Culture War Continues: Notre Dame University Mass

[Crumpy]

I probably just didn’t notice it before, but the processional cross for the Sunday-televised Mass from Notre Dame University is a bare cross, and does not bear the image of the crucified Christ.

Yeah, yeah, I’m an old fart and just like things the way they used to be.

But, a bare cross is just not the same thing as a crucifix depicting Jesus crucified. Having been a Catholic all my life, I am still at a loss to understand why the empty cross is a better icon than the crucified Christ?

I suppose the logic is the other way around, that an empty cross is better than a procession headed by nothing.

Actually, before Vatican II, the procession was rather minimal: just a signal, almost always a bell of some sort to announce the beginning of Mass, and then the minimal walk from a doorway in the sanctuary to the foot of the altar.

Vaticann II brought the Mass in the “vernacular” which mean in the common language. But it also brought about the free-standing altar closer to the congregation. And, then, the procession itself became a big deal, usually as it is nowadays, from the rear of the assembly to the center of the church.

In its highest form, at the National Shrine Basilica in Wash DC, the procession on the high holy days consists of hundreds of priests and bishops. That seems to be an excess in itself, taking maybe 10 minutes just to get all these guys in there. So what’s important? – what’s at the beginning of the procession (the cross), what’s in the middle (all the clerics), or what’s at the end of the procession (the chief celebrant)? When everything is to such an excess, it’s hard for me to understand “the point” or the “focal point” to be specific.

To belabor the point a bit more, an empty cross makes about as much sense to me, as if the processional book of the gospel was actually just blank pages.

 

[Fidei_Defensor]

Crumpy:

To belabor the point a bit more, an empty cross makes about as much sense to me, as if the processional book of the gospel was actually just blank pages.

That’s beautiful.

 

[palmas85]

Crumpy:

I probably just didn’t notice it before, but the processional cross for the Sunday-televised Mass from Notre Dame University is a bare cross, and does not bear the image of the crucified Christ.

Yeah, yeah, I’m an old fart and just like things the way they used to be.

But, a bare cross is just not the same thing as a crucifix depicting Jesus crucified. Having been a Catholic all my life, I am still at a loss to understand why the empty cross is a better icon than the crucified Christ?

I suppose the logic is the other way around, that an empty cross is better than a procession headed by nothing.

Actually, before Vatican II, the procession was rather minimal: just a signal, almost always a bell of some sort to announce the beginning of Mass, and then the minimal walk from a doorway in the sanctuary to the foot of the altar.

Vaticann II brought the Mass in the “vernacular” which mean in the common language. But it also brought about the free-standing altar closer to the congregation. And, then, the procession itself became a big deal, usually as it is nowadays, from the rear of the assembly to the center of the church.

In its highest form, at the National Shrine Basilica in Wash DC, the procession on the high holy days consists of hundreds of priests and bishops. That seems to be an excess in itself, taking maybe 10 minutes just to get all these guys in there. So what’s important? – what’s at the beginning of the procession (the cross), what’s in the middle (all the clerics), or what’s at the end of the procession (the chief celebrant)? When everything is to such an excess, it’s hard for me to understand “the point” or the “focal point” to be specific.

To belabor the point a bit more, an empty cross makes about as much sense to me, as if the processional book of the gospel was actually just blank pages.

Protestants usually reject the crucufix while Catholics embrace it. I remember protestant schoolmates s used to say that we(Catholics) kept Christ on the cross so that he could die over and over again in the Mass. Apparently many Catholic churches are doing away with any crucifixes at all in a bow to that opinion and so as to not offend anyones sensibilities… It is not uncommon these days to find churches that don’t have any crucifix at all, anywhere, in violation of the rubrics.

Ecumenism at work.

I agree with your analogy and would add this, a cross without Jesus is just two pieces of wood. Thats all.

 

[jbuck919]

Isn’t there still a regulation (not that anyone pays any attention to those) that the cross in certain contexts must be a crucifix?

 

[palmas85]

jbuck919:

Isn’t there still a regulation (not that anyone pays any attention to those) that the cross in certain contexts must be a crucifix?

The GIRM requires that there be a crucifix in or near the Sanctuary. Some of the "modern " churches that have completely done away with a crucifix will sometimes have one in the entrance procession and I guess that fulfills the requirement.

Not to have a crucifix is a clear violation of the rubrics of the Mass.

 

[AJV]

Crumpy:

I probably just didn’t notice it before, but the processional cross for the Sunday-televised Mass from Notre Dame University is a bare cross, and does not bear the image of the crucified Christ.

Yeah, yeah, I’m an old fart and just like things the way they used to be.

But, a bare cross is just not the same thing as a crucifix depicting Jesus crucified. Having been a Catholic all my life, I am still at a loss to understand why the empty cross is a better icon than the crucified Christ?

I suppose the logic is the other way around, that an empty cross is better than a procession headed by nothing.

Actually, before Vatican II, the procession was rather minimal: just a signal, almost always a bell of some sort to announce the beginning of Mass, and then the minimal walk from a doorway in the sanctuary to the foot of the altar.

Vaticann II brought the Mass in the “vernacular” which mean in the common language. But it also brought about the free-standing altar closer to the congregation. And, then, the procession itself became a big deal, usually as it is nowadays, from the rear of the assembly to the center of the church.

In its highest form, at the National Shrine Basilica in Wash DC, the procession on the high holy days consists of hundreds of priests and bishops. That seems to be an excess in itself, taking maybe 10 minutes just to get all these guys in there. So what’s important? – what’s at the beginning of the procession (the cross), what’s in the middle (all the clerics), or what’s at the end of the procession (the chief celebrant)? When everything is to such an excess, it’s hard for me to understand “the point” or the “focal point” to be specific.

To belabor the point a bit more, an empty cross makes about as much sense to me, as if the processional book of the gospel was actually just blank pages.

While your point about the empty cross has merit, I don’t see what’s wrong with a procession. For Pontifical and solemn High masses in the older rite there were processions. What about the older Papal processions- all the guards and flabella and dignitaries- was there no focus then? A procession has always been a feature of public liturgy.

 

[puzzleannie]

I heard the same thing a few weeks ago, and asked a young friend who is an ND student and attends Mass at the chapel used for the televised Mass. she says the processional cross they use does indeed have a crucifix. Maybe they used a different one for the Mass you saw, or it was turned around?

She and her parents were pleasantly surprised that the Masses they have attended thus far follow the rubrics and GIRM (all 3 are EHMCs and lectors in our very orthodox parish and know what is proper). Evidently you can attend Mass in several venues on campus from rather traditional to contemporary Christian music to charismatic. ND was one of the original sites of the Catholic Charismatic renewal and evidently there is still a small core group that worship this way with prayer groups etc. She says there have been two Latin Masses since she has been there but does not know who said them.

 

[John_Lilburne]

From the 2002 GIRM n. 122: “… The cross adorned with a figure of Christ crucified and perhaps carried in procession may be placed next to the altar to serve as the altar cross, in which case it ought to be the only cross used; otherwise it is put in a dignified place. …”

 

[Domer1997]

There are two professional crosses used in the Basilica of the Sacred Heart at Notre Dame. One is a very ornate gold crucifix and one is a plain cross (without the corpus) with stained glass in parts. Usually, the gold cross is used. But, I believe the plain cross was probably used most recently due to the Lenten season.

 

[Domer1997]

I’m an idiot! On my last post I actually wrote “professional crosses”. Wow…I feel like a major bonehead. I meant to write “processional crosses!”. It’s a good think God loves the ignorant too…ha-ha!

 

[ThomasMore1535]

palmas85:

Protestants usually reject the crucufix while Catholics embrace it. I remember protestant schoolmates s used to say that we(Catholics) kept Christ on the cross so that he could die over and over again in the Mass. Apparently many Catholic churches are doing away with any crucifixes at all in a bow to that opinion and so as to not offend anyones sensibilities… It is not uncommon these days to find churches that don’t have any crucifix at all, anywhere, in violation of the rubrics.

Ecumenism at work.

I agree with your analogy and would add this, a cross without Jesus is just two pieces of wood. Thats all.

Indeed, I would agree that a rejection of the corpus on the cross is a bad thing, if the intention of doing so is to adopt a Protestant mindset.

I would, however, add that if you do see this abuse, a good form of mortification would be to look at that empty cross as being the cross that God is inviting you yourself to take up and carry, in union with His Sacrifice. Now, I’m not saying that it’s right to violate the rubrics, obviously, but if you ever do see such a violation, look at that empty cross as waiting to be taken up by you, in union with the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

That way, you can turn what would otherwise be a distraction during mass into a wonderful way to unite your sufferings with those of Our Lord.

 

[Brendan]

A processional cross does not require a corpus.

For example, here is pic of the Cross of Cong, the processional cross used for centuries in the Cathedral of Tuam.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

What is required is that one be visable in the Sanctuary during the celebration of the Mass. This could (and should) be one that is permanently mounted, perhaps as part of a reredos.

This