Journal: Westminster Theological Journal
Volume: WTJ 83:1 (Spring 2021)
Article: The Early Church On The Aniconic Spectrum
Author: John B. Carpenter

WTJ 83:1 (Spring 2021) p. 35

The Early Church On The Aniconic Spectrum

John B. Carpenter

John B. Carpenter is pastor of Covenant Reformed Baptist Church in Providence, NC.

The issue of images in the early church is beset with fuzzy thinking and imprecise terminology, even among scholars. By precisely defining aniconic, icon, and iconography, this article seeks to awaken scholars to greater clarity, and thus a grasp of the nuances, categories, and full range of aniconism (the opposition to icons). Historically, the terms are new, with “aniconism” (Anikonismus) and “aniconic” (anikonisch) only being introduced in the late nineteenth century. Through defining aniconism, we see that it is not a monolithic phenomenon; the choice is not a binary one between a rigorous aniconism on the one hand and a full-blown iconography on the other. Rather, there is a spectrum to aniconism, from the rigorous prohibition of all images to the lax position that only draws the red line at worship. This article further examines the exact nature of the early church’s aniconism, whether it was truly austere or more lax, through an inventory of the early church’s main statements on images, including writings by Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, the Council of Elvira, Eusebius, and Epiphanius.

The issue of images in the early church is beset with fuzzy thinking and imprecise terminology, even among scholars, and either apathetic ignorance or heated dogmatism on the part of the laity. Awakening interest in the apathetic or cooling the hot-headedness of zealots is not our concern here. Rather, the aim of this article is to awaken scholars to greater clarity hoping they, in turn, will address the apathetic and misinformed. While strides have been made in the last quarter century in bringing more depth and nuance to our understanding of images in the first four centuries of Christian history, a key category, namely icons, is often missing, and unfocused terminology lingers. The consensus from twentieth-century scholarship to the present day is that the early church was dedicated to an “austere aniconism,” that is, opposed to icons.1

WTJ 83:1 (Spring 2021) p. 36

Nevertheless, the exact nature of the early church’s aniconism, whether it was really “austere” or not, seems to be muddled, particularly by the inexact use of terms, even by scholars who are normally otherwise extremely exacting. Modern Protestants, in particular, have given too little attention to the topic (with some exceptions), so much so that the terminology around the issue is new and foreign to many of us. Historically, the terms are new, with “aniconism” (Anikonismus