Chapter 21 - PERSECUTION OF THE CHURCH: USSHER'S FRESH LITERARY LABOURS: CORRESPONDENCE: DECLINING HEALTH, AND DEATH: HISTORY OF HIS BOOKS AND LIBRARY: CONCLUSION.

Page 356

THE fortunes of the Church of England were now at their lowest ebb. Episcopacy had been abolished throughout the three kingdoms and no other form of Church government could be said to have taken its place. The clergy who refused to accept the solemn League and Covenant had been driven from their dioceses. The "great Idol of the Service Book” as the Prayer-book was called, was silenced in favour of the "Directory of Public Worship." The "Calves Coop" as the prayer desk was called, was put away. Any minister using the Book of Common Prayer, either in public or private, was liable to be fined five pounds for the first offence, and ten pounds for the second; or refusing to use the Directory, forty shillings for each offence. "Master presbyter was left to do as his pickle brains would suit him".

Page 357

The worship of God was left "to chance, in deliberation, and a petulant fancy." Only here and there did a faithful priest of the Church of England, like Taylor or Sanderson, dare to minister in holy things. When the Prayer Book was used at all, it was from memory. The charge was brought against the learned Pococke, of Oriental fame, that he used part of the Prayer book; that he began his service with the words "Almighty and most merciful Father" and that he said "Praise ye the Lord." He was charged with using the entire of the "Confession" and the substance of the "Absolution". [1] Bishop Sanderson in his effort to escape the letter of the law drew up a MS. prayer-book fashioned on the language of the Book of Common Prayer. [2] Other grievous charges were brought against the clergy, involving the most outrageous attacks on their moral character, and the English language was scarcely full enough for the opprobrious terms leveled at them.

A Presbyterian scheme of Church government had been voted by the General Assembly, after thirty days’ debate, creating lay elders and deacons for every parish, with congregational provinces and national assemblies; but the Independent party overthrew it.

[1] See Twell's Life of Pococke, p. 151, &c.

[2] Sanderson's Liturgy edited and published by Dr. Jacobson, Bishop of Chester, in his Edition of Sanderson's Works.

Page 358

A grand committee for religion and to try the "malignant" clergy was then established, before whom suspected clerics were summoned. Puritanical ministers were placed in the benefices from which the malignants - that is, the Royalist clergy - were driven. Nor did things fare better with the universities. Dr. Hammond was expelled from his sub-deanery of Christ Church and imprisoned; Dr. Sanderson was driven from his Chair as Regius Professor of Divinity, and forced to retire into the country. Nearly all the Masters and Fellows of Cambridge were ejected, and the revenues of the Colleges sequestered. The Primate and the Bishops of Ely and Bath and Wells were thrown into the Tower. Twelve of the other bishops for a time shared their imprisonment. Bishop Hall, by no means an extreme prelate, tells us in graphic language how it fared with him - his goods sold, his rents withheld, and his cathedral ransacked; all the organ-pipes, vestments, copes, surplices, with the service books and singing-books, carried to the fire in the public market-place, “a lewd wretch walking before the train in his cope, trailing in the dirt, with a service book in his hand, imitating in an impious scorn the tune, and usurping the words of the Litany used formerly in the Church. [3]

[3] See Life of Bishop Hall, by Geo. Lewis, p. 401.

Page 359

Nor did the other cathedral churches fare better. The Parliamentary soldiers wreaked their will on Canterbury, spreading destruction on every side, tearing alike surplices, gowns, and Bibles, and mangling the Books of Common Prayer. Cromwell, we are told, “did most miserably deface the Cathedral of Peterborough." [4] It was a hideous orgie in the name of religion.

The aged Archbishop must have seen and heard many things at this time to make his heart ache, and lead him almost to despair of Church and State. There was an ominous outburst of all kinds of fanatical excesses at the same time that the Church services were entirely suppressed. The Quakers alone of the sects received no toleration, and, strange to say, they filled the jails during the entire period of the Commonwealth. [5] John Evelyn, in his Diary, under date December 25, 1655, tells us what he felt at the prevailing famine of the Word of God. "I went to London where Dr. Wild preached the funeral sermon on preaching, this being the last day after which Cromwell’s proclamation was to take place that none of the Church of England should dare either to preach or administer Sacraments, teach schools, &c., on pain of imprisonment or exile.

[4] Mercurus Aulicus, quoted by Archdeacon Perry, History of the English Church, vol. ii. p. 468.

[5] See George Fox's Life for an account of his several imprisonments.

Page 360

So this was the mournfullest day that in my life I had seen, or the Church of England herself, since the Reformation, to the great rejoicing of both Papist and Presbyter. So pathetic was his discourse that it drew many tears from the auditory. Myself, wife, and some of our family received the Communion." [6] Again, sometime later we find him recording in his Diary how a few faithful Churchmen ventured to meet in London to keep Christmas Day, and how, during the celebration of the Holy Communion, the church was surrounded by soldiers, and the congregation taken prisoners. As they went up to receive the Communion the soldiers held their muskets against them as if they would have shot them at the altar. [7]

The utter collapse of the Church was only prevented by the courage and faithfulness of men like Hammond; Taylor, Skinner; Sanderson, and Martin (Bishop of Meath), who now and then admitted a suitable candidate to holy orders, and maintained in some measure theological learning by their writings.

[6] Evelyn's Diary; p. 297. Dr. Wild had been chaplain to Archbishop Laud. At the Restoration he was made Bishop of Derry.

[7] Ditto, p. 309.

Page 361

Archbishop Ussher from his retreat at Reigate, viewed this state of things with the utmost alarm. He saw with his usual prescience that the Church of Rome alone would prosper by the general confusion and make capital out of the universal disintegration. [8] It was her interest to set sect against sect, and intensify the Puritan reaction. In a remarkable letter addressed to Ussher by Bramhall about this time (July 1654), the later clearly set forth the nature of the Roman conspiracy. He had learned from the best authority that over one hundred Romish clergy had been sent into England from the Continent, who were to feign themselves to be some Presbyterians, some Anabaptists, and who were to argue for or against the merits of their respective systems. Corroboration of the fact that such a deep plot was being hatched at this time to confound all religious conviction in the country, and so make the way easier for a return to the Roman camp, is not wanting; and one of the strongest proofs of the truth of the charge is to be found in the action of the Roman Catholics themselves, who succeeded in suppressing the first edition of Parr's “Life and Letters of Archbishop Ussher,'" on the ground that it contained this letter of Bramhall's with its damaging revelation.

[8] See Evelyn's Diary, vol. i. p. 294. In Ussher's opinion, “the Church would be destroyed by sectarians, who would in all likelihood bring in Poperie."

Page 362

But throughout these troublous times Ussher kept steadily at his purpose of enriching the Church with theological and historical contributions. In 1650 he published, as the result of many years labour, the first part of his Annals of the Old Testament. Four years later the second part of the work was given to the public. He contemplated a third part, carrying on the work to the beginning of the fourth century of the Christian era, but he did not live to complete it. A tribute to Ussher's universal sovereignty in the Protestant world may be seen in the fact that his theology has been accepted by nearly all the Reformed Churches. In a Latin letter addressed by Bishop Hall to Ussher, he acknowledges with gratitude the gift of a copy of the Annals and expresses his astonishment at the enormous industry of the Archbishop. [9] The learned Arnold Boate [10] likewise writes acknowledging a copy, and expressing his thanks. [11]

[9] Ussher’s Works xvi. pp. I57-8.

[10] Boate was born in Holland and graduated in medicine at Leyden. He became a great student of Rabbinical writings, and was invited to Dublin by Ussher, where he practised among his Dutch countrymen who had settled in the city. He married a daughter of Dungan, Justice of the Common Pleas.

[11] Ussher's Works, xvi. p. 181. It is alleged on the authority of the Stationers’ Registers, under date August 21, 1647, that Fuller translated the Annales into English, but if so the work has disappeared. Fuller in his History, acknowledges that his "wares" were from “the storehouse of that reverend prelate the Cape merchant of all learning. Clean through this work, in points of chronology, I have with implicit faith followed his computations, setting my watch by his dial, knowing his dial to be set by the sun." Ussher's Chronology has been taken advantage of to show that Colenso's principal objections to the truth of the Pentateuch were anticipated and answered more than two hundred years ago. - See Proctor's tractate on the subject, Bishop Colenso’s Principal Objections, &c.

Page 363

Ussher was also occupied during these years in a controversy as to the various readings of the Hebrew text of the Old Testament. It is a remarkable evidence of the regard paid to Ussher's judgment that the two learned men who had engaged in an intellectual duel over the question, both appealed in the most earnest way to the Archbishop to decide between them. "I have great cause to think," writes Boate, "that a full and free declaring of your mind will be a condemning of Capellus in all the main points in the controversy between me and him." Capellus writes in an equally confident strain. [12] The Archbishop, in taking part in the dispute, rejects the attempt to correct the Hebrew text out of the Septuagint or Samaritan Pentateuch, and gives it as his own opinion, from which he says he has never swerved, that the Hebrew text of the Old Testament Scriptures was not less open to errors than that of the New Testament and of all other books, but that for the purpose of ascertaining and correcting these errors the industry of the Massorites was of the greatest avail.

[12] See the correspondence in Ussher's Works, xvi. p. 192, &c. also Works, vol. vii.

Page 364

Some variations of the Hebrew text might be obtained from ancient interpreters, but none from the Septuagint or the Samaritan text. It is plain from this that had Ussher lived in these days his sympathies would have been with the Higher Criticism rather than with its opponents. But, beyond the glimpses we get from his share in the above controversy, little or no light is thrown on Ussher's attitude on the question of inspiration.

With regard to the Septuagint, Ussher held a peculiar opinion. He maintained that "the Seventy Jews translated only the Pentateuch, and that the rest of the Old Testament was translated in the reign of Philometer, an Alexandrian Jew, to gratify the curiosity of the Gentiles on the subject of the Hebrew religion. Ussher likewise maintained that while the original translation perished in the Alexandrine conflagration, several copies had been made, one of which was in the possession of Philo, and was afterwards used by Origen for the completion of his Hexapla. [13]

[13] Ussher's Works, vol. vii.

Page 365

Ussher's opinion was afterwards controverted by Valesius, who in his address to the Archbishop says, "I am unwilling here to heap up praises of you which neither your modesty nor your friendship allows. In most things which you have written on the subject I agree with you, and greatly admire your wonderful learning and keenness of judgment; but there are some points on which I am reluctantly compelled to differ from you." [14] The theory of the Archbishop mentioned above has, we need scarcely say, been universally discarded. It may be observed that Ussher was the first English scholar who undertook a critical examination of the Septuagint. [15]

Towards the close of his life, Ussher kept up an interesting correspondence on astronomical and theological subjects with Mr. Thomas Whalley. [16] One of the questions discussed with considerable zeal was the strange one of the probable period of Adam's sojourn in the Garden of Eden. Mr. Whalley gives his opinion that "the stay of Adam in Paradise was much longer than most men hold . . . perhaps as long as Christ lived upon earth after His baptism. At the same time, it was a nice point on which he did not care to be, too curious.

[14] See Elrington's Life of Ussher, p. 270.

[15] De Graeca LXX. lnterpretum Versione Syntagma. Published 1655.

[16] Whalley was a Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge.

Page 366

In a subsequent letter he gives his reasons for thinking that Adam's sojourn in the Garden was of some duration. He was required to dress it and to keep it, to take notice of and contemplate the natures of the plants and animals; to have the beasts of all kinds presented before him, and give names to a multitude of species; to “visit and search the properties also of so many sorts of herbs and plants,“ to keep a Sabbath, "lie in a heavy sleep, till the woman was built, and then take knowledge of her, and give her a name; and further, to enter into a long conference with the Serpent, and both of them to sew for themselves garments of leaves." In a further letter he speaks of "the tree of life by consent of many good divines and schoolmen) as not only a sacrament, but as medicine to defend man's nature in his integrity from injury and mortality." [17] Unfortunately, Ussher's reply to these speculations is not forthcoming. That he did correspond on the subject is plain from Mr. Whalley's letters, in one of which he writes: "Your correspondence of the feast of expiation, on the 10th of Tisri in memory of the first sin, I hold very ingenious"; and in another he refers to the Archbishop's “other conjectures, of Adam's continuance in Paradise, and will be thankful if he will vouchsafe to impart to him his meditations on that or any other subject." [18]

[17] Archbishop Whately held the same opinion as to the grace conveyed by the tree of life. - See Lessons on.Relig. Worship, ch. x.

[18] Works, xvi. pp. 269-80.

Page 367

The time was now drawing on apace when Israel must die. The aged Archbishop had seen many changes in Church and State. Strafford, Laud, and his Sovereign had alike fallen on the scaffold; the throne had been cast down, and a Protectorate established in its place; the Church was in ruins, the bishops disheartened and scattered, the clergy persecuted, their flock divided, the Prayer-book silenced. [19] Afar off across the Irish Channel things were in all equally deplorable condition. The Church there likewise had been overthrown, while a fierce and bloody revolution had swept over a large portion of the country. Nearly all the bishops had fled; a few faithful ones, like Parry, Bishop of Killaloe, remained at their posts, and witnessed against the ecclesiastical tyranny of the day. [20]

[19] It was a remarkable coincidence, that the same day that Laud was sentenced to be hanged, Parliament abolished the Book of Common Prayer.

[20] See for this Dwyer's History of Killaloe Diocese and the manly protest of the Bishop, p. 255-6.

Page 368

In January 1656, Archbishop Ussher wrote in his Almanac: "Now aged seventy-five years. My years are full"; and below in large letters the word “Resignation." At Reigate, where he went in the following month, having bade farewell to his friends and relatives in London, he attempted to complete his Chronologia Sacra, but without success. His sight failed him, and he was contemplating the service of an amanuensis. Dr. Parr, his chaplain and future biographer, visited and preached before him in the following month. He tells us how, when his sermon was over, the Archbishop called him to his side and spoke to him a few earnest words of instruction and encouragement. On March 20, the aged prelate, now fast hastening to the grave, undertook to give spiritual consolation to a lady who lay dying in the same house, but whom the Archbishop himself was to predecease. At suppertime he complained of pain in his side, and pleurisy set in. The physicians could do little for him, and he calmly prepared for death. He thanked the Countess of Peterborough for all her kindness, and said farewell, commending her to the grace of God. He was then left alone. He was heard to utter the prayer, "O Lord, forgive me especially my sins of omission.” Shortly afterwards, at one in the afternoon of March 21, 1656, he quietly “fell on sleep." [21]

Cromwell required that a public funeral should be accorded to the great Archbishop, and that he should be buried with all honours in Westminster Abbey. The spot chosen for his final resting place was in St. Paul’s Chapel, close to the monument of his first teacher, Fullerton, and near the steps leading to Henry Seventh’s Chapel.

[21] Ussher died intestate. His daughter took out letters of administration, May 1656. Wills Dept., Somerset House, fol. III, of that date.

Page 369

We are told that a large concourse of people met the funeral cortege, including many of the nobility and London clergy. So great was the concourse that a military guard was found necessary. Only on this occasion was the Burial Service of the Church of England read within the Abbey walls during the entire period of the Commonwealth. The sermon was preached by the Archbishop’s chaplain, Dr. Bernard, and afterwards published. He took for his text the suitable words, “And Samuel died, and all Israel were gathered together and lamented him, and buried him.” No stone marks the spot where the Archbishop sleeps. [22]

[22] Several errors are to be noted here. Elrington says Ussher was, buried in St Erasmus Chapel. In the Dub. Univ. Cal. for 1877, pt. ii. p. 1892, we read: "The spot where he is interred is marked by a flat stone bearing this inscription: 'James Ussher, Archbishop of Armagh.'" But the fact is, as mentioned above, Ussher was buried in St. Paul's Chapel, beside the grave of James Fullerton, his early instructor, whose “quaint epitaph” says Dean Stanley, “still attracts attention . . . The statesmen of Charles II. erected no memorial to mark the spot.” - Mem. of West. Abbey; p. 249. Ware in 1734, records: “He hath no monument placed over him." And no monument was subsequently erected to mark the spot. Winstanley likewise is in error in stating that Ussher was buried in Henry VII.'s Chapel. - Worthies, p. 476. Mr. Dixon, in his article on "Distinguished Graduates" (Book of Trinity College; p. 246), perpetuates the error as to his place of interment. The following is "the quaint epitaph" referred to above: - "Here lyes ye remnant of Sir James Fullerton, Knight, first gentleman of ye bedchamber to King Charles ye first, Prince and King: A gracious rewarder of all virtue, a severe reprover of all vice, and a professed renouncer of all vanite. He was a firm pillar of ye Com'wealth; a faithful patron of ye Catholiq’ Church; a faire pattern to ye British court. He lived to ye welfare of his country, to ye honour of his prince, to ye glory of his God. He died fuller of faith than of feare; fuller of resolu’con than of paines; fuller of honour than of dayes." Fullerton, who was a Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin, in 1593, was for some time Ambassador at the Court of France.

Page 370

The funeral expenses, it may be observed, reached a far higher sum than the £200 voted for the purpose by Cromwell, and the deficit was made good by his family, who could ill spare the expense. [23]

Ussher’s public life is thus briefly summed up by Dr. Parr: "He had been fifty-five years a minister, nearly fourteen years a Professor of Divinity in Dublin University, and several years Vice-Chancellor of it; sat as Bishop of Meath four years, and thirty-one years Archbishop of Armagh, being the hundredth from St. Patrick in that See." [24]

[23] The original order to pay the £200 to Nicholas Bernard is published by Elrington, Life of Ussher, p. 278 (note).

[24] Parr's Life pp. 77-8.

Page 371

Several posthumous writings of Ussher were gathered together, some of which were subsequently published, including a volume of his sermons; [25] a collection of tracts published by Bernard, in which Ussher treats of the extent of the satisfaction rendered by Christ's death, of the Sabbath and Lord's Day, and of Ordination in foreign Churches; the Power of the Prince already referred to; the Chronology; the tracts on Celebrating Divine Service in an unknown tongue, and two dissertations on the Pseudo-Dionysian writings and the Epistle to the Laodoceans; the first establishment of English Laws and Parliaments in the kingdom of Ireland, in which last Ussher shows that all Acts made in England were intended for the government of Ireland likewise; a discourse where and how far the Imperial laws were received by the old Irish and the several inhabitants of Great Britain; and the Divinity Lectures. The Bibliotheca Theologica, commenced as early as 1608, was sought for with great interest after Ussher's death. The original MS., a folio of some 600 pages, got into the hands of Bishop Stillingfleet, and is now deposited in the British Museum. Dr. Langbaine Provost of Queen's College, who was named for the task

[25] Works, vol. xiii.

Page 372

by Ussher, "as the only man on whose learning as well as friendship he could rely, to cast it into such a form as might render it fit for the press," [26] endeavoured to collate and transcribe the MS., as it lay in the Bodleian Library, but found it a most difficult business, as a portion had been eaten away by the rats. Langbaine died from a cold he took in the library while thus engaged, having survived the Archbishop three years. [27]

There is, says Elrington, a small thin folio in the library of the University of Dublin, which appears to contain the first sketch of this work. [28]

It will be interesting to know that this library is rich in Ussher MSS., but unfortunately most of them are in imperfect condition. Besides the original matter, there are annotations in Ussher's handwriting on the margin of several MSS. by other hands.

[26] Parr's Life of Ussher, p. 13.

[27] See Wood's Athen.Oxon., iii. pp. 447-8 (note); "Langbaine died of cold taken sitting in the University Library.” - Harl. MSS., 5898, f. 291.

[28] Class D. 3. 29. The MS., which is really an oblong octavo, and is written in what Laud calls Ussher's "small close hand" (Strafford's Letters, ii. p. 24), contains some curious things. For example, Ussher holds an opinion about the creation of our first parents which does not tally with the modern theory of the development of man. He tells us that Adam was created very wise, and that on the same day on which he was framed, being alone, he spake a language not infused, but of his own making, which language Eve also did understand, and that both she and her husband were spoken to by God, proof texts being given from the opening chapters of Genesis.

Page 373

Among the collection are a MS. copy of Hooker's famous sermon on Justification [29] and a MS. containing the Eighth Book of the Ecclesiastical Polity. This latter was collated by Archdeacon Cotton, and proved of great use in ascertaining a more perfect text. It was also examined by the late Dr. Todd, Senior Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin, for Keble's edition. [30] There was formerly a second copy as also one of the Seventh Book among the Ussher MSS., but these have disappeared. Ussher also made an analysis of the Eighth Book for his own use, and this is to be found in the library. [31]

Ussher's famous collection of books had for a time a chequered experience. Some valuable works were lost, but the bulk of them was transferred to Chester, and thence to London. Covetous eyes were cast on them shortly after the Archbishop's death, and among others the King of Denmark and Cardinal Mazarin made offers for them. Cromwell, however, insisted that they should not be disposed of without his consent.

[29] Class A. 5. 6.

[30] See Keble's Introduction to the Eccl. Polity, pp. xxxvii. - ix.

[31] Class D. 3. 3. Six volumes of Ussher's Collectanea were given to the Bodleian Library by James Tyrrel, the Archbishop's grandson. Some further Ussher MSS. came to the Library through Laud. - Macray's Annals Bod. Lib. p. 102; 125, 318.

Page 374

At a meeting of the Council, at which Cromwell was present, Dr. Owen and two others were ordered to read the catalogue, and see what books might be profitably bought for the State. [32] The City ministers desired to purchase them for Sion College at a price of £2500, to be "disbursed by some private citizens." [33] Eventually the army serving in Ireland was allowed to purchase the entire collection, amounting to some 10,000 volumes, at a cost of £2200, with a view to their being brought back to Dublin. [34] For this purpose they were transferred back again to Chester, and there placed on board the Kinsale frigate, and landed in Dublin, August 1657, the captain of the ship, Mr. Robert Phillpott, receiving £9 6s. 8d. for the carriage across.

[32] State Papers; June 12, 1656.

[33] Tanner MSS. lii. p. 163, quoted by Urwick in his Early History of Trinity College, p. 91 (note).

[34] Trinity College MSS. Evidently through a misprint in the figures, this sum got enlarged to £22,000, the amount mentioned by Dr. Stubbs in his History, following the Dub. Univ. Cal. for 1877. Parr and Elrington, in their Lives, and Abbott, in his article on the Library, Book of Trinity College, p. 149, give the correct figures.

Page 375

On reaching the city an embargo was again placed on them, and they were removed to the Castle, where they remained till the Restoration, when Charles II. finally surrendered them to the College, but in the meanwhile many valuable works were lost. [35]

[35] Parr's Life, p. 102; Elrington's Life, pp. 303-4. The University of Oxford is rich in Ussher Collectanea. According to Evelyn, several of the Archbishop's books and rare MSS. sold to provide him with bread. - Letter to Pepys, August 12, 1689. Parr says that Bernard borrowed many of his books and never returned them. Under Class D. I. 4. will be found the MS. catalogue of Ussher's books as given to the College Library, Dublin. The portion of the library where they rest bears the inscription: "Bibliotheca Usseriana ex Dona Serenmissimi Regis Caroli Secundi." The Ussher MSS. have been rich in finds. For example, there is one (Class E. 3. 8. fo1. 163) that contains three letters of Pope Alexander III. addressed to the English King, Henry II., to the Irish bishops, and to the princes and nobles of Ireland respectively, with a view to confirming and strengthening the hold of the English Crown over Ireland. They were originally unearthed by Ussher from "the Little Black Book, of the Exchequer of England in the office of the King's Remembrancer." We learn this from a note in Ussher's handwriting. This work must have been done during one of his many visits to London. In the same way Ussher unearthed Alexander III's Bull confirming Pope Adrian's gift of Ireland, originally preserved in the Hibernia Expugnata of Giraldus, but subsequently suppressed. John Ross, however, the antiquarian and historian of Warwick, who died in 1491, had previously got hold of the Bull and transcribed it into his own Historia Regum Anglia (published at Oxford in 1716). It was in Ross's MSS. that Ussher discovered the document, and so was able to restore the text of Giraldus. The Ussher MSS. contain two copies of Giraldus (Class E. 3. 31, F. 4, 4). The letters of Alexander III. reveal a frightful state of immorality in Ireland, and justify his interference in the direction of bringing a reformation of religion. - See the Irish Eccl. Record, vol. iii. No 69; King's Church Hist. of Ireland, vol. ii. p. 530 (note), and Hergenrother's Catholic Church and Christian State, ii. p. 157. See also Ussher's Sylloge, Works, vol. iv., Epist. xlvi. pp. 549-50.

Page 376

From the story we have now told it will not be difficult to gather the chief features in the life and character of Archbishop Ussher. His learning was unchallenged; it was the admiration of the age in which he lived. There were few branches of knowledge, as we have seen, with which he had not an acquaintance, and his range in some of them was extensive almost to a phenomenal degree. Perhaps he will never be exceeded in his knowledge of ancient Church history and theology. To the present day many of his writings are resorted to, as to an unexhausted and inexhaustible treasure-house. No one can be said to be fairly equipped for the controversy with the Roman Church who is not at home in his "Answer to a Jesuit" and his treatise on "The Religion Professed by the Ancient Irish." As we have seen, he achieved an extraordinary triumph in his successful effort to unravel the mystery of the Ignatian Epistles. His correspondence shows that he was consulted by and that he communicated with all the leading literary men of his time, including many foreign writers of learning and distinction. In private and social life he was all that could be desired - dignified, hospitable, and, with his more intimate friends, affectionate. He was prodigal of his information, and always ready to make others sharers in it. As regards his public life in Ireland, he was frequently placed in circumstances of considerable difficulty. It was needful at times to temporise, and his masters were not always the easiest to serve.

Page 377

He seems at times to have been of a too gentle and yielding disposition, and perhaps on some occasions did not exhibit a sufficiently resolute spirit. He was a man of peace, and above everything else loved the seclusion of his study. It was his fate to live in times when bishops, and especially a prelate holding the exalted position of the Irish Primate, were compelled to interfere much in affairs of State.

In ecclesiastical matters he became gradually educated from the strict standpoint of his early training, until he was able to defend the doctrine and discipline of the Catholic Church, as one of its most learned supporters. His wide reading broadened his mind and helped him to break through the narrow confinement that came of the Puritan and Calvinistic traditions of his youth. The concessions he was ready at one period to make to the principles of Presbyterianism, were not spontaneous, but were forced from him, as we have seen, by the exigencies of the times and his desire to bring about a peaceful solution, if possible, of a great crisis in the history of his country. His subsequent publications showed that, if anything, his adhesion to Episcopacy as the original and apostolic form of Church government had strengthened with the growth of years. [36]

[36] M. Reville, in his Les Origines de L'Episcopat, premiere partie, p. 8 (note), places Ussher's name first in the list of those great English divines who defended Episcopacy in the seventeenth century.

Page 378

For Irish Churchmen Ussher left behind him a great heritage. He left them an example of prodigious industry, showing itself in vast spaces of learning, and herein he exhibits a model they may well follow at the present day.

It remains to be said that Ussher’s published works, including his Life by Dr. Elrington, are contained in seventeen volumes, prepared and issued by the University of Dublin at a cost of £3800. The concluding volume, published in 1864, under the joint editorship of the late J.H. Todd, D.D., Senior Fellow T.C.D., and the late Bishop Reeves, contains the notes of three sermons, and most exhaustive indexes to the entire series of volumes, these latter being the admirable work of the Bishop.

FINIS