17
which man was created. The pity of the prodigal child for his more sensible and dutiful brother, is not unlike what Mr. Whiteside affects to feel for us.. He may very well spare his pity in our regard, and extend it to Dr. Colenso and his own.
CHAPTER, II.
Henry’s visit as a conqueror, not as a courteous tourist—No conquests before him—His character—Misrepresentation of Mr. Whiteside— Unfair quotation by mutilated passages—The desire of plunder, not reformation, the motive of Henry’s visit—Contrast between Irish and English Churches—Mr. Whiteside’s blunders in reference to Councils.
Havong occupied myself in the last chapter with showing how false were the assertions of Mr. Whiteside in regard to the Irish Church, you will not be surprised to find proof of a good deal of his misrepresentation in the present chapter. And, indeed, unless you bear in mind his aim, his object, you cannot well understand his introduction of a variety of matter. ‘To make us venerate the memory of Henry the Second, for giving him a parliamentary and physical constitution (how nearly related is he to Henry?), and to neutralize that alienation of feeling we should entertain towards him as a conqueror, he tells, p. 9-10, that Henry’s visit was quiet and courteous. Of course, having used Cooke’s name as a sort of talisman, a “demiourgos”, to work wonders with, and enchant us in ecclesiastical regions, now at once he is brought forward to prove that Henry was no conqueror. King Edgar, according to him, mastered the greater part of Ireland in the tenth century. Allow me to assure Mr. Whiteside that Edgar made no conquests. He was styled the “peaceable”. During the sixteen years of his reign he carried on no war, abroad or at home. So far from mastering Ireland, he was not
