Doyle. We will not express any opinion on Lord Wellesley's (the then Viceroy) declaration that 'Magee manifestly got the worst of it.' But it was a pretty quarrel indeed; and high was the interest occasioned by this clash of crosiers,' in which the high rank of one disputant, and the brilliant ability and considerable learning of the other, drew the attention of the whole country. We must find room for one of Dr. Doyle's characteristic objurgations :

'J. K. L. regretted to hear from such high authority as Dr. Magee that at the present day those whom your grace considers "the National Clergy are in a state little short of persecution." I know the nature of persecution so well that I shudder at the thought of its being revived in this country against any set of men, and more especially against the Clergy of the Established Church, many of whom, in my opinion, deserve even the praises bestowed upon them all by your Grace; but hitherto, I must confess, I considered them, in a temporal point of view, the most happy, if not the only happy class of persons in Ireland ;-their dignitaries all in splendour, amassing wealth almost beyond calculation, the parochial clergy enjoying sinecures, that otium cum dignitate which the Roman philosopher preferred to the dignity of a consul, or even to the power and privileges of a dictator. But how much we are deceived, and how true it is that no man lives contented with his lot!' (vol. i. p. 211).

His pen was never idle for long together; and the next year (1823) saw another lengthy publication, entitled 'A Vindication of the Religious and Civil Principles of the Irish Catholics, in a letter addressed to the Marquis Wellesley, by J. K. L.,' which produced a powerful effect in encouraging the Roman Catholics, depressed though they were with so many failures in their endeavours to obtain religious emancipation, and in rekindling the agitation, which, in a few more years, was at length crowned with success. The Bishop removed about this time from Carlow itself to Old Derrig, a short distance into the country. The house, we are told,

6

was a large, wild, and neglected, though picturesque place, scantily furnished, except with old books, especially Latin. His visitors wanted nothing, because (as went his apology for this) S. Paul said that Bishops should be hospitable. His own usual mode of living was as simple as possible; his little S. Bridget's Chapel in the garden was a room about twelve feet long, and about ten in breadth, with plain whitewashed walls, and there he daily said mass, and there I have seen tears roll abundantly from his eyes after the consecration in the Holy Sacrifice. But, oh! our evening conversations with a chosen few-the wonderful versatility of thought and language—the sudden and yet connected transitions from divine subjects to the most amusing trifles! We would often have, in half

an-hour, quotations from Job, David, Augustine, Byron, Moore, Shakespeare, and Swift-in a word, hours would seem moments in his company' (i. p. 303).

Much is said by his biographer of his self-denying way of life; and in 1824, when there was a potato famine in Ireland, and great distress in consequence among the poor, the Bishop's efforts were taxed to the utmost to afford relief to the starving peasantry. Some remarkable details are given of this :

'On this trying occasion Dr. Doyle gave to these poor not only what he had received from public munificence, and what he had procured from private personal entreaty-laboriously, unceasingly, imploringly exerted-but he also bestowed on them the very last shilling of his official income. "It so happened at this time that his clothes (contrary to his usual habit) were painfully shabby, and his hat miserably worn. All those acquainted with his character were well aware that, so far from purchasing new clothes, he would not even wear them in this time of universal famine and starvation. It was by his own singular personal efforts that 2,000 persons were fed every day at the College, at the Convent, and at the public soupkitchen. During this time his brother, the Rev. Peter Doyle, came to see him, and observing the dress and the general appearance of the Bishop, was astonished to see his clothes so shabby, and he therefore begged to present him with 25% to get a new outfit. When his brother had taken leave, the Bishop laughingly said, "Poor Peter is ashamed of me, and has given me 257. (as he said) to keep the life in me by warm clothing; but he has done more than he fancied, as I shall, of course, give it to my poor on this day, and keep the life in hundreds of persons for many years yet to come. Whatever I am," he continued, "I am sure I am not the worse for having an old coat and an old hat."

Immediately after this visit of his brother, he came to the College one morning to breakfast, and having met the President and Professors, said "Gentlemen, you are each to give me five guineas for my poor. I myself shall sell, on this week, some silver tankards which I have received as presents. I shall dispose also of my gold watch, and I have already made arrangements to sell, to the Bishop of another diocese, some chalices which we do not want." "Oh! my Lord," said Dr. Fitzgerald, "surely you do not mean to sell the chalices." "Sir," he replied, "be assured I will sell them, and all I have in the world beside, in the present necessity. Surely, you would not have me to preserve the mere metal in which Our Lord temporarily resides in His Sacramental form, and let perish the living tabernacle, the faithful hearts of my own poor, suffering people, where He and the Holy Ghost permanently, cherishingly dwell, as their own dearly loved habitation (i. p. 319).

The Bishop had probably in mind the similar words of S. Ambrose,

Another incident which marked this year was Dr. Doyle's letter on the reunion of the Churches (of England and of Rome), which he thought 'would be the best mode of pacifying Ireland, and of consolidating the interests of the Empire.' This letter was addressed to Mr. Robinson (afterwards Earl of Ripon), who was at that time Chancellor of the Exchequer, and who had said, during a debate in the House of Commons, that 'he was anxious to see the Protestant and Catholic Churches re-united.' In this letter, the Bishop declares that 'the points of agreement between the Churches were numerous, those on which the parties hesitated few, and apparently not the most important.' After suggesting that if Protestant and Catholic divines of learning and a conciliatory character' were summoned by the Crown to ascertain the points of agreement and difference between the Churches, and 'the result of their conferences were made the basis of a project to be treated on between the heads of the Church of Rome and of England, the result might be more favourable than at present would be anticipated.'

After drawing out a list of points to be discussed, he continued that the existing diversity of opinion arose in some cases from certain forms of words which admitted of satisfactory explanation, or from the ignorance or misconceptions which ancient prejudice and ill-will produce and strengthen.

The proposal, as coming from a Bishop of the RomanoIrish hierarchy, was a remarkable one. It attracted much attention from both sides, though some pronounced it 'a visionary plan:' and it is remarkable and significant that so keen a thinker and Catholic-minded a man as Alexander Knox declared it impracticable except by a complete subjugation' of the Church of England to that of Rome.

There could not be the least hesitation at the present day in assenting to this opinion. Circumstances have completely altered, and the relations between the Roman and Anglican Communions are far from being what they were even in Bishop Doyle's day. At that time, for anything we can see, a reunion may have been feasible; or at all events within the limits of possibility. Now the promulgation of new and unCatholic dogmas as de fide has put an impassable barrier between them; impassable, that is to say, as long as England remains apostolical, and Rome ultramontane, in doctrine. Even if it were otherwise, the tone and temper of that 'insolent and aggressive faction' which now has the pre

dominance throughout the Roman communion, would render any accommodation equally impossible. The examination of Bishop Doyle's well-meant and large-hearted endeavour, therefore, can only be of antiquarian interest. But it is instructive nevertheless to note the absence of that supercilious affectation of superiority with which we are so familiar in Roman disputants in our day; and his frank allowance of the Apostolic lineage and spiritual life of the rival communion. Even while reprobating and opposing her establishment in Ireland, he could say, 'we respect the Church of England on account of "the rock from which she has been hewn, and the pit from which she has been digged;" we prize her Liturgy as only less perfect than that from which it has been principally extracted; we admire her translation of the Bible, with all its imperfections, as a noble work; we venerate her hierarchy as an image of the truth' (Vindication, p. 30). These are the words of a candid and just opponent: the reader will find nothing like them in the writings of controversialists of our own day. The truth is, that Bishop Doyle had so clear and unhesitating a Catholicity, that he could afford to be just to opponents; and so candid and serene an intellect, that he desired to be so. His orthodoxy was of that peculiarly uncommon and valuable kind, which enables a man to discover and to state the underlying principle of a theological truth, and, so discovered, to state it in such a manner that it shall almost be self-evident, and shall disarm the prejudices of shallower thinkers. He recalls the theologians of earlier ages; and there is but little in his writings of the narrow, ill-instructed, and hysterical school of writers who seem to represent the Roman Church of this decade. We will give a few examples of Bishop Doyle's views on matters of doctrine. Thus, respecting Holy Scripture, he says:

'The Scriptures alone have never saved any one; they are incapable of giving salvation; it is not their object, it is not the end for which they were written. They hold a dignified place amongst the means of the institution which Christ formed for the purpose of saving his elect; but though they never had been written, this end would have been attained, and all who were pre-ordained to eternal life would have been gathered to the Church, and fed with the bread of life. The Scriptures were given for the most useful ends, as we shall see presently; but it is obvious to all, that they were not written as a regular code of law, still less were they intended to supersede the priesthood. They consist of history, poetry, moral and mystical treatises, as well as of the ordinances prescribed to the Jewish people; they were written generally for some special purpose in different languages, in various countries, and at periods far removed

from each other; and hence, though the entire collection be useful to instruct, reprove, and direct us in the pursuit of happiness, yet if it be looked to as the means whereby mankind may be brought to the knowledge of the truth, and formed to the Christian discipline, it will be found totally inadequate to such a purpose.

'In the hands of the Ministry which Christ, like Moses, so clearly established, the Scriptures have been, and are, most useful. Without them, it would require more than the ordinary providence of GOD to preserve the deposit of faith whole and entire' (Letter vii. p. 164).

Again, with regard to tradition :

'The truth is, that tradition is part and parcel of Divine revelation, or rather revelation once consisted of tradition exclusively, a portion of which was afterwards recorded in writing' (Letter vii. p. 188).

There is a good deal of special pleading in the sections on the invocation of the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Saints; and the fact is ignored that it is not the theoretical basis of the doctrine, but the proved dangers of it in practice, which his opponents object to; so that it verges upon the disingenuous to say that the belief of the Catholic on this subject, which the Protestant swears to be idolatrous, is substantially the same as his own (p. 272). There is the same (we fear we must call it) want of candour running through Bishop Doyle's replies to the House of Lords on the same subject, when he was summoned to give evidence before them in 1825.

In 1827 the Prime Minister, Lord Liverpool, died. During the fifteen years he had been at the head of the Government, his strongly adverse opinion had prevented any steps being taken for the emancipation of Roman Catholics. Now their hopes began to revive, and they were still further increased by the accession to office of Mr. Canning, who was believed to entertain opinions favourable to their claims. His administration, however, lasted but a few months; and, after the ad interim ministry of Viscount Goderich, the conduct of affairs was entrusted to a Tory Ministry, headed by the Duke of Wellington as Prime Minister. It was not perhaps from that side of the House that Dr. Doyle would have looked for the concession of his claims; but the Tories being in power at this time when the question drew to a head, it fell practically to them to deal with it. In fact, the requests of the Irish Roman Catholics had assumed well-nigh the form of demands. Under the leadership of O'Connell public mass meetings were held in all parts of the country to consider the