*•<:<»»-, 
 
 
 m/ -T^^ 
 
 Ift'^J 
 
 v 
 
 
 <l^. 
 
 '% 
 
 4-/ 
 
 ^'m^^-.. 
 
 ^■:',*r-'0'^
 
 ^.;-r^-/.5;>' 
 
 
 ■*. 
 
 a I B RARY 
 
 OF THE 
 U N I VERS ITY 
 Of ILLINOIS
 
 
 -y 
 
 /
 
 #■.
 
 THE IRISH CHURCH; 
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND 
 
 DISENDOAVMENT. 
 
 By CHARLES H. TODD, Esq., LLJ). 
 
 ONE OF HKR MAJESTY'S COUNSEI., AND VICAR-GENERAL OF THE DIOCESES OF DERRY 
 
 AND RAPHOK. 
 
 25.PARLjAiV(^:r\r ^T» 
 
 RIVINGTONS, WATERLOO PLACE ; 
 
 HIGH STUEET, 
 
 TTIINTTY STREET, 
 
 Cambrttrgc. 
 
 18G9.
 
 ii
 
 THE IRISH CHURCH; 
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 
 
 The verdict of the United Kingdom, so far as it can be 
 conjectured from the result of the recent elections, has 
 been recorded against the present Ecclesiastical consti- 
 tution of Ireland. It still remains to be seen to what 
 extent the country is willing to adopt the scheme sha- 
 dowed forth in the Kesolutions moved by Mr. Gladstone, 
 and adopted by a large majority of the late Parliament. 
 No one, however, be his political or religious opinions 
 what they may, can deny the vast importance of the 
 subject, or that legislation in the direction proposed 
 will effect a great revolution in the constitution of 
 these kingdoms, as regards the Country, the Crown, 
 and the Church ; a revolution whose effects cannot be 
 confined within the shores of Ireland or of the United 
 Kingdom, but will probably affect the relations which 
 now exist between the Church and the civil power 
 throughout Christian Europe. 
 
 That such a scheme should be adopted in the British 
 Parliament by a majority of sixty, notwithstanding the 
 gross injustice and the violation of the rights of pro- 
 
 A 2
 
 4 THE IKISH CHURCH : 
 
 perty involved, that it should be favourably received, 
 not merely by those who on religious grounds are 
 opposed to the reformed Church or to religious endow- 
 ments of any kind, but by men of no revolutionary turn 
 of mind, themselves members of that Eeformed Church, 
 is no small matter of surprise. When the component 
 parts of that majority which assented to Mr. Glad- 
 stone's Eesolutions are analyzed, and it is found to 
 consist, not merely of Eoman Catholics, Radicals, and 
 the personal followers of Mr. Gladstone, but even 
 partly of Conservatives, it is impossible to ascribe its 
 success solely to a party move to displace Mr. Disraeli's 
 administration. I cannot think, that were the ques- 
 tion calmly considered and rightly understood, it could 
 be favourably received by any man, who values, not 
 merely the principles of the Reformation, but the great 
 principles of moral right and justice, and who respects 
 those rights of property which are the basis of our 
 great and free constitution. That the chief organ of 
 public opinion in England (the ''Times"), that such 
 men as Earl Grey, Lord Russell, and Mr. Gladstone, 
 that the great Whig party in England, who have 
 hitherto so strenuously opposed all penal legislation, 
 should be the active promoters and supporters of such 
 a scheme, and put it forward as an act of justice to 
 any portion of the community, can only proceed from 
 some great misapprehension of the subject. 
 
 The argument which appears to have most weight 
 with the supporters of this movement, which is most 
 persistently put forward, is this : That it is an anomaly 
 that all the religious endowments of the country should 
 be engrossed by one religious denomination, and that 
 one which embraces but a small minority of the popu- 
 
 ^ . ^ UiUC 
 
 *sy
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. O 
 
 lation. This argument rests upon a palpable fallacy. 
 It assumes that there exists in the country an endow- 
 ment for general religious purposes, granted by the 
 State, to a share of which all religious bodies are 
 entitled, but which has been unjustly or wrongfully 
 engrossed by one denomination, and that a minority 
 of the people. There is no anomaly in the wealthy 
 owners of property, although a small minority, endow- 
 ing their own Church ; nor is there any anomaly in a 
 religious community, however small, acquiring property 
 to any extent. The alleged anomaly consists in the 
 assumption that this property was a State endowment 
 for general religious purposes. It is also assumed, and 
 chiefly by foreigners and persons unacquainted with 
 this country, that in Ireland the majority of the people 
 are taxed or in some way compelled to contribute to 
 the maintenance of the Church of the minority ; and 
 this was actually put forward by Dr. Corrigan as an 
 injustice, in his late address to electors of the city of 
 Dublin. Both these assumptions, however, are untrue. 
 The Irish Church possesses no State endowments, it 
 derives no portion of her property from the State ; 
 neither does any dissenter from the Church in Ireland, 
 be he Protestant or Eoman Catholic, contribute one 
 farthing to the maintenance and support of the Church 
 or of its Clergy : Church-rates, minister's money, and 
 all general assessments, for religious purposes, have 
 been, in deference to the religious feelings of Eoman Ca- 
 tholics and Protestant Dissenters, long since abolished. 
 In Ireland, the churches, the Bishops, the Clergy, the 
 See and glebe houses are built, maintained, and sup- 
 ported exclusively out of the property of the Church 
 itself, aided by the voluntary contributions of its
 
 6 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 own members. The Only religious bodies in Ireland 
 who are in possession of State endow^ments are the 
 Presbyterians, who receive the Fugium Donum, and 
 the Koman Catholics, who receive some 30,000/. or 
 40,000/. a year for the exclusive education of their 
 clergy. The Church of Ireland receives nothing from 
 the State, she is supported altogether by her own 
 property and the voluntary gifts of her own people. 
 AU other religious bodies in Ireland are possessed of 
 property. Where, then, is the anomaly in the Irish 
 Church having property ? or why is its property alone 
 to be confiscated ? 
 
 Mr. Gladstone's Kesolutions embraced two distinct 
 and separate matters, — Disestablishment and Dis- 
 endowment ; which rest on totally different principles, 
 and raise perfectly distinct considerations. 
 
 Disestablishment is purely a question of State policy : 
 it is a question more for the State than for the Church. 
 Nevertheless it is a very grave matter, effecting a 
 most serious change in the established constitution, 
 which has been the source of such great blessings to 
 these kingdoms ; and, it may be, that the State by 
 adopting it incurs a very great responsibility. It is not 
 the substitution of one form of Christianity for another ; 
 it is not the State declaring that the present Church 
 of Ireland is false in her teaching, or distasteful to the 
 majority of the people, and substituting for it another 
 system, either deemed more true or more consonant 
 to the feelings of the people ; but it is a rejection by 
 the State of all religion. 
 
 The union between the Church and the State is not 
 the result of any compact or agreement. The State 
 never formally recognized or adopted the Church by
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 7 
 
 any Act of Parliament. But the ruling Powers in the 
 country being converted to Christianity, the State sub- 
 mitted herself to the Church, recognized the authority 
 of its rulers, conformed her laws to its teaching, and 
 aided the Ecclesiastical authority by her co- active 
 power. The Church has received from her Divine 
 Master no power or authority to inflict temporal pains 
 or penalties, to her has been committed the powder of 
 the keys, not of the sword ; she can only bind or loose, 
 admit or exclude ; she can enforce her discipline only 
 by penance or excommunication. The State, embracing 
 Christianity, gave additional sanction to the laws of 
 the Church by imposing temporal pains and penalties 
 for the infraction of them, and gained reverence and 
 respect for her rulers and teachers by conferring on 
 them civil rank and status. In England, the chief 
 officers of the Church were also the chief officers of 
 the State. The Bishops administered the 'law ; the 
 assembly of the Bishops and Clergy, with the Barons 
 and Knights, framed the laws. By degrees Ecclesiastics 
 were supplanted in civil matters by the laity, and were 
 confined exclusively to Ecclesiastical and religious 
 affairs; so much. so, that, at the present day, it would 
 be considered inconsistent with the sacred character of 
 a Bishop or Priest to sit as a judge in a temporal 
 court, or to go as ambassador on a foreign mission. 
 Still the Bishops retained their civil status ; they held 
 courts and exercised jurisdiction, not only over the 
 Clergy, but over laymen, and not only in matters 
 which may be considered exclusively spiritual, but in 
 many temporal matters, such as testamentary, matri- 
 monial, and other causes. But at the present day, 
 when the principle of Eeligious Toleration is established.
 
 8 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 at least in the British Empire — when it is no longer 
 necessary that the chief puhhc officers and magistrates 
 should be members of the Church, or even Christians, 
 when the Ecclesiastical courts have been deprived of 
 almost all jurisdiction, except over the Clergy — the 
 Church is being regarded, more and more every day, 
 in the same light as any of the numerous religious 
 communities which exist in the country, differing from 
 the others, so far as regards its relation to the State, 
 only in this, that the Crown is the Supreme Ordinary, 
 her Bishops are spiritual Peers, and as such entitled 
 to civil rank and precedence, the law of the Church is 
 a part of the law of the land, the Bishops by virtue 
 of their office exercise jurisdiction ; and the doctrines 
 and discipline of the Church cannot be changed with- 
 out the sanction of the State. Every citizen of the 
 State also enjoys certain rights and privileges in the 
 Church, whether he conforms to her teaching and 
 discipline or not. All religious communities may in 
 these countries acquire and hold property, and that 
 even with less restriction than the Church, which 
 cannot acquire real estate without a licence in mort- 
 main. The rulers of these religious bodies, be they 
 Bishops, Presbyters, Elders, or whatever the ruling 
 power may be called, can exercise jurisdiction, and 
 expel from their society those who contravene its 
 teaching or oppose its discipline, and thus enforce 
 uniformity in practice and opinion more easily than can 
 the Church, because unless some civil right of property is 
 aifected their decisions cannot be controlled by the law 
 of the State ; whereas in the National or Established 
 Church, as it is called, every person has certain rights 
 and privileges which may be enforced in the civil
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 9 
 
 courts, and of which he cannot be deprived without 
 the sanction of the civil law. In these matters consists 
 the difference between the established religion and any 
 other religious community in the country. To dis- 
 establish the Church is to destroy this difference, to 
 deprive it of its privileges and advantages ; but at the 
 same time to relieve it from all interference and 
 control of the State. 
 
 Hpw is this separation from the State, this isolation 
 and independence, to be effected in the case of an 
 institution which has grown with the State, and is so 
 interwoven with it, that it seems almost impossible to 
 rend them asunder without doing injury to one or 
 other, or to both ? I do not notice the difficulty said to 
 arise from the Act of Union between Great Britain and 
 Ireland. It is as competent for the Parliament to 
 repeal that Act as it is any other Act in the Statute 
 Book; and if Mr. Gladstone recognizes " ttie voice of 
 God, in the deep, prevalent, and lasting convictions of a 
 people," if such convictions ''are never found and 
 never stand the test of time and circumstances with- 
 out containing in themselves much of the truth and 
 sacredness of justice," no measure is more imperatively 
 called for than the repeal of the legislative union 
 between these two countries, upon no subject have the 
 convictions of the great bulk of the population of 
 Ireland been more deep, prevalent, and lasting. Nor 
 do I press the objection which may be derived from 
 the constitutional law, viz. that the Clergy are one 
 of the estates of the realm, and that it is incompetent 
 for the other two states — the Lords and the Commons 
 — to abohsli the third ; not only because I beheve no 
 argument based on constitutional law would have any
 
 10 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 influence on the statesmen who have embarked in this 
 enterprise, but because the power of the Parhament to 
 aboHsh the Church and adopt any other form of rehgion 
 cannot be denied. 
 
 In any measure for the disestabhshment of the 
 Church, the first matter to be dealt with is the Koyal 
 Prerogative. Since the days of WiUiam the Conqueror, 
 the right to create Bishoprics in England and to 
 nominate Bishops thereto, has been one of the pre- 
 rogatives of our kings, — the brightest gem in their 
 crown, one most jealously and successfully guarded 
 from the attempts of the Popes of Kome to usurp it. 
 Is the Crown tamely to surrender this right to the 
 Pope ? The Koyal Supremacy is not a new dogma of 
 the Eeformation, it is one of the ancient rights of the 
 Crown, more jealously asserted before the Eeformation, 
 when our sovereigns v^ere Roman Catholics, than it is 
 even now. That it is the right and prerogative of the 
 Crown to create Bishoprics, not only in the United 
 Kingdom, but in all the dominions of her Majesty, 
 is an undoubted and undisputed principle of consti- 
 tutional law, and no foreign power has or can have 
 the power to do so. It was the attempt of the See 
 of Rome to do this in England, which called forth 
 that silly piece of legislation kno^vn as ^^ The Eccle- 
 siastical Titles Act." By which the Whig minister, 
 fearing to lose his popularity, and unwilling to allow 
 so serious an encroachment on the Royal Prerogative 
 to pass unnoticed, attacked the shadow, the harmless 
 and inoffensive shadow, while he left the substance 
 untouched. Even in Roman Catholic countries the 
 Pope cannot create a Bishopric without the consent of 
 the sovereign power. This right to create a Bishopric
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 11 
 
 has been exercised by the Crown m ahuost all the 
 British Colonies. No doubt has been thrown upon 
 the validity of the patents appointing Colonial Bishops 
 so far as they purport to create a Bishopric or to 
 nominate a Bishop. The opinion given by the Judi- 
 cial Committee of the Privy Council to her Majesty 
 in Bishop Colenso's case is only as to the jurisdic- 
 tion conferred on the Bishop, but the right and 
 prerogative of the Crown to create the Bishopric 
 has never been questioned. In any country in 
 which there exists a large body of Eoman Catho- 
 lics, it is essential, not only for the government of 
 the Church, but for the administration of those sacred 
 offices which belong exclusively to the episcopal func- 
 tion, that there should be Roman Catholic Bishops; 
 to these Bishops certain districts must be assigned 
 within which they are to exercise their spiritual 
 functions, and which may popularly be (tailed Sees, 
 although in this country, the right to create a See 
 being in the Crown, they cannot be regarded as legal 
 Sees. Accordingly, since the Reformation, there has 
 existed in Ireland two sets of Bishops : one nomi- 
 nated by the Crown, and the other by the Pope — 
 who are appointed by him to the same Sees as those 
 appointed by the Crown. These Bishops have no 
 legal jurisdiction, they have no civil status, and are 
 regarded by the State only in the same light as the 
 heads of any other religious body tolerated in the 
 community. They assume, however, the titles of the 
 Sees to which they are appointed, and claim to be the 
 Bishops of those Sees to the exclusion of the Bishops 
 nominated by the Crown. Thus there exist in Ireland 
 two fully organized Churches, each claiming to be the
 
 12 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 Church of Ireland, one adopting the principles of the 
 English Keformation, whose Bishops are nominated 
 by the Crown, subject to the law of the land, and 
 therefore enjoying a civil status and political rights 
 which are denied to the other, which in defiance of 
 the law acknowledges the supremacy of the Pope, and 
 owes its chief allegiance to him. Of this latter Church 
 the great bulk of the peasantry of Ireland are members, 
 and have been always so since the Reformation, while 
 the gentry, professional, and mercantile classes, are in 
 nearly the same proportion members of the Eeformed 
 Church. During the last century the Eoman Catholic 
 Church in Ireland has acquired great wealth ; it has 
 studded the country with large, if not handsome, 
 churches, and founded numerous conventual and 
 educational establishments. The laity of the Church 
 have also risen, especially since 1829, in wealth, edu- 
 cation, and position. The highest offices in the State 
 may be, and are, filled by Roman Catholics ; the admi- 
 nistration of the law is largely entrusted to them; our 
 municipal corporations are almost exclusively composed 
 of them ; and most of the Irish members of the House 
 of Commons are returned by Roman Catholic votes and 
 Eoman Catholic influence. Thus they are invested with 
 great political power and high social position, wiiile the 
 social position of their Clergy has not received a corre- 
 sponding improvement. It is but natural that the 
 Eoman Catholic laity should, under these circum- 
 stances, desire to see the social position of their 
 Eishops and Clergy improved. And it is said that 
 they regard it as an injustice and an insult that the 
 Bishops and Clergy of the Eeformed Church should 
 enjoy a civil position and status which is refused to
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 13 
 
 the Bishops and Clergy of their Church. To apply 
 the terms injustice and insult to such a matter is 
 simply a perversion of language. Insult, if any there 
 be, seems to be altogether on the other side. It is 
 offered to the Crown by the Pope presuming to invade 
 its prerogative by appointing Bishops to Sees within 
 its dominions. It is true that the establishment of 
 standing armies, the waning political power of the 
 Popes, and the separation of politics from religion, 
 which has deprived our Bishops of all political power, 
 enable the Crown to regard lightly such invasion of its 
 prerogative ; but there was a time when such usurpa- 
 tion was of political moment. 
 
 The position, however, of the Roman Catholic 
 Clergy in Ireland is undoubtedly anomalous. The 
 State has granted a large endowment and founded a 
 college for the exclusive education of the Clergy of the 
 Roman Catholic Church, but as soon as t*hey are or- 
 dained and sent out into the country to discharge 
 those duties for which the State has educated them, 
 it ignores their existence. This is the real anomaly in 
 the Ecclesiastical condition of Ireland, and not either 
 the Establishment or the Endowment of the Reformed 
 Church. Mr. Gladstone proposes to remove • it by 
 depriving the Crown of its prerogative, and leaving a 
 clear stage for the pretensions of the See of Rome. 
 It may, however, well be doubted whether this be the 
 only solution of the difficulty, or whether it would 
 not be possible to improve the position of the Roman 
 Catholic Bishops and Clergy in Ireland, without im- 
 pairing the royal prerogative or affecting in any way 
 the Established Church. There may be difficulty in 
 the State recognizing Cardinal Cullen as Archbishop
 
 14 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 of Dublin, when the Crown has ah^eady appointed 
 Dr. Trench to that See ; there may be difficulty in 
 acknowledging the Pope's claim to appoint Bishops; 
 yet such difficulties do not appear to be insurmount- 
 able, or to involve a greater violation of constitutional 
 law than the scheme suggested by Mr. Gladstone. It 
 is impossible to look around on the nations of Europe, 
 and not see that a time is approaching when some 
 change must take place in the relations which have 
 hitherto subsisted between the Church and the Civil 
 power ; the continuance of the temporal power of the 
 Pope hangs on a thread ; the Reformed Church in 
 these countries has been for some years growing 
 restive under State interference. It is struggling for 
 freedom, to be governed by its own laws, and to be 
 itself the sole judge of those who contravene its teach- 
 ing or violate its discipline. It would seem to be the 
 natural consequence of the complete toleration of 
 different religious communities ; and our colonies fur- 
 nish us with examples of countries enjoying all the 
 benefits of the English constitution, and yet having no 
 Established Churches. These things all point to a 
 change at no distant period in the relation between 
 the Church and State ; when the Church shall exist in 
 the country, free and independent of State control, 
 making her own laws, herself judging offenders against 
 those laws, enforcing her own discipline, nominating 
 her own Bishops, and maintained and supported by 
 her own property and people. And if this was all 
 Mr. Gladstone proposed to do with the Irish Church, 
 it is possible he would meet with but little opposition 
 from its members. 
 
 In order to disestablish the Church in Ireland, it
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 15 
 
 will be necessary to make several changes in the law as 
 it exists at present, some of which are here noticed : — 
 
 First. The right or prerogative of the Crown to 
 create Bishoprics in Ireland, and to appoint Bishops 
 to the Sees already existing, must be taken away. 
 This prerogative the Crown has enjoyed in England 
 since the reign of William the Conqueror, and in Ire- 
 land since the reign of Henry IL In England, 
 Bishoprics were originally donative by the Crown by 
 delivery of the ring and crozier; they were made 
 elective in the reign of King John, and afterwards 
 made donative again by the 1 Edw. VI., they are now 
 nominally elective under the 25 Hen. VIII. In Ire- 
 land they are donative by letters patent under the 
 statute of 2 Eliz. This statute must be repealed, as 
 well as all the Acts of Eliz. and Hen. VIII. declaring 
 the supremacy of the Crown in Ecclesiastical matters 
 so far as they relate to Ireland. * 
 
 Secondly. It would be necessary to change the style 
 or title of the Sovereigns of England. That style is now 
 fixed by statute 35 Hen. VIII. c. 3 ; by this statute 
 the style of the Sovereign is '' Defender of the Faith, 
 and of the Church of England and also of Ireland, in 
 earth the Supreme Head\" which latter words are in 
 the abbreviated style of the Sovereign expressed by the 
 words "• and so forth." This Act must also be altered. 
 
 Thirdly. The whole law of marriage should be 
 changed. At present, with some exceptions, a mar- 
 riage must be celebrated by a priest in Holy Orders ; 
 were the Church disestablished the law would know 
 
 ' Queen Elizabeth, it is true, had a scruple about being styled 
 *' Supreme Head," and only styled herself " Supreme Governor ;" 
 but the style of the Sovereign never was changed.
 
 16 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 nothing of a priest in Holy Orders, the Clergy would 
 be, in the eye of the law, merely the ministers of one 
 of the religious bodies in the country. It would be 
 necessary, therefore, to make marriage a mere civil con- 
 tract, to which the parties might superadd any cere- 
 mony they pleased. 
 
 Fourthly. The State could exercise no control or 
 power over public worship. It would no longer be 
 compulsory to use the Book of Common Prayer ; the 
 Act of Uniformity should be repealed ; no days of 
 public Thanksgiving or Humiliation could be enjoined 
 by the State. Blasphemy would probably still be a 
 crime, but to deprave or revile the Christian religion 
 would not ; to burn the Bible or Book of Common 
 Prayer in the public highways would be no greater 
 offence than to burn the Koran. 
 
 Fifthly. The Bishops should be deprived of their 
 seats in the House of Lords ; the number of Irish 
 Peers in the House would be diminished ; Ireland 
 would not have her proper proportion of members in 
 that House, so that justice would require that the 
 number of representative Peers should be increased. 
 
 Sixthly. It would be necessary to abolish the whole 
 Ecclesiastical law of the country. A. parish would be 
 a thing unknown to the law, it w^ould be a mere 
 voluntary arrangement made for convenience by a 
 voluntary association. A parish being unknown, a 
 parishioner could claim no rights except by contract or 
 agreement. The churches and churchyards, now public 
 property, in which every parishioner, whether he con- 
 forms to the Church or no, has certain rights, would 
 henceforth become private property, in which no per- 
 son could have any rights except by contract. It is
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 17 
 
 needless to prosecute the inquiry further ; such are 
 a few of the changes which would be the neces- 
 sary result of disestablishment. Disestablishment is 
 almost exclusively a question of State policy. It is a 
 question for Queen Victoria, whether she is prepared to 
 part with a prerogative her predecessors have enjoyed 
 since the reign of Henry II., and hand down a tar- 
 nished Crown to her children. It is, however, only a 
 corollary to the other question of disendowment, in 
 which the Church is vitally interested. In the proposal 
 to disestablish the Church, there is no question of justice 
 or injustice ; but the proposal to disendow the Church, 
 as it is mildly called, is, when the origin of her pro- 
 perty is considered, one of unparalleled injustice. On 
 this subject the greatest ignorance prevails, and the 
 amount of misrepresentation and falsehood which is 
 circulated throughout the country, quite marvellous. 
 It cannot be too strongly or too frequently asserted, 
 that no dissenter from the Church, be he Protestant or 
 Roman Catholic, contributes one farthing to her main- 
 tenance, nor is she in possession of any State pro- 
 vision. The delusion, for it is nothing short of delu- 
 sion, which prevails on this subject, entirely arises 
 from the erroneous impression that Roman Catholics 
 and dissenters in Irelai^I are taxed to support the 
 Church. 
 
 The property of the Church consists of rent-charge 
 in lieu of tithes, glebe lands and houses, and churches. 
 The latter, Mr. Gladstone is graciously pleased to 
 leave to the Church, if her members are able to sustain 
 them. Tithes are an exclusively Ecclesiastical property. 
 No State ever yet possessed tithes as a species of pro- 
 perty or revenue ; they originated in tlie free-will 
 
 B
 
 18 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 offerings of the faithful ; they were a vohmtary gift to 
 the Church, founded upon the Divine ordinance among 
 the Jews, which the Church taught to he equally 
 obligatory upon Christians. The Church claimed them 
 as of Divine right, and Christian nations acknowledged 
 the claim, and enacted laws, not for the purpose of con- 
 ferring the tithe upon the Church, but to facilitate or 
 enforce the payment of them. Thus the preamble of 
 the statute for payment of tithes recites ''that many 
 persons, having no respect to their duties to Almighty 
 God, but against right and conscience, have attempted 
 to substract their tithes due unto God and Holy 
 Church." In process of time they became a distinct 
 species of property, as distinct as the land from the 
 produce of which they were paid, and were and are 
 now held and enjoyed by laymen as well as by Eccle- 
 siastics. Tithes were not paid in the Ancient Irish 
 Church ; they were unknown until the invasion of 
 Ireland by Henry II., and were introduced by the 
 English Ecclesiastics who accompanied him to Ireland 
 to bring the Church of that country into conformity 
 with the Church of England. One of the decrees of the 
 celebrated Council of Cashel, convened by Henry II. 
 in the year 1172, was 'Hhat the faithful do pay tithe 
 of animals, corn, and other produce." 
 
 This was not a gift or grant by the State to the 
 Church, but it was the assertion of a right by the 
 Church, which it believed to be of Divine origin and 
 sanction, and which the State lent its co-active jurisdic- 
 tion to enforce. The appropriation of tithes to the main- 
 tenance of religious houses was the origin of their 
 coming into the possession of laymen. In Ireland the 
 number of monasteries was very great, as was also the
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 19 
 
 number of parishes, the tithes of which were appro- 
 priated to their support. At the suppression of the 
 rehgious houses — a work commenced by Roman Catho- 
 hcs before the Reformation — some of these tithes were 
 restored to the parishes from whence they were de- 
 rived, while others were granted to laymen, and much 
 of this species of property became, in consequence of 
 the treason, or alleged treason, of the owners of it, 
 forfeited to the Crown, and a portion of these impro- 
 priate tithes so forfeited was by the Crown regranted 
 to the parsons having cure of souls in the parishes 
 from which they were derived, while other portions 
 were granted to laymen. The possession by the 
 Church of tithes, or their substitute tithe rent -charge, 
 cannot be said to be a State provision. It never 
 originated with, nor was conferred by the State, and 
 that portion which was regranted to the Church by 
 the Crown was no gift of the State, inasmuch as 
 such tithes were the private property of the Cro^vn, 
 and could have been retained by the Crown for its own 
 private use. 
 
 It is not easy to ascertain the exact condition of the 
 Irish Church as to its property at the time of the 
 English invasion in the reign of Henry II., or even 
 immediately before the Reformation, but whatever its 
 amount or nature, she owed it not to the State, but to 
 the piety and devotion of her own people. During the 
 period that elapsed between the invasion of Henry II. 
 and the Reformation, the civil condition of the country 
 was as bad as it could be, — wasted by continual petty 
 strife among the native chiefs, and by the struggle 
 between the native Irish and the English invaders for 
 the possession of their land. It is not likely that in 
 
 B 2
 
 20 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 these troublous times very much respect was paid to 
 the property of the Church. We do, however, know 
 something of the condition of Church property in 
 Ireland at a later period. 
 
 Sir John Davies, Attorney- General for Ireland in 
 the reign of James I., in a letter to the Earl of 
 Salisbury, gives an account of a visitation made by 
 the Lord Deputy, accompanied by the Lord Chan- 
 cellor, the Lord Chief Justice, Sir Oliver Lambert, 
 Sir Garret Moore, and himself, in July, 1607, of 
 the counties of Monaghan, Fermanagh, and Cavan, 
 during which, in exercise of a commission sent out 
 of England for the purpose, an inquisition was made 
 into the state of the Church in those counties. From 
 which it appeared that in Monaghan '^the churches 
 for the most part were utterly waste : the King was 
 patron of all of them ; the incumbents were popish 
 priests instituted by Bishops authorized from Rome, 
 yet many of them, like other old priests of Queen 
 Mary's time, in England ready to yield to con- 
 formity." Action upon this was reserved ^^ until 
 the Bishop of Derry, Raphoe, and Clogher, which 
 three dioceses comprehend the greater part of Ulster 
 (albeit they be now united for one man's benefit), 
 should arrive out of England, whose absence, being 
 two years since he was elected by his Majesty, hath 
 been the chief cause that no course hath been hitherto 
 taken to redeem this poor people to Christianity, and 
 therefore majiis peccatum habet'K'' In Fermanagh, he 
 
 ^ This Bishop was George Montgomery, who also held the 
 deanery of Norwich in England. In 1610 he resigned the Sees 
 of Derry and Raphoe, and took the administration of Meath, 
 retaining still the deanery of Norwich. This proves the small 
 vahie of the sees of Derry and Raphoe at that tim€.
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 21 
 
 writes, '' the Church lands were either monastery 
 land, Corbe ^ land, or Herenach * land, for it did not 
 appear the Bishop had any land in demesne, nei- 
 ther did we find the parsons and vicars had any 
 glebe lands at all in this county. As to monastery 
 land we found no other than what belonged to the 
 Abbey of Lisgole, not exceeding two Ballibetaghs ^ 
 for the most part in the barony of Clanawly. 
 But the lands belonging to the Corbes and Here- 
 nachs are of far greater quantity. These men pos- 
 sessed all the glebe lands ; albeit the incumbents 
 may be both parsons and vicars, these livings are 
 not sufficient to feed an honest man." In Cavan 
 we found ^' that the greatest number of the parsonages 
 were appropriated to two great abbeys lying in the 
 English Pale;" fourteen to the Abbey of Flower in 
 Westmeath, granted to the Baron of Delwyn, and 
 eight to the Abbey of Kells, farmed by Gerard 
 Flemyng ; two or three to the Abbey of Cavan, 
 in the possession of Sir James Dillon." "• The 
 vicarages were so poor as ten of them being united 
 would scarce maintain an honest minister : that the 
 
 ' Corbe was a prior or resident in a Collegiate Church. 
 
 * The Herenach was in almost every parish. When a layman 
 founded a church, he dedicated a good portion of land to some 
 saint, and gave it to a clerk not in orders and his heirs for ever 
 upon trust, to keep the church clean and repaired, to keep hos- 
 pitality, and give alms to the poor. He was called Erenach ; he 
 had primam tonsuram, but no other orders ; he had a voice in the 
 Chapter, and paid a rent yearly to the Bishop, also a fine upon 
 the marriage of each of his daughters, and a subsidy to the Bishop 
 on his first entrance into his bishopric. 
 
 ^ Ballibetagh means a town able to maintain hospitality ; it 
 was equal to 960 acres. The whole of Monaghan contained 
 86,000 acres.
 
 22 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 churches for the most part were in ruins, and covered 
 only with thatch. That the incumbents, both parsons 
 and vicars, did appear such poor, ragged, ignorant 
 creatures (for we saw many of them in the camp), as 
 we could not deem any of them worthy of the meanest 
 of those livings, albeit many of them are not worth 
 405. per annum. This county doth lie within the 
 diocese of Kilmore, whose Bishop, Robert Draper, is 
 parson of Trim ^ the best parsonage in the whole 
 kingdom — a man of this country's birth — worth well- 
 nigh 4:001. a year. He doth now live in those parts 
 where he hath two bishoprics ^ but there is no Divine 
 Service or Sermon to be- heard within either of his 
 dioceses." 
 
 In 1633, Archbishop Bramhall, then Archdeacon of 
 Meath, was employed in a royal visitation along with 
 Baron Hilton, the Judge of the Prerogative, and 
 writing to Archbishop Laud, August 10, 1633, he 
 says, ' ' that they found the bishoprics in particu- 
 lar wretchedly dilapidated by fee farms and long 
 leases at small rents granted partly by the Popish 
 Bishops, who resolved to carry as much with them 
 as they could, and partly by their Protestant succes- 
 sors, who might fear another turn,- and were, having 
 their example, disposed enough to make use of the 
 same arts. By such means many Bishoprics were 
 made extremely small, some reduced to 100/. a 
 year, some to 50/., as Waterford, Kilfenora; some 
 to five marks % as Kilmacduagh, and particularly 
 
 •^ He held Trim in commendam, on account of the low state of 
 the revenues of the bishopric. 
 
 ' The other bishopric was Ardagh. This prelate was ap- 
 pointed by King James, because he knew the Irish language ! ! 
 
 ^ The mark was 135. 4f7.
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 23 
 
 Cloyne, the Bishop whereof was called Episcopus 
 quinque Marcarum ; Aghadoe was only 1/. Is. ScL, 
 and Ardfert but 60/. Lhnerick had above five parts 
 in six made away by fee farms or encroached on by 
 undertakers. The like was done in Cashel, Emly, 
 Waterford, Lismore, and Killaloe." After this period 
 the Rebellion of 1641 broke out, which was succeeded 
 by the invasion of Cromwell and his fanatics, who 
 persecuted with all the zeal of religious bigotry the 
 Bishops and Clergy of the Irish Church, as well as 
 the Roman Catholics, and other loyalists of Ireland. 
 The Bishops were driven from their Sees, the Clergy 
 from their Benefices, and the Church lay prostrate for 
 fourteen years, during which no very tender regard was 
 paid to her property. So that at the period of the res- 
 toration of Charles II. the condition of the property of 
 the Church was most deplorable. 
 
 I shall now very briefly point out some of the 
 sources from which the Church has derived her pre- 
 sent property. I regret that the information I can 
 give upon this subject is so meagre ; but I trust it 
 will be sufficient to show that the confiscation of 
 Church property in Ireland would be a very gross 
 violation of the rights of property. 
 
 In consequence of the Earl of Tyrone's rebellion, 
 there were large counties and tracts of land forfeited 
 to the Crown : in the six counties of Donegal, Tyrone, 
 Derry, Fermanagh, Cavan, and Armagh, as much as 
 500,000 acres. These counties had been wasted 
 during the rebellion ; great numbers of the inhabitants 
 had perished by the sword and famine, and the rest 
 were so reduced in poverty that they could not manure 
 the land, — so that it was likely to remain waste for want
 
 24 THE lEISH CHURCH ; 
 
 of people or riches to cultivate and improve it. These 
 lands were allotted by King James I., under the advice 
 of Sir Arthur Chichester, Lord Deputy, among three 
 classes of people : (1) The old Irish chieftains and 
 inhabitants ; (2) The Servitors of the Crown, who were 
 either the great officers of state or the captains and 
 officers who had served in the army ; and (3) English 
 and Scotch adventurers. Great indulgence was given 
 to the Irish chiefs, even those who had been implicated 
 in Tyrone's rebellion. Their under-tenants were allowed 
 to be of their own country and religion, being exempted 
 from the Oath of Supremacy, which the tenants of the 
 other planters were obliged to take. The British 
 undertakers being allowed to have none but English 
 or Scotch ; and the Servitors, though permitted to 
 employ natives, were yet bound to employ none but 
 Protestants. The estate of the bishoprics were in 
 Ulster altogether unprofitable to the Bishops, partly 
 being claimed- by the temporal Lords, and partly by 
 the claims of the patentees, who included in their 
 patents the Church lands, not excepting the site of 
 Cathedral Churches and the places of residence of 
 Bishops, Deans, and Canons. Most of the Paro- 
 chial Churches had been destroyed in the rebellion, 
 or fallen down for want of roofs. The livings were 
 very small ; and for years Divine Service had not been 
 used in any parish throughout Ulster, except in some 
 city or principal town. King James ordered all Eccle- 
 siastical lands to be restored to their respective Sees 
 and Churches, that compositions should be made with 
 the patentees for the site of Cathedral Churches and 
 the houses of residence of Bishops and dignities, which 
 were never intended to be granted to them — an equiva-
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 25 
 
 lent to be allowed to the patentees. He ordered the 
 Bishops to give up all impropriations to the respective 
 Incumbents, recompensing them with grants of his 
 own lands. He caused every portion allotted to 
 undertakers to be made a parishi and a Parochial 
 Church to be erected therein, the Incumbent whereof 
 was (besides the tithes) to have a glebe set out to him 
 of 60, 90, or 120 acres, according to the size of the 
 parish. These orders of the King were but badly 
 observed by the Commissioners, who were too intent 
 on their private interest. Glebes were set out in in- 
 convenient places, sometimes out of the district of the 
 parish to the Church of which they belonged ; and the 
 Clergy defrauded if not in the quantity generally in 
 quality of the land assigned to them ; and thus King 
 James's pious intentions w^ere, in a great measure, 
 defeated. 
 
 On the restoration of King Charles If., he found 
 that a large portion of the country had been forfeited 
 and escheated to the Crown, in consequence of the 
 rebellion of 1641. Whether these forfeitures were 
 just or not it would be idle now to inquire. I am not 
 one of those patriots who love to dwell on the dark 
 pages of my country's history, or think the welfare 
 and happiness of my countrymen are best promoted 
 by reminding them continually of the wrongs, if 
 wrongs they be, perpetrated two centuries ago. At 
 this period of our history property forfeited to the 
 Crown became as much its private property as the 
 property of any of the nobility ; and it was quite 
 competent for the Crown to retain the possession of 
 it or to bestow it on whom it pleased. The forfeited 
 estates in Ireland were, however, pledged to recom-
 
 26 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 pense those English officers and soldiers who, as 
 adventurers, volunteered to suppress the rebellion, and 
 secure the country for the Crown of England ; subject 
 to this they were the absolute property of the Crown — 
 its private property. 
 
 The Act of Settlement, 14 and 15 Car. II., c. 2, 
 s. 97, restored to Ecclesiastical persons all property of 
 which ** they were possessed in the year of our Lord 
 1641, and from which they had been dispossessed 
 during the fury and violence of the late times." Sect. 
 98 vested all leases for terms of years of Eccle- 
 siastical lands forfeited to his Majesty in the Ecclesias- 
 tical persons entitled to the reversion expectant on 
 such leases. The effect of these provisions was merely 
 to restore to the Church that which had been its own, 
 the Crown declining to take advantage of the for- 
 feiture occasioned by the treason of the Ecclesiastical 
 tenants. The 99th sect, of the same Act provided, 
 that out of the Ecclesiastical lands which had been 
 granted or conveyed in fee-farm and had been forfeited 
 to his Majesty, certain portions should be granted by 
 way of augmentation to the Archbishops of Dublin and 
 Cashel, and the Bishops of Kildare, Clonfert, Ferns 
 and Leighlin, Limerick, Ossory, and Killaloe. And 
 sect. 101 provided that the same rent should be paid 
 to his Majesty for said lands as was paid by the adven- 
 turers and soldiers for the lands allotted to them. By 
 the Act of Explanation, 17 & 18 Car. 11. , sec. 27, it 
 was provided, that in lieu of the provision contained in 
 the Act of Settlement for Glebes, the Commissioners 
 were to set out so many acres of land as might be 
 sufficient to endow all and every the parochial Churches 
 with ten acres, except such as have already the Hke or
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 27 
 
 a greater quantity of glebe, subject to a rent to his 
 Majesty ; and, by the 28th sect., impropriate or appro- 
 priate tithes vested in his Majesty were granted to 
 the Incumbents of the parishes from which they did 
 arise. 
 
 It seems impossible to contend that the Church by 
 these means is possessed of a State endowment, or 
 that it owes its property to the State more than some 
 of the first families in Ireland who hold their estates 
 under the selfsame title. These provisions amount to 
 no more than a regrant to the Church of property of 
 which she had been despoiled in the troublous times, 
 or grants to her by the King of his own property out of 
 his Royal Bounty. The nation had nothing to say 
 to it. This may be illustrated by the 122 sect, of the 
 Act of Explanation (17 & 18 Car. II.), by which " all 
 messuages, manors, lands, &c., whereof Sir John Fitz- 
 gerald died seised in the year 1640, which were then 
 belonging to the Bishop of Cloyne and his successors, 
 and were by the will of the said Sir John Fitzgerald, 
 dated 18th Sept. 1640, devised to King Car. I., were 
 granted to the Bishop of Cloyne and his successors, 
 except the rectories and impropriate tithes therein 
 bequeathed to his said Majesty, which rectories and 
 impropriate tithes were settled upon the Incumbents 
 and their successors having cure of souls in the several 
 parishes from which they arose, and the patronage of 
 the said Churches was vested in his Majesty, his heirs 
 and successors." This surely is no State provision. 
 The property was devised to King Charles I., and in- 
 herited from him by King Charles II., who of his own 
 bounty granted it to the Church ; and so it was as to 
 the forfeited lands. By the forfeiture they became
 
 28 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 the private property of the Crown, and were granted 
 to the Church by it. 
 
 The first-fruits and twentieth part of all Ecclesias- 
 tical benefices were payable to the Crown, and formed 
 part of its income. In the year 1711 Queen Anne re- 
 mitted to the Clergy the twentieth parts, and granted 
 a patent vesting the first-fruits in trustees, to be applied 
 for ever towards purchasing glebes, building houses, and 
 buying impropriations for the use of the Clergy. In 
 1726 the Bishops, finding that the first-fruits were 
 very inadequate for the purpose intended, considerably 
 augmented them by private subscriptions, and the Clergy 
 also generously contributed. Ajid up to the year 1780 
 there had been sixteen glebes purchased at the cost of 
 3543/. 25. 7d., and tithes for fourteen Incumbents, for 
 5855L 13s. 6d., and assistance given for the building 
 of forty-five glebe houses, by gifts of 4080L It is 
 true that very large sums were annually voted by Par- 
 liament in augmentation of this fund from the time of 
 the union up to the year 1823, but during that period 
 a sum of 102,598/. 4s. 2d. was repaid to the trustees 
 by the Clergy out of their incomes, being advances 
 made to them to assist in building glebe houses. The 
 parliamentary grant during this period was very large, 
 amounting in the whole to about 507,320/.; out of this 
 sum 56,394/. was expended in purchasing glebes and a 
 considerable sum was spent in building Churches. The 
 property thus acquired, so far as regards the first-fruits 
 and their augmentation by private subscriptions, was 
 clearly not derived from the State, but from the pri- 
 vate bounty of the Queen, and the Bishops and Clergy. 
 The only portion of it that can be said to have been 
 derived from the State, is that which is the produce of
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 29 
 
 the parliamentary grants. These grants have ceased 
 to be made since the year 1823. They were granted 
 for a purpose then deemed desirable ; namely, to pro- 
 vide residences for the Clergy, and build Churches 
 throughout the country — their purpose has been ful- 
 filled ; and no case can be made for undoing what was 
 then done, for pulling down the Churches and glebe 
 houses, which have been erected by the assistance of 
 these grants. 
 
 The Church has also acquired much property from 
 the benevolence and piety of her own people since the 
 Reformation. 
 
 Archbishop Bramhall purchased abundance of im- 
 propriations, either with his own money, or by large 
 remittances from England (Archbishop Laud gave 
 40,000/. for this purpose out of his own purse), 
 by money given by his Majesty for pious uses, by 
 borrowing large sums, and securing them, out of the 
 issues of the impropriations he bought, by voluntary 
 contributions, and by a share of the goods of persons 
 dying intestate. By these and other means he regained 
 to the Church 30,000/. a year. 
 
 In 1567 the See of Armagh was so poor that Adam 
 LoFTUS accepted the Archbishopric of Dublin ; and his 
 successor, Thomas Lancaster, had a licence from Queen 
 Elizabeth to hold, in commejidavi, the treasurership of 
 Salisbury, the rectory of Southhill, in the diocese of 
 Exeter, the rectory of Sherfield, in the diocese of 
 Winchester, the archdeaconry of Kells, together with 
 the rectory of Nobber, and the prebend of Stagonil, in 
 the Cathedral of St. Patrick's, Dublin, on account of 
 the poverty of the See. 
 
 Archbishop Henry Ussher obtained, in 1611, a
 
 30 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 grant to him and his successors, Archbishops of Ar- 
 magh, of the manor of Donoghmore and eight town 
 lands in Iveagh, in the county of Down, to be holden 
 of the Crown in frankalmoigne, and also a grant of 
 of three town lands in Iveagh, to Patrick O'Connor 
 0' Kearney and his heirs, to be holden of the Arch- 
 bishop and his successors, as of his manor of Donogh- 
 more, by fealty and suit of court, and the yearly rent 
 of 61 
 
 Archbishop Hampton (1613 — 1624) built from the 
 foundation a handsome palace at Drogheda for himself 
 and his successors, at a cost of 2064/., and repaired 
 the Cathedral of St. Patrick at Armagh, which had 
 been ruined by Shane O'Neill, and the steeple demo- 
 lished. He also cast the great bell, and repaired an 
 old Episcopal house at Armagh, to which he added new 
 buildings, and annexed 300 acres of land near the 
 town of Armagh for mensal lands to the See. 
 
 Archbishop Bramhall, by his will, dated Jan. 5, 
 1662, left 500/. towards the repair of the Cathedral of 
 Armagh and of St. Peter's at Drogheda, over and 
 above such sums as he should bestow on them in his 
 lifetime. He repaired the Episcopal house at Dro- 
 gheda, which he found in ruins. 
 
 Archbishop Margetson (1663 — 1678) rebuilt the 
 Cathedral of Armagh, which had been burnt by O'Neill, 
 by his own money, and contributions collected through- 
 out Ireland, and also repaired and adorned his Episcopal 
 palace, and contributed largely to the repair of the two 
 Cathedrals in Dubhn. 
 
 Archbishop Narcissus Marsh left his estate of 
 Stormanstown in Meath to the Vicars Choral of 
 Armagh.
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 31 
 
 Archbishop Michael Boyle (1678—1702) built in 
 the town of Blessington, near DubHn, a magnificent 
 country house, an elegant chapel, a parish Church 
 and steeple, which he furnished with a peal of six 
 bells : his monument is still in the Church. 
 
 Archbishop Thomas Lyndsay (1713 — 1724) pur- 
 chased the organ and a ring of six bells for the 
 Cathedral of Armagh, and bequeathed 1000/. to be 
 laid out in the purchase of 50L a year for the economy 
 of Armagh. During his life he laid out 4000/. in the 
 purchase of lands which he annexed to the ancient 
 estate belonging to the choir. His munificence to 
 the Church in his lifetime and by will amounted 
 to about 7000/. 
 
 Primate Boulter left a very large sum of money 
 for the purchase of glebes for the Clergy, and the aug- 
 mentation and improvement of small livings. This 
 sum is at present invested in 36,232/. Is.^Sd., 3 per 
 cent. Stock; 38,700/., Bank of Ireland Stock; and 
 14,750/., 3 per cent. Consols. 
 
 Primate Kobinson left 1000/. for the same purpose. 
 These bequests of Primates Boulter and Robinson are 
 at present administered by the Ecclesiastical Commis- 
 sioners of Ireland, and yield an annual income of about 
 4700/. 
 
 Primate Kobinson also built the palace at Armagh, 
 and four Churches, a school, a public library, to which 
 he gave a large collection of books, also a market-house 
 and shambles. 
 
 Lord John George Beresford, Archbishop (1822 
 — 1862), spent nearly 30,000/. in restoring the Cathe- 
 dral of Armagh. 
 
 In the diocese of Meath : —
 
 32 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 George Montgomery, Bishop (1610 — 1620), built 
 a palace at Ardbraccan, and repaired the Church. 
 
 John Evans, Bishop (1715 — 1723), bequeathed 
 lOOOL to build the Episcopal house at Ardbraccan, 
 and his personal estate to the Archbishop of Armagh 
 and Bishop of Meath, to purchase glebe and impro- 
 priate tithes for the endowment of the several Churches 
 in the diocese of Meath, in the sole donation of the 
 Bishop of that See. Ardbraccan House was afterwards 
 built by Bishop Price (1733), from the design of this 
 Bishop. 
 
 Henry Maule, Bishop, by his will, dated October 
 5, 1757, bequeathed lOOL to the Bishop of Cloyne, 
 for the purchase of glebe and tithes for one poor living 
 in that diocese. 
 
 In the diocese of Clogher : — 
 
 EicHARD Tennison, Bishop (1690 — 1697), repaired 
 and beautified the palace, and built out-offices, and in- 
 creased its revenues at least a third part. 
 
 John Sterne, Bishop (1717), left 80/. a year for a 
 catechist to be chosen by the Clergy of the city of 
 Dublin every third year; to building a spire on the 
 top of St. Patrick's steeple, 100/. ; to the trustees of 
 first-fruits, 2000/., to be laid out in the purchase of 
 glebes or impropriate tithes ; 1500/. or 2000/., as his 
 executors should think proper, towards finishing the 
 Cathedral of Clogher, with other charitable bequests. 
 
 In the diocese of Dromore : — 
 
 King James I., by letters patent, granted to WiUiam 
 Worsey, of Hotham, in Northamptonshire, certain lands 
 to hold to him and his heirs, of the Bishop of Dromore 
 and his successors, in free and common soccage, as of 
 his manor of Dromore, at the rent of 40/., on con-
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 33 
 
 clition he should build a stone-house, in or near 
 Dromore, and lay out a curtilage of one acre as a 
 mansion-house for the Bishop and his successors, 
 and the said Worsey covenanted to grant to every 
 Incumbent of Garvagh, Magherawly, and Dromore, 
 in Iveagh, sixty acres adjoining each of the said 
 churches and chapels, as glebe lands for the same. 
 
 Theophilus Buckworth, Bishop (1613), expended 
 500Z. in additional buildings to the See house. 
 
 Jeremy Taylor (1661), administrator of the dio- 
 cese, rebuilt the Church of Dromore at his own 
 expense. 
 
 In the diocese of Eaphoe : — 
 
 John Pooley, Bishop (1702), left 200Z. to improve 
 the Cathedral. 
 
 Nicholas Forster, Bishop (1716), erected chapels- 
 of-ease in large parishes, founded a school in the 
 town of Raphoe, endowed a house in Raphoe, with 
 lands of the value of 751. a year, for the widows of 
 four clergymen. In 1737 he laid out 700/. in re- 
 building the diocesan school-house. He built a steeple 
 on the Cathedral. He bequeathed the money due by 
 his successors to him for improvements (427/.), to- 
 gether with 600/. to the Bishop and Archdeacon of 
 Raphoe, to be paid to the Bishop of Raphoe, to lay 
 out 12/. a year in repairing parish Churches, and 61. 
 a year for repairing the Cathedral. 
 
 In the diocese of Down and Connor : — 
 
 Bishop Hutchinson, with the aid of contributions 
 from the neighbouring gentry and Clergy, built a new 
 Church in the year 1723 in the island of Raghery, off 
 the coast of Antrim, and by means of the first-fruits 
 
 c
 
 34 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 bought the great tithes of the island for the endow- 
 ment of the minister. 
 
 In the diocese of Derry : — 
 
 EzEKiEL Hopkins, Bishop (1681,) was at great ex- 
 pense in beautifying and adorning his Cathedral, in 
 furnishing it with an organ and massive plate. He 
 spent lOOOL in buildings and other improvements in 
 Derry and Eaphoe. 
 
 Bernard, William, Bishop (1747), built a chapel- 
 of-ease, adjacent to the city walls and the Episcopal 
 palace. 
 
 Lord Bristol, Bishop (1768), built the glebe 
 house and chap el -of- ease in Tamlaght O'Crilly, and 
 almost rebuilt the Bishop's palace. 
 
 Knox, William, Bishop (1808), expended 3000Z. 
 on the Cathedral, and built the free Church at Derry. 
 
 In the diocese of Dublin : — 
 
 Narcissus Marsh (1694 — 1702) endowed an 
 almshouse in Drogheda for the reception of twelve 
 widows of decayed clergymen, to each of whom he 
 allotted a lodging and 20/. a year. He gave 40/. 
 a year to the Dean and Chapter of Armagh, he re- 
 paired several Churches at his own expense, bought 
 in several impropriations and restored them to the 
 Church. 
 
 William King (1702), when Bishop of Derry, 
 purchased some advowsons which he added to the See, 
 and largely contributed to building five new Churches, 
 and repairing all in his diocese. He purchased from 
 Lord Ross a large quantity of impropriate tithes in 
 Kildare for 2800Z. for augmenting cures in his diocese ; 
 also lands near Dublin, and annexed them to his See ; 
 and also 49/. a year, part of the estate of Sir John
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 35 
 
 Eccles, at 1050/., and settled it for the support of a 
 lecturer in St. George's Church, Dublin. He spent 
 3000L on the See house of St. Sepulchre, and built a 
 court-house for the manor ; he recovered the lands of 
 Seaton, and had them settled on the See by Act of 
 Parliament. He purchased the lay rectories of Crevagh 
 in the county of Dublin, Ballytemple and New Castle 
 in the county of Wicklow, and collated Incumbents 
 thereto. He purchased 40L a year impropriate tithes 
 from Mr. Wentworth. He devised 400L to the Arch- 
 bishop of Tuam and Bishop of Clogher, to purchase 
 glebes for one or more Churches in the diocese of 
 Dublin and in 1726, he gave 300L to the Board of 
 First-Fruits for purchasing glebes and impropriate 
 tithes for the increase of small livings. 
 
 In the diocese of Ossory : — 
 
 John Wheeler, Bishop (1613), at great expense 
 recovered the See lands, which Bishop Thonery (in the 
 time of Queen Mary) had alienated. Had a grant by 
 patent, 23rd December, 1619, of 1000 acres arable 
 land, wood, and pasture, and 139 acres bog in the 
 plantation and territory of Ely 0' Carroll ; to hold the 
 arable land, wood, and pasture in frankalmoigne, and the 
 bog in free and common soccage of the Castle of Dublin 
 at the yearly rent of 5s. 9d,, with the creation of these 
 premises into a manor. 
 
 Griffith Williams, Bishop, laid out 1400Z. in the 
 repairs of the Cathedral of St. Cunice. The ring of 
 bells had been carried away in the rebellion of 1641. 
 He gave a large bell which cost 144/., repaired the 
 chancel at a cost of 300/., and laid out 40/. on the 
 belfry. 
 
 John Parry, Bishop (1672), laid out 400/. in re- 
 
 c 2
 
 36 THE IRISH church; 
 
 pairing the Episcopal house. In 1675 he gave a ring 
 of six bells to the Cathedral, which cost 24:61. 13s. lOd. 
 He made a present of three bells to three Churches, viz. 
 Gowran, Calan, and Thomastown. He passed patents 
 for the augmentation lands granted under the Act of 
 Settlement, and for many impropriations to the use of 
 the Clergy of his diocese ; for thirteen rectories. He 
 gave by will 200L to Christ Church, Dublin, to buy a 
 pair of large silver candlesticks gilt, and other utensils 
 for the use of the altar, and 100/. to buy plate for the 
 Cathedral of Kilkenny. 
 
 Thomas Otway, Bishop (1679), founded the library 
 at the Cathedral of St. Canice ; he bequeathed 60/. to 
 be distributed equally to the repairs of the Churches of 
 Gowran, Castlecomer, and Durrow; he bought plate 
 for the Cathedral, which had belonged to Christ 
 Church, Dublin, for 116/. 135. Ad, ; he beautified the 
 Cathedral, and erected an organ. He recovered many 
 of the augmentation lands, which had been given to 
 his See. 
 
 Charles Este, Bishop (1735), laid out 1935/. in 
 improving the See house. 
 
 Michael Cox, Bishop (1743), laid out 300/. on the 
 house ; he refused a fine of 700/. for land, held by 
 Lord Shelbume, which he converted into a demesne at 
 the cost of 500/. 
 
 The diocese of Ferns : — 
 
 The See lands had been alienated by Bishop 
 Devereux and by Bishop Hugh Allen, some of which 
 were recovered at great expense by Bishop Eam. This 
 Bishop found the revenues of his See reduced from 
 400/. or 500/. a year to 66/. 65. Sd. He recovered the 
 manor of Fethard, and the town-land of Hevington by
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 37 
 
 law. He built the Episcopal house at Old Leighlin, 
 and left a library for the use of the Clergy. 
 
 Baktholomew Vigers, Bishop (1690), purchased 
 from Joseph Dean, Esq., chief Baron of the Exchequer, 
 a fee-farm in the manor of Old Leighlin for 548Z., 
 which he devised by will to his successors. He also 
 left 300Z. to be laid out by the advice of the Archbishop 
 of Dublin in augmenting the See of Leighlin. 
 
 Walter Cope, Bishop, built the See house at 
 Ferns. 
 
 The diocese of Cashel : — 
 
 Edmund Butler, Bishop (1527), recovered at great 
 expense the See lands from John Fitz-Theobald 
 Burke. 
 
 The diocese of Waterford : — 
 
 Hugh Gore, Bishop (1690), laid out considerable 
 sums in beautifying the Cathedral of Waterford. 
 By will he gave 200L to provide a ring bi bells for 
 the Church of Lismore, and beautifying the choir ; 
 lOOL towards buying a ring of bells for the Church 
 of Clonmel. The residue of his real and personal 
 estate, after some other charitable bequests, he left 
 for building and repairing old ruinated Churches in 
 Waterford and Lismore. This property consists of 
 3381/. 35. 9d,, 3 per cent, stock, and 374/. 155. lOd. 
 per annum tithe rent-charge from the parish of Cahir, 
 in the diocese of Lismore, and is at present adminis- 
 tered by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for Ireland. 
 
 Bishop Chenevix, by will, dated 13th August, 
 1777, bequeathed to the diocese of Waterford, 1600/., 
 the interest to be given to the widows of clergymen 
 of that diocese, and 1000/. to the diocese of Lismore, 
 to be expended for the benefit of that diocese at the
 
 38 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 discretion of the Bishop of the diocese for the time 
 being. ; 
 
 In the diocese of Cloyne, Cork, and Ross : — 
 
 Edward Synge, Bishop (1663), by will devised 
 two plough-lands of Ballycroneen, which he had pur- 
 chased from John Fitz- Thomas Gerald, to the Bishop 
 of Cloyne and his successors. 
 
 Edward Wetenhall, Bishop (1678), repaired the 
 ruinous Episcopal houses of Cork and Kilmore, and 
 rebuilt the Cathedral Church of Ardagh. 
 
 Peter Brown, Bishop (1609), expended 2000Z. on 
 a country-house at Ballynaspeck, or Bishopstown, near 
 Cork, and left it to his successors, as also his improve- 
 ments at Bishopscourt, in Cork, of great value. 
 
 Charles Crow, Bishop (1702), at his own expense, 
 recovered to the see of Cloyne the manor of Don- 
 noghmore, containing 8000 acres of land, plantation 
 measure. 
 
 In the diocese of Killaloe : — 
 
 Sir Thomas Vesey settled the rectorial tithes of 
 Abbeyleix, part of his private estate, on the vicar; 
 and after he was translated to Ossory, he repaired 
 and improved his Palace at Kilkenny. 
 
 In the diocese of Tuam : — 
 
 John Yesey, Bishop (1678), by will directed 400Z. 
 to be laid out in the purchase of lands or tithes for 
 the Economy of Tuam, to be conveyed to the Dean 
 and Chapter of Tuam, and gave to the Dean and 
 Chapter the impropriate tithes of the lands of Dub- 
 dowlagh and Ballyglass in the county of Galway. 
 
 In the diocese of Elphin : — 
 
 Edward King, Bishop (1611), repaired the Cathe- 
 dral at his own expense. He built a castle, and some
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 39 
 
 offices adjoining to it at Elphin, for himself and his 
 successors, and endowed it with lands which he had 
 purchased. His bishopric, which he found reduced to 
 200 marks, he left worth 1500L a year. 
 
 John Hudson, Bishop (1667), devised 566L to 
 erect a new house where the old castle stood, for the 
 Bishop of Elphin and his successors. 
 
 In the diocese of Killala : — 
 . Thomas Otway, Bishop (1670), rebuilt the cathe- 
 dral of Killala from the foundation, as also a parish 
 Church in his diocese. 
 
 Such are a few of the gifts to the Church by her 
 own Bishops only, which a very imperfect search has 
 enabled me to trace, and I have no doubt but that a 
 diligent search among the records of the country, and 
 of the different dioceses, would not only find many 
 more, but would also prove that the laity and in- 
 ferior Clergy have also largely contributed to those 
 endowments which the Church is now possessed of, 
 and of which it is said she must now be despoiled 
 in order to do justice to the Roman Catholics of 
 Ireland ! ! 
 
 Such being the nature of the Church's title, would 
 it not be an act of the grossest injustice to take from 
 her property so acquired ? What right has the State 
 to take possession of, or divert these endowments to 
 other purposes ? 
 
 I am free to admit that when a man grants his pro- 
 perty to the endowment of a public institution, or for 
 a public object, he dedicates it to the public, and the 
 nation has a perfect right to mould that institution, 
 so as may be most beneficial, and even should it be- 
 come injurious to society, to abolish it, and apply the
 
 40 THE IKISH CHURCH ; 
 
 property so granted to other public purposes; but, 
 however, only to such as are as cognate as possible 
 to those for which the donor intended it. But so 
 long as the institution continues, so long as it is 
 suffered by the State to exist, it is contrary to 
 every principle of right and justice, to that natural 
 justice, which even heathen lawyers recognized, that 
 its property should be alienated, and applied to pur- 
 poses for which it was never intended by the donors. 
 To disendow the Irish Church, as is proposed by Mr. 
 Gladstone, to alienate its property and apply it to 
 other, perhaps secular purposes, would be an act of 
 injustice unparalleled in the history of any civilized 
 nation ; it would be so monstrous a wrong, such an 
 outrage on every principle of right and equity, that I 
 cannot believe it possible that a British House of 
 Commons, when really informed on the subject, will 
 ever consent to it. It may possibly be said, that 
 a similar wrong was perpetrated at the Keforma- 
 tion ; but it is not so : no portion of the property 
 of the Church was confiscated or alienated at the 
 Eeformation; the property of the religious houses 
 was confiscated, and a portion of this property was 
 granted to the Church; but then the institutions 
 themselves were condemned. I am far from saying 
 that no wrong was done at this time; nay, much was 
 done which we have every reason to regret and deplore. 
 But, be it remembered, that the whole of this evil is not 
 attributable to the Eeformation ; the suppression of the 
 religious houses commenced before the Reformation, and 
 they were even then condemned as encouraging indo- 
 lence and slothful living, — justly or unjustly, how- 
 ever, the institutions themselves were condemned.
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 41 
 
 They were declared hurtful to society, and therefore 
 society had a right to apply their revenues to other 
 purposes. But even in the suppression of the monas- 
 teries, whatever injustice or wrong was perpetrated, 
 the forms of law and right were observed ; they were 
 all formally surrendered to the Crown ; no doubt those 
 surrenders can hardly be said to have been voluntary ; 
 nevertheless, the perpetrators of this wrong, if wrong 
 it was, felt themselves bound to observe the forms at 
 least of right. The Reformation affords no precedent 
 for such a wrong as is now contemplated by Mr. 
 Gladstone's scheme. What offence has the Church of 
 Ireland committed to justify this confiscation of her pro- 
 perty ? What has she done to call for the enactment 
 of this penal law ? Are her Clergy preachers of sedi- 
 tion or the abettors of crime ? Are her people dis- 
 loyal or disaffected ? On the contrary ; it is admitted, 
 that they are the most loyal, the most civilized, the 
 most industrious, and the most peaceable portion of 
 the community. Even the leader of this assault upon 
 her, the most active promoter of this penal code, 
 admits that she brings to the people of this country 
 that truth which is of all possessions the most precious 
 to the souls of men ^ Why, then, is she to be plun- 
 dered and her property confiscated ? It is said she 
 has failed to effect the object for which she was 
 founded — that she is a missionary Church, and her 
 mission has failed. They who urge this objection to 
 her, speak as if the Irish Church was founded, 300 
 years ago, for the purpose of converting the Roman 
 Catholics of Ireland, nay, some of those who under- 
 
 ' See " A Chapter of Autobiography," by Right Hon. W. E. 
 Gladstone, M.P.
 
 42 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 took her defence in the late Parliament argued on the 
 same assumption. 
 
 The Church of Ireland, however, the church of St. 
 Patrick and St. Columba, boasts of an earlier origin. 
 Nor is she a missionary Church in any other sense than 
 the whole Christian Church is missionary. Her mis- 
 sion is to turn the hearts of the disobedient to the 
 wisdom of the just. I should much regret that the 
 Clergy of the Irish Church should ever believe it to be 
 their chief and paramount duty to endeavour to con- 
 vert the Koman Catholic population of this country to 
 Protestantism. No doubt it is their duty, in season, 
 to teach the truth, and they would rejoice were they 
 able to bring any of the Koman Catholics to abandon 
 the doctrinal errors, and the superstitious, and worse 
 than superstitious, practices of the Church of Rome. 
 But it never can be their duty to keep continually 
 alive the baneful spirit of religious controversy. The 
 Irish Clergy, without entering upon controversy at all, 
 or endeavouring to unsettle the faith of their Roman 
 Catholic parishioners, may do much to encourage 
 amongst them those great Christian virtues, acknow- 
 ledged by all, and which, after all, are the fruit by 
 which the tree is to be tried. The great offence 
 charged against the Irish Church is, that she has not 
 gained over the great bulk of the people. But she has 
 had much to contend against; not the least of her 
 obstacles has been the inveterate hatred of England, 
 which has so long existed in the breast of the Irish 
 peasant, a hatred, which has not its origin in the dif- 
 ference of religious belief. It originated when England 
 was Roman Catholic. The famous statute of Kilkenny 
 was passed by the English Roman CathoHc Colonists.
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 43 
 
 The native Irish were treated as enemies, they were 
 outlawed, and would not be admitted to the protection 
 or benefit of English law, however much they might 
 desire it. The Reformation originating in England was 
 of itself enough to arouse the hostility of the Irish ; 
 the language of the people also, as in Wales, formed a 
 serious barrier to its progress ; the Statute of 2 Eliz. 
 c. 2 (the Act of Uniformity) provided that if a priest 
 was ignorant of the English language he might perform 
 the service in Latin, and although the statute prescribed 
 that this Latin Service should be according to the Book 
 of Common Prayer, yet it is well known that the Latin 
 edition of the Prayer Book of Elizabeth never was 
 circulated or in use in Ireland, and consequently the 
 service which was used in those parts of Ireland, where 
 the Clergy were ignorant of English, must have been 
 the old Roman Service. The Reformation in the reign 
 of Henry YIII. was one more in Ecclesiastical polity, 
 that in doctrine, the Irish Act, 28 Hen. VIIL, c. 13, 
 contains a clause which is not in the corresponding 
 English Act, viz. *' that the Act nor any thing therein 
 should be in any wise prejudicial, hurtful, or derogatory 
 to the ceremonies, uses, and other laudable and politic 
 ordinances for a true tranquillity, discipline, concord, 
 devotion, unity, and the decent order heretofore in the 
 Church of Ireland, used, instituted, taken and ac- 
 cepted;" thus maintaining the old ceremonies and 
 services of the Roman Liturgy. Besides, even in those 
 parts of the country where the English Service was 
 used, it must have been as unintelligible to the mass of 
 the people as the old service. The civil condition of 
 the country, rent by civil war, created an effectual 
 barrier to the spread of either civilization or religion.
 
 44 THE IRISH church; 
 
 It was not until the reign of James I. that EngHsh law 
 obtained any firm footing in the country, or that there 
 was any cessation from internal discord. After thirty 
 years of peace, and some progress made in establishing 
 order and religion, the Church was overthrown by the 
 Cromwellians, and the barbarous cruelties practised 
 by these fanatics increased the hostility of the people 
 both to England and the English Keformation. 
 
 But according to Mr. Gladstone the great proof 
 that the Irish Church is powerless to effect what he 
 supposes to be her mission is that for the last thirty 
 years, since the termination of what is known in 
 Ireland as the tithe war, the Church has enjoyed 
 advantages such as can hardly be expected to recur, 
 ample endowments, perfect security, freedom from 
 controversy (which controversy has, however, im- 
 proved the Church of England), and the htowledge 
 of the Irish language has been extensively attained by 
 the Clergy! While in the Church of Eome her 
 people have been borne down by famine and thinned 
 by emigration, and yet at the census of 1861 only 
 *'the faintest impression has been made upon the 
 relative numbers of the two bodies K" The Protestant 
 poor, however, suffered just as much in the famine of 
 1846 as the Eoman Catholic, and the small Protestant 
 farmers have emigrated in large numbers ; besides this, 
 the poorer classes in every state increase more rapidly, 
 both relatively and actually, than the classes above 
 them in social position, so that little reliance can be 
 placed on this, even if it were any, test of the efficiency 
 of a Church. But if the efficiency of a Church is to be 
 thus tested, what are we to say of the Church of 
 
 ^ "A Chapter of Autobiography," p. 34.
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 45 
 
 England ? At the Eeformation she gained the whole 
 population, she had no prejudices to contend against, 
 and the Bible and Book of Common Prayer being in 
 the language of the people, they not only could under- 
 stand the services, but they could appreciate the bene- 
 fits of the change. Yet she has lost more than a third 
 of the population, who have fallen off to Komanism and 
 Protestant dissent. And during the last thirty years, 
 with ample endowments, in perfect peace, her Episco- 
 pacy increased, we have witnessed a secession from her 
 communion of an amount of talent, piety, and wealth un- 
 paralleled in her history. In truth, however, the effi- 
 ciency of a Church is not to be tested by the number of 
 her converts, but by the lives and character of her own 
 people ; and brought to this test I deny that the Irish 
 Church has failed. On the contrary, there is to be 
 found among her people a great increase in religion 
 and piety, a great abstinence from vicea that were 
 fashionable fifty years ago, an increased devotion in 
 her public services, a greater number of Churches 
 and faithful, painstaking pastors. There is scarcely a 
 parish in the country in which the public worship of 
 God is not maintained according to the forms of the 
 Reformed Church. Civilization and prosperity have 
 followed in her train ; nay, the Church of Rome her- 
 self has greatly benefited b}^ her presence. Why have 
 we not in Ireland those superstitious practices which 
 disgrace the public worship of the Roman Church in 
 other countries ? Why have we not winking Madonnas, 
 liquefaction of the blood of deceased martyrs, or a 
 post-office to the Virgin Mary ? Are not the Irish 
 superstitious enough to believe in such things ? The 
 truth is, such practices could not stand the light, and
 
 46 THE IRISH CHURCH ; 
 
 dare not be attempted in the presence of the Keformed 
 Church. 
 
 Another objection urged against the Irish Church is 
 that she is a badge of conquest, and a remnant of an 
 odious ascendancy. What conquest ? The conquest 
 of Ireland by England ! It was Pope Urban II. that 
 urged the English to the conquest, and granted the 
 country to Henry II. The Eeformation is no doubt 
 English, but is it the only thing English in the 
 country, and are there not more real badges of con- 
 quest than it ? Is it not a badge of conquest that 
 Ireland should be ruled by an English Queen — that 
 her nobility should consist chiefly of Englishmen — 
 that her great landed proprietors should be English 
 absentees — that her legislature should sit in England 
 — are not these more, much more substantial badges 
 of slavery and conquest than the Reformed Church ? 
 And as to ascendancy — ^where is it ? It consists 
 in this, and this only, that it is the undoubted right of 
 the Crown to create Bishoprics in Ireland, and to 
 appoint Bishops to them, and therefore the Pope 
 cannot do so. It is the ascendancy of the Crown, in 
 her own kingdom over a foreign Potentate — a Poten- 
 tate, too, who would not allow the Queen of England 
 to build even one Church within his own capital. 
 Yet the Roman Catholic bishops are respected and 
 treated with all the deference due to their sacred 
 office ; the clergy, if they are not called rectors of 
 parishes, are called by a much higher designation, 
 parish priests. It is true as a class they do not 
 occupy the same social position as the Clergy of the 
 Reformed Church ; but that is because as a body they 
 are taken from a lower grade in society. This, how-
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 47 
 
 ever, will not be remedied by disendowing the Church. 
 The only consequences of such a measure will be to 
 substitute for educated gentlemen, of whom at present 
 the Clergy of the Estabhshed Church are composed, 
 an ignorant, bigoted, and inferior class of Clergy. 
 
 Why, then, are the Bishops and Clergy of the Irish 
 Church to be deprived of their property ? Where is 
 the justice to Koman Catholics in spoliating the 
 Church of that property, which she has received from 
 the piety of her own members ? Why is this wrong 
 to be inflicted on the Reformed Church, this wanton 
 injustice which is to confer no benefit on any one in 
 the whole country ? The promoters of the spoliation 
 themselves have not even yet discovered to what 
 purposes this property is to be diverted. It would 
 seem that any purpose whatever would be in their 
 judgments better than that for which it was originally 
 designed, and to which it has hitherto been applied, 
 viz. the public worship of Almighty God. Does even 
 the new fangled doctrine of religious equality, which 
 seems to have as much sense in it as the Communist 
 theory of social equality, call for or demand this act of 
 spoliation ? If the State is, according to this novel 
 theory, to separate herself from the Church, why 
 should she carry off with her property, which does not 
 and never did belong to her. Disestablish the Church, 
 if it must be so. Let the State ignore all rehgious 
 bodies impartially; but why should she, merely to 
 gratify the bigotry or pride of those who dissent from 
 the Church, perpetrate a wrong and injustice unpa- 
 ralleled in the history of civilized Europe ? Adopt the 
 precedent afforded by the Church of Canada, if it 
 must be so. Make the Church perfectly free from
 
 48 THE IRISH church; 
 
 state control and State patronage. The machinery 
 is at hand. Empower the Primate to convene Con- 
 vocation, and enable Convocation, when convened, to 
 regulate all the affairs of the Church, to make canons 
 and constitutions for the decision of all questions of 
 doctrine and discipline, for the election and conse- 
 cration of Bishops, for the creation or union of sees 
 and parishes, and for the ordering of Divine Service 
 without the control of the Parliament, the Crown, or the 
 civil courts ; incorporate, if necessary, the Upper House 
 of Convocation with power to hold property; recog- 
 nize its judicial functions as regards the Clergy ; give 
 Convocation or diocesan synods power to regulate the 
 property of the Church, the distribution and admi- 
 nistration of its revenues. In all this, whatever other 
 wrong there may be, there will, at all events, be no 
 injustice, no spoliation. I do not say it is to be 
 desired ; but if it be forced upon the Church, if the 
 State is no longer to have any religion, such a mea- 
 sure will, at all events, not be fraught with injustice. 
 
 It is true, that in Canada the Clergy reserves have 
 been secularized ; but there is no analogy between the 
 circumstances of Canada and of Ireland. 
 
 Upon the conquest of Canada, the Koman Catholic 
 clergy were permitted to retain all dues and tithes 
 payable by those of their own communion. 
 
 A large number of persons, chiefly members of 
 the Church of England, emigrated from America into 
 Canada ; to supply their spiritual wants missionary 
 Clergy were sent out from England by the Propa- 
 gation Society, receiving a small stipend from it; 
 and thus was laid the foundation of the Church in 
 Canada in communion with that of England. In the
 
 ITS DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMENT. 49 
 
 year 1791 an Act of Parliament was passed in England, 
 authorizing the Crown to reserve certain portions of 
 the waste lands belonging to the Crown, as they should 
 be allotted, for the benefit of the Protestant Clergy. 
 It was decided by the opinion of the judges in England, 
 that these words were not confined to the Clergy of 
 the Church of England, but embraced other Protestant 
 denominations. These lands, consisting of large tracts 
 of country, mixed up with lands allotted to settlers, 
 waste and uncultivated, were a great inconvenience 
 to the colonists. A portion of them was sold, and the 
 proceeds invested in the funds in England and in 
 Canada. In the year 1840 a stop was put to any 
 further reservation of lands for the purpose, and the 
 Eoman Catholic clergy were admitted to a share of 
 the funds ; which then consisted partly of land, the 
 greater portion of which was waste and uncultivated, 
 and partly of the proceeds of the lands sold and in- 
 vested, as I have said. The interest dividends and 
 rents were paid to theReceiver-Generalof the province 
 of Canada, and were to be applied by him, in pur- 
 suance of warrants to be from time to time issued by 
 the Governor. The share payable to the Clergy of 
 the Church of England was paid to the Propagation 
 Society. In 1851 the Church of England Clergy re- 
 ceived 12,000/. ; the Presbyterians, 6,700/. ; the United 
 Synod of Presbyterians in Upper Canada, 464/. ; the 
 Roman Catholics, 1,369/. ; and the Wesleyan Me- 
 thodists, 639/. This property never was vested in the 
 Bishops and Clergy of Canada ; all they were entitled 
 to was the payment of certain annual stipends out of 
 it, to which the ministers of other religious bodies
 
 LONDON : 
 
 GIIiBEET AND EIVINGTON, PRINTEES, 
 
 ST. JOHN'S SQITAEE.
 
 l:.M»^'^ 
 
 Sl> 
 
 . fc..r 
 
 :#^.^%^ 
 
 
 # ^ •%!• 
 
 t.^ V f ,