The veneration of holy images is a tradition held by the Church, in varying ways and degrees, for the past twenty centuries. There have been iconoclasms, particularly during the 700s and 800s, and some still maintain arguments against it today.
I intend to defend the tradition in this article even though much has been written on the subject since the Early Church. The history is undoubtedly complicated, I am obviously not an eyewitness, and the arguments can be somewhat technical but I will try to avoid that as much as possible.
1. What is an image?
Reply: According to St John of Damascus’s treatise Apologia against Those Who Decry Holy Images, an image “is a likeness of the original with a certain difference, for it is not an exact reproduction of the original”. From Exodus 20:4 et al, the image may be a “graven thing” or any other “likeness”—it could be made of anything and the image can be of anything.
2. Doesn’t the First Commandment forbid the use of images in religious worship?
Reply: Some quote Exodus 20:3–4 (repeated in Deuteronomy 5): “Thou shalt not have strange gods before me. Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth.” However, it is convenient to interpret the above as a ban on religious images since there is nothing that limits this to a religious context. Anyone who honestly believes the above must apply it consistently and destroy all their family photos and get rid of all their cash since coins and notes also contain images.
3. But that is impractical, so isn’t limiting the rule to religious worship more doable?
Reply: The quoted text does not allow for such interpretation, practical or not. Nevertheless, such impracticality is an indication that the interpretation may be wrong.
4. Then what is forbidden regarding images?
Reply: It is what directly follows (Exodus 20:5) that provides an explanation: “Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them: I am the Lord thy God…” It is not merely the act itself but also the intent and circumstances which matter. Whilst no comment is made regarding circumstances, it clearly indicates that the intent is adoration. In other words, there is a distinction between having images and adoring them.
5. Didn’t the Jews of the Old Testament ban images?
Reply: It is apparent that they took a conservative approach. The episode of the golden calf serves as a lesson. (Exodus 32) Moses later reminded the Israelites that God’s appearance to them “from the midst of the fire” deliberately lacked form to avoid confusion between the Creator and any created thing so they would not make any “graven similitude”. This is in the context of adoration to avoid being “deceived by error thou adore and serve them”. (Deuteronomy 4) However, the presumed ban of images, even in religious worship, is not as extreme as some think.
6. In what way did the Jews of the Old Testament use images?
Reply: The instructions regarding the Ark as recorded in Exodus 25 (repeated in Exodus 37) include “two cherubims of beaten gold”. God dictated many other elaborate details regarding the table and candlestick, amongst other things, and finished that part of the instructions with the following: “Look and make it according to the pattern, that was shewn thee in the mount.” (Exodus 25:40) Whilst many of these are not images like the cherubims, these are still sacramentals, physical objects to be used in religious worship with details (“patterns”) that are nevertheless visually orientated. The episode of the “brazen serpent” (Numbers 21) is another example of using an image. Centuries later, King Solomon’s temple included engravings of “cherubims, and lions, and palm trees, in likeness of a man standing”. (1 Kings 7)
7. What is “worship”?
Reply: This is another topic covered in another article but the following is a brief reply. The words “worship” or “adoration” are sometimes used interchangeably depending on the language and context. In English, worship can be a generic term whereas adoration can be a generic term or a specific term referring to that which is given to God alone. (Deuteronomy 6) In Greek, the term used for the adoration that is given to God alone is latria, the veneration given to the Blessed Virgin Mary is hyperdulia, and the veneration given to other saints, including angels, is dulia. These terms literally mean something like “service”. Note that in English veneration is used for the latter two. Even without the above, it is commonsense that there are different levels of worship. We treat persons differently depending on their rank.
8. So, there are different levels of worship and images are permitted in a religious context. But what about the worship of images?
Reply: There is a difference between the image as a thing (its material and construction) and the image as a representation of the prototype. As mere material, it should not be worshipped. As written in Acts 17: “Being therefore the offspring of God, we must not suppose the divinity to be like unto gold, or silver, or stone, the graving of art, and device of man.” As an image, it represents its prototype. St John of Damascus quotes St Basil in the Apologia against Those Who Decry Holy Images: “Honouring the image leads to the prototype.” Therefore, the veneration due to saints includes their images, the veneration due to the Blessed Virgin Mary includes her image and the adoration due to Christ includes His image. “Since, therefore, Christ is adored with the adoration of ‘latria’, it follows that His image should be adored with the adoration of ‘latria’.” (Summa, III:25:3) The Council of Nicea in 787 AD declared similarly: “Those, therefore, who dare to think or to teach otherwise or to spurn according to wretched heretics the ecclesiastical traditions and to invent anything novel, or to reject anything from these things which have been consecrated by the Church: either the Gospel or the figure of the Cross, or the imaginal picture, or the sacred relics of the martyr; or to invent perversely and cunningly for the overthrow of anyone of the legitimate traditions of the Catholic Church; or even, as it were, to use the sacred vessels or the venerable monasteries as common things; if indeed they are bishops or clerics, we order (them) to be deposed; monks, however, or laymen, to be excommunicated.”
9. Did the Early Church use images?
Reply A: The Early Church, like the Jews of the Old Testament, used sacramentals including images. These items and even locations have been sanctified or blessed or consecrated. One of the earliest examples is Moses and the burning bush when God said, “Come not nigh hither, put off the shoes from thy feet: for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.” (Exodus 3) Some of the other sacramentals the Jews used have already been mentioned. These were still in use at the time of Jesus. In Matthew 23, Christ corrects the Pharisees: “Ye foolish and blind; for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold? … for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift? He therefore that sweareth by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things that are upon it.” When Christ gave instructions to his disciples regarding the pasch, He referred to a “furnished” room prepared for the occasion. (Mark 14, Luke 22) Eusebius writes of a statue at Cæsarea Philippi commemorating the episode of the woman with the issue of blood who was healed after touching the hem of Christ’s garment (Matthew 9, Mark 5, Luke 8): “For there stands upon an elevated stone, by the gates of her house, a brazen image of a woman kneeling, with her hands stretched out, as if she were praying. Opposite this is another upright image of a man, made of the same material, clothed decently in a double cloak, and extending his hand toward the woman. At his feet, beside the statue itself, is a certain strange plant, which climbs up to the hem of the brazen cloak, and is a remedy for all kinds of diseases.” (Church History VII:18)
Reply B: Even believers today who do not like images still use the Cross, which is a type of image anyway.
10. The Jews of the Old Testament were conservative with images. So what changed in this era of the New Testament?
Reply A: One of the reasons to not have images of God is because He is invisible to us. He is purest spirit, that which the universe cannot contain. (1 Kings 8) Rules, if true, fundamentally do not change. However, their application can change according to circumstances. If Jesus Christ—True God and True Man in one person and one hypostasis—is the invisible God revealed, then He has changed the circumstances. After all, Jesus Christ is the Second Person of the Trinity, the Son who is the expression of the Father. He said, “I and the Father are one” (John 10) and that “he that seeth me seeth the Father also” and “I am in the Father, and the Father in me”. (John 14) St Athanasius describes in an analogy that the Son is the “image” of the Father. (Against the Arians III:23:5) In other words, if Jesus Christ is God in the flesh, then there is no reason one cannot make an image of Him provided the intent is honorable.
Reply B: As for why God seemed to be stricter during the Old Testament era than in the New Testament, this is perhaps a matter of timing. To consider humanity simplistically as one—for example, God sometimes refers to the Jews as a single collective (“O Israel”)—the commands given to the Jews regarding this matter were the first time such instructions were given. When parents teach a child something for the first time, they start simple. It could be math or good manners. One does not explain the various and at times complex applications. It will confuse the child. The child can over time learn through experience the complexities and apply them. St John of Damascus in Apologia against Those Who Decry Holy Images states: “We have passed the stage of infancy, and reached the perfection of manhood.”
●
It is not that images of anything are permitted. The image in itself must not be wrong. The intent must be justified and the image treated appropriately; that is, they should not be treated more importantly than necessity requires (proportion) let alone take the top spot which belongs to God.
Be sure to subscribe to our mailing list so you get each new Opinyun that comes out!
Comments