*.■ '..; 
 
 .^*t»»- • 
 
 i'^Ni 

 
 L I B RARY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 U N IVER.5ITY 
 
 or ILLINOIS
 
 p 
 
 
 THE 
 
 IRISH CHURCH. 
 
 irs 
 
 PRESENT CONDITION: 
 
 irs 
 
 FUTURE PROSPECTS. 
 
 
 BY 
 
 The Rev. 
 
 ALFRED T. LEE, M.A., LL.D., 
 
 OF Christ's college, Cambridge, rector of ahoghill, and 
 
 
 RURAL DEAN, DIOCESE OF CONNOR. 
 
 "Nothing short of a convulsion, tearing up both Establishments by the j 
 roots, could accomplish its overthrow."— iW?' Justice Skee. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 WILLIAM SKEFFINGTON, 163 PICCADILLY. 
 
 DUBLIN: HODGES AND SMITH 
 
 1866. 
 
 [Price One Shilling.']
 
 NOTICE. 
 
 These Essays originally appeared in the pages 
 of TJie Liiterary Churcliman, and are now re- 
 printed, with the hope that their publication 
 in a collected form will be useful to those 
 requiring information on the Iiish Church 
 question. 
 
 June, 1866.
 
 uiuc r^
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Chapter I. — Survey of the Subject ..... 1 
 „ 11. — The Past History of the Irish Church the Key 
 
 to its Present Position . • . .11 
 
 „ III. — Synods of the Church in Ireland. Part I. . 22 
 „ IV.— Synods of the Church in Ireland. Part II. . 32 
 1, V. — The True Position of the Roman Communion 
 
 in Ireland ....... 45 
 
 „ VI. — The Social Aspect of the Irish Church Question 53 
 „ VII. — Statistics of the Irish Church . . . .61 
 
 „ VIII. — The True Principles on which the Irish Church 
 
 is to be maintained , . . . .73 
 Index 83
 
 THE 
 
 CHURCH IN IRELAND. 
 
 I.— SURVEY OF THE SUBJECT. 
 
 ^HE Irish Church question is daily acquiring more 
 ^ and more importance. The constant appearance of 
 pamphlets and articles in reviews and newspapers on this 
 subject shows that the public mind is awakening to a sense 
 of the anxiety that exists for accurate information respect- 
 ing it ; whilst the persistence of the enemies of the Irish 
 Cliurch in their attack Session after Session, the formation 
 of the Eoman Catholic National Association in Dublin, and 
 the publications respecting the Irish Church, with which 
 the Liberation Society continues to flood the country, 
 inaccurate and exaggerated as they are, all show that its 
 enemies are determined to leave no stone unturned, no 
 argument, valid or invalid, untried, in order to attain the 
 object at which they distinctly and openly aim — the entii'e 
 abolition of the Church as an Establishment in Ireland. 
 
 Now did Churchmen in England really understand the 
 true position of the Church in Ireland were they fully 
 alive to its past trials, its present difficulties, and the future 
 duties that await it, could they be induced to view the sub- 
 ject — not as it appears on the surface, not as it is presented 
 to them in the misleading articles of leading journals, and 
 popular reviews — not as it appears to the jaundiced eye 
 of political prejudice, but calmly, dispassionately, thought- 
 fully, and without that weariness which usually besets the
 
 English mind, when Irish subjects are brought before it, 
 — could this be brought to pass we have no doubt whatever 
 that the Irish Church question would enter at once into a 
 new phase, the clouds of misrepresentation and mis-state- 
 ment which now surround it would be cleared away, and 
 the proverbial straightforwardness and honesty of the 
 English mind would render all the efforts of the enemies of 
 the Irish Church — many energetic, and prodigal of their 
 money as they are — useless and vain. 
 
 With a view, then, of bringing the present position of the 
 Irish Church fully before our readers, we purpose in a 
 series of essays to consider this question, being thoroughly 
 convinced that in so doing we shall be rendering a service 
 to the Church at large, as well as to our own Branch of it 
 in pai'ticular. 
 
 We shall in this essay consider the question as a whole, 
 reserving for subsequent treatment the several parts into 
 which it may be divided. 
 
 Heavy charges are freely brought by her opponents against 
 the Church in Ireland. It is said to be an alien Church of 
 a small minority, thrust upon a reluctant people by the 
 power of England in the middle of the sixteenth century ; 
 to hold property which does not justly belong to it ; to be 
 possessed of surplus revenues which might advantageously 
 be applied to secular purposes. Its clergy are represented 
 as rolling in wealth, with scarcely any duties to perform. 
 Every Irishman, Eoman Catholic or Protestant, is said to be 
 compelled to contribute to its support ; in a word, it is 
 declared to be " the greatest scandal to the English Govern- 
 (\' ment, and the greatest iniquity in Europe." (1) 
 ! If these charojes were true, we should not have a word to 
 
 (1) Vide Circular freely distributed by the Liberation Society during the last 
 General Election.
 
 say in its defence ; bnt we unhesitatingly pronounce them 
 to be, one and all, entirely devoid of truth, as we trust to 
 be able to prove to the satisfaction of our readers. 
 
 First. Let it ever be remembered, in considering this 
 question, that the Established Church is not the English 
 Church in Ireland. It is the old, ancient, Catholic Church 
 of that country. The ^re^rew^ Eoman Catholic Church in Ire- 
 land has no real pretensions to that glorious title. It, and not 
 the Irish Church, was first introduced into Ireland in the 
 sixteenth century. The present Bishops of the Church in 
 Ireland can trace their spiritual lineage in direct and un- 
 broken succession to S. Patrick, the founder of the Irish 
 Church, and from him through the Bishops of the Galilean 
 Church to the Apostles of our Lord and Saviour (2). Not 
 so the present Eomish Bishops in Ireland. They can only, 
 at best with doubtful steps, trace their succession in Ire- 
 land to the middle of the sixteenth century. In 1621 *a.d. 
 all the Irish sees were filled with Bishops of our communion. 
 The whole Eoman Episcopate in Ireland then consisted of 
 only two Bishops in partibus^ and it is weU known that, at 
 the time of the Eeformation, all the Bishops then in pos- 
 session of the Irish sees (with the exception of two, who, 
 however, did not consecrate any successors), became adhe- 
 rents of the Eeformed Faith. The present Eomish Church 
 in Ireland then cannot connect itself with the old Bishops 
 of Ireland. The hands of the successors of S. Patrick were 
 never laid upon them. They derive their orders from 
 Spain and Italy, and not from the ancient Irish Church. 
 When they first came to Ireland, they came as a foreign 
 succession, thrust in by a foreign power, to intrude into 
 Irish Dioceses already occupied by Irish Bishops. These 
 
 (2) See Wordsworth's ' Irish Church,' p. 73, and Archdeacon Hardwick'3 
 ' Church of the Middle Ages,' pp. 10—14.
 
 foreign Bishops it was who introduced a new Ej^iscopate 
 into Ireland in opposition to its ancient and undoubted 
 Episcopate, in direct contravention of the Canons of the 
 Catholic Church. (Cone. Nicaen, Can. 8. Cone. Constant. 
 Can. 2 and 6.) 
 
 Instead, then, of the Irish Church being, as is popularly- 
 supposed, a creature of English extraction, thrust into 
 Ireland upon an unwilling people by English power in 
 the 16th century, it is, in truth, of true native growth, 
 and the old Catholic Church of Ireland, and the only 
 religious body in that country which has any legitimate 
 claim to that title. 
 
 When, then, an attack is made on the Established 
 Church in Ireland, it is no modern institution, but the 
 old Catholic Church of Ireland which is assailed, the 
 Church of S. Patrick and S. Columkille, the Church of those 
 Missionaries who, before S. Augustine landed in Kent, 
 had Christianized the Highlands and the Western Isles of 
 Scotland, and who afterwards penetrated far into England, 
 of that Church which converted much of Europe to 
 Christianity, and which, in modern times, has given to 
 us an Ussher, a Bedell, a Bramhall, a Jeremy Taylor, a 
 Magee, a Jebb, and a Mant. 
 
 The spiritual welfare of such a Church can never cease 
 to be a subject of deepest interest to every earnest Church- 
 man ; we are certain that its difficulties, its dangers, its 
 necessities, need only to be pointed out to secure from the 
 Churchmen of England willing assistance and ready aid. 
 I And, in truth, a strange alliance of discordant elements it 
 
 ' is that now attacks the Church in Ireland, Romish Bishops 
 and Dissenting Ministers, the Dublin Eoman Catholic 
 
 , National Association, and the purely Protestant Libera- 
 
 I tion Society have joined hand in hand in this campaign. 
 
 \ Their object is, if possible, to make the Irish Church a
 
 Government question, in order to secure the doubtful 
 Liberals who might otherwise prefer their Church to their 
 party. And the work goes bravely on, and will continue 
 to do so unless Churchmen brace themselves effectually to 
 oppose it ; Churchmen we mean in England as well as Church- 
 men in Ireland, for the attack is really made on the former 
 as well as on the latter. For none who of late years have 
 watched the tactics of the Liberation Society can doubt 
 that even in this move against the Irish Church the Church 
 in England is the real object of attack. At present we 
 know that their utmost exertions will be used to show that 
 it is not so. No effort will be spared to induce Churchmen 
 to believe that the Church in England and the Church in 
 Ireland stand on different grounds, and that the disestab- 
 lishment of the latter will rather tend to the strengthening 
 of the former ; and we are grieved to see that already some 
 Liberal Churchmen from whom we had hoped better 
 things have been induced to take this ground. (3) Yet surely 
 the slightest consideration will tend to show how utterly 
 and transparently false such reasoning is. If the Church in 
 Ireland is once overturned, principles will have been estab- 
 lished which in due time will be applied with tenfold force 
 to the Church in England. The title by which all Church 
 property is held, whether in England or Ireland, will have 
 been shaken to its very foundations, mere numbers, inde- 
 pendent of truth, intelligence, property, or education, will 
 have been adopted as the standard by which an Estab- 
 lished Church is to be judged. The right of the State to 
 seize on the property of the Church, and appropriate it to 
 secular purposes by its own mere motion, in opposition 
 to the earnest protests of the Clergy and Laity of the 
 Church, wiU have been successfully maintained. A solemn 
 
 (3) Vide speech of Mr J. D. Coleridge, Q.C.,^.P., at his election at Exeter.
 
 National compact, without which the Union of the two 
 Kingdoms could never have been effected, will have been 
 deliberately broken. English Churchmen will have been 
 induced to desert their Irish sister at the very time of her 
 utmost need, when with a zeal, an energy, a self-denial, 
 such as for many years she has been a stranger to, she is 
 bracing herself to the work to which God hath called her. 
 And if these pernicious principles are once established with 
 the consent of English Churchmen, for without their con- 
 sent they never can he established^ what is to prevent them 
 being hereafter carried out to their legitimate extent and 
 applied in all their force and cogency to the Established 
 Church in England ? Can Churchmen for a moment 
 imagine that either Eomanist or Voluntary will be 
 satisfied with the dis-establishment of the Church in Ire- 
 land, and that they will be content to stop here ? No ; far 
 from it. No sooner will the National Church in Ireland 
 have disappeared, and the abolition of the parochial 
 system there have handed over three-fourths of that country 
 entirely into the hands of Eome, than with united forces, 
 flushed with their recent triumph, they will advance with 
 tenfold vigour against the Church in England. And when 
 once the principles which we have mentioned above have 
 been conceded, what is to prevent their ultimate success ? 
 If the State may rightly seize on the property of the 
 Church and adapt it to secular purposes, why may it not 
 do so in England as well as in Ireland ? If mere numbers 
 are to determine when a Church is and is not to be estab- 
 lished, how for a moment, even now, can the National 
 Church be maintained in Wales ? how in any part of the 
 country in which the Dissenting population exceeds that 
 of the Church, e.g., in Cornwall % In reply to all possible 
 arguments that may be adduced, the Voluntary Party will 
 say, and justly say, without possibility of rejoinder, " You
 
 "acted upon this principle in Ireland, you destroyed the 
 " Established Church there, merely because it had not a 
 " majority of adherents ; we only ask you to do the same 
 " in England and Wales, to carry out here the principles ' 
 " which you declared to be right and just there." And 
 under such circumstances who can doubt what the final 
 result must be ? 
 
 Nor should it be forgotten in considering this question 
 that the Church landlords of Ireland now greatly add to the 
 political strength of the Church in the House of Commons ; 
 but if the Irish branch of the United Church is disestab- 
 lished, can we expect that the Irish landlords, who would 
 still have to pay the existing rent-charge to some secular 
 purpose, and upon whom then would principally fall the 
 maintenance of the remaining Clergy of the Church, 
 would be very warm in their support of the English branch 
 of the then disunited Church ? At present the Church 
 has enough to do to return a majority of members in Eng- 
 land favourable to her existence as an Establishment. The 
 Scotch members are almost universally opposed politically 
 to all Establishments, and should the Irish members be of 
 the same mind, how long would the Church as an Estab- 
 lishment exist in England i 
 
 We have stated the matter thus plainly, because this 
 question has been surrounded by such clouds of misrepre- 
 sentation and false statement that we wish Churchmen to 
 see clearly the issue that lies before them, and then to 
 judge for themselves as to what their duty is with respect 
 to it. 
 
 Again, in considering this question let us be careful to 
 remember the true object of this attack, lest we lead away 
 from the real question at issue. It is the abolition of the 
 Irish Chui-ch as an Establishment, and not its reform, that 
 is distinctly and openly sought. Spoliation under the name 
 of reform has already been carried to such an extent in
 
 8 
 
 the Irish Church, that if it is carried much further it mtist 
 soon cease to exist as an Establishment altogether. Ten 
 Bishoprics suspended, 25 per cent, of the revenues of the 
 Clergy confiscated, a heavy tax in addition imposed on 
 their annual income, Church rates abolished, (4) a subse- 
 quent forfeiture of 12,500^. a year by the non-payment of 
 Ministers' money ; these are some of the wise and gentle 
 reforms to which the Irish Clergy have of late years been 
 subject, till, in the words of the Archbishop of Armagh, 
 " their incomes have been pared down to the lowest sum 
 *' compatible with the existence of the Church in this 
 "country." — (Charge of 1864, p, 11.) 
 
 It is abolition, then, and not reform that her enemieas 
 openly seek for. '' We demand the disendowment of the 
 '* Established Church in Ireland," say the Eoman Catholic 
 Bishops at their meeting in Dublin on December 29, 1864, 
 although in 1826, before the passing of the Eoman Catholic 
 Emancipation Act, they had solemnly sworn " that they 
 " would not exercise any privilege to which they are, or 
 " may be entitled to disturb and weaken the Protestant 
 " religion and Protestant Government in Ireland ; " and 
 the Liberation Society re-echoes the cry, "It hails with 
 *' great satisfaction the renewal of the agitation for the 
 " abolition of the Irish Church Establishment (5) ; " and 
 Sir George C. Lewis {' Irish Church Question,' p. 351, ed. 
 1836) had long since observed that " It is ever to be 
 "remembered in discussing the ecclesiastical state of 
 " Ireland that the objections of the Eoman Catholics to 
 " the Established Church of that country are not of more 
 ** or less; that they would not be removed by the abolition 
 " of a few bishoprics, or the paring down of a few benefices, 
 
 " but that they lie against its very existence No 
 
 " improvements in the internal economy of the Established 
 
 (4) Estimated by Lord Althorp, in 1833, to yield 90,000J. per annum. 
 
 (5) ' Liberator,' for leb., 1865.
 
 " Chuf ch, In the distribution of its revenues, or the disci- 
 *' pline of its Clergy, tend to lessen the sense of grievance 
 " arising from this source ; the objection is of principle) 
 " not of degree, and nothing short of perfect equality in 
 " the treatment of all religious sects will satisfy the per- 
 " sons whose discontentment springs from this source." 
 Subsequent experience has shown us how true these obser- 
 vations are, and we may be certain, however specious the 
 statements of some of their more cautious leaders may be, 
 that it is nothing short of the total abolition of the Irish 
 Church as an Establishment that is now sought for by 
 them (6). 
 
 The great impediment in the way of such a consumma- 
 tion is the parochial system, and, therefore, it is attacked 
 on all sides. If once its enemies can succeed in making 
 the system of the Church congregational instead of paro- 
 chial, large tracts of country in Ireland will be left totally 
 destitute of the ministrations of the Church (7). Many of 
 the members of the Church in the south and west of Ireland 
 are and must be entirely dependent for spiritual ministra- 
 tions on the parochial system. By means of it they are 
 kept together, a compact though it may be a small body, 
 in the face of the overwhelming power of Eome. Eemove 
 the parochial system, take away the Clergy of the Church, 
 the parish Church itself will soon be in ruins, the land- 
 lord who, in nine cases out of ten, is a Churchman also, 
 wiU soon follow, and the few Protestants left without the 
 protection of either Clergyman or Landlord must in a very 
 few years be absorbed into the Church of Eome. This is 
 the result which will inevitably follow the abolition of the 
 
 (6) Witness the letter of "An Irish Catholic" in the Times of Nov. 20, 
 1865:— "No tinkering, no patching, no efforts to make the detestable nuisance 
 less unpalatable by softening down its particular or minor scandals can ever be 
 accepted as a final settlement." 
 
 (7) •' In the circumstances of Ireland ... the congregational is the right, 
 proper, and fitting system."— (Speech of Mr Bernal Osborne, June 26, 1863.)
 
 10 
 
 parochial system in very many parts of Ireland, and when 
 the influence of the Clergy of the Church which now per- 
 vades every part of the country shall have been removed, 
 and the Eoman Catholic priests shall thus have obtained 
 undivided sway over the greater part of Ireland, it is 
 easy for any one acquainted with its past history to 
 forecast the results which ere long will surely follow, 
 for there was never a more thorough delusion than the 
 idea that the abolition of the Irish Church Establishment 
 will satisfy the Eoman Catholics, or pacify Ireland (8). Our 
 own experience leads us to believe that Ireland will never 
 really become England's difficulty till the beneficial in- 
 fluence of the Established Church is removed from it. 
 
 Eor all these reasons then, because the Irish Church is 
 the old Catholic Church of Ireland, because its revenues 
 are barely sufficient for the work it has to do, because it is 
 now faithfully and diligently doing that work, because 
 the present attack upon it is unjust, uncalled for, and 
 plainly made subservient to purposes of party, we call 
 upon Churchmen in general to rally round it, not to be satis- 
 fied with the " popular statements " that are current respect- 
 ing it, but to EXAMINE THE FACTS OF THE CASE, FOR THEM- 
 SELVES, and not to cease their effi^rts till sound and correct 
 information respecting the Church in Ireland is diffused 
 throughout the several parishes of England. The result 
 we confidently predict will be the creation of such a sound 
 public opinion on the subject as will render the utmost 
 efforts of its opponents utterly futile and vain. 
 
 (8) The Fenian movement proves the truth of this remark. If the Estab- 
 lished Church was really felt to be such a grievance by the Roman Catholics of 
 Ireland generally, as its enemies represented it to be, the Fenians would have 
 placed it in the forefront of those institutions which they wished to have swept 
 away. But the Irish People (the Fenian organ) frankly admits that Irishmen 
 "care very little" about the Established Church, and commenting on this even 
 the Times, hostile as it generally is to the Irish Church, is led to remark that 
 "neither the abolition of the Irish Church, nor the establishment of tenant- 
 right, would have prevented Fenianism,"— ri»t«, Sept. 27, 1865.
 
 II 
 
 II. 
 
 THE PAST HISTOEY OF THE lEISH CHUECH 
 THE KEY TO ITS PEESENT POSITION. 
 
 The present position of the Church in Ireland can be 
 fully understood by none but those who have made them- 
 selves intimately acquainted with its past history. Those 
 who view Irish Church affairs only as they appear on the 
 surface at the present day, without searching in the true 
 causes of them which he deeply hid in the history of ages 
 past, are ready enough with their remedies for existing evils, 
 which, if adopted, will be found only to aggravate them 
 and make them more incurable than ever. Every month 
 brings before the public some new and ardent Irish 
 Church Eeformer ready with his specific remedy to cure 
 at once and for ever all the evils under which Ireland 
 labours. The pages of the Fortnightly Revieio have of 
 late been especially rich in suggestions of this kind. Mr 
 Anthony Trollope assures us that, " as regards the Eomish 
 " Church in Ireland, all ill blood would be extinguished 
 " by the simple annihilation of Church revenues." Lord 
 Amberley naively tells us at Leeds, " that Bishops in Ire- 
 " land are superfluous luxuries," whilst Mr James 
 Godkin, the Timei correspondent in Dublin, in another 
 article in the Fortnightly , is thoroughly convinced that 
 Ireland may be regenerated by means of proprietary 
 chapels, with pews let at moderate rents ! 
 
 We have thus in the outset called attention to the 
 popular views so flippantly put forth with respect to the 
 Irish Church, that we may the more earnestly urge upon 
 all those who are now turning their thoughts to this impor- 
 tant question, the necessity of considering it calmly and
 
 12 
 
 tlionglitfully, apart from party spirit and popular prejudice, 
 bearing in mind the many difficulties which, since the 
 Keformation, the Church in Ireland has been called upon to 
 encounter, and the vast injury that will accrue should Par- 
 liament be induced, by any hasty or crude legislation, fur- 
 ther to mutilate the already maimed executive of the 
 Irish Church. 
 
 We have before shown that the present Established 
 Church in Ireland is the only representative in that country 
 of the Church of S. Patrick. The one great charge that 
 is ever brought against it is, that it is not the Church of 
 the great majority of the people. Undoubtedly this is the 
 fact ; but upon whom rests the blame ? (1) Upon those who 
 insisted on introducing the Reformation into Ireland in an 
 English dress and in the English tongue. It was not 
 the doctrines of the Keformation that were so hateful to 
 the Irish people as the means that were used to disseminate 
 them. 
 
 " It is highly probable," says Dr Todd in his valuable ' Life 
 of S. Patrick,' p. 242, " that had the Reformation been pre- 
 sented to the Irish people in a Gaelic dress, and in the Gaelic 
 language, it would have been accepted without difficulty. But, 
 unfortunately, the reverse was the case. The Reformation 
 was almost studiously brought into Ireland in ostentatious 
 connection with the Church of the Pale and the English 
 colonists : it was planted on the basis of Puritanism and icono- 
 clastic outrage ; and to this day the influence of that unhappy 
 mistake continues to destroy the usefulness and paralyse the 
 energies of the Irish Clergy. The reformed doctrines were 
 regarded by the oppressed and degraded natives of Ireland as 
 essentially English ; and accordingly they were rejected without 
 examination, and spurned with the detestation and abhorrence 
 with which the English and everything coming from England 
 
 (1) See Wordsworth's ' Sermons on the Irish Church,' p. 248.
 
 13 
 
 were, as a matter of course, received ; and, as if effectually to 
 prevent the Reformed faith spreading amongst the lower 
 orders of the people, no part of the Bible was printed in the 
 vernacular during the whole of the sixteenth century, and no 
 edition of the Prayer Book appeared in Irish till 1608, more 
 than seventy years after the commencement of the Irish 
 Reformation ! " 
 
 This seems not to have arisen from mere neglect, but 
 from the deliberate policy of the Government of the day, 
 for the Act of Uniformity (2 Eliz., cap. 2) contained the 
 following most injudicious and mischievous clause : 
 *'That in every Church and place where the common 
 " Minister or Priest hath not the use or knowledge of the 
 *' English tongue, it shall be lawful for the same common 
 *' Minister or Priest to say and use the Mattins, Evensong, 
 " celebration of the Lord's Supper, and administration of 
 " each of the Sacraments, and all their common and open 
 *' Prayer, in the Latin tongue, in the order and form men- 
 " tioned and set forth in the Book established by this Act." 
 In those parts of the country in which the English lan- 
 guage was not understood the obvious substitute would 
 have been the same Liturgy in the Irish tongue — in 
 a language " understanded of the people." But this 
 might not be, says the Statute, " as well for the diffi- 
 "culty to get it printed, as that few in the realm 
 " could read Irish letters ; " and although a few years 
 afterwards a private Clergyman was enabled to do this 
 with marked success, the Government excused itself under 
 the plea of inability to find persons actually qualified 
 to read the Irish character. Had there been any real 
 desire to teach the people in their own native tongue there 
 would have been little difficulty in obtaining a supply of the 
 proper types for printing, or in training suitable persons
 
 \ 
 
 14 
 
 to minister to the Irish people in their own vernacular ; 
 but the disastrous policy of the day was to force the English 
 power and the English language upon the reluctant Irish 
 people, and for this purpose it was ordered that vacant 
 benefices should be bestowed upon "persons who could 
 ** speak English, apt and convenient to occupy the same," 
 and thus, whilst pastor after pastor was set over the people 
 who could not speak a word which they could understand, 
 can we wonder that they flocked to the ministrations of the 
 emissaries of Eome, who spoke to them in the language 
 which they loved ? There can be but little doubt that had 
 the people of Ireland enjoyed the use of public prayer, and 
 the hearing of the Word of God in a language they under- 
 stood ; had the principles of the Eeformation been carried 
 out in that country as in England ; had every parish church 
 been provided with a Bible and a Prayer Book in the lan- 
 guage of the people ; never would the Church of Eome have 
 regained her hold on their affections, never would Ireland 
 have been torn by the religious animosities which have 
 since rent her asunder, 
 
 II. But this, though the chief, was but one of the many 
 hindrances to the spread of the doctrines of the Eeformed 
 Faith in Ireland. At the Eeformation Henry VIII dis- 
 solved the monasteries in Ireland, as well as in England. 
 At their dissolution they possessed a large portion of the 
 tithes of the country. These were bestowed by the Crown 
 on laymen, and have ever since been enjoyed by them 
 Thus a great proportion of the Church property was 
 alienated to secular uses, and to such a fearful extent was 
 this plundering carried that 562 rectories became impro- 
 priate and 118 parishes wholly impropriate, making in all 
 680 parishes, whose revenues were thus alienated from 
 ecclesiastical uses, whilst, in addition to this, 1,480 glebes
 
 15 
 
 passed out of the possession of the Church into the hands 
 of laymen (2). No wonder, then, that Dr Eyves said, in his 
 *Poor Vicar's Plea' "that the Church of Ireland lies 
 " buried under a heap of impropriations," and that the 
 Convocation of 1634 declared in their address to the King 
 (Strafford's State Papers, i. p. 382), "that in all the 
 " Christian world the rural clergy have not been reduced 
 ** to such extremity of contempt and beggary as in this, 
 " your Highness' s kingdom, by the means of so frequent 
 " appropriations, commendams, and violent intrusions into 
 "their undoubted rights in times of confusion, having 
 "the churches ruined, their habitations left desolate, 
 " their glebes concealed, and by inevitable consequence, 
 *'an invincible necessity of a general non-residency 
 " imposed upon them, whereby the ordinary subject 
 " hath been left wholly destitute of all possible means to 
 "learn true piety to God, loyalty to their Prince, and 
 "civility one towards another." "When Bishop Bedell took 
 possession of his Diocese of Kilmore in 1630, he found 
 his Cathedral Church utterly destroyed, the Bishop's 
 residence levelled to the groand, the parish churches 
 "all ruined, unroofed, and unrepaired," and in 
 the two Dioceses of Kilmore and Ardagh only six- 
 teen resident clergy. The result of his investigation he 
 sadly communicated to Laud, " and shortly," said he, to 
 speak much ill matter in a few words, " the state of the 
 " Church in Ireland is very miserable." The chief cause of 
 this deplorable condition of the Church was the enormous 
 number of impropriate benefices that had become the pro- 
 perty of laymen (3) ; in addition to which Bishop Jeremy 
 
 (2) Vide Dean Newland's ' Apology for the Irish Church,' p. 233. 
 
 (3) Carte, in his ' Life of Ormonde ' (i. 63), tells us that at this time, " in the 
 whole Province of Connaught (which, be it observed, is now the most Iloman 
 Catholic Province in Ireland) there was scarce a Vicar's pension which exceeded
 
 i6 
 
 Taylor tells us, in his funeral Sermon, on the death of Arch- 
 bishop Bramhall : " At the Eeformation the Popish 
 " Bishops and Priests seemed to conform, and did so, that 
 " keeping their Bishoprics they might enrich their kindi^ed 
 *' and dilapidate the revenues of the Church, which by 
 " pretended offices, false information, fee farms at con- 
 "temptible rents, and ungodly abominations was made 
 " low as poverty itself, and unfit to minister to the needs 
 " of those that served the altar, or the noblest purposes of 
 "religion." (Bramhall's Works. Anglo-Cath. Lib., Vol. 
 T. lix.), and thus, whilst they outwardly conformed, they 
 really deformed the Church of which they were the 
 unworthy rulers. 
 
 Nor in the days of Dean Swift, seventy years after the 
 death of Bramhall, had the state of affairs altered for the 
 better. " The Clergy," says he, " having been stripped of 
 " the greatest part of their revenues, the glebes being 
 " generally lost, the tithes in the hands of laymen, the 
 "Churches demolished, and the country depopulated, it 
 " was necessary to unite small vicarages." (4.) And yet 
 at this very time when Dean Swift gives this deplore 
 able account of the poverty of the Church, the Irish 
 Parliament did not hesitate in 1735 still further to despoil 
 it by handing over to the laity the tithe of agistment, 
 or pasturage, (5.) by which measure " such a diminution 
 " of the income of the Clergy in most parts of Ireland 
 " was produced, these several parishes had to be joined 
 
 forty shillings a year, and in many places they were but eighteen shillings ;" 
 and he adds (i. 299) that several of the Bishoprics "were reduced to 50^. a 
 year, as Waterford, Kilfenora, and others ; and some to five marks, as Cloyne 
 and Kilmacduagh." 
 
 (4.) Swift's Works, Vol. IV., pp. 71, 72, quoted by Newland, p. 89. 
 
 (5.) Dean Swift gave vent to his indignation on the passing of this measure, 
 in one of the last but most pungent of his satires, called the Legion Club.
 
 I? 
 
 ^'together to make out a sufficient subsistence for a 
 "minister." (Charge of the late Primate, 1846, p. 21.) 
 
 The rapacity of the Irish landlords thus produced " those 
 *' godless combinations, commonly called Unions," which 
 have placed under the nominal superintendence of a single 
 pastor large tracts of country, over which it is utterly 
 impossible that he can exercise any real supervision, and a 
 vital and permanent injury was thus inflicted on the Church 
 in Ireland, from which it continues to suffer to the present 
 day. Seven, eight, and even ten parishes had of necessity 
 to be united to form even a miserable pittance for a single 
 minister. The Churches in the several parishes thus 
 united, could not all be served by a single clergyman, and 
 these, one by one, gradually fell into decay. The people in 
 many cases having no Church left them to worship in, no 
 Clergyman to minister to their spiritual needs, no glebe 
 house for his residence among them, were gradually 
 absorbed into the Church of Eome, which surrounded them 
 on every side. 
 
 Need we be surprised that under such circumstances as 
 these the Church in Ireland made little or no progress ? 
 Need we wonder that, having at all times a powerful and 
 watchful enemy to oppose her from without, she now lan- 
 guished and grew feeble under the continued extortions of 
 her professed members from within ? 
 
 III. But in addition to those which we have already 
 mentioned there was another grievous hindrance to the 
 progress of the Church in Ireland. In the sixteenth cen- 
 tury, when England found herself vexed with Puritanical 
 teachers, she endeavoured to rid herself of them by 
 importing them into Ireland. Travers, the opponent of 
 Hooker, was thus advanced to the highly-important and 
 influential post of Provost of Trinity College, Dublin. A 
 Puritanical school was thus founded in Ireland, which has 
 c
 
 i8 
 
 ever since exercised a powerful influence in that country. (6.) 
 Nor must it be forgotten that soon afterwards the planta- 
 tion of the Presbyterians in Ulster " disturbed the 
 " Church's peace, impeded her progress, and diminished 
 "her power of promoting religious improvement" — (Bp. 
 Mant's Irish Church History, Vol. I., p. 365)— for in the 
 north of Ireland at that time " the clearance of the Episco- 
 " jDalian Clergy had been most effectual, and their places 
 " had been supplied by the sturdiest champions of the 
 " Covenant, taken principally from the west of Scotland, 
 '^ the disciples of Cameron, Eenwick, and Peden, and pro- 
 " fessing in the wildest and most gloomy sense the austere 
 " principles of their party." (7.) Thus another element of 
 religious division was introduced into Ireland, and hence- 
 forth Pome fomented the division of Protestants to secure 
 her own supremacy. (8.) 
 
 Much more might be added on this subject, but we trust 
 enough has been said to show the manifold difficulties with 
 which the Church in Ireland has had to contend, 
 since the Eeformation, which have impeded and effec- 
 tually hindered all her efforts at extension. When, in 
 addition to this, we remember that nearly up to the 
 time of the passing of the Eoman Catholic Emancipation 
 Act, her chief dignities were bestowed mainly from 
 considerations of State (a practice which has not alto- 
 gether ceased), and with but little regard to the good of 
 the Church, and that thus her strength was paralyzed, and 
 jier vigour crippled in its most vital part, we need not be 
 surprised that the Irish Church has not advanced vrith 
 
 (6) See Bramhall's Works, Vol. L, p. cxiv., 'notes, ia which the Editor shows 
 that at that time "The Irish Church was deluged with Puritanism." 
 
 (7) Jeremy Taylor's Works, Vol I., p. 104. Heber's Edition. 
 
 (8) On this point see especially Archdeacon Wordaworth's ' Sermons on the 
 Irish Church,' p. 262.
 
 19 . 
 
 rapid steps ; our only wonder is that she has so effectWly 
 maintained her position in the country at all. 
 
 Such was the condition of the Irish Church at the time 
 of the Union in 1801. By the 5th Article of the Act which 
 united the two kingdoms, the temporalities of the two 
 Churches of England and Ireland were placed on the same 
 footing, the Ecclesiastical Union which had existed for 
 centuries was further cemented by the consent of the 
 Episcopate of both countries to this measure, and it was 
 made the foundation of this Act, without which it never 
 would have passed the Irish Parliament, " that the con- 
 *' tinuance and preservation of the said united Church, as 
 " the Established Church of England and Ireland, should be 
 " deemed and taken to be an essential and fundamental 
 "part of the Union." — The view which the Irish Bishops 
 of that day took of this measure, how thoroughly they 
 considered that it would identify the Church in Ireland 
 with the Church in England, and thus effectually preserve 
 it from attack, is evident from the letter addressed by 
 Bishop O'Beirne, of Meath, to Lord Castlereagh, in Novem- 
 ber, 1799. enclosing a " memorandum as to the imiting and 
 " identifying the Churches of England and Ireland " (9). 
 In it the Bishop says "the local circumstances of the 
 " Church of Ireland, the existence and safety of which is 
 " essential to the connexion between the two countries^ would, 
 " in themselves require that it should incorporate and iden- 
 *' tify with the Church of England as the greatest security 
 " it can look to, and as its most effectual preservation 
 " against the dangers to which these circumstances may 
 " enforce it." It is evident, then, that the Irish Episcopate 
 agreed to the Union in the belief that the Church in Ireland 
 
 (9) See Memoirs and Correspondence of Viscount Castlereagh. Vol. iii, pp.
 
 20 
 
 would thereby be placed in an unassailable position. How 
 grievously they were mistaken subsequent events have 
 shown. No sooner was the Eoman Catholic Emancipation 
 Act passed in 1829, than an active Parliamentary opposi- 
 tion to the Irish Church was organized. In 1834, under the 
 23retence of reform, ten of her Bishoprics were suspended ; 
 ]r •, soon after, in 1838, a fourth of her revenue was confis- 
 ^ \^ cated ; subsequently, in 1854, she was deprived of 12,500/. 
 V^ V of her annual income, by the abolition of Ministers' money, 
 Jjj^fv-^ by 17 and 18 Vict., c. 11. Thus a continued process of 
 tv ^ spoliation has been carried on, till, in the words of the 
 
 \ \i\j Primate, in his Charge of 1864, " the incomes of the Irish 
 
 V " clergy have been pared down to the lowest sum com- 
 
 "y " patible with the existence of the Church in this country." 
 
 ^ Such, then, are some of the chief causes why the Church 
 
 ^ n Ireland has not long since become the Church of the 
 
 great majority of the Irish people. No sooner had she 
 / reformed herself, with the general consent of the nation, 
 than the English Government compelled her to conduct 
 her services in a tongue which the people could not under- 
 f .stand, and to accept as their pastors, clergy who were 
 totally ignorant of their language. The Bible and 
 Prayer Book were not translated into the vernacular. 
 Court favourites became possessed of a great part 
 Q of her revenues, &c., large proportions of her tithes and 
 
 glebes at once passed into their hands. Then a flood of 
 Puritanism, imported from England and Scotland, swept 
 over the land, quickly followed by the fearful massa- 
 j -cres of 1641-43, in which 143,000 Protestants perishe 
 No sooner had she in some small measure recovered 
 .from this blow, which was intended to annihilate her 
 iiltogether, than the very men who should have suc- 
 coured and defended her — the nobles and landlords 
 ^f Ireland— in the Parliament of 1735 deprived her of the
 
 21 
 
 tithe of agistment, which rendered necessary that deplor- ) 
 able system of unions which has so long left whole districts- J 
 destitute of any real spiritual superintendence from the^ 
 ministrations of the Church ; add to this, that for a very ! 
 long period the Church was used by the State as an instru- 
 ment of Government in Ireland, that her chief dignities 
 were bestowed from matters of policy, not with a view to the 
 spiritual interests of the Church ; that a long series of 
 penal laws were enacted not to protect the Church herself so 
 much as to carry out a long-cherished but mistaken policy 
 which subsequent experience has shown to be both impo- 
 litic and unwise, but from the effects of which, nevertheless, - 
 the Church largely suffers to this day ; when, in addition to 
 this, we remember that no longer than thirty years since^ 
 nearly one half of her Bishoprics were suspended and a 
 fourth of her revenue confiscated, that year after year her 
 Bishops and Clergy are still diverted from their own proper- 
 work to that of Church defence from the Parliamentary 
 attacks which are continually hanging over her ; when we 
 say all these things are duly weighed, and calmly consi_ 
 dered, the wonder is, not that the Church in Ireland has 
 not advanced more rapidly in numbers, but that amidst so 
 many difficulties and discouragements, with ever- watchful 
 foes without, and too often lukewarm and indifferent friends- 
 within, she has been enabled to maintain so faithfully, and 
 so well, the difficult, and often embarrassing position which 
 in the Providence of God she is called to fill.
 
 12 
 
 III. 
 SYNODS OF THE CHUECH IN lEELAND. 
 
 It was a wise remark of the late lamented Baptist von 
 Hirscher, in his treatise on " the State of the Church," 
 published some sixteen years ago, that "the revival of 
 '^ Synodical institutions so long demanded is nothing else 
 " than a product of the universal spirit of the age " (p. 
 125). The subsequent revival of full synodical action in 
 the Provinces of Canterbury and York, the earnest though 
 as yet unavailing efforts made by the whole Irish Episco- 
 pate to remove the enforced silence of their Convocation, 
 the growing desire in all religious bodies for mutual 
 consultation amongst their religious teachers, shows how 
 strongly the spirit to which Von Hirscher alluded has of 
 late years made itself felt. But the peculiar circumstances 
 in which the Irish Church is now placed, the unceasing 
 and unjust attacks which are made upon her, make it a 
 crying injustice that the Government of the day should 
 deliberately refuse permission to her Bishops and Clergy 
 to assemble together in Synod, and consider such measures 
 as may be requisite for the common good. Complaints are 
 most unjustly made against the Irish Clergy, for not pro- 
 posing schemes of internal reform, and yet the only avail- 
 able means by which they can rightly and orderly do so is 
 denied them. And this injustice is the more keenly felt 
 by the Irish Clergy, because the liberty which is refused 
 to them is freely granted to the other religious bodies 
 which surround them. They are refused permission to 
 deliberate in Synod on matters in which they feel the
 
 23 
 
 deepest personal interest, and which greatly concern the 
 present and future welfare of the Church in Ireland. And 
 yet Synod after Synod is convened without let or hindrance 
 by the Irish Legate of the Pope, and no word of disappro- 
 bation is heard, and every year the General Assembly of the 
 Presbyterians is held for the regulation of their spiritual 
 and temporal affairs, and no voice of remonstrance is raised 
 against it. How much longer, then, are the Clergy of the 
 Church to be denied those rights which are freely granted 
 to Pomish Priests and Presbyterian Ministers ? 
 
 But we are fully persuaded that the day is not far distant 
 when this strange anomaly will be removed. Churchmen 
 in Ireland are becoming more and more resolved not to 
 cease their labours till they have secured the restoration of 
 their Synodical action, and Churchmen in England will, 
 we are sure, gladly give them a helping hand. Either the 
 long-suffering patience of the Irish Primates will at length be 
 exhausted, and they will succeed in overcoming the scruples 
 of their Suffragans, which is now understood to be the 
 chief obstacle to their summoning their Provincial Synods, 
 ex mero motu, without any Eoyal writ — which they have 
 an undoubted right to do — or the united voice of Church- 
 men will so imperatively demand that the Irish Church 
 shall no longer be treated with manifest injustice, that the 
 Government will be obliged to yield to pressure from 
 without, and tardily grant that, which now they might 
 gracefully accede to. 
 
 Yet whatever the means may be by which Synodical 
 action shall at length be restored to the Church in Ireland, 
 it cannot but be interesting to us at this crisis briefly to 
 consider the past history of her Synods, and the true 
 state of the question at the present moment. 
 
 In considering it we must always carefully bear in mind, 
 that, although Christianity was introduced into Ireland by
 
 24 ' 
 
 S. Patrick about the middle of the fifth century, it was not 
 till six centuries afterwards that Ireland was divided into 
 Dioceses, or that BishojDS in it exercised Diocesan jurisdic- 
 tion (1). 
 
 The Irish Church was originally planted in a heathen 
 land, and for some centuries was surrounded by a very 
 gross form of heathenism. The consecration of Bishops 
 without sees was therefore at first a matter of necessity, nor 
 was this irregular whilst their duties were essentially mis- 
 sionary. Indeed, the missionary Bishops of Melanesia and 
 Central Africa in our own day, occupy a somewhat similar 
 position. But it would be a great error to suj^pose that 
 because there was no Diocesan EpiscojDacy in the early 
 Irish Church, that the distinction between the orders of 
 Priest and Bishop was not thoroughly understood and 
 carefully preserved. Dr Todd, in the introduction to his 
 ' Life of S. Patrick,' has abundantly proved that in 
 Ireland at this period Bishops alone consecrated Churches, 
 ordained Priests and Deacons, administered the rite 
 of Confii-mation, and consecrated other Bishops. (2.) 
 But of necessity the early Irish Bishops resided chiefly 
 in monasteries, for in such a state of society as that 
 in w^hich they lived, a Christian life was scarcely possible, 
 except in a community exclusively Christian. In process 
 of time such communities were formed in various localities 
 throughout Ireland, and became the centres of civilization 
 and religion to the surrounding districts. But these 
 establishments were often isolated and at a distance from 
 each other, and each therefore had to provide the means of 
 obtaining all the rites of the Church, whether episcopal or 
 priestly, for all those who resided within its walls. " Hence 
 
 (1) See especially R. King's 'Early History of the Primacy of Armagh,' 
 pp. 1-10. 
 
 (2) Todd's ' S. Patrick,' p. 5.
 
 25 
 
 " arose the monastic Bishop of the Scotic religious houses." 
 The Abbot or Superior may have been a Presbyter only, or 
 a layman, or, as in the case of S. Brigid and her dependent 
 abbesses, even a woman. But a Bishop was always connected 
 with the Society, although without Diocese or jurisdiction, 
 and bound, like other inmates of the monastery, to render 
 an absolute obedience to his monastic Superior. (3.) It is 
 probable, however, that in time the jurisdiction of the 
 monastic Bishops gradually extended itself over the minor 
 religious houses in connection with the original monastery, 
 and moreover, when any of the petty Kings or chieftains 
 embraced Christianity, they provided one or more Bishops 
 for their clans, in addition to the other Clergy. The district 
 of coimtry which owed allegiance to the chieftain thus became 
 the proper sphere of labour of the Bishoji and his Clergy, 
 and this was the first aj)proach to Diocesan or territorial 
 jurisdiction in Ireland. The island was at this time sub- 
 divided into a great number of petty principalities, and 
 these were grouped into two great confederacies, one of 
 which comprehended the northern, the other the southern 
 portion of Ireland. These two primary divisions led 
 afterwards to the establishment of the two original 
 Archbishoprics of Armagh and Cashel, whilst the suff- 
 ragan Bishops had jurisdiction equal in extent to the 
 dominion of their chief. (4.) The present dioceses of 
 Dromore, Kilmacduagh, Kilfenora, Ossory, and Ross, are 
 nearly co- extensive with the former territories of ancient 
 Irish clans. 
 
 During the whole of this period, however, in which there 
 
 (3) Dr Todd's ' S. Patrick,' pp. 37, 38. 
 
 (4) See Dr Reeves' Ecclesiastical Antiquities of ' Down and Connor,' p. 126, 
 who remarks that the same practice prevailed in England in the seventh 
 century, when, according to Bede, there were not more than seven Bishops in all 
 the Heptarchy.
 
 a6 
 
 were no fixed Dioceses, or regularly defined parishes, a 
 vigilant system of Episcopal visitation was kept up, and 
 one of the chief reasons for these constant visitations would 
 seem to be, the opportunities they afforded for obtaining 
 contributions from Churches and people. "From early 
 " times," Dr Keeves tells us, (5), " till the tenth century, it 
 " was the custom for the Bishop personally to visit each 
 "parish imder his jurisdiction, once a year, unless when the 
 " Diocese was of too great an extent, in which case the 
 " indulgence of a biennial, or at farthest, a triennial visita- 
 *' tion, was allowed him and many specific instances of 
 " such visitation are given in his introduction to Primate 
 " Colton's visitation of Derry in a.d., 1397." 
 
 Considerable doubts exist as to the authenticity of the 
 Canons ascribed to a Synod, said to have been held by' S. 
 Patrick in a.d. 459, although they are given by Wilkins in 
 the first volume of his Co7icilia (6), but there is no doubt 
 that in the early ages of Irish Church history when 
 occasion arose for the settlement of any matters of doctrine 
 or Ecclesiastical discipline, they were determined by a 
 Synod of Bishops and Clergy. Such a S3Tiod was held by 
 S. Columkille at Drumcheatt, in a.d. 590, which was 
 attended by twenty Bishops and forty Priests, and in a.d. 
 634. The celebrated Synod of the " White Field " was held 
 near Leighlin to determine the observance of Easter (7). 
 
 The anomalous system of unbeneficed Bishops con- 
 tinued to exist in Ireland to the beginning of the twelfth 
 century. The first step towards removing it was taken 
 at the Synod of Eathbreasil (now Mountrath, in the 
 Queen's County) held in a.d. 1110. At this Synod for the 
 
 (5) 'Eccles. Antiquities of Down and Connor,' pp. 93, 
 
 (6) See Todd's ' S. Patrick,' pp. 485-489. 
 
 (7) King's 'Irish Church History,' i. 86 and 171.
 
 27 . 
 
 Jlrst time the Legate of the Pope presided in an Irish 
 Council ; Gillebert, Bishop of Limerick, acting in that 
 capacity. It was chiefly occupied in forming a regular 
 Diocesan system throughout Ireland, and in fixing the 
 boundaries of the several Dioceses. It was determined 
 at this Council that, exclusive of Dublin (8), Ireland should 
 be divided into twenty-four Dioceses, twelve in the north, 
 subject to the Archbishop of Armagh, twelve in the south, 
 subject to the Archbishop of Cashel. But this arrangement 
 was soon afterwards superseded by the Synod of Kells in 
 A.D. 1152, when the Dioceses of Ireland were distributed 
 into four provinces, under the four Archbishops of Armagh, 
 Cashel, Dublin, and Tuam. 
 
 Previous to the twelfth century, then, we must not expect 
 to hear of Provincial Synods in Ireland, since before that 
 period there was no Metropolitan jurisdiction, properly so 
 called, exercised in the Irish Church, but since that time 
 these Synods became frequent (9). In a valuable letter of 
 Archbishop King, of Dublin, to Archbishop Wake, dated 
 September 12, 1717, he speaks of the affairs of the 
 Church previous to the Eeformation being conducted, 
 *' sometimes, though rarely, in National Synods, and fre- 
 " quently in Provincial and Diocesan." " In these," he 
 continues, " I conceive were transacted and ordered the 
 ^•spiritual concerns of the Church, and we have still 
 " remaining several constitutions made in them. The 
 
 (8) This See was left subject to the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Bishops 
 of the Danish towns of Dublin, Limerick, and Waterford were for about a 
 century subject to the Metropolitan jurisdiction of the English Primate and 
 consecrated by him. Hence arose the first connexion between Ireland and the 
 See of Rome. 
 
 (9) A List of such Synods held in the different Provinces of Ireland down to 
 the time of the Reformation will be found in Dr A. J. Stephens', Q.C., learned 
 opinion on the • Provincial Synod of Armagh,' p. 18.
 
 28 
 
 " Provincial Synods were triennial and the Diocesan 
 "annual. The first is dropped in the other three 
 " Provinces, but has all along been kept up in that of 
 " Dublin, and is still, according to this ancient custom, 
 " and at it appear all the Bishops of the Province, the 
 " Deans, Archdeacons, and Proctors for the Chapters, and 
 " other Clergy." His Grace further observes, " The Clergy 
 " of Ireland never made such a submisson as the Clergy 
 "of England did to Henry VIII., nor have we, that I 
 " know of, any law making it penal to us to make Provincial 
 " Constitutions. We have several of these Constitutions 
 " remaining, and an account of the Synods that exacted 
 "them "(10). 
 
 "We have abundant evidence then that Provincial Synods 
 were commonly held in Ireland previous to the sixteenth 
 century. We [shall consider subsequently the manner 
 in which the Irish Church accepted the Eeformation, and 
 conclude our present remarks with a few observations 
 respecting the Ecclesiastical union that existed between 
 the Churches of England and Ireland, previous to the 
 union of these Establishments in 1800. 
 
 At the celebrated Synod of Cashel, held in a.d. 1172, at 
 which three Archbishops and twenty-eight Bishops were 
 present, it was decreed " 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." Henceforth the offices and 
 practices of the Church of Ireland were made to agree 
 wherever the authority of the Council extended, with those 
 of the Church of England, and thus the Anglican faith 
 was introduced into Ireland, many centuries before 
 the Eeformation. Afterwards we find that frequent 
 
 (10) See ' Christian Examiner,' vol. iv., p. 182.
 
 translations of Bishops took place from Irish sees to 
 English sees, and vice versa. Laurence O'Toole, Arch- 
 bishop of Dublin, was present at the Council of Windsor in 
 A.D. 1175, when a peace was agreed upon between the King 
 of England and the King of Connact (Connaught) in Ire- 
 land, and Augustin, an Irishman, was nominated by the 
 King, Bishop of Waterford (11). Henry de Londres, Arch- 
 bishop of Dublin from a.d. 1213 to a.d. 1228, was present 
 at, and advised, the signing of Magna Charta (12). And it 
 is a fact well worthy of note that at the Council of Con- 
 stance, in A.D. 1414, the Ambassadors of the French King 
 having objected that the English Church was not entitled 
 to vote as a separate National Church on account of the 
 fewness of its Bishops, the English Ambassadors replied, 
 " that the Church in England and Ii-eland was one National 
 " Ckurch, and that the number of their Bishops together 
 " exceeded the number of the French Church" (13). The 
 case was minutely entered into and decided by the Council 
 in favour of England, and it is not a little curious to 
 remark that throughout that Council the Anglican Church 
 was represented on all committees and judicial tribunals 
 by " Patrick, Bishop of Cork." 
 
 In accordance with the view thus taken by the Council 
 of Constance, public documents of the date of the Eefor- 
 mation constantly speak of the Churches of England and 
 Ireland as " one Church." In the Injunctions of Edward 
 VI., issued a.d. 1547, the King is spoken of as " Defender 
 "of the Faith, and, under Christ, of this Church of JEng- 
 " land and Ireland the supreme head," In the Articles 
 agreed upon by Convocation of Canterbury in 1552 the 
 
 (11) See Hody's 'History of Convocation,' p. 234. 
 
 (12) ' Liber Munerum Hibemise,' vol. ii., p. 33. 
 
 (13) Vide Labbe and Cossart's ' Concilia Generalia,' as quoted by Archdeacon 
 Stopford in his reply to Serjeant Shee, pp. 98, 99.
 
 30 
 
 same expression "Church of England and Ireland" 
 (Ecclesia Anglicana et Hibernica) occurs (14). In the In- 
 junctions of Queen Elizabeth " the form of bidding the 
 *^ prayers" runs thus, "Ye shall pray for Chiist's Holy 
 " Catholic Church .... and specially for the Church of 
 "England and Ireland " (15), whilst the title of the first 
 Irish Canon of 1634 is "of the agreement of the Church 
 " of England and Ireland in the profession of the same 
 '^ Christian religion," and the Canon itself speaks of the 
 agreement of the Church of Ireland with the Church of 
 England "in the confession of the same Christian faith 
 "and the doctrine of the Sacraments." 
 
 Since a.d. 1634 the Articles of the Irish Church have 
 been the same as those of the English. The successive 
 revisions of the Liturgy in the reigns of Edward VI. and 
 Elizabeth were also adopted by the Church in Ireland 
 The Canons of the Church in Ireland are, it is true, in some 
 minor matters different from those of the Church in Eng- 
 land, but in all important particulars they fully agree (16), 
 but this difference of Canons no more prevents the Provinces 
 of the Irish Church being in full communion with the 
 Provinces of the English, than the difference of the Canons 
 of the Province of York, in former times, prevented its 
 being considered one Church with the Province of Canter- 
 bury. 
 
 The Acts of Union in 1800 made England and Ii-eland 
 
 (14) Sparrow's Collections, pp. 48, 49. 
 
 (15) Sparrow's Collectious, p. 79. 
 
 (16) To this, however, there is now a noteworthy exception. Last year the 
 Convocations of Canterbury and York repealed the 29th English Canon, and 
 altered the Canons respecting subscription, and have thus brought the English 
 Canons into accordance with the Statute Law. The Irish Primates memorialized 
 the Crown for the issue of a Royal writ to enable the Irish Convocation to make 
 similar alterations iu the Irish Canons. In reply, her Majesty's Government 
 simply ignored the existence of Irish Convocation altogether.
 
 31 
 
 one United Kingdom. The Church in England and 
 Ireland was already one Church, and recognized by the 
 highest ecclesiastical and civil authorities as such. The 
 two Establishments had been created by separate legis- 
 latures, and the Acts of Union did but consolidate them, 
 and for this no canonical sanction was requisite. When 
 the Lords Spiritual of Ireland became associated with the 
 Lords Spiritual of England as the Parliamentary represen- 
 tatives of the two Churches, the Establishments were 
 made one by statute, and the two Churches became by 
 the law civil, what they had long been by the law 
 Spiritual, one Church; and the title United Church 
 followed as a matter of course.
 
 32 
 
 % IV. 
 
 SYNODS OF THE CHURCH IN IRELAND. 
 Part II. 
 
 The first decisive step taken in Ireland towards establish- 
 ing the Reformation was the renouncing the Supremacy of 
 the Pope, by an act of the Irish Parliament passed in a.d. 
 1537. (1) Before this the oath of the King's Supremacy had 
 been taken in a.d. 1532-34 by the Irish Bishops and Clergy. 
 It is remarkable that the Irish chiefs quietly followed the 
 example thus set them, and pledged themselves by solemn 
 covenant to annihilate "the usurped authority of the 
 " Bishop of Rome." (2) The foundation stone of the Irish 
 Reformation was thus laid with the aid of the chief autho- 
 rities both in Church and State and the expressed consent 
 of the leaders of the people. " For it is to be noted," says 
 Cox, "that these submissions were so universally made 
 " all over the kingdom, that there was not a Lord, or 
 " Chieftain of any note in Ireland but submitted in this 
 " manner, or in like form, for they made not scruple to 
 " renounce the Pope, when once they had resolved to obey 
 " the King." (3) And it is of great importance that this 
 
 (1) 28 Hen. VIII., c. 2. a.d. 1536—37. 
 
 (2) The Oath of Supremacy was taken by the Irish Chiefs in 1542-44. The 
 Earl of Desmond took it in 1540, O'Donuel's indenture, confirmed by the same 
 oath, is dated Aug. 6, 1642, " Quod renunciabit relinquet et adnihilabit pro 
 posse suo uaurpatam authoritatem, et Primaciam Roman i Pontificis." McMahon's 
 indenture is dated Aug. 14, 1542; O'Neal's January, 1543; and most of the 
 other chiefs followed in the course of that year. O'More's is dated May 13, 1543, 
 O'Kelly's May 24, 0'Rourke's Sept. 1, 1543.— See Cox's Hib. Angl. p. 272, 273. 
 
 (3) Cox, p. 274.— See also Palmer on the Church, i., 423.
 
 33 
 
 sliould be borne in mind at a time when the most unscru- 
 pulous statements are being made respecting the manner 
 in which the Reformation was first established in Ireland. 
 In 1551 A.D. Edward VI. sent an order to the Lord Deputy 
 Sir Anthony St Leger, for the use of the English Liturgy 
 in all the Parish Churches of Ireland. Before he issued 
 his proclamation, the Lord Deputy called " an assembly of 
 " the Archbishops and Bishops, together with the other 
 " Clergy of Ireland," and it was then agreed by a majority 
 of the Synod (the Primate, however, and his Suffragans 
 who were present dissenting) that the English Liturgy 
 should be accepted. It was accordingly fii-st used at Christ 
 Church Cathedral, on Easter Day 1551, on which occasion 
 a Sermon was preached by Archbishop Browne of Dublin. 
 In the reign of Queen Elizabeth, her Majesty signified 
 her pleasure to Lord Sussex, then Lord Deputy, for a 
 general meeting of the Clergy and the establishment of 
 the Protestant religion. At this time Convocation, in the 
 modern sense of the term, did rfot exist in Ireland, but the 
 ancient Sjmod of the Clergy had the power of settling all 
 matters respecting religion. " It would appear," says Dr 
 Elrington's Life of Ussher, p. 41, " that the dissimilarity 
 ** of the proceedings in England and Ireland with respect 
 " to the Reformation arose from the diiferent constitution 
 "of the two Churches. In England the Convocation 
 "originally instituted for the purpose of managing the 
 " temporal concerns of the Clergy, had gradually usurped 
 " the power of the Provincial Synod, and become the in- 
 "strument of framing Articles and Canons for the Church. 
 " In Ireland the Provincial Synod had not been super- 
 " seded, and by their consent given at three different times, 
 " in the reign of Edward, when summoned by Sir Anthony 
 " St Leger, in the third of Elizabeth called together by Lord 
 "Sussex, and in the year 1565 by Sir Henry Sydney, the 
 
 D
 
 34 
 
 " Clergy received the use of the English Liturgy, and ex- 
 " pressed their conformity to the doctrines of the English 
 " Church. . . . The Eeformation then in Ireland was 
 " thus carried on by the regular assembly to which affairs 
 " of the Church ought canonically to be entrusted." 
 
 It was not till the year 1615 that a Convocation, similar 
 to that now existing in the English provinces, was assem- 
 bled in Ireland. Previous to this, the Ecclesiastical affairs 
 of the country had been transacted principally, in provin- 
 cial, but occasionally, in national Synods. James I., how- 
 ever, when in 1603 he summoned an Irish Parliament, 
 convoked with it also a Convocation. Archbishop* Jones 
 of Dublin was its President, and Pandolph Barlow, Arch- 
 deacon of Meath, was Prolocutor of the Lower House. The 
 records of this Convocation have perished, but we know 
 from other sources that Articles of Eeligion, 104 in number, 
 and divided into nineteen heads, were drawn up and agreed 
 upon. They were strongly Calvinistic in their character, 
 but they were not confirmed by Letters Patent under the 
 Great Seal, and they were shortly afterwards superseded 
 by the Canons passed in 1634, and which accej)ted the 
 XXXIX English Articles of 1562. 
 
 Nineteen years elapsed before another Irish Parliament 
 was summoned in 1634, and with it was also summoned the 
 Convocation. It was convened by provincial writs, dated 
 May 24, 1634. Archbishop Ussher was its President ; 
 Henry Leslie, Dean of Down, was Prolocutor of the Lower 
 House. This Convocation enacted those Canons which are 
 still in force at the present day. The first Canon is entitled 
 " Of the agreement of tlie Church of England and Ireland 
 " in the profession of the same Christian religion." It 
 adopted the XXXIX Articles verbatim et literatim, and 
 declared the agreement of the Irish Church with tl-te Church 
 of England " in the Confession of the same Christian faith
 
 35 
 
 "and the doctrine of the Sacraments." These Canons 
 were 100 in number, and were drawn np by Bramhall, 
 then Bishop of Derry ; they are for the most part the same 
 as the English, but are arranged in a different order. 
 Some differences, however, not altogether unimportant, 
 exist between them. (4) 
 
 The Convocation again met in 1636 and 1640, but no other 
 than ordinary business seems to have been transacted during 
 these sessions. In the reign of Charles II. only one Parlia- 
 ment was summoned. Convocation met May 10, 1661, Bram- 
 hall, now Primate, was its President. Dr Mossom, Dean of 
 Christchurch, was Prolocutor of the Lower House. (5) In 
 this Convocation the revised edition of the ' Book of Com- 
 mon Prayer ' was considered and approved of, previous to 
 its being sanctioned by the act of Uniformity, 17 and 18 
 Charles II. cap. 6. The approval of this Prayer-Book by 
 the Convocation is set forth in the preamble to this statute, 
 which thus recognized the Constitutional status of Con- 
 vocation. During the reign of William III. two Parlia- 
 ments were held in Ireland, but the Convocation of 
 "the Clergy was not convened. Neither during the first 
 ten years of this monarch's reign were the Convocations 
 of Canterbury and York permitted to transact any 
 business. 
 
 Queen Anne summoned a Parliament in 1703. Con- 
 . vocation met along with it, but as they had been summoned 
 
 (4) For points of difference with the Enghsh Canons, see ' Mant's Irish Church 
 History,' I., pp. 497—504 ; and an excellent Edition of the Irish Canons, pub- 
 lished by the Association for Discountenancing Vice, and edited by Dr Studdert. 
 
 (5) This Convocation is described in (14 and 15 Charles II., c. 24), a.d. 1662, 
 as "consisting of the Prelates and Clergy of this Church and kingdom of Ire- 
 land, called together out of the several provinces of Armagh, Dublin, Cashel, 
 and Iguana, by the authority of your Highne^'s writ, and orderly assembled in- 
 a national Synod or Convocation," and is thus recognized as an integral part of 
 the Constitution.
 
 36 
 
 only under the " prssmnnientes " clause in the Bishop's 
 writs, they refused to transact business till they were sum- 
 moned by the authority of their Metropolitans under the 
 provincial writs, and thus were formed into "a truly 
 "Ecclesiastical Synod." The Archbishops and Bishops 
 accordingly addressed the Lord-Lieutenant in a memorial 
 in which " they insisted on the Church's rights to have a 
 "full Convocation with every Parliament," and begged 
 that her Majesty would issue the provincial writs to the 
 four Archbishops, that thus they might obtain their "civil 
 " and undoubted rights." The provincial writs were 
 accordingly issued, and Convocation commenced its sittings 
 on January 11, 1704. Marsh, Archbishop of Armagh, was 
 President, and Dr Synge, Dean of Kildare, was Prolocutor. 
 This Convocation continued its sessions till 1711. In that 
 year the Royal license was obtained to treat and conclude 
 upon Canons, and accordingly five Canons were enacted 
 on November 7, 1711, one of which relates to a form of 
 prayer for the visitation of prisoners, and the other to forms 
 for receiving converts from the Church of Rome. This 
 was the last act of the Irish Convocation ; it has not since 
 met for the despatch of business. 
 
 In 1717 the Convocation of Canterbury, in consequence 
 of its proceedings against Bishop Hoadley, was prorogued, 
 and for 130 years the Convocation of the English and 
 Irish provinces were in abeyance. Of late years the Con- 
 vocations of Canterbury and York have renewed their 
 active functions, and are now regularly convened with 
 every session of Parliament. But a like measure of justice 
 is still denied the Convocation of the Irish provinces. 
 They are not permitted to meet and transact business, and 
 even the very existence of such a body is authoritatively 
 denied. It becomes thejitefore necessary to consider this 
 matter somewhat carefully.
 
 37 
 
 We have seen that the Irish Convocation was fully- 
 recognized as a constitutional body from the reign of 
 James I. to that of Queen Anne. Early in the reign of 
 George II., Primate Boulter mentions (6) that the holding 
 of a Convocation was under consideration, but that the 
 Cabinet were not favourable to it. This was in 1727. 
 In 1793 an Irish Act of Parliament, 33 Geo. III., c. 29, 
 was passed, now commonly, called the Convention Act. 
 From the operation of this Act, " the Houses of Convoca- 
 " tion duly summoned by the King's writ " are specially 
 exempted. By this Act of Parliament, therefore, the Irish 
 Convocation is distinctly recognized as a lawful and con- 
 stitutional assembly actually existing, although at that 
 time in abeyance, and it was then eighty-two years since it 
 had met for actual business. If, then, the Irish Convoca- 
 tion existed in 1793, after a silence of eighty-two years, 
 what prevents it being in existence in 1865, after a silence 
 of 154 years ? The mere lapse of time cannot cause the 
 extinction of a constitutional body, it requires some distinct 
 act of the Legislature to terminate its existence. And 
 where will that Act be found ^ not in the Act of Union, 
 for although by it the two Churches of England and 
 Ireland were united into our Protestant Episcopal Church, 
 yet it did not deprive the Convocations of Canterbury and 
 York of their separate existence ; and, therefore, neither 
 did it terminate the existence of the Irish Convocation. 
 In England, previous to the union, there were two separate 
 and independent Convocations in the one Church of 
 England. Since the Act of Union there have been three 
 Convocations in the United Church of England and Ireland, 
 and the co-existence of three Convocations in one Church 
 is no more inconsistent with unity since the Union than 
 
 (6) Letters. Vol. I., p. IGG,
 
 38 
 
 the co-existence of two Convocations in England was before 
 it took place. 
 
 Neither will it be found that the Church Temporalities 
 Act (3 and 4, "William IV, c. 37) in any way interferes with 
 the existence of Irish Convocation. By that Act the 
 Crown, as the fountain of all jurisdiction within the 
 realm, with the consent of both Houses of Parliament, 
 transferred the jurisdiction of the Archbishops of Tuam 
 and Cashel, on the next vacancy of those Sees, to the 
 Archbishops of Armagh and Dublin for the time being, 
 "with all the metropolitan ri()i7its, privileges,, franchises, 
 " duties, potvers and authorities theretofore exercised " (sec. 
 46), and thus a union of provinces took place, and the 
 metropolitan rights of the Archbishops of Armagh and 
 Dublin were extended over the former provinces of Tuam 
 and Cashel, but this in no way deprived the Bishops and 
 Clergy of those provinces of their right to sit in Convoca- 
 tion, or in any way interfered with its existence as a con- 
 stitutional body. There are no other Acts of Parliament 
 which refer at all to the Irish Convocation. 
 
 We cannot then conceive what induced her Majesty's 
 present Government to come to the conclusion con- 
 tained in the letter addressed by Sir George Grey to the 
 Irish Primates, on July 5, 1865, in reply to the urgent 
 request, " that it would be an act of justice and in strict 
 *\'accordance with the principle of the Act of Union to 
 " issue the like writs as were issued to convene the Irish 
 "Convocation down to the year 1714." 
 
 "I have brought this subject," writes the Home 
 Secretary, "under the consideration of her Majesty's 
 " Government, and I have to inform your Grace that if 
 " there existed a Convocatioli of the Branch of the Esta- 
 " blished Church in Ireland, or a Convocation of each, or 
 " one of the provinces of that branch of the Established
 
 39 
 
 *' Church stimmoned from time to time by writ, as is the 
 " case with the Provincial Convocation of Canterbury and 
 "York, her Majesty's Government are not aware of any 
 " ground upon which a different course should be taken 
 " with regard to such a body, from that which have been 
 " taken with regard to the English Convocation. But as 
 " this is not the case, her Majesty's Government do not 
 *' feel it to be their duty to advise her Majesty to call 
 *' such a body into existence."" 
 
 In this reply to the Primate, the Irish Convocation is 
 assumed to have lost its existence, because the Royal writ 
 for its assembling has not been regularly issued. Surely 
 the omission or disuse of a mere formality through the 
 fault of the Government, cannot abrogate an undoubted 
 right, or dissolve a constitutional body. The Royal writs 
 were not issued to the Irish Convocation from 1661 to 1703, 
 and yet in the latter year the Iiish Convocation was again 
 duly assembled. The Royal writ, it is true, has not been 
 issued from 1714 to 1866. Yet this cannot of itself be 
 any real bar to the Irish Convocation being forthwith 
 assembled. If the Royal writ was forthwith issued to 
 the Irish Primate, the Irish Convocation could hold 
 without any delay its regular sessions to consider 
 questions vitally important to the Church in Ireland 
 at the present time. But as things now stand, whilst 
 the enemies of the Irish Church are allowed the greatest 
 liberty "to meet and pass resolutions demanding the 
 *^ disendowment of the Established Church," the Irish 
 Bishops and Clergy are refused permission to exercise 
 their undoubted constitutional rights, and consider such 
 measures as will most conduce to her welfare and efficiency. 
 We fear the present " liberal" Government have other rea- 
 sons than those ostensibly put forward for thus restraining 
 the freedom of the subject, and refusing liberty " of speech
 
 40 
 
 " cUid debate " to the Irish Clergy. Irish Churchmen are 
 at present the best abused and most maligned body in the 
 British Empire, and it is deemed consistent with good 
 government and fair dealing to force into silence the only 
 body which from its knowledge and position can speak 
 the real truth in this matter, and thus dissipate the unrea- 
 sonable prejudices which are fast gathering round the 
 Irish Church question. 
 
 Neither can it be said that the Irish Bisho]3s and Clergy 
 have been inert in this matter. For years past they have 
 been unsuccessfully urging upon the Government their 
 right to meet in Synod to consider the affairs of the 
 Church. The first step towards the revival of Synodical 
 action in Ireland was taken by the Down and Connor 
 Diocesan Conference Committee in 1861, presenting to the 
 late Primate a memorial requesting his Grace to take such 
 steps as he and the Archbishop of Dublin might deem 
 fit to secure " that the voice of the Irish provinces of the 
 " United Church should be heard in Convocation." This 
 was followed in August, 1861, by a memorial from all the 
 Irish Archbishops and Bishops to her Majesty, " praying 
 " that she would be graciously pleased to refer all matters, 
 " involving any alteration in the doctrine, worship, disci- 
 " pline, or government of the Church, to the consideration 
 " of a General Synod of the United Churcli of England 
 " and Ireland,^' to which memorial Sir George Grey re- 
 plied that " her Majesty's Government have not felt it to 
 ''be their duty to advise her Majesty to convene a general 
 "Synod of the Church of England and Ireland." 
 
 In November, 1862, another memorial from the Irish 
 Prelates was forwarded to the Government by the present 
 Primate, praying " that equal privileges with those which 
 " have been granted to the Prelates and Clergy of the Eng- 
 " lish provinces should be extended to the Prelates and
 
 4-1 
 
 '■ Clergy of the Irish provinces," and that " therefore your 
 " Majesty will be graciously pleased to authorize the con- 
 evening of the Irish Convocation to the end that the Pre- 
 " lates and the representatives of the Clergy may be aiforded 
 " an opportunity of considering in Sacred Synod, such mat- 
 " ters as may tend to the advancement of true religion, and 
 " thereby aid in promoting joint and harmonious action on 
 " the part of the several provinces of the United Church." 
 To this memorial of the Archbishops and Bishops of the 
 Irish Church, Sir George Grey simply and curtly replied 
 " that it had been received and laid before her Majesty." 
 
 Nothing deterred by this pertinacious refusal of the 
 Government of the constituted rights of the Irish Clergy, 
 the Primate proceeded to have an elaborate statement of 
 the past history and present position of the Irish Convoca- 
 tion drawn up, which he laid before Sir George Grey in 
 March 1863. No result having followed from this, his 
 Grace took the further step of obtaining in Jan. 1864 the 
 opinion of that eminently learned civilian Dr A. J. 
 Stephens, Q.C., who has made Irish Ecclesiastical matters 
 his own special study and peculiar domain — as to his power 
 "as Metropolitan without any authorization from the 
 " Sovereign, to convene, when, and as often as he thinks 
 " fit, a Provincial Synod of Armagh." In an elaborate 
 opinion, which is worthy of careful study, Dr Stephens 
 discussed the whole question, and arrived at the undoubted 
 conclusion that in the present state of the law, his Grace 
 does possess the power of summoning whenever he may see 
 fit, ex mero motu, his own Provincial Synod. This opinion 
 in Feb. 1864, the Primate forwarded to Sir George Grey, 
 once more reminding him that the interests of the Irish 
 required that the Irish Convocation should be convened, 
 and that " it is not a new or unprecedented thing that is 
 " sought for ; it is the restoration of a privilege which the
 
 42 
 
 " Church in Ireland has been in the enjoyment of under 
 "former Sovereigns." What more reasonable, more re- 
 spectful request could be made by a svibject to a Sovereign ? 
 A venerable Primate placed at the head of a branch of the 
 Church exposed to continual assault and misrepresentation, 
 careful and watchful over the flock committed to his charge, 
 prays that the Bishops and Clergy of that Church may be 
 permitted to deliberate under Royal writ, on such measures 
 as will best promote its welfare and efficiency ; and per- 
 mission to do this is absolutely refused by the Crown 
 through the medium of its responsible advisers. " After 
 *' full deliberation they had been unable," writes Sir George 
 Grey, in March, 1864, " to arrive at the conclusion that 
 " any sufficient ground exists for taking this course, whilst 
 " on the other hand, they apprehend that some practical 
 "inconvenience might result from it." No "sufficient 
 "ground" for reviving the Irish Convocation when the 
 whole Irish Episcopate assures her Majesty that the inte- 
 rests of their branch of the Church demand it ! Surely it 
 was unreasonable to expect that justice should be done to 
 the moderate demands of the Irish Bishops and Clergy, 
 when some " practical inconvenience " might arise to the 
 Liberal Government from the offence that might thus be 
 given to its illiberal supporters on the other side of the 
 Channel. 
 
 One more effort has been made by the Irish Primates to 
 revive the action of their Convocation, but made in vain. 
 The English twenty-ninth Canon of 1603 is the same as 
 the sixteenth Irish Canon of 1634. When, therefore, the 
 former was repealed by the English Convocation under 
 Eoyal licence, and a new Canon enacted in its place, the 
 Irish Primate deemed it a favourable opportunity for asking 
 that a similar privilege might be extended to the Irish 
 provinces of the imited Church. But this untoward
 
 43 
 
 persistence of the Irish Primates in demanding that the 
 same measure of justice should be dealt out to the Irish 
 Clergy as to the English was too much for the patience of the 
 Cabinet, and Sir George Grey was instructed to inform the 
 Irish Metropolitans that they were mistaken in supposing 
 that the Irish Clergy have any Convocation, and that, in 
 fact, such a body does not exist. 
 
 Such is the manner in which the present Government 
 have thought fit to treat one of the gravest of constitutional 
 questions — the rights of the Clergy of the National Church 
 of Ireland to deliberate on matters concerning its own wel- 
 fare. By a national compact enacted in the most solemn 
 form of statute law, the English and Irish provinces of 
 the United Church were placed on a footing of perfect 
 equality. The like privileges secured to one, were secured 
 also to the other. This was especially stipulated by the 
 Irish Parliament as the foundation of the Acts of Union. 
 After nearly a century and a half of silent inactivity, the 
 English provinces of the United Church are permitted 
 under Eoyal writ to meet and deliberate on such subjects 
 as they deem necessary, and under Eoyal licence to alter 
 and amend various Canons relating to matters equally 
 affecting both branches of the Church. The Irish Bishops 
 and Clergy " humbly trusting that their long and patient 
 " forbearance in times past will not now be regarded as 
 ^^prejudicing the claim of the Irish provinces of the 
 " United Church to obtain equal privileges with those 
 " which have been granted to the English provinces " (7) 
 ask permission to do the same. This permission is again 
 and again peremptorily refused them, and at last the Irish 
 Primates were^ told that they are quite mistaken in 
 
 (7) See 'Memorial of Primate to Sir George Grey,' p. 12. Parliamentary 
 paper 258. Session 1863.
 
 44 
 
 supposing that the Irish Convocation exists at all. It is 
 hard to realize that in this 19th century, under the present 
 British Constitution, such a body of men as the Irish 
 Bishops and Clergy could have been treated by any govern- 
 ment in the manner above described. 
 
 It maybe thought by some that the Irish Primates have 
 the remedy in their own hands, and that they should at 
 once proceed to summon, ex mero motu, their own Pro- 
 vincial Synods. They might do this, but their power of 
 action in these Synods, when assembled, would of necessity 
 be very limited, Their moral influence would undoubtedly 
 be great. They might debate such questions as concerned 
 the present welfare of the Irish Church, and thus effectually 
 inform the public mind on the subject : they might also do 
 much toward considering and recommending any measures 
 of internal reform for promoting the real efficiency of the 
 Church. But it is more than doubtful whether, without 
 the Royal writ, they could alter and repeal Canons enacted 
 under it, or whether the separate Provincial Synods of 
 Armagh and Dublin have the power, even when acting 
 concurrently, to alter Canons enacted in a Convocation of 
 all the provinces of the Irish Church. The real question, 
 however, at issue is this, — the Irish Bishops claim that 
 whatever constitutional status is given to the Convocation 
 of the English j^rovinces by the Royal writ, the same 
 constitutional status should, as a matter of light and 
 justice, be extended to the Irish Convocation also. This 
 the Government at present persistently refuse to grant.
 
 45 
 
 V. 
 
 TPIE TRUE POSITION OF THE ROMAN 
 COMMUNION IN IRELAND. 
 
 There is nothing of which it is so difficult to disabuse 
 the public mind as a popular error. The fallacy may be 
 made as clear as the day. It may be shown that it rests 
 upon a misapprehension of the true facts of the case, and 
 is altogether without any solid foundation ; and although 
 a thoughtful few may be thus convinced of the falseness 
 of the popular delusion which has so long held sway, yet 
 the many continue to believe in it, it will croj) up again 
 and agaiii, and be repeated and believed in without ex- 
 amination and without inquiry. Arguments are built 
 upon it, conclusions are drawn from it, as if it were a 
 certain and infallible truth, and thus even grave questions 
 of state policy will sometimes be determined on grounds 
 wholly untenable, and which will be found upon ex- 
 amination to be altogether devoid of real and substantial 
 existence. 
 
 Such a popular error is the wide-spread belief that the 
 present Roman Communion in Ireland is the old Catholic 
 Church of that country. 
 
 Nothing, perhaps, is more firmly believed in by most 
 persons than this. In considering the question in popular 
 articles and reviews, it is presumed to be an axiom which 
 cannot be disputed, yet nothing can be more thoroughly 
 contrary to the real facts of the case. At this time, then, 
 when the Irish Church question is exciting so much 
 interest, and is likely to become daily of greater im- 
 portance, it will be well for us to look into this matter, 
 
 ^
 
 46 
 
 and examine for ourselves what is the true position of the 
 Church of Eome in that country. 
 
 It has ever been the misfortune of Ireland that the true 
 source of the evils with which she is afflicted has rarely 
 been ascertained. Successive governments, anxiously 
 desirous to signalise their term of office by remedying 
 what at the time seemed a crying evil, have hastily 
 concocted remedies for supposed abuses, which in the end 
 have created greater abuses than those which they were 
 designed to remedy. There is no doubt that we Englishmen 
 require great patience when discussing any Irish question 
 above all when discussing the question of the Irish Church. 
 It is so easy to seize on the salient j)oints of a case and. to 
 cry out that this and that is a glaring abuse, of which 
 such and such a plan is an evident remedy, and it 
 is so long, and tedious, and withal with most of us, 
 so unwelcome a task, to trace out the real causes of the 
 evils, from which Ireland has suffered long and is suffering 
 still ; — and the more so because these causes are really 
 historic, and require much thought and patient inquiry to 
 discover ; — so that there is great danger lest, in these days 
 of rapid and eager progress, the legislature should be in- 
 duced to adopt some crude and half-considered measure, 
 which will increase rather than diminish the many un- 
 doubted evils under which Ireland at present labours, not 
 the least of which is the total misapprehension by many of 
 the true position which the Established Church holds in that 
 country. 
 
 That position is as follows : — The Christian Church was 
 first effectually founded in Ireland by S. Patrick in the fifth 
 century. For more than 700 years after S. Patrick first 
 preached in Ireland the Church he founded was uncon- 
 nected with, and independent of, the See of Rome. In the 
 twelfth century, Henry II. conquered Ireland, and brought
 
 47 
 
 Ireland's Church for the first time under the jurisdiction 
 of the Roman See. It was then that England introduced 
 Popery into Ireland, and for three centuries and a half 
 from that time, the Church of S. Patrick was subjected to 
 the Church of Rome. But in the sixteenth century Ire- 
 land's Church rejected this foreign supremacy, and at the 
 same time returned to the state of primitive purity of doc- 
 trine which had existed centuries before the Anglican con- 
 quest. The Pope was thus left without any Communion in 
 Ireland to acknowledge his Supremacy, and although for 
 some years he permitted this state of things to continue, 
 he at length introduced a succession of foreign Bishops in 
 Ireland from Italy and Spain, and intruded them into 
 Sees already in the possession of the Bishops of Ireland's 
 ancient Church. Thus did the present Roman Communion 
 in Ireland first begin. Foreign Bishops, consecrated in 
 foreign lands, assumed to themselves the position of 
 the lawful Bishops of Ireland, and from these foreigner s,2,n.di 
 not from the Bishops of the Church of S. Patrick, does 
 the present Roman Catholic Episcopate in Ii-eland derive its 
 succession. Not one of the present Irish Roman Catholic 
 Bishops can show any connexion with Ireland's ancient 
 Church, whilst every Bishop of the Established Church 
 there can trace back his Apostolic commission in clear and 
 unbroken succession to the Apostle of Ireland himself. 
 
 It is evident, then, that whether Established or dis- 
 established the Irish branch of the United Church is the old 
 Catholic Church of Ireland. Men may doubt or deny this, 
 but the fact remains. The Church which is now the Esta- 
 blished Church of that country is the same Church that 
 existed in Ireland before the Reformation, before the con- 
 quest of Henry II, down to the days of S. Patrick. 
 Through all these long ages it has preserved an unbroken 
 continuity of existence, and the body corporate that now
 
 48 
 
 possesses the small remaining portion of the existing reve- 
 nues of the onoe richly endowed Church of Ireland 
 is the same body corporate as received those lands from 
 the hands of the ancient Lords and Chieftains of Ireland, 
 which some of its Bishops to this day enjoy. Wars, 
 confiscations, and rebellions have swept over and deso- 
 lated that unhappy land, but Ireland's Church has re- 
 mained the same through all, its energies weakened, its 
 powers for good crippled, by ever- active foes without 
 and too often by designing friends within, but the same 
 Church still, the Church which gained for Ireland the far- 
 famed title of " the Isle of Saints," the only Church which 
 still bears witness in that land alike to Apostolic truth and 
 Apostolic order. 
 
 Nor should we forget that it is only of late years that the 
 Roman Communion of Ireland has publicly assumed to itself 
 the title of tlie Catholic Church in Ireland. However per- 
 tinaciously the Eoman Catholic Bishops may have claimed 
 that title in private — though in no true sense dicl it 
 ever belong to their Church — they were content pre- 
 vious to A.D. 1829 to assume the modest title of " Prelates of 
 " the Roman Communion in Ireland," but no sooner had 
 the passing of the Emancipation Act opened out to 
 them Parliamentary influence and Parliamentary power, 
 than they at once assumed the title of the Catholic Church 
 of Ireland, and ignored altogether that Church which alone 
 can prove its right to that venerable title ( 1 ). An d from that 
 day to the pi'esent hour the Eomish Church in Ireland has 
 been increasing its pretensions more and ever more. 
 Having secured one advantage it quickly moves on to 
 
 (1) It is especially to be observed that, although Christianity has existed in 
 Ireland for 1,-134 years, the Church of Ireland has been free from the exercise 
 of the Supremacy of the Pope for 1,052 years of that period. See ' Tacts 
 respecting the Present State of the Church in Ireland,' 5th Edition, p. 20,
 
 49 
 
 secure anotlier. It never rests satisfied with any advance 
 already obtained ; the cry is still give, give. In a.d. 1825 
 the Eoman Catholic Archbishop (Murray) of Dublin, de- 
 clared, before a Select Committee of the House of Commons, 
 " that there was no wish on the part of the Eoman Catholic 
 " Clergy to disturb the present Establishment, or to partake 
 " of any part of the wealth it enjoys ;" and he added, " that 
 " the Eoman Catholic Clergy have not the least objection 
 " to give the most full and entire assurance on that subject? 
 "by any declaration that might be required of them." 
 Bishop Doyle, the celebrated Eoman Catholic Bishop of 
 Leighlin, said on oath before the House of Lords, " I con- 
 " ceive that the removal of the disqualifications under which 
 " Eoman Catholics labour would lessen considerably those 
 " feelings of opposition which they may at present entertain 
 " with regard to the Establishment. The country would 
 " settle down into a Jiahit of quiets (2) In a.d. 1826, the 
 thirty Eoman Catholic Bishops of Ireland declared on oath 
 " that they disclaim, disavow, and solemnly abjure, any 
 " intention to subvert the present Church Establishment 
 "for the purpose pf substituting a Catholic Establishment 
 " in its stead. And further, they swear that they will 
 " not exercise any privilege to which they are or may he 
 " entitled, to disturb and weaken the Protestant religion 
 "and Protestant Government in Ireland." Such were 
 the fair promises and solemn oaths by which a 
 hesitating Parliament was induced to grant the full 
 privileges of citizenship to their Eoman Catholic 
 fellow subjects. The Eoman Catholic Bishops, on behalf 
 of themselves and the whole Eoman Catholic body in 
 
 (2) On this head it is worth referring to the recent reprint, Hayes, Lyall place, 
 price 6d.— of " Roman Catholic Principles in reference to God and the King," 
 under the title of •• The Catholic Eirenicon." 
 
 E
 
 so 
 
 Ireland, solemnly promised that they would not * use any 
 power they then had, or any to which they might become 
 entitled to weaken or subvert the Established Church in 
 that country. How have they kept that promise ? How have 
 they used the power they have since obtained 1 Scarcely 
 was the ink of the Eoyal signature to the , Emancijpa- 
 tion Act dry than an agitation against the Irish Church, 
 under the able leadership of Daniel O'Connell, was com- 
 menced, which only ended when ten Bishoj)rics of the Irish 
 Church were suspended, and a fourth part of her remain- 
 ing revenues confiscated. And who were the chief 
 supporters — the ardent abettors of O'Connell in his crusade 
 against the Church? The Koman Catholic Bishops and 
 Clergy of Ireland. Who are now the founders of a so-called 
 National Association " for demanding the disendowment 
 " of the Established Church in Ireland ?" The same Eoman 
 Catholic Bishops and Clergy. They know well that the 
 X^arochial system of the Irish Church is the one great 
 impediment to their obtaining undivided sway over at 
 least three-fourths of Ireland. They know well that it is 
 the one great safeguard and protection of the scattered 
 Churchmen of the South and West, who have now in every 
 parish a centre of loyalty and Churchmanship round which 
 they can rally in every hour of danger. They know, and 
 daily feel this, and therefore they have resolved to make 
 one bold and determined effort to rid themselves of it for 
 ever. Should they succeed, whose would be the gain ? 
 Their' s, and their' s alone. England's hold' on Ireland 
 would be effectually weakened ; — Eome's grasp of it effec- 
 tually tightened. At present the Irish Church is the one 
 chief means of maintaining that intercommunication be- 
 tween Englishmen and Irishmen on which the connexion 
 between the two countries mainly depends, Irish Bishops 
 sit in the House of Lords, and English graduates hold
 
 51 
 
 preferment in Ireland. We have lately seen one of the 
 brightest ornaments of English literature transferred from 
 an English Deanery to an Irish Archbishopric, whilst his pre- 
 decessor in his See had been the Head of a Hall in Oxford. . 
 The two Irish Primates and the present Bishop of Derry 
 are all graduates of Trinity College, Cambridge. Disendow 
 the Irish Church and this healthful interchange would 
 cease at once. Irish graduates would doubtless cross the 
 Channel in ever increasing numbers, but how many English 
 graduates would cast in their lot with the poverty-stricken 
 dis-established Church of Ireland 1 Some no doubt there 
 would be to whom the urgent need would of itself be call 
 enough. But these could not be many. No : — if ever the 
 people of England and Ireland are to be united in the bonds 
 of cordial friendship, and a real national unity (to say 
 nothing of a common faith), the Irish Church is un- 
 doubtedly the mediator through which that reconcilia- 
 tion must take place. That unity is not accomplished 
 yet, but we are nearer to it than we were. On the 
 other hand, displace the Established Church from the 
 position she has held for nearly seven centuries (3), 
 let Ireland, as regards the State, be left without any 
 National religion, and a most effectual step will have been 
 taken to make the wished-for reconciliation impossible. 
 The Eomish Church, the only real impediments to her 
 supremacy removed, will then be able to dictate the 
 terms on which the Government shall obtain peace 
 in Ireland. The silent restraining power which the 
 Church now exercises will never be fully appre- 
 ciated till England suicidally removes it. The Irish 
 people have never yet been taught to regard the Irish 
 
 (3) The Irish Church was first connected with the State by Henry IL ia 
 
 1172 A.D.
 
 52 
 
 Church as the old Catholic Church of Ireland. Eome has 
 always told them that the true old Irish Church is the same 
 with the Eoman Communion in Ireland, and they have as 
 yet believed her, and the language of English writers and 
 statesmen has helped Eome to fasten this delusion on the 
 people of Ireland. Once let Irishmen be convinced that the 
 present Church of Eome in Ireland has no connexion with 
 the old Church of S. Patrick, once let them realise that the 
 only true successors of the old Catholic Bishops of Ireland 
 are the Bishops of the Eeformed Irish Church, and the power 
 of Eome in Ireland will be shaken to its foundation, and 
 a most effectual stej) will have been taken towards gather- 
 ing the iDeoj)le of Ireland into the fold of the ancient 
 Cathode Church of Ireland, from which so many of them 
 .are now separated.
 
 53 
 
 VI. 
 
 THE SOCIAL ASPECT OF THE IRISH CHUECH 
 QUESTION. 
 
 There is no public body in existence the defects of which 
 are so well known as those of the Church in Ireland. For 
 more than forty years she has been the constant object of 
 Royal Commissioners' reports and Parliamentary inquiry. 
 The religious population of every parish down to the 
 minutest sub-division, the gross and net income of every 
 single Bishop and Clergyman, the area of every benefice, 
 has been fully and accurately ascertained, arranged, and 
 classified. No weak point has been left in the shade, no 
 short-comings have been concealed, all has been paraded 
 before the world ; the worst that could be said of her has 
 been said ; the worst that can be known of her is fully 
 known. 
 
 Through such an ordeal as this what public body could 
 pass unscathed ? And when it is remembered that those 
 who have been nourished in her bosom and now eat of 
 her bread have been amongst the foremost to bring to 
 light her supposed defects, and have thus sounded all her 
 imperfections trumpet-tongued through the land, can we 
 wonder that a false impression has gone abroad respecting 
 her, and that anomalies inherent in a National Church 
 situated as she is, have been mistaken for abuses, and 
 that evils arising from political mismanagement, in the
 
 54 
 
 origin of which she had no share, have been freely laid 
 to her charge. 
 
 " Inequalities, no doubt, exist both in population and 
 " in income, but such difficulties appear to be unavoidable, 
 " and to exist, to some extent, in every Church Establish- 
 " ment. That such anomalies should be remedied (so far 
 "as they can be safely and wisely remedied) none are 
 " more anxious than the Bishops of the Church. It is, 
 ^^ however, much easier to 'point out a defect than to devise 
 " such a remedy as ivould not presently entail greater evils 
 " than it sought to remove.'''' {1) We would commend these 
 weighty words of the Primate of Ireland to the attentive 
 consideration of those would-be Church Reformers, who, 
 restless under the stinging imputations of the Church's 
 enemies, are ever proposing delusive theories of reform, 
 not one of which is capable of being carried out into prac- 
 tice, with the vain hope of averting a danger which arises 
 from no desire for the Church's greater efficiency, but 
 from the determinate jDurpose of procuring, if possible, her 
 downfall as the Established Church of the country, first in 
 Ireland and then in England. 
 
 In 1860, when the Government brought into Parliament 
 a bill for regulating the then pending Census of 1861, it 
 was proposed to ascertain the actual numbers of all the 
 religious bodies in the United Kingdom. Such a proposi- 
 tion was vigorously and successfully oj)posed by the 
 English Dissenters. They had their own reasons for 
 objecting to be counted, and counted they were not. But 
 ', the clause enjoining such an enumeration in Ireland was 
 \ retained, and the result has been a census upon the basis 
 \ of which the present attack on the Irish Church is 
 A nominally based, nominally we say, for the real force of 
 
 (1) Charge of Archbishop Armagh for 1864. Second Edition. P. 20.
 
 55 
 
 the attack comes from the voluntary party in England, 
 and not from %h.e Eoman Catholics of Ireland. It was 
 originated by them under the auspices of Mr Dillwyn long 
 before the formation of the so-called National Roman 
 Catholic Association in Dublin. 
 
 The Eoman Catholic Bishops and Priests, and the few 
 leading demagogues who are joined with them in the ranks 
 of the National Association, would be utterly powerless 
 but for their English allies ; for the mass of the Eoman 
 Catholic population of Ireland cares nothing about the 
 matter, and in nowise feels the Established Church to be a 
 grievance, as the Fenian outbreak has clearly shown. 
 Eoman Catholic Priests, then, and English Protestant Dis- 
 senters have joined together for the purpose of obtaining, 
 if possible, the destruction of the Established Church in 
 Ireland that they may march over its ruins to a successful 
 assault on the Established Church in England, and the 
 one staple argument which they are ever presenting before 
 the public in every possible shape and form is, that the 
 Eoman Catholics are the great majority of the people of 
 Ireland, and that because they are so, they should be placed 
 on a footing of equality with the Established Church in that 
 country — in other words, that either the Eoman Catholic 
 Church should be endowed, or that the Irish Church should 
 be despoiled of her property and disinherited. 
 
 Now, in considering this question, it is well to remember 
 that in every country the number of the landed proprietors 
 and educated classes, upon whom its prosperity and pro- 
 gress chiefly depends, must ever be few in number when 
 compared with the masses of which the great majority of 
 ' the population is composed. It is far from improbable 
 that if the true numbers of those who are connected or 
 sympathize with the Fenian conspiracy could be ascer- 
 tained, they would be found far to outnumber the loyal
 
 56 
 
 and faithful subjects of the Queen in Ireland, but who in 
 his senses would therefore argue that the Irish Republic 
 should forthwith be established ? Yet this is just the 
 argument which we hear resounding on all sides for the 
 destruction of the Irish Church as an Establishment. She 
 is the Church, it is said, of a miserable minority, there- 
 fore down with her, down with her, even to the ground I 
 Yet the Irish Church contains within her fold the 
 very great majority of the nobility, gentry, landed 
 proprietors, and members of learned professions in 
 Ireland ; 90 per cent, of the soil of Ireland is owned 
 by Protestants. Of all the Irish Peers nine only 
 are Roman Catholics, a tenth only of the landed pro- 
 prietors belong to that Church, 28 per cent, only 
 of the barristers of Ireland are Roman Catholics, whilst 
 the greater majority of physicians and lawyers and 
 all other learned professions are Protestant ; and Dr Hume, 
 in his accurate analysis of the Census of 1861, has clearly 
 shown that whenever skilled labour is required Protestants 
 are greatly in the ascendancy ; and where mere manual 
 labour suffices, there a large Roman Catholic majority is 
 found. To take only one instance of many, the great 
 majority of coach and ca,r -makers are Protestants, whilst 
 the great majority of coach and car- drivers are Roman 
 Catholics. 
 
 We would gladly have been spared entering into these 
 details had not the argument so constantly put forward of 
 numbers being on the side of the Roman Catholics, rendered 
 it necessary that we should do so. If mere numbers are 
 to be the only standard by which an Establishment is to be 
 judged, then it is evident that neither the Established 
 Kirk in Scotland nor the Church in Wales can for a 
 moment be defended as the Established religion of these 
 countries ; if the Irish Church falls before an argu-
 
 57 
 
 ment such as this, the Scottish and Welsh Establishments 
 must forthwith share its fate. The Irish Church is as 
 much an integral part of the United Church as the Church 
 in Wales ; and if great principles are thus to be decided 
 by mere numerical majorities, if we are to jDreserve any 
 national religion at all, we must soon have to regulate 
 it anew, according to the result of each successive Census ! 
 Can we, then, for a moment suppose that a Church which 
 comprehends the great majority of the leading classes of 
 the community can be overthrown without a social revolu- 
 tion ? Under the existing circumstances of Ireland, can it 
 be prudent, or even safe, to excite in the minds of those 
 who are the warmest and most loyal supporters of English 
 rule, feelings of dissatisfaction and discontent ? Can it be 
 right to deprive at one stroke 700,000 Churchmen of all 
 the means of grace, and leave them without any provision 
 save that which they can themselves provide for their 
 spiritual needs ? Can it be consistent with sound 'policy, 
 to say nothing of the principles of justice, to leave the scat- 
 tered Churchmen of the South and West of Ireland, few in 
 number it may be, but the very salt of the country as regards 
 its allegiance to our Sovereign, without that pastoral care 
 and those spiritual ministrations to which for centuries they 
 liave been accustomed ? Are we prepared wholly to with- 
 draw that silent restraining influence which the parochial 
 Clergyman now exercises in every joart of Ireland, and 
 hand over three at least of the four Provinces to the 
 uncontrolled dominion of the most Ultramontane and Papal 
 Priesthood in Europe ? Yet all this, and much more, 
 will be accomplished by the downfall of the Established 
 Church in Ireland. The blow would eventually fall with 
 far heavier weight upon the Lay Churchmen of Ireland 
 than upon the Clergy. The former have a far greater and 
 more permanent interest in the temporalities of the Church 
 F
 
 58 
 
 than the latter. The Clergyman's pecuniary interest in 
 his parish is necessarily of a temporary nature. 
 
 •' It soon becomes a story little known, 
 That once he called the parsonage house his own." 
 
 But the landlord remains, and he and his children and his 
 children's children will suffer if the Church's heritage is 
 given over to the spoiler, and the House of God, from which 
 for so long a period has ascended the hallowed words and 
 pure faith of our Church's Liturgy, be left silent and deso- 
 late, a reproachful monument to his posteritj'- of the faith- 
 lessness of that generation which had not the spirit to de- 
 fend the inheritance that God had given them, or the self- 
 denial to make any sacrifice for their Master's sake. 
 
 The time, therefore, has decidedly come when it impera- 
 tively behoves Churchmen on both sides the Channel 
 thoroughly to consider the results that will follow from the 
 disendowment of the Church in Ireland. Those who are 
 leading on the attack seek as much as possible to divert 
 public attention from this subject ; yet it is of the greatest 
 ■ importance that it should be maturely considered by all. 
 Ireland is at present in a transition state ; between 1834 
 and 1861 the Eoman Catholic iioi)ulation was diminished by 
 two millions, and in the four j^ears which have elapsed 
 since the last census, more than 350,000 emigrants have 
 left its shores. During the twenty-seven years above 
 mentioned the Roman Catholics of Ireland lost nearly a 
 tidrd of their whole number, and should the emigration 
 continue merely at its present rate — and it is probable that 
 when the Fenian conspiracy is fully suppressed it will 
 largely increase — the population of Ireland, by the next 
 Census of 1871, will be again largely diminished. "With a 
 population in a state of such rapid transition, it is evident 
 that no worse time could be chosen to propose a fiinda-
 
 S9 
 
 mental constitutional change than the present. In a few 
 years, when j^nblic confidence is restored, and English capi- 
 tal finds its way back into Ireland, the religions aspects of 
 whole districts may be changed, as has been the case already 
 in a minor degree in some parts of the country ; nor can we 
 think that it will tend to increase the prosperity of Ireland, 
 or induce Englishmen to settle there, if the Irish branch of 
 the United Church should be deprived of her revenues, and 
 the burden of supporting her Churches and Clergy be placed 
 entirely upon her own members. Nor should it be for- 
 gotten that the Churchmen of Ireland have ever been the 
 stronghold of loyalty and obedience to the law in that 
 kingdom. Whatever may happen to their , Church 
 revenues, loyal, no doubt, they would ever remain. But 
 they will, in a great measure, be deprived of the means of 
 encouraging loyalty amongst the people of remote districts 
 of the land, where it is most necessary that it should be 
 preserved. One of the first results that must undoubtedly 
 follow from the dis- endowment of the Irish Church would 
 be the withdrawal of the parochial Clergy from these 
 poorer districts, whose inhabitants could not afford a 
 maintenance for their pastor, and the sad results, morally, 
 socially, and politically, that would ensue, it is not needful 
 to dwell upon here. In many cases also the landlord, find- 
 ing himself deprived of his intimate friend, and the spiritual 
 instructor of his children, and the active ministrations of 
 his own Church, would place his property in the hands of 
 an agent, and swell the already large number of absentee 
 proprietors. Nor can we imagine anything more detri- 
 mental to the social prosperity of a country situated such 
 as Ireland is, than the passing of a measure which would 
 deprive it of twelve resident noblemen and 1,500 resident 
 gentry — for such are her Bishops and beneficed Clergy (to 
 say nothing of the 662 Curates), — whose whole income.
 
 6o 
 
 both private and professional, is spent in the country, and 
 whose time and energies are entirely devoted to the 
 spiritual and temporal welfare of its people. We trust 
 that the statesmen and people of England will calmly 
 and thoughtfully consider this aspect of the ques- 
 tion ; upon them the future of the Church in Ireland 
 mainly rests. If they permit her endowments to be 
 confiscated, centuries must elapse before the Church can 
 regain that influence for good which she now possesses 
 there ; if they, on the other hand, refuse to give her over 
 to the spoiler, and preserve intact the ancient heritage of 
 the Church in Ireland, do not her renovated Cathedrals, her 
 almost daily restored parish churches, and the energy, 
 faithfulness, and devotion of her Clergy, give good promise 
 that, by the blessing of the Great Head of the Church, a 
 Jiappy and prosperous future lies before her ?
 
 6i 
 
 VII. 
 STATISTICS OF THE IRISH CHURCH. 
 
 As time goes on the real importance of the Irish Church 
 question is beginning more and more to be realized. 
 Statesmen are carefully considering it, and Churchmen on 
 both sides of the Channel are anxious for accurate infor- 
 mation respecting it. It is now seen that the future of the 
 Reformed faith in Ireland greatly depends on the manner 
 in which this question is settled ; and that if the Estab- 
 lished Church by being disendowed is withdrawn from the 
 remote districts of the country, no long time will elapse be- 
 fore three out of the four provinces of Iieland (with the ex- 
 ception of the large towns) will be entirely in the hands of 
 Rome. It becomes, therefore, a matter of increasing im- 
 portance that Churchmen in general should have the 
 means of forming a fair and trustworthy opinion for them- 
 selves as to what the state of the Irish Church really is ; 
 and this want, as far as regards the statistics of the 
 question, we shall now endeavour in some measure to 
 supply. 
 
 But we must premise in the first place that the true 
 position which the Church holds in Ireland does not depend 
 merely upon the inimber of her members. As regards 
 population she is in an acknowledged minority when com- 
 pared with the Roman Catholics of Ireland. But if ever
 
 62 
 
 there was a case in which a minority deserved to be 
 weighed, as well as counted, it is this. The Church popu- 
 lation of Ireland comprises nearly eight-ninths of the 
 landed proprietors and the great majority of the learned 
 professions, and therefore the Church contains the social 
 and intellectual leaders of the nation, with few exceptions, 
 within her pale ; and if an Established Church is to be 
 preserved in a countiy at all, that Church should be the 
 Church of the governing classes, and not of the mere 
 mass of the population, who naturally, in social and 
 political matters, follow the lead of those placed ovei- 
 them. 
 
 With these preliminary observations let us proceed to 
 consider the question now immediately before us. 
 
 The total population of Ireland during the last two cen- 
 tuiies has been as follows : 
 
 1672 
 1767 
 1805 
 1834 
 1841 
 1851 
 1861 
 
 1,320,000 
 2,544,276 
 5,395,456 
 7,954,100 
 8,196,597 
 6,574,278 
 5,798,967 
 
 It will thus be seen that up to 1841 the population was 
 steadily and rapidly increasing, but during the decade of 
 1841-1851, famine and pestilence, followed by emigration, 
 diminished the population by no less than 1,622,319. The 
 emigTation continued with scarcely abated force during the 
 next ten years, so that in 1861 Ireland contained 775,311 
 less inhabitants even than 1851. The whole loss between 
 1841 and 1861 Avas 2,397,630, or in round numbers 
 2,400,000. It is estimated that between April, 1861, and 
 31st of Dec, 1864, the total number of emigrants from
 
 63 
 
 Ireland was 351,572, but as during that period there has 
 been a large increase of births over deaths, the total popula- 
 tion of Ireland on Dec. 31, 1864, was estimated at 5,673,424, 
 or a loss of 125,543, since April, 1861.(1) 
 
 Now, these returns show that the population of Ireland 
 is still rapidly diminishing, and that the country is, there- 
 fore, in a transition state, and we may expect that, when 
 the Fenian bubble has finally burst, a large exodus of its 
 deluded followers will take place, and the population of 
 Ireland be still further reduced. 
 
 It is evident, therefore, that any legislation, respecting 
 the Irish Church, which may take place during such a 
 period of transition as that through which Ireland is now 
 passing, may, unless great care is taken, result in perma- 
 nent injury to the welfare of that country, especially 
 when we remember that the relative position of Protestants 
 and Eoman Catholics in Ii-eland is undergoing a great, 
 though little considered, change, as we shall now pro- 
 ceed to show. 
 
 In 1834 an enumeration of the people of Ireland accord- 
 ing to their religious profession was taken. This was 
 rather a compilation than a census. The regular census 
 had been taken in 1831, and in 1834 the Commissioners 
 appointed for the purpose " made the population returns of 
 "1831 the basis of their operations, after having duly 
 " considered the great expense, the prospect of delay, and 
 " other inconveniences incidental to an entirely new 
 " enumeration ; " and they thus succeeded in compiling a 
 census which, the Commissioners of 1861 are themselves 
 obliged to confess, is " defective and inaccurate in many 
 ** respects. ^^ (Keport, p. 4.) And yet, be it observed, 
 it is on the comparison of " this defective and inaccurate " 
 
 (1) For particulars see • Thom'a Official Directory ' for 1866.— P. 703.
 
 64 
 
 census of 1834 with that of 1861, and the result derived 
 therefrom, that much of the present attack on the Irish 
 Church is ostensibly based. We say " ostensibly based " 
 because the real attack on the Established Church in Ire- 
 land arises, not from the smallness of the number of its 
 members, but on that determined opposition to all union 
 between Church and State, which is the chief characteristic 
 of English political dissent, as well as on that energetic and 
 vigorous efibrt which the Church of Eome is now making 
 to become supreme in Ireland in all matters, educational 
 as well as religious. The Established Church has ever 
 been the greatest obstacle to this attempted supremacy of 
 Eome, and therefore no effort will be spared to remove 
 her from the position which she has held for so many 
 centuries. 
 
 According to the compilation of 1834 the religious 
 population of Ireland was as follows : 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 Established Church - 853,160 or 10-7. 
 
 Eoman Catholics - - 6,436,060 or 80-9. 
 
 Presbyterians - - 643,058 or 8*1. 
 
 Protestant Dissenters - 21,822 or 0-3. 
 
 7,954,100 
 
 Amongst the members of the Established Church, how- 
 ever, in 1834, the Wesleyan Methodists, " by a peculiarity 
 "of their constitution" (Census Eeport of 1861, p. 5), 
 were included. So that the real number of members of 
 the Church in 1834 was 809,761, and not 853,160. It is 
 important to bear this circumstance in mind, as most 
 erroneous calculations have been made on the supposition 
 that the Church population was diminished by 159,803 
 between 1834 and 1861 ; the truth is, the Church only lost
 
 6s 
 
 114,404, whilst the whole population of the country was 
 diminished during that period by 2,155,133. 
 
 In 1861 the population of Ireland, arranged according to» 
 the various religious denominations, was returned as 
 foUows : — 
 
 Established Church 693,357 or 11*9 per cent 
 
 Koman Catholics . 4,505,265 or 777 „ 
 Presbyterians . 523,291 or 9*0 „ 
 
 Protestant Dissenters 
 Jews .... 393 
 
 5,798,967 
 
 It will thus be seen that whilst the Eoman Catholit; 
 population of Ireland was diminished by a third, the Pres- 
 byterian by between a fifth and a sixth, the Church lost 
 only between a seventh and an eighth, so that although all 
 suffered a diminution of their actual numbers, the Church 
 lost far less in proportion than the Roman Catholics, and 
 considerably less than the Presbyterians. Moreover, it is 
 worthy of especial observation that the proportion per 
 cent, of the Church population has risen in twenty-one 
 Dioceses out of the thirty-two in Ireland, whilst the 
 Eoman Catholic population has decreased in thirty Dioceses 
 out of the thirty-two during the same period. So little 
 truth is there in the assertion so pertinaciously put for- 
 ward, and too commonly believed in, that the hold of the 
 Church on the country is diminishing, whereas the truth 
 is, that one of the most pressing causes of the present 
 movement against her is the great increase of earnest 
 Church work and sound and faithful teaching which is 
 manifest of late years throughout the land. 
 
 The Census Commissioners of 1861 have shown how
 
 66 
 
 little the deliberate statements of suck rei^orts may be de- 
 pended on, when they declare that there has been an in- 
 crease of 251-3 per cent of Protestant Dissenters in Ire- 
 land since 1834. A more fallacious statement could 
 scarcely have been made. It has been clearly shown (2) that 
 there has been a decrease of 22*4 per cent, of Protestant 
 Dissenters instead of an increase, so that the Census Com- 
 missioners, in their anxiety to magnify the progress of Pro- 
 testant Dissenters in Ireland during the last quarter of a 
 century, made a miscalculation of not less than 273'4 
 per cent. Let this ' be a warning to all who are inclined 
 without examination to depend on the supposed accuracy 
 of Census returns I 
 
 As the revenues of the Irish Church have of late formed a 
 fruitful subject of discussion, and from the different accounts 
 published we should be disposed to think that great dilBfi- 
 culties existed in the way of ascertaining their actual 
 value, did we not know that the gross and net value 
 of all the Bishoprics, and of every living over 300?. 
 a year is annually returned to the Ecclesiastical Commis- 
 sioners, and that as far at least as these are concerned 
 there can be no difficulty whatever. But there are only 
 440 livings over 300Z. a year, and there remains 1,070 
 under that number. The gross value of these latter livings 
 are known, but their net value it is not possible" to ascer- 
 tain, as no return exists from which it can be obtained. It 
 is satisfactory, however, to remember, that any calculations 
 based on the returns akeady made to Parliament rather 
 over-estimate than under-estimate the income of the Irish 
 Clergy, and it is well to bear this in mind, as there is 
 scarcely any part of the Irish Church question which has 
 
 (2) See Archbishop of Armagh's Charge of 1864, pp. 17 and 48 ; and ' Facte 
 respecting the Irish Church,' 5th Edition, p. 8.
 
 6? 
 
 been so persistently and constantly misrepresented as 
 this. 
 
 A great difference frequently exists between the nominal 
 and real value of an Irish benefice. The cause of this is 
 easily ascertained, and the diminution of income which 
 ensues in consequence of the taxes payable by the Clergy 
 is often of a very serious nature. It is often forgotten, in 
 considering this subject, that the charges paid by the 
 Church rate in England, in Ireland come out of the 
 jDOckets of the Clergy. All livings over 300Z. a year pay a 
 tax varying from 5 to 15 per cent, according to annual 
 value, and the Bishoprics are taxed in like manner. In 
 1864 this tax (including the charges on the Sees of Armagh 
 and Derry) realized no less than 27,188Z., no inconsider- 
 able sum to be raised annually by a single tax on twelve 
 Bishoprics and 440 benefices. But this is only a single 
 item of a long accoimt. The Clergy pay the full poor rate 
 on the gross rent charge, no deductions being allowed, 
 whilst other landlords pay but half, and the tenants the 
 other half. During the famine year, the poor rate was 
 known to exceed in some districts the Avhole of the Incum- 
 bent's stipend, and it usually averages 10 per cent, of his 
 income. In addition to this a tax is paid to the Diocesan 
 School, and the new Ecclesiastical Courts and Registration 
 Act requires all Incumbents to pay a penny in the pound 
 in lieu of visitation fees. When these taxes are added 
 together they will be found in the aggregate to amount to 
 no inconsiderable sum. 
 
 It has of late been asserted that the value of glebe 
 houses should be included amongst the revenues of the 
 Irish Church. However plausible this may appear at first 
 sight, nothing could be more unfair than such a calcula- 
 tion. The glebe houses in Ireland have been erected 
 either at the expense of the present Incumbents or of their
 
 68 
 
 predecessors. When, a Clergyman is inducted into a 
 living with a glebe house, he usually has to -pay out of his 
 own pochet a large portion of the original cost of building 
 the house, in the shape of a building charge payable to his 
 predecessor or his representatives, in addition to which 
 an annual instalment in many cases has to be paid to the 
 Ecclesiastical Commissioners in liquidation of money 
 borrowed for the building of the house. The incumbent 
 is also under the heavy liability of having to keep the 
 glebe house in thorough repair and free from ecclesiastical 
 dilapidation, and may therefore be considered rather to 
 have purchased the use of the house during his incumbency, 
 than to possess it in right of his benefice. To include, 
 therefore, the annual value of tlie house in his yearly 
 income would be unjust, as well as fallacious. 
 
 The Ecclesiastical Commissioners, the general accuracy 
 of whose returns may thoroughly be relied on, estimate 
 " the gross revenue of the Established Church in Ireland 
 " (including bishoprics and dignities and livings, whether 
 " derived from lands, rent charges, or any other source) at 
 "586,428?. 8s. Id. per annum. The net value, after 
 " deductions directed hy law in estimating the Ecclesias- 
 " tical tax payable to the Commissioners, is 448,943Z. 15s. 
 " lOd." But, the Commissioners add, " there are further 
 " deductions to a considerable amount upon livings under 
 " 300/. a year, which are about 1,070 out of a total of 
 " 1,510, the particulars of which deductions are othcially 
 " unknown to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, such livings 
 " not being liable to tax." It is evident, then, that the 
 sum returned by the Commissionei's as the net income of 
 the Irish Bishops and Clergy is considerably in excess of 
 its real amount. 
 
 Of the above annual revenue the Bishops receive 55,110Z., 
 he beneficed Clergy 393,833?. The incumbents l)eing
 
 69 
 
 1,510, this would give an average of 260Z. a year to each, 
 or allowing lol. for the deductions from the 1,070 livings 
 mentioned above (which would be a small average) their 
 actual income does not exceed 245?. a year each. 
 
 It will thus be seen that no real difficulty exists in 
 ascertaining what are the actual incomes of the Irish 
 Bishops and Clergy. 
 
 But it has been argued that in order to ascertain what 
 the real revenues of the Irish Church are, the annual 
 incomes of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners should be 
 added to those of the Bishops and Clergy. It there- 
 fore becomes necessary to examine how that income is 
 obtained. 
 
 The income of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for 1864 
 arose from the following sources : 
 
 £ 
 Suppressed See Estates - - - 58,127 
 
 Suspended Benefices and dignities - - 19,162 
 
 Tax on Bishoprics and Benefices, and annual 
 
 charge on Sees of Armagh and Derry - 27,187 
 
 Interest on Government Securities, &c. - 7,460 
 
 ^111,936 
 
 Of this sum the Ecclesiastical Commissioners pay 12,500?. 
 u year to the Clergy in lieu of Ministers' mone}', and 
 also some 8,000?. a year in augmentation of small livings, 
 and for disappropriated tithes ; both of which sums 
 have been included in the annual incomes of the respec- 
 tive Incumbents. The total of these items, viz., 20,500?., 
 must therefore be deducted before the balance which 
 is to be added to the Church's revenue on account of the 
 income of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners can be ascer- 
 tained. This would leave 91,436?. a year, which, if added
 
 ^^» 
 
 70 
 
 to the net incomes of the Bishops and Clergy, viz., 448,943L 
 (the deductions from the 1,070 livings under 3001. not being 
 made), would give 540,379Z. as the annual available income 
 of the Irish Church, iacluding that of the Ecclesiastical 
 Commissioners (3). 
 
 As regards the augmentation of the Clergyman's income 
 by means of pew rents, such j)ayments, with the exception 
 of a few proprietary Chapels in some of the larger towns, 
 we are thankful to record, are totally unknown in Ireland. 
 All the seats in the parish Churches of Ireland are 
 free. The aggregate income, therefoi-e, derived by the 
 Irish Clergy from pew rents must be very inconsiderable, 
 and in every case they depend so much upon the popu- 
 larity of the individual Clergyman, that it would be 
 impossible to reckon upon them as a permanent source of 
 income. 
 
 No Church or vestry rates are now paid in Ireland. The 
 requisites for Divine service, the salaries of the clerks and 
 sextons, the fuel for warming, the means for lighting the 
 Churches, and the Elements for the Holy Communion, are 
 all paid out of Church funds provided by the suppression 
 of ten Bishoprics and various benefices, and by an annual 
 tax on the existing Bishops and Clergy. The Church 
 Temporalities Act thus relieved the Laity from all pay- 
 ments for Church purposes, whilst it placed a new and 
 unwonted burden on the Clergy. It was estimated by 
 Lord Althorp in 1834 that the vestry cess alone produced 
 90,000Z. a year, and this, as soon as the Church Temporali- 
 ties Act came into operation, passed into the pockets of the 
 Laity, together with 25 per cent, of the rent charge of all 
 Ireland, The Clergy of the Irish Church have thus lost 
 
 (3) I am indebted to Archdeacon Hincks for having pointed out an oversight 
 in the above calculation, as it originally appeared, but which is now corrected 
 in the text.
 
 71 
 
 within the last thirty years at least 250,000Z. of annual 
 income. We should have thought that would have satisfied 
 the most ardent Irish Church Eeformer, but it is now 
 evident that nothing but the total abolition of the Estab- 
 lished Church is aimed at by those who are conducting the 
 present attack on her temporalities. 
 
 But whilst the income of the Irish Church has thus 
 been continually decreased, she has earnestly and not 
 unsuccessfully laboui^ed with diminished means to main- 
 tain efficiency in every department of her work. It 
 will be seen from the following authentic returns that she 
 has not laboured in vain : 
 
 
 Clergy. 
 
 Churches. 
 
 Benefices. 
 
 Glebe Houses. 
 
 1806 (4) 
 
 1,253 
 
 1,029 
 
 1,181 
 
 295 
 
 1826 (5) 
 
 1,977 
 
 1,192 
 
 1,396 
 
 768 ^ 
 
 1864 (6) 
 
 2,172 
 
 1,579 
 
 1,510 
 
 978 
 
 Since 1806, then, the Irish Clergy have increased by 919, 
 the Churches by 550, the Benefices (chiefly through the 
 dissolving of unions) by 329, and the Glebe Houses by 
 683, it cannot, therefore, be maintained that the Irish 
 Church is not fully alive to the responsibilities which rest 
 upon her. 
 
 We earnestly trust that Churchmen who desire that the 
 Reformed Faith of our primitive and Apostolic Church 
 should at least not recede from the ground it now holds in 
 Ireland, wiU make themselves fully acquainted with the 
 real state and position of the Church in that country. No 
 
 (4) 'Report of Commission of Ecclesiastical Inquiry,' 1807. 
 
 (5) J. C. Erck's ' Ecclesiastical Register.' 
 
 (6) • Parliamentary Return,' 1864. 
 
 See also ' Facts respecting the present State of the Church in Ireland ."^ 
 I'jfth Edition. Page 18.
 
 efforts have been, or will be wanting to excite po^Diilar pre- 
 judices against her. Misrepresentations respecting her 
 which have been again and again exposed, are again and 
 again unblushingly repeated, and therefore it behoves all 
 who desire to form a correct opinion of this important 
 subject to examine the facts of the case for themselves, 
 and to be satisfied with nothing less than a personal 
 examination of the present state and position of the Church 
 in Ireland.
 
 73 
 
 VIII. 
 
 THE TEUE PEINCIPLES ON WHICH THE IRISH 
 CHUECH IS TO BE MAINTAINED. 
 
 The time is not far distant when all Churchmen who 
 earnestly desire the prosperity and advancement of the 
 National Church of these kingdoms will find themselves 
 compelled seriously to consider what their duty is with 
 regard to that branch of the United Church which is now 
 established in Ireland. Political Dissenters in England 
 and the Eoman Catholic Bishops and Clergy of Ireland are 
 banded together to procure her downfall. Shall we be 
 doing our duty to Christ and His Church, if we permit 
 their undeniably earnest and vigorous exertions to succeed 
 without one united effort on our part to avert the threat- 
 ened danger ? Shall we allow the only religious body in 
 Ireland, which teaches alike Apostolic truth, and main- 
 tains Apostolic order, which is one in doctrine, govern- 
 ment, and discipline, with our own Church, to be deprived 
 of the means of teaching those doctrines, and upholding 
 that discipline in the remote districts of the land, whilst 
 we stand by and make no sign ? Can we even, without 
 danger to ourselves, allow a sister Church, united to the 
 State by the same bonds of union as we are, to be shorn of 
 her temporalities, on the sole plea that she is not the 
 Church of the majority of the nation ? Will not principles 
 thus be established which in no long period the opponents
 
 74 
 
 of all State connexion in England will not be slow to 
 apply to ourselves ? And even if we had no personal 
 interest in the matter as I'egards our own Church, can it 
 be right, can it be just, is it consonant with the principles 
 which we all hold so dear, or with our national character, 
 of which we are so greatly proud, to leave the Church in 
 Ireland, the old Catholic Church of that country, to be 
 despoiled by her enemies, whilst we have it in our power 
 to aid, to succour, and successfully defend her ? 
 
 Such are the questions which we are persuaded the 
 course of events will soon bring home to the minds of all 
 earnest Churchmen. The Irish Church question cannot 
 remain long in the position it now occupies ; neither is it 
 desirable even for the Church's sake that it should so do. 
 It must be determined in one way or another, and the settle- 
 ment when it comes should, as far as possible, be final. It is 
 most injurious to the best interests of the community, that 
 such a fundamental question should be left in a state of 
 uncertainty. It keeps agitation alive, whilst it distracts 
 the attention and weakens the energies of the Clergy. 
 
 It may be well then briefly to consider the principles on 
 which the Irish Church should be maintained, and the 
 probable consequences that would follow, should she no 
 longer remain the Established Church of Ireland. 
 
 I. The chief reason undoubtedly why the Irish Church 
 should be maintained in her present position in Ireland is, 
 that " she is the pillar and ground of the truth " in that 
 country. Pre-eminently the Church of Ireland is a city set 
 on a hill, a light which cannot be hid. Whilst inculcating 
 on her own members the sound Scriptural and primitive 
 teaching of the Prayer Book, she presents, on the one hand, 
 to the Irish Eomanist a Church, pure in her doctrine, and 
 Catholic in her faith ; and on the other, to the Irish Dis- 
 senter she offers a form of sound words in her Liturgy,
 
 75 
 
 unrivalled in the world, and the Apostolic ministry. If 
 ever the true faith of Christ, free from Romish and Puritan 
 error, is to become the belief of the great mass of the Irish 
 people (and are we yet prepared altogether to resign the 
 hope that one day this may be the case ?) it must be through 
 the instrumentality of the Church that this great healing 
 must be effected. The Church has never yet been placed 
 in her true position before the eyes of the great mass of 
 the Irish people. They have been taught to look upon her 
 as an alien Church — the Church of their conquerors — as the 
 English Church in Ireland, rather than as she is, the true 
 old Catholic Church of the country. Gradually yet surely 
 this delusion is passing away. The Irish Clergy are more and 
 more plainly bringing before their people the true position 
 their Church holds, and the more they appreciate this truth, 
 the more they will learn to love and respect her. At present 
 the Eoman Catholics scornfully laugh at the teaching of this 
 great truth ; but the time is not far distant when they will 
 find that ridicule is no match for truth, and that if the 
 Church of Eome is to retain her hold on the affections of the 
 Irish people, she must prove (if she can) as well as assert, 
 that she is the old Church of the country. 
 
 II. But the Irish Church is to be maintained in her present 
 position, not merely for the sake of promoting the spiritual 
 and moral welfare of her own members, not merely be- 
 cause in Ireland she is the depository of Primitive and 
 Catholic truth, but also because it is solely through her 
 instrumentality that Christian union can ever be brought 
 about in Ireland. If Churchman, and Romanist, and Pres- 
 byterian are ever to be united in one communion, it is 
 only on the basis of the Church that such a union can be 
 effected. Very rarely do we hear of Romanists becoming 
 Presbyterians, or Presbyterians becoming Romanists, but 
 we hear continually of Romanists arid Presbyterians
 
 76 
 
 becoming Churchmen. The conversions on either side may 
 be comparatively few in comparison with the members of 
 either communion ; but the point to be considered is the 
 direction in which these conversions take place, and we 
 are fully persuaded, from our own experience, that if the 
 principles of the Church were plainly, faithfully, wisely, 
 and moderately set before the Irish Eomanist, and the 
 Irish Dissenter, the Church ere long would gain from both 
 many members to her fold. Hitherto it must be acknow- 
 ledged the Irish Church has been too polemical in her teach- 
 ing, and this is doubtless one of the chief causes why she 
 has not made a more favourable impression on those who 
 are separated from her. A Church progresses more by a 
 diligent and faithful inculcation of her own principles on 
 her own members, than by any amount of vigorous attacks 
 on her opponents, whilst her own members grow up igno- 
 rant of her teaching. In their zeal to make Eoman Catho- 
 lics, Protestants, it may be true that the Irish Clergy have 
 too much neglected to make their own people sound and 
 understanding Churchmen. But this evil is now clearly 
 seen, and is in process of being remedied, and if the Synods 
 of the Irish Church were once more quickened into life, and 
 the Irish Bishops and Clergy were permitted to devise 
 means for Church revival and Church extension, the day 
 is not far distant, when the Irish Church would give proof 
 of a life and vigour within her, such as would effectually 
 answer those objectors, who complain of her want of ex- 
 pansive power, or of her ability to gain the affections of 
 those who now are opposed to her. 
 
 III. Again, the Irish Church is to be maintained as the 
 National Church in Ireland, because the honour of England 
 is pledged to her being so. The Union of 1800 consisted 
 of three parts, — it united two Kingdoms, two Parliaments, 
 two Churches, into one United Kingdom, one United
 
 77 
 
 Parliament, and one United Church. But the fundamental 
 article of the treaty was the union of the two Churches. 
 The Churchmen of Ireland were assured by the Govern- 
 ment that if the Irish Church was completely incorporated 
 with the Church of England " it would be placed on such 
 " a strong and sure foundation as to be above every appre- 
 " hension and fear from adverse interest, and from all the 
 "fretting and irritating circumstances of its colonial 
 " situation ; " and it was not till it had been made " an 
 " essential and fundamental part of the union," (1) that 
 the united Church should be continued and preserved as 
 *' the Established Church of England and Ireland^'' that 
 the Irish Bishops, as the representatives of the Church, 
 agreed in Parliament to the Irish Church giving up its 
 separate and independent existence, and become one with 
 the Church in England, 
 
 Can we for a moment believe that either the Lords 
 Spiritual and Temporal, or the members of the Commons 
 House in Parliament assembled in Dublin College Green, 
 would ever for a moment have agreed to such a imion if 
 they could have foreseen that very little more than half a 
 century afterwards it would be maintained in the united 
 Parliament that, after all, this compact as regards the Church 
 was but of a tem^rary nature, and was not by any means 
 a fundamental and essential part " of the union % " If the 
 union of the Churches can so easily be dissolved, why not 
 also the union of the kingdoms ? If the claims of Irish 
 Protestants on the justice and equity of the British Par- 
 liament are to be treated with indifference and scorn, can 
 we wonder if a future generation of Irish Protestants 
 should come to think that such a Parliament has little 
 claim on their confidence or support? If Parliament 
 
 (1) Speech of Lord Castlereagh on the union.
 
 78 
 
 recklessly disturbs a national compact which solemnized 
 the union of two nations, will it be a matter of surprise 
 to any if the Church in the end is not the party which 
 will principally suffer? Never, we verily believe, will 
 Irishmen become in any way again united to demand a 
 separate national existence till the full consequences of the 
 disestablishment of the Irish Church are felt by Irish 
 Protestants, and who then can say what will follow ? The 
 Irish Eomanist and the English Voluntary may each for 
 their own separate and distinct purpose now join together 
 to demand the disendowment of the Irish Church ; but it 
 is for English statesmen to consider — each one calmly 
 and thoughtfully for himself — what the final consequences 
 of such a fatal step may be, when a Liberal Secretary of 
 State has declared in his place in the House of Commons 
 of such a scheme, " that the Irish Church is interwoven 
 " with the constitution of the country, and could not be 
 " subverted without a revolution," (2) which the Chan- 
 cellor of the Exchequer declares " to be a nest of political 
 " problems of the very greatest difficulty," and of which 
 a Eoman Catholic Judge, Mr Justice Shee, has written, 
 " the Church by law established in Ireland is the Church 
 "of a community everywhere considerable in respect of 
 " property, rank, and intelligence ; it is strong in a prescrip- 
 " tion of three centuries, and in the support which it 
 " derives from the supposed identity of its interests with 
 "those of the Church of England. Nothing short of a 
 " convulsion, tearing up both Establishments by the roots , 
 " could accomplish its overthrotor (3) 
 
 IV. Another, and very cogent reason why the Established 
 
 (2) Sir George Grey's Speech, Jan. 29, 1863. 
 
 (3) ' The Irish Church : its History and Statistics.' Second Edition. Pp. 
 3,24.
 
 79 
 
 Church should be maintained in her present position is, 
 that her disendowment would produce an amount of dis- 
 content amongst Protestants, and subsequent damage to 
 the peace and advancement of the country which is now 
 little thought of. The landlords of Ireland, with few 
 exceptions, are Protestants. The Church is now their bond 
 of xmion. Disestablish the Church. Throw the burden 
 of maintaining her on the landlords, for on them in such a 
 case it must, in most districts, principally fall, compel them 
 as well to pay the full rent-charge to some secular purpose, 
 and the result it is not difficult to foresee. At present the 
 landlords have inherited or purchased their estates subject 
 to the tithe rent-charge, and they receive 25 per cent, of it 
 for becoming responsible for it to the Clergy, and therefore 
 they pay it without a murmur. But let an Act of Parlia- 
 ment devote the whole of the rent-charge to some secular 
 purpose (and Mr Gladstone is very careful to remind the 
 Irish landlords that in such a case they must not hope to 
 retain the 25 per cent, they now receive), let not only the 
 burden of maintaining the Clergy of the Church who are 
 to remain, but also that of repairing and building Churches, 
 and of furnishing the requisites for Divine service now 
 provided from Church funds be placed, as in such a case 
 it must be, solely upon the laity ; and no sooner will they 
 feel the unwonted burden than they will turn on those who 
 have inflicted it, and, however vainly, it may now be hoped 
 that Eoman Catholic discontent in Ireland will be put a 
 stop to by the disestablishment of the Church, it is plain 
 and evident to all those who have carefully considered the 
 matter that a Protestant discontent of no light or trifling 
 kind will then be added to the other difficulties which 
 future Governments will have to contend with in Ireland. 
 Let, then, statesmen pause and consider well the con- 
 sequences that will follow before they rashly introduce
 
 8o 
 
 a new and fruitful element of discord into that unhappy 
 country. 
 
 Be it remembered also that one of the chief difficulties 
 of Ireland arises, not from a diiference of religion, but 
 of race, amongst its people. It is possible to turn a 
 Eoman Catholic into a Churchman, it is impossible to turn 
 a Celt into a Saxon. You may give a sop to Cerberus in 
 hopes of quieting him for a time, but the native dislike of 
 England will ere long break out again with two-fold 
 energy, and no sooner will the Irish Church have been 
 sacrificed to popular clamour, than it will be found that, 
 after all, the Irish land question was at the bottom of 
 Irish discontent, and that their triumph over the Church 
 has not satisfied her opponents, but only emboldened them 
 to make further and more imperious demands. 
 
 V. Lastly, let it be borne in mind that the disendow- 
 ment of the Irish Church means nothing less than the 
 deliberate giving up of all hopes of permanently advanc- 
 ing the principles of the Eeformation in Ireland. It 
 is nothing less than voluntary resigning the religious 
 teaching of the people of three out of the four provinces 
 of Ireland, with the exception of the large towns, with- 
 out any counteracting influence, into the hands of the 
 most Ultramontane Priesthood in Europe. Disendow 
 the Established Church, and in less than a quarter of 
 a century the Eeformed Church will be withdrawn from 
 posts of vantage she now occupies, which it will require 
 three centuries of earnest and persevering work to win 
 back again from the hands of Eome. The Irish Eoman 
 Catholic Prelates, wise in their generation, see and know 
 this, and therefore gladly make use of all the Protestants 
 they can influence, to further their darling design of un- 
 controlled supremacy in Ireland, in all things educational 
 and religious. The wonder is that any Protestants,
 
 8i 
 
 especially dissenting Protestants, can be so blinded by their 
 hatred of connexion of religion with the State, as to fight 
 side by side with those whose object is, to give an effectual 
 and, if possible, a deadly blow to the Reformed faith in Ire- 
 land, by the help of those whose chief boast is, that they 
 faithfully maintain Protestant principles against "the 
 " deadly errors '' of Rome. 
 
 For all these reasons, then, because the Church is in Ire- 
 land the sole upholder of the Sacred and Scriptural teach- 
 ing of our Reformed Church ; because she is the only 
 means by which any future union between Christians in 
 Ireland, now unhappily divided, can be brought about ; be- 
 cause her disendowment would be a violation of a solemn 
 national compact, and therefore a stain on England's 
 honour, and would not remove Roman Catholic dissatis- 
 faction, whilst it would certainly produce a large amount 
 of Protestant discontent which does not now exist ; because 
 her disestablishment would undo the work of centuries, 
 and hand Ireland over politically and religiously into 
 the hands of Rome ; because the withdrawal of the endow- 
 ments of the Irish Church would be but an encourage- 
 ment to a more vigorous and united onslaught on those of 
 the Church in England ; above all, because it would deprive 
 a large number of our fellow Churchmen, without any 
 fault of their own, of the means of grace, and leave them 
 in the utmost danger of becoming a prey to infidelity or 
 Rome ; — for these and many other reasons which are too 
 numerous to mention here, we desire to see the Irish Church 
 strengthened and maintained in the position she now 
 holds, and which for seven centuries she has been in pos- 
 session of. 
 
 It is sometimes brought as a charge against the defen- 
 ders of the Irish Church, that they are opposed to all sin- 
 cere attempts to remove the anomalies which exist in her,
 
 82 
 
 and from which no Established Church can be wholly free. 
 This is, however, far from the true state of the case. Such 
 persons are opposed to spoliation, but would gladly aid 
 every well-considered and judicious scheme of Reform, 
 when brought forward by competent authority, and which 
 would increase the efficiency and augment for good the 
 working of the Irish Church. But the object of the pre- 
 sent attack is not reform, but abolition. This is openly 
 and plainly avowed. The Eoman Catholic Bishops (4) 
 " demand the disendowment of the Established Church." 
 Sir John Gray and those who act with him (5) " are fully 
 " determined never to let this question rest until Church 
 " ascendancy is abolished, and until perfect religious equa- 
 " lity is established in Ireland." 
 
 We cannot therefore complain of reticence of speech in 
 those who are attacking the Church, or of ignorance of the 
 real objects they have in view. Delenda est Carthago is 
 their motto ; nothing less will satisfy them. If, then, 
 Churchmen in general wish to see maintained in Ireland 
 the true principles which our Church teaches, if they are 
 unwilling that the Eeformed faith in that country should 
 recede from the position that it has held for centuries, 
 they must be up and doing, they must be no longer luke- 
 warm or indifferent with regard to her, they must be ear- 
 nest and sincere, faithful and energetic in her cause, they 
 must make some self-sacrifice, and exercise some self-denial 
 for the sake of defending and upholding the Irish branch 
 of Christ's Holy Catholic Church. 
 
 (4) Resolution of Dublin meeting, December, 1864. 
 
 (5) Speech in House of Commons, April 11, 1866.
 
 INDEX. 
 
 • 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Abolition, not reform, sought for .... 1, 82 
 
 Agistment tithe : its seizure by Irish landlords . . .16 
 Alliance between Irish Roman Catholics and English political 
 
 dissenters 1, 55, 78 
 
 Armagh, Archbishop of, his letters to Sir George Grey on 
 
 Irish Convocation 39, 41 
 
 Bedell, Bishop 15 
 
 Benefices in Ireland 71 
 
 Canons of 1634 34 
 
 Cashel, Synod of 28 
 
 Census of 1834 : a compilation 63 
 
 Census of 1861 64 
 
 Church of S. Patrick : Irish Church its only representative . 12 
 Church property : its alienation to secular uses . . .14 
 Church Temporalities Act, 3 and 4 Wm. IV., c. 37 . . 38 
 
 Churches in Ireland 71 
 
 Clergy, Irish, number of .71 
 
 ColumkiUe, S 4 
 
 Consequences of abolition of the Irish Church 6, 50, 57, 74, 78 
 Constance, Council of, Irish Bishops at .... 29 
 
 Convocation, Irish 22, 44 
 
 Correspondence respecting Irish Convocation . . .38 
 
 Danish towns in Ireland, Bishops of . . . . n. 27 
 Decrease of Protestant Dissent in Ireland . . . .66
 
 84 
 
 PAGE 
 
 24 
 
 Dioceses no, in early Irish Church .... 
 Down and Connor Diocesan Conference of 1861, memorial 
 from 40 
 
 Drumcheatt, Synod of 
 
 Ecclesiastical Commissioners' tax 
 
 „ „ annual income 
 
 Edward VI., Injunctions of . 
 Elizabeth, Queen, Injunctions of . 
 English Church, as well as Irish, attacked 
 Established Church, the old Church of Ireland 
 
 Gladstone, Mr, on difficulty of Irish Church question 
 Glebe houses in Ireland . . . . 
 Grey, Sir George, his letters on Irish Convocation 
 
 26 
 
 66 
 69 
 29 
 30 
 5 
 3 
 
 67,71 
 40,42 
 
 Hindrances to the progress of the Irish Church in times past 20 
 
 Impropriations . . . 14 
 
 Irish Bishops, their memorials respecting Convocation . 40 
 
 Irish Church, the, not of English extraction ... 4 
 
 „ „ its continued spoliation ... 15, 16 
 
 „ „ the old Catholic Church of Ireland . 3, 47 
 
 „ „ its true position 40 
 
 „ „ consequences of disestablishing it 
 
 6, 50, 57, 74, 78 
 „ „ the great means of union between England 
 
 and Ireland 50 
 
 its defects have been fully searched 
 
 into 
 
 Kells, Synod of 
 
 King, Archbishop, letter of, to Archbishop Wake 
 
 Landed proprietors, chiefly Protestant 
 Lewis, Sir G. C, on Irish Church question . 
 Liturgy Reformed, first used in 1551 . 
 Livings, Irish Church, their value 
 
 53 
 
 27 
 27 
 
 56 
 
 8 
 
 33 
 
 69
 
 85 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Londres, Henry de, Arclibishop of Dublin, present at signing 
 of Magna Charta 29 
 
 Ministers' money 8, 69 
 
 Mode of attack on Irish Church 4 
 
 Monasteries, Irish, their dissolution 14 
 
 Oath of supremacy taken by Irish chieftains in 1532-34 . 32 
 O'Beirne, Bishop, letter to Lord Castlereagh . . .19 
 Orders of the Irish Church . 3, 47 
 
 Parochial system, the 9, 50 
 
 Population of Ireland 1672-1861 62 
 
 Property, Irish Church, gradual spoliation of . . .70 
 Protest of Roman Catholic Bishops in 1826 against subverting 
 
 the Irish Church Establishment 49 
 
 Provincial Synods in Ireland 27, 33 
 
 Puritanism, introduction of, into Ireland . . . .17 
 
 Rathbreasil, Synod of 26 
 
 Reasons, special, for maintaining the Established Church in 
 
 Ireland 81 
 
 Rebellion of 1641 .20 
 
 Reformation in Ireland 12, 33 
 
 Religious bodies in Ireland, statistics of various . . .65 
 
 Revenues of the Irish Chm'ch 68 
 
 Revival of Irish Convocation, exertions of the Bishops . . 40 
 Roman CathoMc Church, not the old Church of Ireland 3, 45 
 
 Roman Catholic Bishops, have not the Irish succession . 3 
 „ „ „ demand abolition of Irish Church . 8 
 
 „ „ „ in 1826 disavow intention of attack- 
 
 ing the Church . . . .49 
 
 Social aspects of the Irish Church question . . . .53 
 
 Statistics of the Ii-ish Church 61 
 
 Stephens, Dr A. J., Q.C., his opinion on right of Primate to 
 summon a Provincial Synod 41
 
 86 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Steps taken to revive Irish Convocation . . . .40 
 
 Successive spoliation of the Irish Church . . . 8, 20 
 
 Supremacy, oath of, taken by Irish chieftains . . .32 
 
 Supremacy, Papal, how long exercised in Ireland . n. 48 
 
 Swift's, Dean, testimony to spoliation of the Irish Church . 16 
 
 Synods of the Irish Church 22, 32 
 
 Todd, Dr, Life of S. Patrick 12, 24 
 
 True principles on which Irish Church should be maintained 73 
 True position of the Roman Communion in Ireland . . 45 
 
 Union, Act of 19, 30, 76 
 
 Uniformity, Act of 13 
 
 Union of parishes 17 
 
 United Church of England and Ireland . . . .31 
 
 Windsor, Council of 29
 
 BY THE SAME AUTHOR. 
 
 Just published, price One Shilling, 
 
 The STATEMENTS of SIR JOHN GRAY, M.P., in his 
 
 Speech on the Irish Church in the House of Commons on April 10, 
 1866, Examined. Kivingtons. 
 
 Also, Fifth Edition, price 2d., 
 
 FACTS respecting the PRESENT STATE of the CHURCH 
 in IRELAND. Kivingtons. 
 
 The STATEMENTS of EARL RUSSELL, K.G., respecting 
 the Revenues of the Irish Church in the new Edition of his Essay- 
 on 'The EngUsh Government and Constitution.' Examined by an 
 Englishman resident in Ireland. Is. James Parker and Co. 
 
 The ECCLESIASTICAL SETTLEMENT of IRELAND. 
 Reprinted from the Times of January 28, 1866. 2d. Kivingtons. 
 
 S. PATRICK and the HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH of 
 IRELAND. Price 4d. J. and J. H. Parker. 
 
 A LETTER to the BISHOP of DOWN and CONNOR on 
 the CO-OPERATION of the CLERGY and LAITY in the 
 WORK of the CHURCH. 1860. Rivingtons. 
 
 CONVOCATION in IRELAND. A Paper read at the 
 Conference of the United Diocese of Down and Connor in October, 
 1861. 
 
 The SYNODS of the IRISH CHURCH. A Paper read at 
 the Bristol Church Congress. October, 1864. 
 
 The DUTIES of the MINISTRY. A Sermon preached at 
 the Ordination held by the Lord Bishop of Down and Connor. 
 Trinity, 1862. J. H. and J. Parker. 
 
 The HISTORY of the TOWN and PARISH of TEBBURY, 
 Gloucestershire. 1857. Price 12s. J. H. and J. Parker. 
 
 The SLAVERY of SIN. A Prize Essay. 1853. Macmillan 
 and Co.
 
 London : 
 printed bt c. w. reynell, little pulteney street, hatmarket.
 
 Ml 
 
 \ 
 
 / : 
 
 M 
 
 '.^! 
 
 .m; 
 
 -^S 
 
 ^n^ 
 
 % 
 
 'W