'A crucifix is now just a fashion statement and has lost religious meaning': Justin Welby says the purpose of wearing a cross has been lost Archbishop of Canterbury says the sign has been trivialised He said it was once a 'badge of shame' which is now popular Christian leader made claims in a foreword of a new book Wearing the Crucifix is now a fashion statement with no religious meaning, according to the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Most Rev Justin Welby said the Cross has been trivialised and ceases to shock or challenge people. Archbishop Welby wrote that the symbol should represent the ‘deepest encounter and radical change’ for Christians. He added: ‘For those early Christians it was a badge of shame. ‘Today it is more commonly seen as a symbol of beauty to hang around your neck. ‘As a friend of mine used to say, you might as well hang a tiny golden gallows or an electric chair around your neck.’ In a foreword to a book which will be published in the run-up to Lent next year, Archbishop Welby continued: ‘Are we now living with a symbol emptied of power by time and fashion? 'Christianity with a powerless cross is Christianity without a throne for Christ or an aspiration for Christians.’ Click here for the rest of the article: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...lby-says-crucifix-lost-religious-meaning.html
says him. my crucifix is filled with meaning...and since i wear it under my shirt, it has no fashionable use at all. it may be the case for some but certainly not all
You shouldn't read that rag...Bad for the blood pressure and your IQ. The article is a case in point- it is centered around what is presumably a more or less fatuous introductory remark and fails to engage with the content of the book. Mind you, if this is the AoC's opening Salvo, it doesn't sound like the book has enough originality to even be worthy of a news item. Which isn't, I stress, necessarily a criticism; theological acumen can hardly be expected to be the most important factor for one in such a position. We had one of those, I thought he was brilliant but clearly didn't really much know how to organise and manage his episcopal arse from his synodical elbow.
I read it in a good way, to say that the cross sometimes isn't worn with the dignity it deserves. It's true though.
Oh I'm sure he does want to get that across, my ire though was directed at the fact that that almost certainly had only a passing connection to the rest of the book. The Mail completely bypasses the discussion of the meaning of the cross in a weak attempt to sensationalise an almost entirely banal comment. That said, although the DM is a repeat abuser of latching on to small quotes to spew whatever bile it wishes to, this kind of approach is symptomatic of religious reporting across the British Media.
And the CofE, of course, is an Aunt Sally, even though the Daily Mail, I imagine would purport to stand for "traditional British values". Talking of the British media, remember the establishment of the wretched and ill-starred "Personal Ordinariate of St Mary of Walsingham"? What was billed by the (Murdoch) press as a seismic change has turned out, thank God, to be a damp squib. Meanwhile the indolent and complacent CofE Press Office continues to put in a miserable performance.