n, at least a few years later.[46]
We may now for a while leave Gilbert and Cellach and Malchus and
O'Dunan. With Gilbert as legate, and Cellach and Malchus as archbishops;
with dioceses already formed at Limerick and Waterford and in Meath,
probably also at Armagh and Cashel and Wexford; with the great extension
of the movement, and its spread from Munster to Meath and Ulster, all
was ready for the meeting of the Synod whose ordinances should give
definite shape to the policy to be pursued in the future.
III.--The Synod of Rathbreasail
Geoffrey Keating quotes from the lost _Annals of Clonenagh_ an account
of a national Synod or Council held at Rathbreasail in the year
1110.[47] The existing Annals record that a national Council met at
Fiadh meic Oengusa in 1111. With the exception of the _Annals of
Inisfallen_, none of them mention Rathbreasail; but the Inisfallen
annalist tells us that it is another name for Fiadh meic Oengusa.[48] I
shall assume therefore that there were not two national Synods in
successive years, but one; and, following the _Annals of Clonenagh_, I
shall call it the Synod of Rathbreasail, and date it in 1110.
The Synod of Rathbreasail marks the beginning of the second stage of the
Reformation movement. It was convened by the papal legate; its purpose
was the Romanizing of the Irish Church, and, in particular, the
establishment in it of diocesan episcopacy. Fortunately Keating's
excerpts from its Acts give us ample information concerning the canons
which dealt with this matter.
The annalists, as I have said, describe the council as a national
assembly. But we can hardly claim so much for it. It is much more
probable that it was in reality a meeting of the Reforming party. The
first signature appended to its canons was that of Gilbert, who presided
as legate of the Holy See. He was followed by Cellach, "coarb of Patrick
and Primate of Ireland," and Malchus, "archbishop of Cashel," whom we
have known as bishop of Waterford. The signatures of many bishops
followed, but they have not been preserved. We know, however, that
Bishop O'Dunan was present, as was also Murtough O'Brien, king of
Ireland. These were all leaders of the Reforming party; and it is
evident that they guided the deliberations of the Council. Moreover
there were no representatives of the provinces of Connaught and
Leinster, in which as yet, it appears, the Reform movement had not
established itself. That is made clear by not
|