Corpus of Electronic Texts Edition
The Peril of Home Rule (Author: Peter Kerr-Smiley)
Chapter 6
The Religious Difficulty
It is regrettable that in dealing with a question which should be strictly political it becomes necessary to discuss the religious aspect of Home Rule, but this is due to the fact that the Church of Rome predominates in every phase of Irish life. If, then, the religious question is an acute one in Ireland, the fault does not rest with Protestants, who are anxious to live and work on harmonious terms with their Roman Catholic fellow-country men. The cause of the trouble is traceable to the Vatican, which has still a stronger hold on the Irish Roman Catholics than it has on Roman Catholics in any other part of the world. Mr. Redmond recently denied that the priests exercise any undue influence on Irish Nationalists, but anyone who knows Ireland is well aware that the priests are all-powerful among their own people, and that loyalty to the Pope and the Papal policy dominates every other feeling. Mr. Redmond recently gave three instances where he alleged that Irish Nationalists had defied the Pope in political matters, but the Irish Catholic, an influential weekly organ which voices the opinion
p.68
of the Church of Rome, promptly replied that Mr. Redmond was in error and that the instructions of the Church had been carried out in every case to which he had referred. It added the significant hint that, rather than have even one prerogative of the Pope curtailed, the Irish Roman Catholics would forego Home Rule for all time. Mr. Redmond made no reply, and for the very good reason that he knows that any Home Rule scheme which proposed to limit the political activities of the Church of Rome would be doomed to destruction. The bishops and priests insist on retaining their supremacy in political as well as in religious affairs. It is difficult for those who live out of Ireland to understand how closely the two are entwined.
Mr. Redmond wishes the public to believe that under Home Rule the Roman Catholic bishops and priests would confine themselves to their religious duties. Archbishop Walsh, who is a much more important personage in Ireland than Mr. Redmond, said on September 15th, 1885:
‘In Ireland the line between religion and politics is by no means easy to draw. I have some experience now in critically observing such matters, and I have never known that feat to be accomplished with perfect success.’
Five days later he claimed:
p.69
‘As priests, and independent of all human organisations, they have an inalienable and indisputable right to guide their people in this momentous proceeding as in every other proceeding where the interests of Catholicity as well as the interests of Irish nationality are involved.’
In Great Britain clergymen give their individual opinions on political matters for what they are worth, but the Irish priest gives his as a priest who is ‘independent of all human organisations,’ and the people obey his dictates no matter what their character may be. The Freeman's Journal, which is the official organ of the Nationalist party, in an article in its issue of February 18th, 1886, laid down the position which Protestants and Roman Catholics must occupy:
‘The one people (the Irish Catholic) is Christian, the other (the Protesant) non-Christian; the one animated by a supernatural principle, the other by a natural. . . . They cannot freely co-exist in the same society. They must be present, but it must not be as equals, but in subjection and domination; not in peace but in conflict. England has been for three centuries the leader of the great apostasy, and is at this day the principal obstacle to the conversion of the world. . . . The Christian idea is absolute, and will brook nothing that is not itself.’
Knowing as they do that these are the real sentiments of the men who are working for the
p.70
establishment of a Home Rule Parliament, it is only natural that Irish Protestants should resist a Dublin Parliament to the uttermost. Their fears as to religious intolerance are only too well founded. The late Rev. Dr. Parker, a devoted and enthusiastic follower of Mr. Gladstone, opposed Home Rule in 1892 because he believed it would be ‘high treason against the very genius of Nonconformity’ to hand over Irish Protestants to the rule of Rome. ‘I cannot but think,’ he wrote, ‘that my Nonconformist brethren in Ireland must know their own case better than I know it.’ The appeal which roused Dr. Parker's sympathy was signed by almost every Protestant clergyman in Ireland. Sir William Robertson Nicoll, the editor of the British Weekly, who cannot be described as an ‘Ulster bigot,’ writing in 1907, asked Mr. Stephen Gwynn to ‘tell us of a single instance where a Roman Catholic majority has given justice to a Protestant minority.’ After pointing out how the Nationalists carry religious bias into everyday business, he proceeded:
‘Thus it is more clear than ever that Home Rule as the Nationalists conceive it means Rome Rule. We are quite certain that the Nonconformists in this country, properly enlightened, will never hand Ireland over to Rome Rule. . . . Even if they [the English Nonconformists] were to betray their trust the Protestants in Ireland would fight to the death against a tyranny so monstrous that the most enslaved creatures under its
p.71
rule have made their protest. Home Rule will not come without the bloodiest of battles, without the last extremity of resistance, and we have to thank Mr. Stephen Gwynn and his like for corroborating Protestant convictions and renewing Protestant determination.’
Irish Protestants know that Sir W. Robertson Nicoll was right when he declared that Home Rule means Rome Rule. No less an authority than Cardinal Manning made a similar statement in 1891.
In an article in the British Weekly in October, 1906, the Editor wrote:
‘The politicians would fain get away from the religious question, but they cannot. It will not and cannot be evaded so long as the claims of Rome are what they are. Almost everywhere in the civilised world it is a source of continual perplexity. At the beginning of the twentieth century the Papacy seems to be fighting for its life, desperately, blindly, determinedly.’
‘The armies of the Church are the political danger of every country which is not subservient to their purpose. Rome desires temporal power in order that she may enforce her rule. . . . It is by physical coercion that so-called heretical opinions are to be eradicated, and that conscience, of which God alone is Lord, put in irons. Sometimes one is disposed to think that
p.72
violent Protestant controversialists exaggerate. But they do not exaggerate; in fact, it is almost impossible to exaggerate.’
‘Under a Dublin Parliament Ireland would become the most Papal State in Europe, and with the facts of history, as well as those of everyday experience before us, is there the slightest reason for supposing that a Roman Catholic ascendancy would not be established?’
Nonconformists are loud enough in their protestations against the claims of sectarianism in England; it does seem strange that they are prepared to put burdens on the backs of their Irish brethren which they would not for one moment tolerate themselves. Two leaders of Nonconformity, Rev. Dr. Horton and Rev. Joseph Hocking, have published an interesting book entitled Shall Rome Reconquer England? which contains not a few statements that should make their brethren pause before they agree to put Irish Protestants under the heel of the Pope of Rome. In this book we find the following:
‘There is in Romanism some subtle and irresistible tendency to retard, and even to ruin, every country which it dominates. . . .
In this respect Romanism is like Mohammedanism or Hinduism, it really grips people and nations. The Roman Church dominates Ireland and the Irish as completely as Islam dominates Morocco. Ireland, with
p.73
the exception of Ulster, is the Island of the Saints, and exhibits more perfectly than any other part of Europe the virtue and value of the Papal religion. There the Catholic ideals are realised. . . .’
‘The priests control not only the worship but the life of the people. If the Irish peasant desires freedom he emigrates to America. I am told that not only peasants but even priests frequently cross the Atlantic, not for economic or worldly reasons at all, but to escape from the rigid and perfected system of the Roman obedience, which is, as Catholics think, the supreme blessing, and, as Protestants think, the most crushing bane of that lovely and melancholy land.’
‘A friend of mine, who is a large employer of labour in Lancashire, asked one of his men in the 1906 election whether he had made up his mind which way he was going to vote. ‘I don't know yet, sir,’ replied the man, ‘we shan't know till Sunday. Father --- will tell us then.’’
‘Manning is reported to have said on one occasion, ‘Cromwell is not dead, he is only asleep, and he may awake at any moment.’ Manning never uttered truer words. Not only is Cromwell not dead, but Protestantism is not dead. It may seem at times to be slumbering, but its heart still beats with great mighty throbs which send the lifeblood of liberty throughout the veins of the nation. But it is time we were aroused from our slumber.’
‘This I have found in speaking up and down this land; the people respond mightily to the Protestant appeal. If there is indifference, it is from want of
p.74
knowledge, not from want of life. What is needed is that the great facts of history shall be made known to them, that the real nature of Rome shall be revealed to them, that the story of our heroic fathers shall be told to them, that the great fundamental truth for which our Reformers fought and died shall be proclaimed to them. Let the people know these things and have no fear, but if Rome finds England ignorant concerning what is most vital to her, it may be that she will find her an easy prey.’
Irish Protestants dread the establishment of a Roman Tyranny in their country, and they earnestly appeal to their Protestant brethren in Great Britain to protect them from it. They feel that the only way to avert this danger is to maintain the present supremacy of the Imperial Parliament. If there was more of the Puritan spirit abroad, of which Dr. Horton and Mr. Hocking write, the danger to Irish Protestants would soon disappear.
Protestants are sometimes told that their fears are groundless and that there is no danger of history repeating itself. It is not necessary to go to Spain in order to get an object lesson in the intolerance of the Vatican. The Province of Quebec provides a warning which cannot be ignored. At the time of the Confederation of Canada the Protestants of Quebec were assured that they had no reason to fear the Roman Church.
p.75
Later events have shown that their fears were more than justified. The real ruler of Quebec to-day is undoubtedly the Cardinal in his palace, and the effect of his rule has been to elbow out the Protestant population of the City of Quebec, reducing it in a few years from 17,000 to a little over 4,000. The situation is even worse in the rural districts. The Eastern townships, which at one time occupied a position much like the position Ulster occupies in Ireland, are now at the mercy of the clericals, who control everything, whether religious or secular, throughout the Province of Quebec. It has not been necessary to revert to the old-fashioned methods of persecution in order to drive out the Protestants. As in Ireland, the Protestants of Quebec control most of the industries, and the taxes are so adroitly arranged that they fall heavily upon them.
The Roman Catholic Church has unlimited control of education, and the result is that the primary schools are used chiefly for the purpose of teaching the doctrines of that Church. Protestants in the rural districts who desire to have their children educated in schools that are not controlled by the priests have no option but to leave the province. At the present time one-seventh of the total revenue collected in the Province of Quebec goes to support Roman Catholic institutions.
Mr. William Maxwell, who personally examined
p.76
the conditions which exist in Quebec, and published early this year a book embodying the results of his investigation, lets in some light upon the evils that are sure to follow from creating in Ireland a second Quebec. He says:
‘The people of Quebec have put themselves unreservedly in the hands of the Church. Nothing in public or private life is too insignificant to escape the control of their bishops and priests. Their conscience, their education, their politics are controlled and directed by the Church; and the politician, be he Prime Minister of the Dominion or member of the Federal or the Provincial Parliament, who seeks the support of Quebec must first make terms with the Roman Catholic Church.’
‘Let me give an example of this all-pervading power of the Church. Montreal has a population of 400,000, partly British, partly French. It was formerly the capital of Canada, and is still the commercial metropolis. Montreal has no public library and no public hospital. Why? Because the Roman Catholic bishop refused his assent to a public library unless he was permitted to select the books, and refused his assent to a public hospital unless Roman Catholic patients were separated from Protestant patients and put into the charge of Roman Catholic nurses and doctors.’
‘It would be absurd to pretend that this domination is not resented by many French-Canadians who are good Catholics. I have heard them denounce it in unmeasured
p.77
terms and predict the approach of the day when the bond will be shaken off and liberty of speech and of action restored. But these confessions are made with bated breath and in private conversation. Rarely, if ever, are they made in public, for the Church, as the German proverb says, has hands and feet as well as ears.’
‘The Roman Catholic Church in Quebec levies taxes — I mean actually taxes, not voluntary contributions — for the building and maintenance of the churches and the houses of the clergy; it levies a yearly tax for the support of the priest of each parish, and payment of these taxes is enforced by the civil courts. The real estate of the Church is exempted from taxation. When the British took possession of Canada there were only four companies of nuns, numbering in all 150 members, and four male orders, numbering about 100 members. French and Catholic Kings were reluctant to grant charters of incorporation, being of opinion that there were ‘already too many communities and convents in Canada,’ and that any increase was ‘most prejudicial to the interests of the country.’’
‘Since the Confederation of the States of Canada the Quebec Legislature has granted acts of incorporation to no fewer than 40 convents and monastic institutions. There are to-day in the province of Quebec 25 monastic orders with over 3,000 members, and 55 convents with over 10,000 members. Education is controlled by the Roman Catholic bishops and clergy, and no book can be read in the schools that has not received the imprimatur of the Church.’
p.78
Those who know Ireland are well aware that a Dublin Parliament, like the Quebec Legislature, would be at the mercy of the priests. If paper safeguards have proved worthless in Quebec, what reason is there for supposing that they would afford any protection to the Protestants in Ireland? Not only have the clerical party placed themselves above the civil law in Quebec, but they have also used their influence in favour of the establishment of a French-Canadian Republic. In the other Canadian provinces where the Roman Catholics are in a minority the priests quietly influence their people, but in Quebec they simply command them, and the very same thing would happen in Ireland. The history of Quebec shows that under a Parliament in Dublin no law would be passed which had not first received the approval of the Roman Church.
Those who have followed the operations of the ‘Ne Temere’ decree know what to expect. The Roman Church declares that when a marriage takes place between a Protestant and a Roman Catholic in a Protestant Church, it is no marriage at all, and that those who contract it are living in open sin. As the M'Cann case has shown, the Roman Church will ruthlessly break up a home and deprive a mother of her husband and children because she refuses to admit that her marriage in a Presbyterian Church is illegal. The only answer of the Nationalists to this cruel proceeding is to
p.79
throw mud at the heart-broken woman. They have been implored by their Home Rule friends in Great Britain to denounce the ‘Ne Temere’ decree, but they have not done so, and for the very good reason that the priests maintain that a Roman Catholic husband is bound to desert his Protestant wife unless she agrees to be remarried in a Roman Catholic Church. The silence of the Nationalist party on this matter is the strongest proof, if indeed proof were necessary, that they are subject to the control of the Pope, and that no restrictions on the power of a Dublin Parliament would be admitted which diminished the influence of the Roman Church in any way.
The ‘Ne Temere’, decree appears to be more than even a Liberal like Sir Robert Perks can swallow, for in a pamphlet entitled Nonconformity in Parliament he writes:
‘I see that the Catholic Times abuses me in somewhat malevolent language for what I said to the Cardiff Free Churchmen about the recent Papal decree on mixed marriages. Anathema, however, is not argument. I have checked carefully what I said concerning the attitude of the Governments of Germany and Hungary towards that intolerant decree, and I find that I was absolutely correct. Indeed, I might have said much more. For not only does that decree brand with infamy and deny the rites of the Church to any Roman Catholic marrying a Protestant elsewhere than in a Catholic place of worship, cruelly and illegally declaring
p.80
the children of such a union to be in the eyes of the Church illegitimate, but the Papal authorities in their interference with personal liberty go much further. This tyrannical decree declares that no Roman Catholic maiden or youth is even allowed to get engaged to be married without the assent of the priest, before whom the parties to any such betrothal are to sign an agreement, and, I suppose, pay a suitable fee to the Church. No wonder that tens of thousands of Roman Catholics leaving Europe for America escape away from the thraldom of such a system. The Catholic Times is evidently not aware that no Roman Catholic priest could to-day celebrate a marriage in any Catholic church in England and Wales without the presence of a civil registrar were it not for the provisions of the Nonconformist Marriage Act of 1898, which is now in operation in hundreds of Roman Catholic churches in Great Britain. It will be interesting to see what provision the Government makes in the forthcoming Home Rule Bill for the protection of the Protestants of Ireland against this new claim of the Roman Catholic Church to interfere with the liberty of the people in making their marriage contracts without the interference of the priests.’
When Mr. Gladstone's Home Rule Bill was before Parliament in 1893 an amendment was proposed by the Unionists to exempt marriage from the legislative authority of the Dublin Parliament, but the amendment was defeated at the instigation of the Nationalists, Mr. John Redmond being one of the thirty-eight members who composed the
p.81
majority against it. Let Mr. Asquith propose to place any real restraints on the Church of Rome in Ireland, and he will speedily find his Home Rule Bill rejected as ignominiously as was Mr. Birrell's Irish Council Bill when it was found to contain the modest proposal that primary education should be taken out of the hands of the priests and entrusted to the local authorities. Those who live in Ireland and know the real situation are aware that the Editor of the British Weekly stated a plain fact when he wrote that Home Rule in Ireland would mean Rome Rule.