The Cross

[Nick_A]

Originally Posted by earl

Dondi, that has acutally always been my view as well. For me, the crucifix seems to focus on the pre-death moments of absolute suffering, as opposed to the fullness of the life Jesus was preaching and displaying. Of course, many religious traditions centrally discuss the common existential condition of suffering. So I supppose depicting suffering certainly has its place in spiritual tradiitons. Just never understood why so many Christian traditions want to feature it so exclusively. Earl

The Crucifixion was essential for the intended Resurrection the purpose of Jesus' life on earth. Even Peter couldn't understand it and Jesus tried to explain. Peter was thinking like a secular man and felt that it was Jesus' LIFE that was essential: a very natural mistake. The idea of "quality of death" seemed wrong to him.

Matthew 16

21From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.

22Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. "Never, Lord!" he said. "This shall never happen to you!"
23Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men." 24Then Jesus said to his disciples, "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. 25For whoever wants to save his life[h] will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it. 26What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul? 27For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. 28I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

[17th Angel]

Originally Posted by Nick_A

The Crucifixion was essential for the intended Resurrection the purpose of Jesus' life on earth. Even Peter couldn't understand it and Jesus tried to explain. Peter was thinking like a secular man and felt that it was Jesus' LIFE that was essential: a very natural mistake. The idea of "quality of death" seemed wrong to him.

Yeah sure it was esential to happen, but not so essential to dwell on ;/ Yes he died for our sins... Now lets say thank you and dwell on his teachings not his death... His death opened the gateway... To a dark path, but his teachings our the lamp. Stick close to that light... It will guide your foot agaisn't obstacles that may trip you.

[Dondi]

Originally Posted by earl

Dondi, that has acutally always been my view as well. For me, the crucifix seems to focus on the pre-death moments of absolute suffering, as opposed to the fullness of the life Jesus was preaching and displaying. Of course, many religious traditions centrally discuss the common existential condition of suffering. So I supppose depicting suffering certainly has its place in spiritual tradiitons. Just never understood why so many Christian traditions want to feature it so exclusively. Earl

When Paul spoke of 'the Cross' in passages such as I Corinthians 1:18, "For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.", he is using it as synonymous with 'the Gospel', the completeness of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ as stated in I Corinthians 15:1-3. The point here being that something so despictable to those who witness a crucifixion, with all the gore and bloody mess that it entails and the shame of the one who is hung, in which some delight in, becomes the very thing that God will show His power in. "But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:" - I Cor 1:27-28 It puts everyone on a level playing field. We come without boasting, without anything but our own indignatation of ourselves. For the hope of the resurrection comes out of the Cross. And like the Jews must meet at Mount Sinai, believers in Christ must be at the foot of the Cross, before they find themselves at the foot of the Throne.

It is no coincidence that Jesus said that we must deny ourselves, take up our own Cross, and follow Him. This speaks of the humility of forsaking our ego in order to gain it back, this time in the transforming spirit of a sacrificial life in God. "For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it." - Matt. 16:25. When we are so intent at trying to save our own lives in trying to get to heaven, we miss the point of what God is trying to do. God isn't saving you just so you have that seasonal pass in Heaven, but to transform you into something that will make you fit for heaven.

[Nick_A]

Originally Posted by Alex P

Yeah sure it was esential to happen, but not so essential to dwell on ;/ Yes he died for our sins... Now lets say thank you and dwell on his teachings not his death... His death opened the gateway... To a dark path, but his teachings our the lamp. Stick close to that light... It will guide your foot agaisn't obstacles that may trip you.

The whole fall of Christianity into Christendom was produced through interpretations of what to DO. John the Baptist taught what to DO. Jesus teaches what TO BE. To DO is behaviour while To BE is psychological affirmation. What does it mean to stick close to the light?

Matthew 5:

3"Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

If Christianity is spiritual, why be poor in spirit? We interpret so that it feels right and the deeper essential meaning becomes secularized and lost.

[17th Angel]

In my opinion? To imitate, mirror image as best one can the actions of jesus. Surley he was the best example? And through his teachings that is possible... Right?

[Dondi]

Originally Posted by Alex P

In my opinion? To imitate, mirror image as best one can the actions of jesus. Surley he was the best example? And through his teachings that is possible... Right?

True, but even Jesus relied on the power the Spirit of God. He often spent early morning hours upon a mountain in prayer and meditation.

[17th Angel]

So at times he looked to the heavens for advice?... So as I said... Good example...

[Nick_A]

Originally Posted by Alex P

In my opinion? To imitate, mirror image as best one can the actions of jesus. Surley he was the best example? And through his teachings that is possible... Right?

Suppose a robot was invented that looked in every way like a real man. It was programmed to react just as Jesus is described to act during his life. Would the imitations of the robot make it a Christian?

[17th Angel]

Can this robot understand choice? Is this robot not just like man... But does it act and feel like man? Has it's "eyes been opened"?

[Nick_A]

Originally Posted by Alex P

Can this robot understand choice? Is this robot not just like man... But does it act and feel like man? Has it's "eyes been opened"?

Yes, the robot is programmed to consider recognized morality and immorality so considers choice. It has eyes to digest visual impressions just as a man. Is it now a Christian?

[17th Angel]

So it has choice... It has free will.... Eyes opened meaning it knows difference between good and bad. Imitates christ. It certainly then acts like a christian sure Only one in this universe can say for certain if it is a christian though lol.... (obviously not being alive, but it has come to accept christ on it's own free will...so toughy eh?) And that, ain't me nor you. Out of interest though what would your opinion be?

You seen I Robot?

[Nick_A]

Originally Posted by Alex P

So it has choice... It has free will.... Eyes opened meaning it knows difference between good and bad. Imitates christ. It certainly then acts like a christian sure Only one in this universe can say for certain if it is a christian though lol.... (obviously not being alive, but it has come to accept christ on it's own free will...so toughy eh?) And that, ain't me nor you. Out of interest though what would your opinion be?

You seen I Robot?

I will borrow from Jacob Needleman's book "Lost Christianity" to illustrate what I believe to be an important point:

Acornology

I began my lecture that morning from just this point. There is an innate element in human nature, I argued that can grow and develop only through impressions of truth received in the organism like a special nourishing energy. To this innate element I gave a name - perhaps not a very good name - the "higher unconscious." My aim was to draw an extremely sharp distinction between the unconscious that Freud had identified and the unconscious referred to (though not by that name) in the Christian tradition.

Imagine, I said, that you are a scientist and you have before you the object known as the acorn. Let us further imagine that you have never before seen such an object and that you certainly do not know that it can grow into an oak. You carefully observe these acorns day after day and soon you notice that after a while they crack open and die. Pity! How to improve the acorn? So that it will live longer. You make careful, exquisitely precise chemical analyses of the material inside the acorn and, after much effort, you succeed in isolating the substance that controls the condition of the shell. Lo and behold, you are now in the position to produce acorns which will last far longer than the others, acorns whose shells will perhaps never crack. Beautiful!

The question before us, therefore, is whether or not modern psychology is only a version of acornology.

Secularism concerns itself with the shell of the acorn and Christianity refers to the kernel of life the shell surrounds. A robot is only a shell and has no living kernel within so cannot be Christian.

We are out of balance. The shell should serve to provide nourishment and protection for our essential qualities and allow them to grow so that the kernel of life can become free of the need for the shell and can create its own personality and be all things to all people. Instead of the shell being a tool, it has become the master.

Secularism having forgotten this relationship glorifies the shell and society itself becomes an idol.


Romans 2

28A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. 29No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man's praise is not from men, but from God.

"Outwardly" is the domain of the shell. The inner man or kernel of life has the potential for maturity: "TO BE. The Cross represents both. The horizontal line represents the personality or what lives our daily life. The vertical line represents the quality of "NOW." This kernel of life has a place within this line. If it grows it acquires a higher place within this line of "being." If we become a complete slave to our personality, the inner man can be killed. This is what Jesus meant be letting the dead bury their dead.

[Thomas]

It's all about the Cross. This is the implicit message of St John's Gospel. Christ's whole life, His every word and His every deed, led towards this point ... that day, that hour ... He Himself says it:

"And Jesus saith to her: Woman, what is that to me and to thee? my hour is not yet come" (John 2:4). Jesus says it another nine times, and John affirms it three more. In Christ's final words in this life: "Father, the hour is come, glorify thy Son, that thy Son may glorify thee" (John 17:1).

+++

In prayer, Jesus said:
"Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour. But for this cause I came unto this hour" (John 12:27).

And we should politely turn away from His moment of Glory?

Christ didn't preach to save man, He didn't teach to save man, He didn't heal or perform other miracles to save man ... He died to save man, and everything else, before and after that momentous event, ever word and every deed, leads towards the absolute centrality of that act.

+++

The Cross is a scandal. Howso? According to the measure of human hypocrisy.

We are not enlightened to the wisdom of His words, we are drawn into His very being, into the living heart from which wisdom springs. "Thanks for the gift," we might say, "but I find it all rather horrific, actually. I'd rather not talk about it."

Deep inside I wonder if man is not turned away by a sense of shame: I am not worthy of this Sacrifice, I can't live up to it! Or: This is too much! What did I do that you deserve this?

St Matthew understood it deeply: "And blessed is he that shall not be scandalized in me" (Matthew 11:6), for where there is no scandal, no hypocrisy, in those who recognise their own poverty, that they have sunk so low that this is the price of their redemption, "Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 5:3).

And wherein lies the source of that hypocrisy? In saying "You are my God, but I will do as I will". This was the first offense, the Origin of Sin itself ... by our will we disfigured and defiled the world. And that is how we die, disfigured and defiled, on the cross of the world ... brought down by our own sin.

A fault of such magnitude requires something of equal magnitude to negate it, but something of an even greater magnitude to overcome it. Man, having rent the very fabric of his being, is incapable of self-repair. The simple solution, the quick and easy way, is to undo it ... dismantle creation, uncreate it, and start again ...

... But here is a paradox. To do so would require God overthrow Himself, a total inversion of all that is, God becomes subject to of man's actions. We control the Cosmos, and God is our hostage.

The Will of God will not be defied. Even so, the punishment He seems to inflict upon man is nothing other than the self-inflicted result of natural justice — he knew the consequence of his action.

The Mercy of God knows no measure. What man has done, God will take upon Himself to put right, and what man has done to himself, God will take upon Himself to make right. This is the Mystery of the Incarnation, of the Hypostasis — that God joined Himself to corruption, not just to savour it, but to swallow it, to take it into Himself and remake it anew in His own perfect image.

"That which is not assumed is not saved" (St Gregory Nazianzus).

"God became man," the Fathers say "that man might become God" (by filiation, the doctrine of theosis).

This is the via dolorosa. The old man must die to realise the new ... but God does not ask this of man, rather He offers Himself as man's ransom. Christ, in His humanity stands in solidarity with humanity, He goes ahead, takes all mans' sin upon Himself, and offers Himself up to the Father in the sure and certain knowledge that "Amen I say to thee, this day (this hour!) thou shalt be with me in paradise" (Luke 23:43).

Lose sight of the Cross, and we hang alongside that other villain, "... one of those robbers who were hanged, blasphemed (scandalised!) him, saying: If thou be Christ, save thyself and us" (Luke 23:39).

If we turn away, we as good as say, "do it another way ... not like this." If we turn away, paradise is lost.

Oh blessed tree, upon which He hung His life for me,
Take Thee my life, that I may live in He.

Thomas

[Nick_A]

Thomas writes a fine description of meaning associated with the Cross.

Now we go back to "Piss Christ"

Piss Christ - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You can say that Serrano is making a statement as Wendy Beckett said as to "what we've done to Christ." I still see it as primarily degrading a sacred symbol. You can say I am exaggerating but answer me honestly.

If I decided to make a plastic image of a black man being hung from a tree as has happened in the past, and put it in a jar of my own urine as a symbol of what we've done to black people in the past, would I get financial support? Would it be displayed or removed as offensive or as intended racism? Why would people object to this symbol of my creation that isn't even a sacred symbol? If Piss Christ is artistic and my creation racist, what does this selective morality say about us?

Protest is one thing and respect is another? How many can find the balance?

"One cannot imagine St. Francis of Assisi talking about rights." Simone Weil

Perhaps if we understood what Simone suggests, there would not be so much selective morality and rather an accepted value of respect for that which is greater than ourselves.

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

The idolization of symbols deserves ridicule, whether it's the image of Mohamed or the symbol of the cross. The fact that people are willing to kill to protect the honor of a symbol speaks to the need for artistic irreverence.

I have to agree with you. Idolatry leads to all sorts of ridiculousness, such as this:
Video--Crucified Frog Angers Pope
Italian museum defies pope over crucified frog - Yahoo! News

Originally Posted by Nick_A

Blind secularism compells some people to lose the value of the cross making it an object of idolatry so for you this justifies the further abuse the symbol. OK

How about drawing attention to people abusing people over symbols, a malignant side-effect of idolatry? Isn't that what this kind of art draws attention to? Abusing a symbol? Big deal. Abusing people? There is absolutely no honor in that.