OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 29, 2014, 12:19:19 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Western rite Icons  (Read 41015 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Orthodox Wannabe
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 31


« on: June 05, 2008, 01:22:40 AM »

I have just been looking around at some of the posts on the western rite and I have got a question.
Do western rite parishes use Icons or statues and if Icons are they different looking then the ones in the eastern rites?

Thanks
OW
Logged
Orual
Orthodoxy = 7, not 3
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Sunday Morning Costume Parade
Posts: 931


I'm just here for the food.


« Reply #1 on: June 05, 2008, 09:28:33 AM »

The ones I've seen do use regular Byzantine icons.  Many also use statues.  Their icons tend to be smaller and not play as big a role in the overall appearance of the church.
Logged

He spoke it as kindly and heartily as could be; as if a man dashed a gallon of cold water in your broth and never doubted you'd like it all the better. 

- C.S. Lewis, Till We Have Faces
f.k.a. Matron.a
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #2 on: June 05, 2008, 05:54:22 PM »

The ones I've seen do use regular Byzantine icons.  Many also use statues.  Their icons tend to be smaller and not play as big a role in the overall appearance of the church.

The Feast!

Funny story I heard about that (if I remember it correctly). There was once a priest who was fond of keeping statues in the church, and would hide them whenever the Bishop came.  And one day the elder had come to the church, and the priest went and moved out the statues as was his habit.  The elder said nothing as the service went on, and when it was over, mentioned politely to the priest how there was still a statue that had been forgotten (in fact it was a statue hidden off in a corner which no one could see).
« Last Edit: June 05, 2008, 07:57:13 PM by Suaiden » Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
Orthodox Wannabe
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 31


« Reply #3 on: June 05, 2008, 07:56:16 PM »

The Feast!

Funny story I heard about that (if I remember it correctly). There was once a priest who was fond of keeping statues in the church, and would hide them whenever the Bishop came.  And one day the elder had come to the church, and the priest went and hid the statues as was his habit.  The elder said nothing as the service went on, and when it was over, mentioned politely to the priest how there was still a statue that had been forgotten (in fact it was a statue hidden off in a corner which no one could see).
Cheesy Thats a funny one.

So if he was hiding the statues are they not allowed in the western rite but are used anyway?
Logged
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #4 on: June 05, 2008, 08:03:40 PM »

Cheesy Thats a funny one.

So if he was hiding the statues are they not allowed in the western rite but are used anyway?

That's the practice of our Synod, anyway; it was what was originally suggested by Overbeck, and done since as per the Russian Synod's approval of his suggestion (see Abramtsov, a Brief History of Western Orthodoxy).

There were in fact statues in the early tradition of the Church, but they were pretty rare all around.
Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
prodromas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Under the Green Pope
Posts: 1,239

Greek Orthodox


« Reply #5 on: June 05, 2008, 10:14:09 PM »

That's the practice of our Synod, anyway; it was what was originally suggested by Overbeck, and done since as per the Russian Synod's approval of his suggestion (see Abramtsov, a Brief History of Western Orthodoxy).

There were in fact statues in the early tradition of the Church, but they were pretty rare all around.

Exactly Suaiden. Try and tell that to a zealous anti-Roman Catholic convert and they will be dumbfounded. There is a statue of the Theotokos somewhere in Greece (I think) I believe that is constantly guarded.
Logged

The sins I don't commit are largely due to the weakness of my limbs.

1915-1923 Հայոց Ցեղասպանութիւն ,never again,
ܩܛܠܐ ܕܥܡܐ ܐܬܘܪܝܐ 1920-1914, never again,
השואה  1933-1945, never again,
(1914-1923) Ελληνική Γενοκτονία, never again
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #6 on: June 05, 2008, 10:22:15 PM »

Exactly Suaiden. Try and tell that to a zealous anti-Roman Catholic convert and they will be dumbfounded. There is a statue of the Theotokos somewhere in Greece (I think) I believe that is constantly guarded.

There is another like that in Russia.

But I think I've been misunderstood. I meant that the policy of our Synod is that there are no statues in our churches. However, there have been occasional statues used in the Church; however, they shouldn't be used now. Overbeck's policy was to remove all the statues and replace them with icons.
Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
prodromas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Under the Green Pope
Posts: 1,239

Greek Orthodox


« Reply #7 on: June 05, 2008, 10:31:35 PM »

There is another like that in Russia.

But I think I've been misunderstood. I meant that the policy of our Synod is that there are no statues in our churches. However, there have been occasional statues used in the Church; however, they shouldn't be used now. Overbeck's policy was to remove all the statues and replace them with icons.

Ok fair enough. What was the exact reason for Overbecks policy?
Logged

The sins I don't commit are largely due to the weakness of my limbs.

1915-1923 Հայոց Ցեղասպանութիւն ,never again,
ܩܛܠܐ ܕܥܡܐ ܐܬܘܪܝܐ 1920-1914, never again,
השואה  1933-1945, never again,
(1914-1923) Ελληνική Γενοκτονία, never again
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #8 on: June 07, 2008, 01:11:31 PM »

Ok fair enough. What was the exact reason for Overbecks policy?

I'm afraid I don't know exactly.  Asking him and expecting a speedy response would be problematic.  However, the Russian Synod accepted his recommendations wholesale because the use of icons is *fully sanctioned within the tradition of the Orthodox Church*.
Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,639



« Reply #9 on: June 07, 2008, 02:23:19 PM »

Quote from: St. Columba Orthodox Church
The Western Rite Vicariate of the Antiochian Archdiocese has determined that the appropriate form of iconography for Western Rite Churches is the Romanesque Art of the Medieval Western Church.
http://www.stcolumbachurch.org/icon_details.html
Logged
buzuxi
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: GREEK ORTHODOX
Jurisdiction: WORLD ORTHODOXY AGAINST ECUMENISM
Posts: 265


« Reply #10 on: June 07, 2008, 02:53:05 PM »

Unfortunately certain Antiochan WR parishes allow statues, not only for ornamental use but also for veneration and even used in processions.
Logged
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #11 on: June 07, 2008, 03:00:00 PM »

The Western Rite Vicariate of the Antiochian Archdiocese has determined that the appropriate form of iconography for Western Rite Churches is the Romanesque Art of the Medieval Western Church.
http://www.stcolumbachurch.org/icon_details.html


Note statues. St Augustine Church, Denver, Colorado.


Our Lady of Walsingham Chapel with Statue. St Mark's Church Denver.


From the Photo Album of St Michael Antiochian Church, Whittier, CA.  Note in Picture #5 there is also a statue behind the celebrants.

While I have no photo, one parish in Miami (I've seen with my eyes) also has statues.  Others do too.

So I am not quite sure what to think of the AWRV's pronouncement, if they are being honest, or maybe they just think statues are part of Romanesque iconography.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2008, 03:00:29 PM by Suaiden » Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #12 on: June 07, 2008, 03:13:59 PM »

Unfortunately certain Antiochan WR parishes allow statues,
So do the Eastern Orthodox: http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,13045.msg179106.html#msg179106
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #13 on: June 07, 2008, 03:24:57 PM »


Yes, and they are very ancient, and rare. Some, as that one appears to be, were originally bas-relief, that is, attached to a wall, and survived a demolition, et cetera. However, I would probably guess that there are more statues in Churches in the AWRV than there are in Churches in all the Balkans.

I should also be clear and ask you to take a look at those statues in the pictures. They look nothing like that Mary statue, because they are simply basic post-renaissance statues as exist in Roman Catholicism.  So I'll make a deal.  Make exact copies of that ancient Mary statue and dump the Our Lady of Lourdes you've got going in picture #3 and I'll stop complaining.  Better still, let us retain the few examples we have of centuries past of unique statues, and follow the Orthodox Church's practice for centuries.  Or do we now believe that in fact there were statues all over Serbian Churches in the 14th century as well?
Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
buzuxi
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: GREEK ORTHODOX
Jurisdiction: WORLD ORTHODOXY AGAINST ECUMENISM
Posts: 265


« Reply #14 on: June 07, 2008, 03:30:57 PM »

I didnt resent statues for minor ornamental use but for their veneration and liturgical use. I was originally told about 10 years ago that statues were only ornamental in the AWR but during that time the official website of Antioch posted photos of a procession using a Marian statue. An article in the ''Lion' newsletter argied that statues are equal to icons in everyway and thus can be venerated. This is heresy. 
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #15 on: June 07, 2008, 03:32:31 PM »

dump the Our Lady of Lourdes you've got going in picture #3
That's not Our Lady of Lourdes. It's a Hodegetria.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #16 on: June 07, 2008, 04:19:48 PM »

That's not Our Lady of Lourdes. It's a Hodegetria.

That is NOT a Hodegetria.


A Hodegetria guides the viewer to Christ with the right hand. She is in fact holding Christ in the statue.



A Statue of the Hodegetria can be found here:


But you are right about one thing. That statue at St Michael is not Our Lady of Lourdes. Looks like a typical Roman Catholic Mary statue without a crown actually.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2008, 04:24:00 PM by Suaiden » Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #17 on: June 07, 2008, 04:30:37 PM »

A Hodegetria guides the viewer to Christ with the right hand. She is in fact holding Christ in the statue.
You obviously haven't heard of the Hodegetria Dexiokratousa.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #18 on: June 07, 2008, 04:34:31 PM »

You obviously haven't heard of the Hodegetria Dexiokratousa.

Did they delete her hand or something I am not aware of?

The image is here:


It still appears like she's holding Christ with the left hand and guiding to Him with the right.

Meanwhile, your statue has Mary holding Christ with both hands, since he seems to be either proclaiming or wobbling (gotta love that humanism!)
Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #19 on: June 07, 2008, 04:35:58 PM »

It still appears like she's holding Christ with the left hand and guiding to Him with the right.

"They have eyes and see not."

« Last Edit: June 07, 2008, 04:39:03 PM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #20 on: June 07, 2008, 04:37:28 PM »

It still appears like she's holding Christ with the left hand and guiding to Him with the right.
How to tell your left hand from your right:

1) Hold your hands up in front of you, with the palms facing away from you.
2) Hold up only the index finger and thumb of each hand.
3) The one that makes an "L" is your left hand; the other one is the right.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #21 on: June 07, 2008, 04:40:04 PM »

"They have eyes and see not."

True. But I'd rather not know my right from my left than not know the difference between an Orthodox icon and a Roman Catholic statue.

So which hand is Mary using to motion to Christ in this picture, as opposed to HOLDING Him with both hands??



P.S. Left and right have failed me, but I still understand types, and don't throw them around randomly.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2008, 04:44:37 PM by Suaiden » Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #22 on: June 07, 2008, 04:45:12 PM »

So which hand is Mary using to motion to Christ in this picture, as opposed to HOLDING Him with both hands??
Her left.
"Do whatever He tells you."
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #23 on: June 07, 2008, 04:47:52 PM »

Her left.
"Do whatever He tells you."

I guess we will have to agree to disagree, because a cursory search of Jesus and Mary statues would show that your statue, like a typical Roman Catholic statue, simply has her placing her hand over his stomach. She is not pointing, as her hand is pressed against that stomach, unless she is doing it with the top fingers, which still destroys the type; for example this one she holds Him with both hands, but I guess it could be her right hand (or is it her left?) pointing.



But you can imagine she's pointing if you wish, and imagine it with whichever hand you choose.

Let the viewer decide.

By the way, is Santa Claus wearing his own type on this little pic from the same site?

« Last Edit: June 07, 2008, 04:58:06 PM by Suaiden » Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #24 on: June 07, 2008, 04:56:24 PM »

I guess we will have to agree to disagree,
Well, we've managed to agree on a few things:
1) You accepted that this is not Our Lady of Lourdes.
2) You accepted that Hodegetria Dexiokratousa is holding Christ in her right arm.
3) You accepted that there are 3 dimensional Icons in Eastern Orthodoxy.
So it's good we had this talk.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #25 on: June 07, 2008, 05:02:49 PM »

Well, we've managed to agree on a few things:
1) You accepted that this is not Our Lady of Lourdes.
2) You accepted that Hodegetria Dexiokratousa is holding Christ in her right arm.
3) You accepted that there are 3 dimensional Icons in Eastern Orthodoxy.
So it's good we had this talk.

I agree. 

I'd still like to deal with the fact that in the presence of an actual Hodegetria statue, this statue is not a Hodegetria at all.  I'd also like to deal with the fact that none of the statues I am pointing to would I consider "three-dimensional icons.

But I'm glad we cleared this up, even though I don't feel at all well knowing there are a bunch of Roman-style statues in these Antiochian Western-Rite churches of yours.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2008, 05:03:30 PM by Suaiden » Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #26 on: June 07, 2008, 05:55:17 PM »

I don't feel at all well knowing there are a bunch of Roman-style statues in these Antiochian Western-Rite churches of yours.
Well, I think that's pretty clear. Cheesy
Here are my thoughts:
As far as I know, there are no particular Canons against the use of statues for veneration in the Orthodox Church. We've just not had much of a liking for them. But we do have carved Icons in the Orthodox Church, so it's not the fact that an image is three dimensional that seems to be the problem, as the Wonderworking Icon of St. Michael Taxiarches clearly shows:


as well as the statuette of the Hodegetria from Constantinople which you posted (which, btw, is now in the Met if anyone wants to see it in real life):


Nor can we say that the reason to reject statues is because they are not stylized or surreal enough, because we venerate icons which are neither stylized nor surreal such as this Icon of St. George:


So, if as buzuxi claims, venerating statues is "heresy", I'd like to know why it is "heresy". As far as I can see, its just something the Eastern Orthodox haven't practiced a lot of and aren't used to. But why would it be "heresy"?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,147


WWW
« Reply #27 on: June 07, 2008, 06:00:12 PM »

The Orthodox statues do not depict suffering of Christ compared to the 14 Stations of the Cross where each Station depicts Christ's suffering in 3D.

The image of St. Michael and Hodegetria are harmless in that their depictions in 3D have no deviation from their 2D depiction.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #28 on: June 07, 2008, 06:17:33 PM »

The Orthodox statues do not depict suffering of Christ compared to the 14 Stations of the Cross where each Station depicts Christ's suffering in 3D.
Yes, but the question is about statues in general, not specific statues. I certainly would say that the Statue of Our Lady of Grace is heretical because it is based on the Vulgate rather than the Septuagint and has the Virgin (rather than Christ) trampling the serpent. So yes, I think there are heretical statues, but then, there are ancient Icons which would now be considered heretical (for example, those which depict Christ as a Lamb). We can't say from this that Icons in general are heretical.

The image of St. Michael and Hodegetria are harmless in that their depictions in 3D have no deviation from their 2D depiction.
Well, actually, they do deviate. In a traditional "Byzantine" Icon, the light source is the Hypostasis depicted. Thus, Christ's or the Saint's clothing is lightest where it is in closest contact to their body, and they do not cast shadows in order to create the effect that they themselves are the source of light in the image rather than an external source of light shining on them. In a carved or sculpted Icon, the light source is exterior to the Hypostasis depicted and it casts shadows.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2008, 06:19:59 PM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #29 on: June 07, 2008, 07:05:20 PM »

Yes, but the question is about statues in general, not specific statues.

But we are talking about specific statues, and not the bas-relief (Bas-relief IS allowed in the Orthodox Church) images of St Michael or the statue of Mary in question.  We are talking about the Roman Catholic statues in the AWRV.  Including the stations, which were defended by members of the AWRV.

I certainly would say that the Statue of Our Lady of Grace is heretical because it is based on the Vulgate rather than the Septuagint and has the Virgin (rather than Christ) trampling the serpent.

The Vulgate is a legitimate Western Orthodox Bible. It was translated by St Jerome.  I am utterly dumbfounded.  When we are discussion an innovation in the West and introducing it into Western Rite Orthodoxy, I am in awe that probably one of the best-preserved texts of the Orthodox West is tossed aside like that. I'd say that's the least heretical thing about the statue. The Vulgate is not heretical.  Even most of its differences with the Septuagint are consonant.

What's wrong is that it's a free standing statue of some woman dressed as Mary in a very medieval-looking outfit without Christ stepping on a snake.  Strangely enough, the statue in that AWRV parish seems to be wearing similar vestments.

So yes, I think there are heretical statues, but then, there are ancient Icons which would now be considered heretical (for example, those which depict Christ as a Lamb). We can't say from this that Icons in general are heretical.


Fair enough. So you'd agree to scrapping all the Roman Catholic statues with bas-relief images in their place?

Well, actually, they do deviate. In a traditional "Byzantine" Icon, the light source is the Hypostasis depicted. Thus, Christ's or the Saint's clothing is lightest where it is in closest contact to their body, and they do not cast shadows in order to create the effect that they themselves are the source of light in the image rather than an external source of light shining on them. In a carved or sculpted Icon, the light source is exterior to the Hypostasis depicted and it casts shadows.

Or, to make it even shorter, the icon is different because it has colors on it!  That is a very poor comparison.  The linear structure is still the same, and with these modern statues it is most certainly not.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2008, 07:10:42 PM by Suaiden » Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #30 on: June 07, 2008, 10:11:29 PM »

But we are talking about specific statues, and not the bas-relief (Bas-relief IS allowed in the Orthodox Church) images of St Michael or the statue of Mary in question. 
The Virgin of Sokolica Venerated in Kosovo is not a bas relief.  It is a self standing statue. Here is a side view:
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #31 on: June 07, 2008, 10:27:58 PM »

The Virgin of Sokolica Venerated in Kosovo is not a bas relief.  It is a self standing statue. Here is a side view:


Your side view should have been taken from the other side.



Clearly one could make the argument that it is not a freestanding statue.  Apparently some of the backing is missing, and it could well have been attached to a wall. Considering its history, it might have been part of an earlier monastery's wall.
Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #32 on: June 07, 2008, 10:45:51 PM »

And one more minor detail to prove my point.   Shocked

We've all been ogling this here "statue" for a while, as though it is a statue. My mistake. I thought it was a statue till I considered it might be bas-relief.

It wasn't until ozgeorge assumed that the Sokolica "statue" could not be bas-relief till I checked on this one too....



This "statue" is not a statue at all.  In fact, it was a layer on an ivory panel matrix used as a statuette and reliquary.  The Met's description actually says the same: "Over time, some ivory icons experienced wear and tear, subsequently leading to their reconfiguration. Because Byzantine ivory carvers cut deeply into the panels to create images in high relief, the background area is thin and prone to breakage. In the case of the icon illustrated here, the image was excised from the panel to create a statuette; part of the original background can still be seen in the area between the head of Christ and his mother's left shoulder. This object served a double function: an indentation on the back indicates that it was also used as a reliquary. It is not certain whether it served this purpose from the time it was carved or only after it was detached from its ivory matrix."

And if one wants to argue the fact of what the Met caretakers are saying, allow a moment to digest the dimensions of the "statue": Ivory; 9 3/16 x 2 3/4 x 1/2 in. (23.4 x 7 x 1.3 cm)

All right here.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2008, 10:46:49 PM by Suaiden » Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #33 on: June 07, 2008, 10:48:01 PM »

Apparently some of the backing is missing, and it could well have been attached to a wall.
That's the back of the throne she's sitting on. It's a Pantanassa.

What about this medieval statue of St. Nicholas of Mozhaisk?:
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #34 on: June 07, 2008, 10:52:33 PM »

That's the back of the throne she's sitting on. It's a Pantanassa.
Could have been carved into a wall panel....

What about this medieval statue of St. Nicholas of Mozhaisk?:


He's still flat....

EDIT: I believe it also said somewhere that this was from the Patriarchal Palace.  I never said Orthodox never made statues. Just a question of whether they used them in Church....
« Last Edit: June 07, 2008, 10:58:41 PM by Suaiden » Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #35 on: June 07, 2008, 10:59:31 PM »

He's still flat....
Well, he's doing a good job of holding up a three dimensional Church then. Wink
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #36 on: June 07, 2008, 11:01:45 PM »

Well, he's doing a good job of holding up a three dimensional Church then. Wink
And his shoes don't look too flat to me. It looks like he's standing on them. Wink
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #37 on: June 07, 2008, 11:07:09 PM »

Well, he's doing a good job of holding up a three dimensional Church then. Wink

Well, I'll gladly admit the arms extend.  The Church does look 3D.  The problem is the rest of him doesn't. What we DON'T find is this!



And his shoes don't look too flat to me. It looks like he's standing on them. Wink

It looks like he's also in a glass case supported (and probably attached to) a wall, something not commonly done for freestanding items for observation.
Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #38 on: June 07, 2008, 11:18:41 PM »

Well, I'll gladly admit the arms extend.  The Church does look 3D.  The problem is the rest of him doesn't.
I'd argue that it does. There is clearly a space between the front and back of his chasuble through which his obviously 3D arms extend.

What we DON'T find is this!

Well, yes, because that is a Western Orthodox statue in the Western style and St. Nicholas of of Mozhaisk is an Eastern Orthodox statue in the Eastern style. Just like the Celtic Cross is a Western style Cross and the Three Bar Cross is a Russian style Cross and the Greek Cross is a Greek style Cross.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #39 on: June 07, 2008, 11:22:10 PM »

I never said Orthodox never made statues. Just a question of whether they used them in Church....

The Virgin of Sokolica is publicly venerated and is a pilgrim shrine, especially for couples having difficulty conceiving.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Starlight
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of USA (Ecumenical Patriarchate)
Posts: 1,537


« Reply #40 on: June 07, 2008, 11:32:40 PM »

Interesting pictures. Thank you for posting.
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #41 on: June 07, 2008, 11:46:25 PM »

I've also been perplexed at the idea that 3D venerations are "heretical."  I've always seen icons and statues as culturally diverse, not dogmatically divisive.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,404



« Reply #42 on: June 07, 2008, 11:47:41 PM »

The statue in question is in fact a type of Hodegetria-- but derived from a Western, more primitive strain than the highly conventionalized Eastern version. Take a look at the Salus Populi Romani:



The madonna of the Book of Kells is of the same type, as are the various maestri (the latter form elaborates the image by surrounding the seated virgin with angels). It just comes down to the the fact that in the West, the virgin tend to hold on to the Child with both hands, and that in medieval and later art the virgin tends to stand up. There's a late type in which she holds the Child up under His armpits, thus heading in the direction of the Virgin of the Sign.

The virgin of Lourdes is not holding the Child, btw.

Rant all you want about statuary.
Logged
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #43 on: June 07, 2008, 11:51:00 PM »

I'd argue that it does. There is clearly a space between the front and back of his chasuble through which his obviously 3D arms extend.

This is going to end up as an "agree to disagree" till I see the statue in question physically.

Well, yes, because that is a Western Orthodox statue in the Western style and St. Nicholas of of Mozhaisk is an Eastern Orthodox statue in the Eastern style. Just like the Celtic Cross is a Western style Cross and the Three Bar Cross is a Russian style Cross and the Greek Cross is a Greek style Cross.

And with that, I totally give up.  That is NOT a "Western Orthodox statue". It is a typical statue found in Roman Catholic and Anglican Churches, never having been found in a Western Orthodox Church before the schism.  Where it was found (before the statue joined the Vicariate, of course) was in Roman and Anglican Churches, the former which I had seen throughout my childhood.

You can call it an apple all day long, but it's still an orange, or in this case, a post-schism Western statue.  But I will never convince you.  And you-- because of my having grown from a typical visual childhood in Roman Catholicism (we *owned* a statue like that in my house) until I converted to Orthodoxy in my 20's-- will never convince me that the statue in that pic is anything but a typical Roman or Anglican statue, of recent style.
Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #44 on: June 08, 2008, 12:22:27 AM »

never having been found in a Western Orthodox Church before the schism. 
Well, it's found in a Western Orthodox Church now.

Where it was found (before the statue joined the Vicariate, of course) was in Roman and Anglican Churches, the former which I had seen throughout my childhood.
I know.

You can call it an apple all day long, but it's still an orange, or in this case, a post-schism Western statue.
I know.

But I will never convince you.
There's no need to. I know where it has come from.

And you-- because of my having grown from a typical visual childhood in Roman Catholicism (we *owned* a statue like that in my house) until I converted to Orthodoxy in my 20's-- will never convince me that the statue in that pic is anything but a typical Roman or Anglican statue, of recent style.
There's no need to. I know where it has come from.

You are rejecting such statues because you associate them with the Roman Catholicism of your childhood. But you cannot say that Statues in general are "uncanonical" or "heretical" in the Orthodox Church, because we have statues, and we venerate them. Yes, they look different to post-schism Western statues, but they are still statues, so venerating statues is not "heretical" in itself.

Do you know where churchbells come from in the Orthodox Church? They come from the post-schism Western Medieval Church. Originally, the Orthodox Church only had the talanton and symantron, both of which must be manually struck with a hammer according to tradition. Should churchbells be rejected because they came from the post-schism West? Or, has the Orthodox Church adopted this post-schism Western invention and sanctified it?

If we cannot reject church bells simply because they came from the post-schism West, on what basis do we reject Western icongography and statues which do not depict heresy? And just as we adopted and sanctified western Church bells, why can't we adopt and sanctify Western iconography?
« Last Edit: June 08, 2008, 12:23:29 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #45 on: June 08, 2008, 09:36:43 AM »

If we cannot reject church bells simply because they came from the post-schism West, on what basis do we reject Western icongography and statues which do not depict heresy? And just as we adopted and sanctified western Church bells, why can't we adopt and sanctify Western iconography?

Because anything that is Western is demonic, at least that's the impression I'm getting.  Tongue
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
nyc_xenia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Holy Synod of Milan
Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #46 on: June 08, 2008, 11:58:36 AM »

Because anything that is Western is demonic, at least that's the impression I'm getting.  Tongue

The bells aside...

If that's what you believe, then your not reading what he's saying.  What he is saying, is that there is a real pre-schism Orthodox practice and tradition, which ought to be fully restored and practiced.  The original Orthodox practices ought not to be confused with the post schism practices (that are wrongfully represented here) as the genuine Orthodox practice of the West.

 
 
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #47 on: June 08, 2008, 12:01:53 PM »

The bells aside...
But why can we pick and choose what we adopt and sanctfy from the post-schism West?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #48 on: June 08, 2008, 12:13:04 PM »

Xenia rightly pointed out:

The bells aside...

If that's what you believe, then your not reading what he's saying.  What he is saying, is that there is a real pre-schism Orthodox practice and tradition, which ought to be fully restored and practiced.  The original Orthodox practices ought not to be confused with the post schism practices (that are wrongfully represented here) as the genuine Orthodox practice of the West.

To which Ozgeorge replied:

But why can we pick and choose what we adopt and sanctfy from the post-schism West?

To which I have to point out, yet again.....

The bells are no different from how pre-schism images had a place in the West, but not the place, use or form that they have now; bells also have a rich practice in the pre-schism Orthodox West.  Even the Roman Catholics proudly note that. From the Catholic Encyclopedia on Bells.

The first Christian writer who frequently speaks of bells (signa) is Gregory of Tours (c. 585). We learn that they were struck or shaken, and we find mention of a cord being used for this purpose (funem illum de quo signum commovetur, "De Vitâ Martini", I, xxviii), while as regards the use of these signa it appears that they rung before church services and that they roused the monks from their beds. Again, the word signum appears in the almost contemporary "Life of St. Columban" (615), for when one of his monks was dying Columban is said to have assembled the community by ringing the bell (signo tacto omnes adesse imperavit), Krusch, "Scrip. Merov.", IV, 85). Similar expressions, signo tacto, or cum exauditum fuerit signum, are used in Constitutions attributed to St. Caesarius of Arles (c. 513) and in the Rule of St. Benedict (c. 540). Moreover, if Dom Ferotin's view of the very early date of the Spanish ordinals which he has published (Monumenta Liturgica, V) could be safely accepted, it is possible that large bells were in common use in Spain at the same period. Still it must be remembered that signum primarily meant a signal and we must not be too hasty in attributing to it a specific instead of a generic meaning when first employed by Merovingian writers.

Image Again, the word campana, which even in the early Middle Ages undoubtedly meant a church bell and nothing else, occurs first, if Reifferscheid's "Anecdota Cassinensia" (p. 6) may be trusted, in Southern Italy (c. 515) in a letter to the deacon Ferrandus to Abbot Eugippius. It has been suggested from a Latin inscription connected with Arval Brethren (C.I., L. VI, no. 2067) that it was previously used to mean some kind of brazen vessel. However, no quite satisfactory examples of campana in church Latin seem to be forthcoming before that latter part of the seventh century, and it is then found in the North. It is used by Cummian at Iona (c. 665) and by Bede in Northumbria (c. 710), and frequently elsewhere after that date. In Rome, the "Liber Pontificalis" tells us that Pope Stephen II (752-757) erected a bellfry with three bells (campanae) at St. Peter's. It was probably this name which led Walafrid Strabo in the first half of the ninth century to make the assertion that bells were of Italian origin and that they came from Campania and more particularly from the town of Nola. Later writers went further and attributed the invention to St. Paulinus of Nola, but as St. Paulinus himself in the minute description which he has left of his own church makes no mention of bells, this is extremely improbable.

The word clocca (Fr. cloche; Ger. Glocke; Eng. clock) is interesting because in this case it is definitely known what was meant by it. It was certainly Irish in origin and it occurs at an early date both in Latin and in the Irish form clog. Thus it is found in Book of Armagh and is used by Adamnan in his life of St. Columbkill written c. 685. The Irish and English missionaries no doubt imported it into Germany where it appears more than once in the Sacramentary of Gellone. It is plain that in primitive Celtic lands an extraordinary importance was attached to bells. A very large number of these ancient bells, more than sixty in all -- the immense majority being Irish -- are still in existence. Many of them are reputed to have belonged to Irish saints and partake of the character of relics. The most famous is that of St. Patrick, the clog-an-edachta, or "bell-off-the-will" now preserved in the Museum of the Royal Irish Academy, Dublin. There seems no serious reason to doubt that this was taken from the tomb in the year 552. Like most of these bells, it had an official and hereditary custodian (in this case named Mulholland) in whose possession it remained, being handed down for centuries from father to son. Other similar early bells are those of St. Senan (c. 540) and St. Mura; there are several in Scotland and Wales, one at St. Gall in Switzerland, one known as the Saufang at Colonge, and another at Noyon in France. The evidence for the extraordinary veneration with which these bells were regarded in Celtic lands is overwhelming. Even Giraldus Cambrensis notes in the twelfth century that upon them was taken the most solemn form of oath. They were also carried into battle, and even though the earlier specimens are nothing but rude cow-bells, wedge-shape in form and made of iron plate bent and roughly riveted, still they were often enclosed at a later daye in cases or "shrines" of the richest workmanship. The shrine of St. Patrick's bell bears an inscription of some length from which we learn that this beautiful specimen of the jeweler's craft must have been wrought about 1005....

The great development in the use of bells may be identified with the eighth century. It was then, seemingly, that they began to be regarded as an essential part of the equipment of every church, and also that the practice of blessing them by a special form of consecration became generally prevalent. If we interpreted literally a well-known passage in Bede (Hist. Eccl.., IV, xxi), we should have to believe that already in the year 680, the bell (campana) that was rung at Whitby at the passing away of St. Hilda was heard at Hackness thirteen miles off. But the whole setting of the story implies that Bede regarded the occurrence as miraculous and that the distance might as well as have been thirty miles as thirteen. On the other hand, it is clear that in the eighth centurychurch towers began to be built for the express purpose of hanging bells in them, which implies that the bells must have been increasing in size. The case of St. Peter's in Rome has already been noticed. So in the annals of St. Vandrille (cap. x, p. 33) we read that in the time of Ermharius who died in 738 that abbot had a bell made, to be hung in the little tower (turricula) "as is the custom of such churches"; while the "Monachus Sangallensis" (DeCarlo Magno, I, xxxi) tells the story of a monastic bell-founder who asked Charlemagne to give him a hundred pounds of silver with a proportionate amount of cooper to provide materials for a single bell. In any case it is certain from Charlemagne's "Capitularies", as well as from Alcuin, Amalarius, and other writers of the early ninth century that by that time in the Frankish dominions every parish church was expected to have one bell. In the next century Regino of Prüm, providing a programme of questions to be asked at an episcopal visitation, puts in the very first place a question about the church bells. Seeing that the clearest evidence of the popularity of church bells in Carlovingian times is encountered in regions where the influence of Irish or English missionaries had prevailed, it may perhaps be concluded that this development should be traced to Celtic influence. The missionary's hand-bell, with which he gathered his congregation together in the open air, would soon become sacred as a thing immediately associated with him and his work. Moreover, the idea would grow up that no religious service could take place without some preliminary ringing of a bell. Although we have traces of the use of signa and companae in monasteries before the Irish became missionaries, there is no evidence to show that these were bells rather than gongs. On the other hand, semantron, used to announce the beginning of service in Greek monasteries, was a flat plate of metal and its name (from semainein, "to make a signal") is obviously the counterpart of signum. Further we also find in the old glossary of the tenth century that the Greek word tympanon (drum) is given as the equivalent of campanum (Corpus Glossariorum Latinorum. III, 24). At the same time, we can trace in Ireland itself a gradual evolution of the shape of the bell, passing from the small cow-bell of riveted iron to the cast bronze instrument of considerable size with which we are now familiar.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2008, 12:26:59 PM by Suaiden » Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #49 on: June 08, 2008, 12:36:57 PM »

But why can we pick and choose what we adopt and sanctfy from the post-schism West?

And another note I forgot, from my own Hispanic, Western Orthodox tradition:

The historian of the new martyrs of Cordoba, St Eulogius, frequently cited the fact that the Muslim conquerors would not allow them to ring the bells for Church services in Mozarabic Cordoba, cursing in the streets when it did occur, leading to prosecution.

St Eulogius was himself martyred in 859.

Is this another post-schism usage?
« Last Edit: June 08, 2008, 12:37:39 PM by Suaiden » Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
nyc_xenia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Holy Synod of Milan
Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #50 on: June 08, 2008, 12:51:39 PM »

The Virgin of Sokolica Venerated in Kosovo is not a bas relief.  It is a self standing statue. Here is a side view:




http://www.metmuseum.org/special/byzantium/g2_pop_5.R.asp?altView=1

Information on the sculpture:

Sculpture of the Virgin and Child. Byzantine (Serbia), 1312–16. Marble; 106 x 67.5 cm (41 3/4 x 26 5/8 in.). Sokolica Monastery, Kosovo.

    
This sculpture of the Virgin and Child formed part of the former lavish sculptural decoration of the mausoleum church of King Stefan Uro II Milutin (r. 1282–1321), which was dedicated to Saint Stefan, the patron saint of the Nemanjid dynasty. It is also known as "the Sokolica Virgin," after the nearby village and the small church to which it was transferred, probably in the sixteenth century. At present, the sculpture is situated in the bema.

Together with two figures of angels lost long ago, this marble sculpture of the Virgin and Child constituted the main theme of the portal linking the narthex with the naos.1 Like the entire architectural ornamentation of the katholikon of Banjska Monastery, it was modeled after the stone decoration of the Church of the Virgin at Studenica Monastery, the prototype for King Milutin's mausoleum church. The creator of the Banjska sculpture was consistent in following the theme of the seated Virgin with the Child in the lunette of the main Studenica portal, which was itself widespread in Byzantine art and inspired by older models.2 In carving and style, however, the frontal figure of the enthroned Virgin and infant Christ, who confers blessings with his right hand and holds a scroll in his left, differs from its Studenica counterpart. This work was executed in high relief, almost as a full sculpture. The two symmetrically arranged figures are strictly frontal, showing no movement, with the heads slightly tilting back and the gazes fixed. Both figures are short and broad. The faulty proportions of some parts of the body are conspicuous: low brows, small protruding eyes, full puffed-up cheeks. The shallow, carved lines of the drapery folds leave the impression of a stiff drawing. The volumes of the heads and hands are modeled softly and with such sculptural skill that they echo works in ivory. The large, broad-backed throne with a round cushion on the seat is embellished with a relief design of entwined and braided geometric and vegetal motifs. The reliefs are shallowly carved, in the characteristic Byzantine stone-carving technique of the late epoch.3 The sculpture was colored, but only random traces of red and blue survive on the Virgin's cloak, on the throne, and on the arm of the cross on Christ's nimbus, on which the letters IC and X are also visible.

Master masons acquainted with Romanesque architecture and knowledgeable about Byzantine art were engaged for the construction and architectural decoration of the lunette on the church portal. The sculpture of the Virgin with Child from Banjska Monastery clearly points to their aspiration to create a work close in spirit to Byzantine art, that is, to the artistic conceptions of the epoch of its founder, King Milutin.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2008, 12:56:32 PM by nyc_xenia » Logged
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #51 on: June 08, 2008, 01:00:20 PM »



http://www.metmuseum.org/special/byzantium/g2_pop_5.R.asp?altView=1

Information on the sculpture:

Sculpture of the Virgin and Child. Byzantine (Serbia), 1312–16. Marble; 106 x 67.5 cm (41 3/4 x 26 5/8 in.). Sokolica Monastery, Kosovo.

    
This sculpture of the Virgin and Child formed part of the former lavish sculptural decoration of the mausoleum church of King Stefan Uro II Milutin (r. 1282–1321), which was dedicated to Saint Stefan, the patron saint of the Nemanjid dynasty. It is also known as "the Sokolica Virgin," after the nearby village and the small church to which it was transferred, probably in the sixteenth century. At present, the sculpture is situated in the bema.

And as we can see, it is a sculpture, not a statue, and AS WE CAN SEE FROM THE ACTUAL BOTTOM, without CHOPPING IT IN PHOTOSHOP, it is not free-standing at all.
Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #52 on: June 08, 2008, 01:00:58 PM »

Get with the times guys.
Here's the Russian Orthodox statue of St. Nicholas Myra in Demre:

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #53 on: June 08, 2008, 01:06:35 PM »

The bells aside...

If that's what you believe, then your not reading what he's saying.  What he is saying, is that there is a real pre-schism Orthodox practice and tradition, which ought to be fully restored and practiced.  The original Orthodox practices ought not to be confused with the post schism practices (that are wrongfully represented here) as the genuine Orthodox practice of the West.

You're right.  We should sanction the heretical use of microphones (and bells?) in the churches because of the post-schism Western influences that are so demonic.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2008, 01:07:00 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #54 on: June 08, 2008, 01:09:54 PM »

Get with the times guys.
Here's the Russian Orthodox statue of St. Nicholas Myra in Demre:



So what? I never said there were no statues made by Orthodox Christians. We can find plenty. BUT THEY ARE NOT USED IN THE CHURCH.

And as an Orthodox Christian, faithful to our sacred traditions of the West, I have no interest in "getting with the times".  That's what started this to begin with, isn't it?

I would suggest, Ozgeorge, that you watch a very nice movie. It's called "The Agony and the Ecstasy"; it's about Michaelangelo and the Sistine Chapel.  There is a poignant scene where, in frustration with the iconographic types, he begins looking through taverns for types for the Apostles. Sadly, that actually has a historical basis; as does Raphael painting his not-so-circumspect girlfriends as the madonna, to paraphrase a contemporary writer (he used a term that was far less polite and I am not sure I can say it on the list).

The art of the late post-schism West is not Orthodox in style or spirit, and the Orthodox saints of the West would have been disgusted. It should be abandoned in favor of sacred Western Orthodox tradition, which exists in plenty. Perhaps it would look too "Eastern", or, more properly, more "Orthodox"? Well, that is not our problem, is it? Aren't we supposed to convert to Orthodoxy, whether an Eastern or a Western one? Not continually try to make "God in our own image", as is the mantra of humanism? Are we not supposed to become like Him? Are we not supposed to take up the traditions of our Western Orthodox fathers, and not the "fathers" of our choosing?
« Last Edit: June 08, 2008, 01:13:51 PM by Suaiden » Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
nyc_xenia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Holy Synod of Milan
Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #55 on: June 08, 2008, 01:14:26 PM »

You're right.  We should sanction the heretical use of microphones (and bells?) in the churches because of the post-schism Western influences that are so demonic.

LOL..."I'm right?"  Glad you think so.  Tongue

As for bells, they are not post-schism and microphones have little to do with "praxis". Microphones are simply a modern convenience, which does not alter the liturgical practices of the church anymore than the light bulb.
 
 Wink
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #56 on: June 08, 2008, 01:17:19 PM »

There is a poignant scene where, in frustration with the iconographic types, he begins looking through taverns for types for the Apostles. Sadly, that actually has a historical basis; as does Raphael painting his not-so-circumspect girlfriends as the madonna,
I only wish I could see Christ in my neighbour as well as they did. Smiley
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #57 on: June 08, 2008, 01:20:28 PM »

I only wish I could see Christ in my neighbour as well as they did. Smiley

They weren't searching for Christ, they were searching for the "aesthetic" their imaginations wanted.  And Raphael painted his models as the Mother of God as a "prize" for doing what he wanted.  Another movie, "A Season of Giants", shows this well, as dozens of pretty girls clamor around Raphael to be the next "girl in his picture".

I am ashamed by your response.
Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #58 on: June 08, 2008, 01:33:50 PM »

Another movie, "A Season of Giants",
Do you get all your historical information from Hollywood? Smiley

I am ashamed by your response.
So am I. It shames me that the harlots and the publicans are entering the Kingdom of Heaven before me.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #59 on: June 08, 2008, 01:36:26 PM »

Do you get all your historical information from Hollywood? Smiley

No, and I think I've demonstrated that sufficiently to ignore such a bizarre statement.  I was suggesting for you to watch a movie-- historically accurate flicks are great, and noting historical errors is fun as well. Besides, we've been analyzing pictures for a while now, no?

So am I. It shames me that the harlots and the publicans are entering the Kingdom of Heaven before me.

Not by posing for Raphael's pictures they aren't though.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2008, 01:46:19 PM by Suaiden » Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
nyc_xenia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Holy Synod of Milan
Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #60 on: June 09, 2008, 12:04:54 AM »

But why can we pick and choose what we adopt and sanctfy from the post-schism West?

Hardy-har-har....

That was a good one!
Logged
prodromas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Under the Green Pope
Posts: 1,239

Greek Orthodox


« Reply #61 on: June 09, 2008, 12:29:17 AM »

Hardy-har-har....

That was a good one!

What is so funny? People think that there is this completely Black and White distinction when it comes to the West and East schism. There is nothing specifically demonic about the West.
Logged

The sins I don't commit are largely due to the weakness of my limbs.

1915-1923 Հայոց Ցեղասպանութիւն ,never again,
ܩܛܠܐ ܕܥܡܐ ܐܬܘܪܝܐ 1920-1914, never again,
השואה  1933-1945, never again,
(1914-1923) Ελληνική Γενοκτονία, never again
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #62 on: June 09, 2008, 12:36:38 AM »

LOL..."I'm right?"  Glad you think so.  Tongue

As for bells, they are not post-schism and microphones have little to do with "praxis". Microphones are simply a modern convenience, which does not alter the liturgical practices of the church anymore than the light bulb.
 
 Wink

I'm sorry.  I'm in a very bitingly sarcastic mood due to recent events.  On the serious side though, I don't feel that certain praxis is "wrong."  Whatever praxis we adopted, it was part of the culture of the people that we "baptized" into our church and turned spiritual.  In fact, a lot of what we adopted was either from a Jewish or a Gentile/Pagan culture.

To add to the praxis something like statues in a Western style liturgy is nothing more than accommodating to the culture of Western people.

In addition, I've expressed over and over again my skepticism to certain Orthodox who reject things simply because of it coming from a post-schism Western Church, or at least that's the assumption and excuse "ultra-Orthodox" use.  I wouldn't be surprised if someone comes with an argument calling statues the result of the demonic scholasticism that the West suffered.  Things like these truly bother me.  As I continue to live in the States, I am convinced more and more that we should embrace the West, since future generations will be "Westernized" anyway.

It's fun to see the reaction of my father who went to an Antiochian Orthodox marriage and was shocked that the priests did not have beards and long black cloaks, and they drank wine (gasp!).  He wasn't very comfortable with it, but he acknowledged it's just something he's not used to.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
nyc_xenia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Holy Synod of Milan
Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #63 on: June 09, 2008, 02:45:14 AM »

What is so funny? People think that there is this completely Black and White distinction when it comes to the West and East schism. There is nothing specifically demonic about the West.

Do you see how you "all" tend to quote the word?

The word, you may ask...

"Demonic".


I never made mention of it, yet you "all" have.

Sorry "tale-to-tell".

Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #64 on: June 09, 2008, 08:00:47 AM »

To add to the praxis something like statues in a Western style liturgy is nothing more than accommodating to the culture of Western people.
I agree, and I think it could be argued that this is much more honestly "Western Rite" than simply trying to resurrect long abandoned liturgies. The Church meets people where they are now, not where they were 1000 years ago.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,520


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #65 on: June 09, 2008, 06:10:12 PM »

The Orthodox Church indeed has voiced its opinion on 3D statues versus 2D icons:

Act 7, of the Seventh Ecumenical Council:

“We define the rule with all accuracy and diligence, in a manner not unlike that befitting the shape of the precious and vivifying Cross, that the venerable and holy icons, painted or mosaic, or made of any other suitable material, be placed in the holy churches of God upon sacred vessels and vestments, walls and panels, houses and streets, both of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ, and of our spotless Lady the holy Mother of God, and also of the precious Angels, and of all Saints. For the more frequently and oftener they are continually seen in pictorial representation, the more those beholding are reminded and led to visualize anew the memory of the originals which they represent and for whom moreover they also beget a yearning in the soul of the persons beholding the icons. Accordingly, such persons are prompted not only to kiss these and to pay them honorary adoration, what is more important, they are imbued with the true faith which is reflected in our worship which is due to God alone and which befits only the divine nature. But this worship must be paid in the way suggested by the form of the precious and vivifying Cross, and the holy Gospels, and the rest of sacred institutions, and the offering of wafts of incense, and the display of beams of light, to be done for the purpose of honouring them, just as it used to be the custom to do among the ancients by way of manifesting piety. For any honour paid to the icon (or picture) redounds upon the original, and whoever bows down in adoration before the icon, is at the same time bowing down in adoration to the substance (or hypostasis) of the one therein painted. For thus the doctrine of our Holy Fathers, it was the tradition of the universal Church."

Interpretation of the Canon (from The Rudder):

An idol is one thing, a statue is another thing, and an icon (or picture) is a different thing. For an idol differs from an icon in that the icon is a likeness of a true thing and its original, whereas the idol is an image of a false and inexistent thing, and is not the likeness of an original, according to Origen and Theodoret — just as were the idols of the false and inexistent gods of the Greeks. We call those images which embody the whole figure statues and carved or sculptured figures in general. As for this kind of images, namely, the statues, the catholic (Orthodox) Church not only does not adore them, but she does not even manufacture them, for many reasons:

1) because in its present definition this Council says for images to be produced with paints (or colours), with mosaic, or tessellated work, and with any other suitable material (which means with gold and silver and other metals, as Theodosius the bishop of Amorion says in Act 4 of the same Council) upon the sacred utensils, and robes, including sheets and cloths; upon walls and boards, and houses and streets. It did not mention a word about construction of a statue. Rather it may be said that this definition of this Council is antagonistic to statues;

2) because neither the letters written by patriarchs in their correspondence with one another, and to emperors, nor the letters of Pope Gregory to Germanus and of Pope Adrian to the present Council, nor the speeches and orations which the bishops and monks made in connection with all the eight Acts of the present Council said anything at all about statues or sculptured figures. But also the councils held by the iconomachs, and especially that held in Blachernae in the reign of Copronymus, in writing against the holy icons, mention oil paintings and portraits, but never statues or sculptured figures, which, if they existed, could not have been passed over in silence by the iconomachs, but, on the contrary, they would have been written against with a view to imputing greater blame to the Orthodox;

3) because although the woman with an issue of blood made a bronze statue of Christ in memory of and by way of giving thanks for the miracle and the benefaction which it had conferred upon her; and she set it up in the Panead, at the feet of which there sprang up a plant, or herb, which cured various ailments; and, as some say, that statue was smashed to pieces by the Emperor Maximinus, before Constantine the Great, and the bronze was seized by him; or else Julian the Apostate seized it, and put in its place the statue of Jupiter, as an anonymous writer says. Though, I say, the woman who had an issue of blood did make this statue (which the Christians took into the Church and honoured; and people went to see it out of a yearning for the original of it, as Philostorgus the Arian historically records), yet, as a matter of fact, that work of the woman who had an issue of blood was a concession from God, who, for goodness’ sake accepted it, making allowances for the imperfect knowledge of the woman who set it up; and because that was an embodiment and mark not of the grace of the Gospel, but of the old Law, as Pope Gregory II says in writing to St. Germanus (for the old Law had the two Cherubim, which were gold statues and sculptured figures containing all the body of the angelic powers, according to ch. 38 of Exodus, which Cherubim, according to an unknown expositor, had the face of a calf, and adored the Ark of the Covenant (here called the Ark of the Testimony, and by this adoration separated the Israelites from the idolatry of the Egyptians, who used to adore the calf. For the Jews learned from this that if a calf adored the Ark, it followed that the Egyptians were wrong in adoring it as a god).

Not only the old Law, but also the custom of the Greeks fostered the erection of statues and sculptured figures, as St. Germanus writes in a letter to Thomas of Claudiopolis which is to be found in Act 4 of the present Council, and which says: “It being obvious that the Saviour levelled His own grace to condescension with the faith of the woman, and showed what has been made evident to us above, namely, that it is not that what is performed is in general the object, but that it is the aim of the one performing it that is being reduced to experience . . . ." And again: “We do not say this, so that we may find an excuse for exercising the art of making bronze pillars, but merely in order to make it plain that the Lord did not discard the national custom at this point, but, instead, availed Himself of it to exhibit therein for a considerable length of time the wonder-working and miracle-working efficiency of His own benevolence; on which account it is not devout to disparage the custom of a somewhat more pious nature which has prevailed among us.”

You see here three things as plainly as day, to wit: 1) that the erection of the statue of Christ was moral, and that the Lord accepted it as a matter of compromise with the times; 2) that statues ought not to be manufactured; and 3) that it is more pious and more decent for the venerable images to be depicted, not by means of statues, but by means of colours in paintings. For the same saint said above by way of anticipation that in historically recording the facts concerning the statues, he historically recounts the fact that the icons of the Apostles Peter and Paul, painted in colours, were still extant . . . Canon LXXXII of the 6th, moreover, says that we ought to prefer the grace of the Gospel to the legal form, and ought to set up the human character, or figure, of Christ in icons instead of the olden lamb even in oil paintings.

So that from all that has been said it is proved that the Westerners are acting contrary to the definition of this holy and Ecumenical Seventh Council, and contrary to the tradition of the Church in making statues and sculptured figures and plaster of paris replicas, and setting them up in their churches. We said hereinabove those representations which embody the whole of that which they represent are called statues and sculptured work and plaster of paris figures in general, whereas those representations which do not embody the whole of the person or other object which they are intended to represent, but at most merely exhibit them in relief, projecting, that is to say, here and there above the level and surface of the background, are not called statues or sculptured work or plaster of paris figures or any such name, but, instead, they are called holy icons (or, if they are not holy, simply pictures). Such are those which are to be found engraved or stamped or otherwise delineated upon the sacred vessels, on divine Gospels, and other holy books, on precious crosses, of silver and gold, according to Dositheus (p. 656 of the Dodecabiblus); to the same class are assigned also images cast in wax and more or less in relief, that is to say, projecting at various points above and receding at other points below the plane surface of the image, concerning which divine Chrysostom (in his Discourse wherein he argues that one and the same Lawgiver is the author of both the Old and the New Testament; and in Discourse 307 on the vesture of priests, the origin of which is to be found in the Gospel of the kingdom of Christ) says the following:

“I myself have loved the images cast in wax as a matter of piety. For I beheld an angel in an image driving back hordes of barbarians. I saw barbarian troops being trodden underfoot, and the words of David coming true, wherein he says: ‘Lord, in thy city Thou wilt do their image havoc’ (p. 852 of the second volume of the Conciliar Records, in Act 6 of the 7th C.; and p. 647 of the sixth vol. of Chrysostom). Oecumenius, too, accepts and approves this kind of image which is cast in wax in the manner above described (in his commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews). Hence, in writing to Symeon the bishop of Bostra, Anastasius the Patriarch of Antioch says: “though, as a matter of fact, an image is nothing else than a piece of wood and colours mixed and mingled with wax” (p. 845 of the second volume of the Conciliar Records). In the same class with these images are placed also the images which are carved in wooden crosses (crucifixes) and medallions. They, too, likewise are wrought in relief and project above the plane of the level surface, and do not compromise the whole body of the person or thing represented.


The reason and cause why statues are not adored or venerated (aside from the legal observation and custom noted hereinabove) seem to me to be the fact that when they are handled and it is noticed that the whole body and all the members of the person or thing represented are contained in them and that they not only reveal the whole surface of it in three dimensions, but can even be felt in space, instead of merely appearing as such to the eye alone, they no longer appear to be, nor have they any longer any right to be called, icons or pictures, but, on the contrary, they are sheer replications of the originals. Some persons, though, assert or opine that the reason why the Church rejected or did away with statues was in order to avoid entirely any likeness to idols. For the idols were statues of massive sculpture, capable of being felt on all sides with the hand and fingers.

It is clear from the above that, while bas-relief and embossed images are permissible for veneration, fully 3-dimensional statues are not.

Also consider the following:

From Leonid Ouspensky's book Theology of the Icon:

The decisions of the Quinisext Council were signed by the emperor, and a place was left for the signature of the Pope of Rome; following were the signatures of the Patriarchs Paul of Constantinople, Peter of Alexandria, Anastasius of Jerusalem and George of Antioch. These were followed by the signatures of 213 bishops or their representatives. Among the signatures was that of Basil, archbishop of Gortyna (in Crete), who signed on behalf of the Church of Rome. There were also signatures of other bishops of the West. The authority of these representatives of Western Christianity is contested. Hefele writes: "It is true that the Vita Sergii in the Liber Pontificalis reports that the legates of Pope Sergius, having been deceived by the emperor, signed their names. But these legates of the pope were simply pontifical apocrisiaries living in Constantinople and not legates who had been sent expressly to take part in the council." In any case, as soon as the council had ended, the acts were sent to Rome requesting Pope Sergius' signature. He refused, even rejecting his copy of the acts. He declared that the decisions of the council had no value and asserted that he preferred death to accepting error. The error consisted undoubtedly in some teachings and practices which were condemned by the council, such as, for example, the obligatory celibacy of clergy, the Saturday fast (already forbidden by the First Ecumenical Council), the representation of Christ in the form of a lamb, and others. Yet the Roman Church eventually accepted the Seventh Ecumenical Council, which refers to Canon 82 of the Quinisext Council. Therefore, it can be said that the Roman Church implicitly also recognises this canon. Pope St. Gregory II refers to Canon 82 in his letter to the Patriarch of Constantinople, St. Germanus. Pope Hadrian I, for example, solemnly declares in his letter to Patriarch St. Tarasius his adherence to the Quinisext Council; he does the same in a letter to the Frankish bishops in defence of the Seventh Ecumenical Council. Pope John VIII spoke of the decisions of the Quinisext Council without voicing any objection. Later, Pope Innocent III, quoting Canon 82, calls the Quinisext Council the Sixth Ecumenical Council. But all this is only the agreement of some popes, whereas there were others who had contrary opinions. On the whole, the West did not receive the decisions of the Quinisext Council.

The teaching of the Church on the christological basis of the icon, therefore, remained foreign to Western Christianity. This teaching could not enrich the sacred art of the West, which even today retains certain purely symbolic representations such as the lamb. The refusal to accept the decisions of the Quinisext Council later had, in the realm of sacred art, a great importance. The Roman Church excluded itself from the process of a development of an artistic and spiritual language, a process in which all the rest of the Church took an active part, with the Church of Constantinople providentially becoming the leader. The West remained outside of this development.

The Orthodox Church, on the contrary, in accordance with the Quinisext Council, continued to refine its art in form and in contents, an art which conveys, through images and material forms, the revelation of the divine world, giving us a key to approach, contemplate and understand it. It seems to us that it is particularly important for Western Orthodoxy, as it emerges in our own time, to be well aware of the significance of Canon 82 of the Quinisext Council. The canon, in fact, is the theoretical basis of liturgical art. Whatever course Western Orthodox art will take in the future, it will not be able to bypass the basic directive which was formulated for the first time in this canon: the transmission of historical reality and the revealed divine truth, expressed in certain forms which correspond to the spiritual experience of the Church.


The above excerpt goes some way in explaining why there is such divergence in content and form of western religious art and that of canonical Orthodox iconography. Despite the church of Rome accepting the rulings of the Seventh Ecumenical Council (convened almost a century later), it seems little mind was paid by that church to the prohibitions of that Council to the portrayal of God the Father as a bearded old man, hence the perpetuation of such images to this day. An indirect conclusion could therefore be drawn, that the west also similarly saw no problem with statues as ecclesiastical art.

Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #66 on: June 10, 2008, 12:23:07 AM »

Truthfully, just because the 7th ecumenical council doesn't mention statues doesn't mean it's damnworthy, neither does it mean it's accepted.  It simply was not mentioned.  The interpretation from the Rudder can be easily countered by a different Western interpretation.  Simply put, the idea that statues were condemned does not exist.  In fact, the idea that "simple-minded" people like that woman who had a statue of Christ is an "exception" sounds actually quite suspiciously malarkey.

God bless.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,520


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #67 on: June 10, 2008, 04:14:04 AM »

The fact is, minasoliman, that "Orthodox" statues (fully 3-D) are so exceedingly few, and are not found within the walls of Orthodox churches, nor are they found in people's prayer corners to this day. This has been the life and practice of the Orthodox Church since the beginning.

Even in more recent periods, such as post-17thC Greece, Russia, Ukraine, Romania, etc where iconography soon became almost indistinguishable from western religious painting in artistic style, and (sadly) often content, statues in churches and homes were (and are) essentially non-existent. What does this say? It says the devotional practice of the Orthodox Church has continued to maintain the veneration of 2D painted images, to the practically complete exclusion of fully 3D statues.

As for

Quote
The interpretation from the Rudder can be easily countered by a different Western interpretation.


I would be interested if you, or any Orthodox member of this forum, can draw from the Rudder interpretation of Canon 7 the view that statues are permissible images in the devotional and liturgical life of the Orthodox Church.





Logged
buzuxi
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: GREEK ORTHODOX
Jurisdiction: WORLD ORTHODOXY AGAINST ECUMENISM
Posts: 265


« Reply #68 on: June 10, 2008, 04:28:31 AM »

From reading the 7th Ecumenical council (and the Quinisext Council before that, which declared the depictions of Christ as a lamb uncanonical), we can conclude that Statues have always been rare,  have never been considered part of the Holy Traditions of Orthodoxy, and were never considered images worthy of veneration.
Logged
nyc_xenia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Holy Synod of Milan
Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #69 on: June 10, 2008, 11:13:14 AM »

I agree, and I think it could be argued that this is much more honestly "Western Rite" than simply trying to resurrect long abandoned liturgies. The Church meets people where they are now, not where they were 1000 years ago.

It's not "honest" to pass off a non-Orthodox liturgy as if it were "Western Orthodox". It's also not the same thing to use a light bulb and a newly innovated liturgy.  The one innocently illumines a room, the other, well, we can all come to our own conclusions on...
Logged
nyc_xenia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Holy Synod of Milan
Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #70 on: June 10, 2008, 11:23:30 AM »

SNIP>  The interpretation from the Rudder can be easily countered by a different Western interpretation.  Simply put, the idea that statues were condemned does not exist.  In fact, the idea that "simple-minded" people like that woman who had a statue of Christ is an "exception" sounds actually quite suspiciously malarkey.

God bless.

If you can, please reference the interpretation from this passage in the Rudder which can easily be "countered by a different Western" interpretation.

Only please, be sure this interpretation has been done by known Orthodox Saint.

Thanks
Logged
Veniamin
Fire for Effect!
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the South
Posts: 3,372


St. Barbara, patroness of the Field Artillery


« Reply #71 on: June 10, 2008, 11:52:45 AM »

It's not "honest" to pass off a non-Orthodox liturgy as if it were "Western Orthodox". It's also not the same thing to use a light bulb and a newly innovated liturgy.  The one innocently illumines a room, the other, well, we can all come to our own conclusions on...

It's also not honest to claim to be Orthodox when in a schismatic group, but hey, that's not stopping anyone. Roll Eyes
Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #72 on: June 10, 2008, 12:06:31 PM »

The fact is, minasoliman, that "Orthodox" statues (fully 3-D) are so exceedingly few, and are not found within the walls of Orthodox churches, nor are they found in people's prayer corners to this day. This has been the life and practice of the Orthodox Church since the beginning.

Even in more recent periods, such as post-17thC Greece, Russia, Ukraine, Romania, etc where iconography soon became almost indistinguishable from western religious painting in artistic style, and (sadly) often content, statues in churches and homes were (and are) essentially non-existent. What does this say? It says the devotional practice of the Orthodox Church has continued to maintain the veneration of 2D painted images, to the practically complete exclusion of fully 3D statues.

Again, as I said, just because it didn't exist in the East doesn't mean it's condemned.  You are arguing that it doesn't exist in the Orthodox Church, but that's assuming the Orthodox Church in your definition is solely Eastern in your definitions.  This is what I mean.  You people are so stuck in the mindset that Western "stuff" is evil, heterodox, and yes, demonic.  How do you know the West didn't have statues pre-schism?  The Pope of Rome at the time of the seventh council was allegedly threatened by Iconoclasts to have his bronze statue of St. Peter destroyed (source:  http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07620a.htm ).

And just because it's scarcely existed doesn't mean it was unacceptable.  What if we found that an actual church building did not exist in the first four centuries, or that cathedrals didn't exist then, or the use of gold did not exist before then.  Does that mean the Christians sanctioned such use?  Perhaps, the price of such was impossible with the political atmosphere at the time, or the the culture didn't feel it was allowed.  The use and choice of music as well is something to be studied.  The Ethiopians it seems did not develop a unique African rite until the 6th or 7th century with the use of dancing and drums.  This does not exist in Western or Greek cultures, and in these cultures it's understandably objected to, but not grounds for dogmatic rejection.

It's interesting that you use the Rudder, a 17th Century document to interpret the seventh ecumenical council, 10 centuries earlier.  I'm curious to know what St. John Damascus thought of statues, or his disciple for a more accurate scholarly interpretation, not a theological/philosophical speculation.

Quote
I would be interested if you, or any Orthodox member of this forum, can draw from the Rudder interpretation of Canon 7 the view that statues are permissible images in the devotional and liturgical life of the Orthodox Church.

That's not what I said.  I mentioned the canon, not the Rudder.  The Rudder is of no use to me.  It's a document 10 centuries after the seventh ecumenical council.  It's not a scholarly valid or accurate interpretation as of now (perhaps it's valid to use as a study for what 17th and 18th Century Orthodox Christians thought, but not 7th or 8th Century Orthodox Christians).  I mentioned a "Western counter interpretation," and I found something interesting from the Catholic Encyclopedia on Christian Archeology, especially the one on sculptures:

Quote
During the first age of the Church a specifically Christian sculpture was almost unknown. Many reasons have been given to account for this circumstance, the chief of which, besides that of cost, is the practical difficulty encountered in producing works distinctively Christian without the knowledge of a hostile public and Government. Only a few statues and sarcophagi with representations inspired by the Scriptures survive from the first three centuries. Christian sculpture, consequently, began its real development in the fourth century, in the age of peace inaugurated by Constantine. The principal sculptured monuments of this period consist of the many sarcophagi, mostly found in Rome, Ravenna, and in various parts of France, in which Christians of the Constantinian and post-Constantinian epochs were interred. Being sepulchral monuments, the symbolic subjects of the catacomb frescoes were equally appropriate on Christian sarcophagi. But Christian sculptors quickly felt the influence of the new development of Christian art first seen in the basilicas erected under Constantine. The triumphant symbols of the basilcas, and the historical scenes depicted on their walls, are also found on Christian sarcophagi, side by side with some of the earliest and most venerable symbols of the catacombs. The transition from symbolic to historic art is, consequently, nowhere better represented than in the carved sarcophagi of the fourth and following centuries.

And then there's claim in the article about Sculpture that sculptures were indeed there during Constantinonian time and particularly Eastern in nature, not Western:

Quote
The current views of early Christian art have very recently been radically changed because through the researches of Strzygowski and others, the Orient has received its just dues. Both in form and in technique Christian sculpture is, generally speaking, identical with the pagan from which it was developed. But what the latest modern research has shown us is this: that it was not Rome which produced the best and most ancient works of Christian sculpture, but the East, which is certainly the cradle of Christian art. In Asia Minor the influence of Hellenistic art was still so strong that many early Christian works present an almost classical character, but in the West, where this beneficent influence was lacking, sculpture fell earlier into decline. In pre-Constantinian times probably few works of sculpture were executed. This is especially true of representations of the Persons of the Trinity, because the Jews who had become Christians were averse to graven images, and the converted pagans were deterred by their remembrance of the innumerable statues of their former gods. But with the Emperor Constantine the production of sculptures in stone and bronze immediately began on a large scale. Few examples of the statuary of this period have been preserved; but among these are a "Pastor Bonus" in the Museum of the Lateran, and a "Christ" in Berlin, both probably Oriental works. On the other hand, numerous reliefs survive, because, after the ancient custom, the sarcophagi, of which a large number survive, were richly decorated with sculptural representations. The surviving Christian sarcophagi belong mostly to the fourth and fifth centuries, and may be classified into an Occidental and an Oriental group. To the latter belong the beautiful sarcophagi of Ravenna, whose art stood in very intimate relation with the Byzantine. Sculpture in wood and ivory, so highly developed in antiquity, was enlisted in the service of the Church, as is proven by the portals of the Basilica of S. Sabina at Rome, and the numerous preserved book-covers, diptychs, and pyxes. For our knowledge of the transition from the early Christian to medieval sculpture we are indebted principally to reliefs carved in ivory, for there is an almost complete dearth of statuary until the tenth century. Sculpture in ivory achieved great importance in the ninth and tenth centuries. In delicacy of execution, in rhythm of line, and in well-considered observance of the laws of composition, the masterpieces of this epoch approach the creations of the early Renaissance. This branch of sculpture flourished especially in France, at Tours, Corbie, and Metz.

I consider this an honest approach that merits and requires more study.  I would hope that Orthodox Christians today understand the value of how to do an accurate scholarly study and not assume pre-conceived ideas into historical decrees like that of the seventh council.

God bless.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #73 on: June 10, 2008, 12:11:02 PM »

If you can, please reference the interpretation from this passage in the Rudder which can easily be "countered by a different Western" interpretation.

Only please, be sure this interpretation has been done by known Orthodox Saint.

Thanks

I meant the canon, not the Rudder (yes, it wouldn't make sense to have a different interpretation of the Rudder from a non-Orthodox saint, but the seventh council is something common among Catholics and Orthodox).  I have indeed found, not so much a different interpretation of the seventh council by Catholics, but an implied understanding that it included statues, such as the Pope of Rome at the time of that council who apparently owned a statue of St. Peter and a defended the seventh council against iconoclasts.  I'm sorry to say that all my sources are from the Catholic encyclopedia, but I the parts I selected seemed to be geared towards telling facts, not giving interpretive theology, which seems more plausible.

God bless.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2008, 12:13:13 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,404



« Reply #74 on: June 10, 2008, 10:07:41 PM »

It's not "honest" to pass off a non-Orthodox liturgy as if it were "Western Orthodox". It's also not the same thing to use a light bulb and a newly innovated liturgy.  The one innocently illumines a room, the other, well, we can all come to our own conclusions on...

All liturgies were new once, and I find your assertion flagrantly question-begging. Is not the liturgy of an Orthodox church by definition Orthodox? If you want to argue that the WR is not good liturgy, there is perhaps some hope for pressing that point, though it would be hard to persuade the disinterested (or for that matter Protestant) observer that it's bad Orthodox liturgy when one has withdrawn from the main Orthodox bodies.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #75 on: June 10, 2008, 10:20:58 PM »

Is not the liturgy of an Orthodox church by definition Orthodox?
Well, not necessarily.
Orthodox doesn't necessarily mean "of the Orthodox Church", because, by that definition, all heresies which arose in the Church would be "Orthodox". A liturgy can be introduced and used for a while which contains non-Orthodox teachings before being changed or abolished. But in this case, the only aregument I have seen against the Liturgy of St. Tikhon was that "it was originally written by heretics". Well, OK, but does that in itself make it "heretical"? Even the non-heretical writings of heretics anathamatized by the Church are accepted by the Orthodox Church (for example, some of the writings of Origen). What nyc-xenia & Suiaden need to show is that the Liturgy of St. Tikhon is itself heretical, and so far, they have failed to do so.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
nyc_xenia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Holy Synod of Milan
Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #76 on: June 10, 2008, 11:56:14 PM »

All liturgies were new once,

Yeah...O.K.


Quote
and I find your assertion flagrantly question-begging.

Well, I honestly expected such, so "biggy" there.

Quote
Is not the liturgy of an Orthodox church by definition Orthodox?

Now we are treading thin ice.  Because in these days the belief of "where" and "what" the "Church" is varies.
Granted, we both believe we are members of the "Church", and we both believe our ecclesiastical stands are correct.

Nevertheless, let God judge. If for "beliefs" sake our churches remain separated, so be it. It's sort of an imitation vanilla, on the one hand you get the real thing; on the other , you get an imitation flavor extract.

But to change things that are not for 'us' to change, well, (I will stick to my gun) it's wrong.

The Western Orthodox Rites of the pre-schism West are what should be handed down to the faithful.  What is happening now is that many simply prefer innovation rather than the pre-schism (read: Orthodox) traditions and liturgies of the West.  Caught up in a nostalgic familiarity, this mind set opposes that which it is unfamiliar with.  Being unable to defend itself by matter of liturgical virtue, it defends itself by tearing apart those who defend the ancient traditions.

I believe that what some have called "abandoned liturgies" are not abandoned at all, except by the innovationists and modernists of our days, who refuse to accept that there are real living Western pre-schism traditions that God has deemed fit to resurrect and carry on today.

It's sad when people would prefer to invent something that is "supposed" to be Orthodox, instead of learning it's roots and traditions.  Be it the Orthodoxy of the East, or of the West.

Again, only 'till the rites were restored did that "economia" lay upon our shoulders.

Yet the time has come, that people would prefer to follow what is "new" and the innovated rather than traditions, and that, again is not only a problem for the West, but for the East as well.

SNIP>>>>
Logged
nyc_xenia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Holy Synod of Milan
Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #77 on: June 11, 2008, 12:01:09 AM »

Well, not necessarily.
Orthodox doesn't necessarily mean "of the Orthodox Church", because, by that definition, all heresies which arose in the Church would be "Orthodox". A liturgy can be introduced and used for a while which contains non-Orthodox teachings before being changed or abolished. But in this case, the only aregument I have seen against the Liturgy of St. Tikhon was that "it was originally written by heretics". Well, OK, but does that in itself make it "heretical"? Even the non-heretical writings of heretics anathamatized by the Church are accepted by the Orthodox Church (for example, some of the writings of Origen). What nyc-xenia & Suiaden need to show is that the Liturgy of St. Tikhon is itself heretical, and so far, they have failed to do so.

First things first, nobody is calling the Liturgy of St. Tikhon heretical. The Russian synod called it, "colorless", but not "heretical".

Anyhow, better to stick with "real vanilla", not imitation "flava".  Tongue
Logged
nyc_xenia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Holy Synod of Milan
Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #78 on: June 11, 2008, 12:18:13 AM »

The Orthodox Church indeed has voiced its opinion on 3D statues versus 2D icons:

Act 7, of the Seventh Ecumenical Council:

“We define the rule with all accuracy and diligence...SNIP>>>


BTW, I wanted to thank you for posting this.  I had the same excerpt in mind, but I hadn't the time to post it.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #79 on: June 11, 2008, 12:19:05 AM »

Anyhow, better to stick with "real vanilla", not imitation "flava".  Tongue
In the search for the "real" Western Rite, we can go down two tracks:
"Real" means "authentic", but "authentic" what?
You can argue that the Sarum Rite is "authentic" because it was a western rite before the schism. But is it an authentic "Western Rite" if it's tradition was broken? The Sarum Rite was not a living tradition of the West, it was resurrected, so is it authentically "Western" as well as Orthodox if there was no living tradition of it in the West?
On the other hand, the Liturgy of St. Tikhon is authentically Western because it comes from a Liturgy which has been practiced in the West for centuries and is still recognisable as such, and, as you say yourself, it is Orthodox. So the Liturgy of St. Tikhon is both authentically Western and Orthodox.
In the same way, statues are authentically Western, and can be made Orthodox.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2008, 12:21:35 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
nyc_xenia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Holy Synod of Milan
Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #80 on: June 11, 2008, 01:10:24 AM »

I meant the canon, not the Rudder (yes, it wouldn't make sense to have a different interpretation of the Rudder from a non-Orthodox saint,

What?

No it wouldn't!  (Huh)

What has Christ to do with Baal?  Or the prophets of Baal to do with Elijah?

Quote
but the seventh council is something common among Catholics and Orthodox).

Indeed, and it SHOULD be.

Quote
I have indeed found, not so much a different interpretation of the seventh council by Catholics, but an implied

Implied?  How so?

Quote
understanding that it included statues, such as the Pope of Rome at the time of that council who apparently owned a statue of St. Peter and a defended the seventh council against iconoclasts.

Direct quote from the Catholic encyclopedia:

The first Iconoclast persecution
"The pope at that time was Gregory II (713-31). Even before he had received the appeal of Germanus a letter came from the emperor commanding him to accept the edict, destroy images at Rome, and summon a general council to forbid their use. Gregory answered, in 727, by a long defence of the pictures. He explains the difference between them and idols, with some surprise that Leo does not already understand it. He describes the lawful use of, and reverence paid to, pictures by Christians. He blames the emperor's interference in ecclesiastical matters and his persecution of image-worshippers. A council is not wanted; all Leo has to do is to stop disturbing the peace of the Church. As for Leo's threat that he will come to Rome, break the statue of St. Peter (apparently the famous bronze statue in St. Peter's), and take the pope prisoner, Gregory answers it by pointing out that he can easily escape into the Campagna, and reminding the emperor how futile and now abhorrent to all Christians was Constans's persecution of Martin I. He also says that all people in the West detest the emperor's action and will never consent to destroy their images at his command (Greg. II, "Ep. I ad Leonem"). "

 
Quote
I'm sorry to say that all my sources are from the Catholic encyclopedia,

And are not from Orthodox interpretations at all...

However,

 
Quote
...the parts I selected seemed to be geared towards telling facts, not giving interpretive theology, which seems more plausible.

Perhaps, it would be better for any of us to "assume" things.

I believe St. Nicodemus was also telling "facts". Nevertheless, with the grace of God directing him, he was also able (unlike the Catholic Encyclopedia) to give a theological intrepretation. 

Many "modernist" can write an entry on a URL or "wiki", yet how many of them have been DECLARED saints?

Quote
God bless.

Amen.
Logged
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #81 on: June 11, 2008, 01:20:29 AM »

On the other hand, the Liturgy of St. Tikhon is authentically Western because it comes from a Liturgy which has been practiced in the West for centuries and is still recognisable as such, and, as you say yourself, it is Orthodox. So the Liturgy of St. Tikhon is both authentically Western and Orthodox.

She said it was "Orthodox"? Orthodox are reductionists? I thought she said the Russian Synod said it was "colorless". "Colorless" in their meanings was that Protestants and Catholics could recite the same prayers. That's not "Orthodox".  That's just "not heterodox". The proclamation of the Orthodox faith, as the Russian Synod complained, was missing. AND still is.
Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #82 on: June 11, 2008, 01:23:08 AM »

It's also not honest to claim to be Orthodox when in a schismatic group, but hey, that's not stopping anyone. Roll Eyes

Isn't who's in schism for another forum?
Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
nyc_xenia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Holy Synod of Milan
Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #83 on: June 11, 2008, 01:40:21 AM »

In the search for the "real" Western Rite, we can go down two tracks:
"Real" means "authentic", but "authentic" what?

"Real" & "Authentic", meaning, duh..."Orthodox"... Tongue

Sorry, just thought those were kind of obvious.  Grin


Quote
You can argue that the Sarum Rite is "authentic"....

Actually, "I", was not arguing about the "Sarum Rite" at ALL!


Quote
because it was a western rite before the schism.

Uh-huh...

Quote
But is it an authentic "Western Rite" if it's tradition was broken?

Here is a better question...

PLEASE:

Is it an "Orthodox" Rite, if the "rite" was never even "Orthodox"?

 Roll Eyes


Quote
The Sarum Rite was not a living tradition of the West, it was resurrected, so is it authentically "Western" as well as Orthodox if there was no living tradition of it in the West?

You know...That what your arguing makes no sense.

It's like me telling my kids they can't have a cookie before dinner.

Which goes like:

"Why not?"

"Because your hungry, you need REAL food?"


"Why?"

"Because your body WANTS real food! Don't eat that stupid cookie, put it down now and eat real food in a few!"

Anyhow, the post-schism services used in some "Western Orthodox" parishes now a days are handing out cookies.  Yet, some of those same people embroidered within the hems of modern "Orthodoxy" are the very ones who argue for their "cookies", instead of restoring a "Truly Orthodox" tradition.

Oh!  Things that make you go, "Hmm....(?)"  Shocked

Was that quite "simple" and "plain" enough for everyone to get???

Quote
On the other hand, the Liturgy of St. Tikhon is authentically Western because it comes from a Liturgy which has been practiced in the West for centuries and is still recognisable as such, and, as you say yourself, it is Orthodox.

Nope, sorry, can't say that. 

Ya know why? 

LOL, 'cause I never actually "said" that.


 Har-har-har.  laugh


Quote
So the Liturgy of St. Tikhon is both authentically Western and Orthodox.

And that is....

Your conclusion? Undecided

Quote
In the same way, statues are authentically Western, and can be made Orthodox.

I'm an iconographer....NO WAY. 

Nothing happening.

NOT even CLOSE.

I love Mozarabic Icons, though, by some "Easterners", they are as "criticized" just as the Ethiopian style iconography, because they are so crude and "raw"....

But I find that they are something else.  They reflect a very simple "spiritual" reality, which while sometime is not so "pleasant" to the eye, speaks the truth far louder than words.

Yet, I am strongly opposed to anything against what the Holy Fathers say.  Why? Because they are far closer to Christ than I am nor to any "Modern Day Scholar".  So, they are "real vanilla flava" for me.


NEXT!



« Last Edit: June 11, 2008, 01:48:27 AM by nyc_xenia » Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #84 on: June 11, 2008, 01:53:34 AM »

She said it was "Orthodox"? Orthodox are reductionists? I thought she said the Russian Synod said it was "colorless". "Colorless" in their meanings was that Protestants and Catholics could recite the same prayers. That's not "Orthodox".  That's just "not heterodox". The proclamation of the Orthodox faith, as the Russian Synod complained, was missing. AND still is.
The difference between a Sacred object/ritual which is Orthodox and one which is "non-heterodox" is what precisely?


Is it an "Orthodox" Rite, if the "rite" was never even "Orthodox"?
"Is" is present tense. "Was" is past tense. Smiley

It's like me telling my kids they can't have a cookie before dinner.

Which goes like:

"Why not?"

"Because your hungry, you need REAL food?"


"Why?"

"Because your body WANTS real food! Don't eat that stupid cookie, put it down now and eat real food in a few!"

Anyhow, the post-schism services used in some "Western Orthodox" parishes now a days are handing out cookies.  Yet, some of those same people embroidered within the hems of modern "Orthodoxy" are the very ones who argue for their "cookies", instead of restoring a "Truly Orthodox" tradition.
This analogy only works if one buys the argument that Orthodox statues and the Liturgy of St. Tikhon are not "real food". You've yet to prove that.


Nope, sorry, can't say that. 
That's funny, I thought I just did say that. See my response to "Suiaden" earlier in this post, perhaps you can answer the question as well.


I'm an iconographer....NO WAY. 
So what if you paint icons? I'm a psychologist, and believe me, you don't want to hear my opinion.

Yet, I am strongly opposed to anything the Holy Fathers say. 
You said it.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
prodromas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Under the Green Pope
Posts: 1,239

Greek Orthodox


« Reply #85 on: June 11, 2008, 01:57:54 AM »


Yet, I am strongly opposed to anything against what the Holy Fathers say.  Why? Because they are far closer to Christ than I am nor to any "Modern Day Scholar".  So, they are "real vanilla flava" for me.


You do realise that we are in the 21st century and not in the time of the Holy fathers?
Logged

The sins I don't commit are largely due to the weakness of my limbs.

1915-1923 Հայոց Ցեղասպանութիւն ,never again,
ܩܛܠܐ ܕܥܡܐ ܐܬܘܪܝܐ 1920-1914, never again,
השואה  1933-1945, never again,
(1914-1923) Ελληνική Γενοκτονία, never again
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #86 on: June 11, 2008, 02:01:16 AM »

The difference between a Sacred object/ritual which is Orthodox and one which is "non-heterodox" is what precisely?

The difference between an altar and a gallon of milk.

So what if you paint icons? I'm a psychologist, and believe me, you don't want to hear my opinion.
You said it.

Well, I sure don't. You certainly have acted way too subjective to be worth dealing with objectively.

By the way, my mother is a psychologist.  And I still think she's odd.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2008, 02:01:54 AM by Suaiden » Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #87 on: June 11, 2008, 02:02:47 AM »

You do realise that we are in the 21st century and not in the time of the Holy fathers?

For an ORTHODOX, this 21st century of yours is just as much the time of the Holy Fathers as before.
Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
prodromas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Under the Green Pope
Posts: 1,239

Greek Orthodox


« Reply #88 on: June 11, 2008, 02:03:59 AM »

For an ORTHODOX, this 21st century of yours is just as much the time of the Holy Fathers as before.

No it isn't. We are not going through the things the holy fathers did and vice versa.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2008, 02:04:07 AM by prodromas » Logged

The sins I don't commit are largely due to the weakness of my limbs.

1915-1923 Հայոց Ցեղասպանութիւն ,never again,
ܩܛܠܐ ܕܥܡܐ ܐܬܘܪܝܐ 1920-1914, never again,
השואה  1933-1945, never again,
(1914-1923) Ελληνική Γενοκτονία, never again
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #89 on: June 11, 2008, 02:05:41 AM »

No it isn't. We are not going through the things the holy fathers did and vice versa.

Ah, yes. I forgot we've conquered sin.  And now orange juice is available from concentrate. For shame.
Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #90 on: June 11, 2008, 02:07:37 AM »

You said it.

She corrected that. I am not sure how fast a writer *you are*, but that was wrong.... as for you, if you support to the "Mess of--or more properly named after-- St Tikhon" you are no one to talk about disregarding the Fathers.

I would hope your conscience would be stung but I doubt it.
Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
prodromas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Under the Green Pope
Posts: 1,239

Greek Orthodox


« Reply #91 on: June 11, 2008, 02:08:31 AM »

Ah, yes. I forgot we've conquered sin.  And now orange juice is available from concentrate. For shame.

Ah yes thats exactly what I was trying to convey in my post before that we have conquered sin. Suaiden are you serious? I was saying how we live in DIFFERENT times.
Logged

The sins I don't commit are largely due to the weakness of my limbs.

1915-1923 Հայոց Ցեղասպանութիւն ,never again,
ܩܛܠܐ ܕܥܡܐ ܐܬܘܪܝܐ 1920-1914, never again,
השואה  1933-1945, never again,
(1914-1923) Ελληνική Γενοκτονία, never again
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #92 on: June 11, 2008, 02:08:37 AM »

What?

No it wouldn't!  (Huh)

What has Christ to do with Baal?  Or the prophets of Baal to do with Elijah?

What?  Okay, never mind I said that.  What I meant to say is that there is a different interpretation from the Western side on that same canon of Nicea II that was posted earlier.  I'm sorry if that wasn't clear before.


Quote
Implied?  How so?

I've shared with you quotes from Western sources that tell us statues did exist in churches during Constantine's time and that Pope Gregory II, a defender of Nicea II owned a statue of St. Peter.  Implied in this is the acceptance of statues.  It would be ironic after mentioning these facts that somehow one would actually end up saying, "Oh and by the way, statues are heretical, even though these great Orthodox men used them."

Quote
Direct quote from the Catholic encyclopedia:
glad you found it
 
Quote
And are not from Orthodox interpretations at all...

Like I said before, these are not interpretations.  You can imply an interpretation from them.  These are actually facts.  It's no different from accepting the facts of the diagnosis of a Protestant physician.  Unless you can prove these facts are wrong, that's a different story.

Quote
I believe St. Nicodemus was also telling "facts". Nevertheless, with the grace of God directing him, he was also able (unlike the Catholic Encyclopedia) to give a theological intrepretation. 

Ya, he actually admitted that a woman piously used a statue of Christ and then proceed to interpret around that and dismissed her as simply a woman living a simple life and it was okay for her to do this.  But I'm afraid he oversimplifies and doesn't realize that it might have been quite a common thing to have, as it was during St. Constantine's time.

Quote
Many "modernist" can write an entry on a URL or "wiki", yet how many of them have been DECLARED saints?

Likewise for so-called "ultra-traditionalists." 

I only wanted to present to you a counter-argument from a Western pov.  It's called objectivity.  If you feel the need to dismiss it, go right ahead.  I really am not here to convince you if you're adamant about your position.  I only ask for you to do more research and be more open-minded.

God bless you.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2008, 02:12:39 AM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
prodromas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Under the Green Pope
Posts: 1,239

Greek Orthodox


« Reply #93 on: June 11, 2008, 02:12:10 AM »

Yet, I am strongly opposed to anything against what the Holy Fathers say. 

Maybe it's one of those Freudian parapraxis? What is your diagnosis George? Cheesy
 
Logged

The sins I don't commit are largely due to the weakness of my limbs.

1915-1923 Հայոց Ցեղասպանութիւն ,never again,
ܩܛܠܐ ܕܥܡܐ ܐܬܘܪܝܐ 1920-1914, never again,
השואה  1933-1945, never again,
(1914-1923) Ελληνική Γενοκτονία, never again
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #94 on: June 11, 2008, 02:18:38 AM »

For an ORTHODOX, this 21st century of yours is just as much the time of the Holy Fathers as before.
Not really.
And what do you mean by "this 21st century of yours"- isn't it yours also or are you living in another century?
You seem to confuse what the Fathers taught with how they lived.
The Fathers forbade the administration of Holy Communion in any way but the Body being given in the hand of the Communicant and the Blood drunk directly from the Chalice (101st Canon of the Qintisext). Our practice is different now. We use a Spoon and administer both together with it. There has been no official decree to alter this Canon of an Oecumenical Council, yet, the Church has altered it, because the Church is a Living Tree, not a fossilized forest.
A fossil is dead, and it only resembles a tree, in reality it is rock.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
prodromas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Under the Green Pope
Posts: 1,239

Greek Orthodox


« Reply #95 on: June 11, 2008, 02:21:50 AM »

Not really.
And what do you mean by "this 21st century of yours"- isn't it yours also or are you living in another century?
You seem to confuse what the Fathers taught with how they lived.
The Fathers forbade the administration of Holy Communion in any way but the Body being given in the hand of the Communicant and the Blood drunk directly from the Chalice (101st Canon of the Qintisext). Our practice is different now. We use a Spoon and administer both together with it. There has been no official decree to alter this Canon of an Oecumenical Council, yet, the Church has altered it, because the Church is a Living Tree, not a fossilized forest.
A fossil is dead, and it only resembles a tree, in reality it is rock.

Really George? I want to to create another church which practices this "ancient" rite. Why do people constantly want the Orthodox to be stone age?
Logged

The sins I don't commit are largely due to the weakness of my limbs.

1915-1923 Հայոց Ցեղասպանութիւն ,never again,
ܩܛܠܐ ܕܥܡܐ ܐܬܘܪܝܐ 1920-1914, never again,
השואה  1933-1945, never again,
(1914-1923) Ελληνική Γενοκτονία, never again
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #96 on: June 11, 2008, 02:33:58 AM »

Not really.
And what do you mean by "this 21st century of yours"- isn't it yours also or are you living in another century?
You seem to confuse what the Fathers taught with how they lived.
The Fathers forbade the administration of Holy Communion in any way but the Body being given in the hand of the Communicant and the Blood drunk directly from the Chalice (101st Canon of the Qintisext). Our practice is different now. We use a Spoon and administer both together with it. There has been no official decree to alter this Canon of an Oecumenical Council, yet, the Church has altered it, because the Church is a Living Tree, not a fossilized forest.
A fossil is dead, and it only resembles a tree, in reality it is rock.

NONSENSE!!! The Catholics do that, and I can't just accept it.  No no no...let me see what what a 17th century author says about this canon.  It might be just a pious canon and just an exception to the bishops' simple lives, but otherwise unacceptable and heretical.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #97 on: June 11, 2008, 02:38:43 AM »

Really George? I want to to create another church which practices this "ancient" rite. Why do people constantly want the Orthodox to be stone age?
There is nothing wrong with ancient rites. They can and should be examined by the Church (I know I'd like a few revisited!) But it has to happen in the Church's time. But by the same token, we can't forget that we who are Gentiles have actually been grafted on to the Tree of the Church (Romans 11:17). The Church can graft anything in the Cosmos into herself and thereby sanctify it. Sometimes she needs to prune the cutting first before grafting it in, and she does this, as she has done with statues and the Liturgy of St. Tikhon. So don't mock someone because they use the Sarum rite- it is a venerable rite. The only thing in question here is the standard by which some who use the Sarum rite decree those who use the Liturgy of St. Tikhon to be in error.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
nyc_xenia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Holy Synod of Milan
Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #98 on: June 11, 2008, 03:04:51 AM »

The difference between a Sacred object/ritual which is Orthodox and one which is "non-heterodox" is what precisely?

I as in "True Orthodox" or "Old Calenderist", (Orthodoxy or Death) believer would say, "Orthodoxy", period.

http://orthodoxchristian.blogspot.com/2007/12/end-time-instructions.html

That's me...

Quote
"Is" is present tense. "Was" is past tense. Smiley

Ask He who Was and Is and Is to come.

Why would you ask me such a thing?

 angel

Quote
This analogy only works if one buys the argument that Orthodox statues and the Liturgy of St. Tikhon are not "real food". You've yet to prove that.

As I tell my children, "Yes, child..."

Funny thing how you, who "defend" that outside of tradition have also yet to "PROVE" that that which you are claiming is "real food".

Huh, funny thing 'bout that.  Cool

Anywho--

The history of the actual Western RITES say something different than the "modernist" say (yes, "they", as in "MORE" than one Rite) to prove my "underground", "long-dead", "non-practiced" RITES "theory".

There is currently, a newly "innovated" rite, which "claims" to "substitute" the actual, get this, "Western Rite"(as in ONE solid Rite) What a riot? Right?!

Don't tell me that ANY of you have a doubt in your mind between ENGLAND, the Celtics or SPAIN?Huh

 Embarrassed

Sorry, if you do.

Then, it simply shows that you do NOT know the PEOPLE, their "history" nor their "Rites". Cry

No different from the Greeks, (now let's include Milan) they EACH have their own personal heritage and Ceremonial "RITE". Shocked Lips Sealed

Read the history and restoration of some of them if you will, before proclaiming that that which was set up UNTIL "a time of restoration" was the actual "Western Rite".

We, who uphold the "Western Traditions" of old are no different from the "Israel" of Old which would also arise in the "end".

To each "their lot".

What is that to you, or any other?

Lest you argue that which makes no historical sense...

...As in "modern innovations", or "new calendarism" and the like (i.e.; the participation in the W.C.C).
 
Quote
That's funny, I thought I just did say that. See my response to "Suiaden" earlier in this post, perhaps you can answer the question as well.

Ah.

So sorry...

You should have copied and clipped it for me, I don't have enough time to see what it was my husband and you had written to each other.

Maybe I will look at it tomorrow...

Quote
So what if you paint icons? I'm a psychologist, and believe me, you don't want to hear my opinion.

Man, I'll tell you what, you have probably never been so RIGHT!  police

Read: http://www.pelagia.org/htm/b02.en.orthodox_psychotherapy.01.htm

Perhaps my ideals and the "worlds" ideas are quiet separate from each other. But that, to me is how they should be.

So, yes, I "paint" icons, (although to me they are "written", much like the Gospel) and my "theological views" perchance differ from yours.

 I would not expect that "you" or anyone else here (unless they are "old calenderists") understand what has been pointed out (even by my husband "Suaiden") that is to say (that as "True Orthodox"), we are from two "different" worlds altogether. 

Call to mind: http://www.esphigmenou.com/.

BTW, best of luck to you.

As I, like you, must figure out how to work in the "world" for a temporal "pay".

Peace be with you.

 angel
« Last Edit: June 11, 2008, 03:25:30 AM by nyc_xenia » Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #99 on: June 11, 2008, 03:41:29 AM »

I as in "True Orthodox" or "Old Calenderist", (Orthodoxy or Death) believer would say, "Orthodoxy", period.
Oh great, another one claiming to be "True Orthodox".

end-time-instructions.html
That's me...
How nice for you. You live your life according to an internet blog entry entitled "End Time Instructions".

Ask He who Was and Is and Is to come.
I see. So you equate your pronouncements here on OCnet as being equivalent to the Alpha and the Omega.


As I tell my children, "Yes, child..."
And as I tell people who try to be condescending- the only person you belittle is yourself by revealing your insecurity.

Funny thing how you, who "defend" that outside of tradition have also yet to "PROVE" that that which you are claiming is "real food".
You're doing it again! How can something be "outside the tradition of the Church" if the Church is practicing it?

We who uphold the "Western Traditions" of old are no different from the "Israel" of Old which would aslo arise in the "end".
This is the same siege mentality and "faithful remnant" mentality found in any cult from Heavens Gate to Jonestown to Westboro Baptist Church. Which one of them is the true "faithful remnant"?

To each "their lot".
Couldn't agree more. "Whoever is to be led into captivity will be led into captivity."


What is that to you or any other?
Nothing. Live and let live I say. But when you come here and do not allow others to live by calling their practices "non-Orthodox", you should expect a fight. So if your practices are nothing to me, then the AWR practices should expect the same from you. Oh, but I forgot- your Church is the sole harbinger of all truth.


As in modern innovations, new calendarism and the like (as in for example, the participation in the W.C.C. and the like).
Ah! It was just a matter of time before that one came up!  Cheesy
 

So sorry, you should have copied and clipped it for me, I don't have enough time to see what it was my husband and you had written to each other.
Ummm. It was in the same post you have just responded to....but anyway.

Maybe I will look at it tomorrow...
Suit yourself.

Man, I'll tell you what, you have probably never been so RIGHT!  police
Read: http://www.pelagia.org/htm/b02.en.orthodox_psychotherapy.01.htm
"Maybe I will look at it tomorrow...", or then again, may be there's a copy on my bookshelf which I have already read a few times.

Perhaps my ideals and the "worlds" ideas are quiet separate from each other. But that, to me is how they should be.
Yup. Or may be they actually aren't so different. "My groups ideas are right and everyone else is wrong" is not such a unique claim in the world.

So, yes, I "paint" icons,
The Greek word "graphy" means drawing/painting as well as writing.
"Zography"= "Life drawing/painting" (where the holy monastery of Zographou gets it's name)
"Iconography"= "Icon drawing/painting"

(although to me they are "written", much like the Gospel)
And like heresies are often written. Or are you making the claim that an iconographer is automatically "Equal-to-the-Evangelists"?

as "True Orthodox", we are from two "different" worlds altogether. 
Well, thanks for visiting the real world. I hope you decide to stay.

« Last Edit: June 11, 2008, 04:01:49 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
nyc_xenia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Holy Synod of Milan
Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #100 on: June 11, 2008, 04:09:44 AM »

What?  Okay, never mind I said that.  What I meant to say is that there is a different interpretation from the Western side on that same canon of Nicea II that was posted earlier.  I'm sorry if that wasn't clear before.

Okie-dokie, I guess...

Let's move along then.


Quote
I've shared with you quotes from Western sources that tell us statues did exist in churches during Constantine's time and that Pope Gregory II, a defender of Nicea II owned a statue of St. Peter. 

I hate to be petty, but with all actuality, you didn't. 

I posted the exact ref. here to view.

Quote
Implied in this is the acceptance of statues.

Now, we seem to be "assuming things" again aren't we? As in "St. Nicodemous"...

Quote
It would be ironic after mentioning these facts that somehow one would actually end up saying, "Oh and by the way, statues are heretical, even though these great Orthodox men used them."

Wouldn't you mean found the 'economia' to 'allow' them to 'remain'?

Just "IMHO", I'm glad you found it.
 
Quote
Like I said before, these are not interpretations.

Truth be told, they SHOULD be. For our own "safety", within "Orthodoxy's" sake. 

 
Quote
You can imply an interpretation from them.  These are actually facts.  It's no different from accepting the facts of the diagnosis of a Protestant physician.  Unless you can prove these facts are wrong, that's a different story.

No, I hate to disagree.  But I do.

When I bent my neck to venerate the Holy Sepulchre, the "protestants" had "their" "place of the skull" and the "Orthodox", had another.

Yet, I bent my head in prayer and "faith" towards the side of the "Orthodox".

The Holy Fire came down...the Holy "Light & Cloud" on Tabor, and I continued to venerate that which was "Orthodox".

I care not so much for that which is "outside" of my "faith".

I only care that I, like the many other "faithful" in the "book of life", follow their "faith".

What is that to you or any other? I do not know.

I only know the pattern that is set within the rock of Sinai, the crystal embedded therein and the great joy which come upon living over the rock where the Theotokos gave her sash to St. Thomas.

Nevertheless, you say...
 
Quote
Ya, he actually admitted that a woman piously used a statue of Christ and then proceed to interpret around that and dismissed her as simply a woman living a simple life and it was okay for her to do this.

No, it was not for "her" okay.  But for mercy's (economia's) sake, that this "statue" remained. 

However, let us remind ourselves, that the Holy Fathers did NOt issue a blessing for it's "manufacturing", nor "reproduction".

 
Quote
But I'm afraid he oversimplifies and doesn't realize that it might have been quite a common thing to have, as it was during St. Constantine's time.

Really, this is your own word vs. a saints words.

This is why it is better to depend on the saints than our own words and interpretations.


Quote
Likewise for so-called "ultra-traditionalists."


Wow...Who do you mean by 'ultra-traditionalist'?  Something tells me that we differ in "opinion" on these matters.  We wouldn't mean stuff like, oh, I don't know...

The "good monks" in Esphigmenous, would "we"?

Quote
I only wanted to present to you a counter-argument from a Western pov.  It's called objectivity.  If you feel the need to dismiss it, go right ahead.  I really am not here to convince you if you're adamant about your position.  I only ask for you to do more research and be more open-minded.

Thank you, though in the end I see that we beg to differ, I am thankful to see an alternative view.

Quote
God bless you.

Many thanks for your well wishes, may God also help you in your struggles.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2008, 04:13:18 AM by nyc_xenia » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #101 on: June 11, 2008, 11:29:08 AM »


Many thanks for your well wishes, may God also help you in your struggles.


Thank you.  That means a lot.  I'm sorry we can't see eye-to-eye on this.

Keep me in your prayers.

Mina
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,404



« Reply #102 on: June 11, 2008, 10:42:28 PM »

Orthodox doesn't necessarily mean "of the Orthodox Church", because, by that definition, all heresies which arose in the Church would be "Orthodox".

Well, they are "Orthodox", in the sense that they are identified as such through the judgement of the Orthodox church. Only Protestants can, on their own, identify theology or whatever as being heretical. Likewise, as one of those DPs, I can only really identify a liturgy as Orthodox insofar as an Orthodox church so judges it.

That is what makes this kind of discussion innately unsatisfactory on one level. I can participate a discussion of the theological merits of a liturgy, but it really only works either in a Protestant "every man his own theologian"
framework, or as inconsequential discussion of no weight. I mean, depending on how seriously one is going to take this business of the church teaching, the only Orthodox statements that have authority are those that begin "my bishops say" and end with a citation, with points taken off for interpretation. Switching churches over disagreements with those bishops is the ur-Protestant act.
Logged
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,404



« Reply #103 on: June 11, 2008, 11:04:43 PM »

In the search for the "real" Western Rite, we can go down two tracks:
"Real" means "authentic", but "authentic" what?

At this point I'm going to abandon neutrality and go for scripture and reality. I've heard a lot of liturgists go on about "authenticity" of rites for many, many years, and my skepticism over the concept is by now almost completely unassailable. The authenticity that really matters is that in the hearts of the worshipers; therefore, historical authenticity is of no value if it interferes with authentic worship. I am very much a traditionalist (where "tradition" in this case means "what we're already doing") but it's obvious to me that telling people what they mean by their acts of worship is illegitimate and as a rule self-serving. Thus the whole discussion about the authenticity of the Western Rite, particularly the Tikhonite liturgy, seems contrived. One can go on about "Sarum" unto ages of ages, but the rite is (and blatantly exists because it is) a modified Anglican rite in something of the same way that A-C missal rites are Catholicized versions of the more Protestant pre-1979 BCP rites. The real issue seems to be the degree to which Anglican and Roman converts have to abandon their previous history as Christians in order to become Orthodox. The Antiochian answer is that particularly in terms of liturgy they do not have to reject it utterly. The separatist answer, the Milanese answer, is that they have to start over from scratch. All specific theological criticism of the text of the rite is quite beside the point, because it can be fixed.
Logged
Suaiden
Dcn Joseph Suaiden
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 308


« Reply #104 on: June 11, 2008, 11:24:33 PM »

At this point I'm going to abandon neutrality and go for scripture and reality. I've heard a lot of liturgists go on about "authenticity" of rites for many, many years, and my skepticism over the concept is by now almost completely unassailable. The authenticity that really matters is that in the hearts of the worshipers; therefore, historical authenticity is of no value if it interferes with authentic worship. I am very much a traditionalist (where "tradition" in this case means "what we're already doing")

You just hit a pet peeve.  I've heard people say "well, we traditionally have pews in our Church", "we traditionally don't fast on July 4," et cetera.

I think people seem to think that any "tradition" is good.  Where custom goes against Christ, the custom is to be removed. Problem with that thinking? It's St John Chrysostom.  Now I assume Protestants can make the same justification. But tradition proves them to be incorrect.

but it's obvious to me that telling people what they mean by their acts of worship is illegitimate and as a rule self-serving. Thus the whole discussion about the authenticity of the Western Rite, particularly the Tikhonite liturgy, seems contrived. One can go on about "Sarum" unto ages of ages, but the rite is (and blatantly exists because it is) a modified Anglican rite in something of the same way that A-C missal rites are Catholicized versions of the more Protestant pre-1979 BCP rites.

The Sarum rite as used by most of the jurisdictions who use it is pre-schism, the Antiochian being an exception. HOWEVER, if they were using that 14th c. liturgy I would have so much less to complain about, frankly, we wouldn't be talking about this.

The real issue seems to be the degree to which Anglican and Roman converts have to abandon their previous history as Christians in order to become Orthodox. The Antiochian answer is that particularly in terms of liturgy they do not have to reject it utterly. The separatist answer, the Milanese answer, is that they have to start over from scratch. All specific theological criticism of the text of the rite is quite beside the point, because it can be fixed.

The Antiochian answer is that they don't have to reject it AT ALL, but add a few "Orthodox phrases".

[/quote]
« Last Edit: June 11, 2008, 11:25:16 PM by Suaiden » Logged

Still a Deacon of the Autonomous Metropolia, Nope, Still Don't Like Ecumenism, Yep, Still Western "Rite"
nyc_xenia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Holy Synod of Milan
Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #105 on: June 12, 2008, 11:20:59 AM »

Oh great, another one claiming to be "True Orthodox".

Yeah...And?

Quote
How nice for you. You live your life according to an internet blog entry entitled "End Time Instructions".

Actually, the title of the blog is called "Orthodox Christian" @ http://orthodoxchristian.blogspot.com


Quote
I see. So you equate your pronouncements here on OCnet as being equivalent to the Alpha and the Omega.


No, He is Who He is, the Truth.  I am who I am, a simple Orthodox Christian, aware of the many false teachings and innovations within "Orthodoxy".
   

Quote
And as I tell people who try to be condescending- the only person you belittle is yourself by revealing your insecurity.

Actually, the insecurity I face in life has little to do with this or any forum.  That would be really sad if I (or anyone else) based anything on the flames and oppositions which are found on these forums, no? That said, I suppose we should keep such people (i.e. Megan Meier) in our prayers.
 
Quote
You're doing it again! How can something be "outside the tradition of the Church" if the Church is practicing it?

I wish I could express the great sorrow that such a statement brings me.

The ecumenical movement is one example of those things "practiced' by some "Orthodox" in the world. The involvement of the Orthodox with other religions is wrong.  Just as it is also wrong to introduce innovations and present these counterfeits in the place of that which has been truly handed down to us.
 
Quote
This is the same siege mentality and "faithful remnant" mentality found in any cult from Heavens Gate to Jonestown to Westboro Baptist Church. Which one of them is the true "faithful remnant"?

I'll get to that in a sec. First, let me point out that Christ Our God has the ability to restore that which was lost, my point is His will for our restoration. 

Next, I'm sorry, I don't want to drink the cool-aid, I don't own silver shoes, am not awaiting for a Mothership and in the end, I, like the rest of the Orthodox here simply hope to attain eternal salvation through Jesus Christ.

As for the "faithful remnant" thingy, we see the current situation where there are  divisions, schisms, innovations and apostasy from the true faith. How much "better" do you think this situation will be after a third of mankind has died by three plagues, and all except those whose names are written in the Book of Life have worshiped the Antichrist?

I shouldn't hope to see such days, but in the end when Christ returns, the "faithful remnant" will in fact be very small. Nevertheless, as God wills.
 
Quote
Nothing. Live and let live I say. But when you come here and do not allow others to live by calling their practices "non-Orthodox", you should expect a fight.

I "do not allow others to LIVE?"   Goodness, that's bit of an overstatement, no?  It's just a forum, relax.

Quote
So if your practices are nothing to me, then the AWR practices should expect the same from you. Oh, but I forgot- your Church is the sole harbinger of all truth.

Wow, I am so NOT the person to argue such things.  My point of view has nothing to do with "jurisdictional issues" and everything to do with preserving that which pertains to the truth and to that which is truly Orthodox.  My "Church" is not my "jurisdiction", that is erroneous thinking, it puts the "Bride" in a box, I refuse to do that.

The Church is both Militant and Triumphant, she is one, and goes beyond "jurisdictional' squabbles.

So, just to make that really clear, jurisdictional issues do not concern me, innovations and departing from the faith or watching any process of apostasy, does.


 
Quote
Yup. Or may be they actually aren't so different. "My groups ideas are right and everyone else is wrong" is not such a unique claim in the world.

There you go again with the "box".  You seem to think this is a "click-thing", some "group" thinking. 

Well, I suppose if I have to be part of a "group", I would say it is Orthodox and leave it at that.  I only wish that others would leave it whole and uncompromised.

Quote
And like heresies are often written. Or are you making the claim that an iconographer is automatically "Equal-to-the-Evangelists"?

Hmm, you know, you have quite a s-t-r-e-t-c-h of an imagination.  Where do you get such far fetched conclusions from anyway? 

What I am saying is that icons are done by hand and other than depicting the saints, they teach theological truths by means of images instead of words.

Quote
Well, thanks for visiting the real world. I hope you decide to stay.

I live in the real world, however, it is my intension to continue (with God's help and grace) to abstain from all forms of innovation and compromise with regards to my faith.




Logged
Entscheidungsproblem
Formerly Friul & Nebelpfade
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Machine God
Posts: 4,495



WWW
« Reply #106 on: June 12, 2008, 11:31:03 AM »

Oh great, another one claiming to be "True Orthodox".

Residuum revertetur
in their eyes, I suppose.
Logged

As a result of a thousand million years of evolution, the universe is becoming conscious of itself, able to understand something of its past history and its possible future.
-- Sir Julian Sorell Huxley FRS
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,404



« Reply #107 on: June 12, 2008, 01:38:00 PM »

You just hit a pet peeve.  I've heard people say "well, we traditionally have pews in our Church", "we traditionally don't fast on July 4," et cetera.

Well, at the Ukrainian cathedral down the road from me, they do have pews. It's not up to me-- and and I am inclined to think, not up to you either-- to decry this. When you say that "Where custom goes against Christ, the custom is to be removed,", the hyperbole is quite loud. I am absolutely sure that Jesus didn't say anything about pews, so it isn't Christ this might be against, but Church. The reading and interpretation of scripture and tradition belongs, in Orthodoxy, to the church, not to you nor me. Even Chrysostom is subject to interpretation within the church; he cannot simply be invoked by any passing disputant.

Quote
The Sarum rite as used by most of the jurisdictions who use it is pre-schism, the Antiochian being an exception. HOWEVER, if they were using that 14th c. liturgy I would have so much less to complain about, frankly, we wouldn't be talking about this.

Nobody is really using that liturgy-- or rather, the use of that liturgy is brought about through archaeology, not through tradition. That's one of the problems with modern Anglican liturgies: people have taken to "recovering" ancient practices by mining them from old texts, though they cannot really see the context in which they originally appeared. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't; but the whole exercise is one of rationalization. That's why using an old Sarum rite is even more of an innovation than adapting the BCP rite-- any BCP rite, for that matter.

Quote
The Antiochian answer is that they don't have to reject it AT ALL, but add a few "Orthodox phrases".

Um, no. That is not their answer, but your spin. I've looked at the modified epiclesis, and it's more than just the addition of a few "phrases". Perhaps the number of words changed was few, but the prayer has been (clumsily) modified to require a substantial change theory of communion, and to bar other real presence understandings of the sacrament. Your implication that the changes merely amounted to giving a little Orthodox color just isn't accurate; what was produced is a rite that plenty of Anglicans would object to (though not so many as would have objected back in Tikhon's day).
Logged
nyc_xenia
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Holy Synod of Milan
Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #108 on: June 12, 2008, 08:04:43 PM »


Residuum revertetur
in their eyes, I suppose.

Let God judge that.

Measure for measure, I always say.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #109 on: October 17, 2008, 03:33:56 PM »

The Western Rite Vicariate of the Antiochian Archdiocese has determined that the appropriate form of iconography for Western Rite Churches is the Romanesque Art of the Medieval Western Church.
http://www.stcolumbachurch.org/icon_details.html


Note statues. St Augustine Church, Denver, Colorado.


Our Lady of Walsingham Chapel with Statue. St Mark's Church Denver.


From the Photo Album of St Michael Antiochian Church, Whittier, CA.  Note in Picture #5 there is also a statue behind the celebrants.

While I have no photo, one parish in Miami (I've seen with my eyes) also has statues.  Others do too.

So I am not quite sure what to think of the AWRV's pronouncement, if they are being honest, or maybe they just think statues are part of Romanesque iconography.
These western rite pic are beautiful. I especially love the altar!
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #110 on: October 17, 2008, 03:35:57 PM »

That's not Our Lady of Lourdes. It's a Hodegetria.

That is NOT a Hodegetria.


A Hodegetria guides the viewer to Christ with the right hand. She is in fact holding Christ in the statue.



A Statue of the Hodegetria can be found here:


But you are right about one thing. That statue at St Michael is not Our Lady of Lourdes. Looks like a typical Roman Catholic Mary statue without a crown actually.
Are there any Eastern Orthodox images of Mary wearing a crown, as she is the queen of heaven?
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #111 on: October 17, 2008, 03:40:20 PM »

The Orthodox statues do not depict suffering of Christ compared to the 14 Stations of the Cross where each Station depicts Christ's suffering in 3D.
What's wrong with having images of something that really happened in the life of Christ? Especially because St. Paul tells us that we die with Christ and even says that he bears the stigma of Christ in his flesh? Should we not rejoice in the suffering that conforms us to Christ's likeness?
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,520


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #112 on: October 17, 2008, 07:17:53 PM »

Papist, may I offer the following comment:

Western religious art, particularly that from the Renaissance and Gothic period, almost always emphasises the human suffering of Christ at His passion. This is no accident, as, from about the 12th C onwards, the focus of religious devotion in the west gradually changed from dispassionate to passionate expressions, be they in art, music and singing, or the active seeking of particular types of “religious experiences”. A new emphasis was being placed on emotions in spiritual life, resulting in such phenomena as stigmata. This phenomenon was, and continues to be, frequently reported in the west, but is practically unknown in the Orthodox world. Another result was the central emphasis of the Crucifixion (Death) of Christ supplanting that of the Resurrection. In popular devotion, Christ was depicted more and more as a suffering fellow man, rather than as God Incarnate. Perhaps the most stark and uncompromising artwork of this type is the Isenheim Altarpiece painted by the 16th C Gothic artist Matthias Grünewald.

By contrast, Orthodox iconography depicts the passion and crucifixion of Christ in far more dispassionate terms, as it does any of its subject matter. Taking the Crucifixion as an example: We do not see a ravaged, tortured body on the cross, but Christ willingly offering himself as sacrifice for the salvation of the world, and, even in death, triumphant over death and sin. His human life has ended, but He remains God. His divinity is not diminished. There is little blood, Christ’s bodily wounds are confined to the marks of the nails, and the pierced side. Even the crown of thorns is absent, and the inscription above His head reads The King of Glory, not Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews (the latter usually abbreviated to its Latin acronym INRI).

The content of an icon is not intended to force an emotional response. There is a conscious avoidance of movement or theatrical gesture. The faces of participants in the scene are rarely expressive of their feelings at the time as we might imagine them, but suggest virtues - purity, patience in suffering, forgiveness, compassion and love. In crucifixion icons, the physical pain Christ endured on the cross is not shown; the icon reveals what led Him to the cross, the free action of giving His life for others. There is no superficial or exaggerated drama.

Similarly, the Virgin and Apostle John are grief-stricken, but their posture and gestures are restrained yet powerful. The emotion is in the eyes, and the Virgin has her right hand pointing to the crucified Christ in the same way as she does in her icons with the Christ-child. Her posture and gestures also echo hymnody from the Matins of Holy Saturday, sung on Great Friday evening. This is but one verse from this service:

O my Son and my God, though I am wounded to the core and torn to the heart as I see You dead, yet confident in Your resurrection, I magnify You.

In the midst of death and despair, there is the anticipation, the great hope of the Resurrection.

It is also worth looking at the liturgical references to the Passion. The events of Christ’s betrayal, passion and crucifixion are commemorated at the Matins of Great Friday, sung on Holy Thursday evening. In Orthodox tradition, there must be complete harmony and correspondence between iconographic content and that of liturgical hymnody and scripture; liturgical content also represents the distillation of what the Church teaches and espouses on that particular feast or commemoration. While Judas Iscariot and the members of the Sanhedrin are certainly described as treacherous, lawless, greedy ingrates, the other theme permeating the hymnody is the willingness and equanimity with which Christ accepted His suffering and death, out of His boundless compassion for mankind. In addition, the Gospel readings pertaining to Christ’s time in the garden of Gethsemane are from Matthew and Mark, not the more graphic one of Luke (which has, among other motifs, the imagery of His sweat falling to the ground “like great drops of blood”). Perhaps the liturgist fathers found the imagery of the other Gospels sufficient in illustrating the human suffering of Christ so as not to unbalance the emphasis between His human and divine natures. Interestingly, the non-Gospel hymnody does not even mention the events of “the agony in the garden”, perhaps for the same reason.

Consider the iconography of martyr-saints, such as St Ignatius the God-bearer being attacked by lions in the arena, or the stoning of Protomartyr Stephen: Martyr-saints are not shown in throes of physical agony, but, more importantly, in complete submission to their fate, and anticipation of their coming heavenly life. An icon is a spiritual depiction, not a naturalistic one. Therefore, any iconographic depiction of scenes of the passion of Christ, including His betrayal and crucifixion, should be free from any histrionics or grand displays of emotion.

Hope this helps. You're welcome to PM me if you want more info.
Logged
Hank
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10



« Reply #113 on: March 10, 2009, 01:51:23 PM »

To add to the praxis something like statues in a Western style liturgy is nothing more than accommodating to the culture of Western people.
I agree, and I think it could be argued that this is much more honestly "Western Rite" than simply trying to resurrect long abandoned liturgies. The Church meets people where they are now, not where they were 1000 years ago.

Then, adopting the Vatican II liturgy would not be wrong so long as it is edited for heretical items? Nor there isn't anything particularly "religious" about Elizabethan English, is there?

Hank
Logged

Hank
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #114 on: March 10, 2009, 06:03:21 PM »

To add to the praxis something like statues in a Western style liturgy is nothing more than accommodating to the culture of Western people.
I agree, and I think it could be argued that this is much more honestly "Western Rite" than simply trying to resurrect long abandoned liturgies. The Church meets people where they are now, not where they were 1000 years ago.

Then, adopting the Vatican II liturgy would not be wrong so long as it is edited for heretical items? Nor there isn't anything particularly "religious" about Elizabethan English, is there?

Hank

Technically, YES.

I remember some of the first Coptic people in the lands of immigration decided to use Elizabethan English to translate our liturgies, prayer books, and hymns.  I don't know what they were thinking.  I guess, they used the King James Version too much, or maybe some religious movies at the time used Elizabethan English.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
antiderivative
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Northeastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: A jurisdiction
Posts: 349


« Reply #115 on: March 10, 2009, 06:54:40 PM »

I could never see why the Orthodox Church would want to adopt a more modern liturgy. Most Roman Catholics I know want to revert to their older liturgy, and I don't blame them. The old Western Liturgy is not extinct, and many Roman Catholics still practice it.

The Orthodox liturgy has largely been the same for well over a thousand years (except for individual parishes making their own edits), and their is no practical reason we need to change it other than language. Why does it all of a sudden become irrelevant in our time, when for most of Christian history it's always been used the same? I have to admit this can't be argued logically, but an unchanged liturgy is also a good evangelistic tool.
Logged

signature
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,390



« Reply #116 on: March 10, 2009, 08:37:04 PM »

Nor there isn't anything particularly "religious" about Elizabethan English, is there?

Hank

When you mention "Elizabethan English" do you mean the King James Version or something else? 
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Hank
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10



« Reply #117 on: March 11, 2009, 07:27:48 AM »

Nor there isn't anything particularly "religious" about Elizabethan English, is there?

Hank

When you mention "Elizabethan English" do you mean the King James Version or something else? 

Elizabethan and King James English are commonly used interchangeably. They are from the same era, c.1580 to 1620.
Logged

Hank
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #118 on: March 11, 2009, 11:34:34 AM »

Nor there isn't anything particularly "religious" about Elizabethan English, is there?

Hank

When you mention "Elizabethan English" do you mean the King James Version or something else? 

Elizabethan and King James English are commonly used interchangeably. They are from the same era, c.1580 to 1620.
Yes, sometimes it's called Shakespearean English for the same reason, as he wrote during that same time period. In fact, it survives to the present day mainly because of the importance of Shakespeare and the King James Bible in English literature.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
_Seraphim_
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Serbian Diocese of Western America (under His Grace Bishop Maxim)
Posts: 657


May Orthodoxy become our orthopraxis


WWW
« Reply #119 on: March 11, 2009, 12:55:04 PM »

Are there any Eastern Orthodox images of Mary wearing a crown, as she is the queen of heaven?


Very many indeed.  Here are some examples:

Russian icon
Macedonian icon
Ethiopian icon
Arab icon
English icon
Logged

"Disputes merely about words must not be suffered to divide those who think alike."
-St. Athanasius (†444)

Pray for Orthodox Unity

"Behold the light of our Agreed Statement on Christology"
http://www.orthodoxunity.org/state04.html
_Seraphim_
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Serbian Diocese of Western America (under His Grace Bishop Maxim)
Posts: 657


May Orthodoxy become our orthopraxis


WWW
« Reply #120 on: March 11, 2009, 12:58:05 PM »

Papist, may I offer the following comment:
...
Hope this helps.


Excellent post, LBK!
Logged

"Disputes merely about words must not be suffered to divide those who think alike."
-St. Athanasius (†444)

Pray for Orthodox Unity

"Behold the light of our Agreed Statement on Christology"
http://www.orthodoxunity.org/state04.html
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,404



« Reply #121 on: March 11, 2009, 01:16:37 PM »

There are sections of the 1979 BCP (particularly in the collects and additional prayers) where the older language has been very minimally updated, primarily by eliminating the second person familiar and by updating some archaic word choices. The result is some very strong material. Of course, if archaicism is to be worn as a badge of honor, even this small change has to be set aside.

Part of the reason that people might prefer older versions of the Roman rite is that the current NO English is simply terrible. Even the worst sections of the 1979 BCP are better. There really needs to be a step below "pedestrian" to describe it.
Logged
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,404



« Reply #122 on: March 11, 2009, 01:19:14 PM »

Are there any Eastern Orthodox images of Mary wearing a crown, as she is the queen of heaven?


Very many indeed.  Here are some examples:

Russian icon
Macedonian icon
Ethiopian icon
Arab icon
English icon

Well, the last one is Our Lady of Walsingham-- that's an appropriation of a western image. The others seem mostly modern; one wonders whether the crown is therefore also imported.
Logged
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,520


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #123 on: March 11, 2009, 04:55:11 PM »

Are there any Eastern Orthodox images of Mary wearing a crown, as she is the queen of heaven?


Very many indeed.  Here are some examples:

Russian icon
Macedonian icon
Ethiopian icon
Arab icon
English icon

Well, the last one is Our Lady of Walsingham-- that's an appropriation of a western image. The others seem mostly modern; one wonders whether the crown is therefore also imported.


Yes, Keble, the crown on the Mother of God's head is a western "import". There is no need for her to wear a crown in her icons.
Logged
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,860



« Reply #124 on: March 11, 2009, 05:08:32 PM »

Yes, Keble, the crown on the Mother of God's head is a western "import". There is no need for her to wear a crown in her icons.

But there is a "need" for her to where an imperial robe?
Logged
_Seraphim_
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Serbian Diocese of Western America (under His Grace Bishop Maxim)
Posts: 657


May Orthodoxy become our orthopraxis


WWW
« Reply #125 on: March 11, 2009, 05:29:56 PM »

Well, the last one is Our Lady of Walsingham-- that's an appropriation of a western image. The others seem mostly modern; one wonders whether the crown is therefore also imported.


A Coptic icon in Cairo:




^This icon does not strike me in the least as being "modern."  The time period it appears to be from was a time when the Islamic government of Egypt was extremely oppressive of the Egyptian Christians (Copts), who were forced to live very underground lives in close tight-knit circles of friends and family.  Are we to say that the sole reason Mary has a crown in this Coptic icon is because it was a popular practice in Western Europe, even though the cultural interaction between the regions of Islam and Western Europe were (until very recently) extremely miniscule?  The concept of a Royal Crown has existed throughout the world since before the time of Christ. 

Obviously, it isn't a requirement that Mary or Christ wear crowns in an icon.  But I don't understand the need to say that if there is a crown present then it must be due to Western European influence.
Logged

"Disputes merely about words must not be suffered to divide those who think alike."
-St. Athanasius (†444)

Pray for Orthodox Unity

"Behold the light of our Agreed Statement on Christology"
http://www.orthodoxunity.org/state04.html
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,520


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #126 on: March 11, 2009, 05:59:54 PM »

The orb held by the Christ-child is most definitely western in origin. The Coptic icon is very likely of no earlier than 18thC vintage, and most likely 19thC.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2009, 06:00:33 PM by LBK » Logged
_Seraphim_
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Serbian Diocese of Western America (under His Grace Bishop Maxim)
Posts: 657


May Orthodoxy become our orthopraxis


WWW
« Reply #127 on: March 11, 2009, 09:14:12 PM »

The Coptic icon is very likely of no earlier than 18thC vintage, and most likely 19thC.


The last Caliphate of Islam was not officially abolished until 1924… well into the 20th century.  And this was only the beginning of a very slow and tedious process which still continues to unfold today.
Logged

"Disputes merely about words must not be suffered to divide those who think alike."
-St. Athanasius (†444)

Pray for Orthodox Unity

"Behold the light of our Agreed Statement on Christology"
http://www.orthodoxunity.org/state04.html
_Seraphim_
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Serbian Diocese of Western America (under His Grace Bishop Maxim)
Posts: 657


May Orthodoxy become our orthopraxis


WWW
« Reply #128 on: March 11, 2009, 11:17:17 PM »

Greek icon:

Logged

"Disputes merely about words must not be suffered to divide those who think alike."
-St. Athanasius (†444)

Pray for Orthodox Unity

"Behold the light of our Agreed Statement on Christology"
http://www.orthodoxunity.org/state04.html
Entscheidungsproblem
Formerly Friul & Nebelpfade
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Machine God
Posts: 4,495



WWW
« Reply #129 on: March 11, 2009, 11:37:04 PM »

The orb held by the Christ-child is most definitely western in origin.

Why so?  The orb has been used since Imperial Roman times.  Victoria instead of a cross atop, of course.  Or do you just mean its inclusion in artwork/iconography?
Logged

As a result of a thousand million years of evolution, the universe is becoming conscious of itself, able to understand something of its past history and its possible future.
-- Sir Julian Sorell Huxley FRS
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #130 on: March 12, 2009, 01:58:43 AM »

Ummm...so what if it was Western influenced?  Does all things Western equal evil or unnecessary?
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,520


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #131 on: March 12, 2009, 03:43:31 AM »

Ummm...so what if it was Western influenced?  Does all things Western equal evil or unnecessary?

No, the Orthodox Church does not reject anything from other traditions if these things are in keeping with the mind of the Church. But orbs and sceptres, which denote earthly, temporal power, have no place in icons, particularly those of Christ or the Mother of God. Christ's kingdom is not of this world, therefore such motifs, and this includes crowns on His and His Mother's heads, should have no place in icons.
Logged
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,860



« Reply #132 on: March 12, 2009, 01:46:01 PM »

No, the Orthodox Church does not reject anything from other traditions if these things are in keeping with the mind of the Church. But orbs and sceptres, which denote earthly, temporal power, have no place in icons, particularly those of Christ or the Mother of God. Christ's kingdom is not of this world, therefore such motifs, and this includes crowns on His and His Mother's heads, should have no place in icons.

So you disapprove of this image?

Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #133 on: March 12, 2009, 05:00:56 PM »

Ummm...so what if it was Western influenced?  Does all things Western equal evil or unnecessary?

No, the Orthodox Church does not reject anything from other traditions if these things are in keeping with the mind of the Church. But orbs and sceptres, which denote earthly, temporal power, have no place in icons, particularly those of Christ or the Mother of God. Christ's kingdom is not of this world, therefore such motifs, and this includes crowns on His and His Mother's heads, should have no place in icons.

But it's okay to put crowns on bishops and patriarchs?
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,520


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #134 on: March 12, 2009, 05:44:31 PM »

That is a bishop's mitre on Christ's head, not a king's crown.
Logged
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,860



« Reply #135 on: March 12, 2009, 05:51:34 PM »

That is a bishop's mitre on Christ's head, not a king's crown.

I was under the impression that the "mitres" seen today on some patriarchs came into use after the fall of the Byzantine Empire.  Basically, they started wearing imperial crowns after the emperor went away.



Were not "true" mitres originally turbans, and from there developed into various other states?
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #136 on: March 13, 2009, 01:48:20 AM »

That is a bishop's mitre on Christ's head, not a king's crown.

Mitres are imperial crowns, directly from influence of imperial government.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #137 on: March 13, 2009, 05:22:55 AM »

@Alveus Lacuna: it's presbiter's mitre, not bishop's
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
antiderivative
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Northeastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: A jurisdiction
Posts: 349


« Reply #138 on: March 13, 2009, 04:45:38 PM »

I thought mitres were derived from turbans, mitres are even prescribed for priests in Exodus (though at that time they were probably just turbans).
Logged

signature
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #139 on: March 14, 2009, 01:01:26 AM »

I thought mitres were derived from turbans, mitres are even prescribed for priests in Exodus (though at that time they were probably just turbans).

A turban decorated with gold?  And purple robes?  In context, the elaborate nature alludes to some sort of kingship, resembling as I have been told the image of Divine royalty.

Did OT priests wear golden turbans and elaborate robes?
« Last Edit: March 14, 2009, 01:02:26 AM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
antiderivative
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Northeastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: A jurisdiction
Posts: 349


« Reply #140 on: March 14, 2009, 01:03:03 AM »

Quote
A turban decorated with gold?  And purple robes?  In context, the elaborate nature alludes to some sort of kingship, resembling as I have been told the image of Divine royalty.

Perhaps the emperor further evolved the mitre. I don't deny that some Orthodox vestments are derived from the emperor.
Logged

signature
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,390



« Reply #141 on: March 14, 2009, 07:24:43 PM »

Elizabethan and King James English are commonly used interchangeably. They are from the same era, c.1580 to 1620.

Well, just to be pedantic Elizabeth I reigned from 1558 to 1603, while James I and VI ruled in England from 1603 to 1625.  Wink

As Ytterb. wrote it may also be called Shakespearean English and it has survived to this day because of the plays and the King James Version of the Bible which have both beauty and dignity is how the language is used.  So it may not be "religious" but it is very well written, perhaps that is why it is still used in some times and places.  Even my own father who is not a church-goer admires the KJV for its language.

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #142 on: March 14, 2009, 08:14:21 PM »

Quote
A turban decorated with gold?  And purple robes?  In context, the elaborate nature alludes to some sort of kingship, resembling as I have been told the image of Divine royalty.

Perhaps the emperor further evolved the mitre. I don't deny that some Orthodox vestments are derived from the emperor.

Assuming, the emperor evolved the mitre, we as Orthodox still copied the golden mitre, and not the white mitre of the OT.

I don't mean to argue against you, but the original question on the iconography of Christ is just ridiculous.  We're arguing about whether placing a crown on the Lord or not based on some sort of Western influence?  And yet we forget to examine ourselves.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,456



« Reply #143 on: March 14, 2009, 11:02:38 PM »

I thought mitres were derived from turbans, mitres are even prescribed for priests in Exodus (though at that time they were probably just turbans).

A turban decorated with gold?  And purple robes?  In context, the elaborate nature alludes to some sort of kingship, resembling as I have been told the image of Divine royalty.

Did OT priests wear golden turbans and elaborate robes?
Yes, and tradition is explicit that SS. James the Brother of God and John the Theologian did too (the mitre that is).
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,991


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #144 on: March 15, 2009, 02:42:15 AM »

I thought mitres were derived from turbans, mitres are even prescribed for priests in Exodus (though at that time they were probably just turbans).

A turban decorated with gold?  And purple robes?  In context, the elaborate nature alludes to some sort of kingship, resembling as I have been told the image of Divine royalty.

Did OT priests wear golden turbans and elaborate robes?
Yes, and tradition is explicit that SS. James the Brother of God and John the Theologian did too (the mitre that is).

Really?  I honestly thought it was white.  Do you know where I can read some sources for this?
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 443



WWW
« Reply #145 on: March 21, 2009, 03:50:48 PM »

In order for Western Orthodoxy to succeed Education is required.
What I see is a wave of profound ignorance about 1st millenium latin christianity.
There is no other option but to read books and study it at our churches or setup institutes for this purpose. Not with any intentions of creating chaos or liturgical free for all but for busy bishops to genuinely guide in careful moderation.

I highly recommend to you all to attempt to read some of these books listed below before posting further about this topic of images in the western orthodox church.

There is no evidence of plastic 3 dimensional high relief statuary before the late 900's and no significant use of it before the 1100's and the gothic movement emananting from the university at paris in the beginning of the "scholasticism" period began the birth of the humanistic greco-roman pagan renaissance of its day traveling eventually to other western latin universities and churches. Eventually this culminated in Giotto and the beginnings of secular (not sacred) "art history" as we know it.
 
There is a certain Orthodox priest named Fr. Michael Keiser who makes incorrect claims that Hagia Sophia was filled with 3 dimensional high relief statuary which was later destroyed by iconocloasts in the 700's and that at one point there were as many statues used in byzantine churches of the 1st millenium as the latin church used by the late gothic period of middle 2nd millenium. There is no evidence to support this. Many ideas along these lines are essentially mythes to support more modern practices of the western rite "orthodox" and heterodox. 

(see links: http://www.veoh.com/browse/videos/category/faith_and_spirituality/watch/v10798569HDqh8Yc6

http://www.veoh.com/browse/videos/category/faith_and_spirituality/watch/v10798569HDqh8Yc6#watch%3Dv70613013eFRNhtA)

     Because the Eastern Churches have been theologically conservative for so long the developments that take place in them are less suspect, whereas those occuring in the separated western catholic or protestant churches are because of their long departure from tradition are in need of guidance and correction and exposure to their own past which was to large degree in harmony with the east, despite its more primitive qualities. One can not excuse keeping the trappings of present day as a form of inculturation an 11th century frequently latin cleric would not recognize it as the church they knew.


Devotions such eucharistic adoration and the Stations of the cross are largely a product of the 17th and 18th century counter-reformation and incentives for indulgences. They were the will of the hierarchy not the people. One can very clearly see this from a book such as:

"Regulating the people; the Catholic Reformation in 17th-century Spain" by Allyson M Poska

 They did not occur in an manner approved of by Orthodox Christianity.

"The erection of the Stations in churches did not become at all common until towards the end of the seventeenth century, and the popularity of the practice seems to have been chiefly due to the indulgences attached. "

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15569a.htm

In time the Orthodox of the future will look back on these days with much surprise at the ideas held in late 20th century western orthodox churches.


1ST MILLENIUM LATIN RITE REVIVAL
SACRED ART & ARCHITECTURE:

#01 Likeness and Presence; A History of the Image before the Era of Art by Hans Belting (SPECTULAR!)
#02 Byzantine Art and the West (The Wrightsman lectures) by Otto Demus (1970)
#03 The Pictorial Arts of the West, 800-1200 by C.R. Dodwell
#04 Iconography of Christian Art by Gertrud Schiller (1971 New York Graphic Society)
#05 Ars Sacra 800-1200 by Peter Lasko
#06 Romanesque Wall Painting in Central France The Politics of Narrative by Marcia Kupfer (1993)
#07 Pre-Romanesque Art by Harald Busch, Bernd Lohse (1966 or newer)
#08 Art In the Early Church by Walter Lowrie
#09 Romanesque Sculpture; The Revival of Monumental Stone Sculpture in the 11th and 12th Centuries by M. F. Hearn
#10 Carolingian and Romanesque Architecture, 800 to 1200 by Kenneth John Conant
Christian Pilgrimage In Modern Western Europe by Mary Lee & Sidney Nolan; (chapter 6, page 160)

additional books:
Early Christian Iconography and A School of Ivory Carvers in Provence by Earl Baldwin (1918)

The miniatures in the Gospels of St. Augustine by Francis Wormald

Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture: Fourth Edition by Richard Krautheimer, Slobodan Ćurčić


« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 03:56:48 PM by Christopher McAvoy » Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
ChristusDominus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Latin Rite
Posts: 936


Saint Aloysius Gonzaga


« Reply #146 on: May 27, 2009, 03:25:24 AM »

Ummm...so what if it was Western influenced?  Does all things Western equal evil or unnecessary?

No, the Orthodox Church does not reject anything from other traditions if these things are in keeping with the mind of the Church. But orbs and sceptres, which denote earthly, temporal power, have no place in icons, particularly those of Christ or the Mother of God. Christ's kingdom is not of this world, therefore such motifs, and this includes crowns on His and His Mother's heads, should have no place in icons.
How about this?
« Last Edit: May 27, 2009, 03:26:49 AM by ChristusDominus » Logged

There is no more evident sign that anyone is a saint and of the number of the elect, than to see him leading a good life and at the same time a prey to desolation, suffering, and trials. - Saint Aloysius Gonzaga
JLatimer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #147 on: March 30, 2010, 03:30:07 PM »

That is a bishop's mitre on Christ's head, not a king's crown.

There are icons of Christ wearing what is clearly an imperial-style crown, not a bishop's mitre. The caption for the first image, in which Christ wears a king's crown and what appears to be a bishop's omophorion, reads "The King of Kings and Great High Priest." Christ is both King and High Priest. (Of course, his Kingdom is not of this world; however, it is the ultimate reality to which the earthly kingdoms point.)

Notice also in the 3rd image the beads that hang from the crown (which in this case is like a bishop's mitre).These are very similar to what we see on Byzantine emperors (image 4).

This picture shows a secular ruler wearing something similar to an omophorion: http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/zgothic/mosaics/12c/6palermo.html
Logged

1 Samuel 25:22 (KJV)
So and more also do God unto the enemies of David, if I leave of all that pertain to him by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall.
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,520


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #148 on: March 30, 2010, 04:28:07 PM »

Quote
This picture shows a secular ruler wearing something similar to an omophorion: http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/zgothic/mosaics/12c/6palermo.html

The ruler is wearing a dalmatic, and this is typical dress of Byzantine nobility. Nothing to do with clerical vestments.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,926


"My god is greater."


« Reply #149 on: March 30, 2010, 04:40:30 PM »

But aren't the Bishop's miter and vestments based on Roman imperial attire? Doesn't that already establish an analogy with temporal power, even if it isn't literal?

Speaking of orbs, the Archangel Gabriel often holds a sphere with initials of Christ on it. Does anyone know what this object is called and whence it comes?
« Last Edit: March 30, 2010, 04:41:05 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,860



« Reply #150 on: March 30, 2010, 04:42:39 PM »

Speaking of orbs, the Archangel Gabriel often holds a sphere with initials of Christ on it. Does anyone know what this object is called and whence it comes?

I always assumed it was a globe, meaning He rules the entire world, or encompasses the entire cosmos.
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #151 on: March 30, 2010, 05:46:51 PM »

Quote
This picture shows a secular ruler wearing something similar to an omophorion: http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/zgothic/mosaics/12c/6palermo.html

The ruler is wearing a dalmatic, and this is typical dress of Byzantine nobility. Nothing to do with clerical vestments.

Yes, a dalmatic, another imperial garment that became a vestment, with a lorum over it, the imperial garment that became the omophorion.

The mitre, omophorion, dalmatic, sakkos, epimanika, and epigonation, all started as imperial vesture just as the remaining vestments were once the garb of the Roman upper class that the church retained after they fell out of fashion.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #152 on: March 30, 2010, 09:00:40 PM »

Speaking of orbs, the Archangel Gabriel often holds a sphere with initials of Christ on it. Does anyone know what this object is called and whence it comes?

I always assumed it was a globe, meaning He rules the entire world, or encompasses the entire cosmos.

Its a disk showing the Name of Christ in cipher or His Image. A King's envoy, messenger or anyone acting in their name bears the insignia of the King to show in whose name they are coming. We actually still practice this in Monarchies today. Police badges in England for instance bear the cipher for the name of the reigning monarch ("EIIR"- for "Elizabeth II Regina"):

Similarly, the Archangel Gabriel in his Icons is showing the Insignia of his King in Whose Name he is acting.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
JLatimer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #153 on: March 31, 2010, 03:57:35 PM »

But aren't the Bishop's miter and vestments based on Roman imperial attire? Doesn't that already establish an analogy with temporal power, even if it isn't literal?

Yes.
Logged

1 Samuel 25:22 (KJV)
So and more also do God unto the enemies of David, if I leave of all that pertain to him by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall.
JLatimer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #154 on: March 31, 2010, 03:59:41 PM »

Quote
This picture shows a secular ruler wearing something similar to an omophorion: http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/zgothic/mosaics/12c/6palermo.html

The ruler is wearing a dalmatic, and this is typical dress of Byzantine nobility. Nothing to do with clerical vestments.

Yes, a dalmatic, another imperial garment that became a vestment, with a lorum over it, the imperial garment that became the omophorion.

The mitre, omophorion, dalmatic, sakkos, epimanika, and epigonation, all started as imperial vesture just as the remaining vestments were once the garb of the Roman upper class that the church retained after they fell out of fashion.

Thank you!
Logged

1 Samuel 25:22 (KJV)
So and more also do God unto the enemies of David, if I leave of all that pertain to him by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall.
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,347


metron ariston


« Reply #155 on: March 31, 2010, 04:11:55 PM »

Quote
This picture shows a secular ruler wearing something similar to an omophorion: http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/zgothic/mosaics/12c/6palermo.html

The ruler is wearing a dalmatic, and this is typical dress of Byzantine nobility. Nothing to do with clerical vestments.

Yes, a dalmatic, another imperial garment that became a vestment, with a lorum over it, the imperial garment that became the omophorion.

The mitre, omophorion, dalmatic, sakkos, epimanika, and epigonation, all started as imperial vesture just as the remaining vestments were once the garb of the Roman upper class that the church retained after they fell out of fashion.

Thank you!

I'd just qualify that by saying that the dalmatic -- and many other such items -- was not "imperial." It was part of a normal outfit, including those worn by the lower classes on special occasions. For the most part, the major difference between "imperial" vesture and general fashion was the quality of the fabric and the nature of the thread, i.e. the Emperor, nobility, senior clergy, merchants, etc. had a dalmatic made with gold thread. As soon as a new style was introduced at court, it spread to the streets (and the church).
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
Tikhon.of.Colorado
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ruthenian Greek Catholic
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Pheonix
Posts: 2,362



« Reply #156 on: July 26, 2010, 10:54:46 AM »

Her left.
"Do whatever He tells you."

I guess we will have to agree to disagree, because a cursory search of Jesus and Mary statues would show that your statue, like a typical Roman Catholic statue, simply has her placing her hand over his stomach. She is not pointing, as her hand is pressed against that stomach, unless she is doing it with the top fingers, which still destroys the type; for example this one she holds Him with both hands, but I guess it could be her right hand (or is it her left?) pointing.



But you can imagine she's pointing if you wish, and imagine it with whichever hand you choose.

Let the viewer decide.

By the way, is Santa Claus wearing his own type on this little pic from the same site?


LOL!  my mom got me one of those car medallions that Santa' wearing for my birthday! 
Logged

"It is true that I am not always faithful, but I never lose courage, I leave myself in the Arms of Our Lord." - St. Thérèse of Lisieux
Jason.Wike
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,046


« Reply #157 on: August 03, 2010, 12:38:38 AM »


And with that, I totally give up.  That is NOT a "Western Orthodox statue". It is a typical statue found in Roman Catholic and Anglican Churches, never having been found in a Western Orthodox Church before the schism.  Where it was found (before the statue joined the Vicariate, of course) was in Roman and Anglican Churches, the former which I had seen throughout my childhood.

You can call it an apple all day long, but it's still an orange, or in this case, a post-schism Western statue.  But I will never convince you.  And you-- because of my having grown from a typical visual childhood in Roman Catholicism (we *owned* a statue like that in my house) until I converted to Orthodoxy in my 20's-- will never convince me that the statue in that pic is anything but a typical Roman or Anglican statue, of recent style.

The reason you might think that of course is because all the pre-schism western church artifacts were appropriated by the Roman and Anglican groups, think about it... Of course, in the British Isles the Protestants destroyed as many things they could but the statues of Our lady of Ipswich, Our Lady of Walsingham, Our Lady of Cardigan and numerous others - though now only represented by reconstructions, were statues.

I have no particular feeling about this other than I am in an Eastern Rite church so I wouldn't venerate a statue, but really, do you think there were no statues in the west before the schism?
Logged
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,520


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #158 on: August 03, 2010, 01:00:10 AM »

It must be noted that the Pope of Rome did not sign off on the canons of the Quinisext Council of 692, several centuries before the schism. This goes a long way in explaining why statues are still profuse in western worship and devotion, and absent in Orthodox worship and devotion.
Logged
Tags: icons Western Rite statues 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.51 seconds with 186 queries.