He never recanted these opinions (which are confirmed by the subsequent course of events) even after his conversion to Unionism, but derived his opposition to Home Rule from a dread of all democratic tendencies,[69] the only ground on which, if men would be willing to confess the naked truth, it can be opposed.  There the matter ought to rest.  If the doctrines of the Church of Rome are, in fact, inconsistent with political freedom—­I myself pronounce no opinion on that point—­it is plain to the most superficial observer that the Church, as a factor in politics, stands to lose rather than to gain by Home Rule.  British statesmen have often accepted that view, and have endeavoured to use the Roman Catholic hierarchy against popular movements, just as they enlisted its influence to secure the Union.  The Roman Catholic laity have often subsequently rejected what they have considered to be undue political dictation from the seat of authority in Rome.

If I may venture an opinion, I believe that both of these mutually irreconcilable propositions—­that Home Rule means Rome Rule, and that Rome is the enemy to Home Rule—­are wrong.[70] Such ludicrous contradictions only help to destroy the case against trusting a free Ireland to give religion its legitimate, and no more than legitimate, position in the State.  Ireland is intensely religious, and it would be a disaster of the first magnitude if the Roman Catholic masses were to lose faith in their Church.  The preservation of that faith depends on the political Liberalism of the Church.

Corresponding tolerance will be demanded of Ulster Protestants.  At present passion, not reason, governs the religious side of their opposition to Home Rule.  It is futile to criticize Ulster Unionists for making the religious argument the spear-head of their attack on Home Rule.  The argument is one which especially appeals to portions of the British electorate, and the rules of political warfare permit free use of it.  It was pushed beyond the legitimate point, to actual violence, in the Orange opposition to responsible government in Canada in 1849.  And it has more than once inflamed and embittered Australian politics, as it inflames the politics of certain English constituencies.  But it is hardly to be conceived that Ulster Unionists really fear Roman Catholic tyranny.  The fear is unmanly and unworthy of them.  To anyone who has lived in an overwhelmingly Catholic district, and seen the complete tranquillity and safety in which Protestants exercise their religion, it seems painfully abnormal that a great city like Belfast, with a population more than two-thirds Protestant, should become hysterical over Catholic tyranny.  It would be physically impossible to enforce any tyrannical law in Ulster or anywhere else, even if such a law were proposed, and many leading Protestants from all parts of Ireland have stated publicly that they have no fear of any such result from Home Rule.[71]