Mormons don't wear crosses?

[Cow Poke]

Once again, I was introduced to a new term on TWeb... I guess we're just "plain country" in Churches where I've grown up, because I have never heard the term "cruciform" as used below...

----Believing that it's biblical to wear cruciforms as jewelry. Thinking that Jesus commanded His disciples to pray to Him. Believing that Jesus didn't want Christianity to continue to be run by apostles.

I did not know that Mormons did not wear crosses.

And it's possible I'm wrongly assuming that, because Jeff isn't specifically saying that - he's NOT saying that it's NOT biblical, but that Mormons don't believe that it IS biblical "to wear cruciforms as jewelry."

A search of FAIR shows...

FairMormon.Org

Of this question, Elder Marvin J. Ashton of the Twelve said:
Why don't you have crosses on your buildings of worship? Why aren't your chapels built in the shape of a cross? Why don't you encourage your people to wear and display crosses? What is the Church's policy toward crosses? From Matt. 16:24-25: Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. We in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, in response to these questions, try to teach our people to carry their crosses rather than display or wear them.

© source where applicable

To me, this is like asking somebody why they don't eat sushi, and they answer that they like chicken.

"carry crosses rather than wear them?"
When was the last time you saw a Mormon carrying a cross around?
And, yes, I realize it's speaking FIGURATIVELY, but I think it's a silly answer.

Was there some edict or teaching or instruction that started this "don't wear crosses (cruciforms)" thing?

[Sparko]

the Jehovah's witnesses won't wear crosses either. in fact they argue that Jesus died on a stake instead of a cross. but they think that displaying crosses is like wearing a bullet around your neck if your loved one was killed by a gun.

well, if my loved one had come back to life and defeated death, I probably WOULD wear a bullet around my neck to remind me of the victory!

But as for myself, I don't wear a cross. I don't have any problem with doing so, but I just don't like to wear necklaces. I have a cool cross necklace at home though. It is a cross made out of nails, on a leather strap.

[nrajeff]

Once again, I was introduced to a new term on TWeb... I guess we're just "plain country" in Churches where I've grown up, because I have never heard the term "cruciform" as used below...

---Yeah. I learned, a decade or so ago, the difference between wearing a cross devoid of Jesus' image, and wearing one that has it. Apparently, Catholic types prefer to have Jesus in their cross-related iconography, whereas Protestant types want an empty cross. I understand and appreciate the reasoning behind both policies.

I did not know that Mormons did not wear crosses.

---Where have you been?

And it's possible I'm wrongly assuming that, because Jeff isn't specifically saying that - he's NOT saying that it's NOT biblical, but that Mormons don't believe that it IS biblical "to wear cruciforms as jewelry."

---Then I will clarify my position: TMK, the Bible says nothing definitive either way on the question "Did Christians living during the Apostolic Era wear cross-shaped images on their persons?" Nor does the Bible say, definitively, anything to resovle the issue of whether Jesus wants His disciples living today to wear such images.

I believe the LDS church's position on the above is similar to my own.

Of this question, Elder Marvin J. Ashton of the Twelve said:
... We in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, in response to these questions, try to teach our people to carry their crosses rather than display or wear them.

To me, this is like asking somebody why they don't eat sushi, and they answer that they like chicken.

"carry crosses rather than wear them?"
When was the last time you saw a Mormon carrying a cross around?
And, yes, I realize it's speaking FIGURATIVELY, but I think it's a silly answer.

---I don't think it's silly. He was referring to the BIBLICAL idea that disciples of Jesus should show their allegiance to Jesus from their actions, not their bling. Of course, PERSONAL reminders of our committment to following Jesus can be a good thing, so if your reason for wearing a cross of either type (with Jesus or without) is to remind yourself to act like a Christian, I dodn't see anything wrong with that. Nor do I think it's wrong if your reason is to show others that you subscribe to Christianity, like wearing a wedding ring is to show others--AND to remind yourself--that you are married.

But the only Biblical references to Christians and crosses together, is the metaphorical kind, just like Ashton rightly said--the idea of taking upon ourselves the responsibilities that come with being a disciple.

Was there some edict or teaching or instruction that started this "don't wear crosses (cruciforms)" thing?

---I don't know of an official declaration on it. Maybe it was just an "executive decision" so people would not confuse us with mainstream, traditional Christian churches. I believe that the LDS are not the only church in Christendom that has this policy. Wwe are not forbidden to wear crosses, nor are we encouraged to. I wouldn't mind if the leaders recommended that the general membership of the church start wearing them, although in ANY church, the active promotion of such a practice has a potential downside.

[Cow Poke]

---Yeah. I learned, a decade or so ago, the difference between wearing a cross devoid of Jesus' image, and wearing one that has it. Apparently, Catholic types prefer to have Jesus in their cross-related iconography, whereas Protestant types want an empty cross. I understand and appreciate the reasoning behind both policies.

OK, I learned that 40 years ago.

---Where have you been?

Texas

---Then I will clarify my position: TMK, the Bible says nothing definitive either way on the question "Did Christians living during the Apostolic Era wear cross-shaped images on their persons?" Nor does the Bible say, definitively, anything to resovle the issue of whether Jesus wants His disciples living today to wear such images.

Exactly.

I believe the LDS church's position on the above is similar to my own.

Cool.

---I don't think it's silly. He was referring to the BIBLICAL idea that disciples of Jesus should show their allegiance to Jesus from their actions, not their bling. Of course, PERSONAL reminders of our committment to following Jesus can be a good thing, so if your reason for wearing a cross of either type (with Jesus or without) is to remind yourself to act like a Christian, I dodn't see anything wrong with that. Nor do I think it's wrong if your reason is to show others that you subscribe to Christianity, like wearing a wedding ring is to show others--AND to remind yourself--that you are married.

Again... cool!

But the only Biblical references to Christians and crosses together, is the metaphorical kind, just like Ashton rightly said--the idea of taking upon ourselves the responsibilities that come with being a disciple.

Still cool.

---I don't know of an official declaration on it. Maybe it was just an "executive decision" so people would not confuse us with mainstream, traditional Christian churches. I believe that the LDS are not the only church in Christendom that has this policy. Wwe are not forbidden to wear crosses, nor are we encouraged to. I wouldn't mind if the leaders recommended that the general membership of the church start wearing them, although in ANY church, the active promotion of such a practice has a potential downside.

ALL THAT just to say "I don't know"?
The question was ...

Was there some edict or teaching or instruction that started this "don't wear crosses (cruciforms)" thing?

But, "I don't know" is, indeed, a valid answer. Thanks!

[Cow Poke]

the Jehovah's witnesses won't wear crosses either. in fact they argue that Jesus died on a stake instead of a cross. but they think that displaying crosses is like wearing a bullet around your neck if your loved one was killed by a gun.

well, if my loved one had come back to life and defeated death, I probably WOULD wear a bullet around my neck to remind me of the victory!

But as for myself, I don't wear a cross. I don't have any problem with doing so, but I just don't like to wear necklaces. I have a cool cross necklace at home though. It is a cross made out of nails, on a leather strap.

I also do not wear a cross - I USED to have a "cross in my pocket", "just because".... but it wasn't like a "lucky charm" or anything.

And, yes, I've seen those "nails on leather strap" crosses - kinda neat.

[JB]

Of course, PERSONAL reminders of our committment to following Jesus can be a good thing, so if your reason for wearing a cross of either type (with Jesus or without) is to remind yourself to act like a Christian, I dodn't see anything wrong with that. Nor do I think it's wrong if your reason is to show others that you subscribe to Christianity, like wearing a wedding ring is to show others--AND to remind yourself--that you are married.

That's pretty much the way I've always seen it. Like what I've heard some LDS say about their temple garments, the cross can function as a great personal reminder and symbol of God's saving grace. If it becomes something that one has to wear in order to be in the 'in-crowd' something's gone wrong, but neither should anyone be criticized for wearing it for good reasons.

I don't personally wear a cross, chiefly because jewelry ain't my thing, but I do frequently make the sign of the cross, particularly at the conclusion of prayer - not because of any 'magical' powers it might have, but to remind myself whose I am and by what power and authority I can live the sort of life to which I've been called.

[jo7241974]

That's pretty much the way I've always seen it. Like what I've heard some LDS say about their temple garments, the cross can function as a great personal reminder and symbol of God's saving grace. If it becomes something that one has to wear in order to be in the 'in-crowd' something's gone wrong, but neither should anyone be criticized for wearing it for good reasons.

I don't personally wear a cross, chiefly because jewelry ain't my thing, but I do frequently make the sign of the cross, particularly at the conclusion of prayer - not because of any 'magical' powers it might have, but to remind myself whose I am and by what power and authority I can live the sort of life to which I've been called.

When I first joined the Church, I asked a similar question about the fact that none of our Chapels or Temples have crosses on their roofs. I don't know if the answer I received was "official" or not, but I was told that the spire that IS on the roofs of our buildings point toward Heaven. Rather than focusing on Jesus's death on the cross, it is a recognition that Jesus defeated the grave, that He has risen, and, that He lives.

God bless,

jo

[Cow Poke]

When I first joined the Church, I asked a similar question about the fact that none of our Chapels or Temples have crosses on their roofs. I don't know if the answer I received was "official" or not, but I was told that the spire that IS on the roofs of our buildings point toward Heaven. Rather than focusing on Jesus's death on the cross, it is a recognition that Jesus defeated the grave, that He has risen, and, that He lives.

God bless,

jo

I had always heard that the steeple on Churches was so that people coming into town from outside would recognize the Church among all the other buildings, AND that they tended to "point to God" in a sense.

As far as crosses on top of buildings, I've never been in a church that had one "on top" or on the roof - usually on the front wall of the auditorium/sanctuary above, or on both sides of, the baptistry.

AND, just to be clear this wasn't intended to be an "argue" thread (yes, Jo, I realize you're not arguing ) but a "gee, I wonder why" thread.

I'm still curious how it got started that Mormons don't wear crosses.

So, Jo.. have you seen ANY Mormons wear crosses, or "cruciforms"? Just wondering.

[jo7241974]

I had always heard that the steeple on Churches was so that people coming into town from outside would recognize the Church among all the other buildings, AND that they tended to "point to God" in a sense.

As far as crosses on top of buildings, I've never been in a church that had one "on top" or on the roof - usually on the front wall of the auditorium/sanctuary above, or on both sides of, the baptistry.

AND, just to be clear this wasn't intended to be an "argue" thread (yes, Jo, I realize you're not arguing ) but a "gee, I wonder why" thread.

I'm still curious how it got started that Mormons don't wear crosses.

So, Jo.. have you seen ANY Mormons wear crosses, or "cruciforms"? Just wondering.

I can't remember ever seeing a Mormon wearing one. (Yes, I realized this was just a "gee, I wonder why" thread.)

God bless,

jo

[Vivian]

While attending the Mormon church, I was taught that we did not wear or display crosses because God did not want us to remember Jesus' suffering and death, but his resurrection.

Now, as I learn that Jesus' greatest suffering was in prayer the night before, in the Garden of Gethsemane, I wonder why the picture of him praying in the Garden was at the time the most revered?

Also, I have often times wondered how the church now feels about the symbol of the empty tomb?

Shalom!

Viv

[Cow Poke]

While attending the Mormon church, I was taught that we did not wear or display crosses because God did not want us to remember Jesus' suffering and death, but his resurrection.

Interesting, Viv... yet, one of my favorite passages is...

Scripture Verse:

Phil 3:7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,
9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
12 Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.
13 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,
14 I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.

With "fellowship of his sufferings" smack dab in the middle. It really gives "oomph" to the "power of his resurrection".

Now, as I learn that Jesus' greatest suffering was in prayer the night before, in the Garden of Gethsemane, I wonder why the picture of him praying in the Garden was at the time the most revered?

Also, I have often times wondered how the church now feels about the symbol of the empty tomb?

Shalom!

Viv

Obviously, the cross is a much more recognizable symbol, so ...

And, yes, I was taught at an early age that we (church I grew up in) used an "empty cross" because "Jesus isn't THERE anymore". The "empty tomb" seems only to play a major part at Easter.

[Vivian]

Interesting, Viv... yet, one of my favorite passages is...

Scripture Verse:

Phil 3:7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,
9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
12 Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.
13 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,
14 I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.

With "fellowship of his sufferings" smack dab in the middle. It really gives "oomph" to the "power of his resurrection".



Obviously, the cross is a much more recognizable symbol, so ...

And, yes, I was taught at an early age that we (church I grew up in) used an "empty cross" because "Jesus isn't THERE anymore". The "empty tomb" seems only to play a major part at Easter.

Hi CP -

It is a interesting journey to venture back through history into the origins of the symbols that have meaning for us. For example, the cross, or tau, did not begin with Jesus, but had deep significance prior to Jesus' death. The fact that he was crucified on a cross points to the deeper meaning of crucifixion, an understanding which precedes Jesus accomplishments for humanity.

So in other words, at least for me, the meaning of the cross goes way beyond Jesus' dying, and can be found in his teachings, long before he actually hung on a cross - deny self, pick of your cross, and follow me. Obviously the people he spoke this to did not have an image of the Son of God being crucified on the cross to pay for their sins, so for them, the cross meant something else.

And you are pointing to this deeper meaning with the scripture that you quoted - joining in the fellowship of his sufferings. A fellowship of his sufferings? Pretty profound statement, yes? This too points to the deeper meaning of the cross which precedes, and is much bigger than, the physical suffering and dying of Jesus.

I wear a cross and have many in my home and sanctuary as symbols of this fellowship.

And those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.


Shalom!

Viv

[Sparko]

My theory is that Mormons are vampires and that is why they don't wear crosses.

That's my story and I am sticking to it.

[Cow Poke]

My theory is that Mormons are vampires and that is why they don't wear crosses.

That's my story and I am sticking to it.

Rats, Sparko!!!! That's where I was going with this whole thread, and you BLEW it!!!!

[jo7241974]

While attending the Mormon church, I was taught that we did not wear or display crosses because God did not want us to remember Jesus' suffering and death, but his resurrection.

Now, as I learn that Jesus' greatest suffering was in prayer the night before, in the Garden of Gethsemane, I wonder why the picture of him praying in the Garden was at the time the most revered?

Also, I have often times wondered how the church now feels about the symbol of the empty tomb?

Shalom!

Viv

Hi Viv,

We do indeed focus quite a bit on the suffering endured in the Garden of Gethsemane, in fact, I believe that is where He did a great deal of the suffering for our sins. Imagine! He bled from every pore! His suffering on the cross, which also involved the suffering of His personal physical body, then completed His work. Additionally, I believe that He suffered more than our sins. I think He also felt every pain of every illness, every suffering of every kind - be it mental, emotional, physical, abuse, body impairment, fears that man can suffer, etc. In this way, by having experienced them all, He truly is the perfect mediator as He can understand the influences which we make our choices from, etc. In my mind, as if I thought it was incomprehensible for me to imagine His suffering our sins, this makes His sacrifice and suffering even more impossible to comprehend.

The empty tomb, of course, indicates that He Lives!!!

Shalom,

jo