.
We have had a string of Modernist "Bishops of Rome" who have promoted the use of all manner of corrupted crosses that the world at large has presumed to be crucifixes, the ones used by Paul VI and JPII being prime examples:
.
.
Here are some closeups:
.
The drooping crossbar has been linked to a devil worship cross from the middle ages -- it represents the defeated Christ by having the weight of pulling downward being too much for the cross, so that it's overloaded and ultimately fails by breaking in the middle, the broken cross.
.
.
Out of a concern for answering the demand from customers, perhaps, imitation crosses have included the INRI, but the "originals" shown above don't have any INRI. Here's a crucifix from The Catholic Company, for sale:
.
.
So you could ask, why does this one have the INRI, when the ones the putative popes use don't have it? I went to meet JPII in 1985 in Rome and he gave me one of the Rosaries he was known to hand out like party favors. It has one of his crosses in place of the crucifix, and there is unquestionably no INRI on the top. I would expect (but I don't really know for certain) that The Catholic Company had numerous requests for the INRI to be on this cross, so they could have just ordered one to be made for them, to keep their customers happy. But like I said, this is not what the Vatican was putting out. All of their crosses had no INRI, and I never heard any explanation for that. How much trouble would it have been for the Vatican to include the INRI? Why would they choose to omit it? Who made the decision? Some Freemason? A Jew? Jews hate the INRI, and so do Freemasons, who are Jews, basically. Who would that have been??
.
BTW the "papal Rosary" I was given had a centerpiece (where the 3 chains attach) with JPII's coat of arms on the back and HIS OWN IMAGE on the front. I kid you not, it was HIS FACE in bas-relief right there on the centerpiece, instead of Our Lord, or Our Lady or the crown of thorns or whatever. His own picture. Now please explain that one. Not even The Catholic Company produced statues of JPII until he died, but then they started to put out Benedict XVI statues not long after his election. I thought that was pretty weird, but then when Francis was elected, within a month, The Catholic Company and Autom, had SALES on Francis statues! I recall telling friends at the time that I'd never seen that before, sale prices on statues of a newly elected pope. (This had nothing to do with St. Francis de Sales)
.
And now, we have Francis with an entire menagerie of strange crosses for what, entertainment value or whatever, but from what I can tell, NONE of them have any INRI on top. It seems to me that they're trying to distract everyone from the missing-ness of the INRI by having a whole fleet of vastly different crosses-pretending-to-be-crucifixes. It seems like a distraction campaign to tell you, "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!" (Cf. Wizard of Oz) Do not pay any attention to the fact that these things-that-would-be-crucifixes are in fact not crucifixes. Read Benedict XVI's hermeneutic of continuity instead, which explains all the equivocation sophistries for how something can at the same time be and not be. If you're claudel, I'm sure it's one of your favorite reading items.
.
Any child can tell you that a thing either is something or it is not something. A fruit is either an apple, or it's not an apple; but a fruit cannot both be and not be an apple at the same time. Well, not according to Benedict XVI. So if he can do it with apples, then why not with papal crucifixes?
Topic: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary? (Read 15672 times)