The charge of being a political and social injustice, which we have brought against the Establishment, is fully proved by what has hitherto been said. Even if there were no other arguments on which to rest our case, save the single one which we have developed above, it must be admitted that we have made good our accusation. "I hold", said Lord Palmerston in 1845, "that the revenues of the Church of Ireland were destined primarily for the religious instruction of the people of Ireland.... It is impossible, in my opinion, that the present state of things in Ireland, in regard to the establishments of the two sects, can be permanent". But there is more. Evil is ever the parent of evil; and in one comprehensive injustice like the Irish Establishment are involved a thousand minor wrongs. The effects of these wrongs in Ireland, and the mischief wrought by them on our people, we daily see with our own eyes, and hear with our own ears. But to Mr. Cunningham we are indebted for a striking and rather novel view of the Establishment, as a source of mischief to England also. The very guilt she has incurred by the perpetration of so great an injustice, is, in Mr. Cunningham's opinion, the greatest of misfortunes. "To do wrong is a far greater misfortune than to endure it. No man enjoys a wrongful privilege, tramples on his fellow-citizens, or violates fair play, without forthwith incurring a moral loss, compared with which, any external advantage is a bauble indeed". Noble words these: and most refreshingly do they fall upon Catholic ears, wearied with the noisy utilitarian philosophy of the day. Nor does the Establishment confer any external or material advantage on England. On the contrary, it is preparing for her some grievous and humiliating calamity. Who sows the wind must expect to reap the whirlwind; and no other harvest but calamity can possibly be gathered from the evil seed of disaffection on one side, and of tyranny on the other, which the Establishment has sown in Ireland. Mr. Cunningham thus describes how the chronic disaffection of Irishmen is produced:
"The church funds of Ireland belong, without the possibility of a cavil, to the Irish nation; that nation has, from one reason or another, persistently refused to follow us in deserting the general creed of Christendom. They have clung and still cling to their faith with that desperate tenacity which persecution best engenders.... But the gradual abandonment of the atrocious penal code—as one by one its provisions became revolting to the increased humanity of the age—was a virtual confession that we gave up all hope of driving the Irish Catholics within the pale of our church.... Angry at resistance, the English government, coöperating with English fanaticism, set itself deliberately to persecute, degrade, almost destroy, those whom it could not succeed in converting. All has been tried, and the Establishment remains, as of old, the privilege of a powerful minority, the badge of conquest upon a prostrate race, a perpetual source of irritation—and nothing more. So far from being Protestantised, the Irish are already the hottest Ultramontanes in Europe, and are assuming more and more the triumphant air to which their numerical ascendancy entitles them. There is not the ghost of a chance of Ireland becoming other than she is, or of the Establishment making such strides as might render her present position less transparently absurd. The one question is this, whether we choose to perpetuate a state of things condemned by all statesmen as vicious in principle, and proved by long experience to be productive of nothing but a tyrannising temper, on the one hand, and chronic disaffection on the other. Every Irish peasant has sense enough to appreciate the injustice of the arrangement which obliges him to build his chapel, pay the priest, and gives his landlord a church and parson for nothing. He may be excused too for a feeling of annoyance, as he trudges past the empty parish church, supported at the public expense, to some remote chapel crowded with peasants, out of whose abject poverty the necessary funds for its support have to be wrung. He may be excused if his notions of fair play, equal rights, and political loyalty, are somewhat indistinct, and that where the law is from the outset a manifest wrong-doer, it should be sometimes superseded by rougher and more effective expedients. He is naturally a rebel, because the state proclaims herself his enemy. He naturally thinks it monstrous that any proprietor of the soil should have it in his power to refuse the inhabitants a spot of ground on which to celebrate their religious rites; that men, women, and children should be obliged to walk five, six, and even ten miles to the nearest place of worship; that education should be constantly refused, except coupled with open and systematic proselytism; that terrorism and coercion, the mean contrivances of bigotry, should be suffered to do their worst, without the strong hand of government intervening to lighten the blow, or provide means of protection"—pages 28, 29.
All this is well said: nor is the author less happy in his description of the tyrannising temper which it fosters on the part of the Protestants.
"And if the Establishment works ill as regards the Catholic masses, its effects on the privileged minority seem to us scarcely less disastrous. It engenders a tone of arrogant, violent, uncharitable bigotry, which happily is unknown in this country beyond the precincts of Exeter Hall and the columns of the 'religious' newspapers. Indeed, we have only to turn to 'Good News from Ireland', to assure ourselves of the detestable temper in which these modern Reformers set about the process of evangelisation, and of the extraordinary hardihood of assertion by which their ministrations are characterised. The creed of an Irish peasant may be superstitious—where is the peasant whose creed is anything else?—but religion in Ireland has at any rate, in the true spirit of Christianity, found its way to the wretched, the degraded, the despairing: it has refined, comforted, ennobled those whom external circumstances seemed expressly designed to crush them into absolute brutality. The Irish peasant is never the mere animal that for centuries English legislators tried to make him. He is a troublesome subject, indeed, and has a code of his own as to the 'wild justice' to which the oppressed may, in the last instance, resort; but in the domestic virtues, chastity, kindliness, hospitality, he stands, at least, as well as English or Scotch of the same condition in life. As regards domestic purity, indeed, Ireland, by universal confession, rises as much above the ordinary standard as Scotland falls below it: and as regards intemperance, there has been in Ireland of late years a marked improvement, for which unhappily no counterpart is to be found in any other part of the United Kingdom. Yet we are gravely invited to believe, on the testimony of a few hot-brained fanatics, that the whole Catholic system in Ireland is one vast conspiracy against piety, happiness, and civilisation....
"That Protestants are perfectly well aware of the mortification entailed upon their Catholic fellow-subjects by the existing state of things, and regard it with complacent acquiescence, is not the least painful feature of the case. The Irish Church is bad, not only in itself, but as being the last of a long series of oppressions which fear, passion, or necessity have at various times led the English to inflict upon their feeble neighbour. There have been periods when the deliberate idea of even intelligent politicians was, that the one population should exterminate the other; and Burke has pointed out how the religious animosities, which seem now the great cause of dispute, are in reality only a new phase of far earlier hostility, grounded originally on conquest, and strengthened by the cruelties which conquest involved. It is to some such fierce mood, traditionally familiar to the ruling race, that an institution so unjust in principle, so troublesome in practice, so incurably barren of all useful result, can appeal for sanction and support. The blind and almost ferocious bigotry of Irish Presbyterians is owing, one would fain hope, less to personal temperament than to the tastes and convictions of a ruder age, embodied in evil customs and a conventionally violent phraseology. And the same is more or less true of their Episcopalian brethren. It is from the calmer feelings and more discriminating judgment of the English nation that any remedial measure is expected"—pages 33-37.
We have nothing to add to this. Every Catholic will recognize the truth of the picture thus ably drawn. Our obligations to Mr. Cunningham do not, however, end here. There is still another lesson which, although he does not mean to teach it, we are glad to learn from him. It is this. Speaking of the paid clergy of the Establishment, he says:—
"So far from assisting the government in its schemes, they are among its bitterest opponents. Dr. Cullen himself is hardly more hostile to the National Education System than these paid officials of the state, for whom the one possible excuse would be an unflinching support of state measures. The Church Education Society numbers something like two-thirds of the Established clergy among its adherents, and is one of the most serious difficulties with which at present the cause of National Education has to contend. What shall be done with these spaniels that forget to cringe, but bark and snap at the hand that feeds them? Might they not, at any rate, be scourged and starved into a more submissive mood?"—page 43.
These words reveal to us the position which men of the world would expect a clergy paid by the state to assume towards the state. From being ministers of God, they are to become paid officials of the state; from being the stewards of things divine, they are to recommend themselves to their masters by an unflinching support of the state measures. And if conscience should at any time call upon them to refuse the support demanded at their hands, the government has the power and the will to scourge and starve them into a more submissive mood. What a practical commentary does Mr. Cunningham here offer on the words used by Mgr. Brancadoro,[C] in declining the pension offered by the British Government in 1805! Better, far better, poverty with the liberty of the sanctuary, than rich endowments with slavery. We demand the abolition of the Establishment on the broad grounds of social equality and justice, and not because we wish to enrich ourselves with its spoils. We are rich enough in the love of that noble Irish race, than which none other ever gave more blessed consolation to the ministers of Christ.
FOOTNOTES:
[C] I. E. Record, No. II., page 50-55.