Elena Neigum is an established iconographer and educator who is focused on the analysis of contemporary threats to the Byzantine iconography, advocating for the reaffirmation of the icon as a sacred and theological act within the life of the Church. -- LAJ.
Guest article by Elena Neigum
In both Eastern and Western Christendom, sacred art has long served as more than mere visual ornament. The icon in the East and devotional imagery in the West reflect distinct theological emphases, yet both traditions emerge from a shared need: to make the invisible visible through sanctified form. This article examines the enduring relevance of the iconographic canon, especially within the United States, and seeks to explore its resonance beyond the boundaries of Eastern Christianity, proposing that the icon is not only a visual theology, but also a bridge across ecclesial traditions.
Visual Theology and Liturgical Function
Western sacred art -- especially pre-modern works -- often share this purpose, though expressed differently. Romanesque frescoes, early Gothic panels, and even select works of the Northern Renaissance retain a sacramental intentionality. Yet in much of the post-Renaissance West, the theological function of sacred art was gradually subordinated to aesthetics and sentiment.²
Transmission of the Tradition in the Modern West
As an iconographer trained in the ancient techniques of egg tempera on levkas, I have dedicated my work to preserving the theological and liturgical functions of the icon. In my studio in Philadelphia, I teach both children and adults how to engage with this discipline -- not only as an art form, but as a prayerful act rooted in Byzantine dogma and patristic sources.
 |
| Icons by Elena Neigum |
 |
| Icon by Elena Neigum |
In recent years, I have witnessed growing interest in Byzantine iconography among Catholic, Anglican, and even secular audiences. The language of sacred form -- silent, symbolic, and deeply incarnational -- seems to answer a yearning for transcendence. At exhibitions and liturgical installations across North America, viewers describe a sense of stillness and presence. This reception speaks to the icon's capacity to transcend denominational boundaries while maintaining its Byzantine core.³
The challenge of iconography in the modern West lies in balancing fidelity to canon with engagement in contemporary culture. The temptation to "modernize" icons -- through stylistic hybridity or expressive naturalism -- threatens to obscure their genuine liturgical identity. As Vladimir Lossky and Leonid Ouspensky caution, the icon is not merely religious art; it is theology in color.⁴ This is the principle that guides my own work. Whether painting a traditional Deësis for an Antiochian parish in New Jersey or teaching high school students to prepare natural pigments, I emphasize that every element -- the line, color, proportion, even silence -- must conform to the liturgical and theological ethos of the Church. Conclusion The iconographic tradition offers a powerful response to the desacralization of art. In both East and West, sacred art is being rediscovered as a language of the eternal. The Byzantine icon, in particular, stands as a visual confession of the Incarnation, a dogmatic statement rendered in line and color. In transmitting this tradition to a modern audience, we do not merely preserve the past -- we proclaim the ever-present mystery of Christ.
The challenge of iconography in the modern West lies in balancing fidelity to canon with engagement in contemporary culture. The temptation to "modernize" icons -- through stylistic hybridity or expressive naturalism -- threatens to obscure their genuine liturgical identity. As Vladimir Lossky and Leonid Ouspensky caution, the icon is not merely religious art; it is theology in color.⁴ This is the principle that guides my own work. Whether painting a traditional Deësis for an Antiochian parish in New Jersey or teaching high school students to prepare natural pigments, I emphasize that every element -- the line, color, proportion, even silence -- must conform to the liturgical and theological ethos of the Church. Conclusion The iconographic tradition offers a powerful response to the desacralization of art. In both East and West, sacred art is being rediscovered as a language of the eternal. The Byzantine icon, in particular, stands as a visual confession of the Incarnation, a dogmatic statement rendered in line and color. In transmitting this tradition to a modern audience, we do not merely preserve the past -- we proclaim the ever-present mystery of Christ.
Notes1. The Canons of the Seventh Ecumenical Council (Nicaea II, 787), esp. Canons 6 and 7.
2. Baggley, John. Doors of Perception: Icons and Their Spiritual Significance. London: Mowbray, 1987.
3. Florensky, Pavel. Iconostasis. Trans. Donald Sheehan. St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1996.
4. Ouspensky, Leonid and Vladimir Lossky. The Meaning of Icons. SVS Press, 1989.
Bibliography
Lossky, Vladimir, and Leonid Ouspensky. The Meaning of Icons. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1989.
Florensky, Pavel. Iconostasis. Translated by Donald Sheehan. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1996.
Baggley, John. Doors of Perception: Icons and Their Spiritual Significance. London: Mowbray, 1987.
Pelikan, Jaroslav. Imago Dei: The Byzantine Theology of Icons. Yale University Press, 1990.
Evdokimov, Paul. The Art of the Icon: A Theology of Beauty. Oakwood Publications, 1990.
-------
Do you like Liturgical Arts Journal's original content? You can help support LAJ in its mission and vision to promote beauty in Catholic worship either by:
You choose the amount! Your support makes all the difference.
