OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 23, 2014, 05:37:37 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Celtic Christianity and Rome  (Read 1155 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
StGeorge
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 707


St. George


« on: June 24, 2010, 09:58:33 PM »

What was the relationship between ancient Celtic Christianity (pre-Augustine of Cantebury) and the Bishop of Rome?  

I recently read Bede's Ecclesiastical History, and now am reading several other contemporary works collected in _The Age of Bede_, and it is interesting to note the number of references to the bishop of Rome fulfilling the office of Peter, having authority over the whole Church, having the power of the keys, etc.  There is a real cult of Peter, who frequently is described as "Prince of the Apostles."  Rome is seen by Bede and others as having better, more truly Apostolic and orthodox traditions than say the old Irish and Briton churches, which are considered in error on many points.  Indeed, in one story regarding a difference between the old traditions and the newer ones brought from Rome, the bishops are asked, who is greater, St. Columba or St. Peter, to which is exlaimed: Peter!  

It's often said that before the Irish were Romanized, they had their own unique form of Christianity, closer to (Eastern) Orthodoxy, so I'm interested in seeing if their views of Rome and the Bishop of Rome were in any way different.  



  
« Last Edit: June 24, 2010, 10:01:30 PM by StGeorge » Logged
GabrieltheCelt
Hillbilly Extraordinaire
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,988


Chasin' down a Hoodoo...


« Reply #1 on: June 24, 2010, 10:10:47 PM »


It's often said that before the Irish were Romanized, they had their own unique form of Christianity, closer to (Eastern) Orthodoxy, so I'm interested in seeing if their views of Rome and the Bishop of Rome were in any way different.  


 I'm interested in this topic as well (surprise, surprise!  Smiley)  I came across this book the other day at Borders.

http://www.amazon.com/Celtic-Daily-Prayer-Northumbria-Community/dp/0060013249

 It mentions that the actual prayers are monastic and from the 6th century and earlier.  I bring this book up only because it seems to be in agreeance with the above quote.
Logged

"The Scots-Irish; Brewed in Scotland, bottled in Ireland, uncorked in America."  ~Scots-Irish saying
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #2 on: June 24, 2010, 10:41:53 PM »

A word of warning:
Celtic Christianity: making myths and chasing dreams By Ian Bradley
http://books.google.com/books?sitesec=reviews&id=x9pjqsKAG4AC

The Celtic Church in Britain By Leslie Hardinge
http://books.google.com/books?id=kQGc84QNJfwC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

has a Anglo-Catholic ax to grind, which is a little hard to detect unless you see where he is going with his evidence, but he has a lot of references and info, so it isn't totally off the wall, and worth the read as long as you are not susceptible to being misled.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,973


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #3 on: June 25, 2010, 09:47:35 AM »

What was the relationship between ancient Celtic Christianity (pre-Augustine of Cantebury) and the Bishop of Rome?  

I recently read Bede's Ecclesiastical History, and now am reading several other contemporary works collected in _The Age of Bede_, and it is interesting to note the number of references to the bishop of Rome fulfilling the office of Peter, having authority over the whole Church, having the power of the keys, etc.  There is a real cult of Peter, who frequently is described as "Prince of the Apostles."  Rome is seen by Bede and others as having better, more truly Apostolic and orthodox traditions than say the old Irish and Briton churches, which are considered in error on many points.  Indeed, in one story regarding a difference between the old traditions and the newer ones brought from Rome, the bishops are asked, who is greater, St. Columba or St. Peter, to which is exlaimed: Peter!  

It's often said that before the Irish were Romanized, they had their own unique form of Christianity, closer to (Eastern) Orthodoxy, so I'm interested in seeing if their views of Rome and the Bishop of Rome were in any way different.  



  

I'm not sure what you mean by saying that before St. Augustine of Canterbury, Celtic (perhaps you mean British, since the Anglo-Saxons did not have much influence in places like Wales and especially Ireland) Christianity was closer to (Eastern) Orthodoxy. The Britons and the Anglo-Saxon Christians were all Orthodox. Sure, they had different liturgical rites and histories. But the rites of the Greeks and the Celts were quite different from each other. The Celts, by and large, used Latin. Actually, Rome in the 7th century was very close to Constantinople in many ways. The Old Roman chant of the period, for example, is the ancestor of later Byzantine and Gregorian chant.

Anyway, it's easy to read too much into St. Augustine's mission and the aftermath, and to interpret it in an anachronistic way, as a precursor to the high-handed medieval papacy. Pope St. Gregory himself probably did not have such visions of papal supremacy--especially given his dislike of the term "ecumenical patriarch," and his statement that a bishop who declares supremacy over all the Churches would be the forerunner of Antichrist. It is, however, the prerogative of a patriarch and his synod to oversee liturgical rites and episcopal appointments in the patriarchate. Because of political conditions, Britain, Ireland, Wales, and northern France had a kind of de facto autonomy--not really autocephaly, since there were clear links between those places and Rome--links of a subordinate nature (St. Wilfrid of York, a British bishop, himself appealed to the pope in his case against St. Theodore of Canterbury)--more so than between Rome and Spain at that time. While some of the outcomes of Whitby, for example, were perhaps unfortunate, I think that one can argue that problems were resolved relatively soon. There do not appear to have been lasting schisms between the Irish and Welsh and the Anglo-Saxons. And there clearly wasn't the kind of hostile takeover of the Celtic Churches that existed later with the Anglo-Saxon Church under William the Bastard.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #4 on: June 25, 2010, 09:55:40 AM »

What was the relationship between ancient Celtic Christianity (pre-Augustine of Cantebury) and the Bishop of Rome?  

I recently read Bede's Ecclesiastical History, and now am reading several other contemporary works collected in _The Age of Bede_, and it is interesting to note the number of references to the bishop of Rome fulfilling the office of Peter, having authority over the whole Church, having the power of the keys, etc.  There is a real cult of Peter, who frequently is described as "Prince of the Apostles."  Rome is seen by Bede and others as having better, more truly Apostolic and orthodox traditions than say the old Irish and Briton churches, which are considered in error on many points.  Indeed, in one story regarding a difference between the old traditions and the newer ones brought from Rome, the bishops are asked, who is greater, St. Columba or St. Peter, to which is exlaimed: Peter!  

It's often said that before the Irish were Romanized, they had their own unique form of Christianity, closer to (Eastern) Orthodoxy, so I'm interested in seeing if their views of Rome and the Bishop of Rome were in any way different.  



  

I'm not sure what you mean by saying that before St. Augustine of Canterbury, Celtic (perhaps you mean British, since the Anglo-Saxons did not have much influence in places like Wales and especially Ireland) Christianity was closer to (Eastern) Orthodoxy. The Britons and the Anglo-Saxon Christians were all Orthodox. Sure, they had different liturgical rites and histories. But the rites of the Greeks and the Celts were quite different from each other. The Celts, by and large, used Latin. Actually, Rome in the 7th century was very close to Constantinople in many ways. The Old Roman chant of the period, for example, is the ancestor of later Byzantine and Gregorian chant.

Anyway, it's easy to read too much into St. Augustine's mission and the aftermath, and to interpret it in an anachronistic way, as a precursor to the high-handed medieval papacy. Pope St. Gregory himself probably did not have such visions of papal supremacy--especially given his dislike of the term "ecumenical patriarch," and his statement that a bishop who declares supremacy over all the Churches would be the forerunner of Antichrist. It is, however, the prerogative of a patriarch and his synod to oversee liturgical rites and episcopal appointments in the patriarchate. Because of political conditions, Britain, Ireland, Wales, and northern France had a kind of de facto autonomy--not really autocephaly, since there were clear links between those places and Rome--links of a subordinate nature (St. Wilfrid of York, a British bishop, himself appealed to the pope in his case against St. Theodore of Canterbury)--more so than between Rome and Spain at that time. While some of the outcomes of Whitby, for example, were perhaps unfortunate, I think that one can argue that problems were resolved relatively soon. There do not appear to have been lasting schisms between the Irish and Welsh and the Anglo-Saxons. And there clearly wasn't the kind of hostile takeover of the Celtic Churches that existed later with the Anglo-Saxon Church under William the Bastard.

There was in Scotland, where Queen Margaret was canonized by the Vatican for her efforts.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,973


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #5 on: June 25, 2010, 10:09:18 AM »

What was the relationship between ancient Celtic Christianity (pre-Augustine of Cantebury) and the Bishop of Rome?  

I recently read Bede's Ecclesiastical History, and now am reading several other contemporary works collected in _The Age of Bede_, and it is interesting to note the number of references to the bishop of Rome fulfilling the office of Peter, having authority over the whole Church, having the power of the keys, etc.  There is a real cult of Peter, who frequently is described as "Prince of the Apostles."  Rome is seen by Bede and others as having better, more truly Apostolic and orthodox traditions than say the old Irish and Briton churches, which are considered in error on many points.  Indeed, in one story regarding a difference between the old traditions and the newer ones brought from Rome, the bishops are asked, who is greater, St. Columba or St. Peter, to which is exlaimed: Peter!  

It's often said that before the Irish were Romanized, they had their own unique form of Christianity, closer to (Eastern) Orthodoxy, so I'm interested in seeing if their views of Rome and the Bishop of Rome were in any way different.  



  

I'm not sure what you mean by saying that before St. Augustine of Canterbury, Celtic (perhaps you mean British, since the Anglo-Saxons did not have much influence in places like Wales and especially Ireland) Christianity was closer to (Eastern) Orthodoxy. The Britons and the Anglo-Saxon Christians were all Orthodox. Sure, they had different liturgical rites and histories. But the rites of the Greeks and the Celts were quite different from each other. The Celts, by and large, used Latin. Actually, Rome in the 7th century was very close to Constantinople in many ways. The Old Roman chant of the period, for example, is the ancestor of later Byzantine and Gregorian chant.

Anyway, it's easy to read too much into St. Augustine's mission and the aftermath, and to interpret it in an anachronistic way, as a precursor to the high-handed medieval papacy. Pope St. Gregory himself probably did not have such visions of papal supremacy--especially given his dislike of the term "ecumenical patriarch," and his statement that a bishop who declares supremacy over all the Churches would be the forerunner of Antichrist. It is, however, the prerogative of a patriarch and his synod to oversee liturgical rites and episcopal appointments in the patriarchate. Because of political conditions, Britain, Ireland, Wales, and northern France had a kind of de facto autonomy--not really autocephaly, since there were clear links between those places and Rome--links of a subordinate nature (St. Wilfrid of York, a British bishop, himself appealed to the pope in his case against St. Theodore of Canterbury)--more so than between Rome and Spain at that time. While some of the outcomes of Whitby, for example, were perhaps unfortunate, I think that one can argue that problems were resolved relatively soon. There do not appear to have been lasting schisms between the Irish and Welsh and the Anglo-Saxons. And there clearly wasn't the kind of hostile takeover of the Celtic Churches that existed later with the Anglo-Saxon Church under William the Bastard.

There was in Scotland, where Queen Margaret was canonized by the Vatican for her efforts.

Under the reformed Papacy.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #6 on: June 25, 2010, 10:20:20 AM »

Some stuff:
Handbook for Liturgical Studies: Liturgical Time and Space, Volume 5 By Anscar J. Chupungco
http://books.google.com/books?id=Yk5RO1fKXJwC&pg=PA114&dq=celtic+hours+psalms+taft&hl=en&ei=I7ckTLyGLYaDngeC1cm2BA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

The Divine Office in the Latin Middle Ages: methodology and source studies ... By Ruth Steiner, Margot Elsbeth Fassler, Rebecca Anne Baltzer
http://books.google.com/books?id=vbj4Zsybl28C&pg=PA137&dq=celtic+hours+psalms+taft&hl=en&ei=HLgkTKeVJ4aonQei-KTIBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

Western plainchant: a handbook By David Hiley
http://books.google.com/books?id=XzL3_SHNyjoC&pg=PA488&dq=celtic+hours+psalms+taft&hl=en&ei=pbgkTO6aEMuUnQf0rKjPBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=celtic%20hours%20psalms%20taft&f=false

The liturgy of the hours in East and West: the origins of the divine office ... By Robert F. Taft
http://books.google.com/books?id=UK-BkfXmh20C&pg=PP9&dq=Taft+cathedral+rite+hours+Monastic+office+Ireland&hl=en&ei=E7okTOisKsLYnAectPjCBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #7 on: June 25, 2010, 10:41:14 AM »


And there clearly wasn't the kind of hostile takeover of the Celtic Churches that existed later with the Anglo-Saxon Church under William the Bastard.

In Ireland the suppression of the ancient ways was successfully enacted a hundred years later, at the Synod of Cashel in 1172.

The ancient rites of Ireland, Scotland, Wales were entirely and utterly destroyed by the close of the 12th century.  In Ireland this was accomplished at the insistence of the Papal Legate of Pope Adrian at the Synod of Cashel in 1172 AD and backed up by the invading Anglo-Norman army.  Continental Catholicism and the Anglo-Sarum Rite were imposed on Ireland in 1172.   All Irish bishops were replaced by Anglo-Norman bishops.  The remaining forms of the ancient ways of Irish monasticism were completely erased.   From 1172 onwards all diversity was crushed and it had to be only Rome's way.
Logged
StGeorge
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 707


St. George


« Reply #8 on: June 25, 2010, 07:49:17 PM »

What was the relationship between ancient Celtic Christianity (pre-Augustine of Cantebury) and the Bishop of Rome?  

I recently read Bede's Ecclesiastical History, and now am reading several other contemporary works collected in _The Age of Bede_, and it is interesting to note the number of references to the bishop of Rome fulfilling the office of Peter, having authority over the whole Church, having the power of the keys, etc.  There is a real cult of Peter, who frequently is described as "Prince of the Apostles."  Rome is seen by Bede and others as having better, more truly Apostolic and orthodox traditions than say the old Irish and Briton churches, which are considered in error on many points.  Indeed, in one story regarding a difference between the old traditions and the newer ones brought from Rome, the bishops are asked, who is greater, St. Columba or St. Peter, to which is exlaimed: Peter!  

It's often said that before the Irish were Romanized, they had their own unique form of Christianity, closer to (Eastern) Orthodoxy, so I'm interested in seeing if their views of Rome and the Bishop of Rome were in any way different.  



  

I'm not sure what you mean by saying that before St. Augustine of Canterbury, Celtic (perhaps you mean British, since the Anglo-Saxons did not have much influence in places like Wales and especially Ireland) Christianity was closer to (Eastern) Orthodoxy. The Britons and the Anglo-Saxon Christians were all Orthodox. Sure, they had different liturgical rites and histories. But the rites of the Greeks and the Celts were quite different from each other. The Celts, by and large, used Latin. Actually, Rome in the 7th century was very close to Constantinople in many ways. The Old Roman chant of the period, for example, is the ancestor of later Byzantine and Gregorian chant.

Anyway, it's easy to read too much into St. Augustine's mission and the aftermath, and to interpret it in an anachronistic way, as a precursor to the high-handed medieval papacy. Pope St. Gregory himself probably did not have such visions of papal supremacy--especially given his dislike of the term "ecumenical patriarch," and his statement that a bishop who declares supremacy over all the Churches would be the forerunner of Antichrist. It is, however, the prerogative of a patriarch and his synod to oversee liturgical rites and episcopal appointments in the patriarchate. Because of political conditions, Britain, Ireland, Wales, and northern France had a kind of de facto autonomy--not really autocephaly, since there were clear links between those places and Rome--links of a subordinate nature (St. Wilfrid of York, a British bishop, himself appealed to the pope in his case against St. Theodore of Canterbury)--more so than between Rome and Spain at that time. While some of the outcomes of Whitby, for example, were perhaps unfortunate, I think that one can argue that problems were resolved relatively soon. There do not appear to have been lasting schisms between the Irish and Welsh and the Anglo-Saxons. And there clearly wasn't the kind of hostile takeover of the Celtic Churches that existed later with the Anglo-Saxon Church under William the Bastard.

By pre-Augustine of Canterbury I meant before the Roman mission to the British Isles.  

You are right about how Rome in the 7th century was much closer to Constantinople than in later times.  I find it interesting that Theodore (a Greek from Tarsus) was sent to the British Isles by the Bishop of Rome.  

It seems in reading that the authority of the Bishop of Rome is more openly stressed by the pious devotees of St. Peter than by the Bishop of Rome himself.  It seems somewhat the inverse of later ages of the Bishop of Rome asserting plenitudo potestasis.      
« Last Edit: June 25, 2010, 07:52:38 PM by StGeorge » Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #9 on: June 25, 2010, 07:55:01 PM »

As far as I can tell, Bede cannot be seen as representing an endemic Celtic Christian mindset because he was a Northumbrian after the Synod of Whitby. That very fact establishes that they were probably expressing an anti-Celtic mindset as a result of the synod.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2010, 07:55:48 PM by deusveritasest » Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #10 on: June 25, 2010, 08:15:35 PM »


It seems in reading that the authority of the Bishop of Rome is more openly stressed by the pious devotees of St. Peter than by the Bishop of Rome himself.  It seems somewhat the inverse of later ages of the Bishop of Rome asserting plenitudo potestasis.      

See the "canons" of the so-called First Synod of Patrick, which purports to be decrees to the clergy by bishops Patricius, Auxlius, and Iserninus. It can be found in The Irish Penitentials. Ed. Ludwig Bieler, with an appendix by David Binchy. Dublin: The Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 1963, and perhaps also John T. McNeill and Helena M. Gamer, Medieval Handbooks of Penance. New York: Columbia University Press, 1938.

I don't have either text on hand and so can't compare it to the regulations at the end of the Liber Angeli in the Book of Armagh. These are primarily concerned with Armagh's pre-eminence in the Irish church, but the last declares that if Armagh can't solve something, the matter is to be referred to Rome. It can be found in Bieler (edit, intro, trans, commentary). The Patrician Texts in the Book of Armagh. Scriptores Latini Hiberniae. Dublin: The Dublin Instititute for Advanced Studies, 1979, pp. 188-191 (facing pages in Latin and English):

"Further, any exceptional difficulty which may arise, (the law on which) is unknown to all the judges of the Irish people, is by law to be referred to the see of the archbishop of the Irish, that is (the see) of Patrick, for examination by its bishop; if, however, such a suit in the said litigation cannot easily be decided there by wise men, we decree that it is to be sent to the apostolic see, that is, to the see of Peter the apostle, who has authority over the city of Rome. These are (the men) who have made this decree, that is, Auxilius, Patrick, Secundinus, Benignus; after the death of the holy Patrick his disciples have frequently copied his books."

Interesting to note that the Irish seem to be happy to have Rome as an appellate court for knotty problems but also seem to restrict its general authority to the city of Rome.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/celt-archive/message/1943
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #11 on: June 25, 2010, 08:27:15 PM »

"Further, any exceptional difficulty which may arise, (the law on which) is unknown to all the judges of the Irish people, is by law to be referred to the see of the archbishop of the Irish, that is (the see) of Patrick, for examination by its bishop;

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/celt-archive/message/1943


Did anybody notice that - "the see of the archbishop of the Irish..."  Are we looking at nascent phyletism in 5th century Ireland?
Logged
StGeorge
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 707


St. George


« Reply #12 on: June 25, 2010, 09:41:11 PM »


It seems in reading that the authority of the Bishop of Rome is more openly stressed by the pious devotees of St. Peter than by the Bishop of Rome himself.  It seems somewhat the inverse of later ages of the Bishop of Rome asserting plenitudo potestasis.      

See the "canons" of the so-called First Synod of Patrick, which purports to be decrees to the clergy by bishops Patricius, Auxlius, and Iserninus. It can be found in The Irish Penitentials. Ed. Ludwig Bieler, with an appendix by David Binchy. Dublin: The Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 1963, and perhaps also John T. McNeill and Helena M. Gamer, Medieval Handbooks of Penance. New York: Columbia University Press, 1938.

I don't have either text on hand and so can't compare it to the regulations at the end of the Liber Angeli in the Book of Armagh. These are primarily concerned with Armagh's pre-eminence in the Irish church, but the last declares that if Armagh can't solve something, the matter is to be referred to Rome. It can be found in Bieler (edit, intro, trans, commentary). The Patrician Texts in the Book of Armagh. Scriptores Latini Hiberniae. Dublin: The Dublin Instititute for Advanced Studies, 1979, pp. 188-191 (facing pages in Latin and English):

"Further, any exceptional difficulty which may arise, (the law on which) is unknown to all the judges of the Irish people, is by law to be referred to the see of the archbishop of the Irish, that is (the see) of Patrick, for examination by its bishop; if, however, such a suit in the said litigation cannot easily be decided there by wise men, we decree that it is to be sent to the apostolic see, that is, to the see of Peter the apostle, who has authority over the city of Rome. These are (the men) who have made this decree, that is, Auxilius, Patrick, Secundinus, Benignus; after the death of the holy Patrick his disciples have frequently copied his books."

Interesting to note that the Irish seem to be happy to have Rome as an appellate court for knotty problems but also seem to restrict its general authority to the city of Rome.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/celt-archive/message/1943


Thanks for the quotation. 

It would seem that the Irish and the English (those who were converted through Roman influence) both shared the view of Rome as appellate court.  I noticed this especially in the Life of St. Wilfrid. 

I'll make a note of the books, though I do not have access to them at present.   
Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.084 seconds with 40 queries.