beyond the walls of the town, and was by education and ordination an Englishman. One of the Irish clergy in this place,—'a man of exemplary life, so it is said'—gave public expression to his views on the Holy Communion. 'He, being wise in his own eyes, presumed to say that in the Eucharist there was only a sacrament, and not the thing represented by the sacrament; that is to say, that there is only a consecration, and not the true Body.' Malachy reasoned with him in private, but it was all to no purpose. Then a meeting was summoned, from which, contrary to the Irish customs, the laity were excluded. Here 'he endeavoured with all the strength of no mean abilities to assert and defend his error.' Malachy met him first with argument and then with threatening, but all to no purpose. He left the meeting 'discomfited but not corrected,' and protesting that 'he was conquered not by reasoning, but overpowered by the authority of the bishop.' A sentence of excommunication was pronounced against him, but he was still unmoved. 'Thou, O Malachy,' he said, 'without reason thou hast condemned me this day. Thou hast spoken not only contrary to the truth, but against thine own conscience.' Then turning to the rest of the assembly he added, 'All you care for the man rather than the truth. I accept no man's person, if in doing so I must forsake the truth.'
Bernard tells us that this sturdy Protestant repented on his death bed: but he never admits that Malachy made a mistake or failed in any enterprise he took in hand. He altogether suppresses the fact that Malachy was unable to retain the see of Armagh, and attributes to his great humility his retreat from the position which he found to be untenable. We may therefore be excused for suspecting
