Human Rights Organization for Justice, Unity, Peace, and Solidarity
Anti-Catholicism
Anti-Catholicism: The Enduring Pathology and Bigotry of the English Monarch
"Charles could not become King if he were Catholic (Jews, Muslims are fine, but not Catholics)
Patrick Murphy Irish Congressional Briefing Distributed to Congress by Irish National CaucusThe Irish National Caucus has received hundreds of requests to republish this previous posting from March 19, 2022. November 27, 2022 “The Irish National Caucus (founded February 6, 1974) was the first and only major Irish-American organization in the last almost 50 years to raise in the U.S. Congress the sectarian, anti-Catholic foundation stone of the British constitution since the Act of Settlement 1701 to this very day. Only two Irish-Americans involved in the Irish issue objected to our efforts on the grounds—wait for it!—the British constitution had nothing to do with sectarian anti-Catholic bigotry and discrimination in Northern Ireland!!! (Yes, that deserves three exclamation points). And those two ‘useful idiots’ (for the British Monarchy) also claimed the issue had no relevance to Congress—as if Congress was not aware of the importance and wisdom of the ‘Establishment Clause'(‘the clause in the First Amendment of the US Constitution that prohibits the establishment of religion by Congress’—my online dictionary). So, these two ‘useful idiots’ who tried to lecture this Fermanagh man on the history anti-Catholic discrimination in Northern Ireland were not only ignorant of the British constitution but appallingly ignorant of the American Constitution. The anti-Catholic essence of the British (unwritten and non-codified) constitution would be like a clause in the American Constitution that a Black person could not be president of the United States. But then, that might also be acceptable to the two ‘useful idiots’—that is the inherent logic of their position. So, it was refreshing to read the realistic assessment of the British Monarchy in this article “The unreasonable past still walks amongst us” by Patrick Murphy, Irish News of Belfast, Saturday, March 19, 2022. —Fr. Sean McManus. The unreasonable past still walks amongst usPatrick Murphy. Irish News. Belfast, Saturday. March 19, 2022. As the inhumanity continues in Ukraine and the world waits in fear of a wider conflict, Ireland is about to be willingly distracted from reality.
While its leaders fervently advocate democracy, they are preparing to welcome a future head of state whose position is about as undemocratic as you could imagine. Yes, Prince Charles is heading to the 26 counties next week for a state visit, as “part of the royal family’s spring tours to mark Queen Elizabeth’s platinum jubilee.”
While the Irish ridicule the (elected) Boris Johnson as a Tory toff, they will cheer Charles, Britain’s number one (unelected) toff. The difficulty with his visit is not that he is English, but that he has no moral or political authority to be a future head of state (which includes this part of Ireland).
Some argue that the royal family is highly popular, a view which might be tested by having them all stand for election. Many English oppose the monarchy. When stopped by Royal Marines during the Troubles, shortly after Prince Edward joined them, I asked their opinion of him. They were less than complimentary about his entire family (He later dropped out of the training). These were English republicans (and probably more republican than some in the IRA turned out to be).
Those who defend the monarchy argue that it is all harmless pageant. Sadly, this is untrue. Following press revelations, we know that more than 1,000 laws were secretly vetted by the queen or Charles before they were approved by parliament. The queen is also given draft parliamentary bills affecting the Crown’s interests and is asked for consent to debate them. Her private lawyer reportedly pressurized ministers to alter proposed legislation to prevent her shareholdings from being publicly disclosed. She advised Scottish voters to “think very carefully about the future” in the independence referendum, suggesting she wanted a ‘No’ vote. The (unelected) royals exercise political power. Since becoming queen (and head of the armed services), Britain has been involved in over 25 foreign wars.
This week Sinn Féin helped to plant a tree in her honor at Stormont.
These recent wars follow 500 years of the British empire’s invasion, suppression, and exploitation which, just a century ago, ruled a quarter of the world’s population by force.
Last week Charles condemned Russia’s “brutal aggression.”
Of course, Charles could not become king if he were Catholic (Jews, Muslims, or Hindus are fine, but not Catholics). The monarch is also head of the state’s official religion, the Church of England. The House of Lords reserves 26 seats for its bishops, one of the few parliaments in the world where religion directly influences civil law. [Iran is the only other country where parliament reserves places for unelected clerics.]
The argument for his Irish visit is that it will improve Anglo-Irish relations. That is a distraction to mold public opinion. I work with English people. They are all sensible, decent, rational individuals, who are mainly highly skilled scientists. Our ability to work together will not be affected by royal behavior. (My only difficulty with them is that they can be so unbearably reasonable, an affliction from which we rarely suffer.)
So, while the Irish cheer Charles, how would they feel if they had to pay for President Higgins to have seven palaces, about 20 other residences, an extended family costing about £350 million annually, and was also the head of a Church that reserved Seanad seats for its bishops?
By welcoming Charles, they deny that the whole concept of royalty is quite insane, dating from when people burned witches. It is a form of publicly funded Disney-style escapism, which romanticizes the massive inequality in British society by suggesting that the poor should be grateful for being patronized by the obscenely wealthy. It is a wealth largely stolen from colonies across the globe (including Ireland) and used to build royal palaces and Whitehall’s magnificence.
But that, you say, is all in the unreasonable past. It should be. But how can it, when the unreasonable past still walks amongst us?
Patrick Murphy Irish Congressional Briefing Distributed to Congress by Irish National CaucusThe Irish National Caucus has received hundreds of requests to republish this previous posting from March 19, 2022. November 27, 2022 “The Irish National Caucus (founded February 6, 1974) was the first and only major Irish-American organization in the last almost 50 years to raise in the U.S. Congress the sectarian, anti-Catholic foundation stone of the British constitution since the Act of Settlement 1701 to this very day. Only two Irish-Americans involved in the Irish issue objected to our efforts on the grounds—wait for it!—the British constitution had nothing to do with sectarian anti-Catholic bigotry and discrimination in Northern Ireland!!! (Yes, that deserves three exclamation points). And those two ‘useful idiots’ (for the British Monarchy) also claimed the issue had no relevance to Congress—as if Congress was not aware of the importance and wisdom of the ‘Establishment Clause'(‘the clause in the First Amendment of the US Constitution that prohibits the establishment of religion by Congress’—my online dictionary). So, these two ‘useful idiots’ who tried to lecture this Fermanagh man on the history anti-Catholic discrimination in Northern Ireland were not only ignorant of the British constitution but appallingly ignorant of the American Constitution. The anti-Catholic essence of the British (unwritten and non-codified) constitution would be like a clause in the American Constitution that a Black person could not be president of the United States. But then, that might also be acceptable to the two ‘useful idiots’—that is the inherent logic of their position. So, it was refreshing to read the realistic assessment of the British Monarchy in this article “The unreasonable past still walks amongst us” by Patrick Murphy, Irish News of Belfast, Saturday, March 19, 2022. —Fr. Sean McManus. The unreasonable past still walks amongst usPatrick Murphy. Irish News. Belfast, Saturday. March 19, 2022. As the inhumanity continues in Ukraine and the world waits in fear of a wider conflict, Ireland is about to be willingly distracted from reality.
While its leaders fervently advocate democracy, they are preparing to welcome a future head of state whose position is about as undemocratic as you could imagine. Yes, Prince Charles is heading to the 26 counties next week for a state visit, as “part of the royal family’s spring tours to mark Queen Elizabeth’s platinum jubilee.”
While the Irish ridicule the (elected) Boris Johnson as a Tory toff, they will cheer Charles, Britain’s number one (unelected) toff. The difficulty with his visit is not that he is English, but that he has no moral or political authority to be a future head of state (which includes this part of Ireland).
Some argue that the royal family is highly popular, a view which might be tested by having them all stand for election. Many English oppose the monarchy. When stopped by Royal Marines during the Troubles, shortly after Prince Edward joined them, I asked their opinion of him. They were less than complimentary about his entire family (He later dropped out of the training). These were English republicans (and probably more republican than some in the IRA turned out to be).
Those who defend the monarchy argue that it is all harmless pageant. Sadly, this is untrue. Following press revelations, we know that more than 1,000 laws were secretly vetted by the queen or Charles before they were approved by parliament. The queen is also given draft parliamentary bills affecting the Crown’s interests and is asked for consent to debate them. Her private lawyer reportedly pressurized ministers to alter proposed legislation to prevent her shareholdings from being publicly disclosed. She advised Scottish voters to “think very carefully about the future” in the independence referendum, suggesting she wanted a ‘No’ vote. The (unelected) royals exercise political power. Since becoming queen (and head of the armed services), Britain has been involved in over 25 foreign wars.
This week Sinn Féin helped to plant a tree in her honor at Stormont.
These recent wars follow 500 years of the British empire’s invasion, suppression, and exploitation which, just a century ago, ruled a quarter of the world’s population by force.
Last week Charles condemned Russia’s “brutal aggression.”
Of course, Charles could not become king if he were Catholic (Jews, Muslims, or Hindus are fine, but not Catholics). The monarch is also head of the state’s official religion, the Church of England. The House of Lords reserves 26 seats for its bishops, one of the few parliaments in the world where religion directly influences civil law. [Iran is the only other country where parliament reserves places for unelected clerics.]
The argument for his Irish visit is that it will improve Anglo-Irish relations. That is a distraction to mold public opinion. I work with English people. They are all sensible, decent, rational individuals, who are mainly highly skilled scientists. Our ability to work together will not be affected by royal behavior. (My only difficulty with them is that they can be so unbearably reasonable, an affliction from which we rarely suffer.)
So, while the Irish cheer Charles, how would they feel if they had to pay for President Higgins to have seven palaces, about 20 other residences, an extended family costing about £350 million annually, and was also the head of a Church that reserved Seanad seats for its bishops?
By welcoming Charles, they deny that the whole concept of royalty is quite insane, dating from when people burned witches. It is a form of publicly funded Disney-style escapism, which romanticizes the massive inequality in British society by suggesting that the poor should be grateful for being patronized by the obscenely wealthy. It is a wealth largely stolen from colonies across the globe (including Ireland) and used to build royal palaces and Whitehall’s magnificence.
But that, you say, is all in the unreasonable past. It should be. But how can it, when the unreasonable past still walks amongst us?