The church fathers are very explicit that they do not bow down to “lifeless images.” But what does it mean for images to be lifeless? The Cathodox say, “It means the gods depicted in the images aren’t real! When the fathers reject LIFELESS images, they’re saying the gods aren’t really alive! So they’re lifeless!” But the fathers and Scriptures actually specify that the MATERIALS of the images are lifeless, meaning the image itself is not breathing. It has eyes, but they don’t see. It has a mouth, but it can’t speak. It has ears, but it can’t hear. The fathers say Christians do not worship God through such materials, and that God isn’t honored by senseless forms fashioned by man.
How could they speak anymore clearly? What language would they have to use to convince you they are referring to the material of the image, not the deities portrayed in them?
The church fathers couldn’t possibly be referring to the gods depicted in images when they call the images lifeless, since they say such things as, “These images were never alive and never will be.” But Zeus actually WAS alive once, and he will be again at the resurrection. According to the church fathers, Zeus was actually a real man who lived in Crete, and whose tomb is still found there! Likewise, the demons who receive the worship given to Zeus’s statue are also alive. Therefore, the part of the image that is “lifeless” is actually the material itself, not the person depicted, as the fathers repeatedly say.
But the Cathodox still say, “We don’t worship lifeless materials! We worship God THROUGH the materials!” The fathers rejected this argument entirely, and so do you Cathdox, as you even admit that you actually DO worship the material itself when you say, “The honor paid TO the image passes to the prototype.” According to you, God cannot even receive this honor unless it is first paid TO the material image. Therefore, you DO worship lifeless images.
Church Fathers on “Lifeless” Images:
But you are wicked against the God of all, worshipping lifeless images instead of Him or along with Him, and attributing His divine name to every kind of senseless matter. – Clementine Homilies, Homily 9, chapter 2
Begin, then, to divest yourselves of the injurious fear of vain idols, that you may escape unrighteous bondage. For they have become your masters, who even as servants are unprofitable to you. I speak of the material of the lifeless images, which are of no use to you as far as service is concerned. For they neither hear nor see nor feel, nor can they be moved. For is there any one of you who would like to see as they see, and to hear as they hear, and to feel as they feel, and to be moved as they are? God forbid that such a wrong should be done to any man bearing the image of God, though he have lost His likeness. – Clementine Homilies, Homily 10, chapter 7
And in each of those who, according to their ability, imitate Him, there is also a statue of the “image of the Creator,” which they fashion by beholding God with a pure heart, having become “imitators of God.” And, generally speaking, all Christians strive to establish the kinds of altars and the kinds of statues we have described — not lifeless and senseless ones, nor such as are fit receptacles for demons lurking around inanimate things, but ones filled with the Spirit of God, who dwells fittingly in the aforesaid statues of virtue and in the “image of the Creator.” In the same way also the Spirit of Christ rests upon those who are, so to speak, conformed to Him. And wishing to present such things, the Word of God recorded God as saying in promise to the righteous: “I will dwell in them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be My people”; and the Savior as saying: ‘If anyone hears My words and does them, I and My Father will come to him and make our dwelling with him. Let the one who wishes, then, compare the altars I have described with the altars of which Celsus speaks, and the statues in the soul of those who are pious toward the God of all with the statues of Phidias and Polykleitos and others like them. And he will clearly know that those are lifeless and perish with time, whereas these remain in the immortal soul for as long as the rational soul chooses to preserve them within itself. – Origen Against Celsus, Book 8, Chapter 18
Accordingly, we throw ridicule not upon lifeless images, but upon those only who worship (προσκυνούντων) them. – Origen (248 AD) Against Celsus, Book 8, Chapter 41
How much better is it to despise vanities, and to turn to God, to maintain the condition which you have received from God, to maintain your name! For on this account he is called anthropos, because he looks upward. But he looks upward who looks up to the true and living God, who is in heaven; who seeks after the Maker and Parent of his soul, not only with his perception and mind, but also with his countenance and eyes raised aloft. But he who enslaves himself to earthly and humble things, plainly prefers to himself that which is below him. For since he himself is the workmanship of God, whereas an image is the workmanship of man, the human workmanship cannot be preferred to the divine; and as God is the parent of man, so is the man of the statue. Therefore he is foolish and senseless who adores that which he himself has made, of which detestable and foolish handicraft Prometheus was the author, who was born from Iapetus the uncle of Jupiter. For when first of all Jupiter, having obtained supreme dominion, wished to establish himself as a god, and to found temples, and was seeking for some one who was able to imitate the human figure, at that time Prometheus lived, who fashioned the image of a man from thick clay with such close resemblance, that the novelty and cleverness of the art was a wonder. At length the men of his own time, and afterwards the poets, handed him down as the maker of a true and living man; and we, as often as we praise wrought statues, say that they live and breathe. And he indeed was the inventor of earthenware images. But posterity, following him, both carved them out of marble, and moulded them out of bronze; then in process of time ornament was added of gold and ivory, so that not only the likenesses, but also the gleam itself, might dazzle the eyes. Thus ensnared by beauty, and forgetful of true majesty, sensible beings considered that insensible objects, rational beings that irrational objects, living beings that lifeless objects, were to be worshipped and reverenced by them. – Lactantius, Epitome of the Divine Institutes, chapter 25
For this was what those who had known the truth ought to do, and not to degrade and debase the venerable name of God into foul and lustful fables of things unspeakable; nor yet to shut themselves up in cells and dark recesses and buildings made by man, as if they would find God inside; nor to think that they are worshipping the Divine powers in statues made of lifeless matter, nor to suppose that by vapours of gore and filth steaming from the earth, and by the blood of slain animals they are doing things pleasing to God. Surely it became these men of wisdom and of lofty speech, as being set free from all these bonds of error, to impart of their physical speculations ungrudgingly to all men, and to proclaim as it were in naked truth to all, that they should admire (ἀποθαυμάζειν) not the things that are seen, but only the unseen Creator of things visible, and worship (θρησκεύειν) His invisible and incorporeal powers in ways invisible and incorporeal, not by kindling fire, nor yet by offerings of rams and bulls, nay, nor yet by imagining that they honour the Deity by garlands and statues and the building of temples, but by worshipping Him with purified thoughts and right and true doctrines, in dispassionate calmness of soul, and in growing as far as possible like unto Him. But no one ever yet, barbarian or Greek, began to show all men this truth except only our Saviour; who, having proclaimed to all nations an escape from their ancient error, procured abundantly for them all a way of return and of devotion to the one true and only God of the universe. Yet the men perversely wise who boasted of the highest philosophy of life, whereby as the inspired Apostle says, “though they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither gave thanks; but became vain in their reasonings, and their senseless heart was darkened. They professed indeed to be wise, but became fools… and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever.” – Eusebius, Preparation of the Gospel, book 3, chapter 13
[EUSEBIUS] These are the statements of this wonderful philosopher. And what could be more unseemly than talking, as they do, in solemn phrase about shameful things? Or what more violently unreasonable than to assert that lifeless materials, gold, and marble, and such like, bear representations of the light of the gods, and manifestations of their heavenly and ethereal nature? That these are modern sophistries, and never entered, even in a dream, into the imagination of the ancients, you may learn, on being informed that statues made of gold, and other material esteemed more precious, were even rejected among the men of former times. – Eusebius, Preparation of the Gospel, book 3, chapter 7
“And it is said that Peiras, who first founded the temple of Hera in Argolis, and appointed his own daughter Callithyia priestess, cut down a tall pear-tree from the wood about Tiryns, and formed a statue of Hera. For stone being rough and hard to work, and lifeless, they were not willing to have it carved into a likeness of a deity: and gold and silver they thought to be sickly colours and stains breaking out like bruises from a barren and corrupt soil which had been stricken by fire: but sometimes in sport they made use of ivory also, as a variation in luxury.” So says Plutarch; and long before him Plato knew well that there is nothing venerable nor suited to the divine nature in gold and ivory, and things manufactured out of lifeless material: for hear what sort of directions he gives in the Laws: “The land, therefore, and the household hearth are for all men temples of all the gods; wherefore let no man consecrate temples a second time to the gods. In other cities gold and silver, whether in private houses or in temples, are an invidious possession; and ivory taken from a dead body is not a pure offering; iron also and bronze are implements of war.” – Eusebius, Preparation of the Gospel, book 3, chapter 8
But how, if it was not possible to make an image such as the description indicated, and if, as we have seen, it indicated the parts of the sensible and visible world, heaven and the things in heaven, the air also, and earth, and all that is therein–if then, I say, it was not possible to compose an image of the visible parts of the world, how, inasmuch as God was [pure] mind, could any one make an image of him? And what likeness can a human body have to the mind of God? For my part I think there is nothing in it answering even to the mind of man, since the one is incorporeal, uncompounded, and without parts, while the other, being the work of common mechanics, is the imitation of the nature of a mortal body, and represents a deaf and dumb image of living flesh in lifeless and dead matter.
Rather does the rational and immortal soul and the impassible mind in man’s nature seem to me to be rightly spoken of as preserving an image and likeness of God, inasmuch as it is immaterial and incorporeal, and intelligent and rational in its essence, and is capable of virtue and wisdom. If then any one were able to fabricate an image and form of the soul in a statue, such a man might also make some representation of the higher natures; but if the mind of man is without form and cannot be seen or figured, neither discernible by sight, nor in its essence comprehensible by speech and hearing, who would be so insane as to declare that the statue made in the likeness of man bears the form and image of the Most High God? Rather God’s nature is imaged apart from all perishable matter, being contemplated by purified souls in lucid thought and in silence: whereas, in the representation of the visible Zeus, the figure must be an image of a man of mortal nature, yet not an imitation of the whole man, but of one and that the worse part of him, because it conveys not a trace of life and soul. How then can the God who is over all, and the mind which is the creator of the universe, be that same Zeus who is seen in the bronze or in the dead ivory? – Eusebius, Preparation of the Gospel, book 3, chapter 10
And now let us explain the cause for which the incorporeal Word of God assumed this mortal body as a medium of intercourse with man. How, indeed, else than in human form could that Divine and impalpable, that immaterial and invisible Essence manifest itself to those who sought for God in created and earthly objects, unable or unwilling otherwise to discern the Author and Maker of all things? As a fitting means, therefore, of communication with mankind, he assumed a mortal body, as that with which they were themselves familiar; for like, it is proverbially said, loves its like. To those, then, whose affections were engaged by visible objects, who looked for gods in statues and lifeless images, who imagined the Deity to consist in material and corporeal substance, nay, who conferred on men the title of divinity, the Word of God presented himself in this form. Hence he procured for himself this body as a thrice-hallowed temple, a sensible habitation of an intellectual power; a noble and most holy form, of far higher worth than any lifeless statue. The material and senseless image, fashioned by base mechanic hands, of brass or iron, of gold or ivory, wood or stone, may be a fitting abode for evil spirits: but that Divine form, wrought by the power of heavenly wisdom, was possessed of life and spiritual being; a form animated by every excellence, the dwelling-place of the Word of God, a holy temple of the holy God. – Eusebius, Oration in Praise of Constantine, chapter 14
The idols of the nations are silver and gold, the works of human hands. After showing the divine providence and giving glory, as if speaking still to servants who have recently approached from the nations, he accordingly presents the refutation of the gods whom they formerly considered; as he said: “For I have known that the Lord is great, and our Lord is above all the gods.” For He has done so many and such great things; but your former gods are only dead and deaf idols, and may those who make them become like them. For how have those who worship lifeless things not become petrified in their souls? And those whom he formerly called gods according to custom, he now puts to shame and has called idols, denouncing them by both their material and their workmanship. – Athanasius of Alexandria, Expositions on Psalm 133, chapter 27.525
Again he makes his discourse on behalf of the Churches in this psalm, and it is clear from its being inscribed “for the winepresses.” How beloved are your tabernacles, O Lord of hosts! He calls tabernacles the holy churches of God established in each place, to which every God-loving soul also hastens. My heart and my flesh have exulted in the living God. “It is as if he were to say: Both with body and soul I have presented myself to serve the living and true God.” And the phrase, “living God,” is said in contrast to idols; since they are dead, and are made of lifeless matter. – Athanasius of Alexandria, Expositions on Psalm 83, chapter 27.368
Against the idolaters. He then turns to dispel the error of the Gentiles by the prophetic word, so that he may convict their stupid and irreligious superstitions from the very causes of those superstitions, saying: “The idols of the Gentiles are silver and gold, the works of the hands of men. They have a mouth, and they will not speak; they have eyes, and they will not see; they have ears, and they will not hear; they have nostrils, and they will not smell; they have hands, and they will not feel; they have feet, and they will not walk; they will not cry out in their throat; neither is there any breath in their mouth. Let those who make them become like them, and all who trust in them” (Psalm 134:15-18). Frequently in other psalms this same thing has been said concerning the idols of the Gentiles; indeed, the whole of prophecy labors for this purpose: to turn human error away from these most foolish pursuits of irreligion. For many add authority to these impieties of theirs, seeking honor for the gods they have made for themselves through the value of metals, forming them from gold and silver. But they bestow only what they are able: namely, the likeness of a mouth, of eyes, ears, nostrils, hands, and feet, worshipping (adorantes) their own gods in the form of a dead body. When the spirit has fled from such a body, the mouth is mute, the eyes are dim, the ears are deaf, the nostrils are lifeless, the hands are limp, the feet are rigid, and the entire body is motionless. Yet to their error is assigned that which they do not even dare to hope for: that they should become like those whom they worship (adorant), and that those who are venerating (venerantes) should be in the company of those who are venerated (veneratorum), destined themselves to be left behind as dead bodies without the breath of life, after the manner of their idols. – Hilary of Poitiers, Treatise on the Psalms, Psalm 134, chapter 26, PL 9:766
Desist, desist, O groundless fear of the heretics, and do not lie as if you wished to protect the faith of the Church by falsely pretending that you are over-solicitous about this statement! According to our explanation there is nothing corporeal, nothing lifeless in the things of God. What is God is wholly God. In Him there is nothing but power, life, light, blessedness, and spirit. His nature is incompatible with the dull elements of matter, nor is it composed of different things that it may survive. God, as He is God, always remains what He is, and the God who remains as He is has begotten God. – Hilary of Poitiers, On the Trinity, Book 6, chapter 12
It was not the carnal body, which He had received by birth from the Virgin, that could manifest to them the image and likeness of God. The human aspect which He wore could be no aid towards the mental vision of the incorporeal God. But God was recognised in Christ, by such as recognised Christ as the Son on the evidence of the powers of His Divine nature; and a recognition of God the Son produces a recognition of God the Father. For the Son is in such a sense the Image, as to be One in kind with the Father, and yet to indicate that the Father is His Origin. Other images, made of metals or colours or other materials by various arts, reproduce the appearance of the objects which they represent. Yet can lifeless copies be put on a level with their living originals? Painted or carved or molten effigies with the nature which they imitate? The Son is not the Image of the Father after such a fashion as this; He is the living Image of the Living. The Son that is born of the Father has a nature in no wise different from His; and, because His nature is not different, He possesses the power of that nature which is the same as His own. The fact that He is the Image proves that God the Father is the Author of the birth of the Only-begotten, Who is Himself revealed as the Likeness and Image of the invisible God. And hence the likeness, which is joined in union with the Divine nature, is indelibly His, because the powers of that nature are inalienably His own. – Hilary of Poitiers, On the Trinity, book 7, chapter 37
16.27 And therefore the Apostle, refuting the impious opinions of heretics concerning the only-begotten Son and God, and proclaiming the identity of nature with his Father, and also the co-eternity, wrote, as has been already stated: “Who being the radiance of the glory of the Father,” 16.28 and added: “and the express image of his person.” And again, he wrote to the Colossians and to the Hebrews: “Who is the image of the invisible God.” 16.29 And in the Gospel according to John, the Son, showing that his essence is sealed with the character of the Father, said: “For him has the Father, God, sealed.” 16.30 The seal clearly co-exists with the archetype and is of equal form, and in itself perfectly and truly shows the unity of nature of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. For the seal, like the express image, signifies likeness and purity. 16.31 Since it is time to say that the Father himself would not be unbegotten and incomparable, if he were imaged and marked by one begotten and dissimilar. 16.32 These divine and inexpressible sayings, not rightly understanding, but twisting and contending with human thoughts against the words of God, they say: ‘God is one thing and the image of God another, as man is one thing and the image of man another.’ 16.33 And in a certain way they liken the living and active Word of God to an unmoving image. But in essence and in all things, he is the most perfect and eternal image of the Father, not in form and shape, like a molded or carved lifeless and unmoving statue, nor in appearance and color, like an artificial and imitative voiceless image. For these do not naturally, nor in all respects, reveal the original.– Didymus the Blind, On the Trinity, Book 1, chapter 16
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
Hence, through this one blasphemy he rejects all the terms handed down by the Holy Spirit for the glorification of the Only-Begotten, even though the gospel teaches that the Father, God, has set his seal upon him [Jn 6.27], and the Apostle [says] that he is the image of the invisible God [Col 1.15]. He is not a lifeless image, nor handmade, nor a product of art or conceptualization, but a living image, or rather self-existent life which always preserves the indistinguishability, not by likeness of shape, but in his very substance. – Basil of Caesarea, Against Eunomius, Book 1, Chapter 18
Now there are some who say that the words, “the covetous man is an idolater,” are hyperbolical. However, the statement is not hyperbolical, it is true. How, and in what way? Because the covetous man apostatizes from God, just as the idolater does. And lest you should imagine this is a bare assertion, there is a declaration of Christ which says, “You cannot serve God and Mammon.” Matthew 6:24 If then it is not possible to serve God and Mammon, they who serve Mammon have thrown themselves out of the service of God; and they who have denied His sovereignty, and serve lifeless gold, it is plain enough that they are idolaters. “But I never made an idol,” a man will say, “nor set up an altar, nor sacrificed sheep, nor poured libations of wine; no, I came into the church, and lifted up my hands to the Only-begotten Son of God; I partake of the mysteries, I communicate in prayer, and in everything else which is a Christian’s duty. How then,” he will say, “am I a worshiper of idols?” Yes, and this is the very thing which is the most astonishing of all, that when you have had experience, and hast tasted the lovingkindness of God, and hast seen that the Lord is gracious Psalm 34:8, you should abandon Him who is gracious, and take to yourself a cruel tyrant, and should pretend to be serving Him, while in reality you have submitted yourself to the hard and galling yoke of covetousness. You have not yet told me of your own duty done, but only of your Master’s gifts. For tell me, I beseech you, whence do we judge of a soldier? Is it when he is on duty guarding the king, and is fed by him, and called the king’s own, or is it when he is minding his own affairs and interests? To pretend to be with him, and to be attentive to his interests, while he is advancing the cause of the enemy, we declare to be worse than if he breaks away from the king’s service, and joins the enemy. Now then you are doing despite to God, just as an idolater does, not with your own mouth singly, but with the ten thousands of those whom you have wronged. Yet you will say, “an idolater he is not.” But surely, whenever they say, “Oh! That Christian, that covetous fellow,” then not only is he himself committing outrage by his own act, but he frequently forces those also whom he has wronged to use these words; and if they use them not, this is to be set to the account of their reverence.
Do we not see that such is the fact? What else is an idolater? Or does not he too worship passions, oftentimes not mastering his passions? I mean, for example, when we say that the pagan idolater worships idols, he will say, “No, but it is Venus,” or “it is Mars.” And if we say, “Who is this Venus?” The more modest among them will say, “It is pleasure.” Or what is this Mars? “It is wrath.” And in the same way do you worship Mammon. If we say, “Who is this Mammon?” It is covetousness, and this you are worshiping. “I worship it not,” you will say. Why not? Because you do not bow yourself down? Nay, but as it is, you are far more a worshiper in your deeds and practices; for this is the higher kind of worship. And that you may understand this, look in the case of God; who more truly worship Him, they who merely stand up at the prayers, or they who do His will? Clearly enough, these latter. The same also is it with the worshipers of Mammon; they who do his will, they truly are his worshipers. However, they who worship the passions are oftentimes free from the passions. One may see a worshiper of Mars oftentimes governing his wrath. But this is not true of you; you make yourself a slave to your passion.
You have seen that the expression is no hyperbole. Would you hear again another argument, to teach you how covetousness is idolatry, and more shocking than idolatry? Idolaters worship (προσκυνοῦσι) the creation of God (“for they worshipped (ἐσεβάσθησαν),” it is said, “and served the creation rather than the Creator”) Romans 1:25; but you are worshiping (προσκυνεῖς) a creation of your own. For God made not covetousness but your own insatiable appetite invented it. And look at the madness and folly. They that worship idols, honor also the idols they worship; and if any one speak of them with disrespect or ridicule, they stand up in their defense; whereas you, as if in a sort of intoxication, are worshiping (προσκυνεῖς) an object, which is so far from being free from accusation, that it is even full of impiety. So that you, even more than they, excel in wickedness. You can never have it to say as an excuse, that it is no evil. If even they are in the highest degree without excuse, yet are you in a far higher, who art forever censuring covetousness, and reviling those who devote (θεραπεύοντας) themselves to it, and who yet does serve (δουλεύοντας) and obey it.
We will examine, if you please, whence idolatry took its rise. A certain wise man (Wisdom 14:16) tells us, that a certain rich man afflicted with untimely mourning for his son, and having no consolation for his sorrow, consoled his passion in this way: having made a lifeless image of the dead, and constantly gazing at it, he seemed through the image to have his departed one still; while certain flatterers, whose God was their belly (Philippians 3:19), treating the image with reverence in order to do him honor, carried on the custom into idolatry. So then it took its rise from weakness of soul, from a senseless custom, from extravagance. – John Chrysostom, Homily 18 on Ephesians
“The idols of the nations are of silver and gold, the work of human hands. They have mouths, but will not speak; they have eyes, but will not see; they have ears, but will not hear; they have noses, but will not smell; they have hands, but will not feel; they have feet, but will not walk; they will make no sound in their throat. Let their makers be like them” (Psalm 115:4-8). In Psalm 105, in describing their madness, he said, “They sacrificed their sons and daughters to the demons,” whereas in the present psalm it is their insensitivity in clinging fast to lifeless materials. He takes issue with all their limbs, making the satire more comprehensive. Then he makes an additional comment: Let their makers be like them, and all who trust in them. — John Chrysostom, Commentary on Psalm 115
What may therefore also be said of the Greeks is this: although they are disposed almost more foolishly than children, they ridicule things worthy of awe and full of great wonder, while they honor and carefully preserve things that are truly ridiculous. Nevertheless, even though our things are laughed at by them, they remain in their own dignity, suffering no harm to their glory from their laughter; while their own things, though carefully defended on every side, still display their own shamefulness. For how is it not the height of madness that, while they themselves are so easily led into stones and wood and cheap carved images (ξόανα), introducing their own gods into them and shutting them up as though in some prison, they consider themselves to be doing and saying nothing shameful, yet they accuse us, saying that God, having prepared for Himself a living temple from the Holy Spirit, benefited the whole inhabited world through it? And what accusation is this? For if it is shameful for God to dwell in a human body, it is much more shameful for Him to dwell in stone and wood, by as much as stone and wood are more dishonorable than man—unless perhaps they think that our race is even more worthless than these lifeless materials. – John Chrysostom, On the Birthday (In diem natalem), Migne PG 49.358-59
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? Then if he who stones the image of an earthly emperor stones himself, does not he who insults the image of Christ (for man is the image of God) wrong himself? For how long will we love money? For I will not cease crying out against them; for these things are the causes of all evils. Until when will we not have our fill of this insatiable desire? What good does gold have? I am astonished at the matter! Truly it is some kind of sorcery, that gold and silver are so highly valued among us. Therefore, we have no regard for our souls, but great is the care for lifeless images (εἰκόνων). From where did this disease enter the world? Who will be able to destroy it? What word can cut out this harsh beast, and corrupt it with utter destruction? The desire has been sown in the minds of men, and even of those who seem to be religious (εὐλαβείᾳ). Let us be ashamed at the evangelical precepts; the words lie in Scripture only, but are nowhere shown in deeds. – John Chrysostom, Homily 10 on First Thessalonians 5:17-18
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
Actually, Moses and all the prophets were long dead in the body, but in their writings they had them. After all, if a person sets up a lifeless image of son or dear one and thinks that person, though dead, is present, and through the lifeless image he imagines him, much more do we enjoy the communion of the saints through the divine Scriptures, having in them images not of their bodies but of their souls, the words spoken by them being of their very souls. – John Chrysostom, Homilies on the Psalms, Homily on Psalm 146
But nevertheless, foreseeing all these things, He washed them, laying down laws for us, that even if we are higher than all, and more brilliant and more eminent than all, and those who are about to lodge with us are worse than all, we should not for this reason flee from their service, nor be ashamed of their lowliness. But you, O woman, if you see someone helping you in worldly affairs, or assisting in court, or in some other such thing, you both meet him, and receive him with much goodwill, and kiss his hands, and pay money, and do the work of maidservants; but if you see Christ entering, do you hesitate and shrink from His service? If you do not receive the stranger as Christ, do not receive him; but if you receive him as Christ, do not be ashamed to wash the feet of Christ. Do you not see how many of those who are oppressed have fled to the feet of statues? And yet the material is senseless, and the bronze lifeless; but nevertheless, since they are images of kings, they expected to gain some benefit from those feet. But you, seeing not senseless feet, nor lifeless matter, but an image having the king within [a fellow human being], entering toward you, do you not run to her, tell me, and hold her feet, and serve her in every way? And how are these things worthy of pardon? Of how much shame would this not be? Consider with whom you have fellowship, being puffed up, and being lifted up to arrogance, and being ashamed of the service of the stranger. With the devil, clearly; for pride is his disease. – John Chrysostom, On “Let a widow be chosen”, chapter 13
“The idols of the nations are silver and gold” (Psalm 135:15). From the praise of the Almighty he passes to the rebuke of idols, and by describing their worthlessness he exalts the greatness of the Godhead, so as to make good his earlier statement: “Our Lord is above all gods” (Psalm 135:5). “The works of the hands … they do not see” (Psalm 135:16). Idols are fashioned in our likeness, so that a human image may dignify lifeless and shapeless matter. — Theodore of Mopsuestia, Commentary on Psalms – CORPVS CHRISTIANORVM Series Latina volume LXXXVIII A – page 378
For when you took the image of the Great King and cast it into a state of lifelessness, godlessness, lack of counsel, lack of power, lack of glory, and lack of essence, you ought to have had your unholy tongue cut out for uttering such a word against the Lord and for bringing ruin upon a soul that has acted so impiously. For by circumscribing the image of God with lifelessness, you claim that this image possesses neither lordship, nor deity, nor essence, nor counsel, nor power, nor glory. You want it to be an immobile image of these things, as if it were soulless and lifeless, making it out to be something cast outside, and just as soulless as if it were constructed by human art alone. But you refuse to allow that the image of the living God is itself living, or that the image of Essence is itself essence, or that the image of counsel, power, and glory is invariably counsel, power, and glory. To say “invariably” (ἀπαραλλάκτως) does not mean “unbegottenly” (ἀγεννήτως), but rather that it possesses both deity and every divine operation, distinctly impressed and accurately conformed to the Father. – Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion, Heresy 72 (Against the Marcellians)
“For they themselves report concerning us what kind of reception we had among you, and how you turned to God from images (simulacris), to serve the living and true God.” An image (simulacrum) is so called from simulation (simulando). They are rightly said to have been converted from false masters to the true and living God. And to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, Jesus. Such is He, that you may confidently and with joy await the coming of the Lord. – Jerome, Commentary on 1 Thessalonians 1:9
- And yet the Cathodox proudly call themselves “image-slaves,” referring to these blocks of wood and stone as their masters! Do any of you Cathodox honestly believe Jerome would commend you for this?
- The Cathodox pretend that “simulacrum” only refers to “images of pagan deities,” but Jerome tells you exactly what is meant by the word! “It’s called a simulacrum because it is made to resemble the likeness of some dead man.” That is the definition, a thing that was made to resemble another thing. You may not bow down to or offer incense to any simulacrum.
- Also notice that Jerome says people who worship the sun and the moon are actually worshiping demons. He doesn’t just say they’re worshiping non-entities, but that the worship they render to created objects automatically goes to demons! The demons steal it, when it was meant for others. The emphasis is that God forbids us from worshiping even the objects He created, let alone things we dug up from the earth and fashioned with our own hands. Thus, when people bow to objects they refined and colored, they are committing idolatry, no matter who it’s depicting.
“They have eyes, and they will not see: they have ears, and they will not hear: they have nostrils, and they will not smell. They have hands, and they will not feel: they have feet, and they will not walk: they will not cry out in their throat. For neither is there breath in their mouth.” You say to him: “Or if you had adored a beast, although it was an evil thing, yet at least it has eyes, or feet: but this thing which you adore neither sees nor hears.” Why does He add: “They will not cry out in their throat”? Because beasts cry out with a voice, but their cry is unintelligible. You do not understand, nor are you able through letters or through syllables to comprehend, in the way you comprehend the voice of a man. “Let those who make them become like them, and all who trust in them.” “Like them,” that is, if he does not correct his eyes, because he saw that gold, that image [imaginem]. But he is also made like them in soul, while he does not correct himself, because he neither sees, nor understands, nor discerns, while he believes more in error. Therefore he is said to be like them. “And all who trust in them.” Not only those who make them, but also those who trust in them. – Jerome, Commentary on Psalm 115
- Jerome employs the SAME argument as all of the fathers before him, saying that it makes more sense to worship a LIVING animal than a lifeless image! So much for the idiotic argument that these church fathers are actually denouncing the nonexistent entities depicted by the images as being “lifeless.” We’ve already established that Jerome believes there ARE living entities in these images – the demons! But when he calls them lifeless, he’s specifically referring to the GOLD, the material these images are made out of! He condemns the concept of bowing down to lifeless images of dead men.
So there was one sort of mockery for these idols, [that they are] soulless, senseless, and lifeless; and another for the objects they hold in high esteem and worship through them, that is, the demons, when he says, All the gods of the nations are demons, while it is the Lord who made the heavens. And the apostle poured scorn on an idol in one way: We know, he said, that an idol is nothing (1 Cor 8:4), while he commanded us to beware of demons in another, saying, What the nations sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God. I do not wish you to become the associates of demons (1 Cor 10:20). He did not say, “I do not wish you to become the associates of idols.” Perhaps, you see, that would make you afraid to be what you never could be, to be the associate of a wooden idol, in case you were both thrown together on the bonfire. Be afraid to be the associate of demons, in case you are both thrown together into the eternal fire. — Augustine, Sermon 23B, chapter 9
But then it added, Nor will they produce any sound from their throats, and thereby alerted the reader or hearer, who would wonder about the addition and so discover that we are being told of the superiority not of humans only, but even of beasts, to pagan idols. If pagans find it shameful to worship an animal, which God has endowed with the power to see, hear, smell, handle objects, walk, and produce sounds from its throat, they must see how much more shameful it is to worship an idol which is dumb and lifeless. It has been given fake human organs only so that a soul dominated by sensuality may feel affection for a thing that appears living and animated, since the worshipper is aware of similar organs as living and animated in himself. Mice and snakes and other live creatures are much better judges of pagan idols, we might say, for they take no notice of the human shape of an object in which they detect no human life. They often build their nests in the idols, and unless driven away by human activity they seek no more secure habitat. But along comes a human being, moving to frighten the animal away from his god; then he worships as powerful an object impotent to move itself, from which the worshipper had to scare off an animal that was better than the idol. He has frightened a seeing creature away from a blind thing, a hearing creature from a deaf thing, a walking animal from an immobile image, a sentient creature from something without feeling, and a living animal from a dead object—indeed, from one worse than dead, for although a corpse is obviously not alive, it is equally obvious that it has been alive. A corpse has more dignity, therefore, than a god who is not alive and never has been. – Augustine, Exposition 2 of Psalm 113, chapter 2
The very explanations prove that they do not worship that God, the enjoyment of whom can alone give happiness, but things which He has created. And even in the creature they worship not only the virtues, as in Minerva, who sprang from the head of Jupiter, and who represents prudence,—a quality of reason which, according to Plato, has its seat in the head,—but their vices, too, as in Cupid. Thus one of their dramatic poets says, “Sinful passion, in favor of vice, made Love a god.” Even bodily evils had temples in Rome, as in the case of pallor and fever. Not to dwell on the sin of the worshippers of these idols, who are in a way affected by the bodily forms, so that they pay homage to them as deities, when they see them set up in some lofty place, and treated with great honor and reverence, there is greater sin in the very explanations which are intended as apologies for these dumb, and deaf, and blind, and lifeless objects. Still, though, as I have said, these things are nothing in the way of salvation or of usefulness, both they and the things they are said to represent are real existences. But your First Man, warring with the five elements; and your Mighty Spirit, who constructs the world from the captive bodies of the race of darkness, or rather from the members of your god in subjection and bondage; and your World-holder, who has in his hand the remains of these members, and who bewails the capture and bondage and pollution of the rest; and your giant Atlas, who keeps up the World-holder on his shoulders, lest he should from weariness throw away his burden, and so prevent the completion of the final imitation of the mass of darkness, which is to be the last scene in your drama;—these and countless other absurdities are not represented in painting or sculpture, or in any explanation; and yet you believe and worship things which have no existence, while you taunt the Christians with being credulous for believing in realities with a faith which pacifies the mind under its influence. The objects of your worship can be shown to have no existence by many proofs, which I do not bring forward here, because, though I could without difficulty discourse philosophically on the construction of the world, it would take too long to do so here. One proof suffices. If these things are real, God must be subject to change, and corruption, and contamination; a supposition as blasphemous as it is irrational. All these things, therefore, are vain, and false, and unreal. Thus you are much worse than those Pagans, with whom all are familiar, and who still preserve traces of their old customs, of which they themselves are ashamed; for while they worship things which are not gods, you worship things which do not exist. – Augustine, Against Faustus, book 22, chapter 9
Next the Creed says: “Begotten of the Father before all worlds, and not made.” This Creed was uttered by you. You said by your Creed, that Jesus Christ was begotten before the worlds of God the Father, and not made. Does the Creed say anything about those phantasms, of which you now rave? Did you yourself say anything about them? Where is the statue? Where that instrument of yours, I pray? For God forbid that this should be another’s and not yours. Where is it that you assert that the Lord Jesus Christ is like a statue, and so you think that He ought to be worshipped not because He is God, but because He is the image of God; and out of the Lord of glory you make an instrument, and blasphemously say that He ought to be adored not for His own sake, but for the sake of Him who (as it were) breathes in Him and sounds through Him? …. You said in the Creed when you received the Sacrament of true Salvation: “the Lord Jesus Christ, Very God of Very God, Being of one substance with the Father, Creator of the worlds, Maker of all things.” Where are you alas! Where is your former self? Where is that faith of yours? Where that confession? How have you fallen back and become a monstrosity and a prodigy? What folly, what madness was your ruin? You turned the God of all power and might into inanimate material and a lifeless creation: Your faith has certainly grown in time, in age, and in the priesthood. – John Cassian, On the Incarnation, Book 6, chapter 6-7
“People who are deceived, in fact, if some fear alarms them, normally cling to altars, open up shrines, and cry aloud to the lifeless idols, Have mercy, save us, and you, stone, get up, as a god protect those venerating your power and opting to adore you. It is right, therefore, to say Woe to such people because it is to products of gold and silver, with no breath in them, that their devotees make such statements as would better be said to God, who dwells in heaven and has as his own temple the city above; the holy one dwells among holy people, and stays with those venerating him.” – Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on Habakkuk 2
“He had legislated, remember, through the wise Moses, ‘You shall not make gold and silver gods for yourself,’ and ‘You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve him alone.’ But in mockery of my Law, he says, you worshiped the works of your hands; and on seeing a golden heifer made of lifeless materials, you had no objections when the originator of the deception said, “These are your gods, Israel, who led you out of the land of Egypt.’” – Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on Amos 4
“God dismisses the praise given on instruments, disqualifying lifeless matter from offering praise, and transferring participation in such splendid commendation instead to those who give expression with pure minds, since such fine hymns of praise are pleasing to the Lord of all.” – Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on Amos 5
Now, the fact that God needs not lifeless matter but a spiritual array he suggests in saying, Mine is the silver and mine the gold, says the Lord almighty. It would be like saying, “Do not consider the temple inglorious because it happens to lack gold and silver and the splendor of wealth; I need nothing like that.” How so? “Mine is the silver and mine the gold, says the Lord almighty: I look rather for sincere worshipers; it is with the splendor of such people that I shall gild my Temple.” In other words, just as when he relieved Israel of the obligation of sacrifices according to the Law, he necessarily said, “I shall not accept calves from your house, or goats from your flocks, for all the beasts of the countryside, cattle on the mountains, and oxen are mine,” so too here he declines to accept adornment of a material kind, and seeks rather the spiritual kind, saying, Mine is the silver and mine the gold. In other words, I am content and satisfied, and have no need of any such thing; instead, let someone come who has an upright faith, is distinguished for ornaments of virtue, resplendent with love for me, pure in heart, poor in spirit, compassionate, and kind. When they assemble in my temple, in fact, that is, the Church, they will make it glorious, the cynosure of all eyes. – Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on Haggai 2
Instead, it was inevitable that, deprived as they were of the precious freedom from on high, longing for the pleasures of home, impoverished, subject to the whims of their oppressors, they would no longer be able to observe customary ways. Instead, in their grief, and carried away with their intolerable calamities, they condemned those who deceived them, since it was impossible for them to gain anything from people with vain hopes. They were no better off, in fact, either from Baal’s assistance—after all, what could voiceless wood do?—or from the heifers pondering some form of aid for them, since they were made of gold, “the work of human hands,” as Scripture says. – Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on Hosea 2
It is therefore appropriate to deplore heretics, who are hateful to God in directing their speech against God the Son and claiming he is created and actually inferior to the Father. They even, as it were, fashion an idol according to their own thinking, and bid it be adored; if the Son completely falls short of being by nature God, and is generated, and is adored by us and the holy angels, how is it that we do not openly worship creation, as the pagans do under the form of the sun, or some other created thing, fashioning the idol out of foolish and vain imagining? – Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on Zephaniah 1
Pagans on Their Own Idols Being Lifeless:
Plato, Greek (428–347 BC):
Neither God, nor a man who has understanding, will ever advise any one to neglect his parents. To a discourse concerning the honour and dishonour of parents, a prelude such as the following, about the service of the Gods, will be a suitable introduction: There are ancient customs about the Gods which are universal, and they are of two kinds: some of the Gods we see with our eyes and we honour them, of others we honour the images, raising statues of them which we adore; and though they are lifeless, yet we imagine that the living Gods have a good will and gratitude to us on this account. – Plato, Laws, book 9
Plutarch, Greek (46–120 AD):
If, then, the most esteemed of the philosophers, observing the enigma of the Divine in inanimate and incorporeal objects, did not think it right to neglect or dishonour anything, even more do I think that the peculiar properties existing in natures that perceive and possess a soul and feeling and character should, in all likelihood, be cherished [i.e. animals]. It is not that we should honour these, but that through these we should honour the Divine, since they are the clearer mirrors of the Divine by their nature also, so that we should regard them as the instrument or device of the God who orders all things. And in general we must hold it true that nothing inanimate is superior to what is animate, and nothing without the power of perception is superior to that which has that power—no, not even if one should heap together all the gold and emeralds in the world. The Divine is not engendered in colours or in forms or in polished surfaces, but whatsoever things have no share in life, things whose nature does not allow them to share therein, have a portion of less honour than that of the dead. But the nature that lives and sees and has within itself the source of movement and a knowledge of what belongs to it and what belongs to others, has drawn to itself an emanation and portion of beauty from the Intelligence “by which the Universe is guided,” as Heraclitus has it. Wherefore the Divine is no worse represented in these animals than in works of bronze and stone which are alike subject to destruction and disfiguration, and by their nature are void of all perception and comprehension. This, then, is what I most approve in the accounts that are given regarding the animals held in honour. – Plutarch, On Isis and Osiris, chapter 382B
But these men have taken a false notion of philosophy, they make it much like the art of statuary, whose business it is to carve out a lifeless image in the most exact figure and proportion, and then to raise it upon its pedestal, where it is to continue forever. The true philosophy is of a quite different nature; it is a spring and principle of motion wherever it comes; it makes men active and industrious, it sets every wheel and faculty a-going, it stores our minds with axioms and rules by which to make a sound judgment, it determines the will to the choice of what is honorable and just; and it wings all our faculties to the swiftest prosecution of it. – Plutarch, Essays and Miscellanies, That a Philosopher Ought Chiefly to Converse with Great Men
Julian the Apostate (331-362 AD):
Then let everyone make the basis of his conduct moral virtues, and actions like these, namely reverence towards the gods, benevolence towards men, personal chastity; and thus let him abound in pious acts, I mean by endeavouring always to have pious thoughts about the gods, and by regarding the temples and images of the gods with due honour and veneration, and by worshipping the gods as though he saw them actually present. For our fathers established images and altars, and the maintenance of undying fire, and, generally speaking, everything of the sort, as symbols of the presence of the gods, not that we may regard such things as gods, but that we may worship the gods through them. For since being in the body it was in bodily wise that we must needs perform our service to the gods also, though they are themselves without bodies; they therefore revealed to us in the earliest images the class of gods next in rank to the first, even those that revolve in a circle about the whole heavens. But since not even to these can due worship be offered in bodily wise – for they are by nature not in need of anything – another class of images was invented on the earth, and by performing our worship to them we shall make the gods propitious to ourselves. For just as those who make offerings to the statues of the emperors, who are in need of nothing, nevertheless induce goodwill towards themselves thereby, so too those who make offerings to the images of the gods, though the gods need nothing, do nevertheless thereby persuade them to help and to care for them. For zeal to do all that is in one’s power is, in truth, a proof of piety, and it is evident that he who abounds in such zeal thereby displays a higher degree of piety; whereas he who neglects what is possible, and then pretends to aim at what is impossible, evidently does not strive after the impossible, since he overlooks the possible. For even though God stands in need of nothing, it does not follow that on that account nothing ought to be offered to him. He does not need the reverence that is paid in words. What then? Is it rational to deprive him of this also? By no means. It follows then that one ought not to deprive him either of the honour that is paid to him through deeds, an honour which not three years or three thousand years have ordained, but all past time among all the nations of the earth.
- The Second Council of Nicaea made the same argument as the pagans: “If we offer incense to the images of emperors, how much more should we offer incense to images of God!”
Therefore, when we look at the images of the gods, let us not indeed think they are stones or wood, but neither let us think they are the gods themselves; and indeed we do not say that the statues of the emperors are mere wood and stone and bronze, but still less do we say they are the emperors themselves. He therefore who loves the emperor delights to see the emperor’s statue, and he who loves his son delights to see his son’s statue, and he who loves his father delights to see his father’s statue. It follows that he who loves the gods delights to gaze on the images of the gods, and their likenesses, and he feels reverence and shudders with awe of the gods who look at him from the unseen world. – Julian the Apostate, Fragment of a letter to a priest (1913) Works, vol.2, pp. 297-339.
- “Making images of God is just like having a picture of your family member!” Now where have we heard this argument before? Did Julian look forward in time and predict the arguments of the Cathodox? Or did the Cathodox go back in time to retrieve their arguments from the pagans?
The people streamed out of the city, together with the Senate: before them all, however, advanced to receive her the priests and priestesses, arrayed after the manner of the country, with their attention fixed upon the vessel which was coming in under full sail. They gazed at the surging of the waves as they divided themselves around the keel; and as she sailed up they welcomed her, each one kissing his hand to her, as they happened to be standing in front, from a distance. But the ship, as though desirous to prove to the people of Rome that it was not a mere lifeless wooden image (ξόανον) she was bringing them from Phrygia, but that, whatever it was she was bringing them from the Phrygians, it must possess some greater and supernatural power (δύναμιν) of its own, as soon as the goddess touched the Tiber she made the ship stand still, as though it had suddenly taken root in the bed of the river. – Julian the Apostate, On The Mother of The Gods