I have been struggling with how us Orthodox revere icons. I have read things like “it is Theology in colour”, “it is our personal Photo Album of our Family in which we have been adopted”. etc.

But, then I read this description of the famous picture, those that follow the Eleousa pattern, by Archbishop Rowan Williams (who is non-Orthodox!):

“The child Christ embraces Mary, cheek to cheek, his arm encircles her neck, one foot is thrust toward us as if he is pushing himself up against her body with great energy, and his right hand grasps the corner of her veil. In some later versions…he has one hand fondling her chin….This is a child who cannot bear to be separated from his mother. We have seen that God is not ashamed to be our God, to be identified as the one who is involved with us; here, though it is as if he is not merely unashamed but positively shameless in his eagerness, longing to embrace and to be embraced. It is not simply that God will deign not to mind our company; rather he is passionate for it. The image of God’s action we are presented with here is of a hungry love.”

This description completely changed the way I look at icons. I now try to look at the details and meditate on it. Just thought that some day I wish to hear from you (haha sorry Abouna!) about the message behind icons, because I feel many people like me have missed opportunities for spiritual reflection. I mean the icons are all around us, but the spirituality is often neglected or taken in face value. I am sure you have some blessed words to share about the spirituality of icons.

I think Augustine argued similar things.

I looked up “Myth” by Lewis, because I was interested in what you said about the concept of the word ‘myth’ as fluid and it was in his book ‘The Problem of Pain’. Obviously you were right; but just wanted to quote for those who are reading in (I don’t know, but I find it interesting, because I always thought ‘myth’ as unhistorical).

He was talking about our tendency towards sin, and I am really glad you mentioned this because it is a nice passage:

“Thoughts undertaken…are continued as if they were an end in themselves, and then as if our pleasure…our pride or celebrity were the end. Thus all day long…we are sliding, slipping, falling away- as if God were, to our present consciousness, a smooth inclined plane on which there is no resting. And indeed we are now of such nature that we must slip off…it is unavoidable, may be venial. But God cannot have made us so. The gravitation away from God, ‘the journey homeward to habitual self’, must, we think, be a product of the Fall. What exactly happened when Man fell, we do not know; but it it is legitimate to guess, I offer the following picture, a ‘myth’ in the Socratic sense, a not unlikely tale.”

Sorry the quote was huge. The note for Socratic sense, was what you said Abouna, “an account of what may have been historical fact. Not to be confused with ‘myth’ in Dr Niebuhr’s sense (i.e., a symbolical representation of non-historical truth).

Thanks for answering, Abouna. I really appreciate it.