The supposed evils of manger scenes and plum pudding

BY BRANDON MCCAFFERY
Guest Writer

In merry England in 1644, the happy season of Christmas was outlawed by Christians. Puritans rose to Parliament, and the jolly holiday was practically turned into a day of mourning. Plum puddings, as well as fruitcakes, were considered diabolical. All feasting became fasting.

The smallest wreath or decoration intimated — nay, it implied civil disobedience. As was then the custom, priests were on the run; markets were forced to remain open (owing to the date having been declared a “working day”); defiant housewives discovered baking mincepies in secret were pitilessly locked up— and all rebellious carollers and wassailers were either exiled or directly relegated to the prisons. The puritan reason was that Christmas had become, more or less, something like a modern-day Mardi Gras. It was considered heathen and therefore damnable, therefore punishable. Dickens’ pre-converted Mr. Scrooge himself could not have put a better damper on Christmas Day; in fact, at a far more astonishing rate did the Christian Puritans succeed at eliminating the holiday than would, much later, Communist Russia. And fie! we whine and gripe when atheists bewail the plastic nativity scene outside the courthouse on such-and-such street!

Christmas, so it seems, has a tendency to be treated as anything but a holy day. Ninety percent of those ridiculous “holiday movies” that are shown yearly in theatres have nothing to do with Christ, and everything to do with eating, drinking or lovemaking. I do not propose, of course, that we fill our jails with mall-lingering men in Santa outfits, or silence the sweet carol of jingling bells, or sack all gingerbread houses, in order that people realize the true cause for Christmas. I do not think it wise to reject one extreme — i.e. the protestation of manger scenes and candy canes, etc, etc.— only to adopt the other: namely, the boycotting of Christmas altogether. I suggest a middle course, or, in other words, a reasonable solution — one which would, consequently, require Christians to actually practice what they preach. That Christmases are celebrated without Christ is as silly an occurrence as it would be for one to walk dismembered into a hospital, only then to reproach the merest manner of hospitality. For Christmas is a contradiction without Christ. And hanging Him on a Christmas tree does not make Him more significant than those glamorous parcels stacked below it. It takes far more devotion and festivity to put the Christ Child exactly at the heart of His nativity.