Los Angeles Merchants Seek to Save 10-Foot Cross, Nativity Scene in City’s Historic Center
Merchants in Los Angeles seek to join a federal lawsuit defending a 10‑foot cross and nativity display at El Pueblo de Los Angeles. The displays at Olvera Street and a nearby gazebo are challenged for violating the U.S. Establishment Clause, with resident Jack Gerritsen claiming exclusion as a nonbeliever. A district court ruled against Gerritsen, leading him to appeal to the 9th Circuit, where the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty asked the court to let the merchants intervene as defendants. The merchants argue they have a legally protected interest in preserving the historic cross and nativity scene in the city’s historic center.
about 1 month ago
Los Angeles merchants are moving to intervene in a federal lawsuit that challenges the city’s 10‑foot cross and seasonal Nativity scene at the historic El Pueblo de Los Ángeles, arguing that the displays are historic landmarks and vital tourist attractions rather than unconstitutional government endorsements of religion. 1
The cross stands year‑round at the head of Olvera Street, while a Nativity scene is set up each Christmas in a nearby gazebo. Both are located within the El Pueblo historic district, a site that commemorates the city’s 1781 founding by Spanish settlers. 2
Resident Jack Gerritsen sued the City of Los Angeles, asserting that the cross and Nativity display violate the Establishment Clause because they favor Christianity and make non‑believers feel excluded. A district court dismissed the claim, and Gerritsen appealed to the Ninth Circuit. 1
The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty filed a motion on August 24 asking the appeals court to let three Olvera‑Street merchants—Sylvia Gribbell, Valerie Hanley, and Eddie Flores—join the case as defendants. The filing states the merchants have a “significant and legally protected interest” in preserving the monuments. 2
The merchants contend that the cross and Nativity scene draw a “growing volume of visitors” and are central to the neighborhood’s cultural heritage. They note nearby historic resources, such as La Iglesia de Nuestra Señora la Reina de los Ángeles (established 1784) and annual events like the Blessing of the Animals during Lent. 2
The motion argues that, under existing precedent, the displays may not be “sufficiently established” to constitute government endorsement, emphasizing their longstanding presence and historic character. 1
Catholic heritage preserves public religious displays
Catholic teaching supports preserving public religious displays as expressions of religious freedom, cultural heritage, and the spiritual dimension of human life—provided they respect human dignity and do not become instruments of political coercion.
Public crosses, nativity scenes, statues, processions, churches, and other sacred symbols can communicate the history and values that shaped a community. Christian art is not merely decorative: it records “the history of the Covenant between God and humanity” and conveys the richness of revealed faith. Pope John Paul II likewise taught that the Church’s cultural heritage can testify to God’s presence in history, awaken awareness of spiritual values, and prepare people to encounter the Gospel.
The issue is also one of civil liberty. Religious freedom includes not only private worship but the public teaching and witness of religious believers. The Dicastery for Interreligious Dialogue explicitly affirms the right of different religions to display symbols in public places, as long as such displays avoid political manipulation, respect human dignity, and do not constitute unjust provocation.
This does not mean that Catholic heritage gives Catholics the right to suppress other religions or compel belief. The Church’s postconciliar teaching emphasizes that religious freedom is a civil right belonging to individuals and communities, and that truth is not imposed by force but enters the mind through its own persuasive power. Therefore, preserving Christian symbols should be accompanied by equal respect for the peaceful religious expression of others.
Nor does legitimate Church–state separation require banishing religious symbols from public life. Pope Benedict XVI warned that separation must not be interpreted as requiring the Church to remain silent or preventing believers from contributing to public debate. Pope John Paul II similarly argued that society cannot treat the spiritual dimension of the human person as irrelevant to public life.
A balanced Catholic position therefore holds that:
Preserving Catholic heritage in public spaces is thus compatible with pluralism. Indeed, the USCCB teaches that religious groups participating in public life can enhance rather than threaten a pluralistic society. The proper goal is not a religion-free public square, but a public square where religious truth and heritage may be expressed peacefully, lawfully, and without coercion.