In this way the controversy was terminated, the company dispersed, and Agilbert returned home. Colman, seeing his teachings rejected and his following discounted, took away with him all who wished to follow him, that is, all who still dissented from the Catholic Easter and tonsure1 – for there was no small argument about this as well – and returned to the land of the Irish2 in order to consult his compatriots on their future course of action. Cedd, on the other hand, having abandoned the Irish customs and accepted the Catholic, returned to his own bishopric. This Synod took place in the year of our Lord 664, which was the twenty-second year of King Oswy’s reign, and the thirtieth anniversary of the coming of the Irish bishops to England, Aidan having held his bishopric for seventeen years, Finan for ten, and Colman for three.
On Colman’s return to his own land, the servant of God, Tuda, became bishop of the Northumbrians in his place. He had been trained and consecrated, bishop by the southern Irish, and had worn the ecclesiastical tonsure according to the customs of the province, and observed the Catholic Easter customs. He was a good devout man, but ruled the diocese only for a short time. He had arrived from the land of the Irish during Colman’s episcopate, and taught the truths of the Faith diligently in word and deed. Then Eata, abbot of the monastery of Mailros,3 a gentle man and greatly revered, was appointed Abbot of Lindisfarne to rule the brethren who elected to remain there when the Irish withdrew. It is said that before Colman left, he asked and obtained this favour from King Oswy, because Eata had been one of the twelve English boys whom Aidan received to be taught the Christian Faith when he first became bishop; for the king greatly loved Bishop Colman for his innate discernment. This is the same Eata who not long afterwards was raised to the bishopric of the church of Lindisfarne. On his return home, Colman took with him a portion of the bones of the most reverend Father Aidan; but he left some of them in the church over which he had ruled, directing that they be enshrined in the sanctuary.
So frugal and austere were Colman and his predecessors that when they left the seat of their authority there were very few buildings except the church; indeed, no more than met the bare requirements of a seemly way of life. They had no property except cattle, and whenever they received any money from rich folk, they immediately gave it to the poor, for they had no need to amass money or provide lodging for important people, since such visited the church only in order to pray or hear the word of God. Whenever opportunity offered, the king himself used to come with only five or six attendants; and when he had completed his prayer in the church, he used to leave. But if they happened to remain for a meal, they were content with the plain daily food of the brothers and asked nothing more. For in those days the sole concern of these teachers was to serve God, not the world; to satisfy the soul, not the belly. Accordingly the religious habit at that time was held in high esteem. Wherever any priest or monk paid a visit, he was joyfully welcomed by all as the servant of God. And if people met him on the road, they ran to him and bowed, eager to be signed by his hand or receive a blessing from his lips. Whenever he spoke a word of encouragement, he was given an attentive hearing. On Sundays the people flocked to the churches and monasteries, not to obtain food, but to hear the word of God. When a priest visited a village, the people were quick to gather together to receive the word of life; for priests and clerics always came to a village solely to preach, baptize, visit the sick, and, in short, to care for the souls of its people. They were so free from the sin of avarice that none of them would accept lands or gifts for the building of monasteries unless expressly directed to do so by the secular authorities. This continued to be the general practice for some years among the churches of the Northumbrians. But enough has been said on such matters.4
-
Differing styles of tonsure, itself a sign of dedication to God, became concrete symbols of party loyalties. Roman clergy shaved the crown of the head but left a circle of hair all round the head above the temples, in memory of Christ’s crown of thorns. The Celtic clergy however shaved the front of the head, but allowed the hair to grow in flowing locks behind. Allegiance could be discerned at a glance. In the language of controversy the first was attributed to St Peter, the second to Simon Magus. Both claims are quite unhistorical. See also E. James, ‘Bede and the Tonsure Question’, Peritia iii (1984), 85–98. ↩
-
Iona. ↩
-
Melrose. ↩
-
Bede contrasted this with later practice in the Letter to Egbert, p. 344. It seems that he rhetorically exaggerated some aspects of the poverty of Lindisfarne: only a wealthy monastery could have produced the Lindisfarne Gospels thirty-five years later. Its wooden buildings could have been rich and extensive. ↩