Brief Overview
- Early Christians used symbols like the fish to identify their faith secretly.
- The first Christian art is found in underground tombs called catacombs.
- Some early Christian writers were against images because of pagan idol worship.
- A big disagreement called the Iconoclastic Controversy happened over religious pictures.
- The Church decided that honoring images is good because they remind us of Jesus and the saints.
- The main point is that Christians venerate, or show deep respect for, the person the image represents, not the object itself.
Introduction
The question of whether the early Church was against the use of images is a significant one, touching on the very heart of Christian worship and art. Many people today, both Catholics and non-Catholics, wonder about the historical roots of practices involving statues, icons, and other sacred art. A common perception is that the first followers of Christ, stemming from a Jewish tradition that strongly prohibited graven images, would have completely rejected any form of religious imagery. This article will explore the historical evidence, theological developments, and scriptural interpretations that shaped the Church’s understanding. It will show a more complex and nuanced history than is often assumed, tracing the path from the symbolic art of the catacombs to the definitive teaching of the Church on the veneration of sacred images.
Understanding this topic is important for grasping the Catholic faith’s rich artistic heritage and its theological foundations. The discussion is not merely about art history; it is about how Christians have understood the Incarnation—the belief that God became man in the person of Jesus Christ. This article will examine the arguments of those who opposed images, known as iconoclasts, and those who defended them, the iconodules. By looking at the historical context, the teachings of the Church Fathers, and the decisions of ecumenical councils, a clear picture will emerge. This exploration aims to provide a straightforward and accurate Catholic answer, making the Church’s teaching understandable and showing how it is rooted in the earliest centuries of Christianity.
The Old Testament and Graven Images
A primary source of the debate over images comes from the Old Testament, specifically the commandment against making graven images found in Exodus 20:4-5. This prohibition was central to the identity of ancient Israel, setting them apart from their pagan neighbors who worshiped a multitude of idols. The commandment forbids making a “graven 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” and bowing down to worship them. For many, this seems like a clear and absolute ban on all religious imagery, a viewpoint that has fueled opposition to sacred art throughout Christian history. It is essential to understand this background to appreciate the concerns that would later surface within the Church.
However, a closer look at the Old Testament reveals that this prohibition was not understood as a blanket ban on all forms of art. The primary concern was idolatry, the act of worshiping a created object as if it were a god. The verses immediately following the prohibition clarify that the issue is serving and adoring these images. Throughout the Old Testament, God Himself commanded the creation of religious images for the purpose of worship. For example, He instructed Moses to place images of cherubim, angelic beings, on the Ark of the Covenant, a sacred object at the very center of Israelite worship (Exodus 25:18–22). Similarly, the Temple in Jerusalem was adorned with intricate carvings of cherubim, palm trees, and flowers, all created at God’s command.
This context is crucial for understanding the early Christian perspective. The first Christians, being predominantly Jewish, would have been intimately familiar with this distinction. They understood that the commandment forbade the worship of idols, not the creation of religious art that pointed to the one true God. The issue was not the image itself, but the act of idolatry. This nuanced understanding, present within Judaism itself, provided a foundation upon which a distinctly Christian tradition of art could be built. The prohibition in Exodus was aimed at preventing the Israelites from falling into the pagan practices of their neighbors, a danger that was very real at the time.
The key distinction lies in the difference between adoration, which is due to God alone, and veneration, which is a form of honor given to sacred persons or objects. The Old Testament itself provides examples of this distinction in practice. The Ark of the Covenant, with its cherubim, was treated with immense reverence but was not worshiped as a god. This principle, that created things could be set apart for a sacred purpose and be treated with honor, would become a cornerstone of the Christian defense of images. The early Christians inherited this understanding, which allowed them to navigate the prohibition against idolatry while still appreciating the value of art in expressing and supporting their faith.
Early Christian Art in the Catacombs
The earliest identifiable Christian art dates back to the second and third centuries, a time when Christianity was a persecuted religion within the Roman Empire. This art is primarily found in the catacombs of Rome, underground burial chambers where Christians laid their dead to rest. During these periods of persecution, Christian worship and artistic expression were necessarily discreet. The art of the catacombs was not for public display but for a community of believers who understood its symbolic language. The need for secrecy heavily influenced the style and content of this early art, which often used imagery shared with pagan culture but imbued with a specific Christian meaning.
The art of the catacombs was rich in symbolism. Instead of direct depictions of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection, which might have been seen as too explicit for a persecuted community, early Christians used allegorical images. The most common of these was the image of the Good Shepherd, a beardless youth carrying a sheep on his shoulders, which was a symbol of Jesus’ care for his flock. Other popular symbols included the fish (ichthys), which was an acronym for “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior” in Greek, as well as the anchor, representing hope in Christ. These symbols allowed Christians to express their faith in a way that was meaningful to them but not immediately obvious to outsiders.
The themes found in catacomb art often revolved around salvation and deliverance. Scenes from the Old Testament, such as Jonah and the whale, Daniel in the lions’ den, and the three young men in the fiery furnace, were popular subjects. These stories were chosen because they prefigured Christ’s resurrection and demonstrated God’s power to save his people. By depicting these scenes, early Christians were not just decorating their tombs; they were expressing their hope in the resurrection and their belief in a God who saves. This art served as a visual catechism for a community that included many who were illiterate, teaching the core tenets of the faith through images.
The existence of this early Christian art provides strong evidence that the first followers of Christ did not interpret the Old Testament prohibition as a ban on all imagery. While they avoided the kind of idol worship prevalent in the surrounding pagan culture, they clearly saw a place for art in their religious life. The art of the catacombs, with its rich symbolism and focus on salvation, laid the foundation for the development of a more explicit and elaborate Christian artistic tradition in the centuries to come. It demonstrates that from very early on, Christians used visual means to express their faith, to teach, and to inspire hope.
The Rise of Iconoclasm
Despite the early use of images, a significant controversy over their legitimacy erupted in the Byzantine Empire in the 8th and 9th centuries. This period, known as the Iconoclastic Controversy, saw a fierce struggle between those who opposed the use of religious images, the iconoclasts (image-breakers), and those who defended them, the iconodules or iconophiles (lovers of images). The controversy was not merely a theological debate but also had significant political and social dimensions, creating deep divisions within the empire. The iconoclasts argued that the veneration of images was a form of idolatry, directly violating the second commandment.
The rise of iconoclasm was influenced by several factors. Some scholars suggest that contact with Islam, which has a strong prohibition against religious imagery, may have played a role in shaping the views of the iconoclasts. There was also a concern among some that the veneration of icons had become superstitious, with people attributing magical powers to the images themselves rather than honoring the person they represented. The iconoclasts also put forward theological arguments, claiming that it was impossible to depict the divine nature of Christ and that any attempt to do so would either wrongly separate his human and divine natures or improperly try to contain the divine in a physical form.
The controversy began in earnest around 726 AD when the Byzantine Emperor Leo III issued a series of edicts against the veneration of images. This was followed by a period of widespread destruction of icons and persecution of those who defended their use. The conflict was intense, with iconodule monks and clergy facing imprisonment, exile, and even death for their beliefs. The iconoclasts held a council in 754, the Council of Hieria, which condemned the use of images as heretical. This council, however, was not recognized by the wider Church as it lacked the presence of the Pope or the patriarchs of the East.
The period of iconoclasm represents a significant chapter in the Church’s relationship with images. It forced a deep theological reflection on the meaning of the Incarnation and the role of matter in salvation. The arguments of the iconoclasts, while ultimately rejected by the Church, raised important questions about the proper use of religious art and the ever-present danger of superstition. The fierce defense of icons by the iconodules, on the other hand, demonstrated the deep love and reverence that had developed for sacred images within the Christian tradition.
The Theological Defense of Images
In response to the iconoclast arguments, a robust theological defense of images emerged, most notably from St. John of Damascus. Writing from Muslim-controlled territory and thus safe from the Byzantine emperor’s wrath, John articulated the key principles that would form the basis of the Church’s teaching. He argued that the Old Testament prohibition against images was given because God, being incorporeal and faceless, could not be depicted. However, with the Incarnation, everything changed. Since God had taken on human flesh in the person of Jesus Christ and had been seen by human eyes, it was now possible to depict Him in His humanity.
St. John of Damascus made a crucial distinction between the adoration (latria) due to God alone and the veneration (proskynesis) that could be given to sacred images. He explained that when Christians venerate an image, they are not worshiping the wood and paint but are honoring the person represented in the image. The honor paid to the image passes on to the one who is depicted. This distinction was fundamental in refuting the iconoclasts’ charge of idolatry. It clarified that icons were not idols to be worshiped but were windows into the divine, reminders of the reality of the Incarnation and the lives of the saints.
The defenders of images also emphasized the didactic and inspirational role of sacred art. For the many people who could not read, icons served as a “Bible for the illiterate,” visually communicating the stories of the Gospel and the lives of the saints. Seeing images of Christ and the saints could inspire the faithful to imitate their virtues and draw closer to God. The iconodules argued that if God did not disdain to become matter for our salvation, then matter itself could be a vehicle for grace and a means of leading people to God. This view affirmed the goodness of the created world and its capacity to participate in the work of redemption.
This theological defense was not an innovation but was rooted in a deeper understanding of the Christian faith. It affirmed the reality of the Incarnation against a kind of thinking that saw matter as inherently unworthy of representing the divine. The arguments of St. John of Damascus and other iconodules provided a solid theological foundation for the Church’s long-standing practice of using sacred art. They showed that the veneration of images, when properly understood, was not a betrayal of the second commandment but a powerful affirmation of the central mystery of the Christian faith: that the invisible God became visible for our salvation.
The Second Council of Nicaea
The Iconoclastic Controversy was officially resolved by the Second Council of Nicaea in 787 AD. This council, recognized as the seventh ecumenical council by both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, was convened to address the question of the use and veneration of sacred images. The council fathers, drawing heavily on the theological arguments of St. John of Damascus, condemned iconoclasm as a heresy and formally approved the veneration of icons. This decision was a landmark moment in the history of Christian art and theology, providing a definitive answer to a question that had deeply divided the Church.
The council made a clear and important distinction between the absolute worship or adoration (latria) which is reserved for God alone, and the honor and veneration (proskynesis) that can be given to sacred images. The decrees of the council stated that it is appropriate to set up images of Christ, the Virgin Mary, the angels, and the saints in churches, on sacred vessels and vestments, and in homes. The purpose of these images, the council explained, is to draw the viewer to remember and long for the person depicted. By venerating the image, the faithful are in fact venerating the person it represents.
The Second Council of Nicaea affirmed that the veneration of images is a venerable tradition of the Church and is in accord with the reality of the Incarnation. The council’s teachings emphasized that the use of images is not only permissible but also beneficial for the spiritual life of the faithful. The council’s decision marked the end of the first period of iconoclasm, although there would be a second, shorter-lived outbreak in the 9th century before the veneration of images was definitively restored. The teachings of Nicaea II have remained the authoritative position of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches on the matter of sacred art ever since.
The significance of the Second Council of Nicaea cannot be overstated. It provided a clear and doctrinally sound basis for the use of images in Christian worship, steering a middle course between the extremes of idolatry and iconoclasm. The council’s teachings have shaped the artistic and spiritual landscape of Christianity for centuries, fostering a rich tradition of sacred art that continues to inspire and instruct the faithful. The council’s affirmation of the goodness of the created world and its ability to mediate the divine has had a profound impact on Catholic sacramental theology and spirituality.
The Catechism on Sacred Images
The current teaching of the Catholic Church on sacred images is summarized in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which builds upon the foundation laid by the Second Council of Nicaea. The Catechism explains that the Old Testament prohibition against images must be understood in its historical context, as a safeguard against the idolatry that was prevalent among the surrounding pagan nations. With the Incarnation of the Son of God, a new “economy” of images was inaugurated. The invisible God revealed Himself in the visible form of Jesus Christ, making it possible to represent Him in art.
The Catechism affirms the legitimacy of sacred art, explaining that Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment, which forbids idols. The honor rendered to a sacred image is a “respectful veneration,” not the adoration which is due to God alone. This is in line with the distinction made at the Second Council of Nicaea between latria and proskynesis. The movement of reverence is not toward the image in itself, but toward the one who is portrayed in it. This teaching is crucial for understanding the Catholic approach to sacred art and for dispelling common misconceptions about idolatry.
Furthermore, the Catechism highlights the role of sacred art in the life of the Church. It explains that sacred art is meant to evoke and glorify the mystery of God made visible in Christ. It serves as a form of visual catechesis, proclaiming the same Gospel message that Sacred Scripture communicates through words. Art has the power to lift the mind and heart to God, to inspire prayer, and to foster a deeper understanding of the faith. The beauty of sacred art can be a powerful witness to the truth and goodness of God, drawing people into the mystery of salvation.
The Church’s teaching, as expressed in the Catechism, is a continuation of the ancient tradition that was defended so vigorously during the Iconoclastic Controversy. It is a teaching that is deeply rooted in the mystery of the Incarnation, affirming the goodness of creation and the role of the senses in the life of faith. The Catholic understanding of sacred images is not an endorsement of superstition or idolatry but a celebration of the God who loved us so much that He became one of us, a God whose face we can now contemplate in the sacred art of the Church. This perspective is articulated in section 2131 of the Catechism, which explains the basis for the veneration of holy images in the mystery of the Incarnation of the Word of God, and in section 2132, which clarifies that this veneration is not adoration of the image itself but reverence for the one it represents.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the assertion that the early Church was universally opposed to images is a simplification of a more complex historical and theological reality. While it is true that some early Christian writers expressed reservations about images due to the pervasive influence of pagan idolatry, the archaeological evidence from the catacombs demonstrates that Christians were using symbolic and biblical art from at least the second century onward. The Old Testament prohibition against graven images was understood primarily as a ban on idolatry, not on all forms of religious art, a distinction that was already present within Judaism itself. The early Christians inherited this nuanced understanding, which allowed for the development of a distinctly Christian artistic tradition.
The Iconoclastic Controversy of the 8th and 9th centuries forced the Church to articulate a clear and definitive theology of sacred images. The defense of images, championed by figures like St. John of Damascus and culminating in the decrees of the Second Council of Nicaea, was fundamentally a defense of the Incarnation. The council’s teaching that the honor given to an image passes to the one it represents, and its crucial distinction between veneration and adoration, provided a solid theological foundation for the Church’s long-standing practice. This teaching has remained the cornerstone of the Catholic and Orthodox understanding of sacred art, affirming that matter can be a vehicle for grace and that the senses can lead us to a deeper contemplation of the divine. The Catholic Church continues to uphold the value of sacred art as a powerful means of evangelization, catechesis, and prayer, a “Bible for the illiterate” that can inspire and uplift the faithful. For anyone seeking to understand the Catholic position, the key is to grasp the distinction between honoring the person represented and worshiping the object itself, a distinction that is rooted in the earliest centuries of the Church’s life and faith.