Friday, December 14, 2007

Putting the X Back in Xmas

Walking through the labyrinth of the catacombs in Rome, one comes across some of the earliest symbols used by the church. As people would gather and mourn their loved ones, sometimes because they had been martyred for their faith, they would carve expressions of their faith in the stone. One of the most common was what would appear to us as an “X” and and overlapping “P.” It was the combination of two Greek letters, “Chi” and “Rho,” the first two letters of the Greek word “Christos,” or Christ. For us, the most enduring symbol of the Christian faith is probably the cross. For the early church, it was most likely that Chi-Rho combination.

When did the letter “X” come into use to represent Christ? The evidence isn’t clear, though most trace its origins back to those early days of the church and this Chi-Rho symbol. What we do know is that as early as the 1400’s, when Johannes Gutenberg was first introducing the printing press, its use became widespread as one of many abbreviations that were highly valued in a day of high printing costs. X was widely used as an abbreviation for Christ, and terms like “Xmas,” “Xn,” and other derivatives were quite common and considered entirely appropriate.

One would think that 600 years would be enough time to get used to an idea.

I usually try to stay out of a lot of cultural wars, finding most of them just too exasperating and often silly. But one has come home for me in the last few weeks, and seems like it may be worth taking a break from reviewing films to comment.

Our church is holding a Christmas celebration this year. Striving to make better inroads into our community, we have done a lot to try and build up our annual tradition and add features that might be of interest to our neighbors, things like a petting zoo and a visit with Santa. We’ve been trying to get the word out, spreading the word with door hangers and public notices. And of course we’ve used the marquee on our property, which is where we got into trouble.

Having limited space with a lot to communicate, several of our postings over the past few weeks have talked about our “Xmas Celebration.” One would have thought we had posted “Happy Birthday Satan” on Halloween. I wouldn’t say we have been inundated, but there have certainly been several calls from usually less than gracious people offended at our posting. Despite our efforts to educate them about their faith’s own history, our callers are usually pretty much locked into their assessment that our church is set on “taking Christ out of Christmas.”

The topic fascinates me on several fronts. As my comments at the beginning might suggest, to anyone who strives to appreciate the rich and diverse history of the Christian faith, the debate itself is fundamentally flawed. The use of “X” to represent Christ is very much a Christian symbol. It’s ours, and using it offers us the chance to echo and honor the very earliest days of our faith and the people who, often in the face of great persecution, were used mightily by God to pass on a faith that endures across the world thousands of years later. It is a wonderful connection to a remarkable past that we should seek to honor and celebrate. In the midst of a season that offers us many positive and negative things to be shaped by, I’m glad to point to such a rich tradition that is there to shape us, and challenge the historic amnesia that pervades the church.

Of course even if the symbol didn’t have such a rich tradition, it strikes me that the debate is still remarkable silly. Reading an article the other day, the writer had observed a busy person working the checkout at a retail store. Handing the customer their package, the clerk offered “Happy Holidays,” to which they got a terse, and indeed merriless, reply “It’s Merry Christmas!” I expect that this person probably would have called had they seen our sign as well.

What’s the issue? We live in a diverse culture. Many celebrate Christmas, including many who do not worship the Christ for whom the holiday exists, but many do not. Do we want to see a culture where people feel compelled to pay lip service to a faith that they do not subscribe to? The media allows Chevy Chase and Bart Simpson to tell us about the “true meaning of Christmas” (as Bart would say, “We all know Christmas is all about the birth of Santa”). In that context, shouldn’t Christians (excuse me, Xns) seek to invest the holiday with greater meaning, so that people might encounter the real “reason for the season.”

Admittedly, there is a ridiculous hostility on the other side of this cultural war, too. In this camp, advocates are pursuing a “naked public square,” where symbols of any faith are stripped from public places. Pushing back against this is worthwhile, but the response requires a bit more subtlety than we are seeing. Our battle is not for empty symbols in the public square, but instead a context where we can have a robust and meaningful conversation about the coming of our Lord.

The way that Christians need to respond is of course complex and necessarily variegated. But at times it may mean that we appreciate the use of symbols that represent Christ in quieter ways. It is what Eugene Peterson speaks of when he calls Christians to practice “subversiveness” in their culture, offering a message and a lifestyle that quietly offers an alternative to the culture without having to stand in opposition to it.

So I guess we need to put the “X” back in “Xmas,” practicing a greater appreciation for symbols, and looking for quieter ways to express our faith and message in a culture inundated with hostility. One thing’s for sure, the non-Christians that saw our marquee wouldn’t care one wit about the “X” on our sign or the one whom the “X” represents until they see the lives of the people who put the “X” there.

Merry Xmas!

1 comment:

Melanie said...

Cool history lesson. I appreciate the historical gems that you, Carson and Pat offer. Drives me crazy when folks get up in arms over the smallest things.

Hope you and Beth had a Merry Xmas.

:)