Maria wrote:Thank you for all this research, Cyprian.
You're welcome, Maria. Yes, the Fr. Lev, who made the assertion that it is a heretical teaching to identify the Ancient of Days in Daniel 7 as God the Father, mentioned in the letter by Fr. Seraphim to Fr. Neketas (Palassis), protopresbyter of St. Nectarios in Seattle, noted for publishing the OCW (Orthodox Christian Witness), is the notorious Deacon Lev Puhalo, deposed by ROCOR, and now the retired OCA Archbishop Lazar.
I agree Cyprian. I encourage you to seek a blessing to write a book on the matter. You are very lucid in your replies to me.
Cyprian is so BRIGHT - but then so are you, JosephDiGrande. I enjoy reading both of your posts very much - I learn A LOT.
Cyprian should write a book - but under a pseudonym or he will have trouble.
Is there an English translation of the Councils of 1667 and 1776 on the issue of ikons of God the Father and the Trinity? Is there any record of the proceedings that preceded the decisions made there?
Thanks for any information on this.
jdigrande wrote:Is there an English translation of the Councils of 1667 and 1776 on the issue of ikons of God the Father and the Trinity? Is there any record of the proceedings that preceded the decisions made there?
Thanks for any information on this.
It does not really matter about obtaining such translations as those were only local councils.
Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me a sinner.
Since this theologumen concerning the Holy Trinity Icon was not resolved by an Ecumenical Council, nor need it be, this theological matter can remain undefined. There is no reason that the deposed Met. Kyrikos and his lay theologian should be pontificating theologumen.
Studying theology and disputing theologumen will not save us, but such disputes can lead to pride and arrogance. Ultimately, that was the devil's undoing, wasn't it? Trying to convert others by teaching such theologumen can lead these converts to confusion and apostasy. I have seen this occur on facebook, and it is not a pretty sight.
Ultimately, we should keep the faith simple, pray unceasingly, live the Holy Faith with faith, hope, and charity, and only emphasize the unchanging faith as taught by Christ to His Apostles.
Without a repentant and loving heart, one cannot be saved.
There is another angle to this problem that I think is worth posting.
The basic ikonographic setup of a typical Orthodox Church from St. Justinian on is that Christ is portrayed at Pantocrator in the dome.
The Theotokos or Christ is portrayed behind the altar. In Sinai the Transfiguration is portrayed. No where is the ikon of the Trinity portrayed either as a group ikon or God the Father alone as Ancient of Days or any other visions of the Old Testament to my knowledge.
The theology of the Trinity was worked out from 325-381. The Theotokos in 430 and the natures and wills of Christ in the 5th-7th centuries. You would think that there would be an explosion of Trinity paintings and ikon'd churches as a result.
The Orthodox stopped crossing themselves with the right index finger on the forehead (which they did for 300 years) and started crossing themselves with either three fingers (Mar Savva) or two fingers (Studium) in the East and I am not how they crossed themselves in the West from 325-1000. All ikons and priest/bishops blessed with two fingers and still do.
But there are no Trinity ikons portrayed in large ikonography in churches of any size. Cyprian points out one set of statues in 4th century Rome and examples from manuscripts in 1059 and Mt. Athos (Dionysius) which had a functioning Benedictine monastery there at the time.
You would think that God the Father would take the place of Christ Pantocrator in every church but it did not happen.
I have one theory as to why this was the case. There was a very real underground movement to keep Hellenism alive from 325-1453. Plethon was writing a Liturgy for Zeus in 1453 and the Church let him get away with it.
Homer was imbibed along with the Gospels and philosophers/scientists for every educated citizen of 2nd Rome. And who is central to Homer and Greek mythology?: Zeus or Jupiter for the Romans.
Homer was a central part of every education of every erudite child. Homer and his gods/goddesses (pagan demons) were the action heroes for 2nd Rome. If 2nd Rome had had computer games- they would dominate the minds of young people then.
Portrayals of Zeus in stone were still all over the Roman Empire throughout this period and I think the Church had a natural reticence and antipathy about bringing large ikons of God the Father into Church in that the normal people would associate Him with Zeus.
Of course Zeus was revered and worshipped as a god (the chief god) and his essence was believed to be contained in every statue of Zeus that existed. That is why they were called idols. He was portrayed as an old man.
That is just a theory. I might be wrong but there must have been a big reason that God the Father or the Trinity is not present on the walls of our churches either in mosaic or fresco.
This entire thread has dealt with ikonoclasm and whether Monk Kirykos according to the GOC of Archbishop Stephanos (or Met Kirykos to the members of his Church) is one.
If he is an ikonoclast, then he should be avoided.
If he has been condemned as an ikonoclast, why has he not been excommunicated by the GOC?
He is still referred to as a schismatic monk on this site. When one is excommunicated, then does he not get defrocked as a monk and becomes a simple heretical layman by the GOC?
Of course our salvation is made up of many demands from Christ and the Church, one of which is to adhere to the 7th Council and its canons.
