Author Topic: Schlock Icons  (Read 140382 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ansgar

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,053
  • Keep your mind in hell and do not despair
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1035 on: October 14, 2013, 06:01:30 PM »
Yes. That is the Ancient of Days. A non-canonical icon if I have ever seen one. Why do some iconostasi, especially the Russian Baroque and 19th c. style ones, have the triangular eye symbol?

This is how I have heard it:

"The Eye of Providence" (also known as the All-seeing Eye) is a symbol that exists in many cultures around the world. The oldest usage of the symbol appearently dates back to ancient Egypt. In Western iconography, an eye, enclosed by a triangle, have historically been used as a symbol of the Trinity. During the 18th and 19th century, the symbol, together with many other aspects of western art and iconography, was introduced to the Orthodox Church.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2013, 06:02:16 PM by Ansgar »
Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite

Offline Shanghaiski

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,978
  • Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1036 on: October 14, 2013, 06:10:13 PM »
Here's a fully-painted one, of Great-princes and Tsars, all painted as saints. Alexander II is in the top right corner, among the group wearing the cloven crowns:




Link to the full-sized image:

http://nashaepoharu.512.com1.ru:8164/WWW/_Mediafiles/ikons/v_1.jpg

These Russians are simply envious of the Serbs, Georgians, and English.
Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Offline Shanghaiski

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,978
  • Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1037 on: October 14, 2013, 06:14:06 PM »
Holy crap at the hitler one.
Athos was under Hitler's personal protection at one time.

Hitler allowed the Church to bloom in territories under him.

Russian ultramonarchists who venerate all the tsars as saints. Yup, such folks do exist, and I have several of their paintings on file.

And we have them on the forum.

Really? Weird. One would need to be pretty far removed from reality to venerate Ivan IV or Peter III. Alexander I could be a saint if it's demonstrated that he is actually St. Feodor Kuchma. (Not sure of St. Feodor's official vita or service makes mention of that. I would think the Russian Church would want to see the bones of Tsar Alexander I first, given its scruples over the Romanov relics.)
Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Offline Hawkeye

  • Διονύσιος ὁ Όμηρίτης
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 760
  • What does everyone look like?
  • Faith: More Neronov than Avvakum
  • Jurisdiction: Old Rite Chapelist
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1038 on: October 14, 2013, 06:49:17 PM »
Yes. That is the Ancient of Days. A non-canonical icon if I have ever seen one.

It's such a shame that it isn't canonical. Many of those I've seen have been most pleasant on the eyes, especially the one in the parish I knew as a child.

Holy crap at the hitler one.
Athos was under Hitler's personal protection at one time.

Hitler allowed the Church to bloom in territories under him.

Russian ultramonarchists who venerate all the tsars as saints. Yup, such folks do exist, and I have several of their paintings on file.

And we have them on the forum.

Really? Weird. One would need to be pretty far removed from reality to venerate Ivan IV or Peter III. Alexander I could be a saint if it's demonstrated that he is actually St. Feodor Kuchma. (Not sure of St. Feodor's official vita or service makes mention of that. I would think the Russian Church would want to see the bones of Tsar Alexander I first, given its scruples over the Romanov relics.)

Normally, I'm not one for conspiracy theories but the tale of a Tsar who faked his death to become a righteous pauper saint? That is not something I can just ignore.

Maybe I'm simply gullible and naive but the moment I heard about it, I became a true believer.
Quote from: The Life of Ivan Neronov
[Ecclesiastics] conspired against him because they hated his teaching for its zealous emphasis on proper Christian conduct: with great courage he denounced all whom he saw behaving in an ungodly fashion... [As such] he was deprived of his priestly rank, bound in iron chains, and broken down in jails.

Offline Nephi

  • Monster Tamer
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,762
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1039 on: October 14, 2013, 07:02:24 PM »
Yes. That is the Ancient of Days. A non-canonical icon if I have ever seen one.

Well, I think Ancient of Days is OK (if I'm remembering my LBKology right) when depicted as Christ and not as the Father; it's the triangle halo that's improper in this one. So apart from the halo shape, I'd say it's fine because the icon has the "ho on" in the halo, thus this icon is depicting Christ as Ancient of Days - not the Father. I'm not sure though if Ancient of Days icons have to depict Christ in the typical blue over red clothing, so that may be another issue with it too.

In short it may be canonically deficient, but I'd imagine it's still venerate-able even by somewhat stricter standards.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2013, 07:02:58 PM by Nephi »

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,539
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1040 on: October 14, 2013, 10:20:10 PM »
Yes. That is the Ancient of Days. A non-canonical icon if I have ever seen one. Why do some iconostasi, especially the Russian Baroque and 19th c. style ones, have the triangular eye symbol?

This is how I have heard it:

"The Eye of Providence" (also known as the All-seeing Eye) is a symbol that exists in many cultures around the world. The oldest usage of the symbol appearently dates back to ancient Egypt. In Western iconography, an eye, enclosed by a triangle, have historically been used as a symbol of the Trinity. During the 18th and 19th century, the symbol, together with many other aspects of western art and iconography, was introduced to the Orthodox Church.

The eye in the triangle may have come into use in Orthodox lands, but it is unacceptable in iconographic terms.
Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline Fr. George

  • formerly "Cleveland"
  • Administrator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 20,234
  • May the Lord bless you and keep you always!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1041 on: October 14, 2013, 10:23:27 PM »
Yes. That is the Ancient of Days. A non-canonical icon if I have ever seen one. Why do some iconostasi, especially the Russian Baroque and 19th c. style ones, have the triangular eye symbol?

This is how I have heard it:

"The Eye of Providence" (also known as the All-seeing Eye) is a symbol that exists in many cultures around the world. The oldest usage of the symbol appearently dates back to ancient Egypt. In Western iconography, an eye, enclosed by a triangle, have historically been used as a symbol of the Trinity. During the 18th and 19th century, the symbol, together with many other aspects of western art and iconography, was introduced to the Orthodox Church.

The eye in the triangle may have come into use in Orthodox lands, but it is unacceptable in iconographic terms.

I've always been uncomfortable with it.  I try and comfort myself with the words "all-seeing eye" which come up in the priest's prayer at the bowing of heads at the end of the Orthros (and, of course, the accompanying prayer), but it is of little use.
"O Cross of Christ, all-holy, thrice-blessed, and life-giving, instrument of the mystical rites of Zion, the holy Altar for the service of our Great Archpriest, the blessing - the weapon - the strength of priests, our pride, our consolation, the light in our hearts, our mind, and our steps"
Met. Meletios of Nikopolis & Preveza, from his ordination.

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,539
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1042 on: October 14, 2013, 10:47:37 PM »
Yes. That is the Ancient of Days. A non-canonical icon if I have ever seen one.

Well, I think Ancient of Days is OK (if I'm remembering my LBKology right) when depicted as Christ and not as the Father; it's the triangle halo that's improper in this one. So apart from the halo shape, I'd say it's fine because the icon has the "ho on" in the halo, thus this icon is depicting Christ as Ancient of Days - not the Father. I'm not sure though if Ancient of Days icons have to depict Christ in the typical blue over red clothing, so that may be another issue with it too.

In short it may be canonically deficient, but I'd imagine it's still venerate-able even by somewhat stricter standards.

You're almost right, Nephi. Christ can be depicted as the Ancient of Days, dressed in radiant garments, bearing the halo with the nine bars and the name of God, and with white hair and beard - but He should bear the inscription IC-XC, as is the case in the more commonplace icons of Him.

Here's an example:



Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline Nephi

  • Monster Tamer
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,762
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1043 on: October 14, 2013, 10:55:35 PM »
You're almost right, Nephi. Christ can be depicted as the Ancient of Days, dressed in radiant garments, bearing the halo with the nine bars and the name of God, and with white hair and beard - but He should bear the inscription IC-XC, as is the case in the more commonplace icons of Him.

Here's an example:





That makes me wonder then, is IC-XC more important in an icon of Christ than the ho on?

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,539
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1044 on: October 14, 2013, 10:56:50 PM »
.... and another:



The depiction of Christ is good, but the icon is spoiled by the inscriptions of the Evangelists' names next to the four heavenly creatures surrounding Him. While the creatures mystically represent the four Evangelists, naming them in this way is wrong. Sts Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were all human beings in essence. St Luke was not an ox, St John was not an eagle, etc.
Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline biro

  • Excelsior
  • Site Supporter
  • Hoplitarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,983
  • Chapter one again, here I go again
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1045 on: October 14, 2013, 10:59:02 PM »
.... and another:



The depiction of Christ is good, but the icon is spoiled by the inscriptions of the Evangelists' names next to the four heavenly creatures surrounding Him. While the creatures mystically represent the four Evangelists, naming them in this way is wrong. Sts Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were all human beings in essence. St Luke was not an ox, St John was not an eagle, etc.

Sorry, I didn't see the picture come out. I think I can tell what you mean, though.

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,539
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1046 on: October 14, 2013, 11:01:39 PM »
You're almost right, Nephi. Christ can be depicted as the Ancient of Days, dressed in radiant garments, bearing the halo with the nine bars and the name of God, and with white hair and beard - but He should bear the inscription IC-XC, as is the case in the more commonplace icons of Him.

Here's an example:





That makes me wonder then, is IC-XC more important in an icon of Christ than the ho on?

The fresco I posted dates from the 12th century, when the halo was just as likely to feature jewels, as this one does. The three letters of the name of God began appearing in the halo at about this time, and quickly became the norm. It is not acceptable to omit the title IC-XC.
Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline Fr. George

  • formerly "Cleveland"
  • Administrator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 20,234
  • May the Lord bless you and keep you always!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1047 on: October 14, 2013, 11:02:01 PM »
You're almost right, Nephi. Christ can be depicted as the Ancient of Days, dressed in radiant garments, bearing the halo with the nine bars and the name of God, and with white hair and beard - but He should bear the inscription IC-XC, as is the case in the more commonplace icons of Him.

Here's an example:





That makes me wonder then, is IC-XC more important in an icon of Christ than the ho on?

If you're trying to distinguish between a proper icon of Christ and an inappropriate icon of the Father, then yes, it certainly is.  The Ο ΩΝ is technically descriptive of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but IC XC is only descriptive of Christ.  You'll notice that in the icon in reply #1042 the Ο ΩΝ is missing, but it's obvious (9-bars of the halo cross) that the icon depicts a member of the Trinity; the IC XC solidifies that it is depicting the Son in the pre-incarnate form of the Ancient of Days of the revelation to Daniel.
"O Cross of Christ, all-holy, thrice-blessed, and life-giving, instrument of the mystical rites of Zion, the holy Altar for the service of our Great Archpriest, the blessing - the weapon - the strength of priests, our pride, our consolation, the light in our hearts, our mind, and our steps"
Met. Meletios of Nikopolis & Preveza, from his ordination.

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,539
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1048 on: October 14, 2013, 11:02:59 PM »
.... and another:



The depiction of Christ is good, but the icon is spoiled by the inscriptions of the Evangelists' names next to the four heavenly creatures surrounding Him. While the creatures mystically represent the four Evangelists, naming them in this way is wrong. Sts Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were all human beings in essence. St Luke was not an ox, St John was not an eagle, etc.

Sorry, I didn't see the picture come out. I think I can tell what you mean, though.

Try this link, biro.

http://pravicon.com/images/icons/13/13206.jpg

Which browser are you using? It shows up OK on Firefox.
Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline biro

  • Excelsior
  • Site Supporter
  • Hoplitarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,983
  • Chapter one again, here I go again
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1049 on: October 14, 2013, 11:04:47 PM »
I still can't see it. I was using Safari on my phone. Thanks, though.

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,539
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1050 on: October 14, 2013, 11:16:32 PM »
I still can't see it. I was using Safari on my phone. Thanks, though.

Can you see it now? It's the same image, from another site:

Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline biro

  • Excelsior
  • Site Supporter
  • Hoplitarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,983
  • Chapter one again, here I go again
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1051 on: October 14, 2013, 11:17:44 PM »
Aha! Now I see it. Thanks.

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,539
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1052 on: October 14, 2013, 11:19:23 PM »
Aha! Now I see it. Thanks.

No problem.  :)
Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline ilyazhito

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 955
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1053 on: October 16, 2013, 12:53:09 PM »
The icon that I was referring to had a triangular halo and no IC XC inscription. If this was a depiction of God the Father, it is uncanonical. Unfortunately, such depictions do exist in domes of churches done in 19th century style. However, they might hopefully be replaced.

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,754
  • Pray for me, a sinner.
    • Blog
  • Faith: Christ Clothes
  • Jurisdiction: Puerto Rican Orthodox Sobor
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1054 on: October 16, 2013, 12:58:52 PM »


Searching, then saw this one.  not sure if it was posted:

Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

No longer pasting here.

Another blog - http://literarydiktator.blogspot.com/

Offline mike

  • The Jerk
  • Stratopedarches
  • **************
  • Posts: 22,543
  • Shevchenko - extraordinary poet and top footballer
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Makurian Orthodox
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1055 on: October 16, 2013, 01:01:42 PM »
The icon that I was referring to had a triangular halo and no IC XC inscription. If this was a depiction of God the Father, it is uncanonical. Unfortunately, such depictions do exist in domes of churches done in 19th century style. However, they might hopefully be replaced.

Not really. Monument laws etc. At least here.
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

not everything I typed before [insert current date] may reflect my current views on the subject

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • The Fourteenth Apostle and Judge of the Interwebs
  • Section Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,746
  • "I pledge allegiance to the flag..."
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Czech Lands
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1056 on: October 16, 2013, 01:05:08 PM »
I have this in my icon corner:



I have no real intention of getting rid of it.  Sue me.  :P

But in searching for that, I found this:



Rather disturbing.  The Father has blue eyes, but the Son has brown.  Where did the Father get his recessive genes?    
« Last Edit: October 16, 2013, 01:06:17 PM by Mor Ephrem »
"Do not tempt the Mor thy Mod."

Quote
Bartholomew, 270th Archbishop of Constantinople-New Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch, is spiritual leader to 300 million Orthodox Christians throughout the world.

Offline TheTrisagion

  • The cat is back and its better than ever!
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,199
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1057 on: October 16, 2013, 01:06:26 PM »
Mor, I fear you have fallen to prelest.  Repent while there is still time.  ;D
Guys! They're not intercoursing. It's just an unfortunate angle.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • The Fourteenth Apostle and Judge of the Interwebs
  • Section Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,746
  • "I pledge allegiance to the flag..."
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Czech Lands
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1058 on: October 16, 2013, 01:08:41 PM »
Mor, I fear you have fallen to prelest.  Repent while there is still time.  ;D

That ship sailed a long time ago, at least according to some.  :P
"Do not tempt the Mor thy Mod."

Quote
Bartholomew, 270th Archbishop of Constantinople-New Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch, is spiritual leader to 300 million Orthodox Christians throughout the world.

Offline TheTrisagion

  • The cat is back and its better than ever!
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,199
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1059 on: October 16, 2013, 01:12:30 PM »
Is the Spirit a male, female or androgynous in that pic?

Also, why does the Father have His beard tucked into His cloak?
Guys! They're not intercoursing. It's just an unfortunate angle.

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,754
  • Pray for me, a sinner.
    • Blog
  • Faith: Christ Clothes
  • Jurisdiction: Puerto Rican Orthodox Sobor
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1060 on: October 16, 2013, 01:14:45 PM »
Is the Spirit a male, female or androgynous in that pic?

Also, why does the Father have His beard tucked into His cloak?

It would be blasphemy to fully depict the true awesomeness of the beard.  There was a Council about it.
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

No longer pasting here.

Another blog - http://literarydiktator.blogspot.com/

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • The Fourteenth Apostle and Judge of the Interwebs
  • Section Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,746
  • "I pledge allegiance to the flag..."
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Czech Lands
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1061 on: October 16, 2013, 01:16:23 PM »
Is the Spirit a male, female or androgynous in that pic?

I'm pretty sure the Spirit is a woman's head budding from the back of a dove in flight (no doubt trying to escape). 
"Do not tempt the Mor thy Mod."

Quote
Bartholomew, 270th Archbishop of Constantinople-New Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch, is spiritual leader to 300 million Orthodox Christians throughout the world.

Offline Shanghaiski

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,978
  • Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1062 on: October 16, 2013, 01:18:17 PM »
Is the Spirit a male, female or androgynous in that pic?


All three. And more.
Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Offline Eastern Mind

  • Hi! I'm Olaf and I like warm hugs!
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 713
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1063 on: October 16, 2013, 02:01:36 PM »
But in searching for that, I found this:



Rather disturbing.  The Father has blue eyes, but the Son has brown.  Where did the Father get his recessive genes?    

Okay, the second picture, that woman/holy spirit/whatever it is/ reminds me of Alex Grey's "Sophia" which, if you paid attention in Gnosticism 101, she was supposedly the goddess of wisdom. I have heard some people try to say that the Holy Spirit and Sophia are in fact one (just so we are clear, I disagree with that), so maybe that's what the artist was shooting for?
"ALL THE GODS OF THE HINDUS ARE DEMONS HAHAHAHAHA!!"

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,754
  • Pray for me, a sinner.
    • Blog
  • Faith: Christ Clothes
  • Jurisdiction: Puerto Rican Orthodox Sobor
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1064 on: October 16, 2013, 02:09:07 PM »
Where does the Father and the Son get their self-tanning?  It's ghastly.
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

No longer pasting here.

Another blog - http://literarydiktator.blogspot.com/

Offline monkvasyl

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 653
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1065 on: October 16, 2013, 02:11:12 PM »
Also, why does the Father bless with the Name of Jesus?
The unworthy hierodeacon, Vasyl

Offline Hawkeye

  • Διονύσιος ὁ Όμηρίτης
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 760
  • What does everyone look like?
  • Faith: More Neronov than Avvakum
  • Jurisdiction: Old Rite Chapelist
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1066 on: October 16, 2013, 04:43:11 PM »


And here I had thought that the Prosopon school had simply made it all up themselves. Glad to see that they're at least not that far gone.

Again, this is such a potentially attractive piece of imagery. Uncanonical and theologically deficient? Sure, but attractive nonetheless.
Quote from: The Life of Ivan Neronov
[Ecclesiastics] conspired against him because they hated his teaching for its zealous emphasis on proper Christian conduct: with great courage he denounced all whom he saw behaving in an ungodly fashion... [As such] he was deprived of his priestly rank, bound in iron chains, and broken down in jails.

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,539
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1067 on: October 16, 2013, 06:04:50 PM »


And here I had thought that the Prosopon school had simply made it all up themselves. Glad to see that they're at least not that far gone.

Again, this is such a potentially attractive piece of imagery. Uncanonical and theologically deficient? Sure, but attractive nonetheless.

Unfortunately, "attractive" does not trump "correct theology". Would you find a hymn or prayer tweaked to reflect an opinion or stance at odds with what the Church teaches acceptable, as long as it sounds good to the ears? Think about it.

And devotees of the Prosopon school aren't the only ones recycling the Paternity/Otechestvo image.  :P :P
« Last Edit: October 16, 2013, 06:06:48 PM by LBK »
Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,754
  • Pray for me, a sinner.
    • Blog
  • Faith: Christ Clothes
  • Jurisdiction: Puerto Rican Orthodox Sobor
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1068 on: October 16, 2013, 06:07:50 PM »
This one's bad:
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

No longer pasting here.

Another blog - http://literarydiktator.blogspot.com/

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,539
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1069 on: October 16, 2013, 06:23:19 PM »
This one's bad:


Oh, yes, it's been in my schlock file for some time now.  Ghastly. :P :laugh:
Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,754
  • Pray for me, a sinner.
    • Blog
  • Faith: Christ Clothes
  • Jurisdiction: Puerto Rican Orthodox Sobor
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1070 on: October 16, 2013, 06:33:51 PM »
Our Lady of China, apparently:

Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

No longer pasting here.

Another blog - http://literarydiktator.blogspot.com/

Offline Eastern Mind

  • Hi! I'm Olaf and I like warm hugs!
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 713
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1071 on: October 16, 2013, 06:36:30 PM »
This one's bad:


Oh, yes, it's been in my schlock file for some time now.  Ghastly. :P :laugh:

It's not even a good bad icon  :laugh:
"ALL THE GODS OF THE HINDUS ARE DEMONS HAHAHAHAHA!!"

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,539
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1072 on: October 16, 2013, 06:39:10 PM »
Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline Hawkeye

  • Διονύσιος ὁ Όμηρίτης
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 760
  • What does everyone look like?
  • Faith: More Neronov than Avvakum
  • Jurisdiction: Old Rite Chapelist
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1073 on: October 17, 2013, 05:28:37 AM »
Unfortunately, "attractive" does not trump "correct theology". Would you find a hymn or prayer tweaked to reflect an opinion or stance at odds with what the Church teaches acceptable, as long as it sounds good to the ears? Think about it.

No, no, certainly not. I don't support the production or propagation of any such images and neither do I consider them acceptable in the slightest. It's just that when I look at them as simple pieces of art, not that icons should ever be reduced to such, they're not necessarily aesthetically ugly.

Proper theology must always take precedence and what appeals to my fallen eyes need not matter in this regard.
Quote from: The Life of Ivan Neronov
[Ecclesiastics] conspired against him because they hated his teaching for its zealous emphasis on proper Christian conduct: with great courage he denounced all whom he saw behaving in an ungodly fashion... [As such] he was deprived of his priestly rank, bound in iron chains, and broken down in jails.

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,539
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1074 on: October 17, 2013, 05:39:42 AM »
Unfortunately, "attractive" does not trump "correct theology". Would you find a hymn or prayer tweaked to reflect an opinion or stance at odds with what the Church teaches acceptable, as long as it sounds good to the ears? Think about it.

No, no, certainly not. I don't support the production or propagation of any such images and neither do I consider them acceptable in the slightest. It's just that when I look at them as simple pieces of art, not that icons should ever be reduced to such, they're not necessarily aesthetically ugly.

Proper theology must always take precedence and what appeals to my fallen eyes need not matter in this regard.

Thank you for clarifying. I was getting a bit concerned .... :)
Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline W.A.Mozart

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 504
  • Lazare, veni foras!
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1075 on: October 20, 2013, 04:36:30 PM »


 
completely new, especially not yet used

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,539
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1076 on: October 20, 2013, 05:23:13 PM »


 

I'm pretty sure someone posted this one a few pages back.  :)
Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline W.A.Mozart

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 504
  • Lazare, veni foras!
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1077 on: October 20, 2013, 06:02:48 PM »
well then... mea culpa  ::)
completely new, especially not yet used

Offline Gunnarr

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,933
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1078 on: October 21, 2013, 06:20:48 AM »


Saint Michał
I am a demonic servant! Beware!

Offline TheTrisagion

  • The cat is back and its better than ever!
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,199
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Schlock Icons
« Reply #1079 on: October 21, 2013, 05:27:47 PM »
Guys! They're not intercoursing. It's just an unfortunate angle.