- Krishnan S. Chittur

The decision by New York City Board of Education to permit Muslim students to display the Crescent and Star symbol during holiday season is a welcome development. It will encourage inter-cultural understanding, blunt the stereotypical "Islamic terrorist" image, and foster a progressively tolerant milieu where different cultures increasingly feel included.

The U.S. Constitution, as we know, mandates a dichotomy between religious and secular matters. But this was originally meant more to protect diversity amongst various Christian denominations rather than amongst various religions. Thus, Christian views and symbols have enjoyed predominance and patronage since the birth of the Republic; no other adherents were present in significant numbers.

Witness, for example, the Thanksgiving Proclamation issued by the South Carolina Governor in 1844. Gov. Hammond exhorted "our citizens of all denominations to assemble at their respective places of worship, to offer up their devotions to God their Creator, and his Son Jesus Christ, the Redeemer of the world." M. Borden, Jews, Turks, and Infidels (1984). Charleston Jews protested vehemently against this "obvious discrimination and preference" to the "utter exclusion" of a portion of the populace. Gov. Hammond's response -- and this was over half a century after the Constitution was adopted -- was blunt:

I have always thought it a settled matter that I lived in a Christian land! And that I was the temporary chief magistrate of a Christian people. That in such a country and among such a people I should be, publicly, called to an account, reprimanded and required to make amends for acknowledging Jesus Christ as the Redeemer of the world, I would not have believed possible, if it had not come to pass.

Many U.S. Presidents have issued similar proclamations. For example, President Franklin D. Roosevelt suggested "a nationwide reading of the Holy Scriptures during the period from Thanksgiving Day to Christmas" so that "we may bear more earnest witness to our gratitude to Almighty God." While not as explicit as Gov. Hammond's, the Christian undertone is unmistakeable.

So also, Christian displays such as nativity scenes have abounded in public property. To meet the inconvenient Constitional mandate, these were justified as being "cultural/secular" rather than "religious". As J. Barnett observed in his book, The American Christmas, A Study in National Culture (1954), "[B]y the latter part of the last century, the folk-secular aspects of Christmas were taking precedence over its religious ones". Maybe so, but the Christian intonation was loud and clear.

Challenged in court in recent times, these practices have met with mixed results. Christmas trees and Santa Claus, for example, are now generally accepted as "secular" symbols, while nativity scenes could be proscribed due to their context or message.

The problem this presents remains the one raised by the Charleston Jews in 1844: a State preference for Christianity and its adherents to the "utter exclusion" of others. Since this was being done under the differentiation of "secular/cultural" from "religious," the Jews -- probably the group most well-versed in moulding public opinion in this country -- were not to be left behind.

Thus, Jews commenced displays of the Chanukah "Menorah", a candle with eight branches -- one for each day of the holiday -- plus a ninth to hold the shamash (an extra candle used to light the other eight). Like Christmas, Chanukah also had significant religious as well as secular overtones. And Menorahs started appearing in public places, taking at face value Christians' "secular/cultural" justification for public displays of Christmas emblems.

Incidentally, in the hierarchy of Jewish holidays, Chanukah ranks fairly low in religious significance. Orthodox Jews consider Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur to be much more important than Chanukah, a "minor" festival. But the proximity to Christmas -- and the clever placement of the Menorah by the Christmas tree during Thanksgiving/Christmas, a very common occurrence now -- heightened the significance of Chanukah. Public officials could now affirm saluting religious "liberty" with such a bi-polar display, making conservatives and liberals happy at the same time.

Being left out with this endorsement of Judaism and Christianity, Muslims responded with a law suit in federal court in Brooklyn. They sought to display the Crescent and Star, alongwith the other holiday displays, contending that it was a "secular" symbol of Muslim culture.

The contention was surprising at first blush, since the Crescent-Star symbol invariably flies aloft mosques in several cities like Bombay. The Holy Quran also refers to the Crescent, for example, for commencement and cessation of Ramadan and fasting.

But Islamic scholars concur that that the symbol has no religious significance by itself; as one explained, the Crescent was a "spiritual sign from Allah" while the star was the unwavering, guiding, North Star. Besides, save Pakistan and Turkey, the symbol is not found in most Muslim flags -- even those of proclaimed Islamic Republics. For example, the Saudi Arabian flag carries the Shahada or profession of faith ("There is no God but God and Muhammad is his Prophet"), while the Iraqi flag carries "Allah-O-Akhbar"; neither carries the Crescent/Star symbol. The Organization of Islamic Conference's flag has a Crescent, but no stars.

The Crescent/Star symbol thus appears to be non-religious, cultural -- more like the Christmas tree rather than the Cross. But the Muslim overtone is clear; placed alongside the Menorah and the Christmas tree, it heralds the "arrival" of Muslims in significant numbers in U.S. society.

Such displays would obviously heighten awareness of Muslim culture, thereby altering stereotypes and unfortunate incidentals. Even today, for example, terrorist acts typically raise an immediate presumption of an Islamic connection (the Middle-East legacy). Integrated cultural displays will convey the Muslim component of U.S. society, drawing attention to their contributions to arts, science, and culture. Muslim diversity and tolerance will be held aloft, far removed from the stereotypical bearded mullahs preaching hatred and violence. Eventually, peace-loving Muslims could cease fearing retaliation from bigots upon reports of a terrorist attack, as happens in certain places now.

To be sure, the commercial benefits are significant. Muslim retailers, designers, and other businessmen will benefit substantially from displaying this new addition. There's a lesson in there for other cultures as well: Organize, mobilize, and fight for public display and recognition. Wouldn't it be great if each of our cultures needs a reminder like the one given by Justice Douglas in the context of Christmas: "Christmas, I suppose, is still a religious celebration, not merely a day put on the calendar for the benefit of merchants." Perhaps we may even see the Swastik (the original one, not the Nazi mutilation) being accepted unreservedly as a symbol of peace and prosperity, courtesy Hindu culture.

- Krishnan S. Chittur, S.J.D.