CARR 261-263

CCAR RESPONSA

Contemporary American Reform Responsa

174. Christian Decorations in a Business

Office

QUESTION: A Jewish employee of an insurance firm has

protested against the planned Christmas decorations. He is one of eight employees in his office.

Most of the offices in that business building are decorated for the holiday of Christmas. Is there

anything in the halakhah which might encourage him to object? What should our attitude

be toward Christmas decorations in non-public places? (Rabbi J. Brown, Long Beach,

CA)ANSWER: This question, first of all, involves the Jewish attitude towards

Christians and Christianity. Ever since Talmudic times, Christianity as well as Islam have been

viewed as monotheistic religions. Therefore, none of the strictures which the Bible and

the Talmud place upon idolatry are relevant for Christianity. The

Talmud began to consider pagans of its day differently from the ancient heathen; it

treated Christians similarly. The precise attitude toward Gentiles during the five centuries of

Talmudic times depended upon specific circumstances. Thus, Simeon ben Yohai could be

uncomfortably negative (J. Kid. 66c, with full reading in Tosfot to A. Z. 26b;

Soferim 15.10). On the other hand, it was possible for Meir and Judah Hanasi to have warm

friendly relationships with Gentiles (B. K. 38a). We comfort their dead, visit their sick, help their

poor, etc. (Git. 29b; Tur Hoshen Mishpat 266). R. EIiya bar Abba said in the name of R.

Johanan that Gentiles outside the land of Israel were not idolaters. They merely continued to

follow the customs of their fathers (Hul. 13b). By the Middle Ages, Christians were

generally no longer classified as idolaters (Meir of Rothenburg, Responsa #386). Rabbi

Isaac of Dampierre placed Christians in the category of Noachides and not of pagans (Tosfot

to San. 73b and Bek. 2b). Menachem Meiri (1249-1306) went further by stating that

Christians and Moslems who live by the discipline of their religion should be regarded as Jews in

social and economic relationships (Bet Habehirah to A. Z. 20a). Maimonides stated that

Christians or Muslims should be considered as gerei toshav. They would assist in the

preparation for the Messianic era (Yad Melahim 8.11 and Teshuvah 3.5; Edut. 11.10,

etc.). He expressed harsher views at other times and considered Christianity idolatrous

(Yad. Hil. Avodat Kokhavim 9.4, etc.). A French Tosafist of the same period expressed

similar views, and so we see that they were not restricted to Sephardic Jewry (Bekh. 2b).

Maimonides dealt with Christianity in the abstract in contrast to the authorities who lived in a

Christian world. A French Tosafist of the same period expressed positive views akin to Meiri, and

so we see that this point of view was not restricted to Sephardic Jewry (Bekh. 2b). This point of

view- became normative, and Christians as well as Moslems were considered in the same

category as gerei toshav. This view was accepted by Caro in the Shulhan Arukh

(Yoreh Deah 148.12; also Tur Yoreh Deah 148) and most forcefully by Mosheh Rifkes,

author of the Beer Hagolah to the Shulhan Arukh (Hoshen Mishpat, 425 at the

end). The statement is remarkable because the author himself had fled Vilna to Amsterdam from

anti-Jewish riots. He stated: “The sages made reference only to the idolaters of their day who did

not believe in the creation of the world, the Exodus, God’s marvelous deeds, or the divinely

given law. But these people, among whom we are scattered, believe in all these essentials of

religion. So, it is our duty to pray for their welfare, and that of their kingdom, etc.” The status of

the Gentile in the general application of Jewish law had, therefore, changed and this positive

opinion of Gentiles was reemphasized at the beginning of the modern era by Emden, Bacharach,

Ashkenazi and other Orthodox authorities (See A. Shohet, “The German Jew, His Integration

Within Their Non-Jewish Environment in the First Half of the Eighteenth Century,” Zion,

VoI. 21, 1956, pp. 229 ff) as well as Mendelssohn (“Schreiben an Lavater,” Schriften,

1843, Vol. 3, pp. 39 ff). As we turn to the specific question of decorations, we

must note that it would obviously be wrong for a Jew to worship symbols which are sacred to

Christians, especially as we do not agree with their trinitarian concept of God (Tosfot to

San. 63b; Shulhan Arukh Orah Hayim 156 and note of Isserles). In our instance, the

decorations used are a general reminder of the holiday season, but they are rarely specifically

religious. Christmas trees, wreaths, poinsettias, Santa Claus, etc. are not objects of worship. In

fact, many devout Christians reject them as they have detracted from true religious devotion, as

well as the importance of Christmas. We can, therefore, find little objectionable to such

decorations in an adult business setting. Our feelings, of course, would be different if we were

dealing with a public institution, or especially a public school. That represents an infringement of

religious liberty and the separation of church and state in our land. It would also be an effort to

influence children toward the majority religion, and we would object to that. We might

also look upon this entire matter by investigating the rights of a minority versus the majority. That

has nothing to do specifically with the relationship of Jews and Christians. Let us briefly look at a

Jewish view of minority rights within a totally Jewish setting. If an injustice has been done and

not been rectified, then an individual may interrupt synagogue services and demand that

attention be given to his case. This right, probably of Palestinian origin, was reaffirmed by a

taqanah of R. Gershom (Finkelstein, Jewish Self Government, p. 119) and was

also reported in Medieval Spain (Adret, Responsa IV, #56). Its abuse led to some

objections and the curtailment of this right (Sefer Hassidim, ed. Margolis, #107 f;

Solomon Luria Responsa #20). Under other circumstances, however, the minority is

required to adjust itself to the majority. For example, if an individual comes to a community and

finds that their customs of reciting prayers or celebrating a holiday differ from his, he must abide

by the customs of that community and can not make a nuisance of himself (J. Pes. 30d;

Yad Hil. Yom Tov 8:20; Shulhan Arukh Orah Hayim 468; 498 also Peri

Hadash). Actually, the question of minority rights was only urgent in those medieval lands

which restricted the Jewish community to one synagogue and that threat may bring redress of

complaints. A threat of defection by a large segment of the community often guaranteed a fair

hearing. In our case, which of course is not a Jewish setting, the individual may seek some

adjustment in the decorations, but there would be no basis for absolute objection. In summary,

the decorations involved in this business office are not religious and are not used for worship,

and so the Jewish employee has little grounds for objection. He may protest and thus assure

sensitivity to a minority point of view.December 1979

If needed, please consult Abbreviations used in CCAR Responsa.