Imágenes de páginas

the government and forms of worship established in the Church of England."

To the question as to the authority of the Articles Dr. Bernard answers: "Now" whereas some have doubted whether they were fully established as the Articles of Ireland, I can testify that I have heard him say, that in the forenamed year 1615 he saw them signed by Archbishop Jones then Lord Chancellor of Ireland, and Speaker of the House of the Bishops in Convocation, signed by the Prolocutor of the House of the Clergy in their names, and also signed by the then Lord Deputy Chichester by order from King James in his name." But this evidence will not prove that the Articles were fully sanctioned, for it does not appear that they ever were submitted to Parliament. Without that sanction they could not be legally enforced. Queen Elizabeth was greatly blamed for stopping in the House of Lords the bill, which had passed the Commons, for enforcing the Thirty-nine Articles, as if it were an invasion of her prerogative, and she did not submit till the year 1571, yet the same persons who censured her conduct will maintain the complete establishment of the Irish Articles, and that it required an Act of Parliament to alter or remove them.

In the year 1614 Ussher was chosen Vice-Chancellor of the University of Dublin. The entry in the Registry is as follows: "Mar. 2, 1614, Doctor Ussher was chosen ViceChancellor by the Provost and Fellows, and the next day he was confirmed and approved touching this choice by the whole Senate of the University. July 3, 1817. Dr. Ussher was again chosen Vice-Chancellor by the Provost and Fellows."

From a letter of Dr. Ward it appears that Ussher was

n Bernard's Life of Ussher, p. 50.

• There is a curious entry with respect to him in 1616.

"May 13, 1616. Mr. Dr. Ussher was chosen to supply the place of Vice-Provost during the Provost's absence.

"It was agreed that Mr. Dr. Ussher should have the fee of his Professorship of Theological Controversies under the College Seal."

It does not appear whence the necessity of this new appointment under the College Seal, nor how he could be elected Vice-Provost when not a Fellow.



in London in April, 1615, but except the expression of regret in the letter at not meeting him, there are no other traces of his visit. Sir Oliver St. John soon after his appointment as Lord Deputy, was entertained at Trinity College with a public disputation. It is stated in the College Registry: "July 23, 1617. Lord Deputy, Lord Chancellor, and Earl of Arundel were entertained at the College with a theological lecture and disputation. The performance of the former was by Dr. Ussher, of the latter by Mr. Martin respondent, Mr. Egerton and Mr. Donnellan opponents. The questions were, "Spiritus Sanctus in Scriptura loquens est solus infallibilis judex controversarium," and "Jejunium pontificium neque Scripturæ neque rationi est consentaneum."

In the Autumn of the year 1619 Dr. Ussher determined to visit England again. But he found that however James might have been influenced to give his assent to the Irish Articles, he had not extended his favour to their compiler. Unfavourable reports of him had been industriously circulated in London, and it was very evident that he was an object of suspicion to the jealous monarch. Dr. Bernard says: "And now he wanted not enemies in scandalizing him to King James under the title of a Puritan', so odious to him in those days." Under these circumstances he succeeded in procuring a very extraordinary document, a letter of recommendation from the Lord Deputy and Council in Ireland to the Privy Council in England. The letter is as follows:

P Dr. Parr has given the following letter addressed to Dr. Ussher in order to prove, that the nickname of Puritan was given to many who did not deserve it.

"REV. SIR,-I hope you are not ignorant of the hurt that is come to the Church by this name, Puritan, and how his Majesties good intent and meaning therein is much abused and wronged; and especially in this poor country, where the Pope and Popery is so much affected. I being lately in the country had conference with a worthy painful preacher, who hath been an instrument of drawing many of the meer Irish there from the blindness of Popery to embrace the Gospel, with much comfort to themselves and heart breaking to the Priests, who perceiving they cannot now prevail with their juggling tricks, have forged a new devise: They have now stirred up some crafty Papists, who very boldly rail both at ministers and people, saying, They seek to sow this damnable heresie

"May it please your Lordships,

"The extraordinary merit of the bearer Mr. Doctor Ussher prevaileth with us to offer him that favour (which we deny to many that move us) to be recommended to your Lordships and we do it the rather, because we are desirous to set him right in his Majesties opinion, who it seemeth has been informed, that he is somewhat transported with singularities, and unaptness to be conformable to the rules and orders of the Church. We are so far from suspecting him in that kind, that we may boldly recommend him to your Lordships, as a man orthodox and worthy to govern in the Church, when occasion shall be presented, and his Majesty may be pleased to advance him; he being one that hath preached before the State here for eighteen years, and has been his Majesties Professor of Divinity in the University for thirteen years. And a man who has given himself over to his profession: an excellent and painful preacher, a modest man, abounding in goodness, and his life and doctrine so agreeable, as those who agree not with him, are yet constrained to love and admire him. And for such a one we beseech your Lordships to understand him, and accordingly to speak to his Majesty and thus with the remembrance of our humble duties we take leave.

"Your Lordships most humbly at command,







"From Dublin the last of Sept. 1619."

of Puritanism among them; which word, though not understood, but only known to be most odious to his Majesty, makes many afraid of joining themselves to the Gospel, though in conference their consciences are convicted herein: so to prevent a greater mischief that may follow, it were good to petition his Majesty to define a Puritan, whereby the mouths of these scoffing enemies would be stopt: and if his Majesty be not at leisure, that he would appoint some good men to do it for him; for the effecting thereof you know better than I can direct, and therefore I commit you and your affairs to the blessing of the Almighty, praying for your good success there and safe return hither, resting

"Your assured Friend, to his power

"Dublin, 24th Oct. 1620."

This attestation appears to have produced a good effect, but Ussher was indebted for his success much more to a conversation with his Majesty, in which the King exercised his favourite office of examinant into points of faith and doctrine. Of the particulars of the interview no record has been preserved. If the King pressed his two favourite subjects of discussion, the Head of the Church, and the unlawfulness of resistance to regal authority, Ussher could have given his Majesty the fullest satisfaction, that he did not entertain Puritanical notions on these questions; but whatever were the topics debated, he succeeded so completely, that the King declared, "that the knave Puritan was a bad, but the knave's Puritan an honest man." It is probable indeed that his Majesty had many interviews with Ussher, who appears to have remained two years in England. In January 162 Dr. Montgomery, Bishop of Meath, died, and the King immediately named Dr. Ussher the new bishop, and often boasted "that he was a bishop of his own making." The appointment was hailed with great delight in Ireland, as the following letter from the Lord Deputy testifies :

"To Dr. James Ussher, Bishop Elect of Meath.

"Dublin, 3rd February, 1620. "MY LORD, I thank God for your preferment to the Bishoprick of Meath; his Majesty therein has done a gracious favour to his poor Church here: there is none here but are exceeding glad that you are called thereunto, even some Papists themselves have largely testified their gladness of it. Your grant is, and other necessary things shall be sealed this day or to-morrow. I pray God bless you and whatever you undertake, so I rest

"Your Lordship's most affectionate Friend,

a Dr. Parr states that his conge d'elire was immediately sent over, and he was elected by the Dean and Chapter. This is a strange mistake. A conge d'elire is never issued in Ireland, as the Bishoprics are absolute donatives by the 2 Eliz. c. 4; and Meath is the only See in Ireland in which there is not a Dean and Chapter.

Various circumstances at this time had raised the cry of Popery against the King. His remarkable change of sentiment after the Synod of Dort was represented by the Puritans as a conversion to Popery. His refusal to assist his son-in-law the Elector Palatine was held up as a desertion of the Protestant cause, and his projected alliance for his son with the Infanta of Spain gave a new subject for clamour. The King, to silence these rumours, called a new Parliament, but the suspicions of the people extended from the monarch to the House of Commons; and the report was industriously circulated, that many members of the House of Commons were Roman Catholics. In order to remove all pretext for these murmurs it was determined, that the members of the House of Commons should attend at St. Margaret's church on the first Sunday in Lent to receive the communion, and the new Bishop elect was called upon to preach on the occasion. The following extract from the Bishop's memorandums has been preserved by Dr. Parr : "I was appointed by the Lower House of Parliament to preach at St. Margarets Westminster. The Prebends claimed the privilege of the Church and their exemption from episcopal jurisdiction for many hundred years, and offered their own service: whereupon the House being displeased appointed the place to be at the Temple. I was chosen a second time and Secretary Calvert by the appointment of the House spake to the King, that the choice of their preacher might stand: the King said, it was very well done. Feb. 13 being Shrove Tuesday I dined at Court; and betwixt four and five I kissed the Kings hand, and had conference with him touching my sermon. He said, I had charge of an unruly flock to look to next Sunday.' He asked me how I thought it could stand with true divinity, that so many hundred should be tyed upon such short warning to receive the communion upon a day, all could not be in charity after so late contentions in the House: many must needs come without preparation and eat their own condemnation: that himself required all his own houshold to receive the communion, but not all the same day, unless at Easter, when the whole Lent was a time of pre


« AnteriorContinuar »