The Theology of the Icon

The theological arguments of the Church in support of the holy icons may be attributed to
the writings of three important Church Fathers: St. John of Damascus (who shined during the
first phase of the controversy), St. Theodore the Studite, and Patriarch Nikephoros of
Constantinople (both of whom championed the cause during the second phase). Their theological
positions may be viewed in four areas: (1) the argument about the Mosaic prohibition of idols
(Ex 20.4-5); (2) the nature of the image itself; (3) the Christological argument; and (4) the issue
of worship vs. veneration.

The opponents of the holy icons and the positions they took were highly influenced by
three dominant religious philosophies of the time: Judaism, Islam, and Manichaeanism, a heresy
which taught that the material world was evil and not a creation of God. Judaism and Islam both
advocate a spiritual worship of God and thus reject any graven or material image. The
Iconoclasts were clearly following this line of reasoning when they rallied around the biblical
prohibition of graven images in Exodus and Deuteronomy. For them, the icons were made by
imperfect human hands, and the perfect and infinite God could never be controlled nor mastered
nor circumscribed by visible human efforts and profane physical matter. Countering this stance,
St. John of Damascus argued that although the worship of God is indeed primary among the
Orthodox, God still commanded the tabernacle to be decorated with religious images, such as the
cherubim and seraphim. These images were to lead the Israelites to a greater worship of God.
Secondly, the Fathers taught that God made images of Himself, first and foremost being Christ
Jesus, the likeness of God and the image of the invisible God (cf. 2 Cor 4.4; Col 1.15). Thus,
the birth of God in the flesh, the Incarnation, surpassed all Old Testament prohibitions. Thirdly,
humanity itself was created in the image and likeness of God (cf. Gen 1.26). Hence, since God
dwells in each human being, and since mans image was depicted everywhere else in the world,
how could Christs holy image not be depicted upon the holy icons?

Regarding the nature of the image, the Iconoclasts claimed that a true image must have
the same essence (homoousios) as the original person (prototype) being depicted. The icons were
not of the same essence with their prototypes. The Orthodox Fathers never regarded the holy
icons as being of the same substance with the prototype. At the Seventh Ecumenical Council it
was stated that, . . . the icon resembles the prototype, not with regard to the essence, but only
with regard to the name and to the position of the members which can be characterized . . . (D.
Sahas, Icon and Logos, p. 77). The honor then passed from the visible image to the prototype
depicted upon the icon. St. Basil the Great likened the homage paid to the image of the Emperor
with the honor given the holy icons (On the Holy Spirit 18.45). The people always respected the
bust of the Byzantine Emperor in the squares and marketplaces, considering the material statue
itself the Emperor but realizing that there were not two Emperors, but one. In addition,
Theodosios the Great established a legal precedent, that any person seeking political asylum at
the statue of the Emperor in the city could not be apprehended for ten days, out of reverence for
the imperial icon and its prototype.

As for the Christological arguments, the Iconoclasts claimed that if the icons depicted
only the humanity of Christ and not the divine nature, then their opponents were in violation of
the Fourth Ecumenical Synod (451 AD), which taught that Christ is perfect God and perfect Man
and were thus either monophysites (they believed that the divine was subsumed in the human) or
Nestorians (Christs divine nature was denied). Furthermore, if the icons depicted somehow
Christs divinity, then Christ was not divine since it was impossible to depict divinity by
imperfect human means. St. John of Damascus writes this classic apology in defense of depicting
the incarnate Word of God:

But now when God is seen in the flesh conversing with men, I make an image of the God whom
I see. I do not worship matter: I worship the Creator of matter who became matter for my sake,
who willed to take His abode in matter, who worked out my salvation through matter. Never will
I cease honoring the matter which wrought my salvation! I honor it, but not as God (St. John of
Damascus, First Apology 16).

He further adds that what can be assumed can be saved. The only way for Christ to save the
world and restore it was to be born in it and to sanctify matter, by becoming matter Himself.
Indeed, the Incarnation of the Son of God then not only made the veneration of icons possible
within Orthodox Christianity but a downright necessity. St. Theodore the Studite wryly states
that if only mental worship was sufficient, then God would not have become human and endured
the Cross. He could just as easily have communicated with humans mentally (seeFirst
Refutation 7). Whats more, only the person of Christ (His hypostasis), and not His two natures
could be depicted on an icon. The human and divine natures of Christ, perfectly united but never
confused, co-existed in the mystery of the incarnate Son and Word of God.

A final word on the distinction between worship and veneration. While worship is
reserved only for God, veneration, or honor, is extended beyond the image to the prototype in the
icon. The respect and honor do not stop at the icon, nor is the icon the recipient of our worship
and praise. The icon serves as a reminder of the spiritual life that co-exists alongside our world, a
window even, through which we envision the deified world of the Kingdom. Indeed then, as one
writer put it very succinctly, The appropriate encounter with the icon, despite its powerful
presence as a visual image, is an encounter that goes beyond the icon itself to the greater
transcendent reality of God.

Implications for Orthodox Worship Today

As material objects depicting the transformed, defied life of the Kingdom, the holy icons
are used today primarily because of two very basic Orthodox teachings: (1) that matter is by
nature good; and (2) that Christs incarnation rendered matter an instrument of salvation. These
two very important doctrinal truths suggest to us various implications in our liturgical worship. I
wish to share with you three of these.

First, just as we live in a very material world, we also worship in a very material Church.
The basic Orthodox belief in the goodness of all matter is the fundamental reason for our use of
physical items in our worship: bread, wine, water, oil, incense, candles, icons, and music. We can
take the famous pop singer Madonnas verses, We live in a material world, and I am a material
girl and modify them to apply to our Churchs liturgical worship: We pray in a material
Church, and I am a material worshiper. The major difference here though is that Christ, through
His incarnation, not only affirmed the goodness of matter, but also transformed it to serve as a
means of divine grace, through which we are saved. The secular, material world seeks not the
transformation and redemption of man, but rather his separation from God. In the secular world,
matter is not a means to God but an end to itself, an idol, a god. In Orthodox worship, all our
senses are engaged to praise and glorify the God of all.

Second, the icons affirm not only the Incarnation, but also every single event Christ our
Lord effected for our salvation. In our liturgical worship, God acts mystically when man acts
physically. In other words, the various prayers and actions and gestures, the various material
items we use in church, become the media, the instruments, through which the Lord acts in our
lives to bless us and help us and save us. Through faith, and only through faith, can we see the
hand of God acting mystically through the unworthy hand of the priest. Only through faith can
we behold the glory of God in human beings. Put simply, faith allows us through physical
worship to relive the salvific acts of Christ and to witness firsthand Gods continued involvement
in the lives of His people.

Finally, as the icons are holy images which point to a greater, transcendent reality, so too
are we icons of God, in whom God dwells forever. As St. Paul says, we are living temple of the
Holy Spirit and, as such, each of us created in Gods image and likeness (Gen 1.26) requires
the respect and honor which is our due. This means that both inside and outside of worship, we
are to treat others and be treated ourselves with the holiness and respect and piety due the holy
icons, because God lives in each of us. Beyond our physical appearance, in our souls, God exists
and makes His abode inside of each of us. For this reason does Christ command us to love one
another, as I have loved you, for the simple reason that in loving another human being, no
matter who he or she is, we love God. As St. John the Evangelist writes, If someone says, I
love God, and hates his brother, he is a liar, for he who does not love his brother whom he has
seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen? (1 Jn 4.20). Indeed then, we are all icons for
each others salvation, through whom we cannot help but see, with the eyes of faith, the presence
of Almighty God.