‘Community’s tree’ no more

When citizens blasted the city of Wichita for calling the subject of its December 2004 lighting ceremony the “community’s tree,” Mayor Carlos Mayans said 2005 would be different, declaring, “God is God, and a Christmas tree is a Christmas tree.” And sure enough, the street-closures item on Tuesday’s City Council agenda is for a Dec. 8 event labeled, “Christmas Tree Lighting and Night of Santa.” The city meant well in trying to make the tree-lighting and Winterfest events inclusive of all faiths. But Wichita’s municipal Christmas tree tradition dates to 1914, and Mayans and other officials are right to want to go back to calling it what it is.
Posted by Rhonda Holman

25 Comments

  1. Ray Thomas
    Posted November 6, 2005 at 10:33 am | Permalink

    Pastor Mayans is flirting with an ACLU lawsuit for violating the Constitutional separation of church and state..

  2. Ray Thomas
    Posted November 6, 2005 at 10:38 am | Permalink

    What will the citizens of Wichita do if our next mayor is a Buddist, and pushes that religion? Will people support that? Of maybe we have a Jewish mayor…who wants everyone to celebrate Channukah.. will there be support for that?

    Separation of church and state means just that. As you are free to worship as you wish, the government is prohibited from recognizing or establishing any one church.

    Mayans needs to be reminded he was elected “concil member at large”, or mayor…not city pastor.

  3. Steven E.
    Posted November 6, 2005 at 10:50 am | Permalink

    Doesn’t it seem disingenuious to call this a “community tree”, when clearly it is a Christmas tree.

    I generally favor the seperation issue, but Rhonda is right on this one.

    The only other alternative would be to not have the celebration at all — I could live with that, and would favor the tax savings, as well.

  4. Posted November 6, 2005 at 10:51 am | Permalink

    If they truly want tradition, the so called Christmas tree has its origins in earlier pagan religions. It was used to celebrate the passing of Winter Solstice. It was adopted by the Roman Christian church about 400 AD and was changed to Christmas to adopt the pagan holiday into the new religion.So if they really want tradition, call it a Winter Solstice Tree. It really has nothing to do with Christmas. The council and people of Wichita have once again, showed their intolerance towards anyone with a different religion.

  5. Steven E.
    Posted November 6, 2005 at 10:59 am | Permalink

    Perhaps this issue is one where “liberals/secular humnaists” can join the “market foces/avoid taxation at all costs/libertarian” sect. Maybe the two groups could agree — no tax dollars for anything that smacks of religion — an area where the family makes better choices than the government.

    It is a nice fantasy . . .

  6. NoJoCo
    Posted November 6, 2005 at 2:36 pm | Permalink

    The arguement that the Christmas tree has its roots in pagan rituals assumes that the tree continues to be a symbol of pagan worhip among Christians. I can remember having a tree in every church that I have attended. I can’t remember anyone ever mentioning that the tree represents the winter solstice. To me, and many other Christians, the tree simply represents the time that we celebrate the birth of Christ – God with us. It also means that Christ died for our sins on a cross made from a tree.

    The biggest distraction to what Christians believe is the Santa Claus story where Christ is absent. There is a porcelin statue that shows Santa Claus kneeling in front of Jesus’ cradle – now that’s Christmas!

    The majority of people in Wichita are Christians. The majority tradition should be reprented by a Christmas Tree.

    Oh, and the Christmas Tree downtown was purchased by private funds.

  7. Posted November 6, 2005 at 3:40 pm | Permalink

    Most things about christmas are forgotten. The 25 of December was chosen because that was an important day to pagans. Jesus was born sometime in the summer.And the whole chrismas, santa claus, etc is a bunch of BS. It is not a day christians celebrate their lord, it is a day americans bail out retail stores that have made too many bad business decisions in the previous 11 months. If it was really about Christ and celebrating his life then why do we put ourselves in debt to the credit card companies for the next 6-8 months. I don’t ever remember hearing anything about Jesus maxing his credit limit.And just because Wichita is mostly christian doesn’t mean the majority gets to trample on the rights of the minority.

  8. justoneman
    Posted November 6, 2005 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

    O.K., just for now let’s forget that the whole Christmas tree thing was stolen,oops, converted from pagan or celtic beliefs to fit the conquering forces and the church they brought with them. The tree has become a standard symbol of Christmas, which is a Christian holiday. So let the Christians celebrate. If other religions have a special symbol that they display at this same time of year, then perhaps they could erect their own symbol with the tree. But, for pete’s sake let the Christmas tree be a Christmas tree.

  9. J M Walker
    Posted November 6, 2005 at 4:36 pm | Permalink

    I’m in favor of calling it The “Stolen Pagan symbol now used by Christians to celebrate the birth of Christ on december 25th, when he was really born sometime during the summer months” tree. Maybe add that wally world is having a sale on plastic models of the tree.

  10. NoJoCo
    Posted November 6, 2005 at 4:42 pm | Permalink

    There’s no problem with non-christian groups celebrating and erecting whatever they want to erect – menorah (sp?), etc. There’s no conspiracy that says minority groups can’t celebrate their beliefs.

    k, a majority of Christmasses have been celebrated without credit cards.I will say that businesses have become very dependent on the season. The Jews also celebrate Hanukah (sp?) by buying gifts for each of the eight days of their holiday.

    I have wanted to take all the money my family wants to spend on Christmas and give it to the people who really need it. So, I can understand someone being in a minority position because my family doesn’t want to go with my idea.

  11. Steven E.
    Posted November 6, 2005 at 4:42 pm | Permalink

    So, is the electricity for the lights on the tree, the time it takes the city council to meet and agree on closing streets, roadblocks set up, etc., etc. underwritten by private funds?

    If no, I think I have a complaint about this government sponsored event!

  12. Roo
    Posted November 7, 2005 at 3:57 am | Permalink

    Well, even the annoying Jolly Ol’ Elf figure has been stolen from Finnish fertility god.

    Also, the real Saint Nick’s day is on 6th December. Let’s separate Christmas and the wanton commercial gift-buying.

  13. Jed
    Posted November 8, 2005 at 11:36 am | Permalink

    Hey NoJO,Ring Lardner wrote a marvelous story about Santa and the Baby Jesus. Look it up sometime- you’ll really enjoy it!

    Symbols can, and often do change meaning. One of the best examples is the tetraskel, which for 5,000 years, represented the passage of time in many cultures. When it was taken over by the German National Socialists and renamed the Swastika, it destroyed, in 20 years, all those thousands of years of meaning. The Christmas tree’s co-option was a similar, but much more conscious attempt to destroy the pagan meaning.What meaning will the cross have 100 years from now? That’s being decided by the actions of churches today!

  14. NoJoCo
    Posted November 8, 2005 at 11:55 am | Permalink

    Jed,Any idea on the title or when it was written?

  15. NoJoCo
    Posted November 8, 2005 at 11:58 am | Permalink

    Jed, Any idea on a title or date?

  16. NoJoCo
    Posted November 8, 2005 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

    Jed, Any idea on a title or date?

  17. Jed
    Posted November 8, 2005 at 12:47 pm | Permalink

    NoJo,Sorry, I got the author wrong- It’s Roark Bradford,”How Come Christmas,” and is online at: http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Andes/4354/roarkbradford.htmlYou’ll get a real kick out of it!

  18. Jed
    Posted November 8, 2005 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

    NoJo,Sorry, I got the author wrong- It’s Roark Bradford,”How Come Christmas,” and is online at: http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Andes/4354/roarkbradford.htmlYou’ll get a real kick out of it!

  19. Gertie
    Posted November 8, 2005 at 11:21 pm | Permalink

    As a lifelong Wichitan, I feel compelled to point out that our city has a tradition of decorating and lighting CHRISTMAS trees. The trees reflecting on the bend of the Little Arkansas across from the art museum are a beautiful sight. As a child, I remember going downtown on Thanksgiving night to watch the Christmas lighting ceremony. It is a wonderful childhood memory.I know that this time of year can be somewhat annoying to those who do not celebrate Christmas, whether it be for religious reasons or personal ones. But why get all bent out of shape over a Christmas tree? Last year, did any of us look at the “Community” Tree and say, “Wow, it looks so different this year — it looks so multi-cultural.” No, we looked at it and said, “Okay, call it what you will, but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck…” you get my point.

  20. Jed
    Posted November 9, 2005 at 9:47 am | Permalink

    Gertie,Even though I’m not christian, I have no problem with christmas trees, in fact I rather enjoy them! My problem is what happens when government gets involved in religion and religious symbols.There was a time, not too long ago in our history, when nonchristians were barred from testifying in court, were considered unfit to adopt children or hold office, were discriminated against at most levels of sociey. When the government is perceived as favoring one religious view, it’s also seen as against the rest!I am a citizen of this country. I pay taxes. I contribute to the society. While I don’t expect any favored treatment because of my religious views, I don’t expect others to get it for theirs, either!

  21. Gertie
    Posted November 12, 2005 at 8:46 pm | Permalink

    Jed — How is calling the tree a Christmas tree considered “favored treatment because of religious views?” If we had a giant Buddha in the middle of downtown, would we call it a “big fat guy in a diaper” just so the Christians and the Jews wouldn’t be offended or think that the Buddhists were getting special treatment as taxpayers? I certainly understand the separation of church and state, but call things what they are and stop being so overly sensitive! I swear — half the people on this board are looking for things to upset them!

  22. Ed Friedemann
    Posted November 12, 2005 at 9:16 pm | Permalink

    Santa brings Christmas Trees, and lots of joy for children, sweethearts, and good tiding for everybody.

    It’s an American cultural tradition. And it going to stay that way.

  23. Jed
    Posted November 13, 2005 at 2:32 am | Permalink

    Gertie,As I said, I have no problem with christmas trees! Put them up in front of your homes, businesses and churches, wear ‘em for earrings, send ‘em on christmas cards, use ‘em for wallpaper on your computer! Just don’t get them involved with the government. Same goes for symbols of any religion. As much as you want it to, the government,by law, cannot take sides in whatever little religious war you want to perpetrate. Get over it!

  24. Brian
    Posted November 13, 2005 at 2:53 am | Permalink

    It’s not called a CHRIST-mas tree for nothing. Oy vay!!

  25. Jed
    Posted November 13, 2005 at 3:44 am | Permalink

    Oy Vay? Funny, you don’t type Jewish!