´óÏó´«Ã½

You said that you want to communicate good news, not bad news. The good news is that our Lord is the only one to be raised from the dead to live forever more. That all starts with the crucifixion. Of course it was a horrifying death. How do you think He felt on that cross. The good news is the gospel. There is no gospel apart from the crucifixion. There is no better uplifting and inspiring symbol than what is already up there. He did what no other person in the world was qualified to do. We've already taken Him out of school. We can't afford to take Him off the cross.

"It was a real put-off."

Really? Jesus Christ.

Coming from an iconoclastic and nonconformist background (in both senses of those words), I'm not comfortable with personal use of religious imagery.

However, how does this image sound? Omit the cross itself and nails. Show an image intended to represent Jesus raised from the dead. His wounds are there, but His is an attitude of triumph, not dejection. He can even have His arms spread out wide, like if they were on a cross.

You have hope, a sense of the sacrifice, and fewer "disturbing" images.

The PC brigade strike again, they must sanitise the Christian Faith... I cannot wait for them to start on the Koran, that will go down real big....

William:
Maybe there was other reasons for the removal of the crucifix....
~Dennis Junior~

It's not the cross as such - just a particularly scary version. It does look a bit like Nosferatu.

It is pretty scary looking, to be honest!

I agree with Orvillethird, it would be better to have the triumph of the resurrection - which was, after all, the 'final act' of the story.

Do we know anything about the artist and his intentions? Is there a particular "school" of art behind this crucifix?

GV

Hi Graham

There might be a 'school' of art, but there doesn't appear to be a 'school' of theology!

Well the death on the cross was pretty damned scary. Any crucifix that isn't scary isn't a very good one. Which is ALL of them. And this one doesn't strike me as much scarier than any other.

I'm wondering if this story merits a sensible reply, so while I ponder that a little, here's a stupid one.

William is there anyone at the ´óÏó´«Ã½ who is a bit of a wiz with photoshop and could run up a speech bubble for the photo above which says, "BOO!"?

Peter,

Your wish is my command.

OK, sorry, I can't let this pass.

I've been on their website and it looks like a pretty fun and funky faith sort of place in an Evangelical sort of way. (For those in the know, the evangelical clues litter every page) And these things make me less evangelical by the day.

Frankly I've come to the conclusion that the church has nothing to fear from atheism because we're so adept at shooting ourselves in the foot (sorry was that too gory an idiom?) We're going to be the end of ourselves.

So, let's imagine a conversation at St. John's

Mummy, why did Jesus have to die?
Hush child, don't worry, he didn't really die, he passed away, and then came back again.

Can I trust the bible mummy?
Well sonny, you can trust the bits with no blood in them.

Mummy can I have 'Gears of War' for my birthday?
Of course dear.

What's a cross mummy?
I'm not cross love, there there, settle down.

Our scripture reading today is taken from John chapter 19: v 28 - 37, but we're leaving out verses, 30, 31,32,33,34,36 and 37.

And this week's announcements, for those of you wondering what we're going to do about the big space a the front of our building where the, you know, ehem, sshh, 'sculpture' used to be, well, we're taking delivery this week of a big spherical yellow light up smiley, you know, just to show that christians can have fun too, and to help us get in touch with the 'text' generation.

______________

Sooner of later, they're going to drive me away from the church altogether.



Oh and BTW don't take your kids on a day out to Dublin:



scary place that.

John

What can I say!

Graham - your post # 8.

I am not an art historian, merely an aficionado of modern (and post-modern!) art, but I would see something of the influence of the work of Jacob Epstein in this style of sculpture, maybe a hint of Giacometti too. Something, but not a lot and none of the good parts! The example on the church in question is, in my opinion, a pretty poor one lacking honesty andinspiration. If you are interested in a local flowering you could do worse than nip down to Banbridge and have a dekko at some of F E McWilliam's stuff there - you should see some similarities.

For me, however, the prime example of a religious work in this style is Scorzelli's Crucifixion on the Papal Staff - it is intense and utterly moving. I love the way the weight of the world's sin contained in the emaciated body of Christ bends the cross-bar down toward earth. It is a perfect portrayal of an empty husk of a body, bruised, beaten, oozing dejection and desolation, dead but somehow not lifeless - one can see looking on it why on this man, this event, all our hope could be founded.

This story is a classic case of getting the wrong end of the stick.
Look out for Ewen Souter's interview on Southern Counties Radio and South Today. The crucifix has been removed to be replaced by a new piece of art which will be a steel cross with rays of light eminating from it's centre reminding us that Jesus died a horrific death on the cross, but is now raised from the dead and offers hope to many through his death and what it paid for, yes, but also by his resurrection, when he concurred death itself.
As for the parishioner who is worried about the Church removing the pews, well it's about time they went to St John's, because they were removed 10 years ago.

Greatgoodnews

Of course you are right about the resurrection and the defeat of death, but how do we escape the quotes above. Put simply it strikes me as, yet another, example of evangelicalism going all PR savvy in all the wrong ways. It's just more consumer speak. It's like mission statements and vision statements and the 'Five values of our worshipping community' and the like that we're all into at the moment. He is quoted as saying,

"We want to communicate good news, not bad news, so we need a more uplifting and inspiring symbol than execution on a cross."

The whole point is that the cross is good news because of the bad news, precisely because it is not me hanging on it.

There is no more uplifting and inspiring symbol in christianity other than the cross.

And apart from that, all this cosseting of our children is misplaced concern, just talk to them and explain what is going on.

A church that removed the pews TEN YEARS AGO? Wow. That's progressive.

The cross - "to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness". This trendy church is proving its a stumbling block to them too.

I am glad they removed it. The church should consider replacing it with the Risen Crucifix.

The church should replace it with a swinging conker, to signify, by analogy of a missing testicle, the position the church finds itself in at this point in its history.

I was a member of this church, got married there and only left because we moved away from the area after our wedding. This is no chocolate box church, the pews dated all the way back to 1963 when the church was completed and the crucifx to c1965, commissioned by the then very anglo-catholic congregation.

This church is not anti the cross, the sacrifice of Jesus or any such thing. Nobody liked THIS PARTICULAR piece of sculpture and it was an objective decision taken in conjunction with local residents (there are a row of houses facing onto this facade of the church building who came face to face with this sculpture every morning from their bedroom windows).

The sculpture, mildly interesting in art history terms, has been donated (yes, given away for free!) to the local museum in Horsham where everyone can go and see it. It is being replaced by an empty cross, more in keeping with the evangelically based theology now taught by this bible observant, reading and teaching church.

Phew, finally an opinion expressed by someone who was part of the committee who originally thought about removing the crucifix back in 1993 (we decided it was more important to get rid of those VERY UNCOMFORTABLE pews which went in 1999). Unfortunately the press weren't really interesting in interviewing me: they preferred to publish the opinion of the single dissenter who moaned about throwing out the bibles (there are over 100 in that particular) church and ripping out pews: see above.

By the way, if you're still reading: there was a survey done throughout the whole village about this crucifix. Not a single positive comment from either church member or villager. This is a non-story really, isn't it?

Nic, thanks for saying this. You should have a listen to your minister's interview on the Sunday Sequence programme last Sunday. I thought he did an excellent job making a case for a risen cross image rather than this gaunt crucifix. I hope the publicity helps the church itself. You deserve every success.