Two major differences in outlook make Partition necessary. First Eire’s separatist nationalism by virtue of which she has shut herself up in the shell of her own life and, consequently, forced out the North, which has important links and associations with the excluded world.
 From this point of view Partition may be defined as an internal manifestation of Eire’s isolationism.
 The second factor obstructing unity is a difference in the evaluation of man, the human optimism of the North and the pessimism of Eire.
 The full measure ofr this difference in social outlook is not usually appreciated because it is taken to approximate that between Protestant and Roman Catholic.

—

 While this latter difference is appreciable it is not unsurmountable, because both may be defined as individualist. Both attach a primary importance to the individual and see social progress as an outcome of his growth.
 But while Protestantism places its full faith in the individual, Roman Catholicism takes the view that the individual needs the guidance of the Church, which is the final arbiter on questions of faith and morals. Nevertheless, stemming from the same religious faith, both views have much in common, especially to-day when their Christian basis is under the gravest threat and demands the closest alliance.
 Unfortunately, the above difference does not exhaust the constrast in the human stand taken by Eire and Northern Ireland today.

—

The more extreme positions taken up by Northern Ireland and Eire today came about because the North sympathised with European humanism which sought to increase man’s status and so the degree of his perfection and perfectability.
 This liberal humanism has fallen on evil days. The proud image of man whic hit inspired was defiled in the concentration camps of Nazi Germany and Russia. The Northern Ireland are no perhaps, of European communities, its staunchest adherents. Roman Catholic Ireland on the other hand reacted against humanism and adopted a too belittling and cynical attitude towards man. This attitude is not clearly defined or expressed and exists rather as an unconscious force which has, however, a great influence on the Souther outlook and social policy.

—

A natural consequence of adopting a cynical attidue to human nature is a depreciation of human achievement. This led to an inevitable weakening of the Roman Catholic idea of a synthesis of Grace and nature, and resulted in a tendency to behave ‘as if the supernatural replaced the natural instead of reinforcing it" - to use an expression of Rev. Dr. Alfred O’Rahilly.
 The typical attitude in Eire to human nature is, consequently, negative rather than postive, destructive rather than constructive.
 The tragedy of such a negative attitude is that it has permitted Irish life to be inspired by other than Christian ideals.

Such a concept has little in common with Roman Catholic philosophy which advocates dependence rather than independence, is indifferent to the question of language as such, and is disposed towards political unity only when it has a spiritual basis, that is, when it is free and supported by common aspirations and arms.
 One can appreciate how this doctrinaire nationalism led to a gross oversimplification of the problems it posed. Unity was regarded unconditionally as if the North were obliged to come under a Dublin Government no matter how narrow its outlook and policy. Hence the failure to make a realistic study of life in the North in order to find out what it had in common with life in Eire and to see how divergences might be met.
 Eire would be morally justified in demanding that the North should make appreciable sacrifices on behalf of unity but she is hardly entitled to demand a sacrifice without estimating the measure of that sacrifice.

Mr. Costello’s speech on the need to Christianize Eire’s foreign policy made in Dublin on his return from his recent tour in America is an example of the kind of revision necessary; though Mr. Costello’s critical reflections were presented in an oblique manner. But that kind of revision is very rare.
 Nor is its rarity merely the result of a lack of courage. There is a real absence in Eire of that Christian or liberal political sense to make such revision possible.
 Mr. Costello’s speech, for instance, did not evoke response: a fact which shows that though Eire may be critical of the politics of nationalism she is far from a new constructive position.
 In such a situation a positive lead form the Irish Roman Catholic Church would be an enormous help, for the values of Roman Catholicism being human in a wide or internationa sense woud give a fuller and more realistic interpretation of those problems of nationhood - cultural, political and economic - which obsess Irish statesmen.

—

In the recent past the Irish Roman Catholic Church has failed to suport the more Christian and realist political outlook of the original pro-Treaty party whci avoided the excesses of nationalism and adopted an externally co-operative policy.

 Yet it seems that their original liberalism exercises a nostalgic pull on some of the members of this party as can be seen from occasional speeches on the part of Mr. Costello and Mr. Cosgrave.
 A way out of the present political impasse lies in a return to such liberal political concept.s It is not an easy way, however, because many will refuse to forgive the Fine Gael party for defaulting from tis stand for an externally co-operative Eire and, what is more important, the Irish Catholic Church is not liekly to use its powerful influence in support of political ideas which in the immediate past she permitted to be overcome by the narrow, distorting concepts of a doctrinaire nationalism.