IjiitSXli

THE
REFORMED CHURCH
OF ^
IRELAND.

THE

REFORMED CHURCH

OF

IRE LAIsT D.

(1537-1886.)

BT THE EISHT HON.

J. T. BALL, LL.D., D.O.L.

LONDON:
LONGMANS, GREEN, AND 00,
DUBLIN:
HODGES, FIGGIS, AND CO.
1886.

DUBLIN :
PRINTED AT THE UNIVEKSITY PRESS,
BY PONSONBY AND WELDKICK.

PREFACE.

rVF THE CHURCHES in which during the sixteenth
century, either by legislative interference or their
own voluntary action, the principles of the Reforma
tion were introduced, none can claim attention more
justly than the Church then established in Ireland.
Its history has been traced to the time of the Union
with accuracy and minuteness ; but of subsequent
events, although some (for instance. Disestablishment
and the construction of a new Constitution) are of the
highest importance, a narrative is yet wanting. The
following pages are an attempt to supply this defi
ciency ; they also aim at recalling what has been
already discussed by others, but ia a compressed form,
and without details which no longer instruct or in
terest. Opinions, as they have prevailed within the
Church, the eminent persons by whom they have been
supported, and the reasons which have been assigned

A 2

iv PEEFAOE.
for them, necessarily come under consideration, but
merely historically, and with no design of taking
part in the controversies which have arisen in refe
rence to theological questions. Other denominations of
religion contemporaneously existing in Ireland, their
systems and proceedings, and in like manner the
general history of tlie country, are noticed only so far
as was required for the purposes of the narrative.
December, 1886.

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I.
INTRODUCTION. PASE
Scope of the present Treatise,  1
Ecclesiastical policy in Ireland in the reign of Henry VIII. directed from
England,  1
Reformation Movement in England at that time,  2
¦Condition of Society in England at that time,  2
Improved condition and increased power of the English Laity, . . 3
Discontent caused by the intemal condition of the Churcli in England, . 3
State of the Parochial Clergy in England  3
State of the Religious Houses in England,  4
The Laity become estranged from the Clergy in England, ... 5
Wolsey's policy,  6
Henry VIII. takes part with the Reformers  7
Ecclesiastical Legislation of the English Parliament, .... 8
Previous ecclesiastical statutes,  8
The King claims to be " Supreme Head of the Church," ... 9
Admission of "the Headship" with a, qualification by the two English
Convocations,  10
English Statute " in Restraint of Appeals,"  10
English Statute in relation to Convocation,  11
Decision of the Convocations of Canterbury and York as to the .Jurisdic
tion of the Pope  12
English Supremacy Act,  13
Effect of Henry's ecclesiastical statutes (English),  14
Down to 1535, no legislation in England as to doctrine, . . - , ,14

Ti CONTENTS.
CHAPTER II.
[1535-1547.] PAGE
The Reformation Movement of the Sixteenth Century did not extend
itself to Ireland,  1^
Relations then supposed to exist between England and Ireland, . . 16'
The Supremacy of the Crown in the Church in Ireland held to be a con
sequence of the Supremacy in England  15
In 1535, Henry VIII. proceeds to have the Supremacy acknowledged in
Ireland,  16
Henry appoints George Browne Archbishop of Dublin, . . . .17
Commission to Archbishop Browne and others, to induce admission of the
King's Supremacy in Ireland,  . .17
Opposition in Ireland to the King's Ecclesiastical Policy, . . .17
Letter from Archbishop Browne to Cromwell recommending a Parliament
to be called,  18
Separation of the Irish People into two divisions,  18
Constitution of the Irish Parliament, . . . . . . . 1&
No Convocation as yet in Ireland, . . . . . . . .19
Proctors sent by the Clergy to attend Parliament,  20
Irish Parliament met in May, 1536,  .20
Statute to declare the Proctors had no right to vote, .... 20
The Commons favourable to the Supremacy,  .20
Opposition to the Supremacy among the Lords, ..... 20
Speech of Archbishop Browne in the House of Lords, .... 21
Irish Supremacy Act passed,  . 21
Other Ecclesiastical Statutes also passed,  .22
Effect of this Legislation confined to the English districts, ... 23
Condition of the Irish districts,  23
Condition of the Pale,  24
Act to change the King's style from " Lord "to " King " of Ireland, . 25
After this Act a policy of conciliation adopted, . . ¦ . . 25
Influence of the Crown in Ireland increased, ...... 26
Neglect of missionary exertions to introduce the Reformation among the
native Irish,  26
The Bishops in the Pale favoured the Reformation, .... 27
How far there was Doctrinal Reformation in England in Henry's reign, . 28
How far in Ireland,  . 28
Archbishop Browne's " Form of Beads,"  28
First Fruits and Twentieths in Ireland given to the Crown, ... 29
ReUgious Houses in Ireland dissolved,  30
No Legislation at this time as to Convocations or Synods in Ireland, . 30
Appointments to vacant Bishoprics in Ireland after the Supremacy Act, . 30

CONTENTS.

vu

CHAPTER III.

[1547-1558.] PAGE
Accession of Edward VL,  31
The King educated in Protestantism  31
No Parliament in Ireland in this King's reign,  31
Various Latin Services in use in England,  32
Services in use in Ireland,  32
An English Prayer Book enacted by the English Parliament, ... 33
The English Prayer Book introduced into the Church in Ireland under
the authority of a Letter from the King,  34
St. Leger, the Lord Deputy, summons an Assembly of Bishops and Clergy
to consider the King's Letter,  35
3536 37
3839 39
39 3939

Meeting and proceedings of the Assembly,
Proclamation to require the use of the Prayer Book, ....
Edward's first Prayer Book difiers from the present English Prayer Book,
Sources from which the Services adopted in the Prayer Book were derived,
St. Leger recalled and replaced by Crofts,
Conference of Crofts with Archbishop DowdaU,
Primacy transferred from Armagh to Dublin, .
Archbishop DowdaU leaves the country, .
Goodacre appointed in the room of DowdaU, .
Consecration of Goodacre as Archbishop of Armagh, and of Bale as Bishop
of Ossory, according to the English form.
Appointment of other Bishops in Ireland by the King,
Edward's first Prayer Book printed in DubUn,
Irish Version ordered, but not made,
Second English Prayer Book of Edward VL, .
Accession qf Mary, 
Restoration of DowdaU to the See of Armagh,
Some Bishops deprived : others fied, . . .
Appointments in the room of Bishops deprived,
Death and character of Archbishop Browne, .
BuU of Paul IV. pronouncing absolution of the separation from Rome
Repeal of the ecclesiastical statutes of Henry VIIL,
No persecution in Ireland for religion, .
Commission alleged to have been issued,
Civil affairs in Mary's reign in Ireland, .
The " Plantation " system introduced, .
King's and Queen's Counties formed and planted.
Statutes to faciUtate the formation of counties,
Effect of the civU policy initiated at this time,

40
40 40
4041 42
42 42
43 43
44
44 45
45 45 4646
4747

viii CONTENTS.
CHAPTER IV.
[1558-1603.] PAGK
Accession of Q,ueen Elizabeth, .  4^
Numerical proportion of Roman CathoUcs and Protestants in England, • 49
Superior energy of the Protestants,  50
Protestant influence in Elizabeth's first English ParUament, ... 50
EngUsh Supremacy Act of EUzabeth, .  51
Elizabeth's objection to be called " Head of the Church," ... 51
Substitution in the Oath of Supremacy of the words " Governor," &o.,
for " Head of the Church,"  51
Heresy defined,  51
Supremacy explained, .......... 52
EUzabeth's EngUsh Prayer Book,  53
Alterations in this Prayer Book from former Prayer Book, ... 53
Irish ParUament summoned, and met in 1560, ..... 54
Acts of the Irish Parliament,  .55
Irish Supremacy Act,  55
Irish Act directing the use of EUzabeth's EngUsh Prayer Book, . . 56
Other Irish Ecclesiastical Acts,  58
Meeting of Clergy in Ireland caUed by Lord Sussex, the Deputy, . . 59
Proceedings at the meeting of Clergy,  60
Leverous, Bishop of Kildare, and Walsh, Bishop of Meath, deprived, . 61
Conduct of other Bishops,  61
Appointments of Bishops,  62
How far the Statutes relating to reUgion were enforced, . . , .64
The Thirty-nine Articles enacted in England,  65
In Ireland a different set of Articles, Eleven in number, enjoined, . . 66
Nature of " the Eleven Articles,"  66
" Free Schools " estabUshed,  68
Foundation of Trinity College, DubUn,  , . 68
Establishment of the English power in Ireland in Elizabeth's reign, . 69
Additional Counties formed,  70
Plantation of Munster,  71
Other Colonization in this feign,  73

CONTENTS.

IX

CHAPTER V.
RETROSPECT. PAGE
Orj;anization of the Church of Ireland in 1536,  74
Monastic Institutions in Ireland, ........ 74
Their condition at the era of the Reformation,  76
The Parochial system at the era of the Reformation, .... 77
Evil effect of the system of Appropriations upon the Parochial Clergy, . 78
Other causes depressing at this time the condition of the Clergy, . . 79
Measures adopted in relation to Monastic property,  79
The interests of the Church neglected,  80
Injudicious ecclesiastical policy adopted,  83
Effect of the policy adopted on the Clergy,  83
Letter of Sir PhUip Sidney to Q,ueen Elizabeth in relation to the state of
the Church  84
How far Protestantism made progress,  85
Difficulties in the way of Protestantism among the Irish part of the people, 85
Neglect to introduce Protestantism among the Irish, .... 86
Progress of Protestantism in the Pale and EngUsh districts, ... 87

CHAPTER VI.
[1603-1625.]

Accession of James I., 
General submission in Ireland to the authority of James,
•Change of poUcy in civU affairs, ....
Division of the Island into counties completed,
Circuits of the Judges enlarged, ....
Irish Chieftains accept grants from the Crown,
Tyrone and Tyrconnell leave the Kingdom,
Forfeiture of the territories of Tyrone and TyrconneU,
Plantation of Ulster, 
Majority of the new settlers Scotch,
Parliament summoned, and met in 1613,
Constitution of the ParUament of 1613, .
Sir John Davis elected Speaker, ....
His Address to the Deputy, Sir Arthur Chichester, .
Repeal of Statutes which oppressed the Irish, .
First Convocation in Ireland, 
Convocation proceeds to frame Articles of Faith,

89
89 90
90 91919192 9294 959596
96
97 97 98

X CONTENTS. PAGE
The Thirty-nine Articles not adopted,  99'
Reasons for this course, .......... 100
Irish Articles of 1615  lOO
Less reUgious toleration in Ireland under James than under EUzabeth, . 104
Proceedings of James in reference to ecclesiastical affairs, . . .105
Episcopal appointments by James,  103
Hampton, Archbishop of Armagh,  105'
Downham, Bishop of Derry,  107
Effect of the King's measures,  108

CHAPTER VII.

[1625-1660.]
ReUgious controversies in England at the Accession of Charles I.,
Increased power of the Puritan party in Parliament,
Hostility of Elizabeth, James I., and Charles I., to the Puritans,
Mode in which the ecclesiastical patronage of Charles was exercised.
Dissolution of Charles's third English Parliament, .
Fourth Parliament of Charles (1640), ....
Discontent of the Laity, 
In Ireland there was not at this time religious dissension,
Letter of Charles reproving the condition of the Church in Ireland,
Strafford appointed Lord Lieutenant of Ireland,
BramhaU accompanies Strafford to Ireland,
Condition of the Church in Ireland, ....
Measures of Strafford for the benefit of the Church,
Strafford and Bramhall desire to introduce the EngUsh Articles
Irish Convocation of 1634 
BramhaU proposes the adoption of the English Articles, .
Adoption of the English Articles by the Irish Convocation,
The Irish Articles of 1613 not expressly repealed,
Course pursued by Convocation as to the Canons,
Statutes affecting the Church,
Removal of Strafford (1640), ....
RebeUion of 1641, 
Effect of the RebeUion of 1641 on the Church,
Westminster Assembly, .....
The Solemn League and Covenant, .
The Westminster Directory, &c 
Prohibition in Ireland of the use of the Prayer Book,

in Ireland

llO'
112 112112
112 113113114114114114115116.117 117117118 119' 120121121122 123124 124125 126.

CONTENTS. xi
CHAPTER VIII.
USSHER AND BEDELL. PAGE
Death of Archbishop Ussher,  128
Incidents of his life,  128
Character of Ussher as a Bishop,  129
Ussher' s defence of Episcopacy  130
Ussher's opinions as to the nature of the Episcopal ofBce, . . . 131
Compromise of the controversy as to Episcopacy suggested by Ussher, . 131
Learning and opinions of Ussher,  133
Ussher's personal character,  135.
Bishop BedeU,  13a
State of Bedell's Dioceses,  136
Bedell's character, &c  137
CHAPTER IX.
[1660-1685.]
Rule of the Commonwealth in Ireland,  1 39
Transplantation of the Natives to Connaught,  139
Colonization,  140
Effect of colonization on the interests of the Church, .... 140
Re-estabUshment of the Church by Charles IL,  142
BramhaU appointed Archbishop of Armagh,  142
Consecration of two Archbishops and ten Bishops,  143
Jeremy Taylor,  143
Taylor preaches the Consecration Sermon,  144
The Irish ParUament meets,  145
Taylor preaches before ParUament,  146
Proceedings of the House of Commons,  146
Claims of the Presbyterian Clergy,  147
EngUsh and Irish Uniformity Acts,  148
Position of the Presbyterian Clergy in Ireland before the Uniformity Aot, 148
Revision of the English Prayer Book,  149
The Prayer Book as revised in England adopted in Ireland, . . . 149
Changes introduced in the Prayer Book,  149
Additions in Ireland to the English Services,  150
Influence of BramhaU ; his character  150
PoUtical measures affecting the Church,  161

xii CONTENTS.
CHAPTER X.
[1685-1702,] PAGE
PoUcy of the EngUsh Government in Ireland before 1685, . . .152
PoUcy of James IL,  ^^^
Different results of his policy in England and Ireland, . . . .153
Abdication of James, . . . ... . . • • .153
The Crown conferred in England upon WilUam and Mary, . . .153
Ascendency of the Roman Catholic interest in Ireland, .... 153
Parliament called by James in Ireland (1689),  154
Acts of the ParUament caUgd by.Jamqs,  15*
Protestant Ascendency restored in Ireland,  ¦ 155
The EstabUshed Church restored to its former position, . . . .156
Vacant Bishoprics filled,  156
The Irish Convocation not summoned by William and Mary or by WiUiam, 157
The Clergy taxed by Parliament in Ireland, ...... 167
Non- Jurors in England and Ireland,  157
Charles Leslie,  158
Acts of the Irish Parliament relating to ecclesiastical affairs, . . . 159
Primate Boyle,  159
Bishop Hacket deprived,  159
Beginning of the Penal Code,  100
Assertion by the EngUsh Parliament of a right to legislate for Ireland, . 161
Discontent in Ireland,  1 61
Molyneux's " Case of Ireland," &c.,  162
Molyneux's Treatise condemned by the English Parliament, . . .162
Effects of the Controversy raised by Molyneux  163

CHAPTER XI.
[1702-1714.]
Penal Code for Ireland as enacted in the reign of Q,ueen Anne, . . 164
Provisions of the Irish Penal Code,  1 64
Injurious effects of the Penal Code upon the Interests of Protestantism
in Ireland,  165
ImpoUtic laws as to Protestant Dissenters in Ireland, .... 166
Neglect of the real interests of the Church by the Irish Parliament, . 167
First Fruits and Twentieths restored,  167
Swift represents to the Queen the depressed condition of the Church, . 167
Convocation meets along with Parliament in 1703,  169

CONTENTS. xiii
PAGE
Resolution of the Lower House in reference to the conversion of the
native Irish  169
Proceedingsof Convocation in 1705, 1709, 1711,  3 70
The Crown ceases to summon Convocation in Ireland, . . . .171
Considerations which discouraged exertions to coavert the Natives, . 171
Measures adopted for the purpose of converting the natives, . . . 172
Vacancies in Bishoprics filled,  173
Primates Marsh and Lindsay,  173
Archbishop King,  173
Swift  174
Bishop Stearne,  175
Neglect of duty by many Bishops  175
Effects of the Penal Code,  176
Protestant Ascendency completely established,  176

CHAPTER XII.
[1714-1760.]
Social condition of Ireland during the reigns of George I. and George II. 177
ReUgious condition of England and Ireland at the commencement of the
eighteenth century,  177
Prevalence of InfideUty,  178
Standard of opinion in' society irrespective of religion, . . . .179
English and Irish clergy,  180
PecuUar circumstances' injuriously affecting the Irish Clergy, . . . 180
Mode in which the ecclesiastical patronage of the Crown was exercised in
Ireland, .  181
Merit of some of the Irish Clergy,  181
The questions debated at this time related to the truth and authority of
revealed reUgion,  181
Archbishop King's writings,  182
Bishop Peter Browne's writings  183
Bishop Berkeley,  184
The writings of Berkeley,  186
PoUcy of Swift and of Berkeley contrasted,  187
Abbadie, Dean of KiUaloe,  188
Treatise of Abbadie on'the Truth of the Christian Religion, . . .188
Controversy between Bishops Browne and Berkeley on the moral attri
butes of a Supreme Being  189
English and Irish parties in the State and the Church, . . . .190
English policy in Ireland,  190
Swift  190
Swift's " Sentiments of a Church of England Man," and Sermons, . . 191

xiv CONTENTS.
CHAPTER XIII.
[1760-1800.] PAGE
Revival of a reUgious spirit before the accession of George III. . . 194
The revival of reUgion principaUy due to Wesley and his associates, . 194
Wesley adhered to the Church both in England and Ireland, . . . 195
Introduction and progress of Methodism in Ireland, .... 196
The Evangelical party in the English Church,  197
Improvement of manners in England and Ireland,  197
Improvement of the clergy,  198
Patronage of the Crown in Ireland guided by poUtical motives, . . 198
Primate Stone,  199
Bishop Hervey (Earl of Bristol)  200
Character of other Irish Bishops,  201
Non-residence of many of the beneficed clergy  202
ParUament relaxes the Penal Code,  203
ParUament neglects legislating for the Church  203
Primate Boulter,  204
Primate Robinson (Lord Rokeby)  205
Bishop Law,  206
Bishop Rundle,  208
Bishop Percy  208
Bishop O'Beime,  209
Bishops HamUton and Young,  209
Kirwan  210
Primate Neweome,  211

CHAPTER XIV.
THE UNION.
Union of the Kingdoms of Great Britain and Ireland, .... 212
Union of the Churches of England and Ireland,  212
Act 6 George I., declaring the right of the EngUsh ParUament to legis
late for Ireland  213
Effects of the Act 6 Geo. I. and of Poyning's Law,  213
Swift revives Molyneux's protest against the EngUsh ParUament legis
lating for Ireland,  215
Molyneux's protest renewed by Lucas at a later date, .... 215
New ParUament at the accession of George III  216
Discontent of the Irish ParUament with its subordinate position, . . 216

CONTENTS. XV
P.4GE
The Volunteers (1778)  216
Concessions to the popular party,  217
•Grattan's motion in the Irish ParUament asserting its independence (1780), 21 7
Act 6 Geo. I. repealed,  218
The exclusive right of the Irish Parliament to legislate for Ireland con
ceded,  218
Effects of the concession,  , 218
Disagreements between the English and Irish Parliaments, . . . 219
The poUcy of uniting the kingdoms of England and Ireland favoured by
the Government,  221
Union of the Churches of England and Ireland approved, . . .221
Bishop O'Beirne's proposal as to the union of the Churches, . . . 221
Act of Union (1800),  222
No national Synod or Convocation summoned either in England or Ireland
to consider the union of the Churches,  223

CHAPTER XV-*
[1800-1871.]
Eelations of the State to the Churches of England and Ireland, . .224
The union of the Churches continued for seventy years, .... 225
In 1871 the union of the EngUsh and Irish Churches terrainated, . . 225
The Irish Church disestablished and disendowed,  225
For thirty years after the Union the question of the Irish Church not
raised  225
Untu 1829 the question of CathoUc Emancipation occupied attention, . 225
Mr. Pitt and Lord Castlereagh intended that Emancipation shoiUd ac
company the Union,  225
Successful opposition of George III. to Emancipation, . . . .226
Emancipation Act of 1829,  226
Effect of delay in granting Emancipation,  226
Emancipation Act preceded and foUowed by agitation, .... 226
Tithe system,  227
Agitation is turned against the EstabUshment,  227
Tithe Composition Act,  228
Eoyal Commission to inquire into the revenues of the Established Church
in Ireland (1832),  228
Eoyal Commission to ascertain the number of persons in communion with
the Church,  229
Church TemporaUties Act (Ireland) (1833)  229

• This and succeeding: Chapters, have been erroneously numbered in the treatise as XVI.,
XVII., XVIII., XIX,, XX.

xvi CONTENTS. PAGE;
Tithe Rentcharge Act (Ireland) (1838),  230
Act abolishing Ministers' Money in Ireland (1854), .... 230'
Objections made to the Irish Church Establishment, .... 231
Arguments of those who opposed the establishment of any Church, . .231
Answer of those who supported EstabUshments, ..... 232
The question of endowment-distinct from the question of establishment, . 233
Benefits from the Established Church in England  234
Inadequacy-of the voluntary system to meet the religious needs of society, 234
The Establishment in Ireland exposed to objections peculiar to itself, . 235-
Considerations which -operated to prevent the objections to the Irish
Establishment being acted upon,  237
Opposition to the -Irish EstabUshment for about twenty years makes little
progress, . . . . . . • . ' . . . . 23ft

CHAPTER XVI.
[1800-1871.]
Intemal condition of the Irish Established Church from the Union to
Disestablishment  239
General reaction in Europe from the prevalence of Infidelity which had
characterized the end of the eighteenth century, .... 239
Improvement in reUgious feeling of the Clergy and Laity of the Church
of Ireland, . •  239
Tendency in the members of the EstabUshed Church in Ireland to recur
to the opinions in favour during its early history, . ' . . . 240
A party which received the name "Evangelical" formed within the
Church of Ireland,  . .241
Opinions of the Clergy of the EvangeUcal party, '  241
Progress of EvangeUcal opinions in Ireland,  242
Primary education in Ireland,  , 243
In 1831 a new system of primary education founded and supported by the
State,  243
Controversies within the EstabUshed Church as to the new system of
education, ¦  244
Controversies in relation to theological and educational questions diminish, 244
Improved exercise of ecclesiastical patronage by the Crown in Ireland, . 245
High estimation in which, at the period of -Disestablishment, the clergy
of the Established Church in Ireland were held, .... 246
Some theological writings of members of th« Established Church in Ire
land after the Union, noticed;  246 '
Archbishop Magee's work upon the Atonement,  24^7.
Differences of opinion within the Church in Ireland as to the question of
" Justification by Faith only,"  24^ •<l'

CONTENTS. xvii,
"ownham's " Treatise of Justification,"  248
Jeremy Taylor's Sermon entitled Ji'rfes Pomote  249
Opinions of the EvangeUcal Party upon the question of Justification, . 249
Bishop O'Brien's " Sermons upon the Nature and Effects of Faith," . 250
Alexander Knox's opinions upon the question of Justification, . . 251
Alexander Knox's general reUgious system,  252
Bishop Jebb's works,  252
The Tractarian party in England,  253
Tractarianism not favoured by the Laity or Clergy of the Church of Ireland, 253
" Cautions for the Times,"  253
Archbishop Whately's writmgs,  254
Theory of the " Cautions for the Times" as to Apostolical Succession, . 266
Professor Archer Butler's Sermon on Church Principles, . . .267
Archbishop Laurence and Bishop Mant,  257

CHAPTER XVII.
DISESTABLISHMENT.
Censusof the people in 1841, 1851, and 1861,  250
Census of 1861 ascertained the reUgious profession of the people, . . 259
Disproportion between the number of members of the EstabUshed Church
and that of the whole people,  260
Disproportion between the aggregate of aU Protestant denominations and
the whole people,  261
Arguments against the EstabUshment in Ireland founded on the Census, 261
Census of 1861 exhibited the predominance of three reUgious systems, . 262
The members of each of the three chief religious systems for the most part
of a distinct race,  262
FaUure to convert the Irish,  263
Delay in proceeding against the Church in Parliament after the Census
of 1861,  265
Question of the Irish Church moved in the House of Lords (1867), . . 266
Royal Commission to inquire into the condition of the Irish Church
issued (1867),  267
In 1868 the question of the Irish Church brought forward in the House
of Commons  267
Resolutions and a BiU to suspend appointments in the Church of Ireland,
carried in the House of Commons  269
BUl to suspend appointments in the Church moved in the House of Lords,
and rejected,  269
Report of the Commission to inquire into the Irish Church, . . , 269
Dissolution of ParUament (1868),  271
Iiish Chuich Act (1869),  271
jriovisions of the Irish Church Act,  272

XVUI

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER XVIII.
[1869-1871.]

Necessity of making provision to secure the continuance of the Disestab
lished Church,  275
Operation of the Irish Church Aot in rendering the holding of Convoca
tion or a General Synod legal without Ucence from the Crown, . . 275
The Archbishops summon Convocation,  277
Meeting of Convocation,  277
Arrangement of the Episcopate at this period,  277
Constitution of the Upper and Lower Houses of Convocation, . . . 278
Proceedings of Convocation, ......... 278
Resolution passed by Convocation to invite the co-operation of the Laity, 279
Convocation makes rules to regulate the representation of the Clergy in
a Convention of Clergy and Laity,  279
Influential Laymen request a Lay Conference to be summoned by the
Archbishops  280
Lay Conference summoned,  280
Meeting and proceedings of the Lay Conference,  281
Convention, or General Synod of Clergy and Laity summoned, . . 281
Subjects requiring immediate decision by the Convention, . . . 281
Meeting of the Convention (February, 1870),  282
Constitution of the Church framed by the Convention, .... 282
Preface to the Constitution,  283
Provisions of the Constitution,  284
Charter granted for incorporation of the Representative Body, . , 288
Provisions of the Constitution regulating the General Synod, . . . 288

CHAPTER XIX.
[1871-1886.]
Power given by the Irish Church Act for ecclesiastical persons to commute
their life estates and annuities,  290
The Bishops and Clergy commute,  291
The Commissioners pay over to the Representative Body the value of the
life estates of the commuting Clergy charged with annuities, . , 291
Annual subscriptions towards future maintenance of the Clergy, . . 291
Power given by the Irish Church Aot to the Representative Body to
contract for retirement of the Clergy from duty, .... 292

CONTENTS. xix
PAGE
Retirement of the Clergy permitted on condition that a proportion of the
commuting capital of a retiring incumbent shaU be left for the
Church,  292
Management of the property of the Church by the Representative Body, . 293
Purchase of the Glebe Houses and portions of the Glebes by the Repre
sentative Body from the Commissioners,  293
Proceedings of the Synods  294
Changes in the organization of the Church,  294
New code of Canons enacted by the General Synod, .... 295
Revision of the Prayer Book by the General Synod, .... 297
Observations upon the present position of the Disestablished Church, , 303

APPENDIX.
Notes aitd Illtjsteaxioks,  , . . . 307

" It is very true that these ecclesiastical matters p.re things not
properly appertaining to my "profession, which I was not so in
considerate but to object t6 myseli,' but finding that it is many
times seen that a man that ^tandeth off, and somewhat removed
from a plot of ground, doth better survey it and discover it than
those which are upon it, I thought it not impossible but that I,
as a looker-on, might cast mine eyes upon some things which the
actors themselves, especially some being interested, some led and
addicted, some declared and engaged, did not or would not
see." — Bacon.

THE
EEFOEIED CHUECH OF lEELAND.

CHAPTER I.

INTEODUCTION.

NEARLY three hundred and fifty years have elapsed
since the legislation which, in the reign of Henry
the Eighth, separated the. Church of Ireland from the
See of Rome. It is proposed in the following pages
to examine the nature of this legislation, the circum
stances connected with it, and the more important
incidents in the subsequent history of the Church, as
it was thenceforward constituted. These matters can
not, however, be adequately estimated, or even un
derstood, without reference to the laws which were
previously enacted in relation to the Church of Eng
land, and to the causes and transactions out of which
those laws originated. Irish ecclesiastical policy was
then directed from England ; it followed and repeated
what was approved in that country, and was influenced
by the relations supposed to exist between the two
kingdoms, rather than by local conditions of society.
Accordingly, the events which in England preceded

2 INTEODUCTION. [Chap. I.
the commencement of the period with which we are
now concerned will be considered (briefly, since they
are generally well known) in the remainder of this
chapter. The movement, which in the sixteenth century was
directed to obtain a reformation of the religious system
then established in most European kingdoms, commenced
in Germany, and thence extended itself to England.
There it found controversies in relation to the Church,
its discipline, and doctrine, already prevalent. These
had been originated about one hundred and fifty years
before by WyclifEe and his followers. Subsequently re
pressed, but never entirely extinguished, they owed their
revival at this period to conditions of society which some
time previously had come into existence.
During the reign of Henry VII. changes were effected
in the circumstances of the different classes of the Eng
lish people, and in their relations between themselves.
It was the interest of this monarch to depress the power
of the nobility, and his legislation was therefore in
some important respects directed to that object. One of
his statutes gave increased facilities for barring entails
of land, and thereby enabled its alienation and its con
sequent subdivision. New owners of this species of
property were thus introduced. At the same time com
merce extended itself, and diffused opulence among the
merchants and traders. Contemporaneously education
improved. This was especially the case in the two
universities, where the range of instruction, long nar
rowed from excessive reverence for the schoolmen, be
came liberalized and expanded by study of the great
writers of antiquity. A lay middle class, remarkable

Chap. L] INTEODUCTION. 3
for its energy, enterprize, and intelligence, gradually
rose into importance.
Formerly the nobles and the ecclesiastics of high rank
altogether predominated in English social life. They
had no desire to see what was established by law or
practice either in the State or the Church altered, and
discouraged innovations which, if commenced, might
reach themselves. The persons who at this time ad
vanced upon the stage were animated by very different
sentiments. A spirit of inquiry, a desire to try received
opinions by the tests of reasoning, and of the more ac
curate information which research was daily bringing to
light, had grown up among them, and through their in
fluence pervaded the community. Existing institutions
began to be scrutinized, and were subjected to acute
criticism. Increase of power and of mental activity on the
part of the laity came in contact with an ecclesiastical
system which it was impossible to observe without dis
satisfaction. In the lapse of time abuses had grown up
and inserted themselves in the administration of the
Church. The monasteries appropriated the revenues
of numbers of valuable parishes, and left the cure of
souls in them to an inferior class of clergy inadequately
paid. Pluralities abounded. The disproportion between
the incomes of the dignified and of the parochial clergy
was extreme. The few were inordinately rich, the many
depressed and impoverished. In the monasteries, in the
colleges, and among the dignitaries, were persons of
ability and attainments, but the mass of the clerical
order, reached only to a low standard ; they did not
share in the progress of the period. Discipline was
B 2

4 INTEODUCTION. [Chap. I.
relaxed among them, and their general habits and man
ners were altogether unsuited to their calling.*
The condition of the Monastic Orders excited equal
dissatisfaction. They had accumulated an amount of
property in lands, tithes, and personalty, conferred
upon them by the bounty of successive generations,
or obtained through appropriations of parochial endow
ments, which to the laity seemed excessive. This feel
ing particularly existed in reference to their landed
property, which, being inalienable, was withdrawn from
the operation of the laws that in other instances were
multiplying the number of proprietors. Discontent and
envy followed wealth, and were not appeased by com
pensating services. The Religious Houses at this time
made no adequate return to the community for the
benefits they had received. Originally designed to form
the retreats of learning and piety, they no longer an
swered the ends of their foundation. In every part of
Europe the popular estimate of the monks, of their
character and conduct, was unfavourable, f
At the same time, and while thus declining in the
* The need of reform of the English clergy formed the subject of a
remarkable sermon preached by Colet, Dean of St. Paul's, before the Con
vocation of Canterbury in 1511 (Knight's Life, App,). With this should
be compared a Commission issued in 1456, by Archbishop Bourchier, "Ad
reformandum orimina et excessus clericorum et laicorum dioeceseos Can-
tuariensis," and a pastoral of Archbishop Morton in 1486, "Epistola con-
tinens statuta de vita et moribus clericorum in provinciali synodo edita "
(Wilkins, Concilia, vol. iii,, 573, 619).
f The writings of Erasmus represent the prevalent notions of the age
respecting monastic persons. It is a different question how far specific
charges afterwards made against the English religious houses were
actually established in proof, (See on the one hand Lingard, Sen. VIII.,
ch. ii,, and on the other, Froude, Hist., ch. x. ; also the recent observa-

Chap. I.] INTEODUCTION. 6
estimation of the people, the whole clerical order de
manded for themselves rights and privileges which, had
there been no other cause, must necessarily have pro
voked complaint. Thus they asserted that they were
to be tried only in the spiritual courts, and that for
offences, even the most criminal, they were not amen
able to the temporal. On the other hand, they insisted
that the laity were subject to ecclesiastical judges for
mere breaches of the moral law, and instituted prosecu
tions in respect of them, which were the more resented
because of the great expenses attending proceedings
before the Church Courts.*
Owing to these various circumstances, estrangement
had manifested itself in England between the clergy
and laity before the Reformers in G-ermany made any
move. When they did, at first their example, afterwards
their success, attracted imitation. As they advanced,
the English laity, sympathizing with the objects which
they professed to seek, advanced also ; and it became
obvious that the prevailing discontent, unless it were in
some way appeased, would manifest itself in action hos
tile to the ascendency claimed by the clergy, t
tions of Canon Perry, Sist., 2 ser,, ch. viii,). That complaints were made
of the monasteries before Henry YIII, or his time is certain. In 1489
Pope Innocent VIII. issued a Bull, Pro reformatione monasteriorum et
loeorum exemptorum, in which these complaints are referred to (Wilkins,
ui. 631),
* The complaints made of the ecclesiastical courts are collected in a
petition of the House of Commons, a,ii, 1528 (cited by Eroude, Hist. , ch. iii.)_
f In 1515 the Bishop of London, speaking of the trial of an ecclesi
astic by a jury, said to Wolsey, " The citizens of London so favour heresy,
that they would find any clerk guilty, though he were as innocent as
Abel" (Burnet, Ref., vol. i. p, 36), Colet, in the sermon already cited,
speaks of the contradiction of lay people.

6 INTEODUCTION. [Chap. I.
At this period Wolsey was Henry's chief minister.
To the sympathies of an ecclesiastic he added the ideas
of a statesman; and perceiving the danger which
threatened the ecclesiastical system, sought to avert
revolution by reform. Possessing legatine powers,
which enabled him to visit the monasteries, he pro
ceeded to examine such of these institutions as had
poor endowments and few inmates, being those respect
ing which there was most ceilsure, and obtaining Bulls
for the suppression of some of them, used their property
towards founding new educational institutions. The
object which he sought by these establishments seems to
have been the improvement of the clergy, to remove
from them the reproach of ignorance which the Lu
theran party brought against them, and in accordance
with advice, which he is said himself to have given
the Pope, " to set up learning against learning."*
But before he could further develop his designs came
his fall from power, and with his fall his policy ter
minated. No one took his place or persevered with his
measures. Even had his authority continued, they came,
as is often the case with the policy of reform both in
civil and ecclesiastical affairs, too late to have operated
effectively. ]\iatters had advanced beyond the stage
when they might have availed, and the progress of
opinion in the direction of extensive change could not
be stayed. Germany had rejected mere internal amend
ment, and by this time wholly severed connexion with

* Lord Herbert's Henry VIIL, p. 148. Hallam judges Wolsey se
verely ; Froude regards him more favourably ; Brewer, the able editor
of the State Papers, thinks that had he served a different master, he would
have effected extensive reforms.

Chap. I.] INTEODUCTION. 7
Rome. Less than Germany attained would not then
have satisfied the demands of the time.*
At this crisis of ecclesiastical affairs the king inter
vened. He had determined to obtain a divorce from
Catherine of Arragon, upon the ground that she was the
widow of his deceased brother, and that therefore his
marriage with her was illegal. He had for the purpose
instituted proceedings before the court of Rome. These
were designedly delayed both by the Pope and his
legates who were sent to try the case. Henry, meet
ing from them only procrastination and indecision, and
foreseeing ultimate failure, unless he could come before
some other tribunal, resolved to repudiate the Papal ju
risdiction. This decision cast the whole weiglit of the Crown
(always in English social life of preponderating influ
ence) into the scale of those who, discontented with the
state of the Church, advocated alteration of the existing
system. They had for some time been steadily gain
ing ground. This support accelerated their progress.
That without it they would not u.ltimately have suc
ceeded there is no reason to think ; but certainly their
success would not have been equally rapid ; possibly
* Erasmus represented in Germany an unsuccessful minority, who
advocated reform of the Church, without separation from Eome, That,
with or without separation, reform was urgently needed is admitted by
the ablest adversaries of the Eeformation, (See Cardinal Bellarmine,
Concio. xxviii. ed Colon Agr, 1617, vi, 296 ; Bossuet, Histoire des Varia
tions des Eglises Protestanies, liv, i, s, i,), Bellarmine's words are : " Annis
aUquot ante quam Lutherana et Calviniana heresis oriretur, nulla ferme
erat (ut ii testantur qui etiam tunc vivebant), nulla (inquam) prope erat
in judioiis ecclesiasticis severitas, nulla in moribus disoiplina, nulla in
saoris Uteris eruditio, nulla in rebus divinis reverentia, nulla propemo-
dum jam erat religio,"

8 INTEODUCTION. [Chap. I.
also the result might not have assumed exactly in all
respects the same shape and form. As it was, the king
and the people advanced together, sought the same ob
jects, and concurred in the same measures.
These measures were directed to assert the inde
pendence of the national Church, to repudiate the ju
risdiction and authority of the Pope over it, and to
establish the supremacy of the Crown within it. The
policy on which they are founded cannot be said to
have been then wholly new ; it was in a considerable
degree indicated in the statutes of previous reigns.
So early as the time of Edward III. parliament had
begun, and under subsequent kings it continued, to im
pose limits on the authority of the See of Rome, and
to restrict its interference with the English Church.
It declared that Church to have been founded and en
dowed by the ancestors of the king and of his nobles,
and that their descendants ought therefore to have
the right of presenting to its dignities and bene
fices. It repudiated the claim of the Bishop of Rome
(for it is by this title he is described) to encroach
upon the seigniories of these preferments and benefices
as if he were patron or advowee thereof, and enacted
that the appointments to them should be free according
to the manner in which they were originally established.
It condemned interference with the sentences of the
king's courts in cases relating to rights in ecclesiastical
property, and declared that the Crown of England had
been so free at all times, that it was in no earthly
subjection, but immediately subject to God in all things
touching its regally, and to none other, and that it was

Chap. I.] INTEODUCTION. 9
not to be submitted to the Pope, nor should the laws
and statutes of the realm be by him defeated. Lastly,
it prohibited the purchasing or bringing from Rome of
translations, processes, sentences of excommunication,
Bulls, or any other matters touching the king, his
regalty, or his realm.*
The mode adopted to establish the supremacy of the
Crown in the Church was by claiming that the king
should be acknowledged to be its " supreme head." In
assuming the title it is probable that more was aimed
at than displacing the supremacy of Rome, for which,
and indeed for repudiating its ecclesiastical system, a
denial of its pre-eminence would have sufficed, "j* The
title of "head," while it effected this object, gained
the further advantage that it prevented any power
within the realm being set up in rivalry of the king,
and reduced into subordination all other authorities,
including the convocations or synods of the clergy,
from whom interference might be apprehended.
In 1531 the clergy were in Henry's power. They
had violated the law which forbade the Bulls of the
Popes to be introduced into the country, or to be acted
upon if introduced. The offence was primarily Wol
sey's in obtaining his appointment as "legate" from
Rome. He had made no defence when arraigned for it ;
and now the clergy were involved in the consequences,
* 16 Eic, II, 0, 5 (2), a, D, 1392 ; and see also 25 Edw. III. st, 5,
c. 22 ; 25 Edw. III. st, 6; 38 Edw. III. st, 11 ; 13 Eic. II, st, 11, c, 2 ;
13 Eic, II. st, 11, c. 3 ; 7 Hen. IV, c. 8 ; 3 Hen, V, c, 8,
f De qua re agitur cum de primatu Pontificis agitur ? brevissime
dicam — de summa rei Christianas. Id enim quaeritur, debeatne Ecclesia
diutius consistere, an vero dissolvi et concidere,' — Cardinal BeUarmine,
Prmf. in libros de smnmo Pontif., vol. i. p, 189, G, (ed, 1615).

10 INTEODUCTION. [Chap. I.
as they had recognized the appointment. Advantage
was taken of the circumstance to press for an admis
sion by the Convocations of Canterbury and York of
the king's supremacy; and ultimately their liability
was compromised by giving the required acknowledg
ment with a qualification, and by paying to the king
large sums of money. The qualification attached to the
acknowledgment was, that it was made only so far as it
agreed with the law of Christ.*
This seems to be the first occasion on which the
title, " Head of the Clrarch," was claimed by any king of
England, or that it was by any parliament, convocation,
or synod of the clergy, acknowledged to belong to him.
The title of "Vicar of God, who defends and rules the
Church," is, however, ascribed to the office of king in
the laws of the Confessor, j*
In the year next after the acknowledgment of the
title of Head of the Church had been made by the con
vocations, the king obtained from parliament the statute
" for the restraint of appeals." This remarkable enact
ment treats the king as " head of the realm, unto whom
a body politic divided by the names of spiritualty and
temporalty were bound to bear obedience." It then
recites that he was furnished with plenary and whole

* Cujus ii. e. ecclesiae et cleri Anglioani) singularem pretectorem,
unicum et supremum dominum, et, quantum per Christi legem licet,
etiam supremum caput ipsius maj estatem reoognoscimus (Wilkins, Concil.,
iii. 742),
f The passage ascribing this title is cited in Cawdrey's Case, reported
by Lord Coke (5 Eep.) It is more fully in Thorpe's Laws of Edwarrd the
Confessor (p. 193) : Eex autem, qui vicarius Summi Eegis est, ad hoc
constitutus est, ut regnum et populum Domini, et super omnia, sanctam
ecclesiam rQgat et defendat ab injuriosis.

Chap. I.] INTEODUCTION. H
power and jurisdiction, to render and yield justice and
final determination to all residents or subjects within his
realm, in all causes and contentions occurring within the
limits thereof, without restraint or provocation to any
foreign prince or potentate. And after these recitals it
provides that all causes testamentary, causes of matrimony
and divorce, rights of tithes, oblations and obventions
(the knowledge of which causes, it declares, by the
goodness of the princes of the realm and the laws and
customs of the same appertained to the spiritual jurisdic-
diction), shall from thenceforth be heard and adjudged
within the king's jurisdiction and authority, in such
courts spiritual and temporal as the nature and qualities
of the cases and matters in contention shall require.
Whoever should procure from Rome, or any other foreign
court out of the realm, any manner of process, citation,
appeal, or restraint, or execute the same, was to be liable
to the punishment and penalties inflicted by the statute
of premimire (so called from the first words of the writ
issued under it), which amounted to loss of the king's
protection, imprisonment, and forfeiture of goods.*
This Act " in restraint of appeals," was followed in
1533 by another, prohibiting the convocations from
legislating or acting without the king's leave. In
pursuance of a submission made by these bodies in the
previous year, it was now among other matters enacted
that the clergy should not in time coming promulgate
or execute any canons, constitutions, or ordinances, in
their convocations (which it is declared shall always
be summoned by authority of the king's writ), without
* 24 Henry VIII, ch, 12 (Eng,), a,d, 1532,

12 INTEODUCTION. [Chap. I.
the king's assent and licence. And preliminary to thus
enacting, it was declared that the clergy had acknow
ledged, according (it adds) to the truth, that the convo
cation of the clergy is, always hath been, and ought to
be, assembled only by the king's writ, and that they
submitting themselves to the king had promised, in verba
sacerdotii, that they would not presume to enact or ex
ecute any new canons, constitutions, or ordinances,
without the king's licence.*
About the time when this last statute was under con
sideration by parliament, the Convocation of Canterbury,
at the request of the king, discussed whether the Roman
Pontiff had any greater jurisdiction in the realm of Eng
land conferred upon him by God in Holy Scripture than
any other foreign bishop. On the 31st of March, 1532,
they returned the formal answer that he had not. And
on the 5th of May subsequently the Convocation of York
gave the same reply. These answers were given with
out any qualification, and were not obtained by the
pressure which accompanied the admission of the su
premacy, the liability in which the clergy then were
having been condoned, and being now not capable of
revival. After the statutes relating to appeals and to the con
vocations, it only remained, in order to complete the
assertion by the king of his supremacy, and place his
position beyond controversy, that an acknowledgment
of the title, which in 1531 he had claimed from the
convocations, should be also obtained from parliament.
In order to effect this, a bill containing the provisions
* 26 Henry YIII. ch. 19 (Eng,), a.b, 1633,

Chap. I.] INTEODUCTION. 13
requisite for the purpose was in 1534 brought forward,
and in the month of November of that year became law.*
The statutef then passed is entitled " the King's
Grace to be authorized Supreme Head." Its extreme
importance demands that its exact language should be
quoted. It commences by a recital in the following
termS': " Albeit the king's majesty justly and rightfully
is and ought to be the supreme head of the Church of
England, and so is recognized by the clergy in their
convocations, yet nevertheless for corroboration and con
firmation thereof, and for increase of virtue in Christ's
religion, and to repress and extirpate errors, heresies,
enormities, and abuses heretofore used in the same, ..."
After this preamble thus declaring the existing law, and
the motives for legislating in respect of it, the statute
proceeds to enact, "that the king our sovereign lord, his
heirs and successors, kings of this realm, shall be taken,
accepted, and reputed the only supreme head in earth
of the Church of England, called Anglicana ecclesia ; and
shall have and enjoy, annexed and united to the imperial
Crown of this realm, as well the style and title thereof
as all pre-eminences, jurisdictions, privileges, authori
ties, and immunities, to the said dignity belonging."
Also it provides that he and they may visit, order, re
form, correct, restrain, and amend all errors, enormities,
and abuses, which by any manner of spiritual jurisdic
tion ought or might lawfully be reformed, ordered, re
strained, corrected, or amended.
* This is the date adopted by Bishop Stubbs in his very learned Paper
printed in the Appendix to the Eeport of the Eoyal Commission to in
quire into the Ecclesiastical Courts (a.b. 1883).
t 26 Henry YIII. ch. 12 (Eng.), a.b. 1534.

14 INTEODUCTION.
In this manner, before the commencement of the year
1535, the supremacy of the Crown in the Church was re
cognized in England both by the convocations and by
parliament. The Sovereign was declared to possess a
visitatorial power ; the right to convene and dissolve the
convocations, and to control their proceedings ; he was
also admitted to be the source of ultimate appellate ju
risdiction from the ecclesiastical courts. It was at the
time alleged as a reproach to this legislation that it was
intended to go farther, and to confer something of a
spiritual character upon the king, as if he were to be
both Pope and King ; but this was expressly denied,
and does not seem well-founded.*
Down to this period (which it will hereafter appear
is that from which the narrative of Irish ecclesiastical
affairs, for the purpose of the present treatise, is in
tended to commence) no discussion or legislation in
reference to any proposed alterations in the received
system of theology, or connected with its teaching
upon doctrinal questions, had arisen either in the
convocations or in parliament ; neither had the king
made any declaration of his intentions respecting
them. Whatever progress the religious views of the
Continental Reformers attained before this time in
England was exclusively due to the zeal and exertions
of the first converts to them, and to independent in
vestigation on the part of the people.
* This subject is considered in Note L of the Appendix, in connexion
with the Supremacy Act of Queen Elizabeth, which for the words of
Henry's Act (" Supreme Head in earth of the Church of England ") sub
stituted in the oath of supremacy the words, " supreme governor of this
realm and of all other her highness's dominions and countries, as well in
all spiritual or ecclesiastical things or causes as temporal."

CHAPTER II.
[1635-1547.]
IN the historical records of the sixteenth century, so
far as they have been preserved, nothing appears to
indicate that the religious movement, which preceded
the ecclesiastical legislation then enacted in England,
extended itself to Ireland, or that any of a similar
character originated at that period with its people.
Nevertheless, from the time when the policy of separat
ing the Church from the See of Rome was entered upon
in England by Henry VIII. and his ministers, there
could have been little doubt that they would seek also
to introduce it in Ireland. According to the ideas then
accepted, the latter country was dependent upon, and
subordinate to, the former ; bound to receive thence the
principles of its laws. This was more especially the
case in respect of questions relating to the prerogative,
the King of England, although in Ireland having only
the title of " lord " {^dominus Hihernice)^ being supposed
to possess in the two kingdoms the same pre-eminence.
If he were declared supreme in the national Church of
the superior country, such, the statesmen of that age
held, he was and ought to bq declared in the Church of
the other also.

16 THE CHUECH [Chap. IL
No proceeding, however, in furtherance of these
views* was taken in Ireland before the commencement
of the year 1535, nor if there had, could it have been
expected to lead to any satisfactory result, the country
being disturbed, and the attention of the local govern
ment engaged by its condition. Indeed even then the
insurrection of Lord Thomas Fitzgerald still continued ;
but as advantages had been gained over his forces, its
speedy suppression and the restoration of the English
government to its former authority were to be antici
pated. Under these circumstances the period seemed
to be, and probably was, as favourable to interference
with Irish ecclesiastical affairs as any likely to occur.
Accordingly, early in this year Henry determined
to assert in Ireland the same rights and jurisdiction in
connexion with the Church as he had succeeded in hav
ing acknowledged in England. In order to this it be
came indispensable (none of the Irish bishops or clergy
manifesting any tendency in favour of the Reformation)
to send over some English ecclesiastic of eminence who
would in that kingdom act the part which Cranmer had
performed for the king in England, and by his ad
vocacy support the measures which it might be thought
expedient to adopt. The person selected, owing, it is
said, to the advice of Cromwell, whose influence was
then in the ascendant, was George Browne, a monk
of the Augustinian Order, and its Provincial in Eng
land. He had become noted in London for preaching,
* The views of the period as to the relations of the two kingdoms,
and the consequences in reference to the ecclesiastical affairs of Ireland
following from them, are indicated in the preambles of the Irish statutes
of Supremacy and of Appeals, which wiU be subsequently stated.

1535-1547] IN THE EEIGN OP HENEY VIII. 17
which in many respects was adverse to the doctrines
taught at Rome, and was supposed to sympathize with
the opinions of the German Reformers. A vacancy in
the See of Dublin, which had for some time been un
filled, gave the opportunity to confer upon him a position
of eminence in the Irish Church ; and the concurrence
of the Dean and Chapter of St. Patrick's Cathedral,
Dublin, and of the Prior and Canons of the Church of
the Holy Trinity (afterwards known as the Cathedral of
Christ-Church), Dublin, having been obtained in his ap
pointment to fill the vacant office, he was, at London,
on the 19th of March, 1535,* pursuant to a mandate from
the king, consecrated Archbishop of Dublin, by Arch
bishop Cranmer, assisted by two suffragan bishops.
This appointment was followed by the issue of a
Commission directed to Browne, along with other per
sons of eminence, by which they were directed to confer
with " the nobility and gentry" in Ireland, and endea
vour to procure their support for the king's ecclesiastical
policy, and in particular to induce them to admit his
supremacy. In conjunction with his colleagues, the arch
bishop during some months persevered in exertions for
this purpose, not unaccompanied by danger to himself
personally, but without attaining any success. From
the clergy generally he met opposition. In this they
were led by Cromer, Archbishop of Armagh, a prelate
highly esteemed, and possessing much influence. What
ever (they argued) might be elsewhere alleged against
* The dates always assume the year to begin on the 1st of January.
If it were reckoned, according to the EngUsh practice of the time, to
begin 26th March, the year of Browne's consecration should be expressed
1534-5.

18 THE CHUECH [Chap. II.
the authority of the Roman See, it was not in Ireland
that it should be denied by a king of England, for to
this source he owed his own title to rule the island.
" The Pope's predecessors," said Cromer, " gave it to
the king's ancestors."
In the autumn of 1535 (the Commissioners having
come to recognize that it was useless for them to proceed
further), Browne addressed a letter to Cromwell, in
which, after explaining the failure of their proceedings
and the causes of it, especially adducing as such the
ignorance of the clergy, the predilection of the people
for the religion to which they were accustomed, the
small value set on the king's Commission, he recom
mended that a parliament should be called to enact the
supremacy.* At this time, notwithstanding that nearly four cen
turies of English rule had elapsed, the Irish people were
separated into two great divisions, forming, in effect,
distinct nations, differing in language, sentiments, and
interests. One was composed of descendants of the Eng
lish, who had from time to time settled in the country,
principally in Dublin and a district round it, termed
the Pale, composed of portions of the four counties,
Dublin, Kildare, Meath, and Louth. The other con
sisted of the native population, who occupied the pro
vinces of Ulster and Connaught, almost all of Munster,
and the greater part of Leinster. Parliament represented
only the English race, and legislated with a view solely
* This letter is printed in full in Note B of the Appendix. The
principal authorities for the transactions of the period are this letter,
and a Life of Browne, compiled by Sir James Ware's son, and published
by him along with the English version of the Annals of his father.

1535-1547] IN THE EEIGN OF HENEY VIII. 19
to their interests. It was composed of two Houses — a
House of Lords and a House of Commons. The former
consisted of laymen, who had received or inherited peer
ages conferred by the English Crowii, of the bishops,
and of the superiors of twenty-four Religious Houses.
As yet no Irish had been made lay Peers. The House
of Commons was returned from counties, then not more
than twelve in number,* and from cities and boroughs
situate in those counties. The number of members did
not, it is said, reach one hundred. None came from
any place exclusively inhabited by the Irish; and a
native, if elected, was not allowed to sit.f
In England, with every parliament assemblies of the
clergy for the provinces of Canterbury and York, known
as the Convocations, and consisting of the bishops, cer
tain dignitaries, and representatives of the clergy, called
Proctors, who were returned from the different dioceses,
were summoned. The bishops and clergy sat together
in one house in the Convocation of York, and in separate
houses in that of Canterbury. These assemblies were the
authorities empowered to tax the clergy for the needs of
the State. In Ireland no assembly of the character of
the English convocations was, down to this time, sum
moned with parliament,^ or had assumed, like them, the
* These counties were the same as Eing John formed, a, n, 1210,
viz. Waterford, Dublin, Kildare, Meath, Uriel or Louth, Catherlough or
Caxlow, Kilkenny, Wexford, Cork, Limerick, Kerry, Tipperary, In
1543 Meath was divided into two shires, Meath and Westmeath, See,
as to the formation of the other counties, Note C of Appendix.
f The constitution of the Irish Parliament is further considered in
Note D of the Appendix.
J As will subsequently appear, an Irish convocation was convened
by the Crown, first in the reign of James the First, and last in the
reign of Queen Anne. A summary history of Irish convocations will be
C 2

20 THE CHUECH [Chap. II.
right to levy a subsidy. Usually, however, with the
bishops attending an Irish parliament there came proc
tors representing the clergy of their dioceses, who were
entitled to sit in the House of Commons along with the
lay members, but whether as a constituent part thereof,
and with the right to vote, or as assessors and advisers,
and if so, whether with a veto, does not seem to have
been as yet definitively settled.
After Browne's advice had been given to convene
parliament, there appears to have been some delay, for
its first subsequent meeting was not until the month of
May in the next year (a.d. 1536). It was then found
that the proctors claimed to vote, and that if their claim
was admitted, they were likely to obstruct the king's
measures. An Act was therefore passed which, profess
ing to be in accordance with the opinions of the judges
and other learned men, declared that the proctors were
only counsellors and assistants, and not members of the
House of Commons.
When the proctors were thus excluded from voting,
the House of Commons was, for legislative purposes,
wholly lay ; also it was entirely English. Accordingly,
its members appear not to have made any objection* or
difficulty as regards the question of the supremacy. It
was otherwise in the House of Peers, where the Spiritual
found in a Paper on the subject read by Dr. Eeeves, now Dean of Ar
magh in the disestablished Church of Ireland, at a meeting of the Church
Congress in Dublin, a.d, 1868. It is much to be desired that Dr.
Eeeves' 8 contributions to Irish ecclesiastical history, made on this and
similar occasions, were published in a collected form.
* Justice Brabazon writes to Cromwell that " the Commons' House is
marvellous good for the king's causes, and aU the learned men within the
same be very good." 17th May, 1636. — State Papers, ii. p. 316.

1535-1547] IN THE EEIGN OP HENEY VIII. 21
Lords were numerous.* A summary of the arguments
used by Archbishop Browne in that assembly, when
answering his brethren, has been preserved. They rest,
first upon the king's authority in the State — " He that
will not (he says) pass this Act, as I do, is no true
subject to his Highness"; and next upon precedents of
similar concessions by Rome itself — " Rome and her
bishops in the Fathers' days acknowledged emperors,
kings, and princes, to be supreme over their dominions,
nay, Christ's own vicars."|
Ultimately an Irish Supremacy Act, J modelled upon
the English, and of exactly the same effect, was obtained
from this parliament. It declares that the King our
Sovereign Lord, his heirs and successors. Kings of the
realm of England, and Lords of this land of Ireland,
shall be accepted, taken, and reputed the only supreme
head in earth of the whole Church of Ireland, called
Hihernica ecclesia, and shall have and enjoy, annexed and
* The number does not appear, but Lord Gray and Justice Brabazon
say of the Spiritual Lords "they sought an occasion to deny all things
that should be presented to the Upper House, where they were the most
in number," — State Papers, Hen, YIII., ii, p. 438,
f The report of Browne's speech, which has been preserved, is given
in Note E of the Appendix.
X 28 Hen, YIII, oh, 5 (Ireland), a.b, 1537, The Acts of this parUa
ment are not numbered in the order in which they were passed. The
Supremacy Act is ch, 5 ; the Act as to the proctors, which preceded it,
is ch. 12. The parliament commenced to sit in May, 1536, at DubUn ;
was adjourned to Kilkenny, 25th July following ; afterwards it was
adjourned and prorogued, meeting at various places successively ; and
finally, on 13th October, 1537, meeting at DubUn, it was there terminated
and concluded 20th December, 1637. The date assigned for the Acts in
the editions of the Statutes is 1537, being the year which corresponded
with the end of the parliament when the roll of its transactions was
completed, — See statement prefixed to the Acts of 28 Hen. YIII., in the
edition of the Statutes, 1765.

22 THE CHUECH [Chap, II.
united to the Crown of England, as well the style and
title thereof, as all jurisdictions, &c., to the same dig
nity belonging.
The preamble which prefaces the enacting part de
serves attention. It differs entirely from the English ;
and a comparison of the recitals contained in the two
statutes will illustrate how distinct the principles were
upon which the legislation of each country proceeded.
The English founds itself upon what is assumed to be
the previous law of the kingdom (that the king was and
ought to be head of the Church), and upon the acknow
ledgment of this by the clergy in their convocations :
the Irish makes no allusion either to Irish law or the
Irish clergy, but states that the king was head of the
Church of England, had been so recognized by the
English clergy and parliament, and that Ireland was
depending and belonging to the Imperial Crown of
England ; thus clearly announcing the Act to be a
corollary and consequence of the English.*
The Irish Supremacy Act was, like the English,
accompanied by a statute t prohibiting appeals being
taken to Rome, and substituting a tribunal of delegates,
to be appointed under the Great Seal of Ireland, to hear
* The preambles of the Irish Supremacy Act and of the Statute of
Appeals are in the following words. Of the first — " Like as the king's
majesty justly and rightfully is and ought to be supreme head of the
Church of England, and so is recognized by the clergie, and authorized
by an Act of Parliament made and established in the said realm : so in
like manner of vnse, forasmuch as this land of Ireland is depending and
belonging justly and rightfully to the imperial Crown of England," Of
the second — " Forasmuch as this land of Ireland is the king's proper
dominion of England, and united, knit, and belonging to the imperial
Crown of the same realm."
t 28 Hen. YIII, ch, 6 (Ir,), A,n. 1637.

1535-1547] IN THE EEIGN OP HENEY VIII. 23
them. It recites that the land of Ireland is united, knit,
and belonging to the Crown of England, which Crown
(it declares) is endowed with power and pre-eminence
sufficient to yield full and plenary remedies in all causes.
Another Act of this time declares that the king's majesty,
the lords spiritual and temporal, and the commons, were
forced of necessity, for the public weal, to exclude any
foreign pretended power or jurisdiction within the land ;
and enacts that any person, by writing, act, or deed, ob
stinately and maliciously maintaining the authority of
the Bishop of Rome or of his See, shall incur the pen
alties of the English statute of premunire (16 Ric. II.) ;
and that an oath acknowledging the king's supremacy
shall be taken according to the form, and upon the occa
sions, therein prescribed, an obstinate refusal by anyone
bound to take it to amount to treason.*
That this legislation had, or was expected to have,
any practical effect outside the districts inhabited by the
English colonists is not probable. In the Irish country,
that is, in much the greater part of the island, English
law was not acknowledged ; the king's writ did not, as
it was expressed, run ; the natives adhered to their own
ancient customs and usages. They were nominally
subjects of the Crown of England, but were in fact
governed either by chieftains of their own race, or by
Anglo-Norman lords, to whose ancestors estates acquired
by forfeiture or conquest had from time to time been
granted, and who in manners and sentiments were as
Irish as the Irish themselves. Too powerful to be con
trolled by a weak central executive government, these
chieftains and nobles, the real rulers of the country,
* 28 Hen, YIII. oh, 13 (Ir.), a.d, 1537,

24 THE CHUECH [Chap. II.
assumed the position of independent princes, making
peace and war between themselves, as their interests or
enmities prompted, without reference to the Crown.*
Even in the Pale at this period the English interest
was weak. It had declined during the civil wars of the
houses of York and Lancaster, when the resources of the
mother country were engaged at home, and assistance
could not be spared elsewhere. From the depression
then caused it had not as yet recovered. During its
continuance the Irish of the tribes which surrounded the
Pale crossed with impunity its borders, and gained pos
session of much land near them : while the colonists
Inadequately protected, and subject to spoliation and
violence, became dispirited, and either left the country
or took refuge in the immediate neighbourhood of Dub
lin. At this time the English language, habits, and
manners, seem to have reached only a limited distance
from the seat of Government.!
With such difficulties surrounding the introduction of
a new policy, it became of importance to remove what
ever tended to diminish the royal authority, or hinder
the admission of its pre-eminence by all the king's sub
jects. These consequences were attributed to the title
of "Lord," borne by the kings of England in Ireland.
* In a remarkable State Paper written in, or not long before, 1515,
the names of the Irish chieftains possessing "regions, some as big as half
a shire, some a little less," described as " chief captains who live by the
sword," and of the Anglo-Irish, described as "captains of the EngUsh
noble folk, who follow the same Irish order," are given. The former are
twice as numerous as the latter. See Note F of Appendix,
f In 1636 an important representation of the state of the Pale was
made by official persons through Allen, Master of the Eolls, to the king.
See Note G of Appendix.

1535-1547] IN THE EEIGN OP HENEY VIII. 25
It was considered to denote inferiority, and its origin
was referred to the circumstance of a grant of the island
from Pope Adrian IV. to Henry IL* If that monarch
and his successors had other right, if their title was ori
ginal, and not derived from another power, why (it was
argued) were they not kings ? To take away the grounds
on which this reasoning rested, and confer upon the
Crown such additional influence as it was thought would
accompany the appellation of higher dignity, parliament
was summoned ; and that its decisions might possess
more than ordinary weight and importance, Irish chief
tains were induced to attend it. An Act was passed
which, after reciting that under the name of lords the
kings of England had all the jurisdiction of a king, but
that for lack of the name of kings. Irishmen and in
habitants within the realm of Ireland had not been so
obedient to his highness and his progenitors as they,
according to their allegiance, ought to have been, pro
vided that the king, his heirs and successors, kings of
England, should be always kings of Ireland.!
This measure was followed by exertions to conciliate
the most important of the Irish and Anglo-Irish chief
tains, who had hitherto stood apart from the king's
government in Ireland. Peerages were conferred upon
* The prevalence of this supposition among the native Irish was
expressly asserted by AUen, Master of the EoUs, when he recommended
to the king's Commissioners a change in the king's title: "Irishmen,
of long continuance, have supposed the regal estate of this land to con
sist in the bishop of Eome, and the lordship of the kings of England
here to be but a governance under the obedience of the same, which
causeth them to have more respect of due subjection unto the said bishop
than to our sovereign lord," — State Papers, ii, p. 480. Bishop Staples, in
1638, advised to the same effect : State Papers, iii. 30.
t 33 Hen. YIII. ch. 1 (Irish), a, n. 1642.

26 THE CHUECH [Chap. II.
several of the former ; and Desmond, the most powerful
of the latter, was placed upon the Council. Partly
owing to this policy, and partly to success in some en
counters with the natives of a previous date, the influ
ence of the Crown steadily gained ground during the
remainder of Henry's reign ; the disaffected submitted ;
and at the time of his death, about six years later, there
appeared a general acquiescence in his authority.
These circumstances, if taken advantage of, might
have in some degree facilitated missionary exertion in
favour of Protestant tenets among the Irish. In Eng
land the Bible was translated and placed in the churches
for the congregations to read ; and the theology of the
Reformers was taught by preaching and by writings ex
tensively circulated. In Ireland neither of these means
of instructing the people were at this time adopted ; the
Bible was not translated into the Irish tongue, nor were
Irish-speaking teachers of the new religious system sent
among the natives. Acknowledgments of the supremacy
were, in important instances, obtained from persons of
eminence, both lay and clerical, in the Irish districts,*
but such acknowledgments were consistent with their
not conforming on other points, and were not followed
by any efforts on their part to gain over converts even
upon the question of the supremacy.
It must therefore be pronounced that the Reforma
tion was at this time presented only to the English
* As many as two archbishops and eight bishops took the oath of su
premacy at Clonmel before Archbishop Browne, the Lord Chancellor, and
other dignitaries, when the latter were upon a progress through the
country (^State Papers, Hen, YIII,, vol. iii, p. 117). The agreements of sub
mission between Henry and the Irish chieftains contain admissions that
the king was head of the Church of Ireland (Leland, vol, ii, p. 168).

1535-1547] IN THE EEIGN OP HENEY VIII. 27
portion of the people. To them it came not merely
from the Government, but from the teaching of those
members of the clerical order who followed Archbishop
Browne, and gave their support to the opinions approved
in England. No difficulty caused by difference of lan
guage, or want of respect for the source whence these
opinions came to them, distracted the attention of the
colonists from the topics submitted for their considera
tion. They had never ceased to sympathize with the
mother country, to reverence its authority, and follow
its lead in politics and manners.
Much the greater proportion of those who were of
English descent dwelt in Dublin and the part of the
Pale which surrounded it. The Pale was situate in
four dioceses, Dublin, Meath, Kildare, and Armagh.
The bishop of the first-named diocese was Archbishop
Browne ; of the second. Staples, who adopted the opi
nions of the Reformers as decidedly, and advocated
them as strenuously, as Browne. In 1540, a vacancy
enabled the king to nominate to Kildare an Irish ec
clesiastic, Miagh, who immediately acted with Browne
and Staples. The part of the Pale within Armagh
diocese was small. Thus episcopal influence among
the English was substantially on the side of the new
ecclesiastical policy.
It requires to be kept in mind, when examining the
events of this reign, that neither in England nor Ireland
had doctrinal teaching assumed the form it took under
Edward VI. and Elizabeth. In Ireland no Act of Par
liament or proclamation of the Government gave an
authoritative exposition upon the subject. In England
a statute was passed, and publications were sanctioned

28 THE CHUECH [Chap. II.
by the king, which expressly deal with questions of
theology, and which show that much of the old tenets
were to be still retained. Thus "the Act of the Six
Articles" (a. d. 1539) affirmed transubstantiation, the
celibacy of the clergy, private masses (^. e, for the dead),
and auricular confession; and the book called "the
Erudition of a Christian man " adhered to the Roman
Catholic view of the sacraments as to number and na
ture. The subjects respecting which in both countries
distinctly Protestant opinions were pronounced, were
"the remission of sins," and the graven images and
relics in the churches. The first, it was declared,
could not be given by the Pope, or any other eccle
siastical authority ; the images and relics were to be
completely removed.
A document of importance, indicating, so far as it
extends, the ideas approved in Ireland at this time by
the reforming party, has been preserved,* and may pro
perly be now referred to in connexion with the subject
of doctrinal teaching. It consists of directions issued by
Archbishop Browne to his clergy to be read in the parish
churches, as a guide for the prayers of the congregations.
It is entitled "the Form of the Beads."t It commences
by directing them "to pray for the universal Catholic
Church, both quick and dead, and especially for the Church
of England and Ireland, and first for the king, supreme
head on earth immediate under God of the said Church."
It then declares that the jurisdiction usurped by the
* State Papers, vol. ii, p. 664, Hen, YIII, pt. iii,, a,b. 1638.
f The " Form of Beads " is printed in full in the State Papers. The
word " beads" was at first used to signify prayers, afterwards what they
were counted by.

1535-1547] IN THE EEIGN OP HENEY VIII. 2&
Bishop of Rome is now, by the authority of parliament,
and by the consent and agreement of the bishops, pre
lates, and both universities of Oxford and Cambridge,
and of the clergy both of England and Ireland, extinct,
and ceased for ever ; and directs this to be published to
their children and servants. This, the clergyman is to
say he himself knows to be true, and that it is certified
to him by his ordinary, the Archbishop of Dublin, under
his seal. It then exhorts to have no confidence in the
Pope, or his letters of pardons (since " no man can for
give sins but God only "), and to put all their confidence
and trust in our Saviour, Jesus Christ, " which is gentle
and loving, and requireth nothing of us, when we have
offended him, but that we should repent and forsake our
sins, and believe steadfastly that he is Christ the Son of
the living God, and that he died for our sins, and so-
forth, as it is contained in the Credo ; and that through
Him, and by Him, and by none other, we shall have
remission of our sins, a poena et culpa." Prayers for the
royal family and persons in authority, as specified, are
then enjoined; as they are also " for the souls departed
out of this world in the faith of our Saviour Christ,
which sleep in rest and peace, that they may rise again
and reign with him in eternal life." Lastly, it directs
that " for these and for grace every man say a Pater
noster and an Ave."
Beside the legislation which has been narrated, mea
sures affecting the property of the Church also came into
operation during this reign. Thus, the First Fruits and
Twentieths were added to the revenues of the Crown.
The former was a tax of one year's emoluments of a
bishopric or benefice levied from the incumbent on his

30 THE CHUECH IN THE EEIGN OF HENEY VIII.
appointment, and heretofore paid to the Pope ; the latter
was a proportion of his annual income, thenceforth made
payable to the king. The Religious Houses, except such
as were situate in the remote Irish districts of the north,
were dissolved, and their property confiscated. The
entire of their possessions were either retained for the
benefit of the Crown or granted to laymen; nothing
was restored to the Church.
There was not in this reign any legislation relating
to convocations or national synods : none respecting the
former, because they had never been convened in Ire
land ; none respecting the latter, because they had long
fallen into disuse, very probably in consequence of the
clergy being, like the laity, divided asunder according
to the races from which they were respectively de
scended, and therefore declining to meet together.
Legislation was, of course, not needed in respect of
provincial or diocesan synods, which were summoned
by archbishops and bishops, and which met from time
to time; but, it is said, were attended only by the
English, and held, as it was expressed, inter Anglicos,*
At the period of the Supremacy Act no prelate then
in office was removed, neither were the incumbents of
the benefices disturbed. Between that date and Henry's
death some vacancies occurred in the bishoprics. One
of these was in the See of Armagh : to this and to others
the king appointed directly ; in some instances he con
firmed appointments made by the Pope.t

* Leland, vol, ii, p. 159.
t The particulars of these appointments will be found in Mant's His
tory, voL i. pp. 167-172.

CHAPTER III.
[1547-1558,]
WHEN, upon the death of Henry VIII. (January 28,
1547), his son Edward succeeded to the throne,
he was a child nine years old. From the guardians
appointed by his father's will, the Earl of Hertford,
brother of Jane Seymour, the king's mother, was se
lected to act as Protector. This nobleman, long sus
pected of holding the opinions of the Reformers, now
manifested his decided adherence to Protestantism ; and
finding in the young king a mind singularly precocious,
and naturally inclined to religious inquiries, he placed
around him persons likely to communicate the sentiments
he himself approved. Under these influences, as well as
from his own reflections, Edward, as he advanced in
years, became more and more favourable to the Re
formers ; gave them, especially Cranmer, his confidence,
and encouraged every measure calculated to promote
their views. Accordingly, during his reign, various
statutes recommended by them, and having relation to
the Church and ecclesiastical affairs, were passed. These
were not re-enacted in Ireland, no parliament being there
summoned from the death of Henry until the third year
of Queen Mary ; but some of them, now to be noticed,
were, notwithstanding, put in force in the Irish Church.

32 THE CHUECH [Chap. III.
The most important of Edward's measures was the
English Prayer Book. Until this was completed, the
existing Latin services continued to be used. They
varied in different dioceses, the principal varieties being
the uses of Sarum, York, Bangor, and Lincoln : among
which that of Sarum, prevailing in the province of
Canterbury, was the most generally adopted.*
What were the liturgies of the Irish Church at this
time is not stated by historians. At the Synod of Cashel
(1172), held by order of Henry IL, it was directed that
" all divine matters shall for the future, in all parts of
Ireland, be regulated after the model of Holy Church,
according to the observance of the Anglican Church."t
Whether this was ever completely carried into practice
is very doubtful : the English and Irish portions of the
clergy lived for the most part separate from each other ;
and it is not improbable that usages varied in different
parts of the country. It may, however, be with confi
dence assumed, that in Dublin and its neighbourhood
the example of the English Church would have decisive
influence : and as the intercourse from these places with
England was with the dioceses where the use of Sarum

* It appears from Lyndwood, a canonist of authority, that in the
province of Canterbury the use of Sarum was foUowed. The following
reason was assigned for it : Episcopus namque Sarum in collegio episco-
porum est precentor, et temporibus quibus arohiepiscopus Cantuariensis
solenniter celebrat divina, prsesente collegio episcoporum, chorum in divinis
officiis regere debet, de observantia et consuetudine antiqua (Prov, de fer,
ii. 4), The composition of the use is attributed to Osmund, Bishop of
Salisbury, 1078.
I Omnia divina ad instar sacrosanctae ecclesiae, juxta quod Anglicana
observat ecclesia, in omnibus partibus Hibernise amodo tractentur. Cited
by Ussher (iv. 275) from Giraldus Cambrensis.

1547-1558] IN THE EEIGN OP EDWAED VI. 33
prevailed, that the services were according to the Sarum

use.*

The preparation of an English Prayer Book was en
trusted to Commissioners over whom Cranmer presided.
The draft prepared by them was approved by the Con
vocations of York and Canterbury, f and then was finally
enacted in a statute which required it to be read at
common and open prayer, in every cathedral or parish
church, or other place within the realm of England,
Wales, Calais, or other the king's dominions.
The words just cited, it will be observed, refer not
only to England and Calais, but to " other the king's
dominions," and are therefore wide enough to include
Ireland. Similar language had been used in the English
Acts of Appeals, of First Fruits, and of Faculties, in the
reign of Henry VIII. ; but in none of these instances
was English legislation considered sufficient ; statutes to
the same effect as the two first Acts had been passed,
and the third Act had been extended to Ireland, by the
Irish Parliament.
Whether it was supposed by the English Govern
ment that the words of the enactment relating to the
new Prayer Book obliged its use in the Irish Church
does not appear. At a later period the legal authorities,
who upheld the power of the English Parliament to
make laws binding in Ireland, J conceded that general
* Henry de Loundres, Archbishop of Dublin under John, came from
Sarum diocese, a,d, 1212. See Note H of Appendix.
f Procter on the Booh of Common Prayer, p. 22.
X Acts of Parliament including Ireland by express words were before
this period, and one was at this period, passed by the English Parliament.
Its claim of authority to legislate for Ireland was not abandoned until
1782. That it was ever admitted by the Irish people was at that time
D

34 THE CHUECH [Chap. IIL
words did not suffice for the purpose: that Ireland
should be expressly named. But this may not have
been thought at this time. Accordingly Edward and
his ministers relying, it is probable, upon the English
Act, but possibly also considering that the royal supre
macy in the Church gave jurisdiction to direct forms
of worship, proceeded as if the sanction of the Irish
Parliament could be dispensed with, and that it was
enough to issue an order from the Crown.
Upon the Gth February, 1551, a letter was addressed
to Sir Anthony St. Leger, who was then the Deputy,
by the king, in which, after reciting that his father had
translations of the Bible placed in the parish churches,
and that he himself had caused the liturgy and prayers
to be also " translated* for the general benefit of his sub
jects' understandings, wherever assembled in the parish
churches, either to pray or to hear prayers read, and
in order that they might the better join therein in
unity, hearts and voice," he directed notice to be given
to the bishops and clergy "to perfect, execute, and obey
his royal will and pleasure accordingly."
denied ; but whether the claim was or was not legaUy just, it is ob
vious that its existence tended to dispose the Irish Parliament to accept
the measures proposed by the English Govemment ; since, if the claim
were well-founded, opposition was useless, as there remained the ultimate
resource of the English Parliament ; and if iU-f ounded, yet being advanced
by the stronger power, who might proceed to maintain it by force, prudence
would suggest to obviate controversy by voting for what was desired.
* It has been suggested that the word " translated " was used in con
sequence of the amount of the old Sarum services which (as wUl subse
quently be seen) were actually translated and retained ; but it is more
probable that it merely means, have been expressed in English : transla
tion referring to the language, not the contents. The full words are,
" translated into our mother tongue of the realm of England according to
the assembly of divines lately met within the same."

1547-1558] IN THE EEIGN OP EDWAED VI. 85
Soon after he had received this communication, St.
Leger summoned an assembly of bishops and clergy, in
order to submit it for their consideration, and to induce
them to act in conformity with its directions. Henry
does not seem to have consulted any synod or merely
ecclesiastical assembly in respect of his measures, or to
have communicated them to any such, after they had
been enacted by parliament. The present is the first
recorded occasion subsequent to the Supremacy Act on
which reference was made by the Crown or by any
Deputy to a body composed exclusively of persons of
the clerical order, in connexion with a measure or
proceeding of an ecclesiastical character.*
On the Ist March, 1551, the assembly summoned by
the Lord Deputy met. The See of Armagh, to which
at this time was attached the Primacy in the Church,
was filled by DowdaU, who had been appointed by
Henry VIII. upon the death of Cromer. He had pre
viously been Prior of a monastery, which he surren
dered, and had also been Cromer's official. Pope
Paul IIL, not recognizing the king's right to nominate,
conferred the office upon another ecclesiastic, Waucop,
who, relying upon this title, attended the Council of
Trent, and subscribed himself Armachanus. DowdaU,
however, being consecrated in Ireland by Staples, Bishop
of Meath, and other bishops, gained and kept posses
sion of the See, and was acknowledged by the suffra
gan bishops and by the clergy of the province to be
the archbishop. When the king's directions had been
* Both Sir Eichard Cox and the Life of Browne, by Ware, state
that the persons summoned were the archbishops, bishops, together with
other of the then clergy.
"•^-^ -,.,_^^ D 2

36 THE CHUECH [Chap. III.
brought before the assembly by the Deputy, the Pri
mate, who, notwithstanding the events connected with
his appointment, adhered to Rome, at once opposed the
adoption of the Prayer Book, particularly objecting that
the most ignorant could then say mass. A discussion
ensued between him and St. Leger; and ultimately
DowdaU, with all his suffragan bishops, except Staples,
Bishop of Meath, retired from the meeting. Upon this
occurring, the Deputy, it is reported, turned to Arch
bishop Browne, who in the absence of the Archbishop of
Armagh, was the highest in rank, and handed him the
king's order. Browne then addressed those who re
mained, and urged upon them the duty of obedience
to the king, very much in the same manner as he had
formerly expressed himself in the House of Lords during
the debate upon the supremacy in the late king's time.
With those who continued present he appears to have
been successful, and to have obtained from them acqui
escence in his propositions.*
After this meeting a proclamation was issued to
carry the king's directions into effect, and a service in
English was first publicly performed in Christ Church
Cathedral, Dublin, on Easter Day, 1551, in the presence
of the Deputy, Archbishop Browne, and the Mayor and
Bailiffs of the city. Subsequently English services came
into use in many churches of the Pale.
The Prayer Book, which was at this time introduced
into the churches of England and Ireland, differs from that
* The Life of Browne says that "after this" (but whether after
Browne's speech or after the meeting is not clear) " several of the meeker
or most moderate of the bishops and clergy cohered with Browne." See
the full narrative extracted from the Life, in Note I of Appendix,

1547-1558] IN THE EEIGN OP EDWAED VI. 37
now in use in the English Church in various particulars,
of which the following are the most important. In the
former the Morning and Evening Prayer began with
the Lord's Prayer ; the Exhortation, the General Con
fession, and the Absolution, which now precede it, being
all subsequent additions. In the Litany there was a
suffrage praying deliverance from the Bishop of Rome,
and the clergy were described as bishops, pastors, and
ministers, and not as bishops, priests, and deacons.
In the Communion Service (which was entitled, "The
Supper of the Lord and the Holy Communion, com
monly called the Masse "), the men and women were se
parate ; the sign of the cross was used in consecrating
the elements ; water was mixed with the wine ; the
Ten Commandments were not read ; and to the present
prayers, when consecrating the elements, were added
the words, " with thy Holy Spirit and word vouchsafe to
bless and sanctify these thy gifts, and creatures of bread
and wine, that they may be unto us the body and blood
of thy most dearly beloved Son Jesus Christ." The sign
of the cross was made when repeating the words " bless
and sanctify these thy gifts, and creatures," &c. When
delivering the elements only the first of the two clauses
now said by the officiating minister was to be used.
In the Baptismal Service there was a form of abjura
tion directing the unclean spirit to come out of the
child and depart ; and two ancient ceremonies were re
tained — investing the child with a white garment called
the chrisom, and anointing. In the Burial Service there
was a prayer that the sins of the deceased should not be
imputed to him, and a collect, epistle, and gospel were
appointed for a communion at that time. In the prayer

38 THE CHUECH [Chap. III.
for the estate of Christ's Church there was contained
a thanksgiving for the grace and virtue declared in the
saints, and chiefly in the Virgin Mary, who was de
scribed as "glorious and most blessed"; and also a
commendation to the mercy of God of those who had
departed " with the sign of faith, and now do rest in
the sleep of peace." In the Visitation of the Sick, the
sick person, if he desired it, was to be anointed, and
there was a prayer referring to the ceremony.
The instruction to the Commissioners who prepared
the Prayer Book was, according to the statement in the
recitals of the English statute enacting it, " to have as
well eye and respect to the most sincere and pure
Christian religion taught by the Scripture, as to the
usages in the primitive Church." In preparing the
forms much use was made of the existing services, par
ticularly those of Sarum ; but of what was thus derived
a large proportion can be traced to a still remoter
antiquity. The collects for Morning and Evening
Prayer, and more than half those then appointed and
still retained for Sundays and Holidays, are contained
in collections upwards of twelve hundred years old.*
The prayers adopted from the ancient liturgies
have at all times been regarded as presenting ad
mirable models for public worship. A severe sim-
* The collects for Moming and Evening Prayer, and fifty -four of the
coUects read with the epistles and gospels, were taken from the Sarum
Missal. These can be traced, some to the Sacramentary of Leo (Pope
440-461), some to that of Gelasius (Pope 492-496), and the rest to that
of Gregory the Great (Pope 590-604). The Missal now in use in the
Eoman Catholic Church is formed from a revision of the former services,
made after the CouncU of Trent, under the authority of Pope Pius Y.,
and from additions of Popes Clement YIII. and Urban YIII.

1547-1558] IN THE EEIGN OP EDWAED VI. 39
plicity of thought and expression characterizes the
originals, and the translations were made at a period
when the English language exhibited a strength and
majesty not since surpassed. To the influence of their
example it must be attributed that the portions of the
present services which were added to, or substituted for,
omissions from the old, have attained an elevation of
sentiment and diction not unworthy to be placed beside
what was preserved, so that nowhere is there perceptible
inequality or want of harmony.
St. Leger, being recalled, was succeeded as Deputy
by Sir James Crofts, who being desirous to induce ac
quiescence in the views of the English Government,
invited DowdaU to a conference. This afterwards took
place at St. Mary's Abbey, and after much debate was
terminated by the latter saying, "It was all in vain
when two parties so contrary met ; and that the Lord
Deputy's pains were only lost." The bishops of Meath
(Staples) and Kildare (Lancaster) attended Crofts at
this interview. The discussion was carried on between
DowdaU and Staples. The former urged the antiquity
of the Mass ; the latter that the Prayer Book was but
the Mass reformed.
In consequence of the course taken by Archbishop
DowdaU, an Act of the King and Council of England
deprived Armagh of the Primacy, and transferred it to
the See of Dublin. Subsequently, DowdaU left the
country, whether voluntarily, in resentment of this treat
ment, or being banished, is not certain ; but whichever
was the case, the king, dealing with the bishopric as
vacant, appointed to it an English ecclesiastic named
Goodacre, who, together with Bale, another Englishman

40 THE CHUECH [Chap. III.
nominated to Ossory, was consecrated (February, 1563)
by Archbishop Browne, assisted by the bishops of Kildare
and Down, in Christ Church Cathedral, Dublin. For this
consecration an English service, which had been sanc
tioned some time after the Prayer Book, was used. Bale
having insisted upon it, although no proclamation to au
thorize it in Ireland had been issued by the Viceroy.
Besides Goodacre and Bale, Edward, during his short
reign, appointed the following bishops : Lancaster, Dean
of Ossory, to Kildare, vacant by the death of Miagh ;
Travers to Leighlin, on the death of Sanders ; Casey, a
clergyman of the diocese, to Limerick, upon the death
of Coyn or Quin ; and Walsh, a person of native de
scent, to Waterford.
In 1551 an edition of the English Prayer Book
was printed in Dublin. It professes to be issued by
commandment of St. Leger, late Lord Deputy, and
of the Council. It contains at the end a prayer for
Crofts by name, who is described as "now governor
over this realm, under our most dread sovereign Lord
Edward VI."*
In the instructions given to this Deputy when he came
to Ireland, it was directed that the services of the Prayer
Book should be translated into Irish for use in those
places which needed it. Unfortunately this injunction
was not carried out, and no Irish version was then
made either of the Bible or Prayer Book.
In England, during this reign, the doctrinal opinions
* A copy of this edition of the Prayer Book is in the Library of
Trinity College, Dublin, It was the flrst book ever printed in Dublin.
Its title-page is, " The Book of the Common Prayer and Administration
of the Sacraments and other Eites and Ceremonies of the Church : after
the use of the Church of England."

1547-1558] IN THE EEIGN OP EDWAED VI. 41
of the Reformers were extensively adopted. One result
of this was, that various matters in the English Prayer
Book were objected to as not consistent with them;
and, as these were also disapproved by some eminent
divines of the foreign Protestant Churches, the services
were again subjected to revision. A second Prayer
Book, the result of this proceeding, was enacted by par
liament. It was never, either by statute or order, in
troduced, nor was it at all used, in the Irish Church ;
but as it formed the basis of that which under Elizabeth
was authorized for Ireland, some of the more important
changes therein made require notice. In it, for the first
time, were introduced in the Morning and Evening
Services the prefatory Sentences, the Exhortation, the
General Confession, and the Absolution. The Abjura
tion, investing with a chrisom and anointing in Baptism,
directed in the first Prayer Book, were omitted : so
also anointing in the Visitation of the Sick. Prayers
for the Dead were left out of all services where they
occurred. In the Communion Service, the words in the
title, " commonly called the Masse," were omitted:
the prayer at Consecration was changed into — " Grant
that we, receiving these thy creatures of bread and wine,
according to thy Son our Saviour Jesu Christ's holy
institution, in remembrance of his death and passion,
may be partakers of his most blessed body and blood " :
the direction to use water with the wine was expunged;
so were the words in the first book at delivering the
elements, and in lieu of them the second of the clauses
now used on that occasion substituted. In the Burial
Service, the suggestion of a Communion was omitted.
Offices for Ordination were annexed.

42 THE CHUECH [Chap. III.
The ecclesiastical policy pursued by Edward's
Government in Ireland was terminated by his death
(1553). Mary, who succeeded him, resolved to re-estab
lish the power and influence of Rome in all her do
minions. Notwithstanding that her religious opinions
were well known, she was described in the letters from
the English Privy Council, upon her accession, as "on
earth supreme head of the Churches of England and
Ireland." One of her first acts in Ireland was to restore
DowdaU, who had been dispossessed under Edward,
to the Archbishopric of Armagh, and to uphold the
primacy of that See. This act must be referred to her
supremacy, for DowdaU had never been recognized by
the Pope, who acknowledged Waucop, nominated from
Rome. Goodacre having died before the queen's ac
cession, no conflict arose with his claims. Then
steps were taken both in England and Ireland to
proceed against such bishops as favoured Protestant
ism, the ground of offence put forward being their
having married. The result was that Browne, Arch
bishop of Dublin; Lancaster, Bishop of Kildare; and
Travers, Bishop of Leighlin, were deprived. Two
other bishops anticipated removal by flying from the
country — Bale, Bishop of Ossory, and Casey, Bishop of
Limerick.* In their room Curwin, a native of West-
* Casey was restored by Queen Elizabeth in 1571, when the person
appointed by Mary in his place died. Some writers consider Lancaster a
different person from Lancaster, afterwards Archbishop of Armagh, but
from Cal, S, P. Ir, 1609-1673, p. 371, he seems the same. Why others
were not restored has not been explained. Bale was one of the prelates
named in the warrant for the consecration of Archbishop Parker in Eng
land, and is supposed to have objected to retum to Ireland.

1547-1558] IN THE EEIGN OP MAEY. 43
moreland, and then Dean of Hereford, was appointed
to the See of Dublin; Walsh, a Cistercian monk, to
Meath ; Leverous, who had been a chaplain to the Earl
of KUdare, to Kildare; O'FihU (angUcized Field), a
Franciscan friar, to Leighlin ; Lacy or Lees, a canon of
Limerick, to Limerick; and Thonory to Ossory. For
the Archbishopric of Cashel, which, though vacant be
fore Edward's death, had remained unfilled, Roland
Fitz Gerald, caUed Le Baron, was, pursuant to a Queen's
Letter, elected by the Dean and Chapter. Such
appointments as were made by the Crown had the
sanction of the Pope. All the new prelates, except
Curwin, were of Irish race, and unfriendly to the Re
formation. Curwin, to judge by his subsequent con
duct, seems not to have been of any very decided
opinions. Browne, soon after he was deprived, died. He was
unquestionably the most able agent concerned in the
introduction of the Reformation into Ireland. He is
described as "a man of a cheerful countenance, in his
acts and deeds plain and downright, to the poor merci
ful and compassionate, pitying the state and condition of
the souls of the people." He has not, however, escaped
censure. He was reproved by Henry VIII. for negli
gence of duty, "elation of mind and pride." Staples,
Bishop of Meath, who was of his own party in ecclesi
astical affairs, also at one time complained of him. On
the other hand there exist contemporary testimonies to
his zeal and to the merits of his preaching.* By writers
of a later period he has been condemned for unduly
* See especially a letter of Lord James Butler to Henry YIII., 1638,
printed in State Papers, Henry YIII., vol. ii, p. 563,

44 THE CHUECH [Chap. III.
exalting the authority of the Crown, resting the case
against Rome too much upon it. But this was not pe
culiar to him : simUar ideas were popular with many of
the Protestant party in England, and Cranmer himself
went great lengths in the same direction.
In the third year of the queen's reign a parliament
was convened at Dublin, when a Bull from Pope Paul
, IV., pronouncing absolution for the separation from
Rome, was read by Archbishop Curwin to the Lords
Spiritual and Temporal. It, however, confirmed the
dispositions of benefices, the dispensations, and other
ecclesiastical proceedings, and the dealings with Church
lands, that had taken place during the separation. An
Act was then unanimously passed repealing all " sta
tutes and provisions made against the See Apostolic of
Rome since the twentieth year of King Henry VIIL;
and also for the establishment of spiritual and eccle
siastical possessions and hereditaments conveyed to the
laity." The queen also made gifts to laymen of lands
derived by the Crown from the monasteries. The loss
to the Church occasioned by Henry's grants of monas
tic property was not redressed ; and the practical effect
of the measures of this reign extended little beyond re
storing the use of the Latin Liturgies instead of the
English Prayer Book.
Notwithstanding the persecution of Protestants in
England at this time, there is no record of anyone
having suffered for religion in Ireland ; and it is related
that, so far as questions of that character were concerned,
the social condition of the country was sufficiently tran
quil to induce English Protestants from Cheshire to come
and reside in Dublin.

1547-1558] IN THE EEIGN OF MAEY. 45
It is said that shortly before Mary's death it was
intended to put in force laws against heresy, which
had been revived, and that a Commission for the pur
pose was issued by the queen. The failure of the
design is attributed to the abstraction at Chester of the
document which contained the Commission from the per
son who had charge of it.* There is no doubt that a
story to this effect was in the next reign current. The
narrative does not, however, suggest that the Commission
was sought by the Irish Government, or that it had any
other origin than the policy of the queen and her English
ministers, with whose other proceedings it would have
been in perfect consistency.
During the reign of Edward no events of importance
connected with civU affairs occurred. The peace which
his father had established over the country was main
tained ; but only externally, no substantial progress
towards uniting together the English Government and
the native Irish being in reality made. The agreement
of Mary with the latter upon religious questions did not
lead to any alteration in the political relations of the two
countries. The old disturbances revived; the old pro
ceedings to put them down were resumed, t But upon

* The story, and the authorities for it, are published with much cir
cumstantiality of detaU in Ware's Life of ArcMishop Browne. See Ap
pendix, Note K.
f Sir Eichard Cox having remarked the zeal of Queen Mary for her
reUgion, observes : " Tet the Irish were not quieter during her reign than
they were under her brother ; but, on the contrary, their antipathy against
Englishmen and Govemment induced them to be as troublesome then as
at other times, and prevaUed with Mr. SuUevan to give this severe cha
racter of her reign — that although the queen was zealous to propagate
the Catholic religion, yet her ministers did not forbear to injure and

46 THE CHUECH [Chap. III.
success an entirely new mode of dealing with the van
quished was initiated. The territories of the defeated
septs, and not merely the seigniories and rights "of their
chieftains, were held to be forfeited to the Crown, which
therefore was entitled to dispose of them as if they were
its own possessions, and to allot them among English
settlers. The first example of plantation (as colonization in
this manner came to be called) was upon the subjugation
of the tribes known as the O'Moores, O'Connors, and
O'Dempseys. They occupied districts not far from the
Pale, of which the chief were then known as Leix and
Offaly. These were confiscated and converted into
two counties, named thenceforward, from Mary and her
husband Philip king of Spain, the Queen's and King's
Counties, in each of which a fort was erected, and by
degrees around the forts small towns formed, the fort
and town in the former being designated Maryborough,
and in the latter Philipstown.
Contemporaneously a statute* was passed by the Irish
Parliament which empowered the Lord Deputy to grant
the lands situate in these counties for estates in fee-sim
ple, or of more limited tenure, as, in order to " the more
sure planting and strength of the countries with good
subjects, should be thought in his wisdom and discretion
abuse the Irish. Quse tametsi CathoUcam religionem tueri et ampli-
ficare conata est, ejus tamen praefecti et conciliarii injuriam Ibernis in-
ferre non desistiterunt." — History, p. 309.
* 3 & 4 P. and M., ch, 1 (Irish). The preamble of this Act recites—
"Whereas the countries of Leix, Slewmarge, OffaUie, Irrie, and Glyn-
malier, which belong of right to the King and Queen's most excellent Ma
jesties, were of late possessed by the Moores, the Connors, the Dempseys,
and other rebels, and now by the industrious travaile of the Earl of Sussex,

1547-1558] IN THE EEIGN OP MAEY. 47
meet and convenient." The statute was acted upon until
the queen's death, but not to any considerable extent ;
the number of new inhabitants brought upon the con
fiscated lands being, when compared with their dimen
sions, small. Those who came were scattered too much
apart, and were consequently exposed to the incursions
of the former owners who had been removed to make
way for them, without being able to combine together
for mutual protection.
Another statute, also affecting the position of the
native Irish, was passed about the same time as that
relating to Leix and Offally. It enabled what were
termed in it " waste grounds," that is, lands not then
being shire land, to be divided into counties, shires, and
hundreds.* Both this statute and the policy of plantations which
was commenced along with it were calculated to effect
great social changes. To convert a territory into coun
ties was the preliminary to enforcing English law, and
an English mode of administering justice. To plant,
was to substitute entirely new owners and occupiers.
Heretofore the course pursued had been to leave the
Irish parts of the island without interfering with their
inhabitants, or abrogating their customs or regulations
as to the possession of land. When any portions of
now Lord Deputy of Ireland, be brought again to be in the possession of
their Majesties, and so remain, to be disposed as to their Highnesses shaU
be thought good : forasmuch as the well disposing of the aforesaid countries
and planting of good men there shall not only be a great strength to
those quarters, but also a wonderful assurance of quiet to aU the rest of
the EngUsh countries, and a great terror to all the Irish countries border
ing upon the same."
* 3 & 4 P. and M. (Irish), ch. 3.

48 THE CHUECH IN THE EEIGN OP MAEY.
them fell, after an unsuccessful rebellion or otherwise,
within the power of the Crown to dispose of, it was
deemed sufficient to set over them new paramount Chief
tains. Anglo-Normans ruled in place of native Irish
men ; inferior rights were not touched ; the old services
and duties continued to be rendered ; the change was
only in the persons who were to receive them. Hence
forward all titles, whether original or derivative, came
to be regarded as involved in the consequences of a for
feiture ; and all claiming through them were liable to be
dispossessed. That the Irish districts sent no members to parlia
ment ; that neither directly nor indirectly was their assent
given to this mode of proceeding, formed no objection to
it in the minds of English statesmen of the sixteenth
century. They held that the superior and victorious
nation had the right to legislate for the defeated and sub
ordinate ; to take their lands, and, when they had been
taken, to distribute them. Looking solely to the inter
ests of their own country, they perceived the advantage
of introducing in Ireland allies instead of enemies, civili
zation in lieu of barbarism, and of effecting these im
provements by means which provided for those who,
unemployed, were troublesome at home : they overlooked,
or, if they saw, they disregarded, the consideration that
arbitrary acts of this character alienate the affections of
the subject race from the governing, spread through
the community a sense of insecurity, and finally create
the impatient discontent that predisposes to disloyalty
and rebellion.

CHAPTER IV.
[1558-1603.]
T^LIZABETH, when, upon the death of her sister
-L^ Mary, she came to the throne, proceeded after
a slight delay, which was employed with judgment
in conciliating popularity and strengthening her own
influence, to determine what course it was proper to
pursue in reference to ecclesiastical affairs, and ulti
mately resolved that the policy which had been adopted
in the reigns of her father and of her brother Edward
should be "revived.
In what proportion the people of England were, at
the accession of the queen, divided between the old
and the new religious systems there are no satisfactory
modes of determining; and, as might under these cir
cumstances be anticipated, historians disagree upon the
question; some holding that those who favoured Pro
testantism formed a majority of the people: others
that the Roman Catholics were the more numerous : and
others that there was a zealous Protestant] party, a
zealous Roman Catholic, and an intermediate, which,
according to events and the political considerations
arising from them, might be swayed to either side.*
*See HaUam, Const. Hist. vol. i. 137, note. Lingard, Hist., Reign
of Eli%abeth, ch. 7. Macaulay, Essay on Lord Burleigh.
E

50 THE CHUECH [Chap. IV.
But whatever may have been the number of those
who adhered to each religion, circumstances and the
position which the Reformers occupied in the country
aided the progress of Protestantism, and tended to
procure for it superior influence. The strength of the
Roman Catholic interest lay partly in the northern
counties, which, remote from the seat of government,
were then the least important; and partly in the agricul
tural districts, where the population was scattered over
a wide surface. On the other hand, in London and
the other towns the principles of the Reformation were
in the ascendant, especially among the trading and
manufacturing classes, who were the most active and
intelligent portion of the people, and had for some
time been acquiring wealth and power.
It was probably owing to these causes that, when
the Queen's first Parliament met, and measures re
pealing the ecclesiastical statutes of the preceding
reign were brought forward, the House of Commons
was found (although not without division of opinion)
willing to pass them ; and that in the end, notwith
standing opposition from the bishops, legislation was
obtained which a second time severed the connexion
of the English Church with the See of Rome, and per
manently impressed a Protestant character upon its con
stitution and formularies.
Of this, the most important enactment was a new
Supremacy Act. It substantially agreed with the former
statutes in relation to this subject, and, like them, pro
hibited any foreign prince, person, prelate, or potentate
from exercising any manner of jurisdiction, authority,
pre-eminence, or privilege, spiritual or temporal, within

1558-1603] IN THE EEIGN OP ELIZABETH. 51
the realm, or any other Her Majesty's dominions. There
was, however, one important particular in which the Act
varied from the Supremacy Act of Henry VIII. In the
oath of supremacy which was now imposed, the queen
was described, not as before by the terms " head in earth
of the Church of England," but by the words, " the only
supreme governor of this realm, and of all other Her
Highness's dominions, as well in all spiritual and ecclesi
astical things or causes as temporal."
The substitution of the word " governor" was made
in dsfere nee to the objections which had from the
first been by many urged against the use of the word
" Head of the Church," and were now again raised and
renewed. Among those who objected was Elizabeth
herself. " She is unwilling," Jewel wrote to Bullinger,
"to be addressed in speaking or in writing, as head of
the Church of England, for when the title was pro
posed, she earnestly answered that this honour is due
to Christ alone, and cannot belong to any human being
whatever."* The Statute also contained a provision not before
enacted, which confined "heresy" to what had been
adjudged such by the authority of the canonical scrip
tures, or by the first four General CouncUs, or any of
them, or by any other General Council wherein the same
was so declared by the express and plain words of the
said canonical scriptures, or as should thereafter be

*JueUus ad Henricum BuUingerum. " Eegina non vult appellari
aut scribi caput ecclesiae Anglicanae ; graviter enim respondit, &c." —
Jewell's Worlcs, pubUshed by Parker Society, p. 1211. It appears, from
the correspondence of the Spanish Ambassador, that Elizabeth told him
she would not be called "Head of the Church." — ^Froude, Hist., vii. 67, 69.
E 2

52 THE CHUECH [Chap. IV.
adjudged such by Parliament, with the assent of the
clergy iu their convocation.
Notwithstanding the alteration in the oath of supre
macy, considerable misunderstanding of the meaning
and effect of the statute continued; and accordingly
it was deemed advisable to take advantage of "injunc
tions" which were issued from the queen to persons
selected to hold visitations through the country, and
publish in them "that the queen's subjects were not
to give ear to those who said that any power of ministry
in divine things might be challenged under her laws for
kings and queens; that only the same authority was
claimed that had been used under her father and brother,
and is and was due to the queen, that is, under God to
have the sovereignty over all manner of persons within
the queen's realms and dominions, of what estate,
ecclesiastical or temporal, they be, so that no foreign
power should have superiority over them."
Again, at a later period of her reign, when the Articles
of Religion were framed for the Church, the subject of
the Supremacy was explained in one of them (xxxvii.) :
this being the last time at which, either by the Eng
lish Parliament or Convocation, any declaration was
made in reference to the subject. The language of
this Article agrees with the "injunctions"; and it states
that the queen's majesty hath the chief power in the
realm of England and other her dominions, unto whom
the chief govemment of all estates of this realm, whether
they be ecclesiastical or civil, doth appertain ; and that
where we attribute to the queen's majesty the chief
government, we give not to our princes the ministering
either of God's word or of the sacraments ; but that

1558-1603] IN THE EEIGN OP ELIZABETH. 53
only prerogative which we see to have been given to
all godly princes in Holy Scriptures by God himself,
that is, that they should rule all states and degrees
committed to their charge, whether they be ecclesi
astical or temporal."*
The same Parliament, which passed the Supremacy
Act, re-established English Services in the churches,
instead of the Latin that had been restored by Mary.
The second Prayer-book of Edward VI. revised, and in
some respects altered, was ordered to be used. Of these
alterations the most important were in connexion with
the Communion service. For the first time the two
clauses now used in administering the elements were
joined together, the first only having been in the First
Prayer-book of Edward VL, and the second only in his
Second Book. The Communion was directed to be
received kneeling, and a further rubric, explaining that
adoration was not thereby intended, was omitted. This
change aimed at conciliating the Roman CathoUc party;
so did also an omission from the Litany of the suffrage,
which had been in both Edward's Prayer-books, for

* In Protestant monarchical countries, where the supremacy of the
Pope is repudiated, there are reasons of policy for asserting such a supre
macy for the Crown, as is explained in the thirty-seventh Article ; other
wise, there is great risk of disunion, of empire within empire. The Crown's
greatness is the greatness of the nation; and being, according to the
explanation given in the Articles, secular in character, it expresses the
power of the laity, and their authority in the Church.
Bishop Browne (commenting on Article xxxvii,) says the Eastern
Church admits the Supremacy of the Crown. At a synod of bishops held
in Greece in 1833 it was resolved that spirituaUy the Head is Christ, but
with respect to the administration of the Church, the king of Greece is
head (Neale, Eastern Church, Introduction, p. 60.)
See further as to the question of the Supremacy, Note L of Appendix.

54 THE CHUECH [Chap. IV.
deliverance from the Bishop of Rome. Prayers were
added for the queen and clergy.* Dress and habits
were to be as they were allowed at the time of Edward's
first Prayer-book, until order should take place therein,
under the authority of the queen, with the advice of the
commissioners for causes ecclesiastical."
When the supremacy of the Crown and the use of the
new Prayer-book in the Church of England had been
established, a Parliament was called in Ireland, in order
that by its assistance similar results might be there
attained. This Parliament met in the month of Janu
ary, 1560. It was constituted in the following manner:
The House of Lords was composed of lay peers and
bishops, the House of Commons of lay representatives
from counties, cities, and boroughs. If all bishops who
seem to have been entitled attended, they would num
ber twenty ; if all Lords temporal, twenty-three. The
names of fifty-six citizens and burgesses from twenty-
eight cities and boroughs are preserved ; so also are the
names of twenty knights from counties. They were re
turned from ten counties, viz., Dublin, Meath, West
meath, Louth, Kildare, Carlow, Kilkenny, Waterford,
Tipperary, and Wexford. f
Of the proceedings of this Parliament, except the
Acts which were passed by it, there is no record. These

* These were derived from Pope Gregory's Sacramentary.
f The dissolution of the monasteries reduced the number of Peers by
twenty-four, this being the number of abbots and priors who used to sit.
Leland says that in the towns from which the citizens and burgesses
came the royal authority was predominant. History of Ireland, vol. ii,,
p, 225. See further as to the constitution of this ParUament, Note M
of Appendix.

1558-1603] IN THE EEIGN OF ELIZABETH. 55
Acts related to the Supremacy, the Prayer-book, the
First Fruits and Twentieths, and the appointment of
Bishops. The Supremacy Act followed the English,
and, like it, in the oath which it prescribed, omitted in
speaking of the queen the phrase " head of the church,"
and substituted that of "the only Supreme Governor of
this realm, and of all other Her Highness's dominions
and countries, in all spiritual or ecclesiastical things or
causes as well as temporal." The oath was to be taken
by every person then or afterwards holding ecclesi
astical or civil office, on pain of not being admitted to
the office, or, if in possession, of forfeiting it. Persons
advisedly and maliciously speaking or writing in defence
of the pre-eminence or jurisdiction, spiritual or ecclesi
astical, of any foreign prince or potentate, were guilty
of offences, punished in some cases by forfeiture of
goods, in others by imprisonment, on a second repetition
by the penalty of the statute of Premunire, and on a
third as for treason.*
The preamble of this statute recites, that in the
queen's father's reign divers good laws were made for
the extinguishment of foreign powers and authorities, and
for restoring and uniting to the imperial crown of this
realm the ancient jurisdictions, authorities, superiorities,
and pre-eminences to the same of right belonging, and
that these had been repealed by an Act of Parliament
of King Philip and Queen Mary, by reason of which
repeal the queen's subjects were brought under an

* 2 Eliz., chap. 1 (Irish), a.d. 1660, entitled : " An Act restoring to
the Crown the ancient jurisdiction over the State ecclesiastical and
spiritual, and aboUshing all foreign power repugnant to the same."

56 THE CHUECH [Chap. IV.
usurped foreign power and authority. The Act is then
declared to be for repressing the said usurped foreign
power, and for restoring the rights, jurisdictions, and
pre-eminences appertaining to the imperial crown of this
realm. It does not, like the Irish Supremacy Act of
Henry VIIL, refer to the relations between England
and Ireland, or found itself upon them.
The Act* relating to the Prayer-book introduced
into Ireland the book which, as has been mentioned,
had been enacted by the English Parliament in the first
year of the queen. Its principal provisions are the fol
lowing: It recites, that at the death of King Edward VI.
there remained one uniform order of common service,
prayer, and administration of the Sacraments and other
Rites and Ceremonies in the Church of England, set forth
in one book, authorised by Act of Parliament of the fifth
and sixth years of the same king, which was repealed
and taken away by an Act of Mary. It then enacts that
all and singular ministers in any cathedral or parish
church, or other place within the realm of Ireland, shall
say and use the matins, even-song, celebration of the
Lord's Supper, and administration of each of the sacra
ments and all other common and open prayer, in such
order and form as in said book mentioned, with such
alterations and additions as are therein set forth.
The use by the clergy of the services thus authorised
is ordered under severe penalties. Preaching or speak
ing, in derogation of the Prayer-book or of any part
thereof by the clergy, is prohibited. This last provi
sion, so far as open words, is extended to all persons.

2 Eliz,, chap, 2 (liish), a, d, 1660.

1558-1603] IN THE EEIGN OP ELIZABETH. 57
Punishments are also to be inflicted for compelling,
causing, or procuring other services to be performed, and
for interrupting those prescribed. Persons not having
reasonable excuse shall resort to their parish church or
chapel accustomed, or upon reasonable let thereof to
some substituted place, upon every Sunday and other
days ordained and used to be kept as holy days, upon
pain of punishment by the censures of the Church;
and also upon pain that every person so offending
shall forfeit for every such offence twelve pence, to be
levied by the churchwardens of the parish where the
offence shall be done, to the use of the poor.
This Act contains the singular provision that, if the
minister or priest had not knowledge of the English
tongue, he might say the new services in Latin. The
reason assigned in the Act for this was, that in most
places there could not be found English ministers to
serve in the churches, and that if those who did serve
were to use such language as they understood, the due
honour of God would be advanced; and "that the same
may not be in their native language, as well for difficulty
to get the services printed in Irish, as that few in the
whole realm could read the Irish letters."
It is also to be noticed that the Act did not leave the
character of the ornaments of buildings, or the dress of
the clergy, to be determined by a rubric, but expressly
provided that such ornaments of the Church and of the
ministers thereof should be retained, and be in use, as
were in the Church of England by the authority of Parlia
ment, in the second year of the reign of Edward VI. , until
other order should be therein taken by the authority of
the queen's majesty, with the advice of her commissioners

58 THE CHUECH [Chap. IV.
appointed and authorised imder the Great Seal of Eng
land or of Ireland for causes ecclesiastical ; or by the
authority of the Lord Deputy or other governor or go
vernors of the realm of Ireland for the time being, with
the advice of the Council of said realm under the Great
Seal thereof, with power to the same authority with the
like notice, and in the circumstances therein mentioned,
" to ordain and publish such further ceremonies or rites
as may be most for the advancement of God's glory, the
edifying of His Church, and the due reverence of Christ's
holy mysteries and sacraments."
This statute is the first enactment by an Irish Parlia
ment which enjoined the use of an English Prayer-book.
When the first Prayer-book of Edward VL was intro
duced in the Irish Church, it had the sanction only of a
direction from the Crown; and it is very doubtful to
what extent even in English districts that direction had
practical effect. The statute is framed according to the
notions of the statesmen who were then in favour with
Elizabeth, upon the assumption that the State had a
right to regulate forms of religion, especially matters
relating to public worship, and that all its subjects must
externally conform to its orders.
With respect to the First Fruits and Twentieths,
which were by Henry VIII. given to, and by Mary
withdrawn from, the Crown, they were now again added
to its resources. And along with them, were also re-
annexed to its possessions the emoluments of such rec
tories as, having belonged to the monasteries and having
been retained by the Crown, had been by the late queen
relinquished. The Act regulating appointments to bishoprics pro-

1558-1603] IN THE EEIGN OF ELIZABETH, 59
vided that they were to be made by patents under the
Great Seal, consequent upon instructions or letters mis
sive from the queen and her successors, instead of, as
in England, by the deans and chapters of the sees, who,
when electing, had to act in obedience to recommenda
tions from the Crown, which, as they might not be
disobeyed, were in effect mandates.* It was felt that
in the unsettled state of the Irish Church, and with the
opinions accepted by much the greater proportion of
its clergy, any reference to the Chapters might lead
to conflicts between the queen and these corporations ;
and that it was better the office of Bishop should be
granted directly from the Crown.
The Deputy, when the Parliament of 1560 met, was
Lord Sussex. By him, as soon as the legislation he
desired had been obtained, it was dissolved : he himself
returning to England. After a short time Sussex was
again sent back as Lord Lieutenant, and in about three
weeks after he had been sworn into office he received a
letter from the queen, " signifying," as it is reported,
' ' her pleasure for a general meeting of the clergy of
Ireland, and the establishment of the Protestant religion
through the several dioceses of that kingdom."!
In pursuance of these directions, and summoned by
* 2 Eliz,, chap, 4 (Irish), a, b, 1660. This Act recites that, "elections
of archbishops and bishops, by deans and chapters within the realm of
Ireland, were to the delay and costs of such persons" as tho queen
appointed ; and that these elections were "in very deed no elections, but
only by a writ of conge d'elire, had colours, shadows or pretences of
elections, serving to no purpose, and ,seeming also derogatory and preju
dicial to the queen's prerogative royal, to whom appertaineth the collation
of aU archbishoprics and bishoprics within her said realm,"
f Sir James Ware's Annals, a, d, 1560,

60 THE CHUECH [Chap. IV.
Lord Sussex for the purpose of carrying them out, a
meeting of bishops, or more probably of bishops and
clergy, took place in the third year of the queen's reign;*
but no record remains of the names of the persons
actually attending, or of the precise nature of the
proceedings which took place when the assembly met,
further than that one of the bishops, Walsh of Meath, is
reported to have been " enraged with her majesty's
proposals," and " after the assembly had dispersed them
selves," to have preached against the new Prayer-
book. As he alone of the bishops is mentioned to have
dissented, the acquiescence of such others as were present
in the Deputy's proposals may not unreasonably be in
ferred. When introducing his ecclesiastical policy Lord
Sussex received the assistance of Curwin, who had been
appointed Archbishop of Dublin and Lord Chancellor
by Mary, and who now conformed, retaining both his
offices. Leverous, bishop of Kildare, seems to have at
once, and before the meeting, which has been described,
was held, gone into opposition, refusing to take the oath
of supremacy. His objections were, he represented,
increased by its being required for a queen, for as
ecclesiastical authority had not been conferred upon the
Virgin, the supremacy could not be meant for any other
of her sex.f He, and Walsh who persevered in his
* Ware calls this meeting " an assembly of the Irish clergy." In the
Loftus MSS. it is termed " a convocation of bishops," See Note N of
Appendix, fLeverous's argument is mentioned in Mason's History of St.
Patrick's Cathedral, p. 163. It was first related in Bishop Eothe's
Analecta, part Ui., entitled, de proeessu martyriali, which has been
lately reprinted at DubUn in a volume edited by Dr, Moran, Eoman
Catholic Archbishop of Sidney, N.S.W. The Article relating to the

1558-1603] IN THE EEIGN OF ELIZABETH. 61
hostility to the new Prayer-book, were deprived of
their offices.
What was the conduct of the bishops who were in
possession of the other sees, at Elizabeth's accession to
the throne, has been a subject of controversy. Some of
them owed their appointment to Mary : the rest had been
allowed by her to remain when others were removed;
all must have at least professed adherence to her views.
These circumstances have been urged to prove, not
merely that these prelates were not Protestant in opinion
(for which purpose they furnish most legitimate topics),
but that none of them conformed. How little they can
be relied upon to support the latter inference, Curwin is
a decisive example. He served Mary and he served
Elizabeth. No one can doubt that, both in England
and Ireland, many beside Curwin did the same ;* nor
has there ever been a period of change and transition
Supremacy was later in date than Leverous's objection. In 1680,
Lord Baltinglass repeats Leverous's ideas. " Questionless " (he says),
"it is great want of knowledge, and more of grace, to think and be
lieve, that a woman, uncapax of aU holy orders, should be the Supreme
governor of Christ's Church : a thing that Christ did not grant unto
His own mother.'' (Letter to Lord Ormonde, July, 1680, Cal. Carew
MSS., 1676-1588, p. 289,
* St. Leger was Deputy of Edward and Deputy of Mary, Lord Sussex
was Deputy of Mary and Lieutenant of Elizabeth. The truth is, that
many, both in England and Ireland, had no decided opinions on the
matters in controversy, and readily obeyed whatever was, for the time
being, directed by the authority of the Crown. Nor under a Tudor
sovereign were there wanting those who would say vrith Erasmus,
"Non omnes ad martyrium satis habent roboris; vereor autem, ne si quid
inciderit tumultus, Petrum sim imitaturus. Pontificis ac Caesaris bene
deoernentis sequor quod pium est : male statuentis fero quod tutum est.
Id opinor etiam bonis viris Ucere, si nuUa sit spes profectus." — ad Eicm.
Pacaeum, vol. iu., 661 d. (ed. Lugd. Bat. 1703).

t)2 THE CHUECH [Chap. IV.
in which conduct of this character has not extensively
prevailed. Why, too, if there was not compliance, was
there not deprivation ? Bishops of remote dioceses
might have escaped notice or interference from the
govemment, but if those within its reach imitated Walsh
and Leverous, it is in the highest degree improbable
that they would not have met the same punishment.
The vacancies in Meath and Kildare, caused by the
deprivation of Walsh and Leverous, were filled by the
queen, who selected for the latter Craik, Dean of St.
Patrick's Cathedral, Dublin, and for the former, Hugh
Brady, a native of the diocese, whose merits afterwards
gained for him from Sir Henry Sidney the character of
" an honest, zealous, and learned bishop, a holy minister
for the gospel, and a good servant to the queen."
Elizabeth found the Archbishopric of Armagh vacant,
delayed long in appointing to it, and finally conferred
it upon Adam Loftus,* to whom she had previously
given the Deanery of St. Patrick's when vacated by
Craik. Brady and Craik were appointed by patents ;
Loftus, for some reason not satisfactorily explained,
by writ of conge d^elire. In 1567 Curwin, Archbishop
of Dublin, induced Elizabeth to translate him to the
bishopric of Oxford in England, and Loftus was by the
queen moved to Dublin. The vacancy thus caused in
Armagh, and three succeeding vacancies in that see,
all occurring during this reign, were filled by the queen,
the appointments being by patents. She also conferred
* Adam Loftus came over from England as chaplain to Lord Sussex.
His graceful manners, attractive personal appearance, logical and rheto
rical abilities, had previously attracted the notice of the Queen, who became
herself his patron, and made him one of her chaplains.

1558-1603] IN THE EEIGN OF ELIZABETH. 63
the Archbishopric of Cashel in 1567 and 1570, and of
Tuam in 1573 and 1595 ; all which offices were like
wise granted by patents. Vacancies in the other dio
ceses, with the exceptions now to be stated, were
filled in a similar manner.* The exceptions were in
Deny and Raphoe, Killaloe, Kilfenora, and Emly, in
none of which dioceses did the queen ever exercise
patronage : also in Kilmore, in which she exercised it
only on one occasion. In Down one vacancy was filled
by the Pope, the others by the Crown.
The exercise by the queen of the right to collate
to bishoprics is not to be regarded as proof that when
appointments were made in such dioceses as were not
in or immediately near the Pale, Protestantism had
been accepted by their inhabitants, or that even the
English services were in use. They were assertions
of political power. If the ecclesiastics appointed ad
mitted the supremacy, the object which was esteemed
most important was gained. It was not their theo
logical opinions, but their profession of allegiance un
qualified by any reservation in favour of a foreign
power, to which consequence was attached. Also, it
is not to be assumed that the clergy in such dioceses
were, to any extent, guided by the bishops placed
over them. Irish for the most part, they were as
little disposed to yield obedience to an ecclesiastical
ruler nominated from England, as the laity of their race
were to a civil.
* Abstracts of the queen's letters or patents for these appointments
will be found in Morrin's Calendar ofthe Patent and Close Rolls of Chancery
.in Ireland, vols. i. and ii. See further, as to the bishops who held office
under Queen EUzabeth, Note 0 of Appendix.

64 THE CHUECH [Chap. IV.
How far the law relating to attendance at church
was enforced is doubtful. In the next reign the Roman
Catholic party, seeking indulgence from James and de
sirous to present Elizabeth to him as an example, said
attendance was not compelled : the Protestants replied,
true, but this was because everyone, whether in opinion
Roman Catholic or Protestant, readily went to church.
It is, however, certain that in Dublin, whatever may
have been the case elsewhere, at one time fines for non-
attendance were levied.* Notwithstanding, and although
on several occasions ecclesiastics were treated with
cruelty, the queen's government seems to have been
tolerant when merely religion was in question If the
instances which some writers allege to the contrary are
examined, they appear to be connected with political
transactions, and to have arisen from a supposition
which, whether rightly or wrongly, was entertained,
that the persons punished were engaged in the Irish
confederacies, t Some commissions were issued to
obtain acknowledgments of the supremacy, but even as
to this the administration of the law was negligent.^
*Ware says that fines for non-attendance were levied in Dublin
{Annals, a.d, 1663), Carte {Ormonde, i, 67) seems to say the people
generaUy went to church at first. Compare also Leland' s History of
Ireland, vol, ii, p. 381, note.
f See Froude, x. 482; xi. 262 ; BagweU, ii. 357. Plowden, a Eoman
Catholic historian, says, that " during the whole reign of Elizabeth in Ire
land we read of no imprisonment, banishment, or execution of any priest
for the sake of his religion," History of Ireland, vol, i, p, 331. There is
no reason to think that a Eoman Catholic of English race, supporting the
English govemment, would have been molested because of his religion.
X The commissions are stated in Morrin, i. 497 ; ii. 252, 290. In
the next reign, when the lords of the Pale complained to James that
magistrates were deposed for not taking the oath of supremacy, they

1658-1603] IN THE EEIGN OP ELIZABETH. 65
Controversial discussion in relation to Roman Ca
tholic doctrines, and the use of contemptuous or severe
language in speaking of them, the Queen in every way
discouraged : of which a singular illustration is recorded
in the case of Jones, then bishop of Meath. This
prelate was reported to her for having in a sermon
"inveighed in sharp and vehement sort against those
that were of the Romayn religion." She summoned
him to London, and referred the sermon to the Arch
bishop of Canterbury, and not until this prelate certified
that what was uttered in it ought not to minister any
just cause of offence, did she excuse the preacher."^
The Prayer Book was, in England, followed some
years after its use was enacted by the adoption in
the Church of the standard of doctrine known as the
" Thirty-nine Articles of Religion." These were not
introduced into the Church in Ireland until the time of
Charles I. In Elizabeth's reign, and for some portion
of the next, a short collection of Articles, eleven in
number, was prescribed to be read by parsons, vicars,
and curates on first entering into their cures, and also
on two days in each year afterwards. It was pub
lished in 1566, as is said on the title-page, t by the
say that " this was sparingly and mildly carried on in the time of your
late sister of famous memory. Queen Elizabeth," Leland, ii, 444,
* Letter from the Queen to the Lord Deputy, May 12, 1687, Morrin, ii.
125, In this letter she says that her directions were that " such a sharp
manner of proceeding should be forborne by our clergy in Ireland,"
Lord Mountjoy says his instructions from the council were, to deal
moderately in the matter of religion, Leland, ii. 383.
f The title-page is " A breefe declaration of certein priacipall Articles
of Eeligion, set out by order and aucthoritie, as well of the right Hon.
Sir Henry Sidney, knight of the most noble order, Lord President of
F

66 THE CHUECH [Chap. IV.
authority of the Deputy and of the archbishops, and
bishops. The Articles were a copy of some framed by
Archbishop Parker and other English bishops, and used
in the English Church before the Thirty-nine Articles
were authorised. It has been asserted that the Irish
clergy, along with them, used to subscribe the Thirty-
nine Articles also; but, if so, it was without direction
from the Deputy, the Parliament, or any Synod. If
any did subscribe, it was to meet the wishes of the
bishops who ordained or instituted them.
These eleven Articles being so long in use deserve to
be briefly summarised. The first states the doctrine of
the Trinity in explicit terms. The second asserts the
Scriptures to contain all things necessary to salvation,
and professes belief in the Nicene, Athanasian, and
Apostles' Creeds. The third relates to the Church and
its power to institute or vary ceremonies. The fourth
defines who may lawfully take any office or ministry,
ecclesiastical or secular. The fifth acknowledges the
queen's prerogative and superiority of government of
all estates and in all causes, as well ecclesiastical as
temporal, within this realm, and other her dominions,
as in the late statute was expressed. The sixth declares
the Bishop of Rome to have no more authority than
other bishops have in their provinces and dioceses.
The seventh assents to the Prayer Book set forth by

the Councel in the principalitie of Wales, and marches of the same, and
General Deputie of this realme of Ireland, as by the archbyshopes and
byshopes and other Her Majestie's High Commissioners for Causes Ecclesi
astical, in the same realme," Imprinted at DubUn by Humfrey Powel,
the 20th of January, 1566. There is a copy in the Library of Trinity
CoUege, Dublin, supposed to be the only one extant.

1658-1603] IN THE EEIGN OP ELIZABETH. 67
the authority of Parliament. The eighth denies that
certain ceremonies, which were formerly used at bap
tism, and had been then lately abolished, pertained
to the substance of the rite. The ninth condemns
private masses, and the doctrine that the mass is a
propitiatory sacrifice. The tenth maintains the minis
tration of the Communion in both kinds. The eleventh
disallows the extolling of images, relics, and feigned
miracles, and exhorts all men to the obedience of God's
law and to the works of faith, of which examples are
enumerated.* The Irish Supremacy Acts of Henry and Elizabeth,
although varying in expression, were equally effective
for the purpose of causing a separation from the Roman
Catholic system. Both were inconsistent with the
supremacy of the Pope, and with his being the para
mount governor and ruler of all Christian Churches.
But denial of his supremacy might coexist with reten
tion of the doctrinal opinions upheld at Rome ; and in
point of fact for a long time many of them were not
repudiated. Elizabeth's Prayer Book, especially when
compared with the first Prayer Book of Edward VI. ,
marked a line of decided dissent from former theological
opinions. The divergence thereby manifested was made
stiU more wide by the Articles which have just been
cited. The Church in which they were brought into
use was thenceforth in direct antagonism to the doc
trinal teaching of Rome upon several distinct points of
grave importance.
* A twelfth Article merely expresses assent to the others. Hence
they are quoted by Hardwicke as " eleven." A reprint of the Dublin
edition of 1566 is given in the Appendix to Elrington's Life of Ussher.
r 2

68 THE CHUECH [Chap. IV.
The want of schools which existed in every part
of Ireland attracted, at an early period of Elizabeth's
reign, the attention of her government, and led to an
Act being obtained from Parliament, which required " a
free school " to be maintained in every diocese. The
nomination of masters for these schools was given in
the dioceses of Armagh, Dublin, Meath, and Kildare,
to their respective bishops ; in the others to the Lord
Deputy. The salary of the master of each school was
to be provided by a tax levied upon the Ordinary and
clergy of the diocese.*
At the period of the Reformation there was no
University, nor was there even a collegiate institution
of any importance, in Ireland. It was not untU 1592
that this deficiency was supplied. The Queen then in
corporated a college, to which she gave the name of
Trinity College, with which an University was to co
exist, supplied from the College with officers and stu
dents, and entitled to confer upon these students the
usual academic degrees. There were to be a Provost,
Fellows, and Scholars : there was also to be a Chan
cellor.! The first Provost and the first Chancellor were
* 12 Eliz, chap, 1 (Irish).
I The effect of Elizabeth's charter, as regards the constitution of an
University, is far from clear. It is not exactly defined whether the
College and University are identical or distinct ; nor, if distinct, whether
the University was at once created, or was to be subsequently developed.
Whatever was intended, the result practicaUy came to be the same ; for
as Lord Chancellor Blackburne, when Yice-Chancellor of the University,
decided, by means of the agency of the ChanceUor or Vice-Chancellor and
proper officers, for whose perpetual appointment the Crown made ample
provision, the power to grant degrees was ensured. In the next reign,
when the right of sending burgesses to Parliament was conceded, the
existence of tlio University as a separate body was assumed, and it has

1558-1603] IN THE EEIGN OF ELIZABETH. 69
named in the charter; the former was Archbishop Lof
tus, and the latter Lord Burleigh, Elizabeth's great
minister. A building for the use of the College was
erected near Dublin, the site and grounds around it
being the gift of the Corporation of that city, to whom,
with other property of the dissolved monastery of AU
Hallowes, they had been granted after the suppression
of the religious houses. There is no doubt that to serve
the Church, by educating those who were to be its fu
ture clergy, was a prominent object sought in establish
ing the College,* but this did not confine the range of
study, which extended to every department of litera
ture and science.
The scope of the present treatise admits only of a
brief reference to the civil events of Elizabeth's reign.
Wars and insurrections succeeded each other in an al
most uninterrupted series. Shane O'Neill soon after its
commencement, Desmond about thirty years later, and
Tyrone for some years before the Queen's death, were
in open rebellion against her authority; each at the
head of forces which it needed armies from England to
subdue. In the intervals between these wars occurred

ever since been acknowledged in the various charters and letters issued
by the Crown. The charter describes the College as mater univer sitatis, a
phrase which seems to indicate that there were two distinct bodies, and to
refer, either to the College supplying the students to whom the University
would grant its degrees, or to its supplying the persons who were to be its
officers and members, or to both. See Todd's Preface to List of Graduates,
published in 1869, and Sir Joseph Napier's observations in the Supple
ment. See as to the foundation of the College, also. Note P. of Appendix.
* " Ad bonas artes percipiendas colendamque virtutem et religionem"
(Charter). The Fellows were to hold only for seven years, "ut alii in
eorum locum suffecti, pro hujus regni et ecclesia beneficio, emolumentum
habeant."

70 THE CHUECH [Chap. IV.
insurrections, on a less scale, but formidable. Of these
contests the ultimate result was, that the English power
became triumphant over the whole island, and that at
the Queen's death there remained no adversary capable
of further resisting it, Tyrone, the last and most pow
erful of the rebel chieftains, having then given in hi»
submission.* As the conflicts between the English and the na
tives, which have been referred to, were not all at the
same time nor in the same place, opportunities would
seem to have been presented after the termination of
each for attempting conciliation of the defeated septs.
But an exactly opposite course was pursued, and vic
tory was foUowed by much severity and cruelty on
the part of the Queen's soldiers. This was especially
the case in Munster, where vast territories were laid
waste, so that those who escaped the sword perished
miserably by pestilence and famine, t
During this reign there was a considerable increase
in the number of counties. At its commencement there
were the twelve formed by King John, of which one was
subdivided by Henry VIII. into Meath and Westmeath :
* "Queen Elizabeth sent over more men and spent more treasure to save
iind reiluco the land of Ireland than all her progenitors since the Conquest.
During her reign there arose three notorious and main rebellions, which
drew several armies out of England : the first of Shane O'Neill, the second
of Desmond, the last of Tyrone ; for the particular insurrections of the
Viscount Baltinglass, and Sir Edmund Butler, the Moors, the Cavanaghs,
the Birnes, and the Bourkes of Connaught, were all suppressed by the
standing forces here." (Sir John Davis, Biscoverie, &c,, p, 17.)
f Spenser's description of the state to which Munster was reduced has
been often cited. It is painful to read it. In addition, Lecky refers to
other authorities. History, vol, ii, p, 96. During these wars Elizabeth
seems to have sought to prevent religious animosities being infused inta

1668-1608] IN THE EEIGN OF ELIZABETH. 71
there were also two more which had been made by
Philip and Mary:* beside these, Thomond, then called
Clare, had been formed ; and what is now Down was at
that time in two divisions — Down or Lecale, and Ard.
In 1565, Sir Henry Sidney added five more shires,
viz., Longford, Galway, Sligo, Mayo, and Roscommon.
Clare he transferred to Connaught from Munster. At
a later date Sir John Perrot constituted Leitrim, Ar
magh, Monaghan, Tyrone, Coleraine or Derry, Ferma
nagh, and Cavan. In 1575 and 1585, the two divisions
of Down were united into the county that now bears
the name.f But these proceedings were followed by
scarcely any practical effect. Until the time of the
Queen's successor the Judges were not sent to any of
the new counties. J
The policy of colonising the country with English
settlers, commenced by Mary, was continued by Eliza
beth. She found the plantation of the King's aud
Queen's Counties, which had been begun by the former,
incomplete; she therefore, after observing that "our
countries of Leix and Offaly did yet remain unestab-
lished and uninhabited, being peopled only with our
the controversies. "Tour Highness" (says Lord Grey) "gave me a
warning at my leave-taking for being strict in dealing with religion,"
See letter to the Queen, 22nd December, 1580, cited by Froude, xi, 242 :
who also there refers to a letter from Lord Grey to Walsingham, com
plaining that "rebelUon and disobedience to the Prince's word was
chiefly regarded, and reformation of God's cause made a second or nothing
at all," It seems agreed that the Queen's armies were not entirely
EngUsh, and contained Eoman Catholic Irish. Plowden, i. 87 ; Lecky,
U. 101. *Seepp, 19 and 46.
j- See Note C of Appendix as to the formation of counties, &c,
X See Sir John Davis's Biscoverie, &c., pp, 53, 54.

72 THE CHUECH [Chap. IV.
men of war, whereby they lay waste, and that, there
fore, our charge was likely to grow intolerable," gave
directions to have castles and houses of strength built,
and the lands peopled.* Notwithstanding that she
incurred much expense in order to encourage this
plantation, it was considered to have failed in attain
ing the objects for which it was undertaken. The
English power was but slightly increased by it, only
an insufficient number of colonists taking advantage
of the opportunities it afforded, and those that did
becoming mixed and assimilated with the natives among
whom they were dispersed. The Queen, however, un
deterred by the limited success of Mary's plantation,
herself entered upon one of greater magnitude. When
the last Desmond was subdued, she divided the ter
ritories which he and the subordinate chieftains who
followed him had ruled over in Munster, and sub
stituted for them English proprietors. Those who
received grants from her were instructed to intro
duce English farmers, labourers, and artisans ; but the
^ize of the estates bestowed upon them rendered them
independent of control, and emboldened them to re
gard more their own personal interests than the rules
laid down for their guidance. It was attended with less
expense find brought more profit, to retain the Irish
occupier than to introduce the English settler; nor was
the latter object always attainable. Hence the proposed
plantation was carried out only to a small extent.
English chiefs or proprietors were substituted for Irish;
and by them, in places adjacent to their forts and
* Cal. Carew MSS., 1616-1674, p. 279.

1558-1603] IN THE EEIGN OP ELIZABETH. 73
castles, and along the coast, English colonists were in
duced to come and reside. But this was confined to the
coast and to the neighbourhood of their residences ;
and at the close of Elizabeth's reign the Irish still
formed the mass of the actual occupiers of the soil of
the southern province.
Beside, however, the colonists who were brought over
in pursuance of schemes of plantation, many English,
animated by a spirit of adventure (about this time very
prevalent), established settlements in the country. En-
terprizing, not easily deterred by fatigue or danger,
they added much to the strength of the Anglo-Irish
population.

CHAPTER V.

RETROSPECT.

THE termination of the reign of Queen Elizabeth —
forty-five years after her accession to the throne,
and sixty-six after the Irish Supremacy Act was passed
— affords a convenient occasion to examine the condi
tion of the Reformed Church of Ireland, and to estimate
what were the effects of the measures that had been
adopted in relation to its property and discipline, and
what the progress which the religious system it repre
sented had made among the people.
The organization of the Irish Church, at the time
when the Parliament of 1536 was summoned to deal with
its interests, was diocesan and parochial. It consisted
of four archbishops, twenty-six bishops,* of cathedral
chapters, of the incumbents of parishes (into which the
whole island had been subdivided), and of curates. To
these are to be added the clerical members of the re
ligious orders, whose establishments were then nume
rous and spread over the entire country.
For centuries monasticism had prevailed in the Irish

* The number of Sees was thirty-five ; but by the consoUdation or
union of some, the number of archbishops and bishops was always less.
See Note Q of Appendix.

Chap. V.] EETEOSPECT. 75
Church, and was especially venerated by the people.
Of reverential and devotional temperament, they sym
pathised with the ceremonial and ritual observances of
its system, and regarded with affectionate admiration
those whose lives were dedicated to maintain them.
Sentiments of this character were subsequently confirmed
by the benefits which the religious houses conferred
upon the community. In a period of barbarism civiliza
tion owed to them that it even existed. There were
then neither educational nor charitable institutions ;
these associations supplied their place, and were the
inns, hospitals, and colleges of the age.
At first the endowments of monasteries and convents
in Ireland were of moderate amount : between the twelfth
and sixteenth centuries they had immensely increased.
The Anglo-Normans bringing over with them the ideas
of their own more opulent country, enlarged and en
riched many old foundations, and added others of greater
magnitude. As the possessions of these corporate bodies
were carefully preserved, whatever they at any time re
ceived was added to the previous amount, so that their
lands and chattels now represented the accumulated gifts
of successive generations, and the aggregate of all had
come to be of large value. A third species of property
— tithes — they derived from a practice which had been
brought into England by the Normans, and afterwards
introduced (probably by their descendants) into Ireland,
whereby, under the name of appropriations, benefices
were annexed to religious houses, and the emoluments
which they produced became, after some provision for
the discharge of parochial duties, the property of the
societies to which the houses belonged.

76 EETEOSPECT. [Chap. V.
The monks were both of English and Irish race ; the
former generally in the Pale and other English districts,
and the latter in the Irish provinces. They were also
of every class. The Superiors of twenty-four houses
were spiritual lords, and with them were to be ranked
others who, without being Peers, were not inferior in
position to those who were. The mendicant friars
touched the other extremity of the social scale. Be
tween these were many of intermediate importance.
Variety of circumstances was accompanied by a variety
of discipline, which enabled the Orders to adapt their
ministrations to every condition of society. While mem
bers of the greater monasteries were the guides of chiefs
and nobles, and influenced the opinions of the higher
classes, missionaries from the humbler penetrated the re
motest districts, and preached to the most rude and un
civilized tribes.
Whatever education existed in the country was de
rived from the religious houses. Their teaching of the
English portion of the people was aided by the inter
course which it maintained with England, and by
the opportunity thus presented of obtaining and mak
ing use of the books which, after the introduction of
printing, were published there. In the Irish districts
no similar assistance was available; for English books
could not be read by their inhabitants, a printing-
press did not exist in the entire island, and neither
English nor foreign printers employed their types on
Irish writings.
In England the influence of the monasteries was di
minished by the charges of misconduct and immorality
brought against their inmates. The Irish were not free

Chap. V.] EETEOSPECT. 77
from allegations of a similar import, and in some in
stances authority may be cited to support them which
is of weight ; but there is no official declaration against
them generally upon this ground, as there was in the
case of the English, and in its absence the unfavourable
representations cannot be accepted as by any means
universally well-founded.*
In comparison with the monastic system, the parochial
must be held to have been at the era of the Reformation
depressed. The aggrandisement of the former was pur
chased by the impoverishment of the latter. The tithes
which the religious houses owned came altogether from
the revenues of benefices which had become vested in
them by appropriations. They amounted to more than
one-sixth of what were rendered by the entire island, "j"
To make up such an amount, they were necessarily
collected from an extremely large number of parishes.
Thus, in Meath there were in all two hundred and
twenty-four parishes, of which one hundred and fifty-

* The number and condition of the religious houses at the era of the
Eeformation are further considered in Note E of Appendix,
f Tithes belonging to private owners (impropriate, as they are
called, in order to distinguish them from appropriate, t, e. those belonging
to ecclesiastical corporations) are all derived from monastic property.
According to the reports of the Eoyal Commission appointed in 1834 to
inquire into the revenues of the Church ol Ireland, tbe amount of com
positions for impropriate tithes then came to £108,877 a-year, while
those for the tithes of incumbents of parishes were £486,783 a-year, and
of appropriators, £48,032 a-year. See Eepoits of 1836 and 1837. To
estimate accurately the tithes owned by the religious houses, additions
should be made to this amount of impropriate tithes, to represent por
tions of them which after Elizabeth's reign were restored by the Crown
to the parishes out of which they accrued, or which were given to them
by private bounty.

78 EETEOSPECT. [Chap. V.
seven were appropriate to the monasteries, fifty-two of
them having vicars endowed, and one hundred and five
being without vicars.*
Appropriations when made to monastic corporations
still left the emoluments which were transferred by
them avaUable for religious uses ; they therefore can
not be held to have been entirely without benefit for
the Church. But to the parishes and the parochial sys
tem they were altogether injurious. From the former
they withdrew a large revenue, which properly should
have been expended in the localities whence it was de
rived : while for the most part they left only an inade
quate remuneration for the resident incumbents, whether
vicars or curates — enough to provide subsistence, and in
some instances a few comforts, without any surplus for
hospitality or the poor. From the latter they took away
the richer benefices, these being generally those appro
priated, as the poorer would not afford a surplus above
the provision which was required to maintain the dis
charge of religious duties.
The impoverishment of the appropriated parishes
acted injuriously upon the supply of clergy who were
willing to serve in them. They were of an inferior
* These are the numbers of benefices and impropriate rectories in
the diocese of Meath, as they were reported to Queen Elizabeth by Sir
Henry Sidney. The impropriate necessarily correspond with those which
had belonged to the monasteries, as it was by the confiscation of their
possessions the Crown acquired its power to dispose of them. This
letter is dated 28th April, 1666, See Sidney's Letters and Memorials,
i. 112. Other evidence of the extent of the appropriations will be found
cited by Mant, vol, i. pp, 356-370 ; and also at pp, 358, 370-379, 389.
See also " Eeport of the Eoyal Commission to inquire into the Unions in
the Irish Church," dated 18th April, 1831,

Chap. V.] EETEOSPECT. 79
grade, deficient in knowledge and attainments. From
them the evil of the system extended much farther.
The standard of intellectual cultivation could not be
lowered for so numerous a portion of the order with
out reducing the level generally. The clerical call
ing fell in popular estimation, and its interests were
neglected. To the same result other causes contributed. A dis
turbed state of society subjected the benefices which
were situated outside the Pale to loss and suffering from
violence : in some places they were seized, and in
truders, even, it is said, laymen, forcibly put in posses
sion. In all, even the best districts, patronage was
often improperly exercised, the bishops being not sel
dom overawed by the chiefs and nobles into injudicious
selections, and many appointments by the Court of Rome
(which, although prohibited by law, still continued) being
obtained through private interest, and made in igno
rance of the character of those promoted.*
Affected by these various unfavourable influences,
and perhaps still more by the state of society as it ex
isted everywhere outside Dublin and a limited circuit
around it, the parochial organization was received by
the Reformed Church in a condition of weakness and
insufficiency. Unfortunately the remedies imperatively
demanded were not applied, and the measures of Henry
and his successors tended to aggravate, not to lessen,
the hindrances to its efficacy. When the monasteries
were dissolved, the appropriated parishes might fairly
have expected that the tithes which were drawn away
* See Note S of Appendix.

80 EETEOSPECT. [Chap. V.
from them would have been restored : the interests of
the Church, indeed of society, demanded that, for the
work of education heretofore conducted by the Reli
gious Orders, schools and colleges should have been
provided. But neither measure was approved. The
tithes, being either retained by the Crown or granted
to laymen, became mingled with the mass of private
property, and were held to be under no more obli
gation than the rest of it was to contribute to eccle
siastical or charitable uses. An educational institution
suited for either the gentry or the clergy was not
established until about ten years before Queen Eliza
beth's death, when Trinity College was founded. Some
alleviation of these adverse circumstances might have
been obtained from judicious redistribution of ecclesias
tical revenues : but nothing of the kind was attempted.
The division of parishes, the emoluments of dignitaries
and incumbents, remained exactly as they had been,
and no alteration was made to correspond with social
changes. The only expedient employed in order to
meet the case of ill-endowed benefices, such as the
vicarages and impropriate curacies, was one from which
many evils subsequently flowed — the creation of unions
and pluralities.
Without redistribution the property which remained
for ecclesiastical purposes, after the abstraction of what
belonged to the monasteries, inadequately met the needs
of the Church. This inadequacy was increased by
subsequent events. Causes, some of which operated
from without, and others of which arose from within,
combined to lessen the amount and value of ecclesiasti
cal endowments. Among the former were the continual

Chap. V.] EETEOSPECT. 81
wars and insurrections of Elizabeth's reign, which were
attended by much waste and spoliation. Government,
maintaining itself with difficulty in any part of the
island, could afford little protection to districts outside
the neighbourhood of Dublin. Glebes and See-lands
were frequently seized by the insurgent chieftains ;
and, their former boundaries being defaced, they be
came confused with the adjoining private property. Of
the internal sources of loss, the most serious was the
law which permitted bishops to deal with episcopal
property in an improvident manner. With the con
sent of their deans and chapters, often easily procured,
they could lease their lands for any term and at any
rent which they thought fit, or even alienate them.
Such a power presented an opportunity of enriching
themselves, and their relatives or friends, which in
times of trouble, when the incumbents knew not of
what opinions their successors might be, and were often
far from favouring the system they professed to serve,
was too frequently taken advantage of.*
If we turn from financial to other interests of the
Church, here also the policy pursued on behalf of the
Crown will be found to have been injudicious. The
inmates of the religious houses, when deprived of their
own establishments, were not provided with other places
of retreat, and were scattered among the people over
all parts of the country. They were, even more than
* Mant, in hia History of the Irish Church, enumerates instances of
improvident dispositions of the See-lands (vol, i. p, 279), He also men
tions several cases where, owing to the poverty of the bishoprics, arising
from this and other causes, their incumbents were aUowed to hold bene
fices in oommendam (vol. i. p. 282, &c,).

82 EETEOSPECT. [Chap. V,
the secular clergy, opposed to innovation : and the
treatment which their societies received deepened op
position into active hostUity. They became the most
decided, and from their abiHty and energy the most
formidable, adversaries of the Reformed Church. More
than any other agency they kept aUve a spirit of unwa
vering allegiance to Rome. Nor did this cease with the
generation which suffered ; for although the Orders of a
higher class could not well be maintained without en
dowments, this was not the case with those of an inferior.
Upon " the begging friars " (as they were called) repres
sive statutes and confiscations had little effect. Subsist
ing upon alms, in reality as well as profession poor, they
offered nothing to attract cupidity: as they were wan
derers, without fixed settlements, interference with them
was difficult, if not impossible ; and, accordingly, their
associations, although by law dissolved, practicaUy es
caped and continued to exist.*
While the monastic portion of the clerical order was
thus arrayed against the new religious system no steps
were taken to gain over to its support such of the pa
rochial clergy as were of Irish race. Indeed, one of
the measures adopted was calculated to repel them. By
a statute of the Parliament which met in 1536 it was
provided, that if a benefice fell vacant it should be
conferred upon a person who could speak English, un
less, after proclamations in the next market town, none
such could be had.f The policy in favour with English
statesmen at this time (of which the enactment now
* See Brewer's Introduction to the 3rd volume of the Calendar of the
Carew MSS., p, xiv.
f 28 Henry YIII, (Ireland), chap, 15, sec. 7.

Chap. V.] EETEOSPECT. 83
mentioned is an example) was to confine the Irish clergy
to the Irish districts, and even there to discourage and
supersede them whenever possible. The effect of this
necessarily was to subject them to the exclusive influ
ence of the uncivilized condition of society amid which
they lived, and effectually to bar the possibility of their
improvement. With respect to the clergy of the Reformed Church
in the English districts, the neglect to provide means of
educkting persons intended for the ministry produced
consequences not less injurious than those which ensued
in the case of the Irish, They were ignorant, of rude
manners, negligent in the performance of their duties.
In order to compensate for their defects, it was thought
expedient to induce English clergymen to accept Irish
benefices : some were therefore sent over ; others came
of themselves ; but of either class there were few, and
most of the latlfer were (it is said) either "unlearned,
or men of some bad note, for which they had forsaken
England."* What was the result of the course thus pursued
in relation to ecclesiastical affairs has been pictured
in a contemporary representation, which is of such
high authority that more than a passing reference
to it seems called for. In the year 1566, Sir Henry
Sidney, then Lord Deputy, addressed to Queen Eliza
beth a letter, describing the state of the Church, and
suggesting some remedies. The diocese of Meath, which
he terms the " best inhabited country of the realm," he
selects as an illustration, and from it (he observes) "it
will be easy to conjecture in what case the rest is, where
* Spenser, View of Ireland, p, 670,
G 2

84 EETEOSPECT. [Chap. V.
little or no reformation of religion or manners hath yet
been planted." The parishes in this diocese, which
had been vested in the monasteries, were now impro
priate in the Crown: of these, as has been already
mentioned, fifty-two had vicars, and one hundred and
five none. The latter Sidney found to be under the care
of curates, to whom he appHes the epithets of " simple
or sorry"; of whom only eighteen could speak Eng
lish; "of little learning or civility, living on the bare
altarages (that is fees for services connected with the
altar); without a house standing for any of them to
dwell in ; the walls of many of their churches being
down ; very few chancels covered ; windows and doors
ruined and spoiled. The former class (in which vicars
officiated) were (he mentions) better served and main
tained than the others, "yet but badly." Having thus
exhibited the condition of the parishes, he turns from
them to what he terms "the spoil" of the bishoprics,
occasioned "partly by the prelates themselves, partly
by the potentates, their noisome neighbours " ; and then
as to the entire Church, he emphatically declares "your
Majesty may believe it, that upon the face of the
earth, where Christ is professed, there is not a Church
in so miserable a case ; the misery of which con
sisteth in these particulars : the ruin of the very temples
themselves ; the want of good ministers to serve in them
when they shall be re-edified, and of competent living
for the ministers being well chosen." *
* Sidney's Letters, &c., vol. i. p. 112. At a stiU later date, but
also in Queen EUzabeth's reign, Spenser gives an even more unfavourable
account of the condition of the Church and clergy. He describes the
poverty of the benefices in the Irish districts, which often do not yield a

Chap. V.] EETEOSPECT. 66
With a Church thus depressed, what progress was
made by the religion which it was established to teach ?
This question requires to be answered separately for the
English and the Irish portions of the people, so difl'erent
were the proceedings adopted as to each, and the influ
ences affecting them respectively.
To consider the case of the Irish first — there is no
doubt that the hostile relations existing between them
and the English Government raised great difficulties in
the way of their accepting the Reformation, Protest
antism, as it was presented to them, assumed a poli
tical, rather than a theological, character. The tenet
most prominently put forward was the supremacy of
the Crown in the Church ; this was asserted to be a
part of the royal prerogative, and was proclaimed by
similar legislation, enforced by similar penalties, as other
branches of it. To admit the supremacy was therefore
to strengthen the regal authority, it gave what was
supposed to be a religious sanction to the dominion
claimed by each English Sovereign over Ireland — a
dominion always submitted to with reluctance, and,
when opportunity enabled, certain to be resisted. Any
religious system which involved this doctrine came in
conflict with national sentiment,
competent maintenance for any honest minister to live upon — scarcely
enough to buy him a gown. The clergy (whether, it would seem, Irish or
English) he charges with simony and other " enormities." The Irish (he
says) are mere laymen, save that they have taken orders. — View of
Ireland, pp. 508, 510.
In 1607, Sir John Davis accompanied Sir Arthur Chichester to some
of the Ulster counties upon a progress to inquire into their condition.
He reports the poverty of the livings in Cavan, and adds : " The incum
bents were such poor, ragged, ignorant creatures we could not esteem
them worthy of the meanest of those livings." — Davis's Tracts, p. 266.

86- EETEOSPECT. [Chap. V.
Whether by judicious measures such Protestant
opinions, as are not connected with the supremacy,
might have been successfully introduced among the
Irish, is uncertain, since none such were tried. The
course actually pursued was calculated to raise only
obstacles in the way of their acceptance. Not merely
were the Irish clergy, as we have seen, neglected, and
no effort made to conciliate them, but they were not
even addressed by argument or persuasion. Bishops,
when appointed by the Crown, and sometimes incum
bents of benefices, were required to acknowledge the
supremacy : in other respects, the Irish clergy were left
to themselves, without its being proposed to reason with
or instruct them. Under such circumstances, how could
their conversion be expected ? They had little know
ledge of the Latin language, and less of the Greek or
English, and until the reign of James I. there was neither
an Irish New Testament nor an Irish Prayer Book;
until as late as 1685 not an Irish Old Testament. *
In truth, Irish publications of any kind were then and
long afterwards discouraged by English statesmen : they
tended to preserve the language ; and to preserve the
language, it was held, would foster national sympathies
and feelings.
To address the Irish laity separately from their clergy
would have been useless. Always remarkable for at
tachment to their religious teachers, f they had never
* See Note T of Appendix,
f Mommsen attributes to the Irish and the Gauls (both of Celtic race)
that they see in the priest a father, "die kindliche Frommigkeit, die in
dem Priester den Yater sieht und ihn in alien Dingen um Eath fragt." —
History of Rome, book v,, chap, vii., near the end.

Chap. V.] EETEOSPECT. 87
at any time initiated an independent religious move
ment. Of the knowledge requisite for the purpose they
had absolutely none. They could not have acted by
themselves, and they would not follow English guides.
Laity and clergy took up the same position : both re
jected what England dictated: both faithfully adhered
to the Church and Court of Rome.
With the colonists of the English districts the same
circumstances which predisposed the native Irish against
the Reformation aided its progress. Their interests were
bound up with the greatness of England : on that they
depended for the retention of their own power in the
midst of a hostile people, exceeding them altogether in
number. They looked to the parent country as a guide,
and inclined to follow its example. No difficulty arose
with the Irish House of Commons, returned as it was
from towns and counties with English inhabitants, in
passing the Supremacy Acts of Henry or Elizabeth :
afterwards, the constituencies which were represented
expressed little dissatisfaction with its legislation.
The doctrinal teaching of Protestantism was there
fore, in Dublin and the English districts, relieved from
the difficulties which surrounded it in the Irish. It was
promoted by reprinting or importing the various publi
cations which in England advocated or served its cause.
When the English Prayer Book was adopted, it was at
once published also in Dublin ; when the English Bible,
after Elizabeth's accession, appeared in a convenient
form in London, numerous copies were brought over to
Dublin and circulated.* The impulse thus given was
* In Ware's Annals, Eliz. (p. 3, ed. Dublin, 1705), it is said that
John Dale, a bookseller, sold seven thousand Bibles in two years' time

88 EETEOSPECT. [Chap. V.
followed and assisted by the use in many churches
of the Pale of the English Prayer Book and Bible.
Under such influences a generation of English-speaking
people grew up.* That many of these, especially of
such as dwelt at a distance from the metropolis, still dis
sented from the Established Church is true ; but on the
other side are to be reckoned all the new colonists. It
may therefore be affirmed with confidence, that at the
period with which we are now concerned a large pro
portion of the English race were Protestant as well in
opinion and belief as by profession.
for the booksellers of London, when they were flrst printed and brought
over to Ireland, in the year 1566.
He also mentions that Heath, Archbishop of York (himself friendly
to the Roman Catholic party in England), sent to the two Deans of Dublin
(viz, of St. Patrick's and Christ Church) two large Bibles, to be placed
in the middle of their choirs, which, he says, caused "a great rush of
people on purpose to read them,"
* Another matter, which in the diocese of Dublin aided the progress of
the Eeformation, is, that it was not until 1600 the Pope made an appoint
ment to the See in opposition to the archbishop in possession. Thus the
authority of Curwin, and for thirty-three years of Loftus also, was prac
tically undisputed. When the Pope did appoint, he sent over Oviedo, a
monk of Spain, who came with troops sent from that country to assist
Tyrone — a circumstance not likely to make him acceptable to the Anglo-
Irish.

CHAPTER VL
[1603-1625.]
JAMES THE FIRST, upon his accession to the throne
of England, found in Ireland universal submission.
He succeeded just when the prolonged struggle, which
the native portion of the people maintained against
English dominion during the reign of his predecessor,
was terminated, and received a kingdom which, what
ever may have been its real sentiments, professed
obedience. Order had, however, not been completely
established, and society still continued to exhibit the
effects of the wars and disturbances through which for
forty years before it had passed.
From the time when the native princes and chief
tains submitted to Henry II. , the Irish had been treated
as enemies, against whom the colonists needed to be
protected. The union of the two races was obstructed,
and so far as legislation could promote the object, they
were kept apart. For the English in Ireland to imi
tate the habits or manners of the natives, to take their
names, to furnish them with horses or armour, were
made punishable offences ; to intermarry with them was,
if the law were enforced, treason.* Measures of this
* See the provisions of the Statute of Kilkenny. This statute is not
in the Statute-book. It has been admirably edited by Mr, Hardiman.

90 THE CHUECH [Chap. VI.
character avail little against the influence of neighbour
hood and intimacy ; but they are not the less mischievous
in their effects. They proceed upon an assumption of
superiority on the part of the nation imposing them,
which the people against whom they are directed
are certain to resent.
James, who had been brought up in Scotland, and
was therefore not biassed by the prevalent English
ideas, seems from the first to have proposed to himself
a policy of a different character. All who lived in
Ireland, natives as well as colonists, he professed to
regard as subjects who, if obedient, deserved his pa
ternal care. Distinctions of laws and customs in dif
ferent provinces or districts were to be abolished, and
the whole system of jurisprudence, the constitution of
society, to be assimilated to what was established in
England. In order to accomplish these ends, the first matter
entered upon was to extend everywhere the adminis
tration of justice in the English manner. The new
counties, defined during Elizabeth's reign, facUitated
this measure ; and to them was now added another
shire, formed from part of the county of Dublin,
which was considered too large. The new shire was
named Wicklow. It completed the division of the island
It was renewed by an Act of 10 Hen, YIL, except as to some clauses
which forbade the English to speak Irish among themselves, or to ride in
the Irish manner. The Acts, 6 Edw, IY., c. 3 ; 25 Hen, YI,, c, 4 ; 28
Hen, YL, c. 1, are dictated by the same policy : and as late as Henry
YIII, it is continued by 28 Hen, VIIL, c. 15, which prohibits the Eng
lish from following the Irish habit of wearing long hair, or hair on the
upper Up, and from using (as the natives did) linen dyed with saffron, and
fixes prescribed dimensions for shirts and smocks.

1603-1625] IN THE EEIGN OF JAMES I. 91
into counties, which from that time to the present
has, with some alterations, but merely of boundaries,
continued the same. The circuits of the judges were
enlarged, so as to take within their reach at first Ulster,
and subsequently all parts of the country.
The next proceeding was to induce as many as pos
sible of the Irish chieftains to surrender their existing
titles, and accept grants from the Crown. On such oc
casions they were obliged to make new arrangements
with those who held under them, and rents payable in
money were required to be substituted for the services
and duties that had been until then rendered.*
While these proceedings were in progress, either
secret information, or some occurrences in Ulster, led
the Irish Government to apprehend a renewal of dis
turbances, and to take precautions against it. Tyrone,
who, although, as has been before mentioned, his rebel
lion was entirely subdued, had as yet not been inter
fered with, and Tyrconnell, another of the northern
chieftains — either because they intended insurrection,
or because, if innocent, they feared that in the event
of an outbreak they would be treated as guilty — de
cided to consult for their own safety, and fled to
the Continent. A short time afterwards, O'Dogherty,
also a native chieftain, who had before been their
ally, proclaimed war, and, being at first unchecked,
seized and burned the town of Derry. Tyrone
and Tyrconnell were at once treated as outlaws ;
O'Dogherty met his death from an accidental shot.
Thereupon, the territories not only of these three
* See Sir John Davis's Biscovery, Sec, pp. 57, 58.

92 THE CHUECH [Chap. VI.
Chiefs, but also of their followers, were held to be
confiscated to the Crown. Thus immense tracts of
land, amounting to the entire, or nearly the entire, of
the counties of Donegal, Tyrone, Derry, Fermanagh,
Cavan, and Armagh, were placed at the disposal of the
King. James, notwithstanding the policy which he had laid
down to guide his general conduct towards the natives,
entertained upon the question of colonization precisely
the same ideas as his predecessors, Elizabeth and Mary.
So also did his ablest ministers.* It was, therefore, de
termined to plant the lands now subject to his control
with English and Scotch settlers. As former proceed
ings for a similar purpose had been attended with little
success, the causes of their failure were investigated,
and the plan for the present occasion framed with pro
visions designed to obviate them. In devising it the
King was aided by the great abilities of Bacon, at that
time his Attomey -General in England, and by the ex
perience in Irish affairs of Sir Arthur Chichester, then
the Lord Deputy.
The scheme of plantation ultimately approved was
upon a most extensive scale ; the importation of settlers
being intended to be numerous enough to ensure that
they, and not the natives, should preponderate in influ
ence over the planted counties. Lest the colonists might
be induced to abandon their previous habits, and in order
to prevent their assimilation with the Irish they were
to be encouraged to live together in villages. No single

* See, for instance, Lord Bacon's Tract entitled, Considerations touching
the Plantation in Ireland, and Sir John Davis's Biscovery, &o., p. 68.

1603-1625] IN THE EEIGN OF JAMES I. 98
proprietor was to have more than two thousand acres.
Those who had this amount were to constitute one class.
A second class might receive fifteen hundred acres, and a
third one thousand. The first class were to build a castle
and a fortified courtyard (called a bawn) ; the second a
house and bawn ; from the third a bawn only was re
quired. The first class were to introduce twenty fami
lies, numbering forty-eight persons of English or Scotch
birth ; four of their farmers were to have one hundred
and twenty acres, and to hold in fee-farm ; to six, leases
were to be made of one hundred acres each ; and the re
sidue of every allotment of two thousand acres was to be
occupied by husbandmen and artificers. The other classes
were to be under similar obligations proportioned to the
dimensions of their grants. Large estates were to be
assigned to the Companies of the Corporation of Lon
don.* Lands which had belonged to the Church were
to be restored to it; and, in addition, portions of the
estates forfeited by laymen were to be granted as glebes
for parochial clergymen. In each county certain dis
tinct and defined districts were to be reserved for the
dispossessed natives. f
These rules, admirably calculated to promote the
objects of those who prepared them, were (not, how
ever, without considerable variations) carried out. The
* When the lands were distributed. Trinity CoUege also received a
portion. t Davis, however, says that " the king made a mixed plantation of
British and Irish, that they might grow up together in one nation : only,
the Irish were in some places transplanted from the woods and moun
tains into the plains and open countries, that being removed (like wild
fruit-trees) they might grow the mUder and bear the better and sweeter
fruit." — Biscovery, &c., p, 58,

M THE CHUECH [Chap. VI.
result was, that a large number of English and Scotch
emigrated from their own countries, and came and set
tled in the six forfeited counties. Of these the Scotch
formed a majority : and as two other Ulster counties,
Down and Antrim, were also in the early part of the
seventeenth century peopled from the same kingdom,
they gained a decided predominance of power and
influence in the northern districts of the island.
The introduction of so many Scotch colonists added
another to the races of which the Irish people were com
posed. From this time they must be classified in three
divisions, each marked by its own peculiar characteris
tics. The distribution of these in the occupation of the
soil, after the plantation had been carried out, was much
as follows : — The principal part of the English dwelt in
Dublin, the Pale, the Ulster settlements, towns in other
parts of the country outside the Pale, especially the sea
ports; the Scotch were altogether in Ulster: the Irish
everywhere else, numbers of them being etlso in the
Pale and Ulster.*
Wlien the plantation had been carried out, the course
of the King's policy towards the natives was resumed,
and partly in order to complete it, partly with the ob
ject of obtaining a confirmation of the attainder of the
Ulster chieftains and of the confiscation of their terri
tories, a parliament was summoned. To give weight to
its enactments, to exhibit the impartial rule of the So
vereign, and in the hope of conciliating at least some
* Estimates of numbers, either of the people or of their subdivisions
in this reign, are mere conjectures. It seems probable that persons of
unmixed native descent continued to form the majority, Davis, however,
seems to think they did not. Biscovery, &c., p, 3.

1608-1625] IN THE EEIGN OF JAMES I. 95
discontented tribes, it was determined to extend the
representation of the people in the House of Commons.
The right to vote for its members, and the right to sit,
if elected, were to be irrespective of any distinction of
race or religion. It was also determined that not only
iihould the entire number of counties (now for the first
time) be represented, but that a number of new bo
roughs should be created. In selecting these, however,
regard was had to the supposed tendencies of their
inhabitants in favour of the English interest; and it
was owing to this circumstance that most of the new
towns which had been commenced by the settlers in
Ulster were among them.
The parliament thus summoned met in the month
of May, 1613. The House of Lords consisted of bishops
and temporal peers, the latter about twenty-five in num
ber; the members returned to the House of Commons
amounted to two hundred and thirty-two, of whom two
hundred and twenty-six attended. These were found
to be divided into two parties, one on the side of the
King's government, and ready to support their mea
sures, the other adverse to them : the former English
and Scotch, in religion Protestant, numbering one hun
dred and twenty-five ; the latter composed of the other
members, partly Irish, partly English by descent, all
opposed to the Reformation, and, from refusing to con
form, then termed Recusants.*
A contest for the office of Speaker, for which each
of the two parties put forward a different candidate.

* See as to this parUament, Leland, who refers to a MS, in the Lam-
teth Library. — History of Ireland, vol. ii, p, 447.

96 THE CHUECH [Chap. VI.
finally ended in the appointment of Sir John Davis,
James's Irish Attorney- General, and one of the most
eminent persons of the age. To this circumstance we
are indebted for the most complete account extant of the
differences between the constitution of this parliament
and that of its predecessors, Davis having taken the op
portunity of an address to Sir Arthur Chichester, when
he as Deputy ratified his appointment, to enter at some
length upon the subject.* In this he points out that
former parliaments were summoned on special occasions,
and for limited purposes ; that the House of Commons
came at first from a small number of shires, and even when
the counties were increased, not from the remote shires of
Ulster : whereas, the present parliament was (he observes)
called not to repel a rebellion, or to reduce degenerate
subjects to their obedience, but, as God hath blessed the
whole island with an universal peace and obedience, to
gether with plenty, civility, and other felicities, princi
pally in order then to confirm and establish these blessings,
and to make them perpetual unto posterity. The time
at which it is convened is (he says) when the kingdom^

* Sir John Davis's address is preserved in the original journal of this
House of Commons, from which it is printed in the Appendix to the
second volume of Leland's History. Davis was sent to Ireland by James ;
but he had in the previous reign acquired distinction in England, espe
cially by a philosophical poem, entitled Nosce Teipsum, of great merit,
but scarcely deserving Hallam's judgment that " perhaps no language
can produce a poem extending to so great a length, of more condensation
of thought, or in which fewer languid verses wUl be found," His repu
tation now rests on the historical treatise in relation to Ireland, which has
been referred to in previous notes to this chapter. Charles I,, in 1626,
appointed him Chief Justice of England, but he died suddenly before he
could enter on this office.

1603-1625] IN THE EEIGN OF JAMES I. 97
wholly reduced into shire-ground, contains thirty-three*
counties at large; when all Ulster and Connaught, as
well as Leinster and Munster, have voices in parliament
by their knights and burgesses ; when all the inhabi
tants, English of birth, English of blood, the new
British colony, and the old Irish natives, do all meet
together to make laws for the common good of them
selves and their posterity, f
In conformity with the King's general policy, and
with the objects which were by their Speaker thus set
before the House of Commons, an Act was obtained
from this parliament which repealed all the statutes
then in force that tended to keep separate the people
of English and of Irish race. Its recitals were as im
portant as its enacting provisions. They declared that
"the cause of the former laws did now cease; in that
all the natives and inhabitants of the kingdom, without
difference and distinction, were taken into his Majesty's
gracious protection ; and that there were no better means
to settle peace than to allow them to commerce and
match together, that so they might grow into one na
tion, and former differences be forgotten.''^
Along with this parliament a Convocation of|the
clergy was, for the first time in Ireland, summoned.
It met on the 24th of May, 1613. It was modelled after

* This number seems to be obtained by regarding Tipperary as divided
into two ridings.
j- " I speak " — said Lord Clare in his celebrated speech advocating the
Union — " I speak without incurring the hazard of contradiction, when I
say, that Ireland never had an assembly which could be caUed a parlia
ment until the reign of James the First."
X Act 13 James I., ch. 5. H

98 THE CHUECH [Chap. VI.
the Convocation of Canterbury, except that it was for
the entire island, whereas that was only for a province.
It consisted of two Houses, sitting separately — an Upper,
composed of bishops ; and a Lower, of certain dignitaries
ex-officio, and of two representatives, called proctors,
elected for each diocese by its clergy. Jones, Arch
bishop of Dublin, and then also Lord Chancellor, pre
sided in the former, and Barlow, afterwards Archbishop
of Tuam, was Prolocutor of the latter.* Although so
few years had elapsed of James's reign, almost all the
bishops of this date owed their appointments to him :
they were by birth either English or Scotch. t Parlia
ment and Convocation were not dissolved until 1615,
there being in the interval adjournments and proroga
tions of both. Convocation assumed the same power of
taxing the clergy which was enjoyed by the English
Convocations, and not long before it was dissolved
voted the King a subsidy.
In 1614, the attention of Convocation was directed
to the Articles of Faith of 1566, then in use in Ireland.
A consideration of their brief and imperfect nature led
to a determination that others of a more extended and
elaborate character should be framed and substituted for
them; and accordingly a license to prepare articles of
religion was obtained from the Crown. J
* Both Jones and Barlow were from Cambridge, Jones held the office
of Lord Chancellor, from his appointment to the archbishopric, untU his
death in 1619. Barlow was recommended for the Archbishopric of Tuam
to Charles I. by Ussher, in 1629 (Cotton's Fasti, iv. 14). He was pro
bably, therefore, of theological opinions similar to those held by Ussher.
j- See Note TJ of Appendix.
X This writ. Archbishop King informed Swift, in 1711, and Arch
bishop Wake, in 1717, that he had seen. (See Dr, Eeeves's Paper " On

1603-1625] IN THE EEIGN OP JAMES I. 99
At this time in the English Church the Articles
known as the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion were in
use. They were dated as of 1562 ; but it was not until
1570 that their subscription was required from the clergy
by Parliament.* These Articles had been so framed as
to admit of some latitude in their interpretation, and
were in practice assented to by persons of opposite opi
nions. This was especially the case in reference to the
Article relating to the questions of predestination and
election (xvii).
As the Irish Established Church had heretofore fol
lowed in the footsteps of the English, it might have
been expected that for this reason, as well as from the
advantage which the freedom of opinion conceded by the
English Articles gave the clergy, they would have been
at once adopted by Convocation ; but it was decided
otherwise : and accordingly Articles which, while making
use of the Thirty-nine Articles, and of other standards
of faith, should as a whole be an original composition,
were directed to be prepared. That a motive to this
course was a desire to act independently ; to show that
the Reformed Irish Church had for itself considered the
doctrines respecting which it pronounced judgment, and
had arrived in respect of them at its own conclusions,
is certain ; but there is reason also to think that with
this was united a desire to speak upon the question of

Convocations ", already referred to at page 20, note.) Some writers date
the first meeting of this Convocation in 1615, but Dr, Eeeves shows that
it met nearly coincidently with the ParUament, and at the times men
tioned in the text,
* 13 Eliz,, ch. 12, A.D. 1570 (English).
H 2

100 THE CHUECH [Chap. VI.
predestination more exclusively in favour of the views
of the German Reformers than the English Articles did.
This was the case more particularly in the Lower
House, where circumstances gave a preponderance to
what was afterwards termed "doctrinal Puritanism":
a religious system which, in reference to predestination,
if it did not adopt the opinions usually associated with
the name of Calvin precisely in his own words, certainly
differed from them only in a more mitigated form of ex
pression. The circumstances which had this effect were,
in the first place, the position of Irish Protestantism in
the country engaging it in constant antagonism to the
Roman Catholic creed, and as a result drawing it farther
and farther from its tenets ; and, in the second place,
the influence which the new College, where Puritanism
had been introduced by its first Provosts, began to ex
ercise over the clergy.*
The tendency of Convocation soon manifested it
self ; for when the new Articles came to be framed,
instead of adopting the language of the English Seven
teenth Article, recourse was had to "the Lambeth Ar
ticles," a composition which had been drawn up to
please the Puritan party by some English divines about
* The first Provost was Archbishop Loftus, who was so decidedly of
the Puritan party, that he recommended for an Irish bishopric Cart
wright, its most eminent champion in England (Shirley's Letters, &c.,
p, 321). The second was Travers, who had been Hooker's antagonist on
the questions in controversy with the Puritans, and of whom Walton
relates, that it was said, when Hooker preached Canterlwy at the Temple
Church in the morning, Travers preached Geneva at the same place in the
afternoon. Alvey was the third, who was also a Puritan. See Elring
ton's Life of Ussher, pp. 15, 16. Sir Arthur Chichester, also, the Deputy
at this time, is said to have belonged to the Puritan party.

1603-1625] IN THE EEIGN OF JAMES I. 101
four years before Queen Elizabeth's death, and which,
although accepted by Archbishop Whitgift, she, with
the concurrence of Burleigh, had rejected.
The Lambeth Articles deviated from the English
Seventeenth Article by adding to what was contained
in the latter a distinct affirmance of the doctrine of
reprobation. Their first and third Articles say, "that
God from eternity has predestinated some unto life, and
has reprobated some unto death : that of the predesti
nated there is a predetermined and fixed number which
can neither be increased nor diminished."*
The composition of the Irish Articlest is attributed
to James Ussher, afterwards Primate, than whom no
one had at that time, either in England or Ireland, a
higher reputation for ecclesiastical learning. He then
held the office of Professor of Divinity in Trinity Col
lege. His theological opinions were known to be of
the Calvinistic school of divinity.
Whether the Articles as they were ultimately ap
proved differed in any respect from Ussher's original
draft does not appear. When completed they were one
hundred and four in number. Their most important
difference from the Thirty-nine Articles was in respect
of the predestinarian question. They on this subject
adopt the additions which were made by the Lambeth
Articles to the English Seventeenth Article, and bor
row the language as to reprobation which has been
* i. Deus ab etemo praedestinavit quosdam ad vitam, et quosdam ad
mortem reprobavit. iii, Prsedestinatorum prsefinitus et certus est nume-
rus, qui nec augeri nec minui potest. Cited from Hardwick on Thirty-
nine Articles, App., p. 344.
f See Carte, Life of Ormond, vol, i. p. 147.

102 THE CHUECH [Chap. VI.
cited. They, however, contain a clause apparently in
tended to mitigate the severity of the Article as to
reprobation. It is expressed in the following terms : —
"All things (it proceeds) being ordained for the mani
festation of his {i.e. God's) glory, and his glory being
to appear both in the works of his mercy and of his
justice, it seemed good to his heavenly wisdom to choose
out a certain number towards whom he would extend
his undeserved mercy, leaving the rest to be spectacles
of his justice."*
Their other differences from the Thirty-nine Articles
were owing to the greater number of subjects entered
upon, rather than to variance in doctrine. Among
these subjects are some more usually dealt with in
homilies, such as our duty to God, and our duty to
our neighbour; and some which involve questions that
other Churches have judged it wiser not to enter upon
— such as the primeval state of man, the fall of angels,
and the place of departed spirits after death, f It de
serves to be noted that as regards the observance of
Sunday the Articles lay down teaching directly con
trary to the directions issued in England by James,
who enjoined that in the intervals between the services
in church the people should indulge in such sports
* Among Ussher's MSS, preserved in the Library of Trinity College,
Dublin, was found a Tract by Hooker, which discusses the question of pre
destination. It is printed in the Appendix to the second volume of Keble's
edition of Hooker's works. The language of the Irish Articles in refer
ence to predestination should be compared with what Hooker in this
Paper describes as St, Augustine's " latter judgment " upon the subject.
See Note V of Appendix,
f See Elrington's Observations upon the Articles in his Life of Ussher,
p. 44.

1603-1625] IN THE EEIGN OP JAMES I. 103
and games as he enumerated. The Fifty-sixth Article
expressly declares, that " the first day of the week,
which is the Lord's Day, is wholly to be dedicated to
the service of God: and that therefore we are bound
therein to rest from our common and daily business,
and to bestow that leisure upon holy exercises, both
public and private."
From this circumstance, as well as from the general
tendency of the Articles, it clearly appears that Convo
cation proceeded spontaneously, without the slightest
dictation on the part of the Crown : and as it has never
been suggested that the assembly was not duly sum
moned, its standard of doctrine may be taken fairly to
represent what was generally approved by such portion
of the Irish clergy as were really in communion with
the Reformed Church. That the Articles as enacted
were permitted by the King has excited surprise. Pro
bably at a later period they would not have been ac
cepted by him, for then his ecclesiastical policy was
opposed to the theology which they represented ; and
he altogether discouraged Calvinism, and was actively
hostile to Puritans and Puritanism.*
The Articles, when completed by Convocation, were
signed by the President of the Upper House, and by the
Prolocutor of the Lower ; and were then ratified by the
Lord Deputy, pursuant, it is said, to the direction of the

* In 1620, James's hostility to the Puritans was well known. See a
letter of Emanuel Downing to Ussher, of 24th October, 1620 (cited in
EUington's Life, p, 50), in which, among other things, he says, " which
word («'. e. Puritanism), though not understood, but only known to be
most odious to his Majesty, makes many afraid of joining themselves to
the gospel, though in conference their consciences are convicted herein,"

104 THE CHUECH [Chap. VI.
King.* They were not submitted to parliament, for
what reason has not been explained; and, if the King
authorised them, it is now impossible to conjecture.
Although James's political ideas in various respects
favoured the native Irish, they were treated, so far as
religion, with less toleration than in Elizabeth's time.
Besides proclamations both at the commencement and
near the end of this reign against seminary and other
priests remaining in the country, attendance on the
services at church was, in 1605, ordered " on pain of
his Majesty's high displeasure, and of such further pun
ishments as may be lawfully inflicted upon the wilful
contemners of his royal commands and prerogatives."
Nor did the matter rest in words and menaces ; fines
were imposed for disobedience of this order, and also
for refusing to take the Oath of Supremacy. t
It is probable that in these proclamations and penal
ties the King was animated more by a desire to main
tain his prerogative than by any consideration of a
particular form of religion, or zeal to uphold it. He
did not, however, neglect Irish ecclesiastical affairs.
* The official title of the Articles was — " Articles of religion agreed
upon by the Archbishops and Bishops, and the rest of the Clergie of Ire
land, in the Convocation holden at DubUn, in the yeare of our Lord God
1616, for the avoiding of diversities of opinion, and the establishing of
consent touching true religion."
The Articles are printed at length in the Appendix to Elrington's
Life of Ussher ; in the Appendix to Hardwick on the Thirty-nine Articles ;
und also in the Appendix to the first volume of Dr. Killen's Ecclesiastical
History of Ireland. It is therefore not thought necessary to repeat them
in the Appendix to the present treatise.
t See the proclamations and instances of the proceedings to enforce
them, cited by Dr. Killen from the State Papers. — Ecclesiastical History,
vol. i, pp, 475-80,

1603-1625] IN THE EEIGN OF JAMES I. 105
Besides the grants which he made for the benefit of the
Church out of the Ulster forfeited lands, restitution was
compelled of property which had been forcibly taken
from it ; and in various instances when, by errors in
previous patents, ecclesiastical estates were conveyed to
laymen, a composition was obtained, it being intimated
that unless this were conceded the patents would be
vitiated, on the ground that the Sovereigns who issued
them had been deceived in their grants.* Moreover,
the condition of the Church was inquired into by Com
missions t and otherwise, and exertions were used to im
prove the discipline of the clergy, but (as will appear
from investigations made in the next reign) with little
beneficial effect.
Besides the vacancies in the bishoprics which, as has
been mentioned, were before the Convocation of 1613
filled with English and Scotch ecclesiastics, others oc
curred afterwards, in which the same system of appoint
ing Englishmen or Scotch was continued. Ussher, who
was Irish by birth and education, forms an exception.
He was promoted first to Meath, in 1521, and thence to
Armagh, in 1525, a few days before the King's death.
Ussher's predecessor in Armagh, Hampton, was also
appointed by James. His character, attainments, and
* Carte's Life of Ormond, vol, i. p. 35.
j- The Eeports as to the state of the dioceses of the Province of Ar
magh (except Dromore), given by their bishops in 1622, to a Commission
issued by James, are preserved in the Library of Trinity College, Dublin ;
that for Dromore is in the Armagh Library. Mant summarises them in
his History, vol, i,, pp, 395-407. The number and evil effects of the im
propriations clearly appear. Thus, in Armagh, while there were 46 rec
tories, there were 13 vicarages, and 33 impropriate curacies, which had
only small allowances from the lay rectors.

106 THE CHUECH [Chap. VL
exemplary discharge of the duties of his office de
serve mention. Some time before he came to Ireland he
had been sent by James on a mission to the Scotch, in
the hope that his arguments might aid in reconciling
them to episcopacy and to the ecclesiastical policy pro
posed for their Church ; he had then preached a sermon
on these subjects before the Assembly at Glasgow, which
added to his previous reputation.* On one point — tole
ration and charity towards those who differed from
him — he seems to have been in advance of his contem
poraries. There has been preserved a letter of his to
Ussher, occasioned by a sermon of the latter, which
gave offence from language alleged to have been "harsh
and sharp," and which was supposed to have recom
mended a more rigid execution of the laws against
Recusants. In this letter Hampton counsels a milder in
terpretation of " the points offensive," and in reference
to an expression which it was charged had been uttered
in favour of drawing the sword uses the remarkable
words, "of this spirit we are not nor ought to be".t
James's theological opinions varied at different
periods of his reign. He was always strenuous for
episcopacy, repeating as an undoubted maxim in state
craft, "no bishop, no king"; but when he first came
to England this did not hinder his being content with
Calvinistic divines ; and he sent some of them to the
Synod of Dort to represent the English Church. After
that assembly had been held, he observed that the party
which began then to be called Arminian, from its leader

* A copy of his Sermon is in the Library of Trinity College, Dublin.
f The letter is printed in Ussher's works, vol. xv. p. 183. It is dated
17th October, 1622.

1603-1626] IN THE EEIGN OP JAMES I. 107
upon the Continent, and which was in direct opposition
to Calvinism, was eminently zealous for the royal au
thority and prerogative, and he proceeded to give his
confidence and support to them. When he appointed
Ussher to Meath, he inclined decidedly to this party;
nevertheless, the high reputation of this eminent man,
and the personal esteem he had for him, entirely out
weighed the objections which the doctrinal views he
advocated might otherwise have caused.
Before James turned towards Arminianism, he col
lated to the See of Derry George Downham, or Downain,
whose theological opinions in many respects resembled
those held by Ussher. This divine had obtained high
distinction at Cambridge, where he held the Professor
ship of Logic. He had also, with ability, taken part in
the controversy respecting episcopacy,* which was com
menced by the Puritans in the reign of Queen Elizabeth,
and had ever since continued. The views which he ad
vocated in reference to the office of bishop deserve atten
tion. He holds it to be of apostolical institution, and
that this is the opinion to which ascertained facts con
duct — (1) because episcopal government was generaUy
used in all Christian Churches for three hundred years
after Christ and his Apostles, and there is no decree of
any General Council to account for its adoption during
that period ; (2) because it was in use in apostolic times,
and was not contradicted by the Apostles ; (3) because
in some instances the Apostles ordained bishops. In
*" See " Sermon defining the honourable function of bishops, preached
I7th April, A,D, 1608, at the consecration of the Eight Eeverend Father
in God the Lord Bishop of Bath and Wells, by George Downham, D.D,"
Printed at London, a.d. 1608.

108 THE CHUECH [Chap. VI.
connexion with the apostolical origin of the institution,
he refers to a distinction taken by some which he seems
inclined to approve between things which are divini juris,
and those which are apostolici juris : * the former being
generally, perpetually, and immutably necessary ; the
latter not so. With respect to the position of presbyters
in reference to ordination, he holds that the right to
ordain ministers is in bishops, yet he will not so appro
priate it to them as that extraordinarily and in case
of necessity it might not be lawful for presbyters to
ordain. The policy of the King in extending English rule
* When the controversy respecting episcopacy first commenced, the
defence of the order was largely rested upon the fact that the State had
selected this form of Church government. Before the end of Elizabeth's
reign a higher tone was adopted, and episcopacy was by some defended
as being (what Downham thought) apostolici Juris, and by others as
being divini juris in the highest sense. Still the first line of reason
ing continued to be urged by great names. Thus, Lord Bacon in his
Tract on Pacification of the Church, addressed to James I., says : — " That
there should be but one form of discipUne in all Churches, and that
imposed by necessity of a commandment and prescript out of the Word
of God : it is a matter volumes have been compiled of, and therefore
cannot receive a brief dismissal, I, for my part, do confess, that in
revolving the Scriptures, I could never find any such thing ; but that
God had left the like liberty to the Church government, as he had done
to the civil government ; to be varied according to time, and place,
and accidents, which nevertheless his high and divine providence doth
order and dispose," So also Paley, in a sermon preached in the Castle
Chapel, DubUn, at the consecration of Bishop Law, observes, that " whUst
the benefits of Christian morality and the fundamental articles of the
faith are, for the most part, precise and absolute ; are of perpetual,
universal, and immutable obligation ; the laws which respect the dis
cipline, instruction, and government of the community, are deUvered in
terms so general and indefinite, as to admit of an application adapted to
the mutable condition and varying exigencies of the Christian Church,"
— Works, vol, V. p. 32.

1603-1625] IN THE EEIGN OF JAMES I. 109
and law to the Irish districts was expected quickly to
accomplish the improvement of the natives. It was
followed by some satisfactory results, but by no means
to the degree that was anticipated. In truth the
change was too abrupt and too complete. Reform, to
succeed, must accompany, not outrun, the growth of
society. Many Irish reluctantly exchanged the free
dom of their old independence for the restraints of
civilization. The effect, however, of his other great measure,
the Ulster Plantation, upon both the civil and eccle
siastical interests of the country was extensive. The
northern counties were transformed into a high state of
cultivation, covered with towns, villages, and the com
fortable residences of opulent proprietors and farmers.
The Established Church gained increased endowment ;
the churches and glebes were restored and put in order ;
the numbers of her members were augmented by the
English colonists. But, on the other hand, the Scotch
settlers brought with them the dislike to episcopacy
which animated their own countrymen : and although
such sentiments were discouraged by the Government,
they adhered to them. Ultimately they founded a dis
tinct Church upon their own principles. Henceforward
the Irish religious system, representing the differing
opinions of the three races of which the people were
composed, becomes separated into three divisions — Ro
man Catholic, Protestant with episcopacy, and Protestant
without episcopacy.

110 THE CHUECH [Chap. VII.

CHAPTER VII.
[1625-1660.]
WHEN Charles the First came to the throne he
found England divided by religious controversies
relating to ecclesiastical government, discipline, and
doctrine. These had commenced early in the reign of
Queen Elizabeth. They originated with the exiles who,
having resided upon the Continent during the persecu
tion of the Reformers by Mary, returned after her death,
bringing with them ideas in relation to all these subjects
more in consonance with the organization of foreign
Protestant Churches, than with the religious system
which was being established in England. At first the
questions raised were not of importance. Some cere-
moniesj and procedure sanctioned by the Prayer Book
were objected to ; the apathy of the clergy commented
upon ; and abuses in the administration of affairs within
the Church pointed out. From these topics those who
took this side went on adding to and increasing their
grounds of censure, until at last many repudiated epis
copacy altogether ; and a considerable number formed
separate] and^ independent sects. The progress of the
assailing party was met (reaction being always propor
tioned to^ the action which causes it) by corresponding
resistance. The defenders of the Church kept pace with

1625-1660] IN THE EEIGN OP CHAELES I. Ill
its adversaries ; the claims put forward on its behalf
became higher and more exclusive. At first it was
thought enough to prove that the ceremonies and mat
ters of like kind which were condemned were things
indifferent ; that the State had much authority in such
cases, and that certainly the Church could make its own
ordinances as to non-essentials : it was even admitted
that there were imperfections, and the difficulty of re
moving what had grown up with so much that was good
was pleaded. Afterwards no concession would be al
lowed ; everything that had been done or established
was right, and was alone right : episcopacy was not
merely the preferable, but the only permitted, form of
Church government ; and the orders of ministers not or
dained by bishops, even though they were of the foreign
Churches which had no episcopate, invalid.*
The antagonism between these two parties reached
its utmost height in the three first parliaments of Charles.
In each of them, so far as the House of Commons, the
* Bacon, in his Tract entitled. An Advertisement touching the Contro
versies of the Church of England, remarks that "some indiscreet persons
have been bold enough in open preaching to use dishonourable and de
rogatory speech and censure of the Churches abroad ; and that so far as
some of our men ordained in foreign parts have been pronounced to be no
lawful ministers," In the same he says of the opposing Church parties,
'¦' the beginnings were modest, but the extremes are violent ; so as there
is almost as great a distance now of either side from itself as was at first
from the other." (See the Tract in Spedding's Life and Letters of Bacon,
vol, i. p. 73).
On the question of episcopacy this growth of opinion — at least as ex
pressed in argument — will be seen by comparing the reasoning of Whitgift
answering Cartwright in 1573, that the Church had from very early
times determined to be governed by bishops, and of Saravia in 1690, that
episcopal govemment came immediately from God, and men cannot alter
it of their own free will. (See Keble's Preface to Hooker, pp. Ixiii, Ixvi.)

112 THE CHUECH [Chap. VII,
party of change (who for many years had previously,
either as a reproach, or from their own choice, been
known by the appellation of Puritans) prevailed. In
doctrine Calvinistic, they at this time added to their
other grounds of dissatisfaction with the administration
of ecclesiastical affairs, a complaint that Arminianism
(which they termed a covert road to Popery) had for
some time been favoured in the patronage of the Crown,
had gained ground upon the episcopal bench, and was
increasing among the clergy,
Puritanism was in general united with an indispo
sition to admit the high prerogatives claimed for the
Crown by Elizabeth and James, and was therefore
by those princes dreaded as a source of dissension in
the State, Charles, like them, looked at it from a
political aspect, but he added to their objections a
disapprobation of it on religious grounds. He was
unquestionably attached to episcopacy from a consci
entious opinion that it was an institution of divine
authority ; and his doctrinal opinions were those of
Arminius, not of Calvin.
During the four years of his reign, which elapsed
before he dissolved his third parliament (for in that
short time he had called and dissolved two parliaments),
his patronage in the Church was distributed among such
of the clergy as were understood to hold in a decided
and unqualified manner the ideas with which he sym
pathised. One of his appointments was the translation
to the See of London of Laud, then Bishop of Bath and
WeUs, the most zealous and uncompromising, if not the
ablest of the party, which, from its ideas upon Church
government and doctrine, may for distinction (although

1625-1660] IN THE EEIGN OF CHAELES I. 113
the name was not given until a much later date) be from
this time designated the High Church party.
Neither Charles nor the House of Commons in any
of these three parliaments would make the least con
cession to each other : the differences, more particu
larly upon ecclesiastical and religious questions, being
by each side considered matters of principle, could not
be reconciled. When the third parliament was dissolved
the King, despairing of obtaining any more support for
his policy in a new parliament than he had already
found, proceeded to rule, and even to levy taxes, either
of his own absolute authority, or with the advice and
sanction only of his Privy Council. In this course he
persevered for eleven years.
During this time Laud (on whom, in 1633, he con
ferred the Archbishopric of Canterbury) was his adviser
in ecclesiastical affairs. Owing to his counsel, as well as
to the King's predilections, the High Church party con
tinued to be favoured in episcopal appointments. Partly
from this cause, and partly from the zeal and learning
of their leaders and advocates, the principles which they
maintained gradually spread among the clergy, and ul
timately acquired predominance in the Church.
Both the civil and the ecclesiastical policy of the
King displeased the laity. The prerogatives claimed
by the former would have left with the Commons little
authority or influence ; and the latter was supposed to
aim at establishing, what was equally unpopular, clerical
ascendency. The discontented joined, or if they did not
actually join, encouraged the Puritan party, which alone
seemed able to resist the progress of arbitrary power.
When, in 1640, a fourth parliament met, members in
I

114 THE CHURCH [Chap. VII.
connexion or sympathy with Puritanism formed a ma
jority of the House of Commons, and disagreement
between them and the King was at once manifested.
In Ireland the religious dissensions which at this
time divided society in England had not as yet arisen.
The Church was, however, involved in troubles of a
different character. They arose from mismanagement
of its property, and from relaxed discipline. The
latter subject appears to have attracted Charles's at
tention about 1631, for in that year he addressed to
the four Irish archbishops, and through them to the
bishops and clergy, a letter which pointed out, among
other matters which are observed upon, the necessity
of the clergy being careful in the discharge of their
duties ; that they should preach and catechise in the
parishes committed to their charge, and " live an
swerable to the doctrine which they preached to the
people."* The condition of the Church in Ireland, and an in
tention to provide remedies for its abuses, were probably
among the considerations which determined Charles to
entrust the government of that country to some Minister
of pre-eminent ability. Wentworth, on whom he at a
later date conferred the title of Earl of Strafford, was
selected. It also seems to have been with a view to the
conduct of measures of ecclesiastical reform that Bram
hall, who afterwards attained the highest station in the
Irish Church, and whose capacity for business had then
attracted notice, was at the same time induced to re
sign his preferments in England, and become Strafford's
* Cited by Mant, vol, i, p. 438, from Parr's Life of Ussher, p. 38.

1626-1660] IN THE EEIGN OF CHAELES I. 115
chaplain in Ireland. Certainly, both Strafford and
Bramhall proceeded, immediately upon their arrival, in
1633, as if the improvement of the Church was the first,
or one of the first, duties with which the former had
been charged.
A regal visitation, in which Bramhall assisted, and
other investigations made by him, confirmed the truth
of the complaints which had come to England respect
ing the management of the property of the Church and
the discipline of its clergy. Except in Ulster, where
lands were acquired in the Plantation, its financial state
continued to be very much what we have seen that it
was at the close of Queen Elizabeth's reign ; for al
though many impropriations that remained vested in
the Crown were restored to the parishes by King James,
and augmented their resources, upon the other side must
be counted losses of Church lands occasioned by impro
vident grants and leases, and in many instances also
from the forcible intrusion of laymen. As yet there
would appear to have been few of the clergy edu
cated in Trinity College ; generally unlearned, secular
in habits, the parochial incumbents were very little
respected.* * A correspondence of this period between Laud on the one hand, and
Strafford and Bramhall on the other, has been pubUshed, which records
the condition of the Irish Church as the latter found it — "An unlearned
clergy " (says Strafford), " which have not so much as the outward form
of churchmen to cover themselves with, nor their persons anyways re
verenced or protected : the churches unbuilt ; the parsonage and vicarage
houses utterly ruined ; the people untaught through the non-residency of
the clergy . . . the possessions of the Church to a great proportion in lay
hands ; the bishops aUening their very principal houses and demesnes to
their children, to strangers." (Letter, Slst Jan., 1634; Strafford's Let
ters, vol, i. pp. 186, 187 ; and see also, to the same effect, a letter of Bedell
I 2

116 THE CHUECH [Chap. VII.
The power of the Irish Government, which at this
time was almost despotic, was used by Strafford to
compel the restitution of much ecclesiastical property.
Thus, from the Earl of Cork tithes worth about two
thousand pounds a-year, which he had taken possession
of, were recovered. Other tithes alienated from the
Church, which were beyond the reach of such inter
ference, were purchased back by Bramhall with the pro
ceeds of subscriptions for the purpose in England, and of
loans upon the property to be regained. At the same
time the King restored impropriations according as the
existing leases of them expired.*
The authority of the Deputy was also used to in
duce the enforcement by the bishops of order and dis
cipline among the clergy: in particular noticing their
habitual non-residence in their parishes, and the vain
expense in which (he says) they indulged in towns to
the disservice of their cures and the great scandal of the
Church, he required that they should be compelled " to
repair to their churches, and attend that charge whereof
they owed an account both to God and man."!
The object, however, connected with ecclesiastical
affairs in Ireland which especially engaged the attention
to Laud, 1st April, 1630, cited in Burnett's Life of Bedell.') Yesey in his
Life of Bramhall says that there was not one bishopric in the province of
Cashel " that had not the marks of the sacrilegious paw upon it."
* The grants of impropriate tithes and lands by James I. and
Charles I. to the Church will be found enumerated in the Eeport of the
Commission to inquire into the revenues and condition of the Established
Church (Ireland), 1868. (See Appendix to this Eeport, No. 29, p, 169,)
t Strafford's Letters, vol, ii. p, 7 ; Mant, vol, i, p. 5 1 1 , Leland (who is
not in general favourable to Strafford) says that under him " abler and
more respectable teachers were generaUy provided for the people." —
History, vol, ii, p. 40.

1626-1660] IN THE EEIGN OF CHAELES I. 117
of Strafford and Bramhall, and was sought by them with
most anxiety, was to terminate the difference between
the Churches of England and Ireland in respect of
the Articles which formed the standards of doctrine
in each, and to effect an absolute uniEormity between
them. It is said that this measure was desired by the
King, and was one of the matters which he gave into the
charge of Strafford, when he sent him to Ireland.* Nor
was this wholly for reasons of a theological character :
it was thought that agreement between the two king
doms in ecclesiastical affairs would promote harmony
also in political.
Accordingly, when Convocation met in 1634, occa
sion was taken to propose that the English Thirty -nine
Articles should be adopted in Ireland. The subject
was first brought forward in the Upper House by Bram
hall, who had shortly before been created Bishop of
Derry. Nothing was there said as to the Irish Articles
of 1615 being either condemned or approved. Bram-
hall's observations were directed to urge the expediency
of having "the correspondence between the Churches of
England and Ireland more entire and accurate." He
also pointed out "the convenience of having the Articles
of peace and communion in every national Church
* Carte's Life of Ormond, vol, i. p, 149, The Irish Articles displeased
the High Church party in England. Their estimate of them, it may be
assumed, is represented in the language used by Jeremy Taylor when
preaching at BramhaU's funeral, in Dublin. In his sermon on this oc
casion, after alluding to Bramhall having caused the English Articles to
be accepted, he says, " that they and we might be populus unius labii, of
one heart and one life, buUding up our hopes of heaven on a most holy
faith, and taking away that Shibboleth which made this Church lisp too
undevoutly, or rather in some Uttle degree to speak the speech of Ashdod,
and not the language of Canaan,"

118 THE CHUECH [Chap. VII.
worded in that latitude, that dissenting persons in those
things that concerned not the Christian faith might
subscribe, and the Church not lose the benefit of their
labours for an opinion which, it might be, they could
not help."*
In this Convocation Ussher was President of the
Upper House — a question of precedence in dispute
between the Sees of Armagh and Dublin having been
decided in favour of the former by Strafford a short
time before. Lesley, Dean of Down, was Prolocutor of
the Lower House. The Upper House readily voted for
adopting the Thirty-nine Articles, "f In the Lower House
there was opposition, and the difficulties raised were
overcome only by the interference of Strafford, who
insisted that the English Articles as they stood should
be voted for affirmatively or negatively, without amend
ment or alteration, and without any accompanying ex
pression of approval of the Irish. He himself drew up
the form which was to express the resolution he desired
from Convocation, and it was his draft which, being
adopted by them, became the First Canon.J It was ex
pressed in the following words: — " . . . For the mani
festation of our agreement with the Church of England
* Cited by Mant (vol, i, p, 489) from Yesey's Life of Bramhall.
j- There were at this time four archbishops and nineteen suffragan
bishops, of whom only Ussher and Martin, Bishop of Meath, were edu
cated in Trinity College, Dublin ; the rest were EngUsh or Scotch. (See
Note W of Appendix,) Bramhall says he did not remember any except
two who spoke in favour of the Irish Articles : " If there were any, they
were very few, and did it faintly," — Works, Anglo-Cath. Lib,, v. 81.
X Strafford, when sending his draft of the Canon, conveyed his wishes
to Convocation in a communication marked by that despotic imperious-
ness which marred his great qualities, and was one cause of the enmity
which pursued him to his end, , . . " Mr, Prolocutor — I send you here

1626-1660] IN THE EEIGN OF CHAELES I. 119
in the confession of the same Christian faith and the
doctrine of the sacraments, we do receive and approve
the Book of Articles of religion, agreed upon by the
archbishops and bishops, and the whole clergy in the
Convocation at London, in the year of our Lord 1562,
for the avoiding of diversities of opinions, and for the
establishing of consent touching true religion. And,
therefore, if any hereafter shall affirm that any of those
Articles are in any part superstitious or erroneous, or
such as he may not with a good conscience subscribe
unto, let him be excommunicated, and not absolved be
fore he make a public recantation of his error."
Strafford succeeded in preventing any declaration
by Convocation in affirmance of the Irish Articles of
1615 ; but neither was there, it is to be noted, any
express repeal of them. The consequence was, that by
some it was supposed that both sets of Articles were to
be in force; and among these seems to have been Ussher,
who, when writing to a correspondent in England, says
of the Irish: "We let them stand as they did before;
but, for manifesting our agreement with the Church of
England, we have received and approved your Articles
concluded in the year 1562." * Whether Ussher, or
any bishops agreeing with Ussher, required both the
enclosed the form of a Canon to be passed by the votes of this Lower
House of Convocation, which I require you to put to the question for
their consents, without admitting any debates or other discourse : for I
hold it not fit, nor wiU suffer, that the Articles of the Church of Eng
land be disputed. Therefore I expect you to take only the voices con
senting or dissenting, and to give me a particular account how each man
gives his vote. The time admits of no delay, so I further require you
to perform the contents of this letter forthwith, and so I rest, your good
friend, Wentwoeth." This letter, not printed in Stratford's Letters,
wiU be found among Laud's Letters, Anglo-Cath, Theol,, vii. 98.
* Letter to Dr. Ward, 15 Sept., 1635 ; Works, vol, xvi, p, 9.

120 THE CHUECH [Chap. VII.
English and Irish Articles to be subscribed, is not clear ;
certainly most of the bishops, holding the Irish to be im-
])liedly revoked by the authoritative document of later
date, treated the English as alone obligatory upon the
clergy at their admission into the Church and institution
to benefices. After the Restoration the Irish Articles
fell entirely into disuse ; and from that time the sub
scription required from the clergy by all the bishops was
to the Canon enacting the Thiyty-nine Articles.*
Bramhall, having succeeded in inducing Convocation
to accept the Thirty-nine Articles,- endeavoured to obtain
their assent also to the English Canons. These, it is
said, were in some respects supposed to conflict with the
ideas of the Puritan party, to which the clergy leaned in
opinion.! Their acceptance was also resisted upon the
ground that they related to matters on which each
Church should exercise its judgment, accommodating its
rules to its own peculiar circumstances — a reason which
met Ussher's support. The result was, that distinct Ca
nons were enacted, differing from the English in their
arrangement, mode of expression, and in several of their
provisions ; but not on any points of importance. Agree
ment with the English Church was affirmed not only by
the Canon as to the Thirty-nine Articles already cited,
but also by another prohibiting the use in the Churches
of any form of liturgy or divine service other than that
which was established by law and comprised in the Book
of Common Prayer, Some of the Canons make pro
vision for needs occasioned by local circumstances, en
joining that, where the people were Irish, certain portions
* Elrington's Life of Ussher, p. 493,
j- Carte's Ormonde, vol. i, p, 149. See also Strafford's Letters, vol. i.
p. 381,

1626-1660] IN THE EEIGN OF CHAELES I. 121
of the Service should be read in Irish as well as English,
if the Ordinary approved : and that in such cases, if the
clergyman were English, a parish clerk able to read
them should be chosen : also that there should be an
Irish Bible and Prayer Book at the expense of the parish.
In lieu of the special directions in the English Canons as
to kneeUng and gestures, there is substituted a general
¦direction that all persons shall use " such reverent ges
tures and actions as by the Book of Common Prayer are
prescribed in that behalf, and the commendable use of
the Church received." In reference to the administra
tion of the Communion, they, like the English, pre
scribe that "the minister shall deliver both the bread
and the wine to every communicant severally."*
Statutes benefiting the interests of the Church were
obtained by Strafford, during his rule as viceroy, from
Parliament ; the most important of which was one in
tended to prevent the alienation or improvident dispo
sition of the lands belonging to the bishops and other
ecclesiastical persons. This regulated the lettings which
were thenceforth to be allowed of Church lands, fixed
for them limited periods, and defined what rents might
be reserved. It rendered any act, by incumbents of sees
or benefices, not in conformity with the powers thereby
<;onferred, void against their successors. There was also
an Act passed which facilitated the restoration of impro
priations to the parishes.!
In 1640, Strafford was finally removed from Ireland.
* The Irish Canons, and their differences from the English, are dis-
¦cussed by Mant, History, i. 497, and by Elrington, Life of Ussher, p. 180.
j- These Acts were 10 & 11 Charles I., ch. 2 (Irish) ; 10 & 11 Charles I.,
ch. 3 (Irish).

122 THE CHUECH [Chap. VII.
His departure was followed by a series of events ad
verse to the welfare of the Church, which render its
history for the next twenty years merely a record of
depression and suffering: of calamities inflicted by ex
ternal violence, and neither caused nor increased by its
own acts or defaults.
The first in order of these events was the insurrec
tion which, from the magnitude it assumed, is known
as the rebellion of 1641. On the night of the 23rd of
October in that year, at a large number of places situate
in the counties of the Ulster Plantation, the dwellings
and settlements of the English were attacked by armed
bands of the native Irish ; and (as nothing of the kind
was expected) with almost unresisted success. It is not
improbable that the immediate cause which led to this
outbreak was apprehension that proceedings hostile to
the Roman Catholic religion in Ireland, and designed to
oppress such as adhered to it, would be taken by the
Puritan party, who were rapidly becoming predominant
in England ; but, if so, this was only the proximate, and
neither the sole nor the chief, cause. The native popu
lation which remained in Ulster after the Plantation were
numerous. They were compelled to resign to the colo
nists the most valuable portions of their lands : they were
treated as a subject and inferior race ; and they regarded
with indignation the usurpation which deprived them of
their property and former social condition. Beside, they
resented the loss of the independence which, until the
Plantation, they and their chieftains enjoyed. To set
these elements of disturbance in motion needed only —
what the time and occasion furnished — ambitious leaders.
The movement, under their guidance, assumed a cha-

1626-1660] IN THE EEIGN OF CHAELES I. 128
racter of greater magnitude than the redress of local
grievances. A barbarous people, as the insurgents un
doubtedly were, without the restraint of military dis
cipline, may be always expected to indulge remorselessly
the passions which civil war engenders : and in the pre
sent instance, with a large proportion of the assailants,
these were heightened to peculiar exasperation, since
their incursions were made upon the soil from which
they had been evicted, and against those who had dis
possessed them. Hence, the insurrection was followed
by extreme loss of life. The estimates of this loss by
historians* have varied much, and from the nature of
the case no calculation can be relied upon as accurate ;
since to the deaths in battle or other conflict, which
might have been counted, are to be added numbers slain
by scattered bodies of insurgents who rose tumultuously
over the country, of whom there could not be any com
plete record ; numbers more, who, despoiled of every
thing, and driven from their homes to seek shelter in
Dublin and other towns, were swept away by the
hardships they endured or the diseases they contracted
in their flight, and perished unnoticed. The same
causes which occasioned an excessive loss of life led to
an unsparing destruction of property. The farm-houses
and other buildings of the colonists, their chattels of
every kind, were plundered or destroyed. The land
became a waste.
The consequences of this rebellion fell principally
upon the members of the Church, the Scotch at first not
being assailed, and thus having time and opportunity to
organize a defence. The clergy fled or were driven
* See note X of Appendix,

124 THE CHUECH [Chap. VII.
away along with their congregations; many churches
and glebe-houses were reduced to ruin. In much of
Ulster the Church ceased to exist.
This insurrection was followed by the extension to
Ireland of the great Civil War between Charles and
the English Parliament. During its continuance the
Church was exposed to the enmity alike of the Irish
and of the Parliamentary party, and its interests pe
culiarly suffered.
While these occurrences were taking place in Ire
land, the party hostile to Episcopal Church government
was acquiring an ascendency in the English Parliament.
In 1643 they obtained the appointment of a body of
persons, consisting of eminent divines, of some peers,
and some members of the House of Commons, " to
confer and treat among themselves of such matters and
things concerning the liturgy, discipline, and govern
ment of the Church of England, and the vindicating
and clearing of the doctrine of the same from all as
persions and misconstructions, as should be proposed by
either or both Houses of Parliament and no other."
This body, meeting in Henry the Seventh's Chapel, or
the Jerusalem Chamber, Westminster Abbey, acquired
the name of the Westminster Assembly. The opinions
of the majority were Calvinistic and Presbyterian. With
these original members were afterwards joined Commis
sioners from Scotland.
Iri the same year was framed in Scotland the de
claration in reference to ecclesiastical reform, which was
termed the Solemn League and Covenant. This bound
those who subscribed it to preserve the reformed religion
in the Church of Scotland ; also to uphold the reforma-

1626-1660] IN THE EEIGN OF CHABLES I. 125
tion of religion in England and Ireland according to the
Word of God and the example of the best reformed
Churches; and to bring the Churches of God in the
three kingdoms to the nearest conjunction and uni
formity in religion, confession of faith, form of Church
government, directory for worship and catechising ; also
to endeavour, amongst other things, the extirpation of
Popery, Prelacy, " that is " (it explains), " Church-
government by Archbishops, Bishops, their Chancellors
and Commissioners, Deans, Deans and Chapters, Arch
deacons, and all other ecclesiastical officers depending
on that hierarchy."
This declaration was approved by the Westminster
Assembly, and adopted by the English Parliament, with
a title describing it to be for the peace and safety of
England, Scotland, and Ireland
Beside approving the Solemn League and Covenant,
and thus condemning Episcopacy, the Westminster As
sembly issued a Directory for public worship, a Con
fession of Faith, a longer and a shorter Catechism,
intended to supersede the English Prayer Bi lok. Articles
of Faith, and Catechism. The Directory was a code of
instructions as to public worship, which expressly set
aside the former liturgy. The Confession was a standard
of doctrine in character decidedly Calvinistic.
When the " Solemn League and Covenant," and
these other theological compendiums of the Assembly
had attained acceptance in England, the Presbyterian
party sought to have them introduced and put in force
in Ireland. " The League " was first tried. It was re
jected by the army under the command of the Marquis
of Ormonde ; but in the North there were Scotch troops,

126 THE CHUECH [Chap. VII.
commanded by General Munroe, who had been sent from
their own country by the king to aid in putting down
the rebellion, and by this officer and his soldiers it was
at once accepted. It was also received with favour by
numbers of the Ulster Protestants, especially by those of
Scottish descent. The Directory was first enforced in
1647, when Ormonde surrendered Dublin to Commis
sioners of the Parliament, who forthwith prohibited the
use of the English Liturgy in the churches in that city,
and ordered the regulations of the Directory to be
followed. During the Protectorate the prohibition of the use of
the services of the English Prayer Book, which thus com
menced in Dublin, was continued and extended to the
country generally. External action on the part of the
Protestant Episcopal Church ceased. The revenues of
the bishoprics were seized for the purposes of the State ;
vacancies in the office were not filled. Presbyterianism
also was at first discouraged. Religion it was proposed
to maintain through the agency of persons " of pious
life and conversation," who should be found by Commis
sioners (selected for the purpose) qualified with gifts for
the preaching of the Gospel, and by paying these persons
stipends from the public revenues.* Afterwards Crom
well relaxed the severity of his rule towards the Pres
byterian clergy, and contributed to their support ; "j"
but there was no change in his treatment of the Epis
copalian clergy, whom he seems to have regarded as

* Eeid's Hist, of Preslyterian Church in Ireland, vol, ii, p, 160,
f See Ecclesiastical History of Ireland, by Dr, Killen, late Moderator
of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, vol, ii,
pp. 104-107.

1625-1660] UNDEE THE COMMONWEALTH. 127
enemies of his government,* and whose public min
istrations were (with only a few exceptions) therefore
silenced. His victorious despotism established itself
upon the total ruin of the civil and ecclesiastical polity
which had been before upheld in Ireland by the English
•Government. * CromweU, when excusing his policy towards the episcopal clergy
in England, told Archbishop Ussher that he was advised by his council
not to grant any indulgence to men who were restless and implacable
enemies to his person and government. — Elrington's Life of Ussher,
p, 274.

CHAPTER VIII.

USSHER AND BEDELL.

DURING the Protectorate of Cromwell, Ussher, Arch
bishop of Armagh, died. The part which he took
in connexion with some of the most important events
affecting the Church of Ireland — especially the prepa
ration of the Articles of 1615, and the enactment of the
English Articles in 1635 — has been narrated when re
ferring to these periods ; but more than an incidental
notice of a prelate, whose pre-eminence in learning was
in his own day universally admitted, is called for in any
history of the Church of Ireland, however brief.
James Ussher was of an English family named
Neville, which in the reign of King John settled in
Ireland, and from the founder of the Irish branch hold
ing the office of Usher to that prince, he assumed the
latter name. He was indebted for his early education
to a singular circumstance. James the First, before his
accession, sent two Scotchmen, named FuUerton and
Hamilton, to Dublin, to promote his interests among
the Protestant gentry. To disguise from the jealous
observation of Elizabeth their real objects, they assumed
the character of teachers, opened a school in Dublin,
and gave instruction to many (among whom was Ussher),

Chap. VIIL] USSHEE AND BEDELL. 129
which, in the condition of the country at that time, they
could not otherwise have received.*
In the College which Elizabeth founded, FuUerton
and Hamilton were appointed Fellows, in addition to
those named in the Charter. Ussher came with them
as a student ; was then one of the Scholars ; afterwards
Fellow and Professor of Divinity. From this office he
was, as has been already mentioned, promoted to the
bishopric of Meath, and thence translated to the arch
bishopric of Armagh.
When the insurrection of 1641 broke out Ussher
was in England. The disturbed state, then, of the North
of Ireland, and subsequently of the entire kingdom, the
predominance of the Puritan party hostile to episcopacy,
and ultimately the measures adopted for its suppression,
prevented him from ever again returning to Ireland,
He suffered great losses of property in the rebellion.
Soon after he, like the other bishops of the Irish Church,
ceased to receive any revenues from the lands of his See.
Charles gave him the bishopric of Carlisle in commendam,
but he derived Httle from it : an intended grant to him
from the See-lands of Armagh seems to have failed ;t
and before his death he was indebted to friends.
Ussher, so long [as he was permitted, discharged the
duties of the episcopal office with admirable diligence,
setting to his clergy an example of personal piety and

* Hamilton was by James, in 1622, created a Peer, with the title of
Viscount Claneboye. 7 Whenever," says Dr. Parr, one of Ussher's
biographers, " the Archbishop recounted the providences of God to him
self, he would say that he took this for one remarkable instance of it,
that he had the opportunity and advantage of his education from those
men {i.e. FuUerton and Hamilton), who came hither from chance."
f Elrington's Life of Ussher, p. 271. K

130 USSHEE AND BEDELL. [Chap. VIII.
active exertion, and publishing admonitions and instruc
tion to guide them. He was least successful as a ruler.
" For the governing part of his function (says Burnet)
he was not made : he had too gentle a soul for the work
of reforming abuses." We ought to take into account,
however, when judging him, the difficulties caused by
the condition of society in his time and the circum
stances with which he had to deal.
When detained in England, in 1641, Ussher joined
Charles I. at Oxford, and he appears to have been then
and afterwards consulted by the King, and much in his
confidence. His counsel on one momentous occasion is
recorded. In conjunction with Juxon, Bishop of Lon
don, he advised that the royal assent should be refused
to the Bill for the attainder of Strafford. When, con
trary to his remonstrances, the assent was given, he
attended Strafford in the interval until his execution,
and accompanied him to the scaffold.
No question was more debated between Charles and
the Long Parliament than the continuance of episcopacy
in England. The English divines induced Ussher to
join them in defending the Order, and two tracts were
written by him, having relation to the subject. One
was entitled, " The Original of Bishops and Metropo
litans briefly laid down," and the other, " A Geogra
phical and Historical Disquisition touching the Asia
properly so called," The ground of episcopacy (he
asserts) is derived partly from the pattern prescribed
by God in the Old Testament, and partly from the imi
tation thereof brought in by the Apostles, and confirmed
by Christ himself in the time of the New, Its history
he traces from the appointment of Timothy by St, Paul

Chap. VIIL] USSHEE AND BEDELL. 131
as bishop at Ephesus. The Seven Churches mentioned
in the Apocalypse he holds were metropolitical, and
the angels of them, spoken of by St. John, their bishops.
For the age next after that time he mentions (to use his
own words) a succession of witnesses to episcopacy.
These tracts are only directed to maintain on his
torical grounds the office of bishop, and do not discuss
its nature. On that subject Ussher's views are said to
have been extremely moderate. It is reported by his
chaplain. Dr. Bernard, that when interrogated by him
upon the point, he answered, . , . " I have ever de
clared my opinion to be that Episcopus et Presbyter gradu
tantum differunt, non ordine, and consequently, in places
where bishops cannot be had, the ordination of presby
ters standeth valid." With reference, however, to some
ordinations by presbyters in England, and lest from his
opinion of the office he might be supposed to sanction
them, he added , , , " holding, as I do, that a bishop
hath a superiority in degree over a presbyter, you may
easily judge that the ordination made by such pres
byters as have severed themselves from those bishops
unto whom they had sworn canonical obedience cannot
possibly by me be excused from being schismatical."*
It is not improbable that it was the moderation of
his views in relation to this subject which suggested
either to himself, or other advisers of the King, that he
should draw up some scheme of episcopal government
in connexion with synods, which might be offered as a
compromise to the parliamentary party. This he seems
* Cited in Elrington's Life of Ussher, p. 258, from Bemard On Ordi
nation, p. 126. K 2

132 USSHEE AND BEDELL. [Chap. VIII.
to have done a short time before the civil war commenced;
but his propositions were not debated, with a view to
being a subject of treaty, until the King was a prisoner
in the Isle of Wight, when the clerical part of the Com
missioners sent by the Parliament to the King received
them favourably ; but the lay rejected them. What
they were appears from a tract published by Dr. Ber
nard after his death, entitled, " The Reduction of Epis
copacy unto the form of Synodical Government received
in the Ancient Church," which is on the title-page stated
to have been drawn up in 1641, "as an expedient for
the prevention of those troubles which afterwards arose
about Church government."
To state the scheme put forward in this paper
shortly — it proposed that the rural deans should be
suffragan bishops, such as those sanctioned by an Act
of Henry VIIL, each with a synod of the rectors within
his precinct, and that according to the votes of the ma
jority of the synod matters should be determined. The
diocesan bishops were to have higher authority, and
also to act with synods, at which these suffragans and a
select number of rectors were to attend, and the greater
matters to be considered and decided, the majority pre
vailing : and at the head over all was to be a provincial
synod, composed of the diocesan and suffragan bishops,
and of clergy elected by the dioceses, at which the
Archbishop of the province was to preside.*
* In 1670, Archbishop Leighton, who had many opinions in common
with Ussher, endeavoured, but without success, to compose the contro
versies in Scotland respecting Church government, upon the basis of nn
episcopacy acting with presbyters and synods, (See Burnet's Own Time,
book ii,, and Leighton's tract, entitled, Befence of a Moderate Episcopacy.)

Chap. VIII,] USSHEE AND BEDELL. 133
During the Protectorate, Ussher was treated with
respect by Cromwell, and was on some occasions con
sulted by him ; but, notwithstanding, he was unable to
obtain from him permission for the public use of the
Church services. Upon the Archbishop's death, Crom
well ordered a public funeral, but Iiis contribution to the
expense was of inadequate amount, and left much to be
paid by the surviving relatives.
Selden — and no man was more competent to pro
nounce judgment on the subject — declared* that the
learning of Ussher amounted to a prodigy. Even as
early as his collegiate career it was recognized : acathol-
icorum doctissimus were the terms in which even then
he was described upon the Continent. Unquestionably
in the department of ecclesiastical history he is without
a rival either in his own time or since.
The theological opinions of Ussher, at the date of the
Articles of 1615, are reflected in them. Upon the subject
of predestination he appears to have modified his views
in the latter years of his life. " I can testify (says Dr.
Brian Walton), that having often discoursed with the
late Most Reverend Father in God, James, Lord Pri
mate of Armagh, concerning divers controversies in
divinity, and in particular the last time he was in Lon
don, which was not long before his death, concerning
the controversies of grace and free-will, election and
reprobation, and the dependents thereupon: he did de
clare his utter dislike of the doctrine of reprobation, and
that he held the universality of Christ's death, and that
* Jacobus Usserius, vir summa pietate, judicio singulari, usque ad
miraculum doctus, et Uteris severioribus promovendis natus, — Selden,
Preface to Marmora Arundeliana.

134 USSHEE AND BEDELL. [Chap. VIII.
not only in respect of sufficiency, but also in regard of
efficacy, so that all men were thereby salveable: and
that the reason why all were not saved was because
they did not accept of salvation offered, and that the
grace of conversion was not irresistible, but that men
might, and often did, reject the same: that in these
points he did not approve the doctrine of Geneva, but
Avas wholly of Bishop Overall's opinions."* Hammond,
however, who agrees with Walton in stating that Ussher
" did for many years acknowledge universal redemp
tion," shows that this was with a qualification, or as he
terms it, a distinction, non ex cequo pro omnibus — a dis
tinction which, in the form of its expression, is of the
more importance, because it is in direct contradiction
to words used upon the subject by one of the ancient
fathers, f
Ussher has been justly censured for his views in
reference to the political treatment of Roman Catholics.
A sermon which he preached on the subject drew (as
has been already mentioned) reproof from Archbishop
Hampton ; and afterwards, in 1626, upon the occasion
of a proposal to enlist Roman Catholics in the army, he

'* Overall (Burnet, in his comment on Article XVII,, says) espoused
Arminian tenets. He was one of the authors of the Church Catechism, in
which one answer affirms of our Lord, " who hath redeemed me and all
mankind," The reference to Overall, therefore, had pecuUar significance.
I The words of Hammond (as cited by Dr. Elrington, Life of Ussher,
p. 291) are: — "The Bishop (Ussher) did for many years acknowledge
universal redemption, but that with a distinction of non ex cequo pro
omnibus, which puts me in mind of the words of Holy Maximus that
;^io-ros vTTip iravTiov e^ lctov, which last words (when I read them long
since) I could not guess why they were added, till 1 saw there was some
body that granted the aTridavev inrep 7raj/To)v, but denied the ii lorov."

Chap. VIIL] USSHEE AND BEDELL. 135
joined others of the Irish bishops in a protest against
toleration.* But in judging a great man in reference
to a question of this character, the ideas of his age
must be kept in mind; he cannot be measured by the
standard of subsequent enlightenment. At this time no
theological writer in England had advocated toleration
of dissent from an established religion, and even states
men and legislation generally proceeded upon a con
trary principle.
The biographers of Ussher represent him in every
capacity (except that of ruler, in which he was open to
the reproach already mentioned) as an almost perfect
character, " Passion, pride, self-will (says Burnet),
seemed not to be so much as in his nature." The
meekness, forbearance, unperturbed temper, and ha
bitual cheerfulness, which he displayed under many
trials, are especially remarked.
It is proper to note that he attributed much im
portance to the effects produced by preaching; that
he considered this duty more incumbent upon bishops
than was generally supposed ; and that in his diocese,
and afterwards in England, until prohibited, he was

Baxter, who also testifies to Ussher's later views, would seem to have
himself held opuiions similar to those which Hammond attributes to
Ussher. (See Bishop Harold Browne on Article XYIL). They may also
be traced in Paradise Lost : —
' ' Some I have chosen of peculiar grace
Elect above the rest ; so is my will :
The rest shall hear me call, and oft be warned
Their sinful state, and to appease betimes
Th' incensed Deity, while offered grace
Invites,"
* Mant, History, vol, i, p, 423,

136 USSHEE AND BEDELL. [Chap. VIII.
frequently in the pulpit ; speaking extempore, with flu
ency, in a plain, unadorned style, easily understood,
with much success in reaching the hearts and con
sciences of his hearers.
Contemporary with Ussher, Bedell presided over the
diocese of Kilmore — a prelate of apostolic piety and
zeal, deserving to be placed beside Ussher in any record
of their times. Of him Father Paul, the great historian
of the Council of Trent, with whom he had become inti
mate, when he resided in Italy as chaplain to Sir Henry
Wotton (ambassador from James I. to the Court of
Venice), said, "that he had learned from him during
their intercourse more of theology and practical religion
than from any other person during his whole life."
This exemplary person was English by birth, and
came over to Ireland in consequence of an invitation
(suggested by Ussher) from the Fellows of Trinity Col
lege, Dublin, to become their Provost. Accepting the
office, he held it for about two years, during which he
effected considerable improvements in the discipline and
rules of the institution. Of these James, who thence
advanced him to the united See of Kilmore and Ardagh,
takes notice in his letter of appointment — " By his care,
and good government of the College, there have been
(he says) wrought great reformations to our singular
contentment." The dioceses over which Bedell was to preside had
been long neglected. He has himself recorded their
condition — " The churches unrepaired, and in a manner
ruined": incumbents "holding two, or three, or four,
or more vicarages apiece " : some of the best of the

Chap. VIIL] USSHEE AND BEDELL. 137
clergy English, " who had not the tongue of the people,
nor could perform any divine offices, or converse with
them," so that they could be understood. To meet these
evils he exerted himself with energy, resigning the
bishopric of Ardagh in order to exhibit his condemna
tion of pluralities ; examining with great strictness the
candidates for Orders ; appointing to benefices with
judgment ; obliging residence, and translating into Irish
a catechism, forms of prayer, and selected passages from
Scripture. An Irish Version of the Old Testament,
which was afterwards in 1685 published, was due to
him, he having employed the person by whom it was
made, and having himself revised it.
At the commencement of the insurrection of 1641
Bedell was treated by the natives with forbearance and
respect, and was even allowed to give shelter to fugitives
from the rebels. This indulgence was due very much to
the example and precept of the Roman Catholic Bishop
of Kilmore, Dr. Swiney, who offered, if it were neces
sary for the protection of Bedell, to take up his residence
with him. After about two months Bedell, refusing to
send away those whom he sheltered, was taken away by
force, under an allegation that it had been so ordered
by the Council of Kilkenny, and was confined in a castle
upon an island in Loughouter, where, with his son and
chaplain, he was kept until they were exchanged for
some leaders of the rebels who had been made prisoners
by the loyalist party. Forbidden to proceed to Dublin,
he took refuge with a clergyman in the neighbourhood
of the castle ; but his health and strength were then
much impaired, and he did not long survive his removal.
Bedell did not publish any theological works : some

138 USSHEE AND BEDELL. [Chap. VIII.
writings of his, it was said, were destroyed or lost during
the rebellion ; but if so, it, is not probable that they
were either numerous or important. His life was spent
in the practice of piety, and in impressing upon others
its necessity, Christianity (he used to say) was not so
much a system of opinions, as a divine principle renew
ing and transforming the heart and life: " with Augus
tine, I look for fruit, not leaves."
After his death a remarkable testimony to his ex
cellence was given by the conduct of the very people
who had been arrayed against him during the rebel
lion. Numbers of them followed his funeral, and while
declaring that he should be the last of the English,
expressed in the strongest terms his praise. One by
stander, a Roman Catholic ecclesiastic, moved by the
remembrance of his many virtues, exclaimed aloud,
sit anima mea cum Bedello.*

* BedeU has had several biographers. One of the latest and best
sketches of his life will be found in WiUs' Lives of Illustrious Irishmen,
vol. iv. p. 130.

CHAPTER IX,
[1660-1685,]
WHEN the rule of the Commonwealth was established
in Ireland, the entire kingdom was treated as if
it had been involved in rebellion, and as if the landed
property of its inhabitants was forfeited to the State,
Those who could prove their " constant good affection"
to the Parliamentary party during the Civil War, as also
husbandmen, ploughmen, and persons of like condition,
who it was thought would be of use to any new colonists
that might be introduced, were alone exempt from pro
scription. The consequence of this policy was that immense
territories in Ireland were placed at the disposal of the
English Parliament, These they proceeded to redis
tribute, but conducted the redistribution upon principles
differing materially from those which guided the arrange
ments of the Plantation under James. Then a portion
of the forfeited lands was reserved for the dispossessed
natives ; now, in three provinces (Leinster, Munster, and
Ulster), the native Irish, and many Roman Catholic
Anglo-Irish who were classed with them, were ordered
to migrate to Connaught, and to accept in its wild and
uncivilized districts whatever settlements might be

140 THE CHUECH [Chap. IX.
allotted to them as a substitute for their former interests
in landed property.
The effect of the transplantation* (as it was called)
thus decreed, although in practice it was carried out with
exceptions and dispensations, was extensive. It removed
the most formidable of the i^iatives and Roman Catholics
to places where they could no longer endanger the
English authority. It consequently reduced their party
to a condition of extreme weakness.
In the room of proprietors who were deprived of
their property new owners were introduced. These
were Protestant in religion, but imbued with sympa
thies differing from those of the old gentry of Anglo-
Irish race, who were almost all loyalists, and attached
to the Church which had been established in alliance
with the Crown. At the Restoration many of these new
settlers were as little favourable to Episcopacy as the
Scotch colonists in Ulster.
Hence, although there was in Ireland under the
Commonwealth a considerable increase in the number,
strength, and influence of the Protestant part of the
* The most complete account of the transplantation of the Irish to
Connaught wiU be found in Mr. Prendergast's Cromwellian Settlement in
Ireland. He seems to think that this oppressive measure was adopted
in order to protect the colonists ; but there is some reason to think there
was also a vindictive motive, originating in resentment caused by the
sufferings of the Protestants during the insurrection of 1641. Certainly
CromweU assigned this reason for his own cruelty in the war. When
answering a remonstrance of the Eoman Catholic bishops and clergy
(1649) he says: . . . "You, unprovoked, put the English to the most
unheard-of and barbarous massacre (without respect of age or sex) that
the sun ever beheld." . . . "We are come to ask an account of the
innocent blood that hath been shed." — Carlyle's Letters and Speeches of
Cromwell, vol. U. pp. 210-223, ed. 1871.

1660-1685] IN THE EEIGN OF CHAELES II. 141
population, this by no means brought a proportionate
increase of adherents to the Protestant Episcopal Church,
It was depressed, not merely by the ordinances of the
Parliament directed against the public ministration of
its clergy, but by the absence of support from a most
active, and then, owing to the success of the Parliament,
most powerful class. Many of the parish churches, not
merely in Ulster, but also elsewhere, came into the
possession of ministers who had not received episcopal
ordination ; also on them , often devolved the spiritual
care of the parishioners.
Not only, therefore, was the constant opposition of
the Roman Catholics to the Church, which, however,
was at this time of less political weight than at any
former period, to be considered by the King and his
ministers when determining whether, in Ireland, the
establishment was to be reinstated in its previous pre
eminence and endowments : they had also to take into
account an increased Protestant dissent from its system.
This, as might be expected, manifested itself, under
the guidance of the ministers not episcopally ordained,
in objection to the government of bishops and to the
use of the services of the Prayer Book.
A similar question arising as to the English Church
was at once decided in its favour. The ecclesiastical
policy pursued in England had always from the Refor
mation been repeated in Ireland. That the same course
should be now followed was urged by the Marquis
(afterwards Duke) of Ormonde, the King's principal
adviser in reference to Irish affairs. Warmly attached
to the Protestant Episcopal Churches in both countries,
he now urged that their restoration followed as a

142 THE CHUECH [Chap. IX.
necessary consequence from the restoration of the mo
narchy: succeeding in his advocacy of these views, he
then pressed that as this principle had been acknow
ledged in England it should be also in Ireland, without
.waiting for a Parliament, of which the constitution
could not be foreseen with certainty.
The result was, that a few months after his return
the King announced his recognition of the restored
position of the Irish Church ; acknowledged that it had
resumed its former rights and privileges, unaffected by
the intervening usurpation ; and declared that he would,
therefore, proceed to fill the bishoprics, which, with the
exception of eight, were all vacant.
A little later he addressed to the clergy, in answer to
a petition from them seeking his protection, a letter* in
which, further indicating his future ecclesiastical policy,
he stated that he would by all the ways and means
in his power preserve their rights and those of the
Church of Ireland, so far as by law and justice he might;
and that nothing could give him more content than,
when occasion should be offered, to add to the revenues
thereof (which, he observed, had been too much dimi
nished by rapacious or improvident hands), and to re
store it to its ancient patrimony ; in proof of which he
referred to letters he had sent granting the impropriate,
and forfeited tithes in his gift to the incumbents of the
parishes liable to pay them.
One of the vacant bishoprics was Armagh, To this,
the highest office in the Irish Church, BramhaU, one of
the eight surviving bishops, was translated. The See of
* 24th December, 1660. Carte's Ormonde, iv. p. 22.

1660-1685] IN THE EEIGN OF CHAELES II. 143
Derry, thus rendered vacant, and all the other vacant
bishoprics were subsequently filled.
On the 27th January, 1661, two Archbishops and ten
Bishops were consecrated at St. Patrick's Cathedral,
Dublin, by Bramhall and four assisting Bishops. The
ceremony was attended by the Lords Justices, by the
Mayor and Aldermen of Dublin, and by the general
Convention, which had been assembled before Parlia
ment was regularly summoned, at whose head was then-
speaker. Sir William Domvile.*
Among the Bishops who were upon this occasion
consecrated was Jeremy Taylor, then justly reputed the
most eloquent of English divines. t He had held during
the Commonwealth a Lectureship in Ireland at Lisburn,
which appears to have escaped interference. He came
thither from England, having suffered much during the
Civil War, in which he ardently espoused the King's
cause. The reputation of his writings was about this time
at the highest : under the disadvantage of circumstances
most adverse to study, he had sent forth from the remote
retreats, in which he took shelter from the persecution
inflicted by the dominant party upon the Church of
England, not merely sermons and addresses of extra
ordinary eloquence, but elaborate treatises upon pro-

* Mason, in his History of St. Patrick's Cathedral (p. 192), has com
pUed a minute account of this remarkable ceremony, from a MS. of
Dudley Loftus, then Judge of the Prerogative Court, preserved in Marsh's
Library, Dublin, and from a newspaper called The Kingdom's Intelligencer
of nth February, 1661.
f Hallam, speaking of Taylor as an orator, says: " We have no
reason to beUeve, or rather much reason to disbelieve, that he had any
competitor in other languages." — Literatwe of Europe, vol. ii. p. 360.
3rd edition.

144 THE CHUECH [Chap. IX.
found theological subjects, characterized by much
learning and research.
The popularity of Taylor's practical writings has
survived the vicissitudes of literary taste. He had not
the precision of expression requisite to treat theological
questions of difficulty, or to conduct controversy suc
cessfully, but in the expression of devotional feeling,
occasionally of elevated thought and pathetic reflec
tion, he rises to a height which, except it be by some
relics of primitive Christianity, has never been sur
passed.* Among Taylor's merits not the least must be reckoned
that he was the first English author who issued an elabo
rate argumentative pleading for toleration upon questions
of a theological nature. His celebrated treatise, " The
Liberty of Prophesying," written with that object, was
published in 1647. It is characterized by the same elo
quence and learning as mark his, other writings, and by,
perhaps, more ingenuity of argument and reasoning. It
produced, at the time, great effect upon public opinion,
and thus prepared the way for the more accurate and
comprehensive views of later times upon the subject.
The qualities which recommended Taylor for one of
the bishoprics now filled suggested his selection to preach
upon the occasion of the Consecration. His sermon
* Taylor's biographers. Bishop Heber and Archdeacon Bonney, both
cite the characteristic sentence, in which Dr. Parr, placing him in a
pre-eminence shared only by Hooker and Barrow, pronounces Hooker
the object of our reverence, Barrow of our admiration, and Taylor of our
love. 'QKujpov fiev cre/Boi, Oavfid^oi 8e Bdppovov, Koi (fiiXS) TalXwpov. Heber,
probably justly, places Taylor first of this triumvirate, "in imagination,
in interest, in that which properly and exclusively deserves the name of
genius."

1660-1685] IN THE EEIGN OF CHAELES II. 146
remains. It discusses the questions connected with the
episcopal office, and contends for the views respecting
them then entertained by the High Church party. The
apostles, he holds, were the first rulers of Christ's fol
lowers ; their office was not to die with them : it was as
necessary for perpetuating as for founding the Church.
The eminence of power which they enjoyed must there
fore be transmitted; hence the order of bishops was
requisite; it was to take the place of the Apostles as
to government, and to possess similar authority. Ac
cordingly, to bishops he attributes the foundation and
preservation of the Church — the foundation, not only
because the apostles, who were (he says) bishops, had
been the first preachers of the Gospel and planters of
churches, but because the apostolical men whom the
apostles used in planting and disseminating religion
were by all antiquity affirmed to have been diocesan
bishops : the preservation, because they have the power
of ordaining the clergy — a power which (as he confines
to those so ordained the right to administer the sacra
ments) becomes, in his estimate, of momentous im
portance. Not long after the consecration of the Bishops, a Par
liament, which had been convened, met. In its depressed
condition the Roman Catholic interest was unable to
return representatives to the House of Commons. The
members of that assembly were Protestants, generally
either of the Episcopalian party, or persons who, if not
of the Episcopalian party, were yet of moderate ideas,
indisposed to thwart the policy of the Government. The
general enthusiasm for the Restoration had at the elec
tions swept before it all opposition, and rejected those

146 THE CHUECH [Chap. IX.
from whom hostility was to be apprehended either by
the Monarchy or by the Church in alliance with the
Monarchy. Taylor, now Bishop of Down, was appointed to
preach before Parhament. Selecting for his text, " To
obey is better than sacrifice," he urged the obligation
of obedience to superior authority, both in Church
and State : but accompanied his observations with ad
monitions to his hearers who, as constituting the Par
liament, were part of this authority, that they on their
side should exhibit justice and mercy: duties which the
questions about to arise before them in respect of the for
feited estates rendered especially fitting to be inculcated.
The House of Commons, composed, as it was, either
of active friends of episcopacy, or of persons who would
not oppose its friends, proceeded at once to pronounce in
favour of the Church formerly established. It directed
that a resolution should be drawn up requiring all sub
jects of the kingdom to conform to the episcopal model of
Church government and to the liturgy as enjoined by law.
This was followed by a declaration that the Solemn
League and Covenant imposed by the parliamentary
party in the reign of Charles I. was against the laws of
God and the fundamental constitution of the kingdom;
and that any person going about to defend or justify the
same should be accounted an enemy to his Majesty and
to the peace and tranquillity of the nation. Proceeding
yet farther in the same spirit, the House also ordered
that the entries in its journals in the same reign, which
appeared to censure Lord Strafford, Bramhall, and other
eminent persons, should be expunged.
In a declaration which Charles, before returning from

1660-1685] IN THE EEIGN OF CHAELES II. 147
exile, had issued from Breda, he, among other matters,
promised that no man should be disquieted or called
in question for differences in matters of religion, which
did not disturb the peace of the kingdom ; and that he
would be ready to consent to such an Act of Parliament
as, upon mature deliberation, should be offered to him for
the full granting of such indulgence. This declaration,
it was alleged by the ministers without episcopal orders,
who were at the time in possession of parish churches,
contemplated that such of them as had come in upon
vacancies were not to be dispossessed, and were to be re
lieved from question as to the validity of their orders, and
from obligation to use the services in the Prayer Book.
Whether the declaration from Breda did or did not
reach to the extent alleged by the Presbyterian party,
there seems little doubt that it would have been wiser
to have yielded the claims which they founded upon its
language. If this course had been adopted, it would
probably have then retained, in connexion with the
parish Churches of the Establishment in both coun
tries, all the Protestants ; their children and descend
ants would have grown up in habits of attendance upon
the Churches ; then, as the occupying incumbents died
off, successors of episcopalian principles would have
taken their place ; and time and usage might have been
trusted to gain over whatever in the end remained of
dissent among the congregations.
At the same time it must be admitted that the en
gagements which, by taking the Solemn League and
Covenant, almost all the ministers not episcopally or
dained had taken against prelacy, raised difficulties
in the way of concession. It was thought uncertain
L 2

148 THE CHUECH [Chap. IX.
whether, if protected in their titles, they would not use
their position to create an anti-episcopal feeling within
the Church itself, and thus not improbably a schism
upon a point of vital importance.
But whatever might now be our decision in reference
to the rights of those ministers, or as to the expediency
of yielding to their claims, neither the English nor Irish
Parliament of that age exhibited any sympathy with a
policy of conciliation. On the contrary, first in the
English, and afterwards in the Irish Parliament, a
stringent Uniformity Act was passed, and in each
country it was enacted that all ministers in possession
of benefices who then had not obtained, and before a
certain prescribed day should not have obtained, epis
copal ordination, were to be, ipso facto, deprived.
When the Irish Uniformity Act was passed, there
could be no question as to the necessity of episcopal
orders to qualify for a benefice ; but the previous law,
it seems to have been then assumed, equally required
such orders ; and in the interval from the Restoration
the bishops had acted upon this supposition. When
the clergy at their Visitations presented their letters of
orders, if they appeared to be from a non-episcopal
authority, they were held not to show a valid title.
Bramhall in his diocese, where numbers of the incum
bents in possession had received only Presbyterian
orders, being desirous to retain them, offered to re-
ordain such, and accompanied the proposal by a decla
ration that he did not thereby dispute the value of
their previous ordination, nor those acts they had ex
ercised by virtue of it, but that he did not see how
they could recover their tithes, if any were to refuse to

1660-1685] IN THE EEIGN OF CHAELES II. 149
pay them, unless they were episcopaUy ordained.* This
proposal met some acceptance in his own diocese; but
in the other Ulster dioceses the clergy who had not
received episcopal ordination united in rejecting any
overtures from the bishops for their reordination, and
were deprived.
In England, besides pressing for indulgence to the
ministers not episcopally ordained, the Protestant Dis
senters sought to have the Prayer Book revised. A con
troversy arose upon the subject, and ultimately there were
numerous alterations ; but, with the exception of a few
of no importance, they were not at all in agreement with
the suggestions of the Non -conformists. In Ireland, also,
the English Prayer Book, as then revised, was adopted.
The following were the principal changes intro
duced into the Prayer Book at this time : — The
version of the Bible of 1611 was substituted in the
prefatory Sentences, in the Epistles and Gospels, and
(with the exception of the Psalter, the Ten Com
mandments, and some portion of the Communion Ser
vice) in all the other extracts from the Bible. The
word "priest" was substituted for "minister," in
the description of the person who was to read the
Absolution. To the occasional prayers were added
* It will be observed that Bramhall put the case upon legal, not theo
logical, grounds. He accordingly introduced into the letters of orders
issued to those whom he reordained the words, " non annihilantes pri-
ores ordines (si quos habuit) nec validitatem aut invaliditatem eorum
determinantes, multo mines omnes ordines sacros ecclesiarum forensi-
carum condemnantes, quos proprio judici relinquimus : sed eolummodo
supplentes quicquid prius defuit per canones ecclesiae Anglicanae requi-
situm " (Yesey's Life). See further, as to the position of ministers with
Presbyterian ordination at this time in possession of benefices, Note Y of
Appendix.

150 THE CHUECH [Chap. IX.
a second prayer "in the time of dearth and famine";
two prayers for Ember week : prayers for Parlia
ment, and "for all sorts and conditions of men"; a
Thanksgiving for restoring public peace at home ; and
the General Thanksgiving. In the prayer for the
Church Militant, the present clause respecting saints
departed was inserted. The direction to kneel in
the Communion Service, which had been in Edward's
Prayer Book, and was omitted in Queen Elizabeth's,
was restored ; in the explanatory note at the end of
this service, the words " corporal presence of Christ's
natural flesh and blood" were substituted for "any
real or essential presence therein being of Christ's na
tural flesh and blood." Services for the 30th January
and 29th May (the anniversaries of the execution of
Charles I. and the accession of Charles II.) were added ;
and also forms of prayer to be used at sea, and a service
for the baptism of those of riper years.
In the Irish Prayer Book there was inserted a ser
vice for the 23rd of October, the anniversary of the
commencement of the Rebellion of 1641. This day had
by a previous Act been ordered to be observed in the
churches, by saying morning prayer, and giving thanks
for deliverance and preservation from the rebellion.*
The Irish Prayer Book also contained a prayer for the
chief governor or governors of Ireland.
Of the Bishops of this reign Bramhall most influenced
the course of ecclesiastical policy. He held the highest
office in the Church, and brought to the discharge of
its duties pre-eminent abilities. His writings are of
* 14 & 16 Charles IL, sess, 4, ch. 23 (Ireland), a.d, 1662.

1680-1685] IN THE EEIGN OP CHAELES II. 151
great excellence, characterised by original thought and
much power of reasoning. He was reputed to belong to
the High Church school of theology ; hence, and from his
zeal for the King's interests, he was unpopular with the
Puritan and Parliamentary party, and was by them
classed with Laud : Cromwell applying to him the ap
pellation of the Irish Canterbury. But, if he was of
Laud's opinions, he advocated and acted upon them
with very different judgment and discretion. His his
tory and character have been illuminated by Taylor,
who preached his funeral sermon, with the utmost
splendour of eloquence. An impartial judgment may
demand some abatement from the language of this
brilliant panegyric ; but, after it has been made, we
must still concur in ranking this prelate among the
greatest of his Order either in England or Ireland.
The only political measures passed under Charles II.
which affected the interests of the Church were those
relating to the estates confiscated by Cromwell. His
redistribution of them was complained of by the loy
alists : by such Roman Catholics as, having abstained
from hostilities, claimed to be regarded as innocent :
and by the Church. By the Acts of Settlement and
Explanation, a compromise was effected between these
various claimants and the proprietors who had been
placed in possession, and new arrangements were made.
The Church not only received back property of which
it had been deprived, but had additional grants be
stowed for its benefit.

152 THE CHUECH [Chap. X.

CHAPTER X.
[1685-1702,]
IN Ireland, from the time when the authority of the
Crovm of England had been first acknowledged,
until the death of Charles II. , the uniform policy pur
sued by successive English Governments, even when,
as in the reign of James I., it was desired to conciliate
the native Irish, was to maintain the ascendency of
the colonists over the rest of the people. During the
portion of this period which elapsed subsequent to the
Supremacy Act (excepting only while Queen Mary
and the Commonwealth ruled), there was united with
this object— and indeed regarded as essential to it — the
determination to uphold the superiority of the Church,
as reformed under Henry and Elizabeth, over other
religious systems.
This policy was interrupted by James the Second.
He had, for some years before coming to the throne,
avowed his conversion to the Roman Catholic faith.
He had taken this course from such deep-rooted convic
tion as outweighed all considerations of personal ad
vantage, and impelled him to disregard the danger to
his succession which might arise from the disapproba
tion of the English people, then influenced by decidedly

1685-1690] IN THE EEIGN OF JAMES II, 153
Protestant sentiments and opinions. Acting from similar
motives, he, when he became King, proceeded to direct
his conduct and measures to advance the interests of the
Church which he had joined, and, if possible, to ensure
its predominance. In England these designs were successfully resisted,
James, flying from the kingdom, was held to have ab
dicated, and the Crown was transferred to his daughter
Mary, wife of the Prince of Orange, and her husband.
In Ireland for some time he succeeded : and it was not
without civil war, nor until he had been defeated in two
great battles, that he was dethroned.
The difference in the course of events in the two
kingdoms was the natural consequence of differences in
the condition of society in each. The English people,
although descended from several distinct races, were at
this time one nation, which was in its religious profession
Protestant. In Ireland the larger number of the people
were of native descent, and of these almost all were
Roman Catholics. Some of the colonists, descended
from the first settlers in the Pale, or from followers of
the Anglo-Norman lords who, in other parts of the
country, had been substituted for the native chieftains,
were also Roman Catholics. Only a minority of the
people was Protestant. James, therefore, had in Ire
land what he had not in England, a majority of his
subjects predisposed by religious sympathy to view
his measures with approbation.
The policy of James produced important changes in
Ireland ; and had its operation and further progress not
been prevented by William's victories, it would have
effected a revolution. Before his abdication the chief

154 THE CHUECH [Chap. X.
departments of the State, the army, the magistracy, the
Judicial Bench, had been remodelled by Tyrconnell,
his Lord Lieutenant. As before this time all offices
and employments under the Crown were filled with
Protestants, so they were now with Roman Catholics.
One form of ascendency was substituted for another.
After his abdication, it was sought by legislation to effect
stUl more extensive alterations. A parliament, convened
in the spring of 1689, when James himself was in Ire
land, composed, with merely a few exceptions, of mem
bers of his party and religion,* proceeded to undo the
distribution of landed property made -by the Act of
Settlement of Charles II. One of its statutes enacted
that, where subsequent to the 22nd October, 1641 (the
day before the rebellion of that time began), lands had
come into the possession of new owners, the original
proprietors, or their heirs, might enter in and regain
possession of them. In cases where the new owners, who
would thus be dispossessed, derived directly under the
grants of the State, they were to receive no compensa
tion ; in cases where they were purchasers from such
grantees, for pecuniary considerations, they were to be
reprized (so it was expressed) out of the forfeitures
which were expected to accrue when William's adhe
rents should be overcome. Along with this Act was
passed another which, if it had taken effect, would

* Six of the bishops attended in the House of Lords. One of these,
Dopping, Bishop of Meath, spoke with courage and ability against the
BiUs passed in this parliament (King's State of the Protestants of Ireland
under James IL). Dopping was a prelate whose excellence was generally
acknowledged. Archbishop King calls him " a most useful and eminent
pillar of the Church." (Cited by Mant, History, vol. ii, p, 91,)

1685-1690] IN THE EEIGN OF JAMES II. 155
probably have placed at the disposal of James for the be
nefit of his friends a very large additional extent of land.
By it more than two thousand Protestants were by name
attainted : one class (who were supposed to be actively
engaged on the side of William), unless by a prescribed
day they came in and submitted themselves to a trial ;
another class (who had left the country, and who were
charged with not giving James the assistance which, by
a proclamation, he had required from his subjects), un
less within a defined time they returned, and established
their innocence before an Irish judge.*
With James's defeat passed away the predominance
of the Roman Catholic interest. The offices of the
State were again filled by Protestants ; the legislation,
dealing with landed property, and attainting the sup
porters of the Revolution, being that of an assembly not
convened by the authority of William and Mary as a
Parliament, was treated as absolutely null and void.
This was declared by express enactments of both the
English and Irish Parliaments : of the former in 1 690,
and of the latter in 1695. The Irish, in addition to these
declarations against the validity of the proceedings of
James's Parliament, directed that for the better guiding
and assuring the minds of his Majesty's good subjects,
and that no memorial might remain, all the pretended
Acts, and the rolls on which they were engrossed, and
all proceedings by the persons pretending to be such

* The proceedings of Tyrconnell, and subsequently of James's ParUa
ment, are very fully narrated by Macaulay {History, vol. iii. chap, xii,).
With him, as regards the latter, should be compared Lecky {History, vol.
ii. chap. vi. pp. 184-194). In one respect James's Parliament set a good
example ; they passed a Toleration Act.

156 THE CHUECH [Chap. X.
Parhament, and also all writs issued for calling the said
pretended Parliament, and all its journals, should be
brought before the Chief Governor at the Council-
chamber, and there be publicly and openly cancelled,
and utterly destroyed.*
The Established Church shared in the vicissitudes of
civil policy in the reigns of James and of William and
Mary. Under James it was depressed. An Act of the
Parliament of 1689 withdrew from the clergy the tithes
payable by Roman Catholics, that is, the greater part of
their emoluments in three provinces, without compensa
tion to the existing incumbents. Under William and
Mary the Church was reinstated in its old position, and
restored to its former pre-eminence and endowments,
with some addition to the latter from a grant for its
benefit of impropriations forfeited to the Crown.
During the reign of James several Irish bishoprics
had fallen vacant, and were by him left unfilled. To
these William and Mary, when order had been in some
degree restored, appointed ; the first exercise of their
patronage being in the month of December, 1690, by the
translation of Narcissus Marsh from the See of Leighlin
and Ferns to the Archbishopric of Cashel. This pro
motion was well-merited by the zeal and fidelity with
which, until compelled to abandon his diocese and take
refuge in England, this prelate had discharged the duties
of his office. t
Although the Church henceforward enjoyed its

* 7 WUUam IIL, ch, 3 (Irish).
f The Church was indebted to Marsh for an excellent library in Dub
lin, intended chiefly for the clergy, and an endowment for it, by which
it is still maintained.

1690-1694] IN THE EEIGN OF WILLIAM AND MAEY. 157
ancient privileges, it is remarkable that neither by
William and Mary, nor by William when he reigned
alone, was Convocation ever summoned. The right to
tax the clergy, which this assembly had in Ireland
exercised under James I. and Charles I. and II. , was
now assumed by Parliament : very probably in imi
tation of what had taken place in England, where, in
1664, authority to tax the clergy had been conceded to
Parliament under an arrangement between Archbishop
Sheldon and Lord Chancellor Hyde, the clergy in return
receiving or assuming the privilege of voting for mem
bers of Parliament. * Taxation of the clergy by Parlia
ment was opposed by the Irish bishops in the House of
Lords, and their protest claiming this power for Convo
cation was recorded in the journals of that assembly. f
It is probable that the refusal to summon Convoca
tion arose from the supposed attachment of the Irish
clergy to the House of Stuart. Like their English
brethren, many of them inclined to the doctrine of
divine right and indefeasible authority in the King
claiming by descent. They were not, however, equally
ready to become martyrs for the theory ; and, while in
England, some Bishops, and about four hundred of the
clergy, refusing to take the oath of allegiance to Wil
liam and Mary, were deprived of their preferments, and
seceding, formed the sect of the Non-Jurors, in Ire
land very few refused to comply with the law. Among
those were, however, two of note, Sheridan, Bishop of

* Carwithen's History ofthe Church of England, vol. iii. pp, 106-112.
I See letter of Archbishop King to the Bishop of Worcester, 9th Feb
ruary, 1699, cited by Mant, History, vol. u. p. 100,

158 THE CHUECH [Chap. X,
Kilmore, and Charles Leslie, Chancellor of the diocese
of Connor.* Leslie was a theological writer of great ability. He
was noted for the acuteness and logical power of his
arguments. " Charles Leslie," said Dr. Johnson, em
phatically, "is a reasoner, and a reasoner not to be
reasoned against "f — a panegyric well deserved, if by
no other of his writings, by his treatise entitled, "A
Short Method vath a Deist." In this, laying down cer
tain tests to distinguish a true history of events, he ap
plies them to the accounts of the institution of the Mosaic
and Christian religions. These tests were — (1) that the
matters of fact alleged be such as could be judged of
by the senses, seen and heard; (2) that they shall have
occurred publicly in the face of the world ; (3) that mo
numents, acts, and observances, in memory of them shall
have existence and continue ; (4) that these shall have
their commencement and institution from the time that
the matters are said to have occurred.^
Convocation not being summoned, there was not,
* Another Non-Juror of celebrity, Henry Dodwell, was an Irishman.
He was a layman, and then Camden Professor of History in the Univer
sity of Oxford ; but previously he had been a Fellow of Trinity College,
Dublin. He was noted for his erudition, a chronological work of his
being still cited. His theological opinions went beyond those of any other
of the High Church party. According to him the immortality of the soul
is conveyed in baptism, and its efficacy comes from the bishops through
the clergy ordained by them ; sacerdotal absolution is necessary for the
remission of sins (see his Epistolary Biscourse). An Irish Bishop, Mills
of Waterford, and Dr. Clarke, published replies to his writings.
f Boswell's Life of Johnson (Croker's edition), vol. v. p. 186, note.
X Leslie was son of Bishop John Leslie (Clogher) : he went to the
Continent and joined there the Court of the Pretender ; was allowed to
return home again, and died at his own house, Glasslough, in the county
of Monaghan, where his descendant, Sir John Leslie, now resides.

1690-1694] IN THE EEIGN OP WILLIAM AND MAEY. 159
except in Parliament, where the Bishops represented the
interest of the Church, any public discussion or debate
in respect of Irish ecclesiastical affairs. Under William,
however, several measures relating to them became law.
Thus statutes were passed for abolishing the writ de
haeretico comburendo (which as yet continued to be legal
in Ireland) ; suppressing profane cursing and swearing ;
regulating the days to be observed as holy days, and
enforcing the observance of Sunday. The erection of
glebe-houses was encouraged by obliging the incumbent
who succeeded the builder to repay a portion of the ex
pense of construction, and by enabling him to obtain
contribution again from his own successor.*
The Primate from the accession of William and
Mary, until the death of William, was Michael Boyle,
previously Bishop of the united diocese of Cork, Cloyne,
and Ross. This prelate was also Lord Chancellor ; the
last ecclesiastic who in Ireland ever filled the office.
The Court of Chancery was indebted to him for some
of the rules which long regulated its procedure. It is
characteristic of the mode in which the government of
the Church of Ireland was conducted in the seventeenth
century, that when Bishop of Cork, Boyle held with the
office six parochial benefices ; until his own kinsman,
Lord Orrery, when President of Munster, compelled
him to resign them.
Another instance of the open violation of the laws of
the Church is furnished by the case of Hacket, Bishop
of Down and Connor, deprived in 1694, by a visitatorial
* The Acts of the Irish Parliament referred to in this paragraph
are : 7 Wm. IIL, ch, 2 ; 7 Wm, III,, ch, 9 ; 7 Wm. Ill,, ch, 14 ; 7
Wm. IIL, ch, 17 ; 10 Wm, III,, ch. 6.

160 THE CHUECH [Chap. X.
commission, for non-residence, simony, and other of
fences. He had, during twenty years previously, been
tolerated in almost total absence from his diocese with
out excuse.
From the time when the sovereignty of William and
Mary had been established, the political policy pursued
was devoted to the aggrandizement of the Protestant
party. The Parliament which then (1692) was con
vened met under influences not favourable to a calm
and statesmanlike review of affairs. It was composed
exclusively of Protestants, of whom many had been
excluded from office by Tyrconnell, and more had seen
the title to their lands endangered by the legislation of
James's Parliament. Animated by resentment, and the
pride of victory, they sought only how to assert and
keep for themselves the ascendency which the defeat of
James had secured for them, and, that they might the
better accomplish that purpose, to render their adver
saries incapable of making any resistance. The same
spirit continued in the succeeding Parliaments. At the
death of William there were upon the statute-book
several Acts directed against persons professing the
Roman Catholic religion, and particularly against the
clergy of that faith. These formed the commencement
of the laws which, from their extraordinary severity,
are known as emphatically " The Penal Code," and
which, completed in the next reign, will more properly
come to be considered in connexion with its events.
Beside the Act annulling the proceedings of James's
Parliament, the English Parliament passed other statutes
professing to bind Ireland. Some of these related to the
Church : one of them imposed new oaths, and abrogated

1694-1702] IN THE EEIGN OP WILLIAM III. 161
the oath of supremacy which was then prescribed in Ire
land.* This appears to have been unpopular with the
clergy, and being added to the refusal to summon Con
vocation, and to the taxation of ecclesiastical persons by
Parliament, to have created extreme dissatisfaction. Re
ferring to these causes of complaint, and to others which
affected the laity more than the clergy. Bishop King,
who had been appointed to the See of Derry by William
and Mary, states the opinions of the time in the following
terms : . . . " These considerations are very afflictive
and uneasy to the people of Ireland, and make them
sensible that they are not like to be so happy a people
as they promised themselves on the Revolution."!
If the legislation of the English Parliament, in re
lation to Ireland, had been confined to the Acts which
were passed concerning the Church, it is not probable
that the exercise of the power which was thus assumed
would have excited much attention from any except
those whose interests were directly affected. But
civil affairs were also included within its scope, and it
was proposed to deal with Irish trade. The woollen
manufacture had prospered in Ireland ; and its success
was prejudicial to the interest of persons engaged in
the same business in England. By them it was pro
posed that English legislation should be used to put
dovTi this manufacture in Ireland ; and one of the mea
sures suggested was, that the export of Irish wool to the
Continent should be prohibited, lest it might be worked
up by foreign industry to compete with English cloth.
When it was seen that the power assumed by the English
* See 3 WUliam and Mary, ch. 2 (EngUsh).
f See letter to Bishop of Worcester, already referred to, p, 157, note.
M

162 THE CHUECH [Chap, X.
Parliament might be used for purposes in the highest
degree injurious to the trade of Ireland, discontent arose,
and led to an examination of the precedents and reasons
wliich were alleged in support of this assumption.
In 1698 appeared an elaborate discussion of the
subject in a treatise entitled, " The Case of Ireland
being bound by Acts of Parliament in England stated,"
written by Molyneux, Member for the University of
Dublin in the Irish Parliament, who was then much
esteemed both in England and Ireland for his scientific
attainments.* In this the right of the English Parlia
ment to legislate for Ireland is controverted upon con
stitutional and historical grounds, with much force and
ingenuity of reasoning.
The appearance of Molyneux's work was followed
by considerable excitement in England. The House of
Commons voted an unanimous resolution that " the book
published by Mr. Molyneux was of dangerous tendency
to the Crown and people of England, by denying the
authority of the King and people of England to bind
the kingdom and people of Ireland, and the subordina
tion and dependence that Ireland ought to have upon
England, as being united and annexed to the imperial
Crown of that realm." Not content with this resolution,
they ordered the book to be burned by the common
hangman ; and they presented to King William an
address urging that such of their laws as related to
Ireland should be enforced.
* Locke terms Molyneux " that very ingenious and studious pro
moter of real knowledge, the learned and worthy Mr, Molyneux " ; and
mentions a problem proposed by him to illustrate the degree in which
ideas attributed to the sight are acquired from experience. — Essay on the
Human Understanding, book U,, ch. 9, s. 8.

1694-1702] IN THE EEIGN OP WILLIAM III. 163
William, deeming it inexpedient to come into con
flict on this question with the English Parliament,
promised compliance with the address. The Irish Par
liament remained passive. The consequence was, that
the opposition to the proceedings of the former, which
was begun by Molyneux,* died away, and the claim
of England to supreme legislative power was in prac
tice acknowledged.
In this manner, for the time, terminated the con
troversy between the English and Irish Parliaments :
not, however, without consequences of the utmost im
portance. To the discussions connected with it was
due the commencement among the Anglo-Irish of an
Irish interest separate from an EngHsh ; of distinct
parties to maintain each, which included the clergy as
well as the laity, and differed as to the policy proper to
be pursued in reference both to ecclesiastical and civil
affairs. * See Note Z of Appendix,

M 2

164 THE CHUECH [Chap. XI.

CHAPTER XI.
[1702-1714.J
THE reign of Anne in Ireland is associated with the
Penal Code, which, as there has been occasion to
mention in the preceding chapter, beginning with some
statutes passed before William's death, had, under this
Queen, its provisions very considerably extended, and
its operation enforced with increased efficiency and
stringency. It would not be consistent either with the plan of
the present treatise, or with the space which it allows for
consideration of political events, to enter into the pro
visions of the various statutes which constituted this
code. Also, the examination they have received in civil
histories and in essays renders anything beyond a sum
mary of their effect not needed. It suffices, therefore,
now to say that the code (which, however, had some
additions later in date than Anne's reign) reduced the
Roman Catholic part of the people to the lowest point
of depression that can be conceived capable of coex
isting with their being recognized as a portion of the
community. Under its enactments they were neither
eligible to be members of Parliament or of the municipal
corporations : nor could they vote at elections to return

1702-1714] IN THE EEIGN OF ANNE. 165
such members ; in no official capacity under the Crown
were they employed ; no profession, except the medical,
was open to them ; they were not permitted to acquire
landed property for more than limited interests; and
upon its descent, if the heir or devisee did not con
form to Protestantism, the inheritance was subdivided.
Neither clergy, nor schoolmasters of their religion, were
even tolerated.
Laws of this character were not peculiar to Ireland :
similar enactments proceeded at this time from the Par
liament of England; and with less excuse, since what
ever might be said respecting the danger to the Pro
testant Constitution as established at the Revolution,
which might result from giving Roman Catholics poli
tical power in the former country, where they were nu
merous, no such reason could be assigned in the latter,
where they were few. For the same reason, however,
the English penal legislation, while more unjustifiable,
was less oppressive than the Irish — the former affected
a sect, the latter four-fifths of the people.*
The injustice, and not less the impolicy, of the
Penal Code, the obstacles it interposed in the way of
social improvement, the interruption to the internal
peace of the community, and consequent peril of the
State caused by its intolerant distinctions of classes,
* This was Archbishop Boulter's calculation of the proportion of Eo
man Catholics in 1731 (see his Letters, vol. ii, p, 67), Others, however,
at that time thought the estimate should be higher, and there are au
thorities for a lower. Until a denominational census was taken in Ire
land, statements as to the statistics of religious profession cannot be held
to rest on a secure basis. The evidence bearing on the question, so far as
the first half of the eighteenth century, is referred to by Lecky, History,
vol, ii, p, 255.

166 THE CHUECH [Chap. XI.
are now universally admitted. It has not been with
equal clearness perceived that in Ireland no interest, no
institution, suffered more from its effects than Pro
testantism. So long as the provisions of its statutes
continued in force, Roman Catholics were divided from
the rest of their fellow-countrymen by a legislative
barrier : it was intended that they should be as distinct
as the Helots from the Spartans, In practice the in
tention was imperfectly fulfilled, but this was due not
to the law, but to the instincts of human nature over
coming the law. Was it to be expected that those who
suffered under such legislation should distinguish be
tween its authors and their creed, or fail to regard both
with distrust and resentment ?
As the progress of Protestantism among the people
was at this time obstructed by injudicious enactments,
so also was the progress of the Church among Pro
testants by a similar cause. Its members were placed
in a position of invidious elevation over Protestant Dis
senters. One provision of the laws passed by the Irish
Parliament under Anne imposed as a qualification for
office or trust under the Crown the obligation of re
ceiving on some Sunday the Sacrament of the Lord's
Supper, according to the usage of the Church of Ire
land. Thus, a Presbyterian, or other Protestant Non
conformist, whom conscientious scruples might hinder
from participating in this rite, was excluded from official
position. The clause which introduced this obligation is said
to have been inserted in England by the Council,
when the Bill in which it appeared was, in conformity
with a provision of the laws then in force, sent over for

1702-1714] IN THE EEIGN OF ANNE. 167
approval.* Whatever may have been its origin, sub
sequent efforts to repeal it failed, and it continued in
operation until the next century. f
The completion of the Penal Code, and the Sacra
mental Test, were the measures of Anne's Irish Par
liament which call for notice in connexion with
ecclesiastical history. The Peers and Commoners who
passed them were almost all of the Established Church ;
but it was not so much to advance its interest as to se
cure the ascendency of themselves and their descendants
that their policy was designed. Nothing really for the
advantage of the Church was done. The impropria
tions, the consequent poverty of many benefices, the
frequent unions and pluralities, were left without any
attempt to provide a remedy.
One benefit, not large in amount, but, from the use
made of the revenue thus acquired, of much service to
the Church, was conferred by the Queen herself. Under
the existing law, the Crown continued to receive from
the clergy the First Fruits and Twentieths, which, as
has been mentioned, Henry VIII. and Elizabeth ap
propriated. J Anne remitted the latter tax altogether,
and granted the other to a Board of Trustees, to be
applied by them in providing glebes for the incumbents
of parishes, and in purchasing impropriation s.§
The case of the Irish Church for relief in respect
of these imposts was placed before the Queen and her
ministers by Swift, who had some time before been
* Burnet, Own Time, vol, iv, p. 23.
f The Sacramental Test was not by law abolished for either England
or Ireland untu 1828.
X See as to Henry, p. 29, supra, as to Elizabeth, p, 58,
§ Anne's grant was confirmed by an Act of George tho First,

168 THE CHUECH [Chap. XI.
promoted to a small benefice in Ireland in the patronage
of the Crown. He represented the scarcity of glebes,
and the number of impropriations which impoverished the
parochial incumbents. . . . "Hardly one parish," he says,
" has any glebes, and the rest very small and scattered,
except a very few, which seldom have any houses.
There are, in proportion, more impropriations in Ireland
than in England ; which, added to the poverty of the
country, makes the livings of very small and uncertain
value, so that five or six are often joined to make a
revenue of £50 per annum ; and these have seldom
above one church in repair, the rest being destroyed by
frequent wars and other causes. For want of glebes,
the clergy are forced to take farms in their own or the
neighbouring parishes, and to live at rack rents."*
A statement made on such an occasion must be re
garded as an official communication, and may be taken
to represent not inaccurately the state of the Irish
Church at its date. The same cause which, before
the Reformation, impoverished the clergy still existed —
that from numerous parishes their revenues were with
drawn : as then for the monks, so now for the laymen
who had been substituted as owners. Parliament left
the distribution of Church revenues without change ;
and the law not being effective to oblige impropriators
to make adequate provision for the parishes of which
they were the lay rectors, several had to be united in
one incumbent to make up a moderate income.'f
* Memorial presented to Harley, Oct. 17th, 1710; Swift's Works,
vol, X, p, 126,
f Swift, in the meraorial to Harley, says the impropriations were
more numerous in Ireland than in England; but the poverty of the

1702-1714] IN THE EEIGN OP ANNE. 169
The same desire to serve the Established Church that
led to the grant of the First Fruits and Twentieths in
duced the Queen and her ministers to revive the practice
of summoning the Irish Convocation, which had, from
the reign of Charles II. , been discontinued. It met
along with Parliament in 1703, 1705, 1709, 1711, and
1713.* In 1703 the principal business transacted by Convo
cation related to the suggestion of means to be used for
converting the natives. Notwithstanding that more than
five centuries had elapsed since the English first ac
quired dominion over the Irish race, and although they
had planted in the country numerous English-speaking
colonies, the use of the Irish language among the portion
of the people who were of Irish descent continued, t
The Lower House of Convocation, considering that,
except through the medium of written and oral com
munication with them in their own language, the con
version of the natives could not be accomplished, sent to
clergy seems to have been there just as great. Burnet says that " hun
dreds of cures have not of certaui provision £20 a-year, and some thou
sands have not £60," — Own Time, vol, iv, p, 33,
* Mant does not mention any meeting of Convocation in 1713 ; but
see Dr, Eeeves's Paper on Convocation in Ireland, referred to at p, 20
supra. f The use of the Irish language is now confined to a few districts
along the West Coast of Ireland. Its discontinuance elsewhere is, how
ever, of comparatively recent date. The tenacity with which it was
retained by the natives finds parallels in Wales and the Highlands, where
also the people were Celts. It has an equaUy remarkable paraUel in the
case of the Galatians, to whom St. Paul addressed his Epistle. Origi
naUy a colony from Gaul to Asia Minor, the Galatians are found in the
time of Jerome, six centuries after their emigration, to retain in the
middle of a Greek population the Celtic language. (See Bishop Light-
foot's Introduction to his Commentary on Galatians, p, 12,)

170 THE CHUECH [Chap. XI.
the Upper House a resolution asserting the expediency
of employing preachers in the Irish tongue, and re
questing the bishops to take into consideration what
number of preachers would be required, and how they
were to be supported.* But the resolution was not then
followed by any active measures.
In 1705 the Lower House was occupied with canons
for the reformation and restoration of discipline ; the
subject, however, received no attention from the Bishops,
and the proceedings of the Lower House became inopera
tive, " There has been a session," says Archbishop King,
" without one clause for the good of the Church."t
In 1709 and 1711 the question of converting the
natives was again before Convocation. On the former
occasion the Upper House initiated the consideration of
the subject, as a matter of concern to all Protestants and
particularly to the clergy ; and the Lower House passed
resolutions directing the printing of Irish versions of the
Bible, and of the English liturgy, and the use of services
and the employment of preachers in the Irish tongue.f
In 1711, besides entering on the subject of the con
version of the natives, Convocation, having received the
royal licence, framed some canons ; also it approved of
forms of prayer for prisoners and debtors, which were
afterwards printed in Irish editions of the Prayer Book.
In 1705 an attempt was made by the Lower House of
Convocation to regain the power of taxing the clergy,
* See Archbishop King's letter to the Bishop of Cloyne, 26th June,
1706 ; and also his letter to the Archbishop of Tuam, 17th April, 1706,
cited by Mant, History, vol. ii. pp, 177 and 178.
j- See Eichardson's History of Attempts to Convert the Natives of Ire
land, published in London, 1712 ; and Mant's History, vol, ii, p, 217.

1702-1714] IN THE EEIGN OF ANNE. 171
and an address to the House of Commons in relation to
the subject was prepared ; but their proceedings were
treated by that House as a contempt, and their actuary
committed to the custody of the sergeant-at-arms.* In
the end the claim seems to have been relinquished. No
subsidy was voted by any Convocation in Anne's reign.
From the death of Anne until the disestablishment of
the Irish Church (1869) the Irish Convocation was never
convened by the Crown ; and, not being summoned or
licensed to meet, it could not during this period legally
assemble. Its discontinuance was said to have been at
first owing to fear of the Jacobite tendencies of the
clergy; afterwards, from other political motives.!
It appears to have been thought at this time that,
although Convocation was engaged at its meetings in
considering the question of converting the natives, there
was much less zeal for the requisite proceedings than
was professed. " I do not find," writes Archbishop
King, "that it is desired by all that the natives should be
converted." J It was thought by some that if they were
they would be too powerful; by others, that any attempts
towards their conversion might be followed by social
disturbances. Also it was still considered impolitic to
disseminate publications in the Irish language, as tending
* See Dr, Eeeves's Paper on Convocation, already cited.
f After 1717 the EngUsh Convocation, although it continued to be
summoned, did not receive a Ucence to proceed to business. Hence Pope's
line, "The Convocation gaped, but could not speak," It now receives,
and for some years previously has received, the requisite licence, and is
permitted to debate the most important questions,
X In his letter to Swift, cited by Mant, History, vol, U, p. 230 ; also
another to Swift, dated Sept, 1, 1711, published in Swift's Works.

172 THE CHUECH [Chap. XI.
to encourage its use, and thus to keep alive a marked
distinction between the natives and other portions of the
people.* Notwithstanding that at this period, and on these va
rious grounds, a powerful opposition existed among per
sons of influence to any organized plan for effecting the
conversion of the natives to Protestantism, considerable
exertions were made to spread its principles among them.
Irish versions which had been completed of the New
Testament in 1603, and of the Old Testament in I685,t
were reprinted and circulated — also the English Prayer
Book, with the Church Catechism and an Exposition of
it, all in Irish, as recommended by Convocation, were
published. To meet the necessary expenses, subscrip
tions in Ireland, and aid from the English " Society for
Promoting Christian Knowledge " were obtained. In
various districts where Irish was spoken, some of the
clergy preached in that language. And, with a view to
train up candidates for the ministry to speak the Irish
tongue, its study was encouraged in Trinity College.

* In 1767, objections were made to the publication of the Bible in
Erse or Gaelic, similar to those urged against its ^publication in Irish.
These were answered at that time in a very able letter from Dr. Johnson,
"I did not," he says, " expect to hear that it could be, in an assembly
convened for the propagation of Christian knowledge, a question whether
any nation, uninstructed in religion, should receive instruction ; or
whether that instruction -should be imparted to them by a translation of
the holy books into their own language. If obedience to the will of God
be necessary to happiness, and knowledge of His wiU be necessaiy to
obedience, I know not how he that withholds this knowledge or delays it
can be said to love his neighbour as himself." — Croker's Boswell, vol. ii.
p, 29. \ See Appendix, Note T.

1702-1714] IN THE EEIGN OF ANNE. 173
The success, however, resulting from these proceedings
was small.*
Between the Revolution and the death of Anne there
were many vacancies in bishoprics. The greater number
of these occurred before her accession, and were filled
by William and Mary, or by William. In 1702, the
Primacy became vacant by the death of Boyle, of whom
mention has been made in the preceding chapter. It
was conferred upon Narcissus Marsh, Archbishop of
Dublin. On his death in 1713, Thomas Lindsay was
translated from the See of Raphoe to Armagh. Upon
the promotion of Marsh, Bishop King, then of Derry,
was promoted to Dublin.
Both at Dublin and Armagh Marsh was deservedly
esteemed. Of Lindsay there is little to be said. His
promotion is reported to have been advocated by Swift,
who had, in the last years of Queen Anne's reign, much
influence with her then ministers, Harley and Boling
broke, and was their guide as to Irish affairs. Lindsay
was reputed to be of weak character, and not suited to
be placed at the head of affairs. He has, however, the
merit of munificence to the Church. To him the choir
at Armagh Cathedral was indebted for a liberal endow
ment. Archbishop King had in his own day no superior in
the Irish Church, either as a Bishop or as a theological
author. His writings will be subsequently considered.
His conduct in the dioceses which were successively

* See, as to exertions to convert the natives, Eichardson's History
already referred to, and Mant, History, vol, ii, p. 218-230.
f See as to Lindsay, Mant, History, vol, U. p. 408.

174 THE CHUECH [Chap. XI.
under his rule may be now referred to. When he went
to Derry, he found the country in great disorder. It
had suffered much during the civil war. Tillage had
been then neglected, the live-stock destroyed, the
buildings dilapidated. , Hence, the farmers and peasants
were impoverished. Along with the social, the eccle
siastical condition of the diocese decayed ; many of the
clergy fled ; those who remained were poor ; most of
the churches and glebe-houses (the latter at that time
few in number) were out of repair. These evils were
met by corresponding exertions on the part of the Bishop
— with such success that, upon his translation to Dublin,
he transmitted to his successor a diocese, which might
favourably compare with any other in Ireland.
As Archbishop of Dublin, King displayed similar
energy and zeal. Swift, a severe judge of character,
describes him, a few years after his translation to the
office, as spending his time in acts of hospitality and
charity, in building churches, repairing his palace, and
in introducing and preferring the most worthy persons
he could find, without other regards : "in short, in the
practice of all virtues that could become a public or
private life."*
It was in Anne's reign that Swift received the
office with which his name is principally associated.
In 1713 he was nominated Dean of St. Patrick's Ca-

* This character of Archbishop King appeared in the first edition
(1708), of Swift's Letter from a Member of the House of Commons of
Ireland. In Faulkner's edition of his works (Dublin, 1739), the letter is
published without this portion relating to King : the preface says,
" some passages are omitted, which relate to certain persons, and are of
no consequence to the argument."

1702-1714] IN THE EEIGN OP ANNE. 175
thedral, Dublin. After his installation he returned to
London. On the Queen's death in the next year he
came back to Dublin, and, with some occasional absence,
resided in Ireland during the remainder of his life, de
voting himself with extraordinary energy to advance
the interest of the country in which his lot was cast.
The vacancy which enabled the appointment of Swift
was caused by the promotion of Stearne, the previous
Dean, to a bishopric. This prelate is described as di
ligent in the discharge of his duties, personally pious,
and singularly generous and charitable : if only the
qualities of character suited to his office be considered,
none of his contemporaries deserved more esteem.
While, however. Marsh, King, Stearne, and some
other of th(> episcopal bench would have reflected honour
upon any period of ecclesiastical history, many of their
brethren exhibit an unfavourable contrast. They were
reproached with habitual neglect of duty, and said to
be constantly absent from their dioceses. In 1714, in
the province of Armagh, which then comprised more
than a third of the Irish bishoprics, and these, from the
number of Protestants in them, perhaps the most im
portant, there were, according to Archbishop King, but
two bishops resident, and for several years previously
there had been but one.* In some degree this absence of
the bishops from their dioceses was caused by attendance
upon the House of Lords whenever Parliament sat. It
existed most among the bishops transferred from the Eng
lish Church, who, leaving a higher degree of civilization,
* King to Annesley : Letter, July 3, 1714. Cited by Mant, History,
vol, ii, p, 156,

176 THE CHUECH IN THE EEIGN OP ANNE. [Chap. XI.
were seldom reconciled to the state of society with
which they came in contact in such parts of the country
as were remote from Dublin.
Before the close of this reign the Penal Code had
begun to operate upon the social condition of the
people.* At the same time, from another cause, there
occurred a great change in the ovmership of landed pro
perty, which completed the depression of the Roman
Catholic portion. The estates of the proprietors who
followed James had been confiscated by William, and
conferred upon the Generals of his army and his per
sonal friends. But the English Parliament annulled his
grants, assumed the right to dispose of the forfeited
lands, and vested them in trustees, in order that they
might be sold. Roman Catholics were disabled from
purchasing, and thus all this vast extent of territory
came to be assigned exclusively to Protestants.
The result of the policy of this period was the
establishment in every department of a Protestant as
cendency. The Roman Catholics were as numerous
as ever, but they were dispirited and without leaders.
Deprived of the power to acquire landed property, and
not allowed to rise in the service of the State, they
turned to the pursuits of trade and commerce. Many
in this manner became rich; the rest, especially those
concerned with land, did not, until about sixty years
later, regain social power or influence.

* As early as 1708 Swift looked upon the Eoman CathoUc interest
as inconsiderable. " Their lands (he says) are almost entirely taken
from them, and they are rendered incapable of purchasing any more ;
and for the Uttle that remains, provision is made by the late Act that it
wUl daily crumble away." — Works, vol. iii, p. 146.

CHAPTER XII.
[1714-1760.]
DURING the reigns of the first two kings of the House
of Hanover there was not any relaxation of the
penal laws. The social system in Ireland retained with
out alteration the form which it had assumed under
William and Anne. None of the legislation of that time
can be said to have operated upon the course of ecclesias
tical affairs. Protestantism made few converts ; and
the relative numerical proportions between its denomi
nations continued much as they had previously been.
There is, therefore, for a considerable period little in the
external history of the Church to detain attention, and its
internal state, the sentiments and ideas which influenced
its members, and the general condition of society as
regards religion, may now properly be brought under
examination. At the commencement of the eighteenth century,
both in England and Ireland, the effects of the reaction
from Puritanism which accompanied the Restoration
were still felt. The licentiousness of manners which
prevailed under Charles II. had indeed in some degree
passed away, and virtue and morality, then the subject
of ridicule, began to be again treated with respect.
N

178 THE CHUECH [Chap. XII.
But still a sceptical spirit, which had arisen about that
time, continued prevalent ; and literature and the conver
sation of the educated classes were largely imbued with
irreverence for sacred subjects, and with loose and un
settled notions as to the authority of revealed religion,
which took the name of free thinking.
With not a few persons, opinions of this character
reached to a profession of even absolute infidelity. So
late as 1736, the great author of the "Analogy" stated
that many took for granted that Christianity was at
length discovered to be fictitious, and assumed this
to be an agreed point among people of discernment.*
These were, however, the smaller part of those who
sympathised with Scepticism. In the case of most of
those who did so the authority of Christianity was im
paired, but not wholly annulled: they did not altogether
deny, but they ceased to be impressed with, the sanctions
claimed for its precepts ; and the influence of religion
over them was weakened, not destroyed.
Under such circumstances there was, as might be
expected, little external demonstration of respect for
the Church among the laity, either in England or Ire
land, and small attendance upon its observances and
services. In no neighbouring state or country, accord
ing to Addison, ¦]* was there less appearance of religion
than in the former kingdom. In the latter, the genera-

* Advertisement prefixed to the first edition ofthe "Analogy" (1736).
Compare Berkeley's Biscourse addressed to Magistrates and Men in Autho
rity, occasioned by the enormous Licence and Irreligion ofthe Times : published
in Dublin, 1736. In this he inentions a society in Dublin for the purposQ
of " studied, deliberate indignities against the Divine Majesty."
t Freeholder, No. 37, a. d. 1715.

1714-1760] IN THE EEIGNS OP GEOEGE I. AND II. 179
lity of men (it was said) cast an ill aspect upon the
Church and upon Churchmen.*
If we regard society, irrespective of its religious
character, and merely with reference to its general
standard of opinion, a judgment equally unfavourable
must be pronounced. An age of Unbelief is always an
age of low aims and objects. The attraction upwards,
derived from looking to the divine superintendence and
a future state of reward and punishment, is withdrawn :
the faith which exalts human nature above human frailty
ceases to operate, t Motives of interest, the calculations
of selfishness, take the place of higher impulses. Ac
cordingly, the history of the period records nothing dig
nified or ennobling. Manners were unrefined ; mental
cultivation was restricted to a few ; conversation was
coarse and indelicate.^ External decorum, not virtue,
was the utmost that the most rigid censor required. In
every class excessive indulgence in drink prevaUed, In
Ireland the habits of the gentry were convivial to an
excess, and were attended very frequently by expense
out of proportion to their means of supporting it,
* So Archbishop King says in a letter to Bishop Foy. In the same
letter he adds : — " The faith of religion is very weak amongst all, and the
sense of it almost lost," and complains " how diUgent some persons of
great quaUty are to propagate irreligion." — Mant, History, vol. ii, p, 95.
f Bacon supports this line of observation by an iUustration from
animal nature: ..." Take (he says) an example of a dog, and mark
what a generosity and courage he will put on when he finds himself
maintained by a man, who to him is instead of a God, or melior natura —
which courage is manifestly such as that creature, without that confi
dence of a better nature than his own, could never attain," — Essay on

X Swift, about 1720, speaks of the corruption of morals among the
English people. — Letter to a Toung Clergyman. Works, vol, ii. p. 308.
N 2

180 THE CHUECH [Chap. XIL
Although the clergy of the English and Irish Es
tablished Churches must be exonerated from the alle
gation of having adopted sceptical opinions, and from
charges of vice or positive misconduct, it cannot be said
that they were exempt from the influences of the time.
They were superior, but generally little superior, to the
laity. The greater number had an inadequate apprecl^
ation of the charge entrusted to them ; they were negli^
gent in the discharge of professional duties, and without
zeal or fervour. They compared, it was then thought,
unfavourably in these respects with the clergy of other
countries : were more remiss in their labours, and less
severe in their lives.* Their sermons seldom rose above
commonplaces upon morals.
In the case of the Irish clergy, some circumstances
peculiar to their position operated injuriously. Much the
larger proportion of them lived surrounded by a popula
tion that rejected their ministry; they had consequently
no spiritual work to perform beyond reading prayers and
preaching to the few Protestants who attended church
upon Sunday. The discipline of character, which Is
supplied by visiting, instructing the young, consoling
sickness and suffering, was wholly wanting. The in
cumbents of the parishes where, as was generally the
case, the inhabitants were almost all Roman Catholics,
were simply country gentlemen of moderate or humble
fortune. A judicious exercise of patronage might have done
* This is the judgment of Burnet as to the EngUsh ( Own Time, vol. iv.
p. ,344), He also says : " The main body of our clergy has always appeared
dead and lifeless to me ; and instead of animating one another, they seem
rather to lay one another asleep." — ^p. 342.

1714-1760] IN THE EEIGNS OP GEOEGE I. AND II. 181
something to counteract these disadvantages ; it might, at
least, have supplied a stimulus to study and mental cul
tivation. But the patronage of the day was administered
from very different motives. The bishops (all appointed
by the Crown) were chosen, in most instances, with a
view to political services already rendered by them
selves or those who recommended them, and with the
expectation that they should attend in the House of
Lords and vote for the measures of the King's ministers,
whoever they might be. The general character of pre
lates so chosen could not be other than secular, and
from them a secularism of ideas and habits spread to
those who looked up to their example, and depended
upon them for promotion.
While, however, for most of the Irish clergy, the
standard of duty and intellectual attainment was low,
noble examples to the contrary were to be found among
them — men blameless in their lives, and diligent in their
calling. There were also some of high distinction in
literature, whose works deserve to be classed among the
ablest contributions to the theological and philosophical
controversies of the period.
These controversies, so far as they related to religion,
referred to subjects different from those which previously
engaged attention. Doctrinal tenets or modes of Church
government were no longer debated ; it was the exist
ence of Christianity that was in peril. And, accordingly,
with this as the paramount question, the discussions of
the period were concerned, either directly: as, for in
stance, when the truth and authority of the Scriptures
were examined: or indirectly, as when the relations
which they reveal between the Supreme Being and His

182 THE CHUECH [Chap. II.
creatures were considered, and the motal government of
the world was vindicated.
Among the Irish writers who took part in these dis
cussions. Archbishop King (whose administrative ability
and excellence of character there has been already oc
casion to mention) is entitled to a pre-eminent place. His
treatise On the Origin of Evil, and his Discourse on Predesti
nation, are characterized by thought and reasoning of a
high order. They are still always referred to when the
topics of which they treat come under examination.
The treatise On the Origin of Evil was the first of
these publications. It was composed in Latin, and trans
lated into English by Edmund Law, afterwards Bishop
of Carlisle. The explanations offered in this work of the
difficulties it proposes to solve have been censured, upon
the ground that they contain speculative propositions not
sufficiently restrained by a sense of our finite capacity
and limited knowledge. But of what other attempts to
reconcile the mystery of the existence of evil with the
omnipotence of a Supreme Being of infinite goodness
may not the same be said ? Here, if anywhere (to use
an expression of Hooker), our safest eloquence is our
silence. The sermon on Predestination is wholly free from the
faults attributed to the essay. Indeed, so admirable is its
moderation of idea and expression, and so judicious are
its observations upon the limits of our powers, that, as
has been remarked by the very distinguished prelate*
who in our own time republished and edited the sermon,

* Archbishop Whately. The sermon, with comments upon it, is now
published along with Whately's other works.

1714-1760] IN THE EEIGNS OP GEOEGE I. AND II. 183
it might justly have borne the title of a " Rule for
interpreting rightly the Scripture accounts of God."
Accordingly, there is no attempt to explain the fore
knowledge of contingent events, or by reasoning to
reconcile free-will with prescience ; the argument aims
merely at demonstrating that what seems to us contra
dictory may have that appearance, not because of any
thing in its own nature, but because of the imperfection
of our faculties and our consequent ignorance.*
Contemporary with King was Peter Browne, Bishop
of Cork (1710-1735). He had been Provost of Trinity
College, and to him it was due that the pursuit of
mental philosophy was especially encouraged in this in
stitution, and that the writings of Locke, although then
condemned at Oxford, were recommended for study.
Browne's merits as a writer on metaphysical subjects
have been always recognized ;t he was also a mathema
tician, and learned in theological studies. He appears
to have been extremely effective in the pulpit. It is re
corded that having preached before Queen Anne upon
the text, " Never man spake like this man," he received
* It is perhaps right to note that another Irish prelate (Bramhall), in
a work of earlier date than King's, had sought to explain these difficul
ties. "The readiest way (he says) to reconcile contingence and liberty
with the decrees and prescience of God is to subject future contingents
to the aspect of God, according to that presentiality which they have in
eternity. . . . The knowledge of God comprehends all times in a point " 
a view not improbably suggested by the great mediaeval theologian
Aquinas, who terms eternity Nunc Stans, " an ever-abiding now," See
Works of Bramhall in Lib. Anglo-Cath. Theol. vol, iv. pp. 153-190.
f Professor Webb terms Browne " the most original and independent
of the followers of Locke " {Isis, p. 3). Dugald Stewart ( Works, iii.
38, 9), shows that Browne, on some important points, anticipated Hume
and Eeid.

184 THE CHUECH [Chap. XIL
from her the praise that the text might justly be applied
to himself.* There are preserved pamphlets and a sermon
published by Browne in condemnation of drinking to the
memory of the dead. These were suggested by a practice
then commencing, and not yet altogether discontinued,
of giving as a toast, " the glorious, pious, and immortal
memory of King William III." Such toasts he considers
profane, and not free from disrespect to the sacrament
of the Lord's Supper.
The writings of Bishop Browne of most importance
are entitled. The Procedure, Extent, and Limits of the
Human Understanding, published in 1728, and Things
Divine and Supernatural conceived ly Analogy with Things
Natural and Human, published in 1733. f In the first
he builds on the foundation laid by Locke. Of all our
knowledge, both human and divine, he holds that the
senses furnish the groundwork. The mind is at first a
tabula rasa ; according to the dogma of the schoolmen,
nihil est in intellectu quod non prius in sensu. The second
aims at establishing that when we proceed from the
faculties, properties, and operations of our own spirit
to the divine and supernatural, we must use merely
analogies and resemblances.
Another contemporary of King was Berkeley, Bishop
of Cloyne (1734—1753), than whom there was no one

* Campbell's Philosophical Survey, p. 421. After Browne's death two
volumes of his sermons were published. (London, 1749.) When Bishop, he
diligently promoted the welfare of his diocese. Mant, Hist., vol, ii, p, 194.
f Butler's Analogy of Religion, Natural and Revealed, to the Constitu
tion and Course of Nature was of later date than Browne's treatise. But
except in the use of the word " Analogy " on the title-page, there is no
resemblance between them.

1714-1760] IN THE EEIGNS OP GEOEGE I. AND II. 185
in his own age the object of more affectionate admira
tion. This popularity was due partly to the brilliant
theories suggested by a genius singularly subtle and
original, and partly to the charm of a character shadowed
by few imperfections. His excellence has been described
by Atterbury — an acute observer, little disposed to un
merited panegyric — in a few pregnant words that need
no addition: . . . "So much understanding, so much
innocence, such humility, I did not think had been the
portion of any but angels, until I saw this gentleman."
Berkeley had been a Fellow of Trinity College, Dub
lin, and was thence promoted to the Deanery of Derry.
This office, which was the most lucrative Church
preferment (not episcopal) in Ireland, he proposed to
resign, and with three of the Fellows of Trinity College,
whom he induced to join him, to proceed to Bermuda,
and there to found an educational establishment, which
should form a centre of civilization for the American
savage tribes. He allotted to himself as its President an
income of £100 a-year, and to each of the disinterested
persons who were to accompany him £40 a-year. The
resignation was not accepted by the Crown, but the pro-
,ject was entered upon, andfor some years was in operation.
It was then abandoned in consequence of the persistent
refusal of Walpole to support it. Justly did Swift say
of Berkeley, "he is an absolute phUosopher with regard
to titles, wealth, and power" ; * still more justly might he
have described him as something higher and better ; for
when did philosophy ever prompt to such sacrifices ?
Berkeley ranks at the head of metaphysical writers in
* Letter of Swift to Lord Carteret, Sept, 4, 1724. Works, xi. 249.

186 THE CHUECH [Chap. XIL
the interval between Locke and the Scotch School. In
1709 he published his Essay towards a new Theory of
Vision, in which he put forward the doctrine — until
lately generally accepted, and still maintained by high
authority — that the eye conveys only sensations of colour,
and that the perceptions of distance, magnitude, form,
are acquired as the result of experience, by substituting
impressions really derived from the touch.*
The Theory of Vision was followed by the Principles of
Human Knowledge, unfolding his ideal theory. The world,
which seems to be external, exists only in mind ; in his
own words, " all the choir of heaven and furniture of
earth, all those bodies which compose the mighty frame
of the world, have not any substance without a mind."
There is nothing actual but spirit : the Divine Spirit,
and the finite spirits created by the Divine. Of these
speculations it is no exaggeration to say, that without
themselves producing conviction, they have exercised a
profound influence over the course of modern thought,
not only in Great Britain, but in Germany and France.!
In 1732, Berkeley published an elaborate answer to
the then popular objections to revealed religion. It was

* A treatise entitled Sight and Touch (London, 1864), by Mr. Abbott,
one of the Fellows of Trinity College, Dublin, contains an elaborate
argument against_Berkeley's theory. At the same time he admits that it
was generaUy accepted. Professor Webb, in his Isis, and Mr, Mahaffy, in
his introduction to a Translation of Kuno Fischer's Kant, take the same
side. MiU, Hamilton, Professor Eraser (the recent editor ol Berkeley's
works), support Berkeley.
f The Idealism of Berkeley has been recently discussed, and the various
modUying or opposing theories enunciated in reference to the subject traced
in a series of Essays by Professor Webb, with an acuteness not unworthy
of Berkeley himself, — Isis, Dublin, 1885.

1714-1760] IN THE EEIGNS OP GEOEGE I. AND II. 187
entitled Alciphron, or the Minute Philosopher,* and con
sists of seven dialogues, in which a debate is main
tained between two advocates of Free Thinking (one
representing the notions of intellectual sceptics, and the
other those current in fashionable society), and two
defenders of the truth of Christianity. In the discussion
thus conducted, the whole domain of thought and know
ledge, such as it was at that day, and so far as it bore
upon the subjects treated, is traversed with extraordi
nary ingenuity and learning.
In zeal to promote Irish interests, Berkeley ranks
with Swift; but his patriotism extended farther. Swift
thought only of the Anglo-Irish; Berkeley of the whole
people. So far as appears, he is the first who asked the
question, whether a scheme for the welfare of the nation
should not take in the whole inhabitants. "]* Nor is this
the only matter as to which he was before his age.
In the remarkable publication, where he suggested
the ideas as to Ireland wliich have been mentioned, he,
through the medium of questions — a mode of instruction
probably suggested by what he had read in his favourite
Plato concerning Socrates — developed his views on other
subjects also, and made many admirable suggestions,,
then novel, and little encouraged, designed to promote
social and political reforms.
'* The name " Minute Philosopher " seems to be derived from a passage
in the de Senectute, which Berkeley prefixed as a motto. In this, Cicero,
having expressed how, if to beUeve in the immortality of the soul were
an error, he preferred to err, adds, sin mortuus (ut quidam wwMfo'philosophi
censent) nihil sentiam : non vereor, ne hunc errorem meum mortui philo-
sophi irrideant.
f See Querist (published by Berkeley in 1735), query No. 255. There
are several other interrogatories to a like effect.

188 THE CHUECH [Chap. XII,
Prior to Berkeley's Alciphron had appeared a de
fence of Christianity against the Free Thinkers by
Abbadie, Dean of KiUaloe (1699-1727), As Berkeley
is in some respects the forerunner of Butler and the
Analogy, so is Abbadie of Paley and the Evidences,
Unfortunately for his fame in this country, Abbadie's
work is in the French language. In a compressed form it
touches upon most of the evidential proofs, more fully
expanded by subsequent writers — the need of a revela
tion, exhibited in the corruption of natural religion by
Paganism ; the superiority of the Judaic views of the
Supreme Being over all before known ; the succession
and relation of Christianity to Judaism ; the testimony
to its divine origin afforded by prophecy, by the miracles,
life, death, and resurrection of its Founder, and by the
majestic purity and self-denial of its teaching. He an
ticipates later writers in observing that the first mis
sionaries of Christianity were martyrs for the assertion,
not of opinions, respecting which they might be mis
taken, but of facts.*
William III. desired to confer upon Abbadie the
Deanery of the Cathedral of St. Patrick, Dublin, but his
defective knowledge of English prevented the King's
wishes being carried out. The objection was waived
as to Killaloe, a remote place, where there were few
* The title of Abbadie's work is Traiti de la Ver ite de la Religion
Chretienne. It first appeared at Eotterdam, in 1684. It obtained from Mr-,
Pitt the praise of being the best book upon the subject that he had read.
(See Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, vol iv, p, 84.) It is interesting to note
Pitt's opinion, now that evidential proof has fallen into disesteem ; and to
compare with it another declaration made by him to Wilberforce, in which
he stated that (as often happens with apologetical defences) Butler's
Analogy had raised more doubts in his mind than it answered. — Life of
Wilberforce, by his Sons, vol, i, p, 95.

1714-1760] IN THE EEIGNS OP GEOEGE I. AND II. 189
Protestants. Abbadie was Swiss by birth, and had been
minister in a French Church in the Savoy, before he
became connected with the Irish Church.
A controversy, which cannot be considered to have
yet terminated,* arose out of some statements in the writ
ings of King, Browne, and Berkeley, which we have been
considering. In the sermon on Predestination of the
first were observations to the effect that we cannot draw
inferences as to moral attributes — such as justice, mercy,
love — in a Supreme Being from what we know of them
in ourselves, any more than we can of his power from
what we can do : and that as regards their nature, what
he termed an analogical knowledge is all that we are
capable of in our present state. Berkeley in his Alciphron
expresses the opinion that such qualities may, by the
finite nature, be attributed proportionally to the in
finite ; and that we may affirm that all sorts of perfec
tion which we can conceive in a finite spirit are in God,
without any of the alloy which is to be found in
his creatures, t Browne, in his treatise On Things Divine
and Supernatural conceived by Analogy with Things Natural
and Human, answered Berkeley, and maintained
that the divine moral attributes differ from human,
not merely in degree, but in kind, J and that there
is only a similitude or correspondency between natural
or human knowledge and moral qualities, and a divine
supernatural knowledge and attributes.
* See the note on the " right ol the moral faculty to judge of the
Divine attributes," appended to the Sermons on the Efficacy of Prayer, by
Dr. Jellett, the present Provost of Trinity College, Dublin.
j- Alciphron, Dial. iv. s. 21.
X See page 263 of Browne's book, ed, 1733, Browne's comments

190 THE CHUECH [Chap. XII.
An examination of the state of the Irish Church,
during the period which we are now considering,
would be imperfect without reference to the division of
both clergy and laity into parties representing, one the
English, and the other the Irish interest, which, com
mencing some years before, had now widened and in
creased. During the reigns of William and Anne, if these
interests were opposed, the English triumphed ; in
particular, the trading and commercial regulations
between the two countries were then based upon the
supposition that only England was to be regarded.
For the great offices of Church and State, until the next
century. Englishmen were preferred, not merely before
the Irish, but before the English colonists in Ireland.
General discontent prevailed, and with none more than
the clergy, who saw the great prizes of their profession
taken from them, and numbers of parochial benefices,
even when in Episcopal patronage, conferred upon such
relatives and friends of the Englishmen who obtained
Irish bishoprics as accompanied or followed them from
their own country.
This pecuUar conjunction of affairs called into action
the commanding abilities of Swift. His motives may not
have been free from a mixture of disappointed ambition
on Berkeley exhibit little of the calmness to be expected from a philo
sopher. Their contemporary, Skelton, author of Beism Revealed, addressed
a Letter to the authors ofthe Minute Philosopher and of the Bivine Analogy,
in which he sought to reconcile them, and to which he prefixed the
motto : — " Ne tanta animis assuescite bella,
Neu pati'ise validas in viscera vertite vires."
Skelton was Eector of Templecarne, in the diocese of Clogher, and added
to his attainments as a theologian the merit of being a most admirable
parish clergyman.

1714-1760] IN THE EEIGNS OP GEOEGE I. AND II. 191
and animosity towards the political party, then in the
ascendant; but, unquestionably, his paramount object was
to advance the measures which he thought would serve his
native country. To promote its interests he dedicated
his whole time and energy, a capacity for command,
and a sagacity to discern, which have never been rival
led. No man without official station has exercised
equal political authority. Until his mind decayed he
maintained an undisputed ascendency over the Irish
people. After his death the influence of his policy still
survived ; and it can be distinctly traced in the tone
of public opinion during the rest of the eighteenth cen
tury, and in the legislative measures then passed.
Swift's great powers were developed least in his pro
fession. Neither by study nor inclination was he suited to
it ; and he is said to have observed, that when he desired
to prepare a sermon he produced a pamphlet. Such
of his writings as were connected with the Church or
religious subjects are, however, not without interest,
and deserve notice.
Of these writings, one of the most remarkable is a tract
designed to mediate between the extreme parties which
divided the Church of England, entitled " The Senti
ments of a Church-of-England-Man with respect to Reli
gion and Government." In this Swift expressed opinions
upon the question of Episcopacy which may properly be
added to those of other eminent persons who have been
cited in the course of the present treatise in connexion
with the subject.* . . . " A Church-of-England-Man (he
observes) hath a true veneration for the scheme estab-
* Supra, pp. 108, 111, 131, 146.

192 THE CHUECH [Chap. XII.
lished among us of ecclesiastical government ; and al
though he will not determine whether Episcopacy be of
divine right, he is sure it is most agreeable to primitive
institution : fittest of all others for preserving order and
purity, and under its present regulation best calculated
for our civil state. He should, therefore, think the
abolishment of that order among us would prove a
mighty scandal, a corruption to our faith, and manifestly
dangerous to our monarchy : nay, he would defend it by
arms against all the powers on earth, except our own
legislature : in which case he would submit as to a
general calamity, a dearth, or a pestilence."
Swift's sermons — as from his character we may antici
pate — do not rise above good sense and practical observa
tions. One preached upon the Doctrine of " the Trinity,"
and another " On the Difficulty of Knowing One's Self,"
well merit attention. The opening of a discourse against
sleeping in church will Ulustrate the sarcastic spirit
which accompanied him even into the pulpit. Having
read the passage in the Acts of the Apostles which re
cords how Eutychus, while listening to St, Paul preach
ing, fell from the window, he proceeds : — "I have chosen
these words with desire, if possible, to disturb some part
in this audience of half an hour's sleep, for the con
venience and exercise whereof this place (St, Patrick's
Cathedral) at this season of the day is very much
celebrated, , , . The accident which happened to the
young man in the text hath not been sufficient to dis
courage his successors ; but because the preachers now
in the world, however they may exceed St. Paul in the
art of setting men to sleep, do extremely fall short of
him in the working of miracles; therefore, men are

1714-1760] IN THE EEIGNS OP GEOEGE I. AND II. 193
become so cautious as to choose more safe and convenient
stations and postures for taking their repose without
hazard of their persons ; and, upon the whole matter,
choose rather to trust their destruction to a miracle than
their safety."
When engaged in his celebrated controversy respect
ing Wood's copper coinage. Swift did not hesitate to
preach a sermon upon the subject. Anticipating objec
tions to such an use of the pulpit, he refers to the
mischievous effects which he anticipates from the pro
ject, and observes that "it is time for the pastor to cry
out that the wolf Is getting into his flock, to warn them
to stand together, and all to consult the common safety."
The sermon accumulates the motives which ought to
induce patriotism, or the love of one's country ; alludes
to the condition of affairs which at that juncture ren
dered the practice of this virtue highly necessary, and
points out that every man's exertions may be of advan
tage ; " for there are few people (he observes) so weak
or mean who have not sometimes in their power to be
useful to the public."

194 THE CHUECH [Chap. XIII.

CHAPTER XIII.
[1760-1800,]
THE reign of George III. began in 1760, and ended
in 1820. When about forty years had elapsed,
the Act of Union between Great Britain and Ireland
was passed. This measure brought with it changes
of great magnitude in the relations between the two
countries, operating as well upon ecclesiastical as civil
affairs. Its date will, therefore, form a convenient
division in the narrative to be now entered upon, and
attention may for the present be confined to the events
which preceded it.
Some time before the death of George II. a religious
spirit had begun to revive within the Church both in
England and Ireland. Necessarily its progress was
gradual ; for at first it found a clergy to whom zeal
and fervour were distasteful, and a laity apathetic and
difficult to move. In both countries its development
was principally among the humbler classes of society.
This revival of religious sentiment is now generally
acknowledged to have been due principally to John
Wesley, and a small number who associated themselves
Avith him. They were all members of the Church of

1760-1800] IN THE EEIGN OP GEOEGE III. 195
England. Wesley himself was an episcopally ordained
clergyman. His teaching was at first directed solely
against irreligion ; he sought to arouse the people from
their almost universal neglect of sacred duties, and by
the discipline of observances to confirm habits of per
sonal piety. He made no objection to the doctrines or
formularies of the Church of England; had no design
of separating from it; and to the end of his life he
adhered to this policy. In 1773, observing among his
followers in Ulster a tendency to abandon their con
nexion with the Established Church, he preached against
the project at Omagh, and, as he records in his Journal,
"warned them of the madness which was spreading
among them of leaving the Church." * And two years
later, at Bath, he said: ... "I believe one reason why
God is pleased to spare my life so long is to confirm
them (the Methodists) in their present purpose not to
separate from the Church." f
It is obvious that this course ensured for Methodism,
(by which name Wesley's system was generally known),
an acceptance and influence it could never otherwise
have gained. Numbers who would have shrunk from
the notion of following a Sect, and who, if Methodism had
been announced as one, would never have inquired what
it had to offer either as to doctrine or practice, were

* Wesley's Jownai: Works, vol. xvi. p. 106.
f Sermon cxv. Works, vol. xvi. p. 267. Shortly before his death,
Wesley wrote in his Journal : — " I never had any design of separating
from the Church. ... I live and die a member ol the Church of Eng
land." (See as to Wesley's position towards the Church, and as to
Wesleyanism generally, a lecture on the Wesleyans in Canon Curteis's
Bampton Lectures on Bissent in its relations to the Chwrch.)
0 2

196 THE CHUECH [Chap. XIIL
brought in contact with its teaching. They were also,
by the presence of its followers among themselves, com
pelled to observe that the rule of life and conduct pre
scribed by its discipline was more strict than had been
usual. Thus attention to both the example and precept
of its founders was forced upon the clergy and laity of
the Established Churches.
Methodism had many preachers and adherents in
England before it was introduced into Ireland. At
first its missionaries, when they appeared there, excited
surprise rather than hostility, and were listened to by
the lower orders of all religious denominations. In
a short time opposition arose. The Roman Catholic
clergy withdrew their flocks. To the Presbyterians
the Wesleyan form of Methodism, which was that pre
sented to them, could not be acceptable, for it was
entirely opposed to the standard of faith adopted by
their Church upon the questions of Predestination and
Election ;* as it also was upon the subjects of Episco
pacy and Episcopal Orders. Wesley's disciples in
Ireland were therefore recruited from members of the
Established Church, and as its clergy in general disap
proved of his system, almost altogether from the laity.
With them its progress was constant and steady ; and at
the time of the Union it was computed that Methodism
numbered about 90,000 in connexion with its discipline,
beside grown-up children and hearers of its preachers.!

* A portion ol the Methodists under Whitefield, held Calvinistic
opinions. Wesley always opposed them. His sermon of Free Grace
was expressed so strongly that it led to a breach with Whitefield. (See
Southey's Life of Wesley, ch. xxv.)
I This is the calculation of Alexander Knox, who had been Lord

1760-1800] IN THE EEIGN OF GEOEGE IIL 197
But the indirect effect of a religious movement very
often exceeds the direct. While the clergy of every
Church in Ireland rejected Methodism, they neverthe
less felt its influence. It stimulated an emulative zeal.
All awoke to the necessity of competing with their rivals
at least by a diligent discharge of their professional
duties. Later than Methodism arose another party within
the English Church. The name "Evangelical"* was
subsequently given to its adherents. The first leaders
of this party generally adopted Calvinistic tenets. In
consequence of their ability in preaching and of their
personal piety, they, after some time, acquired influ
ence ; much less extensive, however, than Wesley pos
sessed. Their opinlons'after some time spread to Ireland,
but until the next century they did not obtain more than
a small number of converts.
Contemporaneously with these religious impulses,
there was going forward a general improvement in the
modes of thought, and in the manners prevailing in
society. The standard of opinion at the end of the
eighteenth century, both in England and Ireland, was

Castlereagh' s secretary before the Union, and who being in great in
timacy with Wesley, and after his death with his followers in Ireland,
had peculiar opportunities for liivestigating the subject. (See letter of
Knox to Lord Castlereagh, Feb. 19, 1801, in the Castlereagh Corre
spondence, vol. iv. p. 55.)
* The names " Methodist," "EvangeUcal," were given by the adver
saries of the systems they denominate, and derisively. So " Quaker,"
and many other designations applied to sects, had a similar origin. Nay,
the word "Christian," seems, according to the better opinion, to have
come first at Antioch not from disciples, but enemies of the religion it
described.

198 THE CHUECH [ChAp. XIII.
higher than it had been at the beginning. The means
of education were, at least for the middle class, more
adequate, and it was more widely diffused. Increased
refinement of sentiment, respect for virtue, and decorum
of conduct, were generally to be found.
In the English and Irish Established Churches, as
the clergy were taken from the middle class, and
for the most part received their education in the same
schools and colleges as laymen, they shared with them
in the vicissitudes of social progress. Hence, the ad
vance of society co-operated with the other influences
which, as has been pointed out, beneficially affected
the clerical order at this time A decided improve
ment in their ideas and habits took place.
In the instance of the Irish clergy, this improvement
was more in the younger than the older; in the parochial
incumbents rather than the higher dignitaries. Upon
the latter, especially the Bench of Bishops, the mode in
which the patronage of the Crown was exercised ope
rated detrimentally. From the accession of George III.
(1760) until the Union (1800), just as had been the case
under the two preceding kings,* political motives guided
the selection for ecclesiastical appointments. The min
isters, on whose recommendations from time to time
they were made, seem seldom to have looked beyond
support already received, or to be secured for the
future. Two Prelates of the eighteenth century strikingly
illustrate the effect of such a system of promotion. One
of these, George Stone, held the Archbishopric of

* Sec p. 181,

1760-1800] IN THE EEIGN OF GEOEGE III. 199
Armagh, the highest office in the Irish Church, for
eighteen years (1747—1765) ; the other, Frederick Au
gustus Hervey, Earl of Bristol, Bishop of Derry, was
in possession of the most richly endowed bishopric in
Ireland for thirty-five years (1768-1803).
Stone, when appointed to the Primacy, was about
forty years of age ; yet he had already filled three
bishoprics in succession — Ferns and Leighlin, Kildare,
and Derry. Of a handsome person, agreeable man
ners, considerable conversational powers, with industry
and ability for business, he was chosen in order that
he might assist the Government in the House of
Lords, and generally in the conduct of affairs. How he
first became connected with the Irish Church (for by
birth and education he was an Englishman) does not
appear ; nor is it certain to what interest he owed his
appointment, in 1732, to the Deanery of Ferns, the first
valuable preferment which he received. His brother,
Andrew Stone, was in favour with Frederick Prince
of Wales, and it has been suggested that by his influ
ence the Primate's advancement was aided. But what
ever support he may have obtained in this way, there
is no doubt that it would have availed little without the
qualities which enabled him to take advantage of any
opportunity that opened. Ambitious, energetic, devot
ing his whole attention to public affairs, he was pre
cisely the person of whom the Irish Government stood
in need, and whom, therefore, they preferred to every
competitor. Nor, when he gained power, did he dis
appoint the expectations of those who selected him.
In the counsels of successive Irish administrations, in
Parliament, with the Protestant public, he soon won,

200 THE CHUECH [Chap. XIII.
and afterwards during his life retained, an ascendency
which only one man (Boyle, at first Speaker of the
House of Commons, and afterwards Earl of Shannon)
attempted to rival. Professional merit he neither had
nor desired to be supposed to have. " Look on me,"
he is reported to have said to the English physicians
whom he consulted when his health gave way, " not as
an ordinary clergyman, or as subject to the diseases of
the clerical profession, but as a man who has injured
his constitution by sitting up late and rising early to
do the business of Government."*
The Earl of Bristol was as ill-qualified for his office
as Stone. His manners, his ideas, his pursuits, were
wholly foreign from the clerical profession. The family
of which he was the head was noted for eccentricity ;
and it used to be said that all the eccentricity of the
race was concentrated in him. Possessing, in addition
to the large revenues of his bishopric, an ample private
fortune, of high rank as a spiritual, and higher as a lay
Peer, he was discontented unless he could also acquire
popularity and political power. Accordingly, he re
solved to convert all the advantages of his station and
wealth into means toward this end. When the Convention
of Volunteers assembled with the object of assisting the
national party in Parliament — then demanding reform
in the parliamentary representation — the Bishop caused
* Stone and Lord Shannon died within nine days of each other.
They were both at the time Lords Justices, (See Hardy's Life of Char-
lemont, vol, i, p, 201,) Not denying that Stone had in some respects
far juster views than his contemporaries. Hardy says, " his own aggran
dizement predominated over every other consideration." The anecdote
of his conversation with his physicians is told in Campbell's Survey of
the South nf Ireland (London : 1778), p. 55,

1760-1800] IN THE EEIGN OF GEOEGE III. 201
himself to be returned from Derry as a delegate to attend
it ; and, surrounded by a troop of light cavalry, raised at
his own expense by his nephew, the unfortunate George
Robert Fitzgerald,* proceeded to Dublin. Thus sur
rounded, this singular representative of Irish prelacy
was received along the road everywhere with military
honours. Upon his arrival he was met by a troop of
Volunteers, with whom, in addition to his own escort,
he went in state through the city, until he reached the
place where the Convention was assembled. In that
body he then took his seat, and was for some time
among its most prominent leaders. He afterwards went
abroad, and spent the last years of his life in Italy, f
If the character of other Irish bishops selected, like
Stone and Lord Bristol, from inducements of a political
nature. Is examined, it will be found that worldliness
altogether predominated. Their ideas and habits
were not such as became ecclesiastics. Of some
in Swift's time, if his representations were to be fol
lowed implicitly, still stronger censure ought to be ex
pressed ; but descriptions of his contemporaries, whether
lay or clerical, by this great satirist, must be read with
caution ; he is seldom fair in speaking of his political
opponents, or of those patronised by them.ij: The
* George Eobert Fitzgerald, a noted duellist, was executed for murder
at Castlebar in 1786,
f See as to Lord Bristol, Hardy's Life of Charlemont, vol. ii, p, 102;
Sir Jonah Barrington's Rise and Fall of the Irish Nation ; Mant, History,
vol, ii. pp. 688-696. A writer in the Quarterly Review (vol. Ixxxii.
p. 514), in a review of Mr, -Croker's edition of Lord Hervey's Memoirs,
alludes to the bishop as " the celebrated ' Comte-Eveque ' of the Conti
nent" — notus nimis omnibus, eccentric there as well as at home,
I The sarcasm attributed to Swift on the English portion of the

202 THE CHUECH [Chap. XIII.
bishops whom he condemned owed their appointments to
the Whig party, against whom, from the time he joined
Harley and St. John until his death, he maintained a
perpetual and bitter controversy. They had, also, many
of them been English clergymen ; and Swift, at the
head of the Irish interest and Irish party, made the
preference of Englishmen for the great offices in Church
and State the object of his most severe censure.*
One of the complaints most frequently made as to
both bishops and clergy in Ireland in the eighteenth
century was non-residence. To this several causes con
tributed. Many parishes had no glebe-houses, and
houses suitable for the incumbents were not to be
procured. Another cause was, that from the poverty
of the separate parishes several were often united to
gether, and of course there could be a resident rector
only in one of them. Englishmen, whether bishops,
or in possession of benefices conferred upon them either
by the Crown or by the Englishmen who were bishops,
seldom were content to reside in remote districts, and
sought excuses for absence.
The proceedings of the Irish Parliament for about
Episcopal Bench in Ireland (I do not know on what authority originally)
is too often cited, as U it were serious. The persons selected were (he
said) good and excellent; but "as the worthy divines crossed Hounslow
Heath, on their way to Ireland, they have been regularly robbed and
murdered by the highwaymen frequenting that Common, who seized
their robes and patents, came over to Ireland, and are consecrated
bishops in their stead,"
* There is an excellent letter (July 3, 1725), from Swift to Lord Car
teret, the Lord Lieutenant, pressing the claims of the Irish clergy to be
considered in the exercise of Church patronage by the Government. "The
misfortune (he says) of having bishops perpetually from England, as it must
quench the spirit o£ emulation among us to excel in k'uruing and the

1760-1800] IN THE EEIGN OF GEOEGE III. 203
thirty years before the Union were of extreme import
ance. Much of the Penal Code was repealed, or re
laxed. A policy of justice towards the Roman Catholic
portion of the people was favoured. So far, indirect
benefit accrued to the Church from its legislation, but
direct consideration of its interests there was none.
Yet never was reform more needed. Redistribution of
the revenues, long requisite in order to compensate for
the poverty inflicted upon many parishes by the impro
priations, was now required to provide for others pau
perised by the loss of the tithe of agistment, which,
condemned by a resolution of the House of Commons in
1735, was no longer collected. Indeed the whole tithe
system required amendment. It was levied in kind, a
mode of collection by which the owner was defrauded,
and the payer oppressed.* The consequent abuses were
a subject of declamation, but the remedy attainable by
substituting the composition of an annual money pay
ment, fairly adjusted, was not even suggested.
Reserving a further account of the civil history
and legislation of this period for the next chapter, it
remains now to advert to such of the more remarkable

study of divinity, so it produces another great discouragement, that those
prelates usually draw after them colonies ol sons, nephews, cousins, or
old college companions, to whom they bestow the best preferments in
their gift ; and thus the young men, sent into the Church from the Uni
versity here, have no better prospect than to be curates or small country
vicars for lile."^ — Works, vol. xi. p, 272.
* Tithes in kind were coUected by the agency of tithe-proctors.
The clergy were generally glad to compound with them for less than the
rightful amount : the proctors made as much more as they could, " There
are not (says SwUt) ten clergymen reputed to possess a parish of £100
a-year, who for some years past have received £60, and that with the
utmost difficulty and vexation," — Swift's Works, vol, vin, p, 419,

204 THE CHUECH [Chap. XIII.
ecclesiastical persons as then or previously in the eight
eenth century held office in the Irish Church, and have
been as yet unnoticed.
Of the Englishmen sent to Ireland during that
period. Stone and Lord Bristol have been mentioned;
both had been chosen because they were Englishmen,
and in order to forward political objects. Another, of
very different character, but selected for similar reasons,
was Boulter, Archbishop of Armagh (1724-1742). This
very eminent prelate at once on his arrival became the
head of the English interest and party, and obtained
paramount influence in civil as well as ecclesiastical af
fairs. In advising as to patronage, his policy never rose
above conferring every office in Church and State upon
an Englishman. His correspondence with the EngHsh
Ministers was, after his death, published, and exhibits
the pertinacity with which, whenever a vacancy either
upon the judicial or the episcopal Bench occurred, he
presses that an Englishman should be chosen to fill
it. He seems to have thought that there was no safety
for the English dominion if Irishmen were trusted.*
This prejudice detracts from Boulter's fame ; in other
respects his government of his diocese, and his measures
for the Church, were admitted, even by those who dis
liked his politics, to be entitled to approbation. He
* See in the pubUshed correspondence of Boulter letters to the Duke
of Newcastle, dated 19th January, 1724, 1st May, 1726, 3rd .December,
1st January, 16th January, 9th February, 18th February, 1726 (0. S.) ;
also letter to Duke of Dorset, 17th August, 1730. In one to the Duke of
Newcastle, 4th March, 1724, he says — "If I be not allowed to form
proper dependencies here to balance all the present Dublin faction on the
Bench (of Bishops), it will be impossible for me to serve His Majesty in
my present capacity,"

1760-1800] IN THE EEIGN OP GEOEGE HI. 205
was, during his life, most liberal in gifts for charitable
purposes ; and at his death he bequeathed his fortune
to provide glebes where they were wanted, or to endow
poor parishes.
Robinson, created in 1777 Lord Rokeby, Archbishop
of Armagh (1765—1794), is another Englishman whose
merits deserA'^e acknowledgment. To great adminis
trative capacity he added a noble munificence, and
unwearied zeal for the interests of the Church. He
found the diocese of Armagh (as might be expected,
since Stone was his predecessor) in disorder. Before
his death, churches built and repaired, numerous glebe-
houses provided, a house and demesne constructed for
the see, manifested the energy of his rule. Extensive
improvements in the city of Armagh, the erection of
an infirmary, a public library, an astronomical observa
tory (the two latter maintained by endowments which
were his gift), still attest that his desire for the public
good was not confined to ecclesiastical affairs.
Boulter and Robinson have both been censured for
not rising above the political ideas of their age. The
censure forgets their profession. They, and the other
ecclesiastics of the time, may be excused, until it is
shown that the statesmen, their contemporaries, exhi
bited any superior degree of enlightenment. When the
march of political opinion did bring into effect an im
proved policy it met little opposition* from the Irish
bishops, and was not without at least one of its ablest
advocates among them.

* This is observed by Mr. Croker in an Article upon Irish affairs in
the Quarterly Review, vol. Ixxvi, p. 269.

206 THE CHUECH [Chap. XIII.
The prelate referred to is John Law, Bishop of Clon
fert (1782-1787), subsequently of KiUalla (1787-1795),
and of Elphin (1795—1810), who zealously supported
the measures for relief of the Roman Catholic part of
the people, which were promoted in the later years of
the eighteenth century.
Law was son of the Bishop of Carlisle, who trans
lated and edited King's Origin of Evil,* He had been
a Fellow of one of the Cambridge Colleges, and had
obtained previously high academic distinction. He
was there the friend of Paley, and shared many of
the opinions of this admirable writer. The chapter in
Paley's Moral and Political Philosophy upon reverencing
the Deity, certainly not inferior to the rest, has been
attributed to Law. Before he was moved to Ireland
he had been Archdeacon of Carlisle, and while in
that office he obtained the character " of great va
riety of knowledge, uncommon genius, and sincere
religion."t Law seems to have had many ideas in common with
his great contemporary Edmund Burke J respecting the
relations of the State and of the Church to Roman Ca
tholics in Ireland. At KiUalla he found that almost all
the people were members of that Church. Considering
their conversion to Protestantism hopeless, he sought,
as he expressed himself, to make them good Catholics ;
and with a view to their instruction caused the works
* See p, 182, supra.
f See in reference to Law, Mant, History, vol. ii, pp. 686-6, and
Croker's Boswell, vol. iv. p. 294.
X Burke's Letter to a Peer of Ireland against the Penal Laws is dated
in 1782 ; his letter to Sir Hercules Langrishe on the question of admit
ting them to the franchise, in 1792.

1760-1800] IN THE EEIGN OP GEOEGE III, 207
of Gother, a Roman Catholic divine, inculcating piety
and morality, to be at his own expense printed and
distributed.* In a like spirit In 1793, when the Bill for relieving
the Roman Catholics from disabilities and restrictions
under which they suffered, and for admitting them to
the parliamentary franchise, was before the House of
Lords, he expressed himself in the following words : . . .
" I look upon my Roman Catholic brethren as fellow-
subjects and fellow-Christians, as believers in the same
God, and partners in the same redemption, t Specula
tive differences in some points of faith with me are of
no account. They and I have but one religion — the
religion of Christianity. Therefore, as children of the
same Father, as travellers in the same road, and seekers
of the same salvation, why not love each other as breth
ren ? It is no part of Protestantism to persecute Ca
tholics ; and without justice to the Catholics there can
be no security for the Protestant Establishment : as a
friend, therefore, to the permanency of the Establish
ment, to the prosperity of the country, and to the justice
due to my Catholic brethren, I shall cheerfully give my
vote that the Bill be committed." X
* Mant, ut supra, citing Nichols.
j- Compare Berkeley in his Word to the Wise. Addressing the Eoman
Catholic clergy, he says : ..." I consider you as my countrymen, as my
feUow-subjects, as professing belief in the same Christ. And I do most
sincerely wish there was no other contest between us but who shall most
completely practice the precepts of Him by whose name we are called,
and whose disciples we all profess to be."
X Bebates in the Parliament of Ireland for the Session 1793 : Dublui,
1793. Bishop Dickson (Down) also advocated a policy favourable to
the Eoman Catholic claims. See Froude, English in Ireland, vol, iii. p,
294 ; Mant, History, vol, ii, p, 760,

208 THE CHUECH [Chap. XIII.
Another of the bishops sent from England obtained
considerable celebrity in his own time — Rundle, Bishop
of Derry (1735—1743). He was unquestionably a per
son of ability and attainments. He is said to have
excelled in conversation, but with such " vivacity of
wit," as carried him into indiscreet expressions. He
was intended for an English bishopric, but put aside on
account of objections raised to his orthodoxy. Under
such circumstances his appointment was at first unpo
pular in Ireland ; but in a short time the dissatisfaction
was overcome by his manners and conduct ; and, ac
cording to Swift's description, he was " esteemed as a
person of learning, conversation, and humanity, and
beloved by all people."*
Percy, Bishop of Dromore (1782—1811), had, when
Dean of Carlisle, been one of the brilliant circle which
gathered round Johnson. His collection of ancient
English poetry had much influence upon the character
of poetical literature in the nineteenth century. Percy,
when a bishop, is said to have been revered for his piety
and benevolence.
Not many bishops of this time, who were Irish by
* Letter to Pope, Feb. 27, 1736; see also Life of Archbishop Seeker,
cited by Mant, History, vol. ii. p. 538. "What do you say," writes
Pulteney to Swift, " to the bustle made here to prevent the man (Bundle)
from being an English bishop, and afterwards allowing him to be good
Christian enough for an Irish one ?" — Swift's Works, vol. xiii. p. 160.
Swift and Pope were both on Bundle's side. The former contrasted
Bundle with the other Irish bishops, of whom he wrote with bitter
sarcasm {Works, vol. xvii. p. 178) : —
" Bundle a bishop ! well he may.
He's still a Christian, more than they.
We know the subject of their quarrels ;
The man has learning, sense, and morals,"

1760-1800] IN THE EEIGN OP GEOEGE III. 209
birth were eminent. The most distinguished seems to
have been O'Beirne, appointed to the See of Ossory in
1795, and promoted to Meath in 1798. This prelate
was originally a Roman Catholic, afid it is related that
while he rose to eminence in the Protestant Church his
brother was about the same time promoted in the
Roman Catholic. He was noted for attention to the
discipline of his clergy, and especially for his efforts to
repress the evil of non-residence. In one of his charges,
having pointed out the example of the Roman Catholic
clergy, who (he says) all lived among their flocks, and
were in famUiar intercourse with them, he urges, that
"if we hope to succeed in our good cause we must come
down to an emulation of their exertions : an emulation
not of envy and strife ; not of angry controversy or
disputation; not of any intemperance of proselytism,
where the idle contest is merely to swell the number
of nominal votaries, without making better Christians
or better subjects, and with the continual breach of
Christian charity and benevolence, but an emulation in
the discharge of such pastoral duties as are most calcu
lated to secure us the respect and the attachment of our
flocks." Hamilton, at first Bishop of Clonfert (1796-1798),
and afterwards of Ossory (1798—1806), and Matthew
Pope selected four bishops for panegyric, and Bundle was one ol
them : —
" Even in a bishop I can spy desert :
Seeker is decent, Bundle has a heart.
Manners, with candour, are to Benson given.
To Berkeley every virtue under heaven,"
It will be observed that of the four bishops two were on the Irish
Bench. P

210 THE CHUECH [Chap. XIIL
Young, Bishop of Clonfert (1798-1800), had been
Fellows of Trinity College, and were distinguished for
mathematical attainments. They were both esteemed
for conscientious attention to their official duties.
Young has received in every capacity no ordinary
praise, being described as combining with his scientific
powers other intellectual endowments, and a character
irresistibly engaging.*
With the close of the century a change in the style
of preaching began to be perceptible. Sermons had
been essays on morality, or explanations of doctrinal
questions. Kirwan (exclaimed Grattan) came to in
terrupt the repose of the pulpit ;'f and from the time
of his appearance a tendency to appeal to the emo
tions as well as the reason may be dated. His elo
quence, if judged by its effects, its power to touch
the heart, and impel to acts of generosity and bene
volence, has not been since equalled; but as is also
the case with Whitefield, a preacher of extraordinary
persuasiveness, no record of it which has been pre
served is worthy of his contemporary reputation. His
manner was modelled upon the examples of MassiUon
and the other great French preachers. To the study
of their oratory he was probably directed by the cir
cumstance that his education was at a Jesuit College
at St. Omer, which he entered with a view to becoming
* See as to Young, Mant's History, vol. ii. pp. 743-5.
f Speech in the House of Commons, January 17, 1792. It was in
speaking of Kirwan, and the inadequate preferment conferred upon him,
that Grattan used the expression so often since applied with Uttle ap
propriateness : . . . "The curse of Swift was upon him to have been an
Irishman and a man of genius, and to have used it for the good of his
ceuntry,"

1760-1800] IN THE EEIGN OP GEOEGE III. 211
a member of the Roman Catholic priesthood. Contro
versial discussion he entirely avoided. The highest
dignity to which this brilliant ornament of the Irish
Church rose was the poor Deanery of Killala. More
sense of his merits was shown after his death, when
his widow received from the King a liberal pension.
From 1795 to 1800 Neweome was Primate. He was
translated from the bishopric of Waterford and Lismore.
It is said that in his appointment public utility alone
was considered, and that it was " his unassuming virtue,
conduct, principles, and erudition, which recommended
him for the office."*
* Letter of Lord Charlemont. Hardy's Life, vol, ii. p. 224.

P 2

CHAPTER XIV.
THE UNION.
IN the year 1800, the Union of the Kingdoms and
Churches of Great Britain and Ireland was enacted
by the Parliaments of the two countries. The supreme
importance of a measure of this character justifies a
slight digression to notice not merely its provisions
but the events which led to its adoption.
In 1707, Scotland was united with England ; and
from that time the Parliament of Great Britain asserted
the same predominance over the Parliament of Ire
land, and the same right to legislate for the latter
country, which the English Parliament maintained in
the reign of William IIL* In order to place its claims
beyond dispute, about five years after the accession of
George I. (1719), a statute was passed, which declared
that Ireland hath been, is, and of right ought to be, sub
ordinate unto, and dependent upon, the Imperial Crown
of Great Britain, as being inseparably united and an
nexed thereto ; and that the King's Majesty, by and
with the advice and consent of the Lords and Commons
*See page 162.

Chap. XIV.] THE UNION. 213
of Great Britain in Parliament, had, and of right ought
to have, full power and authority to make laws and
statutes of sufficient force and validity to bind the king
dom and people of Ireland.
This enactment of the Parliament in England was in
form declaratory. If the proposition which it asserted,
namely, that the Parliament of Great Britain was en
titled to make laws for Ireland, was true, the statute
was unnecessary ; if it was not true, it had no validity
or effect. Nevertheless, it was of supreme importance,
for it exhibited the determination of the British Parlia
ment to persist in its assumption of legislative authority
over Ireland, and its language offered a distinct chal
lenge to the Irish Parliament; and if this were per
mitted to pass without notice, acquiescence in the claim
thereby made might fairly be inferred.
The Act of George I. operated as an external
¦check upon the movements of the Irish Parliament.
The power which it asserted for the English Parlia
ment was a restraining force in reserve, liable to be
called into action. Another law more directly and
more constantly controlled the proceedings of the Irish
Parliament. By a statute passed in Ireland in the
reign of Henry VIL, knovsm as Poynlngs' law from the
Deputy under whose rule it was enacted, it was pro
vided that before a Parliament should be held in Ireland
the Chief Governor and Council were to notify to the
King the causes and considerations for it, and all such
Acts as it seemed to them should pass; that such
causes, considerations, and Acts, should be affirmed by
the King and his Council in England to be good
and expedient; and that the King's licence there-

214 THE UNION. [Chap. XIV.
upon, as well in affirmation of the said causes and
Acts as to summon the said Parliament, should be
obtained under the Great Seal of England. An amend
ing Act of Philip and Mary empowered the Chief
Governor and Council in Ireland, in case events
necessary to be provided for should happen during a
session of Parliament, to certify to the King such
other causes and provisions as they should think good :
which, if returned approved by the English Council,
might then be enacted. This statute expressly pro
vided that no other Acts, except those transmitted
back from England, either before or during the Session
of Parliament, could become law. From the time of
Charles I. it was held, that without viola,ting these
statutes Parliament might consider, not a Bill, but
" heads for a Bill," although no previous approval had
been obtained either from the Lord Lieutenant and Irish
Council or from the King and English Council ; and
at the time with which we are now concerned this
was the practice. When "the heads" were adopted
by Parhament, they were laid before the Lord Lieu
tenant and Irish Council, in order that they might
be transmitted by them to the King, and be brought
before the English Council, without whose consent there
was to be no further progress. A Bill returned by
the English Council, whether this occurred before or
during the Session of Parliament, might be accepted
or negatived by the Irish Parliament, but could not
be altered or amended.
It cannot be denied that under the restrictions
imposed by Poynlngs' law, and so long as the claim
to legislate for Ireland was maintained by the Parlia-

Chap. XIV.] THE UNION. 215
ment of Great Britain, the Irish Parliament was reduced
to a position of subordination and dependence. Never
theless there was no appearance before 1780 of any
move on the part of either Lords or Commons in
Ireland to obtain an alteration of the relations between
the two kingdoms created by these laws.
This acquiescence was, however, confined to Par
liament. About five years after the Act of George I.
was passed. Swift, in his letters respecting Wood's
coinage, renewed the protest which Molyneux, as has
been stated, made in the time of William against legisla
tion by the English Parliament, and, like him, repudiated
its authority. Molyneux, he said, had opposed the as
sumed authority, "as far as truth, reason, and justice
were capable of opposing;" but against his opposition
"the love and torrent of power had prevailed." "I
have," he adds, "looked over all the English and Irish
statutes, without finding any law that maketh Ireland
depend upon England, any more than England does
upon Ireland. We have, indeed, obliged ourselves to
have the same King with them ; and coni^equently they
are obliged to have the same King with us."
For a time Swift aroused a spirit of nationality;
but before his death it had become dormant; nor was
it until about the middle of the century that it again
revived. Then it appeared in the speeches of Lucas,
a member of the Corporation of Dublin, who became
prominent in political affairs. With Lucas many of the
gentry combined ; and, at a later period, a large number
of them expressed their discontent, and complained
that the Irish Parliament was subject to so much
control. They regarded the English Parliamentary

216 THE UNION. [Chap. XIV.
system as a model, and thought themselves injured
in the instances wherein the Irish differed.*
Upon the accession of George III. (1760) a new
Parliament was necessarily summoned in Ireland. It
reflected public opinion in a much greater degree
than did its predecessor, which had sat during the
entire reign of George II. — a period of thirty-three
years. After some time a party, professing to be
animated by patriotic sentiments, zealous for Irish, not
English, interests, grew up in the House of Commons.
At its head appeared leaders of remarkable eloquence
and political knowledge.
At the same time the power and influence of the
English House of Commons were increasing. Great
questions arose for its consideration, and were debated
with conspicuous ability. Thus the form and the pro
ceedings of a perfect representative assembly, engaged
upon subjects of supreme importance, free and unre
strained in its treatment of them, were constantly before
the eyes of the Irish Parliament, and presented a con
trast to their own depressed condition. A desire to attain
similar independence began to be felt, if not by a majo
rity, certainly by a large minority, of the Commons.
The year 1778 brought to the Parliamentary
patriotic party a great accession of strength. They
acquired allies, with whose aid they could no longer
be resisted. Volunteers for the defence of the king
dom were then embodied. Enlisted from all classes
and all parts of the country, the Volunteers were imbued

* See Lecky, History, vol. iv. p. 353 ; and see also Note A A of
Appendix.

Chap. XIV.] THE UNION, 217
with the ideas then popular, and quickly manifested
their sympathy with the friends of national interests in
the House of Commons.
The immediate result of this alliance was seen in con
cessions by the Government upon commercial questions.
Regulations oppressing Irish trade, and in the highest
degree injurious to its prosperity, were abandoned;
and it was enacted that there should be free export
and import to and from Ireland with the West Indies
and with the British settlements and colonies in America
and Africa — subject only to such duties being levied in
Irish ports as were or might be levied in British.
When this success had been attained, it was seen
that no further reforms were to be expected, unless
the barriers interposed by Poynlngs' law and the Act
of George I. should be removed out of the way. Nor
was this the only reason alleged for condemning these
statutes. They not only (it was said), protected wrong,
but were a wrong themselves. Ireland was a kingdom,
and their provisions reduced it to a province.
On the I9th of April, 1780, the first proceeding was
taken towards obtaining Irish independence. On that
day Grattan moved in the House of Commons a reso
lution that the King's most excellent Majesty and the
Lords and Commons of Ireland were the only power
competent to make laws to bind Ireland. " If (he said)
I had lived when the Act of William took away the
woollen manufacture from Ireland, or when the Act of
George I. declared the country to be dependent and
subject to laws to be enacted by the Parliament of
England, I should have made a covenant with my own
conscience to seize the first moment of recovering my

218 THE UNION. [Chap. XIV.
country from the ignominy of such acts of power ; or
if I had a son I should have administered to him an
oath that he would consider himself as a person sepa
rate, and set apart for the discharge of so important a
duty." The motion did not then succeed ; but it initiated a
movement, the result of which was that about two years
later all that Grattan demanded was granted. By one
statute the Act of George I. was repealed,* and by
another it was declared that the right claimed by the
people of Ireland to be bound only by laws enacted by
the King, and by the Parliament of that kingdom, was
established and ascertained ;t also the restrictions of
Poynings' law were aboHshed: the previous assent of
the King and Council for the bills to be proposed ceased
to be necessary : they could be proposed and debated
without it. J For the final validity of statutes the royal
assent was required; and as it was thought advisable
that this assent should be given upon the advice, not
of the Irish, but of the English Ministers of the Crown,
it was provided that it should be expressed under the
Great Seal of England.
The independence of the Irish Parliament was con
ceded without either limiting its range of action, or
providing for the case of its disagreeing with the
English Parliament upon subjects of imperial interest,
which there might be occasion to submit to both.
There was no reason why the Irish Parliament could
not have a separate foreign policy, a separate com-
* 22 George IIL, ch. 51 (English).
t 23 George IIL, ch. 28 (EngUsh).
I 21 & 22 George IIL, ch, 47 (Irish).

Ch.\p. XIV.] THE UNION. 219
mercial policy ; why it could not impose protective
duties, or decide for itself upon such constitutional
questions as might at any time arise.
If two independent ruling authorities dealing with
the same subjects have the same interests, they may be
trusted to work harmoniously together ; but England
and Ireland had not, or at least were supposed not to
have, the same interests in reference to political ques
tions. Accordingly, in no long time, disagreements
arose between their Parliaments. The first of these
occurred about three years after the repeal of the Act
of George I. Resolutions which were designed to re
gulate the commercial relations between England and
Ireland, and which were intended in many respects to
serve Ireland, were adopted by the House of Commons
and the House of Lords in England. In the Irish House
of Commons these resolutions, opposed fiercely and sup
ported feebly, although of the utmost importance, had
to be abandoned.
Four years later a subject of even more importance,
affecting the very foundation of the executive govern
ment, again provoked controversy. George III. be
came disabled by mental infirmity from discharging
the duties of a Sovereign. Did the Prince of Wales by
right succeed to his authority, or did the succession
and the terms of it depend upon the decision of Par
liament ? The Irish Parliament took the former view ;
the British the latter. As the King recovered his
health the cause of dissension ceased; but, if it had
been otherwise, the Prince would have been in England
a Regent with limited powers — in Ireland a King in
all but name.

220 THE UNION. [Chap. XIV.
When a spirit of disagreement had manifested itself
in reference to domestic affairs, English Statesmen be
came apprehensive, lest it might extend to relations with
foreign countries also, and weaken the means of carrying
on the war then waged by Great Britain with France.
Moreover, it began to be perceived that, even as to
affairs exclusively Irish, there were disadvantages at
tending separation of the Legislatures. The views of
a local Parliament were necessarily bounded by local
sentiments and local prejudices.*
These considerations induced a conviction that some
change was required. What direction, then, was the
change to take? Subordination of the Irish Parliament
had been tried and failed. It was condemned by the
universal voice of the Irish people, and its injustice
had been acknowledged by English statesmen, t It could
not be revived. A third course lay open. The Legisla
tures of the two kingdoms might be fused together ; and
one united Parliament would then take the place of a
Parliament for England and a Parliament for Ireland.
* Jan. 23, 1799, Pitt first stated his reasons for advising the Union.
He referred to the advantage of "an impartial legislature, standing aloof
from local party connexion, sufficiently removed from contending fac
tions, to be advocate or champion of neither"; to the disagreement which
had already occurred between the two Parliaments, and to the possibility
of further disagreement upon "subjects involving the safety of both
kingdoms : as, for instance, upon aUiance with a foreign power — upon
the army, the navy, any branch of the public service, upon trade or
commerce." — Speeches, vol. iii. pp. 364, 368.
f See the speech delivered in the EngUsh House of Commons by Fox,
as Secretary of State, when bringing forward the repeal of the Act of
George I. ; see also Pitt's speech (1799), in which he declared his
disapprobation of the system terminated in 1782, as unworthy the
UberaUty of Great Britain, and injurious to the interests of Ireland. —
s, vol. iii. p. 363.

Chap. XIV.] THE UNION. 221
An union of the two kingdoms and of the Parlia
ments of the two kingdoms was the measure determined
upon. If it was to be effected, then it became necessary
to consider what course was to be pursued as to the
Churches established in England and Ireland. They
were then separate and distinct ; and the mere fact that
the kingdoms and Parliaments were united did not of
itself prevent the Churches continuing separate. But
analogy and example avaU much in politics. If there
was union of the kingdoms, why not of the Churches ?
Besides, it was thought that by becoming connected with
the English Church the position of the Irish Church
would be strengthened. It then stood alone, surrounded
by many enemies and supported by few friends. If it
were made part of an united Church, whose numbers
would form a majority of the aggregate population of
England and Ireland, it might be expected to rest
upon a more secure foundation.
Accordingly, union of the churches of England and
Ireland met the general support of the Irish Episcopal
Bench. One of the ablest prelates. Bishop O'Beirne,
seems, however, to have thought that mere union
would not ensure safety for the Irish Church ; that there
ought to be but one Church, and that both in England
and in Ireland this should be the Church of England,
with the Archbishop of Canterbury as Primate.* On
the question of this proposed primacy he cited prece
dents f from Irish ecclesiastical history.
*-See Memorandum by the Bishop ol Meath (O'Beirne). — Castlereagh
Correspondence, vol. iii. p. 2,
f Immediately before the English invasion, and for some time pre
viously, the Bishops of Dublin, Waterford, and Limerick, cities of which.

222 THE UNION. [Chap. XIV.
The Union of Great Britain and Ireland, and of their
Parliaments and Churches, was carried into effect by
two statutes — one of the English, and another of the Irish
Parliament — which embodied certain articles of agree
ment between the two Legislatures. So far as these arti
cles relate to civil affairs, it is not requisite to state more
than the following: "... The kingdoms of Great Britain
and Ireland were, on and after the Ist of January, 1801,
to be for ever united into one kingdom by the name of
the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland ; for
this United Kangdom there was to be one and the same
Parliament; four Lords Spiritual, entitled according to
a prescribed rotation, and twenty-eight other Lords
elected by the Temporal Peers, were to represent Ire
land in the House of Lords of the United Parliament,
and a hundred members were to be returned to the
House of Commons.
As there was to be one United Kingdom, so there was
to be one United Church, whose doctrine, worship, dis
cipline, and government should be, and should remain,
in full force for ever, as the same were then by law
estabhshed for the Church of England. It was also
declared that " the continuance and preservation of the
said United Church, as the Established Church of Eng
land and Ireland was to be deemed, and taken to be,
an essential and fundamental part of the Union."
There was originally in the draft of the Bill a clause

the Danes, or to speak more accurately, a Livonian colony claiming alli
ance with the Normans, had been possessed, were consecrated by, and
swore canonical obedience to, the Archbishop of Canterbury (see Ussher's
Religion of the Ancient Irish: Works, vol. iv. p. 326, and Ware's Bishops).

Chap. XIV.] THE UNION. 223
referring to Convocation, and making provision for the
summoning of the Archbishops, Bishops, Priests, and
Clergy of the several provinces in England and Ireland,
whenever His Majesty should summon a Convocation of
the Clergy; but the clause, being thought unnecessary
and likely to raise objections, was ultimately omitted,
and no mention whatever was made of Convocation.*
Neither in England nor Ireland was any Synod or
Convocation summoned to consider the union of the
English and Irish Churches, or the provisions con
nected with the subject. They rested solely on the
authority of the Parliaments of the two Kingdoms.

* See letter of Lord Auckland to Lord Castlereagh in the Castlereagh
Correspondence, vol. iii. 294-5,

224 PEOM THE UNION [Chap. XVI.

CHAPTER XVI.
[1800-1871.]
FROM the Union, as the Church of Ireland and the
Church of England were united together, the re
lations of the State to each was necessarily the same..
But this had been the case equally before this event ; for
the two Churches were from the time of the Reformation
established with similar rights, privUeges, and incidents.
In both the supremacy of the Crown was recognised : in
both the power to appoint their archbishops and bishops
was vested in the sovereign : in both the express legis
lation of Parliament came in aid of their formularies
and discipline. The most important part of their en
dowments — tithes — ^had been possessed by both before
the Reformation. Their title to this property may not
have owed its origin to the State ; but its confirmation,
and such a proprietorship in it as was capable of legal
enforcement, were due to it.
Except in one particular, no change was made in the
rights of either Church by the Union. That was in the
case of the Church of Ireland, which previously might
have had its own independent formularies, of which the
articles of 1616 and the canons of 1634 were examples,
but which thenceforward was to have "the same doc
trine and worship " as the English Church.

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 225
For seventy years the union of the Church of
England with the Church of Ireland continued, and the
connexion of both with the State, as it existed imme
diately after the Act of Union was passed, remained
unimpaired. On the 1st of January, 1871, the union
of the Churches was severed, and the relations then
existing between them were terminated. The Church
of Ireland was at the same time disestablished and
disendowed. The question of the maintenance of a religious estab
lishment in Ireland, which found its solution in this
result, did not assume any prominence until about
thirty years after the Union. During the intervening
period a controversy in relation to a matter of para
mount importance, and requiring more immediate de
cision, engrossed the attention of the Irish people, and
so prevented discussion of other political subjects.
The controversy arose out of the relations which
then by law subsisted between the State and such of its
subjects as professed the Roman Catholic religion.
Many oppressive provisions of the penal code directed
against the latter had, before the Union, been repealed
by the Irish Parliament, but some disabilities of grave
importance still continued to affect their social position.
They could not sit in Parliament, and they were
excluded from any office of place or trust under the
Crown. In the Act of Union no relief was afforded from
these grievances. The consideration of them was re
served for the united Parliament by Mr. Pitt and Lord
Castlereagh, the ministers who were at that time prin
cipally concerned with Irish affairs ; and it was their de-
sio-n, that whenever this assembly met, measures should
Q

226 PEOM THE UNION. [Chap. XVI.
be brought before it which would admit Roman Catholics
to the same constitutional rights and privileges- as were
enjoyed by Protestants.*
Unfortunately the intentions of these statesmen could
not take effect, owing to the opposition of George IIL,
in whose judgment to confer political power on members
of the Church of Rome was a violation of the principles
asserted by the settlement of the Crown upon his family
in preference to the Stuarts, and who considered himself
disabled from agreeing to any enactment having that
operation, however expedient it might be, by the oath
he had taken at his coronation.
The policy, which was at this time defeated, did not
triumph until 1829. It failed when it would have been
attended only by beneficial results. It succeeded when
untoward circumstances impaired the good to arise from
its adoption. The " Emancipation Act," by which it
was carried into effect, had been preceded in Ireland by
an organized agitation. It had, therefore, the appear
ance of being passed, not in acknowledgment of a debt
due to justice, but as a concession extorted by pressure.
Under these circumstances the leaders of the popular
party, claiming to have won the measures of relief now
granted, did not rest content with gaining the objects at
first sought : inspirited by success, and perceiving the
means which led to it, they turned to other projects,
and directed their energies to attain them. The Estab-
* It was intended that one of these measures should make a provision
lor the Eoman Catholic clergy. After the Union a proposition to this
efiect was, upon one occasion, submitted to the House of Commons and
was successful. In 1825 a resolution was in that House passed, "That
it was expedient provision should be made by law towards the mainte-

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 227
lished Church in Ireland at once attracted their atten
tion. Its privileged position, when compared with the
magnitude of the dissent from its system, provoked
jealousy, and supplied those who refused to conform
to it with reasonable grounds for hostility.
The chief source, however, of discontent at the time
in relation to ecclesiastical affairs was in connexion with
tithe. This mode of raising a revenue is, under any
circumstances, attended with objectionable incidents.
Being, where there is tillage, a proportion of the pro
duce, the demand increases as the crop increases ; conse
quently improved cultivation is discouraged. In Ireland,
where subdivision of the soU was carried to excess, tithe,
being paid by the occupier, not the owner, fell largely
upon an humble class. From its nature this charge
coiUd not well be collected by clergymen; and they
therefore were obliged to employ such agents as would
undertake a very unpopular office. The conduct of
these agents at all times gave rise to much complaint.
There had been an Act enabling composition of tithe,
but, its application not being made compulsory, its
operation was very limited, and the dissatisfaction pre
valent before it was passed, had, therefore, been little
diminished by its provisions. At no time in Ireland, not
even when the Church which owned the tithes was
accepted by the people, and all who paid them belonged
to it, had they been collected without difficulty.* Now
nance of the secular Eoman Catholic clergy exercising religious functions
in Ireland." There was a majority of 43 in its favour : 205 votiag for,
and 162 against.
* The payment of tithes ol cattle, corn, and other produce, was en
joined at the Synod of Cashel, convened by Henry II, Whether before
Q 2

228 PEOM THE UNION [Cg(AP. XVL
they were levied from farmers, of whom, in thriee pro
vinces, Leinster, Munster, and Connaught, thel great
majority were Roman Catholics; and in the fourth
(Ulster) many were Roman Catholics, and many Presby
terians. It is, therefore, not surprising that the adversaries
of the Church were able to arouse a violent agitation
against the payment of tithe. As the incomes of the
clergy were thence derived, the tax could not be remitted,
and assistance was given by the Govemment to aid its
collection. But the demand was almost everywhere met
by determined resistance : combinations were formed to
obstruct and terrify the persons engaged to enforce it ;
violence was without scruple resorted to, and in many
places outrages of great enormity were perpetrated.
Finally over a large part of the country tithes prac
tically ceased to be levied.
The condition of society forced upon the Govern
ment, and subsequently upon Parliament, a consideration
of the position of the Established Church in Ireland, and
led to measures of importance. In 1832 an Act making
composition for tithes permanent and compulsory was
passed. In the same year a Royal Commission for
inquiring into the revenues and state of the Church
was issued, and from its reports subsequently the most

that Synod it was legaUy obUgatory does not seem clear. Dr. Carew,
Professor of Divinity in Maynooth College, says that until the English
invasion the people of Ireland, at least generaUy, were unacquainted with
the tithe system, — History, p. 149. The Eev. Mr, Brenan (a Eranciscan),
in his History says, that, notwithstanding the decree of the Synod of
Cashel, tithes were not paid in Ireland, except within the Pale, or that
mere fractional portion in which the English influence predominated (p.
317). The same view seems to be taken by Protestant writers. (See
Essays on the Irish Church, 1866, pp. 131, 132, 159).

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 229
full and complete information was obtained. Another
Commission was also issued in 1834, which was di
rected to ascertain the number of persons in commu
nion with the Church in each parish.
In 1833 a statute known as the Church Temporalities
Act became law, which was amended and supplemented
by another in the next year.* These Acts aimed at
removing some not unjust grounds of complaint. The
expenses of building and repairing the fabrics of churches,
and of providing the requisites for divine service in them,
were defrayed by assessments imposed at the vestries.
These assessments, like the tithes, were paid by Roman
Catholics and Protestant Dissenters. In lieu of them a
fund applicable for the same purpose was provided from
the property of the Church. To supply it, the number
of archbishoprics and bishoprics was reduced, the former
to two, and the latter to ten ; and the revenues of such
bishoprics as were no longer to be filled (ten in number)
were appropriated for the purpose. The reduction of the
number of bishoprics was effected by union and consoli
dation of Sees. It was to take effect, as vacancies in the
Bench of Bishops occurred. A Board of Commissioners
was appointed to administer the fund thus created. If
there should be an excess of income poor benefices might
be augmented. The fund was to be also assisted by a
percentage charged upon all benefices and dignities
which were above £300 a-year in value; and by the
emoluments of sinecm-es which, under a power given for
the purpose, might be suspended by the Privy CouncU

* Church Temporalities Acts (Ireland) 3 & 4 Wm. IV., ch, 37, a.d.
1833, and 4 & 5 Wm. IV., ch. 90, a.b. 1834.

230 PEOM THE UNION [Chap. XVL
upon the application of the Commissioners. Beside
these provisions there was enacted an elaborate scheme
for perpetuating the interests of persons holding under
terminable leases from the bishops and dignitaries. These
had been customarily renewable in consideration of fines
for such limited periods as were permitted by previous
statutes. The tenant was now enabled, by paying to
the Commissioners a certain sum ascertained by them in
the manner directed, to convert his tenure into a
perpetuity, subject to a fee-farm rent, which repre
sented the former rent and the average annual fine,
and was liable to vary at intervals according as the price
of grain rose or fell.
The Tithe Composition Act of 1832 not producing
much result, the law in relation to this property was
again altered in 1838. Then the Tithe Rent-charge
Act was passed. This enactment transferred the liability
for tithe from the occupiers to the owners of land.
In place of a proportion of production, and of the com
position which represented it, was substituted a perpetual
rent-charge, issuing out of the land, and payable by the
owners of the fee or of some long derivative tenure
under the fee. The rent-charge was to be equivalent to
three-fourths of the composition, and to be recoverable
by proceedings similar to those for enforcing payment
of other rent-charges, with some additional remedies.*
In 1854, " Ministers' Money," a tax for the mainte
nance of the clergy in towns, was abolished, and an
equivalent made payable by the Commissioners.
There is no doubt that all these measures, as they
* 1 & 2 Vict,, ch. 109 (Ireland), a.d. 1838,

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 231
came into operation, tended to strengthen the Estab
lished Church in Ireland. Much the greater proportion
of the land was owned by its members, and tithe rent-
charge fell upon the proprietor, not the occupier, of
the soil. The clergy were therefore In only a small
degree supported by those who rejected their min
istry. Also, henceforward the expenses of the buildings
and of providing requisites for divine service, and after
1854 the provision for incumbents in towns, were de
frayed from ecclesiastical property, and, not as before,
from taxation affecting Roman Catholics and Protestant
Dissenters. It is, however, also obvious that none of these
measures answered, or were designed to answer, a dif
ferent class of objections to the Irish Establishment. No
internal improvement, no amendment of its external
relations, could possibly appease the hostility either of
those who condemned any alliance between Church
and State as wrong in principle, or of those who con
sidered such an alliance, however advisable in other
countries, to be unsuited to the actual condition of
society in Ireland. The effect of such reforms was,
therefore, merely to change the ground occupied in the
controversy, and to introduce for discussion a different
range of topics and arguments.
The objections of those, who were adverse to Estab
hshments generally, applied equally to the English and
to the Irish Church. According to them, any connexion
between Church and State was objectionable. Each
had its own duties to discharge : those of the State being
confined to secular affairs, the ordering and government
of the community, the preservation of peace and order ;

232 PEOM THE UNION [Chap. XVI.
those of the Church relating to spiritual affairs, the pro
motion of man's moral improvement and welfare. Then-
spheres of action, it was said, were therefore distinct,
and ought to be kept so. If they were intermingled,
the influence of the State, supported by immediate and
visible advantages, would preponderate over that of the
Church; religion itself would be affected by it; and a
secularity of spirit could not fail to pervade the ideas
and practice of its ministers.
In reply, it was urged that the State can no more
divest itself of obligations in connexion with religion
than its subjects can. It is capable of resolving and
acting ; can receive benefits or injuries ; has thus, it
may be said, a personality. As each person is indebted
for existence and well-being to a Divine Providence, so
is each State : as the former, in his individual capa
city, is in return bound to manifest gratitude, so also
is the latter in its corporate character. An Established
Church expresses the national homage to the great
Author and Founder of society.
Then, if there is to be an Establishment, could there,
it was asked, be a more perfect example than, from the
nature of its system, the United Church of England and
Ireland presented ? By its constitution, the Crown,
which was necessarily supreme in the State, was de
clared to be also supreme in the Church : thus, civil and
ecclesiastical authority were united together, and each
lent the other support. The former gained for its acts
a higher sanction than force could supply; and the
latter, while engaged in its divine mission, received pro
tection. No injury ought to accrue to either from these
relations : the object was to make the State religious.

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 233
and there was nothing in the means used for this end
which need make the Church secular. There might, in
deed, be some ascendency conferred upon Episcopalian
Protestantism over other denominations of religion ; but
it was an ascendency which elevated them also, since
it involved an admission by the Civil Power that those
principles of faith and practice, which they all alike de
sired to uphold, were, in importance, before all others.
But was it only as an Establishment that the Church
and its maintenance had to be considered ? It was en
dowed as well as established. An Establishment is
accompanied by an Endowment; but Endowment may
exist without Establishment. Thus, the Presbyterian
Church in Ireland was not established, but it received
an annual grant from the State. The endowments of
the United Church had been consecrated to sacred uses
for centuries. Were they now to be confiscated, and
when confiscated cast into the common mass, thence to
be appropriated for some want of the community uncon
nected with religion, or, it might be, granted to private
owners ? Impulses and convictions beyond the calcula
tions of expediency caused their dedication : the same
should secure their preservation.*
The effect of Establishment and Endowment ought.

* These views were forcibly expressed by Sir James Graham in
the House of Commons, 30th March, 1835 : . . , " The property set apart
by the piety of our ancestors to maintain and propagate the Protestant
religion is sacred, and must be applied for these purposes. Those who
minister at the altar should live by the altar. This decree is high as
heaven, and you cannot reach to take it away ; it is strong as the Almighty,
and you cannot overthrow it; it is lasting as the Eternal, and you cannot
unfix it. It now binds you as a legislature of Christian men, acting on
Christian principles,"

234 PEOM THE UNION [Chap. XVI.
it was contended, to be judged from some example where
they had succeeded, not from cases where adverse cir
cumstances hindered or weakened their efficiency. Take
the instance of England. There the Church everywhere
interpenetrates society. The parochial system brings
home its influence to every district, and places in the
centre of each, not a self-con stituted missionary, but
an authorized representative of civilization and religion.
To all ranks and classes it sends its representatives.
None are superior to their teaching, and none below
their care.* The guides and comforters of the poor;
the friends and equals of the more wealthy ; while de
scending to instruct the unlearned, they meet the ex
panding capacities of an age of intellectual activity with
mental cultivation and intelligence equal to its own.
If Establishment and Endowment are rejected, there
can remain, it was urged, only the alternative — that re
ligious teaching shall be furnished by voluntary agents,
supported by voluntary contributions. But will the
supply of instruction from such sources be sufficient ?
Will it have the requisite permanence, universality, and
authority ? Is it not precisely when and where its
aid is most demanded that it will fail ? The more
man needs, the less he seeks the religious teacher. In
periods, therefore, of scepticism and irreligion, at the
very time when the ministers of Christianity are most
required, how are they to be maintained ? The volun-
* Goethe, in a criticism on the Vicar of Wakefield, makes some obser
vations upon the position of an EngUsh country clergyman which deserve
to be noted, Kitei observing that the hero of the tale is a hasbandnaan,
the father of a family, not separate from the community, he continues : —
" On this pure, beautiful foundation rests his higher calling ; he guides his

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 235
tary system is effective with congregations predisposed
to welcome it ; but its exertions soon languish and grow
faint under the discouragement of general apathy and
neglect. And as for its authority — when not invited
it is an intruder ; when invited, a dependent, resting
upon the favour and the fancy of those it teaches,
eoerced to reduce the quality of its preaching to their
level, and never venturing to controvert or rise above
the ideas which they approve.
In Ireland, however, the objections made to the
Church were not founded upon abstract principles ap
plicable to Establishments or Endowments generally.
These would have had there little weight. The Ro
man Catholic Church formerly possessed most of the
emoluments which were now owned by a Protestant
clergy, and in the enjoyment of them it was then pro
tected and supported by the State. The same Church in
many European kingdoms still enjoyed similar property
and similar protection. It could not lay down doctrines
antagonistic to its own practice. Not Establishment and
Endowment were condemned, but Establishment and
Endowment of a Church, which was so little in harmony
with the religious sentiments of the people among
whom it was placed. The Irish Established Church,
it was said, was the Church of the few, not of the
many; of the rich, not of the poor; for the few who
adhered to it were the most wealthy persons in the
parishioners through Ule ; he blesses them at all epochs of their existence ;
he consoles them in all trials ; and if other sources of consolation fail,
calls up and guarantees the hope of a happier future. It, may be a narrow
circle in which he lives, but it comes in contact with the highest." —
Warheit und Bichtung, Book 10.

236 PEOM THE UNION [Chap. XVI.
community. Nor was it merely that its members were
few, and therefore not entitled to have privileges for
themselves ; rich, and therefore not in need of them ;
but that they were Irish only by birth, descendants
from conquerors or colonists of a foreign race, who
had during their possession been placed in an invidious
predominance. Of this ascendency the Establishment,
it was alleged, must be regarded as the representative.
But while these considerations weighed against the
Establishment, others of gravity and importance were
cast into the opposite scale. The question was not
respecting the foundation of an institution of this cha
racter in Ireland, but whether having been founded,
and having subsisted in its existing form for three
hundred years, it was to be removed? Its fall might
endanger more than itself. If long possession were in
one instance deemed of no account, there were other in
stances in which it might also be disregarded : if one act
of the State were utterly reversed and undone, so might
other acts. Would rights connected with secular pro
perty continue to be respected if those connected with
ecclesiastical were invaded ? Then the Reformed Church
had not only ancient title and actual possession* to
plead, but its preservation had been guaranteed by a
most solemn compact between two nations. It was by
the Act of Union united with the Church of England,
and this union of the two Churches had been by the
* Dr. Lee, iaEssayson the Irish Church (1868), states that Dr. Slevin,
Professor of Canon Law at Maynooth, in evidence which he gave before
the Commissioners of Education in 1826, admitted the possession to be
beyond the utmost period of prescription laid down by the Court of Eom«.
This would seem to be a hundred years.

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 237
same Act declared to be an essential and fundamental
part of the Union of the Kingdoms. What, then, would
be the result of severing it ? What the effect upon the
Union of the Kingdoms ? *
Nor, it was by many contended, could only political
reasons be regarded in dealing with the Church Estab
lishment in Ireland ; others of a different character
were also to find a place. The State had deliberately
fixed there a system which it believed to represent the
most pure form of Christianity; it had maintained it
not only for the sake of those who came within its fold,
but also of those who refused to come, and who but for
the provision thus made for their instruction, could know
nothing beyond such notions as they inherited. An Es
tablishment, by the security and independence which it
affords its ministers, by the rewards for diligence and
eminence which it offers to them, and in some degree
also by the social station to which it elevates them, pre
sents peculiar advantages towards the formation in its
clergy of a high standard of acquirements and manners.
It affects its own followers by direct influence, others by
example. The State had, therefore. Introduced into
Ireland powerful agencies to serve the interests of re
ligion and truth, and the mere fact that their effect had
as yet been limited did not justify their wlthdrawal.f
* Some observations of the Eight Hon. Eichard A. Blake, a Eoman
Catholic barrister of eminence, to the effect that the Establishment should
be preserved as " a main Unk in the connexion between Great Britain
and Ireland," are cited in Note BB of Appendix.
f Gladstone's The State in its Relations to the Church, is the most able
of the writings of this period which advocate the maintenance of the Es
tablishment on the grounds of its teaching the truth. See also his speech
in the House of Commons, June 1, 1836. — Hansard, vol, xxxiU, p, 1317.

238 PEOM THE UNION [Chap. XVI.
Too much stress also, it was argued, had been laid
upon the fact that the Church did not make progress
among the people generally. Its exertions were ob
structed by hindrances over which it had no control.
Its friends had been its worst enemies. They had as
sociated it with civil war, with relentless confiscations,
with an offensive penal code. Until the legislation
which commenced in 1829 it was weighted with these
disadvantages. Now these were at an end: Roman
Catholic and Protestant met upon an equality as to civil
rights : the prejudices which oppression fostered against
the reformed religion must fall along with their cause :
pride would no longer present an obstacle to confor
mity. Time should be given for the consequences of
these altered circumstances to develop themselves, and
for the Church, under the protection of the State, to
take advantage of them.*
Lastly, some social benefits which the organization
of the Church conferred could not be overlooked. In
a country of absentee proprietors it provided a resident
gentry : it had introduced or retained in Ireland, in
connexion with itself, learning and ability, much virtue,
and excellence. If it was not a missionary of religion,
it was unquestionably a missionary of civilization.
In the end the statesmen of highest eminence became
disinclined to agitate the question of the Irish Establish
ment, and the opposition to it for more than twenty years
made little progress. Then it was again revived, owing
to circumstances which will be afterwards noticed.

* These topics were powerfuUy used in a speech of Sir Eobert Peel in
the House of Commons, April 2, 1835.

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 239

ch;a.pter xvii.
[1800-1871.]
THE last chapter traces, from the Union until dis
establishment, the external history of the Church
of Ireland, the legislation affecting it, and the political
controversy to which it gave rise. Its internal condition
during the same period is now to be examined — what
progress, as an institution to teach and promote religion,
did it then make ?
The religious impulses which before the commence
ment of the nineteenth century had, as we have seen,
appeared within the Church continued to operate
afterwards. They received assistance from the general
tendency of the age. In the French Revolution the
experiment had been tried of a nation without Chris
tianity ; of infidelity, under the sanction of authority,
reduced to practice. Warned by the results, European
opinion now everywhere cherished faith and morals as
the only basis of social order.*
Improvement in religious feeling on the part of both
the clergy and laity of the Church in Ireland for some
*• See reflections to this effect in a Sermon preached in Dublin, in
1796, by Archbishop Magee, then a EeUow of Trinity CoUege. — Works,
vol. ii, p. 326.

240 PEOM THE UNION [Chap. XVII.
time manifested itself principally in outward acts — in
more frequent attendance on divine worship ; conversa
tion free from the improprieties of a former time; the
formation of societies to discountenance vice, and to
disseminate the Scriptures and the writings of such lay
and clerical authors as most effectually inculcated piety.
But conduct founds itself upon belief, and practice can
not be dissociated from doctrine. Sentiments which
urge to action induce investigation of the principles
proper to guide it.
When a spirit of inquiry respecting theological sub
jects arises, there will generally be found, in the Church
where it exists, a disposition to recur to the opinions
prevailing during its early history, and to the great
names that traditional veneration associates with them.
Accordingly, now, the doctrines, which in Ireland had
been embodied in the Articles of 1615,* again came
into notice. They had been in abeyance from the
time of the Restoration.
At first the supporters of these doctrines were few :
influential only in consequence of their virtues. By
degrees new converts were added ; and at length the
number of those who openly professed adherence to
them was so considerable that they were estimated as
a distinct religious party. In energy and zeal they
resembled the first Methodists ; but they had not, like
the Methodists, either an elaborate organization, a
peculiar discipline, or a central authority. They were
bound together simply by harmony of sentiments. As
a party, they received the designation (given also in
* See pp. 100-104, supra.

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 241
England to persons of similar sentiments). Evange
lical.* In a party constituted in this manner absolute uni
formity of ideas could not be expected to exist. The
right of private judgment, and reference to the Scrip
tures as the sole test of truth, were encouraged ; any
authority less than divine was in but a small degree
respected. In general, the Evangelical clergy in Ireland
entertained (but not without considerable variations in
the expression of them) moderate views in respect to
episcopacy, clerical orders, the nature of the sacra
ments, and the degree of importance to be attached to
rites and ceremonies. In their teaching, no doctrine
had more prominence than the doctrine of justification
by faith only.f Some of them connected this doctrine
with the Calvinistic tenets as to predestination ; but the
others, and probably the larger number, held it not in as
sociation with these opinions, and it was in very many in
stances accompanied by even decided opposition to them.
In both the clergy and laity of the party there was a
tendency to strictness and severity of conduct. They

*See p. 197. In Bishop Eyle's Christian Leaders of the last Century
wiU be found an account of the clerical founders of the EvangeUcal
party in England.
f Dr. Mahaffy, in his remarkable Essay on the Beeay of Modern
Preaching, comments upon the comparative neglect of other important
doctrines by some Evangelical clergymen, " There is," he remarks,
" even a school of pious men who think all Christianity centres round
one cardinal doctrine — ^justification by faith in Christ's atonement; and
I have often heard them say that they should feel unable to give an
account of their stewardship U a stranger had chanced to attend for
once their ministry, and, being ignorant of the truth, had not heard
it from their lips,"— Page 120, E

242 PEOM THE UNION [Chap. XVII.
were indisposed to take part in mere amusements, or
in any pursuits which were not of a grave character.
In all these respects Evangelicalism (if it may be so
called) was a revival of Puritanism ; and this circum
stance was the cause of and excuse for much resistance to
its progress. Both systems (it was contended) deserved
the same reproach : they enforced asceticism of manners,
and exaggerated the importance of dogma. Such ob
servations were not without effect for some time ; but
when it was seen that no secession from the Church
followed among Evangelicals ; that, unlike the Puritans,
they appealed to the standards of faith adopted by
the Church ; that their doctrines were accompanied by
active exertions to repress irreligion, to inculcate prac
tical goodness, and to encourage works of benevolence
and charity ;* the hostility which in the beginning
met them,, was gradually overcome, and their opinions,
at first only tolerated, afterwards received approval, and
ultimately became in a high degree popular, especially
among the laity. t
Differences of opinion upon doctrinal subjects were
* Mr, Froude has borne testimony to his experience of Evangelicalism
in Ireland, such as it came under his observation in the family of a
clergyman with whom he resided there. He says he " had been brought
up to regard Evangelicals as unreal and affected" : he found "in this
household quiet good sense, intellectual breadth of feeling," . . .
" Christianity was part of the atmosphere which we breathed ; it was
the great fact of our existence, to which everything else was subordi
nated," ..." The problem was to arrange all our thoughts and acquire
ments in harmony with the Christian revelation, and to act it out
consistently in all that we said and did." — Short Studies on Great Sub
jects, vol, iv. p. 295 (ed, 1883).
f In the historical work of an eminent Presbyterian Divine, which has
been before referred to, will be found an interesting account of the pro-

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 243
followed in the Church of Ireland by differences of
opinion in reference to education. For some years be
fore 1831, primary education in Ireland was conducted
principally by a voluntary Association, which was aided
with liberal grants from Parliament. This Associa
tion, from the place in Dublin where its offices were
situate, was known as the KUdare-place Society. Its
rules prohibited proselytism, and so far were calculated
to recommend it to the various religious denominations
in Ireland ; but one of its regulations, requiring the
Bible to be read in the schools without note or com
ment, was disapproved by the heads of the Roman
Catholic Church. In 1831, a system of education,
which it was hoped would be free from the ob
jections made to that adopted by the Kildare-place
Society, was established by the authority of the Govern
ment which was then in power, and was placed under the
administration of a Board of Commissioners nominated
by the Lord Lieutenant. The principle of the new sys
tem of National Education may be shortly stated as that
of united secular, and separate religious, instruction.*

gress of the EvangeUcal movement among the clergy and laity of the
Established Church in Ireland, and of those clergymen whose preaching
principally contributed to advance it. (See Killen's Ecclesiastical History
of Ireland, vol. U. pp. 383-388.)
*Earl EusseU, in his Reflections and Suggestions (1875), expresses the
principle of the system administered by the National Board of Educa
tion in Ireland in words slightly different. . . . "The object of the
system (he says) is to afford combined literary and moral, and separate
religious, instruction to children of all persuasions, and as far as possible
in the same school, upon the fundamental principle that no attempt shall
be made to interfere with the peculiar religious tenets of any description
of Christian pupils." K 2

244 PEOM THE UNION [Chap. XVII.
Selections from the Scriptures were, however, prepared
by, or under the sanction of, the Board, and used in
the schools. The separation of religious from secular
instruction, the separation of the children from each
other when religious instruction was given, and the
substitution of selections from the Bible for the Bible
in its completeness, were condemned by many of th6
Protestant clergy and laity.*
That either upon theological or educational ques
tions, or indeed upon any matters of opinion, there will
not be, even in the same church or association, dis
agreements, is a vain expectation : differences in cha
racter and intelligence, if there were no other cause,
render them inevitable. Nor is it certain that if this
were otherwise the interests of truth would be served ;
since where unanimity exists there is little research or
inquiry. But if it be true that disagreements cannot
be averted, it is also true that experience and reflec
tion mitigate the asperities of controversy, and abate the
sharpness of the distinctions between opposing systems
and parties. Long before the period of disestablishment,
the divisions within the Church which have been ad
verted to were growing faint and indistinct ; the causes
of them were thought to be of diminished importance,
and discussion in connexion with them was conducted
with increased moderation. Party spirit, although not
extinguished, was inactive.
* The growth of the system of the National Board of Education will
be seen from the foUowing figures (see Thorn's Birectory, 1886) : —
Scbools. Number of Pupils. Parliamentary Grant.
In 1834, . 1106 145,621 £20,000
In 1884, , 7832 1,089,079 £766,027

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 245
The tendency of the Church in this direction had
been promoted by the high standard of education in the
Divinity School of the University of DubHn. A suc
cession of eminent professors presided over it, and re
quired from the candidates for orders an extensive
course of study. Necessarily the result was that en
larged and comprehensive ideas in connexion with
theological questions were diffused among them.
No circumstance had, prior to the Union, more in
juriously affected the interests of the Church than the
mode in which the patronage of the Crown was exer
cised; nowhere was a more beneficial change perceived
subsequently. The small number of bishops entitled to
sit in the House of Lords rendered their support of
less consequence to parliamentary parties : and hence,
though political motives cannot be said to have been
overlooked, they were less regarded by Ministers in
advising appointments, and, if taken into account, were
considered along with professional merit. The great
majority of the prelates, during the interval between
the Union and DisestabHshment, were deserving of their
position. Many added to their excellence, as theolo
gians or clergymen, high attainments in other studies.*

* To mention only such of the Bishops distinguished for literary or scien
tific pursuits as were connected with Trinity CoUege, Dublin : — Keamey
(Ossory, 1806), HaU (Dromore, 1811) had both been Provosts; Magee
(Eaphoe, 1819; DubUn, 1822) had been a Fellow; Elrington (Ferns,
1822) had been Provost; Brinkley (Cloyne, 1826) had been Professor of
Astronomy; Kyle (Cork, 1835) had been Provost ; Sandes (Cashel, 1839)
had been a EeUow; O'Brien (Ossory, 1842) had been a Fellow, and a
Professor of Divinity; Singer (Meath, 1852) had been a Eellow ; Griffin
(Limerick, 1864) had been a Fellow; Butcher (Meath, 1866) had been
a Fellow, and Eegius Professor of Divinity ; Graves (Limerick, 1866)

246 PEOM THE UNION [Chap. XVII.
Generally, at the time of disestablishment, the
clerical order in Ireland was deservedly held in high
estimation : its members were for the most part edu
cated, refined in manners, courteous and conciliatory:
where they had parishioners of their own religion,
they discharged with diligence the duties of their office;
where they had none to attend their ministry, they were
at least agents to spread social improvement.*
An examination of the merits of individuals eminent
during the period which we are now considering would
detain too long, for at no period did a greater number
justly claim to be specially noticed. Also it is not pro
bable that such an examination, if undertaken, would
prove satisfactory. We are as yet subject to the influ
ences which affected those on whom we should have- to
pronounce judgment, and are imbued with like prepos
sessions and sympathies. A contemporary — at least a
contemporary who has lived in intimacy with many
whose acts must come under review — cannot hope to
bring to the task the requisite impartiality. No more,
therefore, will be attempted than to notice the most
had been a Fellow, and Professor of Mathematics. Dickinson (Meath,
1840), Wilson (Cork, 1848), and Fitzgerald (Cork, 1867; KiUaloe, 1862),
although not Fellows, were highly distinguished ia connexion with
academic studies.
*A testimony to the merits of the clergy of the EstabUshed Church
was, in 1867, given by Dr. Moriarty, the Eoman CathoUc Bishop of Kerry,
equally honourable to himself and them. In a letter to his clergy (Dublin,
1867), advocating disestablishment, he says, . . . "but it must be said,
and we say it with pleasure, for we rejoice in aU that is good, that in
every relation of life the, Protestant clergy who reside amongst us are
not only blameless, but estimable and edifying. They are peaceful with all,
and to their neighbours they are kind when they can ; and we know that
on many occasions they would be more active in beneficence, but that

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 247
important of the writings which, in connexion with the
theological controversies of the first sixty years of the
nineteenth century, guided the direction of opinion
within the Church.
Of these, as being the earliest in date, and as being
also of pre-eminent excellence, the well-known work
of Magee, afterwards Archbishop of Dublin, upon The
Atonement, occasioned by the progress of Unitarianism,
may be properly first referred to. It presents one of the
instances where an author seizes possession of a subject
not yet occupied, and, by the skill and ability with which
he treats it, appropriates it for ever. In the discourses
and dissertations, of which the book consists, great
learning is at the command of equally great intellectual
power. The matters discussed in them are the general
objections to a mediatorial scheme: they do not examine
the various theories which have been advocated by those
who, concurring in admitting the doctrine of the atone
ment, disagree respecting questions necessarily growing
out of, or connected with it.*
Among these questions, unquestionably the most
they do not wish to appear meddling, or incur the suspicion ol tampering
with poor Catholics. In bearing, in manners, and in dress, they become
their state. II they are not learned theologians, they are accomplished
scholars and polished gentlemen. There is little intercourse between
them and us; but they cannot escape our observation; and sometimes
when we noticed that quiet, and decorous, and moderate course of life,
we feel ourselves giving expression to the wish : talis cum sis utinam
noster esses."
* A life ol Archbishop Magee, evidently founded upon authoritative
information, wUl be lound in Wills' Lives of Illustrious Irishmen, vol. vi.
p. 363. Magee's reputation for eloquence as a preacher rivalled Kirwan's ;
but, unlike Kirwan, he has left specimens which perfectly justify the
reputation he attained with his contemporaries.

248 PEOM THE UNION [Chap. XVII.
important relate to "Justification" — What are the
conditions under which the benefits of the atonement
reach to, or are received by, fallen man ? By what
means is " justification " attained ? At the time of
Ussher the clergy of the Church of Ireland would
have answered that " justification " was " by faith
only " : at the time of the Restoration, that it was by
" faith and works " together, that is, by the obedience of
faith. The former, as is well known, was the doctrine
of Luther, who pronounced its acceptance or rejection
the test of a Church — articulus stantis vel cadentis ecclesice.
The latter tenet, or opinions resembling it, began to find
favour with influential Protestant divines about the time
of the Synod of Dort.
Among the writings of the older Irish divines who
are to be classed of the Lutheran school in relation to
the question of Justification, it is sufficient to refer to
an elaborate Treatise of Justification, written by Down
ham, Bishop of Derry* (1616-1634). This very able
work treats of justification, the relation of faith to justi
fication, the nature of justifying faith, and the effects
of such faith in regenerating those who have it. Justi
fication is defined as "a most gracious and righteous
action of God, whereby He, imputing the righteousness
of Christ to a believing sinner, absolveth him from his
sins, and accepteth him as righteous in Christ, and as an
heir of etemal life to the praise and glory of His own
mercy and justice." f
The opposing theory is (perhaps more strongly than
* See p. 107, supra.
f The Treatise of Justifieation appears to have been written as an
answer to Cardinal BeUarmine.

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 249
by any other Protestant divine) stated by Jeremy
Taylor in a sermon which, when Bishop of Down, he
preached in the cathedral of Christ Church, Dublin, and
which he entitled Fides Formata: or. Faith working by
Love. It was on the text in St. James, " by works a man
is justified, and not by faith only." This text, he says,
"does not assert that we are not justified by faith, for
that had been irreconcilable with St. Paul ; but that we
are so justified by works, that it is not by faith alone :
it is faith and works together ; that is, by the obedience
of faith, by the works of faith, by the law of faith,
by righteousness evangelical, by the conditions of the
Gospel, and the measm-es of Christ." ..." Faith and
good works are no part of a distinction, but members
of one entire body."*
The Evangelical school of theology, as has been
mentioned, reverted to the ideas of an earlier period
in Ireland ; and among these to what was then held in
relation to justification. In opposition to them, their
adversaries either advocated the opinions enunciated
by Taylor in the sermon which has been cited, or
others intermediate between the views of Taylor and
those of Downham.
Among the discussions of the subject which were
occasioned by the revival of controversy at this time,
none deserve to be rated higher than, on the one side,
an examination of the question by Dr. O'Brien, a Fellow
of Trinity College, who successively became Professor
of Divinity in the University of Dublin, and Bishop of
Ossory in the Established Church of Ireland; and on
'*See vol. iii., page 321, of Hughes's edition of Taylor's Sermons.

250 FEOM THE UNION [Chap. XVII.
the other side some essays and papers of Alexander
Knox, a layman of the same Church, whose philoso
phical reflections and persuasive eloquence gave, at
the time, to his writings, and, perhaps, even more to
his conversation,* great influence.
The work of Dr. O'Brien, now alluded to, was pub
lished in 1834. It professes for its object to explain
and establish the doctrine of justification by faith only,
in Ten Sermons upon the Nature and Effects of Faith, The
sermons had been preached in the chapel of Trinity
College in 1829 and 1831.t These sermons follow
Luther and the Continental Divines contemporaries of
Luther in their exposition of the subject, perhaps even
more closely than Downham had done; J but with so
much that is new of argument and illustration, especiaUy
in connexion with an exposition of the moral effects of
* The superiority of Knox's conversation over his writings is asserted
in a review of his correspondence in the Bublin University Maga%im,
vol, iv,, page 242, evidently written by one who knew him intimately.
To the affluence of ideas in his conversation Bishop Jebb has borne
a striking testimony. ..." Scarce a day passes in which some ener
getic truth, some pregnant principle, some happy iUustration (and those
Ulustrations powerful arguments), does not present itself, for which I
was primarily indebted to the ever-salient mind of Alexander Knox,"
(Introduction to Jebb's edition of Burnet's Lives.) Knox had been
Secretary to Lord Castlereagh before the Union ; but although urged by
him to pursue a political career, and offered a seat in ParUament, he,
after that event, withdrew from public affairs to a lUe of study and
reUgious contemplation.
X Bublin University Calendar, 1886, page 411.
X In the preface. Dr. O'Brien says: . . . " If I have proved that the
doctrine of justification which I have found in the Bible was found
there by the Eeformers of the Continent and of Britain, I have traced
my views of the doctrine to the only human parentage which I feel very
soUcitous to establish for them."

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 251
faith contained in them, that they may fairly receive
the praise of originality. Faith is defined in these dis
courses to be not merely or properly a belief of the
truth of the Scripture narrative concerning our Lord,
or an assent of the understanding to certain propositions
derived from that narrative; but to be trust in Christ
or in God through Christ, founded upon such a belief
or assent; an entire and unreserved confidence in the
efficacy of what Christ has done and suffered for us ;
a full reliance upon Him and upon His works. Justi
fication is regarded as a judicial acquittal from the con
sequences of having violated the divine law, and accept
ance as if it had been fulfilled. Righteousness of life
is the consequence of faith, and receives from that
principle the most effective motives and impulses.*
Knox's opinions in reference to this subject are
contained in a collection of essays, memoranda, and
letters, that under the title of his Remains were published
after his death, which occurred in 1831. According to
Knox, justification is rather internal than external; a
provision not merely to effect acquittal from legal con
demnation, but to deliver from the thraldom of sin, and
to purify from moral pollution. "Our reputative jus
tification," he holds to be, " the result of previous moral
justification." It is, he observes, a departure from the
simplicity of Scripture to suppose that to save from sin
is no more than to save from its penal consequences — to
cleanse from all our sins, the same as to cleanse from the
punishment or imputation of them. To forgive is, he
* See pp. 14, 68, 69, 256, of second edition of the Sermons.

252 PEOM THE UNION [Chap. XVII.
admits, to remove the penalty ; but then the worst
penalty of sin is the reigning power of sin.*
Knox, while opposing the Evangelical party upon
these and other topics, bore testimony to their practical
vlrtuesf. Without condemning them, he asserted that
there might be, and was, " a more excellent way."
Religion, according to him, is a life : its end and ob
ject to exercise a transmutatlve influence over the heart;
that it also presents a creed for acceptance, and appeals
to the intelligence as well as the affections, he did not
deny ; but in his estimate the amanda ranked before the
credenda. Jebb, Bishop of Limerick (1823— 1834), was a disciple
of Knox. After their deaths a correspondence, which
had been carried on between them for thirty years, was
published — a book of great value, as preserving admir
able observations and reflections upon theological ques
tions, and as casting much light upon the history of
religion in Ireland during their time. Jebb's own works
are of high merit. To him is due the full development
of the theory originated by Bishop Louth, that paral
lelism, correspondency of thought, not of metre, is an
essential element of Hebrew poetry. :{:

* Knox's Remains, vol, i. p. 306, ii. p. 13, iv. p. 375, and see,
in relation to justification, also his letter to Mr, Parken {Remains, vol.
i. p. 281) ; and compare with it his essays On the leading design of the
Christian dispensation, as exhibited in the epistle to the Romans, and On re
demption and salvation by Christ, as exhibited in the epistle to the Romans and
the Hebrews. See further on the general question. Note CC of Appendix.
fin a letter of 5 Aug., 1828, Knox says " The Evangelicals (as they
are called) have been the chief instruments of maintaining experimental
religion in the Eeformed Churches," — Remains, vol. iv. p. 501.
{ See Jebb's Sacred Literature, 2nd edition, London, 1828.

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 253
About the time when Knox's Remains were published
a movement originated with the High Church party
at Oxford. Its leaders, in order to spread their ideas,
issued a series of tracts, to which they gave the name
of Tracts for the Times, whence their adherents were
called "Tractarians." Knox, they alleged, both fore
saw and contributed to the rise of this movement.* Its
object was to revive the very high views in reference to
apostolical succession, the sacraments, and the authority
of the Church both in itself and as guardian of tra
ditions from the early ages of Christianity, which had
become popular among the English clergy in the latter
part of the reign of James I. and in the reign of Charles
I.; also to recommend reserve, when instructing the
laity respecting some subjects, especially in connexion
with the question of justification. These ideas found
many supporters in England ; and the Tractarian party
there, not merely by their writings, but by numerous
and conspicuous examples of zeal and piety, exercised
much influence over the clergy. They found no fol
lowers in the Church of Ireland. Their system was by
both the clergy and laity of that Church regarded as a
mitigated form of all from which the Reformers dissented,
and with which Protestantism was in Ireland contend
ing. It was disapproved by the Bishops ; in the charges
of some of them decisively condemned ; and it received
from one of the Bench, Whately, then Archbishop of Dub
lin, assisted by other ecclesiastics of the Irish Church, f
* See this asserted in an article on Church Parties in the British
Critic for April, 1839, which Newman, in his Apologia, says was written
by himself. f Of this assistance the greatest and most valuable part came from

254 PEOM THE UNION [Chap. XVII.
in the Cautions for the Times, an answer that, probably,
of all which the controversy called forth was the most
able. In addition to his share in the Cautions for the Times,
Archbishop Whately was the author of many treatises
upon religious subjects, entitled to the highest place
in theological literature. He was essentially a thinker,
distinguished in his investigations, not more by the
sagacity than the impartiality and judicial calmness
with which they were conducted. He has been cri
ticized as wanting in depth, and as being confined to
a narrow round of topics. Neither observation is just.
The notion that he wants depth arises from his clear
and lucid style, not surpassed even by Paley, against
whom a similar complaint was, for a like reason,
urged; and the supposition that his range is limited
is caused by a habit of repetition in the statement
of his opinions, which he acquired at Oxford when
as a tutor impressing instruction upon his pupils. It
would be difficult to find essays more imbued with a
philosophical spirit, or exhibiting more acuteness in the
analysis of men's motives and conduct, than his
Bampton Lectures "On the use and abuse of party feeling
in matters of Religion," or the work which was termed
On the Errors of Romanism having their Origin in Human
Dr. Fitzgerald, then Whately's chaplain, and afterwards Bishop ol KU
laloe, whose learning and sound judgment rendered him an invaluable
aUy in the controversy. A memoir of Bishop Fitzgerald has lately ap
peared, prefixed to an edition of Lectures on Ecclesiastical History, which
he deUvered in the University of Dublin. It is recorded of this eminent
prelate that he was accustomed at times to write in his books the maxim,
iv p.i(T<o r) ap^T-q ; and there is no doubt that his opinions were eminently
characterized by its spirit.

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 256
Nature, but which, being of much wider scope than
this title imports, might more appropriately have been
called Errors inherent in Human Nature in connexion
with religion.
The views of so eminent a person, in reference to
some questions respecting which the opinions of other
divines of the Irish Church have been stated, demand to
be at least briefly noticed. In his Essays on the Difficulties
in the Writings of St. Paul, he (as might from the subject he
had proposed to himself for consideration be anticipated)
discusses the predestinarian question. Referring to the
opposite theories usually maintained in relation to elec
tion — one making it depend upon an immutable and un
conditional decree arbitrarily determined upon, whereby
a certain number are chosen, who, as a consequence, are
influenced to a life of righteousness here and brought
finally to eternal happiness hereafter; and the other ad
mitting a choice, but treating it as not arbitrary ; as, on
the contrary, being founded upon the foreseen faith and
obedience of those who are its objects — he shows that
these alternatives by no means exhaust the views in
reference to this subject which require to be examined.
There may, he points out, be election without being
election of the character suggested. The Jews were
unquestionably as a nation elected, and elected arbi
trarily : but it was an election not to blessings absolutely,
but to a privilege, to the offer and opportunity of
obtaining a peculiar blessing, such as was not placed
within the reach of other nations. And so there is an
election under the Christian dispensation, but of an ana
logous nature : an election not arbitrarily to salvation,
but to privileges — the knowledge of the gospel, the aids

256 FEOM THE UNION [Chap. XVII.
of the Holy Spirit, and the offer of eternal life. Of these
all are exhorted, but none compelled, to make a right
use ; and according as this is, or is not, the case, they
will prove a blessing or a curse.*
In the Cautions for the Times apostolical succession,
and the ideas upon this subject suggested in the Oxford
Tracts for the Times, are considered. While the authors
of the Cautions affirm that the three orders of bishops,
priests, and deacons, were instituted by the apostles in
the original platform of the Church; they also assert
that no unalterable model of government is drawn for
the Christian Church in Scripture, as there was for the
Jewish. There has been an apostolical succession in the
sense that there has been such an order of men as Chris
tian ministers from the time of the apostles ; but this is
different from a succession in the individual minister,
which these writers hold, could never be established as
a fact.t Whately is the fourth Irish prelate to whose opinions
in relation to the episcopal and ministerial offices there
has been occasion to refer ; % the series of authorities
may well be closed by referring to a sermon upon the

* See the second series of these essays, 7th edition, pp. 68-93.
Whately is sometimes supposed to have held predestination to be of
nations; in one sense he did, for nations may enjoy pecuUar privUeges ;
but the doctrine of National Election (properly so called) is not his, but
Archbishop Sumner's, who considers rather who are called, whether
nations or individuals, while Whately regards not so much who are
caUed, but to what they are called, privileges or absolute blessings.
f See Cautions for the Times, pp. 301, 302, 315, 316, with which
Whately's Kingdom of Christ may be compared.
X See the opinions of Bishop Downham at p. 107 ; of Archbishop
Ussher at p. 130 ; of Bishop Taylor at p. 145. And see Appendix DD.

1800-1871] TO DISESTABLISHMENT. 257
same subject, delivered by Professor Archer Butler, of
the University of Dublin, which, like his other writ
ings, exhibits a combination of profound thought with
brilliant eloquence. The object of this discourse is to
reconcile high views as to these offices with universal
Christian sympathy. The preacher assumes the sacred
right of the offices : that a divine commission was ori
ginally given : that it has been transmitted in direct
and unbroken succession through and from the apostles.
He admits that, nevertheless, there are Churches, where
this organization does not exist and whose ministry
cannot claim this transmitted authority, which have
manifested examples of religious influences, of practical
righteousness, and of devotional zeal. Does the fact
refute the theory ? No, it is replied ; for, while the
union of a divinely-appointed polity with a pure sys
tem of religion was intended, the latter by itself will
produce these results. Besides, relaxations of a pre
scribed scheme might be permitted, and thus, or from
special interpositions, the success of exceptions from it
may be explained.*
Adhering to the limit already assigned for conside
ration of the theological writings of this period, it will
be sufficient, in addition to those already noticed, to refer
to the works of Laurence, Archbishop of Cashel (1822-
1838), and of Mant, Bishop of Down (1823-1848). The
Bampton Lectures of the former were designed to
establish that the Articles of the Church of England
were not framed to bear merely a Calvinistic sense ;

* See Sermons by Eev. William Archer Butler: Dublin, 1849, p.
458, 8

258 PEOM THE UNION TO DISESTABLISHMENT.
and with that object he enters into an investigation of
contemporary ecclesiastical history, and of the opinions
of the authors of the Articles upon the subject of pre
destination. The writings of Bishop Mant* refer very
much to questions which have been raised respecting
the services, rules, and rubrics of the Church. In the
controversy respecting education he took part with those
who contended that religion should be the basis of edu
cation. But the literary work with which the name of
Bishop Mant is likely to be most permanently connected
is the History of the Church of Ireland, from the Refor
mation to the date of the Union. To this there has
been occasion in the present treatise very frequently to
refer : and to it every student of Irish Ecclesiastical
History must continue to refer, as the most complete
and accurate coUection of the facts occurring within
the period of which it treats, f
* A complete catalogue of the numerous writings of Bishop Mant, in
cluding his charges and sermons, will be found in Cotton's Fasti, vol. iii.
pp, 213-218.
I Another history, also by a member ol the Established Church of
Ireland, the Eev. Eobert King, ought to be studied in conjunction with
Bishop Mant's., It commences from the introduction of Christianity into
Ireland, and ends at 1622. Under the unassuming title of "A Primer,"
it contains the results of much research, especially as to the earlier
periods.

CHAPTER XVIII.
DISESTABLISHMENT.
IN 1834 the first official inquiry into the number of
persons in communion with the Established Church
in Ireland was instituted.* In 1841 a census of the
people was taken, and another in 1851 ; but in neither
was any return required of religious profession. The
census of 1851 disclosed a great diminution of the
population generally; but in what degree this diminu
tion affected the relative numbers of adherents to the
different Churches and religious systems existing in Ire
land was left uncertain. In 1861 was the next census;
and then in Ireland the people were required to state
of what religious denominations they professed to be
members. When the enumeration was completed it
disclosed the following result : —
Eoman CathoUcs,  4,505,265
Members of the Established Church, . . 693,357
Presbyterians,  523,291
Other dissenting bodies (except Jews), . 76,661
Jews,  393

Total,  5,798,967
These figures, which were ascertained not from
speculative estimates or other defective sources of in-
* See p, 229,
S 2

260 DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XVIII.
formation, but from the actual returns made of their
religious profession by the people, placed beyond doubt
the great disproportion existing between the number of
members of the Established Church and the whole popu
lation.* The advocates of disestablishment at once saw
the advantage which the facts thus proved gave them.
They renewed the controversy, which had since 1838
been quiescent, and pointed out how it was then sug
gested that by the legislation of that period, directed,
as it was, to conciliate the Roman Catholic portion of
the people, all obstacles to the progress of the Church
would be removed, and that only its success was to be
expected. t These anticipations, it was urged, had ob
viously not been fulfilled, and their failure must, when
taken into consideration for political purposes, assume
the greater importance, because there was no demerit on
the part of the Church, regarded merely as a religious
institution, to account for it. On the contrary, its clergy
were admitted to be, in every respect, worthy of their
calling: foremost in works of benevolence, kind and
generous, and encouraging kindness and generosity in
others.

* In the inquiry of 1834 Commissioners were appointed to ascertain
the number who in Ireland were in communion with "The United
Church of England and Ireland," They had less perfect means of ac
quiring information than was provided by the mode in which the census
of 1861 was taken. The Commissioners "were to ascertain the number
in each parish on the spot, by the best evidence they could procure
there or elsewhere." In comparing their estimates with the enumera
tion in 1861, it is to be remembered that they classed the Methodists
with the members of the Church, while in the latter the Methodists were
regarded as a separate religious body dissenting from it.
f See p. 238, supra.

Chap. XVIIL] DISESTABLISHMENT. 261
Nor was it merely the Established Church which, it
was said, must as a missionary Church be pronounced to
have failed. Protestantism generally was open to the
same reproach. The census showed that the members of
the Presbyterian Church were not much less numerous
than the members of the Established ; its clergy were
exemplary in conduct, and characterized by ability and
energy. However they might differ from their epis-
copally-ordalned brethren upon questions of Church
government, they were their allies against the Church of
Rome, and against its doctrinal teaching. There were
also other Protestant dissenters in Ireland who took
the same side. The Church of Rome and its religious
system had successfully held their ground against all
varieties of Protestantism, whether separately or in
combination. Previous to, and during the beginning of, the
nineteenth century, there existed apathy and neglect
on the part of Protestants in relation to the conver
sion of Roman Catholics. But this had long ceased.
For more than fifty years before the census of 1861,
energetic exertions were made for the purpose ; so
cieties formed to promote it were supported alike by
Church Protestants and dissenting Protestants, and were
supplied both in England and Ireland with ample con
tributions. Their agents penetrated every part of
the country, bringing home to the inhabitants, by
preaching, and by the books and tracts which they dis
seminated, a knowledge of the objections made to the
authority and tenets of the Church of Rome. These
efforts were not without results ; but the results, it was

262 DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XVIIL
admitted, were not sufficient of themselves to stay or
even influence the course of political action.*
The topics which have been now referred to would
suggest themselves upon even a cursory reference to
the census of 1861, and to the events which preceded
it. A more minute examination of the census disclosed
other circumstances which, it was alleged, deserved to
be at this time also taken into account. Three Churches
— the Roman Catholic, Protestant Episcopalian, and
Presbyterian — were seen to be pre-eminent in numbers ;
the same were also, all would allow, pre-eminent ih
intellectual cultivation, and in social power and influ
ence. When the localities where the persons who re
turned themselves as in communion with these Churches
came to be scrutinized, it was found that Protestants
were numerous only in places where settlers had from
time to time been introduced : the Episcopalian Pro
testants being in those where colonization was English,
and the Presbyterian where it was Scotch. The portion
of the people who were of Irish descent were seen to
have almost all adhered to the Roman Catholic religion.
So also did many of mixed native and English race,
and a less number of pure English descent. Thus it
was observed not only were there in Ireland three re
ligious systems entitled to social pre-eminence, but.

* An account of the proceedings adopted in the nineteenth century
for the conversion to Protestantism of Eoman Catholics in Ireland wUl
be found in a Paper read at the Church Congress held in Dublin in
1868, by the Hon. and Eev. W. C. Plunket, now Lord Plunket, and
Archbishop of Dublin in the disestablished Church of Ireland. — See
Report of this Congress, p. 115.

Chap. XVIIL] DISESTABLISHMENT. 203
what seems to be without parallel in any other king
dom, each of these three derived its chief support from
a distinct and different nationality.*
If the general result of the census was unfavourable
to the continuance of the Establishment in Ireland, these,
its more minute, details, were alleged to be equally so.
Did it not seem, it was said, as if some inexplicable, but
not the less insuperable, barrier opposed the introduc
tion of Protestantism among the mass of the people ?
The experiment had been tried ; it had not as yet suc
ceeded. What reason was there to infer that the future
would differ from the past ? The people of Ireland,
from the reign of Henry VIII. to that of James I., were
subdivided into two religious denominations ; and from
the reign of James I. into three. None of them had in the
intervening period gained ground against the others, f
Then as to reasons of a religious character, which
thirty years before were offered in defence of the Es
tablishment, these, it was contended, ought no longer to
prevail. If the idea had once been entertained that the
State should select for its favour an ecclesiastical system

* Eoman CathoUcs, Protestants belonging to the Church, and Pres
byterians, according to the census of 1861, were distributed in the
provinees as foUows : —

Rom, Caths,

Chur, Prots,

Presbyterians,

Ulster,

966,613

391,315

503,835

Leinster, .

. 1,252,553

180,587

12,355

Munster, .

. 1,420,076

80,860

4,013

Connaught,

866,023

40,595

3,088

Total, . . 4,505,265 693,357 523,291
j- Some writers of eminence seem to think that there are characteris
tics of the Celtic race which hinder the progress of Protestantism among
them. But on this subject see Note E E of Appendix.

2G4 DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XVIII.
because it taught religious truth, this policy must, it was
asserted, be held to have been for some time deliberately
abandoned. An increased grant had been made to the
College of Maynooth in order to provide instruction
in Roman Catholic theological principles for students.
After this measure the State, it was suggested, could
not consistently allege an obligation, resting on the
ground of duty, to maintain the Irish Church.*
In some respects, it was generally admitted, the
State was benefitted by the existing Establishment : the
union of the Churches strengthened the union of the
kingdoms ; the clergy promoted social improvement ;
but did these benefits, it was asked, counterbalance the
difficulties in which the administration of government in
the country was placed by local discontent originating
from the ascendency of a Church which was unpopular
with the great majority of the people ?
Notwithstanding, however, that the arguments, which
have been stated, were pressed with ability, and received
with favour by many, six years elapsed after the census
of 1861 before any move was made in Parliament to
induce a decision in conformity with them. The ad
versaries of the Church were agreed in demanding its
disestablishment, but not agreed as to the course to be
* See Mr. Gladstone's Chapter of Autobiography, published in 1868,
to explain his change of policy in reference to the Church of Ireland : —
" The moment," he says, " that I admitted the validity of a claim by the
Church of Eome for the gift, by the free act of the Imperial Parliament,
of new funds for the education of its clergy, the true basis of the Estab
lished Church of Ireland for me was cut away. The one had always
been treated by me as exclusive of the other " (p. 30). Compare with
these observations his former opinions, as they have been stated at p.
237, supra.

Chap. XVIIL] DISESTABLISHMENT. 265
pursued in reference to its endowments. And, until
they were united upon this point also, parliamentary
action was thought to be both useless and injudicious.
The difference of opinion as to the endowments
of the Church — if a measure of disestablishment were
carried — was divided between the alternatives of total
disendowment, or partial disendowment with a concur
rent provision for the Roman Catholic and Presbyterian
Churches. Which of these measures was to be preferred ?
The answer to this question concerned other
Churches besides the Established. The Roman Catholic
and Presbyterian Churches were both in the receipt of
assistance from the State : an annual sum was paid for
the benefit of each from the Imperial revenues — to the
College of Maynooth, about £26,000 a-year ; to the
Presbyterian Church, from £45,000 to £50,000 yearly.*
If the Church were totally disendowed, these grants, it
was certain, would not be continued. Thus total dis
endowment would eventuate in casting not only the
Established Church but every other Church in Ireland
solely upon voluntary support. In a country of limited
means, the entire provision for educating, and after
wards for maintaining, the ministers of religion, must
be supplied from that precarious source. This, it was
argued, was to imperil grave interests, "f
Nor would the effect of total disendowment be

* See Mr, Gladstone's speech, March 1, 1869.
¦f- See, in support of these views. Letter of Earl Russell to the Right
Hon. Chichester Fortescue, Feb, 3, 1868 ; Letter of Earl Grey to the Right
Hon. John Bright, March 26, 1868 ; The Three Churches, by Dean Stanley,
London, 1868; and conversations of Nassau Senior with Archbishop
Whately, in Senior's Journals in Ireland, vol. ii. pp, 129, 293,

266 DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XVIII.
confined to Ireland. What was now resolved upon for
that country would form a precedent for other coun
tries and other times. In every Christian kingdom in
Europe there had been set apart, out of the general
property of the community, a portion reserved as a
fixed and permanent estate dedicated to the mainte
nance of religious teaching. Circumstances might in
some or even in all of these kingdoms oblige a review
of the arrangements connected with ecclesiastical en
dowments. Were they to be taught, by the example
of the Parliament of Creat Britain and Ireland, that
the principle upon which to proceed was neither reform
of the institutions in the enjoyment of these endow
ments, nor transfer to, nor redistribution among, other
religious communities, but simple and absolute confis
cation for purposes of a merely secular character?
At length, in 1867, Earl Russell, who was known to
favour the concurrent endowment of the three Churches
pre-eminent in Ireland in preference to their total dis
endowment, brought under discussion in the House of
Lords, the question of the Irish Church. He moved
that a Royal Commission should be issued to inquire
into the property of the Church of Ireland, "with a
view," as it was expressed in the terms of the motion,
"to make the property more productive, and in order
to its more equitable application for the benefit of the
Irish people." This motion, with the omission of the
reference to a more equitable application of the pro
perty, was acceded to by the Grovernment of the day,
and an undertaking was given that commissioners should
be appointed to make the inquiry which was sought.
Accordingly, later in the same year such Commis-

Chap. XVIIL] DISESTABLISHMENT. 267
sioners were nominated. They were directed to inquire
and report upon the whole organization and property
of the Church in Ireland : as to its archbishoprics, bi
shoprics, dignities, benefices, and corporations aggre
gate, and the revenues of the same respectively ; as to
its several united and separate parishes and parochial
districts ; as to its churches and chapels ; and as to the
number of members of the Established Church of Eng
land and Ireland inhabiting the parishes or districts
attached to the churches: also as to the property and
emoluments vested in, and administered by, the Board
of Ecclesiastical Commissioners for Ireland which had
been constituted by the Church Temporalities Acts of
1833 and 1834, and their administration of the same ;
and lastly, to inquire and report whether any improve
ment should be made in the administration or distri
bution of the revenues, or in relation to the offices which
were to be inquired into and reported upon.*
At the opening of the next Session of Parliament
(1868), although the Commission thus appointed was
engaged upon the inquiry committed to it, and had not
then reported, the subject of the Irish Church occupied
the attention of the House of Commons, and gave rise
to considerable controversy. The Minister at this time
in charge of Irish affairs in that House was the Earl
of Mayo, remarkable then, as also afterwards in the

* The Commissioners were Earl Stanhope (the historian) ; Earl of
Meath ; Viscount De Vesci ; Sir Joseph Napier (Ex-Lord Chancellor of
Ireland) ; Colonel Shafto Adair (afterwards Lord Waveney) ; E. P, Shir
ley ; Edward Howes (one of the EngUsh Ecclesiastical Commissioners) ;
George Clive, M, P, ; and the author of the present treatise (then Vicar-
General of the Province of Armagh).

268 DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XVIII.
more conspicuous office of Governor- General of India,
for enlarged and generous views of policy. Objecting
to the position of the Church of Ireland being made the
subject of parliamentary controversy, before the Com
mission granted in consequence of Earl Russell's mo
tion had reported, he, in the course of an elaborate
speech dealing with the general condition of Ireland,
expressed his unwavering hostility to any plan for total
disendowment of the Church : "Of all the schemes that
have been proposed," he said, " I object pre-eminently
to that known as the process of levelling down." ..." I
believe that in these matters, as in everything else, con
fiscation is the worst proposal."
But the Government of which Lord Mayo was a
member were in a minority in the House of Commons.
Their support of these views lent no additional weight
to them in the estimation of that assembly; and the
leaders of the Opposition determined to make the ques
tion of the Church the occasion of immediate party con
flict. Resolutions, and then a Bill for the suspension of
appointments in the Church of Ireland, were submitted to
the House of Commons, with the avowal that they were
preparatory to a complete measure of disestablishment
being introduced when a new Parliament should meet,
after the present had, in consequence of changes enacted
in the representation of the country, been dissolved.
The justification offered for these proceedings was
founded upon political reasons. Motives of expediency
induced their adoption. No complaint whatever was
made of the Church or of its Clergy ; there was no alle
gation of any neglect or default on the part of either.
" My belief," said Mr. Gladstone — who brought forward

Chap. XVIIL] DISESTABLISHMENT. 269
these measures — " is, that as far as abuses, in the com
mon sense of the word, are concerned — that is, those
which depend on the conduct of the bishops and clergy,
and which are remediable by the wisdom and energy
of the clerical body, or the purity of life of the lay
members — it is my belief that the Irish Church is
entirely free from such abuses. We must all accord to
that Church this praise : that her clergy are a body of
zealous and devoted ministers, who give themselves to
their sacerdotal functions in a degree not inferior to
any other Christian Church."
The Resolutions and Bill for suspending Irish ec
clesiastical appointments passed through the House of
Commons by considerable majorities ; but the Bill was
rejected in the House of Lords. Further parliamentary
action in reference to the Church of Ireland was deferred
until it was seen what, in reference to the Church ques
tion, would be the opinions of the members of the House
of Commons to be returned at the general election, which
was soon to take place.
Later in the same year (1868), the Commissioners ap
pointed to inquire into the condition of the Irish Church
made their Report. . . They calculated the area of the
entire island at 20,701,346 acres. The whole (they stated)
was included in and subdivided into parochial divisions.
The Church population scattered over this extent had
been, as has been already mentioned, ascertained by the
Census Commissioners to be 693,357. From them the
Church Commissioners obtained an account of its dis
tribution over the country, according to the parochial
districts under separate incumbents. These they reck
oned at 1478 ; and of them there were 181 which had

270 DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XVIII.
a Church population above 1000 ; 1096 with numbers
varying from that amount down to 40 persons; 110
with under 40 and not less than 20; and 91 with less
than 20. There were 2 Archbishoprics, 10 Bishoprics,
30 corporations of Deans and Chapters, 32 Deaneries,
33 Archdeaconries, and 1518 benefices.
The property of the Church, according to the Re
port, consisted of tithe rentcharges, lands let to tenants,
and lands and houses in the occupation of ecclesiastical
persons. The value of the last description of property
the commissioners had no means of estimating, except
what were furnished by the valuations for local taxa
tion. It was therefore returned according to these
valuations ; but such estimates were, in accordance with
the principles on which an official valuation was made,
below the letting value. The net income from tithe
rentcharge and from lands let to tenants was calculated
to exceed £580,000, a-year.* Of this amount, more
than £113,000 a-year was administered by the Eccle
siastical Commissioners for Church purposes, such as
the building and repairing of churches, and providing
requisites for the celebration of worship ; about £19,000
a-year belonged to the capitular bodies, and was by
them applied towards maintaining the cathedrals and
their services ; and the residue supplied the incomes of
the bishops, dignitaries, and beneficed clergy.
The Commissioners made suggestions for improve
ment in the internal management of the Church and of
its property. Among other things they recommended
a reduction of the Episcopate to one Archbishop and
* See Note FF of Appendix.

Ch.\p. XVIIL] DISESTABLISHMENT. 271
seven bishops, accompanied by diminution of their
salaries : the dissolution of all cathedral corporations,
except in the cities where the residences of the Bishop
rics retained were to be : and the abolition of cathedral
dignitaries and officers in the dissolved cathedral cor
porations.* At the general election which followed the dissolu
tion of Parliament upon the termination of the Session of
1868, a majority of the members returned to the House
of Commons were favourable to the disestablishment of
the Irish Church. Early in 1869 a Bill intended to
effect that object was brought forward by the Govern
ment which was then in office. This Bill, with some
alterations, ultimately, under the name of the " Irish
Church Act," became law.
The Act was founded upon the principle of the total
disestablishment and disendowment of the Church of
Ireland, and of the withdrawal of all assistance from
the State to other Churches. The interests of incum
bents of offices and benefices in the Church, and of
other persons interested for life in the properties, or
* In a charge delivered in the autumn of 1868, alter the pub
lication of this Eeport, Archbishop Beresford observed : — " The pro
position that the Church, after a severe scrutiny, has been shown to
be not excessive in its general endowments, with no overgrown fortunes
in its individual ministers, and free from the reproach of pluraUties, has
been estabUshed by this Eeport. What the clergy individually are (with
rare exceptions), in character and conduct, and exemplary discharge of
their duties, has been testified by their opponents ; and by no one more
freely and more fuUy than by Mr. Gladstone himseU. If we are to fall,
it is for no default of duty, no reasonable objection to our ecclesiastical
system, nor to the constitution or condition of our Church : it is solely
for external causes and reasons. Of this consolation we can never be
deprived."

272 DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XVIII.
annual grants affected by the Act, were respected, and
either preserved or made a subject of compensation.
For the purpose of this treatise it is at present only
necessary to refer to some provisions of the Act : — On
and after the first day of January, 1871, the union be
tween the Chm-ches of England and Ireland was, it
was declared, dissolved, and the Church of Ireland was
then to cease to be established by law. As of the
same day, every Ecclesiastical Corporation in Ireland,
whether sole or aggregate, and every Cathedral Cor
poration, was dissolved. Then also, subject only to
such life estates and rights as were to be retained by
ecclesiastical persons, and to such rights and compen
sation as were given to them in respect of any revenues
taken from them, all the property of the Church, whether
real or personal, was to vest in Commissioners, to be
called " The Commissioners of Church Temporalities
in Ireland," and by them to be converted and ap
plied. Life estates in lands were preserved ; but an
nuities were substituted for the incomes derived from
tithe rentcharge, and were to be paid by the Com
missioners. Power was given to create a corporation,
to be termed " The Church Representative Body,"
which might hold and manage property for the dis
established Church. The churches in use at the passing
of the Act were to be conveyed to this body, sub
ject to the life interests of the incumbents; the same
was to take place with such burying-grounds as ad
joined these churches ; and the Temporalities Commis
sioners were to sell to this corporation for the benefit
of the Church the houses of residence and a suitable
proportion of the glebes connected with them. As an

Chap. XVIIL] DISESTABLISHMENT. 273
equivalent for private endowments, which it was felt
that it would be unjust to confiscate without compen
sation, a sum of £500,000 was to be paid to the Re
presentative Body.
By the general law Convocation could not be sum
moned, nor could it proceed to business, without the
licence of the Crown. There was also in Ireland an
Act known as the Convention Act, which forbade rer
presentative assemblies, composed of delegates returned
by election, from meeting. If the disestablished
Church were to govern itself, these difficulties must be
removed. It was therefore enacted that any law or
custom whereby the archbishops, bishops, clergy, or
laity of the Church of Ireland, were prohibited from
holding assemblies, synods, or conventions, or electing
representatives thereto, should be repealed, and that
nothing in any Act should prevent them, by represen
tatives meeting in general synod or convention, and
therein framing constitutions and regulations for the
general management and good government of the
Church, and property and affairs thereof, and the
future representation of the members thereof in dio
cesan synods, general convention, or otherwise.
It was also provided that, notwithstanding disesta
blishment, the existing ecclesiastical law, the existing
articles, doctrines, rites, rules, discipline, and ordinances
of the Church — but with and subject to such (if any)
modification or alteration as should be made according
to the constitution of the Church — should be deemed
to be binding on its members in the same manner as if
such members had mutually contracted and agreed to
abide by and observe the same, and should be capable

274 DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XVIII.
of being enforced in relation to any property vested in
the Church under the Act, as if it had been conveyed
upon trust to be enjoyed by persons who should observe
such ecclesiastical law, and the said articles, rules, and
ordinances. As the annual grants from the State to the Presby
terian Church and the College of Maynooth were to
cease, compensation was made to both by payment of
sums of money which it was supposed would represent
the value of the life interests of those who were then
receiving and would have been benefited by the grants,
if they had been continued.
The surplus, after answering all the compensations
provided by the Act for the disestablished Church, for
the Presbyterian Church, and for the College of May
nooth, was disposed of by a clause expressed in the fol
lowing terms : . . . " Whereas it is expedient that the
proceeds of the property (the subject of the Act) should
be appropriated to the relief of unavoidable calamity
and suffering, yet not so as to cancel or impair the ob
ligations now attached to property under the Acts for
the relief of the poor ; be it enacted that the said pro
ceeds shall be applied accordingly in the manner Par
liament shall hereafter direct."

CHAPTER XIX.
[1869-1871,]
THE Irish Church Act received the Royal Assent on
the 26th of July, 1869. Under its provisions an
interval of one year and five months was to elapse be
fore the disestablishment and disendowment which it
enacted would take effect. After the 1st of January,
1871>, no valid appointment to any ecclesiastical office,
benefice, or preferment, could be made in Ireland by
the Crown, by any archbishop or bishop, or other
ecclesiastical person, or by any lay patron. If the
Church were to be continued, it was indispensable that
in the meantime some constitution should be framed
which would provide for the discharge of spiritual
duties by successors to the existing incumbents of
offices and benefices.
It was the intention of the Statute to confer upon
the Church of Ireland complete freedom, and an un
restricted right to legislate in reference to its own
internal arrangements. From the language of the
provisions removing legal difficulties which prevented
the meeting of a general Synod or Convention of
bishops, clergy, and laity in Ireland, it was evident
that those who framed them intended that measures
requisite to meet the exigencies of the period should
be enacted by an assembly of this character. These
T 2

276 AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT, [Chap. XIX.
provisions came into immediate operation. In the sta
tute no notice was taken of Convocation; however,
the language used in reference to the meeting of a
general Synod or Convention included within it Con
vocation also.
Convocation in Ireland was formed by the pro
vincial Synods of the Archbishops meeting together.*
But without the permission of the Crown such a meet
ing was hot lawful. From the reign of Queen Anne'
the Irish Convocation had pever been either summoned
or licensed to proceed to business by the Crown. Its
sittings were therefore during the intervening period
discontinued. The Church Act dispensed with the ne-
qessity of summons or licence from the Crown, and
the archbishops could thenceforward act without this
previous authority being given to them. It lay with
them at their own discretion to assemble Convocation.
by summoning each his own provincial Synod to a
joint meeting.
It is obvious that, when there existed within the-
Church a legally constituted body capable of discharg
ing legislative functions, even although the laity were
not members of it, it was in the highest degree ad
visable to ask its assistance and obtain its concurrence
in whatever course was now to be pursued. If it
were to recommend that its own meeting should be
followed by the assembling of a Convention composed
of laity as well as clergy, such a recommendation
would lend additional sanction to an assembly of this
nature, and probably remove the objections which
* See as to Convocation in Ireland, pp. 19, 97, 169.

1869-1871] AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. 277
might by some be entertained to its assuming authority
in reference to ecclesiastical affairs.
The number of Archbishops presiding at this time
over the Church in Ireland was two — being the number
retained under the provisions of the statutes which
had been passed in 1833. These were the Archbishops
of Armagh and of Dublin. Within the metropolitan ju
risdiction of the former were included both the province
of Armagh and the province of Tuam, as originally
constituted in the system of the Church of Ireland ;
and within that of the latter the provinces of both
Dublin and Cashel. The prelates who at this time
filled these offices, after consultation with the other
bishops, resolved, that in the circumstances in which
the Church was placed, the first step that it was ad
visable to take was to summon their Synods so as to
form a Convocation. They, accordingly, by mandates
issued to their suffragan bishops, and by such other
means as were in use upon the occasions when former
Convocations were constituted, procured the - attendance
of their provincial Synods in the month of September,
1869, at St. Patrick's Cathedral, Dublin.
The assembly composed of these Synods, when it
met, formed itself into a Convocation. It consisted
of the archbishops and bishops, of all the deans and
archdeacons, and of clerical persons elected, some by
the chapters, and some by the clergy of each diocese,
as their representatives.
The organization of the Episcopate at this time was
as follows : — The number of episcopal persons to rule
over the Sees of the Irish Church had, in conse
quence of the provisions of the Church Temporalities

278 AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XIX.
Acts (1833 and 1834), been reduced to two arch
bishops and ten bishops.* Under them the Sees were
incorporated, or united in the following manner: —
Armagh with Clogher; Dublin and Glendalough with
Kildare ; Derry with Raphoe ; Down with Connor
and Dromore ; Kilmore with Elphin and Ardagh ;
Tuam with KlUala and Achonry; Ossory with Ferns
and Leighlin ; Cashel with Emly, Waterford, and
Lismore; Cork with Cloyne and Ross; Killaloe with
Kilfenora, Clonfert, and Kilmacduagh ; Limerick with
Ardfert and Aghadoe. Meath, in which Clonmacnois
had been long merged, was not united with any other
See.t The Convocation, according to precedent, was com
posed of two Houses. The two archbishops and the ten
Bishops formed the Upper House. As the Primacy of
Armagh had, from the time of the decision of Straf
ford J in favour of this See, been always admitted,
the Upper House was presided over by the Archbishop
of Armagh. The Lower House, composed of the clergy,
official and representative, elected as Prolocutor, Dr.
West, Dean of St. Patrick's Cathedral, Dublin. Convo
cation sat for some days debating the various questions
which arose for determination, and passed resolutions de
signed to provide for the altered position of the Church.
'* For the Sees of the Church of Ireland, vide Note Q of Appendix,
f The prelates who, at the time when this Convocation met, filled the
two archbishoprics and the ten sufiEragan bishoprics were : — Beresford
(Armagh) ; Trench (Dublin) ; Butcher (Meath) ; O'Brien (Ossory) ; Daly
(Cashel) ; Knox (Down) ; Fitzgerald (KiUaloe) ; Gregg (Cork) ; Graves
(Limerick) ; Bernard (Tuam) ; Alexander (Derry) ; and Verschoyle
(Kilmore). X See p. 1 18 supra, and also Note Q of Appendix.

1869-1871] AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. 279
The first of these resolutions unanimously declared,
" that they were now called upon, not to originate a
constitution for a new communion, but to repair a
sudden breach in one of the most ancient churches
in Christendom." This was followed by another re
solution inviting the co-operation of the laity — " That,
under the present circumstances of the Church of Ire
land, the co-operation of the faithful laity had become
more than ever desirable." The mode in which this
was to be obtained, and in which the future constitution
of the Church might be most satisfactorily determined
upon and framed, was held to be by the summoning
of a general Convention, to consist, not merely as a
Convocation or general Synod did, of bishops and
clergy, but of bishops, clergy, and laity. And ac
cordingly, in order to prepare the way for a Con
vention of this character being summoned, the Lower
House of Convocation, with the concurrence of the
Upper House, arranged what should be the number
and nature of the representation of the clergy in
such an assembly. They resolved that the represen
tatives of the clergy in a general Synod or Conven
tion of the bishops, clergy, and laity of the Church
of Ireland, should be elected from the diocesan Synods;
that the persons entitled to vote for these represen
tatives in the diocesan Synods should be the beneficed
clergymen, and also the licensed clergymen, provided
they were of the order of priest in each diocese, and in
any exempt jurisdiction out of the diocese; and that the
persons qualified to be elected should be Presbyters, who
had for five years been in Holy Orders. The number
of representatives to this general Synod or Convention

280 AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XIX.
was to be in the proportion of one to every ten of
the clergy entitled to vote in each diocese, together
with an additional representative for any remaining
number exceeding five. No dean or archdeacon was
to have a seat ex officio ; and no cathedral chapter
was to return a representative.
So far, therefore, as the bishops and clergy assem
bled in Convocation were concerned, their decision was
clearly announced to be, that a Convention or general
Synod should be summoned, and that such Convention
or general Synod should be composed, not only of
bishops and clergy, but of laity also.
Similar views were in favour with the laity : and
previous to the resolutions of Convocation, a meeting
had been held of eminent laymen, who addressed to
the two archbishops a request that they would convene
a representative assembly under the name of a " Lay
Conference," with a view to making arrangements for
lay representation in a Convention or general Synod.
The suggestion being approved by the Archbishops,
they arranged that such "a conference" should take
place in Dublin, and that representatives should be
elected to attend it. For this purpose the following
proceedings were then adopted : — In every parish a
meeting of Church parishioners was held, at which
parochial delegates were elected to the diocesan Synod.
These lay parochial delegates having assembled in
Synod in their respective dioceses, elected representa
tives to the lay assembly, which was to be convened
by the archbishops. The number elected was one for
every five of the parochial delegates. The total num
ber was 417.

1869-1871] AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. 281
An assembly of laymen thus constituted, and repre
senting the laity of the Church in every diocese, and thus
in the entire island, met in Dublin, in October, 1869.
At the first meeting the Archbishop of Armagh presided.
Subsequently the Duke of Abercorn acted as chairman.
Illis body resolved that the lay representatives to a
Convention or general Synod, composed of both clergy
and laity, should be to the clerical in the ratio of two
to one : that the proportion of lay representatives to
be allotted to the respective dioceses should be partly
based on population and partly on the parochial sys
tem ; and they then fixed the number of laymen
which, acting on that principle, should be allotted to
each diocese. The entire number of laymen was to
be 446. They also recommended that an organizing
committee should be appointed, consisting of not more
than four delegates from each Synod — two lay and two
clerical; and that such delegates, with their respective
bishops, and such other learned persons as the bishops
and delegates might think it expedient to call to their
aid, should frame a draft Constitution to be submitted
to, and voted upon by, the future Convention of bishops,
clergy, and laity.
The resolutions of Convocation and of the "Lay
Conference," as to the Convention of bishops, clergy,
and laity, were approved and adopted by the Episcopal
Bench ; and, in conformity with their recommendations,
a Convention or general Synod was summoned by the
archbishops. Representatives to attend it, both clerical
and lay, were elected by the diocesan Synods.
The matters which called for immediate decision
were — What was to be the future legislative authority

282 AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XIX,
for the Church? In what manner questions, arising
among its members in connection with their rights or
duties under its system or in relation to its discipline,
were to be decided ? In whom was the right of ap
pointing to bishoprics and benefices to be vested ? In
what manner was the Representative Body to be con
stituted ? Neither doctrine, nor the former standards of
faith, nor the services for divine worship, nor the polity
and discipline of the Church of Ireland, had been in
any way interfered with by the Church Act.*
On the 15th of February, 1870, the Convention of
the bishops, clergy, and laity of the Church of Ireland
met in St. Patrick's Cathedral, Dublin, and subsequently,
by adjournments, at other places in Dublin, until the
2nd of April, when it was prorogued. In the autumn
of the same year it again sat in Dublin, and then com
pleted the enactment of a Constitution for the Church,
and of a code of laws which defined the authority of
the persons and bodies empowered to act in relation

* This was very clearly and forcibly pointed out, soon after the Irish
Church Act was passed, in a Charge delivered to his clergy by the then
Primate, Archbishop Beresford — a prelate whose statesmanlike quaUties
eminently fitted him to preside during a period of transition. In the same
Charge he adverted to the temptations which beset the sudden acquisition
of absolute powers of government, and ol legislation, by bodies unaccus
tomed to such responsibiUties ; and cited, and impressed on his hearers the
profound wisdom of. Bacon's well-known words — " It is good that men
in their innovations should follow the example of time itself, which,
indeed, innovateth greatly but quietly, and by degrees scarce to be per
ceived ; it is good also not to try experiments unless the necessity be
urgent, or the utiUty evident ; and well to beware that it be the refor
mation that draweth on the change, and not the desire of change that
pretendeth the reformation," (See Charge, pubUshed in Dublin, 1869,
p, 17,)

1869-1871] AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. 283
to ecclesiastical affairs, and which also contained clauses
designed to regulate the proceedings of these bodies.
The Constitution having been subsequently amended,
its provisions will be stated, not exactly as they were
then expressed, but as they now (1886) stand.*
The Constitution deals with the Synods which were
to represent the Church, the persons entitled to elect
members to sit in them, and the qualifications of the
persons who might be elected ; also with their powers
and duties. It provides for the episcopal, parochial,
and cathedral organization ; for the construction of
tribunals; and for the frame of the Church Represen
tative Body — the institution which, under the Church
Act, was to receive and hold the property of the Church.
But its legislation upon these subjects is preceded by
a Preface of supreme importance, which it is proper first
to notice. This Preface is to the following effect: — It com
mences by affirming " That the Church of Ireland
doth accept and believe the Canonical Scriptures of
the Old and New Testament, as given by inspiration
and as containing all things necessary to salvation ;
and doth continue to profess the faith of Christ as
professed by the primitive Church ; " it then proceeds to
state that "the Church of Ireland will continue to ad
minister the doctrine and sacraments, and discipline
of Christ, as the Lord hath commanded ; and will
maintain inviolate the three orders of bishops, priests,
* The Journal of the Convention was published after it was dissolved.
A preface to it states the events {i.e. the meeting of Convocation, and of
the Lay Conference and the preUminary proceedings that have been
referred to) which preceded the Convention.

284 AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XIX.
and deacons ; and that as a reformed and Protestant
Church it re-affirms its constant witness against all
those innovations in doctrine and worship, whereby
the primitive faith hath been from time to time de
faced or overlaid, and which at the Reformation this
Church did disown and reject." It then proceeds to
express the approval by the Church of " The Book of
the Articles of Religion, commonly called the Thirty-nine
Articles, which had been accepted by the bishops and
clergy of Ireland, in the Synod holden in Dublin in
1634;" and also of ^^ The Book of Common Prayer, and
the form and manner of ordaining bishops, priests, and
deacons, which had been approved in the Synod holden
in Dublin, a.d. 1662."* This is followed by a decla-
tion that the Church will maintain communion with the
sister Church of England, and with all other Christian
Churches agreeing in the principles of the declaration ;
and will forward, so far as in it lieth, quietness, peace,
and love among all Christian people. A general Synod,
consisting of the archbishops and bishops, and of re
presentatives of the clergy and laity, is declared to be
the authority to have chief legislative power in the
Church, and such " administrative power as may be
necessary for the Church and consistent with its epis
copal constitution."
Following the declaration in the Preface, the Con
stitution provides a general Synod, composed of bishops,
clergy, and laity. This Synod consists of two Houses
— a House of Bishops, and a House of Representatives.
The House of Bishops is formed of all the archbishops

* See pp. 118, 149,

1869-1871] AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. 285
and bishops of the Church of Ireland for the time
being ; the House of Representatives of 208 represen
tatives of the clergy, and 416 representatives of the
laity. The representatives are returned from the dio
ceses in certain proportions specified in the statute, and
are elected by the diocesan Synods. The members of
the House of Representatives vote together, unless, upon
a division being called, ten members shall by a requisi
tion in writing require the votes to be taken by Orders,
when they shall be so taken; the Orders then voting
separately. Every proposed statute or canon is to be
introduced as a Bill ; and the procedure, in order that
it should become law, must be in the manner prescribed.
The bishops are to vote separately. And no question
shall be deemed to be carried unless there be in its
favour a majority of the bishops present, if they desire
to vote, and a majority of the clerical and lay repre
sentatives present voting conjointly or by Orders ; but
if a question affirmed by a majority of the clerical and
lay representatives, voting conjointly or by Orders, but
rejected by the bishops, shall be re-affirmed at the next
ordinary Session of the General Synod, by not less than
two-thirds of the clerical and lay representatives, voting
conjointly or by Orders, it shall be deemed carried,
unless it be negatived by not less than two-thirds of
the then entire existing Order of Bishops, the said two-
thirds being then present and voting, and giving their
reasons in writing. A Bill has to be read twice before
going into Committee ; then, when it has passed through
Committee, in order to become law it must be read
a third time. No modification or alteration can be
made in the articles, doctrines, rites, rubrics, or (save

286 AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XIX.
so far as was rendered necessary by the Church Act)
in the formularies of the Church, unless by a Bill.
A Bill for any such purpose must be founded upon
a resolution passed by the Synod, and no such Bill
or resolution shall be deemed to be passed except by
majorities of not less than two-thirds of each Order
of the House of Representatives present and voting.
The General Synod has power to alter existing pro
vincial and diocesan territorial arrangements, which
otherwise continue as they were.
Beside the general Synod, which legislates for the
whole Church, it is provided that each diocese, or
united diocese, shall have a Synod of its own. This
consists of the bishop, the beneficed and licensed cler
gymen of the diocese, and of laymen ; every parish
is entitled to return two laymen for each of its offi
ciating clergymen ; and the lay representatives are tO'
be elected by vestrymen registered as directed. The
cathedrals are also represented ; and, in the diocese of
Dublin, Trinity College returns members to the diocesan
Synod. In the intervals between the meetings of the dio-'
cesan Synods the affairs of the dioceses are managed by
diocesan Councils, composed of clergymen and laymen
elected by the Synods ; and over these Councils the
bishops of the dioceses respectively preside.
Vestries composed of persons possessing certain qua
lifications prescribed by the Constitution meet annually,
and elect churchwardens, and also a certain number
of " select vestrymen ": the latter during the year after
their election have the control of parochial funds and
contributions, and out of these provide the requisites

1869-1871] AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT, 287
for divine service, and defray the expense of keeping
the church buildings in repair.
The regulations in reference to appointments to arch
bishoprics, bishoprics, and benefices upon vacancies, are
as follows : — The archbishops and bishops (except in
the instance of the archbishopric of Armagh) are elected
by the diocese, or united dioceses (as the case may be)
then to be filled, the voting being conducted according
to prescribed rules. In the case of Armagh, upon va
cancy the Synods of Armagh and Clogher elect an ad
interim bishop. The bishops and the person chosen for
this office then elect one of themselves to be Archbishop
of Armagh. If the ad interim bishop is not selected, he
takes the place of the bishop who is preferred. The
incumbents of benefices are elected by Boards, each
composed of the following persons, viz. : — Three lay
men, elected by the vestry of the vacant parish, termed
parochial nominators ; two clergymen and one layman,
elected by the diocesan Synod, termed the diocesan no^
minators ; and the bishop of the diocese, who presides.
The tribunals are a Diocesan Court and an Appellate
Court, called the Court of the General Synod. The
former Court is composed of the bishop of the diocese,
with his chancellor (who must be a barrister of ten
years' standing) as assessor, of a clergyman, and of a
layman, the two latter selected by rotation from a list
of three clergymen and three laymen chosen by the
diocesan Synod. The Court of the general Synod is
composed of some of the bishops, and of a certain
number of laymen, who hold, or have held, certain
judicial offices, and who are elected by the general
Synod to be members of the Court.

288 AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XIX.
The provisions as to the Representative Body enact
that it is to be composed of three classes — (1) the ex-
officio ; (2) the elected ; (3) the co-opted. The ex-officio
are the archbishops and the bishops ; the elected are
representatives from the dioceses, or united dioceses,
chosen by theii- Synods (one clergyman and two lay
men by each) ; the third class are persons co-opted by
the other members of the body. The number of the
ex-officio members is thirteen ; of the elected, thirty-
six ; of the co-opted, twelve. Rules are laid down to
define the powers of the corporation and to guide them
in the management of the property vested in them.
Before the Convention had finally concluded its
sittings, a Charter, dated 19th October, 1870, incor
porating the Representative Church Body in accordance
with the provisions contained in the Constitution, was
granted by the Queen.
By the enactment of a Constitution, the continuance
of the Church as an ecclesiastical organization was en
sured ; and by the incorporation of the Representative
Church Body all difficulties in the way of the ma
nagement and preservation of the property which,
either under the Church Act it then received, or from
donations and contributions it might afterwards receive,
were removed.
As the enactments of the Convention are not final,
as they are necessarily liable to be altered from time to
time by the supreme legislative authority, that is by
the general Synod, the provisions in relation to this as
sembly must be deemed to be of paramount importance.
If they are examined, they will be found to combine in
a remarkable manner elements which conduce both to

1869-1871] AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. 289-
progress and permanence — to be at once liberal and
conservative. The former results are ensured by the
representative character of the Synod ; and the latter
by the vote by Orders, by the proportion of each Order
which, when the vote is taken by Orders, is required
in order to enable any alteration in the articles, doc
trines, and formularies of the Church to be made, and
by the ultimate veto given under certain conditions to
the House of Bishops.

u

290 AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XX.

CHAPTER XX.
[1871-1885].
WHEN a supreme legislative authority over the
affairs of the Church had been constituted, and
a corporate body to hold its property and attend to its
pecuniary interests had been formed, the matters which
first claimed their attention were connected with the
interests of the clergy in the emoluments of their be
nefices, and the provisions of the Church Act in re
ference to them.
The Hfe estates of ecclesiastical persons were by
the Act preserved in the case of their lands, and
compensated for in the case of the tithe rentcharges
by equivalent annuities. In connexion with their life
interests in these annuities and in lands, it was pro
vided that they might be commuted in the following
manner: . . . The capitalized value of the incomes
of ecclesiastical persons might, with the consent of the
Representative Body and of the clergy, be paid over to
the Representative Body, subject to, and charged with,
the payment to the commuting clergy of their incomes
for their lives. And as this proceeding would only
have vested in the Representative Body the exact value
of the annuities which they were in return to pay,
it was, with a view to their safety in making such an

1871-1885] AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. 291
arrangement, further provided that in all dioceses where
three-fourths of the ecclesiastical persons should agree
to commute, an addition of twelve pounds in the
hundred was to be made to the commutation money.
The power conferred by these provisions being by
the members of the Representative Body thought to
be beneficial to the interests of the Church, as tending
to promote the union and mutual co-operation of its
members, rules were made by them to enable and en
courage commutation. The rules were received with
general approval ; and ultimately the bishops and clergy
(with only a few exceptions) commuted. The result
has been that the Commissioners, in whom the property
of the disestablished Church had been vested, in obe
dience to the Act of Parliament, have paid over to the
Representative Body the capital sum of £7,581,470,
charged with annuities to the amount of £596,751
yearly. The Representative Body were thus possessed of a
very large capital sum ; and by means of the annuities,
which they had to pay out of it, they were enabled to
provide for spiritual duties in the parishes, so long as
the clergy who were in office at the date of disestab
lishment should live. After their deaths there would be
no resource except voluntary contribution. The needs
of the existing generation were provided for without
calling upon it ; future generations would have to bear
without assistance the burden of supporting their own
ministers. Under these circumstances it seemed just to ask
those who had the advantage of an immediate pro
vision for their parishes to contribute towards a future
U 2

292 AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT; [Chap. XX.
endowment for the Church ; and the amount in the
hands of the Representative Body afforded an opportu
nity for accomplishing this in an effectual manner. If
subscriptions were during the lives of the commuting
clergy sent to the Representative Body, the annual di
minution of the fund from which their annuities had
to be met might be lessened, and a considerable por
tion of the capital could be saved for the future.
Accordingly, in order to attain this end, the Repre
sentative Body entered into arrangements with all the
dioceses, in pursuance of wliich immediate annual pay
ments were to be made to them by the parishes, and
they in return were to undertake to pay, according as
vacancies occurred among the existing incumbents, a
proportion of the incomes of the clergymen who might
be appointed to succeed.
Still further to assist the accumulation of some en
dowment for the future, the Representative Body and
the General Synod took advantage of another power con
tained in the Church Act, whereby the Representative
Body was enabled to make terms with the commuting
clergy in respect of their annuities ; and they agreed
that such of these clergy as desired to retire from the
discharge of duty should receive a proportion of what
ever then remained of the capital representing their
annuities — the proportion being regulated by a fixed
scale according to their ages.
These measures of the Representative Body have
been attended with considerable success. In the period
which has elapsed since disestablishment a very large
amount of annual subscriptions has been received ; and
composition (as the division of the capitalized value of

. 1871-1885] AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. 293
annuities payable to the clergy between them and the
Representative Body is called) has resulted in profit.
It is, however, not merely in the arrangements con
nected with commutation and composition that the Re
presentative Body have acted with judgment. Their
general administration of the property of the Church
has been most skilful. And their exertions to advance
its interests have been zealously seconded by the laity
generally. Much has been received from donations and
bequests. Still, however, the great difficulty in the
way of maintaining the clergy remains, that in a very
large, if not the larger, part of the country, the numbers
professing to be in communion with the Church are few,
and on this account are often unable to supply the con
tributions which, if the parochial system is to be upheld,
are required.
Beside the duties devolving upon the Representa
tive Body that have been adverted to, they were
empowered to purchase the houses of residence and
portions of the demesne and glebe lands attached to
them. The Act fixed the price to be paid for the
houses, gardens, and curtilages, but left that which
was to be paid for the lands to be settled by agreement.
The Representative Body acted upon this power, and
invested part of the funds in their hands in purchasing
the houses and portions of the adjoining lands.
Much of the property in the hands of the Repre
sentative Body is impressed with peculiar trusts and
obligations, either under the provisions of the Church
Act or the directions of those who have bestowed it.
What is not bound by trusts is subject to the control
of the General Synod.

294 AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XX.
The General Synod and the Diocesan Synods meet
yearly. The latter also, whenever vacancies occur
in the Episcopal Bench, assemble to elect the future
bishops. Of the present Bench seven were consecrated
since disestablishment.*
In the organization of the Church there have been
changes. Some parishes have been united, and the
boundaries of others have been altered. The number of
benefices has been diminished. In the case of the Epis
copate there has been an addition of one bishop. The
diocese of Clogher, which at the period of disestablish
ment was united to Armagh, having an unusually large
number of members of the Church, has been again
constituted a separate bishopric.
Of the legislation of the General Synod since
disestablishment some enactments in relation to the
Prayer Book, services for public worship, and formu
laries of the Church, are of importance. The Church
Act left in force the then existing Articles, discipline,
rules, rites, and doctrines of the Church, but gave
the Church assembled in Synod power to modify and
alter them. Propositions were therefore brought for
ward on several occasions in the General Synod in
reference to these subjects, which led to a revision of
the Prayer Book and of the services. A code of Con-

* The names of the Bishops from a.d. 1535 to 1841, according to their
succession in the several Sees, is given by Bishop Mant in his History ;
from A.D. 1535 to the abdication of James II. , in a Table in the Appendix
to vol. i. ; and from the abdication of James II. to November, 1840, in
another Table in the Appendix to vol. ii. The appointments from the
latter period to the present time will be found in Note GG of the
Appendix to th« present treatise.

1871-1885] AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. 295
stitutions and Canons, in many respects substantially
new, was previously framed.
The Constitutions and Canons commence by enact
ing the forms of liturgy and of ordination to be used.
The liturgy is to be the liturgy or divine service which
is comprised in the Book of Common Prayer and ad
ministration of the sacraments, and ordination is to be
according to the forms in the book of ordering bishops,
priests, and deacons. In case other forms may be
prescribed by the lawful authority of the Church of
Ireland, they also are to be in force. The canons en
join that " the Lord's day, commonly called Sunday,"
shall be duly observed " according to God's holy will
and pleasure, and the order of this Church." Holy-
days authorized by the Church are also to be ob
served. Directions are given for the celebration of di
vine service. The dress to be worn by the bishops and
clergy when engaged in the public ministration of the
services of the Church is to be — for the bishops the
customary ecclesiastical apparel of their Order ; for the
clergy a plain white surplice with sleeves ; but bands
may be worn, and upon the surplice the customary
scarf of plain black silk, and the hoods representing
university degrees are aUowed. When preaching, the
clergy may wear a black gown. Questions relating to
dress are to be decided by the Ordinary, with an ap
peal to the " Court of the General Synod." The offici
ating minister is to speak audibly, and when offering
up public prayer he is not to turn his back to the
congregation : when saying the prayer of consecration
in the Communion Service he is to stand at the north
side of the table, by which it is explained is to be un-

¦,296 AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XX.
¦derstood that side or end of the table which in churches
lying east and west is towards the north. No minister
or other person during the time of divine service shall
make the sign of the cross, save where prescribed in
the Rubric ; nor shall he bow nor do any other act of
obeisance to the Lord's Table or to anything there or
thereon : no bell shall be rung during the time of divine
service. The Ordinary may prohibit in the conduct of
public worship any practice not enjoined in the Book of
Common Prayer or in any Rubric or Canon enacted by
lawful authority of the Church of Ireland. When the
congregation consists wholly, or in part, of Irish-speak
ing people, the minister may use such portions of the
service in the Irish tongue, and at such times, as the
Ordinary shall direct. Directions are given for the
clergy as to preaching, catechizing, obeying calls to
christen or bury, solemnizing marriages, confirmation,
and celebration of the Communion. The duties of Arch
deacons, the qualifications and conditions required be
fore admission to Holy Orders, are prescribed. The
residence of incumbents is ordered, with, however, some
exceptions, which are strictly defined. Power to deal
with cases of negligence is given to the Bishops, and
regulations affecting the conduct of clerical persons are
made. The Communion Table is to be of wood, and to
have such decent covering as the Ordinary shall approve;
no lights are to be upon it or in the church, except when
necessary for the purpose of giving light. No cross,
ornamental or otherwise, is to be on the Communion
Table, or on the covering thereof ; nor shall a cross
be erected or depicted on the wall or other structure
behind the Communion Table. In the administration

1871-1885] AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. 297
of the Lord's Supper any elevation of the paten, or cup,
beyond what is necessary for taking the same into the
hands of the officiating minister, the use of wine mixed
with water, or of waferbread, and all acts, words, or
naments, or ceremonies other than those prescribed by
the order in the Prayer Book, are prohibited. The use of
incense, the carrying of crosses, banners, pictures, in any
religious service or ceremonial, also processions through
the church or churchyard in connexion with such ser
vices, are forbidden. No change is to be made in the
structure, ornaments, or monuments of any church with
out the consent of the incumbent and select vestry, and
the approval of the Ordinary. The du.ties of church
wardens and of the select vestry are prescribed. The
authorities to construe and enforce obedience to the
several canons are defined. In cases left to the decision
of the Ordinary, any person aggrieved by his decision,
or by his refusal to hear and determine the matter, may
appeal to the Diocesan Court, and from it to the Court
of the General Synod. Finally, the penalties which
may be inflicted for wilful disobedience of the laws
or canons of the Church, by persons holding office, are
decreed.* In 1878 a revised Prayer Book was published by
authority of the General Synod of the Church of Ire
land. It contained all alterations in the rubrics, ser
vices, and formularies which, down to that period, had
received the sanction of the General Synod. Its use
has been since that time enforced in the case of clergy-

* Additional canons in relation to the admission of intending commu
nicants to the Lord's Supper were added in 1877.

298 AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XX.
men who, subsequently to the disestablishment of the
Church, have been ordained, or have accepted a new
appointment, or have by any other act become legally
bound to obey the laws and canons of the Church.
In a Preface prefixed to the Prayer Book the cir
cumstances which led to its revision are explained. Some
changes in rubrics and services were indispensable by
reason of the altered position of the Church consequent
upon its disestablishment. Many desired that occasion
should be taken to make a fiUl review of the forms then
in use. This suggestion, the Preface states, was the more
readily acceded to, because it was perceived " that all
men on all sides professed their love and reverence for
the Book of Common Prayer in its main substance and
chief parts, and confessed that it contained the true doc
trine of Christ, and a pure manner and order of divine
service, according to the Holy Scriptures and the prac
tice of the Primitive Church ; and that what was sought
by those who desired such a review was not any change
in the whole tenor or structure of the book, but the
more clear deduction of what they took to be its true
meaning, and the removing of certain expressions here
and there which they judged open to mistake or per
version." In order to guard against the supposition that either
the fact of revision or the actual changes made implied
any censure upon the former Prayer Book, the Preface
points out that in the Convention of 1870 the book, as
then in use, had been approved ; also there is inserted
an express disclaimer of any intention to suggest that,
when rightly understood and equitably construed, it
contained anything contrary to the Scriptures.

1871-1885] AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. 299
With respect to the reasons for the changes con
tained in the revised Prayer Book the preface states
that they will for the most part appear upon a compari
son of the two books. In some instances, however,
" a further explanation why certain things have been
altered and others retained" was deemecj advisable, and
has been given. The instances are the services for the
Holy Communion and for Baptism, the office for the
Visitation of the Sick, the form of Ordination for
Priests, the Athanasian Creed, and the Lectionary.
After stating what had been done, or deliberately left
undone, in connexion with these subjects, the Preface
ends with an admonition addressed to all who, for dif
ferent and, it might be, opposite reasons, should object
to the revision as it had been accomplished : . . . " And
now (it proceeds) if some shall complain that these
changes are not enough, and that we should have taken
this opportunity of making this book as perfect in all
respects as they think it should be made, or if others
shall say that these changes have been unnecessary or
excessive, and that what was already excellent has been
impaired by doing that which, in their opinion, might
well have been left undone, let them, on the one side
and the other, consider that men's judgments of per
fection are very various, and that what is imperfect,
with peace, is often better than what is otherwise more
excellent, without it."
With respect to the service for the Holy Communion,
the Preface observes that some were at first earnest for
the removal of expressions which they thought might
lend a pretext for the teaching of doctrine concerning
the presence of Christ in that sacrament repugnant to

300 AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XX.
what was set forth in the Articles of religion ; but that
there had not been found in the formularies any just
warrant for such teaching, and that therefore, in this
behalf, no other change was made than to add to the
Catechism one question, with an answer, taken out of
the Twenty-eighth of the Articles.* In connexion with
other errors in relation to this sacrament it is then
added that canons (of which mention has been already
made) were framed to prohibit such acts and gestures
as might be grounded upon or lead to them ; and that
by the note which since the revision of Charles II.
had been at the end of the Communion Service, and
which was to be retained in the revised book, it is
declared that the posture of kneeling, prescribed for
all communicants, is not appointed for any purpose of
adoration. With respect to the " formularies relating to bap
tism " the Preface states that no substantial change had
been made. At the same time it is declared that the
liberty of expounding these formularies, hitherto al
lowed by the general practice of the Church, is recog
nized ; and that, as concerning those points whereupon
such liberty has been allowed, no minister of the Church
is required to hold or teach any doctrine which has not
been clearly determined by the Articles of religion.
With respect to the office for Visitation of the Sick,
it is observed that the special absolution in this office

* The question and answer introduced in the Catechism are : —
Question. — After what manner are the Body and Blood of Christ
taken and received in the Lord's Supper ?
Answer. — Only after a heavenly and spiritual manner ; and the mean
whereby they arc taken and received is Faith.

1871-1885] AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. 801
has been the cause of offence to many ; and that as it is
a form unknown to the Church in ancient times ; and
as no adequate ground for its retention was seen, and
there was no ground for asserting that its removal would
make any change in the doctrine of the Church, it was
deemed fitting that in the special cases contemplated
in this office, and in that for the Visitation of Pri
soners, absolution should be pronounced to penitents
in the form appointed in the office for the Holy Com
munion.* With respect to "the formula for Ordination of
Priests," the Preface states that no change was made :
for that, upon a full review of the formularies, it is
deemed plain that, save in the matter of ecclesiastical

' * The form of Absolution formerly in the office for the Visitation of
the Sick, and now omitted, was in the foUowing words : . . , " Our Lord
Jesus Christ, who hath left power to His Church to absolve all sinners
who truly repent and believe in Him, of His great mercy forgive thee
thine offences ; and by His authority committed to me, I absolve thee
from all thy sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Ghost." . . . This form with slight variations followed one in
the Penitential of Egbert, Archbishop of York, in the eighth century
(Wheatly On the Book of Common Prayer).
The form substituted is as follows : . . . " Almighty God, our hea
venly Father, who of His great mercy hath promised forgiveness of sins
to aU them that with hearty repentance and true faith turn unto Him ;
have mercy upon thee : pardon and deUver thee from all thy sins : con
firm and strengthen thee in all goodness : and bring thee to everlasting
lite : through Jesus Christ our Lord,"
With both may be compared the form which Cardinal Newman in
his Apologia states to be that in use in the Eoman Catholic Church : , . .
" Dominus noster Jesus Christus te absolvat : et ego auctoritate Ipsius te
absolve, ab omni vinculo excommunicationis et interdicti, in quantum
possum et tu indiges. Deinde ego te absolve a peccatis tuis, in nomine
Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti."

302 AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XX.
censures, no power or authority is by them ascribed to
the Church or any of its ministers in respect of for
giveness of sins after baptism, other than that of declar
ing and pronouncing on God's part remission of sins to
all that are truly penitent, to the quieting of their con
science, and the removal of all doubt and scruple ; that
nowhere is it taught that confession to, or absolution by,
a priest are any conditions of God's pardon : but, on the
contrary, it is fully taught that all Christians who sin
cerely repent, and unfeignedly believe the Gospel,
may draw nigh as worthy communicants to the Lord's
Table, without any such confession or absolution: which
comfortable doctrine of God's free forgiveness of sin is,
it is added, more largely set forth in the Homily " of
Repentance," and in that "of the Salvation of Man
kind." With reference to the Athanasian Creed, it is pointed
out that the rubric directing its use on certain days
has been removed ; but that, in so doing, the Church
has not withdrawn its witness, as expressed in the Ar
ticles of religion, to the truth of the articles of the
Christian Faith therein contained.
As to the Lectionary, it is said, the English table of
lessons was retained, with the exception that lessons
from the Apocryphal Scriptures were omitted, and that
the whole, instead of a part, of the Revelation of St.
John was included in it.
The changes in the former Prayer Book, which are
noticed in the Preface, seem to be those which are of
most importance. The others consist of additional
prayers and services for special occasions, and, in oc
casional instances, of amendments of the old forms.

1871-1885] AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. 803
Several rubrics are in some respects varied, and some
new rubrics are added or substituted for others.*

With the account of the proceedings of the Church
subsequent to the Irish Church Act, which has been
given in this chapter and in the chapter immediately
preceding it, I close the sketch of its history intended
to be the subject of the present treatise.
There is no doubt that by disestablishment the
Church was placed in circumstances of extreme diffi
culty. Accustomed, from the date of the Irish statute
declaring the supremacy of the Crown, to act in union
with the State, it was abruptly left to its own guidance
without control. The right to legislate for its needs, and
the authority to regulate its proceedings, became vested
in a numerous body returned by a still more numerous
constituency. The danger incident to the exercise of
power by popular assemblies was at once imminent.
There was reason to fear that change for the sake of
change might be desired ; that when it was effected
it would reflect only the theological views with which
the majority might happen to sympathize ; and that
thus the range of free thought would be narrowed.
But these evils have been avoided. The Church has,
so far, come forth in honour and safety ; it has retained
unity within itself and continuity with the past ; it is
still substantially the same in polity, in doctrine, in
ritual, as it formerly was. It has not parted with

* The changes made in the Prayer Book, as they appear in the re
vised Prayer Book pubUshed under the authority of the General Synod,
are enumerated at more length in the Appendix, note HH.

304 AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. [Chap. XX,
its comprehensiveness ; it permits every difference of
opinion that was formerly allowed.
For a complete estimate of the effects of disestab
lishment upon its welfare the time has not arrived.
The Church is not as yet cast upon its own resources.
When separated from the State it still retained in its
service a clergy of high excellence, educated and pious,
bound, unless released by its own permission, to dis
charge for their lives their former duties. Its organi
zation has been, and is still, maintained largely by
their assistance; and its standard of theological teach
ing continues to be influenced by their example.
If it is too soon to forecast the effect of disestablish
ment upon the internal prosperity of the Church, it is
certainly also too soon to judge of its effect upon other
religious denominations. No substantial alteration has
taken place in the relative numerical proportions of
Roman Catholics, Protestant Episcopalians, and Pres
byterians. Some provisions in the constitution of the
Church as it existed before disestablishment, which
were objected to by Protestant Nonconformists, and
which therefore furnished reasons for their separation
from it, have been removed. Thus the Church can no
longer be charged with being controlled and secularized
by the State ; it is free and self-governed ; appoint
ments to bishoprics and benefices are not now in the
power of the Crown ; Bishops are elected by the Diocesan
Synods, and incumbents of benefices by Boards ; and of
these bodies, both presbyters and laymen are, in addition
to the Bishop of the diocese, members. In place of the
coercive jurisdiction of ecclesiastical courts, formerly
complained of, tribunals have been substituted which

1871-1885] AFTEE DISESTABLISHMENT. 305
found themselves upon consent and voluntary submis
sion. Yet it cannot be said that there is as yet ap
parent any nearer approach to union among Protestant
ecclesiastical systems in Ireland ; nor can such a result
be predicted as likely to occur. Religious divisions
survive their causes, and continue to exist long after
the original grounds of difference disappear.

X

APPENDIX.

NOTES AND ILLUSTEATIONS.
I HAVE thought it better to defer to an Appendix the consideration
of some subjects which, if introduced in the narrative, would have
unduly interrupted its course. To the notes requisite for this purpose
I have added others containing citations from original authorities
which have ceased to be reprinted. For a correct estimate of trans
actions of remote date, we must note not only the fact, but the descrip
tion of it, by those who record it — not only what is narrated, but how
it is narrated.

Note A.
The account given of the events connected with the arrival of Arch
bishop Browne in Ireland, and the introduction there by him of the
principles of the Eeformation, is (as has been mentioned in the note
to page 18) based principaUy upon a letter of the Archbishop, which
will be found extracted in the next note, and upon a Life of Archbishop
Browne, written by Eobert Ware, son of Sir James Ware. Although
Sir James Ware's Annals comprise this period, they do not mention-
the proceedings in which Archbishop Browne was concerned. Eobert
Ware's Life is, however, partly founded upon papers which came to
him from his father. (See p. 150 of the Dublin edition of Sir James
Ware's Works, 1706.) There is another historian, who also treats of
this period. Sir Eichard Cox, Lord Chancellor of Ireland in the reign
of Queen Anne, author of Hibernia Anglicana. He, however, seems
to have derived his information in reference to this time from the two
Wares. The Annals of the Four MriRter.i do not allude to Archbishop
X 2

808 APPENDIX. [Note A.
Browne. They refer in general terms to a law having been intro
duced under Henry VIII. : to the fact that opposition to the Pope
arose ; that new laws were made by the King and Council [Parlia
ment (?)] ; to the monastic orders having been expeUed from their resi
dences ; and to the destruction of the images which had been in the
churches. It may be convenient to mention the editions from which Ware
and other writers to whom there has been occasion frequently to refer
in the present treatise are cited. Ware is cited from the Dublin
edition of 1705, or Harris's edition of 1739, 1745, also published in
Dublin. The works of Archbishop Ussher are cited from the edition
in seventeen volumes, published by the University of Dublin (1847-
1864). The life of Archbishop Ussher referred to is that by Eev. Dr.
Elrington, contained in the same edition. The edition of Leland's
History of Ireland used is the Dublin, in three volumes, octavo (1774) ;
it is cited simply as " Leland." The edition of Swift's works cited is
that edited by Sir Walter Scott, published in 1814. HaUam's Con
stitutional History is cited from the fourth edition ; Froude's History
of England from the edition in twelve volumes (1856-1870) ; his
English in Ireland in the Eighteenth Century, from the edition of
1872. Sir John Davis's Discovery, &c., is cited from the DubUn
edition, 1705 ; and Carte's Life of Ormonde, from the Clarendon
Press edition. Calendars of the Patent and Close Eolls in Chancery in
Ireland have been published for the reigns of Henry VIIL, Edward,
Mary, and Elizabeth. They were edited by Mr. Morrin, and are
therefore referred to simply as " Morrin." The English State Papers
were published by Eoyal Commission (1830-1852) ; they were edited
by Mr. Lemon ; vols. ii. and iii. (Part III.) relate to Ireland. There
is also a Calendar of other State Papers relating to Ireland, marked by
the years from 1509 to 1578. These are aU referred to as " State
Papers," or simply with the letters " S. P." Besides, there is also a
Calendar of the Manuscripts of Sir George Carew, which are preserved
in the Ubrary at Lambeth Palace ; this is edited by Mr. Brewer. It
is cited as " Carew MSS." Original Letters, &c., edited by E. P. Shirley
(1851), are cited as " Shirley."

Note B.] APPENDIX. 309

Note B.
The letter of Archbishop Browne to Thomas CromweU, then Lord
Privy Seal, written in September, 1535 (which is referred to in the
previous note, A, and at page 18, supra), is reported by Eobert Ware,
in the Life of Archbishop Brotvne, ia the foUowing words : —
" Mt most Honoubed Loed, — Your most humble servant receiving
your mandate, as one of his Highness's Commissioners, hath endea,
voured almost to the danger and hazard of this temporal life, to pro
cure the nobility and gentry of this nation to due obedience, in owning
of his Highness their supreme head as weU spiritual as temporal, and
do find much oppugning therein, especiaUy by my brother Ardmagh,
who hath been the main oppugner ; and so hath withdrawn most of
his suffragans and clergy within his See and jurisdiction : he made a
speech to them, laying a curse on the people whosoever should own
his Highness's Supremacy : saying that this isle, as it is ia their Irish
Chronicles, insula sacra, belongs to none but to the Bishop of Eome,
and that it was the Bishop of Eome's predecessors gave it to the King's
ancestors. There be two messengers by the priests of Ardmagh and
by that Archbishop, now lately sent to the Bishop of Eome. Your
Lordship may inform his Highness that it is convenient to caU a Par
Uament ia this nation to pass the Supremacy by Act ; for they do not
much matter his Highness's Commission which your Lordship sent
us over. This island hath been for a long time held in ignorance by
the Eomish Orders : and as for their secular orders, they be in a
manner as ignorant as the people, being not able to say Mass, or pro
nounce the words, they not knowing what they themselves say ia the
Eoman tongue. The common people of this isle are more zealous in
their bUndness than the Saints and Martyrs were in the truth at the
beginning of the Gospel. I send to you, my very good Lord, these
things, that your Lordship and his Highness may consult what is to be
done. It is feared O'Neal wiU be ordered by the Bishop of Eome to
oppose your Lordship's order from the King's Highness ; for the na
tives are much in numbers within his power. I do pray the Lord
Christ to defend your Lordship from your enemies. Dublin, 4 Kalend,
Septembris, 1535."

310 APPENDIX. [Note C.

Note C.
Sir John Davis says that before 33 Hen VIII. there were twelVe
counties beside the Liberty of Tipperary (see the next note, D) ; but
in his treatise {Discovery, &c., p. 27) he makes Tipperary one of the
twelve. He therefore seems to treat " the Liberty " as being, for par
liamentary purposes, in addition to the county. Davis takes no noticb
of counties formed in Ulster under Edward I., which were afterwards,
in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, united and formed into the modern
county of Antrim, and some into the modern county of Down. These i
sent no members to Parliament in the reign of Henry VIII.
In 1556, under the Act 8 & 4 Philip and Mary, cap. 2, the King's
County and Queen's County were formed (see p. 46). In 1565, under
the same Act of Philip and Mary, but in the reign of EUzabeth, and
by Sir Henry Sidney, then Lord Deputy, were formed the counties of
Longford and Clare (the last from a territory before reputed in Mun
ster, which he transferred to Connaught), Galway, Sligo, Mayo and
Eoscommon. Also in the reign of EUzabeth were formed by Sir John
Perrot, L.D., in 1583, Leitrim, and in 1584, Armagh, Monaghan,
Tyrone, Coleraine or Derry, Donegal, Fermanagh, Cavan (all under
11 EUz., sess. 8, cap. 9) ; also Down and Antrim were finaUy defined
and constituted by Perrot. In 1605, in the reign of James I., under
the Act 11 Eliz., Wicklow was formed by Sir Arthur Chichester, L.D.

Note D.
The account which I have given of the Parliament of Ireland in
the reign of Henry VIII. foUows that given by Sir John Davis, when
Speaker of the Irish House of Commons, in his Address to the then
Deputy, Sir Arthur Chichester (see page 96, supra). It is printed by
Leland (vol. U., App.), fr-om the Journals of the House of Commons.
On the subject of the admission of the natives to the House of Com
mons, Davis says : . . . " Before the 33 year of King H. 8, wee do
not finde any to have had place in Parliament, but the English of
blond, or EngUsh of birth onlye ; for the mere Irish in those days
were never admitted, as well because their countryes lying out of the
lymittes of countyes, could send noe knights, and having neither

Note D.] APPENDIX. 311
cittyes nor boroughs in them, could send noe burgesses to the parlia-
mente : besides that the State did not hold them fit to be trusted with
tbe oouncell of the realm." ... As to the number of members of the
House of Commons, he says : — " Before the 34 year of H. 8, when Meath
was divided there were noe more but twelve countyes in Irelande besides
the libertye of Tipperary ; and the number of knights must needs have
been fewe ; and since the antient cittyes were but foure, and the bor
oughs which sent burgesses not above thirtye, the entire bodye of the
whole house of commons could not then consist of one hundred per
sons ; and though Queene Mary did add twoe shires, and Queene EU
zabeth seaventeene more, to increase the number of knightes in that
house, yet aU did not sonde knightes to the parliament, for the remote
shires of Ulster returned none at all." ... As to the Lords temporal,
he says: — "Though they are yet but fewe, yet was the number lesse
before Kinge H. 8 was stiled Kinge of Ireland, for since that tyme
divers of the Irish nobiUitye, and some descended of EngUsh race, have
been created both earles and barons. And lastly, for the bishops and
archbishops, though their number was greater that nowe it is, in re
spect of the divers unions made of later years, yet such as were resident
ia the mere Irish countryes, and did not acknowledge the Kinge to be
their patron, were never summoned to any parliament."
Davis in this Address does not mention Abbots and Priors as hav
ing ever had seats in the House of Lords ; but Sir James Ware states
that fourteen Abbots and ten Priors were entitled to be summoned ;
and he enumerates the names of the Eeligious Houses over which
these abbots and priors presided. (See Antiquities, ch. 26, p. 116, and
Annals, a.d. 1539, p. 100 : Dublin edition, 1705.)
In Bagwell's Ireland Under the Tudors — -a work which evidences
much research, and is written with an impartiality not often to be
found in Irish histories — a chapter is devoted to considering the Irish
Parliament before Henry VIII. When parliamentary representation
began to take shape ia England, it was, he says, soon imitated in Ire
land. But previously John had asked an aid from the archbishops,
bishops, abbots, priors, earls, barons, justices, sheriffs, knights, citizens,
burgesses, and freeholders of Ireland : " and in 1228 Henry III. ordered
his justiciary to convoke the archbishops, bishops, abbots, priors, earls
and barons, knights and freeholders, and the bailiffs of every county,
and to read Magna Charta to them." (Vol. i. p. 94.)

312 APPENDIX. [Note E.

Note E.
The speech (mentioned at page 21) which Archbishop Browne is
reported to have delivered in the Irish House of Lords, when he advo
cated before that assembly the Supremacy Act, is stated in Ware'^
Life of Browne. The report seems to be a summary. It is ia thb
foUowing words : ... " My Lords and Gentry of this his Majesties
realm of Ireland, Behold your obedience to your King is the observing
of your God and Saviour Christ ; for He, that High Priest of our souls,'
paid tribute to Cesar (though no Christian) ; greater honour surely is
due to your Prince his Highness the King, and a Christian one : Eome
and her Bishops in the Father's days acknowledged Emperors, Kings
and Princes to be supreme over their dominions, nay, Christ's own
Vicars ; and it is much to the Bishop of Eome's shame, to deny what
their precedent Bishops owned ; therefore his Highness claims but
what he can justifie the Bishop Eleutherius gave to Lucius the first
Christian King of the Britains ; so that I shaU without scrupling vote
his Highness King Henry my supreme over ecclesiastical matters as
well as temporal, and Head thereof, even of both isles England and
Ireland, and that without guilt of conscience or sin to God ; and he
who wiU not pass this Act, as I do, is no true subject to his Highness."
The story, alluded to in this speech, of a correspondence between
Lucius, or more properly Llewer Mawr, who was said to have been
in the second century a King of the Britons, and Eleutherius, then
Bishop of Eome, is considered legendary. The genuineness of the
letter to Eleutherius which is attributed to Lucius, is disproved by
internal evidence. (See Canon Perry's History of the English Church,
1st ser., p. 3.) In the sixteenth century it seems to have been reputed
of authority. Dr. Eeeves (who while this work was passing through the press,
has become Bishop of Down, &c.), in addition to other valuable as
sistance contributed by him to its preparation, has caUed my attention
to a citation of this correspondence by another Irish bishop of much
later date than Browne. When Hampton, afterwards Archbishop of
Armagh in the reign of James I., preached at Glasgow the sermon
mentioned at page 106, supra, he referred to it, and pointed out that
according to Eleutherius a King is God's lieutenant, vicar, and deputy.

NoteF.] appendix. 313
vicarius Dei, (As to this last title, see page 10, supra.) Wherefore he
argues that the King is " a mixt person," and entitled to make laws
for religion. The idea, however, that a King is a mixed person, persona mixta,
and so haviag temporal and ecclesiastical jurisdiction, did not originate
with Hampton. It will be found mentioned in a discussion in the
Year-Books (10 Hen. VIL, 18) : ... "Brian said that a sage Doctor
of Laws said one time to him that priests might be tried at common
law, ' car il dit, quod rex est persona mixta, car est persona unita
cum sacerdotibus Saint EgUse.' " (And see Bishop StiUingfleet's Works,
vol. Ui. p. 782.)
Burnet, when commentiag on the Article which relates to the
Supremacy (XXXVII.), refers to the fictitious correspondence of Eleu
therius and Lucius ; and observing that it is probably a forgery, he
adds the just remark, that being unquestionably very old, and having
for many ages passed for true, it is, though not genuine, of value, as
showing the ideas of a remote age, "for a forgery is calculated to the
sense of the age when it is made."

Note P.
The State Paper referred to in the note (page 24), as containing
the names of the Irish chieftains and of the Anglo Irish lords (who in
effect ruled the greater part of the island), is ia the Calendar of State
Papers, Tempore, Hen. VIIL, vol. ii. p. 11. It professes to describe
" aU the noble folk, as well of the King's subjects and English rebels,
as of Irish enemies." ..." There be (it says) more than sixty counties
caUed regions in Ireland inhabited with the King's Irish enemies, some
regions as big as a shire, and some a Uttle less ; where reigneth more
than sixty chief captains (whose names and descriptions are afterwards
given), whereof some calleth themselves kings, some king's peers in
their language : some princes, some dukes, some archdukes, that liveth
only by the sword, and obeyeth no other temporal person, but only to
himself that is strong : and every of the said captains maketh war and
peace for himself, and holdeth by sword, and hath imperial jurisdic
tion within his room, and obeyeth to no other person, English nor
Irish, except only to such persons as may subdue him by the sword."

314 APPENDIX. [Note G.
Of the English noble folk the names of thirty are given, who are
described as " foUowing the same order as the Irish chiefs, and keeping
the same rule, and every of them maketh peace and war for himself,
without any licence of the King, or of any other temporal person, save
to him that is strongest and of such that may subdue them by the
sword." The effect of this subdivision of power may be seen in the constant
wars between the chiefs, as recorded in the Annals of the Four Masters,
Taking their account, Mr. Eichey has computed that between a.d. 1500
and A.D. 1534 there were, principally ia Ulster and Connaught, which
were the districts then most ovmed by the Irish, besides hostilities
against the English, which are omitted from the calculation, one hun
dred and fifteen battles and incursions for plunder ; that in the same
time, of Irish gentlemen there were one hundred and two kUled in
battle, and one hundred and sixty-eight murdered. [Lectures on Irish
History, 2nd series, p. 11.)
These constant wars creating general iasecurity, and turning the
attention of the population to martial pursuits and exercises in pre
paration for them, hindered civiUzation and improvement. They also
led to new and additional oppressive exactions being levied on agri
culture, in order thereby to maintain them. (See in Mr. BagweU's
Ireland under the Tudors, already referred to, vol. i. p. 131, an enu
meration of the taxes and impositions levied by the chieftains, EngUsh
and Irish.)

Note G.
The account of the Pale under Henry VIIL, as it is given in the
paper sent to him in 1535 (mentioned in the note to page 24), is most
unfavourable. The paper must be regarded as of high authority, for
it was prepared and subscribed by the Archbishops of Armagh and
Dublin (Cromer and Browne), by the Bishops of Meath and Kildare
(dioceses in the Pale), by some abbots and peers residing in the Pale,
and by other persons of station, and was sent to Henry, in the care of
Allen, Master of the Eolls. It describes " the great decay of this land "
(which term was then used to denote the Pale) ; that neither the
English order, tongue, nor habit has been used, nor the King's laws
obeyed above twenty mUes in compass : that the old exactions were

Note H.] APPENDIX. 315
levied on the people, and that there be other " like abuses and oppres
sions practised ; " also it relates the discouragement of the English
settlers, and the admission of the Irishry as tenant's, " which can live
hardily without bread or other good victuals ; " submitting to more
rent and other impositions than EngUsh husbandmen be able to give.
The Pale at this time extended from Dublin to Dundalk about fifty
miles to the north of Dublin ; from Dundalk to KilcuUen about
twenty miles west ; and from that round under the Wicklow mountains
to Dalkey, about eight miles south of Dublin-. At an earlier period it
had extended as far south of Dublin as Waterford.
In considering the state of society in Ireland in the reign of
Henry VIIL, even ia the Pale, it is to be noted that the first mention
of a printing-press ia Ireland is ia the next reign (Edward VI. ), when
the first prayer-book of this King and proclamations were printed for
the Government by a person named Humfrey. (See page 40, supra.)
The date at which first a Latin book is known to have been printed in
Ireland is 1626. (See Life of Ussher, p. 123, nate.) Before this date,
however, ia 1618, according to Ussher {Works, vol. xv. p. 135), the
" Company of Stationers " erected " a factory for books and a press "
ia Dublia. Ussher says they were to begin with- printing the statutes
of the reaUn, and then to come to some of his own writuigs.

Note H.
According to Ussher, about the begianiag of the twelfth century
the Eoman use for Uturgical purposes was brought into Ireland by
Gillebertus, legate from the Pope, and it was afterwards confirmed by
Malachias and Christianus, also legates. Gillebertus speaks of " diversi
et schismatici illi ordines, quibus Hibernia pene delusa est," thus
evidenciag that before him there were varieties of procedure. Of Ma
lachias, St. Bernard in his Ufe says: " Consuetudines sanctse Eomans
ecolesiffi in cunctis eoclesiis statuebat. Hinc est quod hodieque ia illis
ad boras canonicas cantatur et psalUtur juxta morem universse terrse :
nam minime id ante fiebat, ne in civitate quidem."
Christianus presided over the Council of Cashel (1172) when the rule
(cited at page 82, supi-a) was made as to omnia divina proceeding juxta
quod Anglicana observat ecclesia. This rule, with the other statutes of
that CouncU, was confirmed by the authority of King Henry II. Regia

316 APPENDIX. [Note L
sublimitatis authoritate firmata is the expression of Giraldus Cambrensis
(See Ussher's Religion prof essed ly the Ancient Irish: Works, iv. 274.
Archbishop de Loundres came over in the next century (1212).
He also was a legate. By him the collegiate church of St. Patrick,
DubUn, was erected iato a cathedral ; and it is stated that " he took
care to conform it to the statutes of Sarum Church." It is very im
probable that he would have neglected to require, or at least to en
courage, the Sarum use to be observed in Dublin, and wherever else
his jurisdiction extended.

Note I.
The account of the proceedings of the assembly of the clergy, con
vened by Sir Anthony St. Leger in 1551, is contained (as is mentioned
ia the note to page 86, supra) in Eobert Ware's Life of Archbishop
Browne ; and from the importance of the meetiag, the exact words of
it are now cited  "Before proclamations were issued out [i.e.
proclamations to bring the new English Prayer Book into use). Sir
Anthony St. Leger upon his {i. e. the King's) order caUed an assembly
of the archbishops and bishops, together with other of the then clergy
of Ireland, in which assembly he signified unto them as well His Ma
jestie's order aforesaid, as also the opinions of those bishops and clergy
of England, who had adhered unto the order, saying that it was His
Majestie's wUl and pleasure, consenting unto their serious considera
tions and opinions, then acted and agreed on in England as to ecclesi
astical matters, that the same be ia Ireland so likewise celebrated and
performed." Ware then contiaues : ..." Sir Anthony St. Leger
haviag spoken to this effect, George DowdaU, who succeeded George
Cromer in the primacy of Ardmagh, stood up, who (through his
Eomish zeal to the Pope) laboured with all his power and force to
oppose the liturgy of the Church, that it might not be read or sung
in the Church ; saying, ' then shall every iUiterate fellow read ser
vice (or mass), as he in those days termed the word service.' To
this saying of the archbishop. Sir Anthony replied, ' No ; your
Grace is mistaken, for we have too many illiterate priests amongst
us already, who neither can pronounce the Latin, nor know what it
means, no more than the common people that hear them ; but when
the people hear the liturgy in English, they and the priest will then

Note I.] APPENDIX. 817
understand what they pray for.' Upon this reply, George DowdaU
bade Sir Anthony beware of the clergie's curse. Sir Anthony made
answer, ' I fear no strange curse, so long as I have the blessing of that
Church which I beUeve to be the true one.' The archbishop again
said, ' Can there be a truer Church than the Church of St. Peter, the
Mother Church of Eome?' Sir Anthony returned this answer, 'I
thought we had been all of the Church of Christ ; for He oaUs all true
believers in Him his Church, and Himself the Head thereof.' The
archbishop repUed, ' Is not St. Peter's the Church of Christ ? ' Sir
Anthony returned the answer, ' St. Peter was a member of Christ's
Church ; but the Church was not St. Peter's ; neither was St. Peter,
but Christ the head thereof.' Then George DowdaU, the Primate of
Ardmagh, rose up, and several of the suffragan bishops under his juris
diction, saviag only Edward Staples, then Bishop of Meath, who tarried
with the rest of the clergy then assembled, on the kalends of March,
according to the old style, 1551, but if we reckon as from the Annun
ciation of Our Lady, which was the 25th of March, it was 1550. Sir
Anthony then took up the order, and held it forth to George Browne,
Archbishop of DubUn, who (standiag up) received it, sayiag, ' This
order, good brethren, is from our gracious Kiag and from the rest of
our brethren, the fathers and clergy of England, who have consulted
herein and compared the Holy Scriptures with what they have done,
unto whom I submit, as Jesus did to Csesar, in all thiags just and
lawful, makiag no question, why or wherefore, as we own him our true
and lawful King.' After this, several of the meeker, or most moderate
of the bishops and clergy of Ireland, cohered vnth George Browne,
the Archbishop of DubUn, amongst whom Edward Staples, Bishop of
Meath, who was put out from his bishopric for so doing in Queen
Mary's days, on the 29th of June, 1554 ; John Bale, who on the 2nd
of February, 1552, was consecrated Bishop of Ossory for his fidelity,
and afterwards by Queen Mary expulsed ; also Thomas Lancaster,
Bishop of KUdare, who was at the same time put from his bishopric,
with several other of the clergy, being all expulsed upon Queen Mary's
coming to the Crown."

818 APPENDIX. [Note K.

Note K.
Another matter, in respect of which it seems to be advisable to
cite the exact narrative from Eobert Ware's Life of Archbishop Browne,
is the account there given of the Commission said to have been sent
by Queen Mary " to call the Protestants in question" in Ireland, and
of the abstraction of it from the messenger at Chester. (See page 45,
supra.) It is in the following words : — " Queen Mary, towards the
end of her reign, granted a Commission to call the Protestants ia
question here ia Ireland, as weU as they had done in England ; and to
execute the same with greater force, she nominated Dr. Cole, some
time Dean of St. Paul's in London, one of the Commissioners ; and so
sent the Commission by this said doctor ; and in his journey coming to
Chester, the mayor of that city, hearing that Her Majesty was sending
Commissioners iato Ireland, and he being a churchman, waited on the
doctor, who ia discourse with the mayor took out of his cloak-bag a
leather box, and said unto him, ' Here is a Commission that shaU lash
the heretics of Ireland,' calliag the Protestants by that title. The
good woman of the house being well affected to the Protestants and to
that religion, and also having a brother named John Edmonds, a Pro
testant, and a citizen in Dublin, was much troubled at the doctor's
words ; but she, waitiag her convenient time, whilst the mayor took
leave of the doctor, and the doctor complimenting him dovm the stairs,
she opened the box and took the Commission out, and placed in lieu
thereof a pack of cards, with the knave of clubs faced uppermost, and
wrapt them up. The doctor comiag up to his chamber, suspecting
nothing of what had been done, put up his box as formerly. The next
day going to the water-side, wind and weather serving him, he saUed
towards Ireland, and landed on the 17th October, 1558, at Dublin ;
then coming to the Castle, the Lord Pitz-Walters, being at this time
Lord Deputy, sent for the doctor to come before him and the Privy
Council, who coming in, after he had made a speech relating upon
what account he came over, presented the box to the Lord Deputy,
who causing it to be opened, that the secretary might read the Com
mission, there appeared nothing save a pack of cards, with the knave
of clubs uppermost ; which not only startled the Lord Deputy and the
Council, but the doctor, who assured them he had a Commission, but

Note L.] APPENDIX. 819
knew not how it was gone. Then the Lord Deputy made answer,
' Let us have another Commission, and we will shufBe the cards in the
meanwhUe.' The doctor, being troubled in his miad, went away, and
returned into England, and coming to the Court, obtained another
Commission ; but staying for a wind at the water-side, news came to
him that the Queen was dead. Thus God preserved the Protestants
in Ireland from the persecution intended."
Ware refers to Boyle, the celebrated Earl of Cork, and Primates
Henry and James Ussher, as authorities for this story. He also says
that Queen Elizabeth gave the woman who abstracted the Commission a
pension of MiO a-year. A similar narrative will be found in Sir Eichard
Cox's History ; but it seems to be by him derived from Ware.
Among the Carew MSS. Mr. Bagwell has found a passage in
" instructions from PhUip and Mary to the Lord Deputy, 28th April,
1556," which, in addition to the circumstantiality with which the
story has been told, tends to confirm its credibility ..." Lord Cardinal
Poole, beiag sent unto us from the Pope's Holiness and the said See
Apostolic, Legate of our said realm, mindeth in brief time to despatch
into Ireland certain his Commissioners and ofBcials to visit the clergy
and other members of the said realm of Ireland." — Ireland Under the
Tudors, i. 418, note.
It will be observed that this extract tends to confirm the opinion
I have expressed at page 45, that if the Commission was sent, it ori
ginated in England, without suggestion from anyone in Ireland.

Note L.
In considering the legislation of the English Parliament as to the
supremacy in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, we must keep ia mind
(what is often overlooked) that the Acts of Henry VIII. in relation to
the subject were repealed under Queen Mary; and that neither the
Supremacy Act of Henry, nor any other of his enactments, giving the
title of " supreme head " was (with one exception) revived under Queen
Elizabeth. The exception is an Act entitled, " A BiU that Doctors
of the Civil Law, being married, may exercise ecclesiastical jurisdic
tion " (37 Hen. VIIL, chap. 17). This was probably owiag to the
Queen's objection to be called " Supreme Head." (See p. 51, supra.)

820 APPENDIX. [Note L,
There is no title in Queen Elizabeth's Acts defining the ecclesias
tical position of the Crown, except in the Oath of Supremacy, and
there the title is, " Supreme Governor of this realm, and of aU other
Her Highness's dominions and countries, as well in all spiritual or
ecclesiastical things or causes, as temporal : " but the title " supreme
head " is, nevertheless, given to the Sovereign by legal writers as a
title to which the Crown is by the common law entitled. Thus Black
stone says, "the King is considered by the laws of England as the
head and supreme governor of the National Church." — Book i. ch. 7.
Beside the support which the declaratory form of the Act of Henry
VIII. (framed not as if enacting a new law, but as if declaring an ex
isting law) gave to the idea that the common law asserted the supre
macy, there was an express decision ofthe English judges in its favour.
In Caudrey's case, reported by Lord Coke (5 Eep.) — a case which came
to be decided on the common law, not on statutable law — it was re
solved that " by the ancient laws of this realm, this kingdom of England
is an absolute empire and monarchy consisting of one head, which is
the Kiog, and of a body politic, compact and compounded of many, and
almost infinite several, and yet well-agreeing members : all which the
law divideth into two several parts, that is to say, the clergy and the
laity both of them, next and immediately under God, subject and
obedient to the head : also the head is instituted and furnished with
plenary and entire power, prerogative, and jurisdiction, to render jus
tice and right to every part and member of this body; of what estate,
degree, or caUing soever, in all causes ecclesiastical or temporal ; other
wise he should not be a head of the whole body."
The judgment in Caudrey's case professes to found itself upon a
series of authorities, commencing with the words in the laws of the
Confessor, which have been already cited (page 10, supra), which de
scribe the King as vicarius summi regis, and as ruling and defending
the Church. An argument to the same effect, and very probably fol
lowing the judgment in that case, is said to have been on one occasion
delivered in Ireland. In the reign of James I. Sir John Davis is stated
to have, at the Castle of Dublin, made a speech designed to show that
the prerogative claimed for the Crown in ecclesiastical affairs by Henry,
Edward VL, and Elizabeth, was no new thing, but "a flower ofthe
Crown from the beginning," and tUat the acts of these Sovereigns
against appeals to Eome, and in confirmation of the regaUa of the

Note L.] APPENDIX. 321
Crown, were affirmations of the common law as it had been used and
practised ia the courts of their royal progenitors. (Carte's Life of
Ormonde, vol. i. p. 79.)
The nature of the Supremacy, as it is by the Church of England,
and as it was by the established, and is now by the disestablished.
Church of Ireland acknowledged, must be ascertained from Article
XXXVII. (which being one of the Articles required by an Act of Par
liament to be subscribed by the clergy, must, it is to be observed, be
held to have parliamentary sanction). This Article declares " that Her
Majesty hath the chief power in the realm and other her dominions,
and that unto her the chief government of aU estates of the realm,
whether they be ecclesiastical or civU, doth appertain, and that she is
not subject to any foreign jurisdiction."
There seems no reason to think that statesmen of the age of
Henry VIII. intended to claim more for the Crown than it is ad
mitted was conceded by the Supremacy statute of Queen Elizabeth, and
by Article XXXVII. Henry may himself have wished to be a Pope as
well as a King, but he took care publicly to negative this meaning for
" the headship." Thus, in a letter which he addressed to Tunstall
(Bishop of Durham) ia connexion with the meeting of the Convocation
of York, when the proposition of " the headship " [supremum caput
ecclesia) was to be brought forward, he points out that it is " as per
sons, and as to property, acts, and deeds, the clergy are under the
King as head ; and that as to spiritual things, as sacraments, they have
no head but Christ." (See summary of the letter in a very learned
paper of Bishop Stubbs, priated in the Appendix to the Eeport of
the Eoyal Commission on Ecclesiastical Courts, 1888.) A like repu
diation of the notion that a spiritual character is claimed by the
supremacy appears in an authoritative document drawn up at the
time of the Supremacy Act, which says "the King, as supreme head,
has oiUy such power as to a king of right appertaineth by the law of
God, and not that he should take any spiritual power from spiritual
ministers that is given them in the Gospel." (See Froude's History,
vol. U. p. 327, where the entire paper is cited.)
Article XXXVII., applying in its language to a King or Queen
[Eegia Majestas in the Latin version), could not be adopted by the Pro
testant Episcopal Church in the United States of America. Accord
ingly, in lieu of it, the following Article has been substituted by that
Y

322 APPENDIX. [Note M.
Church : . . . " The power of the civil magistrate extendeth to all men
as weU clergy as laity, in aU things temporal ; but hath no authority
in things purely spiritual. And we hold it to be the duty of all men
who are professors of the Gospel to pay respectful obedience to the
civU authority, regularly and legitimately constituted."
Note M.
The Irish Parliament of 1560 having been that which passed the
Supremacy Act, and passed also the Act introducing ia the Church of
Ireland the English Prayer Book, and being in this way the means of
giving to the Church, as then established, a Protestant character, it
becomes a matter of much interest to ascertain of what persons it was
composed. A record which throws light upon the subject has fortu
nately been preserved. This record is in the Eolls Office ia Chancery ia
Dublin. It is headed, " Nomina Dominorum spiritualium et tempora-
lium ac Communium in quodam Parliamento domina regiase apud
Dublin die Veneris proximo ante festum Sancti Hilarii viz XI° die
Januarii, anno regni reginas EUzabethse secundo . . . summonito et
tento." This record has been recently printed in the Appendix to
Hardiman's edition of the Statute of KUkenny, in the Tracts relating
to Ireland, published by the Irish Archaeological Society, vol. u. pp.
134-8. The Domini spirituales (twenty in number) are enumerated as
follows : . . . " Hugo DubUn, Hibernise Primus, Dominus Cane. ; Eo-
landus CassU ; Chris. Tuam ; WiUielmus Midensis ; Patr. Wat. and
Lismor. ; Eogerus Cork and Clon. ; Alexr. Pern. ; Thomas Darensis
(i.e., Kildare) ; Thomas Leghlin ; Johannes Ossorien. Imolacensis
(Emly) ; Hugo Lymericen ; EoUandus Clonfert et Elph. ; Eugenius
Dunen (Down) ; Eps. Eossensis ; Eps. Laonensis (Killaloe) ; Eps.
Coranensis (Achonry) ; Eps. Aladensis (KiUala) ; Eps. Ardfertensis ;
Eps. Ardacadensis (Ardagh)."
It wiU be observed that the Christian names of thirteen of these
bishops are given, and that of seven merely the titles are mentioned.
The reason for this is not stated by any contemporary, nor even by
any old authority ; but it has recently been suggested that in those
instances where Christian names are recorded, the bishops named
attended, and that the others did not. The insertion of the Chris-

lHoTE M.] APPENDIX. 323
tian names in the one case, and the omission m the other, is by Mr.
Bagwell thought (and not unreasonably) to indicate that the Dublin
¦officials knew little about the latter. (Vol. ii. p. 368.)
The names of the thirteen Bishops whose Christian names are
.given were, DubUn, Curwin ; Cashel, Fitzgerald, or Le Baron ; Tuam,
Bodkin ; Meath, Wm. Walsh ; Waterford, Patk. Walsh ; Perns, De
vereux ; Kildare, Leverous ; Leighlin, Field ; Ossory, Thonery ; Lim-
-erick. Lacy ; Clonfert, De Burgo ; Down, Magennis. The names of
the seven bishops whose titles only are given were : Emly, De Burgo ;
Eoss (it is doubtful if this was filled ; see Ware) ; Killaloe, O'Brien ;
Achonry (who was bishop seems doubtful ; Dr. Brady, in his pamphlet
on the Conversion of the Bishops, Dublin, 1886, says O'Coyne or Quin) ;
KUlala (Ware has not the name ; Dr. Brady says O'Gallaher) ; Ard
fert, Fitz Maurice; Ardagh, Mac Mahon.
There were then eight other bishoprics, and these are not at all
mentioned in this record, viz., Clogher, Clonmacnoise, KUmore, Dro
more, Derry, Eaphoe, KiUaloe, KUfenora.
The Domini temporales (twenty-three in number) mentioned in
this record are. Earl of Ormond (Butler) ; Earl of Kildare (FitzGerald) ;
Earl of Desmond (FitzGerald) ; Earl of Thomond (O'Brien) ; Earl of
<]lanricarde (De Burgo) ; Lord of Buttevante (Barry) ; Lord of Fermoy
(Eoche) ; Lord of Atherney [Athenry] (Breminghame) ; Lord of
Kinsale (Courcey) ; Viscount of Gormanston (Preston) ; Viscount of
Baltinglass (Eustace) ; Viscount of Mountgarret (Butler) ; Baron of
Delvyn (Nugent) ; Baron of Slane (Fleming) ; Lord of Killyen, or
Eileen (Plunket) ; Lord of Howth (St. Laurence) ; Lord of Trimleston
(Barnewall) ; Baron of Lacksnaway, or Licksnaw, commonly called
Baron of Kerry (Fitz Morishe, or Fitz Maurice) ; Lord of Dunsany
(Plunket) ; Baron of Dunboyne (Butler) ; Baron of Louthe (Plunket) ;
Lord of Currahmore (Poer) ; Upper Ossory (Fitzpatrick).
For the House of Commons twenty counties are mentioned. The
names of the members for ten are given (two for each). They are
Dublin, Meath, Westmeath, Louth, KUdare, Catherlow, Kilkenny,
Waterford, Tipperary, Wexford. The other ten are, Cork, Kerry,
Limerick, Connaught, Clare, Antrim, Ardes, Down, King's County,
Queen's County ; but for these ten no names of members are stated.
There are twenty-nine cities and boroughs mentioned, and the
names of the members returned for them are given, except in one
y 2

324 APPENDIX, [Note N.
instance — Kilmallock. The twenty-eight for whom both the names of
the cities and boroughs, and of their burgesses (two for each) are
stated, are Dublin, Waterford, Cork, Lymerick, Drogheda, Galway„
YoughUl, Cragfergus, Kilkenny, Kinsale, Wexford, Eosse, Dundalk,
Carlingford, ClonmeU, Fideteh (Fethard), Thomastown, Athenry, Nase,
Kildare, KeUs, Tryme, Athboy, Navan, Athird (Ardee), MuUingar,
Athie, Dungarvan.
It will be observed that Connaught, not being yet subdivided, is.
treated as one county ; that only two towns situate in that province
(Galway and Athenry) returned members ; that from Ulster are named
only one bishop (Down), no temporal peer ; but three counties (Down„
Ardes, and Antrim), and one borough (Carrickfergus). Peers and
Commoners are, with few exceptions, of Anglo-Irish race.
Ware's notice of this Parliament is merely . . . "12 Jan. 155&
(O.S.), began the ParUament to sit in Christ's Church, which also
ended in the beginniag of February foUowing, having enacted the Act
of Uniformity and several other laws." ..." At the very beginning of
this Parliament, her Majestie's well-wishers found that most of the
nobility and Commons were divided in opinion about the ecclesiastical
government, which caused the Earl of Sussex to dissolve them, and to
go over to England, to consult her Majesty about the affairs of thia
kingdom." [Annals, a.d. 1559.)

Note N.
The account given by Ware of the meeting of ecclesiastical persons
(mentioned at page 60, supra) which took place after Lord Sussex's
return from the journey to England, which is related in the last note
(M), is as foUows : . . . " The Earl of Sussex having been in England
some months, returned again and took his oath as Lord Lieutenant of
Ireland. Withia three weeks after which came letters from her Ma
jesty to him, signifying her pleasure for a general meeting of the clergy
of Ireland, and the establishment of the Protestant reUgion through
the several dioceses of the kiagdom. Among bishops, WiUiam Walsh,
then Bishop of Meath, was very zealous for the Eomish Church ; not
content vnth what offers her Majesty had proposed, but very much
enraged (after the assembly had dispersed themselves), he feU to preach
against the Common Prayer (in his diocese at Trim), which was newly

J^ote 0.] APPENDIX. 825
-come over, and ordered to be observed ; for which the Lord Lieutenant
¦confined him, till he acquainted her Majesty with it, who sent over
ier orders to clap him up in prison." {Annals, a.d. 1559.)

Note 0.
It is admitted by all writers who have discussed the conduct of the
bishops at the accession of Elizabeth, that Archbishop Curwin not
only conformed, but took an active part in carrying into operation the
new ecclesiastical system. There seems also no doubt that Field, or
O'Fihel (Leighlin), conformed. In a State Paper (dated 28th May,
1559), it is stated that he took the oath of allegiance and of abjuration
of aU foreign jurisdiction and authority (Shirley, p. 93, and Cal. S. P.
Eliz., p. 154) ; and on the 6th October, 1564, he was appointed along
with Archbishop Loftus, Bishop Brady of Meath, and Bishop Daly of
Kildare (aU nominated to their bishoprics by the Queen, and all de-
¦cided Protestants), upon a Commission for inquiry into heretical opi
nions, into charges of not using the proper Church services, and other
•ecclesiastical offences." — Morrin, vol. i. p. 489.
Others of these bishops beside Field are named in Commissions
dated after the Queen's Supremacy Act. The seventh section of this
Act prescribed the oath of supremacy, and required it to be taken by
every archbishop, bishop, and aU and every other ecclesiastical person
and minister, and aU and every temporal judge, justice, mayor, and
other lay or temporal officer and minister. Forfeiture of office ipso
facto as if the party were dead, and disabUity to retain their offices,
were penalties attendant on the refusal of these persons to take the
oath (sec. 8). It is, therefore, in the highest degree improbable that
.bishops named in Commissions, if they had not afready taken, did not
¦before acting take, the oath.
The bishops who are thus named in Commissions are Archbishop
FitzGerald, or Le Baron (Cashel), who was one of the Commissioners
in a Commission of gaol deUvery for Munster and Thomond, dated 2nd
August, 1560 (Morrin, vol. i. p. 488) ; Archbishop Bodkin (Tuam),
who was a Commissioner in 1567 (for as such he signed an injunction
to the sheriff of the county of Connaught (Morrin, vol. i. p. 505) ;
Devereux (Ferns), who is named in Commissions dated May, 1559,
.and 18th April, 1562-3, for administering civil and mUitary affairs in

S26 APPENDIX. [Note 0.
Wexford county (Morrin, vol. i. pp. 412, 477). Patrick Walsh (Wa
terford), is named in a Commission dated November, 1566, for arbi
trating between Ormond and Desmond [Cal. S. P. 820) ; Lacy, or Lees
(Limerick), in one for gaol deUvery in Munster and Thomond, dated
2nd August, 1560 (Morrin, vol. i. p. 488) ; his name also appears in a
decree made by the members of another Commission dated 29th Sep
tember, 1564 (Morrin, vol. i. p. 492) ; and he seems to have acted
again on one m 1568 [Cal. S. P. EUz. 360).
The inference to be drawn from bishops being Commissioners is-
not to be extended beyond outward conformity. Thus it comes out in
an examination (17th March, 1564-5) of Creagh, the Eoman Catholic
Archbishop of Armagh, that Lacy, notwithstanding that he in this
way politically helped the Government, gave twelve marks to the
nuncio who about four years previously came over from the Pope.
(Shirley, p. 173). Ware says Lacy resigned in 1571. Others say he
was deprived. In the note at page 42, supra, it has been erroneously
assumed that he retained the See of Limerick imtil his death. Whether
he resigned or was deprived, he is said afterwards to have been in com
munion with Eome. Lacy's place was fiUed by the restoration of Cateey,.
who had been displaced under Mary. Leverous and Thonery, not Pro
testant, were at first in commission. (Morrin, i. 412.)
With respect to Devereux, it is to be noted that he came into-
office under Henry VIIL, and after the Supremacy Act of 1537 ; and that
lie continued under both Edward VI. and Mary. ,In 1566 a dispatch
to CecU, signed by Sir H. Sidney and others, complains of Devereux
granting his lands to his sons. It does not say whether they were legi
timate or illegitimate. If legitimate, Devereux had married, and must
be held to have been a Protestant ; if illegitimate, it is unlikely that
unless he at least professed Protestantism more proceedings than
complaiaing would not have been taken by the Deputy.
With respect to the other bishops at the accession of EUzabeth
(sixteen in number), in the case of two of them some incidents are
stated which would suggest their conformity. De Burgo (Clonfert),,
uncle of Lord Clanricarde, was in 1661 on sufficiently good terms with
Queen Elizabeth to recommend that a clergyman named Laly should
be confirmed in the Deanery of Tuam (Morrin, vol. i. p. 448). Eugene
Magennis (Down) was one of the prelates at the consecration of Good-
acre and of Bale in the time of Edward VI. (see pages 89, 40, supra).

Note 0.] APPENDIX. 827
he received a pardon from her in 1559 ; and it is not likely that he
then disobeyed her. Ware expressly states that Magennis was present
at the ParUament of 1560. Of the rest nothing is recorded that can
be considered to bear upon the question, except that on Magennis's
death, in a petition from (it is supposed) Pierres, Constable of Carrick
fergus, praying that some worthy, learned man be promoted to the
bishopric of Down, it is said that " certain Irish prelates near adjoin
ing were very zealously affected." — Shfrley, ibid., p. 135.
It has been said by some modern writers that the oath of supre
macy could not have been enforced except from bishops in the Pale
(Meath and Kildare), and that in fact it was not attempted to be en
forced. But why not from those who were prelates in the dioceses
bordering on the Pale? Also why not from those who were Com
missioners, or who happened to attend Parliament ? A Eoman
Catholic writer of authority, Eothe, Bishop of Ossory, in the reign of
James I., states that the oath was directed to be enforced : — " Quisquis.
(he says) refugeret illud (juramentum) suscipere, ex toto cuneo Pre-
latorum statim excideret a su^ dignitate et prelatura." By the same
authority it is related that Sussex reproached Leverous for his refusal
to take the oath, when so many doctors and prelates in England and
Ireland had recognized the Queen's supremacy : — " Quorsum negaret
Eegiaam esse caput ecclesise, quod tamen recognoscebant tot magni
et iUustres vfri, tot doctores et praesules tam in Anglia quam in ipsa
Hibernia." The suggestion, therefore, which has been lately made, that the
consecration of Elizabeth's first bishops (Craik, Loftus, &c.) was by
Curwin alone, is ia the highest degree improbable. By the Act regu
lating appointments, and by the ordination service, it was intended
that the canonical number should attend ; the Queen's coUation was
ordered to be signified to the prelates who were to officiate at the
consecration, and obedience was required under the penalties of ihe
premunire statute (2 EUz., chap. 4, sees. 2, 3, 5).
It is worthy of remark in connexion with this subject, that Bram
haU, when asserting the regularity of the first consecrations of bishops
under EUzabeth in England, uses as an argument the fact that there
was no need of irregularity, as, if there were any want of English
bishops, Irish bishops could have been had recourse to : ..." If it
had been needful, they might have had seven more out of Ireland,

328 APPENDIX, [Note P.
archbishops and bishops ; for such a work as a consecration, Ireland
never wanted stores of ordainers ; nor ever yet did any man assert the
want of a competent number of consecrators to an Irish Protestant
bishop. They who concurred freely in the consecration of Protestant
bishops at home would not have denied their concurrence in Eng
land, if they had been commanded." {Works, Ang.-Cath. Libr., voL
U. p. 52.)
It has also been asserted that the power of Queen Elizabeth over
the Irish Episcopate during the rest of her reign was confined to the
Pale. But there are more than forty patents abstracted by Morrin
dated within the Queen's reign which relate to bishoprics ; appoint
ing and translating to them, and in some instances permitting other
preferments to be held in commendam. This does not seem consistent
with the Queen having no power. The English Government was cer
tainly able to influence the dioceses near the Pale, and probably more.
Against the writers who limit the extent of the Queen's power may be
set the authority of Mr. Brewer, the able editor of the State Papers,
whose views in reference to aU historic questions connected with the
reigns of the Tudor princes deserve great respect. He has expressed
his opinion that "unless EUzabeth's Deputies and Council were so
negligent and ignorant as never to complain, and never to betray the
emptiness and vanity of the Queen's commands, as well as the im
possibility of complying vnth them, we must admit that from the first
year of her reign, and all through to the close of it, she exercised her
jurisdiction far beyond the limits of the English Pale." [Preface to
Carew MSS.)
Those who desire to pursue further the subject of this note may be
referred to the pamphlets on the subject of Dr. Brady, Archdeacon
Lee, and Dr. Alfred Lee, published in Dublin and London, 1866 and
1867 ; and see also Bagwell's Ireland Under the Tudors, chap. xxxv.

Note P.
FuUer, in his English Church History, makes a curious digression
to Trinity College, Dublin. He enumerates in it the different bene
factors to whom the College was indebted, numbering them in the
oUowing order: — (1) Henry Ussher, then Archdeacon of Dublin,

Note Q.] APPENDIX. 329
afterwards Archbishop of Armagh, and uncle of James Ussher, " who
(he says) took a journey to England, and procured the mortmain from
(2) Queen EUzabeth." (3) Lord Burleigh, the first ChanceUor. (4) Sfr
WUUam Fitz WiUiam, the Deputy. (5) Mr. Luke ChaUoner, " who
(he says) received and disbursed the moneys." (6) The Mayor and
Aldermen of Dublin, who bestowed on the CoUege the site, " with
some accommodations (of considerable grounds) about it." (7) Arch
bishop Adam Loftus, who was the first Master " holding it as an
honorary title, though not so much to receive credit by, as to return
lustre to, the place." (8) Sir Warham St. Leger, who " was very boun
tiful in paying yearly pensions to the students before the College was
¦endowed with standing revenues." (9) Sir Francis Shane, whom he
describes as "a mere Irishman, but a good Protestant, who kept this
infant foundation from being strangled in the bfrth thereof." (10) Eobert
Devereux, Earl of Essex, who gave " a cannoneer's pay and the pay
of certain dead soldiers, to the value of weU-nigh J0400 a-year, for the
scholars' maintenance." (11) King James, " who (he says) confirmed
the revenues in perpetuum, endowing the College with a great propor
tion of good land in the province of Ulster." " Nor (he afterwards
.adds) is it to be forgotten that what Josephus reports of the temple
buUt by Herod : Kar iKiZvov rov Kaipov oiKoSooyov/jLivov tov vaov, ras /tev
rj/iepa^ ov)(^ veiv, iv Se rats vv^l yivecrOai tovs oij,/3povs, <i)S fJiT] KioXScrat to
ipyov — ' During the time of the buUding of the temple it rained not
in the daytime, but ia the night, that the showers might not hinder
the work.' I say, what by him is reported hath been avouched to me
by vritnesses above exception, that the same happened here, from the
founding to the finishing of this college ; the officious heavens always
.smUing by day (though often weeping by night) till the work was
completed." The first stone of the College was laid 19th March, 1592, of the
present style, or 1591-2 of the style then ia use.

Note Q.
According to the Eeport of the Eoyal Commissioners on Ecclesi
astical Eevenue and Patronage, dated 1st March, 1833, the Sees of
the Church of Ireland were thirty-five — Armagh, Dublin, Glenda
lough, Cashel, Emly, Ardagh, Meath, Clogher, Clonmacnois, Down,

830 APPENDIX. [Note Q.
Connor, Derry, Eaphoe, Kilmore, Dromore, KUdare, Ossory, Perns,.
Leighlin, Limerick, Ardfert, Aghadoe, Waterford, Lismore, Cork,,
Eoss, Cloyne, KiUaloe, Kilfenora, Elphin, Clonfert, Kilmacduagh,.
KiUala, Achonry, Elphin.
Before 1586 Dublin and Glendalough, Down and Connor, Ardfert
and Aghadoe, Waterford and Lismore, were incorporated or united
permanently together. The others could at that time be held se
parately or in union.
With respect to the union of the others, the Eeport states that by
Act 11 Eliz. Cashel was united with Emly, and Clonmacnois with
Meath ; that from 1744 Ardagh had been held in commendam with
Tuam ; that Perns was permanently united with Leighlin at the
beginning of the seventeenth century: so also was Clonfert with
Kilmacduagh, and Killala with Achonry ; that from 1660 Limerick
was united with Ardfert and Aghadoe ; that from the Eestoration
Cork and Eoss were accustomably united; and from 1750 KiUaloer
and Kilfenora.
In 1536 four of the Sees were Archbishoprics, viz., Armagh,,
Dublin, Cashel, and Tuam.
Among the Sees of the Irish Church Armagh was from a remote
date conceded the Primacy. It is claimed for it in the "Book of
Armagh," a MS. ofthe ninth century : and Bishop Eeeves has found
even older authorities in its favour. (See Eeport of Eoyal Commis
sion, 1868, App., p. 99.) " Armagh," he says, " owed its dignity to-
the supposed choice of St. Patrick, which again may have been in
fluenced by its proximity to Emania, the ancient capital of Ulster."
Among the suffragan bishoprics Meath had precedence : it does not
appear why. Ware merely says that Meath was formed, not long-
after the coming of the English, out of the old Sees of Clonard,,
Kells, and Duleek, and that in the order of sitting among the suffra
gan bishops of Ireland in councils and elsewhere the bishop of Meath
had the first place, the bishop of Derry the second, and the rest took
their places according to the time of thefr ordination. [Antiquities,
Dublin edition, 1705, pp. 39, 40.)
The number of suffragan bishoprics at the date of the Eeport of
1883 was eighteen. The number at the date of the Eeformation
Mant reckons to have been twenty-six. [Histoi-y, vol. i. p. 3.)
The alterations in the arrangements as to bishoprics made by the.

Note E.] APPENDIX.

331

Act of 1838 (see p. 229) had all taken effect before the Eoyal Commis
sion of 1867 (see p. 266). Then the arrangements as to the arch
bishoprics and bishopries, and the Sees united together, were as
foUows : — The archbishoprics were — (1) Armagh, which was united
with Clogher, and had provincial jurisdiction over the old province
of Tuam ; (2) Dublin, which was united with Glendalough and
KUdare, and had provincial jurisdiction over the old province of
Cashel. The bishoprics were — (1) Meath; (2) Down, Connor, and
Dromore united ; (3) Derry and Eaphoe united ; (4) Kilmore, Elphin,
and Ardagh united; (5) Tuam, KUlaUa, and Achonry united; (6)
Ossory, Ferns, and Leighlin united; (7) Limerick, Ardfert, and
Aghadoe united ; (8) Cashel, Emly, Waterford, and Lismore united ;
(9) Cork, Cloyne, and Eoss united; (10) KiUaloe, Kilfenora, Clonfert,
and KUmacduagh united. The first five were suffragan to Armagh ;
the last five suffragan to Dublin.

Note E.
Ware gives a list of the monasteries and convents which were
founded, exclusive of those which, having been erected in the first
times of the Irish Church, had been afterwards converted into parish
churches. The religious houses enumerated by him numbered 362,.
of which 142 were in Leinster, 90 in Munster, 82 in Connaught, and
48 ia Ulster. (See Antiquities, Dublin edition, 1705.) Harris, ia his
edition of Ware, increases the number.
The Augustinian Order (so called from a monk to whom their
discipline was due), including the Aroasians, seem to have had the
largest number of these houses ; the Cistercians some of the greatest,
as Mellifont, near Drogheda, and Holy Cross, in Tipperary. The
Mendicant Orders had a considerable number. At Kilmainham and
Clontarf were great establishments of the HospitaUers, or Knights of
St. John.
According to the State Paper of 1515, which has been cited in
a previous note of the Appendix (P), the preachers at that time were
" the begging Friars." From this and some other authorities Brewer,
in his preface to the State Papers, and foUovring him Eichey, regard
these monastic persons favourably. But, on the other hand, Ussher
(Works, iv. p. 802) and Bishop BedeU (Mant, i. 436) speak severely of

332 APPENDIX. [Note E.
them. Ussher cites Fitz Ealph, Archbishop of Armagh in the four
teenth century — a prelate unquestionably of the highest eminence —
to testify against them. It is, however, to be remembered, that in an
appeal of the Mendicant Friars to Pope Innocent VI. against Fitz Ealph
they were successful ; also that Pitz Ealph was opposed in principle
to the system of monastic mendicancy, and so was unfavourably pre
disposed towards it when he came to examine its practice. Thus he
distinctly says : — Dominus Jesus nunquam mendicavit : docuit nec
debere homines mendicare : nuUus potest prudenter et sancte spon-
tanee mendicitatem super se perpetuo assumere asservandam. (See
Ussher's Works, vol. iv. p. 302.)
With respect to the moral conduct of the religious orders in
Ireland generaUy, in the time of Henry VIIL, the opinion of recent
historians has been divided. Dr. KiUen speaks of them with censure.
(See his Ecclesiastical History of Ireland, vol. i. pp. 336-389.) Dr.
Eichey takes the opposite side. (See his Lectures on Irish History,
2nd series, p. 73.) Mr. Bagwell adopts somewhat of an intermediate
view — " That some monks were immoral or useless is (he says),
doubtless, true ; " . . . but " there is ample evidence that the monks
were not all bad." (See Ireland Under the Tudors, vol. i. p. 299.)
The chief authority, in addition to some recorded instances of
actual delinquency, to support the charges against the monks is Eobert
Cowley, Master of the Eolls. He expressed to Cromwell, then Henry's
chief adviser, the opinion that "the religious houses in Ireland were
less continent and virtuous than those in England." [S.P. ii. 371.)
But if CromweU and Henry found Cowley's report of their general
character affirmed by others, or themselves believed it, it is difficult to
understand why in no Irish Statute or Commission relating to the
monks are charges of this kind made against them, especiaUy as in
one of the Commissions there are accusations of a different nature,
viz., that the religious houses were addicted to " their own super
stitious ceremonies," and to the " doctrines of the Eoman Pontiff."
(Morrin, vol. i. p. 55.) This observation is entitled to the more
weight, because Henry, in his Act in relation to the smaller monas
teries in England, puts forward their vicious living in justifieation of
their suppression, (27 Henry VIIL, c. 28.)
In the case of six religious houses, of which one was a nunnery,
the councU petitioned that they should be spared, upon the ground

Note S.] APPENDIX. 88a
that "in default of inns, which are not in this land, the councU and
officers, also Irishmen and others resorting to the king's deputy, are
most commonly lodged in them at the cost of the said houses, and
that in them young men and children, both gentlemen's chUdren and
others, both of mankind and womankind, be brought up in virtue,
learning, and in the English tongue and behaviour, to the great
charges of the said houses," [S. P., Ireland, vol. iU. p. 130.)

Note S.
The state of the clergy in 1515 is described in the same State Paper
[Cal. S. P., vol. U. p. 11) which has been already cited (Notes P and
E), in the following terms. ..." There is no archbishop nor bishop,
abbot nor prior, parson or vicar, nor any other person of the Church,
high or low, great or small, English or Irish, that useth to preach the
Word of God, saving the poor friar beggars." ..." The Church of
this land use not to learn any other science but the law of Canon
(i. e. Canon Law) for covetyee of lucre transitory : all other science
whereof grows none such lucre the parsons of the Church doth
despise. They hold more by the plough rustical than by lucre of
the plough celestial, to which they have stretched their hands, and
look always backwards. They tend much more to lucre of that
plough whereof grows slander and rebuke than to lucre of the souls — ¦
that is, the plough of Christ."
In 1528, Inge, Archbishop of Dublin, and Chief Justice Birming
ham, wrote to Wolsey : — " Your Grace, we doubt not, heareth the sor
rowful decay of this land, as well in good Christianitie as other laudable
manners, which hath grown for lack of good prelates and curates ia
the Church" — curates used in the same sense as in the Collect for
bishops and curates. " The diocese of Meath" (the most civilized in
Ireland) they afterwards say " is far in ruin, both spirituaUy and tem-
poraUy, by the absence of the bishop there." [8. P. U., pt. 3, p. 126.)
Archbishop Browne, in his letter of September, 1535 (App. B),
draws a distinction between the monks and the clergy. The former,
he says, " keep the people in ignorance ; the latter are as ignorant as
the people, being not able to say Mass, or pronounce the words, they
not knowing what they themselves say in the Eoman tongue."
Agam, in a later letter to Cromwell, Browne says : — " Those of

^834 APPENDIX. [Note T.
the clergy as your Lordship hath had from me before, being ignorant
and not able to speak right words in the Mass or Liturgie, as being
not skilled in the Latin grammar ; so that a bird may be taught to
speak vrith as much sense as several of them do in this country."
[Life of Browne by Ware, letter 3, Kal. AprU, 1538.)
In articles exhibited by Lord KUdare agamst Lord Ormonde he
speaks of the churches in the counties KUkenny and Tipperary being
in such extreme decay that no divine service is kept there. . . . "If
the king do not provide a remedy, there wUl be no more Christentie
than in the middle of Turkey." (Cal, Carew MSS., vol. i. p. 23.)

Note T.
A translation of the New Testament into Irish is said to have
been made by Archbishop Pitz Ealph in the fourteenth century. (See
Ussher's Historica Dogmatica, Works, vol. xU. p. 345.) But if there
was, it has not been preserved. The first which was ever printed
seems to have been commenced by Nicholas Walsh, successively
Chancellor of St. Patrick's Cathedral, Dublia, and Bishop of Water
ford (1577-1585), assisted by Nehemiah Donnellan, afterwards Arch
bishop of Tuam, and John Kerney, Treasurer of St. Patrick's. It
was completed by WiUiam Daniel or Donnellan, Archbishop of Tuam
(1595-1628). This version was first printed in 1602, accompanied by
a dedication to James I., in which the archbishop says that " in the
translation I tied myself, as of duty I ought, to the original Greek."
The same prelate subsequently translated the EngUsh Prayer Book
into Irish, and had his version printed in 1608-9, with a dedication to
the Lord Deputy. This was ordered to be read in the shire towns of
every diocese. (See the notices of Walsh and Daniel in Ware's
Bishops; Eichardson's History of the Attempts to Convert the Native
Irish: London, 1712, pp. 14, 15 ; Mant's History, vol. i. pp. 292-3.)
The Old Testament in Irish was first published in 1685. Its
publication was in a great degree due to the exertions of Eobert
Boyle, then well known from his philosophic studies : it was superin
tended by Archbishop Narcissus Marsh. The version adopted in it
seems to have been commenced under the care of Bishop BedeU, and
to have been perfected about the time of its pubUcation. (Mant's
History, vol. i. pp. 468, 671.)

IToTEs U AND v.] APPENDIX. 335

Note U.
Of the bishops m 1618, MeUer Magrath (Cashel) ; Lyon (Cork) ;
'Crosby (Ardfert and Aghadoe) ; Linch (Clonfert), were appouited by
¦Queen Elizabeth. The others were appointed by James I. They
were — Hampton (Armagh) ; Montgomery (Meath) ; Echlin (Down) ;
Moygne (KUmore) ; Buckworth (Dromore) ; Knox (Eaphoe) ; Turner
(Derry) ; Jones (Dublin) ; PUsworth (KUdare) ; Wheeler (Ossory) ; Earn
(Ferns) ; Adams (Limerick) ; Lancaster (Waterford) ; Eider (KUlaloe) ;
Daniel (Tuam) ; and King (Elphin). None of James's bishops were
Irish by race or birth. Note V.
The clause in the Irish Articles of 1615, which is stated at page
102, and which appears to me to have been intended to mitigate the
¦severity of the propositions in relation to election and reprobation that
were introduced into them from the Lambeth Articles, has received less
.attention from those who have commented upon the Irish Articles than
it merited. They generaUy speak of the Irish Articles as repetitions upon
this subject of the Lambeth. On the other hand, with the qualification
¦expressed in this clause, the Irish seem to me not to go beyond what
Hooker, in the treatise mentioned in the note to page 102, describes as
:St. Augustine's " latter judgment." To illustrate this, I extract one
passage from Hooker's summary of this judgment : . . . " The whole body
¦of mankind, in the view of God's eternal knowledge, lay universaUy
polluted with sin, worthy of condemnation and death : over the mass
of corruption there passed two acts of God — an act of faA^our, UberaUty,
,and grace, choosing part to be made partakers of everlasting glory ;
and an act of justice, forsaking the rest, and adjudging them to end
less perdition ; these vessels of wrath, those of mercy."
The view of the question of predestination which is put forward in
the words I have cited, has, by some writers, been termed Augus-
tinianism, in order to distinguish it from the Calvinistic scheme of pre-
destiaation, of which reprobation is an essential element. It would seem
to have been that most in favour in the Church before the Eeforma
tion — at least I am not able to find any solid distinction between it
and the teaching of Thomas Aquinas, the highest authority among the

33G APPENDIX. [Note W..
schoolmen, as it appears ia the extracts from his writings given by Sir
James Macintosh in his Introduction to Ethical Philosophy. Thus : —
" Prsedestinatio est causa gratisB et glorise . . . Deus inclinat ad bonum
admiaistrando virtutem agendi et monendo ad bonum. Sed ad malum
dicitur iaclinare in quantum gratiam non prsebet, per quam aliquis a
malo retraheretur."
The Article of the Church of England which relates to the subject-
of predestination (XVII.) was composed by divines who held in refe
rence to the question discordant opinions. There seems no doubt that
the language used in it was designedly of a character which might,
admit of its being consistently subscribed not only by persons holdings
Calvinistic or Augustinian views, but also by those who, like Arminius-
and his followers, dissented from both these systems.
At the date of the Irish Articles the English Seventeenth Article
was accepted by English clergymen, who agreed in every respect with
the Irish Articles. If therefore the Irish Convocation had sought only
liberty for their own ideas, they could have had that by adopting the
Thirty-nine Articles. It seems evident that what they desired went
farther, and aimed at excluding all who did not hold in reference to-
predestination, at least Augustinianism.

Note W.
The bishops at the time of the Convocation of 1634, beside Ussher,
Martin, and BramhaU, were : Spottiswoode (Clogher), by birth Scotch
Echlin (Down), Scotch (succeeded by LesUe in 1635, also Scotch)
Bedell (KUmore), by bfrth EngUsh ; Eichardson (Ardagh), English
Buckworth (Dromore), EngUsh; Leslie (Eaphoe), Scotch; Bulkeley
(Dublia), EngUsh ; PUsworth (KUdare), English (but in 1685 succeeded
by Eobert Ussher, Irish) ; Wheeler (Ossory), EngUsh ; Earn (Ferns and
Leighlin), English (succeeded, in 1635, by Andrew, English) ; HamUton
(Cashel), Scotch ; Webb (Limerick), English ; Steere (Ardfert and
Aghadoe), English ; Michael Boyle (Waterford and Lismore), Eng
Ush (succeeded, in 1635, by Atherton, also English) ; Eichard Boyle
(Cork), English ; Jones (Killaloe), English ; Barlow (Tuam), English ;
King (Elphin), EngUsh ; Dawson (Clonfert), EngUsh ; Adafr (KiUala),,
Scotch.

Note X.] APPENDIX. 337

Note X.
The first accounts of the loss of life ia the EebeUion of 1641 were, ¦
there seems no doubt, much exaggerated, and especially as to the loss
at the commencement. Sir WUUam Petty [Political Anatomy, ch. iv.)
thought that 37,000 were massacred in the first year of the tumults.
Warner, one of the Fellows of Trinity CoUege, Dublin, after examining
the depositions of witnesses in relation to the subject, which are pre
served in the library of his college, reduced the estimate of loss of life,
directly and iadfrectly, during the first two years, to 12,000 ; but he
seems to have rejected some evidence which he should have acted upon.
A recent re-examination of these depositions has led to an estimate of
the number " murdered by the sword, gun, rope, drovming, &c., in the
first three or four years, not including those kiUed in battle, at 25,000."
(See Miss Hickson's Ireland in the Seventeenth Century.) In this book
for the first time some of the most important of the depositions are
printed. The question of the number of lives lost in the first year of
this rebeUion is also discussed by HaUam (Const. History, ii. 352) ; by
Froude [English in Ireland, ii. 96-113) ; and by Lecky [Hist., ii. 125-
170) ; but it is to be noted that their observations were written before
Miss Hickson's work was published.

Note Y.
The sections of the L-ish Uniformity Act (17 & 18 Car. IL, ch. 6)
which require incumbents of benefices to be episcopally ordained are
the Sth and 9th. The eighth deprived any person then an incumbent,
and in possession of any benefice, &o., who was " not already in holy
orders by episcopal ordination, or should not before 29th September,
1667, be ordained priest or deacon according to the form of episcopal
ordination," i.e. the form in the then revised Prayer Book. The ninth
clause enacted that no person should thenceforth be capable of being
admitted to any benefice, &c., before such time as he should be or
dained priest, according to the form and manner in the said book {i. e.
the then revised Prayer Book) prescribed, "unless he have formerly
been made priest by episcopal ordination," upon pain of pecuniary
penalties, and of disabUity to take or to be admitted into the order
of priest, by the space of one whole year. These clauses are identical
z

338 APPENDIX. [Note Y.
with the 13th and 14th clauses of the EngUsh Aot of Uniformity,
except that in the English Act the date at which deprivation was to
take effect was " the feast day of St. Bartholomew" (August 24), 1662.
The object in both countries seems to have been the same — to declare
invaUd orders conferred by presbyters, and to recognize those conferred
by Eoman Catholic bishops."*
It was, however, in the interval between the Eestoration (1660)
and the Irish Act of Uniformity (1665) that the clergy in possession
of benefices in Ireland, who had not been episcopally ordained, and of
whom most had orders from presbyters, were held not entitled to re
tain them. The view at that time taken of the law applicable to them
seems to have been somewhat as follows : — There had then been no
statute ever passed by an Irish Parliament repealing the Irish Uni
formity Act of Elizabeth. Cromwell never even summoned an Irish
Parliament. Whatever was done under the Commonwealth in relation
to the Irish Church was regarded as a mere exercise of arbitrary wUl,
of no force or effect when the usurping authority had passed away.
The Uniformity Act of Elizabeth would, therefore, operate after the
Eestoration, just as it did under Charles I. This Act did not con
tain the clauses now cited from the Acts of Charles II. , but it con
tained provisions which seem to have been thought to have much the
same effect. It imposed the obligation to use the Prayer Book as
then revised, and as part of it the Ordination Service, in the Preface
to which it was expressly declared that " no man shall be accounted
or taken to be a lawful bishop, priest, or deacon, in the Church of
Ireland, or suffered to execute any of the said functions, except he be
caUed, tried, examined, and admitted thereto, according to the form
hereafter following, or hath had formerly episcopal consecration or
ordination." The practice in England was not, however, strictly consistent with
this view of the law. After Elizabeth's Prayer Book came into use,
there were ministers officiating in the Church of England who had

*Thewords" formerly made priest hy episcopal ordination " seem to me not eon -
fined iu their operation to the date of the Act. And in this construction is probably to
be found the reason why a Eoman Catholic priest, conforming to the Church of Eng
land or the Church of Ireland, has been allowed to officiate without re-ordination. Of
this practice the great preacher, Kirwan, is perhaps the most celebrated example in.
Ireland. (See on the question Phillimore'a note to Burns' E, L., ed. 1842, p. 70.)

Note Z.] APPENDIX. 339
not been episcopally ordained. Keble says that they were numerous.
" Nearly," he says, "up to the time when he (i.e. Hooker) wrote, num
bers had been admitted to the ministry of the Church in England,
with no better than Presbyterian ordination." (Preface to his edition
of Hooker's Works, vol. i. p. Ixxvi.) Keble mentions that their ad
mission was attributed to a construction placed upon a statute of
13 EUzabeth, which permitted persons not ordained according to the
prescribed form to subscribe the Articles : otherwise their ecclesias
tical promotions to be void, Most of such persons had foreign orders.
(See Keble's Preface, p. Ixxvi.).

Note Z.
The question agitated by Molyneux in the reign of King WiUiam III.
— whether the English Parliament could bind Ireland by its statutes —
had been previously raised — (1) in the EngUsh Courts ; (2) in the Irish
ParUament; (3) in a celebrated treatise ascribed to an Irish Lord
ChanceUor, Sir Eichard Bolton, but more probably, Harris thinks,
written by Patrick D'Arcy, an eminent Irish barrister.
(1). The first reference to the question in the English Courts seems
to have been in a case reported in the Year Books, 2 Eic. IIL, fol. 12.
There it is stated to have been laid down in the English Exchequer
Chamber that the Irish have a Parliament, which makes and changes
laws for them, and that they are not bound by statutes made in Eng
land, because they do not send here knights of Parliament [non obli-
gantur per statuta in Anglia, quia non hie habent milites Parliamenti) ;
but this, it is added, is to be understood concerning lands and affafrs
in that kingdom, and matters affecting them : sed hoc intelligitur de
terris et rebus in terris illis. It is, however, added that, these being
subjects of the King, as such are bound to anything to be done out of
Ireland, &c., like those who dwell in Calais, Gascony, Guienne, &c.
A dfrectly opposite opinion is reported to have been pronounced in
the reign of Henry VII. by Chief Justice Hussey : le chief justice disoit
que les statutes faits en Engleterre liera ceux d'Irland ; and this, it is
added, was then not denied by the other Justices, although they had
been of a contrary opinion in the preceding Term, when the Chief
Justice was absent. (Year Books, 1 Hen. VIL, fol. 2.) Another case
in the Year Books also bears upon the question (20 Hen. VI. , fol. 8).
Z 2

840 APPENDIX, [Note Z.
There Justices Fortescue and Portington laid down that if a tax of a
tenth or fifteenth were granted in England, this should not bind them
in Ireland, the latter giving as his reason that " the Irish do not re
ceive commandment by writ to come to our Parliament."
In this way the question stood when Calvin's Case (as to the status
of subjects born in Scotland after the accession of James I. to the
throne of England) was brought before the English Judges. The po
sition of Ireland relatively to England being discussed in illustration
of the question in the case, the dictum in the Year Books, 2 Eic. IIL,
already cited, was referred to ; and, in reporting it, Lord Coke, who-
was himself one of the Judges, after the words denying the binding
effect of English law in Ireland, inserts the words, " unless it (Ireland)
be specially named " (Coke's Reports, pt. 7, fol. 22) ; for which the
reason is afterwards assigned, that although Ireland was a distinct
dominion, yet " the title thereof being by conquest, the same by judg
ment of law might by express words be bound by Act of the Parlia
ment of England."
(2). The reference to the question in the Irish Parliament was in
two statutes — 19 Edw. IV., and 29 Henry VI. These statutes are
not in the Statute Book, but exemplifications of them were preserved
in the Treasury at Waterford. (See Bolton's and Mayart's Tracts,
afterwards referred to.) These Acts affirmed, that in order to bind
Ireland an English statute or law should be confirmed by the Irish
ParUament. (3). Bolton's Tract is written to refute the dictum in Calvin's Case,
and to assert the independence of Ireland. He was answered by
Mayart, who is described by Harris as Sergeant and Second Judge
of the Common Pleas.
Molyneux in his treatise repeats much that was in Bolton's. He
meets with express contradiction the statement upon which the dictum
in Calvin's Case was founded — that Ireland was a conquered country.
He holds that it voluntarily submitted. Ireland, too, he urges, was a
kingdom just like Scotland, and in the same position as Scotland
after the accession of James I. ; and therefore the law as to both
countries must be the same. But no one had ever alleged that the
Acts of the English ParUament could bind Scotland.

^OTE A A,] APPENDIX. 341
Note A A.
The statement of Lord Chancellor Bowes as to the growing dis-
¦content caused in the Irish House of Commons by its subordinate
position, which has been referred to at page 216, is in the following
words : ... " Formerly, Protestant or Papist were the key-worda ;
they are now court or country, referring still to constitutional griev-
,ances . . . They have considered your House [i.e. the English House
of Commons) as the model, and in general think themselves injured
in the instances in which theirs, upon the legal constitution, must
differ." At a later date Grattan, when urging on the Irish Parliament to
¦assert its iadependence, held up for their imitation the example of the
English Parliament in exacting the Petition of Eight, and the Bill of
Eights. (Speech, 19th April, 1780.)
It was at the time remarked that if the apprehension then were,
that the example of England would excite an emulation of freedom ia
Ireland, the converse had been the case in the days of the Eoman
Empfre. Agricola thought that if the Irish were not subdued — et
loelut e conspectu libertas tolleretur — the Britons would revolt.

Note B B.
The evidence of Mr. Blake, referred to at page 237, is in the fol
lowing terms : ..." I should not wish to see any settlement of the
Catholic question effected m which the rights of the Established
¦Church were not preserved. I gave expression to the same feeUng
when I was examined before the House of Lords. I think what I
.stated then in substance was, that I should not be favourable to any
.settlement, or that I should object to any settlement, which went
to disturb the Protestant Establishment ; that I considered it a main
link in the connexion between Great Britain and Ireland, and that
with that connexion I was satisfied the interests of Ireland were essen
tially identified. I understand it has since been imputed to me, that
in uttering this sentiment I indulged in a pecuUar latitude of expres
sion in order to make a show of liberality. I wish, therefore, now most
unequivocaUy and most solemnly to reiterate the same feeling ....
vThe Protestant Church is rooted in the Constitution ; it is established
¦by the fundamental laws of the realm ; it is rendered, as far as the

342 APPENDIX. [Note 00.
most solemn acts of the legislature can render any institution, funda
mental and perpetual ; it is so declared by the Act of Union between
Great Britain and Ireland. I think it could not now be disturbed
without danger to the general securities we possess for liberty, pro-
perty, and order ; without danger to all the blessings we derive from
being under a lawful government and free constitution. FeeUng thus,
the very conscience which dictates to me a determined adherence to
the Eoman Catholic religion, would dictate to me a determined re
sistance to any attempt to subvert the Protestant Establishment, or ta
wrest from the Church the possessions which the law has given it."
Not long before this evidence was given by Mr. Blake, Mr. (after
wards Lord) Plunket, in a debate in the House of Commons on a
motion for an inquiry into the Church of Ireland (6th May, 1825),
thus expressed himself: ... "I consider the Protestant EstabUsh
ment necessary for the security of all sects ; and I think that there
should not only be an Established Church, but that it should be richly
endowed, and its dignitaries enabled to take their stations among the
nobles of the land. But speaking of it in a political point of view, I
have no hesitation in stating that the existence of the Protestant Es
tablishment is the great bond of union between the two countries. If
ever the unfortunate moment shall arrive, at which the legislature
shall rashly lay hands upon the property of the Church, that moment
wUl seal the doom of the Union, and terminate for ever the connexion
between the two countries."

Note C C.
The proposition that justification is by faith only may be concurred
in by persons who yet disagree widely : the proposition being, of course
when this occurs, explained by them in different ways. This diversity
of interpretation arises from the various meanings attributed to the
words faith and justification. Thus, by some divines faith is in the
proposition understood to signify mere trust, while others think that it
is used to express what has been termed fides formata, faith informed.
and perfected by charity, &c. : and justifieation has, on the one hand,.
been restricted in its sense to acquittal from the consequences of sin,
the person justified being then counted righteous ; and, on the other
hand, it has been extended to include that he is not only counted,,
but made righteous, and counted because he is made. ,

NoteCC] appendix. 843
The Irish divines who explain faith as trust, and justification as
acquittal, derive their opinions from the German Eeformers. With
them faith wa,s fiducia, and justification (in the words ofthe Augsburg
Confession) remissio peceatorum et imputatio justitiee. The ideas of the
opposing school of thought, as represented by Jeremy Taylor and Alex
ander Knox, may be traced distinctly in some of the Fathers ; (with
perhaps a slight difference) in eminent Eoman Catholic divines, and in
at least one great Protestant writer, Grotius. (See Bishop Browne on
Article XL, and a tract by Bishop Fitzgerald, entitled Episcopacy, &c.,
published in Dublin in 1839.)
The Thirty-nine Articles having been re-affirmed by the disestab
lished Church of Ireland (see page 284), the Eleventh Article, which
treats " of justification," has, in the system of this Church, an
authority equal to that which it possesses in the Church of Eng
land. This Article speaks of justification by faith only as a " doc
trine most wholesome and very full of comfort," and refers to one
of the Homilies (called in it the Homily of Justification, but in the
Homilies called "a Sermon of the salvation of mankind") as more
largely expressing this comment. The following extract from the
Homily may be compared with the writers to whom reference has
been made : . . . " The true understanding of this doctrine — we
be justified by faith without works, or that we be justified by faith in
Christ only — is not, that this our act, to believe in Christ, or this our
faith in Christ, which is within us, doth justify us and deserve our justi
fication unto us ; for that were to count ourselves to be justified by some
act or vfrtue that is within ourselves. But the true understandmg and
meaning thereof is, that although we have faith, hope, charity, dread
and fear of God within us, and do never so many good works thereunto,
yet we must renounce the merits of aU our said virtues of faith, hope,
charity, and aU our other virtues and good deeds, which we either
have done, shaU do, or can do, as things that be far too weak, and in
sufficient, and unperfect to deserve remission of our sins and our justi
fication ; and therefore we must trust only ia God's mercy, and in that
sacrifice which our high Priest and Saviour Christ Jesus, the Son of
God, offered for us upon the cross, to obtain thereby God's grace and
remission, as well of our original sin in baptism, as of all actual sin
committed by us after our baptism, if we truly repent and turn un
feignedly to Him again . . . Great and godly a virtue as the lively faith
is, yet it putteth us from itself, and remitteth or appointeth us unto

344 APPENDIX. [Note DD.
Christ, for to have only by Him remission of our sias or justification.
So that our faith in Christ, as it were, saith unto us thus : It is not I
that take away your sins, but it is Christ only ; and to Him only I
send you for that purpose, forsaking therein all your good virtues,
words, thoughts, and works, and only putting your trust in Christ."

Note D D.
The theories in reference to Episcopacy, which have been put
forward by divines of the Protestant Churches of England and Ire
land, seem to be reducible to the three following propositions, and to
have been advanced in the order in which they are now stated : —
(1) No one precise form of Church government is absolutely pre
scribed ia the Scriptures. A regular ministry was constituted, but no
specific order of pre-eminence or distribution of office and authority
was laid down. A right to choose among systems of ecclesiastical go
vernment resides, according to some, in the State, and according to
others in the national Church of the country. (2) The order of Bishops
is of apostolical institution. (8) The order of Bishops is of divine in
stitution, a mode of government not resting upon mere practice or
usage, but enjoined as of universal and perpetual obligation in the
Christian religious system.
Those whose opinions are represented in the first proposition (1)
point out the advantages which accrue from ecclesiastical government
being, like the civil government, not bound by one inflexible model.
In each the end — the order and well-being of the community — remains
always the same, but the means by which it is to be attained can be
varied so as to adapt them to the vicissitudes of time and occasion,
and bring them into harmony with the condition, circumstances, and
dispositions of the people among whom they are to be introduced.
The theologians who support the second proposition (2) in
general consider that what is apostolici juris is divini jurit also, since
we may assume the Apostles to have been guided by a divine impulse,
or at least controlled by a divine superintendence. They do not, how
ever, in general hold Episcopacy to be divini juris in the same sense
as ordinances [e.g. the sacraments), which were established by our
Lord, and the institution is, therefore (they concede), not, as such
ordinances are, either indispensably necessary or immutable.
The advocates of the third proposition (3) regard Bishops as direct

NoteEE.] appendix. 345
successors of the Apostles. Most of them interpret the commission
implied in the words of our Lord after His Eesurrection — " As the
Father hath sent me, even so send I you " — to be one conferred not
generaUy, but upon the Apostles, and regard the accompanying act —
¦" He breathed on them "—as done in analogy with the original gift of
"the breath of life ;" the effect in each case not being restricted to
the immediate recipients of the benefit, but designed to be transmitted
through them in a perpetual series of successors.

Note EE.
Among those authors who (as has been mentioned at page 263)
think that the character of the Celtic race disinclines them to Pro
testant systems of religion is Motley. In his History of the Dutch Re
public, vol, in. p. 82, he assigns as one of the reasons why in some
provinces ofthe Netherlands Protestantism did not extend itself, "the
greater infusion of the Celtic element always keenly alive to sensuous
and splendid manifestations of the devotional principle."
In any race which (like the Celtic) is fervid, emotional, easily
affected through the imagination and the feelings, tendencies of this
nature may be expected to exist, and, where existing, to predispose the
people to favour ritualistic and ceremonial systems of religion. Natio
4st omnis Gallorum (and Galli Galatae and Celtse are but varieties of the
same race), admodum dedita religionibus, says the historian of antiquity
through whom the Celtic character is best known. (B. G. vi. 16.)
But tendencies do not necessarily always prevaU ; and race is not
an altogether overpowering influence in the social system : it is only
one of several agencies which operate at the same time, and the result
is the representative of the reciprocal action of aU, not of the exclusive
action of any one : nor, when it is in connexion with religion that
the future is to be predicted, may we forget that higher impulses, such
as a conviction that particular doctrines have been divinely taught,
are Uable to intervene and disturb calculations based upon mere pro-
babiUty. WhUe it may be true as a general rule that Protestantism has not
been successful with Celtic nations, stiU there are remarkable excep
tions from the rule. The inhabitants of Wales, of the Highlands of
Scotland, and of the Isle of Man, are of Celtic origin, and they are all
now Protestant.

346 APPENDIX. [Note PF.
Another historian, Macaulay, thinks that it is only in communities
where the tongue is Teutonic Protestantism makes way. " Wherever,"
he says, " a language derived from ancient Eome is spoken, the religion
of modern Eome prevails to this day." From this he deduces the in
ference that the Eeformation was "not only an insurrection of the
laity agaiust the clergy, but also an insurrection of the great German
race against an alien domination." [History, vol. i. p. 67.)
And no doubt there was in the German people, and from the
period when they resisted the dominion of ancient Eome had been, a
free and independent spirit, which aided the progress of Protestantism,
and predisposed those among whom it was at first originated, or to
whom as of like or kindred race with themselves it most speedily tra
veUed, to sympathise with it. But that it spread no farther is due,
probably, not so much to anything in the character of the nations
among whom it did not penetrate, as to internal improvement in the
character of the Church, which continued its connexion with Eome,
and to the consequent removal of the sources of discontent with its
condition which, far more than doctrinal controversies, led to the Ee
formation. The external movement for reform, as has been pointed
out by Eanke, was met and stayed by counter-reform from within
[History of the Popes, vol. ii. books 5, 7). Of the nations which at the
end of the sixteenth century adhered to the Church of Eome, however
much they differed in race or language, none has since seceded from it.

Note P P.
In the Eeport of 1868, the annual revenues of the EstabUshed
Church of Ireland (exclusive of the value of houses of residence and
lands in the occupation of ecclesiastical persons), after deducting an
aUowance for the proportion of poor-rates, which the persons paying
rents and tithe rentcharge were entitled to deduct from ecclesiastical
owners, and after deducting the expenses of collection and quit-rents
were estimated to be : . . . Prom the rents of lands let to tenants,
JE204,982 19s. Td. ; from tithe rentcharge, JE864,224 16s. lid. ; from
other sources, £15,530 6s. Id. ; making in aU, £584,688 2s. 7d. In
this estimate the amount actually deducted on account of poor-rate
for the year 1866, was taken as a measure of the allowance made
on that account. In the same Eeport the value set on the houses-

Note PP.] APPENDIX. 347
of residence and the lands connected with them, which were actuaUy
in the occupation of ecclesiastical persons, was derived from the official
valuation for the purposes of local taxation. It amounted to £50,237
yearly. This, of course, was subject to the taxes which affect occu
piers of land, such as poor-rate, &c., which in the year 1866 came to
£18,086. The buUding charges due in respect of the houses were
returned at £232,335. The net revenues seem to have been distri
buted among their ecclesiastical owners in the following manner :
the bishops owned about £58,000 a-year ; the capitular bodies about
£19,000 a-year; the Ecclesiastical Commissioners about £113,000
a-year ; and the beneficed incumbents the remainder. Of the bene
fices with incumbents, the emoluments — after deducting for poor-
rate, &c., and making an aUowance for actual payments to curates in
1866, and for the rent of a house when there was no glebe-house —
seem to have been much as follows : ... Of about 300 under £100
a-year ; of about 420 between £100 and £200 a-year ; of about 365
between £200 and £300 a-year ; those of the remainder were more
than that amount, but in only seven instances did they equal or exceed
£1000 a-year. (See Tables annexed to the Eeport : viii. as amended
in Appendix, p. 249, ix., x., xx., xxi., xxii., xxvi., xxviU.)
The Commissioners were directed to report suggestions for im
provement in the system of the Church (see page 267) ; but they in
terpreted the words in which this was expressed to confine them to
alteration and redistribution within the limits of the Church, and to re
qufre them to assume that the EstabUshment would be continued. This
being so, the matter which then appeared to them most to need re
form was the inadequate remuneration of many of the incumbents.
of parishes, and the disproportion between payment and work— the
former being frequently in an inverse ratio to the latter. It was in
order to remedy this state of affairs, and to obtain a fund for the
purpose, that the Commissioners (as has been mentioned at page 270)
proposed to reduce the number of bishops, of cathedral capitular bodies,
and of cathedral dignitaries. With the same object they desired " a
readjustment of parochial arrangements and endowments, based upon
a consideration of the circumstances proper to be taken into account,
such as area. Church population, and Church accommodation." In
this way in places where there were few Protestants the number of
distinct districts to be provided with incumbents could be diminished,
and the revenues of those suppressed be set free for general use.

348

APPENDIX.

[Note PP.

The policy, advocated in the Eeport, of adjusting the internal ar
rangements of each locality to the extent of resident Church popu
lation, and of endeavouring adequately to provide for the clergy in
¦charge of the parishes, even if it were necessary to reduce their num
ber in order to do so, seems still more suitable to the circumstances of
the Church, when it is, as now, dependent upon voluntary support.
Accordingly, so far as reducing the number of incumbencies, it has
been, and as the opportunities open by vacancies probably wUl in the
future be, still further carried out. But no change has been as yet
made in the number of cathedral dignitaries, although numbers of
them have neither cathedral duties to discharge, nor salaries to receive.
The Eepresentative Body submit to the General Synod yearly
reports of the financial condition of the Church. The last report
(1886) brings their accounts down to 31st December, 1885. The
amount of subscriptions, legacies, and donations, which they received
in the year 1886 was £137,167. They had then £3,732,636 remain
ing of the commutation money paid over to them by the Commis
sioners of Church Temporalities as the capitalised value of the annui
ties of the ecclesiastical persons who commuted their incomes under
the provisions of the Irish Church Act (see page 291, supra). The
¦original amount of annuities charged on the commutation money had
by deaths, composition, &c., been then reduced to £130,810 a-year,
which continued to be charged on and payable out of the remaining
capital sum. Beside this capital sum, and the glebes purchased, the
Eepresentative Body then had in investments about £2,742,309 ; of
which the sum of £500,000 had been paid to them as a substitute for
private endowments under the Act of Parliament, and the rest was
derived from bequests, donations, &c.
In 1881 a Census was taken, which ascertained the religious pro
fession of the people, and the number of persons who classed them
selves as of each Church or persuasion, The foUowing Table contains
the returns of this Census, and also of the Census of 1861, which was
the last before disestablishment : —

A,D,

Koman
Catholics,

Prot, Epis
copalians,

Presby terians,

Methodists,

Another
Persuasions
except Jews.

Jews, 393
472

Total.

18611881

4,505,265 3,960,891

693,367 639,574

523,291470,734

46,399 48,839

31,262
, 63,796

5,798,9675,174,306

Note GG.]

APPENDIX.

349

Note GG.
The following Table enumerates the Bishops of the Church of
Ireland appointed subsequently to November 1840, the date when
Bishop Mant's Tables, recordiag episcopal appointments made after
A.D. 1535, end : —

Date of

See,

Bishop.

Consecra tion,

Vacancy,

Meath,

Charles Dickinson, D,D,, .

1840

1842

Ossory, Ferns, and Leighlii

1, James Thomas O'Brien, D.D,,

1842

1876

Meatli,

Edward Stopford,

1842

1850

Cashel, Waterford, Lismore

,

and Emly, .
Eobert Daly,
1843
1872
Cork, Cloyne, and Ross,
James Wilson, .
1848
1857
Do-«'n, Connor, and Dromor
3, Eobert Knox,
1849
18861
Limerick, Ardfert, and Agl
1-
adoe, .
WilHam Higgin,
1849
1853
Meath,
Thomas S, Townsend,
1850
1852
Meath,
James H, Singer,
1862
1866
Derry and Eaphoe, .
William Higgin,
1853
1867
Limerick, &c,, .
Henry Griffin, .
1854
1866
Kilmore, Elphin, and Ardag
h, Marcus Gervais Beresford, .
1854
18622
Cork, Cloyne, and Ross,
William Fitzgerald, .
1857
1862»
Killaloe, &c,, .
William Fitzgerald, .
1862
1884
Cork, Cloyne, and Eoss,
John Gregg,
1862
1878
Duhlin and Kildare, .
Eichard C, Trench, .
1864
1885
Meath,
Samuel Butcher,
1866
1876
Limerick, &c,, ,
Charles Graves,
1866
—
Tuam, Killaloe, and Aohon
ry, Hon, Charles Bernard,
1867
—
Derry and Eaphoe,
William Alexander, .
1867
SuESEaUENT TO DISESTABLISHMENT.
Kilmore, .
Charles Leslie, .
1870
1870
Kilmore, .
Thomas Carson,
1870
1874
Cashel, &o,.
Maurice F, Day,
1872
—
Kilmore, Elphin, andArdai
i;h, John R, Darley,
1874
1884
Ossory, Fems, and Leighlii
1, Eobert S, Gregg,
1875
1878*
Meath,
Lord Plunket, ,
1876
18855
Ossory, &c,.
William Pakenham Walsh,
1878
—
Cork, &c,.
Robert S, Gregg,
1878
—
KiUaloe, ,
William Bennett Chester, ,
1884
—
Kilmore, .
Samuel Shone, .
1884
—
Dublin and Kildare, .
Lord Plunket, .
1885
—
Meath,
Charles Parsons Reichel, ,
1886
—
Armagh, .
Eobert Knox, ,
1886
—
Down, Connor, and Dromoi
e, William Reeves.^
1886
—
Clogher, ,
Charles M. Stack, .
1886
» Translated to Armagh, » Translated to Armagh. = Translated to Killaloe.
* Translated to Cork, = Translated to Dublin, . .^. . ,, , , ^, ,
' Previously, on vacancy in the See of Arniagh, elected Interim Bishop ot Armagh and Clogher.
350 APPENDIX. [Note H H.

Note H H.
The Prayer Book pubUshed by the General Synod differs fr'om that
which was formerly used in the United Church of England and Ire-
land, and is still used in the Church of England, in the foUowing
particulars : —
i. In the Prefaces, a new Preface is inserted (see page 298, supra),
and the dates are put to the former Prefaces. The entire of the ad
dendum to the Preface which is entitled, " concerning the Services of
the Church," and which is in fact a Eubric, has been omitted. This
takes away the direction that " all Priests and Deacons are to say
daily the Morning and Evening Prayer either privately or openly, not
being let by sickness or some other urgent cause."
ii. The direction how the Psalter is to be read is placed at the
head of the Psalter ; the order how Holy Scripture is appointed to be
read is, in some respects, altered, and the Lectionary which foUows
varies from the English, principally by omitting all Lessons taken from
the Apocrypha, and by inserting additional Lessons from the Apo
calypse (see page 302, supra),
iii. After the Table of Vigils, &c., there is inserted power for the
Archbishops and Bishops to appoint Days of Humiliation, and Days of
Thanksgiving, to be observed by the Church of Ireland, and to pre
scribe special services for the same. Here also there is introduced a
Note on the Golden Numbers.
iv. In the Order for Morning and Evening Prayer, in the title
the words "to be said and used," before "daily," are omitted, also
the direction as to dress is omitted, and this is hereafter to be
regulated by the Canons (see page 295, supra). Then are introduced
powers to enable selections from the Services, with approval of the
Ordinary, to be used ; also for the use of the Morning and Evening
Prayer, the Litany, and the Order for the Administration of the
Lord's Supper, as separate Services, or in any combination, subject
to the control of the Ordinary. And if the use of full Services be
found seriously inconvenient, the Ordinary may dispense with one or
more of them. With his permission a sermon may, on special occa
sions, be preached without the use of morning or evening prayer, some
prayers from them being used. The Archbishops may vary the prayers

Note H H.] APPENDIX. 851
relating to the Eoyal family. It is explained that though all things
set forth are to be read or sung in the English tongue, this is not to
prevent the Irish language, or any other the people may understand
better, being substituted.
V. In the Order for Morning Prayer, the cxlviii. Psalm {Laudate
Dominum] is introduced as an alternative to the Te Deum or Benedicite.
When the Litany is said, the Lord's Prayer and three versicles after
the Te Deum may be omitted.
vi. The Eubric directing the use of the Athanasian Creed is
¦omitted ; and the Creed remains without alteration, but with no
¦direction as to its use (see page 302, supra).
vii. There is a new Eubric before the Litany directing what is to
be read with it, when it is read either as a separate Service or in
¦combination with the Communion Service.
viii. In the occasional prayers and thanksgivings there is iatro-
¦duced from the Service for the 20th June a prayer for Unity ; also
the foUowiag new prayers — (1) for a sick person ; (2) for Eogation
days ; (3) for New Year's Day ; (4) for Christian Missions ; (6) for the
General Synod while it is in Session ; (6) for use in Colleges and
Schools ; (7) a thanksgiving for recovery from sickness. The prayer
for use in time of plague, &c., is altered in some respects ; so also is
the prayer for Parliament, in which for the words " most religious and
gracious Queen," are substituted the words " our Sovereign Lady the
¦Queen." ix. In connexion with the Collects, Epistles, &c., there are three
Eubrics providing, among other things, for the case of a holyday fall
ing upon a Sunday. If on Christmas Day or Easter Day there are
two celebrations of the Holy Communion, a new CoUect, Epistle, and
<jospel, are provided, which may be used at the first. For the Sunday
after Easter Day there is a new Epistle.
X. In connexion vnth the Order for Administration of the Lord's
Supper the preliminary Eubric is altered in some respects ; so also
are the Eubrics before the Offertory. In the Offertory sentences the
two from Tobit are omitted. The Eubric about the collection of the
Offertory is altered, to enable it to be before the sermon. In the
Nicene Creed, in the words "I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord
and Giver of life," a comma has been inserted after Lord, to bring
the sense more to the Greek form, viz., to Hvevfia to ayiov, to Kvpiov,

352 APPENDIX. [Note HH.
Kal TO ^moTToibv. The Eubric before the exhortation to those who come^
to the Communion contains an insertion of the words " those who do
not intend to communicate, having had opportunity to withdraw."
The exhortation is slightly altered. It may be omitted at the disr
cretion of the minister, the consent of the Ordinary having been first
obtained, but provided that it shall be read once a month at least,
and at all great festivals. In the Eubric before the prayer of consecra
tion the words " standing at the North side of the table " have been
introduced (and see the canons on this head, page 295, supra). At
the end of the office some additional Collects are introduced ; one of
which may be used after the Offertory when " the prayer for the Church
MiUtant " is not read. In the Eubrics which follow these Collects.
provisions are added which enable the minister to dispense with the-
" prayer for the Church Militant " ; prohibit the administration of the
Communion unless two at the least are present ; and permit on oc
casions sanctioned by the Ordinary the service to begin with the
Collect, Epistle, and Gospel. The direction as to the nature of the
bread is now imperative — " shall be," not as before, " it shall suffice
that it be." When by reason of numbers it is inconvenient to ad
dress each communicant separately, the words, on delivering the
elements, may, with the consent of the Ordinary, be said once to as-
many as shall together kneel at the Holy Table ; but they are to be
said separately to any communicant desiring it.
xi. In the Service for Public Baptism of Infants alterations are
made in the Eubrics, the effect of which is to permit parents to be
sponsors for their own children ; and when three sponsors cannot be
found, to allow two ; and if two cannot be found, to allow one. Also
some alterations are made as to the times for administration of the
rite. In the exhortation at the beginning of the service, in place of
the words " except he be regenerate and born anew of water and of
the Holy Ghost" are substituted the words " except a man be born
of water and of the Spirit." Also the Eubric before the words "I
baptize thee " has been altered, and now reads, " he shall dip it (the
child) in the water discreetly and warily, if they shall desire it, and
he shall be certified that the child may well endure it ; otherwise it
shall suffice to pour water upon it." At the end of the service a
new Eubric is added, which explains the use of the sign of the cross :
" that it is not thereby intended to add any new rite to this sacrameni'

Note HH.] APPENDIX. 353
as a part of it, or necessary to it ; or that the using of that sign is of
any virtue or efficacy of itself, but only to remind aU Christians of the
death and cross of Christ, which is their hope and their glory ; and to
put them in mind of their obligation to bear the cross in such manner
as God shall think fit to lay it upon them, and to become conformable
to Christ in his sufferings." In the PubUe Baptism of Adults the
openiag exhortation is modified, as in the Service for Infants, and a
new Eubric states that persons of riper years may, upon great and
urgent cause, be baptized in private.
xii. In the Catechism a question and answer having relation to the
Sacrament of the Lord's Supper have been introduced (see page 800,
supra). In the Eubric directing the curate to catechise, for the words
" on Sundays and Holydays " are substituted " at such times as he
shall think convenient." The direction in another Eubric that every
one shall have a godfather or godmother as a witness of thefr confir
mation has been omitted.
xiii. In the Order for Confirmation is inserted a question ask
ing those baptized in riper years if they renew the promise of their
baptism. The Eubric as to admission to the Holy Communion is now
changed into " every person ought to present himself for Confirmation
(unless prevented by some urgent reason) before he partakes of the
Lord's Supper."
xiv. In the Form of Solemnization of Matrimony the first Eubric
recognizes the use of Licences, and gives directions as to Banns. In
the openiag exhortation there are some verbal changes. Directions
are given for procedure when more than one couple are married.
The prayer beginning "0 merciful Lord!" is verbally altered. At
the end of the Service there are added the third of the Collects after
the Offertory, and the benedictory prayer for grace (2 Cor. xiii. 14).
XV. In the Visitation of the Sick there is a new Eubric, permitting
the minister to edify and comfort the sick as he shall think meet by
instruction or prayer ; but if the sick person requires the office to be
used, the minister shall use it. A precatory form of absolution is
substituted for the former (see page 801, supra) ; and in the Eubric
before it the words " the sick person shall be moved to make con
fession" are changed into "if the sick person feel his conscience
troubled with any weighty matter," and the words " he shall absolve
him" into the words "the minister shall say thus." There are
2 A

354 APPENDIX. [Note HH.
added a new alternative Collect after the absolution, and a new
prayer for a sick person when his sickness is assuaged. In the
Communion of the Sick the Eubric before it is modified, to aUow the
CoUect, Epistle, and Gospel of the day to be used in place of those
prescribed. Power is given to shorten the office if the person is sick ;
and the last Eubric is in some respects varied.
xvi. In the Order for Burial of the Dead the first Eubric is enlarged,
and allows in certain oases a portion of the office to be used for un-
baptised persons : an alternative Lesson from 1 Thess. is added to the
former one from 1 Cor. xv. In the words said at the grave, beginning
" For as much," &c., the words " of His great mercy " are left out.
In the prayer beginning " Almighty God, with whom do live the spirits
of them that depart this life," for the words " we give Thee hearty
thanks for that it hath pleased Thee to deliver," &c., are substituted
the words " we bless Thy holy name for all Thy servants departed
this life in Thy faith and fear."
xvii. In the Commiaation Service the first exhortation has been
modified ; and in the long exhortation " fruits of penance " have been
changed to "fruits of repentance."
xviii. Eubrics are placed before the Psalter taken out of the old
prefaces. xix. In the Ordination and Consecration Services Church is instead
of Eealm, and also of Church and Eealm.
XX. In the Form for the Anniversary of Her Majesty's ascension
there are some unimportant variations of Eubrics, and some CoUects
are omitted.
xxi. Some emendations are made in the former Irish Service for
Visitation of Prisoners : in the Absolution in this Service the same
change is made as in the Visitation of the Sick.
XX. There are the following new Services : — (1) " to be used on
the first Sunday on which a minister officiates in a church to which
he has been instituted ;" (2) " A form of thanksgiving for the blessing
of harvest ;" (3) " A form for the consecration of a church ; " (4) " A
form of consecration of a churchyard or other burial-ground."

THE END.

EEEATA.

Page 41.

It is erroneously stated that in the second Prayer Book of Edward VI.
the Prefatory Sentences, the Exhortation, &c., were introduced in the Evening
Prayer. They were not introduced in the Evening Prayer until the revision
of Charles II. Page 42.
The person in whose place Casey was restored was not, as stated in the
note, then dead: he had either resigned or been deprived. (See Appendix,
page 326.) Page 55.
It should have been noticed that in the clause defining what should be
deemed heresy, the words of the EngUsh Supremacy Act, which required
that the determination of Parliament should be with the assent of the clergy
in their Convocation, were in the Irish Supremacy Aot omitted.

Page 212,
Instead of the words " the Union of the Kingdoms and Churches of Great
Britain and Ireland," the words should be "the Union of the Kingdoms of
Great Britain and Ireland, and of the Churches of England and Ireland."

Chapters XV., XVI., XVII., XVIII., XIX., have been erroneously
numbered XVL, XVII., XVIII., XIX., XX.