Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sunstone speaker attempts to explain LDS 'aversion' to cross
Mormon Times ^ | Sept. 10, 2009 | Michael De Groote

Posted on 09/10/2009 1:30:04 PM PDT by Colofornian

In 1916 a church asked the Salt Lake City Council to allow them to build a huge cross, "the symbol of Christianity," on Ensign Peak. "We would like to construct it of cement, re-enforced with steel, of sufficient dimensions that it can be readily seen from every part of the city," the request read.

That request came from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The cross was to honor the Mormon pioneers.

Even though the proposal was approved by the City Council, the monument was never built.

Today, there are no crosses on Mormon temples. Yet two are shaped like a cross. Mormon chapels do not have crosses, either. But many have prints of the crucifixion hanging on their walls. Michael G. Reed, who has a bachelor of arts in humanities and religious studies and a master of art in liberal arts from California State University, Sacramento, explored at a recent Sunstone Symposium what he called, in rather charged language, the "LDS Contempt for the Christian Symbol."

Reed also uses the word "contempt" for how Protestants feel about the cross -- 19th-century Protestants, that is. It turns out that cross "aversion" was a Protestant pastime in times past. Its source was anti-Catholicism. Reed quoted historian Ryan K. Smith, who said that from 1820 to 1850 the number of Catholics in the United States grew from about 195,000 members to 1.75 million members, the largest religious body in the nation. And Catholics used crosses.

And so the Protestants didn't. "To Protestant Americans, the cross was perceived to be a strictly Catholic symbol," Reed said.

So the Mormons got their "opposition" to the cross from the Protestants?

Not so fast, according to Reed. Mormons did not pick up their feelings about the cross from the Protestants. At least not entirely.

"While searching for evidence to support the assumption that early Saints had initially rejected the symbol of the cross, I couldn't find any," Reed said.

As a church of converts from other churches, it shouldn't be surprising if some attitudes crept into Latter-day Saints' attitudes. But Reed couldn't find any hints of the Protestant cross attitudes until around 1877. By that time, Protestants had already begun adopting the cross as their own symbol.

Instead, Reed found the cross all over Mormondom. It appeared as jewelry on Brigham Young's wives and daughters. It appeared in floral arrangements in funerals. It appeared as tie tacks on men's ties and watch fobs on men's vests. It appeared on cattle as the official LDS Church brand. Crosses were on church windows, attic vents, stained-glass windows and pulpits. They were on gravestones and quilts.

Even two temples, the Hawaiian and the Cardston, Alberta Temple were described in a 1923 general conference as being built in the shape of a cross. Reed said the cross "taboo" was grass roots and began around the turn of the 20th century.

In 1916, when LDS Church Presiding Bishop Charles W. Nibley asked the Salt Lake City Council to approve the church's plan to erect a large cross to honor the pioneers, he didn't anticipate any opposition. He was, according to Reed, "quickly criticized, and even accused of succumbing to Catholic agenda."

Anti-Catholic feelings quashed the effort.

Mormon missionary work in predominantly Catholic countries "was very challenging," Reed said. Mexican (and presumably Catholic) revolutionaries had executed a Mormon branch president and his cousin the year before. The two were told before they were shot, "If you will renounce your religion and confess before the Virgin Mary, we will spare your lives."

"As a result of conflicts with Catholics abroad such as this, smaller conflicts with Catholics in Utah had a tendency to get blown to greater proportions," Reed said.

Just two weeks before the LDS Church's cross proposal, Catholic Bishop Joseph S. Glass complained about Mormons dancing on Good Friday. He decried a "city of unbelievers" and called upon others to protest. "Are there not enough Christians in Salt Lake City to command some kind of general respect for the holiest day of the year?"

Reed said Bishop Glass' protest offended Mormons, who traditionally did not observe Good Friday. Non-Mormons also thought it was "arrogant" for the bishop to "impose his religious convictions upon others."

This controversy was "fresh on the minds of many Utah citizens who opposed the 1916 Ensign Peak proposal," Reed said.

Plans for a monument on Ensign Peak were reluctantly set aside for almost two decades. But it was only a year later, on July 24, 1917, that a This Is the Place monument in the shape of a cross was erected at the mouth of Emigration Canyon.

For 40 more years the symbol of the cross continued to polarize Latter-day Saints. "While some rejected the symbol," Reed said, "others continued to embrace it."

In 1957, a jewelry store in Salt Lake City advertised cross jewelry for girls. LDS Church Presiding Bishop Joseph L. Wirthlin called President David O. McKay to see if it was proper for LDS girls to purchase the crosses to wear.

Reed believes that President McKay "institutionalized" the LDS Church's feelings toward the symbol in his reply. President McKay expressed two reasons why he didn't think it was a good idea.

He told Bishop Wirthlin that the crosses were "purely Catholic and Latter-day Saint girls should not purchase and wear them. ... Our worship should be in our hearts."

According to Reed's reading of Gregory Prince and Wm. Robert Wright's book "David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism," President McKay had developed some critical attitudes toward the Catholic Church when he served in the 1920s as president of the LDS Church's European Mission.

These attitudes ended when Catholic Bishop Duane Hunt met with President McKay about an LDS author's book that was highly critical of Catholics. President McKay began to "privately re-examine his own beliefs" about Catholicism, according to Reed.

Reed said that members of the LDS Church have rid themselves of "much of the anti-Catholic ideas of the past."

But even when the use of the cross is divorced from anti-Catholicism, Mormons, as a whole, still do not generally use the cross as an outward symbol of their faith.

In 1975, President Gordon B. Hinckley, then a member of the Quorum of the Twelve, spoke in general conference about the symbol of the cross. He recognized and respected how other churches view the symbol, and said, "But for us, the cross is the symbol of the dying Christ, while our message is a declaration of the living Christ."

"Contempt." "Aversion." "Opposition." "Taboo." Reed struggled throughout his presentation to find the right word to describe how Mormons feel about using the cross as a symbol. In a recent telephone interview, Robert A. Rees, an LDS scholar (and the "response" to Reed's presentation at the Sunstone Symposium), used the word "ambivalence" to describe Mormons' feelings toward using the cross as a symbol.

Not hostility, but a shifting ambivalence.

The attitude of Mormons toward the cross has changed over the years. Members of the LDS Church did not accept the 19th-century Protestant prejudice against the cross. Over time, some embraced the cross as a symbol and others avoided its use. Some even used it as a way to denigrate the Catholic Church.

Today members of the LDS Church concentrate on the body and blood of Christ more than the nails and wood. The cross may not be used as a special outward symbol any more than the crown of thorns, the whip and the spear, but thoughts of the cross and what it represents still cause Latter-day Saints to stand all amazed.


TOPICS: Apologetics; History; Other Christian; Theology
KEYWORDS: antimormonthread; christianity; cross; lds; ldschurch; mormon
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-75 next last
From the article: Today, there are no crosses on Mormon temples...Mormon chapels do not have crosses, either.

(Or IN temples, either...kind of surprising, given the extent of "proxy" activity going on inside temples -- baptisms for the dead, for example...I mean, wasn't Christ dying on the cross the greatest "proxy" act of eternity???)

From the article: Reed said the cross "taboo" was grass roots and began around the turn of the 20th century...even when the use of the cross is divorced from anti-Catholicism, Mormons, as a whole, still do not generally use the cross as an outward symbol of their faith. "Contempt." "Aversion." "Opposition." "Taboo." Reed struggled throughout his presentation to find the right word to describe how Mormons feel about using the cross as a symbol. In a recent telephone interview, Robert A. Rees, an LDS scholar (and the "response" to Reed's presentation at the Sunstone Symposium), used the word "ambivalence" to describe Mormons' feelings toward using the cross as a symbol.

Could it be that the cross is the great "work" accomplished on our behalf -- and 'tis anathema to a spirit of "pull-yourself-up-by-your-own-bootstraps" mentality?

u>From the article: "While searching for evidence to support the assumption that early Saints had initially rejected the symbol of the cross, I couldn't find any," Reed said...Reed found the cross all over Mormondom. It appeared as jewelry on Brigham Young's wives and daughters. It appeared in floral arrangements in funerals. It appeared as tie tacks on men's ties and watch fobs on men's vests. It appeared on cattle as the official LDS Church brand. Crosses were on church windows, attic vents, stained-glass windows and pulpits. They were on gravestones and quilts. Even two temples, the Hawaiian and the Cardston, Alberta Temple were described in a 1923 general conference as being built in the shape of a cross.

Well, if 19th century Mormonism was a "restoration" -- and if 19th century Mormons weren't prominently "anti-cross" -- then where did the 20th & 21st century Mormons base their authority to neglect the cross?

1 posted on 09/10/2009 1:30:05 PM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Reed also uses the word “contempt” for how Protestants feel about the cross — 19th-century Protestants, that is. It turns out that cross “aversion” was a Protestant pastime in times past.

I’ve never heard that claim in my life. What a bizarre lie.


2 posted on 09/10/2009 1:36:25 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
From the article: President McKay began to "privately re-examine his own beliefs" about Catholicism, according to Reed. Reed said that members of the LDS Church have rid themselves of "much of the anti-Catholic ideas of the past."

(How do you erase though what Lds leaders -- "apostles" and others like Pratt & McConkie -- have said about Catholics that simply??? Especially since their works & quotes are still found throughout Lds bookstores & Lds curricula manuals, etc???)

Besides, Lds still haven't erased their anti-Catholic "scriptures" like 1 Nephi 14:9...or Joseph Smith -- History vv. 18-20 in the Pearl of Great Price -- where Smith's founding vision indirectly labeled ALL Catholic creeds as an "abomination" to the Mormon god and ALL Catholic professing believers were indirectly labeled as "corrupt."

The Lds church HQ has not only NOT pulled back on that -- but they've ensured that stuff is printed in the MILLIONS and translated into dozens of languages worldwide!!!

3 posted on 09/10/2009 1:38:13 PM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
It turns out that cross "aversion" was a Protestant pastime in times past

In a word, liar.

4 posted on 09/10/2009 1:39:04 PM PDT by svcw (Legalism reinforces self-righteousness - it communicates to you the good news of your own goodness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Reed also uses the word “contempt” for how Protestants feel about the cross — 19th-century Protestants, that is. It turns out that cross “aversion” was a Protestant pastime in times past. Its source was anti-Catholicism. Reed quoted historian Ryan K. Smith, who said that from 1820 to 1850 the number of Catholics in the United States grew from about 195,000 members to 1.75 million members, the largest religious body in the nation. And Catholics used crosses.

And so the Protestants didn’t. “To Protestant Americans, the cross was perceived to be a strictly Catholic symbol,” Reed said.


There is a difference between a Crucifix and a cross.


5 posted on 09/10/2009 1:40:00 PM PDT by Grunthor (Everything I need to know about Islam, I learned on 9/11.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Oh my. All you do on the FR is post anti-Mormon screed. We have a radical communist administration now. The Mormons are one of the most consistently conservative groups in the USA. Utah is one of the most reliably conservative States, and that’s because of the Mormons. You can keep your transparent attempts to drive a wedge between conservatives. I’m not LDS, but I live in Utah and I’m just fine with the Mormons. I’ve met far fewer left-wing O-bots amongst them than I have amongst Californians and Coloradans.


6 posted on 09/10/2009 1:41:49 PM PDT by Seruzawa (If you agree with the French raise your hand - If you are French raise both hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

On this one I have to say I have an aversion to the symbol of a cross. It is the low point of our Saviour’s life as a man. It is a position of defeat, humiliation, and pain. As a testament to my faith, I much prefereither a living example or perhaps an empty tomb. That is a more powerfulmessage and symbol as far as I am concerned.

Fact is I see all too many folks flaunting a cross as jewelry and then living as if they were mocking the One who paid the Ultimate price


7 posted on 09/10/2009 1:42:49 PM PDT by the long march
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: svcw

Then you don’t know your church history. Not all sects but many despised the cross —— revered the empty tomb.


8 posted on 09/10/2009 1:43:47 PM PDT by the long march
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

I have no problems with not having crosses on a church. Physical symbols really don’t have a place in worship. per se. The church is the body of Christ and our relationships are with God through Christ.

Our faith has nothing to do with a symbol, but, in fact, the memory and knowledge of what God, Christ, and the great men and women in the Bible have granted us to be able to follow and grow our souls.

We don’t have 50 ft. tall versions of Bibles on our churches, nor do we have a burning bush at our alter. Both of these should suffice as reasonable “symbols” of worship to those who think worship requires them, but, strangely, they don’t.

You can have a church with no steeple and no cross and be perfectly fine before God and Christ.


9 posted on 09/10/2009 1:44:16 PM PDT by ConservativeMind (Liberals have an inability to value good character or to desire it for themselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seruzawa

Oh please. It is a religion post. Go to breaking news ifyou want something hotter


10 posted on 09/10/2009 1:45:19 PM PDT by the long march
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
I attended a church for many years that did not display the cross, nor any image of Christ, nor stained glass, nor any other image or symbolism. The idea was that the essence of faith is a personal relationship with Jesus which is available to each individual who is open to it, without the need for any intermediate influence or "religious" gateway. This was not "animosity" toward the cross and it wasn't Mormanism.

You seem to go out of your way to criticize a religion to which you apparently don't belong. I don't see the benefit of that, but if it floats your boat- then have at it, I guess.

11 posted on 09/10/2009 1:47:33 PM PDT by San Jacinto (/i)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

The word “contempt” is not true.

But there are, or were at least, protestant groups that did not consider wearing a cross to be proper. This was based on two issues; one being the “graven image” issue, the other being that the focus ought better to be on the resurrenction rather than the crucufixion.

I think some of that is going away. For that matter (you might not know it to read some FR threads) but a lot of the inter-denominational hostility is easing, I think. Christians recognize fellow Christians where they find them, even if they disagree on points of doctrine. I think the fact that the fact that Christianity is so much under assault in the popular culture that people are starting to recognize their allies come from varied Christian backgrounds, but if they are willing to stand up under fire, they’re a brother nevertheless.


12 posted on 09/10/2009 1:49:08 PM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA

I am Jewish, so I am clearly not an involved party, but personally the cross never bothered me, but the cross with Jesus on it always struck me as a “graven image” (idol).

Same with the statutes of saints/angels/etc.

I file it under “none of my business,” but it is a bit odd for any religion to have those that deems itself a Judaism-offspring.


13 posted on 09/10/2009 1:50:23 PM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: marron

resurrenction = bad eyes


14 posted on 09/10/2009 1:50:36 PM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

It is a fascinating subject - graven images. I have read some Jewish commentaries on it. While there may be some disagreement amongst Christians about how or when to display the cross all Christians agree on the meaning behind it.


15 posted on 09/10/2009 1:59:37 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
Today, there are no crosses on Mormon temples. Yet two are shaped like a cross. Mormon chapels do not have crosses, either. But many have prints of the crucifixion hanging on their walls. Michael G. Reed, who has a bachelor of arts in humanities and religious studies and a master of art in liberal arts from California State University, Sacramento, explored at a recent Sunstone Symposium what he called, in rather charged language, the "LDS Contempt for the Christian Symbol."

Reed also uses the word "contempt" for how Protestants feel about the cross -- 19th-century Protestants, that is. It turns out that cross "aversion" was a Protestant pastime in times past. Its source was anti-Catholicism. Reed quoted historian Ryan K. Smith, who said that from 1820 to 1850 the number of Catholics in the United States grew from about 195,000 members to 1.75 million members, the largest religious body in the nation. And Catholics used crosses.

Related thread:
The Political Surf on Mormons and the cross

According to Michael Reed, an LDS historian at the University of California in Sacramento, the LDS church’s frowning on crosses was part of a movement initiated in the 1950s, under then-President David O. McKay, that sought to emphasize the church’s differences with the Catholic Church. In 1957, McKay declared the cross off limits on jewelry, saying the cross is “purely Catholic. … Our worship should be in our hearts,” McKay said, writes Stack in her article.

According to Reed’s thesis cited in Stack’s article, McKay had been annoyed by Catholic celebrations in Belgium while a mission president. Also, anti-Catholic feelings intensified when church leaders worried a Utah Catholic radio show was designed to win converts from among Latter-day Saints.


16 posted on 09/10/2009 2:00:06 PM PDT by Alex Murphy (...We never faced anything like this...we only fought humans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA
There are vast stretches of the country where you find many church buildings without a large belltower, steeple or cross. Probably has more to do with the "poverty" of the congregation that built what it could at the time and it just stayed that way, PLUS tornadoes and other highwinds.

The United States has more tornadic activity than the rest of the world combined and church steeples just don't stand up to it.

On the other hand I don't believe I've ever seen any sort of Protestant church without at least one cross inside. Just guessing the "expert" hasn't been inside many Protestant churches.

17 posted on 09/10/2009 2:02:26 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: the long march

And you do not know what I know.
Will let it go at that.


18 posted on 09/10/2009 2:04:44 PM PDT by svcw (Legalism reinforces self-righteousness - it communicates to you the good news of your own goodness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca
Do the words "כרובים" and "שׂרפים" mean anything to you?

Although not often pictured for purposes of Jewish worship in these days, in older times they were displayed.

You just happen to live in an age where the main thrust of Judaism is to discount the use of images.

19 posted on 09/10/2009 2:08:54 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: svcw

Bwahahhahhahahhaa

see ya on the other side. Whited sepulchres have a bad reputation i the New Testament


20 posted on 09/10/2009 2:10:21 PM PDT by the long march
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-75 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson