One of the founding fathers of ancient philosophy, and with it the entire European civilization, the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle said: “Philosophy begins with wonder.” The same can be said about Christian dogma - it cannot but cause surprise. The worlds of Tolkien, Ende and Lewis with all their fabulous mysteries do not even touch the shadow of the mysterious and paradoxical world of Christian theology.
Christianity begins with the great mystery of the Most Holy Trinity - the mystery of God's Love, revealed in this one incomprehensible unity. V. Lossky wrote that in the Trinity we see the unity in which the Church abides. Just as the Persons of the Trinity remain unmerged, but constitute One, we are all gathered into the single Body of Christ - and this is not a metaphor, not a symbol, but the same reality as the reality of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist.
How to depict a mystery? Only through another secret. The joyful mystery of the Incarnation made it possible to depict the Indescribable. The icon is a symbolic text about God and holiness, revealed in time and space and abiding in eternity, just as the fairy-tale forest from Michael Ende’s “The NeverEnding Story”, created in the imagination of the protagonist, begins to exist without end and beginning.
We can comprehend this eternity thanks to one more mystery, far from the last in the world of Christian theology: God Himself enlightens every Christian, following the Apostles, by bestowing Himself - the Holy Spirit. We receive the gifts of the Holy Spirit in the Sacrament of Confirmation, and He permeates the whole world, thanks to which this world exists.
So, the Holy Spirit reveals to us the mystery of the Trinity. And that is why we call the day of Pentecost - the Descent of the Holy Spirit on the Apostles - “The Day of the Holy Trinity”.
“The Hospitality of Abraham” - the plot of the icon of the Life-Giving Trinity
The indescribable can be depicted only to the extent that it has been revealed to us. On this basis, the Church does not allow the depiction of God the Father. And the most correct image of the Trinity is the iconographic canon “Hospitality of Abraham,” which sends the viewer to distant Old Testament times:
And the Lord appeared to him at the oak grove of Mamre, when he was sitting at the entrance to [his] tent, during the heat of the day.
He lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, three men stood against him. When he saw it, he ran towards them from the entrance to [his] tent and bowed to the ground and said: Master! If I have found favor in Your sight, do not pass by Your servant; and they will bring some water and wash your feet; and rest under this tree, and I will bring bread, and you will strengthen your hearts; then go [on your way]; as you pass by your servant. They said: do as you say.
And Abraham hurried to Sarah’s tent and said to [her], “quickly knead three sati of fine flour and make unleavened bread.”
And Abraham ran to the herd, and took a tender and good calf, and gave it to the lad, and he hastened to prepare it.
And he took the butter and the milk and the calf that had been prepared, and set it before them, while he stood beside them under the tree. And they ate.
The story of a hospitable old man who recognized God in three men is in itself touching and instructive for any believer: if you serve your neighbor, you serve the Lord. We meet the image of this event very early.
Mosaic on the triumphal arch of the Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore in Rome created in the 5th century. The image is visually divided into two parts. At the top, Abraham runs out to meet three men (one of them is surrounded by radiance, symbolizing the glory of the Divine). In the lower part, the guests are already sitting at the set table, and Abraham is serving them. Sarah stands behind Abraham. The artist conveys the movement by depicting the old man twice: here he is giving instructions to his wife, and here he turns around to bring a new dish to the table.
By the 14th century, the canon “Hospitality of Abraham” was already fully formed. Icon "Trinity of Zyryansk", which, according to legend, belonged to the brush of St. Stefan of Perm is a slightly modified version of it. Three angels are seated at a table, a calf lies under it, and Abraham and Sarah stand at the bottom left. In the background there is a building with a turret (the house of Abraham) and a tree (the Oak of Mamre).
The images may change, but the set of symbols and characters remains the same: three angels, a couple serving them, below - a calf (sometimes with a youth slaughtering it), an oak tree, the chambers of Abraham. 1580, icon " Holy Trinity in existence”, surrounded by stamps depicting events associated with the apparitions of the Trinity. An interesting detail: Abraham and Sarah here not only serve at the table, but also sit at it. The icon is located in the Solvychegodsk Historical and Art Museum:
More typical, for example, is a 16th-century icon from the Trinity-Gerasimov Church in Vologda. Angels are in the center of the composition, followed by Abraham and Sarah.
The icon is considered the pinnacle of Russian icon painting Trinity, written by Rev. Andrei Rublev. Minimum symbols: three angels (Trinity), a cup (Atoning sacrifice), a table (the Lord's Table, the Eucharist), a reverse perspective - “expanding” from the viewer (the space of the icon, describing the heavenly world, is immeasurably larger than the world below). Among the recognizable realities - an oak tree (Mamre), a mountain (here is the sacrifice of Isaac, and Golgotha) and a building (Abraham's house? Church?..).
This image will become a classic image for the Russian icon, although some discrepancies in details are possible. For example, sometimes the middle angel has a cross on his halo - this is how Christ is depicted on icons.
Another example: Simon Ushakov depicts the meal in more detail.
The canon “Hospitality of Abraham” is optimal for depicting the Holy Trinity: it emphasizes the unity of essence (three angels) and the difference of hypostases (angels are present in the space of the icon “autonomously” from each other).
Therefore, a similar canon is used when depicting the appearance of the Trinity to saints. One of the most famous images is Appearance of the Holy Trinity to Saint Alexander of Svirsky:
Non-canonical images
However, there have been attempts to portray God in the Trinity in other ways.
It is extremely rare in Western European and Russian temple painting to come across an image used in the iconography of the Renaissance, where three faces are combined in one body. It did not take root in church painting because of its obvious heresy (mixing of Hypostases), and in secular painting because it was unaesthetic.
But the image " Trinity New Testament"occurs often, although it contains the other extreme - the division of the Essence of the Divine.
The most famous icon of this canon is “ Fatherland» Novgorod school (XIV century). The Father sits on the throne in the form of a gray-haired old man, on his knees is the Youth Jesus, holding a circle with the image of the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove. Around the throne are seraphim and cherubim, closer to the frame are saints.
No less common is the image of the New Testament Trinity in the form of the Elder-Father, on the right hand - Christ the King (or Christ holding the Cross), and in the middle - the Holy Spirit, also in the form of a dove.
How did the canon of the “New Testament Trinity” appear if the image of God the Father, Whom no one has seen, is prohibited by the council? The answer is simple: by mistake. The book of the prophet Daniel mentions the Old Denmi - God:
The Ancient of Days sat down; His robe was white as snow, and the hair of His head was like pure wool. (Dan.7:9).
It was believed that Daniel saw the Father. In fact, the Apostle John saw Christ in exactly the same way:
I turned to see whose voice was speaking to me; and turning, he saw seven golden lampstands and, in the midst of the seven lampstands, one like the Son of Man, clothed in a robe and girded around the chest with a golden belt: His head and hair were as white as white wool, like snow...
(Rev.1:12-14).
The image of the “Old Day” exists on its own, but is an image of the Savior, not the Trinity. For example, on the fresco of Dionysius in the Ferapontov Monastery, a halo with a Cross, with which the Savior is always depicted, is clearly visible.
The Virgin Mary in images of the Trinity
Two more interesting images of the “New Testament Trinity” came from the Catholic Church. They are rarely used, but also deserve attention.
"Adoration of the Holy Trinity" by Albrecht Durer(the painting is kept in the Vienna Museum of Art History): at the top of the composition is the Father, below Him is Christ on the Cross, and above them is the Spirit as a dove. The Trinity is worshiped by the Heavenly Church (angels and all saints with the Mother of God) and the Earthly Church - the bearers of secular (emperor) and ecclesiastical (pope) power, priests and laity.
Image " Coronation of the Mother of God“is associated with the Mother of God dogmas of the Catholic Church, but due to the deep veneration of the Most Pure Virgin by all Christians, it also became widespread in Orthodoxy.
In the center of the composition is the Virgin Mary, the Father and the Son holding a crown over Her head, and a dove depicting the Holy Spirit hovers above them.
Orthodoxy is perhaps the only Christian denomination in which icon veneration is very developed. Moreover, if Catholics respect sacred images, then numerous Protestant churches unanimously accuse the Orthodox of almost idolatry.
In fact, for a believer, an icon is not an idol at all, but a reminder of another world, of saints and God. The phrase “to venerate an icon” carries a slightly different meaning than “to venerate God.” An icon can be compared to a photograph of a loved one, which is carefully stored in or hung on the wall. No one considers a photo to be an idol or a replacement for the original, even if it receives a lot of attention.
In many religions there are no icons, and any images are prohibited for a completely reasonable reason: no one has ever seen God, so how can one depict the indescribable?
Orthodox icon painters also do not invent anything, and, according to the rules, only what was material is depicted on icons.
But what about the “Holy Trinity” icon, because no one has ever seen God! This is not entirely true. We saw our God in human form. Jesus Christ is God and man. So at least the second Face can be depicted. The Holy Spirit also had some incarnation. He appeared several times in the form of a white dove. It wasn't a real dove, of course, but it could be written that way.
So, the two Persons of the Trinity are depicted, but for completeness, God the Father is not enough. The “Holy Trinity” icon cannot exist without the Father.
Icon painters found several ways out of this situation - more or less successful. For example, there is an icon of the Holy Trinity, a photo or reproduction of which is located in every prayer corner. On it, God the Son sits on a throne, above Him is God the Holy Spirit, and is indicated by a certain icon of outpouring grace. There is another option, which is usually called Catholic, where God the Father is arbitrarily depicted as an old man, and God the Holy Spirit as a dove. Everyone admits that it is non-canonical, that is, it does not correspond to the Orthodox rules of icon painting, but it came into widespread use back in the 19th century.
The most famous icon “Holy Trinity” was painted by Rublev.
This depicts a moment in Old Testament history when three angels came to Abraham. According to the interpretation, this was God, or maybe Andrei Rublev used only an image. In any case, the icon is a unique work not only of icon painting, but also of theological thought. Rublev’s “Holy Trinity” icon is not only that moment at the tent of Abraham, but also the eternal council. This idea is suggested by the contents of the bowl on the table. It (according to many interpreters) contains the sacrament, that is, the Blood of Jesus Christ. This is the moment of a certain prophecy about the future, about the incarnation of the Son of God and about His suffering. It is this mysterious meeting that is called the eternal council.
The “Holy Trinity” icon is mysterious; it has a huge number of symbolic details, by which one can determine that Andrei Rublev designated a certain Person of the Holy Trinity with each Angel. Discussions about it are still ongoing. This image is now kept in the temple at the Tretyakov Gallery. Here it is under guard, but you can venerate it, pray to God and light a candle.
However, in Orthodox icon painting there are images whose deep meaning is not so easy to immediately understand.
One such example is the icon of the Holy Trinity. Not only are there several different versions of this image, but it is also not always clear who exactly is depicted. Let's try to understand this difficult theological issue.
Who is the Holy Trinity and what are its icons?
The dogma of the unity of the Holy Trinity is one of the most complex and at the same time fundamental postulates of the Orthodox faith. According to him, we believe in One God, who is represented in three persons or hypostases - God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit. Each of the hypostases is God, and God inextricably contains all three persons. There is no hierarchy in the Trinity; God the Son is God to the same extent as God the Father or God the Holy Spirit.
Icon of the Holy Trinity
It is beyond the power of a simple layman to fully understand this teaching; the best theologians of the entire Christian world are racking their brains over this. For an ordinary ordinary person who believes in our Lord Jesus Christ, it is enough to understand that the One God has three persons, each of which is equally God. Canonically, icons can only depict what was revealed to people. Thus, a great miracle was revealed to humanity to see the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, which is why we have a large number of icons with his holy face.
About the icons of Jesus Christ:
As for God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, apparently they never appeared to people. There are places in the Bible where the Lord sent his voice from Heaven, and also the Holy Spirit descended in the form of a dove. These are all physical manifestations of the other two hypostases that humanity has. In this regard, there is no icon that in its natural form would depict the Holy Trinity (as, for example, there are icons of Christ that reliably repeat His appearance).
All images of the Trinity are deeply symbolic and carry a great theological load. One of the most famous images is “The Hospitality of Abraham.” It depicts a scene from the book of Genesis when the Lord appeared to Abraham in the guise of three angels. It was then that one of the angels announced to Abraham about the imminent birth of his son.
In this image we see three angels sitting at a table and Abraham and Sarah serving them. In the background you can see the Oak of Mamre, the home of Abraham himself, and the mountains. The essence of this image is that symbolically the secret of the Trinity Lord was revealed to Abraham and Sarah in the guise of three angels.
Appearance of the Holy Trinity to Abraham
Icon of St. Andrei Rublev
The essence of the Trinitarian Divine nature is most fully revealed in the image of St. Andrei Rublev. Perhaps this is the most famous and revered icon of the Holy Trinity in our church. The artist abandons the images of Abraham and Sarah, the angels sit alone at the table. They no longer eat the food, but seem to bless it. And there is no food as such on the table anymore - only one cup remains, which symbolizes communion and the Holy Gifts.
Many researchers have tried to unravel the order in which the Monk Andrei Rublev depicted each hypostasis of the Lord. Most experts agreed that in order to emphasize the unity of the Trinity, the artist did not indicate where anyone is depicted.
By and large, for a simple Christian believer it makes no difference where each entity is located. We still pray to the One God, and it is impossible to pray to the Son without also praying to the Father or the Holy Spirit. Therefore, when looking at an icon, it is best to perceive the image as a whole, without dividing it into three different figures.
Even the image itself seems to emphasize the unity of all the characters - the figures of all three angels fit into an invisible circle. In the middle is the Cup, which symbolically points to Christ's Sacrifice for all mankind.
It is necessary to mention that there are various non-canonical attempts to depict the three hypostases of God. The mystery of the Christian understanding of God has always attracted many researchers, and they did not always coordinate their views with the canons of Orthodoxy. Therefore, believers should carefully avoid being carried away by such images. You cannot find such icons in churches; you don’t need to have them at home either.
Icon of the Most Holy Trinity by St. Andrei Rublev
Where should the icon of the Holy Trinity be located and how to pray in front of it
If we talk about temples, then in most of them you can find this holy image. If the temple is consecrated in honor of the Holy Trinity, then the main icon will be on the lectern, in a prominent place. Any Christian believer can come to such a temple and venerate the shrine.
Before the image, prayers can be served, and water can be blessed. Such small services provide great consolation to the Orthodox who pray at them for what concerns their souls. You can submit notes with the names of relatives and friends, then the priest will offer petitions to God and for them.
Important! The basis of any prayer service is not the fact of submitting a note with names, but a sincere appeal to God by a believer. Therefore, it is very advisable to attend the prayer service in person.
You can also have an icon of the Holy Trinity at home so that you can turn to the Lord in personal prayer at home. For this home, you can equip special shelves for images - home iconostasis. All the icons in the family are placed on it. It is worth remembering that when decorating the iconostasis, the central place should be occupied by the icons of the Lord and the Blessed Virgin Mary, followed by the saints revered in the family.
According to Christian tradition, it is customary to install all iconostases on the eastern wall or corner of the house. However, if for some objective reasons this cannot be done (for example, the eastern side is occupied by a large window or door), then there is no sin in placing home shrines in any other suitable place.
The main rule is that the attitude towards the place where the images are stored should be reverent. You need to keep it clean, wipe off dust in a timely manner, and change napkins. It is completely unacceptable when the owners maintain order, for example, in the kitchen, but at the same time the sacred corner looks neglected and unkempt.
Icon of the Holy Trinity
What does an icon help with?
In near-Christian circles one can often come across the opinion that one can pray in front of certain shrines strictly on certain issues. You can often hear such advice even in front of experienced parishioners and old-timers of churches. This approach does not entirely correctly reflect the essence of the Orthodox faith.
About other famous Orthodox icons:
In all troubles and sorrows in which we ask for spiritual help, only the Lord God can give us an answer. The saints are our helpers who, together with us, can ask the Lord to give us everything we need for our lives. It’s just that a tradition has developed that prayers in front of certain images help in a given situation. But this is not a strict rule, and a person in front of any icon can ask for anything.
Important! The belief that help comes precisely from the icon in front of which a person prays is a pagan approach and distorts the essence of the Orthodox faith.
Therefore, praying in front of the icon of the Holy Trinity at home or in church, a person can ask for everything that lies in his soul. You just have to remember that you cannot go to the Lord with sinful thoughts, dishonest or obviously bad requests.
Most of the holy fathers of the church say that real prayer is one that does not ask for anything, but only thanks God and entrusts His concern for human life. The Gospel says that not even a hair will fall from a person’s head unless it is God’s Will. Therefore, it is best to stand before the shrine with a repentant heart, humility, and the desire to correct your life according to God’s will. Such an appeal will always be heard and a person will feel grace and spiritual help in life.
Video about the icon of the Holy Trinity by Andrei Rublev
There are dozens of options that will capture one significant event with paints on boards - the meeting of three wanderers. The history of the shrine is described in chapter 18 of the Book of Genesis and transferred to icons with symbolic meaning, either depicting scenes with Abraham and his wife, wanderers, or depicting the plot of the appearance of three angels before Abraham.
However, the most famous among all the icons is the icon of the Holy Trinity, representing the Trinity of God, painted by Andrei Rublev.
History of the icon
According to historical research, the first mention of the Holy Trinity icon, painted by Andrei Rublev, dates back to 1551, when it was mentioned in an order in the Stoglav Cathedral. There they were talking about a certain shrine of the Trinity (the members of the zemstvo church knew about it), which was fully consistent with the canons and could be taken as an example. In addition, information about the shrine is contained in another source, namely in “The Tale of the Holy Icon Painters,” which speaks of the request of Nikon of Radonezh, the second abbot of the Trinity Monastery, to paint an icon of the Trinity in praise of Father Sergei, but this version raises some doubts, although and is considered generally accepted. In general, the icon of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit has only two possible dates of creation: 1411 and 1425-1427. The first date refers to the construction of a wooden church after a fire, and the second - to the construction of the Trinity Church made of stone. Both numbers are based on the construction of cathedrals, so the question of the exact year of creation of the icon remains open today.
Where there are no inaccuracies is with the author of the Holy Trinity icon. It is definitely Andrei Rublev. Although once, after the cleansing of the icon, some researchers doubted the authorship of the Russian icon painter, seeing Italian motifs in the shrine, but this assumption was soon debunked, and the Italian motifs turned out to be the influence of Byzantine painting.
The meaning of the Holy Trinity icon
As mentioned earlier, the icon of the Holy Trinity has many symbolic images that form a general idea of the event, and also through details reveal the power and significance of the shrine for believers.
The central subject of the composition is the bowl. It reflects the suffering and torment of Jesus Christ, through which He is ready to go through in the name of atonement for human sins. The red liquid that will be poured into the vessel symbolizes God's blood collected after the crucifixion of Jesus on the cross. But even while the cup is not empty, now it contains the head of a calf - the main symbol of sacrifice.
Three angels sit at the table in complete silence, holding a scepter in their hands, denoting power. Their heads are slightly tilted towards each other, and the contours of the figures resemble the key image. Each of them has its own symbol. God the Father in a purple robe in the center blesses, bending two fingers over the bowl. Behind Him grows the Mamre Oak, which in Andrei Rublev takes on the meaning of the Edenic Tree of Life. On the right side of God the Father sits the Holy Spirit, and behind Him is the Christian church, the so-called house of the Holy Spirit. With a gesture of his hand, He blesses and at the same time, in an imperative form, directs the Son through suffering. God the Son sits opposite. His head is humbly lowered, and his gaze, full of readiness, is directed at the bowl. Behind Christ’s back rises a mountain - a symbol of redemption, which He will definitely climb.
What does the icon of the Holy Trinity help with?
As for help, the icon of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit is powerful in guiding a person on the righteous path and in cleansing him from sin. The shrine helps those praying during difficult times and inspires hope when it is necessary to overcome difficult life trials. The image of the three Saints supports during times of great excitement and anxiety, and also helps when making important decisions.
Prayer to the icon
Likewise, the celebration of the icon of the Three Angels falls on “Pentecost” (the 50th day after the Resurrection of Christ), but believers can read the prayer every day.
No one turns to the Saints unless necessary, and it’s also not worth blessing them because it’s necessary. The image of the Trinity will protect and help everyone who truly asks, you just have to say the words of prayer from the bottom of your heart in front of the icon of the Holy Trinity:
To the Most Holy Trinity, the Consubstantial Power, all the good Wines that we will reward You for everything that You have rewarded us sinners and unworthy before, before you came into the world, for everything that You have rewarded us every day, and that You have prepared for all of us in the world to come ! It is fitting, then, for so much good deeds and generosity, to thank Thee not just in words, but more than in deeds, for keeping and fulfilling Thy commandments: but we, having grown up with our evil customs, have cast ourselves into countless sins and iniquities from our youth. For this reason, as unclean and defiled, do not just appear before Thy Trisholy face without coldness, but below Thy Most Holy Name, utter what is sufficient for us, even if You Yourself had not deigned, for our joy, to proclaim that we love the pure and righteous, and repentant sinners are merciful and please accept me kindly. Look down, O Divine Trinity, from the height of Your Holy Glory upon us, many sinners, and accept our good will, instead of good deeds; and give us the spirit of true repentance, so that, having hated every sin, in purity and truth, we may live until the end of our days, doing Your most holy will and glorifying Your sweetest and most magnificent name with pure thoughts and good deeds. Amen.
This and the previous images of the Holy Trinity are, strictly speaking, non-canonical, although they are not uncommon.
Icons of the Savior, with the exception of the Image Not Made by Hands, do not have special names. The Savior is sometimes depicted as a King sitting on a throne and is revered as the image of the Lord
The faces of the Holy Trinity, seated next to God the Father, the so-called. "New Testament Trinity". Some images of the Crucified Christ are realistic, reflecting His physical and mental suffering; others were written in a conventional manner: the Savior’s features were given an expression of serious calm and grandeur. The Moscow Council of 1667 condemned any images of God the Father. The basis for the resolution of the Council of 1667 was the Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition. “No one has ever seen God,” says the Evangelist John, “the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has revealed” (John 1:18; 1 John 4:12). The Seventh Ecumenical Council considered it possible to permit the depiction of the Son of God precisely because He, “taking the form of a servant, became in the likeness of men, and became in appearance like a man” (Phil. 2:7) and, thanks to this, became accessible to sensory contemplation. As for the essence of God, outside of its revelation in the Person of the God-Man, it remains hidden and inaccessible not only to sight, but also to reason, for God is the One Who “dwells in the inaccessible light, Whom no man has seen and cannot be seen.” can" (1 Tim. 6:16). The Lord, out of His boundless love for fallen people, met the eternal thirst to see Him or, at least, to perceive Him sensually. He “gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16), and “the great mystery of godliness was accomplished: God was revealed in the flesh” (1 Tim. 3:16). Thus, the inaccessible God, in the Person of the Son and Word of God, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, became a Man accessible to sight, hearing, touch and, as the Church approved at its 7th Council, also accessible to image. Likewise, the symbolic image of the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove has a biblical basis, for at the baptism of the Savior He descended on Him in the form of a dove. This image of the Holy Spirit is canonical, as is the image of Him in the form of tongues of fire descending on the apostles. Although the Moscow Council did not allow the depiction of the Lord of Hosts, this prohibition was consigned to oblivion and He began to be depicted as the “Ancient of Days” (i.e., the Elder) on the icons of the “New Testament Trinity” Isa. 6:1-2; Dan. 7:9-13; Rev. 5:11). In the Orthodox East, there are icons of the “Old Testament Trinity,” which depict the appearance of God to Abraham in the form of three wanderers. Such an image is quite canonical: God was pleased to reveal Himself in this image, which had a deep symbolic meaning, and does not pretend to be a realistic reflection of the Personality. This icon has been widespread since ancient times, both in the Orthodox East and in Russia.
The Tretyakov Gallery also houses the most famous work of Andrei Rublev - the famous "Trinity". Created in the prime of his creative powers, the icon is the pinnacle of the artist’s art.
During the time of Andrei Rublev, the theme of the Trinity, which embodied the idea of a triune deity (Father, Son and Holy Spirit), was perceived as a certain symbol of time, a symbol of spiritual unity, peace, harmony, mutual love and humility, readiness to sacrifice oneself for the common good. Sergius of Radonezh founded a monastery near Moscow with a main church in the name of the Trinity, firmly believing that “by looking at the Holy Trinity, the fear of the hated discord of this world was overcome.”
Reverend Sergius of Radonezh, under the influence of whose ideas Andrei Rublev’s worldview was formed, was an outstanding personality of his time. He advocated for overcoming civil strife, actively participated in the political life of Moscow, contributed to its rise, reconciled warring princes, and contributed to the unification of Russian lands around Moscow. A special merit of Sergius of Radonezh was his participation in the preparation of the Battle of Kulikovo, when he helped Dmitry Donskoy with his advice and spiritual experience, strengthened his confidence in the correctness of his chosen path and, finally, blessed the Russian army before the Battle of Kulikovo.
The personality of Sergius of Radonezh had special authority for his contemporaries; a generation of people during the Battle of Kulikovo was brought up on his ideas, and Andrei Rublev, as the spiritual heir of these ideas, embodied them in his work.
In the twenties of the 15th century, a team of masters, headed by Andrei Rublev and Daniil Cherny, decorated the Trinity Cathedral in the monastery of St. Sergius, erected above his tomb, with icons and frescoes. The iconostasis included the “Trinity” icon as a highly revered temple image, placed according to tradition in the lower (local) row on the right side of the Royal Doors. There is evidence from one of the sources of the 17th century about how the abbot of the monastery Nikon instructed Andrei Rublev “to paint the image of the Most Holy Trinity in praise of his father Saint Sergius.”
The plot of “Trinity” is based on the biblical story of the appearance of deity to righteous Abraham in the form of three beautiful young angels. Abraham and his wife Sarah treated the strangers under the shade of the Mamre oak, and Abraham was given to understand that the deity in three persons was embodied in the angels. Since ancient times, there have been several options for depicting the Trinity, sometimes with details of the feast and episodes of the slaughter of the calf and the baking of bread (in the gallery’s collection these are 14th-century Trinity icons from Rostov the Great and 15th-century icons from Pskov).
In the Rublev icon, attention is focused on the three angels and their condition. They are depicted seated around a throne, in the center of which is a Eucharistic cup with the head of a sacrificial calf, symbolizing the New Testament lamb, that is, Christ. The meaning of this image is sacrificial love.
The left angel, signifying God the Father, blesses the cup with his right hand. The middle angel (Son), depicted in the gospel clothes of Jesus Christ, with his right hand lowered onto the throne with a symbolic sign, expresses submission to the will of God the Father and readiness to sacrifice himself in the name of love for people. The gesture of the right angel (the Holy Spirit) completes the symbolic conversation between the Father and the Son, affirming the high meaning of sacrificial love, and comforts the doomed to sacrifice. Thus, the image of the Old Testament Trinity (that is, with details of the plot from the Old Testament) turns into the image of the Eucharist (the Good Sacrifice), symbolically reproducing the meaning of the Gospel Last Supper and the sacrament established at it (communion with bread and wine as the body and blood of Christ). Researchers emphasize the symbolic cosmological significance of the compositional circle, into which the image fits laconically and naturally. In the circle they see a reflection of the idea of the Universe, peace, unity, which embraces multiplicity and cosmos. When comprehending the content of the Trinity, it is important to understand its versatility. The symbolism and polysemy of the images of the “Trinity” go back to ancient times. For most peoples, such concepts (and images) as a tree, a bowl, a meal, a house (temple), a mountain, a circle, had a symbolic meaning. The depth of Andrei Rublev's awareness in the field of ancient symbolic images and their interpretations, the ability to combine their meaning with the content of Christian dogma, suggest a high level of education, characteristic of the enlightened society of that time and, in particular, of the artist’s likely environment.
The symbolism of the “Trinity” is correlated with its pictorial and stylistic properties. Among them, color is the most important. Since the contemplated deity was a picture of the heavenly heavenly world, the artist, with the help of paints, sought to convey the sublime “heavenly” beauty that was revealed to the earthly gaze. The painting of Andrei Rublev, especially the Zvenigorod rank, is distinguished by a special purity of color, nobility of tonal transitions, and the ability to impart a luminous radiance to the color. Light is emitted not only by golden backgrounds, ornamental cuts and assists, but also by the delicate melting of bright faces, pure shades of ocher, and the peacefully clear blue, pink and green tones of the angels’ clothes. The symbolism of color in the icon is especially noticeable in the leading sound of blue-blue, called Rublevsky cabbage roll.
Comprehending the beauty and depth of content, correlating the meaning of the “Trinity” with the ideas of Sergius of Radonezh about contemplation, moral improvement, peace, harmony, we seem to come into contact with the inner world of Andrei Rublev, his thoughts translated into this work.
The image of the New Testament Trinity in Russian art of the 16th century.
The name of this iconographic version - “Trinity of the New Testament”, as well as the definition of its composition - “Co-throne”, are terms accepted in modern art history literature. In the 16th century, judging by the inscriptions preserved on the icons, this image could be called the words of the Easter troparion “Carnally in the grave”; “On the throne was with the Father and the Holy Spirit,” borrowed from Psalm 109 with the verse “The Lord said to my Lord: sit at My right hand, until I will make all Your enemies a footstool for Your feet.” The first version of the inscription, in addition to the famous “Four-Part” icon from the Annunciation Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin, which gives a detailed illustration of the troparion, can be seen on the Moscow icon “The Lenten Triodion” (Tretyakov Gallery, inv. No. 24839), where the image of the New Testament Trinity is included in the composition of the Last Judgment. The same inscription was on the Solovetsky icon of the New Testament Trinity mentioned by V.P. Nikolsky (XVI-XVII centuries). Examples can be more numerous if we include monuments from the 17th century. The second version of the inscription is visible on the icon “The Last Judgment” from the village of Lyadiny (GE, inv. No. ERI-230). S.A. Nepein describes a folding house from the Vologda Vladychenskaya Church of the late 16th century. where in the middle there was an image of the text of Psalm 109:1. The second variant of the name seems to be more rare. In addition, being included in the composition illustrating the Creed, the image of Jesus Christ and the Lord of Hosts seated on the co-throne refers to the words: “and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father.”
The image of the New Testament Trinity in the iconographic type of the Co-Altar in Russian art earlier than the 16th century. unknown Probably, one of the first images of this kind could have been the image on the outer eastern wall of the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin, which has not reached us in its original form, but was painted based on traces taken from previous frescoes and parts of the large composition of the Last Judgment in the same cathedral (1513-1515 - 1642-1643). The painting of the outer eastern wall is the only example in Russian art of the 16th century. representative image of the New Testament Trinity. It is impossible to say whether this fresco has retained its original composition in all details. This makes it difficult to resolve the question of the sources of its iconography.
The most favorable material allowing us to trace the formation of the iconography of the New Testament Trinity on Russian soil are images of the Last Judgment. On the Novgorod icon “The Last Judgment” from the collection of A.V. Morozov (Tretyakov Gallery, inv. No. 14458, second half of the 16th century), the Lord of Hosts sits at the top in the center, on his right hand an empty place is left on the throne, which is made especially noticeable thanks to to the second, also empty, foot. On this side of the throne, at the front edge of the back, there is a sacrificial cup at the top. Between the cup and the head of Hosts the Holy Spirit is depicted in the form of a dove. The image of Hosts is repeated on the right, but there is no free space on the throne next to it. Instead, here we see the image of Jesus Christ surrounded by a mandorla. He is shown approaching the throne of God the Father, which contradicts the inscription that speaks of Christ being sent to earth “to judge the living and the dead.” In this icon one can see borrowings from Western compositions. These two scenes on the Novgorod icon in the fresco of the Assumption Cathedral correspond to the “Eternal Council” and
“The Sending of Christ to Earth”, however, the question again arises of how much preserved painting of the 17th century. corresponded to the original composition of the 16th century.
On another Novgorod icon “The Last Judgment” from the Church of Boris and Gleb in Plotniki (Novgorod Museum, inv. No. 2824, mid-16th century) appears that had developed by the mid-16th century. composition of the New Testament Trinity - Christ and the Lord Hosts are seated on a co-throne half-turned to each other, between them is placed the image of the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove. Christ's garments are revealed and he points to a wound on his ribs. We see a similar image of the New Testament Trinity on the famous icon from the Trinity-Sergius Monastery. On this icon, the image forms a rich and thoughtful iconographic program. I know of only one icon that repeats this iconographic program - “The New Testament Trinity” in the State Russian Museum (inventory No. DZh3085, 17th century)
During the second half of the 16th century. the image of the New Testament Trinity is enriched with new details, such as the fallen doors of the heavenly gates borrowed from the scene of the “Ascension of Christ” (an early example of the “Four-Part” icon from the Annunciation Cathedral), the throne with the Gospel placed on it and a standing chalice, and the cross and instruments of the passion placed nearby (on icon "Saturday of All Saints" from Stroganov's letter of the late 16th century from the collection of I.S. Ostroukhov, Tretyakov Gallery, inv. No. 12113).
The question may be raised, on the one hand, about borrowings from Western art of both the iconographic scheme as a whole and individual details of the image of the New Testament Trinity, and on the other hand, about the prerequisites that take place in Russian art, opening the way for these borrowings and allowing rethinking and organically include them in the context of Russian iconographic creativity of the 16th century.
The image of the Trinity on other icons
Baptism (Epiphany). Around 1497
Academician B.V. Rauschenbach. ADDITION
". FACE THE HOLY TRINITY"
The doctrines of the Trinity are among the fundamental ones, and it is therefore not surprising that icons of the Trinity are found very often. Suffice it to recall, for example, the classic Russian five-tiered iconostasis, in which the Trinity icon is placed in the center of the forefathers' row, then in the row of holidays and, in addition, in the local row. It is quite natural that the icons of the Trinity have long attracted the close attention of researchers, especially the icons of the Old Testament Trinity, which have more ancient roots than the New Testament Trinity. Of course, this is due to the fact that the Monk Andrei Rublev wrote his “Trinity”, following precisely the ancient iconography.
If we analyze the very extensive literature devoted to Rublev’s Trinity, it becomes obvious that the authors paid the main attention to the artistic features of the outstanding creation of human genius. The connection of the icon with the difficult circumstances of a historical nature characteristic of the time of its painting was not left aside. However, it is not complete enough, it seems that these works provide a theological interpretation of what is shown on the icon. In recent years, many researchers have turned to the question of which of the angels depicted on it corresponds to which Person. Opinions are expressed very different. Most often, the middle angel is identified with either the Father or Son, and depending on the choice made, the correspondence of the side angels to the other two Persons is determined. The number of possible combinations here is quite large, and it must be said that the authors provide many interesting arguments to confirm their points of view. But there is still a long way to go to an unambiguous answer to this question. Perhaps , he will never be found. The most complete and critical examination of this problem can be found in the book by L. Muller.
There is no doubt, however, that the problem of identifying angels and Persons is of a secondary nature. After all, no matter how the question of correspondence between angels and Persons is resolved, the Trinity continues to remain only the Trinity. Only the interpretation of gestures changes, but not the cardinal quality of the icon, which is naturally considered to be the complete expression of the dogmatic teaching about the Trinity. Indeed, in the Orthodox Church, an icon is not just an illustration explaining the Holy Scripture (which is quite acceptable for Catholics), but is organically included in liturgical life. It will be shown below that in Rublev this completeness of expression reaches its maximum. Considering the icons of the Trinity from the point of view of the completeness of expression of dogmatic teaching, it is interesting to trace how gradually this expression is improved and how, as theological rigor weakens when painting icons, it becomes clouded. In addition, the proposed approach allows us to analyze the icons of the Old Testament Trinity and the New Testament Trinity from a single point of view, to compare them essentially, and not attribute them to different iconographic types and, accordingly, consider them separately, without connection with each other.
In order to streamline the subsequent analysis, it is useful to formulate in the briefest form the main qualities that the Trinity possesses according to the teaching of the Church.
1. Trinity
2. Consubstantiality
3. Inseparability
4. Co-essence
5. Specificity
6. Interaction
The six qualities formulated here and related issues were discussed in my previous article. The listed qualities could be called structural-logical, since they define precisely these aspects of the dogma of the Trinity. In addition, the Trinity is also: 7. Saint; 8. Life-giving.
It seems that the latest definitions do not need any comment.
When considering the question of the evolution of the complete expression of the Trinity dogma in icons, it would seem natural to begin with the most ancient examples and end with modern ones. However, another path seems more expedient: first turn to the highest achievement in the matter of such expression - the icon of St. Andrei Rublev, and then move on to the analysis of the types of icons that preceded and followed it. This will make it possible to more clearly identify the features of other icons, the weakening in them of the full expression of dogma, having before our eyes the highest example. Much of what Rublev used goes back to earlier iconographic traditions, but will not be mentioned in the analysis of his Trinity. It will become clear when we subsequently turn to more ancient icons.
The fact that Rublev's "Trinity" carries within itself a highly complete expression of dogma was intuitively felt by many. This is best evidenced by the unpublished work of V.N. Shchepkin, in which he, nevertheless, absolutely rightly writes that Rublev created “the direct embodiment of the main dogma of Christianity” and, further, that “the poetic thought about dogma is poured out everywhere in the icon.” . In a similar sense, one can interpret the thought of Father Pavel Florensky that the icon of the Trinity "Rublev". has already ceased to be one of the images of facial life, and its relation to Mamvra is already a rudiment. This icon shows in a striking vision the Most Holy Trinity - a new revelation, although under the veil of old and undoubtedly less significant forms."
An analysis of how fully and by what artistic means Rublev embodied the dogma of the Trinity in his icon will be carried out in the same sequence as proposed above. The first quality in this series was named trinity . It is possible to show that three Persons make up one God only by depicting them on one icon (therefore, it is unthinkable here what is often done in the icons of the Annunciation, where the Mother of God and the Archangel Gabriel - for example, on the royal doors - are depicted on separate icons that make up in turn a single composition). An additional and very significant technique is the prohibition on the inscription of halos on Persons and the use instead of them of a unifying inscription representing the Triad in the form of a Monad: “The Most Holy Trinity.” Related to this is the prohibition on separating Faces by depicting different halos. The above suggests that, without clearly distinguishing the Persons on his icon, Rublev acted from dogmatic considerations. But if this is so, then the “deciphering” of “characters,” which is now often attempted, to a certain extent loses its meaning, becoming a secondary matter.
The second quality to discuss is consubstantiality . Rublev conveys it extremely simply: the three depicted angels are completely of the same type. There are no visible differences between them, and this is enough for the sensation of consubstantiality to arise. As for inseparability, then it is symbolized by the sacrificial cup located on the throne. The cup is rightly interpreted as a symbol of the Eucharist. But the Eucharist unites people into the Church, therefore, in this case, the cup unites three Persons into some kind of unity. Such a subtle expert in the theology of icon veneration as L.A. Uspensky speaks about it this way: “If the tilt of the heads and figures of two angels directed towards the third unites them with each other, then the gestures of their hands are directed towards the one standing on a white table, as if the altar, the Eucharistic chalice with the head of a sacrificial animal. It constrains the movements of the hands." The sacrificial cup - the semantic and compositional center of the icon - is one for all three angels, and this also suggests that we have a Monad.
Transfer on the icon co-essence presents a very difficult task. After all, this means that the three Persons exist only together (this is evidenced by their inseparability) and always. But “always” is a category of time, and it is extremely difficult to convey time using the means available to fine art. Here only indirect methods are possible. Rublev very subtly and successfully uses this opportunity. By using all the means available to him (composition, line, color), he creates a feeling of silence, peace and stopping time. This is also facilitated by the fact that the angels have a silent conversation. After all, an ordinary conversation requires the utterance of words, takes time, and if Rublev had depicted such a conversation, time would have entered the icon. In a silent conversation, images and emotions are exchanged, not words. After all, emotions can arise instantly and last indefinitely. No wonder such concepts as “love at first sight” or “eternal love” appeared. Images are similar: a person is able to immediately imagine a beautiful landscape. If you try to convey love or a landscape in words, then it will take time, and it is impossible to adequately convey such subtle feelings as love in words. The image and emotions will always be richer and brighter than words in this sense. As a result of the totality of the means used by Rublev, it seems that the three angels have been sitting and talking for an infinitely long time and will continue to sit here for just as long. They are outside the bustling and hurrying world of people - they are in eternity. But in eternity time does not flow, it is entirely within it. That which is in eternity truly becomes ever-present , always existing.
Specificity Persons are a kind of opposition to consubstantiality. Consubstantiality does not mean the complete identity of Persons; they are not impersonal. As P.A. Florensky very successfully formulated, the trinitarian dogma makes Persons distinguishable, but not different. In Rublev, specificity is shown very simply: the angels have different poses, they wear different clothes. But the simplicity of this technique allows us to simultaneously achieve the fact that Rublev’s specificity is not striking. He very subtly and restrainedly conveys the differences of the Persons while emphasizing their consubstantiality, which is fully consistent with the teaching of the Church about the Trinity.
Interaction Rublev conveys the faces in the form of a silent conversation of angels. It was already said above that the three Persons not only coexist, but are in close interaction: the Son is born, and the Holy Spirit comes from the Father. But it is unthinkable to depict birth and procession on an icon, especially since, due to the incomprehensibility of God, we do not know the exact meaning of the words birth And origin and I can’t imagine it. Of course, the interaction of Persons is not limited to these two points included in the Creed, but is more multifaceted. Therefore, depicting interaction in the form of a silent conversation, or rather, an exchange of images and inexpressible words-emotions, is quite reasonable as a method of visually representing celestial interaction.
Holiness The Trinity is emphasized by the halos of the three Persons, by the fact that they are depicted as angels, and, in addition, by the fact that in the background of the icon, on the right, a mountain is shown, which also embodies a symbol of holiness.
Vitality characterizes the tree of life located behind the middle angel. This is the appearance that Rublev took on the Mamvri oak tree, in the shade of which Abraham feasted on the Trinity. Thus, an everyday detail - oak - became a symbol for Rublev, appropriate when depicting the mountain world.
The brief analysis carried out here showed that all the fundamental components of the rather complex trinitarian dogma were conveyed by Rublev with amazing accuracy and precisely by artistic means. Of course, the meaning of Rublev’s icon is not limited to finding worthy visual means for this purpose. Researchers of the work of St. Andrew quite rightly pointed out, for example, that the sacrificial cup on the throne symbolizes the voluntary sacrifice of the Son, and interpreted the gestures of the angels accordingly. They also found that the interaction of the depicted angels (through their poses and gestures) speaks of the love that binds the Persons into Unity. All these and other considerations of this type are certainly interesting, they attempt to understand the life of God in Himself, but they are not directly related to the issue that is being discussed here: the problem of the completeness of the transmission of the Trinity dogma in icons. Concluding the analysis of Rublev's "Trinity", I would like to especially emphasize that, starting from the Old Testament story about Abraham's meeting with God, Rublev deliberately eliminated everything everyday and secular from the icon and gave an amazing image of the heavenly world. This is probably what Father Pavel Florensky had in mind when he said that the icon shows the Most Holy Trinity, and its relation to Mamvre is already a rudiment.
In the time preceding Rublev, all icons of the Trinity were painted according to a type known as the “Hospitality of Abraham.” Not only the Trinity was depicted here, but also Abraham and Sarah treating dear guests, and sometimes the slaughter of a calf by a youth. This immediately reduced the emerging image, bringing it closer to everyday earthly life - it no longer represented the world above, but the world below, which, however, was visited by God. It should be noted here that compositions depicting the Trinity in the form of three angels existed before Rublev, but the absence of Abraham and Sarah in them is explained quite simply: there was not enough space to depict them. Such compositions are found only on panagia, the bottoms of small vessels, and in other cases when the icon painter was severely limited by the size of the field provided to him. As soon as the size of the sacred image increased, Abraham and Sarah inevitably appeared in the field of view.
The first images of the Old Testament Trinity appeared in the Roman catacombs. Of the later images that have reached us, we should first of all mention the mosaics of the 5th century (Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome) and the 6th century (San Vitale, Ravenna). What is characteristic of all these works is that here the authors were not too concerned with conveying the Trinity dogma through artistic means; they were more interested in strictly following the text of the Old Testament, which speaks of the appearance of God to Abraham: “And the Lord appeared to him at the oak grove of Mamre, as he sat at the entrance to his tent in the heat of the day. He lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, three men stood against him" (Gen. 18: 1-2). In full agreement with this text, the Persons of the Trinity are depicted as men, not angels. From the Trinity dogma, one can see here only a weakened transmission of holiness (only halos), trinity and consubstantiality. Specificity and distinction of persons are completely absent, just like inseparability, co-essence, interaction and life-giving origin. Later, and by the 11th century everywhere, Persons are already depicted in the form of angels, which indicates a desire to, as it were, strengthen the external signs of Their level of holiness: on the table at which Abraham’s guests are sitting, a sacrificial bowl appeared, but besides it, other “cutlery” is also shown ", as a result of which the scene does not acquire the deepest symbolic meaning as in Rublev's.
The desire to be closer to the text of the Old Testament leads to the emergence of a specific iconography of the Trinity: the middle angel is depicted as sharply different from the side angels; he clearly stands at a higher level of the hierarchy. Sometimes the halo of this angel is made baptized, i.e. tells the angel the signs of Jesus Christ. Such iconography goes back to the interpretation of God’s appearance to Abraham that was widespread in its time, according to which it was not the three Persons of the Trinity that appeared to him, but Christ, accompanied by two angels. The Old Testament text provides the basis for such an interpretation, but then what is depicted is no longer the Trinity (although the corresponding inscription claims this), since here, perhaps, the main thing in the dogmatic teaching about the Trinity - consubstantiality - is clearly violated. Some icon painters, realizing the inadmissibility of departing from the dogmatic doctrine of consubstantiality, make the halos of all three angels baptized, although such a halo is appropriate only when depicting Christ and is completely excluded when depicting the Father and the Holy Spirit.
Over the centuries, the completeness of the transmission of the Trinity dogma, achieved by the 11th century, remains almost unchanged. Only minor enhancements can be noted. The angels begin to interact more intensively, the Mamvrian oak is now depicted conditionally, not as “realistically” as on the Ravenna mosaic, and can be interpreted as tree of life(although in many cases he is not depicted at all). This suggests that icon painters understand the need to depict not only Abraham’s hospitality, but also to convey the dogmatic teaching about the Trinity. It would be possible to consider from this point of view numerous icons of the Trinity of the 11th-14th centuries and for each of them formulate the degree of completeness of the transmission of the Trinity dogma, following the methodology used above for the analysis of Rublev’s “Trinity”. However, such an analysis, useful when studying any individual icon, is of little use when referring to a large array of icons. The fact is that the average statistical conclusion that such an analysis would lead to would only indicate that the level of compliance with dogma in these icons is always lower than that of Rublev.
The appearance of Rublev's "Trinity" in the 15th century was not the result of gradual development, it was a leap, something explosive. With amazing courage, the artist completely excludes scenes of hospitality and removes everything from the background. The table is no longer set with “cutlery” according to the number of people eating - this is no longer a joint meal that can unite members of a single fellowship, but the Eucharist, which unites not into fellowship, but into the Church. Rublev manages to make the person contemplating the icon sees complete trinitarian dogma. In pre-Rubble times, icons, relatively speaking, had to have a commentator who would explain and supplement what was depicted, since their content from the point of view of the embodiment of dogma was always incomplete. Here, for the first time, such a commentator turned out to be unnecessary. It is not surprising that immediately after the appearance of the “Trinity”, Rublev’s iconography - with one or another variant - began to quickly spread in Russia.
The further development of the iconography of the Trinity, in which icon painters tried to “improve” what Rublev had achieved, only confirmed the obvious: if the maximum has been achieved in some matter, then any deviation from it, no matter in which direction it is made, will mean deterioration. Surprisingly, the main and widespread “improvements” of Rublev’s iconography primarily concerned the “setting” of the table. Here again some mugs, bowls, jugs and similar objects appear. In this regard, Simon Ushakov’s “Trinity” from the Gatchina Palace (1671) is very characteristic, almost exactly repeating Rublev’s iconography in form and noticeably departing from it in essence. Not only the numerous “cutlery” lowers the high symbolism of Rublev to the level of everyday life, but also tree of life again becomes an oak tree, under whose shade the Trinity sits. Completely conventional chambers, which in Rublev symbolized the house-building of the Holy Trinity, are transformed in Ushakov into a spatial and intricate architectural ensemble of the Italian type. The entire icon becomes an image of a certain everyday scene, but in no way symbol heavenly world.
Another example typical of the 17th century is the Trinity icon from the Trinity Church in Nikitniki in Moscow. Its authors are presumably Yakov Kazanets and Gavrila Kondratyev (mid-17th century). Everything that was said above about Simon Ushakov’s “Trinity” is visible here: a richly served table under the shade of a spreading oak tree, and the architecture of the quaint chambers in the background, but there is also something new: an appeal to the theme of Abraham’s hospitality, i.e. refusal to depict the world above (where Abraham and Sarah are inappropriate) and a return to depicting the world below on the icon. This is characteristic not only of this icon, but also of icon painting in the 16th-17th centuries in general. One can clearly see (especially in the 17th century) a decline in interest in high dogma and an increase in interest in the possibility of a realistic depiction of people's lives. It seems that the icon becomes a reason for creating everyday scenes using pictorial means. Returning to the icon under discussion, it should be noted that it is highly narrative. Here you can see not only the Trinity sitting at the table, but also a whole story about it: first the scene of Abraham’s meeting with the Trinity, then Abraham washing the feet of three angels, then the main semantic center - the meal and, finally, the departure of the Trinity, and Abraham’s farewell to her . Such a narration shows that the Old Testament text is rather a source of imagination for the icon painter. To create such a composition developing over time from a series of almost everyday scenes is much easier than to do what Rublev managed: to exclude time from the icon and thereby give a feeling of eternity.
The deviation from dogmatic teaching in the icons of the 17th century is quite consistent with the lowering of the level of theological thought and weakening of holiness noted at that time. The noted evolution thus turns out to be not an accidental phenomenon, but a completely natural consequence of the ongoing secularization of all life in the country. If we return to the discussion of dogmatic completeness in the icons of the Trinity of that time, what is striking is the increase in the number of icons of the New Testament Trinity, which in previous centuries were a rare exception.
Many theologians rightly noted the danger of rationalizing the Trinity dogma, which often led to heretical constructions. The basis of the tendency towards rationalization is, as a rule, the desire to make this dogma “understandable”, to reconcile it with familiar ideas. The icons of the New Testament Trinity can be interpreted as a kind of rationalization performed by artistic means. Indeed, instead of the symbolic representation of the three Persons in the form of angels, a more “intelligible” form is used. The Second Person of the Trinity is depicted as is customary on all icons of the Savior, the third Person - in the form of a dove (which, strictly speaking, is only appropriate on the “Baptism” icons). This choice of symbol for depicting the Holy Spirit is quite natural: if it is depicted in the form of a tongue of flame (as on the icons of the “Descent of the Holy Spirit”) or in the form of a cloud (as on Mount Tabor), then the problem of composition of the icon would become practically insoluble. As for the First Person - the Father, here he is shown as the “ancient of days”, based on dubious interpretations of the visions of the prophets Isaiah and Daniel. As can be seen, in this case, too, the attempt at rationalization and the desire for clarity led, in fact, to a kind of “heresy”, to a departure from the resolutions of the VII Ecumenical Council. This was understood by many, and by the decrees of the Great Moscow Cathedral (1553-1554), icons of this type were actually prohibited. The ban, however, was not enforced, since the number of such icons was already large, and they seemed to be legitimized by church practice. Related issues are discussed in detail in the monograph by L.A. Uspensky.
In all icons of this type, one notices a departure from the dogmatic doctrine of the consubstantiality of Persons (or at least its unacceptable weakening). If we can talk about the consubstantiality of the Father and the Son depicted on the icon, since both are represented in the form of people, then there can be no talk about the consubstantiality of man and dove. Here again, next to the icon, it is necessary to place a commentator explaining that the Holy Spirit, nevertheless, is consubstantial with the Father and the Son. Compared to the icons of the Old Testament Trinity, in which there is consubstantiality visible this is not the case here: the icon painter seems to be demonstrating his inability to convey through pictorial means the most important position of the dogmatic doctrine of the Trinity.
Icons of the New Testament Trinity are usually painted in two types, which are known as “Co-throne” and “Fatherland”. In the icons of the first type, the Father and Son are depicted sitting side by side on a co-throne, and the Holy Spirit is depicted as a dove hovering in the air between them, just above their heads. Since the New Testament Trinity is radically different from those discussed earlier, let us repeat its analysis for compliance with the need for complete expression of the dogmatic teaching about the Trinity formulated above, bearing in mind the “Co-throne” option.
Trinity shown here, as before, in the form of a joint image of three Persons on one icon. As for the ban on the inscriptions of halos, now it is meaningless, because Persons are depicted in different ways, and besides, as a rule, they have different halos: Christ is baptized, the Father is eight-pointed, the Holy Spirit is ordinary. But the trinity, albeit not as perfectly as before, is shown.
Transmission of the most important position of the Trinity dogma - consubstantiality- it turns out to be impossible to implement, as was already mentioned above. The same can be said about inseparability . In Rublev, to make this quality clear, the unifying symbolism of the Eucharist was used, but here nothing (except, of course, a conventional commentator) prevents the Persons from “dispersing” in different directions, each according to their own affairs. Coexistence is a quality associated with time, with eternity. It was shown above how subtly and skillfully Rublev managed to convey this eternity, using various indirect methods. There is nothing like it here. Moreover, the icons of the New Testament Trinity provide grounds for denying it. By showing the Father as an old man and the Son as a younger man, the icon gives the right to assume that there was a time when the Father already existed and the Son did not yet exist, which contradicts the Creed. Here again a conditional commentator is needed to deny the absence of co-essence of Persons in the icon. For the icons of the Old Testament Trinity, such a comment is not required - the angels are always depicted as “of the same age.” Specificity The faces are very strongly expressed - they all have a completely different appearance. It can even be argued that this specificity is shown too emphatically, to the detriment of consubstantiality. The icon painter is not able to do what Rublev managed - to show both at the same time. Interaction The faces are depicted, as in Rublev, but weakened - in the form of a conversation between the Father and the Son, in which the Holy Spirit (dove), of course, cannot take part. The holiness of faces is expressed through halos, vitality - has not been identified at all.
If we turn to another version of the New Testament Trinity - “Fatherland”, then almost everything said remains valid here. In icons of this type, the Father seems to be holding on his knees (or in his bosom?) the Son, who is now presented as Christ the Youth (Savior Emannuil). This further enhances the undesirable appearance of the difference in their “ages”, which was mentioned above. Such iconography also tries to convey the indescribable - the birth of the Son from the Father. Perhaps this is just what the interaction of the first two Persons shown here comes down to. The Holy Spirit no longer hovers above, but is visible on a large medallion held in the hands of the Son, and, of course, again in the form of a dove.
As follows from what has been said, the completeness of expression of the Trinity dogma in the icons of the New Testament Trinity is very small, even if we compare them with the “Trinity” not of Rublev, but with the entire totality of icons of the Old Testament Trinity. As for the “Fatherland” icons, here one can see not only an insufficiently complete transmission of dogmatic teaching, but even a distortion of it. As already noted, the composition of the icon speaks of the desire to show the indescribable - the birth of the Son from the Father; but this is not enough; the icon also attempts to show the procession of the Holy Spirit. The medallion with the Holy Spirit - a dove - is held in the hands of the Son, and he himself is held by the Father, and this indicates that the icon is closer to the Creed distorted by Catholics, according to which the Holy Spirit comes from the Father and the Son, than to the Orthodox Niceno-Constantinopolitan Symbol according to which the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father.
Summing up the analysis of various icons of the Trinity from the point of view of the transmission of the Trinity dogma in them, we can state that in different periods the completeness of this transmission was also different. Initially, it intensified; over time, icon painters strove for an ever more complete expression of the dogma, reaching its greatest completeness in Rublev. Then interest in dogmatic teaching begins to wane, icons become closer and closer to illustrations of the texts of Holy Scripture, and their theological depth decreases accordingly. Even icons of the New Testament Trinity appear, in which the dogmatic side is of little interest to the icon painter. He now strives to make the icon “more intelligible”, allowing himself what clerk Viskovaty called “self-thinking” and “Latin wisdom.” All this speaks of the decline of church consciousness in the 17th century, however, this is another topic.