CH. IV.] oppose the Reformation in Ireland. 761 —----, whose offence was considered more serious, was A. D. 1560. first imprisoned, and subsequently banished. He died at Alcala in Spain, in January, 1577.* So far as these two prelates were influenced by conscientious motives, they claim respect and sympathy, even from those who feel their cause to have been a bad one, and their removal from the dignities which they had enjoyed a necessary step, that they might be able no longer to inculcate into the minds of the people from the seat of authority their unsound and anti-scriptural principles. We cannot however forget that both these bishops were only served as they themselves had served others; that they had been irregularly intruded into their respective sees during the reign of Queen Mary, while the rightful occupants were still living; and that Walsh and Leverous had assisted in depriving other bishops of their sees for the grievous offence they had been guilty of in being married men. With the exception of these two individuals, all The other the Irish bishops of that time remained in their bishops all several sees; and from them the present bishops their sees, of the reformed or orthodox faith have derived *Mant, i. 276. Leverous at first, for some time after his deprivation, enjoyed the hospitable protection of the earl and countess of Desmond. His treatment shows how little the government of that day was disposed to visit with corporal punishment the maintenance or avowal of religious convictions opposed to the system legally established, when such convictions did not lead to acts of open violence and treason. continue in 762 The Succession of the Ancient Irish Church [Book VI. A.D. 1560. their orders, being the true and unquestionable successors of the prelates of the ancient Irish Church. Thus the friends of reformation in Ireland at that time enjoyed a great advantage in not being driven to the necessity of acting in defiance of the constituted authorities of their Church, and in having on the contrary in most instances, the tacit sanction or active co-operation of those authorities in favour of the great work in which they were engaged. The persons who occupied the different sees at the period in question are for the most part known from historical records, as also the manner in which the sees became vacant afterwards, whether by death, translation, or otherwise.* transmit episcopal charge to Protestant successors; Thus it appears that the Romish prelates, ting their (that is, the persons who were the bishops of the Church of Ireland during the prevalence of Romanism in that body,) did not refuse at the period of the Reformation to transmit their episcopal office to Protestant successors; but that they on the contrary consented readily enough to bequeath the government and charge over the Church which had been entrusted to them, to persons, who like the ancient bishops and saints of Ireland, considered themselves independent of the bishop of Rome, and at liberty to act in opposition to his authority, * See Appendix, No. xxv. CH. IV.] continued in the Reformed Church of Ireland. 763 where it enjoined or sanctioned what they es- A.D. 1560, teemed contrary to the Word of God. as may be seen in vari And accordingly we see that Archbishop Browne, himself a supporter of the Reforma- ous instantion, was consecrated by Romish bishops in ces. England.* And in the consecration of Archbishop Goodacre and Bishop Bale, he was assisted by Eugene Magenis, the Romish bishop of Down and Connor.† And in like manner Curwen archbishop of Dublin, who had been appointed in Queen Mary's time, assisted in promoting the Reformation in the reign of her successor; and by him Adam Loftus, who was advanced to the archbishopric of Armagh in Loftus made primate, Queen Elizabeth's reign, was consecrated to his March, 1563, episcopal office on the 2nd of March, 1563; Dowdall, who had been primate in Queen Mary's time, having died a few months previously to the accession of her sister Elizabeth, on the 15th of August, 1558. From which it appears that the see was allowed to remain vacant for some years after the death of the last mentioned archbishop. Nor was this a solitary instance of such apparent carelessness and want of energy on the part of government in providing for the advance *p. 682, sup. + p. 729, sup. Ware's Bishops, pp. 92, 93. Routh's "Analecta de rebus Catholicorum in Hibernia." De Richardi Creaghi. Arch. Epise. Armach. vita notationes. pp. 9, 10. Ed. Coloniæ, 1619. 764 Turbulent Nobles a curse to Ireland. [BOOK VI. A.D. 1563. ment of the welfare and interests of the Irish Church.* Of Richard Creagh, the first titular primate of Ireland subsequently to the Reformation, who was appointed by the pope as a rival to the lawful primate Loftus, we shall have occasion to speak in the next chapter. bles con stantly the turbu chieftains. CHAP. V. OF SHANE O'NIAL AND HIS REBELLION.-MISERABLE STATE OF THE Fresh trou- NOTWITHSTANDING the comparative tranquility to which Ireland had attained in the reigns of arising from the Kings Henry VIII. and Edward VI., still lence of the new disorders of a more or less serious character were continually breaking out in the country from the restless turbulence of the chieftains, and their obstinate quarrels about the succession to the headship of their several tribes, or nations, as they were called. Of these party contentions or civil wars, no general account can be expected in this place. A few only of the most important struggles of the times in question, closely connected with the religious history of the country, will require to be briefly noticed.† *Mant, i. 191. + Leland's History of Ireland, ii. 214-220, seqq. CH. V.] Some Account of Shane O'Nial. O'Nial. 765 Ulster in particular had been made, in the A.D. 1563. reigns of Edward VI. and Mary, the scene of Character much disturbance through the factious violence of Shane and ambition of the great northern family of O'Nial. Wars had arisen between Mathew baron of Dungannon, and his rival brothers, John and Hugh,* who were naturally jealous of the dignity which to their prejudice had been conferred on him; and in the course of these tumults Matthew had fallen by the hands of some of the barbarous followers of his brother John. Then upon the death of the old Earl Con Baccagh, (i.e. Con the lame,) in the reign of Queen Mary, John, or Shane O'Nial, as he has been commonly called, assumed the chieftainry of his tribe, in defiance of the English law, which would have secured it to Matthew's issue; and from his great influence with his family and connections, he was able to support his claim to that dignity while he lived. He was a man of brutal and besotted character, indulging in riot, excess, and lewdness, and all the gross vices of barbarous life; but being possessed of a rude and boisterous valour, he was considered in those times by the partizans of Rome and Spain as a very fit leader for a religious war in behalf of the faithful in Ireland; the only defect attributed to him in this point of view being, it * ib. 204, 214. |