Search just our sites by using our customised search engine

Unique Cottages | Electric Scotland's Classified Directory

Click here to get a Printer Friendly PageSmiley

Proceedings of the Fourth Congress at Atlanta, GA., April 28 to May 1, 1892
The Scotch-Irish in America—Who are they? and what are they?
By Dr. A. Given, of Louisville, Ky.

It is generally supposed that the race called "Scotch-Irish" had its origin from the union of the Scotch and the Irish. That is to say, if a Scotchman marries an Irish lady from the South of Ireland, who is a Celt of the ancient tribe of Tuatha De Danann, the offspring will be Scotch-Irish. While that is true, yet there was originally an unmixed race called "Scotch-Irish."

A writer has lately advanced the idea that there is not a distinct race known in history as "Scotch-Irish." If we have with us German-Americans, then upon the same principle there was once a people in Ireland called "Scotch-Irish." That is to say, a race called "Milesians" or "Scoti," located in Ireland and became world-renowned as advocates of learning, morals, and Christian civilization which has never been surpassed by any other race.

The Scots, as a distinct race, are supposed to have migrated from Asia to Europe in an early day. Their history, however, is obscure until we find them located on an island called "Ireland.' That is to say, they were Scots by origin, and Irish by choice. They called the island "Scots" or "Scotland." Hence after the island took the name of "Hibernia" or "Ireland," the inhabitants were called "Erse" or "Irish." So also, when the Scots who were born in Ireland settled in Caledonia, they were called "Erse" by the Caledonians (Caledones and Picts) to distinguish them as being of Irish birth. Therefore, the Scots of Scotland and the Irish in the North of Ireland, who are descended from the ancient Scoti, are the real Scotch-Irish; and when the race was crossed by intermarriage with the Caledonians, the offspring was said to be of Scotch-Irish descent. In history, however, the people of Scotland are known as "Scots," and those of Ireland are called "Irish;" and yet the people of the North of Ireland are a distinct race from those of the South. That is to say, the former are said to be a Celtic race called "Scotch-Irish," while the latter are Celtic Irish, belonging to an entirely different tribe.

The history of the Scotch-Irish race is exceedingly interesting to those who admire all that is lovely in a true Christian character, all that is elevating in morals and honorable in politics. They are indeed a chosen race, for all through the ages they have had a sublime regard for civil and religious liberty, and a devotion to a code of morals unsurpassed by the Hebrews in their best days.

When Christianity dawned upon a world in moral darkness, the Scotch-Irish were among the first to catch its refulgent rays as they began to beam upon Europe, and by accepting its teachings they were soon converted into a noble race of Christian men and women.

History reveals five principal or grand characteristics in the life of the Scotch-Irish race.

1. They are of ancient origin. It is said that Japheth, the third son of Noah, was the father of the Indo-pelasgian race, and that Gomer, his eldest son, was the progenitor of the Gaelic or Celtic race, five branches of which settled in Hibernia and Caledonia. Hence we have those countries to examine in search of the history of the Scotch-Irish race.

Hibernia, or Ireland.

We learn from "Alden's Manifold Cyclopedia" that "Irish historians claim that their country was first inhabited by Celts under Nemedius, and after remaining two hundred and seventeen years they left the island in three bands or tribes: the Firbolgs, Tuatha De Danann, and Cymri. The Firbolgs returned to Ireland and established a kingdom, 1934 B.C.; but after thirty-six years they were driven out by their kinsmen, the Tuatha De Danann."

It is supposed by many historians that the Milesians or Scoti under Heber and Hereman came over from Galicia, Spain, 500 B.C. and conquered Ireland, and set up a kingdom which had one hundred and seventy-one reigning kings. They called the island "Scotia" or "Scotland," and held undisputed sway for several hundred years. I think it probable that when the tribe left the plain of Shinar they first settled in Iona, Asia Minor, and near or in Miletus, and when they went into Spain under their King Milesius, they assumed or were given the name of "Milesians" or "Scoti." After establishing themselves in Ireland, they sent out colonies to settle Caledonia and Britain, as we shall see hereafter.

The Scoti embraced Christianity soon after the apostles were scattered from Palestine; and they maintained their own ecclesiastical polity until finally subdued by the missionaries of Rorne.

The pope of Rome, having gained ecclesiastical sway over Ireland, suppressed Culdeeism and issued his bull 1174, granting the temporal kingdom of Ireland to Henry II. of England upon the payment of a stipulated fee. Thus was combined the throne of England and the ecclesiastical power of Rome to overthrow the civil and religious authority of the Scotch-Irish in Ireland. As one province after another had to submit to a foreign yoke, the Scotch-Irish retreated to the north, leaving the invaders and the ancient Celts to inhabit the conquered territory. The last kingdom to submit to England was Ulster.

About the year 1175 De Courci, an English knight, determined to try to subjugate Ulster. "It is said that in defiance of all authority, he set off at the head of a band of soldiers for Downpatrick, the capital of Ulster. The inhabitants of the city were aroused at daybreak from their sleep by the sound of the English bugles, and starting up saw the streets filled with armed troops. The houses were forced open and plundered, and the soldiers were soon masters of the town. O'Niel, the king of Ulster, came forward boldly to oppose the invaders, and a hard-fought battle took place, which ended in the complete overthrow of the Irish, and the establishment of De Courci's authority in Ulster." It is proper to say that the people of Ulster were taken by surprise, as they were then obedient subjects of ecclesiastical Rome, and King Henry II. had agreed to allow every province to remain undisturbed that paid its tribute for the pope.

The Scotch-Irish of Ulster having been overpowered by England and being forced to adopt the semichristian civilization of Pagan Rome, soon relapsed into idolatry, and became demoralized as a race. It is not true, however, as some would have us believe, that the old Culdee faith was wholly obliterated from the minds and hearts of the ancient Scotch-Irish of Ulster during the Dark Ages.

As their progenitors had kept the faith untarnished in the Highlands of Scotland, it is highly probable that they kept up a communication with their brethren in Ireland, and thus by tradition some of them at least were aware of the struggle of their forefathers to maintain the old Culdee faith of civil and religious liberty.

Caledonia, or Scotland.

Amid the conflicting views of historians we may reasonably conclude that Caledonia was first settled by two Celtic tribes, the Caledones and the Picts. The former wore probably the first settlers, from whom the country took its name. It appears that the Picts became the ruling power, and established the Pictish monarchy, and the inhabitants were afterward known as "Caledonians."

The views of writers conflict as to the early history of Caledonia. It is probable that the Caledones and the Picts had petty kingdoms. But finally the Picts conquered the Caledonians and established the Pictish monarchy over the whole of Caledonia, except that portion which had been subdued by the Scotch-Irish. It appears from undoubted history that the latter conquered the Britons in the Lowlands and laid the foundation for the Caledonian or Scottish monarchy.

It is difficult to arrive at the exact date when the Scotch-Irish emigrated from Ireland to Caledonia. In looking over "Hayden's Book of Dates," we find it stated that Fergus I. founded the Caledonian monarchy 330 B.C. As evidence that he was neither a Cale-done nor a Pict, I quote from Anderson: "Fergus, a brave prince) came from Ireland with an army of Scots, and was chosen king. Having defeated the Britons and slain their king, Coelus, the kingdom of the Scots was entailed upon his posterity forever. He went to Ireland, and having settled his affairs there, was drowned on his return, launching from the shore near the harbor called "Carrick-fergus to this day."

Thus we find the Scotch-Irish invading Caledonia 330 B.C., or about one hundred and seventy years after their forefathers, the Scoti, settled in Ireland.

After the death of Fergus I., we know but little of the history of the Scots in Caledonia until the second importation from Ireland. Venerable Bede, in speaking of Caledonia, says: "It retained this name until A.D. 258, when it was invaded by a tribe from Ireland and called 'Scotia.' The ancient inhabitants appear to have been Caledonians and Picts, tribes of the Celts." In speaking of the third importation of Scotch-Irish from Ireland, A.D. 306, Bede says: "The Scots, having driven the Picts into the north, settled in the Lowlands and gave their name to the whole country. Hence the remarkable distinction of language, habits, customs, and persons between the Highlanders and the southern inhabitants." This distinction is due, in a great measure, to the fact that the Scotch-Irish intermarried with the Caledones and the Picts in the north, and became one people in language, etc.; while on the other hand, the Scotch-Irish also intermarried with the ancient Britons in the north of England, and hence the difference between the north and south of Scotland at the present time. Thus, then, the Highlanders of to-day are Scotch-Irish as well as the Lowlanders and those in the North of Ireland.

We find Eugenius I. on the throne of Caledonia, A.D. 357. He was killed in battle by Maximus, the Roman general, and the confederate Picts. Boece and Buchanan say that "with this battle ended the kingdom of the Scots, after having existed from the coronation of Fergus I., a period of seven hundred and six years."

Anderson tells us that Fergus II. again revived the Caledonian monarchy, A.D. 404. Hayden says that "after many wars, Kenneth II., king of the Scoti, subdued the Caledonians and Picts, and united the whole country under one monarchy, A.D. 838, then named Scotland, and in A.D. 843 he became the first sole monarch of all Scotland."

Historians tell us that Kenneth was the son of Alpin, king of the Scots, who was descended, in the female line, from the ancient sovereign of the Picts. Thus we see the early amalgamation of the Scotch-Irish and the Caledonians, and hence the disagreement of historians as to the real founders of the Caledonian monarchy. Or in other words, they failed to make the proper distinction between the Pictish kingdom in the north and the Scotch-Irish kingdom in the south, which was afterward called the "Caledonian Monarchy," of which Fergus I. was the founder, and Kenneth II. became the first sole monarch.

It is probable that Caledonia was divided up into petty kingdoms until the establishment of the Pictish monarchy in the Highlands. Prior to that time, however, the Scotch-Irish had founded the Caledonian monarchy in the Lowlands.

From A.D. 843 the Caledonians and the Scotch-Irish became one nation, and were afterward known in history as "Scots," while the Scotch-Irish in Ireland were known as the "Irish" until after the "plantation of the Lowlanders in Ireland," when the term "Scotch-Irish" was revived, and is now applied to all those who have any Scotch-Irish blood in their veins.

The question, "Who are the Scotch-Irish?" having been answered in accordance with the best light before us, and as the origin of the Milesians or Scoti is obscure prior to their coming to Spain, I wish to state the fact that, as their history is being unfolded, there is some evidence that they may have been of Semitic origin instead of Japhetic, as heretofore taught. It is believed by some that the Scoti descended from the Danites or Danes, and the reasons given are logical.

It is said that an old Celtic manuscript has been found in the North of Ireland, which when fully deciphered will probably throw some light on the subject. It contains some Hebrew words or phrases, thus showing that the writer at some time was acquainted with the Hebrew language by tradition or otherwise.

It is evident that the Scoti were much more refined and intelligent than the Celtic tribes by which they were surrounded, and made much more rapid progress in Christian civilization, thus showing that their ancestors must have been civilized at some time prior to their leaving Asia.

It is a remarkable coincident that the Hebrews took their name from Heber, the great-grandson of Shem; and it is said "that Heber, a Milesian prince from Galatia, conquered Ireland and called it 'Scotia' or 'Scotland,'" thus showing that they must have been familiar with the Hebrews at some time in order to adopt their names.

There is a legend that after the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, a high priest took the ark of the covenant, the breastplate of the high priest, Aaron's rod, etc., and secreted them. Many years afterward those emblems, together with a female descendant of the deposed king of Judea, were carried to the North of Ireland for safety; where the Jewess married the king of the Scoti on condition that her heirs should inherit the title of the throne. After her death, the remains, together with the emblems of the temple, were deposited in a mound or tomb, and no one was ever allowed to stick a pick in the sacred spot, and for ages the spot has been forgotten. Whether there is any truth in the story or not, there is a fascination surrounding the subject that is worthy of a critical examination by expert antiquarians.

If such emblems were found, the mystery so long surrounding the lost tribes and the Jewish race would begin to unfold, and the prophecy relating to their return to their native land, and the reestablishment of their theocratic government in Palestine would seem probable in the near future, as we shall hereafter see that it is claimed that the Anglo-Saxon race is descended from Joseph's sons, and hence is a part of the lost tribes. If that is true, and if it be true that the Jewess, who married the king of the Scoti on condition that her heirs should inherit the title of the throne, was in the line of Jewish monarchs, and if, according to prophecy, the lost tribes and the Jews are again to be united under one government, then is it not evident that the throne has been partially reestablished since Victoria of England, who descended from the Scotch-Irish in the line of the Jewess queen of the Scoti, is now supposed to be reigning over two branches of the lost tribes of Israel?

The prophecy will not be complete until the Jews unite with the lost tribes in reestablishing the Hebrew throne in Palestine. This can be accomplished at any time by the aid of England, when the Jews are prepared to accept the result.

Many years ago I became interested in the history of the "Lost Tribes of Israel," and I determined to examine the history, habits, peculiarity, and family relations of every known tribe and nation on earth to see if a trace of them could be found. After a careful examination of the origin, character, and peculiarities of that remarkable race called "Scotch-Irish," and their similarity, religiously, to the ancient Hebrews, I came to the conclusion that if they are not a part of the lost tribes, then I know not where to find them. One thing is certain: I know of no race which will be better prepared by religious training, faith, and morals than the Scotch-Irish, to meet and welcome the Saviour at his second coming to Jerusalem.
The fact that the manuscript referred to is written in the Celtic language cuts no figure, other things being true, as to the probability of the Scoti being Shemites. For the lost tribes were expelled from Palestine 721 B.C., and hence, having been wanderers among so many nations, and having lived so long with the Colts, they naturally adopted their language, as the Jews have done in every nation to which they have been scattered.

2. The Scotch-Irish embraced Christianity soon after its promulgation by Christ and his apostles. This fact is admitted by all writers on the subject; and, strange as it may seem, nearly all Church histories that are written for the general public fail to give the distinctive characteristics of the early religious training and faith of the Scotch-Irish, and the reader is led to infer that their civil and religious views were the outgrowth of the Reformation; while the reverse is true.

Baronius, the Roman Catholic historian, says that "Christianity was carried to the British Isles A.D. 35." Others state that the Scots received the gospel A.D. 63. Spotswood, Buchanan, and others assert that during Domitian's persecution (A.D. 95) some of John's disciples preached the gospel in Scotland. Tertullian, who was born sixty years after the death of the apostle John, says that during his day, Scotia, meaning Ireland and Scotland, were subject to Christ.

The early Christians among the Scotch-Irish, the English, and the Welsh were called "Culdees"—"Cultores dei, worshipers of God."

3. The Scotch-Irish have always been a missionary people. This is fully demonstrated by the fact that at a very early period we find their missionaries Christianizing Britain and other countries. About the year A.D. 525, Succathus, afterward called "Patricious" or "Patrick," son of a Scottish deacon, visited Ireland, where he did a wonderful work, not only among his brethren, the Scotch-Irish, but also among the Celtic-Irish.

It was that illustrious personage who introduced the "shamrock" as a "simile of the Trinity, to give the Irish an ocular demonstration of the possibility of three uniting in one, and one in three."

After the Saxons subdued the Britons, they established the pagan religion in the country, and the Christians were driven into Scotland and Wales. It was not long, however, until the Culdee missionaries began again to Christianize England.

About the year A.D. 564 Columkille or Columba, a Scotch-Irishman from the North of Ireland, went over with twelve companions to the isle of lona and established a theological college with a view of preparing missionaries to help their kinsmen convert the Picts in the North of Scotland.

The Rev. J. V. Moore, D.D., in his history of the "Culdee Church," says: "The institutions of lona were not designed to cultivate eremites and solitary ascetics, but to train Christian scholars and missionaries, who would go forth as soldiers of Christ, trained to conquer and occupy the outlying territory of heathenism. This it did to an extent that is amazing, and only beginning to be understood by the laborious researches of German scholars, who show that this Scottish Church did more to carry a pure gospel to all parts of Great Britain, France, Germany, and Switzerland during the sixth and seventh and eighth centuries than all Christendom besides, and with this gospel, to diffuse letters and science, industry and civilization." Some of their distinguished missionaries of an early day were Columba, founder of the famous college at lona; Columbanus, founder of Bobbis, North Italy; Gallus, of St. Gall, in Switzerland; and Ferghal or Virgillius, evangelizer of Corinthia, a part of ancient Illyria.

Had it not been for the interference of the Church of Rome, the Culdee missionaries would have Christianized the Anglo-Saxon pagans of Britain, and hence England would to-day be under the ecclesiastical polity of the Scotch-Irish. As evidence of this fact, I again quote from Dr. Moore: "When Gregory became pope, he remembered the vow he had made, and sent a deputation to convert England, which, after laboring for a time in the South of England, met these Culdee laborers at work in the north." The radical difference between the Culdee faith and the Romish is shown by the fact that they could not labor together, and that the Romish missionaries found that the expulsion of the Culdees was necessary to their success. Milman, in his "Latin Christianity," in speaking of this collision, says: "One half of the island had been converted by the monks from Scotland; the other, by those of Rome. They were opposed on certain points of discipline, hardly of less importance than vital truths of the gospel."

Thus we see that the Scotch-Irish Church was a missionary Church from its foundation until driven from its field of Christian civilization by the iron hand of an ecclesiastical despot.

The pure gospel flame, however, which had been kindled by divine power in the East, was destined at last to consume the dross of a worldly churchism and a corrupt semichristian civilization. Its brilliancy, which was intended to light up every nook and corner of the earth, and expel the moral darkness from the human family, was only hidden for a time by the dazzling robes of a frail, backsliding hierarchy and a debauched throne, in union with a corrupt amalgamation of paganism, superstition, and a semichristian civilization.

At the dawn of the Reformation, the descendants of those old Scotch-Irish, who had ever been true to their faith all along the Dark Ages, again came out from their forced seclusion, and once more unfurled the Culdee banner of the "shamrock and the thistle," and by the old missionary spirit rolled back the dark pall that hung over Church and state and retarded their progress and prosperity so long.

The efforts of the Culdee missionaries in England, though retarded, were not lost, for the doctrine of civil and religious liberty of the Scotch-Irish gained a permanent hold on the minds of the people. The Wickliffites or Lollards continued to agitate the subject which eventuated in the rise of the Reformed Presbyterian Church, the Puritans, and the Independents, and thus the Scotch-Irish leaven shaped, in a measure, the ecclesiastical and political destiny of England, and made it one of the greatest nations on the earth. The political rulers of England have always been of a composite nature. First ruled by ancient Britons, then the Anglo-Saxon line, then the Danish line, then the Normans, and from 1603 the descendants of the Scotch-Irish, mixed with other nations, have continued to reign until the present time.

It is a remarkable fact that King James VI. of Scotland was a Scotch-Irishman and began to reign in England in 1603 as James I., and every king and queen who reigned on the throne of England and Scotland, as separate or united kingdoms, were either pure Scotch-Irish or their descendants.

Victoria, the noble Christian Queen of Great Britain, was granddaughter of George III. of England, who was grandson of George II., who was son of George I., who was a descendant of James VI, of Scotland. That is to say, George I. was the son of Sophia, a granddaughter of James VI. of Scotland, who was also King James I. of England. Thus we have a rightful claim to Queen Victoria as of Scotch-Irish descent.

Dr. McCarthy, in his "Lost Tribes of Israel," gives a very plausible argument in favor of the idea that the Anglo-Saxons were the descendants of Joseph, through his two sons. Hence if that is true, and if it be true, as I believe, that the Scotch-Irish race is another branch of the lost tribes, and if it be true that a Jewess in the line of the kings of Judah married the king of the Scoti, then indeed have the kingdoms of Israel and Judah been "partially reestablished, and Queen Victoria is now reigning by right of her descent from the Scotch-Irish and the Jewess Queen of Scoti.

While the Scotch-Irish were unable to fully divorce the ecclesiastics of England from all the forms and ceremonies of the Church of Rome, and bring them back to their ancient Culdee faith, yet they adopted the Culdee doctrines, and England became a Protestant nation.

To-day the old Culdee banner is being planted in every land by Scotch-Irish missionaries and their co-workers, the Reformed Churches, and wherever it waves, the gospel in its simplicity and a pure code of morals are being preached.

4. Culdeeism is essentially Presbyterianism. That is to say, a government by Presbyters, and a parity of bishops. I do not mention this fact in the spirit of sectarian bigotry; but simple to illustrate the fact that from the dawn of Christianity the Scotch-Irish have been the loyal and unflinching advocates of a government by Presbyters, both lay and ministerial.

If my remarks under this head seem a little too sectarian to meet the conservative views of the Scotch-Irish Congress, my apology is that the two grand principles, civil and religious liberty, which have ever characterized the Scotch-Irish in all ages, have been so intimately connected that to attempt to divorce them at this late day would mar the beauty and utility of their historical record, which shows them to have been the great exponents of Christian civilization, education, and morals for nearly nineteen hundred years. Hence, if their history seems to run in a sectarian groove, it is owing to the providence of God and the peculiarity of that chosen race.

As prelacy and parity now divide the Christian world, and as they shaped the destiny of many nations, both ecclesiastically and politically, it is absolutely necessary to the proper understanding of the Christian character and political history of the Scotch-Irish to show what relation they sustained to that controversy.

There had been but few innovations into the Christian Church prior to A.D. 325, when Constantine the Great, Emperor of Rome, called the Council of Nice, and united Church and state by proclaiming himself Moderator or Pope of that Council. He had only been a convert to Christianity the year previous, and hence knew but little about the doctrines and polity of the Christian Church. Hence when he united Church and state, and issued his proclamation that his empire must be Christian, many pagan temples were converted into Christian churches with all their paraphernalia of pagan worship, and some priests, in order to retain their patronage, became professed Christians without a change of heart, and continued their worship, partly pagan and partly Christian. Thus, then, the difference between the apostolic Church and the semichristianized Pagan Church of Rome during the Dark Ages.

It may be stated that at that time the whole Christian world was under the Roman Empire, except Ireland and Scotland, which had never been conquered by the Romans, and hence a deflection from the apostolic simplicity occurred everywhere except in Ireland and Scotland.

As we have already seen, it was when the missionaries of Rome met the Culdees at work Christianizing the Anglo-Saxons in the North of England that the Scotch-Irish made their protest to the doctrine of the union of Church and state, and pagan innovations into the apostolic Church. Thence there were Protestants years before Luther was born.

We have already shown that the Scotch-Irish received their Christianity direct from the early apostolic Church, and as they were afterward called "Culdees" on account of their peculiar zeal and religious character, we shall see that that those Culdees maintained their opposition to Rome until 1297, when they were suppressed. They, however, reestablished their independence in 1527, and revived the old controversy, and continued it until the present time; thus showing that the Scotch-Irish Church and the Church of Rome were two distinct branches of Christianity since A.D. 325, when Rome began to deflect under Constantine the Great.

Well may it be said that the Bark Ages dawned upon the political and Christian worlds when the Culdees, the true Christianizers and civilizers of the world at that time, were driven from England by a secularized Church.

The ancient Israelites were once the great religious civilizers of the world. All nations to-day that are really civilized and Christianized owe their progress and prosperity, in a great measure, to Israelitish literature, and the Christian civilization of the Scotch-Irish.

As autocracy became popular with the ministry, and the people became proud and vain of the pompous autocrats, both of Church and state, the Church began to backslide, and the bishops and priests lost moral influence over themselves and the politicians, and hence all alike became corrupt.

Thus, then, when moral principle failed to be the guiding star of Church and state, they both became morally bankrupt, and hence the great need in different ages of such reformers as Waldo, Wycliffe, Huss, Zwingle, Luther, Knox, Calvin, and Wesley.

If it can be shown that the Scotch-Irish bishops or pastors maintained a parity of rank and authority from their conversion until the twelfth century, then St. Patrick and Columba were both Scotch-Irish Presbyterians, notwithstanding the effort of some historians to claim them for the Church of Rome. We need no further evidence that they were Culdees than the fact that when St. Patrick left Scotland, about A.D. 425, he began preaching and organizing Culdee Churches in Ireland. Archbishop Usher says: "We read in 'Nennius' that at the beginning St. Patrick founded three hundred and sixty-five Churches, and ordained three hundred and sixty-five bishops and three thousand presbyters or elders." That is to say, one bishop or pastor and about eight elders for each Church, which is Presbyterianism pure and simple. Thus it is evident from Usher and others that as Patrick ordained one bishop for each Church, they were Presbyterian and not prelatic bishops.

It is, however, probable that before the death of St. Patrick he was induced, as some say, to accept the office of diocesan Bishop of Armagh. But there is nothing positive on this subject, for we have proof, as already stated, that he was organizing Culdee Churches up to his departure to Rome, A.D. 453, if he was ever in Rome at all.

"Alden's Manifold Cyclopedia," in speaking of St. Patrick, says: "The story that he went to France, where he became a monk, first at Tours, afterward in the celebrated monastery of Lérins, and that he went, A.D. 431, to Rome, whence he was sent by Pope Celestine to preach in Ireland, is entirely without evidence, although long the received account. Much obscurity has arisen from confusing two other men of the name "Patrician" with this saint. One of these, under the name "Palladius," was sent by Pope Celestine, as bishop, to Ireland, A.D. 431. St. Patrick's mission, on which he entered probably about A.D. 425, was eminently successful."

It is probable that St. Patrick, before his death, in some way fraternized with the Church of Rome, in carrying on their mission work in Ireland, or else Catholic Ireland would never have accepted him after death as their patron saint.

We learn that Columba left Ireland A.D. 564, and established a Culdee college on Iona. Thus, then, if Columba and St. Patrick had any connection whatever with the Church of Rome during their missionary labors, why did they not preach the doctrines and polity of that Church, instead of teaching Presbyterianism, as is shown by Bishop Stillingfleet, when he says: "Some whole nations seem to have been without any bishops at all. So if we may believe the great antiquarians of the Church of Scotland, that Church was governed by their 'Culdei,' as they called their presbyters, without any bishop over them."

In the year 650 the Prelate of Rome again renewed his effort to bring the Culdees into his fold. Finally, in the year 1150, by the aid of the secular power, popery was established in Ireland and Scotland. Culdeeism, however, was not overpowered until 1297, when the Culdees of St. Andrews were suppressed.

McLauchlin, an able historian, says: "It requires but little acquaintance with Scottish history to observe that the principles of the old Culdee Church never were eradicated; that during the reign of the Roman Church in the kingdom they continued to exist, exhibiting themselves occasionally in such outbreaks as the letter to King Robert Bruce and his nobles to Pope John, on the uprising of the Lollards of Kyle, and finally culminated in the events of the Scottish Reformation."

I have thus emphasized this branch of my subject because it has been the studied purpose of some historians to ignore or fail to give the Scotch-Irish credit for their early struggle for civil and religious liberty, which is, and always has been, the crowning glory of the race.

Thus we see that they have made themselves memorable both in Church and state.

5. Wherever the Scotch-Irish went they were the undaunted advocates of civil and religious liberty, education and morals. If those doctrines had not been of God's own planting, they would long since have been trodden under foot by savage nations, and ignored by a corrupt, ecclesiastical, and monarchial despotism. But thanks to the indomitable will of the Scotch-Irish, as instruments in the hands of Providence, the banner of the "shamrock and the thistle" waves triumphantly over many nations, and civil and religious liberty is now the watchword of many that once opposed the doctrine.

It makes the heart faint to read of the struggle and persecution unto death of those who upheld the glorious principles of Christian civilization, and who had only the welfare of the human family at heart.

Patrick Hamilton was burned at the stake A.D. 1527, because he refused to recant his views of civil and religious liberty. A papist afterward said that " the smoke of Mr. Patrick Hamilton infected as many as it blew against."

John Knox, the great champion of the Scotch-Irish faith, after a long and eventful struggle, had this eulogium passed upon his life at death: "There lies one who never feared the face of man."

Hew Michail, a zealous preacher, was tortured to death, A.D. 1666, for his Culdee faith. Just before he expired, he exclaimed: "Farewell, sun, moon, and stars; farewell, weak, frail body; welcome, eternity; welcome, Saviour of the world; and welcome, God, the Judge of all! "

Argyle, as he walked to the scaffold, was heard to exclaim: "I could live as a Roman, but I choose to die as a Christian."

Notwithstanding the fearful struggle, the old Culdee lamp was kept burning, though dimly at times, through the Dark Ages by the Vallenses and Waldenses in Italy, and the Waldenses in France, Wycliffites or Lollards in England, Welsh in Wales, Hussites in Bohemia, Swiss in Switzerland, Hollanders in Holland, Germans in Germany, and the Scotch-Irish in Scotland, until the Reformation, when it was retrimmed by Zwingle, Luther, Hamilton, Knox, and others, and became a beacon to all lovers of civil and religious liberty.

The "Plantation of Ulster by Scots from the Lowlands, A.D. 1605," marked a new era in the history of the Scotch-Irish race. It was a reversal of the order of their ancestors. At first it was a plantation of the Scots from Ireland into Caledonia by order of King Fergus I. The Caledonians called them " Irish," and hence the name "Scotch-Irish," for they were Scots born in Ireland. From A.D. 843 they were known in history as "Scots." It was the modern Ulstermen who revived the term "Scotch-Irish," and applied it to the descendants of the Scots who were born in Ireland after the "Plantation." But, as heretofore stated, the Scots of Scotland of to-day are as much the descendants of Scotch-Irish as are the Ulstermen.

By the "Plantation of the Lowlanders in Ulster," God in his providence seems to have had two special objects in view. 1. To revive their ancient brethren who had remained in Ireland and relapsed into idolatry and ignorance during the Dark Ages. 2. To prepare a race to people America and fully develop those grand principles which ever characterized the Scotch-Irish race. In their new field of Ulster they revived the faith and spirits of their brethren, and they became aggressive and progressive.

After many struggles, it was reserved for the Scotch-Irish colonies of America, together with the Puritans of like faith, to establish Scotch-Irish civil and religious liberty beyond the grasping power of kings and potentates. When Patrick Henry, that eloquent and noble specimen of the Scotch-Irish race, sounded the tocsin, "Give me liberty or give me death," it reverberated from mountain to mountain, and from hilltop to hilltop, until the thirteen colonies heard the echo and resolved to die or be freemen.

While the Scotch-Irish had enjoyed the blessings of their ecclesiastical republican form of government which their fathers had adopted in the mother country, yet they were strangers to the glorious privilege of living under a democratic form of government both of Church and state, until the adoption of the Constitution of the United States of America, which was, in a measure, copied from their Church government.

Thus in looking back from our standpoint, we see that in all ages blood of martyrs has been the seed of civil and religious liberty.

While some Protestants may differ from the Scotch-Irish on many points, yet they all agree with them in their devotion to civil and religious liberty, education, and morals. I mention the fact to their honor, that whenever a Scotch-Irishman wanders into some other ecclesiastical fold, whether he be Baptist, Episcopalian, Methodist, Congregationalist, or Disciple, he never loses sight of the grand principles of his forefathers, and trains his family or his flock in the true principles of education and morals.

I presume that I speak within the bounds of truth when I say that the Scotch-Irish have been more devoted to education and morals than any other race that has ever lived. I am aware that some nations have carried intellectual culture to the highest point to which aspirants could wish to reach, and yet in all these the moral and religious training was wanting, which is essential to true happiness and prosperity to Church and state.

As evidence that I am not claiming too much for the Scotch-Irish race, I may mention the fact that while it was in its infancy there were some nations and communities that were in the zenith of their glory under pagan political civilization, but are now far below them in the scale of intellectual, religious, and moral culture. This may be readily seen when we compare Scotland with Italy and Russia, England with France and Spain, North with South of Ireland, Scotch-Irish communities in Canada with the French settlements, and the United States of America with Mexico and South America.

It is a significant fact that while those non-Scotch-Irish countries all profess to be Christian nations, yet in all of them the holy Sabbath is desecrated, and piety and morality are far below par.

Candor compels me, however, to say that the enemies of good government and morality are continually harping on Puritans and Puritanical laws when any effort is made to reform the immorality of society, and thus the Scotch-Irish in some places are becoming lukewarm in their efforts to keep their faith and works up to their ancient standard. Politicians, under a mistaken idea of protecting personal liberty, are neglecting to abate immorality and to enforce Sunday laws, which are essential to the best interest of Church and state, and each separate community. Owing to these facts, some communities that were once models of piety and morality now quietly acquiesce in the desecration of the holy Sabbath and the demoralizing influences being thrown around the rising generation.

What we need to-day are a few more Luthers, Knoxes, and Wes-leys in the Church, and Patrick Henrys in politics, who would dare to say to Church and state to call a halt and retrace their steps before our birthright of civil and religious liberty is bartered for a mess of unsavory pottage.

Return to Proceedings Index Page


This comment system requires you to be logged in through either a Disqus account or an account you already have with Google, Twitter, Facebook or Yahoo. In the event you don't have an account with any of these companies then you can create an account with Disqus. All comments are moderated so they won't display until the moderator has approved your comment.

comments powered by Disqus