Fourth Session:
The ancient tradition of the holy fathers, which we received as
something for us to follow from our predecessors the most blessed and orthodox pontiffs
who after the blessed Peter presided in his apostolic see, has hitherto been
kept and preserved intact by this holy catholic and apostolic church. It is
therefore a duty, with the whole purpose of the mind and the exercise of a supreme
desire, to venerate and adore images both of our Lord Jesus Christ and of his
most holy Mother and of the blessed apostles and all the saints, and [117]
to resist with all the energy we possess the madness of those schismatics who
would prohibit the people form venerating them.
For nothing can be harmful to those in the peace of the church if the appropriate
painting of figures of the saints produces in the faithful an increase of love,
because, indeed, while they look at their faces and call what they did, God,
who dwells within them, receives perfect praise. Certainly, if God, who, being
invisible and incorporeal, appeared to the eyes of mortal men not in his own
divine substance but through creatures subject to him, as a supreme privilege
for those who believe, why should the souls of the saints, which, when still in
the body, had the faces of each one and performed works pleasing to God
according to his dispensation, not to be venerated by us with great honour? Why
should we hate the images of those through whom we came to know the truth of
the faith?
God, of course, appeared to our father Abraham not in the flesh nor in
soul, but in the form of three men. Perceiving one thing and realizing it to be
another, he fell to the ground and worshipped, saying, ‘Lord, if I have found
grace in your eyes, I shall bring water and wash your feet’ and the rest.
Abraham at once ‘believed in God, and this was impute to him as righteousness’,
and he was called the friend of God. And later he appeared to Jacob in the form
of a creature subject to him, which led Jacob to say, ‘I have seen God face to
face and yet my life has been saved’. Behold, if the bodiless and invisible God
willed to be seen by mortals in the form of a creature subject to himself, so
that it should be a grace for those who believe, how can we be criticized
because of the icons of the saints, whom we believe to have been bodily and
visible, if we venerate them as true friends of Christ? For if their effigies
were thought detestable, it is obvious that the relics of those whose flesh
undergoes corruption in the grave ought to be considered of no worth—perish the
thought!
But if our aim is to attain fellowship with them, it is obvious that
everything in honour of the saints, that is, the remains not only of their bodies
but also of their raiment and the mages of their faces as well, in whatever
place [118] they are painted, are things that we ought to venerate with conspicuous
honour, remembering how Isaiah testifies that we beheld the form of a creature
subject [to God], when he says, ‘I saw the Lord of hosts seated on a high
throne and those beings who were beneath him filled the temple’ and the rest.
Moses and Aaron likewise went up and saw the throne where God was stead, and ‘there
was under his feet as if a work of sapphire’ and (as it were) the firmament of
heaven with the brilliance of lightning, and cherubim of pure gold standing
around. For all these beings whom Solomon later set up in the temple, Moses saw
in image and prefiguration when he was speaking with God on the mountain.
The fathers who preceded us, knowing all this and more, had images of
our Saviour Jesus Christ and of his most holy Moher ever-Virgin and of all the
saints painted on the walls of churches, as time proves today, and out of a
fullness of love did not prohibit their painting in suitable places up till the
present. What harm can it do a sincere Christian, on condition he does not
treat as divine what he loves and cherishes to the point of worshipping it, but
paints it on a wall or a panel or inspire awe and trembling? What harm is it,
if we look at images of Christ in a church and meditate in the privacy of the
heart on the coming of the one whose image we behold and who will soon come as
judge of the living and the dead? What is contrary to our faith, if, since ‘the
Word was made flesh and dwelt among us’, our souls keenly desire [to see] in
the center of the space above the altar the figure of the one whose image
preserves the inscription of his name? And since we worship the one who is Son
by nature, why should we not worship in virtue of adoption the new name written
on a stone or gem?
[119] The holy alter on which we perform the votive sacrifices to almighty
God is by nature a common stone, no different from other slabs which adorn our
walls and pavements; but because it has been consecrated, it has received God’s
help and blessing, which make it the holy table. Again the bread that is
offered on it is indeed common bread; but when it has been consecrated by the
sacrament, it becomes in truth and is called the body of Christ. Likewise
ordinary wine is something worthy of existence even before it is blessed, but
after sanctification by the Spirit it becomes the blood of Christ. The image of
Christ, before it receives the figure of his form, is in the eyes of all merely
common wood; but when it receives the likeness that in every way deserves veneration,
it is sacred and terrible to demons, because that which is represented in it is
Christ. (The Acts of the Council of Constantinople of 869-70 [trans.
Richard Price; Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2022], 198-200)
Tenth Session:
That the image of our Lord Jesus Christ is to receive equal honour and
veneration as the book of the holy gospels and the form of the precious cross,
and likewise the images of his immaculate mother Mary the Mother of God and of
all the saints and heavenly ministers.
We decree that the sacred image of our Lord Jesus Christ, the redeemer
and saviour of all, is to be venerated with equal honour as is the book of the
holy gospels. [312] For just as all obtain salvation through the eloquence
of words contained in a book, so everyone, both the wise and the uneducated,
receive benefit, from what is readily at hand, through the iconic effect of
colours. For what speech in words teaches and recommends, so too does depiction
in colours. And it is right, according to both rational appropriateness and
ancient tradition, on account of the honour that is owed to the originals themselves,
that imitative images should be honoured and venerated as well, no less than
the sacred book of the holy gospels and the figure of the precious cross. If
anyone, therefore, does not venerate the image of Christ the Saviour, may he
not behold his form when he comes in his Father’s glory to be glorified and to
glorify his saints, but may he be excluded from the splendour of his communion.
Likewise, we paint the image of his immaculate mother Mary the Mother of God,
and in addition the images of the holy angels, just as divine Scripture
describes them in words, and we also honour and venerate those of the praiseworthy
apostles, prophets, martyrs and holy men, together with those of all the saints.
As for those who do not do so, may they be anathematized by the Father and the
Son and the Holy Spirit. (The Acts of the Council of Constantinople of
869-70 [trans. Richard Price; Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2022],
392-93)
Further Reading:
Answering Fundamentalist Protestants and Roman Catholic/Eastern Orthodox on Images/Icons
