"Heretical Plants of Irish Growth": Catholic Critics of Mathewite Temperance

Abstract

In mid-November, 1843, Thomas Chisholm Anstey sat in his London law office, preparing a lengthy, anxious affidavit for Prefect of Congregation of Propaganda Fide in Rome.1 Anstey's concerns centered on accomplishments of charismatic Capuchin friar Father Theobald Mathew, whose astonishingly successful temperance crusade had recently swept across Ireland, converting millions of Irish men and women to strict practice of total abstinence. In a series of some 350 emotional open-air meetings beginning in late 1839, Mathew had addressed massive crowds of tens of thousands of enthusiastic peasants and administered, for hours and days on end, sign of cross and a short pledge to abstain from alcohol for life to continuous batches of dozens or hundreds of kneeling postulants. After pledging, Mathew's disciples formed a vast network of vigorous local temperance societies, complete with meeting halls, reading rooms, burial societies, and bands. The scale of Mathew's success astonished observers on both sides of Irish sea, including zealous Anstey, while ambitious Capuchin and his determined disciples, including journalists such as Charles Gavan Duffy (co-editor of Nation) and John Francis Maguire (founder and editor of Cork Examiner) drew comparisons to Saint Patrick's missionary activity and trumpeted dawn of a new era in Irish history. As Mathew's secretary and chief propagandist, James McKenna, exulted in his unpublished history of movement composed in 1843,Mathew spoke-the fiend of intemperance, which so long rioted in her misery, was exorcised-the spell of her infamy was broken, and Ireland like uncaged eagle, now soars on high in moral firmament.2 Surveying this radical landscape and alarmed by what he termed the very indiscreet and dangerous delusions of friar, Anstey took it upon himself to warn Roman authorities that movement bespoke a church in crisis, one which threatened spiritual future of Catholic Ireland. Unless Holy see shall promptly and speedily send a legate unto Ireland, armed with necc. and accustomed powers in such cases, and authorized to supercede [sic] Archbishops and Bishops themselves, or many of them, in their respective functions, mischiefs and abuses now existing will become multiplied, and be made more grievous, discontent of people increased, and within less than twenty years by means of teetotal movement or by any other means more suited to such an end, old heresies of Wycliffe, Huss and Waldo firmly established on Irish soil, as plants of Irish growth.1 What should be made of Anstey's strident predictions and urgent recommendations, and his charge, elaborated throughout his lengthy diatribe against Father Mathew, that Temperance movement represented a grave threat to Irish Church as it existed in years before famine and devotional revolution of 1850's and beyond? What was nature of that threat, and why was Anstey so anxious to see it met? To begin with, it is important to note that Anstey's extended assault on temperance crusade represented third in a succession of Catholic-authored attacks on many of underlying principles and practices of Mathew's campaign. These attacks, detailed below, began with pastoral letter of American Bishops in spring of 1843, which had been followed by a series of critical articles in Tablet, journal of record for English Catholics. Anstey's statement deserves particular attention, however, on several grounds, including his prominence in English Catholic community, his close connection to Ireland and to temperance movement, and his intensely critical disposition. No mere crank, Anstey, a successful Middle Temple barrister, legal scholar, and journalist, was an early specimen of enthusiastic upperclass English Catholic converts produced by writings of Oxford Movement, although his own degree was from University College London. …