Insula Sanctorum et Doctorum; Or, Ireland's Ancient Schools and Scholars

by John Healy

Colman was a monk in Iona during the abbacy of Segienus, the third ruler of that monastery from A.D. 623 to 652. These were years of much missionary enterprise, especially after King Oswald mounted the throne of Northumbria in A.D. 634. At his request Segienus sent one of his monks, Corban by name, to preach to the Northumbrians. But Corban’s mission was a failure; he expected too much from the semi-barbarous Angles of Northumbria; and he offered them the solid food before he gave them the milk of sound doctrine. After his return to Iona, Aidan, an Irishman, as Bede tells us, was consecrated bishop, and sent to preach in Northumbria. Bede gives a most interesting account of his life and character,[384] and adds, as might be expected, that his mission was entirely successful. He converted the Northumbrians, and founded the monastery and See of Lindisfarne about the year A.D. 635. When Bishop Aidan died in A.D. 651, another Irish prelate called Finan was sent to succeed him in the government of the Northumbrian Church. His first task was to build a church in Lindisfarne, of hewn oak, after the manner of the Irish, and he covered it with reeds. In this church he laid the body of his sainted predecessor on the right side of the high altar.

The Easter Controversy, of which we have already spoken, embittered the brief episcopacy of Finan. Like Aidan and all the monks of Iona, he still followed the old Irish custom of calculating the Easter Day, so that the southern Angles, who followed the Roman method, were much scandalized to see the King celebrating Easter Sunday, while the Queen, Eanfled, and her Roman chaplain were keeping the rigorous fast of Palm Sunday.

Bishop Finan died in A.D. 661, after ten years’ episcopacy, during which nothing was done to bring about uniformity; and Colman, another Irish monk of Iona, was appointed to succeed him. But he, too, persisted in observing the old Irish Easter, and wearing the frontal tonsure, so that even King Oswy felt it was high time to try and establish one uniform usage in Northumbria.

For this purpose a Conference, or Synod, was appointed to meet in the monastery of Streaneshalch, since called Whitby. The abbess Hilda favoured Bishop Colman, and presided over the assembly as it was held in her monastery; and she was besides a royal lady. King Oswy also favoured the Scots, but Aldfrid, his son, the crown prince, was in favour of the Roman usage. The learned and eloquent Wilfrid, then an abbot, but afterwards Archbishop of York, was the great champion of orthodoxy, and was supported in his views by Agilbert, a Frenchman, who had studied the Scriptures in Ireland, and appears to have been acquainted with the Irish language and usages. On the other side was Colman, and he had an able episcopal supporter in Bishop Cedd, who, though a southern prelate, was inclined to favour the Irish usage, for he was trained and consecrated by the ‘Scots,’ that is the Irish party.

Colman was called upon by the king to open the discussion. He justified his own usage by three arguments—first, because he received the practice from the holy elders of the Irish Church, who had ordained him bishop and sent him to Northumbria; secondly, because it was the practice of the holy Apostle St. John; and thirdly, because this usage had been sanctioned by the holy and learned Anatolius, a man of great authority in the Church of God.

Then Wilfrid[385] rose to reply, as he was well acquainted with the Anglo-Saxon tongue. He was, besides, an able and learned man who had travelled much abroad. His first argument against Colman was of itself quite conclusive: “The Easter which we observe we saw celebrated everywhere in Africa, Asia, Egypt, and Greece—we saw it celebrated by all men at Rome, where the blessed Apostles, Peter and Paul, lived, taught, suffered, and were buried.” Apostolic authority and universal usage were thus clearly against the few Picts and Britons—the Irish had nearly all given in by this time—who still adhered to the old Easter and the frontal tonsure. As to the authority of St. John, to which Colman appealed, it was not to the purpose. For according to Wilfrid, St. John kept Easter on the 14th day of the first moon in the evening, no matter what day of the week it happened to be—in this respect following the Jews, whilst it was yet lawful to Judaize. “But you, Colman, admit that Easter may not be celebrated on a week day, and hence you do not follow the practice of St. John, nor, as I have shown, of St. Peter either.” This was a home thrust for poor Colman, and Wilfrid followed it up by disposing of Anatolius also. “He was, I admit, a holy, learned, and commendable man; but you do not observe his decrees; for he had a cycle of nineteen years of which you know nothing, or if you do, you despise it; although it is now followed by the entire Church.”

As to Colman’s appeal to the authority of his sainted predecessors, Wilfrid admitted that they were holy men, and perhaps even men of miracles; but they were excusable on account of ignorance of the truth: “you, however,” he says, “have no such excuse because the more perfect rule adopted by the entire Church is now brought home to your minds.”

Wilfrid concluded by appealing once more to the authority of the Apostolic See of Peter as conclusive, for it was to Peter our Lord said—“Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

“Colman,” said the king, “is it true that these words were spoken to Peter by our Lord?” “It is true, O king,” said Colman. “Then,” said the king, “as Peter is the door-keeper, I will not contradict him in anything lest there should be none to open to me if I made him my adversary.” So the Conference ended, and Colman and his clerics felt that they were defeated. It was a severe blow to the old man; and he felt it keenly, not for his own sake, but for the sake of his sainted predecessors. “His doctrine,” says Bede, “was rejected and his sect despised;” and that, too, by men whom he must have regarded as interlopers. Why should they put their sickles into his harvest? Why not leave him and his clergy and people in peace? When hard work was to be done, they were not to be found—it was the monks of Iona who converted the Northumbrians to the Church; but now these Southerns came to regulate the date of their Easter Day, and forbid them to wear the tonsure, which they had worn from their boyhood, and which was worn by Columcille himself, the great Apostle of the Picts and Scots. It was intolerable; and now as King Oswy and his son Aldfrid had turned from their spiritual fathers to Wilfrid and his associates, Colman resolved to leave Northumbria for ever.

But first the old man returned to Lindisfarne, and told his monks all that had happened. For his own part, he declared that he would not accept the new discipline, nor give up the traditions of his sainted predecessors, who proved their mission by countless miracles; and that, as the king was determined to follow the new discipline introduced by Wilfrid, he himself would return to his native country where he might follow the ancient discipline in peace. Those who listed might remain; but those who choose to come with him were welcome, and together they would seek an asylum in the far west of Ireland.