Iconoclastic Controversy

7/30/2019 Iconoclastic Controversy

1/13

JASO N LEO N AR D 06 /03 /2013 C H U R C H H I STO R Y

C H U R C H H I S T O RY

T H E I C O N O C L A S T I C C O N T R O V E R S Y


2/13

Introduction

The beginning of the Iconoclastic (image-breaker) Controversy is multifaceted and

obscure1. In large part because prior to the Controversy the Christological argument for and

against icons (images) was not really developed.2

When the emperor of the Byzantine Empire,

Leo III, forbade image worship, he turned what the Second Council of Nicaea calls a royal

highway3 into an intersection of debate and division; instigating a controversy which would

take over one hundred years (725-842) to settle.

The Byzantine Backdrop

When Leo III took over the throne of the Byzantine empire in 717, the immediate task

was thwarting the Arab siege of Constantinople, the capitol of the empire. For more than twenty

years the Muslim forces had been advancing on Constantinople, laying it under siege once before

in the middle of the seventh century. The empire was also stricken from within, with a recent

history of short lived, despotic emperors. Leos defeat of the Muslim siege of Constantinople

marked a turning point for the Byzantine empire. The Muslim armies would not advance on

Constantinople for hundreds of years and the many internal reforms issued by Leo helped to

strengthen the empire.

It is in light of his securing Constantinople, and with it the Byzantine empire, in the face

of internal conflict and external struggle against Muslim forces that Iconoclasm comes into sharp

focus. In 727, Leo issued a prohibition from worshipping images. While the exact reasons for

Page 2

1 Cross, F. L., & Livingstone, E. A. Iconoclastic Controversy. The Oxford Dictionary of the ChristianChurch (3rd ed. rev.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. 820. Logos.

2Hussey, J.M. The Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. 34.Web. (as quoted by: http://theorthodoxlife.wordpress.com/2012/02/05/an-overview-of-the-iconoclastic-

controversy/)

3 Second Council of Nicaea. ewtn.com. ETWN. June 3, 2013. Section articulating history of beliefsabout icons and images. Web.
http://theorthodoxlife.wordpress.com/2012/02/05/an-overview-of-the-iconoclastic-controversy/http://theorthodoxlife.wordpress.com/2012/02/05/an-overview-of-the-iconoclastic-controversy/http://theorthodoxlife.wordpress.com/2012/02/05/an-overview-of-the-iconoclastic-controversy/http://theorthodoxlife.wordpress.com/2012/02/05/an-overview-of-the-iconoclastic-controversy/http://theorthodoxlife.wordpress.com/2012/02/05/an-overview-of-the-iconoclastic-controversy/


3/13

Leos edicts against image worship are unclear, they were influenced by a number of factors.

Prior to Leos volatile decrees against image worship he forced the baptism of a large number of

Jews, who abhorred image worship as a form of idolatry and a violation of the second command

of the decalogue.4 In light of this, Leo might have thought the removal of image worship would

make it easier for Jews and Muslims to convert to Christianity.5 A Paulician sect from the region

where Leo was born might also have contributed to his iconoclastic bent.6 The forces of the

Byzantine empire had also witnessed the destruction of many cities and buildings which were

thought to be protected by images or relics of saints. This provides us with a strong reason why

the Byzantine army, who had witnessed the untrustworthiness of relics and images for protection

in battle, were largely iconoclastic.7 Perhaps the most significant influence on Leos

iconoclasm, however, was the constant warring with the Muslims who counted the Christians as

an idolatrous group because of their relic and image worship.8 The forces under the

Mohommadean banner were fighting against every form of idolatry and understood Christians,

with their claiming Jesus to be God and their bowing down and praying to images, to be a

religion of idolatry. Every victory over the Christians fed the Islamic armies the idea that their

battle against every species of idolatry was just. Given that Leo had just thwarted the downfall

Page 3

4 Schaff, P., & Schaff, D. S. The Iconoclastic War, and the Synod of 754. History of the Christian Church.

New York: Charles Scribners Sons, 1910. Section 101. Logos.

5 Iconoclasm. newadvent.org. New Advent. June 3, 2013. Web.

6 An Overview of the Iconoclastic Controversy. theorthodoxlife.wordpress.com. Christ the King Mission

Station. June 3, 2013. Web.

7 Schaff, P., & Schaff, D. S. The Worship of Images. Literature. Different Theories. History of the

Christian Church. New York: Charles Scribners Sons, 1910. Section 100. Logos.

8 Crone, Patricia. Islam, Judeo-Christianity and Byzantine Iconoclasm hs.ias.edu. International Schoolof Historical Studies. 66-69. June 3, 2013. Web.


4/13

of the Constantinople ten years prior and was trying to fortify the empire, it is likely that he saw

Iconoclasm as a way to minimize the provocation of the Muslim armies.9

The Use of Icons & Images in the Christian World

Leos first prohibition against the worship of images was followed up three years later

(730) with a command to remove or destroy all of the images. He inaugurated this edict with the

destruction of an image of Christ which hung over the imperial gate. 10 This war on images

roused the anger of monasteries, the common people, and the Pope in the West.

Due to the increasing ubiquity of saint worship and relic infatuation, along with the

ongoing conversion of pagans into Christianity, images (or icons) played an important role in the

life of the Church. Dead saints, understood to be accessible and willing to pray and offer

blessing, were recognized as intermediate examples for the believers. Since the early second

century bones of martyrs and saints were recognized as treasures11 and the belief that they

offered some mystical powers or, at least, better access to the throne room of God was defended

from select accounts from the Bible.12 For the illiterate masses, images of the saints (along with

images of Jesus, Mary, the apostles, and martyrs) were simply one step removed from the relics

and were used as an aid in prayers.13 Along with being a help for prayer, these images were

Page 4

9 Schaff, P., & Schaff, D. S. The Iconoclastic War, and the Synod of 754. History of the Christian Church.New York: Charles Scribners Sons, 1910. Section 101. Logos.

10 Schaff.

11 The Martyrdom of Polycarp. earlychristianwritings.com. June 3, 2013. Section 18:2. Web.

12 2 Kings 13:21, Acts 5:15; 19:12

13 Enns, Paul P. The Iconoclastic Controversy. The Moody Handbook of Theology. Chicago: MoodyPress, 1989. 433. Logos.


5/13

thought of as educational14: a sort ofbookorBible for common people who could not read 15. So

prevalent was the use of images that when the Byzantine emperor issued his iconoclastic

demands, Pope Gregory II is noted for saying, [A]ll people in the West detest the emperors

action and will never consent to destroy their images at his command.16 Although there is

evidence of iconoclastic murmurings prior to 727, and no major synod or council had been called

to discuss the orthodox use of images, saint worship and the use of images in worship and prayer

was commonplace and largely uncontested in medieval churches in both the East and West.17

The Synod of 754

When Leo, then, demanded that everyone cease worshipping images and subsequently

began destroying the images, it is not surprising that the leader of the Roman church took issue

with the emperor. Gregory II (713-731) exchanged heated letters with Leo; threatening

excommunication while Leo threatened attack. The next Pope, Gregory III (731-741) held a

synod declaring all iconoclasts excommunicated from the church.18 Unmoved, Leos son

Constantine V (741-775) was an even greater force of iconoclasm.

Constantines long rule was marked by a vigorous iconoclasm and stamped with the

Synod of 754. He held a council in Constantinople, declared it ecumenical, and sought to

formally unite the church against image worship. Leaning heavily on the second commandment

and passages of Scripture condemning idolatry, condemned and forbade the public and private

Page 5

14 Janzen, Waldemar. Exodus. Believers Church Bible Commentary. Waterloo, ON; Scottdale, PA: HeraldPress, 2000. Exodus 20:18-21. Logos.

15 Schaff, P., & Schaff, D. S. The Worship of Images. Literature. Different Theories. History of theChristian Church. New York: Charles Scribners Sons, 1910. Section 100. Logos.


17 Schaff.



6/13

worship of sacred images on pain of deposition and excommunication.19 Constantines wrath

against the iconodules (those in favor of image worship) was unrelenting and cruel. He was

adored by iconoclasts while labeled a heretic and even a second Mohammed (whose war on

images and idolatry had ravaged the Eastern empire) by those in favor of image worship.20

It is important to first understand that no one, on either side of the argument, was arguing

that the honor belonging to God was to be shared with anything or anyone else. Both the

icondules and the iconoclasts believed that God alone was to be worshipped. The question was

whether or not a derivative, or lesser, honoring of images of Christ or the saints was confusing

worship and practicing idolatry. The iconoclasts argued that images of Christ were not Christ

Himself, and neither were the images of the Saints the Saints themselves. Worshipping these

images in any way, then, was misplaced worship and a form of idolatry. Theses arguments were

were not persuasive enough to quell image worship.

The iconoclastic defense had major inconsistencies and weaknesses which undermined

their persuasive abilities. First, the iconoclasts stopped short of abolishing all images. They held

firmly to the idea that the Eucharist was the only image which could be worshiped and revered

because it was the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ.21 As they removed the images of

Christ coins and gates and walls, they often replaced them with a cross.22 The iconoclasts

struggle to oust forms of idolatry were evident even in the fact that the tomb of Constantine V

Page 6

19 Schaff, P., & Schaff, D. S. The Iconoclastic War, and the Synod of 754. History of the Christian

Church. New York: Charles Scribners Sons, 1910. Section 101. Logos.

20 Schaff.

21 Breckenridge, James D. The Iconoclasts Image of Christ. The University of Chicago PressVol. 11,No. 2 (1972): 3. JSTOR.

22 Breckenridge. 6.


7/13

was a popular place of prayer for them.23 Though the tomb is not an image, and relics were left

largely untouched by the Synod of 754, this demonstrates the very real desire for Christians on

both side of the iconoclastic struggle to use various forms of mediation and authority in their

faith. While iconoclasm rightly worried about idolatry and appropriate worship, it only

succeeded at tearing down what the monks and masses used for worship and replaced it with

nothing. The iconoclasts attempted to white-wash an empire and this was its chief defect24.

The Iconodule Response at Nicaea

The iconoclastic controversy was far from over when Constantines son, Leo IV died.

His wife, Irene, led the Byzantine empire as regent for her son. She had a secret devotion to

image worship and when she took over the throne, she had the power to reverse the course of the

past fifty years. Elevating faithful image worshippers to high positions in society and

proclaiming tolerance, she is responsible for convening another council in 787 to discuss the

iconoclastic controversy.25

The Synod of 754 at Constantinople was not attended by patriarchs of Jerusalem,

Antioch, or Alexandria and Pope at the time refused to attend. The council Irene convened in

Nicaea had representatives from each of these places and was instigated with a much different

focus: Pope Hadrian I sent his representatives only on the condition that the Synod of 754 was

was condemned.26 This council at Nicaea was intended to overturn the iconoclastic decrees and

establish an ecumenical, authoritative endorsement for image worship.

Page 7

23 Schaff.



25 Schaff, P., & Schaff, D. S. The Restoration of Image-Worship by the Seventh Oecumenical Council,

787. History of the Christian Church. New York: Charles Scribners Sons, 1910. Section 102. Logos.

26 Cross, F. L., & Livingstone, E. A. Nicaea, Second Council of. The Oxford Dictionary of the ChristianChurch (3rd ed. rev.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. 1152. Logos.


8/13

First establishing their trust in previous ecumenical councils and that the Synod of 754

was heretical and not ecumenical, the council was free to establish what they believed was the

proper understanding of images. They articulated that tradition and history of church was filled

with the Holy Spirit and that image worship was so common and useful that it was a royal

highway they were stepping in to the midst of.27 The council argued for a veneration of images

and icons and relics and understood this veneration to equal veneration for the person whom the

thing represented.28 Anathemas were declared upon anyone who does not confess that Christ can

be represented in his humanity, does not accept art as a valid means for representing evangelical

scenes, does not salute those representations as standing for the Jesus or the Saints, and anyone

who rejects the tradition (written or not) of the church.29

The councils arguments were defended with Scriptural examples of images being used in

the Tabernacle - particularly the Cherubim - to point beyond themselves to the glory of God

(particularly Exodus 25:17-22, Ezekiel 41:1, 15:19, Hebrews 9:1-5) and also the testimony of

alleged miracles performed by images.30

The council was closed with an image brought in and

everyone present kissing it.

The Tension Continues

Just as the Synod of 754 did not quell the image worship in the empire, the Second

Council of Nicaea did not oust iconoclasm. Fractious persecution marked both sides of the

debate with volatile regime changes in the East, armies largely iconoclastic, and the people and

Page 8

27 Second Council of Nicaea. ewtn.com. ETWN. June 3, 2013. Introduction. Web.

28 Second Council of Nicaea.

29 Second Council of Nicaea. ewtn.com. ETWN. June 3, 2013. Section on Anathemas. Web.

30 Schaff, P., & Schaff, D. S. The Restoration of Image-Worship by the Seventh Oecumenical Council,787. History of the Christian Church. New York: Charles Scribners Sons, 1910. Section 102. Logos.


9/13

monks largely devoted to image worship.31 For fifty five years the ebbs and flows of the debate

increased the division between the East and West and strained unity in the Byzantine empire. It

was not until 842, when another Synod at Constantinople reenacted the decrees of the seven

ecumenical councils, restored the worship of images, pronounced the anathema upon all

iconoclasts and commemorated the event with a celebration on the first Sunday of Lent that the

Iconoclast Controversy was finally settled. With minor struggles over the language of the

councils still to follow, particularly in the Turkish empire, for the next hundred years, the future

of image worship in the Eastern and Roman churches was settled.

The Impact of the Iconoclastic Controvery

The most obvious impact of Iconoclastic Controversy was the increased devotion to

images, relics, and saints after the ninth century.32 Before the iconoclasts raised their voices,

image worship was wide-spread but not authoritatively established by the leadership of the

church. Now an ecumenical council has declared anathema on any iconoclast - bolstering the

faith of the people in images and saints.33 By the end of the tenth century, any opposition to the

decrees of the Second Council of Nicaea virtually ceased.34

The ecumenical councils of the first seven hundred years of the Christian church dealt

largely with the theology of the person of Jesus and the nature of the Triune God. The seventh,

the Second Council of Nicaea, and the surrounding Iconoclastic Controversy had few

Page 9

31 Schaff, P., & Schaff, D. S. Iconoclastic Reaction, and Final Triumph of Image-Worship, a.d. 842.

History of the Christian Church. New York: Charles Scribners Sons, 1910. Section 103. Logos.

32 Cross, F. L., & Livingstone, E. A. Icon. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (3rd ed. rev.).

Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. 820. Logos.

33 Schaff.

34 Fahlbusch.


10/13

repercussions35 on theology. It had much more significance in the practical results of liturgy

and expression of worship than it did on any major theological tenant. As already discussed,

both sides of the controversy agreed that there was a particular worship owed to God alone. So

while the the Iconoclastic Controversy had little effect on theological ideas about God or man, it

had the ironic effect of solidifying image worship in much of the church: becoming a fixed part

of Eastern Orthodoxy36 and it has remained a mostly unchanged practice in the Roman Catholic

Church for the past twelve hundred years.

Icons & The Reformation

Seven hundred years after the Iconoclastic Controversy was finally settled, the

reformation brought the next attack against images. Although not a major focus of schism

between the Catholic and Protestant churches, saint worship and the use of images was still a

dividing line. Image worship was a derivative and obvious ramification of saint worship.37 Even

the iconoclasts prior to the reformation revered and venerated the saints and image worship

spread naturally with their worship.38 When the Second Council of Nicaea sought to address the

challenge of the iconoclasts, their major tool for victory was in the delineation of worship

through vocabulary. The Council articulated that there is a worship due to God alone, a lesser

kind of worship (veneration) due to the saints, and a higher form of veneration due to Mary.39

Page 10

35 Cross, F. L., & Livingstone, E. A. Iconoclastic Controversy. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian

Church (3rd ed. rev.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. 820. Logos.

36 Cross, F. L., & Livingstone, E. A. Nicaea, Second Council of. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian

Church (3rd ed. rev.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. 1152. Logos.



38Schaff.

39 Second Council of Nicaea. ewtn.com. ETWN. June 3, 2013. Definition of Veneration. Web.


11/13

The reformers of the sixteenth century did away with saint worship and so, with it, the fuel for

any image worship.

Though the reformers were varied in their use of imagery for education and adornment

purposes - with some aligning more with the Catholic use of images (Luther) and some more

firmly iconoclastic (Zwingli)40 - they were alike in their understanding that saints were not to be

worshipped. Calvin articulated clearly how the reformers felt about the Catholics veneration of

saints. It is plain that the worship which Papists pay to saints differs in no respect from the

worship of God: for this worship is paid without distinction.41 Although the Catholics defined

the worship with different language, Calvin argued that if the difference is only in language and

not in practice, it is no real difference at all.

It is no mere coincidence that a sixteenth century which saw the invention of the printing

press, the translation of the Bible into common vernacular, and the emphasis of the reformers on

Biblical literacy and authority were the backdrop for a rejection of saint worship. The common

people in the sixteenth century had more access to the Scriptures and a greater opportunity to

develop a comprehensive theology from the texts than ever before. The need for images as more

than adornment was shrinking and the opportunity to learn directly from the Scriptures was

increasing.

Conclusion

Imagery can never be entirely done away with. Even as some reformers championed the

Scriptures over and against imagery and pomp, the Scriptures themselves are ripe with imagery.

Everything God has made has a degree of glory and honor due to it (1 Corinthians 15:40-41).

Page 11

40 Janzen, Waldemar. Exodus. Believers Church Bible Commentary. Waterloo, ON; Scottdale, PA: HeraldPress, 2000. Exodus 20:18-21. Logos.

41 Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. 1.12.2. Web.


12/13

God has given his people objects which point to other things (Hebrews 8:5). Jesus even

insinuated that people could believe in God on account of signs and miracles (John 14:11).

Images, in other words, are not the problem and idolatry cannot be eliminated simply by

removing a particular form of art from culture.42 The iconoclastic desire to eradicate all forms of

idolatry would find support in the Scriptures and the history of the Church, but not because

images themselves are bad. So too, the iconodule recognition that we have things before around

us which can point to other things - to serve as shadows or copies of greater things would find

support in Scripture. The problem, which the Synod of 754 tried to address, is that there is a

worship which is due only to God and not to anything else. We should have no other gods before

Him and there is only one mediator between God and Man (1 Timothy 2:5), Jesus Christ. This

Jesus was neither an iconoclast - for He created more images and signs for the Church - nor an

icnonodule - for He needed nothing outside of God to worship God in Spirit and in Truth. If the

church can not live in the tension of following Jesus, it will always surrender to an iconoclastic

or iconodule temptation.

Page 12

42 Janzen.


13/13

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Articles

Breckenridge, James D. The Iconoclasts Image of Christ. The University of Chicago Press

Vol. 11, No. 2 (1972): 3-8. JSTOR.

Books

Cross, F. L., & Livingstone, E. A. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (3rd ed. rev.).

Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. Logos.

Enns, Paul P. The Iconoclastic Controversy. The Moody Handbook of Theology. Chicago:

Moody Press, 1989. 433. Logos.

Fahlbusch, Erwin and Geoffrey William Bromiley. The Encyclopedia of Christianity. GrandRapids, MI; Leiden, Netherlands: Wm. B. Eerdmans; Brill, 1999-2003.

Janzen, Waldemar.Exodus. Believers Church Bible Commentary. Waterloo: Herald Press, 2000.

Exodus 20:18-21. Logos.

Schaff, P., & Schaff, D. S.History of the Christian Church. New York: Charles Scribners Sons,

1910. Logos.

Websites

Second Council of Nicaea. ewtn.com. ETWN. June 3, 2013.

Page 13

Iconoclastic Controversy

Documents

Transcript of Iconoclastic Controversy