My dear Schultz, you may well accuse me of conservatism in iconography, yet, I ask you to come up with any pre-18thC icon of Christ which shows the wounds of His crucifixion, other than in the examples I mentioned. Regarding the icon of Apostle Thomas, one only needs to look at the text of the Vigil to this feast to find it full of references to Christ's wounds, both literally, and in their spiritual significance in relation to Thomas' examination of them, as proof positive of his Lord's resurrection. Liturgy and iconography go hand in hand, my friend.
On the other hand, the image you posted is directly derived from non-Orthodox images of quite recent (two centuries or less) provenance.
As for the "patroness of soccer and sport" image (yet another sad addition to my schlock file) is a blasphemy and travesty. Yet, from the blog this image was drawn, we see supposed ecclesiastical approval for this image. According to the film footage on the blog: As best as I can make out the Ukrainian, it says that the icon was blessed by the Ukrainian Greek Catholic bishop Mykolaj (Simkaylo) and a priest of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Kiev patriarchate). Some may regard what I have to say as arrogant, but it only goes to show that even clergy can make grave iconographic mistakes. What's the solution to this sort of problem? EDUCATION! of clergy and laity alike.
I once wrote this on another thread last year:
Iconography is the most visible and identifiable characteristic which sets apart the Orthodox Church from all others, yet, lapses continue to occur, often, it must be said, out of honest ignorance. However, be that as it may, it is imperative that distortions and assaults on the doctrinal, theological and liturgical integrity of this holy and priceless treasure are exposed and remedied. It is in this spirit that I post in the way that I do, not to lord it over people, nor to draw attention to myself (after all, I post anonymously), but to allow a greater understanding of the pitfalls of error.
