Is a Cross with the Risen Christ licit?

 

Is a Cross with the Risen Christ licit?


JANUARY 2011/OCTOBER 2012/JUNE/JULY 2013/5 DECEMBER 2014

“Not to oppose error is to approve it, and not to defend the truth is to suppress it” – Pope St. Felix III

 

Note: In this report I may occasionally use bold print, Italics, or word underlining for emphasis. This will be my personal emphasis and not that of the source that I am quoting.

 

Q:


Dear Ron,

This is an issue that was brought to me by conservative Catholics. They are upset over the following. The most popular new icon being installed in Indian churches seems to be the one of the Risen Christ. These icons are often behind the main altar, sometimes outside the church building. The main problem for these Catholics is that the wounds of Jesus are not visible. They seem to believe that such an icon comes from Mormonism, which treats the passion of Jesus as a past thing and irrelevant today. They are familiar with the approved icon that is used at Easter tide and which shows Jesus’ wounds. They argue that there is neither precedent nor ecclesial approval for this new model. Your comments please.

Regards, Michael Prabhu – India

 

A:


First, I point out that the Catholic Church writes its laws and doctrines in a style referred to as the positive-affirmative. This simply means that what they write is what is either required or what is permitted. As an example, The Sacramentary has a section in the beginning that lists what is permitted to be placed upon the altar.

However, it does not say what is not permitted. For instance, it does not say that there cannot be a statue of Buddha on the altar, although we all know this is not permissible. As you can imagine, if the Church was required to list all prohibited items the lists would indeed run into the millions! I think you ‘get the picture’ here. I occasionally hear about clergy and laity claiming things like, “the Sacramentary doesn’t prohibit this which means it is all right”. They are, of course, wrong and are attempting to use a lame excuse to justify their errors. Things such as a cross with a risen Christ are ‘modernist ideas’ implemented at various local levels without Vatican approval! As a reference point for you, I am quoting from The Sacramentary used in the USA. India may have some variations in The Sacramentary that is used there. The Sacramentary and The General Instructions of the Roman Missal are the primary books that describe what images that are required or permitted within a Church. Since neither mentions a risen Christ on a cross we turn to Canon Law. “The liturgical books approved by competent authority are to be faithfully observed in the celebration of the sacraments; therefore no one on personal authority may add, remove or change anything in them.”

 

As you know from reading my reports, I extensively quote and footnote writings that are from or about Holy Church. So, finding writings to quote about what is prohibited is scant at best! I will begin my answer by quoting some things on this subject that do originate with Holy Church.

 

There is also to be a cross, with the figure of Christ crucified upon it, either on the altar or near it, where it is clearly visible to the assembled congregation. It is appropriate that such a cross, which calls to mind for the faithful the saving Passion of the Lord, remain near the altar even outside of liturgical celebrations.”

“Sacred Images: Images of the Lord, the Blessed Virgin Mary, and the Saints, in that heavenly liturgy which is celebrated in the holy city of Jerusalem toward which she journeys as a pilgrim, and where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God; and by venerating the memory of the Saints, she hopes one day to have some part and fellowship with them.

 

 

 

Thus, images of the Lord, the Blessed Virgin Mary, and the Saints, in accordance with the Church’s most ancient tradition, should be displayed for veneration by the faithful in sacred buildings and should be arranged so as to usher the faithful toward the mysteries of faith celebrated there.” A risen Christ on a cross will not draw people to the Passion and suffering and death of Jesus on Calvary!

 

With the above in mind, many if not most people who convert to our Catholic faith get their first exposure to our beliefs by visiting the inside of one of our churches, perhaps during a wedding or funeral. If these ‘newbies’ are introduced to a risen Christ on a cross they can easily become confused and possibly believe that we teach that Jesus was resurrected on the cross (a heresy), not from a burial cave! Catholic images and statuary have always been a central element to teaching us about our faith and drawing us to meditate upon what we see! “Holy images have a similar purpose. When we look at the crucifix (not a risen Christ on a cross), it reminds us of the sacrifice of Jesus. Our thoughts may have been wandering, but when we see the crucifix, we are able to refocus and return to prayer. As our physical eyes look at the statue, painting, card, or other image it helps the ‘eyes’ of our heart and mind to turn to Him Who is represented in the artwork. Through history many images were also meant to instruct the faithful. When reading and books were not accessible to the masses, the artwork in the church was a teaching tool.”

By the accounts of the mysteries of our redemption, portrayed in pictures or in other representations, the people are instructed and confirmed in the articles of faith which should be kept in mind and constantly pondered over – The Council of Trent.”

 

“For St. Paul, the Cross of Christ was not only a precious remembrance of Christ’s suffering and death, but also a symbol closely associated with His sacrifice and the mystery of the Passion. It was, moreover, natural that it should be venerated.”

 

“The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, ‘the honor rendered to an image passes to its prototype’, and ‘whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it’. The honor paid to sacred images is a ‘respectful veneration’, not the adoration due to God alone.”

 

“The altar of the New Covenant is the Lord’s Cross (in our faith the cross means a crucifix), from which the sacraments of the Paschal mystery flow.”

“By His glorious Cross Christ has won salvation for all men.”

 

Over the many years of doing Catholic research I frequently check the columns written by the Catholic experts at the Eternal Word Television Network (Mother Angelica) in Irondale, Alabama. EWTN has a multi-decade reputation of being orthodox and traditional. I will quote from a few of their past Q&A’s concerning the risen Christ on a cross.

 

“I would still try to make the argument, however, that a “resurrected” crucifix is not a crucifix at all, but a flight of artistic fancy that is historical and not founded in Catholic liturgical tradition. The signs of sacrifice on the resurrected Lord are the marks of the nails and the opening in His side, not the Cross behind Him. That is biblically, historically and liturgically incorrect.”

 

Question: Which cross is preferred/acceptable as the main Crucifix in the front of Catholic Churches, the Crucified Christ or the Risen Christ?

Answer: The Crucified Christ, because it was His Crucifixion that saved us.”

 

Question: Is there a rule or regulation requiring that a cross present on an altar during Mass must contain a corpus?

Answer: The image of the cross should preferably be a crucifix, that is, have the corpus attached, especially in the case of a cross that is erected in a place of honor inside a church.

The Ceremonial of Bishops comments that the image on the cross is to face forward. (n. 128) In the Latin version (of The
Ceremonial of Bishops), which is the authoritative version, “cross” is “crux” meaning a crucifix. This has always meant a crucifix. The same word is used in documents before and after the Second Vatican Council. Had a new interpretation of this word been intended, mention would have been made somewhere. A risen Christ crucifix is an oxymoron and does not fulfill the requirement for a crucifix since a risen Christ is not a crucified Christ.”

 

“As the entrance song is being sung, the procession moves from the vesting room (sacristy) to the sanctuary (chancel) in the following order: censer bearer carrying a censer with burning incense; an acolyte carrying the cross, with the image to the front, etc.”

 

“The General Instruction of the Roman Missal requires that a crucifix (a cross with a corpus of the crucified Lord on it) be on or near the altar. If there is a crucifix affixed to the wall or suspended above the altar or if the processional crucifix is placed near the altar, then no additional crucifix is needed on the altar.”

 

“In the context of the Roman liturgy, ‘cross’ means a crucifix (a cross with Christ crucified upon it). A figure of a risen Christ behind an altar cannot be regarded as a substitute for the cross.”

 

What some modernist churches allow is almost unbelievable. A few years ago I visited a Catholic Church within my own diocese to pickup some old pews for a shrine. I observed, in the sanctuary, a full-size statue of the Blessed Virgin Mary with a lot of exposed cleavage! So, would venerating this image bring to mind all that our Lady represents or could it bring us to the near occasion of sin by having lustful fantasies? (This paragraph is just a bit of venting on my part).

 

If you need further information, please ask. END

 

This report prepared on November 16, 2010 by Ronald Smith, 11701 Maplewood Road, Chardon, Ohio 44024-8482, E-mail: <hfministry@roadrunner.com>. Readers may copy and distribute this report as desired to anyone as long as the content is not altered and it is copied in its entirety. In this little ministry I do free Catholic and occult related research and answer your questions. Questions are answered in this format with detailed footnotes on all quotes. If you have a question(s), please submit it to this landmail or e-mail address. Answers are usually forthcoming within one week. PLEASE NOTIFY ME OF ANY ERRORS THAT YOU MAY OBSERVE!

 

Å Let us recover by penance what we have lost by sin Å

 

THE ENQUIRY WHICH I FORWARDED TO RON SMITH- MICHAEL

From:
Name Withheld
To:
michaelprabhu@vsnl.net
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2010 10:39 PM

Subject: Fw: The idol and the Mormon rejection of the cross

Dear Michael,

It was nice talking to you this morning… I’m attaching an article as per our telephonic discussion. It would be helpful if you could provide additional insight after going through the article.

God Bless you and your family. CR, Goa

 

Godhead (Latter Day Saints)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godhead_%28Latter_Day_Saints%29

 



Latter-day Saints believe in the resurrection of Jesus, as depicted in this replica of Bertel Thorvaldsen‘s Christus statue located in the North Visitors’ Center on Temple Square in Salt Lake City.

 

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints#cite_note-35#cite_note-35

Latter-day Saints believe that Jesus’ status as the son of a mortal woman (Mary) gave him the ability to suffer temptation (yet he did not succumb to it)[53] and experience physical death; while his status as the Son of God gave him the power to lay down and take up his life again at will. The church also believes in the physical resurrection of Jesus’ body.[54]

Because of its emphasis on Jesus’ resurrection and his status as the living head of the church, the church does not use the symbol of the Christian cross except on the uniforms of military chaplains. Instead, the church tends to focus on the belief that Jesus overcame suffering and death and that he lives today.

[53] Newsroom.lds.org. “Euthanasia and Prolonging Life”. Press release. http://www.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=aae4b28d7cb9f010VgnVCM100000176f620aRCRD&vgnextchannel=726511154963d010VgnVCM1000004e94610aRCRD. Retrieved March 2007. 

[54]
Newsroom.lds.org (2006-10-19). “Political Neutrality”. Press release. http://www.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=6203d93c8688f010VgnVCM100000176f620aRCRD&vgnextchannel=726511154963d010VgnVCM1000004e94610aRCRD. Retrieved March 2007 ; see also Newsroom.lds.org, “No Thumbs Up or Down To Legislature”, Retrieved May 2007.




THE RISEN CHRIST …ON A CROSS …WITH THE WOUNDS OF THE PASSION

 

A SECOND ENQUIRY

From:
Name Withheld To:
michaelprabhu@vsnl.net
Cc:
director@ephesians5-11.org

Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 9:42 AM

Subject: How to open discussion regarding Risen Christ statue in the church and homes

Dear Bro in Jesus Christ, praised be the name of Jesus and Mary,

In our church we have the Risen Christ idol from last 4yrs+. I request your help by the grace of God how to tackle this situation and to remove the same. Please guide me with church documents to this effect as to how it has entered the church. Also enlighten me all other errors which has entered the church for which what precaution we may take for the same. Kindly also update me with all changes and facts via my email. Thanking you and may God bless you all and us. AF (V), Mumbai

From:
prabhu
To: Name Withheld
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 10:48 AM

Subject: Re: How to open discussion regarding Risen Christ statue in the church and homes

Dear V…

On the subject of the “Risen Christ” I do have some information for you. I have to retrieve it and then send it.

In the meantime, I hope you don’t mind my asking you how you obtained my email address.

May I also have your telephone number please? Love and prayers, Michael NO RESPONSE

 

 






 


THE RISEN CHRIST ON A CROSS

 

 

 

 




 

TRADITIONAL RESURRECTED CHRIST ICONS

 

From:
Name Withheld
To:
prabhu
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 10:43 AM

Subject: Re: CONFESSION PROBLEM

Dear Michael, […] Your “Emperor Emmanuel” report was very enlightening.

Also your article on the “Risen Lord” images. 

More and more people are installing the image of the Risen Lord. In our very parish, they are circulating the Risen Lord images to all the families.

There is an urgent need for the awareness of subtle errors that are creeping in the Catholic Church. 

1. The whole emphasis is on “Celebration” which has evolved through the charismatic understanding that the Lord is risen and so there is need to “Rejoice and Celebrate”. In fact, Fr. Erasto of the Blessed Sacrament Fathers openly teaches that Christ died and rose at the same time.  

2. Actually, resurrection is the ‘result’ of the passion of Christ. Therefore, the need of a crucifix to remind us as long as we are in the world we have to carry our cross and die on it. Here the emphasis is more on penance, sacrifice, mortification and a continuous purification through the Blood of Jesus. What is strange is that the charismatic or the new movements call on the Blood of Christ without going through his passion or meditating on his suffering.

3. The world is suffering and it needs a God who is on their side. When they look at him struggling on the cross innocently, it definitely gives them hope to live. By just focusing on the “Risen Lord” and bypassing his suffering, it does not give us hope.

4. Whenever an “Exorcism” is done, the priest uses the “Crucifix” and not the “Risen Lord”. Satan is defeated by seeing the wounds of Jesus bleeding and the smell of the Blood suffocates him.

Hence, it is highly recommended to keep a crucifix either big or small to ward off our homes from all evil and to continue to protect us, so that the Lord sees the blood on our lintel and pass by. Our Lady of La Salette gives us a crucifix with added tools – hammer & pliers. Actually Our Lady of La Salette is seen wearing this crucifix and she has promised that this crucifix would emanate “Light” during the dark days.

5. Imagine how improper it would be to take away the crucifix from St .Francis Xavier’s hand and replace it with the “Risen Lord”.

6. “Every time anyone kisses the Crucifix or looks at it with devotion, the gaze of the Blessed Trinity is fixed upon that soul – and at the same moment a wondrous beauty is added to that soul, and a reward treasured for an endless glory”- Words to St. Gertrude.

Thanking you very much for all your mails and your fervent love for the Church. Keep doing the good work. God Bless you. Keep good health. Praying for you. Continue praying for priests.

 

 

 


Risen Christ on Cross

Q:
Dear Mr. Ronald Smith, I request you to kindly e-mail me detailed information of the
risen Christ on the cross. Here in India there are several Catholic Churches that have taken down the corpus cross and have put up the risen Christ on the cross. The faithful are also following this trend in their homes as well as many book stores are selling these risen Christ crosses. Another error is that the image of Christ has the left foot over the right.

Capt. Mervin John Lobo, Mahim, Mumbai 400 016 India

 

A:Capt. Lobo: Along with this report I am sending you my original report dated November 16, 2010 titled Is A Cross With The Risen Cross Licit? It should answer all of your questions regarding the Risen Christ Cross. “The cross (meaning a cross with attached corpus of Jesus) is the most widespread and venerated sacramental of the Church. This symbol of mankind’s redemption has been used since the early days of the Church, and today it is present in all Catholic and most Christian Churches (without a corpus).”

“There is also to be a cross, with the figure of Christ crucified upon it, either on the altar or near it, where it is clearly visible to the assembled congregation. It is appropriate that such a cross, which calls to mind for the faithful the saving Passion of the Lord, remain near the altar even outside of liturgical celebrations.”

 

Most crucifixes are made showing the right foot of Jesus crossing on top of His left foot. However, some people have told me that they have a crucifix of Jesus with His left foot crossed over His right foot. In all of my research documents I cannot find a rubric (requirement) for one way or the other.

 

This report prepared on Holy Wednesday, April 21, 2011 by Ronald Smith, 11701 Maplewood Road, Chardon, Ohio 44024-8482, E-mail: <hfministry@roadrunner.com>. Readers may copy and distribute this report as desired to anyone as long as the content is not altered and it is copied in its entirety. In this little ministry I do free Catholic and occult related research and answer your questions. Questions are answered in this format with detailed footnotes on all quotes. If you have a question(s), please submit it to this landmail or e-mail address. Answers are usually forthcoming within one week. PLEASE NOTIFY ME OF ANY DOCTRINAL ERRORS THAT YOU MAY OBSERVE!

 

Let us recover by penance what we have lost by sin

 

Our church has a large cross with a figure of the risen Christ attached but no crucifix. Even the processional cross has the risen Christ. Shouldn’t there be a crucifix near the altar?

http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/quickquestions/?qid=176

The General Instruction of the Roman Missal instructs that there must be a cross (with a crucified corpus) on or near the altar, “positioned either on the altar or near it, and . . . clearly visible to the people gathered there” (GIRM 308). In the case where a crucifix is not in the sanctuary, the processional cross with the figure of Christ crucified upon it would be an option.-Peggy Frye

 

UPDATE OCTOBER 2012

Paganisation of the Liturgy in India

http://www.einsicht-online.org/assets/download/e3408.pdf
EXTRACT

By C.B. Andrade Ph. D

The Risen Christ is never depicted on a Cross

 

 

 

 

From:
CD
To:
prabhu
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 12:46 AM Subject: Article on ML

Dear Michael, Praise the Lord.

Please follow the link for your article ‘Is a Cross with the Risen Christ licit?’ published on Laitytude:-http://mumbailaity.wordpress.com/2012/10/20/is-a-cross-with-the-risen-christ-licit-by-michael-prabhu

 

From: RPC To: michaelprabhu@vsnl.net Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 4:34 AM

Subject: Risen Christ Crucifix

Dear Michael,
I read the reply of Ron Smith to your letter on this subject.
I am sure that you know that St. Paul preached the Risen Christ. Whether this was what persuaded him of the authenticity of Jesus or was the reason that he convinced the Apostles, who were strong on Jewish tradition, that Jesus was sent to all, including non-Jews.
My personal preference is to have no distractions on the Altar or around it. As Ron Smith writes the nails in the cross and the wound in his side, not the body or the Cross, are the relevant symbols. They are symbols that he was DEAD. Anything more, as many devout Catholics like to add in flowers and artifacts, can be distracting and more about life in the world than unity with Christ in worship of the Father.

From: FM To: michaelprabhu@vsnl.net Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 6:14 PM

Subject: The risen CHRIST cross

Please see my comments on your Laitytude submission. No doubt you are a profound scholar and deep thinker, but I think you will agree that in these days of turmoil in the Church, we can do without one more controversy. Our so called shepherds are running wild with the perks and lifestyle changes that come with promotions in the hierarchy, and feel that they have become undisputed/absolute authorities in their little kingdoms/fiefdoms called parishes. They must be checked or else every parish priest will interpret as he pleases, and cause confusion.

From:
prabhu
To:
FM
Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2012 11:00 PM

Subject: Re: The risen CHRIST cross

I thank you for your very kind letter. I greatly appreciate your love for the Church that prompted you to write to me.

To clarify, it was not I who submitted the referred article to the Laitytude. The article is on my web site www.ephesians-511.net which is in the public domain and it was taken from there.

My articles are written not with the intention of “creating controversy” but to create awareness of what is right and wrong about issues related to the Catholic Faith. All articles and reports must be read in the context of my entire ministry, otherwise misunderstanding might arise.

Yes, I am aware of the other issues [financial, moral, etc.] but the concern of my ministry is on the spiritual aspects mainly.

From:
FM To:
prabhu
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 7:12 AM

Subject: Re: The risen CHRIST cross

Thank you for replying; but who is going to bell the cat and categorically affirm if it is proper for this “risen Christ cross” to be displayed in place of a crucifix, and venerated. This may give rise to each “king of the castle” parish priest making his own interpretation and confusing the faithful. I strongly feel the POPE should step in now, before the situation gets out of hand, and clarify once and for all. I shall be trying to send a mail to Pope Benedict asking him to do so. If you ever reach … do give me a ring, mobile …; would be nice to meet you for a brief chat.

 

From:
arcanjo sodder
To:
prabhu
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 9:50 PM

Subject: FW: Is a Cross with the Risen Christ licit? By Michael Prabhu

FYI, Archie

From:
gordonjacobs2004@yahoo.com
To:
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 06:11:48 -0700
Subject: Is a Cross with the Risen Christ licit? By Michael Prabhu

 

 

 

—– Forwarded Message —– From: gordon jacobs <gordonjacobs2004@yahoo.com>
To: The Holy Father <
av@pccs.va>; Apostolic Nuncio New Delhi nuntius@apostolicnunciatureindia.com> Cc: Cardinal Ossie Gracias <abpossie@sancharnet.in>; Archbishop Bombay <diocesebombay@gmail.com>; Archbishop of Bombay <bombaydiocese@vsnl.com>; Catholic Bishops Conference of India <cbcisec@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 1:24 PM
Subject: Is a Cross with the Risen Christ licit? By Michael Prabhu

This has shaken me.

Can the Holy Father or his representative in India please clarify?

We Catholics at Mumbai have lost faith and trust in the administrative powers of our Cardinal, who does not ever respond to queries, may be he is too busy to take care of his heavenly sheep.

Mind well, the time will come when the sheep will grow horns, become rams and revolt.

I hope Holy Father you and you representative in India, (who is supposed to be a close friend of the Cardinal at Bombay are listening). I will appreciate a feedback.

Gordon Jacobs, 09819662963

—– Forwarded Message —–
From: THE LAITYTUDE
comment-reply@wordpress.com
To:
gordonjacobs2004@yahoo.com

Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 10:33 PM
Subject: [New post] Is a Cross with the Risen Christ licit? By Michael Prabhu

Is a Cross with the Risen Christ licit? By Michael Prabhu
by
The Voice Of Bombay’s Catholic Laity

See all comments
at
http://mumbailaity.wordpress.com/2012/10/20/is-a-cross-with-the-risen-christ-licit-by-michael-prabhu/#comments

 

UPDATE NOVEMBER 2012

NOW, A RISEN YOGIC CHRIST ON THE CROSS

The following picture of the Risen Christ on the Cross is reproduced from a flyer published by the
National Biblical, Catechetical and Liturgical Centre [NBCLC], Bangalore, which advertises for “A Series of Training Programmes and Training Material (Faith-Kit) in the Year of Faith for a New Evangelization“, a series of programmes commencing September 2012 and completing October 2013.

What can be expected of the NBCLC which is a promoter of much catechetical and liturgical error and abuse including the infamous “Indian Rite Mass“?

 


 

According to the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India [CBCI] Directory, the
National Biblical, Catechetical and Liturgical Centre is “a National Centre sponsored by the CBCI“.

 

 

 

From:
PRIEST, Name Withheld
To:
prabhu
Sent:
Wednesday,
January
26, 2011 10:43 AM

Subject: Re: CONFESSION PROBLEM

Dear Michael, 

[…] The Emperor Emmanuel report was very enlightening. Also your report on the “Risen Christ on the Cross” images. 

More & more people are installing the image of the Risen Christ. In our very parish, they are circulating the Risen Christ images to all the families.

There is an urgent need for the awareness of subtle errors that are creeping in the Catholic Church. 

1. The whole emphasis is on “Celebration” which has evolved through the charismatic understanding that the Lord is risen and so there is need to “Rejoice & Celebrate”. In fact, Fr. Erasto of the Blessed Sacrament Fathers openly teaches that Christ died and rose at the same time.  

2. Actually, resurrection is the result of the passion of Christ. Therefore, the need of a crucifix to remind us as long as we are in the world we have to carry our cross and die on it. Here the emphasis is more on penance, sacrifice, mortification and a continuous purification through the Blood of Jesus. What is strange is that the charismatic or the new movements’ call on the Blood of Christ without going through his passion or meditating on his suffering.

3. The world is suffering and it needs a God who is on their side. When they look at him struggling on the cross innocently, it definitely gives them hope to live. By just focusing on the “Risen Lord” and bypassing his suffering does not give us hope.

4. Whenever an “Exorcism” is done, the priest uses the “Crucifix” and not the “Risen Lord”. Satan is defeated by seeing the wounds of Jesus bleeding and the smell of the Blood suffocates him.

5. Hence, it is highly recommended to keep a crucifix either big or small to ward off our homes from all evil and to continue to protect us, so that the Lord sees the blood on our lintel and passes by. Our Lady of La Salette gives us a crucifix with added tools – hammer & pliers. Actually Our Lady of La Salette is seen wearing this crucifix and she has promised that this crucifix would emanate “Light” during the dark days.

6. How improper would it be to take away the crucifix from St. Francis Xavier’s hand and replace it with the “Risen Lord”.

7. “Every time anyone kisses the Crucifix or looks at it with devotion, the Gaze of the Blessed Trinity is fixed upon that soul – and at the same moment a wondrous beauty is added to that soul, and a reward treasured for an endless glory” -Words to St. Gertrude.

Thanking you very much for all your mails and your fervent love for the Church. Keep doing the good work. “He who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ” – Phil 1:6.

God Bless you. Keep good health. Praying for you. Continue praying for priests.

Fr. Name Withheld, Diocesan, Mumbai

 

One
Prakash Lasrado
wrote to the Archbishop of Bombay on the issue of the Risen Christ on the Cross. For what it’s worth, this is the correspondence circulated by him to about 100 email addresses:

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:58 PM, prakash.lasrado@gmail.com wrote:

The artist has missed out DEATH and BURIAL of Jesus as per below Scripture.

Jesus said “I will destroy this temple and build it in 3 days. For just as Jonah was in the belly of the whale for 3 days and 3 nights, so shall the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth for 3 days and 3 nights”

I have never seen a risen Christ on the Cross at any papal Mass at the Vatican. It is always a crucified Christ.

From:
prakash.lasrado@gmail.com
To:
Archbishop Oswald Gracias PVT ; Cardinal Oswald Gracious
Cc: [About 100 others] Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 8:58 AM

Subject: Reply from His Eminence: Risen Christ on the Cross

Rev. Fr. KT Emmanuel, Cardinal Gracias,

Thank you for your attached reply.

I thought I would never receive a reply but you did reply which is appreciated.

I am quoting part of your reply below

“The Resurrection is a central tenet of our Faith and the presentation of the Resurrected Lord on the Cross by itself is not theologically wrong.
It could be an artist’s way of presenting Christ’s passion, death and resurrection.”

My response is that the artist has missed out death.

If a Muslim sees a risen Christ on the Cross he would say triumphantly, “The artist’s depiction matches with the Quran since according to Quran Christ escaped death and directly rose to heaven.”

Quran 4:157-158

And [for] their saying, “Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah.” And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.

However we Christians know that Christ suffered, DIED, WAS BURIED and then was resurrected from the TOMB AFTER 3 DAYS AND NOT FROM THE CROSS and that the Quran is NOT TRUE regarding the crucifixion and death of Jesus.

From:
Archbishop Bombay <diocesebombay@gmail.com> Date: Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:27 PM Subject: Reply from His Eminence To:
prakash.lasrado@gmail.com
Dear Mr. Prakash,
Attached please find a letter from His Eminence dated 9 July 2013.
Thanking you
Fr. K. T. Emmanuel
Secretary to the Archbishop

A01-001.03                            July 9, 2013

Dear Mr. Lazrado,

I have seen your note about the Risen Christ on the Cross.

The Resurrection is a central tenet of our Faith and the presentation of the Resurrected Lord on the Cross by itself is not theologically wrong.  It could be an artist’s way of presenting Christ’s passion, death and resurrection. 

However, as you have rightly pointed out, in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, there is reference to Cross with the crucified Christ.  Hence, according to regulations, the Cross with the figure of Christ crucified is to be placed on or near the altar where the Eucharist is celebrated.  There could be a big Cross with the Resurrected Christ in the Church.  In such cases, another Cross with the Crucified Lord should be on or near the altar for Mass.

With kind regards and best wishes,

Yours sincerely in Christ,

Oswald Cardinal Gracias

Archbishop of Bombay

From:
prakash.lasrado@gmail.com
To:
Archbishop Oswald Gracias PVT ; Cardinal Oswald Gracious

Cc: [About 100 others] Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 3:57 PM

Subject: Re: Reply from His Eminence: Risen Christ on the Cross

The “risen” Christ on the Cross gives an Islamic impression that Christ swooned on the Cross, regained consciousness, loosened his nails, escaped death and directly rose to heaven confusing his enemies.

http://quran.com/4/157 

http://quran.com/4/158 

The artist is ashamed of portraying the death of Jesus just like the Muslims because death and humiliation is perceived as a defeat for a prophet by Muslims.

However we Christians are not ashamed of the death and humiliation of Jesus which saved us from our sins. Without death there is no resurrection. Resurrection loses its meaning. Unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it is only a grain with no life.

During an exorcism, it is the crucifix which the demons are most terrified of because of the ransom paid for our sins by the death of Jesus. 

Hence it is essential to show Christ crucified and either dead or in agony on the Cross. A cross which is a symbol of defeat has now become a symbol of victory because of the subsequent resurrection from the tomb.

 

 

The Risen Christ on a Cross

http://www.saint-mike.net/qa/fs/viewanswer.asp?QID=113

August 26, 2004

I was just reviewing photos from my boss’ wedding from this past weekend. I remembered that the particular parish he got married at had the Risen Christ on the Cross at the altar, as opposed to the Crucified Christ on the Cross at the altar. I’ve also seen the Risen Christ at some other parishes, such as when I was in Ensenada and only at a few parishes where I attended Mass. I see the Crucified Christ at most parishes I visit. I’m just curious as to why one is chosen over the other at a particular parish and who makes the decision. –May

The so-called “Risen Christ” crucifixes are an oxymoron. Christ was not on the Cross when he resurrected. These “Risen Christ” crucifixes one painfully sees in many parishes is, in my opinion, an attempt to soft pedal the Passion.
I heard a few months ago that in the parish where I offered my vows as a consecrated brother the crucifix and corpus in the Sanctuary had been altered. Previously it has a few specks of blood dripping down our Lord’s face and chest. A friend of mine, who is now the pastor at the parish, asked why these small depictions of blood were removed. He was told that they did not want to disturb the children!!!!
Give me a break. Our children see blood and gore daily on TV. How was this modestly artistic depiction of a few drops of blood on the corpus of our Lord going to upset the children? And, why has it not upset the children of the parish for the decades previous to this alteration?
Such nonsense is an attempt to water down the Passion. We do not want to be reminded any more than necessary about the pain and suffering our Lord voluntarily accepted for love of us. By George, if we think too much about the Passion we might begin to feel guilty for not living the way we should. God forbid that we feel guilty. 
In addition to this disingenuous display of the “Risen Christ,” using such a thing is liturgically nonsensical not only because the Resurrected Christ was not on the Cross, but because it does not to mind or represent either mystery — the Passion or the Resurrection. Any art that is used in liturgy is meant to “naturally” bring our minds to the mysteries without having to figure out an interpretation of the art.
Thirdly, the “Risen Christ” crucifix has absolutely no liturgical history or tradition, and frankly fails as a trivial artistic representation. It is, in my opinion, a scandal to have this thing in the Sanctuary, and from an artistic point-of-view, to have it anywhere on parish property.
But the question concerns whether or not this “Risen Christ” figure is legal.
Unfortunately, it is legal with one proviso. During the Mass a traditional crucifix with corpus MUST be on or near the altar. If the only “crucifix” present during the Mass is the “Risen Christ” one, then the priest is doing something illegal.
The General Instructions on the Roman Missal states:

117. …Also on or close to the altar, there is to be a cross with a figure of Christ crucified. The candles and the cross adorned with a figure of Christ crucified may also be carried in the Entrance Procession.

308. There is also to be a cross, with the figure of Christ crucified upon it, either on the altar or near it, where it is clearly visible to the assembled congregation. It is appropriate that such a cross, which calls to mind for the faithful the saving Passion of the Lord, remain near the altar even outside of liturgical celebrations.

Thus, as long as a regular crucifix is prominently present during the Celebration of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the “Risen Christ” figure, while liturgically impotent and artistically tacky, can be in the parish church (presuming the permission of the Bishop). -Bro. Ignatius Mary
P.S. I thought I read somewhere that new legislation was enacted that ordered the “Risen Christ” figures to be taken down, but I cannot find the reference. Thus until such time as the Holy See orders these things to be taken down, as long as a real crucifix is present during Mass I guess they are allowed.

 

Replacement of crucifixes with the Risen Christ on a Cross

http://www.saint-mike.net/qa/fs/viewanswer.asp?QID=744

September 13, 2007

I just returned to CCD/R. E. P. for the 2007/2008 year. I’ve been teaching Catechism for almost 20 years. Last night I discovered that the crucifixes in our Parish Center classrooms were replaced by the ‘Risen Lord’ on the Cross. I was on the verge or tears. Every year, I start the Catechism classes by explaining prayer, how we pray, our bodily demeanor, looking at the Crucifix… This morning I talked to the DRE who informed me she didn’t know when that took place over this summer break. Furthermore, she stated she has no say in what changes are made at the Parish Center. She advised me to speak to the Pastor. I’m seriously concerned about how I can approach him. I’m aware his is somewhat ‘unapproachable’ –putting it kindly. Please, please help me. I love being reminded of our Lord’s sacrifice of his Son and Jesus’ Passion and death on the Cross. Throughout the years, I have learned that the students appreciate the understanding of human suffering and how it unites us our Lord Jesus Christ’s sacrifice. Is there perhaps something in print, with and ‘official’ understanding/teaching of the Church in reference to this matter? -Malena

I am sorry to hear that the crucifixes have been removed. Whoever authorized that is, at best, misinformed about the importance of the crucifix, at worse, may have a problematic liberal agenda.

There are no Church regulations about this for classrooms and offices. There is Church law concerning the Mass. A Crucifix MUST be present during the Mass, and if I remember correctly, the recent law requires the big cross above the altar to be a crucifix.

But what is hung on the wall of offices, classroom, halls, and other rooms, etc. is not regulated by law.

Even though there is no law concerning this, that does not mean that it was appropriate to remove all the crucifixes at the center.

Without knowing your pastor I cannot offer any specific advice. All I can offer you is some generic advice about things like this.

Be prepared with what you want to say, what you are concerned about and why. Be prepared to offer suggestions for resolutions. Then say a prayer and then approach your pastor in a calm and business-like way to express your concern about this.

I would approach him in a manner similar to this:

“Father, I noticed that all the crucifixes have been replaced with resurrection crosses. I am a little confused about that.”

This allows the pastor to explain. Once he explains his reasons, then you can express your reasons to have crucifixes.

If he says, “What are you confused about?” Then say, “Well, I do not understand why.”

Just be yourself and tell him how you feel and why you think the crucifixes ought to be returned. Perhaps offer to compromise by having both a crucifix and a resurrection cross on the wall.

Bro. Ignatius Mary OMSM

 

The Risen Christ on a Cross

http://www.saint-mike.net/qa/lit/viewanswer.asp?QID=443

September 15, 2011

This past Sunday my wife and I attended Sunday Mass in Florida. The Pastor had just recently purchased a new Crucifix which he has placed above the Altar.
It is my understanding that a Mass can not be offered without a proper Crucifix being present, this Crucifix, to me, does not appear to be a proper Crucifix. I was unable to send a photo of the Crucifix do to technical difficulty.

Since the Crucifix appears to be both, the Crucified Christ with the right hand nailed to the Cross, and the Risen Christ with the left hand reaching up toward heaven, I am somewhat confused. –John

Yes I’ve seen these “crosses” before.  Here’s what the Church says on the matter:

308. There is also to be a cross, with the figure of Christ crucified upon it, either on the altar or near it, where it is clearly visible to the assembled congregation. (From the current GIRM)

A figure that is only “half crucified” in my opinion does NOT satisfy the requirement to be CRUCIFIED, because Jesus was crucified with both arms nailed to the cross.  Although it may be considered an inspiring work of art that tells a miraculous story, it is not appropriate to serve as the crucifix in our Liturgy. –Jacob Slavek

 

Turning to the East in the Diocese of Lincoln

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2014/11/turning-to-the-east-in-the-diocese-of-lincoln/
EXTRACT

Posted on 21 November 2014 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

 


 

5 comments

1. Father Zuhlsdorf,

Acknowledging that the Mass celebrated ad orientem does just seem right — logical, even — I think something in the picture is jarringly incongruous with that right-ness: the Resurrexefix.

2. One cannot separate Christ crucified from the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. This is supposed to be confirmed/reflected in the symbols we use. This isn’t something new either:

An excerpt from Catholic Encyclopedia, with this link Altar Crucifix for anyone who would like to read up a little more on the subject:

“The crucifix is the principal ornament of the altar. It is placed on the altar to recall to the mind of the celebrant, and the people, that the Victim offered on the altar is the same as was offered on the Cross. For this reason the crucifix must be placed on the altar as often as Mass is celebrated (Constitution, Accepimus of Benedict XIV, 16 July, 1746). The rubric of the Roman Missal (xx) prescribes that it be placed at the middle of the altar between the candlesticks, and that it be large enough to be conveniently seen by both the celebrant and the people (Cong. Sac. Rit., 17 September, 1822). If for any reason this crucifix is removed, another may take its place in a lower position; but in such cases it must always be visible to all who assist at Mass (ibid.)”

I am reminded of a spiritual director I had until seven years ago, who belonged to a religious order of missionaries. At that time he was a chaplain in a large palliative and long-term care institution. One day his community erected a huge, beautiful, Ressurexa (without even a cross) above the tabernacle in their main chapel. A while later, a large crucifix which had also occupied an adjacent space came down. So my spiritual director went to his Provincial, and asked him to please have the large Crucifix put back in the main chapel, adding that , ” Christ is still crucified in His Mystical Body – I see Him in the patients I minister to each day.”

3. Even outside the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, there is still supposed to be an image of Christ crucified present in the church. One is still left wondering how its effectiveness might be effected when placed in the vicinity of, and dwarfed by, a Ressurexefix which is clearly on steroids.

Despite the fact that Vatican II never touched this aspect, in 1964 the instruction “Inter Oecumenici,” issued by the Council in charge of enacting the liturgical reformed desired by the Council in No. 91 prescribes: “It is good that the main altar be detached from the wall to be able to turn around easily and celebrate ‘versus populum.'” From that moment, the position of the priest “toward the people,” although not obligatory, became the most common way of celebrating Mass. Things being as they are, the Holy Father proposes, also in these cases, that the old meaning of “oriented” prayer not be lost and suggests that difficulties be averted by placing at the center of the altar the sign of Christ crucified (cf. “Teologia della Liturgia,” p. 88).

Espousing this proposal, added in my turn is the suggestion that the dimensions of the sign must be such as to make it very visible, under pain of lacking effectiveness (cf. M. Gagliardi, “Introduzione al Mistero Eucharistico,” Rome, 2007, p. 371). The visibility of the cross on the altar is implied by the General Instruction of the Roman Missal: “There is also to be a cross, with the figure of Christ crucified upon it, either on the altar or near it, where it is clearly visible to the assembled congregation. It is appropriate that such a cross, which calls to mind for the faithful the saving Passion of the Lord, remain near the altar even outside of liturgical celebrations” (No. 308).

OFFICE FOR THE LITURGICAL CELEBRATIONS
OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF , Placing the Crucifix at the Center of the Altar

4. Are there reasons for not having a Ressurexifix at the entrance to the nave, facing the altar?

5. Chris Garton-Zavesky: It’s even weirder than other “Resurrexifixes” I’ve seen, in that our Lord is off-center and below the Cross, with His arms raised in an asymmetrical fashion, as if saying “Ha-ha, missed me!”

We can certainly hope, since Bishop Conley has had the fortitude to introduce Mass ad orientem that that piece of art will not long endure in his cathedral.

 

UPDATE DECEMBER 5, 2014

This is a picture taken on February 8, 2009, at the dedication of a new church to St. Gonsalo Garcia in Vasai when Most Rev. Thomas Dabre, Chairman of the CBCI’s Doctrinal Commission was Bishop. There were other bishops in attendance. St. Gonsalo Garcia was CRUCIFIED to death, like his Lord Jesus, for his faith. So, how was he honoured at this dedication of the new church building to his memory? By relativising Christianity, the faith he died preaching — juxtapositioning the Cross between the Hindu “OM” and the Islamic crescent.

(From the placard being presented at the altar, do we get the message that the Saint need not have died so horribly had he engaged in interreligious dialogue instead of proselytization?)

 

 

Source:
http://www.daijiworld.com/news/news_disp.asp?n_id=56705

 

But it gets worse. There appears to be no crucifix on the altar at the dedication Mass. And there’s no crucifix on the wall behind the altar. There’s the “Risen Christ” or “Resurrexefix“, except that they’ve gone whole hog at this church and completely done away with the Cross (instead of even the now routine Risen Christ on a cross).

 

 

 

 


 

From the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (G.I.R.M):

#117: Also on or close to the altar, there is to be a cross with a figure of Christ crucified.

 

#308: “There is also to be a cross, with the figure of Christ crucified upon it, either on the altar or near it, where it is clearly visible to the assembled congregation. It is appropriate that such a cross, which calls to mind for the faithful the saving Passion of the Lord, remain near the altar even outside of liturgical celebrations.”

 

From the Catholic Encyclopedia, Altar Crucifix:

“The crucifix is the principal ornament of the altar. It is placed on the altar to recall to the mind of the celebrant, and the people, that the Victim offered on the altar is the same as was offered on the Cross. For this reason the crucifix must be placed on the altar as often as Mass is celebrated (Constitution, Accepimus of Benedict XIV, 16 July, 1746). The rubric of the Roman Missal (xx) prescribes that it be placed at the middle of the altar between the candlesticks, and that it be large enough to be conveniently seen by both the celebrant and the people (Cong. Sac. Rit., 17 September, 1822). If for any reason this crucifix is removed, another may take its place in a lower position; but in such cases it must always be visible to all who assist at Mass (ibid.)”

 


 

So, for the Chairman of the Doctrinal Commission of the CBCI, who was also at that time the diocesan Bishop, to have celebrated Mass with a crucifix neither on the altar nor near it, visible to all, was a flagrant violation of the rubrics of the GIRM.

 

(Thanks to Ancy Paladka (Salvadore D’Souza or Salu Soz, salusoz@yahoo.co.in,
ancyds@gmail.com) of Mangalorean Catholics yahoo group for providing us with these photographs and information, including “The Bishop was then welcomed with the Aarthi and a Bindi.“)

See at our web site the series HINDU RELIGIOUS MARK ON THE FOREHEAD 01
to
19, and

BINDI OR TILAK MARK ON THE FOREHEAD-INDIAN OR HINDU?

http://ephesians-511.net/docs/BINDI_OR_TILAK_MARK_ON_THE_FOREHEAD-INDIAN_OR_HINDU.doc

 

No “Risen Christ” here, but there doesn’t appear to be a crucifix on this altar either, or near it, visible to all, as is required by the GIRM. No symbol of Christ but Auxiliary Bishop of Bombay Dr Agnelo Gracias presided, wearing a BINDI!

Mumbai: Inter-Religious Dialogue Held at St Joseph Church, Mira Road, Thane

http://www.daijiworld.com/news/news_disp.asp?n_id=127505
EXTRACT

Rons Bantwal – Daijiworld Media Network

Mumbai, January 16, 2012

 


 





 

Selected readers’ comment

Bishop of Bombay Dr Agnelo Gracias looks very handsome with tilak.Alwyn Fernandes, Mangalore

 

michaelprabhu@vsnl.net



Categories: Liturgical Abuses

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s