Homoousios or Homoiosis: Redefining the Christian Image in the Wake of the Iconoclastic Controversy

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 0 RELIGION
Arianne Conty
{"title":"Homoousios or Homoiosis: Redefining the Christian Image in the Wake of the Iconoclastic Controversy","authors":"Arianne Conty","doi":"10.1163/15685292-02705006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article will elucidate the philosophy of the image that developed in the wake of the Iconoclastic Controversy in the Eastern Christian Empire in the ninth Century. Iconophilia was finally reinstated after a wave of iconoclasm swept across the Empire. The controversy coincides with dramatic changes within the Byzantine empire, making it difficult to establish consensus amongst scholars regarding its possible causes. After discussing several of the theories that seek to explain the adoption of iconoclasm in the Byzantine Empire, we will seek to show how image veneration was transformed and differentiated from relic worship thanks to its encounter with iconoclasm. After reviewing icon veneration prior to the Iconoclastic Controversy, this article will elucidate the philosophy of the image developed by Patriarch Nicephorus in order to show how he differentiated veneration from idolatry by redefining the image as “similar to” (<em>homoiosis</em>) rather than consubstantial with (<em>homoousios</em>) its model. By differentiating image veneration from the theory of consubstantiality that was normative within Judaism and Islam, Christian philosophy of the image will differentiate resemblance from identity, inscription from circumscription, and thereby reveal iconoclasm to be in the eye of the beholder.</p>","PeriodicalId":41383,"journal":{"name":"Religion and the Arts","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religion and the Arts","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685292-02705006","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article will elucidate the philosophy of the image that developed in the wake of the Iconoclastic Controversy in the Eastern Christian Empire in the ninth Century. Iconophilia was finally reinstated after a wave of iconoclasm swept across the Empire. The controversy coincides with dramatic changes within the Byzantine empire, making it difficult to establish consensus amongst scholars regarding its possible causes. After discussing several of the theories that seek to explain the adoption of iconoclasm in the Byzantine Empire, we will seek to show how image veneration was transformed and differentiated from relic worship thanks to its encounter with iconoclasm. After reviewing icon veneration prior to the Iconoclastic Controversy, this article will elucidate the philosophy of the image developed by Patriarch Nicephorus in order to show how he differentiated veneration from idolatry by redefining the image as “similar to” (homoiosis) rather than consubstantial with (homoousios) its model. By differentiating image veneration from the theory of consubstantiality that was normative within Judaism and Islam, Christian philosophy of the image will differentiate resemblance from identity, inscription from circumscription, and thereby reveal iconoclasm to be in the eye of the beholder.

Homoousios还是Homoiosis?在圣像之争后重新定义基督教形象
本文将阐释九世纪东基督教帝国圣像之争后形成的图像哲学。在圣像破坏浪潮席卷整个帝国之后,圣像崇拜最终得以恢复。这场争论与拜占庭帝国内部的巨变同时发生,因此学者们很难就其可能的原因达成共识。在讨论了试图解释拜占庭帝国采用圣像破坏论的几种理论之后,我们将试图说明图像崇拜是如何因遭遇圣像破坏论而发生转变并与遗物崇拜区分开来的。在回顾了圣像破坏论战之前的圣像崇拜之后,本文将阐释尼斯福鲁斯牧首提出的圣像哲学,以说明他是如何通过将圣像重新定义为 "类似于"(homoiosis)而非与其模型同质(homoousios)来区分圣像崇拜与偶像崇拜的。通过将图像崇拜与犹太教和伊斯兰教的同体理论区分开来,基督教的图像哲学将区分相似性与同一性、铭刻与圈定,从而揭示出圣像崇拜是在观察者的眼中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信