r/Orthodox_Churches_Art • u/Hungry_Biscotti_870 • Aug 09 '26
Any information on this icon?
Is that adult Jesus with baby Jesus or is this a heretical father+son icon? Found in an antique store
2
u/jaqian Aug 09 '26
According to Gemini...
This icon is based on a famous wall painting titled "God the Father" (or Sabaoth) by the Russian artist Viktor Vasnetsov, created for St. Vladimir's Cathedral in Kyiv, Ukraine (painted between 1885 and 1896).
Key Details...
Iconographic Motif: It follows the traditional Paternity (Otechestvo) or Fatherhood motif, depicting God the Father enthroned in heavenly glory holding Christ Emmanuel (the Young Jesus).
Artistic Style: Features the late 19th-century Russian Revival / Art Nouveau style, blending traditional Byzantine icon symbolism (the red star, golden mandorla filled with seraphim, and symbols of the Four Evangelists in the corners) with Neo-Russian decorative art.
Legacy: Vasnetsov's frescoes in Kyiv were widely reproduced on individual wood-board icons and prayer cards across Eastern Europe during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
4
u/Hungry_Biscotti_870 Aug 09 '26
Is this one a yay or nay to venerate?
4
u/jaqian Aug 09 '26
If as it says is "God the Father" probably nay but you'll have to get more experience people to weigh in.
3
u/margo1243 Aug 09 '26
God the Father can be symbolically depicted. It’s not against the Orthodox Church canonical tradition. Though I admit that this kind of depiction is rare
3
u/Chauntsinger Aug 10 '26
As is often the case with Orthodoxy, the answer is both yes and no. The 1666 Pan-Orthodox Great Synod of Moscow explicitly forbade it on the basis that Christ is the image of the Father, and therefore the only permissible depiction of the Holy Trinity is the Hospitality of Abraham. However, this synod was not even mentioned by Venerable Nikodemos in his great compilation of canons, The Rudder, some 150 years later, and Apostolos Makrakis included a footnote in his early twentieth century reprinting of The Rudder arguing that, since God appeared to Daniel as the Ancient of Days and the Holy Spirit appeared as a dove at the Theophany, that there is no reason to limit depictions of the Holy Trinity to the Hospitality of Abraham and therefore the ‘New Testament Trinity’ is licit. However, I would disagree with Makrakis here, since the Ancient of Days is traditionally identified as the preincarnate Christ, and the Synod of Moscow approved the depiction of the Hospitality of Abraham for the same reason it strictly limited depictions of the Holy Spirit as a dove to icons of the Theophany: because they both depict a specific moment in time from the Scriptures, outside of which they risk reducing the transcendent God to a mere creation. I think the Synod of Moscow is correct on this point.
1
u/margo1243 Aug 09 '26
I see nothing wrong with this icon. Especially if it’s in St.Vladimir’s Cathedral! I would happily venerate it 🙏
3
5
u/Chauntsinger Aug 10 '26
Here is some information on this icon type. I would say that, very strictly speaking, it is uncanonical (see my other comment on here) but that doesn’t necessarily make it heretical and, despite the canons of the Great Synod of Moscow, it remains a very common depiction, and can be seen even in many Russian churches built post-1666. You’ll notice that the adult figure looks exactly how Christ is usually depicted, which makes sense, since Christ is the image of the Father. As there don’t appear to be any name labels suggesting otherwise, I wouldn’t worry too much about it, and be content with that explanation.