DOI Artikel:
Sulikowska, Aleksandra: The Old-Believers' Images of God as the Father: Theology and Cult
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.18949#0108
However, the most important distinguishing feature of the 01d-Believers’
icons was long duration of iconographic canons, perceived by the advocates
of the old Orthodoxy in dogmatic categories as the basie criterion for
evaluation of art and a safeguard of its sacral values. Despite the intended
traditionality and accordance with canons, the set of themes characteristic
for the art of the 01d-Believers differs distinctly from the Byzantine canon.
The art of the 01d-Believers abounds in iconographic types4 5 unknown or
rare in Byzantium and old Rus’ until the 16rh century; plentiful images of the
Lord of Hosts as a white-bearded old man are contrary to the tenets of the
theology of image formulated during the iconoclasm period. ' If, exceptionally,
they do appear in the Byzantine art, they are viewed according to patristic
and liturgical texts as symbolic representations of the Perennial Logos, and
thus of Christ.6 7 * *
“No man hath seen God at any time” (Jn 1:18)
The permissibility of depicting God as the Lord of Hosts was one of the
main issues in the debates on art that took place in the 17th and the
beginning of the 18th century, during the early stage of shaping the Old-
-Believers’ doctrine. The Orthodox Church, striving for Byzantinising of
religious life, took a elear standpoint on this matter. The Great Council of
Moscow in 1667 and then the Holy Synod in 1722 excluded these images
on the basis that they undermine the sine qua non of icon theology (the fact
of the Incarnation of the Son of God), they abuse the rules of sacral painting
and so should be judged as “preposterous” and heretical. These decisions,
meant to cleanse art of non-canonical elements and discrepancies such as
icons of a dog-headed St. Christopher, a three-handed Mother of God or
the Lord of Hosts,' were aimed against paintings which, in the believers’
4 Among the popular motifs of the 01d-Believers’ icons are the depictions of strife of good
against evil (Archangel Michael, Archstrategist, St. Nikita Fighting with the D’evil), icons
devoted to the cult of the Virgin Mary derived from the Russian tradition, for example, Ease My
Sorrows (Utoli moya pechali), Mother of God, Joy of all the Afflicted (Vsekh skorbyashchikh
Radost) and others. Depictions of “birds of paradise” by Sirin and Alkonost are particularly
characteristic for the 01d-Believers’ lubok (popular print).
5 C. Mango, The Art of Byzantine Empire 312-1453. Sources and Documents, Englewood
Cliffs N.J. 1972, pp. 170, 172-173; Ouspensky, op. cit., pp. 347, 355.
6 According to this interpretation, three paintings of Christ: the Ancient of Days, Pantocrator
and Emmanuel represent Him as: the Ancient God (and so from before the Incarnation), the
Lord of All Things and as the Logos Incarnated. T. Avner, “The Impact of the Liturgy on Style
and Content. The Triple-Christ Scene in Taphou 14”, Jahrbuch der Ósterreichischen Byzantinistik,
32, 1982, 5, pp. 459-465; Ouspensky, op. cit., p. 347; cf. K. Weitzmann, The Monastery of Saint
Catherine at Mount Sinai. The Icons: From the Sixth to the Tenth Century, Princeton 1976,
cat. 16, p. 41ff, ill. 19.
7 B. Dąb-Kalinowska, Między Bizancjum a Zachodem. Ikony rosyjskie XVII-XIX w.. Warszawa
1990, pp. 19-20, 72-73; Ouspensky, op. cit., p. 345; N. Pokrovskiy, Ocherki pamyatnikon
khristianskoy ikonografii i iskusstna, Saint Petersburg 1900, pp. 364-365.
106
icons was long duration of iconographic canons, perceived by the advocates
of the old Orthodoxy in dogmatic categories as the basie criterion for
evaluation of art and a safeguard of its sacral values. Despite the intended
traditionality and accordance with canons, the set of themes characteristic
for the art of the 01d-Believers differs distinctly from the Byzantine canon.
The art of the 01d-Believers abounds in iconographic types4 5 unknown or
rare in Byzantium and old Rus’ until the 16rh century; plentiful images of the
Lord of Hosts as a white-bearded old man are contrary to the tenets of the
theology of image formulated during the iconoclasm period. ' If, exceptionally,
they do appear in the Byzantine art, they are viewed according to patristic
and liturgical texts as symbolic representations of the Perennial Logos, and
thus of Christ.6 7 * *
“No man hath seen God at any time” (Jn 1:18)
The permissibility of depicting God as the Lord of Hosts was one of the
main issues in the debates on art that took place in the 17th and the
beginning of the 18th century, during the early stage of shaping the Old-
-Believers’ doctrine. The Orthodox Church, striving for Byzantinising of
religious life, took a elear standpoint on this matter. The Great Council of
Moscow in 1667 and then the Holy Synod in 1722 excluded these images
on the basis that they undermine the sine qua non of icon theology (the fact
of the Incarnation of the Son of God), they abuse the rules of sacral painting
and so should be judged as “preposterous” and heretical. These decisions,
meant to cleanse art of non-canonical elements and discrepancies such as
icons of a dog-headed St. Christopher, a three-handed Mother of God or
the Lord of Hosts,' were aimed against paintings which, in the believers’
4 Among the popular motifs of the 01d-Believers’ icons are the depictions of strife of good
against evil (Archangel Michael, Archstrategist, St. Nikita Fighting with the D’evil), icons
devoted to the cult of the Virgin Mary derived from the Russian tradition, for example, Ease My
Sorrows (Utoli moya pechali), Mother of God, Joy of all the Afflicted (Vsekh skorbyashchikh
Radost) and others. Depictions of “birds of paradise” by Sirin and Alkonost are particularly
characteristic for the 01d-Believers’ lubok (popular print).
5 C. Mango, The Art of Byzantine Empire 312-1453. Sources and Documents, Englewood
Cliffs N.J. 1972, pp. 170, 172-173; Ouspensky, op. cit., pp. 347, 355.
6 According to this interpretation, three paintings of Christ: the Ancient of Days, Pantocrator
and Emmanuel represent Him as: the Ancient God (and so from before the Incarnation), the
Lord of All Things and as the Logos Incarnated. T. Avner, “The Impact of the Liturgy on Style
and Content. The Triple-Christ Scene in Taphou 14”, Jahrbuch der Ósterreichischen Byzantinistik,
32, 1982, 5, pp. 459-465; Ouspensky, op. cit., p. 347; cf. K. Weitzmann, The Monastery of Saint
Catherine at Mount Sinai. The Icons: From the Sixth to the Tenth Century, Princeton 1976,
cat. 16, p. 41ff, ill. 19.
7 B. Dąb-Kalinowska, Między Bizancjum a Zachodem. Ikony rosyjskie XVII-XIX w.. Warszawa
1990, pp. 19-20, 72-73; Ouspensky, op. cit., p. 345; N. Pokrovskiy, Ocherki pamyatnikon
khristianskoy ikonografii i iskusstna, Saint Petersburg 1900, pp. 364-365.
106