THE IRISH CHURCH.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."] SIR,—The usual and most telling argument against the mainte- nance of the Irish branch of the United Church is that it is hated by the great bulk of the Irish people. Now, granting the fact for argument's sake, I would ask, does not this argument prove too much? If no institutions are to be maintained in Ireland except those which please and satisfy the great bulk of the Irish people, counting them by heads, as they are counted in this argument against the Irish Church, what will become of the Act of Union, nay, of the Act of Settlement ?
I fancy there is very little doubt what would be the result of an Irish plebiscite, taken with respect to these two Acts. And it is to such a plebiscite that the argument against the Irish Church virtually appeals. I do not at all say that the Union should not be repealed and that the landed property of Ireland should not be— we will say rearranged—for the benefit of those "millions whom Irish landlords despise, but for whom Christ died." I am not arguing what ought or ought not to be done. But whatever is done, I wish to be done by people having their eyes open to what
they are doing.—I am, Sir, &c., C. P. RmcnEt.
[Mr. Reichel may confute a popular argument, but he does not confute one that is worth much. The true argument against the- Irish Established Church is, not that it is unpopular, but that it applies national property to a purpose in no sense national,—but purely sectional, if not sectarian. The fund set apart for national civilization really answers no purpose of national civilization,— rather the reverse.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
