Epistle 1 (60). To the iconoclastic cathedral

When some of those who had the same rank of hegumen with us decided to come there and enter into a disputation, we had to hear that from which our humble heart is so broken.

For, they say, this assembly took place for the overthrow of the Second Holy Council of Nicaea, i.e. for the destruction of the veneration of the honorable icon of our Lord Jesus Christ and the Mother of God, as well as of all the saints. Hearing of this, who does not sigh heavily from the depths of his heart, for by this the salvific economy of our Lord Jesus Christ is already overthrown? Hear, O heavens, and hearken, O earth, - let the most majestic Isaiah cry out with us (Isaiah 1:2); or rather say: "Listen, East and West, North and Sea Country, in what state our affairs are now and why we have dared to convene a council."

But we, the lowliest, both those who have arrived and those who have not arrived, for others are unanimous in one divine thought, holding to the faith in agreement with the Church under heaven, affirm that to display and venerate the divine icon of our Saviour Jesus Christ Himself and of His Most Holy Mother and of each of the saints is just, according to the teaching of the Second Holy Council of Nicaea or of another who divinely taught before it. Moreover, having written and unwritten testimonies from the very coming of our Lord and God, we are firmly on the foundation of which Christ says: "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18).

Truly, what word can be found in one who wishes to contradict such a power of truth? For if our Lord Jesus Christ undoubtedly appeared in human form and in our form, then He is rightly depicted and depicted on an icon, like us, although His Divine image remains indescribable. He is the Mediator between God and people, and at the same time he preserves the properties of both natures of which he is composed.

And if He were not describable, He would cease to be a Man, and even more so a Mediator, since with the destruction of describability, all properties homogeneous to it are destroyed. For if He is not describable, He is not tangible; and if we are tangible, then at the same time we describe what it would be foolish to contradict, since these are the properties of the body to be touched and depicted. And how will He be indescribable if He can suffer?

If He is describable and can suffer, then, of course, it is necessary to worship Him in the form in which He is depicted. For the glory of the prototype is not divided in the image, as Basil the Great put it. The honoring of the image passes to the prototype [2], i.e. the honoring of any image, whether natural or artistic.

In the same way, it is necessary to reason about the image of the Venerable Cross: through the veneration of this image, the Life-Giving Tree is also honored with veneration; and, conversely, along with the destruction of the first, the second is necessarily destroyed. Is not the confession of this image a confession of the Life-Creating Cross? In the same way, the rejection of the Transfiguration is rejected by the Cross itself.

A similar relationship should be assumed between the icon of Christ and Christ Himself to every sensible person. However, now is not the time for a dogmatic exposition, which can easily convince even the feeble-minded to recognize the light of truth.

Such is our Gospel faith of sinners, such is our apostolic confession of the humble; such is the worship of God handed down to us, the lowlies, from the Fathers! Moreover, if not only one of the present or ancient, but even if Peter and Paul speak of the impossible, as if it were possible, even if he who comes from heaven itself should teach and preach differently (see Galatians 1:8), then we cannot receive him into communion, as not agreeing with the sound teaching of the faith.

Finally, however pleasing your authority may be, our humility is ready to suffer unto death rather than to renounce our sincere confession.

Notes

1. This and the following letter were written in 815 on the occasion of the renewal of the iconoclastic heresy under the emperor Leo the Armenian. In the title of this letter is added: "As if on behalf of all the abbots."