|
|
|
|
|
|
by zumtar
3975 days ago
|
|
|
Yes, of course they did. They were Irish, but the unionists agreed (along with Great Britain) that Ireland should be ruled by the King and be under British rule, and subsequently they all adopt the "British" sect of Christianity (Anglicanism). |
|
|
The relationship between Unionism and Protestantism and Nationalism and Catholicism was and still is much more grey than many realise. The current situation with Northern Ireland makes this appear much more dry-cut than it actually is because NI was set up on sectarian grounds. However, historically many, in fact the majority, of the prime movers in Irish nationalism have been from Anglican backgrounds that would naively be associated with Unionism.
Also, Irish Nationalism was contrary to Unionism, but a good number of prominent Nationalists had Monarchist tendencies too, such as the founder and leader of the original Sinn Fein, Arthur Griffith[1]. Republicanism was something that came out of the more militant strains of Nationalism, as represented by the Irish Republican Brotherhood, who infiltrated Sinn Fein to use it as a vehicle for their own aims.
Moreover, the vast majority of Irish Protestants have been Presbyterian, not Anglican. Anglicanism was the church of the Establishment, not the common people. Presbyterians, being Nonconformist, were subject to many of the discriminatory practices of the various penal laws, just as Catholics were, because they weren't Anglicans, albeit not to quite the same extent. Anglicanism was historically the church of the upper classes and parts of the middle class.
[1] Griffith wasn't technically what you'd call a Monarchist, but he wasn't a Republican either. He supported the idea of an independent Ireland under a dual monarchy with the United Kingdom.