Amphilochia
Question 205
On the Formation and Character of Holy Icons
By St. Photios the Great
Question 205
On the Formation and Character of Holy Icons
By St. Photios the Great
The most impudent and ill-intentioned of the Iconoclasts, who consider the strange to be wisdom, ask the question: "Which of the icons of Christ is true? The one that the Romans have, or the one painted by the Indians, or the one painted by the Greeks, or the Egyptians? For they do not resemble one another, and whichever one of them someone describes as true, it is obvious that he erases the rest."
But this question of theirs, or rather their mischief, you, the beautiful joy of Orthodoxy, can refute in many ways and prove that it is full of much absurdity and irreverence.
We can initially say to them: "First of all, by your decision to fight against icons, you have, without wanting to, confirmed their existence and veneration in all parts of the world where there are Christians." Thus, what they attempt to overthrow, they are caught in their own words and in turn strengthen it more.
Second, they have forgotten, by what they say, that they are included in the order of the Greeks, since we can say that what has been said about august icons and about the other mysteries is the same.
For one could say: "Which words of the Gospel do you call divinely inspired?" or "Which do you call the Gospel? Because with other shapes and types of letters the Roman is composed, with others the Indian, with others the Hebrew, and with others the Ethiopian. And they are not only written with different types and shapes of letters, but they are also pronounced with a different sound and meaning of voice of a different kind and completely unrelated." So they cannot say it.
"Why should you not rather say: It is not fitting for anyone to believe or to approach the Gospel, because they pronounce it with dissimilar characters, forms, sounds of voice, and meanings?"
And this boldness is certainly of your own considerations; for no pagan, no one, will easily ask us this question, since there are also among them many similar reverences, and just as their nature is common to ours and the mind and speech and the concord of the soul with the body which is done in a similar way and countless others, so is their idea of the Divine, even if they differ in many and the most important things. There are therefore those which, because of the clarity of the common concepts, even they do not dare to oppose.
Therefore will the pagan not question this practice of ours, but only someone who is completely an unbeliever and irreligious, who absolutely does not accept any concept of the divine, nor of worship.
Third and similar to the second: "Which cross will you say is with certainty similar to the original, the one that is formed together with the title, or the one that is drawn and changed to be without the title?" For whichever the likeness of which shall be confessed by us, from this (according to your own wise reasoning) the construction and veneration of the rest will be rejected (but in your opinion, which dares such a thing, for such serious matters, may have already been rejected).
"Fourth, the difference that we have and the dissimilarity in the secret sacrifices and other Hierurgies will you present as a cause to defame and overthrow all our immaculate ceremonies and worship; for, by the wicked plans that you have studied with your intellect against the icon of Christ, you have been reproved in that you are shaking the entire sacred ceremonies and the divine mysteries of the Christians from the very foundations."
Fifth, we must say what most reproaches their impiety and their maliciousness: "Why do you stand before the divine icon and unfold this chatter, while you should undertake the fight against the one depicted in the icon itself (a thing they have been hiding until now)? Why do you not reveal what you are carrying in your minds, namely the implacable war against Christ, with your lips and bare face, but under the guise of the icon?"
Let them tell us that, because the Greeks think that Christ appeared similar to them, the Romans also that He resembles them more, the Indians again in their own form, and to the Ethiopians it is obvious that He resembles them. Since these things happen, who is the true Christ? Which of those who think different?
Should they not confess that they do not believe that Christ was incarnated in the flesh on earth? And truly for these wretched people He did not even incarnate. For the malice they manifested against the icons was revealed much earlier as a rage against the thing depicted, because, motivated by the difference that they thought existed, they declared the complete rejection of that which they thought had a difference.
Do you see what their purpose was and what their artifice against the icon aimed at?
But close to what we have said, we must say this, not to them (because they are unworthy), but to the faithful and lovers of Christ, that the dissimilarity of the representations does not destroy the nature and truth of the icon.
For color does not only convey the body and form of the person depicted, but also some disposition and action that accompanies it, and the declaration of passions, and dedication to holy places, and the interpretation of inscriptions, and other exceptional symbols, of which it is quite impossible not to omit some, if not most, in the icons of the faithful. With the absence of which, we do not understand less, the meaning and honor of the person depicted, (than if they were all present); which is the purpose of iconography.
This is my brief reply as the epistolary form requires. However, the accuracy of the work, by God's permission, will be referred to its proper subject.
Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos.
