No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Bishop Nicholas French and the second Ormond peace, 1648-9
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2016
Extract
Europe in the seventeenth century was a land of mar and confusion because the great political problems raised by the religious disruption of the preceding century had not yet been solved. Chief among these was the problem of the relations between the Roman catholic church and a protestant state. The teaching of the pope's indirect power in temporal matters in any problem involving a breach of the moral order (ratione peccati) had been strongly re-stated by Bellarmine, and was the official attitude of the church. A protestant prince had committed a grave sin, that of heresy, and so it was the pope's right and duty to depose him and absolve his Catholic subjects from their allegiance. But this political theory was becoming impractical as the seventeenth century progressively demonstrated that Europe was permanently divided. As might be expected, juridical forms lagged behind the development of events; but by the middle of the century the Roman curia, while not prepared to give antecedent approval to a peace with protestants, might be said to be ready to acquiesce once it had been concluded, if the position and rights of the Catholic church could be assured. Yet this assurance was, in the circumstances, almost impossible. The Catholic church could not rest satisfied with toleration as a sect, but demanded recognition as an organised society with a source of jurisdiction illdependent of the state.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Irish Historical Studies Publications Ltd 1948
References
1 This is clearly implied in Zelo domus Dei issued as a protest against the peace of Westphalia (Bullarium Romanum, t. vi, pt iii, p. 173).
2 The distinction of ‘Old Irish’ and ‘Anglo-Irish’ was very clearly marked, but not quite complete. The mixed ancestry of e.g. Rory O’More, Inchiquin, Sarsfield, is evidence of the beginnings of fusion.
3 It is admittedly difficult to assess the sentiments of the ‘common people Apart from the lawyers and clergy, and to some degree the men of property, the only people who might be said to be in any way articulate were the town-dwellers. Yet among these there is some evidence of pro-nuncio sympathies, especially in Galway at this time, where the ‘common people’ favoured the nuncio, though the men of substance, due mainly to Clanricarde influence, opposed him. The country-folk have, of course, left no record of their sentiments.
3a Comment. Rinucc, ii. 700.
4 Comment. Rinucc., iii. 659 (or possibly November 20; Philopater Irenaeus, Vindiciae, p. 165).
5 Comment. Rinucc., iii. 66θ; cf. Sir Richard Blake to Sir Robuck Lynch, 25 Nov. 1648 (Gilbert, Ir. confed., vii. 146-8, citing Carte Papers, xxii. 446).
6 Gilbert, Ir. confed., vi. 290, citing Carte Papers, xxii. 247.
7 Gilbert, Ir. confed., j vi. 293–4, citing Carte Papers, xxii. 241.
8 Philopater Irenaeus, Vindiciae, p. 177; Plunkett MS (N.L.I. MS 345), p. 952.
9 Cf. the very definite statement in the letter of Sir Richard Blake to Sir Robuck Lynch, as above, with the vague generalizations adduced in support of the opposite^ view in Comment. Rinucc., iii. 410).
10 Sir Richard Blake to Sir Robuck Lynch, as above; Comment. Rinucc., iii. 409.
11 Sir Richard Blake to Sir Robuck Lynch, as above.
12 Moran, Spicil. Ossor., ii. 115 ff.
13 Comment. Rinucc., iii. 409.
14 Bellings to Ormond, 26 Nov. 1648 (Gilbert, Ir. confed., vii. 148–9, citing Carte Papers, xxii. 447).
15 Philopater Irenaeus, Vindiciae, pp. 166–7 ‘Philopater’ is, of course, the pseudonym of John Callaghan, and the Vindiciae, published in Paris in 1650, was a bitter attack on the nuncio and all his supporters. Cf. McNeill, C., Publications of Irish interest published by Irish authors on the continent of Europe prior to the eighteenth century, pp. 20–25.Google Scholar
16 Moran, Spicil. Ossor., ii. 125.
17 Comment. Rinucc., iii. 670.
18 Plunkett MS (N.L.L MS 345), p. 960.
19 Comment. Rinucc, iii. 686 ff.
20 Ibid., iii. 685.
21 Hutton, , Embassy Rinucc., p. 462.Google Scholar
22 Comment. Rinucc., iii. 682.
23 Comment. Rinucc., iii. 682.
24 Hutton, , Embassy Rinucc, pp. 444–5Google Scholar; Comment. Rinucc, iii. 682.
25 Comment. Rinucc., iii. 670. There is an obvious allusion to Cardinal Roma’s letter.
26 Ibid., iii. 671.
27 Ibid., iii. 690.
28 Ibid., iii. 671; cf. Hutton, , Embassy Rinucc, pp. 440–3.Google Scholar
29 Ibid., iii. 672–4.
30 Cf. Comment. Rinucc, iii. 667, with Moran, Spicil. Ossor., ii. 118.
31 Comment. Rinucc. iii. 667–8.
32 It seems he was convinced that the bishops could be persuaded to see his point of view if they could be got to Kilkenny- Cf. Moran, Spicil. Ossor., ii. 118.
33 Comment. Rinucc., iii. 668.
34 Ibid., iii. 675.
35 Hutton, , Embassy Rinucc., p. 444.Google Scholar
36 ‘Accepi litteras Romanas missas a dominationibus vestris’ (Comment. Rinucc., iii. 676).
37 Ibid., iii. 676.
38 Gilbert, , Ir. confed., 7. 156,Google Scholar citing Carte Papers, xxiii. 35–6.
39 Cf. His Majesty’s last letter to parliament, London, 1648, p. 4; Comment. Rinucc., iv. 33.
40 Cox, Hibernia Anglicana, ii. 202; Carte, Ormonde, ii. 12–15.
41 Gilbert, , Ir. confed., 7. 154–5,Google Scholar citing Carte Papers, xxiii. 34.
42 Comment. Rinucc, iii. 669.
43 Gilbert, , Ir. confed., 7. 156–7,Google Scholar citing Carte Papers, xxiii. 38.
44 Gilbert, , Ir. confed., 7. 157–8,Google Scholar citing Carte Papers, xxiii. 40,
45 Gilbert, , Ir. confed., 7. 159,Google Scholar citing Carte Papers, xxiii. 46.
46 Gilbert, , Ir. confed., 7. 160,Google Scholar citing Carte Papers, xxiii. 45.
47 Gilbert, , Ir. confed., 7. 163,Google Scholar citing Carte Papers, xxiii. 57
48 Gilbert, , Ir. confed., 7. 164–5,Google Scholar citing Carte Papers, xxiii. 58. Cf. Articles of cessation printed in Gilbert, op. cit., vi. 236.
49 Carte, Ormonde, ii. 46 ff.
50 Ormond to Sir Richard Blake, Dec. 26 (Gilbert, op. cit., vii. 170).
51 Gilbert, , Ir. confed., 7. 167–8,Google Scholar citing Carte Papers, xxiii. 66.
52 Carte, Ormonde, ii. 49; iii. 600–602.
53 Gilbert, , Ir. confed., 7. 171,Google Scholar citing Carte Papers, xxiii. 72.
54 Cf. Carte, Ormonde, iii. 600.
55 Gilbert, , Ir. Confed., 7. 172–3,Google Scholar citing Carte Papers, xxiii. 77.
56 Cf. the letter of N. French to the nuncio, Dec. 30, Comment. Rinucc., iii. 678.
57 Walsh, , Irish remonstrance, first treatise, pp. 614–5.Google Scholar
58 Walsh, , Irish remonstrance, first treatise, pp. 614–5.Google Scholar
59 Carte, Ormonde, iii. 600–3.
60 Cf. his letter to Sir Charles Coote, in Carte, Ormonde, ii. 252.
61 Cf. speeches of Ormond and Sir Richard Blake, in Gilbert, Ir. £ on fed., vii. 180–4.
62 Cf. Moran in Ossory Arch. Soc. Trans., ii. 361.