No new insigniae are needed to indicate the loyalties and intentions of the proper Right of the West (and of Christendom more generally). The unbroken Cross of the Tradition will do, whereas no other could. In no other sign could we ultimately, truly conquer; in every other sign we should certainly, finally suffer defeat. So nor should any others than the Cross or its many variations be deployed as our banners. Two in particular signify and muster and urge the Church Militant:
Pingback: In Hoc Signo Vinces – Deus Vult! | @the_arv
I can’t argue with that!
Pingback: In Hoc Signo Vinces – Deus Vult! | Reaction Times
I prefer the cross of Santiago and the cross of Saint Andrew. But those are ok.
Will also like to point that the second one is not a cross, but the name of our redeemer.
The chi is a cross.
Well, it is a letter. Or as much of a cross as the letter t.
The symbol used to anoint kings, priests and prophets in ancient Israel was the Old Hebrew tau, which is scribed the way the Greeks scribe chi. So the sign of the cross used to christen Christians – kings, priests, prophets, all of them (eventually) – reads both as T and as X.