What all of this [history of the cross in Mormonism] tells me is that there is often a very unfortunate result when we feel compelled to make up some sort of explanation for why we are different from someone else that has no basis in history. To point out that Latter-day Saints do not use a particular symbol in the same way as other religions is not an explanation but merely an observation. In addition, a Latter-day Saint may explain why he or she personally does not use or wear crosses, but this is a completely different question from why the Latter-day Saint church and tradition historically did not adopt the cross in its architecture or in personal adornment. If we are seeking to explain the latter, then we must use historical sources. If we are seeking to explain the former, I simply suggest we proceed with caution because the results can be disastrous.Read the entire thing here.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Summa Theologica, which is the title of a work by the Italian Catholic philosopher Thomas Aquinas. Their latest article is on Mormonism's relationship to the Cross, that is as an ornamental symbol. The author does a great job looking at the history and giving advice on how to approach those wondering why they don't see Mormons wearing crosses or crosses on our meetinghouses. An excerpt: