Icons...

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Thanks for the great insights and great pictures! I agree with MoreCoffee that there always have been Catholic churches with freestanding altars. However, they were the exception rather than the rule. St. Peter's Basilica is a fine example. Today the rule is freestanding altars.

Theologically it does make a difference. Traditionally it was where the priest offered the corporate worship of the congregation to God, thus he faced the altar which represented the divine. Today it seems that it is more the joint worship of the congregation around the altar, which, IMO is not necessarily a bad thing.

BTW, the Lutheran Frauenkirche in Dresden, which has been beautifully reconstructed from the rubble of World War II doesn't even have an altar per se, but is focused on an elaborate pulpit with a large rank of organ pipes above it.

...But then the State "Lutheran" Church just is not all that Lutheran anymore, since the forced union with the Calvinist Church.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

...But then the State "Lutheran" Church just is not all that Lutheran anymore, since the forced union with the Calvinist Church.

Intriguing...

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Intriguing...

This free synod is independent of the state Church, it is Confessional, and with them we are in full fellowship: SELK, Independent Evangelical-Lutheran Church of Germany (German: Selbständige Evangelisch-Lutherische Kirche).
http://www.selk.de/

 

[JesusFreak78]

You disagree that the source of an Icon of Christ is the Incarnation? So you want proof that Jesus Christ was God? Sorry, but I'm not following your logic here so it's difficult to respond in any meaningful way.

I disagree with an icon of Christ is from Christ since an icon can't and never will be able to show Who Christ is.

 

[Gnarwhal]

I disagree with an icon of Christ is from Christ since an icon can't and never will be able to show Who Christ is.

What like his humanity and his divinity?

I don't think that's the point, the point is depicting Christ whom the Apostles knew and sharing that with their successors and subsequent generations. I've heard it explained that Eastern icons are intentionally inaccurate to remind the viewer that the icon is depicting a spiritual truth rather than a visible reality.

 

[JesusFreak78]

What like his humanity and his divinity?

I don't think that's the point, the point is depicting Christ whom the Apostles knew and sharing that with their successors and subsequent generations. I've heard it explained that Eastern icons are intentionally inaccurate to remind the viewer that the icon is depicting a spiritual truth rather than a visible reality.

You can't separate Christ's Humanity and Divinity since they both are part of Who Christ is.

If your icons are inaccurate, you will also get an inaccurate view of Christ. It's called to make a god in your own image which is idolatry.

 

[Gnarwhal]

You can't separate Christ's Humanity and Divinity since they both are part of Who Christ is.

If your icons are inaccurate, you will also get an inaccurate view of Christ. It's called to make a god in your own image which is idolatry.

I never said you could separate that.

The only purpose of an icon is to turn ones focus on Christ, not dissect whether the icons are depicting Christ appropriately.

Unless of course they're portraying Christ as a three-headed hydra from Ancient Greece.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

I disagree with an icon of Christ is from Christ since an icon can't and never will be able to show Who Christ is.

Then we should also discard photos of those whom you love, as they do not speak to who they are either; yet we treasure these photos; because they photos keep memories alive. We look upon an icon, a statue of Christ, and we are mindful of what was done for us in the Gospel.

What like his humanity and his divinity?

I don't think that's the point, the point is depicting Christ whom the Apostles knew and sharing that with their successors and subsequent generations. I've heard it explained that Eastern icons are intentionally inaccurate to remind the viewer that the icon is depicting a spiritual truth rather than a visible reality.

Thanks Cogent; this is so true. While we were not there for the events in the old and new Testaments; we see the "spiritual truth" in Scripture, just as in art, a gift from God, that has been part of the Church for the last 2000 years.

You can't separate Christ's Humanity and Divinity since they both are part of Who Christ is.

If your icons are inaccurate, you will also get an inaccurate view of Christ. It's called to make a god in your own image which is idolatry.

Twisting words, we can make an Icon because we were made in God's image!

I never said you could separate that.

The only purpose of an icon is to turn ones focus on Christ, not dissect whether the icons are depicting Christ appropriately.

For many the written and spoken word are thin and dry, but a picture is worth a thousand words.

Unless of course they're portraying Christ as a three-headed hydra from Ancient Greece.

In which case they would be heretical and apostate; something that many reformed protestands already think we are.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I don't think that's the point, the point is depicting Christ whom the Apostles knew and sharing that with their successors and subsequent generations. I've heard it explained that Eastern icons are intentionally inaccurate to remind the viewer that the icon is depicting a spiritual truth rather than a visible reality.

Realistic paintings run no risk of being received as a substitute for Christ or of being mistaken for the real Christ but all art used in the service of God is set aside for that purpose is holy and useful. God gave Israel the images of the Seraphim and Cherubim as well as the animal and plant images that adorned the temple. God also gave to the whole world a perfect image of himself in human form, our Lord Jesus Christ. So it is right and just for us to use the images we've received from God in our art to adorn our places of worship.

The second council of Nicaea declared:

... the production of representational art; this is quite in harmony with the history of the spread of the gospel, as it provides confirmation that the becoming man of the Word of God was real and not just imaginary, and as it brings us a similar benefit. For, things that mutually illustrate one another undoubtedly possess one another's message.

Given this state of affairs and stepping out as though on the royal highway, following as we are the God-spoken teaching of our holy fathers and the tradition of the catholic church — for we recognize that this tradition comes from the holy Spirit who dwells in her—we decree with full precision and care that, like the figure of the honoured and life-giving cross, the revered and holy images, whether painted or made of mosaic or of other suitable material, are to be exposed in the holy churches of God, on sacred instruments and vestments, on walls and panels, in houses and by public ways, these are the images of our Lord, God and saviour, Jesus Christ, and of our Lady without blemish, the holy God-bearer, and of the revered angels and of any of the saintly holy men.

The more frequently they are seen in representational art, the more are those who see them drawn to remember and long for those who serve as models, and to pay these images the tribute of salutation and respectful veneration. Certainly this is not the full adoration {latria} in accordance with our faith, which is properly paid only to the divine nature, but it resembles that given to the figure of the honoured and life-giving cross, and also to the holy books of the gospels and to other sacred cult objects. Further, people are drawn to honour these images with the offering of incense and lights, as was piously established by ancient custom. Indeed, the honour paid to an image traverses it, reaching the model, and he who venerates the image, venerates the person represented in that image.

So it is that the teaching of our holy fathers is strengthened, namely, the tradition of the catholic church which has received the gospel from one end of the earth to the other.

So it is that we really follow Paul, who spoke in Christ, and the entire divine apostolic group and the holiness of the fathers, clinging fast to the traditions which we have received.

So it is that we sing out with the prophets the hymns of victory to the church: Rejoice exceedingly O daughter of Zion, proclaim O daughter of Jerusalem; enjoy your happiness and gladness with a full heart. The Lord has removed away from you the injustices of your enemies, you have been redeemed from the hand of your foes. The Lord the king is in your midst, you will never more see evil, and peace will be upon you for time eternal.

Therefore all those who dare to think or teach anything different, or who follow the accursed heretics in rejecting ecclesiastical traditions, or who devise innovations, or who spurn anything entrusted to the church (whether it be the gospel or the figure of the cross or any example of representational art or any martyr's holy relic), or who fabricate perverted and evil prejudices against cherishing any of the lawful traditions of the catholic church, or who secularize the sacred objects and saintly monasteries, we order that they be suspended if they are bishops or clerics, and excommunicated if they are monks or lay people.​

 

[Rev Randy]

What like his humanity and his divinity?

I don't think that's the point, the point is depicting Christ whom the Apostles knew and sharing that with their successors and subsequent generations. I've heard it explained that Eastern icons are intentionally inaccurate to remind the viewer that the icon is depicting a spiritual truth rather than a visible reality.

I think "intentionally inaccurate" is not the term we would use. If you really want to understand the Eastern mindset:https://mospat.ru/en/2011/02/06/news35783/

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Since we are talking about Icons... Here is a very modern mosaic Icon of Christ based on the Te Deum in the Walther Library at Concordia Lutheran Sem. in Ft. Wayne Indiana:

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Since we are talking about Icons... Here is a very modern mosaic Icon of Christ based on the Te Deum in the Walther Library at Concordia Lutheran Sem. in Ft. Wayne Indiana:

Just came across this for the first time. Truly stunning and glad to see that icons are being contexualized with the art of the times we live in rather than limited to how they were designed in the Early Church - as those in the Early Church were also designing based on the imagery before them in the Byzantine Empire and how they perceived things to be. As mentioned elsewhere, I often wonder why the culture, art, hymnology, and symbols of 4th-century Byzantium are held in such high regard as to be considered in essence the peak of perfection, the summit of revelation...but anything differing from that (or Eastern Christianity in general) is ignored.

Personally, I've been very thankful to see the reality of how much diversity is truly present in Christianity when it comes to imagery - especially as it concerns art from an Indigenous perspective of who the Lord is

So many come to mind - one being the latest wonderful painting by Aboriginal Christian Artist Safina Stewart, called "Travelling the Ancient Land"!

​

And of course, there are others from the perspective of those in Mongolia...​

​

 

[Cappadocious]

You can't separate Christ's Humanity and Divinity since they both are part of Who Christ is.

If you believe that to depict Christ through his humanity would be to depict his divinity, then you believe that the divinity and humanity of Christ are con-fused. This is a form of docetism called monophysitism that makes jesus a demigod or monster instead of the incarnate God.

If you believe that to depict Christ through his humanity would be to divide him, then you believe in a form of docetism called Nestorianism, because you believe that Christ's Divinity does not shine forth through the humanity.

Both humanity and divinity belong properly to the subsistent person of Christ, such that to encounter the incarnate Christ is to encounter the true subsistent person of Christ.

In other words, just as to see Christ in the flesh is really to see Christ, a photo of Christ would really be a photo of Christ, an icon of Christ is really an icon of Christ.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

This free synod is independent of the state Church, it is Confessional, and with them we are in full fellowship: SELK, Independent Evangelical-Lutheran Church of Germany (German: Selbständige Evangelisch-Lutherische Kirche).
Selbständige Evangelisch-Lutherische Kirche (SELK) - www.selk.de - Home

Understood, Bruh

 

[Gxg (G²)]

This free synod is independent of the state Church, it is Confessional, and with them we are in full fellowship: SELK, Independent Evangelical-Lutheran Church of Germany (German: Selbständige Evangelisch-Lutherische Kirche).
http://www.selk.de/

Understood, Bruh

 

[seashale76]

Wow- what a long thread. There's no way I'm reading the whole thing- so what I'm sharing has either already been covered or may not really have much to do with how the topic has evolved. This is something I put together a few years ago after reading a few books on icons.

The earliest iconographers in Byzantium weren’t considered artists they were considered craftsmen. There are strict rules to iconography. God the Father is never shown, and the Holy Spirit is only represented by a dove, rays of power, or tongues of flame. People who defile them, make portraits of other people like Ghandi or Martin Luther King in an iconographic style, people who print them on t-shirts: it is seen pretty much as very sad and outrageous. Not everything that claims to be an icon is an icon. Books upon books have been written about icons. I suggest to anyone interested in the subject to go find some books (I especially rec Quinot and Martin).


Linette Martin in her book Sacred Doorways: A Beginner’s Guide to Icons (page 212) states, “To the question, “Where does an icon belong?” the obvious answer is, “In a church, to be an integral part of the Divine Liturgy, or in a Christian home as a devotional focus.”

Symbolism is key. There is a lot of it to be found. From seemingly random trees, to personification, to color, to the way figures hold their hands, to the scale of figures, to profiles, animals, arrested movement, body language, buildings, clothing worn, drapery, rocks, furniture, haloes, handheld objects, inscriptions, landscape, simultaneous narration, etc. it all means something. There is an entire theology behind icons.

The earliest icons we know of are almost all at St. Catherine’s Monastery in Mt. Sinai, Egypt (and many of them were exhibited at the Getty for a few months a while back, accompanied by a few of the Monks). Go to their website and watch the video about the monastery and the icons. Holy Image, Hallowed Ground (Getty Center Exhibitions)

The following is an excerpt from an article that gives an extremely brief general overview of icons. I highlighted the last paragraph because it talks specifically about Christ in icons.

Eastern Orthodox Christians and Iconography | Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese
So what is an icon? Webster defines an icon as an image (Webster, 1966). In the Orthodox Church an icon is a sacred image, a window into heaven. An image of another reality, of a person, time and place that is more real than here and now. More than art, icons have an important spiritual role. Michel Quenot says it well in his book, The Icon: Window on the Kingdom, an icon is
“theology in imagery, the icon expresses through color what the Gospel proclaims in words”.

For this reason the rules regarding the creation of an icon are rigorous. The iconographer must prepare himself for the task of painting an icon by following a strict discipline of fasting and prayer. He must quiet his spirit and submit himself to God. The icon he creates will not be signed. He will not expect accolades or applause when the icon is completed. The icon will be created to inspire and lead others into worship. Painting the icon is not a use of imagination. Instead, the icon will be painted using the prescribed regimen and style that has been passed down through the centuries. Everything from the facial expressions to the colors used is predetermined. The following is a prayer recited by an iconographer prior to starting to work:

O Divine Master of all that exists, enlighten and direct the soul, the heart and the mind of your servant: guide my hands so that I might portray worthily and perfectly Your Image, that of Your Holy Mother and of all the Saints, for the glory, the joy, and the beautification of Your Holy Church. ( Quenot, p.13)

The primary purpose of the icon is to aid in worship. Its design follows that purpose. Through lines and color the iconographer conveys the awesomeness of the invisible, divine reality(Evdokimov, 1990). The creation of an icon is defined by tradition. That is a 21 st century iconographer would not decide to change the shape of Christ’s face. It is understood that a person who saw them in the flesh painted the first icon of an individual. St. Luke is accredited with painting the first icons of Christ and Mary the Blessed Virgin. Each subsequent iconographer will use the original icon as a guide. There is room for a small amount of stylistic change but tradition limits the options for that change ( Forest, 1997).

Icons are not created to force an emotional response. When portraying historical scenes the faces don’t show emotions but instead portray virtues such as purity, patience in suffering, forgiveness, compassion and love. An example of this would be the portrayal of Christ on the cross. Neither is the icon a sentimental picture. Christ is always shown as God. Even the icons of Christ seated on His mother’s lap show Him with an adult face, revealing that even though Christ lived as a child among us He was also God ( Forest,1997).

Icons depict silence. There are no actions displayed, no open mouths. The icon invites the Christian to enter into contemplation,prayer, and silence (Ware,1979). Space is not defined as three-dimensional and time is insignificant. The story told by the icon precludes time and space. An example would be the icon of the Nativity, which shows the cave where Christ was born in the background with those who came to adore in small vignettes. Lighting proceeds from the character portrayed in the icon. There are never shadows in icons. This shows us that the saint portrayed is “glorified” having completed the race and entered into heaven (Quenot,1991).

Symbolism is used in icons and details are used minimally. For example, when showing John the Baptist baptizing in the river the grown man he baptizes is shown as an infant because the baptism is a rebirth. Colors are also symbolic. Blue reveals heaven and mystery. Green is youth, fertility and the earth’s vegetation. Red, the color of blood, suggests life, vitality and beauty. White is purity, the divine world and innocence. Gold indicates sanctity, splendor, and the glory of God and life in the heavenly kingdom. Purple reveals wealth, power and authority.

First and foremost, icons are a constant reminder of the incarnation of Christ, that is to say, they remind us that God “sent His only begotten Son”(Bible, John 3:16) to rescue us from our sin and death. We cannot see God the Father or God the Holy Spirit, but, because Christ chose to take on human flesh, we can see Him. His face can be portrayed on wood with paint. We can also paint His Mother and other saints who have finished the race and gone on to heaven. The Orthodox believe that surrounding themselves with icons help them to acknowledge the constant presence of Christ and the saints in their lives.

I thought this was enlightening enough regarding the particular thread to add in this information about how Christ is portrayed in icons.

From Linette Martin’s book, Sacred Doorways: A Beginner’s Guide to Icons (page 150, 151) published by Paraclete Press, copyright 2002:

“Christ Pantocrator (pan-to-crah-tor) means Christ, the ruler of all.

The domed roof of a Byzantine church represents the vault of heaven, and originally, mosaicists may have decorated it with the Ascension. By the tenth century, the figure in church domes was half-length, and the picture for a dome had changed from narrative to confrontational. It was discovered that a half-length figure fitted more easily into a circle than one of full length, and it allowed the face to be on a larger scale… He holds a closed book, which may be seen as the Gospels or as the Book of Judgment in Revelation 20: 11,12…”

The fingers of his right hand are bent in the position of a priest’s hand of blessing and are pointing toward himself. The index finger of his other hand points powerfully across the picture, balancing the sideways glance of his eyes to his left. When we look carefully at the face of this Pantocrator, we see a difference between one side and the other. His right side, the side of blessing, is calm; his left side, the side of judgment, is fierce with an angry eyebrow. After nearly nine hundred years this awe-inspiring image still has the power to convert. Confronted with it for the first time some people react with shock: This is not a tame Jesus. The only thing that lets us off the hook is that those eyes do not look directly at us. The image is a reminder that the Last Judgment should be feared because it will be absolutely just, albeit tempered by mercy and total understanding.”

The Pantocrator is not intended to represent Christ as the Jesus of Galilee, but as the awe-inspiring God-Man, the King of the Universe and terrible Judge at the end of time.”

 

[MoreCoffee]

I have an image from a children's book that is called TOO MANY CHEEKY DOGS

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I have an image from a children's book that is called TOO MANY CHEEKY DOGS

So?



.

 

[Thekla]

Since we are talking about Icons... Here is a very modern mosaic Icon of Christ based on the Te Deum in the Walther Library at Concordia Lutheran Sem. in Ft. Wayne Indiana:

reminds me a bit of Rouault

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

reminds me a bit of Rouault

The Icon or my buddy Fr. Lary?