I read somewhere that the Church used to burn Irish books and manuscripts as part of it's programme to Anglicize Ireland.

Has anyone more information and references about this?

If the above is true, and it may be, it would be nothing in comparison to the entire libraries that went up in flames during the destruction of Ireland's monasteries as part England's attempts to cleanse Catholicism from this country.

There's no doubt that the Catholic Church (authorities at least) disgracefully turned their backs on the Irish language during the 19th century.
But this was only one element in the decline of Irish.

Of course, it's become very fashionable in recent years to bash the Catholic Church and blame it for every misfortune in history from the destruction of native American civilisations to the holocaust!
And who could forget that horrible, sinister albino monk from 'The Da Vinci Code'!!! :)

Give it a rest.

Maybe its fashionable because its true? People these days arent afraid to point the finger at the Catholic Church as they dont wield the power that they have done in previous times!

Ya, the Tudor cleansing was savage. A lot is blamed on Cromwell, and rightly so, but the Tudors enacted genocide in Munster and the Stuarts were no angels either.

I don't point to them as the most culpable, but rather wonder if they did at some time

http://yourarchives.nationalarchives.gov.uk/index.php?title=The_Dissolution_of_t he_Monasteries_and_Chantries

"Most Irish records relating to the dissolution were destroyed in the burning of the Dublin Record Office in 1922, but surrenders of religious houses and the award of pensions to their heads are printed in Calendar of the Patent and Close Rolls of Chancery in Ireland, vol 1 (Dublin 1861). "

So to add insult to injury -the records of the events where themselves destroyed, insuring fantasy a top spot in future visions of the period

But that you can't blame on the Church! That was the IRA.

I have never heard or read of Church authorities burning Irish books and manuscripts.

In fact, the Franciscans etc are responsible for saving much of what we have - the Four Masters, for example, were Francisican monks.

And I am aware of Louvain too

quote:

People these days arent afraid to point the finger at the Catholic Church

I don't think most people were quite so cowed by the Catholic Church in the past as is usually depicted.

Here's an old proverb:
"Ceathrar sagart gan a bheith sanntach,
ceathrar Franncach gan a bheith buidhe,
ceathrar gréasaidhe gan a bheith bréagach,
soin dhá fhear dhéag nach bhfuil san tír."
"Four priests who aren't greedy,
four Frenchmen who aren't yellow (dirty?),
four cobblers who aren't deceitful,
there's twelve men who aren't in the country."

The people who enjoyed reciting this aren't too likely to have been overly afraid of or unduly reverential towards the church.

Sea, ach bhí gaeilge acu!

I know Edna O Brien's novels in English were burned, and the book about the Tailor and Ansty (also in English).
There was clerical involvement in both of those.

Frank O Connor got into trouble for a translation into English of the Midnight Court - it was banned. But it was freely available in Irish....

I think the same is true of the Churches in Ireland as is true of the rest of the population. A small number of enthusiasts (Peadar Ó Laoghaire, Eoghan Ó Gramhnaigh, Dinneen), a small number virulently opposed (but no names spring to mind!) and the majority of the clergy indifferent.

quote:

the majority of the clergy indifferent.

Mar a dúirt an t-easpag sa chéad úrscéal le Pádraig Standún, "Scíobh do rogha rud i nGaeilge. Ní mórán a léanns í."

As a Catholic who loves the Church and the Irish language, I find it saddening that such a thing might be true, and I'm not denying it if it is. Even clergy in good standing in the church admit that wrongs have been done by men in the church, even some of the clergy. But it's also true that the Catholic Faith has been a strong spiritual foundation for Irish people through the centuries in very hard times.

As for the Church's involvement with the Irish language in the past, let's remember also more positive recent actions like the publishing of 'An Bíobla Naofa', which contains both Old and New Testaments. There are also prayer books by priests, and if I'm not mistaken, the Liturgy of the Hours as Gaeilge. People can also hear Mass said in Irish in the Gaeltachtaí. I think these and other things show that for any harm to the language in the past, the same Church has also become a help to the Irish language.

Dódh a lán rudaí le linn staire na hÉireann!

Bhíos i mo dhéagóir sna seachtaidí agus thart ar an tréimhse sin - faoi mar is eol dúinn - thosaigh cumhacht na Eaglaise Caitlicí ag cúlú. Cor cinniúna ba ea é i stair na tíre. Roimh an tréimhse seo dhéanadh na daoine i gcoitinne a ndícheall a gcráifeacht a theaspáint (agus bhí an chuid is mó díobh fiú i ndáiríre, déarfainn) agus d'fhéadfaí a rá go raibh umhlaíocht an marbháin ag roinnt mhaith acu ar a laghad roimh an gcléir. I gceann roinnt blianta bhí cuma eile ar an scéal agus bhí an frithchléiriúlachas á shaothrú ag roinnt mhaith daoine a raibh cruth agus meon mealltach nua-aimseartha ag teastáil uathu. B'fhéidir gurbh é an ghlúin a d'fhás suas ag an am sin an chéad cheann nach raibh greim draíochta na hEaglaise orthu a thuilleadh. Ach i ndáiríre, d'fhan cuid mhór acu idir dhá cheann na meá.

Agus ó thaobh na staire de: b'fhéidir go raibh an chléir rialta ag tacú leis na gnáthdaoine ach bhíodh dearcadh eile ag an gcliarlathas. Ná déantar dearmad air go raibh cliarlathas na hEaglaise - roimh an Reifirméisean dar ndóigh - ina rannpháirtí toilteanach gníomhach cúnta i gcúrsaí gabhála na hÉireann. Ag pointí cinniúnacha na staire leathnaigh an Eaglais chéanna faoi chroí mór maith fallaing mheabhlach na bréag-dlíthiúlachta thart ar an gcreachadóir.

Ach níor dheineadh aon tagairt dó sin sna leabhair oiris a bhíodh againn sa scoil. Ach b'fhéidir go raibh na leabhair leis an "Slánfhírinne" dóite cheana féin - cibé duine ar dhein é! Ach i ndáiríre ni gá leabhair na slánfhírinne a loscadh mar ní chlóbhuailtear a leithéid de rud am ar bith, áit ar bith.

(Message edited by ormondo on November 12, 2008)

(Message edited by ormondo on November 12, 2008)

(Message edited by ormondo on November 12, 2008)

(Message edited by ormondo on November 12, 2008)

Haven't actually heard of priests buring manuscripts but in South Armagh, Louth and many other areas during the late 19th century priests actively discouraged the local population from speaking Irish.

There are many stories of people being afraid to speak Irish in front of strangers or priests as the clergy were constantly promoting the 'values' of English etc.

quote:

The Irish language had drained from the great institutions and had stagnated in the unstirred and unstirring pools of the poor. Their church had made a devilish bargain with the state that provided it didn't support sedition it would eventually be given tolerance and even respectability.

Cont'd

quote:

The deal was never spelled out in any document, or plan of campaign, or political treatise, but it seemed as palpable as the breathing day. Ireland would Anglicise in tongue, Catholicise in religion, and respectabilise in society. This is, in effect, what happened.

- Alan Titley "How Did We Get Here From There?" p. 14
from: Who Needs Irish? Reflections on the Important of the Irish Language Today (Mac Murchaidh et al., Veritas, 2004, Dublin)

Stagnated in the unstirred and unstirring pools of the poor? It would seem we can thank the poor at least in part, for preserving the language.
And why would the church make such a bargain? Why would the Church think that respectability would be gained by anglicising the tongue of Ireland, when the English govt. had itself already rejected the Catholic Church? And Gaelic Ireland already shedding its blood rather than reject the Catholic Faith?

Things change. We are talking here about the 19th century, where the Hierarchy came to an arrangement with the British State.

Since the poor kept the language alive and a in a very fine form too, I would not say it stagnated, rather it contracted in registrars and scope

"And Gaelic Ireland already shedding its blood rather than reject the Catholic Faith?"

George, that's, may I say it, a bit naive -the Church is a political animal thru and thru -even in Islamic nations, you frequently find Catholics in top ministerial positions -they know they have someone from a minority who won't rock the boat and has an interest in 'stability'. Just look at how many dictatorships it has happily co-existed with

I don't think it's naive at all. While there are those who use the Church politically, that doesn't make it political through and through. The Church is a spiritual institution which unfortunately is used by some for political gain.

"Happy co-existence with dictatorships"? Co-existence perhaps for a time, but happy? The 20th century alone was one of the bloodiest centuries in the past 2,000 years for Christians, who were martyred for the Faith through persecution at the hands of dictatorships. And persecution continues.

And Irish people did indeed shed their blood rather than reject the Catholic Faith. Those who survived certainly risked their lives by continuing to practice it. To deny these things would add insult and offense to injury.

Similarly, some would say that to minimize the Church's political bedfellow arrangement with the dictatorial Brits during the "famine" would, likewise, be adding insult and offense to injury.

Just an observation.

George,
you need to take the context of what Alan Titley wrote into account, and also his style.

Also the period. The Penal Laws were no longer an issue in the 19th century.

quote:

Also the period. The Penal Laws were no longer an issue in the 19th century.

The Penal laws were most certainly an issue in the 19th century. Catholic emancipation didn't come about until 1829 and, without a doubt, their effects continued. (To the present day it could be argued.)

"And why would the church make such a bargain? Why would the Church think that respectability would be gained by anglicising the tongue of Ireland, when the English govt. had itself already rejected the Catholic Church? And Gaelic Ireland already shedding its blood rather than reject the Catholic Faith?"

The Church's concern was people's souls (securing the free practice of the Catholic faith in the kingdom) and not the preservation of their culture, tongue or any other earthly part of the community. Indeed, from where they stood, the surrender of the whole kit-and-kaboodle was a bargain if it meant tolerance of the Church's functioning.

While 1829 was sort of an "officializing" of the tolerance, the Church met with increasing apathy and decreasing violence as any real hope of success for the Jacobite cause waned. In short, the british government had beaten the Church to the point where it simply didn't pose a threat to their authority anymore...Catholics were to be the recipients of derision, but no longer required violent suppression.

That is, unless it were perceived that the Church was agitating to break up the crown's authority over the whole of the isles by stroking Irish nationalism...supporting a distinct gaelic culture in the face of an anglicising policy by the government could have been seen as just that and might have provided justification for renewed suppression.

It was a chance the Church simply didn't want to take...in the Church's estimation, it was better to have an english-speaking *Catholic* island of west-brits rather than to have the Church so thoroughly near-eradicated as it had been in england proper. In short, as long as the irish were permitted to remain practicing Catholics, it didn't matter who their caesar was.

Thank you Antaine, that was a well thought out response. I agree that the main concern is people's souls, and I do believe that salvation is more important than preserving a culture. So I don't blame the Catholic Church for putting that concern above all else. "What does it profit a man to gain the whole world if he lose his soul?" Likewise, what would it profit to preserve a culture at the cost of one's soul? As much as I love Irish culture and language, it would mean nothing to me if didnt have faith in Christ.

Perhaps things could have been handled better by the Church, but I can understand the Church not wanting to take chances. As things are though, thanks be to God that in His Providence, the Irish language and culture has survived. And thanks be to God also that the Church now even dedicates a portion of the Catechism to talking about the importance of culture in peoples' lives. But culture must be grounded in faith, and oriented toward unity with God.

Ach conas a shábháiltear anamacha díolta?

quote:

But culture must be grounded in faith, and oriented toward unity with God.

Tá fonn urlacain orm.

Thabharfainn mála urlacain duit ach tá mo cheann lán cheana féin.

I agree that the main concern is people's souls, and I do believe that salvation is more important than preserving a culture.

Tír gan teanga, tír gan anam! :)

Sea, ach duine?

As one of the posters above has already said, the Catholic Church is an international institution. It has many centuries of experience, not only of surviving in adverse circumstances but of expansion wherever and whenever possible. It is also an institution whose affairs are governed by human beings with all our virtues and failings, just like General Motors. We have to accept the truth of this even if we believe that the Church moves infallibly by the will of God and that there is some overall purpose we cannot fully conceive of.

For the multinational Catholic Church with the hope and desire of expanding its power/influence as the opportunity presents itself, an English-speaking Catholic Church in Ireland could and did provide thousands of English-speaking missionaries who were acceptable to the British colonial rulers of territories in Africa, India and other parts of the empire. They were acceptable as Anglicisers ['civilisers'?] of the local people now subjects of the British monarchy, whereas Irish-speaking workers could not be. English-speaking Irish emigrants to Britain, Australasia and America also spearheaded the Catholic Churches' revival or growth in those countries.

So while there have been many individual Irish Catholic bishops, priests and nuns down the centuries whose love and loyalty to the Irish language is well attested, sometimes at great personal cost, the international Church cannot have been particularly in favour of a full-scale revival of the language if not downright against the idea, and the Irish Catholic Church hierarchy as a body subject to Rome, could never give the predominant place to Irish in its official mind that individual clerics, even at the highest levels, might have wished. Even among those worthy gentlemen, one of their best arguments in favour of Irish was that it could act as a shield or barrier in the education system against the wholesale importation of 'Godless' British mores, a theme taken up enthusiastically by the conservative authorities of the new Irish state from 1922 until quite recently in historical terms.

Seanfhear