The papal legates voiced their approval of the restoration of the veneration of icons in no uncertain terms, and the Patriarch sent a full account of the proceedings of the council to
Pope Adrian I, who had it translated (
Pope Anastasius III later replaced the translation with a better one). While Adrian's legates were returning from Constantinople to Rome with a copy of the
Acts of the Council, the deposed
Lombard king
Adalgis along with a Byzantine expeditionary force
were disembarking in Italy to drive out the Franks. The proceedings of the Council proclaimed the unity of the Byzantine emperor and pope on iconodulia, intentionally neglecting to mention
Charlemagne,
King of the Franks, which enraged the Franks who the Pope was attempting to align himself with. However, the Franks successfully repelled the Byzantine expedition, and Adrian's relations with Charlemagne were restored despite his diplomatic blunder. The Frankish clergy initially rejected the Council at a
synod in 794. Charlemagne supported the composition of the
Libri Carolini, which was most likely composed in summer 793 by the influential Carolingian theologian,
Theodulf of Orléans, in
Saint Emmeram's Abbey,
Regensburg. The main purpose of the work was to rebut the decrees of the Council, especially the "errors of the Greeks". Some modern scholars judge the Latin translation of the
Acts, which Theodulf used, to be very poor: "a monument of inadequate translation. Its garbled nature gave rise to outrage among the court theologians"; it is also said to be, "bedeviled by inaccurate and in some cases intentionally incorrect translations". Other scholars, such as Thomas Noble, note that "the Carolingians themselves exhibited for some fifty or sixty years an essential familiarity with all the basic elements in discussions about sacred art." Theodulf's judgment was that Irene's aim was to "promote the superstitious adoration of images" through the council. Theodulf cited
Church Fathers such as
Augustine of Hippo as iconoclast witnesses. A copy was sent to Pope Adrian, who responded with a refutation of the Frankish arguments. The
Libri would thereafter remain unpublished until the
Reformation, and the Council was subsequently accepted as the Seventh Ecumenical Council by the
Catholic Church. According to the
Libri, the ruling of the council against iconoclasm led to "civil war" within the Empire, and other ninth-century iconodule sources condemn clergymen and laymen who remained iconoclasts. The Council, or rather the final defeat of iconoclasm in 843, is celebrated in the
Eastern Orthodox Church, and
Eastern Catholic Churches of
Byzantine Rite as "The Sunday of the
Triumph of Orthodoxy" each year on the first Sunday of
Great Lent, the fast that leads up to
Pascha (Easter), and again on the Sunday closest to 11 October (the Sunday on or after 8 October). The former celebration commemorates the defeat of iconoclasm, while the latter commemorates the council itself. The Papacy did not formally confirm the decrees of the council until 880. Many
Protestants who follow the French reformer
John Calvin generally agree in rejecting the canons of the Council, which they believe promoted idolatry. He rejected the distinction between veneration (
douleia,
proskynēsis) and adoration (
latreia) as unbiblical "sophistry" and condemned even the decorative use of images. In subsequent editions of the
Institutes, he cited the
Libri Carolini. Classical Anglicanism also rejected the decrees of the Council. The official Anglican
Homily against the Peril of Idolatry in the 16th century singles it out several times as justifying idolatry: “And at the second Council Nicene, the Bishops and Clergy decreed, that images should be worshipped: and so by occasion of these stumbling blocks, not only the unlearned and simple, but the learned and wise, not the people only, but the Bishops, not the sheep, but also the shepherds themselves (who should have been guides in the right way, and light to shine in darkness) being blinded by the bewitching of images, as blind guides of the blind, fell both into the pit of damnable Idolatry.” The
Thirty-Nine Articles also states: “…de veneratione tum Imaginum… res est futilis, inaniter conflicta, et nullis Scripturarum testimoniis innititur; imo verbo Dei contradicit.”
Bishops of Dalmatia It is particularly interesting that four
Dalmatian bishops are among the signatories of the synod, whose cities were no longer under
Byzantine rule. These Dalmatian bishoprics had been dissolved earlier. So the question arises of when these bishoprics were re-established in these medieval Dalmatian cities. The four Dalmatian bishops who signed the synod were the following, in order. • “Ioannes episcopus sanctae ecclesiae Salonentianae” (John of
Salona-
Split) • “Laurentius episcopus sanctae Absartianensis ecclesiae” (Lawrence of
Osor) • “Ursus episcopus Avaritianensium ecclesiae” (Ursus of
Rab) • “Ioannes episcopus Decateron” (John of
Kotor) This suggests that new bishoprics was founded or old (Early Christian) episcopal seats were re-established in this area. The founding of these bishoprics is attested by the 8th century
Chronicon Gradense. The chronicle reports the foundation of several Dalmatian bishoprics, such as the bishopric of Rab as "Avoriciensis/Avonciensis ecclesia", the foundation of the bishopric of
Krk as "episcopatus in Vegla", the foundation of the bishopric of Osor as "episcopatus in Asparo", and the bishopric of
Pićan as "episcopus Pathensis". As the chronicle reports a Dalmatian provincial synod held in the city of
Grado. ==Critical edition of the Greek text==