Baring-Gould’s sources: By Greeks and Latins on the same day. Authority:—His life by Ignatius, deacon and keeper of the sacred vessels at Constantinople, afterwards bishop of Nicæa, a disciple of Tarasius; also the Church historians of the period.
The Incarnation of God was the descent of the Most High to the level of human necessity. Man had found a difficulty in believing in and loving the Infinite; human language failed to express the nature of God save by a multitude of abstractions and negations. He was not limited, had no localized habitation, was not comprehensible by man; so the philosophers taught, and so they strove to make men believe; men made the effort, believed, and in the effort, their devotion expired. The philosophers had lifted God into the region of an idea, and in so doing, had divested him of personality; and when His personality was lost, all interest in Him died away. God was to them an object of speculation, not an object of worship. God the Father, knowing man's natural incapacity for realizing the Godhead, sent His Son into the world clothed in flesh. Man had now a God-Man, whose nature and personality had been brought vividly before him to believe in and to love. God was "manifest in the flesh," the visible and the invisible, the spiritual and the material, the finite and the infinite, the local and the omnipresent were united in One. Thenceforth the law of God's dealings with man was to be in accordance with his natural capacities, the visible was to become the medium of the invisible, the material the vehicle of the spiritual, the omnipresent adorable through a local presence, the infinite discernible through the finite. In Jesus Christ men saw God and lived; and when He was withdrawn from the eyes of men, He did not leave them orphans, but perpetuated his presence in the Holy Eucharist, even unto the end of the world.
In the old heathen world men had been idolaters or philosophers. The idolater saw in the material image his God; the philosopher declared that God was everywhere present, and he despised the idol. Christianity combined in one the truth taught by the philosopher, and the craving felt by the idolater. Through the sacraments as outward and visible means, grace was conveyed to man, chiefly through the Holy Eucharist; and through sacred images and the holy cross, worship was addressed to God. Through the seen to the unseen, to God; from the unseen through the seen to man, is the law of the Incarnation.
At first, on account of the idolatry which surrounded them, the early Christians did not deem it prudent to introduce images into their churches. Idolatry was so prevalent, that the first lesson they had to insist upon to the heathen, was the omnipresence of God; but when heathenism was conquered, the danger of idolatry ceased, and the peril was in the other direction; men began to insist on the infinity of the essence of the Godhead, and to deny the possibility of His becoming local by incarnation. They were ready to admit that Christ was inspired with a divine afflatus, but not that He was very and eternal God. Then, at once, it became necessary for the Church to use her every effort to impress on men's minds and hearts the truth that God had become very man, of the substance of His mother. Then pictures and images were introduced into churches. We must remember that the Church, to defend the truth, had to assume successively opposite positions, for the truth was double,—if we are to understand how she first opposed images, and then defended them. She did not contradict herself, her attitude was forced upon her, to maintain a two-fold truth.
The use of images was commonly received in the east, when the Emperor Leo the Isaurian, resolved to abolish the practice. The contest began about the year 725. He was opposed by Pope Gregory II., Germanus, patriarch [the title of the bishops of the great ancient sees: Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem] of Constantinople, and S. John Damascene. The first wrote vehemently to him on this subject. He maintained that the Word by having rendered Himself visible in taking a human body, subjected Himself to all conditions of a man, and that as it was lawful to represent any man, emperor or prince, so it was lawful to make representations of Christ. But, said he, Christians do not worship the cloth on which the picture is painted, nor the stone out of which the statue is hewn, but they use these visible representations as means of renewing the memory of the saints, and of raising up the mind to God. He denied that images received divine honours, but if "Lord Jesus, save us," be said before an image of Christ, "Holy Mother of God, intercede with Thy Son for us," before one of the Virgin, and "Intercede for us," before one of a Martyr; these prayers are not addressed to the image, but to Christ, or the Holy Virgin, or the Saint whom the figure is designed to portray.
Constantine Copronymus, the son of Leo, followed in his father's steps, and for the better establishing his purpose, he called together a council ( a.d. 754) at Constantinople, composed of 338 bishops. It began its sittings in February and ended in August. The Western Church, and the patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, were not represented at this council, which was thus composed of prelates under the immediate control of the emperor, gathered together in his imperial city, surrounded by guards, and, unfortunately, the majority of these bishops partook of that time-serving and obsequious disposition which characterised and disgraced the episcopal order in the Eastern Empire for many centuries. This council decreed the destruction of images in churches, and the erasure of paintings on the walls. [70]
By the authority of the emperor, a great part of the Eastern Church received and executed this decree; but Irene, who had married Leo the Fourth, son of Constantine Copronymus, though a cruel, ambitious woman, espoused, perhaps out of caprice, the opposite side, and on the death of her husband, during the minority of her son Constantine, who was but ten years old, assumed the regency, and stopped the savage persecution of the monks, and the ruthless destruction of images which had proceeded without intermission through the three preceding reigns. Paul III., patriarch of Constantinople, had been raised to that dignity by the late emperor. Being a timid man, desirous of remaining in favour with court, he had bowed to the will of the emperor in the matter of images. But he was a good and charitable man, greatly beloved by the poor. Finding that the Iconoclasts were now out of favour, and fearing for himself, he suddenly resigned his patriarchal see, and took refuge in a monastery.
The empress and her son visited him, and endeavoured to dissuade him from his intention, but found him resolved. Tarasius, an officer of the court, noted for his piety, was then appointed patriarch, in spite of his urgent remonstrance. He declared that he would not accept the office till a council had been called, which exhibited those marks of being œcumenical which the former council had lacked, and which might compose the differences which had agitated the Eastern Church. This being agreed to, he was solemnly declared patriarch, and was consecrated soon after, on Christmas Day.
His first act was to write synodal letters to the patriarchs of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, convening a general council. Pope Adrian sent two priests to act as his legates, and the Eastern bishops did the same. The council assembled on the 1st August, 786, in the Church of the Apostles at Constantinople, but a tumult having broken out, and the soldiers having besieged the bishops in the church, and endeavoured to break up the council, it was adjourned till the following year, when it met at Nicæa. The papal legates sat in the first place, then Tarasius, patriarch of Constantinople, then the deputies of the Eastern bishops, who were themselves unable to attend because not permitted by the Saracen conquerors, afterwards Agapetus, bishop of Cæsarea, in Cappadocia [a region of central Turkey], John, bishop of Ephesus, Constantine, metropolitan [the archbishop who heads a group of dioceses] of Cyprus, with 250 bishops and archbishops, and above 100 priests and monks, and two commissioners of the emperor and empress to maintain order.
The first session was held on the 24th September, 787, in the Church of S. Sophia; it opened with the reading of the letter of the empress Irene and the emperor, wherein they assured to the bishops that they had assembled the synod with the consent of the patriarchs, and that they left the bishops at full liberty to speak their minds; that Paul, the last patriarch of Constantinople, acknowledging his fault in having received the decrees of the council of the Iconoclasts, had quitted his see, and had caused Tarasius to be elected in his room; that Tarasius had refused the dignity, but having been urged to accept it, had required a council to be held to suppress the schism which divided the Church on the subject of images; and that, therefore, in accordance with his request, this council was convened. In conclusion, the empress and her son exhorted the bishops to judge truthfully and courageously, in accordance with Catholic doctrine and practice; and they said that letters had been received from Pope Adrian, which should be read to the assembly.
After this many of the prelates who had taken part with the Iconoclasts, or had submitted to the decrees, seeing that the direction of the courtly breeze had changed, veered round with obsequious readiness. Such were, Basil, bishop of Ancyra, Theodosius [name of Roman emperors; Theodosius I (379–395) made Christianity the state religion] of Myra, Theodosius of Amorn, Hypatius of Nicæa, and others, who now acknowledged that they reverenced sacred images.
In the next session the letters of Pope Adrian were read, declaring the utility of images as means of teaching the ignorant, and of awakening piety and compunction. He demanded also that all archbishops of his patriarchate should receive ordination from the bishop of Rome, and that the primacy of the see of Rome [a bishop’s “see” is his diocese, named from his seat (Latin sedes)] should receive general recognition, as also that the patriarch of Constantinople should be prevented from assuming the title of "Universal Bishop." These latter articles were not transcribed by the Greek fathers. Dupin, the judicious historian, suggests that probably the legates of the Pope did not judge it prudent at that moment to present them. A letter from Adrian to Tarasius was then read, expressing the trouble given to the Pope by the news of the nomination of a layman to the influential see of Constantinople, and exhorting him to procure the condemnation of the synod which had forbidden images in churches. After the reading of this letter, the Papal legates asked Tarasius whether he approved of it. He answered that he did, and that he did reverently honour the images of Christ, the Holy Virgin, and the saints, but that to God alone was due true adoration and worship (latria). Of this the synod approved. Our English word worship has got at the present time a meaning which it had not of old. Worship now means to adore as God, with supreme reverence; and such worship may not be given to creatures, however exalted; but the old signification of the word had not this force, but was synonymous with reverence. Thus, in the Anglican prayer book, in the marriage service, the husband says to the wife, "With my body I thee worship," i.e. , honour; and magistrates are called the "worshipful." When Protestants accuse Catholics of worshipping images, in one sense they are right, but in another sense they are wrong. Catholics do worship sacred images so far as to render them respect and honour, but they do not give to them that honour which is implied by the word "worship" in its modern sense. In the old signification of the word, the sailor worships the quarterdeck when he touches his cap on passing it, the soldier worships the royal standard when he presents arms to it, and the peers the throne when they bow to it on taking their places in the House of Lords.
In the third session of the council, a letter from the patriarch of Jerusalem, approved by his bishops, was read, wherein he acknowledged that reverence and honour were to be shown to sacred images.
In subsequent sessions the acts of the Iconoclastic Council at Jerusalem were examined and refuted in order, and the council closed with the usual acclamations and prayers for the prosperity of the emperor and empress; after which synodal letters containing the decrees were sent to all churches. Pope Adrian approved of all that had been decreed, and sent copies of the Acts into France, where pictures and images were used historically, but no honour, such as burning candles or offering of incense before them, was allowed. On receiving these copies, Charlemagne [king of the Franks, crowned emperor in 800] wrote, or caused to be written, or put forth under his name, a work containing an examination of the decrees of the second council of Nicæa, by some of the bishops, of whom Alcuin was chief. This contained a repudiation of these Acts, and a rejection of image-worship. It maintained that respect was due to pictures and statues of the Saviour and the Saints, but refused the right of offering them any sort of religious honour, as by lighting candles and incensing them. This work was presented to Pope Adrian by Engilbert, the ambassador of Charlemagne, and it drew forth from the pope an answer which, however, did not alter the practice of the Gallican Church, for in the Council of Frankfort, held in 794, the decrees relative to the worshipping of images passed by the second Council of Nicæa were rejected, as was the case again in a council held at Paris, in 824. Tarasius, in the meantime, obedient to the decrees of the synod, restored holy images throughout the extent of his patriarchate. His life was a model of perfection to both clergy and laity. He lived a quiet, austere life, in the midst of magnificence and luxury. He reduced to the smallest possible amount the expenses of his household, and gave to the poor what he had economised. He often took the dishes of meat from his table to distribute among them with his own hands: and he assigned them a large annual revenue. And that none might be overlooked, he visited every house and hospital in Constantinople. His discourses turned on the mortification of the senses, and he was particularly severe against all theatrical entertainments, which served then to encourage and diffuse licentiousness. Some time after, the emperor became enamoured of Theodota, a maid of honour to his wife, the empress Mary, and, after having spent seven years in marriage, in 795, he resolved to divorce the empress. He used every effort to gain the patriarch. He sent an officer to him to inform him that a plot of the empress to poison him had been discovered. S. Tarasius, however, received the request to divorce the emperor, and marry him to Theodota, with a stern refusal. "Tell him that I will rather suffer death and all manner of torments than consent to his design." The emperor, hoping to prevail with him by flattery, sent for him to the palace, and said, "I can conceal nothing from you, whom I regard as my father. No one can deny but I may divorce one who has attempted my life. The Empress Mary deserves death or perpetual penance." He then produced a vessel, full of the poison, which he pretended she had prepared for him. The patriarch, with good reason, judging this to be an attempt to impose upon him, answered, that he was too well convinced that his passion for Theodota was at the bottom of all his complaints against the empress. He boldly declared to Constantine that even if she were guilty of the crime laid to her charge, a second marriage during her lifetime would be adulterous. The monk John, who had been legate [an official representative sent by the pope] of the Eastern patriarchs in the council at Nicæa, being present, also spoke resolutely to the emperor, who was so irritated that he drove them both out of his presence, and John narrowly escaped with his life. As soon as they were gone, he turned the empress Mary out of the palace and obliged her to assume the veil. Tarasius persisted in his refusal to marry him to Theodota, and the ceremony was performed by Joseph, the treasurer of the church of Constantinople. The patriarch became thenceforth an object of persecution to the emperor, who placed spies about his person, suffered no one to speak with him without their leave, and banished many of his relations and servants. This confinement gave the patriarch more leisure for prayer and contemplation. In the meantime, the ambitious Irene, discontented at being no longer at the head of the administration, formed a conspiracy to dethrone her son. The secret was faithfully kept above eight months, till the emperor, suspicious of his danger, escaped from Constantinople, with the design of appealing to the provinces and armies. By this hasty flight the empress was left on the brink of a precipice. She addressed a private epistle to the friends whom she had placed about his person with a menace that, unless they accomplished, she would reveal, their treason. Their fear rendered them intrepid. They seized the emperor on the Asiatic shore, and transported him to Constantinople, where his mother and the other conspirators decided to render him incapable of the throne by blinding him. Her emissaries assaulted the sleeping prince, and stabbed their daggers into his eyes. He survived for several years, oppressed by the court, and forgotten by the world; whilst his unnatural mother resumed the sovereign power, of which he had divested her by becoming of age. She reigned for five years, during which she recalled all the banished, and favoured the Catholics. But she was in turn conspired against by the high treasurer, Nicephorus, who was secretly invested with the purple, and crowned at S. Sophia by the patriarch. The empress was sent into exile in the isle of Lesbos, where she was obliged to earn a scanty subsistence by the labours of her distaff, till her haughty spirit consuming her, she died of grief.
Under Nicephorus, S. Tarasius persevered peaceably in his practices of penance, and in the functions of his pastoral charge. Through his last sickness he continued to offer daily the holy Sacrifice as long as he was able to move. A little before his death he fell into a trance, as the author of his life, who was an eye-witness of the scene, relates, wherein he was heard disputing with a number of accusers, very busy in sifting his whole life, and objecting to his actions. He seemed to be in fear and agitation, and defending himself against everything laid to his charge. This filled all present with fear, seeing the endeavours of the enemy of man to find some condemnation in the life of so holy and so irreprehensible a bishop. But a great serenity succeeded, and the holy man gave up his soul to God in peace, on the 25th of February, in 806, having sat twenty-one years and two months. God honoured his memory with miracles, some of which are related by the author of his life. His festival began to be celebrated under his successor.
