In our brief study of the perversion of the ordinance of baptism, we found frequent reference to the "sign of the cross." This superstition, which is still retained in the Catholic Church, was not confined to church ceremonies, but was connected with almost every act of life. Says Gibbon:—
"In all occasions of danger and distress, it was the practice of the primitive Christians to fortify their minds and bodies by the sign of the cross, which they used, in all their ecclesiastical rites, in all the daily occurrences of life, as an infallible preservative against every species of spiritual or temporal evil."—Decline and Fall, chap. SO, paragraph 13.
That this is not a prejudiced statement appears from the following from Mosheim, whose Christianity no one will question:—
"In the sign of the cross, they supposed there was great efficacy against all sorts of evils, and particularly against the machinations of evil spirits; and therefore no one undertook anything of much moment, without first crossing himself."—Ecclesiastical History, book 1. cent. 3, part 2, chap. 4, sec. 5.
Tertullian says that this was the custom in his day, and both he and Justin Martyr taught that the sign of the cross had great efficacy, and, was absolutely essential. The reader will remember the extract from Tertullian, in that which he claims that the Israelites conquered the Amalekites, not because Moses prayed, but because he exhibited the form of the cross.
For this custom, as for all others, there was, of course, no difficulty in finding a valid "reason." But we find that, like all other superstitions or abominable practices that were foisted upon the Christian church, it had its origin in heathenism. Says Dr. Killen:—
"It is a curious fact that the figure of the instrument of torture on which our Lord was put to death, occupied a prominent place among the symbols of the ancient heathen worship. From the most remote antiquity the cross was venerated in Egypt and Syria; it was held in equal honor by the Buddhists of the East; and, what is still more extraordinary, when the Spaniards first visited America, the well-known sign was found among the objects of worship in the idol temples of Anahuac. It is also remarkable that, about the commencement of our era, the pagans were wont to make the sign of a cross upon the forehead in the celebration of some of their sacred mysteries. A satisfactory explanation of the origin of such peculiarities in the ritual of idolatry can now scarcely be expected; but it certainly need not excite surprise if the early Christians were impressed by them, and if they viewed them as so many unintentional testimonies to the truth of their religion. The disciples displayed, indeed, no little ingenuity in their attempts to discover the figure of a cross in almost every object around them. They could recognize it in the trees and the flowers, in the fishes and the fowls, in the sails of a ship and the structure of the human body; and if they borrowed from their heathen neighbors the custom of making a cross upon the forehead, they would of course be ready to maintain that they thus only redeemed the holy sign from profanation. Some of them were, perhaps, prepared, on prudential grounds, to plead for its introduction. Heathenism was, to a considerable extent, a religion of bowings and genuflections; its votaries were,, ever and anon, attending to some little rite or form; and, because of the multitude of these diminutive acts of outward devotion, its ceremonial was at once frivolous and burdensome. When the pagan passed into the church, he, no doubt, often felt, for a time, the awkwardness of the change; and was frequently on the point of repeating, as it were automatically, the gestures of his old superstition. It may, therefore, have been deemed expedient to supersede more objectionable forms by something of a Christian complexion; and the use of the sign of the cross here probably presented itself as an observance equally familiar and convenient. But the disciples would have acted more wisely had they boldly discarded all the puerilities of paganism; for credulity soon began to ascribe supernatural virtue to this vestige of the repudiated worship. As early as the beginning of the third century, it was believed to operate like a charm; and it was accordingly employed on almost all occasions by many of the Christians."—Ancient Church, period 2, sec. 1, chap. 3, paragraph 5.
What Dr. Killen says on this point leaves very little room for comment. Of course it must be understood that when Dr. Killen speaks of "the disciples" seeking to find the sign of the cross in everything in nature, he does not mean those who in the New Testament are called disciples, but the professed Christians of a later day.
On the use of images in connection with the sign of the cross Neander has the following:—
"The use of religious images among the Christians, did not proceed from their ecclesiastical, but from their domestic life. In the intercourse of daily life, the Christians saw themselves everywhere surrounded by objects of heathen mythology, or by such as shocked their moral and Christian feelings. Similar objects adorned the walls of chambers, the drinking vessels, and the signet rings (on which the heathen had constantly idolatrous images), to which, whenever they pleased, they could address their devotions; and the Christians naturally felt themselves obliged to replace these objects, which wounded their moral and religious feelings, with others more suited to those feelings. Therefore, they gladly put the likeness of a shepherd, carrying a lamb upon his shoulders, on their cups, as a symbol of the Redeemer, who saves the sinners that return to him, according to the parable in the gospel. And Clement of Alexandria says, in reference to the signet rings of the Christians, 'Let our signet rings consist of a dove (the emblem of the Holy Ghost); or a fish, or a ship sailing towards heaven (the emblem of the Christian church, or of individual Christian souls); or a lyre (the emblem of Christian joy); or an anchor (the emblem of Christian hope); and he who is a fisherman, let him remember the apostle, and the children who are dragged out from the water; for those men ought not to engrave idolatrous forms, to whom the use of them is forbidden; those can engrave no sword and no bow, who seek for peace; the friends of temperance cannot engrave drinking cups.' And yet, perhaps, religious images made their way from domestic life into the churches, as early as the end of the third century, and the walls of the churches were painted in the same way. . . . It is probable that the visible representation of the cross found its way very early into domestic and ecclesiastical life. This token was remarkably common among them; it was used to consecrate their rising and their going to bed, their going out and their coming in, and all the actions of daily life; it was the sign which Christiaus made involuntarily, whenever anything of a fearful nature surprised them. This was a mode of expressing, by means perceptible to the senses, the purely Christian idea, that all the actions of Christians, as well as the whole course of their life, must be sanctified by faith in the crucified Jesus, and by dependence upon him, and that this faith is the most powerful means of conquering all evil, and preserving oneself against it. But here also again, men were apt to confuse the idea and the token which represented it, and they attributed the effects of faith in the crucified Redeemer to the outward sign, to which they ascribed a supernatural, sanctifying, and preservative power; an error of which we find traces as early as the third century."—Rose's Neander, pp. 183,184.
And that is as early as there is any evidence of a growing regard for the Sunday festival. The worship of images and the observance of the Sunday festival came into the church about the same time; but images were regarded with reverence a long time before Sunday was regarded as a sacred day.
No comments:
Post a Comment