Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

“And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.” — Luke 2:10 KJV

As the feast of Christmas is almost upon us it is time for me to wish all of my readers a very Merry Christmas and a Happy and Prosperous New Year.

As a person growing up in the 1940s I have many warm memories of Christmas. As my father was exempt from the draft in World War II due to his work in factory producing materials for defense I was fortunate to have him at home during the Christmas season. Unlike some of my friends and school mates, who had fathers in far flung corners of the world fighting for our freedom, my dad was able to celebrate each Christmas during WWII with the family.

Those WWII Christmases, while sparse when it came to toys and gifts, were always great family affairs with the entire family gathering at the house for Christmas dinner and celebrating the holiday. As a said toys were sparse as metal was used for defense, not children’s toys and there were no toys or games that required batteries. I still recall one Christmas gift, a toy gun that was a replica of a Colt .45 made of compressed sawdust. The gun lasted for a couple of days until I dropped it and in broke into pieces and my dad attempted to glue it back together. After that it took a great deal of my child’s imagination to think of it as a gun. Another toy was a bomb sight made of cardboard and a mirror that you held to your eye over a cork target and dropped darts in the shape of little bombs. Of course the cork target had maps of Germany and Japan on it.

After the war ended and steel was available I remember going with my dad to the store to pick up my first erector set. For those who are not familiar with the AC Gilbert Erector Set is was a collection of small metal beams with regular holes for nuts, bolts, screws, and mechanical parts such as pulleys, gears, and small electric motors. that allowed you to build things like oil derricks, building frames, and bridges. It provided hours of educational entertainment for my father and I.

Of course there were no outdoor lights on houses and department stores had great Christmas displays in their windows. We never had outdoor lights on our house until 1959. The lights on the Christmas tree were always a problem as they were wired in series so that when one bulb burned out you had to spend time taking each bulb out a replacing it with a “good” bulb hoping the string of lights would go on again. Of course there were the bubble lights that were filled with liquid that bubbled when the bulb heated up.

As a child going to Catholic elementary school I sang in the choir. We performed at Sunday Mass and for the Midnight Mass on Christmas Eve. We would sing the Mass responses in Latin with Christmas Carols intermixed. I can still recall walking to church with my parents on those cold Christmas Eves.

After the war Christ began to become more and more secular. I remember that when people began using “Xmas” instead of “Christmas” they were a campaign to put Christ back in Christmas. There nativity scenes and Christmas trees in the public square and elementary schools had Christmas pageants depicting the birth of Jesus along with traditional Christmas carols. No one complained — it was expected and welcomed. Salvation Army Santa Clauses were commonplace in front of department stores with their bells and kettles — no one complained, no one was offended. People wished you “Merry Christmas and Happy New Year” “happy holidays” was rarely heard.

There were great Christmas movies and TV shows where the mention of the birth of Christ was commonplace. Films such as “It’s Wonderful Life”, ”Miracle on 34^th Street”, and “ A Christmas Carol”, staring Alistair Simms were traditional favorites.

Of course there were the numerous albums of Christmas Carols and songs by recording artists like Bing Crosby, Nat King Cole, and almost anyone you can think of. TV shows always had a Christmas themed episode in December. When someone mention mentioned “Black Friday” you thought they were referring to the stock market crash of 1929 — not the obscene shopping orgies that take place on the day after Thanksgiving where people riot over the chance to buy the latest smart phone or some other popular toy or gadget.

Houses decorated with Christmas lights came into vogue and neighborhoods would enter competitions as to who could use more lights to decorate their homes and people would come from miles around to view the displays. In my neighborhood there are several homes that have spectacular displays of lights including one house where even the interior is decked out in Christmas trappings. The home owner opens his house to the public and welcomes people to walk through to marvel at all of his work. All he asks is that you bring some can goods to donate to those who are in need.

As godless secularism becomes more and more entrenched in our culture, the Christmas season is one of the most contentious times in our calendar. Every year, there are stories in the news of banned Christmas trees or of Christmas trees renamed "holiday trees." Christmas concerts at public schools draw threats of a lawsuit (even when the poor in Africa are the beneficiaries!), and U.S. congressmen are barred from wishing their constituents a "Merry Christmas" in their official mailings. This ban also applies to school children and even the exchange of Christmas Cards is outlawed. This year, even Charlie Brown is creating controversy.

Actually, when it comes to A Charlie Brown Christmas, there was controversy from the beginning. In 1965, just as the culture wars were heating up in the U.S., the "enlightened" executives at CBS balked at the Peanuts classic containing Bible passages. Most every American has heard Linus, in teaching Charlie Brown the true meaning of Christmas, perfectly recite the King James Version of Luke 2:8-14. Of course, the Scripture reference is what was "controversial."

Charles Schulz, the creator of Peanuts (the most popular and influential comic strip of all time), was insistent. As Lee Habeeb of National Review puts it, "[Schulz] knew that the Luke reading by Linus was the heart

Today children (and adults) are bombarded with deceptive (but alluring) messages about "Christmas spirit" and how Christmas is about "spreading joy throughout the world" and "a time for warmth and brotherly love" (as a recent TV cartoon declared). Even Dickens's iconic A Christmas Carol is bereft of the complete message of Christmas.

Of course, brotherly love and spreading joy are not bad things, but they are far from the "heart and soul" of Christmas. Schulz was right. The "heart and soul" of any Christmas story is "behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, which is Christ the Lord."

Or, as C.S. Lewis put it, Christmas is the story of how "the rightful King has landed." Just prior to His death, as Jesus stood before the Roman governor Pilate, Pilate asked Him, "Are you the king of the Jews?" After some discussion, Pilate concluded to Jesus, "You are a king, then!" Jesus answered him saying, "You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world."

Of course all of these so-called bans on based on the fact that schools and public officials are fearful of lawsuits by disgruntled people who have a personal axe to grind — not on the law, the Constitution or Supreme Court rulings. According to the American Center for Law and Justice Several federal district courts have ruled that under certain circumstances, it is permissible for a public school to display religious holiday symbols in school calendars and in holiday displays. For example, a district court in New Jersey directly addressed this issue in Clever v. Cherry Hill Twp., 838 F. Supp. 929 (D.N.J. 1993). In Clever, the plaintiffs challenged a school policy that provided for religious symbols to be used in school calendars and in a Christmas display. After noting the importance of context and the absence of denominational preference, the court upheld the policy:

“Christmas and Chanukah are celebrated as cultural and national holidays as well as religious ones, and there is simply no constitutional doctrine which would forbid school children from sharing in that celebration, provided that these celebrations do not constitute an unconstitutional endorsement of religion and are consistent with a school’s secular educational mission.”

There are numerous other Federal Court rulings permitting the celebration of Christmas in Public Schools and the Public Square. I am happy to report that in my town we have Christmas displays on public property and in neighboring cities there are nativity scenes in the public square.

So Christmas is a celebration of the birth of our Savior King. "Hark! The herald angels sing; glory to the newborn King!" This is the reason for the all of the conflict and contention when it comes to Christmas time. This is why so many fear a Nativity scene, a Christmas tree, or even a meek "Merry Christmas."

Who wants to be confronted with the idea that maybe they are ignoring the most significant event in human history? Who wants to be reminded that perhaps Jesus Christ really was (and is) a King?

And He's not just any king, but a king with a holy mission. "Amazing love, how can it be, that you my King would die for me?" Jesus was the Christ, the "Messiah," the "Anointed One." As the angel reported to the shepherds, "today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you". Jesus was a king who was born to die — not only to die, but to rise again and rule forever.

His death was to "redeem" us and to serve as "atonement" for us. Jesus came into the world so that the world, through Him, "might be saved." And on the third day after his death, our King, born in a stable, conquered even death so that we could live forever with Him.

When Christians truly celebrate Christmas, we celebrate not just a birthday, but the beginning of a sequence of events that would change the world forever. He was born, He lived, He died, He arose, and now He is preparing a place for all of those who would believe in Him. Just as sure as all of the other events took place, we who celebrate Christmas look forward to His return, and we will celebrate for all eternity.

Have a Merry Christmas and may God's light shine bright upon you, your family and our great nation in the coming year!

The War on Christianity Goes on and on and on

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” — First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

Every year we hear or read of examples where atheists or liberals attack Christianity and Christmas. Every year it gets worse and worse. The two latest examples of this attack on religion and the Constitution are in Athens, Texas and Santa Monica, California.

Let’s begin with Santa Monica, or as many people in Southern California call it “the People’s Republic of Santa Monica.

“Another day, another nativity scene drama. Atheists are mounting a full-out war on Christmas in Santa Monica, California” — or so say those who support an annual, Christian-theme display.

According to a report in the LookOut News, a local Santa Monica paper:

“For the first time in nearly six decades, there may be no “The Christmas Story” nativity scene in Santa Monica’s Palisades Park. Each year, a giant two-block long display offers visitors 14 nativity scenes that are presented in life-size form. But atheists, who are likely seeking to replace these images, are on the offensive.

This year, non-believers have reportedly vied for the open display spaces and, as a result, they have taken over much of the space that would be used for the nativity scene. The Santa Monica Nativity Scenes Committee, which organizes the annual nativity scene, isn’t happy about what its members see as an attempt to co-opt Christmas. They’ve apparently been left with three, small spaces.”

“This has been a city tradition for nearly 60 years,” said Hunter Jameson, the committee’s chair. “These new groups applying for permits aren’t even Santa Monica residents, and they are just derogatory to organized religions.”

Jameson believes that these images come from one group of people and it is being reported that they include images of devils. According to The LookOut, he has prepared a response:

“Jameson…is not giving up so easily. He feels that City rules have been manipulated to prevent “a month long, time-honored tradition supported by 14 Santa Monica-based organizations representing thousands of local residents.”

He has organized a nonprofit group called Santa Monica Nativity Scenes and formed a campaign drive to “Save Our Nativity Scenes,” urging like-minded residents to petition City Council members and the city manager’s office to allocate adequate space for all 14 Nativity scenes in the park next year.”

One man, a Hollywood prop maker named Damon Vix, who applied for a permit last year out of frustration at the “offensive Nativity display,” is displaying an alleged Thomas Jefferson quote this year — “religions are all alike – founded upon fables and mythologies.” Vix was quoted in the LookOut as saying:

“I don’t have a problem with Christmas, if it’s Santa Claus and elves. But there are a lot of people who live in Santa Monica who are not Christians.”

The Santa Monica Daily Press wrote the following about Vix’s 2010 display, which has apparently emboldened other non-believers to join him this year in trying to boot the nativity scene out:

“The Hollywood prop maker is the man behind a display that can be found just south of the nativity scenes that features quotes from the founding fathers about the importance of the separation of church and state. A quote from President Thomas Jefferson is by far the most visible. It reads: “Religions are all alike, founded upon fables and mythologies.” On the back of the display there’s another sign that says: “Happy Solstice,” in recognition of the winter solstice on Dec. 21.

Vix is on a mission. The atheist (who is apparently also an ordained minister) is against promoting religion on public property, so he’s setting out to cause a bit of chaos this year.

“There is a growing secular community in this country that has kept quiet for too long. If they want to display Nativity scenes on church property, that’s fine,” he said. ”I don’t have a problem with Christmas, if it’s Santa Claus and elves, but there are a lot of people who live in Santa Monica who are not Christian.”

This year, more than a dozen permits were submitted for space in the park, so the city has put together a lottery system to allocate them — which means, they were selected at random. This, of course, means that the nativity scene won’t get the space it has traditionally had. With atheists competing for the space, it means that there’s less to be allocated for the massive Christian display.

The city cannot designate space for or against a display based on its content, so a random selection is the only way the city can legally go. ”Though the City can designate particular space… for winter displays and prohibit displays in other park space, it cannot favor one speaker or message over another,” City Attorney Marsha Moutrie explained.

Vix, who doesn’t believe that faith displays belong on public land, thinks that the nativity scene discriminates against non-Christians. In his world, he’s doing a public service. In the eyes’ of others, he’s hampering their right to celebrate the holiday season.

Christian pastors in Henderson County, Texas, are fighting back against atheists who are demanding that a nativity scene located on a courthouse lawn be taken down.

The group behind the complains, the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation, frequently targets faith and religion projects that are placed on public lands. The group sent a letter to the county that explains how a local resident, who wishes to remain nameless, is offended by the scene. Here is some of the text from the letter (via the Malakoff News):

“It is our information and understanding that a large nativity scene is on display at the Henderson County Courthouse and that it is the only seasonal display on the grounds (see photo enclosed). It is unlawful for the County to maintain, erect, or host this nativity scene, thus singling out, showing preference for, and endorsing one religion. The Supreme Court has ruled it is impermissible to place a nativity scene as the sole focus of a display on government property. [...]

We request that, as Henderson County Commissioners, you take immediate action to ensure that no religious displays are on city or county property. Please inform us in writing of the steps you are taking to remedy this First Amendment violation so that we may notify our complainant.”

That Christianity was being promoted, endorsed by local government and this made them feel unwelcomed,” said Annie Laurie Gaylor, the co-founder of the Freedom from Religion Foundation. “It sends a message of intimidation and exclusion to non-Christians and non-believers this time of year.”

“Anybody walking by that is going to say, ‘Hmmm. This is a Christian government building. I’m not welcome here if I’m not Christian,’” she continued.

But rather than bow down to the atheists’ demands, the pastors are planning to defend their display. “It’s time that Americans stand up and take America back for the faith that we were founded upon,” said Nathan Lorick, pastor of the First Baptist Church in Malakoff, Texas. “We’re going to stand up and fight for this.”

To combat the group’s demands, the pastors are assembling a rally in support of the nativity scene. And it’s not just pastors getting who are on the defense. Henderson County Commissioner Joe Hall calls Gaylor‘s and the FFRF’s attacks “stupid” and he pledges to fight them “until hell freezes over.” According to hall, the nativity has been up for 35 years, without incident.

Tracie Lynda, a local resident, doesn’t see what the big deal is. “What is so offensive about a baby in a manger?,” she asked. “If it does not mean anything to you, why does it offend you?”

First of all I am offended by the signs and proclamations of atheists, pro-abortion advocates, homosexuals, and the occupy Wall Street crowd. I realize they have a right under the First Amendment to display these signs and make their proclamations. I just ignore them. I don’t read the New York Times either.

This BS about freedom from religion is nonsense. The First Amendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Just because a pinhead court took the letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists telling them not to worry about the government telling them what religion would be recognized. Jefferson said in his letter:

“I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.” his doctrine, known as the "wall of separation" or "strict separationism," would later become highly influential in 20th century Supreme Court understandings of the relationship between church and state. As a result, the relevance of this letter is a subject of heated debate, with scholars such as Robert Boston emphasizing its importance, and others such as Mark David Hall arguing that the letter was a historical outlier.

During his lifetime, Jefferson could not have predicted that the language in his Danbury Baptist letter would have endured as long as some of his other arresting phrases. The letter was published in a Massachusetts newspaper a month after Jefferson wrote it and then was more or less forgotten for half a century. It was put back into circulation in an edition of Jefferson's writings, published in 1853, and reprinted in 1868 and 1871.

The Supreme Court turned the spotlight on the "wall of separation" phrase in 1878 by declaring in Reynolds v. United States "that it may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the First Amendment."

The high court took the same position in widely publicized decisions in 1947 and 1948, asserting in the latter case, McCollum v. Board of Education, that, "in the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and state.'" Since McCollum forbade religious instruction in public schools, it appeared that the court had used Jefferson's "wall" metaphor as a sword to sever religion from public life, a result that was and still is intolerable to many Americans.

Some Supreme Court justices did not like what their colleagues had done. In 1962, Justice Potter Stewart complained that jurisprudence was not "aided by the uncritical invocation of metaphors like the 'wall of separation,' a phrase nowhere to be found in the Constitution." Addressing the issue in 1985, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist lamented that "unfortunately the Establishment Clause has been expressly freighted with Jefferson's misleading metaphor for nearly 40 years." Defenders of the metaphor responded immediately: "despite its detractors and despite its leaks, cracks and its archways, the wall ranks as one of the mightiest monuments of constitutional government in this nation."

Jefferson letters, one published and the other his final draft, have been certified by the FBI and are currently in the Library of Congress.

That Jefferson consulted two New England politicians about his messages indicated that he regarded his reply to the Danbury Baptists as a political letter, not as a dispassionate theoretical pronouncement on the relations between government and religion. His letter, he told Lincoln in his New Year's Day note, was meant to gratify public opinion in Republican strongholds like Virginia, "being seasoned to the Southern taste only."

For years this letter has been used by politicians and courts to promote the so called “Wall of Separation”, something that does not exist in the Constitution. Under the dictum of Stare Decisis these erroneous rulings by the courts have been used over and over again by federal and state courts to take away the rights of Christians (and in some cases Jews) to promote their religious beliefs in the public square and some cases on private property where a Christian symbol such as a cross can be seen from a public highway.

We now have these minimalist special interest groups like the Freedom From Religion Foundation and the ACLU running about county looking for cities to sue over some irate citizen’s complaint that a cross, nativity scene, the Ten Commandments or a Christmas tree or carol offends them. I suggest they go home a take a laxative, they need one.

These anti-religious groups, usually, if not always, based on progressive, liberal ideology, and financed with substantial funds from like-minded fools run in and file their suits. In almost all of these cases the cities or school districts capitulate as they do not have the funds to fight the case and the George Soros funded atheists win. They win not on their Constitutional arguments, but on the force and coercion of the dollar bill. In almost all cases the city manager, mayor, or school superintendent wet their pants when the ACLU or FFRF knocks on the door and ignores the wishes and rights of the vast majority of the community. If the defendants due decide the fight the plaintiffs have already court and judge shopped to pursue their suit.

Jefferson’s “political” letter has gone a long way to take away the rights of Christians in this country. I do believe if her were alive today and saw the damage his letter has done he would withdraw it. The letter has no force in constitutional law, it was just his opinion at the time.

It’s time the people of this country fight back against these anti-religious groups by finding organizations like the Alliance Defense Fund and donate a couple of bucks to help them take on the ACLU and FFRF. We need to turn this nation around in more ways than just the economy. We need to get back in tune with God.

Perhaps Mr. Vix would like to change the name of Santa Monica to just plain Monica. After all Santa Monica translates to Saint Monica, a saint in the Roman Catholic Church. I bet every time he utters the name of the city it ticks him off.