This article was originally published in St. Stephen’s News in December of 2010.
The Salvation Army’s Santas began ringing their bells three or four weeks ago, heralding not only the Saviors birth, but the start of the Christmas shopping season. And to be sure, recession or no recession, the malls have been as crowded as ever.
“Can you believe it? The ‘shop-early-for-Christmas’ crowd have started even earlier than usual this year,” groused a friend in response to the Santa’s pre-Christmas serenade. But it is wrong to fault the Salvation Army for sending out its Santas earlier than usual—if that is indeed what has been done. It has been a particularly hard year for many ordinary families; not only the unemployed, but those whose incomes have been cut back by furloughs or reduced hours of work.
The Christian response to increased need is to dig deeper into our pockets—not mutter “Bah! Humbug!” or “Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?” like Ebenezer Scrooge.
Aside from the charitable aspects of the early arrival of the Salvation Army Santa, however, the “shop early for Christmas” advertising campaigns should be welcomed by all Christians in this apostate age. Indeed, one might argue that it would be better for Christianity if they started even earlier—in August, for example. After all, for many people, especially the young, it is pretty well the only mention of Jesus’ name that they will hear all year.
It doesn’t matter how commercialized the Christmas season becomes, it is quite impossible to separate it from the Christ Child in the Manger. The most barbarously vulgar advertising jingles cannot drown out the Christmas message of “Peace on Earth; and good will to all men.” Even the American Civil Liberties Union’s obsessive/compulsive attempts to ban the public display of crosses, creches and Christmas trees work only to our advantage. The publicity generated by these grinch-like efforts to ban all public mention of the birth of Christ serves, ironically, not to suppress the Christmas messages but to promote it. The ACLU, it seems, cannot win for losing.
Recently I received notice of the launch of a campaign aimed at encouraging Christians to deluge the ACLU’s headquarters with Christmas cards. The idea is that a flood of Christmas greetings will disrupt their operations. The staff will have to open every single card, or risk missing envelopes containing donations. Actually, I am all for sending Christmas greetings to the ACLU, but not in malice. Think of how much we would lose in public relations terms if they abandoned their anti-Christian obsession. We should be genuinely grateful to them.
But, then, the whole notion of “shopping early for Christmas” as a recent innovation is, as Henry Ford once said of history, pure “bunk.” When I was seven—more years ago than I care to remember—an elderly lady who lived nearby asked me if I would like to see her Christmas dinner.
It was late August or early September and I was beguiled by the thought of seeing a table laid out for Christmas, complete with turkey and pudding, so far ahead of time. To my surprise, however, she led me not to her dining room, but to the garden shed. There, in a roomy hutch, nibbling a juicy carrot, was the most handsome white rabbit I had ever seen. “He’s going to be absolutely delicious!” she exclaimed.
Food was in short supply in England back in those days, but, even so, it seemed a terrible pity to eat such a beautiful creature. Naturally, when I got home, I begged grandmother to obtain a reprieve for the rabbit.
At length, grandmother weakened and negotiated a trade. The white rabbit was ransomed in exchange for two chickens. Our elderly neighbor got the better part of the bargain—a rabbit was not worth a single chicken in those days. But I guess that’s what she was aiming for when she showed me her Christmas dinner. In any event, it was a very merry Christmas all round—especially for the white rabbit.GPH✠
Newsletter