ffi 
 
 
 
 I
 
 
 
 lySsPVfff 

 
 THE POPE Ai IRELAND: 
 
 CONTAINING 
 
 NEWLY-DISCOVERED HISTORICAL FACTS CONCERNING THE FORGED BULLS 
 
 ATTRIBUTED TO 
 
 POPES ADRIAN IV. + ALEXANDER III. 
 
 TOGETHER WITH A SKETCH OF 
 
 THE UNION EXISTING BETWEEN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH^IRELAND 
 
 FROM 
 
 THE TWELFTH TO THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 BY STEPHEN J. MoOORMICK 
 
 EDITOR OF THE SAN FRANCISCO " MONITOR " V ' 
 
 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA : 
 A. WALDTEUFEL. PUBLISHER 
 
 BENZIGER BROTHERS, 
 NEW YOBK. CINCINNATI. CHICAGO. 
 
 1889.
 
 COPYBIGHTKD. ALL BIGHTS BK8ERVED.
 
 TD 
 
 PDPE LED XIII, , 
 
 The Faithful and AffEctionatE 
 
 FRIEND DF THE IRISH FEDPLE 
 
 in 
 
 EvEry LegitimatE Struggle tn Dhtain 
 their National FrEEdnm, 
 
 THIS BDDK 
 is mast RsspEctfully ^ AffEctinnately 
 
 LlEdicatEd 
 As a Trihute ni HamagE 
 
 and a 
 of Filial
 
 P R E_F^\ C E. 
 
 When a few of the articles which form a great portion of the chapters in 
 this volume first appeared in the columns of the San Francisco MONITOR, it 
 was suggested that such historical matter was well worthy of being placed in 
 book form so as to give it a permanency which it otherwise could not acquire. 
 The suggestion, coming as it did from many revered friends, has been acted en, 
 and in this way the public is placed in the possession of the only volume in 
 the English language which is devoted exclusively to defending the Popes and 
 the Irish people against the aspersions of both ancient and modern enemies. 
 
 Viewing the present work in this aspect, the author hopes that he has 
 added at least something to the general stock of literature and thrown a great 
 deal of light upon a subject which has hitherto been dealt with only in a 
 fugitive, transitory and superficial manner. 
 
 A writer in the Irish Ecclesiastical Record, alluding to the Bulls attributed 
 to Popes Adrian and Alexander, says : " This question is now and again 
 brought forth under the foolish hope of weakening in the minds of Catholics their 
 attachment to the Holy See." 
 
 Doubtless it was for this purpose the work of which this volume is a re- 
 view and a refutation, was issued. But we are proud to say that truth has been 
 vindicated and error crushed in the following pages. We have procured evidence 
 from sources which have not hitherto been known to the general reader, and we 
 have treated the subjects under discussion in as extensive a manner as their 
 importance justified. Some persons may deem it strange that two such Papal 
 Bulls as those attributed to Popes Adrian and Alexander should have existed in 
 the world for seven hundred years without having been proved fictitious and 
 their falsity thoroughly and permanently established. But in this respect, to 
 ise a familiar phrase, "history repeats itself." Like the Adrian and Alexander 
 forgeries, it was not until seven centuries of controversy had been indulged in 
 that the False Decretals of Isadore Mercator were finally and successfully proved 
 fictitious. These documents first came into prominence in the middle of the 
 ninth century and they were received with credence until the middle of the 
 sixteenth century, when public faith was withdrawn and they were relegated to 
 the museum of fictitious literature. 
 
 It is well known that the forgery of both Papal and other documents was 
 quite common in the twelfth century. Professor Jungmann, in the appendix to 
 the fifth volume of his Dixscrtationes Historian Ecclesiastics, says, in support of 
 the opinion of those who hold that the Bulls attributed to Popes Adrian and 
 Alexander are forgeries, "it is well known from history that everywhere towards 
 the close of the twelfth century there were forged of corrupted Papal Letters 
 or Diplomas. That such was the case frequently in England is inferred from 
 the Letters of John Sarisbiensis and of others." 
 
 Richard, the Prelate who succeeded St. Thomas in the See of Canterbury,
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 commanded all the Bishops under his ecclesiastical jurisdiction to promulgate in 
 all their churches the punishment of excommunication against the f>ublic pest of 
 foryery. So says Peter Blessenais. 
 
 In the time of Pope Innocent III., various statutes were passed against this 
 abominable crime, which was a source of great annoyance, as well as of in- 
 security, in relation to all important official documents of an ecclesiastical nature. 
 
 In the present age of the world, of course, it is easy to understand that 
 the forgery of Papal documents has been rendered an impossibility in conse- 
 quence of the vigilance exercised at the Vatican as well as from the fact that 
 the printing press and the telegraph would soon solve any doubts concerning 
 such documents if they were suspected. But in the twelfth century no such 
 resources were available, hence apochryphal documents were generally accepted 
 as genuine when first circulated, and in this way a great deal of annoyance was 
 encountered by ecclesiastics. 
 
 Within the past few years efforts have been made in nearly every English- 
 speaking section of the world where Irish people congregated, to wean them 
 from their fidelity to the Church and the Pope by means of false and malicious inven- 
 tions regarding the attitude assumed by Pope Leo XIII., towards Ireland's 
 struggles for political supremacy and National Home Government. 
 
 Thia movement was made with the view to "strike the Shepherd," so that 
 the sheep of the flock of Christ might be dispersed. But in order that truth 
 might prevail over error and malice be confuted by impartial evidence, the 
 author deemed it a worthy task to place in the possession of the reading public 
 all the principal points which poisonous literature had presented in antagonism 
 to the Vicars of Christ, and then to bring forth the antidote in the shape of 
 such facts as impartial historians furnished, in order that a correct knowledge of 
 the historical questions under discussion might be clearly acquired. 
 
 A great deal of prejudice has been engendered in the public mind against 
 both the Church and the Pontiffs by reason of false history and false bio- 
 graphies of the Popes being circulated throughout the world, and left to 
 occupy the literary field without any contradiction on the part of Catholic 
 authors. In this way the Church and the Vicars of Christ are prejudged and 
 false verdicts are found against both even by Catholics themselves, who, find- 
 ing all history filled with calumnies against the Church and her Chief Bishops, 
 give up all contest in despair, and finally acquiesce in the rancorous false- 
 hoods which teach untruth in the pages of so much nineteenth-century litera- 
 ture. 
 
 This volume, therefore, the author humbly hopes, will serve to stem the tide 
 of calumny so far asj concerns the Pope and the Irish people, proving, as it 
 does, the constant fidelity of the Irish race to the See of Rome, as well as 
 demonstrating the ready [reciprocity with which that fidelity was recognized by 
 the Roman Pontiffs. 
 
 The foot-notes and references introduced into the volume will furnish a 
 key to Sthose who [desire to certify the proofs the author adduces or the 
 charges he makes as there is nothing so far from his intention as to strive 
 to gain a point by any unfair^ line of argument. For this reason, therefore, 
 he has taken great pains not to introduce his own ideas to such an extent 
 as to shut out the evidence which he found in authors of reputation and stand-
 
 THE 1'01'K AND IRKLANb. 
 
 ing, knowing full well that auch evidence has far mor importance and weight 
 in the estimation of all reflecting men than any opinions which the author 
 might a lvai.ee, if su h opinions were unsupported by documentary evidence. 
 
 In the treatment of the questions which have arisen between the enemies 
 of both the Pope and Ireland during the past decade of years, the author has 
 been at great pains to procure irrefutable evidence, so as to establish the 
 truth of history on such a solid basis that no future calumnies against the char- 
 acter of the Holy Father Leo XIII., at present gloriously reigning, can be 
 brought forward without being liable to immediate refutation by reference to 
 these pages. 
 
 All the efforts of the author have been directed towards clearing away the 
 clouds of calumny which ancient foes and modern enemies have heaped up 
 against both Ireland and the Pope both of whom are looked upon by the 
 world as something to be hated, and thus both share in the glory of having 
 earned the world's animosity in consequence of their steadfast fidelity to God 
 and His Church. 
 
 Ireland will never falter in her Faith nor lose her renown as the mother of 
 true children of the Church of Rome. As Pope Leo XIII., well says : "Irish- 
 men take a just pride in being called Catholics an appellation which, according 
 to St Augustine, means the guardians of all honor and uprightness, the fol- 
 lowers of all equity and justice. Let them fulfill by their acts all that this word 
 Catholic implies ; and let them, while vindicating their own just rights, en- 
 deavor to be indeed all that their name suggests." 
 
 By such a course of conduct will the cause of Ireland prosper. Erin will 
 succeed in securing temporal prosperity without the sacrifice of Catholic prin- 
 ciple, and then indeed 
 
 Fixed as fate will her altars stand ; 
 
 I'n changed -like God her Faith ; 
 Her Church will like her mountains stand 
 
 Untouched by Time or hand of Death !
 
 .THE POPE AND IRELAND, 
 
 C II A P T E 11 I . 
 
 Preliminary Considerations Regarding Judge Mi guire's " Ireland and the Pope." 
 
 A Brief History of Papal Intrigues a? in*t Irif>h 
 Liberty from Adrian IV. to Leo XI IT. By 
 J amea G. Maguire, J udije of the Superior 
 Court of San Francisco, California. San 
 Francisco : James II. Barry, 18S8. 
 
 After a careful perusal of this volume, 
 we have come to the conclusion that it is a 
 bad book, published through bad motives, 
 and, in its results, it is far more likely to 
 recoil disastrously upon the head of its 
 author than it is to have the damaging and 
 demoralizing affect its author's animosity 
 against the Vicar of Christ intended. 
 
 It is an open secret that the author of 
 this vicious volume is a great admirer of 
 Dr. McGlynn and Henry George, both of 
 whom he has already lauded publicly, 
 whilst, at the same time, he has poured the 
 vials of his wrath upon the devoted head 
 of Pope Leo XIII as their enemy. 
 
 Any book upon " Ireland and the Pope," 
 emanating from an author whose mind is 
 a, seething cauldron .of passion and preju- 
 dice combined, must naturally be looked 
 upon as the result of rancor, and hence it 
 can possess but little or no value in the 
 esteem of men who want to read the truth of 
 history, and not the vaporings of individuals 
 whose minds are so strongly tainted with 
 vengeance against the Pope that they can- 
 not permit themselves even to speak 
 courteously of the Pontiffs whom they pre- 
 sent to their readers as the persecutors of 
 the Irish people, and as the barriers which 
 have ever been stumbling blocks in the 
 way of Ireland's independence. 
 
 Had this bad book been written by an 
 open and avowed Orangeman, an anti- 
 Catholic Calvinist, or an ex-priest who had 
 turned Presbyterian, its Pope-slandering 
 contents and its many misleading and 
 
 malicious statements, would not have as- 
 toni hed us in the least. But being, as it 
 is, the work of an author who was born, 
 baptized, and brought up in the Catholic 
 Church, and whose position on the Bench 
 implies a decent respect for all aufhmity, 
 both civil and ecclesiastical, then indeed 
 our wonder is excited that James G. 
 Maguire could sully his Catholic soul and 
 soil the ermine of his high judicial position, 
 by placing his name and official designation 
 upon the title-page of a book that is be- 
 neath criticism as a literary production, 
 and which can confer no honor upon either 
 the literary or the judicial reputation of the 
 gentleman who generated it. 
 
 We intend to review t ; s work thwough- 
 ly, for the reason fiat it involves questions 
 upon which "tho truth, the whole truth, 
 and nothing but the truth," should be 
 known. The patriotic impulses of many 
 Catholic Irishmen very often leave them 
 liable to have their minds filled with venom 
 against the Vicar of Christ, because of some 
 fancied wrong (or " outrage" as Judge 
 Maguire would call it), which the Popes are 
 said to have perpetrated in the past or 
 present against the Irish people; and, in 
 order to avoid such a calamity, it is one 
 of the most important duties of the MONI- 
 TOR to place before its readers a full, fair 
 and candid contradiction of just such in- 
 sidious falsehoods as the work under review 
 contains. 
 
 History has been denned as "a con- 
 spiracy against truth," and in no instance is 
 this definition more veracious than when it 
 embraces within its scope those so called 
 "histories" wherein occur any reference to 
 the Popes, whose characters have been
 
 10 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 depicted in the darkest colors by hireling 
 heretical writers, and by the enemies of the 
 Church, for no other cause than the horrid 
 hallucination that by traducing the Head 
 of the Church, the body and the members 
 would also suffer. 
 
 Such has been the conduct of the ca- 
 lumniators of the Pontiffs in the past, and 
 it seems that, in this regard at least, the 
 world has not improved, for the work before 
 us, when contrasted with the high judicial 
 position of its author, is truly " a conspir- 
 acy against truth," and is so malignant 
 in its misrepresentations, and so disrespect- 
 ful in its allusions to the Pope, that it 
 will astonish and disgust all decent people 
 who lose their time in turning over its tur- 
 gid pages. 
 
 The MONITOR feels sorry for the position 
 in which Judge Maguire has placed himself 
 before the Catholic body at large. We 
 have not even the scintillation of any feel- 
 ing of animosity towards the gentleman for 
 his furious but foolish attack upon the Vicar 
 of Christ, but it would be criminal in us 
 as a Catholic journalist to permit a poison- 
 laden publication like the present work 
 to be circulated all over this country, 
 without exposing the falsehoods which fig- 
 ure most conspicuously upon its pages. 
 The character of the Vicar of Christ is dear 
 to every Catholic, and the author whc 
 imagines that he can publish any calumny 
 he pleases against the Popes, will discover, 
 to his sorrow and confusion-, that the ques- 
 tions he has so dogmatically decided against 
 the Pontiffs, have another side to them 
 wherein Truth will prevail over error, and 
 plain facts dominate over fanatical fictions. 
 
 The first ebulition of malice which the 
 author of " Ireland and the Pope" mani- 
 fests, appears in the "Dedication" where 
 he alludes to the Pope as a " foreign poten- 
 tate.''' Now, as one who was educated 
 under Catholic influences, Judge Maguire 
 ii<iht to have known that the Catholic 
 people all over the world repudiate the 
 idea that any Pope from St. Peter to Leo 
 XIII. should be contemplated under the 
 contemptuous title of "a foreign potentate. " 
 
 From the days of St. Patrick, the Irish 
 people have always loved, honored and 
 obeyed the Pope as their spiritual Father 
 after God their best and most reliable 
 guide. 
 
 It is now about fourteen hundred years 
 since St. P.itrick converted the Irish peo- 
 ple to Christianity, and one of those beau- 
 tiful proverbs known as Dicta Sancti 
 Patritii, preserved in the Book of Armagh, 
 which was transcribed in the year 807, is to 
 the following effect : "Thanks be to God," 
 said St. Patrick, speaking of the conversion 
 of the Irish people to the Catholic faith, 
 " You have passed from the kingdom of 
 Satan to the city of God ; the church of 
 the Irish is a church of Romans ; as you are 
 children of Christ, so be you children of 
 Itome." This was the legacy which St. 
 Patrick left to those whom he had redeemed 
 from pagan darkness and placed under the 
 light of the Cross. The Pope represents 
 the Church and he represents Rome, and 
 when any writer thinks to air his wrath 
 by styling the Pope ' a foreign poteutate,'' 
 he insults all Catholics who in the 
 language of St. Patrick are not only 
 "children of Christ but also children of 
 Rome." 
 
 So far from being "a foreign potentate," 
 the Pope of Rome, the successor of St. 
 Peter, is, in the estimation of every dutiful 
 Catholic, the chief Pastor who holds the 
 title-deeds of the love and loyalty of every 
 Catholic "from Greenland's icy mountains 
 to Africa's burning sands." The whole 
 world is the Pope's spiritual domain. He is 
 enshrined in the hearts of the Catholic 
 people of every land as the Apostolic Lord 
 and Father of Fathers, the Shepherd of the 
 Fold of Christ, who hath charge of the 
 lambs and the sheep, so that they may not 
 wander into the poisonous pastures which 
 the world has prepared for their temporal 
 and spiritual ruin. No metes or geographi- 
 cal bounds, therefore, circumscribe the 
 paternal influence of the Pope. To the 
 faithful he is ever their dearly-beloved 
 Father, and in calling the Vicar of Christ 
 "a foreign potentate," the author of this 
 volume only vents his spleen whilst he tar- 
 nishes the fair fame of his Christian edu- 
 cation.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 11 
 
 The oliject for which this book is written 
 is set forth in the Preface thus : " To show 
 the " wrong and injustice" of papal inter- 
 ference with the Irish people, and to point 
 out the necessity and the patriotic duty of 
 firmly and constantly rejecting and resisting 
 every political edict, issued by a pope or 
 inquisition respecting Irish affairs." The 
 author, however, seems to have very con- 
 veniently forgotten that there is no in- 
 stance on record where the Catholic Bishops, 
 priests or people of Ireland ever complained 
 of any " wrong and injustice" which they 
 suffered through " papal interference. " And 
 the captious critic of the Vicar of Christ 
 seems also to have forgotten that " political 
 edicts" do not come within the Province 
 of the Pope, save where the question of 
 faith and morals is involved. The whole 
 Catholic world admits that the voice of the 
 Pope is the Supreme law in all matters 
 appertaining to faith and morals, but Judge 
 Maguire, of the Superior Court of San 
 Francisco, seems to have been so anxious 
 to punish the Pope by placing him in the 
 pillory of Irish politics, so as to exhibit 
 him for public execration, that he acts the 
 part of judge, jury and public executioner ! 
 Every man, even if he enjoys what Judge 
 Maguire so elegantly describes in his al- 
 lusion to the Pope as " the unenviable, not 
 to say infamous distinction of being danger- 
 ous only to those who confide in him," is 
 entitled to a full, free and impartial trial 
 at the hands of his peers. This trial, the 
 MONITOR has resolved the Pope shall have, 
 eVen though the case has been already 
 prejudged and passed upon without the 
 defendant being even cited to appear in 
 court! "Fair play is a jewel," Judge, 
 and neither the Pope nor the Catholic 
 Church asks more from any man or body 
 of men. But the Pope and the Church do 
 dread calumny. They have reason to fear 
 the baneful effects of all bad literature, 
 whether sensuous or sensational, malicious 
 or misleading, because the people of the 
 world are always more ready to believe 
 evil reports of any person, whether Pope 
 or pauper, than they are to accept the plain, 
 substantial statements of mere matter-of- 
 fact events in the lives of men about whom 
 the world concerns itself. 
 
 For thif, and other cogent reasons, it is 
 only proper that "Ireland and the Pope" 
 should be thoroughly dissected, so as to 
 prove to the world that the Pope has "a 
 case in court" which contains irrefutable 
 testimony on his side whereby to secure a 
 verdict of acquittal against the charges 
 contained in Judge Maguire's indictment' 
 " One story is good," Judge, "until the 
 other is told." And now that the MONITOR 
 has read your decision, we hope your Honor 
 will read the rebutting testimony which 
 these columns will present during the next 
 few weeks, in defence of one who stands 
 pre-eminent among Christians, and who 
 shall never be hounded to death unheard, 
 so long as the MONITOR'S guns can carry a 
 shot into the ambush of his enemies, 
 
 In the course of his Preface to " Ireland 
 and the Pope," the judicial author poses as a 
 philanthropist who hates to pitch mud at the 
 Holy Father, because he may miss his aim 
 and some of it may bespatter the Catholic 
 Church ! Very considerate, indeed, Judge; 
 the sentiment does you great honor, and in 
 order that the readers of the MONITOR may 
 not be kept in ignorance of this most gra- 
 cious condescension on your part, we print 
 the precious and peerless paragraph in full ', 
 
 " I am painfully aware of the extreme diffi- 
 culty if not impossibility, of exposing and con- 
 demning the political errors and faults of one 
 who is the spiritual head of a church, without 
 working some injury to the church which he 
 represents." 
 
 We have purposely italicized those por- 
 tions of the foregoing paragraph which will 
 cause Catholics to smile serenely even at 
 the expense of being guilty of contempt of 
 Court ! Judging from the above extract, it 
 is not unfair to say that the judicial power 
 of the author of " Ireknd and the Pope," 
 is not confined to such civil or criminal 
 cases as may come before his court, but he 
 has elected himself as Most Magnificent 
 Censurer- General of Popes, Cardinals and 
 Roman Congregations ! Well might this 
 worthy legal but rather illogical luminary 
 say : 
 
 No pent up Civil Code confines our powers 
 We're Pontiff of Pontiff*. The earth is ours ! 
 
 Catholics will doubtless remark with 
 admiration the deep feeling of sorrow
 
 12 
 
 THE POPE AND IUKI.AXD. 
 
 wlii.-h JuJge Maguire evinces, when he 
 contemplates the vast amount of injury 
 whidi his wonderful book is destined to 
 can-"** to " a church" over which the Pope 
 presides. How very kind and considerate 
 <( * eminent and erudite a modern Jupiter? 
 Hi* power is so great that he could crush 
 tlic Church of God entirely out of existence 
 l-i!i-:ith the Juggernaut of his gigantic 
 j i' 1 ueship, but he kindly vouchsafes to ex- 
 j>tv*s his sorrow that the Church cannot 
 is -ape "some injury" from the powerful 
 indictment which his Honor has brought 
 against her ! 
 
 And, right here, if it would not trespass 
 to much on the patience of the Court, we 
 would like to ask the author of ''Ireland 
 and the Pope," by what Code of Christian 
 law his Honor came to the conclusion that 
 the Pope presided over ' a ( hvrch" and not 
 the Church? Is there some Christian sta- 
 tute hidden away in the Superior Court of 
 San Francisco which sets forth as an un- 
 deniable fact that Christ established aiore 
 than one Church ? Or is this phrase '* a 
 church," merely a ruse by which it is sought 
 to belittle the One, Holy, Catholic and 
 Apostolic Church, and to make its mountains 
 i-f Faith and Truth and Apostolicity and 
 Authority appear only the same small mole- 
 hills as are Methodism, Mormonism and 
 MiGlynnism ? Ah ! Judge, your satire ill 
 becomes your position, howevet we 1 it n ay 
 coincide with th* cause which you champion. 
 " Thou art Peter," said our Divine Saviour 
 tn the first Pope, "and upon thee I will build 
 My Church," and until these words are re- 
 Vuked by the Second Person of the Blessed 
 Trinity Who said them, Catholics will be 
 compelled to accept them as even "higher 
 law" than any judgment upon this question, 
 even though it should emanate from " the 
 Superior Court of San Francisco, California !" 
 
 It may be well, also, to call the attention 
 of the author of " Ireland and the Pope" to 
 the fact that he must either accept as a Cath- 
 olic the Creed wherein the Church is de- 
 clared to be the " One, Holy, Catholic and 
 Apostolic Church," or he must reject the 
 Creed and thus stand before the world as an 
 open apostate. " He that shall deny Me 
 before men," says our Blessed Redeemer, 
 "I will also deny him before My Father 
 
 Who is in Heaven," and when J:idge Ma- 
 guire publicly proclaims his belief that the 
 Church of God is only a church among many 
 churches, then indeed, has he denied God 
 before all men ! 
 
 So far as the future of the Church is con- 
 cerned, in relation to this wonderful book, 
 the MONITOR desires, in the most cordial 
 and charitable manner possible, to assure 
 Judge Maguire that he need neither fret 
 nor fume, wonder nor worry over the 
 amount of "injury" which his unfortunate 
 book will cause to the Church. The quantity 
 and quality of ' chaff ' which he has cast at 
 the Church and the Popp, will all have been 
 blown to the four winds of Heaven long be- 
 fore Judge Maguire will have emerged from 
 the fog of odium in which he has enveloped 
 .himself through his unfortunate literary 
 venture. 
 
 Further along in his Preface the bitter 
 critic of the Chief Pastor of the Catholic 
 Church, assures his readers that "it is not 
 his fault if the spiritual heads of the Cath- 
 olic Church claimed also to be, by divine 
 right, temporal rulers, theoretically, over all 
 nations, and in terrible reality over Ireland." 
 DJ not be alarmed, Judge ; nobody will ever 
 think of holding you accountable for any 
 shortcomings of the Popes ! God knows you 
 have sins enough of your own to be respon- 
 sible for without saddling your juJicial 
 shoulders with the peccadillos and the " po- 
 litical edicts" of the Popes ! Besides, it 
 would be radically in opposition to the Civil 
 Code of California to hold an eminent and 
 erudite American citizen responsible for the 
 crimes of a foi-eigu poteidute ! The idea is 
 perfectly preposterous, and we hasten to as- 
 sure Judge Maguire that so far as the MON- 
 ITOK is concerned, not one of its readers 
 shall ever harbor such a horrible thought as 
 that which seems to harrow fearful furrows 
 in the otherwise serene soul of the Most 
 High and Mighty Censor-General of God's 
 Vicegerent on Earth ! 
 
 Irrespective entirely of these reasons, 
 it is also a well and widely known fact that 
 throughout the past nineteen centuries the 
 Popes have always, everywhere, and under 
 even the most adverse circumstances, man- 
 aged to " hold their own" against all their
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 13 
 
 assailant?, whether the assaults came from 
 heretic or apostate, king or kaiser, soldier 
 or statesman In every conflict with the 
 world the Pope has always triumphed in the 
 end. and so will it be in your case, Judge ; 
 the Pope will be loved, revered and vener- 
 ated by hundreds of millions of Catholic 
 hearts long after the fly-speck with which 
 you have >ried to deface the Palace of Peter 
 shall have been washed away completely by 
 the tears of a prodigal's repentance ! 
 
 Further on in his Preface, the candid 
 author of " Ireland and the Pope" tells us 
 that he speaks " neither as a friend nor as 
 an enemy of the Catholic religion," and yet, 
 dear Judge, it is well for all Christians to 
 bear in mind that Almighty God has said : 
 " He that is not with Me, is against Me ; 
 and he that gathereth not with Me, scat- 
 tereth." The Pope, his Honor will please 
 to remember, represents Almighty God in the 
 eyes of Catholics, and he that is not the 
 friend of Christ's Church is always ranked 
 among her foes ! There is no middle course, 
 dear Judge. The Divine law is plain : He 
 that is not the friend of God is Hia enemy. 
 You can take which horn of the dilemma 
 you please, although the close perusal of 
 your unfortunate book would lead us to be- 
 lieve that you have allied yourself with the 
 worst enemies the Church, the Pope, and 
 the Irish Catholic people have to contend 
 with the class that would steal Catholic 
 faith from fervent Irish souls, under the 
 delusive plea of making them purer Irish 
 patriots ! 
 
 Alluding to just such books as the volume 
 before us, an eminent Irish Prelate said 
 some years ago, that they were written "not 
 out of any love for our poor country or of 
 historic truth," but they proceeded mainly 
 from people who desired to proclaim their 
 hostility to the Sovereign Pontiff and from 
 the vain hope that their exaggerated state- 
 ments, might in some way weaken the chord 
 of Christian faith which binds the Irish peo- 
 ple to Rome. Others who were the pre- 
 cursors of Judge Maguire in his attacks on 
 the Popes, found nothing but "chaff" in the 
 hopper when they threshed out the crop of 
 
 anti-Catholic literature they had sown, and 
 so will it be when his Honor looks around 
 for the ' injury" which he egotistically im- 
 agines his book will accomplish. He will be 
 both chagrined and astonished to find the 
 old Church still foremost in the world, with- 
 out a dent in her sides, a rent in her sails, 
 or a spot to show that the malice of man 
 has cast even a thimbleful of mud at the 
 mystic body wherein Christ dwelleth for 
 ever ! 
 
 Further on in his Preface, the ardent au- 
 thor of " Ireland and the Pope" says his de- 
 s re is "to assist in raising my father's 
 countrymen and my own kinsmen above 
 that groveling fear of the Pope, which makes 
 so many of them nerveless when he ftriJces 
 a blow at their country and their race." 
 This desire on the part of his Honor, how- 
 ever, is entirely uncalled for, inasmuch as 
 no good Catholic fears the Pope. The Pope 
 is only feared by those who look upon him 
 as "a foreign potentate." Catholics love 
 him as the Father of all the Faithful and 
 they venerate him as the Vicar of Christ. 
 Fear only enters their souls when they have 
 sinned against the laws of God or the pre- 
 cepts of the Church, but so long as they are 
 not culprits in the sight of God they look 
 upon the Pope as their Father ; they love 
 him and pray for him, so that his reign over 
 the Church may be productive of peace and 
 good-will among all Christian peoples. 
 
 The Popes, may it please the Court, 
 have never yet struck a blow at Ireland or 
 at the Irish race. Anti-Irish authors have 
 said so, and anti-Catholic critics of the Popes 
 have purposely adopted and circulated the 
 calumny. In like manner malicious men 
 mention "the female Pontiff Joan," to 
 this day, but this fable, like many others, 
 has been dissipated from the minds of all in- 
 tellectual men by the light of recent histori- 
 cal revelations which were not known to 
 those who lived in past generations. 
 
 It may also be judicious to remind Ju Jge 
 Maguire that there exists a very old saying 
 which runneth thus : " Those who eat the 
 Pope die of the Pope," and such has been 
 the fate of many men far more notable in 
 the world than even a judge of the Superior 
 Court of San Francisco. The "injury"
 
 14 
 
 THE 1'OI'E AND ICELAND. 
 
 therefore, which will accrue from '* Ireland 
 and the Pope," will be quite insignificant, 
 as most of the work is compiled from au- 
 thors who are neither reliable nor respec- 
 table, and, besides, Catholics have the assur- 
 ance of the Son of God that not even the 
 Gates of Bell shall prevail against that 
 Church which Judge Maguire is so much 
 alarmed maybe "injured" by his re-hash 
 of "history" which has been hitherto both 
 refuted and repudiated. 
 
 In another part of his Preface, the author 
 of " Ireland and the Pope" assures his 
 readers with the dogmatism of a newly- 
 fledged Protestant Doctor of Divinity, that 
 "a man may reject the tenets of the Cath- 
 olic religion and yet be an equally good 
 Iriah patriot." And then he cites the names 
 of Grattan, Emmet, Wolfe Tone, Davis, 
 Mitchel and Parnell. Now these notable 
 Irish patriots were all born Protestants, who 
 never had the grace of Catholic faith direct- 
 ly bestowed upon them, nor tendered to 
 them for their acceptance. Hence these 
 men never rejected the tenets of the Catholic 
 religion. But, on the other hand, when a 
 Catholic publicly be- littles and belies the 
 Church of God by slurringly styling her " a 
 church ; " when he slanderously charges the 
 Pope of Rome with being " dangerous only 
 to those who trust in him ; " when he calls 
 a member of the College of Cardinals " the 
 red- cap-bunting-hound of the Vatican," and 
 when he brazenly asserts that clerical influ- 
 ences have always kept the great mass of the 
 Irish people in ignorance of the facts con- 
 cerning the history of their country every 
 true Catholic will rightly doubt the genuine- 
 ness of such "patriotism" when it is founded 
 upon such apparent apostacy. 
 
 The paragraph which concludes the Pref- 
 ace to this unfortunate book may be likened 
 to a scorpion as it carries its sting in its 
 tail ! Alluding to the " political interfer- 
 ence" which the Pope is supposed by the 
 author's hallucination to be always "in sea- 
 son and out of season'' forcing on the Irish 
 people, Judge Maguire with that dignity 
 which is so characteristic of a Catholic 
 gentleman when writing of the most 
 exalted Ecclesiastic throughout the Chris- 
 
 tian world and one whom Kings, Queens> 
 Princes and Presidents delight to honor 
 thus depicts the attitude of the successor 
 of St Peter, the Vicar of Christ : 
 
 " The Pope, in this respect, enjoys the un- 
 enviable, not to say infamou* distinction of h*>it g 
 dangerous only to those who confide in him." 
 
 We are not familiar with the form of lan- 
 guage used by the J udiciary of California, 
 but we should most sincerely hope that 
 the foregoing insulting garbage is not a fair 
 specimen thereof ! Catholics will feel the 
 insult intended and they will cheerfully ac- 
 cept it as a part of that Cross which all true 
 disciples are bound to carry. For the Judge 
 of the Superior Court of San Francisco, all 
 Catholics will ardently pray : " Forgive him 
 Father, for he knows not what he says." 
 But if no other assertion in his unfortunate 
 book revealed Judge Maguire's malicious 
 motive in compiling this literary concoction 
 of conceit and calumny combined, the 
 above quotation is sufficient to place his 
 Honor among the ranks of those Pope-hating 
 "patriots" that are the bosom friends of fa- 
 natical Frank Pixley, who, very consistently 
 with his well-known hatred of the Catholic 
 Church and Ireland, pats Judge Maguire 
 affectionately on the back in the last issue 
 of his anti-Catholic Argonaut, and says to 
 his latest recruit : " Well done my good 
 and faithful servant." 
 
 The author of " Ireland and the Pope," 
 opens his volume with an imaginary conver- 
 sation between himself and " a devout Cath- 
 olic and brave but disheartened Irish pa- 
 triot'' who thought the Pope was " misin- 
 formed" when he issued the recent Rescript. 
 Judge Maguire, on the contrary, is morally 
 certain that the action of the Holy Father 
 "had a political price." Of course every- 
 body can afford to laugh at his Honor's sug- 
 gestion, in view of the recent Letter of the 
 Irish Bishops on the Rescript. But we must 
 do Judge Maguire the justice to say that he 
 gives some reasons and very queer reasons 
 they are - why he believes the Pope intended 
 to kill the Irish National League through 
 Mgr. Persico's agency as a ''congenial con- 
 fidant and general spy.' 1 Here is the prin- 
 cipal reason :
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 15 
 
 I. " Mousignor Persico, ia his letter of 
 October last to the Pope, expressly shows that 
 he was sent to Ireland tn pave the way for the 
 destruction of the Irish National League." 
 
 As the legal fraternity would say : We 
 demur to the decision of the Court, for sev- 
 eral reasons. First because Monsignor Per- 
 sico ivrote no letter to the Pope last October, 
 his Honor s assertion to the contrary, not- 
 withstanding ! Secondly, if as we can 
 prove Monsignor Persico sent no letter to 
 the Pope, most assuredly a document that 
 never existed could hardly be made to demon- 
 strate the fact that Monsignor Persico was 
 sent anywhere to destroy the Irish National 
 League or anything else under the sun ! 
 
 No doubt the author of the unfortunate 
 literary venture called " Ireland and the 
 Pope" was misled in his views by reading 
 only one side of the case before him a handy 
 habit in a pettifogger, but a questionable 
 practice for a judge and so the English- 
 concocted cablegrams led him into this ludi- 
 crous error. If Judge Maguire had read 
 the MONITOR of October 19th, 1887, he 
 would have been enlightened on this matter 
 to such an extent that he would not have 
 fallen into the pit which the foes of both 
 Ireland and the Pope dug for him. Here is 
 an extract from the MONITOR of the above 
 date rvhich will enlarge the visual organs 
 of his Honor considerably : 
 
 NO REPORT FROM MGR. PERSICO. 
 
 Untruthful reports concerning Mgr. Persico's 
 opinion of the state of Ireland as derived from 
 personal observation, having been maliciously 
 circulated by the Tory English press, the Pope's 
 representative has found it necessary to public- 
 ly contradict the falsehoods thus circulated for 
 the sole purpose of damaging the Irish cause. 
 
 On a recant visit to Waterford, Mgr. Persico 
 alluded to this disreputable action on the part <>f 
 the English press in the following terms : " His 
 mission," he said, " was one of deference to the 
 Bishops and Catholic people of Ireland. Through 
 his humble person the Holy Father sent his mes- 
 sage of loving sympathy to the Irish nation. He 
 knew that contradictory statements had been 
 made in certain papers that he had sent a report 
 of a certain character to Rome. He gave that 
 statement an emphatic contradiction, but he felt 
 that the Irish people did not need any such con- 
 tradict! in at his hands. He came among them 
 not to criticize or pry, but with love and pym- 
 
 pathy in his heart, anxious to see for himsel 
 the Hta'e f the country and what it needed to 
 male ; it happy anil peaceful. The Holy See had 
 always evinced the mt loving sympathy for 
 In-land and had received in return th warmest 
 devotion of her ppoole. Bvr n<> Pontiff was that 
 f-elini? more strongly shared than by the present 
 Holy Father." 
 
 This extract most effectively bursts the 
 bubble which Judge Mrguire blew up out 
 of the literary suds of sensational papers 
 which are constantly on the qui vive to put 
 the Pop-j, Parnell, Mgr. Peraico or other 
 prominent men in the Church or in Ireland 
 in precisely the wro^y attitude before the 
 eyes of the whole world ! Justice in this 
 instance, at least, was very blind, and his 
 Honor we hope will pardon us if we modest- 
 ly make the suggestion that he will also be 
 forced to reverse his decision in all that he 
 has said condemnatory of the Pope and 
 Monsignor Persico ! 
 
 The Court will also please order the clerk 
 to erase from its opinion on page 11 of " Ire- 
 land and the Pope ' all the incorrect conclu- 
 sions his Honor arrived at through false in- 
 formation concerning Mgr. Persico whom 
 he very graciously condescended to notice 
 as "this treacherous ecclesiastical states- 
 man 1 ' who wrote to the Pope that " the Irish 
 priest would not abandon the political strug- 
 gle of their countrymen, even when urged 
 to do so in the name of the Pontiff and for 
 the good of the Church. " All of which is 
 untrue and naturally falls to the ground 
 when the Court has discovered that no let- 
 ter was sent, and that the cablegram which 
 deceived his Honor was concocted by some 
 scheming lover of sensational lies, who thus 
 caused the Superior Court of San Francisco, 
 California, to sadly blunder in its decision in 
 the celebrated case of "The Pope vs. James 
 G Maguire." 
 
 Thus we have fairly met and refuted 
 some of the first falsehoods with which 
 the author of "Ireland and the Pope" has 
 seen fit to interlard his ill-starred publi- 
 cation.
 
 1C 
 
 THE POPE AND IRBLAND. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 The Fictitious Bull of Pope Adrian IV. Education in Ireland. The Character of Giraldus 
 Cambrensis Analysed by Historical Writers. 
 
 The corner-stone of the inflammatory in- 
 dictment which the author of " Ireland ami 
 the Pope" brings against the successor ot 
 St. Peter, is the bogus Bull of Pope Adrain 
 IV., which Judge Maguire accepts as true, 
 and concerning which he coolly says : 
 
 "The subjugation "f Ireland to English rnl*, 
 as is well known to all students of Irish history, 
 WMS n >t accomplished by fence of English arm-, 
 but by the decree and grant of Pope Adrian IV . 
 supplemented and enforced by the decrees iul 
 order* of Pope Alexander III. 
 
 " While, as I have said, these facts are well- 
 known to all student* of Irish history, and while 
 they are fully attested by every Irish historian 
 worthy of name, clerical influences have alwa> 
 kept the great masses of Irish people in ignor- 
 ance of (hem, so that to-day not one among a 
 hiMidred of the Irieh people know how their 
 country lost her nationality, and still fewer ate 
 ware of the persistent efforts of the successors <-f 
 Adrian and Alexander to keep Ireland in the 
 slavery to which their infamous bargain had de- 
 livered her." 
 
 Such is the dogmatic manner in which 
 Judge Maguire decides the criminality of 
 Popes, defines the crimes which they have 
 committed, and renders a verdict of "guilty" 
 in the harshest language which his Honor 
 could invoke on the heads of innocent men 
 whom without producing a particle of evi- 
 dence he delivers over to the execration of 
 even Catholics, for the " infamous bargain" 
 they entered into ! 
 
 Now it will be a most pleasing task on 
 mr part to point out the errors into which 
 Judge Maguire has fallen in consequence of 
 his Honor having read only one side of this 
 historical question, and thus prejudging the 
 Topes and prejudicing the Irish people 
 against them, 
 
 In the first place therefore, it is not tmte, 
 and consequently it is not by any means 
 "well-known to all students of Irish history" 
 that Popes Adrianand Alexander decreed and 
 granted Ireland to Henry II. of England. 
 No doubt Judge Maguire would like every- 
 body to believe otherwise, but the weight of 
 
 testimony a we shall show further on is 
 greatly against him. 
 
 In the next place, Judge Maguire's "facts" 
 (as he calls his unwarranted assertions) are not 
 "well known to all students of Irish history," 
 nor are they " fully attested by every Irish 
 historian worthy of the name. " The charge 
 against Popes Adrian and Alexander is at 
 best what Father Tom Burke (God rest his 
 soul!) would call t- a Thumping English Lie," 
 and it is adopted only by such Irish histori- 
 ans as are only too willing to take the Eng- 
 lish view of the question, or too lazy to give 
 the subject that scrutiny, which it deserves 
 at their hands. England has often hired 
 moral assassins to keep Ireland within her 
 clutches. Unfortunately for the cause of 
 Erin England has found even Catholics who 
 were willing to be bribed into writing so- 
 called "histories'' which like Scott's "Life 
 of Napoleon," were written to order by the 
 British Government in order to convince the 
 world that England was right in every in- 
 iquity she perpetrated against those whom 
 she overthrew. 
 
 The very first man whom England 
 hired to give currency to the falsehood 
 that Popes Adrian and Alexander gave Ire- 
 land to England, was a Welsh priest named 
 Gerald Barry, who is known under the nom 
 de plume of " Cambrensis," and who evinced 
 his idolatry for the monarch to whom he had 
 hired himself, by styling Henry II., " the 
 Alexander of the West," " the Invincible," 
 " the Solomon of the age," " the most pious 
 of Princes," when as we shall show further 
 on, it is well known that Henry was not 
 only a most immoral man, but he also caused 
 the saintly Bishop Thomas a'Becket to be 
 murdered in his own Cathedral ! 
 
 It is really singular what unanimity 
 exists between all enemies of the Church 
 and the Popes concerning their fears re- 
 garding a mythical something which they all
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 designate by the attractive title, of " clerical 
 influence." Luther lampooned it, Benry 
 VIII., hurled defiance at it, Dr. McGlyrm 
 censured it, Her.ry George decried it, and 
 now conies the Censurer-General of the Vice- 
 gerent of Christ - the disgruntled author of 
 ''Ireland and the Pope" who declaims 
 most violently against that ethereal hob- 
 L'oblin conveniently called by critics of the 
 Popes "clerical influence." The Judge of 
 our Superior Court unqualifiedly asserts that 
 the Irish people are so disgracefully ignor- 
 ant that not one in a hundred of them knows 
 anything of the "infamous bargain" of 
 Popes Adrian and Alexander and their suc- 
 cessors! This is a serious charge, but, for- 
 tunately, ic is one of Henry George's flimsy 
 fictions which his San Francisco disciple has 
 copied from him. The Irish people are 
 neither the ignorant dupes Judge Maguire 
 depicts them, nor are they foolish enough to 
 accept the frantic fanaticism of a frothy 
 fireband for the truth of history. Centuries 
 before the Superior Court of San Francisco 
 had a Chief Censurer-General of the Popes 
 within its bailiwick, the Irish people knew far 
 better than Judge Maguire can now tell 
 them, the whole history of their land as it 
 was handed down through tradition from 
 parent to child. And the descendants of 
 this grand old Irish stock, who live in the 
 present day, have no occasion to sit at the 
 feet of any Georgeite Gamaliel in order to 
 learn the history of the land of their birth. 
 Where and from whom did did this ghost 
 of " clerical influence" assume a shape and 
 became materialized '', Assuredly not in 
 Rome nor from the Popes, as not one of them 
 ever exercised the slightest restraining influ- 
 ence over the education of the Irish people. 
 Was it from the Irish Bishops 1 Decidedly 
 not ! No body of Prelates in the Universal 
 Church of Christ ever did more to foster and 
 to propagate among their people a knowl- 
 edge of the history of their native land, than 
 did the Bishops of Ireland. In the face of 
 the fiercest Penal Code that ever disgraced 
 the statute books of any country, the Irish 
 Bishops had the history of Ireland taught 
 to Catholic children in the shadows of the 
 sweet hawthorne hedges of Ireland, because 
 it was imprisonment and exile toboih teach- 
 er and pupil if British spies discovered a 
 
 Catholic school in Erin ! It was the Irish 
 Bishops who sent their ecclesiastical stu- 
 dents to Rome, Louvain, Paris and other 
 cities in Continental Europe, to be thorough- 
 ly educated in Irish literature and theology, 
 so that they could lead their flocks both 
 along the narrow path of true Faith, and also 
 through the lines of legitimate agitation by 
 which they could and will eventually 
 secure the liberty of their native land. 
 
 Comparatively speaking it is only a few 
 years since Catholic Emancipation was 
 granted and the legal shackles of coercion of 
 conscience unloosed from Priest and patriot 
 in Ireland. Yet what a grand galaxy of 
 scholars, historiar s, orators, statesmen, poets 
 and theologians the Catholic body in Ireland 
 has produced since then ! The mythical 
 " clerical influence" of Judge Maguire did 
 not certainly use what his Honor would call 
 its " infamous bargain" in repressing the 
 poetical, musical, oratorical or historical 
 genius of Ireland ! No country in the world 
 has more of its history embodied in its music 
 and poetry than Ireland, and even the boys 
 and girls of Ireland, as they whistle and lilt 
 the martial air and words of " Let Erin Re- 
 member the Days of Old," could give Judge 
 Maguire a lesson in Irish history which 
 would actually alarm the Judge of the Su- 
 perior Court of San Francisco at his own 
 "ignorance" and at the surprising knowl- 
 edge possessed by even the yossuuns and col- 
 leens of old Grunuaile ! 
 
 To her glory be it said, the great majority 
 of Ireland a best and brightest men were 
 educated under the >Egis of the Catholic 
 Church, and beneath the very canopy of that 
 " clerical influence" which Judge Maguire 
 so mistakingly and yet so maliciously desig- 
 nates as exercising its prerogative to keep the 
 people of Ireland in ignorance of the history 
 of a land whose political persecution came 
 through the prescriptive legislation leveled 
 at the Church herself ! To keep the Irish 
 people in ignorance of the history of their 
 country, therefore, would be to eradicate 
 from their minds the history of the martyrs 
 who died for the Catholic faith, the 
 Confessors who proclaimed it, and the per- 
 secuted people who suffered for it ! Even 
 as recent an enemy of the Pope as the Judge 
 of the Superior Court of San Francisco, will
 
 18 
 
 THE POPE AND IREL.VHD. 
 
 be forced to admit that no "clerical influ- 
 ence'' whatever, in the Catholic Church, 
 would so stupidly stultify itself as to com- 
 mit such a suicidal blunder as that ! 
 
 The truth is that the history of Ireland 
 has been told by Catholic Bishops and Priests 
 to their people from the pulpits of Irish 
 churches, in lectures and sermons, from time 
 immemorial, especially during the long night 
 of English bondage, when, in the eyes of the 
 enemies of suffering Erin, 
 
 ' It WHS treacon to love her 
 And death to defend." 
 
 On the rostrum and from the altar-steps, 
 on the verdant hillsides and by the banks of 
 the Shannon, the Suir, the Biackwater, the 
 Liffey and the Lee; in the cabin of the peas- 
 ant and beside the sweet-smelling turf fire 
 of the Sogyarth Aroon, the sad history of 
 Ireland's sufferings has been reiterated time 
 and again, until even the women and chil- 
 dren of that country treasured every fact of 
 it in their ever-faithful hearts ! 
 
 And in later years, when the sunlight of 
 freedom of conscience, of speech, and of the 
 press, was permitted to permeate the penal- 
 law laden atmosphere of Ireland, how glad- 
 ly the Bishops of that partially emancipated 
 land availed themselves of the valuable ser- 
 vices of the Teaching Orders of the Church 
 in order to dispel that very murky "ignor- 
 ance" which Judge Murphy asserts was fos- 
 tered by '.clerical influence." The Broth- 
 ers of the Christian Schools, the Brothers 
 of St. Patrick, the Brothers of St. Francis, 
 and even the priests themselves, founded 
 Catholic schools wherein the very atmos- 
 phere was impregnated with Irish patriotism 
 gleaned from a knowledge of Irish history. 
 And what the Fathers and Brothers did for 
 the boys of Ireland, the Jesuits, the Vin- 
 centians, the Marists, the Dominicans and 
 the secular clergy did for the young men of 
 Ireland in the Colleges which the "clerical 
 influence" of Catholic Bishops established in 
 nearly every Diocese in that Island of Saints 
 and Sages ! 
 
 And what shall we say of the "ignorance" 
 of Irish history in which the female youth 
 of Ireland has been kept for the past half 
 century by those pure and patriotic Sisters 
 who form the Female Religious Orders who 
 .have implanted virtue and holiness as well 
 
 as historical knowledge in the immaculate 
 breasts of the daughters of St. Patrick ? 
 What a sentiment of disgust must flash over 
 the faces of the Presentation Sisters, Sis- 
 ters of Mercy, Ursulines, Sisters of Charity 
 Poor Clares, Sisters of Loretto, and other 
 zealous teachers of Ireland's youth, when 
 they learn from the Judge of the Superior 
 Court of San Francisco that they are co- 
 conspirators with certain undefined " cleri- 
 cal influences" to keep the rising generation 
 of Irish girls in deep "ignorance" of the 
 true history of their country ! Shame upon 
 the writer who would bring such a wanton 
 charge against the Church which gave him 
 the Christianity and the education he thus 
 defiles ! 
 
 The facts we have cited, therefore, will 
 impel every Irish Catholic and every Irish- 
 American Catholic within the jurisdiction 
 not only of the Superior Court of San Fran- 
 C'sco, but also within the jurisdiction of the 
 Supreme Court of the United States, to de- 
 nounce in unmeasured terms the false and 
 foul assertion of Judge Maguire, as a piece 
 of dastardly defamation which would dis- 
 grace the already dishonored mind of even 
 the fraudulent Froude himself ! In fact 
 such an assertion could only emanate from 
 a mind surcharged with hatred against the 
 Popes, the Prelates, the Priests and the peo- 
 ple of Ireland who belong to God's Church, 
 a Church which entails upon itself the wrath 
 of its enemies because she excommunicates 
 insubordinate ecclesiastics, and which says to 
 political demagogues who would seek to se- 
 cure temporal rights at the sacrifice of Faith 
 and Christian ethics : " Thus far shalt thou 
 go and no farther." 
 
 Recklessness of expression is characteris- 
 tic of all would-be Church critics, especially 
 when they happen to be Catholics who have 
 fallen away from the faith of their fathers. 
 In their over reaching ambition to drag 
 down other Catholic men to the deep pit 
 into which they themselves have fallen 
 
 "Unwept, uohonored and unsung," 
 
 these unfortunate soul-suicides make the most 
 reckless and ridiculous charges against the 
 Church to which they have proved renegades, 
 and the Faith they have foolishly flung back
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 19 
 
 into the Holy Face of that God from Whose 
 Charity they received il. These unwise 
 worldlings act thus so that they may present 
 themselves to the world they worship as men 
 animated by the highest motives and the 
 purest "patriotism." But vain are their 
 caustic criticisms, idle are their vapory in- 
 sinuations, whilst their covert calumnies 
 only recoil upon their heretical heads, to the 
 greater increase of their deep yet well-de- 
 served degradation. 
 
 No amount of pretended " patriotism" 
 can conceal from the penetrating gaze of 
 Irish Catholic people the leprous ulcers on 
 the sin-laden souls of apostate priests or 
 turn coat politicians. With the Irish Cath- 
 olic, whether in Australia or America, on the 
 Continent of Europe, or in the jungles of 
 India, 
 
 F*ith and Fatherland 
 Go hand in hand. 
 
 They know full well that the pretended 
 '* patriot'' who is a Judas to his God, will 
 eventually prove an Arnold to the Irish 
 cause. They realize the fact fr^m bitter ex- 
 perience that a staunch Protestant like Par- 
 nell is a far safer political guide than a Cath- 
 olic who has made himself believe that his 
 soul is not large enough to contain both his 
 religion and his Home Rule principles. 
 Hencs, those foolish writers who mistakingly 
 think they elevate themselves by puffing up 
 their pretended "patriotism," by lampoon- 
 ing and lying against the Popes, and by 
 concocting windy and watery diatribes 
 against " clerical influences" which are 
 merely meaningless, mental cobwebs of their 
 own diseased imaginations soon find their 
 level when their tricks are exposed and their 
 cant, hypocrisy and degraded demagoguism 
 is pilloried in the public press in all its 
 naked deformity ! 
 
 In his eager desire to prove that the Bull 
 of Pope A drian was a genuine document, 
 Judge Maguire vauntingly proclaims the 
 fact that with two exceptions - all the Irish 
 historians from Geraldus Cambrensis in 1178, 
 bear witness in favor of his side of the case. 
 Now let us examine into the moral, intel- 
 lectual and linguistic acquirements of Gerald 
 Barry who is the Geraldus Cambrensis of 
 Judge Maguire in order to present to "the 
 
 Court" the character of the witness whom 
 his Honor .introduces as best qualified to 
 give testimony against Popes Adrian and 
 Alexander. 
 
 Here is the faithful pen-portrait which the 
 Abbe MacGeoghegan draws of this hireling 
 Welshman whom Judge Maguire very singu - 
 larly selects as foremost among Irish his- 
 torians ! Here is the character of Judge 
 Maguire's principal witness in the hopeless 
 task his Honor has undertaken of proving 
 his charges against certain Popes of Rome. 
 
 In the opening chapter of his elaborate 
 History of Ireland, the Abbe MacGeoghegan 
 thus dissects the "history" which Geraldus 
 Cambrensis concocted by order of the King 
 of England who was determined to make 
 falsehood appear as truth, and to foster 
 forgery through fraud --in order to adduce 
 even suborned evidence in proof of his pre- 
 tended right t ) retain Ireland in the grasp 
 of England. 
 
 "The English, having in the twelfth cen- 
 tury, put an end to the Irish monarchy, 
 and wishing to give a color of justice to 
 their usurpation, and to the tyranny 
 which they exercised against the inhabi- 
 tants of the country, have, without any 
 other title than a fictitious bull, of Adrian 
 the Fourth, and the right of the strongest, 
 represented the Irish as savages, who in- 
 habited the woods,* and who never obeyed 
 the laws, as if these titles were sufficient 
 for stripping them of their properties.f 
 What! that people so renowned in the 
 first ages of Christianity for their piety 
 and learning, and among whom the Anglo- 
 Saxons themselves went, according to their 
 own historians, to be instructed, during 
 the centuries, which preceded the invasion 
 of the English, are all of a sudden reduced 
 to the condition of savageslj The meta- 
 morphosis is too difficult to be admitted, 
 and at the same time too obvious for us not 
 to feel how absurd such an accusation 
 must be. * 
 
 Gerald Barry, a priest, and native of * v 
 country of Wales, k 
 Latin Cambria, (from 
 the name of Cambrem 
 is known)., was the fi 
 undertook to write the i 
 
 *Sylvestres Hiberni. 
 tCamd. edit. Lond. p. 73f 
 
 } "They retired hither, f 
 of divine study, or a mcA 
 Bede's Church History, b.C
 
 20 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 n order to perpetuate the 
 which his countrymen had already pub- 
 lished against its inhibit 'intx. 
 
 Circumstances required that they should 
 m ike th Irish pass for barbarians. The 
 title of Henry the Second was founded only 
 upon a bull obtained clandestinely from 
 Pope Adrian the Fourth, an Englishman 
 by bir'.h. The cause of this bull was a 
 false statement which Henry had given to 
 the Pope of the impiety and barbarism of 
 the Irish nation. CambrensU Was then 
 ordered to verify, by writing, the state- 
 ment upon which the granting of the bull 
 had been extorted. He did not fail to 
 intermix his work witU calumnies, and 
 groundless absurdities; however, the credit 
 of a powerful kingknew how to make even 
 the court of Rome believe them. It was 
 in this spirit that Cambrensis wrote his 
 history^ and from thence the English 
 authors have taken the false coloring 
 under ^ which ancient Ireland has been 
 represented. Passion and interest made 
 them pass over the recantation which 
 Cambrensis felt himself obliged to make, 
 in the latter part of his life, of several false 
 and calumnious imputations, with which 
 'his history has been filled. Cambrensis 
 did not possess the necessary requisites for 
 an historian. History is not a mere pro- 
 duction of the mind; it is an assemblage of 
 facts, the arrangement of which depends 
 alone upon the author. To write the 
 history of a country it is essential to know 
 it, likewise the character and genius of ita 
 inhabitants, and to be capable of consult- 
 ing its annals. Cambrensis possessed none 
 of these qualities with respect to Ireland, 
 the history whereof he undertook to write. 
 It is true, that he had been twice in that 
 country, first through curiosity, in 1171, 
 to witness the advancement of his relations 
 and friends; secondly, as preceptor of John 
 Earl of Montayne, son of Henry the Second 
 to whom, the king, his father, had given 
 the title Lord of Ireland. In those two 
 voyages he remained but eighteen months 
 in Ireland, and saw about one-third of it, 
 which alone obeyed the English; he could 
 not with safety put his foot into any other 
 '"rt of the kingdom. Being incapable of 
 - *' rds of the country, 
 
 guage to which he was 
 jger,) he tt\s obliged to 
 id of truth! falsehoods, 
 ,ons of a pr< jikliccd mind, 
 umes. 
 
 animals, which wallow in 
 i'er it to the sweetest flowers* 
 
 defiled his writings with the 
 
 rabble; he resolved to stuff 
 
 >n with the iiii perfections of 
 
 orded by himself, like the 
 
 .aws poison from the thyme 
 
 he attached himself to whatever he coulJ 
 discover meanest and most vil i among the 
 people; unsupported likewise by any 
 written authority, or the evidence of any 
 correct or impartial man, he composed an 
 absurd collection of old women's, sailors' 
 and soldiers' stories, which he seasons with 
 scandalous aspersions, satires and invec- 
 tives against tne nation; neither prince 
 nor people,- clergy, secular or regular, are 
 spared; he respects nothing; everything 
 becomes the object of his calumnies and 
 detraction^ Having spent five years in 
 composing this fine work, the five books 
 of his pretended history of Ireland came 
 forth. In raptures with that new produc- 
 tion of his genius, and unable to conceal 
 his vanity, Cambrensis repaired to Oxford}: 
 where, in presence of learned doctors and 
 the assembled people, he read, after the 
 example of the Greeks, his topography, 
 during three successive days, giving to each 
 successive book an entire day. To render 
 the comedy more solemn, he treated the 
 whole town splendidly for three days; the 
 first was appropriated to the populace; the 
 second to the doctors, professors and prin- 
 cipal scholars of the university; and lastly 
 the third day he regaled the otner scholars 
 soldiers and citizens of the town; "a noble 
 and brilliant action," Bays Cambrensis 
 himself, "whereby the ancient custom of 
 the poets has been, for the first time, re- 
 newed in England." But unfortunately 
 for him, the success did not answer his 
 expectations; it was easily seen, particu- 
 larly at court, that the bad choice he had 
 made of the materials whereof his history 
 had been composed, and the fables he had 
 introduced into it, could be but the effect 
 of his ignorance, or hatred for the Irish 
 nation. They were not astray for the 
 cause of that hatred; besides the private 
 quarrel which he bad with Aubin O'Mol- 
 loy, monk of the order of Citeaux, and 
 abbot nf Bahinglass, in which he was 
 defeated, and wbich excited his anger 
 against that nation, he wished for the ruin 
 and destruction altogether of the Irish, 
 who might prove an obstacle to the ag- 
 grandizement of his relatives and friends, 
 
 t Grat. Lucius, r.ap. 5, p. 38. 
 } Usser. Silog. edit. Par. Epist, 49, p. 84, 
 et, 85. 
 
 from which the bee extracts honey. He has 
 thus formed from among the most abandoned 
 of the Irish, a package; leaving those things 
 which he found most eminent, unnoticed. 
 Whatsoever filth he discovered, appeared as 
 a gem to him; with it, as if most precious, 
 has he arranged his productions and work, 
 so that, like the swine, he delights more in 
 the dunghill than to enjoy himself amidst 
 the sweetest odors." Gratianus Lucius, p. 5, 
 c. 41.
 
 THE POPE AND 1RKLAND. 
 
 21 
 
 as appear* from his second book on the 
 conquest <.f that people. Nothing tends to 
 discover* more easily the malignity and 
 inconsistency of Cambrensis' mind, than 
 the extremes into which he lets himself be 
 carried. Sometimes he extols with warmth 
 the merit of his relations, newly wtuWi^hed 
 in that country; again he exclaim* vio- 
 lently against the English and Normans 
 engagMl with them in the same cause, 
 against the Irish. 
 
 While King Henry II. lived, that prince 
 was, according to him, "the Alexander of 
 the west," "the Invincible," "the Solo- 
 mon of his age," ''the most pious of prin- 
 ces, " who had the glory of repressing the 
 fury of the Gentiles, not only of Europe, 
 but likewise of Asia, beyond the Mediter- 
 ranean. The most extravagant phrases 
 which the refined flatterer could invent 
 were not spared in extolling him, contrary 
 to reason and common sense; for exam- 
 ple, he did not blush to say of that prince, 
 that his victories and conquests were lim- 
 ited only by the circumference and ex- 
 tremities of the earth. However, so soon 
 as the .king was dead, (as David Powell 
 remarks,) he broke forth into a thousand 
 invectives against his memory in the book 
 entitled "The Instructions of a Prince," 
 and gave free vent to his ancient enmity 
 against him. That alone should suffice to 
 characterize this author, and to show what 
 littie credit every thing else which he ad- 
 vanced is entitled. 
 
 The reproaches which were directed 
 against Cambrensis /or having inserted in 
 his writings so much fabulous matter ob- 
 liged him to recant what he had advanced 
 both by an apology, inserted in the preface 
 of his book, called, "The Conquest of Ire- 
 land," and a treatise on "Recantation." 
 In these he acknowledges that, although 
 he learned from men of that country, 
 worthy of belief, mftny things which he 
 mentions, he had followed the reports of 
 the vulgar in many others; but he thinks 
 as St. Augustine, in hi* book on the "City 
 of God," that we should not positively aff- 
 irm, nor absolutely deny, the things we 
 have only from hereby. Sir James Ware 
 in his "Antiquities of Ireland," knew how 
 to appreciate with justice the merit of our 
 
 * Grat. Luc. c. 7, p. 49, 50, 51. 52, 53 etc. 
 
 * "Many things concerning Ireland could 
 be noticed in this place as fabulous, which 
 Cambrensis hath heaped together in his to- 
 pography. To analyze or descant upon each 
 would require a whole tract. Caution should 
 be particularly applied by the reader to his 
 topography, which Giraldns himself confess- 
 es. I cannot but express my surprise, how 
 men now-a-days otherwise grave and learned 
 have obtruded on the world the fictions of 
 Giraldus for truths." Ware's Antiquities of 
 Ireland, c. 23, 
 
 author. The following is the opinion he 
 holds of him: "C.imbrensis," said he 
 "has collected into his topography .so many 
 fabulous things, that it would r< quire an 
 entire volume to diccuss it correctly." Ih 
 the mean time he warns the reader to per- 
 use it with caution; he then adds, ''That 
 it astonishes him how men of his time, 
 otherwise grave and learned, could have 
 imposed upon the world, by giving as 
 truths the fictitious of Cambrensis" 
 
 But. notwithstanding the incontestable 
 proofs of tlie fallacy and imposture in the 
 writings of this discredited author, and al- 
 though they had lain 400 years in obscurity 
 until 1602, when Camden had them pub- 
 lished at Frankfort, all. who have spoken 
 of the Irish since that period, but partic- 
 ularly the English, have no other foun- 
 dation for the.ir abuses against them 
 than the authority of that impostor. 
 The evil has become so general throughout 
 Europe, that in most books and geograph- 
 ical treatises, wherein there is mention of 
 the manners and customs of nations, we 
 find upon the Irish only the poisoned darts 
 which Cambrensis had directed against 
 them.f 
 
 After the character now drawn of Cam- 
 brensis, let the judicious and impartial 
 reader judge if he can be considered as a 
 grave historian, and one worthy of credit; 
 or if he should not, on the contrary, oe 
 looked upon as a libeller and impostor, 
 who sought, by amusing the public with 
 absurd tales, to disgrace, against all truth 
 and justice, an entire nation. All others 
 among the English who have undertaken 
 to write the history of Ireland, particularly 
 since the Reformation, have, "like the asp 
 that borrows the venom of the viper,"t 
 taken the same tone as Cambrensis, and 
 faithfully followed his tracks; among the 
 number are Hammer, Campion, Spencer, 
 Camden &c. By breathing the same air 
 as he, they were animated by the same 
 spirit, and have inherited all his hatred 
 against the Irish. 
 
 What must intelligent and impartial peo- 
 ple think of Judge Maguire's principal wit- 
 ness against the Pope and in favor of the 
 bogus Bull ? A hireling writer is like a 
 perjured witness, and Gerald Barry, as the 
 Abbe MacGeoghegan clearly shows, was the 
 purchased tool of one of England's tyranni- 
 cal monarchs who hired the Welshman to 
 malign the people of Ireland, and to fabri- 
 
 t Grat. Luc. c. 1, p. 4. 
 
 t "They are borne by a similar propensity 
 to traduce the Irish, (as it is expressed in the 
 proverb) the asp borrows poison from the vi- 
 per." Gratianus Lucius, c. 1, p. 3.
 
 22 
 
 THK POPB AND IEELAND. 
 
 cate reasons why a fraudulent, forged and 
 fictitious Bull should be considered genuine ! 
 
 A nice witness that to support the ani- 
 mosity which Judge Magu ire's antagonism 
 to the Pope's clearly demonstrates ! A bad 
 cause is consistently backed up by bad men 
 and bad books, and in selecting the malig- 
 nant, mercenary Cambrensis as the corner- 
 stone of his testimony against Pope Adrian, 
 Judge Maguire has virtually broken down 
 his own case, and every candid person will 
 say with the MONITOR that it should be 
 thrown out of Court ! 
 
 It will be noticed in the above extract 
 that the Abbe Mac Geoghegan says " the 
 title of Henry II. to Ireland was founded 
 only upon a Bull obtained clandestinely from 
 Pope Adrian IV. The cause of this Bull 
 was a false statement which Henry had given 
 
 to the Pope of the impiety and barbarism of 
 the Irish nation." This at first sight might ap- 
 pear as if such were the sentiment of the 
 writer, but as the Abbe MacGeoghegan had 
 perviously made use of the condemnatory 
 expression " a fictitious Bull of Adrian the 
 Fourth," it is easily seen that the writer was 
 merely stating the case us set forth by the 
 enemies of the Church, who were always de- 
 sirous of discovering some pretext by which 
 to break the chains of faith and love which 
 have ever bound the hearts of the people of 
 Ireland to the Pope of Rome. 
 
 So much for the wretch Gerald Barry, 
 whom Abbe" MacGeoghegan justly styles " a 
 libeller and an impostor," and whom Judge 
 Maguire places most prominently in the wit- 
 ness-box in order to give perjured testimony 
 against the Popes of Rome !
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 23. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 The Character of Giraldns Cambrensis Depicted by Different Writers. 
 
 THIRD ARTICLE. 
 
 The fraudulent motiyes which prompted 
 the hireling Giraldua Cambrensis to accede 
 to the request of King Henry II. of Eng- 
 land, which the Abbe McGeoghegan so 
 lucidly exposes, have also drawn down 
 upon the head of that disreputable Welsh- 
 man the just indignation of numerous other 
 Irish historical writers. 
 
 Assuredly Judge Maguire could not have 
 known the true character of Giraldus Cam- 
 brensis, or he would never have cited that 
 pensioned libeler of the Irish people as a 
 witness to the authenticity of the bogus 
 Bull of Pope Adrian IV. Already we have 
 shown the diabolical mendacity of Judge 
 Maguire's principal witness against the 
 Popes, upon the evidence of such veritable 
 testimony as that given by the Abbe Mac- 
 Geoghegan, and now let us place on the 
 witness stand of the Superior Court of San 
 Francisco other trustworthy witnesses whose 
 evidence will not only fully corroborate 
 the truth told by Abbe MacGeoghegan, but 
 some of whom go even to further extremes 
 in their just condemnation of the bribe- 
 taking calumniator of both the Pope and 
 the Irish people, the stool-pigeon of Henry 
 the Second Giraldus Cambrensis. 
 
 Speaking of the inhuman brood of blood- 
 thirsty Welshmen whom the iniquitous 
 Irish traitor MacMurrough gathered around 
 him in Wales, when he applied to King 
 Henry II. of England for help to avert the 
 threatened vengeance of the Irish people, 
 Professor Martin A. O'Brennan, in the first 
 volume of his Irish Antiquities, draws the 
 following brief but graphic picture of the 
 peculiarities which adorned their characters: 
 
 " Almost every history on Irish matters, 
 even Wright's, (brought out by Tallis), has 
 agreed that the cause of religion in Ireland, 
 at that, very time, [the time of Henry's in- 
 vasion] did not require any reformation 
 and could not expect it from the allies of 
 the adulterous, perjured Mac Murrough. 
 Who were his first adherents in Wales ? 
 The Fifcz Henrys, illegitimate sons of Henry 
 I., and other children of Nesta, the concu- 
 bine of the said Henry, viz. De Gros, Fitz- 
 
 GeraM, Fitz Stephen, the three De Harris, 
 one of whom was the infamous Cambrensis- 
 all the offspring of the harlot Nesta a 
 vicious monarch, with Cavanagh, his bas- 
 tard son, were the nest of robbers who, at 
 first, gave their adhesion to Derinod. iiod! 
 how awful is the reflection, that an island 
 which was so powerful iti resources should 
 become the prey of such an infernal ban- 
 ditti - all the issue of sin ! The soul shrink* 
 back from the contemplation of, and the 
 flesh of the hand that writes these lines, 
 creeps with disgust at the mere recording of 
 such turpitude. From the origin of the 
 gang of English plunderers we refer to 
 Wright's ' Ireland,' chap. ix. p. 1. The 
 idea of Satan quoting Scripture is not more 
 repugnant than religious reform from such 
 sinful reptiles. What a precious company 
 Dermod brought with him to the Abbot of 
 Ferns, in Wexford. Cambrensis says that 
 the Helen of Ireland, Dervorgilla, wife of 
 O'Rourke, was one of the company at the 
 Abbot's table. Can it be? We cannot 
 answer. What a fraternity ! Only the 
 presence of the murderer of the glorious 
 a Becket was wanted to complement one of 
 the most remarkable brotherhoods that ever 
 existed !" 
 
 What do Catholics think of the origin of 
 Giraldus Cambrensis, the first and foremost 
 witness whom the author of "Ireland and 
 the Pope" has presented in Court in order 
 to convict, upon perjured testimony, Popes 
 Adrian IV. a.nd Alexander III. of commit- 
 ting a most heinous crime against the Cath- 
 olic people of Ireland ? Are our readers 
 prepared to give any credence whatever to 
 this Welsh calumniator of the Irish people ? 
 We think not. The iniquitous birth, the 
 corrupt blood, and the evil company kept by 
 Giraldus Cambrensis, at once stamp him as 
 the perjured tool of King Henry II., and 
 the fitting sycophant to first concoct the 
 story of Pope Adrian's gift of Ireland to 
 that disreputable monarch ! 
 
 Judge Maguire is cheerfully welcome to 
 all the credit he can achieve by introducing 
 to the American public the malodorous 
 memory of Giraldus Cambrensis, as his first 
 and best witness against a Pope who was 
 raised up by Almighty God from the posi-
 
 21 
 
 THK POPK AND IRELAND. 
 
 tion of a beggar boy to the highest position 
 which man can achieve on earth ! Pupe. 
 \ in ni IV. was an Englishman, and the 
 fact of his nationality has been used by the 
 riu- iiiii-s of truth in order to prejudice the 
 whole Irish Catholic race against him. 
 Every English historian, and every enemy 
 alike of Catholicity, Ireland, and truth, 
 {) trades the fact that Pope Adrian IV., was 
 *' the only Englishman that ever occupied 
 the Chair of Peter." Numerous other na- 
 tionalities have had but a single representa- 
 tive in the person of the Vicar of Christ, 
 but not a single biographical or historical 
 writer makes allusion to the fact ! Why, 
 therefore, do the historians of England and 
 the opponents of the Papacy in this 
 country, so steadfastly harp upon the fact 
 that Adrian IV. " was the only Englishman 
 that ever occupied the Chair of Peter" ? 
 Simply in order to try and create in the 
 hearts of Irish Catholics a virulent antipa- 
 thy to the Vicar of Christ, and thus cause a 
 schism in the Catholic Church. Catholics, 
 therefore, should view with suspicion any 
 assertions made by writers who form 
 their false charges against a Pontiff upon 
 the prejudices which they hope to arouse 
 through working upon the well-known na- 
 tional antipathy which the Irish people 
 have against English rulers whether civil 
 or religious. 
 
 The next witness whom we shall produce 
 in order to further illustrate the infamous 
 character of Giraldus Cambrensis, is Mr. 
 John J. Clancy, whose work, " Ireland : 
 As She Is, As She Has Been, and as She 
 Ought to Be," Judge Maguire no doubt is 
 familiar with. In the opening of the second 
 chapter of that work, the author alludes to 
 Giraldus Cambrensis as " the lying Welsh- 
 man," and, in another portion of the 
 volume, he thus portrays the vile character 
 of Judge Maguire's most prominent witness 
 against the Popes : 
 
 " Gerald Barry (Cambrensis), Welshman 
 by birth, monk by profession, knave and 
 sycophant by nature, was the first British 
 historian to deal with Anglo-Irish affairs. 
 James A. Froude, Englishman by birth, 
 ex-theologue by profession, bigot and par- 
 tisan by temperament and education, is the 
 latest adventurer who has donned the cap of 
 Cambrensis. 
 
 Each may be accurately described as the 
 hlttiirian laureate of England, bound to earn 
 1m purridge ty praising his mister through 
 thick and thin, and halting at no obstacle 
 of rude fact while doing so. The Welsh- 
 man was commissioned by Henry II. to 
 j> lint the Irish as a lawless, graceless, god- 
 less crew ; so Gerald promptly reported 
 that ''their chief characteristics were treach- 
 ery, thirst for blood, unbridled licentious 
 ness, and inveterate detestation of order 
 and rule" ! Of the scribe who penned these 
 words it has been said that he never spoke 
 the truth, unless by accident." 
 
 A man whose moral character is so bad 
 that "hi never spoke the truth except by acci- 
 dent," is hardly up to the standard of his- 
 torians who are worthy of belief. Cam- 
 brensis may be good enough authority for 
 Judge Maguire, but we feel assured that 
 Catholics must have more credible and re- 
 spectable testimony before they will ad- 
 judge Popes Adrian and Alexander guilty 
 of having made over Ireland to the murder- 
 er of Thomas a Becket, on the testimony of 
 a witness who has the reputation of "never 
 having told the truth except by accident !" 
 
 The next witness we will call in order to 
 enlighten Judge Maguire upon the character 
 of Cdmbrensis, is the celebrated Irish poet 
 and historian Thomas Moore, who thus 
 outlines the reaswns which should impel all 
 impartial-minded people in refusing to give 
 credence to a single statement made by this 
 mercenary maligner of both the Popes and 
 the Irish people. " In estimating the value 
 of Cambrensis' testimony," says Moore, on 
 page 342 of the second volume of his 
 "History of Ireland," "the character of 
 the man himself ought to be taken into 
 account ; and, finding him so ready a be- 
 liever and reporter of all sorts of physical 
 marvels and masters, we should consider 
 whether a taste for the morally monstrous 
 may not also have inspired his pen, and 
 induced him in a similar manner, to impose 
 as well upon himself, perhaps, as his read- 
 ers. " 
 
 Such is the estimate which Thomas 
 Moore places upon Judge Maguire's stal- 
 wart witness. And now, let us introduce 
 into the Superior Court of San Francisco the 
 well-known history of Thomas Mooney, 
 and learn the corrupt character of the Pope-
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 25 
 
 libeling Cambrensis, as described by him in 
 the presence of his Honor James G. Ma- 
 guire. Here is Thomas Mooney's testimony, 
 as recorded on pages 107-9-11 of his " His- 
 tory of Ireland" : 
 
 " The man who stands conspicuous on 
 the page of time, as the historian caul tra- 
 ducer of Ireland, is Gerald Barry , commonly 
 allied Giraldus Cambrensis ; he was the first 
 stranger who undertook to write a history 
 of Ireland. Giraldus was a Welsh priest, 
 who followed the fortunes of his relatives 
 and friends, in their invasions of Ireland, 
 from 1169 to 1171. Henry the Second of 
 England had made claim to the Irish soil, 
 at the court of Rome ; he represented the 
 Irish people to Pope Adrian (an English- 
 man) as destitute of religion, law, morals, 
 or government ; and to support this repre- 
 sentation, with a view to induce the Pope 
 to join his cause, he employed Giraldus to 
 write his book. The Popes of that epoch 
 had much temporal power awarded to them 
 by the nations of Europe. They were, by 
 a kind of universal consent, referred to as 
 arbiters it all national or princely disputes. 
 Their decisions were bowed to with implicit 
 obedience by the whole Christian world. 
 Hence the anxiety of Henry to procure a 
 corrupt witness against Ireland, which Gir- 
 aldus proved himself to be. It appeared 
 that Henry obtained a clandestine bull 
 from Pope Adrian, which (though the 
 genuineness of this document has been dis- 
 puted by O'Connell and others) conferred 
 authority on Henry to invade Ireland, and 
 force it into subjection to England, and, 
 through the English monarch, more im- 
 mediately than it had been, to the Pope. 
 
 To sustain the king, Cambrensis wrote his 
 "History of Ireland." He was only twice 
 in Ireland, once with the adventurers 
 under Strongbow, and once with Prince 
 John, the son of Henry the Second, both 
 visits not occupying more than eighteen 
 months; he only saw about one- third of the 
 country ; he, or his, durst proceed no farth- 
 er ; he understood not the language of the 
 people, to whom he was a total stranger, 
 and could not, therefore, consult the records 
 of their ancient archives ; he was obliged to 
 substitute inventions, and tales, picked up 
 after the manner of our modern travellers, 
 for historical facts ; he mixed only with the 
 most common and illiterate, and such tales 
 as he obtained from the lowest, he distorted 
 and mixed up with the most ridiculous in- 
 ventions of his own, representing the people 
 as little better than barbarians, and their 
 civilization by conquest a meritorious act. 
 * * * * The "History of Ireland," 
 written by this half-idtted cahimniator, 
 represents the river Shannon as discharging 
 itself into the North Sea, whereas it dis- 
 
 charges itself into the South or Atlantic. 
 He scarcely mentions who were the first 
 inhabitants of Ireland ; as to the Scoto- 
 Milesians, who were the peaceful possessors 
 of it for two thousand years, he gives no 
 account whatever, either of their govern- 
 ment, laws, battles or inventions ; he says, 
 indeed, there had been one hundred and 
 eighty-one monarchs of that race before his 
 time, but does not give us so much as their 
 names. 
 
 Such was the authority on which the ma- 
 jority of subsequent English writers have 
 deprived Ireland of her two thousand years 
 of literature and glory. The learned Abbe" 
 McGeoghegan, from whom, in O'Kelly's 
 translation, I have condensed some of the 
 foregoing, asks, with great force, " Have 
 not the Irish an equal right to complain of 
 him, as Josephus [in his first book against 
 Appion] complains of some Greek authors, 
 who undertook to compose the history of 
 the Jewish war, the destruction of Jeru- 
 salem, and captivity of the Jews, from hear- 
 say, without having ever been in the 
 country, or seen the things of which thf y 
 wrote, and who, he said, impudently as- 
 sumed to themselves the title of histori- 
 ans?" ****** 
 
 Men " grave and learned" have adopted, 
 age after age, the falsehoods of Cambrensis; 
 have added to these falsehoods, and have 
 piled them up with unblushing effrontery ; 
 for this they have been well rewarded with 
 fat places and easy chairs by the British 
 government ; and the worst of it is, there 
 are plenty of "grave and learned men," in 
 our day, who pursue the self -same course in 
 reference to unhappy Ireland, and who are 
 rewarded by the self-same power that in- 
 stigated and rewarded Cambrensis. The 
 works of this false witness lay buried in 
 obscurity for four hundred years, until re- 
 published by Camden, at Frankfort, in 
 1602 ; and thus was the poison generated 
 anew through the mind of Europe. Those 
 old, confronted, and discredited falsehoods 
 were reproduced by the host of calumnia- 
 tors, who grew up after the Reformation, 
 and who methodically and unblushingly 
 followed Cambrensis, building up their 
 histories on his fictions ; for the same mo- 
 tives that actuated Cambrensis, in the 
 twelfth century, have guided the pens of 
 most of the English historians of Ireland, 
 since the Reformation. Hammer, Campion, 
 Spenser, Camden, and Leland, are amongst 
 the most conspicuous of the English defam- 
 ers of Ireland ; whilst it must be confessed, 
 with deep humility, that Ireland has vomi 
 ted forth monstrosities, who have under- 
 taken, for English pay, to disparage and 
 vilify the glorious, though oppressed, land 
 that bore them." 
 
 We have other witnesses by whom we
 
 THK POPK AND IRELAND. 
 
 might also prove the contemptible, corrupt 
 and untruthful character of Judge Maguire's 
 chief witness, but we think it entirely un- 
 necessary to call them into Court, as the 
 evidence we have already adduced is suffici- 
 ent to satisfy every unprejudiced person 
 that neither Popes Adrian IV., Alexander 
 III. nor the Irish people, were guilty of the 
 crimes he charged against them. That is, 
 Adrian never sent a Bull to King Henry 
 II., bestowing Ireland upon him; Alexan- 
 der IIL never sent a Bull sanctioning it ; 
 nor were the Irish people the savages which 
 this libellous hireling depicted them. 
 
 And now that we have torn the mask 
 away from Judge Maguire's most treasured 
 witness, and shown him up in all his naked 
 deformity, we will turn our attention to the 
 Bull itself, and next week we will introduce 
 as our first witness in defence of Popes 
 Adrian and Alexander, his Eminence Car- 
 dinal Moran, whose learned essay upon that 
 interesting historical question is purposely 
 deprecated by the prejudiced author of 
 " Ireland and the Pope," for the sole pur- 
 pose of undermining its influence and pre- 
 disposing Irish Catholic readers to reject its 
 truthful statements. 
 
 The name of Cardinal Moran carries with 
 it great weight. He is among the most 
 ardent Irish patriots that ever wore a mitre. 
 
 As an Irish annalist and student of Irish 
 ecclesiastical history he has no ecjual in our 
 day. He has made the question of the 
 genuineness or the fraudulency of the sup- 
 posed Bull of Pope Adrian to Henry II., 
 the subject of close study for a number of 
 years. His Eminence visited Rome fre- 
 quently in order to search among the Vati- 
 can Archives for documents bearing on this 
 great Irish Catholic question, and he spi nt 
 much valuable time in compiling authorities 
 which add great weight to his able argu- 
 ment, which, by the way, Judge Maguire 
 superciliously throws asHe with the curt 
 and caustic criticism that it is "a very in- 
 genious but radically defective essay.'' 
 
 Notwithstanding Judge Maguire's ipse 
 dixit, however, our Catholic readers have 
 sufficient intelligence to peruse, digeat, and 
 decide for themselves whether Cardinal 
 Moran's able contribution in defence of the 
 supposed criminals whom Judge Maguire 
 has prejudged and condemned, is the " de- 
 fective essay" the author of "Ireland and 
 the Pope" designates it, or an unanswerable 
 argument in proof of the fact that Henry 
 II. of England, and some of his courtiers, 
 f&rged the so-called Bull of Pope Adrian 
 IV. in order to frame for him and them an 
 excuse for invading Ireland.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 27 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 ? 
 
 Pope Adrian's Bull Proved Fictitious by Cardinal Moran. An Able Historical Essay. 
 Conclusive Proofs that the Bull was a Forgery. 
 
 There was a time when it would be little 
 less than treason to question the genuine- 
 ness of the Bull by which Pope Adrian IV. 
 is supposed to have made a grant of Ireland 
 to Henry the Second; and, indeed from the 
 first half of the thirteenth to the close of 
 the fifteenth century, it was principally 
 through this supposed grant of the Holy 
 See that the English Government sought 
 to justify their claim to hold dominion in 
 our island. However, opinions and times 
 have changed, and at the present day this 
 Bull of Adrian has as little bearing on the 
 connection between England and this coun- 
 try, as it could possibly have on the union 
 of the Isle of Man with Great Britain. 
 
 On the other hand, many strange things 
 have been said during the past months in 
 the so-called nationalist journals, while as- 
 serting the genuineness of this famous 
 Bull. I need scarcely remark that it does 
 not seem to have been the love either of 
 our poor country or of historic truth that 
 inspired their declamation. It proceed- 
 ed mainly from their hatred to the Sov- 
 ereign Pontiff, and from the vain hope 
 that such exaggerated statements might 
 in some way weaken the devoted affec- 
 tion of our people for Rome. 
 
 Laying aside such prejudiced opinions, 
 the controversy as to the genuineness of 
 Adrian's Bull should be viewed in a purely 
 historical light, and its decision must de- 
 pend on the value and weight of the histor- 
 ical arguments which may be advanced to 
 sustain it. 
 
 The following is a literal translation of 
 the old 
 
 LATIN TEXT OF ADRIAN'S BULL: 
 
 "Adrian, Bishop, servant of the servants of 
 God. to our most dear Son in Christ, the illustri- 
 ous King of the English, greeting and the Apos- 
 tolical Benediction. 
 
 "The thoughts of Your Highness are laudably 
 and profitably directed to the greater glory of 
 your name on earth and to the increase of the 
 reward of eternal happiness in heaven, when as 
 a Catholic Prince you propose to yourself to ex- 
 tend the borders of the Church, to announce the 
 truths of Christian Faith to ignorant and bar- 
 barous nations, and to root out the weeds of 
 wickedness from the field of the Lord; and the 
 more effectually to accomplish this, you implore 
 the counsel and favor of the Apostolic See. In 
 which matter we feel assured that the higher 
 your aims are, and the more discreet your pro- 
 ceedings, the happier, with God's aid, will be the 
 result; because those undertakings that proceed 
 from the ardor of faith and the love of religion 
 
 are sure always to have a prosperous end and is- 
 sue. 
 
 "It is beyond aU doubt, as your Highness also 
 doth acknowledge, that Ireland, and all the is- 
 lands upon which Christ the Sun of Justice has 
 shone, and which have received the knowledge 
 of the Christian faith, are subject to the author- 
 ity of St. Peter and of the most Holy Roman 
 Church. Wherefore we are the more desirous to 
 sow iu them an acceptable seed and a plantation 
 pleasing unto God, because we know that a most 
 rigorous account of them shall be required of us 
 hereafter. 
 
 "Now, most dear Son in Christ, you have sig- 
 nified to us that you propose to enter the island 
 of Ireland to establish the observance of law 
 among its people, and to eradicate the weeds of 
 vice; and that you are willing to pay from every 
 house one penny as an annual tribute to St. Pe- 
 ter, and to preserve the rights of the churches of 
 that land, whole and inviolate. We, therefore, 
 receiving with due favor your pious and laudable 
 desires, and graciously granting our consent to 
 your petition, declare that it is pleasing and ac- 
 ceptable to us, that for the purpose of enlarging 
 the limits of the Church, setting bounds to the 
 torrent of vice, reforming evil manners, planting 
 the seeds of virtue and increasing Christian 
 faith, you should enter that island and carry into 
 effect those things which belong to the service of 
 God and to the salvation of that people; and that 
 the people of that land should honorably receive 
 and reverence you as Lord; the rights of the 
 churches being preserved untouched and entire, 
 and reserving the annual tribute of one penny 
 from every house to St. Peter and the most Hcly 
 Roman Church. 
 
 "If, therefore, you resolve to carry these de- 
 signs into execution, let it be your study to form 
 that people to good morals, and take such orders 
 both by yourself and by those whom you shall 
 find qualified in faith, in words, and in conduct, 
 that the Church there may be adorned, and the 
 practices of Christian faith be planted and in- 
 creased; and let all that tends to the glory of 
 God and the salvation of souls be so ordered by 
 you that you may deserve to obtain from God an 
 increase of everlasting reward, and may secure 
 on earth a glorious name throughout all time. 
 Given at Rome," &c. 
 
 SOME PRELIMINARY REMARKS. 
 
 Before we proceed with the inquiry as 
 to the genuineness of this letter of Pope 
 Adrian, I must detain the reader with a 
 few brief preliminary remarks. First: 
 Some passages of this important document 
 have been very unfairly dealt with by mod- 
 ern writers while purporting to discuss its 
 merits. Thus, for instance, Prof. Richey, 
 in his "Lectures on Irish History," present- 
 ing a translation of the Latin text to the 
 lady pupils of the Alexandra College, 
 makes the Pontiff to write: "You have 
 signified to us, our well-beloved son in
 
 28 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 Christ, that you propose to enter the island 
 of Ireland in order to subdue the people, 
 etc. .... We therefore, regarding 
 your pious and laudable design with clue 
 ifavor, etc., do hereby declare our will and 
 pleasure, that for the purpose of enlarging 
 the borders of the Church, etc., you do en- 
 ter and take possession of that island."* 
 Such an erroneous translation must be the 
 more blamed in the present instance, as it 
 was scarcely to be expected that the ladies 
 whom the learned lecturer addressed 
 would have leisure to consult the original 
 Latin text, or the document which he pro- 
 fessed to translate. This, however, is not 
 the only error into which Professor Richey 
 has been betrayed regarding the Bull of 
 Adrian IV. Having mentioned in a note 
 the statement of Roger de Wendover, that 
 the Bull was obtained from Pope Adrian 
 in the year 1155, he adds his own opinion 
 that "the grant appears to have been made 
 in 1172."f However, at that date, Pope 
 Adrian had been for about thirteen years 
 freed from the cares of his Pontificate, 
 having passed to a better world in the year 
 1159. 
 
 Second : Any one who attentively weighs 
 the words of the above document will see 
 at once that it precinds from all title of 
 conquest, while at the same time it makes 
 no gift of transfer of dominion to Henry 
 the Second. As far as this letter of Adrian 
 is concerned, the visit of Henry to our is- 
 land might be the enterprise of a friendly 
 monarch, who, at the invitation of a dis- 
 tracted State, would seek by his presence 
 to restore peace, and to uphold the obser- 
 servance of the laws. Thus, those foolish 
 theories must be at once set aside which 
 rest on the groundless supposition that 
 Pope Adrian authorized the invasion and 
 plunder of our people by the Anglo-Nor- 
 man adventurers. 
 
 Third: There is another serious error 
 which must also be set at rest by the sim- 
 ple perusal of the above document. I 
 mean that opinion which would fain set 
 forth the letter of Pope Adrian as a dogma- 
 tical definition of the Holy See, aa if the 
 Sovereign Pontiff then spoke ex cathedra 
 i. e., solemnly propounded some doctrine 
 to be believed by the Universal Church 
 Now it is manifest from the letter itself 
 that it has none of the conditions required 
 for a definition ex cathedra; it is not ad- 
 dressed to the Universal Church; it propos- 
 es no matter of faith to be held by all the 
 children of Christ; in fact it presents no 
 
 * "Lecture on the History of Ireland," by 
 A. G. Kichey, Esq., delivered to the pupils 
 of the Alexandra College during the Hilary 
 and Easter Terms of 1869. Dublin, 1869, 
 pages 122, 123. 
 
 t Ibid, page 121. 
 
 doctrine whatever to be believed by the 
 faithful, and it is nothing more than a 
 commendatory letter addressed to Henry, 
 resting on the good intentions set forth by 
 that monarch himself. There i.- one max- 
 im, indeed, which awakens the suspicions 
 of the old Gallican school, viz.: that "all 
 the islands are subject to the authority of 
 St. Peter." However it is no doctrinal 
 teaching that is thus propounded; it is a 
 matter of fact admitted by Henry himself, 
 a principle recognized by the international 
 law of Europe in the Middle Ages, a maxim 
 set down by the various States, the better 
 to maintain peace and concord among the 
 princes of Christendom. To admit, how- 
 ever or to call in question the teaching of 
 the civil law of Europe, as embodied in that 
 maxim, has nothing whatever to say to the 
 great prerogative of St. Peter's successors, 
 while they solemnly propound to the faith- 
 ful, in unerring accents, the doctrines of 
 Divine faith. 
 
 Fourth: To many it will seem a para- 
 dox, and yet it is a fact, that the supposed 
 Bull of Pope Adrian had no part what- 
 ever in the submission of the Irish chief- 
 tains to Henry the Second. Even ac- 
 cording to those who maintain its genuine- 
 ness, this Bull was not published till the 
 year 1175, and certainly no mention of it 
 was made in Ireland till long after the 
 submission of the Irish princes. Tlie 
 successes of the Anglo-Normans were 
 mainly due to a far different cause, viz., to 
 the superior military skill and equipment 
 of the invaders. Among the Anglo-Nor- 
 man leaders were some of the bravest 
 knights of the kingdom, who had wtm 
 their laurels in the wars of France and 
 Wales. Their weapons and armor render- 
 ed it almost impossible for the Irish troops 
 to meet them in the open field. The 
 crossbow, which was made use of for the 
 first time in this invasion, produced as 
 great a change in military tactics as the 
 rifled cannon in our own days. When 
 Henry came in person to Ireland his num 
 erous army hushed all opposition. There 
 were 400 vessels in his fleet, and if a min- 
 imum of twenty-five armed men be allow< d 
 for each vessel, we will have an army of at 
 least 10,000 men fully equipped, landing 
 unopposed on the southern shores of our 
 island. J It is to this imposing force, and 
 the armor of the Anglo-Norman knights, 
 that we must, in great part, refer whatever 
 success attended this invasion of the Eng- 
 lish monarch. 
 
 t The authorities for the statements made 
 in the text may be seen in Macariae Excidium 
 edited by Mr. O'Callagban for the K. I. A., 
 in 1850.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 29 
 
 HISTORICAL CRITICISMS ON THE BULL. 
 
 To proceed now with the immediate 
 matter of our present historical inquiry, 
 the following is the summary of the argu- 
 ments in favor of the authenticity of Pope 
 Adrian's letter, inserted in the Irishman 
 newspaper of June 8 last, by J. C. O'Cal- 
 laghan, Esq., editor of the Macariae Ex- 
 cidium, and author of many valuable 
 works on Irish history: "We have, firstly 
 the testimony of John of Salisbury, Secre- 
 tary to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and 
 one of the ablest writers of the day, who 
 relates hia having been the envoy from 
 Henry to Adrian, in 1155, to ask for a 
 grant of Ireland, and such a grant having 
 been then obtained, accompanied by a gold 
 ring, containing a fine emerald, as a token 
 of investure, with which grant and ring the 
 said John returned to Henry. We have, 
 secondly, the grant or Bull of Adrian, in 
 extenso, in theworksof GiraldusCambren- 
 sirt, and his contemporary Radulfus de 
 Diceto, Dean of London, as well as in those 
 of Roger de Wendover, and Mathew Paris. 
 We have, thirdly, several Bulls of Adrian's 
 successor, Pope Alexander III., still further 
 to the purport of Adrian's, or in Henry's 
 favor. We have, fourthly, the recorded 
 public reading of the Bulls of Adrian and 
 Alexander, at a meeting of Bishops in 
 Waterford in 1175. We have, fifthly, 
 after the liberation of Scotland from Eng- 
 land at Bannockburn, and the consequent 
 invitation of Bruce's brother Ed ward, to be 
 King of Ireland, the Bull of Adrian pre- 
 fixed to the eloquent lay remonstrance, 
 which the Irish presented to Pope John 
 XXII. against the English; the same Bull 
 moreover, referred to in the remonstrance, 
 itself as so ruinous to Ireland; and a copy 
 of that Bull, accordingly sent back by the 
 Pope to Edward II. of England, for his use 
 under those circumstances. We have, 
 sixthly, from Cardinal Baronius, in his 
 great work, the Annales Ecclesiastici, 
 under Adrian IV., his grant of Ireland to 
 his countrymen in full, or, as is said, 'ex- 
 codice Vaticano, diploma datum ad 
 Henricum, Anglorum, Regem. We have 
 seventhly, the Bull in the Bullarium Ro- 
 manum, as printed in Rome in 1739. The 
 citations and references in support of all 
 the foregoing statements will be found in 
 the 'Notes and Illustrations' of my edition 
 of Macariae Excidium for the Irish Ar- 
 chaeological Society in 1850, given in such 
 a manner as must satisfy the most skepti- 
 ca'." 
 
 testimony of John of Salisbury, who, in his 
 Metalogicus (lib. iv., cap. 42,) writes, that 
 being in an official capacity at the Papal 
 Court, in 1155, Pope Adrian IV., then 
 granted the investure of Ireland to the il- 
 lustrious King Henry II. of England. 
 
 I do not wish in any way to detract from 
 the praise due to John of Salisbury, who 
 was at this time one of the ablest courtiers 
 of Henry II. However, the words here 
 imputed to him must be taken with great 
 reserve. Inserted as they are in the last 
 chapter of his work, they are not at all re- 
 quired by the context; by cancelling them 
 the whole passage runs smoother and is 
 more connected in every way. This is 
 more striking, as in another work of the 
 same writer, which is entitled Polycraticus 
 we meet with a detailed account of the 
 various incidents of his embassy to Pope 
 Adrian, yet he tbere makes no mention of 
 the Bull in Henry's favor, or of the gold 
 ring and its fine emerald, or of the grant 
 of Ireland, all of which would have been 
 so important for bis narrative. 
 
 We must also hold in mind the time 
 when the Metalogicus was written. The 
 author himself fixes its date; for immedi- 
 ately before asking the prayers of "those 
 who read his book, and those who hear it 
 read," he tells us that the news of Pope 
 Abrian's death had reached him a little 
 time before, and he adds that his own 
 patron, Theobald, Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury though still living, was weighed down 
 by many infirmities, f Now, Pope Adrian 
 departed this life in 1159, and the death of 
 Archbishop, Theobald happened in 1161. 
 Hence, Gile and other editors of John of 
 Salisbury's works, without a dissentient 
 voice, refer the Metalogicus to the year 
 1159. 
 
 THE TESTIMONY ANALYZED. 
 
 Examining these arguments in detail. I 
 will follow the order thus marked out by 
 Mr. O'Callaghan. 
 
 I. We meet, in the first place, the 
 
 QUEER ACTION OF HENKY H. 
 
 Now, it is a matter beyond the reach of 
 controversy, that if Henry the Second ob- 
 tained the investiture of Ireland from 
 Adrian IV., he kept this grant a strict se- 
 cret till at least the year 1175. For twenty 
 years, i. e., from 1155 to 1175, no men- 
 tion was made of the gift of Adrian. Henry 
 did not refer to it when authorizing his 
 vassals to join Diarmaid in 1167, when 
 Adrian's Bull would have been so oppor- 
 tune to justify his intervention; he did not 
 mention it when he himself set out for Ire- 
 tand to solicit and receive the homage of 
 the Irish princes; he did not even refer to 
 it when he assumed his new title and ac- 
 complished the purpose of his expedition. 
 The Council of Cashel in 1172 was the first 
 episcopal assembly after Henry's arrival 
 in Ireland; the Papal Legate was present 
 
 t Metalogicus, lib. iv. cap. ult.
 
 30 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 there, and did Adrian's Bull exist it should 
 necessarily have engaged the attention of 
 the assembled Fathers. Nevertheless, not 
 a whisper as to Adrian's grant was to be 
 heard at that famous Council. Even the 
 learned editor of "Cambrensis Eversus" 
 while warmly asserting the genuineness of 
 Adrian's Bull, admits "there is not any, 
 even the slightest authority, for asserting 
 that its existence was known in Ireland be- 
 fore the year 1172, or for three years later" 
 vol ii., p. 440, note z). It is extremely 
 difficult, in any hypothesis, to explain in a 
 satisfactory way this mysterious silence of 
 Henry the Second, nor is it easy to under- 
 stand how a fact so important, so vital to 
 the interests of Ireland, could remain so 
 many years concealed from those who 
 ruled the destinies of the Irish Church. 
 For, we must hold in mind that through- 
 put that interval Ireland numbered among 
 its Bishops one who held the important of- 
 fice of Legate of the Holy See; our Church 
 had constant intercourse with England 
 and the continent, and through St. Law- 
 rence O'Toole and a hundred other distin- 
 guished Prelates, enjoyed in the fullest 
 manner the confidence of Rome. 
 
 HISTORICAL CONTRADICTIONS CONSIDERED. 
 
 If Adrian granted this Bull to Henry at 
 the solicitation of John cf Salisbury in 1155 
 there is but one explanation for the sil- nee 
 of this courtier in his diary, as set fi-rth in 
 the Pbfycraticus, and for the conceal men t 
 of the Bull iteelf from the Irish Bishops 
 and people, viz., that this secrecy was re- 
 quired by the State policy of the English 
 monarch. And, if it be so, how then can 
 we be asked to admit as genuine this pas- 
 sage of the Metalogicus, in which the as- 
 tute agent of Henry, still continuing to dis- 
 charge offices of the highest trust in the 
 Court, would proclaim to the world as 
 early as the year 1159, that Pope Adrian 
 hfed made this formal grant of Ireland to 
 his royal" master, and that the solemn rec- 
 ord ofthe investiture of this high dignity 
 was preserved in the public archives ofthe 
 kingdom? 
 
 It must also be added that there are some 
 phrases in this passage of the Metalogicus 
 which manifestly betray the hand of the 
 impostor. Thus the words usque in hodier- 
 num diem imply that a long interval had 
 elapsed since the concession was made by 
 Pope Adrian, and surely they could not 
 have been penned by John of Salisbury in 
 1159. Much 1 ss can we suppose that this 
 writer employed the words jure hoeredit- 
 ario possidendam. No such hereditary 
 right is granted in the Bull of Adrian. It 
 was not dreamt of even during the first of 
 the Anglo-Norman invasion, and it was 
 only at a later period, when the Irish 
 
 chieftains scornfully rejected the Anglo- 
 Norman law of hereditary succession, that 
 this expedient was thought of for allaying 
 the fierce opposition of our people. 
 
 Thus we are forced to regard the sup- 
 posed testimony of John of Salisbury aa 
 nothing more than a clumsy interpolation, 
 which probably was not inserted in his 
 work till many years after the first Anglo- 
 Norman invasion of our island. 
 
 THE MAIN ARGUMENT CONSIDERED. 
 
 I now come to the second and main ar- 
 gument of those who seek 'to defend the 
 authenticity of Pope Adrian's Bull. We 
 have Giraldus Cambrensis, they say, a 
 contemporary witness, whose testimony is 
 unquestionable. He asserts in full this let- 
 ter of Adrian IV. and he nowhere betrays 
 the slightest doubt in regard to its genu- 
 ineness. 
 
 Some years ago we might perhaps have 
 accepted this flattering character of Gi- 
 raldus Cambrensis, but at the present day, 
 and since the publication of an accurate 
 <<lition of his historical works, it is impos- 
 sible for us to do so. 
 
 It was not till mnny years after the 
 death of Pope Adrian that Gerald de Barry, 
 better known by the name of Giraldus 
 Cambrensis, entered on the stage of Irish 
 history. Twice he visited Ireland after the 
 year 1183, and on both occasions he dis- 
 charged those duties which, at the present 
 day, would merit for him the title of spe- 
 cial court correspondent with the invading 
 army. The Expugnatio Hibernica, in 
 which he inserts Adrian's Bull, may justly 
 he said to have been written to order. 
 Hence, as a matter of course, Giraldus 
 adopted in it as genuine every document 
 set forth as such by his royal master, and 
 any statements that strengthened the 
 claim, or promoted the interests of his 
 brother Welsh adventurers were sure not 
 to be too nicely weighed in the scales of 
 criticism by such an historian. The editor 
 of the works of Giraldus, just now pub- 
 lished under the direction of the Master of 
 the Rolls, has fully recognized this spe- 
 cial feature of the historical writings of 
 Giraldus. The official catalogue describ ng 
 the Expugnatio Hibernica, of which we 
 treat, expressly says: "It may be regarded 
 rather as a great epic than a sober rela- 
 tion of facts occurring in his own days. No 
 one can peruse it without coming to the 
 conclusion that it is rather a poetical fic- 
 tion than a prosaic truthful history." 
 
 GIRALDUS CAMBRENSIS CORNERED. 
 
 In the preface to the fifth volume of the 
 Historical Treatises of Giraldus, the 
 learned editor, Rev. James F. Dimpck, en- 
 ters at considerable length into the inquiry,
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 31 
 
 whether, the Expugnatio Hibernica was 
 to be accepted as genuine and authentic 
 history. 1 need do no more than state the 
 conclusions which he enunciates: 
 
 "I think I have said enough to justify 
 me in refusing to accept Giraldus' history 
 of the Irish and of their English invaders 
 as sober, truthful history." And again he 
 writes: "My good friend and pre-laborer 
 in editing these volumes ofGiraldus' works 
 (Mr. Brewer) says of the Expugnatio, 
 that Giraldus would seem to have re- 
 garded his subject rather as a great epic, 
 which undoubtedly it was, than a sober 
 relation of facts occurring in his own 
 days 
 
 This is a most true and characteristic 
 description ofGiraldus' treatment of his sub- 
 ject; the treatise certainly is, in great 
 measure, rather a poetical fiction than a 
 prosaic truthful history." 
 
 I must further remark as another result 
 from Rev. Mr. Dimock's rssearches, that 
 the old text of Giraldus in reference to 
 Pope Adrian's Bull, from which Mr. 
 O'Callaghan's citations are made, is now 
 proved to be singularly defective. I will 
 give the pithy words of that learned editor, 
 which are stronger than any I would wish 
 to use: "-ZVo more absurd nonsensical a 
 muddle ivas ever blundered into by the 
 most stupid of abbreviators." It is of 
 course from the ancient MSS. of the work 
 that this corruption of the old text is mainly 
 proved; but it should indeed be apparent 
 from an attentive study of the very printed 
 text itself, for, as Mr.Dimock remarks, be- 
 ing accurately translated, its words "mar- 
 vellously contrive to make Henry, in 
 1172, apply for and procure this privilege 
 from Pope Adrian, who died in 1159, 
 and with 'equally marvellous confusion 
 they represent John of Salisbury, who had 
 been Henry's agent in procuring this priv- 
 ilege in 1155, as sent, not to Ireland, but 
 to Rome, for the purpose of publishing the 
 Bull at Waterford in 1174 or 1175." 
 
 I will only add, regarding the testimony 
 of Giraldus Cambrensis, that in the genu- 
 ine text of the Expugnatio Hibernica he 
 places on the same level the Bull of Adrian 
 IV. and that of Alexander III. Neverthe- 
 less, as we will just now see he elsewhere 
 admits that there were many and grave 
 suspicions that the supposed Bull of Alex- 
 ander had never been granted by the Holy 
 See. 
 
 OTHER AUTHORITIES ANALYZED. 
 
 The other names mentioned together 
 with Giraldus will not detain us long. 
 They are all writers who only incidentally 
 make reference to Irish matters, and in 
 these they naturally enough take Giraldus 
 for their guide. 
 
 Ralph de Diceto wrote about 1210, and 
 like Giraldus, received his honors at the 
 hands of Henry the Second. Irish histo- 
 rians have not yet accepted him as a guide 
 in reference to matters connected with 
 our country. For instance, the Synod of 
 Cashel of 1172, which was one of the most 
 important events of that period of our his- 
 tory, is described by him as held in Lis- 
 more. 
 
 Roger de Wendover was a monk of St. 
 Alban's, who died 6th of May, 1237. His 
 Flares Historiarum begin with the crea- 
 tion of the world, and end two years be- 
 fore his death, in 1235. He merely com- 
 pendiates other sources down to the begin- 
 ning of the 13th century. It is only the 
 subsequent portion of his work which is 
 held in esteem by our annalists. 
 
 Mathew Paris was a brother religious of 
 Roger de Wendover, in St. Albans, where 
 he died in 1259. Mr. Cpxe, who edited a 
 portion of the Flores Historiarum for the 
 English Historical Society (1841-1844), has 
 proved that down to the year 1235 Mathew 
 Paris only commendiates the work of Wen- 
 dover. At all events his Historia Major 
 is of very little weight. A distinguished 
 German historian of the present day, 
 Scrhodl, thus conveys his strictures on its 
 merits: 
 
 "Se trompe a chaque instant, et, en- 
 traine, par son evaugle rage de critique, 
 donne pour des faits historigues des anec- 
 dotes piquantes qui n'ont aucune authen- 
 ticite, des legendes, deraisonnables et toutes 
 sortes de details suspacts, exageres et cal- 
 omnieax. 
 
 To the testimony of such writers we may 
 well oppose the silence of Peter de Blois, 
 Secretary of Henry the Second, though 
 chronicling the chief events of Henry's 
 reign, and the silence of all our native an- 
 nalists, not one of whom ever mentions 
 the Bull of Adrian. 
 
 THE THIRD ARGUMENT CONSIDERED. 
 
 But it is time to pass on to the third ar- 
 gument which is advanced by our oppon- 
 ents. It is quite true that we have some 
 letters or Bulls of Pope Alexander III., 
 connected with the Irish invasion. Three 
 of these, written in 1172, are certainly au- 
 thentic. They are preserved in the"Liber 
 Niger Scaccarii" from which they were 
 edited by Hearne, and in later times they 
 have been accurately printed by Mr. 
 O'Callaghan and Rev. Dr. Kelly. They are 
 addressed respectfully to the Irish Bishops, 
 King Henry and the Irish princes. So 
 far, however, are these letters from cor- 
 roborating the genuineness of Pope Adri- 
 an's Bull, that they furnish an unanswer- 
 able argument for wholly setting it aside as 
 groundless and unauthentic. They are en-
 
 32 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 tirt-ly devoted to the circumstances of the 
 invasion of our island and its n suits, and 
 yet the only title that they recognize is 
 ''that monarch's power and the submission 
 of the Irish chieftains." They simply ig- 
 nore any Bull of Adrian, and any investi- 
 ture from the Holy See. 
 
 BULL OF POPE ALEXANDER III. 
 
 There is, however, another Bull of Alex- 
 ander III. preserved byGiraldus Cambren- 
 sia, which he supposed to have been 
 granted at the request of King Henry in 
 1172, and is confirmatory of the gift and 
 investiture made by Pope Adrian. Mr. 
 O'Callaghan holds that this Bull of Alex- 
 ander III. sets at rest forever all doubt as 
 to the genuineness of the grant made by 
 Adrian IV. 
 
 The question at once suggests itself: la 
 this Bull of Alexander III. to be admitted 
 as genuine and authentic? If its own au- 
 thority be doubtful, surely it cannot suffice 
 to prop up the tottering cause of Adrian's 
 Bull. Now its style is entirely different 
 from that of the three authentic letters of 
 which we have just spoken. Quite in op- 
 position to these letters, "the only author- 
 ity alleged in it for Henry's right to Ire- 
 land is the Bull of Adrian" as Dr. Lani- 
 gan allows. The genuine letters are dated 
 from Tusculum, where, as we know from 
 other sources, Alexander actually resided 
 in 1172. On the other hand, this confirm- 
 atory Bull, though supposed to have been 
 obtained in 1172 is dated from Rome, thus 
 clearly betraying the hand of the impostor. 
 Such was the disturbed condition of Rome 
 at that period that it was impossible for 
 His Holiness to reside there; and hence 
 we find him sometimes holding his Court 
 in Tusculum, at other times in Segni, 
 Anagni, or Ferrara. It was only when 
 these disturbances were quelled that Alex- 
 ander III. was able, in 1178, to return in 
 triumph to his capital. 
 
 BUT THERE IS STILL ANOTHER REASON 
 
 why we must doubt of the authority of this 
 confirmatory Bull. The researches of 
 Rev. Mr. Dimock have proved what Us- 
 sher long ago remarked, that this Bull of 
 Alexander originally formed part of the 
 work of Giraldus Cambrensis, although 
 later copyists, and the first editors, includ- 
 ing the learned Camden, recognizing its 
 spuriousness, excluded it from Giraldus' 
 text. The matter is now set at rest, for 
 the ancient MSS. clearly prove that it orig- 
 inally formed part of the Expugnatio Hi- 
 bcrnica. Thanks, however, to the zeal 
 nnd industry of Mr. Brewer, we are at 
 
 S resent acquainted with another work of 
 iraldus, written at a later period than 
 His Historical Tracts on Ireland. It wen- 
 
 titled Dz Pi-incipis Instructions, and was 
 edited in 1 846 for the Anglia Christiana 
 Society. Now. in this treatise, Giraldus 
 refers to the Bull of Alexander III., of 
 which we treat, but he prefixes the follow- 
 ing remarkable words. "Some assert or 
 imagine that (his Bull was obtained from 
 the Pope; but others deny that it was ever 
 obtained from the Pontiff. "Sicut a qui- 
 busdam impetratum aseeritur am confiu- 
 gitur; ab alias autem unquam impetratum 
 tuisse negatur." Surely these words 
 should suffice to convince the most skep- 
 tical that the fact of the Bull of Alexander 
 being recited by Giraldus in his "Expug- 
 natio Hihernica" is a very unsatisfactory 
 ground on which to rest the argument for 
 its genuineness. 
 
 AS REGARDS THE SYNOD OF WATERFORD 
 
 in 1175, and the statement that the Bulls 
 of Adrian and Alexander were published 
 therein for the first time, all these matters 
 rest on the very doubtful authority of Gi- 
 raldus Cambrensis. We have no record in 
 the Irish Annals that any general meet- 
 ing of the Irish Bishops was held in 
 Water ford in 1175. The circumstances of 
 the country rendered such a Sjnod impos- 
 sible; for war and dissensions ranged 
 throughout the length and breadth of our 
 island. It was in that year, however, that 
 the first Bishop was appointed by King 
 Henry to the See of Waterford as Ware 
 informs us; and, perhaps, we would not 
 err were we to suppose that the Synod so 
 pompously set forth by Giraldus was a con- 
 vention of the Anglo-Norman clergy of 
 Waterford under their newly appointed 
 Prelate, all of whom would, no doubt, 
 joyfully accept the official documents pre- 
 sented in the name of the King by Ni- 
 cholas of Wallingford. 
 
 Leland supposes that this Svnod of 
 Waterford was not held till 1177. "The dis- 
 turbed state of the kingdom, however, ren- 
 dered a Synod equally impossible in that 
 year, and all our ancient authorities ut- 
 terly ignore such a Synod. 
 
 IN THE REMONSTRANCE ADDRESSED 
 
 by the Irish princes and people to John 
 XXII., about the year 1315, repeated men- 
 tion is made of the Bull of Adrian. But 
 then it is only cited there as a conclusive 
 argument ad hominen against the En- 
 glish traducers of our nation, "lest the 
 bitter and venomous calumnies of the En- 
 glish, and their unjust and unfounded at- 
 tacks upon us and all who support our 
 rights, may in any degree influence the 
 mind of your Holiness.'' The Bull of 
 Adrian IV. was published by the English, 
 and set forth by them as the charier deed
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 33 
 
 of their rule in Ireland; yet they violated 
 in a most flagrant manner all the condi- 
 tions of that Papal grant. The Irish 
 princes and people in self-defense had now 
 made over the sovereignly of the island to 
 Edward de Bruce, brother of the Scottish 
 King; they style him their adopted mon- 
 arch, and they pray the Pope to give a 
 formal sanction to their proceedings. 
 Thus, throughout the whole Remon- 
 strance, the Bull of Adrian is used as a tell- 
 ing argument against the injustice of the 
 invaders, and as a precedent which John 
 XXII might justly follow in sanctioning 
 the transfer of the Irish crown to Edward 
 Bruce. But in all this the historian will 
 find no grounds for asserting the genuine- 
 ness of the supposed Bulls of Adrian or 
 Alexander. We will just now see that at 
 this very time the Irish people univers- 
 ally regarded these Bulls as spurious inven- 
 tions of their English enemies. 
 
 Baronius, the eminent ecclesiastical his- 
 torian, inserts in his invaluable Annals 
 the Bull of Adrian IV., "from a Vatican 
 Manuscript." This is the sixth argument 
 advanced by Mr. O'Callaghan. 
 
 IT IS NOT MY INTENTION TO QUESTION 
 
 in any way the services rendered by Car- 
 dinal B ironius to the cause of our Church 
 history; but at the same time no one will 
 deny that considerable progress has been 
 made in historical research during the 
 past three hundred and fifty years, and 
 many documents are now set aside which 
 were then accepted ;is unquestioned on the 
 supposed reliable authority of preceding 
 chroniclers. 
 
 In the present instance we are not left in 
 doubt MS to the source whence Baronius de- 
 rived his informatian regarding Adrian's 
 supposed Bull. Daring my stay in Rome 
 I took occasion to inquire whether the 
 MSS of the eminent annalist, which are 
 happily preserved, indicated the special 
 "Vatican Manuscript" referred to in this 
 text, and I was informed by the learned 
 archivist, of the Vatican, Monsignor 
 Theiner, who is at present engaged in giv- 
 ing a new edition and continuing the great 
 work of Baronius, that the Codex Vat- 
 icanus referred to is a MS. copy of the 
 history of Mathew Paris, which is pre- 
 served in the Vatican Library. Thus it is 
 the testimony of Mathew Paris alone that 
 here confronts us in the pages of Baronius 
 and no new argument can be taken from 
 the words of the eminent annalist. Rely- 
 ing on the same high authority, I am 
 happy to state that nowhere in the private 
 archives or among the private papers of the 
 Vatican, or in the Regesta, which Jaffe's 
 researches have made so famous, or in the 
 various indices of the Pontifical Letters, 
 
 can a single trace be found of the supposed 
 
 Bulls of Adrian IV. and Alexander III. 
 
 _____ 
 
 THE LAST ARGUMENT ADVANCED 
 
 by Mr. O'Callaghan will not detain us 
 long. The insertion or omission of such 
 ancient records in the BuLlarium is a mat- 
 ter that depends wholly on the critical skill 
 of the editor. Curious enough, in one edi- 
 tion of the Bullarium, as may be seen in 
 the references of Dr. Lanigan, Adrian's 
 Bull is inserted, while no mention is made 
 of that of Alexander. In another edition , 
 however, the Bull of Alexander is given in 
 full, while the Bull of Adrian is omitted. 
 We may well leave our opponents to settle 
 this matter with the conflicting editors of 
 the Bullarium. They probably, like 
 Baronius, merely copied the Bull of Adrian 
 from Mathew Paris, and erred in doing so. 
 Labbe, in his magnificent edition of the 
 Councils, also publishes Adrian's Bull; but 
 then he expressly tells us that it is copied 
 from thr work of Mathew Paris. 
 
 THE IRISH OPINION OF ADRIAN'S BULL. 
 
 We have thus, as far as the limits of this 
 article will allow, examined in detail the 
 various arguments which support the gen- 
 uineness of the supposed Bull; and now it 
 only remains for us to conclude that there 
 are no sufficient grounds for accepting that 
 document as the genuine work of Pope 
 Adrian. 
 
 Indeed, the Irish nation at all times, as 
 if instinctively, shrunk from accepting' it 
 as genuine, and unhesitatingly pronounced 
 it an Anglo-Norman forgery. We have 
 already seen how even Giraldus Cambren- 
 sis refers to the doubts which had arisen re- 
 garding the Bull of Pope Alexander; but 
 we have at hand still more conclusive evid- 
 ence that Adrian's Bull was universally re- 
 jected by our people. There is, happily 
 preserved in the Barberini archives,Rome, 
 a MS. of the fourteenth century, contain- 
 ing a series of official papers 'connected 
 with the Pontificate of John XXIII., and 
 among them is a letter from the Lord Jus- 
 ticiary and the Royal Seal, and presented 
 to His Holiness by William of Nottingham, 
 Canon and Precentor of St. Patrick's Cath- 
 edral, Dublin, about the year 1325. In 
 this important, but hitherto unnoticed doc- 
 ument, the Irish are accused of very many 
 crimes, among which is insidiously intro- 
 duced the rejection of supposed Bulls: 
 "Moreover, they assert that the King of 
 England under false pretences and by false 
 Bulls obtained the dominion of Ireland, 
 and this opinion is commonly held by 
 them." "Asserantes etiam Dominum 
 Regem Anglia ex falsa suggestione et ex 
 falsis 'Bullis terram Hibernie in dominium 
 impetrosse ac communiter hoc tenentes."
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 This national tradition was preserved un- 
 broken throughout the turmoil of the fif- 
 teenth and sixteenth centuries, and on the 
 revival of our historical literature in the 
 beginning of the seventeenth century was 
 registered in the pages of Lynch, Stephen 
 White, and other writers. 
 
 It will be well, also, while forming our 
 judgment regarding the supposed Bull of 
 Adrian, to hold in mind the disturbed 
 state of society, especially in Italy, at the 
 time to which it refers. At the present day 
 it would be no easy matter indeed for such 
 a forgery to survive more than a few 
 weeks. But at the close of the twelfth cen- 
 tury it was far otherwise. Owing to the 
 constant revolutions and disturbances that 
 then prevailed, the Pontiff was oftentimes 
 obliged to fly from city to city; and fre- 
 quently his papers were seized and burned, 
 and he himself detained as a hostage or a 
 prisoner by his enemies. Hence it is that 
 several forged Bulls, examples of which 
 are given in "Cambrensis Eversis," date 
 from these times. More than one of the 
 grants made to the Norman families are 
 now believed to rest on such forgeries; and 
 that the Anglo-Norman adventurers in 
 Ireland were not strangers to such deeds of 
 darkness, appears from the fact that a 
 matrix for forgicg the Papal Seal of such 
 Bulls, now preserved in the R. I. Academy, 
 was found a few years ago in the ruins of 
 one of the earliest Anglo-Norman monas- 
 teries founded by De Courcy. 
 
 HOW THE BULL WAS PROMULGATED. 
 
 The circumstances of the publication of 
 the Bull by Henry were surely not cal- 
 culated to disarm suspicion. Our oppon- 
 ents do not even pretend that it was made 
 known in Ireland till the year 1175, and 
 hence, though publicly granted with sol- 
 emn investiture, as John of Salisbury's 
 testimony would imply, and though its 
 record was deposited in the public archives 
 of the kingdom, this Bull, so vital to the 
 interests of the Irish Church, should have 
 remained dormant, for twenty years, un- 
 noticed in Rome, unnoticed by Henry's 
 courtiers, still more, unnoticed by the Irish 
 Bishops, and I will add, unnoticed by the 
 Continental Sovereigns so jealous of the 
 power and preponderance of the English 
 Monarch. For such suppositions there is 
 Indeed no parallel in the whole history of 
 investitures. 
 
 It is seldom, too, that the hand of the 
 imposture may not be detected in some at 
 least of the minor details of the spurious 
 document. In the present instance more 
 than one ancient MS. preserves the con- 
 cluding formula of the Bull: "Datum 
 Romae," dated from Rome. Now, this 
 simple formula would suffice of itself to 
 
 prove the whole Bull to be a forgery. 
 Before the news of the election of Pope 
 Adrian to the Chair of St. Peter could 
 reach England, that Pontiff was obliged to 
 seek for safety in flight from his capital. 
 Rome was in revolt, and Arnold of Brescia 
 sought to renew there a spectre of the old 
 Prtgan Republic. John of Salisbury, in his 
 "Polycraticus" faithfully attests thf ton his 
 arrival in Italy, the Papal Court was held 
 not in Rome but in Beneventum; it was in 
 this city he presented to Pope Adrian the 
 congratulations of Henry II., and he men- 
 tions his sojourn there during the three 
 months that he remained in Italy. This is 
 further confirmed by the Italian chronicles. 
 Baronius saw the inconsistency of the for- 
 mula, Datum Romae,"with the date 1155, 
 and hence, in his Annals, he entered 
 Adrian's Bull under the year 1159; but, if 
 this date be correct, surely then that Bull 
 dould not have been brought to Henry by 
 John of Salisbury, and the passage of the 
 "Metalogicus" referring to it must at once 
 be admitted a forgery. Other historians 
 have been equally puzzled to find a year 
 for this supposed Bull. For instance, 
 O'Halloran in his History of Ireland, while 
 admitting that the Irish people always 
 regarded the Bull as a forgery, refers its 
 date to the year 1167, that is eight years 
 after the death of Pope Adrian IV. 
 
 A CONCLUDING REFLECTION. 
 
 There is only one other reflection with 
 which I wish to detain the reader. 
 The condition of our country and the 
 relations between Ireland and the Eng- 
 lish King, which are set forth in the sup- 
 posed Bull, are precisely those of the year 
 1172; but it would have required more 
 than a prophetic vision to have anticipated 
 them in 1155. In 1155 Ireland was not in 
 a state of turmoil or verging toward barba- 
 rism; on the contrary, it was rapidly 
 progressing and renewing its claims to 
 religious and moral pre-eminence. I will 
 add, that Pope Adrian, who had studied 
 under Irish masters, knew well this flour- 
 ishing condition of our country. In 1172, 
 however, a sad change had come over our 
 island. Four years of continual warfare, 
 and the ravages of the Anglo-Norman fili- 
 busterers, since their first landing in 1168, 
 had well nigh reduced Ireland to a state of 
 barbarism, and the authentic letters of 
 Alexander III., in 1172 faithfully describe 
 its most deplorable condition. Moreover, 
 an expedition of Henry to Ireland, which 
 would not be an invasion, and yet would 
 merit the homage of the Irish Princes, 
 was simply an impossibility in 1155. But 
 owing to the special circumstances of the 
 Kingdom, such in reality was the expedi- 
 tion of Henry in 1172. He set out for
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 35 
 
 Ireland, not avowedly to invade and con- 
 quer it, but to curb the insolence and to 
 punish the deeds of pillage of his own Nor- 
 man freebooters. Hence during his stay 
 in Ireland he fons;ht no battle and made 
 no conquest; his first measures of severity 
 were directed against some of the moat 
 lawless of the early Norman adventurers, 
 and this more than anything else recon- 
 ciled the native princes to his military 
 
 display. In return he received from a 
 majority of the Irish chieftains the empty 
 title of Ardrigh, or "Head Sovereign." 
 which did not suppose any conquest on 
 his part, and did not involve any surrender 
 of tneir own hereditary rights. Such a 
 state of things could not have been imag- 
 ined in 1155; and yet it is one which is 
 implied in the spurious Bull of the much 
 maligned Pontiff, Adrian the Fourth. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 A Historical Contrast. The Characteis of Pope Adrian IV. and King Henry II. Compared. 
 
 Having in our previous chapters thorough- 
 ly diagnosed the disreputable character of 
 Giraldus Cambrensis, whpse literary services 
 King Henry II. of England secured in 
 order to introduce into his history of Ire- 
 land the forged Bull of Pope Adrian IV., 
 by which that Pontiff was supposed to have 
 granted Ireland to Henry Plantagenet, it ia 
 now in order to introduce historical testi- 
 mony which will forcibly demonstrate the 
 fact that the character of King Henry the 
 Second of England was not of that calibre 
 which would entitle him to receive the 
 confidence of any Pontiff, -much less to have 
 bestowed upon him unlimited authority ever 
 an independent people, such as the Irish 
 were up to the time of the English invasion. 
 
 In order that our readers may the more 
 readily understand this important historical 
 question, it is well to bear in mind a few 
 important facts and dates, so as to more 
 clearly understand the character which 
 King Henry II. presented to both the Pope 
 and the Irish people at the opening of the 
 very year when the forged Bull of Giraldus 
 Cambrensis was first brought to light. 
 
 Nicholas Breakspeare was elected to suc- 
 ceed Pope Eugenius III., on December 2nd, 
 A. D., 1154, and took the name of Adrian 
 IV. By birth he was an Englishman, and 
 as a notable historian truly remarks the 
 extraordinary circumstances attending his 
 promotion to the Pontifical Chair of St. 
 Peter plainly indicated the workings of the 
 
 Almighty Hand. Almighty God called this 
 Servant of Servants jfrom the lowest rank 
 of human society to the most supereminent 
 position man can occupy, and no Catholic 
 can for a moment harbor the thought that 
 Almighty God placed Nicholas Breakspeare 
 in the Chair of St. Peter for the sole 
 purpose of enslaving the Irish people by 
 handing them over to the brutality of a 
 British king. 
 
 The lives of all the Popes have less- 
 ons in them for every Catholic, hence, in 
 order that our readers may have an intim- 
 ate knowledge of the genius displayed by 
 this much-maligned Pontiff, we will briefly 
 sketch his life and his labors, so that every 
 person interested in knowing the truth may 
 conclude at once that Pope Adrian was the 
 last man in the world who would be guilty 
 of making such a concession to Henry II. 
 of England as to best >w Ireland upon that 
 monarch in order to purify the morals 
 of the Irish people, and for the propagation 
 of religion. 
 
 The father of Pope Adrian IV. was a 
 servant in the English monastery of St. 
 Alban's, where the son was supported 
 through the charity of the Religious. After 
 a few years of penury and parental cruelty, 
 young Nicholas Breakspeare wandered off to 
 work his own way in the world, and after 
 spending some time in England he crossed 
 over to France, where he enjoyed for a
 
 36 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 period the hospitality of the monks in the 
 monastery of St. Hufus, near Aries. He 
 had not been long in the company of these 
 Religious until they discovered in his char- 
 acter a religious zeal, a remarkable regularity 
 of lif, a lofty and generous disposition, and 
 an amount of genius and superiority which 
 prompted them to elect him Abbot. 
 His strictness of discipline, however, caused 
 some of the monks to complain to Pope 
 Etigenius III., and when that holy Pontiff 
 heard their story he said to them : " Go 
 and choose an Abbot with whom you may 
 be able, or rather with whom you are will- 
 ing to live in peace ; your present Superior 
 shall not long be a burden to you ; I ap- 
 point him Cardinal of Albano." 
 
 From these two circumstances it may 
 easily be surmized that the future Pope 
 Adrian IV. was no ordinary man. Honors 
 sought him, and not he them. He was far 
 from being the sycophant implied by 
 those who foolishly assert that he bestowed 
 Ireland upon Henry II., because he was an 
 Englishman; and his future course in the 
 government of the Church proved his dig- 
 nity and sterling justice in every cause that 
 came before him. 
 
 The new Cardinal stood sp high in the 
 estimation of Pope Eugenius III., that he 
 sent him as Apostolic Legate to the north- 
 ern Kingdoms of Denmark, Sweden and 
 Norway. In each of these lands he en- 
 deared himself to the people through his 
 prudence, piety, eloquence, and gentleness 
 of disposition. He was the Apostle of Nor- 
 way, and the bosom friend of the great St. 
 Eric, or Henry, the martyred Bishop of 
 Upsal, whose feast falls on January 19th. 
 Thus every Catholic can readily understand 
 that the experience whicli Pope Adrian IV. 
 gained by his Apostolic labors among the 
 Danes, Swedes and Norwegians, as well as 
 the constant intimacy which existed be- 
 tween him and the saintly Bishops who 
 were then planting the faith among these 
 different nations, developed in him those 
 qualities whicli made him afterwards illus- 
 trious as one among the many notable Pon- 
 tiffs that occupied the Chair of St. Peter. 
 
 On the return of the Cardinal of Albano 
 to Rome, his high reputation at once gained 
 
 for him the unanimous vote of the College 
 of Cardinals as the successor of Pope An- 
 astasiiis IV., then recently deceased. But 
 scarcely had Nicholas Breakspeare assumed 
 the title of Pope Adrian IV., ere he was 
 called upon to do battle against royal en- 
 croachments upon the rights of the Roman 
 people. And yet, unreflecting writers say 
 that the same Pontiff permitted and author- 
 ized the royal encroachment of Henry II. 
 of England upon the independent Irish 
 people. 
 
 Arnald of Brescia was in Rome, develop- 
 ing his plans for the revival of paganism, 
 but Adrian IV. was equal to the occasion, 
 and by placing Rome under Interdict 
 circumvented the designs of the enemy of 
 Christianity, who was beheaded in 1155. 
 
 The next enemy of the Church over 
 whom Pope Adrian prevailed was William 
 the Bad, who succeeded his father Roger 
 on the throne of Sicily. He then faced no 
 less a foeman than Frederick Barbarossa 
 whose path through Lombardy was marked 
 by rivers of blood and by mountains of 
 ruins. Barbarossa sought to make the 
 whole world a single Empire, with as his- 
 tory records him saying "the Sovereign 
 Pontiff as its spiritual and the Emperor as 
 its temporal chief." But Pope Adrian IV. 
 scorned the bribe. He determined at all 
 hazards to defend the rights of the people of 
 Lombardy against this second Attila, and 
 the Pontiff triumphed over the persecutor 
 in the end, going so far as to excommuni- 
 cate the Archbishop of Milan for falsely 
 asserting that the will of Frederick Barbar- 
 ossa was "right, justice and law." The 
 Pope also severely censured the Bishops of 
 Lombardy for their slavish compliance to 
 every demand of this ambitious tyrant. 
 Here again we may well ask : Was such a 
 Pontiff likely to act in opposition to all his 
 antecedents by quietly enslaving Ireland to 
 England whilst he used all his powerful in- 
 fluence to prevent the people of Lombardy 
 and of Italy from the loss of their freedom ? 
 Pope Adrian died at Anagni on Septem- 
 ber 1st. A. D., 1159, leaving behind him a 
 brilliant record, unsullied by a single speck 
 of iniquity. " He is described by his con- 
 temporaries," says Rev. John Miley, in his
 
 THE POPE AND IUELAND. 
 
 37 
 
 " History of the Papal States," "as a man 
 full of kindliness and good nature ; mild, 
 patient, profound : versed in Greek and 
 Latin literature : eloquent : a complete 
 master in ecclesiastical music : powerful in 
 handling the Word of God, not easily ruf- 
 fled, prone to forgive, liberal of alms and 
 gifts, and altogether a most amiable and 
 perfect character." 
 
 Now let us place in contrast with Pope 
 Adrian IV., the character of King Henry 
 II. of England, so that we may discover, if 
 possible, a single reason why Henry Planta- 
 genet should be authorized to propagate 
 what is styled his "glorious renown," in 
 the bogus Bull published in Judge Ma- 
 guire's pamphlet, wherein this fictitious 
 document is dated as "' Given at Rome, in 
 tho year of Salvation, 1156. 
 
 The first pen-portrait of King Henry II. , 
 whose "glorious renown" Pope Adrian IV. 
 is falsely accused of desiring to propagate, 
 is taken from an address delivered at Fort 
 Wayne, Indiana, on St. Patrick's Day, 
 1881, by Hon. Edmund F. Dunne, LL. D., 
 ex-Chief Justice of Arizona. Speaking of 
 the English invaders of Ireland, Judge 
 Dunne says : 
 
 " But neither was it from the Normans 
 proper that the troubles of Ireland began. 
 There was a tribe came after William the 
 Conqueror worse than the Normans, the 
 Angevins, and they were the devils incar- 
 nate who began the present troubles of the 
 Irish people. They were descended from 
 one of those moral monsters with which 
 God in his wrath sometimes afflicts the 
 world, from the infamous Fulc the Black, 
 wife-murderer of Anjou. Henry II. was 
 his representative in England. This was 
 the man who began English rule in Ireland. 
 According to the accounts of even English 
 historians, he was a devil incarnate if there 
 ever was such a thing in this world, and his 
 end as told by English writers was so fear- 
 fully horrible, not from physical torture, 
 for no man touched him, so fearfully horri- 
 ble I say that I would not dare shock you 
 to-night by a repetition of the blasphemies 
 which preceded it." 
 
 A nice man this to " teach the Christian 
 faith to the ignorant and rude Irish," and 
 to extirpate the roots of vice "from the field 
 of the Lord," as the fictitious Bull makes 
 Pope Adrian TV. say to "His dearest Son 
 in Christ, the Illustrious King of England !" 
 
 " You have heard of a King of England 
 who, enraged because he could not chastise 
 the people of Wales as he wished, turned 
 upon the hostages he held, the sons and 
 daughters of the noblest families of Wales 
 and rooted out the eyes of the youths and 
 amputated the ears and noses of the daugh- 
 ters. This was the king who did it." 
 
 Yet the bogus Bull tells us that this same 
 inhuman monster was authorized to " ex- 
 tend the borders of the Church" in Ireland ! 
 He was also deputed by the Pope to "re- 
 strain the progress of vice," to increase 
 religion and to do all things whichsoever 
 pertained to the honor of God! 
 
 "You have heard of St. Thomas A'Beck- 
 ett, who was murdered in the house of God 
 while participating in the vesper chant ; 
 stricken down within the chancel, his brains 
 dug out with a sword and smeared upon the 
 altar. This King Henry was the instigator 
 of the murder." 
 
 What a charming character to send into 
 Ireland as a Christian Apostle ! The king's 
 mission, according to the fraudulent Bull of 
 Pope Alexander III. was to reform the bar- 
 barous Irish people who were " Christians 
 only in name !" 
 
 " There were four sons of a King of Eng- 
 land once. One of them, afterwards Rich- 
 ard I. of England, said : ' The custom of 
 our family is that the son shall hate the 
 .father ; our destiny is to detest each other. 
 This is our heritage which we shall never 
 renounce. From the devil we came ; to the 
 devil we will return." These were the sons 
 of this King Henry." 
 
 A bad tree produces bad fruit, and King 
 Henry's genealogical tree may be well called 
 the Upas tree whose deadly odors poia- 
 oned the atmosphere surrounding it. 
 
 " There was a King of England once who 
 said : ' Accursed be the day on which I 
 was born, and accursed of God be the chil- 
 dren I leave behind me.' That was also 
 this same King Henry." 
 
 No doubt when Henry Plantagenet drew 
 down this malediction upon the heads of 
 himself and his offspring, he had in mind 
 the bogus Bull which he had forged and which 
 worked such iniquity upon the independent 
 Catholics of Ireland. 
 
 "But there was another malediction he 
 uttered before his death, more fearful than 
 any of these. A malediction which I dare 
 not repeat to you. I will not say go to the 
 histories and find it. You can find it if you
 
 38 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 look for it, but you cannot read it without 
 horror, nor afterwards think of it without 
 terror. The rule of these Angevin devils 
 lasted about 300 years. This Henry II. 
 was the first of the brood ; the crooked- 
 back tyrant, Richard III., was the last. 
 1 have said that England had men of genius 
 to foresee, and iron hearts to execute. 
 These were some of them, and all English 
 rulers of Ireland since, in everything relat- 
 ing to Ireland, seem to have inherited their 
 cruelty of character, determining every Irish 
 question not upon any principle of natural 
 justice but solely upon the cold-blooded 
 policy of how most to injure Ireland and 
 prevent her in any way rivalling England. 
 Do my American friends smile a little at 
 this, thinking it a Celtic exaggeration I Ah ! 
 if they do. it only proves how necessary it is 
 for us to show them what enormities have 
 been perpetrated upon the Irish people, 
 under the forms of English law. Did you 
 ever hear of the Penal Laws in force in Ire- 
 land down to a late day I King Henry was 
 not more enraged by Welsh resistance than 
 his successors were by Irish obstruction. 
 King Henry was not more cruel to his 
 Welsh hostages than his successors were to 
 their Irish subjects. They forbade to the 
 Irish people all liberty of religion; forbade 
 them to speak the Irish language, to have 
 Irish books, or to instruct Irish children. It 
 was declared by these laws that the life of an 
 Irishman, or the honor of nn Irishwoman 
 might be taken at will, anywhere outside the 
 pale, that is, anywhere over fifty miles from 
 Dublin; and to mark their hatred of the 
 Irish rrfce, they enacted that if an English- 
 man dared to marry an Irishwoman, he was 
 to be half hanged, his heart cut out before 
 he was dead, his head struck off and his 
 lands forfeited to the crown. Do you ask 
 whether these laws had not been left simply 
 a dead letter on the Statute book ? Many 
 of them were not only in force but enforced 
 down to 1829. 
 
 This Henry IF. was the first English king 
 who claimed to govern Ireland, and he did 
 it on the pretence of wishing to improve the 
 morals of the people. He knew that the 
 deepest, strongest love which the Irish peo- 
 ple had, was for their old Catholic faith, and 
 that they had unmeasured respect, love and 
 affection for the Holy Father, visible head 
 of their Church. Now, how do you suppose 
 he applied that knowledge ? He forged a 
 Butt, as coming from the Pope, giving to him 
 the sovereignty of Ireland, and calling upon 
 the people of Ireland to render him allegiance. 
 
 Thus the very beginning of English rule 
 in Ireland was built on a foundation of fraud, 
 and ever since, it has been continued by 
 fraud, treachery, robbery, rapine, murder, 
 slaughter and every other crime known in 
 the calendar." 
 
 It will be noticed in one of the para- 
 graphs of the foregoing extract, that Judge 
 Dunne alludes to the inhumanity of King 
 Henry the Second toward the children of 
 his Welsh hostages. Lingard makes this 
 blood-red record of that horrible barbarity : 
 
 " Henry II., in his excursion into Wales 
 in 1164, 1 uiving received as hostages the 
 children of the noblest families of that 
 country, gave orders that the eyes of all tho 
 males should be rooted out, and the eara 
 and noses of the females should be amputa- 
 ted." 
 
 It is also reported of this brutal kin" thst 
 on one occasion his anger became so fierce 
 that he actually became crazy. The occa- 
 sion arose as follows : " The king being at 
 Caen, he was provoked against Richard de 
 Harnet, because he said something in de- 
 fence of the king of Scotland. Breaking 
 out into a rage of passion, king Henry 
 called him a traitor, and thereupon, begin- 
 ning to be inflamed with his wonted fury, 
 he flung his cap fr.nn his head, ungirted 
 his belt, hurled away his cloak and gar- 
 ments wherewith he was apparelled, cast 
 off with his own hands a coverlet of silk 
 from his bed, and sitting as it were upon a 
 dunghill of straw, began to chew the straws 
 in order to glut his demoniacal rage !" 
 
 On another occasion a page carried a let- 
 ter to King Henry H., the contents of 
 which were not pleasing to his Majesty, so, 
 in order to give vent to his vengeance, he 
 grasped the unfortunate messenger by the 
 throat and attempted to pluck out his eyes 
 with his royal fingers ! 
 
 A man infuriated with such diabolical 
 passion and such brutal propensities, was not 
 exactly the kind of ruler Pope Adrian IV. 
 would place over the Irish people or address 
 as a monarch of " glorious renown." 
 
 Now let us turn to the treatment which 
 St. Thomas A'Becket, Bishop and Martyr, 
 received at the hands of this monarch who 
 was the first accessory to the Archbishop's 
 murder. King Henry II. ascended the 
 English throne on the 20th of December, 
 A. D., 1154, and three years later he ele- 
 vated the distinguished divine whose murder 
 he subsequently suggested, to the high 
 position of Lord Chancellor of England.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 39 
 
 From the first day he entered upon the 
 duties of his oflice, until he resigned it 
 into the king's hands, St. Thomas was con- 
 stantly annoyed by the petty tyranny and 
 the usurpation by the king of ecclesiastical 
 authority over even the Catholic Prelates. 
 At length King Henry determined to per- 
 secute St. Thomas to death if possible. Ac- 
 cordingly, Henry called a Council of the 
 Bishops and nobility at Northampton, on 
 October 8th, 1164, during which he pro- 
 nounced sentence of exile against the saintly 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, and declared 
 all his goods confiscated to the Crown. St. 
 Thomas fled to France, where he had an 
 audience with the Pope, to whom he re- 
 lated all the trouble which Henry II. had 
 caused the Church in England. 
 
 In the meantime the English monarch 
 was greatly incensed against both the Pope 
 and the Archbishop, because the latter had 
 escaped his wrath and the former had com- 
 mended him for his course. In order to grati- 
 fy his passion, therefore, Henry confiscated 
 not only the goods of the innocent Arch- 
 bishop, but he actually seized upon all the 
 property belonging to all the friends, rela- 
 tives and domestics even of Saint Thomas, 
 banished them from his dominions, not 
 sparing even year- old infants or tottering 
 age ! Then he compelled them by oath to 
 proceed in a body to the place where the 
 Archbishop was residing at Pontigny, in a 
 monastery of the Cisterian Order, so that 
 he might be compelled to shed tears of sor- 
 row at the sight of so much helpless poverty 
 and undeserved destitution ! Not satisfied 
 with these acts of inhuman tyranny, the 
 brutal butcher of the Welsh Innocents, act- 
 ually wrote to the Cistercian monks that he 
 would close up and confiscate every Cister- 
 cian monastery in England unless the 
 monks of Pontigny turned St. Thomas out 
 of their house ! 
 
 The Pope and some of the Princes of 
 Europe tried to bring Henry II. to effect a 
 reconciliation with St. Thomas, but the 
 Plantagenet persecutor went so far as to 
 threaten the Holy Father with his direful 
 vengeance if he dared again to address him 
 on the subject ! 
 
 The saintly Archbishop not desiring to 
 bring down the King's ungovernable wrath 
 
 upon the innocent members of the Cister- 
 cian Order, left their hospitable roof, and 
 proceeded to Sens, where the King of France 
 provided him with the few necessaries of 
 life required by this living martyr of a bru- 
 tal monarch's vengeance. From the mon- 
 astery of St. Columba, adjacent to Sens, 
 the exiled Archbishop of Canterbury sent 
 Pastoral Letters over to England, excom- 
 municating all those who should obey the 
 late orders of the King of England in seiz- 
 ing the estates of the Church, and exhorting 
 that monarch to repentance. In the mean- 
 time King Henry sent some of his deputies 
 to Rome in order to influence the Cardinals 
 against St. Thomas. But his secret diplom- 
 acy availed him nothing in the end, as 
 Cardinal Otto, one of the two Legates ap- 
 pointed by the Pope, wrote to Henry that 
 he must return the ill-gotten property he 
 had gained by unjust confiscation. 
 
 The King of France then undertook to act 
 as arbitrator between Henry and the sintly 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, but the audi- 
 ences subsequently held availed nothing. 
 The Pope then sent two new Legates 
 Gratian and Vivian to the turbulent King, 
 and, after them, two more, but the surly 
 monarch would not accede to their terms of 
 required restitution. As adding insult to in- 
 jury, Henry caused his son to be crowned 
 King by the Archbishop of York, in the 
 very Diocese of Canterbury from which St. 
 Thomas a'Becket had been expatriated. The 
 cruel monarch moreover, obliged his subjects, 
 even by inhuman torments, to renounce 
 their obedience not only to the Archbishop 
 but also to the Pope ! 
 
 At lenght a reconciliation was brought 
 about by the Archbishop of Sens, but it was 
 of the nature of a reconciliation which a 
 wolf might make with a lamb in order to 
 satiate its craving for flesh and blood. King 
 Henry, finding that he could not wreak his 
 vengeance with sufficient severity upon the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, so long as he re- 
 mained in France, patched up a peace in or- 
 der to get the innocent victim of his terrible 
 wrath into the kingdom where his death 
 would pay the penalty of the blood-thirsty 
 monarch. Archbishop Becket who well 
 knew there were no bounds to King Henry's 
 had a premonition that the English
 
 40 
 
 TIIK 1'01'K AND IRKLAND. 
 
 king meant him greviuua bodily harm, as he 
 said to the French King when taking leave 
 of him : "I am going to seek my death in 
 England." The monarch answered : "So 
 I believe," and pressed St. Thomas to stay 
 in his kingdom where he could live in peace 
 and religious happiness, but the innocent 
 victim of King Henry's wrath answered with 
 true Christian resignation : "The will of God 
 ' must be accomplished. '' 
 
 St. Thomas proceeded to England, where 
 he landed in safety, but during his journey 
 into the interior he miraculously escaped 
 ambuscades set for him by assassins hired 
 no doubt by Henry to murder him. This is 
 evident from the fact that when, a few weeks 
 afterwards, a deputation of dissatisfied Pre- 
 lates arrived in Normandy to have an inter- 
 view with King Henry, in order to inform 
 him that St. Thomas would not remove the 
 Censures which were promulgated against 
 them in consequence of their quiet acqui- 
 escence with King Henry's robbery of the 
 temporalities of the See of Canterbury, the 
 wrathful monarch cried out in a voice 
 quivering with demoniacal passion, that 
 "He cursed all those whom he had honored 
 with his friendship, and enriched by his 
 bounty, seeing that none of them had the 
 courage to rid him of out Bishop, who gave 
 him more trouble than all the rest of his 
 subjects." 
 
 These words at once suggested to several 
 of his courtiers who surrounded him, the 
 propriety of murdering St. Thomas, in order 
 to please the detestable tyrant. According- 
 ly on Christmas Day, when St. Thomas came 
 to preach, he took for his text : ' 'Peace to 
 men of good-will on earth," telling his flock 
 that it was his last discourse, as he should 
 shortly leave them. In the meantime five 
 assassins and a troop of armed men were 
 approaching Canterbury Cathedral, which 
 they reached' next day. It was the Vesper 
 hour, and the Archbishop was in the sacred 
 edifice when the murderers entered with 
 drawn swords. One of the ruflians advanced 
 towards the venerable Prelate exclaiming : 
 
 "Now you must die !" The Archbishop 
 calmly answered : "I am ready to die for 
 God, for justice, and for the liberty of His 
 Church. * * * I have defended the 
 Church as far as I was able during my life, 
 when I saw it oppressed, and I shall be 
 happy if by my death at least I can restore its 
 peace and liberty." He then slowly sank to 
 the ground on his knees and spoke these his 
 last words : "I recommend my soul and the 
 cause of the Church to God, to the Blessed 
 Virgin, to the holy patrons of this place, to 
 the martyrs St. Dionysius and St. Elphege 
 of Canterbury.'' The saintly Prelate, with 
 the true courage of a Christian martyr, then 
 prayed for his murderers and placed his head 
 so they could strike it with their swords. 
 The hirelings of King Henry desired to re- 
 move him from the Cathedral, but he 
 courageously exclaimed : *'I will not stir ; 
 do here what you please, or are commanded." 
 The assassins then fell upon him, hacking 
 his head and scattering his brains upon the 
 consecrated floor of the Cathedral. When 
 fienry's minions had thus accomplished their 
 master's will, they proceeded to the martyred 
 Archbishop's residence which they rifled of 
 all its valuables as their booty for the bloody 
 deed they had performed. This horrible 
 murder occurred on the 29th of December, 
 1170. 
 
 In justice to the murderers of the Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury, and the monarch who 
 suggested the horrible butchery, it is proper 
 to state that, with one exception, they 
 all repented their fearful crime, but the fact 
 still remains that it was at the suggestion of 
 King Henry II. of England, the martyred 
 Archbishop was ruthlessly slaughtered, and 
 it requires no great stretch of the imagination 
 to conclude that a ruler who would suggest 
 the murder of a saintly Archbishop, merely 
 because he defended the Church against the 
 King's injustice, would not hesitate to cause 
 a forged Bull to be manufactured in order to 
 fortify injustice towards the Irish people by 
 perpetrating a fraud against Rome.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 41 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 The Bull of Adrian Tested. Analysis of the Pontificate of Alexander III.- More of 
 Judge Maguire's Mistakes. Pope Adrian's Bull Viewed from a Critical Stand- 
 point. 
 
 The three principal characters that figure 
 most prominently in the historical question: 
 "Did Pope Adrian IV. bestow Ireland 
 upon King Henry II. of England ?" are, 
 the Pontiff who is supposed to have made, 
 the grant, the King who is said to have re- 
 ceived it, and Pope Alexander III., the 
 Pontiff who is reported to have confirmed it. 
 Already we have made a sufficient analysis 
 of the characters of Pope Adrian and King 
 Henry to satisfy any reasonable mind that 
 the former never made the grant and that 
 the latter never received it. Now let us 
 make an analysis of the character and 
 policy of Pope Alexander III., and ascer- 
 tain whether a single action of his whole 
 Pontificate points him out as a spiritual ruler 
 likely to use the uncharitable and untruth- 
 ful language in which the Bull attributed 
 to him is couched. All men, whether 
 Popes, Presidents, or private individuals, 
 are to be judged by their works, and not 
 by a single act attributed to them by parties 
 deeply interested in sustaining their own 
 iniquitous proceedings, and which stands 
 in direct opposition to all their other official 
 proceedings. 
 
 The Pontificate of Pope Alexander III. 
 commenced September 7th, A. D., 1159, and 
 ended August 30th, 1181. The bogus Bull, 
 printed in Judge Maguire's bad book, bears 
 date thus : "Given at Rome, in the year of 
 Salvation, 1172," although the Pope was 
 not in Rome at that time. The absence of 
 day or month from the document is also 
 another fatal omission which goes far to 
 prove the aforesaid document a clumsy 
 forgery. These facts, however, we will de- 
 velop in their proper place, and we will now 
 proceed at once to give a sketch of the 
 character which Pope Alexander sustained 
 throughout his occupancy of the Chair of 
 St. Peter, and offer irrefutable proof show- 
 ing that he loved popular freedom far too 
 dearly to permit himself to be a party to 
 
 such enslavement of a whole independent 
 nation as that contemplated by King Henry 
 II. 
 
 Pope Alexander III. was the emancipator 
 of the slaves in the middle ages. In a 
 Council held in the twelfth century, this 
 great Pontiff abolished, as far as lay in his 
 power, the curse of slavery throughout the 
 world. His prudence, wisdom and justice 
 gave him a great victory over Frederick 
 Barbarossa. He it was who as a French 
 historian says "restored the rights of na- 
 tions and curbed the passions of kings." 
 Voltaire says of him:" "If men have re- 
 covered their rights, it is chiefly to Pope 
 Alexander that they are indebted for them ; 
 to him so many cities owe their new or re- 
 covered splendor." This is a grand eulogy 
 coming from such an enemy of the Church 
 as Voltaire, but Pope Alexander well de- 
 served such praise for the fortitude and 
 prudence which he constantly manifested 
 during his twenty years exile from Borne, 
 in the midst of threatened schism, persecu- 
 tion, and a constant struggle against the 
 armed hosts of the ambitious Barbarossa, 
 who desired to bring the whole world under 
 his regal sway. 
 
 Alexander III. had scarcely received the 
 news of his election to the Pontifical throne 
 ere he had to quit Rome and hurry to the 
 monastery of Santa Nympha, where he was 
 consecrated, whilst the anti-Pope Victor 
 III. reigned in Rome. The Emperor Fred- 
 erick favored Victor, and a number of the 
 Cardinals did the anti-Pope homage, but 
 Alexander faced the fierce storm with cheeks 
 unblanched with fear, and when deputies 
 were sent by Barbarossa to call the true 
 Vicar of Christ before a council which 
 Frederick had called to meet at Pavia, 
 Alexander replied to the request in these 
 courageous terms : ' ' We recognize in the 
 Emperor," said the exiled Pontiff, "the
 
 42 
 
 THE POPE AND 1UELAND. 
 
 armed defender of the Roman Church, but 
 never shall the prerogative given by JKSCS 
 CHRIST to St. Peter be violated in our per- 
 son. The Roman Church judges all others, 
 and is subject to the judgment of none. 
 We are prepared to give our life in defence 
 of her rights." 
 
 Notwithstanding the Pope's declaration, 
 the council met and the anti-Pope Victor 
 was placed upon the Pontifical throne by 
 the Emperor Barbarossa, who proclaimed 
 that all Bishops should obey the authority 
 of Victor on pain of perpetual banishment. 
 The true Pope replied by solemnly excom- 
 municating Frederick, together with the 
 anti-Pope and all his partisans, both lay and 
 clerical. 
 
 This was the first act in a drama which 
 lasted for many years, and which engaged 
 the attention of the whole of Europe, array- 
 ing against the patient Alexander III. the 
 bitter animosity of a world conquering ty- 
 rant who has been well-named "the modern 
 Attila." The ancient and beautiful city of 
 Milan was reduced to a heap of shapeless 
 ruins, because the inhabitants recognized 
 Alexander as the true Pope. Other cities 
 did likewise, until Alexander III. became 
 the head and the leader about whose sacred 
 person all the Italian cities rallied when 
 they saw their independence threatened by 
 the despotic ambition of the German Em- 
 peror, Frederick Barbarossa. 
 
 In order to get beyond the reach of the 
 would-be Emperor of the world, Pope Alex- 
 ander III. retired in 1163 to France, where 
 he heard of the death of the anti-Pope 
 Victor, and also of the election of the anti- 
 Pope Paschal III. through the influence of 
 Barbarossa. Yet the undismayed Vicar of 
 Christ was determined to die in exile if 
 necessary, sooner than submit to the en- 
 slavement of a single people to the sway of 
 the tyrant who persecuted the Church in 
 the person of its Pontiff. And thus it came 
 about that at last the warlike Barbarossa 
 yielded to the exalted ecclesiastic whose 
 only weapon was his crozier and whose only 
 shield was the Cross. The Vicar of Christ 
 was called back to Italy, and as the exiled 
 Pontiff aaw himself surrounded in Venice 
 
 by the Prelates of the Church and the rep- 
 resentatives of the Emperor who sought 
 pence at his hands, he must have felt that 
 his triumph came from God. " Well- 
 beloved sons," said Alexander, " it is a 
 miracle of God's power, that an aged ami 
 unarmed priest should have resisted the 
 rage of the most powerful king on earth ; 
 by this let all men know that it is impossi- 
 ble to war against the Lord and against His 
 Christ." 
 
 Such was the courageous hero of liberty 
 whom Catholics are asked to believe helped 
 to hand over the independent Irish people, 
 bound hand and foot, to Henry II of Eng- 
 land, in order to confer upon the English 
 monarch the Apostolic power of "teaching 
 the truth of the Christian faith" to people 
 who had about thirty Archbishops and 
 Bishops, as well as hundreds of secular 
 priests and members of Religious Or- 
 ders ! Is there any sensible Catholic in 
 America who would harbor such an idea for 
 a moment ? What ? A Vicar of Christ to 
 ignore the Bishops and priests of a country, 
 and to confer Episcopal powers on an alien 
 layman ? Such an outrage never was perpe- 
 trated by any Pontiff that ever sat in the 
 Chair of St. Peter. 
 
 It is true that Henry did penance and 
 was forgiven for the part he acted in the 
 horrible butchery of St. Thomas A'Becket, 
 but it by no means follows that Pope Alex- 
 ander would make such a rebellious, im- 
 moral and ruffianly character as he knew 
 King Henry to be, the second Apostle of 
 Ireland to " propagate the righteous planta- 
 tion of faith" in an island whose fame for 
 sanctity was known all over the world 
 through the numerous saints it had sent to 
 convert the nations of Europe ! The Bull 
 was made by King Henry's order, and Pope 
 Alexander never saw it ! 
 
 Another feature in the character of Popo 
 Alexander III , which goes very far towards 
 proving that he never signed the Bull at- 
 tributed to him, is the fact that he kncic 
 King Henry to be a bad man and the pro- 
 moter of the murder of St. Thomas A' Becket, 
 Archbishop of Canterbury . 
 
 In order to escape from the fury of the 
 ferocious King of England it became neces-
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 43 
 
 sary for St. Thomas A'Becket to fly to 
 France in 1164, in order to lay before Alex- 
 ander III. the injustice, robbery and sacri- 
 lege done by a monarch who became 
 a perfect demon in his passion, presenting, 
 as Lingard says, "the raving of a mad man 
 with the fury of a savage beast. In his 
 paroxysms his eyes were spotted with 
 blood, his countenance seemed to flame, his 
 tongue poured forth a torrent of abuse and 
 imprecation, and his hands were employed 
 to inflict vengeance on what ever came 
 within his reach." 
 
 Pope Alexander received the exiled vic- 
 tim of Henry's hatred with open arms. He 
 directed the Archbishop to promulgate a 
 Bull of excommunication against Henry II., 
 and against all who abetted his tyranny and 
 his thievery. The Letters containing these 
 Pontifical censures had to be secretly con- 
 veyed into England by some monks, in con- 
 sequence of the caution used by Henry, 
 who determined to prevent the Pope from 
 laying an Interdict* upon his kingdom. In 
 order also to accomplish his antagonism to 
 both Pope and Prelate, the King caused 
 these hu*nane regulations to be published 
 along the whole English coast: "If any 
 Religious attempt to bring Pontifical Letters 
 into England, he shall lose his feet ; if a 
 cleric, he shall lose his eyes ; if a layman he 
 shall be hanged, and if a leper, burned." 
 This barbarous order from a King who is 
 foolishly supposed to have been delegated 
 by the same Pope to Christianize the Irish 
 people who in the bogus Bull are called 
 " Christians only in name" was promulga- 
 
 * For the benefit of readers who may not fully 
 understand the severe nature "f an ecclesiastical 
 Interdict when issued against a nation, and also 
 for a better appreciation of the dread felt by 
 Henry II., it may be well to state that in a dis- 
 trict or country under Interdict the churches 
 were closed ; the bells were silent ; solemn re- 
 ligious services ceased ; the sacraments were ad- 
 ministered only to infants and the dying ; and 
 the interment of the dead took place without 
 any religious services. Thus the sovereign was 
 punished through his subjects, to whom, in a 
 short time, the deprivation of all the aids and 
 ministrations of religion became intolerable. 
 Hence the offender was eventually compelled to 
 submission, pleading with a most penitential 
 spirit to the Sovereign Pontiff to forgive his ob- 
 stinacy, to raise the Interdict, and thus restore 
 again the sacraments and services of the true 
 Church of God to the suffering people. 
 
 ted in Normandy and throughout the Eng- 
 lish possessions in France. 
 
 The Letters excommunicating King Hen- 
 ry II., when promulgated in England, 
 threw the whole kingdom into a state of 
 consternation ; the excommunicant could 
 not find a priest to celebrate Mass in his 
 presence. And in this crisis the unfortu- 
 nate monarch turned to the Pope, plying 
 him with all the vast influence at his royal 
 command, in order to have the Interdict 
 raised. But Pope Alexander sternly refused 
 every petition, referring both the King and 
 his advocates to the Archbishop whose sen- 
 tence of excommunication against the hate- 
 ful Henry, Pope Alexander "most heartily 
 confirmed ! 
 
 The brutal murder of St. Thomas has al- 
 ready been described, and when the news of 
 this most atrocious crime reached the ears 
 of Pope Alexander III. he shed bitter tears 
 to the memory of the saintly Thomas 
 A'Becket. Such indignation did the Pon- 
 tiff manifest that he refused to see any Eng- 
 lishman. " Hold ! hold !" exclaimed the 
 Pope, to one who was about to utter the 
 detestable name of the King of England in 
 his presence : "Such a name may not be 
 spoken before a Sovereign Pontiff." Pope 
 Alexander then hurled the anathemas of 
 the Church against the assassins, with all 
 their advisers and protectors. All this oc- 
 curred only tivo years before the spurious 
 date (1172) ascribed to the fictitious Bull ! 
 
 The Pontificate of Pope Alexander III., 
 the victorious champion of Italian liberty, 
 the courageous asserter of the sovereignty 
 of the Apostolic See against Kings in their 
 fury and people in their infatuation, came 
 to a close in glorious victory. After twenty 
 years of struggle, persecution and exile, the 
 great Vicar of Christ rested in peace on 
 August 30th, 1181, bequeathing to the 
 Church that peace which he had won for 
 her through his pious courage, prudence 
 and love of justice and liberty, which were 
 the brightest ornaments of his character. 
 The Pope was preceded in death by King 
 Louis VII. of France, who died on Septem- 
 ber 18th, 1180, and as this King will figure 
 in the controversy over the two bogus Bulls
 
 III! rOl'K AND IRKLAND. 
 
 of Adrian and Alexander further on, we al- 
 lude to the matter in this place so as to fix 
 the dates upon which these two characters 
 in this long-disputed question ceased to ex- 
 ist About this time, also, there disap- 
 peared from this earthly scene, John of 
 Salisbury, called by some authors " Johan- 
 nes Parvus," John the Little, who is said to 
 have received the bogus Bull from Pope 
 Adrian. This character in the drama, the 
 plot of which we are developing, died at 
 Chartres, France, on October 25th, 1180. 
 He was the author of several works, two of 
 which we expect to refer to hereafter. 
 These are the Polycraticus and the Meta- 
 logicus, into th"e latter of which was first 
 injected (by an anonymous interloper) the 
 fraudulent account of the Bull claimed to 
 have been received from Pope Adrian by 
 John of Salisbury himself. Of this more 
 anon. 
 
 Now that we have given pen-pictures of 
 several of the principal actors in this twelfth 
 century historical melodrama, let us take 
 up Judge Maguire's "Ireland and the 
 Pope," so as to refute a few more of the 
 false statements therein which he picked out 
 of the works he quotes, without any regard 
 whatever for the author's reasons prefixed or 
 affixed thereto. The first wisp of wisdom 
 which we pluck therefrom is the following : 
 
 " In the year 1152 Ireland was a prosperous 
 and independent nation. . . . Her people 
 were Catholics, and had for many generations 
 looked lovingly to the Pope of Home as their 
 spiritual father, but thy neither owned nor 
 recognized any political allegiance to him.'' 
 
 Such wisdom as is manifested in the fore- 
 going extract must have a very debilitating 
 effect upon Judge Maguire's mental vital- 
 ity ! And so there were no Protestants in 
 Ireland in the year 1152 three hundred 
 and thirty-one years before Martin Luther 
 was born ! Mirabil-e dictu ! Ah ! deal 
 Fudge, 
 
 'Twas well for poor humanity 
 
 You undertook to write, 
 Your amazing erudition 
 Is so very erudite ! 
 
 How important it is to know that in the 
 year 1152 there were no Methodists in 
 Mullingar ; no Baptists io Ballinasloe ; no 
 ongregaiionalists in Cort ; no Presbyteri . 
 
 ans in Portarlington ; no Dunkers in Dub- 
 lin ; no Campbellites in Castlecomer ; no 
 Lutherans in Lismore ; no Shakers in Shan- 
 agolden ; no Sabbatarians in Stradball) ; no 
 non- Conformists in Newtownmountken- 
 nedy ; and no Salvation Army in Sligo ! 
 Such information, coming as it does to Irish 
 Catholics whom his Honor calls a people 
 " crushed in ignorance," and from so super- 
 eminent a dignitary as the Superior Judge 
 of the Superior Court of a superior city like 
 San Francisco, is worthy of being framed 
 for exhibition among the curiosities of Cali- 
 fornia in the cabinet of the Pioneers' Asso- 
 ciation ! 
 
 And now, dear Judge, since you have so 
 mjst graciously condescended to enlighten 
 the Irish people, who have been "crushed in 
 ignorance," on this point, will your Honor 
 so far descend from your high dignity as to 
 write a pamphlet in answer to this query : 
 " Why is it that there were no inhabitants 
 in Ireland until people first settled there ?" 
 
 The next specimen of Judge Maguire's 
 sapience comes to the crushed "ignorant" 
 Celts in this fashion : 
 
 "In that fatal year (1152) Cardinal John 
 Paparo appeared in Ireland as a special legate of 
 Pope Eugenins III. He was the fleet Italian 
 legate ever sent to Iieland may Persico be the 
 last ! He summoned the bishops and principal 
 priests to the Synod of Kelt*, and there deliv- 
 ered palliums to the archbishop", taking their 
 oaths of obedience to the Pope. From that hour 
 dates the downfall of Irish nationality." 
 
 Here we have it on the authority of the 
 electric legal light who illumines the Su- 
 perior Court of San Francisco, that it was 
 palliums, and not Papal Bulls, which caused 
 the downfall of Irish nationality ! What 
 profound knowledge ! What beguiling bald- 
 erdash ! The conferring of the terrible pal 
 Hums which seems to have made his Honor's 
 anti-Papal heart palpitate with extraordin- 
 ary emotion, had no more to do with "the 
 downfall of Irish nationality' 1 than Judge 
 Maguire had with framing the Ten Com- 
 mandments ! 
 
 As one of those Catholic Irishmen who 
 have been "crushed in ignorance," we also 
 most respectfully desire to correct his Honor 
 concerning the baneful influence which the 
 bestowal of the apostate- scaring pallium is 
 supposed to have exercised on Ireland's des-
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 45 
 
 tiny. The first papal Legate in Ireland was 
 St. Malachy, Archbishop of Armagh, who 
 visited Rome about twelve years before 
 Cardinal Paparo was sent to Ireland, and, 
 while in the Eternal City, the great Irish 
 saint was appointed by Pope Innocent II. 
 who reigned from 1130. to 1143 Apostolic 
 Legate for all Ireland. The Pope also 
 promised St. Malachy the mysterious pal- 
 lium which Judge Maguire seems to think 
 is a kind of dynamite bomb invented by 
 the Pope specially for the destruction of Ire- 
 land ! 
 
 When St. Malachy was in Rome he asked 
 the Pope for pattiums for the other Arch- 
 bishops of Ireland, but the Holy Father 
 said he preferred to have petitions presented 
 from the ecclesiastics of the several Dio- 
 ceses presided over by Archbishops, before 
 sending palliums to the incumbents. Here 
 the matter rested until the year 1145, when 
 Pope Eugenius III. sat in the Chair of St. 
 Peter. Two years after his election, a 
 National synod comprising 15 Bishops and 
 200 Priests was assembled at Holmpatrick, 
 by order of the Primate Gelasius, and there 
 both Bishops and Priests petitioned the 
 Holy See to confer palliums on the Metro- 
 politans of Armagh and Cashel. They also 
 elected St. Malachy as their representative 
 to the Vicar of Christ. The saint set out 
 on his journey but died before he reached 
 his destination. 
 
 The death of St. Malachy delayed mat- 
 ters for some time. Finally, however, 
 Christian, Bishop of Lismore, was appointed 
 Papal Legate, to succeed St. Malachy, and 
 a short time thereafter, Pope Eugenius III. 
 sent Cardinal Paparo to Ireland, in order to 
 carry out tlie ivishes of the ecclesiastics of 
 that country. A National Synod convened 
 at Kells, on March 9th, 1152, and the 
 Pope's Legate conferred the pallium upon 
 the Metropolitans of Armagh, Cashel, Dub- 
 lin and Tuam. The pallium, as all Catho- 
 lics know, is merely a woolen insignia of the 
 fullness of the Episcopal office, and it has 
 no more political significance than has the 
 archiepiscopal cross of a Metropolitan. 
 
 Judge Maguire says that the Irish 
 Archbishops "took the oath of obedience to 
 the Pope," as if this also was some new- 
 
 fangled notion which some "foreign poten- 
 tate " had imposed upon the Irish episcopate. 
 The truth is that from the early ages this 
 rule existed, just as it does down to this 
 day, and its effect no more circumscribes 
 the mental or political independence of a 
 Bishop than does the band of linen which is 
 bound round his head during the ceremonies 
 of his consecration. 
 
 From all this it follows that neither the 
 visit of Cardinal Paparo to Ireland and the 
 reception of the palliums by the Archbishops, 
 nor the oaths taken by the Metropolitans, had 
 a single feather's weight in " the downfall of 
 Irish nationality," even though the High 
 and Mighty Censuror- General of Popes, Car- 
 dinals, and the " ignorant" Irish gives a con- 
 trary opinion. 
 
 Judge Maguire next says that one of the 
 benefits which accrued to " Pope Adrian's 
 financial and political advantage," was that 
 the Pope " desired to put Ireland under 
 tribute to the Vatican; the Irish people hav- 
 ing previously paid those small dues called 
 Peter-Pence to the See of Armagh, which 
 the rest of Europe paid to Rome." His 
 authority for this assertion is O'Halloran's 
 History of Ireland; but as the greater part 
 of that work was compiled by a number of 
 anti Irish Englishmen, it possesses no value 
 as a History of Ireland. The truth is 
 that Peter-Pence was not paid by Ireland 
 previous to the invasion, nor, though it 
 was expressly promised by the invaders (ad- 
 mitting for argument's sake that Adrian's 
 Bull was genuine), does it anywhere appear 
 that a single penny of such contribution 
 was ever sent to Rome! Right here arises 
 another doubt concerning the genuineness of 
 the Adrian Bull, inasmuch as if that docu- 
 ment was of Papal origin, would not Pope 
 Adrian or Alexander or some of their imme- 
 diate successors have forwarded a just claim 
 to England for damages, and would not the 
 Papal authorities have declared the Bull 
 null and void in consequence of the King of 
 England not having carried out the money 
 stipulation in that supposed agreement be- 
 tween himself and the Pope '( But no Pope 
 ever uttered a word of remonstrance; no 
 Cardinal ever carried to England a single 
 complaint. And why ? Because the Bui
 
 46 
 
 THK POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 was hixjuit and its terms were binding on 
 nobody I 
 
 Again, if the Bull were genuine, England 
 forfeited every iota of authority which that 
 document gave Henry 1 1. over Ireland. The 
 specific purpose for which the Bull is said to 
 have been given was that King Henry 
 should have certain rights in Ireland, pro- 
 vided as the document quoted by Judge 
 Maguire, says "that you (King Henry II.) 
 are willing to pay from each house a yearly 
 pension of one penny to St. Peter, that you 
 will preserve the rights of the churches of 
 the land whole and inviolate." Did King 
 Henry fulfill these stipulations ? Most as- 
 suredly not ! He not only never paid a 
 single penny in Peter-Pence nor was he 
 ever asked for it but, instead of " preserv- 
 ing" the rights of the Catholic Church in 
 Ireland, he saw churches demolished, mon- 
 asteries destroyed, and he quietly acquiesced 
 whilst robbery and rapine worked the ruin 
 of numerous holy Irish shrines ! Did any 
 Pope chide him for thus breaking his bond ? 
 Most assuredly not. And why ? Because 
 no Papal official in Rome had any authorita- 
 tive knowledge of the existence of such 
 Bulls as those fraudulently represented to 
 have emanated from Popes Adrian IV. and 
 Alexander III. 
 
 Now, even as prejudiced a critic of the 
 rights of the Catholic Church as his Honor 
 the Judge of the Superior Court of San 
 Francisco, will be forced to admit thai, when 
 King Henry II. failed to fulfill these obliga- 
 tions, the Bull ceased to have any binding 
 force either upon the Pope or the Irish peo- 
 ple. The document became so much waste 
 
 paper, just as it really was from the first 
 hour of its forgery. These are plain, pal- 
 pable facts which no amount of pettifogging 
 can push aside ! 
 
 In accordance with the unfortunate habit 
 he has acquired of manufacturing historical 
 facts and distorting them to suit his own 
 side of the case, Judge Maguire puts this 
 very untruthful text into his remarkably un- 
 reliable publication : 
 
 " That everlasting yearly ' penny from every 
 house' again the price of poor Ii eland's liberty. 
 It has been faithfully paid. England's promise to 
 the Vatican has been faithfully fulfilled to the 
 letter ; but alas, every penny of the tribute baa 
 been atained with the blood and tears of Erin's 
 subjugated children." 
 
 This paragraph is as clear a perversion of 
 truth as we have yet caught Judge Ma- 
 guire in telling. There is not a single word 
 on record to prove that England ever paid 
 a single farthing of Peter-pence in fulfill- 
 ment of the fraudulent Bull. 
 
 Rev. P. J. Carew, in his "Ecclesiastical 
 History of Ireland," decides the whole mat- 
 ter by saying on the 171st page of his 
 work "Henry's promises to Adrian respect- 
 ing the Peter-Pence appears to have been 
 wholly forgotten by him. The exaction of 
 this tribute he never attempted to enforce on 
 Irish subjects." Thus we correct another of 
 Judge Maguire 's ''mistakes," and we advise 
 his Honor to reserve his tears in future in 
 order to shed them over his own false his- 
 tory, rather than to waste them in weeping 
 over supposed wrongs which Ireland never 
 suffered !
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 The Peter-Pence Proviso Continued. More Proof Exhibiting the False Character of 
 the Stipulation. King John's Surrender of England to the Pope. Important 
 Documents Relating Thereto. Additional Evidence of the Fictitious Nature of 
 the Two Bulls of Adrian and Alexander. The Editor of Cambreusis Criticises 
 that Falsifier's Fabrications. 
 
 In our last chapter we showed from reliable 
 historical authority that Ireland never paid 
 Peter- Pence to the Pope, in accordance with 
 the clause of the bogus Bull attributed to 
 Pope Adrian. But we have still further 
 proof to offer in this direction. During the 
 Pontificate of Pope Innocent III. , a demand 
 was sent by that Pontiff to the Bishops of 
 England, (but not to those of Ireland) de- 
 manding some over-due Peter-Pence from 
 them. This is strong evidence that Pope 
 Innocent III., either never knew of any 
 Bulls by Popes Adrian and Alexander, re- 
 quiring Peter- Pence from the Irish people 
 in accordance therewith, or, if he had ever 
 heard of them he looked upon them as 
 utterly unreliable. 
 
 On page 189 of the first volume of the 
 Chronicles of Rymer, Fcedora, etc., will be 
 found a document from Pope Innocent which 
 still more forcibly sets forth the fact that 
 the Pope never knew that any Peter- Pence 
 was promised by King Henry II. , on the 
 part of the Irish people. The document in 
 question is a Letter which Pope Innocent 
 addressed to Cardinal Nicholas, Bishop of 
 Tusculum, Legate of the Apostolic See in 
 England, and also to Pandolphus, Sub-Dea- 
 con, and a familiar friend of the Sovereign 
 Pontiff. In that Letter Pope Innocent says : 
 
 " As every house throughout all England as 
 you very well know must give every year a 
 penny as the revenue due to the Holy See, the 
 Prelates of England, who have collected the 
 revenue in Our name, have disposed of it against 
 the will of the owner, and they have not feared 
 to keep the greater part of it for themselves. 
 They have sent to TIs only three hundred marks ; 
 and they have kept more than one thousand 
 marks in their own hands. 
 
 Wishing, therefore, that the rights of the 
 Roman Church be protected, We command you, 
 by the authority of this letter, and We ordain 
 expressly, that you receive in the first place 
 from their hands the sums that have been paid 
 up to this time, and to oblige them, if neces- 
 
 sary, by ecclesiastical censures without appeal. 
 Then you shall enjoin them formally, in Our 
 name, to pay integrally the balance. We do 
 not see what title they can allege ; they cannct 
 produce a privilege granted to them by the Holy 
 See, nor can they prove a prescription of one 
 hundred years against the Roman Church. 
 
 Given at the Lateran, on the 5th kalends of 
 February, in the 6th year of Our Pontificate." 
 
 Here we find that Pope Innocent III., 
 was afforded a most suitable opportunity 
 for demanding the Peter-Pence due to his 
 Holiness from Ireland under the bogus bond 
 which is attributed to King Henry. But 
 the Pope never once alludes to it ; he in- 
 sists upon being paid the collections made 
 in England to the last penny, but he leaves 
 Ireland entirely out of the question. Now, 
 we ask any reasonable individual, what 
 would be the line of argument used in the 
 above Papal document, if Pope Innocent 
 had the slightest claim on England for any 
 Peter- Pence collected in Ireland ? Would 
 not the Pontiff have included Ireland in 
 the text 1 Most assuredly he would, as his 
 Holiness was not to be cheated out of his 
 dues with impunity. It is clear, therefore, 
 that down to the year 1206 the Bull of 
 Adrian had no status whatever in the mind 
 of the Vicar of Christ, and here again we 
 have another proof that the Bull attributed 
 to Pope Adrian IV. was a flagrant forgery. 
 
 Now let us cite another historical event 
 wherein additional evidence lucidly appears 
 against the Peter-Pence proposal in the 
 fictitious Bull of Pope Adrian. It is a mat- 
 ter of history that in the year 1213 King 
 John of England (Lackland, or sans-terre) 
 seeing himself without resources and on the 
 brink of ruin, placed his person and his 
 kingdom under the suzerainty of Pope In- 
 nocent III. The Golden Bull which con- 
 cluded that compact may be found in
 
 48 
 
 THR POPK AND IKELAND. 
 
 Rymer, as well as the agreement of King 
 John, wherein occurs this passage : 
 
 " Not determined by force, nor constrained 
 by terror, but of our own free and spontaneous 
 will, and of the common council of our Barons, 
 we offer and freely concede to God, to His 
 Apostles Peter and Paul, to the Holy Roman 
 Church, our Mother, and to our Lord Pope In- 
 nocent III., and his Catholic successors, the 
 whole kingdom of England and the whole king- 
 dom of Ireland," etc. 
 
 Then the prince promises, among other 
 things, to pay to the Pope one thousand 
 pounds sterling every year, being 700 for 
 England, and 300 for Ireland, under pain 
 of forfeiture for himself as well as for his 
 successors. 
 
 When offering his kingdom to the Holy 
 See, John had a splendid opportunity 
 whereby to refer to the Bull of Ad nan, 
 who, about seventy years previously, had, it 
 is alleged, generously given over the spiri- 
 tual and temporal affairs of Ireland to the 
 tender mercies of his father, King Henry 
 II. The prince was aware of the alleged 
 existence of the Bull, because the king- 
 worshipping Cambrensis had dedicated to 
 John a few years before, the third edition 
 of his Expugnatio Hibe.rnica, into which the 
 dubious document was inserted. In fact, 
 so eager was Cambrensis to attract the at- 
 tention of King John to the bogus Bull, 
 that he overshot the mark by a special ap- 
 peal to the king in the dedication of the 
 work, calling the particular attention of his 
 Majesty to that document ! This of itself 
 looks very much like one of the many 
 disreputable tricks which Cambrensis was 
 famous for, and it also tends to cast addi- 
 ditional doubt upon the authenticity of the 
 Adrian Bull. 
 
 Another query arises in our mind right 
 here : If King John had any faith in the 
 authenticity of the Adrian Bull, ichy did he 
 keep silence concerning it ? Would it not 
 have been more in accord with common 
 sense on his part, as well as on the part of 
 his counsellors, to tell the Pope that he was 
 already the feudatory of the Holy See in 
 Ireland, he being the immediate successor 
 of his father King Henry II. 
 
 Instead of acting in this rational way, 
 
 however, we find the ruling monarch ad- 
 dressing the Holy Father as if he, the King 
 of England, was entering for the first time 
 into negotiations concerning Peter-Pence 
 with the Pope of Rome. We must, there- 
 fore, come to the conclusion that, even in 
 the estimation of the son and successor of 
 King Henry II., the Bull of Adrian had 110 
 value as an official document even when he 
 was in treaty with a legitimate successor of 
 the Pope who is said to have made it ! 
 
 If we are astonished at the silence of 
 King John regarding Pope Adrian's Bull, 
 what excuse can be given for the silence of 
 Pope Innocent III. on tlie subject 1 It will 
 be also remarked that the Pope to whom 
 King John became submissive, says nothing 
 of the Bull of Alexander, although that do- 
 cument decrees that a very large sum should 
 be paid as Peter-Pence by the people of 
 Ireland to the Pope, whereas John offered 
 the paltry sum of three hundred pounds 
 sterling. 
 
 Now we ask any common-sense citizen, 
 who has the slightest idea of diplomacy, if 
 documents of such vast importance as the 
 Bulls of Adrian and Alexander would not 
 have been alluded to on such an important 
 occasion as the one we have described pro - 
 vided they were known in Rome ? Every 
 person familiar with the mode of procedure 
 in the execution of important trusts in 
 Rome, where the interests of a whole nation 
 are at stake, will admit that there is no 
 Court in Europe where genuine documents 
 are more frequently cited and quoted than 
 by the Chancellor of the Papal Court. 
 That official has ever been noted' for de- 
 claring that the Sovereign Pontiff " walks 
 in the footsteps of his predecessor Pope So- 
 and-so, " that he "continues the work they 
 have commenced," and then reference 
 is made to Bulls, Briefs, Concordats or 
 Letters which formerly treated of the ques- 
 tion under immediate consideration. 
 
 The case of King John was precisely the 
 opportunity which the Roman Chancellor 
 would have been delighted to take advan- 
 tage of by introducing the ancient official 
 style of " Praedecessorum nostorum vestigiis 
 inhaerentes, evrumque concessionem appro-
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 49 
 
 bantes et conjirmantes, etc.," if he was 
 afforded the opportunity. But that official 
 found no document of any " predecessor" of 
 Pope Innocent, in whose footsteps his Holi- 
 ness could " walk," nor could the Chancel- 
 lor coerce his Pontiff to "continue" a 
 course of conduct which neither Adrian nor 
 any other Pope ever commenced ! It is per- 
 fectly certain, therefore, that neither the 
 Pope himself, nor any official connected 
 with the Papal archives, knew anything of 
 the so-called Bull of Adrian during the 
 Pontificate of Pope Innocent III. 
 
 We now come to another very important 
 feature in this surrender of his kingdom on 
 the part of John to the Pope. It takes 
 two to make a bargain, and although King 
 John offt red "the kingdom of Ireland'' to 
 the Holy Father, the Vicar of Christ en- 
 tirely ignored the gift ! 
 
 A reference to Rymer's Chronicles (Vol. 
 I, pp. 179) will disclose a Letter which the 
 Pope addressed to the Irish people on Oc- 
 tober 27th, 1213, in which his Holiness al- 
 ludes to the kingdom of England, but he 
 never joins therewith the name of Ireland. 
 The Pope styles John " King of the Eng- 
 lish," without adding that he is also King 
 of Ireland. He says that " the Kingdom 
 of England belongs through the act of do- 
 nation made by King John to the Church, 
 and that she possesses " a special right over 
 that kingdom," but does not say that the 
 Church also received by John's act any 
 temporal power whatever over Ireland ! 
 
 Need we comment on these facts 1 We 
 think not. They prove, with all the force 
 of truth that Pope Innocent III. well knew 
 that although King John of England offered 
 his Holiness full temporal authority over the 
 " kingdom of Ireland," still that monarch 
 did not possess a single particle of title to 
 an inch of that island. Hence the Pope 
 wisely ignored John's proposition because 
 he knew that his title was mythical. 
 
 In counselling the people of Ireland as to 
 the best course they should pursue in their 
 diplomatic relations with England, Pope 
 Innocent never makes use of the terms 
 "obedience" or "submission" to any Eng- 
 lish monarch. His Holiness recommends 
 
 "benevolence" and "friendship" on the 
 part of the Irish people towards King John. 
 Nor do we see how the Pope could do other- 
 wise, because the Vicar of Christ was fully 
 cognizant of the fact that he -as the custo 
 dian of the English kingdom possessed n<> 
 temporal power whatever over the Bishops, 
 princes, nobles and people of Ireland. 
 Hence his Holiness could never think of 
 asking them to submit their allegiance to 
 King John and his successors. 
 
 Pope Innocent was also well aware of the 
 fact that only a small fraction of Ireland 
 was in the possession of the English, and 
 that the greater portion of the island pres- 
 erved its independence. The Kings of Ire- 
 land generally continued to exercise their 
 regal functions in peace ; and the districts 
 of Ireland which the English did not oc- 
 cupy preserved their independence inviolate. 
 But even supposing that the Pope had re- 
 quired submission to King John on the part 
 of the Irish people, such a mandate could 
 only affect those within the English Pale, 
 or the territory which Strongbow and his 
 satellites had stolen by force and fraud. 
 
 Returning to the Letter which King John 
 sent to the Pope, we call the attention of 
 our readers to the 300 which that prince 
 promised to send to Rome as his tribute 
 from Ireland. But so little value did Pope 
 Innocent III. place upon the king's volun- 
 tary offering, that his Holiness entirely 
 avoided all mention of it in his Letter to 
 the Irish people ! Like the " gift" of " the 
 kingdom of Ireland" which John presented 
 to the Pope, his Holiness received the prom- 
 ised 300 as a myth which looked far more 
 substantial upon the bond of surrender than 
 it was in reality ! 
 
 In point of ^fact King John derived no 
 regal title whatever from Ireland. Henry 
 VIII., who scandalized the world about 
 three centuries after King John, wrote a 
 book against Luther, and, in dedicating it 
 to the Pope, he styles himself King of 
 England and Lord of Ireland. But the 
 Lord knows his "lordship" in Ireland hard- 
 ly amounted to anything, as he never added 
 a solitary inch of land to the territory his 
 henchmen usurped ! On the other hand,
 
 50 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 it ia known to all readers of history that it 
 was not until the time of Pope Paul IV., 
 that Ireland was erected into a kingdom, 
 and this occurred some three hundred and 
 fifty years after King John had offered 
 "the kingdom of Ireland" to a Pope who 
 had no idea of becoming a receiver of stolen 
 goods ! 
 
 Whilst we are treating of this era in 
 English history, it may not be amiss to 
 introduce another instance where the 
 Peter-Pence paragraph in the pretended 
 Hull of Pope Adrian helps materially to 
 prove that document to be a rank forgery. 
 Four years previous to the events just nar- 
 rated, Giraldus Cambrensis had represented 
 to King John that one of the causes which 
 led to the severe reverses which the English 
 forces had met with in Ireland, arose from 
 the fact that both Henry and his hopeful 
 son had neglected to establish the collection 
 of Peter-Pence in Ireland, in accordance 
 with the provision of that Bull, the text and 
 terms of which were far more familiar to 
 Cambrensis than they were to any Pope or 
 Cardinal in the Catholic Church. 
 
 In conformity with the advice of Cam- 
 brensis, John should have made this pro- 
 position to Pope Innocent, instead of offer- 
 ing the paltry sum of fifteen hundred dol- 
 lars to the Holy See. But King John was 
 like his father wise in all things wicked. 
 He had his suspicions that the Adrian Bull 
 was bogus, and so he studiously avoided all 
 mention of it, and although several dona- 
 tions of 1,000 were sent from England to 
 Rome, the whole sum was credited to Eng- 
 land, and no mention whatever made of any 
 I>art of it coming from a country which 
 itome knew was no party to the compact ! 
 
 In the year 1234, when King Henry III., 
 occupied the English tlirone, the Peter-Pence 
 collection was due for several years. So 
 the Pope's Chancellor wrote over to England 
 to remit the back dues. The response of 
 King Henry III., as quoted by Rymer, ia 
 dated February 25th, 1235, and states that 
 from the first concession of the tribute, it 
 was stated in the document of King John, 
 that the sum of 1,000 would be given to 
 
 the Roman Church in an undivided manner. 
 Here again we find the Adrian Bull ig- 
 nored, the document sent by King John to 
 the Pope, when he surrendered his king- 
 dom to his Holiness, being quoted as the. 
 first concession of the Peter-Pence tribute ! 
 The force of this evidence will be better ap- 
 preciated when it is brought to mind that 
 the Adrian Bull was manufactured by order 
 of his Majesty Henry the Second, nearly 
 seventy years previously ! 
 
 These historical proofs entirely overcome 
 any assertions that can be advanced against 
 the bogus character of the Adrian Bull, and 
 now, having conclusively proved that the 
 Peter-Pence clause in both Bulls was false, 
 misleading, and inoperative, we will present 
 some new phases of historical evidence in 
 support of the claim of truth and justice on 
 the part of both the Catholic Church and 
 the Irish people. 
 
 We have before us as we pen these lines 
 the Topographic Hibernica and the Expuy- 
 natio Hibernica of Giraldus Cambrensis, 
 edited by James F. Diniock, M. A., Rector 
 of Barnburgh, Yorkshire, and published in 
 London in 1807.* Now let us open this 
 volume and hear the editor describe for our 
 edification the moral and intellectual charac- 
 ter of Cambrensis, whom Judge Maguire 
 endeavors to glorify, simply because that an- 
 cient perverter of truth is a perjured wit- 
 ness against the Pope of Rome and the in- 
 nocent Irish people. 
 
 The Editor of the works of Cambrensis 
 in the first part of the Preface thereto, 
 when speaking of Cambrensis, whom his 
 Honor falsely styles "a leading Prelate," 
 (misleading would be the proper term) 
 gives these reasons why the works of that 
 disreputable author were not transcribed by 
 the monks of his own time : 
 
 "We cannot be surprised at these treatises 
 having been no favorite subject of transcription 
 in the scriptoria of our larger English monas- 
 teries, the great source of all English mediaeval 
 manuscripts, where Giraldus and the See of St. 
 David would be held in a vastly lower degree of 
 importance than that in which he regarded it 
 and himself. His bitter abuse of monasticieni, 
 
 'Official edition published under the auspices 
 of the Master of the Holla.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 51 
 
 moreover, would make him far from a welcome 
 inmate generally of iconastic libraries. Hm 
 Speculum Ecclesiw, especially, could only have 
 been looked upon by monks as a piece of yross, 
 lying, blasphemous ribaldry, which it would be 
 no venial sin for any monk to transcribe. No 
 wonder that some of his works have so barely 
 survived to our days" 
 
 Such is the estimation formed of Giraldus 
 Cambrensis by the English Protestant Edi- 
 tor of his works, in 1867 ! The Editor 
 further contradicts Judge Maguire's as- 
 sertion that Cambrensis' " history" ap- 
 peared in 1173, during the lifetime 
 of Alexander III. Now as Pope Alex- 
 ander departed this life in 1181, it is 
 scarcely possible that he came out of his 
 tomb to read the falsifying " history" of 
 Cambrensis, even supposing that author's 
 first attempt at libelling the Irish people 
 was issued as early as 1182 ! This rectifies 
 another of Judge Maguire's "mistakes." 
 
 On another page of Mr. Dimock's Preface 
 we read that Cambrensis did not complete 
 his first work until the years 1185 or 118G, 
 so that by no possibility can Judge Maguire 
 squirm out of his very peculiar manner of 
 anticipating events and manufacturing his- 
 tory to suit the sentiments of splenic hate 
 which impelled him to commit the blunder 
 of issuing his bad book. 
 
 Turning to page 42 of Mr. Dimock's Pref- 
 ace, we come to a disclosure which throws 
 very considerable light upon the bungling 
 manner in which the bogus Bulls were 
 manipulated by Cambrensis and his co- 
 conspirators against both Ireland ' and 
 the Catholic Church. Alluding to the' 
 omissions and subtractions in the Cambren- 
 sian manuscripts, Mr. Dimock makes this 
 damaging revelation : 
 
 "There is one other case of subtraction to be 
 mentioned and a most strange one. In the 
 5th chapter of the 2ad book (Expugnatio Hiber- 
 nico.) the early MSS. gives under the year 1174 
 or 1175 a privilege long before obtained from 
 Pope Adrian IV. authorizing Henry II. 's in- 
 vasion of Ireland ; and a confirmatory one of 
 the then Pope, Alexander III, with some pref- 
 atory matter principally relating to the persons 
 employed in bringing these privileges for pub- 
 lication into Ireland at this time, and to the 
 agency of John of Salisbury in having pro- 
 c red the first from Pope Adrian in 1155. But 
 
 the later MSS. omit Alexander' i privilege and 
 all mention of him, and give Adrian's privilege 
 only. The prefatory matter had to be altered 
 accordingly. In doing this they marvellous- 
 ly contrive to make Henry in 1172 apply 
 for and procure this privilege from Pope 
 Adrian who died in 1159 (!!!) And with equally 
 marvellous confusien they represent John of 
 Salisbury, agent in procuring this privilege in 
 1155, as sent, not to Ireland, but to Rome, for 
 the purpose of publishing it at >V aterf urd iu 
 1174 or 1175. (!!!) 
 
 In a foot-note to page xliii. , from whicli 
 this extract is taken, Mr. Dimock adds this 
 explanation which throws another very 
 serious doubt upon the genuineness of the 
 Adrian Bull : 
 
 " But the cause of the suppression of Alexan- 
 der's Bull, and the germ of the blundering in 
 the prefatory matter, were both perhaps sup- 
 plied by Giraldus, in his copy of this chapter, 
 as given in the De Instr. Princ. (p. 51, etc.) 
 He there states, in introducing Alexander's 
 privilege, that some asserted it to be a forgery (I!!) 
 and hence perhaps its suppression afterwards 
 in the Expwjnatio by some rectifier of his his- 
 tory of Henry's papal rights over Ireland." 
 
 The plain meaning of this paragraph shows 
 that even during the lifetime of Cambrensis 
 there were persons who suspected Adrian's 
 Bull to be a forgery. This completely nul- 
 lifies Judge Maguire's boast that the 
 genuineness of the Bulls of Adrian and 
 Alexander was not challenged when first 
 published. Here we have prima facie evi- 
 dence that Pope Adrian's Bull was forged, 
 as no candid, honest or truthful historian 
 could make such fearful blunders or such 
 a jumble of facts or dates, unless his mind 
 was beclouded by the darkness of doubt 
 through a departure from truth and the 
 adoption of falsehood. A manuscript that 
 had to be altered, amended, revised and 
 corrected after the manner in which Mr. 
 Dimock proves the miscalled " history" 
 of Cambrensis to have been changed and 
 corrupted by that author himself, is entire- 
 ly unworthy of any respect from reasonable 
 men as an authority upon any question of 
 fact whatever. 
 
 It has been already clearly demonstrated! 
 in these pages that Cambrensis did not 
 possess a single necessary qualification to 
 entitle him to be ranked as a historian of 
 Ireland, but in case any person might
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 demur to this sweeping charge, we will 
 again have recourse to the testimony of Mr. 
 Dimock the Editor of the works of Cam- 
 brensis and the man who is supposed to 
 have been most deeply versed in his writ- 
 ings. Here is that gentleman's verdict, 
 showing how entirely valueless Cambrensis 
 is for any purpose : 
 
 " As to his history of the English invasion, it 
 must have been wholly derived from the English 
 themselves, and in great measure from his own 
 near friends. If Giraldus had been the moat 
 cool and fair and unbiassed of writers still a his- 
 tory 80 derived could not well have been any- 
 thing but one-sided. * * * Giraldus was replete 
 with the exact qualities the very reverse of 
 what are needed to form au impartial historian. 
 * * * Giraldus asserts that from the time of 
 St. Patrick there had never been a single Irish 
 Bishop who had manfully striven to instruct 
 and correct the people, and this he asserts though 
 St. Malachi's fame could not possibly be un- 
 known to him. St. Malachi had been dead only 
 
 about forty years ; and few, if any, more ear- 
 neat and laborious instructors and reformers 
 can perhaps be named amongst the Bishops of 
 all Christendom of all times, and he had con- 
 temporaries and followers not unworthy of him. 
 And this, too, he (Cambrensis) asserts of the 
 Isle of Saints, for ages after Patrick's time the 
 great nursery of missionary Bishops, Apostleit 
 of the Faith, throughout the wide district of the 
 Continent of Europe, where the name of many 
 an Irish saint and martyr is still held in rever- 
 ence ; to whom also was due the conversion of 
 Scotland and of a large part of Saxon England." 
 
 In requires no comment on our part to add 
 any additional force to the plain truth of 
 the foregoing caustic criticism which Mr. 
 Dimock makes regarding the utterly worth- 
 less character of the writings of Giraldus 
 Cambrensus, so we will leave the character 
 of this historical hireling in the keeping 
 of our readers while we pass under review 
 other matters connected with this period. 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 Proof that Giraldus Cambrensis knew the Adrian Bull was a Forged Document. His 
 Spiteful and Slanderous Sermon in Dublin. The "Synod of Cashel" Critically 
 Analyzed. More of Judge Maguire's Mistakes Made Manifest. 
 
 We will now reveal to our readers an- 
 other action of Giraldus Cambrensis, which 
 will serve to show, that he himself knew 
 that the Bull attributed to Pope Adrian 
 was a forgery. Giraldus composed numer- 
 ous works (such as they were) and whilst 
 at Rome in the year 1190, he presented 
 copies of them to the Pope and several 
 notable Italian Church dignitaries, but 
 with the cunning of a genuine conspirator 
 against truth he was very careful not to 
 present anybody in the Eternal City with a 
 copy of his Expugnatio Hibernica, which 
 contained the spurious Bull of Pope 
 Adrian ! 
 
 In the year mentioned, Cambrensis pre- 
 sented Pope Innocent III., with six of his 
 .works, but the Gemma Sacerdotulis, the 
 infamous Conquest of Ireland, was studious- 
 ly kept from the sight of that Pontiff or any 
 of his Cardinals !* 
 
 Brewer's Ed. Cambrensia. Edition of 1861, 
 Vol. I., pp. 70. 
 
 In the Symbolum Electorum, there occurs 
 a letter written by Cambrensis to the Pre- 
 micarius and Chancellor of the Roman 
 Court, to whom he presented his works en- 
 titled " The Topographia of Ireland," and 
 the " Description of Wales," but he was 
 cute enough to conceal from the prying eyes 
 of that Pontifical Official the "Conquest 
 of Ireland."! 
 
 Here again we have explicit proof which 
 will help all who are interested in this in- 
 tricate question in forming a just opinion, 
 and of coming to a correct conclusion, that 
 Giraldus Cambrensis knew in his heart 
 and soul that the Adrian Bull was the 
 outgrowth of early British ' conspiracy 
 against truth," and hence he kept it care- 
 fully concealed from the sight of those who 
 toould have discovered the fraud! 
 
 Alluding to the "sermon'' which Giraldus 
 preached in Dublin, and which Judge Ma- 
 
 t Brewer, pp. 308.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 53 
 
 guire ignorantly cites as evidence that Cam- 
 brensia was " a leading Catholic Prelate of 
 the time of Popes Adrian and Alexander," 
 Mr. Dimock gives this not very complimen- 
 tary explanation : 
 
 " Giraldus first made this assertion [his at- 
 tack upon the Irish Bishops cited last week] in 
 a sermon which he preached before a Synod of 
 the Clergy in Dublin, and he deliberately re- 
 peats it in the Topographia of the present 
 volume, and again long afterwards in his DC 
 Rebus, etc. The preacher of the day before, 
 an Irish Abbot, had denounced, and very justly, 
 as was proved, the incontinence of the English 
 Clergy, who had followed the invaders into 
 Ireland. Giraldus retaliated in his sermon, 
 with a sweeping charge of excessive drinking 
 against the Irish clergy, but adds not a word as 
 to any attempt being made to prove the charge ; 
 and not content with that, he then makes this 
 charge of utter neglect of duty against the 
 Bishops of Ireland, without one exception since 
 the time of St. Patrick. It was bad enough, in 
 a moment of exasperation, to make so reckless 
 an assertion ; it was worse, to persist deliberate- 
 ly in it afterwards. It seems incredible that 
 he should not have well known its gross false- 
 hood, if not at the time he first uttered it, at 
 any rate long before he repeated it in the DC 
 Gestis etc. But there was nothing that Gi- 
 raldus had once said, which in his opinion was 
 not well worthy of being said again. There can 
 be but one opinion of a historian who could thus 
 recklessly make an untrue statement, and thus 
 deliberately persist in it." 
 
 What can honest people think of a " his- 
 torian" who would make a false, dastardly 
 and calumniating charge against the Prel- 
 ates and the Priests of Ireland, and then 
 well knowing it to be a most outrageous 
 and unfounded slander repeat it over and 
 over again ad nuusiem ? Would such an 
 unscrupulous scribe hesitate for a moment 
 to assist the king he idolized in forging a 
 fictitious Bull ? Besides, Cambrensis frank- 
 ly admits that in writing his book on Ire- 
 land " truth was not his main object," but 
 that the volume was especially concocted 
 " for the purpose of sounding the praises of 
 King Henry the Second." Expect truth, 
 honesty, or even ordinary impartiality, from 
 such a villifying villian ] As well look for 
 Truth in the pit of perdition ! But per- 
 haps some reader may doubt that even as 
 debased a character as Cambrensis so com- 
 pletely stultified himself as to admit these 
 
 telling facts so clearly showing that no re- 
 liance whatever can be placed in a single 
 word ever written by this champion con- 
 spirator against truth. In order, therefore, 
 to meet any such objection, let us turn 
 again to the work before us and we will find 
 that on page Ixix of Mr. Dimock's Preface, 
 the Editor of the works of Cambrensis thus 
 explicitly states the disreputable reason 
 which that author had in writing his mis- 
 called " history." Mr. Dimock says : 
 
 " I think I have said enough to justify me in 
 refusing to accept Giraldus's history of the Irish 
 and of their English invaders as sober, truthful 
 history. Somewhat to the same purpose will be 
 found occasionally in my notes, when it has 
 seemed to me allowable to compare his state- 
 ments with those of other authorities. Giraldus, 
 indeed, seems himself to allow, in the case of 
 the Topographia, that truth was not his main 
 object. He says that he compiled the work for 
 the purpose of sounding the praises of Henry 
 II." 
 
 Here, therefore, we ask any candid read- 
 er, what estimate he would place upon a 
 Papal Bull which made its first appearance 
 in the world through the works of such an 
 obsequious scribe and such a malignant 
 calumniator of the whole Irish Episcopate ? 
 The only conclusion every impartial person 
 can come to is that King Henry II., em- 
 employed Giraldus Cambrensis, John of 
 Salisbury and other traitors to truth, to 
 concoct the bogus Bull of Pope Adrian, 
 which was filed away and not taken from 
 its hiding place until about twenty years 
 after the fictitious year forged on a docu- 
 ment which is dated from Rome, although 
 Pope Adrian was not in Rome at that time ! 
 
 A great deal of stress is laid by 
 those writers who suppose the spurious 
 Bull of Pope Adrian IV. to be genuine, 
 upon what is generally known as a Confer- 
 ence of the Irish clergy called at " Cashell" 
 by order of King Henry, in some year from 
 1171 to 1177, regarding the date of which 
 there are as many different opinions as there 
 are disputants concerning the issuance of 
 the Bull itself. 
 
 Judge Maguire, with his usual blunder- 
 ing derived from ignorance of the facts in 
 the case, says on this point : 
 
 " Armed with these Bulls, King Henry, who,
 
 54 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 before receiving the last, had entered Ireland 
 (October 18th, 1171), claiming it under that of 
 Adrian IV., immediately summoned the prin- 
 cipal clergy of Ireland to meet in conference at 
 
 "This conference is historically known as 
 the ' Synod of Cashel.' Here the Bulls of 
 Adrian and Alexander were read, and, ' in the 
 name of the Sovereign Pontiff, the clergy and 
 people of Ireland were callod upon to receive 
 Henry the Second of England as their king.' 
 
 "At this Synod the Pope's Legate presided, 
 St. Geiasius, the Primate of Ireland, having re- 
 fuged to attend." 
 
 These paragraphs are all right, save that 
 the date (October 18th) is wrong : the year 
 (1171) is inexact: the "arming" of King 
 Henry a bad bull: the Synod of " Cashell" 
 is a myth : and the whole matter a mis- 
 leading fiction manufactured by English 
 writers in order to cover up King Henry's 
 iniquitous invasion of Ireland ! So far 
 from being "armed with these Bulls," 
 as Judge Maguire stupidly asserts, the 
 bogus documents were lying (in far more 
 senses than one) in some dark corner of 
 Winchester Castle, ready to be removed 
 into the light as soon as the parties whose 
 names were forged thereto had "shuffled off 
 this mortal coil." A pretty extensive read- 
 ing of Irish history in connection with this 
 question, justifies us in boldly asserting that 
 no Conference of the Irish Hierarchy or 
 Clergy was held in "Cashell" on October 18th, 
 1171. Rev. P. J. Carew, in his " Eccle- 
 siastical History of Ireland," says that the 
 Synod at which the bogus Bulls were for 
 the first time publicly read in Ireland, was 
 in the year 1175, and he mentions Water- 
 ford as the place. 
 
 In the Appendix to his work, Father 
 Carew has given a list of the " Principal 
 Synods held in Ireland before the Thir- 
 teenth Century. " This list is copied from 
 Lanigan's History, and the only Synods 
 mentioned from 1162 to 1172 are the fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 1170. Synod of Armagh. This Synod de- 
 creed that all the English who were detained in 
 servitude in Ireland, should be restored to 
 liberty. 
 
 1172. Synod of Cashel, by order of Henry II. , 
 convened for the purpose regulating some matters 
 of ecclesiastical discipline. 
 
 Judge Maguire's statement concerning 
 the Synod of October 18th, 1171, will have 
 to be added, therefore, to the other num- 
 erous "mistakes'' for which his Honor is 
 becoming daily more notorious. 
 
 Thomas Moore in his History of Ireland, 
 also gives the year 1175 as the date when 
 the manipulated manuscripts first saw the 
 sunlight of Ireland fall upon their fictitous 
 faces. This writer thus describes the man- 
 ner of their introduction : 
 
 " It was about this time (A. i>. 1175) that 
 the Bull of Pope Adrian, granting the kingdom 
 ol Ireland to Henry II., and obtained by this 
 Sovereign by the Holy See as far back as the 
 year 1151, was for the first time publicly an- 
 nounced to his Irish subjects. * * * The persons 
 appointed to carry these documents to Ireland 
 were, William Fitz- Aldelm, and Nicholas, the 
 Prior of Wallingford ; and a Synod of Bishops 
 being assembled, on their arrival, the Papal 
 grants were there publicly read." 
 
 This extract does not look as if King 
 Henry was " armed" with Bulls to any very 
 alarming extent wheu he went to Ireland, 
 although as eminent a legal authority as his 
 Honor the Judge of the Superior Court of 
 San Francisco says so ! Tom Moore's his- 
 tory, therefore, is far more likely to be cor- 
 rect than Judge Maguire's miserable liter- 
 ary failure. 
 
 Let us now hear what the Abbe Mac- 
 Geoghegan has to say on this subject. This 
 celebrated historian makes no mention 
 whatever of any Synod of Irish Bishops 
 being held in Cashel on October 18th, 1171, 
 nor does he allude to the introduction of 
 the bogus Adrian Bull at any time during 
 the twelfth century, except in the following 
 paragraph : 
 
 " About this time, says Ware, fallowing the 
 English authors by whom alone it is mentioned, 
 Henry II. sent Nicholas, Prior of Wallingford. 
 and afterwards Abbot of Malmsbury, and 
 William Fitz-Aldelm to Ireland, A. D. 1175, 
 with the Bull of Alexander, which, they say, 
 was read and approved of at an assembly of 
 the Bishops at Waterford. This Bull, accord- 
 ing to them, confirmed that by which Adrian 
 IV., had already granted to this prince, the 
 title of Lord of Ireland, and other privileges." 
 
 The portions of the above paragraph
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 55 
 
 which we have placed in italic, will demon- 
 strate at a glance to our readers how en- 
 tirely valueless is the whole assertion ! In 
 the first place, every person familiar with 
 the manner in which Irish history has ever 
 been concocted by English authors, is well 
 aware of the fact that such works are gen- 
 erally genuine " conspiracies against truth. " 
 In the second place, this event is mentioned 
 by Bngliah authors alone, and upon their 
 authority "it is said" that the Alexander 
 Bull was read and approved of in an as- 
 sembly of Bishops ! This whole paragraph, 
 therefore, may be set down as partaking of . 
 that fradulent character which good Father , 
 Tom FJurke (fJod rest his soul !) s graphi- 
 cally described as " a Thumping English 
 Lie !" 
 
 Among the most valuable Annals of Ire- 
 land, are those of Maurice Regan, secre- 
 tary and interpreter of Dermod MacMur- 
 rough, last King of Leinster, and the man 
 through whose evil ways the English first 
 entered Ireland. The Chronicles of Began 
 embrace that important era in Ireland be- 
 tween the years 1167 and 1173, and most 
 assuredly King Henry the invader could 
 not have been "armed" with the ammunition 
 of the bogus Bulls, without the chronicler 
 making some mention thereof. Yet Kegan 
 is as silent as a Sphinx on the subject. 
 
 The work+ is one of the rarest books on 
 Irish history extant, and it contains some 
 very valuable statistics, as well as speci- 
 mens of the singular title-deeds which the 
 King of England made to the different in- 
 vaders of the lands of Ireland. As a speci- 
 men of the orthographical combinations of 
 the English language in the last century we 
 append the opening paragraph in the pref- 
 ace, which was written in 1747 : 
 
 "It apperith that this History followeing 
 was written by one callid Maurice Began (some 
 tymes mentioned in this Discourse) who was 
 Ssrvauut and Interpreter unto Dermott Mac- 
 
 " HlBEENlCA : Or, some Antient Pieces re- 
 lating to Ireland. Part I. Containing the 
 History of Ireland by Maurice Regan. Servant 
 and Interpreter to Dermod BCaoManronxh, 
 King of Leinster, translated from the Irish into 
 French and from thence into English bv Sir 
 Georee Carew, Lord President of Munster. 
 Dublin : Printed for John Millikn (at No. 
 10) in Skinner-Row. M,DCC,LXX." 
 
 Murroyh, Kyng of Leinster, and put into French 
 Meetre by one of his familiar Acquaintaunce : 
 ' * * It endith abruptly at the winning of 
 Limeiick, which was not full three Yeres after 
 Robert Fitz-Stephen his first arrivall in Ireland." , 
 
 Concerning the manner in which King 
 Henry of England became connected with 
 Ireland, the chronicler of this work (under ; 
 date of 1168-9) after recounting Dermod ' 
 MacMurrough's visit to Henry the Second, 
 says: 
 
 " When he came to the presence of Kyng 
 Henry, he related at large unto hyiu the Cause 
 of his Comying, telling hym, that his vassals 
 had forsaken hym ; that he was forced to runne 
 iu to F, tile, and beseechinge hym to gyve hym 
 Aide, whereby he mought be restorui to his In- 
 heritance ; which yf it shuld plese hyin in his 
 goodness to graunt, he would acknowledge hym 
 to be his Lorde, and serve him faithfully during 
 his Life." 
 
 "THIS petiful Relation of the distrepsed 
 Kyng so much movid Kyng Henry to Com- 
 passion, as that he promised him Aid, and 
 willed him to return to Bristol!, ther to Re- 
 mayne untill he herd futhir from hym ; and 
 with all he wrot to Robert Harding, rtquireing 
 hym to receve Kyng Dermod and his Followers 
 into his House, and to intreat them with all 
 the Courtesie and Humanitie he could ; wherof 
 Robert failed in Nothing. 
 
 " AFTIK that Kyng Dermod had remained 
 more than a Moneth in Bristoll, and seeing no 
 hope of Aide from Kyng Henry, weary of delaye, 
 and Comfortless, he went to the Erie Richard, 
 intreating Succours from hym, and prom- 
 ising, that yf by his Means he mought be re- 
 established in his Kyngdome, that he would 
 gyve hym his Daughter to Wife, and with her 
 the whole Kyngdom of Leinster for his In- 
 heritaunce. The Erie tickled with so fair an 
 Offer, made Answeare, that if he culd obteyne 
 leave of the Kyng his Mastir, he would not 
 fail to Assiste him in his Person, and bridge 
 sumciaunt Aid ; but for the present he desired 
 to be excused ; for unless the Kyng wuld give 
 his Assent ther unto, he durst not entertaine a 
 Business of that Importance. 
 
 "THIS faire and discreet Answear so well con- 
 tentid the exiled Kyng, as he solemnly Sware, 
 that whensoever the Erie did bring Aide unto 
 hym, he wuld gyve him his Daughter in Mar- 
 riage, and after his Death the Kyngdome of 
 Leinster. These Conditions bring agreed on 
 either Party, Dermond departid, and went to St. 
 David's, where h staid untill Shipping was 
 provided to Traasport hym into Irland. 
 
 "!N the meane tyme while the banished Kyng's 
 Shipping was in prepareing, he was Advised to
 
 56 
 
 THB POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 goe and Visite a King in Walts, called Rice, 
 to Desyre hym to Eulardge out of his Prison a 
 (jreutilman callid Robert Fill-Stephen ; but how 
 the sayd Robert was taken, or for what Offence 
 InrjrUoned, I doe not understand ; but that he 
 was Enlargid by King Rice, at the request of 
 the Kyng of Ltinstcr, I atn well Assured. 
 
 "HAVlNQobleyned his Request, he returned to 
 St. David's, carrying no more Englishmen with 
 him than one Gentilman called Richard Fitz- 
 G-tdobcrt, who had many good Parts in him, 
 but BO slenderly attendid, as they were of small 
 use for King Dermond, when he came into Ir- 
 land ; wherfore he licenced them to depart 
 home. 
 
 'THE Kyng of Leiruter findinge it to be an Im- 
 possibility ior hym to recovir his Kyngdome, 
 and to prevaile in hys Designs without Aid 
 out of England, Dispatched his Trusty Servaunt 
 and Interpreter, Maurice Regan, with Letres 
 into Wales, and with Auctority in hys Name to 
 promUe all souche as wuld come to serve hym 
 in his Wars in Irland large Recompence in 
 Landes of Inheritaunce to souche as wuld staye 
 in the Country, and to those that wuld returne, 
 he would gyve them good Intertainment eyther 
 in Money or in Cattle. As soone as these 
 Promises were divulged, Men of all Sortes, and 
 from divers Places, preparid themselves to goe 
 into Irland, first, especially Robert Fits-Stephen, 
 a Man of good Esteeme in Wales, (who had 
 lately been ealargid out of Prison by the Media- 
 tion of Dermond) undirtooke the Imployment, 
 and with hym some nine or ten Knights of good 
 account, namely." 
 
 We cite these passages in order to show 
 our readers that the invasion of Ireland 
 was decided upon by Henry of England 
 long before he thought of forging the two 
 bogus Bulls. And now let us turn to this 
 author's account of King Henry's landing in 
 Ireland, which appears under date of 1171- 
 2-3, in the following quaint style of spell- 
 ing : 
 
 "A. I). 1171. Assoonaathe Winde served, Kyng 
 Henry, attended by Erie Richard, Fitz Aldelme, 
 Humfrie de Bohun, Hugh de Lacy, Robert Fitz- 
 Bernard, with divers others Lordes, Erles and 
 Bctr.jnn. besides four Hundred Knights and 
 four Thousand Soldiers imbarqued for Irland, 
 and Undid nere unto Waterford ; which City 
 the Erie Richard deliverid unto hym, and did 
 Homage for the Kyngdome of Leinster, the In- 
 heritaunce whereof was graunted unto hym ; 
 the Government of Waterford was bestowed 
 upon him Robert Fitz-Bernard ; but before the 
 Kyng's departur the Men of Weixford, as 
 they promised, brought Robert Fizt-Stephen, 
 and delivered him unto the Kynge, where in 
 
 the presence of all that were present he sharp- 
 ly reproved Fitz-Stephn for big past Mis- 
 demeanours. He made his humble Excuse, 
 and all the Lordes, as well Euglish, Normans, 
 and Flemings, became Suretie for his future Be- 
 haviour. 
 
 " A. i). 1172. THE Kyng, making but little 
 Staie at Waterford, marched into Dublin, whych 
 City the Earle deliverid unto him ; who com- 
 mitted the keepeinge thereof to Hugh de Lacy. 
 
 Ai'TiK some small abode at Dublyn, the 
 Kynge tooke his Jorney into Mounster, where 
 the Archbishop of Cashell came unto him hym ; 
 at Lismore he gave Direction for the building 
 of a Castle ; from whence he returned into 
 Leinster. 
 
 "THE Kynge made his aboade at Dublin, and 
 the Earle Richard at Kildare ; and in thyg 
 Tyme of the Kyng's beinge in Irland all sorts 
 of Victualles were at excessive Rates. 
 
 " WHILE the Kyngo remained at Dublin, by 
 Messingers and Intelligence out of England he 
 was certified, that his Son, the yonge King 
 Henry had rebelled against him, and that Nor- 
 mandie was in Danger to revolt unto hym. 
 
 "THIS ill News troubled the Kyng beyond 
 all Measure ; and enforced him to hasten his 
 return out of Ireland. The Cittie of Waterford 
 he left in the Custodie of Robert Fitz-Bernard, 
 and Dublyn unto Hugh de Lacy. Robert Fitz. 
 Stephen, Meyler Fitz-Henry and Myles Fitz- 
 David were in a sort restrained, and to remain 
 at Dublyn with Lacy. Before his Departure 
 from Dublyn he gave unto Hugh de Lacy the 
 Inheritaunce of all Meath, to hold of hym at 
 fifty Knight Fees, and unto John de Courcey 
 he gave all Ulster if he could conquer it. 
 
 "A. D. 1173 WHEN the Kynge had taken 
 provisional Order for the Affairs of Irland, he 
 went to Weixford, where he imbarqued, and ar- 
 rived at Forth' nan in Wales, halfe a League 
 from St David's, and in his Companie Miles de 
 Cogan, whom he carryed with hym out of Ir- 
 land ; and from thence with all possible Expedi- 
 tion he passed through England, and so into 
 Normandie." 
 
 Hero we find that tho only allusion to 
 " Cashell" is that King Henry, being in 
 the province of Munster in 1172, the Arch- 
 bishop of "Cashell" paid him a visit. There 
 was no Synod, therefore, or assuredly this 
 chronicler who was living at that period 
 would have mentioned such an important 
 assemblage of the Irish Ecclesiastical body. 
 
 We now turn to the " History of Ireland" 
 by Sister Mary Francis Clare, popularly 
 known as "the Nun of Kenmsre," whom 
 Judge Maguire vain-gloriously alludes to as 
 
 -
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 57 
 
 one of the Irish historians who "attest 
 to the genuineness of the Adrian Bull." 
 But in this regard, as in a great many other 
 matters in his bad book, Judge Maguire 
 misjudges this author's opinions from a ran- 
 dom foot-note. If the careless author of 
 " Ireland and the Pope' 1 had opened the 
 Nun of Kenmare's work at pa^e 259, he 
 would have saved us the trouble of ex- 
 posing his shallowness, as therein he 
 would have read the following opinion of 
 that estimable Sister, upon the favorable 
 Letter which King Henry gave to Dermod 
 MacMorrough when he asked the English 
 monarch for help to reinstate him in his 
 Irish possessions : 
 
 The royal letter ran thus : " Henry, King 
 of England, Duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, 
 and K-irl of ADJOU, to all his liegemen, English, 
 Norman, Welsh and Scotch, and to all the na- 
 tions under his dominion, sends greeting. As 
 soon as the present letter shall come to your 
 hand, know that Dermod, Prince of Leinster, 
 has been received into the bosom of our grace 
 and benevolence : wherefore whosoever, within 
 the ample extent of our territories, shall be 
 willing to lend aid towards this prince as our 
 faithful and liege subject, let such person know 
 that we do hereby grant to him for said purpose 
 our licence and favor." 
 
 " Commenting on this Letter, the Nun of 
 Kenmare says : 
 
 " In this document there is not even the re 
 molest reference to the Bull of Adrian, conferring 
 the island of Ireland on Henry, although the 
 Bull had been obtained some time before. In 
 lohatcver light we may view this omission it is 
 certainly inexplicable." 
 
 This extract proves that the good Nun of 
 Kenmare was not thoroughly convinced of 
 the genuineness of the Adrian Bull. But 
 we have other proofs from this author, 
 that also offset Judge Maguire's claim 
 upon this gifted writer as coinciding with 
 the English writers on this subject. Al- 
 luding to the Synod of Cashel regarding 
 which no date is given the Nun of Kenmare 
 says : 
 
 "The Synod of Cashel, which he (Henry) 
 caused to be convened was not attended as num- 
 erously as he had expected, and the regulations 
 made thereat, were simply a renewal of those 
 which had been made previously. The Primate 
 of Ireland was absent, and the Prelates who as- 
 sembled there, far from having enslaved the 
 
 State to Henry, avoided any interference in 
 politics either by word or act. It has been well 
 observe 1 that whether "piping or mourning," 
 they were not destined to escape. Their office 
 was to promote peace. So long as the perma- 
 nent peace and independence of the nation 
 seemed likely to be forwarded by resistance to 
 foreign invasion, they counselled resistance ; 
 when resistance was hopeless they recom- 
 mended acquiescence, not because they believed 
 the usurpation less u-ijmt, but because they 
 considered submission the wisest course. But 
 the Bull of Adrian had not yet been produced ; 
 and Henry's indifference abjut this document, 
 or his reluctance to use it, shows of how little 
 reil importance it was considered at the time." 
 
 This extract, taken in connection with the 
 preceding one, does not look as if the Nun 
 of Kenmare had the unreserved faith in the 
 genuineness of the Adrian Bull which Judge 
 Maguire credits her with. That estimable 
 friend of Ireland, on the contrary, seems to 
 have had very serious misgivings on this 
 point, even when she wrote her history a 
 quarter of a century ago, and we have little 
 doubt but when Sister Mary Francis reads 
 the MONITOR'S revelations on this subject, 
 she will become thoroughly convinced that 
 both the Adrian and Alexander Bulls were 
 bogus. 
 
 The next extract we make from the anti- 
 M*guirean pages of the Nun of Kenmare's 
 history is entirely in opposition to his 
 Honor's idea that King Henry had "armed" 
 himself with bogus Bulls before he left the 
 British shores in order to invade Ireland. 
 In fact he was in England for several years 
 before the spurious documents were com- 
 pleted sufficiently to present them in public. 
 
 " Henry now considered it time to produce 
 the Papal Bulls, A. i>., 1175. He therefore dis- 
 patched the Prior of Wallingford and William 
 Fitz-Aldelm to Water ford, where a synod of 
 the clergy was assembled to hear these important 
 documents. * * * Our historians have not in- 
 formed us what was the result of the meeting. 
 Had the Papal donation appeared a matter of 
 national importance, there can be little doubt that 
 it would have excited more attention." 
 
 A Synod of " the Clergy of Ireland" could 
 have no standing in Canon Law unless 
 presided over by some Prelate and author- 
 ized by the Pope's Legate or the Archbishops 
 and Bishops of that country. It is sheer
 
 58 
 
 THE rOPK AND IRELAND. 
 
 folly, therefore, to speak of a " Synod of 
 the Clergy of Ireland" having ever convened 
 in that Island of Saints for any such pur- 
 pose. A Synod even of " the Clergy" which 
 was so insignificant in size, substance and 
 sacerdotal character as not to be worthy of 
 being chronicled by Irish historians, must 
 have been a very mythical body ! Even 
 Water jord, the place where according to 
 English writers only the supposed Synod 
 was held, would be the last place in Ireland 
 which the Irish Bishops would select for 
 
 assembling. This fact will not fail to strike 
 our readers when they have learned the 
 character of the class of people who forcibly 
 entered and occupied Waterford both at the 
 time of the Anglo-Norman invasion as well 
 as for centuries previous. 
 
 We will now give our readers aome 
 idea of the early inhabitants of Waterford, 
 which will go far towards showing why a 
 bogus Bull should be brought before a bogtm 
 Synod even supposing that such a gather- 
 ing ever took place. 
 
 CH APTEK IX. 
 
 A Description of Waterford's Inhabitants. A Favorite Abiding Place of Danes, 
 English and other Enemies of Ireland. When that See was Established. Why 
 no Synod Ever Met There. Pope Alexander and the Irish Bishops. Another of 
 Judge Maguire's "Mistakes" Made Minced-meat of. 
 
 Waterford is one of the most ancient 
 maritime ports of Ireland, and was known 
 as far back as the second century by the 
 name of Cuan-na-grain, or " The Harbor of 
 the Sun." But its present name of Water- 
 ford is generally supposed to be a corrup- 
 tion of the Scandinavian Voder Fi&rd, 
 or the " Ford of Father," and this name it 
 received from the foreign freebooters from 
 the North of Europe who landed there as 
 early as the ninth century.* 
 
 For nearly three hundred years prior to 
 1175, Waterford had been the headquarters 
 in Ireland of the piratical Danes, who es- 
 tablished a regal dynasty there under 
 Sitrack, which continued to exist down to 
 the Norman invasion. It was in Waterford 
 that the first body of Norman freebooters 
 landed, and it was the same place which 
 King Henry selected as his landing place 
 so as to arrive in the midst of his friends. 
 
 Waterford was also the scene of one of 
 the most barbarous deeds that ever black- 
 ened the pages of history, and one well 
 worthy of being the first act in the bloody 
 drama which English tyranny has acted 
 upon Ireland's stage since it first baptized 
 
 *Marmipn'8 Ancient and Modern History of 
 the Maritime Pprt? of Ireland. 
 
 that beautiful land in blood, seven centuries 
 ago. 
 
 The advance guard of the Anglo-Norman 
 invaders under Strongbow, built a small 
 fort near Waterford, and seized all tne cattle 
 in the surrounding district. They had in- 
 vaded the land of a peaceable people, and to 
 pilfer the personal property of the rightful 
 owners of the soil, was a most suitable ac- 
 tion with which to open the Anglo-Norman 
 campaign in Ireland. The robbery of their 
 cattle so incensed the native Irish that they 
 very naturally assembled in order to drive 
 off the piratical pilferers from their locality, 
 but an unarmed and undisciplined crowd 
 was no match for the Welsh and Anglo- 
 Norman soldiers, encased in coats-of-mail 
 and armed with warlike weapons. The 
 result was that five hundred Irish were 
 slain and a large number taken prisoners, 
 among whom were some of the principal 
 inhabitants ; and although large sums of 
 gold were offered for their ransom, these 
 proto-martyrs in defence of their homes and 
 property were most brutally murdered by 
 England's savage hirelings. According to 
 an English annalist, these unfortunate Irish- 
 men were marched up on the high cliffs 
 adjoining the sea, where their limbs were
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 59 
 
 broken in the most brutal manner, and 
 their bleeding bodies then cast headlong 
 on the rocka beneath ! Such was the first 
 scene enacted by England's minions when 
 the shadow of their blighting presence fell 
 upon the virgin soil of virtuous Ireland ! 
 It was, as already stated, in Waterford, 
 also, that King Henry landed, when he 
 went to Ireland in 1172 with 500 knights 
 and 4,000 soldiers, many of whom settled 
 in that country, and, amongst others, a 
 number of English, Norman and Welsh 
 priests, whose morals were such as to scan- 
 dalize the Irish people and to receive the 
 just condemnation of numerous Irish his- 
 torians. 
 
 Waterford, therefore, at the time when 
 the very suspicious skeleton Synod already 
 mentioned, is supposed to have been 
 held, was the hive into which had gathered 
 the greater number of the Irish-hating ad- 
 venturers who had followed the fortunes of 
 Strongbow and King Henry to Ireland, in 
 order to improve their finances by filching 
 the lands and property of the Irish people by 
 means of force of arms, forged Bulls, or in 
 any other iniquitous manner which sug- 
 gested itself to such a squad of piratical 
 invaders. 
 
 It is very certain, therefore, that if any 
 Synod was held in Waterford during any 
 year from 1171 to 1177, very likely it was 
 composed of the foreign ecclesiastical ele- 
 ment which had colonized there, and who 
 were ready to accept any document pre- 
 sented to them through the influential 
 agents of King Henry, and to ask no ques. 
 tions as to its genuine character or its 
 j ustice. 
 
 Those writers who copy from hired Ens.'- 
 lish historians, repeat the romance that the 
 bogus Bull of Alexander was read to an as- 
 sembly of "Bishops," but these "Bishops," 
 we may safely surmise, were merely the 
 foreign ecclesiastics who are thus described 
 in Carew's Ecclesiastical History of Ireland : 
 
 " Of the English Clergy who settled in this 
 country, there were many whose lives were a 
 reproach to their sacred calling. These, we are 
 assured, had scarcely taken up their abode in 
 Ireland, when several of them were found to 
 live in the violation of the solemn obligations 
 which are annexed to the Priesthood. That, 
 
 under the pretense of introducing a more strict 
 morality into Ireland, the country should 
 have been made tributary to England, was in 
 itself sufficiently mortifying to the Irish Clergy. 
 But, that such spiritual instructors as had been 
 imported by the invaders, should be employed 
 to enlighten the piety of the Irifh people, pro- 
 voked their utmost indignation." 
 
 With such ecclesiastical material as these 
 Anglo-Norman and Welsh Priests formed, 
 King Henry would have no trouble what- 
 ever in molding them to suit his views. A 
 Pope's Bull, without date or location, would 
 be approved and accepted without a dis- 
 senting voice, especially if like the Alex- 
 ander forgery it calumniated the Catholic 
 Bishops, Priests, Religious and people of 
 Ireland, by designating them under the 
 diabolical aspersion of being "Christians 
 only in name." Even, therefore, supposing 
 there was a Synod at Waterford, in the 
 twelfth century, there is no proof extant 
 that any of the Irish Bishops assisted 
 thereat, and a Synod in which the Irish 
 Bishops took no part would be nothing 
 more than a convention of unauthorized 
 clerics who would incur excommunication 
 for their contumacious conduct in thus 
 usurping an authority solely vested in the 
 Irish Prelates. 
 
 It is said by English writers and repeated 
 by their American imitators in the pro- 
 pagation of falsehood, that the bogus Bulls 
 were seen by the Irish Bishops and accepted 
 by them as genuine. Now, if such were 
 the fact, was it not an act of rank disobe- 
 dience to, and of actual rebellion against, the 
 Holy See, for each of those twenty or thirty 
 Bishops then in Ireland, to live and die 
 without ever once asking their flocks for a 
 single penny for St. Peter's successor ? 
 Does any person who has even the re- 
 motest idea of the ready obedience and the 
 scrupulous punctiliousness of the Irish 
 Bishops, in carrying out the provisions of 
 all genuine Bulls received by them from 
 Rome, harbor for an instant the idea that 
 St. Gelasius, the Primate of Armagh, St. 
 Laurence O'Toole, then Archbishop of 
 Dublin, and all the other saintly Prelates 
 who at that period presided over God's 
 Church in Ireland, would rebel against the 
 Roman Pontiff whom they had sworn to 
 obey in all things just? It is very clear to
 
 60 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 our mind, therefore, that no Irish Bishop 
 believed the Adrian Bull to be genuine, al- 
 lowing even that any of them saw it, and, 
 if we had no other evidence of the spurious 
 character of this document, the scornful and 
 bcurvy treatment that it received at the 
 hands of the entire Hierarchy of Ireland, 
 would satisfy us that they saw through the 
 fraud at the first glance, hence they paid 
 no attention to it. 
 
 No Bishops in the world were more in 
 harmony with Rome in the twelfth century 
 than the Irish Prelates. Popes Adrian and 
 Alexander were personally known to many 
 of them, and the idea that not a single one 
 of the Bishops would obey those Pontiffs' 
 demand for "a penny from each house in 
 Ireland," as Peter-Pence, is a statement 
 so contrary to the saintly obedience of 
 these noble successors to St. Patrick as 
 to cast the shadow of diabolical calumny 
 athwart the sacred shrines in which 
 their blessed ashes repose ! No ! a thou- 
 sand times No ! The Irish Bishops of the 
 twelfth century who saw the bogus Bulls, 
 set them down at their true value and to 
 a man they silently spurned with sacer- 
 dotal scorn the spurious documents and 
 may God increase their heavenly happiness 
 for having done so ! 
 
 superficial readers of Irish history so often 
 purposely make in order to mislead their 
 dupes. Dr. Lingard says that the Adrian 
 Bull was read at a Synod of the Irish Bish- 
 ops : but a Synod held nn where, and on a 
 day in a month and year not designated, 
 would be precisely the place for introducing 
 a forged Bull without date, and issued from 
 Rome by a Pope who was not permitted to 
 occupy the Eternal City during the fictitious 
 year attributed to the fraudulent document ! 
 The fitness of the bogus Bull and the boijus 
 Synod, will, therefore, be both apparent as 
 well as transparent to all our readers ! 
 
 The next witness we call into the Superior 
 Court of San Francisco in order to convict 
 its Judge of a very serious "mistake," is 
 Dr. John Lingard, the eminent historian, 
 who, speaking of the first introduction of 
 the Adrian fraud into Ireland, says, after 
 alluding to King Henry's return to Eng- 
 land : 
 
 "It was during this period, when his au- 
 thority in Ireland was nearly annihilated, that 
 Henry bethought him of the letter which he 
 had formerly procured from Pope Adrian. I 
 had been forgotten during almost twenty years 
 now it WAS drawn from obscurity, was intrusted 
 to William Fit/. Aldelm, and Nicholas, Prior 
 of Wallingford, and was read by them with 
 much solemnity to a Synod of Irish Bishops." 
 
 It seems, therefore, from Dr. Lingard 's 
 language, that Judge Maguire's assertion 
 about King Henry being " armed" with 
 double-barreled Bulls, when he set out for 
 Ireland, waa one of those " mistakes" which 
 
 Another fact which we desire to impress 
 upon our readers in connection with 
 this very suspicious Synod which is sup- 
 posed to have been held in Waterford, is, 
 that from the time of St. Patrick (about the 
 year 456) down to the year 1175, there were 
 a great number of National Synods held in 
 Ireland, but not one of them ever assem- 
 bled in Waterford ! Nor is there any ac- 
 count in Irish history of any such Synod 
 ever being held in that locality for more 
 than a hundred years thereafter, t 
 
 It is well to understand that so few Cath- 
 olics were there in Waterford during the 
 six centuries intervening between the years 
 456 and 1096, ' that the See of Waterford 
 had no existence. This is another evi- 
 dence of the fact that Danes, Scandinavians, 
 Normans and people from other portions of 
 Pagan Europe, must have predominated in 
 Waterford, especially when we have his- 
 torical proof of the fact that twenty Cath- 
 olic Sees 'were formed in Ireland between 
 the founding of the Dioceses of Armagh, 
 Clogher, Meath, Clonmacnoise, Down and 
 Ardagh in the fifth century, down to five 
 hundred years thereafter, when a See was 
 established in Waterford. Thus it came 
 about that Waterford was created a See 
 only about seventy-five years before the 
 English invasion, and six hundred and forty 
 years after the See of Armagh. It is not 
 likely, therefore, that not only St. Gelasius, 
 the Irish Primate, was absent from this 
 very suspicious Synod, but that every other 
 Irish bishop carefully and dutifully made 
 
 fCarew's Ecclesiastical History,
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 Cl 
 
 themselves absentees from such an assembly 
 of scandal-giving English and Welsh ec- 
 clesiastics. 
 
 Judge Maguire seems to imagine that he 
 has made a point in favor of the genuine- 
 ness of the Adrian Bull, by copying the as- 
 sertion of a writer who says that " St. Law- 
 rence O'Toole, and other leading Bishops of 
 Ireland, conversed with Pope Alexander 
 III. about the Adrian Bull as well as the 
 reigning Pontiffs own confirmatory Bull," 
 during the time these Irish Prelates were in 
 Rome attending the Third Lateran Council 
 in 1179. 
 
 Admitting, for the purpose of illustrating 
 the falsity of the foregoing statement, that 
 St. Laurence O'Toole and the Irish Bishops 
 conversed every day for a year about the 
 two Bulls above mentioned, and that each 
 Prelate could recite every word of these 
 documents from memory, we claim that this 
 very fact, so far from proving anything in 
 favor of the authenticity of .the Bulls in 
 question, actually helps to show their fraud- 
 ulent nature, thus adding another link to 
 the chain we are making in order to de- 
 monstrate their spurious character. 
 
 Now we ask any reflecting Catholic to 
 consider this phase of the case as we pre- 
 sent it from a Catholic standpoint : 
 
 Irish Bishops go to Rome ;J while there 
 two Bulls calling for an annual alms of 
 one penny from every house in Ireland, as 
 Peter-Pence for the propagation of the 
 Faith, are presented to them by one of the 
 Pontiffs who is said to have issued a Bull of 
 his own in confirmation of that of one of his 
 predecessors. The Pope lucidly explains 
 the two documents to the Prelates ; he 
 points out the Peter-Pence clause particu- 
 
 JThere were six Irish Prelates in Rome in 
 attendance at the Council of Lateran. These 
 are said to have been St. Laurence of Dublin, 
 Catholicus of Tuam, Constantino O'Brien of 
 Killaloe, Felix of L is ED ore, Augustine of Water- 
 ford, and Brictius of Limerick. Pope Alex- 
 ander III., bestowed the kindest attention on 
 them all, taking the Church of Dublin under 
 under his own special protection ; confirmed the 
 jurisdiction of St. Laurence O'Toole over the 
 Sees of Grlendaloch, Kildare, Ferns, Leighlin 
 and Ossory ; and appointed the saintly Metro- 
 politan of Dublin tho Legate of his Holiness 
 throughout the Kingdom of Ireland. Carets 
 Ecclesiastical History. 
 
 larly ; he causes certified copies to be made 
 of the Bulls, hands them to the Bishops at 
 their departure from the Eternal City, gives 
 them his blessing, and bids them God- speed. 
 St. Laurence O'Toole and his Episcopal 
 brethren arrive in Ireland; they publicly and 
 privately recite their experience in Rome 
 during the Council, and particularly allude 
 to their frequent conferences with Pope 
 Alexander III., on the two Bulls calling for 
 Peter-Pence every year, and yet, not one of 
 these Bishops ever sent to Rome a single penny 
 in response to the double request for Peter- 
 Pence made by Popes Adrian and Alexan- 
 der ! 
 
 Is there a single Catholic on the face of 
 God's footstool who will charge the saintly 
 St. Laurence O'Toole and the other Bishops 
 of Ireland with having thus heaped insult 
 and injury upon Pope Alexander III. and 
 the Holy See ! Yet this is precisely the 
 unenviable position these Prelates must in- 
 evitably occupy in the estimation of a just 
 public opinion, if the statement in Judge 
 Maguire's bad book is to be credited. 
 
 Laurence O'Toole, Archbishop of Dublin, 
 was canonized and is duly recognized as a 
 great Saint in the Church of God, but if, 
 during the process of the proceedings prior 
 to his Canonization, the Devil's Advocate 
 had adduced evidence to prove that this 
 holy Prelate had been disobedient, insubor- 
 dinate and contumacious towards Popes 
 Adrian and Alexander, the nimbus of can- 
 onization would never have encircled his 
 brow ! 
 
 It is worse than folly, therefore, for Judge 
 Maguire, or any other anti-Catholic to say 
 that any Bishop in Ireland ever had a 
 conversation with any Pope upon Bulls that 
 never were issued by the Pontiffs named, 
 nor were ever properly registered in any 
 official record of evidence belonging to the 
 Church of Christ. Pope Alexander never 
 saw them ; St. Gelasius never saw them ; 
 St. Laurence O'Toole never saw them 
 either in the Vatican or any other place 
 within the walls of the Eternal City, and 
 thus it came about that the Irish Prelates 
 never collected a single cent of Peter- Pence 
 as laid down in both the criminally -con- 
 cocted bogus Bulls !
 
 G2 
 
 T1IK POI'B AND IltELAND. 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 The Synod of Windsor Criticised. King Henry's Treaty with the King of Connaught. 
 Neither the Adrian nor the Alexander Bulls Known in England even as late as 
 the Year 1175. Cardinal "Vivian's Visit to Ireland. The Bight of Sanctuary in 
 Ireland. More of Judge Magnire's Malignant Mistakes Melted in the Crucible of 
 Historic Truth. 
 
 Now that we have clearly shown the 
 aham character of the Waterford Synod, let 
 ua turn to the Synod of Windsor, in order 
 to ascertain the fact that even in England 
 no person had knowledge of any Bulls 
 from Popes Adrian and Alexander relating 
 to England and Ireland, down to the year 
 1175. 
 
 According to the Annals of Roger de 
 Hoveden,* in 1175, King Henry II., held a 
 Council at Windsor, in England, at which 
 assisted the Archbishops of Tuam and Dub- 
 lin, as well as Cantordis, Abbot of St. Bran- 
 dan and Master Laurence, Chancellor of 
 Roderic, King of Connaught. This fact in- 
 troduces new evidence to prove that the 
 Bulls of Adrian and Alexander were not in 
 existence in 1175, although one is dated 1156, 
 and the other forgery 1172. 
 
 The Council of Windsor was held for the 
 purpose of making a treaty of peace with 
 Roderic O'Connor, King of Connaught, on 
 whose behalf the Irish Prelates were pres- 
 ent. The terms which bound the King and 
 Roderic to keep the peace, help to elucidate 
 the fact that up to this date no one in Eng- 
 land or Ireland had any knowledge of the 
 Bulls, the fradulent character of which we 
 are exposing. Here is the agreement as 
 printed in Leland's History of Ireland, 
 copied from the Annals of Rymer : 
 
 Roderic, on bin part, consented to do homage, 
 and pay tribute, as liege-man to tbe king of 
 England ; on which conditions he was allowed 
 to hold the kingdom of Connaught, as well as 
 his other lands and sovereignties in as ample a 
 manner as he had enjoyed them before the ar- 
 rival of Henry in Ireland. His vassals were to 
 hold under him in peace, as long as they paid 
 tribute, and continued faithful to the king of 
 England ; in which Roderic was to enforce their 
 
 'An English historian in the age of Hnry II. 
 He was born at York, was Court Chaplain to 
 Henry and also one of his Majesty's legal ad- 
 viaera. He wrote annals which began in the 
 year 731. where Bede left off. and continued to 
 the third year of King John. 
 
 due obedience, and for this purpose to call to 
 his assistance the English government if neces- 
 sary. The annual tribute to be paid was every 
 tenth merchantable hide, as well from Con- 
 naught as the reat of the island, excepting those 
 parts under the immediate dominion of the king 
 of England and his barons. Dublin with its ap- 
 puitenances, Meath with all its appurtenances, 
 Wexford and all hamster, and Waterford with 
 its lands, as far as tn Dungarvan inclusive ; in 
 all which districts. Roderic was not to inter- 
 fere, nor claim any power or authority. The 
 Irish, who had fled from hence, were to return, 
 and either to pay their tribute, or to peiform 
 the services required by their tenures, at the 
 option of th?ir immediate lords; and if refrac- 
 tory, Roderic, at the requisition of their lords, 
 was to compel them to return. He was to take 
 hostages from his vassels, such as he and his 
 liege lords should think proper ; and on hia part 
 to deliver either these or others to his lord as 
 Henry should appoint His vassels were to 
 furnish hawks and hounds annually to the Eng- 
 lish monarch, and were not to detain any ten- 
 ant of his immediate demesne* in Ireland, con- 
 trary to his royal pleasure and command. 
 
 Here we find an agreement by the condi- 
 tions of which the King of Connaught re- 
 tains his kingdom. " as well as his sover- 
 eignties and other lands in as ample a man- 
 ner as he had enjoyed them before the ar- 
 rival of King Henry in Ireland !" This is 
 certainly a very singular agreement for 
 King Henry to make, if as is falsely sup- 
 posed he had the Adrian Bull in his pos- 
 session ! King Henry exacts from Roderic 
 an annual tribute of "every tenth mer- 
 chantable hide" for himself, but he never 
 once thinks of asking Roderic O'Connor fcr 
 that " penny from every house" collection 
 for the Pope who gave him all Ireland for a 
 free donation ! Was not Henry a most un- 
 grateful wretch ? To capture every tenth 
 hide and to leave not a hair for the Popes 
 who made him both Pope and King of Ire- 
 land ! Deeper ingratitude than this no 
 man ever committed ! But was it in- 
 gratitude ? Or, rather, does not Henry'}
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 conduct and the contents of his agreement 
 with Roderic O'Connor clearly prove that 
 the English King had not a scrap of 
 Adrian's or Alexander's Bulls among his 
 archives even as late as 1175 ! 
 
 If these Bulls existed, both the English 
 and the Irish Prelates present at the Synod 
 of Windsor, would most assuredly have 
 known of them, and have alluded to them 
 and their peculiar Peter-Pence clauses, be- 
 fore closing the above treaty of peace ! 
 King Henry would certainly have alluded 
 to the collection of Peter- Pence (provided 
 he had the Popes' authority therefor) when 
 he entered into a treaty with Roderic as 
 King of Ireland. The Irish Bishops, too 
 had they an inkling of any Bulls by which 
 the Papal treasury was entitled to certain 
 specified donations could not do otherwise 
 than to see that such a clause was put into 
 the treaty of peace as would make the col- 
 lection of the Peter-Pence just as binding 
 on the two kings as Henry made the obli- 
 gation of furnishing "a tenth merchantable 
 hide" obligatory upon the part of Roderic. 
 This is very clear, and these circumstances 
 cast an additional shadow of doubt over the 
 genuineness of both the apocryphal Bulls at- 
 tributed to Popes Adrian and Alexander. 
 
 Again, if, as Cambrensis and his copyists 
 say, there was a Synod of Bishops in Cashel 
 or elsewhere in 1172, at which the bogus 
 Bulls were read and accepted by the Irish 
 Bishops, would not the Archbishop of 
 Tuam's memory have carried him back 
 three years prior to 1175 and revived that 
 fact? 
 
 And when that Prelate read and signed a 
 treaty of peace in which an annual tribute 
 of " every tenth merchantable hide" was to 
 be paid to King Henry, would not such a 
 proviso prick his conscience that in signing 
 such a document he was virtually robbing 
 Peter of his pence in order to favor a for- 
 eign prince ? 
 
 We leave every intelligent reader to an- 
 swer these questions to the satisfaction of 
 his own reason, but for ourself we can 
 freely say that no Irish Bishop could act in 
 the fraudulent, dishonest, disrespectful and 
 degrading manner English falsifying his- 
 torians chronicle, simply because such ne- 
 farious actions belong to the lives of the 
 
 scheming, the ambitious, the unscrupulous, 
 and the irreligious, but not to the saintly 
 lives of the humble, pious, virtuous Apostles 
 of Almighty God who ruled over His Church 
 in Ireland in every century from the fifth 
 to the nineteenth ! 
 
 The Irish Bishops, like the Round Towers 
 of that holy land, stand as monuments of 
 the Faith in an island where Christianity 
 took root as spontaneously in the hearts of 
 the people, as did the shamrock in its na- 
 tive soil ! More loyal men to Faith, truth, 
 justice and honor than the Bishops of Ireland 
 never lived ! And to falsely charge these 
 Prelates with double hypocrisy towards the 
 Vicar of Christ on one hand, and against 
 King Henry on the other, is to charge the 
 very sun in the heavens with giving forth 
 no light ! 
 
 It is clear, therefore, that no Synod of 
 Irish Bishops ever saw the bogus Bulls, nor 
 did Henry the Second issue his order to 
 have them forged and fraudulently signed 
 even as late as the year 1175. 
 
 Let us now carry our readers back to 
 Dublin, where, as some historians assert, 
 and some copyists repeat, a Synod was sum- 
 moned in the year 1177, by, and immediate- 
 ly held under Vivian, the Pope's Legate 
 to Ireland. Judge Maguire, copying from 
 Carew, who copied from Lanigan, who 
 copied from the falsifying calumniator Cam- 
 brensis, says " the Legate set forth Henry's 
 right to the sovereignity of Ireland, in 
 virtue of the Pope's authority, and incul- 
 cated the necessity of obeying him under 
 pain of excommunication." The inventor 
 of this falsehood was Cambrensis, and every 
 reader of these lines already knows what 
 reliance can be placed upon any expres- 
 sion of that publicly-convicted perverter of 
 each truth, fact and circumstance his pen 
 ever treated of. Cambrensis says that Car- 
 dinal Vivian proclaimed publicly (but ver- 
 bally) in the Dublin Synod, the right of the 
 King of England over Ireland, and the con- 
 firmation of Pope Alexander, "with the 
 rigorous precept, both to the clergy and 
 people, to remain faithful to the King, un- 
 der pain of excommunication." 
 
 In regard to this assertion, as well as to 
 all others made by Cambrensis, it is clear
 
 ' ! 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 that it will not stand the test or critical 
 scrutiny. The Council of Dublin could not 
 have been attended by any Irish clergy out- 
 side the English Pale, as Cambrensis him- 
 self tells us that during the same year in 
 which the Dublin Council was held (1177) 
 the entire Provinces of Ulster and Con- 
 naught remained iniccetsible tv the English, 
 whose attacks the natives constantly re- 
 pelled. It is safe to say, therefore, that not 
 one-half of the clergy of Ireland attended 
 the Dublin Synod. 
 
 When, therefore, Cambrensis says that a 
 verbal proclamation of excommunication 
 against the whole Episcopate, the clergy and 
 people of Ireland, was made by Cardinal 
 Vivian, that untruthful scribe fairly outdoes 
 himself as the champion historical falsier of 
 the twelfth century ! There is not a single 
 word of truth in that part of his statement 
 concerning Cardinal Vivian or the threat of 
 excommunication ! And now for the proof: 
 Leaving aside altogether every copyist of 
 Cambrensis from the mercenary Giraldua 
 himself down to the malignant Maguire 
 let us take up the ancient Chronicles writ- 
 ten by men who were not hired to calum- 
 niate the Catholic Church, nor whose hate 
 against the Pope was not so malignant as to 
 lead them into the filthy habit of picking up 
 every scrap of rotten rubbish which they 
 found floating along the scum of libellous 
 literature flowing from the foulest sources of 
 English bigots for no other purpose than 
 to cause a separation between the Vicar of 
 Christ and the children of St. Patrick. 
 
 When hottest men desire to investigate 
 the dogmas of the Catholic Church, for the 
 purpose of learning the truth concerning 
 them, they do not consult the works of anti- 
 Catholic writers whose prejudices preclude 
 the possibility of truth having any existence 
 in their mental regions. In like manner, 
 when any honest investigator of Irish events 
 desires to learn the truth concerning them, 
 he does not consult the works of Ireland's 
 worst enemies (as Judge Maguire does) in 
 order to blacken the character of the Cath- 
 olic Church and to justify his own Judas- 
 like apostacy. 
 
 Now let us open the Annals of Ireland, 
 written by Irishmen, and see how far they 
 will assist in convicting Judge Maguire of 
 
 another of those " mistakes" which are 
 prompted by his an ti- Papal prejudices and 
 vitalized by his vicious attack upon the 
 Church of his holy Irish ancestors. 
 
 The ancient annals of Ireland mention 
 the arrival in that country of a Cardinal 
 Vivianus, (or Vivian as it is abridged by re- 
 cent writers). This Legate of the Pope is 
 recorded as having arrived in Ireland in 
 1177. Under that date we 6nd, in the 
 Annals of Dublin, the following : 
 
 "Cardinal Vivianu? came to Ireland, and 
 convened a Synod of Irish Bishops and Abbots 
 at Dublin, on the first Sunday in Lent, at which 
 they enacted many ecclesiastical regulations, "f 
 
 The Chronicles of the Four Masters say : 
 " In the year 1177 Cardinal Vivian arrived in 
 Ireland. A Council of the whole Irish clergy, 
 with its Bishops and Abbots was assembled by 
 the Cardinal on the first Saturday of Lent ; he 
 promulgated several ordinances which now are 
 not known. " 
 
 Even if we had no other evidence to 
 offer, these two extracts are sufficient to 
 prove that the Synod of the Irish Bishops, 
 clergy and people was never in 1177 or at 
 any other time threatened with excom- 
 munication by any Pope if they refused to 
 remain faithful to the King of England. 
 In the first place the crime (if crime it was f) 
 and the punishment, are opposed in fact and 
 essence to the ever just laws of God and of 
 His Church. Threaten with excommuni- 
 cation Bishops, Priests and millions of peo- 
 ple, if ever they were unfaithful to a foreign 
 invader who was a murderer, a robber and 
 a sacriligious violator of God's consecrated 
 sanctuaries ? Is there a single sane person 
 whose mind is acquainted with even the ele- 
 mentary principles of God's justice, the in- 
 tegrity of the Holy See, and the code of 
 Canon Law, who harbors the thought for an 
 instant that such a transaction ever trans- 
 pired ? 
 
 Now let us apply the rules of Catholic 
 justice to the Dublin Synod, and see how 
 far they prove that Cardinal Vivian could 
 not act in the manner that Cambrensis 
 states. 
 
 Giraldus says of the Pope's Legate that 
 
 tlrish Miscellany, VoL L, pp. 195. 
 ^Quoted by Cambrennis, Vol. V. pp. 345.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 C5 
 
 when he called the Ecclesiastical Council of 
 Dublin, he announced publicly (but verbal- 
 ly, be it borne in mind) the right of the 
 King of England to rule over Ireland, and 
 the confirmation of Pope Alexander, with 
 the unusual and extraordinary penalty 
 against all the Bishops, the Clergy and the 
 people of Ireland, to remain faithful to the 
 English King under pain of anattiema. 
 
 This assertion may be all right, coming as 
 it does from Cambrensis, who could scarce- 
 ly tell the truth even by accident, but when 
 it is weighed and measured by the scale of 
 Canon law, and long-established custom in 
 the Catholic Church, it immediately (if we 
 may be permitted to imitate King Henry, 
 and fabricate a Evil) weighs nothing and 
 measures less ! 
 
 Rome has certain laws by which all docu- 
 ments emanating from the Vatican are 
 brought to the notice of those who come 
 under their provisions and upon whom they 
 are binding. But no one will pretend to 
 say that in the Code of the Catholic Church 
 there is any enactment by which even Car- 
 dinal Vivian would be justified in making a 
 vprbal announcement of a Bull to a few of 
 the Irish Bishops, and then threaten the 
 whole Episcopate, clergy and people of Ire- 
 land with the vengeance of anathema if 
 they were disloyal to the English King. 
 
 Rome does not disseminate her Bulls after 
 any such loose fashion, nor does she expect 
 that they will be propagated by word of 
 month, or obeyed by Prelates and people 
 who know their contents only by hea-rsay. 
 Rome never countenances an injustice 
 against her children, nor does she expect 
 obedience in anything impossible. 
 
 In 1177 neither the Province of Ulster 
 nor Connaught were embraced in that por- 
 tion of Ireland invaded by King Henry. 
 
 Few persons have a clear comprehension of 
 the awful spiritual punishment which is com- 
 prised within the simple word "anathema." 
 Anathema is rarely pronounced, but when pro- 
 mulgated it is conducted with far more imposing 
 ceremonies than excommunication, in order to 
 strike terror into the hearts of the culprits and 
 to bring them back to repentance. The cere- 
 mony is performed by a Bishop and twelve 
 priests, who hold lighted candles in their hands, 
 which, after prescribed prayers, they cast upon 
 the earth, and trample upon them the moment 
 the awful sentence is pronounced, uttering male- 
 edictions and execrations against the guilty par- 
 ti ea. -Leg. 13: Fit. 9. p. 1. 
 
 And for this reason we are safe in asserting 
 that no Bishop, Priest, Monk of Friar out- 
 side the English Pale, ever set foot in the 
 Synod of Dublin. 
 
 The English chronicler Hoveden speaks 
 of Cardinal Vivian, and his journey to Ire- 
 land in 1177, but he says not a word about 
 any Synod at Dublin or anywhere else in 
 Ireland during that year. Here is what his 
 chronicles say on that subject : 
 
 "The same year (1176) Vivian, Cardinal- 
 Priest of the title of St Stephen on the Cecilian 
 Mount, Legate of the Apostolic See, passed the 
 Christmas in the Isle of Man, with King 
 Guthred. After the Feast of the Epiphany 
 (1177) he set Rail for Ireland and landed at I >m 
 in Alvestre.1I As he was going to Dublin, by 
 the shore, he met the army of John de Curci, 
 by whom he was arrested and detained, but 
 when his ecclesiastical character was revealed 
 he was released. 
 
 " John de Curci laid seige to and captured 
 Dun, i the chief city of Alvestre,* where repose 
 the bodies of the holy Confessors, Patrick and 
 Columba, at well as the body of St. Bridget, 
 Virgin. Roderick, King of Alvestre.^T on hear- 
 ing this, collected a large body of Irishmen and 
 gave battle to John de Curci, but the latter was 
 victorious. The Bishop of Dun|| was captured 
 in the combat, but subsequently liberated at the 
 entreaty of the Cardinal." 
 
 When the Pope's Legate had procured 
 the best terms he could for the defeated 
 Irish, he proceeded to Dublin, where as 
 the Nun of Kenmare says "he held a 
 Synod. The principal enactment referred 
 to the right of sanctuary." The Nun says 
 nothing about any excommunication for a 
 crime not committed, and thus Judge Ma 
 guire's witness gives evidence for the Pope 
 and against the English Cambrensis and his 
 California imitator ! 
 
 ARCHBISHOP COMYN'S CHARACTER. 
 
 In his attempts at exposing what he calls 
 " Humiliating the Irish priests and people 
 and Papal interference with Irish struggles 
 for liberty after the Conquest," Judge Ma- 
 guire is just as inaccurate as he is in every 
 other portion of his bad book. His honor 
 must have had a bad attack of anti-Catholic 
 
 HDownpatrick. 
 
 HUlster.
 
 66 
 
 THE POPE AND IBELAND. 
 
 rabiea when he wrote the following foolish 
 fusillade of fanatical hate : 
 
 "In the year 1180 King Henry, who persecuted 
 the Holy Prelate, St. Laurence, fur his ardent 
 attachment to the land of his birth, resolved 
 that an office of BO much importat.ee (Ihe Arch- 
 bishopric of Dublin) should not be entrusted to 
 an Irishman. * * * Accordingly on the 
 monarch's recommendation, his chaplain, Jodn 
 Coinyn, a native of England, was elected to tl.e 
 Archbishopric of Dublin, by some of the clergy 
 who had assembled at Evesham foi that purpose. 
 John vxu not then a priest, but was in the fol. 
 lowing year ordained, aud was consecrated 1 y 
 Pope Lucius III." 
 
 After reading the foregoing paragraph, 
 Catholics will naturally conclude that Judge 
 Maguire has a very small stock of Catholic 
 knowledge, inasmuch as he tells his readers 
 that John Coinyn was chaplain to Henry 
 II. , but was not ordained! Was ever man 
 in buch a dual position ? A priest and a 
 layman at the same time ! Now the truih 
 of the circumstance is that John Coinyn, 
 (" Cumyn," or "Cummin "as it is variously 
 written by Irish historians) was a good Irish 
 Prelate, although an Englishman by birth. 
 Here is what Judge Maguire's favorite au- 
 thor, the Nun of Kemnare, says of the Arch- 
 bishop of Dublin : 
 
 "The English Archbishop resented the 
 wrongs of the Irish Church as personal injuries, 
 and devoted himself to its advancement as a per- 
 sonal interest. We are indebted to Archbisop 
 Comyn for building St. Patrick's Cathedral in 
 Dublin, as well as for his steady efforts to pro- 
 mitte the tctffare of the nation."= 
 
 Judge Maguire seems to think Henry did 
 a most iniquitous deed when he sent John 
 Comyn to Dublin, but if the English mon- 
 arch never did anything worse, the Irish 
 people would have little cause to censure 
 him. John Comyn, when selected for the 
 See of Dublin was not a chaplain to 
 Henry II., but one of his secretaries. He 
 was an eloquent and learned layman. 
 The election took place in the monastery at 
 Eveaham, where ihe clergy of Dublin elected 
 him, September 6th, 1181. The candidate 
 proceeded to Italy, studied theology, was 
 ordained Priest, and subsequently conse- 
 crated Archbishop at Veletri, by Pope 
 
 "McGeoghegan. 
 
 - The Patriot's History of Ireland. 
 
 Lucius III., as the successor of St. Laurence 
 O'Toole, in the See of Dublin. Now, what 
 is wrong about all that ? Assuredly Pope 
 Lucius knew fully as much about the needs 
 of the Catholic Church in Ireland in the 
 twelfth century, as Judge Maguire thinks Ite 
 dues in the nineteenth century ! But his 
 Honor thought he would make a point 
 against the Pope and so as usual he put 
 his own foot in the hole he dug for his Holi- 
 
 In order to create and foster animosity 
 against the Pope, Judge Maguire says that 
 the British Government has generally dic- 
 tated the appointment of most of the Cath- 
 olic Archbishops and Bishops of Ireland. 
 While this is not exactly true, except in 
 some special cases, it by no means follows 
 that the Archbishops and Bishops so selected 
 were not true to Ireland. To a man they 
 were with their people in every laudable and 
 Christian effort which was made to benefit 
 Erin. These Bishops did not believe as 
 Judge Maguire seems to imagine, that a 
 man's patriotism is promoted by his apos- 
 tacy, nor did they suspect that the best way 
 to serve Ireland was to curse the Pope. On 
 the contrary, these holy Prelates guided 
 their flocks on the lines of Christian law 
 and human justice in their struggles for 
 freedom, and, when the sword was invoked, 
 the Irish Prelates blessed the green banners 
 of the brave Irish patriots ! 
 
 CONCERNING THE RIGHT OF SANCTUARY. 
 
 On the twenty-fifth page of Judge Ma- 
 guire's bad book, we read this malignant 
 and monstrous concoction of calumny and 
 anti-Catholic hatred combined : 
 
 " Until that time (1177) the Catholic churches 
 were inviolable sanctuaries into which the 
 hunted people might flee, and in which their 
 lives were safe from murder and their property 
 from spoliation. At this Synod of Dublin, the 
 Pope through his Legate made Ireland an ex- 
 ception to this rule, and gave leave to the Eng- 
 lish soldiers to enter the churches and strip the 
 people of the food brought there for safety. 
 Since these things were done by the Vicar of 
 Christ how terrible to contemplate what the 
 Vicar of Hell would have done under similar 
 circumstances."
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 G7 
 
 To the closing sentence of the above dia- 
 bolical diatribe we may justly reply : When 
 such sentiments are the product of Judge 
 Maguire's mind, the Vicar of Hell must 
 have gained full possession of that mental 
 region from which the Vicar of Christ has 
 been ruthlessly evicted ! 
 
 Concerning the first portion of Judge Ma- 
 guire's malignant aspersion upon the Pope's 
 Legate we are happy to state that it is about 
 as mean a piece of pettifogging as ever was 
 perpetrated. Now for the facts and the 
 historical proofs of our assertion. 
 
 The first witness whom we shall intro- 
 duce in order to convict Judge Maguire of 
 not telling " the whole truth," is no less a 
 personage than the Nun of Kenmare, who 
 says : 
 
 " Cardinal Vivian now proceeded to Dublin, 
 where he held a Synod. The principal enact- 
 ment related to the right of sanctuary. During 
 the Anglo-Norman wars, the Irish had secured 
 their provisions in the churches ; and, it is said, 
 that in order to starve out the enemy, they even 
 refused to sell at any price. It was now decreed 
 that sanctuary might be violated to obtain food ; 
 but a fair price was to be paid for whatever was 
 taken."** 
 
 With this paragraph staring him in the 
 
 face, Judge Maguire mendaciously kept back 
 
 . the truth in order to stab the Pope and to 
 
 draw down the maledictions of evil-minded 
 
 **H5story of Ireland, pp. 287. 
 
 men upon the Church of Christ ! Since 
 such things are done by Judge Maguire, the 
 Vicar of Hell must indeed have made the 
 Satanic suggestion ! 
 
 Moreover, Judge Maguire accuses the 
 Pope and Cardinal Vivian with having made 
 this rule, when the fact is it was the Irish 
 Bishops themselves who voted it int o existence / 
 No Pope, no Legate, no power on earth 
 could coerce a Synod of Bishops (in Ireland 
 or anywhere else) into adopting domestic 
 rules during the existence of warfare, with- 
 out the consent of those most interested. 
 The matter rested in the hands of the Irish 
 Bishops. If they had voted the matter 
 down no such regulation could have been 
 made, but when they in Synod assembled 
 determined by their votes that, during 
 the continuation of hostilities, provisions 
 should be furnished to those who paid for 
 them, it was solely the act of the Bishops, 
 with which neither Cardinal Vivian nor 
 Pope Alexander III. had anything whatever 
 to do. 
 
 The conclusion every candid- minded read- 
 er must come to in regard to this point, there- 
 fore, is that Judge Maguire is again con- 
 victed of another "mistake" in which he is 
 caught purposely keeping back a fact which 
 changes the entire face of the charge he so 
 disreputably fabricated against the Church 
 of his former Faith but now the victim gf 
 his virulent calumny.
 
 r>8 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 Strong Evidence of Euglish Chroniclers, Irish Historians and other Writers from the 
 Twelfth to tin- Nineteenth Centuries against the Authenticity of the Adrian Bull. 
 
 Among the numerous proofs of the 
 spurious character of the Bull attributed to 
 Pope Adrian IV., by which that Pontiff 
 was supposed to have donated Ireland to 
 King Henry II. of England, the fact that 
 the forged document first made its appear- 
 ance in a work written by the notorious 
 falsifier OSiraldusCambrensis, is not the least 
 worthy of consideration. The despicable 
 character of that untruthful and unreliable 
 hirelingof Henry II. which even the Protest- 
 ant editors of his works acknowledge, make 
 it entirely unnecessary on our part t-i parti- 
 cularize the many disqualifications which a 
 man who " could tell the truth only by ac- 
 cident" possessed for writing a history of 
 the Irish people, and the great doubt with 
 which every statement of his should be 
 received by the reasoning public of any cen- 
 tury from the time of his existence down 
 to the end of time. 
 
 The Adrian Bull is supposed by some 
 writers to have been issued about the year 
 1151, others guess at the date of this gross 
 fraud anywhere about or between the years 
 1152 to 1166. 
 
 Now if this Bull were a genuine docu- 
 ment, there would be no trouble whatever in 
 settling not only the exact year of its issu- 
 ance, but also the very day, month and 
 place when and where it was sealed with the 
 Bnlla of Pope Adrian IV. It is clear, 
 therefore, that when those English and anti- 
 Catholic American writers whose interest it 
 is to support the genuineness of the Bull in 
 question, fail to prove with certitude the 
 day, month and year when it was issued, as 
 well as the city from whence Pope Adrian 
 promulgated itthere is truly a mountain 
 of doubt erected as a mausoleum over this 
 document which should bury it forever 
 among the rotten rubbish where repose all 
 similarly spurious Papal instruments. 
 
 we have already shown the authenticity of 
 the Adrian Bull was publicly challenged. 
 And right here the question naturally arises : 
 Why did not King Henry If., or Cambren- 
 sis who were each personally responsible 
 for its production and publication take 
 means to prove its authenticity at that early 
 period ? A simple letter sent to the Sov- 
 ereign Pontiff would have dispelled all 
 doubts regarding the document and set at 
 rest for ever all contention as to its authen- 
 ticity. But when we find King Henry 
 and his obsequious hireling historian, both 
 possessing a full knowledge of the disbelief 
 of many readers of the Cambrensian work 
 in which the fictitious document first ap- 
 peared, and yet not making a single effort 
 to disabuse the public mind of all doubt 
 then, indeed, it is reasonable to conclude 
 that they were cognizant of the spurious 
 character of the document, and, further 
 more, that they did not desire to apply any 
 test that would reveal their rascality. 
 
 Even in the lifetime of Cambrensis as 
 
 Another suspicious feature about the 
 fraudulent Adrian Bull arises from the fact 
 that it is found to be mentioned in the 
 works of only a couple of early English 
 Chroniclers alone. And now let us trace 
 this Bull down the course of time, from the 
 twelfth to the nineteenth century, and learn 
 from the evidence of reliable annalists, 
 Irish historians, and other reputable writ- 
 ers how much credence they placed in that 
 English-made Roman document. 
 
 THK EVIDENCE OF BARONIUS. 
 
 Cardinal Baronius, the celebrated official 
 compiler of the Pontifical Annals of Rome, 
 who flourished in the sixteenth century, and 
 whose Ecclesiastical Annals include the 
 twelfth century, does not mention the name 
 of King Henry If., of England in connec- 
 tion with any Bull issued under the signa-
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 69 
 
 ture of Pope Adrian IV., by which a dona- 
 tion of Ireland was made to that English 
 monarch. 
 
 To any person who is acquainted with the 
 careful fidelity with which Baronius notes 
 every important act of each Pope of Rome, 
 in his official records, the omission we 
 have mentioned will be considered fatal, 
 and will close all further controversy on the 
 subject. . 
 
 In his annals for the year 1150, Baronius 
 makes record of the death of Pope Adrian ; 
 then he gives a lengthy biographical sketch 
 of the deceased Pontiffs life, noting with 
 great minuteness the principal events in 
 which he was prominent during his Ponti- 
 ficate. These events having all been de- 
 tailed, Baronius in order that his Annals 
 might not lack completion makes this ad- 
 dendum : 
 
 " In order to leave out nothing which may 
 have reference to the memory of so great a Pon- 
 tiff, he desires to quote, according to a manu- 
 script of the Vatican,* a diploma given to 
 Henry, King of England, for the purpose of re- 
 establishing religion in Ireland ; but in what year 
 of the Pontificate of Adrian ^he diploma was given 
 is uncertain." 
 
 More " uncertainty" regarding the date 
 of this remarkably doubtful diploma ! 
 When there is any " uncertainty" about the 
 date of as highly important a document as a 
 Papal Bull ; when the year in which it was 
 issued is not known; and when the sus- 
 picious document is said to have issued from 
 Rome, at a time when the Pontiff to whom 
 it is attributed, was not in lhat city, the 
 document is at once stamped " spurious" by 
 virtue of these shortcomings ! 
 
 Rome is most severely critical in her 
 scrutiny of official Papal documents, and if 
 there is the least doubt concerning any 
 Bull, Brief, Concordat, or other ecclesias- 
 tical or diplomatic epistle, Council of the 
 most erudite Cardinals is called, and upon 
 their decision the document is adopted or 
 condemned, according as the evidence may 
 justify. 
 
 Baronius clearly doubted the genuineness 
 
 *It was the Chronicle of Mathew of Paris, an 
 Englishman who flourished in the 13'h century, 
 which was smuggled into the Vatican, and of 
 whom Lingard says but little credit is due, be- 
 cause "his narrations abound with errors." 
 
 of the Adrian "diploma," for the potent 
 reason that he could not discover the year, 
 the day, nor the place of its issuance, and 
 with such a skilled compiler of ecclesiastical 
 records as Baronius, such omissions cause 
 all documents in which they occur to be 
 classed among those looked upon as apocry- 
 phal. 
 
 No annalist expresses himself more per- 
 spicuously than Baronius whenever there 
 is question of the authenticity of any docu- 
 ment upon which there is no doubt. But 
 by affirming the absence of any date, in 
 the present instance, Baronius flatly con- 
 tradicts every English and Irish author who 
 pretends to fix a year to this "doctored" 
 diploma, which, as Baronius cautiously 
 remarks, was not a " Bull," but merely a 
 "document" which he found among some 
 other unimportant papers in the Vatican 
 Archives. This document says nothing 
 about any "donation" of Ireland to King 
 Henry ![., it being issued entirely, as 
 Baronius says, "for the purpose of re-estab- 
 lishing religion in Ireland." 
 
 Doubtless the paper found by Baronius 
 was a transcript of the spurious " Bull" 
 which was concocted to order for King 
 Henry in England, and a copy of which was 
 surreptitiously introduced among the Vati- 
 can manuscripts . so as to give the color of 
 authenticity to the original which King 
 Henry kept carefully concealed from public 
 gaze in the secret archives of Winchester 
 castle. 
 
 EVIDENCE OF BZOVIUS. 
 
 Bzovius, a Polish Dominican, examined 
 authoritatively the Archives of the Vatican, 
 and published different works, besides con- 
 tinuing the A unals of Baronius. t Although 
 his predecessor in recording the Vatican 
 chronicles alludes in a peculiar way to "a 
 document" in which King Henry's name is 
 mentioned, Bzovius is entirely silent con- 
 cerning it. He quotes, however, John of 
 Salisbury, gives three extracts from the 
 Polycraticus, but he altogether ignores the 
 Metalogicus and the donation of Ireland. 
 
 fThe first volume of bis continuation of the 
 Annals of Barjnius appeared in the year 1615 
 and was dedicated to Pope Paul V.
 
 70 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 li: \MIKNT i IIUOXH-LK8 AND 
 BIOORAPUKKS. 
 
 It is a very remarkable fact, and one not 
 to be easily forgotten, that outside a few of 
 t h< iso of England, the ancient Chroniclers of 
 Kurupe make no mention whatever of the 
 Adrian and Alexander Bulls, until we dome 
 down to the sixteenth century, ' when these 
 forgeries were copied from English works. 
 
 It is also a notable fact that all the bio- 
 graphers of Pope Adrian outside of English 
 influence, make no reference in their lives 
 of that Pontiff to his ever having made any 
 donation of Ireland to King Henry II. of 
 England. A strong instance of this char- 
 acter is found in the sketch of the Ponti- 
 ficate of Pope Adrian IV. written by the 
 great Dominican St. Antoninus, who flour- 
 ished in the fifteenth century, and who is 
 silent concerning any donation. This saint- 
 ly scribe quotes the Polycraticus of Salis- 
 bury, but he omits altogether the interpo- 
 lated addenda which constitute the forty- 
 second chapter of the Metalogiciis, treating 
 of Ireland and the fictitious donation. 1 
 
 TWO OTHER BIOGRAPHERS OF ADRIAN IV. 
 
 In the fourteenth century so little was 
 known of the Papal Bull attributed to Pope 
 Adrian, that even the eminent Ecclesiastics 
 who were denizens of the Papal Court had 
 no knowledge of its existence. Two elabor- 
 ate biographies of Pope Adrian IV., were 
 written during that period by eminent men 
 who resided at the Pontifical Court of 
 Avignon, neither of which contain the 
 slightest allusion to any compact said to 
 have existed between that Pontiff and King 
 Henry of England. 
 
 The first biography was the work of the 
 learned Dominican, Guidonis, who died in 
 1331. The other work was composed by 
 Cardinal d'Arragon, who was raised to the 
 puq>le in 1356, by Pope Innocent VI. 
 The two biographies are contained in 
 Muratori's Scriptorcs rernm Italicarum. 
 
 In his biographical notice of Pope Alex- 
 ander III., which follows that of Adrian 
 IV., Cardinal d'Arragon quotes the oath of 
 Henry II., in the Cathedral at Avranches, 
 
 and he also inserts other documents show- 
 ing his intimacy with all the events of that 
 Pontiff's career. But as he kept silence in 
 regard to the Bull of Adrian, it is a clear 
 proof that he did not find any mention of it 
 in the Pontifical Archives. 
 
 1, 9. 
 
 Antoninus, Paw hiatorialia, Tit 17, chap. 
 
 GRAFTON'S ENGLISH CHRONICLES. 
 
 A minute search through Graf ton's Chron- 
 icles, published in London in the year 1809, 
 and which contain all the public acts of 
 King Henry II., from his birth to his death, 
 failed to reveal any allusion whatever to 
 either the Adrian or the Alexander Bulls. 
 In fact this English chronicler says plainly 
 that Henry won Ireland by force of arms, 
 whilst this author's account of Henry's 
 invasion also clearly implies that the Eng- 
 lish monarch neither possessed nor required 
 any Papal Letter, Bull, Diploma or docu- 
 ment of any kind whatever in order to in- 
 vade Ireland. He had a large army and also 
 400 ships strongly manned, so that by 
 force of arms alone he was prepared to suc- 
 cessfully invade a portion of the island, en- 
 tirely regardless of any interference from 
 Rome. If no successor to St. Peter existed 
 in the Eternal City in the twelfth century, 
 the Invasion would still have occurred, for 
 Dermod MacMorrough's invitation to King 
 Henry, as well as to Strongbow, and other 
 soldiers of fortune whose swords were at the 
 service of any person who wanted them for 
 conquest or defence, was the primal and prin- 
 cipal cause of Ireland's becoming a prey to 
 unprincipled Norman, English and Welsh 
 adventurers. 
 
 Alluding to the precipitate flight of King 
 Henry from England, and the cause that 
 lead to it, Grafton's Chronicles after al- 
 luding to the murder of St. Thomaa 
 a'Becket and the departure of the King's 
 ambassadors to Rome in order to placate 
 the Pope gives this quaint account of that 
 eventful transaction : 
 
 " The King's ambassadors, lying, as U sayd in 
 lloipe, could find no grace or favour for a long 
 tyme at the Pope's hande. At length, with 
 much ado, it was agreed that two Cardinally 
 should be sent down, to enquire oat the matter 
 concernying them that were consentying to 
 Becket's death. The King perceyving (perceiv- 
 ing) what was in preparing at Rome, neither
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 71 
 
 being yet eertaine, whereto the intent of the 
 Pope and the commying downe of the Cardi- 
 nalles would tende. in the mean tyme addressed 
 hymaelf with a greate power to c nter into Ire- 
 lande, giving charge and command that no mes- 
 senger from Borne shuld be permitted to enter 
 his kingdome or to pass unto Ireland." 
 
 Here is a plain statement of the reasons 
 which impelled Henry to invade Ireland. 
 He had heard that the Papal Legates were 
 coming over to England in order to lay his 
 possessions under Interdict, and he flew 
 over to Ireland so that he could not be 
 brought face to face with the Pope's repre- 
 sentatives. He had neither Bull, Rescript, 
 or Letter of any such ecclesiastical character 
 in his possession at that time, nor did he re- 
 quire any documentary justification whatever 
 for his iniquitous encroachment of a neigh- 
 boring country which even the Romans never 
 invaded. 
 
 PLOWDEN S PLAIN EVIDENCE. 
 
 The next historian to whom we desire to 
 call the attention of our readers in order to 
 furnish evidence wherewith to refute the 
 idea chat the Bull of Pope Adrian IV. was 
 a genuine document, is Francis Plowden, 
 author of an Historical Review of Ireland 
 from the Invasion down to the year 1800. 
 Here is his testimony. Speaking of the 
 bogus Bull, Plowden says : 
 
 "The Irish nation, however, drew the 
 true line of demarcation between the spiri- 
 tual and temporal power, by resisting this 
 inock donation of the kingdom to a foreigner; 
 a distinction which the nation has generally 
 made, but which before the accession of his 
 present majesty it had not been allowed to 
 give earnest of upon oath. If anything can 
 strongly paint the abusive profanation of re- 
 ligion it is certainly Henry's attempt to gloss 
 over with a sanctified varnish of spiritual 
 sanction the infamous support of an adul- 
 terous tyrant and the more iniquitous efforts 
 of his own ambition and usurpation. Pos- 
 sibly King Henry may have relied more 
 upon the devotion of the Irish to the Ro- 
 man mandate than upon the power of his 
 arms. In the first he was disappointed, and 
 he would have failed in the latter had Ire- 
 land been united in itself. " 
 
 Plowden'a History of Ireland, pp. 27-8 
 
 It is scarcely necessary to dilate at any 
 length upon this denunciatory language of 
 Plowden, as every reader can easily com- 
 prehend the indignation which that writer 
 manifests at the outrage perpetrated by 
 King Henry in order to cast a religious 
 cloak over his rascally invasion of Ireland. 
 
 Plowden plainly points out that the Irish 
 people resisted the mock donation of their 
 kingdom to a foreigner, and that they clear- 
 ly recognized the infamy of King Henry, 
 in attempting to gloss over with English- 
 made "spiritual varnish," the infamous 
 designs of his iniquitous invasion. The 
 Irish people saw at once through his ill-con- 
 cealed ''profanation of religion," and 
 hence they repudiated both Henry and his 
 spurious Bull- as innovations upon their 
 vested rights and their ancient liberty. 
 Thus Irish perspicuity and patriotism com- 
 bined in the rejection of both the bogus 
 Bull of Adrian IV., and the British King 
 who tried to invade Ireland under the false 
 cloak of religion. 
 
 " BOWER'S HISTORY OF THE POPES." 
 
 Archibald Bower, the author of this work, || 
 was a Scotchman who was born in 1685, 
 educated for the Priesthood in Douay, went 
 to Rome, thence to England, where he 
 apostatized in 1726, recanted in 1745, and 
 cast himself into the arms of heretics again 
 in 1777. Like all the Priests who became 
 perverts he followed the example of Luthei, 
 having married the neice of a Protestant 
 bishop in 1749, and then he died September 
 2nd, 1766, in the 80th year of his age. 
 
 We narrate these events in the life of this 
 unfortunate changeling in order that our 
 readers may fully understand that Bower 
 was not partial to the Popes whose lives he 
 has written, as the evidence he gives con- 
 cerning the Adrian Bull gains much addi- 
 tional strength when this fact is fully under- 
 stood. Mr. Bower was a Scotchman, and, 
 being an apostate, of course he hated the 
 Irish people for their consistent fidelity 
 to the Catholic Faith, even at the expense 
 of life, liberty and property. This fact 
 should also be borne in mind in order to 
 
 i | History of the Popes from the Foundation of 
 the See of Rome to the Present Time. By 
 Archibald Bower. London : VoL vi. pp 107.
 
 72 
 
 THE POPE AMD IRELAND. 
 
 understand that his sentiment* were purely 
 the result of his experience in reading and 
 his knowledge of Irish history, and not from 
 any partiality for the Pope or the Irish peo- 
 ple. 
 
 Having followed other English authors in 
 saying that King Henry made the Pope ac- 
 quainted with his designs on Ireland and 
 that the English monarch begged the advice 
 and favor of the Apostolic See, Bower says : 
 
 "It were to be wished that Hadrian" had 
 told us upon what he grounded his undoubted 
 claim of Ireland, and to all other islands that 
 had embraced the Christian faith. But neither 
 he nor his successors have to this day thought 
 fit to let the world into that secret. 
 
 " What the King and the Pope meant that 
 the end of the intended expedition against Ire- 
 land was to extend the bounds of the Church, 
 I know not. The Christian faith had been 
 planted in Ireland many ages before, and they 
 had at thia time a settled Church, governed by 
 
 H%drian. Nfrly all the old Chroniclers 
 print Adrian thuo. 
 
 its proper Bishops and Metropolitans, who had 
 a few yean before received their Palliums from 
 Roma, and they were, for aught that appeal B to 
 the contrary, as orthodox in their faith, and * 
 regular in their discipline, as most other nations." 
 
 Here we find even an apostate from the 
 faith of his forefathers who bears testimony 
 to the fact that the Catholic Church in Ire- 
 land was in a far better moral and spiritual 
 condition than is designated by the denun- 
 ciatory terms of the manipulated Adrian 
 and Alexander Bulls ! In the Adrian Bull 
 the Pope is made to say that Ireland was in a 
 state of moral iniquity and religious dark- 
 ness, whilst Mr. Bower expresses his aston- 
 ishment that any such charges could be 
 brought in a Papal document against a 
 Church that was " as orthodox in faith and 
 as regular in discipline as must other na- 
 tions." Evidently Mr. Bower surmized 
 that no Pope ever saw the Adrian Bull, and 
 he was thoroughly correct in his conclusion.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 73 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 Continuation of the Evidence of Historical Writers in proof of the False Character of 
 the Adrian and Alexander Bulls. Absurd Statements of English and Irish 
 Historians. How "Iniquity Hath Lied to Itself." 
 
 In addition to the testimony which we 
 have already compiled, in order to show the 
 spurious character of the Adrian Bull, we 
 now desire to introduce the evidence of 
 other writers regarding that dubious docu- 
 ment. 
 
 ABBE MAC GEOGHEGAN'S TESTIMONY. 
 
 In the first article of the present series, 
 we have given a portion of the strong evi- 
 dence which Abbb MacGeoghegan's History 
 of Ireland furnishes, in order to prove the 
 spurious nature of both the Adrian and 
 Alexander Bulls. The annexed paragraphs 
 from the same work, are, therefore, confir- 
 matory of what has already been said by 
 that distinguished Irish historian. Com- 
 menting on the text of the Adrian Bull 
 Abbe MacGeoghegan says : 
 
 The ab >ve was an edict pronounced against 
 Ireland, by which the rights of men, and the 
 most sacred laws are violated, under the specious 
 pretext of religion and the reformation of morals. 
 The Irish were no longer to possess a country. 
 That people, who had never bent under a for- 
 eign yoke, nunquam externce subjacuil ditioni, 
 were condemned to lose their liberty, without 
 even being heard. But can the Vicar of Jesus 
 Christ be accused of so glaring an act of injus- 
 tice? Can he be thought capable of having dic- 
 tated a Bull which overthrew an entire nation, 
 which dispossessed so many ancient proprietors 
 of their patrimonies, caused so much blood to be 
 shed, and at length tended to the destruction of 
 leligion in the island ? It is a thing not to be 
 conceived. 
 
 In truth were we to consider the circum- 
 stances and motives of the Bull, it has all the 
 appearance of a fictitious one, under the borrowed 
 name of Adrian IV. Baronius quotes it, with- 
 out giving any date of year or day, which would 
 make it suspicious ; it remained unpublished for 
 seventeen years ; it is said that it was fabricated 
 in 1155, and not made public till 1172. * * * 
 
 The Bull gains but little authentication from 
 the authority of John of Salisbury, afterwards 
 Bishop of Chartres, in his treatise " <(e nugis 
 curialibus" The writer is made to say, at 
 the end of the last chapter of his fourth 
 book, that " Pope Adrian^ had granted Ire- 
 
 land to King Henry, at his request, it being 
 the patrimony of his Holiness by hereditary 
 right, inasmuch as all the islands belonged to 
 the Roman Church, by the concession of the 
 Emperor Constantino the Great." But this non- 
 sense is considered by the learned aa having 
 been added to the chapter by a strange hand; 
 since the author, in ppeaking particularly in the 
 sixth and eighth books of his visit to the Holy 
 Father at Benevento, where he remained with 
 him for three months, states most minutely the 
 various conversations he had with his Holiness, 
 without making any mention of the Bull in ques- 
 tion, though it was a matter of particular im- 
 portance, and that was naturally the fit time to 
 have mentioned it. Pierre de Blois, a zealous 
 panegyrist of this Prelate, who publishes his 
 praises in various epistles, makes no mention of it 
 either. 
 
 It is well known that King Henry, who found 
 creatures sufficiently devoted to him to revenge 
 his quarrel with the holy Prelate of Canterbury, 
 did not want for venal writers to add to, and re- 
 trench from, the writings of the times, in ord^r to 
 give an appearance of authenticity to a documei<t 
 so necessary for the justification of his conduct. 
 Besides, it appears that Salisbury had gone to 
 Italy of his own accord, and through curiosity, 
 to visit his countryman Adrian, and not with any 
 commission from the King of England ; while 
 the Bull, according to Mathew of Westminster, 
 was obtained by a solemn embassy, which Henry 
 had sent to the Pope. In my opinion, however, 
 this circumstance appears to be another fable 
 added to the former, as he is the first who men- 
 tions this embassy, and that two centuries after 
 wards. The silence, too, of Nubrigensis, an 
 English contemporary author, respecting this 
 embassy and the Bull which it is affirmed was 
 granted, is an argument which, though negative, 
 deserves some attention. This author, who was 
 so zealous for the glory of Henry II., and his 
 nation, commences his narrative by saying that 
 the English had entered Ireland in a warlike 
 manner, and that, their forces increasing everv 
 day, they subjugated a considerable part of it.* 
 He makes no mention of a Bull granted by any 
 Pope ; and I consider it highly improbable that 
 
 * " At this time the English made a descei>t 
 upon Ireland in a warlike manner, and their 
 numbers having increased, they became masters 
 of no inconsiderable part of it by force of arms." 
 Nubrigensis, de Rebus. Anglic, b. 2, c 26.
 
 74 
 
 TIIK POPE AND IRELAXD. 
 
 he would have forgotten to speak of a circum- 
 stance BO necessary to give an appearance of 
 justice to the unprecedented conduct of his na- 
 tion. However this be. it may be affirmed that 
 no Pope, either before or after Adrian IV., ever 
 punished a nation so severely without cause. 
 We have seen instances of Popes making use of 
 their spiritual authority in opposition to crowned 
 heads; we have known them to exc-mmunicate 
 emperors and kings, and place their states uuder 
 an interdict, for crimes of heresy, or other 
 causes ; but we here behold innocent Ireland 
 given up to tyrants, without having been sum 
 moned before any tribunal, or convicted tf any 
 crime. 
 
 It would be entirely a work of superero 
 gation on our part to add a single word of 
 comment to the clear, concise and convin- 
 cing testimony which the learned Abbe Mac- 
 Geoghegan offers in order to show that he 
 had no doubts whatever upon his mind in 
 regard to the spurious character of the bogus 
 Adrian BulL Hence we will leave our 
 readers to draw their own conclusions 
 from the foregoing extracts, and proceed to 
 produce other witnesses in support of the 
 Catholic side of this question. 
 
 FATHER THOMAS N. BDRKE 8 EVIDENCE. 
 
 The next witness whose evidence we in- 
 troduce in order to show the fallacy and the 
 fraudulent character of the Adrian and 
 Alexander Bulls, is the celebrated Domini- 
 can, Father Thomas N. Burke, of cherished 
 memory, who was both a great Catholic 
 Priest and a distinguished Irish Patriot. 
 
 In his first Lecture in answer to Froude, 
 which was delivered in the Academy of 
 Music, New York, on the evening of No- 
 vember 12th, 1872, Father Burke alluded to 
 the Norman Invasion of Ireland and the 
 forged Bulls of Adrian and Alexander, in 
 the following terms of unqualified con- 
 demnation : 
 
 Henry landed in Ireland in 1171. He was 
 after murdering the Holy Archbishop of Can- 
 terbury, St. Thomas a'Becket. They scattered 
 his brains before the fcot of the altar, before 
 the Blessed Sacrament at the Vesper hour. The 
 blood of the saint and martyr was upon his 
 hand* when he came to Ireland to teach the 
 Irish, " Thou shall not kill" What was the 
 occasion of their coming ? When the adulterer 
 was driven from the sacred soil of Erin as one 
 unworthy to profane it by his tread, he went 
 
 over to Henry and procured from him a letter 
 permitting any of his subj ;cts that chose to em- 
 bark for Ireland to do HO, and there to reinstate 
 the adulterous tyrant King Dermot in hi king- 
 dom. They came there as protectors and help- 
 er* of adultery to teach the Irish people, " Thou 
 shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife." * * * 
 
 But suppose that Popa Adrian had given the 
 letter to King Henry, and Henry had kept it so 
 secret because hi* mother, the Empress Matilda, 
 did not want him to act upon it. Well, when 
 he did act upon it. why did he not produce it ? 
 That was the only warrant on which he came to 
 Ireland, invaded the country and never breathed 
 a word to a human being about that letter. 
 There is a lie on the face of it ! Oh ! Mr. Froude 
 reminded me "to remember that Alexander 
 III., bis successor, mentions that rescript of 
 Adrian's, and confirms it." I answer, with Dr. 
 Lynch and the learned author Dr. Moran, of 
 Oasory, and with many other Irish scholars and 
 historians, that Alexander's letter is a forgery at 
 well as Adrian's. 
 
 I grant that there are learned men who admit 
 the Bull of Adrian and Alexander's Rescript ; 
 but there are equally learned men who deny 
 that Bull, and I have as good reason to believe 
 one as the other, and / prefer to believe it was a 
 forgery. Alexander's letter bears the date 1172. 
 Now, let us see whether it is likely for the Pope 
 Alexander to give Henry such a letter, recom- 
 mending him to go to Ireland, the beloved son 
 of the Lord, to taka care of the Church, etc. 
 Remember it is said that Adrian give the Re- 
 script and did not know the man he gave it to. 
 But Alexander knew him well ! Henry in 1159 
 and 1160, supported the Anti-Popes against 
 Alexander, and, according to Matthew of West- 
 minster, King Henry II., obliged every one 
 in England from the boy of twelve years of 
 age to the old man, to renounce their alle- 
 giance to Alexander III. and go over to the 
 Anti-Popes. Now, u it likely that Alexander 
 would give him a Re-script telling him to go to 
 Ireland then and settle ecclesiastical matters ? 
 Alexander himself wrote to Henry, and said to 
 him : "Instead of remedying the disorders 
 caused by your predecessor*, you have added 
 prevarication to prevarication; you have op- 
 pressed the Church, and endeavored to destroy 
 the canons of Apostolic men." * * 
 
 It was this man that was sent over as an 
 Apostle of morality to Ireland ; he who was the 
 man accused of violating the betrothed wife of 
 his own son, Richard I.; a man whose crimes 
 will not bear repetition ; a man who was be- 
 lieved by Europa to be possessed of the devil ; a 
 man of whom it is written "that when he got 
 into a fit of anger he tore off his clothes and sat 
 naked, chewing straw like a beast." Further-
 
 THK POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 75 
 
 more, IB it likely that a Pope who knew him BO 
 well, who suffered so much from him, would 
 have sent him to Ireland the murderer of 
 Bishops, the robber of churches, the destroyer 
 of ecclesiastical liberty, and every fiorm of lib- 
 erty that cams before him. No ! I never will 
 believe that the Pope of Rjme was so very short- 
 sighted, so unj ust as by a stroke of nU pen to 
 abolish and destroy the liberties of the most 
 faithful people who ever bjwed down in alle- 
 giance to him. 
 
 Like the evidence of the Abbe MacGeo- 
 ghegan, the truthful and trenchant testi- 
 mony of the great Father Burke cannot 
 but carry conviction to the soul of every 
 reader that is not blinded by prejudice or 
 political passion. Both these eminent and 
 immortal sons of Holy Mother Church 
 looked at this vexed question from a truly 
 Christian standpoint ; they were anxious 
 solely to state the truth, and they have 
 done so in such a manner as to stamp en- 
 tirely out of existence any > pretensions to 
 authenticity which the spurious Bulls, to 
 which the names of Popes Adrian and Alex- 
 ander were forged, may have gained during 
 the past seven centuries. 
 
 THOMAS MOONEY S TESTIMONY. 
 
 Thomas Mooney, whose History of Ire- 
 land is doubtless familiar to many of our 
 readers, thus alludes to the two Bulls which 
 were fabricated by order of King Henry 
 the Second of England : 
 
 It was pretended by King Henry that Adrian 
 the Fvurth had made over the whole of Ireland 
 to him. He lost no time, therefore, on his ar- 
 rival, in inviting the clergy of the South and the 
 West to a grand Conference, at the ancient seat 
 of legislation in CashelL The pretended Bull 
 of Adrian which had been dead eighteen years, 
 was produced. It set forth the anxieties of the 
 Holy See to have virtue and religion cultivated 
 in Ireland, and the chief pastors obedient and 
 submissive to the Sovereign Pontiff ; and the 
 better to insure this object, the clergy and peo- 
 ple of Ireland were called upon to receive Henry 
 the Second of England as their king. A second 
 Bull, confirming the foregoing, purporting to be 
 from Alexander the Third, was also read ; and 
 though this one also has since been proved a forgery, 
 yet it had an astounding effect on the assembly. 
 
 No wonder the bogus Alexander Bull had 
 " an astounding effect on the assembly !'' 
 It would have had " an astounding effect 
 on any assembly" inside or outside of Ire- 
 
 land ! If ever Irish Bishops, Priestg or lay- 
 men listened to the libelous assaults upon 
 their race and their religion, their morals 
 and their very manhood which that anti- 
 Christian concoction contained, they would 
 have torn it into shreds and have flung the 
 fragments into the face of King Henry him- 
 self were he present on the occasion ! There 
 is not a single Bishop of the Catholic Church 
 who ever lived we care not what his na- 
 tionality may be that would dare to defend 
 the Alexander Bull as a Papal document. 
 The very idea that the Irish people are 
 styled therein '" Christians only in name," 
 is enough to brand this document as fraudu- 
 lent on its very face, and enough is known 
 of the aggressive character of the Irish peo- 
 ple to warrant us in saying that it would be 
 unsafe for any reader to proclaim such a 
 scurrillously falsifying document even in the 
 presence of an assemblage of Irish disciples 
 of the God of Peace ! It is clear, therefore, 
 that no Pope ever issued such a scandalous 
 document, nor did any assemblage of the 
 Irish clergy ever undergo the dishonor of 
 listening to its libelous language. 
 
 REV. J. J. BRENNANS TESTIMONY. 
 
 The next witness we desire to introduce 
 on the side of historical truth and justice 
 is Rev. J. J. Brennan, the author of a text- 
 book History of Ireland from which we 
 make the following extract : 
 
 In 1154 Henry II. succeeded to the English 
 throne, and in the same year, Nicholas Break- 
 spere, an Englishman, was elected Pope, under 
 the title of Adrian IV. Seeing his opportunity, 
 Henry is said to have asked and obtained per- 
 mission from the new Pontiff to invade and con- 
 quer Ireland. A Bull, giving the requisite au- 
 thority, is indeed attributed to Adrian, but his- 
 torians are about equally divided as to its au- 
 thenticity. If the Pope did issue the document, 
 he had no right whatever to do so, as Ireland 
 never belonged to Home, and such an action on 
 his part would be wholly unj ust. Adrian IV. , 
 however, was a man of piety, and, as long as we 
 are without positive proof of his guilt, it is wrong 
 to blacken his character by attributing to him 
 the lies and the base motives contained in the 
 Bull in question. 
 
 JAMES J. CLANCY'S EVIDENCE. 
 The next witness we desire to introduce 
 in order to give his testimony showing that,
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 even if the Adrian Bull was authentic, it 
 potteased no binding force on the Irish peo- 
 ple, is James J. Clancy author of a very 
 interesting work on Ireland,* wherein he 
 thus speaks of the supposed Bull by which 
 Henry II claimed to possess spiritual and 
 temporal sovereignty over Ireland : 
 
 Meantime Henry II., who had long yearned 
 to acquire the mastery of Ireland, grew alarmed 
 lest his vassal, StrongV>w. should assume an in- 
 dependent sovereignty (which the latter might 
 claim through his marriage with MacMurrough'* 
 daughtei). The consequence was that in 1172 
 Henry arrived with four thouaud five hundred 
 men, and exhibited a Papal Ball investing him 
 with the sovereignty of Irelai.d. This docu- 
 ment, alleged to have been given by Adrian 
 IV. the only Englishman that ever wore the 
 Roman tiara is a grievous stuoibling-bloik to 
 gome people, and countless are the controvemiea 
 based upon it. There is little practical value in 
 such discussions, whether the Bull was forged, 
 aa some Bay, or genuine, as is commonly con- 
 ceded. Had Heury brought a shipload of i-uch 
 Bulls, and every one of them authentic, they 
 would not have improved his title one j >t, and 
 would have no more essential bearing on the 
 case to-day than so many military order* signed 
 by Julius Cseiar. No document can sanctify 
 injustice or vindicate deliberate fraud. Above 
 and beyond all trafficking parchments rest the 
 ina'ienable rights of mankind. It is an amusing 
 fact that this Bull of Adrian is the one solitary 
 Papal utterance for which the English people 
 profess gratitude and respect. They hoot and 
 howl at Rome, yet they would be ineffably 
 thankful if Rome engaged in the holy and whole- 
 s >me work of forcing loyalty down the Irish 
 throat. It is to be regretted that the Irish 
 Clergy (who of course were an influential clasp) 
 took no decisive and resolute stand against 
 Henry's impudent claim. A large portion of 
 them deceived by the Bull and desirous of peace 
 at almost any price, advised the recognition of 
 Henry's authority, which be it remembered, 
 was claimed to be a merely titular sovereignty. 
 Acting on this ad vice, Roderick O'Connor signed 
 a treaty defining their mutual relations, and ex 
 presaly stipulating that the English monarch 
 thould occupy only the position of feudal tuze 
 rain in Ireland. Every subsequent act of Eng- 
 liah aggression was a violation of that first sol- 
 emn compact. 
 
 Bull of Pope Adrian, granting the kingdom of 
 Ireland to Henry II., and obtained by thin BOV. 
 creign from the Holy See as far back as Ci/; year 
 //.// wa for the first time publicly announced 
 to his Irish hul'jectf.t 
 
 Here is an historical muddle worthy of 
 Judge Maguire himself ! Let us see what 
 complications arise from this short para- 
 graph from the pen of Ireland s bard ? 
 
 Henry II. was born in 1132, and ascended 
 the English throne in 1154, so that if the 
 mis called " Adrian" Bull was issued in 
 1151, it must have been sent to Stephen, 
 Bail of Blois, who reigned as King of Eng- 
 land until the year 1153 ! 
 
 Again, if the Bull signed "Adrian IV.," 
 was issued in 1151, it must have emanated 
 from Pope Eugenius III., as Pope Adrian 
 IV., was not invested with the tiara until 
 December 3rd, 1154 ! 
 
 If, therefore, we take Moore's statement 
 of the case, we will be forced to believe the 
 " Adrian" Bull, addressed to " Henry II." 
 to have been issued by Pope E igenius the 
 Third, and sent over to England to Stephen, 
 Earl of Blois ! . 
 
 This is a complicated historical enigma, 
 the solution of which we leave to Judge 
 Maguire as a penance for issuing his very 
 bad book ! 
 
 U 
 
 THOMAS MOORE S TESTIMONY. 
 u about this time (A. n. 1175) that the 
 
 Ireland : As She I*, as She Has Been, and 
 M She Ought To Be. New York : 1877. 
 
 MONSIGNOR BERNARD O BULLY 8 EVIDENCE. 
 
 The name and literary fame of Dr. Ber- 
 nard O'Rielly, D. D., L. D., is doubtless 
 familiar to all our readers. His numerous 
 letters upon Irish subjects which have ap- 
 peared in the MONITOR, as well as his un- 
 equalled biography of Pope Leo XIII., 
 have made the name of this distinguished 
 Prelate a household word in every part of 
 world. 
 
 Monsignor O'Rielly has also written a 
 work on Ireland,^ in which he casts an ad- 
 ditional doubt upon the Adrian Bull, and 
 thus adds new strength to the numer- 
 ous proofs we have produced in order to 
 clearly demonstrate its spurious character. 
 
 In the work alluded to Mgr. O'Rielly 
 says: 
 
 He (King Henry II.) produced, it is said, the 
 
 fHistory of Ireland, Vol. II., pp. 276. 
 
 t" The Cause of Ireland Pleaded Before the 
 Civilized World." New York, 1886.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 77 
 
 Bull of Pope Adrian, bestowing on him the 
 lordship of Ireland. But the latest and ripest 
 scholamh'p has discovered, in what must be ac- 
 counted the genuine Letter of Pope Adrian, in- 
 stead of an absolute gift of the island, a positive 
 injumtion laid on Henry in his projected expedi- 
 tion to Ireland, that "he should attempt -nothing 
 of the kind without the consent of the Princes, 
 Bishops and people of Ireland." 
 
 Monsignor O'Rielly is eminently correct 
 when he intimates that so far from Pope 
 Adrian ever having granted any Bull, Brief, 
 Rescript or Letter even, to King Henry of 
 England, authorizing him to invade Ireland 
 for any purpose whatever, that learned 
 and just Pontiff actually forbad? the in- 
 vasion of that country, unless it was done 
 with the consent of the princes, Bishops and 
 people most interested in the matter. This 
 phase of the question we are elaborating 
 will be treated fully in a subsequent chapter. 
 
 OEOFFREY KEATING S EVIDENCE. 
 
 This author was born in Ireland in the 
 sixteenth century, during the reign of Queen 
 Elizabeth. His work was composed in the 
 Irish language, and he states that his his- 
 tory was written in order to develop the 
 rank injustice with which Anglo- Irish au- 
 thors before him had treated every Irish 
 subject. Speaking of the Bull of Pope 
 Adrian IV. Keating says : 
 
 It must be surprising to every one who makes 
 himself acquainted with Irish history, to find 
 such an expression in the Bull of Pope Adrian 
 as that the King of England was to enjoy the : 
 crown of Ireland, upon the condition that he \ 
 would revive the ancient faith and restore it to its 
 former lustre ; as if Christianity had been ex- , 
 pelled, and the people had returned to a state of ; 
 paganism and idolatry. Whoever gave this ac- 
 count to the Pope was as great an enemy to 
 truth as he was to the glory of the Irish na- 
 tion 
 
 In the light of facts already developed, 
 we join with Dr. Keating in his laudable in- 
 dignation. No Pope, either in the twelfth 
 or any other century since Christianity came 
 into the world had a scintilla of evidence 
 before him to justify the outrageous expres- 
 sions employed in the Adrian and Alexan- 
 der fictitious Bulls. 
 
 Vol. 2, pp. 368. 
 
 Dr. Keating, in order to show the un- 
 truthfulness of the Adrian Bull, next points 
 out the fact that the Pontiff must have 
 known different, because, he says : " it was 
 the custom of the times'' for numerous Irish 
 pilgrims to journey to Rome, andhementions 
 the names of many of them. In order also 
 to show the absurdity of the Bull wherein 
 it is intimated that Catholic faith was dead 
 in Ireland in the twelfth century, Keating 
 says that new churches, abbeys and monas- 
 teries were at that period in course of con- 
 struction all over Ireland. This assertion 
 he supports by the following facts and fig- 
 ures : 
 
 St. Mary's Abbey, Dublin, built by Maol- 
 seachluin, King of Meath and Monarch of the 
 Island, in 1139 ; Abbey of Mellifont, built by 
 Donough O'<JarrolJ, Monarch of Oirgialiuch, 
 1142; St. Malachias, Bishop of Each Dun, 
 built the Abbey of Jobhair Cintragha, in 1144. 
 Diarmod MacMorrough, King of Leinster, laid 
 the foundation of the Abbey of Baltinglass in 
 the year 1151. The Abbey of Beictiff, in the 
 County Meath, the Abbey of O'Dorma in the 
 County Kerry, and the Abbey of Boyle, were 
 erected in 1161 ; Daniel O'Bryen, King of Lim- 
 erick, built the Abbey of Holy Cross, in the 
 County Pipperary, in 1169 ; the Abbey o 
 Fermony, in the County Cork, was completed 
 in the year 1170. 
 
 Many other instances, says Keating, might 
 be produced of churches, abbeys, monasteries, 
 and other religious foundations erected in those 
 pious times before the English came upon the 
 Irish coast; and consequently it follows that 
 those foreigners did not plant the Catholic faith 
 in the Island, but found it as it was believed and 
 established for many preceding ages. 
 
 Such a Bull, therefore, as that to which 
 the name of Adrian IV. was signed by 
 some English forger, never could have 
 emanated from any other source than the 
 mind of a bad, designing English monarch. 
 
 CHARLES O KELLY S EVIDENCE. 
 
 Charles O'Kelly, author of Macarice Ex- 
 cidinm says " King Henry thought that 
 the moment had come to execute a plan 
 which he had long previously conceived. 
 In fact he prepared the artifices which he 
 was to employ in order to subjugate Ireland 
 and to extend his kingdom by the annexa- 
 tion of so large a territory. For that pur- 
 pose he fabricated a Bull of the Sovereign
 
 78 
 
 THE I>Ol'E AND llir.I \NI>. 
 
 Pontiff, a Bull which granted to him, said 
 /, the domain of Ireland, on condition 
 that he would protect the Priesthood, re- 
 establish in its ancient splendor Catholic 
 worship, and the temples and altars that 
 were overturned." 
 
 Inasmuch as King Henry failed in the 
 performance of any single one of the clauses 
 of the Adrian Bull, it is certainly good proof 
 that he had it manufactured himself for his 
 own base purposes. 
 
 EVIDENCE OF LELAND. 
 
 Thomas Leland, the Protestant author of 
 the History of Ireland, which bears his 
 name, was born in Dublin in the year 1702. 
 He was educated in Trinity College, and 
 afterwards became Prebendary of St Pat- 
 rick's Church in that city. He died in 
 
 1785. His work is hostile to the Catholic 
 Church, and like many other so-called 
 " Histories of Ireland," it seems to have 
 been written entirely in the interest of Eng- 
 land. 
 
 After a passing allusion to the Adrian 
 Bull, Leland furnishes us with evidence in 
 proof of the fact that in his time the long 
 chain of doubt which had commenced to be 
 formed in men's minds even when Cam- 
 brensis lived, slill continued to be woven, 
 link by link, down to the eighteenth cen- 
 tury. Here is what Dr. Leland says upon 
 this phase of the spurious Bull : 
 
 " Some Irish writers, scandalized at the gross 
 representations of the corruptions and barbar- 
 isms of their country," (as depicted in the 
 Adrian Bull) "seemed willing to question the 
 authenticity of this Bull."* 
 
 *Vol. I., pp. 11. 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 Further Evidence in Proof of the Spurious Character of the Adrian and Alexander 
 Bulls. O'Halloran's History Dissected. Extracts from the Historical Writings 
 of Hume, Lingard, Father Thebaucl, S. J., and others. 
 
 1ESTIMONY PROM O'HALLORAN'S HISTORY.* 
 
 The work we design peering into at pres- 
 ent is one of those so called Irish HLtories 
 which are bound in green cloth so that 
 those who buy them may actually judge the 
 book " by the cover." On the back of the 
 work is stamped the name O'Halloran, so as 
 to lead Irish people into the false idea that 
 some person with that Celtic patronymic 
 was the author, while on the title-page 
 appears the thoroughly English name of 
 " Dolby." This work, therefore, is, to all 
 intents and purposes, a spurious History of 
 Ireland, only one-third of which was writ- 
 ten by an Irish historian, whilst the other 
 two-thirds are the concoction of some hire- 
 ling Cockneys who were bitterly anti- 
 Catholic as well as anti-Irish, as we in- 
 tend to prove when we come to cite certain 
 passages. 
 
 *" The History of Ireland from the Invasion 
 by Henry II.. to the Present Times." By Wil- 
 liam Dolby. New York. 
 
 This O'Halloran-Dolby mixture is cited 
 very frequently in Judge Maguire's bad 
 book, for the reason that as an English 
 publication it just suited his anti- Catholic 
 views on the question of the bogus Bulls, 
 hence he drew many of his worst falsehoods 
 from the prejudiced pages of this fraudulent 
 volume. 
 
 In the so called O'Halloran portion of 
 this Irish- English History, t we are told in 
 the body of the work that King Henry 
 *' entered the harbor of Waterford, October 
 18th, 1172," but the modern Editor of 
 O'Halloran's part, it appears knew more 
 than the Irish historian did, and so he added 
 this foot-note : 
 
 The reader will remember that Dr. Leland 
 and others, have unfortunately followed the 
 authority of Giraldus Cambrensis for this date 
 (1172.) It has lately been ascertained that the 
 right year is 1171. Dr. O'Connor is severely in- 
 dignant at the mistake. When such learned 
 
 3J4-306-308.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 79 
 
 Doctors disagree, surely my friend O'Halloran 
 may be excused. T. Moore equitably observes 
 that it is "a mark of carelessness, unquestion- 
 ably, but by no mean* meriting the grave sev- 
 erity with which Dr. O'Connor remarks upon 
 it." 
 
 Here, then, we have the date of King 
 Henry's arrival in Ireland decisively settled 
 as having taken place on October 18th, 
 1171. Very well ! Now let us glance at 
 the text of the Alexander Bull as it appears 
 on another page of this Irish-English " his- 
 tory," and we find to our great astonish- 
 ment that it bears date 1172 ! And yet 
 O'Halloran says that both the Adrian and 
 Alexander Bulls were presented by the 
 English monarch before the Synod of Cas- 
 hel, held within a couple of weeks after 
 King Henry's arrival in Ireland ! 
 
 This Cashel Synod, O'Halloran says, "was 
 splendid and numerous," but were it the 
 largest and most gorgeous assembly of nota- 
 bles ever convened in the world, how, we 
 ask, in the name of all the mathematicians 
 that ever lived from the time of Euclid 
 down to our own Davies could King 
 Henry present to any body of men in the 
 month of October, 1171, a document pur- 
 porting to have been issued at Rome in the 
 year following 1 
 
 The only way we can account for such a 
 blunder in the date of the spurious Bull is 
 that King Henry II., when he had that 
 fictitious document drawn up, did not in- 
 tend to invade Ireland until the year 1172, 
 and he had that date inscribed upon it, but 
 the murder of a Becket, and the news that 
 two Papal Legates were coming over to 
 England to lay his country under Interdict, 
 hastened his departure by several months, 
 and in his flurry the King forgot to alter the 
 dale on the spurious document I 
 
 Under the date 1171, in the O'Halloran 
 section of this spurious Irish "history," we 
 are told that King Henry of England had 
 completed his rupture with Rome by the 
 murder of a' Becket. Then the English- 
 Irish writer conveniently sends Henry to 
 Normandy to meet the Papal Legates ; then 
 he says that Henry took the oath at 
 Avranches, and then and there he was pres- 
 ented with the Alexander Bull, and jour- 
 neyed to Ireland in the October following ! 
 
 In this statement O'Halloran stands 
 "alone in his glory !" Not even Carnbren- 
 sis, with all his inventive faculty for false- 
 hood, ever pretended that King Henry 
 went to Avranches and became reconciled 
 to Pope Alexander before he entered Ire- 
 land. The English-Irish O'Halloran, there- 
 fore, is guilty of a wilful perversion of truth! 
 
 We now come lo the Dolby "donation" 
 to this badly-doctored Irish-English "his- 
 tory," and on the very first page of the 
 English- Irish portion of the work the Cock- 
 ney Editor flMy contradicts O'Halloran 
 after this fashion : 
 
 While Henry was busy in Ireland, his sor 
 became treacherous and refractory. Their dis- 
 obedience was instigated by the jealousy of his 
 Queen, Eleanor, on account of the untimely at- 
 tachment of their father to "Fair Rosamond" 
 Clifford. The same messengers who secretly 
 brought him information of the conduct of his 
 sons also rep jrted that the two Cardinals, Al- 
 bert and Theodine (who had been delegated by 
 the Pope to make an investigation of the death 
 of Thomas a'Bocket) were now impatient of any 
 further delay, and required Henry's immediate 
 presence in Normandy, where they had already 
 waited for him about a year. 
 
 Here our readers will at once discern the 
 value of the O'Halloran-Dolby literary de- 
 coction, when they find the English continu- 
 ator contradicting the Irish originator ! 
 
 In the O'Halloran section of this two- 
 sided historical hodge-podge, we were told 
 that King Henry exhibited the Adrian and 
 Alexander forgeries to a grand Synod of the 
 Irish Clergy in the year 1171. Now comes 
 the English Editor in his section, and he 
 flatly refutes O'Halloran again by assuring 
 his readers that Henry obtained the Adrian 
 Bull as far back as the year 1151,^ and that 
 the twin forgeries were first seen in Ire- 
 land in 1175 or thereabouts ! 
 
 There are several other instances in this 
 English Irish volume where contradictions 
 occur similar to those we have exposed, but 
 we will not stop to notice them. Before 
 laying down this work, however, it is well 
 that our readers should know its anti-Cath- 
 olic character, and here are instances there- 
 of. Speaking of the Protestant Reforma- 
 tion, the English Protestant editor says : 
 
 It is to be hoped that these slight and im- 
 
 0'Halloian-Dolby History, p. 28.
 
 80 
 
 THB POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 perfect notices of the state of Ireland during the 
 fifteenth century will enable the reader to judge 
 how the great " Reformation" of the succeeding 
 century nhould be estimated, with reference to 
 the ilomtttic and educational benefit* proposed to 
 be tkttt conferred on the Irish people ; and also ita 
 effect* on the welfare of mankind generally.* 
 
 On another page of the Dolby addition 
 occurs a virulent attack on " that fatal de- 
 lusion" Monaaticism, and on still another 
 paget we are told that " ihe Reformation 
 in England was supported by the majority 
 of the people and a great body of the Clergy, 
 iceary of the Papal yoke." On the same 
 page " the Romish Church" is alluded to in 
 no very complimentary terms, showing the 
 virulence of the English Protestant Dolby. 
 On another page+ Queen Mary of Eng- 
 land is said " to have fully proved her 
 right" to the title of " Bloody," and Queen 
 Elizabeth is painted as an angelic creature 
 who had all the virtues of her sex ! 
 
 Such is the source from which Judge Ma- 
 guire drew most of his calumnies against 
 the Popes and the Catholic Church, and 
 when he went to such a work for the pur- 
 pose of fortifying his falsehoods, he at once 
 exposed his venomous hatred towards that 
 holy Church which made him a Christian. 
 The double faced Dolby and his coterie of 
 English contributors were just the men 
 Judge Maguire should have fellowship with, 
 a* they are in perfect unanimity with him 
 in their hatred of all things Catholic. 
 
 HISTORIAN HUME'S TESTIMONY. 
 
 It is scarcely necessary to tell our readers 
 that David Hume, the English historian, 
 was no friend either of the Catholic Church 
 or of the Irish people. Hence it is reason- 
 able to conclude that his account of the 
 so-called "Conquest of Ireland," was writ- 
 ten from a thoroughly anti-Catholic and 
 anti-Irish standpoint. The man who could 
 say that the " Irish from the beginning of 
 time were buried in the most profound bar- 
 1'insin and ignorance,' 1 could not be ex- 
 pected to write impartially on any question 
 wherein the interests of Rome and Ireland 
 w re at stake. 
 
 In view of this fact, it is not surprising 
 
 i'ge97. fPagelM. J Page 174. 
 
 to learn from Hume that the Irish were 
 " imperfectly converted to Christianity by 
 some missionaries from Britain." "Pope 
 Adrian, therefore," continues Hume, "in 
 the year 1 156, issued a Bull in favor of 
 Henry, in which," says the English his- 
 torian, "the Pope exhorts the King to 
 invade Ireland," gives the English King 
 "entire right and authority over the island, 
 commanding all the inhabitants to obey 
 him as their sovereign, and invests with 
 full power all such godly instruments [!] as 
 he (the king) should think proper to employ 
 in an enterprise they calculated to under- 
 take for the glory of God and the salvation of 
 the souls oj men. " 
 
 What irony ! Is it possible that we are 
 asked to believe that any Pope of Rome 
 would ever delegate his supreme spiritual 
 authority as Vicar of Christ to a layman ? 
 Not only that --if what Hume states is true 
 but the Adrian Bull actually permits 
 Henry to delegate his supreme spiritual au- 
 thority to "all such godly instruments" as the 
 King might select ! No matter how igno- 
 rant, vicious, immoral or heretical these 
 disciples of King Henry might be, they 
 could not be interfered with by Priest, 
 Bishop, Cardinal, or even by the Pope him- 
 self ! Can any sane man calmly come to 
 the conclusion that the Vicar of Christ ever 
 delegated such spiritual jurisdiction to any 
 body of unknown men ? We hope, for the 
 honor of the intellectual enlightenment of the 
 nineteenth century, there is not one such 
 man to be found in the world ! 
 
 No Pontiff could delegate such powers as 
 the spurious Bull attributed to Pope Adrian 
 designates. The document was gotten up 
 by King Henry himself, aided by some of 
 his household officials, and, as that monarch 
 endeavored during the lifetime of St. Thom- 
 as a'Becket to be Pope of the Catholic 
 Church in England, and caused St. Thomas 
 to be murdered because he thwarted his ec- 
 clesiastical ambition, it waa the most na- 
 tural thing in the world to suggest to his 
 amanuensis that he place in the body of the 
 bogus Bull a clause by which the King 
 could appoint ecclesiastics in Ireland who 
 would carry out his intentions when he had 
 invaded that country. 
 
 $ History of England, Vol. I., pp, 330, tt stq.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 81 
 
 This, to our ?iiind, is very clear, and this 
 fact goes far to prove the spurious character 
 of the Adrian Bull. 
 
 Hume tells ua that Dermot MacMor- 
 rogh, King of Leinster, appealed to King 
 Henry when he was staying in France, to 
 help the Irish monarch to regain his pos- 
 sessions. Henry promised his assistance, 
 accepted MacMorrogh as his vassal, and, 
 adds Hume : " gave MacMorrogh letters 
 patent by which he empowered all his sub- 
 jects to aid the Irish prince in the recovery 
 of his dominions." 
 
 What a pity it was that Henry had not his 
 forged Bull ready for this emergency ? This 
 meeting between MacMorrogh and Henry 
 took place in 1172, according to Hume ; 
 the Adrian Bull was supposed to have been 
 issued in 1155, so that seventeen years after 
 Pope Adrian gave Ireland over to King 
 Henry of England, the most that King 
 could do for the restoration of the territorial 
 possessions of the King of Leinster was to 
 ask his English subjects to assist him ! 
 
 If, as some writers allege, Henry had the 
 Adrian Bull in his possession at that period, 
 why did he not carry out its provisions ? 
 Hume says Pope Adrian gave Henry " en- 
 tire right and authority over the island, 
 commanded all its inhabitants to obey him 
 as their sovereign, and invested with full 
 power all such godly instruments" as Henry 
 should select to Christianize the Irish peo- 
 ple ! 
 
 Why, therefore, did not Henry delegate 
 MacMorrogh as one of the "godly instru- 
 ments," whom he had authority to select to 
 represent the Roman Pontiff in England's 
 new territorial acquisition ] With a copy of 
 the Adrian Bull and Henry's letter of ap- 
 pointment to such an ecclesiastical position 
 of dignity and power, MacMorrogh could 
 have gone back to Ireland and preached 
 from the pulpit in Armagh Cathedral and 
 even the Primate himself could not have 
 prevented such a scandal ! 
 
 But Henry's Bull was not yet born ; so 
 he could not avail himself of such a splen- 
 did opportunity to gore the Irish people 
 in order to despoil them of life, liberty and 
 happiness ! 
 
 Hume next informs us that " Henry, 
 jealous of the progress made by his own 
 subjects, sent orders to recall all the Eng- 
 lish, and he made preparations to attack 
 Ireland in person." Why should King 
 Henry " attack Ireland," if he had the Ad- 
 rian Bull and that other document which is 
 conveniently called the "confirmatory" 
 Bull of Alexander ? The Irish people had 
 shown no animosity toward Henry. Ac- 
 cording to Hume, the Norman and English 
 adventurers had mowed down all the Irish 
 that appeared before them, and when 
 Strongbow passed through Ireland "he had 
 no other occupation than to receive the 
 homage of his new subjects." 
 
 It would appear, therefore, that instead 
 of making preparations to "attack Ireland," 
 which had according to Hume already 
 been virtually conquered the most feasible 
 action on King Henry's part would have 
 been to have sent a couple of " godly in- 
 struments ' over to Ireland, with copies of 
 the Adrian Bull for all the Bishops of that 
 country, and then awaited the entire sur- 
 render of the spiritual and temporal suprem- 
 acy of Ireland into his Majesty's keeping ! 
 As Henry did not do this, it is very reason- 
 able to conclude that the Adrian Bull was 
 not in his stall at Winchester Castle during 
 the ever-memorable year of our Lord, 1171. 
 
 FATHER THEBAUD S TESTIMONY. 
 
 The eminent Jesuit whose work* we will 
 now introduce as evidence against the gen- 
 uineness of the Adrian Bull, did not enter 
 into any extensive review of that long-con- 
 troverted document. He merely alludes to 
 it incidentally, but he was evidently con- 
 vinced that the Adrian document was dic- 
 tated by King Henry of England, and that 
 Pope Adrian IV. had nothing whatever to 
 do with it. 
 
 Alluding to the rebellion which broke out 
 in Ireland when John Lackland went over 
 there in order to smite the Irish to the 
 earth by means of a glance of his English 
 eye, Father Thebaud, says : 
 
 This solemn protest was not without effect 
 in Europe. At the beginning of the reign of 
 
 *"The Irish Race in the Past and Present." 
 By Rev. Augustus J. Thebaud, S. J. New 
 York. 1873.
 
 82 
 
 THK POPK AND IRELAND. 
 
 Richard I., Clement Id., on appointing, by 
 the King's rc'juest, William de Longchamps, 
 Bishop of Ely, an his Legate in England, Wales 
 and Ireland, took good care to limit the au- 
 thority of this Prelate to those parts of Ireland 
 which lay under the jurisdiction of the Earl of 
 Moreton that is, of John, brother to Richard. 
 He had power to exercise his jurisdiction "tn 
 A nglia, Wallia, ct Hits Hibernice partibut in qui- 
 lutJoinnts Morctonii Comes potettitem habtt et 
 rioninium."(MaUh. Paris) It would seem, 
 ihtn, that Clement III., knew nothing of the 
 Mull of Adrian IV. 
 
 Pope Clement ascended the Chair of St. 
 Peter December 19th, 1187, nearly a third 
 of a century after the Adrian Bull is sup- 
 posed to have been issued, yet he knew 
 nothing about it ! 
 
 DR. LTNGARD'S EVIDENCE. 
 Doctor John Lingard, the eminent Cath- 
 olic divine, whose history of England is 
 familiar to most of our readers, seems to 
 have had a secret conviction in his soul that 
 the Adrian Bull was spurious. Of course as 
 an Englishman, and writing for the English 
 people, it could never be entertained by the 
 intolerant element among that race that 
 Lingard should be permitted to proclaim 
 that England's title to Ireland was based 
 upon a bogus Bull and an unjust and brutal 
 invasion of the country of a peaceable na- 
 tion. Lingard, therefore, was compelled to 
 keep within the bounds of mental reserva- 
 tion any doubts he may have had, but when 
 he speaks of Pope Adrian "smiling" at 
 Henry's hypocrisy, this expression clearly 
 indicates that the historian could scarcely 
 believe that such a Pope would grant a do- 
 nation of Ireland to such a double-dyed 
 villain aa Henry the Second was in all his 
 relations with the Catholic Church. Here is 
 Dr. Lingard's account of the invasion of 
 Ireland by the Norman adventurers : 
 
 The proximity of Ireland to England, and the 
 inferiority of the natives in the art of war, had 
 suggested the idea of conquest to both William 
 the Conqueror and the first Henry. * * Within 
 a few months after bis (Henry II. 's) coronation, 
 John of Salisbury, a learned monk, and after- 
 wards Bishop of Chartres,f was dispatched to 
 solicit the approbation of Pope Adrian* The 
 
 t Twenty yean "afterward." 
 ^Salisbury says he himself procured the Bull 
 at ** hit own requett" 
 
 envoy was charged to assure hi* Holiness that 
 Henry's principal object was to provide instruc- 
 tion for an ignorant people, to extirpate vbe 
 from the Lord's vineyard, and to extend to Ire- 
 land the annual payment of Peter-Pence, but 
 that, as every Christian island was the property 
 of the Holy See, he did not presume to make the 
 attempt without the advice and consent of the 
 successor of St. Peter. The Pontiff who mutt 
 hare tmiled at the hypocrisy of this addrest, 
 praised in his reply the piety of his dutiful son ; 
 accepted the asserted right of sovereignty which 
 had been so liberally admitted, expressed the 
 satisfaction with which he assented to the King's 
 rt quest, and exhorted him to bear in mind 
 the conditions on which the assent had been 
 grounded. 
 
 This is a very plausible presentation of the 
 case from an English standpoint. Now let 
 us see how far the statements of Dr. Lin- 
 gard will serve to show the authenticity of 
 the Adrian Bull, or, on the other hand, 
 help in the good work of exposing this gi- 
 gantic fraud of the twelfth century. 
 
 King Henry the Second of England, was 
 crowned King at Westminster, December 
 19th, 1154. " Within a few months after 
 his coronation," says Dr. Lingard, John of 
 Salisbury was dispatched to solicit the ap- 
 probation of Pope Adrian to King Henry's 
 intended invasion of Ireland. The infer- 
 ence is drawn from the remaining text 
 printed above that the Pope gave John of 
 Salisbury a letter addressed to "the King 
 of England," but without mentioning any 
 name. Then Dr. Lingard continues : 
 
 At the following Michaelmas a great Council 
 was held to deliberate on the enterprise ; but a 
 strong opposition was made by the Empress 
 Mother and the barons : other projects offered 
 themselves to Henry's ambition, and the Papal 
 letter was consigned to oblivion in the Archives 
 of the Castle of Winchester. 
 
 If Lingard is correct, therefore, in saying 
 that Pope Adrian's Bull was received by 
 John of Salisbury, prior to Michaelmas, 
 1155, that letter could not have been the 
 Bull which is printed in Maguire's bad book 
 and dated 1156 ! This is very apparent 
 when we come to consider that it was just 
 as impossible to exhibit the Adrian Bull, 
 bearing date 1156, before "a great Coun- 
 cil" held in 1155, as it was to present the 
 Alexander Bull, dated 1172, to a Synod of 
 Irish Clergy convened in 1171 ! Yet both
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 83 
 
 of these seemingly impossible feats were ac- 
 tually accomplished if we are to believe 
 English historians and their silly American 
 copyists ! 
 
 Well, indeed, may Lingard call this 
 strange and spurious Bull of Adrian IV., a 
 "singular negotiation," and aptly does the 
 same writer express the sentiments of the 
 majority of our readers when he says that 
 "the Pope must have smiled at the hypo- 
 crisy of King Henry's address," when ask- 
 ing him for the donation of Ireland ! 
 
 In a foot-note to the page from which the 
 foregoing extracts are culled, Dr. Lingard 
 shows that he had serious doubts regarding 
 the genuine character of the Adrian "letter," 
 as he remarks that " when King Louis of 
 France, a few years later (1159), meditated 
 a similar expedition, Pope Adrian refused 
 his approbation unless the would-be invader 
 first procured the consent of the Princes, 
 Bishops, Clergy and people of Ihe country he 
 contemplated invading." 
 
 We have said that the statements con- 
 cerning the Adrian Bull made by Dr. Lin- 
 gard lead to the conclusion that the spurious 
 document dated 1156, was issued in 1155. 
 This doubtful document itself, however, 
 had no date or place of publication whatever, 
 when it first appeared, but as a Bull without 
 a date or place of birth would be nothing 
 more than a nonentity in the world, several 
 officious Englishmen have attached to it the 
 year in which they thought it ought to have 
 been issued ! But John of Salisbury never 
 received a Bull, or even a letter from Pope 
 Adrian IV., donating Ireland to King 
 Henry of England in the year 1155, or at 
 any other time. 
 
 In another portion of his work, Dr. Lin- 
 gard calls attention to the difference be- 
 tween Salisbury's statement concerning the 
 terms of the Bull, and that document itself. 
 Thus : Salisbury, who most assuredly should 
 have been familiar with the tenor of a Bull 
 which he says was given " at his request," 
 calls that document " a concession of inheri- 
 tance," but the Adrian Bull contains no 
 clause of any such nature. 
 
 Admitting even that Salisbury conveyed 
 the Papal document to England, what use 
 
 did King Henry make of it? That mon- 
 arch made all his preparations to invade 
 Ireland and he went there, leaving the Salis- 
 bury Bull in the secret Archives of Winches- 
 ter Castle ! A sovereign who was "armed" 
 with such a document, would most 
 assuredly have carried his credentials for in- 
 vading a neighboring country with him, 
 but as Henry did not do so, it is only fair to 
 presume that the spurious Bull had not yet 
 been concocted ! 
 
 After a mock funeral and a mock burial 
 which continued for nearly twenty years, 
 the Bull (we are told by Cambrensis and his 
 copyists) was read with great solemnity in a 
 Council of Irish Bishops conveniently held 
 nowhere, on which Lingard sarcastically re- 
 marks : " We will allow ourselves to think 
 to what degree this document served to 
 convince the Prelates that the King was the 
 legitimate sovereign of Ireland." 
 
 It is clear, therefore, from Dr. Lingard 's 
 testimony, that any Pope who would be com- 
 pelled to smile at the hypocrisy of a mon- 
 arch's petition, would not be likely to grant 
 the prayer of it. And it is also beyond be- 
 lief that Pope Adrian would hand over Ire? 
 land to a foreign king, merely because a 
 simple Priest casually made the suggestion. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF FATHER MORRIS. 
 
 In his "Life of St. Patrick," recently 
 published, Rev. W. B. Morris, of England, 
 in alluding to English-Irish histories of Ire- 
 land (like that of O'Halloran, alluded to 
 above), says : 
 
 For seven hundred years England has been 
 before the world as spokesman for Ireland, 
 from the days of QIRALDUS and MAT- 
 THEW PAKIS, the so-called history of Ireland 
 it went forth to the world, was in great part 
 written for diplomatic purposes, and each false- 
 hood became the parent of a brood. 
 
 The same writer, in a passing allusion to 
 the bogus Adrian Bull, says : 
 
 The spurioua Ball of Adrian IV., without 
 name of sender or receiver, unsigned, unsealed, 
 and undelivered, it was worthless as an ecclesias- 
 tical or political instrument. Its venom and that 
 of other kindred forgeries lay in the motives 
 which were supposed to influence the Popes. 
 Those epistles, well worthy of the title of False 
 Decrttals, that condemned the Church and na- 
 tion of SS. Cehus, Malachy, and Laurence, once
 
 84 
 
 THK POPE AND IRKLANH. 
 
 entrenched in the page B vf the Court historians 
 of Henry II.. became the text of honest sat well 
 M dishonest writer* in subsequent centuries. 
 
 There are several other writers from 
 whose works we also could extract testimony 
 of the same character aa that which we have 
 from the authorities already quoted, 
 
 and all tending to show the fraudulent 
 character of both the Adrian and Alexander 
 Bulls, but we think the testimony already 
 produced is sufficient to satisfy our readers 
 on that point, hence we will introduce an- 
 other aspect of this historical question in 
 the next chapter. 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 Evidence of the Fraudulent Character of the Adrian and Alexander Bulls. An 
 An iljsis of the Text of Each. Criticisms Proving their Fictitious Origin. New 
 Light on the Great Forgery of the Twelfth Century. 
 
 Now that we have presented our readers 
 with a vast amount of extrinsic proof clear- 
 ly and conclusively demonstrating the 
 dpurious character of the Adrian and Alex- 
 ander Bulls, let us introduce these docu- 
 ments themselves in evidence, carefully 
 analyze their contents, and thereby add 
 additional strength to the proof already 
 adduced against the possibility of their ever 
 having emanated from the Popes of Rome 
 whose names they bear. 
 
 Before doing this, however, there are a 
 few matters of general interest concerning 
 these documents, the knowledge of which 
 will give our readers a fuller insight into 
 the fact that both the Adrian and Alexander 
 Bulls were forged by one and the. tame per- 
 aoit. This assertion is borne out by the 
 following somewhat singular coincidences 
 when it is known that there are sixteen years 
 difference in their dates. 
 
 Both Bulls are similar in title, and both 
 omit the name of the person to whom they 
 were supposed to be addressed. Both Bui s 
 when first published had neither place, 
 date nor year to designate the city from 
 which they were promulgated, the time of 
 their publication, or the name of the persi u 
 for whom they were intended. 
 
 Both Bulls mention the "Peter-pence 
 collection," although the Adrian Bull is 
 supposed to be sixteen years older than the 
 Alexander fabrication, and it would require 
 in -re than ordinary credulity to believe that 
 Pope Alexander would reiterate the 
 " Peter-pence collection" in a Bull issued 
 
 in 1172, when he must have been well aware 
 that not a cent had ever be< n jj<tid in re- 
 sponse to a Bull supposed to have been 
 issued somewhere about the years 1151, 1154 
 or 1156 by Pope Adrian the Fourth. 
 
 B ,th Bulls manifest a most malignant 
 hatred towards the ever-faithful Catholic 
 people of Ireland, a hatred which could 
 never have lodged in the mind of any 
 Prelate who ever held the supereminent 
 position of Vicar of Christ. These spurious 
 documents, issued in the twelfth century, 
 speak precisely in the same strain of slander 
 concerning the "ignorance," "rudeness," 
 'viciousness," and "disobedience to laws'' 
 of the Irish people, as the London Times 
 and all the other Irish-hating newspapers 
 of England and elsewhere have constantly 
 employed in portraying the "difficulty" 
 which they experienced in the way of 
 "settling the Irish question" during the 
 past eighty- eight years. 
 
 The tone of both these Bulls is thorough- 
 ly anti-Catholic and British, and although 
 Pope Adrian can be accused of being an 
 Englishman, no such charge can be brnught 
 against Pope Alexander, yet the hatied of 
 the Catholic people of Ireland which the 
 forger injected into the spurious Alexander 
 K>dl, is even more intense, ferocious and 
 foul than the denunciations fulminated in 
 the fraudulent document attributed to 
 Pope Adrian IV. 
 
 lu addition to the anti-Papal tone of 
 these documents, as well as the omission of
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 85 
 
 very important features, without which no 
 Vatican diploma can be considered complete 
 or possessed of official ecclesiastical authority, 
 we also desire to call the attention of our 
 readers to the fact that in the B'dlariinn 
 Koin mum (the volume which contains the 
 Latin text of not only the yi-.iiuine Bulls 
 isssued by the different Popes -but also 
 such as may have been attributed to them) 
 there are upwards of twenty documents 
 which we will now proceed to classify in 
 order to show that the spurious Bull by 
 which King Henry and his successors on the 
 English throne laid claim to Ireland, was 
 fabricated deliberately for the purpose of 
 making a false claim to that island. 
 
 From the volume of the Bullarium lio- 
 ifKtnum under examination we glean the 
 following very important evidence : 
 
 All the genuine Bulls attributed to Pope 
 Adrian IV. give the years and the date of 
 the month, in which they were issued. 
 
 [The spurious Bull is without bothj. 
 
 All the genuine Bulls are attested as hav- 
 ing been issued from some certain city or 
 place, such as Rome, Castellana Civitas, 
 Civita Vecohia, Benevento, Lateran, Etc. 
 
 [The doubtful "donation" Bull is entire- 
 ly defective in this regard.] 
 
 All the genuine Bulls bear the proper 
 official attestation of their ecclesiastical 
 character thus : 
 
 Given at St Peter's, Rome, by the hands 
 of Roland, Cardinal Priest and Chancellor 
 of the Holy Roman Church, on the 7th of 
 the kalends of March, in the 3rd indiction, 
 1155th 5 ear since the Incarnation of the 
 Lord, and in the first year of the Pontificate 
 of our Lord Pope Adrian IV. 
 
 OK THUS: 
 
 Given at Civita Vecchia by the hands of 
 Roland, Cardinal Priest and Chancellor of 
 the Holy Roman Church, in the year of the 
 Incarnation of the Lord U55, 5th indiction, 
 3rd of the month of October, and second 
 year of our Lord Pope Adrian IV. 
 
 [The fictitious "donation" document, 
 fraudulently concocted and forged by order 
 of King Henry II. of England, contains no 
 name whatever of Cardinal or Chancellor, 
 no date, no month, no place, and no allu- 
 sion to the year of its issuance or the era of 
 
 the Pontificate of any Pope that ever suc- 
 ceeded St. Peter !] 
 
 All the genuine Bulls have the names <-f 
 the individuals to whom they are addressed 
 set forth in full after these forms : 
 
 "ADRIAN, Bishop, Servant of the iSer- 
 vants of God, to his venerable Brother 
 HENRY, Patriarch of Graden, to his Canon- 
 ical successors for ever." 
 
 "ADRIAN, Bishop, Servant of the Ser- 
 vants of God to his beloved Sons ANM s 
 Arch priest of the Church of Bellunus, and 
 to his Brothers, present and to come, to be 
 substituted according to the Canons for 
 ever." 
 
 [The bogus Bull concocted by King 
 Henry II. of England, omits entirely to 
 name " the beloved son" to whom thespuii- 
 ous document was supposed to have been 
 addressed !] 
 
 All the genuine Bulls, with the exception 
 of four, are not only signed by Pope Adrian 
 IV., but are also attested by several of the 
 Cardinals as well. Some of the Consistorial 
 Bulls have the names of six Cardinals at- 
 tached and others are signed by fourteen 
 Cardinals. The Bulls signed only by the 
 Pope conclude thus : 
 
 " I, ADRIAN, Bishop of the Catholic 
 Church, have subscribed." Then follows 
 the Pope's seal, and, on the left hand cor- 
 ner : Given &c. &c. 
 
 [ The bogus Bull King Henry concocted 
 has neither the Pontifical signature nor the 
 Pope^sseal, nor does it pretend to have ever 
 emanated from any special person or from 
 any particular place !] 
 
 Among the documents in the Bullarium 
 Romanum, the editor of the edition of 1739 
 introduces a Letter supposed to have eman- 
 ated from Pope Adrian IV. to some English 
 King, no name of said British monarch 
 being given. The compiler of these ecclesi- 
 astical documents ia careful, however, to 
 cast off all responsibility -for the genuine- 
 ness of this document from his own should- 
 ers, by printing a footnote to the page on 
 which the spurious document is printed, in 
 which he says that it is given only on the 
 authority of the falsifying Giraldus Cam- 
 brensis, and the unreliable Matthew of 
 Paris. The document in question is the
 
 86 
 
 THE POPE AND IHELAND. 
 
 bogus Bull whose defects and omissions we 
 have already carefully defined and exposed. 
 
 Let us now turn to another volume, 
 namely the Patrologia of Migne,* where- 
 in may be consulted two hundred and 
 forty-seven documents which are attributed 
 to Pope Adrian IV. Of these some are 
 fragments, and all are papers of transitory 
 importance, the originals of which it was 
 not necessary to preserve, whereas the so- 
 called "Bull," which we have now under 
 consideration, was King Henry's title-deed 
 to an entire kingdom. 
 
 It is also to be remarked that in each and 
 every one of these documents (with the 
 exception of the unaddressed, unsigned and 
 evidently spurious " Bull"), we find an 
 intelligible, legal statement of the subject 
 matter, with the proper names, titles and 
 addresses of the persons concerned. 
 
 The libraries and archives of Italy, Ger- 
 many, France, Spain, England, Scotland, 
 Poland and Greece, in fact of every then 
 Christian country, except Ireland, have de- 
 livered up their evidence to the active and 
 powerful administration of Pope Adrian IV. 
 for insertion in this work, and each docu- 
 ment, whether complete or mutilated, 
 bears the stamp of that jealous defence of 
 the established rights of the Church which 
 is seen in so marked a manner in all the 
 writings of this Pontiff, and to all of which 
 the spurious Bull fabricated by Kins; 
 Henry's order forms such a marked con- 
 trast. 
 
 Leaving aside and entirely out of consid- 
 eration, however, any of the "foregoing 
 reasons for refusing to acknowledge the 
 genuine character of the Adrian and Alex- 
 ander Bulls, let us call the attention of our 
 readers to the natural equity of the case 
 under consideration, and ask : What proof 
 has ever been adduced that these Popes 
 ever issued these documents ? None. 
 What Cardinal or Roman Chancellor ever 
 attested to these as Vatican documents? 
 Not one. What Irish Prelates have ad- 
 mitted them to be genuine I Not one. Is 
 it possible, therefore, that any Pope could is- 
 
 * Vol. 188: C.L.XXXVIII. 
 
 sue so important a document without it being 
 known in Rome or ever acknowledged by 
 the Hierarchy of Ireland as the work of the 
 Holy Father ? These Bulls have been pro- 
 nounced false by Prelates, Priests and the 
 Irish people, and they as the parties most 
 interested are the best judges in the case. 
 
 In making a critical examination of the 
 Bull attributed to Pope Adrian IV., the 
 first question that naturally arises is : 
 Would King Henry IL have hesitated to 
 perpetrate such an outrageous forgery? 
 Let us answer this question by undoubted 
 evidence. No man who lived contempor- 
 aneously with Henry Plantaganet knew 
 him more intimately than Cambrensis, and 
 this is the character this conspirator against 
 truth gives of that master of diplomatic 
 duplicity: 
 
 " By a certain natural inconstancy he was a 
 transgressor of his word, lor as often as he got 
 into a tight place or difficulty, he preferred to 
 repent of his word rather than of his act, and he 
 more readily nullified his word than hid act."+ 
 
 The plain meaning of this extract is that 
 beneath a deceptive exterior, there beat in 
 Henry's breast a heart that was capable of 
 descending to the vilest artifices, and of 
 sporting with his honor and his veracity. No 
 person could rely upon his word or place 
 any confidence whatever in his promises. 
 He justified his natural passion for duplicity 
 by the maxim that in order to carry out his 
 nefarious schemes it was better to break his 
 word and sully his honor than to fail in 
 reaching the goal of his ambition. 
 
 This double-dealing and chicanery was so 
 marked a trait in King Henry's character 
 that Cardinal Vivian who knew him in- 
 timately and long pays him this not very 
 flattering compliment : "I have never seen 
 a man lie so audaciously."^ "His anger 
 was that of a mad man ; his fury that of a 
 wild beast. "+ The other venal traits of 
 Henry's character have already been well 
 described previously so now we will turn 
 again to the forged document itself. 
 
 Having thus given our readers a gen- 
 eral insight into some of the fatal defects of 
 
 t Opp. V. p. p. 304. 
 
 fEpibt St. Thomas, 3-6. + EpUt 66. 715, 
 Peter de Biois.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 87 
 
 the Adrian Bull, we might stop right here 
 and rest our case, as we have already ad- 
 duced evidence sufficient to prove to every 
 intelligent and impartial reader that Pope 
 Adrian never saw or heard of such a docu- 
 ment as that forged and fraudulently circu- 
 lated by certain disreputable hirelings of the 
 second King Henry of England. But in 
 order that not a loop-hole may be left 
 wherein any captious anti Catholic scribe of 
 the future can hang a doubt, we will now 
 place this spurious document on the MONI- 
 TOR'S dissecting table and disjoint it for the 
 edification of our readers. 
 
 THE SO CALLED ADRIAN BULL 
 
 as copied from Cambrensis by the historian 
 Leland, that being the original copy of this 
 doubtful document. This notorious fabri- 
 cation begins with this sentence : 
 "ADRIAN, bishop, servant of the servants of 
 God, to his dearest son in Christ, 
 the illustrious king of England, 
 greeting, and apostolic benedic- 
 tion." 
 
 It will be observed that this Bull is ad- 
 dressed to no person in particular. " The 
 king of England" is an unmeaning title 
 when the Pope calls that personage " his 
 dearest Son in Christ," as, in the twelfth 
 century, it took a couple of months to travel 
 from Rome to England, and "the king" 
 for whom the Bull was intended, might die 
 while the Bull was in course of preparation 
 and transition, and another king or queen 
 even, might ascend the English throne in 
 the interval. 
 
 Rome is far too wise to risk the occur- 
 rence of any such misapplication of so im- 
 portant a document as a genuine Bull, by 
 omitting the name of the individual in 
 whose interest or for whose information, 
 guidance or instruction, it may have been 
 promulgated. Hence, even in the very in- 
 iatory passage of the spurious document 
 under consideration, there occurs an omis- 
 sion that, of itself, furnishes sufficient 
 evidence that the forged instrument, which 
 was first published by the untruthful Cam- 
 brensis, came from an evil source, was 
 manufactured for a most malicious purpose 
 and was never suggested, accorded, signed, 
 sealed nor delivered by the Pope who reigned 
 in the bee of St. Peter under the pontifical 
 title of Adrian IV. 
 
 FIRST PARAGRAPH OF THE SPURIOUS BULL. 
 
 Full laudably and profitably hath your mag- 
 nificence conceived the design of propagating 
 your glorious renown on earth, and completing 
 your reward of eternal happiness in heaven ; 
 while, as a Catholic prince, you are intent on 
 enlarging the borders of the Church, teaching 
 the truth of the Christian faith to the ignorant 
 and rude, exterminating the roots of vice from 
 the field of the Lord, and for the more con- 
 venient execution of this purpose, requiring the 
 counsel and favor of the apostolic see. In 
 which, the maturer your deliberation, and the 
 greater the discretion of your procedure, by 
 so much the happier we trust, will be your pro- 
 gress, with the assistance of the Lord ; as all 
 things are used to come to a prosperous end and 
 issue, which take their beginning from the ar- 
 dour of faith and the love of religion. 
 
 The document from which the foregoing 
 extract is made was supposed to have been is- 
 sued in the year 1151-4-5 or. 6. Let us ad- 
 mit that it was written in 1156, less than two 
 years after Henry became King, and during 
 which time he did nothing of a beneficial 
 nature that would entitle him to the eulogy 
 of having achieved any " glorious renown" 
 whatever. Later on in the reign of King 
 Henry, when he had invaded Ireland and 
 had defeated his enemies in Scotland, there 
 might be some truth in saying that King 
 Henry had gained " glorious renown," but 
 such a laudatory phrase could never have 
 been used by Pope Adrian in alluding to 
 that English monarch even as long as two 
 years after his occupancy of the English 
 throne. 
 
 Neither Popes, Bishops nor Priests ever 
 assume that any living man's salvation is 
 secure, even though that individual may be 
 King of England. God's fiat alone fixes 
 that. Invading Ireland even for the pur- 
 pose of reforming " the ignorant and rude" 
 Irish could not add a feather's weight to- 
 wards completing King Henry's "reward of 
 eternal happiness in Heaven." Almighty 
 God never blesses injustice, nor does the 
 Catholic Church canonize those who per- 
 petrate it. Hence, when the forger so for- 
 cibly asserted the saintly character of Henry, 
 and claimed that his invasion of Ireland 
 would " complete" that monarch's "reward 
 of eternal happiness," he disclosed the 
 cloven foot of King Henry's amanuensis
 
 88 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 beneath the cloak of some pretended official 
 of the Vatican. 
 
 King Henry, we are plausibly told in 
 the foregoing first paragraph of the ficti- 
 tious Adrian Bull, was "intent on enlarg- 
 ing the borders of the Church" in Ireland, 
 hut how could this be possible ? Pope 
 Adrian knew full well (but the forger did 
 not) that the Catholic Church occupied all 
 Ireland ; his Holiness was well aware that 
 heresy had never raised its hideous head in 
 that notable holy Island ; and the Vicar of 
 Christ had hundreds of pilgrims from Ireland 
 to visit him every year who could tell him 
 with truth that Ireland's heart beat constant- 
 ly in unison with that of the Vicar of Christ 
 whether the Pontiff was called Celestine 
 or Adrian 1 In the reign of Pope Adrian 
 IV., Ireland was the daughter and Rome 
 was the Mother, just as that lovely land 
 of Catholic missionaries is to-day under the 
 glorious Pontificate of Pope Leo XIII. No 
 schism has ever separated Rome and Ire- 
 land. The golden chain of Catholic Faith 
 whose first link was forged by St. Patrick, 
 on Tara's historic hill, has been growing, 
 link by link, as centuries have rolled on, 
 until, at the present day, the chain of filial 
 love and Catholic faith not only binds to 
 Rome the people of Ireland, but also the 
 tens of millions of those Irish exiles, their 
 children and their children's children, who 
 dwell in every continent of the world and 
 on every island throughout the universe ! 
 
 There never has been a time, therefore, 
 when any Pope could justly commission a 
 licentious layman with a wife and an illicit 
 lady-love, known as Fair Rosamond, to go 
 over to Ireland to " enlarge the borders of 
 the Church" that was already universal on the 
 Island, or to " exterminate the roots of 
 vice from the field of the Lord" where no 
 genus of the weeds of heresy or Protestantism 
 ever prospered I 
 
 What " vices" did Henry discover in Ire- 
 l.ind which he found it necessary to exter- 
 minate ? In answering this question it is 
 amusing to notice the "vices" which both 
 vicious English historians and Irish writers 
 under English pay, set forth as so many 
 black spots on the character of 'the Irish 
 
 people. It was only in 1152 four years 
 before the latest date of the forged Adrian 
 Bull that Cardinal Paparon, as the Legate 
 of Pope Eugenius III., had visited Ireland. 
 Three thousand ecclesiastics assembled by 
 his direction in the town of Drogheda ; * 
 four Palliums were conferred on the Arch- 
 bishops of Armagh, Cashel, Dublin and 
 Tuam; the celebration of Easter was settled 
 in accordance with the Pontiff's desire, and 
 all the affairs of the Church in Ireland were 
 most amicably arranged to the entire satisfac- 
 tion of both the Papal Legate and the three 
 thousand Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, 
 and the great body of the Regular and Se- 
 cular Clergy who met on that memorable 
 occasion ! 
 
 Are we to believe, therefore, that in four 
 short years, the successor of Pope Eugenius 
 IIL could write to an English layman of 
 immoral character that the " borders of the 
 Church" in Ireland needed " enlarging," 
 or that it was necessary for a layman to go 
 over to Ireland in order to "teach the truth 
 of the Christian faith" in a land not one- 
 fifth of the size of California, in which there 
 were three thousand Catholic ecclesiastics, 
 and each of them in complete religious har- 
 mony with the Vicar of Christ in Rome ? 
 
 When our Blessed Redeemer selected his 
 Apostles they were laymen, but before He 
 sent them to " teach all nations," He filled 
 them with the grace of the Holy Ghost and 
 consecrated them specially to His service. 
 And again, when Pope Celestine selected 
 St. Patrick to be the Apostle of Ireland he 
 consecrated him a Bishop. Yet in the face 
 of these prominent precedents, we are asked 
 to believe that Pope Adrian selected a lay- 
 man of loose morals and lax religious fer- 
 vor, to "enlarge" the Catholic Church in a 
 l*nd where it was universal, and to " teach 
 the true faith" to a people whose fellow- 
 countrymen had helped to bring all Europe 
 into the one true fold of Christ ! Those 
 persons who try to believe such a superla- 
 tively ridiculous proposition as that Pope 
 Adrian ever commissioned King Henry to 
 " convert" Ireland, are merely the dupes of 
 their own ignorance or their intense hatred 
 
 "Ireland'* History of Ireland, Vol. I., p. 8.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 89 
 
 of Ireland and the Catholic Church com- 
 bined. 
 
 So far from the Church in Ireland need- 
 ing "reforming" in the year 1156, there 
 was no country in the world where it was 
 better organized. The Archbishop of 
 Armagh had ten Suffragan Bishops under 
 him ; the Archbishop of Dublin had live ; 
 the Archbishop of Cashel had twelve, and 
 the Archbishop of Tuam had seven Suffra- 
 gans. Christian O'Conarchi, Bishop of Lis- 
 more, was Pope Adrian's Irish Legate ; 
 the saintly Gelasius (subsequently canon- 
 ized) was Primate ; and in every portion of 
 that Island of Saints the sweet breath of 
 God's blessing rested on the religious labors 
 of Priests, Sisters and people alike ! Ab- 
 beys and monasteries dotted every hill and 
 valley from Antrim to Kerry and from 
 Down to Mayo, and, when we recall the 
 fact that neither King Henry nor one of 
 his hireling satellites ever enlarged " the 
 borders of the Church in Ireland ' by a 
 hair's breadth, nor " taught the truth of 
 the Christian faith" to anybody ; nor ex- 
 terminated a single " vice" from that most 
 Roman, most Catholic and most Papal land 
 in all the world it is fair to conclude that 
 Pope Adrian never sent any such message 
 to King Henry, especially when the Church 
 in Ireland was under the ecclesiastical 
 jurisdiction of a Papal Legate, four Arch- 
 bishops and thirty-four Bishops, assisted by 
 2,961 Ecclesiastics of every rank known to 
 the Catholic Church. These facts also fur- 
 nish strong evidence of the fictitious na- 
 ture of the miscalled Adrian Bull. 
 
 SECOND PARAGRAPH OF THE SPURIOUS BULL. 
 
 There is indeed no doubt but that Ireland, 
 and all the islands on which Christ the son of 
 righteousness hath shone, and which have re- 
 ceived the doctrines of the Christian faith, do 
 belong to the jurisdiction of St. Peter, and of 
 the Holy Roman Church, as your excellency 
 also doth acknowledge. And, therefore, we are 
 the more solicitous to propagate the righteous 
 plantation of faith in this land, and the branch 
 acceptable to God, as we have the secret con- 
 viction of conscience that this is more especially 
 our bounden duty. 
 
 The English forger who concocted the 
 foregoing extract makes Pope Adrian say 
 
 something which no Pope either before 
 or since the Pontificate of Adrian IV. 
 ever uttered. 
 
 Let us now put this paragraph in the 
 spurious Bull to the crucial test which truth 
 possesses for all such fabrications, and the 
 first important discovery we make discloses 
 the fact that Christianity had no part what- 
 ever in the island possessions alluded to 
 therein, for the potent reason that the 
 power of Constantine, in his political rela- 
 tions, were precisely the same in Pagan 
 islands as well as in those whose inhabi- 
 tants had embraced Christianity. Pope 
 Adrian of course, was well aware of this 
 fact, hence it is an insult to his erudition, 
 experience and well-known diplomatic 
 genius to assert that he ever wrote such 
 an absurd paragraph as the above. 
 
 Again, it is well-known that Constantine 
 had no control whatever over any islands 
 save those that were attached to, or de- 
 pended on, his Empire. Was Ireland such 
 an island ? Most assuredly not ! The Ro- 
 mans neither conquered Ireland nor is there 
 a chart or map extant which shows it to 
 have been within the territorial boundaries 
 of their dominions. This very important 
 fact must have been familiar to Constantine, 
 who passed much of his time in insular 
 Britain, and the fact was also equally well 
 known to Pope Adrian, although the Eng- 
 lishman who forged this paragraph in the 
 bogus Bull seems to have been not so well 
 posted in ancient history. 
 
 And again, it is a fact easily susceptible 
 of proof that the Popes never took advan- 
 tage of the donation of Constantine for 
 Rome, for the Italian continent, nor for the 
 adjacent islands. Those who have any 
 curiosity to test this assertion can do so by 
 consulting the Letters of the Codex Caro- 
 linus, the authenticity of which is beyond 
 controversy ; or they can examine the 
 Regesta of St. Gregory the Great, and then 
 they can pore over the Imperial Diplomas 
 from the 9th to the loth centuries. 
 
 Seeing, therefore, that preceding Popes 
 refrained from making use of the dona- 
 tion of Constantine, it is not at all likely 
 that Pope Adrian who was well skilled in 
 Canon Law and very familiar with all
 
 90 
 
 TUB POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 Pontifical documents of diplomatic character, 
 would insert in a Bull a statement which 
 every official in the Vatican could have at 
 once pronounced incorrect. 
 
 We have already intimated in our criti- 
 cism of other phases of this spurious Bull 
 that the Adrian and Alexander documents 
 were not forged until some time after 1172, 
 the year in which King Henry acknowl- 
 edged the feudal sovereignly of the Pope 
 over the Kingdom of England by the 
 oath which he took in the Cathedral at 
 Avranches. The foregoing paragraph con- 
 firms our opinion on this point, for the 
 reason that prior to taking the oath at 
 Avranches King Henry could never have ad- 
 mitted, much less suggested as the above 
 paragraph intimates that the Holy See had 
 jurisdiction over " all the Islands," for the 
 
 very potent reason that Henry would there- 
 by have compromised and endangered the 
 Kingdom of England itself ! No ! King 
 Henry was too shrewd and too selfish a 
 monarch ever to have suggested or acknowl- 
 edged to the Holy See in the year 1154 or 
 "55, or '56, that " all the Islands * * * do be- 
 long to the jurisdiction of St. Peter and of 
 the Holy Roman Church." Hence it is 
 very clear that the forgery of the fictitious 
 Adnan Bull was not meditated until afttr 
 King Henry had taken the oath at 
 Avranches, when the Pontiff whose name 
 was forged in the document had been dead 
 for thirteen years ! This point makes an 
 additional link in the chain of evidence 
 which will help to convict King Henry of 
 having committed the great fraud of the 
 twelfth century. 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 Intrinsic Evidence of the Fraudulent Character of the Adrian and Alexander Bulls. An 
 Analysis of the Text of Each. Criticisms Proving their Fictitious Origin. New 
 Light on the Great Forgery of the Twelfth Century. 
 
 THIRD PARAGRAPH OF THE ''ADRIAN BULL. 
 
 Yon then, most dear son in Christ, have sig- 
 nified to us your desire to enter into the island of 
 Ireland, in order to reduce the people to obedi- 
 ence auto laws, and to extirpate the plants of 
 vice ; and that you are willing to pay from each 
 house a yearly pension of one penny to St. 
 Peter, and that you will preserve the rights of 
 the churches of this land whole and inviolate. 
 We therefore, with that grace and acceptance 
 suited to your pious and laudable design, and 
 favorably assenting to your petition, do hold it 
 good and acceptable, that, for extending the 
 borders of the church, restraining the progress of 
 vice, for the correction of manners, the planting 
 of virtue, and the increase of religion, you enter 
 this inland, and execute therein whatever shall 
 pertain to the honor of God and the welfare of 
 the land ; and that the people of this land re- 
 ceive you honorably, and reverence you as their 
 lord : the rights of their churches still remaining 
 sacred and inviolate ; and saving to St. Peter 
 the annual pension of one penny from every 
 house. 
 
 The idea pervading the first sentence in 
 
 the foregoing paragraph clearly intimates 
 that Pope Adrian had received a letter 
 from King Henry in which the English 
 monarch "signified" to the reigning Pontiff 
 his desire " to enter into the island of Ire- 
 land." The question naturally arises, 
 therefore, as to when, where, and by whom 
 was this letter sent to the Pope ? Neither 
 Cambrensis nor any other English chron- 
 icler record a word of its text ; no Irish, 
 English or Continental historian ever pub- 
 lished it. The very name of the officials 
 who carried it to the Pope (if ever such 
 officials existed in the flesh), have never 
 been known to a human being inside or out- 
 side of England ! Was this letter a myth ? 
 It looks very much as if the English forger 
 wanted some kind of a document apparently 
 emanating from King Henry, whereon to 
 base a bogus Bull, and he very conveniently 
 inserted in the spurious document an 
 intimation concerning a letter which had
 
 THE POPE AND IUELAND. 
 
 91 
 
 no existence save in his own over- vivid im- 
 agination ! Thus forgery had to be support- 
 ed by forgery, just as falsehood has to lean 
 on untruth for support. 
 
 The second, or ' Peter- pence" clause of 
 the above extract we have already devoted 
 several pages to, and our readers are no 
 doubt satisfied already on that point. 
 
 LAST PARAGRAPH OF THE ADRIAN BULL. 
 
 If then you be resolved to carry the design you 
 have conceived into effectual execution, study to 
 form this nation to virtuous manners ; and labor 
 by yourself, and others whom you shall judge 
 meet for this work, in faith, word, and life, that 
 the Church may be there adorned, that the re- 
 ligion of the Christian faith may be planted and 
 grow up, and that all things pertaining to the 
 honor cf God, and the salvation of souls, be so 
 ordered by you, that you may be entitled to the 
 fulness of eternal reward from God, and obtain 
 a glorious renown on earth throughout all ages. 
 
 [No date, no ivitnesses, no seal, and no 
 signature]. 
 
 How the English forger must have chuck- 
 led as he put the finishing touches (in the 
 shape of the above paragraph) to the docu- 
 ment he wrote at King Henry's dictation ! 
 He must have fairly boiled over with British 
 glee at the successful manner in which his 
 Britannic Majesty had outwitted the Pope, 
 circumvented the Irish Church, and pulled 
 the wool over the eyes of every person in 
 the whole Christian world ! 
 
 King Henry, the gross voluptuary, the 
 immoral sensualist, the disgusting dishonor- 
 er of hig wife, was selected as the model 
 man in all Europe to form the Irish nation 
 to virtuous manners! Spirit of Christian 
 Charity, let us bury our just indignation 
 beneath the holy shadow of thy wings ! 
 
 The world has read of "setting a thief to 
 catch a thief," but we think this is the first 
 instance on record where a royal rake, a 
 licentious libertine and a noted liar was ever 
 selected as an apostle to cany the typical 
 palms of Catholic morality to a virtuous 
 people! And persons pretend that the 
 Pope of Rome, the Vicar of Christ, did this? 
 Never ! The tombs of the Saints of Ireland 
 would open, and the blessed dead come 
 forth, in order to vindicate the virtue of Ire- 
 land's sons and daughters against such a 
 vile calumny ! 
 
 And the:t, not satisfied with crowning 
 himself modeler of Irish morality, King 
 Henry had his amanuensis write that he 
 was to act as the Pope's substitute in ap- 
 pointing other men of his own choosing to 
 " adorn" the Irish Church, and to "plant" 
 the Christian faith ! Shade of St. Patrick, 
 what impudent irony ! Nice ornaments to 
 ''adorn" the Church in Ireland where the 
 savage Strongbow, and the murderous crew 
 that followed his blood-stained trail in the 
 work of slaughtering the unarmed Irish 
 people, pilfering their property, destroying 
 their churches, robbing religious shrines, 
 and pulling down the very crosses which 
 Irish Saints had erected for the glory of 
 God! 
 
 This English prince of putrid character 
 became according to the text of the forged 
 Bull a higher ecclesiastical dignitary than 
 the Papal Legate in Ireland ! Henry was 
 the spiritual superior of the whole Irish 
 Hierarchy ! The 2,963 Regular and Secu- 
 lar priests then in Ireland, became merely 
 puppets in the hands of this self -elected 
 Papal Patriarch of the British Isles ! 
 
 Now is it possible that human credulity 
 is so pliable as to be stretched to that ten- 
 sion where people can be made to believe 
 that any Pope of Rome ever gave a mal- 
 odorous monarch such ecclesiastical powers 
 in the Church of God ? Three or four years 
 previously the same Pope - who is said to 
 have made Henry his Vice-gerent for the 
 purpose of " planting" faith and virtue in 
 Ireland sent Cardinal Paparo over to that 
 portion of the flock of Christ, for the pur- 
 pose of honoring the Hierarchy by confer- 
 ring the pallium of ecclesiastical jurisdiction 
 upon four of their number ! Is it not 
 passingly strange that Pope Adrian should 
 show such filial affection for the Irish 
 Church in 1152, and then three or four 
 years later ask a lascivious English lay- 
 man to invade Ireland so that the "Island 
 of Saints" and the " Mother of Catholic 
 Missionaries," might be "formed to vir- 
 tuous manners" and " Christian faith plant- 
 ed" in the land of the glorious St. Patrick, 
 St. Columbkille, and hundreds of other 
 saintly Irishmen who were Apostles of 
 Christianity in every portion of the world !
 
 92 
 
 Till: POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 It would ba a vile calumny on the character 
 of the Vicar of Christ to think for a mo- 
 ment that Pope Adrian IV. ever devised 
 such a spurious document as that which 
 contains such a transparent falsehood. 
 
 THK ALEXANDER FORGERY. 
 
 Having thoroughly dissected and analyzed 
 the spurious Adrian Bull, let us now turn 
 to the contemplation of the Alexander 
 forgery, which commences thus : 
 
 " ALEXANDER, bishop, servant of the servant* 
 of God, to his most dear Son in 
 Christ, the illustrious King of 
 England, health and apostolic 
 benediction." 
 
 Like its predecessor in perfidy, this docu- 
 ment is addressed to nobody in particular, 
 so that any King of England might claim it 
 as addressed to him. Then this royal 
 concoction continues : 
 
 " Forasmuch as these things, which have been 
 on good reasons granted by our predecessors, de- 
 serve to be confirmed in the fullest manner, and 
 considering the grant of the dominion of the 
 realm of Ireland by the venerable Pope Adrian, 
 we, pursuing his footsteps, do ratify and confirm 
 the same (reserving to St. Peter, and to the 
 Holy Roman Church as well in England as in 
 Ireland, the yearly pension of one penny from 
 every house), provided that the abominations of 
 the land being removed, that barbarous people, 
 Christians only in name, may, by your means, 
 be reformed, at.d their lives and conversation 
 mended, so that their disordered church being 
 thus reduced to regular discipline, that nation 
 may, with the name of Christians, be so in act 
 and deed." 
 
 [No date, no seal, no witneis, no signa- 
 ture]. 
 
 In the whole range of anti -Catholic and 
 an ti Irish literature, we know of no docu- 
 ment more diabolical in its hatred than the 
 foregoing. It bears the birth-marks of its 
 British parentage upon its face Its prom- 
 inent prejudice against the faithful Catholic 
 people of Ireland, proves at once that it 
 must have emanated from some English 
 hireling who hated that race. 
 
 Abbe MacGeoghegan was most assuredly 
 right in his conjecture when he said that a 
 comparison between these spurious bulls 
 attributed to Popes Adrian and Alexander, 
 with the treatise on " Ireland Conquered," 
 
 issued about the same time by Giraldus 
 CambrensU, would indicate a great similarity 
 of style between them ; and if they were not 
 written by the same writer, it is very evi- 
 dent that they were concocted for the pur- 
 pose of maintaining each other mutually, 
 and thereby the more readily deceive an 
 unsuspecting public. 
 
 HIT) POPE ALEXANDER GRANT THIS BL'LL? 
 
 Let us see ; and in order to answer this 
 question let us take a brief retrospective 
 glance at the relations which existed be- 
 tween Pope Alexander III. and King Hen- 
 ry, whom that Pontiff must have looked 
 upon as more than half a heretic. 
 
 In 1164, only eight years priur to the 
 date when the bogus Bull is supposed to 
 have been issued, Roger Hoveden says that 
 King Henry (whom Alexander is made to 
 call " his dear son in Christ") issued a mos* 
 harsh and heretical edict against the very 
 Pontiff from whom Henry afterwards de- 
 clared he procured the Bull ! 
 
 In 1166, only six years prior to the date giv- 
 en to the spurious document, King Henry not 
 only proclaimed his allegiance to the anti- 
 pope Guido, but he also had laws enacted* 
 by which it was strictly forbidden, under 
 heavy penalties, to obey the Pontiff known 
 as Pope Alexander III , or to give obedi- 
 ence to his commands ! Such were the 
 immediate antecedents of that King who 
 received from the Pope he cursed and con- 
 demned, a Rescript authorizing him to go 
 over to Ireland and to " reform the barbar- 
 ous people, in a land of abominations, whose 
 inhabitants were Christian only in name" (!) 
 Men who believe in the genuineness of such 
 a bull, given for such a purpose, and to *>/</! 
 a man, must be either fools that know no 
 better or else fanatics that hate the truth 
 and desire to persevere in their error. 
 
 MacGeoghegan quotes Baronius as alleg- 
 ing that King Henry ' raised the waters to 
 overwhelm not only the Bishop of Canter- 
 bury, together with the English-Catholic 
 Church,but the entire flock of the whole Cath 
 olic Church, together with its Chief Pastor 
 Alexander III , against whom in particular, 
 he directed his machinations." Is it likely, 
 
 * MacGeoKhegun, Hut. lie.aud, p. 250.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 93 
 
 therefore, that Pope Alexander would place 
 such a man over the holy Hierarchy of the 
 Church in Ireland, or authorize such an 
 Anglican anarchist to bring " a disordered 
 church" into disc'pline] No sane person 
 can believe in such improbabilities ever hav- 
 ing come to pass. 
 
 In 1168, only four years anterior to the 
 date of the fictitious Bull, Westmonasteri- 
 ensis says " King Henry, whose anger was 
 ch .nged into hatred of Blessed Thomas and 
 of the Pope, in consequence of his having 
 espoused the cause of the former, sent to 
 the Emperor Frederick, requesting him to 
 en- operate in removing Pope Alexander 
 from the Papal Chair.'' Of course Pope 
 Alexander 1 1 [. was well aware of these 
 different acts of schismatical insubordination 
 on the part of Henry, and in order to prop- 
 erly chastise him therefor, he gave him an 
 Apostolic commission to go over to Ireland 
 in order to clean " the impurities" from the 
 Irish Church ! 
 
 In 1169, just three years before Pope 
 Alexander dubbed King Henry his " most 
 dear son in Christ, " that same monarch dis- 
 missed with contempt from his court, the 
 two Cardinals whom Pope Alexander had 
 sent over to hold a conference with him in 
 regard to his anti Catholic conduct toward 
 his Holiness and the representative ecclesi- 
 astics of the Catholic Church in England ! 
 Assuredly Pope Alexander would have 
 proved himself a very weak and foolish 
 Pontiff if ever he granted to King Henry 
 any diploma authorizing him to regulate 
 even so small a space as a rood of Chris- 
 tendom, much less to "reform" the Catholic 
 Church in Ireland the most consistent and 
 const mt in fidelity to Rome ! 
 
 WAS IRELAND EVER "CHRISTIAN ONLY IN 
 NAME ?" 
 
 It seems to us to be an act bordering on 
 an insult to the intelligence of the age to 
 answer such a supremely ridiculous, as well 
 as palpably false, question. Yet, inasmuch 
 as there are persons who pose as Irish 
 "patriots" because they have transformed 
 themselves into anti- Catholic perverts, and 
 who desire to impress this conviction upon 
 the public mind, it is necessary for us in 
 
 upholding the honor of God's Church and 
 the Catholicity of Ireland to briefly glance 
 at the fame Ireland had already achieved 
 when that fraudulent document known as 
 " the Alexander Bull'' was first forged by 
 order of King Henry II. of England. 
 
 It is not through any spirit of egotism 
 we proclaim without fear of contradiction 
 that, from the time of their conversion down 
 to the present day, no people were ever 
 more purely or faithfully Catholic than the 
 Irish. Long before the Cross was acknowl - 
 edged as the sign of man's redemption in 
 many parts of Europe, Ireland was popula- 
 ting Heaven with saints, and thus she shone 
 as the Sun of God's glory, whose rays pene- 
 trated far and wide, and whose Apostles 
 carried the knowledge of God to nations 
 then living in the darkness and shadow of 
 death. 
 
 Ireland was the hive of holiness from the 
 day when St. Patrick first pressed her sham- 
 rock-strewn sod with his anointed feet. 
 From out her Monasteries, Abbeys, Clois- 
 ters and Schools went forth hundreds of 
 holy men in order to plant the Cross in 
 every land on the European Continent. 
 The names of saints like Aiden, Colman, 
 Arbogart, Maildulphus, Cuthbert, Killian, 
 Virgilius, Fuiden, Columbanus, Brendan, 
 Boniface, Ado, Gerard, Cormac, Celsus, 
 Silave, Malachy, Laurence, Comgall, 
 Cronan and hundreds of other canonized 
 soldiers of the Church Triumphant in 
 Heaven, all bear testimony that Ireland 
 herself was always Christian to her heart's 
 core, and that what she was in the early 
 centuries, she is in the nineteenth the gar- 
 den spot wherefrom is reaped a constant har- 
 vest of Christian missionaries to plant the 
 Cross in every section of the known world ! 
 
 Could it be possible for Pope Alexander 
 to call the people of Ireland " Christians 
 only in name," when he had only to consult 
 the hagiology of the Church in order to 
 learn that in a little over two centuries 
 (from 432 to 664) Ireland had no less than 
 350 Saints who were Bishops, 300 Saints 
 who were Priests, and fully 200 Saints who 
 were Anchorites, Hermits, or men whose 
 lives justified the Church in crowning their 
 brows with the aureola of superior sanctity ?
 
 94 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 In vain, then, would Pope Alexander look 
 over the whole Christian world for a par- 
 allel among any people on a par with the 
 holy Catholic Irish nation ! 
 
 Now let us introduce some testimony from 
 disinterested witnesses that we may show the 
 thoroughly Christian condition of Ireland 
 throughout the ages which followed her 
 first joyful acceptance of the true Faith 
 from the holy hands of St. Patrick. 
 
 SAINT BERNARD'S TESTIMONY. 
 
 The holy Abbot of Clairvaux, in his Life 
 of the Irish St. Malachy, speaks thus of 
 what was accomplished by a single Irish 
 saint in the sixth century : 
 
 A most noble monastery had been founded in 
 Bangor* by St. Comgall, which brought forth 
 many thousand monks, and was the head of 
 many monasteries. It was a place truly holy, 
 pregnant with saints, and bringing forth most 
 copious fruit to God : so much so, that one of 
 the members of that holy congregation, Molua 
 by name, is said to have been the founder of one 
 hundred monasteries. Its branches overcpread 
 both Ireland and Scotland. Nor were these the 
 only countries blessed by its religious : as bees 
 from the parent hive, they flocked to foreign 
 shores, and one of them, named Columbanus, 
 proceeding to Luxieu, founded there a monas- 
 tery which soon grew into a great people. 
 
 It would be strange, indeed, if the na- 
 tives of a land which was so fruitful in 
 sanctity during the sixth and seventh cen- 
 turies, should be called " Christians only in 
 name" by a Vicar of Christ. 
 
 The Irish of the seventh century were so 
 far from bein $ "Christians only in name,'' 
 that Mirianus Scotus, under date of the 
 year 674, makes this entry in his Chronicles: 
 "Ireland was Ailed with saints or hoJy men." 
 
 From the eighth to the tenth century Ire- 
 land was the literary lamp of Europe and 
 her sons the Cross bearers and Teachers 
 throughout that continent. Two Irish mis- 
 sionaries went to France in 791, and so 
 superior was their learning to those among 
 whom they sojourned, and so attached to 
 them did the French people become, that 
 these saintly Irish scholars founded the 
 first Universities in the world Paris and 
 Pavia. 
 
 The Venerable Bede, an Anglo-Saxon, 
 
 'County Down, Ireland. 
 
 tells us in his 4 Ecclesiastical History" that 
 numbers were daily coming into Britain 
 from the country of the Scots (Irish) preach- 
 ing the Word of God with great devotion." 
 Eric of Auxerre, a French writer of the 
 ninth century, in his letter to Charles the 
 Bald, is so astounded at the immense num- 
 ber of saints and scholars Ireland sent at 
 that period to the continent of Europe that 
 he asks : 
 
 What shall I say of Ireland, which, despising 
 the dangers of the deep, is migrating, with al- 
 most her whole train of philosophers to our 
 coast. 
 
 Lord Littleton, in his Life of Henry the 
 Fecund, pays this high compliment to the 
 Irish people whom the bogus Alexander 
 Bull declares to have been " Christians only 
 in name" : 
 
 A school was founded in Armagh, which soon 
 became very famous. Many Irish went from 
 thence to convert and teach other nations. Many 
 Saxons out of England resorted thither for in- 
 stiudtion, and brought from thence the use of 
 letteis to their ignorant countrymen. 
 
 Thierry, in his History of the Norman 
 Conquest, thus speaks of Ireland during that 
 period : 
 
 In many things, especially in religion the Irish 
 were enthusiasts. * * * Their island possessed 
 a multitude of saints and learned men, venerated 
 alike in England and in Gaul ; for no country 
 has furnished a greater number of Christian mis- 
 sionaries. 
 
 A people who were " enthusiasts in reli- 
 gion,' 1 among whom there were such "a mul- 
 titude of saints," and who had "furnished 
 a greater number of Christian missionaries 
 than all other nations in the world," might 
 be called "Christian only in name," by 
 some bigoted British booby hireling of King 
 Henry II. , in consequence of his ignorance 
 and prejudice, but to insinuate that either 
 Alexander III., or any other Pope of Rome 
 ever gave currency to such a most unwar- 
 ranted calumny upon the Catholic character 
 of the Irish people, is one of the foulest and 
 grossest slanders that ever soiled the litera- 
 ture of any age from the days of the falsi- 
 fying Cambrensis down to his manikin imi- 
 tator in malignancy Judge James G. Ma- 
 guire of the Superior Court of San Francisco.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 95 
 
 TESTIMONY OF ST. COLUMBANUS. 
 
 The name of the great St. C-lumbanus 
 stands high in Irish hagiology. He was the 
 illustrious founder of Bobbio and many oth- 
 er monasteries. In his fourth Letter to 
 Pope Boniface, this great Irish servant of 
 God thus firmly and faithf uliy places on re- 
 cord the f roud position Ireland then held 
 as the truest and most loyal child of the 
 Church of God : 
 
 To the most lovely of all Europe, to the Hiad 
 of all the Churches, to the Beloved Father, 
 to the Ex il ted Prelate, to the Pastor of 
 Pastors, etc. 
 
 After thus acknowledging the reigning 
 Pontiff as " the Head of all Churches," and 
 thus proving that Ireland was subject to 
 Rome in all things spiritual, St. Columbanus, 
 in the body of this Letter, continues : 
 
 For we Irish, are disciples of St. Peter and St. 
 Paul, and of the divinely-inspired canonical 
 writers, adhering constantly to the faith and 
 Apostolic doctrine. Among us neither Jew, 
 heretic or schismatic can be found, but the 
 Catholic faith, entire and unshaken, precisely as 
 we have received it from you, who are the suc- 
 cessors of the holy Apostles. For, as I have al- 
 ready said, we are attached to the Chair of 
 Peter, and although Rome is great and re- 
 nowned, yet with us it is great and distinguished 
 only on account of that Apostolic Chair. 
 Through the two Apostles of Christ ye are more 
 celestial, and Borne is the head of all the 
 Churches in the world. 
 
 What a sublime eulogy in favor of the 
 fidelity of a great Catholic nation which 
 only revered Rome because it contained the 
 Chair of St. Peter ! Could it be possible 
 that such a people would ever become 
 " Christians only in name"! 
 
 Cardinal, John Henry Newman, passes upon 
 the Catholicity of the Irish people : 
 
 " I look towards a land both old and young 
 o'd in its Chrittianity, young in its promise of 
 the future ; a nation which received grace long 
 before the Saxon came to Britain, and which hat 
 never questioned it ; a Church which compre- 
 hends in its history the rise and fall of Canter* 
 bury and York, which Augustine and Paulinus 
 found, and Pole and Fisher left behind them. 
 
 Cardinal Newman evidently never har- 
 bored the thought that there ever was 
 an epoch in the history of Ireland, when 
 the false and foul charge of being " Chris- 
 tian only in name," could be successfully 
 brought against that nation of Virgins, An- 
 chorites, Confessors, Martyrs and Apostles 
 of the Church of God ! 
 
 TESTIMONY OF CARDINAL NEWMAN. 
 
 We could cite a score of additional wit- 
 nesses, were it necessary, in order to prove 
 the thorough Catholic character of the Irish 
 people throughout every century, but we 
 feel assured that it is not necessary. So we 
 will now conclude this portion of the defence 
 of the Popes and the Irish people by pro- 
 ducing the testimony of Cardinal Newman 
 and a few other modern writers, in order 
 to show the fidelity of the Irish people to 
 the Church of Rome throughout all ages. 
 Here is the eulogy which the great English 
 
 TESTIMONY OF ARCHDEACON LYNCH. 
 
 Dr. Lynch, the learned Archdeacon of 
 Killala, whose historical work wherein he 
 refutes the ribald calumnies of Cambrensis, 
 we have already alluded to, thus depicts the 
 close and constant intimacy which existed 
 throughout all ages between Rome and Ire- 
 land : 
 
 If I allowed myself to detail at length the in- 
 tercourse of the Irish with Home in former ages, 
 my page would swell to unreasonable limits, and 
 exhaust my power of language, though not the 
 subject itself. To sum up then in a few words : 
 No dissension on religious matters ever arose in 
 Ireland which was not referred to Rome. 
 From Rome Ireland had her precepts of mor- 
 ality, and her oracles of faith. Rome was the 
 mother ; Ireland the daughter ; Rome the head, 
 Ireland the member. From Rome, the fountain- 
 source of Religion, Ireland undoubtedly derived, 
 and with her whole soul imbibed, her faith. 
 In dcubtful matters the Pope was the arbiter of 
 the Irish ; in things certain their master ; in ec- 
 / clesiastical matters their head ; in temporals, 
 their defender; in all things their judge, in 
 everything their adviser ; their oracle in doubt, 
 their bulwark in the hour of danger. Some has- 
 tened to Rome to indulge their fervor at the 
 tomb of the Apostles ; others to lay their hom- 
 age at the feet of the Pope, and others to obtain 
 the nee ssary sanction of his authority for the 
 discharge ot their functions.* 
 
 TESTIMONY OF HISTORIAN GORRES. 
 
 The learned Gorres, the eminent German 
 c/'ambrensis Eversus, vol. ii., p. 635.
 
 THK POPK AND IRELAND. 
 
 historian, thus depicts the monasteries of 
 Ireland and the prolific faith which pro- 
 ceeded from them : 
 
 When we look into the ecclesiastical life of the 
 Irish people, we are almost tempted to believe 
 that some potent spirit had transported over 
 the sea the cells of the valley of the Nile, with 
 all their hermits -its monasteries with all their 
 inmates, and settled them down in this Western 
 Island ; an island which, in three centuries, gave 
 eight hundred and eighty taiiits to the Church, 
 won over to Christianity the North of Britain 
 and a large part of Germany, and while it de- 
 voted the utmost attention to the sciences, cul- 
 tivated with especial care the mystical contem- 
 plation in her communities, as veil as in the 
 saints which they produced. 
 
 The German Gorres, evidently never 
 harbored in his mind the horrible idea that 
 Ireland was even for a second of time 
 " Christian only in name." 
 
 REV. A. COOAN S TESTIMONY. 
 
 In his " History of the Diocese of Meath," 
 Rev. Anthony Cogan, Curate of Navan, 
 thus beautifully portrays the enduring fidel- 
 ity of Ireland's faith throughout all past 
 Christian ages : 
 
 Insula Sancta I Missionary Island I Ever 
 faithful and ever true I In the long night of thy 
 bondage, when thy enemies were drunk with 
 the blood of thy saint*, when thy soil was pur- 
 pled with the blood of martyrs, when thy tem- 
 ples were desecrated, thy shrines plundered, thy 
 virgins banished, thy Priests were struck down on 
 the very steps of thy altars ; when the Mysteries 
 of that saving Faith for which yon sacrificed 
 all in this world, were celebrated in tbe lone 
 glen or in the fastnesses of the mountain, as well 
 as in the days of thy greatness and glory, when 
 admiring Europe hailed thee as the Insula 
 Sanctorum et Doctorum. Holy Island ! Through 
 the gloom of thy chequered and mournful his- 
 tory, true haft thou been to thy sacred truttf^ 
 
 ('Diocese of Meath, Ancient and Modern." 
 Dublin. 1862. 
 
 We are firmly convinced that nothing 
 more need be said on our part in order to 
 prove most conclusively the constant, un- 
 swerving Catholic character of Ireland in 
 every age of her long Christian career. We 
 will close this chapter, therefore, by asking 
 those few people who believe the Alexander 
 Bull to be genuine, why it is that neither 
 Pope Alexander III., nor any Pontiff since 
 the year 1172, ever stopped the missionary 
 spirit of the Irish people ? Most assuredly 
 a people who were " Christians only in 
 name," were not the proper material from 
 whence to procure Apostles to carry the 
 true faith all over the world ! If Pope 
 Alexander harbored such an idea, he should 
 have forbidden the Irish priests from pene- 
 trating into other lands to plant the Cross 
 therein ! But did Irishman ever evince a 
 single trace of being Christians only in 
 name 1 Look at England, look at Scotland, 
 look at America, look at Australia, look at 
 New Zealand, look at every portion of the 
 whole world which has been brought under 
 the sweet yoke of Christ in recent centuries 
 by means of Irish missionaries, and wherein 
 Irish Priests and Irish Bishops predominate 
 to day, and what man ,be he heretic or a 
 hater of Irish Catholics who will dare to 
 say that the immutable and eternal Faith 
 which they have transplanted from Ireland, 
 bears the faintest shadow of " Christianity 
 only in name" ? 
 
 It is clear, therefore, that Pope Alexander 
 never had act or part in perpetrating the 
 foul calumnies against the Irish Catholic 
 people which make up the forgery which 
 men like Judge Maguire delight in digging 
 up from its reeking rottenness in order to 
 fling the foul mess with the hands of apos- 
 tates into the faces of the ever-faithful Irish 
 people !
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 97 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 John of Salisbury Dissected. How King Henry II. Concocted the "Adrian" Bull. 
 Salisbury's "Metalogicus." Who Wrote the 42nd Chapter? Proof that it was 
 not the Work of John of Salisbury. 
 
 It was impossible that any false Bull 
 attributed to Pope Adrian IV., and con- 
 cerning Ireland, could have been success- 
 fully promulgated during the lifetime of 
 King Louis VII. of France, for the cogent 
 reason that the fraud would at once have 
 been discovered in consequence of the 
 King of France having in his possession the 
 Letter which Pope Adrian IV, sent to 
 him, in which that Pontiff flatly refused to 
 give his sanction to any attempt at invading 
 Ireland, which that Prince in conjunction 
 with King Henry II. had planned, and 
 which Louis VII. had presented to Adrian 
 IV. for his approval. 
 
 It is for this potent reason, therefore, 
 that not a single trace of the bogus Adrian 
 bull is to be found in any document issued 
 in England prior to the year 1180, which was 
 the year in which King Louis VII. died. 
 This incident will appear all the more 
 singular when we bring to mind the fact 
 that a number of occasions occurred when 
 King Henry could have made good use of a 
 genuine Bull had he possessed one during 
 the many years which tra spired between 
 the spurious date of the fictitious Adrian 
 Bull, and the year when it first appeared in 
 print by means of the instrumental! y of 
 that champion historical falsifier of the 
 twelfth century Giraldus Cambrensis. 
 
 If the Bull of Pope Adrian was genuine, 
 why is it that such a document was secretly 
 concealed for upwards of twenty years after 
 the death of Pope Adrian ? Nor was it until 
 King Louis of France had been for some* 
 time in his tomb, that Cambrensis injected 
 into his " Topographia Hibernica," for the 
 first time, the dubious document falsely sup- 
 posed to have been issued by that Pontiff. 
 
 The answer to this question is very sim- 
 ple. When Pope Adrian was dead, and 
 King Louis was entombed also, the two 
 
 main witnesses who had the power and 
 knowledge which would enable them to 
 discover and expose the fraud, could no 
 longer offer any opposition; hence there 
 was no risk to run by first injecting the 
 forged document into the "Conquest of 
 Ireland," by Cambrensis, so as to prepare 
 the minds of those who perused the work of 
 Giraldus, for the belief that such a Bull 
 actually existed in the archives of England. 
 
 Cambrensis says that the Adrian Bull was 
 procured by John of Salisbury, and that 
 personage says so himself. We have al- 
 ready exposed the calumnies and the false- 
 hoods with which Cambrensis filled his 
 book entitled the " Conquest of Ireland " 
 and now let us pass the testimony of John 
 of Salisbury through the crucible of truth, 
 in order to discover if that priest was 
 partictps criminis with Cambrensis, or was 
 he merely made the means by which the 
 evil intentions of Henry I f. were consum- 
 mated. 
 
 The first question to be answered is : Did 
 John of Salisbury make any mention of the 
 Adrian Bull! It is true that there is an 
 allusion to that document in the last chapter 
 of his work entitled " Metalogicus," forty-one 
 chapters of which are devoted to a defence 
 of Logic, Metaphysics, Dialectics, the Cate- 
 gories of Aristotle, and the philosophers 
 themselves both the peripathetics and the 
 Platonics against the assaults of ignorant 
 adversaries. These themes are consecutive- 
 ly continued with great perspicuity and 
 erudition throughout every chapter written 
 by Salisbury, and the work closes with a 
 suitable peroration at the end of the forty- 
 first chapter, when the different difficult 
 subjects treated of have been diffusively 
 and exhaustively explained and elucidated. 
 In fact it would be almost impossible to add 
 another chapter congenial to the themes 
 discussed and say anything new.
 
 98 
 
 THK POPK AND IRELAND. 
 
 But, presto, change ! The forty-second 
 chapter reads just as appropriate as would 
 the addition of Mark Twain's " Innocents 
 Abroad'" if added to Burke's work on "The 
 Sublime and the Beautiful" ! 
 
 There is neither autonomy, coincidence, 
 consistency or connection with the text of 
 the previous forty-one chapters, and the 
 themes therein explained, nor has the last 
 chapter a single broken link even to bind 
 an idea or an occurrence in it with the deep 
 and metaphysical subjects which are han- 
 dled in such a masterly manner by the au- 
 thor in all the previous sections of his 
 erudite production. 
 
 We now intend to introduce to our read- 
 ers the contents of the forty-second chapter 
 of the " Metalogicus*" but before doing so 
 we again desire to bring vividly before their 
 minds the fact that the book to which it 
 was added, was devoted to the exposition 
 of the intricacies of Logic, guiding tyros in 
 knowledge through the mazes of Meta- 
 physics, diagnosing the difficulties of Dia- 
 lectics, explaining the Questions of Aristotle, 
 and separating the dross from the pure 
 metal in Philosophical treatises. Now to 
 forty-one chapters on these abstrusive, 
 deep and difficult subjects even for scholars 
 themselves, we find the work in which they 
 are expounded with marvellous skill, closed 
 with this specimen of literature, which is 
 not only laughable from the very ridiculous 
 attitude it occupies, but also darkly sus- 
 picious from the falsehoods with which it is 
 embellished in order to strengthen the 
 forged Bull which is attributed to Pope 
 Adrian the Fourth. 
 
 Following is the text of the dubious 
 chapter which we present to our readers as 
 it has been tranala ed from the French of 
 the editor of the Atwlecta Juris Pont fail, 
 of Paris, who translated the document 
 from the original Latin. Here is what 
 John of Salisbury is made to say in the last 
 chapter of his work on Logic : 
 
 "I have just finished (the " Afttalogicus"). 
 The present time is to be devoted to weeping 
 rather than writing. I am taught by sensible 
 experience that the whole world is sutject to 
 vanity. We looked for peace, but alaa ! the 
 storm has burst upon the inhabitants of Ton- 
 louse, and it has stirred up all around the 
 
 French and the English kings that formerly 
 lived in harmony, aa we can bear testimony, 
 now relentlessly with each other. Farther- 
 more, the death of our Lord Pope Adrian, has 
 brought grief to all Christendom, but especially 
 to England, the land of his birth. All good 
 people deplore his loss, but no one should weep 
 for him more than I. Indeed, though he had a 
 mother, and a brother, he loved me more than 
 he loved them. He declared, both publicly and 
 privately, that he loved me better than he did 
 any one else in the whole world. He had such 
 an opinion of me that he felt pleasure in opening 
 his heart and his conscience to me whenever an 
 opportunity presented itself. Though Roman 
 Pontiff, he was pleased to have me as his guest 
 at bis table, and, notwithstanding my opposi- 
 tion, he would have it that we should use to- 
 gether the same plate and glats At my request 
 he conceded and gave to the illustrious king of 
 England, Henry II., Ireland, to be possessed by 
 him, by hereditary right, as A.drianV Letters, 
 which are preserved to this day, plainly show. 
 For all the islands, by virtue of an ancient right, 
 are regarded as belonging to the Roman Church. 
 Besides, Pope Adrian sent through me a gold 
 ring adorned with a ruby of great value, for the 
 king's right of in vesture in Ireland, and that ring 
 ie, according to order, preserved in the public 
 archives of the Court. 
 
 I would never get through if I attempted to 
 mention all the virtues of the illustrious Pontiff. 
 But what deeply afflicts all hearts, is the schism 
 which, in punishment of our sins, desolates, just 
 after the death of the Pope, the Church. Be- 
 sides the public grief which affects all, I enduie 
 a personal affliction which is not less oppressive. 
 Indeed, my Father and Lord, who is also your?, 
 the venerable Theobald, Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury, is seriously sick, and we cannot yet tell 
 what will be the result of this kfiimity. Being 
 no longer able to attend to business, as was his 
 wont, he has imposed on me a very severe duty, 
 a very heavy burden, by confiding to me the 
 care of all the ecclesiastics. My mind meets 
 everywhere but afflictions and sufferings, and I 
 feel that I am incapable of expressing the tor- 
 ments that I endure. There remains to me no 
 other support than to pray to the God Man, the 
 Son of the stainless Virgin." 
 
 . This strange document eays the editor of 
 the Annlecta calls for some very serious 
 observations, which we shall divide into 
 sections, so as to throw all the light possible 
 on the subject. 
 
 " The passage in the document which re- 
 fers to the Siege of Toulouse, is copied from 
 the preface of the " Polycraticus." If John
 
 THB POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 99 
 
 of Salisbury entered, about that period, into 
 the service of A'Becket, could he be, at the 
 same time, the Chancellor and Secretary of 
 Archbishop Theobald? 
 
 n. 
 
 In the preface to the " Metalcgicus" Salis- 
 bury speaks of functions which he per- 
 formed by order of his Lord, in regard to 
 the ecclesiastical causes of all England ; but 
 he does not name the Archbishop ; he does 
 not say that he is speaking of Theotald. 
 Here is the passage of the preface referred 
 to: 
 
 " Scarcely any more time was taken from my 
 necessary occupations than what was needed for 
 my meals and sleep, for, at the command of my 
 Lord, which I was faithful in obeying, the care 
 of all England, with regard to ecclesiastical 
 causes, devolved on me." 
 
 Now all this harmonizes well enough with 
 the early period of A'Becket ; with the pe" 
 riod anterior to the conflict with Henry II. 
 It follows then that the " Metalogicus" 
 must have been composed about this period. 
 
 We cannot see what motive prompted the 
 author to repeat in the 42nd chapter what 
 he had already said in the preface, to wit : 
 That he was completely absorbed by busi- 
 ness ; by the labors that his oflice super- 
 induced. What is clear in the preface 
 becomes amphibological in the 42nd chap- 
 ter. The preface thus reads: "The care 
 of all England with regard to ecclesiastical 
 causes." This reading denotes the exerdse 
 of Metropolitan or Primatial jurisdiction, 
 In the 42nd chapter, on the contrary, there 
 is no. longer question of the affairs of all 
 England ; he speaks only of ecclesiastics, 
 which reading certainly points out only 
 persons of a special class omnium ecchsi- 
 asticorum sollicitvdo. It might be that 
 Salisbury was a simple superintendent of 
 the moral conduct of the clergy ! 
 
 What is truly new in the suspected chap- 
 ter, is the name of Theobald, which is not 
 in the preface. As it is extremely doubtful 
 whether Salisbury was ever in the service 
 of Theobald, this circumstance greatly 
 aggravates the suspicion against the 42nd 
 chapter of the " Metalogicus " 
 
 What the writer relates about the famili- 
 arity with which Pope Adrian treated him, 
 is, beyond all question, unworthy of the 
 
 Papal majesty. Salisbury expressed him- 
 self far more modestly in the " Polycrati- 
 cus": 
 
 " I remember that I set out for Apulia with 
 the intention of visiting our Lord Pope Adrian 
 IV., who admitted me to close familiarity with 
 him. I remained neer him at Beneventum for 
 about three months. As we often spoke on diff- 
 erent topics, as is the custom among friends, and 
 as he questioned me familiarly and carefully 
 about what men thought of him and the Roman 
 Church, I took the liberty of declaring plainly 
 to him what I had learned in the different prov 
 inces." (Pofycraticus, lib. G. chap. 24). 
 
 What mortal will believe that Pope Adri- 
 an ever said, publicly or privately, that he 
 " loved Salisbury better than he loved any 
 other person in the world, better even than 
 he loved his own mother and his brother V 
 If there ever was "bosh," there it is. 
 
 Now we know that the Pope eats alone. 
 The Roman Ceremonials of the twelfth cen- 
 tury point out the days on which the Cardi- 
 nals were invited to the Papal table. It 
 would be already a sufficiently strange story 
 that Salisbury was an habitual guest of the 
 Pope for nearly three months, but that the 
 Pope himself should have arranged matters 
 in such a way that he and Salisbury should 
 eat from the same plate and drink from the 
 same glass, is an enormity which ought to 
 have been, from the beginning, sufficient to 
 reject the document under consideration as 
 truly apocryphal. There was only one thing 
 more needed to be said by Salisbury to ren- 
 der this document supremely ridiculous, to 
 wit : that he and the Pope slept in the 
 same bed! It seems incomprehensible how 
 the forger did not see that his ridiculous 
 exaggeration would take away, beforehand, 
 all faith in what he was going to say about 
 Ireland. 
 
 iv. 
 
 If it is true that Pope Adrian gave Ire- 
 land to the King of England, at the request 
 of Salisbury (ad preces meas), that naturally 
 signifies that Kin^ Henry II. did not solicit 
 this donation, which was spontaneous on 
 the part of the Pope. But this circum- 
 stance is contradicted by the apocryphal 
 Bull, which mentions the Letter of the 
 King. In any case, it is a very strange 
 thing that the donation of a kingdom should
 
 100 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 have been obtained by an individual who 
 had no official character. The pseudo-Salis- 
 bury of the 42nd. chapter does not even hint 
 that Henry II., had charged him with the 
 mission of soliciting, in his name, the au- 
 thority to invade the land of Ireland, and to 
 force its inhabitants to acknowledge him as 
 their lord and master. On the other hand 
 the apocryphal Bull does not name Salis- 
 bury, nor does it designate any ambassador 
 who solicited the gift in the name of the 
 King. One would be inclined to think that 
 the whole affair was managed and concluded 
 by epistolary correspondence ! 
 
 V 
 
 Salisbury designates in the Polycraticus 
 the period of his interview with Adrian IV. 
 by saying that he saw him at Benevento. 
 Adrian IV. sojourned at Beneventum more 
 than seven months, viz : from the 21st of 
 November, 1155, to the 10th of July, 1156. 
 If the concession of Ireland was made 
 during the three months that Salisbury re- 
 mained at Beneventum, how explain the 
 silence he observed in regard to the Bull in 
 his Polycroiwus, which was published three 
 years afterwards, viz : in 1159 ? 
 
 And, on the other hand, if the donation of 
 Ireland occurred during another visit made 
 by Salisbury, the author of the 42nd. chapter 
 should have for so much the more reason 
 designated the epoch of the Bull's issuance, 
 as the apocryphal Bull is without date in 
 the works of Giraldus Cambrensis, who was 
 the first to publish it. 
 
 Other historians or compilers have added 
 Datum Romce, etc. According to that the 
 Bull could not have been issued during the 
 sojourn of Adrian at Beneveutum. Nor 
 can it be connected with the visit of John 
 of Salisbury, described in the Polycratlcus. 
 vi 
 
 The author of the 42nd. chapter of Meta- 
 loyiciu tells of a Letter of Adrian IV., in 
 relation to Ireland ; but he certainly did 
 not know the tenor of it, and he never saw 
 it. Had he known its tenor or seen it, he 
 would not have stated that the Pope gave 
 Ireland to the King of England and to his 
 successors to be possessed by them by heredi- 
 tary right. "Ad prece* meas illustri 
 Anglorum regi Benrlco secundo roncesrit 
 
 et dedit Hibernian Juro hcereditario posri- 
 demiam, sicut litterce ipsius testantur in 
 hodiernum diem." 
 
 What a misfortune that the writer did 
 not give the date of the hodieritus die* ! 
 In the apocryphal Bull, on the contrary, 
 there is no question of investiture, and still 
 less of perpetual investiture, which passes 
 to the heirs and successors without the ob- 
 ligation of having it renewed at every change 
 of government. The apocryphal Bull sim- 
 ply announces a personal concession to 
 Henry II. given to him for the purpose of 
 reforming morals and repressing vices. It 
 was only for the accomplishment of this 
 temporary mission exclusively religious 
 and moral that the Pope urged the people 
 of Ireland to receive with honor the king, 
 and to revere him as their lord. 
 
 "We therefore," (it is the apocryphal Bull 
 that is speaking) " with approving and favor- 
 able views commend thy pious and laudable de- 
 sire, and, to aid thy undertaking, we give to thy 
 petition our grateful and willing consent, that 
 for extending the boundaries of the Church, the 
 restraining the prevalence of vice, the improve- 
 ment of morals the implanting of virtue, the 
 propagation of the Christian religion, thou enter 
 that island and pursue those things which shall 
 tend to the honor of God, and the salvation of 
 His people, and that they may receive thee with 
 honor, and revere thee as their lord." 
 
 Now all this differs essentially from feu- 
 dal investiture ! 
 
 The sending of a ring as a sign of inves- 
 titure, is unparalleled in history, unless the 
 Pope designates at the. same time a dele- 
 gate charged with performing publicly the 
 ceremony of the giving of the ring. The 
 pseudo- Salisbury says, in all seriousness, 
 that ''Pope Adrian sent a gold ring adorned 
 with a ruby of great value, by which the 
 right of investiture would be made, and 
 that the very same ring was preserved, ac- 
 cording to orders given, in the public Ar- 
 chives. " We are looking all around to see 
 who the Papal Delegate was who performed 
 the ceremony ? But we cannot make out 
 who it was. It certainly was not Salisbury, 
 who was only a simple priest. It was no 
 one ! The apocryphal Bull does not say a 
 word about a ring, nor investiture. We
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 101 
 
 nowhere find a vestige of the ring save in 
 Giraldus Cumbrensis and in the pseudo- 
 Salisbury ! 
 
 vm 
 
 There is not a single case of hereditary 
 investiture to be found in the Papal di- 
 plomatics of the twelfth century. The 
 Popes who permitted the investiture to pass 
 to heirs and successors, required a renewal 
 and confirmation of it at every change of 
 government and Pontificate. The Normans 
 of Naples and Sicily were subject to the 
 common law. The Diplomas may be seen 
 all through Baronius' Annals and other 
 works. According to the pseudo-Salisbury 
 Adrian IV. treated the Normans of Eng- 
 land with more consideration than their 
 brethren elsewhere, and arranged that their 
 investiture should continue perpetually 
 through the magical influences of a ring 
 kept in the royal Archives of Winchester ! 
 
 Salisbury was by far too well instructed 
 to say thai the Emperor Constantine founded 
 the Roman Church. Its foundation dates 
 from JESUS CHRIST, and the days of the 
 Apostles. It is not even quite true that 
 the Emperor endowed the Roman Church, 
 for even during the persecutions, the 
 Church possessed goods which, being con- 
 fiscated under Diocletian, were restored by 
 order of Constantine. 
 
 If John of Salisbury wrote in 1160 that 
 all the islands belonged to the Holy See, it is 
 clear that he did not reflect that he was, by 
 his very words, putting the island of Eng- 
 land under the Holy See ! We meet with the 
 same inconsistency in the false Bull. In a 
 word the whole 42nd. chapter of the Meta- 
 logicus is a tissue of blunders, inconsis- 
 tencies and inaccuracies. Our remarks en-, 
 tirely relieve John of Salisbury of its 
 fathership it is certainly the work of a 
 pseudo-Salisbury and very bunglingly gotten 
 up!" 
 
 SALISBURY'S CONNECTION WITH HENRY n. 
 For the better understanding of this im- 
 portant historical question, it may not be out 
 of place to give our readers an idea of the 
 close intimacy which existed between the 
 
 King who caused both the Adrian and 
 Alexander Bulls to be forged, and the ec- 
 clesiastic in whose work the statement was 
 made that Pope Adrian gave at his simple 
 request Ireland to King Henry II. 
 
 John of Salisbury spent a number of 
 years on the Continent, until in the year 
 1160, the publication of his Polycraticus 
 gained for him such public attention that 
 Thomas a'Becket, at that time Chancellor of 
 England, sent for him and attached him to 
 his service. 
 
 Among the voluminous correspondence 
 which Salisbury left behind him, there have 
 been discovered a number of letters to Pope 
 A., written by him as Secretary of Arch- 
 bishop T., but unfortunately these initials 
 are just as well adapted to Pope Alexander 
 and A rchbishop Thomas, as-they are to Pope 
 Adrian and Archbishop Theobald. 
 
 Here the question naturally arises : Could 
 Salisbury be in the service of Archbishop 
 Theobald, and, at the same time, act as 
 Secretary to St. Thomas? In answer to 
 this interrogatory the only solution is pre- 
 sented by the last and interpolated chapter 
 of the Metalogicus, which most undoubtedly 
 was written by some person whose interest it 
 was to circulate the rumor that during the 
 last years of the life of Archbishop Theo- 
 bald, viz : in the year 1160, or the year fol- 
 lowing, Pope Adrian donated Ireland to 
 King Henry II. of England. Did Salisbury 
 add this chapter, or was it forged and ap- 
 pended to his work by other hands ? Let us 
 probe deeper into this problem. 
 
 Salisbury's secretaryship to St. Thomas is 
 admitted, because he volunteers his own 
 testimony that he was constantly on the 
 alert to restrain the zeal of St. Thomas, in 
 order to prevent any breach of friendship 
 between King Henry and that Prelate. 
 From his officious intervention, it would 
 seem that Salisbury was more favorable to 
 the King of England than he was to the 
 Primate of Canterbury who employed him, 
 yet we must do him the justice to say that 
 he shared the exile of St. Thomas when 
 Henry's threats and turbulence drove that 
 holy Prelate over to France. And when St. 
 Thomas returned to England, Salisbury 
 came over also and resumed his position as
 
 102 
 
 THK POPK AND IRKLAND. 
 
 the Archbishop's secretary, an office he oc- 
 cupied up to the fatal hour when the saint- 
 ly form of Thomas a'Becket was struck down 
 by the hands of his murderers. 
 
 After the death of St. Thomas, Salisbury 
 continued to be attached to the Cathedral of 
 Canterbury as a simple priest, up to the year 
 1176, when he was nominated to the See of 
 Chartres in France through the influence of 
 Kiity Henry. It is true, however, that 
 Salisbury was e'ected to that See by the 
 canonical mode then in custom, and more- 
 over it is of record that King Louis of 
 France sent him an epistle advising him to 
 accept the See. These circumstances may 
 look plausible enough on the surface, but 
 nevertheless we are justified in suspecting 
 conspiracy and dissimulation in all such 
 mat ers where the secret influence of King 
 Henry is apparent. 
 
 Why did King Henry originate the move- 
 ment to make Salisbury the Bishop of a 
 French See ? Did the King expect some 
 great favor in return, or had he bargained 
 beforehand for such a requisite return for 
 his royal condescension ] In a word, was the 
 
 See of Chartres the price of Salisbury's 
 treason to truth, and was that benefice the 
 quid pro quo for Salisbury's kindness to the 
 King by adding the forty second chapter to 
 his Metalogicus, in ivhich alone appears any 
 allusion to Adrian, Henry or the bogus Bull, 
 througfwut the whole work? 
 
 The priestly character of John of Salis- 
 bury compels us to reject the idea that he 
 ever entered into any bargain whatever with 
 King Henry II., relative to the bogus Bui). 
 But from what our readers already know of 
 the cunning and unscrupulous character of 
 King Henry, it requires no stretch of the 
 imagination to suppose that monarch capa- 
 ble of carrying out any nefarious scheme 
 that he deemed necessary for the gratifica- 
 tion of his passion, his aggrandisement or his 
 ambition. 
 
 It is supposed by several authorities that 
 John of Salisbury wrote his Metalogicus in 
 1176, previous to his elevation to the See of 
 Chartres, nor is it unlikely that he left the 
 manuscript of his work with King Henry, 
 who caused the forty-second chapter to be 
 added thereto after the author's death. 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 Further Criticisms on the Fictitious Chapter in Salisbury's "Metalogicus." Professor 
 Jungmann's Judgment. King Henry's Oath at Avranches. An Insight into the 
 Characters of the two Popes to whom the Spurious Bulls are Attributed. Finding 
 the Matrix from which Papal Seals were Forged. 
 
 In the last chapter we gave the very 
 exhaustive and caustic criticism of the Adri- 
 an Bull, as well as the added chapter to the 
 "Metalogicus" of John of Salisbury, which 
 Victor Palme, the learned editor of the 
 Anvlecta Juris Pontificii, published some 
 six years ago in Paris. But in order that 
 our readers may fully understand that the 
 subject is by no means entirely exhausted, 
 we now produce the testimony of other 
 writers on the spurious character of two 
 documents which are at last beginning to 
 have the light of historical truth turned 
 upon them, in order to prove beyond con- 
 troversy that they were purposely forged by 
 a licentious English King, in order to give 
 him a false claim under cover of which 
 
 he hoped to invade Ireland and to rob that 
 people of their liberty and their property. 
 
 CONSIDERATIONS ON POPE ADRIAN S CHAR- 
 ACTER. 
 
 In the apocryphal chapter of the " Meta- 
 logicus," by John of Salisbury, which has 
 already been published, occurs the follow- 
 ing brief but rather singular account of how 
 Ireland was supposed to have been taken 
 from its rightful owners and handed over 
 to K ng Henry II. of England, without 
 that King ever going to the trouble of 
 making such a request ! Here is what the 
 "Metalogicus" is made to say on that 
 subject : 
 
 "At my request he (Pope Adrian IV.,) ceded
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 103 
 
 and gave to the illustrious King of England, 
 Henry II., Ireland, to be possessed by him, by 
 hereditary right." 
 
 If we are to believe the above extract 
 from the " Metulogicus," Pope Adrian gave 
 Ireland to King Henry at the mere request 
 of John of Salisbury ! The folly of such 
 a donation being given at the request of a 
 simple priest without courtly influence or 
 kingly credentials, is too preposterous to be 
 worthy of any consideration ! 
 
 Are we to believe that the same Pontiff 
 who refused the kiss of peace to the Em- 
 peror Frederick Barbarossa, because the 
 German conqueror declined to hold the 
 Pope's stirrup while his Holiness mounted 
 his horse, gave away an Island with a mil- 
 lion of inhabitants, 3,000 Catholic ecclesias- 
 tics and hundreds of churches, convents, 
 monasteries and abbeys at the simple re- 
 quest of a viiiting priest without official 
 character or credential of any kind ? 
 
 Are we to believe that the Pope who 
 refused to surrender a single town in Italy 
 to the German Emperor, backed by a hun- 
 dred thousand German spears, could hand 
 over the independent Irish nation to an 
 English monarch at the after-dinner request 
 of John of Salisbury 1 
 
 Is it not past human credence to suppose 
 that the Pope who for years defied Arnold 
 of Brescia, and finally vanquished him by 
 the power of the spiritual sword, would 
 think so lightly of the lives, liberties and 
 happiness of the Irish Catholic nation, as 
 to barter them all away without once ask- 
 ing that people if they desired such a 
 change ? 
 
 Could it be possible that the sagacious 
 and courageous Pontiff who boldly told 
 Frederick of Barbarossa that "the rights, 
 the posspssions, and the liberties of the 
 Roman Church would be maintained at any 
 cost," would prove so inconsistent to all his 
 former actions as to bestow Ireland upon 
 King Henry as a personal favor to a transi- 
 tory visitor? 
 
 Pope Adrian's life to use his own ex- 
 act words had been passed " between the 
 anvil and the hammer." He had been 
 compelled to flee from Rome by the violent 
 assaults of the vicious enemies of the 
 Church, and more than one-half of the 
 
 years of his Pontifioate were spent in exile 
 battling against the persecutions and an- 
 tagonism of armed allies who desired to 
 crush the Papacy and to rob the Church of 
 her temporal possessions. Is it possible, 
 therefore, that the Pope who so persistent- 
 ly, and at such personal sacrifice, defended 
 the temporal possessions cf the See of 
 Rome from the hands of vandal Emperors, 
 would surrender so quietly, so unjustly and 
 so ridiculously, the whole people and the 
 land of Erin into the keeping of a foreign 
 king who had no more right to Ireland 
 than he had to the Chair of St. Peter or 
 the tiara of the Pope himself 1 
 
 Pope Adrian was not the Pontiff to act 
 in the foolish and unjust manner John of 
 Salisbury is supposed to depict him, and 
 few people there are who will believe that 
 such a "donation" was ever bestowed upon 
 the mere request of a friendly visitor whose 
 description of his life in Beneventum, places 
 the stamp of "doubt" upon his whole nar- 
 rative. 
 
 PROFESSOR JUNGMANN S JUDGMENT. 
 
 Professor Jungmann, from whose "His- 
 torical Lectures" we are about to quote, 
 has been for several years Professor of 
 History in the University of Louvain, and 
 as this justly celebrated Belgian historian 
 is entirely devoid of any prejudice which 
 might be attributed to an English or 
 an Irish writer, thereby preventing them 
 from giving impartial testimony in the case, 
 we claim that Professor Jungmann's evi- 
 dence adds much additional weight to the 
 volume of testimony which we have already 
 produced in order to show clearly, explicitly 
 and conclusively, that the spurious Adrian 
 Bull was manufactured in England. 
 
 Professor Jungmann says there are grave 
 reasons for considering the Adrian Bull to 
 be spurious, "as it is well known from his- 
 tory that everywhere towards the close of 
 the twelfth century forged or corrupted 
 Pap il Letters or Diplomas were not uncom- 
 mon j| That such was the case in England 
 
 ;i The Anglo Norman adventurers, who enter- 
 tained the design of invading Ireland even as 
 early as 1155. fortunately left behind them the 
 evidence of their guilt in the shape of a matrix 
 which was used for forging the Papal seal, wnbh 
 was found some jears pgo in the ruins of one of
 
 104 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 is susceptible of proof from the Letters of 
 John Sarisbiensis and of others.* 
 
 "Richard, Archbishop of Canterbury, the 
 successor of Thomas A'Becket, commanded 
 all the Bishops to promulgate in all their 
 churches the severe punishment of excom- 
 munication against the public pest of forg- 
 ery, so common had this crime become in 
 the twelfth centuryt. In the time of Pope 
 Innocent II f., also, various statutes were 
 enacted against this abominable crime, 
 which was becoming daily more widespread 
 and dangerous. X 
 
 " In view of these facts," says Jungmann, 
 ' it is not at all to be wondered at if some 
 forged document attributed to Pope Adrian 
 IV., should be produced and circulated. 
 Moreover, the document attributed to Pope 
 Adrian, which has no place, day or year 
 whereby to locate it, must necessarily be 
 ascribed to the year 1155 or 1156, that be- 
 ing the time when it is said John of Salis- 
 bury visited the Pope at Beneventum. 
 But down to the year 1175. there is not a 
 vestige of proof that the so-called bull of 
 Adrian was shown or published by King 
 Henry of England, although it was of the 
 highest importance that it should be made 
 known, since there was question of the 
 submission of Ireland." 
 
 " It is true," continues Professor Jung- 
 mann, "that Sylvester Malone, in his 
 Church history of Ireland, states that the 
 Letter of Adrian was shown and its purport 
 made known to the bishops and princes of 
 Ireland in 1172, at a synod said to have 
 been held in Cashel, and that, therefore, 
 we can readily understand the cause of the 
 ready submission of Ireland to King Henry 
 II. "But," remarks Jungmann, "there is 
 no mention whatever of the Adrian docu- 
 ment found, and the submission of a por- 
 tion of the Irish people to the English King 
 is explained sufficiently well from far differ- 
 ent circumstances." 
 
 the aarliest Anglo-Norman monasteries founded 
 by De Courcy, and which is now preserved in 
 the Royal Irish Academy. " Fronde's Slanders 
 on Ireland and Irishmen," by Col. James E. 
 McGee. New York : 1872. 
 
 Cfr. epp 83, 89, 129. in Epht m p<t>tab 
 Altxa*dro III. : " Nobit si plactt, rescribite qua 
 animadrersione feriendi tunt corruptorts littr- 
 arum rtttrarum.'' 
 
 t Ptttr Bleus, ep 53 
 
 i Phillip, K. R. B. III. - 154 168. 
 
 "Even Pope Alexander III., the im- 
 mediate successor in the Papal Chair of 
 Pope Adrian IV. , makes no mention in his 
 own genuine epistles of such a concession 
 ever having been made by his predecessor 
 in the Papacy, nor does he allude to the 
 donation, or to any Bull granting such a 
 right to the King of England. 
 
 There are three genuine epistles of Pope 
 Alexander III.,* which relate to the sub- 
 mission of Ireland. One dated Tusculani, 
 September 20th, 1172, to King Henry II., 
 to the kings and princes of Ireland, and 
 also to Christian, Archbishop of Lismore, 
 Legate of the Apostolic See. There is 
 another, which was first published by Gir- 
 aldus Cambrensis, and is said to have been 
 issued from Rome in the year 1172, but 
 this is held to be a forgery, ior the reason 
 that Pope Alexander was not in the Eter- 
 nal City during that year, and also because 
 the style of the document is widely diff- 
 erent from that known to be Pope Alex- 
 ander's. 
 
 la the forged document of 1172 alone 
 is found any mention of the supposed 
 " donation" of Pope Adrian IV., and Cam- 
 breasis himself, in his little work entitled, 
 " De Principis Iiistitutiotie," which was 
 re-published in 1846, makes this confession 
 concerning this forged Bull of Pope Alex- 
 ander III : 
 
 " Sicut a quibuidam impetratum asseritur aut 
 con/ingitur : ab aliit auiem unquam impetratum 
 esse negalur." 
 
 Malone lays considerable stress on the 
 genuineness of this document to which is 
 attached the name of Alexander III., but 
 
 "Concerning the authenticity of these letters 
 there is a diversity of opinion. Victor Palme, 
 in hi* valuable historical es*ay published in the 
 Anahfta, says of them : "There is no need to 
 discuss the authenticity of these three letters. 
 They have come to us only as copies and have 
 seen the light of day only after 555 years from 
 their date, and they contain invectives against 
 the Irish people such as are never found in the 
 Acts of the Holy See at least as to expression 
 and form. They announce things that are evi- 
 dently falsa and fabricated, at d which would 
 cause us to believe that surreptition and obrepti- 
 tion had a great deal to do with them, even if 
 we could suppose that their authenticity was 
 positively certain. We will assume that they 
 are authentic, but we will on that very account, 
 infer an argument that will demonstrate that the 
 false Bull of Adrian had even yet remained un- 
 known : Nr>w none of the three letters mention 
 the Bull of Adrian, nor dcet any one of them make 
 the tlightett allusion to it."
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 105 
 
 the most erudite critics reject it as apo- 
 chryphal, nor did Jaffe' include it among 
 the Rrgesta of that Pontiff's Rescripts, 
 hence, concludes Jungmann, the statements 
 of Malone are not correct." 
 
 " Whether the epistle of Adrian IV. , was 
 published, proclaimed or made known in 
 the year 1175 (or in 1177) in somo synod 
 that was held in Waterford, is very doubt- 
 ful. For Giraldus Oambrensis, who asserts 
 that it was, is very inaccurate in his rela- 
 tion of historical facts, nor can much faith 
 be placed in his statements. It is well 
 known, however, that it was not until to- 
 wards the close of the twelfth century that 
 the so-called Bull of Pope Adrian IV. 
 was first made known, as may be proved by 
 Giraldus himself, who at that period pub- 
 lished his " Hibernice Expngnatio," in 
 which it first appeared. From the first 
 introduction by Cambrsnsis, the document 
 supposed to hive been given to King Henry 
 by Pope Adrian, was nowhere published 
 until the year 1175, although there were 
 frequent opportunities for publishing it, 
 hence it follows that this document must 
 have been purposely kept secret, and that 
 there were other reasons besides domestic 
 ones, for keeping the supposed " donation" 
 document locked up. 
 
 THE "METALOGICUS" OF JOHN OF SALISBURY 
 was completed by its author in 1159 or 
 1160, for he speaks therein of matters that 
 clearly refer to that period as being the 
 time when his work saw the light of day. 
 If, therefore, John of Salisbury could speak 
 so positively of the " donation" made by 
 Pope Adrian IV. to King Henry, how does 
 it happen that although the books of Saris- 
 berensis were known, there was no mention 
 made of the aforesaid " donation" until 
 the year 1175 ? Several authors maintain 
 that the forty-second chapter that being 
 the portion of the work in which the " do- 
 nation" of Ireland to King Henry is nar- 
 rated is an interpolation. The context of 
 the book reads correctly even if the 42nd 
 chapter was omitted altogether. 
 
 "Ad preces meas illustri regi Anglorum 
 Henrico II., dedit Hiberniam jure heredi- 
 tario possidendam, sicut literce testautur IN 
 
 HODIERNTTM DIEM." 
 
 The expression, " in hodiernum diem," 
 
 suggests per se the idea that there was a 
 series of years (a long interval) between the 
 issuance of the Adrian Bull and the pub- 
 lication of the work of Sarisberensis. Such 
 language is never used to express short 
 intervals when there is question of his- 
 torical fact. Yet, only three or four years 
 intervened (from 1156 to 1159 or 1160) 
 between the issuing of the supposed Adrian 
 Bull and the completion of the "Metalogi- 
 cns." There can be little doubt, therefore, 
 that some person for a purpose only known 
 to themselves but which we of the nine- 
 teenth century may surmise from surround- 
 ing circumstances inserted the words used 
 in the above Latin extract, without giving 
 due consideration to the proper difference 
 of expression when designating a long or a 
 short time. 
 
 John of Sarisberensis died in 1180, and 
 there are many critics who believe that the 
 whole 42nd chapter which is entirely for- 
 eign to the work was added in time." 
 
 KING HENRY'S OATH AT AVRANCHES. 
 
 All readers of the events of the twelfth 
 century are familiar with the fact that in 
 order to clear himself from the charge of 
 being the instigator of the murder of St. 
 Thomas A'Becket, it became necessary for 
 King Henry of England to make oath that 
 he was guiltless of that fearful crime. 
 
 Some writers assert that Henry went to 
 Ireland in order to escape from being served 
 with the notice of excommunication which 
 Pope Alexander III. had promulgated 
 against him, and, after waiting in that coun- 
 try for several months whilst his repre- 
 sentatives were pleading his cause before 
 the Papal authorities he at length received 
 a favorable report from his friends and then 
 hastened at once over to Avranches, in 
 France, in which country Pope Alexander 
 then was, in order to swear on the Holy 
 Gospels, in the Cathedral of that city, in 
 the presence of the Pope's Legate, the 
 Cardinals, Prelates and the people there 
 assembled, that he was not guilty of any 
 crime which deserved excommunication. 
 
 Here is the oath which King Henry took 
 on that memorable occasion, as given by 
 both Baronius and Muratori, and which 
 they copied from the Vatican documents:
 
 10G 
 
 THE POPE AND 1UELAND. 
 
 I, Henry, swear on these Holy Gospels that 
 I did not premeditate the murder of St. Tboma> ; 
 that I did not know that it waa going to take 
 place, and that I did not command it to be done; 
 that on hearing the account of this crime, I fell 
 grief aa intense aa if I had heard of the murder 
 of nay own eon. But there is a point that I can- 
 not excuse myself in regard to, viz : that he was 
 put to death in consequence of the anger and 
 resentment I conceived against him. I appeared 
 then to have given the occasion for hie death. 
 For this fault I will send at my own expense, 
 and without delay, two hundred cavaliers to 
 Jerusalem, for the defense of Christianity, and 
 I will maintain them there during the year. I 
 will myself take the Cross for three years, and I 
 will net out in person for the Holy Land, unless 
 the Sovereign Pontiff dispenses me in this 
 matter. 
 
 All the illicit customs that I introduced 
 during my reien into my country, I will remove 
 entirely, and forbid them to be practiced here- 
 after. I will guarantee fall liberty to make ap- 
 peals to the Apostolic See, and I will net inter- 
 fere with any person in this matter. Further- 
 more, I, King, and my beloved son, swear that 
 we will receive or hold the Kingdom of England 
 from our Lord Pope Alexander and from his 
 successors for ever, and we will not regard our- 
 selves aa the ttue Kings of England until the 
 Pope or Popes look upon us as Catholic Kings. 
 
 The silence observed by King Henry con- 
 cerning Ireland in this oath, shows most 
 conclusively that Pope Adrian did not be- 
 stow that nation upon the English monarch. 
 It also proves that the bogus Bull had not 
 as yet been evolved from the inventive 
 brain of whoever forged it. Assuredly 
 King Henry would never have thought of 
 placing England alone under the jurisdic- 
 tion of the Holy See, if he possessed any 
 right to Ireland, especially when we con- 
 sider that the double offering would have ma- 
 terially assisted him in becoming reconciled 
 to the Holy Father, in gaining absolution 
 for his admitted participation in the murder 
 of St. Thomas, and also in regaining the 
 prestige which he had temporarily lost by 
 the grave charge brought against him. 
 
 Again, it is of record that King Henry 
 wrote to the Pope at the end of the same 
 year in which he took the above oath, ask- 
 ing the assistance of his Holiness in a war 
 which his eldest son was then waging against 
 hi tn. 1 11 that letter he again declares that 
 England is tinder the jurisdiction of the 
 
 Pope, but makes no mention whatever of 
 Ireland occupying a similar position. 
 
 Now if any Pope had bestowed Ireland 
 upon King Henry, and if that monarch was 
 feudatory of the Holy See in that island, 
 would he have neglected to ask the protec- 
 tion of the Pope against the Irish " rebels" 
 as they were called, especially when at that 
 juncture the EnglUh monarch had lost near- 
 ly every portion of the land usurped by the 
 Norman invaders ? These points are addi- 
 tional links in the chain which serve to 
 prove that the Adrian Bull was forged for the 
 purpose of procuring a fraudulent title to 
 Ireland. 
 
 POPE ALEXANDER NOT LN ROME IN 1172. 
 
 The Bull which is attributed to Pope 
 Alexander III., concludes thus in Judge 
 Maguire's bad book : 
 
 Given at Rome in the year of Salvation, 
 1172 
 
 Now let us briefly trace the career of 
 Alexander III., in order to prove beyond 
 doubt that the fictitious Bull was never is- 
 sued from Rome in the year designated in 
 that spurious document. 
 
 Pope Alexander was crowned at a place 
 called Cisterna, midway between Yelletri 
 and Terracina, in Italy, on Sunday, Septem- 
 ber 20th, A. D., 1159. The Holy Father 
 then fixed his residence at Terracina, thence 
 he went to the following places in the years 
 designated. The Pope was in Tusculum in 
 1172 ; in Segni in 1173 ; in Anagni in 1176, 
 in Monte Gargano in 1177, then to Venice, 
 from whence he did not reach Rome until 
 1178. 
 
 The impossibility, therefore, of this Bull 
 ever having emanated from Rome is fully 
 established, and its forgery clearly and suc- 
 cessfully proved ! 
 
 Aside, even from the irrefutable facts 
 we have furnished, we feel quite positive 
 that the illiberal, untruthful and even un- 
 Christian document, miscalled the Alexander 
 Bull, never could have emanated from a 
 Pontiff who is thus eulogized by the Prot- 
 estant critic Bower : 
 
 " Most of the contemporary writers speak 
 of him (Alexander) as a man of great pru- 
 dence and discretion. * * * He is said
 
 THE POPE AND IHELAM). 
 
 107 
 
 to have been the most learned of all the 
 Popes that for the space of a hundred years 
 have presided in that See, and better ac- 
 quainted than any of them with the Canon 
 Laws and Decrees of the Roman Church." 
 
 Dr. Miley, the distinguished author of 
 "The Papal States," says of Pope Alexan- 
 der 111. : "After a protracted reign of 
 three and twenty years, during which he 
 piloted the bark of Peter with such singular 
 wisdom, skill, moderation and energy, as to 
 secure for it peace the most profound and 
 glorious, after all sorts of storms and dan- 
 
 gersthis great High Priest of the Church 
 and author of Italian liberty, Alexander 
 III , was called to his reward, on the 30th 
 of August, A. D., 1181." 
 
 That a Pope possessing such superior pru- 
 dence, discretion, learning, wisdom, skill, 
 energy, moderation and experience, couUl 
 not subscribe to such a scurrilous concoction 
 as the forgery said to have been issued from 
 Rome in the year 1172, mint therefore be a 
 foregone conclusion in the mind of every 
 intelligent reader, regardless alike of all 
 previous prejudices or anti-Catholic bias. 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 An Able Article Proving the Adraiu and Alexander Bulls to be Forgeries. Father 
 F. A. Gasquet's Learned Contribution to the "Dublin Review." Severe Strict- 
 ures on the Spurious Chapter Attributed to John of Salisbury. The Genuine 
 Letter of Pope Adrain from which the Bogus Bull was Compiled. 
 
 One of the main objects we had in view 
 when we undertook the task of proving 
 both the Adrian and Alexander Bulls to 
 be forgeries, was to compile under one 
 cover the different contributions of learned 
 men who have hitherto written wisely and 
 well upon this subject. Already we have 
 placed within reach of our readers the 
 scholarly essay of Cardinal Moran, as well as 
 the exhaustive criticism of Professors Palme 
 and Juugmann, and now we introduce the 
 more important portions of the very inter- 
 esting article which Rev. Francis Aiden 
 Gasquet, O. S. B., of St. Gregory's, Down- 
 side, Bath, England, contributed to the 
 Dublin Revieiv in July 1883, omitting only 
 those paragraphs which treat of facts that 
 have already been introduced in evidence in 
 these pages. 
 
 Father Gasquet prints the text of the 
 spurious Adrian Bull, and then he thus 
 clearly and caustically criticises the bogus 
 Bull itself as well as the different persons 
 who were in any way connected with its 
 construction or publication. 
 
 FATHER GASQUET'S TESTIMONY. 
 
 "This document," [the Adrian Bull] says 
 Father Gasquet, " is not dated, but John 
 
 of Salisbury, who claims to have been the 
 ambassador who obtained it for Henry II., 
 gives the year 1155 as the date when it was 
 granted. There are however, grave, if not 
 overwhelming, reasons for questioning the 
 value of this testimony, since the biography 
 of Salisbury makes it exceedingly improba- 
 ble that he was ever entrusted with such a 
 mission to Rome. Educated out of Eng- 
 land, which he left in 1 137, John of Salis- 
 bury did not return to his native country 
 until 1149, and then only for a very short 
 time, as he can be proved to have returned 
 almost immediately to the Continent, where 
 he became occupied in teaching at Paris. 
 It is hard to believe that Henry would have 
 made choice of an unknown and untried 
 m'-iii to conduct so important and difficult a 
 piece of diplomacy as negotiating with the 
 Pope about the expedition to Ireland. 
 This much is certain, indeed, that Henry 
 did, at the beginning of his reign, send 
 ambassadors to Adrian, who was then al- 
 most at the close of his pontificate ; but 
 this mission was given to three bishops and 
 an abbot namely, Rotrodus,* Bishop of 
 Evreux, of whom we shall have more to 
 
 * " Gallia Curistiana," toiu. ii. pp. 557 and 776.
 
 108 
 
 THK fOPK AND Ii:KI.\Ni>. 
 
 say ; Arnold, Bishop of Lisieux ; the Bish- 
 op of Mans ; and Robert, Abbot of St. 
 Albans. John of Salisbury, if he were 
 with this embassy, could not have played 
 the important part he claims to have done, 
 but would have gone only in the capacity of 
 a simple clerical retainer. It is a curious 
 fact that the date of this mission to the 
 Pope from Henry is the same as that 
 claimed by Salis v ury for his visit, A. D. 
 1155 ; and it is most unlikely that the 
 English king would have sent two different 
 embassies at the same time. The old 
 Chronicles give as the object of the visit of 
 these prelates to Rome at this time, the 
 wish of Henry to obtain from Adrian abso- 
 lution from an oath made by him to his 
 father Geoffrey. Apparently other English 
 business was treated of at the same time, 
 as we judge from a letter bearing the date 
 of February 27, 1155, written by Adrian to 
 the Scotch bishops. Nothing whatever ap- 
 pears as to the proposed expedition to Ire- 
 land. 
 
 Other circumstances also tend to throw 
 discredit upon the account given by John of 
 Salisbury. When he finished his work 
 called " Polycraticus," he dedicated it to 
 Thomas, afterwards S. Thomas A'Becket, 
 then Chancellor of England, who at that 
 time was with his royal master at the siege 
 of Toulouse. This was in the year A. D. 
 1159 ; and in that year, apparently for the 
 first time, Salisbury was presented -to Henry 
 by St. Thomas. If, as we may suppose 
 from this fact, he had been up to this time 
 unknown to the king, it is most improbab'e 
 thtit four years previously the same monarch 
 had entrusted him with so private and con- 
 fidential a mission to Borne. 
 
 Moreover, although Salisbury speaks in 
 the "Polycraticus" of his having passed 
 three months at Beneventum with Pope 
 Adrian a fact itself rendered most unlikely 
 by reason of the details he gives of the ex- 
 traordinary familiarity with which the Pope 
 treated him he makes no mention what- 
 ever in that work of the important grant of 
 Ireland accorded to his petition. Such an 
 omission is all the more curious because the 
 work in question was intended by its author 
 as a moans of securing the favor and patron- 
 age of the Chancellor ; and had Salisbury 
 
 been the means of obtaining for England 
 so signal a favor, this mere fact would have 
 been a certain pass to the countenance and 
 protection, not alone of St. Thomas, but of 
 King Henry himself. This omission is 
 sufficient to n.ake us suspect either that the 
 chapter in Salisbury's subsequent work, the 
 'Metalogicus," in which mention is made 
 of Adrian's grant, w not h's irnrk nt all ; or 
 thnt the grant was inserted by him at the in- 
 stance of the kiny, and to gain his favrr. 
 ******** 
 It is linden iuUe that the forty second 
 chapter of the work has absolutely nothing 
 to do with the rest, which had for its object 
 the defence of the study of logic and meta- 
 physics. The forty- first chapter finishes 
 this subject in a natural and Christian man- 
 ner by a quotation from the Book of 
 Wisdom, and it is a strange contrast in 
 the next chapter (forty -second) to come 
 upon a lament over the siege of Toulouse 
 and the evils likely to arise out of the 
 quarrel of the two kings, oddly mixed up 
 with records of a most unlikely familiarity 
 existing between himself (Salisbury) and 
 Pope Adrian. The Pontiff is represented 
 as insisting on eating off the same plate 
 with him and drinking from the same cup, 
 while he is supposed to have declared 
 publicly that he loved Salisbury more than 
 his own mother and brother. Thtse curious 
 details are immediately followed by the 
 declaration of Adrian's gift of Ireland, to 
 which is added a repetition of what he had 
 said in the prologue about his occupation as 
 chancellor and secretary to the Archbishop 
 of Canterbury. The whole chapter is thus 
 to strange in itself, so different in style to 
 the other writings of John of Salisbury, 
 and so oddly tacked on to a work on phil- 
 osophy, that it is highly probable it was not 
 his work ut all. This probability is in- 
 creased by the fact that the circumstances 
 of the interview with Pope Adrian described 
 in the " Metalogicus" differ so much from 
 those in the "Polycraticus," where no 
 mention is made of Adrian's donation ; nor 
 of the " fine emerald ring" sent from the 
 Pope to Henry to convey some strange sort 
 of investiture. Moreover, the hand of the 
 impostor is betrayed by one or two ex- 
 pressions such as " usque in hodiemum
 
 THE POPK AND IRELAND. 
 
 109 
 
 diem' and "jure hutredituriu po$tidendenn" 
 
 Lastly, if the last chapter of the "Meta- 
 logicus" is genuine, it was written about the 
 year 1159, since the illness of Archbishop 
 Theobald, who died in 1161, is mentioned. 
 At latest the date of the work is 1160 ; 
 while it is a matter beyond dispute that no 
 mention whatever was made by Henry of 
 this "grant" of Ireland by the Pope till 
 at earliest A. D. 1175,t or fifteen years 
 after it was published in the " Metalogtcus. " 
 This is inexplicable, except on the ground 
 that the chapter is a subsequent interpola- 
 tion in order to give color to Henry's claim 
 on Ireland. We must here note that the 
 possession of such a " Bull" would have 
 been most useful to Henry in 1167, when 
 his followers first joined Dearmaid, in order 
 to justify English interference ; it was of 
 vital importance when he went over to re- 
 ceive the homage of the Irish, and could 
 never have been withheld or concealed at 
 the Council of Cashel in 1172, at which the 
 Papal legate presided. Such silence can 
 only mean that the "Bull" did not exist, 
 and as yet Henry was unable to forge it for 
 a reason which will be obvious later. 
 * * * * * * * * 
 We may here note a strong confirmation 
 of our doubts as to the authentic character 
 of Pope Adrian's "grant," even if the sub- 
 sequent " Bull" of Alexander is not also 
 affected. Directly the murder of St. Thom- 
 as became known, Henry crossed over to 
 Ireland with the object apparently of pre- 
 venting the anger of the Pope finding him 
 out by letters of excommunication or inter- 
 dict. For five months a strict watch was 
 kept on all vessels coming from the Contin- 
 ent, and not a ship was allowed to reach 
 the Irish coast, even from England, without 
 the king's knowing that it was not convey- 
 ing any Papal letters. Directly a favorable 
 message was brought to him at Wexford he 
 set out at once, and, crossing England, 
 passed over into Normandy. There, in the 
 cathedral of Avranches, on the Sunday be- 
 fore the Assumption, 1172, Henry swore 
 on the Gospels, in the presence of the le- 
 gates, bishops, barons and people, that he 
 was not guilty of the murder of the Arch- 
 
 t " Cambrensis Eversus," vol. ii. p. 440, not*. 
 
 bishop. This oath, taken under such sol- 
 emn circumstances, included the placing of 
 the kingdom of England under the Pope, 
 and the oath of fealty for it to Alexander. 
 Had Ireland at this time been really given 
 to England by the Holy See, under such 
 circumstances as these it would have been 
 mentioned. This, however, is not the case. 
 " Praeterea ego," runs the oath, " et major 
 filius meus rex juramus, quod a Domno 
 Alexandro Papa, et ejus Catholicia success- 
 oribus recipiemus et tenebimus regnum 
 Anglian, et nos et nostri successores in per- 
 pecuum non reputabimus nos Angl'ue veros 
 reges donee ipse nos Catholicos reges tenu- 
 erint." In the following year Henry wrote 
 to Pope Alexander by his secretary, Peter 
 of Blois, and referred to his holding Eng- 
 land as a fief under the Holy See, but 
 neither in this is there any mention of Ire- 
 land^ These two facts are strong confirma- 
 tion of any suspicions of the genuineness 
 of Pope Adrian's Bull. 
 
 We have shown that the evidence in favor 
 of the authentic character of the Papal 
 grant of Ireland to the English Crown must 
 be accepted with extreme caution, if not 
 with positive suspicion The authorities 
 upon which it has been so long received by 
 English historians as a strange but true 
 fact, prove, on examination, to be hardly 
 reliable sources of information. Many ex- 
 ternal circumstances, as well as the inher- 
 ent, intrinsic improbability of the "grant, ' 
 confirm the impartial mind in objecting to 
 receive it as undoubted history. Moreover, 
 the labors of the editor of the Analecta 
 have now made it possible to show with 
 reason that Adrian IV., so far from giving 
 any encouragement to Henry in his designs 
 on Ireland, in reality refused, when asked, 
 to be a party to the enterprise, and pointed 
 out the injustice of it. The idea of effect- 
 ing the conquest of the island had sug- 
 gested itself to the Conqueror and to Henry 
 L, and it was but natural that the project 
 should revive in the restless mind of Henry 
 II. It must have been evident, however, 
 
 .t The clause in the oath is not found in John 
 of Salisbury's account ; but Barouius inserts it 
 as found in the Vatican Archives. Also Mura- 
 t'irio t " Keruoi Italicarum Scriptores," torn. iii. 
 463. 
 
 Lingard, vol. ii. p. 191, note.
 
 no 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 that "an Eniflixh l\>pv would of necfxsity be 
 cautious in favoring any pretensions of his 
 own" countrymen against a neighboring 
 country. The knowledge that Adrian's ap- 
 proval would in all probability be withheld, 
 if the idea was started as an English 
 scheme, seems to have obliged Henry to 
 look for some other sovereign to help him 
 in obtaining the authorization of the Pon- 
 tiff for his design, and Louis VII. of France 
 was clearly the only prince in a position to 
 render him this service. On the theory that 
 for this purpose Henry wanted to make a tool 
 of Louis, we can explain a fact that has ap- 
 peared to puzzle annalists namely, why it 
 was that these two kings, who had been for a 
 longtime avowed enemies, suddenly, and by 
 the advances of Henry, became fast friends, 
 just at this very period, A. D., 1158. After 
 many years of war and contention Henry 
 met Louis at Rouen, and not only made 
 peace, but espoused his son to the infant 
 daughter of the French King. The Pope 
 wrote to the Chancellor of Louis to convey 
 his congratulations to the two sovereigns on 
 their complete reconciliation. The two pro- 
 ceeded together to Paris, and afterwards 
 made a joint pilgrimage to Mount St. 
 Michael's in Normandy.* So complete was 
 their reconciliation that at this time they 
 despatched a joint mission to Rome to ask 
 Adrian's blessing and approval of a hostile 
 expedition they were intending to make to- 
 gether. The choice of an Eng ishman as 
 an ambassador seems to point to the fact 
 that the projected enterprise was of more 
 importance to the English than to the 
 French King. Rotrodus, the envoy select- 
 ed^ was at that time (A. D. 1158) Bishop of 
 Evreux, and had been one of the witnesses 
 of the reconciliation between the two kings 
 He was much attached to the interests of the 
 English King, and had, from the time of 
 his coronation, at which he assisted, been 
 employed in several missions for his royal 
 master. Amongst others, as we have noted 
 before, he was in the embassy despatched to 
 Rome by Henry in 1155. It was thus a 
 courtier of Henry who was sent on this joint 
 mission from the two monarch*. 
 
 Mitne, " Patrol." torn. clx. p. 484. 
 t " Ga'lia Christiana," torn. ii. p. 776. See 
 aloo the Pope's letter in reply. 
 "Gallia Chmtiana,"*tom. iv. p. 633. 
 
 " Rotrodus arrived in Rome at the close 
 of the year 1158. or the beginning of the 
 following year, and informed the Pope of 
 the project entertained by Henry and Louis. 
 What this project was does not absolutely 
 appear, but there can be little doubt that it 
 was really the invasion of Ireland upon 
 which the mind of Henry was intent. In 
 order to give color to the pretensions it was 
 necessary to represent it as being intended 
 in reality as a crusade in favor of religion. 
 The Pope, however, would not enter into 
 the designs of the two kings, and refused to 
 be a party to such an injustice. He not only 
 refused the request of Bishop Rotrcdus, but 
 wrote to Louis at some length to point out 
 the reasons that compelled him to take this 
 course. On this letter can be based many 
 arguments to show that the attitude of Ad- 
 rian towards the proposals of the English 
 King as regards Ireland was one of strong 
 disapproval, and that granting that this let- 
 ter refers to Ireland, it would be impossible 
 for Adrian to have issued, very much about 
 the same time, the " Bull'' of donation at 
 the request of Jo^.n of Salisbury. 
 
 "In the first place, the Pope's letter 
 shows clearly enough that his consent 
 had been asked solely on the ground 
 that the expedition had a religious 
 character, and the fact of the reply 
 being addressed to Louis would, probably 
 only prove that Henry had taken care not 
 to be too prominent in the business for fear 
 that the real motive might become too ap- 
 parent to the English Pope. Adrian pro- 
 ceeds to say that he could not give consent to 
 any project of such a nature, unless he were 
 certain that the people and clergy of the conn- 
 try ivanted foreign interference. This, be it 
 remarked, is a very different sentiment to 
 that with which the same Pope is credited 
 in the alleged "Bull," The various dan- 
 gers which Louis is likely to run are then 
 pointed out to him by the Pope, and for 
 every reason he concludes not to give him 
 any " Bull" encouraging the project until 
 such time as he has warned the people of the 
 kingdom of the intention of the two kings, in 
 order to see whether they will co-operate 
 with them. In conclusion the Pontiff begs 
 the king to reflect well on the matter, and
 
 THB POPE AND IRBLAN*. 
 
 Ill 
 
 not to undertake the enterprise before consult- 
 ing the Bishops and cleray of the country 
 
 "It is well at once to declare that the 
 great difficulty in fixing the reference of this 
 letter to the design of invading Ireland is 
 the fact that the country is not mentioned 
 by name. Unfortunately, it was a com- 
 mon custom in the transcription of docu- 
 ments to write only the initial letter of 
 proper names. Thus, in this letter the en- 
 voy is called " R. " Bishop of Evreux, and 
 the country the two kings were anxious to 
 obtain the Pope's approval to invade is only 
 " El,"' which may stand equally well for 
 " Hispania" and " Hibernia." We are thus 
 left to the internal evidence of the docu- 
 ment itself to determine to which of these 
 two countries it has reference. Dr. Lin- 
 gard was apparently aware of the existence 
 of the letter, but it did not suggest itself 
 so his mind that it had any reference to Ire- 
 land. He says : " When Louis a few years 
 later (1159) meditated a similar expedition 
 into Spain, and for that purpose requested 
 the " consilium et favorem Romance Ec- 
 clesiee," the answer was very different. 
 Adrian dissuaded him because it was " in- 
 consulta ecclesia et populo teme illius." 
 
 " It is, however, clearly shown in the 
 Analecta that it is impossible that this letter 
 of Adrian, addressed to the two kings, can 
 have any reference to Spain, while every 
 circumstance in it tending to fix the special 
 country, gives weight to the opinion that it 
 was Ireland about which the Pope wrote. 
 It the first place, the document refers not 
 to a kingdom (regnum) but to a country 
 (terra). Now Ireland was not recognized as 
 a kingdom officially till the sixteenth cen- 
 tury, and in all formal papers before that 
 time it is constantly spoken of as a country 
 (terra) merely. Spain, on the other hand, 
 was at this time divided into three kingdoms 
 Castile, Aragon and Galicia ; and the 
 most powerful, the King of Castile, had the 
 title of Emperor. King Louis of France 
 had only a year or two before the date of 
 the letter (1155) made a pilgrimage to St. 
 James, and was well received by his father- 
 in-law the Emperor of Castile.] | Hence, not 
 
 ' History," vol. ii. p. 178, 5th ed., note, 
 i Robertas de Monte. Migne, "Patrol." torn, 
 clx. p. 478. 
 
 only have we the official title of Spain to be 
 a kingdom at the time when Adrian wrote, 
 but it is impossible to suppose that Louis 
 could have been so ignorant of the feelings 
 of a country in which he had not long be- 
 fore been journeying, and over which his 
 own father-in-law reigned as Emperor. 
 
 "Again, the country referred to in Adrian's 
 letter clearly had many princes or chiefs, 
 which was quite true of Ireland but not of 
 Spain, about the state of which the Pope 
 could not be ignorant. It also, undoubtedly, 
 must have posesssed its own episcopal hier- 
 archy, capable of free deliberation; for Adri- 
 an advises Louis and Henry to consult the 
 Bishops and Clergy as to their wish to receive 
 foreign intervention in their affairs. The 
 Church in that part of Spain, at this time 
 overrun by the Moors, had almost disap- 
 peared, and for the rest it would have been 
 quite unnecessary to ask the advice of the 
 Spanish Bishops as to punishing their op- 
 pressors. On the other hand, the Holy See 
 must have been well acquainted with the 
 flourishing state of the Church in Ireland at 
 this period. During the hundred and fifty 
 years which preceded the reign of Henry 
 II., numerous and well-attended Councils 
 had been held for the maintaince of disci- 
 pline and regulation of morals. Only a few 
 years before Henry made his first attempt 
 on the country, several great and renowned 
 Irish saints occupied Sees in the coun- 
 try, and a great Council was held at 
 Athboy at which 13,000 representatives 
 of the nation attended to hear what 
 the Church commanded. That Adrian 
 must have known the state of the Church 
 is rendered all the more likely since he 
 had studied in Paris under a celebrated Irish 
 professor, Marianus, afterwards a monk of 
 Ratisbon, for whom he conceived a great 
 affection. It was only to be expected, 
 therefore, that if he had this knowledge of 
 the Irish Church, he should require that the 
 Bishops and Clergy be consulted as to the 
 propriety of such an invasion as the French 
 and English kings contemplated. 
 
 "It musb be remembered, also, that 
 Adrian desires that the people of the coun- 
 try be consulted, a thing impossible in the 
 portions of Spain in possession of the Sara- 
 cens. He also, throughout, repeats his
 
 112 
 
 IIII. pnl'i: AND IHELAND. 
 
 doubts as to the utility and necessity of the 
 enterprise proposed by the kings, which 
 would certainly not have been the case had 
 their wish been merely to drive the infidel 
 out of Spain. It is obvious that Adrian, 
 like all his predecessors, would have been 
 only too glad to grant protection to the 
 kingdoms of France and England, had the 
 wish of the kings been merely to fight 
 against the Moors in Spain. 
 
 "Lastly, a comparison of the allfgcd 
 41 Bull" of Adrian and the authentic letter 
 brings out one or two strange facts. In the 
 first place, the document, as given by Giral- 
 dus, does not express the name or even the 
 
 initial of the prince to whom it was granted: 
 " Adrianus episcopus servus servorum Dei, 
 carisaimo in Christi filio illustri anglorura 
 regi salutem." Next, the preamble of the 
 " Bull" is almost word for word the same as 
 that of the letter written to Louis VII., in 
 1159, and although it might happen that a 
 few words of the two official documents 
 would be the same, there is no other example 
 of such a singular similarity, extending, as 
 it does, over ten or fifteen lines. As this 
 curious fact is the basis of a theory we shall 
 state in brief, to account for the forgery of 
 the ''Bull'' of Adrian, it is worth reproduc- 
 ing the two documents in order that our 
 readers may judge for themselves. 
 
 ADRIAN 8 LETTER TO LOUIS VII. 
 
 Satis laudabiliter et fructuose de Chris- 
 tiano nomine propagando in terris, et 
 se tern se beatitudims puemio tibi cumulando 
 in ccelis, tua videtur magnificentia cogitare, 
 dum ad dilatandos terminos populi Chris- 
 tiani, ad paganorum. barbariem debellandam 
 et ad gentes apostatrices, et qje catholic* 
 fidei refugiunt nee recipiunt veritatem, 
 Christianorum jugo et ditioni subdendas, 
 simul cum charissirao filio nostro Henrico il- 
 lustri Anglorum regi, in H. properare inten- 
 dis, et studes assidue (ut opus hoc felicem 
 exitum sortiatur) exercitum ut quae sunt 
 itineri necessaria congregare. Atque ad id 
 convenientius exsequendum, matris tuje 
 sacrosanctsB Romance Ecclesiae consilium 
 exigis et favorem. Quod quidem proposi- 
 turn tanto magis gratum acceptumque ten- 
 emus, et amplius sicut commendandum est, 
 commendamus, quanto de sinceriore charita- 
 tis radice talem intentionem et votum tarn 
 laudabile processum credimus, ac de majori 
 ardore fidei et religionis amore propositum 
 et desiderium tuum principium habuerunt. 
 
 " BULL' TO HENRY II. 
 
 Laudabiliter satis et fructuose de glorioso 
 nomine propagando, in terris, et setern 
 felicitatis praemio cumulando in coelis, tua 
 magnificentia cugitat; dura ad dilatandos Ec- 
 clesiie terminos ad declarandum indoctis et 
 rndibus populis Christiana? tidei veritatem et 
 vitiorum, plaiitaria de agro Dominico extir- 
 panda, sicut catholicus princeps intendis ; 
 et ad id convenientius exsequendum con- 
 silium Apostolicse sedis exigis, et favorem. 
 In quo facto, quanto altiori consilio et ma- 
 jori discretione procedis, tanto in eo feli- 
 ciorem progressuin te, pnestante Domino, 
 confidimus habiturum ; eo quod ad bonum 
 exitum semper et finem solent attingere, quee 
 de ardore fidei et religionis amore, princi- 
 pium acceperunt, etc. Significasti sequi- 
 dem nobis, fili in Christo carissime, te Hi- 
 bernise insulam. ad subdendum ilium popu- 
 lum legibus et vitiorum plantaria inde ex- 
 tirpanda, velle intrare, etc. NOB itaque, 
 pium et laudabile desiderium tuum cum 
 favore congruo prosequentes, et petitioni 
 bona) benignum impendences assensum, 
 gratum et acceptum habemus, ut pro dila- 
 tandis Ecclesia? termiriis, pro vitiorum re- 
 stringendo decursu, pro corrigendis moribus, 
 et virtutibus inserendis, pro Christiana? reli- 
 gionis augmento, insulam illam ingrediaris. 
 
 " It is almost impossible to compare the 
 two documents here given without coming 
 to the conclusion that the similiarity is not 
 the result of a mere accident. The idea con- 
 sequently suggests itself as possible that the 
 text of Adrian's actual refusal, as conveyed 
 to the kings in the letter brought back by 
 Rotrodus to Louis, was made to serve as the 
 basis of the forged "Bull." What is certain 
 about the matter is, that Louis and Henry 
 
 having applied to the Pope for his approba- 
 tion of a proposed invasion of a country 
 called by its initial letter "H." the Holy 
 Father refused to grant any such approba- 
 tion, and grounded his refusal upon reasons 
 similar to those by which he is supposed, 
 about the same time, to have been induced 
 to grant permission to Henry to invade Ire- 
 land. The two documents are strangely like 
 in form and expression, and every oircum-
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 113 
 
 stance, by which the country referred to by 
 the letter " H" may be identified, points to 
 the conclusion that it also was meant to re- 
 fer to the proposed Irish expedition. Of 
 course, had Adrian really refused the per- 
 mission asked for, as he clearly did in his 
 letter to Louis, the French king would have 
 known that any pretended permission was a 
 forgery ; and had the refusal been intended 
 to prevent any expedition to Ireland, the 
 " Bull" which is supposed to have sanc- 
 tioned it, could never have been produced 
 during the lifetime of the French king. A 
 reference to dates will show that this is so, 
 and that all mention of the existence of the 
 document was carefully avoided before the 
 year A. D. 1180, when Louis died.* The 
 silence which was kept for so many years 
 about so important a document, and one 
 which would have been so useful to Henry, 
 has often been remarked upon as suspicious, 
 and has puzzled many historians to explain. 
 May it not be accounted for by the knowl- 
 edge that such a forgery would be at once 
 detected by Louis ? 
 
 " In fact, although the secret of the ne- 
 
 *In A. D. 1177, Henry was chosen to arbitrate 
 between two Spanish kings. In this office he 
 Btyled himself " King of England, Duke of Nor- 
 mandy and Aquitaine, and Count of Anjou " 
 No mention is made of Ireland (Rymer, torn. i). 
 
 gotiations of Rotrodus with Adrian in be- 
 half of Henry and Louis was kept so well, 
 that the text of the Pope's refusal was until 
 lately almost unknown, still the annalist of 
 Anchin, who continued the chronicle of Sige- 
 bert, appears to have had some suspicion of 
 the fact. Speaking of the year A. D. 1171, 
 about the preparations made by Henry for 
 the invasion of Ireland, he says :t "Henry, 
 King of England, puffed up with pride, 
 and usurping things not conceded; striving 
 for things he had no business to do, pre- 
 pared ships and called together the soldiers 
 of his kingdom to conquer Ireland." 
 
 "Whether this theory as to the origin of 
 the " Bull" be correct or not, it can safely 
 be said that the evidence upon which the 
 authenticity of the document has so long 
 been held is at best very doubtful and should 
 be accepted with extreme caution. A careful 
 examination will, we believe, induce most 
 inquires to reject the "Bull" as em un- 
 doubted forgery, and to consider it more 
 than probable that Pope Adrian IV., so far 
 from granting any approbation to Henry in 
 his designs on Ireland or making any dona- 
 tion of that country to the English crown, 
 in reality positively refused to be a party to 
 such an injustice." 
 
 fMigne, "P<trologie," tome clx. p. SU7.
 
 114 
 
 THK POl'K AND IRELAND. 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 English Translation of Pope Adrian's Letter to King Louis VII. of France. The 
 I'.'pe's Refusal to allow Ireland to be Invaded. A Comparison Between the 
 Wording of the Letter and the Text of the Spurious Bull. Reasons why the 
 Fraud was not Exposed in Past Centuries. 
 
 The portion of the Latin text of the 
 Letter which Pope Adrian IV. sent to 
 King Louis VII. of France, which we 
 have already laid before our readers, will 
 reveal at once the corner-stone upon which 
 the fraudulent Bull, falsely attributed to 
 Pope Adrian IV. was founded. 
 
 On this point there can be no doubt 
 whatever, as the Latin text which we pub- 
 lished in last week's issue clearly shows the 
 close copying of the forger of the fraudu- 
 lent document from the original text of 
 the Letter which was purposely, and with 
 malice aforethought, concealed by King 
 Henry in the secret archives of Winchester 
 Castle. 
 
 The genuine Letter which Pope Adrian 
 sent to King Louis VII. of France is given 
 by Mansi as well as by Migne, and as 
 the history of that important document 
 will throw considerable light upon the 
 forged Bull, we append it for the better 
 understanding of the question at issue. 
 
 It is most likely that it was on the 
 occasion of the alliance between the two 
 royal families of France and England, and 
 at the meeting in Paris in the year 1158, 
 of the two monarchs Louis VII. of 
 France and Henry II. of England that 
 these two ambitious rulers came to the 
 determination that the invasion of Ireland 
 would not only give congenial employment 
 to a vast number of restless men of martial 
 mien in both kingdoms, but that such an 
 enterprise would also redound to the re- 
 nown of the allied monarchs, for the reason 
 that hitherto Ireland, though often invad- 
 ed, had never been conquered. 
 
 Both kinsrs had in their respective do- 
 minions large numbers of knights and veter- 
 ans whose only trade was war, and who 
 were becoming restless for want of an 
 opportunity to prove their prowess upon 
 some battlefield, either as invaders of some 
 
 foreign shore or as adventurers in extend- 
 ing the possessions of the respective mon- 
 archies under whose flag they gloried in 
 fighting. 
 
 It was necessary, therefore, to find some 
 congenial employment for these martial 
 spirits, many of whom had accompanied 
 King Louis himself, when, in 1145, that 
 monarch in conjunction with Conrad III., 
 of Germany, undertook to aid in capturing 
 Jerusalem from the Mussulmans, but were 
 ingloriously defeated through the treachery 
 of the Greeks, at the loss of four- fifths of 
 their forces. 
 
 In all probability the suggestion for the 
 invasion of Ireland was made by King 
 Henry, as such a scheme seems to have 
 been brooding in his brain for years previ- 
 ously. So when King Louis heard the 
 proposition, he discovered at once a mili- 
 tary enterprise which would furnish occupa- 
 tion for the thousands of restless military 
 heroes who were compelled to idleness 
 through peace. 
 
 King Louis, therefore, commenced at 
 once to call together his troops, to procure 
 munitions of war, prepare vessels for the 
 voyage, and to make all necessary prepa- 
 rations for invading Ireland. In order, 
 however, to conform to the custom of the 
 age, Louis deemed it right and proper to 
 address a diplomatic document to Pope 
 Adrian IV., in order to acquaint him with 
 the contemplated project, as well as to ask 
 the reigning Pontiff to extend his paternal 
 blessing upon the enterprise, and to issue a 
 Bull of Indulgences similar to those ap- 
 plied to the Crusaders, so that the martial 
 valor of the French military forces might 
 be aroused, and success crown the dual 
 scheme of the French and English plotters 
 against the peace of the Irish people. 
 
 Pope Adrian replied to the letter of King 
 Louis, but not in the affirmative manner
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 115 
 
 that monarch anticipated. So far from 
 encouraging and blessing the enterprise, 
 the Holy Father forbv.de such a contemplited 
 act of injustice against the Irish people. 
 
 After proving to the King of France, 
 by a very apt illustration, that an act or 
 project, in order to be acceptable to Al- 
 mighty God, and beneficial to those who 
 might successfully accomplish such a scheme, 
 should be good in every respect, and that 
 any deviation from the line marked out by 
 Heaven for its justice and propriety 
 would render such acts and such projects 
 unfit to be offered to God. The same 
 teaching is expressed by all theologians in 
 this maxim: " Bonum enim ex inteyra 
 causa; malum vero ex quolibet defectu." 
 
 The just and holy Pontiff defines the 
 King's duty as a Catholic prince, and then 
 Adrian the Just gives this sage counsel to 
 the French King : 
 
 "Furthermore, it appears to be neither 
 wise nor safe to enter for the object named 
 into a territory belonging to other people, 
 without first consulting Ihe wishes of tlw 
 princes and people of that territory. But 
 you, as We have been informed, have all 
 arrangements made, and are most eager to 
 make the journey, without having consult- 
 ed the Church or the princes of the country 
 that you are so anxious to enter. Uiider 
 no consideration should you attempt any- 
 thing of the kind until the necessity for 
 so doing is made manifest to you by the 
 princes of the country, and until you are 
 invited by them for the purpose specified. 
 
 Because We love with all the intensity of 
 Our heart your honor and exaltation, it is 
 Our wish that you enter into no such project 
 unless a reasonable cause exists for so 
 doing, and through this Letter We urge 
 your Excellency to find out from the 
 Princes of the country if there be a neces- 
 sity for carrying out this project of yours, 
 and also to enquire diligently what are the 
 wishes not only of the princes but also of 
 the Church and the people of the country 
 in regard to the journey you are contem- 
 plating, and to be directed as is just by 
 their wishes.* 
 
 *"TJnde quia DOS honorem et incrementum 
 tuum tota mentis intentione diligimns et nihil 
 tale aggredi, nisi ratioiiabili causa exi^ente vel- 
 
 " After you shall have done all that We 
 urge to be done in this matter," continues 
 the Pope, "if you should find that there 
 is a necessity for the journey, that is, that 
 the Church of the country advises you to 
 undertake it, and the princes call on you 
 for help, and unite their counsel to that of 
 the Church for the same purpose, you may, 
 under such circumstances, proceed <o act 
 and carry out your laudable intention, and 
 God's blessing shall accompany your ef- 
 forts, "t 
 
 "But should you enter the country under 
 any other circumstances, it would be to be 
 feared that your journey would be unfruit- 
 ful, and would not lead to the end desired. 
 The princes themselves, and the people of 
 the country, would be annoyed and op- 
 pressed by such an entrance as your project 
 implies, if there were no necessity for its 
 execution, and We Ourselves might be 
 regarded, for many reasons, as being rather 
 capricious in the matter. For, your Ex- 
 cellency ought to consider, and remember 
 how, on another occasion, when both Con- 
 rad of happy memory, formerly King of 
 the Romans, and yourself, unwisely under- 
 took without consulting the people of the 
 country the Jerusalem project, you both 
 failed to reap the advantages you looked 
 for, and what detriment and injury came 
 upon the Church of God, and the whole 
 Christian people, from that expedition. 
 Indeed, the Holy See suffered not a little 
 from its having advised and helped you in 
 that business, and all cried out with much 
 indignation against it, declaring that it was 
 the cause of the whole calamity. 
 
 " In fine, follow in the matter before us 
 for consideration, that counsel which you 
 know should be observed according to the 
 dictates of right reason. " 
 
 The wise and just Pontiff concludes his 
 
 lemus, sublimitati tuae presentibus nuademu* nt 
 prius necesnitatem teriae per principp* illius 
 resni inspiciaa, et considerec, et tern illius ec- 
 clesiae quam principnm et populi volnntattm 
 diligenter ii quiras, et ab eis consiliutn t-i.-ut 
 decet, accipia*.'' 
 
 f'Q'io facto, si et necessitatem teriae videria 
 imminere et eccleciae coni-ilium fuerit, ipsi etiam 
 ten 33 principes tuae snblimitatis auxilium poa- 
 tulaverint, et consilium dederint, jnxta pos f u- 
 lationem et consuUum eorum poteris postea in 
 facto ipso procedere et laudabile votutn tuum, 
 divino comitante praeeidio adimp'ere."
 
 116 
 
 THK POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 Letter by warning Kin Louis to receive 
 the words of Rotrodus, Bishop of Evreux, 
 ai if they came directly from the Vicar of 
 ChrUt, and he eulogizes in the highest 
 degree the prudence and virtue of that 
 great Bishop. 
 
 This Letter is dated from the Lateran, 
 12 kalend. Maii, apparently 1159-t 
 
 The sources from which the Letter of 
 Pope Adrian IV. to King Louis VII. of 
 France, has been procured, renders that 
 most important document thoroughly genu- 
 ine beyond a shadow of doubt. People do 
 not forge documents containing refusals, 
 and, moreover, the Letter itself is as much 
 in keeping with the undeviating principles 
 and implicit rectitude of Pope Adrian IV., 
 as the spurious Bull is diametrically an- 
 tagonistic thereto. 
 
 Inasmuch as some of our readers might 
 resurrect the now obsolete objection that 
 the letter " H" in the document which Pope 
 Adrian IV., sent to King Louis VII., of 
 France, referred to Spain, it is well to anti- 
 cipate such an objection by fortifying what 
 we have already said upon this matter, 
 through the introduction of additional testi- 
 mony which will show plainly to every dis- 
 cerning mind that by the letter 'IT'the 
 Holy Father meant Hibetnia, Ireland, and 
 not Hispania, Spain. 
 
 Before proceeding with our additional 
 proofs, however, we will state the fact that 
 the first person to assert that the letter 
 " H" in Pope Adrian's missive to King 
 Louis alluded to JHispjinia, Spain, was a 
 Calvinist, named James Bongars, born at 
 Orleans, in France, in the year 1546, and 
 who afterwards became the counsellor and 
 steward of the French King Henry IV., 
 and was also employed by that prince 
 as his Ambassador at the Court of Ger- 
 many. During his official career he came 
 into possession of a large number of manu- 
 scripts belonging to the Library of Saint - 
 Benoit-sur-Loire, which were scattered in 
 consequence of that abbey having been 
 
 t Bougara, Geita Dei pir Franco*, pag. 1174. 
 Andre Diibchesne, Berum francigcarum Scrip- 
 tore*, Tom. iv. pa. 557. Dom. Bouquet. Re- 
 cueil des historians, Tom. 15. Migne, Patro- 
 logie, Tom. 188. Col. 1615. 
 
 pillaged by the Calvinists. In addition to 
 these valuable documents, Bongars also pro- 
 cured by purchase a great many important 
 manuscripts which were originally a portion 
 of the valuable collection stored in the Li- 
 brary of the Cathedral of Strasbourg. 
 
 Bongars died at Paris, in the year 1612, 
 the year following the publication of a work 
 known as the Geata Dei per Francos a vol- 
 ume which has become very valuable in the 
 great question under debate. 
 
 The letter of Pope Adrian IV., to King 
 Louis VII., of France, which we have al- 
 ready presented to our readers, first ap- 
 peared in the Geata Dti per Francos,** 
 where it is catalogued as the 28th. among 
 the missives written to King Louis Vil , 
 by Kings, Princes and Prelates. Twenty- 
 seven of these letters were borrowed from 
 the valuable collection of manuscripts in the 
 library of President Petau, but Bongars 
 does not mention the source from which he 
 procured the 28th. letter, viz : the missive 
 sent by Adrian IV., to King Louis VII. It 
 is not unlikely, however, that all these let- 
 ters were originally the property of the 
 Abbey Saint Benoit-sui-Loire, and it is not 
 improbable that Bongars had given them all 
 with the exception of the Adrian- Louis 
 missive to President Petau, retaining the 
 latter document in his own posession until 
 after the death of the editor or collector of 
 these letters. 
 
 Thirty years later a French bibliophile, 
 found these valuable documents in the pos- 
 session of Alexander Petau, Senator or 
 Counsellor of the French Assembly. They 
 appeared in the 4th. tome of a work entitled 
 Rerum Franciccarum Sc* iptorfs, published 
 in the year 1641, shortly after the death of 
 the editor. 
 
 The compiler tells us that the manuscript 
 of these letters is ancient, ft As already 
 stated, the volume did not appear until 
 af er the demise of Andrew Duschene, but 
 this learned man doubtless was aware of the 
 fact that Bongars had previously published 
 these letters. 
 
 The Abbey of St Victor, in Paris, pos- 
 
 *P. 1174, Hanovias 1611. 
 
 tfEputorarum volumen, qias Pontiftces Ro- 
 uiitni, etc.. ad Ludovicum VII. Scripi-erunt, ex 
 veteri codice MSS. viri clar. Alexandri Petavii 
 Senatoris Pariaiensis nunc primum editum 1041.
 
 THE POPE AND I BEL AND. 
 
 117 
 
 seased another manuscript copy of these val- 
 uable letters, a fact borne out by the tes- 
 timony of the editor of the Duschene vol- 
 ume, in these words : " Whence it can 
 easily be conjectured that this collection 
 of letters was made by some Abbot or 
 Canon of the Monastery of Saint Victor, in 
 Paris."+:t 
 
 The manuscripts owned by President 
 Petau were considered so extremely valuable 
 that they were ultimately purchased for 
 their weight in gold by Queen Christina of 
 Sweden, who presented them to the Vati- 
 can Library, and thus greatly enriched that 
 vast storehouse of historical lore, and also 
 saved to the world valuable testimony on 
 the present historical question. 
 
 Bongars was the first to interpret the ini- 
 tial " H" in the letter of Pope Adrian IV. 
 to King Louis VII., as meaning Hispania, 
 Spain. And, when it is taken into considera- 
 tion that this man was a Calvinist at a time 
 when that persecuting sect was most bitterly 
 waging a blood-thirsty persecution against 
 the Church, it is easy to surmize that such 
 an arbitrary decision was not altogether un- 
 designed on the part of Bongars. 
 
 Like the numerous errors, calumnies and 
 falsehoods of Cambrensis, this wrong inter- 
 pretation of the letter "H" by Bongars, has 
 led subsequent writers into erroneous con- 
 clusions, simply because they did not stop 
 to consider the prejudiced source from 
 whence this opinion came. 
 
 Right here this important question will 
 no doubt suggest itself to the minds of 
 many of our readers : ' Did the Calvinist 
 Bongars have any peculiar sectarian interest 
 in keeping the world in ignorance of the 
 fact that Pope Adrian IV., so far from 
 having authorized the iniquitous invasion of 
 Ireland had, on the contrary, formally dis- 
 suaded the Kings of both England and 
 France from any such scheme, and openly 
 refused his consent to any such expedition ?" 
 
 One thing is certain, that the publication 
 of Pope Adrian's letter to the French King, 
 if published in the year 1611, and made 
 known to the English-speaking world, would 
 
 tJFuit et simile olim exemplar in Bibliotheca 
 Canonicorum Regularium Sancti Victoiis, Paris. 
 Not : 11,22. Kerum Franciccarum Tom. IV , 
 pag. 557. 
 
 have subsequently exercised a wonderful 
 influence in thwarting the pretensions of 
 England in proclaiming its supremacy over 
 Ireland by authority of any Bull or (.-ther 
 Papal document. 
 
 Another question which naturally sug- 
 gests itself in this connection is this : Could 
 it be possible for a Calvinist to so denude 
 himself of his determined and diabolical 
 hatred of both Popes and Popery, as by 
 any act of his to let a single beam of the 
 light of truth fall upon the falsely -sullied 
 character of a Pope whose memory, for so 
 many centuries, had been clouded by a cal- 
 umnious charge coated with the blackest 
 odium ? The answer to this question will 
 suggest itself to every mind enlightened by 
 the knowledge of the black-hearted bigotry 
 which has constantly been demonstrated by 
 Calvinists against the Catholic Church. 
 
 Now let us return to the consideration of 
 the letter " H 1 ' in Pope Adrian's letter, so 
 as to adduce a few more proofs in substan- 
 tiation of what we have already asserted 
 i. e. that the letter of Pope Adrian to Louis 
 VI[., could not possibly have referred to 
 Spain, and that it necessarily alluded to Ire- 
 land alone. 
 
 Aside from all other reasons why " H" 
 could not mean Hispania, it would appear 
 perfectly ridiculous for the King of France 
 to ask permission of the Pope to help the 
 King of Castile, who was his own father-in- 
 law. Again, if Spain was the objective point 
 against which the English and French mon- 
 archs desired to move in martial array, why 
 select the Englishman, Rotrodus, Bishop of 
 Warwick, to undertake negotiations therefor 
 with the Holy Father ? 
 
 And again, let us look at the text of the 
 Adrian letter and ask any impartial reader 
 it by any remote possibility even, these 
 words could apply to Moorish Spain : 
 
 "The Clergy, the Princes and the people must 
 be consulted, and their wishes with respect to 
 intervention must be followed." 
 
 It is entirely unnecessary to dilate on 
 this point, as every reader of history knows 
 that Pope Adrian could never intend such 
 an allusion to refer to a country many of 
 whose inhabitants were at that period Mos-
 
 118 
 
 THK 1'Ol'E AND IUELAND. 
 
 leiu enemies of the Church, and who were 
 consequently at direct enmity with the 
 Spanish Clergy and the Christian rulers of a 
 portion of Spain. In order, however, to 
 meet any captious critic who may adopt the 
 Culvinistic interpretation of the letter "H" 
 as inspired by Bongars, let us suppose that 
 Pope Adrian's letter had no reference 
 either remote or immediate -to Ireland. 
 Would such an admission, even if true, mili- 
 ta e against our defence of Pope Adrian 
 IV. ] By no means ! The sterling senti- 
 ments of that grand Pontiff no matter what 
 country they allude to stand as a trium- 
 phant refutation of the moss-covered cal- 
 umny which has clouded his memory during 
 (he past seven centuries. 
 
 Pope Adrian's letter expresses the Chris- 
 tian grandeur and integrity of his soul ; his 
 sublime nobility of character, and his un- 
 flinching integrity in defending the rights of 
 an inoffensive people about to be assailed in 
 their own land ! 
 
 With pride then, we ask : Could a Pope 
 who gave such divine, such heaven-born in- 
 structions as are found in Pope Adrian's 
 letter to King Louis, ever be capable of 
 concocting the vile, unchristian document 
 which the hireling Cambrensis ushered into 
 the world as King Henry's title to a land 
 which has ever since been crucified on the 
 Calvary of British injustice ? 
 
 These points add still another link to the 
 chain of cumulative evidence which clearly 
 proves that neither Pope Adrian IV., nor 
 Alexander III., ever issued the diabolical 
 documents attributed to them, and which, 
 by the way, neither Bongars nor Duschene 
 met with among all the 12th century manu- 
 scripts they investigated. 
 
 Now let us call the particular attention 
 of the reader to some very interesting 
 points of peculiar similarity between the 
 genuine Letter and the spurious Bull, so as 
 to convince every candid reader that King 
 Henry II. of England forged the Bull by 
 which he is said to have acquired Ire- 
 land through Pope Adrian IV. 
 
 In the genuine Letter of Pope Adrian 
 IV. it is said that King Louis VII. of 
 France had gathered an army and provided 
 munitions of war and all other things 
 
 necessary for making both a journey by 
 land as well as a voyage by sea : " Studes 
 assidue . . . exercitum, et qua; sunt iten- 
 eri necessaria congregare." It is scarcely 
 necessary to say that a military expedition 
 on land required nothing more than a 
 well- equipped army, and thus we discern 
 that the expedition regarding which Louis 
 VII. of France, and Henry II. of England, 
 sent a joint letter to the Pope, consulting 
 him regarding the project, alluded to Ire- 
 land, and not to Spain, as some writers 
 erroneously assert. 
 
 The true Letter reads thus: ''Jit //. 
 properare intendis," and in the Apocryphal 
 Bull : Significastj, nobis, te HibernitK in- 
 sulam .... vette intrare .... Gratum 
 habemus ut . . . . insulam. illam ingredi- 
 aris." These expressions seem to indicate 
 that there is question of penetrating into 
 the interior of Ireland, and, moreover, they 
 plainly indicate that the King of England 
 occupied some points on the Irish sea coast, 
 while the fact is that it was about ten years 
 after the death of Pope Adrian IV. that 
 the Norman invaders and King Henry took 
 possession of Waterford and Dublin. This 
 latter fact, alone, clearly shows the utter 
 impossibility of the bogus Bull ever having 
 emanated from Pope Adrian, ever having 
 being sent to King Henry from Rome or 
 from any other place in Europe whose soil 
 was ever pressed by the foot-prints of a 
 successor of St. Peter ! 
 
 The forgers who fabricated the fraudulent 
 Bull were evidently ignorant of the very 
 important fact that all Bulls of concession 
 of investiture were Consistorial acts which 
 required the signatures of the Cardinals. 
 But inasmuch as many members of the 
 College of Cardinals who flourished during 
 the pontificate of Pope Adrian were still 
 alive when the bogus Bull was under the 
 stylus of some British caligrapher, it would 
 never do to sign the names of any Cardinals 
 to such a fraudulent document, hence the 
 name of Adrian IV. was made to do duty 
 solitary and alone, and the owner of that 
 name having died about thirty years previ- 
 ously, the forger had little to fear that 
 Pope Adrian IV. would discover the fraud ! 
 
 Finally, the forgery of both the so-called
 
 THE POl'E AND IltELAND. 
 
 119 
 
 Adrian and Alexander Bulls is so palpable 
 it is actually amazing that the trans- 
 parent fraud had not long ages ago aroused 
 the suspicions of historians who could have 
 penetrated into the vitals of the vicious 
 documents and dissected the diabolical in- 
 ventions for the enlightenment of the whole 
 world. 
 
 That such a discovery was not made 
 several centuries ago, can be accounted for 
 only on the hypothesis that no historical 
 writer took the time or trouble to compare 
 the documents before him, to analyze their 
 language, or to subject the dates, facts and 
 circumstances set forth to that scrutiny 
 which has resulted in such a triumph for 
 truth and justice, and gained such a glori- 
 ous victory for the Popes so long maligned 
 by ignorant and designing men, and also 
 for that Church which has been the recipi- 
 ent of the calumny of even some of her 
 own children, but of whom she can with 
 great truth say : "Father, forgive them, 
 for they know not what they do." 
 
 Among the multitude of facts which we 
 have brought forward to prove the spurious 
 character of the forged Papal documents 
 
 under consideration, there is still another 
 circumstance which will add strength to all 
 that has already been said on this subject, 
 and that is the instinct (which to us appears 
 to have been super- human), by which every 
 Pope prudently refrained from making any 
 direct official reference to the fraudulent 
 document falsely attributed to Pope Adrian 
 IV. even upon important occasions when 
 it might seem judicious to allude to it 
 casually or to mention it directly. 
 
 This fact comes forcibly before us in the 
 action of the Cardinals who officiated at 
 Avranches, when King Henry swore that 
 he had no intention to be accessory to the 
 murder of St. Thomas A'Becket, as well as 
 in the case of such Pontiffs as Innocent 
 II I., John XXII., Paul IV., and St. Pius 
 V., in his Bull against Elizabeth ; Gregory 
 XIII. and Clement VIII., all of whom had 
 frequent occasion to mention both the 
 Adrian and the Alexander "Bulls," vhen 
 treating of subject matters relating to Ire- 
 land. But no doubt these Pontiffs ha> I no 
 faith in the forged diplomas, and thus they 
 ignored them altogether as entirely- un- 
 worthy of their notice.
 
 120 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 The Papal Court of the Fourteenth Century had no Knowledge Concerning the Bogus 
 Adrian Bull. The Letter Sent by King Edward of England to Pope John XXII. 
 Reply of that Pontiff. Letter from O'Neil, King of Ulster, to Pope John XXII. 
 Comments thereon Proving that the Spurious Adrian Bull never Originated in 
 Home, nor was its Genuine Character ever admitted by the Irish People. 
 
 In the year 1310, a short time after the 
 election of Pope John XXII., King Ed- 
 ward of England sent three plenipotenti- 
 aries to Rome in order to place in the 
 hands of the Holy Father the tribute of 
 one thousand pounds sterling promised by 
 John Lackland, and to offer the excuses 
 of his Majesty for the tardiness of payment, 
 there being then about twenty-four annui- 
 ties in arrears. The annalist who succeeded 
 Baronius publishes the King's Letter in 
 which Edward makes no mention of any 
 portion of the same as coming from Ireland. 
 
 If Pope John XXII. had any knowledge 
 of the existence of the Adrian and Alex- 
 ander Bulls, he must have entertained a 
 very peculiar idea of King Edward's hon- 
 esty when that monarch informed him that 
 there were twenty four years indebtedness 
 of Peter Pence due from a nation that had 
 first promised to pay it in 1156 under the 
 supposed Bull of Pope Adrian ! From 1156 
 to 1316 is one hundred and sixty years, 
 and Pope John would certainly have re- 
 minded King Edward of this fact in their 
 financial agreement, if such a Bull could 
 be discovered anywhere in the Papal ar- 
 chive* ! 
 
 Pope John XXII. was one of those Pon- 
 tiffs who took deep interest in all matters 
 that concerned the welfare of the Holy 
 See, and no doubt he gave this question of 
 the Adrian Bull a rigid investigation. Be- 
 sides, his Holiness was assisted in such 
 secular concerns by a staff of saintly, able 
 and erudite men such as the eminent 
 Dominican Bernard Guido and others. Yet, 
 after all the scrutiny devoted to the search 
 for the Adrian and Alexander Bulls, by 
 these archivists and officers of the Vatican, 
 not a solitary trace of either of these docu- 
 ments coidd be dif covered ! 
 
 The annals of the Church kept in Rome 
 
 failed to reveal a particle of evidence that 
 would throw any light upon the two Eng- 
 lish documents. The Cardinals had never 
 heard of them, common rumor had never 
 mentioned them and thus the bogus Bulls 
 of both Adrian and Alexander were aa 
 unknown to the Pope of Rome in the year 
 1316, as any other document could be that 
 nerer had a legitimate existence ! 
 
 The Pope wrote a reply to King Edward, 
 in answer to the epistle which he sent by 
 his equerries, and therein he tells Edward 
 that John Lackland delivered up his king- 
 dom, with its rights and dependencies, to 
 the Pope of Rome ; that the English King 
 promised- for himself and his successors 
 that he and they would render proper hom- 
 age, and pay the annual tribute, under pain 
 of forfeiture. "All this," says the Pope, 
 "is known both by rumor and from the 
 Chronicles.* 
 
 It follows, therefore, in the most logical 
 manner, that neither the officials around 
 the Pontifical court, nor Pope John himself, 
 had ever heard of the existence of these 
 bogus Bulls. 
 
 Let us suppose, however, that the annals 
 of Giraldus Cambrenais, Raoul de Diceto, 
 Mathew Paris, Roger of Wendover, and all 
 the other Englishmen who who had com- 
 piled Chronicles for more than a century 
 previous, were entirely unknown in Rome, 
 would the Pope have rested satisfied? 
 Certainly not. His Holiness would have ap- 
 plied to the text of the official Regesta, then 
 the Bullarium would have been tried, and 
 when that failed, the Vicar of Christ would 
 have referred to public rumor (fama ncti- 
 ficat) in order to ascertain some information 
 concerning the existence of such ecclesias- 
 tical compacts with two English Kings. 
 
 So certain is it that the Pontifical Court 
 
 * " Prout haec omniafama notijicat, et chroni- 
 carum twpectio manifestat."
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 121 
 
 had no knowledge of the Adrian and Alex- 
 ander Bulls, that the Irish people, when they 
 felt themselves constrained to send a long 
 letter of complaint to Pope John XXII., 
 enclosed a copy of the spurious Adrian Bull 
 to the Holy Father and to the Cardinal 
 Legates. 
 
 In his reply to the complaint of the Irish 
 petitioners, Pope John spoke precisely as 
 any person would who harbored grave doubts 
 as to the genuineness of the documents 
 aent to him 
 
 In reference to the bogus Adrian Bull 
 hia Holiness wrote : " Quas (litteras) prae- 
 dictus Adrianus Praedecessor noster eidem 
 ivgi Angliae de terra Hiberniae Concessisse 
 dicitur," the translation of which is : Which 
 letter the aforesaid Adrian, our predecessor, 
 is a lid t-> h'ive conceded to the same Henry 
 King of England, in reference to the coun- 
 try of Ireland." 
 
 This is plain and positive proof that the 
 tirsc intimation Pope John XXII. ever had 
 that such a document as Pope Adrian's 
 Bull to King Henry of England had any 
 existence, was when he received it from the 
 people of Ireland who used it as an argu- 
 menttim ad hominem against the cruelties 
 and injustice which the King of. England s 
 minions in Ireland were then subjecting 
 them to. 
 
 The chiefs and the Irish people of the 
 Province of Ulster, being no longer able or 
 willing to undergo the robbery, rapine, 
 cruelty and injustice heaped upon them 
 by their British tyrants, broke out in re- 
 bellion and called to their assistance Ed- 
 ward Bruce, brother of the celebrated hero 
 Robert Bruce, King of Scotland. In order 
 that their rebellion might be justified in 
 the estimation of the then reigning Pontiff 
 and the Catholic princes of the whole world, 
 the Irish sent couriers to the two Cardinal 
 Legates, Joscelin and Fieschi, then living 
 in Scotland, enclosing a copy of the so- 
 called Adrian Bull for the purpose of point- 
 ing out the fact that its conditions having 
 been ignored by the English monarchs 
 the whole document was void in consequence 
 of such violations. 
 
 When Pope John XXII. received the 
 
 Letter of complaint from the Irish people, 
 he caused a Brief to be addressed to King 
 Edward, fo which the following is a correct 
 translation, there being in existence several 
 fahe translations which were purposely 
 made through English influence, in order to 
 make it appear that the Pope sent to the 
 King of England a transcript of the Adrian 
 Bull as he found it in the Vatican archives; 
 
 JOHN, Bishop, Servant of the Servants of 
 God, to Edward, Illustrious King of 
 England, Health and Apostolic Bene- 
 diction. 
 
 The earnest exhortations which We address to 
 you, Dearly Beloved Son, in order to move you 
 to do what is pleasing to the truly just Judge, 
 to preserve peace in the countries and among the 
 subjects of your kingdom ; to provide for all 
 that can contribute to your renown and glory, 
 emanate from a paternal heart which desires the 
 exaltation of your Excellency. You ought then 
 to receive them with affection, and show your- 
 self prompt and docile in fulfilling them. 
 
 We have received a Letter which the Rulers 
 and people of Ireland sent some time ago to our 
 Dear Sons Joscelin, Cardinal Priest of the 
 titles of SS. Peter and Marcellinns, and Luke 
 Fieschi, Cardinal Deacon, of the title of St. 
 Mary Inviolata, Nuncios of the Apostolic See. 
 This Letter these same Cardinals have trans- 
 mitted enclosed in their own Letter to Us. 
 
 In these Letters from the Irish, among other 
 things, we have read that Pope Adrian, our 
 predecessor of happy memory, having, under a 
 certain manner and form expressed in the Apos- 
 tolic Letters drawn up for that purpose, con- 
 ceded the domain of Ireland to your ancestor 
 King Henry II. of illustrious memory. That 
 Prince and his successors the king* of England 
 until this day, far from observing the aforesaid 
 manner and form, have, on the contrary, trans- 
 gressed against all rule, and by cruel vexations, 
 unheard of oppressions, unsupportable servitude 
 and most, inhuman tyranny, crushed the Irish 
 in a manner so much the more unfortunate and 
 unsupportable as that tyranny has lasted so 
 long, and no one until this day has repaired the 
 wrongs done, nor put a stop to the disorders. 
 No one has had compassion on their misfor- 
 tunes, although they have many times addressed 
 their complaints to you, and although the cry 
 of the oppressed had reached your ears. These 
 are the reasons why, not being any longer able 
 to support their condition, they have been con- 
 strained to withdraw themselves from your 
 house and to call in another prince to govern 
 them. 
 
 If these complaints are well founded, dearly 
 beloved Son, they affect us so much the more 
 intensely, as we are most anxious that all your
 
 122 
 
 THE POPK AND IRELAND. 
 
 affairs may tarn out well and prosperously for 
 you. You should exert all your care to remedy 
 the evils, and act with promptness in striving to 
 please your Creator in this matter. Beware of 
 doing anything that may provoke God Himself 
 the Lord of vengeance againit yon. Him 
 who does not despise even one of the sighs of 
 those who are unjustly treated, and Who, as a 
 punishment for injustices, rejected His chosen 
 people, and transfened from them His kingdom 
 as we learn from the Holy Scriptures. 
 
 At a period so disturbed as this is. We desire 
 most earnestly also that you will adopt the 
 measures that will bring back to yourself the 
 affection and submission of the people complain- 
 ing, and that you avoid everything that can 
 detach them from your service. 
 
 As it is to your highest interest to arrest new 
 charges, and to remedy at once the trouble 
 which may increase and become irremediable, 
 We seriously solicit your Royal Excellency, and 
 prudently counsel you to reflect wisely and to 
 act promptly, through ways and means that are 
 suitable, in order that you may pat a stop to the 
 complaints, and that you may effect reforms 
 which will arrest movements that are so danger- 
 ous. You can in this way please Him by whom 
 yon rule, and by fulfilling faithfully your duty 
 yon will put an end to all complaints. 
 
 Then there will be room for hoping that the 
 Irish, being inspired with better counsels, will 
 submit to your authority, or even, if they wish 
 to persist in the rebellion inaugurated (which 
 may God foibid) they will transform their 
 cause into a flagrant ID justice, and you wil 
 stand excused before God and man. 
 
 In crder that you may thoroughly understand 
 the griefs and complaints upon which the Irish 
 lay stress, we enclose iu the present Letter, the 
 oue which they had transmitted through the 
 undersigned Cardinals to Us, and We join with 
 it the one which, it it said, Our predecessor 
 Adrian granted to said Henry, King of Eng- 
 land, in regard to the land of Ireland. 
 
 Given in the Srd Kalends of July 29th of 
 June. 
 
 Tt is scarcely necessary to call particular 
 attention to the severity with which Pope 
 John XXII. lashes the oppressions con- 
 demned by the divine law and conscience, 
 nor to point out in any extended remarks 
 how that Pontiff informs the King that the 
 cause of the Irish will be entirely just if he 
 does not speedily put an end to the iniqui- 
 ties perpetrated against the Irish people 
 for so long a period. 
 
 This language is not such as would be 
 used by Pope John XXII., if he had the 
 
 slightest notion that his predecessor Adrian 
 IV. had donated Ireland to an English 
 King. Again : If Pope Innocent III. had 
 accepted the suzerainty of Ireland which 
 King John offered to him at the same time 
 that he offered England, would Pope John 
 XXII. have omitted all mention of such 
 an important diplomatic transaction ? Would 
 he have confined his counsel to the King 
 within the limits of "justice and con- 
 science" ? Would he not rather have 
 charged his Legates to have the case of 
 Ireland's complaint against the English 
 King brought before them, who would then 
 give judgment in the case between the 
 Papal feudatory King and his Irish vassals 
 who would also have become the vassals of 
 the Church of Rome ? Moreover, he would 
 have written direct to the representatives 
 of the Irish people, in order to assure them 
 of redress for their grievances, and to put 
 an end to the wrongs that were perpetrated 
 in their land. As Pope John XXII. did 
 not act thus, we claim his failure to cany 
 out such a line of duty, as another proof 
 against the authenticity of the so-called 
 Adrian Bull. 
 
 We have said that false, trans' 'at ions 
 have been made of the letter of Pope John 
 XXII., by biased British writers, and here 
 is a britf explanation of the crime thus 
 committed. According to the continuator 
 of Baronius, who collated the original 
 Regesta, Pope John XXII. expressed him- 
 self doubtingly on the subject of the so- 
 called Adrian Bull, when he used the words 
 " concessisse dicitur," but the British copy- 
 ists, with the desire to falsify the Pope's 
 expression of doubt, have made the passage 
 read thus: " Adrianus Henrico regi Au- 
 gliae de terra Ibernise concessit." Accord- 
 ing to that false rendering, the Pontiff 
 would have admitted without dispute the 
 authenticity of the Bull of Adrian, and 
 thus falsehood and fraud would have tri- 
 umphed over truth and justice. 
 
 So cleverly was Uu's mistranslation effect- 
 ed that some Irish writers themselves, not 
 suspecting such sinful scheming on the part 
 of prejudiced English historians, have, in 
 many cases, copied the English "concessit." 
 Thus, Peter Lombard, Archbiahop of AT-
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 123 
 
 ina^h, representing the Irish people at 
 Rome during the Pontificate of Pope Clem- 
 ent VIII., followed the interpolated text 
 in his work, " Annals of Ireland.''* 
 
 Abbe MacGeoghegan, who published his 
 history at Paris in 1758, copied from Lom- 
 bard, but ho would have discovered the 
 fraud had he consulted " Baronius' Annals," 
 which gave the true text in these words : 
 
 " Ut autem de praedictis gravaminibus et 
 querelis quibus praedicti innituntur Ibernici, 
 tuis sensihus innotescat ad plenum prce- 
 dictas litteras missas Cardinalibus antedic- 
 tis, turn formam litterarum quas praedictus 
 Adrianus praedecessor noster eidem Henrico 
 Regi A" glue de terra Hibernae concessisse 
 didt'ir, tuae magnitudini mittimus prae- 
 sentibus interclusas.''t 
 
 The remarkable circumspection of Pope 
 John XXII., in quietly repudiating the 
 Bull manufactured by King Henry II. in 
 Pope Adrian's name, is increased several 
 degrees when it is known that the repre- 
 sentatives of the Irish people who sent the 
 letter of complaint against King Edward to 
 that Pontiff, seemed to imagine that the 
 Adrian forgery was a genuine Papal docu- 
 ment which, they alleged, was obtained by 
 fraud. $ 
 
 On the other hand it is well known to all 
 persons familiar with Irish history, that the 
 vast majority of the people of Ireland, 
 constantly and persistently rejected the 
 so called " Bull" falsely attributed to Pope 
 Adrian as spurious, false and apocryphal. 
 This fact is susceptible of proof in many 
 vays, but we will give a single instance 
 
 * Page 260, Louvain edition, 1632. 
 
 tAnnal. Baron. Ami. 1317, N. 43. [Judge 
 Maguire, in his bad book, asks this question : 
 " Where did Pope John XXII., get the copy of 
 Adrian's Bull which he sent to the King of Eng- 
 1 uicl, if the Bull itself was not in Rome ?" Thia 
 (('isation is answered above. The Ulster Irish 
 seat a copy of the false Bull to that Pope, and 
 John XXII. transmitted the same copy to the 
 English King, as he had neither use for it nor 
 faith ir. its authenticity.] 
 
 J Vide MacGeoghegan Hiat. Ireland, p 33. 
 
 which will serve to furnish sufficient evi- 
 dence to justify our assertion. 
 
 The Library Barberini, of Rome, con- 
 tains a fourteenth century manuscript com- 
 prising numerous original documents relat- 
 ing to the Pontificate of Pope John XXII., 
 and embracing events which occurred during 
 the period of which we are at present 
 treating. Among the manuscripts is a let- 
 ter from the Royal Council of Dublin, 
 accusing the Irish of various misdemeanors 
 displeasing to their English appointed rulers, 
 and among the most heinous crimes charged 
 against them is their treasonable and un- 
 pardonable custom of perpetually declaring 
 that King Henry II. of England, and his 
 successors, employed fraud and spurious 
 Papal Bulls in order to support their pre- 
 tended dominion over Ireland. 
 
 Writers who desire to prejudice the 
 reading public against the Popes, and who 
 have some particular reason for spreading 
 falsehood so as to divorce the Ir.sh Catholic 
 people from their allegiance to the Vicar 
 of Christ, falsely assert that the document 
 which we have laid before our readers 
 represented the sentiments of the Irish- 
 people, whereas the letter in question was 
 sent by O'Neill, King of Ulster, who took 
 to himself the title of heirahip of all Ire- 
 land, but such a very violent presumption 
 by no means proves that the admissions 
 made in that letter concerning the so- 
 called Adrian "Bull" should be set down 
 as the unanimous opinion of the whole peo- 
 ple of Ireland, the great majority of whom 
 had neither hand, act nor part in concocting 
 the O'Neill letter to Pope John XXII., 
 nor did they place any reliance whatever 
 upon the British made "Bulls" under 
 which King Henry claimed authority to 
 unjustly invade, rob and ruin both the tem- 
 poral and the spiritual rights of the Irish 
 people. 
 
 " Asserrentes etiam Domiuum regem Au- 
 gliae ex falsa suggeatione et ex falsia Bullis ter- 
 rain Hibtrniae impetrasse, ac communiter hot 
 tenentes."
 
 124 
 
 THK I'OI'K AND IRELAND. 
 
 CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 The Erection of Ireland into a Kingdom by Pope Paul IV. How English Fraud 
 Accomplished that Object. Comments on Certain Expressions in the Letter 
 of Pope John XXII. Rome's Equal and Exact Justice Exemplified. Eng- 
 land's Vicious Methods Illustrated. 
 
 Up to the year 1555, Ireland was known 
 in all public acts and official documents as 
 "The Land of Ireland." Anterior to that 
 date the word "Kingdom," never meant 
 Ireland, except in the bogus. Bull attribu- 
 ted to Pope Adrian, when the forger forgot 
 this fact and inscribed the wrong word in 
 that spurious document. 
 
 In all official mention of the Kings of 
 England, from the time of the invasion, 
 these monarchs were known as Lords of 
 Ireland, nothing more. " Land of Ireland" 
 was the appellation used in all the Bulls, 
 Rescripts and Encyclicals from Rome. Of 
 this fact we have sufficient proof in the 
 genuine Letter of Pope Adrian IV. to King 
 Louis VII. of France, wherein that Pontiff 
 invariably makes use of the same term to 
 designate the country which the Kings of 
 England and France designed to invade. 
 
 King John offered to surrender to Pope 
 Innocent III. the "kingdom of Ireland," 
 but the Sovereign Pontiff was sufficiently 
 wise to avoid using the word " kingdom" in 
 relation to Ireland, because he knew the 
 country was not known under such an ap- 
 pellation. King Henry VIII. , in writing 
 to Pope Leo X., did not style himself 
 " King," but merely "Lord of Ireland," 
 as he also well knew that Ireland was not 
 styled a kingdom. 
 
 The Protestant Parliament which was 
 held in Dublin, erected Ireland into a king- 
 dom, and Edward VI. took for himself the 
 pompous title of " King of England, France 
 and Ireland." This example was followed 
 by Queen Mary, who succeeded her brother 
 Edward in 1553. When she married Philip 
 of Spain, son of Charles V., the proclama- 
 tions and ordinances of the royal titles 
 mentioned, among others, that of " King 
 and Queen of Ireland," On this historical 
 poiiit Dr. Lingard says : 
 
 " Cardinal Pule understood that difficulties 
 might arise from the taking of this title by Phil- 
 ip and Mary, and for this reason he asked tLe 
 Sovereign Pontiff to erect Ireland into a king- 
 dom before the arrival of the ambassadors at 
 Rome. But the death of Juliu III. following 
 closely upon that of Marcellus II., had prevent- 
 ed these Pontiffs from carrying out the Car- 
 dinal's suggestion. The urgency of the matter 
 therefore suggested itself to Pope Paul IV., and 
 immediately upon his coronation that Pontiff 
 published a Bull by which, at the request of 
 Philip and Mary, he erected the seignory of 
 Ireland into a kingdom." 
 
 Pope Paul IV., in the Bull by which 
 Ireland was erected into a kingdom, makes 
 no allusion whatever to any Bulls concern- 
 ing that country issued by Popes Adrian 
 IV., Alexander III., or any other of hia 
 predecessors. Had this Pontiff known of 
 such documents, most assuredly he would 
 have mentioned them, instead of making a 
 vague allusion to the fact that the Kings 
 of England had acquired the sovereignty <-f 
 Ireland by or through the Apostolic See. 1 1 
 is very apparent, therefore, that down to 
 the year 1555 the Apostolic See "had no 
 knowledge of any such Bulls ever having 
 been issued by any Pontiff who had previ- 
 ously occupied the Chair of Peter. In this 
 connection it may be well to state that 
 it was not until half a century later that 
 Baronius, the Papal ecclesiastical chronicler, 
 accidently came across the Adrian forgery 
 in the works of Mathew of Paris (who had 
 copied it from Cambrensis) and entered it 
 in the Bullarium, at the same time throw- 
 ing discredit upon its authenticity. 
 
 In the Letter which Pope John XXII. 
 sent to King Edward II., that Pontiff al- 
 ludes to the Bull attributed to Pope Adrian 
 IV., and it may be well to consider the 
 reasons which impelled that Pontiff to
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 125 
 
 f >rward to the English monarch the copy 
 of the English forgery which he had re- 
 ceived from O'Neill and the other petition- 
 ers of Ulster. The reason, it is plain 
 enough, was for no other purpose than to 
 inform the Prince that the Pope had no 
 official knowledge of any such document 
 having ever existed. 
 
 The Bull of Pope Paul IV., passes over 
 in silence the agreement entered into in the 
 year 1213 between Pope Innocent III. and 
 King John of England. It is a matter of 
 historical certainty that the King offered 
 the "kingdom of Ireland" to the Pope, the 
 language used being, "totum regnum Hi- 
 bernice" ("the whole kingdom of Ireland,") 
 but it is equally certain that the Pope did 
 not receive the proffered donation. 
 
 As the Latin proverb runneth : " Nemo 
 dat quod non habets ;" "No one can give 
 what he has not got," and thus it was with 
 King John, who, possessing by force and 
 fraud only a small portion of the sea coast 
 of Ireland, consequently he could not do- 
 nate "the whole kingdom." It must also 
 be borne in mind that no Pontiff would 
 ever think of accepting such a trust in the 
 case of Ireland, as no such "kingdom" had 
 any status in the diplomatic circles of the 
 whole world. In point of fact, in order to 
 accept the suzerainty of Ireland, it would 
 be necessary for the Holy Father first to 
 raise Ireland to the dignity of a kingdom, 
 but as it is nowhere stated that the Pope 
 conferred the investiture of Ireland on King 
 John or his successors, Pope Paul IV., 
 knowingly and prudently, kept silent on 
 the subject. 
 
 Inasmuch as neither the spurious "Bull" 
 attributed to Pope Adrian, nor the diploma 
 of Pope Alexander III., furnishes a founda 
 tion for a title to Ireland, it will doubtless 
 puzzle our readers to account for the ex- 
 pression which Pope Paul IV. used when 
 he alluded to the Kings of England as hav- 
 ing acquired the sovereignty of Ireland 
 through the Holy See. 
 
 But this expression of the Pope is easily 
 accounted fur. In the meantime, how- 
 ever, we desire to remind our readers that 
 King John, at the beginning of his reign, 
 took to himself the illicit title of Lord of 
 
 Ireland, a title which had no foundation 
 whatever, as even admitting the spurious 
 Adrian Bull to be authentic that docu- 
 ment conferred no such hereditary right 
 upon any of the descendants of King Henry 
 U. And as it was Henry II., who created, 
 by his own usurped and valueless authori'y, 
 John Lord of Ireland, his claim to such a 
 title was just as spurious as that of the 
 "Bull" by which that royal robber, his fath- 
 er, made to himself a " donation" of Ireland 
 under the seal of a forged Papal document. 
 
 What did the Popes do in this matter ? 
 Mark the prudence and justice of the Vicars 
 of Christ even in this seemingly small mat- 
 ter of diplomatic ettiquette. The Popes, so 
 far from acknowledging King John's title 
 as "Lord of Ireland," styled him merely 
 "Count de Mortagne," the distinctive title 
 he owned prior to his father's mock cere 
 mony by which he was put in illegal posses- 
 sion of a small part of Ireland. 
 
 After the death of King Henry II., and 
 when England had passed under the control 
 of Richard the Lion-hearted, Pope Clement 
 III. , having occasion to speak of Ireland 
 and of John Lackland, addressed that prince 
 by the title of Count de Mortagne, entirely 
 ignoring the spurious appellation of " Lord 
 of Ireland." 
 
 From these facts it may easily be under- 
 stood that there is no historical co-relation 
 between the unjust adoption of King John's 
 title and any concession whatsoever of Eng- 
 lish sovereignity in Ireland by the Apostolic 
 See. All that need be said, therefore, on 
 this phase of the question, is that the com- 
 piler of the Bull of Pope Paul IV., traiis- 
 cribed the request of Philij) and Mary and 
 herein lies the whole explanation. 
 
 England has always studiously endeavored 
 to impress upon the minds of every succeed- 
 ing generation of the Irish people since the 
 twelfth century, that British rule in Ireland 
 originated with the Pope, and that the Irish 
 people should look upon the Holy Father as 
 the Lord Suzerain of that land. But not- 
 withstanding England's anxiety to impress 
 this falsehood upon the minds of the Irish 
 people, the natives of that land continued 
 incredulous, and their incredulity on this
 
 12G 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 point grew stronger with each succeeding 
 generation. In order, however, to apply 
 the seal of Papal approval to that usurped 
 title, Philip and Mary had representations 
 made to the Papal Court during the reign of 
 Pope Paul IV., that the King of England 
 had acquired the eovereignity of Ireland by 
 concession of the Apostolic See. But had 
 the ambassadors of the English monarchs 
 not stated a wilful untruth for the special 
 purpose of deceiving the Pope, Paul IV. 
 would never have acceded to their request. 
 
 Rome is guided by justice in all her ac- 
 tions. The Holy Father may be deceived by 
 designing conspirators filled with falsehood 
 in order to accomplish a diplomatic scheme, 
 but in all decisions emanating from Rome, 
 religion, sound reason and rigid justice are 
 indellibly stamped thereon. It is a funda- 
 mental principle at the Roman Chancellor's 
 office, that concessions on request are emi- 
 nently conditional and depend altogether on 
 the intentional and objective veracity of the 
 statement of the facts in each case. But 
 when untruth and fraud are resorted to, 
 the foundation of such a case gives way, 
 and all rights conferred through such mis- 
 representation crumbles into useless and 
 valueless atoms. 
 
 In no matter that comos before it for ad- 
 judication is the Holy See more particularly 
 scrutinizing and just than in the preserva- 
 tion of the rights of others. This is clear in 
 the Bull of Pope Paul IV., wherein that 
 Pontiff throws this guard around the rights 
 of the Irish people : " Sine prejudicio ju- 
 rinm ipsius Romanov Ecclesice, et cvjuscnm- 
 que alterius in ilia (insula) vel ad illam jns 
 habere prcetendentis." 
 
 The Consistorial Decree contains the same 
 reservation, and this consideration on the 
 part of the Pontiff for the reserved rights of 
 the Irish people, did not only include their 
 
 present peacable possession (jus in re,) but 
 also their future right or disputed right (jus 
 ad rem.) 
 
 The Irish people inhabiting twenty one 
 counties possessed full and peacable posses- 
 sion of their lands and property, and the 
 Holy Father had no intention whatever of 
 altering their condition in favor of the Eng- 
 lish invaders. Rome, therefore, left to the 
 Irish people the right to win back the ter- 
 ritory possessed by the invaders, as well as 
 to hold intact that portion of Ireland which 
 had then held out against the English 
 enemy. Neither investiture nor donation 
 are alluded to in any way, nor did the Eng- 
 lish usurpers of Irish rights acquire an iota 
 of authority over that people by reason of 
 the Bull of Pope Paul IV., elevating Ire- 
 land into a kingdom. 
 
 In treating of the Bull of Pope Paul IV., 
 Bzovius relates the private conversation 
 that Pontiff held with the ambassadors of 
 Queen Mary. At this private audience, says 
 Bzovius, the Pope complained that the ec- 
 clesiastical goods pillaged by the English in- 
 vaders from the Irish churches, monasteries 
 and abbeys, had not been restored, and he 
 reminded them that the restitution should 
 be full and absolute on the part of the pil- 
 fering usurpers. The Holy Father re- 
 minded them that the English ought to 
 know that such sacrilegious robberies would 
 draw down upon their perpetrators the 
 maledictions of Almighty God. The Pope, 
 therefore, urged the ambassadors to write to 
 their monarchs on this matter and to coun- 
 sel them to make full and immediate resti- 
 tution. But to England's shame be it said, 
 the pilfering and sacrilege of the fourteenth 
 century was continued down to the niner 
 teenth century, regardless alike of the sacred 
 rights of God or the natural rights of the 
 Irish people
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 127 
 
 CH APTEK XXII. 
 
 A New and Important -Witness to the Fraudulent Character of the Adrian and Alex- 
 ander Bulls. Selections from the Celebrated Historical Work " Cambrensis 
 Eversus, " by Dr. John Lynch. Seventeenth Century Evidence Against both 
 the Spurious Documents. 
 
 In the first portion of this volume we 
 made a passing allusion to a celebrated 
 work on Ireland entitled Cambrensia Ever- 
 nus* by Dr. John Lynch, and expressed 
 our regret that the work was so rare that 
 not a copy of it could be found on the Pa- 
 citic coast. Fortunately, however, tlirough 
 the great kindness of friends, a copy was 
 purchased in London, and now we are 
 enabled to lay before our readers some very 
 important evidence which hitherto has 
 been completely hidden from public gaz 
 both in consequence of the high price of 
 Dr. John Lynch 's invaluable work, as 
 well as from the fact that but very few 
 copies of this historical work are for sale in 
 any portion of the world. 
 
 Cambrensis Everms consists of a general 
 history of Ireland from the earliest ages, 
 and from the amount of historical matter 
 to be found in this vast store-house of Irish 
 lore, we are surprised that so little atten- 
 tion has been given to the exhaustive work 
 of an author whom we look upon as cer- 
 tainly the most truthful, polished and 
 learned among all the men who have ever 
 attempted to write on Ireland. 
 
 Dr. Lynch devotes but a few chapters 
 to the consideration of the bogus Bull at- 
 tributed to Popes Adrian and Alexander, 
 but as our readers will discern further on 
 in that brief space, he has furnished such 
 proof of the spuriousness of these docu- 
 ments that not a doubt can remain in the 
 mind of any impartial reader. 
 
 The forger of the falsely- called Adrian 
 
 * The full title of the work is, " Cambrensis 
 Eversus ; or Refutation of the Authority of Gir- 
 aid-as Cambrensis on the History of Ireland. By 
 Dr. John Lynch (1662), with some account of 
 the affairs of that kiu^-ioin during bis own and 
 former times. Edited, with translation and 
 copious notes, by the Rev. Matthew Kelly, 
 Royal College of St. Patrick, Maynooth. Pub- 
 lished in Dublin by the Celtic Society, during 
 the years 1849-50 and 1851." 
 
 Bull, our readers will remember, insinu- 
 ates in that document that the Catholic 
 population of Ireland in the twelfth cen- 
 tury was steeped in vice both morally and 
 intellectually. In order to show the falsity 
 of the forged document, and also to over- 
 throw the aspersions made by Giraldus 
 Cambrensis upon the moral character of 
 the faithful Irish Catholic people, Dr. 
 Lynch, in the work before us, devotes 
 three chapters of the second volume 
 to that disputed point, and although we 
 have touched upon that aspect of the ques- 
 tion under consideration already, in a brief 
 way, we feel that Dr. Lynch's evidence will 
 not only add to the share of useful knowledge 
 which every Catholic should possess, but it 
 will also re-affirm the fact that neither in 
 the twelfth century, nor at any time an- 
 terior or subsequent, were the morals, cus- 
 toms or habits of the Irish people in that 
 state of degradation set forth by the no- 
 torious Giraldus Cambrensis, the English 
 falsifier, whose untruths were so numerous 
 as to gain for him the very doubtful honor 
 of being distinguished from all other his- 
 torical writers as the man who "could not 
 tell the truth except by accident." 
 
 Alluding to the charge made against the 
 piety and morality of the Irish people by 
 Giraldus Cambren&is, Dr. Lynch says :t 
 
 St 11 adhering to his original error, our 
 author here gives Muircheartach the title 
 of king of Ireland, though our annalists 
 make him only successor to his father on 
 the throne ot Munster, and assign hid 
 death to 11C7. Perhaps it may be Muir- 
 cheartach Mac Lochlinn, who was pro- 
 claimed king of Ireland in the year of our 
 Lord 1157, and reigned to his death in 
 1166. If all other circumstances con- 
 curred, we may consistently with chronol- 
 ogy, maintain that he was the king referred 
 to in the chronicle ; for Pope Adrian 
 
 t Vol. II., chap, xxi., page 403, et seq.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 brea* lied his last in 1159. Now, as these 
 journeys which took place in his day evi- 
 dently prove that Irish kings at home and 
 Irish ecclesiastics abroad were zealous in 
 good works, is it not impossible to believe 
 that Pope Adrian would solemnly have 
 charged the Irish with depravity of morals ? 
 Would not the fear alone of being de- 
 nounced as ungrateful have deterred him 
 from maligning them ? It is utterly abhor- 
 rent to reason, that the only mark of his 
 gratitude for the service of his Irish pre- 
 ceptor Marianus, should be to transmit to 
 posterity a defamatory character of that 
 preceptor's native country ; especially when 
 he must have seen Irishmen rising in for- 
 eign countries to such eminence in learning 
 and piety, as to be selected for the arduous 
 honor of instructing others. 
 
 Every person who has even a slight 
 knowledge of the Christian religion, is very 
 well aware that it would be a crime to de- 
 sert one's country, when it is plunged in 
 savage depravity and universal ignorance 
 of the rudiments of faith, and to go plant 
 an abundant harvest of virtue and religion 
 on a foreign soil, while barrenness and 
 aridity wastes the whole extent of his na- 
 tive land. The men who were so eminent 
 for all other virtues, assuredly cannot be 
 supposed deficient in charity, which requires 
 that its fruits should begin at home, with 
 ourselves and our friends, before it extends 
 its beneficence to others. St. Paul desired 
 to become an anathema for his brethren 
 according to the flesh, nor would those 
 Irish have gone out in " crowds," as our 
 author says, " to instruct foreign nations in 
 virtue and learning, if there was not abund- 
 ance of public instructors left after them at 
 home. " 
 
 The Pope, after duly weighing those 
 facts, would certainly have come to the 
 conclusion that the Irish could not teach 
 abroad what they had not learned at home. 
 He must have known, that either immedi- 
 ately before or during his pontificate, 
 Dionysius, Isaac, Gervas, Conrad, his pre- 
 ceptor Marianus, Christian and Gregorius 
 at Ratisbon, Maurus and twelve other 
 monks, in the monastery of Maniurgghen, 
 and Macarius, with his twelve associates at 
 Wurzburg, were celebrated for their sanc- 
 tity and learning. 
 
 At home in Ireland every diocese had its 
 Bishop, every parish its priest, old monas- 
 teries were repaired, new ones were built, 
 and all abundantly supplied with monks. 
 The written catalogues of Sees and mon- 
 asteries prove the uninterrupted succession 
 of bishops and monks. So great was the 
 number of priests in Ireland, that 500 of 
 them assembled in council in 1143, with 
 twelve bishops and Muireadach O'Dubh- 
 thaich, Archbishop of Tuam. Catholicus, 
 
 Archbishop f the same See, a prudent and 
 a learned man (for his am-), was accom- 
 panied to the Council of Lateral), 1170, by 
 Lorcan, Archbishop of Dublin, Cuim of 
 Kill da lua, Brie of Limerick, Augustine of 
 Waterford, and Felix of Lismore. If 
 their flocks were plunged in that hideous 
 barbarism charged against all the Irish l>y 
 some writers, how could they be worthy 
 of being called to a distant place to sit in 
 council on the important interests of the 
 Catholic world ; men who either could not 
 or would not heal the infirmities of those 
 whom they were bound by duty to protect ? 
 That Pope, at all events, would not sum- 
 mon them, who is said to have made over 
 the dominion of Ireland to King Henry to 
 improve the morality of the Irish. This 
 fact alone justifies a strong suspicion that 
 the Bull attributed to Pope Alexander is 
 as spurious or at least as surreptitious, 
 as that by which Pope Adrian is said to 
 have annexed Ireland to the dominions of 
 King Henry. Neither could it ever be re- 
 ported that St. Lorcan, Archbishop of Dub 
 lin, had, in his patriotic zeal, obtained some 
 privileges from Pope Alexander, derogatory 
 tO'the dignity of the crown if the author- 
 ity of the same Alexander had already 
 armed Henry for the conquest of Ireland. 
 The Pope would never have made St. Lor- 
 can his legate, who he knew had taken the 
 field against Henry at the siege of Dublin, 
 and encouraged others to take arms. The 
 Pope could not have been guilty of such 
 inconsistencies. Nor could St. Lorcan 
 himself, a Prelate so eminent for his piety, 
 and so obedient to the Supreme Pastor of 
 the Church, ever have so openly resisted by 
 his letters, his council, and his arms, those 
 bulls of the Pope, had they really existed. 
 There are most abundant reasons, there- 
 fore, for believing that those bulls, which 1 
 am about to produce, were never issued by 
 the Popes. 
 
 In the following chapter Dr. Lynch 
 gives the text of the spurious Adrian Bull, 
 and comments on it at some length, but as 
 we have already included in the evidence 
 presented, several of the points dwelt upon 
 in the pages of Cambrentia Eversus, we will 
 extract only those portions which will intro- 
 duce new testimony in proof of the fraudu- 
 lent character of the papal documents 
 forged in England. 
 
 After citing the names of numerous Irish 
 ecclesiastics famous for their apostolic zeal 
 and rich in every Christian virtue, Dr. 
 Lynch says : 
 
 We know from Colgan that Muirchear- 
 tach, Marianus, Clement, John, Isaac, Can-
 
 THE POPE AND IKELANJJ. 
 
 129 
 
 did us, Magnoald, and many others went 
 over to Ratisbon about this period, and 
 refreshed the inhabitants of that city and 
 its environs with the salutary waters of 
 piety and learning. No person can imagine 
 for a moment that these holy men were so 
 lost to the feelings of humanity as to re- 
 nounce that love which all men bear to the 
 land of their birth ; if they had not well 
 known that Ireland was abundantly sup- 
 plied with teachers, to conduct her in the 
 ways of salvation and civilized institutions, 
 they would have been more mindful of the 
 duties of well-regulated charity, and de- 
 voted themselves to the instruction of their 
 countrymen at home, rather than of 
 strangers abroad. Our Saviour Himself first 
 began by instructing His own countrymen, 
 the Jews, and then proceeded to conduct 
 the Gentiles from the darkness of ignor- 
 ance. Who ever watered another man's 
 field, when his own was parched with 
 drought ? Do not the laws themselves de- 
 clare that it is severe and akiu to cruelty 
 to turn a water- course from your own 
 estate, for the use of others, to the injury 
 of your neighbors, and while your own 
 fields are parched ? I beg of any person 
 who reads this to consider for a moment 
 how many kings of Ireland and princes 
 as I have proved, by the testimony even 
 of foreign writers, nobly discharged their 
 duties as kings ? How many monasteries 
 were erected as great nurseries of literature 
 and piety? How many retreats of anchor- 
 ites] How many facilities were afforded 
 for the acquisition of learning ? Masters in 
 all branches of science being ready to in- 
 struct all comers in the cathedrals, the 
 colleges and the monasteries. The man 
 must either have no conscience, or not be 
 in his right senses, who would hand over 
 the government of such a people to a for- 
 eign prince, on the sole grounds of reform- 
 ing their morals. 
 
 This bull, therefore, mnst be a forgery 
 of some unknown impostor, and not the 
 decree of. Adrian, He was raised to the 
 purple by Eugene the Third, and was col- 
 league in chat great dignity with Eugene's 
 legate, John Papyro, a man of the strictest 
 integrity, and praised in the highest terms 
 by St. Bernard in his Epistles. Adrian 
 could have easily ascertained that during 
 the legatine mission of his colleague, Pap- 
 yro, all the disorders of Ireland had been 
 rectified. Moreover, he must have heard, 
 if he had not actually seen with his eyes, the 
 great works accomplished by St. Mael- 
 maedhog ; for it is natural to suppose that 
 as both were members of the same Order 
 of Canons Regular, the surviving brother 
 would make some inquiries into the life 
 of one who had but recently departed. 
 
 When the devils appear in the form of 
 
 angels of light, to deceive men, they are 
 always betrayed by the cloven foot or some 
 other mark. The forgers of documents, in 
 the same way, let something unwittingly 
 escape them, which reveals the fraud. I 
 have already given one instance. Here 
 follows another, given by the concoctur of 
 the bull. 
 
 Dr. Lynch then alludes to the Peter Pence 
 clauses of the spurious Bull, and also to 
 the allusion in the fictitious Bull concerning 
 the supposed right conferred on the Pope 
 over Ireland by reason of the alleged dona- 
 tion of Constantino, but as we have already 
 alluded to both these phases of the ques- 
 tion, we will pass on to where Dr. Lynch 
 mentions the reasons which impelled King 
 Henry II. to conceal the forged Bull for 
 seventeen years : 
 
 But there are still more powerful ob- 
 jections against this bull than any of those 
 which have been mentioned. And first, 
 Baronius assures us that no date either of 
 day or year is given in it, a circumstance 
 which, of itself alone, is a certain ground 
 of suspecting any document as a forgery, 
 and which authorizes us to reject it as such. 
 ' A rescript (says Masuerus) which does 
 not give its date, the day, the consul, and 
 the year of our Lord, is invalid." 
 
 Moreover, this bull, when obtained by 
 secret solicitations, was for a long time 
 suppressed, for the writers state that it was 
 given in 1155, but not published before 
 the year 1172, as if the imprudence of ob- 
 taining it were to be prudently remedied 
 by suppressing it. For second thoughts 
 are best. Stolen goods are not exhibited 
 publicly very soon. But Nicholas Trivetus, 
 A. D., 1155, says that the Bull was not 
 produced, because when "King Henry, in 
 a parliament at Windsor, was deliberating 
 with his barons on the conquest of Ire- 
 land, his mother, the empress, was opposed 
 to the project, and its execution was there- 
 fore deferred to another time." So that it 
 would appear this noble and virtuous lady, 
 more humane than the king who demanded, 
 more just than the Bishop who received, 
 more merciful than the Pope who granted 
 the bull, abhorred the execrable design ; 
 but when an opportunity offered after her 
 death, the project was revived and the ex- 
 pedition undertaken. But as "a rescript is 
 null, if the petitioner do not avail himself 
 of it within a year," of what service could 
 this grant be to king Henry who concealed 
 it during seventeen years, without even 
 availing himself of the rights which it cor- 
 ferred upon him ? 
 
 Moreover, the author of the bull uncon- 
 sciously represents a most virtuous Pope as
 
 130 
 
 THK POPK AND inEI.ANH. 
 
 traMipling on the law of nature, on the laws 
 of nations, and on all the laws cf justice. 
 Fr in it not a violation of all the dictates 
 "f all laws, to rob, not one roan, but a whole 
 nation, not of some trifling right, but of 
 their country, their fortunes, and their 
 lives, without hearing one word in their de- 
 fence / D .es the humblest official that ad- 
 ministers justice, presume to adjudicate on 
 a case without having heard the statements 
 f both parties? Whoever decides after 
 hearing one side only, " ia unjust, though 
 his judgment should be just." 
 
 The judge, who is influenced by favor 
 and not by equity in his judgments, is not 
 only branded among men with the foulest 
 stigma of disgrace, but incurs, moreover, 
 the damnation of his immortal soul. God 
 himself says, "judge that which is just, 
 whether he be one of your country or a for- 
 eigner." For who can look upon himself as 
 the friend, when he assumes the character of 
 the judge I Liberty is the dearest right of 
 man ; and whoever deprives him of it, and 
 unjustly hands over princes, prelates and 
 people to a foreign yoke, is excessively 
 temerarious, and (to use the mildest phrase) 
 unjust. 
 
 The concoctor of this bull, therefore, 
 merits the most hearty execration for repre- 
 senting the character of a Pope in so odious 
 a light. He represents him in the first place 
 as having no title to be called an honest 
 man ; next, as a man who was swayed by 
 his own interests, not by justice ; then as 
 c mdemning the innocent without a hearing ; 
 a ,'ain as subverting that kingdom of Ireland, 
 which had never before own*d any foreign 
 ]> >wer ; moreover, as the credulous dupe of 
 whispering slanderers, the violator of the 
 rights of immemorial possessions ; the enemy 
 of all laws ; the most profligate scoffer at 
 all religions ; finally, the firebrand of exe- 
 crable war, and the most odious propagator 
 of burning hatred. See the load of ig- 
 nominy which this vile scribe would heap 
 upon the head of a Pontiff whose virtues 
 were not a disgrace to his high station ; cal- 
 umniously representing him as trampling 
 upon every principle of justice to make his 
 prince sovereign lord of Ireland. He cared 
 not in what odious colors this lying bull 
 exhibited the Pope, if he attained his ob- 
 ject, and gave the king of England some 
 hadow of title to the Irish crown. He for- 
 gets the maxims of positive law, " That re- 
 scripts are invalid, which were either ob- 
 tained on false grounds, or are opposed to 
 the Divine law, to human positive law, or 
 to the public good ; " and also " that a re- 
 script of the Pope, obtained by a layman, 
 on any matter regarding the secular forum, 
 can have no effect ; " finally, " that a re- 
 script is invalid, if obtained to the injury of 
 a third person. " After this exposure of the 
 
 base arts by which this treacherous villian 
 attempts to blast the character of an excel 
 lent Pontiff, we proceed to refute all his 
 other quibbling. 
 
 But to clothe the nakedness of this story: 
 Matthew of Westminster, who lived about 
 200 years later, borrowed some false 
 plumage from his own imagination, for he 
 was the first who said that a solemn em- 
 bassy was dispatched by order of king 
 Henry to Pope Adrian, then lately elected, 
 to obtain this bull. Such is the general lot 
 of stories, circulated among the vulgar ; the 
 farther they travel, the greater bulk and 
 consistency they acquire. Matthew, seeing 
 that this flagrantly fictitious bull had lived 
 to so respectable an age, could not think of 
 allowing it to go farther on its journey with- 
 out giving it a retinue ; and accordingly, 
 without any warrant from the bull itself, or 
 from any preceding writer, he draws upon his 
 own creative powers. A common courier, 
 bearing the bull from Adrian to Henry, 
 was too vulgar a picture for the page of his- 
 tory, and accordingly Matthew metamor- 
 phoses him into a solemn embassy ; but with 
 his kind permission, the interval of so many 
 centuries c?nnot be so easily bridged over 
 by his mere authority, that we must credu- 
 lously believe his word, without the support 
 of a single writer from our own day, to the 
 supposed date of the bull. 
 
 Dr. Lynch next alludes to the fabulous 
 stories attributed to John of Salisbury in 
 the interpolated chapter of his Polycraticun, 
 which we have already reviewed extensively, 
 so we will pass on to where the learned au 
 thor of Cambrerisis Eversus exposes in a 
 most thorough manner the errors of Mat- 
 thew of Paris : 
 
 Still drawing on his imagination, Matthew 
 asserts " that the Pope empowered king 
 Henry to enter Ireland by force of arms 
 and subj ugate it, '' though the bull expressly 
 orders the reverse, " that the people of that 
 land should receive Henry with honor, and 
 venerate him as their lord. " Thus, with con- 
 summate treachery, the Pope would publicly 
 command the Irish to obey the Englishman, 
 and encourage him privately to cut their 
 throats. So with heartless barbarity he 
 would order the Irish to embrace with open 
 arms the man who pointed his sword at their 
 heart ; with horrible rigor he would rob of 
 their native land a people guilty of none, or 
 at least of trifling offences, and punish with 
 the excruciating scourge a fault that at worst 
 deserved the whip ; in fine, he would repeal 
 that law of nature, which tells a man to re- 
 pel force by force. That law is. not written, 
 but born with us ; we have not learned nor 
 received it from others, nor read it in 
 books ; it is the dictate, the impulse, the
 
 THE POPE AXD IUKLAND. 
 
 131 
 
 cry of nature, to which we have not been 
 schooled, but created, not influenced by 
 others, but inspired : if your life is in dan- 
 ger from treachery, or from violence, 
 whether of robbers or of enemies, all means 
 of defence are justifiable. It is intolerable 
 that Matthew should exhibit the Pope in 
 colors of such varied malignity, and deprive 
 Irishmen of the right even of the slave. 
 What slave could brook those edicts of a 
 Manlius or Phalaris, even from his master I 
 Were he ordered, for no crime, to hold his 
 throat for the murderer, would he not in- 
 fallibly resist with all his might ? 
 
 Tyranny of that kind was never known, 
 u der the mild government of the Popes, 
 whose pious and learned delegates employed 
 gentle and persevering persuasions, not vio- 
 lence and platoons, to civilize the hearts of 
 men, lighting by admonition the path for 
 voluntary obedience, not goading them 
 against their will at the point of the sword. 
 When the Apostles went forth to propagate 
 the Faith, they were not allowed to carry 
 even a staff ; and can it be lawful for their 
 successors in that sacred duty to force by 
 arms some nameless sort of reformation on 
 men eminently instructed in religion ? 
 Arms rather barbarize than civilize man ; 
 war destroys learning and law ; levels cities, 
 burns houses, devastates land, tramples the 
 corn fields, begets murder, adultery, incest, 
 rapes, and rapine ; in a word, throws every- 
 thing into disorder. A most contemptible 
 fool the man must be, who first invented the 
 story of the adoption by the Apostolic See 
 of so preposterous a mode of reforming the 
 morals of any nation : Christ addressing His 
 Apostles said to them : "if they do not re- 
 ceive you, going forth, shake off the dust of 
 your feet" at them. He does not say, gird 
 on your swords, brandish your daggers, cast 
 your javelins, in a word, make war on them. 
 
 St. Bernard addressed a work De Con- 
 sider atioiie, to Pope Eugene, which Adrian 
 no doubt perused attentively ; it was then a 
 new book and of course was eagerly sought 
 for and read with avidity, especially as 
 coming from so illustrious a man, and pro- 
 posing to admonish Pope Eugene of the 
 duties of his office, a point on which Adrian 
 himself, as Harpsfeld informs us, was ex- 
 tremely solicitous. Adrian, moreover, had 
 a singular respect for Eugene, by whom he 
 had been raised to the episcopacy and ap- 
 pointed legate, and elevated to the College 
 of the Cardinals ; and moreover, Eugene 
 had occupied the snme Apostolic chair, im- 
 mediately before Anastasius, Adrian's pre- 
 
 decessor. Now, in this book, which must 
 have had so many irresistible attractions for 
 Adrian, he could read that " it is not domi- 
 nation, but Apostleship over the world that 
 becomes the Vicars of Christ : " and also St. 
 Leo, " that (Rome) held more extensive 
 sway by the Divine religion than by earthly 
 empire.' Could he then allow himself to 
 be carried so far from the line of his duty, 
 as to let loose an army for the massacre of the 
 Irish, at the very moment that his legates 
 were laboriously and successfully discharging 
 their duty in Ireland 1 Would he present an 
 antidote in one hand, and the poisoned cup 
 in the other ? The virtuous Pope could not 
 so far contemn the laws of prudence and 
 justice as to arrogate to himself a power 
 never claimed by any of his predecessors. 
 Whenever nations were contaminated with 
 any horrible crimes, the censures of the 
 Church were always used before an appeal 
 to arms, that they might be induced to re- 
 pent by prayers and threats, rather than 
 compelled by the eloquence of the sword. 
 The charges of the accusers were heard in 
 one ear ; the defence of the accused in the 
 other ; both were not open to the former, 
 both were not closed to the latter. Puni^h- 
 ment was invariably preceded by admoni- 
 tion ; nor were blemishes of a lighter na- 
 ture ever punished by the ruin of a whole 
 nation. The Apostles permitted the Jews 
 to use those peculiar customs which were 
 only gradually and insensibly eradicated. 
 St. Gregorious writes to St. Augustinus, the 
 Apostle of England, " what cannot be easily 
 reformed must be tolerated ; the Church 
 must purge away some things by her fervor, 
 tolerate others by her mildness, and over- 
 look others by her prudence. " St. Augus- 
 tinus also asserts ' that the very change of 
 a custom however beneficial in itself, causes 
 disorder by its novelty ; " and St. Gregorius 
 tells us "that they who wish to propagate 
 the faith by severe methods, show that 
 they love their own cause more than the 
 cause of God." The forger of the bull 
 intimates very plainly either that the Pope's 
 understanding was wrapt in such a night of 
 ignorance as not to know these things, or 
 that his will was steeled by such depravity, 
 that he knowingly and willingly dishonored 
 his name, and damned his conscience by 
 so execrable a crime. History and common 
 sense clearly attest the falseness of such an 
 inference. And hence, a bull which is vul- 
 nerable in so many points, evidently cannot 
 have any authority. What has been already 
 said appears of itself sufficient to refute it.
 
 THK POPK AND IKKI.ANH. 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII. 
 
 More Proofs of the Spurious Character of the Adrian and Al> xandt-r Bulls, from 
 the " Cambrensis Evcrsus" of Dr. John Lynch. That Eminent Scholia's 
 Criticisms on the Alexander Forgery. 
 
 In the twenty-third chapter of his great 
 work entitled Cambrensis Euersus, Dr. 
 Lynch passes under review the singular- 
 ly-worded document falsely attributed by 
 some writers to Pope Alexander III. After 
 giving the text of the document in ques- 
 tion, the scholarly author we quote frora 
 says : 
 
 This Bull, which is grounded on the 
 former, is, most undoubtedly, equally devoid 
 of authority. I have many reasons for as- 
 serting that both were forged by the same 
 hand, though, like the sources of the Nile, 
 their paternity is yet a mystery. Be it ob- 
 sejved in the first place, that of all the 
 arguments already advanced against the 
 former Bull, there is not one which does 
 not apply with equal force to this, so that 
 if anything appear incomplete in my reason- 
 ing here, its defects can be supplied from 
 the preceding chapter. ***** 
 
 Can any man in his senses believe, that 
 the Supreme pastor of the church would 
 entrust the moral regeneration of Ireland, 
 and the amelioration of her ecclesiastical 
 discipline, to a king who surpassed William 
 Rufus, Henry I., and King Stephen (im- 
 moral men, all, as I have shown), nay, all 
 his predecessors and successors, by intem- 
 perately cherishing his great power, to as- 
 sail and destroy and disgrace the dignity 
 of the Church ( A man who stood forth 
 prominently as the enemy of the Pope, and 
 strained all his might to nullify the laws and 
 destroy the authority of the Apostolic See ; 
 who sacrilegiously ordered the ecclesiastical 
 Orders of his kingdom to be dragged before 
 lay tribunals, and exerted all his power to 
 destroy every vestige of the ancient im- 
 munities of the ecclesiastical body ( 
 
 Take up, one by one, his crimes against 
 the Church, and with their proofs. The 
 first sparks of his fury against her, burst 
 forth in his burning hatred of St. Thomas, 
 Archbishop of Canterbury. This was the 
 black source of the evil. Taking the others 
 in order, you have in the year 1163, the 
 foundations of the contests laid at West- 
 minster, the king fiercely insisting on the 
 enactment of some unjust laws, most op- 
 pressive to the ecclesiastical Order, though 
 introduced under the imposing title of an- 
 
 ciet.t customs, which St. Thomas firmly 
 resisted. In the year 1104, King Henry, 
 according to Hoveden, issued a severe and 
 execrable edict against Pope Alexander 
 III., for it was in this year that he carried 
 the constitutions of Clarendon, prohibiting 
 obedience to the commands of the Roman 
 Pontiff, and declaring all censures issued 
 by him or St. Thomas, null and void, and 
 entailing severe penalties. Baronius truly 
 sketches the character of this king : " Hen- 
 ry excited a storm to overwhelm not only 
 the Primate of Canterbury and the whole 
 English Church, but to destroy the Holy 
 Catholic Church herself, with Alexander 
 her chief pastor, who was the special object 
 of It is mu cliimitions. " 
 
 What better witness could you have of 
 the wickedness of King Henry than the 
 Pope himself ? He held the authority of 
 the Apostolic See in such sovereign con- 
 tempt, that he told the Cardinals sent to 
 him by Alexander III, in 1169, " I care 
 not for you or your excommunications ; I 
 value them no more than a single egg '' To 
 such a pitch of frenzy did he ascend at last, 
 that he stands charged with the murder of 
 St. Thomas. A. D. 1171, and became so 
 odious to the Pope, " that the Pope would 
 neither see nor hear the ambassadors whom 
 he sent twice to clear himself of the murder 
 of the martyr, Thomas, Archbishop of Can- 
 terbury. But the whole court of Rome 
 cried out to the ambassadors, ' stop, stop, 
 as if the very name of King Henry, their 
 master, was an abomination in the ears of 
 our Lord the P8pe. So our Lord the Pope 
 had immutably made up his mind, with the 
 unanimous consent of his brethren, to issue 
 a sentence of interdict on King Henry by 
 name, and on his lands at this side of the 
 sea, and to confirm that which had been 
 issued against the Bishops." 
 
 But the ambassadors having sworn before 
 the Pope and the Consistory, that the king 
 would submit to whatever he decided in 
 this matter, the Pope abstained from men- 
 tioning King Henry's name in the sentence, 
 which however excommunicated those who 
 aided, assisted or abetted the assassination. 
 
 Can any man imagine that the Pope who 
 thus tacitly excommunicates King Henry, 
 would publicly load him with his favors? 
 Who could expect a foreign nation to be
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 133 
 
 brought under the authority of the Pope, 
 hy a king who withdrew his own kingdom 
 from that same authority I that he would 
 make foreigners observe a law against which 
 he himself had rebelled 1 that the seeds of 
 virtue would be planted in a foreign soil by 
 one who profligately abandoned himself to 
 vice at home ? In truth, the king indulged 
 in loathsome excesses ; he profaned the 
 holiness of the marriage bed, by intercourse 
 with paramours and abandoned women ; 
 but, far beyond all his excesses of this kind, 
 was his unchaste solicitation some say, his 
 violation of Adela, sister to Philip, King of 
 France, and betrothed wife of his own son 
 Richard. Nay, was it not believed that, 
 after his divorce from his lawful wife, he 
 intended to marry Adelaide, and if he had 
 issue, to bastardize and disinherit the chil- 
 dren of the former marriage ! Certain it is, 
 that by tergiversation and negotiation he 
 deferred so long the marriage of his son 
 Richard, that the Frenchman declared war 
 against him, and that Richard conceived 
 such an aversion for Adela, on account of 
 that sinister suspicion, that he refused her 
 hand, and married Berengaria, daughter to 
 the King of Navarre.'' 
 
 Moreover, he allowed " his kinswoman 
 Mary, daughter to King Stephen, the Ab- 
 bess of the Nuns of Ramsey, to live as wife 
 with Matthew, Count of Boulogne a hor- 
 rible precedent for posterity." Oaths were 
 always on his lips. Nothing more common 
 than to hear him swear "by the eyes of 
 God." He is even charged with perjury 
 more than once, ''for having violated the 
 last will of his father, Geoffrey, to which he 
 had sworn, and another oath, thrice repeat- 
 ed, of going to the crusades." * * * * 
 
 The forger of this Bull must have been 
 deranged when he represented the Pope 
 entrusting the moral reformation of any 
 nation to a man blasted with such vices. 
 The Pope could not so far forget himself 
 as to give a remedy which would propagate 
 rather than cure the disease, and make the 
 cicatrized wounds gape afresh more hideous- 
 ly. A master of that character, instead of 
 cleansing the blemishes of those placed 
 under his tuition, would blacken them with 
 his own hues ' As well might you entrust 
 him with the office of moral reformer as fit 
 a saddle on an ox. ****** 
 
 Would not Henry be a fitter instrument 
 for alienating the Irish from the Pontiff, 
 and preventing them from embracing his 
 laws, than for winning them over to the 
 Pope, and subduing them to his authority? 
 Had not himself rebelled against the Pope, 
 and tramplrd on his most solemn decisions ? 
 Were his unparalleled contumacy and 
 dogyeil obstinacy to be rewarded, not pun- 
 ished, by the Pops I When the King ap- 
 plied for the honor of such an office, well 
 
 may we address him in the words of Hora- 
 tius: 
 
 "The courser asks a plough, the ox a saddle." 
 Or reproach him with Ovidius: 
 
 ' Phaeton, great thy desire*, and far beyond 
 Thy streugth, the office which you seek." 
 
 The Popes never before commissioned, 
 even persons who wore the royal diadem, 
 to reform the savage morals of men, if they 
 were not eminent for piety and virtue aa 
 well as for rank. And whoever undertook 
 the responsibility, did not trust to an army 
 to subdue the people whom they were to 
 instruct, but used persuasion to conciliate 
 them. Henry's services to the Church were 
 not so signal as to excite the Pontiff to 
 grant him a novel and unprecedented favor. 
 On the contrary, the most rigorous ecclesi- 
 astical penalties were inflicted on him for 
 his injuries to the Church, and especially for 
 shedding the innocent blood of St. Thomat, 
 which excited the indignation of the Pope 
 more than of all the others. "For the first 
 announcement of that murder struck such 
 deep and bitter grief into the Pope's heart, 
 that for eight days he never spoke even to 
 his domestics ; and strictly ordered that no 
 Englishmen should be admitted to his pres- 
 ence." Henry, no doubt, most bitterly 
 repented the perpetration of this murder, 
 but he does not appear to have ever so far 
 recovered the good graces of the Pope as to 
 get a grant of such extraordinary import- 
 ance. The Pope "was a prudent man, 
 eloquent, subtle, and profoundly learned in 
 the sacred Scriptures, and in Divine and 
 human laws. Very few of his predecessors 
 were equal to him in learning," according to 
 a contemporary author. Such a man, 
 knowing well that the King's daily delin- 
 quencies must have engendered a propensity 
 to evil, would never confide to him the moral 
 reformation of a whole nation. 
 
 Of all the Bishops of England, Thomas 
 alone adhered to the Pope ; all consented 
 publicly or tacitly to the iniquitous consti- 
 tutions of Henry against the liberty of the 
 Church. "So low were they fallen, that 
 with the exception of the Archbishop, none 
 openly opposed " How could the Pope 
 find among such Prelates a person fit to 
 bring any nation to the head of the Church, 
 from which they were themselves cut off 1 
 
 But an attempt .to bind the Irish more 
 firmly to the Pope was superfluous, because 
 they never separated from him. All Orders 
 in Ireland, lay and ecclesiastical, were 
 unanimous in their zealous protestations of 
 obedience, and in all things submissive to 
 his will ; his legates were promptly, un- 
 reservedly obeyed ; the liberties of the 
 Church were extended and confirmed by 
 law, and the preservation of all the rights oj 
 thf Pope., iclide. ami entire, was the chief
 
 134 
 
 THK POPE ANI IRKLAtfD. 
 
 concern of the nation. Therefore, they 
 that are in health need not a physician but 
 they that are ill." 
 
 If a lawsuit arise regarding some little 
 estate, or any property, however trifling, a 
 judgment is never pronounced until both 
 the claimants come forward and state their 
 arguments, or, at least, through their own 
 fault do not appear. Thia rule, invariably 
 followed in matters of minor interest, 
 should it be denied to the Irish in the moat 
 momentous of all? Liberty is "a thing 
 beyond all price," the dearest treasure of 
 man ; so dear, that there is no evil, how- 
 ever great, which they would not encounter 
 to preserve it. Yet this judgment anni- 
 hilates the liberty of Irishmen, who are not 
 aware of their trial, nor even summoned. 
 They are doomed to be slaves in their own 
 soil, before they are afforded an opportun- 
 ity of confronting and refuting their ac- 
 cusers. War itself is more just in its rules ; 
 for an enemy sends a declaration of war 
 before he draws the sword, and would deem 
 himself disgraced if slaughter, burnings, 
 devastation, and the other evils of war, 
 were the first notification he sent to his 
 surprised antagonist to meet him in the 
 field. 
 
 In this judicial proceeding the liish were 
 condemned without evidence. For, contrary 
 to the law of God and man, the enemy was 
 sole witness and accuser. "In the mouth 
 of two or three witnesses, every word may 
 stand ;" and therefore the laws decide that 
 one witness is to be valued as if there were 
 no witnesses. The laws also exclude from 
 giving evidence a person of known partial- 
 ity for one party. But all, save the wil- 
 fully blind, must perceive that the author 
 of the Bull was a partisan of his own cown- 
 trymen, and a furiou* enemy to ours. 
 
 Finally, every form and principle of law 
 is violated by this j udgment, which, by a 
 heinous injustice, deprives the Irish of their 
 kingdom, their liberty, and their property. 
 In their case the maxims of law and right 
 were set aside ; their ruin was doomed to 
 be consummated by force, and could they 
 be blamed, if they strained all the energies 
 of body and soul t > resist it f " Thia has 
 retson prescribed to the learned, and neces- 
 sity to the barbarians, and custom to na- 
 tions, and nature herself to the wild beast, 
 that they should at all times, by all means, 
 repel all violence from their body, from 
 their head, from their life." For when 
 argument is not a sufficient protection, there 
 can be no injustice to appeal to arms. Such 
 is the express doctrine of Cicero. "As 
 there are two kinds of dispute one by argu- 
 ment, another by force, and as the former 
 is peculiar to man, the latter to beasts, we 
 must appeal to the latter if we cannot use 
 the former. Ulpianus also approves the 
 
 maxim of Cassius, " that it is lawful to re- 
 pel force by force, and that the right is 
 founded in nature." The same is expressed 
 by Ovidius : 
 
 " Arms against arms to take all laws allow." 
 
 These Bulls, therefore, have no authority, 
 because " whatever is done, contrary to 
 law, ought to be regarded as null." * * * 
 
 The author of the Bull must therefore 
 have been under some malignant influence 
 when he sent forth this document as a 
 trumpet blast to inflame men to rage, 
 rapine, conflagration, devastation, murder, 
 and the other ills of war, and to stimulate 
 them, as Tertullianus says, "to treachery, 
 savageness, injustice, the peculiar business 
 of war." To make war on a people in 
 order to give them laws, is the same as to 
 use inhumanity and ferocity to produce 
 humanity and gentleness. Law is silenced 
 by the clash of arms. Antigonus senior, 
 when storming some cities, laughed at a 
 man who presented to him a treatise on jus- 
 tice, and Marius protested that, amidst the 
 din of War, he could not hear the voice of 
 Law. Even Pompeius himself, generally so 
 modest, dared to say, "How can I think of 
 law while I am in arms ?" 
 
 Noble instruments, truly, for introducing 
 virtue and more refined manners among any 
 nation. Henry II., a man black with 
 crime, and his armed followers, ferocious by 
 nature, and by the example of their leader ! 
 
 " The morals of oar king infect us all. 
 Pliant as soldiers at the trumpet's call." 
 
 If rank shoots of immorality disfigured 
 the Irish character, they should be lopped 
 off by the pruning knife of erudition, not 
 cloven down with the battle-axes of those 
 savage sons of Mars. 
 
 The forger of this Bull, which has been 
 put forth under the name of Pope Alexan- 
 der, represents the character of the Irish 
 in a more horrid light than they appear in 
 the Bull attributed to Pope Adrian. The 
 latter rather insinuates than directly asserts 
 that some Irish customs were barbarous ; 
 the former styles them " Christians in name, 
 1 ut barbarians in reality," though it is a 
 most undoubted fact that at this very period 
 the efforts to reclaim and civilize them were 
 never more zealous and successful." * * * 
 
 But now, to set before my reader what I 
 have already frequently proved, in various 
 places, how, I ask, could that nation be 
 deficient in refinement of manners, where 
 there was not a single extensive territory 
 that had not several monasteries, and where 
 every respective monastery had at least one 
 learned man publicly dispensing the treas- 
 ures of his knowledge ? Each cathedral had 
 its school open to all who wished to avail 
 themselves of it ; at this day there are 
 thirty-one such churches in Ireland, and
 
 THE POfrE AND IRELAN*. 
 
 135 
 
 formerly the number was much greater. 
 Moreover, there was at all times an im- 
 mense concourse of scholars to the Univers- 
 ity of Ardmacha, and so great was it at one 
 period, according to Florence McCarthy, 
 that they reached the number of 7,000. 
 
 Thus we need not found the glory of 
 Ireland exclusively on her primitive ages, 
 " when she was the rich and verdant land 
 of scholars when her pastures, if I may so 
 speak, were gemmed with the living flowers 
 of learning, thick as the starry coruscations 
 of the twinkling orbs around the pole ! ! 1" 
 Whence Eadfrid "imbibed Ambrosia; 
 where three times, in the course of about 
 two years, he drank of the rich cream of 
 wisdom, and feasted on the gemmed honey- 
 comb of Irish learning : for great crowds 
 and fleets of Britons went over to Ireland," 
 as Adelm testifies in his letter to Eadfrid, 
 the 13th in Ussher's Sylloge. Camden, 
 page 730, adopts their authority : "In 
 those days," he says, "our Anglo-Saxons 
 
 flocked from all sides to Ireland as the mart 
 of useful learning. Hence nothing is more 
 common in our histories of the lives of holy 
 men than " he was sent to Ireland for hia 
 education." And in the life of Sulgen, who 
 flourished 600 years ago, we read, " In- 
 spired with a love for study, he went, after 
 the example of his fathers, to the Irish, eo 
 il.ustrious for their wonderful learning. 
 From the Irish, the old English, our an- 
 cestors appear to have derived the form of 
 our letters, which are the very same as 
 those used in Ireland at the present day. 
 Thus was Ireland abundantly stocked with 
 eminent saints and brilliant scholars, at a 
 time when the culture of useful learning 
 was neglected and unknown throughout the 
 Christian world." May we not justly apply 
 to Ireland the lines of Buchanan : 
 
 ' Thither, when war convulsed the Roman world, 
 The muses in their flight their wings unfurled: 
 Their only home ; whence to the shores of Gaul 
 Doctors and learned guides of youth r*-ctll 
 The oracles of Greek and Latin lore," 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 Further Extracts from Father Lynch's "Cambrensis Eversus." Ireland Always Loyal 
 to Borne Additional Testimony proving the Adrian and Alexander Bulls to 
 be Entirely Spurious. 
 
 In his great work, "Cambrensis Eversus," 
 Dr. Lynch makes the following important 
 allusion to the forcible historical fact that 
 unlike England Ireland never revolted 
 against the dogmas of the Church or op- 
 posed the lawful Pontiff of Borne. On this 
 point Dr. Lynch says : 
 
 "But let me resume once more the train 
 of my argument. England has revolted 
 more than once to anti- Popes ; Ireland has 
 always faithfully clung to the true Pope 
 In England the clergy were sullied with the 
 loathsome stain of impurity ; in Ireland 
 they were pre-eminently distinguished for 
 chastity. In England ecclesiastical dis- 
 cipline was shaken by the violent dissen- 
 sions of the Bishops amongst themselves, 
 and their disobedience to the higher au- 
 thority, which compelled St. Thomas to 
 launch against them the anathemas of the 
 Church; but in Ireland the discipline of 
 the Church was strictly observed, the sec- 
 ond order of the clergy assiduously attend- 
 ing the churches, both in reciting the divine 
 offices, and observing the most rigid abstin- 
 ence, while the Bishops held numerous 
 synods, meeting and consulting together on 
 the canons most conducive to the spiritual 
 
 interests of their flocks, but never deciding 
 on the affairs of greater moment without 
 the authority of the Legate. To him, if to 
 any man, must be attributed the refinement 
 of morals which was wrought in Ireland, 
 and not to King Henry, whom Cambren&is 
 flatters in the following strain : " He was 
 appointed by Heaven, King and Lord of 
 Ireland. To that glorious King, the Church 
 and kingdom of Ireland owe whatever peace 
 or religious improvement they have yet en- 
 joyed. For, before his arrival in Ireland, 
 multifarious evils had constantly luxuriated 
 there in all ages back, until his power and 
 agency extirpated them for ever." 
 
 One would imagine, heaven save us, that 
 this Henry was a god that dropped down 
 from the clouds, with a " divine" commis- 
 sion, to reform the morals of Ireland by 
 the mere breath of his spirit, and to fight 
 the battles of the Lord like another Gideon 
 or Baruc, or Sampson, or Jeptha, or David, 
 or Samuel, or the Machabees. But Gir- 
 aldus must allow us to remark, among a 
 great many others, one very striking diftVr- 
 ence between Henry and these holy mtn ; 
 that they "by faith conquered kingdoms," 
 while he attempted to subdue Ireland by 
 "the force of his own arm." They, placing 
 their confidence in God alone, believed
 
 136 
 
 THE POI'E AND IltELAND. 
 
 " that the success of war is not in the multi- 
 tude of the army, but strength cometh from 
 heaven." He, relying on his own strength, 
 burst upon Ireland with the whole weight 
 of his power : he landed in Ireland with 
 4<Xi Urge ships, freighted with warlike men, 
 and horses, and arms, and provisions an 
 estimate which is given by Walter of Cov- 
 entry, not in numerals, but in express 
 words, "the King," he says, "went with 
 fur hundred ships, full of armed men, to 
 Ireland." 
 
 Nothing but loathsome flattery could 
 have extolled, beyond all measure, and at- 
 tributed even to God himself, an enterprise 
 reeking with such ferocity ; " but flatterers 
 f.'rget even the common meaning of words ; 
 make a present of another man's goods, it 
 is liberality ; be obstinate in wickedness, it 
 is fortitude." In the same way, cowards, 
 and loons, and misers, and wicked men of 
 all sorts, are metamorphosed into heroes, 
 and great souls, and generous hearts, and 
 models of all virtue. So far from having a 
 commission from heaven to oppress Ireland, 
 lie had none even from earth that is, no 
 human power had given to him any extra- 
 ordinary authority to make war upon Ire- 
 land. That spurious Bull of Pope Adrian 
 never saw the light, until it was shown to 
 the Irish in the synod of Waterford many 
 years after its supposed date, and, according 
 t> the English writers themselves, Henry 
 ha<l invaded Ireland before he obtained the 
 Bull from Pope Alexander. 
 
 Both Bulls, I contend, must be pro- 
 nounced spurious, for many reasons; but 
 above all, because they condemned the 
 Irish without a hearing, to forfeit their 
 liberty and the homes of their fathers. No 
 mortal man has a right to condemn any 
 one without a hearing : the law of nature 
 declares, "that innocence, if brought to 
 trial, can be acquitted, but that guilt can- 
 not be condemned without a trial." God 
 himself appears to have revealed that law, 
 for, when Adam and Eve had committed a 
 manifest crime, He did not condemn them 
 unheard. Neither did he wish to punish 
 severely the notorious horrors of the in- 
 habitants of Gomorrah, until he had wit- 
 nessed them himself'. " For," he says, 
 " the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is 
 multiplied, and their sin has become ex- 
 ceedingly grievous. I will go down and see 
 whether they have done according to the 
 cry that is come to me, or whether it be 
 not so, that I may know." Hence the first 
 admonition of the Council of Lateran to 
 judges is that they should not hastily heark- 
 en to accusations, but that after the 
 example of God Himself, they should care- 
 fully examine them, before they pronounce 
 the doom of the accused. 
 
 When the Pope had resolved tc introduce 
 
 solid reformation into Ireland, could he 
 have so far forgotten the rules of pru- 
 dence as to entrust the establishment of 
 religious rites to a layman, rather than to 
 some member of the ecclesiastical body 
 whom he could select for the task ? Is the 
 helm of the ship entrusted to a ploughman, 
 or the plough to the cobbler ? No, let all 
 men work at their own trade. It is the 
 excellent advice of Horatius : 
 
 " The landsman fears the helm to guide ; 
 
 health's rules 
 Phytfcians teach ; each trade knows its own 
 
 tools." 
 
 He, forsooth, is to prescribe the best 
 rules for celebrating or hearing Mass, 
 " who, even during the short hour of the 
 Sacrifice of the Sacred Host, was so op- 
 pressed by cares of state and of his crown, 
 that even that short time was spent more 
 in conversation and deliberation than in 
 devotion." Surely, he was not sufficiently 
 grounded in piety to undertake the re- 
 ligious reformation of others. I have clear- 
 ly proved that he was so deeply tainted 
 with vice, that you might as well expect 
 to gather grapes from thorns, or figs from 
 briars, as learn virtue from him. It is not 
 my intention now to return to that subject, 
 because stale repetition is always disagree- 
 able. But if the Irish were delivered over 
 to his care to be cleansed from their iniqui- 
 ties, it would be, to use a common saying, 
 only throwing them from the limekiln into 
 the coalpit. 
 
 There is no cleansing Giraldus from the 
 guilt of flattery, when he said, " that the 
 Church of Ireland owed to Henry alone 
 whatever perfection it had attained." But 
 more outrageous still was his assertion, 
 ' that whatever peace Ireland enjoyed waa 
 to be attributed to that King ;" for, what 
 is this but to say plainly that a man who 
 convulsed a kingdom by the blast, or rather 
 the tempests of war, had breathed over it 
 the gentle zephyrs of peace. May we not 
 apply here, with strict propriety, the words 
 of Isaias : " Woe to you that call evil good, 
 and good evil ; that put darkness for light, 
 and light for darkness ; that put bitter for 
 sweet, and sweet for bitter." Such is the 
 natural bent of flatterers, to call the scoffer 
 an agreeable man ; the obscene talker, a 
 jovial companion ; the hot-tempered, brave; 
 the miser, an economist ; the spendthrift, 
 munificent ; the obstinate, persevering ; in 
 a word, dazzled by the false lustre of evil 
 deeds, they veil their hideousness under 
 the name of v rtues. Though Henry were 
 admirably qualified in every other respect, 
 to confer on Ireland such vast blessings, 
 both in religion and in peace, he had neith- 
 er time nor leisure for the work, as he spent 
 no more than six months in Ireland, and 
 was employed more in evoking ferocious
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 137 
 
 passions by his arms, than in instructing the 
 nation. 
 
 For Diarmuid, King of Leinster, being 
 guilty of adultery and rebellion, the Irish, 
 in order to enforce the legal penalties of 
 those crimes, took up arms against him, 
 when all other means of repressing his 
 audacity had failed. King Henry then 
 came forward as the determined patron of 
 adultery and rebellion, and did not only not 
 crush the insolence of a man who trampled 
 on the laws and spurned his lawful superi- 
 ors, but even goaded him on in his career 
 of vice by sending an army to his support. 
 Is it not, then, plain that Henry inculcated 
 no virtue in Ireland, but rather sowed vice 
 broadcast ; he established no new laws, but 
 labored with all his might to abolish the 
 good old laws of the land. Truly, it amazes 
 me, that any man could have ever imagined 
 Henry had the Pope's authority for such 
 proceedings. 
 
 Though the proofs already advanced are 
 more than sufficient to show that the Bulls 
 of Adrian and Alexander are spurious, 
 there remains yet one argument, which, in 
 my humble judgment, places the question 
 beyond the possibility of doubt. " Now 
 John De Courcey," says Newbrigensis, 
 gathering a valiant band of horse and foot, 
 resolved to invade the province of Ireland, 
 which was separated from Scotland by a 
 narrow channel, and is called Ulster. But 
 it so happened that Vivian, a very eloquent 
 man, and Degate of the Apostolic See, had 
 landed there from Scotland, and was re- 
 ceived with every mark of respect, by the 
 Kings and Bishops of that province. While 
 he was stopping at Dun (Down), a city on 
 the sea shore, news came to the Irish of 
 the advance of the hostile army. They 
 consulted the Legate as to what they should 
 do in such a conjuncture, and he told them 
 that they should fight for their country, 
 and he gave them his blessing with hearty 
 prayers for their success." But they were 
 defeated, " and the city of Dun was taken." 
 The Roman Legate, with his attendants, 
 took refuge in a church that was famed for 
 its relics of the saints ; for he was a prudent 
 man, and had procured letters from the 
 King of the English to his governors in Ire- 
 land, to aid him by their authority in the 
 discharge of his legatine functions among 
 the barbarians. On the security of those 
 letters he passed unmolested to Dublin, and 
 by virtue of a commission, either from the 
 King of England or our Lord the Pope, he 
 held a general council of the Irish Bishops 
 and Abbots. But wishing to enforce too 
 violently the observance of Roman custom, 
 in a church of barbarian simplicity, the 
 King's governors ordered him either to de- 
 part or to take part with them in the war. 
 He did depart, loaded with Irish gold, 
 
 which had been the grand object of his 
 wishes " 
 
 Can any man imagine that such a minis- 
 ter either knew not or despised the orders 
 of his master ? Would he have come to 
 Ireland without the order of the Pope, and 
 utterly ignorant of the duties he was bound 
 to inculcate among the Irish ? If the Pope 
 had appointed Henry Lord of Ireland, as 
 the Papal Letter had ordered the Irish to 
 obey Henry, why were not the Irish ordered 
 to obey the words of his Legate, especially 
 as Cardinal Vivian was the first Papal 
 Legate that came to Ireland after the su- 
 preme dominion of Ireland had been con- 
 ferred OP. Henry by the Pope. It was 
 notorious that the Irish not only did not 
 acknowledge, but opposed by arms, Henry's 
 claims to their kingdom ; and hence the 
 principal duty of the Legate should have 
 been to produce the Pope's Bull, and to re- 
 strain them within the bounds of duty, and 
 curb their impetuosity by his exhortations. 
 If the short interval of five years from the 
 supposed Papal grant of the Crown of Ire- 
 land to King Henry had obliterated the 
 Bull from his memory, it is amazing that 
 the strife of arms did not rouse him from 
 his lethargy and remind him of that im- 
 portant document. Would uot so singular 
 and unprecedented a power, conferred on a 
 foreign prince without the knowledge of the 
 victims themselves, challenge attention and 
 excite wonder 1 This fact alone proves to 
 demonstration that the Bull never existed ; 
 it was not produced at a conjuncture when 
 there was not only occasion but even neces- 
 sity forit ; does the soldier let his sword rust 
 in the scabbard when the army is on him? 
 ******** 
 
 At all events, it is certain that King 
 Henry either did not believe in the authen- 
 ticity of the Bulls of Adrian and Alexander, 
 or the validity of the claim which they pur- 
 ported to give to the sovereignty of Ireland. 
 For we find him distrusting them, and 
 laboring to extort from Pope Lucius, the 
 Third, successor of Alexander, a grant simi- 
 lar to the preceding. Yet, though he had 
 deserved well of Pope Lucius, and sent him 
 a large sum of money in 1188, he was dis- 
 appointed in his expectations. The Pope 
 refused the request, probabiy, as well as we 
 can conjecture, because, after an attentive 
 examination of the whole affair, he discov- 
 ered either that the Bulls had never been 
 issued or that they were fraudulently ob- 
 tained. Hence we find Henry still restless, 
 from the conviction, perhaps, that the pre- 
 ceding Bulls had been unjustly procured, 
 and were therefore invalid. Again, he 
 applies to Urban III., the successor of Pope 
 Lucius, and begs a new grant of the king- 
 dom of Ireland. In the year 1185, Henry, 
 King of England, sent his ambassadors tg
 
 138 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 Urban and obtained many favors, which had 
 been sternly refused by Pope Lucius. One 
 of the concessions was that he was em- 
 powered to have any of his sons crowned 
 King of Ireland, and the Pope confirmed 
 that right to him by a Bull, and sent to 
 him, as a token of his will and approbation, 
 a crown of peacock feathers wreathed with 
 gold." As merchants of slender means can- 
 not get goods on credit, but must pay down 
 ready money, even so this writer has no 
 more claims to the assent of his readers 
 than what his authorities can command. 
 Would it, I ask, have been more trouble- 
 some to give a copy of that Bull than to 
 make this passing notice of it ? Can there 
 be any possible reason for suppressing it, 
 but the conviction that it had not really 
 been granted by the Pope ? In the first 
 year of his pontificate, before he was under 
 the least obligation to Henry, could Urban 
 be so indecorous, so flexible, as to grant 
 thus readily what neither the most pressing 
 solicitation nor the choicest favors could 
 extract from his predecessor? Surely he 
 could not take such liberty with the prop- 
 erty of others, as to make a present of a 
 whole kingdom to a foreigner, without even 
 communicating his designs to the inhabi- 
 tants or hearing their defense. Surely he 
 would send some more respectable pledge 
 of his liberality than a hunting cap of pea- 
 cock's feathers, which would gird, with more 
 propriety, the temples of some stage king 
 in a theatre, than the head of a true and 
 real monarch. 
 
 But what is the substance of this grant 
 of the Pope ? Henry is authorized to select 
 any of his sons and have him crowned King 
 of Ireland. Now the author himself as- 
 sures us that Henry had already actually 
 usurped that power. In the year 1177, 
 " the King came to Oxford, and in a gen- 
 eral assembly appointed his son John King 
 of Ireland, with permission and authority 
 of Pope Alexander." When the business 
 was concluded, it was an odd time to ask 
 permission to have it done. It was a mock- 
 ery of authority. But such was Henry's 
 habit, first to seize upon a territory and 
 then to beg a grant of the same from the 
 Pope. Thus he lands in Ireland at the 
 head of an army, before he published the 
 Bull of Adrian, or obtained the Bull of 
 Alexander; proceeding in an inverted 
 order, beginning where he should end. 
 When war is over, succor is too late and 
 useless ; when a possession is secured, a 
 grant of it is needless, a petition for the 
 grant is a mockery. What crime more re- 
 volting than to make another man bear the 
 infamy of your crime while you enjoy its 
 fruit? To ask another to staunch the 
 wound which your own hands have torn 
 open, and load him with the execration due 
 to your own guilt ? 
 
 One of the most powerful arguments, 
 perhaps, against the authenticity of these 
 Bulls of Adrian and Alexander is, that the 
 editors, who have used all possible diligence 
 to give a complete edition of the Bulls, 
 pisned them over with contempt, and n'.ver 
 inserted them in their collections. They 
 could not dream of registering such spurious 
 bantlings, so unbecoming the solemn dig- 
 nity of the Pope among the legitimate 
 emanations from the Apostolical See. 
 These editors were like the eagles which 
 are said to know their young by the follow- 
 ing ordeal : The parent bird takes the 
 fledgling in its talons and holds it against 
 the rays of the sun. If the eaglet gazes at 
 it steadily it is acknowledged legitimate, 
 but if the eye blenches, " the talon opens 
 and the spurious pretender is dropped to 
 the earth." Another excellent reason for 
 doubting the authenticity of the same Bulls, 
 is the confession of Giraldus himself, who 
 appears to doubt their validity, by intro- 
 ducing other princes to make good by their 
 assent the Papal grant of the sovereignty of 
 Ireland to Henry II.. " There was, more- 
 over," he falsely says, " the authoritative 
 sanction of the Popes and of all the princes 
 and primates of Christendom." Thus the 
 power of giving a ruler to Ireland, which 
 Giraldus had at first represented as the ex- 
 clusive prerogative of the Pope, is now 
 divided among the emperor and foreign 
 kings and primates. Wretched, indeed, 
 must have been the condition of the Irish, 
 who had as many masters to obey as there 
 were princes and primates in Europe, 
 though ''no man can serve two masters, 
 for he will either hate the one and love the 
 other, or sustain the one and despise the 
 other." 
 
 But what friendship could foreign princes 
 have for Henry when his own sons hated 
 and took up arms against him, and if they 
 had no friendship for him how could they 
 delegate to him their authority over Ire- 
 land ? I am at loss to know what induce- 
 ments primates could have to bestow any 
 favor on a man who had murdered one of 
 their own Order, the primate of England, 
 St. Thomas, Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 Could foreigners expect favors from him 
 who was savagely cruel to his countrymen ? 
 It was a silly dream of Giraldus to give so 
 many colleagues to the Pope in the supreme 
 dominion of Ireland. The greater the 
 number of colleagues in that supreme do- 
 minion the less the power of the Pope, 
 because the princes and primates of all 
 Christendom are represented as coequal in 
 power to the Pope in disposing of the sov- 
 ereignty of Ireland. Nay, this very at- 
 tempt to strengthen Henry's authority over 
 Ireland utterly destroys it, for as the princes 
 or primates never claimed the least power
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 139 
 
 over Ireland, their colleague the Pope 
 ought not to have assumed it. 
 
 But I ask, in the first place, did these 
 princes and primates of all Christendom 
 assemble in general conclave to make a 
 present of the kingdom of Ireland to King 
 Henry ? Or were they solicited individual- 
 ly to ratify this grant to King Henry ? 
 Synodical act, or private letters of the kind 
 I have never been able to discover, and the 
 word of Giraldus, if not supported by au- 
 thorities, is not a very safe ground of cer- 
 tainty. Moreover, Maurice Regan, retainer 
 and interpreter of Diarmaid, King of Lein- 
 ster, who first brought the English to 
 Ireland, has left us a detailed account of 
 the events of his own time, but never makes 
 any allusion to those supposed bulls of 
 Adrian and Alexander. Now, a man of 
 ordinary judgment must find it very diffi- 
 cult to believe that a writer who has given 
 minute details of comparatively trifling mat- 
 ters would have passed over in silence an 
 affair of momentous interest, when the in- 
 trinsic importance of the documents and 
 even the very names of the Popes should 
 have been a powerful inducement to bring 
 their bulls from their obscurity into the 
 light of day. Such documents could not 
 escape the notice of a writer even of or- 
 dinary diligence, who undertook to record 
 the current events of Irish history. 
 
 The forgery of the two Bulls was consider- 
 ably facilitated by the previous exploits of 
 others in the same work of deception. 
 Thus, the Bull of Pope Honorius, purport- 
 ing to be a grant made to Cambridge, is 
 considered by many to be apocryphal. 
 Harpsfield gives the following opinion re- 
 garding it : " Without presuming to pro- 
 nounce a positive decision, or dispu'e the 
 wiser judgment of others, I cannct extricate 
 myself fully from doubts of various kinds, 
 arising from chronological difficulties. It is, 
 
 if not impossible, at least exceedingly diffi- 
 cult to reconcile these statements, with a 
 history of undoubted authority, and com- 
 posed nearly at the same time by the ven- 
 erable Beda, who states that after this 
 period a school for boys was founded by 
 Sigebert at Etst Anglia on the Kentish 
 model, and that masters and professors 
 were brought there from Kent ; but above 
 all, I cannot reconcile it with the chronology 
 and events of the rign of Honorius. For, 
 can any one believe that theological studies 
 were so flourishing, or that either Arch- 
 bishops or Bishops had any authority in a 
 territory then governed by Pagan Saxons? 
 Or that Honorius himself and the said son 
 of Petronius, of consular rank, could have 
 studied in Cambridge in those days ? I 
 need not observe, moreover, that the words, 
 " when I was in the University in minor 
 orders, were, if I do not mistake, unknown 
 in that sense during that century. I omit 
 other questions which perplex me on this 
 intricate and slippery topic. Others I fer- 
 vently hope may at length, perhaps suc- 
 ceed, in clearing them up." This Bull is 
 published in the "Antiquities of Cam- 
 bridge" (lib. 1, p. 75); but it is impugned 
 by Brienne Twine and completely refuted. 
 The Bulls of Eugene IV. and Sergius I. to 
 the same Cambridge are admitted to be 
 spurious also. Twine refutes both of them. 
 Speiman also proves, conclusively, that a 
 Bull purporting to be a grant of certain 
 privileges to the monks of Canterbury, by 
 St. Augustine of Canterbury, is spurious. 
 Again, Gervase, at the year 1181, writes 
 " that the Augustinian monks brought for- 
 ward several rare and suspicious docu- 
 ments." Thus, if the author of the forged 
 Bulls of Adrian and Alexander can be de- 
 fended by precedent, it were easy to collect 
 and scrape together a great number of 
 forged and surreptitious Bulls, to mitigate, 
 in some measure, the pain of his guilt.
 
 THK POPE AM) 11(1 I. AM). 
 
 CHAPTER XXV. 
 
 Profound Reverence of the Irish People for the Vicar of Christ. Nearly Every 
 Nation in Europe placed under the Ban of the Chur h except Ireland. 
 
 In continuing his argument in order to 
 I 'iove the spurious character of the Adrian 
 and Alexander Bulls, Dr. Lynch thus 
 brings forth the stern fact that so far from 
 Ireland being in a state of insubordination 
 alluded to by the fictitious Bull attributed 
 to Pope Alexander III., that Island of 
 Saints was the only nation in Europe which 
 was faithful to the Holy Father and loyal 
 to the Catholic faith in the dark days which 
 tried men's souls : 
 
 It has ever been the custom of Holy 
 Mother Church to admonish her offending 
 children before she subjects them to any 
 severe penalty, and to endeavor to deter 
 them by threats from the commission of 
 crime, before she applied severe remedies. 
 Thus Adrian II. threatened Charles the 
 Bald with excommunication for attempting 
 to deprive Louis, son of the deceased Em- 
 peror Lothaire, of his crown ; and in the 
 same way John VII. threatened Charles the 
 Fat, if he did not restore the property of a 
 certain monastery. When Alphonsus, King 
 of Spain, was about to marry the relation of 
 his wife, Gregorius VII. ordered a threat of 
 excommunication to be pronounced against 
 him, Many similar examples of the lenity 
 of Popes in punishing the guilty could be 
 produced, but I omit them at present for 
 brevity's sake. 
 
 Is it possible that ao kind a mother would 
 have departed from her constant course of 
 mercy to crush Ireland by her severity, and 
 involve the innocent in ruin, without the 
 slightest intimation of the impending woes ? 
 The horrors of the punishment would press 
 heavily on Ireland if she had been openly 
 convicted of some heinous crimes. The 
 just punishment of crime must be borne 
 with cheerfulness and fortitude. 
 
 " Pain on the guiltless to inflict is pain." 
 
 But how excruciating must have been the 
 agony of being condemned, absent and un- 
 heard, when the Roman laws themselves 
 enacted that no sentence should be pro- 
 nounced on any person in his absence, and 
 that if pronounced it should be invalid. 
 The senate even decreed that no judgment 
 should be pronounced on King Phillippus in 
 his absence. In fine, St. Augustinus re- 
 proves Secundus, Primate of Tigisitan, for 
 
 not preventing persons from being con- 
 demned in their absence. 
 
 That Ireland was never degraded by 
 crimes of an atrocious die appears from this 
 single fact, that while all other Catholic 
 kingdoms were, at some time or other, laid 
 under excommunication or interdict by the 
 Pope, according to the nature of their 
 offences, Ireland alone never incurred his 
 ecclesiastical censures. 
 
 Let us begin with Scotland, as it is the 
 nearest neighbor of Ireland. In the year 
 1186, William, King of Scotland, obstinate- 
 ly opposed Pope Alexander HI., by not 
 only preventing John, the lawfully appoint- 
 ed Bishop of St. Andrews, from taking pos- 
 session of his See, but even by expelling 
 him from his kingdom. He appointed his 
 own chaplain, Hugh, and then placed him 
 by force of arms in the See of St. Andrews, 
 whereby the Pope was so deeply offended 
 that he excommun ; cated the King aiid laid 
 his kingdom under an interdict. Again, in 
 the year 1216, " Swalo, the Pope's legate, 
 launched the final bolts of the Church 
 against Alexander II., and laid the king- 
 dom of Scotland under interdict until the 
 injuries inflicted on England were repaired, 
 and Carlisle restored to the English, from 
 whom it had lately been taken. 1 In the 
 year 1318, "the Cardinal legates fulmina- 
 ted the thunders of the Church against 
 Robert, King of Scotland, and laid his 
 whole kingdom under interdict, because he 
 violated his treaties and waged forbidden 
 war against Edward, King of England." 
 
 Passing now to England, we find it more 
 than once visited with the same punishment. 
 " Thus, about the year 905, the Roman 
 Pontiff laid an interdict on Edward the 
 Elder, on account of some flagrant dis- 
 orders in ecclesiastical discipline in the 
 western parts of the kingdom. And Eugen- 
 ius III., quashing every obstacle from ap- 
 peal, ordered the sentence of interdict to be 
 pronounced, by the authority of the Pope, 
 on the land of King Stephen." Innocent 
 III. visited King John with a similar pun- 
 ishment, so that all England was under an 
 interdict during six years and fourteen 
 weeks, the conventual churches alone being 
 allowed to have the sacred mysteries cele- 
 brated once only in the week, and even 
 then with doors closet. During that time 
 " the bodies of the degd were carried out
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 141 
 
 from the cities and towns and buried like 
 dogs in the hye-ways and ditches, without 
 prayers or the miniatiy of the clergy." 
 
 Let us go now from England to Ger- 
 many, where Lothaire, Emperor and King, 
 was excommunicated t y Nicolas the First 
 for associating Veldreda, a concubine, with 
 his lawful wife Therberga King Robert 
 also was excommunicated by Gregorius V. 
 for marrying a relative of his mother, within 
 the degrees of affinity. So completely was 
 he abandoned by all his friends, that only 
 two poor slaves remained with him to serve 
 his table ; and yet so loathsome was even 
 that simple duty, that they burned all the 
 vessels in which the king's meat and drink 
 was served up. When Philippus the First 
 repudiated his lawful wife Bertha, and took 
 Bertrada his concubine to wife, he was ex- 
 communicated by Pope Urban II. Ivo, 
 Cardinal legate of Innocent II , laid the 
 kingdom of France under interdict, because 
 Rudolph, Count of Verdun, divorced his 
 wife and married a sister of the Queen, and 
 because Louis VII. contumaciously opposed 
 the orders of the Sovereign Pontitf. These 
 examples, however, were not sufficient to 
 deter Philippus Augustus from repudiating 
 his lawful Queen Gereberga, and forming a 
 criminal connection with Agnes ; but to 
 punish that crime, " the whole territory of 
 the King of France," says Baronius. * was 
 laid under the strictest interdict, so that all 
 the churches were closed and the bodies of 
 the dead were never buried in cemeteries, 
 but left rotting in all quarters of the earth." 
 France lay during eight months under this 
 interdict, and then, as had already hap- 
 pened, under Philippus the First, all the 
 public documents and deeds were dated, as 
 I have heard, in the reign of Christ. 
 
 Spain itself has not been exempt from 
 these visitations. When Innocent III. was 
 informed that the King of Leon had mar- 
 ried his cousin, the daughter of the King of 
 Portugal, he excommunicated the incestu- 
 ous couple and the King of Portugal him- 
 self, and laid their kingdoms under an 
 interdict. Again, Sanchez, King of Portu- 
 gal, having married his daughter Tarsia to 
 his nephew Adelphonso, King of Gallicia, 
 Celestmus III., excommunicated Adelphon- 
 8us, and laid his k ; no;dom under interdict 
 until after a lapse of five years, during 
 which three sons were born to him ; he at 
 last dismissed her. Portugal was under an 
 interdict during full twelve years for no 
 other reason than the repudiation of his 
 wife by King Alphonsus, and his cohabiting 
 with a concubine. The kingdom of Na- 
 varre, also, was interdicted during one year 
 by Pope Julius II. 
 
 Poland also suffered under these penal- 
 ties. Gregorius VII. placed the whole 
 province of Gnesen, the metropolitan cf 
 
 Cracow, under a general interdict on ac- 
 count of the murder of St. Stanislaus, and 
 deprived King Boleslaus of all regal honors 
 and authority. Celestinus II f. also ana- 
 thematized Leopold, Duke of Austria, for 
 disobedience and subjected his territory to 
 interdict. Need I mention the Emperors 
 of Germany, Henry III., Henry IV., Fred- 
 eric II., and Henry V., who were often 
 smitten with the thunders of the Church, 
 and Henry III. and Frederic, who were, 
 moreover, deposed from their Imperial 
 thrones by the Popea, and beheld all their 
 subjects absolved from that oath of allegi- 
 ance which had once bound the people re- 
 ligously to their masters. 
 
 Even in Italy the city of Naples was laid 
 under anathema by Adrian II. Rome her- 
 self, the head of cities, suffered a similar 
 punishment for wounding a Cardinal ; and 
 Florence, also, for hanging a Bishop. 
 Rome was punished by Alexander III. ; 
 Florence by Sixtus IV. But long before 
 that period St. Catherine of Sienna had pre- 
 vailed upon Gregorius XI. to relieve the 
 Florentines from the sentence of interdict. 
 Thus, to sum up in one word, every country 
 in Europe was punished by those scourges 
 for some heinous crime. Ireland alone 
 never compelled the Pope to wield the 
 spiritual sword against her, for she has at 
 all times devotedly persisted in her obedi- 
 ence to him, and never raised her own re- 
 bellious will against his authority. Neither 
 were her kings aver contaminated by crimes 
 heinous enough to excite the indignat-on 
 of the Pope to excommunicate them and to 
 absolve their subjects from the oath of al- 
 legiance. ***** 
 
 When heresy first acquired its political 
 ascendancy in Ireland there was no point 
 of Catholic doctrine for which the Irish 
 were more persecuted than for their con- 
 stant profession that the Pope was the 
 Supreme Visible Ruler of the Church Mili- 
 tant, and for their unflinching refusal to 
 take the oath of the King's ecclesiastical 
 supremacy, though the heretics exhausted 
 all the appliances of force and persuasion 
 to compel them to renounce the authority 
 of the Pope. 
 
 In Ireland, the cities and municipalities 
 were authorized by an ancient privilege 
 conferred on them by the King, to elect 
 from among their citizens or burgesses a 
 magistrate to watch over the common in- 
 terests. But if he presumed to enter on 
 his office without having previously taken 
 the oath of supremacy he was carried off to 
 Dublin and lodged in prison, and when he 
 persisted that the Pope was the Supreme 
 Visible Head of the Church Militant, he 
 was detained in prison until he abdicated his 
 office and was condemned to a fine, which 
 generally was greater than all his wealth.
 
 142 
 
 THK POFK AND IBBLAND. 
 
 Student* of our common law, after great 
 labor and enormous expense incurred in 
 the study of law, were not only debarred 
 from ever sitting as judges in the courts and 
 tribunals, but were, moreover, prevented 
 from pleading even in civil or criminal 
 cases, because they firmly refused to re- 
 nounce the Pope and take the oath of the 
 King's ecclesiastical supremacy. This unan- 
 imity in maintaining the supremacy of 
 the Pope had long since taken firm hold of 
 the souls of the Irish. Even at the very 
 birth of the English heresy, when King 
 Henry VIII. first revolted from the au- 
 thority of the Pope, John Travers, an Irish- 
 man and Doctor of Divinity, published a 
 work strenuously advocating the supremacy 
 of the Pope over the Church. When asked 
 by his judges who was the author of the 
 book, he held out the thumb, index and 
 middle finger of his right hand before the 
 judges, " these fingers," he nobly avowed, 
 "wrote that book, and I shall never forget 
 the labor it cost me." For this heroic deed 
 his unjust judges ordered his right hand to 
 be cut off and cast into the fire, but the 
 three fingers were taken out unhurt from 
 the flames and persevered afterwards by the 
 Catholics with religious veneration. 
 
 What need of more ? Of all the countries 
 in Europe subject to heretical kings, there 
 is not one in which a greater number of 
 subjects have preserved in the old faith, 
 and in obedience to the Sovereign Pontiff, 
 than in Ireland. Cardinal Bentivoglio has 
 truly observed, "that the Irish would seem 
 to have sucked in the Catholic faith with 
 their mother's milk." In other countries 
 smitten with heresy the majority followed 
 the example of the King or other governing 
 power of the state and renounced the old 
 faith and the supremacy of the Pope. But 
 in Ireland, I do not hesitate to assert, that 
 not U e tenth, nor the hundredth, no nor 
 the thousandth part revolted from the fa'th 
 of their fathers to the camp of the heretics. 
 Orlandinus might say, with perfect truth, 
 " that the Irish had preserved in heart and 
 soul the Catholic faith in all its integrity, 
 and the most devoted obedience to the 
 Roman Pontiff." And Bozius also, "as 
 far as we can judge from history, not one 
 of all the northern nations has been more 
 constant in the profession of the one faith." 
 May I not then apply to the Irish what 
 
 Virgilius sang regarding the Romano : 
 
 " Let others better mould the running maa 
 Of metals, and inform the breathing brats ; 
 And soften into flesh a marble face ; 
 Plead better at the bar : describe the t-kies, 
 And when the stars descend, and when they rise. 
 But, Erin, be It thine, mark well ! I pray. 
 Thy faith to hold, Christ's vicar to obey." 
 
 The following passage of the author of 
 the Analecta may be appropriately intro- 
 duced here. " Though the authority of the 
 Pope has been long since proscribed and 
 condemned by all the public authorities and 
 tribunals, and by the laws of the land, no 
 violence could extinguish, nor fear obliter- 
 ate, the ardent attachment to the Vicar of 
 Christ, which is deeply imprinted on the 
 hearts of these people. Laws, discipline, 
 and forms of government have been changed, 
 but wherever they interfered with religion 
 no violence or artifice could induce the peo- 
 ple to adopt them. Knavery was employed 
 to deceive, seduction to allure, insult to 
 provoke, intrigue to solicit, threats to ter- 
 rify, rewards to conciliate. They oppress 
 and they promise, they chalk out their ap- 
 proach and seize all the avenues ; they work 
 both the mine and the battery ; all ma- 
 chines are plied, but all in vain ; they do 
 not advance one inch ; we gain more on 
 them than they on us." 
 
 Truly hath Andrew Thevet asserted "that 
 the people of Ireland have maintained the 
 Christian religion in all its integrity in des- 
 pite of the English; who exerted all their 
 strength to prevent and involve them in 
 their own execrable sect. When the su- 
 preme council of the Catholics of Ireland 
 refused obedience to the censures of the 
 Pope's Nuncio in the year 1648, the vast 
 majority of the Iriah adhered to him and 
 left but few supporters to the council. The 
 common people were inflamed with so ar- 
 dent a love of the Pope, that they deemed 
 it an inexplicable crime not to obey the 
 orders of his minister. Tumults frequently 
 burst forth like a torrent in all quarters, 
 and contentions were rife in public and pri- 
 vate. The chief men of the confederate 
 Catholics themselves maintained the princi- 
 ple, for they appealed to the Pope himself. 
 Thus all orders have been at all times unani- 
 imous in Ireland in their profound rever- 
 ence and obedience to the supreme author- 
 ity of the Pope.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 143 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 Ireland's Aid to Home in the Propagation of the Faith. Irish Saints and Apostolic 
 Missionaries who Helped to Spread Christianity Throughout Europe. 
 
 In order to illustrate the unity which 
 existed between Rome and Ireland through- 
 out all ?ges, from the time of St. Patrick 
 down to the twelfth century, Dr. Lynch 
 presented the following important historical 
 facts to his readers, and as the glory of 
 Ireland is one of the greatest objects of this 
 work, we present the following pages from 
 Cambrensis Emrsus as valuable testimony 
 that both Rome and Ireland were a unit in 
 the true Faith, notwithstanding the slurs 
 cast upon Ireland by the English forger of 
 the Adrian and Alexander Bulls. On this 
 interesting historical subject Father Lynch 
 says: 
 
 But it was not in our times alone, and 
 in those of our fathers and grandfathers, 
 that the Irish clung with invincible fidelity 
 to the Pope ; they evinced, in ancient 
 times, the same devoted attachment to the 
 Catholic faith and to the head of the 
 Church. " The reverence of the Irish," 
 says Lombard, " for the authority of the 
 Apostolic See, so far transcends their rev- 
 erence for all other powers and dignities, 
 that they bow to its authority, not only in 
 ecclesiastical but even in temporal affairs." 
 If what Polydorous relates be true, "the 
 Irish subjected themselves and all their 
 rig its to the dominion of the Apostolic 
 See, and invariably professed that the Pope 
 was their sole Lord from the time that the 
 Christian religion was first established 
 among them." Sanders repeats the same 
 assertion in nearly the same words, " that 
 they never admitted any other supreme 
 Lord but the Pope." Keating refers this 
 acknowledgment of the temporal sovereign- 
 ty of the Pope to a later period, when 
 Donnchadh O'Briain, son of Brian Borum- 
 ha, and King of Ireland according to him, 
 but of Munster only according to all others, 
 and even deposed from that throne in 1604, 
 went on a pilgrimage to Rome, and, with 
 the consent of all his chieftains, surrendered 
 the supreme dominion of Ireland into the 
 hands of the Pope. 
 
 Though there are strong reasons to doubt 
 the accuracy of those statements of Poly- 
 
 dorous, Sanders and Keating, and powerful 
 arguments to prove that the Irish never 
 surrendered the political supremacy of their 
 country to the Pope, it is an undoubted an 
 incontrovertible fact that, from the mo- 
 ment the Irish received the faith, all their 
 principles in religious affairs were sub- 
 ordinate to the power of the Pope ; and the 
 great pillars of our Church in all ages and 
 conjunctures sought in Rome direction and 
 authority for all their arrangements in 
 ecclesiastical concerns. On the first dawn 
 of the Christian faith, St. Mansuetus, an 
 Irshman, went to Rome in the year 66, 
 and met St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles, 
 by whom, according to Saussaye, "he was 
 baptized in the saving waters, and renoun- 
 cing his old Gentile name, with the old 
 man, took the name Mansuetus, as a type 
 of the lamblike gentleness of his character. 
 He was then sent by St. Peter to enlighten 
 with the rays of divine faith the city of 
 Tulle in Lorrain." St. Kiaran, Bishop of 
 Saighir, having heard in the year 382 of 
 the fame of the Christian religion in Rome, 
 left Ireland and went to that city, where 
 he was baptized and instructed in the faith 
 of Christ, and remained there twenty years 
 studying the Sacred Scriptures, collecting its 
 different books, and acquiring a full know- 
 ledge of all the details of ecclesiastical dis- 
 cipline, until he was consecrated Bishop.'' 
 
 Again, "St. Hilarius, seeing the great 
 holiness of St. Ailbhe, sent him to our Lord 
 the Pope to be consecrated Bishop. He 
 was most graciously welcomed by the Holy 
 Pontiff, and remained with him one year 
 and fifty days." Now, there came at the 
 same time 50 other holy men after St. 
 Ailbhe from Ireland to Rome, and when 
 they met the Pope and St. Ailbhe, the 
 Pope appointed a monastery for themselves 
 and placed them under the government of 
 St. Ailbhe. Many of them were homony- 
 mous ; thus, 12 Colmanns, 12 Caeimhghins, 
 12 Fintans." This residence of St. Ailbhe 
 and his associates at Rome is referred by 
 Ussher to the year 397. 
 
 About the same time, also, St. Declan, 
 as his life informs us, conceived the design 
 of going to Rome to learn the Canons of 
 the Church and to receive permission from 
 the Apostolic See to preach, and also to
 
 144 
 
 THR POPK AND IRSLAND. 
 
 introduce the Ritual and rules of the 
 Roman Church. Now, when he and hia 
 holy companions arrived in Rome, the Pope 
 received him with great demonstrations of 
 joy and proclaimed to the Roman people 
 his high descent and his great virtue, so 
 that the holy deacon was exceedingly hon- 
 ored and beloved by the clergy and people 
 of Rome. 
 
 St. Seizin also attended the scripture 
 schools in Rome in the year 435, and was after- 
 wards consecrated Bishop by the apostplical 
 authority of Celestinus the First, and Ap- 
 pointed to accompany St. Patrick in his 
 Irish mission. 
 
 St. Ibar afterwards went to Rome, ac- 
 companied by his diaciple St. Abban, who, 
 on three subsequent occasions, made fie 
 same pilgrimage in honor of Christ. St. 
 End a also went to Rome about the year 
 461, and Scothin, a disciple of St. David 
 (who died in the year 550) having, on one 
 occasion, some urgent business to be settled 
 at Rome, is said to have journeyed, or 
 rather to have been translated thither, in 
 one day from Ireland, and after dispatching 
 all his business, to have returned to Ireland 
 in the next. 
 
 St. Cassau, a Bishop, who flourished 
 about the year 405, took some companions 
 with him to Rome, "to imbibe true learning 
 and piety at the fountain head." 
 
 St. Mochta, a Bishop, "was engaged in 
 his sacred studies in Rome in the year 480. 
 He was a favorite of God and man, every 
 day surpassing himself in wisdom and edify- 
 ing others by word and example. Disciples 
 crowded around him, who imbibed from 
 his holy soul the salutary waters of wisdom, 
 and became perfect men in faith, word and 
 work. His extensive erudition, adorned as 
 it was by a life of unsullied purity, having 
 induced the Fope to exalt him to the epis- 
 copal rank, he returned to his own country 
 with the authority and blessing of the Pon- 
 tiff, accompanied by twelve associates " 
 
 In the year 522, St. Nennidh, went to 
 Rome to visit the tombs of the apostles, 
 and during his pilgrimage great was his 
 fasting, and greater still his abstinence from 
 all sin. St. Senanus also, who by some is 
 supposed to be the Archbishop of Ardmacha, 
 " went to Rome to visit the tombs of the 
 apostles. He flourished about the year 
 544. Nearly at the same period St. Car- 
 thac the Elder also visited Rome. " 
 
 St. Barr, Bishop, with twelve compani 
 ons, amongst whom were St. Eulogius and 
 St. Maidoc, of Fearna-mor (Ferns), having 
 gone on a pilgrimage about this time to 
 Britain, proceeded thence accompanied by 
 St. David of Menavia, ''on a pilgrimage 
 to Rome to visit the tomb of the apostles." 
 St. Fridian or Finnan, "visited the tomb 
 of the apostlea in 555." His learning and 
 
 piety, his high rank and singular beauty of 
 person, secured for him an honorable re- 
 ception from Pope Pelagius with whom he 
 remained during three months, having in 
 that short space of time made himself per- 
 fect master of the ecclesiastical and apos- 
 tolical discipline : for he was a man of 
 brilliant genius. Having received, accord- 
 ing to the usual custom, the Pope's bless- 
 ing, he returned to his own country. 
 
 About the year 599, St. Dagan, Abbot, 
 but afterwards Bishop, "going on a pil- 
 grimage to Rome, brought with him the 
 rule which St. Molua had prescribed and 
 dictated for his monks. When Pope St. 
 Gregorius read that rule he said before all 
 present. ' the Saint that composed that 
 rule made a bulwark around his monks that 
 raised them to heaven.' So Pope St. Gre- 
 gorius sent his prayers and his blessing to 
 St. Molua." 
 
 In the year 628, St. Laisrean " went to 
 Rome with fifty holy men, where he was 
 ordained and consecrated Bishop by the 
 Pope and appointed apostolical legate on 
 his return to Ireland." For when the 
 Paschal controversy was discussed in the 
 synod of Leith-ghlinn (Leighlin), and could 
 not easily be decided, ''it was decreed,' 
 as Cumin relates, "ty our seniors, accord- 
 ing to the command, that if any difference 
 arise between cause and cause, and opinions 
 vary between leprosy and no leprosy, they 
 should go to the place which the Lord hath 
 chosen ;" and if the cause was one of the 
 causes majores, that it should be referred 
 to the head of cities according to the syn- 
 odical canon.' We, accordingly, sent men 
 of tried wisdom and humility, who, by the 
 favor of God, had a prosperous journey, 
 and some of them arriving in the city of 
 Rome, returned thence to us in the third 
 year." St. Laisrean was the principal of 
 those legates. About the year 630, St. 
 Caidoc renounced, with St. Richarius, the 
 vanity of the world and retired to Rome. 
 St. Monon retired thither also about the 
 same period. In the year 648, " the Pope 
 earnestly entreated St. Fursa to remain at 
 Rome and consent to be enrolled among the 
 lordb of the Roman court (to use the old 
 words of the legend) that is, the College of 
 Cardinals. But no importunities could in- 
 duce him to accept the offer. The Pope 
 then invested him with all his authority, 
 and gave him different relics of saints and a 
 pastoral staff, resembling in shape the pil- 
 grim's staff, which had been used by several 
 Popes before himself, and also consecrated 
 him and St. Foilan Bishops." Molanus 
 also records of St. Foilan, "that he went 
 to Rome to obtain the blessing of the Pope 
 for the conversion of the infidels." 
 
 St. Indracht, son of the King <>f Ireland, 
 "went to Rome w.th nine companions, but
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 145 
 
 returning thence in the year 678, was mar- 
 tyred. St. Kilian also abstained from 
 preaching the Word of God until he had 
 presented himself to Pope Conon in Rome 
 in the year 686, in order to receive from the 
 See of Rome the entire deposit of Christian 
 doctrine and authority to preach it." 
 
 If I allowed myself to detail at length 
 the intercourse of the Irish with Rome in 
 former ages, my page would swell to un- 
 reasonable limits and exhaust my power of 
 language, though not the subject itself. 
 Such prolixity would also, no doubt, weary 
 the patience of my reader. To sum up 
 then in a few words ; no dissension on re- 
 ligious matters ever arose in Ireland which 
 was not instantly referred to Rome for ad- 
 judication. From Rome Ireland had. her pre- 
 cepts of morality and her oracles of faith. 
 Rome was the mother, Ireland the daugh- 
 ter ; Rome the head, Ireland the member. 
 From Rome the fountain head of religion, 
 Ireland undoubtedly derived, and with her 
 whole soul imbibed her faith. In doubtful 
 matters the Pope was ever the arbiter of 
 the Irish ; in things certain, their master ; 
 in ecclesiastical matters, their head ; in 
 temporals, their defender; in all things 
 their judge ; in every thing their adviser; 
 their oracle in doubt, their bulwark in the 
 hour of danger. Some hastened to Rome 
 to indulge their fervor at the tomb of the 
 apostles ; others to lay their homage at the 
 feet of the Pope, and others to obtain the 
 necessary sanction of his authority for the 
 discharge of their functions. * * * 
 
 All the world knows that the Irish went 
 over, hot one by one, but in crowds, to 
 Britain, to Gaul, to Belgium, and to Ger- 
 many, to convert the inhabitants of those 
 regions to the Christian religion, and bring 
 them under the obedience of the Roman 
 Pontiff. A signal testimony to this fact is 
 found in the letter of Eric of Auxerre to 
 Charles the Bald. " Need I mention Ire- 
 land ; she, despising the dangers of the deep, 
 emigrates to our shores, with almost the en- 
 tire host of her philosophers ; the most emi- 
 nent amongst them become voluntary exiles, 
 to minister to the wishes of our most wise 
 Solomon." Such, also, is the testimony of 
 St. Bernard, "from Ireland, as from an 
 overflowing stream, crowds of holy men de- 
 scended on foreign nations." Walfridus 
 Strabo says, "that the habit of emigrating 
 had become a second nature to the Scoti." 
 namely, the Irish, as I have already proved ; 
 hence the just observation of Osborne, that 
 the habit of emigrating "had taken the 
 strongest hold of the Irish. For what the 
 piety of other nations has made a habit, 
 they have changed from habit into nature. " 
 Those holy emigrants of the Irish were dis- 
 tinguished by a peculiarity, never, or but 
 very seldom found among other nations. 
 
 As soon as it became known that any eminent 
 Monk had resolved to undertake one of 
 these sacred expeditions, twelve men of the 
 same order placed themselves under his 
 command, and were selected to accompany 
 him ; a custom probably introduced by St. 
 Patrick, who had been ably supported by 
 twelve chosen associates in converting the 
 Irish from the darkness of paganism to the 
 light of the true Faith. St. Fioch, nephew 
 of St. Patrick, and walking in his footsteps, 
 was attended in his sacred mission to foreign 
 tribes and regions by twelve colleagues of 
 his own order ; and when St. Rupert, who 
 had been baptized by a nephew of St. Patrick, 
 apostle of IreLnd, departed to draw down 
 the fertilizing dews of true religion on pagan 
 Bavaria, twelve faithful companions shared 
 the perils and labors of his journey and mis- 
 sion. St. Finnian, Bishop of Cluain-irard, 
 selected twelve from the thronged college of 
 his disciples, to devote them, in a special 
 manner, to establish and to animate the 
 principles of the Christian religion among 
 the Irish ; and Columba was accompanied in 
 his apostolic mission to Scotland by twelve 
 Monks. Twelve followed St. Finnbar in his 
 pilgrimage beyond the seas, and twelve St. 
 Maidoc, Bishop of Fearna-mor, in one of his 
 foreign missions. St. Colman Finn was 
 never seen without his college of twelve 
 disciples. When the ceaseless eruptions of 
 foreign enemies, or the negligence of the 
 Bishops had well nigh extinguished the 
 virtue of religion in Gaul, and left nothing 
 but the Christian faith when the medicine 
 of penance and the love of mortification 
 were found nowhere, or but with a few, 
 "then," says Jonas, "St. Columbanus de- 
 scended on Gaul, supported by twelve as- 
 sociates, to arouse her from her torpor, and 
 to enlighten her sons with the beams of the 
 most exalted piety." Twelve disciples fol- 
 lowed St. Eloquius from Ireland to illumine 
 the B slgians with the rays of faith ; twelve 
 accompanied St. Willibrord from Ireland to 
 Germany, the pilgrimage and labors of St. 
 Farannan, in Belgium, were shared by twelve 
 faithful Brothers of the cowl ; and the same 
 number were fellow exiles with St. Maccal- 
 lann. Perhaps the reason, why the Irish 
 clung with such invincible attachment 
 to this custom, was the number of 
 the apostles chosen by our Saviour, and the 
 same number of disciples appointed by the 
 Apostolic See to accompany Palladius to 
 Ireland. 
 
 But it was not in companies of twelve, 
 alone, that great men went forth from Ire- 
 Ian to plant or to revive sound doctrine and 
 discipline in foreign lands. Bodies, far more 
 numerous, are also mentioned. St. Albert 
 was accompanied by nineteen disciples. 
 Sixty accompanied St. Brendan in his voyage 
 in search of the land yf promise. St. Guigner,
 
 146 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 son of the King of Ireland, passed over to 
 Britain, with a noble band of 777 associates; 
 and St Blaithmac, son of the King of Ire- 
 land, was followed thither by a good number 
 of Monks. St Donnanus led away from his 
 country fifty-two associates. Twenty-four 
 disciples of St. Ailbhe were sent by him to 
 propagate the faith in Iceland. St. Emilius 
 brought to the aid of St. Fursa at Lagny, a 
 large body of their countrymen, and gave 
 him wonderful aid in instilling the grace of 
 God into the souls of men. St. Sezin was 
 accompanied by seventy disciples to Bre- 
 tagne, and Alsace welcomed St. Florentius, 
 with Arbogastus, Theodatus, and Hildulph. 
 
 Irish Saints are also found toiling in 
 strange lands, in smaller numbers, and 
 fertilizing them abundantly with the dew 
 of their faith and of their virtues. In Italy 
 there were Donatus of Fiesole, Andrew, and 
 his sister, St. Brighid of Opaca ; in Picardy, 
 SS. Caidoc and Fricorius, otherwise Adrian; 
 at Rhemess, SS. Gibrian, Tressan, Hselen, 
 Abraui, German, Veran, Petroan, Promptia, 
 Possenna, and Trada ; at Paris, hence they 
 were styled by posterity the twelve apostles 
 of Ireland. St. Claude, Clement, and John; 
 among the Morini (of Boulogne), SS. Vul- 
 gan, Kilian, and Obod ; in the territory of 
 Beauvais, SS. Maura and Brighid, virgins 
 and martyrs, and their brothers Hyspad ; at 
 Fusciria, SS. Mathilda, virgin, and her 
 brother Alexander. In Kleggon, a district 
 in Germany, St. Northberga, with Sista, and 
 nine others of her children. At Ratisbon, 
 SS. Marian, John, Candid us, Clement, Mur- 
 cherdach, Magnoald, and Isaac. In Aus- 
 trasia, SS. Kilian, Cohonatus, and Totnan; 
 and St. Cathro and his associates at Walcedor. 
 These devoted their lives to the instruction 
 of the people, and were celebrated for the 
 miraculous favors obtained by their inter- 
 cession. 
 
 Though it would be too tedious to mention, 
 in detiil, the great number of our country- 
 men who were distinguished on the conti- 
 nent for their marvellous works, and for the 
 sanctity of their lives, it wouid be unpar- 
 donable to omit them altogether. Not tak- 
 ing into account those who were canonized 
 in Britain, nor those who went over to the 
 continent in large bodies, we have in Italy, 
 St. Cathaldus, patron of Tarentum, St. Don- 
 atus. patron of Fiesole, St. Emilian, pitron 
 of F-iventum, and St. Frigidian of Lucca. 
 Pa via honors John A Ibinus as the founder of 
 her University ; and St. Cumean is, above 
 all other Irish saints, the favorite patron of 
 Bobio. 
 
 In Gaul, St. Manauetus is patron of Tulle; 
 St. Finlag, Abbot of St. Simphorian, patron 
 of Metz; and St. Pnecordins of Corbie, situ- 
 ate between Amiens and Peronne. Amiens 
 honors St. Forcensius and Poitiers, St. 
 Fridolinus, Abbot of the monastery of St. 
 
 Hilarius. St Elias is patron of Angouleme. 
 St. Anatolius of Besancon, St. Fiacre of 
 Meaux, St. Fursa of Peronne, and St. 
 Laurence of Eu. Lietje honors St. Mo mo, 
 and Strasburgh SS. Florentius and Arbo- 
 gastus. In Bretagne, SS. Origin, Joava, 
 Tenan, Gildas, Brioc, and many others are 
 revered as patrons. In Rhemes and the 
 surrounding district; SS. Gibrian, Heran, 
 German, Veran, Abran, Petran, and three 
 sisters. Frauda, Tompa and Passima, are 
 held in the highest veneration. In Bur 
 gundy, the vineyard of the Lord yielded an 
 abundant harvest to the zeal of St. Colum- 
 banus, who founded there a great number of 
 monasteries and colleges of Monks, restored 
 the true service of God, and left there after 
 him Deicolus, Columbinus, and Anatolius. 
 In Burgundy, also, St. Maimbod is honored 
 as a martyr. 
 
 In Belgium, you have in Barbant, SS. 
 Rumold, Fredegand, Himelin, Dympna, and 
 Gerebernus. In Flanders, SS. Levin, 
 Guthagon, Columbanus ; in Artois, SS. 
 Liugluio, Liuglianus, Kilian, Vulgan-Fursa, 
 and Obodius ; in Hainault, SS. Etto, Adal- 
 gisus, Abel, Wasuulph, and Mombolus ; in 
 Naniur. SS. Farannan and Eloquius; in 
 Liege, SS. Ultan, Foil Ian, and Bertuin ; in 
 Gueldres, SS. Wiro, Plechelm, and Othger ; 
 in Holland, St. Hiero ; in Friealand, SS. 
 Suitbert and Acca. 
 
 But Germany, especially, was the most 
 flourishing vineyard of our saints. St. 
 Albuin, or Witta. is honored as apostle in 
 Thuringia ; St. Disibode, at Treves ; St., 
 Erhard, in Alsace and Bavaria ; St. Frido 
 in the Grisons of Switzerland ; St. Gall, 
 among the Suabians, Swiss, and Rhsetians ; 
 St John, in Mecklenberg ; St. Virgil, at 
 Saltzburg ; St. Kilian, in Franconia ; St. 
 Rupert, in part of Bavaria: From these 
 saints, Uese different places received the 
 grace of faith, and the sacred discipline of 
 Christian virtue, and afterwards honored the 
 memory of their benefactors, as the apostles 
 of their nation. But these are not the only 
 saints to whom the Germans send up their 
 filial prayers; equal honors are paid by them 
 to some other of our countrymen. St. 
 Albert is honored at Ratisbon, SS. Deicola 
 and Fintan at Constance, and St. Euse 
 in Coire. The town and canton of St. Gall 
 took their names from our countryman, St. 
 Gall. "This monastery," says Munster, 
 "was the school of the noble and of the 
 peasant, and the nursery of a great number 
 of learned men ; at one period it contained 
 no less than one hundred and fifty students 
 and Brothers." Ireland was, therefore, 
 both the athenaeum of learning, and the 
 temple of holiness, supplying the world with 
 literati, and heaven with saints. Truly doth 
 she appear the academy of the earth, and 
 the colony of heaven. Was ever panegyric
 
 THE POPE AND IHELAND. 
 
 147 
 
 more appropriate than the words of Eric of 
 Auxerre? "Need I mention Ireland, who, 
 despising the dangers of the deep, emigrates 
 to our shores, with almost the whole host of 
 her philosophers : the most eminent amongst 
 them become voluntary exiles to minister to 
 the tastes of our most wise Solomon? ' 
 
 Accordingly, the Popes have frequently 
 evinced their affectionate solicitude for the 
 Irish, in a remarkable degree, when they 
 found them fervent in receiving the faith, 
 faithful in observing, constant in preserving, 
 and zealous in extending it to others, and, 
 above all, so convinced in their hearts of this 
 principle, never to allow themselves to be 
 separated from the visible head of the 
 Church ; lest, if the life sap of religion and 
 of true piety should not circulate constantly 
 amongst them, they should shrivel up and 
 wither, and be at length cut off, and cast 
 into eternal flames. They never dreamed of 
 building on any foundation but on that 
 which was laid by Jesus Christ himself, who 
 
 said to Peter, and, in him, to all his suc- 
 cessors, "Thou art Peter, and upon this 
 rock I will build my Church, and the gates 
 of hell shall not prevail against it : and I 
 will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of 
 heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on 
 earth, shall be bound in heaven ; and what- 
 soever thou shall loose on earth, shall be 
 loosed in heaven." 
 
 Whenever occasion required, the Popes 
 were, therefore, ever ready to bestow their 
 choicest favors on the Irish. For, as the 
 greatest of all blessings and favors is to point 
 out the most certain path to salvation by 
 substituting religion for superstition, truth 
 for falsehood, faith for error, and light for 
 darkness, so the greatest of all benefits was 
 conferred on the Irish by the Popes, who 
 commissioned many others to feed the lamp 
 of true faith amongst them, in addition to 
 those many illustrious men, whom we have 
 already described as laboring in the same 
 noble work. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVII. 
 
 The Irish Church under the Popes. How the Holy Union was kept Intact. List 
 of Legates Sent from Rome. Historical Errors Corrected by Dr. Lynch. 
 His Concluding Remarks in which he shows up Cambrensis in the Garb of 
 a Notorious Calumniator of Both the Catholic Church and the Irish People. 
 
 In the third volume of his very valuable 
 work, which has proved such a mine 
 of historical lore, and which has thrown so 
 much light on the subject under considera- 
 tion, Dr. Lynch introduces the following 
 well-authenticated evidence in proof of the 
 fact that it would be impossible for any Bulls 
 such as those attributed to Popes Adrian 
 and Alexander, tc originate in Rome, for 
 the reason that both Popes were too well 
 informed concerning the excellent condition 
 of the Catholic Church and the fidelity of the 
 Irish people to the See of St. Peter, to use 
 the harsh, unjust and untruthful language 
 in which both these Bulls are couched. On 
 this and similar points Dr. Lynch says : 
 
 The labor of those Popes (Honorius and 
 John), in extirpating the Pelagian heresy, 
 and establishing the canonical observance 
 of paschal time in Ireland, were crowned 
 with such perfect success, that the Irish 
 Church was now without a blemish and at- 
 
 tained the summit of perfection. Under 
 the care of the Popes, "she was presented 
 as a glorious Church, not having spot or 
 wrinkle, but holy and immaculate." The 
 Irish, therefore, owe the whole glory of 
 their Church to the Popes ; and as eternal 
 salvation is the greatest of all blessings, 
 boundless should be their gratitude to the 
 Popes who pointed out to them the right 
 road to heaven, nay, conferred, in a certain 
 sense, everlasting happiness itself by show- 
 ing how it could be attained. But when 
 the Popes beheld the Irish Church radiant 
 with such surpassing splendor, they relaxed 
 for a considerable time their ancient solici- 
 tude for the Irish, sending neither legates 
 nor letters, lest they might be said to be 
 holding up a lamp to the sun, but they em- 
 ployed an immense number of pious and 
 holy Irishmen in instructing other nations 
 in morality and religion. The catalogue of 
 those apostles I omit inserting at present, 
 because I have given it in different parts of 
 the work, not indeed full ard complete (for 
 that would require an enormous volume), 
 but such as the occasion required.
 
 148 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 But as sorrow often follows on the foot- 
 steps of joy, so the ferocity of the Danes 
 almost extinguished the glory of the Irish 
 Church. During full two hundred years, 
 the lives and fortunes of the Irish, laity and 
 clergy, were at the mercy of their relentless 
 rago ; palaces and temples were burned, the 
 country laid waste, the people massacred, 
 and the clergy sacrificed to their atrocious 
 fury, doomed, wherever they were taken, 
 either to a dungeon and chains or to a death 
 of excruciating torture. But when the 
 gentle breath of peace once more succeeded 
 the horrid tempest of war, the ancient light 
 of piety and learning burst forth afresh ; not 
 only could Ireland boast of having a high 
 name in literature and piety at home, but 
 she alio sent forth many (as you see from 
 other parts of this work) who revived litera- 
 ture and piety in foreign nations. 
 
 The torrent, however, which had so long 
 deluged Ire'and, left some of its slime and 
 weeds on the national fame. To remove 
 them the Popes exerted all their pastoral 
 solicitude, ly sending legates in uninter- 
 rupted succession to Ireland, who left no 
 source untried to repair the lost splendor of 
 her religious fame. Gilbert, Bishop of 
 Limerick, was the first of those legates. 
 He waa an honor to his country, and de- 
 voted his life exclusively to re-establishing 
 good institutions. St. Mael-maedhog suc- 
 ceeded. On h s departure from Borne he 
 had received a stole and episcopal mitre 
 from Pope Innocent II. Christian, Bishop 
 of Lismore, was next appointed by Eugen- 
 ius III. St. Laurentius succeeded under 
 the pontificate of Alexander III.; and Mat- 
 thew, or Maurice, Archbishop of Caiseal, 
 was the next. They were all Irishmen, 
 and therefore better qualified than any 
 others to inflame their countrymen with a 
 love of virtue, to censure their vices with 
 severity and to stimulate their progress in 
 learning. The Irish, who were so very re- 
 mote from the court of Rome, would never 
 have been entrusted to the care of those 
 legates if the Popes had not been convinced 
 that they were eminently qualified for the 
 teaching of nations. 
 
 The zeal of the Popes for the reformation 
 of Ireland appears more manifest still in the 
 appointment of subsidiary and extraordin- 
 ary legates, to aid the preaching of the 
 former in Ireland. Three Cardinals were 
 ordered by the Pope to visit Ireland : John 
 Paparo, Cardinal priest in Damaso, Vivian 
 Tomasius, and John of Salernum. Three 
 thousand bishops, priests, monks and can- 
 ons, met in council at Keannanus under 
 Paparo, ; the legatine labors of Vivian, 
 Cardinal priest of St. Stephen, in the Cseh- 
 an Mount, are set forth in another part of 
 this work. John of Salernum. who was 
 also Cardinal priest of St. Stephen, on the 
 
 Ctelian Mount, held two councils in the 
 year 1202, one at Dublin, the other at Ath- 
 luain, and in both enacted salutary canons. 
 From the office of the translation of St. 
 Patrick, Briqhid, and Columba, we learn 
 that the same Cardinal, " with all due ven- 
 eration and solemnity, translated the said 
 relics in the church of St. Patrick at Dun, 
 from the place where they were buried. 
 At this ceremony of translation there were 
 present, with the legate in St. Patrick's 
 Church, fifteen bishops, together with ab- 
 bots, dignitaries, deans, archdeacons, and 
 an immense number of faithful believers." 
 
 Ussher believed that this legate's name 
 waa Vivian, but this grievous error arose, 
 probably, from the fact that both were 
 Cardinals of the same title. After the 
 death of Vivian, John was promoted to the 
 same office, a circumstance which led Us- 
 sher, though generally correct, into the 
 mistake. Cardinal Bellarminus certainly 
 states that there were several Cardinals of 
 the title of St. Stephen in Mount Ceeli > 
 about that period. While John resided aa 
 legate in Ireland, he received letters from 
 Innocent III., and our annals also record 
 that James, the Pope's penitentiary or 
 chaplain, was exercising legatine authority 
 in Ireland about the year 1220." I had al- 
 most forgotten the Italian Giraldus, an 
 ecclesiastic of the Church of Rome, " who 
 was sent over to those parts with legatine 
 powers," according to Cambrensis. Car- 
 dinal Othobon was also legate in [reland, 
 for he celebrated at London a great council 
 of all the prelates of England, Wales, Scot- 
 land and Ireland in 1268 
 
 In consequence of the negligence of his- 
 torians, we have fewer records of legates in 
 Ireland in succeding ages. Matthew of 
 Westminster states that Peter de Sufflein 
 was legate in Ireland in 1240 and John 
 Rufus in 1247. Stanihurst also records in 
 his English history of Ireland, that a great 
 quarrel having arisen between the citizens 
 of Dublin and the retainers of the Earl of 
 Ormonde, the citizens burst in a body into 
 St. Patrick's Cathedral, where the Earl had 
 taken refuge, and attempted to kill him. 
 They cast their javelins against the images 
 of the saints, threw down the statues, dese- 
 crated the relics, and most profanely viol- 
 ated the holy place. Ormonde appealed to 
 the Holy See to punish this sacrilege, and a 
 legate was immediately sent over to punish 
 the delinquents according to their deserts. 
 But at the earnest request of Walter Fitz- 
 simon, Archbishop of Dublin, and other 
 prelates, the citizens were pardoned on this 
 condition, that the " Mayor of the city, as 
 a perpetual commemoration of the thing, 
 should w.lk barefooted every year in the 
 solemn procession on Corpus Christi." And 
 that was faithfully observed until the
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 149 
 
 Catholic religion waa abolished by law. 
 
 After the death of Henry VIII. and Ed- 
 ward VI., the Church recovered her former 
 power and splendor under the reign of 
 Queen Mary. Cardinal Pole was then ap- 
 pointed legate, both for England and Ire- 
 land (as appears from the letters of the 
 King and Queen in Reymer), but he never 
 entered Ireland ; but when Elizabeth suc- 
 ceeded to the throne of both kingdoms the 
 Church was once more deprived of power 
 and almost totally destroyed, whence there 
 were but few legates in Ireland during her 
 reign. Alphonsus Salmero, of the Society 
 of Jesus, was, however, a nuncio apostolic 
 in Ireland, according to Ribadeneira's 
 41 Writers of the Society of Jesus," I also 
 saw a dispensation granted by David Wolf, 
 of Limerick, to Richard Lynch, a citizen of 
 Galway, grandfather to Nicholas Lynch, 
 provincial of the Irish Dominicans, who 
 died at Romo about twenty years ago, 
 deeply regretted by his friends. The dis- 
 pensation was signed by David Wolf, apos- 
 tolic nuncio. Orlandinus speaks of him in 
 his history of the Society of Jesus. I have 
 learned that he was a man of extraordinary 
 piety who fearlessly denounced crime when- 
 ever it was committed. When the whole 
 country was embroiled in war he took 
 refuge in the castle of Clunoan, on the 
 borders of Thomond and of the county of 
 Galway, but when he heard that its occu- 
 pants lived by plunder, he believed it a sin 
 to take any nourishment from them, and 
 sickened and died. 
 
 The relentless cruelty of Elizabeth against 
 all ecclesiastics could not deter that great 
 man, Nicholas Sanders, from nobly dis- 
 charging the lega ine functions in Ireland. 
 He not only devoted himself to the punctual 
 discharge of his duties, but even sacrificed 
 his life as himself had anticipated. Thadanis 
 Egan succeeded him as legate. He was 
 assassinated while he was in the act of 
 exhorting the soldiers on the day of battle 
 to fight bravely for the Catholic religion. 
 After a long interval, Father Francis Scar- 
 ampi, a man of noble rank and great virtue, 
 a priest of the Oratory, came to Ireland by 
 order of Urban VIII. Some time after 
 John Baptist Rinnucinni, Archbishop and 
 Prince of Fermo, came as extraordinary 
 legate to Ireland from Innocent X., and 
 was received with transports of joy by the 
 Irish. He spared neither labor nor ex- 
 pense to raise Ireland from her prostrate 
 condition, but the evil genius of the land 
 blasted his exertions and the fond hopes of 
 the Irish. 
 
 Moreover, while heresy in its rampant 
 atrocity was clouding the splendor of the 
 true faith, all the Popes for the time being 
 sent over many learned men as lamps to 
 dispel that great darkness ; and if they 
 
 removed not altogether those clouds of 
 error, they at least succeeded happily in 
 preventing them from remaining on the 
 minds of most of the natives. And that 
 the Popes should leave no means untried 
 that could be desired for sustaining the 
 Catholic religion in Ireland, Innocent X. 
 sent over, in our own days, a large quantity 
 of money for the restoration of the faith, 
 as Gregorius XIII. had, in our fathers' 
 time, sent over an army raised at great ex- 
 pense, to assist the Irish, and save religion 
 from the total destruction to which it waa 
 then exposed. 
 
 But what need of more 1 There were 
 only two archbishoprics in England and two 
 in Scotland, that is four in Great Britain, 
 established by the Popes, though Great 
 Britain, according to Caesar's estimate, is 
 twice as large as Ireland. Religious worth, 
 not extent of territory, made them place 
 Ireland on a level with a country so far 
 superior in extent. For the same reasons 
 the Popes have not appointed Bishops to 
 the Episcopal Sees of England, Scotland, 
 Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and other king- 
 doms which revolted against the Church 
 and the papal authority ; though an almost 
 uninterrupted succession of illustrious Bish- 
 ops has been appointed in almost all Irish 
 Sees, even while the government was ex- 
 clusively in the hands of the heretics. 
 
 If, then, St. Gregorius has been justly 
 styled by Beda the Apostle of England, 
 because he commissioned Augustinus and 
 his companions to emancipate the English 
 from the darkness of paganism, how great 
 and powerful are the bonds between the 
 Irish and those Popes, who not only la- 
 bored strenuously in pouring out on them 
 the full light of faith, but also in preserving, 
 at all times, that faith when once planted, 
 and rooting it deeply in their hearts, and 
 diffusing it more and more, sometimes by 
 the public ministry of papal delegates, more 
 frequently by the secret missions of learned 
 men, and at times by military aid to assist 
 their righteous resistance to the destruction 
 which threatened the country. To the 
 Popes, therefore, Ireland owes not only the 
 ornaments of her dignity, but much more, 
 the elements of her constancy. 
 
 Should it be objected that I was seduced 
 by a false love of country to assert, without 
 grounds, that Ireland was never visited by 
 the censures of the Pope, I answer that if 
 the documents produced against me be sub- 
 mitted to a serious examination, it will 
 clearly appear that the thunders of the 
 Church were never launched against Ireland : 
 "It is evident," they say, "from the letters 
 of St. Gregorius and the life of St. Kilian, 
 that Ireland was often cut off from the 
 Church by censures." But let us examine 
 both assertions separately ; and commencin
 
 150 
 
 THK POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 with St. Gregorius, I maintain his two let- 
 ters were not directed to the Irish, but to 
 the Iberians, a people of Asia, between 
 Albania and Colchis, and at present a part 
 of western Georgia. The MMS. copy of 
 the second letter in the Vatican library 
 reads " Iberia," not "H.bernia." By the 
 negligence of transcribers one letter was 
 added and afterwards printed ; and thus 
 the affairs of two distant nations, having no 
 connection with each other, were jumbled 
 and confounded. This circumstance, and 
 other arguments which I am about to ad- 
 duce, leave no doubt on my mind that both 
 the letters were addressed to the Iberians, 
 and not to the Irish. 
 
 An error, sin i'ar to that in St. Gregori- 
 us's, has also crept into the writings of 
 others Thus, Rufinus relates that a ser- 
 vant maid, a Christian, converted the King 
 of Iberia, and then his whole people, from 
 the darkness of paganism to the light of 
 Christian faith. The fact is thus recorded 
 in the Roman Marty rology : "In Iberia, 
 beyond the Euxine Sea. the festival of a 
 holy Christian maid, who, by her miraculous 
 powers, converted that nation to the faith 
 of Christ in the time of Conatantinus. " But 
 preceding writers, by a gross blunder, apply 
 to the Irish Church the establishment of 
 Christianity among the Iberians. Philip- 
 pus of Bergamo says "that an humble 
 Christian woman, being carried a slave into 
 Ireland, established the faith of Christ in 
 that country/' He adds, however, that 
 "those Iberians are called Gregorions at 
 present, and form but one province or ter- 
 ritory with the Armenians and Colchians." 
 Thua, though he writes the word Hibernia, 
 he gives us clearly to understand tht he 
 means Iberia. Is it surprising, then, that 
 Sabellicus, who adopts this history on the 
 authority of Philipius, should have applied 
 it to Ireland. Hector Boethius copies not 
 only the facts, but the very words of Sabel- 
 licus, but makes one little addition of his 
 own, namely, that this woman, of whose 
 country the others are silent, was a Pict. 
 He appeals for that circumstance "to the 
 Scotic annals, but Dempster grounds it on 
 Irish tradition." The discrepancy in their 
 testimony proves that vague rumor, which 
 the credulous always exaggerate, was the 
 sole ground for their statements. 
 
 Arnold Pontanus must have also been mis- 
 led by confounding those names, when he 
 writes, "that the Iberians were converted 
 to the faith of Christ by the preaching of St. 
 Patrick." Again, in the words of St. 
 Hieronimus, "he won over Iberia to 
 Christ." Iberia ia read by some Hibernia, 
 as Erasmus observed. Hence arose the er- 
 ror of Arnold Merriman, grounded on the 
 common editions of E use bins, that Galba 
 had extended his empire to Ireland; and 
 
 again, in the life of St. Firmin, Pampeluna, 
 a city of Iberia or Spain, is set down as be- 
 ing in Ireland; Vincent also, misled by con- 
 founding the words Hibernia and Iberia, as 
 Ussher thinks, "states that St. James vis- 
 ited the coasts of Ireland." But as in the 
 last copy of the last epistle of St. Grego- 
 rius, the word is written " Iberia," and as 
 the first was certainly directed to the same 
 country, both were evidently sent, not to 
 the Irish, but to the Iberians. 
 
 In the concluding chapter of the fourth 
 volume of his Cambrensis Eversus, Dr. 
 Lynch gives a brief summary of the princi- 
 pal points contained in this valuable work, 
 and then he thus scores the slanderous Gir- 
 aldus Cambrensia for the foulness of the 
 falshoods which he ei her fabricated himself 
 in order to gratify his anti- Irish venom, or 
 which he heard from the traductive tongues 
 of some hirelings like himself, who deemed 
 it an honor to fulminate falsehood, because 
 thereby they could calumniate the Irish peo- 
 ple and damage the reputation of the great- 
 est and most loyal Catholic nation the world 
 has ever witnessed. 
 
 The object of my labor has, I think, 
 been now obtained. Truth, which can of- 
 ten defend herself without aid against the 
 craft and ingenuity of man, has been brought 
 to light from under the hoar of centuries 
 which enveloped her. She cannot be 
 crushed by the might of calumny, nor over- 
 whelmed by the length of time, nor extin 
 guished by all the efforts of violence; the 
 more vehemently and bitterly she is assailed, 
 the more majestically does she rise, like the 
 palm the which has been weighed to the 
 ground. In vain has Giraldus endeavored 
 to defile her with his bitter calumnies; 
 these dissertations have removed all his foul 
 colorings, and she rises on our view with 
 more .than her pristine brilliancy. "Great 
 is the power of truth, which can easily and 
 without aid defend herself against all the 
 intellect and craft, and cunning and con- 
 cocted conspiracies of men. " The very title 
 of his first work "Topography," was a lie. 
 Through the whole course of his work there 
 is not even a shadowy sketch of the subjects 
 signified by that title. 
 
 He had the audacity to commit a similar 
 disgraceful error in entitling that work of 
 his " The Conquest of Ireland," the book 
 itself not containing the least realization of 
 what its title promises. The conquest of 
 Ireland was not completed for several hun- 
 dred years after the death of Giraldus. 
 Thus he sticks in the very port which por- 
 tends certain shipwreck, when he launches 
 out into the great ocean of Irish history, es-
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 151 
 
 pecially when he was not well provided with 
 those aids which would enable him to con- 
 struct his projected fabric. Chronology he 
 neglected; and where its cynosure is want- 
 ing, there can be but blind sailing on 
 the deep of history. For some persons 
 maintain that accurate chronology is the 
 only eye of history; and as that eye is 
 wanting in the history of Cambrensis, it 
 must be "a horrid, shapeless, and sightless 
 monster. " An evident proof of the defect- 
 iveness of his chronology is, that he makes 
 ' St. Columba and St. Brigid contempora- 
 ries of St. Patrick," though he had pre- 
 viously stated that St. Patrick had rested in 
 the Lord in 458 (which Colgan proves ought 
 to be 493), that St. Columba, who died in 
 or near Jhe year 496, was not born before 
 the year 519. and that St Brigid departed 
 to heaven about the year 523. What could 
 be expected from a stranger who knew noth- 
 ing of Irish affairs nor the Irish language, 
 without which a knowledge of the records of 
 Ireland could not be acquired, and who 
 spent only two years in collecting the ma- 
 terials for his work, without visiting, in the 
 meantime, hardly one-third of the island 1 
 The only witnesses cited as his authorities 
 were generally his own countrymen, the 
 principal of whom were overwhelmed in 
 debt at home, and had broken faith with 
 their creditors, and therefore may be fairly 
 pronounced unworthy of much credit abroad. 
 Many of the statements in his book were 
 taken from a different class of his country- 
 men, namely, sailors, common soldiers, rob- 
 bers, incendiaries, debauchees, and murder- 
 ers, and, in fine, from the dregs and refuse 
 of the people, the outcasts and disgrace of 
 human society. He caught up with greedy 
 ears the rumors of lying report, and pro- 
 posed them to the belief of mankind as 
 gravely as if they had been pronounced by 
 oracles. Other facts he records, to which 
 he says he was himself an eye witness. He 
 culled the most discreditable facts from the 
 Irish annals, and suppressed those that emi- 
 nently deserved to be recorded like the 
 leech which sucks out corruption, but leaves 
 the sound humors untouched. Is not a 
 work raised on such frail foundations obvi- 
 ously tottering to ruin ? especially when he 
 who attempted to raise the structure was 
 turbulent and quarrelsome, and a diviner, 
 and crediting dreams and auguries, shame- 
 fully parading his own panegyric, and im- 
 moderate in his eulogy of his friends, as he 
 was merciless in vituperating his enemies, 
 and contradicting himself as well as others, 
 and never recited with praise by any respect- 
 able author, and the most vapid enemy of 
 the Irish. What calm sense could be ex- 
 pected from a firebrand, or fair statement 
 from a litigant, or consistency from a divi- 
 ner, or solidity from a dreamer 1 what but 
 
 visionary folly and insincerity from a sooth- 
 sayer and a boaster ? what truth could be 
 expected from the slave of prejudice what 
 consistency from the fickle what worth 
 from the contemptible what justice from an 
 enemy a man who labored to patch up his 
 case with variegated shreds of equity, like 
 seasonings of rancid meat ? When bulrush 
 columns support a marble palace, then you 
 may expect a fair history from a man blasted 
 by such defects ! If the vanity of dreams 
 and the divinations of augurs can command 
 the implicit belief of an historian, must not 
 everyone suspect that a similar weakness de- 
 stroys all the credit of his narratives ? 
 
 But these are not the only blemishes 
 which exclude him from the rank of credit- 
 able historians. Historians are bound as 
 strictly not to suppress things worthy of rec- 
 ord as not to state falsehoods in their history. 
 Now Giraldus, after promising a complete 
 history of Ireland, suppressed not trifles 
 merely or inconsiderable events, but the 
 most capital points of history. He has sup- 
 pressed not only the deeds but even the 
 names of the kings of Ireland. It would 
 not suit his purpose to have even the names 
 of kings glittering in the pages of a work, 
 which was intended to be tilled with the til- 
 thy and discreditable practices of the Irish ; 
 his sole object being to collect from all 
 quarters into one mass whatever was dis- 
 graceful to them, and to find matter for cal- 
 umny in their soil, and sea and climate, as- 
 serting falsely that the climate was excess- 
 ively severe, the sea torn by eternal tem- 
 pests, and the land swamped by extraordin- 
 ary humidity. So inveterate was his lust 
 for calumny, that he should reproach us 
 with the small size of our cattle, and the 
 black color of our sheep. * * * * The 
 bulls of Adrian IV. and Alexander HI. he 
 falsely imagined gave grounds for his cal- 
 umnies, those bulls being either entirely 
 spurious or surreptitiously obtained by the 
 fradulent and secret machinations of the cal- 
 umniators. The filthy practices falsely im- 
 puted to the Irish in these bulls were exag- 
 gerated and multiplied by Giraldus, who 
 magnified flies into elephants, and atoms 
 into mountains ; but he was building on 
 sand when he labored to rear the fabric of 
 his own calumnies on those false documents, 
 the bulls being one tissue of unfounded 
 stories, utterly at variance with truth, and, 
 if attentively examined, outrageously op- 
 posed to the laws both of God and man, be- 
 cause they condemned the innocent without 
 a hearing to the most frightful punishment, 
 and were full of many other intolerable de- 
 fects. 
 
 * * ***** 
 
 I appeal now to the judgment of every 
 candid reader, whether I have not estab- 
 lished, that no credit can be given to the
 
 152 
 
 THE POPE AND IHELAXD. 
 
 writings of a man who was morose and quar- 
 relsome, a diviner and a believer in sooth- 
 sayers, a flatterer, and vainglorious pane- 
 gyrUt of himself and his friends : who con- 
 sulted his prejudices and not truth in his 
 writings ; who recorded what should have 
 been suppressed, and suppressed what should 
 have been recorded ; who was opprobrious 
 to his adversaries and calumnious against his 
 enemies ; who reconciles impossibilities, 
 publishes falsehoods, and has often concealed 
 the truth ; who disgorged his filthy calum- 
 nies against the whole Irish people, sparing 
 
 neither the tender years of the child, nor 
 the sex of the woman ; ridiculed the com- 
 monalty, libelled the noble, insolently de- 
 spised the princes and king*, carped at the 
 clergy, lacerated the prelates, aimed a mor- 
 tal blow at the Church Militant herself, and 
 hurled his calumnies, even to the court of 
 heaven, against the saints of Ireland. Such, 
 alas ! is the fate of all things ; when they 
 once begin to totter, there is no stay to their 
 fall till they sink to the lowest depths of 
 ruin. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIII. 
 
 Farther Historical Proofs Concerning the Letter which Pope Adraiu IV., sent to 
 King Louis VII. Evidence Showing the Letter to have Alluded to Ireland 
 and not to Spain, as Claimed by Anti-Catholic Writers. 
 
 Having now given the evidence of the 
 celebrated Dr. Lynch, as recorded in 
 preceding chapters, we will turn again to 
 the Analecta Juris Pontificii of Victor 
 Palme, in order to adduce some ad litional 
 testimony from the fruitful pen of this 
 most recent and, we may add, most suc- 
 cessful, writer of modern days among all 
 who have attempted to treat of this in- 
 tricate historical question. 
 
 M. Palme, in his Adrian IV. and 
 Irdind,* has left nothing unsaid on this 
 subject. He has viewed this long- disputed 
 historical question from every standpoint, 
 and he has advanced arguments and 
 presented documents which throw new 
 light upon the subject and which can- 
 uut fail to convince every candid-minded 
 reader that the Bulls in question were 
 most assuredly forged. In the introduc- 
 tory remarks to his exhaustive essay M. 
 Palme says : 
 
 Wo know of no historical document 
 which has evoked so many controversies 
 as the Letter of Pope Adrian IV., 
 authorizing, it is said, Henry II., King of 
 England, to undertake the conquest of Ire- 
 land, and ordering the Irish to submit to 
 that prince as their legitimate master. 
 
 'Published in the year 1882 in the Analecta 
 in Paria, of which &. Palme* i the distinguished 
 editor. 
 
 For seven hundred years the Irish 
 have questioned the authenticity of the 
 Papal Letter. They could not be per- 
 suaded into the belief that the common 
 Father of Christendom had, without con- 
 sulting the clergy and the people of the 
 country, without being informed as to 
 whether the intervention of the English 
 prince was solicited or desired by the 
 parties most concerned, condemned on 
 an incomplete and inexact statement of 
 affairs a nation distinguished for its at- 
 tachment to Christianity, to forfeit its in- 
 dependence and to become the prey of the 
 covetous and ferocious Anglo-Normans. 
 
 This train of thought has been developed 
 with a great deal of warmth and bitterness 
 by Abbe MacGeoghegan, as the following 
 words show : 
 
 The above (the letter of Pope Adrian IV.) 
 was an edict pronounced against Ireland, by 
 which the rights of men and the most sacred 
 laws were violated, under the specious pretext of 
 religion and the reformation of morals. The 
 Irish were no longer to possess a country. 
 That people who had never bent under a foreign 
 yoke ( nunquam ext'.rnaesubjacuitditioni ) were 
 condemned to lose their liberty without even 
 being heard. * * * * It may be well affirm- 
 ed that no Pope, either before or since Adrian 
 IV., ever punished a nation so severely without 
 cause. We have seen instances of Popes mak- 
 ing use of their spiritual authority in opposition 
 to crowned beads ; we have known them to
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 153 
 
 excommunicate emperors and kings, and to 
 place their States under an interdict, for crimes 
 of heresy or other causes ; but we here behold 
 innocent Ireland given up to tyrants, with mt 
 having been summoned before any tribunal, or 
 conviuted of any crime.''f 
 
 Furthermore, Irish writers have at all 
 times laid particular stress upon the fact 
 that the original diploma of Pope Adrian 
 has never been seen or produced by anybody ; 
 that it was not seen or exhibited by any- 
 body at the period when it was first men- 
 tioned or referred to, that is, towards the 
 close of the twelfth century, and that no 
 annalist or historian from that time for- 
 wards has bem able to say that he saw the 
 original document or quoted from it. So 
 true is all this that Rymer, who took the 
 greatest care with regard to every document 
 of the Fcedera, to cite on the margin the 
 autographs ex Turre Londonensi, or from 
 some other official Registry, found himself 
 compelled, in respect to this Letter of 
 Adrian IV., to cite as a guarantee only 
 Matthew Paris, who lived about a century 
 after Adrian. 
 
 It is true that Cardinal Baronius has in- 
 serted in his Ecclesiastical Annals the Let 
 ter attributed to Pope Adrian ; but the 
 manner in which the learned annalist ex- 
 presses himself shows conclusively that he 
 had not before him the original document, 
 and, consequently, that it did not exist in 
 the archives of the Vatican at the time of 
 Baronius. In fact Baronius does not give 
 date, year, nor day of the Letter. Other 
 writers have dated it from Rome, . whilst it 
 is proved that at the period in question 
 Adrian IV. was at Benevento, where he 
 dwelt for a considerable period of time. 
 But would Baronius have neglected to affix 
 the name of the place, the year and the day 
 of the Letter (conditions so essential, es- 
 pecially to an important document) if he 
 had before him the official Ktgestum of 
 Adrian IV., or, at least, an authentic tran- 
 script of the Letter 1 From this it is clear 
 that he had in his possession, or under his 
 control, only a private copy which was des- 
 titute of every mark of authent city. 
 
 The defenders of the authenticity of the 
 spurious Adrian document agree in saying 
 
 f MacGeoghegan's Hi.tory of Ireland, p. 246. 
 
 that it was written in 1155, a few months 
 after the flection of Pope Adrian IV. 
 Baronius, on the contrary, places the docu- 
 ment at the end of the pontificate of the 
 Pope, and declines to assume any responsi- 
 bility with regard to Us date. It was not 
 because Bironius attached any importance 
 to the document that he inserted it in his 
 Annals, but simply because he did not 
 wish to leave out anything that was even 
 attributed to so illustrious a Pontiff. 
 "Moreover,' he says, in alluding to this 
 doubtful diploma, " for fear that anything 
 should perish that belongs to the memory 
 of so great a Pontiff, we here transcribe 
 from a manuscript of the Vatican, the 
 diploma given to Henry, King of England, 
 relating to the affairs of Ireland, restored 
 to a better condition iu respect to relig- 
 ion " 
 
 So then, Baronius refrained from re- 
 marking on the political character of the 
 Letter which has been for so long regarded 
 by many as the act of donation of Ireland 
 to the English king ; the annalist prefer- 
 ring, on tho contrary, to call attention 
 only to the amelioration of the religious 
 status of the country. 
 
 The defenders of the apocryphal Letter 
 attributed to Pope Adrian IV., imagine, 
 no doubt, that all the manuscripts which 
 are kept in the vast library of the Vatican, 
 are original diplomas and official collec- 
 tions. They also pretend that it was from 
 the Vatican itself, and from a Vatican 
 manuscript (ex codice Vaticano) that Bar- 
 onius took the document in question. But 
 these champions of the authenticity of 
 Adrian's Letter are, evidently, not aware 
 that the Vatican Library contains thous- 
 ands of manuscripts, which, beyond a 
 doubt, have no official or authentic char- 
 acter. The original Eegesta of the Popes 
 are preserved, not in the Library, but in 
 the archives of the Vatican. Furthermore, 
 the series of the Regesta commenced only 
 in the year 1198, that is, jorty years after 
 
 -Vrl haec insuper, ne quid excidat de tanti 
 poufcificis memoria. hie describimua ex codice 
 Vaticano diploma datum ad Henricum Anglor- 
 um rfgem de rebus Hibernite in meliorem stat- 
 utn religionis restitutis, sed quoto sui pontifi- 
 catus anno, incertum. Baronius, Annates Eccle* 
 siastici, torn. 12, page 531. Mognntiae, 1608.
 
 154 
 
 THK POPK AND IRELAND. 
 
 the death of Pcpe Adrian IV. What, 
 then, is the Codtx Vaticanvt in which 
 Baronius found the Letter attributed to 
 Pope Adrian the Fourth? It is nothing 
 more than a copy of the work of Mattfn c 
 Pom. 
 
 In 1872 an interesting and truthful 
 article on Pope Adrian IV., and his pre- 
 tended donation of Ireland to Henry II , 
 appeared in the Irish Ecclesiastical Record, 
 wherein the author states that during a 
 sojourn of several years in Rome he made 
 it his business to ascertain what the manu- 
 script of the Vatican (codrx Vaticaniis) from 
 which was taken the copy of Adrian's 
 Letter, amounted to. The Archivist of 
 the Vatican, after long and earnest inves- 
 tigation in the universal Library, attested 
 that Baronius had absolutely 'nothing as a 
 foundation for the Letter in the Annals, 
 sore the "Major Bistoria" of Matthew Paris. 
 
 It follows then, that the testimony of 
 the Codex Vaticanus, and that of B ronius 
 himself who used it, are precisely one and 
 the same with that of Matthew Paris, that 
 is, the testimony of a historian who never 
 saw the original of the Letter, and who 
 wrote about a century after Adrian's time. 
 Here, then, we have another confirmation 
 of the fact that Cardinal Baronius dis- 
 covered nowhere in the Vatican the orig- 
 inal Letter of Adrian IV. , with its date 
 and other marks of authenticity. 
 
 It now remains for us to answer an ob- 
 jection arising from the fact that the 
 Diploma attributed to Pope Adrian has 
 been inserted in some of the editions of 
 the Bullarium Romanum. 
 
 The learned know that the collection 
 called the Bullarium Romanum was a 
 private and individual undertaking whose 
 authenticity the Popes have not guaranteed. 
 It was quite possible, then, for apocryphal 
 documents to gain admittance therein. 
 
 When, in 1234, Pope Gregory IX. pub- 
 lished the Decretals, he placed at their 
 head a Papal Diploma authenticating the 
 collection. 
 
 Popes Boniface VIII. and Clement V. 
 did the same in regard to other Canonical 
 codes. Subsequently, Leo X. declared 
 
 authentic the Acts of the Fifth Council of 
 Late ran. Pins IV. did the same in re- 
 spect to the Decrees < f the Council of 
 Trent, an edition of which was brought out 
 in Rome in 1504. Some years afterwards, 
 Gregory XI 11. authenticated, in like man- 
 ner, the Roman edition of the Corpus juris 
 Cunoiiici. Under the pontificate of Pope 
 Paul V., the great editions of the General 
 Councils was brought out at Rome, but it 
 was clearly expressed in the Preface that 
 the work laid no claim to official and 
 judical authenticity. 
 
 The Holy See has never assumed the 
 responsibility of the contents of the differ- 
 ent editions of the Bullarium Romanum t 
 which have, at various per ods, been pub- 
 lished ; hence the Bulh-|| and Brief ^ in- 
 serted therein have legal value only in so 
 much as they are copies or transcripts in 
 the authentic form and with all the other 
 requisites. 
 
 The four volumes of the Bullar!um of 
 Pope Benedict XIV. alone form an ex- 
 ception to the rule just stated, because that 
 Supreme Pontiff authenticated them by a 
 Diploma placed at the head of the collec- 
 tionlf. 
 
 IT Remigius Maschat, Cl. R-K. S. P., lays 
 down the same doctrine, and in it clearlv voices 
 the sentiment of the learned, in his Intt : t"tioncs 
 Canonical vol. 2 part 1 ma.. pag 126. NJ. 20. 
 
 || " An magnum Bullarium continent Constitu- 
 tionet Pottificias habeat auitorttjlem juris?' 
 11. Negative, nisi certo. saltern mra iter. con- 
 stet. quod dictse Oonotitutionew rite sint pro- 
 mulgate utu recfptae et per omnia conformes suo 
 origina'i. Hiuc cr.ante dubin in jiuiicio mm 
 probaiit, nisi pr.ducantur in forma authentica. 
 et quidem in Cum R man a sub Sigiho Uan- 
 cellarii, vel Camerarii, Auditoris, t xtra vero sub 
 plumbo cum consueta Bnbncriptione. Si Breve 
 seu Diploma apostolicum eat. plerun que consist 
 brevi Scriptura in papyro, cera rubru, et annulo 
 piscatoris sigilUta, ac signo sfcrvt.rii notata, 
 et suhscripta. Si Bulla est. scribitur plerum- 
 que in metnbrana plumbo e funibua pendetite 
 munita, nalutationem cum narrotioae, et con- 
 cessions Pat JE continens." 
 
 J" BULLS, so called from the seal, whether of 
 gold, silver or lead, which is appended to them, 
 begin thus : LEO (or the name of the reigning 
 Pontiff), Episcopus, Servus Scrvortim Dei. 
 
 BHLEFS begin with a Buperacriutiou, having 
 the name of the reigning Pontiff thus: LEO 
 P. P. XIIl. Formerly Bulls had appended, on 
 a ailken or hempen cord, a leaden (sometimes 
 silver or even gold) seal, and were, moreover, 
 written up->n thick, coarse and somewhat dark 
 parchment, in old style or Teutonic letters, and 
 without any punctuation. At present, accord- 
 ing to a mot us proprius of Pope Leo XIII., now 
 happily reigning, issued December 29th, 1878,
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 155 
 
 CHAPTER XXIX. 
 
 Ciiticism on the True Letter of Pope Adrian IV., und the False Bull. Reasons 
 Why the Letter "H" alludes to Hibernia and could not mean Hispania. 
 
 In the concluding summary of his exhaus- 
 tive criticism on the Letter written by Pope 
 Adrian IV., to King Louis VII., of France 
 and Henry II , of England, M. Palme thus 
 epitomizes the reasons which impelled him 
 to believe that Letter to have alluded to 
 Ireland and not to Spain. 
 
 THE XBUE LETTER AND THE FALSE BULL. 
 
 1. Adrian IV., never conceded to the 
 King of England authorization to invade 
 Ireland. On the contrary, he positively 
 refused to have anything to do with the 
 undertaking, the danger and injustice of 
 which he pointed out in a moat signal 
 manner. 
 
 2 The Letter commonly attributed to 
 Pope Adrian is spurious or apocryphal. 
 This conclusion follows necessarily from 
 the foregoing, independently of all reasons 
 that concur to prove the spuriousness of that 
 document. 
 
 3. The true Letter of Adrian, in which 
 he peremptorily refustd to allow Ireland to 
 be invaded, is not !o*t ; it has been pre- 
 served by safe, authorized and irrefutable 
 witnesses. 
 
 4. The tenor of the true Letter itself 
 does not allow a shadow of suspicion to fall 
 on its authenticity, whilst the extrinsic 
 proofs combine to render wonderfully clear 
 and potent the intrinsic. 
 
 5. This true Letter of Pope Adrian IV., 
 by itself furnishes the key to the proper 
 understanding of a great number of facts 
 
 the use of the Teutonic characters ia entirely 
 abolished, and the ordinary Latin mode of writ- 
 ing is substituted. The use of the leaden seal is 
 restricted to the more important Bulls. The 
 other Balls, like Briefs, have a red seal im- 
 pressed, and are written on fine white parch- 
 ment. The nw red seal of Bulls as prescribed 
 by Pope Leo XIII. bears on its face the im- 
 ages of SS. Peter and Paul, surrounded by the 
 name of the reigning Pope."- Smith's Ecc. 
 Law. vol. I., chap. 3 , art. 5. no. 48. 
 
 See also K mings Theolojice Moralis, S. Al- 
 phonsi Coujp. pt. 2; No. 175; pp. 73-4. Fer- 
 raris, verbum, Cancellaria. 
 
 Consult especially Devoti's Instttutionum (Jan- 
 onicarum. Tom. 1. cap. vii xcv-cii., but par- 
 ticularly xcviii. and xcix. pp. 88-9. 
 
 that have hitherto remained dark, inexplica- 
 ble and enigmatical. It unveils the motive 
 of the mysterious silence that was kept j'of 
 more than twenty years on the existence 
 of a supposed act of Adrian IV. relating 
 to Ireland It explains why Henry II. 
 caused that country to be attacked firt by 
 adventurers ; for the refusal of the Pope 
 to concur in his scheme at once blocked eceiy 
 direct and open invasion of the country. 
 
 6. The spurious Le ter was forged on 
 the true one. Henry II. preserved in the 
 apocryphal Bull the preamble of the lre 
 Letter, but he completely changed the enact- 
 ing part. In place of the refusal on the 
 part of the Pope to have anything to do 
 with the scheme of the invasion of Ireland, 
 he inserted the dona.ti.on of Ireland, and an 
 exhortation to the Irish to recognize the 
 King of England as their Lord and Master. 
 The falsification is flagrant. 
 
 7 Not one of the successors of Adrian 
 IV., in the Papacy, confirmed his pretended 
 donation. It is true that in the treatise of 
 Giraldus Cambrensis, entitled Expugnatio 
 Hibernice, we find a Brief attributed to 
 Alexander III., but that historian acknowl- 
 edged in good faith, in a subsequent work, 
 that the Brief just referred to had been pur- 
 posely forged. 
 
 THE LETTER "H -> MEANS HIBERNIA. 
 
 In the Middle Ages the Chancellors who 
 transcribed Papal Diplomas, had the habit 
 sometimes very annoying to modern 
 writers of giving simply the initials of 
 proper names. This hibit may be con- 
 stantly noticed in the very Regesta pre- 
 served in the Archives of the Vatican. 
 
 The ancient manuscripts which have 
 preserved to us Pope Adrian's Letter (which 
 we have already placed before our readers) 
 does not designate the country to which it 
 has reference, except by the initial '"H." 
 But the tenor itself of this important docu- 
 ment clearly points out marks by which we 
 are enabled to recognize at once, and beyond 
 all doubt, the country to which it relates. 
 I say that the Letter of Pope Adrian IV.,
 
 166 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 relates to Ireland (Hibtrnia) whose conquest 
 Louis VII , and Henry II., wished to bring 
 about, and that it it not possible to app'y 
 that document to any other country, nor to 
 any other affair than its conquest. 
 
 The following marks, clearly designated 
 in the Papal Letter, show that it is Ireland 
 alone of which there is question in that 
 document 
 
 1. The country of which there is ques- 
 tion is not a kingdom, a political society 
 which is in the possession of that eminent 
 dignity. Adrian IV., constantly calls it by 
 the name of country. Mark his expres- 
 sions : ' The princes of that country ; ' 'The 
 population of the same country,' etc. Such 
 was the official title that Ireland bore 
 throughout all antiquity, and kept until the 
 16th century, when it was erected into a 
 kingdom.* 
 
 3. This same country (referred to in 
 Adrian's Letter) possessed a Church of its 
 own, that is, an Episcopal Hierarchy regu- 
 larly constituted, and free to enter into 
 common deliberations. Adrian IV., rec- 
 ommends that that Church be consulted, 
 and its decision be obtained in regard to 
 foreign intervention. This action of the 
 Pope plainly points out that the Church 
 alluded to did not by any means exist under 
 a hostile domination which might or could 
 interfere with its assemblies It is clear, 
 too, that the Church of which he speaks in 
 his Letter, exercised a preponderating influ- 
 ence even in political questions ; for the 
 Pope required that it should be consulted 
 in regard to the projected intervention. 
 
 3. The country that Pope Adrian wished 
 to preserve from foreign intervention did 
 not depend on only one chief, or on only 
 one king. His words designate several 
 princes who governed, independently of one 
 another, their respective districts. How 
 cm it be doubted that Ireland is the coun- 
 try in question? Adrian IV. recommends 
 that the princes be consulted and their con- 
 sent be obtained, before intervention can be 
 employed ; but he does not name those 
 princes neither by their personal appellation 
 nor by the title of the districts they gov- 
 erned. Indeed at that period the interior 
 situation of Ireland was but little known 
 on the Continent. Rome knew well enough 
 of the Episcopal Hierarchy, which had been 
 re-constituted in Ireland about a decade of 
 years before, but it had only imperfect in- 
 formation in respect to the political divisions 
 
 * Among the many proofs that could be ad- 
 duced to substantiate this statement, consu't 
 the collection <>f the Ftedtra of Rymer. in w h c\ 
 on almost every page, tbe icadt-r will tiiui Ire- 
 laud allude, I to by the term country. 
 
 of the coun ry and the names of the reign- 
 ing chiefs and princes. The English them- 
 selves were not much better informed on 
 these points, although living in such close 
 proximity to Erin. 
 
 4. Adrian IV , wished thut the people 
 should bo cunsu'ted, and that they should 
 freely express their opinion about interven- 
 tion. The conduct of the Pope clearly 
 supposes that the people of the country of 
 which he is speaking, instead of being op- 
 pressed by tyrants, enjoyed such liberty as 
 it was necessary for tlitin to have, in order 
 to assemble together, deliberate in com- 
 mon, take part in general interests, and alfo 
 in political affairs. A Christian people 
 bowed down under the yoke of Infidels, 
 would not have the power to express their 
 opinion in regard to an expedition projected 
 for their deliverance from servitude. It 
 follows then, in the plainest manner pos- 
 sible, from the Papal Letter, that the peo- 
 ple of that country of which he is speaking, 
 instead of being plunged in barbarism, 
 possessed, en the contrary, a certain cul- 
 ture and civilization. No one is evtr obliged 
 to consult barbarians or brutes ! 
 
 5. The great majority of the inhabitants 
 professed Christianity ; if it were otherwise 
 the Pope would not make use of the term 
 ' Church of the country,' but by so doing 
 he gives us clearly to understand that the 
 Ecclesiastical Hierarchy comprises the whole 
 country. There were still some pagans 
 there ; but they were not in such force as to 
 constitute a body, society or government 
 possessing whole districts. There were 
 there too some bad Christians, who behaved 
 as apostates, and who denied by their irre- 
 gularities the faith that they had once pro- 
 fessed. This situation explains and justi- 
 fies the terms employed in the preamble of 
 the Papal Letter ; but these expressions do 
 not imply that there is question of a coun- 
 try ruled over by Infidels against whom a 
 crusade should be preached. 
 
 6. No doubt could be for a moment en- 
 tertained about the necessity of an expedi- 
 tion to expel Infidels cruelly oppressing 
 Christian provinces ; all that was to be done 
 in such a case was to count and measure 
 the forces which the Christians could em- 
 ploy against their enemies. But here Pope 
 Adrian constantly doubts of the opportune- 
 ness, utility and necessity of the undertaking, 
 although two powerful kings proposed to 
 unite all the forces of France and England 
 for the undertaking. It is very clear, there- 
 fore, that the country referred to in the Papal 
 Letter was not one of those oppressed by 
 the Moors or other Infidels. 
 
 7. There is no example in all history 
 where the Pope refused to take under his 
 protection, and to defend against every at-
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 157 
 
 tack, the kingdom of a prince starting out 
 on a Crusade against Infidels. In the pres- 
 ent case Adrian IV. refnaed the Bull of pro- 
 tection which Louis VII.. entreated him to 
 issue, and he did not permit the Crusade to 
 be preached. 
 
 HKSPANIA NOT MEANT BY THE LETfER "H.' 
 
 We have designated sewn marks which 
 Pope Adrian specified in hi* Letter as be- 
 longing to the country .which was the ob- 
 ject of his epistle. But not one of these 
 marks can be applied to Spain (Hispitiia). 
 It would be absurd, therefore, to maintain 
 that the Papal Letter concernel an ex- 
 pedition which Louis VII. and Henry II. 
 wished to undertake together against the 
 Moors who oppressed a part of that penin- 
 sula. 
 
 1. Adrian speaks of a country. Spain, 
 on the contrary, enjoyed in the twelfth 
 century the dignity ad title of kingdom 
 Indeed, it embraced three kingdoms Cas- 
 tile, Aragnii, and Galicia. As the King of 
 Castile was the most powerful of the three 
 kings, he bore the title of Emperor. Rob- 
 ert of Mont, the continuator of Sigebert 
 relates (1153) that Louis VII., King of 
 France, having repudiated Eleonora of 
 Guyenne, married Constancia, the daughter 
 of Alphonsus, King of the Spains. The 
 annalist says that Toledo was the capital 
 of the kingdom ; and as the King of Castile 
 was far above the petit kings of Aragou and 
 Galicia, he was called the Emperor of the 
 Spains Ltiis VII. having made a pil- 
 grimage in 1154 to St. James of Galicia, 
 was well received by his father in law, the 
 Emperor of the Spains ''+ 
 
 In 1170 the Emperor of Spain married 
 Elennora, the daughter of Henry II., King 
 of England. Ou that occasion again Rob- 
 ert de Mont remarked that Toledo was the 
 capital' of Castile. As the Prince was then 
 but fifteen years old, he was persecuted by 
 the kings of Galicia and Navarre, who 
 were, however, his near relatives. If the 
 expedition proposed to P pe Adrian IV., 
 had reference to Sp4n (Hispania), would 
 Louis VII. have omitred to speak of the 
 Emperor of Castile, his father in law, who 
 demanded his assistance ? Would not a 
 
 t Robertus rie Monte in " Patrologia de 
 Migne," Tom. 160, pag. 478. Ibid. 511. 
 
 Castilian ambassador have accompanied 
 Rotrodus to Rome for the purpose of 
 smoothing over matters there ? 
 
 2. The country of which Adrian IV. 
 speaks in his Letter, had a Church, and an 
 Episcopate, and the Pope demanded that 
 it should be consulted iu reference to the 
 projected expedition. But Spain was at 
 that time divided into two camps. In the 
 part under the possessio'n of the Moors 
 there was no Church nor Bishops ; or, at 
 least, it would have been passably absurd 
 to exact that the sentiment of these Bishops 
 should be taken in regard to an expedition 
 that was prepared against their tyrants. 
 
 3. If the Papal Letter concerned Spain, 
 Adrian iV. would have undoubtedly said 
 that there should be concert of action with 
 the Emperor of Castile and with the kings 
 of Aragon, Navarre and Galicia, who were 
 each well known throughout all Europe. 
 
 4. As to the population; it is useless 
 to speak of the Moors who occupied the 
 country. But could the unfortunate Chris- 
 tians who were subject to their yoke, find 
 the ghost of a chance to express their opin- 
 ion in regard to an expedition which had 
 for its object their deliverance from bond- 
 age I To apply to Spain the Letter in 
 which the Pope says the peop'e should be 
 consulted and express their sentiments 
 with respect to foreisn intervention, is to 
 make Pope Adrian IV guilty of the great- 
 est folly. 
 
 5. The fifth mark does not suit Spain 
 any better than do the first four. The 
 Moors, after having massacred the most of 
 the Christians, resided principally in the 
 provinces which they reserved for them- 
 selves On the other hand, not being 
 idolaters, did they present the quality of 
 pagans (pagani) of which Pope Adrian 
 speaks in the preamable of his Letter. 
 And where do we find in Spain the apostates, 
 whom Louis VII. and Henry II. wished to 
 bring under the Christian yoke ? 
 
 6. Adrian, certainly, would not have 
 exhibited so much hesitation if there was 
 really a question of an expedition against 
 the Moors of Spain. 
 
 7. Finally, he would not have refused 
 to have the Crusade preached, and he would 
 have readily received the kingd m of 
 France under the care of the Holy See 
 during all the time the expedition lasted, 
 if the expedition was destined for operations 
 in Spain.
 
 158 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 CHAPTER XXX. 
 
 Whnt the Topes Have Done for Ireland. Help Extended to the Irish People. Im- 
 portant Historical Facts. Correspondence Between Pope Pius IX. and the 
 Irish in Borne. Cardinal Manning's Tribute. 
 
 Having now completely refuted the as- 
 sertion that the Adrian and Alexander 
 Bulls are genuine, and having shown 
 from irrefutable evidence why and where- 
 fore these long- disputed documents were 
 purposely forged, we return again to Ju^'ge 
 Maguire's malicious book in order to com- 
 plete our task by exposing and refuting the 
 other falsehoods with which he filled the 
 pages of his publication. 
 
 Speaking of the unfriendly attitude 
 which he claims the Popes always mani- 
 fested towards Ireland and the Irish people 
 throughout their numerous struggles for 
 national independence, Judge Maguire 
 says : 
 
 " Consistency them art a jewel," but surely 
 Rome cannot be charged with inconsistency in 
 dealing with the Iiish. She has been consis- 
 tently and constantly urjust and insultinx to 
 them. She has found them corifi ling and obe- 
 dient, while she has spurned and spat up >n 
 them, and she has spurned and ppat upon them 
 incessantly cpparently for no other reason than 
 that she has found them still coifiiinpr and 
 obedient, and that their humiliation pleased 
 and conciliated a more independent power.* 
 
 Fortunately for the cause of the Catholic 
 Church, the Popes, and the people of Ire- 
 land, History is an open book to every 
 person in search of facts wherewith to re- 
 fute such falsehoods as the above fabrica- 
 tions, and within whose pages we hope 
 to find proofs which ought to put to 
 blush even apostates who bear false wit- 
 ness against the long line of Popes who 
 have succeeded the much-maligned Adrian 
 IV. and the equally slandered Alexander 
 III. 
 
 We are told in the work before us that 
 the Roman Pontiffs have ' spurned and 
 fpat upon" the Irish people incessantly, 
 and, furthermore, that Rome has been 
 
 Ireland and the Pope pp. 29-30. 
 
 t 
 
 "consistently and constantly vnjutt and 
 instil ting to the people of Ireland." Can 
 such an allegation have even an atom of 
 truth in its whole formation ? Let us turn 
 to the records of the past and from the 
 pages of history again convict Judge 
 Maguire of being a wanton calumniator of 
 the Pontiffs of the Catholic Church. 
 
 Before doing so, however, it may be well 
 to call the attention of our readers to the 
 fact that Rome has done more to help Ire- 
 land, both in her spiritual and temporal 
 concerns, than she has done for any other 
 country in the world. 
 
 It is the fashion of certain fallen Catholic 
 Pope- haters who are heretics at heart 
 to harp upon the assertion that Rome never 
 helped Ireland ia her struggles for consti- 
 tutional liberty, or when she was strug- 
 gling in the throes of religious persecution. 
 But it must be borne in mind that the 
 Vicar of Christ is not a military Major- 
 General ; the College of Cardinals is not 
 composed of martial officers ; St. Peter's is 
 not a powder magazine ; the Vatican is 
 not an arsenal, nor are the Roman Basillicas 
 barracks in which a vast army of soldiers 
 are housed. The Pope has neither an 
 army nor a navy to resist assaults upon 
 his own territory, much less to help other 
 nations either to defend or to win their 
 freedom. There exists no treasury in Rome 
 from whence can be drawn funds where- 
 with to furnish the munitions of war to 
 foreign nations engaged in revolution, or 
 in the defence of their lives and property 
 against the assaults of persecuting tyrants. 
 
 What folly, then, on the part of dema- 
 gogues and quasi- Catholics who are a dis- 
 grace to the Church that made them Chris- 
 tians, to upbraid the Popes with having 
 been " consistently 'and constantly unjust 
 and insultirg" to the Irish people, because
 
 THE POPE AND IKELAtfD. 
 
 159 
 
 Rome did not furnish firearms which she 
 had not, powder which she did not possess, 
 and soldiers which i-he knew not of in 
 order to help in every effort which Erin 
 has made in the past to shake off the Eng- 
 lish yoke. 
 
 We have already declared that Rome did 
 more for Ireland than she has ever done 
 for any other nation under the sun, and, 
 in order to illustrate the truth of this as- 
 sertion, we will brufly run over a few 
 events as they crop out in Irish history, 
 showing how Rme drew the temporal 
 sword in Ireland's behalf on many occa- 
 sions, although Judge Maguire says that 
 Rome has "spurned and spat upon the 
 Irish people incessat<Vy' - that is constantly 
 and without cess tion. 
 
 Now let us discover what Irish history 
 reveals regarding this important subject : 
 
 1. Duiing the reign of Queen Elizabeth, 
 when the Plantation of Ulster was in- 
 augura ed in order to replace the Catholic 
 Irish with Piotestant English, "letters 
 were intercepted from Rome, addressed to 
 the Irish natives, wherein the Pope earnest- 
 ly exhorted them to persevere in their op- 
 position to the Queen's government, with 
 assurance of being supplied with money and 
 troops," as well as with spiritual favors. 
 This financial and martial help was ten- 
 dered to Ireland about the year 1574-5. t 
 
 2. A short time subsequently, during 
 the reign of the same Queen, and in ac- 
 cordance with the previous promise of the 
 predecessor of Pope Gregory XIII., a 
 ship of war was furnished, six hundred 
 well-disciplined soldiers were supplied, and 
 three thousand stand of arms were contri- 
 buted by the Papal influence to help the 
 Irish to defend their homes against the 
 minions of the English Queen. These 
 munitions of war were furnished by Rome 
 about the year 1580. t 
 
 3. Speaking of the Confederation of 
 Kilkenny, which met on the 10th of May, 
 1642, the Nun of Kenmare says : " Envoys 
 were arriving from foreign courts, and 
 Pope Urban VIII., had sent Father 
 
 fLeland's History of Ireland, vol. II., p. 311. 
 
 tLingard's History of England, vol. VI., pp. 
 157-8. 
 
 Scarampi with indulgences and a purse of 
 $30,000 collected by Father Wadding. 
 
 4. " The terrible rising of 1641, was the 
 commencement of a war of eleven years, 
 ending with the surrender of Galway, in 
 1652. Innocent X., sent the Archbishop 
 of Fermo (Rinuccini), as his Nuncio to Ire- 
 land, in the autumn of 1645, with consider- 
 able supplies of armt and money. This war 
 was for complete religious freedom and na- 
 tional independence. "|| 
 
 5. About the year 1688, 72,000 francs 
 a year were supplied by Rome for the sup- 
 port of the Irish secular clergy and laity. 
 In 1699 the Pope sent to King James II., 
 at St. Germain's fifty-eight thousand francs 
 for the Irish Ecclesiastics exiled that year. 
 From about 1750 to 1800 the Popes sent 
 the Irish Bishops a hundred Roman crowns 
 a year in aid of the Catholic poor schools. IT 
 
 6. "The Roman Pontiffs, as Rulers of 
 the Papal States ; the Emperors of Germany, 
 as heads of the German Empire ; and 
 the Kings of Spain and France, always 
 covertly and sometimes openly received 
 the envoys of O'Neill, Desmond and 
 O'Donnell, and openly dispatched troops 
 and fleets to assist the Irish in their 
 struggle for their de facto independence. 
 All this was in perfect accordance, not 
 merely with the authority which Catholic 
 powers still recognized in the Sovereign 
 Pontiff, but even with the new order of 
 things which Protestantism had introduced 
 into Western Europe, and which England, 
 as henceforth a leading Protestant power, 
 had accepted and eagerly embraced. By 
 the rejection of the supreme arbitration of 
 the Popes on the part of the new heretics, 
 Europe lost its unity as Christendom, and 
 naturally formed itself into two leagues, 
 the Catholic and the Protestant. An op- 
 pressed Catholic nationality, above all a 
 weak and powerless one, had therefore the 
 right of appeal to the great Catholic powers 
 for help against oppression. And the pre- 
 tension of England to the possession of 
 Ireland was the very essence of oppression 
 and tyranny in itself, doubly aggravated 
 
 aistory of Ireland, p. 488. 
 HUath. Diet. Art. Irish Church, p. 461. 
 ITCatholic Dictionary, Art. Irish Church, p. 
 461.
 
 160 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 by the fact of an apostate ai.d vicious king 
 or queen making it treason for a people, 
 utterly separate and distinct from theirs, to 
 hold fast to its ancient and revered religion. 
 Who can say, then, that Gregory XIII. 
 was guilty of injustice and of abetting re- 
 bellion when, in 1678, he furnished James 
 Fitymaurice, the great Geraldine, with a 
 fleet and army to fight against Elizabeth ? 
 The authority greatest in Catholic eyes, and 
 most worthy of respect in the eyes of all 
 impartial men the Pope thus endorsed 
 the patent fact- that Ireland was an inde- 
 pendent nation, and could w<ige war against 
 her oppressors. Here we have a stand point 
 from which to argue the question for future 
 times. "= 
 
 The foregoing selections, culled hurriedly 
 from Irish and English writers, prove be- 
 yond cavil that when Judge Maguire as- 
 serted that Rome had " constantly and 
 consistently spurned and spat upon" the 
 Irish people, he was only carrying out the 
 programme of calumny against the Popes 
 and the Catholic Church which de61es every 
 p*ge of his falsifying, malicious and mis- 
 leading publication. Nor was it for the 
 cause of religion alone that the Popes 
 assisted the Irish people, as uiitruthfu.ly 
 asserted in the work under review ; on the 
 contrary, the Pontiffs who succeeded 
 Adrian IV., and Alexander 111., well knew 
 that Ireland was an independent nation, 
 and was, therefore, perfectly free to wage 
 war against England or any other power 
 which tried to enslave that valorous people. 
 On these grounds, therefore, the Popes 
 assisted Ireland in several of the uprisings 
 of her people, sending ships, soldiers and 
 munitions of war to help the Irish to win 
 back their national independence. 
 
 It has ever been the aim of the enemies 
 of the Popes both inside and outside the 
 Church to make capital for themselves by 
 calumniating the Sovereign Pontiffs. This 
 fact is patent to all readers of Church His- 
 tory. In the same way there are certain 
 men of the present day, who, although born 
 of Catholic parents and baptized in the 
 Catholic Faith, are blatant in their bold 
 denunciation of the Pope because he re- 
 
 = Father Tbtband, The Irish Race, p. 210. 
 
 fuses to eudurse every hair brained attempt 
 made by irrepressible and inexperienced 
 mock patriots for the purpose of gaining 
 Ireland's freedom through means that are 
 neither pleasing to Almighty God, nor ac- 
 ceptable to Irishmen with common sense 
 and Christian principles. 
 
 These men pose as "patriots" whose ideas 
 are far in advance of those peace policy 
 Irishmen who prefer to live under unjust 
 laws a little longer, rather than to abbre- 
 viate their time of enslavement beneath the 
 iniquitous laws of England even a single 
 minute by having recourse to midnight 
 meetings of sworn associates where murder 
 is plotted and where the vengeance of God 
 is invoked upon the cause of Ireland by 
 means of the Satanic blood stained bond 
 which binds these misguided men who leave 
 a foul stain upon the fair character of their 
 suffering country. 
 
 The Vicars of Christ have ever been the 
 champions of liberty in every age and for 
 every land. Why, then, will men strive to 
 impress upon their fellow- men the false idea 
 that the Popes, who have been the means 
 of striking the shackles from millions of 
 slaves and of emancipating woman from 
 her long bondage of serfdom, should desire 
 that Ireland of all countries in the world 
 should remain a languishing slave 
 chained by the unjust laws of England and 
 slowly dying of destitution and decay? 
 
 There is no country in the world which 
 the Popes would sooner see numbered 
 among the nations of the earth than Ire- 
 land. Any why? Because she has as 
 she deserves to have the deep sympathy 
 of every reigning Pontiff in consequence of 
 the fidelity with which Erin's sons and 
 daughters have " fought the good fight," 
 "kept the faith," and planted the Cross 
 upon nearly every island and continent of 
 the known world ! 
 
 Already we have shown what some of the 
 Popes did for Ireland in the earlier* cen- 
 turies, let us now turn to our own times 
 and learn from the lips of the saintly Pope 
 Pius IX., and his successor now gloriously 
 reigning what sentiments they enunciated 
 in behalf of Ireland's right to self govern-
 
 THB POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 1G1 
 
 merit even in the very hour when their 
 calumniators were crying vengeance against 
 the Vatican so as to make themselves con- 
 spicuous and thus gain questionable celeb- 
 rity among the bitterest enemies of both 
 the Pope and the Irish people. 
 
 The sea of trouble which lashed around the 
 Chair of Peter in the year 1860, drew from 
 the Catholic body in every country in the 
 world expressions of deep sympathy for the 
 gad state in which the Vicar of Christ was 
 placed, surrounded as he was, by both for- 
 eign and domestic enemies. On the llth 
 of March in that year, the Irish residents of 
 Rome met in conference on the condition 
 of the Holy See, and determined at once 
 to proclaim to the world their fealty to the 
 Holy Father Pope Pius IX. , as a grateful 
 return for the love he ever manifested for 
 the Irish people, and also to place them- 
 selves on record as protesting against the 
 diabolical diplomacy practiced by the Italian 
 Government, by which the Holy Father 
 was despoiled of the property of the Church 
 and deprived of his personal .liberty. 
 
 The Address presented on that memor- 
 able occasion will stand on record for all 
 ages as a durable refutation of the false 
 ideas promulgated by certain anti Papal 
 "patriots" who strive to win both fame and 
 fortune by endeavoring to persuade the 
 world that the love which the Irish people 
 once had for the Holy Father has vanished 
 from i he hearts of that Catholic people, 
 and that the Irish have no grateful mem- 
 ories of the past to recur to in their con- 
 nection with Rome. The following address 
 is presented to our readers in order that 
 they may understand the grateful feelings 
 which welled up in the hearts of the Irish 
 residents in Rome, in return for the many 
 favors bestowed by the Popes on Ireland 
 during by-gone centuries. 
 
 ADDRESS PRESENTED TO POPE Pius IX., 
 
 BY THE IRISH RESIDENTS OF RoME, 
 
 ON SUNDAY, MARCH HTH, I860. 
 
 Mvtt Boly Father: Whilst the Irish 
 nation t'i om one extremity to the other is 
 moved at the sight of the indignities offered 
 to the Vicar of Christ in the august person 
 of your Holiness, we, your devoted chil- 
 dren of the same country, are gathered 
 around your throne to share in their sen- 
 
 timents of unbounded devotion to the 
 Chair of St. Peter, and to give expression 
 to our most deep felt sympathy and filial 
 love towards your Holiness Most Holy 
 Father, it will ever remain a true glory to 
 our country that when some unworthy few 
 of your subjects, stimulated by foreign 
 enemies to your throne, prepared so severe 
 an ordeal for the Vicar of Christ, Ireland 
 should be the first nation whose heart 
 throbbed with affectionate sympathy and 
 inaugurated the great Catholic movement, 
 which, spreading through the universe, now 
 fills with dismay the enemies of our holy 
 religion and displays the ever enduring 
 vitality of the Catholic faith. Most Holy 
 Father, Ireland has many special reasons 
 for approaching your Holiness in the hour 
 of trial. Long has she deemed it her 
 happy privilege to be assailed by every 
 storm that was raised against the Bark of 
 Peter ; for more than two centuries and a 
 half her children gladly suffered confisca- 
 tion of their property, exile, imprisonment 
 and the gibbet, rather than sever the sweet 
 bonds that united her with Rome, and, 
 even at the present day, it is our glory to 
 share with the Holy See the assaults of the 
 enemies to all order and religion. But, Most 
 Holy Father, persecution could not overcome 
 the fealty of our hearts for the Vicar of 
 Christ ; and even those children who were 
 torn from the bosom of Ireland and com- 
 pelled to seek a home in other lands, 
 became, in the hands of God, harbingers of 
 the ylad tidings of faith, and, true to the 
 tradition of their fathers. The churches 
 that they founded in England, and Scotland, 
 and Au-tralia, and India, and the United 
 States and the many British possessions in 
 the Old and New Worlds, some of whose 
 representatives have the honor of approach- 
 ing to-day the feet of your Holiness, re- 
 echo still the same sentiments of unalterable 
 attachment to the Chair of St. Peter. 
 Therefore, Most Holy Father, as Irishmen, 
 who are indebted, after the grace of God, 
 to j our glorious predecessors for the bless- 
 ings of faith which they now enjoy for it 
 was a Roman Pontiff that sent St. Patrick 
 to the shores of Ireland it was Rome that, 
 in the centuries of her persecution and 
 desolation, watched by her side, sharing 
 her trials and her sorrows, pouring into 
 her bosom words of consolation and sweet 
 hope, and inviting the nations of i he earth 
 to alleviate her sufferings ; and it is, more- 
 over, to the constant and inviolate attach- 
 ment of the Irish nation to the successors 
 of St. Peter that she owes, after Heaven, 
 her having ever preserved undiminished, 
 by any native heresy, or schism, the most 
 glorious title of "Island of Saints" as 
 ministers of the sanctuary, who deem it a 
 special privilege to apply to the study of
 
 162 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 sacred knowledge, under the shadow of the 
 Chair of Peter, in this city of holy shrines, 
 the new Jerusalem of Christ, the central 
 See of the Church of God as Catholics 
 who contemplate, in the monuments of the 
 Eternal City, the triumph of the Church 
 over the powers of the world, and who, 
 moreover, are witnesses (some of us for 
 n any years) of the mild and paternal sway 
 of your Holiness in your temporal domin- 
 ions, we deem it our duty to approach the 
 throne of our beloved Father, to tender 
 the tribute of our affection and sympathy, 
 and to present to him the homage of all 
 that we possess, as well as of our devotion 
 and love. At the same time, Most Holy 
 Father, we wish to record our protest 
 against every violation of your territorial 
 rights, and to declare, in unison with the 
 whole Catholic world, that we will ever 
 look upon any usurpation or political in- 
 fringement on the temporal sovereignly of 
 the Holy See as a deep wound inflicted on 
 the whole Catholic Church of God Yes, 
 Most Holy Father, in the political inde- 
 pendence of the successors of St Peter we 
 recognize a providential disposition of that 
 Divine Spirit which vivifies and directs the 
 Catholic Church for it is yours to watch 
 over the spiritual interests, not alone of one 
 province, or of one kingdom, but of all the 
 kingdoms of the universe that are illumined 
 bv the rays of heavenly faith. It is yours 
 to uphold the eternal laws of justice, the 
 indiasolubility of the marriage bond, the 
 discipline of the Church, and to vindicate 
 their infraction by the proper penalties, no 
 matter who may be the offender, whether 
 rich or poor, potentate or subject ; and 
 hence it has been recognized for centuries 
 by the jurisprudence of all nations that the 
 common Father of all should be subject to 
 none. Most Holy Father, if your sorrows 
 have been great, they have been only por- 
 portionate to the glory with which you have 
 adorned the Catholic Churc-h. Too many 
 were the bulwarks raised by your hands 
 around the mystic edifice ot the House of 
 God too happy were the efforts of your 
 zeal in invigorating sacred discipline, as 
 well as in extending the tents of Israel, 
 and gathering new nations to the fold of 
 Christ, not to provoke the special rage of 
 Satan, and render your sacred person the 
 special object of his fiercest assaults. But 
 be consoled, Mo-t Holy Father, for whilst 
 the voice of History attests that every hand 
 raised against the Vicar of Christ has 
 withered, each era of glory in the Church 
 of God has been marked by the fierce storms 
 which assailed the Bark of Peter The Im- 
 maculate Virgin, whose brow you have 
 decked with a peerless crown, shall once 
 more crush with a virginal foot the infernal 
 the head of enemy that assails you. And 
 
 when it was asked in the words of the 
 Paalmiat : " Why do nations rage and peo- 
 ple devise vain things ?" the Divine assur- 
 ance will be verified in reply, " He that 
 mirth in the Heavens shall laugh at them, 
 the Lord shall deride them." Most Holy 
 Father, at your sacred feet we ask for our- 
 selves, our Bishops, our families, and our 
 whole nation, your Apostolic Benediction. 
 
 EEPLY OF POPE PIUS IX. 
 
 The reply of the Holy Father was to the 
 following effect : 
 
 No one could have doubted that faithful 
 and Catholic Ireland, which in every age 
 has given such signal proofs of its attach- 
 ment to the successors of St Peter, and so 
 zealously guarded the only true treasure on 
 earth, the Catholic faith, would be found 
 amongst the first to manifest its pympathy 
 in the present afflicting circimintances and 
 sufferings of the Vicar of Christ, of the 
 Head of the Church, or, rather, of the 
 Church itself For it is certain that all the 
 schemes and plotting of the revolutionists of 
 the present day have for their chief object 
 to assail our Catholic faith and destroy ihe 
 Church of God. Nor is it without pleasure 
 that I rt fleet that the words of the Gospel 
 of this day : " Ome Regnum in seipnum 
 divisum dfso'abitur,' * cannot be applied to 
 you. Union is the secret of strength, and 
 it was your union in past ages, as at the 
 present day, that enabled you to preserve 
 the faith and strike with terror the enemies 
 of God. I recommend to you this holy 
 union - union of faith, union of sentiments 
 union of charity, union of prayer ; for pray- 
 er is our support in every tribulation Let 
 this union be ever inviolate, and you may 
 rest assured of Heaven's aid. I enjoin you 
 to exhort all to maintain it, whilat at the 
 s> me time you will communicate my bless- 
 ing to the thousands and millions of your 
 countrymen who so fearlessly and effica- 
 ciously display their sympathy, and by 
 words and deeds sustain the rights of the 
 Holy See. Whilst you are thus gathered 
 around the threshold of the House of God 
 of that sacred edifice in which are divine- 
 ly deposited the blessings and the riches of 
 faith, the powers of hell cannot overcome 
 you. This is the threshold that opens on 
 the path of salvation, and ever bear in mind 
 that through it alone can man hope to enter 
 the fold of Christ. I exhort you, there- 
 fore, to cherish this sacred threshold, and 
 to be vigilant in its defence, especially by 
 prayer. Prayer has always been our re- 
 fuge ; let your prayers never cease to be 
 offered up to God, Who, in His own time, 
 will make kn <wn His power to the nations 
 
 *very kingdom divided against itself shall 
 be made desolate." ST. MATTHEW, xii., 25.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 1G3 
 
 that now "rage against the Most High," 
 and endeavor to destroy the work of His 
 right hand. Powerful, indeed, are the 
 enemies that assail us ; but God's omnipo- 
 tent arm will crush and discomfit them. 
 However, let it be our prayer that the 
 majesty and power of God may be dis- 
 played, not in the chastisements which pro- 
 ceed from His divine justice, but in the 
 fullness and depths of His infinite mercy. 
 With sentiments of the liveliest gratitude, 
 I leave you now, imparting to you my 
 blessing, and I pray the Almighty to 
 shower down the plentitude of His bene- 
 diction upon you, that it may accompany 
 you on your journey, be communicated to 
 your families and relatives, and to the 
 whole "Island of Saints." In return pray 
 to God for me ; pray to Him to grant me a 
 spirit of patience and resignation to the 
 Divine will, as well as of courage and forti- 
 tude amidst the difficulties which now en- 
 compass me. Pray to Him especially 
 through that Saint, your glorious Apostle, 
 St. Patrick, whose festival and memory y -u 
 will celebrate in a few days. That great 
 Saint so deeply rooted the plant of divine 
 faith in Ireland, that the continual assaults 
 and persecution to which your country was 
 subjected could never destroy the practice 
 of all Christian virtues for which your 
 island is renowned, or weaken its devoted- 
 ness and reverence to the Vicar of Christ. 
 Pray to him now that he is seated near the 
 Throne of God, that he may obtain for you 
 the treatest of all heavenly blessings which 
 no creature can merit the gift of final 
 perseverance. I impart to you now my 
 blessing in the Name of Jesus Christ, in the 
 Name of the Most Holy Trinity, of the 
 Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost ; may 
 these Names be ever on your lips during 
 life ; in the name of Mary the Imma- 
 culate Virgin, who is our hope and our con- 
 solation ; and may you utter them with your 
 dying breath when about to be freed from 
 all earthly sufferings, and admitted to the 
 joys of the Lord. 
 
 In the foregoing magnificent tribute to 
 the Irish people, Pope Pius IX., arises up 
 in the nineteenth century to give his testi- 
 mony concerning the fidelity of the Irish 
 people to the Chair of St. Peter, and there- 
 by to vindicate that consistent Catholic 
 ace from the aspersions cast upon their 
 Christian character by the forged Bulls 
 falsely attibuted to his predecessors Adrian 
 IV., and Alexander HI. 
 
 Speaking of the fidelity of the Irish peo- 
 ple to Rome Pope Pius IX., uses these 
 words which welled up from the deep 
 gratitude he felt ia his heart for " faithful 
 
 and Catholic Ireland, which, in every age, 
 has given such signal proofs of its attach- 
 ment to the successors of St. Peter, and so 
 zealously guarded the only true treasure on 
 earth.' 1 It follows, therefore, that the 
 language used in the two Bulls under 
 criticism was purposely invented by some 
 enemy of the Church, the Irish people, and 
 of truth. 
 
 In connection with the exalted eulogy 
 which Pope Pius IX , bestowed upon the 
 Irish people for their fidelity to the Vicar 
 of Christ throughout oil agesii maybe 
 well to annex the following beautiful tri- 
 bute from Cardinal Manning on the same 
 point. The sentiments of both these 
 exalted Church dignitaries demonstrate 
 beyond cavil that they were fully conscious 
 that the calumnies against the Catholic 
 character, fidelity and consistency of the 
 Irish people injected into the Adrian and 
 Alexander Bulls, were founded only in the 
 malicious misrepresentations of the miser- 
 able hireling who concocted them, and that 
 neither of the Pupes mentioned ever saw 
 the diabolical documents in which they ap 
 peared. 
 
 JSwaking of Ireland's fidelity to the Holy 
 Roman See, his Eminence Cardinal Man- 
 ning made use of these glowing words 
 of admiration for the sufferings of the Irish 
 people for the true Faith. 
 
 "For 300 years the Catholic Ch-rch in 
 England lay desolate. For 300 years there 
 was no hierarchy uniting it with the hier- 
 archy of the Church throughout the world ; 
 for 300 years there were scattered faith- 
 ful who preserved their religion at the peril 
 of their Jives ; there were scattered Priests 
 who ministered to them in secret ; but 
 there was no Catholic Church in England in 
 the lull perfection of its structure and au- 
 thority. It had fallen from being a pro- 
 vince in the Empire of Our Divine Master 
 to be a wilderness. The greater part of 
 those who hear me are the children of a 
 Church which was never wrecked, and 
 though trodden down and persecuted, never 
 lay desolate. It never lost its Bishops. 
 They were martyred, but others rose in 
 their stead. It never lost its Priesthood. 
 They were martyred ; they were deprived ; 
 they were exiled ; they were dr ven away ; 
 but when one left his post vacant, another 
 took his place. The Episcopate and Priest- 
 hood of Ireland have never failed. Pius
 
 164 
 
 THK POPR AND IRELAND. 
 
 IX. had no need to do in Ireland what he 
 had need to do in England. No Pontiff had 
 been called to restore the work of St. Fat 
 rick ; and yet, the children of the Church 
 in Ireland have gone throughout the wide 
 world, and wheresoever you have been scat- 
 tered you have carried with you the holy 
 Catholic faith. Not BO with us. And 
 
 therefore I call on you by that greater bene- 
 diction which you have never lost, to work 
 together with us, in union of gratitude and 
 charity, to enable the Catholic Church in 
 England to spread among r eathen nations 
 that faith which has cost you so dear an 1 
 which you have loved better than your life." 
 
 CHAPTEK XXXI. 
 
 The Paternal Love of Pope Leo XIII. for the Irish People. How Public Opinion was 
 Prejudiced against the Holy Fitther. Calumnies cabled around the World. 
 The Pope presented in his True Character as the Consistent Friend of the 
 People of Ireland in their struggle for National Independence by rightful means. 
 
 Among the long line of successors of St. 
 Peter, few Popes have been more maligned 
 and misrepresented through the public 
 press than Leo XIII. , at present gloriously 
 reigning. Since the very day of his elec- 
 tion, eleven years ago, the enemies of the 
 Church in Italy, France and England, 
 have been untiring in their efforts to 
 prejudice public opinion against him in 
 every portion of the world. A coterie of 
 Jews and infidels have the management of 
 the cable dispatches sent from Rome, and, 
 in a hundred instances at least, some of 
 the most malignan' and baseless misrep- 
 resentations of both the public and private 
 acts of the Holy Father, have been fur- 
 nished to the reading world for no other 
 purpose, seemingly, than to arouse the 
 antipathy of all nations against the in- 
 nocent victim of their diabolical slanders. 
 
 Realizing the unity of Faith and of love 
 which exists between the Vicar of Christ 
 and the glorious Catholic race of Ireland, 
 the enemies of God's Supreme representa- 
 tive on earth have labored with might and 
 main to break that adamantine chain of 
 consistent loyalty which unites the hearts 
 of the Irish people in every land with the 
 Head of Christ's Church. For this pur- 
 pose Pope Leo XIII. had to be accused 
 of holding opinions adverse to the national 
 aspirations of the Iiish people. Fabulous 
 charges were concocted by an Italian 
 coterie of conspirators against truth, and 
 
 then circulated by cable to all parts of the 
 world. The Holy Father was accused of 
 being hostile to Home Rule ; of being 
 opposed to any redress for Ireland's politi 
 cal wrongs through public agitation ; and of 
 being in league with the English Ministry 
 to keep the Irish people plunged in the 
 sea t f misery which has marred their pro- 
 gress ever since English law became su- 
 preme in that misruled Island. 
 
 These calumniating charges were kept 
 up so constantly and repeated so often that 
 they had a direful effect in many instances. 
 Falsehood flies with lightning speed, 
 whilst the stride of truth is slow but 
 sure. Before, however, the truth could 
 reach the public ear in distant lands, even 
 some Catholics had come to the conclusion 
 that Pope Leo XIII. was not the friend 
 of the Irish people. How groundless and 
 erroneous was that opiuion thus precipi- 
 tately and passionately formed, is best 
 known now to many once guilty of rash 
 judgment against the Vicar of Christ. 
 
 The best test by which to judge Pooe 
 Leo XI II., in his connection with the 
 affairs of Ireland, is to place before the 
 reading world his words and his acts con- 
 cerning Irish affairs, and when these have 
 been presented in the garb of truth, it 
 will be clear to every impartial reader that 
 the hatred which Pope Leo XIII. is said 
 to have manifested towards the cause of 
 national independence in Ireland, was
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 165 
 
 merely the malicious invention of menda- 
 cious allies of anti-Christ, whilst the love 
 which His Holiness manifested in every 
 instance toward the Irish people was the 
 love of a Father for his children whose 
 temporal and spiritual happiness pervaded 
 every pulsation of his heart. 
 
 Let us, therefore, pass under review 
 the acts and expressions of Pope Leo XIII. 
 during the past eleven years, so as to ex- 
 hibit the Holy Father in th true light 
 in which he stands now and will stand 
 for ever in the estimation of all just- 
 minded men. This is the more necessary 
 because prejudice and passion have forced 
 false conclusions upon the minds of s^me 
 Catholics who have seen the reigning 
 Pontiff only through the haze which hatred 
 has cast around his august presence for 
 the purpose of antagonizing the children 
 of the Church of God against their spiritual 
 Father. 
 
 Monsignor O'Rielly, in his " Life of 
 Leo XIII.," informs us that shortly after 
 the election of his Holiness, one of the first 
 missions entrusted by the Holy Father to 
 Cardinal Franchi, Secretary of State, was 
 to visit Ireland for the purpose of gaining 
 personal knowledge of the true condition 
 of that unhappy country. 
 
 "Certain it is," says the author in ques- 
 tion, "that Leo XIII. had a clear con- 
 ception of the just claims of Ireland to self- 
 government and to a full and practical 
 religious liberty, and that his efforts thence- 
 forward aimed at keeping the Irish Catho- 
 lics and the National party within the 
 strict bounds of constitutional agitation, 
 legal, orderly, and peaceful methods, while 
 seeking for the justice which so many 
 Englishmen acknowledge to be due them."* 
 
 Thus we see that even in the very first 
 years of his pontificate Pope Leo XIII. 
 was a firm believer in the justice of Ire- 
 land's claims to self-government, and as 
 the Chief Shepherd of Christ's flock, he 
 was determined that as far aa his counsel 
 and influence could go, the Irish cause 
 should never be crimsoned with crime 
 against the supreme laws of God or the 
 Christian ethics of His Church. No Catho- 
 
 *Life of Pope Leo XEIL, p. 343. 
 
 lie can gainsay these precautionary metlu ds 
 of the Holy Father who is the guardian 
 of God's Faith. 
 
 In March, 1878, the Mayor and muni- 
 cipal officers of the city of Cork sent an 
 address of congratulation and filial homage 
 to the Holy Father on his election to the 
 pontifical throne In response thereto Pope 
 Leo XIII. expressed his deep sense of 
 gratitude for their filial affection and con- 
 stant love. In concluding, his Holiness 
 said : " To you therefore, beloved sons, 
 we gladly express in this letter our grati- 
 tude and affection ; and, ready as we are 
 ever to give you every proof of our fatherly 
 love, we pray God from our heart to be 
 evermore your protector and helper, and 
 so to inspire your counsels that your labors 
 may procure His glory as well as the wel- 
 fare and prosperity of your fMow-citizens." 
 
 Such language coming from the pen of 
 a great Pontiff, proves beyond cavil that 
 every pulse of his heart beat in unison with 
 the aspirations of the Irish people for 
 Home Rule and national prosperity. 
 
 It is asserted by designing demagogues 
 of low degree and of little conscience that 
 Pope Leo XEII. wrote two Letters to the 
 Irish Bishops in the years 1882 and 1883, 
 in which he unreservedly condemned the 
 Irish Land League and the National League 
 which succeeded it, and which subsists to 
 this day. How far such an assertion is 
 from the truth may best be ascertained 
 by a candid perusal of the Letters them- 
 selves, copious extracts from which we 
 append in order that truth may triumph 
 over falsehood in such an important his- 
 torical matter. 
 
 The Letters in question which Pope Leo 
 XIII. addressed to the Hierarchy of Ire- 
 land in reply to several missives sent by 
 them to him, as well as to Pastorals issued by 
 the Irish Bishops concerning agrarian out- 
 rages then becoming prevalent, were dated 
 August 1st, 1882, and January 1st, 1883, 
 respectively, and the sentiments they con- 
 tained partook far more of Fatherly love 
 than of the passionate condemnation so 
 falsely attributed to the present Pontiff. 
 
 "The kindly affection which we have 
 cherished toward Irishmen," says the Holy
 
 1G6 
 
 THE POPE AND IKKLAND. 
 
 Father in his Letter datod August 1st, 
 1882, "and which seems to increase with 
 their present sufferings, forces us to follow 
 the course of events in your island with 
 the deep concern of a fatherly heart. From 
 their consideration, however, we derive 
 more of anxiety than of comfort, seeing 
 that the condition of the people is not 
 what we wish it to be, one of peace and 
 prosperity. 
 
 " There still remain many sources of 
 grievance ; conflicting party passions incite 
 many persons to violent courses ; some even 
 have stained themselves with fearful mur- 
 ders, as if a nation's welfare could be pro- 
 cured by dishonor and crime ! 
 
 " This state of things is to you as well 
 as to us a cause of serious alarm, as we 
 had evidence of ere now, and as we have 
 just noticed by the resolutions adopted in 
 your meeting at Dublin. Fearful as you 
 were, for the salvation of your people, you 
 have clearly shown them what they have 
 to refrain from in the present critical 
 conjuncture and in the very midst of the 
 national struggle. 
 
 "In this you have discharged the duty 
 imposed alike by your episcopal office and 
 your love of country. At no time do a 
 people more need the advice of their Bish- 
 ops than when, carried away by some 
 powerful passion, they see before them 
 deceptive prospects of bettering their con- 
 dition. It is when impelled to commit 
 what is criminal and disgraceful that the 
 multitude need the voice and the hand 
 of the Bishop to keep them back from 
 doing wrong, and to recall them by timely 
 exhortation to moderation and self-control. 
 Most timely, therefore, was your advice 
 to your people, reminding them of the 
 Saviour's injunction, ' Seek ye first the 
 kingdom of God and His justice.' For all 
 Christians are therein commanded to keep 
 their thoughts fixed, in their ordinary con- 
 duct as well as in their political acts, on 
 the goal of their eternal salvation, and to 
 hold all things subordinate to the fulfilment 
 of their duty to God. 
 
 "If Irishmen will only keep to these 
 rules of conduct they will be free to seek 
 to rise from the state of misery into which 
 they have fallen. They surely have a right 
 
 to claim the lawful redress of their wrongs. 
 For no one can maintain that Iiishmen 
 cannot do what is lawful for all other peo- 
 ples t<> do. 
 
 " Nevertheless, even the pub ic welfare 
 must be regulated by the principles of hon- 
 esty and righteousness. It is a matter for 
 serious thought that the most righteous 
 cause is dishonored by being promoted by 
 iniquitous means. Justice is inconsistent 
 not only with all violence, but especially so 
 with any participation in the deeds of un- 
 lawful societies, which, under the fair pre- 
 text of righting wrong, bring all communi- 
 ties to the very verge of ruin. Just as our 
 predecessors have taught that all right- 
 minded men should carefully shun these 
 dark associations, even so you have added 
 your timely admonition to the same effect. 
 
 "As, however, these same dangers may 
 recur, it will become your watchful care to 
 renew these admonitions, beseeching all 
 Irishmen by their reverence for the Catho- 
 lic name, and by their very love for their 
 native land, to have nothing to do with these 
 secrtt societies. These can in no way help 
 a nation to obtain redress for its grievances; 
 and, all too frequently, they madly impel 
 those whom they have ensared to commit 
 crimes. 
 
 "Irishmen take a just pride in being 
 called Catholics an appellation which, ac- 
 cording to St. Augustine, means the guardi- 
 ans of all honor and uprightness, the follow~ 
 ers of all equity and justice. Let them 
 fulfill by their acts all that this word Catho- 
 lic implies ; and let them, while vindicating 
 their own just rights, endeavor to be indeed 
 all that their name suggests. Let them 
 remember that ' the highest liberty consists 
 in being free from all crime; and let no one 
 among them, so long as he lives, have to 
 undergo lawful punishment ' as a murderer, 
 or a thief, or a slanderer, or one who has 
 coveted other people's property. ' " 
 
 " . . . We deem what you have de- 
 creed concerning your young priests to be 
 proper and timely. For if ever there were 
 circumstances when priests should be zeal- 
 ous and energetic in maintaining public 
 order amid popular excitement, such are 
 the present circumstances with you. And 
 j list as the estimation in which one is held
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 167 
 
 by the public is the measure of his influ- 
 ence over others, even so should priests 
 endeavor to win this public esteem by self- 
 respect, firmness, and temperate word and 
 deed. They should do nothing that pru- 
 dence could condemn, nothing that can fan 
 the flame of party strife 
 
 " In this way, and by following such 
 rules of conduct, we do believe that Ireland 
 shall yet attain to the prosperity which she 
 seeks, and that, too, icithout wronging any 
 one. As we have already declared to you, 
 we trust still that the government will 
 conclude to grant sa'isf action to the just 
 claims of Irishmen. This we are led to be- 
 lieve from their acquaintance with the true 
 state of things and from their statesmanlike 
 wisdom ; for there can be no question that 
 on the safety of Ireland depends the tran- 
 quility of the whole empire. 
 
 "Meanwhile, sustained by this hope, we 
 shall lose no ppportunity of helping the 
 Irish people by our advice, pouring forth to 
 God for them prayers tilled with the warm- 
 est zeal and love, beseeching God to look 
 down with kindness on a nation made il- 
 lustrious by the practice of so many virtues, 
 to appease the present storm of political 
 passion, and to reward them at length with 
 peace and prosperity." 
 
 Breathes there a Catholic so dead to 
 Divine Faith and so disloyal to the justice 
 of Ireland's holy cause, as to condemn 
 Pope Leo XIII. for a single expression 
 contained in the above love-laden epistle 
 to the Irish Episcopate ? The Holy Father 
 counsels Christian justice and he condemns 
 the commission of crime. What true Irish 
 patriot desires to ignore God's laws in 
 order to gain liberty for his native land ? 
 "Let them remember," says the paternal 
 Pontiff, " that the highest liberty consists 
 in being free from all crime," and in thus 
 keeping the Irish Land League free from 
 the stain of crime, the Holy Father be- 
 came at once the most powerful as well as 
 the most prominent friend of the Irish 
 people in the whole world. The Popes 
 never condemned constitutional agitation 
 as a political remedy for political wrongs, 
 but when misguided men go outside God's 
 
 law and the moral law in order to find, 
 through secret and illegal sources, remedies 
 for political injustice then it is the duty 
 of n t only Popes, Bishops and priests, to 
 condemn their course, but even the hum- 
 blest Catholic layman should raise hia 
 voice to warn his fellow-countrymen aguust 
 becoming the willing victims of such viciou* 
 men, who seek only self-aggrandizement by 
 betraying their dupes, and earning the wages 
 of sin by turning State's evidence agdiuat 
 the very men they have drawn into iheir 
 meshes. 
 
 The cruel operation of the Coercion Act 
 in Ireland, in the year 1882, was the cause 
 of much turmoil, excitement and crime in 
 that sad country during that year. Ac- 
 cordingly, the Hierarchy appealed to the 
 Holy Father for light, counsel and guid- 
 ance in the hour of their country's trial, 
 and in replying to their appeals Pope Leo 
 XIIL wrote thus : 
 
 " Your letter," he says in reply, ' is a 
 new proof of your respect and affection, as 
 it is an evidence of the gratitude you and 
 they feel toward us for our concern in the 
 welfare of Ireland, and for the counsels 
 given in our letter of August 1st, last. 
 
 " . . . We cannot help congratula- 
 ting you ... on the zeal displayed 
 in calming the existing agitation. . . . 
 We also congratulate these children of the 
 Church, who have listened so obediently 
 to your admonitions, and who, enduring 
 with holy Christian fortitude the sufferings 
 of adversity, knew how to keep their sense 
 of wrong within the bounds imposed by duty 
 and religion. 
 
 " Still, although Irish Catholics continue 
 to give splendid proofs of their zeal for 
 religion and of obedience to the Supreme 
 Pastor, the condition of public affairs re- 
 quires that they should bear in mind the 
 rules of conduct which our affectionate 
 solicitude for them induced us to lay down 
 for their direction. The secret societies, as 
 we have learned with pain during these 
 last months, always persist in putting their 
 hope in the commission of crime, in kindling 
 into fury popular passions, in seeking for 
 the national grievances remedies worse 
 than the grievances themselves, and in
 
 1(58 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 pursuing a path which will lead to ruin in- 
 stead of to prosperity. 
 
 "It is, therefore, imperative that you in- 
 culcate deeply into the minds of ymir beloved 
 people, as we have already said that there 
 is but one rule for what is right and for what 
 is us-fid; that the just cause of their coun- 
 try must be kept separate from the aims, 
 the plots, the deeds of criminal associations ; 
 that it is both right and lawful for all who 
 suffer wroxg to seek redress by all lawful 
 means, but that it is neither right nor lawful 
 to have recourse to crime for redress ; that 
 Divine Providence enables the just to reap 
 at last a joyful harvest from their patient 
 waiting and their virtuous deeds, whereas 
 the evil doers, having run their dark course 
 to no purpose, incur the severe condemnation 
 of both God and man. 
 
 " While we remind you of all these truths, 
 impel ed to do so by our ardent desire to 
 secure some solace, quiet and prosperity for 
 Ireland, we are also filled with confidence 
 that you, acting in concert and bound to- 
 gether by brotherly love, will continue to 
 bestow your best care in preventing your 
 faithful people from having anything to do 
 with men who, carried away by their own 
 passions, think they are doing their country 
 service when thty commit the worst crir.ies, 
 and who, by urging others to like wicked- 
 ness, bring shame and dishonor on the cause 
 of the people." 
 
 Neither in the above extracts nor in 
 those copied from the preceding Letter, do 
 we find a single word of condemnation 
 against the Land League, although this 
 waa openly charged against the Pope in the 
 press of the period. The Holy Father 
 commends a peaceful solution of Ireland's 
 difficulties, and the only objects against 
 which he hurls the anathemas of the 
 Church is crime and secret societies - two 
 fatuitous factors which have worked ruin 
 in Ireland to every cause with which they 
 were allied. Here, again it is self-evident 
 tlvit Pope Leo XIII. had the cause of Ire- 
 tand close at heart when he sent these 
 Letters to the Bishops of Ireland, and 
 every friend of Home Rule will bless him 
 fur his paternal solicitude. 
 
 Commenting on the fatlvrly counsel 
 which the Vicar of Christ imparted to the 
 
 Irish people in order that even their aspira- 
 tions f</r freedom for their native land 
 might be in full accord with the justice of 
 God, Monsignor O'Rielly, from whose bio- 
 graphy we quote, says : 
 
 ''It was worthy of the great heart of the 
 Pontiff, tried as he was then by many sor- 
 rows, and burdened by an intolerable load 
 of care, to utter his sentiments regarding 
 Ireland with such solemn emphasis and 
 such fatherly tenderness, while the struggle 
 in Ireland was growing in intensity, and 
 every effort to coerce only increased ten- 
 fold the power of resistance, and intensified 
 in the same measure the hatred of laws, 
 law-givers, and law courts, wh : ch to the 
 people meant only the administration of in- 
 justice. 
 
 " No doubt the words of Leo XIII., re- 
 peated and commended from every pulpit 
 in Ireland, went far to assuage the public 
 resentment at the passing and enforcement 
 of the 'Crimes Act,' and still further to 
 prevent many from joining the dark so- 
 cieties which always spring from national 
 misery and thrive on national discord. 
 
 " The Land League was suppressed and 
 its members imprisoned by the hundred ; 
 but this repression only left the secret so- 
 cieties a free field to work, and murders and 
 outrages increased apace. The prison- 
 doors were opened by the government, and 
 it became at once apparent that the Land 
 League, instead of being a source of agita- 
 tion outrage, and crime, was the only effec- 
 tive barrier against them. 
 
 " Then arose the National League, which 
 grew and grew until it counted among its 
 members or its fellow- workers the whole 
 body of the clergy, nine- tenths of the Cath- 
 olic laity, and not a few of the most en- 
 lightened and influential among Protest- 
 ant clergymen and laymen. 
 
 " An incident occurred soon after this 
 which chilled for the moment the warm feel- 
 ings of gratituds and veneration felt in Ire- 
 land and among Irishmen everywhere for the 
 Holy Father. We allude to the famous 
 Propaganda circular. But the See of Dub- 
 lin becoming vacant in February, 1885, by 
 the death of Cardinal McCabe, the Sov- 
 ereign Pontiff reserved to himself to con- 
 firm the choice made of Very Rev. Dr.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 1C9 
 
 Walsh, President of St. Patrick's College, 
 Maynooth, to succeed to the deceased Car- 
 dinal. 
 
 " The election of this distinguished man 
 was in itself remarkable, as indicating among 
 the clergy of the metropolis an almost 
 unanimous impulse to join the national 
 movement and thus reverse the policy fol- 
 lowed by the two last Archbishops. The in- 
 trigues, authorized or unauthorized, which 
 thereafter occurred, to have the nomination 
 of Dr. Walsh set aside by Rome, proved in- 
 effectual. The Irish Hierarchy had been 
 summoned to Rome before the death of 
 Cardinal McCabe. They repaired thither 
 in May. The Sovereign Pontiff had, there- 
 fore, ample opportunity to ascertain the 
 wishes of the Irish Episcopate on the sub- 
 ject of this important election, and to be 
 made acquainted with the true significance 
 of the national movement. 
 
 "In June Dr. Walsh's nomination was 
 confirmed. Thenceforward this Prelate 
 was both the organ of his brother- Bishops 
 in all public and national matters and the 
 spokesman of his fellow-countrymen. From 
 that moment, too, there was a unity of 
 thought, purpose, and action between the 
 clergy and the Parliamentary party. 
 
 *' The passing cloud which had in the Pro 
 paganda circular for a moment darkened 
 and chilled the Irish Catholic heart was 
 now forgotten, and Leo XIII., became to 
 Ireland and her sons the Lumen in Coslo of 
 their own St. Malachy. 
 
 "In dealing with the Br tish cabinet the 
 Pope, while considering the interests of the 
 Catholic subjects in Great Britain and in 
 Ireland, as well as throughout the colonies, 
 
 had also to have a regard for the feelings of 
 the Irish race both inside and outside the 
 British dominions. As the settled gloom 
 on the material prospects of the Emerald 
 Isle deepened with every decade that passed, 
 leaving the Irish agriculturist less of re- 
 sources and hope, and Irish labor no re- 
 munerative field or market within the com- 
 pass of the Irish seas, the best and most re- 
 ligious men in the nation found increasing 
 difficulty in restraining the outbursts of 
 mingled despair and righteous wrath arising 
 from wrongs easy of redress, but to which 
 the Government only applied homoeopathic 
 doses of relief, coupled with intolerable 
 coercion. 
 
 " English statesmanship, Orange fanati- 
 cism, and hatred of race cried aloud : Let 
 them starve or emigrate ! What could the 
 religious guides or the wise political leaders 
 of a starving and oppressed people say or do 
 to prevent an armed uprising, which would 
 have justified the accusations and the de- 
 mands of the exterminators ? And what 
 could the fatherly heart and the unpur- 
 chasable justice of the Roman Pontiff do to 
 save the sufferers, to inspire the misgovern- 
 ing with a sense of equity and humanity, 
 to refuse to the oppressor a sanction of any 
 of his schemes for redressing the wrong, but 
 what, in the preceding pages, as we can 
 judge from his own letter, he has done ? 
 
 " He has set the seal of his sanction on 
 the justice and righteousness of Irish claims 
 for self-government ; he has recommended 
 to the nation and its leaders, churchmen 
 and laymen, obedience to the laws, peace- 
 ful and constitutional methods, and he has 
 expressed his hope and uttered his prayer 
 that justice may be done to Ireland. "
 
 170 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXII. 
 
 Farther Manifestations of the Love of Tope Leo XIII., for the Irish People. Address of 
 His Holiness to the Irish Pilgrims iu Rome. The Papal Rescript of 1888 
 Explained. Archbishop Walsh's Views. Addresses of his Grace on the Sympathy 
 of the Holy Father for Ireland. Opinions of Cardinal Pecci, Cardinal iloran, 
 Bishop Eeane and Mousignor O'Rielly. 
 
 We now come down to the eventful year 
 of 1888, during which the personal charac- 
 ter of his Holiness Pope Leo XIII. was 
 made a prominent target for traducement at 
 the hands of both the avowed enemies of 
 the Church as well as by hot-headed poli- 
 ticians who taking their cue from anti- 
 Irish and anti-Catholic authority con- 
 demned the Pontiff at present gloriously 
 reigning, even before they knew the truth 
 or the falsehood of the charges brought 
 against him concerning his sentiments on 
 the Irish question. 
 
 The first important event which took 
 place during the year 1888, in which the 
 Irish people were interested, was the visit 
 of the Irish pilgrjms to the Eternal City. 
 Whilst visiting the shrines of the Apostles 
 the Irish pilgrims had an audience with 
 the Sovereign Pontiff, during which an ad- 
 dress of fealty to the Holy See and also to 
 the Successor of St. Peter was presented, 
 and in reply thereto his Holiness after 
 alluding to other matters said : 
 
 " We accept heartily the assurance you 
 give Us of the great joy with which both 
 you and your fellow-countrymen commem- 
 orate Our Sacerdotal Jubilee. On Our side 
 We desire that you should have no doubt 
 as to Our reciprocating your affection. 
 
 "Yes, indeed, Our miud was turned to 
 Ireland from the very beginning of Our 
 Pontificate with a true fatherly solicitude. 
 For Ireland commended herself to Us on 
 many grounds, above all for the integrity of 
 her faith, upheld by the triumphant cour- 
 age of your ancestors, after the good seed 
 had been sown among them by the labors 
 and virtues of St. Patrick a faith which 
 Ireland has handed down to you as a deposit 
 to be sacredly guarded. 
 
 " Nor is it without good reason that you 
 firmly rely on Our affection. We shall 
 never ceaae to treat the Irish people with 
 
 the love which We justly owe them; and 
 We shall therefore continue to watch over 
 their peace and prosperity in a way to con- 
 vince everybody that We have always re- 
 sponded to the trust you have reposed in 
 Us. 
 
 " Of this kindly disposition towards you, 
 you have at this moment a striking evidence 
 in the fact that We have, at the present 
 juncture of your affairs, sent to Ireland on 
 a specific Mission, Our Venerable Brother, 
 the Archbishop of Damietta,. in order to 
 make it possible for Ourselves to gather 
 from his report, information about the con- 
 dition of things there, and what is best 
 suited to you. 
 
 "But, inasmuch as your difficulties are 
 most urgent you must in your conduct, 
 adopt the rule laid down in the Letters ad- 
 dressed by Us some years ago to the Arch- 
 bishop of Dublin. This is what your reli- 
 gion requires of you, that religion in which 
 the Irish nation chiefly glories ; it is also 
 what is demanded by the common good of 
 the people, since it never can serve the com- 
 mon good to violate justice the foundation 
 of order and all prosperity." 
 
 The most hypocritical heretic can find 
 nothing in this address to turn to the Holy 
 Father's disadvantage, or in any way to 
 lessen his right to the gratitude of all the 
 Irish people, as one of their best friends 
 and their most reliable counsellors 
 
 The feast of St. Agatha, (Feb. 5th, 1888,) 
 was celebrated with great pomp, ceremony 
 and joy in the Eternal City, and after the 
 religious exercises of the day had been 
 brought to a close, a banquet was given at 
 the Irish College, at which the toast of the 
 Holy Father Pope Leo XIII., was given 
 and responded to by his Eminence Cardi- 
 nal Schiaflino, who thus portrayed the feel- 
 ings of love which welled up in the Holy 
 Father's heart for the Irish people and
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 171 
 
 the lovely land for whose liberty they were 
 struggling. His Eminence made this al- 
 lusion to the Irish question, which is another 
 proof in contradiction to the angry aspersions 
 cast upon the Holy Father by both open and 
 secret enemies : 
 
 " Although every Catholic rejoices when 
 he hears the Holy Father named, the 
 special ties which bind the Irish Catholics 
 to the Pope are more holy and indissoluble, 
 because united by the sacred title of martyr- 
 dom. For three hundred years, gentlemen, 
 you have struggled to maintain your faith, 
 to uphold the prerogatives of St. Peter and 
 the right of the Holy Roman See. While 
 defending that Frimacy and those inalien- 
 able rights you have spared no sacrifice, and 
 have freely jjiven up the dearest things of 
 the earth. The sad history of your coun- 
 try has won for you the love of the Pope. 
 The green flag of Ireland has always been 
 pure and stainless, and as trut flag has 
 waved in your own glorious land, you need 
 not fear to unfurl it in the Vatican, where 
 you have just offered to Leo XIII. the 
 homage of your love and faith. You are 
 passing through difficult times, and if you 
 only keep away from dangerous enemies, if 
 you will give no ear to societies condemned by 
 the Pope, your triumph cannot be long de- 
 layed." 
 
 Here again we find in the words of 
 Cardinal Schiaffino, a reverberation of the 
 language of the Holy Father addressed to 
 the Irish people: "If you will give no 
 ear t > societies condemned by the Pope, 
 your triumph cannot be long delayed." 
 The Holy Father has no condemnation to 
 hurl at the legitimate struggles of the Irish 
 people for the attainment of their liberties, 
 his condemnation including only acts of 
 violation of God's law and the moral order 
 which acts were caused by the secret 
 societies which were so justly condemned 
 by not only the Pontiff and the Cardinals, 
 but also by every Bishop in Ireland as well 
 as by Charles Stewart Parnell and the 
 Catholic members of the Irish movement. 
 
 In April, 1888, a Rescript was issued 
 in Rome which caused a great sensation 
 throughout the whole world. The excite- 
 ment at the time was both intense and 
 vindictive beyond consistency even among 
 Catholics themselves. The Holy Father 
 was assailed by the Press of Europe as the 
 foe of freedom, and even in Ireland he was 
 ranked among the staunchest allies of Eng- 
 
 land in her efforts to keep Ireland under 
 the galling yoke of slavery. 
 
 But now that the clouds which obscured 
 the vision of thousands of well-meaning 
 Irish Catholics have become dissipated, let 
 us look at this doubly-denounced Rescript 
 dispassionately, and we shall soon learn how 
 illogical and indiscreet were those Catholics 
 who considered Pope Leo XIII. Ireland's 
 worst enemy because a Roman Congrega- 
 tion had certain questions in morals pro- 
 posed to them and the Cardinals gave their 
 decisions based upon the questions as they 
 were put before them. 
 
 It is now nearly a year since this docu- 
 ment was issued, and there is not on record 
 a single case where it has operated to the 
 injury of the Irish National cause. Why is 
 this ? Simply because the advice of the 
 Holy Father was hearkened to by the Hier- 
 archy, the priests and the people of Ireland, 
 and the constitutional agitation of the Irish 
 question has not since been sullied by the 
 commission of any act at variance with the 
 rules for its regulation as laid down by Pope 
 Leo XIII. 
 
 On May 24th, 1888, when the excitement 
 regarding the Rescript was yet at white 
 heat, Archbishop Walsh of Dublin was on 
 the eve of leaving Rome for Ireland, when 
 he was favored with a long interview by 
 the Holy Father, and he afterwards stated 
 publicly that so far as the Irish question 
 was concerned it was of a "most satis- 
 factory character." 
 
 The Rome correspondent of the Boston 
 Pilot, cabled about the same time to the 
 effect that " the Irish cause" had "nothing 
 to fear from Leo XIII.," and also that 
 " papal interference in Irish politics is im- 
 possible. " 
 
 Immediately after the departure of Arch- 
 bishop Walsh from Rome, the correspon- 
 dent of the Liverpool Catholic Times in 
 that city wrote an account of the interview 
 between the Pope and the Prelate, in which 
 he thus described the nature of the docu- 
 ment which was the innocent cause of such 
 excitement for the time being : 
 
 "The Archbishop had an audience with 
 his Holiness a few days before he left, 
 which lasted more than an hour, and the 
 result of it leaves his Grace full of hope.
 
 172 
 
 THE POPE AND IRKI.AND. 
 
 He takes with him to the Irish people a 
 message of encouragement from the Holy 
 Father in reference to the National move- 
 ment which will dispel a good deal of mis 
 understanding, and will calm the fears of 
 many. The message, I am sure, will leave 
 no doubt on the minds of the people about 
 the sympathy of the Holy Father with both 
 the present object of the National move- 
 ment and with the movement itself. No 
 persons are more dissatisfied with the re- 
 cent Decree than those who tried eve'y 
 means, fair and foul, to obtain it and no 
 persons have more reason. What they 
 worked for was the condemnation of the 
 movement itself, or, at least, of the Na- 
 tional League. Their misrepresentations 
 and calumnies have been nailed, and they 
 themselves have been found out. It is 
 hardly possible to give you an adequate 
 idea of all that has been said and done to 
 deceive the authorities in Rome and that 
 by those from whom cught to be expected 
 more respect for the Holy See and more 
 regard for the Decalogue which they so 
 zealously preach to others. That Ireland 
 has not been placed under an interdict as 
 the effect of their falsehoods, ought to be a 
 clear indication to those malicious busy- 
 bodies that the authorities here suspected 
 them even without any refutation of their 
 tales. Certainly, if all they said were be- 
 lieved, nothing less could be done. 
 
 But the Archbishop of Dublin has nailed 
 every calumny, and I believe that the very 
 near future will give the well known clique 
 cause to regret their action much more than 
 their present disappointment causes them to 
 regret it now. It may be said th^t they 
 believed that they were doing a duty. That 
 may be. But, however, a sense of duty 
 may urge them to carry their tales to the 
 authorities, it is hard to see how it could 
 make them go about the shops and private 
 houses here, trying to poison the minds of 
 every one." 
 
 These facts so succinctly set forth by the 
 correspondent in question alo serve to 
 show how inconsiderate and uncalled-for 
 was all the malicious misrepresentation 
 circulated at that time, and fanned into 
 Same by designing men for the sole pur- 
 pose of making a breach in the bond of 
 unity which has always bound Ireland to 
 Rome, and which has been an eye-sore to 
 all the enemies of the Church throughout 
 the past fourteen centuries. 
 
 When Archbishop Walsh arrived in 
 Dublin he was accorded a reception by the 
 Dean and Chapter of his Archdiocese, at 
 which an address of welcome was presented 
 
 to him, and as the Archbishop's response 
 thereto will serve still further to show 
 that the Rescript which caused so much 
 rancor was never intended to interfere with 
 the legitimate actions of the Irish people 
 in their agitation for Home Rule, we print 
 the following extracts therefrom : 
 
 I beg to thank you, Monsignor, and you, 
 my lord, and all the members of the ven- 
 erable Chapter of Dublin, for the warm- 
 hearted welcome with which you have 
 greeted me on my return from Rome. It is, 
 I believe, without precedent in the annals 
 of this ancient See at all events since the 
 close of the era of persecution that its 
 Archbishop should have be:n absent from 
 it so long as I have been. But I think lam 
 safe in saying that at no time in all those 
 centuries could an Archbishop of Dublin 
 have had the satisfaction of feeling that he 
 was engaged in a work more directly tend- 
 ing to the advancement of the best interests 
 of the diocese and of its people than that iu 
 which it waa n>y privilege to be ergaged, in 
 compliance with the wishes of the Sovereign 
 Pontiff himself, during the months of my re- 
 cent absence in Rome. 
 
 "That absence, 1 have learned, was at 
 times, and especially at one most critical 
 moment, a source of anxiety to you, and to 
 the clergy and people of the diocese at large. 
 If I use strong language in referring to 
 those things that gave rise to your anxiety, 
 I only borrow the words of your address. 
 No other ground for it existed than that 
 ' unbroken series" of 'perversions' and, in- 
 deed, of 'absolute falsehoods," which were 
 poured foith from day to day by men whose 
 Pharisaical zeal for the observance of one of 
 the commandments seems absolutely to have 
 blinded them to the existence of another 
 that stands by its side. 
 
 ' ' It was their policy, it would seem, to 
 set in circulation such rumors as they 
 deemed mott likely to serve their purpose 
 in shaking that firm foundation of Irish 
 Catholicity, the confidence of our people in 
 the Holy See. Viewing it merely as a 
 policy, we cannot deny that it was in some 
 sense a skillfully devised one. But it 
 labored under one serious drawback. The 
 course that it could run could, at the best, 
 be but a short one. They could hardly hope 
 that its period of usefulness to them could 
 be measured by months, or indeed by many 
 weeks. How short-lived it would be must 
 have been as well known to its authors as it 
 was to me, or to the great Pontiff whose 
 venerable name and whose august dignity 
 they treated with such painful levity in 
 presuming day after day to make him fig- 
 ure in their foolish tales. From the very 
 nature of the case, the mere fact of my re-
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 173 
 
 turn to my post of duty would manifestly 
 be sufficient to overturn the whole fabric of 
 their misrepresentations. Knowing all this, 
 they must have been sadly astray in their 
 estimate of the firmness and constancy of 
 the attachment of our people to the See of 
 Peter when they so foolishly thought that 
 any harm could come to it from so frail an 
 engine of attack. 
 
 * * * * * 
 
 "To these, and to the other matters of 
 interest referred to in the latter portion of 
 your address, I shall doubtless again have 
 occasion to refer. But I do not wish t > 
 leave unused the opportunity which you 
 have to-day afforded me, of saying at all 
 events this - that the Holy Father was no 
 less anxious to learn the truth about Ireland 
 that T was to make the freest use of the oc- 
 c ision which he so graciously extended to 
 me, of putting before him in the fullest de- 
 tail the true character of the claims and as- 
 pirations of our people. Whether as regards 
 the movement for national autonomy, or 
 as regards the national struggle for the re- 
 dress of all that cruel injustice which, not- 
 withstanding the adoption of so many 
 measures of reform, still oppresses the agri- 
 cultural tenants of Ireland; all those claims 
 and aspirations are now most fully in his 
 possession. He has grasped them in all their 
 bearings and, whilst of course we must re- 
 member that in matters purely of politics it 
 is not for him to interfere, it is well for us 
 to know, and it is my privilege to be au- 
 thorized to make it known to the people of 
 Ireland, that in every legitimate effort for 
 the attainment of that for which tht-y strive, 
 our people may count upon the fullest sym- 
 pathy. 
 
 " Wherever else the foolish fiction may 
 have had its way, that the legislation of re- 
 cent years has done justice to the people of 
 Ireland, or to the Irish tenant, that fiction 
 finds no footing at *ll events in the Vatican. 
 Unfortunately indeed for Ireland and her 
 people, and unfortunately, most of all, for 
 that cruelly-oppressed section of her people 
 to which I have just now referred, the rev- 
 olutionary changes of modern times have 
 left but little of political influence in the 
 hands of the Sovereign Pontiff. That influ- 
 ence, if it existed, would to-day be freely 
 and unreservedly placed at our disposal. 
 
 * Of some incidents of our recent history, 
 as they occurred during my absence from 
 Ireland, I do not wish to speak in detail. 
 Some words of mine have already been pub- 
 lished in which I spoke of the pain they 
 had brought to the heart of the Holy Father. 
 To those who know, as I have reason to 
 know, the warmth of his paternal feeling for 
 his Irish children, it will not come as a 
 surprise to hear that during the months of 
 anxiety through which we have recently 
 
 passed, the thought which brought to him 
 perhaps the heaviest load of sorrow was that 
 of the injustice which seemed to be done to 
 him by some, whose words appeared to in- 
 dicate a want of confidence in the sincerity 
 and earnestness of his desire for the welfare 
 of our people. Of all this I had, before 
 leaving Rome, an assurance from his own 
 lips. I hold in my hands to-day an assur- 
 ance of it in a more enduring form, in a 
 letter to the Irish Bishops. 
 
 " In this most important document, whilst 
 enforcing with all the weight of his supreme 
 pastoral authority the unlawfulness, as well 
 as the short-sighted policy of allowing the 
 banner that is uplifted in so good a cause tb 
 be darkened by even the faintest shadow of 
 moral guilt, his Holiness assures the Bishops 
 of Ireland, and through them the Irish peo- 
 ple, that there is not one, even of ourselves, 
 who feels more intensely than he does tha 
 miseries under which our country still suf- 
 fers. Not satisfied even with this, he as- 
 sures us in words of solemn emphasis of the 
 earnestness of his desire that our distracted 
 country may speedily receive the blessing of 
 a lasting peace, a peace based upon that 
 which alone can be regarded as a solid or 
 secure foundation the attainment of that 
 prosperity which Ireland, by the heroic 
 steadfastness of her faith through centuries 
 of persecution, has so nobly earned." 
 
 It is hardly necessary to point out to the 
 reader the sterling sentiments which the 
 Holy Father advances for Ireland's tem- 
 poral and spiritual prosperity in the fore- 
 going extracts from the addresses and cor- 
 respondence of Pope Leo XIII., but, as a 
 fitting climax to the triumphant vindication 
 of this great Pontiff, we append the Letter 
 which the Holy Father addressed to the 
 Bishops of Ireland at the close of his Jubi- 
 lee year, and which entirely exonerates 
 the Vicar of Christ at once and forever 
 from the foul aspersions of antagonism to 
 Ireland's best interests which his enemies 
 have so unjustly and iniquitously hurled 
 at the Head of the Church of God on earth. 
 
 Following is the text of a document 
 which removes every stigma with which 
 slander may have smirched the saintly char- 
 acter of Pope Leo XIII. 
 
 " Venerable Brother : Health and Apos- 
 tolic Benediction. 
 
 " Whilst we embrace with a father's love 
 every member of the fold of Christ, which 
 He has entrusted to Our keeping, Our most 
 special care, and the first place in Our 
 thoughts, are reserved for those whom We 
 know to be sufferers from misfortuna For
 
 174 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 We are moved by that instinct which na- 
 ture has implanted in the heart of every 
 parent to love and cherish beyond all the 
 rest, those of their children who have been 
 stricken by any calamity. For this reason, 
 We have always held in a special feeling of 
 affection, the Catholics of Ireland, long and 
 sorely tried by so many afflictions. And 
 We have ever cherished them with a love 
 all the more intense, for their marvellous 
 fortitude under those sufferings and for 
 their hereditary attachment to their religion, 
 which no pressure of misfortune has ever 
 been able to destroy or weaken. 
 
 " As to the counsels that We have given 
 tly/m from time to time, and in Our recent 
 decree, We were moved in these things 
 not only by the consideration of what is 
 conformable to truth and justice, but also 
 by the desire of advancing your interests. 
 For such is Our affection for you that it 
 does not suffer Us to allow the cause in 
 which Ireland is struggling to be weakened 
 by the introduction of anything that could 
 j ustly be brought in reproach against it. 
 
 " And that Our affection towards the 
 people of Ireland, may now be specially 
 manifested, we send to you a number of 
 gifts. Among them there are vestments, 
 sacred vessels and ornaments of various 
 kinds for the furnishing of the altar. These, 
 for the greater splendor of the house of 
 God and of His worship, We present to the 
 Cathedral churches of Ireland. There are 
 also other gifts of less value. These We 
 have specially blessed. They will serve to 
 promote the piety of the persons to whom 
 We wish them to be given, in accordance 
 with the directions that will be sent to you. 
 
 "We are confident that even from this 
 it will be most clearly seen that Our pater- 
 nal love for the ptople of Ireland has under- 
 gone no change. And upon this, Our love 
 for them, they will have ever stronger and 
 stronger claims if they continue to receive 
 Our teaching with docility, trusting in Us, 
 and keeping on their guard against the de- 
 ceits of those who do not shrink from put- 
 ting a false construction upon Our counsels 
 in the hope of uprooting, if it were possible, 
 that renowned fidelity to the Catholic 
 Church, which holds so high a place amongst 
 the virtues of the people of Ireland, and 
 which has come to them from their fore- 
 fathers as their chief and richest inheritance. 
 
 " With a fervent prayer that Our Apos- 
 tolic Benediction may bring with it the 
 richest gifts and graces of Heaven, We most 
 lovingly bestow it upon you, venerable 
 brother, upon the clergy and faithful of 
 your charge, and upon all Ireland. 
 
 " Given at Rome, at St. Peter's, on the 
 21st day of December, in the year of Our 
 Lord, 1888, the eleventh year of Our Ponti- 
 ficate. 
 
 "LEO XIII., Pope." 
 
 CARDINAL PECCIS SENTIMENTS. 
 
 It will be gratifying to every Catholic 
 reader to know that the deep interest felt 
 by the Holy Father in the welfare of Ire- 
 land, both religiously and politically, is 
 ardently shared in by the brother of His 
 Holiness, His Eminence Cardinal Joseph 
 Pecci, whose Titular Church is that of St. 
 Agatha in Rome, whose feast is kept with 
 imposing solemnity every ye r by the 
 faculty and students of the Irish College in 
 the Eternal City. 
 
 His Eminence was duly installed in his 
 titular Church on December 27th, 1879, 
 and on that occasion Mgr. Kirby, President 
 of the Irish College, delivered an address, 
 in which, after congratulating his Eminence 
 on the dignity that had been conferred on 
 him, he said : 
 
 "Our church, Most Rev. Eminence, 
 which was dedicated to St. Agatha, Virgin 
 and Martyr, erected in time of Constan- 
 tino, and constituted a Cardinals title by 
 Honorius III., lays aside to-day her mourn- 
 ing garb of widowhood to receive ; with joy- 
 ful exultation, your Eminence as her new 
 titular. The great heart of Daniel O'Con- 
 nell, which reposes near your throne, must 
 rejoice when it feels that the brother of 
 our glorious Pontiff, Leo XIII., is titular 
 of the National Church of the Irish in Rome, 
 the Church of that country for whose faith 
 and for whose emancipation O'Connell, for 
 half a century, and armed only with the 
 weapons of reason, truth and legality, fought 
 and conquered. Your Eminence is not 
 merely a golden support (sardine), which 
 will aid and dignify the Church, but also a 
 model of Christian and ecclesiastical virtues 
 for our students to copy, and a brilliant 
 torch of profound science to kindle in the 
 breast of our young Levites a vivid desire to 
 gain by prayer and study the treasures of 
 learning, and to imitate, even at a long dis- 
 tance, their sainted ancestors and fellow- 
 countrymen, such as St. Fregidianus, Arch- 
 bishop of Lucca ; St. Cataldus, Archbishop 
 of Tarento ; St. Donatus, Bishop of Fiesoli ; 
 St. Columbanus, founder of Bobbio Monas- 
 tery, who was styled by Bellarmine the 
 luminary of his century ; and many other 
 illustrious Irishm n who left their native 
 shores, and poured themselves, as St. Ber- , 
 nard says, like an inundation over all the 
 countries of Europe, watering them with 
 the sweat of apostolic toil, and adorning 
 them with examples of doctrine and piety. 
 The crown is put to our rejoicing when we 
 reflect that in your Eminence we possess a 
 lively image of Leo XIII., who was given
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 175 
 
 as a light in the heaven of the Church Mili- 
 tant, to dispel the dark errors of the lurid 
 and lying philosophy which in those days 
 has invaded the minds of so many foolish 
 and corrupt men, perverting or concealing 
 the most essential truths of natural as well 
 as of revealed religion. In your Eminence 
 we recognize a near resemblance of the lofty 
 wisdom and integrity of heart of this great 
 Pontiff, whom we thank for his exceeding 
 kindness in giving us his brother to be Titu- 
 lar of this church and our own Cardinal- 
 Deacon, entitled to our love and veneration. 
 We invoke the invincible martyr to whom 
 this temple is sacred, and the Apostle of 
 Ireland, protector of our college, to grant 
 to you length of days and felicity of every 
 kind, spiritual and temporal. The same 
 blessing we implore for the Pontiff, your 
 brother. Tell to him that we Irish, de- 
 voted like our fathers even to the shedding 
 of our blood for the cause of the Holy See, 
 desire to behold his triumph, as once in 
 times of old these walls witnessed the 
 triumph of Gregory the Great, when, after 
 the profanations of the Arians, he conse- 
 crated this Church of St. Agatha, amid the 
 prodigies of heaven and the applause of the 
 Romans. " 
 
 The reply made by Cardinal Pecci to this 
 speech of Mgr. Kirby was an elaborate and 
 magnificent oration, delivered in the Italian 
 language, with the utmost fluency and 
 grace. The Pope, it is well known, was at- 
 tracted in an especial manner, when a young 
 student to the history of Ireland, and prob- 
 ably owed to his elder brother, Giuseppe, 
 his interest in the trials of the Irish nation. 
 For this reason, the language used by Car- 
 dinal Pecci in the Church of the Irish Col- 
 lege, may be taken to represent the senti- 
 ments of the Holy Father, and that language 
 was truly remarkable. After alluding to 
 the cruel and excruciating tortures so nobly 
 and triumpnantly endured by St. Agatha, 
 in defence of the faith of Christ, his Emi- 
 nence observed that St. Patrick, the Apostle 
 of Ireland, knew how to infuse into the 
 hearts of his Irish children the spirit and 
 fortitude of the virgin saint He traced 
 with a master hand the extraordinary cour- 
 age and endurance displayed by the Irish in 
 defence of the Catholic Church during long 
 centuries of persecution, entering into ela- 
 borate and minute details of confiscations, 
 torments and deaths under various shapes 
 during the reigns of Henry VII f., Eliza- 
 beth, James, Anne and the Georges. To 
 
 the sanguinary persecution succeeded an- 
 other, which the Cardinal styled a continu- 
 ous and slow assassination, tending to de- 
 populate the country by the fabrication of 
 the most inhuman and unjust laws the 
 world had ever seen. He quoted the words 
 of Edmund Burke, characterizing in fit 
 terms this singularly subtle code of legisla- 
 tion, formed for the purpose of driving the 
 Catholic nation into exile or compelling 
 them to deny their faith and embrace the 
 Arglican heresy. He described in glowing 
 expressions of commendation the obstinate 
 and successful resistance of the Irish to these 
 anti-Catholic enactments, and their stead-' 
 fast attachment to the creed of their fathers 
 and to the Holy See, in spite of all allure- 
 ments and temptations to apostasy. The 
 Irish, he said, knew how to suffer and to 
 die for their religion ; but they, thanks to 
 the spirit inherited from St. Patrick, were 
 incapable of betraying their conscience or be- 
 coming apos'ates. The Cardinal did not 
 omit the services of O'Connell, but went 
 over every stage of his career, alluding 
 most touchingly to his final attempt to lay 
 in person before the Human Pontiff the 
 trophies of his exertions, and to attest with 
 his dying breath his unsullied loyalty to the 
 Chair of Peter. But, said his Eminence, 
 God did not think fit to gratify his last de- 
 sire. He died at Genoa, on his way to the 
 tomb of the Prince of the Apostles, and be- 
 queathed his heart to Home. The throb- 
 bings of that heart vibrate in every Catholic 
 breast. Finally, Cardinal Pecci concluded 
 an oration, which was heard with rapt at- 
 tention, by a well-deserved compliment to 
 the zeal and piety of the students of the 
 Irish College. 
 
 CARDINAL MORAY'S SENTIMENTS. 
 
 In the beginning of the present year 
 Cardinal Moran returned to his affectionate 
 flock in Sydney from his visit to the Holy 
 Father. His Eminence was received with 
 a most unanimous enthusiastic welcome 
 and addresses were presented to him by 
 both the Priests and the laity. In the 
 course of his reply to the sterling sentiments 
 of veneration for the Vicar of Christ which 
 was voiced by the Catholics of his See, Car-
 
 176 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 dinal Moran attested to the love which he 
 well and intimately knew possessed the 
 heart of the Sovereign Pontiff for the Irish 
 people in general and the cause of Home 
 Rule in particular : 
 
 " Whilst I was in Rome," said Cardinal 
 Moran, " I received from the Pontiff's 
 hands the "Encyclical on Christian 
 Liberty," which I commend to every one 
 who has at heart that important subject, 
 so vital to society at the present day. It 
 lays down the rules and principles which 
 alone can rescue social order from shipwreck, 
 whilst, at the same time, it does not conceal 
 the great truth, so often ignored by states- 
 men in modern times, that it will not suffice 
 to engrave the sacred name of Liberty on our 
 chains, to give us the heaven-born blessing of 
 true liberty. It is no breach of confidence to 
 say that the Holy Father was in a particular 
 manner pained by the misrepresentations 
 which, for awhile, caused such anguish to 
 millions of Irish hearts at home and abroad, 
 as if his views were in opposition to his Irish 
 children in the struggle for national life in 
 which they are now engaged. Nothing could 
 be more unfounded than such a supposition. 
 I do not know that in the long line of Sov- 
 ereign Pontiffs there has been even one to 
 love Ireland with greater affection than does 
 the present illustrious Pope. He has sym- 
 pathized with her in her sorrows and re- 
 joiced with her in her triumphs, and at the 
 present moment his best wishes are with 
 her devoted son?, who, through good repute 
 and through evil repute, are endeavoring to 
 assert her rights and redress her wrongs. 
 And when the cause of truth and justice 
 shall have triumphed, and the Empire shall 
 decree to Ireland the laurel wreath of na- 
 tional freedom, none shall more lovingly 
 rejoice with her in victory than Leo XIII." 
 
 BISHOP JOHN J. KEANE S TESTIMONY. 
 
 In the course of his instructive and in- 
 teresting lecture on " The Providential 
 Mission of Leo XIII.," Rt. Rev. John J. 
 Keane, then Bishop of Richmond, but now 
 Rector of the Catholic University, thus 
 delineates the fidelity with which the Holy 
 Father clung to the cause of Ireland's na- 
 tional aspirations, even when every species 
 of English diplomacy was brought into sway 
 in order to induce him to cast the weight of 
 his powerful and extensive influence on the 
 side of the English Government : 
 
 " While," says Bishop Keane, " the Holy 
 Father was thus busy foiling the fierce as- 
 sault of mail-clad Germany, he had to with 
 
 stand another attack of Ceesarism from an- 
 other quarter. This time, however, it 
 came in a very different guise. It was not 
 Caesar trying to coerce the Church or to 
 crush her ; it was Caesar cunningly seeking 
 to cajole the Church and to use her as a 
 cat's-paw for his own selfish ends. This 
 tells plainly enough whence the attempt 
 emanated. With stealthy overtures of 
 friendliness on the one hand, and insinu- 
 ated threats of hostility upon the other, 
 England sought to win the Pope to the un- 
 worthy task of restraining poor Ireland's as- 
 pirations after just government and rightful 
 freedom, of holding her submissive to the 
 chains of centuries, from which the spirit of 
 our era is dehvetitig her. But here, too, Leo 
 XIII. was found impregnable. Calmly but 
 firjnly, heeding neither promises nor threats, 
 he threw his sympathy and his influence on 
 the side of justice and humanity. Poor, 
 down- trodden, long-suffering Ireland felt 
 that she had indeed in him a Father and a 
 friend, when, in spite of the bitterest op- 
 position and the most wily influences, he 
 appointed to the See of Dublin the patriot 
 Priest who was the choice of the Irish hier- 
 archy and the darling of the Irish people. 
 Few men have a more difficult position 
 than that held by Archbishop Walsh. Com- 
 pelled by his providential situation to be 
 not only the spiritual guide but also the 
 temporal adviser of a down-trodden, gen- 
 erous-hearted, and impulsive people, who, 
 asking only the barest justice, are exasper- 
 ated by taunts and goaded by coercion ; 
 forced, on the one hand, to assert his peo- 
 ple's right, and, on the other, to restrain 
 their honest indignation and hold them in 
 the wise and safe paths of peace ; constant- 
 ly maligned by his country's enemies, and 
 often misunderstood and misrepresented by 
 those who ought to be her friends ; he must 
 indeed have many a sad and weary hour. 
 But his chitf comfort, next to his trust in 
 the Qod of truth and justice, is the loving 
 sympathy of Leo XIII." 
 
 MONSIGNOR O'KIELLY'S TESTIMONY. 
 The name of Monsignor O'Rielly is well- 
 known to the majority of our readers 
 through the numerous letters wl ich he has
 
 THB POPB AND IBBLAND. 
 
 177 
 
 written for the American press upon Irish 
 affairs. In one of these contributions pub- 
 lished in February, of this year, this distin- 
 guished Irish ecclesiastic passes this well- 
 deserved eulogy upon Pope Leo XI IT., for 
 the fortitude and friendship which he mani- 
 fested in Ireland's favor, even when every 
 avenue to the Vatican was crowded with the 
 representatives of England and the paid 
 emiasaries of English power in Ireland. 
 
 Alluding to the Letter which the Holy 
 Father sent to the Irish Bishops on Decem- 
 ber 28th, 1888, Monsignor O'Bielly says : 
 
 " It is, then, with unspeakable satisfaction, 
 after all the efforts made and the intrigues 
 set on foot to obtain from Leo XIII. a con- 
 demnation of the Irish national cause, that 
 we hail his Letter to the Irish Bishops. 
 No more explicit or formal indorsement of 
 the cause pursued by the immense majority 
 of the Irish people, their clergy, and their 
 representatives in Parliament could be 
 given by the supreme authority in the 
 Church than is contained in this most op- 
 portune document. " Venerable brothers," 
 the letter begins, " although embra -ing in 
 one fatherly love all individuals composing 
 the flock confided to our care, we reserve 
 our most special solicitude and the first 
 place in our thoughts for those who are tried 
 by affliction. We are impelled by an in- 
 stinct which nature has given to the heart of 
 every father to love and cherish above all 
 others such of their children as misfortune 
 has stricken. For this reason we have al- 
 ways entertained a sentiment of particular 
 affection for the Catholics of Ireland, so long 
 and so cruelly tried by many afflictions. 
 We have cherished towards them a most in- 
 tense love because of their marvellous for- 
 titude in bearing with their sufferings, and 
 of their attachment to their religion, which 
 no ill fortune has ever been able to destroy 
 or weaken." This, surely, is an outspoken 
 profession of generous love worthy of the 
 heart of the Pontiff, and worthy of the 
 much-tried nation for whom he cherishes 
 such deserved and honorable predilection. 
 But in no manner can the love of a father 
 for his dearest ones be shown more con- 
 vincingly than by counselling them in dan- 
 ger and warding off from the cause with 
 which their honor and their happiness are 
 identified any temptation, any peril, any 
 element of a nature to threaten seriously 
 the one or the other It is a knowledge of 
 this rule of fatherly love and care which 
 will enable us to judge aright the next para- 
 graph. " In what relates," he says, " to 
 the advice which We have occasionally given 
 you, anH Our recent decree, they have been 
 inspired not alone by considerations based 
 
 on truth and justice, but by a desire to ad- 
 vance your cause. For Our affection for 
 you is such that it will not permit the cause 
 for which Ireland is struggling to be weak- 
 ened by mixing it with anything that may 
 bring on it just reproach." I do not believe 
 that a Pope placed in the delicate and diffi- 
 cult position in which Leo XIII. finds him- 
 self with respect to the great powers of Chris- 
 tendom could express himself more undis- 
 guised^ in favor of the cause of a nation 
 heroically struggling for the attainment of 
 her just rights. Even where the Pontiff's 
 counsel or decree might seem at first sight, 
 to wound the national sentiment, or to be 
 adverse to the policy pursued by the people 
 and their guides, Leo. XIII. affirms that 
 what he advised and what he did were in- 
 tended solely to advance the cause of Ire- 
 land. That sacred cause, he adds, was so 
 just in his eyes, so dear to his heart, that 
 he could not bear to see its success marred, 
 its justice or its honor tainted by any pro- 
 ceeding that could deserve condemnation in 
 the public opinion of Christendom, which he 
 is so anxious to conciliate in favor of our 
 struggling people. Statesmen, public men 
 of 1 ng experience and ripe wisdom, will 
 say that no proof of love in a parent, in a 
 ruler, is greater than when he has the courage 
 to advise those who are dear to him to pre- 
 fer the eternal principles of honor and jus- 
 tice to the results of a questionable and 
 short-lived expediency. I have reason to 
 know that, had the crops failed in Ireland 
 last summer, as it was very much feared at 
 one time they would, the affection of Leo 
 XIII., for the suffering people of Ireland 
 would have been further demonstrated by 
 generous deeds. As it is he will not allow 
 his jubilee year to close without sending to 
 every diocese in the Green Isle, for distri- 
 bution, gifts which will remain to speak of 
 his fatherly love during many a coming year. 
 "In order," he continues, "that Our affec- 
 tion for the people of Ireland should be es- 
 pecially shown at the present time We send 
 you a goodly number of presents, among 
 which you will find vestments, sacred ves- 
 sels and ornaments of various kinds for the 
 service of the altar. We offer them to the 
 cathedral churches of Ireland to enhance 
 the splendor of God's house and of His wor- 
 ship. There are also gifts of less value. 
 These We have blessed in a special manner. 
 They will serve to stimulate the piety of 
 the persons We desire them to be given to, 
 in conformity with the special instructions 
 which shall be sent to you. We trust that 
 it will be clearly seen that Our fatherly love 
 for the Irish has undergone no change. 
 On this love they shall have still greater 
 and greater claims if they continue to re- 
 ceive Our teaching with docility, to have 
 confidence in Us, and to be on their guard
 
 178 
 
 THB POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 against the wily dealings of men who do not 
 fear to give a false meaning to Our words of 
 advice, in the hope of plucking up by the 
 roots that far- famed fidelity to the Church 
 which holds a foremost place among the 
 virtues of the Irish people, a fidelity handed 
 down from their ancestors as their richest 
 inheritance. Praying fervently that Our 
 Apostolic Benediction may bring you the 
 richest gifts and graces from on high, We 
 lovingly bestow it on you, venerable 
 brothers, on your clergy, on the faithful of 
 your diocese, and on all Ireland. Given at 
 Rome from St. Peter's, the 21st day of 
 December, in the year of our Lord, 1888, 
 the eleventh of our Pontificate. Leo XIII., 
 Pope " It is with feelings of an indescriba- 
 ble joy that I write you this letter. If re- 
 ligion is to count in the present struggle in 
 Ireland, as it has ever counted in the past, 
 as one of the mighty forces which sustained 
 
 the nation at every new crisis in its exist- 
 ence, it is now more than ever important 
 that this force bu not weakened that it be, 
 on the contrary, like the core in the Trans- 
 atlantic cables, the life centre through which 
 the Irish people shall feel every pulsation 
 of their undivided and increased national 
 energies." 
 
 With this extract we close this chap- 
 ter, in the full belief that no impartial 
 man of any nationality who has read 
 the preceding pages, can retain for a mo- 
 ment the false impression that Pope Leo 
 XIII. ever harbored for an instant a single 
 sentiment adverse to the legitimate struggle 
 of the Irish people for their political eman- 
 cipation from the slavery which England has 
 imposed upon them. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIII. 
 
 Refutation of Miscellaneous Historical Errors which are the Cause f Unjust Censure 
 upon the Roman Pontiffs. 
 
 Having thus traced the conduct of the 
 Popes towards Ireland down through many 
 centuries, and proved by the force of im- 
 partial and incontestible evidence that there 
 was not a single successor in the See of St. 
 Peter who can be named as an enemy of 
 Ireland, let us conclude this tabor of love 
 by exposing the remaining fallacies in the 
 work before us, and thus bring to an end a 
 review and a refutation of historical errors 
 which, it is earnestly to be hoped, will not 
 fail to convince all who peruse these pages 
 that the Pontilfs of Rome were by no means 
 possessed of the prejudice against Ireland 
 which their enemies assert. 
 
 The first question which we propose to 
 answer is this : 
 
 DID POPE JOHN XXII., EXCOMMUNICATE ED- 
 WARD BRUCE AND HIS ADHERENTS? 
 
 In seeking for slanders by which to stain 
 the character of the Popes, so as to arouse 
 the angry passions of the Irish people of the 
 nineteenth century against the whole line of 
 Pontiffs, the author of the book under re- 
 view extracts a large portion of his false 
 
 history from the pages of a work which we 
 have thoroughtly exposed already under 
 the caption of the O'Halloran-Dolby Anglo- 
 Irish History.* 
 
 From this source of English fabricated 
 falsehoods against both the Popes and the 
 Catholic re'igion, any enemy of the Catholic 
 Church can draw comfort and consolation, 
 as, like his infamous predecessor and fellow- 
 countryman Cambrensis, Dolby delights 
 in depicting both the Popes and the religion 
 of the Irish people in the darkest colors 
 that arose in his an ti- Irish imagination. 
 
 We are not much surprised, therefore, 
 to read in the book under review. upon the 
 authority of the fallacious Dolby that 
 Pope John XXII., pronounced sentence of 
 excommunication against Edward Bruce 
 and all his Irish adherents, and thereby 
 caused the national cause to be defeated in 
 consequence of the Irish people imagining 
 they were under " the curse of the Church 
 the blighting breath of Roman curses." 
 
 It i* a fact well known to all readers of 
 
 *3ee 
 
 79-8J.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 179 
 
 history that since the fatal day when the 
 basilisk eyes of a British king were tirst 
 fixed upon Ireland as a suitable country for 
 invasion, every English Protestant writer 
 who wrote on Irish subjects, did so under 
 the inspiration of the Father of Lies. From 
 calumniating Cambrensis down to the 
 Cockney Dolby at the end of nearly every 
 link in the chain of English writers on Irish 
 subjects there stand the names of English- 
 men whose minds generated falsehood and 
 whose pens diffused poison against both 
 the Popes and the Irish people. 
 
 Pope John XXII , against whom this 
 charge is brought, was the Pontiff to whom 
 Donnell or Donald Neil addressed the 
 letter on the sufferings of the natives of 
 Ireland under their English and Norman 
 invaders to which we have already devoted 
 a chapter, t and a perusal of that Pontiff's 
 Letter in reply to the petition of the Irish 
 princes will satisfy every impartial reader 
 that Pope John XXII., never hurled the 
 anathemas of excommunication against a 
 people whom he styles " the Rulers and the 
 people of Ireland," thereby acknowledging 
 their national independence and theii legiti- 
 mate right to drive out of their territory 
 the English, Norman or other invaders. 
 
 What did Pope John XXII., do in the 
 case of the Scotch, when, in 1318, they be- 
 seiged and captured several English border 
 towns belonging of right to King Edward 
 of England ? Did he excommunicate the 
 Scotch for this act of reprisal 1 No. The 
 Pontiff acceded to the request of the Scotch 
 rulers and people ; he sent a letter to King 
 Eclward (precisely as he did in the case of 
 Ireland) asking him to conclude an honor- 
 able peace. Why, therefore, should Pope 
 John XXII., excommunicate Edward Bruce 
 and his Irish followers, for defending Ire- 
 land against foreign invaders, when he 
 merely recommended the English king to 
 make an honorable peace with those Scotch 
 invaders who captured and burned many 
 English towns in revenge for wrongs which 
 that people had suffered at the hands of the 
 English. 
 
 Pope John was one of those Pontiffs who 
 will be honored by the Catholic world 
 
 fLmizard's England, under date 1316-18. 
 Abbe Darras' Church History. 
 
 throughout all generations. His Pontifi- 
 cate was a model of prudent, firm, and we'l- 
 regulated administration and until there is 
 more reliable authority than the detracting 
 Dolby, Catholics will refuse to believe that 
 any Pontiff ever excommunicated any por- 
 tion of a people who were attempting to 
 drive out of their country foreign invaders, 
 who as said by O'Neil in his letter to the 
 Pope "oblige us by open force to give .up 
 our houses and our lands, and to seek 
 shelter like the wild beasts upon the moun- 
 tains, in woods, marshes and caves." After 
 specifying in detail the proofs of these and 
 other general charges, the eloquent prince 
 concludes by uttering this memorable vow 
 that the Irish "will not cease to fight 
 against and among their invaders unt'l the 
 day when they themselves, for want of 
 power, shall have ceased to do us harm, and 
 that a Supreme Judge shall have taken just 
 vengeance on their crimes, which, we firmly 
 hope, will sooner or later come to pass. "|j 
 
 WAS MAYNOOTH COLLEGE! FOUNDED IN ORDER 
 TO EDUCATE IRISH PRIESTS IN THE IN- 
 TERESTS OF ENGLAND 1 
 
 In the work under review we find the 
 following fallacious remarks concerning tlie 
 origin and objects of the foundation of 
 Maynooth College, an educational institu- 
 tion in Ireland which has given to the 
 Church many of her most learned and 
 patriotic Priests and Prelates : 
 
 " la the year 1793 a most extraordinary, but 
 keen, far-dghted and statesmanlike change was 
 made by the English government in the matter 
 of governing the restless, liberty-craving Irish. 
 * * * * Edmund Burke, Wm. Pitt, L -rd 
 Granville, J. Fox and other English statesmen 
 resolved upon a plan, acceptable to the Vati- 
 can, and also to the Irish Bishops and repre- 
 sentatives, by which the great influence of the 
 Irish Priesthood might be made, at least 
 negatively, to serve the purposes of the English 
 Government, This plan was no less than the 
 establishment of a royal college for the educa- 
 tion of Itish Catholic Priests at the expense of 
 the English Protestant Government." 
 
 The above extract is false from beginning 
 to end, and as the history of the manner 
 in which Maynooth College was founded, 
 and the names of the celebrated. Irishmen 
 
 See paees 120 to 123. 
 
 Vol. L pp. 219-20.
 
 180 
 
 THB POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 who originated the idea, are but little 
 known, the best way to refute the foregoing 
 fallacious assertions is to give the details 
 concerning Maynooth College, which, in 
 brief, are as follows : 
 
 In the year 1794 Archbishop Troy, of 
 Dublin, presented a memorial to the Earl 
 of Westmoreland, then Lord Lieutenant of 
 Ireland, on bohalf of himself and other 
 Catholic Prelates of that Island. In this 
 memorial, after referring to the destruction 
 of the Ecclesiastical colleges in France, and 
 representing the absolute necessity for 
 places of education in Ireland for young 
 men intending to reinforce the ranks of 
 the Catholic clergy, the memoralists stated 
 that they were induced to undertake the es- 
 tablishment of proper places for the educa- 
 tion of the clerical youth of their com- 
 munion, and prayed a rojal license for the 
 endowment of academies and seminaries 
 for educating and preparing young men to 
 discharge the duties of Priests in Ireland 
 under Superiors of their own communion. 
 
 The result of the petition of Archbishop 
 Troy and the other Irish Prelates was the 
 enactment of a law by the Irish Parliament 
 which did not expressly ordain the founda- 
 tion of Maynooth College or any particular 
 institution for the education of Priests in 
 Ireland, but which provided facilities for 
 the foundation of a Catholic College which 
 the then existing state of the laws affecting 
 Catholic education did not allow. 
 
 The Act in question, set forth the 
 fact that by the laws then in force in the 
 Kingdom of Ireland, it was not lawful to 
 endow any college or seminary intended 
 exclusively for the education of Catholics. 
 It required a special Act of Parliament, 
 therefore, to entitle Catholics to educate 
 their children, and when the measure passed 
 into a law, the then Lord Chief Justice of 
 the Queen's Bench, the Chief Justice of the 
 Common Pleas, the Chief Baron of the 
 Exchequer, six Catholic laymen, namely, 
 the then Earl of Fingal), Viscount Gormans- 
 town, Viscount Kenniare, Sir Edward Bel- 
 lew, Richard Stronge, Sir Thomas French, 
 and the four IiUh Catholic Archbishops, 
 and seven other Cathuhc Ecclesiastics, were 
 appointed trustees for the purpose of es- 
 
 tablishing, endowing and maintaining one 
 academy for the education solely of persons 
 professing the Roman Catholic Religion. 
 
 Such was the origin of the foundation of 
 Maynooth College, and the object for which 
 it was founded. The idea first originated 
 with Dr. Troy, Archbishop of Dublin ; it 
 was then taken up by the Bishops of Ire- 
 land ; the Act was passed by the Irish 
 Parliament, and by referring to the docu- 
 ment itself (36 George III., C. 21, A. D. 
 1795) the reader will find therein not u 
 word authorizing the education of Roman 
 Catholic ecclesiastics. 
 
 The College was founded, as already re- 
 la' ed in 1795, and an annual Parliamentary 
 grant of about 8,000 was given towards its 
 maintenance. Rev. Thomas Hussey was 
 the first President. The College contained 
 about a hundred students in 1798, when 
 the notable rebellion broke out in Ireland, 
 and it was publicly proclaimed that the 
 Maynouth Priests were at the bottom of the 
 new insurrection against England! Evi.' 
 dently the people nearest Maynooth in 
 those days did not consider that the Irish 
 Priests could be turned into English tools 
 by the curriculum of the College ! 
 
 The number of students in Maynooth 
 continued to increase as the reputation of 
 the College became known, until fully four 
 hundred and fifty students found educa- 
 tional facilities within its hospitable walls. 
 With the increase of students the Govern- 
 ment very justly increased the annual pen- 
 sion, thus in 1813 Maynooth received a 
 grant of 9,673 per year, and again in 1845 
 the Government allowance was increased 
 owing to the strenuous efforts of the Irish 
 Bishops, backed by the arguments and influ- 
 ence of such eminent men as Thomas 
 Babington Macaulay, whose memorable 
 speech on the Maynooth Grant, when before 
 Parliament in 1845, contains this beautiful 
 passage : 
 
 In the debate on the Maynooth grant in 
 1845, Macaulay spoke in no measured 
 words on the gross injustice done to Catho- 
 lics by those who had appropriated their 
 property and granted a pitiful return. 
 
 "When I consider,'' said Mr Macaulay, 
 "with what magnificence religion and science
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 181 
 
 are endowed in our Universities; when I 
 call to mind their long streets of palaces, 
 their venerable cloisters, their trim gardens, 
 their chapels, with organs, altar-pieces, and 
 stained windows; when I remember their 
 schools, libraries, museums, and galleries of 
 art ; when I remember, too, all the solid 
 comforts provided in those places, both for 
 instructors and pupils; the stately dwellings 
 of the principals, the commodious apart- 
 ments of the fellows and scholars ; when I 
 remember that the very sizars and servitors 
 are lodged far better than you propose to 
 lodge those priests wh are to teach the 
 whole people of Ireland ; when I think of 
 the halls, the common-rooms, the bowling- 
 greens, even the stabling of Oxford and 
 Cambridge the display of old plate on the 
 tables, the good cheer of the kitchen, the 
 oceans of excellent ale in the buttery ; and 
 when I remember the faith of Edward III., 
 and Henry VI., of Mtrgaret of Anjou, and 
 Margaret of Richmond, of William of 
 Wycheham, of Archbishop Chicheley, and 
 Cardinal Wolsey ; when I remember what 
 we have taken from the Roman Catholic 
 religion King's College, .New College, my 
 own Trinity College, and Christ's Church 
 and when I look at the miserable Do-the- 
 boys Hall we have given them in return I 
 ask myself if we, and if the Protestant 
 religion, are not disgraced by the compari- 
 son." 
 
 To unreflecting Catholics, or to non-Cath- 
 olics with an ti- Papal prejudices, it may ap- 
 pear strange that the British Government 
 should contribute towards the sustention of 
 a College for the education of Catholic 
 Priests in a country where the Church and 
 the people had been persecuted without 
 restraint by the very government that now 
 stepped forward to help Maynooth College. 
 But this is easily explained when it is re- 
 membered that the British Government had 
 in its possession a vast quantity of valuable 
 real estate and buildings in the shape of 
 churches, convents, monasteries, abbeys and 
 religious institutions which it had stolen 
 from the Catholic Church in past centuries 
 of persecution for no other reason than be- 
 cause it was "Popish" property. The funds 
 derived from this sequestered property were 
 used to maintain the Protestant Episcopal 
 church in Ireland, which at one time had a 
 revenue of 850,000 per annum, and, very 
 naturally, the Catholics, when they adopted 
 the idea of establishing a College for Cath- 
 olic young men, reminded the British Gov- 
 ernment of its ill-gotten wealth, and asked 
 
 that at least a portion of it should be ap- 
 propriated for the use of the descendants of 
 the original owners of St. Patrick's Cathe- 
 dral and Christ Church in Dublin, and a 
 hundred similar institutions throughout Ire- 
 land, which were originally Catholic editicts 
 but which formed part of the spoils of the 
 extensive robbery perpetrated during the 
 era of the attempt made to introduce the 
 Pro estant Reformation into Ireland, which 
 (thank God !) never succeeded ! 
 
 The funds appropriated by Pa-liament 
 were used to maintain frte scholarships 
 in Maynooth, as by a regulation of the 
 Faculty it was decided to admit two hun- 
 dred students into the College as free 
 scholars, for whose board 20 each should 
 be allowed. These two hundied free places 
 were distributed among the four Ecclefcias- 
 tical Provinces of Ireland, in the following 
 proportions : To the Provinces of Armagh 
 and Cashel were alloted CO each ; and to 
 those of Dublin and Tuam 40 each. 
 
 Afttr the College was established, the 
 trustees made known the fact to the Cardi- 
 nal-Prefect of the Propaganda at Rome, 
 stating that the institution was designed for 
 the education of young men in Ireland who 
 had a vocation for the Presthood, and on 
 the 9th of July, 1796, a reply was receivtd 
 from the Cardinal- Prefect commending the 
 undertaking. 
 
 From the above brief but authentic ac- 
 count of the origin of JUaynooth College, 
 every reader may discern at once t at 
 there was not a single iota of "collusion" 
 between the Vatican and the British Gov- 
 ernment at the inception of that institution. 
 The whole plan originated in Ireland, was 
 managed in Ireknd, and the grant came 
 from the Irish Parliament. The Pope 
 (Pius VI.) was entirely absorbed in en- 
 deavoring to repel the rising spirit of Galli- 
 canism in France, and in finding means by 
 which to save Italy from becoming involved 
 in the whirlpool of revolution which was 
 then rife in Europe and which was subse- 
 quently followed by the triumphal march of 
 Napoleon Bonaparte through the vineyards 
 
 of Italy. 
 
 It is very clear, therefore, that what is 
 
 said in the book under review concerning 
 the Pope, the British Government, and their
 
 182 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 secret alliance for the purpose of educating 
 Irish Priests so as to transform them into 
 English subjects, has like a great many 
 other statements in the same volume no 
 foundation whatever save the quicksands of 
 malicious falsehood. 
 
 WAS THE KEPEAL MOVEMENT KILLED BY A 
 PAPAL RESCRIPT? 
 
 ID the book under review it is stated that 
 Daniel O'Connell organized the great Re- 
 peal movement in the year 1829, and had 
 every prospect of achieving success until, in 
 an evil hour, " Pope Gregory XVI. issued 
 a Rescript in the year 3843, commanding 
 the Priests of Ireland to refrain from at- 
 tending the Repeal meetings." And then 
 the writer continues : 
 
 " O'C/onnell saw in thia Rescript the doom of 
 bis race and country ; the blasting of all his 
 cherished hopes. He rose in the grandeur of his 
 almost superhuman power to meet and turn the 
 power of the Holy See. He published a letter 
 to prove that the Rescript was an illegal inter- 
 ference with the civil liberties of the clergy, la 
 the agony of his soul he uttered hia famous cry : 
 ' As much religion as you please from Borne, but 
 no politics.' " 
 
 This precious piece of bombastic absurdity 
 is a regular jumble of disjointed events 
 to d after the unusual fashion of placing the 
 cart before the horse ! 
 
 The Repeal movement was started in 
 April, 1840, under the title of the " Loyal 
 National Repeal Association,"* and as the 
 immense organization preserved its concrete 
 unity up to January 22nd, 1847, when 
 O'Connell left Ireland as a political field 
 for the " Young Ireland" party, it must 
 have puzzled the readers of the book we are 
 reviewing to understand how a Papal Re- 
 script issued in 1843 could have killed it ! 
 
 The truth is that what this erratic and un- 
 r jliable adversary of the Pope calls a Papal 
 Rescript was not issued until 1845, and the 
 document was a simple Letter to the Irish 
 Bishops asking them to see that their Priests 
 used less inflammatory language in their 
 political speeches, and cautioning them not 
 to permit religion to suffer through too 
 great absorption in politics. And what was 
 the effect of this Rescript ? Here is the 
 
 *Ihebaad'b Irish Race, p. 49. 
 
 answer in a nutshell : " The only effect pro- 
 duced by the Papal Rescript was, that the 
 tone of the Catholic clergy, in Iheir political 
 tpeeches at subsequent meetings, was more 
 guarded "t 
 
 It is not true, therefore, that a Papal Re- 
 script killed the Repeal movement, any 
 more than it proved to be " the doom" of 
 O'Connell 's " race and country," or that it 
 "blasted all O'Connell 's cherished hopes." 
 The Repeal movement met its mortuary 
 end from far different influences than those 
 which radiate from the Vatican. Its death 
 was caused by O'Connell's rash promises 
 never performed, and by the organization 
 of the more active members of the Repeal 
 association into what was aptly called "Tho 
 Young Ireland Party," in whose ranks 
 were numbered such patriots of unyielding 
 energy as Davis, Mitchel, Duffy, O'Brien, 
 Meagher, and a phalanx of similar Irish- 
 men of unblemished character and undying 
 enthusiasm in the cause of their native 
 land. 
 
 The causes which led to the downfall of 
 the Repeal movement, were the natural out- 
 come of the changes in the political senti- 
 ments of the Irish people who had grown 
 up in the country during the decade of 
 years in which O'Connell had preached his 
 peace policy from the hill tops of Ireland. 
 But when the Irish people found that the 
 Lord Lieutenant Lad issued a proclamation 
 suppressing the meeting O'Connell proposed 
 holding on the plains of Clontarf, then they 
 saw that the cry of " peace" towards the 
 English Government could no longer rally 
 the people under O'Connell's standard, and 
 they were ready to adopt any system of 
 physical force agitation which presented it- 
 self for their relief from the thraldom of 
 England. 
 
 The Clontarf meeting was announced to 
 take place on Sunday, October 8th, 1843, 
 but bad to be abandoned in order to save 
 from general massacre the hundreds of 
 thousands of Irish men and women who 
 would have gathered there. One year later, 
 (October 14th, 1844,) O'Connell, his son 
 John, Thomas Steele, T. M. Ray, Charles 
 
 fO'Keefe'8 Life and Tim:s of O'Connell, Vol. 
 IL page 724.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 183 
 
 Gavan Duffy, John Gray, Richard Barrett, 
 and Rev. Thomas Tyrell were arrested and 
 subsequently tried, convicted of course, and 
 imprisoned in Richmond prison. This 
 event was the first nail in the coffin of the 
 Repeal movement. 
 
 When O'Connell and the other traversers 
 of English lav in Ireland were released 
 from prison on September 7th, 1845, the 
 Liberator was accorded what proved to be 
 the final ovation of the Irish people to the 
 idol of their hearts. Half a million people 
 joined in or witnessed with willing sym- 
 pathy the procession which escorted the 
 Irish Tribune and his compatriots along the 
 streets and quays of the city of Dublin, and 
 all Ireland was ablaze with joy at the libera- 
 tion of the Catholic champion of down- 
 trodden Erin. 
 
 This day proved to be the full meredian 
 of O'Connell s glory. It was the closing 
 tableau in the Irish political drama wherein 
 he had represented the hero of the hour, 
 and his place on the public stage of Irish 
 politics was replaced by such revolution- 
 ary associations as the " '82 Club," the 
 " Phoanix Clubs," the " Young Ireland 
 Party," and instead of preaching the peace 
 policy which Richard Barret of the Dublin 
 Pilot and John Gray of the Dublin Fi ee- 
 man's Jownal had advocated during the 
 time of O'Connell's agitation for Repeal by 
 constitutional means, the Nation under 
 Duffy, and the Felon under Mitchell, vied 
 with each other in their earnestness to erect 
 barricades in the streets of the Metropolis, 
 to invoke the strong arm of the Irish peas- 
 antry, and to wage war to the hilt against 
 the English oppressors of the Irish people. 
 This was the second nail in the coffin of the 
 constitutional movement for Repeal of the 
 Union between Great Britian and Ireland. 
 Let us now turn to a reliable source* and 
 learn therefrom the causes which led to the 
 final collapse of the Repeal agitation : 
 
 The British aristocracy made O'Connell a 
 prisoner in a jail, but the Irish democracy 
 enthroned him as a king in the Rotundo. 
 The ignominy which the government sought 
 to attach to him was removed and melted 
 away in the brilliant splendors of the 
 "levee," and the humiliation of the one was 
 
 Lite and Times of Danf! O'Connrll, by C. 
 M. O'Ktete. Vol. II , pp. 728-9. 
 
 amply compensated by the more than kingly 
 honors of the other. Nevertheless, it is 
 quite certain that at this period indeed 
 ever since the advent of Lord Heytesbury to 
 Ireland the tide of O'Connell's popularity 
 was insensibly lapsing and ebbing from him. 
 To accelerate its motion, a very ingenious 
 device was adopted by the deadly enemies 
 of Irish liberty. Highly respectable men, 
 of great influence and large property men 
 allied to the aristocracy of the country 
 joined the Repeal movement. The thought- 
 less people rejoiced at their adhesion, and 
 their appearance in Conciliation Hall was 
 hailed with shouts of transport. But the 
 rising of these men amongst the Repealers, 
 like that of certain constellations at sea, was 
 but the signal of storm and wreck. This 
 was inevitable they belonged to that class 
 who have strong material interest in main- 
 taining the present state of things. One of 
 these was the son of a Protestant bishop, 
 the owner of large landed property in the 
 North of Ireland Grey Porter. He pub- 
 lished a pamphlet, immediately after join- 
 ing the Association, which delighted Davis 
 and all the young men of Ireland, for he 
 propounded that Ireland ought to have a 
 national militia of one hundred thousand 
 men. To a people like the Irish, "delighting 
 in wars ' the most military, and therefore 
 the most unfortunate people in Europe 
 such a proposal was in the highest degree 
 seductive and gratifying " Honor to Mr. 
 Porter," exclaimed Davis, "for having had 
 the manlines-s to propose what thousands 
 thought but spoke not." Porter seized 
 upon the weak point in the Irish character, 
 and became for a time eminently popular. 
 He conjured up visions of military glory 
 which enchanted the poetic minds of young 
 and cultivated men. ***** 
 
 Porter's pamphlet attracted general at- 
 tention, and as a consequence his secession 
 made great noise ; and a world of discussion 
 ensued which was not serviceable to the 
 cause of Repeal. Many were at a loss to 
 account for 1'orter's conduct. It was rather 
 surprising, they said, that this son of a 
 Protestant bishop who had accumulated 
 vast wealth by the excoriation of Catholic 
 poverty, should be so scrupulously careful of 
 the money of the "Popish Repealers. " It 
 was certainly a tendency which did not run 
 in his blood. In the meantime, however, 
 the minds of many were filled with suspicion 
 and doubt, and great damage was done to 
 the Repeal. The enemy was enabled to 
 fling bitter taunts at the Association and 
 tarnish patriotism with the imputation of 
 sordid motives. The whole affair contribu- 
 ted powerfully to break vp what Sir Robert 
 Peel termed a "formidable confederacy 
 against British government and British con- 
 nexion." 
 
 When the leader of a political organiza-
 
 184 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 tion has failed in achieving the political 
 rights which for years he has struggled to 
 gain for his country, and when the men 
 who stood by him begin to doubt his ability 
 to make their rulers redeem the promises 
 he has made to his own people then it 
 may truly be said that the dry-rot of poli- 
 tical decay is destroying that party. Such 
 was the case in 1844-5, the time when 
 "great damae was done to Repeal," and 
 when bo h the enemies of O'Connell and 
 the friends of physical force were contri- 
 butingby different courses of procedure 
 " to break up" the last remnants that re- 
 mained of the Repeal Association. 
 
 About this time, as if to add additional 
 fury to the waters which lashed around the 
 base of the rock of Irish politics, a Letter 
 or Rescript was received from the Sacred 
 CoLege, declaring that whereas it had been 
 reported to hia Holiness that some of the 
 more ardent patriots among the Irish Priest- 
 hood had become absorbed in politics and 
 had spoken too rashly in public concerning 
 affairs of State, they were requested there- 
 after to attend more exclusively to their 
 religious duties and to leave the angry agi- 
 tation of politics to persons in civil life. 
 
 This is the Rescript regarding which the 
 author under review says that O'Connell, 
 "in the agony of his soul uttered his famous 
 cry : ' As much religion as you please from 
 Rome, but no politics.'" The "agony of 
 soul" in this instance at least, is entirely a 
 myth ! Daniel O'Connell never experi- 
 enced any such "agony" over the Papal 
 document, nor did he ever give utterance to 
 the "/jmc/ws cry" attributed to him ! The 
 sentiment " as much religion as you please 
 from Rome, but no politics," was given ex- 
 pression to by O'Neill Daunt, a member of 
 the Repeal association, at a meeting of that 
 body held in Dublin in the year 1845,* and 
 thus we remove from the hallowed memory 
 of Ireland's Liberator the foul blemish 
 which bigotry and ignorance have cast upon 
 it by attributing to him words he never 
 used. 
 
 When once the tide of popularity begins 
 to ebb away from a popular patriot whose 
 star is on the wane, it does not take long 
 
 *Sie Life and Times of O'Conne'l, by C. M. 
 O'Keefe, Vol. II., pa,<e 734. 
 
 until he finds himself standing almost soli- 
 tary and alone upon a barren strand. Such 
 was O'Connell's fate. In addition to the 
 elements of discord which already existed 
 in the Repeal ranks, Sir Robert Peel's god- 
 less College Bill proved a regular apple of 
 discord among the divided Irish patriots. 
 Thomas Davis and his friends were enthu- 
 siastic advocates for these colleges which 
 were purposely contemplated for the sole 
 object of secularizing education. O'Con- 
 nell, the Catholic Bishops and Clergy, as 
 well as the bulk of the laity were opposed 
 to what O'Connell called " the young blood 
 of Ireland," and the result was to widen 
 still wider the fatal gap which separated in 
 hate the people that should have been 
 united in love. This was the last nail in 
 the coffin of the Repeal movement. 
 
 Thomas Davis died in 1845, and the 
 death of this great and gifted Irish patriot 
 nearly broke O'Connell's heart. He saw in 
 him a successor to himself, as the great 
 leader of the Irish people, and the high es- 
 teem in which the Liberator held the 
 patriot-poet may be judged from the follow- 
 ing extract from a letter which O'Connell 
 sent to the Repeal Association when he 
 heard of the death of Davis : 
 
 Writing to the Repeal Association, he 
 alludes to this fatal event in the following 
 touching words : "I do not know what to 
 write. My mind is bewildered and my 
 heart afflicted. The loss of my beloved 
 friend my noble-minded friend is a source 
 of the deepest sorrow to my mind. What a 
 blow what a cruel blow to the cause of 
 Irish nationality ! He was a creature of 
 transcendent qualities of mind and heart. 
 His learning was universal his knowledge 
 was as minute as it was general And then 
 he was a being of such incessant energy and 
 continuous exertion. I, of course, in the 
 few years if years they be still left to me, 
 cannot expect to look upofc his like again or 
 to see the place he has left vacant adequate- 
 ly tilled up. And I solemnly declare that 
 I never knew any man who could be so 
 useful to Ire 'and in the present state of her 
 struggles. His loss is indeed irreparable. 
 What an example he was to the Protestant 
 youths of Ireland ! What a noble emula- 
 tion of his virtues ought to be excited in 
 the Catholic young men of Ireland. And 
 his heart, too ! it was as gentle, as kind, as 
 loving as a woman's. Yes ! it was as ten- 
 derly kind as his judgment was comprehen-
 
 THE POPE AND IHKLAND. 
 
 185 
 
 sive and his genius magnificent. We shall 
 lung deplore his loss. As 1 stand alone in 
 the solitude of my mountains, many a tear 
 shall I shed iu the memory of that noble 
 youth. Oti ! how vain are words or tears 
 when such a national calamity afflicts the 
 country. Put me down among the fore- 
 most contributors to whatever monument or 
 tribute to his memory shall be voted by the 
 National Association Never did they per- 
 form a more imperative or alas ! - so sad a 
 duty. I can write no more my tears 
 blind me ; and after all, 
 
 ' Fungor inani munere.'" 
 Early in October, 1845, the first, dark 
 shadows of impending Famine began to 
 hover over Ireland All thoughts of repeal 
 of present unjust laws, or of retribution for 
 past political wrongs, vanished from the 
 minds of the masses of the people. Self- 
 preservation became the ruling passion, 
 and the spirit of patriotism languished under 
 the repulsive presence of starvation. The 
 result may easily be conjectured. The Re- 
 peal association went into the last throes of 
 dissolution. Conciliation Hall reverberated 
 with rancorous expressions which sowed the 
 dragon's teeth of disunion in many an 
 honest Irishman's breast, and thus Ireland 
 became again a corpse upon the dissecting 
 table of England. 
 
 On January 26th, 1846, O'Connell took 
 his departure from Dublin, accompanied by 
 his sons Maurice and John. He went to 
 London, entered the House of Commons in 
 order to try and wring even an atom of jus- 
 tice from the English Government in order 
 to save his people from falling victims to 
 famine. But the only answer he received 
 was the proposition to pass a Coercion Bill ! 
 This drastic measure, however, was defeated, 
 the Tories resigned and the Whigs came 
 into power and then the political cauldron 
 in Ireland was set to bubbling and boiling 
 over to such an extent that Repeal and 
 O'Connell were both almost entirely for- 
 gotten. 
 
 About this time (1846) a rupture occurred 
 between O'Connell and Snath O'Brirn, 
 which brought the latter gentleman into 
 prominence and relegated O Connell to the 
 tomb of the Capulets. To make matters 
 more rapidly approach a crisis difficulties 
 sprung up in the Repeal meetings, held in 
 Conciliation Ha'l, between Thomas Francis 
 
 Meagher and Smith O'Brien on one side, 
 and O'Connell and his son John on the 
 other, which ultimately led to an open 
 rupture by the withdrawal from the asso- 
 ciation of a large number of Repealers who 
 held " Young Ireland" views, and whose de- 
 parture from the Hall caused tears to flow 
 from many an Irish eye that witnessed the 
 sad scene. 
 
 These turbulent scenes were so many 
 swords of sorrow which pierced O'Connell'a 
 heart and ultimately hastened his death. 
 He was prostrated by a general breaking 
 up of hia system. His physicians recom- 
 mended rest and medical treatment, but all 
 was unavailing, for what remedy can 
 
 " Pluck from the memory a hidden sorrow, 
 Razi out the writtea troubles of the brain." 
 
 O'Connell determined to make a pilgrim 
 age to Rome, to kneel at the feet of the 
 Sovereign Pontiff, and to ask the blessing 
 of the saintly successor of St. Peter Pope 
 Pius IX. He was accompanied on his voy- 
 age by his son Daniel and Rev. John Miley, 
 as his chaplain, and had proceeded as far 
 as Genoa, when, on the 15th of May, just 
 as the glorious sun had set, the great heart 
 of Irel nd's Liberator ceased to beat, and 
 Ireland lost one of her truest and best sons. 
 According to his last wish his heart was 
 placed in an urn and sent to Rome, where 
 it still rests in the Church of St. Agatha, 
 his body was conveyed back to Ireland, and 
 his soul winged its flight to the bosom 
 of that God Who gave it life on earth, and 
 every Catholic will pray that it has long 
 since secured life everlasting. 
 
 It is to the causes we have succinctly 
 alluded to that we must look for the death 
 of the Repeal movement. Its dissolution 
 could neither be marred nor made by any 
 Rescript from Rome to the few Priests who, 
 unwittingly, were too radical in their public 
 speeches. The Pope had neither hand, 
 act nor part in precipitating the Repeal 
 movement down the precipice which changes 
 in popular opinion prepared for it, and 
 into which it would have inevitably fallen 
 even had O'Connell lived for a dozen 
 years longer. There are peculiar fashions 
 in politics just as there are in personal dress, 
 and Ireland in 1845 was becoming tired of 
 waiting for moral force to produce a bene-
 
 186 
 
 THE POIVE AND IRELAND. 
 
 tieial change in the prospects of the coun- 
 try. Disappointed and driven to despair, 
 the young blood of the Island deserted 
 O'Connell, and when the Young Ireland 
 Party was born the Repeal Association drew 
 its last breath as the natural result of the 
 loss of its political vitality. 
 
 WAS THE "YOUNG IRELAND" MOVEMENT 
 KILLED BY BISHOPS AND PRIESTS? 
 
 The malicious intent of Judge Maguire's 
 book may easily be surmised when it is 
 known that he attributes the failure of 
 every plan adopted, both in ancient and 
 modern days, for the amelioration of Ire- 
 land, to the secret or open opposition of 
 either the Pope or the Bishops and Priests 
 of Ireland. Such a sweeping condemn tion 
 of Popes, Prelates and Priests exposes every 
 apostate who adopts it to the suspicion that 
 he merely desires to revenge himself upon 
 the Church he has abandoned, hence he 
 c res not how reckless soever his charges 
 may be so Jong as he can make ' Home 
 howl," and sow the seeds of antipathy to 
 hpiritual authority in the hearts of Irish 
 Citholics. 
 
 The " Young Ireland" movement of 
 1848, following so closely upc --i ;';,> failure 
 of Daniel O'Connell, and the hundreds of 
 thousands who believed in moral suasion as 
 the best argument wherewith to win back 
 Ireland's freedom from the grasp of Eng- 
 land, was doomed to failure from its very 
 inception. 
 
 In the first place the Irish people were 
 demoralized, disunited, disappointed and 
 cast down into despair by the death of 
 O Connell and the calamitous failure of his 
 constitutional movement. 
 
 In the next place the people had just 
 passed through the excruciating agonies of 
 famine and pestilence, and the majority of 
 the agricultural population of Ireland were 
 so reduced to poverty, and so emaciated by 
 starvation, that they had neither the cour- 
 age nor the confidence to take any active 
 part in the new physical force programme 
 advocated by John Mitchel and those who 
 sided with him in his insurrectionary move- 
 ment. 
 
 It must be also borne in mind that the 
 
 foundation upon which Mitchel and his 
 compatriots based their plans for Ireland's 
 freedom was designed after that adopted in 
 Paris when King Louis Philippe was torn 
 from the throne of France. The Dublin 
 Nation up to this time had been the organ 
 of all the Irish writers of both prose and 
 poetry phrased in patriotic sentiments, but 
 John Mitchel's language and suggestions 
 to the people begun at last to be too inflam- 
 matory and too dangerous to permit their 
 pub'ication in the columns of the Nation, 
 and so he and several other members of the 
 Nation's staff seceded and issued a more 
 radical journal under the captivating tit'e 
 of the United Irishman. 
 
 The columns of the new weekly were 
 filled with full directions for street warfare 
 wherein molten lead was to be poured down 
 upon the devoted heads of the enemy, and 
 every column contained matter calculated 
 to arouse the Irish people to insurrection. 
 This style of literature led to a split in the 
 "Young Ireland'' party, one wing being led 
 by Mitchel, and the more moderate wing 
 being under the leadership of William 
 Smith O'Brien, whilst the O'Connellites 
 looked askance upon both wings of the new 
 organization as men who were not in their 
 right senses. 
 
 The Catholic Prelates and Priests of Ire- 
 land looked upon the "Young Ireland" 
 movement from its very inception, with 
 grave doubts as to its propriety according to 
 the standard of patriotism always held 
 sacred by the Irish Catholic people. In 
 the language of A. M Sullivan,* " they 
 fancied they saw in this movement too 
 much that was akin to the work of the Con- 
 tinental revolutionists, and, greatly as they 
 disliked the domination of England, they 
 would prefer it a thousand times to snch 
 ''Liberty'' as Carbonari would procliim." 
 
 "At that time," continues the distin- 
 guished Irish patriot from whom we quote, 
 "in 1848, the power of the Catholic Priests 
 was unbroken, ivas stronger than ever." It 
 would seem from this evidence, therefore, 
 that no "Papal influences," thus far had 
 materially affected Ireland's Priesthood, so 
 
 *New Ireland, page 123.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 187 
 
 far at least as their love for their native 
 land was concerned. 
 
 The result of the deluge of inflammatory 
 literature which the active intellect of the 
 extreme revolutionary element in the 
 " Young Ireland" party poured over the 
 country, was the arrest of Mitchel, Meagher 
 and O'Brien. Mitchel was tried, convicted 
 and transported for fourteen years, and the 
 others subsequently shared his fate. Thus 
 ended the Irish insurrectionary movement 
 of '48, under the segis of the " Young Ire- 
 land" party. 
 
 From the foregoing facts it will be ap- 
 parent to all impartial readers that the 
 " Young Ireland" party was not killed by 
 the Bishops and Priests of Ireland. It was 
 a clear case of self-destruction. Its pro- 
 moters adopted the anti- Catholic tactics of 
 the clubs of Paris and the Carbonari of 
 Italy. Secrecy ruled every society within 
 the organization, and the cause of its defeat 
 and demise arose from the fact that Ireland 
 was not prepared for *ny gunpowder war- 
 fare in the streets of her cities, nor did the 
 masses of the people have any sympathy 
 with the Continental system upon which it 
 was based. 
 
 The wisdom of the Bishops and Priests 
 in Ireland in keeping aloof from this move- 
 ment was dictated entirely by prudence and 
 not prompted by any lack of patriotism. 
 They saw failure stamped upon it from its 
 inception, and their action saved many a 
 life from being uselessly sacrificed through 
 the evidence of Government spies. Because, 
 as A. M. Sullivan testifies, t ''the Govern 
 ment were well informed throiiyh spies of 
 everything that was passing," and all the 
 plots and conspiracies of the " Young Ire- 
 land" party were revealed to the authorities 
 of Dublin Castle almost as soon as they 
 were told with great secrecy in the club- 
 rooms of the insurrectiotary organization. 
 
 \Neio Ireland, page 125. 
 
 Few people can appreciate the terrib e 
 misery inflicted on Ireland by the wild rush 
 for revenge which animated the men of '48, 
 and which ended in depriving the Irish 
 cause of many of its most ardent patriots. 
 The closing scene in this direful drama is 
 thus depicted by A. M. Sullivan. 
 
 "Throughout the remaining months of 
 the year (1848) Ireland was given over to 
 the gloomy scenes of special commissions, 
 State trials, and death sentences. Of the 
 leaders or prominent actors in this abortive 
 insurrection, O'Brien, Meagher, Mac- 
 Man us, Martin and O'Doherty were con- 
 victed ; Dillon, O Gorman and Doheny sue- 
 ceeded in accomplishing their escape to 
 America. O'Brien, Meagher and Mac- 
 Manus, with one of their devoted com- 
 panions in danger, Patrick O'Donoghue by 
 name, having been convicted of high 
 treason, were sentenced to death, but by 
 authority of a specially-p ssed Act of Par- 
 liament, the barbarous penalty of hanging, 
 disemboweling and quartering, to which 
 they were formally adjudged, was com- 
 muted into transportation beyond the seas 
 for life. Duffy was thrice brought to trial ; 
 but although the Crown made desperate 
 f fforts to effect his conviction, the prosecu- 
 tion each time broke down, baffled by the 
 splendid abilities of the defence conducted 
 by Mr. Isaac Butt, Q. C. Eventually the 
 proceedings against him were abandoned. 
 Of less important participators numbers 
 were evicted, and hundreds fled the coun- 
 try never to return. ' Forty-eight' cost 
 Ireland dearly not alone in the sacrifice of 
 some of her best and noblest sons, led to 
 imm late themselves in such desperate 
 enterprise as revolution, but in the terrible . 
 reaction, the prostration, the terrorism, the 
 disorganization that ensued. Through 
 many a long and dreary year the country 
 suffered for the delirium of that time." 
 
 + Ntw Ireland pp. 129-30.
 
 188 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIV. 
 
 Secret Polital Societies. Their Baneful Influence upon Ireland's Struggles for Free- 
 dom. Reasons why the Church Opposes them. The Wisdom of Her Oppo- 
 sition Proved by Numerous Examples. 
 
 The stern and continuous opposition of 
 the Catholic Church to oath-bound Secret 
 Societies is a fact well-known all over the 
 world. It matters not to her whether such 
 organizations are based upon bigotry or 
 benevolence, or that the objects set forth 
 for attainment are founded on patriotism or 
 politics the Church alike places the ban of 
 her disapproval upon all congregations of 
 individuals who are sworn to secrecy in or- 
 der ts conspire against the Christian citadel 
 of Salvation, against the State, or any sec- 
 tion of human society. 
 
 The Catholic Church is inspired by Al- 
 mighty God in the wisdom which she dis- 
 plays for the moral and spiritual guidance 
 of her children, and even her enemies have 
 been compelled to admit that in her rigid 
 opposition to all oath- bound secret societies 
 she has won the admiration of men who 
 otherwise never could be brought to ac- 
 knowledge her as truly God's spiritual guide 
 for all mankind. 
 
 Every wise mother is careful not to per- 
 mit her children to fall a prey to wicked 
 companions. The hen hides beneath her 
 wings her chickens from the vulture and the 
 hawk. And for far more cogent Christian 
 reasons a desire to save the temporal hap- 
 piness as well as the spiritual lives of the 
 flock of Christ the Church warns her chil- 
 dren not to enter any secret societies where 
 their lives, their liberty, their sacred honor 
 and their Catholic conscience might be 
 jeopardized. 
 
 Looking at the baneful influences which 
 oath-bound secret political associations 
 have exercised upon both the politics and 
 the people of Ireland during the past cen- 
 tury, the Catholic Prelates of that country 
 have wisely placed the seal of the condem- 
 nation of the Church upon all such organi- 
 zations. From the rebellion of 1798 down 
 
 to the present day, there never has been 
 any amelioration of Ireland's condition 
 gained through the operation of oath-bound 
 secret society agencies. On the contrary, 
 it is safe to say that more harm has accrued 
 to individuals, to families, and to the for- 
 tunes of Ireland herself, from such combina- 
 tions than from any other cause in connec- 
 tion with Ireland's numerous struggles for 
 political supremacy. 
 
 THE SOCIETY OF UNITED IBISHMEN. 
 
 In order to demonstrate the evils which 
 befell the Society of United Irishmen a cen- 
 tury ago, during Ireland's memorable 
 struggle, we extract from the best and most 
 authentic work on that important era, some 
 passages which will furnish indisputable 
 evidence on that point. 
 
 Speaking of the Irish Rebellion of 1798, 
 Dr. Richard R. Madden* says : 
 
 " The history of the Rebellion of 1798, 
 like that of every other civil war, whatever 
 traits of heroism may be discovered in the 
 conduct of individuals, is a record of crimes 
 and sufferings, which it is not for the in- 
 terest of the people and their rulers should 
 be buried in oblivion, however appaling its 
 details. The evils that are inseparable from 
 civil war, require only to be regarded by 
 both orders as calamities which extend far 
 beyond the event of success or failure, and 
 involve considerations of higher importance 
 than those which are ordinarily taken into 
 account, either by those parties who rush 
 into revolt, or the powers who resist the 
 just, or even the unreasonable, demands of 
 the people. It is indeed impossible to 
 exaggerate the evils of civil war ; but it is 
 possible to overrate the prospective advan- 
 tages which are calculated on from its suc- 
 cess, and to overlook the sufferings which 
 are the inevitable consequences of its failure. 
 
 "It is not alone in the deadly conflict, 
 in the outrages on humanity committed in 
 the frenzy ot popular commotion, or party 
 violence, or lawless power, that these evils 
 are to be met with. The direst of them, 
 
 *The United Irithmen, Fiiat Series, pp. 406-7.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 189 
 
 the most revolting and humiliating to the 
 feelings of all right-minded men, are to be 
 found in the perfidious wickedness of those 
 wretches who rise in troubled times to the 
 surface of socit ty from the obscurity in 
 which their misutiievoua propensities had 
 previously lain innoxious. These are the 
 men whom the people in revolt must expect 
 to find earliest in their ranks, the most 
 prominent in their societies, violent in their 
 councils, conspicuous where there is security, 
 and backward where tnere is danger, and 
 who, while urging on their associates, skulk 
 behind them, and bide their own time to be- 
 tray them to their enemies. 
 
 1 ' These are the men whom the leaders of 
 the people must expect to meet in their 
 secret assemblies, to mingle with in private, 
 to suffer the obtrusive familiarity of, unre- 
 buked whose intemperate activity it is 
 ever a task of difficulty to restrain, whose 
 vicious courses they cannot or dare not in- 
 terfere with, whom they vainly imagine to 
 find steadfast in their cause in the times 
 and troubles which try men's souls, and 
 eventually encounter in the courts of jus- 
 tice, or trace to the portals of the people of 
 authority, shrinking from observation, and 
 lurking about the offices of the underlings 
 of state. 
 
 " These are the men whom the agents of 
 government find fit and proper persons, 
 when " the times are out of joint," to de- 
 feat the objects of those who are inimical 
 to their principles or their power wretches 
 whom it is easy to corrupt, being generally 
 not only infamous and dissolute in their 
 lives, but singularly open and scandalous in 
 their infamy. The employment of such 
 men. makes it necessary to treat them with 
 consideration, to take the tutelage of their 
 testimony into charge, to condescend to hold 
 confidential communications with them, to 
 wink at their iniquities, to seem unconscious 
 of their venality, to work upon their vanity, 
 to exaggerate their preposterous opinions of 
 their own importance, and to conceal the 
 viler features of their treachery under the 
 veil of a solicitude for the interests of jus- 
 tice or the welfare of their country. If an 
 alliance with such men involve their con- 
 federates in danger, the tute'a^e of their 
 testimony cannot be otherwise than revolt- 
 ing to the feelings of their employers. It 
 is impossible to come in contact with them 
 without loathing the individuals whose ser- 
 vices are called into requisition. 
 
 " In either case the consequences of the 
 confidence that is betrayed, or the corrup- 
 tion that is practiced, and the use that is 
 made of the infamous agency of spies and 
 informers, are such that it is hard to say 
 whether the danger attendant on the former, 
 or the degradation on the latter, is the evil 
 most to be apprehended or deplored. 
 
 " By the reports of the Secret Committees 
 of the Lords, in 1703, and of both Houses of 
 Parliament in 1797, it appears that the 
 Government at a very early period, had a 
 knowledge of the conspiracy carried on by 
 the United Irish Societies in the provinces 
 of Leinster and Ulster, though not of the 
 persons who formed the directory of the 
 former province. A regular system if 
 espionage was adopted so early as 1795 ; and 
 in 1796 there were few secrets of the United 
 Irishmen which were not in the hands of 
 the Government. It seems to be one of 
 the necessary results of efforts to establish 
 secret societies, that the more the a crecy 
 of their proceedings is sought to be secured 
 by tests and oaths, the more danger ia in- 
 curred of treachery, and the more difficult 
 it is to guard against traitors ; the very 
 anxiety for concealment becomes the imme- 
 diate occasion of detection. * * * * 
 
 " Mr. Frederick Dutton, who at an early 
 period was employed in the North as an in- 
 foffcner, and had been sent especially to 
 Maidstone to insure the conviction of 
 O'Connor, was a regular informer of this 
 class, a most reckless one in the case of the 
 unfortunate Priest Quigley, in whose great- 
 coat pocket, by mistake for Arthur O'Con- 
 nor's, was placed the treasonable papers on 
 which he was convicted. Mr. M'Gucken, 
 the solicitor of the United Irishmen, was 
 another of the private informers, who was 
 intrusted with the defence of the prisoners 
 charged with treason ia Belfast, and at the 
 same period was in the pay of the Govern- 
 ment was largely paid, and ultimately 
 pensioned ; and during these frightful times 
 M'Gucken continued to possess the confi- 
 dence of the United Irishmen. 
 
 "For upwards of twelve months before the 
 breaking out of the rebellion several mem- 
 bers of the Ulster United Irish Society were 
 likewise in the pay of the Government. 
 John Edward Newell entered on his duties 
 at the Castle the 13th of April, 1797, and 
 retired from them rather abruptly, the Gth 
 of February, 1798. Nicholas Maguan, of 
 Saintfield, in the County of Down, a mem- 
 ber of the Provincial and County Com- 
 mittees, and also described in the report of 
 1798 as a colonel of their military system, 
 during the whole of 1797, and down to 
 June, 1798, regularly attended the meetings 
 of the County Down United Irish Societies, 
 and communicated to the Earl of London- 
 derry's chaplain, the Rev. John Cleland, a 
 magistrate of that county, the treasonable 
 proceedings of those societies after each 
 meeting. * * * * 
 
 " Such were the well-timed measures 
 adopted by the Irish Govemment to cause 
 the insurrection, in Lord Castlereagh's 
 words, ' to explode,' when the mischievous 
 designs of the United Irishmen had been
 
 190 
 
 THE POPE AND IttELAND. 
 
 long known to that Government, and so 
 fully, that one of its leading members de- 
 clared in Parliament, ' that the State pris- 
 oners had confessed nothing which hud not 
 been known to them before.' " 
 
 THE SOCIETY OF RIBBONMEN. 
 
 This plain and straightforward statement 
 is sufficient to demonstrate the danger which 
 lurks in all societies of a similar character, 
 but in order still further to show the dan- 
 gerous character of such organizations we 
 will quote the sentiments of the great Irish 
 Prelate, Bishop Doyle, of Kildare and 
 Leighlin, on the Ribbonmen* 
 
 ' The Society of Ribbonmen had, a few 
 years previously (1819) first sprung into 
 vitality. Originally formed in the West of 
 Ireland, it gradually worked its secret way 
 and influence until the confines of Dr. 
 Doyle's diocese were struck by it. Some 
 acts of violence on person and property 
 having been committed, the Bishop devoted 
 several pages of his first Pastoral to an elo- 
 quent denunciation of the objects of the 
 society. He concluded with a most ar- 
 gumentative dissuasive, which, though 
 erudite and logical, was clothed in a sim- 
 plicity of language that rendered it 
 thoroughly intelligible to the masses. The 
 appeal thus terminated : ' Beloved brethren, 
 we tell you in truth and sincerity that, these 
 associations are opposed to all your inter- 
 ests, both temporal and eternal ; that the 
 oath which unites them is illegal, sacri- 
 legious and unjust ; that if observed, it 
 would be a bond of iniquity ; and that 
 though it would be a crime to take it, it 
 would be a still greater ciiine to observe it 
 by word or deed ; and hence we conjure 
 you by all that is dear to you, your family, 
 your character, your country and your reli- 
 gion, to avoid all connection with these de- 
 luded men, and if any of you have been 
 ensnared by them, to abandon their society 
 to repent for the sins you committed in 
 joining them, and, like Paul, 'you will ob- 
 tain mercy, because it was through ig- 
 norance you did evil.' But if there should 
 be found amongst you any persons who, 
 disregarding these salutary instructions and 
 advice, and who would still continue to set 
 at defiance the laws of God and the coun- 
 try, who would still continue to expose our 
 good name to disgrace, our religion to ob- 
 loquy, and these dioceses, with their peace- 
 able inhabitants, to terror and taxation, let 
 such persons take notice, and we hereby 
 solemnly warn and admonish them that we 
 
 *Life of Dr. Doyle by W. FUzpatrksk, Vol. L, 
 p. 123. 
 
 shall, in case they continue obstinate, re- 
 sort to the severest chastisements, which 
 the power vested in us from above enables 
 us to inflict." ***** 
 
 The great Prelate who uttered these 
 words of con ^emnation was one of the purest, 
 the best, and the most persistent among 
 Irish patriots of his time. But he well 
 knew the dangerous tendencies <>f such so- 
 cieties and his experience led him to pub- 
 licly denounce them hot only in the year 
 1819, but also at a subsequent period when 
 that grand Irish Bishop thus addressed the 
 misguided members of his flock for joining 
 the " Defenders" which was only another 
 change of name for the " Ribbonmen." 
 
 ''But your object is to make your 
 country free and happy. We will not 
 reason with you on the end which you pro- 
 pose to yourselves, which, even it it were 
 laudable, could not justify the employment 
 of unlawful means, 'as evil,' says an apos- 
 tle, ' is not to be done that good may hap- 
 pen; ' but we will consider for a moment 
 your design itself, and the persons em- 
 ployed to carry it into execution, that if 
 possible the absurdity as well as the wicked- 
 ness of it may become palpable to you. 
 And first, who are those who would under- 
 take to subvert the laws and constitution of 
 this country? Persons without money, 
 without education, without arms, without 
 counsel, without discipline, without a leader; 
 k'ept together by a bond of iniquity which 
 it is a duty to violate and a crime to ob- 
 serve ; men destitute of religion and aban- 
 doned to the most frightful passions, having 
 blasphemy in their mouths and their hands 
 filled with rapine, and oftentimes with 
 blood. Can such as these regenerate a 
 country and make her free and happy ? No, 
 dearest brethren ; left even to themselves 
 they would destroy each other, but opposed 
 to a regular force, they would scatter like a 
 flock of sheep upon a mountain when a 
 thunderstorm affrights them."t 
 
 It is not necessary to moralize upon these 
 sterling sentiments of the great ' J. K. L.," 
 so we will proceed at once to inform our 
 readers why the Catholic Church opposed 
 
 THE FENIAN ORGANIZATION. 
 
 Already we have shown how the ranks of 
 the " Young Ireland" party were filled with 
 spies, and as the Fenian organization was 
 the natural offshoot of the " Young Ire- 
 land" and the " Phoenix Club" movements, 
 
 fLife and Timea of Dr. Doyle, pp. 212-13.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 191 
 
 it naturally occurnd to the Bishops and 
 Priests of Ireland that a large number of 
 innocent people would be placed at the 
 mercy of paid spies and perjured informers 
 in the employ of the English Government 
 if the Fenian organization were permitted 
 to propagate itself throughout the country. 
 Nor were the Bishops and Priests of Ireland 
 alone in their opposition to the new secret 
 society. Such unblemished patriots as 
 Smith O'Brien, John Mitchel, A. M. Sulli- 
 van, John B. Dillon, Charles Gavan Duffy, 
 Kevin Izod O Doherty and a very large 
 proportion of the best and purest patriots 
 then in Ireland, were utterly opposed to 
 any plan entailing secrecy upon its parti- 
 cipants, for the good and sensible reason 
 that traitors would in time hand innocent 
 men over to the British authorities and 
 thus work injury to the cause of Ireland as 
 well as bring life-long sorrow upon i.umerous 
 innocent individuals. 
 
 Skibbereen in the county of Cork was 
 the cradle of Fenianism, and the " Phoenix 
 National and Literary Society" was the 
 nucleus of the organization, James Stephens 
 being its sponsor. The secret object of this 
 new organization was to drill Irishmen in 
 military tactics and the manual of arms, 
 then to supply them with the munitions of 
 war from this country, and ultimately to 
 send over from America five or ten thou- 
 sand men to invade Ireland and to be as- 
 sisted by " the men in the gap," who were 
 to fight to the death for Ireland's freedom. 
 This was a very heroic programme, but it is 
 far easier to theorize on such important 
 affairs of military prowess than it is to carry 
 them in all their perfection into practical 
 operation. 
 
 The great Irish National organ, the Dub- 
 lin Nation came out boldly in opposition to 
 this oath-bound secret organization, and 
 inasmuch as the author of Ireland and the 
 Pope has tried to cast odium on the charac- 
 ter of the deceased Bishop Moriarty, of 
 Kerry, we will let Mr. A. M. O'Sullivan 
 give us the full version of that Prelate's in- 
 terference against the Fenian movement, 
 so as to counteract the garbled account in 
 the book under review. Speaking of the 
 notoriety which the Phoenix Society was 
 beginning to attract through floating rumors 
 
 of the connection of some eminent Irish 
 patriots with its principles, Mr. Sullivan 
 says : 
 
 "Meanwhile a new urgency appeared. 
 The Catholic Bishop of Kerry, the Most 
 Rev. Dr. Moriarty, called upon me one day 
 to say that within the past hour he had 
 heard from a Government official a minute 
 account of the ' Phojnix Society' conspiracy 
 in his diocese. 'It is no use pooh-poohing 
 such work,' said he : ' the Government are 
 preparing to treat it seriously, and are in 
 1 ossexsion of full information A friendly 
 warning through the Nation may disperse the 
 whole danger, and bring these young men 
 back to reason. At all events you will save 
 others from being involved in the catas- 
 trophe.' "* 
 
 Bishop Moriarty 's conduct on this occasion 
 was that of a worthy Christian Bishop who 
 had the best interests of his flock at heart. 
 This Prelate well knew from experience the 
 sad fate which had overtaken and ruined 
 hundreds of families in Ireland by means of 
 secret political organizations which looked 
 very patriotic to the unsuspecting victims, 
 but which proved to be so many traps set 
 by designing informers in order to lodge in 
 prison the best sons of the suffering Irish 
 tenantry and thus entail destitution, exile 
 and death upon many a disrupted family 
 which hitherto had enjoyed lives of rural 
 peace and domestic happiness. 
 
 Mr. Sullivan's interview with Bishop 
 Moriarty resulted in placing the Nation in 
 direct antagonism to the Fenian organiza- 
 tion, and the manner of its opposition can 
 best be told by that distinguished patriot 
 himself in the following extracts :t 
 
 " I hesitated no longer ; I not only pub- 
 lished Mr. O'Brien's Tetter, as he desired, 
 but in strong terms appealed to patriotic 
 Irishmen to avoid the hopeless perils and the 
 demoralizing effects of secret societies. I was, 
 in the same sense as the national leaders had 
 ever been, as "seditious" as any of them in 
 my hostility to the imperial scheme of de- 
 stroying our national autonomy, but I had 
 not studied in vain the history of secret oath- 
 bound associations. I regarded them with 
 horror. I knew all that could be said as to 
 their advantages in revolutionizing a coun- 
 try ; but even in the firmest and best of 
 hands they had a direct tendency to de- 
 
 *New Ireland, p. 275. f275-6 J323-4.
 
 192 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 moralization, and were often, on the whole, 
 more "xrilmts to society than open tyranny. 
 In joining issue on this occasion with the 
 hidden chiefs of the movement, 1 kuew I 
 was setting a great deal on the cast ; yet 1 
 did not know all. No acti n of my life bore 
 consequences more full of suffering and 
 sacrifice for me than did this throughout 
 subsequent years. Conducting such a journal 
 as the Nation, I had no choice as to silence. 
 An equivocal attitude would have bean des- 
 picably mean and cowardly. 1 was called 
 upon to speak and act, under not only the 
 public but the conscientious constraint of 
 duty, and I did so. The result proved that 
 the influence of the Nation had been under- 
 rated ; or, perhaps, I should say, its in- 
 fluence in co operation with the appeals of 
 the Catholic clergy. The enrolment was 
 stopped, and it se?med for a while as if the 
 movement had been relinquished." 
 
 Mr. Sullivan devotes a chapter to the 
 Fenian movement, and in order that our 
 readers may fully understand the opposition 
 which that organization met with from many 
 of Ireland's truest, stanchest, and wisest 
 friends, we cull from the chapter before us 
 the following extracts bearing immediately 
 on the causes which entailed the condemna- 
 tion of the Church upon this oath-bound 
 body :J 
 
 "There were in 1858, on the startirg of 
 this enterprise, several Irish- American news- 
 papers ardent y devoted to the cause of Irish 
 nationality. In New York city alone there 
 were at least two ; one was the the Irish 
 News, established by Thomas Francis 
 Meagher ; the other the Irish- American, 
 then, as now, the leading organ of Irish 
 Nationalism in the United States. Even 
 with these journals the Fenian leaders 
 quarrelled as strongly as with the Nation ; 
 so they decided to establish a special organ 
 of the movement, which accordingly ap- 
 peared as the Phoenix newspaper, in New 
 York. In this journal they struck out vig- 
 orously, right, left, and centre, at every- 
 thing and everybody supposed to be inimical 
 to their undertaking. They had no need to 
 waste words in rousing the ire of their read- 
 ers against England. The Irish in America 
 the maddened fugitives of the dreadful 
 famine and eviction times hated the British 
 power with quenchless hate. The obstacles 
 that most concerned the secret leaders arose 
 from opposition given to their scheme by 
 the Catholic clergy and the open-policy or 
 anti-Fenian Nationalists. The Catholic 
 Church condemns oath-bound secret societies, 
 especially if directed to the subversion of 
 the civil power or the overthrow of religion, 
 for several reasons. First, regarding the 
 
 sanctity of an cath, it denies that any cne 
 who chooses can, for any purpose he pleases, 
 formally administer or impose that solemn 
 obligation Secondly, having regard to the 
 safety of society, <i public order, of morals 
 a~d religion, it prohibits the erection of any 
 such barrier between the objects and 
 operations of a society, and authoritative ex- 
 amination and judgment. Over this critical 
 and important issue the Fenian inurement, 
 on its very threshold, was plunged into a 
 bitter war with the ecclesiastical authorities 
 of the Catholic Church " The Priest has 
 no right to interfere in or dictate our 
 politics," s:ii '. the Fenian loaders; "ours is 
 ap-'litical in \ "iuent ; they must not question 
 us or .imped j us." "You cannot be ad- 
 mitted to the sacraments until you give up 
 and repent of illicit oaths," responded the 
 Catholic Priests ; " and if you contumaciously 
 ' continue in membership of an oath- bound 
 secret society, you are liable to excommuni- 
 cation." "Do you hear this ( we are cursed 
 by the Church for loving our country !" ex- 
 claimed the Fenians ; and so fur the first 
 five years, from 1860 to 1865, the struggle 
 between the Catholic clergy and the Fenian 
 organizers was fierce, violent, and unsparing. 
 A ;eally active "B," or Fenian centra, had 
 need to be a man who cared little for the 
 Priest's denunciations, and who could per- 
 suade the people it was " the Maynooth oath 
 and the gold of England " that made Father 
 Tom so ready to "curse" the cause. The 
 Priests, accordingly, complained that the 
 propagators of Fenianism were men who 
 pa'd little regard to clerical authority and 
 shunned the practices of faith. One can see 
 how out of antagonistic views thus pressed 
 the quarrel eventuated in the Fenians de- 
 nouncing the Priests as deadly foes of Irish 
 natio -ality, and the Priests denouncing the 
 Fenians as enemies of the Church, --men 
 who would overthrow the altar and destroy 
 society. 
 
 "Very similar was the conflict between the 
 secret organization and the non- Fenian or 
 anti- Fenian Nationalists ; the great object of 
 the Fenian leaders being that the people 
 should have no alternative patriotic effort 
 between embracing their enterprise and 
 siding with imperial subjugation. Indeed, 
 a reference to the pages of the Fenian news- 
 papers, and to the public chronicles of the 
 period, will show that tho movement during 
 the four years following I860 was directed 
 less against the English Government than 
 against those Irish Nationalists, Priests and 
 laymen, whose influence was supposed to 
 impede the organization." 
 
 From the foregoing extract it will be dis- 
 cerned at once that the onslaught made on 
 the Catholic Church by certain unwise 
 leaders among the Fenians could only re-
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 193 
 
 suit in the destruction of the party who 
 proposed to free Erin by means which 
 were not in accord with the Christian senti- 
 ments of those most interested in the 
 struggle the Catholic Prelates, Priests and 
 people of Ireland resident in that land. 
 The folly of such opposition to the Church 
 was subsequently clearly understood by re- 
 flecting members of the organization, and 
 the very attitude of antagonism to the 
 Church which was assumed served to weaken 
 the force of Fenianism from the first mo- 
 ment of its existence. 
 
 The author of New Ireland very clearly 
 points out the fact that at every stage of 
 the conspiracy through which the Fenian 
 organization passed in Ireland, the British 
 Government had for its spies and informers 
 the most trusted members of the organiza- 
 tion itself. He describes the cause of the 
 suppression of the Irish People, the treason 
 of Pierce Nagle, and the arrest of the prin- 
 cipal leaders, and then he adds :* 
 
 " It was not the power and arms of the 
 British Government alone that operated to 
 disorganize and destroy the Fenian move- 
 ment. Dissension and revolt among its 
 leaders broke its power. Before two years 
 Stephens was the object of fierce denunciation 
 from his own followers, and John O'Mahony 
 was deposed and degraded by the Senate of 
 the American Branch, over which he had so 
 long presided. In each case the dethroned 
 or impeached leaders had numerous partisans, 
 so that the unity of the organization on each 
 side of the Atlantic was at an end." 
 
 Mr. Sullivan next passes under review 
 the "insurrection" of March 5th, 1867, 
 when the Fenian circles undertook to rise 
 in their might and make an end of Ireland's 
 political misery forever. But here, as in 
 all other attempts made to free Ireland by 
 means of oath- bound compatriots, the spy 
 and the informer spoiled the plans of the 
 patriots at the very moment they sought to 
 bring them to a happy consummation. 
 John Joseph Corydon was one of James 
 Stephens' most trusted agents ; he was not 
 only very high in the Fenian Councils, but 
 he was also very deep in the pay of the 
 British Government to whom he furnished 
 every secret that the organization most 
 carefully guarded under the impressive 
 form of a forbidden oath. 
 *New Ireland, p. 369. 
 
 Fenianism, therefore, furnishes us with 
 another evidence of the wisdom of the Cath- 
 olic Church in putting the ban of her con- 
 demnation upon oath-bound secret associa- 
 tions of a political character, not one of 
 which gained anything for Ireland save the 
 disgrace and distress caused by the blood- 
 hounds who " sold the pass" to the British 
 Government. 
 
 WAS THE HOME KULE MOVEMENT OPPOSED 
 BY THE CHURCH '{ 
 
 One of the prime objects for issuing the 
 book under review seems to have been the 
 deliberate misrepresentation of the Pope 
 and the Bishops and Priests of Ireland 
 upon every question connected with efforts 
 to restore the nationality of that long-suf- 
 fering land. No proofs are offered in jus- 
 tification of any criticisms upon the Church, 
 but she is set down as the deadly enemy of 
 Ireland's aspirations for freedom, even 
 though such efforts were grounded upon the 
 laws of the gospel of Christ. The falsity of 
 such a charge has already been made mani- 
 fest in these pages, and now we will pro- 
 ceed to illustrate still further the vicious 
 veaality which prompted such a groundless 
 accusation. 
 
 The author under review says that "the 
 finger of Rome" kept back the Catholic 
 clergy in Ireland during the early stages of 
 the Home Rule movement. But the real 
 cause which operated in keeping the Irish 
 Bishops and clergy in abeyance for a few 
 months, may be found in the fact that they 
 first desired to ascertain whether the new 
 plan of political action was based upon 
 Christian and constitutional laws, or was it 
 merely a continuation of the secret schemes 
 which so recently had brought exile, desti- 
 tution, ignominy and death to so -many 
 brave patriots who were literally sold into 
 penal servitude by the paid spies, iniquitous 
 informers and treacherous traitors of their 
 own race. 
 
 As soon, however, as it was made mani- 
 fest to the ever-faithful Prelates and 
 Priests of Ireland that the Home Rule 
 movement was based on legitimate lines of 
 political agitation, that moment they gave 
 it their heartiest co-operation, and the vast
 
 194 
 
 THE POl'K AND IRELAND. 
 
 majority of them have stood by the stan- 
 dard of Home Rule ever since. This fact 
 is well known to every intelligent indivi- 
 dual and is a sufficient negative answer to 
 the question propounded above. 
 
 WAS THE LAND LEAOUK OPPOSED BY THE 
 POPE ? 
 
 In the work under review we are told 
 that it was, and the author cites, in proof 
 thereof, the following : 
 
 I. Archbishop VlcCabe puhlished some Pas- 
 toral Letters condemning the Land League asi- 
 t it ion. 
 
 II. Archbishop McCabe was subsequently 
 elevated to the ecclesiastical dignity of a Cardi- 
 nal. 
 
 TIL- On the ?0th of January, 1883, Pope L< o 
 XIII., sent a Retcript to the Irish Clergy com- 
 niandir.g them to suppress a certain clans of so- 
 cieties, the description being broad enough to 
 include the Irish political leagues. 
 
 IV. On May llth, of the same year, the 
 Pope issued a more powerful and mandatory 
 Rescript condemning and forbidding disaffection 
 t the Government, and forbidding subscriptions 
 to the Parneil Testimonial Fund. 
 
 I. The assertion that Archbishop Mc- 
 Cabe published Pastorals against the Land 
 League agitation even admitting that'he 
 did so is no proof that Pope Leo. XIII. 
 opposed the Land League. Nor does the 
 fact that Archbishop McCabe was after- 
 wards made a Cardinal indicate in the least 
 that such elevation was caused by his al- 
 leged Pastorals antagonistic to the Land 
 League. So much on these points. 
 
 II. We now come down to January, 
 1883, when Pope Leo XIII., it is said, is- 
 sued a Rescript to the Irish Clergy, com- 
 manding them to suppress a certain class of 
 si cieties, the description being broad enough 
 to include the Irish Land League. 
 
 Here is "the truth, the whole truth and 
 nothing but the truth," concerning the 
 Pope's actions and utterances regarding the 
 L ind League, as we find them recorded in a 
 most impartial work by a disinterested 
 author :* 
 
 ''The condition of the frish Catholics, 
 who comprise over four fifths of the whole 
 population of Ireland, naturally attracted 
 
 *Pope Leo XIII. His Life and Letters. 
 Compiled bv Rev. J ames F. Talbot. Boston : 
 1886. Pp. 230-36. 
 
 the attention of the Pope at this time. It is 
 not necessary to enter here into any de- 
 scription of the state of Ireland in the years 
 following the coronation of Leo XIII. 
 Everybody is familiar with the story of that 
 home-rule agitation which begun to assume 
 definite form after the famine of 1879-80, 
 and the general election of the latter year ; 
 and which, though it has not yet obtained 
 the goal of its desires, is, nevertheless, 
 morally certain of winning for the Irish peo- 
 ple the inestimable boon of legislative auton- 
 omy. When the Land League first began 
 its crusade against alien landlordism, Eng- 
 land resorted to all sorts of dishonest 
 methods to create the impression at Rome 
 that the Irish Catholics were being tainted 
 with heresy and false ideas. It was said that 
 they were becoming perverts to the erroneous 
 doctrines of socialism ; that they refused to 
 pay their just debts ; that they wre no 
 longer disposed to obey their Priests and 
 Bishops ; and that, in fact, unless some effec- 
 tive barrier were soon interposed, they would 
 lose their faith altogether, and become lost 
 to the Church. 
 
 " Naturally such reports as these, which 
 English landlords took good care to get for- 
 warded to Rome, troubled Pope Leo not a 
 little ; and hence he summoned the Bishops 
 of Cashel, Emly, Limerick, Cloyne, Ross, 
 and Ksrxy, to Rome, to consult with them 
 concerning the situation in Ireland. The 
 patriotic Dr. Croke, the Archbishop of 
 Cashel, took upon himself the defence of the 
 Irish agitators ; and he assured the Holy 
 Father that there was little or no truth in 
 the alarming rumors that English agents had 
 so sedulously spread in Rome. He pointed 
 out that all the great reforms that had in 
 the past been won in Ireland were carried 
 by just such means as the Irish people were 
 now employing to destroy alien landlordism 
 and English misrule ; and he assured his 
 Holiness that there was not the slightest 
 danger of the Irish people either losing their 
 faith, or relaxing that attachment which had 
 hitherto knit them so to closely the Holy See. 
 ' Two things,' said the Holy Father, ' weigh 
 much upon my mind, and are all-important 
 in this question. The first is the preserva- 
 tion of the Catholic faith among the Irish 
 people. Upon this point,' continued his 
 Holiness, ' I confess I have less anxiety ; 
 for the past history of Ireland is a pledge 
 for the future, and I have no fear that the 
 Irish, who have preserved their faith through 
 centuries of misfortune, will ever abandon 
 it. The second is the union of the Bishops 
 and clergy with their people, and the impera- 
 tive necessity that no revolutionary princi- 
 ples should be introduced or allowed to take 
 root among them.' Dr. Croke and the other 
 Irish Prelates assured the Pope anew that 
 there was not the slightest danger of a revo-
 
 THE POPK AND IRELAND. 
 
 195 
 
 lutioii occurring in Ireland. They pointed 
 out to him, that the Irish people were now 
 ei> gaged in a peaceful and constitutional 
 agitation for the acquisition of their 
 rights ; and, as they believed that by such 
 an agitation they would eventually win, 
 there was nothing to dread on the score of 
 an armed uprising against the authorities, 
 even if everybody was persuaded that the 
 laws such authorities enforced were unjust 
 and tyrannical ones. The Holy Father had 
 several audiences with the Irish Prelates 
 during their stay in Home ; and he assured 
 them that his sympathies and good wishes 
 went out to Ireland, to the fidelity of whose 
 people to the faith and the Apostolic See 
 he bore willing and eloquent testimony. 
 Later on, the Pope again called the Irish 
 Bishops to Home, for consultation with them 
 on the Irish situation ; but of that more in 
 its proper place. Early in 1881, Cardinal 
 McCabe, Archbishop of Dublin, since de- 
 ceased, communicated to his clergy the text 
 of a most important Letter addressed to 
 him on the 3rd of January by the Holy 
 Father. The Archbishop asks: 'In what 
 terms does the Holy Father address himself 
 to us] An attempt may be made to dis- 
 tort his words, and to make it appear that 
 the Holy See is hostile to the demand of 
 the country for the repeal of harsh laws. 
 which have brought misery and crime 
 amongst us for long generations. Is this 
 the object of the Letter of the Holy Father ? 
 Most certainly not. He knows the injuries 
 inflicted on our people by the present land 
 code, and he prays that these injuries may 
 be speedily redressed by a change in the 
 laws from which they flow ; but whilst he 
 blesses our determination to obtain justice 
 for an oppressed tenantry, there are in the 
 agitation, as carried on, things which he can 
 not approve. No better exponent of the 
 Holy Father's views can be had than the 
 Holy Father himself, who draws a wide dis 
 tinction between the end aimed at, and 
 some of the means employed to achieve 
 that end.' And then the Archbishop tells 
 how, in his audience with the Pope, ' his 
 Holiness did not in any way disapprove of 
 the people seeking by legitimate and constitu- 
 tional means the redress of their grievances;' 
 but he said that ' in the present agitation, 
 as it is carried on, there are certain things 
 done which I cannot approve of. The peo- 
 ple,' he said, 'should be encouraged in doing 
 what is right, but they should be duly im- 
 pressed with the duty of keeping always 
 within the bounds of law and, religion. ' The 
 words of the last paragraph in the Arch- 
 bishop's letter are perhaps the most vitally 
 important of all. Regretfully writes his 
 Grace: "Rumors to which we would be 
 unwilling to give credence are already in 
 circulation, that the scheme about to be 
 
 proposed by Government for the settli- 
 ment of the land question will be but a 
 halfhearted attempt to grapple with the 
 evil they wish to cure. This would be a 
 deplorable misfortune. Unless the cancer 
 which has been eating away the life of the 
 nation be cut out to the last fibre, health 
 and security never can be restored, and 
 sooner or later the disastrous scenes of to- 
 day will return, but with increased vio- 
 lence.' Dr. McCabe calls the evil of the 
 present land system ' a cancer eating into 
 the life of the nation, which must be cut out 
 to the last fibre, or health and security can 
 never be restored.' 'A halfhearted at- 
 tempt' to grapple with it, Archbishop Mc- 
 Cabe designates as 'a deplorable misfoi- 
 tune.' " 
 
 THE POPE'S LETTER. 
 
 TO OUK VENERABLE BROTHER, EDWARD M CABF, 
 ABCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN, PRIMATE OK IB1- 
 LAND 
 
 Venerable Brother : Health and Apostol : c 
 Benedic ion. We read with pleasure yoi r 
 Letter recently addressed to the clergy ai.d 
 people of the Diocese of Dublin, and presented 
 to Us by you when you were in Rome ; for in it 
 We recognized your prudence and moderatior, 
 since, while Ireland is now deeply moved, pai'- 
 ly by a desire of better things, partly by a fear 
 of an uncertain future, you offer counsel admit 
 ably suited to the occasion. 
 
 The unhappy condition of Catholics in Ireland 
 disquiets and afflicts Us ; and We highly esteem 
 their virtue, sorely tried by adversity not for a 
 brief period only, but for many centuries. For, 
 with the greatest fortitude and constancy, they 
 preferred to endure every misfortune rather 
 than forsake the religion of their fathers, or 
 deviate in the slightest degree from their ancient 
 tidelily to the Apostolic ?ee. Moreover, it is 
 their singular glory, extending down to tl e 
 present time, that most noble proofs of all the 
 other virtues were never wanting amnngst their. 
 Thet-e reasons force Us to love them with patt-i- 
 nal btnevolence, and fervently to wish that the 
 evils by which they are afflicted may quickly be 
 brwught to an end. 
 
 At the same time, We unhesitatirgly declare 
 that it is their duty to be carefully on their 
 guard not to allow the fame of their sterling 
 and hereditary probity to be lessened, and not 
 to commit any rash act whereby they may e* pin 
 to have cast aside the obedience due their law- 
 ful rulers ; and for this reason, whenever IreUnd 
 was greatly excited in guarding and defending 
 her own interests, the Roman Pontiffs constant- 
 ly endeavored by admonition and exhortation 
 to allay the excited feelings, lest, by a disregard 
 of moderation, justice might be violated, or the
 
 196 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 cause, however right in itself, might be forced 
 by the influence of passion into the flame of 
 sedition. These counsels were also directed to 
 the end that the Catholics of Ireland should in 
 all things follow the Church as a guide and 
 teacher ; and, thoroughly conforming them- 
 selves to her precepts, they should reject the 
 allurements of pernicious doctrines. Thus the 
 Supreme Pontiff Gregory XVI., on the 12th of 
 March, 1839, and on the 15;h of October, 1844, 
 through the Sacred Congregation of the Propa- 
 ganda, admonished the Archbishop of Armagh 
 to do nothing except with justice and modera- 
 tion. And We, following the example of Our 
 predecessors, took care on the l*t of June 
 last year, as you are aware, to give to all the 
 Bishops of Ireland the salutary admonitions 
 which the occasion demanded ; namely, that 
 the Irish people bhould obey the Bishop.", and in 
 no particular deviate from the sacredness of 
 duty. And a little later, in the mouth of 
 November, We testified to some Irish Bishops 
 who had come to visit the tombs of the Apostles, 
 that We ardently desired every good gift for 
 the people of Ireland ; but We also added, that 
 order should not be disturbed. 
 
 This manner of thinking and acting is entire- 
 ly conformable to the ordinances and laws of 
 the Catholic Church, and We have no doubt 
 that it will conduce to the interests of Ireland. 
 For We have confidence in the j ustice of the 
 men who are placed at the head of the State, 
 and who certainly, for the most part, have great 
 exparience, combined with prudence in civil 
 affairs. Ireland may obtain what she wants, 
 much m"re safely and readily, if only she adopts 
 a course which the laws allow, and avoids giving 
 causes of offence. 
 
 Therefore, venerable brother, let you and your 
 colleagues in the Episcopate direct your efforts 
 to the end that the people of Ireland, in this 
 anxious condition of affairs, do not transgress 
 the bounds of equity and justice. We have as- 
 suredly received from the Bishops, the Clergy, 
 and the people of Ireland, many proofs of rever- 
 ence and affection ; and if now, in a willing 
 spirit, they obey these counsels and Our au- 
 thority, as We are certain they will, they may 
 feel assured that they have fulfilled their own 
 duty, and have completely satisfied Us. 
 
 Finally, from Our heart We implore God to 
 lo >k down propitiously on Ireland ; and in the 
 meantime, as a pledge of heavenly gifts. We 
 affectionately impart in the Lord the Apostolic 
 Benediction to you, venerable brother, to the 
 other Bishops of Ireland, and to the entire 
 Clergy and people. 
 
 Given at St. Peter s, Rome, on the third day 
 of January, 1881, in the third year of Our Pon- 
 tificate. 
 
 LEO PP. XIII. 
 
 It would be a work of supererogation on 
 our part to add any remarks to the above 
 loving Letter of the Holy Father to the 
 Irish people, as its plain language, its 
 parental tone, its friendly expression and 
 its general sympathy for the success of every 
 just effort for Ireland's amelioration, proves 
 it to have emanated from the feeling heart 
 of a Pontiff who has never for a moment 
 wavered in his love for Ireland and her 
 valiant, virtuous Catholic people. 
 
 It is a plain and palpable fact, therefore, 
 that the Land League movement was not op- 
 posed by the Church, and we joyfully 
 pride ourselves upon the fact that the 
 foregoing extracts are triumphant vindica- 
 tions of Pope Leo's friendly attitude to- 
 wards the Irish Land League when carried 
 on in a legitimate manner, and in com- 
 pliance with the laws of Christian morality 
 outside of which no Catholic can venture 
 if he desires the blessing of God and His 
 Church to rest upon his struggles for Ire- 
 land's freedom. 
 
 IV. Let us now pass under review the 
 miscalled "more powerful and mandatory 
 Rescript" which our author miatakingly as- 
 serts to have "condemned and forbid dis- 
 affection to the British Government." This 
 document introduced with such rhetorical 
 spleen and rabid virulence was not a Re- 
 script in any sense. It was merely a sim- 
 ple Letter issued by the Sacred Congrega- 
 tion of the Propaganda to the Bishops of 
 Ireland, and signed by the Prefect Cardi- 
 nal Simeoni. 
 
 The text of this Letter stated that it was 
 sinful to further a just cause by unlawful 
 methods. Thereby admitting that the cause 
 in which the Irish Land League was en- 
 gaged was ju-st in itself, but that some of 
 the means employed to attain its end were 
 not grounded on Christian justice. Cardi- 
 nal Simeoni expressed the fear that cupidity 
 had exercised its influence over a portion of 
 the Irish people, that they were adopting 
 false views, and that they were seeking for 
 national prosperity through the instrumental- 
 ity of remedies which would lead to crime. 
 The Circular stated that class-hatred was 
 engendered in Ireland, horrible crimes were 
 not reprobated, and men were terrorized 
 by the threats of holding them up as the
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 197 
 
 enemies of Ireland unless they subscribed 
 their money to the fund in question. This, 
 in brief, is the contents of the forty-line 
 Circular which has caused so much calumny 
 to be hurled at the Holy Father, who has 
 borne this contumely with model Christian 
 meekness. 
 
 Now let us see what this Circular did not 
 condemn. There is not a syllable in it 
 condemning the Land League. On the 
 contrary, it explicitly states that it is the 
 perfect right of the Irish people to endeavor 
 to obtain an alleviation of their present 
 troubles, and to agitate for their political 
 rights. Not a word in the Circular in con- 
 demnation of Mr. Parnell personally, nor 
 a syllable of censure against his political 
 policy, and the document disclaims any in- 
 tention of doing so.* 
 
 There in not a single reference in the 
 Simeoni Circular condemnatory of the Fair 
 Rent agitation, of the movement for buy- 
 ing out the Irish Landlords, of Home Rule, 
 the Land League, or even entire Repeal of 
 the Union between Great Britian and Ire- 
 land In fine, there is not a single sentence 
 in this document which justifies the ex- 
 travagant language used in connection with 
 it in the pages of the publication whose 
 malicious errors we have so successfully 
 contradicted. It is clear, therefore, from 
 the irrefutable evidence we have adduced, 
 that Pope Leo XIII. did not oppose the 
 Irish Land League. 
 
 THE PAPAL " RESCRIPT" OF 1888. 
 The author whose book we are reviewing 
 seems to have a weakness for calling every 
 document issued by Cardinals or Congrega- 
 tions in Rome by the handy title of Rescript, 
 so as to designedly give them an authorita- 
 tive prominence which, he vainly imagines, 
 they might not otherwise possess. This 
 mistake we have heretofore pointed out 
 and it is only necessary for us to do so 
 again, because the so-called Papal "Re- 
 script" of the 20fch of April, 1888, which 
 our author alludes to, was simply a Circular 
 issued by the Congregation of the Holy 
 Office in Rome and signed by Cardinal 
 Simeoni. This document was the Circular 
 
 *"Quidquid sit de persona Parnelli fjusjue 
 concilia." 
 
 which alluded to the " Plan of Campaign'' 
 and "Boycotting" as not being considered 
 justifiable by the Cardinals according to 
 the matters laid down for their guidance in 
 forming their judgment. 
 
 In the consideration of thia Circular, and 
 in order that our readers may have a clear 
 and authoritative exposition of its real in- 
 tent, force and meaning, we opine that the 
 better way to reach such a conclusion is to 
 publish the opinions of Most Rev. Dr. Wil- 
 liam Walsh, Archbishop of Dublin, as that 
 distinguished patriotic Prelate expressed 
 them in an interview with a representative 
 of the Dublin Freeman's Journal shortly 
 after the document in question was issued : 
 
 Representative : I am fortunate, your 
 Grace, in being the first on your return 
 from Rome to hear what you may have to 
 say about the recent Rescript, and its bear- 
 ings upon the public affairs of Ireland. 
 
 The Archbishop : Well, perhaps so ; but 
 I do not think that I have anything of sub- 
 stantial importance to add to what I have 
 already written from Rome upon the sub- 
 ject. Very soon after the Rescript, as you 
 call it, had been published 
 
 R. Your Grace will pardon me if I ask, 
 then, whether " Rescript" is not the proper 
 term to use I 
 
 A. No; but this is a matter merely of 
 technical accuracy. The word "Rescript" 
 has a restricted technical sense, and, strictly 
 speaking, it is not applicable in the present 
 case. The document in question should 
 rather be spoken of as a " Decree." It is a 
 Decree or decision of the Holy Office, ap- 
 proved by the Sovereign Pontiff. * 
 
 R. The news, as your Grace no doubt 
 is aware, first appeared in a London Protest- 
 ant newspaper, a paper most hostile to the 
 Irish National movements. There is in Ire- 
 land, and also indeed, as a matter of course, 
 among the Irish population in England, in 
 Scotland, and in America, a strong and 
 even angry feeling on this point People 
 are saying that whatever the Decree may 
 be in itself, the fact that it was communi- 
 cated for publication in the first instance 
 through such a channel, in a newspaper 
 notoriously hostile both to the Land League 
 movement, and to the Home Rule move- 
 ment, gives it a decidedly political aspect. 
 
 A. To be candid with you, I do not at all 
 wonder that such a feeling exists. If I did 
 not know the facts of the case I should feel 
 very strongly on the subject myself. But 
 the hasty judgments that have been formed 
 on this point do a grievous wrong to the 
 Holy Father. Take the case even on broad, 
 general grounds. The notion that the Pope
 
 198 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 was in any way influenced by political 
 considerations such as you refer to, rests 
 altogether upon the assumption that his 
 Holiness is in some way opposed to the Irish 
 Nationalist movements to the movement 
 for Home Rule, or to the movement for ob- 
 taining a full measure of justice or of pro- 
 tection against oppression for the tenant- 
 farmers of Ireland. Now no asmimftion 
 con/tl be more absolutely ccnirary to fact. 
 
 R. It is, I may say, universally believed, 
 your Grace, that many strong influences 
 of various kinds have been brought to bear 
 upon his Holiness within the last year or so, 
 to lead him to take an adverse view of the 
 Iri.<h cause. 
 
 A. People may believe what they like, 
 but I know what 1 am talking about. It is 
 essential that this point should be fully 
 understood by the Irish people at home and 
 abroad No matter what influences have 
 been brought to bear upon the Holy Father, 
 no matter through what channels they may 
 have worked, no matter how powerful they 
 may have been, their work has resulted in 
 absolute failure. His Holiness understands 
 the Irish question fully. He knows what is 
 meant by the demand for Home Rule. 
 And he knows what U meant by the de- 
 mand for a full and effective measure of pro- 
 tection against oppression and of justice for 
 t'.ie Irish tenants. That is to say, he knows 
 in the fullest detail what is meant by these 
 de nands as I understand them 
 
 R. Your Grace, it was hoped, would 
 have an opportunity of putting these mat- 
 ters before his Holiness 
 
 A. I had it, and I had it in a fullness 
 which I certainly could not have hoped for. 
 I need hardly add that I availed myself to 
 the fullest possible extent of the opportun- 
 ity that was so graciously afforded me 
 That, in fact, was what kept me so long in 
 Rome The Holy Father is now in full 
 possession of the Irish national programme. 
 Having said so much 1 need only add that 
 nothing could be further from hia thoughts 
 than any desii e to put the slightest obstacle 
 in the way of its success Quite the con- 
 trary. It is the firm conviction of his Holi- 
 ness that the publication of the Decree of the 
 Holy Office, condemning as it does, those 
 points in the practical working of the 
 movement on which so much hostile criti- 
 cism was concentrated, will be the most de- 
 cided help in the advancement of the Irish 
 cause. 
 
 The following day the Archbishop of 
 Dublin was interviewed by a representative 
 of the Star. In the course of the interview 
 his Grace said : 
 
 The Archbishop : If you wish to know 
 my views on the land question I shall be 
 happy to give them to you. 
 
 R. The agitation to which the Rescript 
 has given rise turns mainly upon the state- 
 ment made about the land question in that 
 document The Irish people have been as- 
 sured by your Grace in the first instance, 
 and afterwards by the recent meeting of the 
 Irish Bishops, that the Roman Decree is a 
 decision in morals and not a political act. 
 But it lays down a number of statements 
 that certainly amount to the condemnation 
 of the present land movement from be- 
 ginning to end. 
 
 A. No ; excuse me, nothing of the kind. 
 
 R. Does it not practically define that the 
 Irish tenants have no longer any cause for 
 complaint ? It says, equivalently at least, 
 th*t the rent question is now settled ; that 
 the tenants are under an obligation of jus- 
 tice to pay their rents ; or th .t at all events 
 there are tribunals in existence to do them 
 full justice if they think their rents too 
 high. It is hard to know what it is, if it is 
 not a sweeping condemnation of the Irish 
 Land movement in every shape and form. 
 
 A But you may t*ke it on my authority 
 that there is no such condemnation. I can- 
 not deny that statements such as you have 
 quoted are to be found in the Letter that 
 accompanies the Decree. But the Decree 
 itself approved as it is by the Pope, is one 
 thing ; that Letter is another. 
 
 R. That is the Letter of Cardinal 
 Monaco ? 
 
 A. Yes. There has been a great deal of 
 foolish writing on this subject in some of 
 the newspapers. It is all very irritating to 
 our people, and I have no doubt that a great 
 deal of it was meant to be so. The Decrea 
 itself, as a decision in morals, is binding on 
 consciences of Catholics. As to Cardi- 
 nal Monaco's Letter, it is to be treated of 
 course, with respect; but it has no binding 
 force whatever. It is not intended, and in- 
 deed, it could not have been intended to 
 have any. 
 
 The lucid explanation which the eminent 
 Archbishop of Dublin gives concerning the 
 Propaganda Circular makes it entirely un- 
 necessary for us to say any more on the 
 subject, save to p'ace on record the fact that 
 Pope Leo XIII., is entirely exculpated 
 from all the calumnies cast upon his charac- 
 ter by demagogues and doubtful Catholics 
 whose malice has led them into taking sides 
 with the enemies of both Ireland and the 
 Pope.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 199 
 
 CHAPTER XXXV. 
 
 Some Vicious Falsehoods Regarding "Vatican Politics" fully Refuted The "Italian 
 Ring" Accounted for. The Characters of Pope Alexander VI., and other 
 Pontiffs Triumphantly Vindicated. Conclusion. 
 
 There is no body of representatives that 
 have ever existed in the world who have 
 been more caustically calumniated, or more 
 constantly maligned, than the Popes of 
 Rome the Vicars of Christ, the Vicegerents 
 of God. Catholics may wonder why this is 
 so, since so large a majority of them were 
 pious, pure and prudent, wise beyond their 
 generation, and directed in their office by 
 Divine Wisdom Itself. 
 
 The Popes are in the world but not of it, 
 and, representing as they do in their ca- 
 pacity as Chief Bishops of the one holy 
 Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church of 
 Chribt, that they should be hated and 
 slandered by the world is precisely what the 
 Son of God predicted concerning all who 
 take up their cross and follow Him. The 
 servant cannot be greater than the Master, 
 and as our Blessed Redeemer was ha ed and 
 reviled whilst on earth for man's Redemp- 
 tion, so also were his chief servants, the 
 Popes of Rome, reviled from the first to 
 the nineteenth century. In a word, to that 
 glorious body of saintly men may well be 
 applied the words of our Lord to His 
 disciples : 
 
 "Blessed shall you be when men shall hate 
 you, and when they shall separate you. and cast 
 out your name aa evil for the Son of Man's sake. 
 Be glad in that day and rejoice ; for behold, 
 your reward is great in Heaven. For according 
 to these things did their fathers to the Prophets." 
 
 The author of the work under review ex- 
 presses great anxiety in his last chapter 
 that his readers should have " a general 
 knowledge of the character (religious and 
 political) of the Papal office and of the 
 personnel of its incumbents at various 
 periods, and also a knowledge of the origin, 
 characteristics and personnel of the College 
 of Cardinals," and then follows several 
 pages of some of the most vicious and 
 vituperative falsehoods that ever were 
 
 framed by apostates, animated by the spirit 
 of diabolical hatred against Almighty God, 
 His Church and His Vicars. Such slan- 
 derous and malignant misrepresentations 
 are calculated to exert a most baneful influ- 
 ence in the world if they are penni ted to 
 exist without refutation, hence we add a 
 chapter to our work in order to show the 
 slanderous nature of this author's vile repe- 
 tition of his anti Christian precursors in the 
 evil work of slandering the Bride of Christ 
 and her chief Bishops. 
 
 The apostate antagonist whose work we 
 are reviewing seems to be greatly disturbed 
 in his mind through fear that the Pope and 
 the Cardinals, who constitute the executive 
 organization of the Catholic Church, will 
 commit some overt act which will lead to 
 disasterous consequences, but inasmuch as 
 the writer in question has publicly placed 
 himself outside the pale of the Church by 
 his open apostacy, we fail to see why he is 
 so perturbed on this subject, save that he 
 desires to arouse suspicion in the minds of 
 Catholics so as to change their reverence 
 for their Church into a hatred as intense as 
 that so manifestly and malignantly evinced 
 in his bad book. 
 
 The next complaint made is based upon 
 this statement : 
 
 "The College of Cardinals for over eight hun- 
 dred years (ever since it was created) has been 
 composed almost exclusively of Italians, and 
 these hare been nearly all members of a 
 little Italian nobility consisting of a very few 
 families." 
 
 For the information of our readers it 
 may be well to meet this objection by giving 
 the reasons why a large majority of the 
 members of the College of Cardinals are 
 Italians, which is simply a condition that is 
 enforced by reason of the fact that all the 
 business transacted by the Church is carried 
 on in Rome. It will be easily understood,
 
 200 
 
 THK POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 therefore, that in carrying on the vast 
 amount of ecclesiastical business transacted 
 for the Bishops, Priosts and laity all over 
 the world it is most necessary that the Car- 
 dinals should reside in the immediate 
 vicinity of the Holy Father so as to receive 
 his instructions speedily and easily. 
 
 Rome is the centre and capital of the 
 Catholic Church. Here are received'all ec' 
 clesiastical and diplomatic documents from 
 every portion of the civilized globe, and if 
 the Pope had to wait until Cardinals could 
 be sent for from different portions of 
 the Christian world in order to transact 
 the business detailed in such documents, 
 the wheels of the Church would be clogged 
 and nothing but delay, disorder and disap- 
 pointment would ensue. 
 
 Under the system of having Italian 
 Cardinals who reside in Rome, the mul- 
 tifarious duties of the different Congrega- 
 tions are attended to promptly, and the vast 
 concerns of the Church run along smoothly 
 and successfully. It must also be borne in 
 mind that men are not born Cardinals. 
 The training necessary to understand fully 
 the particular and peculiar methods em 
 ployed by the Holy See in its adminis- 
 tration of the different duties entailed upon 
 the Vicar of Christ, as well as upon the 
 members of the different Congregations, 
 can only be acquired by a long residence as 
 well as by close and constant study and 
 training in the Eternal City. 
 
 It now remains for us only to show why 
 so many Cardinals are members of " a little 
 Italian nobility,'' and that is very easily ac- 
 complished. Cardinals residing in Rome 
 receive only a small stipend which is not 
 nearly sufficient to meet their expenses. 
 Roman Cardinals are compelled to keep up 
 a certain amount of dignity which those in 
 other countries are exempt from. A Roman 
 Cardinal must have a certain number of 
 servants, his own horses and carriage, and 
 all the other appurtenances of his high office, 
 and it is only the members of that ' little 
 Italian nobility," so sneeringly and scur- 
 riously alluded to, that are able to furnish 
 the means to keep up the expenses entailed 
 on Cardinals resident in Rome, in order, 
 therefore, to sustain the dignity of their 
 
 high ecclesiastical position, and to be able 
 to contribute the alms which they are con- 
 stantly interceded for, Italian candidates for 
 the purple have to be either wealthy in 
 their own right, or else members of families 
 whose position in life is such that they are 
 able to assist their relatives with a share of 
 their riches. 
 
 Such is the reason why Italian Cardinals 
 happen in many cases to be members of 
 "a little Italian nobility," and it is the 
 same "little Italian nobility," by the way 
 which has given to the Church some of 
 the greatest Saints, Popes, Cardinals and 
 Bishops that ever lived beneath the shadow 
 of St. Peter's. Thus it would seem as if 
 Almighty God had raised up this " little 
 Italian nobility" around the Pontifical 
 Chair for His own wise ends, for His own 
 greater honor and glory, as well as for the 
 benefit of the whole Church. 
 
 Malignant-minded writers who thus wan- 
 tonly sneer at ''the little Italian nobility" in 
 Rome, and who allude to the fact that some 
 of the Popes were blood relations as some- 
 thing that is dishonorable to the Papacy 
 and inj urious to the Church, evidently for- 
 get that in selecting St. John the Baptist 
 as His precursor, and also in gathering 
 around Himself the twelve Apostles 
 who were to propagate His truths, our 
 Blessed Redeemer had among all of these 
 first Christians many men who were 
 related by consanguinity not only to Him- 
 self but also to each other. Thus St. 
 John the Baptist was a relative of our Di- 
 vine Lord ; St. James the Greater was a 
 brother of St. John the Evangelist and also 
 related to our Blessed Redeemer ; St. James 
 the Less was called the brother of our Lord, 
 and St. Andrew was the brother of St. 
 Peter. Here, therefore, we have the first 
 "colony" of Christians formed by the Son 
 of God Himself, and therein we find a most 
 excellent precedent for " the little Italian 
 nobility consisting of a very few families." 
 The Church of God was founded by " a very 
 few families," yet it was the All wise, Om- 
 nipotent and Omnipresent Creator of all 
 things Who thus founded it. And all 
 praise, glory and adoration to Him for 
 having done so !
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 201 
 
 A VINDICATION OF THE CHARACTER OK POPE 
 ALEXANDER VI. AND OTHER PONTIFFS. 
 
 As an example of the "consuming am- 
 bition and burning jealousies" which marred 
 the lives of the members of " the little 
 Italian nobility," our author cites the case 
 of Pope Alexander VI., whom he styles 
 " an exceptionally unworthy Pope," merely 
 because he found some enemy of that Pon- 
 tiff who had calumniated his character. 
 
 It is the misfortune of the Catholic 
 Church that Protestant calumniators of the 
 Popes have been allowed to fill the ears of 
 mankind in general with their slanders 
 against the characters of many Pontiffs, 
 whilst Catholic writers remained listlessly 
 looking on and seemingly helpless to stay 
 the assaults of the common enemy. For this 
 reason even Catholics themselves have come 
 to look upon Popes like Alexander VI., 
 with feelings of horror, and to wonder how 
 such " monsters of iniquity" could be per- 
 mitted by Almighty God to reign over His 
 Church. In this way the demon of detrac- 
 tion has dinned into the ears of the world 
 all the fallacious fables, malicious inven- 
 tions, and diabolical falsehoods which an- 
 c ent and modern enemies of the Church 
 have thrown upon the surface of the stream 
 of anti- Catholic literature since printing was 
 invented. By this means cowardice has been 
 engendered in the minds of many Catholics 
 who, in their timidity, imagine that no de- 
 fence whatever can be made against such 
 assaults upon the characters of Pontiffs like 
 Alexander VI., who is ranked, seemingly 
 by general consent, as " the worst among 
 bad Popes." 
 
 It is no discredit to us to admit that 
 thirty years ago we were among those who 
 believed in the commonly- reported iniqui- 
 ties attributed to the Pontiff whose defence 
 we have undertaken. But when we had 
 devoted much time to reading, we began to 
 discover that there were positive reasons 
 which impelled certain individuals who 
 lived contemporaneous with Pope Alexander 
 VI., to blacken his character. These slan- 
 ders were carried down the stream of time, 
 being increased in iniquity and augmented 
 in number by Protestant and infidel writers 
 who desired to "make bad worse" for the 
 
 reason that every pang they inflicted upon 
 the Catholic Church was calculated to lessen 
 her influence in the world by undermining 
 the earthly corner-stone of the entire fabric. 
 
 One cause why the character of Pope 
 Alexander VI., has been assailed with such 
 virulence may be traced to the fact that in 
 the period of his existence a great degree of 
 rivalry and animosity existed between some 
 of the leading Italian families, each of 
 which had literary hangers-on who were 
 prepared to blacken the character of Pope, 
 Prince or Bishop in order to satisfy the 
 jealousy and spleen of those who hired 
 them, as well as to replenish their fortunes 
 by means of such malignant attacks upon 
 innocent people who thus became the vic- 
 tims of hatred inspired by misrepresenta- 
 tion. 
 
 An idea of the state of Italy at the time 
 when Pope Alexander was called upon to 
 rule the Church may be gleaned from the 
 fact that between the last illness of Pope 
 Innocent VIII. , and the coronation of his 
 successor, Alexander VI. a period of less 
 than two months there were more than 
 two hundred unpunished assassinations com- 
 mitted in the Ecclesiastical States alone. 
 Among the first acts of the new Pontiff 
 was the appointment of four Commissioners 
 to inquire into these horrible crimes, whilst 
 Alexander himself had to devote one day 
 each week to hearing the complaints of the 
 families of the victims. And this arduous 
 and disagreeable duty he did with such 
 equal and exact justice to all that he gave 
 great public satisfaction.* 
 
 The State of contention between the 
 prominent families which made up the 
 Italian nobility of the fifteenth century, 
 may well be compared, in its scandalous in- 
 tensity, to the attitudes assumed by the dif- 
 ferent political factions in this country about 
 the time when a presidential election is ap- 
 proaching. A person who could con over 
 the contents of the American political press 
 a hundred years from now would form the 
 opinion that both President Harrison and 
 ex-President Cleveland were men who did 
 not possess a single virtue to entitle them to 
 hold for a day the exalted position of 
 
 *Da Montor's Lives and Times of the Roman 
 Pontiffs, Vol. I. p. 634.
 
 202 
 
 THK POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 President of thU great Republic. The 
 partisan press of each political organization 
 so blackens the characters of opposing can- 
 didates that the reader of the future will 
 wonder how the Union continued to exist 
 when certain men were called upon to take 
 the first positions in its government. And, 
 in like manner, the writers of the fifteenth 
 century blackened the character of Pope 
 Alexander VI. through a spirit cf spleen 
 and jealousy which cauaed them to love 
 falsehood better than truth. 
 
 During the present century, however, a 
 great flood of light has been thrown upon 
 the character of Alexander VI., redeem- 
 ing it from the huge mass of filth cast 
 upon it by Guicciardini, Burchardt, Jove, 
 Tomasi, Machiavelli, Voltaire and the 
 school of slanderers who have studiously 
 followed that arch enemy of Christianity 
 with a fidelity worthy of a better cause. 
 Nearly all the calumnies heaped upon this 
 Pontiffs memory have been proved unjust as 
 well as undeserved, and although Roderico 
 Borgia, when a your.g man, may have been 
 addicted to some licentious habits, yet, as 
 Pontiff, his character is free from all carnal 
 corruption. In a word Pope Alexander has 
 been made the scape-goat of the scandal- 
 mongers of the fifteenth century. 
 
 Now let us glance at the character of the 
 men through whose malignant animosity the 
 character of Pope Alexander VI. has been 
 designedly defamed. Let us ascertain by 
 contemporaneous fact and subsequent evi- 
 dence whether they are entitled to credit 
 for the slanderous charges which emanated 
 from their malignant imaginations, and 
 when once we have revealed the vilenesa 
 of the traducers of this Pontiff, the pleasing 
 discovery will be made that they are entire- 
 ly unworthy of any recognition whatever as 
 the accusers of a Pope whose good name 
 they have buried for nearly four hundred 
 years beneath the debris of diabolical de- 
 traction. Here are the principal pensioned 
 or prejudiced witnesses against Pope Alex- 
 ander VI. : 
 
 The first writer whose wicked inventions 
 and innuendos have helped to sully the 
 character of the Pontiff whose case we are 
 considering, is the Florentine, Machiavelli, 
 
 who was a prototype of the notoriously vile 
 Giraldus Cambrensis a man whose evi- 
 dence no person acquainted with his char- 
 acter for falsehood would accept. A pen- 
 sioned writer who purposely poisoned his 
 pages with putrid charges against the Pope 
 in question, for no higher motive than that 
 which impels a hired assassin to remorse- 
 lessly stab his innocent victim to death. 
 Like Cambrensis, the hireling of King 
 Henry II. of England, Machiavelli was a 
 noted traducer, whose libelous pen was ever 
 ready to puncture and poison the characters 
 of those whom he was paid to revile and 
 to bring into disgrace. 
 
 Guicciardini was only twenty years old 
 when Pope Alexander died, hence his accu- 
 sations were merely copies of the calumnies 
 of his purchased predecessors. Speaking of 
 the bad faith of this foe of the Pontiff the 
 infidel Bayle in his Dictionnaire Phil- 
 osophi<fue, says: "Guicciardini deserves 
 to be reprobated ; he is guilty of the fault 
 of all scandal mongers," and even Voltaire 
 accuses this hireling of imposture. So vile 
 was his History of Italy that when Guicciar- 
 dini was on his death bed he requested that 
 it be burned a fate that might justly have 
 been applied to many other fifteenth cen- 
 tury documents which descanted unjustly 
 upon the character of Pope Alexander VI. 
 Paul Jove, another traducer of this Pon- 
 tiff, is described as "a venal and untruth- 
 ful writer," one who boasted that he wielded 
 two pens one of gold, the other of iron 
 to write of princes according to the favors 
 or frowns he received from them ! He was 
 also noted as one who "mercilessly defamed 
 those who would not pay him for his false- 
 hoods." In this age such a character would 
 be called a professional blackmailer ! 
 
 Tomasi was paid his price for his per- 
 fidious slanders by the enemies of the tra- 
 duced Pontiff. He theieby became un- 
 worthy of credence or respect. Such at 
 least is the opinion adduced by Autoine 
 Varrilas in his work on Louis XII. 
 
 We now come to the Diarium of John 
 Burchardt. This book is the chief store- 
 house from which modern enemies of the 
 Church draw their supply of slanders against 
 Pope Alexander VI. which, they inject into
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 203 
 
 the current literature of the century. 
 During his whole life Burchardt was 
 altogether unknown to literary fame. Not 
 a single evidence of his mental labors 
 existed in the world when he died. But 
 nearly tivo hundred years after his death, a 
 French Calvinist claimed to have discovered 
 what is now known as the Diarium or docu- 
 ment of detraction against the character of 
 Pope Alexander VI. The documents which 
 this bitter enemy of the Church said he dis- 
 covered, consisted of a motley group of de- 
 tached leaves, some of them written in 
 Latin, others in French, and others again in 
 Italian. These unauthenticated documents, 
 so suspiciously found nearly two hundred 
 years after the death of Burchardt, were 
 presented to Leibnitz, who gave them to 
 the world as genuine copies of some original 
 documents which he regretted "he had not 
 been able to become possessed of. Such is 
 the slender and very suspicious thread upon 
 which the traductions of the Diarium are 
 strung. 
 
 Here we have a vile work attributed to 
 a man who was not known to have ever put 
 a single thought on paper during his whole 
 life. Two centuries elapse after his death 
 when a bitter Protestant produces some odd 
 leaves of manuscript, he passes them to an- 
 other^Protea ant, and he glad to gather in 
 any literary garbage that would defile the 
 Catholic Church prints them as the diary 
 of a man dead two hundred years and en- 
 tirely unknown in the literary world ! 
 These circumstances are well calculated to 
 excite suspicion. But to make matters 
 worse to make " confusion worse con- 
 founded" other Protestant individuals be- 
 gan to discover other detracting documents 
 which they, too, considered as versions of 
 Burchardt's Diarium, and out of this 
 medley of manuscript has been hatched 
 many of the vilest calumnies which hitherto 
 have blackened the character of Pope Alex- 
 ander VI. in the eyes of both Catholics and 
 Protestants alike. 
 
 Let us ask, therefore, every impartial 
 reader, if the character of one of the ablest 
 successors of St. Peter is to be weighed and 
 found wanting by the unjust weights of such 
 wicked inventions ? The calumnies are con- 
 tained in a book supposed to be written by 
 
 a man who was never known as an author. 
 The manuscripts are fathered by French Cal- 
 vinists the most bitter and unscrupulous 
 enemies the Church encountered in modern 
 ages. The uispicious documents are sud- 
 denly brought to light when two centuries 
 had rolled over the tomb of their reputed 
 author. Do not our readers see the evi- 
 dences of fraud, fanaticism and forgery in 
 these documents j ust as plainly as we have 
 pointed them out in the Adrian and Alex- 
 ander Bulls of a few centuries previous? 
 
 Now let us turn away from these sus- 
 picious documents and glean from the pages 
 of respectable writers the opinions they 
 held concerning the vile fragments which 
 are supposed to make up the volumes at- 
 tributed to John Burchardt. Paris de 
 Grassis, a Canon of Bologna and subsequent- 
 ly Bishop of Pesaro, speaking of the vile 
 rubbish said to have been composed by 
 Burchardt says : " Not only was he no man 
 but he was in reality the most detestable of 
 beasts ; besides, he was very wicked and 
 spiteful. He has written books which no- 
 body can understand unless it be a sibyl 
 or the devil, who must have been his ac- 
 complice."* 
 
 Such is the character of the man who is 
 made to appear on the witness stand of the 
 world to swear against the character of Pope 
 Alexander VI. What think you of him ? 
 A fiend with the Father of Lies to help 
 him, could invent any calumny short of con- 
 victing the Son of God of error, and it is 
 upon such Satan-inspired testimony that 
 the world has uttered its condemnation of 
 Pope Alexander VI. 
 
 The base interpolator who added the 
 forty-second chapter to the Mttalogicns 
 of John of Salsbury made that Prelate eat, 
 drink and all but sleep with Pope Adrian 
 IV., during his sojourn in Rome. In like 
 manner the conspirators against truth who 
 concocted the loose leaves attributed to 
 Burchardt after he had slumbered for two 
 hundred years in the silent tomb, make his 
 familiarity with the Pontiff of his day, fully 
 on a par both in fraud and fiction with 
 that of the vile inventor of the forty- second 
 chapter of the Metalogicus. Here is what 
 
 *Diario ad annum 1506.
 
 204 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 Paris de Grasais says on this point : 
 
 In reading him one would think he never 
 quitted the Pope for a dingle instant, lie fol 
 lows him to the chapel, to the consUtory, to 
 table, to bed ; night has no darkness, the 
 obscurity of w hich he cannot penetrate. lie is 
 a person who does not believe in the existence 
 of virtue, and who by the omnipotence of a 
 ducat would ordinarily explain many a good 
 thought or a good action. Never did a romancer 
 with a naivete so comical sport with the cre- 
 dulity of his readers. Of Alexander VI.. who 
 according to him was dissimulation itself per* 
 sonified, he makes the chief personage of a 
 melodrama who publishes his own dissoluteness 
 to the whole Roman people. Only let a Cardi- 
 nal die and forthwith he examines the drink of 
 the deceased, and almost always finds in it seme 
 traces of poisoning. What was the object of 
 this poisoning? It was because Alexander 
 wished to possess himself of the riches of the 
 Cardinal. Voltaire, as a tragic poet, has biting- 
 ly jeered at this gross violation of the first rules 
 of the dramatic art. " It has been pretended,'' 
 says he, " that in a pressing need for money 
 Alexander desired to succeed to the estates of 
 some Cardinals, but it is certain that Caesar 
 Borgia took away a hundred ducats of gold of 
 the treasure of his father. The need for money, 
 then, was not so real. Besides, how was it 
 possible to be mistaken about that bottle of 
 poisoned wine which it is said caused the death 
 of the Pope ? If, when the Pope died, granting 
 that he was poisoned, the cause of his death had 
 been kuown, it certainly would have been known 
 by the very persons whom it was intended to 
 poison ; they would not have left such a crime 
 unpunished, nor would they have suffered Caesar 
 Borgia to obtain peaceable possession of his 
 father's treasure. ... It is not difficult to 
 invent falsehoods when persons are determined 
 to calumniate." 
 
 Leaving the traducers of Pope Alexander 
 VI. to rest in their own infamy, let us now 
 turn our attention to the life led by that 
 Pontiff, and discover, if we can, a clue to the 
 "infamous deeds" which have made this 
 great Pontiff the cynosure of all Christian 
 eyes as the vilest character that ever in- 
 habited the Eternal City. 
 
 Roderico Borgia, who subsequently became 
 Pope Alexander VI., was born at Valencia 
 in 1431. The family of the Borgia has been 
 so maliciously represented by Protestant 
 and infidel writers that visions of the bloody 
 dagger, the poisoned cup, and the midnight 
 carousal will doubtless arise in the minds of 
 many of our readers. And yet, from this 
 
 same family whose name is covered with a 
 coating of iniquity by the enemies of the 
 Church, sprang two notable Pontiffs 
 Calixtus III. and Alexander II., as well as 
 a great saint the lovable Francis Borgia, 
 one of the Generals of the Society of Jesus. 
 
 After acquiring a most thorough educa- 
 tion, Roderico Borgia adopted the profession 
 of law, but he soon gave that up for the 
 military camp, in search of glory by feats of 
 arms. Here he remained until his uncle, 
 Alphonsus Borgia, was elected Pope under 
 the title of Calixtus III., when he was called 
 to Rome and placed in a position of trust 
 near that Pontiff. He fulfilled his duties so 
 well that he was subsequently elevated to 
 the purple, although he was then but 
 twenty-five years old. 
 
 As yet Roderico Borgia had not received 
 Holy Orders, nor was his case an excep- 
 tional one, as there are several instances in 
 former centuries where laymen became 
 Cardinals, although the modern custom is 
 that a secular on becoming a Cardinal shall 
 receive Sub-Deaconship at least. 
 
 The enemies of Pope Calixtus III claim 
 that his nephew led a most disreputable life 
 and that he was the father of several illegi- 
 timate children. Well, even admitting for 
 argument sake that these occurrences were 
 true, the fact nevertheless remains, that 
 all these children were born fully tuenty years 
 before he took Hvly Orders, uhich he did not 
 enter until 1^7S, when Pope Sixtvs IF., 
 nominated him Bithop of Alba. Fourteen 
 years later August llth 1492 Cardinal 
 Roderico Borgia (Lenzuoli) was called to 
 the Chair of Peter and from the first hour 
 of his Pontificate to the last day of his 
 reign August 18th, 1503 not a single 
 stone can be cast at him as a transgressor 
 against the virtue of continence. 
 
 The Son of God came into the world to 
 save sinners. Thus he changed the perse- 
 cutor Saul into the personification of a most 
 courageous Christian martyr. In like man- 
 ner Augustine the sorrow and the joy of St. 
 Monica became one of the bright particu- 
 lar stars of the Church of that God Whom 
 he spurned and scorned in his youth. 
 When we reflect on these examples of God's 
 mercy towards men whom even the world
 
 THK POPE AND IRKLAtfD. 
 
 205 
 
 called wicked, we will cease to wonder that 
 one who was afterwards Pope had children 
 by Julia Farnese, who was, beyond doubt, 
 legally married to the Cavalier Roderico 
 Borgia. 
 
 Julia Farnese came from a family as 
 notable as even the exalted Borgias, and 
 those writers <vho propagate the idea that 
 such a high-born lady would loosely consort 
 with one of the other sex, know very little 
 indeed of the rigorous Christian chivalry 
 which was one of the main characteristics 
 of the Italian nobility of past centuries, and 
 which is proudly maintained up to our own 
 times. 
 
 The intimate relations which existed be- 
 tween the Borgia and the Farnese families 
 is the best proof that the chi'dren of Julia 
 Farnese were born in honorable wedlock. 
 Cardinal Farnese (who afterwards became 
 Pope Paul III.) was a great favorite with, 
 and a trusted representative of, Pope Alex- 
 ander VI. Angelus Ferdinand Farnese fell 
 whilst fighting under the banner of Ccesar 
 Borgia. Is it at all likely, therefore, that 
 if any criminal contumely had been cast 
 upon the character of Julia Farnese, that 
 her kindred would have served the interests 
 of the family who had brought disgrace 
 upon the unsullied escutcheon of her honor- 
 able family ? It is certain, therefore, that 
 Roderico Borgia's children were legitimate, 
 and were all born fully twenty years before 
 he made his first vows in the vocation of the 
 Priesthood. 
 
 But it is not by any means certain that 
 Roderico Borgia had any male or female 
 offspring. M Chantrel* and the author of 
 a learned disquisition on this important 
 question in the Dublin Review, both con- 
 tend that the chi dren in question were 
 those of the Pontiff's brother, Peter Louis, 
 and this fact was sworn to in Rome on one 
 occasion 
 
 Another learned writer on this subjectt 
 makes this important point, showing how 
 the stories concerning Roderico Borgia's 
 children might have originated : 
 
 It is well known that in those troublous 
 
 *Hiatory of the Popes. Paris. 1862. 
 
 fj. J. Barry, M. D., in an article in 
 American Catholic Quarterly Review for April, 
 1878. 
 
 times it was the custom of the Popes to choose 
 as a General some one of their relations, most 
 commonly a nephew, possessing energy and 
 military talents, to defend the Pontifical domains 
 against the ambitious and grasping princes that 
 surrounded them, and who continually sought 
 to invade them. It was also the custom to give 
 these relations the name of suns, and such we 
 can scarcely doubt was the only bat>is upon 
 which the spirit of enmity supported its original 
 suspicions and calumnies. And need it be re- 
 marked that the terms son and daughter, and 
 their correlative one, father, are the ordinary 
 terms of address between all ecclesiastics of the 
 Catholic Church and their flocks, and that these 
 terms are understood in their spiritual sense ? 
 
 Let us now examine into the behavior of 
 Pope Alexander VI., after he ascended the 
 Pontifical Throne. He was sixty years of 
 age when he first wore the Tiara, and even 
 the enemies of this much-maligned martyr 
 to malignant slanders are forced to admit 
 that he was a man of more than ordinary 
 prudence and whose appearance in public 
 betokened modesty itself. He went about 
 daily doing good, visiting churches, hospi- 
 tals and similar institutions ; and when not 
 thus engaged he was absorbed in affairs of 
 the Church which he managed with mag- 
 ticent skill and superexcellent success. 
 
 In all his actions throughout the eleven 
 years of his Pontificate, Alexander VI. , was 
 a virtuous and a just Pontiff. " Under 
 him, says the reputable AudinJ " the poor 
 as well as the rich could obtain justice in 
 Rome. The people, soldiers and citizens 
 alike, testified great attachment to him, 
 even after his death, because he possessed 
 qualities truly royal. At night he slept 
 scarcely two hours, and from the table he 
 passed almost like a shadow without having 
 made any stay there. Never did he refuse 
 listening to the poor; he liquidated the 
 debts of unfortunate debtors, and he showed 
 himself without pity for remorseless pre- 
 varicators." 
 
 And yet this is the man whom the foul 
 tongue of calumny has consigned to the at- 
 tention of nineteenth-century Christians as 
 " a monster tf iniquity !" We would ask any 
 candid- minded and unbiased reader, there- 
 fore, in view of the character of the tra- 
 ducers of Pope Alexander VI., and the 
 
 JLife of Pope Leo X.
 
 200 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 other facts already asserted in his defence, 
 if there ia a civil tribunal in all Christen- 
 dom that would convict him of the enor- 
 mous crimes charged against him on the 
 evidence of such witnesses ? Every cul- 
 prit is considered by Common Law to be 
 entitled to the benefit of every doubt in his 
 case, and, we ask, shall the same privilege 
 be denied to a Pontiff whose career whilst 
 an occupant of the Chair of Peter was such 
 that not a single disturbance on the part of 
 the populace occurred in the city of Rome 
 during the eleven years of his Pontificate, 
 and who was so universally esteemed, even 
 when first elected to that highest ecclesias- 
 tical dignity, that embassies were dispatched 
 from all the States of Italy in order to 
 express their unanimous congratulations. 
 
 Now let us introduce a few witnesses on 
 behalf of the defendant's side of this case, 
 so as to offset in some measure at least the 
 popular prejudice which has long since un- 
 justly prejudged the case before us. 
 Speaking of Pope Alexander VI , a French 
 writer, M C. F. Cheve says : 
 
 The more attentively and thoroughly the 
 original documents of the history of that period 
 are studied, the moie clear will it become that 
 the memory of Alexander VI. has been fear- 
 fully calumniated. To pass an unbiased judg- 
 ment up in his life, it will be especially necessary 
 to take into account his social surroundings. 
 True criticism has long since cleared the name 
 of Alex ujder VI. of the charges of poisoning 
 and other horrible crimes that had been ground- 
 lessly imputed to him by the revengeful jour- 
 nalists of the ante-room and the scandal-mongers 
 of that aze and country. The implacable hos- 
 tility of the Reformers and the resentment of 
 France because of the political attitude of Alex- 
 ander VI. have also contributed not a little to 
 blacken his memory. It is not our purpose to 
 excuse the irregularities of his life, but we would 
 invite the reader desirous of learning to what 
 extent he has been defamed to peruse the 
 chapter devoted to him by M. Audin (Hist, de 
 L^ in X., T. L, c. 2). He was charitable, ener- 
 getic, fair-minded and moderate. If he in- 
 curred so much ill-will, it is because he over- 
 came and kept in check the feudal aristocracy of 
 Rome. 
 
 The Abbe Darras, in his History of the 
 Church.\\ thus sums up the valueless charac- 
 
 %L>ict ties Papes, 
 
 || Vol. III. pp. 635-639-644. 
 
 ter of the numerous calumnies circulated by 
 many hireling writers against the moral 
 character of Pope Alexander VI. 
 
 The odious charges brought against Alexander 
 VI. himself, in connection with Lucretia, are 
 the inventions of bitter malice : they have not 
 been received by historians of any weight. 
 Their only resource was the license of romance. 
 There are pens which gather up every item of 
 scandal from contemporary libels, and dispense 
 them under the pretence of contributing to the 
 moral education of the public, while flooding 
 the world with immorality. We hold that tbeie 
 were two phases in the life of Alexander VI. : 
 the life of the individual, which was, indeed, 
 but too much like that of most princes of his 
 day ; and that of the Pope, which carried out, 
 on the Chair of St. Peter, the policy inaugurated 
 by his predecessors, and preserved in its in- 
 tegrity, the deposit of faith and of ecclesiastical 
 discipline. * * * 
 
 Many serious charges weigh upon the reputa- 
 tion of Alexander VI.; but no one can accuse 
 him of weakness or defection in his Pontifical 
 career. His courage seemed to increase with 
 reverses ; the errors of his private life never 
 affected his conduct as Popa ; and this is the 
 highest lesson taught by the history of his 
 Pontificate. 
 
 Amid the warring of men and the din of arms, 
 the Pontificate of Alexander VI. drew to a close. 
 " He died," says one of his biographers, " of a 
 tertian fever, after having received the Sacra- 
 ments with edifying piety ; and breathed his 
 last surrounded by the Cardinals." This ac- 
 count differs materially from that of the ro- 
 mances of the day, which state that Alexander 
 died from the effects of a poisoned draught pre- 
 pared for some Cardinals, and which was, by 
 mistake, given to the Pope at a banquet. His 
 death has been as much belied by calumny as 
 his life (A. i>. 1503). Alexander's last days were 
 devoted to a great and noble enterprise. He 
 had used his most earnest endeavors to unite 
 the Christian princes against the Turks ; his 
 persevering efforts only succeeded in obtaining 
 help for the Venetians, who were bearing the 
 whole weight of the war. Whatever may be 
 thought of Alexander VI. as as man, it must be 
 allowed that throughout the whole course of his 
 administration he proved himself a skillful 
 diplomatist, and did much for the good of Italy 
 and of the Church. 
 
 In view of even the meagre amount of 
 evidence we have adduced, we claim, how- 
 ever, that we have demonstrated the fact 
 that in his character Pope Alexander VI. 
 was made the victim of the virulent assaults
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 207 
 
 of hireling writers who had valuable reasons 
 for calumniating him in the blackest manner 
 suggested by their malignant minds. We 
 have also shown that even with all his 
 faults Alexander VI. , as Pontiff, left such 
 a record behind him as no man addicted to 
 the sensuality charged against him could 
 ever have achieved. Never for a single 
 moment during the eleven years of his Pon- 
 tificate, did this able successor of St. Peter 
 forget the high and holy ecclesiastical 
 dignity of his sacred office ; never did he 
 lose sight of the duties which devolved upon 
 him as the Head of Christ's Church ; never 
 did he permit even the smallest and most 
 insignificant compromise of either faith or 
 morals in all the many documents which he 
 has left behind him and the Bullarium of 
 this great Pontiff possesses remarkable value. 
 It is safe, therefore, for Catholics to rest 
 assured that the calumnies against Pope 
 Alexander's character rest as M. Chantrel 
 has well remarked upon these events in 
 his life : 
 
 All the accusations brought against him may 
 be summed in the simple one, that he employed 
 Caesar Borgia to defend the political dominions 
 by force of arms against Italian princes and 
 their foreign allies. What proves that such was 
 the case is, undoubtedly, the significant fact 
 that those who attack him most do so chiefly on 
 account of C;e jar, and show that they do not 
 admit, or at least they pretend to doubt the 
 legitimacy of defending by force of arms the 
 Pontifical patrimony. The accusations of im- 
 morality recall those laid to the charge of Boni- 
 face VIII. and Sixtas IV., and it is easy to see 
 that they come from the envenomed spirit of 
 party, and that they are fully refuted by their 
 own improbability, their atrociousness, and the 
 absence of all impartial and disinterested testi- 
 mony. The only things they mention that can 
 be admitted without reserve, are those which 
 have relation to the defence of that patrimony 
 by force of arms. None of those who acknowl- 
 edge or admit the legitimacy and propriety of 
 this defence attack Alexander. If his case, 
 then, differs from that of some of his pre- 
 decessors and successors, it is simply in the de- 
 gree of calumny with which he has been as- 
 sailed. And yet it may be doubted whether in 
 this respect there is any difference, when one 
 pays attention to the circumstances of the times, 
 and the great resentment which the opposition 
 of contemporary princes excited against that 
 Pontiff, the history of which has conseauently 
 been corrupted in its very source by bribed so- 
 
 called historians. When once we give due 
 heed to these circumstances, we find the case of 
 Alexander VI. to be no other than that of the 
 Sixtuses, the Juliuses, the Bonifaces, the Inno- 
 cents, and the Gregories of the glorious Ponti- 
 fical line. 
 
 The enemies of the Church are imbued 
 with the idea that Pope Alexander VI., died 
 by poison, yet, as De Montor says on the 
 authority of Novaes, "no diary of the time 
 mentions any such circumstance." Alex- 
 ander, a very old man, died in his bed of 
 malignant fever, and the contrary reports 
 were unheard of until the malicious machi- 
 nations of Luther.* 
 
 Desportes thus speaks of the falsely- 
 alleged poisoning of Alexander : 
 
 "The pretended circumstances of the death of 
 Alexander have excited no less doubt. Vol. 
 taire himself, whom no one will suspect of 
 partiality in favor of a Pope, exclaims, with 
 the utmost vehemence, against that assertion 
 in his dissertation on the death of Henri IV. 
 'I dare to say. to Guiccardini,' he exclaim?, 
 ' you have deceived Europe, and you have de- 
 ceived yourself in your own prejudice and 
 passion. You were the enemy of the Pope, and 
 you have too easily credited your own hatred, 
 and the actions of his life. No doubt, he took 
 at times cruel and perfidious revenge upon 
 enemies no less cruel and perfidious,' etc. Those 
 few words from an historical discussion, which 
 it is needless to quote more largely, contain an 
 impartial judgment upon that part of the life of 
 Alexander." 
 
 Feller thus speaks on the same subject : 
 
 " Protestants have often taunted Catholics 
 with the vices of Alexander VI., as if the de- 
 pravity of a Pontiff could render a holy religion 
 less holy ; as if Christianity to be the work of 
 God, must annihilate in its ministers the germs o 
 human passions. It was not the tiara that ren- 
 dered Alexander vicious ; it was his disposition. 
 He would have been the same in whatever 
 sphere he moved. Providence grants that his 
 crimes should not disturb the Church, and that, 
 in these critical circumstances, there were 
 neither schisms nor heresies to battle against. ''f 
 
 A VINDICATION OF SOME OTHER TRADUCED 
 PONTIFFS. 
 
 The author whose bad book has called 
 forth this volume, asserts that " no candid 
 historian will claim that Alexander VI., 
 
 *De Montor's Lives of the Pope*, p. 642. 
 f3ee Feller's Hist. Diet. I, p. 112.
 
 208 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 was any worse than his predecessors Sergius 
 III., John X., John XL, John XII., John 
 XVI., or John XIX.," but as we have 
 clearly demonstrated the fact that Pope 
 Alexander VI., was not by any means as 
 culpable a criminal as his enemies have 
 painted him, it stands to reason that his 
 predecessors whom prejudiced writers have 
 charged with horrible crimes they never 
 committed were not as bad as bigots and 
 bought-up writers of the past have de- 
 lineated them. 
 
 The limits of our book will not permit of 
 any lengthy defence of the Pontiffs who 
 stand charged with being as guilty of crimi- 
 nal acts as Pope Alexander, so we will have 
 to content ourselves with very briefly al- 
 luding to each of them, solely for the pur- 
 pose of showing that these Pontiffs were far 
 from being the bad men fanatics and falsi- 
 fiers have described them. 
 
 POPE SKRGIUS III. 
 
 It is always prudent for both Catholic 
 and non- Catholic readers of the biographies 
 of the Roman Pontiffs to keep well in mind 
 the fact that some authors who wrote lives 
 of the Popes were prompted to execute 
 that work purely from malicious motives, 
 so as to misrepresent their characters, other 
 writers merely copied what previous tra- 
 ducers of the successors of St. Peter had 
 written to gratify the spleen of the public or 
 the private enemies of the Vicar of Christ. 
 Thus the world has been filled with fraudu- 
 lent charges against many of the Pontiffs 
 which had no foundation whatever in fact, 
 and many of which have, by recent re- 
 search, been proved to be purely and pur- 
 posely fabulous. Even such Protestants as 
 Hurter and Roscoe have assisted in clear- 
 ing up many such calumnies, and thereby 
 aided Catholic historians like Rohrbacher, 
 Muratori, Fleury, De Montor, Alzog, Darras 
 and Artand in purging by-gone century 
 libels from the pages of so-called " history" 
 filled with putridity. 
 
 Pope Sergius III. ruled the Church of 
 God from the year 905 to 911, and here is 
 the character given him by three impartial 
 witnesses : 
 
 The name of Sergius III., who was recalled 
 from exile to fill the Chair of St. Peter, is one 
 
 of those upon which the enemies of the lloly 
 See have most delighted in heaping opprobrium. 
 On the strength of Luitprand's testimony, bis 
 morals have been deeply calumniated. The 
 name of Man z'a, wife of Adalbert of Tuscany, 
 a notorious character intimately connected with 
 all the scandals of the day, is mentioned in 
 connection with these foul reports, perpetrated 
 by shameless pens. We may quote contem- 
 porary writers on the character of Sergins III. 
 "This Pope," says Flodoard, "already pro- 
 posed for the Sovereign Pontificate at the time 
 of the election of John IX., was recalled amid 
 the unanimous acclamations of the people, and 
 received the consecration long since destined for 
 him. The seven years of this Pontiff's reign 
 were a season of grateful joy to his subjects 
 throughout the world." Another contemporary 
 author, John the Deacon, thus speaks of the 
 same Pontiff : " After his consecration, Pope 
 Sergius III., was much grieved at the dilapi- 
 dated condition of the Basilica of St. John 
 Lateran, which had fallen into ruins at the time 
 of Stephen VI.. and he had recourse to the Di- 
 vine Goodness in which he ever placid his trust. 
 He undertook to restore the noble pile ; he hap- 
 pily succeeded in his holy work, and adorned the 
 new basilica with the most costly ornaments." 
 The epitaph inscribed on the Pontiff's tomb by 
 a grateful people fully bears out the testimony 
 of Fiodoard and John the Deacon: "Return- 
 ing from his exile at the earnest prayer of the 
 people," says this precious monument, " the 
 good pastor showed equal love to all classes of 
 his flock, and met all usurpers with apostolic 
 energy." These three witnesses, who speak of 
 Sergius as a Pontiff not only of unexceptional 
 moral virtues, but full of faith, piety and zeal, 
 are contradicted by Luitprand's partial voice 
 alone. And so ill-informed is that hostile au- 
 thor on this period of history, that he places the 
 Pontificate of Sergius immediately after that cf 
 Formosus, and ascribes to him the shocking 
 scene so disgraceful to the annals of Stephen VI. 
 We believe that the dawn of truth is now break- 
 ing upon the life of Sergius, and that history 
 has too long been the unsuspecting accomplice of 
 a partial and ill-informed annalist.* 
 
 It may be well to state here that nearly 
 all the calumnies circulated by the enemies 
 of the Church against the Popes of the 
 tenth century, are copied from Luitprandus, 
 an author concerning whose worth an emi- 
 nent writer says : 
 
 Up to the time that Baronius composed his 
 Annals, the writings of Luitprandus were the 
 only source fiom which information was to be 
 
 Darra*-, History of the Church, Vol. II., p. 
 561.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 209 
 
 gathered as to the Popes who lived during those 
 dark and evil days ; and certainly, as Luit- 
 prand told the story, nothing could be too severe 
 for the Cardinal to say of Sergius III., or of the 
 others, as of John X , for instance, whom he 
 similarly condemns. But as was natural 
 enough, the researches of Baroniua, astonishing 
 though they were, still left a vast deal in the 
 archives cf Europe for the industry of later in- 
 vestigators, such as the Benedictines of St. 
 Maur, and as Pagi, Baluzius, Muratori himself, 
 and a host of others, to bring to light. The re- 
 sult has been that every fragment shedding ad- 
 ditional light on the history of the Popes of the 
 10th century has revealed the injustice that had 
 been done them, by those who had too im- 
 plicitly relied on Luitprandus as an authority. 
 And certainly, if what this genius of the most 
 profligate of the Dark Ages tells us of himself be 
 deserving of credit, his testimony is not worth a 
 jot against any one else much less against the 
 Roman Pontiffs. Upon evidence such as his 
 even if not contradicted, as it is emphatically 
 by witnesses above all suspicion a packed jury 
 would blush to bring in a verdict of guilty. f 
 
 POPE JOHN X. 
 
 This Pontiff reigned from the year 914 
 to 928, and concerning his character a his- 
 torian of the Church says : 
 
 Lamentable in the extreme was the condition 
 of Rome and Italy at this period. In the South, 
 the Saracens, intrenched on the banks of the 
 Garigliano, wasted the estates of the Church. 
 In the North, the princes and municipal powers, 
 far from leaguing against the common enemy, 
 did but help his ravages by domestic feuds. The 
 state of Italy called for a Pope who could lead 
 the imbittered spirits into the ways of concilia- 
 tion and peace. John X. was elected to the 
 Sovereign Pontificate (April 30, A. D. 914). He 
 * had been nine years Archbishop of Revenna, 
 and yet Luitprand does not hetitate to state 
 that he was transferred to the Sovereign See of 
 Rome within a year after his appointment to 
 that of Ravenna by Pope Lando. It is impor- 
 tant to correct this error, for upon it depends 
 an entire system of accusations brought against 
 John X. Luitprand himself confesses that he 
 gathered the facts alleged against the Pontiff 
 from a Papular Life of Theodora, mother of 
 M-rozia. The infamous character of these in- 
 triguing and abandoned females plainly shows 
 that his authority could have been but a mere 
 pamphlet. Such is the basis upon which hostile 
 historians have built up all their charges against 
 John X. Flodoard, on the other hand, thus 
 
 fMiley's History of Papal States, Vol. II., pp. 
 270-1. 
 
 speaks of the same Pontiff: "His prudent and 
 virtuous life have won for him a throne in 
 Heaven." The reader is free to chose between 
 these two contemporaneous but contradictory 
 statements. Whatever may be imputed to the 
 private individual whose name has been made a 
 mark for the lying calumnies of writers un- 
 friendly to the Papacy, the Pontiff was un- 
 impeachable, and the Church blesses the reign 
 of John X.* 
 
 POPE JOHN XI. 
 
 This Pontiff reigned from the year 931 to 
 936, and a distinguished author says of his 
 Pontificate : 
 
 John XL, was completely under the contiol 
 'of his brother Alberic, the " lyrant of Rome," 
 and by Cardinal Baronius, he is styled a pseudo- 
 pontifex. This judgment, however, was not a 
 littlo influenced by what we have proved to 
 have been the libellous story told by Luitprand. 
 This Pontiff was the son of Alberic and Maroza. 
 There is no proof that his election was procured 
 by violence, though there is in Flodoard a hint 
 to that effect. By one contemporary he is 
 called a Pontiff, gloriosce indolis ; this however 
 mr,y have been said in a spirit of adulation. 
 Questioned it cannot be, that in his person, the 
 Apostolic See was completely enslaved. "He 
 was stripped of all influence," says Flodoard, 
 ' pushed back into obscurity, and restricted to 
 ti.e mere ceremonies of the Church." His death 
 took place, A. D. 936. He died in captivity, a 
 victim of the ambition of his own kindred, f 
 
 POPE JOHN XII. 
 
 This Pontiff reigned from the year 956 to 
 964. Of his character a modern historian 
 says : 
 
 I repeat what was said of John XII. in the 
 Notizie of Rome for the year 1844 : 
 
 "John XII., Conti, a Roman, was created 
 Pope in the year 956, and governed the Church 
 about eight years. During that time, and in 
 the year 963, Leo was intruded into the Ponti- 
 cate. Being subsequently deposed, he again 
 usurped the supreme dignity on the 26th June, 
 964, and he continued to retain his illegal pos- 
 session of it until April, 965. Nevertheless, Leo 
 is reckoned in the list of Popes under the name 
 of Leo VIII." 
 
 After this preliminary official information, we 
 proceed to details. His name was Octavian, 
 and he was the first Pontiff who changed his 
 
 *Darras, History of the Church, VoL IL, p. 
 567. 
 fDr. Miley's Papal States, Vol. II., p. 286.
 
 210 
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 name. John of the Couti family, grand nephew 
 of Sergius III., and of John XL, was elected, 
 or rather, at the instignation of some Romans, 
 intruded into the Papacy about the 20th of 
 August, 95G. He was then only some sixteen or 
 eighteen years old. Such were the calamities of 
 the times, says Baronius, that it was deemed 
 hotter to tolerate that invasion than to wound 
 the Church by a schism which would be a worse 
 evil still. Therefore the Church accepted and 
 endured him as Pontiff, considering that there 
 would be less evil in tolerating one head, though 
 a monstrous one, than in afflicting the one body 
 with two heads. * * * * 
 
 At leugth the end of John's life came. Luit. 
 prand, who is hostile to John, bitterly accuses 
 him ; but grave authors rightly refuse to admit 
 these latter accusations. Rancor and prejudice^ 
 sometimes overstep all bounds ; having spoken 
 truly on some points, men sometimes fancy 
 themselves privileged to speak untruly on others. 
 Lnitprand was the friend of schismatics, and 
 the flatterer of Otho. 
 
 We shall close by a reflection of Feller's: 
 " The great number," says he, " of virtuous and 
 holy Pontiffs who have occupied the See of 
 Rome, should make us forget the small number 
 whose morals have ill suited their station. 
 Jesus Christ expressly warns us that the chiefs 
 of religion are not impeccable, and that their 
 faults are no argument against the worship of 
 which they are the ministers, or the doctrines 
 of which they are the depositories. ' The 
 Scribes and Pharisees sit in the chair of Moses : 
 all things whatsoever they shall say unto you, 
 observe and do, but according to their works do 
 ye not." "(Matt. xxiiL, 23). J 
 
 POPE JOHN XVI. 
 
 This Pontiff reigned from the year 98C to 
 996, and against his character we find no 
 charges of any gravity. Concerning his 
 Pontificate a biographer of the Popes says : 
 
 John XVI. was elected at the end of Decem- 
 ber, 985. He was a Roman Priest, and the son 
 of Leo. Harrassed by the tyrant Crescentius, 
 who, with the title of Consul, occupied the 
 castle of Saint Angelo, John fled into Tuscany, 
 and appealed to Otho III. As soon as the Ro- 
 mans learned the step that the Pope had taken, 
 they recalled him, so much did they dread Otho. 
 The clergy reproached John with yielding to 
 that kind of favoritism which has since been 
 known as nepotism ; in fact he enriched his re- 
 latives beyond bounds. 
 
 This Pope governed more than ten years. He 
 waa illustrious as a cultivator of letters, not- 
 
 De Montor's Lives of the Popes, Vol. I., pp. 
 252-4. 
 
 withstanding the rudeness of the time, and he is 
 the reputed author of some books on military 
 art. He died on the 30th of April, 996, and 
 was interred at the Vatican, in the oratory of 
 Saint Mary. 
 
 POPE JOHN XIX. 
 
 This Pontiff reigned from the year 1003 
 to 1009. Regarding his character De Mon- 
 tor, in his Lives of the Popes, says : 
 
 John XIX., surnamed Fasanus, was elected 
 in November, 1003. He confirmed the institu- 
 tion of the Bishopric of Bamberg, in Franconia, 
 erected at the desire of the Emperor Henry. 
 
 Under 'his Pontificate concord was restored 
 between the Churches of Rome and Constanti- 
 nople, which had been disunited in consequences 
 of the arrogant pretensions of the patriarch 
 Michael Cerularius, who presumptuously as- 
 sumed the title of oecumenical and universal 
 Bishop, which exclusively belongs to the Ro- 
 man Pontiff. John XIX., having forbidden the 
 patriarch to usurp that title, the right of Rome 
 was recognized, and the patriarch Sergius, in its 
 place, took in the Dyptics i. e., the tables of 
 the Church of Constantinople the title of the 
 Pope. 
 
 Some authors think that John XIX , towards 
 the close of his life, abdicated the Pontificate to 
 retire to the Benedictine Abbey of Saint Paul, 
 at Rome, but modern critics do not admit that 
 fact. This Pope governed five years and five 
 months according to Novaes, and three years 
 and five months, according to the Roman list. 
 It seems certain that he died about the year 
 1009, and that he was interred at Saint John 
 Lateran || 
 
 Such were the Popes of the tenth century 
 whose characters have been assailed as " the 
 very worst" in the long line of the successors 
 of St. Peter ! Is there anything in their * 
 lives which entitles them to the maledic- 
 tions of mankind throughout the past nine 
 hundred years ? Compare their lives with 
 those seculars who surrounded them in the 
 age in whjch they lived, and the Pontiffs 
 will appear as so many suns shining down 
 upon a sinful world 1 
 
 These Popes, therefore, have been calum- 
 niated. When the Church herself has been 
 misrepresented, when her dogmas have been 
 distorted, when her theological truths have 
 been traduced, when her very Sacraments 
 
 De Montor's Lives of the Popes, Vol. I., pp. 
 261-2-3. 
 
 ||De Montor, Vol. I., pp. 270-271.
 
 THE POPE AND IRELAND. 
 
 211 
 
 have been held up as public scandals to be 
 avoided by all decent intelligent people it 
 would be folly to expect that those who are 
 at the head of the Church shou'd escape 
 the poison-laden stylus of the hireling, the 
 heretic and the hypocrite. 
 
 And now that we have defended to the 
 best of our ability the reputations of the as- 
 sailed Pontiff* from the ten h to the nine- 
 teenth century, the task that we set out to 
 accomplish is finished. 
 
 The characters of Popes Adrian and 
 Alexander have been thoroughly purged 
 from the calumnies which have been heaped 
 on them by the falsifying fictions of English 
 forgers. The documents which led to the 
 traduction of these Vicars of Christ have 
 been thoroughly and critically analyzed 
 and dissected. After causing multitudinous 
 controversies throughout more than seven 
 centuries, it may now be said with some 
 degree of truth that both these deceitful 
 documents have been thoroughly exposed 
 and found to be fraudulent in their concep- 
 tion, false in their expression, and fallacious 
 in their character. 
 
 But before closing this page we cannot 
 fail to express our joy that we were able to 
 vindicate not only the Vicars of Christ from 
 the aspersions cast upon their character by 
 the author whose fabrications we have fully 
 refuted, but it was also a labor of love on 
 our part to place the fidelity of the Irish 
 people to Rome and their Catholic faith in 
 
 the true light in which it has always existed 
 and not in the false light in which the 
 enemies of both the Church and Ireland de- 
 light to depict it. 
 
 As the renowned Dr. James Doyle, the 
 patriotic Bishop of Kildare and Leighlin, 
 has well and truly said : "In Ireland re- 
 ligion has always flourished since it was 
 first deposited in her bosom. It is the only 
 country wherein the Christian faith was 
 planted which did not involve the necessity 
 of sowing the Gospel-seed amid blood a 
 proof that Irishmen were naturally fitted 
 for the exercise of all the virtues of Chris- 
 tianity, and of every moral and social obli- 
 gation which binds man in community. 
 We have another great and glorious conso- 
 lation : When infidelity reached our 
 shores, Ireland shook the viper from her 
 bosom and cast it into the depth of the sea. 
 Yes ! it were as easy to strip the fields of 
 their verdure as to deprive Irishmen of the 
 fair religion of Christ. * * * * It was 
 an observation of Montesquieu, that the 
 natural disposition of a people, as well as 
 their social institutions, fit them for the re- 
 ception of Christianity, or dispose them to 
 its rejection. We may account our country 
 particularly blessed, when the Almighty 
 Maker made us particularly disposed for the 
 practice of religion and piety. But as 
 much has been given to us so, much is ex- 
 pected from us ; it is necessary, therefore, 
 that we do good works in a double ratio."
 
 TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. Page 
 
 Preliminary Considerations regarding the book which called forth this Review and Refutation 9 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 The Fictitious Bull of Pope Adrian IV. Education in Ireland. The character of Giraldus 
 
 Cambrensis Analysed by Historical Writers. Abbe" MacGeoghegan'a Criticism 16 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Comments on the Character of Giraldus Cambrensis by Martin A. O'Brennan, James J. Clancy, 
 Thomas Muore and Thomas Mooney 23 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Cardinal Morau's able Historical Essay on the Fictitious character of the Bull attributed to 
 
 Pope Adrian IV 27 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 A Historical contrast between the characters of Pope Adrian IV., and King Henry II. of Eng- 
 land. The murder of St. Tnumas a'Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury 35 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 The Bull attributed to Pope Adrian IV., tested. Analysis of the Pontificate of Pope Alexan- 
 der IET. More Historic*! errors refused. L'he spanou* Adriaa Ball viawed from a ciiucdt 
 standpoint 41 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 The Peter Pence Proviso in the Adrian and Alexander Bulls, The false character of the stipu- 
 lation. King John's Surrender of England to the Pops. Important Document* relating 
 thereto. Additional Evidence of the Spurious character of the Adrian and Alexander 
 Bulls. Caustic ciiticiam of Cambrensis by the English editors of his works 47 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 Proof that Giraldus Cambrensis knew that the Adrian Bull was a forged document. His spite- 
 ful and slanderous Sermon in Dublin. Tne supposed "dyaod ot Castiel" critically analy- 
 sed. More historical Mistakes made manifest 52 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 A description of the inhabitants of Waterford in the Twelfth century. The favorite abode of 
 Danes, English and other enemies ot Ireland. The period when the See of Waterford was 
 established. Why no Synod ever met there. Pope Alexander and the Irish Bishops. 
 More Historical mistakes corrected 58 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 The Synod of Windsor criticised. King Henry's Treaty with the King of Connaught. The 
 Adrian and Alexander Bulls not known in England in the year 1175 Cardinal Vivian's 
 visit to Ireland. The right of Sanctuary in Ireland. More malicious miastatements 
 melted in the crucible of historic truth 62 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 Strong evidence of English Chroniclers, Irish Historians and other writers, from the Twelfth to 
 the Nineteenth Centuries, against the authenticity of the Adrian Bull. Opinions of 
 Baronius, Bzovius, St. Antoninus, Graf ton, Plowden, Bower, and others 68 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 Continuation of the evidence of Historical Writers concerning the False character of the 
 Adrian and Alexander Bulls. Absurd statements of English and Irish Historian*. Ex- 
 tracts from the writings of Abbo MacGeoghegan, Father Thomas N. Burke, Thomas 
 Mooney, Rev. J. J. Brennan. James J. Clancy. Thomas Moore, Monsignor O'Rielly, 
 Geoffrey Keating, Charles O'Kelly. and Thomas Leland 73
 
 214 TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 Additional Witnesses in proof of the Spurious character of the Adrian and Alexander Bulls. 
 The Misleading statements in O'Halloran'8 History diRsecteJ. Extracts from the his- 
 torical works of Hume, Liu^id, K<.\. .1. Thebaud, S. J., and Rev. W. . Morris ...... 78 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 Jntiiiihic Evidence of the Fraudulent character of the Adrian and Alexander Bulls. A brief 
 analysis of the text of each. Criticisms which prove their fictitious origin. New light on 
 the great"Forgery of the Twelfth Century. .- s ____ ' . v ..................................... 81 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 Continuation of the R;I mo sut>j--ot. More historical proof. Was Ireland ever "Christian only 
 in Name .'" Tetiuiouy 01 St. Bernard. Thierry, St. Columbanus, Cardinal Newman, Arch- 
 deacon Lynch, Gorres, and llev. J. Cogan ............... . .............................. 90 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 John of Salisbury dissected. How King Henry II. conco<.tod the bo^us "Adrian" Bull. Salis- 
 bury's "Metalotficus. Who wrote the Forty- second Chapter? -Strong proof that it was 
 not the work of John of Salisbury ..................................................... 97 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 Further criticisms on the fictitious chapter in Salisbury's "Metalogicus." Professor Jung- 
 mann's Judgment. King Henry's oath at Avranchea. An insight into the characters of the 
 two Popes to whom the Bulls are attributed. Pope Alexander not in Rome in 1172. 
 Finding the matrix from which Papal seals were forged ................................ 102 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 Father Gatquet's learned contribution to the "Dublin Review." Severe strictures on the 
 chapter attributed to John of Salisbury. The Genuine Letter of Pope Adrian on which 
 the spurious Bull was compiled ............................... _._. ....... ..." .............. 107 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 English translation of Pope Adrian's Letter to King Louis VII., of France. The Pope's refus- 
 al to allow Ireland to be invaded. A comparison between the wording of the Letter and 
 the Text of the Spurious Bull. Reasons why the fraud was not exposed in past centuries. 114 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 The Papal Court of the Fourteenth Century had no knowledge of the so-called Adrian Bull. 
 The Letter sent by Kins: Edward of England to Pope John XXII. Reply of that Pontiff 
 Letter from O'Neill, King of Ulster, to Pope John XXli. Comments thereon. Proofs 
 that the Adrian Bull never originated in Rome, nor was iis genuine character ever admitted 
 by the Irish people .................................................................... 120 
 
 CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 The erection of Ireland into a Kingdom by Pope Paul IV. How English fraud accomplished 
 that object. Comments on certain expressions in the Letter of Pope John XXLI. 
 Rome's equal and exact justice exemplified England's vicious methods illustrated ....... 124 
 
 CHAPTER XXII. 
 
 A new and important witness to the fradulent character of the Adrian and Alexander Bulls. 
 Selections from the celebrated Historical work "Cambrensis E versus" by Dr. John Lynch. 
 Seventeenth century evidence against both the spurious documents ....................... 127 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII. 
 
 Further proof of the spurious character of the Adrian and Alexander Bulls. Dr. Lynch's 
 criticisms on the Alexander Forgery ............................................... .... 132 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 Additional Extracts from "Cambrensis E versus." Ireland always loyal to Rome. More proof 
 of the fraudulent Forgery of the Adrian and Alexander Bulls ............................ 135 
 
 CHAPTER XXV. 
 
 Profound reverence of the People of Ireland for the Vicar of Christ Nearly every nation in 
 Europe placed under the ban of the Church except Ireland .............................. 140 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 Ireland's aid to Rome in the Propagation of the Faith. Irish Saints and Apostolic Mis- 
 sionaries who helped to propagate Christianity throughout every country in Europe ...... 143
 
 TABLE OF CONTENTS. 215 
 
 CHAPTER XXVII. 
 
 The Irish Church under the Popes. How the Holy Union was kept intact. List of Legates 
 sent from Home. Historical Errors corrected by Dr. Lyuch. That author's concluding re- 
 marks in which he shows up Cambrensis in the garb of a notorious calumniator of both the 
 Catholic Church and the Irish people 147 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIII. 
 
 Further historical proofs concerning the Letter which Pope Adrian IV. sent to King Louis 
 VII. Evidence showing that Letter to have alluded to Ireland and not to Spain, aa 
 claimed by anti-Catholic .writers : 152 
 
 CHAPTER XXIX. 
 
 Criticism on the true Letter of Pope Adrian IV., and the False Bull. Reasons why the Letter 
 " H " applies to Hibcrnia and not to Hispania 155 
 
 CHAPTER XXX. 
 
 What the Popes have done for Ireland. Help extended to the Irish people. Important 
 Historical facts. Correspondence between Pope Pius IX , and the Irish in Rome. C/ar- 
 dinal Manning's tribute to Ireland's Faith 158 
 
 CHAPTER XXXI. 
 
 The paternal love of Pope Leo XIII. for the Irish people. How public opinion was prejudi- 
 ced against the Holy Father Calumnies cabled around the world The Pope presented in 
 his true character as the Consistent Friend of the People of Ireland in their struggle for 
 National Independence by rightful means 164 
 
 CHAPTER XXXII. 
 
 Further manifestations of the Love of Pope Leo XIII. for the Irish people. Address of His 
 Holiness to the Irish Pilgrims in Home. The Papal Rescript of 1888 explained. Arch- 
 bishop Walsh's Views. Addresses of his Grace on the Sympathy of the Holy Father for 
 Ireland. Opinions of Cardinal Pecci, Cardinal Moran, Bishop Keane and Monsignor 
 O'Reilly 170 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIII. 
 
 Miscellaneous Historical Errors Corrected. Did Pope John XXII. Excommunicate Edward 
 Bruce and his adherents? Was Maynooth College founded in order to educate Irish 
 Priests in the interests of England ? Was the Repeal Movement killed by a Papal Re- 
 script ? Was the Young Ireland Movement killed by Irish Bishops and Priests ? 178 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIV. 
 
 Secret Political Societies. Their baneful influence upon Ireland's Struggles for Freedom. 
 Reasons why the Church opposes them. The wisdom of her opposition proved by numer- 
 ous examples. Was the Home Rule movement opposed by the Church ? Was the Land 
 League opposed by the Pope?. Theee questions answered 188 
 
 CHAPTER XXXV. 
 
 Some Vicious Falsehoods Regarding "Vatican Politics" Fully Refuted. The "Italian Ring" 
 Accounted for. The characters of Pope Alexander VI., and other Pontiffs Triumphantly 
 Vindicated. Conclusion . . 199
 
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 Santa Barbara 
 
 ^^^^iKS^^jfcjt 
 
 THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW.
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY 
 
 A 001 033 085