—— Rectory, Hereford.
THE CROSS AND THE CRUCIFIX.
(Vol. v., p. 39.)
Your space precludes controversy: but the communication in Number 115. from W. DN. requires an explanation from me; which I give the more readily as it may perhaps serve to throw further light on a curious inquiry. A correspondent in a former Number (Vol. iv., p. 422.) questioned the correctness of an assertion by the Hon. MR. CURZON, that "the crucifix was not known before the fourth or fifth century, though the cross was always the emblem of the Christian faith." I ventured to sustain MR. CURZON'S view (Vol. iv., p. 485.) by referring to authorities for the fact, that the idea of ignominy associated with that peculiar form of execution had long prevented the cross from being adopted as a symbol of Christ's passion; that the actual representation of the crucifixion itself was still more repulsive, and much later in its admission into the early churches; that allegory was in consequence resorted to, in order to evade the literal delineation of the Saviour's death, which was typified by a lamb bleeding at the foot of a cross; and that when invention had become exhausted, and inert in the production of these emblems, the Church, in the seventh century at the Quini-sextile, or Council in Trullo, had "ordered that fiction and allegory should cease, and the real figure of the Saviour be depicted on the tree." (The words in Italics are my own, and were not given as a quotation.)
W. DN. in Number 115. (Vol. v., p. 39.) does not question the main conclusion sought to be established, but takes exception to my reference to the Council in Trullo as irrelevant, and says, "should your readers turn to the canons of that council, they would be disappointed at finding nothing about the cross;" whence he infers, that I have been "led into a singular mistake." But the mistake, I apprehend, is on the part of W. DN. himself, who evidently has not read the council in question, else he would have found, so far from its canons containing "nothing about the cross," one, the 73rd, is devoted exclusively to the cross, whilst the 82nd is given to the crucifix. The 73rd canon of the Council in Trullo directs all veneration to be paid to the cross, and prohibits its being any longer depicted in the tesseræ of the floors where this "trophy of our victory," as it is called in the canon, was exposed to desecration from the feet of the congregation. The 82nd canon, in like manner, has direct reference to the crucifix, and its style of design. It alludes to the practice which had theretofore prevailed, of representing Christ as the lamb, pointed to by St. John, which was to take away the sins of the world (John, i. 29.); but as that great work has been accomplished, the council declares that the Church now prefers the grace and truth of him who had fulfilled the law, to those ancient forms and shadows which had been handed down as types and symbols only; and it continues:
"In order, therefore, that what has come to pass should be exhibited before the sight of all by the skill of the artist in colours, we direct that the representation of Christ the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world, shall henceforth be elevated in his human character; and no longer under the old form of a lamb."
The words are these:
"ὡς ἂν οὖν τὸ τέλειον κἂν ταῖς χρωματουργίαις ἐν ταῖς ἁπάντων ὄψεσιν ὑπογράφηται, τὸν τοῦ αἴροντος τὴν ἁμαρτίαν τοῦ κόσμου ἀμνοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμῶν, κατὰ τὸν ἀνθρώπινον χαρακτῆρα καὶ ἐν ταῖς εἰκόσιν ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν ἀντὶ τοῦ παλαιοῦ ἀμνοῦ ἀναστηλοῦσθαι ὁρίζομεν."—Concilium Quinisextum, Can. lxxxii. Concil. Collectio, J. B. MANSI, vol. xi. p. 978.: Floren. 1765.
W. DN. has quoted this canon, not from the original Greek of the council, which I copy above, but from the Latin version given in Labbe, and which is much less close and literal than that of Carranza; and the words "erigi et depingi," which it employs, are a very incorrect rendering of the Greek ἀναστηλοῦσθαι, a term peculiarly appropriate to the elevation of a crucifix.
But that the whole canon has immediate reference to the literal delineation of the mode and manner of Christ's passion, will be apparent from the concluding sentences, which expressly set out that the object of the change which it enjoins is to bring more vividly before our minds the incarnation, suffering, and death of the Saviour, by the full contemplation of the depth of humiliation attendant on it:
"Δι' αὐτοῦ τὸ τῆς ταπεινώσεως ὕψος τοῦ Θεοῦ λόγου κατανοοῦντες, καὶ πρὸς μνήμην τῆς ἐν σαρκὶ πολιτείας τοῦ τε πάθος αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῦ σωτηρίου θανάτου χειραγωγούμενοι, καὶ τῆς ἐντεῦθεν γενομένης τῷ κόσμῳ ἀπολυτρώσεως, κ. τ. λ."—Ib. MANSI, v. xi. p. 979.