At first glance I thought that I had found a story about a Catholic church. However, it turns out that it was a Church of England parish. Still, it's an interesting story and there is a good video report to go along with it on the BBC website.
Not surprisingly, probably the majoruty of Protestants would be less than happy about having a large crucifix in sanctuary. A historical aspect of the Reformation was that churches were stripped of statues and ornamentation.
After looking at the photos I would have to say that it's an unusual looking at least--it's sort of a contemporary crucifix. I might expect to see something like it in a modern art museum. Reportedly it had been in the building for 45 years.
I have to agree that there is an element of intense suffering and hunger conveyed by the image. I can easily see how young children--or even older ones--might have a bad dream about it if they were to see the face of the statue up close. Interestingly, I immediately thought that the statue's face looked like a close match to the face of the liberty statue at the top of the Texas capitol. My wife told me thee same thing when she saw it.
Here's the story:
A large sculpture of Christ on the cross has been removed from outside a church in West Sussex after its vicar said it was "scaring young children".
The Reverend Ewen Souter said the 10ft crucifix was "a horrifying depiction of pain and suffering" which was also "putting people off".
The sculpture, located at the side of St John's Church in Broadbridge Heath, has now been given to Horsham Museum.
It will be replaced with a new stainless steel cross.
In a survey carried out by the church, every comment about the sculpture was negative.
Mr Souter said: "Children have commented on how scary they find it and how off-putting they find it as a symbol outside the church.
"As a key exterior symbol for us it was putting people off rather than having a sense of hope and life and the power of the resurrection."
He said rather than undermining the work of the cross, the church wanted to portray "an accurate biblical picture of the crucifixion as a moment of hopefulness for the world, and not one of despair".
The sculpture was designed in the 1960s by former Royal Society of British Sculptors president, Edward Bainbridge Copnall, and made out of coal dust and resin.
It was removed from the church just before Christmas and will be mounted on a large wall in the grounds of Horsham Museum.
Jeremy Knight, curator, said the powerful image portrayed by the figure was that of Christ in pain.
"That today isn't an image which a lot of churches want to follow. They'd much rather see an empty cross where Christ has risen," he said.
It is interesting that he says "they'd much rather see an empty cross where Christ has risen." I have had this said to me on more than one occasion by those who have voiced opposition Catholicism in general--just add it to the list of Pope, Mary, Purgatory, confession, etc., which you're liable to hear about sometime if you get into conversations with non-Catholics who have strong issues against the faith.
A few years back I wore a crucifix that I had received as a gift--it was at the same time as the release of Gibson's The Passion of Christ. I had a stranger ask me if I was wearing it because of the movie. I answered no, that I wore it because of my faith as a Catholic. She replied, "Well, my faith is in the Resurrection personally."
Arguing that an empty cross is a better symbol for Christianity ignores the history of crucifixes being a part of Christian art and architecture. More importantly it ignores the central event of salvation--it removes the (saving) offense from the Cross.
One of the Anglican priests featured on the video remarked that Christ is not still on the Cross suffering. Of course such a theological standpoint makes an error in terms of literal interpretation, but also fails to understand that the victim offered in the sacrifice of the Cross is the same as one offered on the Altar at each Mass.
A reverse parallel to the story has to do with my own parish, which has a large Resurrection cross hanging from the ceiling behind the Altar. I have been told by visitors on more than one occasion that it is unfortunate for the parish not to have a crucifix--though in fact there is a small one on a stand near the Altar at every Mass.
It eased me to see the woman kneeling beside the Cross as it laid on the sidewalk, awaiting its new location's hanging.
I've seen many Bloodless crucifixes in all these years as a cradle Catholic, and my preferences are always for more reality, but here's the thing. He died for each of us, not just collectively, and for those who suffer, to see that their suffering is not foreign to Himself helps, I think. That He knows what they are going through brings Him a little closer to some.
Posted by: Carol | January 09, 2009 at 09:25 PM
You make a very good point Carol. It really is all about suffering in the world, and to know that he suffers with us--not just that he once suffered then it was all over--is an immense comfort. In his suffering he addressed the enigma of suffering in he world, and still he suffers along with us in his great compassion. He takes our human suffering and gives it meaning; he remolds it and sanctifies it so that it is not empty suffering. He joins it completely with the suffering on the Cross--when we ask; when we allow...
Posted by: Deacon DW | January 10, 2009 at 09:13 AM
A few years ago a new church was built in our parish to replace the old one, and all new fittings and furnishings were ordered - but the processional cross had to be returned - and you'll guess why - because there was no figure of Christ on the Cross and parishioners objected.
It took some time, but it came back, beautifully crafted, beautifully finished.
Posted by: Ann | January 12, 2009 at 11:35 AM