Empty Crosses

  • Thread starter Thread starter But_for_Grace
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
InnocentIII:
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.
Click to expand...
The “Christus Rex” is what I’ve heard it called. Yes, this is the one I have. It’s fairly old.
 
An empty cross is ambiguous. Is it the cross waiting for Christ? Is it the cross after Christ has died but before He has risen? Is it the cross after Christ has died and has risen? Is it our personal cross?
 
Many people had been crucified. How do you distinguish a cross which refers back to the cross on which Christ was Crucified? I N R I

Especially if the sculpturer has time to put flower decorations,etc, but no time to put I N R I

The ressurected Christ in front of the cross. Does it have the wounds?

Remember Moses whose hands they wrould lift up everytime they were losing in battle? A Corpus hanging on the cross is analogous to the hands of Moses being lifted up NOT BY MOSES BUT BY HIS COMPANIONS. A statue of a risen Christ in font of a cross with hands raised IS NOT ANALOGOUS TO MOSES WITH HANDS RAISED BY OTHERS BECAUSE THERE, CHRIST IS THE ONE DOING THE LIFTING OF HIS HANDS UNLIKE IN THE CASE OF THE NAILS.
 
The Eurasian:
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?
          • ++
            QUOTE]
I think that it is fine to keep the bare crosses. They are a symbol of what we believe. If they bother you give them to a Protestant friend.
Click to expand...
 
In Carmelite monasteries, every monk/nun has a bare cross in cell. The point is to remind the Carmelite that he himself is to be up on that cross with Jesus.

The bare cross/crucifix thing – as a devotional object in the home, not as a symbol in the sanctuary, where it must be a crucifix – is a far overblown controversy to my mind. Both symbols express something indispensable about our faith.
 
40.png
mercygate:
In Carmelite monasteries, every monk/nun has a bare cross in cell. The point is to remind the Carmelite that he himself is to be up on that cross with Jesus.

The bare cross/crucifix thing – as a devotional object in the home, not as a symbol in the sanctuary, where it must be a crucifix – is a far overblown controversy to my mind. Both symbols express something indispensable about our faith.
Click to expand...
I know! I’m always amazed that this comes up, time and again, in these forums. The Church permits both. In fact, if you look at most steeples on older churches, you’ll notice that they aren’t crucifixes, but plain crosses. The Church Herself uses this symbolism. There is no doctrinaire position to take, outside the fact that there must be a Crucifix in the Sanctuary.
 
40.png
mercygate:
In Carmelite monasteries, every monk/nun has a bare cross in cell. The point is to remind the Carmelite that he himself is to be up on that cross with Jesus.

The bare cross/crucifix thing – as a devotional object in the home, not as a symbol in the sanctuary, where it must be a crucifix – is a far overblown controversy to my mind. Both symbols express something indispensable about our faith.
Click to expand...
I agree!
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/8/8_3_15.gif
 
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?

Hi all
This is one of those questions that when we are standing in front of Christ on that day, we will be ashamed of how we spent so much time on a subject of so little importance. If the Catholic stance on a cross without Christ on it is unaceptable, then this a perfect example of the Lording over of the leadership of your church. You claim that we use scripture out of text but you just did the same thing that you accuse us of. Preaching Christ crucified doesn’t mean that we preach that he is still up there.
We also don’t take his death on the cross lightly, nor do we try and forget the pain and suffering he whent through. What a bunch of arrogant and self centered people. Weather you do or don’t wear a crucifix doesn’t determine how strong of a Christian you are. This is not a Salvation issue.
Thanks.
Click to expand...
 
40.png
NonDenom:
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?

Hi all
This is one of those questions that when we are standing in front of Christ on that day, we will be ashamed of how we spent so much time on a subject of so little importance. If the Catholic stance on a cross without Christ on it is unaceptable, then this a perfect example of the Lording over of the leadership of your church. You claim that we use scripture out of text but you just did the same thing that you accuse us of. Preaching Christ crucified doesn’t mean that we preach that he is still up there.
We also don’t take his death on the cross lightly, nor do we try and forget the pain and suffering he whent through. What a bunch of arrogant and self centered people. Weather you do or don’t wear a crucifix doesn’t determine how strong of a Christian you are. This is not a Salvation issue.
Thanks.
Click to expand...
I think that several people here have pointed out that both the bare cross and the crucifix are symbols. I certainly wouldn’t judge a Protestant for wearing a bare Cross. I know Catholics that do so, also.

I do get annoyed when I am told by a Protestant that “We wear this cross because we believe that Christ rose from the dead.” As if Catholics didn’t. I have also had two very annoying conversations with people who didn’t want to accept my assurance that Catholics do believe that Jesus rose from the dead. They were basing their beliefs on the crucifix. Of course, I have enough sense to know this is an extreme minority view-I was brought up Baptist afterall-I still find it frustrating.

I am not certain what you mean by Lording over anyone.
Click to expand...
 
Our church has a plain/empty cross on top and Crucifix inside.
A cross with the risen Christ on it is not technically a Crucifix in spite of what the religious goods stores advertise it as. The Crucifix, has for millennia, reminded Catholics that Christ redeemed us by his death on the cross.
 
40.png
NonDenom:
Weather you do or don’t wear a crucifix doesn’t determine how strong of a Christian you are. This is not a Salvation issue.
Click to expand...
I agree with both of your statements here. I wear a plain cross myself at times.
 
A lot of churches look like Dracula’s castle…No crucifixes and no holy water. What exactly are the clergy and the liturgists afraid of?
 
33 posts!!! Out of some 30,000 Christian religions, most of these i suppose are Protestant religions. How many of these Protestant religions teach that a sculpture or picture is a graven image?

Despite their VAST knowledge of verses of the Bible, each Protestant BRINGING A BIBLE IN THEIR SUNDAY SERVICE, WITH BALLPEN AND PAPER, LISTENING TO THEIR PROTESTANT PREACHER, How many of them are aware of the BRONZE SERPENT ON A POLE THAT MOSES WAS COMMANDED TO DO?

It is the REASON INSIDE ONE"S MIND that matters.

Remember St. Thomas Moore in King Henry VIII’s time. He said something like this. It would be ironic if I do the same thing as you, and then you go to heaven because you did not know, and I go to hell because I know.
Also, I think Jesus also said something like this. “unless I be lifted up…”

I think Protestants are kind of like Muslims. Although Protestants often talk about Christ’s Blood, THEY DON’T WANT TO BE REMINDED OF A GOD WHO SUFFERED AND WAS KILLED. BUT THAT IS HOW MUCH JESUS CHRIST LOVES US!!!

Maybe what they want is a Jesus Christ who saved us by donating BLOOD to the RED CROSS.

That’s why, maybe that is the reason why ONLY CATHOLICS ARE STIGMATICS. I don’t know about the Baptist girl in the 1980’s whose palms got red or bled(?) without any wounds because one possibility is that there are medicines that thin the blood, maybe so thin that the blood will pass through the skin without any wounds.
,%between%
 
Maybe some history would be helpful.

The history of the practices and development of the cross and crucifix is complicated. In the early Church (long before the Reformation), Christians approached the crucifixion from the “Easter side” rather than the “Good Friday” side - the artwork of the day in Roman catacombs show a complete absence of the crucifixion. The earliest paintings show Christ with a diadem on his head and vested in a colobium, with open eyes and outstretched arms - similar to the “Touchdown Jesus,” actually (I tried to find such a picture on the net; no such luck. The picture I have is from Cross and Crucifix, C.E. Pocknee, 1962). The Early Church was simply more Easter-oriented than Good Friday-oriented. I for one am glad we have found a balance.

The 12th and 13th century Franciscans developed the understanding of the Passion in their worship and devotion as an event be acknowledged and revered, rather than feared. It was then that realistic crucifixes (with a suffering Christ) began to appear, but it wasn’t until the 15th century Grünewald works became widespread that the crucifix as we know it today emerged. Some Protestant historians say that the Protestant reticence came from the crucifix being a new invention to the Church (not quite true, but perhaps generally perceived by those who didn’t get out much), but more evidence leads to the fact that much of the later Protestant influence came from the Celts and Northeastern Europe, and there was no tradition of crucifixes being used in their worship, even before the Reformation.

I think care has to be taken before anti-Catholic AND anti-Protestant attitudes try to take sides on an issue that history clearly shows was long and complicated at best.

I use a crucifix during Lent - and more and more Protestants are adopting such a practice. Some Protestants make no use of symbols whatsoever, so it is a moot point for them.

O+
 
:hmmm:

all have very intresting points, but it seems that I was not clear enough. What bothered me is that they praised the cross for being empty. it is not a matter of history (this church is only a paltry 20 years old). They forget about the bronze serpent and how looking upon it brought healing, in fact they claimed the very opposite that the crucifix was a useless and hollow symbol. What makes it worse is that the man who was speaking was raised catholic and trained as a priest but fell away before ordination (unfortunately I don’t know much more of his story than that but he vows he can “set me right” about the Catholic Church)

NonDenom - I apreciate your honesty but your tact could use some improvement 👍
 
if it is empty to make a dig at catholics, then it is unacceptable. but it has been a Christian symbol (with and without the corpus) for so long i don’t understand how people can say it is unacceptable. the crucifix allows me to meditate on His death, the empty cross allows me to meditate on His resurrection (which Paul says that without the resurrection, our gospel is void and we should be pitied among men). they are both acceptable. in mass however, we must see the corpus for we are partaking of the sacrifice of the cross, so an empty cross doesn’t fit as the central figure in a catholic mass. but since protestants do not partake of the sacrifice, then there is nothing wrong with having an empty cross as it is also an ancient Christian symbol.
 
A lot of churches look like Dracula’s castle…No crucifixes and no holy water. What exactly are the clergy and the liturgists afraid of?
Click to expand...
Not Drac himself apparently. In movies and books when they need to ward him off they always scramble for a Crucifix, Holy water and a Priest, no matter what demonination! 😉

I, myself prefer only a Crucifix, not only because of 1Col. 1:23, but also because it identifys me as a Catholic. I love my Faith and enjoy displaying it. By wearing the Crucifix, words are not necessary and, sometimes, causes a conversation to begin…“You’re a Catholic?”
 
O.S. Luke:
I think care has to be taken before anti-Catholic AND anti-Protestant attitudes try to take sides on an issue that history clearly shows was long and complicated at best.

I use a crucifix during Lent - and more and more Protestants are adopting such a practice. Some Protestants make no use of symbols whatsoever, so it is a moot point for them.

O+
Click to expand...
I think that we should be careful here on these forums to put the words some or a few in front of the word Protestants. The term Protestant covers a wide range of beliefs and practices, everything from extreme fundamentalists to evanglicals to Lutherans to very liberal thinkers.
 
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 love to look at our Lord on my crucifix. I hold him when I pray. I cant think of one thing wrong with a crucifix - and I have debated several hard core “empty crossers” spewing enough garbage to make me totally despise the empty cross, but I don’t. The empty cross is OK - but I prefer Christ on the Cross…

phil
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top