The United States Mint recently unveiled the new designs for the Presidential $1 coins that will enter into circulation this year. It has frequently been said that a nation’s coins are a mirror of its values. In the United States we have an incredible mix of people and motivations which shape our culture. As a result our coins reflect both good and embarassing elements. The first coin of 2010 will honor former Presidents Millard Fillmore. The obverse design on the Millard Fillmore dollar is by United States Mint Sculptor, Engraver Don Everhart. The common reverse design of all the Presidential coins is also by Everhart and features a dramatic rendition of the Statue of Liberty. Inscriptions on the reverse are $1, and United States of America, E Pluribus Unum, 2010, and the mint mark with 13 stars appearing on the edge of the coin. Translated from Latin, the motto “E Pluribus Unum” means “Out of Many, One.” This motto first appeared on U.S. coinage in 1795 and became a mandatory inscription in 1873. The motto “In God We Trust” first appeared on US coinage in 1864. Since 1938, all US coins have carried the inscription.

In 2007 the United States Mint debuted the new series of circulating commemorative dollar coins honoring the former presidents. The golden colored dollar coins featured rotating obverse designs with four president coin designs to be released each year. For the first time in Mint history the national motto was moved to the rim of the coin. As a result of this “special incused edge lettering” there was much public discussion concerning God being moved (quite literally) to the margins. The first dollar honoring George Washington, was released into circulation on February 15, 2007. Shortly thereafter a number of coins were discovered missing the national motto altogether. Public controversy broke out after the “accident” of what became dubbed the “godless dollars.” This caused much public outcry and even a call to boycott the new coins. In response to wide spread public indignation President Bush signed into law H.R. 2764, which required that instead of being concealed on the edge, the motto “In God We Trust” should be moved to the obverse or reverse of Presidential Dollars as soon as practicable.

Millard Fillmore (January 7, 1800 – March 8, 1874) was the 13th President of the United States (1850-1853) As a child his father was said to be Scottish Presbyterian. As an adult Fillmore had no formal religious ties, and indeed had showed little interest in religion, until he joined the local Unitarians congregation in 1831. In 1843, Fillmore ran for governor of New York. While it was a close race, Fillmore lost. He blamed the  defeat on recent Catholic immigrants. Being out of a job, Fillmore looked for an opportunity that would keep him in politics. In 1847, he won election as New York’s comptroller, or chief financial overseer. Fillmore’s winning margin over his Democratic rival was so wide that he was instantly seen as a leading Whig candidate for the upcoming 1848 national campaign. In his report from January 1849, he suggested that a national bank, with the stocks of the United States as the sole basis upon which to issue its currency, should be established. This idea led to the essential principle of our present system of national banks.  In June 1848, Millard Fillmore was nominated by the Whig national convention for vice president, with General Zachary Taylor. Both major parties of the time, the Whigs and the Democrats, avoided an official platform statement on the contentious slavery-extension issue in order to preserve their national unity. The men were to be sworn in on Sunday, March 4, 1849, but being a devout Christian, President-elect Zachary Taylor refused to be sworn into office on a Sunday because it was the Sabbath. Instead, Taylor and Fillmore were sworn in on the next day, Monday March 5, 1849. During a hot day in Washington on July 4, 1850, President Zachary Taylor remained out in the sun too long then had a snack of a large bowl of chilled and iced milk. He complained of stomach pain and died shortly thereafter. Millard Fillmore succeeded him as president. Taylor’s Cabinet resigned and President Fillmore at once appointed Daniel Webster to be Secretary of State. In the autumn of 1852 he was an unsuccessful candidate for nomination for the presidency by the Whig National Convention.

President Franklin Pierce’s 1852 appointment of a Roman Catholic, James Campbell of Pennsylvania, for Postmaster General marked the first Catholic cabinet officer and touched off a political storm that led to the prominence of the nativist American Party (more commonly referred to as the Know-Nothing Party). Millard Fillmore joined the Know Nothing Party and they made him their candidate for president in 1856. The party produced a vast amount of propaganda against the Catholic Church stating that Catholics were not patriotic but owed their allegiance solely to the Pope and therefore could never be true Americans. Frequently anti-Catholicism was voiced as opposition to the Roman papacy, particularly to papal influence in political affairs. Misinformation contributed to ongoing discrimination against Catholics and the popular slogan of the 1884 presidential election, wherein Republicans decried the Democratic Party’s association with “rum, Romanism, and rebellion.” The Know Nothing party sought to exclude from office all Catholics and non-native born citizens while also urging the repeal of naturalization laws. The anti-Catholic movement enjoyed great success in the 1850s, most notably electing governors in Massachusetts and Delaware. In the thirty-fifth Congress, which assembled in December, there were seventy-five Know Nothing members elected. In the election of 1856 Fillmore was pitted against Democrat James Buchanan and the first presidential nominee of the new Republican Party, John C. Fremont. Fillmore carried only Maryland in the election, but won 40 percent of the voted in ten other Southern states. The new presidential dollar reminds us that coins, like national leaders, are a product of their times. The political and theological elements are held in tension should cause us to consider with caution how we as Christians may unwittingly allow national interest or dominant culture to shape our thinking in undesirable ways.

I went to a state school for college in which the Bible was required reading in my history course. Prior to this course, I had assumed that all Bible stories were just made up, like stories about the Easter Bunny and other cartoon characters. My professor, who was an evangelical Protestant and a consummate historian who specialized in the Bible, archaeology and ancient languages, showed how historical the Bible actually was. It was during this time that some students invited me to a Bible study, where the leader asked me how one gets to heaven. My response was that if your good works outweigh your bad works you get in, and if not then you go to hell. He suggested we read Paul’s Letter to the Ephesians, where I read, “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.” (Eph 2:8-9) Shortly thereafter, I prayed (using the evangelical language of the time) accepting Jesus as my Lord and Savior. We read the Bible trying to understand what it taught, and why God instructed us to live. From that point forward, I became very active in the interdenominational group which hosted the Bible study. I was drawn to apologetics, the well reasoned defense of the faith. As a student leader with this group, I led Bible studies, discipled other men of God, and went on missions trips overseas to Japan and at home to the Ozarks, New York, Florida, and Chicago. I came to see being a Christian as more than weekly attendance at Mass, it was a relationship with God. It was falling in love with a person who loved me and wanted the best for my life.

After graduation, I took the next logical step in my life and became a full-time staff member with this evangelical organization. With much joy, for most of my assignments as a full-time (and later associate) staff member I worked at the same university from which I graduated. It was at staff training that I first encountered ardently anti-Catholic literature. I knew the claims were too wild to be true—for example claims like the Catholic Church invented the number zero which it stole from the pagans in order to confound the real Christians; candles were the remnant of human sacrifices—but I recognized that other claims required more investigation. Some of the most helpful authors in my journey were G.K. Chesterton and John Henry Newman, both of whom had themselves converted to Catholicism. I began to discover that the Catholic Church was not just another Christian denomination; it was totally unique. Its claims about itself were too grand—that Jesus established one Church through which to be present to the world. The Church was the authorized guardian to Jesus’ words, and teaching. I soon became involved in Catholic parish groups, and read voraciously about the Catholic Church, ecclesiastical history, and theology, from both Protestants and Catholics. In all the questions posed to Christians by the secular world, I became convinced that the Catholic Church provided the best answers to the questions I investigated. Further, as a Catholic my Protestant brothers frequently inquired regularly about distinctively Catholic practices and teachings. The Protestant inclination towards simplicity occasionally made it difficult to explain the coherence of the Catholic worldview which incorporates theology, history and reason. My friends would ask for one clear verse stating the Catholic position but this rested upon the Protestant belief in the perspicuity and self-sufficiency of Scripture. But sometimes isolated verses appear to point in opposite directions such as in the debate of predestination and free will which divides the Protestants into numerous positions. Verses favoring one reading or the other can be stacked up against one another (Protestants sometimes call this sword-fighting) but the practice does not settle the dispute.

The issues which compelled me to embrace the Catholic faith are too numerous to detail here. One significant issue was that basic question about justification and how we are saved. Protestants disagree heartily among themselves on this very central and basic question. Because of confusions between the ways Catholics and Protestants speak about salvation, Protestants have a tendency to misunderstand the Catholic view on works and on cooperation with God. While the Protestant views are beautiful in their simplicity, the Catholic view is also beautiful in its fine detail and grandeur. The technical theological language Catholicism sometimes uses can be too often oversimplified in the Protestant ear as a new form of Pelagianism, or works righteousness. I think the Catholic view, which requires some significant study and a grasp of the precision of that theological language, in reality emphasizes the fact that ultimately our salvation depends completely on God; in no way can we earn salvation apart from a free gift of God. My studies of this issue, particularly regarding Luther, led me to complete a master’s thesis on the Lutheran and Catholic Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. This joint venture between Protestants and Catholics took decades of study and produced numerous illuminating documents just to get to the point where Protestants and Catholics can speak in one voice on the issue of justification.

Probably the biggest issue both for my own intellectual journey was that of authority. In college I had been taught by my elder evangelical mentors in the faith to follow the Holy Spirit. Yet this individualistic reliance upon the Holy Spirit did not seem to prevent a radical diversity of beliefs on the most basic of all Christian teachings: who is Jesus and what does it take to be saved? I discovered in the Bible what the church fathers already knew:  that Jesus founded the Church, and the same Holy Spirit that inspires Sacred Scripture has been given to His apostles and their successors to interpret and teach those Scriptures. That infallibility and authority worked together and the offices of the Church were just as much of a gift of grace as the divine pages of revelation. Being Catholic was more than mere attendance. Being Catholic was also more than just an individual relationship with Jesus. In becoming friends with Jesus, I became involved with his family, the Church. I also gained the privilege to represent him in the world to others who do not yet know him.

J.R.R. Tolkien, a child-convert to Catholicism, observed that people lose their sense of wonder when they encounter something repeatedly. That is why he used fantasy to reintroduce people to the wonder of the familiar by dressing the everyday up in holiday dress. One of my favorite Tolkien stories is Leaf by Niggle in which an artist paints leaves to create a tree. Later the artist finds the tree, not painted on a canvas, but standing in a field. Unbeknownst to the artist, God had allowed him to be a co-creator cooperating in the creation of the world around us. Likewise God has created the Church and as members of his divine body we not only participate in the creation but we cooperate in our own salvation and in building up the lives of others, all through the unmerited grace of God alone. “For we are God’s fellow workers” (1 Corinthians 3:9).

For Catholics, Christmas doesn’t end on December 25^th, rather, that is the day the Christmas season begins. You may have heard before a Catholic song that has become generally popular called “The Twelve Days of Christmas.” It is a lightly veiled catechetical song, written by a subjugated Catholic minority group living in a hostile English culture that was predominately Protestant, to count the days between December 25^th and the end of Christmastide, which concludes on January 6^th. Each day of the twelve days one sings about a symbol reminiscent of the Christian faith. The four calling birds refer to the four gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; five golden rings remind us of the five books of Moses: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy, and so forth. The twelfth day ends on January 6^th, which is the feast of the Epiphany. This is when the magi from the East visited the Christ-child (see Matt 2:1-18). January 6th was also a celebration of the Baptism of the Lord.  In recent years, the Baptism of the Lord was split from the Epiphany given its own Sunday, and the Christmas season was extended. The liturgical season of Christmas actually continues in the Church until the Baptism of Jesus (the Sunday after the Epiphany) around January 13^th.

Before December 25^th, the Catholic Church celebrates Advent. The word “advent,” comes from the Latin adventus (Greek parousia), means “coming” or “arrival.” The season of Advent is focused on the “coming” of Jesus as Messiah (or Christ). Catholic worship, scripture readings, and prayers prepare us spiritually for celebrating Christmas (his first coming), and also for his eventual second coming. This is why the Scripture readings during Advent include both Old Testament passages related to the expected Messiah, and New Testament passages concerning Jesus’ return. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains¹:

When the Church celebrates the liturgy of Advent each year, she makes present this ancient expectancy of the Messiah, for by sharing in the long preparation for the Savior’s first coming, the faithful renew their ardent desire for his second coming. By celebrating the precursor’s birth and martyrdom, the Church unites herself to his desire: “He must increase, but I must decrease”

Since Advent looks forward to Christ’s birth and Incarnation, it is an appropriate way to begin the liturgical year. However, Advent is not part of the Christmas season itself, but a solemn preparation for it. Thus, many Catholics do not put up Christmas decorations, sing Christmas hymns, or use Christmas readings in Mass until December 25th, the first day of the Christmas season. Generally speaking the liturgical color for Advent is violet.  The use of violet reflects the general themes of Advent: penitence and royalty. The season is somewhat penitential, similar to Lent. The character of worship during Advent is more solemn, quiet, and less festive than during other times of the year. In the Catholic Church, for example, the Gloria in Excelsis is not used.

Often secular culture and many non-Catholic denominations celebrate the day of Christmas, but they take it outside of the ecclesial context of Advent and Christmastide. This is reductionism leading to a loss of meaning. Christmas is not meant to be an isolated day, but a festival of the Incarnation in the midst of the liturgical Church year. Christmas can only be properly experienced and understood after having the preparation provided by Advent. In contrast to the secular commercial excesses leading up to Christmas, the Catholic practice of Advent provides a welcome opportunity to continually re-orient ourselves as Christians to God’s will as we expectantly wait with patriarchs, prophets, and kings for the true meaning of Christmas: the God incarnated in a manger in Bethlehem.

The New Testament identifies Jesus as the expected Jewish Messiah (although Jesus was not the Messiah most Jews at the time expected, a warrior who would forcibly overthrow the Romans). The gospel writers explain that Jesus did not come to establish an earthly kingdom by force, or to simply deliver the Jewish people from the Romans. Rather Jesus proclaimed a heavenly kingdom available to Jew and Gentile alike that would deliver man from slavery to sin. In the first few centuries Christians held untitled remembrances and fasts resembling our current Advent season. St. Hilary of Poitiers (AD 300-367) and the Spanish Council of Saragossa (AD 380) spoke of a three-week fast before Epiphany. Pope St. Leo the Great preached many homilies about “the fast of the tenth month (i.e. December)” prior to Christmas. The first explicit reference to a celebration of Advent occurs in the sixth century. The Gelasian Sacramentary (AD 750) provided liturgical material for the five Sundays before Christmas as well as Wednesdays and Fridays. The Church eventually settled on four Sundays of Advent. Until the twelfth century, in many geographical areas, Advent had a more festive tone, and white vestments were occasionally used. However, the practices and mindset of Advent became more closely related to Lent as Christ’s second coming became more and more a prominent Advent theme, as especially seen in the seventh century Bobbio Missal. During the Reformation, most Protestant groups attacked or de-emphasized many Christian holy days (holidays) and seasons, disconnecting Protestantism from the rhythms of the liturgical calendar and the spiritual understanding of the Church year. Christmas, when tolerated, was treated as a standalone event.

I would venture to guess that not many American Evangelicals (or American Catholics for that matter) are familiar with the Christmas Witch, the traditions of setting dolls on the windowsill or searching for La Befana’s broom. To the ears of my Evangelical friends such practices smack of paganism and the notion of a Christmas Witch is downright blasphemous. Many Protestants in the last few years have also expressed concern over the “war on Christmas” called for by the now dominant secular culture in America, ironically initiated in the name of political correctness and tolerance. Today most people regard Christmas as a Christian holiday celebrated by all the various Christian denominations spanning the breach of Protestants and Catholic. In America even people of other faiths, or no faith have assimilated Christmas into their cycle of yearly holidays. The latest polls place the celebration of Christmas, in some form, in the United States at nearly 96% of the population. Part of the contributing fuel on the fire in the contemporary war on Christmas is the notion among Evangelicals that Christmas is somehow theirs. Sure, others may participate or share in the seasonal festivities but as every Christian knows, Jesus is the reason for the season. Evangelicals, who therefore have a strong public relationship with Jesus, assume special ownership of the celebration of his birth. It is in this close identification between Jesus and the Evangelical that these American Christians sense personal attack when the celebration of Jesus’ birth, Christmas, is altered, commercialized, or banned. Yet historically in America Protestants were the ones who originally banned Christmas because they saw it as a Catholic holiday. After all, Christmas, as the word’s origin reveals, is a celebration of Christ’s-Mass.

Why do Italian children adore an ugly witch with a big nose and nasty red mole who traveled in rags upon a broom? Despite her looks her story is what the holiday is all about. Italy is such a special country that children receive gifts from not one, but two enchanted figures during the Christmas season. Most Italian families get a visit from Babbo Natale (Saint Nicholas) on Dec. 25, but in Italy, as in most Catholic countries, the liturgical season lasts through Jan. 6, which is the Feast of the Epiphany. On that day La Befana, known to some as the Christmas witch, brings snacks and presents to all of the faithful.

Legend has it that La Befana is an old woman who lives in a house in the hills of Italy. When three foreigners knocked on her door, interrupting her cleaning, they told her that they were very wise and had been following the star which would lead them to a newborn king who would rule the world in peace. No fool, she was skeptical. How wise could these men be if they had gotten lost? She gave them directions to Bethlehem but when they invited her to join them on their quest for the baby Jesus—the Christ-Child, she shoed them away and broke down crying. You see La Befana was a mother of a newborn boy. But King Herod had also heard of this Christ-Child who would be king, and not knowing to which parents Jesus had been born, Herod had ordered all the infant sons of the land be put to death. La Befana was so traumatized when her son was murdered she could only occupy herself by doing chores and cleaning her house. She had quickly aged from despair. Her face became wrinkled, her hair turned gray and she grew to look like an old, haggard lady.

After a little while, she had second thoughts. Perhaps, the men were honest and telling the truth. If so, she missed her chance to help them reach this new king who would be holy and just. She decided she should try to catch up with them. So she threw some baked goods along with her son’s belongings in a sack, took her broom for a walking stick and raced out after the caravan in search of the wise men and the baby Jesus.  But they were long gone and La Befana soon got lost herself. Just as she tired to the point of quitting, angels appeared in the sky blessed her broom and gave it the power of flight; this was after all a night of miracles.

She finally found the wise men kneeling before a baby in a manger. It was the Christ-Child, the baby Jesus. La Befana approached Mary and showed her the contents of the sack. Immediately Mary understood what had happened and together they laid the belongings of the child at before the feet of Jesus Christ. He blessed La Befana with eternal life, appointing her to be a giver of gifts. After that, every year on Jan. 5, the eve of the Epiphany, she becomes a mother to all of the world’s children, caring for them and bringing the children gifts and treats. While at first concerned or offended by the Christmas witch, after having the legend explained to them, my Evangelical friends felt comfortable with this Italian legend which highlights how an encounter with Jesus Christ can be a transformative experience.

1. Catechism of the Catholic Church 524