In about a month, the College's Christmas tree will be displayed on the Green. This tree will cost up to $4,000 -- the money coming from the President's discretionary fund -- and will be erected on the middle of the Green, a privilege shared only by the bonfire and the snow sculpture.
The College does not erect any other religious symbols; the town does not allow any other religious symbols to be permanently erected on the Green. Many residents, Christians and non-Christians alike, will enjoy the presence of the tree. But is it right for this tree to receive such special treatment from the College and from the town?
The Christmas tree is, to many and varied non-Christians, a Christian symbol, with which those people would never associate themselves because of their strong non-Christian affinities.
"Why don't you appreciate the tree for what it symbolises, peace and unity?" could be asked of them. What is wrong with the tree? What is wrong with giving a Christian symbol privileged treatment?
The issue is not merely that erecting a tree is a great privilege conferred only to Christianity, and that by endorsing the tree the College spreads Christian doctrine.
The issue is what the Christmas tree has become, an issue important to many serious Christians. 'Secular' American society, mainly of Christian ancestry, has appropriated this Christian symbol as their own. It is to them a symbol of joy and of unity. To those people, it means that all are included.
But there are many who have not forgotten the Christianity of this symbol. If Christmas trees are merely a symbol of the joy of winter, why does one not see festooned trees with a star at the top in Hillel? Or in Muslim households? The Christian connotation of the tree (in America) is a surprise to nobody; it is, after all, a "Christmas" tree. It is unfair to expect non-Christians to universalize this historically Christian icon.
Those who refuse to be brought into the fold of the Christmas tree are marginalized. The Green marks the center of 'our' campus. Putting the Christmas tree on the center of the Green asserts the primacy of Christianity, forcing everybody else to swallow their religious and/or ethnic identity.
"But that is nothing," the conservative derides. "What's the big deal about one tree?"
The exclusive centrality of the Christmas tree creates an atmosphere in which Christianity is, quite literally, central. An atmosphere that assumes the members of 'society' are Christian. An atmosphere that produces 'self-hatred' among minorities; that is, in which members of a minority may try to fit in with secular society, and are forced to abandon and deride their own tradition and ancestry. Or an atmosphere in which minorities are on the side, unseen by 'society'.
This act of cultural imperialism is certainly not the fault of some evangelical branch of Christianity. Rather, it is the fault of a multicultural nation that feels a nationalistic need to define itself, and appropriates symbols for that purpose. Unfortunately, in this case, the appropriated symbol was not from the country's history, but from one particular culture. The majority feels perfectly comfortable with that symbol, because it is their symbol; however, it must be remembered that this is not merely a 'symbol of peace,' but rather a 'Christian symbol of peace'.
Peace and unity are good. It is not good that one religion's icon receive privileged treatment, by being labeled 'secular' at the exclusion of all other religion's icons. Those who share my views are not opposed to the existence of Christmas trees, but we do think that everybody should admit that it is a culturally specific symbol, and that there are other non-Christian symbols that are equally meaningful.
This would require placing those other symbols on a level with the Christmas tree. The Green could be open to symbols of all cultures, including the Christmas tree. The tree should be funded by a Christian organization, not by the College president's discretionary fund. Everyone must have equal opportunities, and no group should receive the special label of 'secular.'
Only when this equality has been achieved, will there be nothing wrong with the Christmas tree.
