Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 3.djvu/424

 CAROLINE

372

CAROLINE

evidenced as extant in the latter half of the ninth cen- tury by Hincmar of Reims (Adv. Hinemar. Laud., c. 20). Its genuinity was long since admitted by Cath- olic scholars like Sirmond and Natalis Alexander (Sa?c. VIII, Diss. VI, § 6). The work was reprinted by the imperialist editor Michael Goldast (Imperialia decreta de cultu imaginum, Frankfort, 1608, p. 67, sqq., and Collect. Constitute imper., I, 23) whence it was taken by others, e. g. Migne (P. L., XCVIII, 989-1248), though the latter had at liis disposition the better edition of G. A. Heumann, Augusta Con- eilii Nicseni II Censura, i. e. Caroli M. de impio imaginum cultu libri IV (Hanover, 1731). Some ex- cerpts from it are re-printed in Jaffe, Bibl. Rer. Ger- manic, VI, 220-42.

The authors of the "Libri Carolini" admit that images may be used as ecclesiastical ornaments, for purposes of instruction, and in memory of past events; it is foolish, however, to burn incense before them and to use lights, though it is quite wrong to cast the images out of the churches and destroy them. The writers are scandalized chiefly by the Latin term adoratio, taking it wrongly to mean absolute ado- ration, whereas the original Greek word, Proskynesis (irposKw^ffis), means no more than reverence in a prostrate attitude. So they insist that God alone is to be adored (adorajidus et colendus). The saints are to be venerated, only in a suitable manner (opportuna veneratw). Ecclesiastical tradition, they insist, holds all images as far inferior, in point of reverential hon- our, to the Cross of Christ, the Holy Scriptures, the sacred vessels, and the relics of the saints. They blame the excessive reverence shown by the Greeks to their emperors, criticize unfavourably the eleva- tion of Tarasius (q. v.) to the Patriarchate of Con- stantinople, and find fault (not always unreasonably) with the Scriptural and patristic exegesis of the Greeks. On the other hand, they ignorantly con- found the sayings and doings of this orthodox council with those of the Iconoclastic conciliabulum of 754, frequently misrepresent the facts, and in general ex- hibit a strong anti-Greek bias. In explanation of their attitude the following words of Cardinal Hergen- rother (Kircheng., ed. Kirsch, 1904, II, 132) seem ap- propriate: "Apart from the [unrecognized] errors of the translation, the acts and decrees of the Seventh General Council offended in various ways the customs and opinions of the Teutonic world where heathen- ism, but lately vanquished, was still potent in folk- life and manners. The rude semi-heathen Teuton might easily misunderstand in an idolatrous sense the honours awarded to images, as yet few in number owing to the uncultivated taste of the people. While, therefore, images were tolerated, they were not yet encouraged and held but a subordinate place. The Greeks had always reverenced highly, not alone the person of the Emperors, but also their portraits and statues, and in this respect incense and prostrations (Gr. Proskynesis, Lat. adoratio) were immemorial usages. It seemed to them, therefore, that they could not otherwise pay due reverence to the images of the Saviour and the saints. It was otherwise with the Germans, unaccustomed to prostrate themselves or to bend the knee before their kings. Such acts seemed fitted to express that adoration (latreia) which was due to God alone; when exhibited to others they were frequently a source of scandal. In the Teutonic mind, moreover, the freer ecclesiastical life of the West already shone by contrast with the extravagance of Oriental emperor-worship."

As stated above, Pope Adrian I, in a letter ad- dressed to Charlemagne, answered lengthily the eighty-five Capitula submitted to him. He re- minded the king that twelve of his bishops had taken part in a Roman Synod (previous to the Second Nicene Council) and had approved the "cultus" of images; he refuted a number of the arguments and

objections brought forward, and asserted the identity of his teaclung with that of the highly- respected Pope Gregory the Great concerning images. He also de- fended in a dignified way the Second Nicene Synod, not yet finally acknowledged by him, calling attention at the same time to his own just grievances against the Greeks who still retained the churches and estates that the Iconoclast Leo III (717-41) had violently withdrawn from Roman jurisdiction. This letter of Pope Adrian (d. 795) may not have been known to the bishops and abbots of the synod which met at Frankfort in 794 and on the above-described errone- ous supposition rejected (can. 2) the Second Nicene Council. Charlemagne sent the acts of this synod to Rome, with a demand for the condemnation of Irene and Constantine VI, but seems gradually to have yielded to the mild and prudent firmness of Adrian for whom he professed at all times the most sincere admiration and friendship. A last echo of the theo- logical conflict crystallized in the "Libri Carolini" is heard at the Paris Synod of S25, which, no wiser than its predecessor as to the erroneous version of the acts in question, sought in vain to obtain from Pope Eugene II an abandonment of the position taken by Adrian I. Despite the increasing favour of the "cultus" of images among their people, the Frankish bishops continued their opposition to the Second Ni- cene Council; the latter, however, eventually gained recognition especially after a new and somewhat more accurate version of its acts and decrees was made by Anastasius Bibliothecarius under John VIII (S72-S2). In the meantime the Frankish writer Walafrid Strabo had summarized and popularized the true ecclesias- tical doctrine in his excellent " Liber de exordiis et in- crements rerum ecclesiasticarum", written about 840 (ed. Knopfler, Munich, 1890). See Iconoclasm; Images; Frankfort, Council of; Dttngal, of St. Denys; Jonas of Orleans.

Hefele, Coneiliengeschichte, III, 67S, 694-717; Hergen- rOther-Kirsch, Handbuch der Kirchengesehichte (4th ed., Freiburg, 1904), II, 132-137; Blanc, Cours d' hist, eeelesias- (ique (Paris. 1896', II, 100-103; Nolte in Kathol. Literatur- zeitung US61), 237; Flos*. I..'.,-,, ,,„d Schriftcn Agobards, Ki-hi.^rhofs i'on Lyon (( intt-r-l.,!,. ]v, ; Dlmmler, Vber Leben mid Lehre des Bisrhofs Claudius von Turin in Sitzungsberwhte der preuss. Akadernie (Berlin, 189."ii, 427; Hauck, Kirchen- fjisrhirfde Deutsrhlands (2ml ed., Leipzig, 1900), II; Hermes in Kirchenlexikon, VII, 189-96; Wagenman'N'-IIauok in Real- eneijclopddie f. prot. Theologie tend Kirche (Leipzig, 1901), X, 88-97; Schafp, History of the. Christian Church (New York, 1S95), IV, 465-70; and the ecclesiastical histories of Rohr-

BACHER, ALZOG, KrAUS, etC.

Thomas J. Shahan.

Caroline Islands. A group of about 500 small coral islands, east of the Philippines, in the Pacific Ocean. The distance from Manila to Yap, one of the larger islands of the group, is 1200 miles. The Caroline Islands were discovered in the sixteenth century by the Spaniards and were so named in honour of Charles V. The Jesuits, John Anthony Cantova and Victor Walter, attempted missionary work there in 1731 ; the former was soon murdered, the latter obliged to flee. Two other Jesuits were killed later. In 1707 the Jesuits were suppressed in the Spanish dominions, and during the next 120 years there is no trace of a missionary. The controversy between Germany and Spain concerning the possession of the Carolines having been settled by Pope Leo XIII in favour of Spain, the king directed Spanish Capuchins to the islands, 15 March, 1SS6, and the Propaganda officially established that mission, 15 May. 1886, dividing it into two sections, named West and Last Carolines respectively. Until then the islands had belonged ecclesiastically to the Vicariate Apostolic of Micro- nesia.

The aborigines, of the Polynesian race, are not cannibals; they live mainly by hunting and fishing, and know nothing of agriculture, though the soil is very fertile. They wear very little clothing and build small huts of branches. Immorality is riff