www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Modern Ikonclasm???

Hello everyone!

The other day I went to a Roman Catholic parish (actually 2 of them), I saw that everything is covered up in purple, like statues, crucifix, etc. That includes the Icons!

I was deeply offended when they covered up the Icons. Cover everything else is fine, but not the Icons, yes?

I wanted to kiss the Icon to venerate Our Lady Theotokos, to show her my love as she is my Mother.

I see Icons as Windows to Heaven and the person which the Icon represents somewhat has a "mystical presence." And I see the covering up as an insult to the person which it represents.

What do you folks think of that? Do you think it's a modern form of Iconclasm? What measures shall I take to try to get them to take the covers off of the Icons? Thanks for your help.

spdundas

Slava Isusu Christu!

As I recall, there are some RC parishes that cover statues, etc. from the Sunday where the Gospel is read of Jesus chastising the people for turning His Fathers house into a marketplace. The custom is that, since Jesus left the city, and didn't return until He arrived triumphantly on Palm Sunday, images of Him remain covered until Palm Sunday. At least that is what I recall, for what its worth.

Ken

We are dealing with two different theologies in the Western and Eastern churches. In the West, during the penitential season of Lent, the statues (which are seen as 're-presentations' of glorious victory) are covered, the bells are not rung (either in the steeple or at the altar) and the more 'festive' aspects of Liturgy are replaced with more somber elements. At Holy Saturday liturgy of the "new fire", at the "Gloria", the bells are rung, the covers are removed, flowers are brought out and the celebration is brought back.

In the East, the somber aspects of the Lenten season are expressed in the words of the Divine Services (Liturgy, Vespers, Pre-Sanctified Liturgy, etc.)and in the music. The icons remain as "windows to the other side", just as always.

While some Latin parishes have discovered icons as objects of devotion (just like the statues and candle stands) their theology still obtains and I guess they feel that they have to cover them. They have borrowed the 'externals', i.e., the icons, but they don't have our theology-- nor should they. So, let them do what they do without trying to force Byzantine practices on them with respect to icons. Go to our Churches and follow our customs if the icon is spiritually significant for you. If you are a dyed-in-the-wool Roman, follow St. Ambrose's advice to St. Augustine: "when in Rome, do as the Romans do."

Blessings!

spdundas,
The covered images in Latin Churches during Lent is simply and old Roman Tradition. You could look at it this way, The Holy Theotokos was well pleased that you wanted to venerate Her image, and that you were disapointed when you were unable to do so.
In Christ Jesus,
Khaled

We did this in the Anglican church. Covered everything with purple but it only happened for a week or so every year.

Oh MY GOSH! You guys scared me! I thought "HEY WAIT A MINUTE! I DID NOT POST THIS!!!!"

That someone else stole my identity! But then I realized...that it was a topic that I posted like THREE YEARS AGO! Haha OH WOW!

Whew!

Yeah, I'm still offended if they do that. If they do that, then I think they (RC) should not have Icons in the Church. As Icon is perceived to be part of our Liturgy (BC/Orthodox). Because typically I think the Icons still have the "effects of mysical presence" whether it's in the Roman Church or not and shouldn't be covered.

Oh I don't know.

But anyway, a big sigh of relief here on the ID thing here. WOW. I just about have a heart attack. Good day.

SPDundas
Deaf Byzantine

Dear SPDundas,

Yet there is a tradition of covering up icons in the East - but only in the home.

When someone has died and even when people have sex . . .

Alex

Dear Spundas,

This may come as a surprise to you but "icons" are not Eastern. Both the West and East have had two dimmensional images in their temples for centuries. Differing theologies have developed around them (as well as artistic techniques). Just because you see an icon, doesn't necessitate Byzantine theology. The East doesn't hold a monopoly on the 2D medium.

Further, icons typically present the glory of our Lord, our Lady, and the Saints. During this penitential time, the glory is veiled. You can't really appreciate the veiling of the images unless you attend the Easter Vigil where they ring the bells and unveil all the images. The glory is unleashed to commemorate our Lord's magnificent resurrection. I think you would highly approve of this custom if you experienced it.

in Christ,
Marshall

Richard Wagner had a notion that love-making and death were related. He called it "der Liebestod," the Love-death. He wrote an opera about it....

So that means the RC use Icons as DECORATIONS!

If it wasn't used as a decoration, that it's part of the spirituality, liturgy or whatever, then it wouldn't be covered up.

So you're saying that the RC don't hold Byzantine Theology of the Icons (which is fine with me) which means that we're wrong?

The differences of Theology may be expressed differently but just as long as one comes with one and the same conclusion to the end of it.

For example: Western theology on Immaculate conception and Eastern theology of "Without Stain" are expressed differently in their own school of thought, but CONCLUDES that the Holy Theotokos is without stain of sin.

So therefore, if the western theology on Icons are different than eastern, but does it come up with the same conclusion? NO and a resounding NO ONLY IF the RC cover the Icons up. Because if the conclusion is the same then NOBODY in the world would NOT cover the Icons up.

So therefore, sure the RC may have Icons, but should be treated with respect and Icons are OF the BYZANTIUM.

That is why I find it disrespectful for RC to cover Icons up because it's perceived as merely DECORATIONS of the Church! If it wasn't a decoration then it shouldn't be covered up.

Does what I'm saying making any sense?

spdundas said So that means the RC use Icons as DECORATIONS!

I have a feeling that I am getting myself into very deep water here - theology as a subject is something I know very little about - but let's see if I can explain here how I understand it.

No Icons are not decorations , neither are statues , nor are the beautiful paintings of the Stations of the Cross that are on the walls of our Church. The intention of them all is to draw our minds to the events depicted - the Stations should make us think of the Suffering of Christ , suffering that we cannot truly comprehend. The Crucifix behind the Altar is to remind us that Christ died for us in a very very terrible way. The Icons that some of us have are to aid us to look beyond the depiction and concentrate on the' Action ' the Mother compelling us to look to Her Son and so on.

When they are covered during Lent it is as a reminder that this is a penitential season and we should be reflecting on preparing for the glories of Easter.

Even the large Crucifix should be veiled [ particularly if it is a modern one showing the Risen Lord]. Our Churches are full of joy therefore it is appropriate that for this very short time they should be as plain as possible during this period of sadness/penitence/preparation - and as Marshall says, during the Easter Vigil we return to joyfullness in the Resurrection of the Lord - bells are rung, lights go on and the veils are removed - The Lord has Risen as He said He would - let us rejoice.

An icon is an epiphany - an 'imaging forth' of the divine. Therefore, according to Eastern spirituality it is a nonsense to hide something that is part of revelation under a cloth. In speaking of the teachings of the Gospel and our own personal witness to Christ the Incarnate Word, we are told not to place our light under a bushel. Icons are part of the incarnational approach to Christianity and as such they physically embody the essence of the Gospel. To hide an icon is like burying a Gospel book. It shows a clash of spiritualities and the failiure of Roman Catholics to understand the very meaning of icons in the life of the Church. This is reflected in the corruption of iconography and the invention of neo and pseudo-iconographer by Latin painters, for that is all they are, not iconographers.

I once saw an image of Mary and Joseph embracing. Whoever painted it failed to understand that in icons such as Joachim and Anna, or Elizabeth and Zacharias this is a symbol of union and conception. Icons are attempted when the painter cannot even understand the language of the world he or she is entering.

It is good that Western Christians love icons and wish to enrich their faith with them, but we often see them taken merely as an attractive details, not as part and parcel of faith.

An icon is part of orthopraxis, of active living faith. An icon is intergrated into the culture of that faith and it is approached with an understanding which stems from living Tradition.

Spasi Khristos -
Mark, monk and sinner.

[hooray as a side note my problems of yesterday seem to have corrected themself - or been corrected for me - sorry but I rejoice at the return of normality]

Fr Mark,

Bless Father.

Actually I understand what you say - and I seem to be caught in this' East/ West understanding' state.

I do feel that however it is as well to try and understand how we differ so that we do not unwittingly cause offence.

Oh and my own icons will not be covered during Holy Week

Anhelyna

spdundas-

Some RC's feel it disrespectful that Byzantines stand during the concecration. I'm sure you would fly into a fit if an RC suggested that to you. Covering images in Church during Lent/Holy Week is a valid Western Tradition. You may perceive disrespect on the their part, but I'm sure you know that no disrespect is meant.

You seem to be intolerant of Western tradition whether it is in your church OR a Western church.

Columcille

P.S The fact you that you named this thread modern iconoclasm is laughable since it is in reference to RC's. Most "Reformed" Protestants think we are idolaters due to the amount of images in our churches. I guess we RC's can't please anyone

Dear spdundas,

If you have the chance of visiting the island of Cyprus during Holy Week and Easter and to attend the Holy Week services at the Metropolitan Cathedral Chuch of of Saint John in Nicosia (Lefkosia), see of the Archbishop of Cyprus, you will get probably deeply offended when you will see that the icons of our Lord and the Mother of God at the iconostasion are covered up in black. Yes the Orthodox Church of Cyprus (French were in Cyprus for centuries) keep aslo this custom.

I agree with you in one point, the liturgical use of Byzantine liturgical images (icons) by the Latin Church can drive to conflics and misunderstandings. Unfortunately most of those Latins (but not only) who takes an icon to their home or put an icon in their church have no idea about the byzantine theology of the holy images.