ECF's -Which ones were right?

[Montalban]

You have no idea how insulting you have been & are, so your sanctimony is easily dismissed.

Ah, so you justify being insulting because you think someone was insulting towards you!

Playing the victim

 

[Montalban]

I don't think he misused it at all.
The confusion over God's identity is compounded by the use of images.
Those Egyptians knew full well that that calf was made from their gold jewelry.
It is a lingering artifact of this confusion that men could not & some still cannot accept the metaphor of the eucharist as a metaphor.
And I will say it flat-out. You worship icons. No insinuating. Worship and veneration are the same thing with a fantasy of significant degree in difference.

So if I put a poster on my wall of Paul McCartney and admire him, I'm worshipping him?

You can hate on me all you want for saying it, but I don't hate you for doing it.

again, so devoid are your posts of intellectual argument that, far from sinking to playing victim you try this old emotional-high-ground.

It's like "Let me insult you; I know I'm going to insult you but I forgive you for feeling insulted"

 

[Montalban]

quick question: Is there ever a worship undertaken by the EO that does NOT include icons?

Do you consider that if I'm on the train to work, and I pray to God, I'm 'worshipping' him? If so, then 'yes' to your question

 

[Uphill Battle]

Do you consider that if I'm on the train to work, and I pray to God, I'm 'worshipping' him? If so, then 'yes' to your question

I was speaking of corporate worship,not individual.

 

[Yarddog]

I don't think he misused it at all.

In reading his words, he clearly shows he misused the verses. The verses from Exodus shows that the Israelites viewed the golden calf as a God and Simon failed to see that. Icons or images are "not" in any form view as God the Father or the Son.

The confusion over God's identity is compounded by the use of images.

Catholics and Orthodox know fully their place with God and his identity, no confusion exists. The confusion is in those on the outside that don't understand the Catholics and Orthodox great love for God.

Those Egyptians knew full well that that calf was made from their gold jewelry.

We are talking about the Israelites, not the Egyptians. But, does this show your inability to understand written scripture and also what was occurring in ancient history.

It is a lingering artifact of this confusion that men could not & some still cannot accept the metaphor of the eucharist as a metaphor.

For someone who hasn't experienced the Real Presence it is easy to see why you would say that. A person cannot understand what they have not experienced. We have experienced God and understand the Real Presence. I pray that you will do the same someday.

And I will say it flat-out. You worship icons. No insinuating. Worship and veneration are the same thing with a fantasy of significant degree in difference. You can hate on me all you want for saying it, but I don't hate you for doing it.

I don't hate you and understand why you would say that. Ignorance is not a bad word, it is simply referring to someone lacking knowledge of something. This matter shows your ignorance in certain items of faith.

If you would allow the Holy Spirit to enlighten your spirit, you could see that the love of Catholics and Orthodox is given to God. An object or image which allows us to recall Christ's suffering is not bad.

You have the Holy Bible, do you worship it? Do you worship the scripture? Do you worship the words?

If you can try and understand your feeling for the Bible and scripture, maybe you can understand the same for images.

Try to remember that in ancient times, most people could not read. Pictures are what they had to understand. They could hear the words of the priests but images drove the message home.

God Bless,
Yarddog

 

[Uphill Battle]

Try to remember that in ancient times, most people could not read. Pictures are what they had to understand. They could hear the words of the priests but images drove the message home.

God Bless,
Yarddog

which, sorry, I have to bring up, shouldn't have much to do with the modern literates, wouldn't you say? If it was only about driving the message home to those who can't read... well... clearly it isn't.

 

[Thekla]

which, sorry, I have to bring up, shouldn't have much to do with the modern literates, wouldn't you say? If it was only about driving the message home to those who can't read... well... clearly it isn't.

yes and no;

many children cannot read, and iconography passes over language barriers (and is helpful for folks whose reading glasses are weak or absent )

but there is another consideration as mentioned before: reading and listening (verbal) are consecutive skills. One must retain and build the information as it is taken in, and then organize in order to make the information "cohere".


visual information is taken in immediately and simultaneously, and the information - where forgotten - is immediately visible for review (there is no re-searching the text or memory). Where executive thinking skills are not yet fully developed or are compromised, or when one is exhausted, etc, visual presentation of information/teaching is remarkably valuable.

 

[simonthezealot]

Hello Simon,


So, if you don't want anyone to say that you are insinuating that we worship icons, stop using references that indicate that.

If you want to try and show that icons should not be used, find scripture that indicates that and don't mis-use it.

Yarddog

Regarding post 112 Yes I did combine information from two different sources there was no intention to mislead there, I simply grabbed 2 prior posts that I had done and placed them on the same post sorry for any confusion...It doesn't affect the commentary by any means, plus I went on in a preceding post to highlight the NAB one for the purpose of why I linked that.
Listen you can view it how you want but my point is and always has been that their use of the gold calf and orthodox view of icons and catholic view of statues are in equally similar in that they are used as a worsip aid in one manner or another...And yes to most that can leave the appearance of worship but regardless either way it is clear it ticked God off. He is clear in His word of His desire for worship in spirit and truth and as I mentioned Isa 44 reitirates that things made from the hands of man can NEVER do our MIGHTY GOD any justice.
But you guys seemed to skim over that post..Not surpising!

 

[simonthezealot]

yes and no;

many children cannot read, and iconography passes over language barriers (and is helpful for folks whose reading glasses are weak or absent )

but there is another consideration as mentioned before: reading and listening (verbal) are consecutive skills. One must retain and build the information as it is taken in, and then organize in order to make the information "cohere".

Holy Scripture is inspired by our Holy God, man made art is not, a bad understanding by the artist can easily mislead people to a false understanding of the message...It is NO more an alternative to Holy scripture than some of the movies coming out of hollywood.

 

[Thekla]

Regarding post 112 Yes I did combine information from two different sources there was no intention to mislead there, I simply grabbed 2 prior posts that I had done and placed them on the same post sorry for any confusion...It doesn't affect the commentary by any means, plus I went on in a preceding post to highlight the NAB one for the purpose of why I linked that.
Listen you can view it how you want but my point is and always has been that their use of the gold calf and orthodox view of icons and catholic view of statues are in equally similar in that they are used as a worsip aid in one manner or another...And yes to most that can leave the appearance of worship but regardless either way it is clear it ticked God off. He is clear in His word of His desire for worship in spirit and truth and as I mentioned Isa 44 reitirates that things made from the hands of man can NEVER do our MIGHTY GOD any justice.
But you guys seemed to skim over that post..Not surpising!

Isaiah 44 again speaks about "other gods" in the form of idols; again, icons are not "gods or other gods".

When the Psalms reiterate what God has done, or refers to creation, the Psalmist is 'giving evidence' of the glory and awesomeness of God, not worshipping history or nature.

 

[Yarddog]

which, sorry, I have to bring up, shouldn't have much to do with the modern literates, wouldn't you say? If it was only about driving the message home to those who can't read... well... clearly it isn't.

When trying to understand what was occurring when the scripptures were written, you must look to the past. The message remains the same.
Modern churches which do not have the past that the ancient churches do, many times ignore a very important part of what makes us what we are.

You are free to do that. You have the convenience of being able to read, maybe not understand the mysteries of scripture, but you can read the words. The experiences of the ancient christians helps us understand so much.

Yarddog

 

[Thekla]

I would like to reiterate; being truly literate requires verbal thinking skills. Not everyone is given to this ability. For example, in mental illness it is not uncommon to lose verbal thinking skills, ie. the short term memory is sufficiently compromised such that serial thinking (which requires the brain to remember each previous sentence, then order, modify and integrate information as each subsequent sentence or verbal instruction is given) is impossible. In this case, the previous sentence or instruction is not retained, making reading and the processing of complex - two or more sentence - communication functionally "impossible".

 

[Yarddog]

Regarding post 112 Yes I did combine information from two different sources there was no intention to mislead there, I simply grabbed 2 prior posts that I had done and placed them on the same post sorry for any confusion...It doesn't affect the commentary by any means, plus I went on in a preceding post to highlight the NAB one for the purpose of why I linked that.

Hello Simon,
Thanks for your response and I hope that you can understand why some of the poster spoke as they did.

Listen you can view it how you want but my point is and always has been that their use of the gold calf and orthodox view of icons and catholic view of statues are in equally similar in that they are used as a worsip aid in one manner or another...And yes to most that can leave the appearance of worship but regardless either way it is clear it ticked God off.

The scripture does not say nor indicate either, that is what your spirit got out of the it. many times people have a bit of prejudice brought about by misunderstanding what occurs in other churches. (I know that I battle misconceptions of Catholics towards non-Catholics, either side allowing this is wrong.)
The golden calf was not a tool to worship our God and Father, in the minds of the Israelites, the golden calf was the God. In the ancient Churches, icons or statues are not Gods. In the Catholic Church, statues are used as reminders of those that lived the Gospel in the early Church.
A statue of Jesus, Joseph, Mary, Paul, Peter, etc.. is not a God and is not worshipped. To see the wounds of Jesus, or the humbleness of Mary, helps us to see things in our lives that are missing and helps us to focus on God. There is no worship involved.

He is clear in His word of His desire for worship in spirit and truth and as I mentioned Isa 44 reitirates that things made from the hands of man can NEVER do our MIGHTY GOD any justice.
But you guys seemed to skim over that post..Not surpising!

I can assure you that those of the ancient Churches worship God in just as much spirit and truth as the modern Churches.
What is really needed is for both, ancient and modern, to allow the Holy Spirit to open each others eyes to the great love for God that exists in others that may experience the Father in different manners.

When I was going through RCIA classes, I had some issues that I disagreed with. I tried to raise these questions up once and when I raised my hand to question the priest, the Holy Spirit told me to put my hand down and listen. After a little while I still didn't agree and raised my hand back up. again the HS told me to put my hand down and listen.

This time the HS allowed me to hear the priest's spirit. There was such an amazing love pouring out for God and Jesus. When I acknowledge this to the HS, the Spirit then said, "And that is what matters most."

God sees into our hearts and spirits to see that love that you and we have. It is this love that God accepts.

I pray that you can see through the error which causes you to fail to see the truth of our love and I pray that we see through the error that causes us to fail to see yours.

Yarddog

 

[bbbbbbb]

Dear bbbbbbb,

Again, thanks for the continued engagement and the interesting information.


Professor Duffy's Stripping of the Altars presents a picture somewhat at odds with the one you present here; but even if you are right, this looks a little like mob-rule. It sounds like the same rationale behind lynching mobs, who were also actuated by their own righteous indignation. If people have complaints, there are legal ways of making them; mobbing a Church seems one of the least Christian ways to deal with anything.

What you say here of some priests is true of us all:

we require help, not judgement by our fellow-sinners. The difference between 'righteous indignation' and self-righteousness judgementalism may be apparent to those in the mob; it is less so to those at the receiving end.

King Josiah had authority as an anointed king for his actions; those who invaded Churches and smashed and burned had no such authority; they were acting as vigilantes. I really do find it awfully difficult to know how anyone else can know what is in my mind when I bow before an icon of the Blessed Theotokos; and what worries me is what is in the mind of anyone who thinks they can make that judgement of another.

Peace,

Anglian

Dear Anglian,

Please pardon my lengthy delay in responding to your thoughtful post. I hope this provides a welcome interruption to the accusations that seem to be flying thick and heavy at this point.

I agree that what occured was the actions of a mob in the cases I described. However, given their particular limitations they had virtually no other alternative. At the time the Church was prosecutor, jury, judge, and executioner (at least through the civili authorities which were under the control of the Church). In considering that situation a present=day situation comes to mind. As you are aware, there has been great public outrage at the revelations of pedophilia committed by some members of the Roman Catholic clergy in the United States, and Ireland, I understand. These activities are not new in the history of the Church, but their revelation to public scrutiny is. Rather than forming mobs and stringing up the perpetrators as happened in the Wild West of the nineteenth century, the courts are now hearing the cases and making judgements, despite the efforts of the Roman Catholic Church to plead a separation of Church and state. If they had been successful in their plea I believe there would have been a greater degree of violence taken on a personal level. As it is, the courts are rendering impartial judgements in these cases. The net result is that not only is the Roman Catholic Church losing the good faith and trust of its members, but it is being drained of its power, as well, both through the hemorraghing of members and the financial restitution paid to the victims.

At the time of the Protestant Reformation in England a large number of factors were at work, some of which I noted. There was also a strong political factor of which we are all aware. The dissolution of the monasteries was not the result of mob action, but was done under direct order of the monarch. The motives for the dissolution have been debated since that time. One thing is certain, however. Without the general support of the aristocracy and the populace in general, England would have had Mary as Queen and not Elizabeth and, as they say, history would have been very different. And, as they say, history (and its telling) belongs to the victor.

By the way, the analogy has been made between Henry VIII and King Josiah, although I suspect Henry VIII had other motives, as well, than the pure glory of God.

 

[simonthezealot]

The Lord God is approachable only through the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, NO scripture or word twisting by a group of men will ever make it okay to do otherwise there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus...Just because God makes an image of Himself by becoming incarnate doesn't mean we can try and do this by making things with our hands.


Epiphanius

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf206.v.LI.html?highlight=place to take the curtain#highlight
"Moreover, I have heard that certain persons have this grievance against me: When I accompanied you to the holy place called Bethel, there to join you in celebrating the Collect, after the use of the Church, I came to a villa called Anablatha and, as I was passing, saw a lamp burning there. Asking what place it was, and learning it to be a church, I went in to pray, and found there a curtain hanging on the doors of the said church, dyed and embroidered. It bore an image either of Christ or of one of the saints; I do not rightly remember whose the image was. Seeing this, and being loth that an image of a man should be hung up in Christ's church contrary to the teaching of the Scriptures, I tore it asunder and advised the custodians of the place to use it as a winding sheet for some poor person. They, however, murmured, and said that if I made up my mind to tear it, it was only fair that I should give them another curtain in its place. As soon as I heard this, I promised that I would give one, and said that I would send it at once. Since then there has been some little delay, due to the fact that I have been seeking a curtain of the best quality to give to them instead of the former one, and thought it right to send to Cyprus for one. I have now sent the best that I could find, and I beg that you will order the presbyter of the place to take the curtain which I have sent from the hands of the Reader, and that you will afterwards give directions that curtains of the other sort--opposed as they are to our religion--shall not be hung up in any church of Christ. A man of your uprightness should be careful to remove an occasion of offence unworthy alike of the Church of Christ and of those Christians who are committed to your charge." - Epiphanius (Jerome's Letter 51:9)

Taking the topic we are on and tying it back into my OP, how are your two groups able to determine that Epiphanius shown above along with the General councel of 754 are NOT right? and john of damascus and the councel of 787 wrong?
What assurance do you have that the adversary was NOT the misleader in this?

 

[Anglian]

Dear bbbbbbb,

Yes, it is a welcome relief; and thank you for, as always, a well-informed and cogent argument.

I take, entirely, your point about the circumstances in Reformation England. It was, I think, a shame that personal zealotry was allowed such license, but I guess that in any revolution such things happen. It has certainly left English Churches gloomier places; nor, at this distance, has it had the effect of making this a more Christian country - but then other things come into play here.

Peace,

Anglian

 

[Thekla]

Taking the topic we are on and tying it back into my OP, how are your two groups able to determine that Epiphanius shown above along with the General councel of 754 are NOT right? and john of damascus and the councel of 787 wrong?
What assurance do you have that the adversary was NOT the misleader in this?

I think this may have been missed (post #31), so again:

1. according to Hegesippus: in reference to the martyrdom of James the Just,

And so he suffered martyrdom; and they buried him on the spot, and the pillar erected to his memory still remains, close by the temple. This man was a true witness to both Jews and Greeks that Jesus is the Christ.
​

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_the_Just

2. from Eusebius :

For they say that the woman with an issue of blood, who, as we learn from the sacred Gospel,22972297 See Matt. ix. 20 sq. received from our Saviour deliverance from her affliction, came from this place, and that her house is shown in the city, and that remarkable memorials of the kindness of the Saviour to her remain there. 2. For there stands upon an elevated stone, by the gates of her house, a brazen image of a woman kneeling, with her hands stretched out, as if she were praying. Opposite this is another upright image of a man, made of the same material, clothed decently in a double cloak, and extending his hand toward the woman. At his feet, beside the statue itself,22982298 οὗ παρὰ τοῖς ποσὶν ἐπὶ τῆς στήλης αὐτῆς. This is commonly translated “at his feet, upon the pedestal”; but, as Heinichen remarks, in the excursus referred to just above, the plant can hardly have grown upon the pedestal, and what is more, we have no warrant for translating στήλη “pedestal.” Paulus, in his commentary on Matthew in loco, maintains that Eusebius is speaking only of a representation upon the base of the statue, not of an actual plant. But this interpretation, as Heinichen shows, is quite unwarranted. For the use of ἐπὶ in the sense of “near” or “beside,” we have numerous examples (see the instances given by Heinichen, and also Liddell and Scott’s Greek Lexicon, s.v.). is a certain strange plant, which climbs up to the hem of the brazen cloak, and is a remedy for all kinds of diseases.
​

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf...i.xii.xix.html

3. both the Synagogue and Church (early third century) at Dura Europas (Syria) have images; this is also a confirmation of the understanding of the commandment as "idolon", not image

4. images in the Catacombs, dating to 2nd and 3rd century

5. the account of the martyrdom of St. Polycarp, which includes statements about the reverential treatment of relics

6. the use of relics in worship (Eucharist celebrated on the tombs of martyrs)


Given evidence (above) of what could be construed as idolatry, are there extant rebuttals to the above practices ?
__________________

 

[Anglian]

Taking the topic we are on and tying it back into my OP, how are your two groups able to determine that Epiphanius shown above along with the General councel of 754 are NOT right? and john of damascus and the councel of 787 wrong?
What assurance do you have that the adversary was NOT the misleader in this?

Dear Simon,
Because what was agreed in 787 has been agreed by the Church ever since, and what was agreed in 754 was overturned by a later Council. If, as we hold, the Spirit guides the Church, then whilst men may make temporary mistakes, the Church will find and rectify them by the guidance of the Spirit amongst His people. The people would not accept the iconoclast triumph any more than they would accept Nestorius denying that St. Mary was the Theotokos.

The Orthodox Church is not an authoritarian Church, and we have little, if any, truck with those who think they are infallible - whatever their position. There was, as St. Jerome memorably wrote, a moment at which the world groaned to find itself Arian; but working through St. Athanasius and the other Fathers and confessors, and with the support of the people, the heresy was defeated and the truth of the orthodox faith upheld.

As I have commented before, the Orthodox do things in a manner rather at variance with the modern practice of the Catholic Church. The congregations have a big say; any hierarch who goes against the sense of the faithful find he goes not very far.

Peace,

Anglian

 

[simonthezealot]

I would like to reiterate; being truly literate requires verbal thinking skills. Not everyone is given to this ability. For example, in mental illness it is not uncommon to lose verbal thinking skills, ie. the short term memory is sufficiently compromised such that serial thinking (which requires the brain to remember each previous sentence, then order, modify and integrate information as each subsequent sentence or verbal instruction is given) is impossible. In this case, the previous sentence or instruction is not retained, making reading and the processing of complex - two or more sentence - communication functionally "impossible".

Thekla are familiar with Arnobius the apologist? He wrote on the very issue of image use on the illiterate.

The full context...
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf...light=unmanageable and ignorant mob#highlight



"Here also the advocates of images are wont to say this also, that the ancients knew well that images have no divine nature, and that there is no sense in them, but that they formed them profitably and wisely, for the sake of the unmanageable and ignorant mob, which is the majority in nations and in states, in order that a kind of appearance, as it were, of deities being presented to them, from fear they might shake off their rude natures, and, supposing that they were acting in the presence of the gods, put away their impious deeds, and, changing their manners, learn to act as men"

 

[Thekla]

Thekla are familiar with Arnobius the apologist? He wrote on the very issue of image use on the illiterate.

The full context...
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf...light=unmanageable and ignorant mob#highlight



"Here also the advocates of images are wont to say this also, that the ancients knew well that images have no divine nature, and that there is no sense in them, but that they formed them profitably and wisely, for the sake of the unmanageable and ignorant mob, which is the majority in nations and in states, in order that a kind of appearance, as it were, of deities being presented to them, from fear they might shake off their rude natures, and, supposing that they were acting in the presence of the gods, put away their impious deeds, and, changing their manners, learn to act as men"

he is speaking of pagans/false gods

I am referring to the fact that Christ came for all people, including young children, elder people with dementia, schizophrenics, the illiterate, etc etc etc - not just those who have achieved verbal fluency. The Church has the responsibility to minister to all.