Religious Symbols at Public Sites

My wife and I would like to express our support of the position taken by the City of Santa Ana in its recent controversy with the Chabad over placing a large menorah in a Santa Ana city park.

We are practicing Jews. But we appreciate the importance of the separation of church and state in creating the tranquil community environment that all Americans enjoy. We disagree with the Chabad’s equating of Christmas trees with menorahs. The former is a non-religious symbol, associated with the non-religious observance of a de-facto, American national holiday. On the other hand, a menorah is as religious a symbol as is the cross.

We understand that the Chabad is arguing for parity. But if the Jewish community is allowed to place menorahs in public parks, then the Christian community will, justifiably, want to place crosses there. At the opposite extreme, the elimination of Christmas trees and of Christmas as a national, secular holiday is not a realistic goal, nor a desirable one. The role of Christmas and the way it is observed in America are positive social influences in many ways.

If the Chabad would like to place non-religious symbols of Hanukkah in a public park, such as dreidles, for example, we would not be opposed, and we would hope that both the American Civil Liberties Union and the City of Santa Ana would agree. We suspect that such symbols would not generate a lot of excitement among Jews, however. The fact is that Hanukkah does not really compete with Christmas, nor should it have to. While Hanukkah may lack the pageantry of Christmas, it is rich in religious and philosophical significance that is universal. And it is the profound values represented by Hanukkah, and by Judaism, that account for their continued vitality after thousands of years. The Chabad, which certainly has the best of intentions, should review its perspective, and should not confuse enjoyable pageantry with deep religious significance.

HENRY WYLE

Irvine