The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1911-11-18
Charge That Under Home Rule CathO-
lies Would Take Over Protest
ant Churches Refuted.
Archbishop of Dublin Recalls How
St. Patrick's Cathedral Became
Protestant Possession.
Says the History of That Transac-
ton is Probably the Basis of
Their Apprehension.

The cornerstone of the new Church
of St. Patrick Ringsend, was laid Sum-
day, October 20. The Archbishop Of
Dublin presided at the ceremony and
delivered an address which Is particu-
larly interesting in that it refers to
the history of tho conflscation Of st.
Patricks Cathedral. Dublin. The Pro-
testant Bishop Of Ossory who was at
one time Dean of st. Patricks (Prot-
.st;n) Cathedral, not long ago made
the statement that iftI1reland were to
get Home Rule st. Patrick's Cathedral
and all the property of the Protestant
Church in Ireland would be exposed
to confiscation by the Catholics.
The Archbishop first denied that
there Is even the remotcst danger OF
such n calamity and then referring to
the history of the confscation of st.
Patrick's Cathedral by Henry VIII, he
continued:
Can it be that he (the Protestant
Bishop) Is conscious of the hollowness
of tho ground on which the original
title Of the present possessors of so
many of their churches. st. Patricks
II, particular, rests? l can well under
stand that {. little reflection upon such
point as that would give rise to no
small amount of disquiet in the mind
,r nol1 r,fR niu,l, ~,
terested in keeping things as they are.
What happened in Dublin at the time
of the official change of religion in
this country in the sixteenth century?
We have 1t attested by historical rec
ords of unimpeachable authority. In
1916, King Henry VIII. dccreed the
suppression of st. Patrick's, and the
Lord Deputy, the Viceroy of the time,
the Lord Chancellor, and others, were
appointed Commissioners to receive in
the chapter -house of that cathedral,
at the hands of the Dean and Chapter
tho surrender of that cathedral church,
its revenues, its estates and all its
possessions. Well. the commission was
duly executed, and the church, with
everything belonging to it, was sur
rendered to the King. Henry WILL,
10 doubt, was known to be a danger
time, there was Il certain amount Of
firmness shown in resistance to the
royal demand. The Protestant histor-
ian Of the cathedral tells us what oc-
Cured. He is speaking OF the resig-
nation of the church and of everything
belonging to it into the hands of the
King, and he says
"rhe transformation was made In
very unlawful manner without the will
or consent of the Archbishop the chief
ordinary, founder and patron Of al
most all the prebends." .... ..
And he continues: "It appears like
wise. that the Dean imprisoned the
Prcccntor, Treasurer, two Archdea-
cons, and fifteen of the Prebendaries,
who were the persons that formed the
Chapter at that time, and forcibly de-
tanned them until he had obtained their
consent"
| That, then, was how the possession
OF st. Patrick's passed into the lands
Of Henry WILL, the so-called Head
Of the Church" in England and in Ire
land. Some years ago there was all
amusing old gentleman in Dublin, very
! fond Of writing letters to the DAILY
Express" and the Evening Mail" He
was persistent in denying that there
had been any confiscation of our
, churches, or of our church property,
) in the time of Henry VIII. He was
persistent also in challenging me to
produce any Act of Parliament trans
ferring St. Patricks Cathedral from
Catholic to Protestant hands. never,
of course, took any notice of his chal-
lenges, as I take no notice of many
other things of the kind. The fact of
his making them showed that he was
busying himself about a subject as to
which he was profoundly ignorant. II
he had not been profoundly ignorant
of it he would have known that the
shameful transaction Of the transfer
! of st. Patrick's to Henry VIII. had
not even such excuse as an Act Of
fs III, ,j1f q