Abstract
Mark Edwards,
Image, Word and God in the Early Christian Centuries
, Ashgate: Farnham, 2013; 228 pp.: 9781409406457, £60.00 (hbk), 9781409406716, £19.99 (pbk)
In this dense but perspicatious study Mark Edwards offers a series of discrete explorations of the complex interface of notions of image and word in Scripture, theology and philosophy down to the fifth century. Eschewing any sort of grand narrative or even single overarching thesis, Edwards testifies to the uniqueness of the Christian understanding of word and image while maintaining an acute sense of the polyphonic nature of that understanding. By way of comparison and in contrast with specifically Christian theology, Edwards devotes particular attention to the Platonic philosophical tradition, furnishing probing studies not only of Plato but also of Plotinus, Porphyry, Iamblichus and Proclus. Unlike many an earlier commentator, Edwards is loathe to trace a saga of decline in post-Plotinian Platonism (excepting the emperor and aspiring philosopher Julian whose credulity comes in for some choice criticism). But for all his sympathy for the Platonic tradition, Edwards has no interest in making easy connections or detecting superficial similarities between it and Christianity. Plato’s use of the term eikon (icon) in some of his key treatments of the theme is, for example, treated as merely adventitious. On the contrary, one of the chief goals of the book is to underscore the differences between Christian theology and Platonic philosophy, differences arising most particularly from Christianity’s espousal of the twin principles of incarnation and revelation.
Edwards is also keen to affirm the gulf that separates Christianity from ideas of image and word in the Hebrew Scriptures. This is a gulf borne out by, among other things, Christian adoption of the codex over the scroll as its preferred medium of Holy Writ, with the codex being, Edwards believes, less amenable to liturgical veneration. Here Edwards might perhaps have made more allowance for Eastern Christian worship which cedes little to Jewish liturgy in its veneration of the physical artifact of Holy Scripture.
When it comes to Christian theology, Edwards is just as subtle and incisive as when dealing with the Platonists. He is particularly good on Christian Platonists such as Origen, Augustine and Dionysius, affirming in each case that their Christianity is of inestimably greater significance than any philosophical orientations they may have had. Taking his theme of word and image into otherwise familiar territory, Edwards offers many striking insights and observations. Why was it, for example, that Nicene theologians initially saw no difficulty in affirming the Son as the image of the Father when the image was, in accordance with the philosophy of the day, self-evidently inferior to the prototype? Why, for that matter, did Arius not make more of this seemingly glaring scriptural warrant for his own particular brand of subordinationism? Perhaps a broader historical compass may have helped tackle such questions, one that embraced, for example, the theory of the Byzantine iconoclasts that a true icon must be consubstantial with its prototype. Taking the story into the Byzantine period would certainly be a fascinating enterprise, allowing a greater engagement with material culture and with explicit arguments for and against the production and veneration of Christian images. It would also allow for exploration of Maximus the Confessor’s understanding of Holy Scripture as a form of incarnation – an idea Edwards deals with in Origen but finds to have little posterity in his chosen period. None of this, I should stress, is intended to criticize the scope of the work, which is already vast, but rather to flag up the potential for a second volume, should the author have the inclination.
This book may not be an easy read, composed as it is largely of close textual analysis, but it certainly repays the effort. Edwards is a scholar of distinction who offers many gems to the determined reader – not least the observation in the conclusion that if Christian Churches are to have any images at all then those images ought logically to receive the veneration due to the prototype rather than be treated as merely pedagogical artefacts.