What's so terrible about a corpus-less cross?

[JReducation]

If a cross without a corpse is “un-Cathlic” (is there such a word?) then St. Francis should be excommunicated and so should the Capuchin-Franciscan friars.

St. Francis promoted the use of the Tau, which is a T shaped cross without a corpse. The Friars Minor Capuchin (Capuchin Francisan Brothers) have always had a plain wooden cross at the end of the rosary that they wear on their habit.

It was the mind of St. Francis to take up the cross as Christ took it.

Whoever said that a cross without a Christ is Protestant knows little about Church history. The Franciscans, Carmelites and Benedictines predate Protestantism by several hundred years. The wooden cross has been part of these three great traditions, either on their habit or in their houses.

The simple cross has been around since the early years of Christianity. It was not a Protestant inspiration. What the Protestants did was ban the crucifix. Banning the crucifix is not the same as ushering in the simple cross. Both traditions existed long before Protestantism.

 

[Conservative]

I’m not talking about liturgical use, mind you, but just in-general use, i.e. Christian art, jewelry, etc…

Over and over I hear Catholics saying how you shouldn’t take Jesus off the cross like Protestants do, but to me, this is just an inversion of the same backwards logic that Protestants use against Catholics when criticizing the crucifix.

Just a moment ago, I was looking at a picture of the Pope, and lo and behold, Benedict is wearing a big fat gold cross with no corpus. He is wearing this big fat gold cross is most of his pictures. Does that mean the Pope is being un-Catholic?

Both the cross and the crucifix are the domain of Christianity and therefore the Catholic Church. Granted, we should not be ashamed of our crucifixes, but we shouldn’t have to avoid using the plain cross for fear of apparently conceding to a vocal minority of Protestants who criticize the crucifix.

Tell me where I’m wrong?

I can’t intelligently answer your question but I don’t see a problem with either one. We’re just not supposed to wear it as decorative jewelry as has become the style. If you’re wearing the cross or crucifix, you are wearing the symbol of what our Catholic religion is all about. It identifies and reminds us who we are. ‘Take up your cross, and follow Me’. Reminding yourself that God’s Son died a horrific death on a cross, but the horror of that event opened the doors of Heaven for our souls. It’s what Catholics or Christians are all about.

 

[JReducation]

The issue that some fundamentalists have with crucifixes is rooted in a lack of understanding of Christian theology. When they see a crucifix, they see an instrument of torture and it brings to mind a horrific form of death. This is actually very accurate. It was the Roman equivalent of the guillotine or the electric chair. The piece that they miss is the ontological change.

When Jesus is raised on the cross, it is no longer an instrument of horrific torture and death, but an instrument redemption.

Redemption is possible only through the Paschal Mystery. The Second Person of the Trinity must live, in order to die. He must die, in order to rise. The nature of the cross changes when Jesus is raised up. It is no longer a cause of pain and sorrow, as it was to the victims of the Romans. It is the cause of salvation and eternal life.

Our Christian ancestors displayed it as icons, later as sculpture. In either case, the concept was the same. They saw it as a sign of redemption. It was a joyful piece of art. It brought us in touch with a divine reality.

With all of the other problems that Christians should be addressing, some are worried about a crucifix vs. a cross. Makes one wonder if some people have too much time on their hands.

 

[mdgspencer]

This thread has certainly challenged me to consider the reason for crucifixes, since I never thought this out before.
I found that the “Catechism of the Council of Trent,” as it explained the value of religious images, remarked that, for example, such images can revive the memory of the faithful and that images are useful for admonishing us by their example to imitate the lives and virtues of those shown.
In this case a crucifix brings to mind what Christ went through for our salvation and reminds us too that out of love for each of us he emptied himself of the form of God and and gave himself to suffering and death for our sake. An empty cross does not do these things well.
The book of Zachariah remarks that in the Messianic age God will pour out grace and they will look on him who have have pierced and they will mourn for him…(Zech 12:10) The Gospel of John applies this passage in Zechariah to Christ on the cross(Jn 19;37). This prophecy in the Old Testament, I have always thought, is a prophecy about how the Catholic faithful in the Messianic age in which we live look at and respond the crucifix.
Christ also said that his followers should pick up their crosses and follow after him. The crucifix in this way too is a reminder of how to live a Christian life.
I don’t find anything wrong with crosses lacking the body of Christ, particularly after realizing myself some years ago that such crosses have had a place in the life of the Church. However, the crucifix provides a different meaning from such crosses, and a meaning that cuts powerfully to the fundamental reality of Christian existence.

 

[JReducation]

This thread is suggesting that we may be spendig too much time on something that is pretty black and white.

The cross is the sign of our salvation, with or without the corpse.

Some people prefer it with, so be it. Others prefer it without, so be it too.

As I said in a previous post, we have religious orders that forbid the use of a corpse on their habit’s cross. Does this make them heretical? Not if you stop and consider that the Church said their founder is the “Mirror of Perfection.”

On the other hand, you have other founders such as St. Paul of the Cross, who venerated the crucifix, because of his love for the passion.

Goes to show you that the Church is comfortable with both, cross and crucifix.

Why do we have to think about this so much?