Replies

"If I left something out, please ask again.

Thanks for the honor of your question."

You left out nothing that I can see and I appreciate your answer. As an aside, icons are not properly "art" at all. They are objects of veneration.

Modern Christian iconoclasm fascinates me. As you know, the last bout The Church had with iconoclasts was in the 8th century for a relatively short period of time and it was condemned by the 7th Ecumenical Council. In those days it seems likely that the iconoclasts were influenced by the iconoclasm of the Mohammedans. I take it modern iconoclasm bases itself in the OT? That, at any rate, was the argument used by the 8th century crowd (which included the Emperor and his court). The council fathers pretty much demolished the argument. Here is what they said:

"As the prophets beheld, as the Apostles have taught, as the Church has received, as the Teachers have dogmatised, as the Universe has agreed, as Grace has shown forth, as Truth has revealed, as falsehood has been dissolved, as Wisdom has presented, as Christ awarded, thus we declare; thus we assert, thus we preach Christ our true God, and honour His Saints in words, in writings, in thoughts, in sacrifices, in Churches, in Holy Icons; on the one hand worshiping and reverencing Christ as God and Lord; and on the other hand honouring as true servants of the same Lord of all and accordingly offering them veneration.

"This is the Faith of the Apostles, this is the Faith of the Fathers, this is the Faith of the Orthodox, this is the Faith which has established the Universe!"

Iconoclasm was dead until after the start of the Reformation and, as you point out, not all Protestants ascribe to it.

Am I correct in assuming that you reject the dogmatic decrees of the 7th Ecumenical Council? If so, do you accept any of the decrees of any of the earlier Ecumenical Councils?

(FK, sorry if I was abrupt. The fate of the world was in the balance and all and I needed to help Jack Bauer figure out what to do, so I was in a hurry.) Have we already discussed the possible connection between iconoclasm and this controversy about Mary? Similarly, then, My Sunday School teacher Mr. Paige, who was so kind to us all, showed us love and thus was an evangelist and thus was a minister of reconciliation ... and So I give him thanks and I give God thanks for acting through him.

And as I seek God, and when He grants a consolation, I can see, oh yeah, a "painting", but also something given to me as a window to help me look beyond where I could possibly see, and there, still only seeing tempera on wood (or whatever) I see what cannot be seen by mortal eye.

But to these other brethren, that is unacceptable. To me they seem parsimonious and fearful of offending God. To them I seem idolatrous and proud of myself. To me an icon or an image is a beautiful thing and a gift which points beyond itself. To them it's at best a dangerous distraction and temptation and a kind of theft from God of what is due to God alone.

I don't know how to go further. I like the world I see where anyone and anything can be a saving act of God and where thanks is the currency of life. T me that Icon knocks my mind right off its rails: The inside is bigger than the outside, the womb of a girl contains that which is bigger than the Universe. And words fall away.

They are objects of veneration.

Not if one were ever found to have been secreted into my house!

"As the prophets beheld, as the Apostles have taught, as the Church has received, as the Teachers have dogmatised, as the Universe has agreed, as Grace has shown forth, as Truth has revealed, as falsehood has been dissolved, as Wisdom has presented, as Christ awarded, thus we declare; thus we assert, thus we preach Christ our true God, and honour His Saints in words, in writings, in thoughts, in sacrifices, in Churches, in Holy Icons; on the one hand worshiping and reverencing Christ as God and Lord; and on the other hand honouring as true servants of the same Lord of all and accordingly offering them veneration.

Sorry, that whole paragraph does not strike me IN THE LEAST as ANY justification for the practices, customs, traditions given--except for a false kind of deluding rationalization--for anything but worship of !!!!TRADITION!!!!

I see nothing Godly and nothing Scriptural and nothing truly lastingly spiritually edifying in a Godly sense in such goals, practices, customs.

I think there was a question about where do I get such an orientation, perspective--yes, in large part from the Old Testament. But not only. I think anyone tuning in with the aid of Holy Spirit to God's heart on such issues would want to avoid such because that's clearly God's heart expressed in Scripture. NO amount of traditions of men, habits, customs, rationalizations can replace GOD'S PRIORITIES AND GOD'S HEART on any matter--particularly one He stated so fiercely as He did the one about avoiding images.

Thanks for your kind questions.