# The ancient Irish church/Chapter 17

CHAPTER XVII.
RISE AND PROGRESS OF THE ROMISH PARTY.
We must now retrace our steps, and ask how the Irish Church itself fared in that age which saw the conversion of the Danes and the establishment of a branch of the English Church on Irish soil. We have seen how the old monastic system broke down, and ceased to be an effective power against the surrounding lawlessness. Some of its worst features, however, survived. From the first, the rule was followed that wherever possible the abbot of every monastery should be of the same family as the founder. This easily developed into a kind of heredity. Celibacy, though encouraged, was never very strictly enjoined, and often the abbacy or bishopric passed from father to son. When ecclesiastical positions became sources of wealth and influence, they were as jealously confined to the ruling families as were the offices of king and chieftain. In Armagh the one family kept possession of the see for two hundred years, and Bernard of Clairvaux stigmatizes it as 'an evil and adulterous generation, for although clergy of that race were sometimes not to be found amongst them, yet bishops they never were without.'
It is, however, not at all certain that this ​condemnation was fully deserved. The turning of the bishopric into a hereditary office was no doubt a great evil; still, it is well to remember that the authority of the hereditary abbot and bishop (for both offices were now united) was cheerfully recognized by bitterly opposing factions. The period of which we are treating saw a long-continued struggle between North and South; but the kings of Munster were as ready to acknowledge Armagh as were those of Ulster. Perhaps, after all, this very hereditary succession secured the peace of the Church as nothing else could have done. If reigning families fought for spiritual as they did for temporal power, the whole country would have relapsed into barbarism, and soon no religion of any kind would have been left.
I have shown that as Armagh increased in power there was a corresponding decrease in the influence of the Columban order. In the period we are now considering, Armagh occupies by far the most prominent part of the history. But it is to be remembered that the materials at our disposal for the history of this period are nearly all derived from sources in sympathy with Armagh, and that therefore it is hard for us to say in how far it really enjoyed ecclesiastical pre-eminence. When we read of a bishop resigning one see because he has been appointed to another, we naturally conclude that the new appointment is one of more importance than the old. This is what actually happened in 988. Dubhdalethe was Abbot and Bishop of Armagh. He was an able and ambitious man. He aspired to the abbacy before it was vacant; and Muiredeach, who held the see in 966, was set aside in his favour. In 973 he made a circuit of the churches of Munster, demanding and obtaining tribute from them. In 985 he asserted ​his rights against the monarch of Ireland. The king had removed the shrine of Saint Patrick from Ardee to Assey on the river Boyne. For this not very heinous offence he was obliged to pay a heavy fine to Dubhdalethe, giving tribute from every portion of his kingdom. Some of the bishop's historical poetry remains; he was therefore a bard as well as an ecclesiastic, and in that age this would have added greatly to his reputation.
In 988 he 'assumed the coarbship of Columkill by the advice of the men of Ireland and Alba.' Ten years he continued in his new office, and in the meantime Muireagan of Bordoney took his place as Abbot of Armagh and Coarb of Saint Patrick. That a man such as Dubhdalethe appears to have been, would have relinquished a greater for a lesser position, is not to be believed. We are therefore led to conclude that as late as the end of the tenth century the Coarb of Columkill took rank above the Coarb of Patrick. We have no other example that we can place beside this, and the incident is therefore to be regarded as the last token of that ascendency which Iona had once enjoyed.
One hundred years later, the see of Armagh had advanced immensely. There could no longer be any question as to its supremacy. The abbot had become a veritable prince of the Church, imposing and receiving tribute from all parts of the country. But in other respects he had few of the prerogatives of an archbishop. It was by no means considered necessary that his advice should be asked or sanction obtained before other bishops were consecrated. They owed him no canonical obedience. They did not repair to him for ordination.
​Under the old Irish monastic system, the bishop was merely one of the officers of the community. Nearly every monastery had a bishop—sometimes more than one—amongst its inmates. When that system broke down, the effect of this unusual arrangement remained. In some cases the bishops had for diocese the territory of the tribe to which they belonged—in other cases they seem to have had no jurisdiction. Anselm of Canterbury complains concerning them, 'The episcopal honour suffers no little disparagement when he who is invested with the pontificate knows not when he is ordained where he is to go, or over what certain place he is to preside in his episcopal ministry.' Every bishop felt quite free to consecrate another bishop, if he were a man of learning and eminence, even though he was to have no diocesan authority. The rule of requiring three consecrators was one that had never been followed in the Irish Church. It is manifest that all this would require to be completely changed before the head of Armagh could in any real sense be said to be an archbishop. At first the exaction of tribute was all that was desired; but afterwards foreign travel made the heads of the Church acquainted with the ecclesiastical arrangements of other countries; and nearer home, the three Danish bishops rendering canonical obedience to the Archbishop of Canterbury, furnished a pattern which the ambitious prelates of Armagh soon endeavoured to reproduce in Ireland.
The first steps towards thus modifying the constitution of the Church of Ireland were taken by Ceallach, who became Coarb of Patrick by the election of the men of Ireland in A.D. 1105. He was not forgetful of the temporalities of his see. In Ulster he exacted 'a cow from every six persons, or a heifer ​in calf for every three persons, besides many other offerings.' In Munster he obtained 'seven cows, seven sheep, and half an ounce of silver from every cantred, besides many jewels.' Other places gave him similar offerings. When the see of Dublin became vacant by the death of Bishop Samuel in 1121, Ceallach assumed the episcopal office in that city. Bishops were elected by the votes of both clergy and laity, and he obtained a majority in his favour. Although Dublin was a Danish kingdom, the Irish in it far outnumbered the Danes, and on an occasion like this could secure the election of any candidate they pleased. But the minority of foreigners were not to be baffled in this way. Seeing that they were outvoted at the first assembly, they held another meeting on their own account; selected one of themselves, Gregory, a layman, for the vacant post; sent him off to Canterbury for consecration to all three orders of the ministry, and wrote at the same time a letter to the archbishop, requesting him to promote their nominee to the order of episcopacy, if he wished to retain Dublin under his jurisdiction, or that otherwise the rights of Canterbury would be usurped by Armagh.
Ceallach was equally energetic in the reformation of what he considered to be defects in the government of the Church. He assembled synods at different places, and caused enactments to be made reducing the number of bishops, appointing to each bishop his diocese, and imposing on them, as far as possible, the obligation of canonical obedience to himself.
In these efforts he found an able helper, or rather director, in Gilbert, Danish Bishop of Limerick. This Gilbert had been the disciple of Anselm, had been accustomed in his early days to the ecclesiastical ​arrangements of France, was a devoted adherent of the Papacy, and was the first in Ireland who ever held the office of legate to the Pope. To his mind the irregularities of the Irish Church rendered it schismatical. He therefore spared no labour in endeavouring to bring the liturgy and government of the Church into conformity with England and Rome. He attended the synods which Ceallach assembled, and helped to frame their canons. According to Romish authorities, he presided at these synods in his capacity of papal legate. The Irish Annalists, however, say that it was Cellach who presided.
No immediate success crowned these labours. The institutions which had existed from the very first were not to be so easily set aside. It was not difficult to frame rules. It was a task of much greater magnitude to put the rules into practice. One thing was soon made evident: that no effectual change could be brought about so long as the hereditary system of succession to ecclesiastical appointments prevailed. Armagh itself was the greatest offender of all in this respect, and its wonderful growth in importance made it the subject of special notice. Cellach was a member of the family that for two hundred years had thus obtained possession of the see. It seemed therefore as if the greatest obstacle of all was without remedy.
On the death of Cellach, an effort was made to break through this long prescription. He was at Ardpatrick in the County Limerick at the time when he was taken with his last sickness, and had therefore near him Gilbert and those who were urging him on in his schemes of reformation. Under their influence he was induced on his death bed to make a kind of will, appointing Malachy, Bishop ​of Down and Connor, to succeed him in the see of Armagh. This would have been to introduce new blood into the succession, and by bringing in one whose sympathies were decidedly with the Romish movement to pave the way for still greater changes. That an episcopal see should be treated as a legacy and made the subject of a will was of course contrary to all order. It was just as uncanonical as the hereditary succession which it was intended to displace; but it seems to have been thought that in no other way could the old arrangement be broken through; and, as a matter of fact, it eventually accomplished all that was intended.
Not at first, however, nor in the way that had been anticipated. Cellach's successor was appointed from the same family, in utter disregard of any claims that Malachy could put forward. The new bishop, Murtagh, took possession of the insignia of office—the Book of Armagh, and the ancient crozier, known as the Staff of Jesus, and having these he was acknowledged by the whole country as the rightful coarb. Gilbert assembled a synod of clergy, in which the claims of Malachy were upheld. But the time had not yet come when the Pope's legate could assert his authority as such: so it was all to no purpose. Then, as now, possession was nine points of the law. Murtagh had possession of the see, and he retained it to the day of his death.
As soon as the bishopric was again vacant, the struggle was renewed. Niall, kinsman of the deceased prelate, was immediately installed in his place; but this time, partly by physical force and partly by purchase, Niall was deposed, and Malachy took his place. The next year, however, the contest was renewed; the abbacy was restored to Niall, and Malachy was again without his coveted prize.
​After this Malachy gave up the contest, and devoted himself to the carrying out of his designs in a different way. He professed to be contented with his small diocese of Connor, but he managed that another rival should be put in opposition to Niall. Against himself there seemed to be a popular prejudice, and it suited him as well to have in Armagh one whom he could bend to his own will. A bishop, therefore, was brought from Derry, Melbride O'Brolcan, one of a family that had been for many years most influential in the Irish Church. He was put up in opposition to Niall, and receiving the popular suffrages was made coarb in his stead. From what we know of the O'Brolcans, it is very doubtful whether Melbride would have lent himself to the designs of Malachy; but the question never arose. Scarcely had he enjoyed his elevation for two years when he died. The same year Niall passed away, and thus at length every obstacle seemed to have been removed. Malachy, however, made no further attempt to assert his right; but he managed to secure the election of Gelasius, one like-minded with himself, who was contented to take him as guide and leader in everything.
Bishop Gelasius was appointed in the year 1139, and retained his bishopric until 1174. Between these two years lie some of the most eventful incidents of Irish history. He himself changed his position of simple Coarb of Patrick for the more magnificent rank of Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of all Ireland. When he was appointed, Ireland was a nation; when he died, it was an English province. A similar change passed over the Church. When he was appointed, the Church of Ireland was independent; when he died, it had been brought into subjection to the see of Rome. ​Gelasius, however, was one who had greatness thrust upon him. In all these events he was a leading figure, yet his actions were for the most part controlled by others. The real work of subjecting the Church of Ireland to the see of Rome was done by Malachy.
With regard to this Malachy we have a very remarkable source of information. His Life has been written by no less a personage than Bernard of Clairvaux. From that life we learn that in his early years he came under the influence of the Danish Bishop of Waterford, that he learnt the Romish method of chanting and of saying the Mass, and became so much enamoured with foreign usages and ways, that in the end he became quite unlike an Irishman. 'He was born in Ireland,' says Bernard, 'of a barbarous race. There he was educated; there he received the knowledge of letters; but for the rest he drew no more from the barbarous country of his birth than the fishes of the sea draw from their native element.'
Bernard's life is a panegyric, and he intends these words for praise. They explain to us why his friends were among the Danish bishops rather than the Irish, why his sympathies were with Rome rather than with his own country, and why he preferred the gorgeous ritual of the continental churches to the simple modes of worship in his own.
Bernard, whose information must have been largely derived from Malachy himself, speaks of Irish Christianity as if it were no better than paganism. Thus he describes the diocese of Connor, telling us that when Malachy first went there, 'this man of God saw that he had to deal not with men, but with beasts. Nowhere had he met such people, no matter how barbarous the place; nowhere ​had he found any so froward in their manners, so gloomy in their forms of worship, so unfaithful to their oaths, barbarous in their laws, stiff-necked with regard to discipline, unclean in their lives; Christian in name; in reality, pagans.'
After this terrible tirade he descends to particulars, and it is quite a relief to find that the awful crimes which he so unsparingly condemns are as follows: 'They did not give either tithes or first-fruits; they did not enter into lawful wedlock; they did not make confessions; there could not be found any who either desired penance or would impose it.' This, after all, was only saying that the Church of Ireland was primitive, and not Roman. The only serious charge in the list—that they did not enter into lawful wedlock—can only mean that their marriage rites were not like those of the Romans, for we have abundant evidence that conjugal fidelity was at that time strictly enforced and observed.
In another place he tells us that 'there was throughout the whole of Ireland a relaxation of ecclesiastical discipline, a weakening of authority, a mere empty kind of religion. Everywhere instead of Christian gentleness there has crept in unaware a savage barbarism; indeed, it is a kind of paganism that has been introduced under the Christian name.' Here, again, is a very sweeping statement, and we might be led to conclude from it that religion had altogether departed from the island. We are reassured, however, when we read on, and find that what he means by 'savage barbarism' and 'paganism' is that 'bishops are changed and multiplied, without order, without reason, at the will of the metropolitan, so that one bishopric was not contented with one bishop, but that almost every church must ​have its own separate bishop.' This was no doubt contrary to ecclesiastical law, but it was the system in vogue when Ireland showed her religious vitality by her missions, and when the successful and enthusiastic preachers of her race contrasted most favourably with the faint-hearted workers sent from Rome.
Although, therefore, Bernard's work is useful and instructive, it must not be implicitly followed. Happily we have other and more reliable sources of information, which enable us to correct in some measure the extravagances into which he allowed himself to be led. One idea, however, runs through the whole of his book. It is that the Church of Ireland did not acknowledge the authority of the Pope, and was not in ecclesiastical subjection to him. The Life of Malachy is meaningless on any other assumption. The life-work of Malachy was to bring about a change in this respect. It is for this that he is lauded by his biographer. It was in recognition of his success that he obtained the unique honour of being the first Irishman resident in Ireland who was canonized by the Pope. If the Irish Church was already subject to Rome, the whole biography is inexplicable.
We have already noted the doctrines and usages in which the Church of Ireland differed from Rome in the seventh century. We are now at the twelfth. It may be well to pause again, and ask how the case stood after five hundred years had passed away.
The controversies as to the time of keeping Easter and of the mode of tonsure had become things of the past. In the other points which have been noted, the old customs survived, and the position of the Church was very much the same in the twelfth century as in the seventh. The attitude ​with regard to the Pope was unchanged. His supremacy was neither admitted nor rejected. It was simply ignored. This was shown very clearly in the way in which bishops and the more powerful ecclesiastics were appointed. Clergy and laity alike had their voice, and when their votes were given, no other sanction was thought necessary. When, as in the case of Malachy, a candidate came with the recommendation of the Papal legate, he was promptly rejected, and the popular nominee successfully held the place against him.
In the matter of ordinations exactly the same differences continued as before. Only one bishop officiated in the consecration of new bishops, and the institution of archbishop did not exist. The celibacy of the clergy was little insisted on, and in the higher orders was seldom followed. Auricular confession was unknown, as was priestly absolution and the so-called sacrament of penance. They still had their peculiar liturgy, stigmatized by the Pope's legate as schismatical, and so different from the Romish that a person accustomed to the one form of worship found himself unable to follow the service when the other form was employed. In baptism they still omitted the use of chrism.
That many believed in the doctrine of transubstantiation is more than probable. That the doctrine was not universally received is shown by an interesting incident related by Bernard. The case arose in Lismore. This was one of the places where an old Irish monastery existed, with an Irish monastic bishop and abbot. No sooner, however, was a Danish bishop appointed to the neighbouring town of Waterford than he began styling himself 'Bishop of Lismore,' as if he were the representative of the old Irish Church, whereas he really had no jurisdiction ​beyond the walls of the town, and was by education and ordination an Englishman. One of the Irish clergy in this place,—'a man of exemplary life, so it is said'—gave public expression to his views on the Holy Communion. 'He, being wise in his own eyes, presumed to say that in the Eucharist there was only a sacrament, and not the thing represented by the sacrament; that is to say, that there is only a consecration, and not the true Body.' Malachy reasoned with him in private, but it was all to no purpose. Then a meeting was summoned, from which, contrary to the Irish customs, the laity were excluded. Here 'he endeavoured with all the strength of no mean abilities to assert and defend his error.' Malachy met him first with argument and then with threatening, but all to no purpose. He left the meeting 'discomfited but not corrected,' and protesting that 'he was conquered not by reasoning, but overpowered by the authority of the bishop.' A sentence of excommunication was pronounced against him, but he was still unmoved. 'Thou, O Malachy,' he said, 'without reason thou hast condemned me this day. Thou hast spoken not only contrary to the truth, but against thine own conscience.' Then turning to the rest of the assembly he added, 'All you care for the man rather than the truth. I accept no man's person, if in doing so I must forsake the truth.'
Bernard tells us that this sturdy Protestant repented on his death bed: but he never admits that Malachy made a mistake or failed in any enterprise he took in hand. He altogether suppresses the fact that Malachy was unable to retain the see of Armagh, and attributes to his great humility his retreat from the position which he found to be untenable. We may therefore be excused for suspecting ​that this incident of the death-bed repentance is an embellishment put in by Bernard to save the credit of his hero. But whether this be the case or not, the significance of the incident remains the same. The denial of the doctrine of transubstantiation comes from an Irish clergyman. The assertion of the doctrine and condemnation of the heretic comes not from the Irish, but from the Romish party. There can be no doubt, however, that the leaven of Romanism was spreading, and that the country was thus being prepared for the important events which were shortly to take place.
* ↑ Bernard, Life of Malachy.
* ↑ Annals of the Four Masters, A.D. 988.