|
Resources » Our Holy Land Gift GuideThe History of Crosses and CrucifixesA note from Rev. Ricky Anderson, owner of Holy Land Treasures USA This history of Crosses and Crucifixes is posted on Crosses.org but the author is unknown and therefore is posted here without his or her permission. I think that it is very informative. See all of our Crosses from the Holy Land or our lovely Crucifixes The cross most commonly referred to and most usually depicted on Christian monuments of all ages is that called the crux immissa, or crux capitata (i.e. the vertical trunk extending beyond the transverse beam). It was on a cross such as this that Christ actually died, and not, as some would maintain, on a crux commissa. And this opinion is largely supported by the testimony of the writers we have quoted. The crux immissa is that which is usually known as the Latin cross, in which the transverse beam is usually set two-thirds of the way up the vertical. The equilateral, or Greek cross, adopted by the East and by Russia, has the transverse set half-way up the vertical. Both the Latin and Greek crosses play an important part in the architectural and decorative styles of church buildings during the fourth and subsequent centuries. The church of Santa Croce at Ravenna, is in the form of a Latin cross; and on the pillars of a church built by Bishop Paulinus at Tyre in the fourth century the cross is carved in the Latin way. The facade of the Catholicon at Athens shows a large Latin cross. And this style of cross was adopted by West and East until the schism occurred between the two churches. Indeed, at Constantinople the church of the Apostles, the first church of S. Sophia, consecrated by Constantine, those of the monastery of St. John at Studium, of St. Demetrius at Salonica, of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai, as well as many churches at Athens, are in the form of the Latin cross; and it appears in the decorations of capitals, balustrades, and mosaics. In the far-off lands of the Picts, the Bretons, and the Saxons, it was carved on stones and rocks, with elaborate and complex Runic decorations. And even in the Catholicon at Athens, crosses no less lavishly ornamented are to be found. In out-of-the-way places in Scotland, too, it has been discovered (cf. Dictionnaire de 1'Acad�mie des Beaux-Arts, V, 38). (ORAZIO MARUCCHI) The cross also played an important part in heraldry and diplomatic science. The former does not directly come within our scope; of the second we shall give the briefest outlines. Crosses are to be found on documents of early medieval times and, being placed at the head of a deed, were equivalent to an invocation of heaven, whether they were plain or ornamental. They were at times placed before signatures, and they have even been equilavalent to signatures in themselves. Indeed, from the tenth century we find, under contracts, roughly-made crosses that have all the appearance of being intended as signatures. Thus did Hugh Capet, Robert Capet, Henry I, and Philip I sign their official documents. This usage declined in the thirteenth century and appeared again in the fifteenth. In our own day the cross is reserved as the attestation-mark of illiterate people. A cross was characteristic of the signature of Apostolic notaries, but this was carefully designed, not rapidly written. In the early Middle Ages crosses were decorated with even greater magnif�cence. In the centre were to be seen medallions representing the Lamb of God, Christ, or the saints. Such is the case in the Velletri cross and that which Justin II gave to St. Peter's, mentioned above, and again in the silver cross of Agnello at Ravenna (cf. Ciampini, Vet. mon., II, Pl. XIV). All this kind of decoration displays the substitution of some more or less complete symbol for the figure of Christ on the cross. (ORAZIO MARUCCHI) Another symbol which has been connected with the cross is the ansated cross (crux ansata) of the ancient Egyptians, wrongly called the "ansated key of the Nile". It often appears as a symbolic sign in the hands of the goddess Sekhet. From the earliest times also it appears among the hieroglyphic signs symbolic of life or of the living, and was transliterated into Greek as Anse (Ansa). But the meaning of this sign is very obscure (Da Morgan, Recherches sur les origines de l'Egypte, 1896-98) We may add that some have claimed to find the cross on Grecian monuments in the letter (chi), which, sometimes in conjunction with (rho), represented on coins the initial letters of the Greek word chrysoun, "gold", or other words indicative of the value of the coin, or the name of the coiner (Madden, "History of Jewish Coinage", London, 1864, 83-87; Eckhel, "Doctrina nummorum", VIII, 89; F. X. Kraus, "Real-Encyklop�die der christlichen Alterth�mer", II, 224-225). The Processional Cross In the Russian Church the conventional form in which the cross is usually shown is in fact a three-barred cross, of which the upper bar represents the title of the cross, the second the arms, and the lowest, which is always inclined at an angle, the suppedaneum or foot-rest. In England it may be said that in the early years of Elizabeth's reign a clean sweep was made of the crosses so long venerated by the people. All the roods were ordered to be pulled down, and the crosses were removed from the altars, or rather the communion-tables which replaced the altars. The only check in this movement was the fact that the queen herself, for some rather obscure reason, insisted at first on retaining the crucifix in her own private chapel. The presence of a crucifix or even a plain cross upon the altar was long held to be illegal in virtue of the "Ornaments Rubrics". In recent years, however, there has been a notable reaction, and crosses, or even crucifixes, are quite commonly seen upon the altar of Anglican churches. Again, in the reredos recently erected in St. Paul's Cathedral in London a large crucifix, with the figures of St. Mary and St. John, forms the most conspicuous feature. In Lutheran churches there has always been much tolerance for the crucifix either upon or behind the altar. (HERBERT THURSTON)
Biblical Cross Quotes: "For Christ sent me not to baptize; but to preach the gospel: not in wisdom of speech, lest the cross of Christ should be made void" I Cor., i, 17 "With Christ I am nailed to the cross" Gal., ii, 19 Christ . . . . "might reconcile both to God in one body by the cross" Eph., ii, 16 "For many walk . . . enemies of the cross of Christ" Phil., iii 18 "Blotting out the handwriting of the decree that was against us, which was contrary to us. "But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ; by whom the world is crucified to me, and I to the world". Gal., vi, 14 It seems clear, therefore, that for St. Paul the Cross of Christ was not only a precious remembrance of Christ's sufferings and death, but also a symbol closely associated with His sacrifice and the mystery of the Passion. (FERNAND CABROL-1895)
A crucifix (from Latin cruci fixus, meaning "one fixed to a cross") is a cross with a representation of Jesus' body, or corpus. It is a principal symbol of the Christian religion, primarily used in the Catholic, Anglican, and Eastern Orthodox Churches. It emphasizes Christ's sacrifice—his death by crucifixion, his subsequent resurrection, and the grace and rebirth that he offers to believers. This history of the crucifix goes back to the beginning of Christianity, and Christ's death on the cross. However, it was originally seen as a grotesque symbol, a sign of death. It was only over time that the crucifix, through its many phases, was imbued with the meanings it now holds for Christian believers. The crucifix is a reminder of the trials and tribulations that human beings face and the hope that comes from the redemption offered through Christ's death on the cross to those who believe. It is a fusion of art and faith, and has been a consistent symbol of Catholicism for over 1500 years.
Crosses CrossFor other uses, see Cross (disambiguation).
A cross is a geometrical figure consisting of two lines or bars perpendicular to each other, dividing one or two of the lines in half. The lines usually run vertically and horizontally; if they run diagonally, the design is technically termed a saltire. The cross is one of the most ancient human symbols, and is used by many religions, such as Christianity. It is frequently a representation of the division of the world into four elements (Chevalier, 1997) (or cardinal points), or alternately as the union of the concepts of divinity, the vertical line, and the world, the horizontal line (Koch, 1955).
[edit] EtymologyThe word cross was introduced to English in the 10th century as the term for the instrument of the torturous execution of Christ (gradually replacing the earlier word rood), ultimately from Latin crux, via Old Irish cros. The word can nowadays refer to the geometrical shape unrelated to its Christian significance. The Latin Crux (translating Greek stauros) was a Roman torture device used for crucifixion.
[edit] History(Heraclion Archaeological Museum, Greece) It is not known when the first cross image was made; after circles, crosses are one of the first symbols drawn by children of all cultures. There are many cross-shaped incisions in European cult caves, dating back to the earliest stages of human cultural development in the stone age. Like other symbols from this period, their use continued in the Celtic and Germanic cultures in Europe. For example, celtic coins minted many centuries before the Christian era may have an entire side showing this type of cross, sometimes with the cardinal points marked by concave depressions in the same style as in stone age carvings. Other coins may be showing the cross held by a rider on a horse and springing forth a fern leaf, sometimes identified as a Tree of Life symbol.
[edit] As markingsWritten crosses are used for many different purposes, particularly in mathematics.
A cross is often used as a check mark because it can be clearer, easier to create with an ordinary pen or pencil, and less obscuring of the text or image that is already present than a large dot. It also allows marking a position more accurately than a large dot. A large cross through a text often means that it is wrong or should be considered deleted.
[edit] As emblems and symbols
[edit] In heraldryThese crosses are ones used primarily or exclusively in heraldry and do not necessarily have any special meanings commonly associated with them. Not all the crosses of heraldry and the crosses with commonly known contexts are listed below.
There are numerous other variations on the cross in heraldry. See heraldry for background information. The semi-classic book A Glossary of Terms Used in Heraldry by James Parker (1894) is online, and contains much information about variants of crosses used in heraldry.
[edit] In flagsSeveral flags have crosses, including all the nations of Scandinavia, whose crosses are known as Scandinavian crosses, and many nations in the Southern Hemisphere, which incorporate the Southern Cross. The Flag of Switzerland since the 17th century has displayed an equilateral cross in a square (the only square flag of a sovereign state apart from the Flag of the Vatican City); the Red Cross emblem was based on the Swiss flag. Links to our Crosses and Crucifixes categories Wall Crosses Olive Wood Crosses Wall Crucifixes Large Wall Crucifixes Olive Wood Crucifix Wooden Crucifixes Catholic The following article is an excellent article written in 1998 by The Rev. Paul McCain of St. Louis, MO. Many Christians take offense at the Crucifix and we feel that the Rev. McCain addresses this subject very well. On CrucifixesDecember 21, 1998 Greetings all, I was asked a question recently re. the use of the crucifix in Lutheran churches, and decided to compose an answer that might be an “all purpose” response to future questions about the crucifix. The Synod’s Church Information Center is adding it to the “FAQ” they maintain on the WWW site. Thought you might be interested or find the following of use. They will be “tweaking” it for typos, so feel free to correct any you find. Q. Question: Is the use of crucifixes a Roman Catholic practice? Doesn’t the empty cross provide a better symbol for Lutherans? How does the LCMS feel about using a crucifix in church? [Note: A crucifix is a cross with a statue of the crucified Christ on it]. A. A common misunderstanding among some some Lutherans is the opinion that a crucifix, or the use of a crucifix, is a “Roman Catholic” practice. The history of Lutheranism demonstrates that the crucifix was a regular and routine feature of Lutheran worship and devotional life during Luther’s lifetime and during the period of Lutheran Orthdoxy. It was also the case among the founding fathers of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod. If you were to visit most of the original congregations of the LCMS here in the United States you would find lovely crucifixes adorning their altars, and in addition, beautiful statues on the altar of Christ and the four evangelists, or other such scenes. There is nothing uniquely Roman Catholic about this. Many Lutherans and Lutheran congregations use crucifixes. Crucifixes are used in the chapels of both of our seminaries. Lutheranism has always considered the crucifix to be a powerful reminder of the sacrifice our Lord Jesus made for us and our salvation, on the cross. A crucifix vividly brings to mind the Apostle Paul’s divinely inspired words, “We preach Christ and Him crucified” (1 Cor. 1:23). Interestingly enough, while there is certainly nothing “wrong” with an “empty” cross, the practice of using an “empty cross” on a Lutheran congregation’s altar comes more from non-Lutheran sources. At the time of the Reformation there was conflict between Lutherans and Reformed Christians over the proper place of pictures, images, statues and the like in the church. Lutherans stood with historic Christendom in realizing that such art in the church was not wrong, and was a great aid for helping to focus devotional thoughts on the truths of the Word of God, no greater truth can be found that the death of Jesus Christ our Lord for the world’s salvation. The “empty cross” is not a symbol of Christ’s resurrection, as some say, for the fact is that the cross would have been empty regardless of whether or not Christ had risen from the grave. The point to be kept clear here is that both an “empty cross” and a crucifix, symbolize the same thing: the death of Christ our Lord for the salvation of the world. Many feel that the crucifix symbolizes this truth more clearly and strikingly. That has been the traditional opinion of historic Lutheranism, until the last fifty years ago, due to the influence we will now mention. Some Lutherans began to move away from crucifixes during the age of Lutheran Pietism, which rejected much of Lutheran doctrine and consequently many Lutheran worship practices. At the time, Lutheran Pietists, contrary to the clear postion of Luther and the earlier Lutherns, held that symbols such as the crucifix were wrong. This was never the view of historic Lutheranism. Here in America, Lutherans have always felt a certain pressure to “fit in” with the Reformed Christianity that predominates much of the Protestant church here. Thus, for some Lutherans this meant doing away with things such as crucifixes, and vestments, and other traditional forms of Lutheran worship and piety. It is sad when some Lutherans are made to feel embarrassed about their Lutheranism by members of churches that teach the Word of God in error and who do not share Lutheanism’s clear confession and practice of the full truth of the Word of God. Lutheranism has always recognized that the use of any symbol (even the empty cross) can become an idolatrous practice, if in any way people are led to believe there is “power in the cross” or that a picture or representation of a cross has some sort of ability, in itself, to bring us into relationship with Christ and His Gospel. Any of God’s good gifts can be turned against Him in this life and become an end in themselves. Lutherans have never believed that banning or limiting proper artwork in the church is the way to prevent its improper use. Rather, we believe that proper teaching and right use is the best way, and the way that is in keeping with the gift of freedom we have in Christ to use all things to the glory and honor of God. Thus, many Lutherans use and enjoy the crucifix as a meaningful reminder of our Lord’s suffering and death. It might interest you to know that our Synod’s president has a beautiful crucifix adorning the wall of his office, constantly reminding him and visitors to his office of the great love of God that is ours in Christ Jesus our Lord. In short, and this is the most important point of all: there is nothing contrary to God’s Holy Word, or our Lutheran Confessions, about the proper use of the crucifix, just as there is nothing wrong with the proper use of an empty cross, or any other church symbol by which we are reminded of the great things God has done for us. We need to guard against quickly dismissing out of hand practices that we believe are “too Roman Catholic” before we more adequately explore their use and history in our own church. In Christian freedom, we use either the crucifix or an empty cross and should not judge or condemn one another for using either nor not using either symbol of our Lord’s sacrifice for our sins. ******************************************************** Rev. Paul T. McCain Assistant to the President The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod Mailing address: The International Center 1333 South Kirkwood Road St. Louis, Missouri 63122 |
|
© Copyright 2006 - 2012 Holy Land Treasures USA All rights reserved. |