Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You're right. The Father should not be depicted.MosestheBlack said:Speaking of Icons... I got a beautiful Russian wall Cross that I love. My question is this: above the Cross is God the Father. I thought that The Father wasn't supposed to be depicted in Icons. Is that true, or are there exceptions, or am I totally wrong?
Thanks
Moses
Well, there are some icons where God the Father is depicted in a human form. I've seen one at a church called Holy Trinity, and one on the back of my bishop's vestments. So it's not forbidden, but it is generally considered bad form because it goes against Nicaea II's arguments in favor of depicting God the Son in icon format. After all, Christ Himself said, "Whomever has seen Me has seen the Father". The Creation icons I have (Stars and the Animal Kingdom) both clearly depict Christ as the one Creating. So I think it is neither necessary nor right to depict God the Father in any way other than the spear in the icons of the Annunciation and Theophany, the angel in the Hospitality of Abraham, etc.MosestheBlack said:Speaking of Icons... I got a beautiful Russian wall Cross that I love. My question is this: above the Cross is God the Father. I thought that The Father wasn't supposed to be depicted in Icons. Is that true, or are there exceptions, or am I totally wrong?
Thanks
Moses
I just found an interesting article about the subject, and about the controversy surrounding the Council in Moscow.Oblio said:I 've got a post somewhere that cites the canon from a council in IIRC Moscow.
MosestheBlack said:Speaking of Icons... I got a beautiful Russian wall Cross that I love. My question is this: above the Cross is God the Father. I thought that The Father wasn't supposed to be depicted in Icons. Is that true, or are there exceptions, or am I totally wrong?
Thanks
Moses
Then why has my bishop a set of vestments that have this icon on the back? You know, that big outermost one.... I forget what it's called.Oblio said:I 've got a post somewhere that cites the canon from a council in IIRC Moscow.
Leonid Ouspensky and Vladimir Lossky said:For centuries, paintings and drawings have depicted the trinity as two men and a bird. In 1667, the Great Moscow Council of the Eastern churches declared "To represent the [Father] on icons with a gray beard, with his only Son on his lap, and a dove between them, is exceedingly absurd and unseemly,"[1] but that doesn't seem to have stopped artists from either the East or the West from perpetuating such depictions.
1 - Leonid Ouspensky and Vladimir Lossky, The Meaning of Icons, trans. G. E. H. Palmer and E. Kadlowbovsky (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1982), 204, quoted in Gail Ramshaw, God Beyond Gender: Feminist Christian God-Language (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995), 88.
Matrona said:Then why has my bishop a set of vestments that have this icon on the back? You know, that big outermost one.... I forget what it's called.
It was a small icon, but I recognized it clearly.
Now I'm so confused!![]()