Religious Holidays and Ideological Neutrality

Long before Christmas, long before Advent, and recently even before All Saints' Day celebrated on November 1st, holiday decorations referencing Christmas began appearing in many stores. They typically disappear quickly once the gift-buying season is over, thus revealing their commercial character, which we have probably already grown accustomed to and which is the subject of cultural and sociological analyses.

Something else is intriguing about this phenomenon – something directly related to religious freedom, as many of these displays in shop windows, ornaments, and decorations deliberately eliminate certain religious symbols. A similar phenomenon can be observed on holiday posters at bus stops or on city bulletin boards, where holiday greetings from local governments appear.

The greeting cards sent during this period can essentially be divided into two groups: one avoids any religious reference like the plague, both to Jesus Christ (who comes into the world in Bethlehem, and this very fact is the subject of celebration and joy for many of Christ's followers worldwide) and to the nativity scene in its traditional form, with shepherds, animals, and the Holy Family. The other group of cards references these religious elements but consequently faces ostracism and criticism as an allegedly unacceptable form of imposing one's own views on others, violating the principles of state secularism and ideological neutrality. Do this accusation and the practice stemming from it have any justification in the concern for religious freedom? What do similar decisions to eliminate religious references from holiday cards, resistance to singing Christmas carols, and refusal to allow nativity scenes in public places indicate?

It is worth first noting that displaying nativity scenes, nurturing the custom of nativity plays, Christmas carols, and holiday cards with motifs of Christ's nativity does not constitute a form of coercion or imposing one's beliefs on others, just as displaying Renaissance masterpieces in museums is not that either. Raphael's Transfiguration or Michelangelo's frescoes referencing biblical scenes are not declarations of faith by the museums that exhibit them publicly. Imagine that, guided by a misunderstood principle of neutrality, museum curators began covering up the Madonna, Jesus, leaving only the landscapes to be admired. Would this be a sign of respect for the work of Raphael or Michelangelo? And yet, it is precisely this type of practice we are dealing with in the case of subtle attempts to hide Christ among presentations of the Nativity scene. Sending holiday cards that contain religious motifs, often belonging to the treasures of Polish culture, is – contrary to the narrative of supporters of secularism and laïcité – not so much an attempt to indoctrinate the viewer as it is respect for one's own culture and heritage. In a way, it is also a commonsense resistance against being aggressively forced to abandon what is the essence of religious celebration accepted in a given country, a defense against cultural amnesia and a situation where something unknown or shameful is celebrated. It would be like celebrating Teacher's Day without mentioning teachers or Polish Armed Forces Day without remembering soldiers and their sacrificial service to the homeland.

However, in this attitude of subliminally exerting influence or social pressure not to show religious elements in the name of supposed neutrality, lies a broader ideological intention, which is related to so-called secularism. This is an attempt not just to omit, but even to change the essence of a religious holiday by emphasizing its secondary aspects. Thus, secularism emerges not so much as protection against an attack by religion (which is how it is justified by its supporters, who see it as a barrier against the dominance of religion in public life), but as an aggressor entering the territory of religion and trying to modify it in the public perception. It is a postulate to de-religionize something inherently religious in the name of ideological assumptions. After all, neutrality means something else: it is the absence of preference for any option, not the marginalization of one of the paths.

Sending cards depicting the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem is not a declaration of faith by an office, but an expression of care for identity and respect for the true motives of celebration. These motives are important for a certain social group and tolerated by other groups. For it is difficult to achieve true tolerance if we pretend the other side doesn't exist, we don't hear their views, or we interpret them in our own way. On the contrary, tolerance involves recognizing the identity of the other and working together, based on respect stemming from human dignity, for the common good. There is no other school for learning such tolerance than getting to know another person with their culture, history, and also religion.

Behind the removal of cultural and religious references to the Christian dimension of Christmas lies, in fact, hostility towards religion. Justifying this hostility with supposed concern for neutrality or secularism is a shortcut. It is not about being tolerant 'despite' who we are as citizens of different religions and worldviews, but 'amidst' these strong expressions of our identity – because religion is a strong self-identification. Discovering the holidays of other religions or denominations: Orthodoxy, Protestantism, Islam, and many others, especially when these religious minorities live among us, is one of the attitudes that has a huge impact on social peace and friendly cooperation of everyone in building the common good. While admiring Christmas nativity scenes, singing carols, sending holiday cards – it is worth remembering this.

Agnieszka Brzezińska PhD