Martin Q. Blank said:
The things which we have decreed, being thus well supported, it is confessedly and beyond all question acceptable and well-pleasing before God, that the images of our Lord Jesus Christ as man, and those of the undefiled Mother of God, the ever-virgin Mary, and of the honourable Angels and of all Saints, should be venerated and saluted. And if anyone does not so believe, but undertakes to debate the matter further and is evil affected with regard to the veneration due the sacred images, such an one our holy ecumenical council (fortified by the inward working of the Spirit of God, and by the traditions of the Fathers and of the Church) anathematises. Now anathema is nothing less than complete separation from God.
Let them who do not venerate the holy and venerable images be anathema!
Anathema to those who blaspheme against the honourable and venerable images!
To those who do not diligently teach all the Christ-loving people to venerate and salute the venerable and sacred and honourable images of all the Saints who pleased God in their several generations, anathema!
To those who have a doubtful mind and do not confess with their whole hearts that they venerate the sacred images, anathema!
Every insurance policy you have ever purchased has a "definitions" section. This is important because, should there ever be a dispute, these definitions aid (although not perfectly) the court to figure out what the document must have meant. The council of Nicea 2 did this, and sorry, but it's a long one:
There is a great distinction between idols and images ( twn eidwlwn kai twn eikonwn ). For idols are the figments and inventions of men, as the Apostle testifies when he says (1 Cor.
554
viii. 4), "We know that an idol is nothing in the world." But an image is a representation of a true thing having a real existence in the world. Thus, for example, the image of our Saviour Jesus Christ and of the holy Virgin Mary, and of all the Saints. Moreover, the Pagans venerated their idols as gods, and offered to them sacrifices, esteeming the gold and silver to be God, as did Nebuchadnezzar.
But when we honour and venerate the images, we in no way venerate the colours or the wood of which they are made; but we glorify with the veneration of dulia ( douleias ), those holy beings of which these are the images, making them by this means present to our minds as if we could see them with our eyes. For this reason we venerate the image of the crucifixion, and place before our minds Christ hung upon the cross for our salvation, and to such like we bow the head, and bend the knee with thanksgiving. Likewise we venerate the image of the Virgin Mary, we lift up our mind to her the most holy Mother of God, bowing both head and knees before her; calling her blessed above all men and women, with the Archangel Gabriel. The veneration, moreover, of the holy images as received in the orthodox Church, in no respect transgresses this commandment.
But this is not one and the same with that we offer to God; nor do the orthodox give it to the art of the painting, but to those very Saints whom the images represent. The Cherubim which overshadowed the mercy-seat, representing the true Cherubim which stand before God in heaven, the Israelites revered and honoured without any violation of the commandment of God, and likewise the children of Israel revered the tabernacle of witness with a suitable honour (II. Sam. vi. 13), and yet in no respect sinned nor set at naught this precept, but rather the more glorified God. From these considerations it is evident that when we honour the holy images, we do not transgress the commandment of the decalogue, but we most especially praise God, who is "to be admired in his Saints" (Ps. lxviii. 35). But this only we should be careful of, that every image has a label, telling of what Saint it is, that thus the intention of him who venerates it may be the more easily fulfilled.
And for the greater establishment of the veneration of the holy images, the Church of God at the Seventh Ecumenical Synod anathematized all those who made war against the images, and set forth the veneration of the august images, and established it forever, as is evident from the ninth canon of that synod.
(Ibid. Quaestio LVI.)
Why was he praised in the Old Testament who broke down the brazen serpent (II. Kgs. xviii. 4) which long before Moses had set up on high? Answer: Because the Jews were beginning an apostasy from the veneration of the true God, venerating that serpent as the true God; and offering to it incense as the Scripture saith. Therefore wishing to cut off this evil, lest it might spread further, he broke up that serpent in order that the Israelites might have no longer that incentive to idolatry. But before they honoured the serpent with the veneration of adoration, no one was condemned in that respect nor was the serpent broken.
But Christians in no respect honour images as gods, neither in their veneration do they take anything from the true adoration due to God. Nay, rather they are led by the hand, as it were, by the image to God, while under their visible representations they honour the Saints with the veneration of dulia ( doulikws ) as the friends of God; asking for their mediation ( mesiteuousin ) to the Lord. And if perchance some have strayed, from their lack of knowledge, in their veneration, it were better to teach such an one, rather than that the veneration of the august images should be banished from the Church.
So, if you read through all of that, truly understand it, pray on it and still decide that veneration is evil and is idol worship, then you don't believe the church and have departed from it. If you have departed from it, you are anathema. But anathema to what? An evil church? Wouldn't you want to be anathema to them?
Last thing: the church here (and in other places in the Nicea 2 documents) clearly express what idol worship is, what veneration of images is, and clearly states they are different. To say the church doesn't actually believe this is to call them liars. On the other hand, if you say what the church teaches is doctrinally sound but the PRACTICE of some of the faithful makes it wrong, re-read the last line of the quoted passage.
I appreciate your post on this. It incentivized me to learn something in more depth
