That history is usefully summarized by Kallistos Ware, a Greek Orthodox theologian, historian, and apologist. First he recognizes the absence of icons in early Christian history: “Early Christian art – as found, for example, in the Roman catacombs – showed a certain reluctance to portray Christ directly, and He was most often represented in symbolical form….With the conversion of Constantine and the progressive disappearance of paganism, the Church grew less hesitant in its employment of art, and by A.D. 400 it had become an accepted practice to represent our Lord not just through symbols but directly. At this date, however, there is as yet no evidence to suggest that the pictures in church were venerated or honoured with any outward expressions of devotion. They were not at this period objects of cult, but their purpose was decorative and instructional. Even in this restricted form, however, the use of icons aroused protests on the part of certain fourth-century writers….”66
Another distinguished historian, Jaroslav Pelikan, who was a Lutheran, but later became Eastern Orthodox, wrote even more strongly about the teaching of the early ancient church. Pelikan insisted that the written witness of the ancient fathers of the church was unanimous through the fourth century against the use of images of God or Christ.67 This means that there was no written, theological defense of images for four centuries, indeed quite the opposite.
Second, Ware acknowledges the rather late development of iconodule practice: “Not until the period following Justinian – during the years 550-650 – did the veneration of icons in churches and private homes become widely accepted in the devotional life of eastern Christians. By the years 650-700 the first attempts were made by Christian writers to provide a doctrinal basis for this growing cult of icons and to formulate a Christian theology of art….The veneration of icons was not accepted everywhere without opposition….The ensuing controversy falls into two main periods: the first phase, 726-780; and the revival of iconoclasm, 815-42.”68 Ware seems clearly to recognize that the veneration of icons was neither apostolic nor very ancient.
Third, he notes that iconodule practice was far from universal on the eve of the controversy: “…the cult of icons which grew up from the middle of the sixth century onwards was by no means universal throughout the Byzantine world at the start of the eighth. If the icons were highly popular in certain circles – at Constantinople, above all among the lower classes, and also in Greece and in most monasteries – they were viewed with far greater reserve by many Christians in Asia Minor.”69
...
Orthodoxy does not embrace a doctrine of evolving tradition, but rather upholds only unwritten apostolic tradition. For example, Dositheos, Patriarch of Jerusalem, wrote in his influential Confession (1672): “For so both the custom obtaining in the Church from Apostolic times of adoring the holy Eikons relatively is maintained, and the worship of latria reserved for God alone….”86
The historical evidence for such apostolic practice and tradition is entirely lacking. As Ware wrote: “They [the iconoclasts] were archaists and reactionaries rather than innovators; their aim was to preserve, or rather to revive, an older tradition of Christian art which relied upon symbolic motifs and did not portray our Lord directly.”87
Sources:
- Kallistos Ware, “Christian Theology in the East 600-1453,” in A History of Christian Doctrine, ed. by H. Cunliffe-Jones, Philadelphia (Fortress Press), 1978
- Jaroslav Pelikan, Imago Dei, Princeton, New Jersey (Princeton University Press), 1990