Do the Church Fathers Endorse Bowing to the King’s Statue?
The Second Council of Nicaea tried to use a statement from Basil to justify a belief that bowing to lifeless images was an acceptable and necessary practice of the church:
We do not fritter away the theology in a divided plurality, because one Form, so to say, united in the invariableness of the Godhead, is beheld in God the Father, and in God the Only begotten. For the Son is in the Father and the Father in the Son; since such as is the latter, such is the former, and such as is the former, such is the latter; and herein is the Unity. So that according to the distinction of Persons, both are one and one, and according to the community of Nature, one. How, then, if one and one, are there not two Gods? Because we speak of a king, and of the king’s image, and not of two kings. The majesty is not cloven in two, nor the glory divided. The sovereignty and authority over us is one, and so the doxology ascribed by us is not plural but one; because the honour paid to the image passes on to the prototype. Now what in the one case the image is by reason of imitation, that in the other case the Son is by nature; and as in works of art the likeness is dependent on the form, so in the case of the divine and uncompounded nature the union consists in the communion of the Godhead. – Basil, on the Holy Spirit, Chapter 18
The Cathodox infer that if Basil would use an analogy that insulting the Son of God is like insulting the image of an emperor, that means he endorses bowing to literal images of emperors! But in reality, all of the church fathers use this analogy – even those church fathers who the Cathodox ADMIT are strictly opposed to image-veneration! Therefore, Basil’s statement is not any kind of endorsement of bowing to the images of emperors. On the contrary, he knew full well that bowing to the emperor’s image would be a denial of the Christian faith.
Epiphanius: 24,1 They violate the arrangement and sequence of the scriptures, and as far as they are able, dismember the truth. They alter and remodel and, by making one thing out of another, completely fool many with their poorly assembled show of the accommodated oracles of the Lord. 24,4 It is as though a beautiful portrait of a king had been carefully made of fine gems by a wise craftsman, and someone were to destroy the image as it stood, reset those gems and recombine them, and produce a likeness of a dog or fox, and poorly made at that— and then state categorically that this was the beautiful portrait of the king which the wise craftsman had made and, by displaying the gems the former craftsman had fitted becomingly into the king’s portrait but the latter had reset badly as a likeness of a dog, defraud with the show of the gems the less experienced who had no idea of the king’s appearance, and convince them that this latter poor effigy of the fox was the former beautiful portrait of the king. In precisely the same way these people have cobbled old wives’ tales together, and then they extract words, sayings and parables from here and there, and want to adapt the oracles of God to their yarns. – Panarion 24.1
This passage is actually a direct quote from Irenaeus in Against Heresies, Book 1, Chapter 8. This is the greatest refutation of the Cathodox, and yet they do the VERY THING Irenaeus is describing by using quotes like this to prove Irenaeus and the fathers endorsed image-worship!
Irenaeus: Such, then, is their system, which neither the prophets announced, nor the Lord taught, nor the apostles delivered, but of which they boast that beyond all others they have a perfect knowledge. They gather their views from other sources than the Scriptures; and, to use a common proverb, they strive to weave ropes of sand, while they endeavour to adapt with an air of probability to their own peculiar assertions the parables of the Lord, the sayings of the prophets, and the words of the apostles, in order that their scheme may not seem altogether without support. In doing so, however, they disregard the order and the connection of the Scriptures, and so far as in them lies, dismember and destroy the truth. By transferring passages, and dressing them up anew, and making one thing out of another, they succeed in deluding many through their wicked art in adapting the oracles of the Lord to their opinions. Their manner of acting is just as if one, when a beautiful image of a king has been constructed by some skilful artist out of precious jewels, should then take this likeness of the man all to pieces, should rearrange the gems, and so fit them together as to make them into the form of a dog or of a fox, and even that but poorly executed; and should then maintain and declare that this was the beautiful image of the king which the skilful artist constructed, pointing to the jewels which had been admirably fitted together by the first artist to form the image of the king, but have been with bad effect transferred by the latter one to the shape of a dog, and by thus exhibiting the jewels, should deceive the ignorant who had no conception what a king’s form was like, and persuade them that that miserable likeness of the fox was, in fact, the beautiful image of the king. In like manner do these persons patch together old wives’ fables, and then endeavour, by violently drawing away from their proper connection, words, expressions, and parables whenever found, to adapt the oracles of God to their baseless fictions. – Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 1, Chapter 8
Theophilus of Antioch: And what great thing is it if God made the world out of existent materials? For even a human artist, when he gets material from some one, makes of it what he pleases. But the power of God is manifested in this, that out of things that are not He makes whatever He pleases; just as the bestowal of life and motion is the prerogative of no other than God alone. For even man makes indeed an image, but reason and breath, or feeling, he cannot give to what he has made. But God has this property in excess of what man can do, in that He makes a work, endowed with reason, life, sensation. As, therefore, in all these respects God is more powerful than man, so also in this; that out of things that are not He creates and has created things that are, and whatever He pleases, as He pleases. – Theophilus, To Autolycus, book 2, chapter 4
Origen: And so that you may be more persuaded that if you revile your neighbor, you have reviled Christ, I will also present this from the holy letters: if anyone abuses the wooden or waxen image of an emperor, he is condemned as if he had abused the emperor, since he commits an abuse against the image. And you, if you abuse or revile someone who has already restored the “in the image” of the Creator, it is his image that you have abused and reviled. Therefore, one must beware of speaking ill and reviling one’s neighbor or acting in any way wickedly. For Christ receives all that happens to himself, either good or bad, that you do to the neighbor. This will suffice for “An enemy has reproached the Lord. – Origen, Homily 3 on Psalm 73, Section 6
Origen: And again, they who put off the old man with his deeds, and put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of Him that has created him, in taking upon them the image of Him who has created them, do raise within themselves a statue like to what the Most High God Himself desires. And as among statuaries there are some who are marvellously perfect in their art, as for example Pheidias and Polycleitus, and among painters, Zeuxis and Apelles, while others make inferior statues, and others, again, are inferior to the second-rate artists — so that, taking all together, there is a wide difference in the execution of statues and pictures — in the same way there are some who form images of the Most High in a better manner and with a more perfect skill; so that there is no comparison even between the Olympian Jupiter of Pheidias and the man who has been fashioned according to the image of God the Creator. – Origen, Against Celsus, book 8, chapter 17
Cyprian: And indeed in that very matter, for the sake of the fear which faith suggests to me, for the sake of the love which brotherhood requires, I think that not virgins only and widows, but married women also, and all of the sex alike, should be admonished, that the work of God and His fashioning and formation ought in no manner to be adulterated, either with the application of yellow color, or with black dust or rouge, or with any kind of medicament which can corrupt the native lineaments. God says, Let us make man in our image and likeness; Genesis 1:26 and does any one dare to alter and to change what God has made? They are laying hands on God when they try to re-form that which He formed, and to transfigure it, not knowing that everything which comes into being is God’s work, everything that is changed is the devil’s. If any artist, in painting, were to delineate in envious coloring the countenance and likeness and bodily appearance of any one; and the likeness being now painted and completed, another person were to lay hands on it, as if, when it was already formed and already painted, he, being more skilled, could amend it, a serious wrong and a just cause of indignation would seem natural to the former artist. And do you think yourself likely with impunity to commit a boldness of such wicked temerity, an offense to God the artificer? For although you may not be immodest among men, and are not unchaste with your seducing dyes, yet when those things which belong to God are corrupted and violated, you are engaged in a worse adultery. That you think yourself to be adorned, that you think your hair to be dressed, is an assault upon the divine work, is a prevarication of the truth. – Cyprian, Cyprian, Treatise 2, chapter 15
Methodius: For instance, then, the images of our kings here, even though they be not formed of the more precious materials — gold or silver — are honoured by all. For men do not, while they treat with respect those of the far more precious material, slight those of a less valuable, but honour every image in the world, even though it be of chalk or bronze. And one who speaks against either of them, is not acquitted as if he had only spoken against clay, nor condemned for having despised gold, but for having been disrespectful towards the King and Lord Himself. The images of God’s angels, which are fashioned of gold, the principalities and powers, we make to His honour and glory. – Methodius, Discourse on the Resurrection, Part 2
Athanasius: For he who in this sense understands that the Son and the Father are one, knows that He is in the Father and the Father in the Son; for the Godhead of the Son is the Father’s, and it is in the Son; and whoever enters into this, is convinced that “He that has seen the Son, has seen the Father,” for in the Son is contemplated the Father’s Godhead. And we may perceive this at once from the illustration of the Emperor’s image. For in the image is the shape and form of the Emperor, and in the Emperor is that shape which is in the image. For the likeness of the Emperor in the image is exact; so that a person who looks at the image, sees in it the Emperor; and he again who sees the Emperor, recognises that it is he who is in the image. And from the likeness not differing, to one who after the image wished to view the Emperor, the image might say, “I and the Emperor are one; for I am in him, and he in me; and what you see in me, that you behold in him, and what you have seen in him, that you hold in me.”Accordingly he who worships the image, in it worships the Emperor also; for the image is his form and appearance. Since then the Son too is the Father’s Image, it must necessarily be understood that the Godhead and propriety of the Father is the Being of the Son. – Athanasius, Against the Arians, 3.23.5
Athanasius: For as, when the likeness painted on a panel has been effaced by stains from without, he whose likeness it is must needs come once more to enable the portrait to be renewed on the same wood: for, for the sake of his picture, even the mere wood on which it is painted is not thrown away, but the outline is renewed upon it; 2. in the same way also the most holy Son of the Father, being the Image of the Father, came to our region to renew man once made in His likeness, and find him, as one lost, by the remission of sins; as He says Himself in the Gospels: I came to find and to save the lost. Whence He said to the Jews also: Except a man be born again, not meaning, as they thought, birth from woman, but speaking of the soul born and created anew in the likeness of God’s image. – Athanasius, On The Incarnation, chapter 14
Athanasius: But of these and such like inventions of idolatrous madness, Scripture taught us beforehand long ago, when it said, ‘The devising of idols was the beginning of fornication, and the invention of them, the corruption of life.’ For neither were they from the beginning, neither shall they be for ever. For the vainglory of men they entered into the world, and therefore shall they come shortly to an end. For a father afflicted with untimely mourning when he hath made an image of his child soon taken away, now honored him as a God which was then a dead man, and delivered to those that were under him ceremonies and sacrifices. Thus in process of time an ungodly custom grown strong was kept as a law. And graven images were worshipped by the commands of kings. Whom men could not honor in presence because they dwelt afar off, they took the counterfeit of his visage from afar, and made an express image of the king whom they honored, to the end that by this their forwardness they might flatter him that was absent as if he were present. – Athanasius, Against the Heathen, Chapter 11, Section 1
Zeno of Verona: Let us therefore, brothers, engage in a noble contest of mutual love! Let us honor the image of God in man, thereby rendering due reverence to the original itself. We know that whoever harms the image also strikes at the original and thus brings destruction upon his own soul. The proof of this is evident: if someone were to damage the portrait of a great king (who, after all, is still only a man), would he not be immediately condemned for sacrilege and punished with death? How much greater, then, must our caution be in matters concerning God, before whom even the forces of nature bow—forces that even earthly kings fear! – Zeno of Verona, Book 1, Treatise 2, chapter 7
Eusebius: For as the image of a king would be honoured for the sake of him whose lineaments and likeness it bears (and though both the image and the king received honour, one person would be honoured, and not two; for there would not be two kings, the first the true one, and the one represented by the image, but one in both forms, not only conceived of, but named and honoured), so I say the Only-begotten Son, being the only image of the Unseen God, is rightly called the image of the Unseen God, through bearing His likeness, and is constituted God by the Father Himself: thus He is, with regard to essence, and gives an image of the Father that grows from His nature and is not something added to Him, because of the actual source of His existence. Wherefore He is by nature both God and Only-begotten Son, not being made such by adoption like those who were without, who only acquire an accidental right to the Name of God. – Eusebius, Proof of the Gospel, book 5, chapter 4
Ambrose: Subsequent events also go to show how the image of such a man is not found but perishes, since his image is not found in the city of the Lord, that Jerusalem which is above. For the Lord has painted us to His image and likeness, even as He teaches us, saying, “Behold, O Jerusalem, I have painted your walls.” If we have acted well, that heavenly image continues in us; if anyone acts badly, this image is destroyed in him, that is, the image of Him who came down from heaven, and there is in him the image of the earthly. On this account also the Apostle says, “Even as we have borne the image of the one that is earthly, let us bear also the image of the other that is heavenly.” Therefore, the images of the good continue to shine forth in that city of God. But if anyone has turned aside to graver sins and has not done penance, his image is destroyed or else cast out, even as Adam was cast out and excluded from paradise. But whoever has conducted himself in a holy and honorable fashion enters into the city of God and brings in his own image so that it may shine in that city of God. “O Lord, in your city you shall reduce their images to nothing,” because those who have clothed themselves with the works of darkness cannot shine in the light. Let us adduce an example from the world. See how the images of good rulers continue in cities, whereas the images of tyrants are destroyed. – Ambrose, Seven Exegetical Works, The Prayer of Job and David, 9.24
Macarius Magnes: Hence the Apostle, in order that he might help many hearers, offered images of a marvelous portrait of a general and a shepherd, of a gardener and farmer, and calls upon the Law for their confirmation, making the evidence weighty based on it. – Macarius Magnes, Apocriticus, book 3, chapter 6
Cyril of Jerusalem: In fact, all the living things were created to serve us. Plants and trees were created for our enjoyment. All created things were good, but none of them was the image of God save man alone. The sun was fashioned by a mere command, but man by God’s hands. “Let us make man in our image and likeness.” A wooden image of an earthly king is honored; how much more a rational image of God. But the envy of the devil cast out this greatest of God’s works, when it was making merry in Paradise. The enemy exulted over the fall of him whom he had envied; would you have wished the devil to continue to rejoice? He did not dare approach the man because of his strength, but approached the woman, as being weaker, when she was still a virgin; for it was after his expulsion from Paradise that “Adam knew Eve his wife.” – Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lecture 12, chapter 5
John Chrysostom: Some of you call my words immodest, because I speak of the nature of marriage, which is honorable; yet you show no modesty in your behavior at weddings. By calling my words immodest, you condemn God, who is the author of marriage. Shall I also tell you how marriage is a mystery of the Church? The Church was made from the side of Christ, and He united Himself to her in a spiritual intercourse. St Paul says, “I betrothed you to Christ to present you as a pure virgin to her one husband,” and “we are members of His body, of His flesh, and of His bones.” Think about all this and stop treating such a great mystery so shamefully. Marriage is an image of the presence of Christ, and will you get drunk at a wedding? Tell me, if you saw a portrait of the emperor, would you insult it? By no means. – John Chrysostom, On Marriage and Family Life, Homily 12
John Chrysostom: Do you see that suffering wrong consists in doing wrong, but that to suffer wrongfully is to receive a benefit? For tell me, if any one were to revile his rulers, if he were to insult those in power, whom does he injure? Himself, or them? Clearly himself. Then he who insults a ruler insults not him, but himself — and he that insults a Christian does he not through him insult Christ? By no means, you say. What do you say? He that casts a stone at the images of the king (Emperor), at whom does he cast a stone? Is it not at himself? Then does he who casts a stone at the image of an earthly king, cast a stone at himself, and does not he who insults the image of God (for man is the image of God) injure himself? – John Chrysostom, Homily 10 on First Thessalonians 5:17-18
John Chrysostom: Let us see then in what way he followed Christ: for this imitation needs not time and art, but a steady purpose alone. Thus if we go into the study of a painter, we shall not be able to copy the portrait, though we see it ten thousand times. But to copy him we are enabled by hearing alone. Will ye then that we bring the tablet before you and sketch out for you Paul’s manner of life? Well, let it be produced, that picture far brighter than all the images of Emperors: for its material is not boards glued together, nor canvass stretched out; but the material is the work of God: being as it is a soul and a body: a soul, the work of God, not of men; and a body again in like wise… 6. Suppose then our tablet to be the soul of Paul: this tablet was lately lying covered with soot, full of spider’s webs; (for nothing can be worse than blasphemy;) but when He came who transforms all things, and saw that not through indolence or sluggishness were his lines so drawn but through inexperience and his not having the tints (τὰ ἄνθη) of true piety: (for zeal indeed he had, but the colors were not there; for he had not the zeal according to knowledge:) He gives him the tint of the truth, that is, grace: and in a moment he exhibited the imperial image. For having got the colors and learned what he was ignorant of, he waited no time, but immediately appeared a most excellent artist. And first he shows the head of the king, preaching Christ; then also the remainder of the body; the body of a perfect Christian life. Now painters we know shut themselves up and execute all their works with great nicety and in quiet; not opening the doors to any one: but this man, setting forth his tablet in the view of the world, in the midst of universal opposition, clamor, disturbance, did under such circumstances work out this Royal Image, and was not hindered. – John Chrysostom, Homily 13 on 1 Corinthians 4:16
Augustine: By wrongly comparing himself to a stone, he commits sacrilege against the Creator, for man was made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). Now, if you were to insult the image of the emperor, you would be guilty of sacrilege — so the public laws declare. What then shall you be when you profane the image of God? Which is worse — to hurl a stone against the image of a man, or to regard a stone as the image of God? Let us therefore leave aside such people — dead and buried as they are — for although it is not absolutely impossible to bring them back to life, it is beyond our power. Yet we must not despair of them, for even though we cannot make them live, God is powerful enough to raise up from these very stones children to Abraham (Matthew 3:9). — Augustine, Sermon 23B, chapter 7
All of the church fathers use the analogy of paintings. This is only more evidence against their position. If the same church father can condemn image-worship and simultaneously use analogies of paintings, then Basil can do the same thing while also being an adamant denouncer of image-worship. The church fathers frequently use analogies of actors in plays, and yet they all denounce the theater. How insane to suggest that using an analogy of a painting means you approve of image-worship! Epiphanius denounces all image-worshipers in the Panarion, and yet he uses the analogy of paintings all the time. Someone can use an analogy without actually approving of doing the things contained in the allegory.
John Chrysostom uses the analogy of humanity being given a love potion when speaking of God’s love for us. Do the fathers approve of using love potions?
Let us therefore be stricken with awe at this so great love of Christ. Let us be inflamed with this love-potion. – Homily 2 on Philemon, Moral
Augustine uses the analogy of a charioteer:
83. Wherefore even in bodily pleasure we find something to teach us to despise it, not because the body is evil by nature, but because it is shameful for a being who can cleave to higher things and enjoy them to be the sport of love of the lowest good. When a charioteer loses control and pays the penalty for his rashness he accuses his equipment. But let him implore aid; let him take command of the situation; let him control his steeds which are making a spectacle of his downfall and bid fair to bring about his death if no help supervenes. Let him get back into his place in the chariot, and take control of the reins, and tame his horses and rule them more cautiously. Then he will realize how well the chariot had been made with all its equipment, which by his ruinous handling brought danger upon himself and left the course of becoming moderation. So in paradise the greediness of the soul which badly used its body produced weakness. For it snatched at forbidden food against the prescription of the physician, in following which salvation is to be found. – Augustine, On True Religion, chapter 83
Does Clement of Alexandria approve of dying clothes, just because he uses an analogy of dying wool?
He [Jesus] uses the very bitter mordant of fear in each case repressing the people, and at the same time turning them to salvation; as also wool that is undergoing the process of dyeing is wont to be previously treated with mordants, in order to prepare it for taking on a fast color. – Clement of Alexandria (The Instructor Book 1, Chapter 9)
Let us then, men and brethren, with all energy act the part of soldiers, in accordance with His holy commandments. Let us consider those who serve under our generals, with what order, obedience, and submissiveness they perform the things which are commanded them. All are not prefects, nor commanders of a thousand, nor of a hundred, nor of fifty, nor the like, but each one in his own rank performs the things commanded by the king and the generals. The great cannot subsist without the small, nor the small without the great. There is a kind of mixture in all things, and thence arises mutual advantage.” – Clement of Rome (1st Clement, Chapter 37)
Do Paul and the fathers approve of participating in the Olympic games, just because they use it as an analogy?
1 Corinthians 9:24-27 – Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may obtain it. And everyone who competes for the prize is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a perishable crown, but we for an imperishable crown. Therefore I run thus: not with uncertainty. Thus I fight: not as one who beats the air. But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified.
Statue-Worship Automatically Implies Deification
The Cathodox take quotes from the church fathers using an analogy of honoring an emperor through his image to prove that worshiping lifeless images is required by God, and they’re so desperate that they have to appeal to fathers who explicitly rejected image-worship!
But tell me, you Cathodox, if you want to use Basil’s quote about people venerating the images of kings to justify Christians venerating icons, are we Christians allowed to bow to the images of kings? Why not? What’s so bad about bowing to an image of a king?
Clement of Rome (died 100 AD):
[Simon Magus says] “I shall be worshipped as God; I shall have divine honours publicly assigned to me, so that an image of me shall be set up, and I shall be worshipped and adored as God.” – Clement of Rome, Recognitions of Clement, book 2, chapter 9
Justin Martyr (160 AD):
He [Simon Magus] was considered a god, and as a god was honoured by you with a statue, which statue was erected on the river Tiber, between the two bridges, and bore this inscription, in the language of Rome: — Simoni Deo Sancto, To Simon the holy God. And almost all the Samaritans, and a few even of other nations, worship him, and acknowledge him as the first god; and a woman, Helena, who went about with him at that time, and had formerly been a prostitute, they say is the first idea generated by him. – Justin Martyr, First Apology, chapter 26
But the evil spirits were not satisfied with saying, before Christ’s appearance, that those who were said to be sons of Jupiter were born of him; but after He had appeared, and been born among men, and when they learned how He had been foretold by the prophets, and knew that He should be believed on and looked for by every nation, they again, as was said above, put forward other men, the Samaritans Simon and Menander, who did many mighty works by magic, and deceived many, and still keep them deceived. For even among yourselves, as we said before, Simon was in the royal city Rome in the reign of Claudius Cæsar, and so greatly astonished the sacred senate and people of the Romans, that he was considered a god, and honoured, like the others whom you honour as gods, with a statue. Wherefore we pray that the sacred senate and your people may, along with yourselves, be arbiters of this our memorial, in order that if any one be entangled by that man’s doctrines, he may learn the truth, and so be able to escape error; and as for the statue, if you please, destroy it. – Justin Martyr, First Apology, chapter 56
Aristides of Athens (117–138 AD):
Therefore the Chaldeans have been greatly mistaken, following after their own desires. For they worship (σέβονται) corruptible elements and dead statues, and do not perceive that they are deifying these things. – Aristides of Athens, Fragment 7.4
Tertullian (155 – 220 AD):
Therefore, as to what relates to the honours due to kings or emperors, we have a prescript sufficient, that it behoves us to be in all obedience, according to the apostle’s precept, “subject to magistrates, and princes, and powers;” but within the limits of discipline, so long as we keep ourselves separate from idolatry. For it is for this reason, too, that that example of the three brethren has forerun us, who, in other respects obedient toward king Nebuchadnezzar rejected with all constancy the honour to his image, proving that whatever is extolled beyond the measure of human honour, unto the resemblance of divine sublimity, is idolatry. – Tertullian (197 AD) On Idolatry Chapter 15
Hippolytus of Rome (225 AD):
14.4. While they were drunk, the king, being puffed up, commanded that the golden and silver vessels, which Nebuchadnezzar his father had brought out from the Temple which was in Jerusalem, to be brought forth, that the magistrate and his mistresses may drink from them. Those vessels, which were dedicated to God for his glory and honor by other kings, they took with defiled hands, and made a drink offering in them and praised the lifeless and motionless idols. 14.5. Accordingly after this happened, fingers of a man’s hand came forth, and they wrote before the lamp upon the plaster of the wall of the house of the king
15.1. And so, after sufficient time had passed and the eighteenth year had come, the king, having remembered his dream, made a golden image, which was sixty cubits high and its breadth was six cubits. 15.2. For when the blessed Daniel, when he interpreted the same dream6 , answered the king saying, “You are the head of the golden image,” in this word king Nebuchadnezzar, having been puffed up2 and having been lifted up in heart, made the image as an anti-type of the dream, so that he might be worshiped as God by all. 15.3. And so having furnished it in greatness he set it up in the plain of Deira in the country of Babylon. 15.4. And having sent out a command he summoned together the governors, captains and rulers and all of those in authority to come to the consecration of the image, which Nebuchadnezzar the king set up. 15.5. And so then, while all the men were coming together for the event and while the musical instruments rang out together, at that moment the peoples, tribes, and tongues, fell down and worshipped the image, some of them only because they feared the king, but all became idolaters, and they heeded the word which was prescribed by the king.
18.2. Daniel, who was standing a far way off and keeping silent, taught these three to be courageous, while smiling at them, he himself even rejoicing at their witness, while observing the three boys who were about to be crowned against the devil. They were not deluded by musical skill nor enslaved by the pleasure of the instruments, nor carried away by the deceit of the Babylonians, nor subdued by the decree of the king, nor did they bend their knees before the golden image, which was wrought with a hammer.
26.1. But why was the king not sorely pricked, having actually seen Daniel, who was a Jew, and why did he not say to him, “Why do you not worship the image?” He no doubt would have said to the king, “Because I do not worship works made with hands, but the living God who made heaven and earth and has lordship over all flesh.” – Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel, book 2
27.10. And at that time Nebuchadnezzar made only one image, but now the deceiver devises greater things in the world, so that through the many spectacles he may delude all men, some being carried about in one direction or another, some worshiping golden idols, others silver, others bronze, some that which is composed from ivory, many revering clay and stone. They all, abandoning the heavenly God, submit to empty and lifeless and useless idols, not wishing to look up to the height of heaven, nor wishing to apprehend the beauty of heaven, so that they, who do not recognize the God of this heaven, are not able to be saved. 27.11. These things are the handiwork of the devil. He worked not only long ago in Babylon, but also now he does the same things and endeavors more reckless things against the the slaves of God. – Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel, book 2
Novation (200 – 258 AD):
If Christ is only man, how is He present wherever He is invoked —since it is not man’s nature but God’s to be able to be present everywhere? If Christ is only man, why is a man called upon in prayer as a mediator, when calling upon a man to grant salvation is considered useless? If Christ is only man, why is hope put in Him,’° when hope in man is declared to be ac-cursed?” – Novatian on the Trinity, Ch.14
Aphrahat (270-345 AD):
Hananiah also and his brethren were persecuted as Jesus was persecuted. Hananiah and his brethren were persecuted by Nebuchadnezzar; and Jesus, the people of the Jews persecuted. Hananiah and his brethren were cast into the furnace of fire, and it was cold as dew upon the righteous. Jesus also descended to the place of darkness, and burst its gates and brought forth its prisoners. Hananiah and his brethren came up from the furnace of fire, and the flame burned their accusers; and Jesus revived and came up from the midst of darkness, and His accusers and they that crucified Him shall be burned in flames at the end. When Hananiah and his brethren came up from the furnace, Nebuchadnezzar the King trembled and was amazed; and when Jesus arose from the abode of the dead, the people that crucified Him were terrified and trembled. Hananiah and his brethren worshipped not the image of the King of Babylon [Nebuchadnezzar]; and Jesus restrained the nations from the worship of dead images. Because of Hananiah and his brethren, the nations and languages glorified God Who had delivered them from the fire: Daniel 3:28-29 and because of Jesus, the nations and oil languages shall glorify (God) Who delivered His Son, so that He saw no corruption. On the garments of Hananiah and his brethren the fire had no power; and on the bodies of the righteous, who have believed in Jesus, the fire shall have no power at the end. – Aphrahat, Demonstration 21.19
Eusebius of Caesarea (260-339 AD):
Since I have mentioned this city I do not think it proper to omit an account which is worthy of record for posterity. For they say that the woman with an issue of blood, who, as we learn from the sacred Gospel, received from our Saviour deliverance from her affliction, came from this place, and that her house is shown in the city, and that remarkable memorials of the kindness of the Saviour to her remain there. For there stands upon an elevated stone, by the gates of her house, a brazen image of a woman kneeling, with her hands stretched out, as if she were praying. Opposite this is another upright image of a man, made of the same material, clothed decently in a double cloak, and extending his hand toward the woman. At his feet, beside the statue itself, is a certain strange plant, which climbs up to the hem of the brazen cloak, and is a remedy for all kinds of diseases. They say that this statue is an image of Jesus. It has remained to our day, so that we ourselves also saw it when we were staying in the city. Nor is it strange that those of the heathen (πάλαι/pagans) who, of old, were benefited by our Saviour, should have done such things, since we have learned also that the likenesses (εἰκόνας) of his apostles Paul and Peter, and of Christ himself, are preserved in paintings, the ancients being accustomed, as it is likely, according to a habit of the heathen (παλαιῶν/pagans), to pay this kind of honor indiscriminately to those regarded by them as deliverers. – Eusebius, Church History, book 7, chapter 18
Athanasius of Alexandria (296-373 AD):
But of these and such like inventions of idolatrous madness, Scripture taught us beforehand long ago, when it said, ‘The devising of idols was the beginning of fornication, and the invention of them, the corruption of life.’ For neither were they from the beginning, neither shall they be for ever. For the vainglory of men they entered into the world, and therefore shall they come shortly to an end. For a father afflicted with untimely mourning when he hath made an image of his child soon taken away, now honored him as a God which was then a dead man, and delivered to those that were under him ceremonies and sacrifices. Thus in process of time an ungodly custom grown strong was kept as a law. And graven images were worshipped by the commands of kings. Whom men could not honor in presence because they dwelt afar off, they took the counterfeit of his visage from afar, and made an express image of the king whom they honored, to the end that by this their forwardness they might flatter him that was absent as if he were present. – Athanasius, Against the Heathen, Chapter 11
Didymus the Blind (313– 398 AD):
16.41 And concerning a natural image, Moses also teaches thus: “Adam begot Seth according to his own likeness.” Seth was not by necessity of a different essence from Adam, and yet he called likeness the image and resemblance of essence. 16.42 But it is also written concerning man, that he is “the image and glory of God.” 16.43 But nowhere, O sirs, is it written that man or any other creature is “the radiance of the glory of God and the express image of his person.” 16.44 It is one thing for man to be an image of God, that is, the created of the creator, as a seat is of the carpenter (for Solomon says: “The maker is beheld in proportion to his works”), and it is another to be, in accordance with conformity, consubstantiality, and co-eternity, the radiance of glory and the express image of person, subsisting and most true. 16.45 For he says: “He who has seen me has seen the Father.” But he who has seen a man has not seen God, just as one who has seen a seat has not seen the carpenter. 16.46 And necessarily the image of the only invisible God is itself invisible, and not the visible man made in the image. 16.47 Therefore the Son is not like to another: for it is written, “Who shall be likened to the Lord among the sons of God?” Nor is he unlike to his own Father: “For I and the Father are one.” 16.48 But those who apply the idea of a created image to him are like Nebuchadnezzar, who commanded a lifeless image made by hands to be worshipped.” – Didymus the Blind, On the Trinity, Book 1, chapter 16:41-16-48
Many of those deported from their own country and homeland into that of their conquerors by the norm of captivity completely abandoned the worship of God and served idols…. and adoring Baal and the dragon as well as the dumb image of the tyrant Nebuchadnezzar. – Didymus the Blind, Commentary on Zechariah, homily 13
Gregory of Elvira (died 392 AD):
We must not pass over in silence why King Nebuchadnezzar commanded that this statue be worshiped. What profit, what honor, or what glory was he to gain if men bowed down to this image? For if, beyond the power of his kingdom, he desired still greater glory, he would have commanded that he himself be worshiped, not that image which had neither sight, nor hearing, nor movement, nor any sense of its own. But this image clearly prefigured the Antichrist. Therefore it was not so much by the will of King Nebuchadnezzar as by the command of the devil, who ruled within him, that it was made. Nebuchadnezzar himself did not know what he was doing. It was made of gold because that same Antichrist will be a most powerful ruler of this world. For after defeating the ten Roman kings who will exist in that time—those revealed in Daniel’s vision as the ten horns—he alone will hold dominion over the entire world….. But now, dearest brothers, it is enough to have said a little about many things, so that you may know by what mystery of iniquity the devil, through Nebuchadnezzar, made that image which the three faithful youths refused to worship—lest they should seem to adore the Antichrist, whose image it was. If those men, for whom Christ had not yet suffered, endured such things for God and for the sacred Law, how much more ought we, for whom the Son of God deigned to be born in the flesh and to suffer, and by the price of his blood delivered us from death and made us debtors of his great benefits, bear all kinds of pain with a steadfast heart for the name of Christ! For he who has once been set free by the hand of Christ does not submit again to tyrannical slavery. — Gregory of Elvira, Tractatvs Origenis XVIII.12-13, 20, 350 AD (Corpvs Christianorvm Series Latina LXIX)
John Chrysostom (347-407 AD):
Why then bring upon thyself that, from which the very opposite is wont to befall thee. Yea, if thou wilt be glorified, despise glory; so shalt thou be more illustrious than any. Why feel as Nebuchadnezzar felt? For he too set up an image, thinking from wood and from a senseless figure to procure to himself an increase of fame, and the living would fain appear more glorious by the help of that which hath no life. Seest thou the excess of his madness; how, thinking to do honor, he rather offered insult, to himself? For when it appears that he is relying rather on the lifeless thing, than on himself and the soul that lives in him, and when for this cause he advances the stock unto such high precedence, how can he be other than ridiculous, endeavoring as he does to adorn himself, not by his way of living, but by planks of wood? Just as if a man should think proper to give himself airs, because of the pavement of his house, and his beautiful staircase rather than because he is a man. Him do many too amongst us imitate now. For as he for his image, so some men claim to be admired for their clothes, others for their house; or for their mules and chariots, and for the columns in their house. For inasmuch as they have lost their being as men, they go about gathering to themselves from other quarters such glory as is full of exceeding ridicule. But as to the noble and great servants of God, not by these means, but by such as best became them, even by such did they shine forth. – John Chrysostom, Homilies on Matthew, Homily 4, chapter 18
Prudentius (348 – 413 AD):
But Thou dost make twofold provision for our nurture; our bodies and our souls with two several kinds of sustenance Thou dost strengthen and invigorate. Thus once Thy renowned power revived a man set amid rough-voiced lions, “with a meal that came to him.” Because he abominated a god cast in metal and thought it sin to bow his head before a material image of polished bronze, the people of fallen Babylon and their king [Nebuchadnezzar] had exposed him to death, giving him over to the wild beasts to be devoured forthwith by their cruel jaws. How safe always are goodness and faith! – Prudentius, The Daily Round IV, The Hymn After Meat
Jerome (342-420 AD):
(CAP. III) (Chapter III.–Verse 1.) Nebuchadnezzar the king made a golden statue sixty cubits in height, six cubits in width. Swift is the forgetting of the truth, that he who shortly before had worshiped (adoraverat) the servant of God as if he were God, now orders a statue to be made for himself, so that he himself might be worshiped (adoretur) in the statue. That it is golden and of infinite weight is for this reason: to create astonishment in those seeing it, and so that an inanimate object might be worshiped as God (adoretur ut Deus), while each person consecrates his own greed. But an opportunity of salvation is given to the barbarian nations through the occasion of the captives (Coloss. III): so that those who had first known the power of the one God through Daniel’s revelation might also learn, in the fortitude of the three youths, to despise death [or, that death ought to be despised], and not to worship (colere) idols.
(Vers. 14.) “Prostrate yourselves (prosternite vos), and worship (adorate) the statue which I have made.” Although he had commanded in fury that the youths be brought forward, nevertheless he gives a space for repentance, so that if they should fall down and worship (ceciderint et adoraverint), the prior fault might obtain pardon: but if they should refuse to worship (adorare), the present punishment might be the burning furnace.
(Vers. 16.) “Nebuchadnezzar the king, it is not necessary for us to answer you in this matter.” In the Hebrew it does not have “the king,” as in the LXX, lest they should seem to flatter the impious one or to call “king” one who was compelling them to evil deeds. But if anyone insistently reads “king” as well: we will say that they were not provocatively calling the king to the shedding of their own blood, but were rendering to the king the honor due, in such a way that the worship (cultus) of God is not harmed. As for what they say: “It is not necessary for us to answer you in this matter.” The sense is this: you ought not to hear words whose strength and constancy you will already prove by the deeds themselves.
(Vers. 18.) “But if he will not”: Beautifully, to what they had said—“He is able to deliver us”—they did not add the contrary “if he cannot,” but “if he will not”: so that if they should perish, it would be of God’s will, not of his inability. “Let it be known to you, O king, that we do not worship (colimus) your gods, and we do not worship (adoramus) the golden statue which you have set up.” Whether we choose to read “statue,” as Symmachus, or “golden image,” as the others translated, those who worship (cultores) God ought not to worship (adorare) it. Therefore, judges and princes of the world who worship (adorant) the statues and images of emperors should understand that by doing this they are doing what the three youths, refusing to do, pleased God. And the proper distinction is to be noted: they say that gods are worshiped (coli), an image is adored (adorari)—neither of which befits the servants of God. – Jerome, Commentary on Daniel chapter 3
Epiphanius of Salamis (310-403 AD):
The man called Elxai joined them later, in the reign of the emperor Trajan after the Savior’s incarnation, and he was a false prophet. He wrote a book, supposedly by prophecy or as though by inspired wisdom. But he taught hypocrisy, by saying that even though one should happen to worship idols in time of persecution, it is not a sin—just so long as he does not worship them in his conscience and, whatever confession he may make with his mouth, he does not make it in his heart…. In addition the fraud ventured to produce a witness. He said that a Phineas, a priest of the stock of Levi, Aaron, and the ancient Phineas, escaped death in Babylon during the captivity by bowing down to the image of Artemis at Susa in the reign of King Darius. Thus all the things he teaches are false and futile. – Epiphanius, Panarion, Heresy 19, Brill Edition, p. 49
Theodoret of Cyrus (393–466 AD):
Thus the wretched one (Nebuchadnezzar) seized, as he thought, the divine honor, and it was not enough for him to be worshiped (προσφέρεσθαι) by his subjects, but he even legislated that this [same] worship (προσκύνησιν) be offered to the image, and on the one hand he astounds all by the material, and the art, and the size of the image; and on the other hand he charms and bewitches with the sound of all kinds of musical instruments; but those who were neither astounded by the size of the image, nor bewitched by the song and pleasure of the instruments, he frightens with the threat of the furnace. And in the case of all the others he did not miss his aim; for he saw everyone doing what was commanded, and accustomed to serve through fear and pleasure; but only those thrice-blessed youths, who kept their ancestral nobility incorrupt even in servitude, Ananias, and Azarias, and Misael, refused the worship, but they did not escape the notice of the Chaldeans who lived in impiety, who wished to have all as partners in their impiety. Immediately, therefore, they approached the king, and reminded him of the law that had been established, which expressly commanded all subjects to worship the image, and which threatened the furnace to those who refused to do so. – Theodoret of Cyrus, Interpretation on Daniel, Chapter 3
Gregory Nazianzus (329–390 AD):
80. It is an imperial law—whether it holds for all men among whom kingship exists I know not, but for the Romans it is one of those customs most zealously observed—that those who rule are to be honored (τιμᾶσθαι) with public images. For crowns, diadems, the splendor of the purple robe, the ranks of spearmen, and the multitude of subjects are not enough to establish their sovereignty; rather, they also require obeisance (προσκυνήσεως), so that they might appear more august. And not only the obeisance (προσκυνοῦνται) paid to their own persons, but also that paid to their likenesses in sculptures and paintings, so that the reverence (σέβας) given to them may be more insatiable and complete. – Gregory of Nazianzus, Against Emperor Julian I, chapter 80
Emperor Theodosius II (401-450 AD):
Theodosius II is notable for abolishing the ancient Roman practice of bowing to the emperor’s image, recognizing that it constituted divine honor:
The Emperors Theodosius Augustus and Valentinian Caesar to Aetius, Praetorian Prefect: Whenever our statues or images are erected, whether on festival days (as is customary) or on ordinary days, let the magistrate be present without the pretentious display of bowing down (adorationis), so that by his presence he may show that he has contributed honor to the day, the place, and the remembrance of us. At the games also, when our likenesses are displayed, let them demonstrate that our divine power and praises are active only in the minds of the onlookers and in the secrets of their thoughts; let the excessive reverence (cultus) that surpasses human dignity be reserved for the divine power above. – Emperor Theodosius II, Codex Theodosianus (425 AD), Book 15, Title 4, Constitution 1
As you can see, Theodosius II specifically mentions that magistrates will no longer be required to bow down to his image when they’re first set up, which used to be the norm. The fathers say that the reason why Nebuchadnezzar summoned the kings, princes, and magistrates from every nation to bow to his image was so that it would appear as if the whole world was bowing through the obeisance of their rulers (since the common people already bowed to their kings).
Theodosius II recognized that this kind of reverence was excessive, resembling the reverence God had outlawed in Scripture, so he changed the obligation of all citizens toward his royal image. It shifted from an external religious ritual to an internal psychological state. They were saying, “You don’t need to perform a pagan-style external ritual to prove you’re loyal to the emperor. Let these images be signs that people respect and honor the emperor in their minds, but no longer treat the images as objects of worship.” Previously, everyone was required to either throw incense on a fire or bow to the emperor’s image, acts which would got a Christian excommunicated on the spot.
The reason why the magistrates are specifically mentioned as bowing to the image is because it was the custom of kings to have the rulers of the lands bow to their image as an example to the citizens under their authority, as Jerome says:
“Nebuchadnezzar sent therefore to the satraps, magistrates and judges, the dukes and potentates, and the prefects and (E) all the princes of the various districts that they should gather themselves together.” It is the higher ranks which stand in the greater peril, and those who occupy the loftier position are the more sudden in their fall. The princes are assembled to worship the statue in order that through their princes the nations also might be attracted into error…. But after the magistrates are led astray, the subject populace perish through the evil example of their superiors. “And a herald proclaimed with mighty voice: ‘To us the order is given, both peoples and tribes and languages, at what hour ye hear the sound of the trumpet. . ..'” Not that the entire population of all the nations could have gathered on the plain of Dura and adored the golden statue, but rather, in the person of their leaders, all the tribes and peoples were supposed to have performed the act of worship. – Jerome, Commentary on Daniel 3:2-5
Theodosius I (347-395 AD):
Preface: Let absolutely no one, of whatever class or rank of men, whether placed in authority or having held office, whether powerful by fortune of birth or humble in lineage and condition, in any place whatsoever, in any city whatsoever, either slaughter an innocent victim before lifeless images/statues (simulacra) lacking perception, or, by a more private act of expiation, having venerated/worshipped (veneratus) the household god, the guardian spirit with wine, or the household gods with incense, light lamps, offer incense, or hang garlands.
1. But if anyone should dare to sacrifice a victim with the intention of performing a sacrifice, or to consult living entrails, let him, brought forward by the accusation of any person whatsoever, receive the appropriate sentence as one guilty of treason, even if he has inquired nothing against the safety of the emperors or concerning their welfare. For it is sufficient for the magnitude of the crime that he wishes to overturn the laws of nature itself, to investigate unlawful things, to uncover hidden things, to attempt forbidden things, to seek the end of another’s life, and to promise hope of another’s destruction.
2. But if anyone should venerate (venerabitur) images/statues (simulacra), which is made by mortal workmanship and destined to perish with time, by offering incense, and, by a ridiculous example, fearing what he himself has fashioned, or if, with a tree bound with sacred ribbons or an altar erected from dug-up turf, he should attempt to honor vain images (vanas imagines)—even though with a comparatively small offering—yet with a complete insult to religion, he, as guilty of violating religion, shall be punished by the forfeiture of that house or property in which it is established that he served the superstitions of the pagans (gentilicia superstitio). For we decree that all places which are found to have smoked with the vapor of incense (turis vapor) shall be joined to our treasury, provided that they are proven to have belonged to those offering the incense.
3. But if anyone should attempt to carry out such a kind of sacrificing (sacrificandi genus) in public temples (templa) or shrines (fana), or in another person’s house or lands, and it is established that he acted without the owner’s knowledge, he shall be compelled to pay a fine of twenty-five pounds of gold. But the owner who knowingly tolerated this crime shall be held under the same punishment as the one performing the sacrifice (sacrificans).
4. We wish this law to be enforced by the judges, defenders, and municipal councillors of each city, so that offenses discovered by them may immediately be brought to court, and those reported by them may be punished. If, however, they believe that anything should be concealed out of favor or neglected through carelessness, they shall be subject to judicial punishment. And if, after being informed, they delay punishment through concealment, they shall be fined thirty pounds of gold, and their staffs shall likewise be subjected to an equal penalty. – Emperors Theodosius I, Arcadius, and Honorius, Codex Theodosianus (Nov 8, 392 AD) 16.10.12
The same Augustus and Julian Caesar: We command that those persons be subjected to the penalty of death who are found either to devote themselves to sacrifices (sacrificiis) or to cultivate/worship/venerate (colere) images/statues (simulacra). Given at Milan on the eleventh day before the Kalends of March, during the consulship of Constantius Augustus for the eighth time and Julian Caesar. – Emperors Theodosius I, Arcadius, and Honorius, Codex Theodosianus (Feb 19, 356 AD) 16.10.6