It May Not Be Realized Yet

San Francisco Faith ^ | STEPHEN FRANKINI

[Aliska]

Fortunately such temptations have been fleeting, but they would manifest themselves more frequently were I forced to contemplate a naked crucifix on a regular basis, even though I concede it is 100% historically accurate.

Your theology is right on and it does make sense to a point. However, Jesus did appeared clothed after the resurrection, so that ought to tell us something. Clothes for this world, who knows what for the next. Nakedness in the next world (the symbolism of it) is another horror. I suppose a book could be written about the subject, but we have too much nakedness, lewdness, and shameless in our world today without inviting more of it from wherever it comes.

In a perfect world, complete with proper climate control, nakedness may be the norm, but not in the one I must inhabit.

Thank heaven for clothing. Thank heaven for what we have left of modesty. Some people are modest by nature, and others are naturally exhibitionistic. Blessed are the simpletons who don't flaunt their erotic body parts.

Man, we didn't used to even have to think of such things. Men undressing women in their minds; probably today undressing men in their minds; what blessing it is to be free of such stuff.

I think, with the exception of seriously fallen women, men have different views in this subject than women.

[drstevej]

***Nakedness in the fallen world thus becomes a condition uniquely appropriate to marriage -- not just because it's more or less necessary, but because it images the trust that should exist between spouses.***

***The fact that nudity's proper context has become nuptial***

At the eternal wedding we have a nuptual context and one of complete trust.

What say we shed those garments to show Jesus we aren't ashamed?

[Romulus]

Oh, come on. You know that by "nuptial context" I'm speaking of the marital act, in the context of the overall intimacy appropriate between spouses. I've already explained why the saints wear a wedding garment. Anyway, and more to the point, the saints already know that Jesus knows they aren't ashamed. They know that shedding a garment would be pointless, as Jesus already has perfect knowledge of them.

[SoliDeoGloria]

methinks your tagline should be: "Behold, I post all things nude". ;)

[Romulus]

Don't worry; God knows what you look like naked. He loves you anyway.

[drstevej]

***Don't worry; God knows what you look like naked. He loves you anyway.***

Yeah, but does he keep naked statues of us around His pad?

[Romulus]

The Persons of the Trinity are naked to each other as well. The Crucifixion is not just Event; it's Revelation. It's a view into the Trinity's inner life, in which the Son gives himself completely in obedience to the Father.

Seen this way maybe you understand that the Crucifix isn't a "statue"; it's a window onto the Kingdom. Its purpose is not to evoke a pietist response but to convey theological truth. We look through the carved image and see its Truthful Prototype.

[SoliDeoGloria]

** Its purpose is not to evoke a pietist response but to convey theological truth. **

Not to be snippy, but the purpose of the Crucifixion was far more than simply conveying "theological truth". Christ was most certainly clothed on the cross... He was clothed with our sins. Be sure not to miss that in your haste to promote the nude crucifix.

BTW, If you won't take the tagline, I will...

[Romulus]

Please re-read my post above; I said "the purpose of the Crucifix," not "the purpose of the Crucifixion."

He was clothed with our sins

Can you elaborate? In what sense did our sins "clothe" him? Is this an understanding deriving from scripture or patristic writers?

As for taglines, if you want to deform sacred scripture to make a point, I can't stop you. But I wish you wouldn't.

[HarleyD]

Nakedness in the Old and New Testament was a sign of scornfulness and contempt. There are MANY, MANY passages on this and only illustrates that our Lord Jesus gave up everything for us.

If God the Father visited your church tomorrow how do you think He would feel to see an image of His only begotten loving Son hanging naked in the center of your church? If you think that he won't mind a bit I would suggust you rethink your theology.

Mat 25:34-40 "Then the King will say to those on His right, 'Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 'For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in; naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me.' "Then the righteous will answer Him, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You something to drink? 'And when did we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or naked, and clothe You? 'When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?' "The King will answer and say to them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.'

If you can't do it for Christ how can you do it for anyone less?

[Romulus]

"And blessed is he whosoever shall not be scandalized in me."

What can I say except that the scandal of the cross is still with us?

You err in supposing that I'm agitating for a naked crucifix as normative. I'm not, as I've said repeatedly on this thread, because it's more truth than most people know how to deal with. But its value is still there, for all the reasons that I won't bother to rehearse here, as well as for the way it underscores the full humanity of the Word made Flesh, to a world determined to reduce him to a concept. It's a rebuke to the christological heretics who've been among us all these centuries, who pretend that the Word merely inhabited a body without being fully one with it.

By all means let us serve Christ in our fellow man, clothing him when he's naked. Let's especially save him from torture and unjust condemnation to death. But let's not for a minute suppose that the commandment to love of neighbor permits us to respond to the sacrifice of Calvary in any way but gratitude and full acceptance:

And Peter took him and began to rebuke him, saying, "God forbid, Lord! This shall never happen to you." But he turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me; for you are not on the side of God, but of men."

Now, as for my church. God doesn't visit it; he lives there. His Son is exposed in the Blessed Sacrament for our adoration, and we receive him in the Eucharist. Some folks thought that was scandalous too.

For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness of the clever I will thwart." Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

[HarleyD]

blas•phe•my [ blás fe mee ] (plural blas•phe•mies)

noun

1. disrespect for religion: disrespect for God or sacred things

2. something showing disrespect for religion: something done or said that shows disrespect for God or sacred things

Try as you might with all the scriptures you can, it’s still

blasphemy

.

[Conservative til I die]

You should change your screenname to "The Strawman." It would be a lot more accurate.

[Conservative til I die]

I'm with you on those crucifixes. I read that the twisted crucifix was a medieval witchcraft symbol.

Don't believe everything you read on the internet. I read that as well on some Fundamentalist's anti-Catholic libel website. I think it's cuttingedge.org. It's really as low as one can sink, that website.

[Conservative til I die]

Yes, but isn't it amazing the absolute filth, blasphemy and perversion against Our Lord and Our Lady and the TRUE Church that can be posted in this forum, and when one rightly and with justifiable anger replies, one gets one head lopped off for being "politically incorrect"!

You're starting to froth, Fido. Relax.

[Conservative til I die]

I think we're all overblowing the nudity thing, both ways. If Jesus was naked on the cross, well, that's just a historical thing, the way they crucified people. I don't think there's a theological significance in and of itself.

[Aliska]

There was more discussion about the book it came from. It was written by a catholic publisher (true) but what kind of catholic I do not know. I had the book on loan but can't remember a thing about it now. I did try to find on the net about the crucifix and the connection to witchcraft and the supposed museum in France and came up with zilch. If it is possible for me to check things out, I do.

Same problem I'm having find the image in Spain that supposedly looks like the one in Guadalupe. Can't find it and can't travel to Spain to look track down the museum. Now I finally found out it is in a monastery, but no photographs are allowed inside, so there isn't one.

I will say that I did find that on cuttingedge.org. I used to make rosaries using that crucifix.

The upshot of it all is that I don't like that crucifix any more. Maybe what I read poisoned me. I thought it was neat because the pope used it, but when I step back and look at it again, I think it is ugly, but I don't buy the connection to witchcraft either.

The net is something else. It is all but impossible to verify things I find, and I don't like gratitutious or mean-spirited catholic bashing, but I do like to try to get to the bottom of things that disturb me.

[fishtank]

I'm told in the Word that I'll be clothed in white in heaven, in the Millenium and in the New Jerusalem.

[Conservative til I die]

The upshot of it all is that I don't like that crucifix any more. Maybe what I read poisoned me. I thought it was neat because the pope used it, but when I step back and look at it again, I think it is ugly, but I don't buy the connection to witchcraft either.

That's cool. To each his/her own.

I used to not like gold crucifixes myself. I always preferred getting crosses, crucifixes, and rosaries that were made of wood. I've recently taken to wearing a gold crucifix around my neck.

It's always been personal preference, so I hear where you are coming from.

[siunevada]

Gee, I sure wish "Helen" would stand up tall and proud and tell us who she is. At least the Joyce Davis statements were solid.

My sister and brother in law lived in Discovery Bay.

I've attended Mass at St. Anne's a handful of times.

I found Fr. Ron to be not to my taste. I never heard him advocate anything this radical from the pulpit.

The most shocking thing to me was to hear the upper middle class ladies (the ones who were obviously involved in "ministry") refuse to use the word "man" while reciting the Creed. I couldn't believe it the first time I heard it and I paid close attention at later Masses. Political correctness trumps the Nicene Creed. Yikes!

The hosts were never unleavened.

Daily Mass was preceeded by the Rosary and the Divine Mercy chaplet.