The Protestant Reformation brought with it a wave of what is called iconoclasm - the destruction of images. Both Calvin and Luther, in their speaking against the excesses of the Roman Catholic church, criticized the elaborate statuary, paintings, and other images that were used to adorn churches and cathedrals. Some of their followers went to great extremes, destroying valuable artwork and seeking to create churches that were stark and bare and devoid of any kind of images. Even musical instruments were banned in some congregations. The attempt was to return to a form of worship that was seen as more pure - closer to the origins of the church and with fewer images and other things between the worshiper and God.

At the core of the conflict was the identification of certain religious symbols as idols. On one side of the conflict were those who argued that for the masses of people who in that time were not able to read, pictures and images provided a way to access the stories of the Gospels and understand the historic faith. On the other side of the conflict were those who said any images were in effect idols and that the people couldn’t tell the difference between the image and the reality of God.

An icon is, at its core, a symbol that points beyond itself. The purpose of the icon is not to be God or to take the place of God, but rather to point towards God. In a sense an icon is supposed to be transparent so that a person can look through it and beyond it to see part of the nature of God.

The concept of “seeing” God is something that needs to be continually challenged. God is transcendent - always beyond human capacity to visualize or imagine. Our imaginations are rich resources for thinking about God and talking about God, but the reality of God is always beyond - always more than what we are able to describe with words. God always extends beyond the limits of ordinary experience. This does not mean that God is inaccessible, only that our perception of God is always incomplete. We can have deeply meaningful and very real experiences with God, but we cannot claim to fully know God.

In interpreting the significance and religious value of any image, painting, piece of music, sculpture or other item, it is important to always keep in mind that the item is not God. Though it might inspire an experience with the transcendent, the item itself is neither good nor bad. It is simply one way of reaching out for an experience - an item that points beyond itself. It is that “beyond” which holds the experience of the holy.

We humans, however, do have a tendency towards idolatry. Even a cursory read of the stories of the people of Israel in the Hebrew Scriptures or the conversations between Jesus and the Pharisees in the Gospels reveal the story of people again and again mistaking idols for the reality of God. We have a religious experience that involves some special item and immediately expect the item to possess magical powers. We confuse the item to the transcendent to which it points.

In practical terms, we run into this confusion in the church all the time. People have deeply meaningful and sacred experiences in a building and they assume that the building itself is sacred. They hear a touching and moving hymn and want to return to the same song over and over again in search of the experience of that song that invited them to reach beyond. Churches are filled with items that one or more people find to be deeply meaningful. It isn’t the meaning that is the problem. The problem arises when people mistake the item for the meaning.

It is possible to be a church without all of the trappings of church. God can be worshiped without buildings, musical instruments, sound systems, hymnals, stained glass windows, and other items. Faith is not dependent on the institutional church. Churches, however, can quickly become institutions. A group of people gather. They have a significant religious experience. They want to repeat the experience. They gather again and again. Soon they want to establish a regular meeting place and sometimes a regular meeting time. Then they begin to add elements that they find meaningful - perhaps a candle, a special song, a style of prayer. The experience ceases to be a one-of-a-kind and becomes a ritual.

Ritual itself is not bad. It can be a way to bring people into contact with the transcendent. But it can become stale and so intent with preserving the experiences of the past that it is not open to the power of the Holy that is beyond the words and actions.

We are quick to point out the tendency to transform icons into idols in the religions and practices of others. In fact one of our terms for an icon that has become an idol is “sacred cow.” That term arises from the elevated place of cows in Hinduism and a lack of understanding of western observers.

We affirm that God is the creator of everything that is. That means that there is a spark of the divine in every thing. It is possible to recognize God in each creature and each item. But that creature or item never can contain the whole of God. Recognizing God is a powerful experience. Seeking to possess God is a form of insanity.

It is not the item that is the problem. It is our attitude toward it.

The invitation of our faith is to continually seek that which is beyond. When an experience of the holy occurs, we are admonished not to rest in that place, but to look beyond that experience for new and different ways to encounter God. When we think we’ve found the formula for a life of faith, we are challenged to study more, pray more, reach for that which is beyond our grasp.

Icons can be great aids in seeking that which is beyond - as long as we don’t treat them as idols.

Copyright © 2014 by Ted Huffman. I wrote this. If you want to copy it, please ask for permission. There is a contact me button at the bottom of this page. If you want to share my blog a friend, please direct your friend to my web site.