Crosses versus crucifixes.

The names in this dialogue were changed to protect the privacy of the people having this discussion. You’ll see why.

LUQMAN. “…You're wearing a crucifix, so you're obviously Christian.”

AISHWARYA. “Cross. Not crucifix.”

LUQMAN. “It's not the same thing?”

AISHWARYA. “No. A crucifix has a dead Jesus on it. Crosses don't.”

ME [butting in]. “Sometimes dead, sometimes not. It depends on whether it shows the spear wound. If no spear wound, he’s dying, not dead.”

AISHWARYA. “No, he's always dead. Catholics worship a dead Jesus.”

SYLVESTER [who’s Catholic, and is now offended]. “We do not. And Leslie’s right; it's a dying Jesus. Crucifixes don't have the spear wound.”

AISHWARYA. “Well I worship a risen Jesus.”

ME. “Every Christian worships a risen Jesus. Whether they wear crucifixes or crosses.”

AISHWARYA. “Catholics don't.”

SYLVESTER. “Where are you getting this [MALARKEY] about Catholics? It sure ain’t from Catholics!”

Lemme correct my Catholic acquaintance: Not all crucifixes depict Jesus as dying instead of dead.
A Russian Orthodox blessing crucifix. Wikimedia Some of them intend to show all the torture the Romans inflicted upon him. This includes all five of “the five wounds”—the nails through his hands and feet, plus the spear in his side. Crucifixes regularly put the nails in the wrong place—the Romans crucified people through the wrists and ankles, not the palms and dorsums, which’d break a number of bones and y’might recall “A bone of him shall not be broken.” Jn 19.36 KJV Plus the “five wounds” don’t count the flogging and the crown of thorns; not sure why not, though most crucifixes definitely include the crown. Anyway, since the spear wound came after Jesus died, Jn 19.34 displaying it obviously means he’s dead. And lots of crucifixes deliberately display it.

Anyway. The reason Protestants tend to be pretty clueless about crucifixes, is traditionally we don’t display them. Largely that’s because, during the Protestant Reformation, the Calvinists decided to undecorate their church buildings. They wanted nothing to distract people from their sermons: No gilding, stained glass, nor art. No statues, including crucifixes. (In fact many of ’em still aren’t entirely sure statues don't violate the command against graven images. Dt 5.8-9) Not even crosses, if you can imagine. Nothing. Bare walls.

The Calvinist sensibility gradually became the prevalent mindset of cultural Evangelicals. It’s only in the 1900s when we begin to see decorations seriously return to Evangelical churches. And not without controversy; many Christians still think there should be nothing but bare walls in our churches. But even in the newly decorated churches, no crucifixes. Great big crosses and lots of ’em, but Jesus isn’t on them.

Anti-crucifix theology.

To justify removing the Jesus statues and crucifixes, Calvinists felt it necessary to rebuke everyone who had ‘em in their churches. That’d be the Orthodox, the Roman Catholics, the Lutherans, and the Anglicans.

If you’re thinking, “Wait, Lutherans have crucifixes?”—up until the 1980s they most definitely did. In the late 1600s, Lutheran theologian Philipp Spener started the Lutheran Pietism movement, which agreed with the Calvinists about crucifixes. Over time, pressure from the pietists, and popular Christian culture, led many Lutheran churches in the United States to swap their crucifixes for empty crosses. In other countries they’re a lot easier to find in Lutheran churches. Historic Lutheranism has always been okay with crucifixes; Martin Luther considered it a powerful reminder of Jesus’s self-sacrifice.

Calvinists felt the need to come up with a whole theological explanation for why Christians shouldn’t have crucifixes. Most of their explanation is total rubbish, but it’s popular rubbish. You see some of it in the dialogue up top:

• It’s a graven image, and we’re not to make graven images. Nor worship them, nor bow down to them. Ten Commandments, remember?
• It’s a dead Jesus; supposedly these folks with crucifixes worship a dead Jesus.
• It focuses one’s religion on death and wrath and other morbid things, but Jesus is alive and the cross is now empty and we’re forgiven.
• It’s not historically accurate. (Plus why is Jesus so white?)

While the historical-accuracy argument makes some valid points, with a few ignorant exceptions, everyone who owns and displays a crucifix recognizes it’s a representation of Jesus and his self-sacrificial death. And this death was undone. He’s alive, in heaven, and is coming back. The empty cross is fine, but it’s not as good a reminder of what Jesus did for us. Bluntly, crosses are treated more like a Christian logo: If you see a cross, you know Christians are involved.

And with a few exceptions, most of the people who perpetuate the anti-crucifix angst are really just anti-Catholic.

Yep, that’s what’s at the core of this. People were raised to think of crucifixes as a Catholic thing, and idolatry. That Catholics aren’t true Christians, and don’t follow Jesus so much as idols, Jesus’s mom, and the pope. Nevermind all the Evangelicals who don’t follow Jesus so much as their favorite preachers and writers, or who worship football and Mammon way more. In general, their attitude is when Catholics revere their saints, it’s idolatry and unforgivable blasphemy; when Evangelicals do the very same thing, they didn’t mean it. Grace for our team, none for theirs.

Again, crucifixes are representations. Same as Jesus paintings. Same as Jesus movies. You see a crucifix, you’re reminded Jesus died for you. You see an empty cross, you’re not always reminded of what a Roman cross was actually used for; you just think, “Christianity.” Crosses aren’t bad things, but they’re not deliberate reminders like a crucifix is.

As for bowing and genuflecting and crossing oneself in front of them: Yeah, that’s a Catholic custom; no, Catholics aren’t worshiping the crucifix. They’re worshiping Jesus. The crucifix is just a reminder to worship Jesus. No doubt there are some Catholics who don’t fully understand this, or who think the image is more than a reminder; same as there are Christians who worship bibles. Doesn’t mean we get rid of the bible! It just means we gotta get better at making sure nobody is unknowingly sliding into idolatry.

Christ Pantocrator. Wikimedia

No, I myself don’t own a crucifix. I have Jesus art. Fr’instance an ikon of the Christ Pantocrator of St. Catherine’s Monastery, which is one of my favorites; I used to use it as part of TXAB’s logo. It’s one of the earliest Jesus images in history. And yes, I’m fully aware Jesus doesn’t look like that; that’s a third-century Greco-Egyptian guy, probably based one of the monks whom the artist figured “looks like Jesus” to him. But Jesus still is a first-century Palestinian Jew. Regardless, I think it’s neat art, and a useful reminder of Jesus. Same as a crucifix.

I may yet get a crucifix if I think it’s cleverly done; I’ve seen a few interesting ones. My mom owns a crucifix which used to belong to her mom; it’s got a secret compartment where you can stash your weed holy water, and Mom has some water in it which she got from Israel. No, she doesn’t genuflect in front of it; it’s just a family heirloom. It might remind the family we’re descended from Catholics, but mostly reminds us Jesus saved us. As crucifixes are meant to do.