Talk:Altar cross

Comments on article as requested by orginator

1) The emphasis on Catholicism is too strong. To avoid having the article marked with highly undesirable tags about tone or bias, other religions should be given mention. Another alternative would have been to work the word "Catholic" in the article title. E.g., "Catholic Altar Crucifix"

2) The 1913 "Catholic Encyclopedia" is a reasonable reference, but it would be nice to have something more modern, if it's available. It might be better to cite www.catholic.com, than a copy kept by Wiki, since changes might happen there, first. (It's got better formatting, too!) http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=555

I note on Catholic_Encyclopedia that there's a 1922 supplement that is in the public domain, but is not online. If that has newer material, that should be the source.

3) Quoting official Catholic documents on the meaning of Catholic crosses is a pretty safe move, but the article is not on such "safe ground" if it makes statements about other churches. This statement, which you cut-and-pasted from the Encyclopedia has a problem in the context of this article:

"...Christians were not accustomed to publicly expose the cross for fear of scandalizing the weak..."

It's a quote from another author inside the article. From the article, it cannot be established when the author wrote, or which "early" Christians he was talking about.

I raise this issue because, frankly, I find it hard to believe it applies to all "early" Christians, or that, indeed, the author was familiar with all Christian practices.

4) Notice that the Crucifix article uses a very long article as one of its sources, one with a very large number of references. That sort of evidence is likely to appeal to Wiki editor checking on sources. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04517a.htm

5) I find the language of the Crucifix article easy to understand, as well as the language in the New Advent site. Whereas the language copied from the Catholic Encyclopedia is dated and convoluted. It would be appropriate for you, the editor, to bring this language up-to-date.

6) Here's an edit on one paragraph to demonstrate. Existing:

"The crucifix placed upon the altar is intended to serve as a reminder to the people in attendance and the celebrant of the believed nature of the Eucharist as the actual body of Christ. It is for this reason that Roman Law decrees it necessary to have the crucifix upon the altar whenever Mass is celebrated. Specifically, it is placed directly in between the Candlesticks in such a way that it can is conveniently seen by the people. In some cases, to better fulfill this requirement, the crucifix is instead suspended above the altar as in this case, so that when the priest is facing the congregation the crucifix is not obstructed."

Edit:

"The crucifix reminds people that the Eucharist is the actual body of Christ, so it must be on the alter during Mass. It is placed between the Candlesticks or suspended above the alter so it can always be easily seen."

I hope some of this is helpful, and isn't too overwhelming. It does take some time to get used to Wiki guidelines, etc.

Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 00:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Not just Catholic

The Methodist Churches and Anglican Churches, as well as Lutheran I am sure, also have Altar Crosses, why is this article only on Roman Catholocism? 74.167.245.190 (talk) 23:13, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Recommend name change

I recommend the name of the article be changed from "Altar crucifix" to "Altar cross", since it is not only about Roman Catholic practice. Any comments? MishaPan (talk) 06:37, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Agreed - not all Catholic ones are crucifixes eiter. Johnbod (talk) 05:10, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Agreed - made change. --IACOBVS (talk) 01:42, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Can we agree to move it to “Altar cross” then? Steepleman (t) 02:15, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Merge info from Processional cross

In some churches the processional cross or crucifix is then placed at the altar, becoming the altar cross. Should these two articles not be combined?Tarheelz123 (talk) 12:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion: No, these two articles should not be combined, since in many places they are two seperate items. Many churches have large, permanently affixed crosses above the altar, and a seperate cross used in processions. MishaPan (talk) 07:00, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree with MishaPan. There is sufficient distinction between the two kinds of cross (even if some do overlap both categories) to justify two separate articles. Valerius Tygart (talk) 21:29, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Me too. They are sufficiently different. After 6 months, I think we are done here, & will remove the tags. Johnbod (talk) 17:43, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Requested move 24 April 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bensci54 (talk) 16:13, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

---

Altar crucifix → Altar cross – Cross is the broader category, a crucifix is a type of cross featuring the crucified Jesus. These terms are not interchangeable, but the article content currently speaks of crosses and not just crucifixes. Dirkwillems (talk) 00:43, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

• Support per nom. See two sections above also. Johnbod (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.