The
Abuse and Persecution of
Ulster Protestants
Students of
Bible Prophecy tell us that a day will come when those who are not
part of the "beast system" will be unable to "buy or sell". There
will be a future trade embargo against believers; their economic
life will be crushed out of them.
There is a lot
of conjecture on the part of such students of Bible Prophecy as to
"the mark of the beast": perhaps it will be a digital implant, or a
bar code, or some such technical innovation. These students teach
that this " beast system" may be manifest in the coming European
Union of which a disintegrated United Kingdom will be only a region,
a servile economic outpost of a great Central European confederacy,
or in some wider global tyranny. These are outline points. Anyone
familiar with these prophetic viewpoints will understand that this
is merely an overview of what is widely taught in Christian circles,
especially in the United States of America, which by reason of
geographical isolation and historical circumstance has remained
remote from the earlier conflicts of the Reformation era in Europe,
and has only the vaguest of understandings as to what actually
divides Protestants and Roman Catholics, as demonstrated by the many
famous evangelical and fundamentalist Americans who unwisely signed
the Evangelicals and Catholics Together document, thus compromising
the gospel of Christ (see R C Sproul, By Faith Alone, Hodder
Christian Paperbacks, 1996). Such teaching holds that some future
superhuman being or potentate will arise known as "the Antichrist".
What is sad is that those who promote these ideas are so superficial
in their treatment of the key word or concept "Antichrist". They
fail to explain that in the original text the word "Antichrist" does
not mean "against Christ", for the use of the prefix "anti-" to mean
"against" is actually a relatively modem sense. The prefix "anti-"
originally meant "rivaling", "simulating", passing into the sense of
"counterfeit, false", in other words, taking attention away from
Christ (see the Oxford English Dictionary, page 514). From this we can
see that the "Antichrist" is not outside the Christian Church and
attacking it; the Antichrist is not a super-Jew, a super-Communist,
or a super~Moslem, but a super- Christian who takes devotion and awe
away from our precious Savior, who even takes salvation, if it were
possible, away from Christ and adorns himself with honor and glory
and power - even the power over heaven and hell. It is those who
will not accept or bow down before this false claimant, this false
Christ, who will not be able to "buy or sell". They will be robbed
off their livelihood; their prosperity will cease; they will
have no future under this "beast system". Destitute, they will have
to flee. What if I were to tell you that this is happening to
Christian people right now, right under our very noses, unknown
because the Christians who can "neither buy nor sell" live in a
region of the world which is in media quarantine. These Christians
are caged up, and the only media voices which go into and out of the
cage are those which report or transmit a message acceptable to the
rulers of the darkness in high places. If we could find such a
Christian community who can "neither buy nor sell" right now, would
this give a clue as to who the beast is, what the mark of the beast
is, and who the Antichrist is? I reckon that it would; but, reader,
you are free to make up your own mind! What will follow is
closely cross-referenced; everything written can be double-checked
against the listed sources.
Let us begin this study by setting it within
the proper context:, terror, lawlessness and
intimidation!
Chapter One
Boycotting is
ethnic cleansing.
It is terrorism without the sound of exploding
bombs, or bullet riddled corpses. What CNN doesn't show, the
American people, the world doesn't know, The persecution of Ulster's
Protestants is the subject of a national cover-up. Boycotting is not
new: boycotting has a long history. Captain Charles Boycott, an
ex-army officer, was the agent for Lord Erne in County Mayo. He had
already evicted three families, when in September 1880 he got ready
to evict a further eleven families who had asked to have their rents
reduced. The local people took matters into their own hands and
persuaded the domestic servants and farm workers to refuse their
services. Soon afterwards, as one newspaper reported, "nearly all
the shopkeepers of Ballinrobe, which was the nearest village,
would have nothing to do with Captain Boycott". Although attempts to
ease Boycott's predicament were made, including bringing in laborers
from Ulster, Lord Erne, the landlord, eventually agreed to reduce
the rents by ten per cent. The Irish peasantry and their Land League
backers had made their point. Charles Stewart Parnell has been
accused of being the author and instigator of Captain Boycott's
troubles because, before a large crowd at Ennis, County Clare, on
19th September 1880, Parnell had urged: "When a man takes a farm
from which another has been evicted, you must show him on the
roadside where you meet him, you must show him in the streets of the
town, you must show him at the shop counter, you must show him in
the fair and in the market-place, and even in the House of Worship,
by leaving him severely alone, by putting him into a moral Coventry,
by isolating him from the rest of his kind as if he was a leper of
old - you must show him your detestation of the crime he has
committed".
The Land
War, as it is termed, raged on.
One writer described the state of rural
Ireland: "It rained evictions, it rained outrages. Cattle were
houghed and maimed; tenants who paid unjust rents, or took farms
from which others were evicted, were dragged from their beds,
assaulted. Graves were dug before the doors of evicting landlords,
murder was committed. A reign of terror was in truth commenced".
What is to be noted is that Charles Stewart Parnell keenly
understood the exquisite relationship between apparently democratic
Irish nationalist politics and the undercurrent of murderous
agrarian unrest, for he had explained in New York in January 1880,
nine months before the boycotting campaign started: A true
revolutionary movement in Ireland should, in my opinion, partake of
both a constitutional and an illegal character. It should be both an
open and a secret organization, using the constitution for its
own purposes, but also taking advantage of its secret
combination. Boycotting was therefore a vitally important
weapon in the armory of Irish nationalism. It had a part to play in
the Land War; and it fulfilled the revolutionary agenda. Those who
were vulnerable and isolated had no answer to it.
As Professor J C Beckett noted in Modern Ireland
(Faber) pp. 389-390: "This demonstration of power (boycotting) was
very alarming to the authorities". Cowper, the Lord Lieutenant, and
Foster, the Chief Secretary, insisted that though in public the
leaders of the Land League "always advocated peaceful methods, their
influence really depended upon the threat of violence".
It can be seen therefore that boycotting in
nineteenth century Ireland was part of a revolutionary struggle in
which a parliamentary faction always talked peace and advocated
peaceful methods while secretly allied to fanatical agrarian
elements who enforced boycotts by the most cruel and outrageous of
methods.
A 17th century letter shows how the Roman
Catholic Church in Ireland controlled the peasantry through fear of
"boycott" A reference to what is now known as boycotting, but which
was a much more ancient form of social control, is found in a letter
from the Protestant Bishop of Ferns. The letter is referred to in
Reid's nineteenth century volumes A History of the Presbyterian
Church in Ireland. The particular letter was written in 1612. "As
for the poorer sort, some of them have not only discovered unto me
privately their dislike of Popery and the mass, in regard
they understand not what is said or done therein, but also
groaned under the many priests in respect of double tithes and
offerings, the one paid by them unto us, and the other unto them.
Being then demanded of me why they did not forsake the mass and come
to church, their answer hath been, (which I know to be true in
some), and if they should be of our religion, no Popish merchant
would employ them being sailors, no Popish landlord would let them
any lands being husbandmen, nor set them houses in tenantry being
artificers; and therefore, they must either starve or do as they
do". This 17th century source indicates that boycotting was well
established in Ireland long before Parnell's land war campaign in
the nineteenth century.
Ordinary Roman Catholic people were gripped by
fear. Undoubtedly many Roman Catholics who now avoid shopping on
Protestant premises fear the power of the priests and the thugs
of the Provisional IRA, who mete out their barbarous punishment
beatings to those who do not conform to the secret code of Irish
Pan-Nationalism.
Boycotting foreshadowed the arrival of William
Prince of Orange at Torbay, 5th November 1688.
P. W. Thompson, in his remarkable book Britain
in Prophecy and History, written between the Wars, noted how the
boycott of Dutch people encouraged support for the cause of William
and Mary in 1688. That military support, as the historical record
shows, would later prove decisive. "With amazing indiscretion, Louis
seized upon this crucial moment to force two quarrels upon his
friends of Amsterdam, the first concerning religion, the second
concerning herrings. Many of the citizens had settled in France
for purposes of trade, their Calvinistic type of
Protestantism being winked at. Urged on, one supposes by the
Jesuits, Louis suddenly and treacherously imprisoned these persons,
and placed an embargo on the importation of those pickled herrings
which they had entered his dominions to sell. In their erstwhile
friend the King of France the burghers of Amsterdam suddenly
recognized the Man of Sin, who persecuted the saints, and forbad the
privileges of the fishmonger to all who failed to show the mark of
the Beast on their foreheads". This continental aspect to the
unknown history of the boycott illustrates a larger truth in that
events in Ulster tie in much more closely than is generally realized
with the development of the European superstate. It may be said that
in Ulster British people lose both lives and livelihoods as a
consequence of the government's policies of duplicity and
appeasement, whereas in England British fishermen and the owners of
small businesses merely lose their livelihoods. The manipulation of
the media, the phony and carefully choreographed "political" events,
the disregard for truth and the erosion of democratic
rights are shared features common to both the sell-out
of Ulster and the entrapment of Britain in a European superstate. It
may reasonably be pointed out that there are anti-British
undercurrents in the Republic of Ireland's approach to EU
issues.
Boycotting
played a strategic role in driving Protestants out of the South of
Ireland: "in a hundred year period three out of four Protestants
left Southern Ireland."
In the light of
all the foregoing evidence, and in view of the catalogue of
victimization, abuse and harassment recorded in the appendices to
this analysis, it seems almost superfluous to examine the damage
inflicted on Southern Irish Protestants in the early years of this
century. Nevertheless, reference must be made to discriminatory and
persecuting techniques applied by the Free State and later the
Republic of Ireland, as it became known, against those of its
citizens who failed to conform or were out of step with the new
state's Roman Catholic ethos.
It is important to realise, to have it
acknowledged, that despite "honeyed words" Protestants are suffering
now within Northern Ireland and while it is still theoretically part of
the United Kingdom, will fare even worse in some all-Ireland
structure. The message is stark:
Protestants are not wanted in
Ireland
- though a 3.5% Protestant minority is useful for "show"
purposes. There have been recent attempts to gloss over the decline
of Protestants in Southern Ireland and produce cosmetic explanations
sanitized of terms such as "discrimination", "burned-out" or the
more emotive "ethnic cleansing". Such attempts should be treated
with great caution as apologists for Irish nationalism are not
averse to creating black holes in the historical record when
necessary. A careful examination of the record and eyewitness
accounts of what happened eighty or so years ago is chilling, but is it
also prophetic, giving insight into the future reserved for Ulster's
Protestants? When recently the Public Record Office in
Belfast's Balmoral Avenue opened secret papers for the 1920s for
inspection, they contained numerous reports of Protestants, even
professional people like doctors and solicitors, moving into
Northern Ireland having been boycotted out of the Irish Free State.
Thus history repeats itself as Ireland's Roman
Catholics attempt to rid Ireland of "heretics". A few extracts from
a public lecture delivered by Dr Noel Browne at Queen's University
will suffice to substantiate this section of the argument. "Far from
creating in his part of the island a genuinely fair and just
pluralist society, in which members of minority religions could rear
their families, walk the streets in dignity, and in the words of the
Proclamation, "enjoy freedom of religious expression, freedom of
conscience, freedom of information, equal rights, and equal
opportunities", deValera gave Rome a free hand under a crude,
unfeeling system of "separate development" and religious "apartheid"
which would ensure that the Irish republic would become a Catholic
state for a Catholic people". Over a period of years, the slow
inexorable inevitable consequence of this policy was the systematic
progressive depopulation of the new Irish State of its Protestant
people. Justifying the sacking of a properly appointed librarian in
Mayo, because, though highly qualified, she was a Protestant, de
deValera argued in June 1930: "I say the people of Mayo in a county
where I think 98% of the population is Catholic are justified in
insisting on a Catholic librarian". He went on to widen the issue
indeed, and asserted: "A Protestant doctor ought not to be appointed
as a dispensary doctor in a mainly Catholic area". Black South
Africa comes to mind, does it not? There being virtually no
significant non-Catholic areas, the consequence of this policy,
nationally, was obvious. In effect Protestants need not apply signs
went up all over the Republic. Incidentally, it is interesting to
note the make-up of the Mayo Library Committee. It consisted of a Catholic bishop,
five Catholic priests, a Christian Brother, a Protestant rector and
four laymen. The voting, ten to two "for" sacking the Protestant.
Now at the conclusion of the tragic fiasco of our own seventy-five
years of "freedom" in the South, we have created a manifestly unjust
ineptly run society, in which just under 20% of our people are
constantly unemployed. One in three of our people, men, women and
children live at or below the poverty line. With no work, in their
thousands our unwanted young men and women must emigrate. The Nazis
boycotted Jewish shops as part of their accelerating campaign of
anti-Semitism. Provisional IRA/Sinn Fein share more than twelve
major characteristics with Hitler's Nazis. A comparison of the
revolutionary techniques adopted by the Nazi Party and by IRA/Sinn
Fein shows an amazing degree of congruence. Propaganda, political
thuggery, talking peace while using violence and force, concealing
an essentially anti-democratic bid for power behind a smokescreen of
democratic and reasonable sounding hype, are all obvious shared
characteristics; playing on the gullibility and willingness to
appease of the English is another. For example, here is one analysis
of Hitler which could be applied to Gerry Adams. In fact to prove
this point I have transposed the name Hitler with that of Adams.
"The danger of Adams was his seductive modernity. His propaganda
could present a totalitarian message with the flair of democratic
persuasion". Most sinister, though, are the occult forces of lying
and lawlessness, those evil spirits driving IRA fanaticism. In the
television documentary, "Hitler - the Fatal Attraction". Dr
Christopher Andrew explored the impact on Hitler of his early years
singing in the choir of the Benedictine monastery school and church
at Lambach, in Austria. The documentary pointed out that the
"swastika", infamous symbol of Nazism, was integral to the interior
decoration of this fine example of baroque architecture. No wonder
Hitler adopted a symbol which had been ever before his eyes as a
choirboy.
Another televised documentary on Nazism, from
which the first quotation in this section is drawn, confirmed the
impact of Roman Catholicism on the youthful Hitler by quoting the
same statement that Dr Christopher Andrew had identified as
important: "I had excellent opportunity to intoxicate myself with
the solemn splendor of the many brilliant church
festivals". This remarkable statement by the man later to become the
Fürer of Nazi Germany resonates with sounds from the Apocalypse,
which speaks of those "inhibitors of the earth made drunk with the
wine of her fornication". It is noteworthy because this theme is
taken up in one of the concluding sections of this essay. In this
program, "Seduction of a Nation", the psycho-analyst and therapist,
Professor Hehn Stierlin, commented that: "These early experiences as
a choirboy exposed Hitler to Roman Catholic ritual which had a very
powerful impact upon him. Hitler later took over elements which were
incorporated into his own home-spun new religion in which he offered
himself as a new messiah. The Germans embraced this dubious
salvation". In Landau Prison, following his Munich Putsch, Hitler
was assisted by the Jesuit Father Staempfle to write his political
testament, Mein Kampf. When I read that Hitler had been aided by a
Roman Catholic priest in writing his political master plan, I
reacted with some incredulity, but a colleague with access to the
libraries of Oxford was able to confirm the sources quoted on page
133 of All Roads Lead to Rome by Michael de Semlyn. Provisional Sinn
Fein/IRA acts in concert with the other parties to the
pan-nationalist front or axis, suggesting a striking parallel with
the relationship between the Nazis and the Catholic Centre Party in
Germany prior to the Nazi seizure of power in 1933 (see "Provisional
Sinn Fein's Revolutionary Strategy",
Wake Up magazine, March/April 1996).
Could it be that
the high number of characteristics shared by Nazism and the
Provisional IRA are not accidents of history?
Could both powerful
terror cohorts have access to the same revolutionary textbook or
manual?
From March 1933, Nazi pressure on Germany's Jewish
population began to increase.
It was in March of that year that Hitler
ordered the Nazi Brownshirts (S.A.) to stand outside Jewish shops to
turn away customers. This economic victimization was but the prelude
to the fiercest of persecution. The boycotting of the Jews in
Germany was an initial step towards the Final Solution. The
Provisional IRA also seeks a Final Solution to the Protestant
problem. This Nazi persecution of the Jews raises a fundamental
problem. There is a sense in which Roman Catholicism was and is
Christianity as far as Jewish people are concerned. Given the Jews'
abhorrence of idolatry, the fact that what Jews perceived to be an
idolatrous religion, Roman Catholicism, is to their minds synonymous
with Christianity means that one of the greatest obstacles to the
conversion of the Jews is in reality Popery. The Pope of Rome stands
in front of Christ, blotting Him out in Jewish eyes. Germans who
ignored the boycott of Jewish premises were singled out for
intimidation by Brownshirt thugs. Under cover of the spurious "peace
process" the military structures of Sinn Fein/IRA remain intact and
the horrendous list of punishment beatings ensures that few Roman
Catholics will challenge the calls from their priests made in
chapels in mid-Ulster to boycott Protestants named by these priests
as targets and victims. Michael J F McCarthy, who was himself an eye
witness to the methods of the Parnellite Land League in late
nineteenth century Ireland was highly skeptical about the manner in
which the Roman Catholic hierarchy disassociated themselves from the
cruelties of the land war at that time. McCarthy commented: "It may
be said that the Church hierarchy condemned the Fenians, but it must
be remembered that the censure was merely official and the priests
had brothers and cousins amongst the rebels". We might ask, what has
changed? Evidence linking the Sinn Fein IRA Boycotting and street
confrontation tactics to those of the ANC in South Africa. A
colleague, writing about South Africa, has noted the tactical
similarity between the revolutionary strategies of Provisional Sinn
Fein/IRA and the ANC. As this extract makes clear, consumer boycotts
were an unsuccessful strategy adopted to force further change in
South Africa: The ANC and South African Communist Party in the
latter stages of the de Klerk Government employed the tactic of a
consumer boycott. This boycott was aimed specifically at right wing
Afrikaners who had business concerns in the East Rand area. The idea
was to try and get Afrikaners to modify their stance in opposition
to the multi-party talks by hurting their pocket books. At the time the CODESA talks were going on in
Kempton Park near Johannesburg. CODESA stands for Convention on a
Democratic South Africa. The boycott did have an effect although it
did not achieve its objective to get Afrikaners to the table, as
CODESA collapsed because it was unrepresentative. It could also be
pointed out that Dr Gatsha Buthelezi's Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP)
organized a series of marches at this time comprising thousands of
Zulus in traditional clothing and carrying traditional weapons
(spears, shields and knobkerries - a sort of club-type instrument).
The ANC/SACP tactic was to confront these marches, which inevitably
led to street violence, with the Security Forces being dragged in.
There were calls from Mandela, Slovo, and Rainaphosa at the time for
the IFP marches to be banned. The Minister of Law and Order, Adrian
Vlok, responded by banning the carrying of traditional weapons, but
not the marches themselves. There are distinct parallels between the
tactics of the ANC/SACP and Sinn Fein/IRA in respect of these two
issues.
Other contemporary examples of boycotting.
Chapter 2
Boycotting is
at variance with human rights.
Article I of the Convention on the Prevention
and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide states: Genocide, whether
committed in time of peace or time of war, is crime under
international law. What, though, is genocide? 11. Acts committed
with an intent to "destroy, in whole or in part, a national,
ethnical, racial or religious group"; and it consists of, among
other cruelties, "killing members of the group, causing serious bodily or mental harm: deliberately
inflicting on the group conditions calculated to bring about its
physical destruction". It is our contention, supported by both
historical and empirical evidence, that there are two nations on the
island of Ireland, a minority British and Protestant nation, and a
majority Roman Catholic and Irish Gaelic nation. Dr Heslinga, in his
seminal work The Irish Border as a Cultural Divide, states on page
155: "James's Plantation of Ulster made a permanent change in the
face of Ireland in the sense that it moved a whole new population -
can I say a whole new nation - into part of Ireland."
Irish nationalists, on the other hand, hold
that all of the peoples on the island are Irish, and those who deny
their Irishness are deviants bought off by the British (sic) or
colonists who have no right (sic) to be in Ireland in the first
place. Such deviants and colonists are to be driven out. Boycotting
is one means of driving deviants and colonists out of Ireland. As
the Provisional IRA expresses it, "Brits out!" As the British state
is secretly engaged in ceding Northern Ireland to the Republic of
Ireland, Britain "tolerates" the humiliations inflicted on Ulster's
diminishing Protestant population as part of the price of an overall
strategy which uses "all the violence" to promote "peaceful change",
i.e. Irish unification by stealth. The Ulster Protestants are the
victims of Provisional IRA terrorism and of an "elaborate strategy"
to enforce their assimilation into an Irish nationalist culture.
There is an almost total media black-out in respect of this example
of anachronistic racism within Western Europe. This issue has never
been debated in the British House of Commons or the European
Parliament. At this moment huge sums of money are flowing into Irish
republican and nationalist areas to the almost complete exclusion
and disadvantage of the people who are being assaulted. Given the
silence of the Government of the Republic of Ireland in respect of
the physical "ethnic cleansing" of Protestants by IRA terror, and
now the silent ethnic cleansing of Protestants by boycotting, it is
obvious that though the government of the Republic covets Northern
Ireland, it does not regard the whole population of Northern Ireland
equally as potential future citizens, but adopts a discriminatory
prejudiced and sectarian approach to the population in Northern
Ireland. The Republic of Ireland supports the interests of Roman
Catholic and nationalist people but turns a blind eye or ignores the
sufferings of those who refuse to embrace an Irish nationalist
ideology. The human rights aspect of the predicament of the Ulster
Protestants was raised three years ago in the Manifesto of the
Ulster Homeland Movement, from which this quotation is drawn: "The
necessity for such a human rights movement arises from and is a
response to an evident and sustained pattern of ethnic cleansing of
the British and Protestant people in the City of Londonderry, South
and East Tyrone, Fermanagh and South Armagh, within Northern
Ireland, while Northern Ireland remains the ultimate responsibility
of Her Majesty's Government. The failure of the British Government
to protect the lives of ordinary people from the depredations of the
Provisional IRA, which was originally set in being by "eminent and
respectable persons" in the Irish Republic, the Constitution of
which lays claim to Northern Ireland, must be viewed as one of the
great political scandals' of the late twentieth century".
"Furthermore, that these calamitous and barbaric events
could take place within the jurisdiction and oversight of Her
Majesty's Government raises the most profound questions about the
nature of British parliamentary democracy, of a bipartisan approach
which has robbed ordinary electors of the protection which
Parliament is said to afford the British citizen, and of a deep
cynicism, and a secretiveness at the heart of political affairs
which is inherently dishonest about the intention of state
policy".
It is self-evident that boycotting is a
human rights issue.
1. See the
application of Edith Elliott and others (number 9348/81 and 9360/81)
to the European Commission on Human Rights. These appeals, though a
decade old, contain un-controvertible documentary and statistical
evidence of the strategic pattern of murders along the frontier of
the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. See also the BBC
Northern Ireland "Spotlight" program, "The Killing Fields". Again,
despite appeals, this program was not networked nationally. This
situation has further deteriorated since 1981.
2.
Clifford, B., Parliamentary Despotism: John Hume's Aspiration
(Belfast: Athol Books, 1986).
3. The
failure of Great Britain to govern Northern Ireland properly and to
deal effectively with terrorism is a deliberate failure and is one
of the great scandals of modem times." Newsletter, 6 December
1991.
4. The
Scott inquiry into the Churchill-Matrix affair throws a spotlight
onto Britain's secretive bureaucracy and its power over government
policy. See also Cosgrave, P., The Lives of Enoch Powell.
The voices of
the boycott victims.
A recently formed organization called "Business
and Professional People for the Union" has produced a report on the
boycotting of businesses in Northern Ireland from July to September
1996 (inclusive). This report sets out a number of significant
features, from which the following extracts are selected:
1. There was evidence, in some
cases, that the boycotts were organized. A letter was sent to about
8 traders in a town in which the writer expressed disquiet at the
incidents arising out of the Drumcree confrontation and declared his
intention to withdraw his custom from, and "strongly advocate that
my fellow Catholics in the community boycott", shops or businesses
owned by those whom he considered were involved or condoned what the
author describes in emotive language as "intimidation and horrific
acts of violence against innocent Catholics, anti-Catholic thuggery", etc. The
majority of the recipients of this letter are not members of any of
the Loyal Orders and had absolutely no connection with any protests.
Their only "crime" is to live and conduct business in areas with
large nationalist populations.
2. There is evidence that some
boycotts were planned prior to the Drumcree confrontation. One of
the traders was told that his name had been mentioned as a likely
victim of a boycott on the 9th July, i.e. 2 days before the Drumcree
situation came to a head.
3. Few of the traders chiefly
affected by the boycotts were involved in roadblocks or any other
action associated with Drumcree, in fact only a small number are
members of the Orange Order. The conclusion is therefore that the
organizers of the boycotts were either poorly informed, which, being
local people in a small community, seems highly unlikely, or the
boycotts are not a spontaneous reaction but are aimed at the wider
unionist community and are sectarian in nature.
4. The businessmen are fearful of
going public about their predicament because it may make their
situation worse and exacerbate the damage already done to community
relations. They make the valid point that the number of murders of
their community by the IRA/Sinn Fein and the destruction of property
over a period of 27 years has not led them to striking back against
the nationalist population whereas the Drumcree incidents are being
used as a pretext by the nationalists to undermine their livelihoods
and to drive them out of business, and ultimately out of the area
altogether. Rev. Ian Paisley, Member of Parliament for a
constituency where the boycotting is taking place called for "an
unambiguous statement from the Roman Catholic Church and the SDLP on
this new IRA strategy of intimidation against Protestants" (Belfast
Telegraph 27th September 1996). In the News Letter of the same date,
Ian Paisley made an important point: "Even Protestants are being
intimidated because they feel they're being marked for going into
shops". In the same edition of the Northern Ireland paper, Alan
Field, a spokesman for a pro-Union pressure group stated that "many
businesses had seen their profits plummet by 60-70% in the past 12
weeks". Mr Field called for a financial rescue package. Two cases of
intimidation that came to light involved Roman Catholics who
continued to shop in Protestant establishments. In the first case, a
woman bought a shirt from a Protestant business, and when this
became known, three Roman Catholic women beat her up. In another
case, the Roman Catholic neighbor spent a few pounds on groceries in
a Protestant store, but on her return home from her shopping trip
she received a threatening telephone call. As in Nazi Germany, her
every move had been monitored!
A discussion between two Protestant victims of
the boycott from different areas in the west of Ulster
highlighted the crucial issues. One victim, who had survived
two shootings at the hands of the IRA, remarked: "Protestants are
supporting me very well, but the fact is that 70% of my trade is
with Roman Catholic people; we've got to wean Roman Catholics back
from Sinn Fein". The other victim responded by saying: "The Roman
Catholics know exactly what they are doing; this is a softening-up
process to weaken Protestant communities while the IRA recruit and
rearm for the next onslaught - the Roman Catholics are not going to
come back, you know! Those who believe different are under a great
delusion". Immediate help would be forthcoming if the British
Government acknowledged that boycotting is a form of terrorism,
which is self-evident. Then victims would be entitled to
compensation, like others who have suffered as a result of IRA
lawlessness.
One cause of extreme sadness among many
ordinary Protestants arises from the failure of their own ministers
of religion to speak up on their behalf Of course, there are
exceptions, but in general Protestant ministers keep a low profile
or actually distort reality. These Protestant ministers attempt to
prop up the myth of good community relations in a region of western
Europe which is deeply polarized and close to further serious
violence as embattled Protestants continue to lose ground to
aggressive Pan-Nationalist Roman Catholics. Another victim of
boycotting explained why Protestant clergymen, even those thought
to be evangelical, say so little about the day to
day religious persecution of their own people. "These ministers know
that if they speak out, they are not going to get on well in the
future. For many Protestant ministers, theirs is no longer a
vocation, it's just a job - there's too much personal risk in
rocking the ecumenical boat, even for so-called evangelicals"
This frustrated Protestant, whose small business lost £4,000
in the first month, spoke of Protestant school children spat upon by
Roman Catholics on their way to and from school near Bellaghy, of
Protestants moving out, and of these boycotts being organized in
rural Roman Catholic parochial halls, the locality of which he went
on to identify. This victim spoke of a Sinn Fein leaflet which had
circulated in the Armagh area, which specifically named Protestant
premises which were to be boycotted. Then in confirmation of all
that had gone before, the victim produced a sinister hand-bill which
had been circulated to both the few Protestants and the very many
Roman Catholics in the town of Coalisland. The leaflet carried no
signature and claimed that thirty Orangemen and a small band
consisting of some elderly musicians and young children had
"intimidated" the people of Coalisland, 97.5% of whom are Roman
Catholics. This specious document, full of half-truths and innuendo,
bore all the characteristics of Provisional Sinn Fein, and set the
scene for the vicious intimidation of Protestants and Orangemen
which took place on the Twelfth of July. After the police were
forced to intervene to rescue the Protestants, and the local Church
of Ireland minister was bombarded with abuse and humiliated in the
street in broad daylight by a republican mob, Rev. Tomey said,
"Today Coalisland has ceased to exist for the Protestant people!" It
was a telling remark. Another eyewitness described the gutted ruins
of Christ Church, Church of Ireland Church, Londonderry. The
eyewitness said that the burned out shell of the church had such
slogans daubed upon it as "boycott" and "get out of Derry". Needless
to say, the local Church of Ireland minister, maintaining the lie of
"good community relations" in Ulster, asserted that the attack on
the Protestant church was not "sectarian!" Yet another message on
the smoldering ruins of his church was stark: "Prods
out".
One anonymous writer to the letters columns of
the Belfast Telegraph Newspaper had asked, two weeks earlier (13th
September): "Following attacks on Protestant homes, churches, halls
and businesses, not to mention the organized campaign against
Protestant shops and parades, I would like to ask Irish nationalists
where do Protestants and loyalists fit in the New Ireland? The
laughable peace process was meant to bring new enlightened thinking
from all sides, but the Catholic nationalist community has turned on
the sectarian heat". The Daily Telegraph carried a detailed report
of the harassment and persecution of Protestant families in the
village of Pomeroy in the paper on November 14, 1996. The
eight-column account by the "Ireland correspondent", Toby Hamden,
gave a graphic account of violence, ostracism and intimidation
directed against the few ordinary Protestant villagers. Once again
the courageous and outspoken Presbyterian minister, Rev. Bingham,
gave an eyewitness account of the sufferings of the Protestant
minority in the village. He declared: "This is Sinn Fein's long war
strategy. It's another way of putting the screw on Protestants.
People were told by hard-line republicans not to go to Protestant
shops" Meanwhile, boycott victim Stephen Boyd, whose brother,
a fridge repair man, was shot dead by the IRA in 1993, said he had
suffered a 25 per cent drop in trade. Catholic women whom he had
known all his life would no longer come into his general store.
Opposite the Roman Catholic chapel in the village of Pomeroy the
walls are daubed with slogans which read: Disband the RUC, IRA All
the Way, and "Brits" (sic) out, the Brits in this case being people
who think of themselves as British and Protestant - Ulster's
loyalists in other words. Mr Ramsay, whose home heating oil delivery
lorry had been doused with petrol and set alight to prevent him from
trading, said: "Things are as bad as ever. Sinn Fein IRA won't be
happy until the last Protestant has been driven out of Pomeroy". It
will take a little longer, but any reasonable analysis must surely
conclude, to paraphrase boycott victim Mr Ramsay, that "Sinn Fein
IRA won't be happy until the last Protestant has been driven out of
Ulster". Strife over Orange parades is a case in point. The real
objection is to the very presence of the Protestant people of Ulster
on the island.
The policy of appeasement followed by
successive British governments means that the British State actually
serves as an agent of ethnic cleansing in Northern Ireland. The
theory has been that if constitutional nationalists are given enough
political rewards they can be detached from the Provisional Sinn
Fein storm troopers. This theory is flawed. Only when Provisional
Sinn fierier are defeated, whether morally or militarily, will there
be any prospect of the Unionist majority in Ulster reaching some
measure of agreement with the Roman Catholic minority. As Sinn
fierier are winning the war, such a prospect is most unlikely.
A simple matter of historical transposition
suggests that conditions described in Ulster resemble those in
Weimar Germany during the rise of Hitler and the Nazis. In a sense
the boycott victims share an identical psychological response to
that evidenced by the Jews in Nazi Europe: a fear of speaking out in
case that made things worse, and a hope that things might improve or
get better, all bound up with an unwillingness to confront the
reality of human evil and wickedness. I have received other reports
of obscene and horrific forms of harassment visited upon ordinary
Protestant working people in recent weeks, but as I cannot
corroborate them fully, such reports have been omitted. Evidently
the rising tide of persecution and aggression against Ulster
Protestants is not yet in full spate! By contrast, the Protestant
population is deeply divided, inarticulate, lacking spokesmen and
leadership. Is it that the judgment of God is upon them?
Who will sing a sad song for this Ulster Protestant
martyr?
On the 17th of September 1996, in the
picturesque seaside village of Glenarm in County Antrim, Mr Ken Auld
took his life into his hands. Mr Auld confronted three Roman
Catholics as they ripped down the Union Jack from a flagpole. Mr
Auld, like many of us, believed that we have a human right to be
British and Protestant on the island of Ireland. He may not have
expressed his sense of identity in quite those terms, but his Roman
Catholic neighbors did not appreciate the Union flag: they preferred
to desecrate it. When Mr Auld expressed his objections to this
attack upon his sense of identity, his right to be what he knew
himself to be, he was abused. No, it was more than abuse. His Roman
Catholic neighbors drove a screwdriver into the 47 year old's head!
Days later, in hospital, he would die of that horrendous
wound. You didn't see or hear of this tragic assault on television.
No cameras whirred while a priest intoned a homily. The murder of an
innocent man was of no propaganda advantage, because Mr Auld was not
a Roman Catholic or an Irish nationalist. He was therefore of no
media interest: he was a non-person like a Jew in Poland in 1942.
Instead Mr Auld was carried with quiet dignity to the grave. Who will
speak up for Mr Auld? Who will speak up for the boycott victims? Who
will speak up for a little nation called Ulster?
Who will write a sad song in memory of a man
who actually believed that the Union flag is worth dying for? Is it
possible to explain why Ireland's Roman Catholics are driven to
expel their Protestant neighbors from the island?
Bosers
Anderup, writing in the Socialist Register in 1981, observed this
phenomenon: "It is the extravagant claim of Irish Catholics to the
whole island which is divisive". As "Prods Out" slogans are painted
on the walls of Protestant churches or on the thoroughfare in the
village of Bellaghy, we must ask what lies behind the Roman Catholic
rejection of neighborliness and the adoption of exclusivity? It is
obvious that not all Roman Catholics harbor such extreme intentions
towards Protestants and Protestantism, though in the towns and
villages where boycotting is at its most intense it may not be so
obvious! Yet even moderate Roman Catholics see no moral problem in
striking up an alliance (the Pan-Nationalist Front) with the most
murderous and cunning of the Irish Republicans. Further, in the
event of action by the British Security Forces, even the most
moderate of Irish Roman Catholic politicians and spokespersons are
impelled to speak up on behalf of "unarmed men, innocent victims,
good family men", and other euphemisms for lawless terrorists shot
dead in dangerous circumstances, while overseeing large arms and
explosive caches. When we delve into the past we discover that the
theme and objective of expelling Protestants from Ireland recurs
again and again within the internal or unspoken mythologies of Irish
Roman Catholicism. The following quotations are drawn from the late
18th and early 19th centuries respectively. In their turn,
Rockites began to bum Protestant Churches and Ribbonmen encouraged
each other by talking of the day when Protestantism in Ireland would
be overthrown - Unionists and Nationalists 1800 - 1886 (a
contemporary school text book by Longmans). "There have
been for centuries, probably since the Reformation itself, certain
opinions floating among the lower classes in Ireland, all tending to
prepare them for some great change in their favor, arising from the
discomfiture of heresy, the overthrow of their enemies, and the
exaltation of themselves and their religion". [William Carleton,
Traits and Stories of the Irish Peasantry (ed. D J O'Donoghue) Vol.
IV "Tubber Derg; or, The Red Well" (London: J M Dent & Co.,
1896), p.31. The following quotation is much more recent; it
is an extract from the Irish Times of 30 June 1955. "Three
hundred years of history should have shown them the futility of
attempting to build a Protestant island in a Catholic sea". Today
the underlying theme of "Planters go home", found amongst graffiti
in Belfast, is expressed in bitter invective and slogans scrawled
throughout Ulster. It is a chilling reminder of the claim made in
the Provisional An Phoblacht (28 November 1975), which predicted
that Ulster would be "ethnically cleansed" of Protestants by the
year 2,000. This drive to expel Protestants is the antithesis of
good community relations. It is amazing that neighbors who in a
rational, an objective sense, have a human right to be British and
Protestant in Ireland, and in reality represents a coherent minority
society or "nation" on the island are denied those rights through
such flagrant victimization. Are the Irish Republicans and their
fellow Roman Catholic allies intoxicated with false doctrine and an
erroneous or fabricated mythology which overawes reality through the
power of propaganda and lawless violence?
Yet perhaps the key is to be found in a piece
of writing which takes us back to the Reformation era, and which has
been recorded (inter alia) for us in a little book entitled The
Trial of antichrist, first published in 1806 although the writer is
quoting from the 1844 Third Edition. A well authenticated letter of
May 1538 was found in possession of Thade O'Brien, a Franciscan
Friar, jailed in Dublin Castle. It had been written to O'Neill by
the Bishop of Metz with the approval of Pope Paul 3. This letter is
also reported independently, though there is no way of knowing if
the poet had read "The Trial of Antichrist", in Rev. Robert Young's
collection of ballads printed in the mid-19th century. The footnote
in the book of ballads is an abbreviated version of the same
document: My Son O'Neill - Thou and thy fathers were ever faithful
to the mother Church of Rome. His holiness Paul, the present Pope,
and his council of holy fathers, have lately found an Irish prophecy
of one St Lazerianus, an Irish Archbishop of Cashel. It saith, that
"the Church of Rome shall surely fall when the Catholic faith is
overthrown in Ireland." The letter then exhorts O'Neil for his own
protection to suppress heresy and oppose the enemies of His
Holiness. The letter continues: "The Council of Cardinals have
therefore thought it necessary to animate the people of the holy
island in this pious cause". The Trial of Antichrist quotes as the
source for this curious letter Leland Vol. 11. 1721. It is painfully
evident that at times the Roman Catholic rural campaign against
Ulster Protestants has taken on all the aspects of a religious
crusade. And the boycott in particular applies financial thumbscrews
to ordinary Protestant businesses having first borne false witness
against the victims with all kinds of black propaganda, evil
speaking and mendacity, so as to leave them isolated and
vulnerable.
It has to be said that it is difficult to know
how much weight can be placed on this source. The writer had in
the past heard mention of the prophecy that when Catholicism
fell in Ireland it would fall world-wide, but the written source
must be treated with caution. The fact that the letter is also
referred to, as an extensive footnote in Young's Ballads must
on balance give it added credence. There is also linguistic evidence
derived from examining Irish Gaelic language forms in which the word
"Protestant" lacks a theological meaning or significance and is
invariably rendered in senses, which imply a foreigner or outsider.
This is a technical point, which would require
further study and elaboration beyond the scope of this present
essay. In a sense the boycotting of Protestants in Ulster is nothing
new. It is a more public manifestation of a type of unspoken
warfare, which has come down to us from the more distant past. It
could be said that Irish Roman Catholicism, even if it does not
always acknowledge the intention or admit to the reality as
experienced in Castlederg, Benburb, Dungiven, Lisnaskea or
Warrenpoint a generation ago, boycotts Protestantism. This is an
analysis that gives a whole new twist to the issues of "integrated
education" (which the writer supports) or media bias against
Protestants and their culture. One side of the story rarely gets
told, and that is even allowing for the fact that some Protestant
organizations in Ulster often fail to answer the telephone or put up
spokespersons to articulate their position.
|
Conclusion.
It
is time for Ireland's Roman Catholics and nationalists to give some
things back!
Today
we all understand that the secret of a happy life is balance. St
Paul referred to it as "moderation" (Phil. 4:5). If we
smoke we will in all probability fall ill and perhaps die. If we
drink and drive we will in all probability cause an accident and
possible fatalities. If we spend to excess on alcohol we may destroy
not only our marriage but family life.
Balance,
moderation and stability: these are the qualities that point to
happiness. So too in regard to communities. Northern Ireland is such
a community. Through the power of propaganda and the propaganda of
violence, social and political life has been thrown out of balance.
It is the opinion of the majority of people, the Protestants, that
things have gone too far: "enough is enough", they say.
Protestants
discern in the responses of the British State, duplicity and
deception. It can hardly be an accident that in each set piece
encounter between London and Dublin it is the Unionists who have
lost ground. Under this process of constitutional erosion, many
ordinary Protestants fear there will soon be no ground left.
Hibernicization of our culture, hibernicization of the RUC, joint
this and joint that: soon the Britishness of Ulster will be history,
overborne by revolutionary violence and appeasement. Boycotting and
the larger issue of ethnic cleansing are part and parcel of the same
war of attrition; the ground is being cut from under the British and
Protestant population in Ulster. "Enough is enough". What
is interesting is that Protestants encounter not neighborliness, not
acceptance, but rejection: "Prods out." In order to
restore balance and order, to invest "neighborliness" with
value and reality, the time has come for the Roman Catholic and
nationalist people to give some things back. A start could be made
by restoring to the Protestant victims of the boycott their good
name, and their freedom to trade. But is this abuse really religious
persecution? At regular intervals throughout the civil unrest in
Ulster, Protestant spokesmen, Orange leaders, or ministers of
religion, conducting yet another funeral of a murder victim called
upon the Roman Catholic hierarchy to excommunicate the IRA. Such
calls went unheeded. Preaching at the funeral of Provisional IRA
murder victim, Albert Beacom, a Church of Ireland clergyman said
this, and his words stand as representative of widespread Protestant
opinion: "Who are these Republican terrorists? They are men who
speak idealistically of a new, united Ireland. Roman Catholic
people, I ask you to stop and think; I ask you to contrast their
heartless and wicked actions with their fine sounding words. Their
works are satanic and their legacy is terror and sorrow. What they
do is often condemned by you, but if they are killed through their
involvement in violence, we see them buried as heroes and treated
like martyrs". The funeral sermon concluded with an appeal,
which went unanswered, to the Roman Catholic bishops to excommunicate
the Provisional IRA. It can be argued, therefore, that had the Roman
Catholic hierarchy in Ireland heeded such appeals from the victims
of terror, and excommunicated the IRA, then it could not be asserted
that the sufferings of the Protestants were a form of religious
persecution (see the writings of life-sentence ex-IRA man Sean
Callaghan, or Connor Cruise O'Brien etc.) As the Roman Catholic
hierarchy failed to excommunicate the IRA and as numerous documents
establish a clear connection between Roman Catholic priests and the
Provisional IRA, then it is reasonable to advance the view that
Protestants suffer religious, that is Roman Catholic, victimization.
A further reason for asserting that the abuse, boycotting and murder
of Ulster's Protestants is in reality religious persecution, turns
on the political and constitutional gains which self-proclaimed
moderate and constitutional Irish nationalists have made at the
expense of the Protestant victims of Provisional IRA terror.
I may be
wrong, but it appears to me that there is a moral problem inherent
in a situation where violence is condemned in the strongest terms,
and yet those who condemn the violence have no hesitation in
profiting by it. Anyone with access to a modern history of Northern
Ireland, for example Keesing's Contemporary Archives, will observe
the strongest possible correlation between Provisional IRA
lawlessness and British government concessions. Yet the
beneficiaries of these concessions are never the IRA themselves -
that would be to reward terrorism. The gains are made by the Dublin
Government and the "constitutional nationalists": the
Roman Catholic populace in general. If you are a devout Roman
Catholic and condemn the violent deeds of your co-religionists in
the IRA, surely for that condemnation to ring true rather than ring
hollow, you cannot be seen in any way, direct or indirect, to be
favored or advantaged by the violence which you condemn. Maybe I am
in error here. Perhaps my understanding of moral theology is
shallow. Or is it that the moral teachings of the Roman Catholic
Church in Ireland have failed the Roman Catholic people as much as
they have failed the Protestant neighbors of the Roman Catholics on
this island? Boycotting substantiates these arguments. Previously it
could be said that IRA atrocities were the work of misguided Roman
Catholic fanatics "representing no one but themselves",
even though the reader will reflect that the whole Roman Catholic
and nationalist population invariably profited from
"concessions" made by British governments. This is
especially true of the government of one of Europe's most Roman
Catholic nations, the Republic of Ireland, which now has a powerful,
totally malign and anti-Protestant influence over how Ulster is to
be governed. This position was won for the Irish Republic by the
bombs, bullets and thuggery of the IRA. After British acts of
appeasement, both governments would solemnly assure the watching
world that "reconciliation" and "peace" would
soon be evident, but Roman Catholic nationalists have interpreted
Britain's policy of appeasement as signifying
"indifference" and "lack of will". Not
unnaturally, pressure on Ulster's Protestants has increased. Such
pressures are now openly sectarian and involve whole sections of the
Roman Catholic community acting as one, to drive Protestants out. It
is also to be observed that while spokesmen from the Church of Rome
have vociferously condemned Provisional IRA outrages, they see no
inconsistency in supporting, and more, actively encouraging,
moderate nationalists to seek political and constitutional profit
from the violence they condemn. In this way, Irish republican
terrorism and self-styled constitutional nationalism work like
pincers or claws with a cutting edge and a gripping edge, while the
victims, the British and Protestant nation in the north-east corner
of the island suffer reverse. The boycotting of Ulster's Protestant
businessmen reveals the Roman Catholic Church's persecuting spirit
and confirms the analysis of the Rev John McDonald, of Mr A. J.
Ferris, of F Turgenot and others. In his book Romanism Analyzed,
published by the Scottish Reformation Society in 1888, the Rev. John
McDonald poses and then answers the following question: "What
forms does Rome's persecuting spirit take in Protestant
countries?" Another form of persecution is boycotting, which
though modem in name is not modem in origin in the Romish Church. It
was devised by the Third Council of Lateran in 1179, and sanctioned
by Pope Alexander III; the terms of the canon were: "We
prohibit all men, under pain of anathema, from admitting them
(heretics) into their houses, or allowing them to subsist on their
lands, or giving them any assistance, or even transacting any
business, as buying or selling with them". (page 364) The
reader will be struck by the similarity between the text of the
canon quoted by Rev. McDonald above and the experience of Bishop
Ferns in 1612 quoted earlier in this essay. A. J. Ferris, in Part 11
of his book The Book of Revelation, a simple explanation and survey
published in 1940 and drawing heavily on the earlier work by E B
Elliot, Horae Apocalyptae notes the following: Verse 17 (of Chapter
13 of the Book of Revelation) tells us that none might buy or sell
save that he has the mark of the beast, that is unless he obeyed the
rites and ceremonies of the church with its Latin prayers etc. This
prophecy is a direct reference to the well known practice of the
Church of Rome called EXCOMMUNICATION, the result of which in the
economic sphere was like the modern boycott. (page 3 1) This review
of present attitudes is, I believe, correct. Unfortunately, Reformed
leaders are reluctant to inquire too deeply into the sufferings of
ordinary Protestants in Northern Ireland right now. Such persecution
does not appear before our eyes because "the rulers of the
darkness of this world" control what we imagine we are
"free" to view on the television screen. In the late
twentieth century if the event is not on the screen, the event may
as well not be happening. Reality is edited out, truth is distorted.
Who does not worship the "image of the beast"? Does the
Roman Catholic boycott of Protestant shops and businesses in
Benburb, Castlederg, Dungannon, Dungiven, Pomeroy, Portglenone and
Lisnaskea, and other forms of abuse and victimization, help us to
understand what "the image of the beast" is? By a
remarkable providence a book, newly published in the United States
and entitled Graven Bread, comes to our aid by answering the
question, what is the "image of the beast". Written by
Timothy F. Kauffman, the full title of this vital study reads:
"Graven Bread, The Papacy, the Apparitions of Mary and the
Worship of the Bread of the Altar".
I burst
into tears when I read on the inside page: "This is dedicated
to Jesus Christ: my Lord, my God, my Master, my Savior. He rescued
me". Oh, that our Roman Catholic friends and neighbors,
acquaintances, workmates, and those Roman Catholics too who
persecute us in Ulster, might really know that Jesus Christ rescues
us. I do - that's why I wept. Timothy Kauffman gives his personal
testimony as to his salvation in another book, Quite Contrary,
produced by the same publisher. Kauffman explains his Roman Catholic
background and devotion to the apparitions of Mary, The blurb on the
back cover says this "is the story of a man who was lost in
Marian devotion and then set free by the power of God's Word".
Kauffman gives his personal testimony of salvation on pages 132 and
133, and it is wonderful.
It is, though, his commentary in Graven Bread, that is most
disturbing, because his analysis reinforces all that we have read
already - because, once again, our author refers us to the loss of
the "right to engage in business and financial
transactions" as a technique used by devout Roman Catholics to
exercise control and enforce Catholicity: In Revelation 13 through
20, God reveals to us that the antichrist will require people to
accept a mark on the forehead and on the hand, and will force people
to worship an image of their own making. It is evident that in some
respects Mr Kauffman has arrived at similar conclusions to myself.
that to assume that "the image of the beast" may refer to
some bizarre future piece of technology is suspect, indeed
unsatisfactory. Mr Kauffman is more to the point than I was at the
commencement of this essay: Our attention, therefore, should not be
focused on our technology, but rather on what God reveals to us in
His Word about a mark on the forehead and the hand. Kauffman then
develops a very compelling argument which all Protestants should
read and think through, and in particular: It should not surprise us
then that the image the Papacy has erected with the assistance of
the apparitions of Mary is not just bread, but communion bread which
originates in the Passover ritual - bread which the Papacy has told
us is really worthy of worship. Pope after Pope has affirmed the
need to worship the Eucharist, and during the Inquisitions, failure
to obey resulted in financial isolation, torture, and death for a
great number of true Christians. "The free and commanded use of
the scriptures - the inculcation of the doctrines of grace and of
the efficacy of the sacrifice and intercession of Christ,
without any allusion to the mass, to ransubstantiation,
purgatory, human merit or prayers for the dead - the diversity in
the forms of celebrating divine worship - the rejection of the papal
supremacy - the marriage of the clergy -the scriptural character of
the early bishops, each having charge of only one parish, and being
laborers "in word and doctrine" the presbyterial order of
the Culdees and their singular piety and zeal all these important
points of doctrine and discipline were maintained and practiced in
the ancient Irish church".
It is
often forgotten that this Christ-centred church was the first
Christian witness in Ireland. With the Plantation comes another
special manifestation of God's Sovereign favor. Descriptions of the
early days of the Plantation have an all too familiar ring to
those of us who mourn over Ulster's contemporary downgrade:
On all
hands atheism increased and disregard of God, iniquity abounded with
contention, fighting, murder, adultery, etc., as among people who,
as they had nothing within them to overawe them, so their ministers'
example was worse than nothing; for, "from the prophets of
Israel profaneness went forth to the whole land."
Yet God was pleased to send to Ulster seven
ministers of exemplary characters, spirituality and evangelical
zeal, with the consequence that: The revival of religion which
occurred at this period, has been repeatedly referred to, as one of
those sudden and extensive manifestations of the power of divine
grace upon a careless people, with which the church has been
occasionally favored. Rarely has the church of Christ in any land
experienced so sensible an increase, in so limited a period.
Robert Fleming, in his Fulfillment of
Scripture observed: "I shall here instance the great and solemn
work of God which was in the church of Ireland some years before the
fall of prelacy, about the year 1628, and some years thereafter,
which, as many grave and solid Christians were yet alive can
witness, who were there present, was a bright and hot sun-blink of
the Gospel; yea, may with sobriety be said to have been one of the
largest manifestations of the Spirit, and of the most solemn times
of downpouring thereof, that almost since the days of the Apostles
hath been seen. There were other revivals in equally troubled times.
In the years immediately following the 1798 rebellion, a band of
faithful itinerant Methodist preachers, roclaiming the Gospel
to Irish people in their own tongue, enjoyed great blessing and
success". If we take some of the testimonies recorded in their
letters and journals for the summer of 1801, we find:
"Thence
the preachers went to Ballyhaise, where they met many of the poor
"sheep without a shepherd" who felt that these men had
more love in their hearts for them than all the clergy in the
country. The Roman Catholics were alarmed, especially while they
declared that neither salt nor water, nor oil, nor beads, would ever
save them; nothing but the Gospel of Christ, which is the power of
God unto salvation to everyone that believeth". The
missionaries told the Roman Catholics that neither their Church nor
their priests, nor masses, nor purgatory could save them. Nothing
but faith in the atoning blood of Christ (Heb. ix:22) could justify
them. "Nothing will do now but hurling the artillery of heaven
against the strongholds of Babylon. Nothing else will shake Rome's
foundations, and destroy her hellebore errors". Oh, such an in
gathering of souls! The Spirit of the Lord had descended in an
abundant manner. The shout of the king was heard in our camp, and
the voice of new-born souls was sweet". The Catholics cried
aloud; "Have we believed the doctrine of devils, and renounced
the Gospel of God for the commandments of men?"
The
History of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland Vol. I, James Seaton
Reid (Edinburgh) p.2, pp.93-127.
The Apostle of Kerry - The Life of
the Rev. Charles Graham, Rev. W. Graham Campbell (Dublin, 1868),
p.124-131.
The Irish Border as a Cultural
Divide, Prof. M. W. Heslinga (Assen, The Netherlands, 1979),
p.120.
|
|
Loyalist
paramilitaries, that "amalgam of thieves", mere tools of
British Intelligence, cannot save Protestant Ulster. Political
parties riddled with back-biting, petty jealousies, inflated egos
and self-interest cannot save Protestant Ulster. Protestant church
leaders, who shamefacedly look in the opposite direction rather than
suffer reproach with their own congregations, have nothing to offer
the ordinary, persecuted, boycotted grass-roots folk who are
convinced that they have a God-given right - the liberty, the
freedom - to be what they know themselves to be. British governments
caught up in the European Union, bullied by Irish Republican
terrorists and a pro united Ireland American State Department, have
nothing to offer other than discreet capitulation. Yet amazingly,
what is happening in Northern Ireland today is described for us in
the last book of the Bible, God's Word, the Book of Revelation of St
John the Divine, Chapter 13 and verse 17, where those who do not
have "the mark of the Beast" cannot "buy or
sell" - the victims of boycotting. A number of prophetic
commentaries have been shown to agree that "boycotting"
accurately describes the predicament of those referred to in this
scripture passage. Therefore we can say with certainty and courage,
standing on the Word of God, that God our loving heavenly Father
sees us in our distress.
The
question therefore is, will God in His grace and mercy deliver us
from those great and imminent dangers by which we are now
encompassed? The answer was given to Orangemen as they met in prayer
for Ulster in Albertbridge Orange Hall on Saturday afternoon, 28th
September 1996 - Ulster Day: "If my people who are called by my
name will humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn
from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will
forgive their sin and heal their land." (11 hron. 7:14).
And what of those who persecute? What of Roman Catholic people
caught up and swept along in a zeal to rid Ireland of its Protestant
population? Friends, time is short; God's judgments are sure; the
lives of Roman Catholic priests and bishops warn of the delusions of
a system the fruits of which are depravity, lies, false witness,
hypocrisy, cruelty, viciousness, hatred and murder. Do you want
civil war in Ulster? Then you may have it; but if you want peace,
then embrace our lovely Savior, Jesus Christ. Let the call go forth:
"Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her
sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." (Revelation
18:4).
|
|