Can internet images be icons?

[Varangian Christian]

Is it alright to use images of icons on the internet for veneration and prayer? Every now and again I will look up online the icons of one of my patron saints but I have been leery of venerating them, but today I discovered icons of the Ancient of Days and I felt moved. I offered up a quick prayer and crossed myself, not really an intellectual prayer, more like I was moved to give honor and praise.

Have I done something wrong?

 

[Phronema]

To the thread title, no. I don't believe internet images (even of icons) can be considered actual icons as they do not meet the specific criteria of an icon. That said I don't think you've done anything wrong by being moved to give honor, and praise to what was being depicted in the icon. I think intent plays a role here, but as a fellow catechumen I'll see what others have to say on the topic. Good question.

 

[ArmyMatt]

no, you have not done anything wrong.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

To the thread title, no. I don't believe internet images (even of icons) can be considered actual icons as they do not meet the specific criteria of an icon. That said I don't think you've done anything wrong by being moved to give honor, and praise to what was being depicted in the icon. I think intent plays a role here, but as a fellow catechumen I'll see what others have to say on the topic. Good question.

I am not Eastern Orthodox but I am curious to learn more about Icons. What criteria is required for it to be considered an icon?

 

[Phronema]

I am not Eastern Orthodox but I am curious to learn more about Icons. What criteria is required for it to be considered an icon?

The criteria in particular that an internet image does not have would be that it has not been blessed by a priest. In addition, traditionally there is preparation associated with the creation of an icon in the form of fasting, and prayer. There's a specifc process that associated with the production of an icon as well. The latter two I've named would be seemingly absent in the case of an internet image of an icon.

They will always depict something holy such as Christ, or the Cross, or the Theotokos (the Mother of Christ), or a Saint. They have to be a "true" image, in that they are correct as well. There is quite a bit I'm not mentioning here, and unfortunately I'm not an iconographer. My best advice if you're in search of a more in depth analysis I'd suggest a google search for iconography.

Hopefully I've been helpful, though I'm no subject matter expert.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

The criteria in particular that an internet image does not have would be that it has not been blessed by a priest. In addition, traditionally there is preparation associated with the creation of an icon in the form of fasting, and prayer. There's a specifc process that associated with the production of an icon as well. The latter two I've named would be seemingly absent in the case of an internet image of an icon.

They will always depict something holy such as Christ, or the Cross, or the Theotokos (the Mother of Christ), or a Saint. They have to be a "true" image, in that they are correct as well. There is quite a bit I'm not mentioning here, and unfortunately I'm not an iconographer. My best advice if you're in search of a more in depth analysis I'd suggest a google search for iconography.

Hopefully I've been helpful, though I'm no subject matter expert.

Very helpful. Thank you.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I'm not sure, but I think the "impermanent" aspect of being a picture on a screen is something of an issue too.

One of the points that underlies iconography is "the Word became flesh" ... the existence of icons helps illustrate that spiritual truth.

If your "icon" is a temporary arrangement of pixels on a screen that can be gone at the tap of a finger, never to return, it negates that aspect.

I think it's a somewhat minor point (among us today, not minor that the Word became flesh!) , but one I thought to share.

I don't mean to say that it's wrong to look on such an image as a help to prayer. Only that it's something else that makes it "not an icon" ... even though it might be an image of one.

I am not Eastern Orthodox but I am curious to learn more about Icons. What criteria is required for it to be considered an icon?

 

[FenderTL5]

..wait, you mean my giant LCD-wall/iconostasis idea needs more thought?
you could feature specific saints on their feast days..


just imagine all of the possibilities...

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

..wait, you mean my giant LCD-wall/iconostasis idea needs more thought?
you could feature specific saints on their feast days..

View attachment 248188
just imagine all of the possibilities...

What about 4K 3D icons?

 

[archer75]

As I recall, there was a public declaration by the ROC in the 19th century that printed copies were not icons. In another hundred years, it'll be "is a hologram an icon?"

 

[~Anastasia~]

What about 4K 3D icons?

Actually the dimensional nature is something we have to be careful with. Too much dimension is often frowned upon.