The Living Tradition An Orthodox Archive of the Church Fathers and Early Church

Orthodox Christianity: start here — lesson 12

Holy icons and the Seventh Council

The image, the incarnation, and a controversy that lasted more than a century.

  • Dogmatic definitionDefined by an ecumenical council or otherwise confessed by the Church as binding doctrine. Not every sentence a council wrote is a definition: its acts, letters and disciplinary canons are different things.
  • Liturgical witnessAttested in the Church's worship — in a hymn, a prayer, a rite or a commemoration. Liturgical language is theological rather than casual, but a hymn is not a canon.
  • Historical consensusBroadly agreed among historians working from the surviving evidence. Consensus can shift when the evidence or the method changes.

Primary evidence verified Content last reviewed 2026-08-29

What still needs checking (1)
  • Confirm the catechetical account of icon veneration against the OCA's The Orthodox Faith.

Report an accuracy issue on this page

What this lesson covers

  • State the iconoclast case in its own terms.
  • Explain why the defence of images is a Christological argument.
  • Describe the distinction the Seventh Council drew and why translation obscured it.

About 8 minutes to read.

Read aloud. Your browser speaks the page using the voices installed on this device. Nothing is uploaded — the text never leaves your computer. Voice quality varies by browser and device.

For most of the eighth century the veneration of images was suppressed in the Byzantine empire, with imperial backing and with a council of its own at Hiereia in 754 that called itself the seventh ecumenical council.

The iconoclast case

Percival's edition prints an epitome of the iconoclast definition, so it can be read in its own words. The argument was serious: an image of Christ must either attempt to circumscribe his divinity, which is impossible, or depict only his humanity, which divides his person. Its supporters also appealed to the commandment against graven images and to the real danger of superstition.

The iconophile answer

The reply distinguishes depicting a nature from depicting a person. An icon depicts the person of Christ as he was seen; it makes no attempt to represent the divine nature. And it presses the Christological point: if God has genuinely become man and been seen, then he can be depicted as man. Refusing that is being uneasy about the flesh.

John of Damascus, writing from outside the empire and so beyond the reach of the emperor enforcing iconoclasm, made the fullest case. The council of 754 anathematised him by name.

The distinction, and a translation problem

The Seventh Council in 787 defined that images are to be honoured with reverence, and that the worship due to the divine nature belongs to God alone. Greek uses separate words for the two, and the distinction is exact.

Iconoclasm returned after 787 and was finally ended in 843. The Orthodox Church commemorates that on the first Sunday of Great Lent as the Triumph of Orthodoxy.

Key Scripture

  • Exodus 20:4-5 — The commandment the iconoclasts appealed to.
  • Exodus 25:18-22 — The cherubim commanded for the ark — images made at God's own instruction.
  • Colossians 1:15 — Christ the image of the invisible God.
  • John 1:14 — We beheld his glory.

On Scripture references. References are given so you can read the passage in the translation your parish uses. This site does not reproduce a modern copyrighted Bible text.

Council and canon connections

  • Nicaea II, 787: the decree, the epitome of the iconoclast definition, and twenty-two canons.

Why this matters in lived Orthodoxy

Icons are venerated with a bow and a kiss, and are found in homes, in cars and on the person as well as in church. Orthodox Christians are taught that the veneration passes to the person depicted.

Icons are also not decorative art. They are written according to a tradition, and a parish's iconography is part of its confession rather than its furnishing.

Review

What was the iconoclast argument?
That an image of Christ must either circumscribe his divinity, which is impossible, or depict only his humanity, which divides his person; and that images invite idolatry.
Why is the defence of icons Christological?
Because it rests on the reality of the incarnation: the invisible God has been seen in the flesh and so can be depicted as man.
How did translation cause a dispute?
The Latin version of the council's acts rendered the Greek words for veneration and worship indistinguishably, so the Frankish reply attacked a position the council had not taken.

Your notes

Stored in this browser only. Never uploaded, never visible to anyone else, and marked as your own words if you add this page to a study packet.

Going deeper

Sources for this page

  1. Tier C The Seven Ecumenical Councils of the Undivided Church Henry R. Percival (ed.); Philip Schaff and Henry Wace (series eds.) The Decree of the Holy, Great, Ecumenical Synod, the Second of Nice annotated edition of conciliar texts Source record
  2. Tier C The Seven Ecumenical Councils of the Undivided Church Henry R. Percival (ed.); Philip Schaff and Henry Wace (series eds.) Epitome of the Definition of the Iconoclastic Conciliabulum held in Constantinople, 754 annotated edition of conciliar texts Source record
  3. Tier C The Seven Ecumenical Councils of the Undivided Church Henry R. Percival (ed.); Philip Schaff and Henry Wace (series eds.) Excursus on the Present Teaching of the Latin and Greek Churches on the Subject annotated edition of conciliar texts Source record

Tiers are explained in the methodology. No page on this site has been reviewed or approved by any bishop, priest, synod or seminary.