Paul  Kengor

It isn’t right to take the most common symbol of the season, found in every household that celebrates Christmas, and demand it be called something else. It disunites Christians from a unifying symbol that bonds them across their wide-ranging differences and denominations.

And aside from the spiritual aspect, it isn’t right from a technical standpoint.

Overall, it entails going out of the way to arrogantly rename something you have no right to rename.

Yet, this is what happens every year in Pittsburgh—at Christmas time. Whether the new-speak architects realize it or not, they have—in the name of unity—affronted Christians during their special time.

Of course, all of that is obvious. It has outraged me for years.

And yet, that said, on further reflection, I’ve recently come to think that the name change is not so bad. Consider:

First, this year’s Unity Tree has a sponsor, the healthcare company Highmark. It has been rechristened the “Highmark Unity Tree.”

Well, on further reflection, the concept of a business sponsor is fitting. Commercialism has hijacked the religious holiday. Spending money buying things is the chief devotion for Americans this time of year. Far more deliberation is done in stores shopping than in churches praying. As a Christian, I must concede this truth.

Hence, it seems appropriate that the Unity Tree is elevated nearer Black Friday than Christmas morning. It honors not Jesus Christ but materialism. The sponsor of the Christmas tree is Christ; the sponsor of the Unity Tree is business. No argument from me.

Second, “unity” is a synonym for “diversity.” Had those who divined “Unity Tree” suffered more time in our universities, they would have designated it the “Diversity Tree,” which, incidentally, would have been a boon for tourism, drawing liberals everywhere in an annual pilgrimage to the Steel City. (The mayor’s office blew that one.) Among the American left and campus community in particular, diversity is not only the buzzword but the central object of homage; it is the contemporary babe in the manger.

Of course, needless to say, excluding Christ from Christmas is not an act of diversity. It excludes, not includes. This is the ongoing fraud perpetuated by “diversity’s” disciples.

Third, barring “Christ” from the tree is a tribute to secularism. What else is the Unity Tree, really, but a monument to secularism?

In sum, what we have with the Unity Tree is a tree that honors not Christ but secularism, commercialism, and the sham that is “diversity.” If you think about it, this unholy trinity is truly what Christmas has become.

Yes, Pittsburgh has a symbol alright—an image that stands apart from Christ, separated from Christ. Maybe the do-gooders never intended that. But, hey, once you remove Christ from His place, it’s a slippery slope.

Merry Christmas, everyone.