their parents and siblings. The idea behind this was that through the efforts required to make gifts for parents and other family members, a child’s inborn goodness and generosity would be awakened and nurtured.

An example of this philosophy in action can be found in the first chapter of Louisa May Alcott’s Little Women. Raised as a Unitiarian, she depicts a carefully constructed example of the progressive Unitarian philosophies of family life. The celebration of Christmas includes modest gifts (Bibles) and there is an opportunity to practice of charity and kindness when the heroines of the story carry their special breakfast feast to a poor neighbor’s family. While the girls expressed disappointment at giving up their much anticipated morning repast, the conversation that follows assures the reader that the lesson of love was not lost.

Did the Unitarians really save Christmas from excess and selfishness and the forces of commerce? It certainly doesn’t seem that they did. The battle for Christmas has never ended, and it’s my opinion that the current skirmish is silly. My favorite letter to the editor on this topic suggested that if we’re going to take back Christmas, it should be over concerns for the needs of the poorest citizens in our community, not the moniker used for the traditional tree.

As I read that letter, it occurred to me that this would be a great opportunity to take back Christmas from the greed and excess that has become the hallmark of the American Christmas. How could we renew the focus on Jesus’ teachings of care for the poor, or peace within families and between neighbors — and enemies? How do we act on his warnings about wealth and possessions? I know that many of you face the battle for Christmas in your own homes. I hope you find comfort in these words from an unknown source that I’ve adapted and expanded.

Blessed are the parents who know that Christmas is not found in the toy department, the catalogs, or the K-Bee website.

Blessed are the parents who turn off the television and the video games and, despite the busyness of the season, give their children some of their precious time for stories and songs and cookie baking.

Blessed are the parents who teach their children to while toys break or grow to be BOOOORING, shared love, laughter bring joy for years

Blessed are they who balance decorating and parties and shopping with times of reflection on the message of the babe grown to manhood, who vow to bring that message of peace, for justice, and lives unfettered by hatred and greet to their own lives, and to the world.

May they become like little children and hearing that old sweet song of love and hope once again —and rejoice!

May it be so!

UUC Home Page

Reverend Brownlie Home Page