"One Richard Wolsely seems to have been Bishop. (Ann. 1502.)

"One Tiberias succeeded next. (1526.) "One Thaddeus, a Franciscan Friar, is said to have been provided to the Bishoprick of Dromore. (1511.)

66

Lawrence O'Galchor, Bishop of Raphoe, was proceeded against for incontinence and other enormous crimes.

"One Donald sat in the See of Derry in 1423. I am of opinion he resigned his See, being made uneasy in it; for Archbishop Swain called him to task for incontinence. and other crimes, which being proved on him, he was obliged to do penance.

"Donald was succeeded by John, against whom a citation issued for homicide and other crimes."

These specimens are sufficient to shew that the Roman Catholic religion, like all religions left alone, was far more inclined to sink into lethargy than rise to political importance.

if we

If the contrary were the case --suppose that the Catholic religion was even at this period possessed of that inimical spirit of bigotry which has been repre

sented as incompatible with submission to any authority that it cannot influence, what must have taken place upon the event of the reformation? A great and new cause of disaffection being added to former causes of notorious activity, more frequent and more inveterate rebellions would have arisen.

But was this the case? No---quite the reverse: For it was immediately after the reformation that the Irish Chieftains submitted to the English government; that the English power was acknowledged as legal, and that a degree of peace and good order took place, which had been unknown since the first invasion of the English. What then must we conclude from this fact?---that there was no such feeling as Catholic bigotry at this period.

The truth is, the Irish rebellions and Irish submissions, had not at this period, nor until long after, any connection with religious opinions. Later historians have ascribed their own feelings to these times; and because religion made a prominent feature in the rebellions of their days, they imagined it must have been a cause of rebellion from the first date of the religious

schism.

But cotemporary writers never mentioned religion as a cause of rebellion, till a long period after the reformation : we plainly perceive to what cause they attributed the disaffection of the natives; their fears are always expressed against the Irishry, not against the Papists; they found the greatest opposition in national pride, not in religion.

We shall be more candid than our opponents; according to their mode of reasoning, we might allege the submission of the Irish chieftains in the reign of Henry VIII. as a proof of Catholic loyalty; but neither their rebellions nor their submissions had any connection with religion. The cause of these submissions is curious. It was simply the assumption of the title of King, in place of Lord of Ireland, by Henry VIII.

The title of Lord of Ireland was not calculated to inspire the regal descendants of Milesius with much respect; it was inferior to their own. Fortunately for the English power, the divisions of the Irish septs had suspended the election of a native King of Ireland, to whom, before the coming of the English, the Irish princes had

A

The

been accustomed to pay allegiance. title had long been in abeyance, but as soon as Henry revived it in his own person, the Irish chieftains were led by their very prejudices, and by a natural association of ideas, to pay him homage.

The Irish princes resisted the feudal supremacy of Henry, while neither his rank nor his force was much greater than their own; but when he assumed the title to which their feudal allegiance had always been paid, and when he asked for nothing more than feudal allegiance, they readily submitted.

Is it not then an exaggeration, and extreme perverseness to represent popish feelings as having any considerable influence at this time, when if they had, more general and more exasperated rebellions would have annihilated the insignificant force of the English? Where is that bond of union--where that identity of purpose---where that indefatigable zeal, and unmitigated hate, which we are told ever marks the conduct of Papists towards Protestants?

On the contrary, objects which were never achieved before by invasion, rapine and destruction, were now accomplished almost

without an effort.---O'Connor, O'Donnel, O'Doyne, M⭑Mahon, O'Moor, M'William, O'Rorke, M'Arty More, M'Arty Reagh, M'Cormick, O'Sullivan, M'Donnough, O'Callaghan, O'Byrne, O'Brien, all independent princes, and governing their several petty nations, acknowledged Henry as their liege Lord, and did not hesitate to renounce the Pope's usurpations, and to own the King's supre

macy.

F

Sir Richard Cox tells us, that there was not a single chieftain who did not acknowledge Henry's supremacy in Church as well as State; and quotes from Sir John Davis with great naiveté, for a violent bigot, that the Irish made no difficulty in renouncing the Pope, when they had once resolved to obey the King. This involuntary testimony of an opponent is sufficient to prove that religious feelings were at this time of very secondary influence.

If the Catholic religion possessed any im munity from the sedative influence which prosperity has on all establishments---if after long habits of indifference, it could, on the first alarm, rouse the minds of its votaries to that zeal, which in general only