Empty Crosses

  • Thread starter Thread starter But_for_Grace
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

But_for_Grace

Guest
As some of you may already know, my wife is still a prostestant (for whom I am still praying, of course). In her church, as well as every other protestant church that I have been in, the cross is empty, that is that it lacks the corpus. In fact today they were praising the fact that they had an empty cross.

Now here is my beef, I cannot stand empty crosses, they seem so hollow to me.

1Co 1:23 But we preach Christ crucified: unto the Jews indeed a stumblingblock, and unto the Gentiles foolishness: (DRB)

Anyone else feel my pain?
 
I put empty crosses and the touchdown crucifixes in the same category. Unacceptable.

PF
 
It depends on why its empty, is it fear of the crucifix as many Protestants are, or was it a cross like at a cemetery?

If its in a Protestant church and in central view without the body of Christ then it is a hollow image and unacceptable.

Also I dont like the reasoning where “Christ arose = Cross empty”.
It should be a picture of an empty tomb if thats what they want to convey. An empty cross means nothing nowdays because protestants dont want to think about the blood and gore and horror of the site, just think happy thoughts.

Anyway my priest said a few Sundays ago that in the early centuries Christians did not have Christ on the crosses because the horror of the punishment was well burned into their brain of just how bad it was from seeing crucifixions first hand. So that was understandable, today its not done for that reason.
 
We know that He rose. This gives us hope. We need to be reminded of the pain and sacrifice. Too many have forgotten His sacrifice.
 
An empty cross could be Your Cross.

That is, I don’t mean you you, I mean the person can have an empty cross and look at it to remind them to take up their cross and follow.
 
40.png
WanderAimlessly:
I put empty crosses and the touchdown crucifixes in the same category. Unacceptable.

PF
Click to expand...
Wander Aimlessly,

Pardon my ignorance, but what is a “touchdown crucifix”?
 
But For Grace,

I voted that they are “acceptable” because I didn’t like the alternative. But “acceptable” certainly doesn’t mean “as good as a crucifix.”
  • Liberian
 
But for Grace:
As some of you may already know, my wife is still a prostestant (for whom I am still praying, of course). In her church, as well as every other protestant church that I have been in, the cross is empty, that is that it lacks the corpus. In fact today they were praising the fact that they had an empty cross.

Now here is my beef, I cannot stand empty crosses, they seem so hollow to me.

1Co 1:23 But we preach Christ crucified: unto the Jews indeed a stumblingblock, and unto the Gentiles foolishness: (DRB)

Anyone else feel my pain?
Click to expand...
I get what your saying but to say they’re unacceptable would be to say that plain crosses worn around the neck are unacceptable. It still highlights His sacrifice, just also saying He rose. Ofcourse though a Crucifix (with Corpus) is the most appropriate thing in a Church for mass re-represents His eternal sacrifice.
 
vicia3:
We know that He rose. This gives us hope. We need to be reminded of the pain and sacrifice. Too many have forgotten His sacrifice.
Click to expand...
AMEN to that. I have a horror of empty crosses (no doubt a hangover from my Congregational relatives) within the church.

The cross per se is the symbol of Christianity and is perfectly understandable without the corpus on the outside of buildings or in cemeteries. Within the church however it is a constant reminder of Our Lord’s love. I find myself constantly gazing up at our sanctuary crucifix in awe and gratitude.

I suspect, though one can never tell motivations, that the empty cross is more comfortable for people these days - we no longer like to be reminded of sacrifice or indeed that Christ died on our behalf. Too much guilt there. It is a way of banishing Christ to heaven where we can contemplate him at a distance. I have noted that those sanctuaries with empty crosses are also those where the Tabernacle is hidden away.
 
I can’t vote because it depends on the reason that a person is wearing an empty cross. If it is a symbol of their religious beliefs and a way to express to the world what they belive then I, personally, see nothing wrong with an empty cross. Infact, I think that this is the main reason that most people wear a bare cross, simply as a way to broadcast their faith and give them comfort.

If though the person is making a statement against Catholism then I would find the empty cross unacceptable. I also find it a bit misguided if they believe that the empty cross signifies Christ risen. Jesus came down dead from the cross, so an empty cross should represent his death.
 
Generally, I like a crucifix.

Some orders, though, also will use an empty cross as a reminder we are to take up our cross and follow Him.
 
There is no Corpus in Protestant crosses because Protestants believe that the Corpus is a graven image.

All those explanations that Christ is already risen are only alibies for their view that the Corpus is a graven image.

Another is that they just want to do things different from what Catholics do. That’s why they are Protestants from the word PROTEST.

God wants obedience. Jesus Christ was obedient to the Father, even unto death!!! Protestants however want DISOBEDIENCE.
to things Catholic. I look at our local Protestant TV channel, and there are several different Protestant Denominations there each taking their turn every hour. Though they are different denominations or religions from each other, THEY ARE ALL UNITED AGAINST THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. If you hear them talking to each other in tv programs, you would think they belong to the same religion as though Protestantism was just 1 religion.

Many Protestants I think are people who try to keep the commandments. Maybe they are just people who like to enter heaven THEIR OWN WAY, THE HARD WAY!!! JUST LIKE THE DISCIPLES WHO NO LONGER FOLLOWED JESUS WHEN THEY UNDERSTOOD CLEARLY THAT JESUS SAID TO EAT HIS BODY AND DRINK HIS BLOOD TO HAVE ETERNAL LIFE.

Can you imagine for example Catholics who split from the Catholic Church to follow King Henry VIII who split from the Catholic Church and form his own church so that his adultery will be acceptable to God??? When King Henry VIII was still alive and could harm them bodily, perhaps it was still humanly understandable. BUT AFTER KING HENRY VIII ALREADY DIED AND COULD NO LONGER HARM THEM, WHY STILL CONTINUE WITH THAT CHURCH OF KING HENRY VIII. WHY NOT IMMEDIATEDLY RETURN BACK TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH???
 
BUT AFTER KING HENRY VIII ALREADY DIED AND COULD NO LONGER HARM THEM, WHY STILL CONTINUE WITH THAT CHURCH OF KING HENRY VIII. WHY NOT IMMEDIATEDLY RETURN BACK TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH???

For at time they did when the Catholic Queen Mary ruled after Henry VIII’s son, Edward ruled (as a child) whose rule was in the hands of Protestant nobles. These nobles were determined to keep the so-called reformation going. They had stolen nearly all the Church lands and other goods, destroyed monasteries and convents. And many church buildings were on the land of the local lord (and still are), so if he went Protestant the people under his authority, which was nearly everyone in the area, had no where else to worship. They were dependent on their lords being faithful to the Church.

Queen Mary persecuted the Protestant nobles and others because of advice she received from her chief adviser, a Cardinal (whose name escapes me at the moment). This entrenched the Protestants in their opposition to reconciliation with the Church.

When Mary died and Elizabeth took the throne Protestantism was imposed on the people by the crown and the nobles. Anyone who protested was tortured and killed. It became a crime for a man to become a Catholic priest.

Anyway, I can’t give you a detailed history of the reformation in England here, but it was much more complex than merely returning to Catholicism upon the death of Henry VIII.
 
**I didn’t answer the poll, because my option wasn’t there. I want a crucifix in Catholic churches, but do not mind if Protestants have an empty cross, because I understand that it goes with their theology. **
 
40.png
twiztedseraph:
Ofcourse though a Crucifix (with Corpus) is the most appropriate thing in a Church for mass re-represents His eternal sacrifice.
Click to expand...
It’s the only one acceptable in the Sanctuary of the church during the offering of the Sacrifice. Some churches get around this or accomodate it, depending on your outlook, by setting the processional crucifix in the Sanctuary during Mass.

I don’t mind the empty cross, as long as I’m not beaten over the head by some Protestant about how “Jesus isn’t on the Cross anymore.” Using that logic, we couldn’t display a Nativity scene (He isn’t a baby anymore). There are some beautiful crosses without the Corpus. They don’t belong in the Sanctuary, though.

I’ve only ever seen a few Risen Christ crosses (what some mockingly call the “Touchdown Jesus.” They shouldn’t, as His Arms are raised in benediction and who couldn’t do without His blessing?) that were well done (I own one, a hand-carved one, where the Corpus is clothed in the robes of a priest and wearing a crown). These shouldn’t be in the Sanctuary, either, but if churches want to display them elsewhere, I think it’s fine. Good ones are few and far between, however. An ugly depiction of Our Lord is still ugly.
 
40.png
Della:
Queen Mary persecuted the Protestant nobles and others because of advice she received from her chief adviser, a Cardinal (whose name escapes me at the moment). This entrenched the Protestants in their opposition to reconciliation with the Church.
Click to expand...
Reginald Cardinal Pole, papal legate and Archbishop of Canterbury, and cousin to the queen. His mother was the last Plantagenent princess and was beheaded by Henry (she had a pretty stout claim to the throne). The Cardinal died within hours of Queen Mary.
 
I do have Protestant crosses and I do not know what to do with them. One time I raised the window of our vehicle. It caused a small vertical line to form, and against a small horizontal line that was already there, IT WAS A SMALL CROSS. And then just a few days after this, i looked at the ground, and there was this small Protestant cross with the flower/plant decoration but no Corpus.

We also have a large one, about one foot high. i think it must have been given to us as a gift or bought without knowing it was a Protestant cross.

What do you think should be done with them? Give them away to some Protestant? Destroy them? Bury them? Grind them? Sell them? Throw them so somebody might find them? Throw them in the dumpster?
          • ++
            Della
I understand all those nobles and lords intimidating people because like King Henry VIII, they were also killing people. They had properties, wealth connected with such. They were profiting as a result of their religion which King Henry VIII founded. BUT WHY SHOULD SUCH NOBLES USE A RELIGION WHICH THEY THEMSELVES DO NOT BELIEVE - JUST TO AMASS WEALTH??? And people in America today where they are not persecuted and can change religion, some well educated and nationally prominent in government and economics for example, WHY STICK TO THAT RELIGION OF KING HENRY VIII.? THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND TODAY, WHY DOESN’T SHE JUST BRING BACK HER FOLLOWERS TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH?

Also the Lutherans. Luther was right that it was wrong to be selling indulgences. But after the Catholic Church corrected this wrong pointed out by former Catholic Priest Luther, WHY DID NOT LUTHER GO BACK TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH??? So also with his followers. WHY DON’T THEY GO BACK TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH?
 
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
I’ve only ever seen a few Risen Christ crosses (what some mockingly call the “Touchdown Jesus.” They shouldn’t, as His Arms are raised in benediction and who couldn’t do without His blessing?) that were well done (I own one, a hand-carved one, where the Corpus is clothed in the robes of a priest and wearing a crown). These shouldn’t be in the Sanctuary, either, but if churches want to display them elsewhere, I think it’s fine. Good ones are few and far between, however. An ugly depiction of Our Lord is still ugly.
Click to expand...
These “Risen Christ” crosses are a relatively recent innovation and I suspect are in part an atempt to combine the Catholic crucifix with the Protestant “living Christ” theology. I have seen some lovely ones too but I have also seen some God-awful ones in modern sanctuaries. There is an element of getting away from the “old catholicism” in their use however. There is also an older type of cross sometimes used in the Sanctuary is the “Victory Cross” with Our Lord dressed in priestly robes and crown but without the arms raised in benediction i.e He stands on the cross with His arms outspread representing Christ the priest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top