In The Orthodox Church,
a leading spokesman, Timothy Ware, lays out a description and a defense for Orthodoxy.
One area of contention is their use of painted images
(icons), which have assumed a central place in Orthodox worship. In this
regard, Ware cites Nicolas Zernov (1898-1980):
·
Icons were for the Russians not merely
paintings. They were dynamic manifestations of man’s spiritual power to redeem
creation through beauty and art. The colors and lines of the icons were not
meant to imitate nature; the artists aimed at demonstrating that men, animals
and plants, and even the whole cosmos, could be rescued from their present
state of degradation and restored to their proper “Image.” The icons were
pledges of the coming victory of a redeemed creation over the fallen one…. The
artistic perfection of an icon was only a reflection of a celestial glory – it
was a concrete example of matter restored to its original harmony and beauty,
and serving as a vehicle of the spirit. The icons are part of the transfigured
cosmos. (The Russians and their Church,
SVS Press,1978, p. 107-108)
Ware tries to distinguish such worship from idolatry by
claiming that it is not really the worship of icons but the veneration of icons:
·
When an Orthodox kisses an icon or prostrates
himself before it, he is not guilty of idolatry; the icon is not an idol but a
symbol; the veneration shown to images is directed, not towards stone, wood and
paint, but towards the person depicted. (Ibid. 32)
This reminds me of my visit to the Hare Krishna temple. They
too have their icons in the form of imposing statues to which they also show
their veneration in many ways and explain that it is actually Krishna that they
worship, who receives their worship through statues of stone and concrete. Perhaps
the Canaanites would have given us a similar defense of their own devotion to
their idols.
Does this violate the Second Commandment’s injunction
against images for worship? I think so. I too had been inclined to conger up images
of Jesus holding me as I’d go through traumatic events. However, I discovered
that this actually replaced the Bible’s insistence that worship had to be
according to truth (John 4:22-24) and not my imagination of Jesus. It is truth
that transforms us and not images:
·
Do not be conformed to this world, but be
transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what
is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect. (Romans 12:2)
It is the Word of God that transforms us:
·
Therefore put away all filthiness and rampant
wickedness and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save
your souls. (James 1:21; 1 Peter 2:2)
Consequently, I try to worship God by meditating on His Word (Psalm 1:1-3; Joshua 1:7-8) rather than finding my inspiration through images.
Perhaps the Orthodox Church esteems the role of icons,
because it has a lesser esteem for the Scriptures. Ware insists that the Bible
must play a subservient role to the Church and its traditions:
·
It is from the Church that the Bible ultimately
derives its authority. For it was the Church which originally decided which
books form a part of the Holy Scripture, and it is the Church alone which can
interpret Holy Scripture with authority. (199)
To apply this faulty logic consistently, the Hebrew
Scriptures also derived its authority from the Israelites – an absurdity. This
is why the Scriptures are called the Word of God rather than the Word of
Israel.
Besides this problem, the claim that only the Orthodox
Church “alone…can interpret the Holy Scriptures” creates a conflict among other
churches that make the same claim. Instead of together reasoning over the meaning
of the Scriptures, their differences have become irreconcilable. Consequently,
the Church has become divided without any hope of unity.
Instead, Jesus had made it plain to all, by means of His miraculous
attestations, that it was the Apostles who would perpetuate the Words of God:
·
And they devoted themselves to the apostles’
teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. And awe
came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were being done through the
apostles. (Acts 2:42-43; Hebrews 2:2-3)
Consequently, the fledgling Church didn’t have to wait for
any authoritative church declarations to know which teachings came from God. According
to the Scriptures, the Words of God are sufficient and supremely authoritative.
Therefore, they should even direct our worship:
·
All Scripture is breathed out by God and
profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in
righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good
work. (2 Timothy 3:16-17)
Why then does the Orthodox Church degrade the Scriptures
making it subservient to ritual and worship? For one thing, Ware explains that:
·
While regarding the Church as the authoritative
interpreter if Scripture, [it] does not forbid the critical…study of the Bible.
(201)
As a result, the Church welcomes the judgments of the
critics. Oddly, this Church is less welcoming of their own lay believers
regarding what they have found in the Scriptures:
·
There are many sayings in the Bible which by
themselves are far from clear, and individual readers, however sincere, are in
danger of error if they trust their own personal interpretation. (199)
While it might be true that certain passages “are far from
clear,” should we place our trust in the professionals to spoon-feed us? Wouldn’t
these passages also be unclear to them? Instead, the emphasis of the Scriptures
is upon the believer deriving a certainty in their own understanding, one which
is between them and their God:
·
One person esteems one day as better than
another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully
convinced in his own mind…The faith that you have, keep between yourself and
God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what
he approves. (Romans 14:5, 22)
Instead of having a personal and direct relationship with
their Savior through His Word, this Church and others claim that their
relationship has to primarily be between themselves and the professionals, at
least when it comes to interpreting the Scriptures.
Consistent with this view is the Orthodox opinion that their
“Tradition” can be altered. Ware writes:
·
The Orthodox conception of Tradition is not
static but dynamic, not a dead acceptance of the past but a living discovery of
the Holy Spirit in the present. (198)
Does Scripture allow us to tamper with the Word of the
Spirit? The Apostle Paul recoiled at such an idea:
·
But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded
ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word, but by the
open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience
in the sight of God. (2 Corinthians 4:2)
Paul understood that Scripture is the inviolable Word of the
Spirit, and so we are forbidden to contradict or go beyond it:
·
I have applied all these things to myself and
Apollos for your benefit, brothers, that you may learn by us not to go beyond
what is written, that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against
another. For who sees anything different in you? What do you have that you did
not receive? If then you received it, why do you boast as if you did not
receive it? (1 Corinthians 4:6-7)
The Apostle Peter concurred:
·
knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of
Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever
produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along
by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter 1:20-21)
Because the Scriptures are the Word of the Spirit and not
the words of men, it could not be violated. This had been true of the OT (Deuteronomy
4:2) and it is also true of the New (Revelation 22:18-19):
·
And we also thank God constantly for this, that
when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not
as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work
in you believers. (1 Thessalonians 2:13)
This was why Paul had been able to speak with such
authority:
·
If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or
spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a
command of the Lord. If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized. (1
Corinthians 14:37-38)
And Paul was able to perform many miracles to substantiate
his authority. To the shame of many churches, we have comprised the authority
of the Scriptures with the pronouncements of the scholars, the scientific
consensus, and even the prevailing culture. If we do so, we can no longer call
ourselves “Christian” or even “a follow of Christ.” To follow Him is to believe
as He did. Never once did Jesus question the Scriptures. According to Him, it
had all been given by God (Matthew 5:17-18), and it all had to be embraced as
such:
·
But he answered [the devil], “It is written,
“‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the
mouth of God.’” (Matthew 4:4 quoting Deuteronomy 8)
No comments:
Post a Comment