Imágenes de páginas

"Operis integri ab autore aucti et recogniti," as no additions had been made to the first edition. Now in this statement Dr. Smith is undoubtedly mistaken. No person could look at the edition of 1678 without perceiving that very considerable additions had been made to the original work. I cannot discover how the editor got those additions; it must have been from some copy of the old edition prepared for publication by the author himself. In the library of Trinity College is an imperfect interleaved copy of the first edition of the work, with several additions written in Ussher's handwriting; these are all accurately printed in the edition of 1678, but with considerable additions, which I have inserted in the edition of the Archbishop's works, as their agreement with those, of whose authenticity there could be no doubt, was strong evidence in their favor, and on verifying the quotations I found them correct.

While Ussher remained in London he appears to have had frequent conferences with Archbishop Abbot, in which a principal subject of discussion was the plan for giving a new charter and statutes to Trinity College, Dublin. By the first charter the Provost and Fellows had the power of making statutes for themselves. In a letter written to Dr. Chaloner, which most probably never reached him, as it is dated only a few days before his death, Ussher states to him the various objections of the Archbishop, and among them two, which could not be expected from such a quar"Hew observed that there was no order taken that the Scholars should come into the chappel clericaliter vestiti, and took great exception against the statute for the ordering of commonplacing which he affirmed to be flat puritanical." The Archbishop also complained of what has been ever the great injury to Trinity College, the small number of Fellows, "counting it a great inconvenience that the Fellows resident should be so taken up with lectures that they can have no time for themselves to grow up in further learning." Up to the present day there has never been a greater number of Fellows than of tutors, and to


w See Works, vol. xv. p. 72. This, no doubt, produced the letter to the Chancellor of Ireland, from which an extract was given, pag. 32, note.

any one acquainted with the embarrassing routine of leetures during every term, it is only wonderful that there ever has been found a Fellow, who was able to distinguish himself in the paths of science or of literature. The proceedings as to any change in the College were suspended by a refusal on the part of the Provost and Fellows to surrender their charter, a refusal the wisdom of which appeared very clearly from the earnestness with which the measure was pressed upon them.

While Ussher was absent in London, his uncle Henry Archbishop of Armagh died on the 2nd of April, and on the 27th of the same month died also Dr. Chaloner. It is probable that these events hastened the return of Ussher, for we find him soon after in Dublin. Dr. Chaloner left but one daughter, to whom he bequeathed a very considerable fortune, enjoining her not to marry any person but Dr. Ussher, if he should propose himself. Dr. Ussher did offer himself, and he and Phoebe Chaloner were married about the beginning of the year 1614. A relationship had existed between them, for Dr. Chaloner married Rose the daughter of Elinor Ussher, the wife of Walter Ball, Mayor of Dublin. Dr. Ussher had but one child, a daughter, Elizabeth, who was married to Sir Timothy Tyrrell of Shotover House near Oxford, to whom Dr. Barlow dedicated his edition of the Chronology, and whose son James Tyrrell dedicated the work on the Prince to Charles II., and was himself a learned and industrious writer.

In the year 1615 a Convocation of the Irish clergy, formed after the model of the English convocation, assembled in Dublin. This seems to have been the first convocation ever held in Ireland. Dr. Parr and Dr. Smith indeed assert the contrary; Dr. Parr says, "There was now a

* Shotover House is not now in the possession of the family of Tyrrell the last of the family who possessed it was the great-grandson of Dr. Ussher, Lieutenant-General James Tyrrell, who died in 1742, and left his estate from the Tyrrell family to his kinsman Augustus Schutz, Esq. In the Library was preserved the volume of letters from which Dr. Parr cut out those he published. The volume, with a few remaining letters, has been presented to the Library of Trinity College by the present possessor, George V. Drury, Esq. Some of these will be found in the sixteenth volume of the Archbishop's works.

Parliament at Dublin and so a Convocation of the Clergy:" and Dr. Smith, "ordinibus regni Hiberniæ in Parliamento Dublinii A. MDCXV. habito coactis, pro more indicta erat nationalis Archiepiscoporum episcoporum reliquique cleri Hiberniæ synodus :" but various circumstances throw a doubt upon their evidence. The first cause of doubt is to be found in the Convocation itself. The Parliament and Convocation certainly did not meet at the same time, as stated by Dr. Parr. The Parliament met on the 18th of May, 1613, and the Convocation did not assemble till the end of 1614, and most probably not till 1615. Then the proceedings of the Convocation argue novelty and imperfection: the clergy do not appear to have granted any subsidies, or even to have claimed the right of taxing themselves. There is no Act of the Irish Parliament to confirm the grant of a subsidy by the clergy, yet there is in existence the transmiss of an act for confirming the subsidies granted by Convocation. The existence of the transmiss proves the wish of the English Government to have all things done regularly after the model of the Convocation in England, and its not being made use of establishes the fact that the Irish Convocation did not understand the proper mode of proceeding. The only business that is recorded to have been transacted, the formation of the Articles, was not concluded in proper form. They were not signed as in England by all the members, but by Archbishop Jones, Speaker of the House of Bishops in Convocation, and the Prolocutor of the House of the Clergy in their names. But while the imperfections of the Convocation of 1615 only afford an indirect argument for its nonexistence at an earlier period, we can obtain more complete proof by examining the proceedings of former reigns. In the reign of Henry VIII. we cannot find any reference of ecclesiastical matters to

This fact Dr. Ryves adduces as proof that Archbishop Hampton had relinquished his claim to precedence of the Archbishop of Dublin, Reg. Angl. Def. part. 3. pag. 44. but he is mistaken. Archbishop Jones took precedence as Lord Chancellor, and does not appear ever to have disputed the precedence of the Archbishop of Armagh. Primate Hampton afterwards resisted Archbishop Bulkeley when claiming it. See pag. 160. The Chancellor took precedence of the Primate till the year 1634.

the Convocation, nor can we find any claims of exemption on the part of the clergy. They were taxed in common with his Majesty's other subjects. In the same reign there is a passage in an Act of Parliament which seems to prove that no Convocation existed in Ireland. The preamble of the 28 Henry VIII. cap. 12, states: "At every Parliament begun and holden within this land, two Proctors of every diocese within the same land have been used and accustomed to be summoned and warned to be at the same Parliament, which were never by order of law, usage, custom, or otherwise, any member or parcel of the whole body of the Parliament, nor have had any right, any voice or suffrage in the same, but only be there as counsellors and assistants to the same; and upon such things of learning, as should happen in controversy, to declare their opinions much like as the Convocation within the realm of England is commonly at every Parliament begun and holden by the King's Highness special license." Now this reference to the Convocation of England appears to be decisive proof that there was no such body existing in Ireland at that time; for if there had, the comparison would undoubtedly have been made with their own Convocation. The Act was caused by an attempt of the Proctors to be members of Parliament, an attempt which it attributes" to their ambitious minds and presumption, inordinately desiring to have authority and to intermeddle with every cause or matter without any just ground." This attempt seems very similar to the demand made by the English Convocation of 1547, yet there is no appearance of any such body as that which acted in England; nor is there any reference made in the Act to the Præmunientes clause, it simply speaks of two Proctors out of every diocese.

In the year 1551 Edward VI. sent an order that the Liturgy of the Church of England should be read in Ireland. Upon this order Sir Anthony St. Leger is not reported to have summoned a Convocation, but says Cox, "Before he issued a proclamation for the observance of it, he called an assembly of the Archbishops and Bishops with others of the then clergy of Ireland to propose the matter to them."

In the second year of Elizabeth a Parliament was assembled and no mention is made of a Convocation, though Acts with respect to the Church were passed. And in the third year of Elizabeth there was not any Parliament, yet she signifies her pleasure to Lord Sussex the Lord Lieutenant for a general meeting of the clergy and the establishment of the Protestant religion. This of course was an order to summon not a Convocation, but the ancient Synod of the clergy, which had the power of settling all matters concerning religion. It would appear then that the dissimilarity of the proceedings in England and Ireland with respect to the Reformation arose from the different constitutions of the two Churches. In England the Convocation, originally instituted for the purpose of managing the temporal concerns of the clergy, had gradually usurped the powers of the Provincial Synod and become the instrument of framing Articles and Canons for the Church. In Ireland the Provincial Synod had not been superseded, and by their consent given at three different times, in the reign of Edward when summoned by Sir Anthony St. Leger, in the third of Elizabeth called together by Lord Sussex, and in the year 1665 by Sir Henry Sydney, the Clergy received the use of the English Liturgy and expressed their conformity to the doctrines of the English Church. There is indeed a passage in the manuscript collections of Dudley Loftus which has been adduced as proof of a Convocation having been held in 1560: "This yeare was held a Convocation of Bishops at the Queen's command for establishing the Protestant religion." But he must have used the word Convocation merely to express a meeting of the Bishops, and would have adopted a very different phraseology had he intended to describe the assembling of the Convocation.

Ware in his Annals of Ireland takes for granted that the clergy met according to the orders given to the Lord Deputy, and does not think it necessary to mention the fact. But he prefaces the account of the consecration of Alexander Craike to the bishopric of Kildare by saying, "soon after the assembly of the Irish clergy had dispersed themselves." The reformation then in Ireland was carried on by the regular assembly to which the affairs of the Church

« AnteriorContinuar »