The Religion Anciently Professed by the Irish and British

The chief Heads treated of in this discourse, are these:

• I. OF the holy Scriptures. pag. 1.
• II. Of Predestination, Grace, Free-will, Works, Justification and Sanctification. pag. 11.
• III. Of Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead. pag. 21.
• IIII. Of the Worship of God, the public form of Liturgy, the Sacrifice, and Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. pag. 30.
• V. Of Chrism, Sacramental Confession, Penance, Absolution, Marriage, Divorces, and single life in the Clergy. pag. 45.
• VI. Of the discipline of our ancient Monks; and abstinence from meats. pag. 54.
• VII. Of the Church and various state thereof, especially in the days of Antichrist: of Miracles also, and of the Head of the Church. pag. 66.
• VIII. Of the Popes spiritual Jurisdiction, and how little footing it had gotten at first within these parts. pag. 75.
• IX. Of the Controversy which the Britons, Picts, and Irish maintained against the Church of Rome, touching the celebration of Easter. pag. 92.
• X. Of the height that the opposition betwixt the Roman party, and that of the British and the Scottish grew unto; and the abatement thereof in time: and how the Doctors of the Scottish and Irish side have been ever accounted most eminent men in the Catholic Church, notwithstanding their dis-union from the Bishop of Rome. pag. 105.
• XI. Of the temporal power, which the Popes followers would directly entitle him unto over the Kingdom of Ireland: together with the indirect power which he challengeth in absolving subjects from the obedience, which they owe to their temporal Governors. pag. 117.

OF THE RELIGION PROFESSED BY THE ANCIENT IRISH.

CHAP. I.

T Woe excellent rules doth St. Paul prescribe unto Christians for their direction in the ways of God: the one, that they be not unwise, but understanding what the will of God is; the other, that they be not more wise than behooveth to be wise, but be wise unto sobriety. and that we might know the limits, within which this wisdom and sobriety should be bounded; he elsewhere declareth, that not to be more wise than is fitting, is not to be wise above that which is written. Hereupon Sedulius (one of the most ancient Writers that remaineth of this Country birth) delivereth this for the meaning of the former rule; Search the Law, in which the will of God is contained: and this for the later; He would be more wise than is meet, who searcheth those things that the Law doth not speak of. Unto whom we will adjoin Claudius another famous Divine, (counted one of the founders of the University of Paris) who for the illustration of the former, affirmeth that men therefore err, because they know not the Scriptures; and because they are ignorant of the Scriptures, they consequently know not Christ, who is the power of God and the wisdom of God: and for the clearing of the latter, bringeth in that known Canon of Saint Jerome; This, because it hath not authority from the Scriptures, is with the same facility contemned, wherewith it is avowed.

Neither was the practice of our Ancestors herein different from their judgment. For as Bede touching the latter, recordeth of the successors of Colum-kille the great Saint of our Country; that they observed only those works of piety and chastity, which they could learn in the Prophetical, Evangelical, and Apostolical writings: so for the former, he specially noteth of one of the principal of them, to wit, Bishop Aidan; that all such as went in his company, whether they were of the Clergy, or of the Laity, were tied to exercise themselves, either in the reading of Scriptures, or in the learning of Psalms. And long before their time, it was the observation which Saint Chrysostom made of both these Islands: that although thou didst go unto the Ocean, and those British Isles, although thou didst sail to the Euxine Sea, although thou didst go unto the Southerne quarters; thou shouldst hear ALL men every where discoursing matters out of the SCRIPTVRE, with another voice indeed, but not with another faith, and with a different tongue, but with an according judgment. Which is in effect the same with that which venerable Bede pronounceth of the Island of Britain in his own days, that in the language of five Nations it did search and confess one and the same knowledge of the highest truth, and of the true sublimity; to wit, of the English, the Britons, the Scots, the Picts, and the Latins. which last although he affirmeth by the meditation of the Scriptures to have become common to all the rest: yet the community of that one among the learned, did not take away the property of the other four among the vulgar, but that such as understood not the Latin, might yet in their own mother tongue have those Scriptures, wherein they might search the knowledge of the highest truth, and of the true sublimity. even as at this day in the reformed Churches, the same Latin tongue is common to all the learned in the meditation and exposition of the Scriptures; and yet the common people for all that, do in their own vulgar tongues search the Scriptures, because in them they think to have eternal life. For as by us now, so by our forefathers then, the continual meditation of the Scriptures was held to give special vigor and vegetation to the soul (as we read in the book attributed unto St. Patrick, of the abuses of the world: ) and the holy documents delivered therein, were esteemed by Christians as their chief riches; according to that of Columbanus,

In which heavenly riches our ancient Scottish and Irish did thrive so well, that many worthy personages in foreign parts were content to undergo a voluntary exile from their own Country; that they might more freely traffic here for so excellent a commodity. And by this means Altfrid King of Northumberland, purchased the reputation of a man most learned in the Scriptures. as Bede writeth of him, in his Poëme of the life of our Countryman St. Cuthbert.

So when we read in the same Bede of Furseus, and in another ancient Author of Kilianus, that from the time of their very childhood, they had a care to learn the holy Scriptures: it may easily be collected, that in those days it was not thought a thing unfit, that even children should give themselves unto the study of the Bible. Wherein how greatly some of them did profit in those tender years, may appear by that which Boniface the first Archbishop of Mainz, relateth of Livinus (who was trained up in his youth by Benignus in the singing of David's Psalms, and the reading of the holy Gospels, and other divine exercises) and Jonah of Columbanus; in whose breast the treasures of the holy Scriptures were so laid up, that within the compass of his youthful years he set forth an elegant exposition of the book of the Psalms, by whose industry likewise afterward, the study of God's Word was so propagated; that in the Monasteries which were founded according to his rule beyond the Seas, not the men only, but the religious women also did carefully attend the same, that through patience and comfort of the Scriptures they might have hope. See for this, the practice of the Virgin Bitihildis lying upon her death bed; reported by the same Jonah, or whosoever else was the Author of the life of Burgundofora.

As for the edition of the Scriptures used in these parts at those times: the Latin translation was so received into common use among the learned, that the principal authority was still reserved to the original fountains. Therefore doth Sedulius in the Old Testament commend unto us the Hebrew verity (for so with S. Jerome doth he style it:) and in the New correct oftentimes the vulgar Latin according to the truth of the Greek copies. For example: in 1 Cor. 7 34. he readeth as we do, There is difference between a wife and a virgin; and not as the Rhemists have translated it out of the Latin. Rom. 12. 19. he readeth, Non vosmetipsos vindicantes, not avenging your selves: where the vulgar Latin hath corruptly, Non vosmetipsos defendentes, not defending yourselves. Rom. 3. 4. where the Rhemists translate according to the Latin, God is true: he showeth that in the Greek copies it is found, Let God be true, or, let God be made true. Rom. 15. 17. he noteth that the Latin books have put glory for gloriation. Galat. 1. 16. where the Rhemists have according to the Latin, I condescended not to flesh & blood: he saith, that in Graeco meliùs habet (for so must his words be here corrected out of St. Jerome, whom he followeth) the Greek hath it better, I conferred not. Rom. 8. 3. where the Rhemists say of God, according to the Latin translation, that of sin he damned sin in the flesh: Sedulius affirmeth, that veriùs habetur apud Graecos, it is more truly expressed in the Greek books; that for sin he damned sin in the flesh. Lastly, where the Rhemists translate after their Latin copy, Gal. 5. 9. A little leaven corrupteth the whole paste: he saith it should be, leaveneth, (as we have it) and not corrupteth, as it is ill read in the Latin books. So where they translate by the same authority, Galat. 6. 1. Instruct such an one in the spirit of lenity: Claudius, following St. Jerome, affirmeth that it is better in the Greek, Restore or Perfect him. and where they make St. Peter say, Mat. 16. 22. Lord, be it far from thee: he noteth, that it is better in the Greek, Lord, favor thyself.

In the Old Testament I observe that our Writers do more usually follow the translation taken out of the Septuagint, than the Vulgar Latin, which is now received in the Church of Rome. So, for example, where the Vulgar Latin hath Isaiah 32. 4. The tongue of the stammerers (or mafflers, as the Douay Translation would have it englished) shall speak readily and plainly: in the Confession of St. Patrick we find it laid down more agreeably to the Greek lection: The stammering tongues shall swiftly learn to speak peace. and in his Epistle to Coroticus or Cereticus; Malachi. 4. 2. You shall dance as calves loosed out of bands: where our common Latin hath; You shall leap as calves of the heard. And Job 20. 15, 16. The riches which he shall gather unjustly, shall be vomited out of his belly, the Angel of death draweth him. He shall be mulcted with the wrath of Dragons: the tongue of the Serpent shall kill him. where the Vulgar Latin readeth: The riches, which he hath devoured, he shall vomit out, and God shall draw them forth out of his belly. He shall suck the head of Asps, and the Vipers tongue shall kill him. The same course is likewise observed by Sedulius in his citations. But Gildas the Briton in some Books, (as Deuteronomy, Isaiah and Jeremiah, for example) useth to follow the Vulgar Latin translated out of the Hebrew; in others (as the books of Chronicles, Job, Proverbs, Ezekiel, and the small Prophets ) the elder Latin translated out of the Greek, as also long after him his country man Nennius, in reckoning the years of the age of the world, followeth the LXX. and Asser alledgeth the text, Genes. 4. 7. If thou offer aright, and dost not divide aright, thou sinnest; according to the Greek reading: whereas the Vulgar Latin hath it; If thou do well, shalt thou not receive again? but if thou doest ill, shall not thy sin forthwith be present at the door?

Of the Psalter there are extant four Latin translations out of the Greek, (namely the old Italian, the Roman, the Gallican, and that of Millayne: ) and one out of the Hebrew, composed by St. Jerome: which though it be now excluded out of the body of the Bible, and the Gallican admitted in the room thereof; yet in some Manuscript Copies, it still retaineth his ancient place. three whereof I have seen myself in Cambridge, the one in Trinity, the other in Benet, and the third in Jesus College Librarie: where this translation out of the Hebrew, and not the Vulgar out of the Greek, is inserted into the context of the Bible. In the citations of Gildas, and the Confession of Saint Patrick, I observe that the Roman Psalter is followed, rather than the Gallican: in the quotations of Sedulius, on the other side, the Gallican rather than the Roman. Claudius speaking of a text in the 118 ^th . (or as he accounteth it, the 117 ^th .) Psalm, saith, that where the LXX. Interpreters did translate it, O Lord save me, it was written in the Hebrew, Anna Adonai Osanna: which our Interpreter Jerome (saith he) more diligently explaining, translated thus; I beseech thee, O Lord, save I beseech thee. Before this translation of S. Jerome, I have seen an Epigram prefixed by Ricemarch the Briton; who by Caradoc of Lhancarpan is commended for the godliest, wisest, and greatest Clerke that had been in Wales many years before his time, his father Sulgen Bishop of S. David's only excepted, who had brought him up, and a great number of learned disciples. He having in this Epigramme said of those who translated the Psalter out of Greek, that they did darken the Hebrew rays with thir Latin cloud: addeth of S. Jerome, that being replenished with the Hebrew fountain, he did more clearly and briefly discover the truth; as drawing it out of the first vessel immediately, and not taking it at the second hand. To this purpose thus expresseth he himself;

Now for those books annexed to the Old Testament, which S. Jerome calleth Apocryphal, others Ecclesiastical; true it is that in our Irish and British writers some of them are alleged as parcels of Scripture, and prophetical writings; those especially that commonly bare the name of Solomon. But so also is the fourth book of Esdras cited by Gildas, in the name of blessed Esdras the Prophet; which yet our Romanists will not admit to be Canonical: neither do our writers mention any of the rest with more titles of respect than we find given unto them by others of the ancient Fathers, who yet in express terms do exclude them out of the number of those books which properly are to be esteemed Canonical. So that from hence no sufficient proof can be taken, that our ancestors did herein depart from the tradition of the Elder Church, delivered by S. Jerome in his Prologues, and explained by Brito (a Briton, it seemeth, by nation, as well as by appellation) in his commentaries upon the same; which being heretofore joined with the Ordinary Gloss upon the Bible, have of late proved so distasteful unto our Popish Divines, that in their new editions (printed at Lions anno 1590. and at Venice afterward) they have quite crossed them out of their books.

Yet Marianus Scotus (who was borne in Ireland in the MXXVIII. year of our Lord) was somewhat more careful to maintain the ancient bounds of the Canon set by his forefathers. For he in his Chronicle, following Eusebius and S. Jerome, at the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus writeth thus: Hitherto the divine Scripture of the Hebrews containeth the order of Times. But those things that after this were done among the Jews, are represented out of the book of the Maccabees, and the writings of Josephus and Aphricanus. But before him, more plainly, the author of the book de mirabilibus Scripturae ( who is accounted to have lived here, about the year DCLVII. ) In the books of the Maccabees, howsoever some wonderful things be found, which might conveniently be inserted into this rank; yet w • ll we not weary ourselves with any care thereof▪ because we only purposed to touch in some measure a short historical exposition of the wonderful things contained in the divine canon. as also in the apocryphal additions of Daniel, he telleth us, that what is reported touching the lake (or den) and the carrying of Abackuk, in the fable of Bel and the Dragon, is not therefore placed in this rank, because these things have not the authority of divine Scripture.

And so much concerning the holy Scriptures.

CHAP. II.

THe Doctrine which our learned men observed out of the Scriptures & the writings of the most approved Fathers, was this▪ that God by his immovable counsel ( as Gallus speaketh in his Sermon preached at Constance) ordained some of his creatures to praise h • m, and to live blessedly from him and in him, & by him: namely, by his eternal predestination, his free calling, and his grace which was due to none. that he hath mercy with great goodness, and hardeneth without any iniquity: so as neither he that is delivered can glory of his own merits, nor he that is condemned complain but of his own merits. for as much as grace only maketh the distinction betwixt the redeemed and the lost; who by a cause drawn from their common original, were framed together into one mass of perdition. For all mankind stood condemned in the apostatical root ( of Adam) with so just and divine a judgment; that although none should be freed from thence, no man could rightly blame the justice of God: and such as were freed, must so have been freed, that by those many which were not freed, but left in their most just condemnation, it might be shown what the whole lump had deserved, that the due judgment of God should have condemned even those that are justified, unless mercy had relieved them from that which was due: that so all the mouths of them, which would glory of their merits, might be stopped; and he that glorieth, might glory in the Lord.

They further taught (as Saint Augustine did) that Man using ill his Free will, lost both himself and it. that, as one by living is able to kill himself, but by killing himself is not able to live, nor hath power to raise up himself when he hath killed himself so when sin had been committed by free will, sin being the conqueror, free will also was lost; for as much as of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he also brought in bondage (2 Pet. 2. 19.) that unto a man thus brought in bondage and sold, there is no liberty left to do well, unless he redeem him, whose saying is this; If the Son make you free, ye shall be free indeed. ( John 8. 36.) that the mind of men from their very youth is set upon evil: there being not a man which sinneth not. that a man hath nothing from himself, but sin. that God is the author of all good things, that is to say, both of good nature, and of good will; which unless God do work in him, man cannot do. because this good will is prepared by the Lord in man; that by the gift of God he may do that, which of himself he could not do by his own free-will. that the good will of man goeth before many gifts of God, but not all: and of those which it doth not go before, it self is one. For both of these is read in the holy Scriptures; His mercy shall go before me, and, His mercy shall follow me: it preventeth him that is unwilling that he may will, and it followeth him that is willing, that he will not in vain. and that therefore we are admonished to ask that we may receive, to the end, that what we do will may be effected by him, by whom it was effected that we did so will.

They taught also, that the Law was not given, that it might take away sin, but that it might shut up all under sin: to the end that men, being by this means humbled, might understand that their salvation was not in their own hand, but in the hand of a Mediator. that by the Law cometh, neither the remission nor the removal, but the knowledge of sins: that it taketh not away diseases, but discovereth them; forgiveth not sins, but condemneth them. that the Lord God did impose it, not upon those that served righteousness, but sin; namely, by giving a just law to unjust men, to manifest their sins, and not to take them away: forasmuch as nothing taketh away sins but the grace of faith which worketh by love. That our sins are freely forgiven us; without the merit of our works: that through grace we are saved, by faith, and not by works; and that therefore we are to rejoice, not in our own righteousness, or learning, but in the faith of the Cross, by which all our sins are forgiven us. That grace is abject and vain, if it alone do not suffice us: and that we esteem basely of Christ, when we think that he is not sufficient for us to salvation.

That God hath so ordered it, that he will be gracious to mankind, if they do believe that they shall be freed by the blood of Christ. that, as the soul is the life of the body, so faith is the life of the soul: and that we live by faith only, as owing nothing to the Law. that he who believeth in Christ, hath the perfection of the Law. For whereas none might be justified by the Law, because none did fulfill the Law, but only he which did trust in the promise of Christ: faith was appointed, which should be accepted for the perfection of the Law, that in all things which were omitted faith might satisfy for the whole Law. That this righteousness therefore is not ours, nor in us, but in Christ; in whom were are considered as members in the head. That faith, procuring the remission of sins by grace, maketh all believers the children of Abraham: and that it was just, that as Abraham was justified by faith only, so also the rest that followed his faith should be saved after the same manner. That through adoption we are made the sons of God, by believing in the Son of God: and that this is a testimony of our adoption, that we have the spirit; by which we pray, and cry Abba Father; forasmuch as none can receive so great a pledge as this, but such as be sons only. That Moses himself made a distinction betwixt both the justices, to wit of faith and of deeds: that the one did by works justify him that came, the other by believing only. that the Patriarchs and the Prophets were not justified by the works of the Law, but by faith. that the custom of sin hath so prevailed, that none now can fulfill the Law: as the Apostle Peter saith, Acts 15. 10. Which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear. But if there were any righteous men which did escape the curse: it was not by the works of the Law, but for their faiths sake that they were saved.

Thus did Sedulius and Claudius, two of our most famous Divines deliver the doctrine of free will and grace, faith and works, the Law and the Gospel, Justification and Adoption; no less agreeably to the faith which is at this day professed in the reformed Churches, that to that which they themselves received from the more ancient Doctors, whom they did follow therein. Neither do we in our judgment one whit differ from them, when they teach that faith alone is not sufficient to life. For when it is said, that Faith alone justifieth: this word alone may be conceived to have relation either to the former part of the sentence, which in the Schools they term the Subject; or to the latter, which they call the Predicate. Being referred to the former, the meaning will be; that such a faith as is alone (that is to say, not accompanied with other virtues) doth justify: and in this sense we utterly disclaim the assertion. But being referred to the latter, it maketh this sense; that faith is it which alone or only justifieth: and in this meaning only do we defend that proposition; understanding still by faith, not a dead carcass thereof (for how should the just be able to live by a dead faith?) but a true and lively faith, which worketh by love. For as it is a certain truth, that among all the members of the body, the eye is the only instrument whereby we see; and yet it is as true also, that the eye being alone, and separated from the rest of the members, is dead, and for that cause doth neither see only, not see at all: so these two sayings likewise may stand well enough together, that among all the virtues in the foul, faith is the only instrument whereby we lay hold upon Christ for our justification; and yet, that faith being alone, and disjoined from the society of other graces, is dead in it self, (as St. James speaketh) and in that respect can neither only justify, nor justify at all.

So though Claudius do teach as we do, that faith alone saveth us; because by the works of the law no man shall be justified: yet he addeth withal this caution. Not as if the works of the law should be contemned, and without them a simple faith ( so he calleth that solitary faith whereof we spake, which is a simple faith indeed ) should be desired; but that the works themselves should be adorned with the faith of Christ. For that sentence of the wise man is excellent, that the faithful man doth not live by righteousness, but the righteous man by faith. In like manner Sedulius, acknowledgeth with us, that God hath purposed by faith only to forgive our sins freely, and by faith only to save the believers; and that, when men have fallen, they are to be renewed only by the faith of Christ, which worketh by love. intimating by this last clause, that howsoever faith only be it which justifieth the man, yet the work of love is necessarily required (for all that) to justify the faith. And this faith ( saith he ) when it hath been justified, sticketh in the soil of the soul, like a root which hath received a shower: that when it hath begun to be manured by the law of God, it may rise up again into bows, which may bear the fruit of works. Therefore the root of righteousness doth not grow out of works, but the fruit of works out of the root of righteousness; namely out of that root of righteousness, which God doth accept for righteousness without works. The conclusion is: that saving faith is always a fruitful faith; and though it never go alone, yet may there be some gift of God, which it alone is able to reach unto. as Columbanus also implieth in that verse:

The greatest depressers of God's grace, and the advancers of man's abilities, were Pelagius and Celestius • the one borne in Britain ( as appeareth by Prosper Aquitanus) the other in Scotland or Ireland; as M ^r . Persons doth gather out of those words of S. Jerome in one of the Prefaces of his commentaries (not upon Ezekiel, as he quoteth it, but) upon Jeremiah. He hath his offspring from the Scottish nation, near to the Britons. These heretics (as our Marianus noteth out of Prosper. in his Chronicle) preached, among other of their impieties, that for attaining of righteousness everyone was governed by his own will, and received so much grace as he did merit. Whole venomous doctrine was in Britain repressed, first by Palladius, Lupus, Germanus and Severus from abroad; afterward, by David Menevensis, and his successors at home agreeably to whose institution, Asser. Men • vensis doth profess, that God is always to be esteemed both the mover of the will, and the bestower of the good that is willed for he is (saith he) the instigatour of all good wills, and withal the most bountiful provider that the good things desired may be had: forasmuch as he would never stir up any to will well, unless he did also liberally supply that which everyone doth well and justly desire to obtain.

Among our Irish, the grounds of sound doctrine in these points were at the beginning well settled by Palladius and Patricius, sent hither by Celestinus Bishop of Rome. And when the poison of the Pelagian heresy, about two hundred years after that, began to break out among them: the Clergy of Rome in the year of our Lord DCXXXIX. (during the vacancy of the See, upon the death of Severinus ) directed their letters unto them, for the preventing of this growing mischief. Wherein among other things they put them in mind, that it is both blasphemy and folly to say, that a man is without sin: which none at all can say, but that one mediator betwixt God and man, the man Christ Jesus, who was conceived and borne without sin. Which is agreeable, partly to that of Claudius; that it is manifest unto all wise men, although it be contradicted by heretics, that there is none who can live upon earth without the touch of some sin: partly to that of Sedulius, that there is none of the elect so great, whom the Devil doth not dare to accuse, but him alone who did no sin, and who said; The Prince of this world cometh now, and in me be findeth nothing.

For touching the imperfection of our sanctification in this life, these men held the same that we do: to wit, that the Law cannot be fulfilled; that there is none that doth good, that is to say, perfect and entire good. that God's elect shall be perfectly holy and immaculate in the life to come, where the Church of Christ shall have no spot nor wrinkle: whereas in this present life they are righteous, holy, and immaculate, not wholly, but in part only that the righteous shall then be without all kind of sin, when there shall be no law in their members, that shall resist the law of their mind. that although sin do not now reign in their mortal body to obey the desires thereof: yet sin dwelleth in that mortal body, the force of that natural custom being not yet extinguished, which we have gotten by our original, and increased by our actual transgressions. And as for the matter of merit: Sedulius doth resolve us out of S. Paul, that we are Saints by the calling of God, not by the merit of our deed; that God is able to exceeding abundantly above that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us, not according to our merits; that whatsoever men have from God; is grace, because they have nothing of due; and that nothing can be found worthy or to be compared with the glory to come.

CHAP. III.

THe next Point that offereth it self unto our consideration, is that of Purgatory. Whereof if any man do doubt; Caesarius (a Germane Monk of the Cistercian order) adviseth him for his resolution to make a journey into Scotland (the greater Scotland he meaneth) and there to enter into S. Patricks Purgatory: and then he giveth him his word, that he shall no more doubt of the pains of Purgatory. If Doctor Terry (who commendeth this unto us as the testimony of a most famous Author ) should chance to have a doubtful thought hereafter of the pains of Purgatory; I would wish his ghostly Father to enjoin him no other penance, but the undertaking of a pilgrimage unto S. Patricks purgatory; to see whether he would prove any wiser when he came from thence, than when he went thither. In the mean time, until he hath made some further experiment of the matter, he shall give me leave to believe him that hath been there, and hath cause to know the place as well as any (the Island wherein it is seated, being held by him as a part of the inheritance descended unto him from his ancestors) and yet professeth, that he found nothing therein, which might afford him any argument to think there was a Purgatory. I pass by, that Nennius, and Probus, and all the elder writers of the life of S. Patrick that I have met withal, speak not one word of any such place; and that Henry the monk of Saltrey, in the days of King Stephen, is the first in whom I could ever find any mention thereof. this only would I know of the Doctor, what the reason might be, that where he bringeth in the words of Giraldus Cambrensis touching this place, as an authentical authority; he passeth over that part of his relation, wherein he affirmeth, that S. Patrick intended by this means to bring the rude people to a persuasion of the certainty of the infernal pains of the reprobate, and of the true and everlasting life of the elect after death.

The Grecians allege this for one of their arguments against Purgatory: that whereas their Fathers had delivered unto them many visions and dreams and other wonders concerning the everlasting punishment, wherewith the wicked should be tormented in Hell; yet none of them had declared anything concerning a purgatory temporary fire. Belike the Doctor was afraid, that we would conclude upon the same ground; that S. Patrick was careful to plant in men's minds the belief of Heaven and Hell, but of Purgatory taught them never a word. And sure I am, that in the book ascribed unto him, De tribus habitaculis, (which is to be seen in his Majesty's Librarie) there is no mention of any other place after this life, but of these two only. I will lay down here the beginning of that treatise; and leave it to the judgment of any indifferent man, whether it can well stand with that which the Romanists teach concerning Purgatory at this day. There be three habitations under the power of Almighty God: the first, the lowermost, and the middle. The highest whereof is called the Kingdom of God, or the Kingdom of Heaven, the lowermost is termed Hell, the middle is named the present World, or the circuit of the earth. The extremes whereof are altogether contrary one to another: (for what fellowship can there be betwixt light and darkness, betwixt Christ and Belial?) but the middle hath some similitude with the extremes. For in this world there is a mixture of the bad and of the good together. whereas in the Kingdom of God there are none bad, but all good: but in Hell there are none good, but all bad. And both those places are supplied out of the middle. For of the men of this world, some are lifted up to Heaven, others are drawn down to Hell▪ namely, like are joined unto like, that is to say, good to good, and bad to bad: just men to just Angels, wicked men to wicked Angels; the servants of God to God, the servants of the Devil to the Devil. The blessed are called to the Kingdom prepared for them from the beginning of the world: the cursed are driven into the everlasting fire that is prepared for the Devil and his angels, Thus far there.

Hitherto also may be referred that ancient Canon of one of our Irish Synods, wherein it is affirmed, that the soul being separated from the body is presented before the judgment seat of Christ, who rendereth it own unto it, according as it hath done: and that neither the Archangel can lead it unto life, until the Lord hath judged it; nor the Devil transport it unto pain, unless the Lord do damn it. as the sayings of Sedulius likewise; that after the end of this life, either death or life succeedeth, and that death is the gate by which we enter into our kingdom: together with that of Claudius; that Christ did take upon him our punishment without the guilt, that thereby he might loose our guilt, and finish also our punishment. Cardinal Bellarmine indeed alledgeth here against us the vision of Furseus: who rising from the dead, told many things, which he saw concerning the pains of purgatory; as Bede, he saith, doth write. But, by his good leave, we will be better advised, before we build articles of faith upon such visions and dreams as these: many whereof deserve to have a place among the strange narrations of souls appearing after death, collected by Damascius the heathen Idolater; rather than among the histories and discourses of sober Christians.

As for this vision of Furscus: all that Bede relateth of it to this purpose, is concerning certain great fires above the air, appointed to examine everyone according to the merits of his works. which peradventure may make something for Damascius his Purgatory in Circulo lacteo (for in that circle made he away for the souls that went to the Hades in Heaven; and would not have us wonder, that there they should be purged by the way:) but nothing for the Papists Purgatory, which Bellarmine by the common consent of the Schoolmen determineth to be within the bowels of the earth. Neither is there any thing else in the whole book of the life of Furseus (whence Bede borrowed these things) that looketh toward Purgatory: unless peradventure that speech of the Devil may be thought to give some advantage unto it. This man hath not purged his sins upon earth; neither doth he receive punishment for them here. Where is therefore the justice of God? as if God's justice were not sufficiently satisfied by the sufferings of Christ; but man also must needs give further satisfaction thereunto by penal works of sufferings, either here, or in the other world. which is the ground, upon which our Romanists do lay the rotten frame of their devised Purgatory.

The later visions of Malachias, Tundal, Owen, and others that lived within these last five hundred years; come not within the compass of our present inquiry: nor yet the fables that have been framed in those times, touching the lives and actions of elder Saints; whereof no wise man will make any reckoning. Such (for example) is that which we read in the life of St. Brendan: that the question being moved in his hearing, Whether the sins of the dead could be redeemed by the prayers or alms-deeds of their friends remaining in this life (for that was still a question in the Church:) he is said to have told them, that on a certain night, as he sailed in the great Ocean, the soul of one Colman (who had been an angry Monk, and a sower of discord betwixt brethren) appeared unto him; who complaining of his grievous torments, entreated that prayers might be made to God for him, and after six days thankfully acknowledged that by means thereof he had gotten into heaven. Whereupon it is concluded, that the prayer of the living doth profit much the dead. But of S. Brendans sea-pilgrimage, we have the censure of Molanus a learned Romanist; that there be many apocryhall fooleries in it: and whosoever readeth the same with any judgment, cannot choose but pronounce of it, as Photios doth of the strange narrations of Damascius, formerly mentioned; that it containeth not only apocryphal, but also impossible, incredible, ill-composed, and monstrous fooleries. Whereof though the old Legend it self were not free (as by the heads thereof, touched by Glaber Rodulphus and Giraldus Cambrensis, may appear) yet for the tale that I recited out of the New Legend of England, I can say, that in the manuscript books which I have met withal here, in St. Brendans own country, (one whereof was transcribed for the use of the Friars minors of Kilkenny, about the year of our Lord 1350.) there is not the least footstep thereof to be seen.

And this is a thing very observable in the ancienter lives of our Saints (such I mean, as have been written before the time of Satan's loosing; beyond which we do not now look:) that the prayers and oblations for the dead mentioned therein, are expressly noted to have been made for them, whose souls were supposed at the same instant to have rested in bliss. So Adamnanus reporteth, that Saint Colme (called by the Irish, both in Bedes and our days, Colum-kille ) caused all things to be prepared, for the sacred ministry of the Eucharist; when he had seen the soul of St. Brendan received by the holy Angels: and that he did the like, when Columbanus Bishop of Leinster departed this life. for I must today (saith St. Colme there) although I be unworthy, celebrate the holy mysteries of the Eucharist, for the reverence of that soul which this night, carried beyond the starry firmament betwixt the holy Quires of Angels, ascended into Paradise. Whereby it appeareth, that an honorable commemoration of the dead was herein intended, and a sacrifice of thanksgiving for their salvation rather than of propitiation for their sins. In Bede also we find mention of the like obsequies celebrated by St. Cuthbert for one Hadwaldus; after he had seen his soul carried by the hands of Angels unto the joys of the kingdom of heaven. So Gallus and Magnus (as Walafridus Strabus relateth in the life of the one, and Theodorus Campidonensis, or whosoever else was author of the life of the other) said Mass (which what it was in those days we shall afterward hear) and were instant in prayers for the commemoration of Abbot Columbanus their countryman; frequenting the memory of that great Father, with holy prayers, and healthful sacrifices. Where that speech of Gallus unto his Deacon Magnus or Magnoaldus, is worthy of special consideration: After this nights watch, I understood by a vision, that my master and father Columbanus is today departed out of the miseries of this life unto the joys of Paradise. For his rest therefore I ought to offer the sacrifice of salvation. In like manner also, when Gallus himself died; John Bishop of Constance prayed to the Lord for his rest, and offered healthful sacrifices for him: although he were certainly persuaded that he had attained the blessing of everlasting life; as may be seen in Walafridus. And when Magnus afterwards was in his death bed, he is said to have used these words unto Tozzo Bishop of Ausborough, that came to visit him. Do not weep, reverend Prelate, because thou beholdest me laboring in so many storms of worldly troubles: because I believe in the mercy of God, that my soul shall rejoice in the freedom of immortality. yet I beseech thee, that thou wilt not cease to help me a sinner and my soul with thy holy prayers. Then followeth: that at the time of his departure, this voice was heard; Come, Magnus, come, receive the crown which the Lord hath prepared for thee. and that thereupon Tozzo said unto Theodorus (the supposed writer of this history) Let us cease weeping, brother; because we ought rather to rejoice, having heard this sign of the receiving of his soul unto immortality, than to make lamentation. but let us go to the Church, and be careful to offer healthful sacrifices to the Lord for so dear a friend.

I dispute not of the credit of these particular passages: it is sufficient, that the authors from whom we have received them, lived within the compass of those times, whereof we now do treat. For thereby it is plain enough (and if it be not, it shall elsewhere be made yet more plain) that in those elder days it was an usual thing, to make prayers and oblations for the rest of those souls, which were not doubted to have been in glory: and consequently, that neither the Commemoration nor the Praying for the dead, nor the Requiem Masses of that age, have any necessary relation to the belief of Purgatory. The lesson therefore which Claudius teacheth us here out of Saint Jerome, is very good: that while we are in this present world, we may be able to help one another, either by our prayers or • by our counsels, but when we shall come before the Judgment seat of Christ, neither Job, nor Daniel, nor Noah can entreat for any one, but everyone must bear his own burden. and the advice which the no less learned than godly Abbot Columbanus giveth us, is very safe: not to pitch upon uncertainties hereafter, but now to trust in God, and follow the precepts of Christ; while our life doth yet remain, and while the times, wherein we may obtain salvation, are certain.

Whereunto John the Briton (another son of Sulgen Bishop of St. David's ) seemeth also to have had an eye, when (at the end of the Poëme which he wrote of his own and his fathers life) he prayeth for himself in the same manner:

CHAP. IV.

TOuching the worship of God, Sedulius delivereth this general rule: that to adore any other beside the Father, and the Son, and the holy Ghost, is the crime of impiety; and that all that the soul oweth unto God, if it bestow it upon any beside God, it committeth adultery. More particularly, in the matter of Images, he reproveth the wise men of the heathen, for thinking that they had found out a way, how the invisible God might be worshipped by a visible image: with whom also accordeth Claudius; that God is to be known, neither in metal nor in stone. and for Oaths, there is a Canon ascribed to Saint Patrick; wherein it is determined, that no creature is to be sworn by, but only the Creator. As for the form of the Litugrie or public service of God, which the same St. Patrick brought into this country: it is said, that he received it from Germanus and Lupus; and that it originally descended from S. Mark the Evangelist. for so have I seen it set down in an ancient fragment, written wellnigh 900. years since: remaining now in the Library of Sir Robert Cotton, my worthy friend; who can never sufficiently be commended, for his extraordinary care, in preserving all rare monuments of this kind. Yea St. Jerome's authority is there vouched for proof hereof. Beatus Hieronymus adfirmat, quod ipsum cursum, qui dicitur praesente tempore Scottorum, beatus Marcus decanta • it. which being not now to be found in any of Saint Jerome's works, the truth thereof I leave unto the credit of the reporter.

But whatsoever Liturgy was used here at first: this is sure, that in the succeeding ages no one general form of divine service was retained, but diverse rites and manners of celebrations were observed in diverse parts of this Kingdom; until the Roman use was brought in at last by Gillebertus, and Malachias, and Christianus, who were the Popes Legates here about 500. years ago. This Gillebertus ( an old acquaintance of Anselm Archbishop of Canterbury) in the Prologue of his book De usu Ecclesiastico, directed to the whole Clergy of Ireland, writeth in this manner. At the request, yea and at the command of many of you (dearly beloved) I endeavored to set down in writing the Canonical custom in saying of Houres, and performing the Office of the whole Ecclesiastical Order; not presumptuously, but in desire to serve your most godly command: to the end that those diverse and schismatical Orders, wherewith in a manner all Ireland is deluded, may give place to one Catholic and Roman Office. For what may be said to be more undecent or schismatical; than that the most learned in one order, should be made as a private and lay man in another man's Church?

These beginnings were presently seconded by Malachias: in whose life, written by Bernard, we read as followeth. The Apostolical constitutions, and the decrees of the holy Fathers, but especially the customs of the holy Church of Rome, did he establish in all Churches. And hence it is, that at this day the Canonical Houres are chanted and sung therein, according to the manner of the whole earth: whereas before that, this was not done, no not in the City it self. ( the poor city of Ardmagh he meaneth. ) But Malachias had learned song in his youth, and shortly after caused singing to be used in his own Monastery; when as yet, as well in the city as in the whole Bishopric, they either knew not, or would not sing. Lastly, the work was brought to perfection, when Christianus Bishop of Lismore, as Legate to the Pope, was President in the Council of Casshell: wherein a special order was taken for the right singing of the Ecclesiastical Office; and a general act established, that all divine offices of holy Church should from thenceforth be handled in all parts of Ireland, according as the Church of England d • d observe them. The statutes of which Council were confirmed by the Regal authority of King Henry the second; by whose mandate, the Bishops that met therein were assembled, in the year of our Lord 1171. as Giraldus Cambrensis▪ witnesseth, in his history of the Conquest of Ireland. And thus late was it, before the Roman use was fully settled in this Kingdom.

That the Britons used another manner in the administration of the Sacrament of Baptism than the Romans did: appeareth by the proposition made unto them by Austin the Monk; that they should perform the ministry of baptism, according to the custom of the Church of Rome. That their form of Liturgy was the same with that which was received by their neighbors the Galls, is intimated by the Author of that ancient fragment before alleged: who also addeth, that the Gallican Order was received in the Church throughout the whole world. Yet elsewhere do I meet with a sentence alleged out of Gildas; that the Britons were contrary to the whole world, and enemies to the Roman customs, as well in their Mass, as in their Tonsure.

Where to let pass what I have collected touching the difference of these tonsures (as a matter of very small moment either way) and to speak somewhat of the Mass (for which so great ado is nowadays made by our Romanists) we may observe in the first place, that the public Liturgy or service of the Church, was of old named the Mass: even then also, when prayers only were said, without the celebration of the holy Communion. So the last Mass that S. Colme was ever present at, is noted by Adamnanus to have been vespertinalis Dominica noctis Missa. He died the mid-night following; whence the Lord's day took his beginning (9 • viz. Iunii, Anno Dom. 597.) according to the account of the Romans: which the Scottish and Irish seem to have begun from the evening going before. and then was that evening-Mass said: which in all likelihood, differed not from those 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mentioned by Leo the Emperor in his Tacticks, that is to say, from that which we call Even-song, or Evening prayer. But the name of the Mass was in those days more specially applied to the administration fo the Lord's Supper: & therefore in the same Adamnanus we see that Sacra Eucharistiae ministeria and Missarum solemnia, the sacred ministry of the Eucharist and the solemnities of the Mass, are taken for the same thing. So likewise in the relation of the passages that concern the obsequies of Columbanus, performed by Gallus and Magnoaldus; we find that Missam celebrare and Missas agere, is made to be the same with Divina celebrare mysteria and Salutis hostiam (or salutare sacrificium) immolare: the saying of Mass, the same with the celebration of the divine mysteries and the oblation of the healthful sacrifice. for by that term was the administration of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper at that time usually designed.

For as in our beneficence, and communicating unto the necessities of the poor (which are sacrifices wherewith God is well pleased) we are taught to give both ourselves and our alms, first unto the Lord, and after unto our brethren by the will of God: so is it in this ministry of the blessed Sacrament. the service is first presented unto God, (from which, as from a most principal part of the duty, the sacrament it self is called the Eucharist; because therein we offer a special sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving always unto God) and then communicated unto the use of God's people. in the performance of which part of the service, both the minister was said to give, and the communicant to receive the sacrifice: as well as in respect of the former part, they were said to offer the same unto the Lord. For they did not distinguish the Sacrifice from the Sacrament, as the Romanists do nowadays: but used the name of Sacrifice indifferently, both of that which was offered unto God, and of that which was given to and received by the communicant. Therefore we read of offering the sacrifice to God: as in that speech of Gallus to his scholar Magnoaldus; My master Columbanus is accustomed to offer unto the Lord the sacrifice of salvation in brazen vessels. Of giving the sacrifice to man: as when it is said in one of the ancient Synods of Ireland, that a Bishop by his Testament may bequeath a certain proportion of his goods for a legacy to the Priest that giveth him the sacrifice. and of receiving the sacrifice from the hands of the minister: as in that sentence of the Synod attributed unto S. Patrick; He who deserveth not to receive the sacrifice in his life, how can it help him after his death? and in that gloss of Sedulius upon 1. Cor. 11. 33. Tarry one for another, that is, (saith he) until you do receive the sacrifice. and in the British antiquities: where we read of Amon a noble man in Wales (father to Samson the Saint of Dole in little Britain) that being taken with a grievous sickness, he was admonished by his neighbors, that according to the usual manner he should receive the sacrifice of the communion. Whereby it doth appear, that the sacrifice of the elder times was not like unto the new Mass of the Romanists, wherein the Priest alone doth all; but unto our Communion, where others also have free liberty given unto them to eat of the Altar, as well as they that serve that Altar.

Again, they that are communicants in the Romish sacrament, receive the Eucharist in one kind only: the Priest in offering of the sacrifice receiveth the same distinctly, both by way of meat and by way of drink; which they tell us is chiefly done, for the integrity of the Sacrifice and not of the Sacrament. For in the Sacrifice, they say, the several elements be consecrated, not into Christ's whole person as it was borne of the Virgin or now is in heaven: but the bread into his body apart, as betrayed, broken, and given for us; the wine into his blood apart, as shed out of his body for remission of sins and dedication fo the New Testament, which be conditions of his person as he was in sacrifice and oblation. But our ancestors, in the use of their Sacrament, received the Eucharist in both kinds: not being so acute as to discern betwixt the things that belonged unto the integrity of the sacrifice and of the sacrament, because in very truth, they took the one to be the other.

Thus Bede relateth, that one Hildmer, an officer of Egfrid King of Northumberland, entreated our Cuthbert to send a Priest that might minister the sacraments of the Lord's body and blood unto his wife that then lay a dying: and Cuthbert himself, immediately before his own departure out of this life, received the communion of the Lord's body and blood; as Herefride Abbot of the monsterie of Lindisfarne (who was the man that at that time ministered the sacrament unto him) made report unto the same Bede. who elsewhere also particularly noteth, that he then tasted of the cup.

lest any man should think, that under the forms of bread alone he might be said to have been partaker of the body and blood of the Lord, by way of Concomitance: which is a toy, that was not once dreamed of in those days. So that we need not to doubt, what is meant by that which we read in the book of the life of Furseus (which was written before the time of Bede ) that he received the communion of the holy body and blood; and that he was wished to admonish the Pastors of the Church, that they should strengthen the souls of the faithful with the spiritual food of doctrine, and the participation of the holy body and blood, or of that which Cogitosus writeth in the life of Saint Brigid, touching the place in the Church of Kildare; whereunto the Abbatesse with her maidens and widows used to resort, that they might enjoy the banquet of the body and blood of Jesus Christ. which was agreeable to the practice, not only of the Nunneries founded beyond the seas according to the rule of Columbanus; where the Virgins received the body of the Lord, and sipped his blood (as appeareth by that which Jonah relateth of Domnae, in the life of Burgundofora: ) but also of S. Brigid her self, who was the foundresse of the monastery of Kildare; one of whose miracles is reported, even in the later Legends, to have happened when she was about to drink out of the Chalice, at the time of her receiving of the Eucharist. which they that list to look after, may find in the collections of Capgrave, Surius, and such like.

But, you will say; these testimonies that have been alleged, make not so much for us, in proving the use of the communion under both kinds, as they make against us, in confirming the opinion of Transubstantiation: seeing they all specify the receiving, not of bread and wine, but of the body and blood of Christ. I answer, that forasmuch as Christ himself at the first institution of his holy Supper did say expressly; This is my body, and, This is my blood: he deserveth not the name of a Christian, that will question the truth of that saying, or refuse to speak in that language, which he hath heard his Lord and Master use before him. The question only is, in what sense, and after what manner, these things must be conceived to be his body and blood. Of which there needed to be little question: if men would be pleased to take into their consideration these two things; which were never doubted of by the ancient, and have most evident ground in the context of the Gospel. First, that the subject of those sacramental propositions delivered by our Savior (that is to say, the demonstrative particle THIS) can have reference to no other substance, but that which he then held in his sacred hands, namely, bread & wines which are of so different a nature from the body and blood of Christ, that the one cannot possibly in proper sense be said to be the other; as the light of common reason doth force the Romanists themselves to confess. Secondly, that in the Predicate, or latter part of the same propositions, there is not mention made only of Christ's body and blood; but of his body broken, and his blood shed: to show, that his body is to be considered here apart, not as it was borne of the Virgin, or now is in heaven, but as it was broken and crucified for us; and his blood likewise apart, not as running in his veins, but as shed out of his body; which the Rhemists have told us to be conditions of his person, as he was in sacrifice and oblation.

And lest we should imagine, that his body were otherwise to be considered in the sacrament than in the sacrifice; in the one alive, as it is now in heaven, in the other dead, as it was offered upon the Cross: the Apostle putteth the matter out of doubt, that not only the minister in offering, but also the people in receiving, even as often as they eat this bread, and drink this cup, do show the Lord's death until he come. Our elders surely, that held the sacrifice to be given and received (for so we have heard themselves speak) as well as offered; did not consider otherwise of Christ in the sacrament, than as he was in sacrifice and oblation. If here therefore, Christ's body be presented as broken and lifeless, and his blood as shed forth and severed from his body; and it be most certain, that there are no such things now really existent any where (as is confessed on all hands:) then must it follow necessarily, that the bread and wine are not converted into these things really. The Rhemists indeed tell us, that when the Church doth offer and sacrifice Christ daily; he in mystery and sacrament dieth. Further than this they durst not go: for if they had said, he died really; they should thereby not only make themselves daily killers of Christ, but also directly cross that principle of the Apostle, Rom. 6. 9. Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more. If then the body of Christ in the administration of the Eucharist be propounded as dead (as hath been shown) and die it cannot really, but only in mystery and sacrament: how can it be thought to be contained under the outward elements, otherwise than in sacrament and mystery? and such as in times past were said to have received the sacrifice from the hand of the Priest; what other body and blood could they expect to receive therein, but such as was suitable to the nature of that sacrifice, to wit, mystical and sacramental?

Coelius Sedulius (to whom Gelasius Bishop of Rome, with his Synod of LXX. Bishops, giveth the title of venerable Sedulius; as Venantius Fortunatus of conspicuous Sedulius; and Hildephonsus Toletanus of the good Sedulius, the Evangelical Poet, the eloquent Orator, and the Catholic Writer ) is by Trithemius and others supposed to be the same with our Sedulius of Scotland (or Ireland ) whose Collections are extant upon St. Paul's Epistles: although I have forborne hitherto to use any of his testimonies, because I have some reason to doubt, whether he were the same with our Sedulius or no. But Coelius Sedulius (whatsoever countryman he was) intimateth plainly, that the things offered in the Christian sacrifice, are the fruit of the corn and of the vine:

or, as he expresseth it in his prose; the sweet meat of the seed of wheat, and the lovely drink of the pleasant vine. Of Melch • sedek (according to whose order Christ, and he only, was Priest) our own Sedulius writeth thus: Melchizedek offered wine & bread to Abraham for a figure of Christ, offering his body and blood unto God his Father upon the Cross. Where note, that first he saith, Melch sedek offered bread and wine to Abraham, not to God: and secondly, that he was a figure of Christ offering his body and blood upon the cross, not in the Eucharist. But we (saith he) do offer daily, for a commemoration of the Lord's passion (once performed) and our own salvation. and elsewhere, expounding those words of our Savior, Do this in remembrance of me; he bringeth in this similitude, used before and after him by others. He left a memory of himself unto us: even as if one that were going a far journey, should leave some token with him whom he loved; that as oft as he beheld it, he might call to remembrance his benefits and friendship.

Claudius noteth, that our Savior's pleasure was, first to deliver unto his Disciples the sacrament of his body and blood; and afterwards to offer up the body it self upon the altar of the cross. Where at the first sight I did verily think, that in the words fractione corporis an error had been committed in my transcript ( corporis being miswritten for panis ) but afterwards comparing it with the original, whence I took my copy, I found that the author retained the manner of speaking used both before and after his time; in giving the name of the thing signified unto the sign, even there where the direct intention of the speech was to distinguish the one from the other. For he doth expressly here distinguish the sacrament of the body, which was delivered unto the Disciples, from the body it self, which was afterwards offered upon the Cross: and for the sacramental relation betwixt them both, he rendereth this reason. Because bread doth confirm the body, and wine doth work blood in the flesh: therefore the one is mystically referred to the body of Christ, the other to his blood. Which doctrine of his (that the sacrament is in it own nature bread and wine, but the body and blood of Christ by mystical relation) was in effect the same with that which long afterwards was here in Ireland delivered by Henry Crumpe the Monk of Baltinglas, that the body of Christ in the sacrament of the altar was only a looking glass to the body of Christ in heaven: yea and within fifty or threescore years of the time of Claudius Scotus himself, was so fully maintained by Johannes Scotus in a book that he purposely wrote of that argument; that when it was alleged and extolled by Berengarius, Pope Leo (the ninth ) with his Bishops assembled in Synodo Vercellensi, an • . Domini, 1050 (which was 235. years after the time that Claudius wrote his commentaries upon St. Matthew ) had no other means to avoid it, but by flat condemning of it. Of what great esteem this John was with king Alfred, may be seen in William of Malmesbury, Roger Howden, Matthew of Westminster, and other writers of the English history. The king himself, in the Preface before his Saxon translation of St. Gregory's Pastoral, professeth that he was holpen in that work by John his Mass-priest. By whom if he did mean this John of ours: you may see, how in those days a man might be held a Mass-priest, who was far enough from thinking that he offered up the very body and blood of Christ really present under the forms of bread and wine; which is the only Mass that our Romanists take knowledge of.

Of which wonderful point how ignorant our elders were, even this also may be one argument: that the author of the book of the wonderful things of the holy Scripture (before alleged) passeth this quite over, which is now esteemed to be the wonder of all wonders. And yet doth he profess, that he purposed to pass over nothing of the wonders of the Scripture, wherein they might seem notably to swerve from the ordinary administration in other things.

CHAP. V.

THat the Irish did baptize their infants without any consecrated Chrism, Lanfranc maketh complaint in his letters to Terdeluacus (or Tirlagh ) the chief King of that country. And Bernard reporteth, that Malachias in his time (which was after the days of Lanfranc and Pope Hildebrand ) did of the new institute the most wholesome use of Confession, the sacrament of Confirmation, and the contract of marriages: all which he saith the Irish before were either ignorant of, or did neglect. Which, for the matter of Confession, may receive some further confirmation from the testimony of Alcuinus: who writing unto the Scottish (or, as other copies read, the Gothish ) and commending the religious conversation of their laity, who in the midst of their worldly employments were said to lead a most chaste life; condemneth notwithstanding another custom, which was said to have continued in that country. For it is said (quot he) that no man of the laity will make his confession to the Priests; whom we believe to have received from the Lord Christ, the power of binding and loosing, together with the holy Apostles.

They had no reason indeed to hold (as Alcuinus did) that they ought to confess unto a Priest all the sins they could remember: but upon special occasions, they did (no doubt) both publicly and privately make confession of their faults, as well that they might receive counsel and direction for their recovery, as that they might be made partakers of the benefit of the keys, for the quieting of their troubled consciences. Whatsoever the Gothish did herein (by whom we are to understand the inhabitants of Languedok in France, where Alcuinus lived) sure we are, that this was the practice of the ancient Scottish and Irish. So we read of one Fiachna or Fechnaus, that being touched with remorse for some offense committed by him, he fell at St. Colmes feet, lamented bitterly, and confessed his sins before all that were there present. Whereupon the holy man, weeping together with him, is said to have returned this answer: Rise up, Son, and be comforted, thy sins which thou hast committed are forgiven; because (as it is written) a contrite and an humbled heart God doth not despise. We read also of Adamanus, that being very much terrified with the remembrance of a grievous sin committed by him in his youth; he resorted unto a Priest, by whom he hoped the way of salvation might be shown unto him, he confessed his guilt, and entreated that he would give him counsel, whereby he might flee from the wrath of God that was to come.

Now the counsel commonly given unto the Penitent after Confession, was; that he should wipe away his sins by meet fruits of repentance: which course Bede observeth to have been usually prescribed by our Cuthbert. For penances were then exacted, as testimonies of the sincerity of that inward repentance which was necessarily required for obtaining remission of the sin: and so had reference to the taking away of the guilt, and not of the temporal punishment remaining after the forgiveness of the guilt; which is the new found use of penances, invented by our later Romanists. One old Penitentiall Canon we find laid down in a Synod held in this country about the year our Lord CCCCL. by S. Patrick, Auxilius, and Isserninus: which is as followeth. A Christian who hath killed a man, or committed fornication, or gone unto a Soothsayer after the manner of the Gentiles, for every of those crimes shall do a year of Penance: when his year of penance is accomplished, he shall come with witnesses, and afterward he shall be absolved by the Priest. These Bishops did take order (we see) according to the discipline generally used in those times, that the penance should first be performed; and when long & good proof had been given by that means of the truth of the parties repentance, they wished the Priest to impart unto him the benefit of Absolution. whereas by the new device of sacramental penance the matter is now far more easily transacted: by virtue of the keys the sinner is instantly of attrite made contrite, and thereupon as soon as he hath made his Confession he presently receiveth his Absolution: after this, some sorry penance is imposed, which upon better consideration may be converted into pence; and so a quick end is made of many a foul business.

But for the right use of the keys, we fully accord with Claudius: that the office of remitting and retaining sins which was given unto the Apostles, is now in the Bishops and Priests committed unto every Church. namely, that having taken knowledge of the causes of such as have sinned, as many as they shall behold humble and truly penitent, those they may now with compassion absolve from the fear of everlasting death; but such as they shall discern to persist in the sins which they have committed, those they may declare to be bound over unto never ending punishments. And in thus absolving such as be truly penitent, we willingly yield, that the Pastors of God's Church do remit sins after their manner, that is to say, ministerially and improperly: so that the privilege of forgiving sins properly and absolutely, be still reserved unto God alone. Which is at large set out by the same Claudius; where he expoundeth the history of the man sick of the palsy, that was cured by our Savior in the ninth of S. Matthew. For, following Bede upon that place, he writeth thus. The Scribes say true, that none can forgive sins but God alone; also forgiveth by them, to whom he hath given the power of forgiving. And therefore is Christ proved to be truly God because he forgiveth sins as God. They render a true testimony unto God: but in denying the person of Christ, they are deceived. and again: If it be God that, according to the Psalmist, removeth our sins as far from us, as the East is distant from the West; and the Son of man hath power upon earth to forgive sins: therefore he himself is both God and the Son of man. that both the man Christ might by the power of his divinity forgive sins; and the same Christ being God, might by the frailty of his humanity die for sinners. and out of S. Jerome: Christ showeth himself to be God, who can know the hidden things of the heart; and after a sort holding his peace he speaketh. By the same majesty and power, whereby I behold your thoughts, I can also forgive sins unto men. In like manner doth the author of the book of the wonderful things of the Scripture observe these divine works in the same history: the forgiving of sins, the present cure of the disease, & the answering of the thoughts by the mouth of God who searcheth all things. With whom, for the property of beholding the secret thoughts, Sedulius also doth concur, in those sentences. God alone can know the hidden things of men. To know the hearts of men, and to discern the secrets of their mind, is the privilege of God alone.

That the contract of Marriages, was either unknown or neglected by the Irish, before Malachias did institute the same anew among them (as Bernard doth seem to intimate) is a thing almost incredible. although Giraldus Cambrensis doth complain, that the case was little better with them after the time of Malachias also. The licentiousness of those ruder times, I know, was such, as may easily induce us to believe, that a great both neglect and abuse of God's ordinance did get footing among this people. Which enormities Malachias, no doubt, did labor to reform: and withal peradventure brought in some new matters, not known here before; as he was very desirous his countrymen should generally conform themselves unto the traditions and customs of the Church of Rome. But our purpose is here only to deal with the doctrine and practice of the elder times: in which, first, that Marriage was not held to be a sacrament, may be collected from Sedulius, who reckoneth it among those things, which are gifts indeed, but not spiritual.

Secondly, for the degrees of Consanguinitie hindering marriage, the Synod attributed unto St. Patrick seemeth to refer us wholly unto the Levitical law; prescribing therein neither less nor more than the Law speaketh: and particularly, against matching with the wife of the deceased brother (which was the point so much questioned in the case of King Henry the eighth ) this Synodical decree is there urged. The brother may not ascend into the bed of his deceased brother: the Lord having said, They two shall be one flesh. Therefore the wife of thy brother, is thy sister. Whereupon we find also, that our Kilianus did suffer martyrdom for dissolving such an incestuous marriage in Gozbertus Duke of Franconia: and that Clemens Scotus for maintaining the contrary was both by Boniface Archbishop of Mainz, and the Council held at Rome by Pope Zechariah in the year DCCXLV. condemned as a bringer in of Judaism amongst Christians. Yet how far this condemned opinion of his prevailed afterward in this country, and how foul a crime it was esteemed to be by others abroad (notwithstanding the Pope doth now by his Bulls of dispensation take upon him to make a fair matter of it) may easily be perceived by this censure of Giraldus: Moreover, saith he, which is very detestable, and most contrary not only to the faith, but also unto common honesty; brethren in many places throughout Ireland do, I say not marry, but mar rather and seduce the wives of their deceased brothers, while in this sort they filthily and incestuously have knowledge of them: cleaving herein not to the marrow but to the bark of the Old Testament, and desiring to imitate the ancient in vices more willingly than in virtues.

Thirdly, touching divorces, we read in Sedulius; that it is not lawful, according to the precept of our Lord, that the wife should be put away, but for the cause of fornication, and in the Synod ascribed to St. Patrick. It is not lawful for a man to put away his wife, but for the cause of fornication. as if he should say; for this cause, he may. Whence if he marry another, as it were after the death of the former, they forbid it not. Who they were, that did not forbid this second marriage, is not there expressed: that Saint Patrick himself was of another mind, would appear by this constitution following; which in another ancient Canon-book I found cited under his name. If any man's wife have committed adultery with another man: he shall not marry another wife, as long as the first wife shall be alive. If per adventure she be converted, and do penance: he shall receive her; and she shall serve him in the place of a maid-servant. Let her for a whole year do penance in bread and water, and that by measure: neither let them remain in the same bed together. Fourthly, concerning single life, I do not find in any of our records, that it was generally imposed upon the Clergy; but the contrary rather. For in the Synod held by St. Patrick, Auxilius, and Isserninus; there is a special order taken, that their wives shall not walk abroad, with their heads uncovered. And St. Patrick himself confesseth (at leastwise the Confession which goeth under his name saith so; and Probus, Iocelinus, and others that write his life, agree therewith) that he had to his father Calphurnius a Deacon, and to his grandfather Potitus a Priest. For that was no new thing then among the Britons: whose Bishops therefore Gildas doth reprehend (as for the same cause he did the chief of the Laity) that they were not content to be the husbands of one, but of many wives, and that they corrupted their children by their evil example: whereas the chastity of the fathers was to be esteemed imperfect, if the chastity of their sons were not added thereunto.

Nennius, the eldest Historiographer of the Britons which we have after him (who in many copies also beareth his own name) wrote that book which we have extant of his, to Samuel the child of Benlanus the Priest, his master: counting it a grace, rather than any kind of disparagement unto him, to be esteemed the son of a learned Priest. Which maketh him in the verses prefixed before the work to say:

But about 60. or 70. years after, I find some partial eclipse here (and the first, I think, of this kind, that can be shown among the Britons) in the laws of Howel Dha: where it is ordered, that if a Clerk of a lower degree should match with a woman, and have a son by her, and that Clerke afterward having received the order of Priest-hood, should have another son by the same woman; the former son should enjoy his fathers whole estate, without being bound to divide the same with his other brother. Yet these marriages for all that were so held out, that the fathers not content their sons should succeed them in their temporal estate alone, prevailed so far that they continued them in the succession of their spiritual promotions also. Which abuse Giraldus Cambrensis complaineth to have been continuedin Wales unto his time; & out of Hill • ebertus Cenomanensis showeth to have prevailed in little Britain also: whence he inferreth, that this vice was of old common to the whole British nation as well on this side as on the other side of the sea. Whereunto for Ireland also we may add the letters written by Pope Innocent the third unto Johannes Salernitanus the Cardinal, his legate, for abolishing the custom there, whereby sons and grand-children did use to succeed their fathers and grand-fathers in their Ecclesiastical benefices.

CHAP. VI.

WHat hath been said of the married Clergy, concerneth the Seculars, and not the Regulars, whereof there was a very great number in Ireland; because here almost all the Prelates were wont to be chosen into the Clergy out of monasteries. For our monasteries in ancient time were the seminaries of the ministry: being as it were so many Colleges of learned divines, whereunto the people did usually resort for instruction, and from whence the Church was wont continually to be supplied with able ministers. The benefit whereof was not only contained within the limits of this Island, but did extend it self to foreign countries likewise. For this was it that drew Egbert and Ceaddae (for example) into Ireland; that they might there lead a monastical life in prayers and continency and meditation of the holy Scriptures: and hence were those famous monasteries planted in England by Aidan, Finan, Colman, and others; unto which the people flocked apace on the Lord's day, not for the feeding of their body, but for the learning of the word of God, as Beda witnesseth. Yea this was the principal means, whereby the knowledge both of the Scriptures and of all other good learning was preserved in that inundation of barbarism, wherewith the whole West was in a manner overwhelmed. Hitherto (saith Curio) it might seem that the studies of wisdom should quite have perished; unless God had reserved a seed in some corner of the world. Among the Scottish and the Irish something as yet remained of the doctrine of the knowledge of God and of civil honesty; because there was no terror of arms in those utmost ends of the world. And we may there behold and adore the great goodness of God; that among the Scots, and in those places where no man would have thought it, so many great companies should be gathered together under a most strict discipline.

How strict their discipline was, may appear partly by the Rule, and partly by the Daily penances of Monks; which are yet extant of Columbanus his writing. In the later of these, for the disobedience of Monks these penances are prescribed. If any brother be disobedient; he shall fast two days, with one bisket and water. If any say, I will not do it; three days, with one bisket and water. If any murmur; two days, with one bisket and water. If any do not ask leave, or tell an excuse; two days, with one bisket and water▪ and so in other particulars. In his Rule, these good lessons doth he give unto his Monks, among many others. That it profited them little, if they were virgins in body, and were not virgins in mind. that they should daily profit, as they did daily pray, and daily read. that the good things of the Pharisee being vainly praised were lost, and the sins of the Publican being accused vanished away: and therefore that a great word should not come out of the mouth of a Monk, lest his great labor should perish. They were not taught to vaunt of their state of perfection, and works of supererogation: or to argue from thence (as Celestius the Pelagian Monk sometime did) that by the nature of their free will they had such a possibility of not sinning, that they were able also to do more than was commanded; because they did observe perpetual virginity which is not commanded, whereas for not sinning it is sufficient to fulfill the precepts. It was one of the points which Gallus (the scholar of Columbanus) delivered in his sermon preached at Constance; that our Savior did so persuade the Apostles & their followers to lay hold upon the good of virginity; that yet they should know, it was not of human industry, but of divine gift. and it is a good observation which we read in Claudius: that not only in the splendor of bodily things, but also in mournful abasing of ones self, there may be boasting; and that so much the more dangerous, as it deceiveth under the name of the service of God.

Our Monks were religious in deed, and not in name only; far from the hypocrisy, pride, idleness and uncleanness of those evil beasts and slothful bellies that afterward succeeded in their room. Under color of forsaking all, they did not hook all unto themselves; nor under semblance of devotion did they devour widows houses: they held begging to be no point of perfection; but remembered the words of our Lord Jesus, how he said, It is a more blessed thing to give rather than to take. When king Sigebert made large offers unto Columbanus and his companions, to keep them within his dominions in France: he received such another answer from them, as Thaddaeus in the Ecclesiastical history is said to have given unto Abgarus the governor of Edessa: We who have forsaken our own, that according to the commandment of the Gospel we might follow the Lord, ought not to embrace other men's riches; lest peradventure we should prove transgressors of the divine commandment. How then did these men live, will you say? Walafridus Strabus telleth us, that some of them wrought in the garden, others dressed the orchard; Gallus made nets and took fish, wherewith he not only relieved his own company, but was helpful also unto strangers. So Bede reporteth of Cuthbert, that when he retired himself unto an anchoreticall life, he first indeed received a little bread from his brethren to feed upon, and drank out of his own well; but afterwards he thought it more fit to live by the work of his own hands, after the example of the Fathers: and therefore entreated, that instruments might be brought him wherewith he might till the earth, and corn that he might sow.

The like doth he relate of Furseus; and Boniface of Livinus; and Theodorus Campidonensis (or whosoever else wrote that book) of Gallus, Magnoaldus, and the rest of the followers of Columbanus; that they got their living by the labor of their own hands. And the Apostles rule is generally laid down for all Monks, in the life of Furseus: They which live in Monasteries should work with silence, and eat their own bread.

But now there is start up a new generation of men, that refuse to eat their own bread, and count it a high point of sanctity to live by begging of other men's bread; if yet the course they take may rightly be termed begging. For as Richard Fitz-Ralphe, that famous Archbishop of Armagh, objected to their faces, before the Pope himself and his Cardinals in his time (and the matter is little amended, I wisse, in ours) scarce could any great or mean man of the Clergy or the Laity eat his meat, but such kind of beggars would be at his elbowe: not like other poor folks humbly craving alms at the gate or the door (as Francis did command and teach them in his Testament) by begging; but without shame intruding themselves into courts or houses, and lodging there. where, without any inviting at all, they eat and drink what they do find among them: and not with that content, carry away with them either wheat, or meal, or bread, or flesh, or cheeses (although there were but two in an house) in a kind of an extorting manner; there being none that can deny them, unless he would cast away natural shame.

This did that renowned Primate (whose anniversary memory is still celebrated in Dundalke, where he was borne and buried, by the name of Saint Richard ) publicly deliver in the year 1357. at the Consistory of Avinion: where he stoutly maintained against the whole rabble of the Friars, what he had preached the year before at Paul's Cross unto the people. namely, that our Lord Jesus Christ, although in his human conversation he was always poor, yet did he never voluntarily beg himself, nor taught others so to do, but taught the plain contrary: and that no man could prudently & holily take upon himself the perpetual observation of voluntary beggary; forasmuch as such kind of begging, as well by Christ, as by his Apostles and Disciples, by the Church and by the holy Scriptures, was both dissuaded and also reproved.

His Countryman Henry Crumpe (a Monk of the Cistercian order in Baltinglas ) not long after, treading in his steps, was accused for delivering in his Determinations at Oxford: that the Friars of the four Mendicant orders are not, nor ever were instituted by God's inspiration, but that contrary to the general Council of Lateran, held under Innocent the third (which prohibited the bringing in of anymore new religious orders into the Church) and by feigned and false dreams, Pope Honorius being persuaded by the Friars, did confirm them. and that all the Doctors which did determine for the Friars side, were either afraid to speak the truth, lest their books should be condemned by the Friars that had gotten to be Inquisitors; or said, As it seemeth, or proceeded only by way of d • sputation and not of determination: because if they had spoken the truth plainly in the behalf of the Church, the Friars would have persecuted them, as they d • d persecute the holy Doctor Armachanus. Which Crumpe himself found afterwards to be too true by his own experience. for he was forced to deny and abjure these assertions in the house of the Carmelite Friars at Stanford, before William Courtney Archbishop of Canterbury: and then silenced, that he should not exercise publicly any act in the Schools, either by reading, preaching, disputing, or determining; until he should have a special license from the said Archbishop so to do.

But to leave the begging Friars (being a kind of creatures unknown to the Church for twelve hundred years after Christ) and to return to the laboring Monks: we find it related of our Brendan: that he governed three thousand such Monks, who by their own labors and handy-work did earn their living. which agreeth well with that saying ascribed to him by the writer of his life: A Monk ought to be fed and clothed by the labor of his own hands. Neither was there any other order observed in that famous Monastery of Bangor among the Britons, wherein there is said to have been so great a number of Monks, that the Monastery being divided into seven portions (together with the Rectors appointed over them) none of all those portions had less than three hundred persons in them: all which (saith Bede) were w • nt to live by the labor of their own hands. From the destruction of which Monastery, unto the erection of Tuy Gwyn, or White-house (which is said to have been about the year 1146.) the setter forth of the Welsh Chronicle observeth, that there were no Abbeys among the Britons.

Here in Ireland Bishop Colman founded the Monastery of Magio (in the county of Limrick) for the entertainment of the English: where they did live according to the example of the reverend Fathers (as Bede writeth) under a rule and a canonical Abbot, in great continency and sincerity, with the labor of their own hands. Like whereunto was the monastery of Mailros also, planted by Bishop Aidan and his followers in Northumberland; where St. Cuthbert had his education: who affirmed, that the life of such Monks was justly to be admired, which were in all things subject to the commands of their Abbot; and ordered all the times of their watching, praying, fasting, and working, according to his direction.

As for their fasting (for of their watching and praying there is no question made; and of their working we have already spoken sufficiently) by the rule of Columbanus, they were every day to fast, and every day to eat: that by this means, the enabling of them for their spiritual proficiency might be retained, together with the abstinence that did macerate the flesh. He would therefore have them every day to eat, because they were every day to profit; and because abstinence, if it did exceed measure, would prove a vice and not a virtue. and he would have them to fast every day too, that is, not to eat any meat at all (for other fasts were not known in those days) until evening. Let the food of Monks (saith he) be mean, and taken at evening; flying satiety and excess of drink: that it may both sustain them and not hurt them. This was the daily fasting and feeding of them that lived according to Columbanus his rule. although the strictness of the fast seemeth to have been kept on Wednesdays and Fridays only: which were the days of the week, wherein the ancient Irish (agreeable to the custom of the Grecian rather than the Roman Church) were wont to observe abstinence both from meat and from the marriage bed. Whence in the book before alleged, of the Daily Penances of Monks, we find this order set down by the same Columbanus: that if any one, unless he were weak, did upon the Wednesday or Friday eat before the ninth hour (that is to say, before three of the clock in the afternoon, according unto our account) he should be punished with fasting two days in bread and water▪ and in Bedes Ecclesiastical History; that such as followed the information of Aidan, did upon the same days observe their fast, until the same hour. in which history we also read of Bishop Cedd (who was brought up at Lindisfarne with our Aidan and Finan) that keeping a strict fast, upon a special occasion, in the time of Lent, he did every day, except the Lord's day, continue his fast, (as the manner was) until the evening; and then also did eat nothing but a small pittance of bread, and one egg, with a little milk mingled with water. Where by the way you may note, that in those days eggs were eaten in Lent, and the Sundays excepted from fasting, even then when the abstinence was precisely and in more than an ordinary manner observed.

But generally for this point of the difference of meats, it is well noted by Claudius out of S. Augustine, that the children of wisdom do understand, that neither in abstaining nor in eating is there any virtue; but in contentedness of bearing the want, and temperance of not corrupting a man's self by abundance, and of opportunely taking or not taking those things, of which not the use but the concupiscence is to be blamed. and in the life of Furseus, the hypocrisy of them is justly taxed, that being assaulted with spiritual vices, do yet omit the care of them, and afflict their body with abstinence: who abstaining from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving, fall to wicked things, as if they were lawful; namely to pride, covetousness, envy, false witnessing, backbiting. Of whom Gildas giveth this good censure, in one of his Epistles which now are lost. These men, while they do feed on bread by measure, for this same very thing do glory without measure; while they use water, they are withal drenched with the cup of hatred; while they feed on dry meats, they use detractions; while they spend themselves in watchings, they disprayse others that are oppressed with sleep; preferring fasting before charity, watching before justice, their own invention before concord, severity before humility, and lastly, man before God. Such men's fasting, unless it be proceeded unto by some virtues, profiteth nothing at all: but such as accomplish charity, do say with the harp of the holy Ghost; All our righteousnesses are as the cloth of a menstruous woman. Thus Gildas: who upon this ground layeth down this sound conclusion; wherewith we will shut up this whole matter. Abstinence from corporal meats is unprofitable without charity. They are therefore the better men, who do not fast much, nor abstain from the creature of God beyond measure, but carefully keep their heart within pure before God, from whence they know cometh the issue of life: than they who eat no flesh, nor take delight in secular dinners, nor ride with coaches or horses, thinking themselves hereby to be as it were superior to others▪ upon whom death hath entered through the windows of haughtiness.

CHAP. VII.

COncerning the Catholic Church, our Doctors taught with S. Gregory; that God hath a vineyard, to wit, the universal Church, which from just Abel until the last of the elect that shall be borne in the end of the world, as many Saints as it hath brought forth, so many branches (as it were) hath it budded. that the congregation of the just is called the kingdom of heaven; which is the Church of the just. that the sons of the Church be all such as from the beginning of mankind until now, have attained to be just and holy. that what is said of the body, may be said also of the members; and that in this respect, as well the Apostles and all believers, as the Church it self, have the title of a pillar given them in the Scriptures. that the Church may be considered two manner of ways: both that which neither hath spot nor wrinkle and is truly the body of Christ, and that which is gathered in the name of Christ without full and perfect virtues; which notwithstanding by the warrant of the Apostle, may have the name of the Church given unto it, although it be depraved with error. that the Church is said not to have spot or wrinkle, in respect of the life to come. that when the Apostle saith; In a great house there are not only vessels of gold, &c. but some to honor and some to dishonor: (2 Tim. 2. 20.) by this great house he doth not understand the Church (as some have thought) which hath not spot nor wrinkle: but the world, in which the tares are mingled with the wheat. that yet in the holy Church also, the evil are mingled with the good, and the reprobate with the elect: and that in this respect it is resembled unto the wise and foolish virgins; as also to the Kings marriage, by which this present Church is designed, wherein the good and the bad do meet together. So that in this Church, neither the bad can be without the good, nor the good without the bad: whom the holy Church notwithstanding doth both now receive indifferently, and separate afterwards at their going from hence.

The number of the good, Gildas complaineth to have been so exceeding short in his time among the Britons, in comparison of the other; that their mother the Church in a manner did not see them lying in her own lap, albeit they were the only true sons which she had. And for external pressures, our Doctors have delivered, that the Church sometimes is not only afflicted, but also defiled with such oppressions of the Gentiles; that if it were possible, her redeemer might seem for a time utterly to have forsaken her: and that, in the raging times of Antichrist, the Church shall not appear; by reason that the wicked persecutors shall then exercise their cruelty beyond all measure. that in those times of Antichrist, not only more often and more bitter torments shall be put upon the faithful, than before were wont to be; but (which is more grievous) the working of miracles also shall accompany those that inflict the torments: as the Apostle witnesseth, saying; Whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all seduction, signs, and lying wonders. namely, juggling ones: as it was foretold before; They shall show such signs that, if it were possible, the very elect should be deceived, by such a fantastical power, as Iamnes and Mambres wrought withal before Pharaoh. What unbeliever therefore ( say they) will then be converted unto the faith? and who is he that already believeth, whose faith trembleth not and is not shaken? when the persecutor of piety is the worker of wonders: and the same man that exerciseth cruelty with torments, that Christ may be denied; provoketh by miracles, that Antichrist may be believed? And what a pure and a single eye is there need of, that the way of wisdom may be found; against which so great deceivings and errors of evil and perverse men, do make such a noise? all which notwithstanding men must pass through; and so come to most certain peace, and the immovable stability of wisdom.

Hence concerning Miracles, they give us these instructions. First, that neither if an Angel should show himself unto us to seduce us, being suborned with the deceits of his father the devil, ought he to prevail against us; neither if a miracle should be done by any one, as it is said of Simon Magus that he did fly in the air: neither that signs should terrify us, as done by the Spirit; because that our Savior also hath given us warning of this beforehand. ( Matth. 24. 24, 25.) Secondly, that the faith having increased, miracles were to cease; forasmuch as they are declared to have been given for their sakes that believe not. and therefore that now when the number of the faithful is grown, there be many within the holy Church that retain the life of virtues, and yet have not those signs of virtues: because a miracle is to no purpose shown outwardly, if that be wanting which it should work inwardly. For according to the saying of the Master of the Gentiles; Languages are for a sign, not to the faithful but to infidels. (1 Cor. 14. 22.) Thirdly, that the working of miracles is no good argument to prove the holiness of them that be the instruments thereof: and therefore when the Lord doth such things for the convincing of infidels, he yet giveth us warning that we should not be deceived thereby, supposing invisible wisdom to be there, where we shall behold a visible miracle. For he saith: Many shall say unto me in that day, Lord, Lord; have we not prophesied in thy name, and in thy name cast out Devils, and in thy name done many miracles? ( Matth. 7. 22) Fourthly, that he tempteth God, who for his own vain glory will make show of a superfluous and unprofitable miracle. such as that (for example) was, whereunto the Devil tempted our Savior, Matth. 4. 6. to come down headlong from the pinnacle of the Temple unto the plain, every miracle being vain, which worketh not some profit unto man's salvation. Whereby we may easily discern, what to judge of that infinite number of idle miracles, wherewith the lives of our Saints are everywhere stuffed: many whereof we may justly censure (as Amphilochius doth the tales that the Poets tell of their God's) for

Yea some of them also we may rightly brand, as For what (for example) can be more unseemly, and tend further to the advancement of the doctrine of devils, than that which Cogitosus relateth in the life of S. Brigid? that she, for saving the credit of a Nun that had been gotten with child, blessed her faithfully forsooth (for so the author speaketh) and so caused her conception to vanish away, without any delivery and without any pain. which for the saving of St. Brigids own credit, either Hen. Canisius or the friars of Aichstad ( from whom he had his copy of Cogitosus) thought fit to scrape out, and rather to leave a blank in the book, than to suffer so lewd a tale to stand in it. But I will not stir this puddle any further: but proceed on, unto some better matter.

And now are we come at last to the great Point, that toucheth the Head and the foundation of the Church. Concerning which Sedulius observeth, that the title of foundation is attributed both to Christ, and to the Apostles and Prophets. that where it is said, Isaiah 28. 16. Behold, I lay in Zion a stone, &c. it is certain, that by the rock or stone Christ is signified. that, in Ephes. 2. 20. the Apostles are the foundation, or Christ rather the foundation of the Apostles. For Christ ( saith he ) is the foundation, who is also called the corner stone, joining and holding together the two walls. Therefore is he the foundation and chief stone; because in him the Church is both founded and finished. and we are to account the Apostles as Ministers of Christ, and not as the foundation. The famous place, Matthew 16. 18. ( whereupon our Romanists lay the main foundation of the Papacie ) Claudius expoundeth in this sort. Upon this rock will I build my Church, that is to say, upon the Lord and Savior, who granted unto his faithful knower, lover, and confessor the participation of his own name; that from petra (the rock) he should be called Peter. The Church is built upon him: because only by the faith and love of Christ, by the receiving of the Sacraments of Christ, by the observation of the commandments of Christ, we come to the inheritance of the elect and eternal life, as witnesseth the Apostle, who saith, Other foundation can no man lay beside that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus.

Yet doth the same Claudius acknowledge, that St. Peter received a kind of primacy for the founding of the Church ( in respect whereof he termeth him Ecclesiae principem, and Apostolorum principem, the prince of the Church, and the prince or chief of the Apostles) but he addeth with all, that Saint Paul also was chosen in the same manner, to have the primacy in founding the Churches of the Gentiles. and that he received this gift from God, that he should be worthy to have the primacy in preaching to the Gentiles, as Peter had it in the preaching of the Circumcision. and therefore that St. Paul challengeth this grace as granted by God to him alone, as it was granted to Peter alone among the Apostles. and that he esteemed himself not to be inferior unto St. Peter, because both of them were by one ordained unto one and the same ministry. and that writing to the Galatians, he did in the title name himself an Apostle of Christ, to the end that by the very authority of that name he might terrify his readers; judging, that all such as did believe in Christ, ought to be subject unto him.

It is furthermore also observed by Claudius, that as when our Savior propounded the question generally unto all the Apostles, Peter did answer as one for all; so what our Lord answered unto Peter, in Peter he did answer unto all. and therefore howsoever the power of loosing and binding might seem to be given by the Lord unto Peter alone, yet without all manner of doubt it is to be known, that it was given unto the rest of the Apostles also: as himself doth witness, who appearing unto them after the triumph of his passion and resurrection, breathed on them, and said unto them all; Receive the holy Ghost, whose sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them, and whose sins ye retain they are retained. Gildas the Briton goeth further, affirming that to the true Priest it is said; Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church. that to Peter and his successors our Lord saith; And unto thee will I give the Keys of the Kingdom of heaven. and consequently, that unto every holy Priest it is promised: Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound likewise in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed likewise in heaven. Whereupon he pronounceth of the good Priests of Britain; that they do lawfully obtain the Apostolical state, and lawfully sit in the chair of St. Paul: and on the other side of the bad, that with unclean feet they usurp the seat of the Apostle Peter, but by the demerit of their covetousness fall into the pestilent chair of the traitor Judas; and so the ordainers of such, place after a sort Judas the betrayer of our Lord, in the seat of Peter.

Lastly, as Claudius noteth, that the foundation of the Church was laid not only upon St. Peter, but also upon St. John: so in a certain Hymn supposed to be written by Secundinus (known in this country commonly by the name of St. Scachlin ) in the year of our Lord CCCCXLVIII. St Patrick also is thus commended. He is constant in the fear of God, and unmovable in the faith, upon whom the Church is built as upon Peter; whose Apostleship also he hath obtained from God, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against him. yea Christ is there said to have chosen him for his Vicar upon earth. His See likewise of Armagh, is by one Calvus Perennis in the days of Brian king of Ireland (who was slain, as appeareth by Marianus in the year 1014.) termed the City Apostolic. So Desiderius Bishop of Cahors in France, is by our countryman Gaellus saluted both Papa and Apostolicus: and the Bishop of Kildare in Ireland, honored by Cogitosus, with the style of Summus Sacerdos, and Summus Pontifex, the highest Priest and the highest Bishop. those titles and prerogatives, which the Pope now peculiarly challengeth unto himself, as ensigns of his Monarchy, being heretofore usually communicated unto other Bishops, when the universal Church was governed by way of Aristocratie.

CHAP. VIII.

MAster Campion telleth us; that when Ireland first received Christendom, they gave themselves into the Jurisdiction both spiritual and temporal of the See of Rome. But herein he speaketh without book; of the spiritual jurisdiction untruly, of the temporal absurdly. For from the first legation of Palladius and Patricius, who were sent to plant the faith in this country, it cannot be shown out of any monument of antiquity, that the Bishop of Rome did ever send any of his Legates to exercise spiritual jurisdiction here (much less any of his Deputies to exercise jurisdiction temporal) before Gillebertus, quem aiunt primâ functum legatione Apostolicae sedis per universam Hiberniam; saith one that lived in his own time, even Bernard himself in the life of Malachias. One or two instances peradventure may be alleged out of some obscure authors, whose names, and times, and authority no man can tell us news of: but unless that which is delivered by Bernard, as the tradition that was current in his time, can be controlled by some record that may appear to have been written before his days; we have small reason to detract any thing from the credit of so clear a testimony.

This country was heretofore, for the number of holy men that lived in it, termed the Island of Saints: of that innumerable company of Saints, whose memory was reverenced here; what one received any solemn canonization from the Pope, before Malachias Archbishop of Armagh, & Laurence of Dublin? who lived, as it were, but the other day. We read of sundry Archbishops that have been in this land: betwixt the days of Saint Patrick and of Malachias, what one of them can be named, that ever sought for a Pall from Rome? Ioceline indeed a late Monk of the Abbey of Furnesse, writeth of St. Patrick; that the Bishop of Rome conferred the Pall upon him, together with the execution of legatine power in his room. But he is well known to be a most fabulous author: and for this particular, Bernard (who was his ancient) informeth us far otherwise; that from the very beginning until his time, the metropoliticall See of Armagh wanted the use of the Pall. with whom the author of the Annals of Mailros doth fully accord; noting that in the year 1151. Pope Eugenius (the same to whom Bernard did write his books de Consideratione) did by his Legate John Papiron transmit four Pals into Ireland; whither a Pall before had never been brought. And therefore Giraldus Cambrensis, howsoever he acknowledgeth that Saint Patrick did choose Armagh for his seat, and did appoint it to be as it were a metropoliticall See, and the proper place of the primacy of all Ireland; yet doth he affirm withal, that in very deed there were no Archbishops in Ireland, but that Bishops only did consecrate one another, until Johannes Papirio (or Paparo) the Popes Legate brought four Pals thither. whereupon some of our Chroniclers after him, give this note concerning Gelasius, who was at that time Archbishop of Armagh; that he is said to have been the first Archbishop, because he used the first Pall: and that others before him were called Archbishops and Primates in name only; for the reverence of Saint Patrick, as the Apostle of that Nation.

And indeed it might seem, that the complaint made by Anselm in his letters to Muriar dach King of Ireland, that Bishops here were consecrated by Bishops alone, might somewhat justify the truth of Giraldus his relation; if we did not find a further complaint there also, that they were often ordained by one Bishop only. But as this latter argueth, not the want of a competent number of Bishops in the land (for, as we shall hear presently, they had more than a sufficient number of such) but a neglect of the observance of the Canon provided by the Nicence Fathers in that behalf: so can it not rightly be inferred out of the former, that we had no Archbishops here at that time, but that the Bishops rather did fail much in the Canonical respect which they ought to show unto their Metropolitan. For that the Irish had their Archbishops (beside many other pregnant testimonies that might be produced) Pope Hildebrands own Brief doth sufficiently manifest; which is directed to Terdeluachus (or Tirlagh) the illustrious King of Ireland, the ARCHBISHOPS, Bishops, Abbots, Nobles, and all Christians inhabiting Ireland. And for the Archbishops of Armagh in particular; it appeareth most evidently by Bernard in the life of Malachias, that they were so far from being Metropolitans and Primates in name only; that they exercised much greater authority before they were put to the charges of fetching Pals from Rome, then ever they did afterward: and that they did not only consecrate Bishops, but erected also new Bishoprics, and Archbishoprics too sometimes, according as they thought fitting.

We read in Nennius, that at the beginning St. Patrick founded here 365. Churches, and ordained 365. Bishops, beside 3000. Presbyters. In process of time the number of Bishops was daily multiplied according to the pleasure of the Metropolitan, (whereof Bernard doth much complain) and that, not only so far, that every Church almost had a several Bishop: but also that in some Towns or Cities there were ordained more than one; yea and oftentimes Bishops were made without any certain place at all assigned unto them. And as for the erecting of new Archbishoprickes: if we believe our Legends, King Engus and S. Patrick, with all the people, did ordain, that in the City and See of Albeus (which is Emelye, now annexed to Cashell) should be the Archbishopric of the whole Province of Mounster. in like manner also, Brandubh King of the Lagenians, with the consent as well of the Laity as of the Clergy, did appoint that in the City of Fernes (which was the See of Moedog, otherwise called Edanus) should be the Archbishopric of all the Province of Leinster. But Bernard's testimony, we have no reason not to believe, relating what was known to be done in his own very time: that Celsus the Archbishop of Armagh, had of the new constituted another Metropolitical See, but subject to the first See, and to the Archbishop thereof. By which we may see that in the erection of new Archbishoprics and Bishoprics, all things were here done at home, without consulting with the See of Rome for the matter.

As for the nomination and confirmation of the Archbishops and Bishops themselves: we find the manner of advancing Saint Livinus to his Archbishopric thus laid down by Boniface in the description of his life. When Menalchus the Archbishop was dead, Calomagnus the King of Scots, and the troop of his Officers with the under-courtiers, and the concourse of all that country, with the same affection of heart cried out, that the holy Priest Livinus was most worthily to be advanced unto the honor of this order. The King (more devout than all of them) consenting thereunto, three or four times placed the blessed man in the chair of the Archbishopric with due honor, according to the will of the Lord. In like manner also did King Ecgfrid cause our Cuthbert to be ordained Bishop of the Church of Landisfarne; and King Pipin granted the Bishopric of Salzburg to our Virgilius: and Duke Gunzo would have conferred the Bishopric of Constance upon our Gallus; but that he refused it, and caused another upon his recommendation to be preferred thereunto.

In the book of Landaffe, which is called Tilo (either from Teliau the second Bishop of that place, whose life is largely there described; or rather from the place it self, which of old was called Telio ) we read that Germanus and Lupus did consecrate chief Doctor over all the Britons inhabiting the right side of Britanie, S. Dubricius, being chosen Archbishop by the King and all the Diocese: and that by the grant of Mouric the King, the Nobility, Clergy, and people, they appointed his Episcopal See to be at Landaff. that Oudoceus, the third Bishop after him, being elected by King Mouric, and the chief of the Clergy and Laity of the whole Diocese, was by them sent to the Archibishop of Canterbury for his consecration. that Gucaunus (the 26 ^th . Bishop of that Church) was consecrated by Dunstan Archbishop of Canterbury; the pastoral staff being given him in the Court by Edgar chief King of the English. that next after him, in the year. 983. election being made by the Kings and the whole Clergy and people of Glamorgan, and the pastoral staff given in the Court by Æthelred chief King of the English; Bledri was consecrated by the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is there named Albricus. (though in truth, at the year here assigned, Dunstan did still hold the place.) and that after his decease in the year 1022. by the election of the people and Clergy of Landaff and the Kings of the Britons (namely King Riderch that reigned at that time through all Wales, and Hivel the substitute of the King of Glamorgan) Joseph was consecrated Bishop by Aelnod Archbishop of Canterbury, at the word of Cnut King of England, in whose Court the Pastoral staff was given unto him.

Here in Ireland much after the same manner, M ^r . Campion himself setteth down, that to the Monarch was granted a negative in the nomination of Bishops at every vocation: the Clergy and Laity of the Diocese recommending him to their King, the King to the Monarch, the Monarch to the Archbishop of Canterbury. although this last clause be wrongly extended by him to the Bishops of the whole land, which properly belonged to the Ostmann strangers, that possessed the three cities of Dublin, Waterford, and Limrick. For these being a Colony of the Norwegians and Livonians, and so country-men to the Normans, when they had seen England subdued by the Conqueror, and Normans advanced to the chief archbishoprick there; would needs now assume to themselves the name of Normans also, and cause their Bishops to receive their consecration from no other metropolitan but the Archbishop of Canterbury. And forasmuch as they were confined within the walls of their own cities: the Bishops which they made had no other diocese to exercise their jurisdiction in, but only the bare circuit of those cities. Whereupon we find a Certificate made unto Pope Innocent the third in the year 1216. by the Archbishop of Tuam and his suffragans; that John Papiron the Legate of the Church of Rome coming into Ireland, found that Dublin indeed had a Bishop, but such a one as did exercise his Episcopal office within the walls only.

The first Bishop which they had in Dublin (as it appeareth by the Records of that Church) was one Donatus, or Dunanus, as others call him: upon whose death, in the year 1074. Gothric their King, with the consent of the Clergy and people of Dublin, chose one Patrick for their Bishop, and directed him into England to be consecrated by Lanfranc Archbishop of Canterbury: who sent him back with commendatory letters as well to the said Gothric King of the Ostmans, as to Terdeluacus the chief King or Monarch of the Irish. Hereupon, after the decease of this Patrick, in the year 1085. the same Terdeluacus and the Bishops of Ireland joined with the Clergy and people of Dublin, in the election of Donatus, one of Lanfrancs own Monks in Canterbury: who was by him there also consecrated. Then when he died, in the year 1095. his nephew Samuel, a monk of St. Albans but borne in Ireland, was chosen Bishop in his place by Murierdach King of Ireland, and the Clergy and people of the City: by whose common decree he was also sent unto Anselm Archbishop of Canterbury for his consecration. Not long after, the Waterfordians, following the example of the Dublinians, erected a Bishopric among themselves; and sent their new Bishop to Canterbury for his consecration. the manner of whose election the Clergy and people of Waterford in the letters which they wrote at that time unto Anselm, do thus intimate. We and our King Murchertach, and Dofnald the Bishop, and Dermeth our Captain the Kings brother, have made choice of this Priest Malchus, a monk of Walkeline Bishop of Winchester, the same man, without doubt, who was afterward promoted to the Bishopric of Lismore; so much commended by Bernard in the life of Malachias.

The last Bishop of Dublin in the year 1122. was sent unto Anselm's next successor for his consecration: touching which I have seen this writ of King Henry the first, directed unto him:

All the Burgesses of Dublin likewise, and the whole assembly of the Clergy, directed their joint letters to the Archbishop of Canterbury the same time: where in among other things they write thus. Know you for verity, that the Bishops of Ireland have great indignation toward us, and that Bishop most of all that dwelleth at Armagh: because we will not obey their ordination, but will always be under your government. Whereby we may see, that as the Ostmans were desirous to sever themselves from the Irish, and to be esteemed Normans rather: so the Irish Bishops on the other side, howsoever they digested in some sort the recourse which they had to Lanfranc and Anselm (who were two of the most famous men in their times, and with whom they themselves were desirous to hold all good correspondence) yet could they not well brook this continuation of their dependence upon a Metropolitan of another kingdom; which they conceived to be somewhat derogatory to the dignity of their own Primate. But this jealousy continued not long. for this same Gregory being afterwards made Archbishop of Dublin, and the Bishoprics here settled by Johannes Paparo: as well they of Dublin, as the others of Waterford and Limrick (for they also had one Patrick consecrated Bishop unto them by Theobald Archbishop of Canterbury) did ever after that time cease to have any relation unto the See of Canterbury.

And now to go forward: as the Kings and people of this land in those elder times kept the nomination of their Archbishops and Bishops in their own hands, and depended not upon the Popes provisions that way: so do we not find by any approved record of antiquity, that any Visitations of the clergy were held here in the Popes name; much less that any Indulgences were sought for by our people at his hands. For, as for the Charter of S. Patrick, (by some entitled, De antiquitate Avalonicâ ) wherein Phaganus and Deruvianus are said to have purchased ten or thirty years of Indulgences from Pope Eleutherius; and St. Patrick himself to have procured twelve years in his time from Pope Celestinus: it might easily be demonstrated (if this were a place for it) that it is a mere figment, devised by the Monks of Glastenbury. Neither do I well know, what credit is to be given unto that straggling sentence, which I find ascribed unto the same author. If any questions do arise in this Island, let them be referred to the See Apostolic. or that other decree, attributed to Auxilius, Patricius, Secundinus and Benignus. Whensoever any cause that is very difficult, and unknown unto all the Judges of the Scottish nations, shall arise; it is rightly to be referred to the See of the Archbishop of the Irish (to wit, Patrick) and to the examination of the Prelate thereof. But if there, by him and his wisemen, a cause of this nature cannot easily be made up: we have decreed, it shall be sent to the See Apostolic; that is to say, to the chair of the Apostle Peter, which hath the authority of the City of Rome. Only this I will say, that as it is most likely, that St. Patrick had a special regard unto the Church of Rome, from whence he was sent for the conversion of this Island: so if I myself had lived in his days, for the resolution of a doubtful question I should as willingly have listened to the judgment of the Church of Rome, as to the determination of any Church in the whole world; so reverend an estimation have I of the integrity of that Church, as it stood in those good days. But that St. Patrick was of opinion, that the Church of Rome was sure ever afterward to continue in that good estate, and that there was a perpetual privilege annexed unto that See, that it should never err in judgment, or that the Popes sentences were always to be held as infallible Oracles; that will I never believe: sure I am, that my country-men after him were of a far other belief; who were so far from submitting themselves in this sort to whatsoever should proceed from the See of Rome, that they oftentimes stood out against it, when they had little cause so to do. For proof whereof I need to seek no further, than to those very allegations which have been lately urged for maintenance of the supremacy of the Pope and Church of Rome in this Country.

First, M ^r . Coppinger cometh upon us, with this wise question. Was not Ireland among other Countries absolved from the Pelagian heresy by the Church of Rome, as Caesar Baronius writeth? then he setteth down the copy of S. Gregory's epistle, in answer unto the Irish Bishops that submitted themselves unto him. and concludeth in the end, that the Bishops of Ireland being infected with the Pelagian error, sought absolution first of Pelagius the Pope: but the same was not effectually done, until S. Gregory did it. But in all this, he doth nothing else but bewray his own ignorance. For neither can he show it in Caesar Baronius or in any other author whatsoever, that the Irish Bishops did ever seek absolution from Pope Pelagius; or that the one had to deal in any business at all with the other. Neither yet can he show that ever they had to do with Saint Gregory in any matter that did concern the Pelagian heresy. for these be dreams of Coppingers own idle head. The epistle of S. Gregory dealeth only with the controversy of the three chapters, which were condemned by the fifth general Council; whereof Baronius writeth thus. All the Bishops that were in Ireland, with most earnest study, rose up jointly for the defense of the Three Chapters. And when they perceived that the Church of Rome did both receive the condemnation of the Three Chapters, and strengthen the fifth Synod with her consent: they departed from her, and clave to the rest of the schismatics, that were either in Italy, or in Afric, or in other countries, animated with that vain confidence, that they did stand for the Catholic faith, while they defended those things that were concluded in the Council of Chalcedon. And so much the more fixedly (saith he) did they cleave to their error, because whatsoever Italy did suffer by commotions of war, by famine or pestilence, all these unhappy things they thought did therefore befall unto it, because it had undertaken to fight for the fifth Synod against the Council of Chalcedon.

Thus far Baronius: out of whose narration this may be collected, that the Bishops of Ireland did not take all the resolutions of the Church of Rome for undoubted oracles; but when they thought that they had better reason on their sides, they preferred the judgment of other Churches before it. Wherein how peremptory they were, when they wrote unto St. Gregory of the matter; may easily be perceived by these parcels of the answer, which he returned unto their letters. The first entry of your epistle hath notified, that you suffer a grievous perfecution • which persecution indeed, when it is not sustained for a reasonable cause, doth profit nothing unto salvation. and therefore it is very unfit, that you should glory of that persecution, as you call it, by which it is certain you cannot be promoted to everlasting rewards. And whereas you write, that since that time among other provinces Italy hath been most afflicted; you ought not to object that unto it as a reproach: because it is written: Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son that he receiveth. Then having spoken of the book that Pope Pelagius did write of this controversy (which indeed was penned by Gregory himself) he addeth. If after the reading of this book, you will persist in that deliberation, wherein now you are; without doubt you show, that you give yourselves to be ruled not by reason, but by obstinacy. By all which you may see, what credit is to be given unto the man, who would bear us in hand, that this epistle of St. Gregory was sent as an answer unto the Bishops of Ireland, that did submit themselves unto him: whereas (to say nothing of the copies, wherein this epistle is noted to have been written to the Bishops of Iberiâ, and not, in Hiberniâ ) the least argument of any submission doth not appear in any part of that epistle; but the whole course of it doth clearly manifest the flat contrary.

In the next place steppeth forth Osullevan Bear; who in his Catholic history of Ireland, would have us take knowledge of this, that when the Irish Doctors did not agree together upon great questions of Faith, or did hear of any new doctrine brought from abroad, they were wont to consult with the Bishop of Rome the Oracle of truth. That they consulted with the Bishop of Rome, when difficult questions did arise, we easily grant: but that they thought they were bound in conscience to stand to his judgment, whatsoever it should be, and to entertain all his resolutions as certain Oracles of truth; is the point that we would fain see proved. For this he telleth us, that when questions and disputations did arise here concerning the time of Easter and the Pelagian heresy; the Doctors of Ireland referred the matter unto the See Apostolic. Whereupon, the error of Pelagius is reported to have found no patron or maintainer in Ireland: and the common course of celebrating Easter was embraced both by the Northern Irish, and by the Picts and Britons, as soon as they understood the rite of the Roman Church. Which ( saith he ) doth not obscurely appear by the two heads of the Apostolic letters, related by Bede, lib. 2. cap. 19.

But that those Apostolic letters (as he calleth them) had that success which he talketh of, appeareth neither plainly nor obscurely by Bede, or any other authority whatsoever. The error of Pelagius, saith he, is reported to have found no patron or maintainer in Ireland. But who is he that reporteth so, beside Philip Osullevan? a worthy author to ground a report of antiquity upon: who in relating the matters that fell out in his own time, discovereth himself to be as egregious a liar, as any (I verily think) that this day breatheth in Christendom. The Apostolic letters he speaketh of, were written (as before hath been touched) in the year of our Lord DCXXXIX. during the vacancy of the Roman See, upon the death of Severinus. Our Countryman Kilianus repaired to Rome 47. years after that, and was ordained Bishop there by Pope Conon in the year DCLXXXVI. The reason of his coming thither, is thus laid down by Egilwardus or whoever else was the author of his life. For Ireland had been of old defiled with the Pelagian heresy, and condemned by the Apostolical censure, which could not be loosed but by the Roman judgment. If this be true: then that is false which Osullevan reporteth of the effect of his Apostolical Epistle, that it did so presently quash the Pelagian heresy, as it durst not once peep up within this Island.

CHAP. IX.

THe difference betwixt the Romans and the Irish in the celebration of Easter, consisted in this. The Romans kept the memorial of our Lord's resurrection upon that Sunday, which fell betwixt the XV. and the XXI. day of the Moon (both terms included) next after the XXI. day of March; which they accounted to be the seat of the Vernall aequinoctium, that is to say, that time of the Spring wherein the day and the night were of equal length. and in reckoning the age of the Moon they followed the Alexandrian cycle of XIX. years (whence our golden number had his original) as it was explained unto them by Dionysius Exiguus: which is the account that is still observed, not only in the Church of England, but also among all the Christians of Greece, Russia, Asia, Egypt, and Ethiopia; and was (since the time that I myself was borne) generally received in all Christendom, until the late change of the Kalendar was made by Pope Gregory the XIII ^th . The Northern Irish and Scottish, together with the Picts, observed the custom of the Britons: keeping their Easter upon the Sunday that fell betwixt the XIIII. and the XX. day of the Moon; and following in their account thereof, not the XIX. years computation of Anatolius, but Sulpicius Severus his circle of LXXXIIII. years. for howsoever they extolled Anatolius for appointing (as they supposed) the bounds of Easter betwixt the XIIII. and the XX. day of the Moon, yet Wilfride in the Synod of Strenshal chargeth them utterly to have rejected his cycle of XIX. years: from which therefore Cummianus draweth an argument against them; that they can never come to the true account of Easter, who observe the cycle of LXXXIIII. years.

To reduce the Irish unto conformity with the Church of Rome in this point, Pope Honorius (the first of that name) directed his letters unto them: Exhortintg them, that they would not esteem their own paucity, seated in the utmost borders of the earth, more wise than the ancient or moderne Churches of Christ through the whole world; and that they would not celebrate another Easter contrary to the Paschal computations, and the Synodal decrees of the Bishops of the whole world. and shortly after, the Clergy of Rome (as we have said) upon the death of Severinus, wrote other letters unto them to the same effect. Now where Osullevan avoucheth, that the common custom used by the Church in celebrating the feast of the Lord's resurrection was always observed by the Southerne Irish; and now embraced also by the Northern, together with the Picts and Britons (who received the faith from Irish Doctors) when they had knowledge given them of the rite of the Church of Rome: in all this (according to his common wont) he speaketh never a true word. For neither did the Southerne Irish always observe the celebration of Easter commonly received abroad: neither did the Northern Irish, nor the Picts, nor the Britons, many years after this admonition given by the Church of Rome, admit that observation among them. to speak nothing of his folly in saying, that the Britons received the faith from the Irish: when the contrary is so well known, that the Irish rather received the same from the Britons.

That the common custom of celebrating the time of Easter was not always observed by the Southerne Irish, may appear by those words of Bede, in the third book of his history and the third chapter. Porro gentes Scottorum, quae in australibus Hiberniae insulae partibus morabantur, jamdudum ad admonitionem Apostolicae sedis antistitis Paschacanonico ritu observare didicerunt. For if (as this place clearly proveth) the nations of the Scots, that dwelt in the Southern parts of Ireland, did learn to observe Easter after the canonical manner, upon the admonition of the Bishop of Rome: it is evident, that before that admonition they did observe it after another manner. The word jamdudum, which Bede here useth, is taken among authors oftentimes in contrary senses: either to signify a great while since, or else, but lately, or erewhile, In the former sense it must be here taken, if it have relation to the time wherein Bede did write his book: and in the latter also it may be taken, if it be referred to the time whereof he treateth, (which is the more likely opinion) namely to the coming of Bishop Aidan into England; which fell out about half a year, after that Honorius had sent his admonitorie letters to the Irish. who, as he was the first Bishop of Rome we can read of, that admonished them to reform their rite of keeping the time of Easter: so that the Irish also much about the same time conformed themselves herein to the Roman usage, may thus be manifested.

When Bishop Aidan came into England from the Island Hy, now called Y-Columkille; the College of Monks there was governed by Segenius, who in the inscription of the epistle of the clergy of Rome sent unto the Irish, is called Segianus. Now there is yet extant in Sir Robert Cottons worthy Librarie, an epistle of Cummianus directed to this Segienus (for so is his name there written) Abbot of Y-Columkille▪ wherein he plainly declareth, that the great cycle of DXXXII. years, and the Roman use of celebrating the time of Easter according to the same, was then newly brought in into this country. For the first year (saith he) wherein the cycle of DXXXII. years began to be observed by our men; I received it not, but held my peace, daring neither to commend it nor to dispraise it. That year being past, he saith he consulted with his ancients; who were the successors of Bishop Ailbeus, Queranus Coloniensis, Brendinus, Nessanus and Lugidus. who being gathered together in Campo-lene, concluded to celebrate Easter the year following together with the universal Church. But not long after (saith he) there arose up a certain whited wall, pretending to keep the tradition of the Elders; which did not make both one, but divided them, and made void in part that which was promised: whom the Lord (as I hope) will smite, in whatsoever manner he pleaseth.

To this argument drawn from the tradition of the elders, he maketh answer: that they did simply and faithfully observe that which they knew to be best in their days, without the fault of any contradiction or animosity, and did so recommend it to their posterity. and opposeth thereunto the unanimous rule of the Universal Catholic Church: deeming this to be a very harsh conclusion. Rome erreth, Jerusalem erreth, Alexandria erreth, Antioch erreth, the whole world erreth: the Scottish only and the Britons do alone hold the right. but especially he urgeth the authority of the first of these Patriarchicall Sees, which now (since the advancement thereof by the Emperor Phocas ) began to be admired by the inhabitants of the earth, as the place which God had chosen; whereunto, if greater causes did arise, recourse was to be had, according to the Synodical decree, as unto the head of cities. and therefore he saith, that they sent some unto Rome: who returning back in the third year, informed them, that they met there with a Grecian, and an Hebrew, and a Scythian, and an Egyptian in one lodging; and that they all, and the whole world too, did keep their Easter at the same time, when the Irish were dis-joined from them by the space of a whole month. And we have proved (saith Cummianus) that the virtue of God was in the relics of the holy Martyrs, and the Scriptures which they brought with them. For we saw with our eyes, a maid altogether blind opening her eyes at these relics, and a man sick of the palsy walking, and many devils cast out. Thus far he.

The Northern Irish and Albanian Scottish on the other side, made little reckoning of the authority, either of the Bishop or of the Church of Rome. And therefore Bede, speaking of Oswy king of Northumberland, saith that notwithstanding he was brought up by the Scottish, yet he understood that the Roman was the Catholic and Apostolic Church (or, that the Roman Church was Catholic and Apostolic) intimating thereby, that the Scottish, among whom he received his education, were of another mind. And long before that, Laurentius, Mellitus and Iustus (who were sent into England by Pope Gregory to assist Austin) in a letter which they sent unto the Scots that did inhabit Ireland (so Bede writeth) complained of the distaste given unto them by their country-men, in this manner. We knew the Britons, we thought that the Scots were better than they. But we learned by Bishop Daganus coming into this Island, and Abbot Columbanus coming into France; that the Scots did differ nothing from the Britons in their conversation. For Daganus the Bishop coming unto us, would not take meat with us, no not so much as in the same lodging wherein we did eat.

And as for miracles, we find them as rife among them that were opposite to the Roman tradition, as upon the other side. If you doubt it, read what Bede hath written of Bishop Aidan ( who of what merit he was, the inward Judge hath taught, even by the tokens of miracles; saith he) and Adamnanus of the life of S. Colme or Columkille. Whereupon Bishop Colman in the Synod at Strenshal frameth this conclusion. Is it to be believed, that Colme our most reverend father, and his successors, men beloved of God, which observed Easter in the same manner that we do, did hold or do that which was contrary to the holy Scriptures? seeing there were very many among them, to whose heavenly holiness the signs and miracles which they did, bare testimony: whom nothing doubting to be Saints, I desist not to follow evermore their life, manners, and discipline. What Wilfride replied to this, may be seen in Bede: that which I much wonder at, among the many wonderful things related of St. Colme by Adamnanus, is this▪ that where he saith, that this Saint, during the time of his abode in the abbay of Clone (now called Clonmacnosh) did by the revelation of the holy Ghost prophesy of that discord, which after many days arose among the Churches of Scotland (or Ireland) for the diversity of the feast of Easter: yet he telleth us not, that the holy Ghost revealed unto him, that he himself (whose example animated his followers to stand more stiffly herein against the Roman rite) was in the wrong, and ought to conform his judgment to the tradition of the Churches abroad. as if the holy Ghost did not much care, whether of both sides should carry the matter away in this controversy: for which (if you please) you shall hear a very pretty tale out of an old Legend, concerning this same discord whereof S. Colme is said to have prophesied.

Upon a certain time (saith my Author) there was a great Council of the people of Ireland in the white field: among whom there was contention about the order of Easter. For Lasreanus, the abbot of the monastery of Leighlin, unto whom there were subject a thousand & five hundred monks, defended the new order that lately came from Rome: but others defended the old. This Lasreanus or Lazerianus is the man, who in other Legends (of no other credit than this we now have in hand) is reported to have been the Bishop of Rome's Legate in Ireland; and is commonly accounted to have been the first Bishop of the Church of Leighlin. His principal antagonist at this meeting was one Munna, founder of the monastery which from his was called Teach-munna, that is, the house of Munna (in the Bishopric of Meath:) who would needs bring this question to the same kind of trial here, that Austin the monk is said to have done in England. In defense of the Roman order, Bede telleth us that Austin made this motion to the British Bishops, for a final conclusion of the business. Let us beseech God, which maketh men to dwell of one mind together in their fathers house; that he will vouchsafe by some heavenly signs to make known unto us, what tradition is to be followed, and by what way we may hasten to the entry of his kingdom. Let some sick man be brought hither; and by whose prayers he shall be cured, let his faith and working be believed to be acceptable unto God, and to be followed by all men.

Now Munna, who stood in defense of the order formerly used by the British and Irish, maketh a more liberal proffer in this kind, and leaveth Lasreanus to his choice. Let us dispute briefly ( saith he ) but in the name of God let us give judgment. Three things are given to thy choice, Lasreanus. Two books shall be cast into the fire, a book of the old order and of the new; that we may see whether of them both shall be freed from the fire. Or let two Monks, one of mine and another of thine, be shut up into one house: and let the house be burnt, and we shall see which of them will escape untouched of the fire. Or let us go unto the grave of a just Monk that is dead, and raise him up again: and let him tell us, after what order we ought to celebrate Easter this year. But Lasreanus being wiser than so, refused to put so great a matter to that hazard: and therefore returned this grave answer unto Munna; if all be true that is in the Legend. We will not go unto thy judgment: because we know that, for the greatness of thy labor and holiness, if thou shouldest bid that mount Marge should be changed into the place of the White field, and the White field into the place of mount Marge; God would presently do this for thy sake. So prodigal do some make God to be of miracles, and in a manner careless how they should fall; as if in the dispensing of them, he did respect the gracing of persons rather than of causes.

In what year this Council of the White field was held, is not certainly known: nor yet whether S. Munna be that whited wall, of whom we heard Cummianus complain. The Synod of Strenshal (before mentioned) was assembled long after, at Whitby (called by the Saxons Streanesheale) in Yorkshire, the year of our Lord DCLXIIII. for the decision of the same question. Concerning which, in the life of Wilfrid ( written by one Aeddi an acquaintance of his, surnamed Stephen; at the commandment of Acca, who in the time of Bede was Bishop of Hangustald or Hexham, in Northumberland) we read thus. Upon a certain time in the days of Colman metropolitan Bishop of the city of York, Oswi and Alhfrid his son being Kings; the Abbots and Priests and all the degrees of Ecclesiastical orders meeting together at the monastery which is called Streaneshel, in the presence of Hilde the most godly mother of that abbey, in presence also of the Kings and the two Bishops Colman and Aegelberht, inquiry was made touching the observation of Easter, what was most right to be held: whether Easter should be kept according to the custom of the Brittous and the Scots and all the Northern part, upon the Lord's day that came from the XIIII. day of the Moon until the XX. or whether it were better, that Easter Sunday should be celebrated from the XV. day of the Moon until the XXI. after the manner of the See Apostolic. Time was given unto Bishop Colman in the first place, as it was fit, to deliver his reason in the audience of all. Who with an undaunted mind made his answer, and said. Our fathers and their predecessors, who were manifestly inspired by the holy Ghost, as Columkille was, did ordain that Easter should be celebrated upon the Lord's day that fell upon the XIIII. Moon; following the example of John the Apostle and Evangelist, who leaned upon the breast of our Lord at his last Supper, and was called the lover of the Lord. He celebrated Easter upon the XIIII. day of the Moon: and we with the same confidence celebrate the same, as his Disciples Polycarpus and others did; neither dare we for our parts, neither will we change this.

Bede relateth his speech thus. This Easter which I use to observe, I received from my elders, who did send me Bishop hither: which all our fathers, men beloved of God, are known to have celebrated after the same manner. Which that it may not seem unto any to be contemned and rejected: it is the same which the blessed Evangelist John, the disciple specially beloved by our Lord, with all the Churches whech he did oversee, is read to have celebrated. Fridegodus a who wrote the life of Wilfrid at the command of Odo Archbishop of Canterbury) expresseth the same Verse, after this manner.

On the contrary side Wilfrid objected unto Colman and his Clerks of Ireland; that they with their complices, the Pictes and the Brittons, out of the two utmost Isles, and those not whole neither, did with a foolish labor fight against the whole world. And if that Columb of yours ( saith he ) yea and ours also if he were Christ's, was holy and powerful in virtues: could he be preferred before the most blessed Prince of the Apostles? unto whom the Lord said: Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; and I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Which last words wrought much upon the simplicity of King Oswy; who feared, that when he should come to the doors of the kingdom of heaven, there would be none to open, if he were displeased who was proved to keep the keys: but prevailed nothing with Bishop Colman; who for the fear of his country ( as Stephen in the life of Wilfrid writeth ) contemned the tonsure and the observation of Easter used by the Romans; and taking with him such as would follow him, that is to say, such as would not receive the Catholic Easter and the tonsure of the crown (for of that also there was then no small question) returned back again into Scotland.

CHAP. X.

IN Colmans room Wilfrid was chosen Archbishop of York: who had learned at Rome from Archdeacon Boniface, the course of Easter, which the schismatics of Britain and Ireland did not know ( so go the words of Stephen, the ancient writer of his life:) and afterward did brag, that he was the first which did teach the true Easter in Northumberland (having cast out the Scots) which did ordain the Ecclesiastical songs to be parted on sides, and which did command S. Benets rule to be observed by Monks. But when he was named to the Archbishopric, he refused it at the first (as William of Malmesbury relateth ) lest he should receive his consecration from the Scottish Bishops, or from such as the Scots had ordained, whose communion the Apostolic See had rejected. The speech which he used to this purpose, unto the Kings that had chosen him, is thus laid down by Stephen the writer of his life. O my honorable Lord's the Kings; it is necessary for us by all means providently to consider, how with your election I may (by the help of God) come to the degree of a Bishop, without the accusation of catholic men. For there be many Bishops here in Britain, none of whom it is my part to accuse, ordained within these fourteen years by the Brittons and Scots, whom neither the See Apostolic hath received into her communion, nor yet such as consent with the sch • smaticks. And therefore in my humility I request of you, that you would send me with your warrant beyond the Sea, into the country of France, where many Catholic Bishops are to be had; that without any controversy of the Apostolic See I may be counted meet, though unworthy, to receive the degree of a Bishop.

While Wilfrid protracted time beyond the Seas, King Oswy led by the advice of the Quartadecimans (so they injuriously nicknamed the British and Irish, that did celebrate Easter from the fourteenth to the twentieth day of the moon) appointed a most religious servant of God and an admirable Doctor that came from Ireland, named Ceadda, to be ordained Bishop of York in his room.

saith Fridegodus. This Ceadda, being the scholar of Bishop Aidan, was far otherwise affected to the British and Irish than Wilfrid was: and therefore was content to receive his ordination from Wini Bishop of the West-Saxons, and tow other British Bishops that were of the Quartadeciman party. For at that time (as Bede noteth) there was not in all Britain any Bishop canonically ordained (that is to say, by such as were of the communion of the Church of Rome ) except that Wini only.

But shortly after, the opposition betwixt these two sides grew to be so great, that our Cuthbert ( Bishop of Lindisfarne) upon his death-bed required his followers; that they should hold no communion with them which did swerve from the unity of the Catholic peace, either by not celebrating Easter in his due time, or by living perversely: and that they should rather take up his bones and remove their place of habitation, than any way condescend to submit their necks unto the yoke of schismatics. For the further maintaining of which breach also, there were certain decrees made both by the Romans, and by the Saxons that were guided by their institution. One of the instructions that the Romans gave them, was this: You must beware, that causes be not referred to other Provinces or Churches, which use another manner and another religion: whether to the Jews, which do serve the shadow of the Law rather than the truth▪ or to the Britons, who are contrary unto all men, and have cut themselves off from the Roman manner, and the unity of the Church; or to Heretics, although they should be learned in Ecclesiastical causes, and well studied. And among the decrees made by some of the Saxon Bishops (which were to be seen in the Library of Sir Thomas Knevet in Norfolk, and are still, I suppose, preserved there by his heir) this is laid down for one. Such as have received ordination from the Bishops of the Scots or Britain's, who in the matter of Easter and Tonsure are not united unto the Catholic Church, let them be again by imposition of hands confirmed by a Catholic Bishop. In like manner also let the Churches that have been ordered by those Bishops, be sprinkled with exorcized water, and confirmed with some service. We have no license also to give unto them Chrism or the Eucharist, when they require it; unless they do first profess, that they will remain with us in the unity of the Church. And such likewise as either of their nation, or of any other, shall doubt of their baptism, let them be baptized. Thus did they.

On the other side, how averse the British and the Irish were from having any communion with those of the Roman party; the complaint of Laurentius, Mellitus, and Iustus before specified, doth sufficiently manifest. And the answer is well known, which the seven British Bishops, and many other most learned men of the same nation, did return unto the propositions made unto them by Austin the Monk (who was sent unto their parts with authority from Rome:) that they would perform none of them, nor at all adneit him for their Archbishop. The Welsh Chroniclers do further relate, that Dinot the Abbot of Bangor produced diverse arguments at that time, to show that they did owe him no subjection: and this among others. We are under the government of the Bishop of Kaer-leon upon Vske, who under God is to oversee us, and cause us to keep the way spiritual. and Gotcelinus Bertinianus in the life of Austin: that for the authority of their ceremonies they did allege, that they were not only delivered unto them by Saint Eleutherius the Pope their first instructer at the first infancy almost of the Church, but also hitherto observed by their holy fathers who were the friends of God and followers of the Apostles: and therefore they ought not to change them for any new dogmatists. But above all others, the British Priests that dwelt in West-wales abhorred the communion of these new dogmatists above all measure: as Aldhelme Abbot of Malmesbury declareth at large in his Epistle sent to Geruntius King of Cornwall. where among many other particulars he showeth, that if any of the Catholics (for so he calleth those of his own side) did go to dwell among them; they would not vouchsafe to admit them unto their company and society, before they first put them to forty days penance. Yea, even to this day ( saith Bede, who wrote his history in the year DCCXXXI. ) it is the manner of the Brittons, to hold the faith and the religion of the English in no account at all, nor to communicate with them in anything more than with Pagans.

Whereunto those Verses of Taliessyn (honored by the Britons with the title of Ben Beirdh, that is, the chief of the Bardes or Wisemen ) may be added: (which show, that he wrote after the coming of Austin into England, and not 50. or 60. years before, as others have imagined.)

As also those others of Mantuan; which show that some took the boldness to tax the Romans of folly, impudency, and stolidity, for standing so much upon matters of human institution, that for the not admitting of them they would break peace there, where the Law of God and the Doctrine first delivered by Christ and his Apostles was safely kept and maintained.

By all that hath been said, the vanity of Osullevan may be seen, who feigneth the Northern Irish, together with the Picts and the Britons, to have been so obsequious unto the Bishop of Rome; that they reformed the celebration of Easter by them formerly used, as soon as they understood what the rite of the Roman Church was. Whereas it is known, that after the declaration thereof made by Pope Honorius and the Clergy of Rome; the Northern Irish were nothing moved therewith, but continued still their own tradition. And therefore Bede findeth no other excuse for Bishop Aidan herein; but that either he was ignorant of the canonical time, or if he knew it, that he was so overcome with the authority of his own nation, that he did not follow it: that he did it, after the manner of his own nation; and that he could not keep Easter contrary to the custom of them which had sent him. His successor Finan contended more fiercely in the business with Ronan his countryman; and declared himself an open adversary to the Roman rite. Colman that succeeded him, did tread just in his steps: so far, that being put down in the Synod of Streanshal, yet for fear of his country (as before we have heard out of Stephen, the writer of the life of Wilfrid ) he refused to conform himself; and chose rather to forgo his Bishopric, than to submit himself unto the Roman laws,

saith Fridegodus. Neither did he go away alone: but took with him all his countrymen that he had gathered together in Lindisfarne or Holy Island: the Scottish monks also that were at Rippon (in Yorkshire ) making choice rather to quit their place, than to admit the observation of Easter and the rest of the rites according to the custom of the Church of Rome. And so did the matter rest among the Irish about forty years after that: until their own countryman Adamnanus persuaded most of them to yield to the custom received herein by all the Churches abroad.

The Picts did the like not long after, under King Naitan: who by his regal authority commanded Easter to be observed throughout all his provinces according to the cycle of XIX. years (abolishing the erroneous period of LXXXIIII. years which before they used) and caused all Priests and Monks to be shorn croune-wise, after the Roman manner. The monks also of the Island of Hy or Y-Columkille, by the persuasion of Ecgbert (an English Priest, that had been bred in Ireland ) in the year of our Lord DCCXVI. forsook the observation of Easter and the Tonsure which they had received from Columkille a hundred and fifty years before, and followed the Roman rite; about LXXX. years after the time of Pope Honorius, and the sending of Bishop Aidan from thence into England. The Britons in the time of Bede retained still their old usage: until Elbodus (who was the chief Bishop of Northwales, and died in the year of our Lord DCCCIX. as Caradoc of Lhancarvan recordeth) brought in the Roman observation of Easter. which is the cause, why his disciple Nennius, designeth the time wherein he wrote his history, by the character of the XIX. years cycle, and not of the other of LXXXIV. But howsoever North-wales did; it is very probable that West-wales (which of all other parts was most eagerly bent against the traditions of the Roman Church) stood out yet longer. For we find in the Greek writers of the life of Chrysostom, that certain Clergy men which dwelt in the Isles of the Ocean, repaired from the utmost borders of the habitable world unto Constantinople, in the days of Methodius (who was Patriarch there, from the year DCCCXLII. to the year DCCCXLVII.) to inquire of certain Ecclesiastical traditions, and the perfect and exact computation of Easter. Whereby it appeareth, that these questions were kept still a foot in these Islands; and that the resolution of the Bishop of Constantinople was sought for from hence, as well as the determination of the Bishop of Rome, who is now made the only Oracle of the world.

Neither is it here to be omitted, that whatsoever broils did pass betwixt our Irish that were not subject to the See of Rome, and those others that were of the Roman communion: in the succeeding ages, they of the one side were esteemed to be Saints, as well as they of the other; Aidan for example and Finan, who were counted ringleaders of the Quartadeeiman party, as well as Wilfrid and Cuthbert, who were so violent against it. Yet nowadays men are made to believe, that out of the communion of the Church of Rome nothing but Hell can be looked for; and that subjection to the Bishop of Rome, as to the visible Head of the Universal Church, is required as a matter necessary to salvation. Which if it may go currant for good Divinity: the case is like to go hard, not only, with the twelve hundred British Monks of Bangor, who were martyred in one day by Edelfride king of Northumberland (whom our Annals style by the name of the Saints; ) but also with St. Aidan and St. Finan, who deserve to be honored by the English nation with as venerable a remembrance, as (I do not say, Wilfrid and Cuthbert; but) Austin the Monk and his followers. For by the ministry of Aidan was the kingdom of Northumberland recovered from paganism: (whereunto belonged then, beside the shire of Northumberland and the lands beyond it unto Edenborrow, Frith, Cumberland also and Westmorland, Lancashire, Yorkshire, and the Bishopric of Durham: ) and by the means of Finan, not only the Kingdom of the East-Saxons (which contained Essex, Middlesex, and half of Hertfordshire ) regained, but also the large Kingdom of Mercia converted first unto Christianity; which comprehended underit, Glocestershire, Herefordshire, Worcestershire, Warwickshire, Leicestershire, Rutlandshire, Northamptonshire, Lincolneshire, Huntingtonshire, Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire, Staffordshire, Darbyshire, Shropshire, Nottinghamshire, Chesshire, and the other half of Hertfordshire.

The Scottish that professed no subjection to the Church of Rome, were they, that sent preachers for the conversion of these countries; and ordained Bishops to govern them: namely, Aidan, Finan and Colman successively for the kingdom of Northumberland; for the East-Saxons, Cedd brother to Ceadda the Bishop of York before mentioned, for the Middle-Angles (which inhabited Leicestershire ) and the Mercians, Diuma (for the paucity of Priests, saith Bede, constrained one Bishop to be appointed over two people ) and after him Cellach and Trumhere. And these with their followers, notwithstanding their division from the See of Rome, were for their extraordinary sanctity of life and painfulness in preaching the Gospel (wherein they went far beyond those of the other side, that afterward thrust them out and entered in upon their labors) exceedingly reverenced by all that knew them: Aidan especially, who although he could not keep Easter (saith Bede) contrary to the manner of them which had sent him; yet he was careful diligently to perform the works of faith and godliness, and love, according to the manner used by all holy men. Whereupon he was worthily beloved of all, even of them also who thought otherwise of Easter than he did: and was had in reverence not only by them that were of meaner rank, but also by the Bishops themselves, Honorius of Canterbury, and Felix of the East-Angles. Neither did Honorius and Felix any other way carry themselves herein, than their predecessors Laurentius, Mellitus & Iustus had done before them: who writing unto the Bishops of Ireland, that dissented from the Church of Rome in the celebration of Easter and many other things; made no scruple to prefix this loving and respectful superscription to their letters. To our Lord's and most dear brethren, the Bishops or Abbots throughout all Scotland; Laurentius, Mellitus and Iustus Bishops, the servants of the servants of God. For howsoever Ireland at that time received not the same laws wherewith other nations were governed: yet it so flourished in the vigor of Christian doctrine, (as Abbot Jonah testifieth) that it exceeded the faith of all the neighbor nations; and in that respect was generally had in honor by them.

CHAP. XI

IT now remaineth that in the last place we should consider the Popes power in disposing the temporal state of this Kingdom: which either directly or indirectly, by hook or by crook, this grand Usurper would draw unto himself. First therefore Cardinal Allen would have us to know, that the Sea Apostolic hath an old claim unto the sovereignty of the country of Ireland; and that before the Covenants passed between King John and the same Sea. Which challenges (saith he) Princes commonly yield not up, by what ground soever they come. What Princes use to yield or not yield, I leave to the scanning of those, unto whom Princes matters do belong: for the Cardinals Prince I dare be bold to say, that if it be not his use to play fast and loose with other Princes, the matter is not now to do; whatsoever right he could pretend to the temporal state of Ireland, he hath transferred it (more than once) unto the Kings of England. and when the ground of his claim shall be looked into; it will be found so frivolous and so ridiculous, that we need not care three chippes, whether he yield it up or keep it to himself. For whatsoever become of his idle challenges: the Crown of England hath otherwise obtained an undoubted right unto the sovereignty of this country; partly by Conquest, prosecuted at first upon occasion of a Sociall war, partly by the several submissions of the chiefetaines of the land made afterwards. For whereas it is it free for all men, although they have been formerly quitt from all subjection, to renounce their own right: yet now in these our days (saith Giraldus Cambrensis, in his history of the Conquest of Ireland) all the Princes of Ireland did voluntarily submit, and bind themselves with firm bonds of faith and oath, unto Henry the second King of England. The like might be said of the general submissions made in the days of King Richard the second and King Henry the eighth: to speak nothing of the prescription of divers hundreds of years possession; which was the plea that Iephte used to the Ammonites, and is indeed the best evidence that the Bishop of Rome's own Proctors do produce for their Masters right to Rome it self.

For the Popes direct dominion over Ireland, two titles are brought forth; beside those covenants of King John (mentioned by Allen ) which he that hath any understanding in our state, knoweth to be clearly void and worth nothing. The one is taken from a special grant supposed to be made by the inhabitants of the country, at the time of their first conversion unto Christianity: the other from a right which the Pope challengeth unto himself over all Islands in general. The former of these was devised of late by an Italian, in the reign of King Henry the eighth; the later was found out in the days of King Henry the second: before whose time not one footestep doth appear in all antiquity of any claim that the Bishop of Rome should make to the dominion of Ireland; no not in the Popes own records, which have been curiously searched by Nicolaus Arragonius, and other ministers of his, who have purposely written of the particulars of his temporal estate. The Italian of whom I spake, is Polydore Vergil; he that composed the book De inventoribus rerum, of the first Inventers of things: among whom he himself may challenge a place for this invention; if the Inventers of lies be admitted to have any room in that company. This man being sent over by the Pope into England for the collecting of his Peterpence, undertook the writing of the history of that nation, wherein he forgot not by the way to do the best service he could to his Lord that had employed him thither. There he telleth an idle tale; how the Irish being moved to accept Henry the second for their King, did deny that this could be done otherwise than by the Bishop of Rome's anthoritie: because (forsooth) that from the very beginning, after they had accepted Christian Religion, they had yielded themselves and all that they had into his power. and they did constantly affirm (saith this fabler) that they had no other Lord, beside the Pope: of which also they yet do brag.

The Italian is followed herein by two Englishmen, that wished the Popes advancement as much as he; Edmund Campian and Nicholas Sanders. the one whereof writeth, that immediately after Christianity planted here, the whole Island with one consent gave themselves not only into the spiritual, but also into the temporal Jurisdiction of the See of Rome. the other in Polydores own words (though he name him not) that the Irish from the beginning, presently after they had received Christian Religion, gave up themselves and all that they had into the power of the Bishop of Rome; and that until the time of King Henry the second, they did acknowledge no other supreme Prince of Ireland, beside of the Bishop of Rome alone. For confutation of which dream, we need not have recourse to our own Chronicles: the Bull of Adrian the fourth, wherein he giveth liberty of King Henry the second to enter upon Ireland, sufficiently discovereth the vanity thereof. For, he there showing what right the Church of Rome pretended unto Ireland, maketh no mention at all of this (which had been the fairest and clearest title that could be alleged, if any such had been then existent in rerum naturâ ) but is fain to fly unto a far-fetched interest which he saith the Church of Rome hath unto all Christian Islands. Truly (saith he to the King) there is no doubt, but that all Islands unto which Christ the Sun of Righteousness hath shined, and which have received the instructions of the Christian faith, do pertain to the right of Saint Peter and the holy Church of Rome: which your Noblenesse also doth acknowledge.

If you would further understand the ground of this strange claim, whereby all Christian Islands at a clap are challenged to be parcel of St. Peters patrimony: you shall have it from Johannes Sarisburiensis, who was most inward with Pope Adrian, and obtained from him this very grant whereof now we are speaking. At my request (saith he) he granted Ireland to the illustrious King of England Henry the second, and gave it to be possessed by right of inheritance: as his own letters do testify unto this day. For all Islands, of ancient right, are said to belong to the Church of Rome, by the donation of Constantine, who founded & endowed the same. But will you see, what a goodly title here is, in the mean time? First, the Donation of Constantine hath been long since discovered to be a notorious forgery, and is rejected by all men of judgment as a senseless fiction. Secondly, in the whole context of this forged Donation I find mention made of Islands in one place only: where no more power is given to the Church of Rome over them, than in general over the whole Continent (by East and by West, by North and by South ) and in particular over Judea, Greece, Asia, Thracia, and Africa; which use not to pass in the account of St. Peters temporal patrimony. Thirdly, it doth not appear, that Constantine himself had any interest in the Kingdom of Ireland: how then could he confer it upon another? Some words there be in an oration of Eumenius the Rhetorician, by which peradventure it may be collected, that his father Constantius bare some stroke here: but that the Island was ever possessed by the Romans, or accounted a parcel of the Empire, cannot be proved by any sufficient testimony of antiquity. Fourthly, the late writers that are of another mind, as Pomponius Laetus, Cuspinian, and others, do yet affirm withal, that in the division of the Empire after Constantine's death, Ireland was assigned unto Constantine the eldest son: which will hardly stand with this donation of the Islands supposed to be formerly made unto the Bishop of Rome and his successors. Pope Adrian therefore, and John of Salisbury his sollicitor, had need seek some better warrant for the title of Ireland, than the Donation of Constantine.

John Harding in his Chronicle saith, that the Kings of England have right

which in another place he expresseth more at large, in this manner: Philip Osullevan on the other side, doth not only deny that Ireland was infected with any heresy: but would also have us believe, that the Pope never intended to confer the Lordship of Ireland upon the Kings of England. For where it is said in Pope Adrian’s Bull; Let the people of that land receive thee, and reverence thee as a Lord: the meaning thereof is, saith this Glozer, Let them reverence thee, as a Prince worthy of great honor; not as Lord of Ireland, but as a Deputy appointed for the collecting of the Ecclesiastical tribute. It is true indeed that King Henry the second, to the end he might the more easily obtain the Popes good will for his entering upon Ireland, did voluntarily offer unto him the payment of a yearly pension of one penny out of every house in the country: which (for ought that I can learn) was the first Ecclesiastical tribute that ever came unto the Popes coffers out of Ireland. But that King Henry got nothing else by the bargain but the bare office of collecting the Popes Smoke-silver (for so we called it here, when we paid it) is so dull a conceit; that I do somewhat wonder how Osullevan himself could be such a block-head, as not to discern the senselessness of it.

What the King sought for and obtained, is sufficiently declared by them that writ the history of his reign. In the year of our Lord MCLV. the first Bull was sent unto him by Pope Adrian: the sum whereof is thus laid down in a second Bull, directed unto him by Alexander the third, the immediate successor of the other. Following the steps of reverend Pope Adrian, and attending the fruit of your desire; we ratify and confirm his grant concerning the dominion of the KINGDOME of Ireland conferred upon you: reserving unto St. Peter and the holy Church of Rome, as in England so in Ireland, the yearly pension of one penny out of every house. In this sort did Pope Adrian, as much as lay in him, give Ireland unto King Henry, haereditario jure possidendam, to be possessed by right of inheritance; & withal sent unto him a ring of gold, set with a fair Emerauld, for his investiture in the right thereof: as Johannes Sarisburiensis, who was the principal agent betwixt them both in this business, doth expressly testify. After this, in the year MCLXXI. the King himself came hither in person: where the Archbishops and Bishops of Ireland received him for their KING and Lord. The King (saith John Brampton) received letters from every Archbishop and Bishop, with their seals hanging upon them in the manner of an Indenture; confirming the KINGDOME of Ireland unto him and his heirs, and bearing witness that they in Ireland had ordained him and his heirs to be their KINGS and Lord's forever. At Waterford ( saith Roger Howden) all the Archbishops, Bishops, and Abbots of Ireland came unto the King of England, and received him for KING and Lord of Ireland; swearing fealty to him and to his heirs, and power to reign over them forever: and hereof they gave him their Instruments. The Kings also and Princes of Ireland, by the example of the Clergy, did in like manner receive Henry King of England for Lord and KING of Ireland; and became his men ( or, did him homage) and swore fealty to him and his heirs against all men.

These things were presently after confirmed in the National Synod held at Casshell: the Acts whereof in Giraldus Cambrensis are thus concluded. For it is fit and most meet, that as Ireland by God's appointment hath gotten a Lord and a KING from England; so also they should from thence receive a better form of living. King Henry also at the same time sent a transcript of the Instruments of all the Archbishops and Bishops of Ireland, unto Pope Alexander: who by his Apostolical authority ( for so was it in those days of darkness esteemed to be) did confirm the KINGDOME of Ireland unto him and his heirs, (according to the form of the Instruments of the Archbishops & Bishops of Ireland) and made them KINGS thereof forever. The King also obtained further from Pope Alexander, that it might be lawful for him to make which of his sons he pleased, KING of Ireland, and to crown him accordingly; and to subdue the Kings and great ones of that land, which would not subject themselves unto him. Whereupon, in a grand Council held at Oxford in the year of our Lord MCLXXVII. before the Bishops and Peers of the Kingdom he constituted his son John KING of Ireland; according to that grant and confirmation of Pope Alexander. And to make the matter yet more sure, in the year MCLXXXVI. he obtained a new license from Pope Urban the third; that one of his sons, whom he himself would, should be crowned for the KINGDOME of Ireland. And this the Pope did not only confirm by his Bull: but also the year following purposely sent over Cardinal Octavian and Hugo de Nunant ( or Novant) his Legates into Ireland, to crown John the Kings son there.

By all this we may see, how far King Henry the second proceeded in this business: which I do not so much note, to convince the stolidity of Osullevan, who would fain persuade fools, that he was preferred only to be collector of the Popes Peterpence: as to show, that Ireland at that time was esteemed a Kingdom, and the Kings of England accounted no less than Kings thereof. And therefore Paul the fourth needed not make all that noise, and trouble the whole Court of heaven with the matter: when in the year MDLV. he took upon him by his Apostolical authority (such I am sure, as none of the Apostles of Christ did ever assume unto themselves) to erect Ireland unto the title and dignity of a Kingdom. Whereas he might have found, even in his own Roman Provincial, that Ireland was reckoned among the Kingdoms of Christendom, before he was borne. Insomuch, that in the year MCCCCXVII. when the Legates of the King of England and the French Kings Ambassadors fell at variance in the Council of Constance for precedency; the English Orators, among other arguments, alleged this also for themselves. It is well known, that according to Albertus Magnus and Bartholomaeus in his book De proprietatibus rerum, the whole world being divided into three parts (to wit, Asia, Africa and Europe) Europe is divided into four Kingdoms: namely, the Roman for the first, the Constantinopolitane for the second, the third the Kingdom of Ireland which is now translated unto the English, and the fourth the Kingdom of Spain. Whereby it appeareth, that the King of England and his Kingdom are of the more eminent ancient Kings and Kingdoms of all Europe: which prerogative the Kingdom of France is not said to obtain. And this have I here inserted the more willingly, because it maketh something for the honor of my Country (to which, I confess, I am very much devoted) and in the printed Acts of the Council it is not commonly to be had.

But now cometh forth Osullevan again, and like a little fury flieth upon the English-Irish Priests of his own religion, which in the late rebellion of the Earl of Tirone did not deny that Hellish doctrine, fetched out of Hell for the destruction of Catholics, that it is lawful for Catholics to bear arms and fight for Heretics against Catholics and their country. or rather (if you will have it in plainer terms) that it is lawful for them of the Romish Religion, to bear arms and fight for their Sovereign and fellow-subjects that are of another profession, against those of their own religion that traitorously rebel against their Prince and Country. and to show, how mad and how venomous a doctrine they did bring (these be the caitiffes own terms) that exhorted the laity to follow the Queens side: he setteth down the censure of the Doctors of the University of Salamanca and Vallodilid, published in the year MDCIII. for the justification of that Rebellion, and the declaration of Pope Clement the eights letters touching the same; wherein he signifieth that the English ought to be set upon no less than the Turks, and imparteth the same favors unto such as set upon them, that he doth unto such as fight against the Turks. Such wholesome directions doth the Bishop of Rome give unto those that will be ruled by him: far different (I wisse) from that holy doctrine, wherewith the Church of Rome was at first seasoned by the Apostles. Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers; for there is no power but of God: was the lesson that S. Paul taught to the ancient Romans. Where if it be demanded; whether that power also, which persecuteth the servants of God, impugneth the faith, and subverteth religion, be of God? our countryman Sedulius will teach us to answer with Origen; that even such a power as that, is given of God, for the revenge of the evil, and the praise of the good. although he were as wicked, as either Nero among the Romans, or Herod among the Jews: the one whereof most cruelly persecuted the Christians, the other Christ himself.

And yet when the one of them swayed the scepter, Saint Paul told the Christian Romans; that they must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake: and of the causeless fear of the other, these Verses of Sedulius are solemnly sung in the Church of Rome, even unto this day.

a better paraphrase whereof you cannot have, than this which Claudius hath inserted into his Collections upon St. Matthew. That King which is borne, doth not come to overcome Kings by fighting, but to subdue them after a wonderful manner by dying: neither is he borne to the end that he may succeed thee, but that the world may faithfully believe in him. For he is come, not that he may fight being alive, but that he may triumph being slain: nor that he may with gold get an army unto himself out of other nations, but that he may shed his precious blood for the saving of the nations. Vainly didst thou by envying fear him to be • thy successor, whom by believing thou oughtest to seek as thy Savior: because if thou diddest believe in him, thou shouldest reign with him; and as thou hast received a temporal kingdom from him, thou shouldest also receive from him an everlasting. For the kingdom of this Child is not of this world; but by him it is that men do reign in this world. He is the Wisdom of God, which saith in the Proverbs: By me Kings reign. This Child is the Word of God: this Child is the Power and Wisdom of God: If thou canst, think against the Wisdom of God: thou workest thine own destruction, and dost not know it. For thou by no means shouldest have had thy kingdom, unless thou hadst received it from that Child which now is borne.

As for the Censure of the Doctors of Salamanca and Vallodilid: our Nobility and Gentry, by the faithful service which at that time they performed unto the Crown of England, did make a real confutation of it. Of whose fidelity in this kind I am so well persuaded, that I do assure myself, that neither the names of Franciscus Zumel and Alphonsus Curiel (how great School-men soever they were) nor of the Fathers of the Society (Johannes de Ziguenza, Immanuel de Roias, and Gaspar de Mena ) nor of the Pope himself, upon whose sentence they wholly ground their Resolution; either then was or hereafter will be of any force, to remove them one whit from the allegiance and duty which they do owe unto their King and Country. Nay I am in good hope, that their loyal minds will so far distaste that evil lesson, which those great Rabbies of theirs would have them learn; that it will teach them to unlearne another bad lesson, wherewith they have been most miserably deluded. For whereas heretofore wise men did learn to give credence to the truth, by whosoevers mouth it should be delivered: now men are made such fools, that they are taught to attend in the doctrine of Religion, not what the thing is that is said, but what the person is that speaketh it.

But how dangerous a thing it is, to have the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ in respect of persons; and to give entertainment to the truth, not so much for it self as for the regard that is had to the deliverer of it: I wish men would learn otherwise, than by woeful experience in themselves. The truth (saith Claudius) is to be loved for it self, not for the Man, or for the Angel, by whom it is preached. For he that doth love it in respect of the preachers of it, may love lies also, if they peradventure shall deliver any. as here without all peradventure, the Pope and his Doctors have done: unless the teaching of flat Rebellion and high Treason may pass in the account of Catholic verities. The Lord of his mercy open their eyes, that they may see the light; and give them grace to receive the love of the truth, that they may be saved. The Lord likewise grant (if it be his blessed will) that Truth and Peace may meet together in our days, that we may be all gathered into one fold under one shepherd, and that the whole earth may be filled with his glory. Amen, Amen.

Faults in some Copies.

IN the Jesuits Challenge, pag. 3. lin. 2. read, contrary. pag. 4. lin. 9. for should, read shall.

In the Answer, pag. 4. l. 26. likewise. p. 5. l. 21. satisfy. p. 12. l. 7. continued. p. 16. l. 22. Penitentiall. p. 26. l. 6. knew. p. 27. l. 26. Augustine. p. 50. l. 23. ( saith ⁿ Fulgentius) p. 51. l. 6. when he • s found to be that. p. 62. l. 3. Antoninus. p. 64. l. 12. after Christ. p. 72. l. 4. for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 put 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 75. l. 6. cresse out, of Mets first and afterwards. p. 76. l. 3. Carisiacum or Cressy. p. 96. l. 9. secretly. p. 123. l. 26. commanded. p. 124. l. 5. sins. p. 126. l. 17. intercession. ibid. l. 19. for the comma put a full point; and in the next line for the full po • nt put a comma. p. 136. l. 1. Anastasius. p. 139. l. 4. Scriptures. ibid. l. 7. Levite. 146. l. 31. instrumentally. p. 147. l. 22. death. pag. 154. l. 25. Augustine. p. 156. l. 2. and p. 162. l. 19. medicine. p. 171. l. 16. the p. 172. l. 14. for these, read their. p. 285. l. 2. Clympiodorus. p. 188. l. 10. (about 243. p. 190. l. 4. who very. p. 194 l. 16. (with. ibid. l. 18. for pid read paid. p. 195. l. 6. intended. p. 205. l. 15. Halleluia. p. 206. l. 8. for drive, read not drive. p. 221. l. 1. write, p. 226. l. 19. in the Roman Pontifical. p. 228. l. 17. apocryphal. p. 234. l. 7. entering again into. p. 253. l. 8. form. p. 264. l. 5. kinds. p. 270. l. 18. for ceasing, read casing. p. 277. l. 26. ascension. p. 281. l. 23. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 p. 284 l. 5. expounding that place in. p. 291. l. 1. entering again into. p. 307. l. 14. apocryphal; p. 310 l. 1. cross out, Vs. p. 323. l. 17. Steuchus. p. 328. l. 20, 21. with that which Olympiodorus writeth upon the same chapt er. p. 330. l. 3. divisiun. p. 343. l. 5. cross out the last comma. l. 22. palace. p. 359. l. 28. of it. p. 361. l.. 27. judgment. p. 368. l. 6. for giveth, read goeth. p. 376. l. 25. sister. p. 379. l. 12. coming. p. 391. l. 26. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 p. 395. l. 26. for depravation, r. deprivation. p. 398. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . l. 18. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 p. 427. l. 9. for excepting r. accepting. l. 15. invocation. l. 16. salvation. l. 18. noted. l. 20. call. p. 428. l. 19. instead of for, r. of. p. 437. l. 6. Anastasius. p. 439. l. 6. were in. p. 441. l. 16. lliads. p. 443. l. 4. tried. p. 449. l. 11. congruity. p. 453. l. 14. here a. p. 454. l. 25. there of. p. 461. l. 26. descend. p. 469. l. 17. of Ang. p. 471. l. 30. Collections. p. 472. l. 5. Colossians. l. 22. Phrygia. p. 473. l. 6. for mad, r. made. l. 18. the word. p. 476. l. 17. (saith. l. 28. speak.) p. 491. l. 4. m Blessed. p. 492. l. 10. despise. p. 497, 500, 501. and 504. in the title, r. Of Images. p. 497 l. 21. for confirm, rs. conform. p. 503. l. 12. Origen. p. 505. l. 8. deaes and divers. p. 506 l. 13. prevail. p. 508. l. 9. a whoring. p. 516. l. 15. destitute. p. 518. l. 3. pu • e. pag. 521. l. 19. to bew, p. 525. l. 15. observeth. p. 535. l. 12. pray. p. 538. l. 6. iuvet. p. 539. l. 30. hortatu{que} p. 540. l. 2. ex fracto. p. 541. l. 17. inspiration. p. 547. l. 27. hereby. p. 548. l. 10. therefore. p. 556. l. 7. in the. p. 557. l. 6. freely. p. 561. l. 10. receiving. p. 569. l. 24. substantial.

In the Margent. Pag. 17. after the letter i, lin. 3. read Monasterii. p. 29. g. l. 10. praescientiam. p. 31. n. l. 1. in 2. 2. p. 42. k. l. 8. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . l. lin. 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 43. 0. l. 8. presbyter. p. 45. b. l. 2. videtis. l. 8. apud Fulgentium in fine libelli de Baptismo AEthiopis; Bedam, &c. p. 46. l. ult. Psalmum. p. 49. l. 14. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 50. n. l. 6. invenitur. Fulgentius (in fine libelli de Baptismo AEthiopis) Augustini nomine citatus apud Bed. &c. p. 54. a. l. 1 • . 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 66. r. l. 5. divinâ autem illum. p. 72. p. l. 1. Removeantur. p. 73. t. l. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 74. c. l. 7. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 p. 76. i. l. 2. effieitur. ibid. k. Suprà. p. 77. r. l. 1. mysterium. p. 82. h. l. 8. College. p. 87. l. lin. 16 for 162. read 262. p. 88. o. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. q. l. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 94. l. l. 25. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ibid. l. 30 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 104. l. lin. ult. inter. p. 111. o. l. 10. quod. p. 116. g. l. 3 non p. 119 s. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 p. 121. g. l. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 123 a l. 3. Sacerdotio. p. 124. g. l. 6. Theophyl act in John. 8. p. 126. u. l. 11. Vossio. p. 128. f. l. 14. inedit. ibid. k. l. 3. misericordiam. p. 129. * l. 1. for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , r. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 143. i. l. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 152. t. l. 2. ignoret. p. 156. l. lin. ult. Aquisgran. sub Ludovico Pio, cap. 37. p. 157. m. l. 1. illum. ibid. l. 27. Iidem. p. 167. c. l. 13 quaest. p. 171. o. l. 33. ostendendi. p. 177. x. l. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. y. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 180. h. l. 18. for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 182. s. l. 10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 187. m. l. 17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 p. 188. o. l. 27. corripimur. p. 189. p. l. 23. after conversat. insert this parenthesis (cuius author Eligius Noviomensis) p. 192. d. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 196. d. l. 4. offerimus. ibid. l. 13. cross out, & 178. ibid. g. l. 8. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 197. i. l. 15. blot out the point after 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. k. l. 2. Apostolis. p. 198. n. l. 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 p. 199. s. l. 3; fruntur. ibid. l. 5. contextione. p. 202. h. l. 25. refern. p. 205. o. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 p. 206. u. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 208. c. l. 6. quos. p. 209. g. l. 4. Gra. câ. p. 210. n. l. 4. Beneventani) p. 211. r. l. 10. for in r. ex. p. 213. y. l. 6. Menesi • . p. 214. § l. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 215. * l. 19. pareret. p. 218. i. l. 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 l. 13. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 p. 222. l. 6. consequuntur. ibid. y. l. ult. col. 228. e. p. 228. q. l. 2. Apocrypha. p. 231. a. l. 14. invenire. p. 232. c. l. 10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 235. q. l. 10. praecesserunt videantur usque ad iudiciidiem, per plurimum scilicet temporis, debitâ sibi remuneratione, &c. p. 236. x. l. 29. for 206. r. 220. p. 237. a. l. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. c. l. 22. Ephesius. p. 238. * l. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 l. 8. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. • . l. 14. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . & l. 17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 241. k. l. 6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 245. a. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 246. f. l. 6. Euchologio, p. 247. m. l. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 248. n. l. 6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 253. h. l. 1. Volaterran. ibid. l. 6. Rupe. p. 254. o. l. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 255. r. l. 12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 p. 260. e. l. 10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 262. d. l. 29. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 263. el. 16. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 264. h. l. 3, 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 265. l. lin 8. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. l 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. l. 13. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. l. ult 138. p. 269. l. 3, 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 272. s. l. 22. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. l. 37. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 p. 273. t. l. 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. l. 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 275. h. l. 6. for aufe • e, r. offerre. p. 278. m. l. 2. for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , r. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 282. g. l. 24. donec. p. 284. p. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 286. all. 10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 287. h. l. 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. l. 11. Asterius. p. 290. s. l. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 291. z, l. 11. cross out in. ibid. l. 14. Lugd. p. 292. l. lin. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 293. n. l. 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. r. l. ult. intravit. p. 294. u. l. 6. cross out, in fine. p. 295. z. l. 6. paupertatis. p. 297. h. l. 10. infernum. p. 299. q. l. 3. infernum ibid. s. l. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. u. l. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 300. x. l. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; Ira. ibid. z. l. 11. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . l. 18. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 301. g. l. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. m. l. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. n. l. 4. laudantes. p. 303. z. l. 1. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 308. y. l. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 313. y. l. 1. for mortuorum, r. mortuum. p. 318. l. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. *. l. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. m. l. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 319. p. l. 12. uruntur. ibid. l. 14. m. Annaeus Seneca, lib. 8. ibid. r. l. 10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 323. o. l. 19. falso. p. 325. c. l. 1. Ibidem in. p. 327. s. l. 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 328. u. l. 8. recidant. ibid. x. l. 4, 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. z. in stead of the Latin, put the Greek. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; Olympiod. Caten. Graec. in Job 17. p. 333. h. l. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 342. * l. 13, 14. phasada for corruption. p. 343. s. l. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 346. u. l. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. v. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 347. b. l. 2, 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 348. d. s. 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 349. h. l. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 350. m. l. 10. cr • sse out the comma. p. 351. s. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 352. a. l. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. l. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 353. b. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibl. 6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 357. n. l. 25. Num. 16. 30, 33. ib. o. l. 10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 361. dil. 10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. 18, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. 24. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 362. h. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 363. s. l. ult. for 238. put 237. p. 364. t. l. 6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. x. l. i. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 366. l. 1. c. Autholog. ib. e. l. 8, 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 367. a. apud. p. 3 • 9. r. put the comma before, not after 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 370. b. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 371. k. l. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. lin. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. o. l. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 376. k. l. 4. positam p. 377. l. lin. 18. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibm. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. 18. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. n. l. ult. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; p. 378. o. l. 12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 379. u. l. 31. Numer. p. 383. k. l. 2. cresse out, 294. &. p. 384. r. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 386. * l. 16. for 349. r. 939. ibid. l. 13. Ad. p. 387. a. l. 17 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. 19. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 391. a. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 394. c. l. 10. Spoletinus. p. 401. z. l. 6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 401. l. lin. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 404. r. l. 18. for 308. put 309. p. 407. i. l. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. k. l. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 422. 0. l. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. 19. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ib. l. 20. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 423. r. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. s. l. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 425, x. l. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 428. b. l. 11, 12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 43. n. l. ult. for 142. put 241. p. 432. o. for contr. put conc. p. 436. • . l. 9, supplicia. ib. g. l. 5. for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , put 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , p. 4. • 7. h. l. 25. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , p. 43. 8. l. 1. k. Sic, p. 440. q. l. 8. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. 29 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 44. u. l. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. z. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. 7. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 44, 2. a. l. 15. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. 22. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , p. 444. d. l. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 446. l. lin. 4, 5. for initio pag. 392. put pag. 435. ad. y. literam. p. 452. * l. 16. quaestiones, ib. l. 18. for, auctorum, r. sanctorum. p. 453. m. l. 16. Vi, p. 457. u. l. 6. for, audiens, r. audens, p. 458. g. l. ult. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 60. k. l. 44. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. 14. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. 16. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. 27. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ib. l. 29. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. 12. in. Matth. and, in Eclogis. ib. l. lin. 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 461. m. l. 7. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. n. l. 2, • . 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ib. o. l. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 462. q. l. 20. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. r. l. ult. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 463. l. 5, 6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. 26. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , p. 46 • . y. l. 7. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , p. 46. *. l. 2. Feirand, p. 469. t. l. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. u. l. 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l. • 0. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , p. 473. 1. l. 4. Origin ib. l. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 474. o. l. 5. quirogae. ib. p. l. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 475. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 476. u. l. 8. honorari, p. 477. a. l. 7. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ib. d. l. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , lin. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ib. e. l. ult. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , p. 485. h. l. 18. AEneid, p. 490. d. l. 2. tribulationis • p. 491. q. l. 1. Miserere, p. 502. x. l. 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ib. z. l. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 506. u. l. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , l. 6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 507. z. l. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , p. 508. b. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , p. 509. l. 17. for, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , r. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 514. l. 1. a. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. • 16. l. 1. f. Quis. à nostrūm p. 518. x. l. 3. istis, r. estis, p. 519. v. l. 5. ut sit. p. 523. l. in. 22. aliqua, l. 27. aequitatem, inesse, p. 526. a. appetere, p. 537. i. Prosper, p. 538. k. l. 11. cùm, p. 540. * l. 25. Baron, p. 542. x. l. 2. viribus, p. 543. a. l. ult. Augustini, p. 548. c. l. 2. quam, p. 553. *. l. 5. merue. p. 554. * l. 7. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , p. 555. g. l. 10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l, 17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. l, 21. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 556. m. lin. 5. Proaemium. ib. n. l. 4, 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ib. p. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p 557. q. l. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. s. l. 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. t. l. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ib. u. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , p. 5 • 8. x. l. 10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ib. a. l. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . l. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . l. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . l. 6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , 18. after 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . put a full point; and after 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in lin 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . l. 11. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . p. 562. k. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , p. 563. n. l. 18. resecat, ib. p. 3. comparari, p. 564. q. l. 6. blot out. the point. after 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . ibid. r. l. 4, 5. read the place thus; quippiam iustum, non respondebo, sed meum iudicem deprecabor. Veiut si apertiùs fa • catur, dicens: Etsi ad opus virtutis excrevero, &c. p. 565. t. l 2. Beda, p. 573. a. l. 3. bona, p. 576. q. Enchirid, p. 580. p. 1. 10. condignae, p. 58. 1. q. l. 8. quidam, p. 582. v. l. 4. Origin, ib. z. l. 15. Ca • sidor, ib. a. l. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

In the Catalogue of the Authors at the end; refer Tatianus to they year 170. at the year 290. put Pamphilus, for Pamphylus. at the year 475. Faustus Regensis, for Repensis. refer Concilium Aquisg • anense sub Pipino, to the year 836. at the year •• 3. 〈◊〉 Asser Menevensis be placed.