Christian Cross: Secular & Patriotic Symbol, Not a Religious Symbol

Is the Latin, Christian cross a religious symbol or a patriotic, secular symbol? According to a federal judge in California, the government has the power and authority to transform the Christian cross into a secular symbol simply by including it in a monument which the government claims is secular and patriotic. Suddenly, *BOOM!*, the cross is secular rather than religious. It's almost like magic, though strangely the judge doesn't cite the power of magic in his ruling. At least resorting to magic would have provided a more sensible and intelligible decision than what he ultimately wrote.

Christians in San Diego have been fighting for years to preserve their giant Mt. Soledad cross and war memorial. After many attempts to deny that a giant cross endorses religion, and late additions of non-Christian symbols that are dwarfed by the cross, the courts had enough. In 2004 a federal judge ordered them to remove the cross and "comply with the laws of our great country instead of trying to find sneaky ways to get around them to pander to a certain group or to satisfy an out-of-state group's religious agenda."

Instead of obeying the ruling, they found another way get around the law by having Congress buy the land for the federal government, thus starting the legal process all over again (because now there is a new plaintiff). This time, Christian Nationalists found a more sympathetic judge who could be convinced that Christian symbols are secularized when adopted by the government.

"The court finds the memorial at Mt. Soledad, including its Latin cross, communicates the primarily nonreligious messages of military service, death and sacrifice," wrote U.S. District Judge Larry Alan Burns in his decision filed Tuesday. "As such, despite its location on public land, the memorial is constitutional."

In his ruling Burns agreed that the cross is the preeminent symbol of Christianity, but said "it does not follow the cross has no other meaning or significance." He pointed to the exhibits on public beaches, such as Santa Monica's, where the group Veterans for Peace uses crosses in the sand to represent U.S. service members who died in Iraq.

The cross is also displayed "along with numerous purely secular symbols in an overall context that reinforces its secular message," the judge said.

Although walls with other religious symbols, such as the Star of David, have been added to the Mt. Soledad display, they are dwarfed by the large cross, [David Blair-Loy, legal director of the ACLU of San Diego and Imperial Counties] said. "It is a 43-foot cross on one of the highest points in San Diego," he said. "If the cross is not a religious symbol, I don't know what is."

Source: LA Times

Tiny secular and non-Christian symbols are inconsequential next to a giant cross - there is no mistaking the fact that the cross is far more important in this memorial. If anything, the presence of tiny non-Christian symbols does even more to convey the idea that Christianity is being privileged and favored by the government.

It's true that the preeminence of the Latin Cross as a symbol of Christianity does not have to automatically exclude it from having other meanings, but Judge Larry Alan Burns doesn't cite any other alleged meanings. The use of crosses to represent fallen soldiers is done for Christian reasons — it goes back to the use of crosses to mark the graves of Christians. Rather than an example of secular uses of the cross, this is actually an example of Christian arrogance in assuming that others are Christian themselves.

Furthermore, even if we had solid examples of secular uses of the Latin Cross, the admitted preeminence of this symbol as one of Christianity means that it is normally viewed as representing Christianity. Any attempt to use the cross outside of Christianity would require a very specific disclaimer. Who, for example, would use a Latin Cross in a corporate logo and be surprised if people assumed the company were Christian? Who would erect a giant cross in their yard and not expect passers-by to assume that it was done to communicate a Christian message?

I'm not sure that Christians should like this decision at all. If it's so easy for the Latin Cross to not be a symbol of Christianity, doesn't this mean that I can do whatever I want to a cross without it being desecration? No Christian can claim that it's offensive or sacrilegious if I freeze a cross in a jar of urine. If I take a communion wafer and drive a nail through it, but do so in a secular context, that can't be offensive anymore, can it? If Christian symbols can become completely secularized so easily, claims of blasphemy, desecration, and sacrilege would become almost impossible.

What would happen if atheists decided to adopt the Latin Cross as their symbol? Take the cross and add things to it depending on which particular group you belong to: the cross plus an "A" for one group, the cross plus an atom for another group, and so forth. If it's true that the cross can be secular and doesn't have to be Christian, then Christians can't complain, can they? They can't say that we're adopting "their" symbol unless they reject Burns' decision. Which do you suppose they would choose?

But the Latin cross originated as a symbol of the Christian faith. How can this symbol provide solace to families of veterans from all different faiths or no faith at all? How is the central symbol of the Christian faith secular?

The veterans who this memorial stands for fought for a country that would not exclude them based on their religious beliefs. This ruling dishonors veterans of other faiths or no faith by allowing the government to make a particular religion’s symbol a national symbol.

Source: Americans United

Of course it's disrespectful for the government to sponsor a memorial that is ostensibly for citizens of all religions, but is specifically designed to promote and endorse just one religion. Christian Nationalists aren't interested in being respectful of all religions equally or in treating all religions equally, though. Christian Nationalists are simply out to get government endorsement of the primacy of Christianity in whatever context or format they can. In their understanding of America as a "Christian Nation," only Christianity really matters. Promoting Christianity is promoting patriotism because there can't be any "true" American patriotism outside of Christianity.