Wearing of the cross

[Anonymous]

Very interesting Roy. nails ok…the wood the nails went into is not??

I think you are exactly right about it being a sign from other christian churches. Our marketing brand just doesn’t include that sign. Then we come up with lots of reasons (kind of like proof-texting) to support why we don’t. It’s just what we do.

Our religion is the christianity that was around…and then…revelation to raise it to a new level through a prophet. It doesn’t make all the other stuff wrong or invalid, but people in the ward will react as they’ve been taught there is something better. Good, better, best.

The cross as a symbol isn’t “wrong”…but we’ve been taught a better thought is focus on Christ is alive.

I bet people would make some comments to this affect, but if you kept wearing the cross and were a model mormon citizen, they would get used to it and be fine. It would be like not wearing a white shirt.

[Anonymous]

There is a difference between being different and being disrespectful. People throughout history have been bad at balancing the two, and we are no different in that regard.

[Anonymous]

The cross that most Christians wear is an empty cross. It is a symbol that Christ is no longer there. He died and He is Risen.

I had heard that SLC had planned a huge cross on the mountain at one point. Whoever was the president of the church said no, as he personally didn’t care for crosses. I heard that was when the “anti-cross” LDS culture started. Anyone else have any hard details on that story?

BY’s daughters wore cross necklaces. They are on display.

[Anonymous]

Withoutend.org had the following post:

Quote:

Contrary to conventional wisdom, the Mormon disdain for the symbol was more of a late development in Church history, emerging at the grass roots around the turn of the 20th century, and was institutionalized in the 1950’s under the direction of President David O. McKay, on grounds that it was a catholic symbol. Prior to this time, many Latter-day Saints (including Church authorities), embraced and promoted the symbol of the cross. My recently published book, Banishing the Cross: The Emergence of a Mormon Taboo (John Whitmer Books, 2012) traces the development of LDS attitudes toward the symbol, and shows that the cross aversion in Mormon culture actually began as a means to disassociate the Church from Catholicism. The book includes many 19th century photos of the cross being worn as jewelry, stitched it into quilts, framed and hung on walls, incorporated in funeral floral arrangements, etc. Perhaps most interesting of all, I explore in detail the LDS Church’s 1916 Ensign Peak cross monument proposal—a proposal to the Salt Lake City Council that had stirred great controversy within and outside the Church – See more at: http://www.withoutend.org/banishing-cross-emergence-mormon-taboo/#sthash.dGhMSd7w.dpuf

[Anonymous]

Those are great quotes, AP.

And this is a great example of exactly how things happen in our religion. The way we see things done in our church or our chapels today, are not forever truths that always were, or not even better ways. Just someone’s good idea once that got accepted and made to become so important to distinguish ourselves from others, that when the person goes to church now wearing a cross…they are likely to be talked to about it. And then there are quotes from GBH and others that explain it, as if to go back and put meaning on something that started with a very different objective.

1. Mormons are fine with crosses, like their methodist or protestant backgrounds taught it as an empty cross shows He is risen

2. Teachings about Catholocism being the “church of the devil” circulate

3. A prophet speaks out against crosses, to distinguish mormonism from catholocism

4. Mormons create a culture of obedience to prophet and taboo on wearing crosses

5. We proof text and find all kind of logical reasons to support why NOT wearing a cross is more focused on Christ living today rather than his death

6. (Not-so)-clever little anectodates go around the tribe about a cross is like wearing a knife after you brother was stabbed with a knife

7. Roy’s MIL wants to remind his family of the nails (which did kill Jesus) instead of the Cross which did not kill Jesus.

And as things evolve over time…

Quote:

One person’s good idea—something that may work for him or her—takes root and becomes an expectation. And gradually, eternal principles can get lost within the labyrinth of “good ideas.”

-Pres Uchtdorf, The Love of God, GC Oct 2009

amateurparent wrote:

The cross that most Christians wear is an empty cross. It is a symbol that Christ is no longer there. He died and He is Risen.

‘nuf said.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

1. Mormons are fine with crosses, like their methodist or protestant backgrounds taught it as an empty cross shows He is risen

2. Teachings about Catholocism being the “church of the devil” circulate

3. A prophet speaks out against crosses, to distinguish mormonism from catholocism

4. Mormons create a culture of obedience to prophet and taboo on wearing crosses

5. We proof text and find all kind of logical reasons to support why NOT wearing a cross is more focused on Christ living today rather than his death

6. (Not-so)-clever little anectodates go around the tribe about a cross is like wearing a knife after you brother was stabbed with a knife

7. Roy’s MIL wants to remind his family of the nails (which did kill Jesus) instead of the Cross which did not kill Jesus.

We probably did #2 in your list because the Catholic church represented the clearest “threat” to claims to the priesthood authority. What’s the church’s main selling point when focusing on being the one and only true church? The priesthood authority. Well don’t the Catholics have that? Gotta create some separation there.

After reading your list I find myself grateful that no one popular ever said “I don’t care for pizza.” over the years.

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

Heber13 wrote:

1. Mormons are fine with crosses, like their methodist or protestant backgrounds taught it as an empty cross shows He is risen

2. Teachings about Catholocism being the “church of the devil” circulate

3. A prophet speaks out against crosses, to distinguish mormonism from catholocism

4. Mormons create a culture of obedience to prophet and taboo on wearing crosses

5. We proof text and find all kind of logical reasons to support why NOT wearing a cross is more focused on Christ living today rather than his death

6. (Not-so)-clever little anectodates go around the tribe about a cross is like wearing a knife after you brother was stabbed with a knife

7. Roy’s MIL wants to remind his family of the nails (which did kill Jesus) instead of the Cross which did not kill Jesus.

We probably did #2 in your list because the Catholic church represented the clearest “threat” to claims to the priesthood authority. What’s the church’s main selling point when focusing on being the one and only true church? The priesthood authority. Well don’t the Catholics have that? Gotta create some separation there.

After reading your list I find myself grateful that no one popular ever said “I don’t care for pizza.” over the years.

The SDA’s (Seventh Day Adventists) are also big into seeing the Catholic church as the church of the devil. It fits their narrative very well. God wants us to worship on Saturday. Catholicism shows up and incorporates pagan rituals into Christianity including worship on Sunday. SDA’s take a stand and go back to Saturday worship. Personally, I feel that the church culture and apostasy narrative of SDA’s is very similar to Mormonism. However, back to the OP, SDA’s do not have Mormonism’s aversion to the cross.

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

We probably did #2 in your list because the Catholic church represented the clearest “threat” to claims to the priesthood authority. What’s the church’s main selling point when focusing on being the one and only true church? The priesthood authority. Well don’t the Catholics have that? Gotta create some separation there.

In the “Banishing the Cross” book about this issue, he outlines all the politics and bad blood between the church and the Catholic Church in earlier times. I wonder if we’d have the taboo if there’d been no Catholic presence in Utah at that time.

Quote:

After reading your list I find myself grateful that no one popular ever said “I don’t care for pizza.” over the years.

😆 Or chocolate …. noooooo!!! Oh, wait, that almost happened, but cooler heads prevailed.

[Anonymous]

Ann wrote:

nibbler wrote:

After reading your list I find myself grateful that no one popular ever said “I don’t care for pizza.” over the years.

😆 Or chocolate …. noooooo!!! Oh, wait, that almost happened, but cooler heads prevailed.

I still say that one of these days a prophet is going to be overheard complimenting some woman on her buttermilk pie, and within a generation, buttermilk pie will replace bread in Sacrament meeting.

[Anonymous]

NightSG wrote:

Ann wrote:

nibbler wrote:

After reading your list I find myself grateful that no one popular ever said “I don’t care for pizza.” over the years.

😆 Or chocolate …. noooooo!!! Oh, wait, that almost happened, but cooler heads prevailed.

I still say that one of these days a prophet is going to be overheard complimenting some woman on her buttermilk pie, and within a generation, buttermilk pie will replace bread in Sacrament meeting.

Sounds better than stale still frozen bread – especially on fast sunday.

[Anonymous]

I still believe in the power of the cross but have since refined it to mean the Empty cross, signifying the Resurection of Christ . Just my 2 cents !!!!

[Anonymous]

I actually like both the crucifix and the empty cross because of the symbolism of both. How can you look at a crucifix and not think about the suffering of the Savior on the cross? Many in the church seem to focus much more on the Garden of Gethsemane, but there is no question that the subsequent suffering and death on the cross were essential to the atonement. Likewise, the resurrection was also essential, hence the empty cross. I see them both as expressions of faith.

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

Many in the church seem to focus much more on the Garden of Gethsemane, but there is no question that the subsequent suffering and death on the cross were essential to the atonement.

We do seem to have a unique Mormon concept of the atonement beginning at the cross based largely on the scripture that references sweat like drops of blood. It is interesting to note that the bloody sweat is only mentioned in the gospel of Luke and there are compelling reasons to believe that this reference was a later addition that was not in the original manuscript. This does not and should not take away from any symbolism that anyone wants to derive from any event. I just believe that it should temper our feelings of superiority when we think that we have hidden knowledge of the true location of the atonement when the rest of the world mistakenly looks at the cross.

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

DarkJedi wrote:

Many in the church seem to focus much more on the Garden of Gethsemane, but there is no question that the subsequent suffering and death on the cross were essential to the atonement.

We do seem to have a unique Mormon concept of the atonement beginning at the cross based largely on the scripture that references sweat like drops of blood. It is interesting to note that the bloody sweat is only mentioned in the gospel of Luke and there are compelling reasons to believe that this reference was a later addition that was not in the original manuscript. This does not and should not take away from any symbolism that anyone wants to derive from any event. I just believe that it should temper our feelings of superiority when we think that we have hidden knowledge of the true location of the atonement when the rest of the world mistakenly looks at the cross.

Before joining the church I always interpreted that scripture in Luke to be a sort of a comparison (his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground). Most other translations of the Bible support that interpretation. http://biblehub.com/luke/22-44.htm” class=”bbcode_url”>http://biblehub.com/luke/22-44.htm So, the idea that it was actually blood was new to me, and I still prefer to interpret it the old way I did – D&C 19 notwithstanding. In fact, D&C 19 is one of the things that gives me doubts about Joseph Smith and the D&C. I simply believe Luke 22 is misinterpreted and D&C 19 is made up or perhaps Joseph Smith misinterpreted the revelation. Either way, I think we as a church too often focus on Gethsemane and ignore the parts others consider the more important parts of the atonement (while they tend to ignore Gethsemane).

[Anonymous]

I don’t think I’d say that Mormons have an aversion to the cross, at least not now days. I’d probably call it more of a devoted lack. In a way, I think it is on par with smoking for them. I’ve never had a cig, and I don’t mean that I have anything against it. I just grew up knowing that I didn’t smoke, end of story. By the time I reached adulthood, I had permanently realized that I had no interest in smoking, commandment or not. If I were to see someone smoking at Church, I’d think it was extremely out of place. Not by way of judgement, but rather just common practice. Other than answering occasional questions about why no cross, I can’t every really thinking about it much as a believer.

[Author]

Posts