With a POD of 1700, break Ireland away from Roman Catholicism by 1900

Either protestantism, a new religion, or some sort of Catholic break-away.

Would enforced deportation to the Americas count? Or do you want the Irish themselves to convert en masse?

Because while evil, deportation is the easiest way I can see to achieve this in Ireland.

Catholocism allowed a seperate identity from the English and led to foreign support, hard to see that being given up.

Unless you change the perception of the Irish by the English and have them treat them as equals and stop abuses etc, may make anglicanism more attractive?
 
Last edited:
If there were a second Western Schism (Pope and AntiPope), and the Pope cozied up to Britain (for defense, say), then the Irish might well go with the AntiPope.

For example, Spain splits off because the Church is too liberal or something. Scenario: Maybe the Pope is ousted from the Vatican during an alt-Roman Republic, and/or Italian unification. Most of the Church realizes that reforms have to be made, and the ousted Pope goes totally reactionary (look at Pius IX, for example - but from a reactionary starting point, not a liberal one). A major Council is held, and the Council announces the deposing of the old Pope, followed by the election of a new one. Meanwhile, the Spanish are still strong in the Med (possibly they still hold Sicily), and Rome is vulnerable, thus the Papacy turns to Britain, the Great Naval Power, to keep the Spain away from Rome.

The Irish loudly proclaim their allegiance to the 'true' (i.e. the ousted, Spanish dominated) Pope, but most of the Catholic world goes with the new one.
 
Either protestantism, a new religion, or some sort of Catholic break-away.

Do away with the worst aspects of the Penal Laws, whilst keeping enough to make sure that converting to Anglicanism is still worth it. Maybe something similar to the Islamic dhimmi system. Basically improve the ratio of carrot to stick. That wouldn't guarantee a Protestant Ireland, but it's the best way I can see (short of wide-scale ethnic cleansing) to achieve that goal.
 
Cromwellian dynasty survives, with successive Cromwell (Henry, his children, children's children!) governors massacring Catholics until Ireland is filled only with Protestants by 1700. Many Irish convert to some form of Protestantism by 1700.

Or...have Catholic plot to blow Parliament (5th November) succeed with Irish Catholics made scapegoat (not Spanish or anything like that!), lots more killing with ATL Charles I becoming a puritan zealous king. Most Catholic powers, eager to distance themselves from regicide, make only token protests as the English enact terrible vengeance on the Irish, with the massacre complete by 1700 by ATL Thomas Fairfax, dubbed "the sword of the True Faith"!
 
Cromwellian dynasty survives, with successive Cromwell (Henry, his children, children's children!) governors massacring Catholics until Ireland is filled only with Protestants by 1700. Many Irish convert to some form of Protestantism by 1700.

Or...have Catholic plot to blow Parliament (5th November) succeed with Irish Catholics made scapegoat (not Spanish or anything like that!), lots more killing with ATL Charles I becoming a puritan zealous king. Most Catholic powers, eager to distance themselves from regicide, make only token protests as the English enact terrible vengeance on the Irish, with the massacre complete by 1700 by ATL Thomas Fairfax, dubbed "the sword of the True Faith"!

Cromwell's reputation as anti-Catholic butcher is exaggerated. He wasn't about to deliberately commit genocide against the Irish Catholics, and there's no reason to suppose that the next three generations of Cromwells would be notably bloodthirsty.

As for your second idea... Blaming the Gunpowder Plot on the Irish might lead to some harsher penal laws, but not to the level of total genocide. Maybe it could work if some ASB decided to replace all the English noblemen with moustache-twirling cartoon villains, but short of that, no.
 
Maybe it could work if some ASB decided to replace all the English noblemen with moustache-twirling cartoon villains, but short of that, no.
Hey, the OP wanted improbable outcome, I just gave improbable PODs (I'm not gonna be so fast to invoke ASB, OTL is weird enough as it is :p).

I just don't see majority Irish voluntarily breaking away from Catholicism with 1700 POD unless there's the sort of massacre I stated. It needs earlier, maybe early conquest of Ireland by English rulers with closer Irish-English ties between the aristocrats, thus when the English start embracing the Reformation, we have the same sentiments in Ireland too. Or just have some random Pope say "Damn the Irish, we hates them anyway!"

The required POD is too late, methinks.

EDIT: OK...maybe more American immigration to get 1900 result, but more Catholics in America? Hmmm...maybe an early US more friendly to Catholics, OTL I remember reading how JF Kennedy, even in relatively modern times, had to deal with the slurs against him being Catholic!
 
Last edited:

PhilippeO

Banned
What about non-Anglican Protestantism ? Scots choose Protentantism without English Anglicanism. Could Calvinism, Puritanism, methodism or Dissenters become popular with Irish ? perhaps to reduce power of roman catholicism or to gainScot support in Parliament, British give any protestant in Ireland same status as Anglicans, with Irish nobles and leadership converted to non-english protestant faith and charity given to native Irish, Irish embrace the dissenting faith.
 

Redhand

Banned
What about non-Anglican Protestantism ? Scots choose Protentantism without English Anglicanism. Could Calvinism, Puritanism, methodism or Dissenters become popular with Irish ? perhaps to reduce power of roman catholicism or to gainScot support in Parliament, British give any protestant in Ireland same status as Anglicans, with Irish nobles and leadership converted to non-english protestant faith and charity given to native Irish, Irish embrace the dissenting faith.

Irish Catholicism has its basis in monasteries. If you threaten those, then they are simply not going to be agreeable. Which is why I only see Ireland being not Catholic through genocidal campaigns against them and a major English settlement effort. Maybe the Puritans are given a Plantation in Cork or something of the sort.

Or African Slavery fails to take hold in the Americas, leading to more Irish slavery in the Americas, which was actually really popular in the 17th century, to continue into the 18th and 19th centuries until Catholic Irish people are gone.
 
Irish Catholicism has its basis in monasteries. If you threaten those, then they are simply not going to be agreeable. Which is why I only see Ireland being not Catholic through genocidal campaigns against them and a major English settlement effort. Maybe the Puritans are given a Plantation in Cork or something of the sort.

Or African Slavery fails to take hold in the Americas, leading to more Irish slavery in the Americas, which was actually really popular in the 17th century, to continue into the 18th and 19th centuries until Catholic Irish people are gone.

The main reason why African slavery took off was that Africans were better able to cope with the hot climates where most of the plantations were located. The Irish, coming from a colder country, tended to find the heat too much and die off, meaning that Irish slavery wouldn't have been profitable enough to justify financially.

Also, I think describing Irish slavery as "really popular in the 17th century" is a bit of an exaggeration. Royalist POWs from the Irish part of the Civil War were indeed enslaved, but AFAIK that's about it.
 

Abhakhazia

Banned
The main reason why African slavery took off was that Africans were better able to cope with the hot climates where most of the plantations were located. The Irish, coming from a colder country, tended to find the heat too much and die off, meaning that Irish slavery wouldn't have been profitable enough to justify financially.

Yeah, this. Irish slavery wasn't very effective, however Irish indentured servants often did tasks even more menial than ones meant for slaves. Plantation owners often Irish laborers to do jobs they wouldn't risk an African slave, who they paid good money for, to do.

Otherwise I basically agree with the posts upthread that say deportation is the best way to do this, especially under a continued Protectorate/Puritan Parliamentary rule. Catholic Ireland would be a massive thorn in the side to Parliament, and they would likely have to put down rebellions ever few decades or even years. One might be so devastating that what ever Lord Protector in charge would decide to deport a wave of Irishmen to the Americas; maybe somewhere towards the nastier end of America, like Florida or Georgia.
 

Redhand

Banned
Also, I think describing Irish slavery as "really popular in the 17th century" is a bit of an exaggeration. Royalist POWs from the Irish part of the Civil War were indeed enslaved, but AFAIK that's about it.

It wasn't just POWs. It was a lively slave trade that took civilians in large numbers as well. The Irish slaves were actually treated even worse than the Africans for two reasons: they were cheaper, as yes, they weren't as accustomed to the climate and died off quickly, but also because there was a glut on the market of Irish slaves following the Cromwellian conquest of Ireland that lasted for 20-30 years, and also they were Catholic, which to English slave owners in the Caribbean and Virginia was worse than being a Pagan African.

It was a popular practice to take Irish women and breed them with African men to increase slave population without having to pay an importation tax but still get a slave who could do field work. This practice became so widespread that the Crown actually banned it as they were losing out on money.

Entire towns in Western Ireland in particular were stripped of native population and deported to the Caribbean and Virginia. The Irish Slave trade continued until the end of the 17th century and saw small amounts of Irish slaves, mostly former rebels and criminals, still being enslaved into the 1720s.
 
Can I suggest an idea where we dont perform genecide on a race of people due to there religion?

I must thank, Dathi THorfinnsson, for pushing me towards this idea with his post.

The Very Reverend, Dr Jonathan Swift Jr.
In April 1667, Jonathan Swift, Swift had been walking around his new home-town of Dublin, when he was nearly killed by a run away horse and cart, luckily for him he had been looking at a flyer on the Church notice board, before walking out of the road, he saw this as an act of divine intervention, so when 7 months later his son, Jonathan Swift Jr., was born on 30 November 1667, the family celebrated and Jonathan Snr., promised in his prayers that night that he would devote his life in bring up his son to be a devote christian.
P.O.D Jonathan Swift Senior died, in the April of 1667, leaving his wife to return to England while their child was left with a benefactor.

Jonathan Swift was soon able to make he fortune when his brothe and himself set up their own law firm in Dublin Swift & Swift. With the money he attained from his firm he was able to send his son to Dublin University, from which he received his B.A. in 1686. During his free time, he worked as a secretary, at his fathers firm and was often trusted with matters of great importance.
He also grew up with communities of mixed Anglicanism, Presbyterianism and Catholicism, seeing the worst and the best of them.
He was studying for his Master degree when political troubles began in Ireland surrounding the Glorious Revolution.
Swift could not under stand what the war of the two kings, was really over. He understood that conflict was between Jacobites who supported the Catholic King James II, and Williamites who in turn supported the Protestant, Prince William of Orange. But he could not see what the real difference was.

So he became a stanch supporter for peace and a political pamphleteer in the cities and towns of Ireland and became known to Field General, Frederick Schomberg, 1st Duke of Schomberg who wrote to Prince William regarding this young man. When, he became King William III on 13 February 1689, one of his piorities was to set up a meeting with the young Jonathan Swift.

In 1690, Jonathan Swift, was greeted by King William III in London, among the talk was the subject of the up coming Treaty of Limerick, King William wanted an Irish civilian, to be among the signers and would love Swift to be that civilian, adding that it helped that he was not catholic. Swift, quickly replied that "Although I am not a catholic, I am afraid that I can not attack one religion without attacking them all."

On 3 October 1691, Jonathan Swift's signature was added to The Treaty of Limerick and by the end of the month he became Speaker of the Irish House of Commons (at King William III orders) replacing Sir Richard Nagle (who was an allie of King James II.)

As Speaker, Swift worked well with Sir Charles Porter who was in his second term as Lord Chancellor of Ireland, the two of them were able to pass laws that were in favour of at least some degree of religious toleration without upsetting to many enemies.
This create an Ireland, where religion was not a bigger issue as OTL, with Catholic ministers happily holding office with Protestant ones.

When Sir Charles Porter, died of a stroke in 1696, Jonathan Swift, was quickly promoted to the position of Lord Chancellor of Ireland an office he would hold for nearly fifty years.

In 1708, he made a dramatic speech in parliament known as "An Argument Against Abolishing Christianity" in the speech, Swift was able to answer several real and rhetorical arguments against Christianity, ending on the quote "that if Catholicism was to be exiled, then all religion should be so banned"

At the age of 77, on 19 October 1745, Jonathan Swift died and was buried in St. Patrick's Cathederal, Dublin, leaving behind a legacy that is still felt today, a united nation within the united kingdom.
 
A Methodist revival sweeps through Ireland as a grassroots "Christian" movement with no connection to any existing denomination. The Irish Methodists are big among the peasants and the poor. It also gives rise to political activists. The Catholics may still make up a large percentage of the population but Catholicism won't have the hold it has in OTL.
 
Top