The New Zealand Tablet THURSDAY. NOVEMBER 5, 1908. OUR HIBERNIANS-A MISCONCEPTION

New Zealand Tablet, 5 November 1908, Page 21

The New Zealand Tablet THURSDAY. NOVEMBER 5, 1908. OUR HIBERNIANS-A MISCONCEPTION

fATHOLICS have one precious privilege which, perhaps, they do not at all times appreciate. Outside the pale of our faith there are to be found a surprising number of persons who, with tinted spectacles and magnifying glasses, search the Church of Rome for sores as industriously as the prospector sifts the earth for gold or diamonds, and who devote so much time to this interesting pursuit that they commonly forget to look to the spiritual households to which they owe real or nominal allegiance. Some of our well-meaning volunteer critics have lately been losing their rest— quite needlessly— over the Hibernian-Australasian Bene&fit Society. A suggestion was made to establish a branch of this splendid organisation in a Southland district- The suggestion elicited from an anxious brother of another faith an expression of surprise that this Society should be tolerated by the Catholic clergy of New Zealand, seeing that (according to him) a practically identical organisation (or one with which the Hibernians of this Dominion are affiliated) lies under the ban of the Church or clergy in Scotland and in the United States The evidence of this latter statement, as regards Scotland, is furnished (i) by a circular letter of the Scottish Bishops, dated July 14. 1907, and having reference to the Ancient Order of Hibernians. Of. the which, more anon. (2) As regards the United States, our anxious Protestant friend supplies a state-ment-also in reference, to the Ancient Order of Hibernianswhich is said to be taken from the Toronto Sentinel (Canada). Of the which, likewise, more will appear in due course. * 1. At the outset, we may remark (a) that neither of the statements, alleged above, directly affects the HibernianAustralasian Catholic Benefit Society, which is a separate; independent, self-contained ' organisation ; (b) that this admirable association extends throughout the Commonwealth of Australia and the Dominion of New Zealand; (c) that there are no branches

of the Ancient. Order of Hibernians in any part of Australasia; (d) that the Hibernian-Australasian Catholic Benefit Society is not, and has never been, affiliated with the Ancient Order of Hibernians in Scotland; and (c) that, for the past three years or so, it has been affiliated with the Ancient Order of Hibernians in the United States. We are at present unable to say whether there is or is not any connection between the Ancient Order of Hibernians in the United States . and Scotland. And now a word as- to the Ancient Order of Hibernians. (a) It is incorrect to describe it simply and without qualification as ' a condemned society 'in the Catholic meaning of that term. For, in the first place, the ends and aims of the society, as set forth in their rules and constitutions, are of the most praiseworthy kind, and represent the high-water mark of a truly Christian benefit organisation. In the second place, the overwhelming majority of the branches and members of the Ancient Order of Hibernians are in close touch and friendly relations with the Church (as, for instance, in Ireland and America). In the third place, the only sections of the organisation of that name that came even into momentary conflict with the ecclesiastical authorities were a few branches in Scotland as far back as 1882. And in their case, the. trouble arose, not over the aims and objects of the association, but over abuses of a purely locaf and temporary character. For these abuses they, and they alone, were condemned by the Holy See on December 14 1882 Jhis condemnation carried with it no disapproval of the objects of the organisation; it was purely and solely a penalty of spiritual deprivation for given abuses which had, in time grown as excrescences on an otherwise excellent organisation The judgment of the Holy See was a rule of local discipline, arising out of a local case, for Scotland. It had no application to the members of the Order elsewhere. Moreover, the Ancient Order of Hibernians in Scotland seems to have soon outgrown the particular abuses which led to its condemnation there, and the judgment against them seems to have fallen into desuetude. That circumstance, however, did not delete the writing against them; ami so much was, in effect, intimated by the Scottish Bishops in a joint letter bearing date July 14, ,907. Their Lordships held, in accordance with the canons, that the judgment should be deemed obe ,n force until revoked. In the meantime they submitted ho position of the organisation to the Holy See for instructions, but they nowhere in their letter, or in any later pronouncement in connection with the case, intimated any objection to the society as it is now, or suggested that the grounds of condemnation -winch existed in lSS 2 are to be found in the organiof To £I°% '^ , hQVe " Ot ICaniCd thC dGtails ° f the ™«»S of the Holy See ,n the matter; but we may state that the pro cecdings of the various branches of the Ancient Order of Hibernians now fIU a large part of the news columns of the two great organs of Catholic opinion in Scotland, the Glasgow Observer and the Catlrolic Her alt. of Edinburgh. And, finally, we may remark tl ttl who|c „of J' of this or that assoc.at.on of Catholics is the Church's own internal and domestic affair, and that she is perfectly capable of managmg it without aid Or counsel from friends outside her

* permit a funeral service in his church because a lodse of the Ancient Order of Hibernians 'had been invited to a tend • ftat his alleged reason for sut h refusal was this: that he was told some unstated things (which he believed to be 'facts') by some marked by crime, and even blood, though not in any deg-ee th O e7 a ie i 6i 6 tO ° f the UlSt6r °^ ni -tion. A numbef o the r leaders were convicted and executed in ,876-7, and th' society was then broken up.) The Sentinel storj further™ /> "ittd Phil »fP hi a P"** with having stated^ha he It nutted the unstated things aforesaid (which he regards „ facts') to Archbishop Ryan of Philadelphia; that the Archbishop declared that the alleged 'facts' « would constitute one o the greatest scandals tfaa Catholic Church had ever known ' and finally, that the Archbishop prevented the submittal of the before'

mentioned mysterious ' facts ' to the Plenary Council in Baltimore.

This whole story may be briefly dismissed. (a) On the face of" it, it has no bearing whatever upon the merits of the Hibernian-Australasian Catholic Benefit Society or upon its relations with the Catholic Church and the ecclesiastical authorities, (b) On the face of it, it does not bear out the statement or suggestion that the Ancient Order of Hibernians in the United States stands condemned by the Catholic Church or by ' the clergy.* Only one priest is mentioned as objecting to the Order — and that not on account of any existing fault or, error, but on the strength of alleged (and unproven) statements said to have been made by convicted murderers regarding events that took place more than thirty years ago. Against this solitary voice (assuming that the voice spoke as stated) we have the fact that the Ancient Order of Hibernians in America is intimately associated with the religious life of a Church which, there as elsewhere, is exceedingly careful both as to the aims and methods of its societies; that the bishops and clergy of the United States are closely connected with its organisation and management ; that it is engaged in all manner of good works ; and that its National Chaplain (elected at the Indianapolis convention in July) is none other than Archbishop O'Connell, of Boston, one of the ablest, most brilliant, and most devoted prelates under the Stars and Stripes. - We may here add that, between July, 1906, and July, 190^ the organisation in the United States (including the Ladies' Auxiliary) added not fewer than 75,000 to its already vast roll of members. (c) The whole story, as told by the Sentinel, is pitched on the hysterical and exaggerated tone that is commonly associated with lack of accuracy and of balance. (d) Not so much as a solitary charge against the Ancient Order of Hibernians in the United States is even formulated or defined — there is nothing but a vague and shadowy Something, apparently of the fee-faw-fum order, on the alleged authority of a murderer's tongue ; and it relates not to the present time, but to incidents of the last generation. (c) Not so much as a scrap or rag of evidence is tendered to show that there is, in all this shadowy and nebulous Something, any fact implicating in crime or dishonor even an individual member of the organisation either past or present; much less the Order as a whole. Till such evidence is forthcoming, natural right compels us to assume the innocence of the association as such and of its members both past and present. It is only with the Irish packed jury and- in Looking-glass Land- that the verdict precedes the evidence and trial nowadays. (f) Again : there is no evidence before us that the story put into the mouth of the Philadelphia priest was ever really told by him. (g) Here, too, we come to a subtle form of suppression of fact which has some bearing on the whole question. We were for a long period a reader, and for some time a subscriber, to . the Toronto Sentinel— at a time -vvOien we were collecting materials for a book on an Irish secret society. Why were not our Southland Catholic friends informed that the Toronto Sentinel is a strong Orange paper, and the r.ecognised organ of the lodges in Canada? That- one item of information would have put a different complexion upon the whole story. The a-priori doubt and suspicion which attaches to the whole tale is greatly intensified by the particular source through which it reaches us. We may add that we have placed otfrselves in communication with Archbishop Ryan and others in Philadelphia on this subject.

Facts in connection with either Catholic associations or associations, of Catholics "(they are not necessarily the same thing) are, of course, fair matter for news or comment in the newspaper"" press, whether of blue or ' yellow ' hue. But we fail to see on what grounds an organ of the Orange lodges could consistently find matter for objection in the association of a society of Catholics, or even of a Catholic society, with a secret organisation conducted on the lines of the disreputable ' Molly Maguires. ' For there was no crime perpetrated by that - detestable association which was not perpetrated on a vastly greater scale by the Orange society, while the long catalogue of the latter's enormities embraces systematic rapine, massacre, repeated terrorism and violence, year by year, by great bodies of armed and drunken or semi-drunken brethren down to the present day, and other offences of which the ' Molly Maguires,' bad as they were, must be held guiltless. The terrible record of the Ulster organisation is told in the reports of numerous Parliamentary Committees and Royal Commissions, in the Acts of Parliament which suppressed the society, and in the Cumberland Plot investigation which closed its career in dishonor in 1836. By comparison with its high crimes, the ' Molly Maguires ' were mere misdemeanants. Y*t

the ' yellow ' organisation never lacks reverend clergy to be its chaplains and grand chaplains, nor churches in which to hold its annual celebrations and thank the Lord that they are not like the rest of men— especially those chuckleheaded Papists. If the Toronto Sentinel were to devote its energies to reform the ways of the brethren, it would be too tired when night came to scold Catholics, or even to weep over the crimes of the happily defunct ' Molly Maguires.'