Thursday, November 26, 2015

What's up with these "crucifixes"?

From my first blog post about those ugly crucifixes in Japan, come this other ugly one.

They do not even show the bitter passion of our Lord?

How can they even be considered a crucifix or a representation of the Passion of the Lord?

They look cartoonish!

They look like a doodle of a 2nd grader in one of his notes, done because of his boredom in class!

It might have probably come from the same "artist" who gave us the twisted wire crucifix.  Probably.

What you have here folks is the continuing saga of the Japanese Catholics to have a decent looking crucifix in their churches and chapels.

Venerable Pius XII wrote in his encyclical on the Liturgy "Mediator Dei":
62. Assuredly it is a wise and most laudable thing to return in spirit and affection to the sources of the sacred liturgy. For research in this field of study, by tracing it back to its origins, contributes valuable assistance towards a more thorough and careful investigation of the significance of feast-days, and of the meaning of the texts and sacred ceremonies employed on their occasion. [Here the brilliant theologian-liturgist-diplomat Pope explains that the purpose of liturgical research is for the understanding of the texts and feast days and NOT how the Chupungcan liturgists have been doing it, telling us go back to how it was done in the catacombs!]  But it is neither wise nor laudable to reduce everything to antiquity by every possible device. Thus, to cite some instances, one would be straying from the straight path were he to wish the altar restored to its primitive tableform; [No thanks to Vatican 2!] were he to want black excluded as a color for the liturgical vestments; [the GIRM does not exclude it yet liturgists frown upon it like a demon-possessed human seeing the crucifix!]  were he to forbid the use of sacred images and statues in Churches[do seminaries and retreat houses look like this?  Oh, I remember!  That Pyramid in Katipunan! And it was reportedly designed by the dean Filipino theologians!] were he to order the crucifix so designed that the divine Redeemer’s body shows no trace of His cruel sufferings; and lastly were he to disdain and reject polyphonic music or singing in parts, even where it conforms to regulations issued by the Holy See. [Thank the inculturated songs of Chupungco - Diwa - Francisco!]

We have these images to remind us what happened.

Will the Passion of the Christ movie by Mel Gibson generated that much attention from both critics and moviegoers alike if it were less gory and violent?  Will it evoke the emotion that a real crucifixion would have if it were less bloody?

How will you ever see the wounds brought about by our sins in this kind of crucifix?

How will you ever see how the Lord suffered if His Face is represented this way?

These kind of rubbish, childish art doesn't and should never ever have a place in our houses of worship, nor in any Catholic homes for that matter!

In fact, this kind of art belongs to those who do not want to see, reflect and be touched by the bitter Passion of the Savior!

1 comment:

  1. I read somewhere that Modernists flee from Beauty as vampires flee from Holy Water.