Skip to main content

Crucifix or Cross?


There is much debate about what symbol of use in a Church, even in homes. The Crucifix, Christ fixed the cross during His Passion is popular in Roman Catholic churches, and some Protestant denominations such as the Lutheran Churches. The question of why many Protestants refuse to use the crucifix, and why some do use it is a matter of perspective and spiritual discernment. The Protestants who protest the use of the Crucifix claim that it is a "symbol of death, it does not depict the Risen Christ (Ressurectixi Christi) but the Dead Christ (Corpus Christi) and this develops a morbid feeling in the viewer, while the plain cross is the symbol of both Christ's Passion and Resurrection, and emphasizes "He is not here, He is Risen." Another reason many Reformed Christians reject the Crucifix is because of its connections to the Roman Catholic Church. The Crucifix was first implemented en masse by St. Bernard of Clairvaux in the 12th Century. Bernard was a zealous Cistercian Monk who preached The Second Crusade, and believed in the absolute authority of the Pope. However, In contrast to many Reformers, Martin Luther and other Protestants argued that the crucifix makes a person focus on Christ more than the cross itself and thus is beneficial for worship and liturgy.

The debate is fierce. On one side Protestants attest, "if the crucifix offends you, then Christ's redemptive death and sacrifice offends you!" On the other side a Protestant argues, "seeing Christ only crucified and not Risen is the incomplete Redemption and evangelion (Gospel), if he still hangs on the cross then it makes people think He then did not rise from dead and thus it is in essence antichrist, even the Muslims agree with this symbol in Sura 153:3-5, and so do the Jews who will not believe in Christ Jesus who was Crucified and Rose from the Dead." However, there is counter argument made by Scripture by the Lutheran brethren, "The Apostle Paul said, 'We preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to the Jews, and foolishness to the Gentiles," (1 Corinthians 1:23), "For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified," (1 Corinthians 2:2) and "I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me." (Galatians 2:20). Scripture would seem to affirm the perspective of the Roman Catholics and Lutherans, but Paul does say, "For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, He was seen by Peter and then by the Twelve," (1 Corinthians 5:3-5), "He was handed over by God’s set plan and foreknowledge, and you, by the hands of the lawless, put Him to death by nailing Him to the cross. But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him," (Acts 2:23-24), and "We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life." (Romans 6:4). The squabble over having a symbol of Christ Crucified or just the Cross as it stood when He rose from grave may seem trivial, but its a matter of identity. The Early Christians of Acts often emphasized the Resurrection, even meeting on Sunday (Resurrection Day) and preached Christ's own words, "Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die; and whoever lives by believing in me will never die. Do you believe this?" (John 11;25-26). The Apostle Paul was the one to emphasize the Crucifixion more, with His words (see verses aforementioned), "From now on, let no one cause me trouble, for I bear on my body the marks of Jesus," (Galatians 6:17). However, Paul did always combine the message of Crucifixion and Ressurection, "For you were buried with Christ when you were baptized. And with him you were raised to new life because you trusted the mighty power of God, who raised Christ from the dead." (Colossians 2:12).


It would seem a balance could be made between the two, since the Apostles emphasize both Christ's Crucifixion and Resurrection. What tends to lend favor to the Crucifix or Empty/Plain Cross is a matter of conscious. For those who antagonistic towards the Roman Church or who wanted no one to mistake them for being Catholic or supporting the Papal claims, wearing a Crucifix is ill advised for it tends to identify a person as Catholic. The Plain Cross in contrast is a universal symbol of Protestantism, with Anglicans, Lutherans, Anabaptists, Pentecostals, and more implementing it in their altars and churches. The Plain cross however was used long before The Reformation, it was used by Emperor Constantine in 333 A.D., and has been popular symbol of Eastern Orthodox Christianity, particularly the Greek Cross that is the shape of the plus sign (+) and the elongated Latin version with Egyptian designs (Sinai Cross). Eastern Orthodox also use Crucifixes, but in Orthodoxy the tendency is to depict Christ Risen and Enthroned, or Christos Pantokrator. The Cross was used prior to Constantine in 100 A.D. by Early Christians in caves and catacombs; so it was no merely Byzantine symbol of Christianity.

In the end each individual must decide what is appropriate for their daily use. For some the Crucifix has too many Medieval connotations and represents Roman Catholicism, while for others it is simply the scene of Christ's sacrifice on the cross (John 20, Matthew 27). The Plain Cross is used by Catholics, usually in Pattee or Formee styles of the Crusader era and they tend to not be elongated, but more Greek in shape and size (+). The Roman Catholic Church uses the Crucifix not merely to remember Christ's sacrifice until He comes (1 Corinthians 11:26), but rather because of the Moderna Devotio (Thomas A. Kempis, "The Imitation of Christ" was a member) movement which wanted to mediate on Life of Christ and His Sufferings, using them as model for Christian life, The Way of Cross (Crucis de Via Del Rosa, the Stations of the Cross is usually practiced on Good Friday, but there are many who practice it all year), Stigmata (a strange supernatural experience where a monk, nun or holy Catholic person receive the exact wounds of Christ on their body, in side, hands, feet, and head), and other Passion devotions that 'tend' to verge into sadism, blood cults, and even mutilation of their own bodies (see Brazilian self-flagellation).

A former Roman Catholic friend named Laura said she was uncomfortable with the Crucifix, "because it is a symbol of death, a spirit of death surrounds it,"; it is Christ dead, and in Rome where Laura lived they do not preach the Gospel, evangelists are rounded up by police [and mafia inferred] and the crucifix is the Roman Church's proclamation that they want Catholics to do penance and Sacraments as if Jesus' death was not enough, and as if Resurrection has no power; they want to keep the Resurrection power from Catholics; the crucifix is thus a flipped image encouraging Catholics to do suffering to atone, oppose to believing the Truth that Jesus' death was enough for sin (1 Peter3:8). I myself tended to favor the Crucifix as reminder that my sins were nailed to cross, and how much Christ loves me, but I do sense some dark feelings with the crucifix, and so the Reformers who said, "It does not show resurrection," indeed does take its toll on the viewer (in fact, there are some Cults of Death like "The Day of the Dead" and other corpus traditions of Portuguese that downright creepy) . Its important to understand that Crucifix came during shift in Medieval Christianity, when Jesus was usually depicted as mean Warlord on throne demanding tribute and devotion to the Crucified Christ that allowed Medieval Christians to relate to Christ's sufferings (they had many, malnutrition,  from plague to wars and genocidal episodes) and his saving death. Ironically, the Crucifix which depicts Christ's ultimate sacrifice for all sin (1 Peter 3:18, Romans 6:10, and Hebrews 9:28) is downplayed by The Roman Catholic Sacraments (Sacrifices); so a dichotomy and paradox plagues Catholics who see Jesus dying once and for all sin, but being taught wrongly by a priest that they must do penitential Sacraments to save themselves (violating Scripture: Ephesians 2:8-9, John 3:16-18, Romans 10:9-10).

Ultimately, every believer must decide what they are most comfortable with. Perhaps there is compromise, wearing a Crucifix during Passion Week, but a plain cross on Resurrection Sunday and the rest of the year. It depends on your perspective, but there is a risk in wearing Crucifix that people will assume your Roman Catholic, even though the symbol is not the sole possession of any one church.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Israel’s Conquest of Canaan: The Nephilim and Giants

  Christianity Today asserts that the conquest of Canaan can be a “stumbling block” for believers. This probably is because of a foolish idea of comparing it to a modern conquest happening in our world. The truth is that God had Israel conquer Canaan because it was ruled by evil giants, “We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them.” (Numbers 13:33). These are Anakim or Nephilim, the children of angels and human women, “When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God (angels) saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. The...

Dispensationalism

John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) was a man who did two things, he took 70th week of the Book of Daniel and stretched out to the End Times, and he was the father of  Dispensationalism , a belief system that God dispenses different peoples with separate blessings and covenants. According to Darb'ys doctrine of Dispensationalism, God dispenses different covenants. There are total of seven dispensations that divide the history of man: I. Dispensation of Innocence (prior to the Fall, "Do not east of the Fruit of Good and Eve, Eden), II. Dispensation of Conscience ( You must assuage guilt and sin with blood sacrifices.) III. Dispensation of Human Government (Multiply and Subdue the world, example the Tower of Babel Gen 11:1-9, and Genesis 1:28). IV. Dispensation of the Promise (Dwell in Canaan, Jerusalem) V. Dispensation of the Law ("Obey the Law of Moses and the Prophets"). VI. Dispensation of Grace (The Church, Jesus Christ has come...

Jesus’ Name in Aramaic

There has been a trend to render Jesus’ name Hebrew, יֵשׁוּעַ , Yeshua. The problem is neither Christ nor his apostles, nor the Jews in 30-33 A.D. spoke Hebrew, they spoke Aramaic. A ramaic is the oldest language on earth and was the language Jesus spoke. In fact, the oldest Old Testament is the Septuagint a Greco translation around 132 B.C.E. (165 Years Before Christ)that was translated from Aramaic. The Masoretic Text, The Hebrew Old Testament most Bibles use, dates from 7th to 10th Century A.D. (Medieval Times).  This translation does not cross reference with the words of Christ in the New Testament which are Aramaic and Koine Greek.  If the Aramaic was what Jesus spoke, then by what name would have been called? Jesus’ name in Aramaic is Isho or Eesho, spelled ܝܫܘܥ . That is the name of our Lord in Aramaic! He would have heard his name in this dialect, “Hail Isho or Eesho!” as well as the Greek, Ἰ ησο ῦ ς , Iesous.  Aramaic is disappearing, only a few peop...