Is this crucifix okay to wear?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Startingcatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Startingcatholic

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

This crucifix recently came in the mail. I got it hoping for the JP II look of it but I just wanted to make sure there is no reason I shouldn’t wear it. Im asking this mainly because I know the JP II crucifix was also controversial and wanted to make sure! Thanks!
 
It looks perfectly acceptable. I have been wanting a crucifix like that myself as well. Also the Notre Dame crucifix
 
I’m afraid it might be misinterpreted as jansenist or possibly have something bad that I was unaware of.
 
It’s modeled after a Papal crucifix. There’s no reason to worry about it.

The old “Jansenist” idea of Jesus’ arms pointing up = Jansenist hasn’t been an issue for probably over a century now. Jansenism was thoroughly rejected by the Church long ago.
 
Last edited:
Reminds me of the one that’s on the Rosaries I got when I joined the Knights. Should be okay.
 
Yeah, it’s on a lot of rosaries, including ones that you buy in Rome to have blessed by the Pope. I have a couple with it from there.
 
A typical Jansenist crucifix has the arms much closer together, as in this one. Yours is the one that Pope St. John Paul II used. You’re fine!

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
It wouldn’t be my kind of crucifix, but so far as I am aware (ultra-traditionalist objections aside), there is nothing “wrong” with it. I’m sure the cross upon which Our Lord was crucified wasn’t “His type” either — “let this cup pass”.

The objection to a “Jansenist” crucifix comes from their use of crucifixes in which Our Lord’s Arms were almost straight up, not stretched out, as a way of suggesting that very few people are saved — a narrower path to salvation, if you will.

Speaking of Jansenism, I am distressed at the way nowadays that many faithful Catholics refer to so many sins as “grave”, regardless of smallness or parvity of matter, and that this could be a type of “neo-Jansenism through the back door”. Using their reasoning, you could go to hell for stealing a pack of chewing gum or a hotel ashtray, or telling your aunt that her new hat is pretty when it’s as ugly as homemade sin — not condoning this kind of thing, but neither do I want to see venial sins regarded as mortal (grave matter + sufficient reflection + full consent of the will = mortal sin). Saying “all stealing is grave” or “all lying is grave” heads in this direction. If this crucifix hints at this kind of thinking — and I don’t think it does — I’d want nothing to do with it.
 
HomeschoolDad said:
Speaking of Jansenism, I am distressed at the way nowadays that many faithful Catholics refer to so many sins as “grave”, regardless of smallness or parvity of matter, and that this could be a type of “neo-Jansenism through the back door”.
Click to expand...
Oh, you noticed that too? I thought the same. I almost told the OP in this thread the real problem of Jansenism wasn’t with the crucifix but with the Catholics who seem anxious to put everybody including themselves in hell over everything.
 
HomeschoolDad said:
40.png
HomeschoolDad:
Speaking of Jansenism, I am distressed at the way nowadays that many faithful Catholics refer to so many sins as “grave”, regardless of smallness or parvity of matter, and that this could be a type of “neo-Jansenism through the back door”.
Click to expand...
Oh, you noticed that too? I thought the same. I almost told the OP in this thread the real problem of Jansenism wasn’t with the crucifix but with the Catholics who seem anxious to put everybody including themselves in hell over everything.
Click to expand...
Yes, and I could be wrong, but I think it’s faulty catechesis. For the past 40 years, Catholics have been catechized any old which-way, sometimes good, sometimes not so good. Without a solid background in simple, basic moral theology for laypeople — the Baltimore Catechism was very balanced in this regard — even Catholics seeking solid, orthodox answers can go astray. I have maintained throughout all of this, that the confusion of terms — “grave sin”, “serious sin”, “mortal sin”, and so on — has muddied the waters, and people have a hard time drawing the line between what is “bad enough to go to hell for”, and what isn’t. I adhere to the old mortal-venial dichotomy and am at peace with it. I recommend that anyone seeking that same peace, should do likewise.
 
HomeschoolDad said:
40.png
HomeschoolDad:
ultra-traditionalist objections aside
Click to expand...
If you don’t mind, what would the ultra-traditional objection be?
Click to expand...
They claim it is grotesque and even satanic. It is very ugly, I will grant that, and it is highly unlikely that the True Cross was curved like that — no traditional representation depicts it as twisted and bowed.

I don’t think it is evil in any way, I just don’t care for it. Some people find it inspiring.
 
HomeschoolDad said:
40.png
HomeschoolDad:
It is very ugly, I will grant that,
Click to expand...
As was the original Crucifixion.
Click to expand...
No argument there.

I have always found crucifixes to be the ultimate reality check — “this is what had to happen because of sin”. Protestants use the empty cross, and Orthodox emphasize the resurrection. We face the Passion head-on and force ourselves to look at it. (Though I will have to admit that some of Jack Chick’s little comic books do an equally good job of showing the crucifixion for what it was — they’re not wrong about everything, and the people at Chick are definitely not ones to avoid disturbing imagery. It doesn’t get much more disturbing than a crucifix, and that’s good, we sinners need to be disturbed. Every day. Me most of all.)
 
Last edited:
Beautiful crucifix. Almost the exact same as I purchased from the Santuario de Cristo Rei in Portugal last December. Truly shows the suffering and realism of a crucifixion. Wear it with pride.
 
HomeschoolDad said:
I have maintained throughout all of this, that the confusion of terms — “grave sin”, “serious sin”, “mortal sin”, and so on — has muddied the waters, and people have a hard time drawing the line between what is “bad enough to go to hell for”, and what isn’t. I adhere to the old mortal-venial dichotomy and am at peace with it. I recommend that anyone seeking that same peace, should do likewise.
Click to expand...
I agree 100%
 
It is a nice piece of jewelry. No harm can come from wearing it. Many wear crosses and crucifix jewelry . . . a subtle reminder?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top