To your credit. I actually think it should be observed as well, but I do not necessarily think it has the same hold that it did for the Jews within the law.
Another argument for Sola Scriptura!• Seventh Ecumenical Council (787 A.D.)
Session 1
CHURCH FATHERS: Second Council of Nicaea
• Anathema to the calumniators of the Christians, that is to The Image Breakers.
• Anathema to those who apply the words of Holy Scripture which were spoken against idols, to the venerable images.
• Anathema to those who do not salute the holy and venerable images.
• Anathema to those who say that Christians have recourse to the images as to gods.
• Anathema to those who call the sacred images idols.
• Anathema to those who knowingly communicate with those who revile and dishonour the venerable images.
• Anathema to those who say that another than Christ our Lord has delivered us from idols.
• Anathema to those who spurn the teachings of the holy Fathers and the tradition of the Catholic Church, taking as a pretext and making their own the arguments of Arius, Nestorius, Eutyches, and Dioscorus, that unless we were evidently taught by the Old and New Testaments, we should not follow the teachings of the holy Fathers and of the holy Ecumenical Synods, and the tradition of the Catholic Church.
• Anathema to those who dare to say that the Catholic Church has at any time sanctioned idols.
• Anathema to those who say that the making of images is a diabolical invention and not a tradition of our holy Fathers.
Seventh Ecumenical Council - OrthodoxWiki
And my point observing your post and the response of another was that where is the harmony or are you indicating we can pluck one verse and contradict by plucking another?I’m having to respond to 4 people at once here.
I posted the verse in Exodus to show that God said to create Golden Cherubs in Exodus. That was the point.
.
I think the point is chronologically the Incarnation was history past for the 7th Ecumenical council. Images created to “house” the Presence of God were obsolete because of the Incarnation.The incarnation of Christ into human flesh making God representable to human eyes IS a Chronological issue.
And that was for a specific use which was also a foreshadowing of Christ being lifted up. See John 3Yet God had Moses fashion a bronze serpent and the people of Israel had to bow before it. Also if you look in the Hebrew the word that translates to "Image or Idol" is the Hebrew word for Idol (pasal, פֶ֣֙סֶל֙).
So it would be wrong for a Catholic to bow down to a statue?Verses 3 and 5 make clear that this commandment is not simply condemning making statues; It is condemning making gods that you bow down to or serve. In a word, this first commandment forbids idolatry, i.e., the worship of anything or anyone other than God. Both the Orthodox and Catholic Church condemn this as well.
As a Confessional Lutheran, we hold Sola Scriptura, and employ the strictest interpretive standard; rejecting all forms of scriptural critical standards, and we also accept the first 7 Ecumenical councils; including the one being discussed here. Yes, Icons can be misused, just as Scripture can be misused to support all sorts of aberrations in the world today.Another argument for Sola Scriptura!
Why does stuff always have to be about Catholics as if they are the enemy? It is not wrong, if one does so to contemplate the incarnation of Christ; same goes for the Rosary. If it is done to deify the Blessed Virgin Mary, then it would be wrong to do so. Contemplating the mystery of Christ's incarnation is one reason we we Lutherans still mark October 15 as the Feast of St. Mary Mother of our Lord or the Dormation of Mary.So it would be wrong for a Catholic to bow down to a statue?
View attachment 261346 View attachment 261344 View attachment 261343 View attachment 261345
I literally cannot imagine any justification for venerating images. Since you do not share my lack, can you explain why God would support anathemizing -As a Confessional Lutheran, we hold Sola Scriptura, and employ the strictest interpretive standard; rejecting all forms of scriptural critical standards, and we also accept the first 7 Ecumenical councils; including the one being discussed here. Yes, Icons can be misused, just as Scripture can be misused to support all sorts of aberrations in the world today.
Note: this quotation is not from any decision of the council. It's from a statement by some bishops who had been iconoclasts and wanted to be received again. The council indirectly approved the statements by accepting the bishops, when in my view they should have rebuked them for their un-Christian manner. But it's not quite accurate to quote this as if it were a statement by the Council.I literally cannot imagine any justification for venerating images. Since you do not share my lack, can you explain why God would support anathemizing -
"those who spurn the teachings of the holy Fathers and the tradition of the Catholic Church, taking as a pretext and making their own the arguments of Arius,Nestorius, Eutyches, and Dioscorus, that unless we were evidently taught by the Old and New Testaments, we should not follow the teachings of the holy Fathers and of the holy Ecumenical Synods, and the tradition of the Catholic Church."
I agree.This Anathema business comes across to me as evil in the form of authoritarian self-righteousness.
I am talking about kings and emperors here. Not popes and bishops. some of whom were complicit but not all. Plus, you can claim pope's, patriarchs and bishops were the heads of these imperial churches all you want. They were as far as a king or emperor would allow them to be. But that is about it. So you want "proof" that the intent of kings and emperors was to keep the Word of God out of the general public's hands. Well you just stated it it above when you said they didn't want to translate the Latin into native languages for "theological" reasons. Yeah. That means they wanted to control what people heard.Source? The problem was the masses being uneducated in Latin and the Church being hesitant to translate it into the vernacular for theological reasons. Not some vast conspiracy to keep the word away from the people.
Communists had to first wipe out the native Christians before they set up their false churches that are not usually in communion with the Original. This is hardly comparable to the early or middle ages. Even in the Eastern Roman Empire the Patriarch of the Church had the right to go against the Emperor's decisions both Politically and Religiously.
Who? Again provide a source. Who in the 7th century persecuted people for reading scriptures readily available in Greek?
A true statement. The "Bible" wasn't around until fairly recently. What the people did have was the Holy Scriptures, and access to them not only every day in services, but also could have copies made, or memorize them themselves as many did. Many Greek Laypeople would simply write down what was read during services. Icons were there for people not educated enough to read, so that they could remember Christ's life easily.
I responded to another poster who indicated images are fine but not to bow down to them.Why does stuff always have to be about Catholics as if they are the enemy? It is not wrong, if one does so to contemplate the incarnation of Christ; same goes for the Rosary. If it is done to deify the Blessed Virgin Mary, then it would be wrong to do so. Contemplating the mystery of Christ's incarnation is one reason we we Lutherans still mark October 15 as the Feast of St. Mary Mother of our Lord or the Dormation of Mary.
Within the hypo static union his natured are both seperate and united. So we can depict his manhood. The most we go to show his divinity is the the Uncreated light (halo)Yet still, you cannot depict his manhood without implying that his divinity is therein represented. Jesus is truly man and truly God, you cannot depict one nature and not the other. In the picture, you are representing him in his person...right?
Yes. It is against the 7th ecumenical council which the RCC later changed.So it would be wrong for a Catholic to bow down to a statue?
View attachment 261346 View attachment 261344 View attachment 261343 View attachment 261345
I literally cannot imagine any justification for venerating images. Since you do not share my lack, can you explain why God would support anathemizing -
"those who spurn the teachings of the holy Fathers and the tradition of the Catholic Church, taking as a pretext and making their own the arguments of Arius,Nestorius, Eutyches, and Dioscorus, that unless we were evidently taught by the Old and New Testaments, we should not follow the teachings of the holy Fathers and of the holy Ecumenical Synods, and the tradition of the Catholic Church."
This Anathema business comes across to me as evil in the form of authoritarian self-righteousness.
I guess you should take that up with PaulNote: this quotation is not from any decision of the council. It's from a statement by some bishops who had been iconoclasts and wanted to be received again. The council indirectly approved the statements by accepting the bishops, when in my view they should have rebuked them for their un-Christian manner. But it's not quite accurate to quote this as if it were a statement by the Council.
I agree.
yes, as long as you don't teach against them.I have a hypothetical question. Could a potential convert who is unable to venerate icons ever be Chrismated into any jurisdiction of the Eastern Orthodox church?
I am talking about kings and emperors here. Not popes and bishops. some of whom were complicit but not all. Plus, you can claim pope's, patriarchs and bishops were the heads of these imperial churches all you want. They were as far as a king or emperor would allow them to be. But that is about it. So you want "proof" that the intent of kings and emperors was to keep the Word of God out of the general public's hands. Well you just stated it it above when you said they didn't want to translate the Latin into native languages for "theological" reasons. Yeah. That means they wanted to control what people heard.
Anyway. Why don't we just start with the decree of Emperor Honorius, later codified into law by the Emperor Justinian.
1.6.2 Emperor Honorius and Theodosius to Anthemius, Praetoriian Perfect.
If any man shall be discovered to re-baptize anyone imbued with the mysteries of the Catholic faith, he, together with him who has permitted this infamous crime-provided the person persuaded to be re-baptized be of an age capable crime-shall be punished by death.
C, TH. 16.6.6
People were ritually baptized into the imperial church as children. To hear the gospel as an adult and to accept Christ on God's terms. Then get baptized like we see millions do in today's world was punishable by death. Why? Becasue that made you a heretic? No. Its because you just committed treason against the crown, that is why. The heretic component of it was just to justify the intent of the law. Which intent was to control Christianity. To do so meant keeping the Word of God out of the general public's hands.
The condemnation of heterodoxy is tied to what we Lutherans call "The Office of the Keys"; the power to bind and loose. The Church does indeed have the authority and the mandate to administer the sacraments, and preach the Gospel rightly and purely; with that mandate comes to authority to condemn those who do not.I literally cannot imagine any justification for venerating images. Since you do not share my lack, can you explain why God would support anathemizing -
"those who spurn the teachings of the holy Fathers and the tradition of the Catholic Church, taking as a pretext and making their own the arguments of Arius,Nestorius, Eutyches, and Dioscorus, that unless we were evidently taught by the Old and New Testaments, we should not follow the teachings of the holy Fathers and of the holy Ecumenical Synods, and the tradition of the Catholic Church."
This Anathema business comes across to me as evil in the form of authoritarian self-righteousness.
Which infallible Byzantine emperor decided that the Second Council of Nicaea was Ecumenical?The Canons and Decrees of The Ecumenical Councils are Infallible.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?