Seasonal Attack on Nativity Scenes

'Tis the season to object to outdoor nativity scenes, especially those in public places.  Here in Wisconsin the Madison-based Freedom From Religion Foundation is once again working to counter the Christmas spirit.  In reaction to a conservative group setting up a nativity scene at the capitol building, they are applying for a permit, the AP article reports, "for an opposing display."  They claim that the nativity scene isn't appropriate for a state building.  So what will their display be?  One that's "slightly blasphemous" with an "irreverent tweak" on the nativity scene.

Let's think about this for a moment.  First of all what is there in a typical nativity scene that should be so objectionable?  The article claims the scene includes "six statuettes."  That probably means there is one representing Joseph and Mary, three for the Magi, and one for the baby Jesus.  Or it could be Mary, Joseph, a shepherd or two, the baby Jesus and an angel.  As I remember most nativity scenes the figures are not labeled.  Now most people realize who the figures represent, but the point is that it is left to the viewer's interpretation.  There are no crosses or other overt religious symbols anywhere to be seen.  Just the figures, and maybe a star, but that certainly can't be construed as a distinctive religious symbol.  The scene makes no claims about what it represents.  It is, strictly speaking, simply an historical representation and no more.  Unlike icons and other traditional religious art, I don't even think that the Jesus figure is usually represented with a halo.  While some of the figures are often seen kneeling in the direction of the Christ-figure, the purpose of the kneeling is again left to the viewer's interpretation.  

Yet, the atheists, in the true spirit of mean-spiritedness, have decided to erect something that is "blasphemous" and "irreverent."  And this from the people who pride themselves on being "freethinking."  A quick look at their website reveals slogans that are intended to ridicule faith.  I thought that freedom of religion meant mutual respect.  How naive I must be.  Well, I think their efforts speak volumes about the direction and tone of their organization.  It's just sad that a strong belief in the separation of church and state has to result in an attack on religion itself. 

Comments

Anonymous said…
I think the organization's name says it all. They do not believe in freedom *of* religion; they believe in freedom *from* religion. Anything overtly religious is to be banned.
December 12, 2011 at 7:06:00 PM PST
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Firefighter's Cross

Image
[Note: A similar article to this will be shared with my department at their next meeting. During this Lenten season when we are meditating on the significance and meaning of the Passion of our Lord and the Cross at Golgotha, it seemed like one way to offer a witness to the department that captured their interest and yet was not too heavy.] [Editorial Note: In response to a recent comment on this article I have made some changes to the original version of this article especially in regard to references to the so-called St. Florian's Cross. For any confusion the previous unreferenced information may have caused I apologize. I hope that the changes are satisfactory.] THE STORY OF THE MALTESE CROSS In many ways the familiar symbol to the right requires no explanation. It is the universal insignia of firefighting nationwide. Yet the precise origins of this symbol are less clear. The most popular explanation proposes its beginning in the far distant past of medieval Crusaders fi...
Read more

Historical Roots of the Warham Guild Hood

Image
In doing just a little checking on the internet, it's interesting to see how the Warham Guild hood, which I have as part of my STM degree attire, is actually a throwback to the Medieval hood. One article notes "the work of the Warham Guild in its imaginative renderings of medieval hoods" (reference is from here ). Again, here is my hood: The Medieval hood, which was originally a very practical outer garment to cover a person's head and shoulders, protecting both from the elements, bears striking resemblance to this revived form: This hood was also a part of the garb of monks in that era. The Medieval hood, in some cases, also had what is known as a "liripipe," a long tail hanging from the back of a hood. You can see the modern stylized version of this on my own hood. From an article on "Academic hood development" we read that "By 1463 the favourite dress of doctors was the hood with round bell-shaped cape, and the lir...
Read more

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

Image
According to a recent documentary, for all the talk about academic freedom in the world of the large American university system, it would seem that it extends only as far as the system defines it - especially with regards to the subject of origins and science. Noted speechwriter Ben Stein stars as host of the film Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. Dr. Angus Menuge, professor of philosophy at CUW, highlights the film in an article included in the Concordia University - Wisconsin magazine Concordian , including some seemingly revealing details about the expulsion of talented scientists who apparently were ‘expelled‘ from their positions for mentioning the theory of Intelligent Design: “In the current climate, even when academicians have a relevant doctorate and a track-record of peer-reviewed publication, their careers suffer if they argue that the scientific evidence points to an intelligent source involved in the creation of the world. In 1992, Dean Kenyon, a biology professor at ...
Read more