Political conflict between Dublin's two cathedrals

Résumé du document

Here is in this little city two great cathedral churches, richly endowed and too near together for any good they do . Here Sir John Perrot, an Elizabethan lord deputy, described the peculiar situation of Dublin which since the thirteenth century owed two cathedrals. Although the church of St. Patrick had been consecrated in 1192 and Archbishop John Cumin had incorporated a secular college to it, it was not until 1220 that his successor, Henry of London, perfected the chapter of St. Patrick?s by including the dignitaries associated with a cathedral. Then, the see of Dublin was constituted of two chapters of different kind: Holy Trinity owed a regular chapter and St. Patrick?s a secular one. Thus, we may wonder if this condition was not one of the origins of the political conflict between the two cathedrals, a conflict for ecclesiastical supremacy. Moreover, it is clear that by the same time, the cathedral chapter had become a very important institution in Ireland since it had the right to choose the new bishop and to assume some of the bishop?s function when the Episcopal see was vacant. As result, we understand that the exceptional context of Dublin led to some wrangles between the two chapters about how the election should be conducted and about the choice of the new archbishop. Moreover, as the chapter of St. Patrick was composed "for the most part of king?s clerks" , it could be assumed that the chapter was used by the King as a mean to control his colony both on an ecclesiastical and political level. We may therefore wonder what exactly the significance of this conflict was, was it a political conflict between the two cathedrals of Dublin due to their both will to lead the ecclesiastical line of the see of Dublin as well as the political line or if it was a conflict of a racial kind opposing the Irish regular chapter of Holy Trinity to the Anglo-Norman secular chapter of St. Patrick?s. Thus, we will firstly intend to assess what exactly the archbishops? intention were in creating the chapter of St. Patrick, then to look at the king?s interest in the nomination of the bishops and at his role in their election and finally how these quarrels expressed themselves.

Extraits

[...] Although Archbishop Luke (1228-1255) tried to settle the relations of the two chapters by proposing that they should come together for elections which were to be held at Holy Trinity, the conflicts between both started again at every vacancies with the result that they had no say in the archbishop's elections of the thirteenth century and most of the late thirteenth century bishops of the diocese were provided by the papacy. Thus, this gave popes the chance to nominate English prelates who were either royal favourite or were on royal embassies at the Curia. Moreover, these archbishops were so closely linked with the royal court that we are tempted to suggest that the king put pressure on the Pope to choose some of his favourite. In addition, we can notice that between 1213 and 1500, the chapter of St. [...]

[...] Moreover, by letters of 1227 the king reserved himself the granting of the licence to elect in the dioceses where Anglo-Norman power was stronger, that is to say in the see of Dublin, whereas in the other cases the justiciar was in charge of granting the licence. Because of this close link between the chapter of St. Patrick, this one being for the most part composed of English clerks, and the royal court, we can assume that the king was tempted to choose the new archbishop in this community since his interest was to anglicise ecclesiastical administration, to secure cooperation of the Church with the State which he needed to maintain a political stability and to subject the Irish Church to the English law. [...]

[...] Milne, Christ Church Cathedral Dublin, Dublin (2000). M. Murphy, ‘Archbishops and anglicisation : Dublin, 1181-1271' in J. Kelly and D. Keogh History of the Catholic Diocese of Dublin (2000), pp. 72-91. J.A. Watt, The Church and the Two Nations in Medieval Ireland (1970). J.A. [...]

[...] Hand in rivalry of the cathedral chapters in medieval Dublin' saying that establishment of Austin canons at Holy Trinity by Lorcán Tuathail and of secular clergy at St. Patrick's by John Cumin and Henry of London is a reminder of a contrast between ancient monastic traditions of Celtic Ireland, given a new expression by the 12th- century reform, and the legalism and practicality of outlook of Anglo- Norman churchmen”[7]. Bibliography D. Bethell, ‘Dublin's two cathedrals' in Clarke H.B., Focus on Medieval Dublin, pp.27-34. G.J. [...]

[...] This close connexion between the ecclesiastical office and political service was not only a coincidence. Indeed, we can notice that in the period with which we are concerned, all the archbishops of Dublin were English born and the reason for their promotion was usually because of their service at a high level to the king of England. We can cite as example archbishop John Cumin who had spent twenty years of service as bureaucrat, judge and diplomat before Henry II arranged his promotion to Dublin. [...]