Since the unity of the Trinity is - as far as I know - a love that is (by natural human standards) reckless in its total self-donation and is poetically compared to a furnace (the Psalms podcast has reminded me to think in concrete images; of course the vicinity of Pittsburgh is a fine place to contemplate real imagery of "a furnace" because this was a city of steel mills), I will be, figuratively, watching with interest.
I tend to think that the idea that icons are "written not painted" is American Orthodoxy trying to make its stuff sound more special, with a tinge of anti-Western Christianity since its post-schism religious art is "merely" painted according to this view. Which is not to say that there aren't theological differences between East and West on what an icon is. Which itself is not to say that Catholics are not iconodules!
Yes, a simple web search will give many different answers to this question as it does to any question. A simple web search on my part yielded the following discussions of the matter:
Which discussions all cohere in explaining that the confusion is caused by a single Russian word, and a single Greek word, being equivalent to the English words for painting and writing. I'm not going to pretend I am an expert, but that seems to me to make far more sense than "something made with paint is not painted because God guided its creation".
Is the creation of icons part of the devotion? If there were a perfect copy of the icon placed in the cathedral for veneration, would it have the same power? That is, does the image itself convey the message of the Trinity, or is it the whole history of the object?
Hopefully priest Gundyayev will no longer be sitting atop the Orthodox community founded by Stalin's NKVD in 1943. It could well be another glowie, but hopefully someone less prone to abusing history and holy things like this ikon for present purposes.
North American English; featured in stories or well known.
Since the unity of the Trinity is - as far as I know - a love that is (by natural human standards) reckless in its total self-donation and is poetically compared to a furnace (the Psalms podcast has reminded me to think in concrete images; of course the vicinity of Pittsburgh is a fine place to contemplate real imagery of "a furnace" because this was a city of steel mills), I will be, figuratively, watching with interest.
"Andrei Rublev painted the icon in honor of St. Sergius of Radonezh, who founded the Trinity Lavra monastery in 1337."
Iconographers and iconodules say icons are written not painted.
I tend to think that the idea that icons are "written not painted" is American Orthodoxy trying to make its stuff sound more special, with a tinge of anti-Western Christianity since its post-schism religious art is "merely" painted according to this view. Which is not to say that there aren't theological differences between East and West on what an icon is. Which itself is not to say that Catholics are not iconodules!
Yes, a simple web search will give many different answers to this question as it does to any question. A simple web search on my part yielded the following discussions of the matter:
https://russianicons.wordpress.com/2011/08/31/is-an-icon-painted-or-written
https://orthodoxartsjournal.org/is-write-wrong-a-discussion-of-iconology-lingo-2/
https://catalog.obitel-minsk.com/blog/2017/02/painted-or-written
Which discussions all cohere in explaining that the confusion is caused by a single Russian word, and a single Greek word, being equivalent to the English words for painting and writing. I'm not going to pretend I am an expert, but that seems to me to make far more sense than "something made with paint is not painted because God guided its creation".
Is the creation of icons part of the devotion? If there were a perfect copy of the icon placed in the cathedral for veneration, would it have the same power? That is, does the image itself convey the message of the Trinity, or is it the whole history of the object?
The veneration given to an ikon passes through the ikon to the prototype (the one depicted).
Putin and his ally, Kyrill in using St Andrei’s ikon of the Triune Unity as a political thing blasphemes the Trinity, one in essence and undivided.
Anaxios!
But would veneration given to a copy of an icon pass through to the prototype? Is the veneration doing the work or the icon?
Hopefully priest Gundyayev will no longer be sitting atop the Orthodox community founded by Stalin's NKVD in 1943. It could well be another glowie, but hopefully someone less prone to abusing history and holy things like this ikon for present purposes.