www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Catholic News Service?

This Catholic news service has NO idea what an Icon is: http://www.catholicnews.com/#

is that SO surprising???

In the West an icon is anything from a religious picture or statue to a Hollywood star!!

I'd give the Catholic News Service a "Dumbell" Award for that piece.

Paul

I think that the poor souls are using 'icon' in the dictionary sense of 'stylized image' (even though it's a reference to a religious image)rather than in the sense that we know. Of course WE know what real icons are all about, but for heaven's sake, don't snitch! They'll get all discombobulated and start issuing regulations!!!!

Christ is Risen!!

Hi Everyone,

I personally would like to admit my ignorance about icons.

I look however to the eastern Church with deep admiration for its remarkable use of icons in conveying heavenly images and religious truths symbolized/represented in the icons. Indeed a venerable tradition of the Church.

Can someone please educate me?

1. What are the allowed colors and what do these different colors theologically represent?

2. What is the meaning of the usual gold edges/borders?

3. How do we get to understand the inscription beside the person represented in each icon. E.g. beside the icon of the Theotokos, we always read the greek letters Mu + Theta (What if I do not know that these represent meter theoun (Mother of God)? where can I look into for the meaning of the different inscriptions (is this correct word for this?).

4. Is there a webpage which teaches these things?

5. Why is the representation not 3-dimensional? [I think this has got to do with the icon being the window to heaven].

6. What other things do I have to look for in an icon that conveys meanings, e.g. the eyes of Christ, and what do they mean?

I understand this is a plethora of questions. I hope someone will satisfy my holy curiosity!

Pray for me, a sinner!
Antonio

yes, the use of the word icon in the western church pertaining to all ilustrations of saints, Our Lord and Theotokos. Please don't treat it like Hollywood stuff, though they(we) have lost the essence of Canonical Icons, they(we) venerate and revered them in the same way.

Thank you,

Christ is Risen! Indeed He is Risen!

Another case of being hypersensitive?

I know this is a tendency of many eastern catholics and orthodox that turns off our western brethren.

We do not have exclusive rights to any words or terms.

I went to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary web site and did a search on the word icon, here is what I came up.

Main Entry: icon
Pronunciation: 'I-"k�n
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin, from Greek eikOn, from eikenai to resemble
Date: 1572
1 : a usually pictorial representation : IMAGE
2 [Late Greek eikOn, from Greek] : a conventional religious image typically painted on a small wooden panel and used in the devotions of Eastern Christians
3 : an object of uncritical devotion : IDOL
4 : EMBLEM, SYMBOL <the house became an icon of 1860's residential architecture -- Paul Goldberger>
5 a : a sign (as a word or graphic symbol) whose form suggests its meaning b : a graphic symbol on a computer display screen that suggests the purpose of an available function
- icon�ic /I-'k�-nik/ adjective
- icon�i�cal�ly /-ni-k(&-)lE/ adverb

As you can see, of the 5 definitions only one of them, number 2, apply to us.

I think its time we allow others to be what they are instead of wanting them to be like us, just as we wish to be ourselves and not like them.

We must also look at the source of this. It is a publication for and by Latin Catholics, it is no wonder that they do not know of, or at the very least, understand Eastern Catholics.

And before you say that they should, it is not their job to know or to educate the masses. That is our job.

Just some thought. :p


David

All,

Maybe I am being less than kind with CNS.

Associating the word icon with a religious image (2 dimensional yet!) is a step in the right direction for the RC press.

I usually learn in steps. CNS can only print what they know. Byzantine iconography is not well known or understood here in the land of Wall Street and cowboys.

Paul

PS: I am looking forward to someone answering Antonio's question.

Dear Friends,

If we are talking about the image on that site - it can be considered an icon in accordance with the Ethiopian tradition.

Alex

Dear Antonio,

Magandang Umaga!

Easter icons are more than "reminders" of Christ and the Saints - they are true windows into eternity, and are sacramental images that directly and spiritually connect with those they represent, conveying Grace to us, and inspiring us to pray and meditate.

The icon is never "painted" but "written" because it conveys the Word of God to us, just as the Bible does.

The icon celebrates the salvation and sanctification of the world through our Lord, God and Saviour, Jesus Christ, God Incarnate, Who took on our nature and Deified it. He also Deified the entire cosmos.

The materials that create an icon represent the entire cosmos then. The paints contain plant, mineral and animal matter. The icon is written on wood that reminds us of the Cross, although icons may be written on any surface, as the Seventh Ecumenical Council taught.

The colour red signifies Divinity and this is why Christ's undercloak is red - teaching us that He is God.

The colour blue signifies humanity since our blood is blue in our veins. This is why Christ's mantle is blue, signifying that He "wrapped Himself" in our human nature.

The colour gold signifies eternal life and this is why the background of many icons is gold, a beckoning to us to share in eternal life through participation in the Deified Body of Jesus Christ and His Saints.

The icons are not three dimensional to allow this holy art-form to convey not only the human dimension of the subjects being portrayed, but also their Divine dimensions.

To see an icon of Christ is to know that He is not only Man, but God and a Divine Person first and foremost.

The Deified bodies of the Mother of God and the Saints, wrapped in light as they are, indicate their own participation in the Deifying Body of Christ that has transfigured them and can transfigure us as we become true "Partakers of the Divinity" of Christ.

Statues cannot convey this and this is why they are simply forbidden in the Eastern Church - a statue depicts only a partial image of the entire truth about Theosis or Divinization.

All icons indicate via lettering what they represent.

Even all Crosses, by special Canon of the Church, must bear the Christogram "IC XC" to indicate the Cross of Christ (something that especially made sense in an age when the memory of crucifixion was quite real).

The Mother of God is, as you correctly state, denoted by "MP OY." The Names of God the Word Incarnate and the Mother of God as well as any Name of God contain a "cap" or line above the lettering.

These lines indicate great holiness and when books are read out loud, it indicates to the reader to pronounce those Names slowly and with profound respect!

To read the iconic lettering, one would have to know the language in which it is rendered, whether Greek or Slavonic in most cases.

The site: www.unicorne.org/orthodoxy [unicorne.org] has sites on icons under its "Resources" page.

Alex

Dear Friends:

I think DavidB mirrors well the sentiment of Latin Rite Catholics like me.

Our exposure to icons is rather limited. In my native country, the Philippines, believers have venerated one single (Eastern) icon for almost 500 years of Catholicism: the image of Our Mother of Perpetual Help. Next to the Holy Rosary, Wednesday Novena to Our Mother of Perpetual Help is a popular devotion throughout the archipelago of approximately 65 million Filipino Catholics, third largest in the world behind Brazil and Mexico.

The dearth (or absence) of icons in Western Christendom should not cause concern among Easterns. You have your "neat" and beautiful icons, we have our holy statues AND the most precious icon of the Theotokos: Our Mother of Perpetual Help!

I could have said two but the Holy Father will soon return (re-patriate?) the equally beautiful icon of Our Lady of Kazan to the Russian Orthodox Church.

Do you have any of our statues to venerate in return?

At any rate, I think the reporter in CNS was/is right in referring to that featured image of Our Lady as merely an "iconic painting," whatever that means.

AmdG

Dear Amado,

That David is close to the Latins is also something that I agree with!

Actually, in the book by Joan Carroll Cruz, "Images of Our Lady," there are many more Byzantine icons that are venerated as miraculous in the West!

The icon of the Black Madonna, Queen of Poland, is also a Byzantine one.

The Seventh Ecumenical Council is rather clear about the exclusive use of icons - for the reasons I gave above.

The East is therefore bound NOT to use statues in public liturgical worship or in its Churches etc.

The West would also be bound by the Seventh Council in this respect too, although I don't believe that the Orthodox today would regard the use of religious statuary in the West as an impediment to full communion between East and West.

Privately, of course, Eastern Christians often count statues among their devotionals, as you know I do.

So while there is no impediment for Western Catholics to venerate icons, there actually IS a canonical impediment for the East to honour religious statuary.

Alex

Hi:

I was not aware that Byzantine-style icons were the only true icons.

I think the next logical step would be to proclaim that Byzantine Christianity is the only true form of Christianity.

While these ideas are expected from the Orthodox, It is disappointing to find them in the Byzantine Catholic forum.

Shalom,
Memo.

Dear Memo,

I think we would want to avoid overgeneralizations about both Orthodox and Eastern Catholics - as well as Roman Catholics!

In fact, the definition of "icon" DOES come from the Seventh Ecumenical Council that is normative for BOTH East and West.

Western icon-writers do adhere to the same rules governing Icon-writing.

It was in the Baroque period, that affected both East and West, that we see religious paintings that flaunt the canonical rules in this respect. The Orthodox Cathedral of St Isaac the Dalmatian is a good example, the Cathedral of St Andrew in Kyiv and the Iconostasis of St Sophia are others.

Modern iconography, Catholic and Orthodox can be equally disconcerting.

What can be said about an icon not being done in accordance with canonical rules is a GENERAL and objective statement of fact.

Those same rules apply to both East and West. The fact that a Roman Catholic may not know anything about the iconographic canons is NOT a statement about Roman Catholicism but about that RC's lack of information about it.

There are Roman Catholic iconographers today that do excellent work and truly DO know what an icon is.

It can also be that while icons aren't the only form of religious art employed in the West, they are so employed exclusively in the East.

Therefore, the East may tend to be more sensitive about the canonical rules, since they are generally more familiar to us.

Alex

The one thing that hit me about this is the fact that the Catholic News Service appears to be in cahoots with the National Conference of Catholic Bishops. One would hope that there would be a least a passing nod to the East.

However, as Alex has pointed out, things began to change during the Baroque era (at least in the West) and the idea of religious image was converted from what we Easterns think of as a "quasi-sacrament" to the more generic "religious representation" in the West. Thus, there is much greater freedom in the West to darken the features of Jesus in African-American contexts, to employ regal-robes and crowns on the Crucified Christ, to images of the Mother-of-God in various national dress. I don't think it's a bad thing, per se, but I think that this manipulation of images has resulted in the de-celestialization of the image. (I'm making this word up, so don't get cranky!) In the East we don't see automobile "icon-shrines" a la the Sacred Heart or Lady of Grace dashboard figurines. We just shouldn't and wouldn't do this because an icon is for veneration, not decoration or an aide-memoire to say a prayer.

So, once again, I guess I'm on the hyper-conservative side when I want to jealously protect what has been handed down to us from our ancestors, and to steadfastly resist the de-sanctification of images.

(But then again, I get real cranked when I see "Jesus" bumper stickers. Jesuits have an incredible devotion to the sacred name of Jesus: "at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, on heaven, on earth and under the earth; and every tongue shall proclaim that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the Glory of God the Father." And: "All who love Your name, shall glory in You, for You bless the just man". It's a Jesuit thing. And to see the Lord's name stamped on a piece of paper over an exhaust pipe just steams me. Have these folks no respect? Can I put a picture of your deceased grandma on a bumper sticker and slap it on the back of my car? GRRRRRRR!) [OK. Fit has passed. Return to text.]

I'd just leave the Romaniaks and their friends alone. They come from a totally different mindset, and it would take a lot of education -and, more importantly, PRAYERFUL USE of icons to help them understand what we Easterns have. I am personally so grateful for the wondrous gift of the icon and the spiritual theology and reality that accompany them.

Let's keep it our secret, shall we?

Christ is Risen!!!