|Mary holding Jesus in the Book of Kells, c. 800|
Someone asked me recently if the early Irish church held views on Mary similar to what the Roman Catholic Church teaches today. It's a great question, and I cannot offer anything in the way of a definitive answer, but for what it's worth here are some thoughts on the question.
Before we look at Ireland a quick perusal of the wider continental church may be helpful.
It may be surprising to note but the Apostolic Fathers have very little to say concerning Mary. When writers like Ignatius do mention her their reasons are always Christological, i.e. defending the virgin birth etc. According to Shoemaker, Marian piety and veneration developed relatively late in Christianity. Writers like Tertullian in the second century affirmed the virgin birth of Christ but denied that Mary remained ever-virgin or sinless. The issue of Mary remaining sinless was open for discussion among the early church fathers and several fathers such as Origen, Basil, Cyril of Alexandria, Athanasius and John Chrysostom openly write of Mary’s personal sins of doubt and ambition. Yet, it must be said, they had no issue in praying to her. By the fourth century prayer and invocation of the saints and Mary was accepted practice. Jerome and Augustine wrote that Mary indeed lived a sinless life (though she still had original sin). These two writers were hugely influential in early Ireland. The council of Trent dogmatically declared that Mary was free from actual sin. The later dogmatic declaration in 1854 by Pope Pius IX declared the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, i.e. that Mary had no original sin. This is something that Augustine did not teach and it is not found in Latin writings until the twelfth century and even then it was opposed by Bernard of Clairvaux and others.
Concerning the perpetual virginity of Mary, Tertullian as we have seen regarded the brothers of Jesus in Matthew 13.55 as children Mary had with Joseph. However, by the second century the basis for Mary’s perpetual virginity was already coming into discussion. The Decretum Gelasianum condemned the earliest texts that refer to her perpetual virginity such as the pseudepigraphical Protoevangelium of James. Writers like Jerome stressed heavily her perpetual virginity, because for Jerome asceticism and celibacy were fundamental to spirituality and he held up Mary as the example par excellence for young Christian women. For Jerome the brothers of Jesus were actually his cousins. In the east Basil also taught that Mary was ever-virgin but accepted that others did not hold this view, he accepted this as within the borders of orthodoxy. The RC Church today regards Mary’s perpetual virginity as a dogma.
The bodily assumption of Mary had few advocates in the early church and the earliest sources that mentioned Mary’s bodily ascension were declared heretical by Pope Gelasius. His dectretal in the fifth century declared these works as the works of heretics and schismatics and condemned them forever under anathema. However, this teaching gained currency over time and in 1950 Pope Pius XII had declared Mary’s bodily assumption an infallible dogma.
|Detail from Book of Kells|
Looking at the early Irish Church we find that the earliest theologians that we have genuine written sources from have practically nothing to say about Mary. St. Patrick’s writings are the earliest Christian documents to have been written in Ireland, but they are not an attempt by Patrick to develop a detailed theology, and tell us practically nothing concerning his views on Mary. However, he does mention new female converts as becoming Virgins of Christ, showing us that for Patrick celibacy was encouraged but not demanded (his own grandfather was a married Priest). The earliest extensive theological writings from an Irish Christian are found in the sixth century in the writings of Columbanus. A collection of his theological writings has survived and is invaluable for listening to an early Irish Christian describe his own faith. Columbanus never mentions Mary in either his epistles or sermons; he does however mention his belief in the intercession of the saints. In the later part of seventh century Adomnán of Iona describes Mary as ‘ever-virgin’, but implicitly denies any ideas of a bodily assumption of Mary. In his popular work De Locis Sanctis he mentions Mary's grave in Jerusalem and that the tomb was empty because her body had been later removed from it. According to Adomnán her body awaits the resurrection, in quo loco resurrectionem exspectat. Another Irish writer Augustinus Hibernicus mentions Mary’s perpetual virginity, though he does not teach that Mary was free from original sin.
The most significant Irish expressions of devotion to Mary come in the eighth century and following. In the eighth century we have Cú Chuimne’s hymn to Mary and in the ninth century Blathmac’s poetry praising Mary. Both of these Irish writers were connected with Iona. This growing Marian devotion can be seen in the Book of Kells, which presents the earliest Madonna and Child image in any western manuscript. Concerning the bodily assumption of Mary there is by the tenth century accounts of her bodily assumption after she dies. Irish accounts of the assumption (see Herbert & McNamara, No. 24) while presenting Mary as the summit of holiness and an intercessor for the faithful also present Mary as doubting Jesus. This is similar to what we saw earlier in writers like John Chrysostom. Invocation of Mary and the saints is evident in the liturgy of the Irish church in the eighth century as the Stowe Missal testifies. A twelfth century litany in Irish is devoted entirely to Mary and invokes her as ‘Queen of the world’.
In conclusion we can see how the various Marian dogmas evolved over time within the western and eastern churches, the Irish church was no exception. While the earliest Irish sources seldom mention Mary there is certainly good evidence for Marian devotion in Ireland by the eighth century and following. So did the Early Irish Church hold to the modern Roman Catholic Church’s Marian dogmas? In all particulars no, but they were certainly in agreement with the wider church of her day concerning these teachings.