The History and Development of Iconoclasm
From EJ Hill & Friends
THE HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF ICONOCLASM
by EJ Hill (1977-)
Introduction
When the apostles looked upon Jesus, they beheld the God-man. The apostle John writes,
"And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth" (Jn. 1v14)
Aside from the fact that representations of Christ are false artistic impressions, they also cannot portray the divine nature of Christ. Thus, they not only portrayed Him as infinitely less than He was, is, and ever will be; but also distract from His Divine glory. they implicitly teach a false theology of Christ. And it was this very observation that drove the early church to condemn pictures of Jesus. [1]
The First Council of Nicea (754 AD)
In the year 754 A.D., the First Council of Nicea declared that such pictures are not biblical and therefore are not acceptable in the Church.
The Epitome of the Definition of the Iconoclastic Conciliabulum held in 754 declared:
"Supported by the Holy Scriptures and the Fathers, we declare unanimously, in the name of the Holy Trinity, that there shall be rejected and removed and cursed one of the Christian Church every likeness which is made out of any material and colour whatever by the evil art of painters... If anyone ventures to represent the divine image of the Word after the Incarnation with material colours, let him be anathema!... If anyone shall endeavour to represent the forms of the Saints in lifeless pictures with material colours which are of no value (for this notion is vain and introduced by the devil), and does not rather represent their virtues as living images in himself, let him be anathema!"
"If any person shall divide human nature, united to the Person of God the Word; and, having it only in the imagination of the mind, shall therefore, attempt to paint the same in an Image; let him be holden as accursed. If any person shall divide Christ, being but one, into two persons; placing on the one side the Son of God, and on the other side the son of Mary; neither doth confess the continual union that is made; and by that reason doth paint in an Image of the son of Mary, as subsisting by himself; let him be accursed. If any person shall paint in an Image the human nature, being deified by the uniting thereof to God the Word; separating the same as it were from the Godhead assumpted and deified; let him be holden as accursed." [1]
Regarding this council Phillip Schaff writes,
"The counsel, appealing to the second commandment and other scripture passages denouncing idolatry (Rom. 1:23, 25; John 4:24), and opinions of the fathers (Epiphanius, Eusebius, Gregory Nazianzen, Chrysostom, etc), condemned and forbade the public and private worship of sacred images on pain of disposition and excommunication ... It denounced all religious representations by painter or sculptor as presumptuous, pagan and idolatrous. Those who make pictures of the Saviour, who is God as well as man in one inseparable person, either limit the incomprehensible Godhead to the bounds of created flesh, or confound His two natures like Eutyches, or separate them, like Nestorius, or deny His Godhead, like Arius; and those who worship such a picture are guilty of the same heresy and blasphemy." [2]
Since the Second Council of Nicea in 787 A.D., the use of images in both the Eastern and Western churches continued unabated until the Protestant Reformation, when a rejection of tradition in favor of Scriptural literalism resulted in the rejection of the veneration of images as idolatry on the grounds that it was a clear violation of the Second Commandment:
"Thou shalt have no other gods before Me" (Ex. 20v4-6)
Girolamo Savonarola (1452-1498)
"The fifteenth century Italian friar, charged the church of his day with idolatry in sermon after sermon, 'In the primitive church the chalices were of wood, the prelates of gold; in these days the church has chalices of gold, and prelates of wood.'" [3]
Desiderius Erasmus Roterodamus (1466-1536) of Rotterdam
Erasmus "remained impatient and angry with the penchant for superstition among the people. The cults of statues, the devotion to the relics of the saints – hair, pieces of bone and finger nail clippings – and visits to Madonnas with rolling eyes were vulgar to a man like Erasmus. The people, he thought, cultivated a religion of external acts and substituted pilgrimages, indulgences and relics for true faith. After all, what else had the Church really taught these people?" [4]
John Henry Cardinal Newman says:
"On the subject of Erasmus of Rotterdam, St Alphonsus Liguori tells us that he called the Invocation of Our Lady and of the saints idolatry..." [5]
Ulrich Zwingli (1484-1531)
According to Dr. Peter Hammond, on the 1st of January 1519 Ulrich Zwingli launched a parallel Reformation starting with the expository preaching of the Gospel of Matthew, in Grossmunster, Zurich. The City Council supported Zwingli's Reforms. All Zurich clergymen were ordered to preach only from the Scripture. The Bible became the basis for all law. The council abolished the mass.
"All religious images, statues, relics and ornaments were removed from churches." [6]
Leo Jud (1482-1542)
"The Iconoclastic Riot in Wittenberg was followed by many similar attacks on art works in other places, notably in Zurich in September 1523. There the reformer Leo Jud (1482-1542) had preached the removal of idols, after which altar paintings, crucifixes, and statues of saints were smashed and holy water mocked." [7]
Thomas Cranmer (1489-1559)
When King Henry VIII of England died, his 9-year-old son, a dedicated Protestant, Edward VI, became king. Archbishop Thomas Cranmer initiated sweeping Reforms. It is said that during these reforms "All paintings and images were removed from churches". [6]
Martin Luther (1483–1546)
Luther's views about art changed and developed dramatically throughout his life.
In the early years of his career, while not an iconoclast, he did not support the existence and use of holy images.
Luther said of the Roman Catholic Church, that,
"... they would rather have the devil himself as god and lord, THAN HAVE CHRIST AND LAY ASIDE EVEN A LITTLE OF THEIR IDOLATRY. Not satisfied with that, THEY WOULD COMPEL US POOR CHRISTIANS, WITH THE SWORD, TO JOIN KNOWINGLY IN THEIR WORSHIP OF THE DEVIL AND BLASPHEMY OF CHRIST. Such a defiance no history records and no age has known. Other tyrants have the poor honor of crucifying the Lord of Majesty unknowingly, as do the Turks, heathen, and Jews; but here are men who under Christ's name, and as Christians, nay, as the highest of Christians, puff themselves up and arm themselves against Christ, and say, - 'WE KNOW THAT CHRIST'S WORDS AND DEEDS ARE AGAINST US; NEVERTHELESS, WE WILL NOT ENDURE HIS WORD OR YIELD TO IT, BUT HE MUST YIELD TO US AND ENDURE OUR IDOLATRY; and YET WE WILL BE CHRISTIANS, AND BE KNOWN AS SUCH'." [8]
"... the pope and his followers now declare that the Church must go to death for them, so that they may continue in their tyranny, idolatry, knavery, and all rascality ..." [8]
"The pope and his crew are mere worshippers of idols, and servants of the devil." [9]
Later in his career, he began to use images as an aid in both teaching and devotion. Luther even went so far as to have his translation of the Bible illustrated and to support the work of Protestant artists who were creating art for newly Protestant churches.
Luther didn't fear image-worship, but rather disapproved of the financial expenditures associated with the splendor of the Church. Luther felt that alms given to the Church were appropriately spent in caring for the poor. He instructed his followers to first give to the poor, and when all had been cared for, then they could furnish their churches. Luther criticized the extreme luxury of the Church in his Long Sermon on Usury, "but there should be a limit to this [the luxury of the church], and we should take care that the appurtenances of worship be pure, rather than costly".
Luther did not only criticize the luxury and expense of the Church, but also the possibility of image-worship, especially as it pertained to the saints and pilgrimages. Certain of Luther's statements were very harsh, even iconoclastic, especially in relation to pilgrimage. Pilgrimages were common, and were frequently revolved around certain miraculous works of art.
In Luther's address "To The Christian Nobility of the German Nation", he strongly stated that these pilgrimage shrines must be leveled. Yet, during the iconoclastic riots encouraged by Karlstadt, Luther took a stand against iconoclasm.
In Volume 40 of the American Edition of Luther's Works, he writes of the iconoclasts of his day:
"I have myself seen and heard the iconoclasts read out of my German Bible. I know that they have it and read out of it, as one can easily determine from the words they use. Now there are a great many pictures in those books, both of God, the angels, men and animals, especially in the revelation of John and in Moses and Joshua. So now we would kindly beg them to permit us to do what they themselves do. Pictures contained in these books we would paint on walls of how God created the world, how Noah built the ark, and whatever other good stories there may be, than to paint shameless worldly things. Yes, would to God that I could persuade the rich and the mighty that they would permit the whole Bible to be painted on houses, on the inside and outside, so that all can see it. That would be a Christian work ... Of this I am certain, that God desires to have his works heard and read, especially the passion of our Lord. But it is impossible for me to hear and bear it in mind without forming mental images of it in my heart. For whether I will or not, when I hear of Christ, an image of a man hanging on a cross takes form in my heart, just as the reflection of my face naturally appears in the water when I look into it. If it is not a sin but good to have the image of Christ in my heart, why should it be a sin to have it in my eyes? This is especially true since the heart is more important than the eyes, and should be less stained by sin because it is the true abode and dwelling place of God." [10]
What bother Luther wasn't the removal of images, but the disorderly and disrespectful way in which it was accomplished. Luther did not fear idolatry like Karlstadt and Zwingli did. He did not believe that people equated the images to God, but that it was inappropriate for people to believe that the support of these images was a good work that would improve their fortunes in the afterlife.
Luther seems a bit confused at times. His words and actions did not always correspond. He allowed his translation of the New Testament to be illustrated, but denied his intention to defend imagery. Luther's feelings about images were quite ambivalent. He does not condemn those who destroy images, as long as it was done in an orderly fashion. Luther even seems to encourage iconoclasm when the images being destroyed have been used in an idolatrous manner.
Hugh Latimer (1485-1555)
In a sermon, titled "The Sermon of the Plough", preached at St. Paul's Cross on the 29th of January 1548, Latimer says:
"And his [the Devil's] office is to hinder religion, to maintain superstition, to set up idolatry, to teach all kind of popetrie, he is ready as can be wished for to set forth his plough, to devise as many ways as can be, to deface and obscure God's glory. Where the Devil is resident and hath his plough going: there away with books, and up with candles; away with Bibles and up with beads; away with the light of the gospel and up with the light of candles, yea, at noonday. Where the Devil is resident, that he may prevail, up with all superstition and idolatry, censing, painting of images, candles, palms, ashes, holy water, and new service of men's inventing, as though man could invent a better way to honour God with than God himself hath appointed." [13]
Nicholas Ridley (-1555)
William Farel (1489-1565)
"In response to his vehement sermon against idolatry, there was a wave of destroying superstitious religious images, statues and idols throughout Geneva. Altars were demolished, the mass was abolished, and images were removed from churches." [6]
Martin Bucer (1491-1551)
"Martin Bucer ... though anxious to be regarded as considerate and peaceable ... advocated quite openly 'the power of the authorities over consciences'. He never rested until, in 1537 ... he brought about the entire suppression of the Mass at Augsburg. At his instigation, many fine paintings, monuments and ancient works of art in the churches were wantonly torn, broken and smashed." [11]
John Knox (1514-1572)
"His fiery sermons against idolatry galvanized the Scottish into immediate action. Altars were demolished. Images, statues and crucifixes were removed from churches." [6]
King Edward VI of England (1537-1553)
"Following the accession of Edward VI, royal injunctions ordered the removal of all images from English churches in 1548. Iconoclasm reached a fevered pitch during Edward's reign, resulting in the defacement of baptismal fonts, the destruction of stained glass windows, the whitewashing of pictorial depictions on walls, the painting over, or actual removal of, mounted crosses depicting the crucifixion of Jesus known as roods." [14]
William Perkins (1558-1602)
The Puritan Divine William Perkins wrote a tract, entitled "A Warning Against the Idolatrie of the Last Times".
"In this influential tract, Perkins argues that monuments (as on tombs) are not idols, but that when images are used to represent God or when what is proper to God is ascribed to creatures or things, idolatry is committed. But Perkins goes further in arguing that misconceptions of God, mental images, pose a danger of idolatry and so the mind must be purged of these as well." [14]
William Dowsing (1596-1668)
Dowsing is unique amongst those who committed iconoclasm during this period because he left a journal recording much of what he did, with many detailed entries.
"We brake down about a hundred superstitious pictures; and seven fryers hugging a nun; and the picture of God, and Christ; and divers others very superstitious. And 200 had been broke down afore I came. We took away 2 popish inscriptions with Ora pro nobis and we beat down a great stoning cross on the top of the Church."
Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758)
Following Jonathan Edwards' publication of the journal of David Brainerd, it was said that:
"The revival had greatest impact when Brainerd emphasized the compassion of the Saviour, the provisions of the gospel, and the free offer of divine grace. Idolatry was abandoned, marriages repaired, drunkenness practically disappeared... Their communities were filled with love." [12]
Bibliography
1 Brian Schwertley; Are Pictures of Christ Unbiblical? (Haslett, MI:) (18/04/2008) http://www.entrewave.com/view/reformedonline/Are%20Pictures%20of%20Christ%20Unbiblical.htm
2 Philip Schaff; History of the Christian Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987 [1910], 4:457-458.
3 Jeff Ziegler and Jay Rogers; Revival & Spiritual Awakening; The Forerunner™; 26 February 2007. http://forerunner.com/forerunner/X0606_Revival__Spiritual_A.html
4 The Medieval Synthesis Under Attack: Savonarola and the Protestant Reformation; The History Guide; 28 February 2007; http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/lecture5a.html
5 John Henry Cardinal Newman; Did Martin Luther Regard the Roman Catholic Church as a Non-Christian, Apostate Institution?; 26 June 2006. http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2006/06/did-martin-luther-regard-roman.html
6 Dr. Peter Hammond; The Greatest Century of Reformation (Cape Town, South Africa: The Reformation Society®: Christian Liberty Books, Post Box 358, Howard Place, 7450); ISBN 0-9585100-1-6; pp.7, 10, 13, 16, 79.
7 Reformation & Iconoclasm. http://www.wga.hu/tours/german/iconocla.html
8 The Works of Martin Luther (Philadelphia: A.J. Holman Co. & the Castle Press, 1931, Vol. 5; Introduction and Translation by Charles M. Jacobs – from the Weimar edition of Luther's Works, L, 509-653); pp.133-136.
9 Table-Talk (Philadelphia: The Lutheran Publication Society®; Translated by William Hazlitt); #178, pp.88-89, and #446, p.249.
10 J.J. Pelikan, H.C. Oswald, and H.T. Lehmann, Ed; Luther's Works: Volume 40: Church & Ministry II (Philadelphia: Fortress Press); pp.99-100.
11 John Henry Cardinal Newman; The Early Protestants Were Ecumenical? Not!: Versus Dr. Paul Owen. http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2004/11/early-protestants-were-ecumenical-not.html
12 Selected and Adapted from Flashpoints of Revival; 3 December 2004; http://www.pastornet.net.au/renewal/fire/ff-1700.htm
13 Dr. Ian R.K. Paisley; Hugh Latimer; European Institute of Protestant Studies. (18/04/2008) http://www.ianpaisley.org/article.asp?ArtKey=latimer
14 Carlos R. Piar; Idolatry: Icons and Iconoclasm. (Long Beach: California State University) (18/04/2008) http://www.folger.edu/html/folger_institute/cultural_stress/church_idolatry.html
