Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| From S. Columbanus to Pope Gregory. PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP
Epistle CXXVII.
From S. Columbanus to Pope Gregory89
89 This epistle of the Irish saint Columbanus
to Gregory was added to the Registrum Epistolarum by the
Benedictine editors, having been first published, with other writings
of S. Columban, by Patrick Fleming in Collectanea sacra; Lovan. a.d. 1667. (See Galland.
Bibliotheca veterum patrum. Sæc. VI. circ.
a.d. 589.) It is assigned by the
Benedictines to a.d. 598–9, and hence
placed at the end of Book IX. of Gregory’s Epistles.
At this time St. Columban was at the monastery
founded by him at Luxovium (Luxueil) among the Vosges mountains
in Burgundy over which country Theoderic II. was now king. He had
already given offence in Gaul, not only by his protest in life and
teaching against prevalent laxity, but also by his continuing to
observe and uphold the custom of his own Celtic Church with regard to
the time for keeping Easter, which differed from what had now been
adopted by Rome and prevailed in the West generally. The main
purpose of this epistle is to plead with pope Gregory for approval of
the Celtic tradition. Subsequently, a synod being held in Gaul
for considering the question, he addressed the bishops there assembled
in a letter which is also extant, defending, as in this epistle, the
Celtic usage, and pleading for being allowed at any rate to follow it
himself in peace (S. Columbani, Ep. II. in Collectan.
sacr.)
It may be observed in the epistle before us, as
also in a subsequent one to pope Boniface IV. with reference to the
same subject (S. Columbani, Ep. V.; Collectan.
sacr), that, though addressing the bishop of Rome in language of
the utmost deference, and recognizing his high position, he shews no
disposition to submit to his authority; telling him on the contrary
that should he declare himself so as to contradict the supposed
teaching of St. Jerome, he would be rejected as heretical by all the
Celtic churches. And throughout the letter there runs a vein of
sarcasm. There is no extant reply from Gregory to the
letter. Probably none was sent. Possibly the letter never
reached its destination: for in the subsequent letter, above
referred to, to Boniface IV. Columban says, “Once and again Satan
hindered the bearers of our letters written formerly to pope Gregory of
good memory, which are subjoined below.”
The point at issue, and Columban’s argument,
as it appears in this letter, may be briefly stated thus. Apart
from any differences in the cycles for calculating the true day of the
Paschal full moon in successive years, there was this difference
between the Celtic and Roman usages. While all agreed in keeping
Easter on a Sunday, the Celtic use was to keep it on the day of the
Paschal full moon itself (i.e. the calculated 14th day of the moon
falling on, or next after, the Vernal Equinox), in case of such a day
falling on a Sunday; whereas the Roman was, in such a case, to defer
their Easter celebration till the following Sunday, so as to avoid
coincidence with the actual day of the Jewish Passover. Hence, in
Bede’s account of the controversy on the subject between the
British and Scottish (i.e. Irish) Churches on the one hand and the
Roman on the other, he speaks of the former keeping their Easter
between the 14th and the 20th days of the moon inclusive, but the
latter between the 15th and the 21st (Bede, H. E. II. 2; III.
25). In Gaul however, as appears from the letter before us, it
was the rule to defer Easter for a week in case of the day of the
Paschal full moon (i.e. the 14th) falling on a Saturday, so as to avoid
coincidence even with the 15th day of the moon. Hence, agreeing
with Bede as to the Celtic usage being to keep Easter between the 14th
and 20th days, he speaks not of the 15th and 21st, but of the 16th and
the 22nd being the extreme limits according to the Gallic usage.
The reason of this difference was, that it had once been the Latin use,
as against the Alexandrian, to keep Easter from the 16th to the 22nd
days, thus avoiding the 15th; and this rule had been retained in the
cycle of Victorius (as to whom see below, note 7), which was still
received in Gaul.
The arguments of St. Columban in
defence of the Celtic usage may be thus summarized. 1. It had
been sanctioned by Anatolius (see below, note 5), whose view had been
approved by St. Jerome. 2. To defer Easter to the 22nd, or even
the 21st day was incongruous, seeing that the moon then entered her
last quarter, rising so late as to give darkness preponderance over
light; and the solemnity of light should not be celebrated under the
domination of darkness. He quotes Anatolius as having insisted on
this principle, of which (we may here observe) we find an intimation in
Philo with reference to the Jewish Passover:—“That not only
by day but also by night the world may be full of all-beauteous light,
inasmuch as sun and moon on that day succeed each other with no
interval of darkness between.” (De Sept. et Fest.
1191.) 3. The alleged objection to keeping Easter on the day of
the Jewish Passover was unfounded and futile. 4. The Mosaic Law
enjoined seven days, beginning with the 14th, as the duration of the
Passover festival; and within the same limits should be kept the Easter
festival. [This argument, it may be observed, whatever its worth
in other respects, appears to be founded on an error. For the
Passover, having been killed before sunset on the 14th of Nisan, is
believed to have been eaten after sunset, i.e. after the 15th day,
reckoned from evening to evening, had begun; and from the latter day
inclusive the seven days of unleavened bread were reckoned, thus ending
with the 21st, which was a special day of “holy
convocation.” Cf . below, note 5.] | .
To the holy lord, and father in Christ, the Roman [pope], most fair ornament
of the Church, a certain most august flower, as it were, of the whole
of withering Europe, distinguished speculator, as enjoying a divine
contemplation of purity (?)90
90 Theoria utpote divina
castulitatis potito. The wordcastulitas may possibly
have been in use among the Irish monks as an endearing diminutive of
castitas(i.e. chastity or purity), regarded as the object
of their affections in the contemplative life. Their writers
appear to have been given to the use of such diminutives, not only of
the names of people, but of other words also.—“In the
following pages (sc. in Adamnan’s Life of St. Columba) the reader
will observe the liberal employment of diminutives, so characteristic
of Irish composition; and he will find them, in many cases, used
without any grammatical force, and commutable, in the same chapters,
with their primitives.” (Reeve’s Adamnan. Appendix
to Preface, Ed., 1857, p. lxi.). | . I,
Bargoma91
91 Perhaps an error for
Barjona, meaning ‘son of a dove,’ in allusion to his name,
Columba, or Columbanus. He afterwards calls himself “vilis
columba.” Cf. “Pauperculus præpotenti (mirum
dictu! nova res!) rara avis scribere audet Bonifacio patri
Palumbus:” “Sed talia suadenti, utpote torpenti actu, ac dicenti potius quam facienti mihi, Jonæ Hebraice,
Peristeræ Græce, Columbæ Latine, potius tantum
[al. tamen] vestræ idiomate linguæ nancto [al.
nuncupato], (S. Columbani Ep. V. ad Bonifacium papam IV. Collectan.
sacr. Patr. Fleming. Galland. sæc. VI. c. a.d. 598). Cf. “Vir erat vitæ venerabilis
et beatæ memoriæ, monasteriorum pater et fundator, cum Jona
propheta homonymum sortitus nomen; nam licet diverso trium diversarum
sono linguarum, unam tamen eandemque rem significat hoc quod Hebraice
dicitur Jona, Græcitas vero ΠΕΡΙΣΤΕΡΑ
vocitat, et Latina lingua Columba nuncupatur.”
(Adamnan’s Life of S. Columba; Secunda
Præfatio.) Du Cange suggests a corruption of Barginna,
said to be a low Latin word, equivalent to peregrinus. | , poor dove in Christ, send
greeting.
Grace to thee and peace from God the Father
[and] our [Lord] Jesus Christ. I am pleased to
think, O holy pope, that it will seem to thee nothing extravagant to be
interrogated about Easter, according to that canticle, Ask thy
father, and he will shew thee; thine elders and they will tell thee
(Deut. xxxii. 7). For, though on me, who am indeed a trifler (micrologo) may be branded that
excellent expression of a certain wise man, who is reported to have
said, on seeing a certain woman, contupictam92
92 The meaning of
this word is obscure. Patrick Fleming (Collect. Sacr.)
suggests an error for compte pictam: Du Cange for
comptam, or acu comptam, some artificial
arrangement of the hair being supposed to be referred to. The
intended point of the comparison seems to be, that Gregory will still
be admirable, though the writer may set him off unskilfully. | ,
I do not admire the art, but I admire the brow, in that I who am
vile write to thee that art illustrious; yet, relying on my confidence
in shy evangelical humility, I presume to write to thee, and impose on
thee the matter of my grief. For writing is not in vain, when
necessity compels one to write, though it be to one’s
betters.
What, then, dost thou say concerning Easter on the 21st or 22nd day of the moon, which (with thy peace be it said) is
proved by many calculators not to be Easter, but in truth a time of
darkness? For it is not unknown, as I believe, to thy Efficiency,
how Anatolius93
93 Anatolius, an Alexandrian by birth and bishop of Laodicea, a.d. 269, is referred to by Eusebius (H. E. VII.
32) as distinguished for learning, and the writer of a work on the
Paschal question, which he quotes. A “Canon
Paschalis,” purporting to be this work, was published by
Bucherius in a Latin Version (Doct. Temp. Antv. 1634); but its
genuineness is doubted. Anatolius was adduced by Colman at the
Synod of Whitby (Bede, H. E. III. 25), as an authority for the
14th and 20th days of the moon being the limits for Easter. But
Wilfrid replied that Anatolius had been misunderstood; for that, having
in view the Egyptian mode of reckoning days from sunset to sunset, he
had meant the day which began after sunset on the 14th day, i.e. really
the 15th. And so also with regard to the 20th day. His
language, as quoted by Eusebius, supports this explanation of his
meaning:—“Given that the day of the Passover is on the
fourteenth of the moon after evening (μεθ᾽
ἑσπέραν).” See
above, end of note 1. | (a man of wonderful
learning, as says Saint Hieronymus, extracts from whose writings
Eusebius, bishop of Cæsarea, inserted in his Ecclesiastical
History, and Saint Hieronymus praised this same work about Easter in
his catalogue) disputes with strong disapprobation about this age of
the moon. For against the Gallican Rimarii94
94 “Forte sic dictos,
quod obscura et difficilia rimarentur.”
Benedictine edit. Migne.—“Nostri
rimeurs vocant poetastras, sed an ea sit hic notio non
definio.” Du Cange. | , who erred, as he says, about Easter, he
introduced an awful sentence, saying, Certainly, if the rising of
the moon be delayed till the end of two watches, which indicates
midnight, light does not overcome darkness, but darkness light; which
thing is certainly not allowable in the Easter Festival, namely, that
any part of the darkness should dominate over the light, since the
solemnity of the Lord’s Resurrection is light, and there is no
communion of light with darkness. And, if the moon has not shone
forth till the third watch, there is no doubt that the moon has risen
on its 21st or 22nd day, in which it is not possible for a true Paschal
offering to be made. For those who lay down that it is possible
for a true Easter to be celebrated at this age of the moon, not only
are unable to affirm this by authority of divine Scripture, but also
incur the guilt of sacrilege and contumacy and peril of their souls,
while affirming that the true Light, which dominates over all darkness,
can be offered while there is any domination of darkness. Also in
the book of holy dogma we read, Easter, that is, the solemnity of the
Lord’s Resurrection, cannot be celebrated before the beginning of
the vernal equinox is past, to wit, that it may not come before the
vernal equinox95
95 The original here, being
probably an incorrect citation, is obscure. It is “Pascha,
ed est solemnitas dominicæ Resurrectionis, ante transgressum
vernalis æquinoctii 16 initiam non potest celebrari, ut scilicet
æquinoctium non antecedat.” | : which rule
assuredly Victorius96
96 Pope Leo I. referred the question between the Roman and Alexandrian Churches as to
the computation of Easter to his archdeacon (afterwards pope) Hilarius
for investigation; and he referred it to Victorius of Aquitaine, who
consequently (a.d. 457) drew up a cycle, which
was accepted first in the Gallican Churches (Concil. Aurel. IV.,
an. 541), and continued to be observed there after it had been
superseded in Italy by that of Dionysius Exiguus (a.d. 527). See above, note 1. | has
gone beyond in his cycle, and hereby has already introduced error into
Gaul, or to speak less boldly, has confirmed one of old standing.
For indeed how can either of these things stand with reason; either
that the Lord’s Resurrection should be celebrated before His
Passion (the thought of which is absurd), or that the seven days
sanctioned by the Lord’s command in the Law, during which only it
is enjoined that the Lord’s Passover could lawfully be eaten
(which are to be numbered from the 14th day of the moon to the 20th),
should against law and right be exceeded? For a moon in its 21st
or 22nd day is out of the dominion of light, as having risen at that
time after midnight; and, when darkness overcomes light, it is said to
be impious to keep the solemnity of light. Why then dost thou,
who art so wise, the brilliant lights indeed of whose sacred genius are
diffused, as in ancient times, through the world,—why dost thou
keep a dark Easter? I wonder, I confess, that this error of Gaul,
ac si Schynteneum97
97
“Schynteneum Græcam vocem σχοινοτενής
putat Editor, id est, tanquam si rectum et legitimum
esset.” Du Cange. This interpretation appears
probable from the fact that the Irish writers of the period were given
to air their Greek learning by the rise of such words.—“He
(Adamnan) occasionally employs Greek or Græco-Latin words”
(Reeves’s Adamnan. p. lxi. See also p. 158, note,
for other evidence of this Irish tendency). The meaning in the
text would thus be, “I wonder that this error should be tolerated
by thee as though it were right and legitimate.” | , has not long ago
been swept away by thee; unless I should perchance suppose, what I can
hardly believe, that, as it is evident that thou hast not corrected it,
it has thy approval.
In another way, however, may thy Expertness be more honourably excused, if, fearing to subject thyself to the mark of
Hermagoric98
98 Hermagoricæ
novitatis; the epithet being apparently formed from the name
of Hermagoras of Temnos, a distinguished Greek rhetorician of the time
of Pompey and Cicero. He devoted peculiar attention to what is
called the invention. Quintilian refers to him and
approves his system: Cicero (De Invent. i. 6) was opposed
to it. The use of a word like this is again characteristic of the
Irish writers. | novelty, thou art
content with the authority of thy predecessors, and especially of pope
Leo.
Do not, I pray thee, in such a question trust to
humility only or to gravity, which are often deceived, Better by
far is a living dog in this problem than a dead lion
(Eccles. ix. 4). For a living saint may correct what had not been corrected by another who came
before him. For know thou that by our masters and the Irish
ancients, who were philosophers and most wise computists in
constructing calculations, Victorius was not received, but held rather
worthy of ridicule or of excuse than as carrying authority.
Wherefore to me, as a timid stranger rather than as a sciolist, afford
the support of thy judgment, and disdain not to send us speedily the
suffrage of thy Placability for assuaging this tempest which surrounds
us; since, after so many authors whom I have read, I am not satisfied
with that one sentence of those bishops who say only, We ought not
to keep the Passover with the Jews. For this is what the
bishop Victor formerly said; but none of the Easterns accepted his
figment99
99 i.e. pope Victor in his
opposition towards the end of the second century to the Asiatic
Quarto-decimans who kept their Pasch on the day of the Paschal full
moon, whatever the day of the week might be. Colman at the synod
of Whitby had alleged St. John, to whom the Asiatics had traced their
tradition, as an authority for the Scottish usage. But Wilfrid
truly alleged in reply that the question at issue between the Scots and
Romans at that time was a different one, since both parties agreed in
keeping Easter on a Sunday only. Still, Columban’s argument
here is to the point as shewing that the Easterns had not objected to
keeping Easter on the actual day of the Jewish Passover. It may
be noted here how the authority of Victor, as well as of other popes,
is set at naught by S. Columbanus. | . But this the benumbing (numb?)
backbone of Dagon; this the dotage of error drinks in100
100 Sed hoc soporans spina
Dagonis, hoc imbibit bubum erroris. On these obscure
expressions it may be observed that spina Dagonis evidently
means what was left to the fish-god (ῥάχις in LXX.), after his head and hands had
been severed. Gregory, in his comment on 1 Sam. v., interprets it
as denoting heathenism prostrate, and at length deprived of even the
semblance of rationality, in the presence of the Gospel, which was
represented by the ark. Columban may possibly have got the idea
from Gregory’s own interpretation of the incident, and been
pleased to use it against him. Bubum,according to Du
Cange, is a late Latin word denoting senium, or languor,
the noun bubulaalso being used in the sense of
fabula. The idea seems to be that pope Victor’s view
was a figment, worthy only to be received (or, as we might now say,
swallowed) by senseless heathenism or wandering dotage. | . Of what worth, I ask, is this sentence,
so frivolous and so rude and resting, as it does, on no testimonies of
sacred Scripture; We ought not to keep the Passover with the
Jews? What has it to do with the question? Are the
reprobate Jews to be supposed to keep the Passover now, seeing that
they are without a temple, outside Jerusalem, and Christ, who was
formerly prefigured, having been crucified by them? Or, can it be
rightly supposed that the 14th day of the moon for the Passover was of
their own appointment, and is it not rather to be acknowledged to be of
God’s, who alone knew clearly with what mysterious meaning the
14th day of the moon was chosen for the passage [out of
Egypt]. Perhaps to wise men and the like of thee this may be
in some degree clearer than to others. As to those who make this
objection, although without authority, let them upbraid God for that He
did not then beforehand guard against the contumacy of the Jews by
enjoining on them in the Law nine days of unleavened bread, if He would
not have us keep the Passover with them, so that the beginning of our
solemnity should not exceed the end of theirs. For, if Easter is
to be celebrated on the 21st or 22nd day, from the 14th to the 22nd
nine days will be reckoned, that is, seven ordered by God, and two
added by men. But, if it is allowed for men to add anything of
their own accord to divine decree, I ask whether this may not seem
opposed to that sentence of Deuteronomy, Lo (he saith), the
word which I give unto thee, thou shalt not add unto it nor take from
it (Deut. iv. 2). But in writing all this more forwardly than humbly, I
know that I have involved myself in an Euripus of presumption attended
with great difficulty, being perchance unskilled to steer out of
it. Nor does it befit our place or rank that anything should be
suggested in the way of discussion to thy great authority, and that my
Western letters should ridiculously solicit thee, who sittest
legitimately on the seat of the apostle and key-bearer Peter, on the
subject of Easter. But thou oughtest to consider not so much
worthless me in this matter as many masters, both departed and now
living, who confirm what I have pointed out, and suppose thyself to be
holding a colloquy with them: for know that I open my
thick-lipped month dutifully though it may be incoherently and
extravagantly. It is for thee, therefore, either to excuse or to
condemn Victorius, knowing that, if thou approvest him, it will be a
question of faith between thee and the aforesaid Hieronymus, seeing
that he approved Anatolius, who is opposed to Victorius; so that whoso
follows the one cannot receive the other. Let, then, thy
Vigilance take thought that, in approving the faith of one of the two
authors aforesaid who are mutually opposed to each other, there be no
dissonance, when thou pronouncest thy opinion, between thee and
Hieronymus, lest we should be on all sides in a strait, as to whether
we should agree with thee or with him. Spare the weak in this
matter, lest thou exhibit the scandal of diversity. For I frankly
acknowledge to thee that any one who goes against the authority of
Saint Hieronymus will be one to be repudiated as a heretic among the
churches of the West: for they accommodate their faith in all
respects unhesitatingly to him with regard to the Divine
Scriptures. But let this suffice with respect to Easter.
But I ask what thy judgment is about those bishops whom thou hast written of as simoniacal, and whom the writer
Giltas101 calls pests. Should communion be had
with them? For there are known to be many such in this province,
whereby the matter is made more serious. Or as to others, who
having been polluted in their diaconate, are afterwards elected to the
rank of bishops? For there are some whom we know to have
conscientious scruples on these grounds; and in conferring with our
littleness about them, they wished to know for certain whether they may
minister without peril after such transgressions; that is, either after
having bought their rank for money, or after adultery in their
diaconate. I mean, however, concealed adultery with their
dependents102
102 Cum
clientelis: meaning perhaps living with females of
their own households as concubines, in distinction from open
transgression. The word can hardly denote, as suggested by the
Benedictine Editors, wives lawfully married before ordination. | , which with our
teachers is accounted as no less criminal.
As to a third head of enquiry, say in reply, I pray thee, if it is not troublesome, what should be done in the case of
those monks who for a closer sight of God, or inflamed by a longing for
a more perfect life, going against their vows, leave the places of
their first conversion, and, against the will of their abbots, the
fervour of monks compelling them, either go free or fly to
deserts. The author Vennianus enquired about these of Giltas, who
replied to him most elegantly: yet still to one who is anxious to
learn there is ever an increase of greater fear. These things,
and much more which epistolary brevity does not admit of, might well
have been enquired about more humbly and more clearly in a personal
interview, but that weakness of body and the care of my fellow-pilgrims
keeps me bound at home, though desirous of going to thee, so as to draw
from that spiritual vein of a living well and from the living water of
knowledge flowing from heaven and springing up unto eternal life.
And, if my body were to follow my mind, Rome would once more be in
danger of being itself despised; seeing that—even as we read in
the narration of the learned Hieronymus how certain persons once came
to Rome from the utmost boundaries of the Heuline coast103
103 De ultimis Heulini,
litoris finibus.— “Loco
Heulini esse legendum Hualini, vel Huelini constat
ex contextu Hieronymiano. Est vox Græca, a
rad. ὕαλος, sive ὕελος, vitrum, crystallus. Sic mare
vocatur (Apocal. iv.) θάλασσα ὑαλίνη. In Hieronymo hic legimus; De
ultimis Hispaniæ Galliarumque finibus”
(note in Benedictine Edition). See above, note 8, as to
the fondness of the old Irish writers for the use of Greek
words. | ; and then (wonderful to be told) sought
something else outside of Rome—so I too, saving reverence for the
ashes of the saints should seek out longingly, not Rome but thee:
for, though I confess myself not to be wise, but athirst, I should do
this same thing if I had time and opportunity.
I have read thy book containing the Pastoral Rule, short
in style, lengthy in teaching, full of mysteries; and acknowledge it to
be a work sweeter than honey to one that is in need. Wherefore bestow, I pray thee, on me who am athirst for what is thine, the works on Ezekiel,
which, as I have heard, thou hast elaborated with wonderful
genius. I have read the six books of Hieronymus on that prophet;
but he has not expounded the middle part. But, if thou wilt do me
the favour, send for me to the city some of thy remaining writings; to
wit, the concluding expositions of one book, and (? namely) the
Song of Songs from that place where it is said, I will go to the
mountain of myrrh and the hill of frankincense, to the end, treated
with short comments, either of others, or thine own: and I beg
that thou wouldest expound the whole obscurity of Zachariah, and make
manifest its hidden meaning, that Western blindness may give thee
thanks for this. I make unreasonable demands, and ask to have
great things told me: who can fail to see this? But it is
true also that thou hast great things, and knowest well that from a
little less, and from much more should be put out to use. Let
charity induce thee to write in reply; let not the roughness of my
letter hinder thee from expounding, seeing that it is my mode of
expression that has been in fault, and I have it in my heart to pay
thee due honour. It was for me to provoke, to interrogate, to
request: it is for thee not to refuse what thou hast received
freely, to put thy talent out to use, to give to him that asks the
bread of doctrine, as Christ enjoins. Peace be to thee and thine;
pardon my forwardness, blessed pope, in that I have written so boldly;
and I pray thee in thy holy prayers to our common Lord to pray for me,
a most vile sinner. I think it quite superfluous to commend to
thee my people, whom the Saviour judges fit to be received, as walking
in His name; and if, as I have heard from thy holy Candidus104
104 Candidus had been sent
by Gregory to Gaul as rector patrimonii there. See
previous Epistles. | , thou shouldest be disposed to say in reply
that things confirmed by ancient usage cannot be changed, error is
manifestly ancient; but truth which reproves it is ever more ancient
still.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|