Does The Orthodox Presbyterian Church use the Crucifix?

The Orthodox Presbyterian Church ^

[Gamecock]

Question:

Does the OPC use the crucifix in the church? If not, are they opposed to it?

Answer:

Thank you for your question. The answer is, so far as I know, the crucifix is not used in OPC churches, and here is why:

1.The Second Commandment (Ex. 20:4-6 and Deut. 5:8-10) forbids any picture or image of God, and that would include the Son of God, even as man. At any rate we do not know what Jesus looked like as there is no physical description of him.

2.The crucifix will always end up being an object of worship—regarded as holy. History teaches as much. The bronze serpent Moses made became an object of worship and was not destroyed till King Hezekiah did it (Numbers 21:9; 2 Kings 18:1-5). Roman Catholics have worshipped it, kissed it and held it to have mystical powers.

3.Christ did not remain on the Cross. In the Roman Church Christ is said to be resacrificed each time the Mass is celebrated. This is heresy; he died once for all—Hebrews 9:25-28.

We in the OPC have learned not to trust our idolatry prone hearts not to do the same as others have in the past. Hence, no crucifixes are used. So, yes, we are opposed to it.

[Mad Dawg]

Omnibus response:

We in the OPC have learned not to trust our idolatry prone hearts...
The image isn't the sin. The sin is in how we relate to the image. We can make idols of even our thoughts. There IS something reasonable about iconoclasm, but I think it misplaces the problem, while failing to grasp the fullness of the implications of "He is the image of the invisible God," of the Incarnation.

In the Roman Church Christ is said to be resacrificed each time the Mass is celebrated.
Not so much. I mean it is said, but not by those speaking carefully. There is only one sacrifice. It is an eternal reality. Unfortunately not too many Protestants (and not a whole lot of Catholics, come to think of it) have a clear idea of what "eternal" means. They wrongly think it has to do with span of time.

I don't think it's a "lie". I think it's an untrue assertion, but I don't think most of those making it intend to lie. They merely err. Their culpability probably lies in failing to take care to speak the truth.

Steve_Seattle, I don't think "recreated" is right either. In loose speech, "re-presented" is not so bad.

Hosepipe: the wafer(missa) is said to become Jesus at mass.
Are you saying that "missa" is is Latin for "wafer"? I don't think so, and neither does my Cassell's dictionary.

Much of christianity has DEVOLVED into idolatry.
Troo dat. We are delivered from idolatry by grace.

I have long wondered where to find this horrible "Roman Church"...
LOL. Me too. Strangely, I remember hating it, but I never found it anywhere.

agere_contra: We are truly present at Christ's gift of Himself. Nice.

Steve_Seattle:the Church does believe that the communion wafer and wine are transformed into the literal body and blood of Christ, although it is said that the "accidental" (visible) characteristics of the elements remain unchanged and it is only - so to speak - the "essence" which is transformed.
I've heard one of the friars here say that. But he's the least theologically precise of the current squad. "Literally" is an over-used word. Even Rush uses it incorrectly. I try to avoid it.

"Really" is better, except that it just pushes off the question of what we mean by "real." My pet "problem" is, "What is it that makes a ring a wedding ring? Not the shape except it has to fit on a finger, I suppose. Not the gold or whatever it's made of. The "whatness" or "what-it-is-ness" of it is not in any of its sensible characteristics.

"Identical" might work. The Catechism of the Catholic Church § 1330 says: "[it is called] the Holy Sacrifice because it makes present the one sacrifice of Christ the Savior and includes the Church's offering."

Steve_Seattle: Once you've said "divinized" you've said a lot.

I would say "body has to do with "self" or "person," while the OT begs, shrieks, for blood to be associated with life, "for the blood is the life."

I don't think "re-enacted" applies except in am almost trivial way. I mean the "actions" of the Last Supper -- took, blessed, broke, gave -- are 'enacted'. There is a kind of "representation," fer shur. But the controversy is around what I think "re-presentation" denominates as well as any word.

The "ana" in anamnesis is the same as that in anastasis - resurrection, standing up. Anamnesis is "remembering up," FWIW.

[Steve_Seattle]

"...ah yes, those darn ‘theological accretions’ again...how dare they get in the way of our being nothing more than 1st century Galilean peasant..."

That is what most of Jesus's early followers were. As for the Eucharist, here is an early Eucharistic prayer from The Didache:

First, concerning the cup: We give you thanks, our Father, for the holy vine of your servant David, which you revealed to us through your servant Jesus. To you is the glory forever.

And concerning the broken loaf: We give you thanks, our Father, for the life and knowledge which you revealed to us through your servant Jesus. To you is the glory forever. Just as the broken loaf was scattered over the hills as grain, and having been gathered together, became one; in like manner may your church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into your kingdom. Because yours is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ forever."

That is believed to be from an early Jewish-Christian community, circa 90-120 AD, and not a Gnostic sect. It predates Martin Luther by well over a millennia, yet has a simplicity and transparency I find appealing. There is no mention of body and blood, re-enactment of sacrifices, transubstantiation, or any of the complex rationalizing that is offered in support of the Mass. (By the way, I am not "anti-Mass" - I do not think it is an idolatrous, evil, or crazy thing, as many Protestants and skeptics do. But I do believe the theology behind it is very complex and that it is only one option among many for the form of Christian worship.)

[Alex Murphy]

Years ago, it did not stop the hucksters at TBN from giving this description away IF you sent in a certain amount of money. Whatz’er name on the show spent a lot of time hawking these descriptions in a way that would have done honor to a medicine show barker.

EXCLUSIVE REPORT: Trinity Broadcasting Network Run by Atheists
Cable Company Goes TBN 24/7 for Delinquent Customers
Writers' Strike Hits TBN Hard

[imardmd1]

I’ve never understood what Protestants have against the Crucifix.

More to the point Hebrews 10:8-14, especially verse 10:

"... we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."

Here, "once" is εφαπαξ, which is a strengthened form of απαξ that means "once for all time, never to be repeated" -- which the context fully supports, so that it cannot be argued that the sacrifice continued. Jesus came to fulfill The Law, and on the Cross He cried out the victory proclamation "τετελησται" -- "FINISHED!" (Jn. 19:30)

I believe that it is a crime to keep on insisting, that what was then and there finished, is still going on. He left the cross, revived, entered into The True Holiest Of All In Heaven, and displayed His Incorruptible Life-bearing Blood on the Mercy Seat, obtaining propitiation and reconciliation by ONCE satisfying all of The God's righteous demands for ever, making it a surety for us, who have come to persistently commit trust in Him, to belong to The God without recrimination, remorse, nor reversal.

The Remembrance Supper is a memorial of His Cross-death, in which His regenerated believer-disciple-priests partake of the Tokens of His Passion, lest we forget.

[Mad Dawg]

I believe that it is a crime to keep on insisting, that what was then and there finished, is still going on.

And what crime, in particular, do you believe it to be.

As I said, the problem is that thinking that "eternal" means "still going on." It doesn't.

[Mad Dawg]

You understand, I trust, that the theology (or, at least, its statement and articulation) arises, as does much of Paul's, in response to controversy.

You used the word "somehow," and my immediate thought was that it's in the "somehows" that all the disputes arise. It is JUST as theological to say "MERE memorial" as it is to say "real presence."

[imardmd1]

Christ’s words at the Last Supper “This is My Body ...” and earlier in His ministry “He who eats My Flesh and Drinks My Blood ...” make it abundantly clear what is meant.

These are figures of speech, and the burnt bread and unleavened wine are representative tokens of His Body and Blood, not transformed into it.

When it is said "She sings like a bird" does not mean the lass, while singing, is transformed into a literal canary or mockingbird; it means that her singing reminds one of a bird. This is a figurative-literal use of the language, as giving the bread is representative of partaking of Him spiritually -- a figure of speech. When Jesus gave the disciples bread that he broke, it was not transformed into human flesh when all of Him was right there, standing before them, not divided! It was a token reminding them of His body to be rent/broken (not bones) for them. Come on!

[Bigg Red]

Excellent explanation.

Perfect and totally amazing tagline, BTW.

[Claud]

For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts.

Malachi 1:11

[metmom]

It’s all the same sacrifice. You are thinking in terms of time, the Christian Faith thinks in terms of eternity.

In heaven, in eternity, Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father.

[metmom]

...what everybody on this thread fails to note; Christ as sacrifice is presented anew, at each celebration, albeit literally in an unbloody manner, as opposed to the bloody, once consummated sacrifice upon Calvary; as the Spotless Victim He is made present under the appearance of bread and wine, i.e. transubstantiation...

What Catholics do not get is that without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins. Hebrews 9:22

An unbloody sacrifice is meaningless and useless.

[Mad Dawg]

... as giving the bread is representative of partaking of Him spiritually -- a figure of speech.

To me, that is assuming the thing to be proved. It's not incoherent in itself, but it's not so much a refutation as a presenting of another view for consideration.

There are layers and layers here, and I don't think it can be determined by argument alone.

Let me offer something from my side, not as an argument but as something suggestive:

When my wife and I had a child, naturally I meditated on many things,among which was the fatherhood of God. And I saw that, the mind and language being what they must be, to say that God is Father is in a way metaphorical.

Then, another time, I was thinking about Unity and Trinity. I concluded that when we, so to speak, "meet" the One, unity doesn't turn out to be what we thought, but rather, THE unity comes in three hypostases.

And in fact, at the sensory level, while we loosely speak of "one thing," in fact, one egg or one stone is a multitude, a manyness of particles and materials and whatnot. So TRUE oneness, I thought,is encountered in God alone.

And then I thought back to fatherhood. And I saw that I am not utterly father. I am son, brother, spouse, and father. And it is scarcely that I myself am father -- except for the accident of my being more or less in charge of one set of genitals.

You see where I'm going? We start with concrete referents in the created world and, the more we look at them, the more we see that they are not very much, certainly not entirely or exactly, what we call them. And it turns out that GOD is the TRUE Father while I am a kind of metaphor.

Naturally, this turns my thinking about John 6 upside down and shakes it.

What ARE bread and wine? Are they anything really? DO they, possibly, come into themselves when they are consecrated? For all of us, Water doesn't make dirt disappear. It attenuates it, spread it around. For those of us who believe in Baptismal regeneration, maybe it alone is the true washing, that REALLY removes REAL spots and stains.

[Claud]

1.The Second Commandment (Ex. 20:4-6 and Deut. 5:8-10) forbids any picture or image of God, and that would include the Son of God, even as man.

Then God broke His own commandment:

[bmontang]

Might I suggest you take a look at the earliest of Church teachings and discern whether they believed in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist?

The teachings in the first century are extremely clear on the presence of the Lord in the Eucharist. Seriously, read those who likely were Catechized by those who walked with Christ.

[CynicalBear]

Well stated. One of the best I’ve seen.

[LibLieSlayer]

“Protestants bearing false witness against Catholics?? How can that be?? /s”

If you see any chasing you with a sword and screaming allahu akbar... run. /S

LLS

[LibLieSlayer]

That is the way I was that taught in the Methodist Church... many years ago... had to leave them due to their GODless national leadership.

[Springfield Reformer]

I have, and I don’t think they support transubstantiation at all, which was a much later formulation. Indeed, I believe many among the early fathers would be welcome in most old school reformed congregations. I doubt they would be comfortable with the contortions of Aquinas on the matter.

[sitetest]

“And it turns out that GOD is the TRUE Father while I am a kind of metaphor.”

Yeah.

[If You Want It Fixed - Fix It]

Does the OPC watch “Jesus movies”?

Of course not, they are images of Jesus Christ and we don’t know what he looked like and we don’t worship idols?

Can OPC folks read....because the Catholics don’t believe what you stated they believe....use the secret internet and check it out....shhhhh.

Do the Catholics kill Jesus thousands of times EACH DAY? Of course not, He’s killed but once, in Mass in every Catholic Church in the world, today and every day since “33AD”, and at Calvary, ONCE!

It’s a wild Mystery! Look it up!