Anwyn’s note: I wrote this, posted it, thought better of it, and took it down within about 10 minutes–not something I do with any frequency. But in that time a splog picked it up. I hate those things, and I hate to have posted something, deleted it, and then have a partial record of it somewhere else. So here it is for whatever it’s worth.

***

Santa and Rudolph and Frosty and Christmas trees with presents under them and turkey or roast beef dinners and lights all over the houses ought to have been devices enough by which to separate themselves from the Christ in Christmas. How many people grew up observing only these trappings of the holiday and never giving a thought to the Christ? Many, I’d bet. But they didn’t bother to stop saying “Merry Christmas” though they no longer contemplated the Christ. Why should they? The holy day had expanded to include those who do not believe in holiness; it took them into a time to be with their loved ones without insisting that they observe the love of God. Yet somehow now the very word Christmas is an offense, an accusatory remonstrance and insistence that they acknowledge the Christ. Whose fault is that? Mine, as a Christian well-wisher? Or yours, hating to be reminded that you’ve already separated the Christ from the Christmas? What do you think I care if you separated it? I haven’t, and that’s all that I’m permitted to judge.

Is that what you meant when you said “Merry Christmas” growing up all those years before you decided to take offense? Did it mean you were pushing an unknown Christ on unsuspecting passers-by and fellow well-wishers? Of course not. Then why can’t you go on with the presents and whatever else is tradition for your family without blustering about the literal meaning of a word that grew beyond its origins to include traditions well away from the celebration of the shock and awe of the birth of the Son of God in a stable?

In an age that insists on plurality, surely Christmas could have been construed already to have enough.

Alas.