When trying to prove icon-worship existed in the early church, the Cathodox must concede there is absolutely on evidence for it whatsoever, so they fall back on a different argument: “The church honored relics! And that’s the same thing!”
The Greek word they translate as “relic” is λειψάνου, meaning “remnant” or “remains,” derived from the ancient Greek verb leipein (λείπειν), meaning “to leave” or “to leave behind.”
As the church fathers frequently point out, one of the fundamental differences between the bodies of the saints and a lifeless painting is that a painting was never alive, nor will it ever be, but the body of a saint WAS alive in the past, and it will be alive again in the future. That body actually belongs to the person whose soul has departed, and it will be restored to them someday. We show respect for the possessions of any person who died; how much more do we show respect to the BODY of that person, which is an actual part of them that shares their very nature!
The Cathodox are aware that there are no church fathers in the first 500 years who support bowing to images and offering them incense, but on the contrary, they all condemn it as idolatry. So the Cathodox use the only thing left in their arsenal of lies: they’ll appeal to the honoring of the saints’ bodies (calling these “relics” in order to be more ambiguous and broaden the scope of what’s allowed to be embraced affectionately), and they’ll say this is the same as icon-worship! But this is more evidence against their position, since we can show that men like Eusebius, Ambrose, Augustine, John Chrysostom, and Epiphanius all showed great respect to the bodies of the saints, testifying to the veracity of miracle-working relics, and yet they still forbade anyone to bow down to images or burn incense to them. How pathetic! You Cathodox are so desperate for validation that you have to go to the very iconoclasts themselves to provide evidence for the honoring of relics, as if they conflated worshiping lifeless images with showing honor to the actual bodies of saints!
The Cathodox are only solidifying our point, that it is possible to show respect to the bodies of the saints while STILL refraining from worshiping images. God forbade the worship of images. He didn’t forbid showing affection to the bodies of the saints. No matter how much you insist these two things are identical, you can’t escape the fact that the fathers DID see a difference and forbade image-worship. All we really need to prove this point is a single example. After all, if we can demonstrate that it’s even POSSIBLE for a church father to simultaneously honor the relics of the saints AND forbid the worship of images, then the Cathodox can no longer make their false equivocation between icons and relics.
But we will provide several examples of church fathers showing great respect for miracle-working relics while also rejecting the idea of worshiping God (or honoring the saints) through man-made images. Up until now, the Cathodox have pulled the classic bait-and-switch with impunity, expecting everyone to ignore the fact that no matter how much the post-Nicene church honored relics, they never prostrated before them, offered them incense, or called themselves “relic slaves,” nor did they do any such things to icons! The sad reality for the Cathodox is that they’ve not only failed to prove we should treat images the same way we treat relics, but they can’t even prove that any bishops of the first 500 years taught that we should do those things to relics! What a joke.
Church Fathers cited:
Augustine
Ambrose
Eusebius
John Chrysostom
Gregory the Great
Augustine (354-430 AD):
For even now miracles are wrought in the name of Christ, whether by His sacraments or by the prayers or relics of His saints; but they are not so brilliant and conspicuous as to cause them to be published with such glory as accompanied the former miracles. When the bishop Projectus was bringing the relics of the most glorious martyr Stephen to the waters of Tibilis, a great concourse of people came to meet him at the shrine. There a blind woman entreated that she might be led to the bishop who was carrying the relics. He gave her the flowers he was carrying. She took them, applied them to her eyes, and forthwith saw. Those who were present were astounded, while she, with every expression of joy, preceded them, pursuing her way without further need of a guide.
Lucillus bishop of Sinita, in the neighborhood of the colonial town of Hippo, was carrying in procession some relics of the same martyr, which had been deposited in the castle of Sinita. A fistula under which he had long labored, and which his private physician was watching an opportunity to cut, was suddenly cured by the mere carrying of that sacred fardel,—at least, afterwards there was no trace of it in his body. Eucharius, a Spanish priest, residing at Calama, was for a long time a sufferer from stone. By the relics of the same martyr, which the bishop Possidius brought him, he was cured. Afterwards the same priest, sinking under another disease, was lying dead, and already they were binding his hands. By the succor of the same martyr he was raised to life, the priest’s cloak having been brought from the oratory and laid upon the corpse. – Augustine, City of God, book 22, chapter 8
But, nevertheless, we do not build temples, and ordain priests, rites, and sacrifices for these same martyrs; for they are not our gods, but their God is our God. Certainly we honor their reliquaries, as the memorials of holy men of God who strove for the truth even to the death of their bodies, that the true religion might be made known, and false and fictitious religions exposed. For if there were some before them who thought that these religions were really false and fictitious, they were afraid to give expression to their convictions. But who ever heard a priest of the faithful, standing at an altar built for the honor and worship of God over the holy body of some martyr, say in the prayers, “I offer to you a sacrifice, O Peter, or O Paul, or O Cyprian?” For it is to God that sacrifices are offered at their tombs — the God who made them both men and martyrs, and associated them with holy angels in celestial honor; and the reason why we pay such honors to their memory is, that by so doing we may both give thanks to the true God for their victories, and, by recalling them afresh to remembrance, may stir ourselves up to imitate them by seeking to obtain like crowns and palms, calling to our help that same God on whom they called. Therefore, whatever honors the religious may pay in the places of the martyrs, they are but honors rendered to their memory, not sacred rites or sacrifices offered to dead men as to gods. – Augustine, City of God, book 8, chapter 27
Augustine clearly reverenced the martyrs’ miracle-working relics and tombs, even calling on believers to invoke the saints in prayer. But did Augustine embrace the doctrine of worshiping God through lifeless images? No! He abhorred the concept.
The same most acute and learned author [Cicero] also says, that those alone seem to him to have perceived what God is, who have believed Him to be the soul of the world, governing it by design and reason. And by this, it appears, that although he did not attain to the truth — for the true God is not a soul, but the maker and author of the soul — yet if he could have been free to go against the prejudices of custom, he could have confessed and counselled others that the one God ought to be worshipped, who governs the world by design and reason; so that on this subject only this point would remain to be debated with him, that he had called Him a soul, and not rather the creator of the soul. He [Cicero] says, also, that the ancient Romans, for more than a hundred and seventy years, worshipped the gods without an image. “And if this custom,” he says, “could have remained till now, the gods would have been more purely worshipped.” In favor of this opinion, he cites as a witness among others the Jewish nation; nor does he hesitate to conclude that passage by saying of those who first consecrated images for the people, that they have both taken away religious fear from their fellow citizens, and increased error, wisely thinking that the gods easily fall into contempt when exhibited under the stolidity of images. But as he does not say they have transmitted error, but that they have increased it, he therefore wishes it to be understood that there was error already when there were no images. Wherefore, when he says they alone have perceived what God is who have believed Him to be the governing soul of the world, and thinks that the rites of religion would have been more purely observed without images, who fails to see how near he has come to the truth? For if he had been able to do anything against so inveterate an error, he would certainly have given it as his opinion both that the one God should be worshipped, and that He should be worshipped without an image; and having so nearly discovered the truth, perhaps he might easily have been put in mind of the mutability of the soul, and might thus have perceived that the true God is that immutable nature which made the soul itself. Since these things are so, whatever ridicule such men have poured in their writings against the plurality of the gods, they have done so rather as compelled by the secret will of God to confess them, than as trying to persuade others. If, therefore, any testimonies are adduced by us from these writings, they are adduced for the confutation of those who are unwilling to consider from how great and malignant a power of the demons the singular sacrifice of the shedding of the most holy blood, and the gift of the imparted Spirit, can set us free. – Augustine, City of God, book 4, chapter 31
That liberty, in truth, which this man wanted, so that he did not dare to censure that theology of the city, which is very similar to the theatrical, so openly as he did the theatrical itself, was, though not fully, yet in part possessed by Annæus Seneca, whom we have some evidence to show to have flourished in the times of our apostles. It was in part possessed by him, I say, for he possessed it in writing, but not in living. For in that book which he wrote against superstition, he more copiously and vehemently censured that civil and urban theology than Varro the theatrical and fabulous. For, when speaking concerning images, he says, “They dedicate images of the sacred and inviolable immortals in most worthless and motionless matter.“ – Augustine, City of God, book 6, chapter 10
You say that your god lies, but that that object that you have made convinces you of the truth. By the fact, however, that it convinces you of the truth, it does not follow that it is superior to you. Even if you say what is false and he what is true, even if you say that it is a god and he a piece of wood, it is not for that reason superior to you. You have no reason, therefore, to worship it, almost as though it were superior to you. You in fact have sensible faculties, whereas he does not. You hear, whereas he does not hear. You see, whereas he does not see. You walk, whereas he does not walk. You live, whereas of him, I cannot even say that he is dead, since he has never been alive. You, therefore, are superior to the image you have made. Well then, worship one who is superior to you, that is, the One who created you! It would be an insult to you if someone considered you as equal to that object you have made. You ask what the one you worship is like? If someone were to say to you out of ill will, “If only you were like that thing there,” you would be beside yourself with rage. And yet you adore what you would abhor to be, and adoring it you become in some way similar to that object, not, of course, changing into wood and ceasing to be a person but rendering your interior person almost similar to the bodily effigy you have made. — Augustine (Newly Discovered Sermons 6.5 – Nuova Biblioteca Agostiniana = Opere di Sant’ Agostino. Rome: Citta Nuova, 1967– NBA 35/1.133.)
The first commandment of the Decalogue is, as God says: “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall not have strange gods before me. You shall not make for yourself a carved image, nor the likeness of anything that is in heaven above, nor of anything that moves in the waters under the earth. You shall not adore them, and you shall not serve them” (Exodus 20:2–5). To these words the blessed Augustine adds a very brief summary, saying: “In the first commandment it is forbidden to fashion any likeness of God out of human imagination—not because God has no image, but because no image of Him ought to be worshiped, except that Image which is the same as He is, and not even that in His place, but together with Him.” — Agobard of Lyons, Book on the Images of the Saints, PL 104:199, (820 AD)
- Remember that Augustine combined the 1st and 2nd commandments into one.
18. As to idols, indeed, who entertains a doubt as to their being wholly devoid of perception? And yet, when they are placed in these temples and set on high upon thrones of honour, that they may be waited upon by suppliants and worshippers praying and offering sacrifices, even these idols, though devoid both of feeling and of life, do, by the mere image of the members and senses of beings endowed with life, so affect weak minds, that they appear to live and breathe, especially under the added influence of the profound veneration with which the multitude freely renders such costly service.
19. To these morbid and pernicious affections of the mind divine Scripture applies a remedy, by repeating, with the impressiveness of wholesome admonition, a familiar fact, in the words, “Eyes have they, but they see not; they have ears, but they hear not,” etc. For these words, by reason of their being so plain, and commending themselves to all people as true, are the more effective in striking salutary shame into those who, when they present divine worship before such images with religious fear, and look upon their likeness to living beings while they are venerating and worshipping them, and utter petitions, offer sacrifices, and perform vows before them as if present, are so completely overcome, that they do not presume to think of them as devoid of perception.
20. The heathen find a plea for their profane rites and their idols in the fact that they interpret with ingenuity what is signified by each of them, but the plea is of no avail. For all this interpretation relates to the creature, not to the Creator, to whom alone is due that religious service which is in the Greek language distinguished by the word λατρεία. Neither do we say that the earth, the seas, the heaven, the sun, the moon, the stars, and any other celestial influences which may be beyond our ken are demons; but since all created things are divided into material and immaterial, the latter of which we also call spiritual, it is manifest that what is done by us under the power of piety and religion proceeds from the faculty of our souls known as the will, which belongs to the spiritual creation, and is therefore to be preferred to all that is material. Whence it is inferred that sacrifice must not be offered to anything material. There remains, therefore, the spiritual part of creation, which is either pious or impious — the pious consisting of men and angels who are righteous, and who duly serve God; the impious consisting of wicked men and angels, whom we also call devils. Now, that sacrifice must not be offered to a spiritual creature, though righteous, is obvious from this consideration, that the more pious and submissive to God any creature is, the less does he presume to aspire to that honour which he knows to be due to God alone. How much worse, therefore, is it to sacrifice to devils, that is, to a wicked spiritual creature, which, dwelling in this comparatively dark heaven nearest to earth, as in the prison assigned to him in the air, is doomed to eternal punishment. Wherefore, even when men say that they are offering sacrifices to the higher celestial powers, which are not devils, and imagine that the only difference between us and them is in a name, because they call them gods and we call them angels, the only beings which really present themselves to these men, who are given over to be the sport of manifold deceptions, are the devils who find delight and, in a sense, nourishment in the errors of mankind. For the holy angels do not approve of any sacrifice except what is offered, agreeably to the teaching of true wisdom and true religion, unto the one true God, whom in holy fellowship they serve. Therefore, as impious presumption, whether in men or in angels, commands or covets the rendering to itself of those honours which belong to God, so, on the other hand, pious humility, whether in men or in holy angels, declines these honours when offered, and declares to whom alone they are due, of which most notable examples are conspicuously set forth in our sacred books. – Augustine, Letter 102, chapters 18-20
75. Do not summon against me professors of the Christian name, who neither know nor give evidence of the power of their profession. Do not hunt up the numbers of ignorant people, who even in the true religion are superstitious, or are so given up to evil passions as to forget what they have promised to God. I know that there are many worshippers (adorers) of tombs and pictures. I know that there are many who drink to great excess over the dead, and who, in the feasts which they make for corpses, bury themselves over the buried, and give to their gluttony and drunkenness the name of religion. I know that there are many who in words have renounced this world, and yet desire to be burdened with all the weight of worldly things, and rejoice in such burdens. Nor is it surprising that among so many multitudes you should find some by condemning whose life you may deceive the unwary and seduce them from Catholic safety; for in your small numbers you are at a loss when called on to show even one out of those whom you call the elect who keeps the precepts, which in your indefensible superstition you profess. How silly those are, how impious, how mischievous, and to what extent they are neglected by most, nearly all of you, I have shown in another volume. 76. My advice to you now is this: that you should at least desist from slandering the Catholic Church, by declaiming against the conduct of men whom the Church herself condemns, seeking daily to correct them as wicked children. – Augustine, On The Morals of the Catholic Church, chapter 34 / paragraphs 75-76
We worship a God who is invisible. He cannot be seen by any bodily eye but is known only to very clean hearts, and few of us have those. This might seem to give pagans an excuse to ask, “Where is their God?” since, unlike us, they can show us their gods, visible to our eyes. This is why the foregoing psalm warned us in advance that the presence of our God is to be discerned in his works, for being enthroned in heaven above, he has done all that he willed in the heavens and on earth. Let the pagans show us their gods, it seems to be saying, for the idols of the Gentiles are fashioned of silver and gold, the work of human hands. We cannot display our God before your eyes, you pagans, though you ought to perceive him through his works; you, on the contrary, can point to the deities you worship. But do not let that lead you astray into empty fantasies. It would do you far more credit to admit you have nothing to show than to prove how blind your hearts are by demonstrating your gods to our bodily eyes. What are you showing us? Only gold and silver. – Augustine, Exposition 2 of Psalm 113, chapter 1
Moreover, we must consider ourselves distinct even from the so-called deities said to dwell within those stones or statues of wood, gold, and silver. For some, seeking to excuse themselves in some fashion, say: “We too know that the idols are vain things, but we do not worship the image itself.” And if you ask them what, then, they worship, they answer: “The divinities that dwell within the image. We bow before the visible form, but we adore the invisible.” But what are these invisible divinities? Let us hear it from our God, who speaks through the prophet: “All the gods of the nations are demons, but the Lord made the heavens” (Psalm 96:5). The demons are not worthy to dwell there. The prophet mocks the demons in one way, and the idols in another. How does he mock the idols? “The statues of the nations are silver and gold” (Psalm 115:4). He does not mention stone or wood, but chooses as the object of ridicule what men esteem most, what they consider precious — the very materials they prize. Thus they are silver and gold, yet still “the work of human hands” (Psalm 115:4). And in what sense are they the work of man? Was it man who made them to be gold or silver? No — that was the work of God. What then did man do? He made them have eyes but not see (Psalm 115:5). Such is the work of man when he fashions his god — a work he himself would not wish to be done to him by the God who made him. He has made a blind god, though he would never wish to have been created blind by God. What more need be said? The psalmist names gold and silver, the most precious of metals, and selects them precisely to mock their divinities, according to what men themselves value most. But is there truly any difference in what he mocks? There is indeed a difference between gold and wood, for gold is more precious than wood; yet as to seeing or not seeing, having eyes or lacking them, the two materials do not differ in the least. Different in use and brightness, they are equal in blindness. — Augustine, Sermon 23B, chapter 8
Why have I said this? Please consider carefully the chief point I’m making. We had started to deal with the apparently better educated pagans—because the less educated are the ones who do the things about which these do not wish to be taken to task—so with the better educated ones, since they say to us, “You people also have your adorers of columns, and sometimes even of pictures.” And would to God that we didn’t have them, and may the Lord grant that we don’t go on having them! But all the same, this is not what the Church teaches you. I mean, which priest of theirs ever climbed into a pulpit and from there commanded the people not to adore idols, in the way that we, in Christ, publicly preach against the adoration of columns or of the stones of buildings in holy places, or even of pictures? On the contrary indeed, it was their very priests who used to turn to the idols and offer them victims for their congregations, and would still like to do so now.
11. Seek in the Father and Son a separation, you find none; no, not if you have mounted high; no, not even if you have reached something above your mind. For if you turn about among the things which your wandering mind makes for itself, you talk with your own imaginations, not with the Word of God; your own imaginations deceive you. Mount also beyond the body, and understand the mind; mount also beyond the mind, and understand God. You reach not unto God, unless you have passed beyond the mind; how much less you reach unto God, if you have tarried in the flesh! They who think of the flesh, how far are they from understanding what God is! – since they would not be there even if they knew the mind. Man recedes far from God when his thoughts are of the flesh; and there is a great difference between flesh and mind, yet a greater between mind and God. If you are occupied with the mind, you are in the midway: if you direct your attention beneath, there is the body; if above, there is God. Lift yourself up from the body, pass beyond even yourself. For observe what said the psalm, and you are admonished how God must be thought of: “My tears,” it says, “were made to me my bread day and night, when it was said to me daily, Where is your God?” As the pagans may say, “Behold our gods, where is your God?” They indeed show us what is seen; we worship what is not seen. And to whom can we show? To a man who has not sight with which to see? For anyhow, if they see their gods with their eyes, we too have other eyes with which to see our God: for “blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.” Therefore, when he had said that he was troubled, when it was daily said to him, “Where is your God?” “these things I remembered,” says he, “because it is daily said to me, Where is your God?” And as if wishing to lay hold of his God, “These things,” says he, “I remembered, and poured out my soul above me.” Therefore, that I might reach unto my God, of whom it was said to me, “Where is your God? I poured out my soul,” not over my flesh, but “above me;” I transcended myself, that I might reach unto Him: for He is above me who made me; none reaches to Him but he that passes beyond himself.
12. Consider the body: it is mortal, earthy, weak, corruptible; away with it. Yes, perhaps you say, but the body is temporal. Think then of other bodies, the heavenly; they are greater, better, more magnificent. Look at them, moreover, attentively. They roll from east to west, they stand not; they are seen with the eyes, not only by man, but even by the beast of the field. Pass beyond them too. And how, say you, pass beyond the heavenly bodies, seeing that I walk on the earth? Not in the flesh do you pass beyond them, but in the mind. Away with them too: though they shine ever so much, they are bodies; though they glitter from heaven, they are bodies. Come, now that perhaps you think you have not where to go, after considering all these. And where am I to go, say you, beyond the heavenly bodies; and what am I to pass beyond with the mind? Have you considered all these? I have, say you. By what means have you considered them? Let the being that considers appear in person. The being that considers all these, that discriminates, distinguishes, and in a manner weighs them in the balance of wisdom, is really the mind. Doubtless, then, better is the mind with which you have contemplated all these things, than these things which you have contemplated. This mind, then, is a spirit, not a body. Pass beyond it too. And that you may see where you are to pass beyond, compare that mind itself, in the first place, with the flesh. Heaven forbid that you should deign so to compare it! Compare it with the brightness of the sun, of the moon, and of the stars; the brightness of the mind is greater. Observe, first, the swiftness of the mind; see whether the scintillation of the thinking mind be not more impetuous than the brilliance of the shining sun. With the mind you see the sun rising. How slow is its motion compared with your mind! What the sun is about to do, you can think in a trice. It is about to come from the east to the west; tomorrow rises from another quarter. Where your thought has done this, the sun still lags behind, and you have traversed the whole journey. A great thing, therefore, is the mind. But how do I say is? Pass beyond it also. For the mind, notwithstanding it be better than every kind of body, is itself changeable. Now it knows, now knows not; now forgets, now remembers; now wills, now wills not; now errs, now is right. Pass therefore beyond all changeableness; not only beyond all that is seen, but also beyond all that changes. For you have passed beyond the flesh which is seen; beyond heaven, the sun, moon, and stars, which are seen. Pass, too, beyond all that changes. For when you had done with those things that are seen, and had come to your mind, there you did find the changeableness of your mind. Is God at all changeable? Pass then, beyond even your mind. Pour out your soul “above you,” that you may reach unto God, of whom it is said to you, “Where is your God?” – Augustine, Tractate 22, chapters 11-13
Ambrose of Milan (339–397):
But we shouldn’t be surprised if Augustine condemned the worship of Christian images when his own teacher and consecrator had the same mind! First, let’s hear Ambrose lavish the relics of the martyrs with praise:
2. Why should I use many words? God favoured us, for even the clergy were afraid who were bidden to clear away the earth from the spot before the chancel screen of SS. Felix and Nabor. I found the fitting signs, and on bringing in some on whom hands were to be laid, the power of the holy martyrs became so manifest, that even while I was still silent, one was seized and thrown prostrate at the holy burial-place. We found two men of marvellous stature, such as those of ancient days. All the bones were perfect, and there was much blood. During the whole of those two days there was an enormous concourse of people. Briefly we arranged the whole in order, and as evening was now coming on transferred them to the basilica of Fausta, where watch was kept during the night, and some received the laying on of hands. On the following day we translated the relics to the basilica called Ambrosian. During the translation a blind man was healed. I addressed the people then as follows:
4. The heavens, it is said, declare the glory of God. When this Psalm is read, it occurs to one that not so much the material elements as the heavenly merits seem to offer praise worthy of God. And by the chance of this day’s lessons it is made clear what heavens declare the glory of God. Look at the holy relics at my right hand and at my left, see men of heavenly conversation, behold the trophies of a heavenly mind. These are the heavens which declare the glory of God, these are His handiwork which the firmament proclaims. For not worldly enticements, but the grace of the divine working, raised them to the firmament of the most sacred Passion, and long before by the testimony of their character and virtues bore witness of them, that they continued steadfast against the dangers of this world.
7. Another Psalm which was read says: Who is like the Lord our God, Who dwells on high, and regards lowly things in heaven and in the earth? The Lord regarded indeed lowly things when He revealed to His Church the relics of the holy martyrs lying hidden under the unnoted turf, whose souls were in heaven, their bodies in the earth: raising the poor out of the dust, and lifting the needy from the mire, and you see how He has set them with the princes of His people. Whom are we to esteem as the princes of the people but the holy martyrs? Among whose number Protasius and Gervasius long unknown are now enrolled, who have caused the Church of Milan, barren of martyrs hitherto, now as the mother of many children, to rejoice in the distinctions and instances of her own sufferings.
9. For not without reason do many call this the resurrection of the martyrs. I do not say whether they have risen for themselves, for us certainly the martyrs have risen. You know— nay, you have yourselves seen — that many are cleansed from evil spirits, that very many also, having touched with their hands the robe of the saints, are freed from those ailments which oppressed them; you see that the miracles of old time are renewed, when through the coming of the Lord Jesus grace was more largely shed forth upon the earth, and that many bodies are healed as it were by the shadow of the holy bodies. How many napkins are passed about! How many garments, laid upon the holy relics and endowed with healing power, are claimed! All are glad to touch even the outside thread, and whosoever touches will be made whole.
13. Let these triumphant victims be brought to the place where Christ is the victim. But He upon the altar, Who suffered for all; they beneath the altar, who were redeemed by His Passion. I had destined this place for myself, for it is fitting that the priest should rest there where he has been wont to offer, but I yield the right hand portion to the sacred victims; that place was due to the martyrs. Let us, then, deposit the sacred relics, and lay them up in a worthy resting-place, and let us celebrate the whole day with faithful devotion.
17. They deny that the blind man received sight, but he denies not that he is healed. He says: I who could not see now see. He says: I ceased to be blind, and proves it by the fact. They deny the benefit, who are unable to deny the fact. The man is known: so long as he was well he was employed in the public service; his name is Severus, a butcher by trade. He had given up his occupation when this hindrance befell him. He calls for evidence those persons by whose kindness he was supported; he adduces those as able to affirm the truth of his visitation whom he had as witnesses of his blindness. He declares that when he touched the hem of the robe of the martyrs, wherewith the sacred relics were covered, his sight was restored. – Ambrose of Milan, Letter 22
The angels must be entreated for us, who have been to us as guards; the martyrs must be entreated, whose patronage we seem to claim for ourselves by the pledge as it were of their bodily remains. They can entreat for our sins, who, if they had any sins, washed them in their own blood; for they are the martyrs of God, our leaders, the beholders of our life and of our actions. Let us not be ashamed to take them as intercessors for our weakness, for they themselves knew the weaknesses of the body, even when they overcame. – Ambrose of Milan, Concerning Widows, chapter 9
And yet, with all of this praise of the martyrs and their relics, Ambrose drew a hard line between honoring their relics and worshiping their images:
24. For visible things are not seen in the same way as He in whose power it lies to be seen, and whose nature it is not to be seen, but whose will it is to be seen. For if He does not wish, He is not seen; if He wishes, He is seen. For God appeared to Abraham because He willed it; to another, because He did not will it, He did not appear. It also seemed to Stephen, when he was being stoned by the people, that heaven opened; Jesus was also seen standing at the right hand of God, and yet He was not seen by the people (Acts 7:55). Isaiah saw the Lord of Hosts, but another was not able to see Him, because He appeared to whom it pleased Him (Isa. 6:1).
25. And why do we speak of human beings, when we have read even concerning the heavenly virtues and powers themselves that no one has ever seen God (John 1:18)? And he added what is beyond the heavenly powers: The Only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has made Him known (ibid.). Therefore, if no one has ever seen God the Father, it must either be conceded that the Son was seen in the Old Testament—and let the heretics cease giving Him a beginning from the Virgin, who was seen before He was born of the Virgin—or certainly it cannot be refuted that either the Father, or the Son, or indeed the Holy Spirit (if nevertheless there is a vision of the Holy Spirit; cf. Augustine, cited above), is seen in that form which the Divine Will has chosen, not which nature has shaped; for we have also received that the Spirit was seen in a dove.
And for this reason no one has ever seen God: because no one has beheld, no one has comprehended with mind or eyes, that fullness of the Divinity which dwells in God. For “saw” must refer to both [mind and eye]. Finally, when it is added, The Only-begotten Son Himself has made Him known, a vision of minds rather than of eyes is declared; for a visible form is seen, but divine power is narrated—the former is comprehended by the eyes, the latter by the mind.
26. But what shall I say of the Trinity? A seraph appeared when it willed, and Isaiah alone heard its voice (Isa. 6:6). An angel appeared, and is now present, yet is not seen; nor is it in our power to see, but in his power to appear. Nevertheless, even if the power to see is not ours, there is grace by which we may merit the ability to see. Therefore, he who had grace merited the opportunity; we do not merit the opportunity, because we do not have the grace of seeing God.
27. And what wonder if in the present age the Lord is not seen except when He wills? In the resurrection itself it is not easy to see God, except for those who are pure in heart. And for this reason He says: Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God (Matt. 5:8). How many blessed people had He already enumerated, and yet He had not promised them the ability to see God! If, therefore, those who are pure in heart shall see God, others certainly shall not see Him. For neither shall the unworthy see God, nor can he who does not wish to see God see Him.
Nor is God seen in a physical place, but in a pure heart; nor is God sought with bodily eyes, nor circumscribed by sight, nor held by touch, nor heard by speech, nor perceived by movement. And when He is thought to be absent, He is seen; and when He is present, He is not seen. Finally, not even all the apostles truly saw Christ; and therefore He says: “Have I been with you so long a time, and yet you have not known Me?” (John 14:9). For he who has known what is the breadth, and length, and height, and depth, and the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, has seen both Christ and the Father. For we no longer know Christ according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit; for Christ the Lord is a spirit before our face—may He deign by His mercy to fill us unto all the fullness of God, so that He may be seen by us. Therefore, the angel appeared to Zechariah at the right side of the altar of incense because he appeared when he willed, and did not appear as long as he did not will to do so. – Ambrose of Milan, Commentary on Luke 1:11
The flesh, therefore, cannot be made to the image of God. This is true, however, of our souls, which are free to wander far and wide in acts of reflection and of counsel. Our souls are able to envisage and reflect on all things. – Ambrose, Six Days of Creation, Day Six, chapter 45
48. The Apostle saith that Christ is the image of the Father—for he calls Him the image of the invisible God, the first-begotten of all creation. First-begotten, mark you, not first-created, in order that He may be believed to be both begotten, in virtue of His nature, and first in virtue of His eternity. In another place also the Apostle has declared that God made the Son “heir of all things, by Whom also He made the worlds, Who is the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His substance.”1The Apostle calls Christ the image of the Father, and Arius says that He is unlike the Father. Why, then, is He called an image, if He hath no likeness? Men will not have their portraits unlike them, and Arius contends that the Father is unlike the Son, and would have it that the Father has begotten one unlike Himself, as though unable to generate His like.
49. The prophets say: “In Thy light we shall see light;” and again: “Wisdom is the brightness of everlasting light, and the spotless mirror of God’s majesty, the image of His goodness.” See what great names are declared! “Brightness,” because in the Son the Father’s glory shines clearly: “spotless mirror,” because the Father is seen in the Son: “image of goodness,” because it is not one body seen reflected in another, but the whole power [of the Godhead] in the Son. The word “image” teaches us that there is no difference; “expression,” that He is the counterpart of the Father’s form; and “brightness” declares His eternity. The “image” in truth is not that of a bodily countenance, not one made up of colours, nor modelled in wax, but simply derived from God, coming out from the Father, drawn from the fountainhead.
50. By means of this image the Lord showed Philip the Father, saying, “Philip, he that sees Me, sees the Father also. How then dost thou say, Show us the Father? Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me?” Yes, he who looks upon the Son sees, in portrait, the Father. Mark what manner of portrait is spoken of. It is Truth, Righteousness, the Power of God: not dumb, for it is the Word; not insensible, for it is Wisdom; not vain and foolish, for it is Power; not soulless, for it is the Life; not dead, for it is the Resurrection. You see, then, that whilst an image is spoken of, the meaning is that it is the Father, Whose image the Son is, seeing that no one can be his own image. 51. More might I set down from the Son’s testimony; howbeit, lest He perchance appear to have asserted Himself overmuch, let us enquire of the Father. For the Father said, “Let us make man in Our image and likeness.” The Father saith to the Son “in Our image and likeness,” and thou sayest that the Son of God is unlike the Father. – Ambrose, Exposition of the Faith, chapters 48-51
14. Man however came forth the last of all created things, in form comely, in mind lofty, to be admired by all creatures, having in him, after the image of the eternal God, an invisible intelligence clothed in human form. This is that intelligence or power of the soul which claims to itself, as the ruling principle, authority over the soul and body. This it is that all other living creatures dread although they see it not, just as we fear God Whom we see not, and fear Him only the more because we see Him not. – Ambrose, Letter XLIII, chapters 14
22. Be thou then, after the likeness of God, one and the same; not sober to-day, drunken to-morrow; to-day pacific, to-morrow quarrelsome; to-day frugal, to-morrow immoderate; for each person is changed by diversity of manners and becomes another man, in whom that which he was is not recognized, while he begins to be that which he was not, degenerate from himself. It is a grievous thing to be changed for the worse. Be then as the image on the half-shekel, immutable, keeping daily the same deportment. Seeing the half-shekel, observe the image, that is, seeing the Law, observe in the Law Christ the Image of God; for He is the Image of the invisible and incorruptible God; let Him be displayed before you as in the mirror of the Law. Confess Him in the Law, that you may know Him again in the Gospel. If you have known Him in His precepts, acknowledge Him in works. – Ambrose, Letter VII
Consider well, I beseech you, and sift the sect of the Heathens; their professions are grand and lofty, but what they espouse is degenerate and effete, they talk of God but bow to images (simulacrum adorant). – Ambrose, Letter XVIII, chapter 2
You worship the works of your own hands, we think it sacrilege that any thing which can be made should be called God. God wills not to be worshipped under the form of stones. Nay, your very philosophers have ridiculed this…. How inconsistent are you, who insult by way of worship, and disparage by way of honour. You consider your god to be a block of wood; what an insulting kind of reverence! – Ambrose, Letter XVIII, chapters 8-9
- What Ambrose says about stones can be said about wood, brass, gold, and silver. It’s not just that FALSE gods shouldn’t be worshiped through lifeless images, but even the TRUE God does wills not to be worshiped under the form of lifeless matter. Compare with John of Damascus: “If the image of the king is the king, the image of Christ is Christ, and the image of a saint is the saint, and if power is not divided nor glory distributed, honouring the image becomes honouring the one who is set forth in the image.” – John of Damascus, On Holy Images, part 1, chapter 36
It is said, therefore, that in investigating the truth, we must observe what is seemly. We ought to look for what is true with the greatest care. We must not put forward falsehood for truth, nor hide the truth in darkness, nor fill the mind with idle, involved, or doubtful matters. What is so unseemly as to venerate (venerari) a wooden thing, which men themselves have made? What shows such darkness as to discuss subjects connected with geometry and astronomy (which they approve of), to measure the depths of space, to shut up heaven and earth within the limits of fixed numbers, to leave aside the grounds of salvation and to seek for error? Moses, learned as he was in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, did not approve of those things, but thought that kind of wisdom both harmful and foolish. Turning away therefrom, he sought God with all the desire of his heart, and thus saw, questioned, heard Him when He spoke. Who is more wise than he whom God taught, and who brought to nought all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and all the powers of their craft by the might of his works? He did not treat things unknown as well known, and so rashly accept them. Yet these philosophers, though they do not consider it contrary to nature, nor shameful for themselves to bow down to (adorare), and to ask help from an image (simulacra) which knows nothing, teach us that these two things mentioned in the words just spoken, which are in accordance both with nature and with virtue, ought to be avoided. – Ambrose, On The Duties of The Clergy, paragraphs 122-123
14. What answer will you give to the priest when he says to you, ‘the Church seeks not your gifts, because you have adorned the heathen temples with gifts; the Altar of Christ rejects your gifts, because you have erected altars to images (simulacris), for it was your word, your hand, your signature, your act: the Lord Jesus refuses and repels your service, because you have served idols (idolis), for He has said to you, “Ye cannot serve two masters?” – Ambrose, Letter XVII, chapter 14
- Let this be said to every Cathodox: Christ rejects your gifts, because you have erected shrines to images – your precious prayer corners!
10. They add also the cause of their departure, that Laban had lost the true glory and those stores of good treasure in which we are born. Vigour of mind has been given us, and the good coinage of God’s image and likeness, which is a spiritual coinage. He lost these because he preferred the splendour of this world to things true and profitable for his true life; for the beauty of these things escapes one who is ignorant of the good things of God, while in his judgment of what is beautiful he deludes and deceives himself. – Ambrose, Letter VII, chapter 10
Further, it is the Lord Jesus Himself who was prefigured in Jacob, a man of two marriages, that is, one who shares both in the law and in grace. He admired the virgin Rachel first; she was predetermined to marriage with him and he loved her with devoted affection. But Lia, like the law, entered in secretly and took him by surprise, and her eyes were somewhat weak, like the synagogue, that could not see Christ from blindness of spirit. – Ambrose, Seven Exegetical Works, Jacob and the Happy Life, 5:25
So, when Laban [Satan] examined Jacob’s [Jesus’] dwelling, he found nothing useless or purposeless there, no representations or likeness of vain idols. For in his dwelling there was no image, but the reality, no likeness of ignorance, but the solid figure of justice and the symbolic expression of living virtue. And thus Laban searched through Jacob’s spiritual dwelling and found no likenesses, for it was filled, not with representations but with realities. – Ambrose, Seven Exegetical Works, Flight from the World, 4.22
It is not by such guides as these that we arrive at the Church of Christ, to which Jacob was bending his steps, to carry down thither the wealth of the nations and the riches of the Gentiles, that he might transplant thither his posterity, flying from the shadows of empty things, preferring to senseless images of virtues their breathing beauty, and serious things to outward show. – Ambrose, Letter XVIII, chapter 13
Moreover, holy Rachel—that is, the Church, or wisdom—hid the images (simulacra), because the Church knows nothing of empty ideas and the vain figures of images (simulacrorum); rather, she knows the true substance of the Trinity. – Ambrose, Seven Exegetical Works, Flight from the World, chapter 5.27 (Patrologia Latina, Volume 14, column 611)
What great mysteries these are! There, there is the Church of God, in which God appears and speaks with His humble servants. There the idols of the nations are taken away and buried, for the faith of the Church has destroyed every practice of paganism. – Ambrose, Seven Exegetical Works, Jacob and the Happy Life, chapter 7.33
There is also the more excellent man, of whom it is said, “But the spiritual man judges all things, and he himself is judged by no man.” Such a one is more excellent than others. On this account David also says, “What is man, that you are mindful of him or the son of man that you visit him? Man is become like to vanity.” Man according to the image of God is not like to vanity, but he who has lost it and has fallen into sin and has tumbled into material things – such a man is like to vanity. The soul therefore is excellent according to its nature, but it generally becomes subject to corruption through its irrationality, so that it inclines to bodily pleasures and to willfulness, while it does not keep to moderation; or else it is deceived by the imagination, turns to matter, and is glued to the body. Thus its visibility is hindered, and it is filled with evil, for while it is intent on evil, it fills itself with vices and grows more unrestrained from the want of goodness. Moreover the perfect soul turns away from matter, shuns and rejects everything that is excessive or inconstant or wicked, and neither sees nor approaches this earthly defilement and corruption. It is attentive to things divine but shuns earthly matter. – Ambrose, Seven Exegetical Works (Isaac, or the Soul), chapters 2.4-2.5
Therefore the soul that cleaves to the invisible God, good and immortal, flees from the things of this body, abandons earthly and mortal concerns, and becomes like to the object of its desire, in which it lives and has its sustenance. – Ambrose, Seven Exegetical Works, Death as a Good, chapter 9.41
Indeed “the king brought me to his inner apartment.” Blessed the soul that enters the inner chambers. For, rising up from the body, she becomes more distant from all, and she searches and seeks within herself, if in any way she can pursue the divine. And when she can obtain it, having passed beyond intelligible things, she is strengthened in it and fed by it. Such was Paul, who knew that he had been caught up into paradise but did not know whether he had been caught up in the body or out of the body. For his soul had risen up from the body, had withdrawn from the vitals and the bonds of the flesh, and had lifted herself up. And he was made alien to himself by himself and held within his very self the secret words which he heard and could not reveal, because, as he remarked, it was not permitted a man to speak such thoughts. And so the good soul scorns visible and material things and does not linger over them or delay or tarry in despising them. Rather, she rises to things eternal and immaterial and filled with wonders, for she rises with pure thought from pious mind. – Ambrose, Seven Exegetical Works (Isaac, or The Soul), chapter 4.11
If anyone then has deserved to see that pure and incorporeal supreme good, what else would he have to desire? Indeed Peter saw the glory of Christ’s resurrection and did not wish to go down, for he said, “Lord, it is good for us to be here.” And how much more beyond compare is the glory of divinity and the inaccessible light than anything else one may see and desire? Kingdoms are not comparable, nor riches nor honors nor glory nor powers; for in the use of them there is no blessedness, but the employment of this supreme good is blessed, that a man may look down on such things, turn to this good, and remain in it. And so, seeing this fair image, let him enter within but leave the likeness of the body outside. For a man who looks to bodily things ought not to look inward; else he may be caught up like one who is sinking in a whirlpool and be swallowed and appear nowhere in sight, like a man plunged into the depths. – Ambrose, Seven Exegetical Works (Isaac, or the Soul), chapter 8.78
First of all, the Apostle taught you that those things are not to be considered “which we see, but the things which are not seen, for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal.” For you read elsewhere: “That the invisible things of God, since the creation of the world, are understood through those things which have been made; His eternal power also and Godhead are estimated by His works.” Wherefore also the Lord Himself says: “If ye believe not Me, believe at least the works.” Believe, then, that the presence of the Godhead is there. – Ambrose, On The Mysteries, Chapter 3
Eusebius of Caesarea (260-339 AD):
The Cathodox love to appeal to statements like this from Eusebius, ignoring the fact that Eusebius is one of the most ardent icon-bashers:
And these things are fitting for the death of those beloved of God, whom you would not be wrong to call soldiers enlisted for the true piety. Whence also it is our custom to go to their tombs and to make our prayers beside them and to honour (τιμᾶν) their blessed souls, as it is reasonable that these things are done by us. – Eusebius of Caesarea, Preparation for the Gospel 13.11.2
And yet Eusebius says IN THIS VERY SAME BOOK, that Christians DO NOT construct images of God or bow down to them! Here is a small sampling from his statements on images:
Since you have written about a certain image, as if it were of Christ, desiring that such an image be sent to you by us; what do you mean and what is this image that you say is of Christ? I do not know where this idea originated from that you command us to draw an image of our Savior. What image of Christ do you seek? Do you seek the true and unchanging one, bearing the natural features of Himself? Or do you seek the one which He took upon Himself for us, putting on the form of a servant? For the Word of God and God, taking the form of a servant, condemned sin in the likeness of sinful flesh, as the divine Apostle says.
Thus, He redeemed us from the old bitterness and demonic bondage with His precious blood, setting us free. Therefore, since two forms of Him are presented, I do not think that you seek the form of God, having been taught by Him once, that no one knows the Father except the Son, nor does anyone know the Son properly except the Father who generated Him…
But surely you seek the form of the servant, and that which He put on for our sake, that is, flesh. But we have also learned that this is mingled with the glory of the divinity, and that the mortal has been swallowed up by life. And it is not at all surprising if, after His ascension into heaven, He appeared in such a way, when even while still living among men, the Word of God, giving His chosen ones an earnest of the vision of His own kingdom, having changed the form of the servant, revealed that very form on the mountain above human nature; when His face shone like the sun, and His garments were as white as light.
Who, then, would be able to inscribe on dead and lifeless colors and shadows the gleaming and flashing radiance of such great worth and glory, when even the divine disciples could not bear to look at Him when He appeared in this way, but fell on their faces, confessing that the sight was unbearable for them? If, therefore, His form in the flesh then received such power, being transformed by the divinity dwelling in Him, what shall we say when, having put off mortality and washed away corruption, He changed the form of the servant into the glory of the Lord and God, after the victory over death, and after the ascension into heaven, and after being seated on the royal throne at the right hand of the Father, after the rest in the ineffable and indescribable bosom of the Father, into which, when He ascended and was seated, the heavenly powers cried out, saying, “Lift up your heads, O gates, and be lifted up, O eternal doors; and the King of glory shall come in.”
Therefore, even the form of the servant, when it became such, was completely transformed and shone with an ineffable and indescribable light, a light worthy of God the Word Himself, a light which eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has it entered the heart of man. How then could any of the weak attain to it? And how could anyone paint an image of such a marvelous and incomprehensible form, if indeed it should still be called a form, this divine and intellectual essence? Unless, like the unbelieving nations, someone were to paint things that are in no way like themselves, just as a painter paints things that are nothing like them. For such people, when they made idols, as they thought, or any so-called heroes, or anything of that kind, they would want to mold and represent nothing similar or even close, being able to paint only strange shadows, carving out misshapen figures.
Surely you too would agree that it is not right for us to do such things. But if you say that you are not asking for an image of His form transformed into God, but rather the form of His flesh before the transformation, that is, of His mortal body, did the reading escape you where God commanded not to make any likeness of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath? Or have you heard such a thing in the Church, either from yourself or from someone else? Has not such a thing been banished throughout the whole world and exiled far from the Churches, and has it not been proclaimed to all that we alone are not permitted to do such a thing?
For I do not know how a certain woman once held two tablets, as if they were philosophers, and declared them to be of Paul and the Savior; I cannot say where she got them or where she learned this. In order that neither she nor others might be scandalized, I took them from her and kept them myself, not thinking it right to bring these things out to others, lest we might seem to carry around our God in an image, as idolaters do. I hear that Paul teaches us all not to be conformed to this world. “For if we have known Christ according to the flesh,” he says, “yet now we know Him no more.”
It is said among the godless heretics that Simon Magus is worshiped in an inanimate material image. And we ourselves have seen the namesake of madness being supported by an image among the Manicheans. But such things are forbidden to us. For since we confess the Lord our Savior as God, we prepare ourselves to see God, diligently purifying our own hearts, so that we might see Him when we are purified. For blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. – Eusebius of Caesarea, Letter to Constantia, PG 20, 1545 f.
We have understood that Simon was the author of all heresy. From his time down to the present those who have followed his heresy have feigned the sober philosophy of the Christians, which is celebrated among all on account of its purity of life. But they nevertheless have embraced again the superstitions of idols, which they seemed to have renounced; and they fall down before pictures and images of Simon himself and of the above-mentioned Helena who was with him; and they venture to worship them with incense and sacrifices and libations. – Eusebius, Church History, book 2, chapter 13, paragraph 6
- Question: How are these heretics “embracing again the superstition of idols?” There was never an idol of Simon Magus in ancient times, so Eusebius can’t be referring to that. The “superstition of idols” is not the practice of bowing to an image of Simon Magus specifically, but the practice of bowing to ANY kind of image and offering incense to it.
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
- Eusebius says pagans (not Christians) pay this honor indiscriminately to people who perform miracles, making it clear they didn’t build these monuments only to Christians but to many other people and demonstrating that these pagans are not Christians (obviously).
And that in the earliest age those upon earth worshipped only the lights of heaven, and knew no image, nor were concerned with the error of the daemons, there is satisfactory proof to be found in the evidence of those, who are strangers to my argument, which I drew upon in the first book of the Preparatio (which I wrote) before the present treatise; they clearly prove that the earliest men did not serve idols fashioned by hand from lifeless matter, nor even invisible daemons, but only those beings, which are said in Holy Scripture to have been distributed among the nations [the sun and moon]. It is time for the Greeks themselves, therefore, whose statements I have arranged in the work mentioned, to agree that the superstition connected with idols was something more recent and novel, being introduced subsequently to the worship of the ancients, as well as the devotion to unseen spirits. All this was the work of the said antagonist of God, who plotted against all those on earth. And all the tribe of unclean spirits co-operated with him. Yea, he surely, the prince of evil himself, worked this result, fulfilling in very deed, in the madness of strange pride, the threats he had uttered against all men, raising the godless cry, “I will be like the Most High,” and with the aid of impure and evil daemons offering oracles and cures and such like in response to human sorcery. – Eusebius of Caesarea, Preparation of the Gospel, book 4, chapter 9
[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
Why then ought we to deify these things which have been made by the God of the universe for sustenance of the bodies of the animals upon the earth? Or why is the worship of the power of the earth becoming to us, who have received from God, the sovereign ruler of the world, a soul whose nature is heavenly, rational, and immortal, capable of contemplation by the purged eyes of thought? – Eusebius, Preparation of the Gospel, book 3, chapter 11
Are they not again convicted of deifying “the creature rather than the Creator,” and the handiwork of the world but not the worker, with great risk and danger, and with mischief that must fall on their own head? But if they shall assert that they deify not the visible bodies of sun and moon and stars, nor yet the sensible parts of the world, but the powers (δυνάμεις), invisible in them, of the very God who is over all–for they say that God being One fills all things with various powers, and pervades all, and rules over all, but as existing in all and pervading all in an incorporeal and invisible manner, and that they rightly worship Him through the things which we have mentioned–why in the world therefore do they not reject the foul and unseemly fables concerning the gods as being unlawful and impious, and put out of sight the very books concerning them, as containing blasphemous and licentious teaching, and celebrate the One and Only and Invisible God openly and purely and without any foul envelopment?
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
So after their long and manifold philosophical speculation, and after their solemn systems of meteorology and physiology, they fell down from their high place, as it were from the loftiest mountain-top, and were dragged down with the common herd, and swept away with the polytheistic delusion of the ancients, pretending that they glorified the like deities with the multitude by offering sacrifice and falling down before images, and increasing, and still further strengthening, the vulgar opinion of the legendary stories concerning the gods. Must it not then be evident to all men that they are only talking solemn nonsense in their physical theories, and, as far as words go, putting a fair face on foul things by their perversion of the truth, but in actual deeds establishing the fabulous delusion, and the vulgar superstition? – Eusebius, Preparation of the Gospel, book 3, chapter 14
What government, then, could be more holy than this? And what honor more fitting for God, with the whole multitude being disposed toward piety, and the special care being entrusted to the priests, and with the entire polity being managed as if it were a kind of religious ceremony? For what others, practicing them for a small number of days, are not able to keep, calling them mysteries and rites, these things we keep with great pleasure and an unchangeable mind throughout all time. What then are the declarations and pronouncements? They are simple and well-known. The first, which concerns God, takes the lead: God possesses all things, perfect and blessed, self-sufficient for himself and for all; he is the beginning, middle, and end of all things, manifest in his works and graces and more evident than anything else, but in form and magnitude most invisible to us. All material, even if it be very costly, is worthless for an image of Him; every art is artless for the conception of imitating Him; we have neither seen nor do we conceive anything like Him, nor is it holy to make a likeness. – Eusebius, Preparation of the Gospel, book 8, chapter 8
[FROM CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA CONCERNING THOSE WHO HAVE MENTIONED THE JEWISH NATION] “Clearchus the Peripatetic says that he knew a certain Jew, who associated with Aristotle.” And after other matters he adds: “Numa, king of the Romans, was a Pythagorean, and having been benefited by the writings of Moses, he forbade the Romans to fashion an image of God in the form of man or of any living creature. At any rate, during the first one hundred and seventy years, though they were building temples, they made no image, either carved or painted. For Numa showed them in a hidden way that it is not possible to apprehend the Best Being by the tongue, but only by the mind.” Further to this, he subsequently adds these words: “And Megasthenes, the historian who lived with Seleucus Nicator, writes most clearly as follows in the third of his Indica: ‘All that has been said about nature by the ancients is said also among the philosophers outside of Greece, in India by the Brahmans, and in Syria by those who are called Jews.’” Further to this, Clement makes mention of Aristobulus the Peripatetic and of Numenius the Pythagorean, saying: “Aristobulus in the first of his books To Philometor writes word for word: ‘Plato followed our legislation, and it is evident that he had carefully studied each of the precepts stated in it. For there had been translated by others before Demetrius, before the supremacy of Alexander and the Persians, both the account of the exodus of the Hebrews our fellow-citizens out of Egypt, and the manifestation of all that happened to them, and the taking possession of the land, and the exposition of the whole legislation. So it is very clear that the aforesaid philosopher has taken many things; for he was very learned, just as Pythagoras was, who transferred many of our precepts into his own system of doctrines.’” – Eusebius, Preparation of the Gospel, book 9, chapter 6
5. What prophet or diviner could foretell that their rites would vanish at the presence of a new Deity in the world, and that the knowledge and worship of the Almighty Sovereign should be freely given to all mankind? Which of them foreknew the august and pious reign of our victorious emperor, or his triumphant conquests everywhere over the false demons, or the overthrow of their high places? 6. Which of the heroes has announced the melting down and conversion of the lifeless statues from their useless forms to the necessary uses of men? Which of the gods have yet had power to speak of their own images thus melted and contemptuously reduced to fragments? – Eusebius, Oration in Praise of Constantine, chapter 9
2. Hence the universal change for the better, which leads men to spurn their lifeless idols, to trample under foot the lawless rites of their demon deities, and laugh to scorn the time-honored follies of their fathers. Hence, too, the establishment in every place of those schools of sacred learning, wherein men are taught the precepts of saving truth, and dread no more those objects of creation which are seen by the natural eye, nor direct a gaze of wonder at the sun, the moon, or stars; but acknowledge him who is above all these, that invisible Being who is the Creator of them all, and learn to worship him alone. – Eusebius, Oration in Praise of Constantine, chapter 10
9. Again, well might we liken those to children, who should admire the seven-stringed lyre, and disregard him who invented or has power to use it: or those who forget the valiant warrior, and adorn his spear and shield with the chaplet of victory: or, lastly, those who hold the squares and streets, the public buildings, temples, and gymnasia of a great and royal city in equal honor with its founder; forgetting that their admiration is due, not to lifeless stones, but to him whose wisdom planned and executed these mighty works. 10. Not less absurd is it for those who regard this universe with the natural eye to ascribe its origin to the sun, or moon, or any other heavenly body. Rather let them confess that these are themselves the works of a higher wisdom, remember the Maker and Framer of them all, and render to him the praise and honor above all created objects. Nay rather, inspired by the sight of these very objects [the sun and moon], let them address themselves with full purpose of heart to glorify and worship him who is now invisible to mortal eye, but perceived by the clear and unclouded vision of the soul, the supremely sovereign Word of God. To take the instance of the human body: no one has yet conferred the attribute of wisdom on the eyes, or head, the hands, or feet, or other members, far less on the outward clothing, of a wise and learned man: no one terms the philosopher’s household furniture and utensils, wise: but every rational person admires that invisible and secret power, the mind of the man himself. – Eusebius, Oration in Praise of Constantine, chapter 11
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
John Chrysostom (347-407 AD):
Like the other church fathers, John Chrysostom speaks of miracle-working relics and urges Christians to make remembrance of the martyrs at their tombs:
When, therefore, he made an end of life there, yea rather, when he ascended to heaven, he departed henceforward crowned. For this also happened through the dispensation of God, that he restored him again to us, and distributed the martyr to the cities. For that city received his blood as it dropped, but you were honoured with his remains, you enjoyed his episcopate, they enjoyed his martyrdom. They saw him in conflict, and victorious, and crowned, but you have him continually.
Not only today, therefore, but every day let us go forth to him, plucking spiritual fruits from him. For it is, it is possible for him who comes hither with faith to gather the fruit of many good things. For not the bodies only, but the very sepulchres of the saints have been filled with spiritual grace. For if in the case of Elisha this happened, and a corpse when it touched the sepulchre, burst the bands of death and returned to life again, 2 Kings 13:21 much rather now, when grace is more abundant, when the energy of the spirit is greater, is it possible that one touching a sepulchre, with faith, should win great power; thence on this account God allowed us the remains of the saints, wishing to lead by them us to the same emulation, and to afford us a kind of haven, and a secure consolation for the evils which are ever overtaking us. Wherefore I beseech you all, if any is in despondency, if in disease, if under insult, if in any other circumstance of this life, if in the depth of sins, let him come hither with faith, and he will lay aside all those things, and will return with much joy, having procured a lighter conscience from the sight alone. But more, it is not only necessary that those who are in affliction should come hither, but if any one be in cheerfulness, in glory, in power, in much assurance towards God, let not this man despise the benefit. – John Chrysostom, Homily on St. Ignatius, chapter 5
But John Chrysostom considers man-made images to be completely different from the actual bodies of the saints, and he warns against obsessing over the bodies of the saints:
Paul, discoursing on the dignity of the Son, says these things, as we also showed: “Who is the image of the invisible God.” Whose image then will you have Him be? God’s? You speak well.Then he is exactly like the one to whom you assign Him. But if you would say He is the image of man, say so, and I will henceforth stand aloof from you as from a madman. And why is an angel nowhere called either image or son, but a man both? Why? Because in the former case, the elevated nature would have quickly cast the many into this impiety; but in the latter, the lowliness and humility guarantees the security, and does not permit those who wish to suspect any such thing, and to bring down the Word below. For this reason, where there was much humility, Scripture boldly places the honor; but where the nature is greater, no longer. The Image of the Invisible is itself also invisible, and invisible in like manner, for otherwise it would not be an image. For an image, so far as it is an image, even among us, ought to be exactly similar, as, for example, in respect of the features and the likeness. But here indeed among us, this is by no means possible; for human art fails in many respects, or rather fails in all, if you examine with accuracy. But where God is, there is no error, no failure. But if a creature: how is He the Image of the Creator? For neither is a horse the image of a man. If the Image mean not exact likeness to the Invisible, what hinders the Angels also from being His Image? For they too are invisible; but not to one another: but the soul is invisible: but because it is invisible, it is simply on that account an image, and not in such sort as he and angels are images. – John Chrysostom, Homily 3 on Colossians
Painters imitate nature by their art, and mixing their colors, they paint the images of visible bodies, and they make men, and irrational animals, and trees, and wars, and battles, and torrents of blood, and spears, and breastplates, and shields, and kings, and private citizens, and a royal throne, and a king sitting, and a barbarian in subjection, and a sharpened spear point, and flowing rivers, and variegated plains, and simply imitating all visible things through their art, they provide a spectacle for those who look. So too the prophets are certain painters of virtue and vice. For they too paint with words the sinner, the just man, the penitent, the one who stands, the one who falls, the one who rises, the one who is shaken. And just as painters depict wars and slaughters, so too they depict sin sometimes attacking, sometimes being cast down, and demons again, now warring, now being warred against, and the devil sometimes plotting, sometimes also being conquered. Since, therefore, their art is such, let us learn it with precision. For when we see the paintings of artists, we go away having gained nothing. For what benefit is it to me to see an image of a king and a consul? For I can neither become a king, nor do I wish to. What benefit then is there for me from a spectacle, for which I have no desire, for which if I should desire it, I am punished? What benefit is it for me to see a rich man? If I am poor, I envy; if I am rich, I am envied. Again suffering the same things, I also lament. Leave those images, and look upon this spectacle. If I see a consul, what is that to me? If I see a sinner who has fallen and risen again, the spectacle becomes for me a subject of instruction. If I see a just man standing, the spectacle leads me by the hand to philosophy. From the spectacle I learn the battle, and I am taught the victory. If I see a just man being tripped up, again I become wiser from the spectacle. But all these things have not been said by me simply or idly, but because the image of the psalm read today leads us to this subject of instruction. For what does the prophet say? Have mercy on me, O God, according to your great mercy; and according to the multitude of your compassions blot out my iniquity. This is the image. For I call the psalm an image. For I see different persons in the psalm: sin attacking and being slain, repentance standing by and fighting on God’s side, loving-kindness shining from above, providing philosophy, and having many fountains of tears from confession. These are the persons of the image. But before I begin the psalm, it is necessary to relate its inscription to you more accurately. For just as images have inscriptions, so also it is with the psalms. For the images standing above have below them purple tablets, [saying] who the king is, and of whom, and what war he has won; but upon the psalm the inscription is placed above, [saying] what the subject is, and what the teaching is, and what the root is, and for what reason the psalm was spoken. – Pseudo John Chrysostom, On Psalm 50 Homily 1, chapter 1
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
- Iconodules say, “Kissing an icon is kind of like kissing a photograph of your dead relative.” Yeah, that’s how idolatry started out! That custom of consoling yourself with pictures comes from “weakness of soul, senselessness, and extravagance,” according to Chrysostom.
So likewise in the instance of Judas, that great wickedness had its birth. For if it had not seemed to him a little thing to steal the money of the poor, he would not have been led on to this treachery. Unless it had seemed to the Jews a little thing to be taken captive by vainglory, they would not have run on the rock of becoming Christ’s murderers. And indeed all evils we may see arise from this. For no one quickly and at once rushes out into vices. For the soul has, yea it has a shame implanted in us, and a reverence for right things; and it would not at once become so shameless as in one act to cast away everything, but slowly, and little by little does it perish, when it is careless. Thus also did idolatry enter in, men being honored beyond measure, both the living and the departed; thus also were idols worshipped; thus too did whoredom prevail, and the other evils. – John Chrysostom, Homily 86 on Matthew
“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
For since neither the Greeks, nor the Jews, nor the children of heretics believed that God begot without change and without passion, for this reason today, coming forth from a passible body, He preserved the passible body impassible, so that He might show that just as, being born from the Virgin, He did not destroy her virginity, so also God, while the holy essence remained without change and alteration, as God begot God in a manner worthy of God. For since men, having abandoned Him,carved human-shaped wooden images (ξόανα), which they also worshiped (ἐλάτρευον) in insult to the Creator, for this reason today the Word of God, being God,appeared in the form of a man, so that He might both destroy the falsehood and, without their realizing it, transfer their worship to Himself. – John Chrysostom, On the Day of Christ’s Birth, Migne PG 56.393-94
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
For this reason, after saying, “Fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in gehenna,” He says again, “I too will deny him.” Thus also Paul does, continually mindful of gehenna. 4. Having then anointed the hearer through all things (for He both opened the heavens to him, and established that fearful tribunal, and showed the theater of the angels, and the proclamation of the crowns in these things, from this preparing much ease for the word of piety), finally, lest the proclamation be hindered by them becoming cowards, He commands them to be prepared for the very slaughters themselves; so that they may learn that those who remain in error will also pay the penalty for their plot. Let us therefore despise death, even if the time that demands it is not at hand; for we will be translated into a much better life. But the body is destroyed? And for this reason one should especially rejoice, that death is destroyed, and mortality perishes, not the substance of the body. For if you were to see a statue being melted down, you would not call what is happening destruction, but a better construction. Reason this way also concerning the body, and do not weep. For then one should have wept, if it remained in punishment. “But,” one says, “this should have happened without the bodies being destroyed, and that they should have remained whole.” And what would this have advantaged either the living or the departed? How long are you lovers of the body? How long are you riveted to the earth and gaping after shadows? Why, what good would this have done? Or rather, what harm would it not have done? For did our bodies not decay, in the first place the greatest of all evils, pride, would have continued with many. For if even while this is going on, and worms gushing out, many have earnestly sought to be gods; what would not have been the result did the body continue?
In the second place, it would not be believed to be of earth; for if, its end witnessing this, some yet doubt; what would they not have suspected if they did not see this? Thirdly, the bodies would have been excessively loved; and most men would have become more carnal and gross; and if even now some cleave to men’s tombs and coffins, after that themselves have perished, what would they not have done, if they had even their image preserved? Fourthly, they would not have earnestly desired the things to come. Fifthly, they that say the world is eternal, would have been more confirmed, and would have denied God as Creator. Sixthly, they would not have known the excellence of the soul, and how great a thing is the presence of a soul in a body. Seventhly, many of them that lose their relations would have left their cities, and have dwelt in the tombs, and have become frantic, conversing continually with their own dead. For if even now men form to themselves images, since they cannot keep the body (for neither is it possible, but whether they will or not it glides and hurries from them), and are riveted to the planks of wood; what monstrous thing would they not then have devised? To my thinking, the generality would have even built temples for such bodies, and they that are skilled in such sorceries would have persuaded evil spirits to speak through them; since at least even now, they that venture on the arts of necromancy attempt many things more out of the way than these. And how many idolatries would not have arisen from hence? When men even after the dust and ashes, are yet eager in those practices.
God therefore, to take away all our extravagances, and to teach us to stand off from all earthly things, destroys the bodies before our eyes. For even he that is enamored of bodies, and is greatly affected at the sight of a beautiful damsel, if he will not learn by discourse the deformity of that substance, shall know it by the very sight. Yea, many of the like age with her whom he loves, and oftentimes also fairer, being dead, after the first or second day, have emitted an ill savor, and foul matter, and decay with worms. Imagine then what sort of beauty you love, and what sort of elegance has power so to disturb you. But if bodies did not decay, this would not be well known: but as evil spirits run unto men’s graves, so also many of our lovers, continually sitting by the tombs, would have received evil spirits in their soul, and would quickly have perished in this grievous madness. – John Chrysostom, Homily 34 on Matthew, chapter 4
- So much for incorruptible saints!
But to show that many would be too often ready to imagine things of them above human nature, unless they saw them enduring such afflictions, hear how Paul was afraid on this very point; “For though I would desire to glory, I shall not be a fool, but now I forbear, lest any man should think of me above that which he seeth me to be, or that he heareth of me.” But what is it that he means? I am able, he declares, to speak of far greater miracles; but I am unwilling; lest the magnitude of the miracles should raise too high a notion of me among men. For this reason Peter also, when they had restored the lame man, and all were wondering at them, in order to restrain the people, and persuade them that they had exhibited nothing of this power of themselves, or from their native strength, says, “Why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk?” And again at Lystra, the people were not only filled with astonishment, but led forth bulls, after crowning them with garlands, and were preparing to offer sacrifice to Paul and Barnabas. Observe the malice of the Devil. By those very same persons through whom the Lord was at work, to purge out ungodliness from the world, by the same did that enemy try to introduce it, again persuading them to take men for gods; which was what he had done in former times. And this is especially that which introduced the principle and root of idolatry. For many after having had success in wars, and set up trophies, and built cities, and done divers other benefits of this kind to the people of those times, came to be esteemed gods by the multitude, and were honoured with temples, and altars; and the whole catalogue of the Grecian gods is made up of such men. That this, therefore, may not be done towards the Saints, God permitted them constantly to be banished,—to be scourged,—to fall into diseases; that the abundance of bodily infirmity, and the multiplicity of those temptations, might convince those who were then with them, both that they were men, who wrought such wonders, and that they contributed nothing of their own power; but that it was mere grace, that wrought through them all these miracles. – John Chrysostom, Homily 1 On the Statues, chapter 17
For a dreadful, a dreadful thing is the love of money, it disables both eyes and ears, and makes men worse to deal with than a wild beast, allowing a man to consider neither conscience, nor friendship, nor fellowship, nor the salvation of his own soul, but having withdrawn them at once from all these things, like some harsh mistress, it makes those captured by it its slaves. And the dreadful part of so bitter a slavery is, that it persuades them even to be grateful for it; and the more they become enslaved, the more does their pleasure increase; and in this way especially the malady becomes incurable, in this way the monster becomes hard to conquer. This made Gehazi a leper instead of a disciple and a prophet; this destroyed Ananias and her with him; this made Judas a traitor; this corrupted the rulers of the Jews, who received gifts, and became the partners of thieves. This has brought in ten thousand wars, filling the ways with blood, the cities with wailings and lamentations. This has made meals to become impure, and tables accursed, and has filled food with transgression; therefore has Paul called it idolatry (Colossians 3:5), and not even so has he deterred men from it. And why calls he it idolatry? Many possess wealth, and dare not use it, but consecrate it, handing it down untouched, not daring to touch it, as though it were some dedicated thing. And if at any time they are forced to do so, they feel as though they had done something unlawful. Besides, as the Greek carefully tends his graven image, so thou entrusts your gold to doors and bars; providing a chest instead of a shrine, and laying it up in silver vessels. But thou dost not bow down to it as he to the image? Yet you show all kind of attention to it.
Again, he would rather give up his eyes or his life than his graven image. So also would those who love gold. But, says one, I worship not the gold. Neither does he, he says, worship the image, but the devil that dwells in it; and in like manner thou, though thou worship not the gold, yet you worship that devil who springs on your soul, from the sight of the gold and your lust for it. For more grievous than an evil spirit is the lust of money-loving, and many obey it more than others do idols. For these last in many things disobey, but in this case they yield everything, and whatever it tells them to do, they obey. What says it? Be at war with all, it says, at enmity with all, know not nature, despise God, sacrifice to me yourself, and in all they obey. To the graven images they sacrifice oxen and sheep, but avarice says, Sacrifice to me your own soul, and the man obeys. Do you see what kind of altars it has, what kind of sacrifices it receives? The covetous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God, but not even so do they fear (1 Corinthians 6:10). Yet this desire is weaker than all the others, it is not inborn, nor natural, (for then it would have been placed in us at the beginning;) but there was no gold at the beginning, and no man desired gold.
… Let us think of those who have gone before us. Do not their possessions stand, preserving nothing but their name; such an one’s bath, such an one’s suburban seat and lodging? Do we not, when we behold them, straightway groan, when we consider what toil he endured, what rapine committed? And now he is nowhere seen, but others luxuriate in his possessions, men whom he never expected would do so, perhaps even his enemies, while he is suffering extremest punishment. These things await us also; for we shall certainly die, and shall certainly have to submit to the same end. How much wrath, tell me, how much expense, how many enmities these men incurred; and what the gain? Deathless punishment, and the having no consolation; and the being not only while alive, but when gone, accused by all? What? When we see the images of the many laid up in their houses, shall we not weep the more? Of a truth well said the Prophet, Verily, every man living disquiets himself in vain (Psalm 39:11); for anxiety about such things is indeed disquiet, disquiet and superfluous trouble. But it is not so in the everlasting mansions, not so in those tabernacles. Here one has labored, and another enjoys; but there each shall possess his own labors, and shall receive a manifold reward. Let us press forward to get that possession, there let us prepare for ourselves houses, that we may rest in Christ Jesus our Lord, with whom to the Father and the Holy Ghost be glory, for ever and ever. Amen. – John Chrysostom, Homily 65 on John, commentary on John 12
For tell me what have you to say to the Greek, if you plunder, and be covetous? Will you say, “Forsake idolatry, acknowledge God, and draw not near to gold and silver”? Will he not then make a jest of you, and say, “Talk to yourself first in this way”? For it is not the same thing for a Gentile to practise idolatry, and a Christian to commit this same sin. For how are we to draw others away from that idolatry if we draw not ourselves away from this? For we are nearer related to ourselves than our neighbor is, and so when we persuade not ourselves, how are we to persuade others? For if he that does not rule well over his own house, will not take care of the Church either (1 Timothy 3:5), how shall he that does not rule even over his own soul be able to set others right? Now do not tell me, that you do not worship an image of gold, but make this clear to me, that you do not do those things which gold bids you. For there be different kinds of idolatry, and one holds mammon lord, and another his belly his god, and a third some other most baneful lust. But, you do not sacrifice oxen to them as the Gentiles do. Nay, but what is far worse, you butcher your own soul. But you do not bow the knee and worship. Nay, but with greater obedience you do all that they command you, whether it be your belly, or money, or the tyranny of lust. For this is just what makes Gentiles disgusting, that they made gods of our passions; calling lust Venus, and anger Mars, and drunkenness Bacchus. If then you do not grave images as did they, yet you do with great eagerness bow under the very same passions, when you make the members of Christ members of an harlot, and plunge yourself into the other deeds of iniquity (1 Corinthians 6:15). I therefore exhort you to lay to heart the exceeding unseemliness hereof, and to flee from idolatry:— for so does Paul name covetousness— and to flee not only covetousness in money, but that in evil desire, and that in clothing, and that in food, and that in everything else: since the punishment we shall have to suffer if we obey not God’s laws is much severer. For, He says, the servant that knew his Lord’s will, and did it not, shall be beaten with many stripes (Luke 12:47). With a view then to escaping from this punishment, and being useful both to others and to ourselves, let us drive out all iniquity from our soul and choose virtue. – John Chrysostom, Homily 6 on Romans, Commentary on Romans 3:8
For terrible is the love of money, terrible; and it cripples eyes and ears, and makes men more savage than a beast, not conscience, not allowing one to think of friendship, or fellowship, or the salvation of one’s own soul, but having completely turned them away from all things, it makes slaves of those it has captured, like some harsh tyranny. And the terrible thing about such a bitter slavery is that it even persuades them to be grateful; and the more they serve it, the more the pleasure increases. And in this way especially the disease becomes incurable, in this way the beast becomes hard to capture. This made Gehazi a leper instead of a disciple and a prophet; this destroyed Ananias and his companions; this made Judas a traitor; this corrupted the rulers of the Jews, who took bribes and became partners of thieves. This has brought in countless wars; filling the roads with blood, and the cities with lamentations and wailing. This also has caused suppers to become unclean and tables accursed, and filled meals with lawlessness. For this reason Paul called it idolatry. But not even so did he cause fear. But why does he say idolatry? Many have money, and do not dare to use it, but dedicate it, passing it on untouched to their descendants and from their descendants, as if not daring to touch some votive offerings. And if they are ever forced to, they are disposed as if they had done something unlawful. And in another way too, just as the Greek reveres the wooden image, so you entrust your gold to doors and bolts, preparing a chest instead of a temple and placing it among silver vessels. But you do not worship (προσκυνεῖς) it, as he does the wooden image? But you show every service toward it. Again, he would gladly give up his eyes and his soul, rather than the wooden image. The same is true for those who love gold. “But I do not worship (προσκυνῶ) gold,” one says. Nor does he worship (προσκυνεῖ) the idol, he says, but the demon dwelling within. So too you, even if you do not worship (προσκυνῇς) the gold, you worship the demon that leaps upon your soul from the sight of the gold and from the desire for it. For the desire of avarice is more grievous than a demon, and many obey this more than others obey idols. For the latter often disobey, but the former yield in all things, and whatever it says to do, they obey. – John Chrysostom, Commentary on John, Homily 65
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
“Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.” In the Epistle to the Romans, he says somewhat on this wise, Having the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law Romans 2:20, where he speaks in commendation of it: but here he speaks of this sin as an evil beyond all other defects. And why is this? Because he does not use the words in the same signification. For an image is often taken to signify a likeness; but sometimes a thing without life, and worthless. Thus he says himself in his Epistle to the Corinthians, A man ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God. 1 Corinthians 11:7 But the Prophet says, Man walks in an image. Psalm 39:9, And the Scripture sometimes takes a lion to represent royalty, as, He couched as a lion, and as a lion’s cub, who shall raise him up? Genesis 49:9, And sometimes to signify rapacity, as, a ravening and a roaring lion. Psalm 22:13 And we ourselves do the same. For as things are compounded and varied in themselves, they are fitly adduced for various images and examples. As when we would express our admiration of a beautiful woman, we say, she is like a picture; and when we admire a painting, we say that it speaks, that it breathes. But we do not mean to express the same thing, but in one case to mark likeness, in the other beauty. So here with respect to form, in the one passage, it means a model, or representation, a doctrine, or pattern of godliness; in the other, something that is lifeless, a mere appearance, show, and hypocrisy. Faith therefore, without works, is fitly called a mere form without the power. For as a fair and florid body, when it has no strength, is like a painted figure, so is a right faith apart from works. For let us suppose any one to be covetous, a traitor, heady, and yet to believe aright; of what advantage is it, if he wants all the qualities becoming a Christian, if he does not the works that characterize godliness, but outdoes the Greeks in impiety, when he is a mischief to those with whom he associates, causes God to be blasphemed, and the doctrine to be slandered by his evil deeds? – John Chrysostom, Homily 8 on 2 Timothy
You who have riches have purchased for a hundred pieces of gold, or even more, but the poor man for a trifling sum of silver. Do you perceive the loss? No, for your pride will not let you see it. Would you have us make out this account in the case of the gold ornaments too, which men put alike about their horses and their wives? For besides the other evils, the possession of money makes fools of men; they account their wives and horses to be worthy of the same honor, and the ornamentation of both is the same; and they would make themselves finer by the same means as the very beasts that carry them, or as the very skins of the awnings, wherein they are borne. What now is the use of decking out a mule or a horse with gold? Or the lady, that has such a weight of gold and jewels about her person, what does she gain? But the golden ornaments are never worn out, he answers. Assuredly this also is said that in the baths and many places both precious stones and gold ornaments lose much of their value. But be it so, and grant that they are not injured, tell me, what is the gain? And how is it when they drop out, and are lost? Is there no loss sustained? And how when they draw down upon you envy and intrigues? Is there no loss then? For when they do the wearer no good, but rather inflame the eyes of the envious, and act as an incitement to the robber, do they not become loss? And again, say, when a man may use them for a serviceable purpose, but is unable on account of the extravagance of his wife, and is obliged to starve and to stint himself, that he may see her arrayed in gold, is it not a matter of loss? For it was on this account that goods have their name from use, not that we should use them thus like goldsmiths’ samples, but that we should do some good therewith; so then when love of gold does not allow this, is not the whole thing loss? For he that dares not use them forbears the use as if they were another’s property, and there is no use of them in any way.
Again, how is it when we erect splendid and spacious mansions, decorated with columns, marbles, porticos, arcades, and in every possible way, setting images and statues everywhere? Many indeed even call demons out of these, i.e. the images, but let us omit the examination of those points. What too is the meaning of the gilded ceiling? Does it not supply the same need as to him, whose house is on a moderate scale? “But there is great delight in it,” he says. Yes, for the first or second day, and afterwards, none at all, but it stands merely for nothing. For if the sun does not strike us with wonder, from its being customary, much more do works of art fail, and we only look at them like things of clay. For tell me, what does a range of pillars contribute to make your dwelling superior to others, or the finest statues, or the gilding spread over the wall? Nothing; rather, these come of luxury and insolence, and overweening pride and folly; for everything there ought to be necessary and useful, not superfluous things. Do you see that the thing is loss? Do you see that it is superfluous and unprofitable? For if it supplies no further use or delight, (and it does, in the course of time, bring satiety,) it is nothing else than loss, and vainglory is the hindrance, which will not let us see this.
Did Paul then forsake those things which he counted gain, and shall not we even quit our loss, for Christ’s sake? How long shall we be riveted to the earth? How long till we shall look up to heaven? Do ye not mark the aged, what little perception they have of the past? Do ye not mark those that are finishing their course, both men in age, and men in youth? Do ye not see persons in the midst of life bereft of them? Why are we so wedded to unstable objects? Why are we linked to things that are shifting? How long before we lay hold of the things that last? What would not the old give, were it granted them to divest themselves of their old age? How irrational then to wish to return to our former youth, and gladly to give everything for the sake of this, that we might become younger, and yet when it is ours to receive a youth that knows no old age, a youth too, which, joined with great riches, has far more of spirit, to be unwilling to give up a little trifle, but to hold fast things that contribute not a whit to the present life. They can never rescue you from death, they have no power to drive away disease, to stay old age, or any one of those events, which happen by necessity and according to the law of nature. And do you still hold to them? Tell me, what do you gain? Drunkenness, gluttony, pleasures contrary to nature and various in kind, which are far worse torturers than the hardest masters. – John Chrysostom, Homily 10 on Philippians 3:1-3
The same thing is done in our time also. Even now is there a king of the Babylonish furnace, even now he kindles a flame fiercer than that. There is even now such an image, and one who gives command to admire it. At his side are satraps and soldiers and bewitching music. And many gaze in admiration upon this image, so varied, so great. For somewhat of the same kind of thing as that image is covetousness, which does not despise even iron, but unlike as the materials are whereof it is composed, it gives command to admire all, both brass and iron, and things much more ordinary than they.
But as these things are, so also even now are there some who are emulous of these children: “who say, your gods we serve not, and your images we worship not;” but both the furnace of poverty we endure and all other distress, for the sake of God’s laws. And the wealthy for their part, even as those at that time, oftentimes, worship this image too and are burnt. But those who possess nothing despite even this, and although in poverty, are more in the dew than those who live in affluence….
But let us hear also what they say, that from this also we may learn their lofty spirit (Daniel 3:17): “There is a God in heaven able to deliver us:” they take no care for themselves, but even when about to be burned the glory of God is all their thought. For what they say comes to this, “Lest perchance if we are burnt you should charge God with weakness, we now declare unto you accurately our whole doctrine. There is a God in heaven, not such as this image here on earth, this lifeless and mute thing, but able to snatch even from the midst of the burning fiery furnace.” – John Chrysostom, Homily 18 on First Corinthians 6:5-6
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
These men then let us also imitate. Because now too there is set up a golden image, even the tyranny of Mammon. But let us not give heed to the timbrels, nor to the flutes, nor to the harps, nor to the rest of the pomp of riches; yea, though we must needs fall into a furnace of poverty, let us choose it, rather than worship that idol, and there will be in the midst a moist whistling wind. Let us not then shudder at hearing of a furnace of poverty. For so too at that time they that fell into the furnace were shown the more glorious, but they that worshipped were destroyed. Only then all took place at once, but in this case some part will be accomplished here, some there, some both here and in the day that is to come. For they that have chosen poverty, in order that they might not worship mammon, will be more glorious both here and then, but they that have been rich unjustly here, shall then pay the utmost penalty. – John Chrysostom, Homilies on Matthew, Homily 4, chapter 19
- The Cathodox only recognize one aspect of the sin of bowing to King Nebuchadnezzar’s image. They say it’s wrong to worship a king as a deity, but they don’t recognize that the worship of mammon (that is, a golden statue) is another aspect of the sin, to say nothing of the fact that having people worship images of you already implies that you are divine. Christians do not bow down to golden images of any kind! Yet the Cathodox say it is only a sin to worship golden images of the wrong people. They say we CAN worship various golden images, even of Mary, and that worshiping Mammon is allowed in the correct circumstances! But when John Chrysostom made the analogy of worshiping a golden image when he says we ought not to worship wealth, he didn’t imagine that Christians would actually be worshiping literal golden images. He wouldn’t have used the analogy of a golden image to illustrate the worship of wealth if he had known you guys would be bowing down to actual golden images. He would have simply said, “Don’t bow down to golden images in the first place!”
- Second Council of Nicaea: “There should be images in the churches of the faithful, especially the image of our Lord Jesus Christ and of the Holy Mother of God, of every kind of material, both gold and silver and of every color, so that his incarnation may be set forth to all men.
But nothing is sweeter than prayer. If you converse with him in private, you will be able to accomplish much, with no one disturbing you, nor distracting you from your supplication; you have the time also as an ally toward obtaining what you wish. But you turn over lying on a soft bed, and you hesitate to get up? Consider the martyrs lying today on the iron bed, not with a mattress underneath, but with burning coals spread beneath. Here I want to end my discourse, so that you may depart having the memory of the bed fresh and new, and remember it night and day; for even if ten thousand bonds hold us, we will be able to break all easily, and to rise for prayer, by constantly considering this bed. And let us depict not only that [torture] bed, but also the other tortures of the martyrs upon the breadth of our heart. And just as those who make their own houses bright adorn them everywhere with flowery painting; so let us also paint the tortures of the martyrs on the walls of our mind. For that painting is useless (ἀνόνητος), but this one has profit; for this painting requires no money, nor expense, nor any art, but instead of all these things it is enough to use zeal and a noble and sober mind, and through this, as through some most excellent hand, to sketch their punishments.
Let us paint, therefore, in our soul those lying on frying pans, and those stretched over hot coals, and those plunging headlong into cauldrons, and those being sunk in the sea, others being scraped, others being bent upon the wheel, others being thrown from a cliff; and those boxing with wild beasts, and those being led to the pit, and those, as each happened to end their life; so that by the variety of this painting, having prepared our house to be splendid, we may make a suitable lodging for the King of the heavens. For if He should see such paintings in our mind, He will come with the Father, and will make His dwelling with us, together with the Holy Spirit; and our mind will henceforth be a royal house, and no improper thought will be able to enter, since the memory of the martyrs, like some brilliant painting, is always stored within us, and sending forth a great radiance, and with God the King of all dwelling continually within us. – John Chrysostom, On Holy Martyrs
Let us not therefore sit down without the furnace, feeling no pity towards the poor; lest the same befall us as then befell those executioners. For if you should go down to them, and take your stand with the children, the fire will no longer work you any harm; but if you should sit above and neglect them in the flame of their poverty, the flame will burn you up. Go down therefore into the fire, that you may not be burnt up by the fire; sit not down without the fire, lest the flame catch hold of you. For if it should find you among the poor, it will depart from you; but if alienated from them, it will run upon you quickly, and catch you. Do not therefore stand off from them that are cast in, but when the devil gives command to cast them that have not worshipped gold into the furnace of poverty, be not thou of them that cast others in, but of them that are cast in; that you may be of the number of the saved, and not of the burned. For indeed it is a most effectual dew, to be held in no subjection by desire of wealth, to be associate with poor persons. These are wealthier than all, who have trampled under foot the desire of riches. Forasmuch as those children too, by despising the king at that time, became more glorious than the king. And thou therefore, if you despise the things of the world, shall become more honorable than all the world; like those holy men, of whom the world was not worthy (Hebrews 11:38). – John Chrysostom, Homilies on Matthew, Homily 4, chapter 20
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
Gregory the Great (540-604 AD):
In the case of Gregory, we can hear him tell us relics are holy and miracle-working, while condemning anyone who dares to touch the bodies of the saints (or even LOOK at them), all within the same letter!
Gregory to Constantina,
The Serenity of your Piety, conspicuous for religious zeal and love of holiness, has charged me with your commands to send to you the head of Saint Paul, or some other part of his body, for the church which is being built in honour of the same Saint Paul in the palace. And, being desirous of receiving commands from you, by exhibiting the most ready obedience to which I might the more provoke your favour towards me, I am all the more distressed that I neither can nor dare do what you enjoin. For the bodies of the apostles Saint Peter and Saint Paul glitter with so great miracles and terrors in their churches that one cannot even go to pray there without great fear. In short, when my predecessor, of blessed memory, was desirous of changing the silver which was over the most sacred body of the blessed apostle Peter, though at a distance of almost fifteen feet from the same body, a sign of no small dreadfulness appeared to him. Nay, I too wished in like manner to amend something not far from the most sacred body of Saint Paul the apostle; and, it being necessary to dig to some depth near his sepulchre, the superintendent of that place found some bones, which were not indeed connected with the same sepulchre; but, inasmuch as he presumed to lift them and transfer them to another place, certain awful signs appeared, and he died suddenly.
Besides all this, when my predecessor, of holy memory, was desiring in like manner to make some improvements not far from the body of Saint Laurence the martyr, it not being known where the venerable body was laid, diggings were made in the course of search, and suddenly his sepulchre was unawares disclosed; and those who were present and working, monks and mansionarii, who saw the body of the same martyr, which they did not indeed presume to touch, all died within ten days, so that none might survive who had seen the holy body of that righteous man.
Moreover, let my most tranquil lady know that it is not the custom of the Romans, when they give relics of saints, to presume to touch any part of the body; but only a cloth (brandeum) is put into a box (pyxide), and placed near the most sacred bodies of the saints: and when it is taken up it is deposited with due reverence in the Church that is to be dedicated, and such powerful effects are thereby produced there as might have been if their bodies had been brought to that special place. Whence it came to pass in the times of Pope Leo, of blessed memory, as has been handed down from our forefathers, that, certain Greeks being in doubt about such relics, the aforesaid pontiff took scissors and cut this same cloth (brandeum), and from the very incision blood flowed. For in the Roman and all the Western parts it is unendurable and sacrilegious for any one by any chance to desire to touch the bodies of saints: and, if one should presume to do this, it is certain that this temerity will by no means remain unpunished. For this reason we greatly wonder at the custom of the Greeks, who say that they take up the bones of saints; and we scarcely believe it. For certain Greek monks who came here more than two years ago dug up in the silence of night near the church of Saint Paul, bodies of dead men lying in the open field, and laid up their bones to be kept in their own possession till their departure. And, when they were taken and diligently examined as to why they did this, they confessed that they were going to carry those bones to Greece to pass for relics of saints. From this instance, as has been already said, the greater doubt has been engendered in us whether it be true that they really take up the bones of saints, as they are said to do.
But what shall I say of the bodies of the blessed apostles, when it is well known that, at the time when they suffered, believers came from the East to recover their bodies as being those of their own countrymen? And, having been taken as far as the second milestone from the city, they were deposited in the place which is called Catacumbas. But, when the whole multitude came together and endeavoured to remove them thence, such violence of thunder and lightning terrified and dispersed them that they on no account presumed to attempt such a thing again. And then the Romans, who of the Lord’s loving-kindness were counted worthy to do this, went out and took up their bodies, and laid them in the places where they are now deposited.
Who then, most serene lady, can there be so venturesome as, knowing these things, to presume, I do not say to touch their bodies, but even at all to look at them? Such orders therefore having been given me by you, which I could by no means have obeyed, it has not, so far as I find, been of your own motion; but certain men have wished to stir up your Piety against me, so as to withdraw from me (which God forbid) the favour of your good will, and have therefore sought out a point in which I might be found as if disobedient to you. But I trust in Almighty God that your most kind good will is in no way being stolen away from me, and that you will always have with you the power of the holy apostles, whom with all your heart and mind you love, not from their bodily presence, but from their protection.
Moreover, the napkin, which you have likewise ordered to be sent you, is with his body, and so cannot be touched, as his body cannot be approached. But since so religious a desire of my most serene lady ought not to be wholly unsatisfied, I will make haste to transmit to you some portion of the chains which Saint Peter the apostle himself bore on his neck and his hands, from which many miracles are displayed among the people; if at least I should succeed in removing it by filing. For, while many come frequently to seek a blessing from these same chains, in the hope of receiving a little part of the filings, a priest attends with a file, and in the case of some seekers a portion comes off so quickly from these chains that there is no delay: but in the case of other seekers the file is drawn for long over the chains, and yet nothing can be got from them. – Gregory the Great, Registrum Epistolarum, Book IV, Letter 30
Just because Gregory affirms the holiness of the relics does not mean he approves of bowing to man-made images:
Furthermore we notify to you that it has come to our ears that your Fraternity, seeing certain adorers of images, broke and threw down these same images in Churches. And we commend you indeed for your zeal against anything made with hands being an object of adoration; but we signify to you that you ought not to have broken these images. For pictorial representation is made use of in Churches for this reason; that such as are ignorant of letters may at least read by looking at the walls what they cannot read in books. Your Fraternity therefore should have both preserved the images and prohibited the people from adoration of them, to the end that both those who are ignorant of letters might have wherewith to gather a knowledge of the history, and that the people might by no means sin by adoration of a pictorial representation. – Gregory the Great, Epistle 105 to Serenus, Bishop of Massilia
For indeed it had been reported to us that, inflamed with inconsiderate zeal, you had broken images of saints, as though under the plea that they ought not to be adored. And indeed in that you forbade them to be adored, we altogether praise you [lat.: Et quidem quia eas adorari vetuisses, omnino laudavimus]; but we blame you for having broken them. Say, brother, what priest has ever been heard of as doing what you have done? If nothing else, should not even this thought have restrained you, so as not to despise other brethren, supposing yourself only to be holy and wise? For to adore a picture is one thing, but to learn through the story of a picture what is to be adored is another. For what writing presents to readers, this a picture presents to the unlearned who behold, since in it even the ignorant see what they ought to follow; in it the illiterate read. […] And if any one should wish to make images, by no means prohibit him, but by all means forbid the adoration of images.
For the dispersed children of the Church must be called together, and it must be shown then by testimonies of sacred Scripture that it is not lawful for anything made with hands to be adored, since it is written, You shall adore (proskynesis) the Lord your God, and him only shall you serve (Luke 4:8). And then, with regard to the pictorial representations which had been made for the edification of an unlearned people in order that, though ignorant of letters, they might by turning their eyes to the story itself learn what had been done, it must be added that, because you had seen these come to be adored, you had been so moved as to order them to be broken. And it must be said to them, If for this instruction for which images were anciently made you wish to have them in the church, I permit them by all means both to be made and to be had. And explain to them that it was not the sight itself of the story which the picture was hanging to attest that displeased you, but the adoration which had been improperly paid to the pictures.– Gregory the Great, Epistle 13, Patrologia Latina 77:1128C
- This shows that bishops were condemning a growing trend of image-worship in the 500s.
It’s as if in venerating Abraham and the prophets they [i.e. the Jews] were placing them ahead even of Truth himself. We are shown that those who do not know God venerate his servants erroneously. – Gregory the Great, Patrologia Latina 76:1152, commenting on John 8:52
- How are Christians venerating God’s servants erroneously? By bowing to their pictures!
WORK IN PROGRESS (more to come)
Athanasius
Epiphanius
Jerome