S
- Status
V
VeronicaAnne
Guest
What we’ve got going on here is a false dilemma.
Whether non-Catholic Christian, or Catholic Christian – some folks emphasize His resurrection… some folks make it a point to remember His suffering… and – either way – non-Catholic Christians and Catholic Christians… both are quite, good, wonderful Christians.
When it comes to “cross” (i.e., the 2 cross-beams devoid of a body)… or when it comes to “crucifix” (i.e., the 2 cross-beams with a body) – sometimes it’s easy to mix up what someone means when they say the WORD “cross.” Sometimes, it’s very clear that the person, when they say the WORD “cross” mean only the instrument of our Lord’s torturous suffering and death.
It’s a both/and – not an either/or.
And they’ll know we are Christians by our love, by our love,
yes, they’ll know we are Christians by our love.
S
St_Violet
Guest
Yes it is…
S
Singinbeauty
Guest
So why do you bash protestants?
G
Grace_Seeker
Guest
That comment was made in response to a discussion with RomanCrusader. He/she had said:
I was curious as to the few that he referred to and his reply was:
So, by “use” I meant that they had a cross depicted in their churches someplace, perhaps a physical object placed up front in the sanctuary or an image of it painted on a wall, or in some other way displayed it and used that display as a reminder of the cross on which Jesus died.
Now, as to whether in my terminology I meant a “cross” by saying “cross” or a “crucifix” by saying “cross”, I mean just an empty cross. And that is where the conversation was when RomanCrusader joined it, having tried to clarify that if someone just said a cross they meant just a cross without a body and if they meant the cross with a body on it then one should use the term “crucifix”.
If you had nickel for everyttime you heard a protestant talking smack about the cross, you would what? I suggest not be able to buy your lunch with it.
St_Violent, I can only assume that, in saying what you said above, you are actually referrring not to just a plain cross, but to a cross with a body on it, in other words a crucifix. If that is what you mean, then saidly, yes, you may hear such comments from some protestants. But until RomanCrusader said that he had heard an SDA reject the cross as a symbol of the faith because of its ties to execution, I had never in my life even heard of a protestant “talking smack about the cross” other than to lift it up as THE preeminent symbol of the faith.
I just came from attending a National Youth Workers Convention, and you saw people there wearing all manner of crosses. Some wore small metal medallions that tuck inside their shirt only visible when they leaned over and fell out of their neckline. Some were larger, too big to wear underneath clothing; rather they were worn conspicuously and hung from around their necks so as to cover their entire chest. Some crosses were made of polished wood. And yet others of rough nails. Some were plain. Some were fancy. Some were not just plain cross, but were cruifixes and had the image of Christ on them; most did not. Some crucifixes were with a figure of Jesus that was in relief, others were painted or etched into the cross. And it was not just Catholics who were wearing crucifixes. So, to speak of protestants as Peary did – “they reject the symbol with a body on it” – is simply not true either. But the key thing is to realize that all of us (though no doubt there exists some exception someplace), both Catholic and Protestant alike, preach Jesus Christ both crucified and resurrected. As we (in my United Methodist Church) affirmed yesterday in taking Holy Communion: Christ has died; Christ is risen; Christ will come again.
To say that any one group of Christians has a monopoly on appreciation of either the work of Christ on the cross or his victory over the grave by virtue of the symbols that members of those groups place in their sanctuaries or wear around their necks is to make divisions where there are none.
It is obvious from this thread that we are divided enough already, please, let us not go lookng for or go around saying things that simply cause more.
C
cazayoux
Guest
I agree that the obvious division can be unsettling.
However, I think the dialog can be good.
We are planting seeds of thought.
I had a coworker last week bring this up.
“You guys have a cross with the body on it, but our doesn’t have it, because Jesus is no longer on the cross, he was resurrected”
I told her, “Amen to that! However, Paul states that he taught Christ crucified”.
I share scripture with her.
*1 Cor 1:22-24
For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. *
It was dialog, not argument.
It wasn’t even scriptural arm wrestling.
It was discussion.
Just because some are uncharitable, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t discuss topics.
Plant those seeds and let the Holy Spirit provide the water of life so that we can grow.
michel
G
Grace_Seeker
Guest
Hallelujah for your appoach.
Lord, may we see more of this type of openness and compassion and less accussation and arrogance in our sharing of what really is our common faith in you with one another. Keep us focused more on who you are than who we are.
- Status