A question on iconography

[Matrona]

Violation of one canon of one rather questionable local council cannot render something heretical. It cannot even render it "uncanonical" except in relation to that single local council.

That's true. IIRC, there's a dead canon that prohibits bringing a dog into an Orthodox church; if one is brought in, the church must be re-consecrated. But I know an Orthodox monastery where they have several dogs, one of whom lays at the nuns' feet during Divine Liturgy.

And if you've ever looked at The Rudder, we've got enough dead canons to sink a battleship. (No pun intended. )

 

[Eusebios]

[Mod Hat on] Please let this serve as a reminder to all particpants in this thread that disagreement is allowed and perhaps even expected as we are all human beings. However, we need all realize that as human beings, created in God's image, we owe each other respect, even when we disagree. Therefore, please avoid ad-hominem attacks in your posts. They will not be tolerated.Please carry on in this light.[/hat]
Eusebios-Sr. Moderator-TAW

 

[Maximus]

That's true. IIRC, there's a dead canon that prohibits bringing a dog into an Orthodox church; if one is brought in, the church must be re-consecrated. But I know an Orthodox monastery where they have several dogs, one of whom lays at the nuns' feet during Divine Liturgy.

And if you've ever looked at The Rudder, we've got enough dead canons to sink a battleship. (No pun intended. )

Besides that, violation of a canon makes a thing uncanonical, not heretical.

Unless I am mistaken (and that's not impossible), heresy involves errors in doctrine, not violations of canon law.

I am not a big fan of attempts at portraying God the Father in art of any kind. But what I object to are bald assertions that all such portrayals are heretical.

It just strikes me as surpassing strange, if depictions of the Father are "heretical," that the Russian Church has so many such icons - obviously painted by Orthodox iconographers of considerable talent - and some of which are miraculous.

If it is true, as some have asserted, that the teaching of the Church is clearly against icons like these, then why is it the Russians don't seem to know it?

And why is it no one here, formally trained or otherwise, can produce one iota of evidence that the Church as a whole has declared iconic depictions of God the Father heretical?

I think I know the answer: they aren't heretical. The mass of supposed tradition opposing such icons just doesn't exist.

 

[Matrona]

Besides that, violation of a canon makes a thing uncanonical, not heretical.

Unless I am mistaken (and that's not impossible), heresy involves errors in doctrine, not violations of canon law.

I am not a big fan of attempts at portraying God the Father in art of any kind. But what I object to are bald assertions that all such portrayals are heretical.

Quite correct, I think.

The assertion that God the Father actually is an old man would be properly termed heretical. A depiction of Him as such, however, certainly wouldn't be heretical, provided that it was able to be understood as a symbolic depiction.

 

[Maximus]

Quite correct, I think.

The assertion that God the Father actually is an old man would be properly termed heretical. A depiction of Him as such, however, certainly wouldn't be heretical, provided that it was able to be understood as a symbolic depiction.

Well said.

That is the key distinction.

 

[Rick of Wessex]

Folks,

It's not just a "canon from an obscure council" that prohibits such depiction.

Leonid Ouspensky, in his book The Theology of the Icon, says:

"The Fathers of the Seventh Ecumenical Council repeat the authoritative argument of Pope Gregory II, contained in his letter to the Emperor Leo III the Esaurian:" 'Why do we neither describe nor represent the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ? Because we do not know what He is...And if we had seen and known Him as we have seen and known His Son, we would have tried to describe Him and to represent Him in art'

"Among the other errors, we often find the image of God the Father. This image has been particularly widespread in the Orthodox Church since the seventeenth century..to analyze it..in respect to the prohibition of God the Father on the part of the Great Council of Moscow in 1666-1667...As we see, the Seventh Ecumenical Council speaks of the absence of God the Father, who is not incarnate and consequently is invisible and non-representable."

Anyway, Mike, thanks for your answer.

I guess this thread can be closed now.

Thanks to everyone.

Rick

 

[RobNJ]

I guess this thread can be closed now.

Thanks to everyone.

Rick

Thread closed at request of the OP