: 10 VINET NEO 9 10 REFORMATION IN IRELAND.Int ati ni elive od to anoitstestin.sm 919 ansiad viiming ad to toe 3me sdt We told, by the modern editors, that this year," but no years is specified, the reformation had gained more ground in Ireland than for merly. Henry VIII, had assumed to himself, by consent of the parliament of that kingdom, the title of king of it the former kings of England having only been called lords of Ireland and though they were obeyed within the English pale, yet the native Irish continued barbar ous and uncivilized, were governed entirely by the heads of their names Oranmo or tribes, and were obedient or rebellious, as they directed "them. The reformation was set on foot in the English pale, but made "small progress among the Irish. At length Bale was sent over to "labour among them. He was an eager writer, and a learned zealous man. Goodacre was made primate of Armagh, and Bale was too be bishop of Ossory. Two Irishmen were also promoted with them; who undertook to advance the reformation there. The archbishop of Dublin intended to have ordained them by the old pontifical, and all, except Bale, were willing it should be so, but he prevailed that it should be done according to the new book of ordinations he then went into his diocese, but found all there in dark Popery, and before he could make any progress the king's death put an end to his designs." Such is the account given by the modern editors, and we must here observe that it is somewhat contradictory, inasmuch as it says that the reformation had gained more ground," and a few sentences after, that it "made small progress," in Ireland. How these contradictions are to be reconciled we must leave to the advocates of Burnet and Fox. The duke of Wellington, who is an opposer of the rights of his Catholic countrymen, though his honours were won by their courage and fidelity, asserted in the house of lords, that the reformation was introduced into Ireland by the mouth of the cannon and the point of the bayonet, but this new mode of propagating the gospel our modern editors have suppressed. They tell us that Bale was sent over to labour among the Irish, who are described as being" barbarous and uncivilized, but they should also have stated that the lord protector, Somerset, sent over 600 horse, and 4,000 foot, to civilize this unfortunate people. And how did they proceed to enlighten the darkness of Popery? Historians inform us, by those disgraceful practices which marked the "progress of the reformation, fraud and violence. Having succeeded in lulling the suspicions of the two most eminent chieftains, O'Moore and O'Connor, who surrendered on the pledged faith of the English commander, they had no sooner arrived in England than they were cast into prison, their lands declared forfeited, and bestowed on the very men who had thus villanously violated their plighted troth. Churches were despoiled of their sacred ornaments and exposed sale and the most fertile districts were laid Waste by the ruthless hands of r men who pretended to be the bearers, of a religion that was to remove the Cimmerian darkness which had so long bound the Irish Papists. We are old that Bale was sent over to labour among the Irish; that he was an eager writer, and a learned and zealous man that he was to be bishop of Ossory that the "archbishop of Dublin intended to have ordained him by the old pontifi "cal, but he prevailed upon the archbishop to have the ceremony per"formed according to the new book of ordination';" that he went into his diocess; that he “found all there in dark Popery;" and that "before “he could make any progress, the king's death put an end to his de"signs" The only authority we have for this very pretty relation is Gilbert Burnet, who produces no testimony to corroborate his statement. We believe it to be a fabrication, and it seems to carry with it its own confutation. Why not give us a few reasons which induced the archbishop to throw aside the ancient form and adopt the new ceremonial? Why say that Bale was to be bishop, and then make him actually so? Why not name the two Irishmen, and the sees they were promoted to? And how lucky it was that death should take away the king to save the credit of Bale. The modern editors who have copied, or rather selected their account of "the progress of the reformation," from Burnet, make a little free, we see, with their authority, in order to suit their own purposes of deception. Burnet says, that Bale" was a busy writer, and "a learned zealous man, but did not write with that temper and DECENCY "that became a divine." This latter part of his character the modern editors have SUPPRESSED. Father Parsons, the able and learned detector of Fox's lies, informs us that this John Bale, for we suppose there was but one learned man of that name in those days, was an apostate friar, and chief gospeller in the time of Henry and Edward, and that he defended the Jewish custom of keeping Easter, in treating on a disputation between Colman, the Scottish bishop, and St. Wilfrid, the English abbot, in accouncil held in Northumberland, in the year 664 Parson's proves Bale guilty of misrepresentation, falsehood, and scurrility, and quotes his own words to shew that he was a jester. “I have," says Bale, written jests and pastimes without any certain number. (Bal. cent. v. descript: Brit.) He is also represented by the same grave authority, as taking an active part in the contention between the lord protector, Somerset, and the lord high admiral, and their wives, before noticed, in which dispute many other apostate friars, and among the rest Hugh Latimer, were great sticklers. Latimer inveighed with much bitterness, in his sermons, against the admiral, and, on the other side, John Bale took the part of the admiral's wife, queen Catharine, whom he set forth, in his book before quoted, as one of the miracles of womankind.So respectable a divine as John Bale must have performed wonders in enlightening the darkness of Ireland, had Providence thought it wise. to prolong the life of the young pope. But allowing this Bale to have been what he is here represented by the modern editors, of what use could his writings be to a people who could not read, and, if they could, were not acquainted with the language of his writings? In what way could he, an Englishman, convert the Irish from their ancient faith, unless he had the gift of tongues, and was able to preach to them in their native language? And here we may be allowed to remark the inconsistency of these pretended reformers in regard to their propagating the new invented forms and doctrines in Ireland. One of the charges brought by them against the Catholic church was, that she kept the people in ignorance by praying in a language which they did not understand, and consequently one of their first measures of reform was to have the liturgy in the English language. For the natives of Jersey * 聘 and Guernsey a French translation was made; but it does not seem to have entered the heads of the reformers that the Irish required to have an edition in their own language. If it were necessary that the English should have the benefit of a form of worship in their own tongue, had not the king's subjects in Ireland an equal right to the same benefit? -But strange to say, the very men who reproached the Catholic church with performing her service in a foreign language, issued a proclamation, by which the Irish were commanded to attend the English church service in a language they did not understand. The result was, that in Dublin, where the English language was somewhat familiar, Brown, the archbishop of Dublin, and four of his brethren, yielded submission to the order; but Dowdal, archbishop of Armagh, and the other prelates, stoutly resisted the decree, and the ancient service was retained, and has been preserved almost universally to this day. The modern editors say, "Goodacre was made primate of Armagh; but / this is another mistake or wilful misrepresentation of an historical fact. Dowdal, for his adherence to the faith of which he was appointed a guardian, was persecuted by the government, who took from him the tille of primate of all Ireland, and transferred it not to his successor in the see of Armagh, but to his more servile brother the archbishop of Dublin. Dowdal was obliged to fly the realm, but recovered his see on the accession of Mary. 3*r» The sacrilegious and infamous robberies of the churches in Ireland, begun by the reformers in Edward's reign, met of course, a check by the succession of his sister Mary. She, however, was no sooner dead, and her place occupied by that virgin lady, who is called by the base writers, the "good queen Bess," though a more merciless tyrant never wielded a sceptre, than the work of devastation was again resumed, and carried to a pitch that was never exceeded by the Goths and Vandals in their inroads on Christian kingdoms. We will here give the testimony of Spencer, Sydney, Hooker, Davies, and Strafford, who lived in the time of the transactions described, and embraces a period of seventy years, commencing in the year 1560 to the year 1630. From these witnesses the reader will learn the gross abuses practised by the new established church, the utter neglect of duty by the bishops, and the utter want of persons to supply the churches or the appointment of illiterate incumbents of the most dissolute morals. Leland writes, "The clergy, who refused to conform, abandoned "their cures. No reformed ministers could be found to supply their places. "The churches fell to ruins. The people were left without any religious "worship or instruction. (Vol. ii. p. 174.). 66 "The prejudices conceived against the reformation, by the Irish natives more especially, were still further increased by the conduct of those who were commissioned to remove the objects and instruments "of popular superstition. Uuder pretence of obeying the orders of state, they seized all the most valuable furniture of the churches, which they exposed to sale without decency or reserve. The Irish annalists pathetically describe the garrison of Athlone issuing forth, with a barbarous "and heathen fury, and pillaging the famous church of Clonmacnoise, tearing away the most inoffensive ornaments, books, bells, plate, win"dows, furniture of every kind, so as to leave the shrine of their fa 66 "vourite saint, Kieran, a hideous monument of sacrilege."-(Ibid. 287-) Spencer writes, "some of them, (the bishops,) whose disoceses are in re"mote parts, somewhat out of the world's eye, doe not at all bestow the be«nefices, which are in their o owne donation, upon any, but keep them in their "owne hands, and set their owne servants and horse-boys to take up the tithes and fruites of them, with the which, some of them purchase great lands, " and build faire castels upon the same. Of which abuse if any question be moved, they have a very seemely colour and excuse, that they have no "worthy ministers to bestow upon them, but keepe them so bestowed for any such sufficient person as any shall bring unto them." (p. 146.) "Whatever disorders you see in the church of England, yee may "finde there, and many more. Namely, grosse simony, greedy covetous"nesse, fleshly incontinency, carelesse sloath, and generally all disordered "life in the common clergymen. And besides all these, they have their particular enormityes; for all Irish priests, which now enjoy the "church livings, they are in a manner meere laymen, saving that they "have taken holy orders'; but otherwise they doe goe and live like laymen; follow all kinde of husbandry, and other worldly affaires, as "other Irish men doe. They neither read Scriptures, nor preach to the "people, nor administer, the communion; baptisme they doe; for they "christen yet after the popish fashion; only they take the tithes and offer"ings, and gather what fruite else they may of their livings." (p. 139.) 1 and ap: 1. to tze Jndwgnuz For's Book of Martyrs, Joerg and to va faire its thing pond to astiari hinn oitéoup yasli CRITICAL AND HISTORICAL it slid har Lavedadi teds can be unlin elemoss (or a oved yout, bovom No. 48. Printed and Published by W. E. ANDREWS, S, Chapters in Price 3d. msn house-court, St. Paul's Churchyard, London, ie oue vos qu EXPLANATION OF THE ENGRAVING-Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland, a mun na less distinguished for his emin his eminent virtues than his exalted birth, was thrown into prison a Few years after his brother, Thomas Percy, had been beheaded, because he maintained the Catholic faith; but as there was no pretext for apprehending him publicly, he was most cruelly put to death in prison. Some of the heretics gave it out he had destroyed him self, but the delitatum, was afterwards discovered, and their falsehood and cruelty detected. auds astir yonby2 swedini bus golongarib ad assigned to anime difted low na 48 349150108 To new tot Ils to team has ovnominis sift to gall Drus sp. I,Jon 25 CONTINUATION OF TH THE REVIEW os 88 (2 "rent, which your majestie receivethe; no parson, or vicar, resident upon any of theim, and a very simple lor sorrye curat, for the most parte, appointed to serve theim: amonge which number of curatts, onely eightene were founde able to speake English (p. 112.)mavis ww I Si No one howse standinge for any of theim to dwell in. In maney "places, the very walles of the churches doune, verie few chauncells. "covered, wyndowes and dores ruyned, or spoyled. There are 52 other "parishe churches in the same dioces, who have viccars indued upon "theim; better served and maynteined then the other, yet but badlye. "There are 52 parishe churches more, residue of the first nomber of "224, which perteine to dyvers perticuler lords, and these though in "better estate, then the rest commonlye are, yet farre from well. If |