THE '98 CENTENARY.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXV, Issue 37, 14 January 1898, Page 31

THE '98 CENTENARY.

TO THE EDTTOR N.Z. TABLET

Sir, — I have read with considerable interest in your last issue to hand, the remarks of Cardinal Moran on the proposal to conmieuiorate the rebellion of 1795. I think it is to be regretted that His Eminence was not more pronounced in disapproving of a proposal, the inevitable effect of which must be to cause ill-feeling on the part of many of our fellow-colonists. To avoid misinterpretation, permit me to state that no one more cordially detests the cruel treatment to which Ireland has been subjected than 1 do, and no one, probably has more admiration for the patriots who gave up their lives for the freedom of their country. But I still think there are many good reasons why in these colonies at any rate, nothing should be done which might be construed to mean simple sympathy with rebellion, or to foster racial or religious hatreds. In the first place, although the great majority of the patriots of 1798 were not Catholics, it will be impossible in the minds of our non-Catholic fellow-colonists to separate the celebration from the Catholic religion. The great majority of those who would take part in it must necessarily be Catholics and it will be difficult — nay, impossible — to show non-Catholics that it is not a Catholic movement. Their hesitancy to believe the contrary will be pardoned by any sensible man. especially when it is remembered that very few of them know anything more than the vaguest outline of the facts about the rebellion. Personally I hold strongly to the opinion that nationalism has in the past been one of the greatest enemies to religion. The Church is not national and never can be unless it is possible for her to cease to be Catholic, and it was the universality of the Church, which in the past made her sway unpopular in more countries than one. In England, for instance, Henry VIII and his parasites did not hesitate to make use of the patriotism of the people to carry out their policy of plunder and murder. Ireland, I believe, is the only country wherein the national sentiment has not clashed with religion, and that is, perhaps largely due to the fact that her oppressors were not only of another race, but of a different creed. But the history of the world since the Christian era shows that nearly all the peisecutors of the Church have sheltered themselves under the sacred mantle of patriotism. The Church being essentially universal, could not conveniently be used as a tool for party purposes, and hence she has had continual warfare with nationalism. Of course this does not necessarily prove anything against patriotism in itself. The love of their native land is implanted by Almighty God in the brea&ts of every people. But all good gifts are capable of being misused, and the excellent quality of patriotism furnishes no exception to the rule. Socialism, like all errors, contains a strong leaven of truth, and one of the best features of Socialism is its opposition to race hatreds — its ambition to abolish warfare to establish what Louis Kossuth called •■ the solidarity of the peoples." Say what you will, it cannot be denied this noble aspiration of Socialism is essentially Catholic. The true mission of religion is to make neighbours and friends of all men, since they are all children of the same Father, no matter what their creed or oountiy, no matter how wide she was or how hijzh the mountains between them. We Catholics have all been taught that •■ our neighbour " means " mankind of every description without any exception of persons."

I do not for one moment say that Catholics who will participate in the centenary celebration of the rebellion of 17 ( .i8 will be guilty of intentional violation oi the principles of the Catholic Church. My argument is that our non-Catholic neighbours, for whom we must cherish the deepest feelings of cha'ity and respect, will not be able to dissever the Church from the celebration, and they will not sympathise with the celebration, because they cannot be expected to look on the rebellion as Irishmen do, nor do any of them, save a small minority know enough of the history of the rebellion to enable them to fully appreciate it. The celebration must, therefore, tend to foster a teeling of irritation, which it should be the ambition of every good man to repress, being opposed as it is to the spirit of religion and to the harmony of the community.

In addition to the foregoing considerations, which appear tome very important ones. 1 fail to bee what good purpose can powbly be effected by reviving the bitter memories of '9s. it' the wrongs of to-day could be remedied by resurrecting the wrongs ot the past the case would be different. The accumulated experience of mankind, however, does not show that wrongs have ever been even mitigated by reopening old wounds. Any liberal minded man must ridicule and deplore the senseless rejoicings which a small section of Irishmen hold every year in commemoration of a battle which took place on the banks of the Boyno 2<>B years ago between a dissolute Dutchman and a Royal coward of the House of Stuart. These miserable demonstrations should be treated with silent contempt ; but believe me, Catholic Irishmen will be only furnishing them with an excuse for existing evils by reviving the memory ot the events associated with the black and bitter penal days.

There are many honest but unreflecting men who believe that the struggle in Ireland was, and is a religious one pure and simple. In reality, however, religion has been used in Ireland, as elsewhere, as an excuse for plundering the people. And such is the case at the present moment. Cratty schemers in high places, fearing the unity of the people, and knowing that division in the popular ranks is the surest guarantee of the continuance of the system of plunder, contrive to fan the loul fierce flame of religious bigotry, and alas ! they succeed, and they could not be provided with better material than will be supplied them by those who wish to

reopen the bloody pages of the history of 1798. That Ireland has been oppressed in the past ; that centuries since Cromwell's soldiers ravished and murdered wholesale, that the pitchcap and the rack were used on her best and purest sons has little, if anything, to do with the present position. What should concern ua is that to-day the Irish people are cruelly wronged, in the name of law, by a land system which is more brutal and un-Christian than any system known in Pagan times. But this great and cruel injustice will never be rectified by keeping alive national and religious hates. It can be rectified by the union of the people in a common crusade against this system of refined and legalised plunder which robs the poor of every country as well as of Ireland. Such a union will not prove visionary or impracticable if only leading men will champion it rather than pander to every base passion and every regular prejudice.

I remember that when the late Mr. Henry George visited Ireland in 1882, he denounced in unmeasured terms the religious and racial complexion which was given to the Irish struggle for liberty. He pointed out that the real robber of Ireland was landlordism, that it suited the few in high places to set Catholic against Protestant, that it was misguided patriotism to set Saxon against Celt, and Catholic against Protestant ; that the people of England, and, indeed, of other countries, suffered from wrongs, many of them the same in principle as those which desecrated Ireland ; and he urged what he termed ' a Holy Alliance of the people" against the common enemy of mankind — landlordism. At the time his was considered "' a voice crying in the wilderness," and indeed so it was ; but he spoke the truth all the same, and there is a rapidly increasing number who realise the fact. But the realisation of an ideal so lofty, so truly patriotic, and so Catholic is delayed rather than hastened by demonstrations, which, no matter how good may be the intentions of the promoters, must necessarily revive old feuds and so place a gulf between people who are no more responsible for the errors of the past than any child is accountable for sins of its remote ancestors. Granting that all my arguments are erroneous, there is still another potent objection. Such demonstrations are often headed by ra&h and imprudent men whose indiscretions generally embroil their moderate colleagues in difficulties, and in the end lead to wrangling between the principals themselves, and so factions are formed within factions, whence we are compelled to conclude that the only consolidating power over them is organised opposition. In view ot all these circumstances, therefore, I am of the opinion that such celebrations had better be avoided altogether, and I feel assured that lam not alone among Irishmen in holding that opinion. — I am, etc., P. J. O'Regan. Reefton, Jan. 4, 1898.