OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 21, 2014, 11:22:40 AM *
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 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Iconographic tradition of the Theotokos  (Read 1898 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« on: April 09, 2013, 01:48:17 AM »

It is another excellent example of how much unity in iconography existed between East and West in the 12th century.

And yet, we can see in this illumination the beginnings of the western separation from the fullness of true iconographic tradition: the absence of the stars of ever-virginity on the Mother of God's maphorion.  Sad
Logged
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 #1 on: April 09, 2013, 06:32:05 PM »



Yes, those stars are important. While many images of her in he west do have them, they are not always found.

However I do not think they are absolutely universally found in byzantine images historically, though now today it is extraordinarily rare to not see them used.

for instance:


http://www.kosovo.net/epatriar2.html
Mother of God (The Virgin in prayer "orans position")
Pec Patriarchate, 14th century

So for the latin west (and maybe also some of the east) there are two possible explanations I can think of for why the stars would not be there.

#1 - though the stars are there at an early date in some regions, many of the oldest images which may have served as prototypes did not have the stars. Sometimes the reason western images (and liturgy) is more primitive is because it never developed far enough past it's paleo-christian (early christian) traditions. Perhaps that could be considered a conservative aspect of latinity.

#2 - sometimes in later repainting and touching up, important details may have been forgotten and or painted over.

Anyway, most images in the same book that this scan was in which are all italian from same period, do have the three star patterns.
So one can say this was also establishing itself as tradition in the west. However it is true that at some point that tradition was abandoned or perhaps "never fully established".

The primitive and or early christian quality of pre-14th c. latin paintings is sometimes not as harmonious with the sophisticated uniform and elaborate developments of the byzantine east during similar time period.  By the time the west made more elaborate in painting, it had also become exclusively gothic/naturalistic in style. This makes the situation of sacred art for the latins somewhat inconsistent, confusing and complex. Though the 13th c. is a very impressive period in it's late romanesque art. Before it transformed into gothic the romanesque "went out with a bang" !

other examples:

examples:


The Maestà from the Pushkin Museum of Moscow (la Maestà del Museo Puškin di Mosca) (painted in florence by italians, but bought by a russian art collector in the early 20th c.) (It has a western version of the assumption on it , which is interesting.)

 (Bigallo madonna):




another one without any, from the west: (one of my favourites.)

Master of the Bigallo Crucifix (Italian, fl.1225-1255)
« Last Edit: April 09, 2013, 06:39:44 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
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #2 on: April 09, 2013, 07:25:58 PM »

Quote
Sometimes the reason western images (and liturgy) is more primitive is because it never developed far enough past it's paleo-christian (early christian) traditions. Perhaps that could be considered a conservative aspect of latinity.

The Third Ecumenical Council dogmatically affirming the Virgin as Theotokos, and dogmatically affirming her ever-virginity, was held in 431. This Council was accepted by both Rome and the eastern churches. Not long after the proclamation of these dogmas, stars of ever-virginity and the inscription MP-ΘY became standard and mandatory in icons of the Mother of God.

As for the fresco at Pec, a rare exception proves nothing, given the sheer consistency over so many centuries of Orthodox icons showing the stars.

Icons are not merely illustrations. They are, and must be, expressions and proclamations of what the Church teaches, proclaims and espouses.
Logged
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,544


« Reply #3 on: April 09, 2013, 07:41:40 PM »

Not long after the proclamation of these dogmas, stars of ever-virginity and the inscription MP-ΘY became standard and mandatory in icons of the Mother of God.

Mandatory? Who mandated it?
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #4 on: April 09, 2013, 07:54:12 PM »

Not long after the proclamation of these dogmas, stars of ever-virginity and the inscription MP-ΘY became standard and mandatory in icons of the Mother of God.

Mandatory? Who mandated it?

Do we not believe and proclaim that the Mother of God is ever-virgin? Is it not a dogma (and one of the few concerning the Mother of God)? Was this teaching not proclaimed at an Ecumenical Council? Or are you simply being your usual contrarian self?  Roll Eyes
Logged
Antonis
"The Most Honourable The Morquess of Something"
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Direct Archdiocesan District
Posts: 1,674


You must try this Balkan blend, Barsanuphius.


« Reply #5 on: April 09, 2013, 08:17:38 PM »

Not long after the proclamation of these dogmas, stars of ever-virginity and the inscription MP-ΘY became standard and mandatory in icons of the Mother of God.

Mandatory? Who mandated it?

Do we not believe and proclaim that the Mother of God is ever-virgin? Is it not a dogma (and one of the few concerning the Mother of God)? Was this teaching not proclaimed at an Ecumenical Council? Or are you simply being your usual contrarian self?  Roll Eyes
I think he's talking about the stars of ever-virginity and MP-ΘY in icons.
Logged

As I dissipate, Christ precipitates.
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 #6 on: April 09, 2013, 09:35:04 PM »

This reminds of the conversation about the portrayal of the "Lamb of God" in Latin art that was had here about a year ago.
I do not know or recall exactly why the Latin church did not fully implement certain canons regarding iconography that were proclaimed by a council. Although I have to admit that it is hard for me to understand how important they could be if they were partially ignored by that many people in the west. That is because unlike some people, I have an inherent "trust of the west" and "trust in it's orthodoxy" before 1054 (and many times after.) When I see things being done in the first millenium that are different from the east, therefore it is difficult for me to view them as heretical, but more often politics or failure to communicate between the Churches.

There are times when the iconographic rules seem more political than essential to our salvation. We notice that iconography in the non-chalcedonian churches is also not always consistent with that of the byzantine either. (Ethiopian, Armenian, Syriac, Coptic, Jacobite). It's not that I am against tradition or canons.. but.. I like to think that in some historic sense there can be leniency applied to the west. Did the people know any better?  I doubt there was any intentional disagreement or intentional breaking of rules.
I don't think the lack of portrayal of the stars is the same as a heresy over the human or divine nature of Our Lord. I do not think it was done to deny perpetual virginity of the Mother of God.

I think for instance that we should follow these canons today, it's not as if it takes any effort to put the stars on her maphorion, however on the other hand, I remain uncertain that the council of trullo's ban on the "lamb of God" was universal and binding on everyone absolutely.

One of the churches I've had to attend which is named after the Holy Trinity has "God the Father" icons all over the place.

I think there theres a bit of leniency in these areas Huh  We're not pharisees. But we are traditional and want to maintain the traditions as much as possible.

« Last Edit: April 09, 2013, 09:44:03 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
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #7 on: April 10, 2013, 12:32:29 AM »

This reminds of the conversation about the portrayal of the "Lamb of God" in Latin art that was had here about a year ago.
I do not know or recall exactly why the Latin church did not fully implement certain canons regarding iconography that were proclaimed by a council. Although I have to admit that it is hard for me to understand how important they could be if they were partially ignored by that many people in the west. That is because unlike some people, I have an inherent "trust of the west" and "trust in it's orthodoxy" before 1054 (and many times after.) When I see things being done in the first millenium that are different from the east, therefore it is difficult for me to view them as heretical, but more often politics or failure to communicate between the Churches.

The doctrinal divergence between east and west had its origins a good two centuries before 1054. The prohibition of symbolic and prefigurative portrayals of Christ, and the necessity of portraying Him in the fullness of His revelation (i.e. as God Incarnate, as Theanthropos) was clearly expressed in Canon 82 of the Quinisext Ecumenical Council of 692, some three hundred and fifty years before 1054. It is known that Rome did not initially accept most of the rulings of this Council, taking many decades to finally accept them, and, even then, never truly implemented them, as we can see from the continued portrayal in its art to this day of Christ in prefigurative, symbolic, and metaphysical forms.

This divergence has nothing to do with a "failure of communication" between the Churches.


There are times when the iconographic rules seem more political than essential to our salvation. We notice that iconography in the non-chalcedonian churches is also not always consistent with that of the byzantine either. (Ethiopian, Armenian, Syriac, Coptic, Jacobite). It's not that I am against tradition or canons.. but.. I like to think that in some historic sense there can be leniency applied to the west. Did the people know any better?  I doubt there was any intentional disagreement or intentional breaking of rules.

The non-Chalcedonian churches only accept the first three Ecumenical Councils.  police

I don't think the lack of portrayal of the stars is the same as a heresy over the human or divine nature of Our Lord. I do not think it was done to deny perpetual virginity of the Mother of God.

Intentional or otherwise, the lack of stars is a denial of the proclaimed dogma of the ever-virginity of the Mother of God. We're not talking about a mere theologoumenon here, nor is there any lack of precedent for an iconographer to take his cue from the innumerable icons which consistently show the stars. Really, this is Iconography 101 material - even the most isolated iconographer monk or nun (as, in those days, practically all icons were painted by monastics) would know this.


I think for instance that we should follow these canons today, it's not as if it takes any effort to put the stars on her maphorion, however on the other hand, I remain uncertain that the council of trullo's ban on the "lamb of God" was universal and binding on everyone absolutely.

Nonsense. If the canons of an Ecumenical Council are not universally binding ....

One of the churches I've had to attend which is named after the Holy Trinity has "God the Father" icons all over the place.

I think there theres a bit of leniency in these areas Huh  We're not pharisees. But we are traditional and want to maintain the traditions as much as possible.

I have spoken many times here about the almost complete overtaking of traditional canonical iconography by naturalistic western artwork from about the 16th century onwards, much of it commissioned and patronized by rulers of Orthodox nations/empires/regions who promoted the infliction of this wound on one of the pillars of Orthodoxy. It takes much time and effort to undo centuries of misinformation, improper practice, and entrenched sentimentality.

Yet, it can, and does, happen. At least three of the twenty or so Orthodox churches in the city where I live have replaced their westernized or uncanonical imagery with proper, canonical icons. It takes much effort, and much careful education. It's everyone's responsibility to get things right, and clergy as well as laity must be properly educated in what is right and wrong when it comes to iconography.
Logged
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,544


« Reply #8 on: April 10, 2013, 06:04:46 AM »

Not long after the proclamation of these dogmas, stars of ever-virginity and the inscription MP-ΘY became standard and mandatory in icons of the Mother of God.

Mandatory? Who mandated it?

Do we not believe and proclaim that the Mother of God is ever-virgin? Is it not a dogma (and one of the few concerning the Mother of God)? Was this teaching not proclaimed at an Ecumenical Council? Or are you simply being your usual contrarian self?  Roll Eyes
I think he's talking about the stars of ever-virginity and MP-ΘY in icons.

Ditto.
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #9 on: April 10, 2013, 07:43:21 AM »

Not long after the proclamation of these dogmas, stars of ever-virginity and the inscription MP-ΘY became standard and mandatory in icons of the Mother of God.

Mandatory? Who mandated it?

Do we not believe and proclaim that the Mother of God is ever-virgin? Is it not a dogma (and one of the few concerning the Mother of God)? Was this teaching not proclaimed at an Ecumenical Council? Or are you simply being your usual contrarian self?  Roll Eyes
I think he's talking about the stars of ever-virginity and MP-ΘY in icons.

Ditto.

The omission of these elements from an icon of the Mother of God renders such an image deficient and defective in expressing who she is. From my earlier post:

Quote
Intentional or otherwise, the lack of stars is a denial of the proclaimed dogma of the ever-virginity of the Mother of God. We're not talking about a mere theologoumenon here, nor is there any lack of precedent for an iconographer to take his cue from the innumerable icons which consistently show the stars. Really, this is Iconography 101 material - even the most isolated iconographer monk or nun (as, in those days, practically all icons were painted by monastics) would know this.
Logged
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,544


« Reply #10 on: April 10, 2013, 08:04:18 AM »

Intentional or otherwise, the lack of stars is a denial of the proclaimed dogma of the ever-virginity of the Mother of God.

No, it's not. At most it might be only not emphasize of that dogma (how many people actually do understand what are these 3 stars for is another one problem) but not a denial.

Nevertheless you showed only your personal opinion and I do not consider you to be authorized to define a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church. I'm waiting for some more authoritative sources (you know, from the Tradition) that a) icons of Theotokos without stars are not allowed and b) not painting the stars means denying the ever-virginity.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2013, 08:07:58 AM by Michał Kalina » Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #11 on: April 10, 2013, 08:10:51 AM »

Intentional or otherwise, the lack of stars is a denial of the proclaimed dogma of the ever-virginity of the Mother of God.

No, it's not. At most it might be only not emphasize of that dogma (how many people actually do understand what are these 3 stars for is another one problem) but not a denial.

Nevertheless you showed only your personal opinion and I do not consider you to be authorized to define a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church. I'm waiting for some more authoritative sources (you know, from the Tradition) that a) icons of Theotokos without stars are not allowed and b) not painting the stars means denying the ever-virginity.

Then what are the stars there for, Michal? What is the inscription MP-ΘY there for, Michal? Are these motifs there purely for decoration? And why are they so consistently, overwhelmingly there, over so many centuries?

I await your answer.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2013, 08:11:06 AM by LBK » Logged
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,544


« Reply #12 on: April 10, 2013, 08:18:42 AM »

Then what are the stars there for, Michal?

To remind about here ever-virginity to those who understand that symbol

Quote
What is the inscription MP-ΘY there for, Michal?

To identify the icon and link it with the prototype.

Quote
Are these motifs there purely for decoration?

No.

Quote
And why are they so consistently, overwhelmingly there, over so many centuries?

Many iconographers thought it is a good idea - that what I thought. No you say you ordered them to do that - that confuses me a bit.

Quote
I await your answer.

Now it's your turn.

And there is the third question: If you don't write in your every post that you eg. are a woman does that mean you deny the fact you are a woman?
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #13 on: April 10, 2013, 08:26:45 AM »

Icons are the visual equivalent of Orthodox hymnography. We do not refer to the Mother of God in our hymns and prayers as simply Mary, not even as St Mary, but, over and over, as Ever-virgin and Theotokos.

Quote
Many iconographers thought it is a good idea - that what I thought. No you say you ordered them to do that - that confuses me a bit.

The presence of these motifs has nothing to do with iconographers thinking it a "good idea", but has everything to do with proclaiming and affirming that she is Ever-virgin and Mother of God. There is nothing random or accidental in proper canonical iconography.

If you're confused, talk to your priest about it.
Logged
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,544


« Reply #14 on: April 10, 2013, 08:31:00 AM »

You ignored my 3 questions.
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #15 on: April 10, 2013, 08:40:41 AM »

You ignored my 3 questions.

What three questions? You make several statements in your last post, and the single question at the end, "If you don't write in your every post that you eg. are a woman does that mean you deny the fact you are a woman?" is completely irrelevant to the matter being discussed here. A post on an online forum is not an Orthodox icon.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2013, 08:41:48 AM by LBK » Logged
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,544


« Reply #16 on: April 10, 2013, 08:47:09 AM »

Where is it stated every icon must have those stars (apart from your posts)?

Where is is stated not painting those start means denying ever virginity (apart from your posts)?

If you don't like the last question, here's the other one: Must, accordingly to you, every single icon of Theotokos present every single doctrine about her?
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #17 on: April 10, 2013, 09:01:05 AM »

Where is it stated every icon must have those stars (apart from your posts)?

The consistent and universal iconographic tradition which arose in the light of the rulings of the Third Ecumenical Council, and supported by Orthodox hymnography.

Where is is stated not painting those start means denying ever virginity (apart from your posts)?

The consistent and universal iconographic tradition which arose in the light of the rulings of the Third Ecumenical Council, and supported by Orthodox hymnography. Would you consider omitting the inscription IC-XC from icons of Christ acceptable?

If you don't like the last question, here's the other one: Must, accordingly to you, every single icon of Theotokos present every single doctrine about her?

At the absolute minimum, icons of the Mother of God must express the dogmas of her ever-virginity and her being the Theotokos, as proclaimed by the Third Ecumenical Council. Other teachings about her which are frequently expressed in her icons are her humility; her humanity being graced by the Divinity (as expressed in her blue tunic - humanity - covered by her red (regal) maphorion); her role as Queen and Mother of the King, shown by the decoration of her cuffs and neckline in the manner of a woman of noble birth, and her wearing crimson slippers, normally only worn by women of royal rank.

Yes, Michal, there are many teachings that an icon of the Mother of God can express. But the absolute minimum are those dogmas the Church has proclaimed about her.

It should also be pointed out that these teachings did not suddenly appear as a result of the Third Council. These teachings are present in the writings of saints and Fathers which predate the Council, as well as in early prayers.

I might add that these dogmas were
Logged
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,544


« Reply #18 on: April 10, 2013, 09:08:30 AM »

The consistent and universal iconographic tradition which arose in the light of the rulings of the Third Ecumenical Council, and supported by Orthodox hymnography.

Not an answer. Something more detailed, please.

Quote
The consistent and universal iconographic tradition which arose in the light of the rulings of the Third Ecumenical Council, and supported by Orthodox hymnography.

Not an answer. Something more detailed, please.

Quote
Would you consider omitting the inscription IC-XC from icons of Christ acceptable?

Inscriptions have different role in icons, not presenting the dogma.
Logged
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,407


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #19 on: April 10, 2013, 09:11:17 AM »

Where is it stated every icon must have those stars (apart from your posts)?

The consistent and universal iconographic tradition which arose in the light of the rulings of the Third Ecumenical Council, and supported by Orthodox hymnography.

Anything to back this up? I feel like the examples here seem to disprove this assertion.
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #20 on: April 10, 2013, 09:32:23 AM »

The consistent and universal iconographic tradition which arose in the light of the rulings of the Third Ecumenical Council, and supported by Orthodox hymnography.

Not an answer. Something more detailed, please.

Quote
The consistent and universal iconographic tradition which arose in the light of the rulings of the Third Ecumenical Council, and supported by Orthodox hymnography.

Not an answer. Something more detailed, please.

Quote
Would you consider omitting the inscription IC-XC from icons of Christ acceptable?

Inscriptions have different role in icons, not presenting the dogma.

None of these statements of yours support your position of opposing what I have to say. You are simply choosing to refuse to listen simply because LBK has stated certain things which, for whatever reason, you object to. Your stubborn refusal is shown to be false and empty through the sheer weight of hymnographic, conciliar and iconographic evidence. Heck, what would I know, I've only studied and written about iconography for longer than you've been alive.  Roll Eyes

If you can't, or won't, accept what I have to say, then talk to your priest about it.

As for your answer to the omission of IC-XC from icons of Christ, to use your words, that is not an answer. The IC-XC inscription is indeed a dogmatic statement, proclaiming Jesus Christ as God and Man, just as the three letters in His halo proclaim His divinity. The presence of IC-XC from an icon of Christ is not optional. OTOH, saints do not have any dogmatic proclamations attached to their icons.
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #21 on: April 10, 2013, 09:39:29 AM »

Anything to back this up? I feel like the examples here seem to disprove this assertion.

Oh, only about 1500 years' worth of icons (I cannot speak for the non-Chalcedonians). A few scattered deviations from established, accepted and consistent tradition and praxis do not overturn that tradition.
Logged
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,544


« Reply #22 on: April 10, 2013, 09:47:17 AM »

You are simply choosing to refuse to listen simply because LBK has stated certain things which, for whatever reason, you object to.

Agreed, I do not treat you as RCs treat their Pope.

Quote
sheer weight of hymnographic, conciliar and iconographic evidence.

You showed nothing from it. You only say "believe me because I say so" and it's hardly convincing.

Quote
If you can't, or won't, accept what I have to say, then talk to your priest about it.

I doubt he believes in a dogma of your infallibility.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2013, 09:47:38 AM by Michał Kalina » Logged
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,407


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #23 on: April 10, 2013, 10:03:46 AM »

LBK, I think I understand where Michał is coming from. The biggest problem I have with your assertions is that you don't cite any sources outside your own authority and a vaguely defined sense of tradition (Not to say that I don't trust you as a source). IMO, I feel that if you provide some more sources to back up your statements, then we could finally put this discussion to rest.
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #24 on: April 10, 2013, 10:07:18 AM »

You are simply choosing to refuse to listen simply because LBK has stated certain things which, for whatever reason, you object to.

Agreed, I do not treat you as RCs treat their Pope.


And where is your evidence to contradict what I have had to say?

sheer weight of hymnographic, conciliar and iconographic evidence.

You showed nothing from it. You only say "believe me because I say so" and it's hardly convincing.

What do our hymns proclaim? What do our Councils proclaim? As for the iconographic evidence, it's everywhere: in churches, homes, books on iconography written by knowledgeable and respected people who know what they're talking about, and even in Google searches.

If you can't, or won't, accept what I have to say, then talk to your priest about it.

I doubt he believes in a dogma of your infallibility.

Dogma of my infallibility? The only dogmas I've quoted are those of the Church, and how the Church has chosen to express them in her hymns and icons. I'll say it again: talk to your priest about the matter, and/or working iconographers, if you're honestly trying to learn, and not simply spoiling for a fight.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2013, 10:15:31 AM by LBK » Logged
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,544


« Reply #25 on: April 10, 2013, 10:32:25 AM »

And where is your evidence to contradict what I have had to say?

Examples of icons without stars posted many times on this forum.

Quote
What do our hymns proclaim? What do our Councils proclaim?

Never heard any canon or hymn proclaiming "icons without stars are forbidden and deny the virginity".
« Last Edit: April 10, 2013, 10:32:48 AM by Michał Kalina » Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #26 on: April 10, 2013, 11:35:13 AM »

And where is your evidence to contradict what I have had to say?

Examples of icons without stars posted many times on this forum.

Yeah, in the "Strange icons" and "Schlock icons" threads, and a few post-schism images here and there.  Roll Eyes


What do our hymns proclaim? What do our Councils proclaim?

Never heard any canon or hymn proclaiming "icons without stars are forbidden and deny the virginity".

Our hymns and prayers constantly proclaim the Mother of God's ever-virginity. Icons and hymns/prayers go hand-in-hand. Each complements the other, each is in harmony with the other. One is verbal, the other is visual. Why do you try so hard to refuse to see or accept this?
Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,267

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #27 on: April 10, 2013, 12:57:46 PM »

It does seem to be an odd notion that, because something became a traditional way of communicating something, that to not have it means you actively reject it. Wouldn't that be a form of the logical fallacy "argument from silence"? And, in particular light of this thread, it seems unreasonable to hold western illumination manuscripts to the standard of eastern iconography. They are simply different traditions. The Eastern Rite is not the measuring stick by which all things are gauged. You can't point to a line of a hymn, or a motif in an icon, and then say that anything which doesn't have either rejects it. It just doesn't work that way.
Logged
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,544


« Reply #28 on: May 27, 2013, 06:18:32 AM »

I don’t know much about the specifics of such things so I won’t pretend I do, but I know if I ask a police officer in Minnesota what the state law is on something and someone from Canada tells me he is wrong, I will believe the police officer from Minnesota, because he has the knowledge and experience.

She wrote it's basic and popular knowledge. Taking into account no one but her knows about it it's neither basic nor popular (even if it's true that I doubt). BTW she now claims omitting stars is not a denial of virginity:

Find the post and show me where I said "active denial". Put your money where your mouth is. What I did say was that images without the stars are dogmatically and doctrinally deficient. There is a difference.  Angry

Since it contradicts clearly what she had written before:

Intentional or otherwise, the lack of stars is a denial of the proclaimed dogma of the ever-virginity of the Mother of God.

I'm not sure what she thinks about it now.

The paintings/pictures in the icons is  about what will happen in the future.And they are depicted by the prophets.

Logged
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,544


« Reply #29 on: May 27, 2013, 06:55:37 AM »

Not here ^
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #30 on: May 27, 2013, 08:10:48 AM »

I don’t know much about the specifics of such things so I won’t pretend I do, but I know if I ask a police officer in Minnesota what the state law is on something and someone from Canada tells me he is wrong, I will believe the police officer from Minnesota, because he has the knowledge and experience.

She wrote it's basic and popular knowledge. Taking into account no one but her knows about it it's neither basic nor popular (even if it's true that I doubt). BTW she now claims omitting stars is not a denial of virginity:

Find the post and show me where I said "active denial". Put your money where your mouth is. What I did say was that images without the stars are dogmatically and doctrinally deficient. There is a difference.  Angry

Since it contradicts clearly what she had written before:

Intentional or otherwise, the lack of stars is a denial of the proclaimed dogma of the ever-virginity of the Mother of God.

I'm not sure what she thinks about it now.


My position has not changed. An image of the Mother of God without the stars is deficient in its theology any way you slice it, and, intentionally or otherwise, is a denial of the dogma of her ever-virginity. The dogmatic requirement for the presence of the stars is indeed basic knowledge for iconographers.

By "iconographers", I do not include the artists who simply paint "icons" as a hobby, a sideline, as an outlet and vehicle for their whims and imaginings, such as those on the DeviantART site. They are nothing more than dabblers, with no sense of the obedience and discipline which a true iconographer submits to, and no sense of the immense responsibility a true iconographer has in faithfully adhering to canon, and fidelity to what the Church teaches and proclaims.
Logged
Cyrillic
Warned
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Posts: 10,038


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #31 on: May 27, 2013, 10:50:49 AM »

I do have to say that I agree with LBK on this one. However, I do wonder, some icons have the Theotokos in blue clothes instead of red ones. What is the reason?
Logged

"Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men; but he who aspires to be a hero must drink brandy."
-Dr. Samuel Johnson
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #32 on: May 27, 2013, 11:14:17 AM »

I do have to say that I agree with LBK on this one. However, I do wonder, some icons have the Theotokos in blue clothes instead of red ones. What is the reason?

There are various reasons proposed, though none are definitive. The one which I find most plausible is that one of the most expensive pigments available to painters and mosaicists in the early centuries of the Christian era was lapis lazuli, which is a rich blue color. Because of the great veneration for the Mother of God, paints and glass colored using this costly mineral was seen as fitting to adorn her garments. Many of the great Roman churches of the 4th-6th centuries show her dressed completely in blue.

With the refinement of iconography over the centuries, the Virgin's garments became defined as red or purple maphorion (veil and cloak) over a dark blue tunic. The symbolism expresses her being mortal, human, and humble (blue tunic, but the blue here represents the cheapest dye available, woad), being graced and overshadowed by Divinity (red or purple). The humble, obedient handmaiden of the Lord becomes the Mother of the incarnate God.
Logged
Cyrillic
Warned
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Posts: 10,038


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #33 on: May 27, 2013, 11:19:08 AM »

Thank you. Your knowledge on iconography is truly impressing angel
Logged

"Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men; but he who aspires to be a hero must drink brandy."
-Dr. Samuel Johnson
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #34 on: May 27, 2013, 11:31:00 AM »

Thank you. Your knowledge on iconography is truly impressing angel

Thank you. What I know is what anyone can learn, if they want to learn, that is.  Smiley
Logged
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 #35 on: May 28, 2013, 01:41:13 AM »


Theotokos of Byelo-Zersk' 13th c.


Around 750 AD, Mosaic in the early Christian chapel under the ranks of seats of the Roman amphitheatre at Durres,Albania. The mosaic on the south wall shows St.Stephen, the first Christian martyr,the Virgin Mary and archangels Michael and Gabriel. .



http://monkschronicle.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/v-a-canterbury-019.jpg enlarged
Reverse Cover of the Lorsch Gospels, Lorsch Abbey, 810 AD. In the V & A Museum, London[/quote]


the enthroned Virgin and Child with saints and angels, and the Hand of God above, 6th century, Saint Catherine’s Monastery, Mount Sinai

Nothing new to say either, I generally agree with LBK, but I like to hope that those artists who were in the past either less knowledgeable or born before the details of canonical iconography were clarified ought to be able to claim "invincible ignorance".
Dispensation or ecclesiastical economy must occasionally exist.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2013, 01:52:42 AM 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
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 #36 on: June 09, 2013, 03:17:06 PM »


Christ and Virgin Mary with child
Byzantine ivory carving, with many classical characteristics retained.

I can't recall the official name of this, an art history book out there has it.
I believe it is 8th century. One can see by this how the late antique nature of her depiction was occasionally retained in Italy into the 13th century, with it's conserative latin nature, before Giotto and his followers encouraged the latin church to abandon this tradition for new forms.



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
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,975


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #37 on: June 09, 2013, 05:25:47 PM »

There's obviously going to be wide variations in iconography, given the thousands of miles and years we're dealing with. What is a commonality, is the abstract style. Other details like stars and letters were not always standard.

It's also difficult to argue from history because so many examples have been lost. We have what has been preserved, and this is a small percentage of what did exist.
Logged

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.
Hinterlander
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 516


« Reply #38 on: October 24, 2013, 09:03:31 PM »

I am curious as to why the Theotokos is depicted as enthroned.
Logged
xOrthodox4Christx
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant (Inquirer)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Christianity
Posts: 3,636



« Reply #39 on: October 24, 2013, 09:47:25 PM »

I am curious as to why the Theotokos is depicted as enthroned.

She's only enthroned because Christ is with her; She is enthroned because Christ is enthroned.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2013, 09:49:36 PM by xOrthodox4Christx » Logged

"Years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth.... While there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element, I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free." (Eugene Debs)
Hinterlander
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 516


« Reply #40 on: October 24, 2013, 09:52:01 PM »

I am curious as to why the Theotokos is depicted as enthroned.

She's only enthroned because Christ is with her; She is enthroned because Christ is enthroned.

So the Theotokos is never enthroned without Christ on her lap/in her arms?
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #41 on: October 24, 2013, 11:14:23 PM »

I am curious as to why the Theotokos is depicted as enthroned.

She's only enthroned because Christ is with her; She is enthroned because Christ is enthroned.

So the Theotokos is never enthroned without Christ on her lap/in her arms?

Correct. Even in matched pairs of icons of Christ and the Mother of God, such as those on the iconostasis to the right and left of the Royal Doors, where these icons are displayed next to each other, the Mother of God should still be shown with the Child, whether she is enthroned, or in half-stature, or full stature.

The Virgin can be shown enthroned, as she is, as scripture and hymns proclaim, the Queen of heaven, and the Mother of the King. Historically, dowager queens had their own throne at the right of the reigning king. The dowager, being widowed, did not reign in her own right (except as regent if the heir was not yet of adult age), but was accorded respect and honor as Queen and Mother. A wise king would respect and value the word and advice of his mother, as, indeed, did Christ when He changed water into wine at His Mother's request.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,733


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #42 on: October 25, 2013, 12:21:25 AM »

I am curious as to why the Theotokos is depicted as enthroned.

She's only enthroned because Christ is with her; She is enthroned because Christ is enthroned.

She is his throne. 
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,636


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #43 on: October 25, 2013, 12:28:14 AM »

I am curious as to why the Theotokos is depicted as enthroned.

She's only enthroned because Christ is with her; She is enthroned because Christ is enthroned.

She is his throne. 

Of course. She is the true Ark and Cherubic Throne, as well as Queen and Mother. Many an iconographic motif has more than one meaning.  Smiley
Logged
hecma925
Non-clairvoyant
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 7,296


Pray for me, a sinner.


WWW
« Reply #44 on: October 25, 2013, 07:12:47 AM »

What about this?  I have seen the Burning Bush icon with Moses as a young man taking his sandals off, but not one where the Theotokos and Christ are the bush. 


Then I saw this Coptic one, where Christ is not there:
http://www.saintmaryhouston.org/content/images/the-burning-bush
Logged

Tags:
Pages: 1 2 »  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 0.157 seconds with 72 queries.