Strange icons

LBK

Toumarches
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
13,641
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Nephi said:
LBK said:
The above is known as The Multiplier of Wheat. Here's part of a post from an older thread:
Do all of the Multiplier of Wheat icons include the mandorla? I've seen this icon so many times that I never paid any attention, and can't remember now.
All the many versions I've seen have the mandorla.
 

biro

Protostrator
Site Supporter
Joined
Aug 31, 2010
Messages
23,166
Reaction score
9
Points
38
Age
47
Website
archiveofourown.org
I have one that is similar to the Multiplier. It's Russian. I find it comforting, even though it looks unusual.
 

Nephi

Protokentarchos
Joined
Apr 18, 2011
Messages
4,829
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
29
Here's one without a mandorla, but this site calls it "Grower of Crops" instead of Multiplier of Wheat:

 

LBK

Toumarches
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
13,641
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Dominika said:
This image was produced for the purpose of using it as part of an anti-abortion campaign. Icons must never be used to promote social or political causes, even if such causes are good ones. God is above and beyond politics, and to turn a holy image into a sociopolitical mascot is nothing short of shameful.  :mad: :mad: :mad:
 

That person

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Dec 11, 2009
Messages
1,166
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Was it? I'm no expert, but a GIS indicates a lot of icons of the Visitation depict Christ and the Forerunner. I'd be curious to read up on that icon's origins, if you have a source. Because independent of whatever agenda it might be pushing, I kind of like it.
 

Dominika

Taxiarches
Staff member
Global Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 23, 2011
Messages
7,394
Reaction score
13
Points
38
Age
28
Location
Poland
Website
www.youtube.com
I've posted it becasue I'm interested in its origin like That person and I've never seen such icon before.

As for anti-abortion icons, I've seen 3 types of it (I think). Of course the task of icon is different, but on the other hand, we know that Church should protect life, and some peopel find icons as an instrument for it, so, maybe in this case, it would be better if it was a kind of picutre, similar to icon?... I'm just thinking out loud
 

LBK

Toumarches
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
13,641
Reaction score
0
Points
0
That person said:
Was it? I'm no expert, but a GIS indicates a lot of icons of the Visitation depict Christ and the Forerunner. I'd be curious to read up on that icon's origins, if you have a source. Because independent of whatever agenda it might be pushing, I kind of like it.
There is only one historic instance I've come across of the fetuses being visible in a Visitation icon, in a fresco in Cyprus, IIRC 17thC. In this fresco, the unborns are not surrounded by a womb-like enclosure; they are painted in a similar style to the Christ of the 12th C Ustiug Annunciation. Be that as it may, the fact that the Cypriot Visitation and the Ustiug Annunciation are the only known examples of the portrayal of the unborn, this should give us pause before regarding such a representation as proper or canonical.

It is also a fact that the type of image posted by Dominika has been used in recent years, in violation of the spirit and purpose of iconography, as the mascot for various anti-abortion campaigns.
 

That person

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Dec 11, 2009
Messages
1,166
Reaction score
0
Points
0
A lot of More Spacious than the Heavens icons use the womb-type thing. Dunno how historic this practice is though.
 

LBK

Toumarches
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
13,641
Reaction score
0
Points
0
That person said:
A lot of More Spacious than the Heavens icons use the womb-type thing. Dunno how historic this practice is though.
The Mother of God of the Sign (Platytera, Znammeniye) icons show Christ Emmanuel surrounded by a radiant circle of Uncreated Light.
 

BoredMeeting

High Elder
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Messages
722
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
The People's Republic of Maryland
LBK said:
Dominika said:
This image was produced for the purpose of using it as part of an anti-abortion campaign. Icons must never be used to promote social or political causes, even if such causes are good ones. God is above and beyond politics, and to turn a holy image into a sociopolitical mascot is nothing short of shameful.  :mad: :mad: :mad:
Really? Can you document when and where it was first written?
 

LBK

Toumarches
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
13,641
Reaction score
0
Points
0
BoredMeeting said:
LBK said:
Dominika said:
This image was produced for the purpose of using it as part of an anti-abortion campaign. Icons must never be used to promote social or political causes, even if such causes are good ones. God is above and beyond politics, and to turn a holy image into a sociopolitical mascot is nothing short of shameful.  :mad: :mad: :mad:
Really? Can you document when and where it was first written?
Read post #109. And the image posted here was painted by Christine Uveges, a Byzantine Catholic, and used in Right to Life marches and campaigns. I have also seen the same composition painted by other artists, and used for the same purpose. The artist herself is on public record with this statement:

[size=10pt][size=10pt]Every year we are in Washington D.C. at the ProLife Rally[/size][/size]
And the artist has authorised that copies of this image are handed out during these rallies.

I repeat: the use of iconography to promote sociopolitical causes, even "good" ones, is a shameful debasement of what icons are and stand for.
 

88Devin12

Protokentarchos
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
5,182
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I see nothing wrong with it, it's illustrating something 100% Orthodox and 100% Biblical. Who cares if its used in the campaign against infanticide. Should we also stop those who paint icons of Rachel's Lament?
 

88Devin12

Protokentarchos
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
5,182
Reaction score
0
Points
0
NicholasMyra said:
It also has that "photo snap-shot" effect that pseudo-iconography often does.
What do you mean by this? You realize most icons in history aren't "portraits" of Saints like we have so mch of today, they are images from the Bible. The very first Christian images were precisely this sort of thing, a "snapshot" of a Biblical event.
 

mike

Protostrator
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
24,873
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
29
Location
Białystok / Warsaw
88Devin12 said:
I see nothing wrong with it, it's illustrating something 100% Orthodox and 100% Biblical. Who cares if its used in the campaign against infanticide. Should we also stop those who paint icons of Rachel's Lament?
Icons are supposed to be used for veneration.
 

88Devin12

Protokentarchos
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
5,182
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Michał Kalina said:
88Devin12 said:
I see nothing wrong with it, it's illustrating something 100% Orthodox and 100% Biblical. Who cares if its used in the campaign against infanticide. Should we also stop those who paint icons of Rachel's Lament?
Icons are supposed to be used for veneration.
You don't and can't "venerate" every icon, we offer them honor and veneration, but unless you are extremely tall, I doubt you can venerate the Pantocrator up in the dome. ;)

I'm simply saying that just because you use an icon in an anti-abortion campaign doesn't make it wrong, should we stop putting photos of icons in books, calendars and cards? Why not take it further and stop people from printing icons on paper? Or stop them from painting on canvas and gluing them to the walls of churches? How far do we take this somewhat extreme legalism regarding icons? Do we take it as far as the Old Believers sometimes do?
 

mike

Protostrator
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
24,873
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
29
Location
Białystok / Warsaw
88Devin12 said:
You don't and can't "venerate" every icon, we offer them honor and veneration, but unless you are extremely tall, I doubt you can venerate the Pantocrator up in the dome. ;)
I've read somewhere there is a difference between icons and icon-like paintings on other objcects like wall or vestments.

I'm simply saying that just because you use an icon in an anti-abortion campaign doesn't make it wrong,
It was created for that purpose.

should we stop putting photos of icons in books, calendars and cards?
I'd love that happen.

Why not take it further and stop people from printing icons on paper? Or stop them from painting on canvas and gluing them to the walls of churches? How far do we take this somewhat extreme legalism regarding icons?
We are not discussing here materials used for icons but icons being used for non-veneration actions, are we?
Do we take it as far as the Old Believers sometimes do?
What they do?
 
Top