The corpus: Catholics VS Protestants

[aquohn]

One of the most distinctive, external differences between us and our…erm, separated brothers and sisters is the corpus. Catholics unabashedly brandish crucifixes with a metallic figure of Christ attached to it, while Protestants virulently…um, protest the practice. The two arguments for using exclusively corpus-free crosses are, generally:

A) Idolatry
B) “I worship a risen Christ”

A) tells of the piggishly literalistic and heretical exegesis of Scripture brought about by sola scriptura. No surprises there. But B) is interesting. B) changes the cross from a representation of the Crucifixion, to that of the Resurrection (which is a pretty odd thing to do). And this, methinks, highlights another key difference between Protestantism and Catholicism.

The focal point of Christianity is the Crucifixion. The salvific act which freed us from the bonds of sin and threw open the gates of heaven for all. The ultimate sacrifice of the pure Lamb of God. And so on (any Christian worth his salt knows what the Crucifixion is). But Resurrection is, to speak somewhat frivolously, PR. The act, while divine in origin, was of absolutely zero intrinsic salvific merit (i.e. it may have helped to save souls, but did not do anything in and of itself).

Isn’t Catholicism VS Protestantism kind of like Crucifixion VS Resurrection? Catholicism has all these rituals, all this theology, all these saints, all these traditions. And even Catholics themselves must admit that it is boring at times. I know of very few people who would take conscious joy in praying the Rosary or dedicating themselves to the Liturgy of the Hours. The formulaic form of the Mass is admittedly dry. But Catholicism saves.

Whereas Protestantism, with its relativistic, mix-and-match sola scriptura, and its offering the temptation of antinomianism through sola fide, and the pure banal showiness of certain modern Protestant groups, is apt in removing the corpus, and emphasising the Resurrection over the Crucifixion. It might be showy, it might sooth their “itching ears” (2 Tim 4:3), but it is of no salvific merit whatsoever. In the end, the empty cross is but an execution device, and the empty falsehood of Protestantism can only lead to death.

Isn’t it interesting that Christmas and Easter have both been co-opted as commercial holidays, while Good Friday remains sacrosanct?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

aquohn

Catholics believe both in the Cross and in the Crucifix. The Crucifix represents Christ’s suffering in order that he might rise from the dead. The empty Cross represents all the suffering we believe we must share with Christ on the cross if we also are to rise from the dead. By denying the Crucifix, Protestantism seems to affirm salvation without suffering, as if anything greatly worth having was not greatly worth suffering to get.

 

[Quaesitor]

I know of very few people who would take conscious joy in praying the Rosary or dedicating themselves to the Liturgy of the Hours.

The days that I don’t say the Rosary or any of the Offices of the Liturgy of the hours just don’t feel complete to me. So I would have to say I get a lot of joy from these devotions. Not only joy but a closeness to our Lord Jesus and his wonderful mother through the Rosary. If someone finds these things joyless, then I would have to question their motivation to say them in the first place.

Just yesterday I missed the Morning and Evening prayer, and it was like a gaping hole was left blank in my day.

Just my two cents.

 

[agnes_therese]

I know of very few people who would take conscious joy in praying the Rosary or dedicating themselves to the Liturgy of the Hours. The formulaic form of the Mass is admittedly dry. But Catholicism saves.

I know a great many people who take joy in the Rosary and the Liturgy of the Hours. The LoH, prayed attentively, takes you through the entire range of human and divine activity. The Rosary brings us into the great events of salvation history, from the Annunciation to the Coronation of Our Lady. That “formulaic form” of the Mass brings tremendous comfort and consolation.

I really do not mean this in a negative way toward you, but these sound to me more like the objections I hear from Protestants. No one is “required” to pray the Rosary, and few lay people are “required” to pray the Liturgy of the Hours, so if they don’t appeal to you, that’s fine, you don’t have to do them. But Holy Mass “dry”?!

 

[catholictiger]

One of the most distinctive, external differences between us and our…erm, separated brothers and sisters is the corpus. Catholics unabashedly brandish crucifixes with a metallic figure of Christ attached to it, while Protestants virulently…um, protest the practice. The two arguments for using exclusively corpus-free crosses are, generally:

A) Idolatry
B) “I worship a risen Christ”

A) tells of the piggishly literalistic and heretical exegesis of Scripture brought about by sola scriptura. No surprises there. But B) is interesting. B) changes the cross from a representation of the Crucifixion, to that of the Resurrection (which is a pretty odd thing to do). And this, methinks, highlights another key difference between Protestantism and Catholicism.

The focal point of Christianity is the Crucifixion. The salvific act which freed us from the bonds of sin and threw open the gates of heaven for all. The ultimate sacrifice of the pure Lamb of God. And so on (any Christian worth his salt knows what the Crucifixion is). But Resurrection is, to speak somewhat frivolously, PR. The act, while divine in origin, was of absolutely zero intrinsic salvific merit (i.e. it may have helped to save souls, but did not do anything in and of itself).

Isn’t Catholicism VS Protestantism kind of like Crucifixion VS Resurrection? Catholicism has all these rituals, all this theology, all these saints, all these traditions. And even Catholics themselves must admit that it is boring at times. I know of very few people who would take conscious joy in praying the Rosary or dedicating themselves to the Liturgy of the Hours. The formulaic form of the Mass is admittedly dry. But Catholicism saves.

Whereas Protestantism, with its relativistic, mix-and-match sola scriptura, and its offering the temptation of antinomianism through sola fide, and the pure banal showiness of certain modern Protestant groups, is apt in removing the corpus, and emphasising the Resurrection over the Crucifixion. It might be showy, it might sooth their “itching ears” (2 Tim 4:3), but it is of no salvific merit whatsoever. In the end, the empty cross is but an execution device, and the empty falsehood of Protestantism can only lead to death.

Isn’t it interesting that Christmas and Easter have both been co-opted as commercial holidays, while Good Friday remains sacrosanct?

I think what we must remember is that while yes the cross is the saving act of Christ without the resurrection its just some random dude who had a following and died. Jesus rising from the dead is the book end to the gospel and I would actually say (looking at our liturgy) that the resurrection is the center and summit of our faith. I will try and explain.

You mention that we don’t put any importance on Good Friday as a culture (People from where I live do but that is for another time and place) and that you find that interesting. If Catholics put such an importance on the crucifixion why don’t we have any commercial holidays for this stuff. I would say that Catholic focus on the resurrection and it is the summit of our faith.

But that is a small point

Look at our liturgy and our liturgical calendar. First lets look at holy week, it begins by remember the passion and Jesus’ glorious entry into Jerusalem with palm branches. Monday Tuesday and Wednesday are nothing special in the liturgical calendar just more daily masses in lent. Thursdays is when it all begins (the paschal triduum). Thursday in Holy week is a celebration of the Last Supper, the last day that we ring the bells during this triduum. It is a preparation for the passion of Christ. Friday we celebrate the Lord’s passion, (there are no sacraments on this day, with the exception of anointing of the sick and confession I think) this is a very somber celebration and no real glorious music or liturgical practices. Holy Saturday is NOTHING, no mass no communion service, the Eucharist isn’t in the tabernacle. The only think that happens on Holy Saturday are emergency sacraments, and veneration of the cross. Then after the Sun goes down the Church celebrates the mass that is the summit of our faith and the life blood of the church and the highlight of the liturgical year. The Easter Vigil. Without going into the liturgy of this mass I hope you realize something Lent and Holy week aren’t only about the crucifixion and burial. It is about the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The cross is the instrument of our salvation, but it is the resurrection when we can truly say we are saved from our sins.

One other thing Easter (outside of ordinary time) is the longest season on the liturgical calendar. It is one of two times we celebrate an octave. Christmas doesn’t matter because the birth doesn’t apply to this discussion. If Catholic focus on the crucifixion and protestants the resurrection why all this focus on the pasche of Christ, the Resurrection.

Again the crucifix is important I don’t deny that one second, but the resurrection is truly the focus summit and most glorious aspect of our faith.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

I think for ordinary mainstream Protestantism such as what I grew up in the original reason was presumably A, but as this way of thinking is now rejected people half-heartedly resort to B to provide some kind of explanation beyond the real one: that crucifixes look too Catholic.

 

[snarflemike]

One of the most distinctive, external differences between us and our…erm, separated brothers and sisters is the corpus. Catholics unabashedly brandish crucifixes with a metallic figure of Christ attached to it, while Protestants virulently…um, protest the practice. The two arguments for using exclusively corpus-free crosses are, generally:

A) Idolatry

My response: better to make an idol of Jesus on the cross than of the cross alone. As with so many Protestant arguments against Catholicism, their own argument condemns them as well.

B) “I worship a risen Christ”

My response: I don’t see the risen Christ, I see a Roman execution device. Maybe Jesus is still in the tomb, for all your empty cross tells us. Maybe it’s the cross you worship and not Jesus.

They’re both such foolish arguments.

 

[aquohn]

massages temples
Wow, I really need to work on focusing the things I write. My essential point is, Catholicism focuses on substance, Protestantism on show. The stuff about dryness, etc. wasn’t really there when I first thought noticed this.

 

[Usige]

Again the crucifix is important I don’t deny that one second, but the resurrection is truly the focus summit and most glorious aspect of our faith.

We need to be careful with that argument. We cannot separate the crucifixion and the resurrection. One is not more important than the other. If Christ had stumbled on a rock and broke his neck and then resurrected, his resurrection would be no more glorious than say Lazarus. These are not two separate events, but one single event. Christ was the innocent sacrifice that was killed for our sins and through the resurrection broke the bonds of death to open the gates of heaven. My point being that the resurrection without the crucifixion is an incomplete picture of salvation.

 

[catholictiger]

We need to be careful with that argument. We cannot separate the crucifixion and the resurrection. One is not more important than the other. If Christ had stumbled on a rock and broke his neck and then resurrected, his resurrection would be no more glorious than say Lazarus. These are not two separate events, but one single event. Christ was the innocent sacrifice that was killed for our sins and through the resurrection broke the bonds of death to open the gates of heaven. My point being that the resurrection without the crucifixion is an incomplete picture of salvation.

yes you are correct my fault.

 

[LightFromLight]

One of the most distinctive, external differences between us and our…erm, separated brothers and sisters is the corpus. Catholics unabashedly brandish crucifixes with a metallic figure of Christ attached to it, while Protestants virulently…um, protest the practice. The two arguments for using exclusively corpus-free crosses are, generally:

A) Idolatry
B) “I worship a risen Christ”

A) tells of the piggishly literalistic and heretical exegesis of Scripture brought about by sola scriptura. No surprises there. But B) is interesting. B) changes the cross from a representation of the Crucifixion, to that of the Resurrection (which is a pretty odd thing to do). And this, methinks, highlights another key difference between Protestantism and Catholicism.

The focal point of Christianity is the Crucifixion. The salvific act which freed us from the bonds of sin and threw open the gates of heaven for all. The ultimate sacrifice of the pure Lamb of God. And so on (any Christian worth his salt knows what the Crucifixion is). But Resurrection is, to speak somewhat frivolously, PR. The act, while divine in origin, was of absolutely zero intrinsic salvific merit (i.e. it may have helped to save souls, but did not do anything in and of itself).

Isn’t Catholicism VS Protestantism kind of like Crucifixion VS Resurrection? Catholicism has all these rituals, all this theology, all these saints, all these traditions. And even Catholics themselves must admit that it is boring at times. I know of very few people who would take conscious joy in praying the Rosary or dedicating themselves to the Liturgy of the Hours. The formulaic form of the Mass is admittedly dry. But Catholicism saves.

Whereas Protestantism, with its relativistic, mix-and-match sola scriptura, and its offering the temptation of antinomianism through sola fide, and the pure banal showiness of certain modern Protestant groups, is apt in removing the corpus, and emphasising the Resurrection over the Crucifixion. It might be showy, it might sooth their “itching ears” (2 Tim 4:3), but it is of no salvific merit whatsoever. In the end, the empty cross is but an execution device, and the empty falsehood of Protestantism can only lead to death.

Isn’t it interesting that Christmas and Easter have both been co-opted as commercial holidays, while Good Friday remains sacrosanct?

“We preach Christ crucified” - 1 Corinthians 1:23

 

[Love4All]

I know of very few people who would take conscious joy in praying the Rosary. . .

I’ll bet, you don’t pray the Rosary!

I recommend you take it up!

 

[aquohn]

Hmm…last I checked, penance was not supposed to be enjoyable.

 

[Usige]

Hmm…last I checked, penance was not supposed to be enjoyable.

Really the rosary is a devotional prayer, but I can see how the use of Hail Marys as penance could confuse the issue. Maybe we need to go back to prayer labyrinths where we would pray our penance on on our knees on hard stone floors.

 

[Love4All]

Hmm…last I checked, penance was not supposed to be enjoyable.

Seriously — try it. Or, refuse to pray, and remain in ignorance of the effect of prayer. Your choice.

 

[SuzanneD]

The days that I don’t say the Rosary or any of the Offices of the Liturgy of the hours just don’t feel complete to me. So I would have to say I get a lot of joy from these devotions. Not only joy but a closeness to our Lord Jesus and his wonderful mother through the Rosary. If someone finds these things joyless, then I would have to question their motivation to say them in the first place.

Just yesterday I missed the Morning and Evening prayer, and it was like a gaping hole was left blank in my day.

Just my two cents.

Have to agree with that, when I miss prayers from the LOTH, I feel like I have really missed a lot and a notice by attitude is not as good.

 

[aquohn]

Gah, rapidly losing signal strength.

The whole point about this thread is how Catholicism, while not as flashy as Protestantism, has the “substance” that really saves. The Rosary, LotH &c were tangential to it. I do pray the LotH every day (or at least try to, and I’ve made it a sort obligation for myself, such that failing to meet those standards makes me feel like I should head for the confessional), but, given a choice, there are times when “I’d rather not”. And my thoughts do wander a fair bit during the Rosary. I’m not sure if it’s just my own impiety, or anything, but you should be able to see how this kind of thing can be boring or draining.

Anyway, our personal spirituality is not supposed to be the focal point here! I was simply making a comment on how the Protestant emphasis on the Resurrection exemplifies their emphasis on show rather than salvific substance.

 

[Semangelof]

I think the cross is beloved equally by both sides for different reasons. The meaning and the contemplation of the death and the resurrection are important.

I would say the unfortunate consequence of a resurrected cross is that the image of God is removed. To the devout protestant Christian the resurrected cross is an earthly image that provokes contemplation of a heavenly and invisible Christ ( a resurrected Christ seated at the right hand of God).

The consequence of God being invisible in the resurrected cross is that to the secular and non devout world it becomes a secular symbol. A crucified Christ can never be used in a secular world, but a resurrected Christ can be worn by every murderer and liar with no thought to the invisible Christ it represents. To them it is a popular piece of gold jewelry. To the worst it is a symbol of an abandoned cross, a vacant heaven where any sin is permissible.

That is the tragedy of a resurrected cross. Our inability to see the invisible, and the glory of God turned to into a fashionable accessory. As you say, it quickly becomes a “show” to many.

The crucified cross is immune to such things, but His death and resurrection call for our contemplation regardless.

 

[Jaysuitical]

So many Protestant books are written for perplexed evangelicals or fundamentalists who wonder why they should have to suffer since they’ve been expunged (as they believe) of all sin. So-called Bible theology is oriented around complete avoidance of suffering – being saved is a matter of being saved not just from Hell, but from unhappiness, from suffering in general. Hence evangelicals feel that, unless they express joyful confidence in the midst of the most terrible suffering, they are somehow showing an absence of faith. Catholics are taught that we will receive the Cross, our Cross, whether we will or not; that our sufferings have to be unified with Christ. And, as Papa Francisco said in one of his earliest homilies, if the Church does not embrace the Cross, it becomes only a charitable NGO. It is not that those who display a cross without the Body of Our Lord believe in a risen Christ – they like it as an abstract symbol and not as a concrete one that shows what all Christians must do.