I would argue that adoption of the crucifix was more troubling and a good indication of how they wanted to limit the true value of what Jesus did here through his words, his acts, and the Resurrection.
The murder of Jesus Christ is one small aspect of his existence here, and yes while important and key to the redemption of mankind, the crucifix has always looked more like a celebration of that act from the spiritual and genetic ancestors of the perpetrators of that murder.
The Catholic church has been compromised for the vast majority of its history.
The rainbow cross is just ridiculous.
The one on the left however, is pretty common. It's called a pectoral cross and the image Pope Francis chose on it is a shepherd leading sheep.
The abandonment of the crucifix is troubling.
I would argue that adoption of the crucifix was more troubling and a good indication of how they wanted to limit the true value of what Jesus did here through his words, his acts, and the Resurrection.
The murder of Jesus Christ is one small aspect of his existence here, and yes while important and key to the redemption of mankind, the crucifix has always looked more like a celebration of that act from the spiritual and genetic ancestors of the perpetrators of that murder.
The Catholic church has been compromised for the vast majority of its history.
It is no celebration of murder.
John 10:18
Chirst chose to lay down his life.
Romans 5:7
His act was a demonstration of love.
1 John 3:16
We ought to imitate his love.
This is what comes to the mind of a Catholic when he sees the cross. "As I loved so must you".
I am well aware of these things.
What were the original symbols of Christianity?
Why was the method of his material "death" ultimately chosen as the official symbol after all that time?