PENITENTIALS———.Four Latin Lives of St. Patrick, Scriptores Latini Hiber-
niae VIII. Dublin: The Institute for Advanced Studies, 1971.
———.The Irish Penitentials: Scriptores Latini Hiberniae V,
54–59. Dublin: The Institute for Advanced Studies, 1975.
———.The Patrician Texts in the Book of Armagh, Scriptores
Latini Hiberniae X. Dublin: The Institute for Advanced Stud-
ies, 1979. Devine, Kieran. A Computer-Generated Concor-
dance to the Libri Epistolarum of Saint Patrick, Clavis
Patricii I, Ancillary Publications III. Dublin: RIA DMLCS,
1989.
Gwynn, John, ed. Liber Ardmachanus. The Book of Armagh.
Dublin: 1913.
Howlett, David Robert, ed. Liber Epistolarum Sancti Patricii
Episcopi, The Book of Letters of Saint Patrick the Bishop.
Dublin: Four Courts Press, 1994.
———. “Synodus Prima Sancti Patricii: An Exercise in Textual
Reconstruction.” Peritia XII(1998), 238–253.
The Bishops’ Synod, ARCA Classical and Medieval Texts
Papers and Monographs I. Liverpool: Francis Cairns, 1976,
pp. 1–8, facsimile pp. 65–75.
Lapidge, Michael, and Richard Sharpe. A Bibliography of
Celtic-Latin Literature 400—1200, Ancillary Publications I.
Dublin: RIA DMLCS, 1985, nos. 25-26, pp. 9-11.
Orchard, Andy, ed. Audite Omnes Amantes: A Hymn in Patrick’s
Praise. In Saint Patrick, A.D. 493–1993. Woodbridge: Boy-
dell,1993, pp. 153–173.
See alsoChristianity, Conversion to; St. Patrick’s
Cathedral
PENITENTIALS
Strictly speaking, a “penitential” is a libellus(small
book) designed for pastoral use covering every kind
of misbehavior that Christians consider “sinful” (i.e.,
offensive to God in contrast to a breach of legal
requirements), arranged within a specific theological
framework, specifying detailed amounts of penance as
remedies. In this sense few penitentials with Irish links
have survived: four in Latin (those of Finnian (6th
century); Columbanus (6th–7th century); Cummean
(7th century); and the Bigotian (8th century)) and one
in Irish (before late 8th century). It is clear from sur-
viving texts that these are only a fraction of the number
that were compiled or used in Ireland. The term is,
however, applied more widely to cover a range of early
medieval legal texts which make prescriptions, regard-
ing sinful acts, using the pattern found in penitential
libelli(e.g., the Canones Hibernenses). The term is
also used more loosely for the system of Christian
penance, usually with the gloss that it emerged in
Ireland, which was used in the West between the dis-
appearance of “public penance” and the appearance of
individual “confession.”
By the fifth century, Latin Christianity had devel-
oped a practice with regard to “sins committed after
baptism” known as “public penance” (admission of the
faults to the bishop followed by public separation
within the community) which applied to the “greater
sins:” murder, apostasy, and fornication. This practice
was a failure. And, that failure was compounded by
the theological justifications made in its defense (e.g.,
by Jerome and Augustine) that it was a “laborious
baptism” available only once in the Christian’s life and
was to be truly difficult. The practice invoked a notion
of sin as a crime deserving divine retribution where
“doing the penance” was simply the sinner applying
this punishment to themself. While several writers (e.g.,
Caesarius of Arles (c.470–542)) pointed out that the
whole system was a pastoral disaster, such voices went
unheeded for fear of breaking faith with the past and
its eminent supporters. Moreover, the system did not
take account of the everyday sins, nor link the notion
of penance for sins with the “doing of penitence” (cf.
Mt 3:2 as found in Latin) preached as a basic part of
Christian living.
Where in the British Isles the break with that practice
was made is not clear (some of the earliest penitential-
like texts have titles that link them to sub-Roman
Britain: e.g., the “Synod of the Grove of Victory,” and
such legislation supposes the theoretical understanding
that only a full penitential could supply), but the oldest
extant formal penitential is by Finnian. The peniten-
tials present a new view of (1) a sinful offense’s nature,
(2) of the purpose of doing penance, and, (3) a new
understanding of religious culpability. In contrast to
the notion of a crime demanding a punishment—an
assumption in Roman law—they adopt a notion of
crime that closely resembles the system of debts found
in Brehon Law whereby a crime, for example, homi-
cide,produced a debt for the murderer to the dead
person’s family which had to be repaid, and the size
of the fine varied with the gravity of the action, the
status of the offender and the offended, and the intention
of the offender. Thus any sinful act’s penitential “loading”
depended on the action (e.g., homicide is worse than
theft), the actor (e.g., a cleric is more culpable), the
one offended—if this is applicable (e.g., stealing
from a church is worse than other thefts), and with
what intention (e.g., by accident or neglect, or in hot
temper, or cold-bloodedly). So just as a crime against
another person produced a debt, so a crime against
God produced a debt that could be worked-off (the
system inherently allowed for the repetition) with
suitable religious payments of prayer, fasting, and
alms (cf.Mt 6:2–18). The other key element in the
penitentials’ understanding of sinfulness is that pen-
ance is not seen as retribution, but therapy; while sin
is viewed as a symptom of sickness rather than a
manifestation of evil. This derives from John Cassian
(c.360–435) whose writings form the basis of western
monasticism. Cassian saw sinful acts as expressions
of eight underlying vices (called “principal” as they
are the principia(sources) from which sins flow)
imagined as chronic illnesses deep within individuals