NT Scriptural argument for ICONODULIA

Romans 12:10: “Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honour.”

(Please note I will focus mainly on icons of Christ for simplicity; as the way we see saints triumphant as living icons is a separate topic on an already heated and complex issue.) The primary scriptural focus I want to draw will be from 1 Corinthians.

FIRSTLY I would like to suggest a particular language to describe icons.

We should also; as iconodules admit that as sinful and flawed humans some have, and may continue; to slip into superstition regarding icons without proper formation in the Catholic faith.

Rev 9:20-21: The rest of mankind, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands nor give up worshiping demons and idols of gold and silver and bronze and stone and wood, which cannot see or hear or walk;

nor did they repent of their murders or their sorceries or their sexual immorality or their thefts.

Deut 4:28: “And there you will serve gods of wood and stone, the work of human hands, that neither see, nor hear, nor eat, nor smell.”

An Icon is not a sentient creature (let alone deity). It is a sacred “tool” or “prop”.

We should think of icons like a musical instrument. We may sing praises to God; and we may augment our praises with the use of instruments to help stir the heart towards the invisible transcendent God.

A person may give praise with their bodies also; through sign language, singing and dancing.

Philippians 2:5-11: "Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,

and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."

An iconodule should recognize the icon of Christ as a visual representation of His name (the appropriate response being reverential bowing)

Just as we do not "worship" the auditory sound "Jee-sus" (or "Ye-shoo-ah)" or the written characters:     "Jesus"      that you see on the screen- our reverence for these is really a reverence for the PERSON of Jesus; who is a person of the divine trinity.

An icon ought to be seen as an instrument for bodily worship to stir our hearts and minds towards the glory of the incarnation. HOWEVER even though icons are similar to musical instruments; they are distinctly different:

  -A musical instrument accompanies auditory worship to God; without changing the focal point.

-An icon as an instrument facilitates a focal point for physical worship.

-icons veneration  was forbidden throughout the old covenants; musical instruments were not.

No one disputes that physical worship (kneeling, dancing, raising hands, prostration) is inherently impious.

The debate is whether this focal point is idolatrous or pious; philosophy alone is never enough. This comparison between icons and musical instruments is certainly not enough to justify icon veneration on its own!    

We must turn to the word of God:

The Old:

Deuteronomy 4:15-20:

“Therefore watch yourselves very carefully. Since you saw no form on the day that the Lord spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire,

beware lest you act corruptly by making a carved image for yourselves, in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female, the likeness of any animal that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged bird that flies in the air, the likeness of anything that creeps on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the water under the earth.

And beware lest you raise your eyes to heaven, and when you see the sun and the moon and the stars, all the host of heaven, you be drawn away and bow down to them and serve them, things that the Lord your God has allotted to all the peoples under the whole heaven.
But the Lord has taken you and brought you out of the iron furnace, out of Egypt, to be a people of his own inheritance, as you are this day.”

Isaiah 40:18,25:

"To whom then will you liken God? or what likeness compare with Him?"

"To whom then will you compare me? that I should be like him? says the Holy One."

The New:

Hebrews 1:3 "He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,"

Hebrews 2:8-9: "Now in putting everything in subjection to him, he left nothing outside his control. At present, we do not yet see everything in subjection to him. But we see Him who for a little while was made lower than the angels,            namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone."

John 1:14-18 "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John bore witness about him, and cried out, "This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’") For from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, He has made him known."

John 14:9 "Jesus said to him, 'Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, "Show us the Father"?’"

Colossians 1:15 "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation."

2 Corinthians 3:12-18 "Since we have such a hope, we are very bold, not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face so that the Israelites might not gaze at the outcome of what was being brought to an end. But their minds were hardened. For to this day, when they read the old covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away. Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their hearts. But when one turns to the Lord, the veil is removed.  Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit."

2 Corinthians 4:4-6 "In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake. For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.”

1 Tim 3:15-16: "so that if I am delayed, you will know how to regulate your conduct in God’s household—that is, in the Church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth. Without any doubt, the mystery of our religion is great:

SECONDLY I wish to note that often the accusation applied to iconodule arguments is that they use "equivocation". 

I challenge that this should be substantiated not merely asserted. When discussing principles they may be identical even when the letter of the law is not the same.

This can work both ways; so to move the conversation forward both sides of this debate must seek beyond the letter or “accidents” of the law to the spirit and principles that the letter stands on:

2 Corinthians 3:6-9: “who has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
Now if the ministry of death- carved in letters on stone- came with such glory that the Israelite's could not gaze at Moses'  face because of its glory, which was being brought to an end, will not the ministry of the Spirit have even more glory? For if there was glory in the ministry of condemnation, the ministry of righteousness must far exceed it in glory.”

An "accident" is a philosophical way to describe something distinct from the substance or in this case underlying principle.  For instance the color of a car is not what constitutes it as "car". For those that do not keep Saturday sabbath (and Jewish feasts of obligation); the designation of "Saturday" is accidental to the law. We might say the principle is: to set aside time every week to rest and remember the Lord- as a distinct cultural/religious group to reflect on important events (creation, redemption etc).

Now If we were to accuse anyone of equivocation would it not be Christ when it comes to adultery and murder? (Matthew 5:21-28)   or especially relevant- the apostle Paul here?:

Colossians 3:5: "Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry."

Ephesians 5:5: "For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God."

Philippians 3:19: "Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things."

It seems if an action that does not involve bowing/kissing a painting or statue is comparable to “idolatry”… then it leaves open the possibility that the inverse may be true in certain circumstances.

Matthew 7:21: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.”

Just as there are those who give exterior devotion to Jesus: even confessing Him as Lord- that do not worship Him truly... we should not be quick to judge an exterior act of piety towards an object/person as "worship".

Nobody denies a person could do a FULL PROSTRATION before Jesus in the flesh- in order to please other people and be popular- and not truly be worshiping Jesus...  So why would we assume that when a full prostration is made before anyone/anything else it automatically "magically" becomes "worship".

Now we must know our icons made by human hands are infinitely less valuable than the living icons made by God (brothers and sisters in the image and likeness of God). Which in turn; we are even less compared to the ultimate icon of God in the divine person- Jesus.

However; with a well formed understanding the veneration of an icon- is an incarnate way of: "confess(ing) that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." It is liturgically fitting to declare the incarnation in an incarnate manner.

1 Corinthians 8-10 can not be ignored on this issue; and will demonstrate some points:

1 Corinthians 8

Now concerning food offered to idols: we know that “all of us possess knowledge.”

This “knowledge” puffs up, but love builds up.
If anyone imagines that he knows something, he does not yet know as he ought to know.
But if anyone loves God, he is known by God.

We must acknowledge that love of God unites everyone from iconodules, to aniconics to iconoclasts. That does not mean this debate is not important; yet we must engage this debate with brotherly love. This means even Iconodules must try to see the iconoclast position (and hopefully vise versa).

If ANY Christian loves God; he is known by God.

Therefore, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that “an idol has no real existence,” and that “there is no God but one.”
For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many: “gods” and many “lords”—
yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.

However, not all possess this knowledge. But some, through former association with idols, eat food as really offered to an idol, and their conscience, being weak, is defiled.

Note here the concern is primarily noted here to be regarding those converts from idolatrous pasts. a concern significantly  less prominent with the rise of Christendom. Most converts today are from atheism, agnosticism or religions that deny the incarnation (Jews, Muslims, Sikh etc).

Arguably modern day pagans converting should be very well catechized before being introduced to icon veneration; but that is a separate discussion.

Note also this chapter beginning the discourse is focused on food- which is relating to meat from sacrifices. Also the knowledge of the nature of God.

Food will not commend us to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do.

But take care that this right of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak.
For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol’s temple, will he not be encouraged, if his conscience is weak, to eat food offered to idols?
And so by your knowledge this weak person is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died.

Thus, sinning against your brothers and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ.
Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble.

St Paul will reiterate this later in the sandwich structure of 1 cor 8-10.

1 Corinthians 9

Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not you my workmanship in the Lord? If to others I am not an apostle, at least I am to you. For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.

(skipping some less relevant text)

For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them.
To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law.
To those outside the law I became as one outside the law                                                                                                                  (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law.

Here we note that St Paul sharply distinguishes between the Mosaic law and the law of Christ. We as Christians are therefore still under a law (of faith, hope and love).

Later I will argue based upon Mathew and Acts that this also includes apostolic binding; but for now both sides can see and agree that we still as Christians have moral and religious obligations that are distinct from Mosaic law.

²¹To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.

Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it.²⁴
Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable.²⁵
So I do not run aimlessly; I do not box as one beating the air. But I discipline my body and keep it under control, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.

1 Corinthians 10

For I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea,
and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea,
and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock that followed them, and the Rock was Christ.

Nevertheless, with most of them God was not pleased, for they were overthrown in the wilderness.
Now these things took place as examples for us, that we might not desire evil as they did.
Do not be idolaters as some of them were; as it is written, “The people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play.”
We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day.

Here Paul quotes Exodus 32 regarding the golden calf. (Exodus 32:5-8):

"When Aaron saw this, he built an altar in front of the calf and announced: "Tomorrow there will be a festival to the Lord.”So the next day the people rose early and sacrificed burnt offerings and presented fellowship offerings. Afterward they sat down to eat and drink and got up to indulge in revelry.
Then the Lord said to Moses: “Go down, because your people, whom you brought up out of Egypt, have become corrupt.
They have been quick to turn away from what I commanded them and have made themselves an idol cast in the shape of a calf. They have bowed down to it and sacrificed to it and have said, ‘These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.’

we cannot know for certain if this "play" also included sexual immorality;  However this example being listed alongside the “23 000” falling in one day suggests the revelry was- if not completely adulterous in nature- likely containing elements of gluttony, drunkenness and sexual immorality. Alongside with certain theological error regarding the nature of the one true God.

The "23 000" falling in one day being a reference to Numbers 25 which involved idolatrous sacrifice and sexual immorality.

One may argue that these events contained also veneration of the idols- and this is certainly true; but in the “sandwich” of 1 Cor 9 and 10 is a context of sacrificial worship highlighting that particular aspect.

 -We acknowledged  that indeed under the Mosaic covenant even veneration of an image is forbidden. As noted the Christian law is distinct from the Mosaic law.

 -further even an iconodule Christian is obviously forbidden from venerating an image of a non-Christian “deity”. It would be a grave sin for a Catholic to bow before an idol of the “goddess” Kali- or to even treat a Christian image as a deity through sacrifice or theological error regarding the nature of the one true God.

Continuing with 1 Cor 10:

⁸ We must not put Christ to the test, as some of them did and were destroyed by serpents,
nor grumble, as some of them did and were destroyed by the Destroyer.

Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come. Therefore let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall. No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.

Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to sensible people;                                                                                     judge for yourselves what I say.
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?
Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.

Consider the people of Israel: are not those who eat the sacrifices participants in the altar?
What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything?
No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons -and not to God. I do not want you to be participants with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons.
Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?

“All things are lawful,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful,” but not all things build up.
Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor.

(There is also an implication here that the mass is sacrificial in nature; and that concomittance is valid; but that is a tangent so will not be addressed.) The following segment is where I will make my primary argument supporting iconodulia:

²⁵ Eat whatever is sold in the meat market without raising any question on the ground of conscience. 

For “the earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof.” 

If one of the unbelievers invites you to dinner and you are disposed to go, eat whatever is set before you without raising any question on the ground of conscience.  BUT if someone says to you, “This has been offered in sacrifice,” then do not eat it, for the sake of the one who informed you, and for the sake of conscience—  I do not mean your conscience, but his. For why should my liberty be determined by someone else's conscience?  If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of that for which I give thanks?

So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.  Give no offense to Jews or to Greeks or to the Church of God, just as I try to please everyone in everything I do, not seeking my own advantage, but that of many, that they may be saved.

DEMONIC "interception"?

We must ask as to the nature of what causes this pagan sacrifice to be bestowed unto demons; if someone says it is because it is before an idol…

In response would it not seem that an animal sacrificed in a field with no images present dedicated to an entity other than God (be it “Zeus” or even a saint)... would we deny that this is still not bestowed unto a demon? Despite the lack of an idol?

Common sense implies that the demon is still receiving or "intercepting" this sacrifice; and thus the presence of an idol is not the sole reason that the sacrifice is bestowed to demons  (if at all...)

Regardless; no sacrifice is offered to an icon. Incense and decorations such as candles and flowers are placed before them but not to them. Akin to anointing, gilding, incensing and sprinkling of religious instruments in the old testament:

(Leviticus 8:10-15, Numbers 7:1, Exodus 30:22-29, 1 Kings 7:48-50, Hebrews 9:19-21)

Sacrifice and sacramental are preformed before them; and they may be decorated with flowers or candles- but this is not offered to them. Just like idols.. and icon is not anything in and of itself. It is simply decorating a decoration in honor of the person.

An icon is not an object of worship; but an instrument for enhancing veneration.

So regardless of whether you think the cause of demonic hijacking is due to the ultimate recipient not being the true God; or if it is because the focal point that this is offered to is an image…

No sacrifice is given to an icon. A skeptic could argue that the veneration may be bestowed to demons; BUT...

As Paul says the idol is nothing; the food offered to idols isn’t “anything”.

Thus what diverts the sacrificial worship of pagans to demons is not solely the method of the sacrifice; but the intent of the intellect and heart and of the covenant (table/altar) which they participate in.

(Even with the Holy Eucharist we acknowledge that this "food" does not magically forgive us and override the necessity for faith and love. in fact the Eucharist received unworthily increases our sin!)

Here are key points Paul stresses:

1) Paul again stresses that the physical idol is nothing. It has no power, no sentience, no agency.

Therefore any image likewise has no intrinsic power- for good or for bad.

and

2) Paul stresses what is at stake here is the conscience of:

-Christians with “weak” consciences

-Non christian believers

that is what is at stake. What we communicate to others.

This is true to such a degree that the same action (in this case eating meat from temples)

Is NOT SINFUL even when done with WILFUL ignorance!

Let that sink in.

If you don’t ask if meat is from a pagan temple… (even if you suspect perhaps it is)

but you don't KNOW that is is from a pagan altar…

and those around you ALSO know that you don’t know…

it is not sinful.

So the key principle that is stressed here is other peoples conception of the action; and out own intent/heart.

Paul establishes a dividing line here between sin and acceptable actions.

What is in the heart, the mind and communicated to others.

The same meat sacrificed to idols is not intrinsically cursed such that an ignorant Christian eating it is committing idolatry. Just because an idol was involved; does not make the meat “magically” demon worship.

Likewise an image on the Christian altar does not magically or intrinsically cause the Eucharist to be offered to demons.

Applying the same principles to icon veneration; an icon being nothing in and of itself…

neither for good not bad intrinsically- the same as any tool or instrument...

Icon veneration is a declaration of the incarnation; and of the truth of the apostolic churches- thus our hearts and minds see it not as idolatrous but as a reaction and declaration of the form of God revealed in the person of Jesus.

When an icon of Jesus or Mary is kissed; they do not magically feel the kiss on their face.

Neither does a demon somehow intercept and receive this show of affection.

An idol is NOTHING. And an icon is nothing but through SACRAMENTALITY-  (That is the grace of God vindicating the faith turn a neutral instrument of an icon into a "good" thing! though not INTRINSICALLY or "MAGICALLY")

That is; through the Holy Spirit binding together the Christian witnesses on earth and the cloud of witnesses triumphant and reigning/judging  beside the glorified human Christ (united to God)… (Rev 20:4, 2 Tim 2:12, Dan 7:27, Mattew 19:28)  the information of our action is conveyed to the glorified saints.

This is through the Spirit. Through the same Spirit I may now kneel to Jesus- with or without an icon, in an empty room- and He (not a demon) will receive the reverence.

For a person who already accepts:
-the sacramentality of relics                                                                                                                                                                             (Acts 19:11-12, 2 Kings 13:20-21)

-and  intercession/communion of saints- including the fully human nature of Christ                                                                (Rev 5:8, 8:3-4, 20:4-6, 2 Macc 15:22-24)

this is not a novel concept.

An icon serves as a window; an instrument to augment physical signs of respect/worship. It augments our praise in the  same ways as a musical instrument (stir the emotions of us and witnesses, teaches about the faith, vindicates the goodness of beauty, proclaims the incarnation).

The numerous verses about idols being nothing; senseless and powerless.. works against the more “superstitious” claim that icon veneration honors demons.

The iconodule can fully acknowledge the sightless, deaf, powerless nature of the icon; and call out to our God (and His saints) with or without an icon present.

Because all physical symbols are just symbols.

God may choose to work through symbols to vindicate His truth; but the symbol is neither intrinsically good nor bad. It is the heart, mind, conscience and covenant (relationship of object to the Word) that matters.

BUT- "conscience of others"

This still leaves what is communicated; that is the conscience of others...

NOTE: At the risk of being attack by iconodules; I want to suggest that for the sake of our protestant brothers we ought to conservatively venerate icons rather than flaunting it in there face.

What I mean is; we ought to acknowledge the concerns of the protestant and respond in a culturally appropriate way that still promotes the veneration of icons; but also is more conservative.

Full prostrations before an image of our lady before protestants simply fuel the instinctive intuitions of protestants.

The chapter above says we are to avoid offense to even Gentiles and Jews; let alone other Christians! (separated brethren)

However from here on I will explain why icon veneration ought to be done by every Christian for unity and obedience:

NOW- "BINDING"

This argument may be extended to say: “should we not then; out of love COMPLETELY forgo icon veneration for the sake of Christian unity? (even if it is not sinful)”

In response we must say firstly that there is a line. A Christian communion must not determine its practice purely by the misconceptions of others.

Should no longer pray to Jesus or the Holy spirit as some accuse us as “tritheists”?

Should the Christians have burnt incense and bowed before the pagan Roman emperors? (culturally conveying assent to their claim of -in this particular circumstance)

The chapter above commands us not to bring offense to the Church of God- and that created matter is good and God's. Keeping our actions in focus of giving glory to God is what is key for us- free from the yoke of the Mosaic law.

In a polemic environment; though both sides may be lawful

Paul stresses that one side must be willing to submit to the other. Numerous verses command Christians to be "of one mind" and "one body" and "submit to leaders". Modern Catholics have inherited the iconodulia position; it is bound unto our conscience to preform these actions-

we are unable to be iconoclasts or totally aniconic without being disobedient to the Church of God.

We should explain the practice; and the concepts expressed above. We should still use the veneration of icons to support the apostolic faith and declare the incarnation of Christ (through whom ALL salvation comes). We must ensure the doctrine of icons is properly understood both within and outside the visible Church of Christ.

And at a certain point peace and unity on essentials must be maintained by the authoritative decree of the Church. A decision must be made and the normative liturgical worship of the Church maintained- regardless of external ignorance of the theology behind icon veneration.

The Church may not always handle things in the most prudent or pleasing ways (to God); but as Catholics we do believe that heresy will not be bound unto the faithful. The enforcement of Icon veneration; even if not prudent is therefore not heretical. In order for unity and communion on essentials; doctrine and liturgical practice must be bound by the appointed authorities. In order to be of one mind in a polemic debate one side must be bound to submission to avert the SIN of schism.

We can see how this functioned in the previous covenant- with was a shadow of the new.

The authority of the prior covenant is criticized by Christ; BUT it is criticized because it had an undeniable degree of validity.

At final judgement Christ will take all matters and factors into consideration… But the verses of Matthew 23 (quoted below) only make sense if their is valid authority to the binding of the pharisees.

(Christ and His disciples  purposefully antagonize them by neglecting some of their traditions; but this is done as an establishment of His superior authority as Christ and messiah of the new and eternal covenant.)

The Christian apostolic magisterium is likewise given the same authority- to bind and loosen. Icon veneration has been loosened as permissible; and bound as a dogma at the 7^th ecumenical council.

We must think on how absurd, heretical and "pagan-ish" St Peter must have seemed to the first Christians when he declared all foods clean to them.

^{Acts 11:9} But the voice answered a second time from heaven, ‘What God has made clean, do not call common.’

MATTHEW 23:1-4:

 “Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples,  “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat,  so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice.  They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger.”

13-15: “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut the kingdom of heaven in people's faces. For you neither enter yourselves nor allow those who would enter to go in.  Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel across sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves.”

In Acts 15 we see the apostolic tradition practice of consulting and deciding what is to be bound on the communion.

Unlike the Mosaic tradition; the Apostolic authority is given by God and guided by the Holy Spirit.

Finally; anticipating the response that this is a “tradition of man” that “makes void the word of God:

Mark 7:14-23:“And he called the people to him again and said to them, “Hear me, all of you, and understand:  There is nothing outside a person that by going into him can defile him, but the things that come out of a person are what defile him.”  And when he had entered the house and left the people, his disciples asked him about the parable.  And he said to them, “Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him,  since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?” (Thus he declared all foods clean.)  And he said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him.  For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery,  coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”

Icon veneration is an external practice. By the logic hinted at in Mark 7 external tradition does not INTRINSICALLY defile a man.

If Venerating icons itself will not damn a person...

NOR will it ensure salvation.

There are many Catholics, Orthodox and Anglicans that practice the liturgical veneration of icons yet still end up in Hell for all eternity.

For those that again say this is “equivocation” I refer you back to St Paul who calls gluttony, greed and sexual immorality with idolatry.

The word of God consistently; new and old- pairs idolatry with pride, intellectual/theological error, lust, orgies, intoxication and child sacrifice. Does icon veneration (opposed to pagan idolatry) incite these things?

I believe even the most rigorous iconoclast would admit that icon veneration does not.

Our internal disposition is what makes and idol and idol.

And what is communicated to others.

ART

When it comes to visible displays of honor (including to saints):

Matthew 23:29-35: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you build the tombs of the prophets and decorate the monuments of the righteous,  saying, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’  Thus you witness against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers. You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell?  Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will flog in your synagogues and persecute from town to town,  so that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar"

In ALL of the new testament we do not see ANY condemnation of idolatry on monuments and sepulchers to saints (though clearly it was practiced by some such as the pharisees). Hypocrisy is ABSOLUTELY condemned here. But the new testament never identifies this practice as intrinsically immoral.

When it comes to these buildings that house the real presence of Jesus in sacramental form of the Eucharist we must remember: Matthew 26:8-9, Mark 14:4-5 and John 12:4-6

I am not arguing that churches and icons should be prioritized over the living icons of other human beings! by no means! If your parents need financial assistance and instead you spend all your money on icons for your home and parish... that is CERTAINLY sinful and disordered.

Yet just as the woman expended funds that could have been spent on the poor (as the apostles note) to annoint Jesus with expensive oil; There is a place for gestures of  religious honor (such as art and decoration)- for the glory of God

 -IF-   it is not done to the detriment of the poor and the living, God-made icons of humanity.

Matthew 22:15-22, Mark 12:13-17 and Luke 20:20-26 we see that Jesus does not correct the disciples when they answer that it is Caesars image and inscription on the coin. Was this image photographically accurate? it is unlikely... Therefore we see an acknowledgement (through Socratic questioning by Jesus); that an imperfect "man-made" image still has a correspondence to the real "God-made" person.

(This alone does not prove the practice of veneration; but is evidence against extreme aniconic positions and shows a basic level of philosophical/scriptural support for the "type-prototype" relationship.)

CULTURAL CONSIDERATIONS

For an extreme example of this concept: if a new religion started that said “hang up black balloons on your door in worship of Satan every Friday!”

I argue that it would be sinful for a Christian (aware of this) to hang up black balloons on Fridays.

Hanging up black balloons is not intrinsically sinful...

But in this cultural context it conveys idolatry through the meaning of the action.

The context creates a language; and the black balloon would speak worship to a being who is not the one true God.

This post defending icon veneration- is NOT saying we can go and venerate pagan idols; or participate in rituals of other faiths... because they are not "magically" demon worship.

Rather we must use context, culture, scripture and the Church to identify what is and is not appropriate liturgical/devotional practices.

“All things are lawful,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful,” but not all things build up.
Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor.

In some cultures; eye contact is seen as respectful- in other rude!

Bowing may be seen by some as akin to a handshake, and by others as "worship"

kissing is rarely done in some cultures (even between spouses) and a common greeting in other cultures!

The point here is simply to acknowledge that this discussion is more complex than: "X action equals Y". We must not equivocate and try to understand both sides.

CONCLUSION

Even if this does not convert an Iconoclast to an Iconodule; I hope it helps bridge understanding and fellowship between the communions.

To go deeper into the concerns of "equivocation".

And encourage Iconodules (while continuing to venerate icons!) to have some cultural sensitivity when it comes to more extreme forms of icon veneration.

Not striving for "false ecumenism"; but still for a greater unity through understanding amongst Christians.