that synod;) all the bishops that were in Ireland rose up with one accord in the most determined spirit of zeal for the defence of the Three Chapters. And they were guilty moreover of this further wickedness, that when they had perceived the Roman Church to be equally determined in condemning the Three Chapters, and strengthening the Fifth Synod by her adhesion, they at once separated from her, and joined themselves with the rest of the schismatics that were in Italy, or Africa, or other places, puffed up with the vain conceit that by defending the acts of the Council of Chalcedon they were making a stand in support of the Catholic faith. So these unhappy, misguided people, influenced by a kind of show of apparent righteousness in their cause, and having a zeal, though not such as was according to knowledge, (since they dwelt in a very remote part of the world where they could not have been very easily admonished or corrected, even independently of those additional embarrassments which are usually connected with wars, pestilence, and famine,) continued in that unfortunate condition for a length of time; entertaining feelings of pity towards those who followed the Fifth Synod, as for persons that were gone astray from the right road of the faith; so far were they from being able to comprehend that it was they themselves who were under the delusion of errors. Yea and they cling to those errors the more obstinately, from conceiving the idea that whatever Italy was suffering from the troubles of war, famine, or pestilence, all such misfortunes had befallen her in consequence of her having acted as the champion of the Fifth Synod against the Council of Chalcedon. And in this most unhappy position they continued ever to the time of pope S. Gregory, that is, to the close of this century; when these bishops aforesaid wrote a letter of inquiry about the matters in question to the said Gregory, knowing him to be a friend of God, and eminent

for holiness. As to the answer which Gregory sent them in return, of that we shall make mention in the proper place. The letter itself, from which we have collected these circumstances, is still extant."-(Vid. Baronii Annales Ecclesiastici, tom. 7, p. 557. Antw. 1658.)

Ussher's

ligion of

viii.

Thus far Baronius in that place, from whose Archbishop narrative Archbishop Ussher concludes "that note on the the bishops of Ireland did not take all the reso- above. Relutions of the Church of Rome for undoubted Ancient Irish, ch. oracles; but when they thought that they had better reason on their sides, they preferred the judgment of other Churches before it”—a conclusion true and certain enough, yet gathered in this instance, as we shall see, from premises not the most indubitable or satisfactory.

grounds the

applied to

As to the fact that the bishops above-men- On what tioned applied afterwards for counsel to Pope bishops in Gregory, the words of Baronius himself are suf- question ficient to suggest to us why they did so; not Gregory for because they considered the bishop of Rome counsel. possessed of authority for regulating with his Church the doctrine of all Christians in the world, but because they regarded him as a worthy counsellor, not only for his high station in the Church, but especially on account of his being one whom they knew to be eminent for holiness and the love of God. This, however, by the way. It may be added, that those bishops, in writing to Gregory, did not exhibit a

reply to

them.

spirit of submission to his pontifical authority, but rather adopted such a tone as indicated that they valued indeed his opinion, and would give it due consideration; yet not so as to feel themselves constrained to adopt it, unless it should commend itself to their own judgment. Style of his This appears plainly from the answer which Gregory returned them in A.D. 592. He sends them a book on the subject at issue, which he thinks ought to be sufficient to convince them that they were in the wrong, and remarks on it in his letter:-" If after the reading of this book, you will persist in holding the same opinions that you now entertain, you show beyond a doubt that you are giving yourselves to be ruled, not by reason, but by obstinacy."

The second passage of Baronius referred to in the text (ad an. 604) occurs at p. 193 of tom. 8, (Antwerpiæ, 1600,) and is as follows. After giving (from Bede) the account of Laurentius' ministerial exertions, to be found at p. 138 of the present work, as far as the commencement of the letter there quoted, he proceeds to say (under the heading, "SCHISMATICS PUNISHED BY GOD, Jer. 5):

Additional "It is quite plain that the Scots also [i. e. the Irish] observations were just in like manner tinged with the same dark dye of Baronius of schism as the Britons, and guilty like them of separathe "schis- tion from the Church of Rome. And for this reason

relative to

toward

A. D. 609.

Ch. v, vv.

15, 19.

they also were visited by God with the same vengeance matical" as came upon the Britons, in being given up for a prey position of to those inhuman savages, the Angles and the Saxons, the Irish according to that prediction of Jeremiah to Israel Laurence of Behold I will bring upon you a nation from afar, a mighty Canterbury. nation;' and lower down, And if ye shall say why hath the Lord our God done all this unto us, thou shalt say unto them, Like as ye have forsaken me, and served a strange God in your land, so shall ye serve strangers in a land that is not yours,' inasmuch as it will be in the possession of strangers. It is plain that all schismatics are convicted in a sense of worshipping strange gods, for this reason, that the one God is not to be rightly worshipped except in the one Church; from which whosoever goeth astray, he is detected in revolting to strangers; according to that word of Samuel, Rebellion is as the sin of witch-1 Sam. xv. craft, and stubbornness is as the iniquity of idolatry.' 23. Surely if any man of understanding were to cast his eyes around, as from some lofty eminence, over the entire surface of the world, he would see that for this one cause above all others, Christian states have been given up to the dominion of barbarians; viz. for their having, in the first instance, forsaken the Church. Thus was it the fate of the Africans to be delivered up to the Vandals, when in the obstinacy of their spirits they refused communion with the Catholic Church of the whole world; thus was it the lot of the Spaniards to fall into the hands of the Saracens, according to the account which will be found in the end of this volume. Thus it appears also to have happened to all the nations of the east, when after their revolt from the communion of the Catholic Church, they were given up to the oppressive tyranny of barbarous invaders.

"Now as to the purport of the communication addressed Laurence's to these people by Bishop Laurentius and his brethren, letter we can gather it from the part of his letter cited by

an indica

tion of the pains taken by the Saxon priests

to bring the Irish, &c.,

to conformity with Rome.

Baronius probably wrong in

making the

Irish bi

shops have any concern with

the contro

versy of the

Three Chapters.

Bede, to the following effect:- To our lords and most dear brethren'. . . &c. &c. [as at pp. 138, 139, sup., to the words] 'no not so much as in the same lodging where we were eating.' Thus far Bede recites of this letter, to show that the Britons as well as the Scots had been, previously to that time, separated from the Catholic Church. "But as for the labours which must have been endured by these priests, few in number as they were, who came as missionaries from Rome, it is almost impossible to form a correct estimate of their number and magnitude; considering that they had not only to work hard by day and by night for the conversion of the Angles, an exceedingly numerous people, from the idol-worship of their fathers, and to labour to win them over to the true religion; but also to toil might and main for the purpose of extricating the Britons and Scots from their schism, and reconciling them to the Catholic Church."

This latter extract from Baronius requires no comment, being sufficiently illustrated by its connection with the matter contained in the text of this work. On the former passage, however, some additional observations are necessary, for the sake of historical truth and clearness, in this place.

The opinion of the Cardinal, that the bishops of Ireland entered with schismatical warmth into the controversy about the Three Chapters, appears to be altogether erroneous. It rests on the supposition that the letter of Pope Gregory, which he refers to, was intended for the bishops of Ireland; but this view of the matter, although