Posted on 12/04/2006 8:23:30 PM PST by Pyro7480
SMPs Seek Clarification Over Sign of the Cross
By The Universe: Members of the Scottish Parliament have agreed to write to the Crown Office to clarify whether it can be an offence for Catholics to cross themselves in public.
The move came after a Scottish Catholic newspaper brought a petition before parliament urging ministers to ensure making the sign of the cross does not lead to prosecution under any circumstances.
The petition was promoted by the case of Celtic goalkeeper Artur Boruc, who was cautioned for a breach of the peace after crossing himself during an Old Firm match at Ibrox in February.
It was made clear at the time that the caution was in relation to other gestures made towards Rangers fans and did not relate to him crossing himself.
Scottish Catholic Observer editor Harry Conroy told MSPs on the Holyrood public petitions committee the paper has been contacted by a large number of concerned readers.
“Nobody other than a bigot would think that crossing yourself is something wrong,” he said.
Committee convener Michael McMahon said he witnessed the Boruc incident but had been assured that the caution he received was for other gestures.
Mr McMahon said he was concerned that the Catholic community might think it was possible for a football player to be arrested for crossing himself.
The Labour MSP also cited a case in his constituency where a person crossed himself in front of passing Orange marchers and was charged.
Last week Cardinal Keith O’Brien claimed that Catholics were five times as likely to be victims of religiously aggravated crime.
The committee agreed to write to the Crown Office to seek clarification.
Ping!
Catholic ping!
Now...why did all those Europeans come to America?
I don't even know what to say.
+
If you want on (or off) this Catholic and Pro-Life ping list, let me know!
No ... really .... I'm sure of it.
I'll confer with Arlen Specter ... I know he has an answer ....
This is strange, because Anglicans (which includes members of the Church of Scotland) cross themselves, at least during worship.
It probably should not be something legislated, but it seems to me that crossing oneself at a sports event for "good luck" is a primitive, magical superstition, and not an act of worship. Anyone who takes these things seriously should not debase a religious practice and cheapen it by inappropriate usage.
I don't think we should speculate on the intention of that specific player. It could have been pious. Also, most Scots are not Anglican. The Church of Scotland is Presybterian, and they do not make the Sign of the Cross.
You are correct. I was confused with the Church of Ireland, which is Anglican.
Presbyterians do not cross themselves that I have ever noticed.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sign_of_the_cross
particularly the end of the article, which indicates that the sign of the cross was used in a sports match in Scotland aimed at an oppositing team. The implications might have been that the sign was being used to ward off an evil, in the fomr of the other players. It is hard to see that as an proper or reverent of the gesture.
(See the Catolic Encyclopedia, http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13785a.htm)
So one can see why this would have been controversial. Poor sportsmanship seems to be rampant in the British isles these days, sorry to say.
It is probably the superstitious use of religious gestures which made the practice distasteful to the Reformers. Anglicans and Lutherans kept the practice. I am quite sure that most Roman Catholic and Orthodox authorities would feel that aiming a solemn and sacred sign at sports opponents with the intention of fomenting hostility is not proper practice.
If they say it is an offence, Christians just might see how many people their jails can hold. Talk about tying up the courts with cases.
"with the intention of fomenting hostility is not proper practice."
How do we know the players intention? I have seen athletes use the sign of the cross with reverence. Prayer is not superstition.
Let's cut the b.s. and call it what it is - just plain old fashoned bigotry.
Lots of Muslims in Scotland. Is their call to prayer allowed in public?
As people have pointed out, the Church of Scotland is Presbyterian, but there is the Scottish Episcopal Church. The sign of the cross is used liturgically there, but I don't know how many members use it about town.
I think with violence in the stands and risk of injury on the field performing a sign of the cross doesn't necessarily have to be an irreverent gesture. If it was directed towards evil among members of the opposing team, so what?
That was the serpent's question to Eve in the Garden ...
"Yea, hath God said ?
So PC questions the authority of the norm and substitutes an abnorm ... holds the abnorm up as if to demand .. this is the way it should be ... foolish, Godless people look and think, "Gee ... it could be ... I'd better not take a chance ... " and what has been an unquestioned part of life and social consciousnous becomes secondary to the question.
When people know not the authority of God, the state becomes the authority and God is shunted away.
If only people knew the scriptures.
I have real problems with non-Catholics holding forth on Catholic teaching.
**Why do we put up with all this crap that is stuffed down our throats. **
So what, exactly, has the Catholic Church tried to stuff down your throat?
The Bible talks about God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
Go figure????
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.