CHAPTER IV.

THE INFLUENCE OF RELIGION UPON SECULAR LIFE IN IRELAND.

In the preceding chapter I attempted to estimate the influence of our

political leaders as a potential and as an actual force. I come now to

the second great influence upon the thought and action of the Irish

people, the influence of religion, especially the power exercised by the

priests and by the unrivalled organisation of the Roman Catholic Church.

I do not share the pessimism which sees in this potent influence nothing

but the shackles of mediævalism restraining its adherents from falling

into line with the progress of the age. I shall, indeed, have to admit

much of what is charged against the clerical leaders of popular thought

in Ireland, but I shall be able to show, I hope, that these leaders are

largely the product of a situation which they themselves did not create,

and that not only are they as susceptible as are the political leaders

to the influences of progressive movements, but that they can be more

readily induced to take part in their promotion. In no other country in

the world, probably, is religion so dominant an element in the daily

life of the people as in Ireland, and certainly nowhere else has the

minister of religion so wide and undisputed an authority. It is obvious,

therefore, that, however foreign such a theme may _prima facie_ appear

to the scope and aim of the present volume, I have no choice but to

analyse frankly and as fully as my personal experience justifies, what I

conceive to be the true nature, the salutary limits, and the actual

scope of clerical influence in this country.

But before I can discuss what I may call the religious situation, there

is one fundamental question--a question which will appear somewhat

strange to anyone not in touch with Irish life--which I must, with a

view to a general agreement on essentials, submit to some of my

co-religionists. In all seriousness I would ask, whether in their

opinion the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland is to be tolerated. If the

answer be in the negative, I can only reply that any efforts to stamp

out the Roman Catholic faith would fail as they did in the past; and the

practical minds among those I am now addressing must admit that in

toleration alone is to be found the solution of that part of the Irish

difficulty which is due to sectarian animosities.

This brings us face to face with the question, What is religious

toleration--I do not mean as a pious sentiment which we are all

conscious of ourselves possessing in a truer sense than that in which it

is possessed by others, but rather toleration as an essential of the

liberty which we Protestants enjoy under the British Constitution, and

boast that all other creeds equally enjoy? Perhaps I had better state

simply how I answer this question in my own mind. Toleration by the

Irish minority, in regard to the religious faith and ecclesiastical

system of the Irish majority, implies that we admit the right of Rome to

say what Roman Catholics shall believe and what outward forms they shall

observe, and that they shall not suffer before the State for these

beliefs and observances. I do not think exception can be taken to the

statement that toleration in this narrow sense cannot be refused

consistently with the fundamental principles of British government.

Now, however, comes a less obvious, but, as I think, no less essential

condition of toleration in the sense above indicated. The Roman Catholic

Hierarchy claim the right to exercise such supervision and control over

the education of their flock as will enable them to safe-guard faith and

morals as preached and practised by their Church. I concede this second

claim as a necessary corollary of the first. Having lived most of my

life among Roman Catholics--two branches of my own family belonging to

that religion--I am aware that this control is an essential part of the

whole fabric of Roman Catholicism. Whether the basis of authority upon

which that system is founded be in its origin divine or human is beside

the point. If we profess to tolerate the faith and religious system of

the majority of our countrymen we must at least concede the conditions

essential to the maintenance of both the one and the other, unless our

tolerance is to be a sham.

So far all liberal-minded Protestants, who know what Roman Catholicism

is, will be with me; and for the main purposes of the argument contained

in this chapter it is not necessary to interpret toleration in any wider

sense than that which I have indicated. Many Protestants, among whom I

am one, do, it is true, make a further concession to the claim of our

Roman Catholic fellow-countrymen. We would give them in Ireland

facilities for higher education which we would not give them in England,

and we would advocate liberal endowment by the State to this end. But

this attitude is, I admit, based upon something more than tolerance, and

those who would withhold this concession need not be accused of bigotry

or intolerance for so doing. They may be, and often are, actuated by the

most liberal motives, by a perfectly legitimate conception of

educational principles, or by other considerations which are neither of

a narrow nor sectarian character.

I need hardly say that in criticising religious systems and their

ministers I have not the faintest intention of entering on the

discussion of doctrinal issues. I am, of course, here concerned with

only those aspects of the religious situation which bear directly on

secular life. I am endeavouring, it must be remembered, to arrive at a

comprehensive and accurate appreciation of the chief influences which

mould the character, guide the thought, and, therefore, direct the

action of the Irish people as citizens of this world and of their own

country. From this standpoint let us try to make a dispassionate survey

of Protestantism and Roman Catholicism in Ireland, and see wherein

their votaries fulfil, or fail to fulfil, their mission in advancing our

common civilisation. Let us examine, in a word, not merely the direct

influence which the creed of each of the two sections of Irishmen

produces on the industrial character of its adherents, but also its

indirect effects upon the mutual relations and regard for each other of

Protestants and Roman Catholics.

Protestantism has its stronghold in the great industrial centres of the

North and among the Presbyterian farmers of five or six Ulster counties.

These communities, it is significant to note, have developed the

essentially strenuous qualities which, no doubt, they brought from

England and Scotland. In city life their thrift, industry, and

enterprise, unsurpassed in the United Kingdom, have built up a

world-wide commerce. In rural life they have drawn the largest yield

from relatively infertile soil. Such, in brief, is the achievement of

Ulster Protestantism in the realm of industry. It is a story of which,

when a united Ireland becomes more than a dream, all Irishmen will be

proud.

But there is, unhappily, another side to the picture. This industrial

life, otherwise so worthily cultivated, is disturbed by manifestations

of religious bigotry which sadly tarnish the glory of the really heroic

deeds they are intended to commemorate. It is impossible for any close

observer of these deplorable exhibitions to avoid the conclusion that

the embers of the old fires are too often fanned by men who are

actuated by motives, which, when not other than religious, are certainly

based upon an unworthy conception of religion. I am quite aware that it

is only a small and decreasing minority of my co-religionists who are

open to the charge of intolerance, and that the geographical limits of

the July orgy are now strictly circumscribed. But this bigotry is so

notorious, as for instance in the exclusion of Roman Catholics from many

responsible positions, that it unquestionably reacts most unfavourably

upon the general relations between the two creeds throughout the whole

of Ireland. The existence of such a spirit of suspicion and hatred, from

whatever motive it emanates, is bound to retard our progress as a people

towards the development of a healthy and balanced national life.

Many causes have recently contributed to the unhappy continuance of

sectarian animosities in Ireland. The Ritualistic movement and the

struggle over the Education Bill in England, the renewed controversy on

the University Question in Ireland, instances of bigotry towards

Protestants displayed by County, District, and Urban Councils in the

three southern provinces of Ireland, the formation of the Catholic

Association, the question of the form of the King's oath, and, more

remotely, the protest against clericalism in such Roman Catholic

countries as France and Austria, have one and all helped to keep alive

the flame of anti-Roman feeling among Irish Protestants.[16]

There are, happily, other influences now at work in a contrary

direction. Among the industrial leaders a better spirit prevails. A

well-known Ulster manufacturer told me recently that only a few years

ago, when an applicant for employment appeared at certain Northern

factories, which my friend named, the first question always put was,

'Are you a Protestant or Roman Catholic?' Now, he said, it is not what a

man believes, but what he can do, which is considered when engaging

workers. And outside the cities there are most gratifying signs of

better relations between the two creeds. We are on the eve of the

creation of a peasant proprietary, involving the rehabilitation of rural

life, and one essential condition of the successful inauguration of the

new agrarian order is the elimination of anything approaching to

sectarian bitterness in communities which will require every advantage

derivable from joint deliberation and common effort to enable them to

hold their own against foreign competition. I recall a trivial but

significant incident in the course of my Irish work which left a deep

impression on my mind. After attending a meeting of farmers in a very

backward district in the extreme west of Mayo, I arrived one winter's

evening at the Roman Catholic priest's house. Before the meeting I had

been promised a cup of tea, which, after a long, cold drive, was more

than acceptable. When I presented myself at the priest's house, what was

my astonishment at finding the Protestant clergyman presiding over a

steaming urn and a plate of home-made cakes, having been requested to do

the honours by his fellow-minister, who had been called away to a sick

bed. A cycle of homilies on the virtue of tolerance could add nothing to

the simple lesson which these two clergymen gave to the adherents of

both their creeds. I felt as I went on my way that night that I had had

a glimpse into the kind of future for Ireland towards which my

fellow-workers are striving.

It is, however, with the religion of the majority of the Irish people

and with its influence upon the industrial character of its adherents

that I am chiefly concerned. Roman Catholicism strikes an outsider as

being in some of its tendencies non-economic, if not actually

anti-economic. These tendencies have, of course, much fuller play when

they act on a people whose education has (through no fault of their own)

been retarded or stunted. The fact is not in dispute, but the difficulty

arises when we come to apportion the blame between ignorance on the part

of the people and a somewhat one-sided religious zeal on the part of

large numbers of their clergy. I do not seek to do so with any precision

here. I am simply adverting to what has appeared to me, in the course of

my experience in Ireland, to be a defect in the industrial character of

Roman Catholics which, however caused, seems to me to have been

intensified by their religion. The reliance of that religion on

authority, its repression of individuality, and its complete shifting of

what I may call the moral centre of gravity to a future existence--to

mention no other characteristics--appear to me calculated, unless

supplemented by other influences, to check the growth of the qualities

of initiative and self-reliance, especially amongst a people whose lack

of education unfits them for resisting the influence of what may present

itself to such minds as a kind of fatalism with resignation as its

paramount virtue.

It is true that one cannot expect of any church or religion, as a

condition of its acceptance, that it will furnish an economic theory;

and it is also true that Roman Catholicism has, at different periods of

history, advantageously affected economic conditions, even if it did not

act from distinctively economic motives--for example, by its direct

influence in the suppression of slavery[17] and its creation of the

mediæval craft guilds. It may, too, be admitted that during the Middle

Ages, when Roman Catholicism was freer than now to manifest its

influence in many directions, owing to its practically unchallenged

supremacy, it favoured, when it did not originate, many forms of sound

economic activity, and was, to say the least, abreast of the time in its

conception of the working of economic causes. But from the time when

the Reformation, by its demand for what we Protestants conceive to be a

simpler Christianity, drove Roman Catholicism back, if I may use the

expression, on its first line of defence, and constrained it to look to

its distinctively spiritual heritage, down to the present day, it has

seemed to stand strangely aloof from any contact with industrial and

economic issues. When we consider that in this period Adam Smith lived

and died, the industrial revolution was effected, and the world-market

opened, it is not surprising that we do not find Roman Catholic

countries in the van of economic progress, or even the Roman Catholic

element in Protestant countries, as a rule, abreast of their

fellow-countrymen. It would, however, be an error to ignore some notable

exceptions to this generalisation. In Belgium, in France, in parts of

Germany and Austria, and in the north of Italy economic thought is

making headway amongst Roman Catholics, and the solution of social

problems is being advanced by Roman Catholic laymen and clergymen. Even

in these countries, however, much remains to be done. The revolution in

the industrial order, and its consequences, such as the concentration of

immense populations within restricted areas, have brought with them

social and moral evils that must be met with new weapons. In the

interests of religion itself, principles first expounded to a Syrian

community with the most elementary physical needs and the simplest of

avocations, have to be taught in their application to the conditions of

the most complex social organisation and economic life. Taking people

as we find them, it may be said with truth that their lives must be

wholesome before they can be holy, and while a voluntary asceticism may

have its justification, it behoves a Church to see that its members,

while fully acknowledging the claims of another life, should develop the

qualities which make for well-being in this life. In fact, I believe

that the influence of Christianity upon social progress will be best

maintained by co-ordinating these spiritual and economic ideals in a

philosophy of life broader and truer than any to which the nations have

yet attained.

What I have just been saying with regard to Roman Catholicism generally,

in relation to economic doctrines and industrial progress, applies, of

course, with a hundred fold pertinence to the case of Ireland. Between

the enactment of the first Penal Laws and the date of Roman Catholic

Emancipation, Irish Roman Catholics were, to put it mildly, afforded

scant opportunity, in their own country, of developing economic virtues

or achieving industrial success. Ruthlessly deprived of education, are

they to be blamed if they did not use the newly acquired facilities to

the best advantage? With their religion looked on as the badge of legal

and social inferiority, was it any wonder that priests and people alike,

while clinging with unexampled fidelity to their creed, remained

altogether cut off from the current of material prosperity? Excluded, as

they were, not merely from social and political privileges, but from the

most ordinary civil rights, denied altogether the right of ownership of

real property, and restricted in the possession of personalty, is it

any wonder that they are not to-day in the van of industrial and

commercial progress? Nay, more, was it to have been expected that the

character of a people so persecuted and ostracised should have come out

of the ordeal of centuries with its adaptability and elasticity

unimpaired? That would have been impossible. Those who are intimate with

the Roman Catholic people of Ireland, and at the same time familiar with

their history, will recognise in their character and mental outlook many

an inheritance of that epoch of serfdom. I speak, of course, of the

mass, for I am not unmindful of many exceptions to this generalisation.

But I must now pass on to a more definite consideration of the present

action and attitude of the Irish Roman Catholic clergy towards the

economic, educational, and other issues discussed in this book. The

reasons which render such a consideration necessary are obvious. Even if

we include Ulster, three quarters of the Irish people are Roman

Catholics, while, excluding the Northern province, quite nine-tenths of

the population belong to that religion. Again, the three thousand

clergymen of that denomination exercise an influence over their flocks

not merely in regard to religious matters, but in almost every phase of

their lives and conduct, which is, in its extent and character, quite

unique, even, I should say, amongst Roman Catholic communities. To a

Protestant, this authority seems to be carried very far beyond what the

legitimate influence of any clergy over the lay members of their

congregation should be. We are, however, dealing with a national life

explicable only by reference to a very exceptional and gloomy history of

religious persecution. What I may call the secular shortcomings of the

Roman Catholics in Ireland cannot be fairly judged except as the results

of a series of enactments by which they were successively denied almost

all means of succeeding as citizens of this world.

From such study as I have been able to give to the history of their

Church, I have come to the conclusion that the immense power of the

Irish Roman Catholic clergy has been singularly little abused. I think

it must be admitted that they have not exhibited in any marked degree

bigotry towards Protestants. They have not put obstacles in the way of

the Roman Catholic majority choosing Protestants for political leaders,

and it is significant that refugees, such as the Palatines, from

Catholic persecutions in Europe, found at different times a home amongst

the Roman Catholic people of Ireland. My own experience, too, if I may

again refer to that, distinctly proves that it is no disadvantage to a

man to be a Protestant in Irish political life, and that where

opposition is shown to him by Roman Catholics it is almost invariably on

political, social, or agrarian, but not on religious grounds.

A charge of another kind has of late been often brought against the

Roman Catholic clergy, which has a direct bearing upon the economic

aspect of this question. Although, as I read Irish history, the Roman

Catholic priesthood have, in the main, used their authority with

personal disinterestedness, if not always with prudence or discretion,

their undoubted zeal for religion has, on occasion, assumed forms which

enlightened Roman Catholics, including high dignitaries of that Church,

think unjustifiable on economic grounds, and discourage even from a

religious standpoint. Excessive and extravagant church-building in the

heart and at the expense of poor communities is a recent and notorious

example of this misdirected zeal. It has been, I believe, too often

forgotten that the best monument of any clergyman's influence and

earnestness must always be found in the moral character and the

spiritual fibre of his flock, and not in the marbles and mosaics of a

gaudy edifice. And without doubt a good many motives which have but a

remote connection with religion are, unfortunately, at work in the

church-building movement. It may, however, to some extent, be regarded

as an extreme re-action from the penal times, when the hunted _soggarth_

had to celebrate the Mass in cabins and caves on the mountain side--a

re-action the converse of which was witnessed in Protestant England when

Puritanism rose up against Anglicanism in the seventeenth century. This

expenditure, however, has been incurred; and, no one, I take it, would

advocate the demolition of existing religious edifices on the ground

that their erection had been unduly costly! The moral is for the present

and the future, and applies not merely to economy in new buildings, but

also in the decoration of existing churches.[18]

But it is not alone extravagant church building which in a country so

backward as Ireland, shocks the economic sense. The multiplication--in

inverse ratio to a declining population--of costly and elaborate

monastic and conventual institutions, involving what in the aggregate

must be an enormous annual expenditure for maintenance, is difficult to

reconcile with the known conditions of the country. Most of these

institutions, it is true, carry on educational work, often, as in the

case of the Christian Brothers and some colleges and convents, of an

excellent kind. Many of them render great services to the poor, and

especially to the sick poor. But, none the less, it seems to me, their

growth in number and size is anomalous. I cannot believe that so large

an addition to the 'unproductive' classes is economically sound, and I

have no doubt at all that the competition with lay teachers of celibates

'living in community' is excessive and educationally injurious. Strongly

as I hold the importance of religion in education, I personally do not

think that teachers who have renounced the world and withdrawn from

contact with its stress and strain are the best moulders of the

characters of youths who will have to come into direct conflict with the

trials and temptations of life. But here again we must accept the

situation and work with the instruments ready to hand. The practical and

statesmanlike action for all those concerned is to endeavour to render

these institutions as efficient educational agencies as may be possible.

They owe their existence largely to the gaps in the educational system

of this country which religious and political strife have produced and

maintained, and they deserve the utmost credit for endeavouring to

supply missing steps in our educational ladder.[19] If they now fully

respond to the spirit of the new movements and meet the demand for

technical education by the employment of the most approved methods and

equipment, and by the thorough training on sound lines of their staffs,

it is impossible that their influence on the young generation should not

be as salutary as it will be wide-reaching.

But, after all, these criticisms are, for the purposes of my argument,

of minor relevance and importance. The real matter in which the direct

and personal responsibility of the Roman Catholic clergy seems to me to

be involved, is the character and _morale_ of the people of this

country. No reader of this book will accuse me of attaching too little

weight to the influence of historical causes on the present state,

social, economic and political, of Ireland, but even when I have given

full consideration to all such influences I still think that, with their

unquestioned authority in religion, and their almost equally undisputed

influence in education, the Roman Catholic clergy cannot be exonerated

from some responsibility in regard to Irish character as we find it

to-day. Are they, I would ask, satisfied with that character? I cannot

think so. The impartial observer will, I fear, find amongst a majority

of our people a striking absence of self-reliance and moral courage; an

entire lack of serious thought on public questions; a listlessness and

apathy in regard to economic improvement which amount to a form of

fatalism; and, in backward districts, a survival of superstition, which

saps all strength of will and purpose--and all this, too, amongst a

people singularly gifted by nature with good qualities of mind and

heart.

Nor can the Roman Catholic clergy altogether console themselves with the

thought that religious faith, even when free from superstition, is

strong in the breasts of the people. So long, no doubt, as Irish Roman

Catholics remain at home, in a country of sharply defined religious

classes, and with a social environment and a public opinion so

preponderatingly stamped with their creed, open defections from Roman

Catholicism are rare. But we have only to look at the extent of the

'leakage' from Roman Catholicism amongst the Irish emigrants in the

United States and in Great Britain, to realise how largely emotional and

formal must be the religion of those who lapse so quickly in a

non-Catholic atmosphere.[20]

It is not, of course, to the causes of the defections from a creed to

which I do not subscribe that my criticism is directed. I refer to the

matter only in order to emphasise the large share of responsibility

which belongs to the Roman Catholic clergy for what I strongly believe

to be the chief part in the work of national regeneration, the part

compared with which all legislative, administrative, educational or

industrial achievements are of minor importance. Holding, as I do, that

the building of character is the condition precedent to material, social

and intellectual advancement, indeed to all national progress, I may,

perhaps, as a lay citizen, more properly criticise, from this point of

view, what I conceive to be the great defect in the methods of clerical

influence. For this purpose no better illustration could be afforded

than a brief analysis of the results of the efforts made by the Roman

Catholic clergy to inculcate temperance.

Among temperance advocates--the most earnest of all reformers--the Roman

Catholic clergy have an honourable record. An Irish priest was the

greatest, and, for a brief spell, the most successful temperance apostle

of the last century, and statistics, it is only fair to say, show that

we Irish drink rather less than people in other parts of the United

Kingdom. But the real question is whether we more often drink to

intoxication, and police statistics as well as common experience seem to

disclose that we do. Many a temperate man drinks more in his life than

many a village drunkard. Again, the test of the average consumption of

man, woman and child is somewhat misleading, especially in Ireland

where, owing to the excessive emigration of adults, there is a

disproportionately large number of very young and old. Moreover, we

Irish drink more in proportion to our means than the English, Scotch,

and Welsh, whose consumption is absolutely larger. Anyone who attempts

to deal practically with the problems of industrial development in

Ireland realises what a terribly depressing influence the drink evil

exercises upon the industrial capacity of the people. 'Ireland sober is

Ireland free,' is nearer the truth, than much that is thought and most

of what is said about liberty in this country.

Now, the drink habit in Ireland differs from that of the other parts of

the United Kingdom. The Irishman is, in my belief, physiologically less

subject to the craving for alcohol than the Englishman, a fact which is

partially attributable, I should say, to the less animal dietary to

which he is accustomed. By far the greater proportion of the drinking

which retards our progress is of a festive character. It takes place at

fairs and markets, sometimes, even yet, at 'wakes,' those ghastly

parodies on the blessed consolation of religion in bereavement. It is

intensified by the almost universal sale of liquor in the country shops

'for consumption on the premises,' an evil the demoralising effects of

which are an hundredfold greater than those of the 'grocer's licences'

which temperance reformers so strenuously denounce. It is an evil in

defence of which nothing can be said, but it has somehow escaped the

effective censure of the Church.

The indiscriminate granting of licences in Ireland, which has resulted

in the provision of liquor shops in a proportion to the population

larger than is found in any other country, is in itself due mainly to

the moral cowardice of magistrates, who do not care to incur local

unpopularity by refusing licences for which there is no pretence of any

need beyond that of the applicant and his relatives. Not long ago the

magistrates of Ireland met in Dublin in order to inaugurate common

action in dealing with this scandal. Appropriate resolutions were

passed, and much good has already resulted from the meeting, but had the

unvarnished truth been admissible, the first and indeed the only

necessary resolution should have run, "Resolved that in future we be

collectively as brave as we have been individually timid, and that we

take heart of grace and carry away from this meeting sufficient strength

to do, in the exercise of our functions as the licensing authority, what

we have always known to be our plain duty to our country and our God."

No such resolution was proposed, for though patriotism is becoming real

in Ireland, it is not yet very robust.

I do not think it unfair to insist upon the large responsibility of the

clergy for the state of public opinion in this matter, to which the few

facts I have cited bear testimony. But I attribute their failure to deal

with a moral evil of which they are fully cognisant to the fact that

they do not recognise the chief defect in the character of the people,

and to a misunderstanding of the means by which that character can be

strengthened. There are, however, exceptions to this general statement.

It is of happy augury for the future of Ireland that many of the clergy

are now leading a temperance movement which shows a real knowledge of

the _causa causans_ of Irish intemperance. The Anti-Treating League, as

it is called, administers a novel pledge which must have been conceived

in a very understanding mind. Those enlisted undertake neither to treat

nor to be treated. They may drink, so far as the pledge is concerned, as

much as they like; but they must drink at their own expense; and others

must not drink at their expense. The good nature and sociability of

Irishmen, too often the mere result of inability to say 'no,' need not

be sacrificed. But even if they were, the loss of these social graces

would be far more than compensated by a self-respect and seriousness of

life out of which something permanent might be built. Still, even this

League makes no direct appeal to character, and so acts rather as a cure

for than as a preventive of our moral weakness.

The methods by which clerical influence is wielded in the inculcation of

chastity may be criticised from exactly the same standpoint as that from

which I have found it necessary to deal with the question of temperance.

Here the success of the Irish priesthood is, considering the conditions

of peasant life, and the fire of the Celtic temperament, absolutely

unique. No one can deny that almost the entire credit of this moral

achievement belongs to the Roman Catholic clergy. It may be said that

the practice of a virtue, even if the motive be of an emotional kind,

becomes a habit, and that habit proverbially develops into a second

nature. With this view of moral evolution I am in entire accord; but I

would ask whether the evolution has not reached a stage where a gradual

relaxation of the disciplinary measures by which chastity is insured

might be safely allowed without any danger of lowering the high standard

of continence which is general in Ireland and which of course it is of

supreme importance to maintain.

There are, however, many parishes where in this matter the strictest

discipline is rigorously enforced Amusements, not necessarily or even

often vicious, are objected to as being fraught with dangers which would

never occur to any but the rigidly ascetic or the puritanical mind. In

many parishes the Sunday cyclist will observe the strange phenomenon of

a normally light-hearted peasantry marshalled in male and female groups

along the road, eyeing one another in dull wonderment across the

forbidden space through the long summer day. This kind of discipline,

unless when really necessary, is open to the objection that it

eliminates from the education of life, especially during the formative

years, an essential of culture--the mutual understanding of the sexes.

The evil of grafting upon secular life a quasi-monasticism which, not

being voluntary, has no real effect upon the character, may perhaps

involve moral consequences little dreamed of by the spiritual guardians

of the people. A study of the pathology of the emotions might throw

doubt upon the safety of enforced asceticism when unaccompanied by the

training which the Church wisely prescribes for those who take the vow

of celibacy. But of my own knowledge I can speak only of another aspect

of the effect upon our national life of the restrictions to which I

refer. No Irishmen are more sincerely desirous of staying the tide of

emigration than the Roman Catholic clergy, and while, wisely as I think,

they do not dream of a wealthy Ireland, they earnestly work for the

physical and material as well as the spiritual well-being of their

flocks. And yet no man can get into the confidence of the emigrating

classes without being told by them that the exodus is largely due to a

feeling that the clergy are, no doubt from an excellent motive, taking

joy--innocent joy--from the social side of the home life.

To go more fully into these subjects might carry me beyond the proper

limits of lay criticism. But, clearly, large questions of clerical

training must suggest themselves to those to whom their discussion

properly belongs--whether, for example, there is not in the instances

which I have cited evidence of a failure to understand that mere

authority in the regions of moral conduct cannot have any abiding

effect, except in the rarest combination of circumstances, and with a

very primitive people. Do not many of these clergy ignore the vast

difference between the ephemeral nature of moral compulsion and the

enduring force of a real moral training?

I have dealt with the exercise of clerical influence in these matters as

being, at any rate in relation to the subject matter of this book, far

more important than the evil commonly described as "The Priest in

Politics." That evil is, in my opinion, greatly misrepresented. The

cases of priests who take an improper part in politics are cited without

reference to the vastly greater number who take no part at all, except

when genuinely assured that a definite moral issue is at stake. I also

have in my mind the question of how we should have fared if the control

of the different Irish agitations had been confined to laymen, and if

the clergy had not consistently condemned secret associations. But

whatever may be said in defence of the priest in politics in the past,

there are the strongest grounds for deprecating a continuance of their

political activity in the future. As I gauge the several forces now

operating in Ireland, I am convinced that if an anti-clerical movement

similar to that which other Roman Catholic countries have witnessed,

were to succeed in discrediting the priesthood and lowering them in

public estimation, it would be followed by a moral, social, and

political degradation which would blight, or at least postpone, our

hopes of a national regeneration. From this point of view I hold that

those clergymen who are predominantly politicians endanger the moral

influence which it is their solemn duty to uphold. I believe however,

that the over-active part hitherto taken in politics by the priests is

largely the outcome of the way in which Roman Catholics were treated in

the past, and that this undesirable feature in Irish life will yield,

and is already yielding to the removal of the evils to which it owed its

origin and in some measure its justification.[21]

One has only to turn to the spirit and temper of such representative

Roman Catholics as Archbishop Healy and Dr. Kelly, Bishop of Ross--to

their words and to their deeds--in order to catch the inspiration of a

new movement amongst our Roman Catholic fellow-countrymen at once

religious and patriotic. And if my optimism ever wavers, I have but to

think of the noble work that many priests are to my own knowledge

doing, often in remote and obscure parishes, in the teeth of innumerable

obstacles. I call to mind at such times, as pioneers in a great

awakening, men like the eminent Jesuit, Father Thomas Finlay, Father

Hegarty of Erris, Father O'Donovan of Loughrea, and many others--men

with whom I have worked and taken counsel, and who represent, I believe,

an ever increasing number of their fellow priests.[22]

My position, then, towards the influence of the Roman Catholic

clergy--and this influence is a matter of vital importance to the

understanding of Irish problems--- may now be clearly defined. While

recognising to the full that large numbers of the Irish Roman Catholic

clergy have in the past exercised undue influence in purely political

questions, and, in many other matters, social, educational, and

economic, have not, as I see things, been on the side of progress, I

hold that their influence is now, more than ever before, essential for

improving the condition of the most backward section of the population.

Therefore I feel it to be both the duty and the strong interest of my

Protestant fellow-countrymen to think much less of the religious

differences which divide them from Roman Catholics, and much more of

their common citizenship and their common cause. I also hold with equal

strength and sincerity to the belief, which I have already expressed,

that the shortcomings of the Roman Catholic clergy are largely to be

accounted for, not by any innate tendency on their part towards

obscurantism, but by the sad history of Ireland in the past. I would

appeal to those of my co-religionists who think otherwise to suspend

their judgment for a time. That Roman Catholicism is firmly established

in Ireland is a fact of the situation which they must admit, and as this

involves the continued powerful influence of the priesthood upon the

character of the people, it is surely good policy by liberality and fair

dealing, especially in the matter of education, to turn this influence

towards the upbuilding of our national life.

To sum up the influence of religion and religious controversy in

Ireland, as it presents itself from the only standpoint from which I

have approached the matter in this chapter, namely, that of material,

social, and intellectual progress, I find that while the Protestants

have given, and continue to give, a fine example of thrift and industry

to the rest of the nation, the attitude of a section of them towards the

majority of their fellow-countrymen has been a bigoted and unintelligent

one. On the other hand, I have learned from practical experience amongst

the Roman Catholic people of Ireland that, while more free from bigotry,

in the sense in which that word is usually applied, they are apathetic,

thriftless, and almost non-industrial, and that they especially require

the exercise of strengthening influences on their moral fibre. I have

dealt with their shortcomings at much greater length than with those of

Protestants, because they have much more bearing on the subject matter

of this book. North and South have each virtues which the other lacks;

each has much to learn from the other; but the home of the strictly

civic virtues and efficiencies is in Protestant Ireland. The work of the

future in Ireland will be to break down in social intercourse the

barriers of creed as well as those of race, politics, and class, and

thus to promote the fruitful contact of North and South, and the

concentration of both on the welfare of their common country. In the

case of those of us, of whatever religious belief, who look to a future

for our country commensurate with the promise of her undeveloped

resources both of intellect and soil, it is of the essence of our hope

that the qualities which are in great measure accountable for the actual

economic and educational backwardness of so many of our

fellow-countrymen, and for the intolerance of too many who are not

backward in either respect, are not purely racial or sectarian, but are

the transitory growth of days and deeds which we must all try to forget

if our work for Ireland is to endure.

FOOTNOTES:

[16] The reproach which is brought upon Irish Christianity mainly by the

extravagances of a section of my co-religionists, to which I have been

obliged to refer, came home to me not long ago in a very forcible way. I

happened to remark to a friend that it was a disgrace to Christianity

that Mussulman soldiery were employed at the Holy Sepulchre to keep the

peace between the Latin and Greek Christians. He reminded me that the

prosperous and progressive municipality of Belfast, with a population

eminently industrious, and predominantly Protestant, has to be policed

by an Imperial force in order to restrain two sections of Irish

Christians from assaulting each other in the name of religion.

[17] '_Pro salute animae meae_' was, I am reminded, the consideration

usually expressed in the old charters of manumission.

[18] One of the unfortunate effects of this passion for building costly

churches is the importation of quantities of foreign art-work in the

shape of woodcarvings, stained glass, mosaics, and metal work. To good

foreign art, indeed, one could not, within certain limits, object. It

might prove a valuable example and stimulus. But the articles which have

actually been imported, in the impulse to get everything finished as

soon as possible, generally consist of the stock pieces produced in a

spirit of mere commercialism in the workshops of Continental firms which

make it their business to cater for a public who do not know the

difference between good art and bad. Much of the decoration of

ecclesiastical buildings, whether Roman Catholic or Protestant, might

fittingly be postponed until religion in Ireland has got into closer

relation with the native artistic sense and industrial spirit now

beginning to seek creative expression.

[19] The following extract from a statement of the Most Rev. Dr. O'Dea,

the newly elected Bishop of Clonfert, is pertinent:--'There is another

cause also--i.e. in addition to the absence of university education for

Roman Catholic laymen--which has hindered the employment of the laity in

the past. Till very recently, the secondary Catholic schools received no

assistance whatever from the State, and their endowment from private

sources was utterly inadequate to supply suitable remuneration for lay

teachers. It is evident that a celibate clergy _can_ live on a lower

wage than the laity, and they are now charged with having monopolized

the schools, because they chose to work for a minimum allowance rather

than suffer the country to remain without any secondary education

whatever. Two causes, then, operated in the past, and in a large measure

still operate, to exclude the laity from the secondary schools,--first,

these schools were so poverty-stricken that they could not afford to pay

lay teachers at such a rate as would attract them to the teaching

profession, and, next, the Catholic laity as a body were uneducated,

and, therefore, unfit to teach in the schools.'--_Maynooth and the

University Question_, p. 109 (footnote).

[20] See, _inter alia_, an article "Ireland and America," by Rev. Mr.

Shinnors, O.M., in the _Irish Ecclesiastical Record_, February, 1902.

'Has the Church,' asks Father Shinnors, 'increased her membership in the

ratio that the population of the United States has increased? No. There

are many converts, but there are many more apostates. Large numbers

lapse into indifferentism and irreligion. There should be in America

about 20,000,000 Catholics; there are scarcely 10,000,000. There are

reasons to fear that the great majority of the apostates are of Irish

extraction, and not a few of them of Irish birth.'

[21] This view seems to be taken by the most influential spokesmen of

the Roman Catholic Hierarchy. See Evidence, _Royal Commission on

University Education in Ireland_, vol. iii., p. 238, Questions 8702-6.

[22] I may mention that of the co-operative societies organised by the

Irish Agricultural Organisation Society there are no fewer than 331

societies of which the local priests are the Chairmen, while to my own

knowledge during the summer and autumn of 1902, as many as 50,000

persons from all parts of Ireland were personally conducted over the

exhibit of the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction at

the Cork Exhibition by their local clergy. The educational purpose of

these visits is explained in Chap. x. Again, in a great number of cases

the village libraries which have been recently started in Ireland with

the assistance of the Department (the books consisting largely of

industrial, economic, and technical works on agriculture), have been

organised and assisted by the Roman Catholic clergy.

Ireland In The New Century · 第 4 / 8 章