It is well known that the Greek John, an outstanding Greek in education, who became secretary of state under the Caliph of Damascus, spoke in defense of icons. This is a kind of paradox. A high-ranking minister in a state hostile to icons of all kinds acts as a defender of icons, while in the Greek Orthodox state itself a war is opened against them from the heights of the throne and the top of the hierarchy. The epistles of John of Damascus in defense of icons are famous. The first of them was written soon after 726, and the next two were written after the installation of Anastasius as patriarch, i.e. after 730.

Wishing to take revenge on John, Leo wrote to the caliph that John was a traitor to the caliph. A later life (eleventh century) tells on this occasion about the miracle of the reunion of John's hand, which was cut off by the caliph. On the contrary, the iconoclastic council of 754, which was vicious against John, portrays John as an enemy of the Byzantine Empire and an Arab patriot. Some modern historians believe that John's actions against Leo could be considered useful to the Arab powers, because the Byzantines reproached John with his Arabic family nickname "Mansur", i.e. "helper in victory". This was the nickname given to a Greek who helped the Arabs take Damascus. Perhaps John of Damascus descended from him. That is, the surname of John and he himself were considered friends of the caliphs and enjoyed their trust, contrary to the story of the life.

Escalation of the conflict with the West

It is typically depicted in the inauthentic polemical correspondence between Emperor Leo and Pope Gregory II, but it is based on some authentic letters, and, most importantly, on thoughts and arguments that were current at that time.

Emperor Leo allegedly writes: "Icons are idols forbidden by the second commandment. The people superstitiously revere matter and consider the saints to be gods.

Yes, I have the right to do so, and it is my duty, for I am a king and a priest."

This saying is often quoted in characterizing Byzantine Caesar-papism. But the letter does not fit the secular ideology of the iconoclastic emperors. However, in the heat of polemics, people are not always consistent. And in the eyes of the West, it was precisely for such ideas that all the Byzantine basileus were guilty. The accusation is typical.

Pope Gregory II condemns this royal arbitrariness and contradicts Leo, among other things, with the following crude arguments: "If you have not learned from the wise, then learn from the foolish. Go to school, and the children will teach you. If you speak disrespectfully about Christ and the Mother of God, then the children will throw blackboards at you."

The Pope's resistance to the heresy of the Emperor could not but raise all the steam of discontent with the Byzantine regime that had accumulated in Italy. Leo's increased taxes aroused acute discontent. And the Lombards, pressing from the north, took advantage of such moments to seize all of Italy, both Greek Ravenna and papal Rome.

With these data, the madness of the new heresy tore Italy away from Byzantium, both ecclesiastically and politically. The old heresies tore the East apart, and the new heresy helped the West to break away as well. The heresy of the Byzantine emperors was thus pernicious both politically and deeply responsible for the preparation of the division of the churches. The vassalage of the pope from Byzantium turned into vassalage from new patrons. The Lombard kings, who became Christians, soon made the Roman popes secular rulers.

Even before the first order of Leo III in 726 reached Rome, the Lombards had already taken Ravenna and other cities. And the Byzantine governors imposed heavy taxes on Southern Italy, and on the churches in particular. The Pope stood up for the burdened. But the Byzantine officials, considering him a state criminal under the circumstances, allowed a conspiracy to form for the murder of the pope. A new exarch, Paul, arrived from Byzantium to support the conspirators with instructions from the emperor to remove (?) Gregory II and bring in his place another. But the Romans united with the Lombards, surrounded Rome and did not allow the pope to be touched. The Venetian army, the population of Pentapolis, and all the Italians declared that they would withdraw from Byzantium if the exarch encroached on the pope. And Pope Gregory II himself had to calm down the uprising and managed to return to the line of loyalty. But zeal in favor of Constantinople did not cease. The Byzantine governor of Naples wanted to encroach on the life of the pope. The Romans killed him. The papal party also killed the Exarch Paul himself in Ravenna. And on the part of the Byzantines there followed a number of encroachments on the pope. Meanwhile, the Lombards occupied city after city. Again, the Pope urged the Romans not to be carried away by enmity, ne desisterent ab amore vel fide Romani imperii.

From this it can be seen how much the "defeatism" of the Romans, i.e. the union with the barbarian Lombards against Byzantium, contradicted their patriotic Roman feeling, and how much it was caused by the insane heresy of the emperors.

When the epistle of Patriarch Anastasius reached Gregory II, the epistle of Patriarch Anastasius, the pope rejected the epithet "brother and concelebrant" that Anastasius had attached to him, denounced Anastasius as a heresy, and wrote that he would excommunicate him if he did not return to Orthodoxy. Gregory II died in 731, and his successor, Gregory III, took the same firm line. At a council in Rome of 93 bishops, the pope decreed: "From now on, whoever seizes, destroys, or dishonors and desecrates the icons of the Savior, His Most-Pure Mother, the Most Honorable and Immaculate Virgin, or the Holy Apostles and other saints, let him be deprived of the Body and Blood of the Lord and be excommunicated from the church." But all the Pope's messages about this to the Emperor and the Patriarch were arrested on the way and were not allowed to reach the addressees. Similar letters were arrested, sent to various cities in Italy. The emperor decided to put an end to the resistance of Rome. In 732 a fleet was sent to Italy, but it was destroyed by a storm in the Adriatic. The embittered emperor imposed a large indemnity on Sicily and Calabria, including the "legacy of the apostles", i.e. on the possession of the Roman see.