Nicaea II: the actual decree
The decree receives holy images and distinguishes honorific reverence from divine adoration.
Key points
- The Orthodox conciliar norm and its account of honor directed through an image.
- Its authority is contested; the same page also quotes the opposing council of 754.
Sources and further reading
Related records
- Incarnational ground
- Prototype and honor
- Nicaea II
- Does the second commandment forbid icons?
- Why bow and kiss if this is not worship?
- Is latreia versus proskynesis a word trick?
- Didn't the golden calf also point to Yahweh?
- Why did Hezekiah destroy the bronze serpent?
- Does Joshua prove people venerated an image?
- Aren't cherubim just special exceptions?
- Where did the apostles command icon veneration?
- Does 'words are images' really prove icons?
- Does a painting divide Christ's two natures?
- What about images of the Father and the Trinity?
- How can we paint a face we never saw?
- Why honor images of saints as well as Christ?
- Is the Eucharist the only image Christ authorized?
- Do catacombs and Dura prove icon veneration?
- Why is the earliest evidence so limited?
- Didn't Elvira prohibit church pictures?
- What about Epiphanius tearing a church curtain?
- Didn't Eusebius reject a picture of Christ?
- Did Gregory allow pictures only for instruction?
- Did Irenaeus associate Christ images with heresy?
- Why anathematize someone who cannot kiss an icon?
- Why trust Nicaea rather than the iconoclast council?
- Is this apostolic tradition or later development?
- Are only Byzantine flat paintings legitimate?
- An icon is a relationship
- A bow is not a complete theology
- Follow the evidence through time
- Build an answer that survives a follow-up
- From an argument to a practice
- Nicaea
- Romanian lands