Quote of the Week: The Annunciation and Gratitude to Mary

Likewise, the Annunciation shows her key-position. — The culmination of the prophecies arrives ; the fruition of her age-old destiny is now at hand.

Consider the awe-inspiring working out of the merciful design of God. Attend in spirit the greatest Peace Conference ever held. It is a Peace Conference between God and mankind, and it is called the Annunciation. In that Conference God was represented by one of his high Angels, and mankind was represented by her whose name the Legion is privileged to bear. She was but a gentle maiden, yet the fate of all mankind hung upon her in that day. The angel came with overwhelming tidings. He proposed to her the Incarnation. He did not merely notify it. Her liberty of choice was not violated; so that for a while the fate of mankind trembled in the balance. The Redemption was the ardent desire of God. But in this, as in all matters minor to it, he would not force the will of man. He would offer the priceless boon, but it was for man to accept it, and man was at liberty to refuse it. The moment had arrived to which all generations had looked forward, just as ever since all generations have looked back to it. It was the crisis of all time. There was a pause. That maiden did not accept at once; she asked a question, and the answer was given. There was another pause, and then she spoke the words: “Let it be with me according to your word” (Lk 1:38), those words that brought God down to earth and signed the great Peace Pact of humanity.

The Father made redemption depend on her. — How few realise all that follows from that consent of hers. Even Catholics in the main do not realise the importance of the part that Mary played. The Doctors of the Church say these things: Supposing that maiden had refused the offer of motherhood that was made to her, the Second Divine Person would not have taken flesh in her. What a solemn thing that is! “What a terrible thought to think that God has made the entrance of the Redeemer dependent upon the ‘Let it be with me’ (Lk 1:38) of the handmaid of Nazareth; that this saying should be the termination of the old world, the beginning of the new, the fulfilment of all prophecies, the turning-point of all time, the first blaze of the morning star which is to announce the rising of the sun of justice, which as far as human will was able to accomplish, knit the bond that brought Heaven down upon earth and lifted humanity up to God!” (Hettinger). What a solemn thing indeed! It means that she was the only hope of mankind. But the fate of men was safe in her hands. She pronounced that consent which, though we cannot fully understand, commonsense nevertheless tells us must have been inconceivably the most heroic act ever performed in the world — such that in all ages no other creature but she could have performed it. Then to her came the Redeemer; not to herself alone, but through her to poor helpless humanity, on behalf of whom she spoke. With him, she brought everything that the faith means, and the faith is the real life of men. Nothing else matters. Everything must be abandoned for it. Any sacrifices must be made to get it. It is the only thing in the world of any worth. Consider, therefore, that the faith of all generations: those that have passed away up to the present, and the uncountable millions yet to come: the faith of all has depended on the words of that maiden.

No true Christianity without Mary. — In return for this infinite gift, all generations must henceforth call that maiden blessed. She who brought Christianity on earth cannot be denied a place in Christian worship. But what of the many people in this world who hold her cheaply, the many who slight her, the many who do worse? Does it ever occur to those people to think that every grace they have they owe to her? Do they ever reason that if they were excluded from her words of acceptance that night, then Redemption has never come on earth for them? In that supposition they would stand outside its scope. In other words, they would not be Christians at all, even though they may cry: “Lord! Lord!” all the day and every day. (Mt 7:21) And on the other hand, if they are indeed Christians, and if the gift of life has come to them, then it has only come because she gained it for them, because they were included in her acceptance. In a word, the baptism that makes a person a child of God makes one simultaneously a child of Mary. Gratitude, therefore — a practical gratitude — to Mary must be the mark of every Christian. Redemption is the joint gift of the Father and of Mary. Therefore, with the words of thanks to the Father must go up the word of thanks to Mary.

(Legio Mariae: The Handbook of the Legion of Mary, chapter 39: Cardinal Points of the Legion Apostolate, pg 275-276)

Quote of the Week: St. Louis De Montfort on Devotion to Mary

With the whole Church I acknowledge that Mary, being a mere creature fashioned by the hands of God is, compared to his infinite majesty, less than an atom, or rather is simply nothing, since he alone can say, “I am he who is”. Consequently, this great Lord, who is ever independent and self-sufficient, never had and does not now have any absolute need of the Blessed Virgin for the accomplishment of his will and the manifestation of his glory. To do all things he has only to will them.

However, I declare that, considering things as they are, because God has decided to begin and accomplish his greatest works through the Blessed Virgin ever since he created her, we can safely believe that he will not change his plan in the time to come, for he is God and therefore does not change in his thoughts or his way of acting.

God the Father gave his only Son to the world only through Mary. Whatever desires the patriarchs may have cherished, whatever entreaties the prophets and saints of the Old Law may have had for 4,000 years to obtain that treasure, it was Mary alone who merited it and found grace before God by the power of her prayers and the perfection of her virtues. “The world being unworthy,” said Saint Augustine, “to receive the Son of God directly from the hands of the Father, he gave his Son to Mary for the world to receive him from her.” The Son of God became man for our salvation but only in Mary and through Mary. God the Holy Spirit formed Jesus Christ in Mary but only after having asked her consent through one of the chief ministers of his court.

God the Father imparted to Mary his fruitfulness as far as a mere creature was capable of receiving it, to enable her to bring forth his Son and all the members of his mystical body.

God the Son came into her virginal womb as a new Adam into his earthly paradise, to take his delight there and produce hidden wonders of grace. God-made-man found freedom in imprisoning himself in her womb. He displayed power in allowing himself to be borne by this young maiden. He found his glory and that of his Father in hiding his splendours from all creatures here below and revealing them only to Mary. He glorified his independence and his majesty in depending upon this loveable virgin in his conception, his birth, his presentation in the temple, and in the thirty years of his hidden life. Even at his death she had to be present so that he might be united with her in one sacrifice and be immolated with her consent to the eternal Father, just as formerly Isaac was offered in sacrifice by Abraham when he accepted the will of God. It was Mary who nursed him, fed him, cared for him, reared him, and sacrificed him for us.

The Holy Spirit could not leave such wonderful and inconceivable dependence of God unmentioned in the Gospel, though he concealed almost all the wonderful things that Wisdom Incarnate did during his hidden life in order to bring home to us its infinite value and glory. Jesus gave more glory to God his Father by submitting to his Mother for thirty years than he would have given him had he converted the whole world by working the greatest miracles. How highly then do we glorify God when to please him we submit ourselves to Mary, taking Jesus as our sole model.

If we examine closely the remainder of the life of Jesus Christ, we see that he chose to begin his miracles through Mary. It was by her word that he sanctified Saint John the Baptist in the womb of his mother, Saint Elizabeth; no sooner had Mary spoken than John was sanctified. This was his first and greatest miracle of grace. At the wedding in Cana he changed water into wine at her humble prayer, and this was his first miracle in the order of nature. He began and continued his miracles through Mary and he will continue them through her until the end of time.

God the Holy Spirit, who does not produce any divine person, became fruitful through Mary whom he espoused. It was with her, in her and of her that he produced his masterpiece, God-made-man, and that he produces every day until the end of the world the members of the body of this adorable Head. For this reason the more he finds Mary his dear and inseparable spouse in a soul the more powerful and effective he becomes in producing Jesus Christ in that soul and that soul in Jesus Christ.

This does not mean that the Blessed Virgin confers on the Holy Spirit a fruitfulness which he does not already possess. Being God, he has the ability to produce just like the Father and the Son, although he does not use this power and so does not produce another divine person. But it does mean that the Holy Spirit chose to make use of our Blessed Lady, although he had no absolute need of her, in order to become actively fruitful in producing Jesus Christ and his members in her and by her. This is a mystery of grace unknown even to many of the most learned and spiritual of Christians.

-St. Louis de Montfort, True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary: paragraphs 14-21

Quote of the Week: Cardinal Suenens on Mary and the Holy Spirit

All this we must bear in mind when we turn towards that primal love which we call the Holy Ghost, the Paraclete.

It was with this royal, creative love that God loved Mary- and us in her- when He came to her on that morning of the Annunciation.  Christianity might be defined as an exchange of two loves in the person Jesus Christ: love descending from heaven to effect this sacred alliance- the Holy Spirit; love rising from earth to meet Him- Mary.

Doubtless this love which, in Mary, is raised up to meet the Holy Ghost, is a participation in the divine love itself.  More than any other creature, Mary received the fullness of heavenly grace.  She loves God with that same love with which He loves her; and it was from the depth of the mysterious communication that God made her of Himself, that she answered the call of divine love.

Yet it remains true that Mary’s role is the authentic response of the creature sanctified for a divine vocation.  Mary is the final culmination of the plan, developed through long ages by the God of the Old Testament, to make of Israel God’s people, a bride ‘blessed in truth and in holiness.’  In Mary ‘the earth brings forth her fruits’ and ‘salvation has rained from the skies.’  Terra dabit fructum suum et nubes pluant justum: this vow, this promise with which the Old Testament is full, is effected in Mary.

At the meeting place of God and man, in Israel, God’s chosen people, stands the Incarnation with all its consequences.

We dare, then, to consider closely Him who so fruitfully overshadowed Mary, and to explore the mysteries of the Spirit ‘on whom the angels desire to look.’ (I Peter I, 12)

We know of course, that the works of God effected outside Himself are common to the Three Divine Persons: the love of God which enfolds and penetrates us is a threefold and single gift, a threefold and single love.  But though His role includes those of the other Persons, the Holy Ghost does not hide Himself under the anonymity of the Trinity.  For though the works of God ‘ad extra’ (outside Himself) are common to all Three Persons of the Trinity, each Person has His own function, which is individual and in no sense interchangeable.  Certainly also, the Holy Spirit does not work alone at our sanctification, still less does He work to the exclusion of the other Persons.  God the Father makes us holy, as does God the Son, but each in His own way: the First Person sanctifies us as a Father sending to us, with and through the Son, the Third Person, the Holy Ghost, Himself at once their supreme gift and the seal of their mutual love.  Receiving the Holy Spirit we enter into the intimacy of kinship with the Godhead.

The Father, says St. Athanasius, is the spring, the Son is the torrent, and we drink of the Spirit.  The Greek Fathers are fond of repeating this in all sorts of ways.  The Holy Ghost, we might say, ushers us into the life of God.  He is the fruit of the union between Father and Son; He is also the link between God and man, especially between God and Mary.  It is as though He were the hand of the arm that God holds out to men.  He it is in whom we posses the Son in the Holy Ghost.  This axiom is the constant theme in Eastern Catholic literature.  The universal Church in the development of the liturgical cycle centres her seasons- Advent, Lent and Petecost- upon the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, respectively, making use of this Trinitarian dynamism to enable us to live in harmony with this divine spiritual rhythm.

-Cardinal Leon Joseph Suenens, The Theology of the Apostolate, pg 3-4

The Hospitality of Abraham and Rublev’s Trinity

A traditional rendering of the Hospitality of Abraham icon

The Hospitality of Abraham is an icon that refers to the event detailed in Gen 18, when three men appeared at Abraham’s tent next to the Oaks of Mamre near Hebron. Abraham provided hospitality to these three men who had suddenly appeared and acted in unison, speaking as one. When they had been given a meal, the three men promised Abraham that he and his wife Sarah would have a child within a year. It was then that Abraham and Sarah realized that they had entertained angels without knowing it and had heard the will of God. The early Church quickly recognized that this event was an early revelation of the Trinity. In earlier icons of the Hospitality, this event was depicted with the three angels grouped around the table, enjoying the meal given them by Abraham and Sarah, who stand beside them and on either side. The table (resembling an altar) bears many vessels, some of which are clearly vessels used during the Divine Liturgy.   Two oaks lean in and Abraham’s tent (portrayed as a building) can be seen in the distance. There is even sometimes included a slave killing a fattened calf for the table. The theme of the icon is that of hospitality, by which we may be entertaining angels. There is also a foreshadowing of the Eucharist present.

St. Andrei Rublev’s Hospitality of Abraham (Trinity)

Yet iconography is open to innovations and creativity. A 15^th century Russian iconographer and monk named St. Andrei Rublev did just this, masterfully shifting the focus of the hospitality icon and making his version the most famous icon in the world. Because of this accomplishment, he is numbered amongst the greatest of Russian theologians. Rublev’s means of accomplishing this came by way of drastically simplifying the icon, leaving only the angels, the altar with a single chalice; and in the background only a house, a tree, and a rock. By getting rid of the many narrative elements, Rublev shifted the focus to the three angels and their interaction with one another, exploring the dialogue of love within the Holy Trinity.

This icon however, has suffered quite a bit of damage. All icons at that time were coated with a special oil to help preserve the paint. Over time, the oil blackened, leaving the image barely distinguishable. Over time different iconographers painted over it in order to renew the image for others to see, following the shapes and patterns that they could still discern. This distorted the image and left some things lost. In the early 1900’s however, there was an effort to restore the icon to its original composition, removing the extra layers of paint given by other iconographers so that we have the icon we know today. There was quite a bit of damage- the gold leaf for the background had been peeled away, there are cracks in the green at the angels’ feet and the colors have faded a bit. But what is left is truly astounding.

There has been a lot of debate about which angel represents which Person of the Holy Trinity, but I think that the three angels sit from left to right in their traditional doxological order- the Father is represented on the left, the Son is represented in the middle, and the Holy Spirit is represented on the right (from this point on I will reference the angels as the Persons they represent rather than continuing to reuse the phrase “the angel that represents” with the understanding that this is not an actual depiction of the Holy Trinity, which would be heresy). It is my hope that this reading of the icon will help make this designation clear.

Each Person wears blue signifying heaven, from which they come. All are identical and are shown to be neither male nor female. They all hold staffs, which symbolize their authority. All of their heads are inclined to one another, none holding any posture of dominance of authority over the others, keeping with the teaching that the members of the Holy Trinity are coequal in majesty and glory. The Father wears a gold robe over his blue inner garment, showing his glory as the Origin of the Godhead. The Son wears the garments that Christ is traditionally depicted in: the red robe and the blue himation. There is even a gold band on his arm near his shoulder, typical of icons of Christ, indicating that he is a priest who offers sacrifice. The Holy Spirit wears green, symbolizing life and regeneration. This calls to mind the psalmist, who wrote, “When you send forth your Spirit they are created; and you renew the face of the earth” (Ps 104:30). Behind the Father is a large building with several windows. This is the “Father’s house” where “there are many rooms” (Jn 14:3). This is our hope and desire of all our lives. Behind the Son is a tree, recalling the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden and the New Tree of Life- the Cross- prepared for Jesus. Behind the Holy Spirit is a large rock that was likely represented by Rublev as cracked- symbolizing Christ from whose open side pours forth the life giving streams of the Holy Spirit.

The best way to understand this icon then is by giving it a new name- the Johannine Pentecost. The Johannine Pentecost comes from Jesus’ Farewell Discourse (Jn 13-17), when he promises the Holy Spirit after his death: “Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you” (Jn 16:7). We can therefore see that the circular movement so apparent in this icon comes from the Son. He is ready to return to the Father (Jn 17) bows to the Father and looks with entreatingly while pointing at the chalice in front of him- the chalice of his suffering and death that he must drink (Mt 26:39, Mk 14:36, Lk 22:42). Yet at the same time he points beyond the chalice to the Holy Spirit. The Son’s right hand was originally closed, with only the index finger extended- a gesture of pointing rather than of blessing. The second finger was added by a later iconographer who likely found this detail incomprehensible. Unfortunately, the restorers did not undo this addition, leaving the gesture significantly changed as a blessing rather than referring. But the intention of Rublev is clear- the focal point of the icon is not the Son, but the Holy Spirit.

The Father, who always hears the Son (Jn 11:42), heeds his request: his hand is shown giving his blessing and he directs his gaze to the Holy Spirit, who bows his head and lowers his hand in assent. Yet the circle remains open- leaving room for us. The Holy Spirit’s gesture of assent is to bring us into the divine life of the Trinity by bringing us in faith to the Son, who shows us the Father. We thus see in this icon the activity of the Persons of the Trinity that have been recorded by Salvation history- the going from the Father, through the Son, in the Holy Spirit and again in the Holy Spirit returning to the Father through the Son.

Besides the Son’s, the Holy Spirit’s hand is the only other hand on the table, near to the chalice of Christ’s suffering by which the Holy Spirit will be given to the world when Jesus “gives up the ghost” (Jn 19:30 DR). It is also the Holy Spirit who is invoked in both the Mass and the Divine Liturgy to change the elements of bread and wine into the Body and Blood of the Lord. This brings us to the next point- the Eucharistic imagery in this icon.

The table that they are set around, as already mentioned, is clearly an altar: the chalice rests on the top and the box on the front is traditionally the drawer in where the relics of the martyrs were kept in the church. The chalice contains a bloody lamb and represents Christ’s sacrifice. It sits near the edge of the altar, inviting us to come and partake in their intimate communion in the space that they have left empty for us. We see this image of the chalice enlarged in the negative space between the Father and the Holy Spirt. Sitting in the center of this larger chalice, reminiscent of the smaller one below, is the Son. The message is clear- we partake of the life of the Trinity, we return to the Father in the Spirit through the Son- when we receive the Eucharist.

We can now see Rublev’s remarkable achievement. In writing this icon, St. Andrei has given us, for the first time, a compelling icon that accurately portrays the doctrine and life of the Trinity by showing us, in keeping with the traditions and laws of Iconography, the three divine hypostases (persons) undivided yet unique within the one ousia (substance). His accomplishment is so stunning and impossible to attribute to merely human ingenuity that we should not find it surprising that the theologian and philosopher Pavel Florensky once said, “Rublev’s Trinity exists; therefore God exists.”

For unto Thee is due all glory, honour, and worship: to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

-From the Divine Liturgy

To see all of my posts on Iconography, click here.

Identifying Mary in Iconography

Panagia Pathous

No person other than Christ is portrayed more than the Holy Mother of God. This should not be surprising since Mary’s entire existence signifies the Incarnation- of God becoming man, which is the central dogma of our faith. Besides this, no other person resembles Jesus more than Mary his mother.

As mentioned earlier, there are clear rules as to how icons are to be written and certain rules as how one portrays particular persons. The Mother of God can always be recognized by the combination of these rules:

 

Her name

Mary’s image can always be recognized because of her name, or rather her title, of Mater Theos (Mother of God) written (usually) in Greek shorthand on each side of her head. This is signified with the letters ΜΡ ΘΥ. However, some icons may not necessarily have this inscription around her head.

Her Clothing

Mary is always shown wearing a blue veil, typical of Jewish women of her day, signifying her humility and piety in the presence of God. Over the veil is a shroud, which is almost always red- a color signifying the divine- and also lays over the top of her dress, which is almost always blue or – signifying her humanity. There are a few exceptions to this, primarily western, in which the arrangement between the color of the veil and the shroud is reversed. This arrangement is the exact opposite of Christ, whose outer garments are blue over red and signify that he wears his humanity over his divinity. The arrangement on Mary calls to mind Gabriel’s words to Mary at the Annunciation: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the most high will overshadow you.” (Lk 1:35) In icons that include her full length figure, Mary wears scarlet slippers, a type of footwear that that was forbidden by Byzantine law to anyone outside of the members of the imperial family.

Stars

Mary is always portrayed with three stars representing her threefold inviolate virginity- before, during, and after Mary’s pregnancy. This is yet another way of using dogma as an identifying feature of a person’s identity. These stars can always be found on the top of her head and her two shoulders (excepting of course the icons in which the Christ-child covers a shoulder).

The Christ Child

Mary is most often (but not always) portrayed holding the Christ-child and it is this that almost always makes her unmistakable (though not necessarily, as you can see with the icon to the left of St. Anne and the Mary-child).  The way to know Christ is by his halo. In other icons in which Mary is alone, the other details make her known.

All of this serves to point us ultimately to Jesus Christ, in whom Mary’s entire identity is faithfully entwined. Without Jesus, we would know absolutely nothing of Mary, which makes Mary the quickest and most easy way of finding Jesus.

 

Other icons of the Theotokos are below:

Icon of the Theotokos “Odigitria” (“Directress”), painted by the Fathers of Vatopedi Monastery, Mount Athos

Theotokos Life Giving Spring

Mother of the Sign

Theotokos of the Passion

Glykophylousa

To see all posts on Iconography, click here.

Portraying God the Father in Iconography

As was mentioned before, the artistic portrayal of God was condemned by the Iconoclasts as idolatry, violating the First Commandment. John of Damascus, however, argued that since Christ had become visible, he could therefore be portrayed in an image. But what about the Father?

The Theophany

God the Father is more frequently manifested in the Old Testament while the Son is manifested in the New.  Throughout the Old Testament, we receive only the most basic descriptions of a “form of God,” but each author is careful to emphasize that they did not see God’s actual appearance. In Ex 33-34, God promises to show Moses his glory on Mount Sinai. But Moses’ eyes are shielded from seeing anything but God’s “back” as God’s glory passes by him for, “man shall not see me and live” (Ex 33:20). In 1 Kings 19, Elijah is told to go out of his cave on Mount Horeb (Sinai) to meet with God. The account describes the Lord “passing by” but strangely, every effect of this- the earthquake, the strong wind, the fire- do not contain or even signify his presence. It is only in a still, small whisper- a far cry from any appearance- that Elijah recognizes that God is present. In Isaiah’s experience of God, he only sees the train of God’s robe filing the temple (Is 6). In Ezekiel’s account of God, he adds so many qualifiers to his description of God that one can’t help but see that he wishes to avoid giving any sort of physical description to God. Above the angels who appear to him he writes,

And above the firmament over their heads there was the likeness of a throne, in appearance like sapphire; and seated above the likeness of a throne was a likeness as it were of a human form. And upward from what had the appearance of his loins I saw as it were gleaming bronze, like the appearance of fire enclosed about; and downward from what had the appearance of his loins I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and there was brightness round about him. Like the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud on the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. Such was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. (Ez 1:26-28)

There is clearly an overwhelming reluctance to claim to have seen any sort of physical attribute of God. Even that semi-tantalizing description of the appearance of the likeness cannot go farther than his waist because of the appearance of fire and bronze above.

The reasons for this mystery were manifold. The Israelites, like all nations round about them, were constantly tempted to fall into idolatry. Even at Mount Sinai, as Moses is on the mountain receiving the Ten Commandments, the people attempt to make a golden calf, calling it YHWH, and are punished accordingly. God was adamant that he is not like other gods who could be contained or summed up in a piece of wood or gold, confined to one place, or could in the least way be portrayed in an artistic likeness. Even the sign of his presence amongst the Israelites- the Shekinah or “glory cloud”- was obscure and unmistakably not him.

Even St. John of Damascus scorned any portrayal of the Father in iconography. The iconographer can only portray in concrete forms what has been seen. Since the Father had never become man or taken any sort of appearance, it was completely illicit, idolatrous, and even heretical to portray him in artwork in any visible human form. To do so would be to commit idolatry and/or to add to scripture.

There is however, three valid ways of portraying the father’s presence in iconic scenes that do not betray this theology.

1. The first example is known as the “Hand of God” and can be seen in the picture to the right (taken from an icon of John the Baptist). This hand can often include a wrist or a portion of arm above it and comes from a mandorla. Used in 2^nd and 3^rd century Jewish art, it was carried over to Christian iconography and used to indicate the Father’s approval of, or intervention in, the events on the Earth. The hand was never taken as literal, but simply a metaphor and is usually portrayed giving a blessing or performing an action. The other subjects in the icon, however, are not able to see the hand, because it was not physically visible at the event. It is usually affixed to the border of the icon at the top.

2. The second way is similar to the first. It simply portrays the mandorla at the top of the icon. A picture can be seen to the left (taken from an icon of the Baptism of the Lord above).

3. The third way is to portray God’s presence with an angel who is acting as messenger of God. This is the most common way that God revealed himself to those he wished to talk to in the Old Testament. This way of representing God the Father is especially prevalent in icons depicting scenes from the Old Testament.  Perhaps the most famous example of this is Rublev’s Hospitality of Abraham (right).

All of this, to put it shortly, is to protect the sensitive theology of the icon and to avoid idolatry.

To see all posts on Iconography, click here.