Reformed Pub discussion

In book 1 chapter 11 part 7, Calvin says something that seems to me like he is calling crosses in churches idols:

"Of what use, then, were the erection in churches of so many crosses of wood and stone, silver and gold, if this doctrine [the gospel] were faithfully and honestly preached..."

So my question is this: is it idolatry to have a cross in a church? Should the preaching of the Gospel be enough?

My attitude would be that simply having the cross as a reminder isn't idolatry. The traditional practice on Good Friday of prostrating oneself and kissing the cross is, however, heading in that direction

I'm going to do more study in this...the worship of icons in catholic tradition appear very different than placing a cross in a church as a symbolic way to communicate that this place exists to explain the significance of that symbol.

I agree with Michael that the attitude is the key. I don't view a cross or even pictures of Christ as breaking the second commandment and committing adultery. However I do think the argument of Calvin is valid. I do prefer simpler churches and I despise silly evangelicalism and sort of kitschy Jesus on t-shirts. This also ties in with the commandment not to take to Lords name in vain. Mark Driscoll had an excellent sermon series on the 10 commandments. He took up how often the name of the Lord gets used in pop Christian culture, once again "fun" t-shirts as an example of breaking the commandment.

So my bottom line. Crosses and pictures are fine but needs constraints. Remember that Calvins argument against idols is done mostly against Catholic theology, where the argument of idolatry is valid. "Hence it is manifest, that whatever statues are set up or pictures painted to represent God, are utterly displeasing to him, as a kind of insult to his majesty." (1.11.2) So, do I imagine the cross (a simple wooden one) in my church to represent God or convene his presence? No! But it's a reminder to whom I come to worship, it helps with focus. Not that it is essential for the ability to worship but it's an help. Also pictures should never take the place of preaching "His injunction is, that the doctrine common to all should be set forth by the preaching of the word, and the administration of the sacraments- a doctrine to which little heed can be given by those whose eyes are carried to and fro gazing at the idols." (1.11.7)

The biggest problem is not crosses and pictures but that "...the human mind is, so to speak, a perpetual forge of idols." (1.11.8) Anything can thus be turned into an idol. Crosses and pictures can have a danger of becoming idols because they are physical objects.

Thanks for commenting....

I agree with what I'm seeing commented here! I think he is focusing on priorities. He says "so many crosses" versus the gospel being preached. It isn't that having a cross is wrong, but when the objects in the church (and the number of them) becomes more important than good teaching, trouble is on its way.

As I read this section the same questions about crosses came to me. Is Calvin referring to crosses or crucifixes?

Also, I think the bigger theme throughout the chapter is man is incapable of creating religious symbols without, in some way, giving them reverence/worship due only God.

I think that's a good point. Calvin seems to heavily imply that it's not simply Catholic crosses that cause men to stumble, but all crosses.

The problem with statues and so forth in Anglican and Catholic contexts was that worship was directed toward them, and/or they were ritual substitutes that distracted from the proper business of the church. Strictly speaking, there's nothing wrong with decoration or symbols, but it's a consideration of worship that keeps them out of the church.

Very interesting, as I am going through the Ante- Nicene Fathers, they speak out ridgedly against any sort of icon or imagery as idolatry coming from a pagan background. Justin Martyr and Clement of Alexendria specifically. How the Orthodox church tries to tie this practice back to the Apostles I know not.

My viewpoint is that we ought to avoid all symbols other than the ones given to us by Christ: baptism and the Lord's supper. I've come to the understanding that pictures of Christ are entirely wrong. The New Testament contains no descriptions of Him - except for John's description in the Book of Revelation which no one could possibly render into a drawing. Children's picture books with drawings of Christ trivialize Him. We want symbols because we want something we can use on our own level, something we can control -- rather than being content with God's Word alone.

I am strongly iconoclastic in practice. Most especially Zwingli , Huldrich influences me.

Here is a sermon on Zwingli's views: http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo...