3. TI(e Iconoclastic Controversy. — In this business Leo would seem to have begun of his own motion, and almost single-handed. No party of any account against image- worship existed in the Church, but he believed that by taking the side of ieonoclasra he coiild hasten the con- version of the Jews and Mohammedans, and though at first very cautious, he finally, after some nine or ten years of his reign, issued his edict prohibiting the wor- ship of all images, whether statues or pictures, of Christ, the Virgin, or the saints. Christendom was astounded by this sudden proscription of its then common religious usages. See Icoxoclasm. Leo, in fact, found arrayed against him not only the bigoted and exasperated mo- nastics, but the superstitious masses of the people of the East and West, and almost all the clergy, with all the bishops, excepting Claudius, bishop of Nacolia in Phrv- gia, and Theodosius, metropolitan of Kpliesus, and per- haps two or three more. Even (iermanus, bishop of Constantinople, joincii with (iregory II of liome in the imiversal outcry against the emperor's attempt, and thus, almost for the first time, the bishops of the two Pomes were (like Pilate and Ileroc]) united in one common cause. Whether pmvoked by the violence, and unrea- sonableness, and relK'Uious spirit of the opposition, or prompted by a growing zeal for the purity of religion, or by the obstinacy ^f personal pride and arbitrary power,
I or guided by considerations of presumed policj', or from ! whatever motives, the emperor soon after issued a sec- I ond edict far more stringent and decisive. It command- ed the total destruction of all images (or statues intend- ed for worship) and the effacement of all pictures by whitewashing the walls of the churches. The image- worshippers were maddened. The officer who attempt- ed, in Constantinople, to execute the edict upon a statue of Christ renowned for its miracles, was assaulted by the women and beaten to death with clubs. The emperor sent an armed guard to suppress the tumult, and a frightful massacre was the consequence. Leo was re- garded as no better than a Saracen. Even his successes against the common foe were ingeniously turned against him. A certain Cosmas was proclaimed emperor in Leo's stead, a fleet was armed, and Constantinople itself Avas menaced ; but the fleet was destroj^ed by tlie Greek fire, the insurrection was suppressed, the leaders either fell or were executed along with the usurper. A second revolt at Constantinople was not suppressed till after much bloodshed. Everywhere in the empire the monks were busy instigating and fomenting rebellion. Germa- nus, bishop of Constantinople, already an octogenarian, as he could not conscientiously aid in the execution of tlie imperial decree, quietly retired, or suffered himself to be removed from his see. Not quite so peaceful was the position pope Gregory II of Kome assumed. Fol- lowing the bent of his own superstitious character, he seized the opportunity when the emperor had his hands full with seditious tumults and disturbances at home, and, confidently relying upon the support of the igno- rant, and monk-ridden, and half-Christianized popula- tion of the West, dispatched to the emperor two most arrogant and insolent letters, and condemned in unmeas- ured terms his war upon images as a war upon the Christian religion itself. The emperor ordered the ex- arch of Kavenna to march upon Pome ; but the pope, by the aid of the Lombards, compelled him to retire, and he had enough to do to maintain himself even at home. In fact, he was reduced to live in one quarter of Paven- na as a sort of captive ; and finaUy Gregory III, the suc- cessor of Gregorj"- II, in 731 held a council at Pome in ■vvhich the Iconoclasts were anathematized. The empe- ror hereupon sent a formidable expedition against Italy, with special orders to reduce Ravenna. The expedition, however, failed, and Ravenna, with the Exarchate, fell into the hands of the Lombards, and thus Italy and the pope became practically independent of the Eastern em- pire. Leo now only sought the accomplishment of one object, viz., the detachment of Greece, Illyria, and Mace- donia from the spiritual authority of the popes, and he consequently annexed them to that of the patriarchs of Constantinople, and this created the real effective cause of the final schism of the Latin and Greek churches (734). The pope henceforth never submitted to the emperor, nor did he ever recover the lost portions of his patriarchate. Meantime, from the East, another voice joined in the fray — John of Damascus. He issued his fidminations against the emperor securely from under the protection of the caliphs, who were more jjleased with the attacks upon Leo than scandalized by the de- fence of image worship. See John ok Damascus, It was in the midst of this wild and protracted controversy that Leo died of dropsy in 741, and left to his son the accomplishment of a taslv -wliich he had hoped he would himself effect.
As to the controversy itself, one of the strongest points ever made against the position of Leo is that he attacked the fine arts, and sought to destroy and abolish all the beauty and ornamentation of tlie Christian edi- fices. On this ground an earnest ajjpeal has been made against him, and .against all opponents of image wor- ship, in the interests of esthetics. Even Neander seems (piite to take sides with Gregory against the barbarian emperor in this point of view. But, in the first place, it is by no means historically certain that Leo proceeded to any such lengths, or with any such motives, in his