Tuesday Bible Study (5/19/20)

The Question of the Real Presence:

Transubstation and Other "Theories" of the Eucharist in Early Medieval Theology

c. 850 A.D.

The Tassilo Chalice, c. 780, Anglo-Saxon
design, now at Kresmuenster Abbey, Germany

Scriptural Starting Places:

Matthew 26:26-29 -  And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.” Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you.  For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.  But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father’s kingdom.”

John 6:51, 53 -  "I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world.” Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you."

1 Corinthians 10:16 - The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?

1 Corinthians 11:26-30 -  For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes. Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.  But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup.  For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep.


Definitions: 

Transubstantiation: Change of one substance into another. Term for [the Roman Catholic] view that in the Eucharistic rite the substance or basic reality of bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of Jesus Christ, while the outward appearances of bread and wine are not affected. 

Consubstantiation: View, falsely charged to Lutheranism, that bread and body form 1 substance ("a third substance”) in Communion (similarly wine and blood) or that body and blood are present, like bread and wine, in a natural manner.

Real Presence: Belief that Christ's body and blood are truly and substantially present in, with, and under the elements of bread and wine in the Lord's Supper. Also referred to as the "Sacramental Union," this teaching affirms that communicants partake of both bread/wine and Body/Blood at the same time. The prepositions "in, with, under" do not denote a metaphysics of the Sacrament, but rather an inability to describe the exact nature of the Mystery and pin down its operation. 

>> These definitions come from the "Lutheran Cyclopedia." Lutherans are often mislabeled as "consubstantialists" which is inaccurate. There is not a third, compound substance formed at the Lord's Supper, but the salvific Body and Blood of Christ is received simultaneously as the physical bread and wine. The prepositions "in, with, and under" are simply indicating the great mystery that takes place; we believe and trust that Christ is really, actually, truly present, but we can't understand everything about the mode of His presence. It happens sacramentally, mystically, supernaturally, salvifically here at the altar. 


The Eucharistic Controversy: Paschasius Radbertus vs. Ratramnus 

Corbie Abbey, outside of Amiens, founded around 660

Around the year 831, the learned and influential abbot of Corbie in northern France produced the first, full-length treatise in the Western Church on the doctrine of the Lord's Supper. This treatise, called De Corpore et Sanguine Domini ("The Lord's Body and Blood") is now Paschasius Radbertus' most well-known work, and it proved to be highly influential as well as very divisive in the history of medieval Christianity. Its arguments for the doctrine of "transubstantiation" set into motion the first of the so-called "Eucharistic Controversies" in the West. Radbertus most likely wrote this treatise for the monks at Corbie. Soon, the chief teacher of the monks, a man named Ratramnus, offered a different interpretation of the Eucharist. 

Ratramnus had an excellent relationship with King Charles the Bald (a grandson of Charlemagne, reined 875 to 877 as Holy Roman Emperor). The emperor had visited Corbie Abbey sometime in 843 and had commissioned the learned monk to write a treatise in response to Radbertus' position.

It would seem that at the time there were two different opinions on the Lord's Supper that existed alongside each other: Radbertus' literal view ("transubstantiation") and Ratramnus' figurative or mystical view. Both monks believed that when Christ said, "This is my body," the word "is" signifies that the Body of the Lord is truly present. Where they different is in the mode of presence. 

Radbertus occasionally sounds Capernaitic in his understanding. This term is taken from John 6:26 - 58 and refers to an almost cannibalistic chewing and swallowing of Jesus' flesh just as other food might be chewed and swallowed. Radbertus asserts that the elements at the Eucharist are transformed by the power of the Holy Spirit so the sacrifice of the Lamb's body and blood can take place again. 

Ratramnus at times seems to understand Holy Communion in a spiritual or symbolical sense, as if the eating and drinking of the Body and Blood happen in the heart of the believer when he or she trusts the Word of the Lord with faith. In this he prefigures the Calvinists and Zwinglians of the 16th century who taught something similar. 

What should be emphasized, however, is that both monks unequivocally state that the Eucharist offers grace and forgiveness of sins, and that it joins Baptism as a mystical sacrament in the Church.  Neither monk understands a sacrament as a "mere" symbol; they differ as to the extent of what a symbol means. In Ratramnus' view, a symbol is a veil, a truth is a direct utterance. Therefore a symbol would be Christ's teaching in John 15 where He calls Himself the "vine" and His disciples the "branches." If this were understood literally, it would lead to a ridiculous and untrue picture! However, believers are to understand it mystically, and by reaching out to it in faith, the Holy Spirit leads to understanding. The Sacrament works in much the same way; the Body and Blood are veiled, hidden from our eyes "under" (he uses this preposition; it's "sub" in Latin) the elements on the altar. 

Radbertus' argument is less clear and organized than Ratramnus'. He represents an older, monastic and devotional approach while Ratramnus presents a more scholarly and systematic approach. Both views exerted influence in future theology, though Radbertus' transubstantiation became the standard view, with further clarifications. 


Samples of the Arguments

Radbertus (transubstantiation): "Yet these [elements] must be believed to be fully, after the consecration, nothing but Christ's flesh and blood." 

Ratramnus (figurative/mystical): "But that bread which through the ministry of the priest comes to be Christ's body exhibits one thing outwardly to human sense, and it proclaims another thing inwardly to the minds of the faithful. Outwardly it has the shape of bread which it had before, the color is exhibited, the flavor is received, but inwardly something far different, much more precious, much more excellent, becomes known, because something heavenly, something divine, that is, Christ's body, is revealed, which is not beheld, or received, or consumed by the fleshly senses but in the gaze of the believing soul." 

Radbertus (transubstantiation): "[It is] truth therefore, when the body and blood of Christ is created by the power of the Spirit in His word out of the substance of bread and wine; but a figure when , through the agency of the priest at the altar, outwardly performing another thing, in memory of His sacred Passion, the Lamb is daily sacrificed as He once was for all." 

Ratramnus (figurative/mystical): "For the very One who now in the church, with omnipotent power, spiritually changes the bread and wine into the flesh of his body and the stream of his blood, then also invisibly made the manna given from heaven to be his body and the water which had been poured forth from the rock to be His very blood." 

Engraving of Paschasius Radbertus

The Eucharist in Orthodox Lutheran Theology

The Formula of Concord is a masterpiece. In it the late reformers systematically organize the tenets of Christian doctrine and present them in a clear and uncomplicated way. The writing is characterized by an insistence on faith and tension - that is, leaving riddles and problems unresolved. 

For example, in the Formula of Concord: Epitome, Article VII paragraph 6 we read: "We believe, teach, and confess that the body and blood of Christ are received not only spiritually through faith but also orally with the bread and wine, though not in Capernaitic fashion but rather in a supernatural, heavenly way because of the sacramental union of the elements. The words of Christ clearly demonstrate this..."  The reformers conclude this article by stating, "Human reason and understanding cannot grasp this, but our understanding must be taken captive by obedience to Christ here as in all other articles of faith. Such a mystery cannot be grasped except by faith and is revealed alone in the Word." 

In all of the Lutheran writings in the Reformation, there is an emphasis not on the priest's words or the recipient's faith, but on Christ's speech. It is Christ's promise at the Last Supper that holds today in the Lord's Supper. It is Christ's Word that confirms and sanctifies the elements. We bring forth the memory of Christ's words today and hold to them in trust, faith, and hope. 

The altar at Martin Luther's church, the "Stadtkirche" of Wittenberg.
Pictured above the altar is Cranach's famous altarpiece (photo by Adam).

Home Bible Study - Psalm 141

Click HERE to get a copy of this Home Bible Study on Psalm 141.

Tuesday Bible Study (5/12/20)

Alcuin and the Beauty of Wisdom:

Education and the Christian in the Early Middle Ages

800 A.D.

A manuscript from around 830. The middle figure is
Alcuin. He and Rabanus Maurus are dedicating a book to
Archbishop Odgar of Mainz.

Scriptural Starting Places: 

Proverbs 1:7 - "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction."

Proverbs 8:32-36 - "And now, O sons, listen to me: blessed are those who keep my ways. Hear instruction and be wise, and do not neglect it. Blessed is the one who listens to me, watching daily at my gates, waiting beside my doors. For whoever finds me finds life and obtains favor from the Lord, but he who fails to find me injures himself; all who hate me love death." 

Ecclesiastes 7:12 - "For the protection of wisdom is like the protection of money, and the advantage of knowledge is that wisdom preserves the life of him who has it."

Sirach 24:12 - "I [Wisdom] took root in an honored people, in the portion of the Lord, His heritage." 

Wisdom of Solomon 6:17-21 - "The beginning of wisdom is the most sincere desire for instruction, and concern for instruction is love of her, and love of her is the keeping of her laws, and giving heed to her laws is assurance of immortality, and immortality brings one near to God; so the desire for wisdom leads to a kingdom. Therefore if you delight in thrones and scepters, O monarchs over the peoples, honor wisdom, so that you may reign forever."

> Wisdom (in Hebrew, Chokmâh, in Greek, σοφῐ́ᾱ - sophia) is a significant theme in the Old Testament. Wisdom is neither experience nor piety, but is a saving knowledge of God and His ways for His creation. This saving knowledge is imparted by old to young, one to another. It is the responsibility of families to raise the next generation in the wisdom and fear of God.  For early Christians, the Wisdom identified by Solomon is none other than the Word, the λόγος who was made flesh for the sake of the world.  Education for believers is therefore a "passing along" of this Wisdom through worship, witness, and formal learning. 


Background

Charlemagne (748-814), the son of Pepin the Short, ruled as Frankish king before gaining more and more power over the Lombards in Italy. In 774 he triumphed and ruled over a large area including modern day France. In 800 he was crowned "Emperor of the Romans" by Pope Leo III on Christmas Day at St Peter's Basilica in Rome. Charlemagne is one of the most significant figures of the early Middle Ages; his reign marks a renaissance in learning, art, and culture. He fought back the Muslim armies in Spain, expanded his empire, and established many important, new monastic schools in his kingdom. 

At this time, due to Charlemagne's keen interest in education, Christian and pagan texts began to be circulated widely after being copied with great skill. Charlemagne reached to all corners of his empire to find the best teachers and scholars for himself, his children, and his court. Among them were Alcuin of York, Theodulf - a Visigoth, Paul the Deacon, Peter of Pisa, Paulinus of Aquileia, Angilbert, Angilram, Einhard, and Waldo of Reichenau. Of all these scholars, the one who is best-known today is Alcuin. 

Charlamagne also increased the number of libraries and scriptoriums (writing and copying workshops) throughout his realm, and established a library in his own palace as well as in the old city of Jerusalem. 

Emperor Charlemagne by Albrecht
Dürer, 1511-1513

Alcuin

Alcuin of York (c. 735-804) was called by a chronicler writing after his death, "The most learned man anywhere to be found." Born in York and educated there by the archbishop, Alcuin rose to prominence in Northumbria (modern day northern England) and was invited by Charlemagne to join his court. 

Becoming the master of the palace school at Aachen, Alcuin personally educated (or supervised the education) of Charlemagne's children as well as the emperor himself. He revamped the curricula of the school to include the Trivium and Quadrivium disciplines- the seven liberal arts of grammar, dialectic, rhetoric, mathematics, music, astronomy, and geometry. The school was nicknamed "The School of Master Alcuin" so great was his influence. 

Alcuin has left us numerous treatises, commentaries, poems and letters. At the end of his life he served as abbot at the Marmoutier Abbey outside of Tours, in Western France. He continued leading his students and monks in copying texts until his death. 

Wherever he was, the great scholar sought the best for his students. In an interesting letter to Charlemagne dating from the late 790s, Alcuin writes,

"This is a matter which has not escaped your most noble notice, how through all the pages of Holy Scripture we are urged to learn wisdom. In toiling toward the happy life nothing is more lofty, nothing more pleasant, nothing bolder against vices, nothing more praiseworthy in every place of dignity; and moreover, according to the words of philosophers, nothing is more essential to government, nothing more helpful in leading a moral life, than the beauty of wisdom, the praise of learning and the advantages of scholarship... O Lord King, exhort the youths who are in your excellency’s palace to learn wisdom with all their might, and the gain it by daily toil while they are yet in the flush of youth, so that they may be deemed worthy to grow grey in honour, and by the help of wisdom may reach everlasting happiness. But I, according to the measure of my little talent, shall not be slothful to sow the seed of wisdom among your servants in this region. Mindful of the saying, ‘In the morning sow thy seed and in the evening withhold not thy hand: for thou knowest not whether shall prosper, either this or that, or whether they both shall be alike good.”

Later Alcuin quotes Jerome (c. 347-420) in saying, 

“The old age of those who have trained their youth in honest arts and have meditated in the law of the Lord day and night, becomes more learned with age, more polished by use, wiser by the lapse of time, and reaps the sweetest fruits of studies long grown old.”


Significance

"The Carolingian Renaissance" is a major moment in European history and educational history. A common script (Carolingian Minuscule) became the standard "font" for the Latin-language kingdom; monastic schools were established and flourished; new libraries abounded; texts were copied and distributed, making many writings available for the first time; and everywhere, education was encouraged by the great emperor who loved learning himself. 

Education is a controversial and divisive subject today. With the amoral "Common Core State Standards" and the removal of the last traces of religion in American schools, education is far removed from the "instruction in Wisdom" that Solomon encouraged. During Alcuin's time there was no question that education involved sacred and secular reading, developing pious and well-balanced students who were able to wisely govern lands, adjudicate disputes, and themselves educate the populace. The telos or goal of education was nothing less than heaven, via a well-ordered life on earth. Education was the means of developing reasoning subjects who defended the land with sword or law as they defended the faith with pen or sermon. In the West today we have split "secular" learning from "sacred" learning. This is something we've come to accept as inevitable, possibly even healthy! But is it? What do other Christian voices suggest?

Stretching into the later Middle Ages and even into the Renaissance, the Carolingian view of education basically prevailed; the Trivium and Quadrivium components of a liberal, classical education were taught, and Christian instruction or catechesis was woven into every element of such an education. Martin Luther himself assumed that education for the young was absolutely necessary for a thriving, Christian population. Like Alciun, he supported no other "model" than that of the Trivium and Quadrivium, with Theology as the "Queen of the Sciences" at the university.  Since God Himself is the source and goal of all learning, the completion of formal education at university (for clergy, lawyers, and physicians) was marked by a special emphasis on Theology itself. Luther believed monastic schools had declined and advocated for strong state schools, with curricula determined by pastors and teaching provided by learned men. 

Erasmus, Luther's contemporary, saw the goal of all education to be a moral, Christian life. Education that is not concerned with or moving toward ethics is not education, by the great humanist's definition. He believed that by the careful study of the Bible (in its original languages) and the classic Greek and Latin authors, a society would be filled with moral and rational people. 

Later Protestant theorists such as John Amos Comenius in the 17th century echoed Luther; education was to be broad, classical, religious, and moral. Comenius saw education as the central task of the Church, preparing our world for righteousness and dispelling the darkness of ignorance. 

The question for the 21st century is, "What is "education" apart from Wisdom, apart from God, apart from the Church?" 

Charlemagne et ses Leudes, a statue in Paris from 1878

Home Bible Study - Psalm 91

Click HERE to get a copy of the Home Bible Study for Psalm 91

Home Bible Study - Psalm 64

Click HERE to download a copy of this Bible Study on Psalm 64!!

Home Bible Study - Psalm 19

Click HERE to download a copy of this Bible Study of Psalm 19!

Tuesday Bible Study (4/21/20)

The Question of Images, Pt. I

The Second Council of Nicaea

+ 787 A.D. +

6th century icon of Mary and the Christ child
surrounded by saints, St Catherine's Monastery
Sinai

Scriptural Starting Places

Exodus 20:4-5 -  "You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me." 

Exodus 35:30-35 - "Then Moses said to the people of Israel, 'See, the Lord has called by name Bezalel the son of Uri, son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah;  and he has filled him with the Spirit of God, with skill, with intelligence, with knowledge, and with all craftsmanship, to devise artistic designs, to work in gold and silver and bronze,  in cutting stones for setting, and in carving wood, for work in every skilled craft.  And he has inspired him to teach, both him and Oholiab the son of Ahisamach of the tribe of Dan.  He has filled them with skill to do every sort of work done by an engraver or by a designer or by an embroiderer in blue and purple and scarlet yarns and fine twined linen, or by a weaver—by any sort of workman or skilled designer.'"

Genesis 1:27 - "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them." 

Acts 17:29 - "Being then God's offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man."

Terms

Icon: a painted or carved image of Jesus, Mary, or a saint (from εἰκών (eikṓn), "figure, portrait, likeness, pattern"

Iconoclast (Iconomachist): an opponent of icons (from εἰκονοκλάστης , eikonoklástēs, "an image breaker"); from εἰκονομαχία ("fighting against icons")

Iconodule (Iconophile): a supporter or lover of icons, from icon + -dule (δοῦλος, doulos, "slave, servant"); from icon + -phile (φῐ́λος , philos, "beloved, dear")

Worship: in Greek, λατρεία (latreia), "service rendered to a god, worship" (slightly different than προσκυνέω (proskuneó) "to bow, to bend the knee in homage, to worship"

Veneration: in Greek, the verb for venerate is τῑμᾰ́ω (tīmáō), "to pay honor to, to venerate, to revere"

Background

Colorful images of Christ, his mother, and the saints adorned churches, monasteries, and shrines throughout the Christian world. Whether painted on wooden panels or plaster walls, images of holy people were part of the popular piety of virtually all Christians. Such images served more than just to decorate empty spaces; they lifted the mind of the worshiper from earthly things and directed his mind to heavenly realities. Icons served didactic purposes: teaching the faithful the stories of Bible heroes, saints, and martyrs; and they also served devotional purposes: providing focal points during worship or prayer for love, devotion, and veneration. 

Scholars are not sure when the first icons were created, but presumably they have been around since the earliest days of the Church. A handful of early Christian writers such as Eusebius voiced fears of idolatry connected to images, but for the most part, Christians in the West and East naturally took to decorating sacred spaces, vestments, and reliquaries with images of Christ and the saints. 

With the Arab Muslim invasions of Palestine, Syria, Egypt, and Asia Minor, the Christian world saw the unstoppable might of a foe which rejected all images. Was it Islam that affected Byzantine Emperor Leo III the Isaurian (reigned 717 - 741)? It's unclear, but beginning in 726 Leo outlawed all images of Christ and the saints in his domain, which at this time included most of modern day Turkey, parts of modern day Greece, Crete, Ravenna, Rome, Sicily, Corsica and Sardinia. Leo's first act was to remove a large icon of Christ above the bronze doors of the imperial palace at Constantinople. This caused a riot and some palace officials were killed in the ensuing melee.  

During this time, icons were part of the popular religious imagination. While certain bishops joined Leo's iconoclasm (partly for political reasons), others, such as the patriarch of Constantinople, Germanus, strongly opposed him. Germanus famously wrote, "[S]ince the only Son... deigned to become man, we make the image of His human form and of His human aspect according to the flesh... thus showing that it is not in a purely imaginary way that He put on our nature." Germanus was forced to give up the patriarch and retreat to his family estate outside of the city.  

In the West, Leo III's iconoclasm also met with hostility. Pope Gregory III and many Latin bishops condemned iconoclasm in a synod in 731. While images were not as central to the Western religious imagination, they nevertheless adorned churches, shrines, and official buildings across Latin Christendom. 

Following St Gregory the Great, most Western theologians viewed icons as "books for the illiterate," that is, scenes illustrating Bible stories and scenes from Church history for those unable to read. In the East, images also served this didactic purpose, but they were seen less as teaching tools and more as windows or portals for the purpose of divine contemplation. In Eastern tradition, an icon was able to lift a worshiper's mind from earthly to heavenly realities.  And, as we shall see, an icon served a Christological purpose as well, being "theology in color." 

During Leo III's iconoclasm, John of Damascus wrote three key treatises defending icons. The battle against images would rage on and off for over a hundred years with iconoclast emperors and iconodule emperors, and, as we shall see, one very influential iconodule empress. 

In 754 there was an important iconoclast council, called the Council of Hieria, where 338 bishops signed decrees forbidding sacred images. The council's argument was that by depicting Christ in an icon, one was only depicting his human nature and not his divine nature. This amounted to Nestorianism and had to be denounced. They also argued that the only true image of Christ was his body and blood at the Eucharist. They noted that the usage of images at worship is redolent of pagan practices and idol worship and therefore must stop: "It is not permitted to Christians, who have the hope of the resurrection, to imitate the customs of demon-worshipers, and to insult the Saints, who shine in so great glory, by common dead matter." 

The Council of Hieria and all its decisions would be condemned by the Second Council of Nicaea, based on the careful theological arguments and spiritual reflections of John of Damascus, Germanus, and others. 

From the era of the Iconoclast Controversy, a 9th century illuminated Psalter.
Called the Chludov Psalter, it was probably created by Iconodules in secret.

Key People

Leo III the Isaurian (emperor 717 - 741): Byzantine emperor who put an end to political stability and successfully fended off the Umayyad Caliphate. In 726 he instigated a war against icons throughout his lands. He quarreled with Popes Gregory II and Gregory III over icon veneration and over the episcopal administration of Ravenna and Sicily, which he transferred over to the Constantinopolitan patriarchate. Then he sent a fleet to Italy to enforce his decree. The fleet was destroyed in a storm. 

Constantine V (emperor 741 - 775): the son of Leo, Constantine was a very successful general but continued the iconoclastic efforts of his father. He was also suspicious of monks and persecuted them during his reign. Later chroniclers called him Kopronymos - the "dung-named." 

Irene of Athens (c. 752 - 803): empress of Byzantium, the wife of Leo IV (son of Constantine V). She became regent when her husband died and the next in line, Constantine VI, was just 9 years old. An iconophile, Irene was a defender of sacred images and the monks. Advised by Paul of Constantinople to call a general council, Irene sent messengers to Pope Hadrian and secured the appointment of Tarasius to become the next patriarch. Irene and her son opened the seventh ecumenical council on August 1, 787 in the Church of the Holy Apostles in Constantinople, but it was interrupted by iconoclast soldiers bursting inside. Adjourning, the council reconvened in Nicaea on September 24. 

John of Damascus (676 - 749): a theologian and monk of Jerusalem we keep running into. He wrote three treatises between 726 and 730 defending the tradition of icon veneration. John wrote, "If we made an image of the invisible God, we would certainly be in error, but we do nothing of the sort, for we are not in error if we make the image of the incarnate God, who appeared on earth in the flesh, and who, in his ineffable goodness, lived with human beings and assumed the nature, quantity, shape and color of flesh." 

Nicephorus of Constantinople (c. 758 - 828): patriarch of Constantinople from 806 to 815, Nicephorus was an iconodule writer in the latter half of the century-long iconoclast struggle. He argued that if Christ has a human body, then he can be pictured. "Where in the world has an uncircumscribed body ever been heard of?" The fact that a body can be drawn, that it has limits (i.e. is "circumscribed") means that Christ, who is the Word enfleshed in our human body, can be drawn and has "limits" according to the human nature. 

Theodore the Studite (759 - 826): theologically, probably the most sophisticated iconodule, Theodore was a monk and abbot of Stoudios, a famous monastery outside of Constantinople. The nephew of another famous iconodule abbot, Plato, Theodore wrote important works defending icons. 

An icon of St John of Damascus

The Theology of Images

In our Western context, there has never been the importance attached to images as there is in the East. For Western Christians, art served its purpose in adorning churches and aiding the understanding, but it never served the sacred and theological function it had in the East. 

Early iconodule writers like Germanus and John of Damascus pointed out that the Bible neither forbade art nor outlawed craftsmanship. Rather, it forbade the worship of images and statues as if they had some kind of essential power in and of themselves. As the Old Testament examples of Bezalel and Oholiab prove, as well as the priestly garments and temple decorations, God commands men to create beautiful objects to honor and glorify their Creator. 

John also made the point that God works through images in the world, especially through His own image within each man and woman. The material world must be honored because it is good and beautiful, and because a devaluation or rejection of the material world is heresy. 

John also made the crucial distinction between adoration (reserved for God) and honor (due to the saints). Sacred images are windows through this physical world to a spiritual world. They are the means through which Christians can be instructed in the virtues and inspired to live a God-pleasing life. Holy images thus have a kind of sacramental, grace-giving power to them. 

Theodore the Studite would develop John's icon-theology even more and bring it to bear in the Christological debates of the last few centuries. 

This brilliant theologian demonstrated that the question of icons is really a question of Christ's incarnation, his two natures, and his two wills. Theodore asserted that Christ can be depicted in icons because he is a Person, a Hypostasis, real and historical. He also argues that if Christ, post-resurrection, suddenly became indescribable and unable to be depicted, then we, his body, would also be indescribable! 

Our human nature has been lifted up - deified - in Christ's Person. The Image of God within us has been repaired by the Image of the Father (see Col. 1:15). 

The remains of the basilica at the St John Studious Monastery in Constantinople

The Council Itself

After an aborted attempt at holding the council in Constantinople, Irene convened it at the Hagia Sophia basilica in Nicaea. Around 300 bishops were present. The patriarch Tarasius opened the proceedings on Sept. 24, 787.

On Oct. 1, a long series of scriptural verses and Patristic citations were discussed. There is a paucity of iconoclast arguments from the Fathers - just scattered references in Eusebius of Caesarea, and then certain iconoclast sentences in the Monophysites Philoxenus of Mabbug and Severus of Antioch. These positions were deemed heretical by the council fathers. After reading the scriptural citations and stories of important fathers witnessing to the miraculous power of icons, the fathers decided that images should be restored. 

On Oct. 6, the long writings and decisions from the false Council of Hieria were read and condemned. 

They concluded: "To make our confession short, we keep unchanged all the ecclesiastical traditions handed down to us, whether in writings or verbally, one of which is the making of pictorial representations, agreeable to the history of the preaching of the Gospels, a tradition useful in many respects, but especially in this, that the incarnation of the Word of God is shown forth as real and not merely phantastic." 

The council also established 22 canons, mostly related to simony and ecclesiastical appointments. The ninth canon is interesting because it calls for a confiscation of all iconoclast books: "All those childish baubles and bacchic rantings, the false writings composed against the venerable icons, should be given in at the episcopal building in Constantinople, so that they can be put away along with other heretical books. If someone is discovered to be hiding such books, if he is a bishop, priest or deacon, let him be suspended, and if he is a lay person or a monk, let him be excommunicated."

Icon depicting the Empress Irene and her son, Constantine,
presiding at the Seventh Ecumenical Council

Aftermath

At the same time as the iconoclastic controversy in the East, Charlemagne in the West was waging a limited war against images. The decrees of the council had passed to Frankish lands in a badly mistranslated text, and Latin theologians misunderstood the conclusions of the council. In the West, it was mistakenly thought that Eastern Christians "adored" icons as if they had special powers. In the Libri Carolini, Charlemagne and his chief theologian called for images to be protected but not adored or venerated. The West would continue to misunderstand the Eastern practice and theology of icons for centuries. Arguably, it still misunderstands. 

The relationship between Christians and images is a bit ambiguous in our American Lutheran context. On the one hand, we have paintings of Christ in our churches, but on the other hand, we do not "adorn" our churches, bless sacred artwork, or reverence the saints.  It would be safe to say that artwork is still primarily didactic in Lutheran churches, illustrating scenes from Holy Scripture to aid the pious imagination in its understanding and faith.  

Hagia Sophia church in Iznik, Turkey, as it appears today. Built by
Justinian I in the 7th century, it was the site of Nicaea II in 787. 

Home Bible Study - Psalm 16

Get a downloadable copy of this study HERE.

A HOME BIBLE STUDY ~ Psalm 16

A miktam of David. 

● The title “miktam” is thought by some to mean “golden”; others think it is related to a word meaning “to cover.” It is found as an inscription on only 6 Psalms (16, 56-60) ...and since they all are written from times of peril, some think the idea is of covering the lips in the sense of secrecy, as if this were a secret or silent Psalm given in a time of crisis. Ultimately, we have no idea what “miktam” means...
● This is a wonderful Psalm relating how David found the secret of contentment and great gladness even in pressing times; and also speaks powerfully of Jesus and His work for us.

1 Keep me safe, O God, for in you I take refuge. 

● “keep me safe” - preserve/sustain ... a desperate cry from David’s lips that God protect him in his time of need (whatever that may be)
● “in you I take refuge” - literally, “I put my trust in You”
● notice that David turns to God in his struggles ... understanding that no where/no one else can be the solid bedrock we need in this life.
● Have you ever cried out to God in desperation?
● What are the false things we sometimes find ourselves putting our trust in?

2 I said to the LORD, "You are my Lord; apart from you I have no good thing."
3 As for the saints who are in the land, they are the glorious ones in whom is all my delight. 
4 The sorrows of those will increase who run after other gods.
I will not pour out their libations of blood or take up their names on my lips. 

● notice the difference in “LORD” and “Lord”... the first is the divine name of God (YHWH) ... and the second is the name “Adonai” ... The great and mighty God is his master...
● literally - “my goodness is nothing apart from you”
● All that David is and has is result of the merciful hand of God towards him ... apart from Him, David would have nothing good in his life.
● “saints” - the sacred ones / the set-apart ones... the holy people of God who surround David
● David delighted in the people of God, despite all their (and his own) failings, scandals, and embarrassments..
● On the other hand, those who willingly lived in idolatry – giving their fear, love and trust to ‘other gods’ only have lives filled with pain and sorrows.
● Following God and His will may not be easy, but to trust in false gods only brings more difficulties.
● Therefore, David acknowledges that he will not allow himself to practice their pagan beliefs of offering blood (their own or others) ... and won’t even utter the names of the pagan gods.
● When something good happens in your life, do you see the fingerprints of God on the gift?
● Someone once said, “Those who love the Lord will love the company of those who also love him." (Boice) Do you enjoy the company of the body of Christ?
● When we put our trust in things other than God (YHWH), do we usually see good or bad as a result?
● What sacrifices do people make today to their “other gods”?

5 LORD , you have assigned me my portion and my cup; you have made my lot secure.
6 The boundary lines have fallen for me in pleasant places; surely I have a delightful inheritance.

● literally, “the portion of my inheritance”
● “made my lot secure” - David was confident that God would maintain what He had first given to him.
● “boundary lines” - reminiscent of the dividing of the land among the Israelites ... what David has received is a delightful and pleasant gift of being in the presence of God.
● David was the youngest son in a family with many sons. He could expect no inheritance from his family; yet he took joy and comfort in the fact that God was the portion of his inheritance, and he knew that he had a good inheritance.
● God said to the priests in the days of Moses: "I am your portion and your inheritance" (Numbers 18:20). David understood that this was a promise given not only to the priests, but also to all who would trust God and His merciful gifts.
● We see here the contentment of David in God’s gifts to him.
● Do you trust that God will keep us in the faith and so you will receive the inheritance won by Christ?
● How content are you with God’s gifts to you in your life?

7 I will praise the LORD, who counsels me; even at night my heart instructs me.
8 I have set the LORD always before me. Because he is at my right hand, I will not be shaken. 

● David offers blessings to God who – unlike the false gods of the nations – provides counsel and advice to guide him in the way of peace.
● “my heart” - literally “my kidneys” ... the seat of emotions and affection (thus our understanding of “heart”... The kidneys and their fat were always to be burnt in sacrifice, to indicate that the most secret purposes and affections of the soul are to be devoted to God.
● When David’s heart trusted in the LORD, then his emotions would not lead him astray.
● Thus David determines that God would always be first in his life.
● With God as David’s “right hand man” ... his Counselor and Guide ... there was stability and security that would not have otherwise existed. 
● How does God counsel you today? What tools does He use to instruct you?
● Obviously only Jesus has always set His heart on God, but in what ways can you make sure that the ways of the LORD are your ways?
● How does God provide security to your life?

9 Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue rejoices; my body also will rest secure,
10 because you will not abandon me to the grave, nor will you let your Holy One see decay.
11 You have made known to me the path of life; you will fill me with joy in your presence,
with eternal pleasures at your right hand.

● The decision to put his total trust in God brought gladness to David’s heart.
● “my tongue” - literally “my glory” ... the Hebrews understood “glory” here as their tongue because God gave us our tongue to glorify Him and as it is the instrument of expressing our thoughts by words, it becomes our glory.
● David also understood the blessing of that relationship with God: he would be provided care and blessing in the life beyond... that he would not be abandoned in the grave, but his life would continue in the presence of God.
● But David also prophetically spoke beyond himself...In one sense David was indeed the Holy One of God, whose soul would not be left in the grave. Yet in a greater and more literal sense, only Jesus Christ fulfills this in His resurrection.
● Peter made this connection on the Day of Pentecost, when he said that these words went beyond David who was obviously dead, buried in a grave, and whose body had long ago decayed into dust (Acts 2:25-31).
● Peter understood that because Jesus bore our sin without becoming a sinner, He remained the Holy One, even in His death...and thus it was not possible that He should be held by death (Acts 2:24).
● “the path of life” - David seemed to understand that the benefits of this life commitment to God were received in both this life, and the life beyond. God gives us eternal life to enjoy as a present gift, extending into eternity.
● “fullness of joy” - that David could experience now, but also ultimately receive when in the more immediate presence of God.
● True pleasures forevermore are found at the right hand of God, not in separation from Him.
● One commentator notes: "We are also told that heaven is to be enjoyed at the right hand of God.

The right hand, even on earth, is the place of favor, and the place of honor, and the place of security. The right-hand place is always regarded as the place of dignity and nobility in all courts. God is not going to give his people any left-handed heaven, but they are to dwell at his right hand for evermore."
W  hen we go back to the first verse of this psalm, we remember that this life of gladness and rejoicing and fullness of joy is not a problem-free life. It is a life that may be challenged, and face attack on many levels. We probably feel that more right now than ever before.  There is such uncertainty about each day. We fear for our health, our livelihood, our family, our church, our economy, our society and our world.

Yet David understood that to put our trust in the things of this life...this world... is useless.  The gods of our hearts and our minds are useless.  Only in a life truly committed to God can there be enjoyment, security, happiness and blessing.  Ultimately, we find the hope of our lives and our eternity in the fulfillment of this Psalm - Jesus Christ.  He is the Holy One who did not see decay, but in the brilliance of Easter morning burst forth from the tomb to assure us that God is FOR us! Our sins are forgiven, the grave is defeated, His love is victorious! Those who trust in Him can have the peace, love and joy won by His resurrection – now, in this life... and in the life to come at the right hand of God!