The Icon in Orthodox Spirituality

The place of the icon in the Orthodox Church is unique and so central that the restoration of icons after the long period of iconoclasm has been characterised as a triumph of Orthodoxy as a whole. In order to justify this central place of the icon, one should not see particular icons only as religious instruments in their concrete environment and function. Rather, one should understand icons as an expression of a theological reality which includes all possible relations between the entire created world and its uncreated Creator. For icons, in general, presuppose di prototype which is reflected in different ways and in varying degrees throughout the entire course of divine economy, so that the divine plan of salvation is served accordingly from the very first steps of revelation to the final stage of parousia. The very concepts of "revelation" and "parousia" presuppose and clearly indicate the visual joy of the icon as the most characteristic way of understanding salvation. This means that the icon is the only immediate presence of the invisible Holy in historical time, and for this reason precisely do icons become the sole refuge and consolation for the faithful as they yearn for the eschaton. If one does not appreciate these general preliminary remarks concerning the importance of the icon in the history of salvation, one would not be able to approach properly the whole complex of related problems. Before dealing with the various aspects of the place of the icon in the Orthodox Church, one should offer a brief account of the historical process which ended in the definite Restoration of the Holy Icons through the Seventh Ecumenical Council in 787. The history of the icon in the life of the Church signifies a long adventure dictated on the one hand by the requirements of the Decalogue and on the other by the overwhelming influence of the Incarnation. The struggle between iconoclasts and iconophiles endured entire centuries, with intervals of peace, and divided the people of God into two opposing sides. For a long time, it was not easy to discern who was correct and to what extent, because extreme attitudes on both sides rendered such judgment almost impossible. Both parties saw the involvement of such distinguished personalities as bishops and emperors, or influential monks and theologians. Each side insisted that the fight was for the purity and integrity of the faith. However, what were the fundamental arguments of the two sides? The first iconoclasts justifiedly referred to the example of the early Christians who had no icons. The Old Testament clearly dictates: "You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth below, or that is in the water under the earth" (Ex. 20:4). This warning prevented not only the veneration but also the simple use of icons. For the first Christians, then, icons were regarded as idols, which characterised the heathen world. Early Christian art was mystical and symbolical. In portraying the Lord