Art and Liturgy - The Question of Images
The following article is also of general liturgical interest. The statement that particularly made me choke on my coffee with a bit of surprise was the following:
After the Second Vatican Council, the impression arose that the pope really could do anything in liturgical matters, especially if he were acting on the mandate of an ecumenical council. Eventually, the idea of the givenness of the liturgy, the fact that one cannot do with it what one will, faded from the public consciousness of the West.
What Does 'Rite' Mean in the Context of Christian Liturgy?
As to works on the theology of the icon by Orthodox Christians that I would recommend, one might consider any of the following:
Books on Icons from Eastern Christian Supply
If anyone has specific questions about any of these books (or questions after you read any of them), just fire away at me -- on the forum or in private.
The most famous of these books is "The Meaning of Icons", and it was the first book I read on iconography. I don't own a copy and haven't read it in years, though. A very interesting little book is "Byzantine Thought and Art," because it discusses not only iconography, but also has a nice chapter on Byzantine chant, and other essays of interest on other topics. Cavarnos is a bit of a Greek chauvinist, but then if I had his knowledge of things Greek -- ancient, modern, and everything in-between -- I might be too. He is always worth reading. The books about Photios Kontoglou are interesting because they are about the man who almost singlehandedly rescued Byzantine iconography from its historical low-point. If anyone in Kontoglou's day had said that Orthodox parishes across America would be taking out their sentimental 19th century icons and replacing them with beautifully rendered traditional Byzantine icons, many would have laughed. For anyone with hopes of restoring one's own tradition, Kontoglou's story gives hope.
It also shows that the Orthodox tradition is anything but static: it is in a constant motion of returning to our traditional roots, although inevitably this happens (unconsciously) in a way that fits the needs of each age.
The following is probably the best on-line catalogue of icons available. One can spend hours browsing and looking at these icons. To get to the icons, click on one of the green-lettered topic links off to the left of the screen (The Lord, The Theotokos, etc...):
Icons from St. Isaac of Syria Skete
Finally, here is a nice on-line article about traditional Orthodox chant by the Greek scholar Dr. Dimitri Conomos. It is well-worth reading:
Early Christian and Byzantine Music
I'll stop there, but there is much more where this came from for those with specific questions.
With regard to my last post, I only pinged those who I remember to have been a part of this particular conversation on this thread. Of course, feel free to ping any other individuals who you think might be specifically interested -- I did not intentionally leave anyone out.
I am reading the article(s) by R. which you linked.
Although my 'first read' simply demands that I read them again, it does seem that B-16 winds up being of mixed mind on the move from Platonic to Aristotelian thinking.
To me, it seems that he is perfectly comfortable with the Platonic viewpoint, and not quite as comfy with the Aristotelian, albeit the RC more or less went the Ari. path after roughly 1200 AD.
Rather, he frames them as complementary--that is, the Ortho's Platonism is Christ-Resurrected-centric, while the RC's Aristotelianism is Christ-in-History-centric (very, very rough terminology.)
The difficulty that he has with the Ari. foundation is due to the situation in which he finds the RC Church today--IOW, the Ari. foundation has allowed things to get a bit out of control.
Bottom-line: I think he's a bit more friendly to the GO's than you may conclude, at the foundational level--so his task is to reconcile the seemingly 'opposing' views.
Where he's going to go is to Christ as the center, whether from the 'salvation history' (Ari.) view, or the 'Resurrected' iconic/Platonic view, and I think he'll work from the Eucharist outward.
This disparity also has implications for the "Jerusalem/Athens" discussions AND for the Orthodox Jewish viewpoint, which would (logically) sort of ignore the Platonic stream.