Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: Matthew on October 03, 2018, 03:18:13 PM

Title: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Matthew on October 03, 2018, 03:18:13 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FpH8xzmPSI

I'm all for Christ the King of course, but I had to raise my eyebrows at the crucifix displayed in the new conference room. Is such a crucifix even traditional? I haven't seen one like that before, and I've been a Trad for a long time, and I haven't exactly led a sheltered life.

It seems (to me) like an argument could be made that they're getting the seminarians prepared to accept "Resurrectifixes" which are commonplace in the Novus Ordo.

Let's put it this way: the first step in acclimating seminarians to Resurrectifixes would be getting them used to seeing something other than the crucified, suffering Lord on the Cross. To me, that itself is the red line.

The traditional Catholic cross is for meditation on the CRUCIFIXION -- the real and painful human death Our Lord underwent for our sake, which He offered up to His Heavenly Father.
Other events and truths in the life of Our Lord (His birth, childhood, public life, glorious Resurrection, His eternal kingship, etc.) are worthy of all honor and praise -- but not on the Crucifix please!

There is a time and a place.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Kazimierz on October 03, 2018, 07:49:34 PM
Gracious. I though resurrecifixes were the exclusive venue of the conciliar church. Definitely an overshadowing of the Passion and Death of Our Lord and Saviour, with a wrongly understood theology of the Resurrection.

What ARE they teaching these days on the new seminary farm?
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: RomanCatholic1953 on October 03, 2018, 08:36:53 PM
Reminds me of a Novus Ordo Funeral I recently attended.    The Deceased is now at the Table of the Lord and nothing
about Purgatory and the importance of praying for those that are now in Purgatory.
Or a Novus Ordo Church that I regularly attended in the 1980's an image of the suffering Face of Christ disappeared and
upon questioning, no one knows what happened to it. Nor they care. And this Parish was staffed by two Priests both were
Ordained in 1940.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Matthew on October 03, 2018, 09:00:25 PM
Oh, I can hear the excuses: "Christ is the Eternal High Priest", "Christ rose from the dead", etc. but that doesn't excuse why the suffering Christ has been replaced on the Cross. It's not traditional.

The Novus Ordo wants to downplay the Cross, because it compels us to penance and imitation of the suffering Christ in our own lives. The Novus Ordo, being sentimental, soft, and feminine, would prefer to focus on the more "fun" event of the Resurrection. After all, Lent and suffering are no fun. The partying happens on Easter! Even the modern world can understand and relate to "partying". And the Conciliar Church is all about conformity with the freemasonic Modern World.

Our Lady is traditionally called the Co-Redemptrix. But it wouldn't be traditional to depict her nailed to the cross, and then place that depiction in a home/chapel/seminary where a proper Crucifix should be!

You know, that's what statues and pictures are for. The Resurrection, Christ the King, Christ as High Priest, veneration of Mary and the other Saints, etc. are all noble, praiseworthy, and worthwhile depictions in art. But not on the Crucifix!

I think those who try to excuse this have been frog boiled.

"Lie down with dogs, rise up with fleas."

The neo-SSPX has been lying down with the diseased Conciliar Church for some time now...

They are in process of losing their Catholic sense. Give it enough time, and SSPX priests will be saying occasional Novus Ordo Masses just like the FSSP.
Baby steps...
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Pax Vobis on October 03, 2018, 09:18:53 PM
Christ is risen!  Glory, alleluia!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yTwJvVTQ6-0 (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yTwJvVTQ6-0)
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 03, 2018, 09:27:05 PM
.
Question:  What kind of crucifix is THAT?
.
Answer: THAT is not a crucifix.
.
(https://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=50147.0;attach=12130;image)
.
.
In order for a physical object to be a crucifix, it must
--- be first a CROSS (which "that" is okay)
--- have the corpus of Our Lord on it (traditionally that means with minimal clothing, since He was stripped
     before being crucified, but THAT shows Him wearing a robe and full garments, so it fails on that account)
--- show the NAILS in the hands and feet* (THAT is not only missing the nails, it's missing the wounds the nails made --
      On closer look, it appears to have the wounds from the nails, but a real crucifix MUST show the nails themselves)
--- have the letters INRI either carved into the vertical post above His head, or be on a sign or scroll there (THAT has neither)
--- usually show the crown of thorns on Our Lord's head, which He had in fact (which THAT does not have at all)
.
Therefore, it FAILS the test of being a crucifix: it is missing the INRI, no nails/wounds, and way too much clothing.
The fact that the crown of thorns is missing is a demerit, but since it's not absolutely essential, is just a negative, but not a FAIL.


* In exorcisms, the devil taunts a priest when the crucifix he's using is not made of real wood OR does not have nails holding Our Lord to the wood of the cross. In the Good Friday liturgy Catholics actually adore the wood of the Cross.


Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Struthio on October 03, 2018, 09:38:49 PM
Christ is risen!  Glory, alleluia!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yTwJvVTQ6-0 (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yTwJvVTQ6-0)

What a faggot! And that wretched overweight trouser suit is representing all men of the U.S. of A. everywhere in the world
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Cantarella on October 03, 2018, 09:39:23 PM
Still better than this:

(https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/43083126_1780606438716980_8823762825026469888_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&oh=5d078e0a6e85d507528b5795983b032c&oe=5C4C3245)


(https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/42917417_1780606418716982_4650188918472310784_n.jpg?_nc_cat=105&oh=6d8d0b2150ee75afeb842c48c104a267&oe=5C21CEC8)


What's up with all these ugly crosses?
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 03, 2018, 09:54:34 PM
Still better than this:


(https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/42917417_1780606418716982_4650188918472310784_n.jpg?_nc_cat=105&oh=6d8d0b2150ee75afeb842c48c104a267&oe=5C21CEC8)


What's up with all these ugly crosses?
.
That's one that was described as having a king cobra (snake) draped over the right crossbar, and its head in the center.
A snake.
Reminds one of the serpent in the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, or else of that snake-on-a-stick of the OT.
(The one that is used as a symbol of medicine, or medical profession.)
.
.
Here is another non-crucifix, which shows either nails or wounds, but far too much clothing, and no INRI:
.
(https://www.catholicfaithstore.com/Graphic/ViewLarger/PicfqcedO.xjpg?MYEZSTORE=12ad6d9ce30885ef9684578a2936e7fb)
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: cosmas on October 03, 2018, 09:56:06 PM
YES, DEFINITELY HEADING TOWARD ROME AND THE N.O. JUST WAIT TILL YOU SEE THE CRUCIFIX IN CATHOLIC HOSPITALS WITH HALF THE CROSS MISSING ALONG WITH ONE OF OUR LORD'S ARMS,SO SACRILEGIOUS !
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 03, 2018, 09:58:34 PM
.
It's as though nothing is sacred anymore. I typed "crucifix" in a search engine and couldn't believe what images come up.
.
There are some so bad I can't post them here. 
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Matthew on October 03, 2018, 10:43:59 PM
Remember that the world has a palpable hatred for Our Lord. Not just "even though" He is good, but specifically because He is good.

And the more we imitate Him in our lifestyle, the more the World will hate us as well.

If the World loves you, you are doing something wrong.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Kazimierz on October 04, 2018, 07:12:13 AM
.
It's as though nothing is sacred anymore. I typed "crucifix" in a search engine and couldn't believe what images come up.
.
There are some so bad I can't post them here.
Interesting. I did the same with dogpile.com, but came up with a majority of pictures that were of proper crucifixes.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 04, 2018, 11:05:36 AM
Interesting. I did the same with dogpile.com, but came up with a majority of pictures that were of proper crucifixes.
I'll post a link in men only for those who want to know.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Kazimierz on October 04, 2018, 11:19:03 AM
I'll post a link in men only for those who want to know.
Methinks I have seen enough blasphemous things for a while. Well, at least until I am grasping mah shotgun or 30.30 to whit I can remove the blasphemy in question. ;)
Deus Vult!!!
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Kazimierz on October 04, 2018, 11:24:17 AM
What a faggot! And that wretched overweight trouser suit is representing all men of the U.S. of A. everywhere in the world
Well he did sing Dixie despite aught else. Look away going away gotta be Dixieland ;D :farmer: :cowboy:
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 04, 2018, 11:38:08 AM
.
The young men in the Virginia seminary are perhaps innocent victims of the gradual slide of the SSPX.
.
But whether they're aware of it or not, they're being slow-boiled like a frog in a cooking pot.
.
I highly doubt that someone like Matthew could manage to audit any of the classes as an observer.
Just to see firsthand what's really going on behind closed doors, IYKWIM.
.
Freemasons hold dear the principle that the fact of being observed changes the content of the thing being observed.
.
The priest giving the lecture in this photo would not say the same things if he knew there was an outsider in the audience:
.
(https://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=50147.0;attach=12131;image)                                      
.
If you know any of the seminarians, you ought to find a way to have a conversation with them when they come home to visit.
.
We should all be prepared with a series of questions to ask them.
.
Find out if they're familiar with the basic facts of history which are in the public domain, or, if they deny their existence.
.
See if they know what GREC is, for example or the AFD (Doctrinal Declaration of April 15th, 2012, by Bishop Fellay).
See if they have ever heard the name Max Krah, and if so, if they know who he is and what he has done for the SSPX.
Find out if they know what essential elements are required for a crucifix to be a crucifix (INRI? Nails? Crown of thorns? Clothing?)
.
Be prepared for responses like, "Some think that studying the Summa is sufficient -- we LIVE the Summa of St. Thomas."
.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: claudel on October 04, 2018, 01:38:45 PM
To the extent that it can be properly seen, the crucifix in the OP image looks like a typical Christ the King crucifix. In this crucifix, a royally garbed Christ is displayed on a Cross whose four enlarged termini house images of the Four Evangelists. I have no idea how old this form of representation is in the West, but as long ago as my college years (the 1960s), I saw photos of Christ the King crucifixes in German Baroque-era churches (17th–18th centuries). In addition, there was a Christ the King parish church in the New York City borough of the Bronx (near E. 170th Street and the Grand Concourse). I occasionally heard Mass (and later served Mass) there from the time I was a young child (early fifties) straight through my high school years (that school, All Hallows Institute, was situated in Christ the King parish). The sanctuary of the church, built around 1900, was dominated by a life-sized Christ the King crucifix. In those years, when Pius XII was pope, no one ever questioned its traditional Catholicity.

Furthermore, one may find very closely related Eastern church images and icons of the Christ Pantokrator superimposed on the Cross that date from the era of Justinian (6th century).

Taken all in all, while no one is obliged to find the Christ the King crucifix desirable or useful in the present day, especially in the context of conciliar distortion and corruption, it is still one heck of a stretch to claim that this crucifix is yet another Modernist weapon designed to undermine or pervert the True Faith.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: klasG4e on October 04, 2018, 02:10:11 PM
As an aside, but perhaps somewhat related to this thread: about 14 years ago full body size (and fairly expensive) authentic copies of the Shroud of Turin were donated to STAS in Winona.  Handsome frames were made by Br. Marcel and they were placed within them.  The negative and more highly defined images (front and back) were hung in the hallway leading to the chapel while the regular photographic images (front and back) were hung in the big downstairs classroom/lecture hall.  When STAS moved to its much more spacious quarters in Virginia all these holy and inspiring images were left behind and as far as I know remain left behind to this day.  I wonder why.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 04, 2018, 02:24:06 PM
To the extent that it can be properly seen, the crucifix in the OP image looks like a typical Christ the King crucifix. In this crucifix, a royally garbed Christ is displayed on a Cross whose four enlarged termini house images of the Four Evangelists. I have no idea how old this form of representation is in the West, but as long ago as my college years (the 1960s), I saw photos of Christ the King crucifixes in German Baroque-era churches (17th–18th centuries). In addition, there was a Christ the King parish church in the New York City borough of the Bronx (near E. 170th Street and the Grand Concourse). I occasionally heard Mass (and later served Mass) there from the time I was a young child (early fifties) straight through my high school years (that school, All Hallows Institute, was situated in Christ the King parish). The sanctuary of the church, built around 1900, was dominated by a life-sized Christ the King crucifix. In those years, when Pius XII was pope, no one ever questioned its traditional Catholicity. [THEY'RE NOT CRUCIFIXES]

Furthermore, one may find very closely related Eastern church images and icons of the Christ Pantokrator superimposed on the Cross that date from the era of Justinian (6th century).

Taken all in all, while no one is obliged to find the Christ the King crucifix desirable or useful in the present day, especially in the context of conciliar distortion and corruption, it is still one heck of a stretch to claim that this crucifix is yet another Modernist weapon designed to undermine or pervert the True Faith. [IT'S NOT A CRUCIFIX!]
.
You are wrong, claudel. These might be crosses, but they are not crucifixes.
.
To be a crucifix, the INRI is required, it is NOT OPTIONAL. No INRI, no crucifix. Period.
.
The abundance of clothes is not a crucifix. Our Lord was STRIPPED of his clothes before the crucifixion.
.
In your experience, if no Catholics complained, then none of them were informed, or, perhaps they were Catholic in name only.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 04, 2018, 02:27:52 PM
As an aside, but perhaps somewhat related to this thread: about 14 years ago full body size (and fairly expensive) authentic copies of the Shroud of Turin were donated to STAS in Winona.  Handsome frames were made by Br. Marcel and they were placed within them.  The negative and more highly defined images (front and back) were hung in the hallway leading to the chapel while the regular photographic images (front and back) were hung in the big downstairs classroom/lecture hall.  When STAS moved to its much more spacious quarters in Virginia all these holy and inspiring images were left behind and as far as I know remain left behind to this day.  I wonder why.
.
Well, let's see: 
Not only did they want to leave behind the memory of Bishop Williamson at Winona, they wanted to also leave behind at Winona any recollection or reminder of the passion, death and burial of Our Lord.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Matthew on October 04, 2018, 03:06:47 PM
Taken all in all, while no one is obliged to find the Christ the King crucifix desirable or useful in the present day, especially in the context of conciliar distortion and corruption, it is still one heck of a stretch to claim that this crucifix is yet another Modernist weapon designed to undermine or pervert the True Faith.
With all due respect, who the #*!@ made such a claim? 
Talk about putting words in my mouth!
Go back and read (rather than skim) my OP.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Matthew on October 04, 2018, 05:07:19 PM
Hey Neil --

Where can I find the official Church regulations on crucifixes? I know it hasn't come up yet, but there are also regulations on which leg goes over which leg, and which direction Our Lord's head leans (left vs. right). There are a whole host of rules, some of which you mentioned, and some you did not. But I know that violating certain rules makes a VERY BAD crucifix, possibly even satanic! (not saying this is the case with the Seminary one; I'm just bringing up a related topic).

I know the Church has regulations on how to portray the Trinity in art as well. Let's face it: artists can be very free spirited and creative and get out of control if you don't give them some hard and fast rules. They'll paint/sculpt anything if you collectively give them a chance.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 04, 2018, 07:32:54 PM
Hey Neil --

Where can I find the official Church regulations on crucifixes? I know it hasn't come up yet, but there are also regulations on which leg goes over which leg, and which direction Our Lord's head leans (left vs. right). There are a whole host of rules, some of which you mentioned, and some you did not. But I know that violating certain rules makes a VERY BAD crucifix, possibly even satanic! (not saying this is the case with the Seminary one; I'm just bringing up a related topic).

I know the Church has regulations on how to portray the Trinity in art as well. Let's face it: artists can be very free spirited and creative and get out of control if you don't give them some hard and fast rules. They'll paint/sculpt anything if you collectively give them a chance.
.
Sorry, Matthew, I can't help you there. It's been too long. I'll have to ask a priest.
.
But in the meantime, you ought to ask Ladislaus, especially since he's the resident expert on which longstanding regulations were jettisoned by any of the various Johnny-come-lately enemies of Sacred Tradition, whom he reveres.  :)
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 04, 2018, 07:37:49 PM
.
Their plan is manifest: Today the crucifix, tomorrow the doctrine.
.
Or perhaps the doctrine can be done today, too...........
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: TKGS on October 04, 2018, 07:48:07 PM
Gracious. I though resurrecifixes were the exclusive venue of the conciliar church.
It is.  
Think about it.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Maria Regina on October 04, 2018, 07:51:48 PM
.
Their plan is manifest: Today the crucifix, tomorrow the doctrine.
.
Or perhaps the doctrine can be done today, too...........
Yesterday the Latin prayers in the Mass were exchanged for Lutheran translations;
today the crucifix is exchanged for a lie as the crucifix has become unbearable for so many Protestants;
tomorrow will be the ecumenical false reunion with Protestants and the canonization of Martin Luther.

Step by step.

Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: claudel on October 05, 2018, 12:13:56 AM
… NOT OPTIONAL … STRIPPED …

Do you truly believe, Neil, that your childish use of full caps makes you appear less trite and moronic than you are? Sean Johnson characterized you to a T several years ago when he wrote that every comment you have ever made is worthless.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: claudel on October 05, 2018, 12:30:27 AM
With all due respect, who the #*!@ made such a claim?
Talk about putting words in my mouth!
Go back and read (rather than skim) my OP.

Putting words in your mouth? As you weren't named in the sentence you quoted or indeed anywhere in my earlier comment, am I to take it that your mouth is now coextensive with the mouths of other commenters, Matthew? Let's assume for the moment, shall we, that it isn't? But then, as you ask, who made such a claim? Well, how about Kazimierz? How about cosmas and Neil the Boy Wonder? And to bring things full circle, how about the clear implication of your own second comment on page 1 of this thread? Or am I to be patronizingly read a Neil-like distinction between the Novus Ordo and the Modernists?
Perhaps it's someone other than I who needs to go back and read rather than skim.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Benzel on October 05, 2018, 01:59:59 AM
Claudel is right. That crucifix is totally Catholic. For centuries, in Europe it is normal to see that crucifix. For example:

(http://www.christianiconography.info/iconographySupplementalImages/crucifixion/lucca.JPG)
8th century. Carved cedar. Cathedral of St. Martin, Lucca, Italy. Local legend has it that this crucifix was carved at the time of the Crucifixion by Nicodemus and that it arrived in Lucca miraculously in 782
http://www.christianiconography.info/iconographySupplementalImages/crucifixion/lucca.html

Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Nadir on October 05, 2018, 03:52:36 AM
Good to see you back, Claudel. I'm pleased you broke your resolve. I've missed your posts.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 05, 2018, 06:58:29 AM
Claudel is right. That crucifix [cross] is totally Catholic. For centuries, in Europe it is normal to see that crucifix[cross]. For example:
[NOT a crucifix -- this is a cross -- maybe a Catholic cross, but not a Catholic crucifix.]
(http://www.christianiconography.info/iconographySupplementalImages/crucifixion/lucca.JPG)
8th century. Carved cedar. Cathedral of St. Martin, Lucca, Italy. Local legend has it that this crucifix was carved at the time of the Crucifixion by Nicodemus and that it arrived in Lucca miraculously in 782.
http://www.christianiconography.info/iconographySupplementalImages/crucifixion/lucca.html
.
claudel is wrong. And so are you. It isn't a crucifix, and neither is this one you show here, even if it is from the 8th century.
It might be artwork, but it's not a crucifix.
.
The source site you're getting that image from is mistaken. They don't know what a crucifix is. They admit as much:
.
Crosses and Crucifixes
HISTORICAL STUDY
The difference between a cross and a crucifix is that the latter bears a "corpus" or sculpted image of Christ's body. On this website I will also use the term "crucifix" for any cross painted with an image of the corpus. Sometimes a museum will display the corpus only, the cross having been lost (example (http://www.christianiconography.info/iconographySupplementalImages/crucifixion/corpusBurgundyS12.html)).
.
For this says that a "crucifix" only needs to be a cross with a corpus on it. WRONG.
A crucifix requires INRI or it's not a crucifix.
A crucifix must have nails or it's not a crucifix.
A crucifix must have a stripped corpus or it's not a crucifix.
.
Just because it's a website doesn't mean it's correct. Websites can be wrong. Wikipedia is famous for being wrong.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Ladislaus on October 05, 2018, 08:25:04 AM
.
Sorry, Matthew, I can't help you there. It's been too long. I'll have to ask a priest.
.
But in the meantime, you ought to ask Ladislaus, especially since he's the resident expert on which longstanding regulations were jettisoned by any of the various Johnny-come-lately enemies of Sacred Tradition, whom he reveres.  :)

Neil, sometimes I wonder if you aren't a bit troubled.  I simply mentioned in passing that John XXIII in the 1962 version of the Tridentine Mass eliminated the second Confiteor, the one right before Communion.  I was merely setting the record straight after a comment suggesting that this was a novelty first introduced by the Novus Ordo.

How does this statement of fact amount to "revering" John XXIII.  In fact, I personally believe it likely that he's a Masonic agent who illegitimately usurped the Holy See after Siri was forced out.  If that's "reverence", I'd love to see your definition of contempt.

And that had nothing to do with this thread, but you get mentally obsessed with things.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Matthew on October 05, 2018, 09:07:19 AM
Claudel is right. That crucifix is totally Catholic. For centuries, in Europe it is normal to see that crucifix. For example:


8th century. Carved cedar. Cathedral of St. Martin, Lucca, Italy. Local legend has it that this crucifix was carved at the time of the Crucifixion by Nicodemus and that it arrived in Lucca miraculously in 782.
http://www.christianiconography.info/iconographySupplementalImages/crucifixion/lucca.html



I hate to seem like I'm moving the goalposts here, but that's actually too old.

I think that the Church had to step in and set regulations on various art. For example, the Church forbids depicting the Trinity as "three identical men". I can't remember some of the other examples since I learned this around 2001. But the main point is: Artists are by nature creative. Creativity is by nature without rules. They don't always put enough "reason" into their works, or foresee what ideas people will get when looking at their work.

So I'm sure that certain ancient art violated rules that were later put into place. But often times if the art is really good, or famous, or owned by someone who doesn't feel like destroying it, the older "grandfathered" art survives despite later prohibitions on said depictions.

Another important point: when did the Crucifix even become popular in the Catholic Church? My understanding is that devotion to the sufferings and death of Our Lord, a focus on His sacred humanity, happened during the Middle Ages, specifically during the great time of suffering known as the Black Death.

I know a Traditional Catholic who was drawing computer art for me a few years ago, and the end result looked positively filthy to an objective eye! I broke the news to her, and she was upset of course. She was innocent, but too innocent. If you can draw and present to the public something which "accidentally" looks like genitalia, you are too innocent, I'm sorry. I guess artists go into a different world when they draw and create things, and completely lose self-awareness. But I digress.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Matthew on October 05, 2018, 09:13:23 AM
Let's get right to the point:

Is there anything wrong with Resurrectifixes?

If it's Traditional or OK to depict Our Lord on the Cross clothed in priestly (or kingly) garments, crowned, alive and well, then what is wrong with depicting Our Lord's resurrected form on the Cross as well?

Our Lord, in any depiction, is Priest, King, Victim, Messiah, God and Man. And He rose from the dead. So why not depict the resurrected Christ on the Cross as well?

Those who have defended the Christ-the-King-affix really have no leg to stand on, if they were to condemn the Resurrectifix as being post-Vatican II, Novus Ordo, redirecting attention from the suffering and death of Christ, etc.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Ladislaus on October 05, 2018, 10:05:23 AM
While I don't really care for this representation, Resurrectifixes are a bit worse due to the incongruity of placing the Risen Lord on the cross.  I could sortof see Christ the King on the cross as an attempt to convey the idea that Our Lord reigns from the cross, that the cross is His throne, as it were.  But the Resurrectifix has no such message about it, as it's an obvious attempt to distance people from the "negativity" of Our Lord's Passion.  I mean, for most of His Passion, our Lord was still alive, so it's not inherently incongruous to depict Our Lord as STILL alive.  But not as returning to the Cross AFTER He had died and risen again.    With that said, even Christ the King on the cross should IMO not whitewash Our Lord's suffering.  If I had any artistic talent whatsoever, even the notion of Christ the King on the cross would show His suffering.

Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Ladislaus on October 05, 2018, 10:17:06 AM
Claudel is right. That crucifix is totally Catholic. For centuries, in Europe it is normal to see that crucifix. For example:

(http://www.christianiconography.info/iconographySupplementalImages/crucifixion/lucca.JPG)
8th century. Carved cedar. Cathedral of St. Martin, Lucca, Italy. Local legend has it that this crucifix was carved at the time of the Crucifixion by Nicodemus and that it arrived in Lucca miraculously in 782.
http://www.christianiconography.info/iconographySupplementalImages/crucifixion/lucca.html

Well, this one is different from the one at STAS.  This still clearly shows the suffering of Our Lord.  It merely adorns Him with a crown and regal vestments.  But the rest of His body, the posture, facial expression, etc. still shows Our Lord crucified and suffering, whereas the STAS one shows him as just standing there, seemingly in no pain whatsoever, very much like a Resurrectifix.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Ladislaus on October 05, 2018, 10:21:21 AM
What's up with all these ugly crosses?

We all know the answer to that.  This isn't just about horrible taste in art.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Ladislaus on October 05, 2018, 10:32:13 AM
Those who have defended the Christ-the-King-affix really have no leg to stand on, ...

There is a difference.  There was an actual period during the Crucifixion that Our Lord remained alive, but the Risen Lord was never actually on the Cross.  Yet Our Lord SUFFERED while alive on the cross.  So they're the same in terms of stripping away the SUFFERING from its depiction of the Passion.  As for the clothing, or adding a crown (vs. the crown of thorns), there's nothing to say it couldn't be changed for symbolism.  After all, it's not 100% certain what, if anything, Our Lord was wearing.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Benzel on October 05, 2018, 10:49:58 AM
Do not confuse any form of traditional Catholic crucifix (like the crucifix in which Christ is dressed as a priest, or crowned as king, or dressed in robes and alive, etc.) with the "Resurrectifix", which is a modernist novelty. With this false crucifix, the modernists want to highlight the resurrection over the death of Christ, but the truth is that Christ redeemed us by his death, not "by his death and resurrection," as the modernists claim (modernist theology of the "Paschal mystery"). The crucifix of Christ the Priest and King aims to highlight the priesthood and the royalty of Christ, not his resurrection.

Interesting quote:

"In the first period the Crucified is shown adhering to the cross, not hanging forward from it; He is alive and shows no sign of physical suffering; He is clad in a long, flowing, sleeveless tunic (colobium), which reaches the knees. The head is erect, and surrounded by a nimbus, and bears a royal crown. The figure is fastened to the wood with four nails"

Archæology of the Cross and Crucifix: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04517a.htm

Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Cantarella on October 05, 2018, 12:28:39 PM
POPE PIUS XII WARNS AGAINST THE VATICAN II NOVELTY CRUCIFIXES AND OTHER ERRORS

Quote
“ 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; were he to want black excluded as a color for the liturgical vestments; were he to forbid the use of sacred images and statues in Churches; 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.”

The enemies of Catholicism have always complained of Catholics using the image of Christ suffering . They can’t stand the fact that God left Himself as the eternal Sacrifice.

They preach the bread and wine Memorial meal and the risen Christ only .
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Ladislaus on October 05, 2018, 12:42:19 PM
POPE PIUS XII WARNS AGAINST THE VATICAN II NOVELTY CRUCIFIXES AND OTHER ERRORS

The enemies of Catholicism have always complained of Catholics using the image of Christ suffering . They can’t stand the fact that God left Himself as the eternal Sacrifice.

They preach the bread and wine Memorial meal and the risen Christ only .

There's a bit of subtlety here.  Pius XII doesn't mean that one cannot PREFER Gregorian chant to polyphony (which I myself do), just that you can't dismiss polyphany as illegitimate simply because it came later in time.  This doesn't per se rule out the use of crucifixes/crosses more in line with the earlier usage ... any more than it rules out the use of Gregorian chant.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Cantarella on October 05, 2018, 01:01:18 PM
Quote
It isn't a crucifix, and neither is this one you show here, even if it is from the 8th century.
It might be artwork, but it's not a crucifix.

I think this is what it ultimately boils down to, as Neil said. These are not crucifixes; but only crosses or "artwork".
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Cantarella on October 05, 2018, 01:04:37 PM
There's a bit of subtlety here.  Pius XII doesn't mean that one cannot PREFER Gregorian chant to polyphony (which I myself do), just that you can't dismiss polyphany as illegitimate simply because it came later in time.  This doesn't per se rule out the use of crucifixes/crosses more in line with the earlier usage ... any more than it rules out the use of Gregorian chant.

I think that what is important in crucifixes is that they maintain the visible signs of cruel suffering in Christ's corpus, as Pope Pius XII was stating here. Otherwise, they are just crosses, quite inappropriate in altars where the Sacrifice of the Mass is celebrated. 
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Cantarella on October 05, 2018, 01:07:24 PM
While I don't really care for this representation, Resurrectifixes are a bit worse due to the incongruity of placing the Risen Lord on the cross.

I agree and this is another point as well. There is a deep incongruity between the cross (suffering) and the resurrected Christ (triumph). When you place the two together, it just looks bad, in my opinion.

I love representations of Our Lord triumphant and resurrected, as well. Just not placed on a cross.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: claudel on October 05, 2018, 02:19:45 PM
… I love representations of Our Lord triumphant and resurrected, as well. Just not placed on a cross.

All well and good, Cantarella. No Catholic is obliged to like or dislike any image purporting to illustrate an aspect of the Divine nature or of salvation history. Put otherwise, any such representation, however orthodox in intent or expression, is merely an illustration. As such, its relationship to core matters of the faith is necessarily peripheral.

With regard to the papal statement you quoted earlier, however, Pius XII was not derogating the Christ the King crucifix. Rather, he was referring, as his words precisely indicate, to the specifically Protestant abuse of misrepresenting the stripped Christ on the cross as an unwounded, impassive figure. The affective response to such an image is ipso facto unrelated to that prompted by the Christ the King crucifix. Pius XII was complaining about tainted apples, not completely sound oranges.

Speaking more generally, I am sure that I am not alone in noting either the puerility or the bad faith of those who—consequent to my first comment and, far more so, to Benzel's striking image and comments—after being compelled to abandon their initial ill-informed claim that the Christ the King crucifix is untraditional and ahistoric, now defend the hastily assembled fallback position that it is decisively tainted by its lack of depictional realism.

The fallback, alas, has grave problems of its own. This is a delicate matter, but surely a few hereabouts are aware that ancient Roman sources make distastefully clear that crucifixion, as standardly practiced by Roman authorities in both Republican and Imperial times, was intended to maximize the victim's pain and humiliation and also to maximize the onlookers' awareness that such a fate awaited them if they transgressed to a similar extent. An integral part of maximized humiliation was that the victim was crucified absolutely naked—that is, there was no such accommodation to ordinary human dignity as retention of a loincloth. In other words, as nothing in the Gospel accounts suggest that the Roman authorities in Judaea authorized an unconventional crucifixion—let alone that the bloodthirsty Jews would have requested it—no morally tolerable representation of Our Lord's crucifixion would ever be true to its extremely likely, extremely shocking manifestation.

May I add that I trust that even Neil will have the decency not to accuse me of calling here for stark naked representations of Our Savior on His Cross.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Ladislaus on October 05, 2018, 03:30:57 PM
With regard to the papal statement you quoted earlier, however, Pius XII was not derogating the Christ the King crucifix. Rather, he was referring, as his words precisely indicate, to the specifically Protestant abuse of misrepresenting the stripped Christ on the cross as an unwounded, impassive figure. The affective response to such an image is ipso facto unrelated to that prompted by the Christ the King crucifix. Pius XII was complaining about tainted apples, not completely sound oranges.

Actually, his intent there was the condemnation of "antiquarianism", this notion that older always was better and more pure ... with the implicit idea that over time the purity of Church tradition became corrupted by the human accretion.  This did not mean a rejection of the older at all.  So, for instance, when he said that we should not reject polyphony, he was not thereby saying that it's better than Gregorian Chant.  Same thing with images of the crucifixion.  I agree that one is not inherently better than another.  Unless some error can be detected as implied in the rendering, it's just a matter of taste and, for liturgical use, what has been approved the authority.  I don't care for these myself, but I don't find anything wrong with them or inherently objectionable.  Could they be seen as part of a broader slide into Modernist sensibilities?  Yes, of course.  And the reason these differ from Resurrectifixes I have already articulated.  Our Lord was not on the cross after His Resurrection, but He can be viewed as being a King whose throne was the cross, that He reigns from the cross.  I like the symbolism, but I don't like the regal trappings.  I think that there's a reason that Our Lord chose to show Himself in so degrading a fashion, to demonstrate the humility of His rule vs. that of worldly monarchs, and to be stumbling-block for the pride ... as only the truly humble can recognize Him for Who He is amid the degradation.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Ladislaus on October 05, 2018, 03:37:58 PM
I think that what is important in crucifixes is that they maintain the visible signs of cruel suffering in Christ's corpus, as Pope Pius XII was stating here. Otherwise, they are just crosses, quite inappropriate in altars where the Sacrifice of the Mass is celebrated.

If you read Pius XII that way, that he was stating a preference for the suffering images of Our Lord Crucified, then you would also have to read him as stating that polyphony is better than or preferrable to Gregorian Chant ... which the Church has never held.  We studied this Encyclical at STAS under Bishop Williamson, and the intent is to condemn the principle that "old is good" and "new is bad" in Church custom.  Then, of course, the Modernists warp the idea of what "old" was (since we don't have detailed descriptions from the early years) ... turning it into a minimalist view of the Liturgy, for instance.  They claim that because we don't have full liturgical texts, the original priests just sat around in a cirlce, ad libbed liturgical stuff, and played loose with form and ritual.  Nothing could be father from the truth, as little was more foreign to the Jewish mind than to have formless worship.  I could go on for a long time about this error.  We lacked detailed liturgical books because of the widespread persecution.  Once the persecution abated, the liturgical texts surfaced ... and these accurately convey what had been all along.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Prayerful on October 05, 2018, 04:55:19 PM
Still better than this:

(https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/43083126_1780606438716980_8823762825026469888_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&oh=5d078e0a6e85d507528b5795983b032c&oe=5C4C3245)


(https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/42917417_1780606418716982_4650188918472310784_n.jpg?_nc_cat=105&oh=6d8d0b2150ee75afeb842c48c104a267&oe=5C21CEC8)


What's up with all these ugly crosses?
That first thing is a exactly a Stang with the nail and wooden V, a Satanic symbol used in witchcraft, and given to him by a 30 yo woman wearing an occult or Wiccan bracelet. The youth rally too was also an occasion of astonishing immodesty. Archbishop Lefebvre remarked that Conciliar Catholicism was a New Religion. A New Religion, and not clearly the Christian one.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Matthew on October 06, 2018, 08:59:26 AM
I think that there's a reason that Our Lord chose to show Himself in so degrading a fashion, to demonstrate the humility of His rule vs. that of worldly monarchs, and to be stumbling-block for the pride ... as only the truly humble can recognize Him for Who He is amid the degradation.

I think this is why the Christ the King crucifix appeals to the neo-SSPX. They are high on themselves, high on pride, and they don't have in themselves the humility expressed by the classic Crucifix. They think they will save the Church, succeed where so many other groups failed, etc.

The Neo-SSPX is the group that built a huge, expensive, brand new seminary in Virginia to accommodate the influx of seminarians from the Indult and Novus Ordo. They are all about taking a high place.

...rather than humbly holding the True Faith inviolate, continuing to be called bad names by the World and various evil men and organizations, and letting God do the exalting on His own good time.

That's why they enlisted the expensive services of a corporate branding agency. Rather than patiently trust in God to send more people into the SSPX, or winning over new souls by their PRAYERS, spotless example, and timeless Catholic doctrine, they went hat-in-hand to the Jewish "human nature" experts on Madison Avenue to use psychology tricks and techniques on the Catholic population -- techniques normally used to sell soap or corn flakes.

You have to admit I'm right about this -- the SSPX is much more accepted now than they were in, say, the early 2000's. Almost no one calls them bad names anymore. Those names are reserved for the Resistance and other faithful Traditional Catholic groups here and there. Hmmm....
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Pax Vobis on October 06, 2018, 09:28:21 AM
Quote
The Neo-SSPX is the group that built a huge, expensive, brand new seminary in Virginia to accommodate the influx of seminarians from the Indult and Novus Ordo. They are all about taking a high place.

...rather than humbly holding the True Faith inviolate, continuing to be called bad names by the World and various evil men and organizations, and letting God do the exalting on His own good time.
Agree.  And how many comments have we heard recently about how some people don't like going to a hotel room for mass?  Or they prefer a "nice" church over a rented conference room?  I mean, is this mentality catholic?  Isn't the Mass more important than where it's said?  Sounds like some people have twisted materialistic-catholicism attitude or want a calvinist-rewarder-God religion.  Explains why the sspx "looks down" on the resistance/independents - because they know most people care about image and self-respect than truth.  Also explains why most will accept a deal with rome.  So sad and short-sighted.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 06, 2018, 01:58:15 PM
I agree and this is another point as well. There is a deep incongruity between the cross (suffering) and the resurrected Christ (triumph). When you place the two together, it just looks bad, in my opinion.

I love representations of Our Lord triumphant and resurrected, as well. Just not placed on a cross.
.
The deep incongruity of placing the two together artists call juxtaposition, then they take that and turn it into an artistic expression.
Artists are constantly groping for the unusual and extreme, to become known for being a pioneer in the art world.
They have to be careful not to cross the line of decency -- but these days some take extra pride in shocking the viewer.
.
It seems to me Newchurch is so afraid of being accused of offending non-Catholics (especially Jews) that they make changes.
They take away traditional Catholic elements of our worship and replace them with what won't offend.
Read: something that isn't perceived as "anti-Semitic."      
Jews hate the Cross.
Jews hate the Crucifix.
Jews hate Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Rabbis teach his natural father was a demon and Christ cast out devils by the power of his father, the devil.
It's in Scripture.
.
Well, they can't make Jews happy all the time, but to "meet them halfway" they're not averse to taking away the Crucifix.
They do that by removing the INRI 
(which the Pharisees of Our Lord's time tried to remove but Pilate rejected their appeal. He told them, "What I have written, I have written." Good for him! He stood his ground. Not too surprising for a Roman).
.
By removing the INRI they make the thing no longer a Crucifix. 
.
Any object cursorily looking like a cross, but missing the INRI, is not a Crucifix.
It stands for "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews," written in Latin, Greek and Hebrew, so everyone could understand it. 
It might seem like a tiny detail, but it is a dealbreaker. 
All crucifixes have the INRI above Our Lord's head or else they're not a crucifix, even if claudel or anyone else says they are.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 06, 2018, 02:09:08 PM
I think this is why the Christ the King crucifix appeals to the neo-SSPX. They are high on themselves, high on pride, and they don't have in themselves the humility expressed by the classic Crucifix. They think they will save the Church, succeed where so many other groups failed, etc.

The Neo-SSPX is the group that built a huge, expensive, brand new seminary in Virginia to accommodate the influx of seminarians from the Indult and Novus Ordo. They are all about taking a high place.

...rather than humbly holding the True Faith inviolate, continuing to be called bad names by the World and various evil men and organizations, and letting God do the exalting on His own good time.

That's why they enlisted the expensive services of a corporate branding agency. Rather than patiently trust in God to send more people into the SSPX, or winning over new souls by their PRAYERS, spotless example, and timeless Catholic doctrine, they went hat-in-hand to the Jewish "human nature" experts on Madison Avenue to use psychology tricks and techniques on the Catholic population -- techniques normally used to sell soap or corn flakes.

You have to admit I'm right about this -- the SSPX is much more accepted now than they were in, say, the early 2000's. Almost no one calls them bad names anymore. Those names are reserved for the Resistance and other faithful Traditional Catholic groups here and there. Hmmm....
.
Excellent post, Matthew!
.
For the sake of 100% accuracy, however, I would recommend being more cautious with the word, by putting "crucifix" in italics or quotation marks. Any Christ the King cross that is missing the nails or INRI is NOT a "crucifix." 
.
Some are wont to say that it was the Romans who crucified Jesus, but according to Saint Paul, that's not the case.
St. Paul said it was the Jews who crucified Our Lord (I Thes. 2:15).
He ought to know, plus the fact that as "the Apostle" (according to St. Thomas Aquinas) he was personally infallible.
.
The SSPX is much more acceptable now by the Jews than they were previously, thanks to Max Krah: a Jew. 
.
Where's Incredulous when you need him, anyway? ...............
.

Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 06, 2018, 02:28:09 PM
.
Excellent post, Matthew!
.
For the sake of 100% accuracy, however, I would recommend being more cautious with the word, by putting "crucifix" in italics or quotation marks. Any Christ the King cross that is missing the nails or INRI is NOT a "crucifix."
.
Some are wont to say that it was the Romans who crucified Jesus, but according to Saint Paul, that's not the case.
St. Paul said it was the Jews who crucified Our Lord (cf. I Thes. 2:15).
He ought to know, plus the fact that as "the Apostle" (according to St. Thomas Aquinas) he was personally infallible.
.
The SSPX is much more acceptable now by the Jews than they were previously, thanks to Max Krah: a Jew.
.
Where's Incredulous when you need him, anyway? ...............
.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 06, 2018, 02:31:21 PM
.
There's a glitch going on. I did not make another post, above. I was only editing my previous post but my edit showed up as a second post! (trivia question: Can you see what the change was I inserted in the second version?)
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 06, 2018, 02:42:27 PM
.
.
The Neo-SSPX is the group that built a huge, expensive, brand new seminary in Virginia to accommodate the influx of seminarians from the Indult and Novus Ordo. They are all about taking a high place.
.
...rather than humbly holding the True Faith inviolate, continuing to be called bad names by the World and various evil men and organizations, and letting God do the exalting on His own good time.
.
.
Agree.  And how many comments have we heard recently about how some people don't like going to a hotel room for mass?  Or they prefer a "nice" church over a rented conference room?  I mean, is this mentality catholic?  Isn't the Mass more important than where it's said?  Sounds like some people have twisted materialistic-catholicism attitude or want a calvinist-rewarder-God religion.  Explains why the sspx "looks down" on the resistance/independents - because they know most people care about image and self-respect than truth.  Also explains why most will accept a deal with rome.  So sad and short-sighted.
.
.
Very true! I can't tell you how often I've heard Catholics complain about the folding chairs, kneeler pads on the floor, rented hall, mass-in-the-house or garage or warehouse, confessionals in a broom closet. People can be so caught up in material trappings.
.
The SSPX is playing to the material sensibilities of people, which is a very soft target.
.
I'm sure Max Krah and his jew-buddy branding experts have steered Menzingen in precisely that direction.


Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: claudel on October 06, 2018, 03:08:14 PM
.
All crucifixes have the INRI above Our Lord's head or else they're not crucifix[es] …

Dear Boy Wonder,

Being what you are, a mouthy guy with little else to offer than mouth, you have been banging away for days with variants on the quoted sentence, usually with some form of highlighting to attract people who are susceptible to the charms of bright colors and carnival barkers. Notable by its absence from your insistent repetitions, however, has been any form of documentary support for your claim that the presence of an INRI plaque or scroll is a sine qua non of crucifix-ness.

Well, Neil, consider your play called: either back down or cite me chapter and verse of a canon or, at the least, a rubric for the Latin Rite Church that declares that a cross shall be called a crucifix if and only if both a corpus and an INRI scroll are present—that is, rather than the required presence of the corpus alone, which is the understanding in place among a mere 99.4 percent of Catholics.

If this sounds as if I am not prepared to take your word for it, you're absolutely right. Nor am I prepared to take the word of a priest you once chatted with in the parking lot after Mass on some Sunday in 2007. I want actual documentation. And don't forget to provide an effective date for your documentation. If this is some nineteenth-century regulation put in place to respond to some local abuse, I'll also want a reference to the order requiring every church in Christendom that displayed a crucifix without the INRI to start an immediate retrofit on pain of whatever.

So that's the story in its entirety. In the most fraternal spirit musterable, Neil, I am calling upon you to put up or shut up.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 06, 2018, 03:14:19 PM
Actually, his intent there was the condemnation of "antiquarianism", this notion that older always was better and more pure ... with the implicit idea that over time the purity of Church tradition became corrupted by the human accretion.  This did not mean a rejection of the older at all.  So, for instance, when he said that we should not reject polyphony, he was not thereby saying that it's better than Gregorian Chant.  Same thing with images of the crucifixion.  I agree that one is not inherently better than another.  Unless some error can be detected as implied in the rendering, it's just a matter of taste and, for liturgical use, what has been approved the authority.  I don't care for these myself, but I don't find anything wrong with them or inherently objectionable.  Could they be seen as part of a broader slide into Modernist sensibilities?  Yes, of course.  And the reason these differ from Resurrectifixes I have already articulated.  Our Lord was not on the cross after His Resurrection, but He can be viewed as being a King whose throne was the cross, that He reigns from the cross.  I like the symbolism, but I don't like the regal trappings.  I think that there's a reason that Our Lord chose to show Himself in so degrading a fashion, to demonstrate the humility of His rule vs. that of worldly monarchs, and to be stumbling-block for the pride ... as only the truly humble can recognize Him for Who He is amid the degradation.
.
The fact that perhaps some very old and respectful and well-intentioned crosses (not crucifixes) may not have had INRI inscribed on them does not make them heretical or worse, considering their age. But just because their maker was trying to make a crucifix doesn't mean he succeeded.
.
Just as dogma becomes more detailed and specific over the centuries after attacks by heresy, and so too, the Creed developed from the simple Apostles' Creed to the much more theologically complete (yet perhaps still not quite perfect!) Nicene Creed centuries later, what is a crucifix and what is not a crucifix has been more completely explained (yet perhaps still not quite perfectly!) after attacks on the Catholic Faith and the person of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
.
Ancient artwork can be beautiful and inspirational and wonderful. At the same time we have to keep in mind how it is used.
.
Something that was once quite effective might become inadequate after a history of attacks by the devil and his minions.
.
You might have a cross that has been dear to your family for generations and at the center of wonderful conversions or even miraculous cures, but during an exorcism, the devil will revile the priest holding it if it doesn't have physical nails holding the corpus to the cross, or if the nails do not penetrate real wood to hold the corpus on. In that case, just being a crucifix is insufficient! It has to be a particular TYPE of crucifix!
.
The late Fr. Gabriele Amorth was always known to use the St. Benedict Crucifix in his exorcisms, which has a semiprecious metallic frame with ebony wood inlays, through which brass nails penetrate both the semiprecious metallic corpus, the front wood inlay and the metal framework. The INRI is a semiprecious metallic formed emblem attached to the crucifix with another brass nail. He used that crucifix because it WORKS, when other crucifixes DON'T WORK.
.
Traditional nuns only use real wood crucifixes with real nails through the wood on their handmade rosaries, and the St. Benedict crucifix is not uncommon.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Ladislaus on October 06, 2018, 03:15:35 PM
It takes a lack of faith not to realize that we receive and experience something greater than the entire created universe in Holy Communion.  I go to receive God and not to see a building and some artwork.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 06, 2018, 03:17:20 PM
Dear Boy Wonder,

Being what you are, a mouthy guy with little else to offer than mouth, you have been banging away for days with variants on the quoted sentence, usually with some form of highlighting to attract people who are susceptible to the charms of bright colors and carnival barkers. Notable by its absence from your insistent repetitions, however, has been any form of documentary support for your claim that the presence of an INRI plaque or scroll is a sine qua non of crucifix-ness.

Well, Neil, consider your play called: either back down or cite me chapter and verse of a canon or, at the least, a rubric for the Latin Rite Church that declares that a cross shall be called a crucifix if and only if both a corpus and an INRI scroll are present—that is, rather than the required presence of the corpus alone, which is the understanding in place among a mere 99.4 percent of Catholics.

If this sounds as if I am not prepared to take your word for it, you're absolutely right. Nor am I prepared to take the word of a priest you once chatted with in the parking lot after Mass on some Sunday in 2007. I want actual documentation. And don't forget to provide an effective date for your documentation. If this is some nineteenth-century regulation put in place to respond to some local abuse, I'll also want a reference to the order requiring every church in Christendom that displayed a crucifix without the INRI to start an immediate retrofit on pain of whatever.

So that's the story in its entirety. In the most fraternal spirit musterable, Neil, I am calling upon you to put up or shut up.
.
Do you have an emotional problem, claudel? Are you afraid of truth? Are you a cryptic jew infiltrator? Shut your incipient trap.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 06, 2018, 03:30:03 PM
It takes a lack of faith not to realize that we receive and experience something greater than the entire created universe in Holy Communion.  I go to receive God and not to see a building and some artwork.
.
The natural tendency is to be lured by trappings but it's too easy for natural man to forget what real Faith is.
.
I had a man tell me one time (he seemed to act like a Freemason but he was really just a Hollywood "Industry" worker) that he believed I was Catholic only because I enjoyed the incense, stained glass, Gregorian Chant, elaborate vestments and ritual of the Church. He was entirely oblivious to the concept of dogma and completely believed that everyone is free to think whatever they want to think about reality. He was convinced that I must get some kind of physical "high" out of going to Mass due to the trappings. There was absolutely nothing I could tell him that made a lick of difference. He had made up his mind.
.
Curiously, since then, I have met Catholics who lean strongly in that direction, and they bemoan the loss of what the Church was regarding trappings of artwork, incense, vestments, etc. They recall their childhood when all those things worked together so well, and long for what has been lost. Usually they're people who are quite fond of watching movies, and know all the actors' names and what they're doing in their personal lives. They see someone in a movie and they make a comment about whom the actor married or what the actor playing the part did recently or when they had met him somewhere or whatever. They have the penchant of instinctively confusing the actor with the character the actor is playing in the film. 
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: claudel on October 06, 2018, 08:35:22 PM
.
Do you have an emotional problem, claudel? Are you afraid of truth? Are you a cryptic jew infiltrator? Shut your incipient trap.

Thanks for your answer, Neil. Thanks especially for confirming, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that your ignorance is matched only by your arrogance. When one or both are revealed for all to see, you resort, as in the quoted sentences above, to channeling Diane Feinstein and Christine Blasey Ford.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: forlorn on October 07, 2018, 09:01:45 AM
Disgusting attempt at glossing over the suffering of Our Lord.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 08, 2018, 12:38:33 AM
Thanks for your answer, Neil. Thanks especially for confirming, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that your ignorance is matched only by your arrogance. When one or both are revealed for all to see, you resort, as in the quoted sentences above, to channeling Diane Feinstein and Christine Blasey Ford.
.
You could do everyone a favor, claudel, by taking your smug pompous ignorance and contempt for the truth and go hide for a few years again like you've done in the past. Nobody would miss you, I'm sure. And have fun "channeling" your idols while you're gone. 
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 08, 2018, 01:15:37 AM
Disgusting attempt at glossing over the suffering of Our Lord.
.
They've basically removed the crucifix and replaced it with something that ignorant or uniformed Catholics (like claudel for example) are fooled by, thinking a resurectifix or whatever is a "crucifix" (when it's not). Jews hate Our Lord and they're offended by real crucifixes, most of all by the INRI on the top, because it reminds them that their forefathers whom Jesus condemned in numerous instances, tried to have that same INRI removed but Pilate refused their demand. They killed Jesus (I Thes 2:15) and they accused Our Lord of casting out demons using the power of a demon (Matt. 9:34, 12:24, Mk. 3:22, Lk. 11:15). Rabbis still teach that to this day, and there are far more blasphemous things they teach to support their lies. If you mention these facts they say you're an "anti-Semite" (because you're saying something jews don't like to hear), even though what you say is the truth. Jews hate the truth.
.
Since the New SSPX is so huggy-kissy with Jews (no doubt recommended by Max Krah and his buddies), they don't want to APPEAR to be "anti-Semitic" (which means doing anything jews don't like) therefore they remove their crucifixes and let the ignorant think that they still have crucifixes (when they really don't). 
.
The New SSPX has chosen not to offend the Jews (who offend Our Lord with abandon) and have chosen that over reminding anyone of the sufferings of Our Lord, which is exactly what any crucifix does.
.
Our Lord warned us to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt. 16:6).  
But the NeoSSPX has chosen to ignore God instead.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Maria Regina on October 08, 2018, 01:34:57 AM
Agree.  And how many comments have we heard recently about how some people don't like going to a hotel room for mass?  Or they prefer a "nice" church over a rented conference room?  I mean, is this mentality catholic?  Isn't the Mass more important than where it's said?  Sounds like some people have twisted materialistic-catholicism attitude or want a calvinist-rewarder-God religion.  Explains why the sspx "looks down" on the resistance/independents - because they know most people care about image and self-respect than truth.  Also explains why most will accept a deal with rome.  So sad and short-sighted.
While I agree that the Mass is more important, my experience with hotels has been very bad. It would be better to celebrate the Mass in a large living room, a  garage conversion, a rented tent, or even a store front. In one case, a company offered their huge lobby on Sundays as they did not work on Sundays, and their parking lot was wonderful -- enough to accommodate all of us.

In larger hotels, conference rooms are sometimes situated between other rooms where loud music is being played at wedding receptions or speeches are being given at various multi-level marketing programs like Amway. Plus there are those hotel patrons who scream and yell in the hallways, even opening the doors to do so. Sometimes I think these disruptions are deliberately done because they see the sign pointing to The Mass.

One simply cannot experience the Mass as a quiet time to commune with God in such an environment.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 08, 2018, 01:55:17 AM
.
I've been to Mass in a hotel room where there were noises in nearby rooms that disrupted the Mass.
.
I've also been in choir rehearsals when a siren's pitch threw everyone off and we had to wait for it to pass by.
.
Some think the Roman catacombs must have been tough, but I have to wonder: they were probably very quiet.
.
Which reminds me of a story. A class of elementary school students went into the Roman catacombs led by their teacher, who thought she knew what she was doing. The passageways are very long and have many unexpected turns, intersections and dark corridors. The teacher took them a little further than she was prepared for, and that's the last that was heard of them; the whole group has never been found. It's very easy to be confused on your way back out, as all it takes is one wrong turn and you'll think you're on the right path but then you're not sure, and going back to find where you went off course only gets you further into unknown areas.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Pax Vobis on October 08, 2018, 08:48:04 AM
Quote
One simply cannot experience the Mass as a quiet time to commune with God in such an environment.
Maybe not but if it comes down to having mass or not, a noisy mass is INFINITELY better than no mass.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Ladislaus on October 08, 2018, 08:50:46 AM
One simply cannot experience the Mass as a quiet time to commune with God in such an environment.

Nobody ever said this was ideal.  What we're saying is that going to a Mass that pleases God is exceedingly more important than the environment.  I could probably go to an Orthodox liturgy and have it be more edifying this way than a Catholic hotel Mass, but I would certainly NOT be drawing closer to God in doing so, despite what the emotions would otherwise lead me to believe.

People are too caught up in thinking that they please God primarily through emotional attachments.  Oh, I FEEL so close to God when I'm in an environment conducive to my emotions.  But we please God in our WILL and in our INTELLECT.  And the saints were very clear about this, that they got closest to God in the deepest parts of their soul precisely when they FELT the farthest away.

So, for instance, when my children were younger, I NEVER experienced Mass the same way I did when I was in the seminary.  I was usually dealing with a fidgety youngsters, holding a crying baby or toddler, trying to keep them well behaved, etc.  This caused me a lot of suffering.  In times past, I was filled with edifying thoughts and sentiments and emotions.  So, when did I come closer to God?  Ironically, it was when I suffered through Mass doing my duty to God.  Because the will and intellect have to be exerted MORE when the emotions are not drawing them along.  It's easy to be pious when the heart is overflowing with emotion, but it requires a serious effort of the WILL to do it when all the outward stuff is militating against it.  That's why the saints go through these "dark nights", because these strengthen their wills, and it's in our HIGHER faculties that we TRULY draw close to God, not in our emotions.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: claudel on October 08, 2018, 11:33:55 AM
Quote
[claudel wrote] Thanks for your answer, Neil. Thanks especially for confirming, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that your ignorance is matched only by your arrogance. When one or both are revealed for all to see, you resort, as in the quoted sentences above, to channeling Diane Feinstein and Christine Blasey Ford.
You could do everyone a favor, claudel, by taking your smug pompous ignorance and contempt for the truth and go hide for a few years again like you've done in the past. Nobody would miss you, I'm sure. And have fun "channeling" your idols while you're gone.

Poor Neil! Even your insults are derivative.

On the little matter of the crucifix, I'm still waiting for you to name the applicable canon or rubric, old buddy.*

How about this: you supply the hard data, and I'll get out of your sandbox for at least two years. Is that a swell deal or what?!
_____________________________________
*Hint: you won't find relevant documents or other references in the Hot Air drawer of your files.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Ladislaus on October 08, 2018, 11:55:58 AM
While your point about the importance and significance of the INRI are well taken, I feel that it's a bit too far to say it's not a crucifix by definition if it lacks the INRI.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Matthew on October 08, 2018, 12:58:07 PM
While I agree that the Mass is more important, my experience with hotels has been very bad. It would be better to celebrate the Mass in a large living room, a  garage conversion, a rented tent, or even a store front. In one case, a company offered their huge lobby on Sundays as they did not work on Sundays, and their parking lot was wonderful -- enough to accommodate all of us.

In larger hotels, conference rooms are sometimes situated between other rooms where loud music is being played at wedding receptions or speeches are being given at various multi-level marketing programs like Amway. Plus there are those hotel patrons who scream and yell in the hallways, even opening the doors to do so. Sometimes I think these disruptions are deliberately done because they see the sign pointing to The Mass.
I agree with this myself. I have experienced "humble Trad chapel" many times, and it's actually quite nice (I would describe it as "cozy"). But I have only attended Mass in a hotel room once while I was on vacation many years ago.

Better to have a permanent location for the traditional group to have Mass -- however humble -- than have to rent some facility.

Likewise, it's better for a family to live on 1/2 acre in a trailer home in the country than to live in a luxury apartment downtown with no yard or privacy.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Maria Regina on October 08, 2018, 01:11:17 PM
Nobody ever said this was ideal.  What we're saying is that going to a Mass that pleases God is exceedingly more important than the environment.  I could probably go to an Orthodox liturgy and have it be more edifying this way than a Catholic hotel Mass, but I would certainly NOT be drawing closer to God in doing so, despite what the emotions would otherwise lead me to believe.
Please do not even be tempted to go to an Orthodox liturgy, and then in effect be under the Moscow Patriarch (MP), the Ecumenical Patriarch (EP), or the Orthodox Church in America (OCA). Modernists and Ecumenists have invaded those Orthodox Churches.

Communist agents have also invaded their seminaries and have become Orthodox priests and bishops. Yes, they also have problems with pedophilia, homosexuality, adultery, and even murder in high places. There have been rumors or eye-witness reports that some priests and bishops in the MP have been murdered by other Orthodox priests and bishops for not doing the will of the KGB or the current state police.

 Why do you think Francis hobnobs with the MP and the EP? They want to be one unholy perverted church -- the church of the Antichrist.

Some are saying that when the MP and EP join with Rome, then the message of Fatima will have been fulfilled. FALSE. FALSE. and FALSE.

Although OCA churches are found in many cities across the USA, they are no safe refuge as they have changed to the modern vernacular. I just did an Internet search. Some parishes are using "altar girls" -- need I say more?  Avoid them like the plague.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Ladislaus on October 08, 2018, 01:18:13 PM
Please do not even be tempted to go to an Orthodox liturgy, and then in effect be under the Moscow Patriarch (MP), the Ecumenical Patriarch (EP), or the Orthodox Church in America (OCA). Modernists and Ecumenists have invaded those Orthodox Churches.

No, I would never go to a schismatic liturgy.  Thank you for your concern.  I was just trying to illustrate the point with a hypothetical example.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: 2Vermont on October 08, 2018, 04:07:14 PM
While your point about the importance and significance of the INRI are well taken, I feel that it's a bit too far to say it's not a crucifix by definition if it lacks the INRI.
Do crucifixes on rosaries all have the INRI?  I don't think so.  
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: TKGS on October 08, 2018, 04:18:00 PM
Do crucifixes on rosaries all have the INRI?  I don't think so.  
All of mine do, though we have one rosary crucifix that doesn't (but it is not on a rosary at this time).

See this link for rosary parts.  It's hard to see, but most of the crucifixes they sell have the INRI.

https://www.rosaryparts.com/crucifix/base-metal/
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Last Tradhican on October 09, 2018, 02:02:30 AM
.
Question:  What kind of crucifix is THAT?
.
Answer: THAT is not a crucifix.
.
(https://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=50147.0;attach=12130;image)
It is not a crucifix, it is a Christ the King and His Cross. It is first and foremost a depiction of Christ as the King and it shows his prize cross. Just like a knight would show his sword. The people here can debate over the minimum requirements for a crucifix, but it is undeniable, that this is not a crucifix, just like a resurrection cross is not a crucifix.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: claudel on October 09, 2018, 04:02:30 AM
… The people here can debate over the minimum requirements for a crucifix, but it is undeniable, that this is not a crucifix, just like a resurrection cross is not a crucifix.

The thing that is undeniable is that you, like Neil, patently lack the authority and the learning to declare that the object pictured is not a crucifix. Your comparing it with the so-called Resurrection crucifix marks you, not as authoritative, but merely brazen and foolish.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 09, 2018, 04:53:47 AM
.
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:
.
(https://s14-eu5.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-PBrzoCg_ICY%2FUTxLAkyhxtI%2FAAAAAAAADqA%2FS3_ZQhvpJLI%2Fs1600%2F104407334.jpg&sp=44877c75f6889d61f597c0e338b81a0e)  (https://s14-eu5.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftomperna.files.wordpress.com%2F2015%2F09%2Fjp-ii-and-papal-cross.jpg&sp=6dd2c786041c06d4a81c7cbb16d889eb)
.
Here are some closeups:
(https://s15-us2.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcm-wp.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com%2Fcontent%2Fuploads%2F14062-ver1.jpg&sp=57feb79596530f6b413f4be53e9c17ff)  (https://s15-us2.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.novusordowatch.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fjp2_broken_cross.jpeg&sp=7e251c654667aa59c55f4283432aed2c)
.
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.
.
(https://s15-us2.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimages-na.ssl-images-amazon.com%2Fimages%2FI%2F41k3RzxjAXL._SX327_BO1%2C204%2C203%2C200_.jpg&sp=7fbcdade01904c19273e76abef2c998d)  (https://s15-us2.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnovusordowatch.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fbrokencross-double_med.jpeg&sp=717559b9c7e81fb5461918cbc2098a24)
.
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:
.
(https://s15-us2.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.trinityroad.com%2Fprod%2F2000%2F2066450.jpg&sp=f4696c4dfdf97e39eaa88b8efadfa449)
.
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?

Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Last Tradhican on October 09, 2018, 07:53:05 AM
The thing that is undeniable is that you, like Neil, patently lack the authority and the learning to declare that the object pictured is not a crucifix. Your comparing it with the so-called Resurrection crucifix marks you, not as authoritative, but merely brazen and foolish.
Not even you believe what you defend. Perhaps if you replaced all the traditional crucifixes throughout the world with  Christ the King crosses, then I would believe you. I do not know anything about you,  I do not know the full spectrum of your Catholicism to speculate as to why you would think as you do. It just looks like you just have a beef against the other gentleman
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: claudel on October 09, 2018, 12:12:11 PM
Not even you believe what you defend. Perhaps if you replaced all the traditional crucifixes throughout the world with Christ the King crosses, then I would believe you. I do not know anything about you. I do not know the full spectrum of your Catholicism to speculate as to why you would think as you do. It just looks like you just have a beef against the other gentleman.
"Not even you believe what you defend." You're a clairvoyant, then, I take it—and a patronizing one at that. Or are you practicing the pseudoscience of psychiatry without a license?

"I do not know anything about you." I quite agree. As for the sentence that follows the just-quoted one, it suggests strongly that you should amend your own presumption and intellectual immodesty before you begin speculating about the "full spectrum of [my] Catholicism."
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 09, 2018, 10:54:27 PM
.
I've known Protestants who object to the corpus of Our Lord on the crucifix because they say, "You're crucifying Christ again..." and they refer to Hebrews 6:6, that a crucifix is "...making the Son of God a mockery."
.
These anti-Catholics hate the crucifix, and try to find excuses for their hatred in Scripture!!
.
But they have no problem with the following:
.
(https://s14-eu5.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhenningers.com%2Fchrist-112.jpg&sp=9911d08e2bc454b543d3b0416572fc25)
.
No nails, no INRI:  no crucifix.
(There are tiny red marks from the nails, but no spear wound, and obviously, way overboard on the clothes.)
So it's not surprising that someone who HATES crucifixes
is at the same time someone who thinks this is just fine.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Nadir on October 09, 2018, 11:01:21 PM
Perhaps if you replaced all the traditional crucifixes throughout the world with  Christ the King crosses, then I would believe you. I do not know anything about you,  I do not know the full spectrum of your Catholicism to speculate as to why you would think as you do. It just looks like you just have a beef against the other gentleman
LT, there is a way to find out about any poster. Just click on their name and all of their posts come up. https://www.cathinfo.com/profile/claudel/

Claudel has a 6 year posting history which shows that he is astute, knowledgeable and doesn't suffer fools gladly.
There is no reason to infer he had any desire to "replace all the traditional crucifixes throughout the world with  Christ the King crosses."
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 09, 2018, 11:11:32 PM
.
Here's one the SSPX overlooked and chose instead the one they did for the classroom:
.
(https://s16-us2.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=https:%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2F236x%2F2c%2Ff0%2F78%2F2cf078d719f13b605d1ab4cdb0f59d78--jesus-pictures-church-architecture.jpg&sp=447a1c7c66355ec21231b76ee03dd29d)
.
I say it's not unreasonable to expect that this would not be acceptable for the NeoSSPX.
Reason being, the INRI above Our Lord's head is offensive to Jews.
Reason being, they REJECT this Jesus Christ as their King.
They want the sign to say, "HE SAID, I am the King of the Jews" (Jn. 19:21).
Simple.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: VeritasLuxMea on October 09, 2018, 11:23:04 PM
The discussion of the artwork and what qualifies as a crucifix aside, I think the original post might be a bit mistaken in the assumptions.

That video was made over 3 years ago, it shows the old seminary, not the new seminary and thus the old conference room in the basement under the chapel (the former bowling alley).

The crucifix/cross/artwork was there since at least 2007 when I remember attending an adult Catechism there on a Sunday. I was told it was a gift of one of the seminary priests to the seminary when the room was converted from the bowling alley into the conference room, so it probably was there earlier than 2007.

I have seen dozens of similar pieces of art in old churches, especially neo-Gothic, Jugendstil-style or Beuronese-style churches, showing Christ the King as High Priest nailed to the Cross in vestments. They were especially common in the early 20th century, particularly the 1930s. Almost every single one, except the more modern ones you can find today, have Our Lord wearing a maniple, so certainly not a post-Vatican II phenomenon. 

I'll leave the definition of what qualifies as a crucifix and what is tasteful art to others, but the history of that piece of artwork of that seems important to point out. It's not at the new seminary, as far as I remember on a tour of it, and at the old seminary it was in that room for at least 10 years before the video was made, so isn't something new.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 09, 2018, 11:30:03 PM
.
That's an interesting contribution, VeritasLuxMea. Thank you. 
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 10, 2018, 01:08:56 AM

(http://www.christianiconography.info/iconographySupplementalImages/crucifixion/lucca.JPG)
8th century. Carved cedar. Cathedral of St. Martin, Lucca, Italy.
Local legend has it that this cross was carved at the time of the Crucifixion by Nicodemus
and that it arrived in Lucca miraculously in 782
.

http://www.christianiconography.info/iconographySupplementalImages/crucifixion/lucca.html
.
Since the photo above cuts off the upper part of the cross, I looked for a more complete photo and found this:
..
(https://s17-us2.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=https:%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2Foriginals%2Ff2%2Fe1%2F97%2Ff2e197e1f2bea68bdac7c25cab87493d.jpg&sp=ecf958ca94a73db643b9aa8508aff515)
.
The crown is missing here, but also notice the angel on the right has a changed position, turned toward Christ on the cross.
All the figures seem to have a more dull luster here too, but that might be due to lighting.
I still can't see anything like an INRI on top, but the figure of the Holy Ghost might be covering up some inscription.
The fact that the crown is missing here should be of no concern: this is still the same shrine and cross with angels.
For different occasions there are a variety of adornments used giving a variety of appearances to the same basic forms.
Notice, Jesus wears a maniple on each arm!:
.
(https://s14-eu5.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi0.wp.com%2Fwww.europeisourplayground.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F09%2FThe-Slow-Travel-Diary_The-Holy-Face_Cover.jpg%3Ffit%3D1500%252C994&sp=77744e5ee08551a52ff19b562256b258)  (https://s16-us2.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http:%2F%2Fwww.stgemma.com%2Fgallery%2Fphotos%2Fvolto_santo.jpg&sp=12c6606955374c9fd28701ffe9ca9509)
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 10, 2018, 02:27:49 AM
.
Ran into this curiosity in Lucca, Italy. The "Amphitheater Square," they say (misspelled?):
.
(http://foto.ilsole24ore.com/Editrice/ILSOLE24ORE/QUOTIDIANO_INSIDE_ITALY/Online/MediaCenter/Gallery/2015/LUCCA/img_LUCCA/01_700-525.jpg)
.
You have to admit, the whole scheme is really remarkable -- elliptical plot plan??
Only in Italy??
.
FWIW   There is absolutely NO WAY anyone could build this in Los Angeles County.
They would never get past first base at Plan Check.

http://www.italy24.ilsole24ore.com/art/arts-and-leisure/2015-01-01/lucca-s-discovery-starts-from-stmartin-cathedral-and-the-wooden-holy-face--193355.php?uuid=AB5gZjXC
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Last Tradhican on October 10, 2018, 07:33:55 AM
LT, there is a way to find out about any poster. Just click on their name and all of their posts come up. https://www.cathinfo.com/profile/claudel/

Claudel has a 6 year posting history which shows that he is astute, knowledgeable and doesn't suffer fools gladly.
There is no reason to infer he had any desire to "replace all the traditional crucifixes throughout the world with  Christ the King crosses."
What I meant by what I said was that if he really believes that it is a crucifix, then he would be alright with all the traditional crucifixes in his home and in all the churches and homes being replaced by that Christ the King cross. If one truly believes something, they would have the conviction to say yes, I would have no problem replacing all the crucifixes with that Christ the King cross.

As I would have no problem with replacing all the crosses in the entire world with this cross:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/58/Maria_Scharten_-_Kruzifix_1.jpg/800px-Maria_Scharten_-_Kruzifix_1.jpg)
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: josefamenendez on October 10, 2018, 08:29:56 AM
I don't know how scrupulous you have to be about the Crucifix, but this is what I was told by someone greatly respected. All of the offending Crucifixes in my home have been changed accordingly.

The Crucifix should be made in Western Europe or at least the USA- NOT CHINA. (for the many reasons you can imagine)
The Cross itself should be wood.
The Corpus' head should be leaning to the right, and the feet should be either side by side or right over left, not left over right.
The lance wound in the side should obviously be on the right- but you would be surprised how many Crucifixes have this wound on the left. ( In the FSSP Church outside of Denver, the Crucifix in the back of the church has the lance wound on the left. Don't tell me they don't know better!)
There should not be any blatant deformities, intentional or manufactured in the corpus, (this happens often especially in the facial area from molds).
Jesus' drape around the waist should be modest without too much artistic license (no wind-blown flowing "fabric", no exposure of the hip or high knotted cloth on the hip- this is a tough one to find for home crucifixes)
And of course, the INRI must be at the top. I'm sure there are more things to look for, but this is what was suggested to me. I'm sure people might take some exceptions to these "rules". The Crucifix above in Tradican's post is practically perfect.( it's a truly beautiful Crucifix, besides the hip knot.....I would certainly modify that "rule" for this magnificent Crucifix)
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Ladislaus on October 10, 2018, 11:52:33 AM
.
Here's one the SSPX overlooked and chose instead the one they did for the classroom:
.
(https://s16-us2.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=https:%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2F236x%2F2c%2Ff0%2F78%2F2cf078d719f13b605d1ab4cdb0f59d78--jesus-pictures-church-architecture.jpg&sp=447a1c7c66355ec21231b76ee03dd29d)
.
I say it's not unreasonable to expect that this would not be acceptable for the NeoSSPX.
Reason being, the INRI above Our Lord's head is offensive to Jews.
Reason being, they REJECT this Jesus Christ as their King.
They want the sign to say, "HE SAID, I am the King of the Jews" (Jn. 19:21).
Simple.

Wow, this one is beautiful.  I would like to get something like this.  Can a copy of this be purchased somewhere?

By definition, of crucifix, you need a cross and Christ's Corpus "fixed" to the cross.  That implies nail wounds & nails.  INRI, well I would want that, but I would not call something that met these other requirements NOT a crucifix for mere lack of INRI.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Ladislaus on October 10, 2018, 11:54:19 AM
I also don't care for Our Lord being depicted without a beard, as was often the case in the early Roman Church, but I wouldn't say that it wasn't a legitimate picture of Our Lord because He lacked a beard.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Neil Obstat on October 11, 2018, 12:31:43 AM
Wow, this one is beautiful.  I would like to get something like this.  Can a copy of this be purchased somewhere?

By definition, of crucifix, you need a cross and Christ's Corpus "fixed" to the cross.  That implies nail wounds & nails.  INRI, well I would want that, but I would not call something that met these other requirements NOT a crucifix for mere lack of INRI.
.
I was struck immediately by this crucifix, even though it does show Our Lord with regal vestments and a crown not of thorns, and no chest wound. There's something about the whole impression it makes that causes one to look twice, stop and think.
.
Here is the URL for the image, let's see if I can find the website (I was using a proxy so it might not be that easy to do) ...
.
https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/spg/show_picture.pl?l=english&rais=1&oiu=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2F236x%2F2c%2Ff0%2F78%2F2cf078d719f13b605d1ab4cdb0f59d78--jesus-pictures-church-architecture.jpg&sp=447a1c7c66355ec21231b76ee03dd29d
.
SUCCESS!! HOORAY!!
.
The artist, Fred Zavadil, is a wood carver with a very impressive website, and he sells all kind of sculpture so you got lucky!
As for buying a copy, perhaps Zavadil has it available, since he seems to have a copy protection on this design.
You'd have to contact him via his website and ask. I don't see any offer of copies for sale there.

Contact:
fred.zavadil@gmail.com
1-519-966-0428
.
http://www.fredzavadilwoodcarving.com/religious-sculptures/
.
(http://www.fredzavadilwoodcarving.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Fred-Zavadil-Wood-Carving-and-Sculpting.png)
.
Samples of Fred’s Religious Sculptures and Catholic Statuary
Basswood statue of Risen Christ (also known as Christus Rex or Christ the King) carved for a cathedral in Pittsburgh. It is about 5 feet tall and it is carved from basswood.
.
He managed to convince the customer this was a "Risen Christ" perhaps to fill the order of a resurrectifix, but it's really a Christ the King crucifix.......
.
(http://www.fredzavadilwoodcarving.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/CHRISTUS-REX.jpg)
Risen Christ, custom carved sculpture of Christus Rex, stained basswood, religious sculptures by Fred Zavadil
.
Detail of the face:
.
(http://www.fredzavadilwoodcarving.com/wp-content/uploads/Christus-Rex-Christ-the-King-basswood-religious-wood-carving-by-Fred-Zavadil.jpg)
.
Looks like Zavadil is a bit of a mixed bag, some of his work is a bit suspicious (Modernist), but he seems to have gotten this one right.
.
Check out the rich tones and grain depth in this 5' tall Honduran mahogany corpus (probably $10,000 I would estimate):
.
(http://www.fredzavadilwoodcarving.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Custom-carved-corpus-Fred-Zavadil-Honduras-mahogany.jpg)
.
.
But as josefamenendez pointed out above, the head should be turned to the right, so I'm not convinced this is proper.
There is something odd about Our Lord's right hand, and the right elbow is bent, as if struggling to escape?
I would be bothered by the fact that since there is a spear wound on His right side He must have been dead.
But then how would His right arm be bent -- wouldn't the weight have pulled it straight? Doesn't make sense.
Sometimes artists let their desire to be creative take charge of the art, and they end up with a clash of principles.
.
But the quality of the wood is beyond question, most excellent.
To obtain this much and this thickness of clear Honduran mahogany would take a special order, and would be $5,000.
.
(http://www.fredzavadilwoodcarving.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Corpus-Mahogany-01-@copyright-www.fredzavadilwoodcarving.com_-e1502205588180.jpg)
.
.
Another one of his works has the left foot on top of the right, which looks weird -- maybe not proper?
.
(http://www.fredzavadilwoodcarving.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Crucifix-custom-sculpture-of-Jesus-Fred-Zavadil-Woodcarving.jpg)
Missing the nails, missing INRI: not good.
Those could be added, but the left foot is not so simple.
Moving the right foot to the front might require starting over.
.
Come to think of it, the hands are too high for the nails to be easily added.
They would have to penetrate below the wrists.
So the entire corpus might have to be moved down 2 or 3 inches.
.
A doctor wrote a book on the position of the nails and he said through the palms, close to the wrist
is the place that makes most sense, not to break bones and to support the weight, but extremely painful,
since it would go right through or at least bruise the median nerve, the major nerve of the arm.
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Markus on October 11, 2018, 02:08:29 AM
What about the devotion to the Child Jesus of Pichincha Mountain?
It is approved as part of the Our Lady of Good Success apparition.

Image attached:
Title: Re: What kind of crucifix is THAT at the SSPX seminary?
Post by: Ladislaus on October 11, 2018, 08:45:19 AM
SUCCESS!! HOORAY!!
.
The artist, Fred Zavadil, is a wood carver with a very impressive website, and he sells all kind of sculpture so you got lucky!
As for buying a copy, perhaps Zavadil has it available, since he seems to have a copy protection on this design.
You'd have to contact him via his website and ask. I don't see any offer of copies for sale there.

Contact:
fred.zavadil@gmail.com
1-519-966-0428
.
http://www.fredzavadilwoodcarving.com/religious-sculptures/

Thank you for looking into this, Neil.

Probably completely unaffordable for me ... unless I win the lottery.  Everything is custom, so you could probably ask him to alter the design to suit your tastes.  This man is incredibly talented.  I didn't care for his "Pieta" (borderline obscene and not sure why Our Lady is depicted as bald) ... but he has incredible artistic talent.