DOCSLIB.ORG

(On Pascha) by Melito of Sardis (Cca 170 A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
(On Pascha) by Melito of Sardis (Cca 170 A Resumé Melito of Sardis, Peri Pascha (On Pascha) The presented book on Peri Pascha (On Pascha) by Melito of Sardis (cca 170 A. D.) contains an introductory essay, a new Czech translation of the Melito´s text and a comprehensive commentary. The bilingual edition of On Pascha is based on the latest existent edition of this writing by S. G. Hall (Oxford 1979). The main aim of the introductory essay and commentary is to outline as far as possible a consensual view on Melito of Sardis and his rediscovered text On Pascha and to present a contemporary Melitonian research. The introductory essay discusses not only the theological questions of the Melito´s text but also its´ wider context represented by contemporary Judaism, Christian heterodox and Gnostic streams, Hellenistic culture and mystery religions. The first chapter “Melito of Sardis in the context of his time” discusses extant ancient testimonies on Melito´s life, influence and significance, in particular Eusebius´ account in his Church History. Melito of Sardis was a significant and influential person of a Quartodeciman Christianity of Asia Minor in the second half of the second century. His extant works testify his excellent rhetorical education. He can be regarded as a representative of the “second sophistic” and his literary style can be compared with the works of Maximus of Tyrus, Favorinus or Lucian of Samosata. Even if Eusebius considered him as a bishop of Sardis, it is not possible – on the basis of extant sources – to verify his presumption. Bishopric in Sardis is testified in the New Testament in Apoc. 3.1-6, the existence of this office in the second century is nevertheless contested by the silence of Ignatius of Antioch. Among modern researchers A. Stewart-Sykes defends Melito´s episcopacy on the basis of the analysis of Polycrates´ letter to Roman bishop Victor attested by Eusebius. According to his interpretation of this letter, Melito of Sardis was also of Jewish origin; this hypothesis explicates his remarkable knowledge of Jewish traditions. He was an ascetic, but his participation in pagan mystery cults suggested by A. Hansen can be precluded on the basis of his supposed Jewish origin. Even if he was considered as a “prophet”, he was not an adherent of contemporary Montanism. The proper context of Melito´s activity is represented by the works of the early Greek apologists on the basis of his Apology addressed to Marcus Aurelius. Melito also used some writings later rated as apocryphal, such as the Gospel of Peter with its´ anti-Judaism. Main feature of Melito´s theology is strong anti-Gnostic stance. Melito was aware of Gnostic doctrines of Theodotus who was contemporary of Melito. In his Peri Pascha 48 he reinterpreted form the orthodox point of view a Gnostic myth on the passion of aeon Sophia attested e.g. in Excerpta ex Theodoto by Clement of Alexandria. Another Gnostic document with possible influence on Melito is represented by Letter of Ptolemaeus to Flora with its´ spiritual exegesis of Jewish Pesach. Melito´s travel to Jerusalem and his canon of the Old Testament are the expressions of his anti-Marcionit direction. The second chapter “Melito as an author of Peri Pascha” discusses the arguments for Melito´s authorship of the rediscovered writing, the problem of two books On Pascha in Eusebius´ list of Melito´s books, Melito´s Quartodeciman belonging, Paschal controversy under bishop Victor and Polycrates´ mention of Melito in his letter to Victor. The question of Melito´s Quartodecimanism is related to his chronology of Christ passion. The theology of Melito´s Peri Pascha is Johannine and Melito also maintained Johannine chronology of Christ´s passion, i.e. the Last supper was not Pesach dinner but was celebrated the day before the Pesach on 13/14 Nisan and Christ was crucified on 14 Nisan at the time when the Pesach lambs were sacrificed in the Temple. Hence the Quartodecimam Pascha was not a commemoration of the Last supper but of Christ´s redemptive death in particular. The Quartodeciman Pascha imitated and reinterpreted the celebration of Jewish Pesach. In Melito´s time the baptism was not yet a part of Christian Pascha. The third chapter “Melito´s writing On Pascha” presents Melito´s typological exegesis of Exodus, theory of his exegesis in Peri Pascha 35–39, his anti-Gnostic theology and Christology, his relation to modalism, which is contested, and anthropology and soteriology of his writing. Even if a one third of Peri Pascha contains the intent polemic against Jewish nation, the question of anti-Judaism in Melito´s text was in Melitionian research for a long time overlooked. Melito´s text with strong influence on later Easter theology, liturgy and catechesis is the first Christian document which explicitly blames Jewish nation for the crime of deicide. Contemporary research discusses sociological, theological and also possible personal reasons of this Melitonian anti-Judaism, which does not have a parallel in the literature of his time. Melito´s anti-Judaism which was refused in modern time both in Protestant and Catholic theology and catechesis represents a document of a complicated contest of early Christianity for finding its´ proper identity. The fourth chapter “The literary means of Melito´s writing” discusses Melito´s relations to the second sophistic, the structure of Peri Pascha and the search for the literary genre of the text. Melito´s text is not a homily in a modern meaning. It can be divided in two parts (PP 1-5 and 46-105); the first part is a liturgical homily and the second part is a Christian version of the Jewish Pesach haggada. According to A. Steward-Sykes Melito´s writing is to be considered as a liturgical text of its kind. The fifth chapter “The influence of Melito´s writing in a later liturgical tradition” discusses the influence of this text on later Byzantine kontakion and Latin Improperia in the liturgy of Good Friday. There existed an old Jewish tradition of reproaches as a prophetic self-criticism of Jewish nation. The Jewish Pesach hymn Dayenu represents their continuation. These Jewish traditions were later reinterpreted by Christians as can be seen in Melito´s text PP 84 and 87. Latin Improperia are a later derivation of this Jewish-Christian tradition. The sixth chapter “Critical editions of Peri Pascha and the new Czech translation” comments on extant editions of Melito´s text and mentions also the first Czech translation of Peri Pascha by J. J. Novák, printed in 1981 under communism in a periodical, which was based on Perler´s edition. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 0100-0200 – Melito Serdum in Asia Episcopus – Fragmenta Remains Of
    0100-0200 – Melito Serdum in Asia Episcopus – Fragmenta Remains of the Second and Third Centuries Melito, the Philosopher this file has been downloaded from http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.html ANF08. The Twelve Patriarchs, Excerpts and Epistles, The Philip Schaff Clementia, Apocrypha, Decretals, Memoirs of Edessa and Syriac Documents, Remains of the First Age Melito, the Philosopher. [a.d. 160–170–177.] Melito3540 may have been the immediate successor of the “angel” (or “apostle”) of the church of Sardis, to whom our Great High Priest addressed one of the apocalyptic messages. He was an “Apostolic Father” in point of fact; he very probably knew the blessed Polycarp and his disciple Irenæus. He is justly revered for the diligence with which he sought out the evidence which, in his day, established the Canon of the Old Testament, then just complete. In the following fragments we find him called Bishop of Sardis, Bishop of Attica, and Bishop of Ittica. He is also introduced to us as “the Philosopher,” and we shall find him styled “the Eunuch” by Polycrates. It is supposed that he had made himself a cœlebs “for the kingdom of heaven’s sake,” without mistaking our Lord’s intent, as did Origen. He was not a monk, but accepted a single estate to be the more free and single-eyed in the Master’s service. From the encyclopedic erudition of Lightfoot we glean some particulars, as follows:— 1. I have adopted his date, as Lightfoot gives it,—that is, the period of his writings,—under the Antonines. The improbability of seventy years in the episcopate is reason enough for rejecting the idea that he was himself the “angel of the church of Sardis,” to whom our Lord sent the terrible rebuke.
    [Show full text]
  • F.F. Bruce, "The Earliest Latin Commentary on the Apocalypse,"
    F.F. Bruce, “The Earliest Latin Commentary on the Apocalypse,” The Evangelical Quarterly 10 (1938): 352-366. The Earliest Latin Commentary on the Apocalypse F.F. Bruce [p.352] The Book of the Revelation was unanimously recognized by the churches of the West long before the eastern churches made up their minds to accept it as canonical. Various reasons might be suggested for this: at any rate there was something about the book which immediately appealed to the souls of the western Christians and convinced them. of its divinity. It might have been thought that its peculiar Greek would not lend itself readily to translation into Latin but as: a matter of fact; the Vulgate Apocalypse is a masterpiece of literature and comes home to the reader with a charm and a vigour all its own. It is quite in keeping with these fact’s that, the earliest complete commentary on the Apocalypse which has come down to us should be in Latin: Its author was Victorinus, bishop of Poetouio in Upper Pannonia, now Ptuj on the Drava in Yugoslavia (until recently Pettau in Austria). Victorious suffered martyrdom, under Diocletian, probably about the year 303. Before his day others had commented on the Apocalypse, but in Greek. Fragments of exposition appear in the works of Justin Martyr and Irenaeus; Melito of Sardis and Hippolytus of Rome wrote complete commentaries on it (both, unfortunately, lost); while Clement of Alexandria and Origen are also said to have commented on it. So, apart from Clement and Origen, even the earliest Greek commentators on the Apocalypse represent the western churches and the churches of the province of Asia.
    [Show full text]
  • St Vladimir's Seminary Elective Course Descriptions – Fall 2018
    6/22 St Vladimir’s Seminary Elective Course Descriptions – Fall 2018 Fall 2016 BIBLICAL LANGUAGES 313 Credits: 3 credits REV. DR GEORGE PARSENIOS The Letters of John. The goal of this course is to introduce students to reading Biblical Greek. In the first half, the course will focus on completing the student's skill in introductory Greek grammar, introducing non-indicative verbal forms and intermediate-level concepts in Greek syntax. In the second half, it will concentrate on performing extended readings from the Letters of John. The course will also include significant parsing exercises and an emphasis on building vocabulary. Prerequisite: One year of Biblical or Classical Greek. Thursday, 9:15a-12:00p CHURCH HISTORY 361 (461) Credits: 3 (3) credits REV. DR ANTHONY ROEBER Orthodox Christianity in North America. This course begins with Orthodox Christianity in the Kievan Rus, the emergence of Moscow by the 15th century, and the issues created by the “Unia” of 1596. The political, ethnic, and religious history of “Ruthenia” provides the context for understanding the migration of Slavic- speaking Orthodox to North America that altered the Alaska mission to the First Peoples of North America. Twentieth-century attempts at constructing a pan-Orthodox Church; the emergence of “jurisdictions”; debates over autocephaly and primacy then allow an analysis of the current relationship of the OCA, ROCOR, and the Russian Patriarchal Parishes to the non-Slavic Orthodox of North America. Prerequisite: Church History 110. Wednesday, 9:15a-12:00p LITURGICAL MUSIC 323 Credits: 3credits MRS ROBIN FREEMAN Advanced Choral Conducting. Advanced techniques of choral conducting are introduced and practiced, drawing on music from the Orthodox liturgical tradition.
    [Show full text]
  • MELITO of SARDIS on BAPTISM by ROBERT M. GRANT Melito Of
    MELITO OF SARDIS ON BAPTISM BY ROBERT M. GRANT Melito of Sardis not only possessed an elegans et declamatorium ingenium (Tertullian in Jerome, De viris inlustr. 24), but also was concerned with philosophical topics. In his apology he spoke of Christianity as "our philosophy" (Eusebius, H. E. iv. 26. 7), and the titles of several of his lost works reveal his use of philosophical language. He wrote On the Subjection of the Senses 1 to Faith, On the Unity of Soul and Body, On Truth, On Faith, On Hospitality, and On the Corporeal God (Eusebius, H. E. iv. 26. 2). Some of these topics may take their texts from the epistle to the Hebrews (5.14 on the exercise of the senses, 13. 2 on hospitality, 12.29 God a fire). The first and the last, however, reflect con- temporary Stoic thought, according to which the senses served the principal part of the soul, where a "firm comprehen- sion", took place (SVF III 548; cf. II 823-62), and according to which God was corporeal (SVF II 1028-48). In the Stoic- Jewish IV Maccabees 2.22, it is the mind which controls the senses. 2 The most recent text of a fragment of Melito's treatise On Baptism was printed by Harnack in his Marcion : das Evangelium vom f remden Gott (ed. 2, Leipzig, 1924), pp. 421*-23*. For Harnack its importance lay in the last sentence. "If the sun with the stars and moon is washed in the Ocean, why is not Christ also washed in the Jordan?" This he regarded as proving that the treatise was intended to refute Marcion, whose gospel 34 omits any account of Jesus' baptism.
    [Show full text]
  • Construing the Cross
    Construing the Cross Type, Sign, Symbol, Word, Action THE DIDSBURY LECTURES 2014 • FRANCES M. YOUNG book.indb 1 12/23/15 4:07 PM Originally published in the United States of America in 2015 by Cascade Books, a division of Wipf and Stock Publishers, Eugene, Oregon First published in Great Britain in 2016 Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge 36 Causton Street London SW1P 4ST www.spck.org.uk Copyright © Frances M. Young 2015, 2016 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. SPCK does not necessarily endorse the individual views contained in its publications. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978–0–281–07550–8 eBook ISBN 978–0–281–07551–5 First printed in Great Britain by Ashford Colour Press Subsequently digitally printed in Great Britain eBook by Graphicraft Limited, Hong Kong Produced on paper from sustainable forests book.indb 2 12/23/15 4:07 PM In Memoriam my respected Wesleyan grandfathers Rev. Ernest Marshall (1878–1957), who was born in Manchester; Rev. Sidney A. Worrall (1880–1978), who trained at Didsbury College. book.indb 3 12/23/15 4:07 PM book.indb 4 12/23/15 4:07 PM Contents Preface vii List of Abbreviations ix Introduction xi Chapter 1: Passover and Passion 1 Chapter 2: Scapegoat and Sacrifice 21 Chapter 3: Tree
    [Show full text]
  • Sinai, Zion, and Eden in Byzantine Hymnographic Exegesis1
    Bogdan G. Bucur PiĴ sburgh, PA “THE MOUNTAIN OF THE LORD“: SINAI, ZION, AND EDEN IN BYZANTINE HYMNOGRAPHIC EXEGESIS1 Introduction In the manifesto of the “Theophaneia School,“ Alexander Go litzin ventures the following bold statement: Theophany permeates Orthodox Tradition throughout, informing its dogmatic theology and its liturgy. That Jesus, Mary’s son, is the very One who appeared to Moses and the prophets — this is the consistent witness of the ante-Nicene Fathers, and remains founda- tional throughout the fourth century Trinitarian controversies and the later christological disputes.2 In the pages to follow, I would like to show that, aside from the his- tory of creeds, councils, and condemnations, and accompanying the patristic works of Christology or trinitarian theology, the identifi cation of the Son of Mary with “the Lord of Glory whom Moses saw of old“ is also aĜ rmed by the hymnographic tradition of the Christian East. The witness of Byzantine hymnography is extremely relevant, as no single patristic work has been read so extensively and with such uncondi- tional acceptance throughout the ages. Nevertheless, as I will show, the exegetical dimension of Byzantine hymnography is diĜ cult to de- fi ne using the categories commonly used for early Christian exegesis (“allegory,“ “typology,“ etc); I submit that a more suitable category (1) Except where indicated, the English translation of the hymns is taken from The Festal Menaion (trans. Mother Mary and Kallistos Ware; London— Boston: Faber&Faber, 1969) and The Lenten Triodion (trans. Mother Mary and Kallistos Ware; London—Boston: Faber&Faber, 1977), modifi ed only to con- form to contemporary use of pronouns and verbs.
    [Show full text]
  • Medical Substitutionary Atonement in Melito of Sardis Mako A
    Medical Substitutionary Atonement in Melito of Sardis Mako A. Nagasawa Last modified: September 3, 2019 1 Introduction: Who is the Heir of the Ancients? ‘When we ask what the precise nature of this vicarious activity of Christ was, we find Nicene theologians regularly falling back upon familiar biblical and liturgical terms like ransom, sacrifice, propitiation, expiation, reconciliation to describe it, but always with a deep sense of awe before the inexpressible mystery of atonement through the blood of Christ. They used these terms, however…to refer, to not any external transaction between God and mankind carried out by Christ, but to what took place within the union of divine and human natures in the incarnate Son of God .’2 ‘Atonement thus occurs for the Fathers through the dynamic of the incarnation itself, not by way of some extrinsic theory, i.e., satisfaction, penal substitution, and so on. Why, one wonders, did theology subsequently fail to reflect this? I am not sure. Part of the reason, I suspect, lies in how the incarnation came to be largely understood. With focus on the miracle of God becoming flesh in the birth of Jesus, the saving significance of the rest of Jesus’ life was overshadowed. With focus returned, so to speak, on the Cross, the climactic end of Jesus’ life, the impression de facto was that the real meaning of God’s identification lay at the beginning and at the end, not in the entire range of Jesus’ life.’3 Steve Jeffery, Michael Ovey, and Andrew Sach, the authors of the recent book Rediscovering the Glory of Penal Substitution , claim that penal substitutionary theory stretches back to the earliest fathers of the church.
    [Show full text]
  • Organs in Orthodox Worship: Debate and Identity
    Journal of the International Society for Orthodox Church Music Vol. 4 (1), Section II: Conference papers, pp. 98–108 ISSN 2342-1258 https://journal.fi/jisocm Organs in Orthodox Worship: Debate and Identity Harrison Russin [email protected] Although instrumental worship is an issue that seems to have received intense treatment by certain patristic writers, the assumption of organs in Orthodox churches in the 20th century has raised supercilious glances and charges of modernism, but in no case has the use of organ music been flatly and effectively condemned by any Church authority.1 Yet the debate continues. Although George Anastasiou claimed in the 1960 edition of his Armonikē Leitourgikē Ymnōdia that he introduced organ usage into Greek Orthodox practice in America in 1921,2 Matthew Namee notes that references to the use of organs in Greek churches date to 1895.3 During the twentieth century, in other words, the use of organs in Greek Orthodox churches spread throughout America; though no figures are available counting or estimating how many Greek Orthodox parishes in America have organs (many sources merely say “most parishes”), the number is significant enough to spur debate over the issue. For example, the 1987 minisymposium of the National Forum of Greek Orthodox Church Musicians asked the question: “The Use of the Organ: Can we reconcile Tradition with emerging American Practices?”4 Such a question has been raised by “traditionalists” such as Constantine Cavarnos, who writes that “[a]nother lamentable innovation [in Orthodoxy] is the introduction of the organ. The introduction of the organ … constitutes an innovation which the Holy Fathers explicitly prohibited and which is contrary to the ordinances of the first Christians.”5 Furthermore, this debate is arising freshly with new investment in older chant forms.
    [Show full text]
  • Meliton's Apology Is a Short Work, Extant Only in Syriac, in a Sixth- Or Seventh- Century Manuscript
    THE APOLOGY OF PS.-MELITON Jane L. Lightfoot Ps.-Meliton's Apology is a short work, extant only in Syriac, in a sixth- or seventh- century manuscript. It is not at all well known. The work itself, which purports to be an example of early Christian apologetic, is a curiosity, as will emerge below. But the real curiosity is a chapter which is packed with information about pagan cults - cults to which the author applies a version of Euhemerism, although again a rather unusual one. Several of his cults are set in the Roman Near East, and it is scholars of this area who have paid the work the little attention that it has received. The author seems to have access to interesting and far-flung information, although it is mediated through a highly individual interpretative bias. The following study is an attempt to make the text more widely- known, and as a protreptic to further study, for there are certainly more things to be discovered about it, and it would benefit from the attention of scholars in more than one area. The first part of the paper considers the text as a whole and raises some general questions about the Euhemerist chapter. The second part, which is prefaced with an adapted version of William Cureton's translation for ease of reference, provides a provisional commentary on the Euhemerist chapter. Since the author's approach is anecdotal, I have used the term 'historiola' for each entry. PART ONE I. WHAT IS IT? The main body of the text consists of a harangue purportedly delivered to an emperor called Antoninus.
    [Show full text]
  • Scholarly Frameworks for Reading Irenaeus: the Question of Theophanies
    Vigiliae Christianae 72 (2018) 255-282 Vigiliae Christianae brill.com/vc Scholarly Frameworks for Reading Irenaeus: The Question of Theophanies Bogdan G. Bucur Duquesne University [email protected] Abstract Irenaeus’ understanding of Old Testament theophanies and their exegesis is one of the loci of marked disagreement in scholarship. After a detailed survey of the vari- ous scholarly positions, this article argues against the oft-repeated judgment that Irenaeus’ treatment of theophanies would set forth a theological corrective to, or even an explicit rebuttal of, Justin of Neapolis’ Logos-theology, and shows that Irenaeus’ exesis of theophanies is also consistent with that of authors who have read Adv. haer. (Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen). If the bishop of Lyons participated fully in the tradition of interpreting Old Testament theophanies as “Christophanies,” it follows that some strands of scholarship are severe misreadings of Irenaeus. Keywords Theophanies – exegesis – Irenaeus – Justin – Tertullian – Orbe – Ochagavía – Behr Introduction A significant body of scholarship on Irenaeus of Lyon is dedicated to the ques- tion of theophanies and their interpretation in early Christianity. Nevertheless, as a recent contributor to this discussion remarks, “[t]he interpretation of Irenaeus’ understanding of the pre-incarnational appearances of the Logos is an open question in scholarship.”1 The pages to follow offer a critical presenta- tion of these divergent accounts, testing them against the data resulting from 1 J. Lashier, Irenaeus on the Trinity (Leiden: Brill, 2014) 129 n. 149. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���8 | doi �0.��63/�57007�0-��34�357 �56 Bucur a comparison between the bishop of Lyons’ exegesis of theophanies and that of other writers who are in some way linked to Irenaeus—Justin of Neapolis, Melito of Sardis, Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria.
    [Show full text]
  • Mary and the Jews: the Gospels and the Early Church Lawrence E
    Marian Studies Volume 60 Telling Mary's Story: The "Life of Mary" Article 8 Through the Ages 2009 Mary and the Jews: The Gospels and the Early Church Lawrence E. Frizzell Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.udayton.edu/marian_studies Part of the Religion Commons Recommended Citation Frizzell, Lawrence E. (2009) "Mary and the Jews: The Gospels and the Early Church," Marian Studies: Vol. 60, Article 8. Available at: https://ecommons.udayton.edu/marian_studies/vol60/iss1/8 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Marian Library Publications at eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Marian Studies by an authorized editor of eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Frizzell: Mary and the Jews MARY AND THE}EWS: THE GosPELS AND THE EARLY CHURcH Lawrence E. Frizzel* 1. Introduction In his Tbeotokos, a major work dedicated to the study of Mary, the Mother of Jesus of Nazareth, the author has an entry on "The Jews" in which he notes that the Second Vatican Coun­ cil stressed the continuity between ancient Israel and the Church (See the Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gen­ tium 9). "She is a unifying bond and a symbol in Judaeo­ Christian history and consciousness. The terrible tragedies of recent times were in some way the occasion, if not the cause, of the statement ofVatican II on the Jews." 1 There are entries for the biblical phrases "Daughter of Zion" and "Poor ofYahweh (Anawim)" but none for Israel or Synagogue; few are the hints of the long and sad history of the pejorative discussions of Mary and the Jewish people.
    [Show full text]
  • Easter Celebration in Seventh-Century Britain: Resolving Conflict Within the Church
    Journal of Theology Southwestern Historical Theology SWJT Historical Theology Vol. 56 No. 2 • Spring 2015 Southwestern Journal of Theology • Volume 57 • Number 2 • Spring 2015 Easter Celebration in Seventh-Century Britain: Resolving Conflict within the Church Rodney H. Orr and Shane Angland Associate Professor of World Missions and Intercultural Studies and ThM Student Dallas Theological Seminary Dallas, Texas [email protected] In AD 664 a debate over the question of the correct Easter computus occurred in the abbey of Whitby, Northumbria. Both sides of the debate had presented their arguments and rebuttals. On one side was the Irish bishop of Northumbria, Colman. Opposing him was the stalwart figure of Wil- frid, an English priest and an up-and-coming figure in English ecclesiasti- cal circles. Finally king Oswiu, who was presiding over this council, wryly smiled and asked the assembled clerics, “Who is greater in the kingdom of heaven, Columba or the Apostle Peter?”1 The answer was a resounding vote of confidence in Petrine supremacy. Wilfrid won the day and Colman departed from Northumbria, eventually returning to Ireland. On the surface the so-called “Synod of Whitby” appears as a simple clash between Irish and English bishops over an obscure point of tradition, the calculation for the date of Easter. In reality Whitby was much more complex and to reduce it to a simple conflict between supposed Celtic and Roman churches does not do justice to the historical data. The English church was still very much in her infancy when Colman abdicated from Northumbria and missionaries on both sides of the debate were affected by its outcome.
    [Show full text]