Why are Catholics replacing Crucifixes with Resifixes?

Now don’t get me wrong, I enjoy a good resifix, but NOT when it replaces a crucifix above the altar! :mad:

Why are we doing this? Were making our selves look more protestant. Seriously. I even considered changing rites from Roman Catholic to either Byzantine or Eastern Catholic.

But please tell me; someone, what is the main reason we change these? Is a smaller crucifix hidden somewhere?

Thanks!

:confused: Haven’t seen much of this in my area. Perhaps it’s just in your parishes and the ones you’ve attended. I wouldn’t go changing rites based on that alone…find another parish if your only concern is the lack of a crucifix.

If you are near Roswell, at least you have that choice! :wink:

That said, I will watch this thread with interest. I have no knowledge of a trend or rationale, and it will be interesting to see if one surfaces.

Meanwhile, I’ll do some digging on the actual form. My guess is that is an invention of some untrained amateur “iconographer” who, while well intended, created something that isn’t consistent with tradition.

I am aware of this “sculpture”, the so-called Resurrection Cross, which at the very least portrays Christ as a “shadow” on the Cross in crucified posture. The physical absence of the Most Pure Body with the imprint still visible is, at least, true to both the Passion and the Resurrection messages.

Maybe talk to your Priest about it and if something still feels out of place ask your Bishop? If it is not liturgically correct the Bishop will resolve the issue.

Haven’t seen it around here either. :confused:

It is a holdover from the 1970s when that kind of “nice” stuff was popular.

The first time I saw one was in a church that had a school on the grounds.

Maybe, if there is a trend at all, it’s for the children. :shrug:

I have never come across this in churches I have been in in the UK. I suppose there might be some, but I don’t think it’s general.

Mind you, I think we should remind ourselves from time to time that Jesus did in fact rise from the dead, and that we are the Easter people.

I’m not saying that we should go against the rubrics, but that the Christian message is of Jesus’s triumph over death.

‘Resifix.’ I never heard them called that before…is that new? I love it!

I don’t like them though…Jesus rose from the the tomb, not the cross.

The only argument in favor is that the Cross does symbolize the triumph over death that is the Resurrection.

Here’s a sample:

http://church.woolverton.com/images/thumbnail.asp?img=images/8560.jpg&width=225

what is a resifixes by the way?

another example:

http://web.stpeters.org.au/bookroom/gifts/salvador/pics1/new05.jpg

Yeah, no offense ByzCath, I find that kind of religious artwork unbearably creepy…:smiley:

basically, it is one that shows a risen Christ (vs. a crucified Christ), like this:

No offense taken - its not my art - I’m just pulling examples of the “genre”

Don’t think you’d find anything like this in one of the churches in my Eparchy :wink:

BTW - the example in post #14 is closer to what I’ve seen most often

Of course…I *love *Byzantine artwork.

Our priest doesn’t understand any cross without the crucifixion on them. Or in his words, “Christless Cross”. That took two seconds to come upto speed. Wonder what he thinks to this kind of art on crosses? After all in some cases the crucifixion is on them. Christ is present.

We haven’t any in our church of this nature anywhere. in not in style of the Church Artitecture to begin with. I can understand the youth and teens may be attracted though and might serve a purpose in schools or in homes of young families because they are bright and colourful.

Though I haven’t been trapsing around English Churches Roman Catholic or otherwise to know how prevailent they may be. Have only seen them in shops and online. Is that what they are called then, not just crosses.

The question is what does the cross represent. Does it not represent his suffering?

If I want to showcase the resurrection, then I would have a picture of our Lord ascending in the clouds.

It makes no sense to me to show a smiling, clothed Jesus on a cross.

I suppose that’s the point. Classically, a Crucifix by definition is a Cross with the crucified Christ, and consistent with Latin Church praxis and fundamental belief on the nature of the Mass, a Crucifix must be present in the sanctuary during the Mass.

The Cross alone (i.e. without imagery beyond the Cruciform) has always been the symbol of Christ’s triumph over death. In that regard, it was never necessary (nor should it be now) to depict a risen Christ on the Cross.

A crucifix is required in all Catholic churches.

From the General Instruction of the Roman Missal:

  1. 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.
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.