Medicine for Sin: Reading Abortion in Early Medieval Penitentials
“The earliest penitential ruling on abortion takes us to early medieval Ireland. It originated in perhaps the oldest surviving penitential, Vinniani, composed in mid to late sixth century Ireland by a certain Vinniaus. A precise date is elusive, though clear use of Vinniani in a penitential attributed to Columbanus gives a reason to suppose that it was written before Columbanus’s departure for Gaul in c. 591.
Although Vinniani was not as directly influential as two other penitentials with Irish connections, Columbani and Cummeani, versions of the relevant rulings entered numerous later penitentials because of their inclusion in Columbani. In one sense, Vinniaus was writing in a monastic context. In a short epilogue Vinniaus explained that he had written a ‘few things about the remedies of penance’ for the ‘sons of his bowels … so that all evil deeds may be destroyed by all people’.
The overwhelming majority of Vinniani’s canons, however, applied to clerics or laypeople, suggesting that Vinniaus was writing with a mixed community including manaig or lay monastic tenants coalesced around a monastery in mind. After opening rulings on sinful thoughts and intentions, a sequence addressed violence and murder. Compared with subsequent penitentials, Vinniani had plenty of moralizing asides.
In one aside Vinniaus very carefully emphasized the extra responsibilities of the clergy compared with the laity. A layman received a lighter penance, Vinniaus reasoned, ‘because he is a man of the world, his guilt is lighter in this world and his reward less in the future’. Thereafter, the bulk of Vinniani addressed mainly clerical sins (Vinniani 10–29) followed by lay sins (Vinniani 35–47). This is our first strong clue to understanding the thought processes behind the relevant ruling.
Despite considerable interest in lay sin, including sexual sin, abortion was addressed in the clerical section. After dealing with clerical fornication in quite some detail, Vinniaus turned to magical practices. First he addressed a scenario in which a cleric or woman, a male or female malificus/a, in some way harmed (we will return to a semantically awkward Latin verb, decipere, in the section on Columbani below) someone through their maleficium. ‘It is an immense sin,’ he added, ‘but can be redeemed through penance’, six years in this case.
Next, if the offender (still by implication a cleric or woman) had harmed no-one but ‘had given [something] to someone out of dissolute love’, he or she received a whole year’s penance. The next ruling (Vinniani 20) was effectively the third in a triad on different forms of maleficium. The perpetrator, however, was now female: If a woman has destroyed someone’s offspring by her maleficium, she should do penance for half a year with an allowance of bread and water, and abstain from wine and from meat for two years and [fast] for six Lents with bread and water.
Breathlessness is an occupational hazard from the earliest penitential ruling on abortion. There are textual and semantic complications. My translation of Vinniani 20 is deliberately open: ‘If a woman has destroyed someone’s offspring’. ‘Someone’ could refer to a woman (as in another woman’s child) or to a man (as in a woman’s child by a man). It is likely that different readers read it in different ways.
The Latin text in Wasserschleben’s older edition requires the first interpretation: ‘If any woman has taken away [that problematic verb, decipere, again] the child of another woman [etc.]’. The difference stems from divergences between the two ninth-century manuscript witnesses to Vinniani. In Ludwig Bieler’s estimation the manuscript on which Wasserschleben based his edition better preserved the order of the original but is less reliable on wording.
Bieler justified his translation, ‘child she has conceived of somebody’, by pointing to the ruling which immediately follows: But if, as we have said, she bears a child and her sin is manifest, six years, as is the judgment about a cleric, and in the seventh she should be joined to the altar, and then we say that she can restore her crown and ought to don a white robe and be pronounced a virgin. This ruling assumed a spiritual, rather than physical, conception of virginity.
A woman could earn back her crown (corona), in other words restore her virginity. The rest of the ruling elaborated on the comparison with fornicating clerics, who would likewise be restored to their office after seven years. The rationale for the duration of penance, incidentally, was scriptural: a just man fell and rose seven times (Proverbs 24. 16).
Read on its own Vinniani 20 could have been taken in either sense outlined above. Moreover, reading partus as a young infant rather than a fetus (which is how partus was used in Latin versions of the Ancyran canon), by itself the ruling could have been read as covering infanticide. Taken together with Vinniani 21 on the lapsed virgin, however, Vinniani 20 implied getting rid of a child before the manifestation of sin through childbirth.
In relative terms, the penance in Vinniani 20 seems lenient: half a year on bread and water, and abstention from wine and meat for two years. The vowed virgin who did not kill her child, by contrast, received six years in total. Hugh Connolly has concluded that ‘Finnian did not accord to the foetus the same status as a human being after the moment of birth’. There is something to this. With some exceptions, penitentials tended not to treat abortion as severely as other offences, including homicide or adultery.
But conceiving fetal status too narrowly is misleading. For Vinniaus fetal status was inextricable from the circumstances surrounding conception and from the repercussions of birth.
Before the maleficium rulings Vinniaus scrutinized four permutations of what he called the ruina of fornication: clerical sexual sin. The key questions were habituation and social visibility. Like the virgin who lapsed, a cleric who fornicated lost his crown (corona). If his sin was an isolated incident which was ‘hidden from people but came before the attention of God’ it received one year of fasting. He would not lose his office because, Vinniaus added, ‘sins can be absolved in secret by penance’.
In the next scenario if a cleric habitually fornicated without its becoming public knowledge, his penance was three years and he lost his clerical office ‘because it is not a smaller thing to sin before God than before people’. But there were degrees of ruina. Fathering a child was the ruina maxima: ‘If any of the clerics has fallen to the greatest ruin and begotten a child, the crime of fornication and homicide is great, but it can be redeemed through penance and God’s mercy’.
This was the ruling to which Vinniani 21 later referred back. Intriguingly, the duration of penance was the same as the penance for the cleric whose fornication was habitual but not public knowledge, though Vinniaus stressed the quality of the penance, undertaken with tears of contrition, and prayers day and night. As well as losing his office in this case, the offending cleric would be exiled until the seventh year, whereupon he could be restored at the discretion of a bishop or priest.
There was one final permutation, a slightly rushed addition, which reemphasizes that durations of penance did not always operate according to a strictly calibrated calculus of moral gravity: ‘But if he has not killed the child, lesser sin but same penance’. Only one other ruling in Vinniani addressed children who were unwanted because sinfully conceived. Although it appeared within the section on lay sins, the ruling concerned puellae Dei, nuns.
A layman who ‘defiled a girl of God and she has lost her crown and he has begotten a child from her’ would do penance for three years, including no intercourse with his wife for the first year. The penance was reduced if the puella Dei did not bear a child. There was no mention of attempts to abort or kill such an infant.
The ‘ethical elite’ at the summit of early Irish Christian communities justified its position in part through its special sexual status. Disclosure of sexual sin through the birth of children to clerics or nuns undermined the hierarchical patterning of these communities. It is not surprising, then, that Vinniaus almost exclusively thought about children born of sinful conceptions in terms of clerics and nuns.
When addressing responses to the conception or birth of such children in the form of abortion or infanticide he did not address laypeople at all. The focus is telling. His penitential rulings on abortion and infanticide were shaped by questions of social visibility and community repercussions when the sexual sins of clerics or nuns became public knowledge.
Coincidentally, a rather different seventh-century Irish source, a precursor to one of the miracle stories with which this book began, handled the disappearance of children conceived in sin in a comparable way. In c. 680 Cogitosus, a monk of Kildare, wrote a vita of one of the most eminent early Irish saints: Brigit of Kildare.
One startling miracle motif concerned Brigit’s encounter with a pregnant nun: With a strength of faith most powerful and ineffable, [Brigit] faithfully blessed a woman who, after a vow of integrity, had fallen into youthful concupiscence, whose womb was now swelling with pregnancy; and, after the conception disappeared in the womb without childbirth or pain she restored her healthy to penitence.
The great temptation in the study of early Irish hagiography, especially Brigidine hagiography, is to excavate pagan fossils from Christian texts. On some readings this brief story offers a glimpse of ‘traditional heathen customs’ or even of Brigit the fertility goddess. More recently, Maeve Callan has argued that Irish pentientials and hagiography capture a ‘remarkably permissive attitude’ to abortion, and that ‘female abortionists in the penitentials … might be said to some extent represent the morality of “ordinary” Irish Christians’.
But the story’s dramatis personae and monastic context, and its appearance in texts which sought to promote Christian ideals every bit as much as Vinniani did, suggest we should resist drawing conclusions primarily about the pagan past or even lay contemporaries. Miracle stories often took the form of healing. In this case the affliction which needed healing was the problem of pregnancy for an individual and, by implication, a community defined by sexual renunciation.
Through her benediction Brigit managed to bring about the end of abortion without quite resorting to the means. Instead of the bloody effusion of abortion the conception simply disappeared ‘without childbirth or pain’, a reference to Eve’s curse in Genesis 3. 16. The miracle lay in averting the painful birth of an unwanted child together with the painful symbolism of having that child as a member of a community defined by chastity.
The apparent leniency of Vinniani 20 was the flipside of Vinniaus’s severity towards clerics who fathered or nuns who gave birth to children. It stemmed from the need to protect the sexual status which defined the spiritual elite in Christian communities. In a sense leniency did represent a position on the status of the fetus, but fetal status was evaluated in terms of circumstances of conception as much as embryological knowledge.”
- Zubin Mistry, Abortion in the Early Middle Ages, c.500-900
1 note
·
View note