Scriptorium Press

NOW AVAILABLE! When were the angels created? What kind of fruit did Adam eat from in Paradise? What will the signs of the Antichrist be? The most celebrated collection of its kind in the Middle Ages, the Questions and Answers to Antiochus the Duke leave no stone unturned. They are now made available in English for the very first time. Also included in this edition is a translation of the Teachings to Antiochus the Duke, an adaptation of the Shepherd of Hermas for medieval monastics. Get your copy now: scriptoriumpress.ca/#antioch…

Good catch.

So, in conclusion, Elvira does not prove aniconism. Quite the opposite, actually: canon 36 demonstrates that there were plenty of images used in the 4th century church, so much so that the church authorities had to regulate their usage.

Augustine also recognized the positive use of icons. In a sermon given before the martyrium of Saint Stephen, he exclaims: "Such a lovely picture this is, where you can see Saint Stephen being stoned, can see Saul keeping the coats of those doing the stoning!" (Sermon 316.5)

Saint Augustine himself, though opposed to the abuses of the refrigerium, clearly believed in the veneration of the martyrs: "We regard the martyrs with the same affectionate intimacy that we feel towards holy men of God in this life, when we know that their hearts are prepared to endure the same suffering for the truth of the gospel. There is more devotion in our feeling towards the martyrs, because we know that their conflict is over; and we can speak with greater confidence in praise of those already victors in heaven, than of those still combating here. What is properly divine worship, which the Greeks call latria, and for which there is no word in Latin, both in doctrine and in practice, we give only to God. To this worship belongs the offering of sacrifices; as we see in the word idolatry, which means the giving of this worship to idols. Accordingly we never offer, or require any one to offer, sacrifice to a martyr, or to a holy soul, or to any angel. Any one falling into this error is instructed by doctrine, either in the way of correction or of caution." (Contra Faustum 20.21) This distinction between veneration and latria is exactly what was defended three centuries later by the Second Council of Nicaea.

It looks like Christian bishops in Spain wished to put an end to this idolatrous practice once and for all, and so, as a safeguard, banned all images from being painted in the martyria. This strictness is in line with the general spirit of the rest of the canons, which do not hesitate from excommunicating people for life or even imposing the death penalty depending on the offence. This extreme measure notwithstanding, a close reading of canon 36 shows that the concern was above all with an abuse of the veneration of the martyrs, not the use of pictures per se. Additionally, when read in context, canon 36 does not provide a blanket ban on all images, but only on those painted in the martyria, where the refrigerium took place.

So putting all the puzzle pieces together, the following image emerges: in the late 4th century, Christians who had recently converted from paganism continued eating commemorative meals at the tombs of the dead. Given that many of the funerary steles above the tombs were painted, as indicated by the archaeological record and suggested by Augustine’s language, it appears that some of these unlearned converts actually offered the food to the pictures of the saints, as to idols. We don't need to go far to see examples of what Saint Augustine was complaining about. In Eastern Asian cultures, people will routinely offer food at the graves of their ancestors, some of which include pictures of the deceased.

We have surviving examples from Ptolemaic Egypt of funerary steles where there are pictures of the deceased painted directly onto the stone slabs, which would perfectly account for Augustine’s dual reference to “tombs and pictures.”

Most interestingly, in his book On the Morals of the Catholic Church, Augustine directly connects the excesses of the refrigerium with the "worship of images": "Do not summon against me professors of the Christian name, who neither know nor give evidence of the power of their profession. Do not hunt up the numbers of ignorant people, who even in the true religion are superstitious, or are so given up to evil passions as to forget what they have promised to God. I know that there are many worshippers of tombs and pictures (sepulcrorum et picturarum adoratores). I know that there are many who drink to great excess over the dead, and who, in the feasts which they make for corpses, bury themselves over the buried, and give to their gluttony and drunkenness the name of religion. I know that there are many who in words have renounced this world, and yet desire to be burdened with all the weight of worldly things, and rejoice in such burdens." (34.75)

In another letter, Augustine explains the pagan origins of the refrigerium: "I explained to them the circumstances out of which this custom seems to have necessarily risen in the Church — namely, that when, in the peace which came after such numerous and violent persecutions, crowds of heathen who wished to assume the Christian religion were kept back, because, having been accustomed to celebrate the feasts connected with their worship of idols in revelling and drunkenness, they could not easily refrain from pleasures so hurtful and so habitual, it had seemed good to our ancestors, making for the time a concession to this infirmity, to permit them to celebrate, instead of the festivals which they renounced, other feasts in honour of the holy martyrs, which were observed, not as before with a profane design, but with similar self-indulgence." (Letter 29.9)

The refrigerium often devolved into rowdy displays which included drunkenness, the pouring of libations to the dead, and immoral behaviour, as Saint Augustine tells us: "Rioting and drunkenness are so tolerated and allowed by public opinion, that even in services designed to honour the memory of the blessed martyrs, and this not only on the annual festivals (which itself must be regarded as deplorable by every one who looks with a spiritual eye upon these things), but every day, they are openly practised...But let us, if it must be so, bear with these things in the luxury and disorder of families, and of those convivial meetings which are held within the walls of private houses; and let us take the body of Christ in communion with those with whom we are forbidden to eat even the bread which sustains our bodies; but at least let this outrageous insult be kept far away from the tombs of the sainted dead, from the scenes of sacramental privilege, and from the houses of prayer. For who may venture to forbid in private life excesses which, when they are practised by crowds in holy places, are called an honouring of the martyrs? If Africa were the first country in which an attempt were made to put down these things, her example would deserve to be esteemed worthy of imitation by all other countries; but when, both throughout the greater part of Italy and in all or almost all the churches beyond the sea, these practices either, as in some places, never existed, or, as in other places where they did exist, have been, whether they were recent or of long standing, rooted out and put down by the diligence and the censures of bishops who were holy men, entertaining true views concerning the life to come — when this, I say, is the case, do we hesitate as to the possibility of removing this monstrous defect in our morals, after an example has been set before us in so many lands?" (Letter 22.3-4)

Vilella published two further articles on the canons of Elvira in 2008 and 2017. He believes that canons 34-36 form a trilogy which was specifically meant to curb the practice known as the refrigerium, a commemorative meal which was eaten by Christians at the tombs of the martyrs. These two other canons read: Canon 34: Candles are not to be lit by day in the cemetery; [for the spirits of the saints are not to be disturbed.] Those who do not observe this shall be excluded from the communion of the Church. Canon 35: It has been decreed to forbid women to keep vigil in the cemetery, [because under the pretext of prayer they often secretly commit crimes]. (Text in brackets indicates interpolations by a later hand).

Furthermore, the 2002 philological study by J. Vilella and P. Barreda (“Los cánones de la Hispana atribuidos a un concilio Iliberritano: Estudio filológico”) has shown that the phrase “lest that which is worshipped and adored be painted on walls” is a 7th-century gloss which was interpolated into the canon and does not form part of its original wording.

However, recent scholarship has increasingly called the validity of this reading into question. Since the time of M. Meigne (1975), it has been recognized that the canons of Elvira were not all issued in 303 but represent a heterogenous collection of canons of disparate origin. The group in which canon 36 falls likely dates from the late 4th century, not the early 4th.

There are 81 canons attributed to the Council of Elvira which touch on various aspects of moral discipline. The infamous canon 36 reads: “It has been decreed that there ought not to be paintings in church lest that which is worshipped and adored be painted on walls.” There has been much discussion on the precise meaning of the phrase “that which is worshipped and adored” and the reference to “walls,” but everyone agrees that Elvira banned religious images of some sort. Consequently, canon 36 is routinely mentioned in modern discussions to prove that the early church was “hostile to religious images,” as Robert Grigg puts it (“Aniconic Worship and the Apologetic Tradition: A Note on Canon 36 of the Council of Elvira,” [1976] p. 428)

Did the Council of Elvira preach iconoclasm? 🧵 The Council of Elvira was held in the year 303 in Spain. Since the early 20th century, its canon 36 has been used as evidence that the early church was aniconic. But is this really the case?

It's treated in our published articles ("On the Authenticity of the Dionysian Corpus"-Part 1) and in Chapter 5 of The Life of Saint Dionysius the Areopagite. I also brought it up in my interview with Cleave to Antiquity.

The cross-over I didn't now I wanted :D