thing the religion did:  it turned a sunken ship into a submarine.  The ark lived under the load of waters; after being buried under the debris of dynasties and clans, we arose and remembered Rome.  If our faith had been a mere fad of the fading empire, fad would have followed fad in the twilight, and if the civilisation ever re-emerged (and many such have never re-emerged) it would have been under some new barbaric flag.  But the Christian Church was the last life of the old society and was also the first life of the new.  She took the people who were forgetting how to make an arch and she taught them to invent the Gothic arch.  In a word, the most absurd thing that could be said of the Church is the thing we have all heard said of it.  How can we say that the Church wishes to bring us back into the Dark Ages?  The Church was the only thing that ever brought us out of them.

I added in this second trinity of objections an idle instance taken from those who feel such people as the Irish to be weakened or made stagnant by superstition.  I only added it because this is a peculiar case of a statement of fact that turns out to be a statement of falsehood.  It is constantly said of the Irish that they are impractical.  But if we refrain for a moment from looking at what is said about them and look at what is done about them, we shall see that the Irish are not only practical, but quite painfully successful.  The poverty of their country, the minority of their members are simply the conditions under which they were asked to work; but no other group in the British Empire has done so much with such conditions.  The Nationalists were the only minority that ever succeeded in twisting the whole British Parliament sharply out of its path.  The Irish peasants are the only poor men in these islands who have forced their masters to disgorge.  These people, whom we call priest-ridden, are the only Britons who will not be squire-ridden.  And when I came to look at the actual Irish character, the case was the same.  Irishmen are best at the specially hard professions—­the trades of iron, the lawyer, and the soldier.  In all these cases, therefore, I came back to the same conclusion:  the sceptic was quite right to go by the facts, only he had not looked at the facts.  The sceptic is too credulous; he believes in newspapers or even in encyclopaedias.  Again the three questions left me with three very antagonistic questions.  The average sceptic wanted to know how I explained the namby-pamby note in the Gospel, the connection of the creed with mediaeval darkness and the political impracticability of the Celtic Christians.  But I wanted to ask, and to ask with an earnestness amounting to urgency, “What is this incomparable energy which appears first in one walking the earth like a living judgment and this energy which can die with a dying civilisation and yet force it to a resurrection from the dead; this energy which last of all can inflame a bankrupt peasantry with so fixed a faith in justice that they get what they ask, while others go empty away; so that the most helpless island of the Empire can actually help itself?”