The Theology of the Icon (The Restoration of Roman Iconographic Tradition)

This post is the final part of my series, 'The Splendor and Glory of the Sacred Image' and covers the theology of the sacred image and the restoration of the Roman Iconographic Tradition. 

The Theology of the icon

Renown Iconographer and iconographic historian Aiden Hart writes, “Perhaps the most essential aspect of any sacred art is that it mediates between a higher divine realm, and our realm.”

I will briefly cover how an icon is composed and the theological underpinnings which give the icon its unique Christological locus. Everything pertaining to the icon revolves around Jesus Christ. Saint Athansius once said, “He became man in order that we might become God.” This central theme of deification, or commonly called theosis in Greek, is the heart and soul of the icon. It leads man to an encounter with God through meditation, in which God, through His grace transforms him. In other words, we should all be climbing the ladder of divine ascent, and the icon helps us to do just that. Father Daniel Montgomery writes, “An icon seeks to make visible the borderline between heaven and earth.  Its subject matter may be “in” this world but not “of” this world.” I hope that the second part of this lecture will inspire you to make the icon a more integral part of your personal devotion and prayer life both inside and outside church. 

Metropolitan Hilarion spoke rightly when he said, “The icon’s purpose is liturgical; it is an integral part of liturgical space, which is the church, and an indispensable participant in divine services... Certainly, every Christian has the right to hang an icon at home, but he has this right only in so far as his home is a continuation of the church and his life a continuation of the liturgy... The icon participates in the liturgy along with the Gospel and the other sacred objects. In the tradition of the Orthodox Church, the Gospel is not only a book for reading but also a liturgically revered object: during the liturgy the Gospel is solemnly brought out for the faithful to kiss. In a similar way, the icon as “Gospel in color” is an object not only to be contemplated but also to be venerated with prayer.” Catholics along with the other apostolic Churches (Orthodox Churches), give reverence to the Gospels and Sacred Images. We should understand that the veneration we give to the Gospels, the Saint’s relics and the Holy Images is not the same as the worship we give to God alone, which is known by theological scholars as latreia. The veneration of icons is known as proskynesis. This is the special honor we give to the Saints and the Mother of God. Although the type of “worship” that we give the Saints and Almighty God is certainly different, God still remains the center focus of devotion. When the Christian engages in the tradition of proskyesis, he or she is really honoring the work of God’s grace in man. In our Latin theological Tradition we hold three modes of worship, latrea which is the worship due to God alone. Hyper-dulia which is the high devotion or veneration to the Mother of God, for she is, “More honorable than the cherubim and truly more glorious than the seraphim.” Finally we have dulia or the veneration of the Saints. 

Most icons in churches are either grafted as frescoes or mosaics onto the walls, are on panels attached to walls, or are panels installed into an iconostasis which separates the sanctuary from the nave. In the Eastern Church the icon of the particular Church Feast of the season, or an icon of Christ or the Theotokos is kept in the front of the church in front of the sanctuary for veneration. In the West this type of icon veneration is also practiced, although the icons are usually near the entrances of the church, and they did not usually correspond to a particular liturgical season. This Western practice of icon veneration has been almost extinct in American Catholicism. If you go to Rome for example, this practice is still alive and well. In the West, usually only an altar rail or rood screen was used to separate the nave from the sanctuary, while in the Eastern Church the separation developed to bring the sacred image to a place of prominence before the worshipper. 

The iconostasis of the East began with a low wall containing one row of icons, and it developed quickly to contain more images. The pinnacle of iconostasis construction is found in the Russian tradition where the iconostasis can span from floor to ceiling containing many rows of icons. This engages the worshipper with images of Christ and His Saints, putting before him or her in image what is actually happening in the liturgy. It is nothing short of the kingdom of heaven brought to mankind as described in Revelation 21:1-3, “Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth...And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God... and I heard  a loud voice from the throne saying: “Behold, the dwelling of God is with men.” There is a proper order in which the icons are traditionally placed on the iconostasis. The royal doors at the center contain the four evangelists and a depiction of the Annunciation. Christ and the Theotokos flank the royal doors, the archangels flank Christ and the Theotokos, and the Saints, usually the patron Saints of the Church flank the Archangels. Above, there are usually depictions of the Feast days of the Church along with other Saints. 

Although the Western Church did not develop in the same way as the Eastern Church did in regard to iconography, it is not accurate to say that icons are an exclusive product of the Eastern Church. This is a mistake made by many today who ignorantly attribute iconographic images as a product of the Eastern Church. Both the East and West share a mutual love and heritage for the sacred image. In fact iconographic scholar and historian Hans Belting says that the original concept of the icon is best understood in light of the churches of Rome. Note, I did not say the the icon is a product of Rome. In the Roman churches however we see the same setting, in which most of the early iconography was displayed, which was on the walls of the church rather than what we see with the development of the iconostasis in the East. There are many splendid Western churches such as Saint Mark’s in Venice, San Vitale in Ravenna, Santa Maria Maggiore and Santa Maria en Trastevere in Rome which have their interior walls, apses and domes covered with mosaic iconography. Although most Western Churches do not make use of an iconostasis as such, the apse and walls on each side of the apse facing the nave, have iconographic depictions, and engage the worshipper to the liturgical setting of the West. This setting for the icon is earlier than that which developed in the East with the iconostasis. I personally consider Saint Mark’s in Venice to be the pinnacle of Western Iconography. I had the wonderful privilege of celebrating Easter Vigil in 2007 there, and it was nothing short of remarkable. The West may have indeed kept this traditional Roman use of the icon, and it may have even developed further had the Renaissance not interfered. The Renaissance in the West marks a departure away from traditional icon depiction in the Western Church. 

The beautiful and inspiring work of Giotto di Bondone can be viewed as the dividing line between the more purely theological image of the icon, and the more secular artistic styles that would soon follow him. We begin to observe movement in Giotto’s image, which had been traditionally absent from the icon. The following renaissance painters broke completely from the traditional form of producing sacred images, in favor of more realistic depictions. Catholic priest and iconographer Monsignor Anthony La Femina calls this later art “religious art” rather than “sacred art” being that it depicts only religious events rather than the more theological composition which the icon depicts, aiming at devotion rather than events. The later efforts at depicting a more “realistic” image, was a misguided one when looked at in the context of liturgical and devotional use, since more corporeal aspects of religion began to dominate over its eternal mystical realities. The more important spiritual aspect of the sacred image was eventually replaced with the corporeal. Although religious art can certainly be beautiful, and have its place in Catholic culture, it should certainly not completely take the place of the sacred image or icon. Here my criticism is not aimed at the quality of the Renaissance art itself, but is aimed at the deficiency of its ability to inspire meditation beyond itself. This same secular movement would come into play theologically in the West as well when secular humanism became to take hold of many in the Church, eventually playing a part in the later Protestant rebellion. 

If we examine the traditional icon, we do not see an image of an exact representation of a Saint, the Theotokos or even Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, as they were when they walked the earth. Nor do we see an attempt at a purely realistic depiction of a Biblical event. The Biblical depictions are not rendered in motion, but as eternal events. The icon does not show the Saint in motion, but intends to convey glorified Saints, who are fully deified by the grace of God. Hence you do not see an attempt at a three dimensional depiction. Father Daniel Montgomery notes, “There is no depth to the picture, and that is just what disturbs us about it at first glance. The picture seems primitive. A closer study reveals, however, that the picture is often exceedingly complex. The flatness, for example, is sometimes achieved by drawing perspective in reverse. The artist expects us not to look at his picture, but through it.” Notice that there are no vanishing points which give the impression that you are seeing the image from front to back.  Again I refer to Metropolitan Hilarion for further explanation, “The icon of a saint shows not so much a process as a result, not so much a way as a destination point, not so much a movement towards a goal but as a goal in itself. In an icon we see someone who does not struggle with the passions but has overcome them, who does not seek the Heavenly Kingdom but has already reached it.” The icon also illustrates heavenly traits unique to different Saints and there are also traditional iconographic models for each Saint which makes them recognizable. For example you can always recognize Saint John Chrysostom due to his slightly enlarged forehead, representing his great wisdom and holiness. The icon opens the door to the Saint, letting us know that Christ is the God of the living, and that His Saints are interceding for us as they stand before Him in heaven. 

For those who are not familiar with the icon, again it is important to understand that the icon is not concerned with a perfectly “realistic” depiction of a Saint in his fallen earthly form. The iconographic scholar Constantine Cavarnos again stresses this point, “Iconography represents persons who have been regenerated into eternity.” Likewise Christ is depicted as an eternal figure, with both His divine and human natures, rather than with only His human nature, which would be stressed in later Western religious art. We can see in an icon of the crucifixion, that the icon retains a focus on not only the crucifixion event, but also on Christ as the eternal Son of God. The viewer is not distracted, but drawn into contemplation. The crucifixion event is not one of movement, but of an eternal nature, it leads one beyond the image. Metropolitan Hilarion says, “The Byzantine icon is not merely an image of the man Jesus but precisely God become man. This is what distinguishes the Orthodox icon from Renaissance religious art which represents Christ “humanized”. The later Western religious depiction of the crucifixion such as Titian's depiction in Venice, although certainly striking and beautiful, somewhat obscures the divine realities, and therefore does not draw one as easily into contemplation. Instead it pulls him to and fro examining the many figures at the foot of the cross. As we meditate on the warm, glowing, and radiant icon, the idea of both the human and divine natures of Christ come to mind, and we begin to see ourselves in the process of deification. The icon does not distract, but leads one beyond itself. As Catholics we struggle to achieve, by the grace of God, the pure state in which we will be glorified in heaven. When we enter a Church to worship the one true God, to receive His Body and Blood, we are essentially entering into eternity, and when we see the sacred images before us, we become more aware of this elusive, yet extremely important reality. So the icon mirrors the priority of the spiritual over the corporeal. Bishop Auxentios writes, “...the spiritual and the physical exist in a hierarchical relationship in man's restored state, the spiritual enjoying the ascendancy. Ideally, then, the body serves, and does not hinder, the spirit, as the latter worships, prays, psalmodizes, and performs good works or acts of asceticism and self-denial.” Therefore, the icon also follows this theological model by bringing asceticism to the forefront of the viewer’s mind. 

This central role of God deifying us does not stop when we leave the church doors, therefore it is important for the sacred images to be present in our homes. In the West, we are more familiar with having statues or forms of religious art in our homes rather than icons to help us in our private devotions. Many of them are indeed beautiful, and I have many myself. Although I believe that statues retain the attributes of the sacred image in a three dimensional presentation, most Eastern scholars would disagree with me on this by the way, I do think they still tend to lack the mystical element of the icon. So I propose that it is best to compliment the use of sacred statues with that of the icon. As far as religious art goes, they make great decoration, and they can help teach us about past religious events, but they are certainly no substitute for the icon. They simply lack the mystical element to draw man beyond itself. 

Bishop Auxentios illustrates the importance of icons in the traditional Russian Christian household, which I think may be useful to us as Western Catholics. “In Orthodox homes, the eastern corner of a centrally located room is always dedicated to the display of icons. There are usually many such icons on display (twenty-five to thirty icons would constitute a conservative average), and this "icon corner" always features at least one vigil lamp hanging before it, religiously and perpetually kept burning by the members of the household or, in the event of their absence, by someone hired or appointed for this task.” Now obviously I am not implying that you should leave candles or lamps burning day and night, or that you go out and hire yourself an icon keeper to keep the vigil lamps burning 24/7. What I am stressing here is how important these people think it is to maintain an iconic presence of God in their homes. Extreme?; perhaps. But no more extreme than what the average American does weekly such as viewing syndicated television programs or sporting events, over eating our rich foods, spending lengthly amounts of time on the internet, putting ourselves in immediate occasions of sin partying down at the local club, consuming massive amounts of alcohol or drugs, or the many other forms of escapism many indulge in today. In other words, the things we are “extreme” about are the things we truly love. Where we spend our time, and what we spend our time doing, in essence tells us what or whom we truly love. Although I have used an example here of how the Russians in the East venerate icons in their homes, we should not think that private veneration of icons is an Eastern phenomenon. In fact, Hans Belting explains that Christians in the early centuries from the West often carried relic boxes with icons on them when they went on pilgrimages to holy sites. Likewise the use of small icons for personal devotion in the household was common. This is one devotional practice that urgently needs to be restored in the West. 

There are five core characteristics of an icon.

 The icon first leads us into prayer.

1. The icon gives us a portrait of holiness as well as a historical truth of the person depicted.
2. The icon gives us a theological truth, which of course varies depending on the event, person or persons depicted.
3. The icon has didactic meaning, one which gives us a religious or moral teaching.
4. The icon contains an anagogic meaning, which unites the earthly with the mystical heavenly realm, and the afterlife. 

If we look even closer at the icon we can see what separates it further in its composition from secular forms of art. Certainly the methods in which the icon has been produced, has developed with time. The icon has been traditionally made with mediums such as encaustic wax, plaster, mosaic tile and egg tempera. The earliest sacred images were certainly simple productions made with pigments from the earth in the form of frescos, and soon after mosaic tiles. Likewise today’s traditional iconography, although more theologically advanced, maintain a similar practice which makes use of earth pigments, mixed with egg, creating a medium known as egg-tempera. 

 There are three characteristics of the iconographer as he engages in writing an icon. 

They are, ‘theory’, ‘practice’ and ‘contemplation’. 

1. Theory is the vast amount of time the iconographer spends in prayer, in researching, studying and observing the icon and the iconographic process. 
2. Practice is the actual icon writing itself, in which the iconographer uses prayer, a physical medium, a theological framework and a recognizable iconographic model to write the icon.
3. Contemplation is the important internalization of writing the icon, which bonds the person with the eternal Godhead through the icon writing process. This is also known as theoria. In a sense, the icon speaks to the iconographer during the process of its creation. In essence, the icon itself becomes a prayer. 

If we examine a panel icon, we see that it is painted where light is brought out from darkness. Acrylic paints are now being used by some iconographers today, but even when using this medium, the same process of applying the color from dark to light is the same. The image begins with preparing a board with gesso, a mixture of plaster and glue. It is sanded smooth and then an image is either drawn or transferred onto the board. After this is done the image is incised, or scribed into the board with a sharp object like a scribing tool. Once this has been done the painting can begin. The background and halo is done first, usually with a clay base, which will be covered in gold leaf. Then a color medium is used to paint the clothing or other objects. There are several layers of highlighting done, and some schools separate them with veils of a thin medium. The highlighting brings the image out of the darkness into the light. As the process continues, we begin to see the grace of God radiating through the icon. All of these steps have a theological meaning, which give the image a unique bond with both the iconographer, and all those who will meditate on it. Through the many steps of writing the icon, it slowly becomes a window, or more accurately, a doorway to heaven. 

We traditionally say that the iconographer does not “paint” an icon, but “writes” it, noting the difference in how the icon is created compared to other art. It is written in much of the same way as Scripture is written, in other words it is the gospel in image. Just as technique is of crucial importance to the creation of an icon, so is the choice of pigments. There are general principles in choosing what colors are used on an icon, but it must be stressed that there have been various schools of iconography which have varied in practice, separated by time and geographical area. So, as a general rule we have the following color explanations. 

1. Gold symbolizes God’s divine light, grace or the splendor of the celestial kingdom. Hence we see the back ground and halos in gold. Notice how the halo is different fro that of later Western art. 
2. Purple symbolizes royalty, we see Christ and some Saints in purple.  
3. Red can depict the passion of God’s love, and divinity. It is also used to depict the blood of martyrdom as is often seen in the icons of the Saints who were martyred. 
4. Green may also used to depict martyrdom in icons. 
5. White is the symbol of the heavenly realm, and is also the color of holiness and cleanliness. Sometimes we see Christ in white such as in the icon of the Descent Into Hell. 
6. Blue is a symbol of eternity or heavenly participation. In some instances it also depicts humanity. For example in many icons you see the Theotokos often wearing blue with red on the outside, showing her humanity covered by divinity. Christ is often shown the opposite, wearing red on the inside and blue on the outside symbolizing His divinity clothed with His humanity. 
7. Brown is used to depict the earthly realm or human nature. It also depicts poverty and many monks are depicted wearing brown. 
8. Black usually denotes death, or eternal darkness. Demons are always depicted black in iconography. 

There are six traditional categories of icons. 

1. The Lord Jesus Christ, or Christ the Savior. Christ is depicted in many forms, such the Pantokrator or the Teacher. 
2. The Theotokos, or Mother of God, often called the All Holy One or the Panagia. Likewise there are many forms in which she is depicted, such as The Guide, Tender Mercy, or the Oranta. (explain 3 stars- virginity)
3. We have the angels, such as Saint Michael or Saint Gabriel. 
4. We have the Feasts of the Church such as the Annunciation, the Descent into Hell or the Epiphany. 
5. Then we have the many Saints of the Church of which the most famous include Saint John Chrysostom, Saint Nicholas and Saint Gregory the Great. 
6. Finally we have didactic icons which are aimed at specific teachings. We have the icons of the Old Testament for example such as Abraham and Isaac, The Old Testament Trinity, or the Three Holy Youths in the Furnace. 

It would be a mistake before we close not to recap on how the sacred image helps us to grow in the love of God. I would like to expound on a few thoughts with Aiden Hart’s perspective on some spiritual aspects of the icon. 

1. Sacred art participates in what it represents- Thus the icon helps us to realize the eternal world we enter into when we enter a church. The building, the art and everything material is consecrated for the purpose of worshipping the one true God. 
2. Sacred art aids repentance- The way the icon depicts divine realities inspires in us to turn towards the light of grace which is depicted in them. The icon also helps us to remove ourselves from the egocentric world we find ourselves regularly immersed in. I would add, that we need the sacred image, to go beyond ourselves and contemplate the eternal. 
3. Sacred art is liturgical- When we enter the church we see sacred images before us. They help us to engage in the liturgical functions more fully. Likewise the sacred images should be venerated, kissed or processed with. We see the procession in the West most frequently with statues of The Blessed Mother, on the Feast of the Assumption for example, while in the East a panel icon is frequently processed with during a Feast. When we honor the icons in our homes, we are actually extending what happens in the liturgy into our homes.  

All three of these attributes of the sacred image bring us to love God more fully. The sacred image brings before our eyes the most beautiful divine realities of the incarnation of Christ, and thus our deification and salvation.

I will leave you now with a few thoughts about the icon, and what it means for us as Catholics today. The great iconographer Leonid Ouspensky writes, “The fundamental principle of this art is a pictorial expression of the teaching of the Church, by representing concrete events of sacred History and indicating their inner meaning. The art is intended not to reflect on the problems of life but to answer them, and thus, from its very inception, is a vehicle of the Gospel teaching.” Furthermore the icon is not a side option of our Christian faith, it is an integral part of our spiritual life. Ouspensky continues, “the doctrine relating to the image is not something separate, not an appendix, but follows naturally from the doctrine of salvation, of which it is an inalienable part.” 

I propose that along with the loss of many of our traditional practices in the Catholic Church, the loss of the sacred image has been one of the most damaging in our era. The Eastern Church won their battle over the iconoclasts and have since developed their own iconic tradition. In the West, our war has yet to be waged against our present day silent iconoclastic movement. The bishops who facilitate this desacralization do not have to outrightly come out and formally condemn the use of icons in word as the heretics did in the eighth century, but their actions are very similar. Many, certainly not all, bishops and their minions have marched into churches, whitewashed the images, jackhammered out altars, many adorned with sacred images and discarded them as yesterday’s garbage. The sacred image has also been prohibited from being placed into new churches, instead being replaced with deformed, profane images. The loss of the sacred image in Western Catholic culture has been detrimental to the Church and society. This decline has come along side of theological errors which have crept into the Church, coming to its full iconoclastic pinnacle over the last 50 to 60 years. The era of modernism following the Second Vatican Council has now almost done away with the sacred image in our Western Catholic worship, both in liturgical and in private devotion. It is not acceptable that many of our Catholic churches today can’t be distinguished from a secular auditorium or business park. Silence should no longer be tolerated when it comes to the profanation of sacred images and the ongoing onslaught of church wreck-ovations today.

Yes, at Christ the King we are somewhat insulated now from the rest of the Western Church. We have six wonderful stained glass windows, a beautiful icon of ‘Our Lady of Perpetual Help’ and beautiful statues of Our Lord, Our Lady, St. Peter, St. Paul and the angels. Obviously I am certainly not advocating that we abandon these sacred image traditions we have developed in the West. What I am calling for however is that we not abandon the traditional iconographic model of the Roman Church as a whole. In other words we have lost some of our Roman iconographic heritage. It is up to us to revive the sacred image by introducing them back into our Western Catholic tradition. They must be a part of our public and private devotion. We can each choose to reintroduce this practice into our homes and pass it on to our children. Many of us stand in awe after the re-election of one of the most heinous men  to ever fill the presidential seat. Should we be surprised? As the Church goes, the world goes. When the Church gets watered down with secularization, society also degenerates. Society is not going to fix itself without the shining beacon of Christ, His Church and His Saints. May we have the courage and holiness to stand up today like those many Saints who came before us, who sacrificed everything they had to save the holy icon. If we listen closely we can still hear the chants of the faithful as they processed through the streets of Constantinople glorifying God and His Saints.

I now close with the troparion which is sung in the Eastern Church in veneration of Saint Nicephoros of Constantinople, to whom I ask for intercession so that we may win our war in the West against these wretched iconoclasts.  

Your inspired confession gained victory for the Church, O holy Hierarch Nicephorus.

You suffered unjust exile through reverence for the icon of God the Word.

O righteous Father, Pray to Christ our God to grant us his great mercy!

Bibliography

Andrejev, Vladislav. Theoria. New York, NY. Prosopon School of Iconography. DVD

Angold, Michael. Byzantium: The Bridge From Aniquity to the Middle Ages. New York,NY: St Martin’s Press 2001. Print.

Beckwith, John. Early Christian and Byzantine Art. Harmondsworth, Eng.: Penguin, 1979. Print.

Belting, Hans. Likeness and Presence: A History of the Image before the Era of Art. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1994. Print.

Bigham, Stephane. Early Christian Attitudes toward Images. Rollingsford, NH: Orthodox Research Institute, 2004. Print.

Hart, Aidan. "The Sacred in Art and Architecture." N.p., n.d. Web.

Herrin, Judith. Women in Purple: Rulers of Medieval Byzantium. London,UK: Weidenfeld & Nicholson (Princeton) 2001. Print

Hilarion, Alfeyev. "Theology of Icon in the Orthodox Church." St Vladimir's Seminary. 5 Feb. 2011. Lecture.

Montgomery, Daniel. Icons Differ From All Other Art In Its Mysticism. Publication of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America 1958

John, and David Anderson. On the Divine Images: Three Apologies against Those Who Attack the Divine Images. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary, 1980. Print.

Kontoglou, Photes, and Constantine Cavarnos. Byzantine Sacred Art: Selected Writings of the Contemporary Greek Icon Painter Fotis Kontoglous on the Sacred Arts According to the Tradition of Eastern Orthodox Christianity. Belmont, Mass., U.S.A.: Institute for Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, 1985. Print.

Ouspensky, Leonide, and Leonide Ouspensky. Theology of the Icon. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary, 1992. Print.

Ouspensky, Leonide, and Vladimir Lossky. The Meaning of Icons. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary, 1982. Print.

Quenot, Michel. The Icon: Window on the Kingdom. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary, 1991. Print.

Safran, Linda. Heaven on Earth: Art and the Church in Byzantium. University Park, Penn.: Pennsylvania State UP, 1998. Print.

Talbot, Alice-Mary Maffry. Byzantine Defenders of Images: Eight Saints' Lives in English Translation. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1998. Print.

Benedictine Sisters Release New CD

The Benedictines of Mary, Queen of Apostles will have their new cd out in a couple of weeks. I will have have to order a copy!

Recommended Books On Iconography

Five Recommended Books On Iconography

For those interested in the history, theology and technique of iconography, I have put together a list of my favorite books on the subject. Where there is more info I have included a website link. All of them can be found on Amazon for purchase. I have kept the book list small and concise, to my five essentials. There are many good books on the sacred image, but these are in my opinion the best ones to begin with, and if you purchase all five, there is not too much overlap in information. Together they will give you a solid historical, theological and technical foundation on the subject. The first part of the list are books, and the second list are some free online articles and websites that I recommend which accompany the books nicely. 

Books

1. Hart, Aidan. Techniques of Icon and Wall Painting. Leominster: Gracewing, 2011. Print.

This is a very nice book. It is a large hardback put together very well and has a ton of full color illustrations. While it does cover some brief history of the icon, it goes into great detail on how to write an icon. From the making of the board, to the gesso, all the way to finishing it, it takes you along step by step. Although it is a bit on the expensive side, if you want to delve into icon painting, it is worth the money. More info found here.

2. John, and David Anderson. On the Divine Images: Three Apologies against Those Who Attack the Divine Images. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary, 1980. Print.

This book contains three written defenses of the Church's use of sacred images, in which all three are from Saint John of Damascus. This should belong on every Catholic's bookshelf. If you dig you can also probably find them all on the internet as well. 

3. Ouspensky, Leonide, and Vladimir Lossky. The Meaning of Icons. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary, 1982. Print.

The Meaning of icons is a great book for those who may want to just have a nice background on iconography as a whole. It covers the basic history, types of icons and their meanings and symbolism. It is an oversized glossy paperback with nice full page illustrations throughout. This is a great book to supplement Hart's book if you are getting into iconography and want to understand more history and the meaning of icons. 

4. Belting, Hans. Likeness and Presence: A History of the Image before the Era of Art. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1994. Print.

Likeness and Presence is a history book, pure and simple. If you want the complete history of Christian art and then some, this is it. It is over 600 pages. I really recommend this book for Catholics because it does cover the icon in the Western tradition as well, which most iconography books tend to overlook because they are usually written by Orthodox theologians. There are also many black and white illustrations that accompany the text as well. If you like history, this one's for you. More info found here.

5. "A History of Icon Painting [Hardcover]." A History of Icon Painting: L. Evseyeva: 9780955008900: Amazon.com: Books. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Apr. 2013.

The final recommendation is a feast for the eyes. The entire book is filled with icons from the various traditions of the East along with explanations of them. If you are going to start painting icons, this will give you hundreds of examples from the many traditions of iconography. 

Free Online Sources/Articles

1. Hilarion, Alfeyev. "Theology of Icon in the Orthodox Church." St Vladimir's Seminary. 5 Feb. 2011. Lecture.

2. Aiden Hart. "Sacred Icons"

3. Icons Explained

4. Orthodox Arts Journal

For Greater Glory: The True Story of Cristeros

If you have not seen the movie yet, you really should. It is great on blu-ray.

Saint Nicholas Punches the Heretic Arius

This is a great video recounting the story of St. Nicholas punching out the heretic Arius. Very cool.

The Doom and Gloom Gang Vs The Balloon and Sunshine Gang

The Doom and Gloom Gang Vs The Balloon and Sunshine Gang

Matthew J. Bellisario 2013

In the Catholic world today we have seen the emergence of two polar opposite “gangs” emerge. This is most readily observed on the internet where you have those who see a doomsday scenario behind every event, or those who think that everything is perfect, where everything comes in a nice neat box with a bow on top. Few are those who view things in a healthy balanced manner, where the bad is recognized and yet the good is also given is due place. 

Since there has been so much material written recently on the election of Pope Francis, it is a perfect topic of discussion for further explanation. There are generally two opposing camps on the internet concerning our new Holy Father. We have the extreme “traditional” side who views everything Pope Francis has done thus far as an utter catastrophe. His liturgical behavior has been the favorite point of attack for the Doom gang. On the other side of the street we have the Sunshine gang, where everything that this Pope has done has been nothing short of miraculous. For them Saint Francis of Assisi has been resurrected from the dead and become pope. The truth however lies somewhere in between the Doom gang and the Sunshine gang. 

As Catholics we should not join in the ranks of either of these “gangs.” Rather we should be in the “Reality and Prudence” guild. That is, to be of the mindset that we see the truth and recognize it for what it is, and deal with it according to our Catholic faith. If we look at the Doom and Gloomers, yes they see a particular truth regarding the liturgical laxity of Pope Francis, but they get absorbed into only focusing on this reality. They fail to see any good that will come about by other things Pope Francis is doing. For example, they fail to see the positive effects that he is having on those with whom he has taken a personal interest in. He has fearlessly gone out to welcome and meet the “average joe” at Saint Peters. No bullet proof car, etc. He has no fear of walking up to a crippled stranger in the crowd of Saint Peters and giving him a blessing, with little to no regard for himself. I know, to most “traditionalists” this is nothing more than touchy-feely nonsense. Yet, Christ Himself did this very same thing. The fact is, these types of acts by the Pope will convert people to the Church. Yet, the Doom gang has become so fixated on his liturgical laxity that they fall into a negative mindset, which also equates to a superficial faith. Rather than observe and move on, everything the Pope does now falls under their view of his liturgical laxity. No matter what he does he cannot do anything right in their mind. This is a travesty. 

Now we look at the balloon brandishing Sunshine gang’s opposite naive view, which makes any excuse it can to justify everything the Pope does, no matter how detrimental it may be to the faithful. For example, it is a fact that Pope Francis has taken the liturgical reverence a step down from that of Pope Benedict XVI. In fact, it is not a stretch to say that he looks rather sloppy at times during the Mass. What is the deal with one hand over the chalice? Why not follow the rubrics, rather than making things up on the fly? Why does he equate “poor in spirit” to wearing horrible looking vestments, etc? Obviously we cannot know the intentions of the Holy Father, and so we must be careful when we voice our concerns. The Sunshine gang however equates this obvious change in liturgical praxis as being a great thing. He is Saint Francis reincarnate, period. For them, he can do no wrong. The Sunshine gang is so insecure in their faith that they never dare to observe the reality that not everything with this pope or the Church is perfect. That would indeed upset their superficial faith. They would rather live in a fantasy world where earth has now become heaven. They refuse to realize that we live in a foreign land here on earth, where Satan constantly wages war on the Church, and those in it. 

How do we avoid the errors of these two rival gangs on opposite sides the street, constantly hurling insults back and forth akin to the opening scene of ‘The Gangs of New York?’ It is critical to observe reality as it is and deal with it as the Church and its Saints teach us to do, which is with the virtue of prudence. When we see the Holy Father at times exhibiting the characteristics what we consider to be a loose canon, we may charitably recognize that his actions are not helpful to our faith, and we pray for him. We are not bound to imitate everything he does. Just because Pope Francis has little regard for wearing beautiful vestments does not mean we have to agree with him. We must live our faith in Christ, receiving the Sacraments and spending time in prayer. Did the Saints during times of great trials spend all of their time complaining about it? No, they spent most of the time in prayer, and when they had a valid opportunity to actually do something positive, they did it in the virtue of prudence. Even the Saints in their greatest times of trial were often joyful and even humorous. They thanked God for the opportunity to suffer for Him. No, they were not usually bitter as many of those on the internet today often are. Many Catholics today on the internet are either bitter, prideful or arrogant, or all of the above. This is very clear with many of the apologists and bloggers on the internet. How they all became experts on the new Holy Father overnight is a mystery to me. 

On the other side of the coin, the Saints did not pretend that a dumpster full of rubbish was a treasure chest of gold. They saw things for what they were and they lived their Catholic faith recognizing both the good and the bad, and yet remained in joy and peace in Christ. They realized that in the end they were going to be judged by what they did, not by what others have done. They refused to let anyone else’s actions be a cause of sin for them. We should have the same attitude. Yes Pope Francis has exhibited what many would call radical behavior since the start of his pontificate. Some of it has been good, some of it hasn’t. Deal with this fact like the Saints dealt with their trials, tribulations and concerns. You or I cannot change how he acts or what he does. Be thankful for the good he does and pray for what we consider to be the negative he does. 

Finally, we should carefully consider whether or not we should even make public remarks about the actions of the Holy Father or others. This is easier said than done, by the way. I know, I have big mouth. For example, it may not be prudent to either criticize or even defend his actions in public, for we may only cause scandal or give our own ill-informed opinions about one thing or another. We run the risk of misleading others. I hope not to do that in any of my future posts here. Remember everything we put on the internet we are going to be held accountable for. That scares me when I go back and see some of the things I posted years ago where I lacked prudence or charity. All of us should strive to act with the virtue of prudence when writing or posting on the internet. When we do give our opinion regarding our observations concerning negative things, we should do so carefully and charitably. Let us not join the ranks of the Gloom and Doomers or the Balloon and Sunshiners. Let us live in the reality of Jesus Christ as he has taught us to do, with the cardinal virtue of prudence. 

Happy Easter From Christ The King 2013

Happy Easter to all from Christ the King, Sarasota FL. Here are a few of the pictures that I took from the Easter Vigil.

Eucharist and Covenant in John's Last Supper Account: Book Review

Eucharist and Covenant in John's Last Supper Account

(A Theological Gift for Our Time)

Matthew J. Bellisario

Pope Pius XII wrote in `Mediator Dei', "Liturgical practice begins with the very founding of the Church." Monsignor La Femina's revolutionary new theological work, 'Eucharist and Covenant in John's Last Supper Account' sheds new light on this very fact, in examining the Johannine Last Supper Account, which until now has not been revealed. There has always been a problem which has separated the synoptic Gospels from the Gospel of Saint John. One of the major problems has always been the absence of the institution of the Eucharist in the Gospel of John, which appears in every synoptic account and in Paul. Likewise, the mystery is reciprocal being that the synoptic Gospels and Paul do not mention the footwashing in their Last Supper accounts. Many biblical scholars over the centuries have come up with a variety of opinions as to why this apparent problem exists, and even among the Church Fathers there has been no unanimous interpretation of Saint John's Footwashing account. Monsignor's book begins by laying out this fundamental problem, and proposes a solution to the problem: Jesus' death was indeed made present at the Last Supper, and John indicated this through his Footwashing analogy of the Eucharist.

This may seem to be a strange interpretation at first, and indeed it is "strange" being that Saint John's account of the Footwashing has never been interpreted in such a manner. Yet this theological gem gives a very convincing argument that Saint John did speak about the institution and nature of the Eucharist in his account of the Last Supper. It is hidden in analogy. The problem and the proposed solution is then built upon by explaining what type of analogy Saint John uses in his account. The book is nicely documented by easy to follow footnotes, so that you can research further into each topic as you study the work. As the book progresses, you will learn many other interesting facts about the Church and the Catholic faith, as well as some of its Jewish roots, especially those that pertain to covenant.

One reason this work is important for our times however lies in the fact that the Church is now in a time of crisis when it comes to understanding and believing the doctrine of the Eucharist, and how it pertains to us. Of course the Eucharist given to us and the person of Jesus Christ are truly inseparable. This is clearly and uniquely articulated in the book. There are however many other important theological topics that are covered as the book unveils this hidden account about the nature of the Eucharist of the Last Supper. For example, do most Catholics really understand the role of Christ as Messiah? Do they understand the meaning of Jesus' command to "love one another as I have loved you"? Do they truly understand Jesus' kingship which is "not of this world?" What about His title, "Son of Man?" Is the Father truly greater than the Son? These any many other important questions pertaining to the person of Jesus Christ are also clearly answered. As the book progresses one begins to truly understand the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist and how the Church actually takes its origin from Christ and the Eucharist. Monsignor states, regarding the Church, "...she is essentially eucharistic because her very origin is essentially bound to the Eucharist and can never be separated from it."

After reading this book you will clearly see how Saint John's Footwashing account flows along side by side with the Last Supper accounts. Monsignor indicates the similarities in circumstances, attributes and effects of the Eucharist in the synoptic and Pauline Last Supper Accounts and the Footwashing in the Johannine Last Supper Account. Moreover, one begins to understand how Saint John views the reality of the Eucharistic covenant. As Monsignor covers the Royal Investiture Tradition and the analogy used by Saint John of the Hittite vassal treaty, this all comes together nicely. After reading this work you truly begin to see the relationship between God the Father, Jesus the Son, and his "children of God."

There is much to be learned from reading this book. It will not only be an eye opener for Catholics, but it will also give Protestants yet another Scriptural conundrum to wrestle with in regards to the Christ and the Eucharist. I highly recommend this work, and having read the other reviews here on Amazon, I must say that this is not really a difficult work. Yet, if you are expecting one of those warm fuzzy books that you read before bed, this is not one of them. This book is best read at the desk with your pencil and Bible close at hand. It is a theological work in the truest sense, and those that understand and appreciate older theological works that are rooted in Saint Thomas will really appreciate the amount of time and effort that went into this theological study. In my copy there is underlining on every page, and although I read the book in two days, I am now going back and rereading it again. This book may truly be the next colossal breakthrough in Catholic Scripture scholarship. With the mayhem brought upon us today by those who have sought to degrade and desacralize the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, this book contains the remedy to their errors. One other note, the book's forward is penned by non-other than Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke. Whether or not you come away from this book convinced of Monsignor's premise, which is truly convincing, I guarantee you will not come away from it without seeing the Gospel of Saint John, and Scripture in general, in a new light.

Great Video on the FSSP

Virtual Tour of Saint John Lateran in Rome

A friend sent this link over to me which is a website containing a very cool virtual tour of the Basilica of Saint John Lateran in Rome. I visited back in 2005 and it was of course among my favorite churches that I visited. Check it out.

http://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_giovanni/vr_tour/index-en.html

The Splendor and Glory of the Sacred Image Part IV Summary

 The Splendor and Glory of the Sacred Image Part IV Summary

 
Now I want to turn briefly to the theological explanations that came out of this controversy, and then I will proceed in the second part of the lecture to examining the icon itself, and the theology that separates them from other forms of artistic expression. Perhaps the most notable Saint and theologian to arise out of this era was Saint John Damascene. He wrote an infamous apologia for the use of sacred images. I think it is worth reading a small portion of his document to explain the proper understanding of the Old Testament ban on graven images, and how it relates to the Church.

“Now adversaries say: God's commands to Moses the law-giver were, "Thou shalt adore shalt worship him the Lord thy God, and thou alone, and thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath."

They err truly, not knowing the Scriptures, for the letter kills whilst the spirit quickens--not finding in the letter the hidden meaning...

You see the one thing to be aimed at is not to adore a created thing more than the Creator, nor to give the worship of latreia except to Him alone. By worship, consequently, He always understands the worship of latreia. For, again, He says: "Thou shalt not have strange gods other than Me. Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor any similitude. Thou shalt not adore them, and thou shalt not serve them, for I am the Lord thy God." (Deut. 5.7-9) And again, "Overthrow their altars, and break down their statues; burn their groves with fire, and break their idols in pieces. For thou shalt not adore a strange god." (Deut. 12.3) And a little further on: "Thou shalt not make to thyself gods of metal." (Ex. 34.17)

You see that He forbids image-making on account of idolatry, and that it is impossible to make an image of the immeasurable, uncircumscribed, invisible God....These injunctions were given to the Jews on account of their proneness to idolatry. Now we, on the contrary, are no longer in leading strings. Speaking theologically, it is given to us to avoid superstitious error, to be with God in the knowledge of the truth, to worship God alone, to enjoy the fulness of His knowledge. We have passed the stage of infancy, and reached the perfection of manhood. We receive our habit of mind from God, and know what may be imaged and what may not....

It is clear that when you contemplate God, who is a pure spirit, becoming man for your sake, you will be able to clothe Him with the human form. When the Invisible One becomes visible to flesh, you may then draw a likeness of His [9] form. When He who is a pure spirit, without form or limit, immeasurable in the boundlessness of His own nature, existing as God, takes upon Himself the form of a servant in substance and in stature, and a body of flesh, then you may draw His likeness, and show it to anyone willing to contemplate it. Depict His ineffable condescension, His virginal birth, His baptism in the Jordan, His transfiguration on Thabor, His all-powerful sufferings, His death and miracles, the proofs of His Godhead, the deeds which He worked in the flesh through divine power, His saving Cross, His Sepulchre, and resurrection, and ascent into heaven. Give to it all the endurance of engraving and colour. Have no fear or anxiety; worship is not all of the same kind.

The incarnation is the binding agent that grafts the sacred image into the body of the Church. Here Saint John amply explains the orthodox Christian understanding of these Old Testament texts. You can find his entire apologia on the internet. I think it is also important to briefly cover some of the statements made by the Seventh Ecumenical Council, which formally upheld the traditional teaching of the Church’s use of sacred images.  At the end of the first session of the Seventh Ecumenical Council, John, the most reverend bishop and legate of the Eastern high priests said: “This heresy is the worst of all heresies. Woe to the iconoclasts! It is the worst of heresies, as it subverts the incarnation (οἰκονομίαν) of our Savior.” 

In Session 1 the following anathemas were proclaimed by bishops reconciling themselves to the Church.

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 hath 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 hath 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.

This is my confession [of faith] and to these propositions I give my assent.  And I pronounce this with my whole heart, and soul, and mind.

Furthermore, the Council proclaimed,

“We, therefore, following the royal pathway and the divinely inspired authority of our Holy Fathers and the traditions of the Catholic Church (for, as we all know, the Holy Spirit indwells her), define with all certitude and accuracy that just as the figure of the precious and life-giving Cross, so also the venerable and holy images, as well in painting and mosaic as of other fit materials, should be set forth in the holy churches of God, and on the sacred vessels and on the vestments and on hangings and in pictures both in houses and by the wayside, to wit, the figure of our Lord God and Saviour Jesus Christ, of our spotless Lady, the Mother of God, of the honourable Angels, of all Saints and of all pious people.  For by so much more frequently as they are seen in artistic representation, by so much more readily are men lifted up to the memory of their prototypes, and to a longing after them; and to these should be given due salutation and honourable reverence (ἀσπασμὸν καὶ τιμητικὴν προσκύνησιν), not indeed that true worship of faith (λατρείαν) which pertains alone to the divine nature; but to these, as to the figure of the precious and life-giving Cross and to the Book of the Gospels and to the other holy objects, incense and lights may be offered according to ancient pious custom.  For the honour which is paid to the image passes on to that which the image represents, and he who reveres the image reveres in it the subject represented.  For thus the teaching of our holy Fathers, that is the tradition of the Catholic Church, which from one end of the earth to the other hath received the Gospel, is strengthened.  Thus we follow Paul, who spake in Christ, and the whole divine Apostolic company and the holy Fathers, holding fast the traditions which we have received.”

I could spend much more time on this most important Ecumenical Council. In many ways this Council is more important to us today than the Second Vatican Council, since we have had more than 50 years of a silent iconoclasm destroying the Church from within, with little to no resistance. I think it would be safe to say that the great Saints of this time period would be astonished at the laxity in which we have allowed the sacred image to be desacralized in our Church today. The sacred image instills in us a love for God and His Saints. There is a much needed devotion for the icon in our sad time of unbelief. In the end it comes down to the faithful, like you and I, who must resurrect the devotion and veneration of the icons in the West, of which these most valiant Saints have passed on to us.

The Splendor and Glory of the Sacred Image Part III The Iconoclastic Controversy

                   The Iconoclastic Controversy and the Incarnation


The iconoclastic controversy of the eighth century is one of the most important events of Church history, being that it not only directly addresses the use of sacred images, but more importantly it addressed the incarnation of Christ. In other words, the Council was primarily Christological in nature. The event brought a waxing and waning of infighting concerning the use of sacred images to a head in the Church. Metropolitan Hilarion illustrates the importance of the Council, “The entire Christological dispute, in fact, reaches its climax with this council, which gave the icon its final ‘cosmic’ meaning… In this way the justification of icon veneration brought to a close the dogmatic dialectic of the age of the universal councils.” The event also provides an excellent platform to discuss the Old Testament prohibition of the use of graven images, and how this Biblical text is to be understood in its proper Christian context. Deuteronomy 5:8-9 and Exodus 20:4, are the proof texts often used by heretics claiming that the Catholic Church is guilty of idolatry. The text of Deuteronomy claims, “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, and you shall not bow down and worship them.” And the Second Commandment given to Moses in Exodus says, "Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath" How do we reconcile this prohibition with the doctrine of the sacred image of the Catholic Church?

It must be noted that the prohibition is obviously not a prohibition on all images since in Exodus 25:1-22 God actually commands the Jews to make images of the cherubim on the Ark. The cherubim commanded to be depicted by God seem to directly go against the text prohibiting graven images. Likewise in Exodus 26 we see the cherubim embroidered on the linens in the tabernacle. Other Old Testament references such as that of Moses and the Bronze Serpent, a prefigurement of Christ, as well as the building of Solomon’s temple, a prefigurement of later church buildings, further demonstrate this point. The ban does not prohibit all images, but first and foremost it bans the idolatrous depictions of false gods, which would be used for false worship, which would be a breaking of the second commandment. Secondly it was not possible at the time for the Jews to depict the one true God Himself, since no man had ever seen God in any corporeal sense. Hence the Jews were forbidden to depict God in the heavens above. Of course this would all change, since through the coming of Christ, we are now able to see the Father. "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”(John 14:16) Saint John of Damascus, the great apologist of the sacred image, hymnographer and defender of sacred music wrote, “Of old, God the incorporeal and uncircumscribed was never depicted. Now, however, when God is seen clothed in flesh, and conversing with men, I make an image of God whom I see. I do not worship matter, I worship the God of matter, who became matter for my sake, and deigned to inhabit matter, who worked out my salvation through matter. I will not cease from honoring that matter which works my salvation.”

It is important to understand the development of the Christian teaching of these Old Testament texts concerning the depictions of the one true God. Before Christ, God had not yet been revealed in the flesh. Once Christ took on human flesh, this obviously revealed something that had not previously been revealed to the Jews. The unique bond between Christ’s incarnation and the sacred image is most beautifully explained by two of the great Saints of the iconoclastic period, Saint Theodore the Studite and Saint John Damascene, whom I will again later quote at length. Likewise the texts of the Seventh Ecumenical Council provide us more insight into the Christian understanding of the use of sacred image. The apparent problem of reconciling the Old Testament ban lies only in misunderstanding the context of the prohibition, which ultimately depends on Christ’s incarnation, one’s ability to understand the difference between idolatrous and non-idolatrous images, and the intended use of the image. We must understand that the Christian does not worship the image, but gives veneration to the person depicted in the image, such as the Saints or the Theotokos. Worship that is given to God alone is reserved to God alone, and when for example Christ is depicted in the icon, then we are able to give that worship which is due to God, through the icon. The icon, when properly understood, is not an end within itself, but leads to the eternal reality beyond itself.

Although the history of the iconoclastic period in the East is quite complex, I will attempt to give you a simplified overview. The era between Constantine in the early 4th century and the iconoclastic period of the early 8th century is one which develops the use of the icon in large churches. Justinian and Theodora’s rule during the sixth century was a rich period for church iconography. It can be said that this period was the last time that East and West enjoyed a united empire, one which soon quickly unraveled. One example of this artistic development is the 6th century church in Ravenna, San Vitale, which contains some of the most famous icons from the pre-iconoclastic period. Thankfully this jewel of Christendom remained untouched during the period of iconoclasm. Although many influences can be cited as to the cause of the crisis, such as the rise of the Islamic heresy, the definite Jewish influence on the Byzantine Emperor, as well as political pressures, the main instigator appears to have been the Nestorian bishop, Xenaeas of Hierapolis, who’s party gained influence over the Byzantine emperor Leo III. (Nestorianism teaching that Christ is two persons, one human one divine.) Likewise as I previously mentioned, there had also been a waxing and waning of sorts between iconophiles and iconoclasts since the earliest days of the Church, and this clash was finally to come to a head under Leo’s reign. As a result of all of these influences and pressures, in 726 Leo III issued an edict which restricted the use of icons in Christian places of worship.

This restriction quickly developed into a widespread campaign to destroy these supposed idolatrous images, and the icons on the church apses and walls were covered by whitewashing. The controversy quickly became heated when the great image of Christ above the main entrance gate to Constantinople was taken down and destroyed. Orthodox Christians rightfully viewed this as an assault on Christ Himself. Just as when someone burns the US flag, the image itself is not what is being attacked, but what it represents. During this incident we see how very different the Christians of that era are to our own. A group of pious women, offended by this assault, physically tried to stop the soldier climbing up the ladder to the icon above the city gate. They arose from the crowd and made their way past the guards and ended up knocking over the ladder, which lead to the soldier’s demise. In short, these women were not going to stand for the image of their Lord being desecrated before them. The women were slain immediately on the spot by the emperor’s soldiers with the exception of the alleged ringleader, St. Theodosia, who is now honored among our Saints. She received more cruel punishments. She was dragged off through the streets, tortured, humiliated and later executed. Riots broke out in the city, and one of the great opponents to the iconoclasts Saint Germanus the patriarch of Constantinople, appealed to Pope Gregory II to condemn this outrageous action.

Pope Gregory II responded quickly to the dire situation and commanded Leo to stop meddling in the affairs of the Church. This is a problem which has always plagued the Eastern Church. Church and state never seemed to able to define their boundaries in Byzantium. Leo responded and commanded the Pope to convene a general council to address the issue of idol worship. Gregory in return chastised him, telling him that no council was needed, and that there was no heresy involved in the proper veneration of the sacred images. Of course, as with most heretics, Leo payed no heed to the Pope’s words and escalated the war upon the monasteries, which were now one of the fiercest opponents to his heretical effort. Monks were murdered, tortured, and their sacred images desecrated and destroyed. The vigilant Patriarch Germanus who opposed Leo and appealed to the Pope was eventually banished as a traitor, but he always remained firm in his orthodox stance. While things were heating up in the East, this tragedy was thankfully something the Western Church did not have to endure. Things remained relatively quiet in the West, where thankfully even those often sympathetic to the East, such as the church in Ravenna, ignored the heretical emperor’s wishes.

In 741 emperor Leo died and there was an uprising to overthrow his son Constantine V. Anastasius, the bishop who replaced Germanus saw an opportunity and now turned on the iconoclasts and sought to restore the use of sacred images to Constantinople. The uprising was short lived however when Constantine’s army marched upon the city and then had Anastasius flogged, blinded and driven into the streets, until he finally gave in to accepting the heresy. Blinding was a favorite punishment for the Byzantines, and it was actually viewed by them as a merciful punishment. Every punishment in the history books seem to read, “he was tortured, blinded and exiled.” Anastasius eventually died in 754, a crippled and broken man. Being that the Pope did not convene the council that his father had demanded, Constantine decided to call his own council. He gathered like-minded heretics from around the known world to officially condemn the use of sacred images. They held what was later known as “the robber council” and published their false anathemas against the iconophiles of the Church. Constantine V escalated the persecutions against the monastics who opposed his “council”. One head abbess was taken and tortured by having burning icons poured over her head. Constantine and his heretical clergy had nuns and monks marched into the hippodrome and humiliated, and then were forced to break their vows and marry. The priest monk, Saint Stephen the Younger took many persecuted monks into his monastery. He out-rightly rebelled against the emperor and his alleged council, and was imprisoned. Finally a group of soldiers riled up a mob of iconoclasts and he was brutally dragged through the streets of the city, clubbed, stoned and finally expired after his brains were literally beaten from his skull. The monastics certainly took a beating, and a Byzantine historian writes, “...monastic property was confiscated and monastic buildings were turned over for military use.” Despite these harsh persecutions, the iconodules did not give up.

There many were many more great martyrs who stood up to the iconoclasts such as Peter the monk who was murdered after refusing to trample on an icon. Andrew of Crete actually left his post as archbishop, set sail from Crete and came to Constantinople to personally address the emperor. He withstood Constantine V to the face, condemned his cruel actions and denounced his heresy. Constantine got so enraged that he had Saint Andrew arrested, tortured, killed and then thrown into a pit where common criminals were disposed. There is also one unexpected hero of sorts, of our story, the Empress Irene who was the wife of Leo IV the son and successor of Constantine V, and now who’s son, Constantine VI, only 9 years old was set to take the place of his father Leo IV. Being that he was of young age, his mother Irene became co-ruler. It was Empress Irene (787) who now sought to restore the use of sacred images to the East. In order to do this however she needed complete control of the government. If you know anything about the Byzantines, there was no shortage of drama, intrigue and hatched plots among their 1000 plus year existence. Irene had a problem, there were several rivals for the throne who had been waiting for her husband to die, so they could take advantage of the supposed weak empress. They certainly underestimated her tenacity. What clever device would she use to neutralize her and her son’s rivals? You guessed it, she had these rivals blinded so she would not have to worry about being interfered with. Yes, even heros have their flaws. As Irene maneuvered key loyalists in place, she was able to secure her spot as empress. Her reign however would later become a problem when her son came of age. There were probably political motives of course, but Irene proved to be an asset for the orthodox Christians in the case of the iconoclastic crisis. She used any and all means to restore the sacred image. Furthermore, she also initiated an effort to have a legitimate ecumenical council called, to counter the earlier robber council.

During this period we see the great Saints such as Saint John of Damascus,, among many other valiant men and women, continuing in the war against the iconoclasts. Due to their efforts as well as a sympathetic empress, a general council was soon called. An effort was first made to convene at Constantinople, but was thwarted by troops who were iconoclastic sympathizers. Irene underestimated the local army’s loyalty to the iconoclasts. Again the determined empress slowly disbanded the local army and replaced it with other soldiers who were loyal to her. The entire Church finally spoke in an official capacity at Nicea in 787 when a legitimate Ecumenical Council was finally convened and the heresy was vigorously condemned by a series of anathemas. The Pope had at least 2 representatives present at the Council along with over 350 bishops from the known world and the Eastern Patriarch of Constantinople.

Although the controversy subsided after the Council, a resurgence of iconoclasm began again 27 years later due to remaining sympathizers again gaining a foothold in the government. More persecutions came and the renown iconographer of the time Lazaros was brought before the high court where his hands were cauterized. This did not stop him, he also withstood them to the face and continued to paint icons with his scarred hands. Others were brought before the court and had inscriptions carved onto their foreheads identifying them falsely as heretics. A second wave of heroes arose such as Saint Ioanikios, Saint Theodore the Studite and the great patriarch Nicephorous, who stood firmly against the icon smashers. Nicephorous the archbishop, too like Germanus years before him under Leo III, was eventually banished across the Bosphorous. Likewise he never ceased to vigorously oppose the heretics. The controversy finally came to an end due to another valiant women, the empress Theodora. Due to her sympathies and influence, on the 11th of March, 843, fifty five years after the Seventh Ecumenical Council, and 116 years after the iconoclastic heresy began, a large procession of clergy and laity with icons in hand, put the iconoclastic controversy to end in the Hagia Sophia. The kontakion (Byzantine hymn) sung during this procession sums up the Church’s teaching well, "No one could describe the Word of the Father; but when He took flesh from you, O Theotokos, He accepted to be described, and restored the fallen image to its former state by uniting it to divine beauty. We confess and proclaim our salvation in word and images."

To this day the Eastern Churches proclaim this victory on the Feast of Orthodoxy on the first Sunday in Lent, where a synodicon is chanted along with the procession of icons, complete with the recitation of the anathemas proclaimed at the Seventh Ecumenical Council. The feast not only celebrates the Church’s victory against the iconoclasts, but also remembers and honors the many Saints who gave their lives, and suffered great sacrifice to defeat this horrific heresy. This feast has unfortunately been long lost to the West, if it ever existed. It cannot be overstated as to the amount of suffering our Catholic forefathers underwent during this atrocious persecution. I certainly cannot do them justice in such a short lecture. I have only mentioned the names of a few of our brothers and sisters in heaven who suffered and died so that we today can enjoy the freedom of use of the sacred image, which we unfortunately as a Catholic whole seem to hold little regard for.