Ikon: Béda antarrépisi
Konten dihapus Konten ditambahkan
Addbot (obrolan | kontribusi) m Bot: Migrating 56 interwiki links, now provided by Wikidata on d:q132137 (translate me) |
m Ngarapihkeun éjahan, replaced: mangrupakeun → mangrupa (2) |
||
Baris ka-1:
{{tarjamahkeun|Inggris}}
'''Ikon''' (ti [[Basa Yunani]] {{polytonic|εἰκών}}, ''eikon'', "gambar") nyaéta hiji gambar atawa wawakil;
<!--
Baris ka-10:
==Icons in Christianity==
[[Image:St. Theodor.jpg|thumb|200px|One of the few ceramic icons in existence, dated to ca. 900, from [[Preslav]], [[Bulgaria]].]]
Christianity originated as a movement within Judaism during a time when there was great concern about idolatry.
There is no evidence of the making and use of painted icons or of similar religious images by Christians within the New Testament writings. However, Eastern Orthodox theologian Rev. Dr. Steven Bigham writes (''Early Christian Attitudes Toward Images'', Orthodox Research Institute, 2004), "The first thing to note is that there is a total silence about Christian and non-idolatrous images. It is important to note that the silence is in the New Testament texts, and this silence should not be interpreted as describing all the activities of the Apostles or 1st century Christians. St. John himself said that 'Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book...' (Jn 20.30). We could easily add that the Apostles also did and said many things not recorded in the New Testament. It is obvious, therefore, that we do not have a complete account of the activities and sayings of the Apostles. So, if we want to find out if the first Christians made or ordered any kind of figurative art, the New Testament is of no use whatsoever. The silence is a fact, but the reason given for the silence varies from exegete to exeget depending on his assumptions." In other words, relying only upon the New Testament as evidence of no painted icons amounts to an argument from silence.
Baris ka-16:
Though the word ''eikon'' is found in the New Testament (see below), it is never in the context of painted icons. There were, of course, Christian paintings and art in the early [[Catacombs of Rome|catacomb churches]]. Many can still be viewed today, such as those in the catacomb churchs of Domitilla and San Callisto in Rome.
The earliest written records available of Christian images treated like icons are in a [[Paganism|pagan]] or [[Gnostic]] context. Alexander Severus (A.D. 222–235) kept a domestic chapel for the veneration of images of deified emperors, of portraits of his ancestors, and of Christ, Apollonius, Orpheus and Abraham (Lampridius, ''Life of Alexander Severus'' xxix.). [[Irenaeus of Lyons|Irenaeus]], in his ''Against Heresies'' 1:25;6, says of the Gnostic Carpocratians, “''They also possess images, some of them painted, and others formed from different kinds of material; while they maintain that a likeness of Christ was made by Pilate at that time when Jesus lived among them. They crown these images, and set them up along with the images of the philosophers of the world that is to say, with the images of Pythagoras, and Plato, and Aristotle, and the rest. They have also other modes of honouring these images, after the same manner of the Gentiles'' [pagans].”
A criticism of image veneration is found in the apocryphal ''[[Acts of John]]'' (generally considered a [[gnostic]] work), in which the Apostle John discovers that one of his followers has had a portrait made of him, and is venerating it:
Baris ka-23:
In addition to the legend that Pilate had made an image of Christ, the 4th Century bishop Eusebius, in his ''Church History'', provides another reference to a “first” icon of Jesus. He relates that King Abgar of Edessa sent a letter to Jesus at Jerusalem, asking Jesus to come and heal him of an illness. In this version there is no image. Then, in the later account found in the Syriac ''Doctrine of Addai'', a painted image of Jesus is mentioned in the story; and even later, in the account given by Evagrius, the painted image is transformed into an image that miraculously appeared on a towel when Christ pressed the cloth to his wet face (''Veronica and her Cloth'', Kuryluk, Ewa, Basil Blackwell, Cambridge, 1991). Further legends relate that the cloth remained in Edessa until the 10th century, when it was taken to Constantinople. In 1204 it was lost when Constantinople was sacked by Crusaders.
Elsewhere in his ''Church History'', Eusebius reports seeing what he took to be portraits of Jesus, Peter and Paul, and also mentions a bronze statue at Banias / Paneas, of which he wrote, "They say that this statue is an image of Jesus" (H.E. 7:18); further, he relates that locals thought the image to be a memorial of the healing of the woman with an issue of blood by Jesus (Luke 8:43-48), because it depicted a standing man wearing a double cloak and with arm outstretched, and a woman kneeling before him with arms reaching out as if in supplication. Some scholars today think it possible to have been a misidentified pagan statue whose true identity had been forgotten; some have thought it to be Aesculapius, the God of healing, but the description of the standing figure and the woman kneeling in supplication is precisely that found on coins depicting the bearded emperor Hadrian reaching out to a female figure symbolizing a province kneeling before him (see John Francis Wilson's ''Caesarea Philippi: Banias, the Lost City of Pan''; [[I.B. Tauris]], London, 2004).
When Christianity was legalized by the emperor Constantine within the Roman Empire in the early 4th Century, huge numbers of pagans became converts. This created the opportunity for the transfer of allegiance and practice from the old gods and heroes to the new religion, and for the gradual adaptation of the old system of image making and veneration to a Christian context. "By the early fifth century, we know of the ownership of private icons of saints; by c. 480-500, we can be sure that the inside of a saint's shrine would be adorned with images and votive portraits, a practice which had probably begun earlier" (''Pagans and Christians'', Robin Lane Fox, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1989).
Baris ka-49:
Though significant in the history of religious doctrine, the Byzantine controversy over images is not seen as of primary importance in Byzantine history. "Few historians still hold it to have been the greatest issue of the period..." (Patricia Karlin-Hayter, Oxford History of Byzantium, Oxford University Press, 2002).
The Iconoclastic Period began when images were banned by Emperor [[Leo III the Isaurian|Leo III]] sometime between 726 and 730. Under his son [[Constantine V]], an ecumenical council forbidding image veneration was held at Hieria near Constantinople in 754. Image veneration was later reinstated by the [[Irene (empress)|Empress Regent Irene]], under whom another ecumenical council was held reversing the decisions of the previous iconoclast council and taking its title as [[Seventh Ecumenical Council]]. The council anathemized all who hold to iconoclasm, i.e. those who held that veneration of images constitutes idolatry. Then the ban was enforced again by [[Leo V the Armenian|Leo V]] in 815. And finally icon veneration was decisively restored by [[Theodora (9th century)|Empress Regent Theodora]].
[[Image:vladimirskaya.jpg|right|thumb|The "[[Theotokos of Vladimir]]" icon (12th century)]]
Baris ka-56:
Icons are used particularly among [[Eastern Orthodoxy|Eastern Orthodox]], [[Oriental Orthodoxy|Oriental Orthodox]], [[Coptic Christianity|Coptic]] and [[Eastern Rite Catholic Churches]].
As was described above, the icon painting tradition developed in Byzantium, with Constantinople as the chief city. We have only a few icons from the 11th century and no icons dating from the two centuries that preceded it, firstly because of the Iconoclastic reforms during which many were destroyed, secondly because of plundering by Venetians in 1204 during the [[Crusades]], and finally the taking of the city by the Islamic Turks in 1453.
It was only in the [[Comnenus|Comnenian]] period (1081-1185) that the cult of the icon became widespread in the Byzantine world, partly on account of the dearth of richer materials (such as [[mosaic]]s, [[ivory]], and [[enamel]]s), but also because a [[iconostasis|special screen for icons]] was introduced in eccelsiastical practice. The style of the time was severe, hieratic and distant.
In the late Comnenian period this severity softened, and emotion, formerly avoided, entered icon painting. Major monuments for this change include the murals at [[Daphni]] (ca. 1100) and [[Nerezi]] near [[Skopje]] (1164). The [[Theotokos of Vladimir]] (ca. 1115, illustrated to the right) is probably the most representative monument to the new trend towards spirituality and emotion.
Baris ka-80:
[[Image:Iconpeter.jpg|thumb|right|[[Romania]]n icon of [[St. Peter]]]]
In [[Romania]], icons painted as reversed images on glass and set in frames were common in the 19th century and are still made. "''In the Transylvanian countryside, the expensive icons on panels imported from Moldavia, Wallachia, and Mt. Athos were gradually replaced by small, locally produced icons on glass, which were much less expensive and thus accessible to the Transylvanian peasants...''" (''Romanian Icons on Glass'', Dancu, Juliana and Dumitru Dancu, Wayne State University Press, 1982).
The Egyptian [[Coptic Christian|Coptic]] Church and the [[Ethiopia|Ethiopian]] Church also have distinctive, living icon painting traditions.
==The Protestant Reformation==
The abundant use and veneration historically accorded images in the Roman Catholic Church was a point of contention for Protestant reformers, who varied in their attitudes toward images. In the consequent religious struggles many statues were removed from churches, and there was also destruction of images in some cases.
Though followers of Zwingli and Calvin were more severe in their rejection, Lutherans tended to be moderate with many of their parishes having displays of statues and crucifixes. A joint Lutheran-Orthodox statement in Helsinki reaffirmed the Ecumenical Council decisions on the nature of Christ and the veneration of images:
''"The Seventh Ecumenical Council, the Second Council of Nicaea in 787, which rejected iconoclasm and restored the veneration of icons in the churches, was not part of the tradition received by the Reformation. Lutherans, however, rejected the iconoclasm of the 16th century, and affirmed the distinction between adoration due to the Triune God alone and all other forms of veneration. Through historical research this council has become better known. Nevertheless it does not have the same significance for Lutherans as it does for the Orthodox. Yet, Lutherans and Orthodox are in agreement that the Second Council of Nicaea confirms the christological teaching of the earlier councils and in setting forth the role of images (icons) in the lives of the faithful reaffirms the reality of the incarnation of the eternal Word of God, when it states: "The more frequently, Christ, Mary, the mother of God, and the saints are seen, the more are those who see them drawn to remember and long for those who serve as models, and to pay these icons the tribute of salutation and respectful veneration. Certainly this is not the full adoration in accordance with our faith, which is properly paid only to the divine nature, but it resembles that given to the figure of the honored and life-giving cross, and also to the holy books of the gospels and to other sacred objects" (Definition of the Second Council of Nicaea)."''
Baris ka-111:
In Numbers it is written that God told Moses to make a bronze serpent and hold it up, so that anyone looking at the snake would be healed of their snakebites. In John 3, Jesus refers to the same serpent, saying that he must be lifted up in the same way that the serpent was. [[John of Damascus]] also regarded the brazen serpent as an icon. Further, Jesus Christ himself is called the "image of the invisible God" in Colossians 1:15, and is therefore in one sense an icon. As people are also made in God's images, people are also considered to be living icons, and are therefore "censed" along with painted icons during Orthodox prayer services. [[Image:ac.byzantine1.jpg|thumb|300px|A somewhat disinterested (not to say jejune) treatment of the highly emotional subject and painstaking attention to the throne and other details of the material world distinguish this superb work by a medieval [[Sicilian]] master from genuine works by imperial icon-painters of Constantinople.]]
According to John of Damascus, anyone who tries to destroy icons "is the enemy of Christ, the Holy Mother of God and the saints, and is the defender of the Devil and his demons." This is because the theology behind icons is closely tied to the Incarnational theology of the humanity and divinity of Jesus, so that attacks on icons typically have the effect of undermining or attacking the Incarnation of Jesus himself as elucidated in the Ecumenical Councils.
The Eastern Orthodox teaching regarding [[veneration]] of icons is that the praise and veneration shown to the icon passes over to the archetype (Basil of Caesarea,''On the Holy Spirit'' 18:45: "''The honor paid to the image passes to the prototype''"). Thus to kiss an icon of Christ, in the Eastern Orthodox view, is to show love towards Christ Jesus himself, not mere wood and paint making up the physical substance of the icon. Worship of the icon as somehow entirely separate from its prototype is expressly forbidden by the Seventh Ecumenical Council; standard teaching in the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches alike conforms to this principle. The Catholic Church accepts the same Councils and the canons therein which codified the teaching of icon veneration.
The Latin Church of the West, which after 1054 was to become separate as the Roman Catholic Church, accepted the decrees of the iconodule Seventh Ecumenical Council regarding images. There is some minor difference, however, in the Catholic attitude to images from that of the Orthodox. Following Gregory the Great, Catholics emphasize the role of images as the ''Biblia Pauperum'', the “Bible of the Poor,” from which those who could not read could nonetheless learn. This view of images as educational is shared by most Protestants.
| |||