Has Benedict XVI disposed of the CCC?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TNT
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
From descriptions I have read about the scourging given to people before crucifixion, you are correct, they barely looked like human beings. It does not hurt us to be reminded of what Jesus suffered for our sins so we could be with him.
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B
 
I liked the JPII crozier so much that I wear a miniature of it. The bent crossbeam is a constant reminder to me of the weight of my sin that Jesus was bearing. I agree with those who remind us that the crucifixion was ugly (“and we hid, as it were, our faces from him”), and to make a beautiful piece of art out of it is to turn it into something that it was not.

DaveBj
 
saint_rafael said:
It’s weird and Crooked Crucifixes have generally been used by Satanists over the centuries for mocking.
Click to expand...
That is irrelevant though. Satanists have also claimed several other Christian symbols like the cross of St. Peter which is basically an upside down cross because St. Peter was hung upside down. The all seeing eye was and still is a Christian symbol but it has been taken up by the masons.

I am fine with JPII’s cross.
 
Bishops can use any crozier they want. Traditionally, the Pope uses one with a cross at the top, but there is not law one way or the other.

The one that John Paul II used was designed by St. John of the Cross. It was deliberately designed to look like a tree from a vision that St. John of the Cross had of Christ hanging of the cross embracing the world, that’s why it is bent downward.

Benedict has used several croziers since his election. He also prefers to use the Eastern Rite crucifix in processions instead of the Roman crucifix.

The Eastern Rite crucifix is the one with two horizontal bars. This crucifix is the crucifix carried by an acolyte when a patriarch is preciding.

JR 🙂
 
kristie_m said:
Well, thank goodness! When I read the topic, I thought perhaps someone was suggesting that the Holy Father had decided to do away with the Catechism of the Catholic Church! :eek:
Click to expand...
lol, that’s what I thought, too.
I was thinking, oh great. What’s next?

I liked JPII’s crucifix alright. The fact that he, the pope, carried it makes it seem rather traditional to me. And I hate, HATE modern art in general.

Now this:
40.png
Lepanto:
img246.imageshack.us/img246/6172/popepompgs5.jpg
Click to expand...
is an abomination. Thanks Lepanto. Now that I’ve seen it, how do I “un-see” it?
 
I am glad that this thread is about Pope John Paul’s cross. When I first saw the title, I thought that someone was accusing Pope Benedict of disposing of the Catechism of the Catholic Church!
 
I liked Both The Realistic silver crucifix and the Gold cross. It depends on the taste in art or symbolism the Pontiff is trying to convey. Maybe that the Pope is trying to convey a message of renewal and continuity with the past by using the Gold Cross of Pius IX? He could also be using it since he has a deep interest in the arts? We must also rememeber John Paul suffered greatly under the hands of the Communists and he lost his whole family early in life. Possible the Silver Crucifix reflected all of his suffereing and the suffering of the people under the Hands of the Communists. The Gold Cross does look big next to Pope benedict maybe because he is of a small stature and not very tall or muscular. The Cross could also have been chosen so that the people look more at the cross and not on him.🤷 We can only presume
 
Let me differ from other Traditionalists in admitting that I rather like John Paul II’s Cross (though I do think the ‘new’ one is quite better, for a change). Yep, a lot of ‘modern art’ are horrible I’ll admit but that does not mean we should disregard all modern art in general.

It’s as if the two Crosses are emphasizing two beautiful different things here: the JPII Cross emphasizes the raw, brutal and ugly suffering of Jesus as the Lamb of God who is both Offerer and Victim while the Gold Cross emphasizes His Glory, Divinity and Majesty as the exalted Son of the Father who sits at the right Hand of God. Perhaps this is why the Pope chose to introduce the Cross in Easter in order to show this point? 🙂
 
ac_claire said:
lol, that’s what I thought, too.
I was thinking, oh great. What’s next?

I liked JPII’s crucifix alright. The fact that he, the pope, carried it makes it seem rather traditional to me. And I hate, HATE modern art in general.

Now this:

is an abomination. Thanks Lepanto. Now that I’ve seen it, how do I “un-see” it?
Click to expand...
Well, I’m sure no one wants my opinion, but here it is anyway. I really like the sculpture shown on the website Lepanto referred to. It has strength and majesty. Very different I will agree, but then beauty is in the eye of the beholder it is said. I like some of the more Gothic art and of course the Cathedrals of Europe are breathtaking. Have any of you been to Notre Dame in Paris? Westminster Abbey? Wonderful! Sometimes “different” and “new” aren’t all they are cracked up to be, but in this instance, I do like the sculpture shown. 👍 Peace.
 
I just returned from a bookstore where I was leafing through a copy of HH Pope Benedict XVI’s *Spes Salvi *(haven’t bought it yet). On the back of the dust cover, there is a photo of the Holy Father holding the pastoral staff of HH Pope John Paul II (may he rest in everlasting peace). It’s a good, close-up shot of the Crucifix. I found it interesting in that I thought the Corpus looked, well, rather traditional. I mention this because some have complained that the Corpus looked barely human. Looking at the picture, I fail to see why any would complain about it.

If anyone could post that particular picture, it might be interesting and pertinent to the discussion. I’m unable to do so.
 
patrick457 said:
Let me differ from other Traditionalists in admitting that I rather like John Paul II’s Cross (though I do think the ‘new’ one is quite better, for a change). Yep, a lot of ‘modern art’ are horrible I’ll admit but that does not mean we should disregard all modern art in general.

It’s as if the two Crosses are emphasizing two beautiful different things here: the JPII Cross emphasizes the raw, brutal and ugly suffering of Jesus as the Lamb of God who is both Offerer and Victim while the Gold Cross emphasizes His Glory, Divinity and Majesty as the exalted Son of the Father who sits at the right Hand of God. Perhaps this is why the Pope chose to introduce the Cross in Easter in order to show this point? 🙂
Click to expand...
I think this is the best post on this subject yet. Thanks for the perspective.
 
elt1956 said:
I like some of the more Gothic art and of course the Cathedrals of Europe are breathtaking. Have any of you been to Notre Dame in Paris? Westminster Abbey? Wonderful! Sometimes “different” and “new” aren’t all they are cracked up to be, but in this instance, I do like the sculpture shown. 👍 Peace.
Click to expand...
I just wish we had more Cathedrals here is the U.S. like they have in Europe. If you want to see one that really is a doozie, (pardon this expression) look at the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington D.C. I found it most awesome and on the par with many of Europe’s finest. It is the largest church in the western hemisphere and the 6th largest in the world. The national cathedral in D.C. does not even begin to compare in my humble opinion. For any of you there or who go there, it truly is a must see. Makes you proud to be Catholic
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
 
saint_rafael said:
Yes he has thank God. The new cross is the one Pope Puis IX used. Traditionally, Popes have used crosses as staffs. Slowly, Pope Benedict is bringing in some tradition.

The Crooked Creepy Crucifix should make Catholics shudder. It’s weird and Crooked Crucifixes have generally been used by Satanists over the centuries for mocking.
Click to expand...
Oh for Pete’s sake…

What makes me shudder is this kind of nonsense. With all due respect, can’t you give a pope the benefit of the doubt when it comes to selecting the style of crucifix he wants to use? Don’t you think there are more important things to worry about?

Peace,
Dante
 
saint_rafael said:
The Crooked Creepy Crucifix should make Catholics shudder. It’s weird and Crooked Crucifixes have generally been used by Satanists over the centuries for mocking.
Click to expand...
Erm, evidence (documentary, pictorial, whatnot)?

While I am glad that the Pope is bringing back some traditional stuff, I do think we should not get caught up too much in it. There’s still a lot of work to do.
 
DanteAlighieri said:
Oh for Pete’s sake…

What makes me shudder is this kind of nonsense. With all due respect, can’t you give a pope the benefit of the doubt when it comes to selecting the style of crucifix he wants to use? Don’t you think there are more important things to worry about?

Peace,
Dante
Click to expand...
I agree with you. I have found this poster’s mind and opinions about everything of and post Vatican II to be very closed. Opinionated would be mild.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
 
Deacon_Ed_B said:
I just wish we had more Cathedrals here is the U.S. like they have in Europe. If you want to see one that really is a doozie, (pardon this expression) look at the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington D.C. I found it most awesome and on the par with many of Europe’s finest. It is the largest church in the western hemisphere and the 6th largest in the world. The national cathedral in D.C. does not even begin to compare in my humble opinion. For any of you there or who go there, it truly is a must see. Makes you proud to be Catholic
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
Click to expand...
i agree, cathedrals are awesome and humbling. never been to the one in DC, but i have seen a number of them in europe. they are a strong and loud statement of our glory to God. 🙂
 
saint_rafael said:
The Crooked Creepy Crucifix should make Catholics shudder. It’s weird and Crooked Crucifixes have generally been used by Satanists over the centuries for mocking.
Click to expand...
That cross was not the creation of any satanic rite. It was designed by St. John of the Cross, one the Doctors of the Church. The reason that he is called a Doctor is because everything that he teaches is consistent with the Catholic faith. There is no error in his theology and there is not doubt in the mind of the Church as to his union with God.

John of the Cross saw that vision in one of his mystical experiences where Christ appeared to him thus. He tried the best he could to explain it in his reflections.

It is based on very solid theology. St. John of the Cross saw that even while nailed to the cross, suffering the worse kind of suffering imposed by our sinfulness, Christ still bends down towards man and reaches out to embrace him, so that the cross embraces the world.

That’s a beautiful and a rationale theological explanation of the cross. I see no demonic or satanic thought here, just truth that can be verified by the teaching of the Church and the scriptures.

Most crosses are very beautiful, but very sanitized. John of the Cross, hence his name, did not see a sanitized cross. He saw a grotesque death of him who reaches out to embrace the world.

JR 🙂
 
Deacon_Ed_B said:
I agree with you. I have found this poster’s mind and opinions about everything of and post Vatican II to be very closed. Opinionated would be mild.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
Click to expand...
Rev. Deacon:

I would add to your post that we should take to heart the words from 1Peter 3:15-18, which were read at mass today. Act with gentleness and reverence toward all.

Also in today’s Liturgy of the Hours Luke reminds us that “He commissioned us to preach to the people and bear witness that he is the one set apart by God as judge of the living and the dead” not us.

There is a tendency on CAF to take on Christ’s role as judge and forget our role as witnesses. I believe that sometimes we bring into Catholicism a fundamentalist mindset that can turn us into a religion of the word, rather than a Church of faith and witness.

As St. James says, “faith is proven by good works.” We should always look for every opportunity to say something good to our neighbour, not to discourage him and shout in his face that he is wrong. Peter was very eloquent about that in today’s readings.

We should never fear what is different as long as it serves to sanctify our lives. Nor do we have to campaign to protect the Church. As today’s gospel said, “I will not leave you orphans, but will come to you” (John 14:15-21) or John 17:1-11. We are not alone.

We on CAF have a tendency to raise the alarm too often and too quickly. The great saints never panicked. They went about their daily lives preaching and giving witness to Truth without alarming anyone. They were truly human and accepted their humanity with all of its frailties. To deny one’s humanity or that of others is to deny the humanity of Christ. Christ came to sanctify humanity. Before humanity can be sanctified, it must first be accepted for what it is. Its weaknesses and misconceptions must be recognized and we must learn to allow Christ to work within us and within others. We cannot act as if there were not Christ, but ourselves.

In regards to the way that we respond to thers, Dostoievsky said, the saint is capable of loving others even in their sin. For what he sees in all things and in all men is the object of the divine compassion.

JR 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top