So much has been said, so much more can and will be said. Here are a few thoughts.
I remember when this was not viewed as a purely religious symbol, but one used to remember the loss and sacrifice of some of those people involved in the tragedy of 9/11.
Christians obviously and rightfully give more meaning and significance to the cross, but even society at large recognized it to be an appropriate memorial.
May God bless and turn to him those affected by the event of that fateful day. May God be glorified through the sadness and pain.
Derrick
14 comments:
Amen.
I have mixed feelings about this one which probably requires more answer to prayer. The cross was an awesome tribute and actually sends chills up my spine. I also must consider those who died and may have not been Christians. The people of many faiths who died in the 9-11 tragedy all need to be remembered in what I consider a proper and respectful manner to their families. A Star of David would have also been a wonderful tribute. This is a tricky issue that is difficult to discern.
In this situation, I do not think that the cross was representing Christianity. People use the sign of the cross as a symbol of respect and sacrifice. To some, the cross means nothing more than a symbol representing death. To others (christians), it means much more.
There is also a cultural issue we need to think about in regard to using the cross. In America, the cross is a historical and long time used symbol of death. If I went to Japan, I would maybe expect a buddah instead of a cross.
The cross at ground zero was equally honoring to every faith. If they were to have created a star of David out of the wreckage, then they would also need to create a symbol to cover every possible faith of every person that died. I would be surprised if any of the families of victims of 9/11 felt dishonored by the use of remains built into a cross on that day.
I agree. It is not dishonor, but honor that should be respected. The internment camp close to lone Pine is a prime example. I see no cross there. That is because these people were forcefully made to live there regardless of their faith. I believe that respect of individual faith is paramount.
Unfortunately, you are also correct on another issue. the cross being a "symbol of death" needs to be realized more as a symbol of life. This part of the cross situation needs adjustment.
1) Considering they used the wreckage of the Twin Towers to display a cross, which, in this case it could be argued had nothing to do with religion per se, it seems unreasonable to expect people of all faiths to be represented. It seems like erecting the cross is the same idea as erecting a giant headstone with RIP on it. A cross is a lot easier to build out of large columns of steel than the Star of David, and the Islamic symbol or a Budhha, or.. fill-in-the blank.
Plus, it seems that when we were children and a family pet died; when you buried him, you put sticks in the form of a cross. I did this before I understood anything about Christianity-it had nothing to do with the faith of my dog.
2)I think Tracy's point has to do with a cultural issue of a foundation of whatever tradition is appropriate in a society. If you live in a largely Budhhist country, it is likely you would see a Budhhist symbol for death/sacrifice, same as if you were in a largely Muslim nation or Christian nation...etc.
--Sidenote: I remember Dennis Prager, a Jew, referring that he had no problem with the use of a cross in a memorial setting.
3) Af far as Manzanar, you don't see a cross, and you don't see a lot of the buildings that were there either. The only thing that proves is that there is no cross.
The memorial there is a more permanent piece of the history reflecting the traditions of the Japanese Americans, whose faith tradition would probably reflect more of their culture. Plus, you did not have nearly the deaths associated with Manzanar. (I think it was only 100 in a year-compared to 3,000 in a day)
4)I'm not sure what you mean by the cross needing to be realized as a symbol of life. I disagree. From a cultural perspective, it seems it primarily represents death and/or sacrifice.
From a theological perspective, it would also seem to represent Christ's death and/or sacrifice. It is the empty tomb that represents life. Without that, there is no hope. Cross=death, Empty tomb=He is risen indeed.
I think the issues are separate-cultural vs. theological. Thoughts? Comments?
The World Trade Center was a place for people of all faiths. I am not at all opposed to a cross being erected there as a tribute. I only add that my experience with Jewish culture ( which has spanned 35 years ) seems to indicate an equality that could only add respect. The extra effort in adding a structure in the form of a Star of David would not be such a difficult task. I'm fairly certain that a volunteer brigade would be more than happy to take on such a task. There are many in the World Trade Center who did not believe in Jesus Christ. I believe that we should respect the respectful cultures whose peoples lost their lives as well. There is no line, so to speak. We trade business stock, buy oil and enery sources, food, and trade goods from Non-Christians. It is only right that we respect their sacrifice as well. My contention is that it adds more compassion to the cross and to those who behold it.
In my opinion, it all comes down to a single question. Was the cross used as a religious symbol for christianity, or a symbol of death? I do not think it was used as a symbol of christianity. If this is true, then there should be no problem with using only the cross. When I drive down HWY 395 and see crosses on the side of the road, I do not think to myself that a Christian must have died. I think that someone died there. It is a marker, a headstone of sorts. I think it is the same with the cross on 9/11.
I think Tracy makes a valid point: If the cross were used as a symbol of the death of the many who worked in (or were trying to get out) the Trade Center building, I did not see anyone who had complained about this.
If it really were an issue of representing all the people of all the different faith traditions who died in the attacks, I think someone would have taken it upon themsleves to go digging in the rubble to make themselves every religious symbol.
I think Tracy is right: It was not a religious statement, it was meant to honor all who died, not just Christians. When I make a marker for when my dogs/cats/lizards died as a child, the cross was meant to recognize them as Christians-it was to remember them.
The attackers did not care the ratio of Jews to Christians it had killed; they did not care if more women than men were killed; they did not care whther more blacks than asians were killed. They were targeting Americans.
I'm sorry, but it seems unreasonable to expect every single "minority" group to be "represented" by a memorial of any sort, particularly one that was an improptu type-thrown up without much thought as to who was feeling left out. Someone will almost always be left out, someone will almost always be offended. I doubt any group, even the atheists, were offfended by this cross honoring the dead.
Derrick
That is why I am a Special Education teacher. I care for those who most of the time are indeed left out.
Special Ed is a special job (no pun intended), but I think they are separate issues.
For you, you care for those left out. The issue of the cross as a symbol of death is different.
Perhaps you could demonstrate that, or argue for the idea that, the cross was used as primarily a religious symbol in this case.
Incindently, I don't think it matters and it doesn't seem to matter with you either because you mention nothing of the other "disenfranchized groups" that also died. You only care about the Christian and Jew. :-)
Derrick
Please do not assume that I only "care about the christian and the jew." I never once said that and it is a very incorrect statement. I mentioned that we should respect "respectful cultures". The Star of David is a practical example of a familiar symbol that most are familiar with. I also did not disagree with Tracy. I offered only my humble opinion. My example of Manzanar where you say that ".. you don't see a cross, and you don't see a lot of buildings that were there either." is absolutely correct. The Twin Towers? I believe we don't see them anymore either. Dennis Pager is but one voice, and may not reflect the sentiment of his his cultre as a whole. To see a cross over a person or peoples who perished or died in any way is fine. I did not argue that. Although not a christian until my mid-twenties, I never erected a cross to put over a dog, cat, or lizard in my entire life. I remember my pets fondly without having done that. :-)
I know you don't care only about the Christian and the Jew-thus the smily face. The problem is once one starts to play the let's-include-everybody game, someone will always get left out.
You say we should "respect respectful cultures" still does not deal with the myriad of micro-cultures that were "left out".
Dennis Prager is but one voice, but I do not think it is that easy to dismiss his comments. After all, if you go that way, then get into a silly-that's just your opinion-oh yeah, well that's just your opinion" discussion and that is unfruitful.
My point in including Dennis Prager, is that his voice is one that represents some religious Jews (and he often makes the point that most Jewish people in the US are Jews by name only-they don't regularly go to synagougue, etc.) and the point that not all Jews had a problem with the cross being at Ground Zero.
I think we are coming to the point where we have to agree to disagree since the discussion seems to be getting bogged down as some of our previous ones have done. :-) It has been fun.
Derrick
Right on... Derrick, I love how you get my thinking cap on. Yeah, we trade stuff, sometimes on a totally different take. Bottom line is that I luv ya man..... I enjoy the ability to trade thoughts with you and still have us give a big hug each and every time we meet. I suppose that may be the true secret to christainity and those who love it. Hey, we are writers in our thoughts more than we are speakers of such thoughts. There is nothing better than raw honesty. Regardless of defferencers in opinion and philosophy, I believe we are bonded in appreciation of such. We both have no hard feelings to each other's opinions. All in your BLOG helps us to grow. Keep it up and The BLOG is awesome!
Dad......
Post a Comment