The Second Council of Nicaea 787: Icons, Incarnation, and Doctrine

The Seventh Ecumenical Council's decision was supported by two great Church Fathers: St. John of Damascus and St. Theodore the Studite. They defended the use of images in Christian worship and explained the meaning and reason for veneration. Icons are understood to be grace-bearing windows onto heaven, where the honor given to an image passes to its prototype. Icons are not honored as paint and wood but as representations of the persons they depict—similar to how people honor photographs of loved ones. The underlying principle is the Incarnation: God became visible and depictable in Jesus Christ, making it imperative for Christians to have images of our Lord, His mother, and the saints.

St. John of Damascus, a major defender of icons during the Iconoclast controversy, identified six types of icons: (1) Natural icons—Christ Himself as the natural icon of the Father; (2) Human icons—humans as icons of God created in His image; (3) Exemplary icons—God's ideal plan for creation; (4) Cosmological icons—angels and other beings as described in Scripture; (5) Historical icons—prefigurations like the Ark of the Covenant representing the Virgin Mary; (6) Artistic icons—actual painted or sculpted representations of holy persons and events. St. John of Damascus taught that icons are a form of visual revelation, similar to how words are verbal revelation. Icons are not idols but windows to the divine reality they depict. St. Theodore Studite, a major defender of icons, distinguished between natural icons (Christ as the natural icon of the Father) and artificial icons (all other representations). He taught that icons do not represent God's divine nature (which cannot be depicted) but rather the human nature of Christ and His personal characteristics.

Two major Christian theologians developed sophisticated arguments to defend iconography against iconoclast criticism. John of Damascus argued that the prohibition on images was a temporary measure for immature believers, similar to how a doctor prescribes different treatments for different patients. He contended that Christ, as the visible image of God, provided the ultimate sanction for iconography. Since Christ became human and took on visible form, it was appropriate to create images of him. Theodore the Studite developed the concept of the icon as a vehicle of grace, arguing that icons serve as channels of divine blessing, transmitting spiritual benefits from the holy figures they represent to the viewer. He distinguished between latria (worship due to God alone) and dulia (veneration due to saints), maintaining that Christians venerate images rather than worship them. These theological arguments established the framework for Orthodox Christian art and iconography.

The great Saints of the time (St. John of Damascus, St. Germanus of Constantinople, St. Theodore the Studite) responded to iconoclasm by saying that icons are blessed and essential because they are a witness to the Incarnation—God became man and dwelt among us. We can depict Him because He did become man and dwell among us. This is a witness to the truth of the Gospel.

St. John of Damascus (6th century) was a prominent defender of icon veneration who wrote extensive theological treatises defending the use of sacred images. He lived in Damascus, which had become the center of the Islamic world after the Arab conquest. Despite his family's high positions in the Muslim administration, John sought to become a monk but was kept at court. When Emperor Leo III and Constantine V persecuted icon veneration, John wrote letters defending icons. The emperor had his courtiers forge a letter supposedly written by John, offering to help the Arab caliph capture Damascus. The caliph ordered John's right hand to be cut off. John, bleeding and in pain, asked only for the hand so he could bury it. After losing his hand, John prayed before an icon of the Theotokos, promising to serve God with that hand if restored. He had a vision of the Virgin Mary telling him his hand would be healed. When he woke, his hand had been miraculously restored.

When Empress Irene convened the Seventh Ecumenical Council and restored icons, the Franks did not hail the return of icons to Orthodox faith. Instead, they composed a reply against the heretical iconoclasts and rejected Nicaea II. Charlemagne's military successes gave birth to dreams of world domination, and the Franks felt powerful enough to cast aside any pretense of Orthodox faith. Instead of accepting the Pope's clarifications, Charlemagne instructed his theological advisors to compose new theology, resulting in the Libri Carolini, which expressed Frankish theological positions opposed to Orthodox views.

The Libri Carolini (Books of Charles), composed around 790 CE at Charlemagne's command, represent the definitive Western medieval statement opposing the Iconophile position established by the Second Council of Nicaea (787). Written primarily by Bishop Theodul of Orleans, this four-volume work contains 120 objections against the council's decrees on sacred images, arguing that while images may serve as ecclesiastical ornaments for instruction and remembrance, they should not receive adoration (which belongs only to God) but only appropriate veneration. The text mistakenly attributed various statements to council members and confused the Iconoclastic Council of 754 with the Second Council of Nicaea due to reliance on a mistranslated Greek text. Although initially rejected by Pope Hadrian I, the work resurfaced during the Protestant Reformation and was cited by John Calvin, eventually being placed on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum until 1900.

Although Christianity had been firmly established throughout the old Mediterranean world, it was now challenged by the new revelation of Islam. While the Seventh Ecumenical Council of Nicaea reunited the Eastern and Western churches in 787, many dissenting currents remained and posed opposition to its devotion to icons. These iconoclastic tendencies continued in the East while very critical disapproval was documented in the Libri Carolini in the West.

A hasty translation of Nicaea II council acts was composed for Frankish audiences, with major problems. A critical passage involving Bishop Constantine of Cyprus was mistranslated—the Greek original stated icons receive relative honor while the Trinity receives true adoration, but the Latin translation suggested equal adoration for both, which would be unacceptable. Combined with tensions including a broken marriage contract between Charlemagne's daughter and Constantine VI, this provided grounds for rejection. Theodulf of Orleans wrote objections to the council, preceding the Opus Caroli treatise. Pope Hadrian responded defending icon veneration but maintaining his position against calling it ecumenical. The Council of Frankfurt referenced the Greek council regarding image veneration, with annals describing it as 'completely and totally useless' and neither seventh nor universal.

The Carolingian Books (Księgi Karolińskie) were written as a response to the Council of Nicaea II. These books were authored by theologians associated with Charlemagne's court, including theologians from Orléans and other authors. They represented the Western Church's theological position on religious images, providing a counterargument to the Eastern Orthodox position established at Nicaea II.

The iconoclasm controversy produced lasting effects across Christian history. Political resistance delayed Western acceptance until Charlemagne's 794 Frankfurt Council initially rejected Nicaea II, though both East and West eventually accepted it. Protestant iconoclasm resurfaced during the Reformation through Zwingli, whose Swiss followers destroyed religious images, founding Anabaptist traditions that evolved into Amish and Mennonite communities. Today, debates continue between Catholic and Orthodox traditions regarding appropriate forms of religious imagery. The core principle established by Nicaea II—that religious images serve as aids to worship drawing attention to Christ and the communion of saints—remains foundational to Catholic and Orthodox understanding of sacred art.

This section examines the Second Council of Nicaea (787) and its resolution on iconoclasm. Tarasius declared that sacred images should be exposed in churches, on vessels, vestments, walls, and tables, including Christ, the Virgin Mary, angels, and saints. The council distinguished between adoration (latria) and veneration (proskynesis)—Catholics do not adore images but venerate them. The section then explores how heresies influenced Christian art: Arianism (5th century) taught only the Father is true God, resulting in awkward Christ representations with exposed genitals. Nestorianism (5th century) taught two persons in Christ, leading to aniconism. Iconoclasm (8th-9th centuries) opposed religious images entirely. The section traces Christian art origins to the stele of Abercius (2nd century) and the Catacombs of St. Callixtus (200 AD), noting that catacombs were pilgrimage sites, not places of Mass celebration.

The Second Council of Nicaea (787 AD) was convened to address the heresy of iconoclasm, which arose in the 8th century in the Eastern Roman Empire. Iconoclasm was partly driven by political concerns, particularly the spread of Islam in the region, as some emperors feared that religious images might be associated with Islamic aniconism. The council was not creating new doctrine but rather clarifying and defending existing apostolic teaching about the use of religious images. The council affirmed that the honor given to an icon passes to its prototype, meaning that when believers venerate an icon, the honor is directed toward the heavenly prototype, not the image itself. Following the council, there was a significant increase in the creation of religious images throughout the Eastern Church.

The seven ecumenical councils accepted by both Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches are: (1) Nicaea I (325 AD) - defined the Trinity and homoousios; (2) Constantinople I (381 AD) - completed the Trinity doctrine; (3) Ephesus (431 AD) - defined Mary as Theotokos and condemned Nestorianism; (4) Chalcedon (451 AD) - defined Christ's two natures; (5) Constantinople II (553 AD) - condemned Origenism; (6) Constantinople III (680 AD) - condemned Monothelitism and defined Christ's two wills; (7) Nicaea II (787 AD) - defined icon veneration. The last council accepted by both traditions was Nicaea II in 787 AD, after which the churches began to diverge significantly.

The Second Council of Nicaea in 787 AD officially justified the veneration of icons, including images of Christ, Mary, angels, and saints. This council established that honoring images is not contrary to the First Commandment, as the honor is directed toward the person represented, not the material image itself.