神父马克西姆：圣像的意义——东正教圣像神学导论
目录
- 按：这是神父马克西姆（Fr. Maximos Constas）在圣母神学院（Notre Dame Seminary, New Orleans）的讲座，讲题为「圣像的意义」（The Meaning of Icons），对东正教圣像神学作总体介绍。本文为中英双语对照文本，由阿甲整理『若整理和翻译有任何问题，欢迎指正』。
若要引用本文，ephremyuan，《神父马克西姆：圣像的意义——东正教圣像神学导论》（伦敦：光从东方来，2026年07月21日），本网页网址，引用日期。也请参考版权申明
油管订阅，以及📁网盘
「请进入学术讲座文件夹」。
神父马克西姆：圣像的意义——东正教圣像神学导论
[English] Thank you, Father Jim, and thank you, Professor Neal, for that very kind introduction. I’m very happy to be back here this year at Notre Dame Seminary and in New Orleans, and especially with three of my students. And those of you who were here earlier to hear those presentations will understand my own appreciation for the work that they did and the words that they offered. As you just heard, the talk tonight is a general introduction to the theology of the icon, and we’ll be on our way right now.
[中文] 感谢吉姆神父，也感谢尼尔教授，非常感谢你们如此亲切的介绍。我非常高兴今年能回到新奥尔良的圣母神学院，特别是能和我的三个学生在一起。你们当中早些时候在这里听过那些报告的人，会理解我对他们所做的工作和所讲的话的赞赏。正如你们刚才听到的，今晚的讲座是对圣像神学的一个总体介绍，我们现在就开始。
[English] The separation of the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches was a long and complex process, not unlike the unraveling of a marriage. Theologians tend to focus on theology and doctrinal matters, which engage only one level or one aspect of the life of the church. But this is rather like trying to use algebra to gauge the moment when one’s affections for his wife or husband had died. Historians and anthropologists are keenly aware of it. Theologians and those engaged in ecumenical dialogue often ignore the fact that the Christians of the East and the West, as those compass points indicate, are people of two different cultures, by which I mean religious cultures. To be sure, theological differences are important, and these have dominated ecumenical dialogue for centuries. Yet, they tend to be relatively abstract compared to the world that most of us live in. This is probably why agreements reached by theologians do not travel well or translate well to their respective constituencies. Of course, culture is a slippery thing and difficult to define. But most of us, living as we do in an age of rather intense cultural wars, will not doubt the power of culture. And part of the power of culture, as well as its problem, is the fact that modern culture is essentially or largely secularized cult. Culture is secularized cult. That is a deracinated, degenerated form of religious cult, a secular liturgy, if you will, which serves as a religion and a system of values for those without religion or values. And this is not a new idea. A long time ago, the Danish philosopher Kierkegaard famously said that in the Middle Ages, everything looked religious but was actually political. And in modernity, everything looks political, but is actually religious.
[中文] 罗马天主教和东正教会的分离是一个漫长而复杂的过程，不亚于一段婚姻的解体。神学家们倾向于关注神学和教义问题，这只涉及教会生活的一个层面或一个方面。但这就像试图用代数来衡量一个人对妻子或丈夫的感情何时消亡一样。历史学家和人类学家敏锐地意识到了这一点。神学家和那些参与普世对话的人经常忽略这样一个事实：东方和西方的基督徒，正如这些方位词所表明的那样，属于两种不同的文化，我指的是宗教文化。诚然，神学差异很重要，几个世纪以来这些差异一直主导着普世对话。然而，与我们大多数人生活的世界相比，它们往往相对抽象。这可能就是为什么神学家达成的协议不能很好地传达或转化为他们各自选民的共识。当然，文化是一个难以捉摸且难以定义的东西。但我们大多数人，生活在一个文化战相当激烈的时代，都不会怀疑文化的力量。而文化的力量及其问题的一部分在于，现代文化本质上或很大程度上是世俗化的祭仪。文化就是世俗化的祭仪。这是一种被连根拔起、退化了的宗教祭仪形式，如果你愿意的话，可以说是一种世俗的礼仪，它为那些没有宗教或价值观的人充当宗教和价值体系。这并不是一个新想法。很久以前，丹麦哲学家克尔凯郭尔曾有一句名言：在中世纪，一切看起来都是宗教的，但实际上是政治的。而在现代性中，一切看起来都是政治的，但实际上是宗教的。
[English] And this brings us to the question of liturgy and its deeply informing presence in our lives. For Orthodox Christians, liturgy is not reducible to a particular rite, which a priest or a community might choose to practice and discard at will, like putting on a costume or a mask. But to the contrary, liturgy is at the core of Orthodox identity. Liturgy is the medium or the mode through which and in which we find our salvation. And to invoke an old cliché, which is not to say that it’s true or that I subscribe to it, if Protestants are saved by faith and Catholics by works, then the Orthodox would say that they are saved liturgically. I would like to think that all Western Christians would or could say the same thing. But the degree of diversity in modern Christian worship has made that increasingly difficult to see. Liturgy and worship in the Orthodox churches, on the other hand, despite their linguistic differences, is highly uniform, so that what the Orthodox call the tipikon, or the ordo, of the church, that is, the outward uniformity of the liturgy, for the Orthodox, that is precisely the visible manifestation of the church’s unity across time and space. In other words, the outward uniformity of the literature, the energy of worship across time and across space, is the external physical manifestation of the unity of the church.
[中文] 这就把我们引向了礼仪的问题，以及它在我们的生活中深刻塑造的存在。对于东正教基督徒来说，礼仪不能被简化为某种特定的仪礼，神父或某个群体可以随意选择实行或丢弃，就像穿上戏服或戴上面具一样。相反，礼仪是东正教身份的核心。礼仪是我们借以并在其中找到救赎的媒介或方式。引用一句老生常谈的话——这并不是说它是正确的，或者我认同它——如果新教徒因信得救，天主教徒因行为得救，那么东正教徒会说他们是因礼仪得救。我愿意认为所有西方基督徒都会或可以说同样的话。但现代基督教崇拜中的多样性程度使得这一点越来越难以看清。另一方面，东正教教会中的礼仪和崇拜，尽管存在语言差异，却高度统一，因此东正教徒所说的教会礼规，即礼仪的外在统一性，对东正教徒来说，正是教会跨越时空合一的可见彰显。换句话说，礼仪的外在统一性，即跨越时空的崇拜能量，是教会合一的外在物质彰显。
[English] One of the places where changes in liturgical culture have been evident is in the various ecclesiastical arts, especially in the forms and functions of sacred art and religious iconography through the late Middle Ages. Christian iconography in both East and West exhibited a high degree of uniformity, both in content and style. The iconographic forms used in East and West had their common origins in the late antique pilgrimage art of the Holy Lands, from where they were diffused throughout the Christian world by pilgrims returning to their respective homes. It was thus that the artistic program of a celebrated Italian painter such as Giotto, who died in 1337, was highly consistent with the iconography of the East. On your left is a contemporary Byzantine icon of the Nativity and on the right is Giotto’s painting of the same subject. We don’t have time to go back and forth and draw out all the parallels, but just visually you can see the color commonalities between them, along with differences. The cave compared to the manger, but all the other elements are present. The kind of relative proximity or distance from Joseph to the Mother of God is another sort of change that has entered the composition. And I could show you many, many other examples, just a few more. This is, again, Giotto on the left, his painting of the baptism. On the right, an Orthodox image of the baptism. They are absolutely identical in terms of form, design, content, and so forth. The style tends to be a little bit different, but otherwise, we’re talking about essentially the same image. This is another of the raising of Lazarus. These are roughly contemporary images again. And again, the parallels are obvious. If we had time, it would be fun to go through them very systematically and point out all of the parallels. We have the Lord making this gesture of blessing with Lazarus’ sisters, Martha and Mary, at his feet. The characters around him, around them, engaged in various sorts of dialogue. Lazarus emerging from the tomb in his shroud, and even the fellow on the right who has those famous biblical words, he stinketh. And here’s an image of what we call the lamentation. And again, the parallels are obvious and don’t need to be highlighted by me. And even in an apocryphal subject, like the meeting of Joachim and Anna at the Golden Gate, which is an image that’s taken to signify their union, their marital union, and conception. Even something like this is common. So here, the common elements are easy to spot, but this is not because Giotto was simply copying Eastern iconographic prototypes, but as I said, because both the Eastern and the Western were working out of a common iconographic tradition that was established in the Holy Lands in Christian antiquity. The same was true for the Sienese school, which flourished from the 13th through the 15th century, and which adhered very closely to iconographic forms that had been the common and visual vocabulary of the Christian world from antiquity. And all of that changed during the Renaissance when traditional Christian iconographic forms, and in many cases their content, were replaced by models either derived directly from or inspired by initially ancient Greek art, which was being rediscovered in the West at that point, so that the values of humanism and naturalism, which you see on display in the Raphael painting on the right, came to prevail in the religious painting of the West. But for Orthodox Christians, it’s difficult not to see the seismic cultural shift known as the Renaissance as introducing something like the secularization of sacred art, which included again, to what appears to Orthodox eyes, to be a kind of carnalization of the bodies of the saved, along with a new preference for three-dimensional figures modeled along the lines of antique statuary, which again at that time was being rediscovered in the West. And again, to Orthodox eyes, the new figures appeared corpulent and fleshly with a physical vibe, volume, and mass that seemed to lack any kind of overt signs of transcendence. And this new naturalist representational aesthetic created various artistic problems which unintentionally altered the theological nature of what up until then had been traditional Christian iconography in East and West, such as the reduction of the halo to a kind of dinner plate floating over the head, suggesting, unintentionally, a disjunction between nature and the supernatural, so that divine grace appears as something outside of or external to nature. And of course, without those halos, there would be little left in the image to distinguish the figures as sacred. Another example. In the earlier tradition, the dead body of the Man of Sorrows could be depicted in an upright posture, it’s a corpse in an upright posture, which must have been as striking in the Middle Ages as it is for us today. On the one hand, the visible artistic subject would seem to be a human death. Yet this death is depicted in the framework of a human impossibility, namely verticality, suggesting that the Man of Sorrows is not simply the son of Mary, but also the Son of God. But once that body is depicted in a more naturalistic form of representation, it requires props, in this case two angels, who are on hand to explain or account for the otherwise impossible upright posture.
[中文] 礼仪文化变化显而易见的地方之一是在各种教会艺术中，特别是在中世纪晚期神圣艺术和宗教圣像学的形式和功能上。东方和西方的基督教圣像学在内容和风格上都表现出高度的一致性。东方和西方使用的圣像形式有着共同的起源，即圣地的晚期古代朝圣艺术，朝圣者们将其传播到整个基督教世界，并带回各自的家乡。因此，一位著名的意大利画家，如1337年去世的乔托，其艺术创作与东方的圣像学高度一致。左边是一幅同时代的拜占庭圣诞圣像，右边是乔托关于同一主题的画作。我们没有时间来回比较并指出所有的相似之处，但仅从视觉上你就能看到它们在色彩上的共同点，以及差异。洞穴与马槽的对比，但所有其他元素都存在。约瑟与上帝之母之间相对的亲近或距离，是进入构图的另一种变化。我还可以向你们展示许多其他例子，再看几个。左边又是乔托的洗礼画作。右边是一幅东正教的洗礼图像。它们在形式、设计、内容等方面绝对相同。风格往往略有不同，但除此之外，我们谈论的实际上是同一幅图像。这是另一幅关于拉撒路复活的画作。这些又是大致同时代的图像。同样，相似之处是显而易见的。如果我们有时间，系统地过一遍并指出所有的相似之处会很有趣。主做出祝福的手势，拉撒路的姐妹马大和马利亚在他脚前。周围的人物，他们周围的人，在进行各种对话。拉撒路裹着裹尸布从坟墓里出来，甚至右边那个说出著名圣经话语“他发臭了”的家伙。这是一幅我们称之为哀悼的图像。同样，相似之处显而易见，不需要我强调。甚至在次经主题中，比如约阿希姆和安娜在金门相遇，这幅图像被用来象征他们的结合，他们的婚姻结合和受孕。即使是这样的主题也很常见。所以在这里，共同元素很容易发现，但这并不是因为乔托只是在复制东方的圣像原型，而是如我所说，因为东方和西方都在沿用基督教古代在圣地建立的共同圣像传统。锡耶纳画派也是如此，该画派在13至15世纪繁荣发展，并非常紧密地坚持了自古以来作为基督教世界共同视觉词汇的圣像形式。所有这一切在文艺复兴时期发生了改变，当时传统的基督教圣像形式，以及许多情况下的内容，被直接源自或受最初在西方重新发现的古希腊艺术启发的模型所取代，因此，你在右边的拉斐尔画作中看到的人文主义和自然主义价值观，在西方宗教绘画中占据了主导地位。但对于东正教基督徒来说，很难不把被称为文艺复兴的巨大文化转变看作是引入了某种神圣艺术的世俗化，这再次包括，在东正教徒眼中，得救者的身体似乎被肉体化了，同时新偏好于按照古代雕像的线条塑造的三维人物，而古代雕像在那时也在西方被重新发现。而且，在东正教徒眼中，新的人物显得臃肿和肉体化，带有一种物理感、体积和质量，似乎缺乏任何明显的超越性标志。这种新的自然主义再现美学造成了各种艺术问题，无意中改变了直到那时为止东西方传统基督教圣像学的神学本质，例如将光环简化为一种漂浮在头顶的餐盘，无意中暗示了本性与超自然之间的脱节，以至于上帝的恩典显得像是本性之外或外在的东西。当然，如果没有这些光环，图像中就几乎没有什么能将这些人物区分为神圣的了。另一个例子。在早期的传统中，忧患之子死去的身体可以被描绘成直立姿势，这是一具直立姿势的尸体，这在中世纪一定和今天对我们一样令人震惊。一方面，可见的艺术主题似乎是人类死亡。然而，这种死亡是在人类不可能的框架内描绘的，即垂直性，暗示忧患之子不仅是玛利亚的儿子，也是上帝之子。但是，一旦那个身体以更自然主义的表现形式被描绘出来，它就需要道具，在这种情况下是两个天使，他们在场解释或说明原本不可能的直立姿势。
[English] Now the Renaissance discovery of classical artistic forms was never a factor in Eastern iconography because the Eastern world was always a Greek speaking world and it was always a world that was in contact with and often conflict with ancient Greek culture and Hellenism because it never lost the knowledge of that ancient culture. For Greek Christians who were living in the East, the cult statue—one of the reasons there are no statues in Orthodox churches—is that in the Greek tradition the cult statue was something that had always been associated with paganism. The Greek world was filled with temples that had three-dimensional statues in them, and these became for Greek Christians the kind of par excellence image of pagan religion, and so they were just banned from use in Greek Christian houses of worship. Statues were also rejected as obstructing the movements of the Byzantine liturgy. If you have a large three-dimensional statue somewhere in your church, it takes up a lot of physical space, and that space was required for the Orthodox liturgy, which had and has not a whole lot of room for the presence of monumental sculptures. So there’s a practical reason for the exclusion of statues as well. Not least, the Orthodox Church did something that the Western Church never did. Namely, it dogmatized its sacred images, so that icons and images in the East were never understood to be simply works of art or merely decorative. Neither were they ever said to be merely pedagogical tools, as if they were books for the illiterate. We hear that a lot. But that’s not what they were understood to be in the East. To the contrary, they were understood to be visual, artistic expressions of the church’s theology. And in the same way that church doctrines could not be changed, neither could the image in which those doctrines were embodied. Thus something like the iconography of the Annunciation could be tampered with no more than the doctrine of the incarnation. And there was always a degree of artistic freedom on the one hand for the artist and his particular style, but the content of the image could not change. In what follows then, I would like to offer a kind of general introduction to the orthodox theology of the icon, because it’s not something that everyone knows, including members of the Orthodox Church. So to begin.
[中文] 如今，文艺复兴对古典艺术形式的发现从未成为东方圣像学中的一个因素，因为东方世界一直是一个讲希腊语的世界，并且一直与古希腊文化和希腊主义保持着接触，且常常发生冲突，因为它从未失去对那古老文化的认知。对于生活在东方的希腊基督徒来说，崇拜雕像——东正教教堂中没有雕像的原因之一——在于希腊传统中，崇拜雕像总是与异教联系在一起。希腊世界充满了内部立有三维雕像的庙宇，这些雕像对希腊基督徒而言成了异教宗教的典型代表，因此它们被禁止在希腊基督教的敬拜场所中使用。雕像也因阻碍拜占庭礼仪的进行而被拒绝。如果你的教堂里某处有一尊大型三维雕像，它会占据大量的物理空间，而东正教礼仪需要这些空间，东正教礼仪过去和现在都没有太多余地容纳纪念性雕塑。因此，排除雕像也有其实际原因。尤为重要的是，东正教做了一件西方教会从未做过的事。即它将其神圣图像教条化，因此东方的圣像和图像从未被理解为仅仅是艺术品或纯粹的装饰。它们也从未被说成仅仅是教学工具，仿佛它们是给文盲看的书。我们经常听到这种说法。但在东方，它们并非被如此理解。相反，它们被理解为教会神学的视觉和艺术表达。正如教会的教义不能被改变一样，体现这些教义的图像也不能被改变。因此，像天使报喜的圣像学这样的东西，不能比道成肉身的教义受到更多的篡改。一方面，艺术家及其特定风格总是有一定程度的艺术自由，但图像的内容不能改变。那么，在接下来的内容中，我想对东正教的圣像神学提供一个大致的介绍，因为这不是每个人都了解的东西，包括东正教的成员。那么，我们开始吧。
[English] In Greek the word icon simply means image. Ikon is the ancient Greek form of icon. The word ikona is the modern Greek version of the word. The word simply means image, and today the word icon normally designates a devotional portrait, an image of Christ, such as the one you see on the screen, the Theotokos, the mother of God, or a saint, painted in egg tempera on a gold-covered wooden board. But an icon can also be a mosaic in the dome of a church, or a monumental wall painting or fresco on the left, or an image engraved on the side of a chalice. I just want us to stay here for a minute. This is the mosaic that I’m referring to. This is a close-up of those mosaics. And these Byzantine mosaicists were so clever and so sophisticated, they would actually embed the mosaics in the wall on different kinds of angles to catch and reflect sunlight at different times. So you might have a place up in the dome that never received a whole lot of light because of the structure of the building, but they could actually set the mosaics on an angle in the stone to reflect, because the cubes are made out of glass. They’re reflective of light, and so the image appears to actually generate light, not simply reflect it. So we said an image in the dome of a church, or a painting, a fresco painting in a church, or an image engraved on the side of a chalice, or a story from the Bible painted in the margins of a book. An icon can be elaborately fashioned, embellished with precious gems and stones, or it can be simple and unadorned, rough-hewn, even crude-looking and mass-produced on inexpensive materials. This is because what ultimately defines an icon has nothing to do with the artistic medium or style but rather depends on how the image is used and most importantly what it is believed to be. And every icon is a means of spiritual encounter and dialogue. It offers us the possibility of such an encounter because it shares in the holiness of the sacred figure whose likeness it bears. The icon is therefore not a work of art, it’s not reducible to a work of art, but rather it is a work of witness, an encounter with the sacred that makes use of art through the use of wood, gold, color, lines and forms. The icon seeks to bring the beholder beyond the limits of ordinary sense perception, inviting us to perceive a new reality and to partake of a new creation. The icon has a distinctively charismatic function, we would say. It bears the energy and the grace of the sacred person whose image it projects. The elder Milianos, who was mentioned earlier, the former abbot of my monastery, used to say that an icon is like a fire, he would say, and how can you walk by an icon and not be warmed by it? There was this gracious, charismatic presence that the image sort of radiates. In this way, again, icons are not simply portraits, but manifestations of human persons in their new heavenly condition. They are images of the spiritual character of human beings reborn, as it were, in the womb of eternity. It is often said that icons are like windows. When we look at an icon of Christ, we do not say, now I am looking at an icon or a picture of Christ, but rather we say, now I am looking at Christ himself contemplated by means of art, as if through a window or in a mirror, I see the human face of God. So icons are windows, they are doors and thresholds too, meaning that they are spiritual places of passage and encounter, a place where I am raised up to the beauty of the archetype and where the archetype is revealed to me, entering deeply into my senses and into my consciousness. The icon has the ability to evoke within me the memory of the forgotten depth of my own being. It enables me to see my true face. It orients me toward my destiny in God and this vision, this remembrance, this knowledge fills me with unspeakable joy and profound consolation. These may seem like extravagant claims, but they are fully consistent with the teaching of Scripture and the Church, especially the Church’s understanding of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and the world that came into being through Him.
[中文] 在希腊语中，“圣像”（icon）这个词仅仅意味着图像。“Ikon”是“圣像”的古希腊语形式。“Ikona”是该词的现代希腊语版本。这个词仅仅意味着图像，而今天，“圣像”一词通常指一幅虔诚的肖像，即基督的图像，例如你在屏幕上看到的这幅，诞神女，即上帝之母，或者一位圣人的图像，用蛋彩画在覆盖着金箔的木板上。但圣像也可以是教堂穹顶上的马赛克，或者是左侧的纪念性壁画或湿壁画，或者是雕刻在圣杯侧面的图像。我只想让我们在这里停留一分钟。这就是我所说的马赛克。这是那些马赛克的特写。这些拜占庭马赛克艺术家非常聪明且技艺精湛，他们实际上会将马赛克以不同的角度嵌入墙壁中，以便在不同时间捕捉和反射阳光。因此，由于建筑结构的原因，穹顶上的某个地方可能从未接受过太多光线，但他们实际上可以将马赛克以一定角度设置在石头中以进行反射，因为这些方块是由玻璃制成的。它们能反射光线，因此图像似乎实际上在发光，而不仅仅是反射光线。所以我们说，教堂穹顶上的图像，或者教堂里的画作、湿壁画，或者雕刻在圣杯侧面的图像，或者画在书页边缘的圣经故事。圣像可以制作得非常精致，用珍贵的宝石和石头装饰，也可以简单朴素、粗制滥造，甚至看起来粗糙，并在廉价材料上大量生产。这是因为最终定义圣像的因素与艺术媒介或风格无关，而是取决于图像如何被使用，最重要的是它被认为是什么。每一幅圣像都是属灵相遇和对话的媒介。它为我们提供了这种相遇的可能性，因为它分享了其所承载的神圣人物的圣洁。因此，圣像不是一件艺术品，它不能被简化为一件艺术品，而是一件见证之作，是一次与神圣的相遇，通过使用木材、黄金、色彩、线条和形式来运用艺术。圣像试图将观者带入普通感官知觉的极限之外，邀请我们感知一个新的现实并参与一个新的创造。我们会说，圣像具有独特的属灵恩赐功能。它承载着它所投射的神圣人物的能量和恩典。前面提到的艾米里亚诺斯长老，我所在修院的前任院长，过去常说，圣像就像一团火，他会说，你怎么能走过圣像而不被它温暖呢？图像似乎散发出这种仁慈的、充满恩赐的同在。这样说来，圣像再次表明它们不仅仅是肖像，而是人类在其新的属天状态下的显现。它们是人类重生后的属灵品格的图像，可以说，是在永恒的子宫中重生的。人们常说圣像就像窗户。当我们看着基督的圣像时，我们不会说，现在我正在看一幅圣像或基督的画像，而是说，现在我正在看基督本人，通过艺术来静观，仿佛透过窗户或在镜子中，我看到了上帝的人类面孔。所以圣像是窗户，它们也是门和门槛，这意味着它们是属灵的通道和相遇之地，一个我被提升到原型之美的地方，也是原型向我显现的地方，深深进入我的感官和意识之中。圣像有能力在我内心唤起对我自身存在被遗忘的深处的记忆。它使我能够看到我真实的面孔。它将我引向我在上帝里的命运，而这种异象、这种记忆、这种知识使我充满无法言喻的喜乐和深刻的安慰。这些可能看起来像是夸大的主张，但它们完全符合圣经和教会的教导，特别是教会对于上帝之子耶稣基督以及通过他而产生的世界的理解。
[English] I’ll say a few words about the church’s Christology, its teaching about Christ and about creation or cosmology, those being the two principal elements that go into the theology of the icon. Icons affirm and celebrate the central affirmation of the Christian faith, the word became flesh. As a consequence of this affirmation, salvation is not an abstract theory, but a particular person, the second person of the Holy Trinity, who entered our world and lived a fully human existence in the concrete and palpable form of a human body. That which was from the beginning, writes the evangelist, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and touched with our hands. That is what we declare to you. Heard, seen, touched. Salvation in Christ is specific, visible and tangible. And it is this tangibility, this reality which the icon of Christ guarantees and makes manifest. In Christ, God entered into human life. He took human nature to himself, formed of the same physical elements as our nature and bodies are. And because Christ has assumed a true and integral humanity, it is possible to depict him in icons as God incarnate. Indeed, the Church teaches that it is not only possible to do this, but necessary to do this, because to refuse to make an icon of Christ is to imply that his human nature is somehow unreal. If he truly became human, then he can be depicted. To deny his depictability, on the other hand, to deny the icon is to deny the reality of the incarnation. Critics of icons, whether in ancient or modern times, have regularly appealed to the second of the Ten Commandments, which forbids any visual representation of God. But what this argument overlooks is precisely the intimate connection between the icon and the incarnation. The prohibition of images was entirely reasonable in the period before the word became flesh, but everything has now been altered by what took place in Nazareth and Bethlehem. In the words of St. John of Damascus, if we attempted to make an icon of the invisible God, that would be sinful indeed. For it is impossible to make an icon of that which has no body, shape, or form. For how can that which is not seen be depicted? But while no one has ever seen God, yet the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father has made the unseen God manifest. And so with confidence, I make an icon of the invisible God, not insofar as he is invisible, but insofar as he became visible for our sakes by partaking of flesh and blood. Israel did not see God. There’s a pun there because Israel means he who sees God. Israel did not see God but we with unveiled faces behold the glory of the Lord as though reflected in a mirror. What was impossible before the Incarnation has now become possible. Christ, the Word made flesh, is the icon of the invisible God, Colossians 1.15. And by virtue of his Incarnation, we can make icons of him who is himself the icon. In him, the whole fullness of the deity dwells bodily, Colossians 2.9. In him, God has become entirely human, thereby enabling us to depict the human face of God. And if we can do so, then we must. Otherwise, we undermine our confession of the Savior’s true humanity.
[中文] 我将简略谈谈教会的基督论，即关于基督的教导，以及关于受造物或宇宙论的教导，这两者是构成圣像神学的主要元素。圣像确认并颂扬基督教信仰的核心宣告：道成了肉身。作为这一宣告的结果，救赎不是一个抽象的理论，而是一个具体的人，即三位一体的第二位格，他进入了我们的世界，以人类身体这一具体可触的形式度过了完全的人类生活。福音书作者写道：论到从起初原有的，就是我们所听见、所看见、亲眼看过、亲手摸过的。这就是我们所宣告给你们的。听见、看见、摸过。在基督里的救赎是具体的、可见的、可触的。正是这种可触性，这种现实性，由基督的圣像所保证并彰显出来。在基督里，上帝进入了人类生活。他将人的本性归于自己，由与我们本性和身体相同的物质元素所构成。因为基督已经承担了真实而完整的人性，所以可以在圣像中将他描绘为道成肉身的上帝。事实上，教会教导说，这不仅可能做到，而且是必须做到的，因为拒绝制作基督的圣像，就暗示着他的人性在某种程度上是不真实的。如果他真正成为了人，那么他就可以被描绘。另一方面，否认他的可描绘性，否认圣像，就是否认道成肉身的真实性。无论是在古代还是现代，圣像的批评者经常诉诸十诫的第二诫，该诫命禁止任何对上帝的视觉表现。但这个论点所忽略的，正是圣像与道成肉身之间的密切联系。在道成肉身之前的时期，禁止图像是完全合理的，但现在一切都因在拿撒勒和伯利恒发生的事情而改变了。用大马士革的约翰的话来说，如果我们试图为不可见的上帝制作圣像，那确实是罪恶的。因为不可能为没有身体、形状或形态的事物制作圣像。因为看不见的事物怎能被描绘呢？虽然没有人见过上帝，但在父怀里的独生子已经将不可见的上帝彰显出来。因此，我满怀信心地为不可见的上帝制作圣像，不是就他不可见而言，而是就他为了我们的缘故，通过分享血肉而成为可见而言。以色列没有看见上帝。这里有一个双关语，因为以色列的意思是“看见上帝的人”。以色列没有看见上帝，但我们敞着脸，好像从镜子里返照一样，观看主的荣耀。在道成肉身之前不可能的事情，现在已经成为可能。基督，道成肉身，是不可见上帝的圣像，歌罗西书1:15。借着他的道成肉身，我们可以为他——他自己就是圣像——制作圣像。在他里面，上帝本性一切的丰盛都有形有体地居住着，歌罗西书2:9。在他里面，上帝已经完全成为人，从而使我们能够描绘上帝的人面。如果我们能做到，那么我们就必须这样做。否则，我们就破坏了对救主真实人性的认信。
[English] The second point is that it’s closely related to the first point. At the Incarnation, God took a human body, using physical flesh as the means for our salvation. This says something about the nature of matter, about the possibilities of matter, to serve as a vehicle for the Spirit, a medium for the Divine, to be transparent to God. Similar to the Incarnation, Creation, the material world, is a theophany of God. It is a material manifestation of the expression of God’s love of God himself. Creation came from God and looks toward him and is returning to him. I heard an analogy once. There are people who think that the world is a random kind of place and it has no meaning to it. Some big bangs put it all in motion and everything happened just by chance. And I suppose if you don’t believe in God, maybe the world doesn’t have meaning for you. The person who said this said, think about something like a porcelain vase. You could take a porcelain vase and give it to a team of scientists, and they could analyze it and study it, and they could tell you what sort of materials it was made out of, how it was mixed, at what temperatures it was fired, and what pigments were used to give it the color that it has. They could publish, they could print out reams of information about that porcelain vase, and all of that information would be perfectly accurate. But there’s one thing those scientists could never tell you, and that’s that the porcelain vase was a wedding gift. So if you don’t see the world as a gift, then maybe it is meaningless for you. Maybe that’s the correct deduction to make. But once you see the world as a gift from God, then everything changes. So creation has a purpose and a God-given end and an aim. God saw everything that he made, and behold, it was altogether good and beautiful, to tease that meaning out of the Greek. All created things are intrinsically good, and all therefore have spirit-bearing and comparing potentialities. To this essential goodness and beauty of the material world, the icon bears joyful witness. In the icon we see matter restored to harmony and so fulfilling its true vocation, which is to reflect and transmit the divine glory. The icon then safeguards not only the authenticity of Christ’s physical body, but also the true value of creation in its unfallen state as created by God. Inherent in the very fact of the icon is an optimistic, affirmative vision of the material creation. As spirit-bearing matter, the icon has what we would call eschatological significance. The icon anticipates the final transfiguration of the cosmos at the last day when the created world will be delivered from its present bondage to corruption, to quote St. Paul, and will enter into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
[中文] 第二点是，它与第一点密切相关。在道成肉身时，上帝取了人的身体，以物质的肉体作为我们救赎的途径。这说明了物质的本性，以及物质作为灵的载体、神圣的媒介、向上帝透明的可能性。与道成肉身相似，受造物，即物质世界，是上帝的神显。它是上帝对他自身之爱的表达的物质显现。受造物来自上帝，仰望他，并归向他。
我曾听过一个比喻。有些人认为世界是一个随机的地方，没有任何意义。一些大爆炸使一切开始运转，所有事情都只是偶然发生。我想，如果你不相信上帝，也许这个世界对你来说就没有意义。说这话的人说，想想像瓷花瓶这样的东西。你可以拿一个瓷花瓶交给一组科学家，他们可以分析它、研究它，告诉你它是用什么材料制成的，是如何混合的，在什么温度下烧制的，以及用了什么颜料才有了现在的颜色。他们可以发表，可以打印出大量关于那个瓷花瓶的信息，而且所有这些信息都完全准确。但有一件事是那些科学家永远无法告诉你的，那就是这个瓷花瓶是一件结婚礼物。因此，如果你不把世界看作一份礼物，那么它对你来说也许就是毫无意义的。也许这是正确的推论。但一旦你把世界看作上帝的礼物，一切就都改变了。
因此，受造物有一个目的，一个上帝赐予的结局和目标。上帝看着他所造的一切，看哪，都甚好且美丽，这是从希腊文中引申出的含义。所有受造物本质上都是好的，因此都具有承载灵和比较的潜能。对于物质世界这种本质的良善与美丽，圣像作出了喜乐的见证。在圣像中，我们看到物质恢复了和谐，从而实现了它真正的使命，即反映和传递神圣荣耀。因此，圣像不仅维护了基督肉体的真实性，也维护了受造物在未堕落状态下由上帝所造的真正价值。圣像这一事实本身就蕴含着对物质受造物的乐观、肯定的愿景。作为承载灵的物质，圣像具有我们所说的末世论意义。圣像预示了末日宇宙最终的变容，届时受造世界将摆脱目前对败坏的奴役——引用圣保罗的话——并进入上帝儿女的荣耀自由之中。
[English] Now earlier I mentioned that icons are often compared to windows. You hear that all the time. They’re windows into heaven through which we see Christ or the saints. But there’s another way to think about icons, not as windows, but as mirrors. And I think this is the better way to think about them. Like an image reflected in a mirror or like the shadow cast by a body, the icon is understood not simply as an artistic depiction or representation of something but rather as the living and dynamic reflection of its source. As an example of this dynamic process of reflection and not representation but reflection, we might think of a tree which just by being what it is, is reflected in the waters of a lake. The subject of that reflection, the tree, itself creates the image upon the surface of the water. The appearance of the reflection of the tree involves no act of making, no planning, no deliberation, and no movement of discursive thought. It requires no act or deed of hand or mind on the part of the tree for its realization. The tree has simply to be what it is and to be where it is rooted there for the image to occur. I don’t know if you can see it, but this is an image of St. George at a source of water, and the icon is reflected here in the water that emerges from. I think you can see the halo there. It’s not a very clear picture, but I think you can see it. So the image that proceeds from its source in such manner remains in dynamic continuity with its source, offering the viewer an immediacy and intimacy of presence, what we might call the gift of participation, dissipation, and the creative self-diffusion of the eternal. Now we might also think of the icon as a kind of trace or a sign, like a fresh track or trail which one might come upon in the woods or on the seashore and which one would recognize perhaps with delight or perhaps with alarm or perhaps a mixture of both because the trace, the track, shows us that whatever made it is still very much in the neighborhood. And the icon fascinates us, it delights us and sometimes alarms us, not through artistic techniques of representation, but through the reflected tangible presence of divine beauty. Yet another way to think about the difference between representation and reflection is to consider the difference between suddenly seeing a painting or a drawing that is a representation, the difference between suddenly seeing a painting or a drawing of a lion and suddenly seeing the reflection of a lion in a mirror. These are very different things. The former, the representation, does not require the presence of a real or living lion, but the latter most certainly does. And in the same way the Orthodox faithful do not understand icons to be mere representations of things that are absent, lifeless, or ineffective. Instead, icons are viewed, approached, and embraced as the reflections of living and life-giving persons who are close at hand and whose beloved faces we behold as if in a mirror.
[中文] 之前我提到过，圣像常被比作窗户。你们总是听到这种说法。它们是通往天堂的窗户，透过它们我们能看到基督或圣人。但还有另一种方式来思考圣像，不是将其视为窗户，而是视为镜子。我认为这是思考它们的更好方式。就像镜中反射的影像或身体投下的影子一样，圣像不被仅仅理解为对某物的艺术描绘或再现，而是其源头的活生生且动态的反映。作为这种动态反映过程（不是再现而是反映）的例子，我们可以想象一棵树，仅仅因为它的存在，就倒映在湖水中。那个反映的主体，即那棵树，本身在水面上创造了影像。树影的出现不涉及任何制造的行为，没有计划，没有深思熟虑，也没有推理性思维的运作。它的实现不需要树在手上或心智上做出任何行为或举动。树只需要做它自己，扎根在它所在的地方，影像就会产生。我不知道你们能不能看到，但这是一幅在水泉旁的圣乔治的图像，圣像就倒映在涌出的水中。我想你们能看到那里的光环。画面不是很清晰，但我想你们能看到。因此，以这种方式从其源头产生的影像，与其源头保持着动态的连续性，为观看者提供了一种临在的直接性与亲密感，我们可以称之为参与的恩赐、消散，以及永恒的创造性自我扩散。现在我们也可以把圣像看作一种痕迹或记号，就像在树林里或海滩上可能偶然发现的新鲜足迹或路径，人们可能会带着喜悦、惊恐或两者兼有的心情认出它，因为痕迹、足迹向我们表明，留下它的东西仍然就在附近。圣像令我们着迷，令我们喜悦，有时也令我们惊恐，这不是通过再现的艺术技巧，而是通过神圣之美的有形反映的临在。思考再现与反映之间差异的另一种方式，是考虑突然看到一幅再现性的绘画或素描，突然看到一幅狮子的画作与突然看到镜中狮子的倒影之间的区别。这是非常不同的事情。前者，即再现，不需要一只真实或活着的狮子在场，但后者绝对需要。同样，东正教信徒并不认为圣像仅仅是不在场的、无生命的或无效的事物的再现。相反，圣像被视为近在咫尺的、活生生且赐予生命之人的反映，人们以这种眼光看待、接近并拥抱圣像，仿佛在镜中凝视他们所爱的面容。
[English] The evocation and presentation, the reflection of the transfigured self is achieved by altering the natural symmetries and proportions of the body, especially the features of the body. We’ll say a few words about why icons look the way they do. Anatomically incorrect, some people might say, but there’s a reason for that. For example, the face of the icon is never depicted in profile, but is always turned more or less directly toward the beholder. The facial expression is serene and controlled. The icon’s eyes and ears have often been enlarged, while the nose is often elongated and reduced in width. The mouth tends to be small and is always closed. What do these changes signify? How do they serve to project the spirit of the Holy Spirit, qualities of the individuals depicted? In the visual language of the icon, the full frontality of the face represents the wholeness, completion and perfection of the person depicted. Frontality also makes the icon dialogical and relational. You can’t communicate with an image if it’s turned away from you, so there’s an obvious sort of devotional function here, and that frontality is at once the sign and the vehicle of communion. The gospel is addressed to the whole world, and the person in whom Christ dwells is turned toward others. Such a person lives for others. The profile, on the other hand, suggests fragmentation. It breaks communion and inaugurates a fading away into non-being. It is the absence of the person. It implies a certain double-mindedness of being two-faced, and as a rule it is reserved for the figure of Judas, who you see here betraying Christ with a kiss, with two very late antique examples in the upper right from the 6th century, a middle Byzantine example to the right. And then a relatively modern Western European example of the same, another example of the continuity here. That profile is reserved for figures like Judas and other figures with whom the viewer is not invited to commune. Looking at the face, we are attracted to the eyes. The eyes are the highest organs of sense perception and have been called the windows of the soul. They are that part of the face in which spiritual life most intensely concentrates. In many cultures, vision and sight function as metaphors for knowledge and understanding. In common parlance, to see is to know, if you see what I mean. If you don’t see what I mean, you’re blind. And the enlarged eyes of the icon represent increased wisdom, heightened awareness, and spiritual insight. Hearing can also represent a mode of perceiving and experiencing God. The Mother of God, in both East and West, this is an ancient tradition, the Mother of God was herself said to have conceived the Word of God through her senses, through hearing. What better way to conceive a word but through the ear or through the sense of hearing. In the case of the saints, holy ears are attentive not only to the still small voice of God, but to the prayer of the church and to the cries of victims and the oppressed. The enlarged ears of the icon signal an acute inner hearing which can perceive the unspoken and unconscious. It’s been said that a person who is deaf to the word of God is deaf to all voices, but the person who hears the word of God can hear every voice. The solemnly closed mouth and pursed lips assure the beholder that the icon does not laugh frivolously, wounding the sorrowful, and so the faithful draw near to shed their tears before it. Though silent, the icon is not a cry of sorrow; the icon speaks, comforting the downcast, reconciling those in discord, and urging all to put nothing in the world before the love of Christ. Divine truth, the saints tell us, does not consist in talking but in silence, in remaining within the heart in long suffering. The language of this world consists of words and speech, but the language of the next world is silence. As mentioned above a moment ago, the nose of the icon is thin and elongated, reminding the viewer that the transfigured person no longer breathes the perfumes and fragrances of this world, but only the life-giving breath of the Holy Spirit, the fragrance of Jesus Christ, who like a flask of precious and sweet-smelling ointment emptied himself upon the wounded world. In the words of Paul, Christ was a fragrant offering, a sacrifice acceptable and pleasing to God. The Apostle sensed that he himself was surrounded by an aura of sacred smell. Corinthians 2:15, for we are the odor of Christ to some. To some we are the odor of life, but to others we are the odor of death, the death of unbelief and judgment.
[中文] 唤起与呈现，即对变容之自我的反映，是通过改变身体的自然对称性和比例，尤其是身体的面貌特征来实现的。我们将简单谈谈为什么圣像看起来是那个样子。有人可能会说这在解剖学上是不正确的，但这其中是有原因的。例如，圣像的面部从不以侧面描绘，而是总是或多或少地直接转向观者。面部表情宁静而克制。圣像的眼睛和耳朵通常被放大，而鼻子通常被拉长并变窄。嘴巴往往很小，并且总是紧闭的。这些改变意味着什么？它们如何用来投射圣灵的灵，以及所描绘之人的品质？在圣像的视觉语言中，面部的完全正面描绘代表了所描绘之位格的完整、圆满和完美。正面描绘也使圣像具有对话性和关系性。如果图像背对着你，你就无法与它交流，因此这里有一种明显的敬拜功能，而这种正面性既是共融的记号，也是共融的载体。福音是向全世界宣讲的，基督内住的位格是面向他人的。这样的位格为他人而活。另一方面，侧面描绘则暗示着破碎。它破坏了共融，并开启了向虚无的消逝。这是位格的缺席。它暗示着一种两面三刀的口是心非，通常它被保留给犹大这个人物，你在这里看到他用亲吻背叛基督，右上角有两幅6世纪晚期的古代例子，右边有一幅中拜占庭时期的例子。然后是一幅相对现代的西欧同类例子，这是此处连续性的另一个例子。这种侧面描绘保留给像犹大这样的人物，以及其他不邀请观者与之共融的人物。看着面部，我们被眼睛所吸引。眼睛是最高级的感官器官，被称为灵魂的窗户。它们是面部中属灵生活最集中体现的部分。在许多文化中，视觉和视力作为知识和理解的隐喻。在通俗的说法中，看见就是知道，如果你明白我的意思。如果你不明白我的意思，你就是瞎了。而圣像放大的眼睛代表着增加的智慧、提高的意识和属灵的洞察力。听觉也可以代表一种感知和体验上帝的模式。上帝之母，在东方和西方，这是一个古老的传统，据说上帝之母本人就是通过她的感官，通过听觉怀上了上帝之道。除了通过耳朵或听觉，还有什么更好的方式来怀上道呢。就圣人而言，圣洁的耳朵不仅留心上帝微小的声音，也留心教会的祈祷以及受害者和受压迫者的呼喊。圣像放大的耳朵标志着一种敏锐的内在听觉，能够感知未说出口的和潜意识的东西。有人说，对上帝之道充耳不闻的人对所有声音都充耳不闻，但听见上帝之道的人能听见每一个声音。庄严紧闭的嘴巴和撅起的嘴唇向观者保证，圣像不会轻浮地发笑而伤害悲伤的人，因此信徒们走近它，在它面前流下眼泪。虽然无声，但圣像不是悲伤的呼喊；圣像在说话，安慰沮丧的人，使不和的人和解，并敦促所有人不要将世上任何事物置于对基督的爱之上。圣人告诉我们，神圣的真理不在于言语，而在于安静，在于在忍耐中存留在心里。这个世界的语言由文字和言语组成，但下一个世界的语言是安静。正如刚才提到的，圣像的鼻子细长，提醒观者变容的位格不再呼吸这个世界的香水和芬芳，而只呼吸圣灵赐予生命的气息，即耶稣基督的芬芳，他就像一瓶珍贵而芳香的膏油，将自己倾倒在受伤的世界上。用保罗的话说，基督是馨香的祭物，是蒙上帝悦纳和喜悦的祭献。使徒感觉到自己被一种神圣气味的氛围所包围。哥林多书2:15，因为我们在某些人中间就是基督的香气。对某些人我们是生命的香气，但对其他人我们是死亡的香气，即不信和审判的死亡。
[English] In the icon, the body and its senses have been restored to their true function as modes of relation with both God and the viewer. Through such communion, the self is energized and transformed so that the body which Plato called the prison of the soul now becomes the living temple of the Holy Spirit. This transformation is described by Anthony the Great, who in a letter to his friends promised them that, and I quote, the Holy Spirit will teach you to keep your body the way you should, from your head to your feet. The Spirit will teach your eyes to look purely, your ears to listen patiently and with peace, your tongue to speak only good, your hands to be raised in prayer and to works of mercy, your feet to walk in the ways of righteousness, in harmony with the will of God. Having thus submitted yourself to the power of the Spirit, you will change, and you will take on the qualities of the spiritual body which you will receive at the resurrection of the just on the last day. In a remarkable passage written more than 1000 years after St. Anthony, St. Mark of Ephesus envisioned some of the qualities of that resurrected body. And I quote, Our eyes will see and we will understand both ourselves and the beauty of God. In place of food we will be filled when we see the glory of God. Psalm 16:15. All of these are biblical, mostly psalm verses, but I’ll leave out the references as I read this. In place of food we will be filled when we see the glory of God. Our eyes will receive the divine voice with joy as it is written, make me to hear joy and gladness. We will taste with our lips and know that the Lord is good, and we shall breathe the fragrance of the spiritual myrrh which poured itself out for us. Although the tongue shall cease from its natural work, there will nonetheless resound the song of those keeping festival and the sound of joy in the dwellings of the just. Together with the curious disciple, we shall touch the Word made flesh, and we shall know his wounds and the reason for his incarnation and passion. And the stomach, when it accepts the nourishment of the Word, shall give birth, for the body will become entirely spiritual, and its members will be spiritual, and the foci of spiritual energies, and thus the body will find its proper use. I just recently found another passage like this, which is St. John of Damascus’ description of the Mother of God in his homily on the birth of the Virgin, and it seemed like a good idea to share it. So this is what he says, speaking of the Mother of God: Your eyes, he says to her, are continually before the Lord, seeing eternal and unapproachable light. Your ears hear the divine words and delight in the harp of the Spirit. Through them the word entered that he might become flesh. Your nostrils are charmed by the scent of the bridegroom’s ointments, who is himself a divine ointment, which is willingly poured out to anoint his own humanity, for your name is ointment poured out. Song of Songs 1:2. Your lips praise the Lord and are attached to his lips. This icon is a glycophilusa type and often the lips, the mother of God and the child are engaged in a tender kiss, hence the words here. Your lips praise the Lord and are attached to his lips. Your tongue and throat discern the words of God and are filled with divine sweetness. Your heart is pure and unblemished, seeing and desiring the unseen God. Your womb contained the uncontainable God. Your hands carried him and your knees became a throne that is higher than the cherubim. Your whole being is a bridal chamber of the Spirit.
[中文] 在圣像中，身体及其感官恢复了其真正的功能，即作为与上帝和观者建立关系的模式。通过这种共融，自我被赋予能量并发生转变，以至于柏拉图称之为灵魂监狱的身体，现在成了圣灵的活圣殿。这种转变由大圣安东尼所描述，他在给朋友的一封信中向他们承诺，我引用如下：圣灵将教导你从头到脚以应有的方式保守你的身体。圣灵将教导你的眼睛纯洁地观看，你的耳朵耐心且平静地聆听，你的舌头只说良善的话，你的双手举起祈祷并做仁慈的工作，你的双脚行在公义的道路上，与上帝的旨意相和谐。既然如此将自己顺服于圣灵的大能之下，你将会改变，并且你将获得属灵身体的特质，这身体是你在末日义人复活时将要领受的。在圣安东尼之后一千多年写成的一段非凡文字中，以弗所的圣马可设想了那复活身体的一些特质。我引用如下：我们的眼睛将看见，我们将理解我们自己以及上帝的美。当我们看见上帝的荣耀时，我们将以之代替食物而得饱足。诗篇16:15。所有这些都是圣经经文，主要是诗篇的经节，但我在读这段时会省略出处。当我们看见上帝的荣耀时，我们将以之代替食物而得饱足。我们的眼睛将充满喜乐地领受神圣的声音，正如经上所记，求你使我听见欢喜和快乐。我们将用嘴唇品尝并知道主是美善的，我们将呼吸那为我们倾注的属灵没药的香气。尽管舌头将停止其自然的工作，但在义人的居所中仍将回荡着守节之人的歌声和喜乐的声音。我们将与那好奇的门徒一起，触摸道成肉身者，我们将认识他的伤痕，以及他道成肉身与受难的原因。当胃接受了道的滋养时，它将孕育生产，因为身体将完全成为属灵的，其肢体也将是属灵的，成为属灵能量的焦点，从而身体将找到其正当的用途。我最近刚发现了另一段类似的文字，这是大马士革的约翰在关于童贞女诞生的讲道中对上帝之母的描述，我觉得分享出来是个好主意。所以这就是他所说的，论及上帝之母时：他对她说，你的眼睛不断仰望主，看见永恒且不可接近的光。你的耳朵听见神圣的话语，并因圣灵的竖琴而欢欣。通过它们，道进入其中以致他可以成为肉身。你的鼻孔被新郎膏油的香气所迷醉，新郎本身就是神圣的膏油，他甘愿倾注以膏抹自己的人性，因为你的名如同倒出来的膏油。雅歌1:2。你的嘴唇赞美主，并紧贴他的嘴唇。这圣像是glycophilusa（甜蜜之吻）类型，通常上帝之母和孩子的嘴唇在进行温柔的亲吻，因此这里有这样的话。你的嘴唇赞美主，并紧贴他的嘴唇。你的舌头和喉咙辨别上帝的话语，并充满神圣的甘甜。你的心是纯洁无瑕的，看见并渴望那看不见的上帝。你的子宫包含了那不可包含的上帝。你的双手抱起他，你的双膝成为高于基路伯的宝座。你的全人是圣灵的新房。
[English] Conclusion. In light of creation and incarnation, icons reveal and convey the vision of the divine glory in which our world is immersed and of which our world is a reflection, as if all things were enfolded within some great living being whose tracks we see everywhere, of which we ourselves are the tracks and traces, because we too are images of the unimageable, we too are images and icons of that for which no image or icon can be made. There are no shadows cast within icons because the icon is not illumined by the light of this world. The light of the icon is an uncreated light that knows no evening. It is the grace of the gift of the Holy Spirit. It is a light which emerges from within the sacred space of the icon, from the radiant faces of the saints. It is a calm, restful, and joyful moment, joyful light. The shining icon is like a light which illuminates and guides you, and you can see it comforting and clear, whether it is day or night. Whether you are joyful or sorrowful, it fills you with a sense of consolation. Whether you live or whether you die, its grace is there and keeps you cradled in life incorruptible. Thank you.
[中文] 结论。鉴于受造物与道成肉身，圣像揭示并传达了神圣荣耀的异象，我们的世界沉浸于这荣耀之中，也是这荣耀的反映，仿佛万物都被包裹在某个伟大的生命存在之中，我们在各处都能看到它的踪迹，而我们自己也是这踪迹和痕迹，因为我们也是那不可成像之物的形象，我们也是那无法制作形象或圣像之物的形象和圣像。圣像内没有投射的阴影，因为圣像不是由这世界的光所照亮的。圣像的光是非受造之光，不知黄昏。它是圣灵之恩赐的恩典。这光从圣像的神圣空间内，从圣人发光的面容中涌现出来。这是一个平静、安宁且喜乐的时刻，是喜乐之光。闪耀的圣像就像一盏照亮并指引你的光，无论白天还是黑夜，你都能看到它令人安慰且清晰。无论你是喜乐还是忧愁，它都让你充满安慰感。无论你是生是死，它的恩典都在那里，将你怀抱在不朽的生命中。谢谢。