View Full Version : The 'ark of salvation' image
Michael, your cat has remarkably similar markings to my calico! Gorgeous shot!
BTW, Nina and Michael, the "icon with the ship" is not really an icon one can venerate, but an illustration rendered in an iconographic style describing "the good ship Orthodoxy" and the various non-Orthodox and non-Christian "forces" battling against it.
I fully accept that many pious people have acquired this image with the best of intentions. I truly don't want to tread on anyone's toes here, or to insult anyone's faith or their person, but I'm afraid this image is little more than an angry polemical piece, originally produced by schismatic Greek Old Calendarists, and more recently reproduced with Slavonic inscriptions and favoured by schismatic Russian groups. It is, of course, incumbent on Orthodox Christians to defend the truths of our faith against heresies and other distortions, but to portray the Pope of Rome, other non-Orthodox, and non-Christians as being in league with demonic forces to destroy Orthodoxy is a debasement of iconography.
Iconography must never be used as a political vehicle, even if the politics depicted are church politics. Even in icons of the matryrdom of saints, past and more recent, such as the Russian New Martyrs, one does not see the persecutors or murderers of the saint(s) portrayed in this way. Neither would you see the members of the Jewish hierarchy thus portrayed in icons of scenes of the betrayal, passion and crucifixion of Christ. Food for thought, friends.
Olga, who said that I have that icon, I venerate it etc? I was just poking fun at myself for asking Michael repeatedly before if he is Orthodox, or not. In any case.
My dear Nina, I was simply pointing out that that image I described should be seen for what it is. It is not an icon, though many people innocently regard it as such. I was not trying to say that you have this image, only that you mentioned it in your earlier post. That's all.
BTW, if an icon corner cannot face east, don't fret. Slavs have a custom of hanging an icon in a corner of every main room in the house. If that corner faces east, great. If this is not possible (and it often isn't, depending on architecture and the orientation of the house relative to the compass points), then the icon is hung in the corner which is first visible when entering the room.
Eric Peterson
08-02-2008, 10:57 PM
I fully accept that many pious people have acquired this image with the best of intentions. I truly don't want to tread on anyone's toes here, or to insult anyone's faith or their person, but I'm afraid this image is little more than an angry polemical piece, originally produced by schismatic Greek Old Calendarists, and more recently reproduced with Slavonic inscriptions and favoured by schismatic Russian groups. It is, of course, incumbent on Orthodox Christians to defend the truths of our faith against heresies and other distortions, but to portray the Pope of Rome, other non-Orthodox, and non-Christians as being in league with demonic forces to destroy Orthodoxy is a debasement of iconography.
Iconography must never be used as a political vehicle, even if the politics depicted are church politics. Even in icons of the matryrdom of saints, past and more recent, such as the Russian New Martyrs, one does not see the persecutors or murderers of the saint(s) portrayed in this way. Neither would you see the members of the Jewish hierarchy thus portrayed in icons of scenes of the betrayal, passion and crucifixion of Christ. Food for thought, friends.
Olga, I believe the icon of the ship of the Church predates the 20th century. Also, I'd be very wary of using absolutes to describe any facets of Orthodoxy, especially of what should or should not be. It usually turns out to be much more complicated, in my experience.
Eric, you are correct in saying the imagery of the ship of Orthodoxy is pre-20thC. In fact, it is very ancient indeed, as evident in the word nave, which describes the area in a church (Orthodox or non-Orthodox) where the congregation stands or sits. If memory serves, the motif of a ship was an element in Christian catacomb art of the earliest centuries.
The "icon" in question is the composition which is making a polemical statement against all who are not Orthodox, and which includes the motif of the ship of Orthodoxy, skippered by Christ, with saints and apostles on board, fending off the assaults of various "enemies of Orthodoxy". It is this image which is quite recent.
Eric Peterson
11-02-2008, 07:25 PM
Olga, as I see it, the icon does not make a polemical statement against non-Orthodox, but a statement of truth about what various hereseiarchs, as perveyors of false doctrines, attempt to do to the Church.
as I see it, the icon does not make a polemical statement against non-Orthodox, but a statement of truth about what various hereseiarchs, as perveyors of false doctrines, attempt to do to the Church.
I second this.
For the interest of readers, I reproduce the description of the image in question, as provided by the monastery which produces and distributes the image:
In the middle, the Church is symbolized as a ship with Christ at the helm holding the holy Rudder. The Rudder in the Orthodox Church is the book which contains the Holy Canons which directs the Church in the proper mode of conduct and confession of Faith. Inside the Ark is the Virgin Mary, and in front of her are the four Evangelists, John, Matthew, Mark and Luke. At the bow of the ship are Peter and Paul, holding the anchor, which is shaped in a three pronged end, signifying belief in the Trinity. Behind them are the Holy Fathers of the Church, Saint John Chrysostom, St. Gregory the Theologian, St. Basil the Great, St. Athanasios of Alexandria, and St. Gregory Palamas, with multitudes of holy Fathers, and Mothers, and Martyrs, etc., etc., as signified by the halos. This all symbolizes the bosom of the Church, both triumphant and militant.
On the bottom of the icon are the enemies of Christ and His Church; that is, all who have fought against Her and persecuted Her, for if one fights against the Church, he is fighting against Christ. From left to right, Antichrist is depicted as a king on his horse and behind him is an old man with a crown on his head, signifying Israel with the star of David on his crown, holding a bag of gold. He has his arm around the harlot of the Apocalypse, with her cup in her hand. Below Antichrist are those who will fight for him. Antichrist is going to come from Jewish lineage, and will reign in Jerusalem and will want all to submit to him. Those who do not will be persecuted. This is the symbolism of those who are under the caption called Antichrist and his Minions.
Next to him to the right is a dreadful looking beast, which is called New Age. New Age is a revival of paganism presented with new packaging. It encompasses the occult, which has absolutely no reverence for Christ.
Next to him is a king on a horse, with a drawn sword in his hand and he is labeled The Persecuting Ruler. Throughout the history of the Church, kings, emperors, governors, etc., have abused their power either by trying to destroy the Church, or by reaching into the realm of the Church to govern it themselves, which is forbidden to them. The Church is governed only by the bishops.
Next to him is one example, the Emperor Leo the Iconoclast, who has a spear in his hand, ready to throw it at the Ark, because he dared to take away the icons which are the glory of the Church and also a dogma which one must believe in to be Orthodox.
Next to him is Luther, with a rifle, ready to shoot. Luther, of course, rebelled against papal abuses, but instead of going back to the Orthodox Church, created his new church, which is properly named not after Christ, but after him. This man symbolizes all of Protestantism which followed his bad example.
Next to him is Lenin, with his Russian pistol carefully aimed at the heart of Christ. He tried to destroy the Russian Church by putting his own KGB agents as bishops. He killed Patriarch Tikhon, who was the heart of the Russian Church, but failed to understand that the Church is not centered around one person. The Church went into the catacombs and lived. One of the bishops of the Catacomb Church was one of the three consecrating bishops who ordained our Archbishop Gregory.
Next to him on the bottom right side is a great beast, with an open mouth, and in his mouth is Mohammed with his tumor on his back, with a drawn bow and arrow directed at the Ark. Mohammed had a tumor of dead skin that protruded from his back, which he told the Arabs was the mark of him being a prophet. Islam has subjugated the Church in the East since the eighth century.
Above him is the Pope, with a long, hooked rod, trying to pull down the bow, either to capsize the boat or redirect it in a direction contrary to the direction that Christ is steering the Ark. When the present day papacy came into being around the year 1054, the pope proclaimed himself as the vicar of Christ and also Christ on earth, thus fighting against the true Christ.
Next to him is Eftyches, the heresiarch who would not accept the decision of the 4th and 5th Ecumenical Councils that Christ has two natures: Christ is both perfect God and perfect man. Eftyches divided the Church with his followers who believed that Christ had only one nature. Therefore, he is depicted with a pointed cowl on his head, which is what the Monophysites wear to this day. Monophysites include the Copts of Egypt, and the Armenians, who are located around Palestine. Behind Eftyches is depicted the demon of the Monophysites and Monothelites.
Next above him is the "Orthodox" Patriarch of Constantinople, Athenagoras, the father of modern day Ecumenism. He also has a hooked rod, trying to redirect the path of the Church. He was a 32 degree Mason, and behind him is the demon of Masonry, who has around his waist the apron which Masons wear with the square and compass and the letter G in the middle. Masons embrace all peoples and faiths into their religion. Ecumenism accepts all religions with a desire to create a one world religion. An Orthodox bishop cannot accept Ecumenism. It is the heresy of all heresies. Because these "Orthodox" bishops accepted the false belief of all religions, not only heretical Christianity, but also Judaism and Islam, saying that "we all worship the same god", just as Masonry tries to do, they are not Orthodox, and in fact fight against the Church.
Let readers make of this what they will.
Let readers make of this what they will.
Thanks Olga!
Mary
From this monastery's own material:
... the Skete was founded in 1979 with the blessing of Archbishop Seraphim of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia.
Following the concelebration of Metropolitan Vitaly with the ecumenist heretic Cyprian of Fili in December of 1995, the Skete broke communion with the ROCA, which had fallen under its own anathema of 1983 and has since slid further and further into the universalist and sergianist bosom of the apostate churches.
Ignorant at the time of the existence of any confessing Orthodox bishops in the Russian episcopate, then-Archimandrite XXX and synodia joined the GOC [Genuine Orthodox Church of Greece] under Chrysostom II Kiousis. Later, finding the President of the Synod to be an ordainer of ecumenists, a persecutor of his bishops and his flock, and a violater of the Church's canons, the Skete left Kiousis' Synod and, in Febuary of 1999, joined the GOC under Metr. Kallinikos of Lamia, presently under the leadership of His Beatitude, Archbishop Makarios of Athens and all Greece.
In 2001, when it became known that there were confessing bishops in Russia who were ordained by the ROCA before the union with Cyprian and did not accept this breach of the canons, the monastic communities were released to join the Russian Orthodox Autonomous Church. Archimandrite XXX was ordained to the episcopacy by these confessing bishops in the same year. In 2004, Bishop XXX was elevated to the rank of Archbishop because of his missionary labours. Not long thereafter, the First Hierarch of the ROAC redirected the course of the Church in an ecumenical direction. Due to this unacceptable sequence of events, Archbishop XXX and his churches throughout America and Bulgaria now find themselves temporarily independent.
I have not supplied this information gratuitously, but to illustrate the origins of the image I have commented on. For this reason I have removed any references to the name of the monastery and its founder. If the moderators of this forum deem this post to be inappropriate and wish to delete this post, they are welcome to do so.
Eric Peterson
18-02-2008, 06:52 PM
Olga, that particular group is possessed of a very strange ecclesiology and, in my mind, they are deluded. But, what I'm saying is, the image did not originate with them. I can't be sure of this, but I've seen it in other places, predating this group.
Also, they're wrong on their history. Athenagoras was not the originator of ecumenism. He was continuing what had gone before him.
Fr Raphael Vereshack
18-02-2008, 11:54 PM
Eric Peterson wrote:
Olga, that particular group is possessed of a very strange ecclesiology and, in my mind, they are deluded. But, what I'm saying is, the image did not originate with them. I can't be sure of this, but I've seen it in other places, predating this group.
The image of the ship or ark to represent the Church is indeed very old.
But what happens here is that the whole meaning of this image has been inverted so that it ends up representing the opposite of its original intent.
The ark of salvation has become a very leaky, one-man dinghy.
In Christ- Fr Raphael
Father David Moser
19-02-2008, 01:55 AM
Olga, that particular group is possessed of a very strange ecclesiology ...
I guess that's just a good example of what can happen when you paint icons while listening to Rush Limbaugh on the radio (I kid you not - I was there, I heard it).
Fr David Moser
Christophoros
13-03-2008, 02:48 PM
I just noticed Uncut Mountain Supply, which is not associated in any way with Dormition Skete, also sells a similar (but not identical) "Ark of Salvation" icon:
http://www.uncutmountainsupply.com/proddetail.asp?prod=GML11
I just noticed Uncut Mountain Supply, which is not associated in any way with Dormition Skete, also sells a similar (but not identical) "Ark of Salvation" icon:
http://www.uncutmountainsupply.com/proddetail.asp?prod=GML11
Whether this distributor of this image is connected with the abovementioned skete is neither here nor there. As I have mentioned before, there is yet another variant I have come across which bears a Slavonic inscription.
Nicolaj
14-03-2008, 02:01 PM
Is there any picture availeble of the discussed 'icon'?
Looked it up on the website of the dormition skete but there is nothing to see.
In Christ, Nicolaj
Christophoros
14-03-2008, 09:00 PM
http://www.dormitionskete.org/DsWebStore/product_info.php?products_id=435&osCsid=3e2c0f4b9905666475ba409b43c8b74b
Nicolaj
28-03-2008, 11:06 PM
Thanks for this, but there is nothing to see on the picture for it is so tiny!!!!
Anyone has something better to offer?
In Christ, Nicolaj
Nicolaj, you can copy the icon from this link (http://www.uncutmountainsupply.com/proddetail.asp?prod=GML11)(it has better resolution) and after pasting it you can magnify it to see the image better.
Christophoros
16-08-2008, 03:52 PM
Attached is a drawing from "The Ark of Salvation" fresco at Zograph Monastery on Mount Athos, dated 1817.
Eric Peterson
16-08-2008, 05:43 PM
I didn't think "ecumenists" was a term used in 1817, nor "New Age."
Yeah, it says "after a fresco"- it's not the fresco itself, which I'd be curious to see an image of.
Nicolaj
17-08-2008, 08:18 PM
Thanks for the Picture, now we look for the fresco!
In Christ, Nicolaj
I didn't think "ecumenists" was a term used in 1817, nor "New Age."
One of the characters in this drawing is indeed labelled "New Age" (Nea Epoche). It is the dragon with the curly tail at bottom left. The figure of the bishop surrounded by the two demons is labelled "Ecumenist" (Oikoumenistis). The Slavonic inscription is also rendered in a more modern form of script than would have been used in the 19thC. I suspect this drawing dates from the early to mid-20thC.
It would be very interesting to see the fresco which "inspired" this drawing. At a guess, I suspect it may be an icon of the Last Judgement, or of the Ladder of Divine Ascent. Both these icons contain common elements with this drawing, but have an utterly different meaning to it.
Fabio Lins
10-09-2008, 05:55 PM
I would like to understand what is wrong with this image. Are not the "enemies of the church" pictures therein really enemies of the Church? Doesn't this image reveal in pictures the spiritual reality of the ongoing spiritual war the Church faces? When politics is used against the Church should we not denounce it just because our reaction will obviously have political aspects too? Should the prophets who denounced kings and princes be reproached just because in their spiritual mission political consequences issued?
I ask these questions not rethorically, but with all honesty trying to understand. As I see it, *there is* a political, cultural war against the Church that is but an instrument of the overral spiritual war the demons have been waging against Her (of which we are members and therefore "military targets"). Although the inner strugle against passions should be in the forefront and is the "field of war" par excellence, I fail to see how reacting in the cultural or political level would not be spiritual either.
Herman Blaydoe
10-09-2008, 06:10 PM
I would like to understand what is wrong with this image. Are not the "enemies of the church" pictures therein really enemies of the Church?
Perhaps not. Or maybe they simply are not the REAL enemies of the Church, deflecting our attention from that which is needful?
Doesn't this image reveal in pictures the spiritual reality of the ongoing spiritual war the Church faces?
Honestly, I don't know. Does it? Some in authority as Olga says, think not, or at least not in an appropriately edifying manner.
When politics is used against the Church should we not denounce it just because our reaction will obviously have political aspects too? Should the prophets who denounced kings and princes be reproached just because in their spiritual mission political consequences issued?
Interesting observation. Do you know (can you cite) reference to icons of a similar nature that show the prophets specifically denouncing kings and princes? Is there a genre of icons that depict this specifically? If so, then perhaps a determination might be made as to whether or not this particular icon belongs to that genre (I really would have to see specific examples however to make a comparison).
I ask these questions not rethorically, but with all honesty trying to understand. As I see it, *there is* a political, cultural war against the Church that is but an instrument of the overral spiritual war the demons have been waging against Her (of which we are members and therefore "military targets"). Although the inner strugle against passions should be in the forefront and is the "field of war" par excellence, I fail to see how reacting in the cultural or political level would not be spiritual either.
Again, if you can direct me to similar authoritative icons that depict such things, it would be much easier to decide if this particular icon fits in that genre or not. If that genre does not exist, then that perhaps ought to serve as evidence that this might not be an appropriate subject to iconify. Otherwise, if the subject is appropriate, then we must ask if this particular icon does so in an appropriate manner. Concerns as to why this might NOT be so have already been fairly well covered, at least to best determination of this bear of admittedly little brain.
Herman the Pooh
Herman makes some very valid points to Fabio's enquiry. This matter could be approached in various ways, my first thought on reading their posts was "where do I start?". My second thought was "there is no such thing as a brief reply to this". My apologies for the length of this post:
First and foremost, iconography is, above all else, concerned with the revelation of God in Trinity: of the incarnation of the Son and Word of God which has allowed the sanctification of fallen creation (matter), including humanity (made in the image of God)**; of the signs and wonders of the Divine revelation in both the Old and New Testament periods; and, in its portrayal of the saints, their transfiguration from mere men and women into those who have attained deification, a "oneness with God" and full participation of the heavenly life with God and in God, through the conduct of their earthly lives and their steadfast witness to the true faith. They have become true icons and reflections of the Divine. The word godly is most apt to describe them.
(** St John of Damascus sums this up beautifully: "Of old, the incorporeal and uncircumscribed God was not depicted at all. But now that God has appeared in the flesh and lived among men, I make an image of God who can be seen. I do not worship matter, but I worship the Creator of matter, who through matter effected my salvation. I will not cease to venerate the matter through which my salvation has been effected."
Secondly, in the same way that the saints have obliterated their passions to give themselves completely to God, icons must also reflect this dispassionate quality. Obvious displays of human emotions, even a “positive” one such as laughter, are considered to be manifestations of human passion, and therefore have no place in iconography. Christ’s kingdom is “not of this world” (John 18: 36), therefore the portrayal of saints in their spiritually transformed state must be dispassionate. This also applies to church singing and reading; the singers and readers are there to glorify God and serve the church by their efforts, not to self-aggrandise. Even the display of sorrow in the face of a saint or the Mother of God should be kept subtle, with the emotion conveyed with the eyes, not through histrionics.
Thirdly, there must be complete agreement between scripture, liturgical content (which represents the distillation of the doctrinal, dogmatic and theological position of the Church - readers may remember the thread on the iconography of St Joseph the Betrothed from a while back), and the pictorial content of an icon for any icon to be deemed canonical.
Hence there is no place for ugliness, anger, enmity, and other negative emotions in iconography. The purpose of an icon is to draw us closer to God. Of course, there are specific examples of didactic icons, such as Last Judgement and Ladder of Divine Ascent which feature fearsome dragon-like creatures swallowing unrepentant evildoers. The Resurrection icon shows the personification of sin and death bound in chains in the abyss. It may be said, therefore, if there is room for such portrayals in these canonical icons, then why object to the presence of the figures in the Ark of Salvation image?
I offer this reply: An icon is a material, tangible expression of the incarnate God. The iconographic portrayal of the saints as icons of Christ, then, should reflect the sanctity, dispassion and boundless compassionate mercy of Christ to those who repent of their sins. Do we not pray to the saints and the Mother of God to intercede on our behalf? Are we not exhorted to pray for our enemies, to love them, and not to hate them? Of all scripture passages on this theme, Matt. 5: 43-48 is perhaps the most useful and succinct:
“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbour and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.
We are also assured that God is Love, and that His love and mercy are available to all who seek Him in true faith. There are petitions in various Orthodox litanies which ask for the repentance and return to the true faith of sinners, apostates, and, yes, enemies. One which immediately comes to mind is "Let us pray for those who love us, and those who hate us", a petition in the litany sung towards the end of the Great Compline services of Great Lent where the Canon of St Andrew of Crete is sung.
Herman rightly raised the question of the iconographic portrayal of prophets and saints who denounced kings and princes. Such scenes are found in the smaller panels of a "life" icon of a saint or prophet (an icon which has a large central panel of the saint or prophet, surrounded by a series of smaller panels showing scenes of his or her life). Keeping to the dispassionate nature of icons, these scenes of rebuke of kings and princes (such as in icons of Prophet Elijah, and any number of OT and NT saints and righteous ones) show the saint standing before the errant ruler with a hand raised in rebuke, but nothing more. It is also significant that such scenes, almost without exception, are never used as icons in their own right.
it is not surprising that certain schismatic groups have favoured this image as it reflects their particular ideology. To me, this so-called Ark of Salvation image suggests that those who are not Orthodox are somehow beyond repentance and redemption. Can we really agree with this as Orthodox Christians? The persecuting Pharisee Saul openly boasted of his zeal and success in persecuting Christians, yet, by the grace of God, became one of the Princes of the Apostles, a pillar of Orthodoxy. There are also innumerable converts to the Orthodox faith who have come from every religious background imaginable, including atheism, paganism and Communism; many who have become saints, in times of old, and in our present day. The grace of God knows no bounds.
Iconography, as I have said before, must never be used for political or ideological purposes. To portray the non-Orthodox as a whole as being irredeemable and in league with demonic and evil forces to destroy Orthodoxy is a shameful debasement of iconography. I am reminded of a reply to a convert to Orthodoxy as to how he came to the conclusion that the Orthodox faith was the true faith: "The Soviet Union was capable of destroying anything. Yet, despite its immense power and resources, it could not destroy the Orthodox Church. So that was good enough for me." The gates of hell cannot prevail, indeed ...
My apologies again for the length of this post.
Fr Raphael Vereshack
11-09-2008, 03:18 PM
This reminded me of the drawing called И НАИС ТИС ЕККЛИСИАС (sorry- don't have Greek font on my PC) which I believe means SHIP (or ark?) of the Church.
In terms of this discussion it is interesting that in this ship are only Christ and the apostles. Since they are shown simply amidst waters the clear suggesion is that the Church in itself as guided by Christ and the Apostles is the saving ark of salvation as we cross the waters of this life. This is the only point of the drawing.
Secondly this is clearly a drawing and not an icon, in the style of if not actually drawn by Photios Kontoglou .
In Christ- Fr Raphael
This reminded me of the drawing called И НАИС ТИС ЕККЛИСИАС (sorry- don't have Greek font on my PC) which I believe means SHIP (or ark?) of the Church.
In terms of this discussion it is interesting that in this ship are only Christ and the apostles. Since they are shown simply amidst waters the clear suggesion is that the Church in itself as guided by Christ and the Apostles is the saving ark of salvation as we cross the waters of this life. This is the only point of the drawing.
Secondly this is clearly a drawing and not an icon, in the style of if not actually drawn by Photios Kontoglou .
In Christ- Fr Raphael
There is nothing objectionable in the figure of Christ and the saints sailing "the good ship Orthodoxy" on the waters of life. What is objectionable is the presence of the other figures on the shore.
It is unlikely Kontoglou himself produced this drawing; there was a certain roughness (for want of a better word) in his artistic technique, and the inscriptions do not resemble his hand or inscription style at all, from the work of his that I have seen.
It is standard practice for painters and iconographers alike to produce line drawings (cartoons) of their proposed work, as drafts, or to be traced onto the surface to be painted, particularly in the case of murals or frescoes. This drawing may well be such a cartoon.
Fabio Lins
12-09-2008, 06:19 AM
Thank you for your replies. I understand it now, plus a couple of other reasons have come to my mind as well. :)
Fabio L. Leite
Thank you for your replies. I understand it now, plus a couple of other reasons have come to my mind as well. :)
Could you share these reasons with us?
Fabio Lins
12-09-2008, 03:43 PM
Could you share these reasons with us?
Certainly. :)
I think of the martyrs as a reference. We also do not have icons with the particularly gross ways many of them died. Still, some of them have in their icons the instruments of their deaths (the icon of St. Catherine is one that comes to my mind).
This is related, as I see it, to a question that some atheists ask: why God does not heal amputees or mutilated people? Because I am not very miracle interested I really do not know if there is not such cases (I would guess there are). But, I cannot fail to see that even the ressurrected glorified body of Our Lord kept the wounds.
What I mean is that whatever our crosses may be, they are glorified along with us just like the Cross was glorified itself and Jesus' wounds. And what matters in the icon is the glorified aspect, not the past wordly one.
Political struggles *are* something particularly gross and the consequences they have in our life and in the church *will* be glorified and that is what matters in the icon. Thus, images that depict them as they are in the world - even in symbolic ways - are not icons as didatic as they may be.
I think that it is important to make clear that there are people and groups who oppose the church. I feel a chill everytime I see people equating socialism - the ideology that killed most Christians ever - with some sort of "secular expression" of Christianism and simply ignoring that it was in free capitalist societies that people fled from those said "social" expressions of "christianism". But pseudo-icons are not the place to express this because this is an eartlhy struggle, much like the instrument of torture of the martyrs.
Christophoros
07-10-2008, 11:41 PM
Here are two scans of the "Mystical Icon of our Holy Orthodox Church Amidst Persecutions," available from Dormition Skete and Uncut Mountain Supply.
Some noticable differences between the two are:
1) The soldier holding the spear near the middle bottom is labeled "Julian the Apostate" in the Uncut icon, and "Leo the Iconoclast" in the Dormition Skete version.
2) The Dormition Skete icon adds the figure of Lenin next to Luther.
3) The beast in the lower right hand corner is labeled "Hades" on the Uncut icon, and "Mohammed" in the Dormition Skete version.
4) The red demon figure on the far right is labeled "Assembly of Heretics" and the figure dressed in episcopal vestments is labeled "Ecumenists" in the Uncut icon, while the two are labeled "Athenagoras and the Demon of Freemasonry" on the Dormition Skete icon.
Christophoros
Thank you very much for posting these enlarged images. They will come in very useful when I next give a presentation on uncanonical icons. The tweaking of the apellations of the images is quite instructive; an unfortunate example of manipulating an already suspect image to suit a particular "ecclesiopolitical" view. Very sad.
M.C. Steenberg
08-10-2008, 01:10 AM
Such icons are classic examples of zealous enthusiasm for the sanctity of the Church, and a deep desire to proclaim its unique truth in the face of heresy, nonetheless completely ignoring the canonical traditions they mean to proclaim with such vigour.
INXC, Dcn Matthew
In an earlier post, Fr Raphael wrote:
This reminded me of the drawing called И НАИС ТИС ЕККЛИСИАС (sorry- don't have Greek font on my PC) which I believe means SHIP (or ark?) of the Church.
In terms of this discussion it is interesting that in this ship are only Christ and the apostles. Since they are shown simply amidst waters the clear suggesion is that the Church in itself as guided by Christ and the Apostles is the saving ark of salvation as we cross the waters of this life. This is the only point of the drawing.
Secondly this is clearly a drawing and not an icon, in the style of if not actually drawn by Photios Kontoglou .
Here is that drawing, which has an inscription "by the hand of Rallis Kopsidis", and a date, which as far as I can decipher, is most likely 1956.
http://www.bombaxo.com/blog/images/ship_lg.jpg
Here is a little about him:
Born at Kastro on the Island of Limnos in 1929, Rallis Kopsidis studied at the School of Fine Arts (1949-1953) with Andreas Georgiadis, but abandoned his studies at the fourth year in order to continue with Photis Kondoglou (1953-1959). He had his first one-man exhibition in Athens (1958) and has shown his work in several Greek cities at other solo and group exhibitions, including a number of Pan-Hellenic ones. He has painted in a contemporary perception the hagiographies of the Patriarchal Center at Chambesy (Geneva) and has written and illustrated several literary books. He is one of the main representatives of the Hellenic style and his work contains elements of the naive and Byzantine painting. He lives and works in Athens.
Fr Raphael Vereshack
15-10-2008, 03:54 PM
Thank you for the information!
In Christ- Fr Raphael
My wife and I were on vacation in Moscow and we visited the Tretyakov gallery. In the section devoted to icons, I did indeed come across an "Ark of Salvation" icon very similar to the ones under discussion. It was dated to the 18th century. It did not, of course, have Lenin or "ecumenists" depicted but there was indeed an array of figures on the shore menacing the Ark, including a figure firing a musket and someone enthroned whom I guessed was the Pope. And there was also a turbaned man, whom I assume to be Muhammad, aiming a bow, as well as other figures. I don't think there were labels attached to identify them, and I didn't have much time to examine the icon, but I think it can surely be said that these contemporary "Ark of Salvation" icons have precedent- which is of course a separate question from whether they are legitimate.
My wife and I were on vacation in Moscow and we visited the Tretyakov gallery. In the section devoted to icons, I did indeed come across an "Ark of Salvation" icon very similar to the ones under discussion. It was dated to the 18th century. It did not, of course, have Lenin or "ecumenists" depicted but there was indeed an array of figures on the shore menacing the Ark, including a figure firing a musket and someone enthroned whom I guessed was the Pope. And there was also a turbaned man, whom I assume to be Muhammad, aiming a bow, as well as other figures. I don't think there were labels attached to identify them, and I didn't have much time to examine the icon, but I think it can surely be said that these contemporary "Ark of Salvation" icons have precedent- which is of course a separate question from whether they are legitimate.
The presence of an icon in a state museum does not, in itself, confer canonicity upon it. Museums and galleries all over the world, including in countries where Orthodoxy is the dominant faith, possess "icons" of unmistakeably uncanonical content. The matter of historical precedent is quite irrelevant, other than from a purely historical perspective. But, historical perspective is irrelevant to the liturgical and doctrinal integrity of an icon.
Do you have a picture or a link to the image in the Tretyakov?
I brought this up entirely as a matter of historical interest- I'm not attached to this image nor will I defend it. Of course there are many questionable images which are centuries old.
Unfortunately I don't have a photograph of the image, and I can't find it online. As I recall, it was somewhere toward the middle of the exhibition and was part of a free-standing display (as opposed to one of the displays along the walls). Anyone going through the Gallery with his eyes peeled will definitely see it.
Fr Raphael Vereshack
27-06-2011, 01:58 PM
Unfortunately I don't have a photograph of the image, and I can't find it online. As I recall, it was somewhere toward the middle of the exhibition and was part of a free-standing display (as opposed to one of the displays along the walls). Anyone going through the Gallery with his eyes peeled will definitely see it.
Most of the art galleries in Russia for understandable reasons either entirely forbid or else greatly restrict the taking of photos. From what I recall Tretyakov is one of those galleries that is very strict about this.
In Christ-
Fr Raphael
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.5 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.