The other day a friend, who is not Mormon, asked me why there are no crosses on LDS buildings and why Mormons don’t wear crosses or hang them in their homes. It’s an interesting question considering the prevalence of the cross within Christianity. My friend was correct – the cross is completely absent from Mormon symbology and is practically absent from Mormon discourse as well.
Over the years I’ve heard many reasons for this dearth of the cross within Mormonism, but two reasons seem to stand out pretty consistently:
- Late 19th and early 20th century aversion to all things Catholic within the LDS Church.
- Mormons don’t choose to focus on the dying Christ, of which the cross is the preeminent symbol, but instead choose to focus on the living Christ.
In this post I’d like to focus on the second reason above: that Mormons choose to focus on the living Christ, illustrated by a comment by President Gordon Hinckley in the April 2005 Ensign’s First Presidency Message:
I do not wish to give offense to any of my Christian colleagues who use the cross on the steeples of their cathedrals and at the altars of their chapels, who wear it on their vestments, and imprint it on their books and other literature. But for us, the cross is the symbol of the dying Christ, while our message is a declaration of the Living Christ. …
… The lives of our people must become the most meaningful expression of our faith and, in fact, therefore, the symbol of our worship.
FairMormon also has a write-up about the issue. Whatever the reason for the absence of the cross, it seems that something important is missed when the powerful symbol of the cross is practically ignored. It was stated well in that quote by President Hinckley: “the cross is the symbol of the dying Christ”. Indeed it is, and it is precisely the cross as the method of Jesus’ death which brings incredible power to his atonement, rather than functioning as a device to move the plot from Gethsemane to his resurrection.
In 1 Corinthians 1:18 Paul says:
For the message about the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
In several of his letters Paul speaks of people being ashamed of the cross, offended by the cross, or the cross being foolishness. Why would he do so? What was it about the cross that was so scandalous?
To properly answer these questions one must consider the meaning of the cross to a 1st century Jew. Crucifixion was a brutal, horrific death, intended to inflict incredible pain upon the recipient. Prior to being crucified, the condemned person was first scourged. Tied to a pole in the nude, with their back and buttocks exposed, the first few lashes cut open the skin, exposing muscle and ligaments. Subsequent lashes tore into the muscle tissue, leaving a flayed back that would later rub against the wood of the crossbeam and pole. The condemned was forced to carry their crossbeam to the site of crucifixion, enduring the jeers and insults of the crowd there to heap shame upon them during their death. They then had nails driven through their wrists (some were tied) and feet, and were left to die a slow, painful death. What was particularly degrading was that the crucified person had to also serve as their own executioner, for it was when they finally gave up, no longer able or willing to struggle for air, that they would die. In effect, they weren’t even deemed worthy of an honorable execution by another human, but were left to die on a tree like a condemned beast.
Crucifixion occurred in a public location so as to demonstrate to all around exactly who held ultimate power. It was the death of brigands, traitors, rebels, and slaves (Roman citizens were not crucified but executed by beheading). It was such a shameful death that, under Jewish law, it brought the condemned under God’s curse:
When someone is convicted of a crime punishable by death and is executed, and you hang him on a tree, his corpse must not remain all night upon the tree; you shall bury him that same day, for anyone hung on a tree is under God’s curse.
Deuteronomy 21:22-23
In a world where pagan gods were powerful, not subject to a shameful death like crucifixion, and where the Jewish God condemned those who were crucified, it was truly foolishness for early Christians to insist that their Messiah and Son of God had been crucified. It is reasonable that so many were scandalized by such a claim; however, it is precisely that scandal which makes the cross so powerful as a symbol, for by dying on the cross (rather than some other death), Jesus took the image of God right to where there was darkness, pain, and suffering – to those marginalized by the injustice of the era’s domination systems. He, as the image of God, died the most shameful death of his day; however, in doing so he concentrated all of the Powers[1] of this world – all the hate, enmity, strife, and derision – onto one man. He concentrated the domination systems of Roman justice and Jewish religious law upon one place and one man. He was killed as a traitor and, because he was judged a traitor, he thus suffered the condemnation of his kingdom. In other words, he focused all the domination systems and evils of human nature upon himself, at that one point. Perhaps that is why the author of 1 Peter said:
He himself bore our sins in his body on the cross, so that, free from sins, we might live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed.
1 Peter 2:24
It is the cross that represents the shame of this world. Jesus’ message and kingdom were condemned by the domination systems of his day, allowing the Powers of this world to render judgement upon Jesus’ work. It was the cross that drew all of these Powers together into one place where they could render such a judgement through the death of one person, but ultimately where they, themselves, would be condemned and judged through God’s raising of Jesus to his right hand. The cross drew the Powers together so their bankruptcy could be demonstrated through God’s vindication of Jesus. The cross was this world’s “no”, and the resurrection was God’s “yes”, to Jesus’ Way.[2] It represented the condemnation by this world’s Powers of Jesus’ kingdom building, while Jesus’ vindication by God condemned the kingdoms and methods of those same Powers.
…and let us run with perseverance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus the pioneer and perfecter of our faith, who for the sake of the joy that was set before him endured the cross, disregarding its shame, and has taken his seat at the right hand of the throne of God.
Hebrews 12:1-2
Indeed, the cross represents the dying Christ and was truly a shameful death, but it was through the dying Christ that the Powers of this world were drawn together and crushed – where we were redeemed from their grasp. We cannot have a vindicated Christ without a suffering and dying Jesus.
[1]: Paul frequently speaks of the “powers” of this world, Sin and Death; and when he speaks of “sin” he almost never is referring to a list of things we do wrong, but rather a general power, which we cannot overcome by human action. Basically, he’s referring to the “natural man, which is an enemy to God”.
[2]: Two approachable, wonderful books on this topic are Simply Jesus: A New Vision of Who He Was, What He Did, and Why He Matters by NT Wright, and The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions by Marcus Borg and NT Wright.
Wheat & Tares 
“Mormons don’t choose to focus on the dying Christ, of which the cross is the preeminent symbol, but instead choose to focus on the living Christ.”
I don’t think any non-members attending the Easter Sunday evening concert put on in our stake last year would have got that impression. Whilst the rest of Christendom were celebrating the resurrection, there was very little celebration in the concert, which focused primarily on the atonement and suffering in gethsemane and on the cross. It was very well done, but I was left wanting a great deal more celebration than the brief nod toward the resurrection at the end. Particularly because it was in fact Easter Sunday.
I wish it were true that Mormons “choose to focus on the living Christ,” but I don’t see much evidence of that in correlation meetings, church-sanctioned culture wars or in the three-hour block. I haven’t heard much at all in the last ten years about Christ in an LDS setting. We say a few hagiographic things, but we don’t talk a lot about parables, how to really enact his teachings in our lives, or even the Sermon on the Mount, a text I would think would be absolutely fundamental to LDS belief. Also, we don’t really have much to do with the liturgical calendar either, for similar reasons to the ones you state above regarding Mormon rejection of mainstream Christianity. I don’t know whether embracing the calendar would help us focus more on Christ, but it couldn’t hurt. Beyond a lot of people saying “Christ lives” over the pulpit, I don’t see much discussion of him. In fact, one wonders if it has become more important to Mormons to continually insist Christ lives than to actually enact his teachings in the world. We as a group seem awfully caught up in simply insisting upon things being true rather than really exploring what it might mean to our daily practice if those things really ARE true.
Both of the reasons cited in the OP are contradicted in Michael Reed’s book on the history of the subject. (The second appears to be an after-the-fact reason constructed to explain the situation without reference to its history.)
“Contrary to conventional wisdom, the Mormon disdain for the symbol was more of a late development in Church history [and not from a rejection of early Mormons Protestant roots], emerging at the grass roots around the turn of the 20th century, and was institutionalized in the 1950’s under the direction of President David O. McKay, on grounds that it was a catholic symbol. Prior to this time, many Latter-day Saints (including Church authorities), embraced and promoted the symbol of the cross.” Michael Reed http://www.withoutend.org/banishing-cross-emergence-mormon-taboo/
Reed’s book is reviewed here. https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V46N02_3135d.pdf
It was Charles W. Nibley, Presiding Bishop of the Church, who suggested placing a large concrete cross on Ensign peak, just north of Salt Lake City. https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/salt-lake-city/3-ensign-peak-historical-preview I read that the proposal was rejected because of anti-Catholic sentiment.
See also article at https://www.deseretnews.com/article/705328913/Mormons-and-the-cross.html
According to Michael Reed’s research, Protestant Christians at the time of the early church were not necessarily using crosses much, as they were seen as a Catholic thing. Protestant use of the cross comes later, and Mormons were already isolated at that time. Ironically, Mormons pick up an anti-Catholic refusal to use the cross later as a reaction to religious competition from Catholics in Utah, leading to the traditional hostility and then non-use one sees today, despite use of the cross in the early Mormon church.
The weird relationship between Protestants and Mormons about the cross then stems from a lack of historical knowledge on the part of both about their own denominations.
I liked his book. I use the cross. I agree about it’s importance. I wish we would use it more. It’s heartening that there is some use, such as the shape of the Rome temple.
I think we try to focus on Christ, but we have failed to grasp the overall message, mainly because of our hang ups about grace and our missing the message of Jesus. A traditional LDS perspective is: 1. God expects perfect obedience to his laws, anything short will not achieve exhalation; 2. We must try our very best to perfectly obey, when we don’t we can rely on the atonement to help make up the difference. While this message is better than salvation being impossible, it is not usually a cause for celebration. Even conservative evangelicals have a theology that salvation comes from accepting Jesus and then abiding in his love (and everyone else is going to hell) and not through obedience.. Is salvation through obedience really the good news? My take on Jesus a radical rejection of institutional government and religious power structures and a call for a change in social structure and religious practice, going from a power structure protecting elites to an inclusive society and from a religion focused on obedience and outward observance to a simple focus on loving God and loving our neighbor. The powers that be killed him for this, but he overcame their attempts to silence him and came back to life and gives us the promise of setting up this kind of society and religion on the earth. The cross is a symbol of the powers that be trying to silence Jesus and him overcoming them. It’s an exciting message and cause for celebration. Easter just seems to remind us of all the ways we’re falling short and makes us feel guilty that we made Jesus suffer for these shortcomings. We used to hear a lot of things in General Conference like “I wonder how many drops were shed for me.” The problem is that this worked when this atonement theology was largely accepted in the Christian world and our theology was seen as progressive (salvation for the dead). Many Christian traditions have moved away from this kind of atonement theology entirely. Now people are asking questions like “why would God demand perfect obedience to his laws?” “Why would God create someone gay and then demand a life of celibacy?” “Why wouldn’t God just love and accept me the way I am right now?” and “Why would God demand a blood sacrifice of his son to appease a need for perfect obedience?” I don’t think we have very good answers to these questions.
felixfabulous, I’m fairly sure auto-correct did it to you, but I got a charge out of “exhalation” in place of “exaltation.” I’m going to do some deep breathing while I ponder what it could mean if it had been intentional. 🙂
@hedgehog: I have noticed the same thing, where, on Easter, wards I’ve attended seem to either focus on the suffering of Jesus to the exclusion of his resurrection, or, more frequently, focus on his resurrection at the expense of his suffering. I wonder if a lack of a liturgical calendar, which would bring Good Friday and an Easter Vigil into the mix, would help allow air time for both aspects of Easter.
@JR and @wanderer: Thanks for mentioning Reed’s research. The FairMormon link I provided mentions it briefly, but I think pointing it out is a good idea. Thank you. While I appreciate Reed’s research, at this point the exclusion of the cross is a *conscious choice* because Mormons aren’t isolated anymore, and leaders continue to give various reasons for continuing the practice of avoiding the cross as a symbol (see https://www.lds.org/ensign/2011/07/the-meaning-of-the-cross-for-latter-day-saints?lang=eng). Perhaps it’ll change, and I don’t intend to cast aspersions on whether it is right or not, only to mention that a significant aspect of Jesus’ work is missed when the cross is glossed over.
@felixfabulous: One of the things I appreciate in Christianity is the diversity of ideas regarding Jesus’ Atonement. I think some of that has been occurring in LDS circles as well, though there is a less rich tradition of doing so. I think that is changing, though.
I was going to mention reeds article and book, but Jr beat me to it. I read this years and years ago and it had a huge influence on me. In some ways it was the start of my truly wanting to understand the role of Jesus Christ as He defined it, rather than how Mormon history/culture defines it.
I also think this topic is one of the reasons the bom doesn’t speak it to me. I want to hear Christ, and there’s too many people, prophets, opinions in the Bom between the purity of Christ and me.
Cody, Hedgehog, I think another reason for the common LDS Easter emphasis on suffering rather than resurrection is that our hymnal is loaded with “sacrament hymns” emphasizing the former while we have very few Easter hymns emphasizing the latter. This is in significant contrast to the other Christian hymnals I’m familiar with. It leaves many of our ward volunteer musicians without knowledge of a lot of resurrection/Easter morning repertoire. Also much of the latter is more difficult to sing, and for many of our volunteer “organists” to play. But there is a lot out there that our largely untrained, volunteer musicians could do, if they knew how to find it, and had a budget. I prefer going to Easter services elsewhere.
I really like this post. As a young adult, I really looked down on the depictions of Jesus hanging on the cross in the cathedrals of Europe. I didn’t like how weak and effeminate Jesus looked. I didn’t like the feelings I got from those depictions of suffering in those dark cathedrals — it was like a dungeon. The best their images conjured for me was a feeling of peace — that the suffering was done, over. In contrast, I loved our strong, glorious Mormon Jesus who overcame all and was going to come down from heaven with power and glory and “healing in his wings”. It seemed like a much more optimistic and forward-looking way to believe, full of hope and anticipation. I really felt like the cross was a symbol of subjection and subjugation, and that it was actually used that way by the nobles and clergy in the middle ages to keep the people down — “see how Jesus suffered? Go thou and do likewise, and don’t complain”.
As a more mature adult, I can see how powerful a symbol the cross can be, and I respect it much more. But the power of symbols is in the heart of the observer, and personally I haven’t grown up with the cross being associated with my spiritual growth. It’s definitely part of a different tradition than mine, and I don’t think I’ll ever completely shake it’s association from those feelings I had in Europe.
By the way, I recently visited Sagrada Familia in Barcelona, and my feeling there was dramatically different (of course, it’s quite modern). I’m convinced Gaudi was inspired and had the Spirit of God about him as he was working on that building. Even with a bajillion tourists swarming the place, I felt I was in a house truly dedicated to God. Interestingly, the cross is used there, but it’s not prominent.
Another great narrative, Cody. My compliments. For whatever it’s worth I stumbled across a REALLY great book at a FAIR Conference a few years ago titled “Banishing the Cross: The Emergence of a Mormon Taboo”. I was stunned (and pleasantly surprised) to learn how prevalent the wearing of, and the display of the Cross was in early Mormonism. I’ve grown to love the Cross – and have a beautiful, hand -tooled turquoise cross hanging in my car.
BrotherSky: I just wanted to compliment you on your comment – and say (if not yell at the top of my lungs) Amen, Amen and Amen!!!
This essay implies that because we no longer have the cultural connection to Crucifixion that the cross no longer holds the same meaning for us.
@JR–auto correct it was. Thanks for the catch.
Stephen, in some ways isn’t that true though? For example does the youth curriculum put the same amount of attention on the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ as it does family roles?
ReTx — I think so. It just hit me that it may not be possible for the cross to mean to us what it meant to Paul (for example).
That said, I think I like it. I guess I’m more of a Charles W. Nibley fan …
I lived in Italy. Catholics definitely focus on Christ’s suffering at easter. The passion week. Passion means suffering. Lots of guys dress up as Jesus and walk down the street with fake blood all over them, with everyone in town following, usually wailing.
Passion Week/Holy Week is not Easter. It is Mormons who may view the week before Easter Day (if at all) as part of Easter. Generally, in the liturgical calendar Easter begins with the vigil on Saturday night and the focus on suffering is ended. Eastertide then generally extends from Easter Sunday to Pentecost. What was observed in Italy likely happened during Passion Week and not on Easter or during Eastertide. Those Italians might be quite surprised to learn that anyone thought that what they were doing had to do with Easter rather than the Passion.
Since the comments have touched on exactly how we celebrate Christ’s sacrifice and resurrection, I have to ask: Why do we refuse to move General Conference by one measly week when it conflicts with Easter??? To me that speaks volumes. On any given Sunday we are much more likely to hear that this is Christ’s church, led by Christ’s apostles, and that the apostles should be heeded in all things. Actual New Testament happenings – hardly ever.
When my faith crisis hit I did two things. I vowed to attend another church’s Easter services instead of General Conference when the two conflict. And I started wearing a small cross. It helps steady me on my journey.
My son must have had the cross-is-bad party line delivered in Primary because he asked me, “Why do we have a cross in our house? It’s a symbol of Jesus’ death, and why do we want to remember that?” My response was that it’s similar to taking the sacrament every week. But he wasn’t listening, because he wasn’t really asking.
Crucifixes I’ll admit I have a hard time with. But crosses I think are beautiful. In our time and place we are so far removed from the practice of crucifixion and much more familiar with the cross’s use as a symbol of faith, and that is what it means to me. It makes it just a little easier to keep my sacramental commitment to “always remember him.” Plus, we are not vampires.
Our ‘former saints’ of the early centuries AD used the cross as a symbol of Christian identification….when I was in the Roman catacombs there are plenty of crosses and these appeared to be worship areas as well as burial ones.
I for one have no problem with the cross as a Christian symbol ….as a LDS it reminds me of the nexus of all Christs suffering as a wonderful gift to me, both physically and spiritually.
This was excellent. In my church I grew up hearing the words “ lay your sorrows and sins at the foot of the cross “ in every service. I don’t remember ever seeing a cross hanging in our house. In my 37 years of marriage to a Catholic we have had a small wooden cross hanging in every room usually above a door. In the bedrooms the cross is above every bed. On Palm Sunday a palm branch is placed behind the cross through Easter services. They are such a part of every room that I realized I was hardly seeing them anymore. This post reminded me to take a good look and to remember why I am actually here on this earth. And to be thankful for it.
But the cross has not disappeared from LDS Hymns.
In addition to the 8 sacrament hymns that refer to it, we still have 2 hymns explicitly acknowledging it as a standard symbol of Christianity: Onward, Christian Soldiers (“With the cross of Jesus Going on before”) and We Are All Enlisted (“Rally round the standard of the cross”) – both adopted (the first originally from the Anglican church for a procession literally following a cross, the second from one of Wm Bradbury’s Sunday School hymnals and using a common Pentecostal phrase). Perhaps Correlation did not complete its work! 🙂
We also still have 3 hymns using the term analogically (as in “take up your cross” ):
Count Your Blessings (“Does the cross seem heavy you are called to bear?”)
Be Still, My Soul (“With patience bear thy cross of grief or pain.”)
Nearer, My God, to Thee (“E’en though it be a cross That raiseth me.”)
I see no reason to avoid the cross as a symbol of Christianity, but Cody is right that some “leaders continue to give various reasons for continuing the practice of avoiding the cross as a symbol” — often quoting earlier leaders who were either anxious to distinguish the LDS Church from Catholicism or ignorant of the history of LDS use of the cross as a symbol and, perhaps, without thought on the hymns we sing continuing to use it as a symbol.
As for my thoughts about the importance of the cross. About 45 years ago my grandparents sent my sister a Greek Orthodox cross for her birthday. I asked my mother what she was going to do with it. Understanding my question as a teaching moment where she could teach me more she responded there is nothing wrong with the cross. It is the worshiping of the cross which becomes the problem instead of the sacrifice of the Savior. Just for perspective on the cross and religious view points one could watch “Sophia” on Amazon Prime.
Sorry Cody but the first Christians never used the cross It was a symbol of execution The most they ever did was draw fish to represent Christ Why not celebrate Lent which has no early Christian roots ? Why do we have to go imitating others The symbol of our faith is the life we lead Others should see Christ in us by the good works we do for others not by hanging symbols of execution around our necks
@Andy Hardwick: there’s no need to be offended. As I stated in the OP, the cross would have been a repellent symbol to early Christians. It was scandalous that the Son of God was executed via crucifixion. That is precisely why the cross can be such a deeply meaningful symbol. It was world-shattering to Jesus’ disciples and we should take the time to consider what it meant for the Son of God to die in such a way. Why not be born into a Roman family and be beheaded? Why be executed at all rather than just die of old age? There is meaning in the symbol beyond your scoffing that people hang “symbols of execution around their necks”.
You also draw a false dichotomy when you suggest that one should either do good works or wear a cross. You do realize that one can do both, right? And many of us do appreciate Lent which, despite not being directly part of earliest Christianity, was influenced by early Christian practices of catechumens fasting prior to baptism at Easter.
I am a bit troubled by the insistence of some Mormons that the cross is a symbol of death and ignominious execution. It smacks too much of the insistence of some others that the inverted pentagram – a prominent symbol on the Nauvoo temple – is a satanic symbol. The meaning of a symbol seems largely dependent upon the observer and what he (or his subculture) chooses to make it mean.
I mentioned above the continuing use of the symbol of the cross in LDS Hymns. I did not then count or include those LDS hymns that identify the cross but call it the “tree.” See, at least:
Reverently and Meekly Now: “With my body on the tree I have ransomed even thee.”
Joseph L. Townsend, 1849-1942 [LDS hymntext writer; LDS tune]
O Lord of Hosts: “Salvation purchased on that tree For all who seek thy face.”
Andrew Dalrymple, b. 1817 [text in LDS hymnal since 1871; LDS tune]
O Thou, Before the World Began: “Now let it pass the years between And view thee bleeding on the tree: My Lord, my God, who dies for me.” William H. Turton, 1856–1938 [Anglican text, LDS tune]
The connection between the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden and the Cross is quite old. At least “The Eastern Orthodox Church has traditionally understood the tree of life in Genesis as a prefiguration of the Cross, which humanity could not partake of until after the incarnation, death and resurrection of Jesus.” Wikipedia It seems that connection has also appeared for a long time in western Christian writings. It is also thoroughly consistent with the Book of Mormon and Lehi’s/Nephi’s visions of the Tree of Life and the explanation in 1 Nephi of the “condescension of God” and the desirability of partaking of the fruit.
For at least some Christians the Cross is a representation of the Tree of Life made accessible through the Atonement of Christ. I cannot understand why any Mormons should think they have any more right to declare an absolute, negative symbolic meaning of the Cross than others have to declare the Nauvoo Temple satanic because of its inverted pentagrams. If the Cross is a negative symbol for some because of whatever preconceived notions they may have or whatever negative cultural associations it has for them, they should not use it. However, that is very different from purporting that it has the same negativism for others, or that our own LDS scriptures and hymns do not support seeing the Cross as an implementation of the concept of a Tree of Life in Genesis and as a meaningful symbol of the same concepts identified as the Tree of Life in 1 Nephi. Seen that way, the Cross is a symbol of life and not death.
Such a great post and great comments. I really am thankful for W&T postings and comments – they feed me spiritually. Thank you all again so much.
I think Mormon aversion to the cross is symptomatic of our religious arrogance and spiritual superiority complex. WE are the true church! WE have the correct teachings! OUR version of the gospel is the true path! WE are the happiest!
Where I live Mormons are a vast minority and the cross is very prevalent. So many people we know of different faiths/non-faiths are such good people and do such good things.
That’s the real issue.
Even my TBM wife thinks that all churches are good and equally capable of bringing good people back to God. Or does that view, that level of nuance, disqualify her as TBM?