The question of icon-worship seems to be purely practical, given that icon-painting is a church-applied art. Ho y Orthodox he received an extremely thorough, truly theological staging. What is the deep connection between Orthodoxy and icon worship? Where the depth of Communion with God can take place without icons, in the words of the Savior: “The time is coming when you will worship the Father, not on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem” (John 4:21). But the icon depicts life in the age to come, life in the Holy Spirit, life in Christ, life with Heavenly Father. That is why the Church honors her icon.
Iconoclasm (the struggle against sacred images) raised a long-standing question – the denial of icons had existed for a long time, but the new Isaurian, imperial dynasty in Byzantium turned it into a banner of its cultural and political program.
And in the first catacomb period of persecution, the hidden Christian symbolism appeared. Both sculpturally and picturesquely depicted the rectangular cross (sometimes as the letter X), a dove, a fish, a ship – all understandable to Christian symbols, even those borrowed from mythology, such as Orpheus with his lyre or winged geniuses who became subsequently typical images of angels. The 4th century, the century of freedom, brought whole Christian paintings and illustrations of the new Christian heroes, martyrs and ascetics into the Christian temples already as generally accepted ornaments on the walls. From the relatively abducted symbolism in the iconography in the IV century, we decisively move to concrete illustrations of biblical and evangelical deeds and the depiction of persons from church history. St. John Chrysostom informs us about the distribution of images – portraits of St. Meletius of Antioch. Blazh. Theodoret tells us about the portraits of Simeon the Pilgrim sold in Rome. Gregory of Nyssa is moved to tears by the picture of Isaac’s sacrifice.
Eusebius of Caesarea responded negatively to the wish of the sister of Emperor Constantius to have an icon of Christ. The divine nature is inconceivable, «but we are taught that His flesh is also dissolved in the glory of the Deity, and mortal is swallowed up by life … And so, who could depict through the dead and soulless colors and shadows the radiant and radiant shining rays of light of His glory and dignity? »
In the West, in Spain, at the Council of Elvira (now the city of Grenada) (c. 300), a decree was passed against wall paintings in churches. Rule 36: “Placuit picturas in ecclesiis esse non debere, ne quod colitur aut adoratur, in parietibus depingatur.” This decree is a direct fight against false iconoclasm, ie. with the pagan extremes in the Christian circles from which the fathers of the council were frightened. Therefore, from the very beginning there was a purely internal and ecclesiastical disciplinary struggle against iconoclasm.
Monophysitism, with its spiritualist tendency to diminish human nature in Christ, was originally an iconoclastic current. Even in the reign of Zeno in kr. In the 5th century, the Monophysite Syrian bishop of Hierapolis (Mabuga), Philoxenus (Xenaia), wanted to abolish icons in his diocese. Severus of Antioch also denied the icons of Jesus Christ, the angels, and the images of the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove.
In the West, in Marseilles, Bishop Seren in 598 removed from the walls of the churches and threw out the icons, which, according to his observations, were superstitiously revered by his flock. Pope Gregory the Great wrote to Seren, praising him for his diligence, inconsideratum zelum, but condemning him for destroying the icons that serve the common people instead of books. The pope demanded that Seren restore the icons and explain to the congregation both his action and the true manner and meaning of the veneration of the icons.
Islam, which appeared in the 7th century with its hostility to all kinds of images (picturesque and sculptural) of human and superhuman faces (impersonal pictures of the world and animals were not denied), revived doubts about the legitimacy of icons; not everywhere, but in the areas adjacent to the Arabs: Asia Minor, Armenia. There, in the center of Asia Minor, lived the ancient anti-church heresies: Montanism, Marcionism, Paulicism – anti-cultural and anti-iconic in the spirit of their doctrine. For whom Islam was more understandable and looked like a more perfect, “more spiritual” Christianity. In such an atmosphere, the emperors, repelling the centuries-old onslaught of fanatical Islam, could not help but be tempted to remove the unnecessary obstacle to a peaceful neighborhood with the religion of Muhammad. It is not in vain that the defenders of the icons called the iconoclastic emperors “σαρακηνοφρονοι – Saracen sages.” (AV Kartashev, Ecumenical Councils / VII Ecumenical Council 787 /, https://www.sedmitza.ru/lib/text/435371/).
The iconoclastic emperors, with perverted enthusiasm, fought with the monasteries and monks no less than with the icons, preaching the secularization not only of the monastic estates, but also of the whole of public life, of every sphere of culture and literature. Inspired by secular state interests, the emperors were drawn to the new “secular” spirit of the time.
The iconographic canon is a set of rules and norms that regulate the writing of icons. It basically contains a concept of the image and the symbol and fixes those features of the iconographic image that separate the divine, upper world from the earthly (lower) world.
The iconographic canon is realized in the so-called erminia (from the Greek explanation, guidance, description) or in the Russian version-originals. They consist of several parts: facial originals – these are drawings (outlines) in which the main composition of the icon is fixed, with the respective color characteristics; interpretive originals – give a verbal description of the iconographic types and how the various saints are painted.
After Orthodoxy became the official religion, Byzantine priests and theologians gradually established rules for the veneration of icons, which explained in detail how to treat them, what could and should not be depicted.
The decrees of the Seventh Ecumenical Council against the Iconoclasts can be considered the prototype of the iconographic original. Iconoclasts oppose the veneration of icons. They considered sacred images to be idols and their worship to be idolatry, based on Old Testament commandments and the fact that the divine nature is inconceivable. The possibility of such an interpretation arises, because there was no uniform rule for the treatment of icons, and in the masses they were surrounded by superstitious worship. For example, they added some of the icon’s paint to the wine for communion, and so on. This raises the need for a complete teaching of the Church about the icon.
