Pomegranates, Protestants, and Pictures

“So Hiram finished all the work that he did for King Solomon on the house of the Lord: the two pillars, the two bowls of the capitals that were on the tops of the pillars, the two latticeworks to cover the two bowls of the capitals that were on the tops of the pillars; the four hundred pomegranates for the two latticeworks, two rows of pomegranates for each latticework, to cover the two bowls of the capitals that were on the pillars; the ten stands, the ten basins on the stands; the one sea, and the twelve oxen underneath the sea.”

–1 Kings 7:40-44 (NRSV)

“After such a figment is formed, adoration forthwith ensues: for when once men imagined that they beheld God in images, they also worshipped him as being there. At length their eyes and minds becoming wholly engrossed by them, they began to grow more and more brutish, gazing and wondering as if some divinity were actually before them. It hence appears that men do not fall away to the worship of images until they have imbibed some idea of a grosser description: not that they actually believe them to be gods, but that the power of divinity somehow or other resides in them. Therefore, whether it be God or a creature that is imaged, the moment you fall prostrate before it in veneration, you are so far fascinated by superstition. For this reason, the Lord not only forbade the erection of statues to himself, but also the consecration of titles and stones which might be set up for adoration. For the same reason, also, the second commandment has an additional part concerning adoration. For as soon as a visible form is given to God, his power also is supposed to be annexed to it. So stupid are men, that wherever they figure God, there they fix him, and by necessary consequence proceed to adore him. It makes no difference whether they worship the idol simply, or God in the idol; it is always idolatry when divine honors are paid to an idol, be the colour what it may. And because God wills not to be worshipped superstitiously whatever is bestowed upon idols is so much robbed from him.”

–John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1.11.9.

—

There is a strange disconnect between Solomon’s temple and John Calvin’s borderline iconoclasm. Yes, eventually, Calvin would condemn iconoclast actions, but there is no denying that he was against religious imagery in worship spaces, or spaces of any kind. Calvin, and so many others throughout history, have thoroughly, if not violently, opposed imagery, icons, art, and symbolism in Christian worship. C.S. Lewis even warned about the danger of a cross or crucifix as a temptation for idolatry in his book The Screwtape Letters. But it was not always like this; there used to be pomegranates in the temple. Not to mention the oxen, lions, carvings, palm trees, wreaths, cherubim, and ornate vestments (also with pomegranates).

But are pomegranates and icons really on par with one another? After all, it is not like pomegranates were put in the temple to represent the image of God like Rublev’s icon of the hospitality of Abraham depicts the Trinity. When was the last time you saw the divine in a pomegranate? That is the funny thing about art, though. Some can look at a pomegranate and see a time-consuming snack, and others can see God’s covenant and promises of blessings and fertility.

In the ancient world, pomegranates were a symbol of fertility, abundance, and blessing. It is one of the items that Moses’s spies bring back from the promised land, and it is a symbol chosen by Hiram and Solomon to adorn the temple. It was also a symbol worn on Aaron’s priestly vestments all the way back in Exodus. To you, the pomegranate might just be a source of juice, but to the ancient Israelites it was a religious symbol that served a similar function to religious symbols and iconography today. The pomegranate reminded the people of God of the promises, blessings, and faithfulness of God.

The tabernacle and temple were full of artistic symbols, reminders, and images that were not worshipped by the Israelites, as Calvin feared and assumed would naturally happen. Rather, these symbols and visual representations were part of healthy and God-approved worship. True, there were no images of God in the temple, and true, modern iconography has provided images of God, but before we throw the baby out with the bathwater, let us consider the possibility that iconography, religious symbols, and artistry may be beneficial and acceptable. Perhaps one can prove Calvin right by adoring an icon and thereby committing idolatry, but generations of Israelites were able to worship in Solomon’s temple, surrounded by imagery, and did not commit idolatry.

Like pomegranates in the temple, religious symbols, art, and iconography often inspire, encourage, and remind me. When I see light shining through a stained-glass panel depicting the birth of Jesus, I am reminded of the light that poured into the world in the incarnation of Jesus. When I look at the cross of San Damiano, I am reminded of the victory of Christ, the willingness of sacrifice seen in his open hands, and steadfastness of God’s love in the face of Jesus. Yes, I can and do have the same inspiration, encouragement, and reminders from reading Scripture, but I also agree with Basil that, “the same things that the Book of the Gospels explains by means of words, the painter shows by means of his works.”