1888: Santa Claus “was banished, as being unworthy of a place in any ceremonial in honor of our LORD. The heathen Christmas tree was also discarded. . .”

1913: “There were some, however, who never regarded the criticisms of these two Christmas features as well founded, and in the course of years one or the other, or both, have gradually regained their former positions in many of our homes.”

In 1888, the Philadelphia schools of the Academy of the New Church held their first Christmas celebration, as reported in the pages of New Church Life:
 
“CHRISTMAS AT THE ACADEMY SCHOOLS, PHILADELPHIA.
 
The Philadelphia schools of the Academy had a service this year in celebration of Christmas, for the first time since their establishment. From this service Santa Claus, the traditional saint of the Catholic Church, was banished, as being unworthy of a place in any ceremonial in honor of our LORD. The heathen Christmas tree was also discarded, because, being a tree without roots, it is dead; and with its lifeless branches, adorned with glittering gewgaws and hung with fruits that never ripened upon them, is a correspondence of the dead church, by which it has been adopted. (T. C. R. 451, 185.)

Children have been accustomed to look forward to Christmas as a day for receiving numerous presents—the most valued of these being sweetmeats, which they are permitted to indulge in even to satiety—while the true meaning and the appropriate observance of the day have been equally neglected. Thus the influence of the prevailing method of observing the day tends to concentrate a child’s thought upon himself, and to strengthen his natural selfishness and self-indulgence.

As a change in this popular programme had been decided upon some time in advance, the children of the school had been duly instructed that in order to think wisely of this day they must think of giving rather than of receiving—that they would find the truest happiness in acknowledging that all the blessings they enjoy of Church and School and Home come from the LORD, and that this could best be done by offering a gift to Him of something that they value of their own possessions. This suggestion was hailed with evident pleasure by one and all. The very youngest had plants to offer of which they were fond. Even the children as yet too young for school entered into the general sphere of giving in honor of the LORD. Several days before Christmas one little prattler of three years stood before the Chancellor [William H. Benade], and eagerly informed him of a flower that he would bring to offer to the Heavenly Father.

So, on Christmas Eve, instead of the usual tree, the spaces on each side of the platform in the Hall were occupied by wide tables on which were arranged representations, taken from the literal sense of the Word, of scenes at the birth of our LORD. On the left was a landscape where were flocks of sheep whose attendant shepherds, in attitudes expressive of awe and astonishment, gazed at the angel who announced the glad tidings of the babe in the manger. On the right-hand side was a representation of an Oriental horse-stable, showing better than any description in words how humble and mean and wretched was the birthplace of the LORD. Palms and plants, such as might grow in Palestine, surrounded these tables without intercepting the view, while the walls around were decorated with inscriptions. Over the repository was one taken from the Doctrines, and one on each side from the letter of the Word. There were others also in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin.

At the opposite end of the room were suspended many photographic views of scenery in the Holy Land. Water-bags and other articles used by the inhabitants of that country were hung about the Hall. A table was placed on the platform at the right of the altar to receive the offerings.

When the pupils, accompanied by their teachers and followed by their parents and friends, reached the top of the stairs, they were met by the Chancellor, who preceded them into the Hall. Here they found the lights turned down except those that illuminated the abovementioned representations. The children gazed at these with deep attention and interest, while those behind were taking their seats. Then, the entire Hall being lighted, there followed a most impressive and delightful service of prayer and reading from the Word and the Doctrines, and singing and responsive recitation—which latter consisted of quotations from the Doctrines read by the Minister and appropriate responses from the letter of the Word by the schools.

Then followed a short address by the Chancellor, explaining the use of making our offerings to the LORD, and showing the meaning of the gold and frankincense and myrrh brought by the wise men to the infant Saviour.

At its close the youngest children, who had been seated in front, went with their offerings to the table, aided by their teacher in carrying such gifts as proved too heavy for such little hands.

After them followed the larger girls with their teachers, bringing whatsoever it seemed to them best to give; then the students, and lastly the parents and friends.

After singing the anthem ‘Unto us a Child is born,’ the Chancellor caused fruit of various kinds to be distributed, making appropriate remarks as to the correspondence of fruit and connecting it with the event celebrated.

After the benediction, a short time was left for social intercourse and enjoyment, while the children inspected more closely the representations made for their benefit.

Then the young people gathered near the piano and sang ‘Oh! lovely Night,’ and this large family slowly dispersed, each one with the memory of an evening, profitably as well as pleasantly spent, and with the conviction that a right beginning has been made in the way of celebrating the coming in the flesh of our LORD and SAVIOUR, JESUS CHRIST.

The children will have time before the next celebration to prepare some gift with greater care. Even the youngest may be taught to lovingly tend some plant, or prepare some simple gift, suited to their age; and thus from their tenderest years become accustomed practically to acknowledge that all they have and all they are comes to them from the LORD, and is theirs only to use. Thus the holy event of our LORD’S birth will cease with them to be celebrated in a way to strengthen self-love and foster self-indulgence.

FIDELIA” (New Church Life 1889, pp. 11; author unknown).

A quarter of a century later (1913), the description published in 1889 of the Academy’s first Christmas service was apparently still having an effect on New Church families. The editorial below was written for New Church Life by Rev. Carl Theophilus Odhner:

“SANTA CLAUS AND THE CHRISTMAS TREE.

This is no pretty little Christmas story, but just an answer to a correspondent who asks what is our opinion as to the propriety of ‘New Church parents celebrating Christmas with a Christmas tree, and permitting the children to believe in Santa Claus.’ As there are divided opinions in the Church on these subjects we prefer not to present any views of our own, but will simply give a resume of the arguments pro and contra, as far as we have heard them stated.

In an account of the Christmas celebration of the Academy Schools in 1888, (published in the LIFE for January, 1889, p. 11), it is reported that ‘from this service Santa Claus, the traditional saint of the Catholic Church, was banished, as being unworthy of a place in any ceremonial in honor of our Lord. The heathen Christmas tree was also discarded, because, being a tree without roots, it is dead; and with its lifeless branches, adorned with glittering gew-gaws, and hung with fruits that never ripened upon them, it is a correspondent of the dead Church by which it has been adopted. (T. C. R. 451, 185).’

In consequence, possibly, of this seemingly authoritative announcement, the Christmas tree, as well as Santa Claus, henceforth met with discouragement in the families of Academy folks. There were some, however, who never regarded the criticisms of these two Christmas features as well founded, and in the course of years one or the other, or both, have gradually regained their former positions in many of our homes. This has been looked upon by some as a backsliding from strict New Church principles and customs, while others look upon it as a sign of a freer and less externalizing spirit. Some who believe in the Christmas tree will have nothing to do with Santa Claus, and vice versa.

As to Santa Claus there are those who hold that there can be no harm in admitting the presence of the rubicund, jovial gnome who is such a universal favorite among the children,—appealing as he does to their sense of humor as well as to their gratitude,—so long as the little ones are taught to look upon him merely as a kindly spirit and in nowise representative of the Lord.

Others, however, maintain that the thought of the Lord should be supreme and all prevailing in the celebration of His birth in the world, and they believe that the figure of this Catholic saint not only contributes nothing to the thought of he Lord, but interferes with it by the injection of something ridiculous into the sphere of the most sublime. In the Old Church the figure of Santa Claus quite overshadows that of the Lord, and it is believed that the elimination of the ‘saint’ is the least that can be asked for in giving something of a distinctive character to Christmas in the New Church.

As to the Christmas tree some hold that it is an inheritance from heathen times; that it, also, contributes nothing to the thought of the Lord; and that there are statements in the Writings indicating that it has an evil correspondence. It is stated, for instance, that spurious charity ‘is like fruit on a tree where it has not grown, but has been fastened on with a pin,’ (T. C. R. 451); and, again, in the same work it is said that the good works which the old theology claims as the fruits of faith alone, ‘do indeed hang from that tree, but still they do not cohere with it,’ (185) In reply to this the friends of the Christmas tree say that the ‘heathen tree’ was originally a representation of the tree of life, which is found in all the mythologies derived from the Ancient Church; that the statements in the Writings do not necessarily refer to the Christmas tree; that a thing of beauty and of joy to little children cannot have an evil correspondence; and that the children need some visible object of glory to mark the Lord’s natal day as the day of all days in the year.

Such are some of the arguments in the discussion of this subject and they all seem worthy of consideration, although the subject does not appear to be of such vital importance as to prevent friends from agreeing to disagree. In view of the division of views, however, it seems to us that neither Santa Claus nor the Christmas tree should be introduced as features of the distinctly religious part of the Christmas celebrations” (New Church Life 1913, pp. 755-756; Carl Theophilus Odhner).

Photo: Rev. William Henry Benade with Christmas trees on the chancel of the Cherry Street Church in Philadelphia. This photograph, now in the Raymond and Mildred Pitcairn Archives, was taken before “The Great Santa Claus and Christmas Tree Debate.”