image "of Christ or of some other saint," which he had torn down and
ordered to be used for the burial of a pauper. The passage, however,
reveals not only what Epiphanius thought on the subject, but also that
such pictures must have been becoming frequent. Nilus, the disciple and
defender of Chrysostom, permitted the symbol of the cross in churches
and also pictorial delineations of Old and New Testament history, but
deprecated other symbols, pictures of martyrs, and most of all the
representation of Christ. In the time of Gregory the Great the Western
Church obtained something like an authoritative declaration on the
question about images, but in a sense not quite the same as that of the
synod of Elvira. Serenus of Marseilles had ordered the destruction of
all sacred images within his diocese; this action called forth several
letters from Pope Gregory (viii. 2. III; ix. 4. 11), in which he
disapproved of that course, and, drawing the distinction which has since
been authoritative for the Roman Church, pointed out that--
"It is one thing to worship a picture and another to learn from the
language of a picture what that is which ought to be worshipped. What
those who can read learn by means of writing, that do the uneducated
learn by looking at a picture.... That, therefore, ought not to have
been destroyed which had been placed in the churches, not for worship,
but solely for instructing the minds of the ignorant."
With regard to the symbol of the cross, its public use dates from the
time of Constantine, though, according to many Christian archaeologists
it had, prior to that date, a very important place in the so-called
"disciplina arcani." The introduction of the crucifix was later;
originally the favourite combination was that of the figure of a lamb
lying at the foot of the cross; the council of Constantinople, called
"in Trullo," in 692 enjoined that this symbol should be discontinued,
and that where Christ was shown in connexion with his cross he should be
represented in his human nature. In the catacombs Christ is never
represented hanging on the cross, and the cross itself is only portrayed
in a veiled and hesitating manner. In the Egyptian churches the cross
was a pagan symbol of life borrowed by the Christians and interpreted in
the pagan manner. The cross of the early Christian emperors was a
_labarum_ or token of victory in war, a standard for use in battle.
Religious feeling in the West recoiled from the crucifix as late as the
6th century, and it was equally abhorrent to the Monophysites of the
East who regarded the human nature of Christ as swallowed up in the
divine. Nevertheless it seems to have originated in the East, perhaps as
a protest against the extreme Monophysites, who even denied the
passibility of Christ. Perhaps the Nestorians, who clung to the human
aspect of Christ, introduced it about 550. From the East it soon passed
to the West.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account