Why does the Western Church make depictions of God the Father?

[Up_In_The_Sky]

The Great Moscow Synod (1666-1667) condemned depictions of God the Father and only allowed for depictions of God the Son/Jesus and the Holy Spirit as a dove in the context of the baptismal theophany. Some old Orthodox churches might still have icons of God the Father and there were some notable artists even after the Moscow Synod who broke the rules and continued to make such depictions, but it is generally forbidden in the Orthodox Church to make any kind of artistic depiction of God the Father.

Why does the Latin Church allow artistic depictions of God the Father? The Gospel of John tells us that no one has seen the Father at any time but the Son, and even the Ancient of Days in the Book of Daniel is interpreted as God the Son since seeing the Son is the closest one can get to seeing the Father as Jesus himself affirms in John 14:9. It seems that anthropomorphic depictions of God the Father have led to the whole nonsense of the “the old bearded guy in the sky”. So why does the Latin Church approve icons and paintings of God the Father?

 

[OldCAFMember]

I think that you’ve got the question backwards. It should read, “Why did a portion of the Eastern Churches suddenly decide in the 17th century that artistic depictions that had never previously been forbidden should be, even though even some Eastern churches had long possessed such icons?”

 

[joeybaggz]

So why does the Latin Church approve icons and paintings of God the Father?

Your word, “approve” is totally wrong. The church does not give its approval to works of art as matters of faith or morals. You need to rethink your question.

 

[Up_In_The_Sky]

Wrong.

It is most absurd and improper to depict in icons the Lord Sabaoth (that is to say, God the Father) with a grey beard and the Only-Begotten Son in His bosom with a dove between them, because no-one has seen the Father according to His Divinity, and the Father has no flesh, nor was the Son born in the flesh from the Father before the ages. And though David the prophet says, “From the womb before the morning star have I begotten Thee” that birth was not fleshly, but unspeakable and incomprehensible. For Christ Himself says in the holy Gospel, “No man hath seen the Father, save the Son”.cf.And Isaiah the prophet says in his fortieth chapter: “To whom have ye likened the Lord? and with what likeness have ye made a similitude of Him? Has not the artificier of wood made an image, or the goldsmiths, having melted gold, gilt it over, and made it a similitude?” In like manner the Apostle Paul says in Acts “Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver or stone, graven by art of man’s imagination.” And John Damascene says: “But furthermore, who can make a similitude of the invisible, incorporeal, uncircumscribed and undepictable God? It is, then, uttermost insanity and impiety to give a form to the Godhead” (Orthodox Faith, 4:16). In like manner St. Gregory the Dialogist prohibits this. For this reason we should only form an understanding in the mind of Sabaoth, which is the Godhead, and of that birth before the ages of the Only-Begotten-Son from the Father, but we should never, in any wise depict these in icons, for this, indeed, is impossible. And the Holy Spirit is not in essence a dove, but in essence he is God, and “No man hath seen God”, as John the Theologian and Evangelist bears witness and this is so even though, at the Jordan at Christ’s holy Baptism the Holy Spirit appeared in the likeness of a dove. For this reason, it is fitting on this occasion only to depict the Holy Spirit in the likeness of a dove. But in any other place those who have intelligence will not depict the Holy Spirit in the likeness of a dove. For on Mount Tabor, He appeared as a cloud and, at another time, in other ways. Furthermore, Sabaoth is the name not only of the Father, but of the Holy Trinity. According to Dionysios the Areopagite, Lord Sabaoth, translated from the Jewish tongue, means “Lord of Hosts”. This Lord of Hosts is the Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. And although Daniel the prophet says that he beheld the Ancient of Days sitting on a throne, this should not be understood to refer to the Father, but to the Son, Who at His second coming will judge every nation at the dreadful Judgment

 

[Up_In_The_Sky]

Depictions of God the Father did not begin until the 10th century in the West and St. John of Damascus says quite plainly,

In former times, God who is without form or body, could never be depicted. But now when God is seen in the flesh conversing with men, I make an image of the God whom I see"

Again he says,

“If we attempt to make an image of the invisible God, this would be sinful indeed. It is impossible to portray one who is without body: invisible, uncircumscribed and without form.”

• Three Treatises on the Divine Images, St. John of Damascus (730 A.D.)

 

[edward_george1]

Flagged. Let’s move along, folks.

-Fr ACEGC