Gripla - 01.01.1993, Side 250

250
GRIPLA
ok svara fyrir þá báða ok taka lausn fyrir beggja hönd, Sighvatr decid-
ed that Sturla, his son, should go, be accountable for, and receive abso-
lution for both of them (ch. 70, p. 402).
Subsequent phrasing suggests that Sighvatr flouted the ecclesiastical
principle that man should be accountable for his own sins only.50
Sturla’s mission on behalf of his father was ipso facto in vain. íslend-
inga saga restricts the description of Sturla’s penance in Rome to his
multiple and public humiliation, to his heroic bearing, to the pity of
the onlookers, and to the achievement of his goal, absolution for him-
self and for Sighvatr Sturluson (ch. 92, p. 364).51 Arngrímr, conversely,
reports the partial failure of Sturla’s mission while stressing his stead-
fastness. Sturla stood unflinching. He endured the physical pain of the
multiple floggings and the silent response of the church to his valiant,
but unrewarded attempt to shoulder penance for his father. Still, Arn-
grímr speaks only of the silence of the church, not of a rejection of the
petition. For his purpose, this inference of rejection is pivotal. He ex-
plicates the silence of the church by a reference not to the canon in
question, but to its substance: sýndist ómöguligt, at sá, sem aldrei
beiddist lausnar og eigi fann sekt í sjálfum sér, mœtti leysast í annarligri
persónu, ’it seemed impossible that he, who never asked for absolution
and who never atoned for his transgression, should be absolved via a
representative’ (ch. 70, p. 403). Did, then, Abbot Arngrímr gainsay his
authority, Sturla Þórðarson? Not directly. There was apparently no
document to prove Sighvatr’s absolution. The church was silent. But
by an inference, Sturla Þórðarson’s unequivocal statement on Sig-
hvatr’s absolution stands corrected: “sýndist ómöguligt“ ‘it seemed im-
possible that . . . !’ Despite the good offices of his son, Sighvatr would
stand unredeemed, an infidel in the embrace of the devil.52
50 Cf. R.P.M.J. Rouet de Journel, S.J., p. 727. See also Stephan Kuttner, Kanonistis-
che Schuldlehre von Gratian bis auf die Dekretalen Gregors IX. Systematisch auf Grund
der handschriftlichen Quellen dargestellt, Studi e Testi Nr. 64 (Rome: Biblioteca Apost-
olica Vaticana, 1935), pp. 69-70, for dispensation from penitential pilgrimages to Rome,
as mandated by canon 15, Second Lateran Council (promulgated by Alexander 111).
51 “Annales regii," in Islandske Annaler, pp. 129,130, to the years 1231-35,1235-1240,
report that, following the reconciliation of both father and son with Bishop Guðmundr,
Sturla returned from Rome with absolution for his father. The author is believed to
have been an acquaintance of Sturla Þórðarson.
52
Erik Vandvik, “Gáter i Kongespegelen," in Studier over Konungs Skuggsia, ed.
Mattias Tveitane (Bergen: Universitetsforlaget, 1971), pp. 64-65, discusses an analogue