by proclamation, commanded that all images and pictures in churches should be destroyed, and required the Bishop of Rome to do the same.

Vol. 6. p. 184, and accompanying note.) And Milner writes, "Leo III. has been so blackened by contemporary writers, that it is not easy to form a just idea of his character. * * All that can be advanced with certainty, is that his cause was just and his zeal sincere, though his temper was too warm. He might be a pious Christian, there is doubtless no proof to the contrary. ** But there lived none at that time capable of doing justice to the holiness of his motives, if indeed, as there is reason to hope, they were holy." (See Church Hist. Cent. viii. Chap. iii.) History deals as hardly with his son Constantine VI. "The chroniclers of those days give him the appellations of magician, worshipper of demons, blasphemer, wretch, Herod, Nero, &c." (Spanheim's Eccl. Annals. Cent. viii. sec. 7.) Mosheim calls Leo "a prince of the greatest resolution and intrepidity," but says that "he acted more from the impulse of his natural character, which was warm and vehement, than from the dictates of prudence." (Eccles. Hist. Cent. viii. Chap. iii.) In his account, however, of Leo's proceedings, Mosheim follows the opinions of Baronius, Fleury, and Le Seur. It appears that at first Leo only forbade the worshipping of images, and for this reason had them placed higher in the churches; finding this ineffectual he destroyed them, and Fleury indeed hints " qu'il avoit dissimulé son aversion pour les images du commencement." (Livre xliv. Chap. xvi.) And Gregory's letter proves that for the ten first years of his reign he made no public demonstration of his

Gregory II. however, then Bishop, instead of complying, called a council of Italian Bishops against him, and excommunicated him, and made decrees that images should be more honoured than ever, and finally caused Rome and all Italy to revolt from the Emperor, thus, by treason and rebellion, maintaining Idolatry.* On the death of Leo, his son Constantine VI. called a council of all the learned men and bishops in Asia and Greece, (A.D. 754) which great assembly, after sitting for six months, decreed, "that all images by the Law of God, and for the avoiding of

"Pendant tout ce temps

disapproval of image-worship. (dix ans) vous n'avez point parlé des saintes images, et maintenant vous dites qu'elles tiennent la place des idoles, et que ceux qui les adorent sont des idolâtres." (Fleury 1. xlii. Chap. viii-)

*So say also Spanheim, and Mosheim, and Gibbon-kaι T Ρωμην συνπασῃ. Ιταλια της βασιλειας αυτου αποστησε, says Theophanes (Chronograph. p. 343.) Indeed all parties except some of the French writers, seem to allow the fact, but the more strenuous Papists glory in it. Baronius in his Eccles. Annals, A.D. 730, calls it "exemplum dignum"-and Bellarmin (de Rom. Pont. lib. v. c. viii.) has the effrontery to say, "mulctavit eum parte imperii."

offence, ought to be taken out of the churches." And now, mark, "that in the churches of Asia and Greece, there were no images* publicly by the space of almost 700 years,” and that "all the learned men and Bishops of the east church, and all the Emperors, (with the exception of one, Theodosius III., who reigned but a year,) universally condemned the setting up of images. Whereas, on the other hand, the Bishops of Rome being no ordinary magistrates appointed of God out of their diocese, but usurpers of prince's authority contrary to God's

* That is to say they had not been properly and positively authorised, for they had certainly been permitted, and had multiplied exceedingly; so that Leo. III. had great difficulty in putting them down. His officers were murdered, himself insulted, and part of his realms (the Islands of the Archipelago) revolted from him; and indeed Germanus, Bishop of Constantinople, whom he afterwards deposed, was a patron of images. (See Mosheim and Spanheim). In these statements Gibbon, Milner, Mosheim, and Spanheim agree. A note in Spanheim records that "730 images were pulled down and burnt." Where is this precise number to be found? May it be a mistake for A. D. 730? (Eccles. Annals. Cent. viii. sec. 7. note 7.)

word, were the maintainers of images against God's word, and stirrers up of sedition, rebellion, and continual treason against their sovereign Lords, contrary to God's law and the ordinances of all human laws, being thus enemies to God, and rebels and traitors against their Princes. These be the first bringers in of images openly into churches. These be the

maintainers of them, and these the means whereby they maintained them; to wit, conspiracy, treason, and rebellion against God and their Princes." Constantine was succeeded by his son Leo IV. also a strenuous Iconoclast; but on his death,* A.D. 780, his wife Eirene assumed the government during the infancy of

66

* Mosheim says Leo IV. was poisoned by Eirene, (see Cent. viii. chap. iii. sec. 13) but the Roman Catholic Fleury gives a different account. Car, comme il étoit passionné pour les pierreries, il eut envie d'une couronne que l'Empereur, Héraclius avoit mise dans la grande Eglise. Il la prit et la porta; mais il lui vint à la tête des Charbons, et il fut saisi d'une fièvre violente, dont il mourut le huitième de Septembre de la même année, sept cent quatre vingt," &c. Fleury, livre. xliv. chap. 16.

D

her son Constantine VII. This unnatural and infamous woman, who committed all sorts of dreadful crimes and cruelties, "was governed much by the advice of Theodore, Bishop, and Tharasius, Patriarch, of Constantinople, who practised and held with the Bishop of Rome in maintaining of images most earnestly." She, "persuaded by the Bishop of Rome, called a council, by which it was decreed that images should be set up in all the churches of Greece, and that honour and worship also should be given unto the said images;" and so "she spared no diligence to make Constantinople like Rome itself." But Eirene was ambitious as well as idolatrous, and was persuaded by wicked counsellors to deprive her son of the imperial dignity, and to bind her subjects with an oath that they would not suffer him to reign during her life. He however recovered the kingdom by force, and immediately set about destroying the images which his mother had set up. He unfortunately (for the right cause) took Eirene