CAMBRIDGE LETTER
A friendly greeting, nothing more
BY BILL KIRKMAN
In a multi-cultural society, the aim should not be to ban the overt celebration of religious festivals, but to ensure that those who wish to celebrate them may do so.
THIS afternoon I took four of my grandchildren to a Christmas party given by my college. More than 50 children were there — and from the noise of young children enjoying themselves, you would have thought the number was higher. They played party games, organised by one of the Fellows of the College whose exuberant enthusiasm has been a feature of these occasions for more than 20 years. A number of student volunteers provided a team of helpers. As usual, the children sang some carols, and awaited the arrival of Father Christmas, carrying his sack, from which he distributed presents to all of them.
Different backgrounds
Wolfson College is one of the youngest of the Cambridge colleges (just 41 years old) and probably the most international. The party, for children and grandchildren of members of the College, has been a feature of College life for many years. As always, the children attending the party (and the adults accompanying them) were from many different countries, many different nationalities — and many different religious faiths.
I mention all this because the party was, as it has always been, a relaxed and jolly occasion, enjoyed by the participants. It was, therefore, an excellent illustration of the stupidity of the attitude adopted by an increasing number of organisations, which are seeking to ban any reference to Christmas for fear that such reference will cause offence to non-Christians.
Disturbing trend
A poll published in the Daily Mail, for example, records that 74 per cent of British employers have banned Christmas decorations in their offices for fear of offending non-Christian workers, and 41 per cent maintain that decorations have a negative effect on productivity. In addition to the "fear of giving offence" argument, the health and safety brigade have jumped on the band wagon (though no doubt being careful to ensure that the band wagon has come to a standstill, and a notice is prominently displayed warning of the dangers of jumping). In one village, for instance, the organisers of a village Christmas party have been warned that they must carry out a risk assessment of their mince pies — traditional Christmas fare.
Paranoia about health and safety and risk is now a depressing feature of British life (as I have mentioned before in these Letters). It is clear, too, that political correctness — another depressing feature of life — used as an argument for attempts to abolish manifestations of Christmas, seems to be growing.
Fortunately, the argument is not going unchallenged. In an article yesterday in The Guardian, the Dean of Southwark Cathedral, which is in the heart of one of London's major business areas, mentioned the many Christmas concerts organised in the cathedral by business organisations. "Never have I heard the suggestion that these great corporate carol services cause offence within the company — I have seen Jews, Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus singing in choirs. They are welcome."
It is a good point. Indeed, it is not people of other faiths who have been behind the campaign to remove Christmas from Christmas celebrations. The point, as sensible people recognise, is that in a multi-cultural society, such as the United Kingdom is, the aim should not be to ban the overt celebration of religious festivals, but to ensure that those who wish to celebrate them may do so. Representatives of all faiths understand this, and understand that the anti-Christmas campaign is likely to produce a backlash.
Clearly, if celebration was turned into a vehicle for aggressive proselytising, there would be just cause for concern. But it is not. If someone in a shop wishes you a happy Christmas, it is not a threatening attempt to convert you; it is a friendly greeting. A Christmas tree, and holly, and twinkling lights, in an office (or on the village green), will not be seen as a threat to anyone's religious freedom (or the freedom of an atheist to reject all religion), except by people who have taken leave of their senses.
No sinister aims
To return to this afternoon's College Christmas party, no one could have thought for one moment that the integrity of their religious beliefs was threatened. No one could have felt that receiving a present from Father Christmas put the recipients at risk of bribery in some sinister cause.
The firms, and local authorities, and other organisations which are trying to remove Christmas celebrations from national life should be laughed to scorn for their preposterous stupidity, and learn to behave in a more intelligent way.
On that note, I would like to wish all my readers a friendly and unthreatening "Happy Christmas".
Bill Kirkman is an Emeritus Fellow of Wolfson College, Cambridge, UK. Email him at: bill.kirkman@gmail.com
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Magazine
