Number of Crucifixes

[FredSchoenhofer]

Is there a rule as to the number of crucifixes that may be in church during Mass? We have been told that we cannot have more than the Processional Crucifix. A permanent Crucifix at the front of church is not permissible by Rome. Is this true? Could I be misunderstanding what I am being told - is there some other rule or guideline that in any way may limit a permanent crucifix in the church proper?

 

[Rolltide]

Is there a rule as to the number of crucifixes that may be in church during Mass? We have been told that we cannot have more than the Processional Crucifix. A permanent Crucifix at the front of church is not permissible by Rome. Is this true? Could I be misunderstanding what I am being told - is there some other rule or guideline that in any way may limit a permanent crucifix in the church proper?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought having a permanent Crucifix at the front of the church is one of the few absolute requirements for a church!

 

[FredSchoenhofer]

One would think. Thank you for the reply. It would appear that there is an insistence on making our places of worship less Catholic. Just wondering if I am the one out of step or not. Thanks.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Is there a rule as to the number of crucifixes that may be in church during Mass? We have been told that we cannot have more than the Processional Crucifix. A permanent Crucifix at the front of church is not permissible by Rome. Is this true? Could I be misunderstanding what I am being told - is there some other rule or guideline that in any way may limit a permanent crucifix in the church proper?

A permanent Crucifix at the front of church is not permissible by Rome. Is this true?

Not true.

Only one Crucifix is to be in the sanctuary area, on or near the altar during Mass. Usually this means that the Processional Crucifix after it reaches the sanctuary is simply carried out and placed out of sight until after Mass and the Resessional.

 

[MarieVeronica]

Usually this means that the Processional Crucifix after it reaches the sanctuary is simply carried out and placed out of sight until after Mass and the Resessional.

At our parish… the Prossesional Crucifix is left on the Altar at all times. And is incensed, during the “High Mass” on Sunday. It is always on the Altar, in a special floor stand. Even when we go to the Church, during the week… for Adoration. It’s there.

Should they be incensing the Permanent Crucifix, instead? (Note: the Permanent Crucifix is HIGH on the wall, to the left of the altar… not directly over it, where I always thought it was supposed to be).

 

[musicmantg11]

My parish has actually 3 crucifixes in the sanctuary. One on the main altar, then a large hanging one on the wall above the tabernacle, then a processional crucifix.

 

[cameron_lansing]

Is there a rule as to the number of crucifixes that may be in church during Mass? We have been told that we cannot have more than the Processional Crucifix. A permanent Crucifix at the front of church is not permissible by Rome. Is this true? Could I be misunderstanding what I am being told - is there some other rule or guideline that in any way may limit a permanent crucifix in the church proper?

Let those who have asserted it to you produce the proof. That burden rests on them.

 

[LilyM]

While it is a requirement to have A crucifix in the sanctuary at all times, I haven’t come across anything that says it can ONLY be one

As above, let those who assert otherwise bring forward the proof. You have any cites Brother Rich?

 

[John_Lilburne]

From the 2002 General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) approved for the USA, which can be accessed from romanrite.com/girm.html :
“122. On reaching the altar, the priest and ministers make a profound bow.
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 away in a dignified place.”

1984 Book of Blessings, Chapter 35, “Order for the Blessing of a New Cross for Public Veneration”:
“1238 The order presented in this chapter is meant for only two situations:
1 the solemn blessing of a cross erected in a public place, separate from a church;
2 the blessing of the principal cross that occupies a central place in the body of the church where the worshipping community assembles.”
I would not see this as forbidding a cross in front of the church, just that the blessing ceremony should only be used for the central cross in the church.

Book of Blessings, Chapter 42: “Order for the Blessing of the Stations of the Cross”. “1401 Whether the stations consist of images with crosses or simply of crosses, they should be set up in the church or in a place of their own, and in a manner convenient for the faithful.”

(Book of Blessings, Liturgical Press, Minnesota, 1989, ISBN 0-8146-1875-8).

1977 Dedication of a Church. “22. It is praiseworthy to keep the ancient custom of hanging on the walls of the church crosses made of stone, brass, or other suitable material or of having the crosses carved on the walls. Thus twelve or four crosses should be provided, depending on the number of anointings (see no. 16), and fixed here and there at a suitable height on the walls of the church. Beneath each cross a small bracket should be fitted and in it a small candlestick is placed, with a candle to be lighted.”
(The Rites Volume Two, Liturgical Press, 1991, ISBN: 0-8146-6037-1, page 366).

In the list of things in the sanctuary for the Dedication of a Church it has: “altar cross, unless there is already a cross in the sanctuary or the cross that is carried in the entrance procession is to be placed near the altar;” (n. 21(b)).

 

[FredSchoenhofer]

Thank you all for your thoughts and replies. You are most helpful.
As a follow up, and I may be reading/interpreting this incorrectly - but the GIRM 122 clause would seem to be refering to a Processional Cross beign used instead of an Altar Cross - and so not to have any bearing upon a large main church cross that would remain in place at all times.
It seems to me (as I am in my 50’s and have some memory of the way churches used to be) that there was occasionally a dilema when the Altar got turned to face the people, and that is typically the priest had his back to the main cross and so an Altar cross was added.
The Altar Cross may have created problems of being in the way of people’s view of what was happening on the Altar, space became an issue as Altars got smaller, etc. I have even seen some two sided crosses for the Altar so that there was a Corpus facing the priest and one facing the people on the same cross.
Placing the Processional Cross in close proximity to the Altar was a good solution to this problem It got the cross off the Altar, saving precious space and clearing people’s view of the Altar. And so, it seemed to me, that this GIRM 122 clause would be addressing the practice of not having a Processional Cross AND an Altar Cross; but it would not have relevacy toward the main cross that may be affixed to a wall behind or to the side of the Altar.
Does this long winded reply make sense? I am trying to be clear for myself and for others as I discuss this question that we are not extending the GIRM clause beyond what it was intended to address - or I could be totally off base…any thoughts?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Thank you all for your thoughts and replies. You are most helpful.
As a follow up, and I may be reading/interpreting this incorrectly - but the GIRM 122 clause would seem to be refering to a Processional Cross beign used instead of an Altar Cross - and so not to have any bearing upon a large main church cross that would remain in place at all times.
It seems to me (as I am in my 50’s and have some memory of the way churches used to be) that there was occasionally a dilema when the Altar got turned to face the people, and that is typically the priest had his back to the main cross and so an Altar cross was added.
The Altar Cross may have created problems of being in the way of people’s view of what was happening on the Altar, space became an issue as Altars got smaller, etc. I have even seen some two sided crosses for the Altar so that there was a Corpus facing the priest and one facing the people on the same cross.
Placing the Processional Cross in close proximity to the Altar was a good solution to this problem It got the cross off the Altar, saving precious space and clearing people’s view of the Altar. And so, it seemed to me, that this GIRM 122 clause would be addressing the practice of not having a Processional Cross AND an Altar Cross; but it would not have relevacy toward the main cross that may be affixed to a wall behind or to the side of the Altar.
Does this long winded reply make sense? I am trying to be clear for myself and for others as I discuss this question that we are not extending the GIRM clause beyond what it was intended to address - or I could be totally off base…any thoughts?

122 of the GIRM is what I based my answer on. Is not the Larger crucifix hanging on the wall sufficient for everyone to see and relate to the Sacrifice of the Mass? Then why do we need a second one?

 

[masterjedi747]

While we’re on this subject, I’ve got 2 related questions.

At my church, in addition to the crucifix carried forward in the procession (which is placed far right to the right of the altar, in a special stand), we have a slightly-larger-than-life-size, very well-proportioned and realistic painting of the crucified Christ (with a solid black backround), which was made by one of the priests we had years and years ago, hanging just in front the wall.

1) Does this count as a crucifix? I would think so, but it is two-dimensional, so I’d like to know for sure if I’m right about this.

Also, during the Easter season (and only) during the Easter season), this painting is turned around to display the beautiful painting mounted on the reverse side, which was also made by the same priest, of the resurrected Christ (blood red backround and large host behind the glorified Christ, displaying all five wounds, with the shroud unwrapping from his body, while his arms are stretched out at a slight angle to his sides).
I guess it’s technically not a “crucifix”, since there’s no cross (although his body is still roughly in that posture)… but it’s not like it’s an “empty cross” either, like you’d find in a Protestant church (in fact, it’s quite exactly the exact opposite).

2) It’s absolutely beautiful, and really reinforces the splendor of the Easter season, but are we really allowed to do this? I hope so, but I’m afraid I might be wrong. And if this is the case, does the presence of the processional crucifix on the altar during Mass provide us with a sort of “loophole” here, since there is still a crucifix present on the altar?

I really wish I had pictures, but I don’t.
Thanks is advance for your answers on this matter.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

While we’re on this subject, I’ve got 2 related questions.

At my church, in addition to the crucifix carried forward in the procession (which is placed far right to the right of the altar, in a special stand), we have a slightly-larger-than-life-size, very well-proportioned and realistic painting of the crucified Christ (with a solid black backround), which was made by one of the priests we had years and years ago, hanging just in front the wall.

1) Does this count as a crucifix? I would think so, but it is two-dimensional, so I’d like to know for sure if I’m right about this.

Also, during the Easter season (and only) during the Easter season), this painting is turned around to display the beautiful painting mounted on the reverse side, which was also made by the same priest, of the resurrected Christ (blood red backround and large host behind the glorified Christ, displaying all five wounds, with the shroud unwrapping from his body, while his arms are stretched out at a slight angle to his sides).
I guess it’s technically not a “crucifix”, since there’s no cross (although his body is still roughly in that posture)… but it’s not like it’s an “empty cross” either, like you’d find in a Protestant church (in fact, it’s quite exactly the exact opposite).

2) It’s absolutely beautiful, and really reinforces the splendor of the Easter season, but are we really allowed to do this? I hope so, but I’m afraid I might be wrong. And if this is the case, does the presence of the processional crucifix on the altar during Mass provide us with a sort of “loophole” here, since there is still a crucifix present on the altar?

I really wish I had pictures, but I don’t.
Thanks is advance for your answers on this matter.

My personaql opinion here is that the picture is not a Crucifix, it is a picture. There is nothing wrong with it being where it is, nothing wrong with turning it over during Easter. Having the Processional Cross there satisfies the requirement. It should however be “near the altar” however, but not in the way.

 

[Spirithound]

Is there a rule as to the number of crucifixes that may be in church during Mass? We have been told that we cannot have more than the Processional Crucifix. A permanent Crucifix at the front of church is not permissible by Rome. Is this true? Could I be misunderstanding what I am being told - is there some other rule or guideline that in any way may limit a permanent crucifix in the church proper?

Uh oh…somebody grab that little old lady she’s wearing a crucifix and we’ve met our quota!!
(Sorry, this was my first thought other answers have been more on the mark )

At our parish… the Prossesional Crucifix is left on the Altar at all times. And is incensed, during the “High Mass” on Sunday. It is always on the Altar, in a special floor stand. Even when we go to the Church, during the week… for Adoration. It’s there.

Should they be incensing the Permanent Crucifix, instead? (Note: the Permanent Crucifix is HIGH on the wall, to the left of the altar… not directly over it, where I always thought it was supposed to be).

I think censing the Processional Crucifix would be the prudent thing to do, since it’s right there. If it were ever not there, the thurifer would swing the censer in the general direction of the Permanent Crucifix to cense it.

 

[Praxis]

My personaql opinion here is that the picture is not a Crucifix, it is a picture. There is nothing wrong with it being where it is, nothing wrong with turning it over during Easter. Having the Processional Cross there satisfies the requirement. It should however be “near the altar” however, but not in the way.

It’s a crucifix.

One need only look to the San Damiano Crucifix (a mural/fresco/icon) to realize that a crucifix need not be 3D.

 

[Praxis]

In his book The Spirit of the Liturgy, Pope Benedict XVI talks about the benefit of a crucifix sitting on the altar’s mensa. Since most churches already have a hanging crucifix it would seem problematic to have one on the altar and one hanging in the sanctuary near the altar.

I wish someone with the right authority would release a quick note saying an altar crucifix and one hanging in the sanctuary is not only permissible but praiseworthy…

 

[masterjedi747]

…sort of a follow-up question. (Thanks for the responses!)

Is it correct that all of these rules for the crucifixes apply to all Masses, or is there some distinction made between what is required for Sundays and weekday Masses? I ask for this reason: if during the Easter Season, our Church replaces the crucifix painting with the painting of the glorified/resurrected Christ (as described perviously)… would it then be necessary for the processional crucifix to remain on the altar for all weekday Masses during the Easter season? They might actually do that already, I can’t remember for sure, but I do know (from experience as an altar server years ago) that during the rest of the year, the processional crucifix is generally brought out only for the weekend Masses. So if the crucifix painting is not displayed, does the processional cross need to be brought out more often during the week, or is this not necessarily required for weekday Masses?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

…sort of a follow-up question. (Thanks for the responses!)

Is it correct that all of these rules for the crucifixes apply to all Masses, or is there some distinction made between what is required for Sundays and weekday Masses? I ask for this reason: if during the Easter Season, our Church replaces the crucifix painting with the painting of the glorified/resurrected Christ (as described perviously)… would it then be necessary for the processional crucifix to remain on the altar for all weekday Masses during the Easter season? They might actually do that already, I can’t remember for sure, but I do know (from experience as an altar server years ago) that during the rest of the year, the processional crucifix is generally brought out only for the weekend Masses. So if the crucifix painting is not displayed, does the processional cross need to be brought out more often during the week, or is this not necessarily required for weekday Masses?

I read it as anytime Mass is celebrated a Crucifix must be near the altar, in the sanctuary, a Crucifix not a painting.

 

[masterjedi747]

I read it as anytime Mass is celebrated a Crucifix must be near the altar, in the sanctuary, a Crucifix not a painting.

Right… but then Praxis pointed out the San Damiano Crucifix (click on the link for more info) as an objection to the “a painting cannot be considered a crucifix” proposal… and I can assure you that the one at my church is far less iconic and colorful. It’s actually far closer to reality than almost every crucifix I’ve ever seen (Jesus isn’t solid silver on a polished oak cross), and there’s nothing in the background but solid black. So I don’t know… but if this counts as a crucifix (and I have seen it used as such), then I think that’s a pretty solid argument, no?

http://www.fspa.org/fspanews/graphics/Perspectives/san damiano cross.jpg

 

[Brendan]

I read it as anytime Mass is celebrated a Crucifix must be near the altar, in the sanctuary, a Crucifix not a painting.

The crucifix must be on or near the altar.

And a Crucifix is an image of Christ suffering death, so either a 2D or 3D image may suffice.