wrote a letter to Pope Gregory himself, 'reproving his innovations with great freedom.'"-(p. 11.)

In conformity with the above evidence on this interesting fact, we find our own historian Hume, in reference to the period here alluded to, corroborating this account

"Of the early independence of the Irish Church; the Irish (says the historian) followed the doctrines of their first teachers, and never acknowledged any subjection to the see of Rome.'”—(p. 16.)

We shall conclude this branch of our subject by adducing the remaining proofs of the Protestant character of the ancient Irish Church, added by the Dean. Thus he writes:

86

Again, the ancient liturgy of the Irish Church agreed with the Greek, and manifestly differed from the Roman, in the communion service, in the prophetical lessons, in the sermon and offices after it, and in various other particulars."-(p. 42.)

The Dean further shews from the testimony of St. Bernard, that auricular confession, as well as authoritative absolution, were rejected by the ancient Church of Ireland. And he adds :—

"The early Irish Christians did not believe in the efficacy of prayers to saints and angels. They neither prayed to dead men, nor for them, nor was the service for the dead ever used by the Irish Church, till they were obliged to attend to it, by the council of Cashel, as may be seen by a reference to the proceedings of that convention."—(p. 43.)

The doctrines of transubstantiation, images, purgatory, the sacrifice of the mass, indulgences, and other Romish novelties, were utterly repudiated by the ancient Irish Church.

"Thus, in the words of Archbishop Usher, the profession and practice of Christianity in the primitive Irish Church varied very little from that of the present established Church of England and Ireland. The use of the holy scriptures was recommended and enjoined as every Christian man's duty. The doctrines of purgatory, and prayers for the dead, were not heard of till the twelfth century. The adoration of images was considered impious and abominable. Infants were baptized without the consecrated chrism, the omission of which is laid to the charge of the Irish by Archbishop Lanfranc. The celibacy of the clergy was unknown, which is proved by the fact, that Pope Innocent, in the twelfth century, sent directions to his legate, to abolish the abuse prevailing in Ireland of sons and grandsons succeeding their fathers and grandfathers in their ecclesiastical benefices.' The sacrament of the Lord's Supper was administered in both kinds to the people. The mass was nothing more than the public service of the Church, and was so called even when prayers were only said, without the celebration of the communion." -(pp. 46, 47.)

Towards the close, however, of this bright epoch in the history of the Irish Church, arose that gloomy and ominous cloud which soon involved the land in worse than heathen darkness. England's monarch, fulfilling the degrading office of deputy for the pope, forced the Romish superstition upon Ireland at the point of his

Anglo-Norman lance. The Church of that country had been, up to this tyrannical invasion of her rights in the twelfth century, totally independent of the See of Rome. For more than six hundred happy years had she enjoyed an unrestricted freedom in the possession of a pure and apostolic faith. But under the sway of Henry II. was imported the usurpation of a corrupt and apostate system; and from that dismal hour to the present, have existed in Ireland two rival churches,-viz., the original establishment; and the comparatively modern incubus of the Church of Rome, with which in the reign of Henry II. the Church in England had unhappily identified herself.

"Such was the origin of the two Churches in Ireland. The one the Church of the Anglo-Popish aristocracy, and of the ascendant party, the other the Church of the Irish clergy and people. The former, though a plant of foreign growth, had certain facilities for striking root, and overwhelming a rival in the night-shade of its branches, which the genius of Christianity did not allow to its opponent. Yet notwithstanding every disadvantage, the native Church continued for three centuries, and discovered even some languishing symptoms of life as late as the reign of Henry the Seventh.”—(p. 112.)

Under this miserably altered state of things, the native Church of Ireland during the second period of her history, can hardly be discerned amidst the surrounding darkness. From the twelfth to the sixteenth centuries, we read of little in that country beyond the insolent efforts of ecclesiastical usurpers to place themselves above all laws, human and divine. Henry the Second had scarcely reached the shores of England, when the Romish bishops established under his auspices, began to perplex and insult the Irish government. Laurence O'Toole, the first archbishop of Dublin under the new régime, took the lead in this course of rebellious insolence, and exhibited to his monarch a striking instance of popish disloyalty and ingratitude.

"After some years of ostentatious attachment to the British monarch, this prelate appeared as his accuser at the Council of Lateran, supported by a deputation of five other bishops. They had all sworn allegiance at Cashel; and the king suspecting their intentions, arrested their progress through England, and exacted a second oath, that they would do nothing at the Council prejudicial to his interests; but the ardour with which they were inspired, overcame every obstacle."-(p. 128).

This traitor, of whom a contemporary writer observes, that "he exerted himself with all the zeal of his nation, for the privileges of his Church, and against the king's authority," was rewarded by the pope for these services with the dignity of apostolic legate, and thus rendered capable of perpetrating still greater evils than before. But Henry wisely prevented his return to Ireland, whither he had

1 Giraldus Cambrensis.

set out; and the disappointed agitator of that day, as the Dean calls him, ended his days in Normandy. Now let us mark what follows:

"This manifold traitor to his country, his native prince, and the sovereign of his own election, was in due season canonized; and his saintly protection is still invoked by our titular hierarchy with a publicity which displays the unshaken constancy of the order.-(pp. 129, 130.)

Unworthy as was the archbishop's conduct, it was even surpassed in enormity by the violence of Comyn his successor, who arrogantly claimed a grant, pretended to be made by the pope to O'Toole, of most extensive possessions in lands, villages, and parishes in the neighbourhood of Dublin, in opposition to a counter-claim of Haymo de Valois, prince John's deputy in the government. This haughty prelate

"Being thus excluded from possession, excommunicated de Valois and all the other members of the administration, and not content with this vengeance upon the transgressors, laid the unoffending city and diocese under an interdict.

"To indicate that the passion of Christ had been renewed, in the indignity offered to his minister, he caused the crucifixes of the cathedral to be laid prostrate on the ground, with crowns of thorns on the heads of the images; and one of the figures was pointed out as the miraculous representative of the suffering Redeemer, the face inflamed, the eyes dropping tears, the body bathed in sweat, and the side pouring forth blood and water. In the end, the lord deputy was obliged to yield; and as an atonement for his former injuries, made a donation of twenty plough-lands to the See of Dublin.”— (p. 130.)

While the Romish prelates were thus tyrannizing over the laity, and keeping the throne itself in vassalage, they frequently disgraced themselves by quarrelling with each other. One or two instances of these scandalous enormities in the newly-imported Church, will suffice for our present purpose.

"In 1210, the bishops of Waterford and Lismore had a dispute concerning certain lands, alleged by each to be the property of his See. The affair was referred to commissioners appointed, not by the government, but by the pope; and these having condemned the bishop of Waterford, that prelate enraged at their decision, formed a plot for seizing the bishop of Lismore; and accordingly, having besieged his cathedral, while he was engaged in divine service, he hurried him away, and cast him into a dungeon in Dungarvan, loaded with irons, and further sorely afflicted him while there with hunger and thirst, and many other cruel indignities."—(p. 136.)

A fearful contest was for many years carried on between the archbishops of Armagh and Dublin, for the primacy of the Church in Ireland. The archbishop of Armagh was the primate of the primitive Church of Ireland, while the archbishop of Dublin was that of the intrusive Roman Church. This tedious dispute was finally settled by the arrangement, that the archbishop of Dublin

should be styled the "Primate of Ireland," and the archbishop of Armagh, the " Primate of ALL Ireland."

"Roland Jorse, archbishop of Armagh, arriving at Howth, the day after the Annunciation, arose in the night-time, and by stealth erected his cross and carried it as far as the priory of Grace Dieu, within the province of Dublin, where some of the archbishop's family met him, and beating down his cross, drove him in confusion out of Leinster. It was a mark of an archbishop's dignity, to bear his cross erect in his own province; and a disgraceful contest existed for many years, between many successive archbishops of Armagh and Dublin, as to the right claimed by each, of exhibiting this symbol of authority in the province of the other. This unworthy dispute was carried on with such fierceness, that on eleven different occasions, in the course of twenty years, between 1429 and 1449, successive archbishops of Armagh having been summoned to appear at parliaments holden in the province of Leinster, made returns to the writ of summons, that they could not personally attend in consequence of this quarrel.”—(p. 150.)

We have already witnessed the rebellious insubordination exhibited by the Romish bishops of Ireland to the English monarch in the person of Henry the Second. We find the same spirit of disaffection actuating their successors against Edward the Second. An opportunity was afforded by the invasion of Ireland by the Scots under Edward Bruce, the brother of Robert and we are presented with the following consummation of their treasonable audacity.

:

"They denounced the English, as enemies to the Church, and oppressors of the nation; they exhorted the populace to flock to the banner of Bruce, a prince, they said, of the ancient line of Milesian monarchs, and the chosen instrument of the common deliverance; and with that vain-glorious impatience of prosperity, which has always frustrated their most promising attempts, formally crowned the adventurer King of Ireland."-(p. 152.)

During this dark era, the Christian portion of the community was exposed to all the horrors of a protracted persecution. The Protestant population was cruelly deprived of every civil and religious privilege, and the properties and lives of its members had become the prey and the sport of those ruthless spiritual tyrants, who were upheld by a foreign power. The native inhabitants, who had never submitted to the English government, were branded with the opprobrious title of Irish enemies, while the Church of Rome, forced for the first time upon the country, viewed them as heretics of the very worst description, because they were strongly attached to the old religion of their forefathers. The Anglo-Norman adventurers who had obtained a grant of nearly the entire island, but who had subdued only a small part of it, united with the Romish hierarchy, now elevated above the rank and condition of the native princes, and hunted down the defenceless aborigines with the most heartless tyranny. To deprive an Irish Protestant of his life was not considered a felony, and the only mode of escape

held out for his acceptance, was an unhesitating conformity to the prevailing superstition.

"The Irish unfortunately had originally stipulated with Henry II. for the use of their own laws. They were consequently held beyond the pale of English justice, and regarded as aliens at the best; sometimes as enemies, in our courts. Thus, as by the Brehon law, murder was only punished by a fine, it was not held felony to kill one of Irish race, unless he had conformed to the English laws, both civil and ecclesiastical."-(p. 121.)

Under the pressure of this grinding persecution, we find the Irish people endeavouring by a large bribe to induce the English king to admit them to a participation in the laws and rights of his own subjects.

"They made up a purse of eight thousand marks, which they tendered to the king, through his Irish governor, with a request that he would receive them as his faithful liegemen, and take them under the protection of the laws of England. Nothing can so well illustrate their broken-hearted wretchedness as this mode of preferring their petition. A measure so just in itself, so fair in its prospects, so full of glory to the prince, who might condescend to adopt it, was not even to be thought of by the supplicants, unless, like too many of their unhappy posterity, they approached the seat of justice with a bribe." (p. 141.)

Edward the First, the monarch referred to, was desirous of acceding to the prayer of the petitioners, after taking precautionary measures for securing the largest possible fine of money as payment for the sought favour; but he was frustrated in his plans by the barbarous policy of the Church of Rome.

"The bishops defeated the good intentions of the king, and closed their ears to the groans of their countrymen. It deserves to be added, that about fifty years after, these Irish outcasts petitioned again for naturalization on their native soil, and that their application was evaded by nearly the same devices."-(p. 145.)

The condition in which the people of Ireland were now left, is fearful to contemplate.

"They were not acknowledged as the king's subjects, the king's courts were not open to them; and if the blood of a father or brother were shed, his assassin had only to plead that the deceased was an Irishman, and he was secure from all vengeance, but that of the Almighty.”—(p. 140.)

Nor did this awful system of persecution cease with the reign of the first Edward. It was in the days of Edward the Third that a series of laws was passed by a parliament convened by his son Lionel, Duke of Clarence, constituting a celebrated code which is commonly called the Statute of Kilkenny, and which has been justly described "as a declaration of perpetual war against the native Irish, and all the English settlers who identified themselves with the Irish." Not only were the English Romanists prohibited under the heaviest penalties, by this law, from