A lo que se ve, el garabato en el aire que trazan apresuradamente algunos jugadores de futbol procedentes mayormente del ámbito cultural católico crea crispación en algunos sitios. Lo cuenta la Wiki, que ha creado una entrada para Artur Boruc (foto):
Boruc makes the sign of the cross before the start of every game as part of a good-luck ritual. [1] On August 25, 2006 he was cautioned by the Strathclyde Police for a breach of the peace for making gestures in front of Rangers fans before a game earlier that year. According to the Sunday Herald, «police reports highlighted three hand gestures made by 26-year-old Boruc … a V sign at the crowd, another obscene gesture at the crowd and a blessing«. The gestures were not caught on video and the caution was issued on the basis of police reports and witness statements. [2]
According to a cross-party working group of the Scottish Parliament, «the sign of the cross in itself is an expression of the Roman Catholic faith; however, using it to alarm, upset or provoke others might be a breach of the peace at common law.» [3]. The Procurator Fiscal said Boruc’s actions, «in the charged atmosphere of an Old Firm match», had «provoked alarm and crowd trouble [among the Rangers fans]».
No sé que pensar. Parece ser que hubo algo más que la señal de la cruz. Imagino también que esto está relacionado con el conflicto histórico de católicos-protestantes. La Reforma eliminó, el recitado de oraciones repetitivas –parecido de alguna forma a los ensalmos de los encantamientos- y los gestos, vestidos, imágenes a favor de la mera palabra. Entre las cosas descartadas imagino que estaría la señal de la cruz, de ahí el rebote de esta especie de “angry muslims” ante el gesto.
Aquí cuentan una anécdota parecida.
Pues no me quiero imaginar si ganan una copa y la ofrecen en la iglesia de su pueblo a la Virgen o al Cristo, van todos detenidos y con grilletes.
Je, pues yo que soy ateo y aun me santiguo (por inercia) ante ciertos eventos….
Y es que la educacion cristiana pesa en la educacion de uno, y lo bueno es que puedes elegir si seguir siendo catolico (o evangelista o lo que sea) sin que te condenen a muerte.
Eso si, me haria musulman solo por el placer de hacer apostasia de esa mierda religion…. y si no viviese en Iran, claro.
Hombre, «parece ser» no, porque lo confirmaron en su momento en varias fuentes: a V sign at the crowd, another obscene gesture. Y, además del «gesto obsceno», imagino que sabrán qué significa esa V en el Reino Unido…
Pues no había pensado eso. Dentro de poco como le ofrezcan algo a la Almudena o la Moreneta se arma un escándalo.
Syme, el asunto es si también el signo de la cruz se consideró ofensivo.
Hombre, yo personalmente lo dudo. Más bien pienso que, siendo amonestado por la combinación de gestos obscenos, algún medio colocaría la noticia de que fue por santiguarse. Es más, recuerdo que algunos medios, al darse a conocer la noticia, no informaron de dichos gestos obscenos, achacándolo sin contrastar la noticia al gesto religioso en cuestión.
Aquí están las prevenciones de los protestantes contra el signo de la cruz:
On the Sign of the Cross
By Kevin D. Johnson on Church History
From Christianity Today:
“The spiritual weight of the sign has always been the same,” Andreopoulos writes. “In texts from Tertullian and Origen to Kosmas and Aitolos, it is a blessing, a prayer, a proclamation of the Christian identity, a living mystery, and an acceptance of the role that God has given us.”
“Whether I sign myself silently or with the invocation [of ‘in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit’],” writes Ghezzi, “it helps me to look beyond the mundane things I have to do every day … and focus on God and on the greater part of reality, the part that is spiritual and invisible.”
Christians of a variety of traditions have begun to discover the beauty and meaning of this ancient act. Protestant objections to the sign of the cross are seldom articulated beyond the vague dismissal, “It’s a Catholic thing,” but Martin Luther prescribed the sign of the cross in his Small Catechism, and the sign has long been part of Episcopal and Lutheran practice. As both Andreopoulos and Ghezzi show, the sign of the cross is hardly a uniquely Catholic practice; it has deep roots in the early and Eastern churches and clear ties to Scripture.
After reading these two books, this previously ignorant Protestant, for one, has decided to introduce the sign of the cross into his daily prayer, as a link with the early church, a sign of God’s claim on me, and a reminder of the mystery of the Trinity.
Whether we practice it or not, the sign of the cross is one manifestation of how physical—how embodied—worship really is. It can be as simple as raising our hands during a praise song, sitting up straight when the first few chords of a hymn are struck, or closing our eyes and folding our hands to pray. All of these motions have become ingrained in our body language of worship. Like the sign of the cross, they contain great potential for physical demonstration and remembrance of a deeper meaning—and also great potential for becoming so routine that eventually we do them out of mere habit—or worse, for show.
From centuries ago, Chrysostom admonishes us to mean what we do. “You should not just trace the cross with your finger,” he wrote, “but you should do it in faith.”
Por que te crees que ya no se va a celebrar los titulos a la basilic de Mercé o a Montserrat que inocente eres AMG para no herir sensiblidades