Chapter 15 - ARCHBISHOP USSHER'S PERSONAL APPEARANCE AND CHARACTER: PRIVATE LIFE IN DROGHEDA: "RELIGION OF THE ANCIENT IRISH"

Page 239

ARCHBISHOP USSHER has been described as moderately tall, and of upright figure with brown hair and rich complexion. The gravity and benevolence of his countenance commanded respect and reverence. [1] His manners were those of a courteous gentleman, free from pride on the one hand, and too much softness on the other.

[1] Parr's Life, p. 74. An original portrait of Ussher by Zuccheri, 1654, can be seen in the Provost's House, T.C.D. There is a copy of it in the Examination Hall, and an engraving in Elrington's Life, as also in the present volume. Eight engraved portraits of Ussher by different hands may be seen in the Library, T.C.D., presented by Edmund Bewley, LL.D. (E. U. 27). A bust of Ussher also stands in the Library. According to Parr, Ussher's face was "hard to hit." He never saw but one picture like him, and that was painted by [Sir Peter] Lely. This portrait, which was preserved by Sir T. Tyrrel at Shotover, gives the Archbishop an anxious, care-worn expression as if he felt the pressure of the times. This picture was sold about 1855, and its present locality is unknown.

Page 240

His fine constitution, which was temperately nourished, enabled him to endure long periods of study, which were sometimes protracted from the early hours of the morning to midnight, with intervals only for his episcopal duties, and a small amount of exercise. In his last years his eyesight began to fail, and as he could only see to read in a strong light, he followed the sun from room to room, book in hand carrying on his studies. [2] Ussher’s temper was mild and philosophic, and at the same time deeply affected by Christian principles. He used say, "If good people would but make goodness agreeable and smile instead of frowning in their virtue, how many would they win to the good cause!" According to his chaplain and biographer, Dr. Parr, "If he perceived any whom he accounted truly religious, sad and melancholy, he would often ask them why they were so, and if anything really troubled them? If not, he would proceed thus: 'If you have entirely devoted yourselves to the service of God, what reason have you to be melancholy, when (if you will seriously consider) none have more cause to be cheerful than those who live a holy and a virtuous life?

[2] Several references to his failing eyesight occur in Ussher's later correspondence. - See vol. xvi. pp. 562, 586; see also Bernard's Life, p.102.

Page 241

By this your dejection you may bring an evil report upon religion; for people seeing you always sad will be apt to think ‘tis that occasions it, and that you serve a hard Master, whose yoke is heavy and commands grievous, which will deter others; and scare them from the ways of piety and virtue, which you ought by no means to do, for sincere Christians may and ought to rejoice, and to show themselves cheerful; whereas the vicious and wicked have the greatest reason to be sad’; and as he advised others, so he himself was always of an even, cheerful temper, seldom troubled or decomposed." [3] At his palace in Drogheda the Archbishop lived a homely and studious life. [4] He preached regularly every Sunday morning, and in the afternoon one of his chaplains repeated the sermon in the private chapel to the servants and retainers, and any of the townspeople who chose to come in.

[3] Parr's Life, p. 84.

[4] Ussher lived in Drogheda because he had no palace at Armagh, the city and cathedral having been burnt down by O'Neill in 1566 (the latter lest it might become a barrack for Saxon soldiers). Ussher uniformly uses the corrupted English form of the word “Tredagh." Englishmen, probably, have found it difficult to compass the Irish name. Drogheda - i.e., “the Bridge of the Ford" - was then one of the most important seaport towns in Ireland. The Deputies frequently resided there, at that time. The original charter was granted to the place by King John, with a right to bear his crest or half-moon and star, with the motto Deus prasidium mercatura decus. - See Dublin Penny Journal, pp. 161, 356.

Page 242

He had prayers four times a day, at 6 A.M. and 8 P.M., and chapel service before dinner and supper. He prized the Prayer-book, and left it in record that "he had a reverent and very high esteem for it, and that he should at any time, have called it an idol was a shameless and most abominable untruth.” [5] His entertainments were such as became his high station - "good and plenteous, but nothing curious or excessive." His chief recreation lay in walking or riding. He was fond of "telling stories, or relating the wise or witty sayings of other men, or such things as had occurred to his own observation; so that his company was always agreeable, and for .the most part instructive; but still he would conform himself to the genius and improvement of those he conversed with, for, as with scholars he would discourse of matters of learning, so could he condescend to those of meaner capacities." [6]

He gave some useful hints to young students, which may well be reproduced here. He advised them to read the Fathers in chronological order, and then Church history, and to avoid thy schoolmen, as for the most part puzzling and unprofitable.

[5] Parr’s Life p. 85. The form of words used in the ordination of priests by the Church of England: "Receive the Holy Ghost," &c., "whosoever sins," &c., was much approved of by Ussher. - Bernard's Clavi Trabales, p. 55. "He so much approved of set forms of prayer in public that he always kept himself to one constant short pathetical prayer before his sermon with little alteration." - Ditto.

[6] Parr's Life, p. 85.

Page 243

We are told that he was particularly averse to the introduction of new terms into theology, and to this end quoted the saying - Qui nova facit verba, nova gignit dogmata. [7] According to Ussher, solid and useful learning would be best promoted, first, by learned notes and illustrations of the Bible; secondly by censuring and inquiring into the ancient councils and works of the Fathers; thirdly; by the orderly writing and digesting of ecclesiastical history; fourthly by gathering together whatsoever may concern the state of the Jews from the destruction of Jerusalem to the present age; fifthly, by collecting of all the Greek and Roman histories and digesting them into one body. [8] We get a most interesting insight into the life and doings of the Archbishop at this time (1634) from a small volume of travels believed to have been written by Sir William Brereton, of Cheshire, during that year. On July 8th he finds himself at Tredaugh (Drogheda). He speaks of the town as one of the largest and best built he has seen in Ireland. The quay is like that of Newcastle, and the water channels remind him of those he has seen in Dutch towns.

[7] Parr's Life, p. 97.

[8] Ditto p. 96.

Page 244

The corporation and townspeople he notes as "popishly affected." The Lord Primate's palace is near the east gate, and "a neat, handsome, and convenient house," built by Primate Hampton. [9] It is four square, of wood, rough cast and not high; a handsome, plain, though long and narrow hall; two dining rooms; one little neat gallery which leads into the chapel . . . there is a little pair of organs therein." Here Ussher preached constantly every Lord's Day in the morning.” One of the dining rooms has the arms of the See and bishopric, together with Hampton’s own arms, and underneath is the inscription, Fac tu similiter. There is a pretty neat garden, and cut in a grass bank the words, “O man, remember the last great day." Such is a picture of an episcopal residence in Ireland in the seventeenth century. We learn that at the time there were two churches in Drogheda.

[9] The Archbishop had two residences, one in Palace Street, Drogheda, the other at Termonfechan (the church-land of St. Feighan), a few miles distant, and of which some ruins may still be seen, which are called the “Bishop’s Castle.” Several interesting antiquities, including holy wells and a “baptizing stone," may be seen in the neighborhood. - See O'Donovan's Letters on the Ord. Survey of Ireland, Roy. Irish Academy, under "Louth," pp. 66-7. The palace in Drogheda ceased to be an episcopal residence in Primate Boulter's time, and no trace of it now remains.

Page 245

The Archbishop was in the habit of preaching in "the great church." [10] The communion-table was placed "lengthwise in the aisle." The chancel not being used, was “wholly neglected and in bad repair." Arriving in Dublin he finds that Ussher preaches every Lord's Day when in town in St. Owen's (Audoen's) Church at eight A.M. He hears him preach, and thinks of him as "the most excellent able man and most abundantly holy gracious man" he has ever heard. He also dines with him. "Dr. Ussher is a tall, proper, comely man, about fifty-six years of age; a plain, familiar, courteous man, who spends the whole day in his study except meal-time . . . . He is a most holy, well-affected Bishop, a good companion, a man of good discourse." Being asked as to the "Book of Sports," published by authority of James I. and afterwards republished by order of Charles I., he said there was no clause therein commanding the ministers to read the book, but if were published in the church by the clerk or churchwardens, that was enough.

[10] This was St. Peter's, one of the finest ecclesiastical buildings of that time in Ireland. Here numerous Synods were held. The steeple was reputed to be the highest in the world. It was blown down by a storm in 1548, and replaced by a wooden one, which lasted till Cromwell fired the church, when it is said 2000 perished by fire and sword. No vestige of the original building remains. - See Dublin Penny Journal, i. pp. 357-8; O'Donovan's Letters, &c., as above, pp. 45-8.

Page 246

The writer meets at dinner Dr. Richardson, Bishop of Ardagh, and his wife, "a tall, handsome, fat woman." [11] On July 12th he again hears the Archbishop preach, and repeats his praise that he is "a most holy and heavenly man, and as pregnant witted as any he has ever heard. He tells us how the Archbishop's study in Dublin, (his town house; as we have seen, was on Hoggan Green, now College Green) was placed at a good distance so as, to prevent distraction from visitors. He sees no one except from eleven to one and about supper-time. The rest of the day from, five in the morning until six in the evening, is usually spent in his study. [12] Such was Ussher as painted by a contemporary, at once the Christian prelate, the learned and thoughtful scholar, a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men.

[11] "Ussher," says his biographer, Dr. Parr, "fed heartily on plain wholesome meat without sauce, and was better pleased with a few dishes than with great varieties . . .  He liked not tedious meals, and it was a weariness to him to sit long at table." - Life, p. 83.

[12] Sir William Brereton's Travels, pp. 134-40. The original MS. had a strange experience, and passed through many hands. Among others, it was seen by Sir Walter Scott, who thought highly of it, and advised its publication. Eventually the Chetham Society issued it from the press. Sir William Brereton visited Ussher in Drogheda in 1634. Four years later the Archbishop entertained an illustrious visitor in the person of the Lord-Deputy Strafford, who in a letter to Archbishop Laud, Nov. 27th, 1638, details some of his experiences: "I was one night with his Grace at Drogheda, where his Lordship made me a very noble welcome, found there the best house I have seen in Ireland, built by Primate Hampton; yet not so much as a communion table in the chapel, which seemed to me something strange. No bowing there I awarrant you." - Strafford's Letters, ii. p. 249. Laud writes back to Strafford: "Truly I would wonder that the chapel should have never a communion-table in it, save that I knew that some divines are of opinion that nothing belonging to that Sacrament is aught extra usum, and do therefore set the table in any corner (good enough for it), save only at the time of administration." - Ditto, p. 263. The same abuse existed in Christ Church Cathedral. - See Heylin, quoted by Urwick, Early Hist. of  T.C.D., p. 86.

Page 247

We must now return to the outward life of Ussher; and consider the part he played in the great controversies that were still troubling the times he lived in. Ever mindful of the importance of vindicating the position of the Reformed Church of Ireland as the true inheritor of primitive and scriptural doctrine, we find him in 1631 in London, publishling a second and enlarged edition of his valuable essay on "The Religion of the Ancient Irish and Britons.” [13]

[13] Ussher's Works, vol. iv. It was while collecting materials for this work that Ussher came on the famous Book of Kells, now in the Library of Trinity College, Dublin. The MS. has the following note written by Ussher: “Aug. 24th, 1621 - I received the leaves of the booke, and found them to be in number 344. He who reckoned before me counted six score to the hundred, - Ja. Ussher [Episcopus], Midensis Elect." The monastery of Kells, where this famous MS. was preserved, was surrendered to Henry VIII. by its last abbot, Richard Plunket, in 1539. The MS. afterwards came into the hands of Gerald Plunket, harbour-master of Dublin. - Gilbert's Cal. Anc. Records ,ii. pp. 44-5; Nat. MSS. of Ireland; pp. 12-21. From him it came to Ussher. Among other valuable MSS. acquired by Ussher, and now for the most part in the Library of Trinity College, may be enumerated the Codex Usserianus, a MS. of the Gospels, probably of the sixth century, an old Latin text of the Hiberno-British recension (Class A. 4. 15). It shows, some interlineations in small Irish characters, and entries in the hand of Ussher. - See Evangeliorum Versio Antehieronymiana ex Codice Usseriano, &c. Edited, with Preface, by Dr. Abbott, Professor of Hebrew, T.C.D. An imperfect copy of the Crede Mihi, an archiepiscopal Register of the See of Dublin, with a note in Ussher's handwriting attributing it to the year 1295. The Psalter of Bishop Rhyddmarch, Bishop of St. David's, who died at the close of the eleventh century. The MS. had belonged to Bedell and bears his autograph. Ussher quotes from it in his "Religion of the Ancient Irish.” The Book of Lecan, one of the most important survivals of old Gaelic literature, compiled about the middle of the fifteenth century. This MS. has had a chequered history. It came from Ussher to Trinity College, then disappeared, and turned up in the Irish College at Paris. It is now deposited in the Library of the Royal Irish Academy. See also Reeve's Adamnan, pp. xxvi., xxxviii., 334.

Page 248

In the dedication to his “very much honoured friend," Sir Christopher Sipthorp, one of the Justices of the King's Bench in Ireland, he declares he was “induced to publish the work with the hope that a true discovery of the religion anciently professed in this kingdom might prove a special motive to induce his poor countrymen to consider a little better of the old an and true way from whence they been hitherto misled." The work was intended to point out to the Irish Romanists in particular that the Papal religion was not the old religion, and to meet their objections, that “they followed the religion of their forefathers, and would never depart from it." It is not too much to say that this work, together with his "Answer to a Jesuit," already noticed, has proved a great storehouse from whence modern controversialists have armed themselves with weapons against the errors and assumptions of the Church of Rome.

Page 249

Very little of substantial value has since been added to the controversy, and Ussher must be acknowledged to take rank with Laud, Jeremy Taylor and Isaac Barrow, as one of the most learned and exhaustive of the defenders of the Protestant faith against Romish innovations. The treatise consists of eleven short chapters, into which an enormous amount of matter is clearly and logically condensed. The following are the subjects treated of: - (I) The Holy Scriptures; (II) Grace, Free Will, Faith, Works, Justification, Sanctification; (III) Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead; (IV) of the Worship of God, the Public Form of Liturgy, the Sacrifice and Sacrament of the Lord's Supper; (V) of Chrism, Sacramental Confession Penance, Absolution, Marriage, Divorce, and Single Life in the Clergy; (VI) of the Discipline of our Ancient Monks, of Abstinence from Meat; (VII) of the Church and various states thereof, especially in the days of Antichrist; of Miracles also, and of the Head of the Church; (VIII) of the Pope’s

Page 250

Spiritual Jurisdiction, and how little footing it had gotten at first within these parts; (IX) of the Controversy which the Britons, Picts, and Irish maintained against the Church of Rome, touching the Celebration of Easter; (X) of the height that the opposition betwixt the Roman party and that of the British and Scottish grew into, and how the Doctors of the Scottish and Irish side have been accounted most eminent men in the Catholic Church, notwithstanding their disunion from the Bishop of Rome; (XI) of the Temporal Power which the Pope's followers would directly entitle him unto over the kingdom of Ireland, together with the indirect power which he challengeth in absolving subjects from the obedience which they owe to their temporal governors. At the end is drawn up a catalogue of some hundred authors cited in the discourse, ranging from Eumenius Rhetor, A.D. 300, to Polydorus Virgilius, A.D. 1530, proving with what conscientious toil the writer pursued his task. As the subject is a very important one, and full of the deepest interest, we shall glance briefly at some of the most valuable conclusions pointed out by Ussher in his work. He first of all shows how the Holy Scriptures were studied by the ancient Irish and British Churches. He quotes Sedulius, Bede, &c., to this effect.

Page 251

Bede, for example, witnesses of Bishop Aidan that "all such as went in his company, whether they were of the clergy or the laity, were tied to exercise themselves either in the reading of Scriptures or in the learning of Psalms."  Proof is also adduced from the same authority of others that from the time of their very childhood they had a care to learn the Holy Scriptures, and that "in those days it was not thought a thing unfit that even children should give themselves to the study of the Bible." Ussher next goes on to prove more suo that the doctrines of "Predestination, Grace, Free Will, Faith, Works, Justification, and Sanctification" were all held and enunciated by the ancient Irish, referring to the teaching of Sedulius and Claudius, "two of our most famous divines," in proof of his assertion. The opposite doctrines he notes as first brought into the Church by Pelagius and Celestius, "the greatest depressors of God's grace and the advancers of man's abilities." "Among our Irish, the grounds of sound doctrine in these points were at the beginning well settled by Palladius and Patricius, sent hither by Celestinus, Bishop of Rome. And when the poison of the Pelagian heresy, about two hundred years after that, began to break out among them, the clergy of Rome, in the year of our Lord DCXXXIX, during the vacancy of the See upon the death of Severinus, directed their letters unto them for the prevention of this growing mischief." [14]

[14] Ussher's Works, iv. pp. 259-60.

Page 252

As against, the Romish Purgatory, he proves the ancient Irish Church knew of only three states, and quotes to that effect “the book ascribed unto" St. Patrick, De tribus habitaculis, in which he says, “There be three habitations under the power of Almighty God: the first, the lowermost, and the middle. The highest whereof is called the kingdom of God or the kingdom of heaven; the lowermost is termed hell, the middle is named the present world, or the circuit of the earth." "The blessed are called to the kingdom prepared for them from the beginning of the world; the cursed are driven into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels." [15] He likewise quotes Sedullus to the effect that after the end of this life "either death or life succeedeth"; and a saying of Claudius, "Christ did take upon himself our punishment and without the guilt, that thereby He might loose our guilt and finish also our punishment."

[15] Ditto p. 265. This writing is now universally recognised not to be Patrician. - See Todd's St. Patrick, p. 485 sq.

Page 253

Reference is also made on this subject to "that ancient canon of one of our Irish Synods," wherein it is affirmed that the soul being separated from the body is presented before the judgment-seat of Christ, who rendereth its own unto it according as it hath done"; and that "neither the archangel can lead it into life until the Lord hath judged it, nor the devil transport it into pain unless the Lord do damn it”. Nor did the early Irish Church offer up prayers for the dead, in the Roman sense, as Ussher plainly proves; although, as he freely allows, it was a universal practice to make eucharistic references in prayer, and especially at the celebration of the Holy Communion, to those "whose souls were supposed at the same instant to have rested in bliss." [16] He quotes Adanman [17] as reporting how Columbkille “caused all things to be prepared for the sacred ministry of the Eucharist when he had seen the soul of St. Brendan received by the holy angels, and that he did the like when Columbanus, Bishop of Leinster, departed this life . . . whereby it appeareth that an honourable commemoration of the dead was herein intended, and a sacrifice of thanksgiving for their salvation, rather than of propitiation for their sins." [18]

[16] Ussher's Works, iv. p. 269.

[17] Life of St. Columba, lib. iii. cap. 15.

[18] Ussher's Works, iv. p. 269.

Page 254

On the subject of "the Sacrifice and Sacrament of the Lord's Supper," Ussher proves that the ancient Irish Church "did not distinguish the Sacrifice from the Sacrament, but used the name of Sacrifice indifferently both for that which was offered unto God and of that which was given to and received by the communicant; [19] and he quotes for the first term the words of Gallus - "My master Columbanus is accustomed to offer unto the Lord the Sacrifice of salvation in brazen vessels"; and for the second expression "of giving the Sacrifice to man," what is noted in one of the ancient Synods of Ireland, that a bishop by his testament may bequeath a certain portion of his goods for a legacy to the priest that giveth him the Sacrifice, and of the receiving of the Sacrifice from the hands of a minister as in that sentence attributed to St. Patrick: "He who deserveth not to receive the Sacrifice in his life, how can it help him after his death? . . ." "The Sacrifice of the elder times," says Ussher, "was not like unto the new Mass of the Romanists, wherein the priest alone doth all" [20]

As to the modern Roman use of giving “the Eucharist in one kind only" to the laity, Ussher shows how their ancestors "in the use of their Sacrament received the Eucharist in both kinds, not being so acute as to discern betwixt the things that belonged unto the integrity of the Sacrifice and of the Sacrament, because in truth they took the one like the other." [21]

[19] Ussher's Works, iv. p. 278.

[20] Ditto, p. 278.

[21] Ussher's Works, iv. p. 279.

Page 255

The members of the old Irish Church knew nothing of the doctrine of concomitance. They "received the Body of the Lord and sipped His Blood." As for the argument that the ancient writers quoted, all specified to the receiving, not of bread and wine, but of the Body and Blood of Christ, and that that makes for the doctrine of transubstantiation, Ussher replies, "for as much as Christ Himself at the first institution of His Holy Supper did say expressly, 'This is my Body' and 'This is my Blood,' he deserveth not the name of Christian that will question the truth of that saying or refuse to speak in that language which he hath heard his Lord and Master use before him." [22] The only question is "in what sense and after what manner these things must be conceived to be His Body and Blood." He goes on to show they can only be such “in Sacrament and mystery." The doctrine of Claudius that "the Sacrament is in its own nature bread and wine, but the Body and Blood of Christ by mystical relation was in effect the same with that which long afterwards was here in Ireland de1ivered by Henry Crumpe, the Monk of Baltinglass, that "the Body of Christ in the Sacrament of the altar was only a looking-glass to the Body of Christ in heaven.” [23]

[22] Ditto, p. 285.

[23] Ussher’s Works, iv. P. 285.

Page 256

With regard to the term “Mass,” now confined by the Roman Catholic Church to the celebration of the Eucharist, Ussher shows that the public liturgy or service of the church was of old named the Mass, even then also when prayers only were said without the celebration of the Holy Communion, so that the last Mass that St. Colme (St. Columbkille) was ever present at is noted by Adamnan to have been Vespertinalis Dominica nostris missa, the evening Mass being in all likelihood that “which we call evensong or evening prayer.” [24] In the matter of public worship, Ussher shows how independent the Irish Church was until the time of Gilbertus, Malachias and others, the Pope’s legates from time to time in Ireland, succeeded in forcing upon the Church the “one Catholic and Roman office.”

[24] Ditto, iv. pp 276-7. Cf. Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet: “Are you at leisure, holy father, now? Or shall I come to you at evening mass?” - Act iv. Scene 1.

Page 257

The subjection was completed at the Synod of Cashel, when it was enacted that “all divine offices of Holy Church should from thenceforth be handled in all parts of Ireland according as the Church of England did observe them, [25] the acts of which Synod (presided over by the Bishop of Lismore, as the Pope’s legate) were duly confirmed by the authority of  Henry II. A.D. 1172. How little does the modern Irish Roman Catholic realise the fact that the religion which has so strong a hold upon him, and whose impulses intensify his antagonism towards English rule and English institutions was originally planted in his country by English authority!

In the fifth chapter Ussher proves that the early Church in Ireland knew nothing of the peculiar doctrines of Rome on the subjects of chrism, sacramental confession, penance, absolution, marriage, divorce, and the celibacy of the clergy. Confession, Ussher allows, was made “upon special occasions both publicly and privately,” as well that they might receive counsel and direction for their recovery as that they might be partakers of the benefit of the keys for the quieting of their troubled consciences."

[25] Acts of the Synod in Giraldus Cambr. Hib. Exp. part i. ch. 34.

Page 258

He adds: “In absolving such as be truly penitent, we willingly yield that the pastors of God's Church do remit sins after their manner - that is to say, ministerially and improperly, so that the privilege of forgiving sins properly and absolutely be still reserved unto God alone.” [26] In proof of this Ussher refers to many writers, including Claudius, Bede, &c.

On the subject of enforced clerical celibacy, Ussher points to the decree of “the Synod held by St. Patrick, Auxilius and Isserninus, wherein a special order is taken that the wives of the clergy should not walk abroad with their heads uncovered”; also to the memorable statement of St. Patrick in His “Confession" that he had to his father Calphurnius a deacon, and to his grandfather Politus a priest. [27]

The sixth chapter is devoted to proving that the members of the early British Churches eschewed the false sanctity taught by Rome to live in abstinence from meats and drinks. "Their monks fasted indeed, and gave up their worldly goods, but under colour of forsaking all, they did not hook all unto themselves; nor under semblance of devotion did they devour widow’s houses. They held begging to be no point of perfection, but remembered the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, ‘It is more blessed to give than take.’” Gildas [A.D. 540] is quoted: ”Abstinence from corporal meats is unprofitable without charity.

[26] Ussher’s Works, iv, p. 290.

[27] Ditto pg. 294.

Page 259

They are, therefore, the better men who do not fast much, nor abstain from the creature of God beyond measure, but carefully keep their heart within pure before God, from whence they know cometh the issue of life, than they who eat no flesh, nor take delight in secular dinners, nor ride with coaches or horses, thinking themselves hereby to be, as it were, superior to others, upon whom death hath entered through the windows of haughtiness." [28]

The seventh chapter is devoted to a consideration of the true Church and it’s Head, and Claudius is appropriately quoted: "The famous place (Matt. xvi. 18) whereupon our Romanists lay the main foundations of the papacy Claudius expoundeth in this sort: 'Upon this rock I will build My Church’; that is to say, upon the Lord and Saviour, who granted unto His faithful knower, lover, and confessor the participation of his own name, that from petra (the rock) he should be called Peter. The Church is builded upon Him, because only by the faith and love of Christ, by the receiving of the Sacraments of Christ, by the observation of the commandments of Christ we come to the inheritance of the elect and eternal life; as witnesseth the Apostle who saith, 'other foundation can no man lay beside that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus.'" [29] Claudius Scotus flourished A.D. 815.

[28] Ussher's Works, iv. p. 308.

[29] Ussher's Works, iv. p. 315.

Page 260

Claudius indeed acknowledges a kind of primacy for St. Peter, but "he addeth withal that St. Paul also was chosen in the same manner to have the primacy in founding the Churches of the Gentiles.” Gildas holds that "to every true priest it is said, 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church' " and that "unto every holy priest it is promised, ‘Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven,' " &c. "The good priests of Britain do lawfully sit in the chair of St. Paul, but the bad with unclean feet, they usurp the seat of the Apostle Peter." As to the titles and prerogatives which the Pope II now peculiarly challengeth unto himself,” they have been previously shared by other bishops e.g., the Bishop of Kildare - "honoured by Cogitosus with the style of Summus Sacerdos and Summus Pontifex." [30]

In the eighth chapter Ussher carefully goes into the consideration of the Pope's spiritual jurisdiction, and proves how little his authority was recognised in the early ages of the Irish Church.

[30] Ussher’s Works, pp. 315-8.

Page 261

It is plain that he accepts the tradition (by no means established) that St. Patrick received a legation from the Pope, but goes onto say there was no further instance of papal interference with the affairs, spiritual or temporal, of Ireland until the time of Gillebert. "We read of sundry archbishops that have been in this land betwixt the days of St. Patrick and of Malachias; what one of them can be named that ever sought for a pall from Rome? [31]

As to appeals made from time to time to the See of Rome to settle vexed questions, Ussher candidly acknowledges that if he himself had lived in St. Patrick's days, for the resolution of a doubtful question he would as willingly have listened to the judgment of the Church of Rome in those days of its integrity as to the determination of any Church in the whole world. That the Irish doctors of ancient times were wont to consult with the Bishop of Rome, Ussher freely allows, but that they "received his resolutions as oracles of truth” is the point, he says, "we would fain see proved." [32]

[31] Ussher's Works, iv. p. 320.

[32] Ditto p.330. On the subject of appeals to Rome, Fra. Puller's able work, The Primitive Saints and the See of Rome, should be consulted. The above deliverance of Ussher has been frequently taken advantage of in a garbled form by Roman Catholic writers. See, for a striking example, Archbishop Moran’s Essays, p. 121.

Page 262

It was originally, as Ussher shows, through the Ostmen sending over their bishops to Canterbury for consecration, for the Danish settlements in Dublin, Waterford, and Limerick, since they despised Irish orders, and afterwards through the English Conquest; under Henry II., that the Church of Rome effectually established her influence over the Church of Ireland. It is to the developing of this point that the last three chapters of the work are devoted. The difference between the early British and Irish Churches and that of Rome in the matter of observing the festival of Easter is one incontrovertible evidence of the original independence of these communions of the See of Rome. A black-letter poem of one Taliessyn, honoured with the title of Ben Beirdth - that is, "the chief of the bards" - is given by Ussher to prove the warm antagonism which existed in those early times to the papal claims:

"Wo be to that priest, y born

That will not cleanly weed his corn

And preach his charge among.

Wo be to that shepherd (I say)"

That will not watch his fold alway,

As to his office doth belong.

Wo be to him that doth not keep

From Romish wolves his sheep

With staff and weapon strong."

Page 263

With great acuteness, Ussher traces in the closing pages of this treatise the steps taken by the Church of Rome to hand over Ireland with her Church to the authority of England, that through the rule of the latter kingdom, now completely subjugated to her spiritual power, she might gain a similar ascendancy over the national and hitherto independent Church of Ireland. “In the year of our Lord 1155, the first Bull was sent unto him [Henry II], the sum whereof is thus laid down in a second Bull, directed unto him by Alexander III., the immediate successor of the other. ‘Following the steps of reverend Pope Adrian and attending the fruit of your desire, we ratify and confirm his grant concerning the dominion of the kingdom of Ireland, conferred upon you, reserving unto St. Peter and the Holy Church of Rome as in England, so in Ireland, the yearly pension of one penny out of every house.'" At the national Synod held, as we have shown above, at Cashel, the heads of the Irish Church, now thoroughly corrupted by English gold and influence, most ignominiously consented to the bargain, and so passed away at the same moment the primitive purity and independence of Ireland's Church. It is a chapter in the history of the country that the modern Roman Catholic Church in Ireland would do well to study; she would then see that she owes to the England against whom she has perpetually warred, that very unreformed faith to which her sons and daughters cleave with such tenacity.

Page 264

It was, in fact; the Church of England, at that time ruled by Rome, that was then established in Ireland. The Bull of Pope Innocent VIII., dated February, 1484, constituting the collegiate church of Galway, enacts that the College shall consist of "one warden and eight presbyters, all civilised men, and duly holding the rites and order of the Church of England in the celebration of Divine service"; and this, in consequence of the resistance still offered to the Roman ritual by the "wild Irish highland men," outside the town, who refused to conform. [33]

 At the close of his work Ussher adds an interesting note, mentioning the principles on which he had wrought throughout, inviting all his authorities to be examined by his opponents, and saying that his intention has been “to deal fairly, and not to desire the concealing of anything that may lead to the true discovery of the state of former times, whether it may seem to make for him or against him."

Another work from the prolific pen of the Archbishop was published in the following year, 1632.

[33] See Hardiman's Galway, p. 681; and O'Flaherty's Far Connaught, p. 167, where the original is given.

Page 265

It is his Veterum Epistolarum Hibernicarum Sylloge [34] a collection of letters with learned notes thereon, treating of Irish ecclesiastical matters, from the time of Gregory the Great to the end of the fifth century. Some of the notes bear the name of Bedell, who had evidently assisted Ussher in compiling the volume. [35] Three poetical effusions of Columbamus will be found in the collection, which is of extreme interest to all students of ancient Irish Church history. [36]

[34] Ussher's Works, iv. pp. 385-572.

[35] Ussher had a high opinion of Bedell's attainments. It is on record that on one occasion, when several of the Bishops were being entertained at Strafford's table in Dublin, one of the party said: "We are all talking, but my Lord Kilmore saith nothing;" to whom Dr. Ussher replied: "Broach him, and you will find good liquor in him." Bedell was then asked some questions on the subject of “faith," when he so puzzled them that they all fell a laughing, except Bedell himself, "and no man did ask him any more questions." - See Clogy's Memoirs of Bedell, p. 151; Bayle's Dict., iii. p. 139.

[36] On the Sylloge, see Dr. Stokes' Ireland and. the Celtic Church, pp. 209-10.