LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
THE IRISH CATHOLICS AND THE UNIVERSITY QUESTION.
cro THE EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR."] SIR,-" Facts," it is often said, are our best teachers. An inci- dent which not long since occurred in Ireland, and attracted much notice, has an important significance, as illustrating the question of University Education, which now occupies so much attention, though it rose out of a matter connected with primary education,—I allude to the conflict at Mallow between the people, who were much attached to the Christian Brothers there, and the Mallow parochial clergy, who deemed it better that the local schools should be transferred from them to the National Board. The instruction, as they stated, would be thus im- proved ; while the town would no longer have to pay for the teachers, who would receive the Government grant. The people were not satisfied with this explanation. They broke out into a riot, and wrecked the schools. As to the merits of the special Mallow question, I know nothing ; but the incident has been referred to as indicating that in Ireland there exists something of that rivalry which used to be common between the Regular Orders and the Secular Clergy. Such an emulation generally is to be found in Catholic countries, and with the usual effects of emulation (useful, on the whole), except at periods of depression, when the efforts of seculars and regulars combined hardly suffice for the ordinary religious minis- trations. It is not generally known that in Ireland, during the time of the Penal Laws, much of the ordinary parochial work was done by the Franciscans and the Dominicans. They held their ground in the most calamitous days, whether from their closer organisation, or an extraordinary zeal and courage, many of their rules being, of course, dispensed with. The love and gratitude of the Irish people to the religious Orders, as well as to their secular clergy, need cause no surprise.
A straw shows how the wind blows, and the " unwisdom " of the Mallow mob might suggest some reflections often missed both by philosophers and statesmen,—that is, suggest them to persons not preoccupied by theory, or vowed to some ethical " orthodoxy." In the first place, it suggests that there is not much dependence to be placed on the allegation that the Irish people, in their preference for religious education, are only following the lead of their clergy. It would be doing a great injustice to the Irish national system of education to represent it as either irreligious or non-religious. On the contrary, in three-fourths of its schools, those called " non-vested," religious instruction is freely given at stated hours, the rights of the minority being justly secured by a conscience-clause ; while again and again the leaders of both parties in the State have admitted that " non-vested training-schools " ought to exist also. Notwithstanding, at Mallow at least, the people prefer a system wholly religious, to the National, even when they have to support it at their elm expense.
A second inference, and one of more urgent importance, is
also suggested. We have before us The O'Conor Don's able and moderate measure for University education, which, though promising a triumph to no party, carries with it the earnest sympathies both of the Catholic clergy and laity. The long delay in settling that question has much benefited the " Home- rule " party, of course ; but it has proportionately disappointed those who had trusted that Ireland was to be legislated for by a Parliament which, at least, was to respect Irish principles and sym- pathies, as it does those of Scotland. That unfortunate delay has arisen froaseveral. remarkable misconceptions. I will name the chief,-1slr Persons who have not looked below the surface have assumed that the University question in Ireland is a question between a mixed and mainly secular education on the one hand, and on the other a denominational and mainly Catholic one,— between an educational system ruled by the State, and one ruled. by the clergy. They are strangely mistaken. No system could permanently succeed in Ireland which did not amply recognise religious principles, but systems very different may alike rest on religious principles. The real competitors are a religious education of a monastic type, on the one side, and on the other a religious education which neither regards all compromise as dishonourable, nor all State aid as injurious ; one directed by a due mixture of clergy and laity,—one which, while religion has its due and secure place, imparts also a sound secular instruc- tion to all, and interferes with the conscientious rights of none.
The Irish National system began with schools on the " vested " system, but very soon changed to a system chiefly of " non- vested" schools, with far more both of religion and freedom about them than could otherwise have been theirs, a change brought about mainly through the energy of the Irish Pro- testants. Had the State not accepted this change, the system would probably have proved a failure ; and the Irish Catholic schools would have been on the " voluntary principle," and on the " monastic " type. A corresponding experiment, as regards the higher studies, if persisted in, will end in a similar result. Religious Colleges will exist, and multiply, whether the State befriends and trusts them, or whether she frowns upon them with contumely.
I proceed to a second misconception. Secondly, State aid to institutions in which religion has its place is obviously, as Mr. Gladstone remarked, when the discussion was in progress re- specting school education in England, by no means the endow- ment of religion, unless the institutions thus aided receive larger aid than non-religious institutions receive. It is simply the State's contribution to approved secular instruction imparted in institutions, whether they elect to impart that only, or to add to it religious instruction at their own cost. Thirdly, it is a mis- conception to suppose that educational equality prevails because the same advantages are offered by a system approved of by some parents, and disapproved by the great majority on
grounds of conscience. This is the feast of the stork and the fox. Fourthly, it is a misconception when men affirm that to endow secular education only is to follow the precedent given when the Protestant Church was dis- endowed. On that occasion, equality between two religious bodies could only have been effected by endowing both, or leaving both disendowed ; and the latter course was adopted. In the matter of education, the two competitors are obviously not two religious bodies, but the maintainers of two ethical systems, one favouring secular and the other religious education, the maintainers of both systems alike, whatever their religion may be, paying taxes in common. These misconceptions have had a " long day," but it is not the nature of such to last for ever. The Irish people, while taxed for the support of institu- tions of which the majority could not conscientiously avail themselves, have contributed -about £200,000 during the last thirty years to the Catholic University. A national instinct is thus indicated, and an instinct concurring with a principle has strength. For myself, I believe in religious education, but I believe also in competition, if it he on a " fair stage." I should be sorry if those who prefer the " Queen's Colleges " were deprived of them ; but I do not understand why those persons should not also accept willingly, and even gladly, a competition on equal terms between what they regard as the sounder and the less sound principle. If endowed and unen- dowed Colleges contend for the same University prizes, is not this plainly a race between horses, some of which are highly fed, while the others are starved ? Free competition on equal terms would speedily provide Ireland with a higher University education than she could derive from the best system exalted
to an unjust "ascendency." It would improve the secular Colleges themselves, by teaching them to appreciate more the spiritual element in education.
It is not the University question only that is at issue. It is the permanence of that course which was taken last year re- specting intermediate education, and taken long since respect- ing primary education. The endowment, not of religion, but of Colleges in which religious education is superadded to secular, but only for those who desire it, and at the sole cost of private individuals, the minority being secured from all attempts to tamper with their faith, can be objected to by none except those who would equally object to the non-vested schools, which constitute three-fourths of those in the National system. Their destruction would be the destruction of that system. Those who wish well to that system, as well as those who would prefer one more exclusively religious, must therefore alike resist that narrow principle, oddly supposed to be "broad," by the too impassioned advocates of an exclusively secular education. The Queen's Colleges are endowed ; to endow also such Colleges as would be included in The O'Conor Don's "University of St. Patrick " would but follow precedent. It would be but the addition of the " non-vested " to the " vested " schools in the National system.
The present time offers special facilities for the settlement of this question. Should the opportunity be lost, it will be settled later, but with a diversity of result which will affect the civil interests of the country more permanently than the religious. The removal of grievances has in Ireland too often been deferred until a long agitation had been created by wrong, and • has not therefore produced gratitude or peace. Catholic emancipation, the Church question, the land ques- tion,—who is there but deplores now that the settlement of these was so long delayed ? That settlement was effected at a heavy cost, and for the sake of peace ; can it be wise to forfeit that peace, by further prolonging a fruitless war against the conscientious convictions of the great mass of Irish- men ? The same unstatesmanlike procrastination which renders the best legislation of recent times in part barren, makes impos- sible an effectual resistance to the dangers that threaten the future of the Empire. Those dangers proceed from the dreams of visionaries and enthusiasts, converted into realities by a sur- viving and palpable injustice, which gives dignity to imaginary grievances, by supplying to them one that is real, prefixing a number to the cyphers. To meet dangers which accident may at any time aggravate, it is necessary to have on the side of order those men whose instincts and whose interests would naturally place them on that side. But these are men who have solid convictions, and who will not sacrifice what they deem the moral welfare of the country to suit the exigencies of parties or appease the fanatics, whether of a sectarian or of an ethical dogma. To refuse just concessions to the men of principle will necessitate progressive concessions to the men of enthusiasm,— concessions which will be found in the end to have fatally fanned the flame they were intended to extinguish.—I am, Sir, &c.,
AUBREY DE VERE.
Previous page
