I love the icon of the Father as an Old man, the Son as a man, and the Spirit as a bird. It is in the center of the iconscreen at St Markella's GOC Cathedral in Astoria, and is inscribed on one set of the vestments of Met Petros of thrice blessed memory, which are displayed downstairs in the Cathedral.
It may not be totally canonical but it is such a nice image.
Anastasios
romiosini wrote:What about the Iconography of the Holy Trinity depicting GOD the Father and the Holy Spirit as an old man and a bird TomS?
As Anastasios says, it is not canonical. But the canons are simply rules made my men anyway.
----------------------------------------------------
They say that I am bad news. They say "Stay Away."
TomS wrote:romiosini wrote:What about the Iconography of the Holy Trinity depicting GOD the Father and the Holy Spirit as an old man and a bird TomS?
As Anastasios says, it is not canonical. But the canons are simply rules made my men anyway.
Actually, let me tell you that these men were guided by the Holy Spirit (GOD) who had the blessing and priveledge to putting down these rules. If it weren't for them, Orthodoxy could've been like those Jehovah Witnesses' cults. :ohvey: Now would you believe Saint Basil the Great was an idiot with the Canons? Or of course, Saint Photius the Great, (who has done so many miracles) was an idiot presiding the 7th Ecumenical Council. See, these men, weren't simply just men. They are the GOD-bearing Fathers of our Church. Now revolving around the Icon issue, there are many Icons of the Holy Trinity that do miracles. Could that be Divine Economy? Of course there are many exceptions of Economy which sometimes are against the canons, such as the return of heretics back to the Church without baptism.
Tom and Anastasios
Greetings!If you read my article. It does explain that the three angels are simply types of the Trinity but they are not the incarnation of the Trinity. There is only one member of the three angels that is God Himself, and that was the center angel with the cross within the nimbus to signify that this angle is God the Word, which is a fortelling of the future Jesus Christ, but, as I said, if you read my article you will see that the other two angels are merely, that, angels. No more and no less. Not only can the Father not be depicted in icons, but neither the Holy spirit accept in the form or fire or a dove, since these are the only ways the Holy Spirit had been seen.
Anastasios, forgive me, but although you may love the picture of "god the father" as an old man, the Son as a man and the Holy spirit as a bird [dove], it is not an icon and it is presumptuous to paint the image [image is the english word for icon] of God the Father, and Holy Spirit as an icon, because they are not incarnate, only the Son. You can say that an image such as an angel in the icon of the Hospitality of Abraham is a type or symbol of God the Father and the Holy Spirit, but we can not say, that it is an icon of their incarnations.
What has never been seen can not be depicted. This is where the commandment "Thou shalt not make any graven image", comes in. If you call the other two angles in the icon of The Hospitality of the Abraham Father and Holy Spirit, then it becomes a figment of ones imagination. In other words, an idol.
The center angel is itself a type, it points to the coming of the incarnation of God the Son. Since the Father and Holy Spirit have never become incarnate, as Christ Himself says, "No one hath seen the Father at any time".
Now, about the picture of the "holy trinity" performing miracles. This is simple. There are two answers to this question. Firstly, these icons are not performing miracles as "trinity icons", but as "The Hospitality of Abraham" icons, and also we reverence the angels in the icon as the symbol of the Trinity, even as we revere the flag of our country. The flag is not our country, but it is a symbol of it [I am not saying that the flag is as important as the Trinity, I am just using this as an analogy.].
Also, The other possibilities to the miracles, just as any other miracle working icons is not a miracle to show Gods approval, but a warning.
I have noticed from many Orthodox that they believe that just because an icon is miracle working that that automatically means that God must be happy with what is going on.
Although, a miracle that comes from an icon that is a warning from God, the warning is as much of a blessing as a miracle working icon that comes from God as a sign of His favor.
Lastly, this conception that the teachings of the Holy Fathers of the Church "are simply rules made by men", is a Protestant conception. Saint Maximos the Confessor said that the instructions given by the Holy Fathers are not man made, not a personal point of view, but grace filled and inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Without the Fathers, the Orthodox Church would not know absolutely how to define and interpret Christs commandment, or the Canons, or the Liturgy, etc. Orthodoxy and its teachings are not simply another opinion or one of many views about God. They are absolute in the midst of a world of relativism. If Orthodoxy is simply another brick in a wall of thousands of religions that is no better or worse than the rest, then Christ and His teachings are irrelevant, and He was not who He claimed to be.
paul
paul wrote:it is presumptuous to paint the image [image is the english word for icon] of God the Father, and Holy Spirit as an icon, because they are not incarnate, only the Son...What has never been seen can not be depicted. This is where the commandment "Thou shalt not make any graven image", comes in.
Paul,
My concern is not so much defending the Icon, as questioning the validity of your arguments against it, because they sound like the words of an Iconoclast.
An Angel is not incarnate either- it is a Bodiless Power. Therefore, even the Hospitality of Abraham Icon doesn't meet with your criteria. Are there Icons of the Archangels Michael and Gabriel on your Church's Iconostasis? Please have them removed since, according to your criteria, they are graven images. Is it not "presumptuous" to dipyct Bodliess Powers as though they had bodies? And is this not a breech of the Second Commandment?
An Icon is not a photograph and can dipyct the undipyctable- for example, the Uncreated Light that appeared at the Transfiguration is dipycted as circumscribed in a mandorla in the traditional Icon of the Transfiguration. Another example is the Icon of the Ladder of Divine Ascent- this ladder is not a real ladder- it is figurative, yet it is dipycted in Icons.
Nor can we say that dipycting Bodiless Powers is possible only now since the Incarnation. God Himself instructed Moses to dipyct two Cherubim above the Ark of the Covenant and one on the Curtain of the Holy of Holies. Did God instuct the Hebrews to break the Second Commandment?
Be careful Paul- your arguments sound like "Super-correctness" and can easily be interpreted by Iconoclasts as defense of their position.
Now remember! I don't want my post to lash out at some war, so please choose your words carefully. And I ask the people who don't know Paul (including myself) not to be inpolite with him, he is an Iconographer (and he sure knows a little more than us) and is highly known for great God-gifted hands in iconography taken from the technique of the thrice-blessed memory of Photius Kontoglou.
