Bale's continued diligence. which was now administered by the Lord Chancellor Cusack, and Aylmer, lord chief justice of the King's Bench, who had been appointed Lords Justices of the kingdom in the preceding December. As to "the lewd example," meaning, I suppose, the foolish or ignorant example, " of the Archbishop of Dublin,” the case appears to have been this: he had received the First Book of King Edward, in obedience to the king's order, through the Irish government, but he had not received the king's Second Book, lately authorised by the English parliament, but hitherto, so far as is recorded, not ordered to be received in Ireland. Had the order been given, the same motives now, as before, would doubtless have secured the archbishop's obedience. But with respect to the writer of the foregoing accusation, it may be remarked, that with an uncommon warmth of temperament, he allowed himself in the use of an unbecoming coarseness, and even grossness of expression, in speaking of those who had incurred his displeasure. And that his displeasure had been incurred in no slight degree by Archbishop Browne, is evident from this and other passages in this treatise, where his character is censured in no measured terms, but without a statement of reasons sufficient to justify the charges. But however these things may have been, the Bishop of Ossory was diligent in discharging his pastoral duties, preaching continually in his cathedral of Kilkenny till after Midsummer, though not without much opposition. Still the period during which he presided over his diocese, "quietly preaching Christ and salvation by him alone to his people, and labouring to withdraw them from popish superstitions," seems to have been a season of satisfaction to him self, and of profit to his flock. And he speaks with complacency of that "half-hour's silence," as he styles it, alluding to St. John's expression in the Revelation, chap. viii., 1, "and those few years of rest that God's people here enjoyed under that blessed servant of Christ, King Edward." Death of the king and of Goodacre. 1553. Archbishop But the period was short. For he had scarcely occupied his seat six months, when the king died, and Queen Mary ascended the regal throne. The Archbishop of Armagh, Goodacre, who had been consecrated with Bishop Bale in February, had died in the following May, a few weeks before the king's demise; "that godly preacher, and virtuous learned man," as he is characterised by Bale in his Vocacyon; who alleges that he was "poisoned at Dublin by Alleged cause of procurement of certain priests of his diocese, for Goodacre's death. preaching God's verity, and rebuking their common vices." The account, which conveyed to him this intelligence, warned him also that a similar plot was laid against his own life. It ought, however, in justice to be stated that no evidence is given of the allegation; and that Sir James Ware, in his brief sketch of the archbishop's life, does not adopt the charge, but merely records his death, without attempting to assign the cause; wherein he is followed by Mr. Stuart, the historian of the city of Armagh. Bale also relates, what he probably could do with greater certainty, that the archbishop left behind him many writings of great value; if, however, any of them were published, their publication had escaped - the researches of the industrious ecclesiastical antiquary, Strype"; nor is his name included in Harris's edition of Sir James Ware's history of English writers who flourished in Ireland, where may be Summary of religious improve reign. found a long catalogue of Bale's own publications 17. The death of the king on the 6th of July, 1553, ment during this put a stop for the present to the improvement of the Church of Ireland. Not much, indeed, had been done or attempted by the English government in that behalf, during his six years' reign; a forbearance which is probably to be attributed to a prudence or timidity of counsels during the king's minority, and to a sense of the intractable temper of the people, and their inveterate attachment to the superstitions of the Church of Rome. The foundations, however, for future improvement had been laid, in the maintenance of the king's supremacy, in the appointment of men of high character to the episcopacy, in the introduction of the English Liturgy, and in the initiative step for its being set forth in the Irish language. By these means, as well as by a careful and due administration of the laws of England, great countenance and encouragement were given to those who embraced the Reformed religion, especially within those counties known by the name of the English pale; the Common Prayer Book of England being brought over thither, and used in most of the churches of the English plantation, by authority of the king, there being hitherto no law of their own parliaments to enforce it on their observance". 17 Book II. p. 325. 18 HEYLYN'S History of the Reformation, p. 123. Proclamations on Queen Mary's accession. Reinstatement of Archbishop Dowdall. Deprivation of the Protestant Bishops. Their places occupied by Papists. Hugh Curwen, archbishop of Dublin. Revival of popish superstitions. Encouraged by the Lord Deputy. Pope Paul's Bull. Acts of Parliament for suppressing heresy and Lollardy. The Queen's purpose of persecuting the Protestants interrupted by her Death. crown of Ireland regulated by that to the crown of England. THE succession of Queen Mary to the crown of Succession to the Ireland did not encounter the temporary interruption which was opposed to her claim upon the crown of England. The crown of Ireland, indeed, had been entailed upon the Lady Elizabeth by name, by the Irish statute of the 28th year of King Henry the Eighth, chapter 2; and that statute had not been subsequently repealed by any Irish act. But the English statute of the 35th year of King Henry the Eighth, chapter 2, was, in effect, a repeal of the aforesaid Irish statute, as it was avowedly a repeal of the English statutes to the same effect. For Ireland was a kingdom subordinate to that of England, and forming a part of its dominion. Whoever was king of England, was, in fact, king of Ireland, as much as he was of any of the minor dependent islands, the Isle of Sheppy, for example, or the Isle of Wight. This was the case at common law; and it had been explained to be so by the Irish statute of Proclamations on the queen's accession. Rejoicings at Bishop Bale's ac count of them. 33rd Henry the Eighth, chapter 1, wherein it was enacted that the king and his successors, kings of England, shall be "kings of Ireland, as united and knit to the imperial crown of the realm of England." Thus Ireland was bound to submit to the same disposal of the crown, which might be made in England; so that when after twelve days' disturbance, which had been raised in opposition to Queen Mary, she was peaceably seated on the English throne, her succession to that of Ireland followed as a regular consequence'. Intelligence of this event having been communicated by the council of England to the lords justices of Ireland, the queen's succession was announced in Ireland by a proclamation, which had been sent. over from the council of England on the 20th of July, 1553; wherein she was styled “supreme head of the church." This was read in Dublin, and in other cities and towns of the kingdom, as is usual on such occasions; and was soon after followed by another proclamation, giving to all persons who would, liberty to attend the mass, but not compelling thereunto those who were unwilling. It what way this event may have been celebrated by the friends of the papacy in other towns of Ireland, I am not aware that we have information. But the following account of the proceedings at Kilkenny, given by Bishop Bale, is curious, and may, perhaps, be taken as a specimen of what occurred elsewhere. "On the 20th day of August," he says, "was the August, 1553. Lady Mary with us at Kilkenny proclaimed queen of England, France, and Ireland, with the greatest solemnity that could be devised, of processions, 1 Cox, i. 29. |