tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4836035001444911450.post3749248319358031948..comments2023-09-02T11:38:09.518-04:00Comments on The Lamb on the Altar: Icons and IncenseChuck Wiesehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09008527429925493264noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4836035001444911450.post-85378539169019108242012-01-14T14:55:39.552-05:002012-01-14T14:55:39.552-05:00One meta-point: worship should be an image (really...One meta-point: worship should be an image (really a union) of heaven - Hebrews, Isaiah, Revelation, Daniel etc is where this is revealed (the Temple of course being a pattern or shadow). While icons play an important theological/dogmatic role - and their centrality is a safeguard against heresy - they are of course only a reminder of the heavenly reality in which we participate. I think it is very dangerous and ill advised to remove them, but, yes, they are not necessary strictly speaking. Not sure I agree about incense, however - that I need to think about.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4836035001444911450.post-5307518739593826862012-01-14T14:48:40.602-05:002012-01-14T14:48:40.602-05:00I was the original anonymous poster - this certain...I was the original anonymous poster - this certainly does not represent the latest scholarly consensus on the topic of images which has been reshaped by archaeological evidence over several decades (nor frankly does the excerpt do justice to the early Christian writings on the topic that affirm the very early use of icons). I suggest Bigham's recent Early Christian Attitudes Toward Images for both a review of the allegations of iconophobia in the early Church as well as a general overview of the topic of Jewish practice.<br /><br />In any case, the main point stands: icons affirm the Incarnation and declare the Gospel - all out practices and beliefs are centered on Christ.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4836035001444911450.post-24425674991371345362011-03-23T20:24:06.588-04:002011-03-23T20:24:06.588-04:00boehadden: I agree that Clement is wrong and I agr...boehadden: I agree that Clement is wrong and I agree with the decision of the 7th ecumenical council. My only point was to show that there has been a change in litrugical practice and so although we are certainly free to use icons and/or incense, our worship should never be such that we could not imagine worship without them. When we worship we join in the with the worship of the church of all ages which includes Clement and the others. There is a difference though I think between statements by statements by Tertullian and Origen in regards to the Trinity or the two natures of Christ and statements about the liturgical use of incense. Origen and Tertullian both had teachings that were eventually rejected by the church but they also lived at a time where there was some disagreement over how we ought to speak about Christ and what we should believe about Him. Praise be to God that the teaching of the Apostles prevailed in the church but I think that even well meaning people who wanted to uphold the Apostolic teaching stumbled at times and so there was some diversity. But there does not seem to be that diversity in the pre-Nicene church when it comes to incense and icons. There seems to be a strong consensus against both (as well as musical instruments and men shaving).Chuck Wiesehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09008527429925493264noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4836035001444911450.post-20618265268664559832011-03-23T03:19:45.198-04:002011-03-23T03:19:45.198-04:00I know this blog is about 1 1/2 old-- I just came ...I know this blog is about 1 1/2 old-- I just came across it. <br /><br />Just on thing to point out:<br />You quoted Clement who wrote: "For He who prohibited the making of a graven image would never Himself have made an image in the likeness of holy things."<br /><br />Clement is a little off here. He seems to be forgetting all of humankind AND the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. God made humans in his "image" or "icon". And Jesus took on flesh (created matter) and is in the "image" of the invisible God (as St. Paul puts it). Simply put, God makes icons.<br /><br />I think your point is valid to a certain degree-- however, remember that a council was specifically to deal with the question of icons. We could lift quotes from Tertullian and Origen that say some weird things about the nature of the Trinity and the two natures of Christ--that doesn't deny that we still uphold what was decided in the Councils in Nicea and Constantinople about Christ and the Trinity. A Council's decision trumps non-biblical fathers' views, I think..<br /><br />Excellent blog! Great thoughts! Blessings to you brother :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4836035001444911450.post-22550519163670980132009-10-01T10:29:17.512-04:002009-10-01T10:29:17.512-04:00Thank you so much! I have Bercot's book, and I...Thank you so much! I have Bercot's book, and I have been collecting early church quotes on my own web site, but I haven't gotten to icons. I already knew this was so without listing the quotes, but thank you so much for doing so!Paul Pavaohttp://www.christian-history.org/orthodox-church.htmlnoreply@blogger.com