Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

A Protestant Ireland

Options
2456

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    robp
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,934 ✭✭✭robp


    Jawgap wrote: »
    What we really missed out on, and what fecked us up royally, was (a) the Marshall Plan money and (b) getting the Yanks onside for discussions over NI........one of the great 'what-ifs' of our history........
    I think Ireland was part of the Marshall plan.


  • Options
    #33
    Manach
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,664 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    robp wrote: »
    I think Ireland was part of the Marshall plan.
    Offhand, I don't recall reading that was so - which would be strange given how much the state is short of a few bob. :)


  • Options
    #34
    rugby addict
    Registered Users Posts: 50 ✭✭rugby addict


    Judgement Day wrote: »
    Ireland didn't leave the British Commonwealth until 1949.
    Sorry about that, the simplified version I was taught appears to be totally wrong


  • Options
    #35
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    robp wrote: »
    I think Ireland was part of the Marshall plan.

    Kind of.....out of a $13 billion programme we accessed
    "$128 million in loans, $18 million in grants, and $1.25 million in technical assistance, as well as appropriating "counterpart funds" through [Ireland's] own budget to parallel the monies received. These funds were used both to purchase American goods, otherwise not obtainable because of the dollar shortage, and costly capital improvements within Ireland."

    From Ireland and the Marshall Plan, 1947-57, by Bernadette Whelan,


  • Options
    #36
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,056 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    rugby addict wrote: »
    Had Ireland remained part of the common wealth, the country would be vastly different today.
    During WW2 Shannon airport or Foynes would have become a vitally important air base for the war in the Atlantic.
    Cobh harbor and Berehaven serious naval bases.
    There would likely have been a network of high quality roads for transporting American soldiers.
    And possibly some war industries.
    On the other hand, Dublin, Cork, Waterford and Limerick would have been blitzed, and much greater numbers of Irishmen would likely have died in the fighting. The human cost aside, the economic cost would likely exceed the benefit from any investment in air bases and (doubtful) investment in "high quality roads for transporting American soldiers".


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    fryup
    Registered Users Posts: 18,069 ✭✭✭✭fryup


    why were the irish so loyal to Catholicism??

    you'd think a large sway of the country would turn to protestantism, if only to make life easier for themselves..but no:confused:

    was it just plain belligerence?? or was there more to it than that?


  • Options
    #38
    robp
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,934 ✭✭✭robp


    fryup wrote: »
    why were the irish so loyal to Catholicism??

    you'd think a large sway of the country would turn to protestantism, if only to make life easier for themselves..but no:confused:

    was it just plain belligerence?? or was there more to it than that?

    If you consider how deeply the Irish landscape is imbued with monasteries, locals saints, relics and pilgrimages which fitted into Catholicism but not protestantism the reformed faith must have seemed to lack authenticity. It must have seemed to be a jarring break from tradition.


  • Options
    #39
    eire4
    Registered Users Posts: 6,626 ✭✭✭eire4


    catbear wrote: »
    This is for another thread but I contend that Irish neutrality favoured the allies. Compared to the UK the free state was sparsely populated and would have stretched defenses enormously. Ireland remaining neutral shut off Britains left flank, traditionally the soft entry route for the French.



    Not to mention while we were neutral we did give the allies indirect asistance. Weather reports, allowing over flights of our territory, sending down allied pilots back etc.


  • Options
    #40
    catbear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭catbear


    fryup wrote: »
    why were the irish so loyal to Catholicism??

    you'd think a large sway of the country would turn to protestantism, if only to make life easier for themselves..but no:confused:

    was it just plain belligerence?? or was there more to it than that?
    Catholicism as reintroduced by Westminster was a bulwark against the excesses of the republican French revolution. The irish peasants got their old religion back but it was aligned to and working for the London establishment. The papacy had lost its strong position in France and would later lose the papal state over which the pope was prince. Being given the peasantry of ireland to govern by a former enemy was odd but welcome and they took to the task of repressing Republican sentiment with gusto.


  • Options
    #41
    Manach
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,664 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    Would that be the same Irish republicans that launched so many fruitless revolts. Catholicism was part of the tradition of the Island in spite of many attempts to crush it, and proved resistant to whatever passing fads the bold patriots were professing.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    catbear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭catbear


    Manach wrote: »
    Would that be the same Irish republicans that launched so many fruitless revolts. Catholicism was part of the tradition of the Island in spite of many attempts to crush it, and proved resistant to whatever passing fads the bold patriots were professing.
    Republicanism crossed the religious groups, there was even a Protestant IRA cell in belfast up until the 60s. The irish republics catholic theocratic tendency allienated many secular republicans, London had succeeded through religion in fracturing the republican cause. Ultimately it was always about suppression.


  • Options
    #43
    Manach
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,664 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    From my reading of the various liberation groups (Irish or otherwise), they have plenty of competing ideologies that can provide the fracture points. The RCC had a tendency to support a more conservative approach as it would have been more stable country long term and hence supported somewhat the more democratic alternatives in the 19thC; for instance elements of the Home Rule party.


  • Options
    #44
    catbear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭catbear


    Manach wrote: »
    From my reading of the various liberation groups (Irish or otherwise), they have plenty of competing ideologies that can provide the fracture points. The RCC had a tendency to support a more conservative approach as it would have been more stable country long term and hence supported somewhat the more democratic alternatives in the 19thC; for instance elements of the Home Rule party.
    The RCC initially opposed the rising. Ireland was always Rome's backdoor to regaining britain. Once it was certain that they could influence domestic policy they accepted the republic. The viceroys residence was first considered for the papacy but was more diplomatically let to the US.


  • Options
    #45
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    catbear wrote: »
    This is for another thread but I contend that Irish neutrality favoured the allies. Compared to the UK the free state was sparsely populated and would have stretched defenses enormously. Ireland remaining neutral shut off Britains left flank, traditionally the soft entry route for the French.

    Well, if you're talking of a potential French / Spanish invasion, we would have been Britain's right flank and the French's left.......

    Anyhoooo, we weren't a traditional soft entry route - how many times was it tried? The French and Spanish liked to stir up trouble for the British here in the same way they like to do it in the Caribbean, the Americas and the East Indies......nothing more than that.

    eire4 wrote: »
    Not to mention while we were neutral we did give the allies indirect asistance. Weather reports, allowing over flights of our territory, sending down allied pilots back etc.

    Our neutrality may have favoured the Allies in relative terms, but lets not pretend it was more than it was. I wonder for each aircrew returned (or not interned), how many sailors and merchant seamen died in the Atlantic Gap for the want of air cover that could have been provided from the west coast.

    And yes, we provided food, but how much hardship do you think might have been caused if the British had not facilitated us importing fuel and other imports necessary to the running of the country.

    Never mind the passive defence of the country provided by the RAF and the RN, that made invasion by anyone impossible.

    As for the Catholic Church, you can ascribe all the motives you want to it, but to my mind it was nothing but a grubby power grab. The institution and the clerics possessed significant power over the population and they were not going to give that up under any circumstances. They used the religion to scare the populace into line and as long as any rebel movement co-operated with them, they would enjoy their support - just as they have always done since the Dark Ages and the rise of the 'castellans.'

    If anything independence made the RCC worse, because the counterweight of the British was gone. They grabbed and kept control of healthcare and education provision for another two to three generations before we began to wrest it from them. These were two important levers (especially education) to keep the population in its place.

    The RCC was against any kind of state welfare provision because it meant people would be less than dependent on them for handouts and you have to wonder if the old age pension had not been brought in before independence, how long would it have taken before something like would have been introduced post-independence?

    Here we have Dev, the head of the democratically elected government of the country kneeling to kiss McQuaid's ring.....

    devkissesring.jpg

    IMO, that one photo sums up all you need to know about rebels and the RCC


  • Options
    #46
    catbear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭catbear


    Can't disagree with any of the RCC stuff, a former kingmaker of Europe relegated to a damp agrarian peasantry on the edge.

    I would counter on the convoy defense that strategically aircover couldn't have been enhanced further by using Irish bases. By concentrating on the north passage efforts were maximised from bases in Scotland and NI.


  • Options
    #47
    drquirky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,866 ✭✭✭drquirky


    eire4 wrote: »
    Not to mention while we were neutral we did give the allies indirect asistance. Weather reports, allowing over flights of our territory, sending down allied pilots back etc.

    Wow. Some effort! Maybe best to just admit the government at the time were a pack of cowards and closest fascists afraid to fight in WWII. Your neutrality in this war is a stain on your country.


  • Options
    #48
    fryup
    Registered Users Posts: 18,069 ✭✭✭✭fryup


    robp wrote: »
    If you consider how deeply the Irish landscape is imbued with monasteries, locals saints, relics and pilgrimages which fitted into Catholicism but not protestantism the reformed faith must have seemed to lack authenticity. It must have seemed to be a jarring break from tradition.

    yes, but the england & scotland were imbued with the same symbolism and yet they adopted protestanism....so what was it about the irish mindset that was so hostile towards it?


  • Options
    #49
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    catbear wrote: »
    Can't disagree with any of the RCC stuff, a former kingmaker of Europe relegated to a damp agrarian peasantry on the edge.

    I would counter on the convoy defense that strategically aircover couldn't have been enhanced further by using Irish bases. By concentrating on the north passage efforts were maximised from bases in Scotland and NI.

    Irish based aircraft would have closed off or at least reduced the southern end of the gap, and helped developed other routes which would have fed into Allied strategy in this area which was based on avoidance - more routes (or more variations to routes) offered more options for avoidance.


  • Options
    #50
    catbear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭catbear


    fryup wrote: »
    yes, but the england & scpopend were imbued with the same symbolism and yet they adopted protestanism....so what was it about the irish mindset that was so hostile towards it?
    This is where terms get interesting. For many protestants the church of England is just watered down catholicism and not truly reformed.
    Yet many RCC Irish understand the Irish branch of that church as being entirely protestant when in fact it's just another pyramidal power structure like Rome with Canterbury as its headquarters.
    Like the pope crowning emporers of europe the archbishop of Canterbury crowned the monarches of England.
    Republicanism is a shared treat to tradition RCC and Anglican power.


  • Options
    #51
    robp
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,934 ✭✭✭robp


    fryup wrote: »
    yes, but the england & scotland were imbued with the same symbolism and yet they adopted protestantism....so what was it about the irish mindset that was so hostile towards it?

    I am not sure they were/are. Particularly so in England where there was a completely different early history of Christianity. So they had a very different starting point. If you consider in Ireland the very stone structure of early medieval churches was seen as a precious and holy relic of various local saints we can get a sense of how deep the tradition was. Also in England like many places protestantism was imposed on people from the top. This may have been possible in England where a ruling class with legitimacy existed but in Ireland the ruling class was noticeable different and foreign. England was forced to dampen efforts to enforce protestantism here as they risked driving the Old English and Gaelic Irish together. Something which of course later happened.
    This is where terms get interesting. For many protestants the church of England is just watered down catholicism and not truly reformed.
    Yet many RCC Irish understand the Irish branch of that church as being entirely protestant when in fact it's just another pyramidal power structure like Rome with Canterbury as its headquarters.
    Like the pope crowning emporers of europe the archbishop of Canterbury crowned the monarches of England.
    Republicanism is a shared treat to tradition RCC and Anglican power.
    Republicanism is something that came hundreds of years later. Its not an issue to the reformation era.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    dubhthach
    Registered Users Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭dubhthach


    fryup wrote: »
    yes, but the england & scotland were imbued with the same symbolism and yet they adopted protestanism....so what was it about the irish mindset that was so hostile towards it?

    England and Scotland were centralising monarchies during the 16th century. Ireland in comparison was a patchwork of areas only some of which were under "Royal control".

    If for example the Bruce's had suceed in Ireland during period 1314-1319 then there's no reason why an Irish state (similiar to Scotland) during the 16th century wouldn't have perhaps been affected by the reformation.

    Due to the nature of the 16th century in Ireland the reformation itself became tied up with the whole process of the Tudor conquest (surrender and regrant mandated conversion and the oath of allegiance). Comes down to the old Irish tradition of been "agin it" -- catholicism thus in sense provided unlikely common point between the Gaelic and Gaelicised lordships and the still english speaking "Old English" against the power of the Tudor state.

    If you consider the nature of Gaelic society up until this point we were hardly catholic in our modern sense of the word. Particulary when it came to things such as marriage and children (civil marriage, widespread divorce, no concept of illegitimate children, mothers declaring other men father's of their sons etc.)


  • Options
    #53
    catbear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭catbear


    robp wrote: »

    Republicanism is something that came hundreds of years later. Its not an issue to the reformation era.
    The movement that became known as Republican had its roots in the reformation. The propensity for protestant schism lead to the an eventual contract whereby everyone could agree to disagree, also known as freedom of speech. There has always been a suspicion that catholics couldn't honour that contract hence Kennedy's speech:
    I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute, where no Catholic prelate would tell the president (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote; where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference; and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.
    While the founding father of the USA were protestant they're had detaching themselves from the church state of England which had previously detached itself from Rome.

    The separatist independents of the English civil war were spurred by their plight to worship free of the state church and their Catholic friendly monarch. Ultimately the only thing all the protestant sects had in common at that time was that they're weren't catholic. The restoration saw the independents keep their gains and parliament through an invited monarch retained the church apparatus of state.

    While there were still catholics in England they were considered loyal to the established English church/state/throne whereas the sizable catholic population in Ireland was viewed as a potential base for a reclamation of the English throne for Rome, as happened with James II.


  • Options
    #54
    robp
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,934 ✭✭✭robp


    catbear wrote: »
    The movement that became known as Republican had its roots in the reformation. The propensity for protestant schism lead to the an eventual contract whereby everyone could agree to disagree, also known as freedom of speech. There has always been a suspicion that catholics couldn't honour that contract hence Kennedy's speech:
    That is simply not a credible link. Indeed the first republics in early modern Europe were often Catholic for example the Catholic Republic of Florence. Isn't Catholic San Marino the oldest constitutional republic in the world?


  • Options
    #55
    catbear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭catbear


    robp wrote: »
    That is simply not a credible link. Indeed the first republics in early modern Europe were often Catholic for example the Catholic Republic of Florence. Isn't Catholic San Marino the oldest constitutional republic in the world?
    Luther was catholic unless he was excommunicated! Venice was an older republic.

    Edit to add: France declared a Republic but reverted to an Emperor! Rome was once a Republic too and it could be stated that the regicidal commonwealth government was the first republic over Ireland.


  • Options
    #56
    robp
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,934 ✭✭✭robp


    catbear wrote: »
    Luther was catholic unless he was excommunicated! Venice was an older republic.

    I am not sure what you mean. Excommunicated Catholics are still Catholics.
    catbear wrote: »
    Venice was an older republic.
    Showing my point again.


  • Options
    #57
    catbear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭catbear


    robp wrote: »
    I am not sure what you mean. Excommunicated Catholics are still Catholics.

    Showing my point again.
    I was wrong, Luther's work were declared heretical and punishable by burning!

    I guess it all hinges on your definition of a Republic. France had a republic, then a dictator who dragged a pope to Paris to crown his emperor of Europe.

    Venice was a republic but even they came under pressure from Rome to deal with heretics during the counter reformation.

    North Korea calls itself a democratic republic.

    Some people come from the Peoples Republic of Cork!

    One thing is certain is that while Republics existed within christendom they were still had to adhere to papal decrees, some do more so than others but failure to do so could have serious consequences.

    Even those monarchs who were declared defenders of the faith like Henry VIII could fall out with Rome, his daughter was declared a heretic too.


  • Options
    #58
    dubhthach
    Registered Users Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭dubhthach


    catbear wrote: »
    Even those monarchs who were declared defenders of the faith like Henry VIII could fall out with Rome, his daughter was declared a heretic too.

    She kept the title though, and it's used by every British monarch since (one just has to look at reverse of an English coin to see it's inscription)


  • Options
    #59
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    robp wrote: »
    I am not sure what you mean. Excommunicated Catholics are still Catholics.

    Showing my point again.

    Only according to the RC Church. The RC church would and still argues that any one initiated into its domain is effectively owned by them body and soul from birth and even after death.

    An individual right to opt out of "membership' whether that was ever voluntary is denied with recent changes being made to deny those seeking to leave the organisation.

    It's not as if as an infant any individual had any choice in the matter.
    The RC church calculate their multitudes in this fashion and claim significant power based on the number of their 'followers'.


    The RC has always been about power and holding into power to the detriment of the individual and a pluralist society.

    Once the penal laws were repealed Rome Catholicism became an aggressive force of domination and actively sought to repress the Irish population to their will. They worked hand in hand with the English administration to further subjugate and control the Irish population into blind subservience and submission. Parnell's denunciation from the pulpit helped seal his end as a force of political change.

    There is a wonderful photograph of a certain Fr Sheehy who openly attacked landlords in his local area and when he had succeeded in causing the ruin of the local elite, established himself in their stead. The photograph shows Fr Sheehy standing outside his large parochial mansion, with his house servant, stable man and horse. This priest was the man who nurtured Eamon DeValera as a young man and paid for his education through to TCD. Fr Sheehy actions give credence that DeValera was in fact the son of one of the local landlords whose ruin Sheehy had brought about. Later DeValera, the likely illegitimate son of a landlord made impassioned speeches to assembled crowds at his first election rally's to become elected as an MP in Co Clare advocating the burning out of local landlords. In this context the photograph of DeValera, the alleged illegitimate son of a landlord kissing the ring of Charles McQuaid and bowing to his episcopal authority is perhaps not surprising. If is unfortunate indeed that it has taken nearly a century to free the country from the control of Sheehy, McQuaid and his ilk.


  • Options
    #60
    catbear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭catbear


    Intriguing Gozunda, I've learned a lot from this thread.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    robp
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,934 ✭✭✭robp


    Totally off topic but this has to be corrected.
    gozunda wrote: »
    Only according to the RC Church. The RC church would and still argues that any one initiated into its domain is effectively owned by them body and soul from birth and even after death. [/B]
    No not true actually. :confused:
    gozunda wrote: »
    It's not as if as an infant any individual had any choice in the matter.
    The RC church calculate their multitudes in this fashion and claim significant power based on the number of their 'followers'.
    No they don't! Its actually based on the census.
    gozunda wrote: »
    Only according to the RC Church. The RC church would and still argues that any one initiated into its domain is effectively owned by them body and soul from birth and even after death.

    An individual right to opt out of "membership' whether that was ever voluntary is denied with recent changes being made to deny those seeking to leave the organisation.
    Incorrect. There never was a formal process to leave the CC. Is there a formal process to leave the local GAA team or photography club? The change you referred to was Catholic marriage regulation. There never was a means to formally be not Catholic as it is utterly unnecessary.


Advertisement