I suppose that there's nothing new under the sun (or even under the Son). From the very beginnings of our country, many voices spoke out against the trivialization and commercialization of Christmas.

From 1659 to 1681, celebrating Christmas was a criminal offense in Puritan-dominated Massachusetts. The Puritans, as you might recall, were not exactly party animals. Their influence waned, though, and by the 1820's, denunciations of an overly commercial Christmas were already appearing in print.

By the 1830s, the middle class was giving lavish presents, and the phenomenon of childhood selfishness was decried by the older generation.

Steven Nissenbaum's book, "The Battle for Christmas," describes holiday charity as a sort of spectator sport. In 1891, The Christmas Society organized a distribution of gifts to 10,000 needy children in Madison Square Garden. Children from wealthy families were invited to watch the gala, but evidently declined.

Rich adults, however, attended in great numbers, and watched poor people eating charity dinners. Only one newspaper, Joseph Pulitzer's New York World, questioned the motivation of wealthy voyeurs. The World reported that "some [of the rich] seemed to look upon this feeding . . . as a spectacle, and whispered and pointed at poorly clad men and women who ate ravenously, or . . . smiled when a piece of turkey was surreptitiously slipped into a capacious pocket."

Turning to the antebellum South, Nissenbaum reminds us that Christmas was the only time when most slaves were allowed to visit friends and relatives on neighboring plantations. The motive of reducing tensions among the slaves was at least equal to any humanitarian inclinations.

Recent polls find that only one-third of Americans consider Christ's birth the most important aspect of Christmas. By 44% to 33%, more people cited the opportunity for "family time" as the main reason Christmas is important to them. Even when considering only respondents who said they were Christians (88% of Americans), the birth of Christ drew only 37%.

Why? In a misguided effort to be unoffensive, starting in the 1950's, "Merry Christmas" began to be replaced with "Season's Greetings," and now it's "Happy Holidays." If a Christian is afraid to say "Merry Christmas" except in rarified situations, is it any wonder that the meaning of the holiday is lost?

The popular culture is perceived as hostile to religion, but the hostility is directed mainly towards Christianity and its practices. Hanukkah, and the newly discovered Kwanzaa, are essentially exempt from criticism.

Ironically, the transformation of Hanukkah into a kind of "Jewish Christmas" is condemned by many as an inflation of a formerly minor holiday into a major event, because of the pernicious influence of Christmas. If these critics knew their history, they would realize that without the Maccabean revolt, and re-dedication of the Temple, commemorated by Hanukkah, there would be no Jews, and no Christmas, for that matter. Some "minor" holiday!

For Christians, at Christmas, we need only turn to the words of Luke 2:10-14...

The angel said to them, "Do not be afraid; for behold, I proclaim to you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. For today in the city of David a savior has been born for you who is Messiah and Lord. And this will be a sign for you: you will find an infant wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger." And suddenly there was a multitude of the heavenly host with the angel, praising God and saying:

"Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests."