The Sign of the Cross

[notsmart]

Interesting I just saw a video on youtube explaining why we should make the sign of a cross.

youtube.com/watch?v=hPfIWxKdpg0

“It really chaffs me-----
Why do we let only the Roman Catholics do this?”

paraphrase-

Gee whiz. Why does he get to look like a Roman Catholic Priest, when his garb is not in the bible?

LOL!

As if he has the power to stop a tradition that came about before his denomination ever existed???

LOL

 

[vocatio]

newadvent.org/cathen/13785a.htm

The course of development seems to have been the following. The cross was originally traced by Christians with the thumb or finger on their own foreheads. This practice is attested by numberless allusions in Patristic literature, and it was clearly associated in idea with certain references in Scripture, notably Ezech., ix, 4 (of the mark of the letter Tau); Ex., xvii, 9-14; and especially Apoc., vii 3; ix, 4; xiv, 1. Hardly less early in date is the custom of marking a cross on objects – already Tertullian speaks of the Christian woman “signing” her bed (cum lectulum tuum signas, “Ad uxor.”, ii, 5) before retiring to rest-and we soon hear also of the sign of the cross being traced on the lips (Jerome, “Epitaph. Paulæ”) and on the heart (Prudentius, “Cathem.”, vi, 129).

…
From New Advent

 

[First_of_9]

Anyways:

Why do you not sign the cross?
Theological reasons? Any explanation really…

Possibly because it is one of the Catholic “heresies and inventions” listed by Lorrainne Boettner in his anti-Catholic diatribe “Roman Catholicism.” According to him, making the Sigh of the Cross was “invented” in 300 AD, although he never explains what is wrong with it.

 

[SIA]

This thread is for Christians who DO NOT sign the cross.

If you do not know…tisk, tisk…
In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen!

With the hand signing the cross from forehead, to torso, to shoulder to opposing shoulder.

I really hope everyone already knows what I am talking about…lol!

Anyways:

Why do you not sign the cross?
Theological reasons? Any explanation really…

For me…it is a very reverant thing to do. Aside from helping us remember our baptism…I love it because it is that constant reminder of the nature of God.

So when I sign, it helps me enter into prayer by first stating the nature of God and it gives me a brief meditation of the cross which our Lord died on.

Thanks!

We Anglicans cross frequently, probably at least 6 or 7 times during our mass. I cross like my priest does; from right to left as the Orthodox cross. I do it because when he does the sign of the cross to the people my crossing lines up with his.

 

[notsmart]

Why is it an “abuse” to do the sign of the cross when passing a church?

He does not say.

Sublime Prince, thanks for that link- its the second reason why I am not a Lutheran. The other reason, only one other poster knows.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Why is it an “abuse” to do the sign of the cross when passing a church?

He does not say.

Sublime Prince, thanks for that link- its the second reason why I am not a Lutheran. The other reason, only one other poster knows.

I didn’t check out the link. What does it have to do with your reasons for not being Lutheran (as in, what about the video?)

 

[notsmart]

I didn’t check out the link. What does it have to do with your reasons for not being Lutheran (as in, what about the video?)

You would know if you saw it. I think. I think you would not agree with his way of approaching this, but I am not sure.

You have to see it for yourself.

 

[latinonly]

Many Life long Lutherans do use the sign of the Cross. I attend a lutheran Church and a number of people do the sign of the cross after the Eucharist.

That is fine and dandy however they have the lords supper in the lutheran church not the Eucahrist. The only place the Eucharist is valid is at a Traditional Latin mass. The new mass (after Vatican II) is not valid.

 

[Publisher]

It simply is not part of my religious practice. I understand why most Christians use it…I understand why most Christians are baptized and celebrate the Eucharist…it is a “ritual sign”…and “outward form” that in Quaker thought could be used as a substitute to the “reality” of faith. Making the “sign of the cross” no more proves ones salvation or proves ones piety than wearing a cross does.

If it enhances your devotion, then by all means utilize it…it does not do so for me.

 

[vocatio]

The new mass (after Vatican II) is not valid.

This is heresy…very wrong. The ordinary form of the mass, known to many as the New Mass or the Novos Ordo, is valid. I’d advise you not bring this up again.

 

[tGette]

Though not many posted who do not make the sign of the cross…the jist I am getting is that Protestants do not do it because:

It looks…

“TOO CATHOLIC!”

 

[tGette]

It simply is not part of my religious practice. I understand why most Christians use it…I understand why most Christians are baptized and celebrate the Eucharist…it is a “ritual sign”…and “outward form” that in Quaker thought could be used as a substitute to the “reality” of faith. Making the “sign of the cross” no more proves ones salvation or proves ones piety than wearing a cross does.

If it enhances your devotion, then by all means utilize it…it does not do so for me.

I agree…just like doing any devotion does not prove one’s salvation. Unless these are done for reverant reasons and being done because of faith to grow in faith and not because of “showing off a cross”, etc.

Even someone saying:
“Jesus is my Lord and Savior” does not prove salvation!
(Which can be akin to someone wearing a cross for show.)
(i.e. Some people who wear a cross are very pious people…some people are not;
some people who make this above statement are pious Christians…some are not)

 

[notsmart]

I also agree with Publisher. I happen to really like doing the Sign of the Cross though. It is so simple to do, and so profound when you think of the life of Jesus in doing it.
Maybe its in the simple things the seemingly small things we do that we can find a way to express our thankfulness to Jesus and meditate on him, and for me it helps my spirituality deepen.

 

[JonNC]

Though not many posted who do not make the sign of the cross…the jist I am getting is that Protestants do not do it because:

It looks…

“TOO CATHOLIC!”

Probably true in some circles. I also cross myself and, since it is for me, I frankly don’t care if someone thinks I look “too Catholic”.

 

[JonNC]

That is fine and dandy however they have the lords supper in the lutheran church not the Eucahrist. The only place the Eucharist is valid is at a Traditional Latin mass. The new mass (after Vatican II) is not valid.

This is heresy…very wrong. The ordinary form of the mass, known to many as the New Mass or the Novos Ordo, is valid. I’d advise you not bring this up again.

I know this is off topic, vocatio, but I know that, even though the CC rejects our Eucharist as not valid, Lutherans accept yours as valid. Why is it that some Catholics such as latinonly reject Novos Ordo? We seem to have more respect for the CC than some Catholics do, or am I wrong?

Jon

 

[notsmart]

I know this is off topic, vocatio, but I know that, even though the CC rejects our Eucharist as not valid, Lutherans accept yours as valid. Why is it that some Catholics such as latinonly reject Novos Ordo? We seem to have more respect for the CC than some Catholics do, or am I wrong?

Jon

I like the Lutherans who post here.

 

[JonNC]

I like the Lutherans who post here.

I think that is because, for the most part, the Lutherans who post here have great respect for the Catholic Church, and love Catholics as brothers and sisters in Christ. Thanks for the kind post.

Jon

 

[TriuneUnity]

I think that is because, for the most part, the Lutherans who post here have great respect for the Catholic Church, and love Catholics as brothers and sisters in Christ. Thanks for the kind post.

Jon

Either that, or we just dislike every other denomination equally LOL

 

[vocatio]

I know this is off topic, vocatio, but I know that, even though the CC rejects our Eucharist as not valid, Lutherans accept yours as valid. Why is it that some Catholics such as latinonly reject Novos Ordo? We seem to have more respect for the CC than some Catholics do, or am I wrong?

Jon

I suspect its a matter of perspective…I watched Arthur this mornig on PBS…anyone?

Just to clean up…this shouldn’t be elaborated on here. Just know that the Church, not including schimatic group beleifs, teaches that both the NO and the TLM are valid. There are other forms of the Liturgy for the Eucharist but they are not licit. Validity of the Eucharist is believed to only occur in true apostolic succession. Andy skip in succession and there is no valid ordination and thus invalid sacraments excluding marriage and baptism. But confirmation, Absolution, annointing of the sick, holy orders, are invalid without the apostolic priesthood conveyed through the episcopacy…a bishop.

Side Note if you think you have a friend on the traditional Catholic side of things: Traditional Catholics also typically believe that all non-Catholics and illicit Catholics [meaning us] are going straight to hell in a hay basket… or something like that. My dad was a traditional Catholic. It’s one of the reasons I doubted Catholicism and bolted many years ago. I was not being taught correctly. But now I submit even when it makes me angry. It’s about obedience.

 

[MrStain]

newadvent.org/cathen/13785a.htm

Thanks for the link, vocatio! I first heard a similar explanation of the bibilical references just a few nights ago by Father Mitch Pacwa on EWTN. I had no idea that it all begins with Ezekial 9:4 (NKJV)which states, "and the LORD said to him, “Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and put a mark on the foreheads of the men who sigh and cry over all the abominations that are done within it.” Apparently the English word “mark” is the Hebrew letter Tau/Tav which looks like a T or a cross. This theme is again carried out in quite a bit Revelations/Apocolypse as follows:

Revelation 7:3 - saying, “Do not harm the earth, the sea, or the trees till we have sealed the servants of our God on their foreheads.”

Revelation 9:4 - They were commanded not to harm the grass of the earth, or any green thing, or any tree, but only those men who do not have the seal of God on their foreheads.

Revelation 14:1 - Then I looked, and behold, a Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with Him one hundred and forty-four thousand, having His Father’s name written on their foreheads.