g 104. THE CAROLINE BOOKS. 465
saint) was put in his place ; the bishops trembled and changed or were deposed ; the monks and the people were delighted. A Synod at Constantinople (the acts of it are lost) reenacted the decrees of the seven oecumenical Councils, restored the worship of images, pronounced the anathema upon all iconoclasts, and decided that the event should be hereafter commemorated on the first Sunday in Lent by a solemn procession and a renewal of the anathema on the iconoclastic heretics.
On the 19th of February, 842, the images were again intro duced into the churches of Constantinople. It was the first celebration of the " Sunday of Orthodoxy," 1 which afterwards assumed a wider meaning, as a celebration of victory over all heresies. It is one of the most characteristic festivals of the Eastern church. The old oecumenical Councils are dramatically represented, and a threefold anathema is pronounced upon all sorts of heretics such as atheists, antitrinitariaus, upon those who deny the virginity of Mary before or after the birth of Christ, the inspiration of the Scriptures, or the immortality of the soul, who reject the mysteries (sacraments), the traditions and councils, who deny that orthodox princes rule by divine appointment and receive at their unction the Holy Ghost, and upon all iconoclasts. After this anathema follows the grate ful commemoration of the orthodox confessors and "all who have fought for the orthodox faith by their words, writings, teaching, sufferings, and godly example, as also of all the pro tectors and defenders of the Church of Christ." In conclusion the bishops, archimandrites and priests kiss the sacred icons.2
§ 104. The Caroline Books and the Prankish Church on Image-
Worship.
I. LIBRI CAROLIXI, first ed. by Elian Fhilyra (i. e., Jean du Tillet, or Tilius, who was suspected of Calvinism, but afterwards became
1 rj KvpiciKT]
1 See the description of Walch (X. 800-808) from the Byzantine historians, and from Allacci, and King (on the Russian church).
466 FOUETH PEEIOD. A. D. 590-1049.
bishop of Meaux), from a French (Paris) MS., Paris, 1549 ; then by Melchior Goldast in his collection of imperial decrees on the imagecontroversy, Fran oof., 1608 (67 sqq.), and in the first vol. of his Col lection of Constitutions* imperiales, with the addition of the last ch. (lib. IV., c. 29), which was omitted by Tilius ; best ed. by Ch. A. Neu mann, Hanover, 1731, under the title: Augusta Concilii Nicceni II. Censura, h. e., Caroli Magni de impio imaginum cultu libri IV., with prolegomena and notes. The ed. of Abbe Migne, in his "Patrol. Lat," Tom. 98, f. 990-1248 (in vol. II. of Opera Caroli M.), is a re print of the ed. of Tilius, and inferior to Heumaim's ed. (" Es ist zu bedauern" says Hefele, III. 696, "dass Migne, statt Besseres, entschieden Geringeres geboten hat, als man bisher schon besass^.) II. WALCH devotes the greater part of the eleventh vol. to the history of image-worship in the Frankish Church from Pepin to Louis the Pious. NEANDER, III. 233-243 ; GIESELER, II. 66-73 ; HEFELE, III 694-716 ; HERGENROTHER, I. 553-557. FLOSS: De suspecta librorum Carolinorum fide. Bonn, 1860. REIFFERSCHEID : Narratio de Vaticano librorum Carolinorum Codice. Breslau, 1873.
The church of Rome, under the lead of the popes, accepted and supported the seventh oecumenical council, and ultimately even went further than the Eastern church in allowing the wor ship of graven as well as painted images. But the church in the empire of Charlemagne, who was not on good terms with the Empress Irene, took a position between image-worship and iconoclasm.
The question of images was first discussed in France under Pepin in a synod at Gentilly near Paris, 767, but we do not know with what result.1 Pope* Hadrian sent to Charlemagne a Latin version of the acts of the Nicene Council ; but it was so incorrect and unintelligible that a few decades later the Roman librarian Anastasius charged the translator with ignorance of both Greek and Latin", and superseded it by a better one.
1 See Walch, XI. 7-36; Hefele, III. 461-463. The sources are silent. Walch carefully gives the different conjectures of Baronius, Pagi, Daill6, Natalis, Alexander, Maimburg, Fleury, Sirmond, Spanheiin, Basnage, Semler. No thing new has been added since. But the preceding iconoclastic zeal of Bishop Serenus of Marseilles, and the succeeding position of Charlemagne and the Frankish church, rather favor the inference of Sirmond and Spanheim, that the synod rejected the worship of images.