Skip to main content

Full text of "Correspondence of John Henry Newman with John Keble and others, 1839-1845;"

See other formats


Qfarnell Mmuerattjj liihrarij 

3tl|aca, Kem ^arh 






BX4705.NW" AJS'"""" ""^ 

^°''''?.?.P,?.nl^n?,?n .9.^ John ...Henry. Newman with 


3 1924 029 434 937 


Cornell University 

The original of this book is in 
the Cornell University Library. 

There are no known copyright restrictions in 
the United States on the use of the text. 

KEBLE AND OTHERS . . . 1839-1845 


AND OTHERS . • . 1839-1845 





All rights reserved 


Nihil obstat 

Carolus J. Cronin, S.T.D. 

Censor Deputatus. 
Die 7 AugusH, 1917. 

Cum Opus cui titulus : " Correspon- 
dence of John Henry Newman, etc. 1839- 
1845," a Censore a Nobis deputato rite 
recognitum et approbatum fuerit, Nos 
illud paelo dignum judicamus. 


die 8 Auziiii, 1917- 

iJ(Eduardus Archiep. Birmingamien 


Edm. Can. Surmont 

Vic. Gen, 

W r ;, M n V •<, RT r RI 1 

die 11 Avgusli, 1917. 


A FEW months after the death of Cardinal Newman in i8go 
his ' Letters and Correspondence during his Life in the 
EngHsh Church' (i 801-1845) were edited by his sister-in-law. 
Miss Anne Mozley. The present volume is a further selection 
from the last six years of the same correspondence. It 
consists of letters which, with a small number of exceptions, 
were not published by Miss Mozley. The chief exceptions 
are some three or four letters from Newman to Mr. Bowden 
written in 1840, and about the same number belonging to 
the correspondence between Newman and Keble during 
the years 1 843-1845. These latter have been included in 
order that the reader may have before him the whole of the 
correspondence of which they are a part. The letters to 
Mr. Bowden were almost indispensable because of the events 
which they describe. The choice practically lay between 
reprinting them and giving a summary of their contents. 
Some passages in them which were omitted by Miss Mozley, 
and are not without interest, have been supplied. 

The reader will hardly need to be reminded of the fullness 
of the last six years of Newman's life in the English Church, 
and their anguish. During the summer and autumn of 
1839, when he was studying the history of the Monophysite 
controversy in the fifth century, he began to discern * an 
awful similitude, more awful because so silent and unimpas- 
sioned, between the dead records of the past and the feverish 
chronicle of the present.' It was in this way, and from this 
most unlikely quarter, that his first doubts concerning the 
tenability of his Anglican position crept upon him. He 
was startled and dismayed, but there could be no question of 
succumbing at once. His doubts might vanish as suddenly 
as they had come. Time alone could show whether they 


were a conviction of the intellect or an obsession of the 

Meanwhile others were beginning to have their doubts 
and difficulties, one of which was how to reconcile sub- 
scription to the Thirty-nine Articles with the profession of 
Catholic principles. To meet this difficulty, which for his 
own part he did not feel, Newman published in 1841 Tract 
90. The storm which this Tract raised took him by surprise, 
but he weathered it fairly well. If anything, it probably 
helped him, by distracting his mind from the thought of his 
own difficulties. As for the Tract, he was quite satisfied 
with the position which he defended in it, and was content 
if it escaped episcopal censure. This latter point, trusting 
to an informal ' understanding,' he thought he had secured 
by his ' Letter to the Bishop of Oxford.' It was, there- 
fore, with a mind at ease that he took refuge in his books 
from the turmoil around him and set to work at translating 
St. Athanasius for the Oxford Library of the Fathers. 

Now came a succession of blows which fairly broke him. 
The chief among these were (i) the Jerusalem Bishopric 
scheme, and the contrast between the calmness with which 
the Church of England endured this public proclamation of 
her homogeneity with foreign Protestantism and the outcry 
against Tract 90 ; (2) the charges fulminated against Tract 
90 ; and, worst of all, (3) St. Athanasius and the history of 
the Arian controversy which brought to life again the doubt 
that had assailed him in the summer and autumn of 1839. 
Then — foris pugnce : intus timores — followed the dreary 
years of spiteful attacks from without and ever-increasing 
doubts from within, while he lay, as he afterwards described 
it, on his death-bed as regards his membership with the 
Anglican communion. In the spring of 1843 he could no 
longer doubt that he doubted, and he sought counsel from 
Keble. In the autumn of the same year he completed the 
process of self-effacement, which he had begun after the 
condemnation of Tract 90, by resigning St. Mary's. The 
autumn of 1844 was the dark night of his soul, into which 
hardly any ray of comfort seems to have penetrated. His 


mind was full of the thoughts of the unhappiness he was 
causing his friends, of the great work which he was undoing, 
and of the unsettlement and despair of discovering religious 
truth which would come over the minds of many. He did 
not expect to have a large following, but he feared much 
that great numbers, instead of standing where they were, 
would gradually sink back to the level from which he had 
raised them. The end came in October 1845, sooner than 
he had anticipated. At one time he had thought of allowing 
a full seven years to pass from the beginning of his doubts 
before he came to a decision. Then he proposed to com- 
plete his ' Essay on Development.' But the power to hold 
his judgment in suspense had practically parted from him, 
so clearly did reason and conscience now speak. 

The editorial matter is intended to serve as a kind of 
historical framework of the letters. For the convenience 
of the reader it has been made distinguishable at a glance 
from them by being printed in closer lines. The amount 
of it may appear excessive to persons already familiar with 
the history of the Tractarian Movement, but this history 
is rapidly becoming ancient history, and the knowledge of 
it on the part of the general reader which could have been 
assumed twenty-five or thirty years ago can no longer be 
taken as a matter of course. Letters are most precious 
memorials of the past. It lives in them as it does in no 
other kind of record or monument. This is their charm. 
But the knowledge necessary in order to feel it, is very 
rarely contained in them. They were not intended for 
posterity to the end that it may know, and do not rehearse 
for its benefit matters familiar to every one at the time when 
they were being written. One need not go very far for an 
illustration. The letters connected with Tract 90 in the 
present volume will serve the purpose admirably. For those 
who bring to them some knowledge of the contents and his- 
tory of this famous Tract they make the excitement which it 
caused almost contagious. But they do not supply this 
necessary preliminary knowledge without which reading them 
is like witnessing a play in an unknown language. The finest 


display of emotion and feeling soon becomes wearisome 
when the spectator does not know what it all turns upon. 
It is a truism, almost too obvious to be uttered, that those 
gain most from the letters and correspondence of a bygone 
age who have least to learn from them in the shape of 
actual facts. 

The Editors desire to record with thanks their appreciation 
of the courtesy extended to them by the following persons : 
To Mrs. Thomas Keble and the Rev. Dr. Lock, Warden of 
Keble College, for permission to use the valuable collection 
of letters written by Keble to Newman. They are, further, 
indebted to Dr. Lock for his kindness in correcting the 
proofs of these letters, the originals of which were deposited 
by Ne^vman in the library of Keble College. To Miss 
Mary Church for permission to use two letters by her father 
the late Dean Church of St. Paul's ; to Mr. J. C. Moberly 
for a letter by Bishop Moberly of Salisbury ; to Mrs. Albert 
Croly for a letter by Dr. James Henthom Todd ; to 
the Rev. Lewis R. C. Bagot for letters by Bishop Bagot of 
Oxford ; to the present Bishop of Oxford and the Rev. 
Canon J. 0. Johnston for letter by Dr. Pusey ; to Miss 
Caroline S, Landon for a letter by the Rev. Arthur Perceval ; 
to the Rev. Canon Wyndham for letters by Cardinal Man- 
ning ; to Mr. R. E. Froude for a letter by his mother, Mrs. 
William Froude ; to Mr. J. R. Mozley for a letter by the 
Rev. Thomas Mozley, and much valuable information 
besides ; to the family and literary representatives of Dr. 
Russell of Maynooth for letters by Dr. Russell ; to Mr. E. C. 
Hawkins for a letter by his grandfather, Dr. Hawkins of 
Oriel ; to Bishop Hook and to Messrs.^ Macmillan and Co., 
Ltd., for letters by Dean Hook ; and to Mr. John Murray 
for extracts made from the ' Life of Bishop W^ilberf orce, ' 
and from the ' Letters of Frederic, Lord Blachford.' 

For any acknowledgment which may be wanting, the 
Editors rely upon the indulgence of those whose names have 
been omitted, whether through inadvertence or from the 
difficulty, after the lapse of so many years, of identif)dng 



I. The Summer of 1839 

II. The New School of Tractarians 

III. Tract XC. January to April 1S41 

IV. Dr. Russell and Newman, 1841 . 
V. The Jerusalem Bishopric, 1841 . 

VI. Increasing Difficulties, 1842 

VII. Resignation of St. Mary's. 1843 

VIII. In Retirement 

IX. The End 

















* Is there anything whereof it may be said, See, this is new? It hath 
been already of old time, which was before us.' — Eccles. i. 10. 

In the summer of 1839 Newman took advantage of the 
quiet of the Long Vacation to study the history of the 
Monophysite controversy. Things were going remarkably 
well with him just then. ' I had/ he says, ' supreme con- 
fidence in my controversial status, and I had a great and 
still growing success in recommending it to others.' ^ [His 
controversial status was the Anglican Via Media with its 
appeal to antiquity against Rome on the one side, and 
Protestantism on the otherTJ 

There are stories of haunted places where some tragedy 
of the past is being constantly re-enacted after a ghostly 
fashion in the present. The exact opposite of this happened 
to Newman. He plunged into the past and encountered 
the spectre of the present * like a spirit rising from the 
troubled waters of the old world, with the shape and 
lineaments of the new.' ^ 

This is how he describes his amazement and disgust : — 

' My stronghold was Antiquity ; now here in the middle 
of the fifth century, I found, as it seemed to me, Christendom 
of the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries reflected. I saw 
my face in that mirror, and I was a Monophysite. The 

^ Apologia, p. 93. * Ibid. p. 115. 


Church of the Via Media was in the position of the Oriental 
communion, Rome was where she now is ; and the 
Protestants were the Eutychians.' ^ 

And again : — 

' It was difficult to make out how the Eutychians or 
Monophysites were heretics, unless Protestants and j 
Anglicans were heretics also ; difficult to find arguments | 
against the Tridentine Fathers, which did not tell against j 
the Fathers of Chalcedon ; difficult to condemn the Popes i 
of the sixteenth century, without condemning the Popes / 
of the fifth. The drama of religion, and the combat of truth 
and error, were ever one and the same/ ^ 

It seems a strange thing to insert a piece of fifth-century 
church history into a volume of nineteenth-century letters ; 
but it is not stranger than the facts which practically 
dictate such a procedure. ' Of all passages of history, since 
history has been, who would have thought of going to 
the sayings and doings of old Eutyches, that delirus senex 
as, I think, Petavius calls him, and to the enormities of the 
unprincipled Dioscorus, in order to be converted to Rome ? '^ 
But as this is what actually happened in the case of Newman, 
it is to Eutyches and Dioscorus that they must go who wish 
to enter into his feelings and reasonings during the years 
1839-1845 ; and they must try to realise these two worthies 
as vividly as they realise the Heads of Colleges who 
condemned Tract XC, or the bishops who wrote charges 
against it. The ancients supplied a text and the moderns 
provided it with a commentary. 

In A.D. 448 Eutyches, the abbot of a monastery in the 
suburbs of Constantinople, was condemned by a synod 
held in that city, and presided over by St. Flavian, Patriarch 
of Constantinople, for teaching the doctrine of One, not 
Two, Natures in Christ. Eutyches was a persona grata 
at court, and St. Flavian was not. In consequence the 
affair soon became one of the first magnitude, and the 
Emperor, Theodosius II, determined upon a General Council 
to settle it. Meanwhile both the Emperor and Eutyches 
wrote to the Pope, St. Leo the Great, but no report came 
from St. Flavian.'-l'The Pope wrote somewhat sharply to 
the last-named. If^was from him that he ought first to 
have heard of the scandal, and it was not clear that Eutyches 

.J- Apologia, p. 114. * Ibid. p. 115. a 75,^ p^ ^^^ 


had been justly condemned. ' Send therefore/ the letter 
continued, ' to give us a full account of what has occurred/ 
On hearing from St. Flavian, the Pope, now fully informed, 
wrote his Epistola Dogmatica ad Flavianum, generally 
known as the Tome of St. Leo, in which Eutyches was 
condemned, and the Catholic doctrine of the Two Natures 
was set forth. 

St. Leo somewhat reluctantly acceded to the Emperor's 
proposal of a General Council, and agreed to be represented 
at it by legates. These were furnished with very definite 
instructions which they were to deliver to the assembled 
bishops. The Council met at Ephesus in August a.d. 449. 
Dioscorus, Patriarch of Alexandria, presided, and carried 
everything before him. The legates were not refused a 
hearing point-blank ; but it was contrived that it should 
never be the opportune moment for them to speak and 
deliver their instructions. Eutyches was honourably 
acquitted ; and St. Flavian was deposed. Unmasked 
violence was used to force the bishops to subscribe to this 
last measure. The legates escaped with their lives, having 
uttered a final protest in the single word ' contradicitur.' 
The Council was dubbed by the Pope a Latrocinium or 
Gang of Brigands, and the name has stuck to it. 

Theodosius died in 450 and was succeeded by Marcian. 
In the following year a Council met at Chalcedon to repair 
the scandal of the Latrocinium. Like the Latrocinium 
it consisted of Eastern bishops, of whom more than 
600 were present, and papal legates. The Emperor 
was represented by lay officials. Proceedings were opened 
by the legates demanding that Dioscorus should leave 
his place among the bishops and be put upon his trial 
because ' he had presumed to hold a Council without the 
authority of the Apostolic See, which had never been done, 
nor was lawful to do.'^ He was condemned at the third 
session of the Council, sentence being pronounced by the 
legates in the name of the Pope and the Council. It may 
be noted that the only defence which Dioscorus offered for 
his treatment of the legates at the Latrocinium was an 
attempt to cast the blame upon others. Also, he was ready 
to throw Eutyches overboard. This was typical of the 
Middle Path, which the Monophy sites afterwards tried to 
steer, between Chalcedon and Eutychianism. The acquittal 

* Dioscorus had continued the Council after the flight of the legates. 


of the heresiarch at the Latrocinium was always a raw 
place with them. 

In the second session the creeds of Nicea and Con- 
stantinople, and two Epistles of St. Cyril of Alexandria 
which stood as authentic monuments of the Faith defined 
at the third General Council, were read. Then followed 
the Tome of St. Leo. It was received with such acclama- 
tions as ' This is the Faith of the Apostles . . . this is the 
Faith of the Fathers . . . Peter has thus spoken through 
Leo.' During the interval between the second and fifth 
sessions of the Council, practically all the bishops had 
subscribed, or in some other way declared their adhesion to 
the Tome.i 

In the fifth session a storm arose which threatened to 
wreck the Council. A definition was drafted which did not 
satisfy the legates. This document has not been preserved, 
but it apparently contained the ambiguous expression 
' Of Two Natures ' instead of the unambiguous one ' In 
Two Natures.' The legates at once declared their intention 
of returning to Italy, where another Council would be held. 
The Imperial officers came to the rescue. Did the bishops, 
they demanded, accept the Tome ? The bishops declared 
they did accept the Tome ; they even ventured to affirm 
that their definition confirmed it, but they would not make 
the desired alteration. The Emperor intervened. The 
bishops might appoint a fresh committee to draft another 
definition ; or they might individually declare their Faith 
through their respective metropolitans. If neither course 
pleased them, then, seeing that they refused to give a stable 
definition respecting the Faith, the Council must be trans- 
ferred to Italy. There was still some show of opposition 
which the Imperial officers quelled with the dilemma, 
' Dioscorus says " Of Two Natures," Leo, '' In Two 
Natures." Which will you follow ? ' ' We believe with 
Leo,' they replied, ' not with Dioscorus. Whoever opposes 
this is an Eutychian.' ' Well then,' rejoined the Imperial 
officers, ' add to the definition according to the judgment 
of our most holy Leo.' This was decisive, and a definition 
was drawn up such as the Pope required. 

J Except the Egyptian bishops, who refused on the ground they could 
do nothing without their Patriarch, i.e. till a successor to Dioscorus had 
been appointed. They pleaded their lives would not be safe when they 
returned home if they did so. 


The Council was not concluded before a monk named 
Theodosius hurried off to Palestine proclaiming that the 
Faith was betrayed, and Nestorianism set up in its place. ^ 
He took forcible possession of the see of Jerusalem and 
was able to maintain his position for two years. In Egypt 
the bulk of the people espoused the cause of Dioscorus. 
There were fierce riots in Alexandria and savage reprisals 
on the part of the government. In 457 the Catholic 
patriarch Proterius was murdered, and his see usurped 
by Timothy the Cat. Timothy was ejected three years 

In 470 a similar attack was made on the see of Antioch 
by Peter the Tanner. He was ejected about a year later. 
In 476 Timothy and Peter were once more in possession 
of Alexandria and Antioch respectively. They were both 
ousted by the Emperor Zeno in 477. Five years later Zeno 
grew weary of the struggle, and issued his famous Henoticon 
which anathematised Eutyches and put aside the Council 
of Chalcedon, passing over the question of the One or Two 
Natures. The Henoticon was, of course, rejected by 
Rome ; and for thirty-five years the East was in schism. 

There were two types of dissidents from the Council 
of Chalcedon : the ultras who may be classed together as 
Eutychians (though strictly speaking this term should be 
confined to the avowed followers of the heresiarch), and 
the more sober Mqnophysites who anathematised Eutyches, 
and endeavoured to strike out a middle path between 
the extravagances with which he was credited, and 
Chalcedon. It would not be possible to draw a sharp line 
of demarcation between the two parties. But such men 
as the Phantasaists, with their denial of the objective 
reality of the Sacred Humanity, and those who held 
that It was so intermingled with the Divine Nature, 
that the latter became passible and suffered on the Cross, 
were clearly on the Eutychian side of the boundary : 
and on the other hand those who held that the Divine 
Nature, while forming one composite Nature with the 
Sacred Humanity, yet remained distinct and unaltered 

^ A report was circulated that the Pope had repudiated the Council. 
It had this much foundation in fact — he rejected the 28th canon, elevating 
Constantinople to the dignity of the second See in Christendom. St. Leo 
probably foresaw that bishops in such close proximity to the court would 
prove very indifferent guardians of the spiritual independence of the 


(they used, or rather abused, the analogy'of^soul and body) 
were on the Monophysite side. 

! Some of the Monophysites came so near orthodoxy, 
that a contemporary CathoHc bishop, VigiHus of Thapsus, 
declares that many of them did in reahty hold the Catholic 
doctrine, but were afraid to profess it except by circum- 
locutions. He applies to them the words of the Psalmist, 
they were afraid where no fear was. They were afraid of 
the term Physis or Nature. They would not accept it as 
explained by St. Leo and the Council, but insisted that it 
must have another meaning, and imply the Nestorian 
doctrine of a human Personality in Christ. There was 
something to be said on behalf of their timidity. Many of 
the ancient Fathers had avoided the term, or been very 
chary of using it, employing in its stead such expressions 
as ' The Man,' ' Manhood,' ' The Flesh.' They too, like 
the Monophysites, had feared that the word might be taken 
to imply those seemingly inseparable adjuncts of human 
nature, viz. (i) a human personality, and (2) the frailties 
in the moral order which are the consequences of original 
sin.i Moreover, St. Cyril's celebrated formula could 
easily be represented as almost canonising the restriction 
of the term, in the Mystery of the Incarnation, to the 
Divine Nature. It is hardly necessary to point out that to 
avoid a word while it is open to misconstruction is one thing, 
and to refuse it after such misconstruction has been carefully 
provided against is another. ^ The ultra-conservatism of the 
Monophysites flung the door wide open to a new heresy. 

The above is a brief summary of that chapter in early 
church history which brought the theory of the Via Media, 
elaborated by Newman in his ' Prophetical Ofhce of the 
Church,' tumbling about its champion's ears. In the 
* Apologia ' he describes how it affected him, but says very 
little about why it did so. The omission can be partly, 
but only partly, supplied from others of his published 
writings, and in some measure from his correspondence. 
It is only a very incomplete account of what passed through 
his mind that can be attempted, for he never fully recorded 
it, very likely — indeed, he as much as says so- — he could 

^ Compare such expressions as ' Poor human nature ' ; * What can you 
expect from human nature ? ' and the hke. 

^ For the employment of the word before the Council of Chalcedon, see 
Newman's dissertation on St. Cyril's formula, MIA *T2I2 TOT ©EOT AOFOY 
2E2APKnMENH, in Tracts Theolog. and Eccles. pp. 331 ff. 


1 ( 

not. It was a process of recognition or identification 
by which he became convinced that (i) the Church of 
to-day which is in communion with the see of St. Peter, 
is the representative of the Church of the fourth and fifth 
centuries which was able to declare her own mind against 
the Arian, the Nestorian, and the Eutychian ; and that 
(2) he, for his part, was in a position analogous to that of 
the semi-Arians, and semi-Eutychians or Monophysites. 
Recognising is a process which it is difficult to explain to 
others, or even to oneself. Who could put into words the 
means by which he is able to identify his own handwriting ? 
or stand cross-examination on how he can discern the 
voices, footfall, or features of his friends ? 

The first shock to Newman was the great power of the 
Pope. It grew upon him, as his mind became steeped 
in the Epistles of St. Leo and the Acts of the Council of 
Chalcedon, that this was something which he had not 
before realised, to which he had been blind partly through 
prejudice, and partly because he had hitherto read the 
Fathers through the eyes of others. 

' In June and July I found my eyes opened to a state 
of things very different from what I had learned from my 
natural guides (i.e. the great Anglican divines). The 
prejudice, or whatever name it be called, which had been 
too great for conviction from the striking facts of the Arian 
history, could not withstand the history of St. Leo and the 
Council of Chalcedon. 1 saw that, if the early times were 
to be my guide, the Pope had a very different place in the 
Church from what I had supposed. When this suspicion 
had once fair possession of my mind the whole Enghsh 
system fell about me on all sides.' ^ 

This ' the place of the Pope ' was only a beginning, and 
a beginning which he did not directly follow up. ' I doubt,' 
he writes in the 'Apologia,' ' whether I ever held any of the 
Pope's powers to be de jure divino while 1 was in the Anghcan 
Church. ' 2 He did not make up his mind upon this point, 

^ P. 17. Compare letter to Rogers in July, giving an account of the 
progress of his studies. ' Two things are remarkable at Chalcedon — the 
great power of the Pope (as great as he claims now almost), and the 
marvellous interference of the civil power, as great almost as in our 
kings.' He jestingly makes the latter a set off against the former. 
The letter is printed in Miss Mozley's Letters and Corr. &c. ii. 254. 

2 P. 113. ' Not that,' he continues, ' I saw any difficulty in the 
doctrine ; not that in connexion with the history of St. Leo, the idea of his 
infallibility did not cross my m.ind, for it did.' 


any more than he did upon Transubstantiation, and many 
other doctrines, till he accepted them on the testimony 
and authority of the Catholic Church. But the door had 
been opened to a host of other questionings. The truth is, 
the question of the Pope's authority was never regarded by 
Newman as adequately representing the real difference 
between England and Rome. It did not go to the root of 
their quarrel, and to treat it as if it did was to obscure the 
real issue. If the Church, Catholic and Roman, had been 
confronted throughout the world by a Church Catholic 
but not Roman, having the same conception of her rights 
and duties, making the same exclusive claim to the authority 
which the Church of St. Athanasius and St. Basil, of St. 
Ambrose and St. Leo, had claimed — under such conditions 
the crucial question, the essential point of difference, might 
well have been the authority of the Pope. But this was 
not how matters stood between England an(i Rome. The 
root of their divergence lay much deeper. / It was to be 
found in their irreconcilable ideas concernmg the unity 
of the Church, and her office in regard to the Faith J These, 
therefore, were the questions which had first to be disposed 
of. When that had been done it would be time to settle the 
question of the Pope's authority, if, indeed, it was not found 
to have already settled itself. 

The method uniformly followed by Newman, both before 
and after 1839, up to the time when he abandoned the 
controversy, was as follows. He first tried to show that 
the English Church, in spite of her isolation, was not out- 
side Catholic unity. This, he candidly admitted, was the 
difficult part of his argument, and he did not try to destroy 
his opponents' conception of unity, but to provide an alter- 
native view. Having done this, he took the offensive and 
accused Rome of adding to the Faith. His Catholic adver- 
saries kept on much the same ground. They insisted on 
the unity and catholicity of the Church, and on her 
authority; and they defended the doctrines which their 
opponents attacked. Among these the Roman primacy 
was not very prominent. Both sides seem to have 
realised that it was idle for men, whose ideas of the 
Church were fundamentally different, to dispute about the 
form of her government. 

* Is there anything whereof it may be said, See, this 
is new ? It hath been already of old time, which was 


before us.' ^ Newman was feeling about for a Middle Path 
between Protestantism and the Council of Trent. Up to 
the autumn of 1839 i^ did not occur to him that his experi- 
ment was other than a novel one. It might succeed, it 
might fail, but as it had no counterpart in history, it was no 
use looking there for auguries of success or of failure. Now 
it flashed upon him that history was merely repeating 
itself. The Monophysites with a very plausible Via Media 
between Eutyches and the Council of Chalcedon, and, as 
he came to feel in 1841, the semi-Arians trying to steer 
between Arius and the Council of Nicea, had both fore- 
stalled him. ' To his confusion and distress [he is speaking 
of himself in the third person] he found in history a veritable 
Via Media in both the semi-Arian and Monophysite parties, 
and these, as being heretical, broke his attachment to 
middle paths.' ^ 

He was also much impressed by the inability of the 
Monophysites to keep clear of the Eutychians. Their 
middle path showed up well enough on paper, but to keep 
one's footing on it was not easy. It ran between a mountain 
and a bog, and those who would not step off on to the 
mountainside were continually found floundering in the 
bog. ' It might have been charitably hoped that the 
Monophysites' difference from the Catholics had been simply 
a matter of words, as it is allowed by Vigilius of Thapsus 
really to have been in many cases ; but their refusal to 1^ 
obey the voice of the Church was a token of real error in 
their faith, and their implicit heterodoxy is proved by 
their connection, in spite of themselves, with the extreme 
or ultra party whom they so vehemently disowned. It 
is very observable that ingenious as is their theory and 
sometimes perplexing to a disputant, the Monophysites 
never could shake themselves free of the Eutychians ; 
and though they could draw intelligible lines on paper 
between the two doctrines, yet in fact by a hidden fatality 
their partisans were ever running into or forming alliance 
with the anathematised extreme.' ^ With this example 
before him one can easily understand the peculiar horror 
with which he regarded an alliance between English Church- 
men and Prussian Lutherans such as the Jerusalem Bishopric 
scheme seemed to contemplate. 

He also seems to have felt that according to the principles 

^ Eccles. i. 10. 2 Via Media, i. i6. * Development, p. 314. 


of the Via Media the Monophysites ought not to have been 
condemned. Commenting on the reasons given by Eutyches 
for refusing the formula, presented to him at the synod of 
Constantinople, he says ' It is plain . . .^ that there could 
be no consensus ^ against him, as the word is now commonly 
understood ' ; and a little further on, ' Much might be 
said on the plausibiHty of the defence which ^ Eutyches 
might have made for his doctrine, from the history and 
documents of the Church before his time/ ^ 

In a like tone he comments on the definition passed at 
Chalcedon, that it ' is the Apostolic Truth once delivered 
to the Saints is most firmly to be received, from faith in 
that overruling Providence which is by special promise 
extended to the acts of the Church ; moreover that it is in 
simple accordance with the faith of St. Athanasius, St. 
Gregory Nazianzen, and all the other Fathers, will be 
evident to the theological student in proportion as he 
becomes familiar with their works : but the historical 
account of the Council is this, that a formula which the 
creed did not contain, which the Fathers did not unani- 
mously witness, and which some eminent Saints had almost 
in set terms opposed, which the whole East refused, as a 
symbol, not once but twice . . . and refused upon the 
grounds of its being an addition to the Creed, was forced 
upon the Council, not indeed as being such an addition 
[i.e. it was not actually inserted in the Creed like the term 
Consubstantial], yet, on the other hand, not for subscription 
merely, but for acceptance as a definition of faith under the 
sanction of an anathema — forced on the Council by the 
resolution of the Pope of the day, acting through his legates, 
and supported by the civil power.' ^ 

1 He refers to the rigoristic interpretation of the Vincentian canon 
quod uhique &c., which interpretation was in his opinion necessary for the 
Anglican position. See Essay on Development, pp. 14, 15. 

^ Ibid. pp. 301 ££. 

3 Development, p. 312. He goes on : 'It cannot be supposed that such 
a transaction would approve itself to the Churches of Egypt . . . they 
disowned the authority of the Council and called its adherents 
Chalcedonians and Synodites.' In a footnote on ' Chalcedonians ' he 
writes : ' I cannot find my reference for this fact.' The omission can be 
supplied after the lapse of more than seventy years. In 1838 Newman 
reviewed Palmer's Treatise on the Church. Palmer makes the same state- 
ment (i. 422), giving as his authority Buchanan's Christian Researches, 
p. 123. Buchanan in his travels came across a creed still in use among 
the Monophysites in which the errors of Arius, Sabelhus . . . Nestorius 
and the Chalcedonians were anathematised. The fact would stick in 

THE SUMMER OF 1839 11 

There is a further aspect of the same subject, viz. the 
significance of what was done at the Council, which cannot 
be passed over, though it is impossible to do justice to it in 
a few words. 1 

Newman tells us in the ' Apologia ' that the controversy 
between England and Rome did not in his view turn upon 
the infallibility of the Pope ; ' it turned upon the question 
of the Faith and the Church.' ' This,' he continues, ' was 
my issue of the controversy from the beginning to the 
end. jThere was a contrariety of claims between the 
Roman and the Anglican religions, and the history of my 
conversion is simply the process of working it out to a 
solution] In 1838 I illustrated it by the contrast presented 
to us by the Madonna and Child, and a Calvary. The 
peculiarity of the Anglican theology was this, that it 
" supposed the Truth to be entirely objective and detached, 
not " (as in the theology of Rome) " lying hid in the bosom 
of the Church as if one with her, clinging to and (as it 
were) lost in her embrace, but as being sole and unapproach- 
able as on the Cross or at the Resurrection, with the Church 
close by, but in the background." ' ^ 

The context of the passage written ' in 1838 ' will 
bring out his meaning more clearly : * The received notion 
in the English School seems to be that the faith which the 
Apostles delivered, has ever existed in the Church whole 
and entire, ever recognised as the faith, and ascertainable 
as such, and separable (to speak generally) from the mass 
of opinions, which with it have obtained a footing among 
Christians. It is considered definite in its outline, though 
its details admit of more or less perfection ; and in con- 
sequence it is the property of each individual, so that he 
may battle for it in his day, how great soever the party 
attacking it ; nay, as not receiving it from the Church of 
the day, but through other sources besides, historical and 

Newman's memory though he had only casually come across it. He 
would remember Hurrell Froude calling CathoUcs ' those miserable 

^ And, it must be added, impossible to be sure that one is not reading 
more into Newman than there is warrant for. Up to now one has had 
the Essay on Development as a guide. The reflections which he makes 
there on the history of the Monophysites are hkely to be those which he 
made in 1839. But he had no occasion in the chapter of the Development 
which treats of the Monophysites to enter into the question now about to 
be considered. 

^ Apologia, pp. 111-112. 


scriptural, he may defend it, if needs be, against the Church, 
should the Church depart from it. . . . This is the doctrine 
of Fundamentals,! and its peculiarity is this, that it supposes 
the Truth to be entirely objective and detached,' &c.2 

It is difficult to imagine that Newman, with this issue 
definitely shaped in his mind, should take up the history 
of one of the General Councils, and yet not be constrained 
to ask himself which of the two theologies, the English or 
the Roman, it favoured. The Council with which he was 
occupied, like previous Councils, put forward a definition 
in terms selected by itself, and anathematised or unchurched 
those who refused to accept it. He is likely to have felt 
that such a procedure was less easy to justify on the sup- 
position that the Faith is something separable or detached 
from the Church, than on the contrary supposition. A 
definition is a claim on the part of the Church to a right 
to interpret the Faith, and the superadded anathema is 
an emphatic denial of such a right to others. It may be 
observed that at Chalcedon the claim and the denial are 
particularly marked because the Monophysites approached 
the Faith from externally the same point of view as the 
Council. They did not rationalise like the Arians, or put 
forward their own interpretations of Scripture as the 
Nestorians may be said to have done ; but they rested 
their whole case upon tradition. One may put the question 
which the phenomenon of a General Council is likely to have 
suggested to Newman's mind thus. Suppose England, 
Moscow and Rome to be brought together in a General 
Council, and suppose this Council to decide questions as 
delicate in its day as was the Monophysite controversy 
in the fifth century — would not the acceptance of the 
definitions of such a Council as irreformable, entail a com- 
plete revolution of spirit and character in English divinity ? 

^ By ' Fundamentals ' he seems to have understood the doctrine 
contained in the Creed as representing essentials, see Prophetical 0£&ce 
{Via Media, i. 216-7). It may be noted here that in the Prophetical 
Office (i) when Newman speaks of the Creed in the singular he means 
both the Western and the Eastern type ; (2) he seems to assume that the 
Creed contained all that was essential, and not merely the heads of doctrines 
communicated to catechumens. Yet the Creed says nothing about the 
Eucharist ! 

2 Palmer's View of Faith and Unity reprinted in Essays Crit. and Hist. 
i. 209. By a curious irony of fate, Newman's celebrated Essay in the 
Rambler was delated at Rome as contradicting that very view of the 
magisterium which made him a Catholic. 

THE SUMMER OF 1839 13 

But it would be presumptuous to pursue this train of 
thought any further. One runs the risk of reading more 
into Newman than one has a right to. All that is certain 
is (i) that the question of 'the Faith and the Church/ as 
described in the * Apologia/ was before his mind in 1839 > 
(2) that, if not then, at all events very soon he began to 
feel that from the English point of view the General Councils 
were a difficulty ; ^ (3) that he realised he was not the 
first Anglican to feel this difficulty. An imposing list of 
divines could be drawn up to whom the definitions, or at 
least the anathemas of the Councils seemed out of harmony 
with English theology. These solved the difficulty by 
something like the following compromise, which, of course, 
Newman could not accept. On the one hand they defended 
the definitions as true doctrine ; on the other, they 
were prepared, if opportunity offered, to enter into 
communion with Monophysites and Nestorians in the 
East. They excused them on the ground either that 
their differences from the Church were verbal rather than 
real, or, that by keeping to the Creeds they preserved the 
essentials of the Catholic Faith.^ 

On August 30 Newman noted down in a memorandum 
book which he kept, ' Finished my reading on Mono- 
physitism.' In the 'Dublin Review' of the same month 
appeared the celebrated article of Dr. Wiseman in which 
a parallel was drawn between the Anglicans and the 
Donatists. This article made a considerable stir, and 
Newman's attention was called to it about the middle of 
September. He read it without being much impressed 
by it. He had discovered his own lineaments in the 
Monophysites ; but he did not see them reflected in the 
Donatists. The position of these turbulent sectaries seemed 
to differ materially from that of the English Church. But 
a friend laid his finger on a passage from St. Augustine, 
quoted in the article, containing the words ' Securus judicat 
orbis terrarum,' and repeated them again and again to him, 
till they rang in his ears. St. Augustine did not ransack 
the dusty archives of the past in order to confute the 
Donatists, but appealed to the living present Church of his 
day ; and her judgment, which he triumphantly quoted 
as final, covered the case of all schisms whatever their 
peculiarities might be. 

^ See infra, p. 22. 2 ^qq jjijy^ of Aug. i. 389 ff. 


To two only of his friends did Newman unburden his 
mind — Frederic Rogers and Henry Wilberforce. The 
latter thirty years afterwards described how this happened 
in his case : 

' It was in the beginning of October 1839, that he made 
the astounding confidence, mentioning the two subjects 
which had inspired the doubt, the position of St. Leo in 
the Monophysite controversy, and the principle "securus 
judicat orbis terrarum " in that of the Donatists. He 
added that he felt confident that, when he returned to his 
rooms and was able fully and calmly to consider the whole 
matter, he should see his way completely out of the difficulty. 
But, he said, *' I cannot conceal from myself, that for the 
first time since I began the study of theology, a vista has 
been opened before me, to the end of which I do not see." 
He was walking in the New Forest, and he borrowed the 
form of his expression from the surrounding scenery.^ 
His companion, upon whom such a fear came like a thunder- 
stroke, expressed a hope that Mr. Newman might die rather 
than take such a step. He replied, with deep earnestness, 
that he had thought, if ever the time should come when 
he was in serious danger, of asking his friends to pray that 
if it was not indeed the will of God, he might be taken away 
before he did it. Of such a [danger ^] meanwhile he spoke 
only as a possibility in the future, by no means as of a thing 
that had already arrived. But, he added, with special 
reference to Dr. Wiseman's article on the Donatists, " It 
is quite necessary that I should give a satisfactory answer 
to it, or I shall have the young men around me — such 
men," he added, " as Ward of Balliol — going over to Rome." 
Hopeful, however, as he still was, it was impossible not to 

Haeret lateri lethalis arundo ; 

for he would walk some time in silent musing, and then 
say " One thing I am sure I can promise you, that I shall 
never take such a step unless Pusey and Keble agree with 
me that it is a duty." At another time, " I wonder whether 
such a step would be justifiable if a hundred of us saw it 
to be their duty to take it with me ? " These words may 

* He had used the term ' vista ' in his letter to Rogers written a few 
days previously ; see Miss Mozley, Letters &c. ii. 256. 

* There are clearly some misprints and omissions in this sentence. 

THE SUMMER OF 1839 i5 

not be quite exact, but the deep wound which they branded 
upon the inmost soul of the hearer makes it quite impossible 
that they should not be correct in substance/ ^ 

The reader of the letters contained in this volume will 
have no doubt of the more than substantial accuracy of 
Mr. Wilberforce's recollections. The ideas, almost the 
very words which he placed in Newman's mouth, will be 
found recurring again and again in them. 

Newman's confidence that he should see his way out 
of his difficulties when he was back in his rooms was in great 
measure justified. He set himself to reply to Dr. Wiseman 
in an article entitled ' The Catholicity of the Anglican 
Church ' ; ^ and this article quieted his mind for about two 
years. These years might be called the St. Martin's summer 
of his Anghcanism. The sun shone out finely during the 
day, but the nights grew longer and more chilly. 

The crisis through which he had passed did not at first 
seem to bring him any nearer to Rome. It destroyed, but 
did not build up. ' Down had come the Via Media, as a 
definite theory or scheme, under the blows of St. Leo * ; 
I had no positive theory : I was very nearly a pure 
Protestant,' ^ i.e. with nothing to go upon except anti- 
Romanism. Yet it is difficult to see what tangible difference 
as regards his position this tremendous upheaval in his 
mind had made. [Before 1839 ^^ wished to seethe doctrines 
of the primitive church without ' Roman additions,' or 
Protestant suppressions of them, realised in the Anglican 
Church.T It was the same too in 1840 and 1841.* There 
then he was in effect still on the middle path, but with 
this difference ; before 1839 he marched \along it gaily, 
after 1839 ^^ shudder ed^^. at it as an ill-omened road — 
vestigia terrent, the footprints'^of Dioscorus and his crew. 
Again, before 1839 ^^ ^^^ weighed the strength of the Roman 
position, as presenting a Church Catholic and undivided, 
and the weakness of England as being apparently in a state 
of schism ; but this weakness was more than compensated 
in his eyes by what he considered the Roman additions to 
the Creed. His mind was the same for some time after 

^ Dublin Review, April 1869, pp. 327-8. 

* Reprinted in Essays Crit. and Hist. vol. ii., with what almost 
amounts to a commentary. 

V Apologia, p. 120. 

* The ' Ghost ' appeared again towards the end of 1841 when he resmned 
his studies. 


1839 with two important modifications : (i) St. Augustine 
had taught him that a state of schism or isolation was an 
even graver matter than he formerly judged it to be ^ ; 
(2) the suspicion gradually grew upon him that Roman 
* additions ' to the Creed were not so patent an introducing 
into it of alien matter as he had once supposed. 

The following are memoranda drawn up by Newman 
during the latter half of 1844. He obviously intended them 
to serve as explanations of the change in his religious 
opinions ; but he never completed or revised them. 
They are merely hasty jottings which he did not go on 
with. Fragmentary though they are, no apology is needed 
for printing them. It should be added that some portions 
of them have been difficult to decipher, and, what is more 
serious, the order or arrangement of the material which the 
writer intended is not always clear. 


July 28, 1844. Memorandum in case of need — a rough 


Anyone who thinks well of me will easily understand 
that it would be much more pleasant to me under present 
circumstances to be silent than to speak. But I do not 
think I have a right to indulge my wishes. There are 
persons whom my conduct is likely to perplex, if it is un- 
accompanied by explanation, and they are just the persons 
whose feelings I should be most grieved to disturb. 

I believe I have no other motive in writing. I am too 
sure that I am right in the step on which I have deter- 
mined, to feel disposed on any other ground to say a word. 
I have waited till I could act without doubt or hesitation, 
I have waited in much dreariness though not in sadness for 
years — I have not waited in order at the end of that time 
to get into controversy about myself. Still, those who 
think well of me and wish me well, have a claim on me to 
say how it is I have come to hold what once I disowned, 

^ He still thought this difficulty could be met fairly and squarely, and 
attempted to do so in his article ' The CathoUcity of the AngUcan Church.' 

THE SUMMER OF 1839 r^ 

and they and their feeUngs are in most cases unknown to 
me, and couldn't be reached by any private communication. 
I cannot be ashamed that my first efforts were to support 
the Church within v.^hich I was born, or that I came to her 
system with a confidence it was true, and studied it with 
prepossessions in its favour, and accepted it with my 
heart as well as with my intellect. I was zealous for her, 
I reverenced her divines, I entered into their theory, 
ecclesiastical and theological — I admired its internal con- 
sistency and beauty. I read the Fathers through them, 
I read the history of the first centuries with their eyes. 
My object was, in what I wrote, to serve them, and their 
and my Church ; to develop their views, and to supply 
and harmonise what was wanting or irregular [he wrote 
above, ' irregular ' * faulty ' as alternatives] in them. 

But so it was, in June and July 1839 reading the 
Monophysite controversy I found my eyes opened to a state 
of things very different from what I had learned from my 
natural guides. The prejudice, or whatever name it be 
called, which had been too great for conviction from the 
striking facts of the Arian history, could not withstand the 
history of St. Leo and the Council of Chalcedon. I saw 
that, if the early times were to be my guide, the Pope had 
a very different place in the Church from what I had 
supposed. When this suspicion had once fair possession of 
my mind, and I looked on the facts of the history for myself, 
the whole English system fell about me on all sides, the 
ground crumbled under my feet, and in a little time I found 
myself in a very different scene of things. What had 
passed could not be recalled. 

I must not leave the impression that this took place in 
an instant. What my state of feeling was through the 
summer of 1839 I cannot tell. I was engaged in the 
theological controversy ^ and that of course had far the more 
prominent place in my thoughts, but toward the end of 
October my attention was drawn to the subject of the 
Donatists, in consequence of an article in the * Dublin 

* [The question of the ' Two Natures.'] 


'Review.' The English explanation I found a second time 
unequal to the facts of the case— and for a time the grave 
truth 1 that the Anglican Church is in a state of schism 
had possession of my mind. 

Yet I did not dare to trust my impression— and I 
resisted it. I trust I did so on principle ; certainly I have 
long thought it a duty to resist such impressions— If true 
they will return (St. Theresa). 

I collected myself and wrote a paper against the article 
in the ' Dublin Review ' [' On the Catholicity of the English 
Church ' which appeared in the ' British Critic ' for Jan. 
1840]. This paper quieted me for nearly two years, till 
the autumn of 1841. 

Meanwhile an important event had occurred. No. 90 
had been censured (at that time, as far as I recollect my 
doubts were as much quieted as they have been at any 
time since 1839). 

At that time, though what had happened had left 
permanent effects upon my opinions, my doubts had so far 
passed away that I could, at the Bishop's wish, repeat what 
I had said against the Church of Rome so far as this, viz. 
that I thought that there was error in it, and till that error 
was removed one could not hold communion with it. This 
indeed I was unwilling to do, not liking to commit myself 
again, with the consciousness of the chance of change in 
prospect, but I did not feel that I had any right to put a 
contingency against a Bishop's command — to confess I had 
had doubts while I made it, would have been to scatter 

(You say I have changed. I have. There is nothing 
to be ashamed of. Changes there are which carry shame, 
but why should this ? Is it any shame that being bom 
under a certain faith, I took it up and tried to maintain it ? 
that I loved the Church into whose communion I had been 
received ? that I adopted the system of its chief divines ? 
that having a Hving in it, I felt I had a charge to fulfil ? 
that being accused of inclining to Rome — and having no 

^ [The word used in the MS. is quite illegible. It may perhaps be 
' doubt,' 

THE SUMMER OF 1839 19 

consciousness that I held what our divines had not held, 
and feeling with them that there were things in Rome with 
which I could not agree, that I should say so ? Ought I to 
have held my tongue when accused untruly ? etc.) On the 
last words of my article on ' Private Judgment ' ^ compared 
with the Jerusalem Bishopric, is not that an act of schism ? 


Rough draft of a letter to a friend ^ 

October 30/44. Carissime — If I consulted my own feelings and 
habits, I should do what I have so often done when I was 
exposed to obloquy on the part of others, keep silence. I don't 
take to myself merit or demerit for such silence on former 
occasions. It is my way. I feel much indisposed to attempt 
what I despair of succeeding in. Men will misunderstand one, 
whatever one says — that is those who wiU, will, and those 
who will not, will not. Those who feel any love for a person 
will interpret his most perplexing words and deeds in a 
charitable way — and those who already think one utterly 
self-deceived, hopelessly inconsistent, and faulty and 
unsound at the hidden springs of character will put a bad 
interpretation on everything — Decipi vult populus, et 
decipiatur. I am impatient of attempts to which I despair 
of an issue. ^ If this comes from disdain it is miserable no 
doubt. But it takes up time, wearies, unsettles the mind ; 
and writing itself is a trouble, and having to arrange the 
thoughts. And then when a man vividly feels that Time 
is the great arbiter of actions and corrector of judgments, 
why should he not leave the elucidation of his thoughts and 
notions to Time ? 

' Leaving the thing to Time who solves all doubt. 
By bringing Truth his glorious daughter out.' 

And above all if he dare look forward to that Day in which 

^ [Written July 1841 ; reprinted in Essays Crit. and Hist. vol. ii.] 

* Evidently intended to be an Open Letter. 

^ Written above ' when I cannot see their utility.' 


Time will end, or if now he is able to look beyond this 
world to judgment now passing out of sight (yes now 
passed), and if the judgment within his own heart, after 
all drawbacks, gives him hopes that the unseen judgment 
is more gracious than the thoughts of men, he will feel very 
little disposed to put himself out of his way to do for him- 
self what he trusts will one day be done for him. ' Populus 
me sibilat, at mihi plaudo ipse domi,' rises in his mind 
with a Christian meaning. 

Yet there are considerations which overcome this 
sluggish habit, inclination, or by whatever better name you 
choose to call it, without laying claim to any very exalted 
charity or any very keen sympathy towards others. Surely 
one may have a conviction about what is due to certain 
persons, persons whom one has never seen, persons who 
only know one through one's writings strong and bitter [?] 
enough to make it a duty to speak now or not to have 
spoken at all. Do then what you will with this letter ; 
you have the entire disposal of it : though I shall write 
it as far as I can with the thought of an individual friend 
before me, not of my well-wishers in general, much less of 
my ill-wishers. But I do not wish my name put, for that 
would be like a call on persons to read it, whereas in an 
anonymous pamphlet it is more their own act, or they may 
excuse themselves, though there are persons of course 
whom I should wish to see it. 

Well then you know what this most distressing, awful 
confession is I have to bring out, if I can find words for 
it. Long, very long, as the subject of it has been before 
my mind, so that it might seem to have lost its fresh- 
ness — ^the contemplation of its keenness ; it is not so. And 
you will understand yourself what I would say without my 
saying it outright in my first sentence. 

It is at this time above four years since [that] a clean 
conviction rose on my mmd, from reading the early con-! 
troversies of the Church, that we were in loco hereticorum.^ 
I saw the position of the Novatian, the Arian, the Donatist, 
the Nestorian, the Monophysite, a very definite one. I saw 

THE SUMMER OF 1839 ("21 

their position, their characteristics, their acts, their fortunes : 
these were all substantially one and the same. We seemed 
to me faithfully to reflect them at this day : i.e. to be as 
like them as they are to each other. I saw they generally 
consisted of a two-fold variety, an extreme party and a 
moderate. I saw our own image reflected in the ancient 
Via Media. I saw that of [the] Church of Rome reflected 
in the severe, uncompromising, and if you will, imperious, 
peremptory behaviour of the saints of the ancient Church, 
St. Ignatius, St. Cyprian, St. Athanasius, St. Augustine, 
St. Leo. But at first I saw still more strongly the opposite 
fact ; not merely that Protestant bodies, that individuals, 
that numbers among ourselves, but, if it must be spoken, 
that our own communion, as such, was there where heretical 
churches were of old. 

It became far more certain to me that we were cut off 
from the Church [he wrote first ' in heresy and schism ' 
and then crossed it out] than that the Roman Church has 
departed from primitive doctrine [he wrote first 'erred 
in doctrine ']. I saw more in the early Church to convince 
me that separation from the great body of the Church, and 
separation from the See of St. Peter was the token of heresy 
and schism, than that the additions which that great 
body, which the See of Peter has received upon the primitive 
faith were innovations [he first wrote * corruptions ']. 
I was not so certain that they might not be developments, 
instead of corruptions, as I was certain that we were not 
in a position to know, that our Church was not in a position 
to pronounce whether they are corruptions or not. 

I ought to illustrate all this — ^but I do not know how to 
do justice to my own reasonings and impressions. They 
are past not present — the impression remains, but the 
process of argument is like a scaffolding taken down when 
the building is completed. ; I could not recollect all the 
items which went to make up my convictions, nor could I 
represent it to another with that force with which it came 
to my own mind. , Corroborations too are generally coin- 
cidences — ^resulting from distinct courses of thought or from 


the bodies of fact which require a certain frame of mind 
to appreciate, and a most extended space even to explain. 
However I will do my best. 

Now first I have very long been perplexed about these 
[ecumenical] Councils. Anglicans generally agree in 
receiving at least four— On what ground do they receive 
them ? Why do they receive the Nicene Creed ? If merely 
because it is Scriptural, then, of course, they do not receive 
the Council, as a Council, at all. They do not receive the 
Council in any other light than they receive the words of 
any private person who agrees with them in opinion. If 
as being near the times of the Apostles, this is not receiving 
the Council, else we ' receive ' St. Athanasius or St. Hilary. 
But to receive a Council is to receive it as a Council. It is 
to hold that certain kinds of Councils are infallible, and 
certain actual Councils are true. Now I cannot make out 
in what sense the Council of Nicea, Constantinople, 
Ephesus or Chalcedon are true Councils, in which that of 
Trent is not a true Council also. I seem to feel I must 
either go on to Trent or stop short of Nicea. (Draw out 
Trent "W'ith, (e.g.) Stillingfieet's or Geddes's objections to it, 
then Chalcedon by way of parallel in this way : ' There is 
a Council in which ' so and so . . . Now this is Chalcedon.)^ 

Again I cannot make out about the separate books of 
the Canon — ^why I receive e.g. Esther and not Ecclesiasticus 
or Wisdom, or (as the late Dr. Arnold speaks) part of the 
Book of Daniel. 

Again about separate doctrines, I cannot see why 
prayers for the dead are primitive, and not the Pope's 

Thus I am in the condition that I must either beheve 
all or none. And so it really is. I see no resting place for 
the sole of my foot between all and none. 

(If I must illustrate what I mean, I will take the Mono- 
physite controversy which affected me most, though I 
think the Donatist furnishes a stronger instance in point — 

* In the margin against the words in brackets he wrote * a separate 

THE SUMMER OF 1839 23 

I felt on what principle do we receive Chalcedon yet not 
Trent ? illustrated by conduct of American Church, being 
more unshackled than we, which is obliged to receive 
Nestorians. On same argument which would prove our 
Church one with Rome would prove our Dissenters one 
Church with us.) 

About at proper place how far going into extreme of 
beheving all, lest one should be sceptical as Arnold puts it. 
No — reason comes in. It is irrational to believe so much 
unless we believe more. This not the mere relief, as he 
says. . . . 


An undated fragment 

Of course I do not mean to say that all these thoughts 
came upon me at once and in their distinctness. But they 
came forcibly and pointedly enough in 1839 ^^ produce at 
the time a clear conviction of our unsatisfactory position 
relatively to Rome which I did not get rid of but with much 
reasoning and consideration, and only gradually. But 
through 1840 and the greater part of 1841 I had reconciled 
myself to things as they are among us, so far as to think 
it a duty to remain under them, and to acquiesce in the 
Anglican professions and formularies ; not indeed without 
a strong desire to find or to read them Catholice ; and on 
the other hand almost an increased anxiety to speak sharply 
against what I considered the practical corruptions of the 
Church of Rome. These two things were the two conditions 
of my feeling it possible to remain where I was ; for they 
of course who insist upon the distinction [written above 
' draw a line '] between the authoritative documents and 
the practical teaching of the Church of Rome, will, of course, 
be led to speak strongly against her teaching to account 
[written above ' as a reason '] for not joining her, and to 
interpret our own Church by her doctrines as a reason for 
\here he broke off]. 



Extract from a letter to a friend [April 5, 1844) 

[The Council of Chalcedon.] I found what surprised 
me very much. It struck me at once, but when it began 
to assume an unsetthng character I do not recollect — ^but 
I found in that history more matter for serious thought 
than in anything else I had read . . . Now I cannot bring 
together all the strange things I found . . . I found the Eastern 
Church under the superintendence (as I may call it) of Pope 
Leo. I found that he made the Fathers of the Council 
unsay their decree and pass another, so that (humanly 
speaking) we owe it to Pope Leo at this day that the Catholic 
Church holds the true doctrine. . . I found a portentous 
large body of Christians thrown into schism by this Council 
— at this day the Churches of Egypt, Syria (in part), and 
Armenia — and the Schismatics, not like the Arians of a 
rationalist [character], but with a theology of a warm and 
elevating character. I found that they appealed, and with 
much plausibility, to certain of the Fathers, as St. Athanasius 
and St. Cyril of Alexandria — that they professed to be 
maintainers of antiquity — that they called their opponents 
(the Catholics) Chalcedonians, as we call the Roman Catholics 
Tridentines. . . Further, I found there was a large middle 
party as well as an extreme. There was a distinct Via 
Media . . . and there was a large body which went on 
for some centuries without Bishops — I am writing from 
memory, but I am sure I am right in all points of consequence 
— in a word I found a complete and wonderful parallel, 
as if a prophecy, of the state of the Reformation contro- 
versy ; and that we were on the anti-Catholic side. 


The same continued 

[The Arians and semi- Arians.] I will go on with this 
part of the subject at the expense of the order of time. I 
add then that from that time to this, the view thus brought 

THE SUMMER OF 1839 25 

before me, has grown upon me. I had hitherto read 
ecclesiastical history with the eyes of our Divines, and taken 
what they said on faith ; but now I had got a key, which 
interpreted large passages of history which had been locked 
up from me. I found everywhere one and the same picture, 
prophetic of our present state ; the Church in communion 
with Rome decreeing, and heretics resisting. Especially as 
regards the Arian controversy. How could I be so blind 
before ! except that I looked at things bit by bit, instead of 
putting them together. Here was Pope Julius resisting 
the whole East in defence of St. Athanasius ; the Eusebians 
at the Great Council of Antioch resisting him, and he 
appealing to his own authority (in which the historians 
support him), and declaring that he filled the See of Peter.^ 
. . . There were two parties, a Via Media and an extreme, 
both heretical, but the Via Media containing pious men 
whom St. Athanasius and others sympathise in — ^there 
were the Kings of the earth taking up the heresy against the 
Church — ^there was precisely the same appeal to Scripture, 
which now obtains, and that grounded on a literal inter- 
pretation of its text, to which St. Athanasius always opposes 
the ' ecclesiastical sense ' — ^there was the same complaint 
of introducing novel and unscriptural terms into the Creed 
of the Church, ' consubstantial ' and ' Transubstantiation,' 
being both of philosophical origin ; and if Trent has opposed 
some previous Councils (which I do not recollect), at least 
the Nicene council adopted the very term ' consubstantial,' 
which a celebrated Council of Antioch, sixty or seventy 
years before, condemned or discountenanced. 


Continuation : April 9, 1844 

[The Donatists.] At the end of the Long Vacation 
(1839) 3- number of the ' Dublin Review ' appeared, containing 
an Article by Dr. Wiseman which made some talk in Oxford. 

^ Julius' Letter, with Newman's notes on it, can be read in the Oxford 
Library of the Fathers — Historical Treatises of St. Athanasius (published 
in 1843). It is interesting to compare the frigid character of the notes 
with the above. 


I looked at it, and treated it very lightly. Persons, who 
(I suppose) half took up our views, said we were bound to 
answer it, meaning it was a great difficulty in the way of the 
Anglican theory. I recollect saying it was ' all the old 
story ' — and would not think about it . . . but I found it, 
on careful attention, to contain so powerful an argument 
that I became (I may say) excited about it. . . The 
argument in the Article in question was drawn from the 
history of the Donatists, and was directed to show that the 
English Church was in schism. The fact to which the 
Monophysite controversy had opened my eyes, that anta- 
gonists to Rome, and churches in isolation, were always 
wrong in primitive times, and which I had felt as a presump- 
tion against ourselves, this article went on to maintain, 
as a recognised principle and rule in those same ages. It 
professed that the /ad of isolation and opposition was always 
taken as a sufficient condemnation of bodies so circumstanced, 
and, to that extent, that the question was not asked How 
did the separation arise ? Which was right, and which 
wrong ? Who made the separation ? but that the fact 
of separation was reckoned anciently as decisive against 
the body separated. This was argued chiefly from the 
language of St. Augustine, as elicited in the Donatist Con- 
troversy, and the same sort of minute parallel was drawn, 
between the state of the Donatists and our own, which I 
had felt on reading the history of the Monophysites. 



* I am surprised at your horror of our ultras — some of them are the 
very persons you would Hke if you knew them.' — Newman to Mr. Hopey 
Dec. 1841. 

No outward event of importance in the history of the 
Oxford Movement marks the close of 1839 and the following 
year. But there was one noteworthy feature in the situa- 
tion — the sudden and unexpected emergence of a new party 
or school with what were called Romanising tendencies. 
This was the school which ' cut into the original Movement 
at an angle, fell across its line of thought, and then set 
about turning that line in its own direction/ It ' knew 
nothing about the Via Media and had heard much of 

The rise of such a party was a not unnatural consequence 
of (i) the doctrinal, and (2) the religious principles of the 
Movement, especially when they encountered opposition. 

(i) The movement began at a time when Disestablish- 
ment and Disendowment seemed far from remote dangers. 
It was an attempt not to avert but to provide against such 
a crisis. The Church must stand for something or cease 
to exist. What was this something to be, if the State 
disowned her ? The Tractarians found an answer in the 
two kindred and almost forgotten doctrines of the Catholic 
Church and the Apostolic Succession. In the strength of 
these the clergy could face the worst the State might do. 
She might discharge them from her service, and leave them 
to shift for themselves ; but if they were the successors of the 
Apostles she could not deprive them of their mission. Natur- 
ally enough, when a number of men had grasped the idea of 
the Catholic Church with its fundamental note of unity, 

* Apologia, p, 163. 


there were among them some to whom the isolated position 
of their own communion presented itself as an anxious 
problem. The originators of the movement had not 
anticipated this ; but within little more than two years 
after it began there was a vague feeling of uneasiness in 
the air : 

' The controversy with Roman Catholics has overtaken 
us like ''a summer's cloud." We find ourselves in various 
parts of the country preparing for it, yet, when we look back, 
we cannot trace the steps by which we arrived at our present 
position. We do not recollect what our feelings were this 
time last year on the subject — what was the state of our 
apprehensions and anticipations. All we know is that 
here we are, from long security ignorant why we are not 
Roman Catholics, and they, on the other hand, are said to 
be spreading . . . and taunting us with our inability to 
argue with them.' ^ 

(2) The Tracts represented the doctrinal side of the 
movement : but there was another influence at work 
more potent than they. ' The Tracts,' to quote Dean 
Church, ' were not the most powerful instrument in drawing 
sympathy to the movement. None but those who remember 
them can adequately estimate the effect of Mr. Newman's 
four o'clock sermons at St. Mary's. The world knows 
them, has heard a great deal about them, has passed its 
various judgments on them. But it hardly realises that 
without these sermons the movement might never have 
gone on, certainly would never have been what it was. . . . 
While men were reading and talking about the Tracts, 
they were hearing the sermons ; and in the sermons they 
heard the living meaning, and reason, and bearing of the 
Tracts. . . . The sermons created a moral atmosphere in 
which men judged the questions in debate.' 2 

Can there have been any connection of cause and effect 
between these sermons and the party or school in question ? 
At first sight it would appear certainly not. The sermons 
treat mainly upon religious and moral subjects, and 
doctrinally they keep well within the limits of a moderate, 
one might say very moderate, high church orthodoxy. 
Then their tendency is to isolate the hearer from his sur- 

1 Newman, Tract LXXI — reprinted in Via Media, vol. ii. 
* Church, Oxford Movement, pp. 129-130, 


roundings and almost to prevent him dwelling upon them. 
It is not by them but by what he is in himself that he will 
be judged. To each man the two supreme realities are 
God and his own soul. 

The Church and her ordinances are treated chiefly as 
means of Grace for the individual soul. As for the 
distressed state of Christendom, the shattered unity of 
the Church split into three great fragments, the Eastern, 
the Latin, and the English, this comes before the mind 
not as an anxious problem, but rather as an incitement to 
watchfulness and prayer. It is a reminder of that crumb- 
ling away of Faith which is to precede the Second Coming. 
On some minds the effect of such teaching would be to make 
them withdraw within themselves and be resigned to what 
there seemed to be no escape from. But on others the 
effect would be different. The preacher was known to 
hold, though he did not obtrude them, strong views on the 
superiority of the single over the married life.^ He insisted 
much upon the duty of self-denial ; on the fearful character 
of sin, especially post-Baptismal sin, on the uncertainty 
there must always be with regard to this latter as to whether 
it had yet received pardon ; on the necessity of self- 
discipline, circumspectness, rigorous self-examination, in a 
word, of 'working out our salvation in fear and trembling.' 
By men of one religious party such ideas would be denounced 
as carnal, legal, trusting in good works, and the like. By 
those of another party they would be denounced as opposed 
to the march of intellect, gloomy and superstitious. ^ But 
there must have been some, certainly not without a 
share in the mens naturaliter Christiana, on whom their effect 
may best be illustrated by the following passage from ' Loss 
and Gain.' 

' Reding, for instance, felt a difficulty in determining 
how and when the sins of a Christian are forgiven ; he had 
a great notion that celibacy was better than married life. 

^ Church, Oxford Movement, p. 370. 

2 ' They all discard (what they call) gloomy views of religion . . . 
and are ready to embrace the pleasant consoUng religion natural to a 
polished age. . . . We are expressly told that " strait is the gate "... 
this is the dark side of rehgion ; and the men I have been describing 
cannot bear to think of it. They easily get themselves to beUeve that 
these strong declarations of Scripture do not belong to the present age, 
or are figurative,' Paroch. and Plain Sermons, i. 317-319. The Oxford 
Movement, hke all great rehgious revivals, was fundamentally a call to 


He was not the first person in the Church of England who 
had had such thoughts ; to numbers, doubtless, before him 
they had occurred ; but these numbers had looked abroad 
and seen nothing around them to justify what they felt, 
and their feelings had, in consequence, either festered 
within them or withered away. But when a man thus 
constituted within, falls under the shadow of Catholicism 
without, then the mighty Creed at once produces an influence 
upon him. He sees that it justifies his thoughts, explains 
his feelings ; he understands that it numbers, corrects, 
harmonises, completes them ; and he is led to ask what is 
the authority of this foreign teaching.' ^ 

But whether chiefly owing to the sermons at St. Mary's 
or to other causes, the important fact is that the new school 
which was rising up was as much, if not more, influenced 
by its religious sympathies as by purely doctrinal and 
polemical questions. Newman realised this, as many 
passages both in his letters and published writings show ; 
and another shrewd observer. Dr. Hook of Leeds, saw it too. 
As early as January 1840 he wrote to a friend : 

' I think that if the Rulers of the Church of England 
do not take very good care, we shall have ere long a great 
defection to Romanism. I do not fear the clergy, but 
there are young men, the generation below us, who have 
been educated in a school of transcendental metaphysics 
mingled with religion, and they require something in their 
religion which will raise the imagination. For a long 
period there was a prejudice against everything mysterious 
in religion ; the feeling now is that mystery is a priori 
evidence in favour of a doctrine. These persons see much 
to admire in Romanism. They admit its doctrinal errors, 
but they see that many of its practices are superior to our 
own ; that when men are striving for perfection they receive 
greater encouragement. Hitherto men's eyes have been 
bhnded to this, partly by Protestant lies, which, discovered, 

'} Loss and Gain, pp. 204-5. The sermons at St. Mary's certainly 
did make men discontented with the existing religious system, and turned 
their minds elsewhere. Newman felt this (see his letter to Keble, Apologia, 
p. 133) and the authorities felt it too, and did their best to keep young 
men from going to St. Mary's. It ought to have been a very serious question 
to these latter why preaching which from a doctrinal point of view might 
be described as moderately Anglican, which did Uttle more than make 
real what they themselves professed, should have been unsettUng. But 
they were not in the mood for heart -searchings. 


give strength to Romanism, and partly by assertions that 
attention to these things is superstition, trusting upon 
works, &c.; the weakness of which dogmatism is easily 
perceived. Men now see that there is good mingled with 
the evil of Romanism, and that much of what has hitherto 
been called superstition is a help to devotion. Having got 
so far as this, there will be many who will consider the 
doctrinal differences of less importance than they really are. 
Surely it is important for our rulers to bear all this in mind, 
and not only to render the Church of England sound in 
doctrine, but to do everything that in them lies, according 
to her principles, to aid men in these their high aspirings 
after perfection.' ^ 

These high aspirings exposed men ' to the danger of 
being swayed in their religious enquiries by sympathy 
rather than reason.' ^ Newman was alive to this danger,^ 
and it made him in his own case slow to move, and nerved 
him to hold others back. But while he could tug might 
and main at the reins, and keep his team of mettlesome 
young men, though kicking and plunging, stationary for 
awhile, he could not try to tiurn them aside from the high 
ideals which he set before them. 

It is not surprising if individual members of this party 
sometimes did and said wild or extravagant things. They 
were under the influence of a great enthusiasm. They had 
entered suddenly into a new world of ideas, the mutual 
bearings and proportions of which they had neither the 
time nor the opportunity to master. Then there was the 

1 Life of W. F. Hook, ii. 45, 46. * Apologia, p. 165. 

2 He was equally alive to it nearly forty years later, as the following 

letter will show : 

The Oratory, October 11, 1879. 

Dear Sir, — In answer to your question, I would observe that there is 

a great temptation, (as it is to some people) without beheving that the 

CathoUc Church is the One Authoritative Oracle of God, and the One Ark 

of Salvation, to join it merely because they can pray better in it, or have 

more fervency than in the AngUcan Church, and in consequence conceive 

a ' hope ' of becoming more rehgious in it than they are at present, whereas 

the demand which the Church of God makes on them is to believe her teaching 

as the teaching of God. We will say, perhaps they become CathoHcs ; 

their fervour after a while dies away, their faith is demanded for some 

doctrine which as yet they have not heard of or considered — and they 

stumble at it and fall away. They have had no root in themselves — 

they never have been CathoHcs in heart, because they never have had 

faith. — Very truly your?, 

J. H. Card. Newman, 


excitement of belonging to the clever party ; of fighting 
against heavy odds ; and of the sacrifice which they were 
making of their future prospects, for it was not long before 
the authorities made it clear that no good things in the 
University or the Church should come to those who were 
the disciples of Dr. Pusey and Mr. Newman.^ Naturally 
enough under such circumstances, zeal sometimes got the 
better of discretion. This was inevitable. ' There will 
ever be a number of persons professing the opinions of 
a movement party, who talk loudly and strangely, do 
odd or fierce things, display themselves unnecessarily, 
and disgust other people ; there will be ever those who are 
too young to be wise, too generous to be cautious, too 
warm to be sober, or too intellectual to be humble : of 
whom human sagacity cannot determine, only the event, 
and perhaps not even that, whether they feel what they 
say or how far ; whether they are to be encouraged 
or discouraged.' ^ 

A number of this eager and earnest body of men followed 
Newman to the end. Others, probably a large majority, 
settled down in Anglicanism ; and others, like James 
Anthony Froude and Mark Pattison, turned to Liberalism. 
All, or nearly all, kept this in common — they were thankful 
to the end of their days that at one period of their lives 
they had come under the influence of Newman. ^ 

The following letter is strictly speaking of too early a 
date for the present volume. But it would be a pity 
to exclude it on this account, for it forms a fitting intro- 
duction to the numerous letters in which Mr. Bowden's 
health is spoken of. The illness of Mr. Bowden was a great 
cloud of sorrow and anxiety hanging over Newman's head 
for the next five years. 

1 ' It became necessary to surrender tutorships, fellowships, and the 
hopes of them ; to find difficulties in getting ordained, to lose slowly the 
prospects of pleasant curacies andhvings, &c.' — Froude, Nemesis of Faith, 
p. 138. There is some exaggeration in this statement. The authorities 
were not able to deprive men already in possession of their fellowships. 

2 Newman, 'Prospects of the Anghcan Church' [April 1839], Essays 
Crit. and Hist. i. 277, 

3 ' The veneration and affection which I felt for you at the time you 
left us, are in no way diminished. ... I can truly say that I have learnt 
m.ore from you than from anyone else with whom I have ever been in 
contact. Let me subscribe myself for the last time your affectionate son 
and pupil, Mark Pattison.' From a letter written to Newman in 1883, 
quoted in Mr. Ward's Life of Cardinal Newman, ii. 182. 


S. F. Wood, to whom the letter was written, is described 
in the ' Life of Pusey ' (vol. ii. p. 396) as ' a layman of 
saintly life whose early death was deeply mourned by Pusey 
and Newman.' He died in 1843. Mr. Bowden died in 1844. 
It was over his coffin that Newman ' sobbed bitterly to 
think that he left me still dark as to what the way of truth 
was, and what I ought to do in order to please God and 
fulfil His will.' (' Apologia,' p. 227.) 

J. H. Newman to S. F. Wood, Esq. 

Oriel College : February 8, 1839. 

Charissime, — Your letter was one of the heaviest I 
ever had in my life. It was so unexpected. We do rely 
on man far more than we know ; at least I fancy I have 
taken it for granted that a long course of usefulness was 
reserved for Bowden. And now, when the possibility 
of another course of things is suggested, I «^eem, what I 
ought not to do, almost to give up all hope. What a most 
dreadful stroke is this for Mrs. Bowden — I mean only the 
idea or prospect — I have written to her a few lines. If I 
might be earnest about anything which does not concern 
me, I would plead most strongly for his going abroad 
at once — ^What has happened is a warning, they should 
make up their minds to go abroad for three years. It does 
us good when the first warning is past and over. Do urge 
this, if you agree with me. The sea always does him good. 
Naples I should think would be just the place for him and 
them ; it is dry and bracing. I fear Rome would be re- 
laxing. I feel the hope suggested by what you say about 
his general ill health — and after all there are very various 
complaints of the lungs, some much more serious than 
others — e.g. Mrs. Pusey has two distinct complaints in 
distinct places — one is getting well — the other (and worse) 
not. I think this news has brought home to me, more than 
anything else, how in the midst of life we are in death. It 
is as if one were standing in a fight, and anyone might be 
shot down. 


I long to see you. Whether we have an election at 
Easter none of us know. If you do not come then, I shall 
hope for Whitsuntide. 

Love to R. Williams, who has sent me a very nice little 
book this morning which I rejoice to see — pray thank him. 

Ever yours most affectionately, 

John H, Newman. 

P.S.— Can you get for me from Williams the name and 
direction of the Carver of the Littlemore Eagle ? 

J. H. Newman to S. F. Wood, Esq. 

Cholderton : In Fest. S. Mich. 1839. 

My dear Wood, — I hear very disappointing accounts 
of your health — and should some time or other like to know 
how you are. I saw Bowden two days before he went, and 
for what I know Rogers saw him off. He was most 
strikingly better than when you last saw him — almost quite 
himself. They were all in good spirits, and had done their 
packing. Mrs. Ward was there and had been helping — 
and Johnson too. This was on Wednesday. On Friday 
morning at ten o'clock they were to embark at Blackwall ; 
and are to be at Falmouth to-morrow. I am pleased to 
think they must have had very fair weather all down the 
Channel. This [is] all I have to tell you of them, I believe. 

R. Williams has led me to look into Dr. W.'s new 
article in the Dublin. I have not studied it, much less 
referred to his authorities — ^but I do not deny that it requires 
considering and has a claim upon us for an answer. I will 
not at all, if possible, act unfairly by it — but think he 
must bring out the whole, before anything is done on our 
part. What I very much fear is our all not keeping together, 
though moving on the same road. Accident of one kind 
or other occasions this or that person to anticipate a truth 
to which others are advancing also — and his anticipating 
it throws others back. There either is something in what 
Dr. W. says, or there is not. If not, all will reject it — if 


there is, all will accept it, i.e. at length. I think one feels 
very diffident about one's own judgment — as if it required 
some exceeding moral perspicacity to be warranted to 
accept doctrines beyond what one's Church admits — 
whereas, it being a clear duty at first sight to accept what 
she enjoins, it were allowable, without any great claim to 
illumination, to defend these. I feel confident that, if 
Dr. W. turns out to prove an3rthing, great or little, Keble 
will eventually see it — and am glad, as well as bound, to 
wait to see what he says. It is more likely that he should 
be right than my own judgment. On the other hand, going 
by my own judgment, even granting, which I do not exactly 
see, that Dr. W.'s argument is good on the one side, yet 
that same judgment tells me of arguments good on the 
other. I almost fear I may give you an appearance of 
taking this too seriously — ^but I write on, since I have pen 
in hand, and from first impressions, which are just the very 
worst in a matter which depends on an examination of facts 
and reasonings. 

Mozley and my sister are very flourishing. He is full 
of plans, and, I hope, will be persuaded to take up the 
subject of the Poor Laws, and other portions of Political 
Economy. I went down to Rogers for a day when in 
London — he is very well, but his eyes the same. He has 
seen an amusing French Priest at Rouen, with whom he 
had some interesting conversation about Henry Wilberforce. 
— I am going to the latter worthy next Friday to stay till 
the nth when I return to Oxford — 

Ever yours. My dear Wood, 
John H. Newman. 

The Dr. W. of this letter is, of course, Wiseman, and the 
' article in the Dublin ' the celebrated one on the Donatists. 
It was Robert Wilhamsi who fastened Newman's attention 
on the words of St. Augustine quoted in the article, but 
which had escaped his observation, ' Securus judicat orbis 

* For an interesting account of him see OUard's Short History of the 
0/fford Mov»m§nt, pp. 63, 64 (footnote). 


terrarum.' He was a source of much anxiety to Pusey 
and Newman. ' As to R. W./ wrote the latter to Pusey m 
January 1840, ' I have resigned him in my mind some 
time . . . since I read Dr. W/s article I have desponded 
much ; for I have said to myself, if even I feel myself 
hard pressed, what will others who have either not 
thought so much on the subject, or have fewer retarding 
motives/ And some months later : ' R. W. is stationary at 
present ; but what is to be done with a man who begins 
with assuming as a first principle . . . that the Roman is 
the Catholic Church/ ^ Williams did not remain stationary, 
and did not realise the fears of his friends, but swung back 
to a robust Protestantism. It is presumably he to whom 
Serjeant Bellasis refers in the following memorandum. 

' J'^^y ly 1S50. — Called on Robert Williams ... I had 
not seen him for some time, and did not know how he 
might be affected by the occurrences of the last few months. 
He thought there was no divine authority save the Bible 
. . . the disturbance now making about Mr. Gorham's 
opinions was absurd. . . . The Roman Catholic Church, 
he was convinced, was coming to an end, it must fall, it 
was clearly foreshown in the Revelations. He had been 
reading a work on Prophecy by Mr. Elliott, which was in 
his judgment irresistible ; it was in four volumes. '^ In spite 
of his changes he preserved Newman's friendship — ' My 
friend, an anxiously religious man, now, as then very dear 
to me, a Protestant still/ ^ 

J. H. Newman to J. W. Bowden, Esq. 

Oriel College : Nov. 4, 1839. 

My dear Bowden, — I have written you a letter, and find 
it is too heavy for the Marseilles post — so I begin again. 
We have heard with great pleasure of your safe arrival at 
your destination ; and I congratulate you on your progress 
towards health and strength, and Mrs. Bowden on the 
miseries of the voyage being over. 

The chief thing I have to tell you concerns Morris of 
Exeter, whom perhaps you know, perhaps not. He is a 

^ Pusey 's Lije, ii. 152-3. 
" Memorials of Mr. Serjeant Bellasis, p. loi. 
Apologia, p. ri6. 



most simple minded conscientious fellow — but as little 
possessed of tact or common sense as he is great in other 
departments. He had to take my Church in my absence ; 
I had not been one Sunday from Oxford till lately since 
October 1838. I had cautioned him against extravagances 
in St. Mary's Pulpit, as he had given some specimens in 
that line once before. What does he do on St. Michael's 
day but preach a Sermon, not simply on Angels, but on his 
one subject for which he has a monomania, of fasting, nay 
and say it was a good thing, whereas Angels feasted on 
festivals, to make the brute creation fast on fast days. 
So I am told — May he (salvis ossibus stiis) have a fasting 
horse the next time he goes steeple chasing. Well this was 
not all. You may conceive how the Heads of Houses, 
Cardwell, Gilbert etc. fretted under this — but next Sunday 
he gave them a more extended exhibition si quid posset. 
He preached to them totidem verbis the Roman doctrine of 
the Mass, and, not content with that, added in energetic 
terms that every one was an unbeliever, carnal, and so 
forth, who did not hold it. To this he added other specula- 
tions of his own, still more objectionable. This was too 
much for any V.C. — In consequence he was had up before 
him — his sermon officially examined, and he formally 
admonished, and the Bishop written to. Thus the matter 
stands at present. The Bp. is to read his sermon — and 
I have been obliged to give my judgment on it to him — 
which is not favorable, nor can be. I don't suppose much 
more will be done but it is very unpleasant. The worst 
part is that the V.C. has not said a single word to me, good 
or bad, and has taken away his family from St. Mary's. 
I cannot but hope he will have the good sense to see that 
this is a mistake. I wish all this kept secret, please, for it 
is not known even here. 

Matthison has just called on me. It seems that the 
Bp. of London is intriguing to hinder the Church Cate- 
chism from being a sine qua non in the National Schools^ 
and that the Bp. of Exeter in another way is playing so 
strange a game, people cannot make out what he is at. 


The waters are rising so fast, that though they destroy the 
Church Catechism I think the ^(9o9 of it will come in with 
the schoolmasters, whoever they are. Jeffreys is appointed 
training Master of the Gloucester School, and Wilson is to 
be of the London — but so strong an opposition is being made 
by Mr. Close, that it is feared it will end in both of them 
withdrawing. I am almost sorry you hindered Lewis from 
accepting the Oxford Mastership (if it was you) as we want 
one badly. 

The authorities of this place are said to have returned 
very much frightened about the spread of Apostohcity, — 
but they cannot stop matters now. The only fear is of 
persons going too far. You should read the late article 
in the Dublin — it is the best thing Dr. Wiseman has put 
out. It is paralleling the English Church to the Donatists 
and certainly the parallel is very curious — the only question 
is whether Augustine's notions are Catholic on this point 
— he certainly does seem to make for Dr. W. — The papers 
say that the question of mixed marriages is coming on in 
Russia — and that the Emperor has sent off the Catholic 
Clergy to Siberia. Other accounts (improbable) are that 
4,000,000 Catholics have gone over to the Greek Church. 
There was a curious document in the papers the other day 
in the shape of a firman of the Porte — I was struck by 
observing that it called the Romans and not the Greeks 
Catholics. . . . 

J. H. Newman to S. F. Wood, Esq. 

Oriel : November lo, 1839. 

My dear Wood, — I have stupidly written the enclosed 
on half a sheet, and have so miserably written it that you 
will be plagued by reading it. But, please, read it — and 
if you think it advisable, send it on. 

I don't know what to do about the direction not knowing 
where R.W. is. I direct it at a shot — and the people in 
Birchin Lane can redirect it. I would leave it to you, but 
am not sure how far you would like to appear in the matter. 


I heartily wish you were better and stronger in health. 
I congratulate you on your Anti-Eras tian hit. People 
are getting stronger you see without knowing it. Soon 
they will be swimming in hot water — and it will do no good 
to say ' Take me out,' when parboiled. 

The steam is getting up here. By bad luck some one 
(Morris) in my absence has been preaching the Roman 
Mass (by accident) in my pulpit — by bad luck the V.C. 
heard it, and he has taken it [up] officially and reported 
it to the Bishop. This is a secret. Two of our ' House ' 
or ' Hall ' men have just got on foundations, to my great 
satisfaction — Pattison and Christie. The former would 
not have stayed up in Oxford but for the House. And 
but for it I should not have known the second. We are 
somewhat scant of inhabitants at this moment. 

Faber of Magdalen has been chosen by V.C. to preach 
Guy Fawkes Sermon, as being a moderate man ; and he 
has preached in favour of the Apostolical movement ^ and 
defended praying for the dead, or at least those who prayed. 

The Provost is hard at his Bamptons, meanwhile — and 
' hushed in grim repose, expects his evening prey.' 

Ever yrs. affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

The ' House ' or ' Hall ' referred to in the above letter 
was a house taken by Pusey or Newman, where young men 
who had taken their degree could reside. They lived in 
common, rent free, each, however, paying a small sum 
for his board. They were employed on the Library of the 
Fathers and other literary projects connected with the 
movement. Newman, in a letter to Bowden thanking him 
for a donation to the house, jokingly calls the inmates ' our 
young monks.' J. B. Mozley in one of his letters described 
it as a 'reading and collating estabhshment.' It was a 
short-lived institution, for it closed when the last inmate, 
J. B. Mozley, was elected fellow of Magdalen in 1840.2 

1 I.e. The Tractarian Movement. 

2 Newman's Life and Correspondence, by Miss Mozley, i. 223 ; Pusey's 
Life &c. i. 339 ; Mark Pattison's Memoirs, pp. i8o fi. ; Letters of J. B. 
Mozley, pp. 78 and 94. 


'When I got back to Oxford in October 1839, it so 
happened there had been occurrences of an awkward 
character, compromising me both with my Bishop, a.nd 
also with the authorities of the University' ('Apologia/ 
pp. 127-8). One of these ' occurrences ' must have been 
Mr. Morris's sermons on the Mass and on Fasting ; another 
was * Bloxam's Escapade.' ^ 

On Nov. 18 the Rev. W. Dodsworth wrote to Newman 
to the following effect. He had heard in Staffordshire that 
Newman's curate, Mr. Bloxam, when on a visit to Dr. Rock 
at Alton Towers, had attended service in a Romish chapel, 
and like other worshippers bowed down at the elevation of 
the Host. So many falsehoods on such matters were re- 
ported that his natural instinct would be to discredit the 
story though it came to him on what seemed good authority. 
So great a departure from what is ' Catholic,' and even 
' honourable ' in a clergyman of the Church of England 
should not be believed except on the admission of the 
person implicated. The writer had to confess to some 
alarm at the feelings manifested in certain quarters. Some 
young men seemed almost prepossessed in favour of Roman- 
ism. It reminded him of the feeling prevalent among the 
Low Church clergy a few years ago, that the nearer they 
approached to dissenting methods the better. Of course 
he did not speak of his fears to others, but he felt that he 
might do so to Newman. 

John Rouse Bloxam lived on till 1891, so all reference to 
his ' escapade ' was omitted in Miss Mozley's ' Letters and 
Correspondence of Cardinal Newman' published in 1890. 
But the editors of the present volume do not feel that they 
are showing any want of respect to the memory of one of 
Newman's staunchest friends by bringing it to light now, 
when people are more likely to be amused at the fuss which 
was made over the affair than shocked at its happening. 
Perhaps Mr. Bloxam during the years 1840-1845 was some- 
what of an extremist, for he is found corresponding with 
Phillipps de Lisle on the subject of Reunion. If such he was, 
he only illustrates the fact that many of these extremists 
eventually settled down as Anglicans. 

Mr. Dodsworth, on the other hand, who became a 
Catholic in 185 1 after the Gorham Trial, may be taken to 

^ This is how Newman in later years docketed his correspondence 
with the Bishop of Oxford on this subject. 


illustrate the corresponding fact that the majority of the 
converts were not men who in their Anglican days had said or 
done very startling things. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. W. Dodsworth 

Oriel College : November 19, 1839 

My dear Mr. Dodsworth, — I hasten to answer your 
friendly letter, and in a way less satisfactory than your 
kindness would desire, yet better than my own fears. 

I was aware Mr. Bloxam had been at Lord Shrews- 
bury's ; the idea that he had bowed down at the elevation 
of the Host had not entered my mind for an instant, tho' he 
told me he had been in the Chapel. 

On the receipt of your letter I went and asked him 
about it. He gives me the following account which I have 
taken down from his mouth. 

* I went into the Gallery of the Chapel every day morning 
and evening and said there our Morning and Evening Service 
for the day according to our Book of Common Prayer. After 
Morning Service I used to stay some time on my knees, 
during which the family came in and had Service in which I 
took no part. This Service, on the Friday, and the Friday 
only, was Low Mass ; in which I took no part either, but re- 
mained just as on other days without changing my posture.' 

I did not think to ask him, but no doubt, had I done so, 
he would have added, ' I had no intention whatever of 
bowing down to the Host.' 

In consequence of your letter, I have written to our 
Bishop — quoting without your name your words, and 
Mr. Bloxam's explanation as given above. 

Of course this is a very unpleasant occurrence, but I fear 
that I must expect some or other in one or other quarter for 
some little while. I fully sympathise in what you say about 
the temper of some younger men. I suppose the case is 
simply this, that we have raised desires, of which our Church 
dpes not supply the objects, and that they have not the 
patience, or humihty, or discretion to keep from seeking 


those objects where they are supplied. I have from the first 
thought that nothing but a quasi miracle, would carry us 
through the trial with no proselytes whatever to Rome— 
and, though I shall fairly have to bear my share in them, 
shall not feel surprise, nor I trust self-reproach at what is 
not my doing. 

I am truly sorry to hear you have passed through Oxford, 
and I away. I have been away only a week at one time, 
and a fortnight at another since Christmas. 

Yours very sincerely, 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to the Bishop of Oxford 

November 19, '39. 

My dear Lord, — I feel much grieved to have to trouble 
your Lordship so soon again on an unpleasant subject,^ 
which I find myself obliged to do. 

I received this morning a letter from a friend in London 
containing the following enquiry : 

' When I was in Staffordshire this Autumn I heard on 
what appeared to me unquestionable authority that your 
Curate, Mr. Bloxam, when on a visit to Dr. Rock at Alton 
Towers, had attended a service at the Romish Chapel, 
in which, like the other worshippers he bowed down at the 
Elevation of the Host.' 

I accordingly have inquired of Mr. Bloxam, who, I 
was aware has been at Lord Shrewsbury's in the summer, 
and he gives me the following account which I have written 
down from his mouth. 

* I went into the gallery of the Chapel every day, morning 
and evening and said there our Morning and Evening Service 
for the day according to our Book of Common Prayer. 
After Morning Service I used to stay sometime on my knees, 
during which the family came in and had Service in which 
I took no part. This service, on the Friday and Friday 
only, was Low Mass in which I took no part either, but 

^ There must have been some correspondence on the Morris afiair. 


remained just as on other days without changing my 

I do not know what I have to say more than this, to 
bring what to me is a very distressing occurrence before 
your Lordship, and am etc. 

J. H. N. 

The Bishop of Oxford to J. H. Newman 

November 25, 1839. 

My dear Sir, — I much regret the information which 
you felt obHged to give me in your letter of the 19th, respect- 
ing your Curate, Mr. Bloxam. 

I feel, however, that it is a matter at present resting 
between yourselves. 

If from any apprehension of Mr. Bloxam really having 
a propensity towards Romanism, or from the great indis- 
cretion he appears to have shown at Alton Towers, you 
think he has acted in a manner unbecoming a Minister of 
our Protestant Church, and therefore as one whom you 
could not with comfort to yourself, employ as your Curate, 
the proposal of separation should come from yourself, and 
it would only be in the event of your Curate's refusal to 
resign his Curacy that the Bishop's aid or interference 
would be necessary. 

Believe me. 

My dear sir, faithfully yours, 

R. Oxford. 

P.S. I shall be at Canterbury to-night. 

J. H. Newman to the Bishop of Oxford 

December g, 1839. 

My dear Lord, — I am very sorry to find from Dr. Pusey 
that I have been careless enough to misunderstand your 
Lordship's note in answer to mine on the subject of Mr. 
Bloxam, and that you are expecting an answer from me. 
I write at once to apologise for it. 


Understanding that your Lordship did not intend to 
take up the case yourself, and since I had no view myself 
of Mr. B/s conduct but that it was an unfortunate in- 
discretion (which is your Lordship's view of it) and one 
which I was sure would not be repeated, I thought the 
matter was at an end. 

I brought it before your Lordship simply because I 
did not like anything to happen connected with St. Mary's 
of a certain character at the present time, without your 
being put at once in possession of the facts. I wish to look 
on myself as merely your Lordship's delegate in the parish, 
not mentioning indeed common occurrences for that would 
be giving your Lordship trouble which it is my very business 
to take from one who has the care of so many Churches, 
but not letting anything pass which I think you would like 
to know. I ought to have reflected that I had not yet 
expressed my own opinion of the occurrence and that you 
seemed to ask it. 

I did not write to your Lordship from any annoyance 
of feeling with Mr. B., and I did so with his full concurrence. 
I am much attached to him (two words illegible). I have 
no serious fault to find with him, though I much regret the 
conduct in question. He is a most valuable Curate to me. 

He shall write to your Lordship himself and he will 
both gladly and cheerfully submit to whatever you think 
fit to be done. 

Yours etc., 

J. H. N. 

The Bishop of Oxford to J. H. Newman 

Blithfield : December 26, 1839. 

My dear Sir, — It is long since the receipt of your last 
letter, and I did not at first think it required an answer, 
at least, not an immediate one, although there were points 
upon which I should have wished some time or another to 

Shortly after I heard from Mr. Eloxam himself, and to 


that letter I have as yet sent no reply, for I have really 
for sometime past been hampered by so great a pressure 
of business that I have had no leisure. A note from Dr. 
Pusey, on Sunday night last, informed me that Mr. Bloxam's 
late indiscretion, and my disapprobation, were preying 
upon his mind. I now therefore take the first opportunity 
since I left Oxford of recurring to the subject. 

With regard to Mr. Bloxam, although I think he might 
have given a more detailed explanation than his short letter 
contains, I am quite willing to consider his feeling and 
expression of sorrow for what took place at Alton Towers, 
as tantamount to a recorded assurance that nothing similar 
either there or elsewhere, shall occur again. Had it occurred 
in my own Diocese, or had it been more generally known, 
my present course would have been less easy — and here, 
my dear Sir, let me entreat you to exert your own high and 
influential name among a numerous body of the Clergy, 
and young men destined for orders who look up to you, — 
to discourage by every means in your power indiscretions 
similar to Mr. Bloxam's, or any little extravagances, the 
results of youth, — harmless perhaps in themselves, but 
which, I am sure, when they occur, and are known, tend 
to retard the progress of sound and high Church principles 
which you would inculcate. You will I feel confident 
forgive my speaking so frankly on this head. 

And now with regard to your last letter to me on the 
subject, you must allow me to say a few words, because I 
think you have rather mistaken the rule on which an In- 
cumbent should act, in regard to referring matters to his 
Diocesan. He ought, I conceive, to make up his mind 
with respect to cases which may occur, to the best of his 
judgement, and to be prepared to render an account cf his 
proceedings to the Bishop if called on, but it seems hardly 
fair to throw the responsibility of acting or not on the Bishop, 
when the Incumbent has abready determined in his own 
mind what course he should take. If such a practice were 
general, what a burden would be thrown on the Bishop, 
more especially as his judgements must be formed on the 


statements submitted to him by the Incumbent, and this 

in regard to matters on which he might afterwards be 

required to decide as Judge. I am led to this statement 

of my opinion by the expression in your letter that you 

wished to look upon yourself merely as my delegate in 

the parish. 

After this letter I, perhaps, need hardly write to Mr. 

Bloxam, at the same time should it be any relief to his 

mind that I should, I will, upon hearing from you or himself, 

do so. 

Believe me, etc. 

R. Oxford. 

J. H. Newman to the Bishop of Oxford 

Oriel : January 5, 1840. 

My dear Lord, — Mr. Bloxam joins with me in thanking 
you very much for your kind letter. I have waited to 
acknowledge it, hoping he would have enclosed a note from 
himself. But the plain fact is that he is in a very delicate 
state of health, to say the least, and this occurrence has 
quite upset him. He has made an attempt to write to 
your Lordship, but could not please himself. I think it 
will end, much against my wish, in his retiring from the 
charge of Littlemore. 

I can assure your Lordship that my efforts neither are, 
nor have been, wanting in keeping younger men from the 
indiscretions to which you allude ; but I feel obliged by 
being reminded of the duty of making them. 

I will do in future as your Lordship wishes about bringing 
things before your Lordship which happen in my parish. 
As the Archdeacon advised me to write to you at once on 
the subject of Mr. Morris before having heard from you 
I thought you would wish me to do so in like manner now. 
I knew your Lordship was in Staffordshire, I thought you 
were very likely to hear the report, and would wish to know 
what the state of the case was. I did not know (I say it 
quite unaffectedly) whether your Lordship's view of the 


matter would be the same as I took myself. I was prepared 
to act on your Lordship's whatever it might be, I did not 
like to give my own uncalled for. I had not the most distant 
intention of relieving myself of responsibility. 

Yours etc. 

J. H. N. 

The Bishop of Oxford to J. H. Newman 

Blithfield : Monday, January 6 [1840]. 

My dear Sir, — I must trouble you with one more line 
to thank you for your letter received this morning, and to 
request you will beg Mr. Bloxam to dismiss from his mind 
all idea of the necessity of writing to me ; I am quite satisfied, 
and very much regret to find this business has had so un- 
comfortable an effect upon his health and spirits. 

With regard to yourself My dear Sir, I trust you did 
not in any degree misunderstand my letter. I stated what 
I conceived to be the ordinary rule respecting the course 
between an Incumbent and Diocesan in cases where it might 
be necessary to act, but be assured it will always give me 
pleasure to hear from you, and to have the most unreserved 
of friendly communications. 

I am, Dear Sir, 

Faithfully yours, 

R. Oxford. 

J. H. Newman to J. W. Bowden, Esq. 

Oriel College : January 5, 1840. 

My dear Bowden, — The best wishes of this season and 
the New Year to you and all yours. I have had two letters 
from you, for which I am much obliged, and the account 
they give is very satisfactory. May He who has helped us 
hitherto, lead us on still. 

I followed Johnson's instructions implicitly about the 
direction of my letter. I now will follow yours. I hoped 
to have written before this, but have been very busy. 


I believe I did not tell you the sequel of the Morris affair. 
The V.C. (very kindly in manner) officially admonished him. 
There you would suppose the matter would end. But not 
so. Against the rule of the Canons a double punishment 
was inflicted for the same offence. The V.C. wrote to the 
Bishop, who wrote to me ; and then came a letter (very 
kind) from the Bishop to Morris, and that at last ended the 
affair. But since that a worse matter has risen ; which 
I think I have this very day closed in a letter to the Bp. 
at least I hope so. Dodsworth in the beginning of November 
wrote to ask me whether it was true that Bloxam my Curate 
had paid a visit to Alton Towers (Lord Shrewsbury's) and 
had there attended Mass, and prostrated himself at the 
elevation of the Host with the other worshippers. I knew 
that he had been to Ld. S's and he had told me, with some 
misgivings that he had been into the Chapel — so this 
frightened me much. On asking him about it he gave me 
this [in re mala) satisfactory account. ' I went into the 
gallery of the Chapel morning and evening to say the 
Prayers for the day from our Common Prayer Book. After 
going through them, I used to remain some time on my 
knees. In the course of this latter time, the family came 
in and service was performed. On the Friday was Low Mass. 
I took no part whatever in it, but remained in the posture 
I was as before.' He seems to have gone to the Chapel as 
a Consecrated place when there was no other place to go 
to. But it [was] very indiscreet certainly. I thought it 
best at once to write to the Bp., who has done nothing, 
but is scarcely pleased at my having brought the matter 
before him. Bloxam is sadly cut up and has let it prey on 
his mind. I suppose it will end in his giving up the Curacy, 
much against my will. He quite agreed with me that the 
Bp. ought to be written to. All this is not known in 
Oxford, but I have expected to see it continually in the 
Record or Christian Observer. But so many lies have been 
told about us that even they perhaps will be tired of 
believing it. 

The said Observer has got milder lately. I suppose it 


finds it is overshooting the mark. Mr. Taylor,^ I think, 
is destroying himself and his cause by proving too much. 
I have not read his fascicuh yet, but I see he talks of the 
Nicene Fathers having the brand of Apostacy on their 
foreheads. It is curious to find that the lawyers and laity do 
not take to Mr. Taylor but the Clergy do — for why ? because 
the doctrine of celibacy touches the latter much more 
closely. Put aside all Mr. Taylor's gross misrepresentations, 
this is the real hitch at bottom. Mr. Todd's ' Sermons on 
An ti- Christ ' etc., have at last appeared, and seem to be 
both bold and seasonable. Not Mr. Taylor, but Dr. Wise- 
man seems taking the lawyers — so I hear. Indeed his 
last article comparing us to the Donatists has taken in 
quarters where I should not have expected it would excite 
an interest. Indeed he has fixed on our weak point, as 
Keble's Sermon, Manning's Rule of Faith, and my Lectures 
on his. (By-the-bye they none of them have attempted an 
answer to this part of the subject.) It is plainly necessary 
to stop up the leak in our boat which he has made, if we 
are to proceed. This I have attempted to begin to do in an 
article in the January ^.C. on the ' Catholicity of the English 

The new volumes of the ' Remains ' ^ are selling 
excellently. The preface by Keble is much liked. I 
suppose we shall have Fraser's Magazine picking out 
what it will call disloyalty and sedition. Old Faussett 
started half off his seat when he heard of new volumes, 
as if he should say ' Why, I annihilated Mr. F.'s writings 
last year — ^what is meant by the absurdity of continuing 
them ? ' 

I am publishing the ' Church of the Fathers.' It makes 
me very anxious. I have not put my name to any strong 
thing yet — and this is regularly strong meat. I suppose 
I must expect a clamour, unless persons are tired of 

^ Author of Ancient Christianity and the Doctrines of the Oxford Tracts 
for the Times — published in parts 1 839-1 842 : and of Spiritual Despotism. 
2 I.e. the second part of Froude's Remains. 



Mr. Spencer the R.C. Priest is coming here to-morrow 
on a visit to Palmer of Magdalen. Those men, who are not 
called ' the party/ may do anything. Dr. Rock was here 
not long since, and Hamilton feted him. But then he is 
not one of the party either. 

Pusey is at Brighton ; his children are not at all better. 
He is pretty well, at present he is very much bent on estab- 
lishing an order of Sisters of Mercy, (I despair somehow, but 
I always croak) and is collecting information. 

At this point, where Newman put aside his letter for 
three days, something may be said about Dr. Todd's 
' Sermons,' or, to give them their proper title, ' Discourses 
on the Prophecies relating to Antichrist,' &c., and why 
they were ' bold and seasonable.' Dr. Todd allied himself 
with Dean Maitland in England in attacking the prevailing 
opinion, over which the Protestant world was, perhaps, 
more nearly unanimous than upon anything else, that the 
Church of Rome was the communion of Antichrist. It 
would be a mistake to regard this grotesque and horrible 
idea as a mere curiosity of polemical literature. For 
centuries it was fervently believed in, and lived up to ; 
perhaps nowhere more than in Ireland. It was still in 
possession in 1840, and real courage was required to attack 
it. Newman had imbibed it in his youth, and, so he tells 
us, it stained his imagination for a long time after it lost 
its hold upon his intellect. He had, of course, abandoned 
it long before 1840 ; but he recognised that it was a real 
obstacle to the spread of Tractarian principles. For 
this reason he welcomed Dr. Todd's ' Discourses,' and made 
them the basis of an article in the British Critic on the 
* Protestant Idea of Antichrist.' ^ Maitland and Todd 
traced the idea back to the disreputable sources in the 
Middle Ages, from which the Reformers derived it . Newman 
only went back a few years. Who had revived the idea, 
when it was growing obsolete, and given it a new lease of 
life ? This fearful duty of once more fixing the seal of per- 
dition on the greater part of Christendom seemed to have 
fallen to a very amiable, but exceedingly comfort-loving 
and preferment -hunting eighteenth-century bishop, ' whose 
most fervent aspiration (as revealed in his frank and 

^ Reprinted in Essays Crit. and Hist. vol. ii. 


engaging autobiography) apparently was that he might 
ride in a carriage and sleep on down, whose keenest sorrow 
was that he could not get a second appointment without 
relinquishing the first, who cast a regretful look back at 
his dinner while he was at supper, and anticipated his morn- 
ing chocolate in his evening muihns/ There was a great 
deal in the article of a more serious character than the 
sketch of Bishop Newton ; but nothing that was so Hkely 
to stick in the memory of its readers. It must have been 
a relief to many persons who had been brought up in Evan- 
gelical homes to learn that they were free to consider 
the tenet in question on its own intrinsic merits, without 
being overawed by the grave and reverend character of 
its champions. 

Letter to J. W. Bowden, Esq., continued 

Jan. 8. — Mr. Spencer called on me to-day under the 
following circumstances. He had come it seems to Oxford 
to see us, and Palmer had asked me to dine to meet him. 
I considered, however, that he was in loco apostatae, one 
who had done despite to our orders etc., etc., so I declined, 
giving that reason, namely that I could have no familiar or 
social intercourse with him. After various remonstrances, 
and fruitless plans on Palmer's part. Palmer asked whether 
I should object to his calling on me. I said that I had no 
right to entertain the idea of putting him to that inconveni- 
ence, but if he would, I should be glad to see him. So he 
came with P. and sat with me an hour. I wish these R.C. 
priests had not so smooth a manner, it puts me out. He 
was very mild, very gentlemanlike, not a controversialist, 
and came to insist only on one point, that we would take 
steps to get Anglo-catholics to pray for the R.C.'s. He said 
he was sure that if we felt the desirableness of unity, and 
if we prayed for each other, where there was a will there 
would be a way, etc., etc. He said that he had been instru- 
mental in beginning the practice in France, that it had 
spread all over that country, and was now being taken up 
in Germany — Thursday being the day fixed on. It is 


certainly a most dreadful thing that we should be separated 
from them — but your account of the Southern Churches, 
makes one almost feel as if a formal union would do no good. 
If we could make strong terms with them so as to act upon 
them, that would be the thing. He called on Routh and 
had a similar talk with him. 

Since I began this letter I have had a most kind letter 
from our Bishop in answer to mine, which has put Bloxam 
in good spirits — but I think it will still end in his ultimately 
retiring from Littlemore. Thank you for the £50, which 
I will lay out in the best way I can, as you shall hear. 

They say there is no doubt the Conservatives are coming 
in — -the Bp. of Exeter says, before the end of 3 months. 
He says also that they will be out by the end of 6 years, and a 
radical Government succeed them — and that their business 
meanwhile is to * make way,' and to do all they can to meet 
the storm, as by building Churches, etc., etc. The Quarterly, 
you will see, is persisting in its Apostolical, though cold, 

You know Reginald Copleston (of Exeter College) a 
very good fellow, is to be the new incumbent of Barnes ; 
the Dean of St. Paul's presenting him. Mr. Close and Co. of 
Cheltenham clamoured so much about H. Jeffreys' appoint- 
ment to the training school at Gloucester that he was obliged, 
though appointed by the Bp. to withdraw. Well I hear 
to-day that at last they have got a young fellow of Lincoln, of 
the name of Atkinson, who is one of our translators ^ ! In like 
manner they refused Copeland here, and have got a man who 
{ex ahundanti cautela) had been a semi-Bulteelite — but who 
it turns out is now rapidly coming on to Apostolical opin- 
ions. In London they are still unprovided. (They say 
the Bp. of London is warning about us.) To return to 
Lincoln, after rejecting James Mozley for a fellowship two 
years since for his opinions, they have been taken in by 
Pattison this last term, an inmate of the Coenobitium. 
He happened to stand very suddenly and they had no time 
to inquire. They now stare in amazement at their feat. 

^ For the Library of the Fathers. 


Christie too another of our inmates, has been elected off on 
the Mitchell Foundation Queen's — so we are run short of 
monks, and hardly know what to do. 

Thank you for your amusing account of your Italian 
friend. Kindest thoughts of the season to Mrs. Bowden 
and the children. 

Ever yrs. affly., 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to J. W. Bowden, Esq. 

Oriel College : February 21, 1840. 

My dear Bowden, — I will not let the day pass over, 
without showing you, what you will not doubt, that I am 
thinking of you upon it, and that I wish to repay the kind 
thoughts which I know you are giving me. Your last letter 
was a very comfortable one about yourself, and I hope you 
continue to go on as well as it promised. 

I have got into a desponding way about the state of 
things, and I don't know why quite. Right principles are 
progressing doubtless, but it seems as if they were working 
up to a collision with Puritanism, which may split the 
Church. I fear the Bps. are not so favorable : but one 
fancies. What I said in my last was that the Bp. of L. 
wavered about us, which was good — but I have lately heard 
that the Bp. of Ripon was about to show some distrust in 
Tot? irepl Hook. But this is a secret — also I am not quite 
sure that Hook himself is not getting frightened ; but this is 
another. Here, the authorities are getting more and more 
cold and averse, I fear — though it may be fancy in me to say 
so. I fear too that some persons will turn Roman Catholics, 
up and down the country ; indeed how is this possibly to 
be helped as things are ? they will be right in their major and 
wrong only in their minor^ — right in their principles, wrong in 
their fact — they seek the true Church, but do not recognise 
the Church in us. 

As to Bloxam you must not be hard upon him — he is an 
exceedingly good fellow. He has been so annoyed at this, 


that it quite preyed on his mind, and I fear for his health, for 
he is in a very deHcate state — he has given up Littlemore, 
and Copeland is to be my Curate, i.e. during Lent. I am 
going up to lodge there to see how things are going on. 

I like your idea of an article on the position of our 
Church in the Mediterranean very much — but perhaps I have 
apprehensions of a suffragan at Malta. You see even the 
Christian Knowledge Society has shown a disposition to 
meddle with the foreign Churches, to substitute our Liturgy 
for theirs, etc., etc. I hardly see how a Bp. at Malta could 
escape this. On all sides our misery is this, that we have not 
the Catholic ?}^09 — in consequence, one dare not hardly move 
— there is almost a certainty of some absurdity or sin being 
the consequence. This feeling has almost made me despon- 
dent and sluggish — as if nothing co^ild be done. Pusey at 
present is very eager about setting up Sisters of Mercy. I feel 
sure that such institutions are the only means of saving some 
of our best members turning Roman Catholics, and yet I 
despair of such societies being 7nuch externally. They must 
be the expansion of an inward principle. All one can do is 
to offer the opportunity. I am sceptical too whether they 
can be set up without a quasi vow. 

As to Dr. Wiseman's article I do not think you have hit 
the point of it. It made a very great impression here, and 
to say, what of course I would only say to such as your- 
self, it made me for a while very uncomfortable in my own 
mind. He maintains first that the present look of Christen- 
dom is such, that St. Austin or St. Basil coming among us 
would say at once ' That is the Catholic Church — and those 
are the heretics,' meaning Rome and us respectively — and 
next the said Fathers and all the Fathers teach that that 
' look ' of things was ever meant to be a providential note, in 
order to save argument ; without going into the question 
who excommunicates, Vv^hen, etc., etc., I frankly confess I 
cannot deny either of his positions — that the Fathers wotdd 
at first sight so judge of us — or that they did so teach. My 
article was to meet this, and I am glad to hear in many 
quarters that it has done good service. But the great 


speciousness of his argument is one of the things which have 
made me despond so much. My ' Church of the Fathers ' is 
now finished, and, I suppose, will be out in the course of 
a week. It is in duodecimo but far too thick — about 400 
pages, which are equal to oct"'" pages. It is the prettiest 
book I have done — which is not wonderful, being hardly more 
than the words and works of the Fathers. Good part of it 
is translation and abstract. I have no notion how it will 
take, as I have been obliged to give out the Fathers* views 
about celibacy and miraculous power. 

The Duke of Wellington is said certainly to be break- 
ing up — and the Wintle ^ party are already canvassing 
for the Duke of Buckingham as Chancellor. Which will 
be miserable but the chance is they are successful as [some 
words illegible'] were in the poor Duke's case. What a 
wonderful thing it is, and what a strange reproach to the 
nation that for the last ten years the Duke should have 
done nothing. Considering his great influence with Euro- 
pean Powers, it is like infatuation that the country should 
not have availed itself of what will never come again ; 
it was part of our purchase by twenty years of bloodshed, 
and now it is thrown away. Dukes of Wellington are not 
to be had for the asking. Is it not sad what the papers say of 
the Queen ? when she is wiser, she will repent when nothing 
remains of the Duke but his name. 

I was told that Mr. Spencer expressed himself quite 
puzzled why I would not dine with him ; so I wrote him 
a letter about a fortnight since, which he has not answered, 
perhaps from fear of getting into controversy. I merely 
said, that it was useless for them to attempt amicable inter- 
course between themselves and us, while their acts were 
contrary, while they allied themselves to Dissenters and 
Infidels, and were plotting our ruin — the voice was Jacob's 
voice, but the hands were the hands of Esau ; that he did 
not come as an individual R.C. but as a priest, on a religious 
purpose, etc., etc. 

Ward of Trinity has been trapped by Mr. Sewell of 

1 [This word is not quite certain.] 


Magdalen (apropos of the publication of the Magdalen 
Statutes) into the absurd step of sending the latter a 
challenge. Mr. S. seems to me to have behaved very badly 
— Ward very well, after the first step. He has apologised 
&c., &c., in the fullest way. The matter is before the 
V.C. who gives his judgment to-morrow. The University 
Punishment is bannitio, but no one can tell what hannitio 
means. Amotio is expulsion, and the idea of rusticating 
a man who is living at Headington does not seem satis- 
factory. I am going up to Littlemore in about lo days. 
Our Provost's Bamptons have not begun. We are having 
bitter frosts, the glass 30 in my room when there is not a 
fire. They are very acceptable ; the wet has been excessive. 

Kindest thoughts to all yours. 

Ever yrs. affly., 

J. H. N. 

From this time Newman began more and more to reside 
at Littlemore. He threw himself into the work of cate- 
chising the village children, and seems to have been extra- 
ordinarily successful in it. But this phase of his life has 
been fully described in Miss Mozley's ' Letters and Corre- 
spondence/ &c. 

G. R. M. Ward of Trinity, who must not be confused 
with W. G. Ward of Balliol, the author of the ' Ideal,' &c., 
was a man of pronounced views and of a combative disposi- 
tion. He was also smarting under the sense of a personal 
grievance, for he had been obliged to relinquish his Fellow- 
ship on his refusal to take Orders. In 1839 he had pub- 
lished a ferocious pamphlet under the title of ' An Appeal to 
the Bishop of Winchester, Visitor of Trinity College, Oxford, 
on the Misappropriation of the Endowments of that Society, 
with Hints towards a History of the '' Poor Man's Church 
in Oxford." ' The ' Appeal ' was followed up by a translation 
of the ' Statutes of Magdalen College,' intended to be the 
first of a series of similar translations, which would be the 
means of 'enabling public opinion, no less than the consciences 
of interested individuals, to canvass the question how far 
any aberrations of practice (i.e. departures from the inten- 
tions of Founders) are justified or unallowable under the 
changes of times and manners.' 


Mr. Ward's zeal for the ' Intentions of Founders ' 
proved infectious, and he was accused of violating them by 
publishing the Statutes. ^ 

It is difficult to imagine Mr. Ward and Newman having 
anything in common. Nothing would be more repugnant 
to the feelings of the latter than the idea of the colleges 
being summoned before the tribunal of public opinion, this 
said pubhc opinion being informed by translations of Statutes 
without note or comment. Nevertheless the two men seem 
to have been good friends. Newman did not wish people 
to be too hard on Mr. Ward, and Mr. Ward, even in his most 
truculent moods, would go out of his way to express his 
admiration for Newman. 

Mr. Ward's grievance was that Fellowships and Scholar- 
ships were lavished upon men already possessing a com- 
petency instead of being reserved for indigent students. He 
does not seem to have troubled himself much with the reli- 
gious ideals of the Founders. The Tractarians and their 
friends wished to go back to the Intentions of Founders in 
rehgious matters also. A movement in the direction of con- 
servative reform, in which James Hope took a leading 
part, had already been initiated at Merton. Newman 
must have thought that the translation of the Magdalen 
Statutes was a good opportunity for calling attention to 
the question, for he suggested to Mr. Hope that he should 
make them the subject of an article in some magazine. 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

Jan. 31, 1840. — I was exceedingly pleased and obliged 
by your prompt answer. Whether your article appears in 
Quarterly or British Critic ^ is a matter for your own judg- 
ment. It depends on what your article is to be, and 
whether the Quarterly likes to meddle with the subject. As 
to my own notion it would be this : that the subject of our 

^ According to Mr. Ward's own account, in his preface to his translation 
of the Statutes of All Souls, published in 1841, his version of the Statutes 
of Magdalen was attacked ' both as a breach of the law of the land, and 
as a work at variance with a good conscience.' He goes on to recount how 
the authorities of Magdalen attempted legal proceedings against him, which 
broke down at a very early stage. 

- Newman was editor of the British Critic. 


Statutes was at this moment uninteresting to the Quar- 
terly s public, and that there has lately been a review in 
the Q. on the subject, whereas the public one wishes to 
interest was the University and clerical public, viz. to put 
words in their mouths against assailants, and to suggest 
hints to those whom it concerned. And now you know 
my meaning you shall decide. 

I do not think your anticipating your book ^ is of any 
consequence. I should have thought it would interest 
persons in the subject, and prepare them for your book. 
And I could have fancied it might have improved your 
book. Both these effects have taken place in my own 
experience. But you are judge. 

As to time I have no right to be strict. . . . Let me 
repeat my thanks. You put it to me to say whether the 
object is important. I cannot help thinking it is, now 
that Magdalen ^ wishes to move, and will be a precedent to 
other bodies — yet one does not like to take the responsi- 
bility of saying so. Is it not important ? 

Ever yours, etc. 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

Feb. 3, 1840. — I was pleased to think that R. Palmer 
was likely to have a share in your work, or rather sure. 
There can be no doubt I suppose, that he would feel it 
desirable to reform. It seems to me a great point to try 
to bring persons to contemplate the possibility of coming 
back to the Statutes, and not to rule it that conformity 
is impossible, as people are so apt to do. All things must 
have a beginning — therefore it does not follow that literal 
obedience must at once be attempted, because it is desirable. 

As to Wilberforce he seems deep in the subject, and is 
unwiUing to part with the books. He must, of course, if 
they cannot be purchased in London. . . . 

You must not be severe with Ward. He is a con- 
temporary of mine at Trinity, a fellow scholar, and does 
me the unmerited honour of thinking me one of the few 

* Mr. Hope was preparing a book On Colleges. He never published it. 
2 Can Magdalen be a slip of the pen for Merton ? 


Catos or Scipios in the University. So it would be most 
ungrateful in me to attack him. And besides, he really 
has a number of good points. 

Yours very truly, etc. 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

My dear Hope,— Bandinel tells me as follows :— ' It 
is not a Laudian MS.,^ but came into the Bodleian Library 
among Rawlinson's Collections. It is certainly official, 
tho' it cannot be ascertained from what quarter it was 
stolen ; I say official, because it has some documents sub- 
sequent to the Foundation added to it, and regularly 
attested by a Notary Public' He thinks it of greater 
authority, if I understand him right, than any other copy. 
The College (I think he said) had lost their original, and 
so had the Visitor. He showed it to me ; and it seemed 
of very considerable age. There are corrections upon it, 
as if it had been compared with some other copy. 

I am obliged to you for the trouble you are taking. . . . 
As to your suggestion, long ago many of my friends have 
been desirous of a Clerical Chancellor, etc. 

Newman then goes on to discuss Mr. Hope's idea of a 
Clerical Chancellor. He was evidently much taken with 
it, and suggested the Bishop of Salisbury ; but not without 
hesitation. * I should be afraid that one would never know 
where to find the Bishop/ He was ' a man to put forward 
and patronise men much less sound than himself.' It 
has not been thought worth while to print this portion of 
the letter. Projects which were never realised have little 
interest, except so far as they illustrate, like the hopes of 
bringing back the Colleges to the ideals of their Founders, 
how full of confidence and enterprise the Tractarians were 
before the catastrophe over Tract 90. The freedom with 
which Newman in this and other letters unbosoms himself 
to Mr. Hope and the confidence which he already had in his 
judgment are striking. Mr. Hope was his junior by more 
than ten years ; and their friendship had only just begun. 

The postscript to the above letter is a trifle which seems 
worth preserving. 

* The MS. of the Magdalen Statutes which Mr, Ward had used. 


P.S. — Rogers was going quietly to bed, when Eden, 
who had already been knocked down once, came and begged 
him and Church to consent to be knocked down again 
with him. It was late at night — the young men had left 
the street — the Proctors were retiring. Accordingly they 
went out, were surrounded by the mob, thrashed soundly 
with bludgeons, and came in again. There was literally 
no one object, either assignable or accomplished, for their 
going out, except that of being knocked down. 

On February the 2ist, and again on the 25th Newman 
wrote to Hope discussing the question of the Chancellorship. 
Pusey was against the Bishop of Salisbury, and the merits 
of other Bishops were discussed. On March 7 Newman 
received the proofs of the article on the Magdalen Statutes. 
Mr. Hope had been very severe on Ward. 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

March 7, 1840. 

Your parcel just come. Many thanks indeed for the 
great trouble you have taken. I am on the point of setting 
off to Littlemore, where, Bloxam being at home from his 
father's illness, I shall be some weeks. I shall send your 
paper to the press forthwith. ... I have looked through 
it. It seems very good and interesting. You are severe 
on Ward, but you are a better judge than I am of the ne- 
cessity of being so. I shall see it in proof as weU as you — 
and will suggest if there is any minor alteration necessary. 

On March 13 Newman again wrote to Mr. Hope. He 
wished in his editorial capacity to say something to soften 
the effect of Mr. Hope's strictures on Mr. Ward. On 
March 19, having carefully studied Mr. Hope's article, he 
wrote to him praising it most enthusiastically. 1 The article 
was published in the April number of the British Critic. 

The last was not yet heard of Mr. Ward. To Newman 
in his capacity of editor of the British Critic he wrote a 
letter which was too indignant for publication. Newman 
rephed in the next number and had to make a concession 

1 See Memoirs of J. R. Hope-Scott, vol. i. p. 190. 


upon one point which Mr. Ward had a right to regard as 
important. He had to admit that a passage in which the 
Founder seemed to prohibit the pubUcation of his Statutes 
might admit of Mr. Ward's interpretation, and refer, not 
to the Statutes, but to other documents. Mr. Ward rephed 
the following year in his preface to a translation of the 
' Statutes of All Souls.' He was rejoiced ' to find that there 
is no ground, save matter of mere opinion, for a dispute 
between himself and a gentleman whom, from long acquain- 
tance, he regards with the highest esteem and respect, and 
reveres as one of the chief leaders of the most healthful 
and happy movement in the cause of true religion since the 
Reformation.' Newman must have winced at this implied 
comparison between himself and the Reformers. From the 
editor Mr. Ward turned to the writer of the article, and had 
a good deal to say about him. But the subject may be left 
here. The fact that the publication of the Statutes of a 
College engendered so much heat is interesting ; but the 
rights and wrongs of the controversy are not ; and, moreover, 
they could only be dealt with by an expert. 

J. H. Newman to S. F. Wood, Esq. 

Littlemore : March lo, 1840. 

My dear Wood, — It is an age since I have seen your 
handwriting ; and, since I have questions to ask, I hope 
to elicit it. 

Bloxam has long wished me to interfere in the school 
here — and since he is now summoned away by his Father's 
illness (by the bye he is leaving Littlemore to my great 
sorrow and regret) I have come up to try to mend matters. 

I think you can get me some practical information and 
suggestions too. 

What is thought of the system of monitors ? What is 
thought of masters taking private or independent pupils ? 

I want to be put in the way generally — what the daily 
lessons should be, etc. 

We have about 30 boys and girls, each. Have you not 
some outline engravings which you could recommend ; or 
if not on the Society's list, yet which I could get. I want 


a cheap Edition of Overbeck, etc. Can you give me any 
hint about music and psalmody ? Any hint of whatever 
kind will be valuable, though I fear I can do little sub- 
stantial while my present mistress continues, who was taken 
as being wife of the master and is a very incompetent person. 

I have no news to tell you about Oxford — Right views 
and practices are spreading strangely ; nor do I think with 
you that they tend to nothing more than rubricism. Yet 
I am not the less anxious on that account. Anglicanism 
has never yet been put to the test whether it will bear life ; 
it may break to pieces in the rush and transport of existence, 
and die of joy. 

You had better direct to me at Oxford, if you have 
anything to say. Tell me some London news. 

Ever yrs. affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 

The following is the rough draft of a letter to some one 
who seems to have taken exception to the following passage 
in the sermon on * Secret Faults,' presumably on account 
of its affinity to the Catholic doctrine of Purgatory. ' Nay 
even to the true servants of Christ, the prospect ^ is awful. 
"The righteous," we are told, "will scarcely be saved." 
Then will the good man undergo the full sight of his 
sins, which on earth he was labouring to obtain, and partly 
succeeded in obtaining, though life was not long enough to 
learn and subdue them all. Doubtless we must all endure 
that fierce and terrifying vision of our real selves, that last 
fiery trial of the soul ^ before its acceptance, a spiritual 
agony and second death to all who are not then supported 
by the strength of Him who died to bring them safe through 
it, and in Whom on earth they have believed.' ^ 

J. H. Newman to a Correspondent 

Littlemore : April 15, 1S40. 

Dear Sir, — Thank you for your kind and frank note. 
I have referred to the passage of my sermon (on ' Secret 
Faults ') and send you the following explanation of it. 

^ I.e. of the Last Day. * j Qq^ jjj j^. 

^ Parochial Sermons, i. 48. 


I consider Scripture expressly tells us that the secrets 
of all hearts will be openly disclosed at the last day, i Cor. iv. 
5 [vide also i Cor, iii. 13). But, if disclosed, to whom if 
not to the individual himself ? and again, if thus disclosed 
to him it will be a most fearful and trying disclosure. 

This is indeed a deduction of my own, but I signify it 
to be such by the word ' doubtless.' 

I conceive everyone has a right to make his own 
inferences from Scripture, provided they are not such as 
to contradict what is directly revealed doctrine. 

As to the particular deduction made in the passage in 
question, I have said the view of ourselves at the last day 
will be terrifying, but as to those who on earth have duly 
believed in our Lord, it will be without harm, as they will 
be supported by His strength ; however that to others it 
will be a second death. I have considered that the mention 
of fire in i Cor. iii. 13 shadows this out among other things. 
Has that text no meaning ? 

My sermon was written in 1825, fifteen years hence. I 
hold to its awful view still, and wish it was more impressed 
upon my heart. 


The reader will find himself constantly reminded of 
the closing words of this letter. The fear of judicial blind- 
ness, the punishment of some * Secret Faults ' seems to have 
been constantly present to Newman's mind during the 
last two years or so of his Anglican life, and held him back. 
See especially the letters to Keble in 1843. 

The following is the rough copy of a letter to some 
correspondent who found things that shocked him in 
Newman's recently published ' Church of the Fathers.' 

J. H. Newman to a Correspondent 

Oriel College : May 21, 1840. 

My dear Sir, — I should gladly have replied to your 
kind note before this, had I more command of my time. 
It gave me much pleasure to find that the ' Church of the 
Fathers ' was not unacceptable to you — that there are 


things in it which you or others may wish away I can easily 
believe and should be very inconsiderate not to anticipate. 
Indeed I have frequent evidence of it from the candid state- 
ments of friends such as your own. What I find, however, 
is that persons whom I respect or value, while they all 
perhaps object, do not agree, or rather conflict with one 
another in their objections, and, though this does not show, 
nor do I take it to show, that I am therefore undeserving of 
criticism, yet it does make it hopeless to attempt to alter 
what I have written with a view of pleasing others, and 
seems to leave me at liberty to go by what I think truth in 
opinion and historical fact. 

I am led to say this from your observing that ' I do 
not know how many really thoughtful men ' I ' offend and 
alienate by some of my statements.' Certainly I do not 
know their numbers, but on the other hand I know perfectly, 
(if one must appeal to results), that I gain ardent and 
superior minds by the very things by which persons to 
whom you allude might be offended. Men are so variously 
constituted that we cannot appeal to expediency in this 
matter. I utterly despair of pleasing all persons, and find 
that, as I conciliate one, I offend another. I find this 
daily — I find I have to unlearn the habit, natural (I suppose) 
to most of us, of trying to please people. I have no mis- 
giving in declaring what many probably will not believe 
of me, that I do not love paradox or wish to startle people. 
I am more and more convinced that the business of all 
of us is to be honest, and to court no one — and to leave 
the course of things to itself, or rather to higher guidance. 

Another thing which somewhat hardens me against 
such friendly remonstrances as yours, is this — that from the 
time when my friends and I began to write on the subjects 
to which the ' Church of the Fathers ' relates, we have 
been exclaimed against, reprobated, and followed. If you 
had our experience of the indignation and horror which 
has been the process through which men have been per- 
suaded and converted, how they protested against points 
which can now be quietly assumed as first principles, how 


we were accused of intemperance and rancour for writings 
which are now blamed as plausible, artful, and affectedly 
dispassionate, you would not wonder that I cannot help 
anticipating that some persons who just now are startled 
at the ' Church of the Fathers ' may end in allowing its 
statements, if not in approving them. The newest Tract or 
volume has always been the indiscreet one, and our last point 
but one has been that at which we ought to have stopped. 

As to St. Gregory's address to St. Basil, and my remarks 
upon it, I assure you there are persons who have been much 
taken with those pages of my book, who see in them no 
' sneer * at our Church, who feel in them nothing repugnant 
to their Anglo-catholic principles. Indeed, I should have 
thought that what is there said was in accordance with 
your own views, viz. that Invocation of Saints, though 
not abstractedly wrong, has been proved by experience 
to be dangerous. At the same time surely it is a great 
principle of our Church, as expressed in the Canons of 
1603, that ' usum non tollit abusus ' ; whereas to urge the 
abuse against the use is the very ground of the Puritans, 
which Hooker is at such pains to invalidate. Scripture 
is as silent about kneeling at the reception of the Elements 
or crossing in Baptism, as about making mention of the 
saints, after St. Gregory's manner ; on the other hand in 
our daily service we say, ' O ye spirits and souls of the 
righteous, O Ananias, Azarias, and Misael, bless ye the 
Lord,' which would seem to show that there are invocations 
which are not Romish. 

As for celibacy does not the notion that it is not a holier 
state than matrimony tend to Pelagianism ? Does not 
the conclusion that it is, follow from the words of the 
Article, ' Concupiscence has the nature of sin ' ? and what 
is the meaning of ' In sin hath my mother conceived me ' ? 

I am, etc., 

John H. Newman. 

The ' address to St. Basil ' (three years after his death) 
ran as follows : ' This, O Basil, to thee from me 


But O, that thou, divine and sacred heart, mayest watch 
over me from above, and that thorn of my flesh, which 
God has given me for my discipline, either end it by thy 
intercessions, or persuade me to bear it bravely ! and 
mayest thou direct my whole life towards that which is 
most convenient ! and when I depart hence mayest thou 
receive me into thv tabernacles ! ' ^ 

The comment on this ' address ' in which Newman's 
correspondent fancied he saw a sneer at the Church of 
England is omitted in later editions of the ' Chiurch of the 
Fathers '; it was as follows : 

' The English Church has removed such addresses 
from her Services, on account of the abuses to which they 
have led ; and she pointedly condemns what she calls 
the Romish doctrine concerning Invocation of the Saints 
as *' a fond thing " ; however, Gregory not knowing what 
would come after his day, thus expresses the yearnings 
of his heart, and as we may suppose, at the time he thus 
made them public had already received an answer to them.' 

Newman, so long as he was an Anglican, set his face 
against direct invocations of the saints. It was, in his 
eyes, a practice not to be adopted, even in private devotion, 
without the sanction of Authority. 

J. H. Newman to J. W. Bowden, Esq. 

Oriel College : June 28, 1840. 

My dearest Bowden, — I am truly glad to hear from 
Manuel [Johnston] of your arrival. In anticipation of 
your arrival I have arranged to come to town next week 
(about July 6) and must pass a day or some hours with you. 
I shall be partly at Westmacott's, partly at R. Williams's. 
On Tuesday next I go to Derby ; if you v^ite me a line 
direct, ' J. Mozley, Esq., Friar Gate, Derby.'— J. M. and 
my sister H. are there at present. 

So you are back — God be praised. Rogers is going 
this winter. He is not so well quite as one should like. 

I have various things to tell you, which I shall reserve 
till we meet. C. Marriott, who is viriting opposite to me, 
desires kindest remembrances. 

1 • 

Church of the Fathers,' Hu^t. Sketches, ii. 75. 


I will give you some account of some of your Tracts. 

I Edn. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 

No. 5. 1000 1000 1000 750 1000 1500 1500 

No. 29. 1000 500 750 1000 1000 1500 1500 

No. 30. 1000 750 1000 1000 1500 1500 

I have made a table of all of them and their editions. 
The Tracts have cleared £300 this last year. 

Kindest thoughts of your wife and children^ all blessings 
be with you. 

Ever yrs. afHy, 

J. H. Newman. 

In June, 1839, Newman wrote to Bowden : ' We sold 
altogether about 60,000 Tracts last year.' 

J. H. Newman to S. F. Wood, Esq. 

Oriel : September 6, 1840. 

My dear Wood, — Your sketch was very satisfactory. 
Pusey much approved it. He has marked two passages, 
I think, for correction — which perhaps you had better look 
to yourself. I hardly agree with him. In one you speak of 
Fronde's views as influencing the writers of the Tracts. 
Now Pusey of course ought to be excluded — ^but as to the 
anonymous writers it is quite true — and I could not consent 
to it not being said. The other is where you prophecy that 
the English Clergy will fall back again upon the Rubrics — 
I should think it a great pity to omit that passage. But, 
since Pusey perhaps thinks it is not sanguine enough, per- 
haps you could put in a sentence or a clause, saying * we 
hope otherwise, etc., etc' 

I want you to review Hope's speech ^ in the House of 
Lords for the British Critic and give a sketch of the history 
of the struggle. Some record should be made of it, and it will 
soon be forgotten if not done at once. You are one of the 
few persons who can do it. 

My love to R.W. and thank him for his kind and 

1 On Anglican Chapters. See Hope-Scott's Life. 


comfortable letter, which I hope he did not expect me 
to acknowledge. 

Pusey is returned better and more cheerful than I have 
seen him many a day. 

I have been sadly pressed with the B.C. this quarter. 
At one time I almost thought I should have to write | of it 
myself — but the prospect brightens — and T.M.i I hope will 
come to the rescue. The said T.M. has 20,000 bricks in his 
Church yard, and his people are dispersed over the plain 
gathering flints; he being in the act of rebuilding his 

I am glad to hear so good an account of yourself. As 
to Shuttleworth,^ I suppose we shall have some episcopal 
Charges from him aimed at certain things. 

Ever yrs. affectionately, 
John H. Newman. 

P.S. — I will send you MS. when and whither you direct. 

The following letter introduces us to one of the most 
valued of Newman's friends and advisers for over a quarter 
of a century. Edward Lowth Badeley, Q.C., was educated 
at Brasenose College, Oxford, taking his degree in 1823. In 
1841 he was called to the Bar. As a lawyer he devoted 
himself almost wholly to ecclesiastical cases. He was one of 
the counsel employed by the Bishop of Exeter in the Gorham 
case. In 1852 he became a Catholic. He lived almost the 
life of a recluse in his chambers, devoting himself from 
' that time exclusively to the solution of the various legal 
difficulties attending the administration of Roman Catholic 
trusts and charities.' ^ He was the friend — ' a man about 
my own age, who lives out of the world of theological con- 
troversy and contemporary literature, and whose intel- 
lectual habits especially qualify him for taking a clear and 
impartial view of the force of words,' — consulted by Newman 
about the adequacy of Kingsley's apology for the insulting 
remarks in Macmillan's Magazine. If he had ruled Kingsley's 
amende satisfactory, the ' Apologia ' in all probability would 
never have been written. Newman dedicated his ' Verses on 

1 Thomas Mozley. ^ Bishop of Chichester. 

2 Gtnthman's Magaiine, v, 6x8 (1868). 


Various Occasions, to Badeley, wishing it to be ' the poor 
expression, long-delayed, of my gratitude, never to be inter- 
mitted, for the great services which you rendered me years 
ago, by your legal skill and affectionate zeal, in a serious 
matter, in which I found myself in collision with the law 
of the land/ 

J. H. Newman to E. L. Badeley, Esq. 

Oriel : September i6, 1840. 

My dear Badeley, — I fear you have thought me neglect- 
ful of your kind note. Till I saw Hope I was not quite 
certain whether ' Temple ' would have been enough of a 
direction — he has given me more. 

It pleased me not a little to read what you said of that 
Sermon — which relates to a very large subject, of which it is 
but a part. I have been trying from time to time to work 
it out but not to my satisfaction. Should I ever do so, the 
Sermon might appear as part of a whole. The volume I 
am going to publish is to be on a particular line of subjects, 
with which it would not fall in. 

Do not think I do not value your suggestion or advice, 
and shall not be grateful for it at any time, because I do not 
avail myself of it now. 

A pleasant tour to you — -pray try to make Hope under- 
stand he must take care of his health in Italy, and that if 
he rambles about he had better stay at home. 

Yours very sincerely, 
John H. Newman. 

The volume of sermons about to be published must 
have been ' Parochial Sermons,' vol. v., the preface to which is 
dated October 21, 1840. The particular sermon to which 
the letter refers must have been ' Implicit and Explicit 
Reason,' i which was preached ' on St. Peter's Day, 1840.' 

^ University Sermons ^ No. XIII. 


Quae ignorabam interrogabant me 

The year 1841 was as eventful as the preceding one had 
been uneventful ; for it was the year of Tract 90, and the 
ill-starred Anglo-Prussian Jerusalem Bishopric. 

The editors have not in their hands many important 
letters written by Newman in connection with Tract 90 
which have not already been published either by Miss 
Mozley or in the ' Life of Dr. Pusey/ but there are many 
of considerable interest which he received ; and from these, 
chiefly, a selection has been made.^ 

Tract 90 was published on February 27, 1841. Like 
its predecessors, with one or two exceptions, it was anony- 
mous. But the veil of anonymity was so thin that every- 
one in Oxford must have seen through it. On March 8, 
four senior Tutors addressed to the Editor of Tracts for 
the Times, ' i.e. Newman, a not very happily worded letter — 
there was a tone of self-conscious correctness and modera- 
tion about it — in which they expressed their apprehension 
that the Tract had a highly dangerous tendency and their 
feeling that some one should avow himself responsible for 
it. In giving specimens of the grounds of their apprehe^ision 
the}^ betrayed such an entire misunderstanding of the scope 
of the Tract, that it might almost seem pardonable to 
suspect that every one of the four, feeling confident that 
the other three had studied it, omitted to do so himself. 
It is, of course, certain that none of them was competent 

^ All the official documents connected with Tract 90, viz. the Tract 
itself ; the Letter of the Four Tutors ; the Censure of the Tract ; New- 
man's Letter to the Vice-Chancellor after the appearance of the censure ; 
the Letter to Dr. Jelf ; the Letter to the Bishop of Oxford, are reprinted 
in Via Media, vol, ii. 


to pronounce an opinion. A novel and complicated piece 
of critical research, such as was Tract 90, cannot be mastered 
by the most practised intellect in the space of eight days. 

Copies of the letter were at once put in circulation. It 
was obviously the opening of a campaign. Two days 
later, on March 10, the Vice-Chancellor, Dr. Wynter, brought 
the Tract and the Letter of the Tutors before the Hebdo- 
madal Board. On March 12 Newman, with the rapidity 
that he was capable of in an emergency, vindicated the 
Tract from the misinterpretations of the Tutors, and cut 
away the ground of the impending censure, in his Letter 
to Dr. Jelf. This was submitted to Dr. Jelf, and sent to 
the press the following day. On March 15 the Hebdomadal 
Board, refusing to wait for the publication of the Letter to 
Dr. Jelf, condemned the Tract. On March 16 Newman 
entered in his diary, ' Hebdomadal Act came out early in 
the morning. My letter to Dr. Jelf came out at midday. 
Dined in Hall.' On the same day he publicly acknowledged 
himself the author of the Tract in a courteous letter to the 

If the Hebdomadal Board, instead of being in such a 
hurry to strike, had condescended to wait a few hours for 
the promised vindication of the Tract, they might have been 
saved from doing a very foolish thing. There were two 
important facts which they could have learned from the 
Letter to Dr. Jelf. The first was that the writer of the 
Tract had a good deal to say in his defence ; the second, 
that he was not a wanton disturber of the peace, merely 
unsettling people's minds. The members of the Board 
acted under the impression that the Tract was designed to 
foster Romanising tendencies. It never occurred to them 
to ask whether these tendencies had not passed the stage 
in which they needed fostering, and whether a toleration 
of the views put forward in Tract 90 might not be the best 
means of restraining them. ' No one,' lamented Dr. Pusey, 
nearly a quarter of a century later, ' can tell how much the 
subsequent history of the Church of England might not 
have been altered, had the respite of the few hours [needed 
for the publication of the Letter to Dr. Jelf] been granted.' ^ 
Equally severe, though not a lament, was the judgment 

1 Tract XC . . . with Historical Preface by the Rev. E. B. Pusey, &c. 
First pubUshed in 1866. The above is quoted from p. xiii of the edition 
of 1903, 


passed by Frederick Oakeley on the blindness of the Heb- 
domadal Board : 

' Had the Oxford authorities been far-sighted enough to 
take Dr. Newman for their guide, and allowed Tract 90 to 
do its intended work without molestation, I do not say they 
would have prevented the subsequent conversions to the 
Church, but they might have indefinitely retarded them. 
Thank God who ordered it otherwise.' Newman realised 
what the authorities were too heedless to know, ' the depth 
in the yearning [in the minds of many] after Rome : and 
. . . that the best way to encourage this yearning was to 
close up, without necessity, the interpretation of the 
Articles.' 1 

The thesis put forward in Tract 90 may be summed up 
in a dictum, current at the time, to the effect that the Articles 
were patient hut not ambitious of a Catholic interpretation. 
The writer of the Tract insisted, with a distinctness which 
severely taxed the forbearance of many of his friends and 
supporters, that the animus of the Articles was uncatholic, 
that they were the product of an uncatholic age, that they 
were not intended to inculcate Catholic doctrine ; but 
having admitted all this, he maintained that they were of 
deliberate purpose so framed that it might be possible for 
men having Catholic leanings to subscribe to them without 
doing violence either to their own consciences, or to 'the 
literal and grammatical sense ' of the Articles. 

To quote his own words : ' Their framers constructed 
them in such a way as best to comprehend those who 
did not go so far in Protestantism as themselves. Anglo- 
Catholics are but the successors and representatives of 
those moderate reformers ; and their case has been 
directly anticipated in the wording of the Articles. It 
follows that they are not perverting, they are using them 
for an express purpose for which among others their authors 
framed them.' He then proceeds to illustrate this by the 
history of the 28th Article. ' In the beginning of Elizabeth's 
reign a paragraph formed part of this Article ... in which 
the Real Presence was denied in words . . . Burnet observes 
on it thus : 

'"When these Articles were first prepared by the con- 

1 Popular Lectures. ' Personal Reminiscences of the Oxford Movement,* 
Lect. II, p. 9 [1855]. 


vocation in Queen Elizabeth's reign, this paragraph was 
made part of them. . . . But the design of the government [the 
itahcs are Newman's] was at that time much turned to the 
drawing over the body of the nation to the Reformation, in 
whom the old leaven had gone deep ; and in no part of it 
deeper than the belief of the corporeal presence of Christ in 
the sacrament ; therefore it was thought not expedient to 
offend them by so particular a definition in this matter ; in 
which the very word Real Presence was rejected." ' 

The concluding words of the Tract were : * The Pro- 
testant confession was drawn up with the purpose of 
including Catholics ; and Catholics now will not be excluded. 
What was an economy in the Reformers is a protection to 
us. What would have been a perplexity to us then, is a 
perplexity to Protestants now. We could not then have 
found fault with their words ; they cannot now repudiate 
our meaning.' 

It seems perfectly clear that if the history of the Articles 
was as Newman describes it, his method of interpreting 
them was unassailable. But, as will presently be shown, 
the history of the Articles was far from being his only 

One may here call the reader's attention to the distinction 
drawn in the Tract between Romish, a term used in the Thirty- 
nine Articles, and Tridentine. It was this apparently para- 
doxical distinction which lay at the root of the four Tutors' 
misconstruction of the Tract. It also brought Dr. Wiseman 
into the fray, and led Dr. Russell of Maynooth to enter into 
correspondence with Newman. 

By Tridentine was meant the cut-and-dried propositions 
enunciated in the decrees of Trent. These decrees were 
promulgated after the Thirty-nine Articles were drawn up. 

By Romish, the term used in the Articles, was meant 
something far vaguer and more indeterminate,^ viz. what 
was taught in the theological schools and from the 
pulpit, and embodied in numberless devotional usages and 
practices. This was vividly present to the framers of the 
Articles. It was part and parcel of the living system in 
which they had been nurtured, and into which they dug 
their knives. 

It was not, of course, suggested that Romish doctrine 

^ And (though this point is not handled in the Tract) far more exposed 
to misrepresentation and caricature at the hands of the Reformers. 


contradicted Tridentine doctrine or even that it was dis- 
countenanced by it. Just the opposite was insisted upon. 
But it was maintained that the former outstripped the 
latter, much as popular Protestantism went beyond the 
Thirty-nine Articles. Both England and Rome had their 
traditionary system which was not fully represented by 
their formularies. 

The distinction was both legitimate and to the purpose. 
It was legitimate because a less developed system of devo- 
tion, and in a measure even of belief regarding some matters, 
than that which prevailed, might be theoretically com- 
patible with the bare letter of the decrees of Trent. It 
was to the purpose because it is the first duty of a com- 
mentator to ascertain the exact meaning of the terms used 
in his text. 

This distinction between Romish and Tridentine had often 
been made by Newman before ; it was not therefore devised 
for the benefit of the thesis which he put forward in Tract 
90.^ But it had an important bearing upon it. There 
were matters upon which the decrees of Trent spoke in such 
general terms, that to take them as representing the 
doctrines which the Articles condemned, would come 
dangerously near to bringing the Articles in collision with 
doctrines and practices which all students of antiquity had 
to allow were primitive. 

But there were further reasons for making much of this 
distinction. It seemed to be necessary in order to preserve 
the very idea of a Catholic Church for English Churchmen. 
According to the Tractarian theory England, Rome and the 
East were branches of the one indivisible Catholic Church. 
The difficulty, a fearfully anxious one to those for whose 
sake Tract 90 had been written, was to reconcile this theory 
with the first note of the Church, that of unity. The only 
means of coming to terms with this difficulty was to mini- 
mise the differences between England and Rome by 
endeavouring to show that they were not radical ones. To 
unchurch Rome by accusing her of having formally and 
officially contravened the Faith at a General Council was 

^ The legitimacy of the distinction from an Anglican point of view 
might have occurred to the censurers of Tract 90 if they had given them- 
selves as many months as they took days before pronouncing judgment 
upon it. Explanations, not retractations, of canonised formulanes were at 
the basis of such projects of Reunion as had been from time to time enter- 
tained by English Churchmen of unimpeachable soundness. 


like a redudio ad absurdum ; for who could look facts 
steadily in the face and believe in a ' Holy Church through- 
out the world ' from which all the Churches in communion 
with the See of Peter were excluded ? 

After all, then, it was not such a paradoxical thing for a 
clergyman of the Church of England to explore what might 
be done in the way of a benignant interpretation of the 
decrees of Trent, and the more learned of his brethren ought 
to have thought twice before raising a popular outcry against 
him. He was only vindicating their right to profess belief 
in one of the articles of the creed. 

The critical principles of Tract 90 may be summarised 
thus. The Articles are to be studied in the hght of the 
following facts: 

1. They do not profess to be a complete body of divinity. 
Doctrines therefore which they do not mention are not of 
necessity condemned. 

2. The Convocation which received and passed them 
spoke with respect of ' the Catholic Fathers and Ancient 
Bishops.' They were not, therefore, intended to be incon- 
sistent with patristic literature. 

3. They approve of the Homilies as ' containing a godly 
and wholesome doctrine.' It was therefore reasonable to 
interpret them in the light of the said Homilies. Now, on 
the one hand, the Homilies countenance much Catholic doc- 
trine which is not found in the Articles, and, on the other 
hand, when they seem most unsparing in their denuncia- 
tion of Catholic ideas, they are often found, whether intention- 
ally or unintentionally, to miss the real Catholic doctrine, and 
to hit ai: real or imaginary abuses of it. 

4. The Articles were published before the decrees of 
the Council of Trent. The importance of this fact has 
already been pointed out. 

5. Those who imposed the Articles on the clergy wished 
it to be possible for men of widely different views, not ex- 
cluding those who did not wish to break altogether with 
the past, to be able to subscribe to them. 

All these facts created a presumption that the Articles 
when examined critically would prove ' patient but not 
ambitious of a Catholic interpretation.' The object of 
Tract 90 was to test this presumption. 

The Tract may be considered as having two objects 


in view. The first, the most important, and the immediately 
practical one was to prove that the Thirty-nine Articles did 
not condemn the Anglican Via Media as it was expounded 
by the writers of the ' Tracts for the Times/ 

The secondary and altogether subordinate object might 
be described as a tentative inquiry into how far Rome, 
supposing her to be ready to treat with England on equal 
terms, would be able to offer interpretations of the decrees 
of Trent which Anghcans could accept. It was over this 
secondary object that the author of the Tract exposed him- 
self to misconstruction and misrepresentation. People 
jumped to the conclusion that he was ready to surrender 
everything and ask nothing in return. The very opposite 
was the fact. Those who had most right to complain, if 
they had cared to do so, were the Catholics. They were 
asked to move out of range of the Articles by adopting almost 
admittedly forced interpretations of the decrees of Trent. 
The Tutors in their Letter enumerated five points upon 
which, as they alleged, the Tract made no difference be- 
tween the doctrine of the Articles and the authoritative 
teaching of the Church of Rome. These five points were : 
(i) Purgatory ; (2) Indulgences ; (3) the Honours paid to 
Images and Relics ; (4) the Invocation of the Saints ; (5) the 
Mass. The list is a useful one. It contains practically all 
the points upon which, in Newman's eyes, the differences 
between the two Churches were almost irreconcilable ones. 
The concessions which, as an Anglican, he would have 
demanded from Rome upon these several points were little 
else than capitulation with the honours of war. 

Newman always maintained that Tract 90 was a legi- 
timate interpretation of the Articles. He did so in the 
'Apologia,' and again in the second volume of his ' Via 
Media.' But in 1883 he expressed himself dissatisfied with 
the reasoning in one important part of the Tract, viz. sec. 9, 
which treats of Art. xxxi., ' the sacrifice of masses,' &c.^ 

There was an important group of Churchmen who were 
in substantial agreement with the Tractarians, but disliked 
and distrusted their methods and the length to which they 
carried their principles. To this school Tract 90 must have 
been a sore trial. Nevertheless, when trouble began, its 
leaders stood by Newman. The first to come forward was 
Palmer of Worcester. His conduct was particularly hand- 

^ See later editions of Via Media, vol. ii. pp. 251-256. 


some, because for some time past there had been a coolness 
between him and Newman.^ He wrote the following letter 
the day before the Tract was brought under the notice of 
the Hebdomadal Board. 

Rev. W. Palmer to J. H. Newman 

St. Giles : [March 9, 1841]. 

My dear Newman, — Though I have taken no part in 
the discussions relative to the Tracts, I yet feel it my duty 
to express to you, under present circumstances, the gratifica- 
tion which I have derived from No. 90 just published. 
While I should hesitate to commit myself to every state- 
ment contained in it, I have no hesitation in expressing an 
opinion that it is the most valuable of the series of Tracts 
that has come under my observation. It will tend to shake 
people out of their implicit reception of traditionary inter- 
pretations which impose human opinions as little less than 
articles of faith. It will lead to a really critical system of 
interpreting the Articles, and will ultimately produce more 
union on the articles of Catholic Faith, and more toleration 
of opinions which have been at all times tolerated in the 
Universal Church. 

I may perhaps have seen a few expressions that I could 

have wished otherwise, but on the whole I most cordially 

thank you for this interesting Tract, and if my opinion 

can be of any service to you I do not wish to conceal it. 

Ever Yours, 

W. Palmer. 

If Mr. Palmer's letter had been written a few days 
earlier, and circulated before people had had time to commit 
themselves, it might have saved the situation ; for he was 
one of the most learned theologians of the day, and the 
soundness of his Churchmanship was beyond suspicion. 
Newman, who was at Littlemore, sent it at once to Church. 
Church passed it on to W. G. Ward, who showed it among 
other persons to Tait, and then scrawled a hasty note to 

1 Letters of the Rev. J. B. Moxley, p. 113. 


Church reporting that Tait was ' extremely struck ' by it, 
and asking that it might be placed in the hands of Dr. 
Richards, the Rector of Exeter, for ' Tait says Twiss tells 
him there is a report of the Heads meeting to-day on the 
subject.' Church forwarded Ward's letter to Newman, 
writing at the bottom of it : 

' Dear N., — I have said yes. I suppose I have done 
right.— Yours affectly, R. W. C Later on, the same day, 
he wrote as follows : 

Rev. R. W. Church to J. H. Newman 

March lo [1841]. 

My dear Newman, — The Heads had a meeting to-day, 
sure enough to discuss No. 90, and Cornish^ came to me 
after it was over, and reported what the Rector ^ had said 
of it. It seems that nothing was done to-day for two 
reasons : i. That they had a good deal of other business, 
and 2, that many or most of the assembly had not yet 
read the said Tract. However they were very fierce against 
it, and against the Tracts in general, against which they 
seem to have declared 'War to the knife.' They are 
accordingly to meet again on Friday at 2 to determine on 
their measures, as by that time everybody may be presumed 
' up ' in the Tract. 

The feeling in the board is represented by the Rector ^ 
as so strong that he did not like to read P's letter, as it 
would have been throwing ' cold water on red-hot iron.' 
Cornish seemed to think that he would not read it, but 
he is to take it with him on Friday, to make what use he 
may of it according to circumstances. He has not read 
the Tract himself yet, but there is no doubt but that though 
he might differ, and perhaps strongly with part of it, he 
would be utterly opposed to any step against it. Daman ^ 
seems to be of the same mind ; I showed him Palmer's 
letter this morning — which has reassured and comforted 

^ Rev. C. L. Cornish. Fellow of Exeter. 
^ Dr. Richards, Rector of Exeter. 
^ Rev. C. Daman, Fellow of Oriel. 



Cornish himself, as far as he wanted comfort. Keble is 
here in my room writing his lecture. All well. He hangs 
out in Rogers' room. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

R. W. C. 

Golias [Golightly] is in high glee ; he ventured to join 
the tto/jltttj of the Provost, and actually took the conde- 
scending line about a paper which he had sent the Provost ^ 
and which the latter had not yet looked at. 

Rev. R. W. Church to J. H. Newman 

Oriel: March ii, 1841* 

My dear Newman, — I have shown your note to Cornish, 
I. Williams and Keble. They all agree that it is better to 
remain quiet and not give up your name till it is officially 
called for. The Exeter C.R. [Common Room] according to 
Cornish (i.e. Sewell, Dayman and Spranger) are all of this 
mind. Things might be said out of Oxford agamst an 
anonymous Tract, which would not be said against you 
and I should have thought it desirable that your name 
should come out ultimately ; but this it will in the course 
of things, I suppose, time enough to meet ra e^co, while 
in Oxford to give it now, would be merely giving them a 

People are still very angry. Golly ^ has struck up a 
great intimacy with the Provost, whom he has propemped ^ 
twice to his lodgings, and whom he patronises most kindly. 
The first consequence to the Provost of his new alliance 
was the loss of his breakfast this morning owing to G/s 
pertinacious prosing. There was a meeting from 9 to i — 
but I don't know what about. The report is that V.C. 
has said he will not meddle : other people talk of an admoni- 
tion to the Four ^ — concerning what ? Keble has written 
to V.C. saying that he had carefully read the Tract and 

' Dr. Hawkins, Provost of Oriel, " Golightly. 

'■ \ word coined by the writer from irpoTri/xira. * The Four Tutors. 


recommended its publication. He does not think that 
anything will come of it. 

The Times is flinching, but at the same time kicks the 
Four [Tutors]. I have shown P's letter to Mules, Eden, and 
Daman. I. Williams showed it to Short : I suppose I have 
not been too free with it. I let Mules take a copy. 

I am sorry to say that S. Wilberforce has just lost his 
wife. She died yesterday. 

Ever Yours affectionately, 

R. W, C. 

A copy of the following letter was sent by Church to 
Newman. It is undated, but must have been written 
before news had reached the writer of the censure of the 
Hebdomadal Board, and the Letter to Dr. Jelf. 

Rev. G. Moberly to Rev. R. W. Church 

Dear Richard, — I am much obliged to you for Palmer's 
letter. I have now read No. 90 carefully, and though I find 
both some expressions and some opinions indicated which 
I am not prepared to go with, yet on the whole the Tract 
in its main design, and i9/20ths of its execution appear to 
me most valuable. We want to be taught that we have a 
higher and holier origin than the Reformation and the 
Articles : and that it is a matter of separate thankfulness 
that we can hold the Church's Truth, and at the same time 
sign the Terms of National Communion. Meanwhile many 
really take the Articles for Creed, Scripture, Church, and 
Commandments. I am extremely anxious to hear further, 
and whensoever you can write shall rejoice to hear. But 
what practical measures can be taken ? I shall probably 
see Keble to-morrow. 

Your affectionately, 

George Moberly.^ 

' There were indeed men, besides my own immediate 
friends, men of name and position, who gallantly took my 

* Afterwards Bishop of Salisbury. 


part, as Dr. Hook, Mr. Palmer, and Mr. Perceval.' 
[* Apologia,' p. 89.] The following letter was from the last 
named of these three : 

Rev. a. Perceval to J. H. Newman 

East Horsley : March 10, 1841. 

My dear Newman, — Pusey, whom pray thank for his 
letter received to-day, writes me word of some counter 
movement in consequence of the last Tract. This has led 
me to look it over more carefully than I had done before, 
and it seems to me both right to you, and a satisfaction to 
myself to tell you, that though in my shortsightedness I 
could have wished it at another time than just at present 
when men are perhaps less qualified to receive the statements 
calmly, than they were a little time back, or will be probably 
a little time hence — I mean from the political espousal of 
the question pro and con. by the state politicians — and 
though I should have been tempted to employ a little more 
of the wisdom of the serpent, e.g. not have unnecessarily 
quoted the passage from Estius which both from the matter 
and author must needs be very likely to raise a cry of war 
to the knife. Yet I think it one of the most important 
papers that has been put out, and calculated, under God's 
Blessing to do much good. Its main object is unexception- 
able, and in details its opponents must look sharp to ground 
a serious objection. 

If I can be of any service I will not fail you. But that 
can only be if good opportunity offers, which does not 
depend upon myself. 

Yours in heart and affection, 

Arthur Perceval.^ 

On March 12 Pusey wrote to the Vice-Chancellor, Dr. 
Wynter. His letter defended Tract 90 from the aspersions 
cast upon it by the Tutors, and called attention to its 

' His [i.e. the author's] feelings were these : our Church 
has condemned nothing Catholic, but only Romish errors ; 

* For Newman's reply see Notes, p. 393. 


yet there are certain opinions and practices, more or less 
prevailing in Catholic antiquity, having some relation to the 
later Romish error, which might seem to be condemned 
by our Articles, as they are often popularly understood. 
This would be a subject of great perplexity to some minds 
... (I happen to know one such case, which would, as 
far as an individual can be, be a great blow and shock, where 
a person's doubts, whether he will remain in communion 
with our Church, turn on this very point.) Thus, as he 
has noticed, there are several opinions of there being some 
Purgatorial process before or at the Day of Judgment, 
whereby those who departed out of this life in an imperfect 
state would be fitted for the Presence of God. Are all 
these (such an one would ask) condemned by our Church ? ' 

The whole letter should be read ; ^ but this extract 
from it will be enough to show how seriously the authorities 
were warned of the risk they ran by not keeping their hands 
off Tract 90. 

The following undated letter of Pusey's must have been 
written on March 13 or 14 ; the ' paper ' which is spoken 
of was the Letter to Dr. Jelf. 

Rev. E. B. Pusey to J. H. Newman 

My dear N. — I like the beginning of your paper very 
much ; it is very clear. There is an admission in a page 
towards the end which I have turned down which would 
be laid hold of. Could you not qualify it consistently with 
your opinion ? ' The only religious communion practically 
in possession of the something is the Church of Rome.' ^ 

^ It is given in extenso in Pusey 's Life, ii. 170. 

* The following is the passage alluded to. Perhaps in its present 
form it owes something to Pusey's suggestions : ' The age is moving 
towards something, and most unhappily the one religious communion 
among us which has of late years been in possession of this something, is 
the Church of Rome. She alone, amid all the errors and evils of her 
practical system, has given free scope to the feelings of awe, mystery, 
tenderness, reverence, devotedness, and other feelings which may be 
especially called Catholic. The question then is, whether we shall give 
them up to the Roman Church or claim them for ourselves, as we well 
may, by reverting to that older system, which has of late years indeed 
been superseded, but which has been and is, quite congenial ... to 
our Church.' Via Media, ii. 386. 


Could you not mark it as being a temporary deficiency in 
our system, not as if our Church never had had it (as in the 
17th century), or as if it might not be brought out in our 
Church, if we acted up to her system ; and again might 
something be thrown in as to the comparative purity of 
Enghsh Romanism, e.g. ' The only religious community 
which has of late years (or the like) been practically in posses- 
sion of that something is the Church of Rome, which being 
seen among us chiefly as it acts upon the higher classes is, as 
Bishop Lloyd observed, free from ' etc. ? But this is long. 

I see your next sentence does qualify this ; only this 
is pithy and might be extracted if not guarded. 

The further points which I want to see brought out 
are (i) that the latitude of interpretation which you claim 
would not extend in other hands to the first five Articles,^ 
because, as you say in the one class the writers meant to be 
comprehensive, in the other definite. (2) Could you explain 
prudently how far you would wish this explanation of the 
Articles to go? What are the Catholic or quasi- Catholic 
tenets or practices which you would wish for the sake of 
others to see admitted by this construction of the Articles ? 

(3) To show again how the Articles bear this, that 
e.g. if they speak of the Romish doctrine of Purgatory they 
do not mean the Greek Purgatorial fire at the Day of Judg- 
ment : if they say the Romish invocation of Saints they 
do not mean such apostrophies as you find in St. Gregory 
Nazianzen etc. 

Could you explain the term ' stammering formularies ' 
as I understand they are (as in Isaiah ^) providentially 
fitted to our imperfect state (as in Wilhams' Tract) ? ^ If 
persons so ill bear our Baptismal service, how much less 
would they bear a Communion Service in which the true 
doctrine was developed ? 

I understand people have been most perplexed by the 
view of the last pages, as if the writers of the Articles were 

1 Those dealing with the Mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation. 
^ Isaiah xxviii. ii. 

3 The reference is to Tract 86, and to the arguments on pp. 80-82. This 
was kindly pointed out by Canon Johnston. 


taken in their own trap, and by this expression [i.e. 
stammering formularies] . 

I enclose a painful note from the Vice Chancellor, but 
it may show you where the difficulty lies. 

I see you mean to preserve your anonymousness which 

I believe would be very desirable till the Heads of Houses 

have decided. 

Yours very affectly, 

E. B. P. 

I mentioned to Jelf your thought of writing to him, 
which he quite enters into, but thought it very desirable 
that you should keep your anonymousness. 

I called just now, but it was only with a view of talking 
over and explaining what I have set down in this note. 

Could you show by quotations what the authoritative 
teaching was before the Council of Trent, so as to contrast 
it with the earlier views of the Fathers, since the more 
definite that teaching and that system, the less room will 
there be for identifying it with the Fathers. 

The following are the two passages which according to 
Dr. Pusey perplexed many people. The first comes quite 
at the beginning of the Tract. 

' Till we feel this, till we seek one another as brethren, 
not lightly throwing aside our private opinions, which we 
seem to feel we have received from above, from an ill- 
regulated, untrue desire of unity, but returning to each 
other in heart, and coming together to God to do for us 
what we cannot do for ourselves, no change can be for the 
better. Till her members are stirred up to this religious 
course, let the Church sit still ; let her be content to be in 
bondage ; let her work in chains ; let her submit to her 
imperfections as a punishment ; let her go on teaching with 
the stammering lips of ambiguous formularies ' &c. 

The second passage is the conclusion of the Tract. It 
follows a long quotation from Burnet on the Articles already 
given ; ^ it described how in Article XXVIH, because ' the de- 
sign of the Government was at that time much turned to the 
drawing over the body of the station to the Reformation,' a para- 

1 p. 72. 


graph rejecting the very term Real Presence was expunged, 
and there were substituted for it words which were 

' What has lately taken place,' commented the author 
of the Tract, ' in the political world will afford an illustration 
in point. A French minister desirous of war, nevertheless, 
as a matter of policy draws up his state papers in such 
moderate language that his successor, who is for peace, can 
act up to them, without compromising his own principles. 
The world, observing this, has considered it a circumstance 
for congratulation ; as if the former minister, who acted a 
double part, had been caught in his own snare. It is neither 
decorous, nor necessary, nor altogether fair, to urge the 
parallel rigidly ; but it will explain what is here meant to 
convey. The Protestant Confession was drawn up with 
the purpose of including Catholics ; and Catholics now will 
not be excluded. What was an economy in the Reformers, 
is a protection to us. What would have been a perplexity 
to us then, is a perplexity to Protestants now. We could 
not then have found fault with their words ; they cannot 
now repudiate our meaning.' 

Thirty-five years afterwards Newman appended the 
following note to the passage in Pusey's letter about * the 
writers of the Articles being caught in their own trap ' : 

N.B. : Aug. 9, 1876. 

I did mean this. It was always a wonder to me that 
Pusey and Manning wished me to cut out my concluding 
words of No. 90, which were necessary for my position ; 
I always said ' The Article framers were double-tongued or 
I. I said in these last words that it was the Article framers,' 

On March 14 Oakeley, who was carrying out Tractarian 
principles at the Margaret Street Chapel in London, wrote 
a long letter to Pusey to the following effect. All persons 
whom he met, and he was not speaking of those who would 
be called ' extreme people,' felt themselves indebted to the 
author of Tract 90 ; and till the news came of the Tutors' 
protest, he had heard of no objections except from some 
correspondent in the Times. There were persons about him, 
among the most valuable members of the Church, who had 
long felt perplexity about certain passages in the Articles ; 
and could not, except on the supposition of a/ Catholic inter- 


pretation ' being possible, subscribe to them &c. This 
letter must have been a great comfort to Newman. It was 
proof not only that the Tract was needed, but also that it 
was doing its work. 

A country clergyman wrote, March i6, 1841 : 

To J. H. Newman 

' I have just heard of the uproar and got No. 90 of the 
Tracts, as I was in town to-day. All I can say is that should 
any vote of censure on the part of Convocation be proposed, 
I shall feel quite happy to come up to oppose such a thing. 
.... Of course I cannot pretend to enter into the full 
bearings of every point — that would be presumptuous, but 
allow me to say that I owe much, very much to your example, 
and, with your leave, friendship to me. I met by chance 
in Rivington's shop Golightly . . . his temper of mind 
was to me very sad, and I could not help telling him in 
plain terms what I thought of him. I was with the Bishop 
of London — he was especially kind ... I live out of the 
world, but still am anxious to do my duty. If therefore 
I am wanted let me know. 

Very truly and gratefully yours.' 

Newman concluded his Letter to Dr, Jelf as follows : 

' In conclusion I will but express my great sorrow that I 
have at all startled or offended those for whom I have 
nothing but respectful and kind feelings. That I am startled 
myself in turn, that persons who have in years past and 
present borne patiently disclaimers of the Athanasian 
Creed, or of the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration, or of 
belief in many of the Scripture miracles, should now be 
alarmed so much, when a private Member of the University 
without his name, makes statements in an opposite direc- 
tion, I must also avow.' 

The same idea struck his brother-in-law Thomas Mozley, 
who on March 17 wrote : 


Rev. T. Mozley to J. H. Newman 

March 17, 1841. 

You will have as little time to read as I have to write 
just now. Your packet has just come, and I cannot let the 
post go, without saying that we both feel the fullest and 
calmest confidence in your cause and you. For my own part 
I am rejoiced to see the controversy becoming one of acts. 

I have read the first sheet of your Letter, and Harriet the 
second. I was just observing on the Heads of Houses having 
required a 1000 men to be pushing them a whole month 
before they would repudiate a denial of the doctrines of 
the Trinity and Incarnation, and now 4 men, and these of no 
such very great weight, are able in 4 days to make them 
speak on a question which leaves these doctrines alone, 
and merely affects the distinctive grounds of the EstabUsh- 
ment — I was just saying this when Harriet showed me a 
passage in the second sheet at the conclusion to the purpose. 

I must confess that I have not yet seen the Tract, 
but am expecting it every day. You have my prayers 
which I wish I could suppose were as effectual and 
fervent as the cause deserves. Lord Morpeth and Mac- 
donald will, of com'se, have the credit of this movement. 
By the bye there must be a traitor in Oxford somewhere, 
for the article in the Dublin Review on Sewell's article 
on Romanism, written I suppose by Quin, shows the most 
perfect acquaintance with Sewell's character and circum- 

On March 17 Dr. Hook, the first of those whom Newman 
singles out in the ' Apologia ' as ' gallantly ' taking his part, 

Rev. W. F. Hook to J. H. Newman 

Vicarage, Leeds : March 17, 1841. 

Dear Newman, — I write a line merely to express to you 
my most cordial sympathy and my readiness to stand by 
my friends at Oxford in any steps they may agree to take 
at this painful Crisis. Our enemies force us into the position 
of a Party, and as a Party we must be prepared to act ; 


by which I mean, that in any ulterior proceedings little 
minor points of difference must be forgotten, and we must act 
as one man in asserting our general Principles. 

Do the Heads of the Houses form the University of 
Oxford ? If so we must submit. If not, does not their 
conduct render it necessary for us to ascertain what the 
opinion of the University is ? It seems to me that we shall 
be compelled to have the formal decision of the University 
now. May we be guided by a Wisdom not our own ! 

You will, I am siu-e, pardon me for saying that if these 
were piping Times of peace I should have a little quarrel 
with you for some things in Tract 90. I do not like your 
seeming to assert that High Churchmen generally have 
found a difficulty in holding Catholic Principles consistently 
with a subscription to the Articles. I do not like yoiu* 
assuming that our Reformers were uncatholic when Manning 
and other High Churchmen contend for the contrary : your 
opinion is different, but the question is not decided among 
us ; and I do not hke your insinuating that while repudiating 
the Romish Doctrine with reference to Images, Relics, etc. 
we wish to maintain some doctrine on these points on which 
I presume no Catholic Doctrine exists. I mention these 
points that if you write on this painful occasion you 
may say something on them for the satisfaction of your 
friends. At the same time we must ever thank you for 
boldly vindicating in this Tract our Liberty of interpreting 
the Articles in our own and not in a traditional sense. 

I have only to repeat to you the cordial expression of my 
sympathy and of my readiness to stand by you. 

Your very affectionate Friend, 

W. F. Hook. 

Newman did not get Hook's letter till the 19th, for on 
the 18th he ' went over to Littlemore and slept there.' He 
had plenty to think of, for the morning's post had brought 
two letters from his Bishop, one to Pusey, and another, 
enclosed in the letter to Pusey, to himself. Both letters 
were as kind and considerate as they could be, but there was 
no mistaking the fact that the writer was anxious and dis- 


tressed. In the letter to Newman he merely expressed his 
earnest wish that there should be no more discussions upon 
the Articles in the Tracts ; to Pusey he suggested that 
Newman might perhaps be willing to publish explanations 
avowing that he did so in deference to the wish of his 
Bishop. Both letters were answered the same day in a way 
most gratifying to the Bishop.^ To Pusey the Bishop wrote 
again a somewhat lengthy letter in which the idea he had 
thrown out in his previous one took a more definite shape ; 
while to Newman he wrote as follows : 

The Bishop of Oxford to J. H. Newman 

Cuddesdon : March 19, 1841. 

My dear Sir, — Though rather hurried by letters to-day, 
I should be sorry to let a Post pass without acknowledging 
yours, and expressing my gratification and thanks (tho' 
no more than I anticipated from the spirit shown in all 
former communications) at the kind manner in which 
you have received my letter, and my apprehensions of 
harm which might come from a continuation of discussion 
upon the Articles in ' Tracts for the Times,' judging by 
the sensation which the publication of the 90th has excited. 
Believe me that in anything I have said, or in anything 
I may hereafter suggest in a friendly manner ; I am guided 
by a consideration for yourselves, and the great good which 
it is your power to effect, and which in many respects you 
have already done, as well as for the peace of the Church. 

Believe me etc., 
R. Oxford. 

In re-reading this letter, probably some thirty years 
afterwards, Newman wrote on the top in pencil, ' To Pusey ? ' 
But it was not the letter which the Bishop wrote to Pusey, 
which was a much lengthier one.^ 

On returning to Oxford on the 19th Newman found 
Hook's letter awaiting him. He answered it the same 
day without alluding to the Bishop's letters to himself 
and Pusey, but clearly showing how alarmed he was. 

^ All four letters can be read in Pusey's Life &c. ii. 183-187. 
^ See Pusey's Life, ii. 187. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. W. F. Hook 

Oriel: March 19, 1841. 

Dear Hook, — Your letter is most kind. I am adding 
a postscript to my letter to Jelf and I will take notice of 
the points you mention. As to the notion of a Declaration, 
I have from the first said ' no ' to it. I think our strength is 
to sit still. But one thing I am very anxious about, viz., that 
the bishops should not commit themselves to one view of 
the Articles. This is well worth your charitable exertions. 
I fear the Bishop of London, and the influence thence 
exerted upon our own diocese. But this in confidence 

Many thanks indeed for youi kindness, which I feel much. 

As to your notion of a University Protest against the 
unauthorised act of the Heads of Houses, I hear people 
talking of this, and it is a very different sort of thing — but 
I suppose it will come to nothing. 

Ever yours affectly, 

J. H, N. 

P.S. — With my postscript I shall have said in my letter 
to Jelf all I can say pretty nearly. I do earnestly intreat 
their Lordships to urge me no further. 

It is a good joke — the Heads of Houses, I am told, now 
say that I have recanted in the letter to Jelf. On Friday 
night last, the 12th, I heard they meant to do something. 
On the 13th I wrote my letter. On the 14th (Sunday) I 
and others wrote to the V.C., Provost etc. begging they 
would suspend their decision till the letter appeared. On 
the 15th the letter was through the press, and the decision 
just got ahead of it by a few hours. 

Hook replied on the 20th. 

Rev. W. F. Hook to J. H. Newman 

My dear Newman, — I have acted on your hint and 
have just written a very strong and decided but respectful 
letter to the Bishop of London. Except to Pusey and 


Palmer, you had better not mention this until you hear 
again. If the Bishop acts rightly he may not wish it to 
be known that I wrote to him ; if wrongly it will be time 
enough hereafter to mention that he did this in spite of a 
remonstrance. Thank dear good Palmer for his letter. 

Yours affectly, 

W. F. Hook. 

What appears to be Bishop Blomfield's answer to 
Dr. Hook will be found in the latter's ' Life and Letters ' 
(vol. ii. p. 64). The Bishop considered the 'tendency' 
of Tract 90 * to be most pernicious/ and ' what you say 
of a number of serious young men who might probably go 
over to the Church of Rome, if Mr. Newman were openly 
condemned is very alarming. . . It is to my mind the 
strongest possible evidence of the evil tendency of the 
Oxford Tracts that they should have made it necessary 
for Mr. Newman to put forth such a commentary on our 
Articles, to prevent his disciples from becoming papists.* 

On the 2oth Newman received the following letter from 
Dr. Todd. 

Rev. J. H. Todd to J. H. Newman 

Trinity College, Dublin : March i8, 1841. 

My dear Newman,— I wrote you a note a couple of days 
ago to introduce to you a very promising young clergyman, 
Mr. Lloyd, who has been ordered to relax a little for the 
benefit of his health, and intends to spend a few days at 
Oxford. I did not at that time know anything of the 
wonderful attack made upon you about the Tract No. 90, 
nor had anything of what has occurred reached my ears, 
or eyes, for I am out of the way of seeing newspapers, and 
have scarcely anybody here to speak to on such matters. 
However, I was this day sent from Oxford a copy of the 
resolution of the Vice-Chancellor and Heads of Houses of 
the 15th inst., and by the same post, a copy of your letter 
to Dr. Jelf. I cannot help writing to say how much I 
sympathise with you, although I trust that is unnecessary — 
nothing can be more true than what you say, that men's 
minds seem drawing towards a higher standard of Christian 


feeling, than could satisfy the last generation, and that this 
seems going on quite independently of the exertions of 
individuals to promote it — better views seem springing up 
in different places, without any connection with others who 
held them before, as if the hearts of men were stirred by some 
superior power, and a yearning created for Catholic truth, 
even before it is known what Catholic truth in practice is. 

I trust and pray that you may be guided in this crisis, 
and that the result may be for His glory, and the permanent 
good of this unhappy, divided and disunited Church, for 
I am more and more convinced that (humanly speaking) our 
only safety against the two streams of Popery and Puritanism 
that are beating upon us, is a return to what you truly say, 
is our native spirit. If the enemies of the Truth should 
succeed now in extracting from our Prelates or Universities 
any very strong condemnation of Church principles, the 
consequences may be very formidable. 

One of my reasons for troubling you with these lines is 
to tell you that the four gentlemen, who have raised this 
storm, seem to be making every exertion to effect that 
object. I have just heard that they have sent their protest 
together with a copy of your Tract, to our Primate — and 
I presume they have done the same to the other Bishops. 
I do not know whether you would think it right to send 
copies of your letter to Dr. Jelf to the Bishops in the same 
way. The Primate, I have no doubt favours you in his 
heart, although he is very cautious about committing 
himself, and there is a large body of sound clergy in the 
diocese of Armagh. The Bishop of Elphin is also, I think, 
disposed to favour Church principles ; and his son who has 
a great deal of influence with him. The Bishop of Cork is 
also very much in our favour, but he is timid, and greatly 
alarmed lest some people should go too far. He is also 
tremblingly afraid of the so-called Evangelical party, and 
labours to keep them quiet. The Bishop of Kildare is 
sound, but cautious, and the rest I need not speak of. You 
know the Bishop of Down yourself. How far it would be 
wise to appeal to the Bishops even so far as by sending 


them your letter, may admit of discussion, and I can hardly 
venture to advise you, but there can be no harm in sending 
a copy to the Primate, as I know he has been appealed to 
by your opponents. 

Ever sincerely yours, 

J. H. Todd. 

The Evangelicals of whom the good Bishop of Cork was 

* tremblingly afraid ' were particularly nasty over Tract 90 ; 
and altogether oblivious of their own equivocal position 
with regard to the Prayer Book. ' How had I done worse,' 
asked Newman in the 'Apologia,' 'than the Evangelical 
clergy in their ex animo reception of the Service for Baptism 
and the Visitation of the Sick ? ' And in a footnote he adds, 
' For instance, let candid men consider the form of Absolu- 
tion contained in the Prayer Book ... I challenge, in the 
sight of all England, Evangelical clergy generally to put 
on paper an interpretation of this form of words, consistent 
with their own sentiments, which shall be less forced than 
the most objectionable of the interpretations which Tract 90 
puts upon any passage of the Articles.' Of the Four Tutors, 
two, Mr. Churton and Mr. Griffiths, were Evangelicals. 
They were hardly the men * to cast the first stone ' at 
Tract 90. Neither, as the future was to show, were the 
other two better fitted for the work. 

A good deal was heard of Mr. Wilson, whose name in 
the Letter of the Tutors came between those of Mr. Churton 
and Mr. Griffiths, some twenty years later. He was one of 
the contributors to ' Essays and Reviews ' where he cham- 
pioned the use of ' forms of expression ' which might be 

* adopted with respect to the doctrines [of the Trinity and 
Incarnation] in the first five Articles without directly con- 
tradicting, impugning, or refusing assent to them, but pass- 
ing by the side of them — as with respect to the humanifying 
of the Divine Word and to the Divine Personalities.' ^ 

We now come to the one really important name among 

^ 'What is meant by ^^ passing by," etc. . . . The clergy are bound by 
the King's declaration to take the Articles in their literal and grammatical 
sense ; the first five Articles are the most important of all. Is it con- 
sistent with their literal and grammatical sense to pass them by ? I 
think not. Is it consistent with the declaration that they are agreeable 
to the Word of God ? If so, why pass by ? ' &c. Dr. Lushington's 
Judgment in the Court of Arches on Essays and Reviews, quoted in Pusey's 
edition of Tract 90, p. 33. 


the four, that of Archibald Tait, the future Headmaster 
of Rugby, then Dean of CarUsle, then Bishop of London, and 
finally, Archbishop of Canterbury.^ 

In 1844 the Hebdomadal Board had three proposals 
ready to submit to Convocation. The first two had reference 
to W. G. Ward, and were to the effect that (i) certain 
passages in his ' Ideal of a Christian Church ' were incon- 
sistent with his good faith in subscribing to the Articles ; 
and that (2) in consequence he should be deprived of his 
degrees. The third proposal took the form of a Test. It 
rendered any member of the University, who might be 
suspected of unsound views, liable to be called upon to 
declare that in subscribing to the Articles he took them in 
the sense in which ' they were first published and were now 
imposed by the University.' The Test raised such a storm 
of protest that it had to be withdrawn. 

Among the most indignant of those who protested was 
Dr. Tait, then Headmaster of Rugby. His protest took 
the form of an open letter to the Vice-Chancellor.^ The 
fact that he made a protest was not remarkable, but the 
grounds upon which he based it certainly were, when 
taken in connection with his procedure in the case of Tract 
90. They shall be given as far as possible in his own words. 
First, however, let it be noted that he did not take the 
line of opposing the Test primarily on the grounds that 
nobody knew exactly what was the sense in which the 
Articles were originally intended to be taken, or in which, 
at any given time, the University might intend them to be 
taken, or whether the two senses must necessarily be one 
and the same. He eschewed such subtleties, and assumed 

1 He was the prime mover. The letter of the Four Tutors was an 
abridgment of one which he had originally intended to send in his own 
name alone. Besides inspiring the other three he saved them from a 
great blunder, if the following piece of contemporary gossip retailed by 
Frederick Temple can be trusted : ' One thmg in the business [of Tract Qo] 
reflects some credit on the " Canny Lion of the North " ; his three brethren, 
it appears, were anxious not only to protest against the false doctrine of 
the Tract, but wished also to insert a scheme of the Church's (i.e. their) 
doctrine on the points in question ; Tait, however, would not have any- 
thing to do with that. Just imagine what a glorious opportunity for 
Newman, if they had been fools enough to have answered his Ultra High 
Church Tract by a scheme of Ultra Low Church doctrine ! He would 
have smashed them so completely that nobody would have liked to attack 
No. 90 again. But it certainly would have been very unlike Tait to have 
placarded an express opinion in his own name to the walls of the University.' 
— Life and Correspondence of John Duke Lord Coleridge, Lord Chief Justice 
of England, i. 98, 99. 

2 A Letter to the Rev. the V ice-Chancellor of the University of Oxford,' 
etc. (Blackwood & Sons. 1845.) 


that the Test would be, what it was intended to be, a means 
of insisting that the Articles should be taken Hterally. He 
objected to this being insisted upon because the Articles 
represented a ' method of theologising ' which was quite 
out of date ! 

He begins by reading the Heads a lecture, the severity 
of which is in striking contrast with the uniform courtesy 
of Pusey and Newman over the matter of Tract 90. ' All 
men,' he informed them, 'have a tendency to think, as life 
advances, that public opinion cannot have entirely changed 
since they were young ; and when sentiments are brought 
forward, which they never heard of in former times, they 
naturally enough conceive that these are merely the follies of 
youthful inexperience. . . . Now I confess that it appears 
to me that the Hebdomadal Board in their present praise- 
worthy efforts to vindicate the character of the Protestant 
University over which they preside, have fallen into this 
common error — that they have judged of the rising genera- 
tion by what they remember of themselves * (p. 6) . He had 
no objection, quite the contrary, to the first two proposals 
which dealt with Mr. Ward : ' I must confess that the 
most vital interests of the Church of England require some 
distinct announcement on the part of the University that 
the misinterpretation of the Articles which he advocates 
is inconsistent with his position as one of its authorised 
teachers ' (p. 8). Special cases require special treatment. Mr. 
Ward's case was on a par with that of an M.A. who avowed 
himself a Socinian. Extreme cases such as these should 
be dealt with as they arose, and not made the pretext for 
sweeping legislation curtailing the liberty of persons 
deserving of every consideration. 

' Of men below the age of forty-five throughout the 
kmgdom, there may be a few — but they are very few, and 
their number is to be counted by units — whose mind is a 
sort of transcript of the Thirty-nine Articles and Prayer 
Book — who have so habituated themselves from their 
earliest years to look upon all which they find therein written 
as infallible, that their thoughts have never ranged beyond 
the prescribed limits' (p. 10). 

The writer then went on to distinguish four theological 
schools ' according to which the younger members of the 
Church of England generally may be classed.' These were : 

(i) The school which ' claims for itself the title of Anglo- 
Catholics ' [i.e. the milder ^kind of Tractarians]. 


(ii) ' The small compact body of the decided followers of 
Mr. Newman, against whom the test is primarily directed/ 

(iii) The Evangelicals. 

(iv) * A large and growing body of younger men, who 
are, for the most part, what is called Low Church in matters 
of discipline, and whose doctrinal theology is in a great 
measure modified, if not formed, by the study of the great 
Protestant writers of the Continent/ 

The ' Anglo-Catholics ' constituted the only party 
' which at all approaches to such a method of theologising 
as that which I have now mentioned,' viz. the method of 
those whose minds were ' a sort of transcript of the Thirty- 
nine Articles/ It was ' the only one which can with any 
consistency support the proposition of the Board of Heads 
for a new Test.' But, as a matter of fact, so far as the 
writer could ascertain this party did not want the Test. It 
was hardly to be expected that they should, for it was 
' against the very men [Mr. Newman and his followers] 
to whose earlier writings they know it to be owing that 
their favourite theology [presumably he meant the doctrines 
of the Apostolic Succession, and the Catholic Church] has 
been resuscitated from the deathlike slumber into which 
it had sunk' (pp. ii, 12). 

The writer did not think much of the ' Anglo-Catholics.' 
They were ' respectable and amiable ' but ' hardly deep 
thinkers,' not likely to be able * to repel the assaults of 
infidelity, or to guide the burning thoughts of a generation 
displeased with its present state, and craving for something 
deeper and more truly earnest' (p. 10). This task was 
apparently reserved for the fourth school. 

The party of Mr. Newman did not, of course, want 
the test. It was levelled at them. 

The Evangelical party could only desire the test * from 
a momentary forgetfulness, in the midst of conflict, of 
its own real position. It is impossible that the Divines 
of this school can be anxious for a more stringent assertion 
of their agreement in the doctrine of the Baptismal Service, 
or of the Catechism' (p. 15). 

The fourth and last school, which * my belief is, ... 
contains by far the greatest amount of the talent of the rising 
generation ' (p. 16) — whose * theological sympathies ' ' are at 
present very comprehensive, seeming almost to range from 
Mr. Carlyle or Schleiermacher on the one hand, to Mr. 


Newman, or the Hermesianer of Germany, or Mohler's 
Symbolik on the other ' — whose members * will seldom be 
found to belong to any distinct party, but appreciating 
what is good and noble, and abhorring what is low and 
selfish in all ' (p. 17)— which (p. 16) ' I suspect will soon be 
found to contain the best scholars, metaphysicians, and 
poets of the rising age ' (p. 16) — ^which if it ' can be saved 
from too latitudinarian and rationalizing a spirit ' ... [is 
the school to which] * we must look as the best hope of the 
generation which is to stand in our place when we are 
dead ' — this school had trouble enough, with the Articles and 
the Prayer Book ; more than was generally known, for it 
had not aired all its grievances. ' The damnatory clauses 
of the Athanasian Creed, and the i8th Article (to say 
nothing of many other points of difficulty which have not 
been made public by an appeal to Parliament), must of 
necessity warn them to pause, before they bind themselves 
more strictly than now to the letter of the Articles ' (p. 15). 

There was something lacking, one might perhaps call it a 
sense of seemliness or gravity, in the man who three years 
after he brought about the condemnation of Tract 90, thus 
championed the right of Broad Churchmen to what amounted 
to a wholesale non-natural interpretation of the Articles 
and the Prayer Book. It would have been better to leave 
this task to others. 

This has been a lengthy digression, but the reader will, 
perhaps, pardon it when he is reminded of Newman's state- 
ment in the ' Apologia ' that ' the men who drove me from 
Oxford were the Liberals.' Besides, an account, however 
compendious, of the condemnation of Tract 90, which passed 
over the views of those who brought it about, would be in- 
complete to the extent of being misleading. 

Edward Bellasis (afterwards Serjeant Bellasis), in 
a letter to a friend of Newman's, wrote as follows from 
London : 

Edward Bellasis, Esq., to Rev. J. B. Morris 

March i8, 1841. 

... Generally speaking I find that those who had 
liked the previous Tracts like this, and attribute the attack 
on Newman to jealousy of the place he has for some time 
occupied at Oxford to the exclusion^of their more dignified 


selves. Whether this is a correct supposition I do not 
presume to determine, particularly as Newman suggests 
better motives in his letter to the V.C. . . . my own opinion 
of the Tract is of httle moment, but it is decidedly this, 
that it is a true carrying out of principles that have been 
contained in the Tracts, and that to my mind it contains 
a ' wholesome doctrine and very necessary for these times.' 
Our London Rectors like your Oxford Heads are somewhat 
astonished and shake their heads, and others say ' so in- 
judicious,' but I think that all those whose opinions you 
would have expected to be favourable are satisfied. 

Another correspondent wrote as follows, 

Letter to J. H. Newman 

... Is it not a little worth remarking in the proceedings 
of the Heads of Houses, that while they are so very much 
displeased at the notion of setting forth what things there 
are which we are not obliged to condemn simply because 
the Church of Rome enjoins them, (which our Articles set 
forth as a church), yet they testify no disapprobation of 
any expressions of charity, or sympathy, or agreement 
with bodies which are not Churches ? We may soften 
down anything almost to show how blamelessly Dissenters 
might sjnnbolise with us, how little [there is] with us which 
need be an offence to them, but must not say a word in 
the same strain as to Roman Catholics. 

Among some criticisms which this writer made of the 
Tract was the following : ' I also regret the last paragraph con- 
taining the illustration from recent political manoeuvres in 
France. It carries an air of secret satisfaction at being able 
to parallel the words of our Reformers with something of 
low cunning if not of knavery.' ^ 

On March 23 the Bishop of Oxford, who had been con- 
sulting with the Archbishop of Canterbury, wrote to Pusey 
inviting him over to Cuddesdon ' for a little private con- 
versation on this painful position of things.' ^ Pusey went 

1 See p. 73. * Pusey's Life, ii. iy2. 


the next day, and received from the Bishop the following 
proposals, (i) The Tracts should be discontinued ; (2) 
Tract 90 should not be reprinted ; (3) Newman should make 
it publicly known that this was done in deference to the 
Bishop's wishes. The negotiations which followed are 
fully described in Pusey's Life. Newman made no demur 
to the first and third of the proposals ; but the second, the 
suppression of Tract 90, seemed to him very hard. If the 
Bishop insisted he would obey him ; but then he must 
resign St. Mary's. He turned for advice to Hook and to 
Keble. To the former he wrote as follows : 

J. H. Newman to Rev. W. F. Hook 

Oriel : in fest Annunc. : [March 25], 1841. 

My dear Hook, — I write to you in some anxiety, and 
quite in confidence. I should like to have a line from you 
at once. 

The Bishop wishes me, in a letter I am to write to him, 
to say that ' at his bidding I will suppress Tract 90.' I have 
no difficulty in so saying and doing, if he tells me, but my 
difficulty is about my then position. I shall then have 
been censured for an evasion by the Heads of Houses, with 
an indirect confirmation of it by the Bishop ; for though 
he puts it on the ground of peace, people do not make nice 
distinctions. I cannot acquiesce or co-operate in such a 
proceeding. To condemn Tract 90 in the wholesale is to 
condemn its interpretation of Articles 6 [of the sufficiency 
of H. Scripture] and 11 [of Justification] quite as much as 
of 22 [of Purgatory, Pardons, Images etc.]. I am a repre- 
sentative at this moment of the interests of many : I cannot 
betray them. 

It seems to me that I shall be observing my duty to the 
Bishop by suppressing the Tract, and my duty to my 
principles by resigning my living. Again, it is painful 
enough to be at St. Mary's with all the Heads against me, 
but if the Bishop indirectly joins them, what is to be my 
support ? I cannot be a demagogue. The Bishop himself 
is all kindness, not so the authorities in London. 


Though the Tract were suppressed, answers to it would 
be circulated freely, and there would be no lack of them. 
Bishops too, to a certainty are to charge. I cannot hold 
a living with such a force against me. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

The letter to Keble is given in Miss Mozley's ' Life and 
Correspondence,' &c. It does not differ substantially from 
the one to Hook. The latter replied as follows — we give 
only the opening sentences : ' 

Rev. W. F. Hook to J. H. Newman 

The Vicarage, Leeds : March 27, 1841. 

My dear Newman, — I do not think you are in any way 
required to write as the Bishop of Oxford proposes. It is 
to your Bishop, not to Dr. Bagot that you are to yield 
obedience. Let Dr. Bagot act as your Bishop and all will 
be right. If he condemns you it will be in his Court and 
by his proper officers, but he cannot condemn you before 
you have obtained a hearing. You may demand permission 
to plead your cause and in so doing you may persuade 
him. It is most important at this time to act with due 
form, for our rights, as well as the authority of our rulers, 
are protected by forms ; and a regard to the proper forms 
will interpose that delay which may prevent the Bishop 
from acting rashly. . . . 

The following was Keble's reply : 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

Hursley : March 26, 1841. 

My dear Newman, — I am afraid I shall write very little 
to the purpose, but I must answer your letter just received 
as I can. I am very much concerned at it, and cannot but 
believe that so good a man as your Bishop will be somehow 
preserved from being the instrument of so bad a proceeding. 

Certainly I do not see how it is consistent silently to 

1 The full letter can be read in Hook's Life &c. ii. 66. 


suppress the Tract and go on as if the point was given up, 
even at a Bishop's command. The least you can do must 
be to get leave to accompany the suppression with a public 
declaration that you do so and so for obedience' sake, not 
at all giving up the view. If the Bishop allows this, he 
permits his clergy to hold the view, as consistent with the 
literal and grammatical sense, which is a great point gained. 
If he does not allow it, I do not see, unwilling as I am to 
come to the conclusion, how you can retain St. Mary's. 
And if you give it up on such a ground, I do not see how 
I and others in other dioceses can remain as we are without 
scandal. We must in some way or other declare our own 
sense of the Articles, by reprinting Tract 90, or writing fresh 
Tracts, or by direct application to our Bishops. I for one 
feel that I must do something, though I cannot clearly see as 
yet what that something would be. Otherwise we entangle 
ourselves in the snare of holding office, and receiving Church 
payments on an implied condition which we know in our 
hearts we are not fulfilling. In short there is no end to 
the serious results which such a step on the Bishop's part 
would have. The least that can be looked for is that he 
would drive some scores of us to lay communion. 

I think you will be able to get this view laid before the 
Bishop, or rather to do it yourself in such a way as he 
will not misunderstand, and that he will on consideration 
waive the measure you speak of. If all the Bishops join, 
that is another thing : and will leave us, I imagine, no 
choice, unless by respectful remonstrance we could induce 
them to mitigate their sentence. It is a sad case, but we 
ought to be very thankful we have Lay Communion to fall 
back upon. I begin now to think that perhaps Pusey 
was right, and we ought to have moved — ^but I don't know. 

God bless and guide you. 

Your ever affectionate, 

J. K. 

P.S.— E. Churton writes to Wilson very kindly, rather 
disapproving of No. 90, but much more of the Heads of 
Houses. He talks of some protest. 


It is interesting to compare Keble's advice with Hook's. 
Try to persuade the Bishop ; if you cannot, obey and resign 
your living, was that of the former. Insist upon his acting con- 
stitutionally, was that of the latter. There was much to be 
said for Hook's advice. The Bishop, in spite of all his kind- 
ness, was asking very much ; and to make matters worse 
he could not protect those who submitted to him. The 
Evangelicals and Liberals were not troubled with ' high 
views ' concerning episcopal authority. To keep their 
hands off Tract 90 and its author because he had satisfied 
his own bishop was almost the last thing in the world which 
it would occur to them to do. Neither would the other 
bishops refrain. But in spite of all this Hook's advice 
was not to Newman's taste. He has told us in the 
' Apologia ' what his views as an Anglican were with regard 
to episcopal authority. He considered each bishop ' as 
the one supreme authority in the Church, that is in his 
own place, with no one above him, except as, for the sake 
of ecclesiastical order and expedience arrangements had been 
made by which one was put over or under another.' ^ But, 
it might be asked, why not insist upon the Bishop observing 
legal forms ? One cannot tell how he would have answered 
this question. Perhaps by asking another. By what 
authority in England were these legal forms restricting the 
divine authority of the Bishop imposed ? Certainly not 
by that of the Universal Church. Or he might simply 
have said he did not like to contend with his Bishop. 

Eventually the Bishop yielded the point of suppressing 
Tract 90 ; but he still insisted upon an open Letter to him- 
self in which his judgment that Tract 90 is ' objectionable, 
and may tend to disturb the peace and tranquillity of the 
Church,' together with his ' advice that the Tracts for the 
Times should be discontinued,' was to be recorded. It 
was to be done instanter. This Newman agreed to do. 
His journal for March 29-31 is as follows : 

March 29. — Manning went. J. W. went, and Church, 
Daman and Prichard. Wrote my Letter to the Bishop ; 
it going to the press as I wrote it page by page. Dined 
in rooms early. 

March 30. — The rest of the Letter through the press — 
dined early in rooms — letter seen by Pusey. 

^ Apologia, p. 107. 


March 31. — And by the Archdeacon, who went over 
to Cuddesdon with it to the Bishop. Letter came out. 

Two days later the Bishop wrote as follows : 
The Bishop of Oxford to J. H. Newman 

Cuddesdon : Friday, April 2, 1841. 

My dear Sir, — I cannot let our late communications 
terminate without a few last words to express my entire 
satisfaction, and gratification with your letters received 
yesterday morning, both printed and written. 

It is a comfort to me too (now that calm has, as I hope, 
succeeded the threatened storm) to feel assured, that though 
I have perhaps caused pain to one in whom I feel much 
interest, and for whom I have a great regard, you will never 
regret having written that letter to me. It is one calculated 
to soften and to silence opponents, as also to attach and to 
regulate friends, whilst the tone and temper of mind with 
which it is written must please and gratify aU who read it. 
Believe me, my dear Sir, faithfully yours, 

R. Oxford. 

Mrs. Froude to J. H. Newman 

March 30. 

My dear Mr. Newman, — I must trouble you again with 
a few lines to thank you for sending me the Tract and also 
to say that your secret is quite safe with us. Indeed we feel 
highly honoiired to be the only people in the world besides 
two others who have a secret of yours in keeping. I was 
glad I did not write this yesterday, for I was (I must confess) 
sadly disappointed and very much disposed to be cross 
at the news contained in your note, viz., that ' the Tracts 
were to cease at the Bishop's expressed desire.' It is indeed 
humihating to find how human feelings mix themselves 
up with our good motives. I had fancied I only wished 
the advancement of your views for the sake of Truth, and 
yet I find in my mind that I was more vexed altogether 


yesterday at thinking of the triumph of our adversaries, 
than at losing the Tracts for their own sakes. 

But William took it in so different a way, and is so 
much quieter-minded, that he has much reconciled me to 
what has happened. He says he is quite sure that nothing 
could have passed which will tend more to advance the 
cause, and that there are quite Tracts enough published 
already to * poison the universe,' and that the rapid sale of 
Tract 90 shows that you are like Samson and have slain 
more Philistines at your death than all you did during your 
life, for though many have, of course, bought Tract 90 only 
from curiosity, still, if they will read it, they will be sure 
to get some good from it, so I think one may see that 
one of the effects of this controversy has been to raise the 
tone of those who oppose you most decidedly. 

I enclose you some Queen's heads [postage stamps], 
as William says I am to pay for the Tract in them. . . Pray 
do not trouble to answer this, and pray excuse it if I seem 
to you to write too familiarly, for somehow you have been 
so kind and friendly to me, that I never could write in a 
more formal way. 

A Cambridgeshire clergyman wrote as follows on 
March 30 : 

I have on more than one occasion expressed my gratitude 
for the benefit of your writings, not only as regards myself^ 
but the church in this country at large ; and I feel it no 
more than due to truth ... to express to you at this 
particular time, when you are as the writer of Tract 90 
assailed with more than usual injustice, the effect of the 
Tract upon my mind and those with whom I am in the 
habit of comparing opinions. ... I began to read the 
Tract with some alarm when I heard of the sensation it 
had made at Cambridge , . . my astonishment was never 
greater than when I got to the concluding words. . . . 
I hope there is no foundation for the report . . . that the 
Archbishop has forbidden the continuation of the Tracts. 
So absurd a thing cannot be true. But I am prepared for 


anything after the late wicked caricature of the Sacrament 
in the Palace under his Grace's immediate sanction. 

I am rejoiced with the Tract. Its notoriety will give 
notoriety to others that have preceded it . . . you have, 
I think, broken the chain which bound the Christian com- 
munity to a deadly and deadening system — a system as 
remote from that which has been preserved to us in the 
Liturgy as truth is from its counterfeit etc. 

Mr. Roundell Palmer (afterwards Lord Selborne) wrote 
on April 2 : 

I have accidentally seen a proof copy of your letter 
to the Bishop of Oxford. I will never trust myself to form 
an opinion as to the future again if it does not do extensive 
good, and far over-balance any untoward consequences of 
late events. At any rate, I as an individual, feel deeply 
indebted to you for it. 

A Gloucestershire Rector wrote on April 6 : 

My dear Newman, — I think it is probable that about 
this time you will be receiving far too many letters for your 
convenience . . . still I am tempted to add to the number 
. . . my object is simply to express to you personally what 
(I see by my Oxford Paper) some persons . . . intend to express 
publicly in the way of Declaration.^ The only part of that 
Document with which I am now concerned is that in which 
the subscribers ' gratefully acknowledge the eminent services 
which the Authors of the Oxford Tracts have done in re- 
calling the public attention to the distinctive principles 
maintained by the Church of England in common with the 
whole Chiirch of Christ.' I certainly hope to see that 
Declaration or some other to the same effect largely signed. 
Meanwhile this will tell you what that could not, that to 
one of those authors in particular I look with a great degree 
of affection as well as respect, and I firmly beHeve that 
the manner in which that affair of the Tract 90 has been 

^ The Declaration alluded to was drawn up by W. Palmer of Worcester. 
It was suppressed in deference to the Bishop of Oxford. See Life 0/ 
Pusey &c. vol. ii. pp. 205 S, 


closed will establish the author in that position which it is 
most for the benefit of the Church that he should continue 
to hold. If I regret the Tract, I rejoice more in your letter 
to the Bishop. It must do great and lasting good. 

On April lo, Newman wrote to a friend : 

From what I am told, and from the letters every post 
brings from friends and strangers, I doubt very much whether 
the sum total of relief and comfort which Tract 90 has 
given, does not equal the sum total of the annoyance it 
has inflicted. I have no misgivings about it, nor have had. 
I feel it to have been necessary. 

Robert Wilberforce wrote on April 8 : 

... I know you are not a person who wishes for praise, 
but I hope that it will not be indifferent to you to receive 
the expression of my hearty sympathy and regard from 
the humblest member of Christ's Church. Respecting the 
prudence of publishing No. 90 I do not speak, but I am 
well satisfied that nothing can be more unjust than the 
attacks made upon it. Its main principles are proved 
beyond controversy. But your letter to the Bishop is 
written in a tone so calm. Christian, and convincing, that 
I am satisfied it will have great weight with all good men. 
I hope the inclination you there express to give up your 
Church at Oxford will not be acted upon. 

A clergyman living at Bath wrote on April 9 : 

He had been reluctant to write to Newman ' on an 
occasion like this when, if ever, a man ought to be accessible 
only to his friends strictly so called.' But he now felt ' it 
would be disingenuous, unjust, and unkind in one of the 
class for whose comfort and relief Tract 90 was written, 
and who has received both from it, not candidly to state 
as much, to thank you for it, and to place the statement, 
tho' not his name at your disposal ' &c. 

The following letter, with some others, was sent by 
Newman to his sister Mrs. J. Mozley. On the top of it is 


written : ' My dear J., — These letters are too kind to show to 
anyone but Aunt. Ever yrs, J. H. N.' 

From a Country Clergyman 

[April 9]. 

My dear Sir, — It will appear, I am afraid, great pre- 
sumption in me that I should think of addressing you under 
your present severe trial, but I cannot resist doing so. . . . 
The grounds of comfort I can see, to any one else I should 
be apt to suggest, but to offer them to you would be folly 
in the extreme, knowing so much better as you do the 
ways of a merciful Providence. There is perhaps one thing 
I may be permitted to say, which is, that it seems to me 
a peculiar favour done you that your trial should be allotted 
you in the season of Lent when your own prayers and those 
of your friends can be offered up for you without distraction, 
for that we are to pray for you I needed not the admoni- 
tion which I received from Jno Keble this morning, who 
cheers himself up with the sanguine hope of a blessing 
attending you from your ' behaving so well under very 
trying circumstances.' 

That I have been bearing you in mind ever since I 
have read your most valuable 90th Tract the following 
passage from my Tuesday sermon may perhaps serve to 
show you, and for this purpose I send it to you, not with 
the foolish notion of suggesting grounds of comfort — ' It 
seems to be a part of the nature of high truths to be received 
with an unkind welcome, and those therefore who were 
appointed to deliver them must look for bitter words, but 
submit to them meekly with the humble hope that the 
day will shortly come when these high truths will be dis- 
covered and valued, and then the deliverer of them will 
come to be loved, and these bitter words be reflected upon 
with sorrow, and the meekness with which they were 
received be duly prized.' 

After saying this I must now come to discharge what 
I look upon as a duty, which is to thank you from my heart 
for the delight as well as benefit I have derived from 


your Tract, the opposition to which I can account for 
in no other way than by supposing it is intended to 
give it a greater pubhcity, and advance the cause of 
CathoHcity, &c. 

■ On the same day, April 9, his sister, Mrs. J. Mozley, 
wrote to him : 

Dear John, — I was only waiting till Aunt had finished 
reading your letter to the Bishop to write and thank you 
very much indeed for sending it to me, but more, I was going 
to say, for writing it. I really cannot but look upon that as 
a happy combination of circumstances which has extracted 
it from you, for I think it tends more to set your character 
in a true point of view to well disposed persons than any- 
thing you have hitherto written. / knew all this was in 
you, but you must be aware that to persons who have not 
been brought up with you, or long accustomed to your 
manner of thought, yours is a difficult character. There is 
something which seems almost paradoxical which they 
cannot understand. I suppose you had heard remarks of 
this sort made on your letter to the V.C, by your notice of it 
to the Bishop. / had — Some people could not quite under- 
stand that this was your habitual feeling — they thought 
you had written under some feeling of depression etc.^ 
As to my opinion of your letter to the Bishop, I must say 
it seems to me quite perfect in its way, and I cannot fancy 
anybody reading it, unless they had a most fearful twist 
of mind without being mollified towards the writer . . . 
you are very kind to be thinking of us so much in the way 
of sending things that interest us, &c. 

The correspondence connected with Tract go cannot 
be better concluded than with the following letter written 
by Newman in 1863.^ 

^ The meekness of Newman's letter to the Vice-Chancellor seems to 
have given rise to the impression that he was cowed. It was the expression 
of his ' habitual deference to persons in station.' Letter to the Bishop of 
Oxford, last paragraph but one. 

* For the circimistances under which this letter was written see Pusey's 
Life, iv. I. 


To THE Editor of the ' Times ' 

Sir, — It would be a great impertinence in me to say one 
word on the subject of the Oxford controversy which has 
lately occupied your columns, nor do I write this with any 
such intention. But Mr. Maurice has thought fit to intro- 
duce my name into his criticisms on Dr. Pusey, and to cast 
imputations on me, which, as a matter personal to myself, 
I think you will in fairness allow me to repel. 

I would rather be judged by my own words than by 
Mr. Maiu-ice's interpretation of them. I distinctly repudiate 
his accusation that I maintained, either in Tract 90 or else- 
where, the right of a man's subscribing to the Thirty-nine 
Articles in a non-natural sense. Nor ought he to speak 
from mere memory, as he seems to confess he did, when 
making a serious charge against another. I maintained 
in Tract 90 that the Thirty-nine Articles ought to be sub- 
scribed in their ' literal and grammatical sense ' ; but I 
maintained also that they were so drawn up as to admit, 
in that grammatical sense, of subscription on the part of 
persons who differed very much from each other in the 
judgment which they formed of Catholic doctrine. 

I ask your permission to quote the passage to which 
Mr. Maurice refers : 

* Their framers constructed them in such a way as best 
to comprehend those who did not go so far in Protestantism 
as themselves. Anglo-Catholics, then, are but the successors 
and representatives of those moderate Reformers ; and 
their case has been dhectly anticipated in the wording of 
the Articles. It follows that they are not perverting, they 
are using them for an express purpose, for which, among 
others, their authors framed them. The interpretation 
they take was intended to be admissible, though not that 
which the authors took themselves. Had it not been 
provided for, possibly the Articles never would have been 
accepted by our Church at all. If, then, their framers 
have gained their side of the compact in effecting the recep- 
tion of the Articles, let Catholics have theirs too in retain- 
ing the Catholic interpretation of them. . . .' Tract 90, 
pp. 81 and 82 (first edition, February 1841).* 

^ Via Media, ii, 346. 


After illustrating my position from Burnet, I end the 
Tract with the following allusion to M. Guizot and M. 
Thiers : 

What has lately taken place in the political world will 
afford an illustration to point. A French Minister desirous 
of war, nevertheless as a matter of policy draws up his 
State papers in such moderate language that his successor, 
who is for peace, can act up to them without compromising 
his own principles. The world observing this, has con- 
sidered it a circumstance for congratulation, as if the former 
Minister, who acted a double part, had been caught in 
his own snare. It is neither decorous or necessary, nor 
cdtogether fair, to urge the parallel rigidly ; but it will 
explain what it is here meant to convey. The Protestant 
profession was drawn up with the purpose of including 
Catholics, and Catholics now will not be excluded. What 
was an economy in the Reformers is a protection to us. 
What would have been a perplexity to us then is a per- 
plexity to Protestants now. We could not then have found 
fault with their words ; they cannot now repudiate our 
meaning (p. 83).^ 

I will take this opportunity of adding that I never held 
that persons who subscribed the Thirty-nine Articles were 
at liberty to hold all Roman doctrine ; but I aimed in 
Tract 90 to open the Articles as widely towards all Roman 
doctrine as was consistent with that ' literal and gram- 
matical sense ' which at p. 80 I professed to be maintaining. 

I have wished to confine myself in the above to matters 
of fact ; and with the same view I am bound, in justice to 
Dr Pusey, to state, what perhaps no one but myself is in a 
position to testify — viz., that he had no responsibility in 
the publication of the Tract, and has no responsibility in 
regard to it to this day, except so far as he has in writing 
committed himself to portions of it, or to certain of its 
principles. He defended me, when it excited notice, from 
the generosity which is his characteristic ; but I am quite 
certain that he did not like it as a whole, and in all its parts. 

I am. Sir, etc. 

The Oratory, Birmingham, 
Feb. 24 [1863]. 

^ Via Media, ii. 347. 



Dr. Russell of Maynooth, who ' had, perhaps, more to do with my 
conversion than any one else ' — ^Thomas Scott, ' to whom (humanly speak- 
ing) I almost owe my soul ' — Walter Mayers, ' who wcLS the human means 
of this Beginning of Divine Faith in me.' — Correspondence with Dr. 
Russell and Wiseman. 

Tract 90 brought Newman into correspondence with 
one whose services to him he gratefully acknowledges in 
the * Apologia/ his ' dear friend Dr. Russell, the present 
President of Maynooth, who had, perhaps, more to do 
with my conversion than any one else.' In striking contrast 
to the refined and scholarly Irish priest was another to 
whom Newman acknowledged himself a debtor — the stout 
old Calvinist, Thomas Scott of Aston Sandford, ' to whom 
(humanly speaking) I almost owe my soul.' ^ 

Newman's indebtedness to Dr. Russell needs no ex- 
planation ; but the precise nature of his obligations to 
Scott will not be so intelligible to the present generation 
as they were when the ' Apologia ' was written. Scott 
(i 747-1 821) was a clergyman whom Newton, the spiritual 
guide of the poet Cowper, converted from Socinianism. 
Thorough Calvinist as he became, in intention at least, 
Scott's relations with his party were not always peaceful. 
He took up a strong line in inveighing against Antinomianism 
and insisting on the need of good works. This was dis- 
tasteful to many persons, and thought by them to savour 
of Arminianism. They apparently wished him to confine 
his preaching to such topics as Justification by Faith only, 
Assurance, Predestination, and the like. Virtuous habits 
would be a matter of course with those who were spiritually 
minded. The following is a typical example of Scott's 

^ The following digression will, it is hoped, be excused, on the ground 
that it contains some facts connected with Newman's early life which 
seem worth rescuing from oblivion. 


experience, as he describes it himself. He advertised a 
course of lectures on the Epistle to the Ephesians, to be 
delivered at the Lock Hospital in London. The lectures 
were well attended while he was going through the doctrinal 
part of the Epistle ; but when he came to the fourth chapter, 
and spoke ' more particularly on Christian tempers and 
the relative duties/ there was an uneasiness which culmin- 
ated when he preached on the words in the fifth chapter. 
See that you walk circumspectly &c. ' The charge,' he says, 
' was everywhere circulated that I had become an Arminian ; 
and at once I lost half my audience.' 

Newman studied Scott's writings when he was a boy of 
fifteen, and they planted deep in his mind the doctrine 
of the Holy Trinity. On the practical side — and this is 
worth noting — he admired in Scott ' besides his unworldliness, 
his resolute opposition to Antinomianism, and the minutely 
practical character of his writings.' * I deeply felt,' he 
continues, ' his influence, and for years I used almost as 
proverbs what I considered to be the scope and issue of his 
doctrine, Holiness rather than peace, and Growth the evidence 
of life.'^ These two maxims might almost be said to sum 
up the religious spirit of the Oxford Movement in its 
antagonism to Evangelicalism. 

It seems likely enough that Scott's writings helped to 
preserve Newman from the subjectivism in religion, the 
tendency to dwell upon one's own feelings and emotions, 
as if they were the things that really mattered, instead of 
upon the objective truths of Revelation, which was one 
of the weak sides of much that was truly admirable in 
Evangelical piety.^ Scott took up Evangelicalism because, 
as the story of his life seems to suggest, it was, in a lati- 
tudinarian age, the highest form of religion with which he 
became acquainted. Happier than Scott, Newman escaped 
from the prison-house, because he found at Oxford traditions 

1 Apologia, p. 15- 

* Those who wish to understand the fearful evil which, in Newman's 
eyes, this subjectivism, or religion of feeling, was during the earher part 
of the last century, should read his lecture on ' Preaching the Gospel,' 
in Lectures on Justification, pp. 312 ff. 'A man thus minded does not 
simply think of God when he prays to Him, but is observing whether he 
feels properly or not ; does not beUeve and obey, but considers it enough 
to be conscious that he is what he calls warm and spiritual ; does not 
contemplate the grace of the Blessed Eucharist, the Body and Blood of 
his Saviour Christ, except — O shameful and fearful error — except as a 
quality of his own mind.' — Ibid, p, 330. 


and survivals of a deeper and, in the literal sense of the 

word, more refined religious spirit.^ 

Something may now be said about that ' excellent man, 

the Rev. Walter Mayers, of Pembroke College, Oxford, who 

was the human means of this beginning of divine faith in 

me.' 2 Mayers was Newman's classical master at Ealing 

School. He was an extreme Evangelical. A short ' Life ' 

of him was published a year or two after his death. From 

this we learn that he had ' conscientious scruples in reference 

to the large portion of his time devoted to tuition.' He 

would have liked to devote himself entirely to his duties as 

a clergyman. But this was impossible, for he had relations 

largely dependent upon him so ' he became more reconciled 

to his situation, and endeavoured to redeem a portion of the 

time devoted to classical studies, for religious instruction. 

Little encouragement was derived, in consequence of the 

apparent indifference with which his devotional exhortations 

were received; he had, however, reason subsequently to 

rejoice in the fruit of his labours ; some of his pupils, who 

were eminently distinguished for their superior talent and 

classical attainments in the University of Oxford, having 

likewise become zealous servants of the Lord. The path 

of duty eventually proves the path of pleasantness and 

way of peace, nor will the believer ever regret following its 



Little did the zealous biographer dream that the fruits 
of Mr. Mayers' pathetic endeavours were to be something 
more than a slight increase of the number of Evangelical 
clergymen who had taken good degrees ! 

Mr. Mayers deserved something better than to have his 
life written in the style and terminology of an Evangelical 
tract. Newman did more justice to his memory in a few 
simple words which he spoke at his funeral : 

* His was a life of prayer. The works and ways of God, 
the mercies of Christ, the real purposes and uses of life, the 
unseen things of the spiritual world, were always uppermost 

^ One must not, however, overlook what Newman owed to the writings 
of the early Fathers, to which his attention was first directed by an 
Evangelical Church History. 

2 Apologia, p. 4: 


in his mind. His speech and conversation showed it. . . . 
It pleased God to show to all around him the state of his 
heart and spirit, not only by the graces of a meek and 
peaceable and blameless conversation (which is, of course, 
displayed by all good Christians), but also by the direct 
religiousness of his conversation. Not that he ever spoke 
for the sake of display — he was quite unaffected, and showed 
his deep religion quite naturally.' 

Yet, in spite of his admiration for good men among the 
Evangelicals, in spite of his indebtedness to many of their 
writers, Newman's judgment went dead against their 
system. The truth is, he never was a real Evangelical ; he 
never passed through the conventional experiences — ' con- 
viction of sin, terror, despair, news of the free and full 
salvation, apprehension of Christ, sense of pardon, assurance, 
joy, and peace,' &c. Of his conversion, when he was 
fifteen, i.e. of the fact that he then ' fell under the influences 
of a definite creed, and received into his intellect impres- 
sions of dogma, which, through God's mercy, have never been 
effaced or obscured ' — of this he was as certain as that he 
had ' hands and feet,' but it did not pass through the 
conventional stages. So little was it according to rule, 
that after he had described it in the ' Apologia,' people used 
to write to him, telling him that ' he did not yet know what 
conversion meant, and that the all-important change had 
still to be wrought in him if he was to be saved. 'i 

When Newman left Eahng, in December 1816, Mr. 
Mayers gave him, as a parting gift. Bishop Beveridge's 
* Private Thoughts.' It was forwarded with the following 
rather wistful letter : 

Ealing, 31 December, 1816. 

My dear Friend,— With this [you wiU receive Bishop 
Beveridge's ' Private Thoughts,' of which I beg your accept- 
ance as a small token of my affectionate regard. On perusing 
it, you wiU see that the opinions which we have discussed, 
though at present singular are not novel, nor are they 
without authority, for they are deduced from the only 
authentic source. To that source let me direct your atten- 

^ Autobiographical Memoir, Miss Mozley's Letters and Corr., vol.- i. p. 108; 


tion. Be more disposed to form your sentiments upon 
religion from that, than to adapt and interpret it to your 
opinions. I have, of course, had somewhat more experience 
of what is called the world, but I can assure you there is 
no real or substantial happiness to be found in its vain and 
unprofitable pursuits. We are candidates for eternity, and 
should live as such ; if we do not, we shall bitterly lament 
our folly in that day when time is no more, and all that is 
human shall appear divested of every disguise. If you 
know me, you will not suppose I would discourage activity 
or exertion in the profession which may be selected for you, 
or that I would encourage melancholy views. Seek first 
the Kingdom of God and His righteousness is a precept 
which reminds us something is to be the secondary object, 
and the exhortation to Rejoice in the Lord always, may 
admonish us that the Christian only has a right to joy, be- 
cause he only can rejoice in the Lord. Did you ever read 
Doddridge's * Rise and Progress,' or Law's ' Serious Call ' ? 
both admirable pieces of practical Divinity. When you are 
settled at the seat of learning, I shall hope to hear of your 
proceedings. I write this in the midst of packing, as I 
intend to leave in the morning. To-morrow will commence 
a new year ; may it be propitious to you, about to embark 
on the tempestuous ocean of hfe — not, I hope, without a 


Yours affectly., 

W. Mayers. 

The religious principles which Mr. Mayers instilled into 
his pupil's mind were new to him. There was no trace of 
Calvinistic teaching in Newman s home. This was positively 
affirmed in later years by his sister, Mrs. J. Mozley.^ His 
father most certainly was not an Evangelical ; and there 
is not a particle of evidence that his mother had any 
leanings that way. Further, the religious atmosphere of 

^ See Appendix I. It may be observed that Calvinist and Evangelical 
seem often to have been used as synonymous terms. The majority of the 
early Evangelicals were Calvinists, though there was a substantial minority 
which was not. It should be remembered that those who were Calvinists 
did not make much, as a rule, of the Calvinistic doctrine of Predestination, 
which horrifies those who do not hold it. 


Ealing School seems not to have been distinctively Evangeli- 
cal. The coldness with which the boys received Mr. Mayers' 
devotional exhortations, the fact that in his letter he speaks 
of the ' opinions ' which he and Newman discussed as being 
' singular/ both suggest that he was trying to introduce 
something new into the school. It may also be noted 
that the boys used to act the plays of Terence. Newman 
himself was one of the characters in a play which some 
forty years later he made more suitable for the present day, 
and renamed the ' Pincerna.' Now, considering the aversion 
which strict Evangelicals had for the theatre, it seems im- 
probable that a school which was intended to meet their 
requirements should go out of its way to have plays at 
all. But this is a point which it would require a minute 
knowledge of the customs of the times to speak upon with 

Newman, nearly sixty years afterwards, wrote in the 
little volume given him by Mr. Mayers, in which the above 
letter was carefully preserved, the following memorandum : 
' This work is not mentioned in my '' Apologia," because I 
am speaking there of the formation of my doctrinal opinions, 
and I do not think they were influenced by it. I had 
fully and eagerly taken up Calvinism into my religion before 
it came into my hands. But no book was more dear to 
me, or exercised a more powerful influence over my devotion 
and my habitual thoughts. In my private memoranda I 
even wrote in its style.' i 

It is a pity that he did not state which among the 
doctrines of Calvinism were most eagerly taken up by him ; 
but the Calvinistic doctrine of predestination was almost cer- 
tainly not one of them. Indeed this doctrine does not seem 
to have exercised much influence even upon those of the 
Evangelicals who were most staunch in their Calvinism. 
They believed in it without assimilating it. The doctrines, 
apart from those common to all or to nearly all Christians, 
which really seem to have moulded their hearts and 
minds were : (i) Total Depravity — that is, the belief that 
human nature was entirely corrupted by the Fall ; (2) 
that Justification is the imputing of righteousness, not the 
bestowal of it. Of these doctrines the former kept its hold 

^ Just as Newman was able to throw himself into the minds of others 
so, when he was young, he could catch the style of any writer who took 
his fancy. 


upon Newman much longer than the latter. It is perhaps 
the subtle but all-pervading influence of these two doctrines 
on the minds of persons who really embraced them, that 
accounts for a certain sense of oppression which steals 
over the mind of those who try to read the books which 
influenced Newman in his youth. 

Beveridge's ' Private Thoughts ' is a solid treatise on 
the duties of a Christian life. It is severe in its tone, and 
makes no appeal to the imagination or to the emotions. 
Most persons would think twice before placing it in the 
hands of a beginner, for fear lest its austerity might repel 
him. The event, however, fully justified Mr. Mayers' 
prudence as a spiritual guide. It speaks much for the 
maturity of Newman's religious life when he was only 
sixteen, that such a book should have captivated him. 
It is as if a Catholic boy of the same age were to fasten eagerly 
upon Rodriguez, or the devotional writings of Blosius and 
Bona. Those who are fond of associating Newman's 
memory with that of St. Philip Neri, the founder of the 
Oratory, will recall the account, given by Bacci, of the 
saint's early days, how ' his devotion had a certain 
maturity about it. It did not consist in those exhibitions 
of childish piety, which are laudable enough in themselves, 
such as dressing little altars and the like, but in praying, 
reciting psalms, and, above all, in eagerly listening to the 
Word of God. He never spoke lightly, as boys will do, 
of becoming a priest or a monk, but concealed the wish of 
his heart, and began even from his childhood to shun all 
parade, of which he was ever an implacable enemy. '^ In 
many respects Newman was a ready-made disciple of 
St. Philip before he came to know him ; in none more than 
in his implacable hostility to all parade. But a comparison 
between St. Philip and Newman is a domestic matter which 
one has hardly a right to intrude upon the reader. 

To go back to Dr. Russell. ^ His study of Leibnitz, 
whose ' System of Theology ' he translated a few years 

'Bacci's Life of St. Philip (English translation), i. 5, 6. 
^ Born in 1812, died in 1880. The account of Dr. Russell's literary 
labours in the short biography of him in the Dictionary of National Bio- 
graphy shows him to have been a man keenly interested in the advance- 
ment of learning, and quite indifferent to personal renown. In the course 
of his life, he refused two bishoprics and one archbishopric. He was only 
thirty when Gregory XVI chose him to be the first Vicar-Apostolic of 
Ceylon, and he had to go to Rome to escape the burden. 


later, disposed him to watch with interest any signs of a 
revival of Catholic doctrine in the Reformed Churches. 
He was one of the very few among the Catholic clergy to 
encourage Dr. Wiseman, with whom he was co-editor of 
the ' Dublin Review/ in the favourable view which he took 
of the Tractarians. ' Newspaper assaults/ Wiseman 
complained, ' remonstrances by letter (and from some of 
our most gifted Catholics), sharp rebuke by word of mouth 
and resisting to my face, were indeed my portion/^ It 
took Dr. Russell a long time before he could summon up 
courage to write to the great Oxford divine, for, besides 
being a comparatively young man, he was one whom it 
cost an almost heroic effort to bring himself forward. 
But at last, as often happens in such cases, he made up 
his mind quite suddenly. He had read Tract 90, and was 
deeply pained by the parts which treat of the 28th Article 
and the condemnation of the doctrine of Transubstantiation. 
It was suggested in the Tract that the framers of the Article 
had chiefly in their minds a gross view about the doctrine 
in question. The natural inference was that this view was 
current at the time of the Reformation. One shrinks 
from describing this supposed view. All that need be 
said is, that he would be a very ingenious man who could 
reconcile it with the teaching contained in the following lines 
of the Lauda, Sion, a hymn which was as familiar to the 
early Reformers as ' Lead, kindly Light ' is to modern 
Englishmen : 

Nulla rei fit scissura, 
Signi tantum fit fractura, 
Qua nee status nee statura, 
Signati minuitur. 

Rev. C. Russell to J. H. Newman 

Maundy Thursday [April 8, 1841]. 

Reverend Sir, — The amiable and unassuming spirit 
which pervades all your writings induces me to hope that 
the following observations, although they come from an 

1 Quoted from an ' Autobiographical Fragment ' published in the 
Ushaw Magazine, March 191 6. For two adverse judgments, delivered, 
as is evident from their style, by men sure of an attentive hearing, see 
Newman, Letter to Dr. Pusey [Anglican Difficulties, ii. pp. 4, 5), 


humble Irish CathoHc priest, will not appear, at least 
offensively, obtrusive. If any apology be necessary, I 
trust I shall not offend your delicacy by pleading the kind 
and benevolent disposition which I cannot help reading in 
all, especially your more recent pubhcations. I write in 
no vain or forward spirit. I have not communicated my 
intention to any person — I have never seen you, nor do I 
see any reason to hope for that honour. And yet I cannot 
bring myself to look on you as a complete stranger. I 
have long regarded with the deepest interest the very 
remarkable movement which originated in your exertions. 
I can scarcely account, even to myself, for the strangely 
powerful impulse by which I am drawn towards yourself, 
personally a stranger in all except your admirable writings. 

It grieves me, therefore, to observe, that, amid the varied 
and profound erudition in all that concerns your own Church 
which your works display, there is to be met much mis- 
apprehension of many doctrines and practices which I 
have been taught since childhood to venerate, and which, 
were they indeed as you represent them, I should abhor as 
fervently as you yourself can do. I need hardly [say] that 
I do not hope to discuss them all in the compass of a letter, 
for the perusal of which I can only reckon on the candour 
which I beheve to characterise you. I perceive from the 
pubHc prints, that a prelate, whom I venerate and love, 
has undertaken the task — I well beheve in the most kind 
and friendly spirit. But I trust that the date of this letter 
wiU sufficiently explain why I take the Hberty of calling 
your attention to one precious doctrine in particular — 
that of the Blessed Sacrament — a doctrine, I doubt not, 
as dear to you as it is to myself. 

I beg, then, with the most respectful earnestness, to 
assure you that you have utterly misconceived our behef upon 
this point, raising up to yourself in it horrors, which every 
member of our Church discards as impious and revolting. 

In explaining the 28th Article you write (No. 90, p. 47) : 
' What is there opposed as '' Transubstantiation " is the 
shocking doctrine that the *' body of Christ/' as the Article 


goes on to express it, is not " given, taken, and eaten, after 
a heavenly and spiritual manner, hut is carnally pressed 
with the teeth, that It is a body and substance," ' etc. 

Your whole exposition of this Article proceeds on the 
supposition that our conception of * Transubstantiation ' 
is of the most gross and repulsive nature, that we think of 
the adorable Body of Our Lord in the Eucharist as of an 
earthly and fleshly thing ; of the eating and drinking as 
animal and corporeal actions, a carnal eating — it is painful to 
write it in this sense — ' tearing with the teeth,' of the Blessed 
Body — a natural and bloody drinking of the adorable Blood. 

That you should explain the Article of your Church in 
the most Catholic sense of which the words or the circum- 
stances render them susceptible, far from complaining, 
I rejoice and am sincerely thankful. But I equally lament 
that this explanation of your own belief should involve the 
imputation upon us of doctrines as odious and repulsive, 
as they are opposed to our true creed. It is to this I beg to 
call your attention in the spirit of most respectful, but, I 
must add, of most earnest remonstrance. Far from entering 
in any way into our behef of the Eucharist, the gross imagina- 
tions ascribed to us are rejected with horror by every 
Catholic ; and you will find in Veron's ' Regula Fidei ' (a 
small volume which I earnestly recommend to your notice, 
and which I should feel most grateful if permitted to send 
you) how far we may go upon the opposite side without 
trenching upon Cathohc principles (' Reg. Fid./ c. ii, n. 4) 
It is true that in the statement of our doctrine, very strong 
language has occasionally been employed by our divines, 
of which Bishop Taylor, as cited by you, produces some 
examples. But these expressions are always understood 
in a sense quite different from that which you attribute to 
them. In the passages quoted from Bellarmine by Bishop 
Taylor, and also by Dr. Pusey in his letter to the Bishop of 
Oxford (p. 134, I beheve), a limitation is appended which is 
altogether omitted by the latter, and imperfectly stated 
by the Bishop, but which, notwithstanding, divests it of 
all its offensiveness. In explaining the abjuration of Beren- 


garius (which you yourself bring forward), Bellarmine 
expressly declares that the Body of the Lord is seen, touched, 
broken, and bruised, through the medium of the species, 
which ALONE are formally touched, seen, broken, and 
bruised (Lib. iii. cap. 23, answer to the 4th objection) ; and 
he rejects as impious and horrible (Lib. i. cap. 7, object. 4) 
the ' Capharnaite ' conception of the mode of eating, which 
Bishop Taylor accuses him of adopting. It is thus the 
Church understands the phraseology employed in the 
retractation of Berengarius, which, however strong it may 
appear, can scarcely surprise us when we remember the 
evasions by which he had explained away his former abjuration, 
and which, by using the strongest language, it was intended 
to exclude from the new one. 

Rest assured, therefore, that you have completely 
misconceived us ; and attribute to the necessity of ex- 
cluding cavils, as offensive to your notions as to ours, the 
strong, and sometimes [coarsely] ^ sounding language 
occasionally employed, but always understood with the 
limitation mediantibus speciebus. It may be useful to 
remind you that the very strongest phrases are transcribed 
literally from the CathoHc Fathers. Of the annexed extracts 
from St. John Chrysostom, three are cited by BeUarmine 
in the very passage objected to him. 

(i) 'To those who desire it. He hath given Himself 
not only to see, but to touch, and to eat, and to fix the teeth 
in His flesh ' [ifnrrj^ai Tov'i ohovra^ rfj aapKi], 46th Hom. 
on St. John, Lect. 3, vol. viii. p. 72. Bened Ed., Paris, 1728. 

(2) ' Of what sun-Hke briUiancy should the hand be, 
which cutteth the Flesh asunder,' 82nd Hom. on Mat., sec. 5, 
vol. vii. p. 788. 

(3) ' Behold thou seest, touchest, eatest Him,' ib., sec. 4. 

(4) ' He gives Himself to thee, not to see only, but to 
touch, to eat, to receive within,' p. 787. 

(5) * But why do we add " which we brake " ? for thou 
mayest see that this is done in the Eucharist, — What He 
did not suffer on the Cross, this He beareth for thee in the 

* The writing here is illegible. 


Oblation, and submitteth to be broken {avkx^rai StaKkcofLevo';) 

to mi all/ 

In more than one passage of the Tracts the policy of 
our Church in defining the mode of the Mysterious, is con- 
demned as presumptuous, and is elsewhere condemned in 
less measured terms. I, on the contrary, regard the very 
stringency of the definitions as under Heaven the great 
preservative of our Faith ; and it has always appeared to 
me that the universal and contemptuous forgetfulness in 
your Church of this heavenly truth, until revived by your 
own enthusiastic and ill-requited exertions, might have 
taught you the wisdom of that ancient policy which, avoiding 
the human device of ' open questions,' has always, as each 
new heresy arose, shut out controversy in all essentials 
for ever, by a clear and stringent definition. 

Permit me, again. Reverend Sir, to apologise for this 
ill-timed, perhaps, but certainly not ill-meant or [un- 
generous] 1 communication. I trust my motives, which, 
believe me, are of a higher order, will not be misunderstood. 
1 have long felt a warm, though distant and respectful 
interest in all that concerns you. I have watched with 
anxiety any approximation to that faith which is my dearest 
and highest hope, and at the altar of which I am an unworthy 
minister, I never fail to remember you in my worthless 
prayers. — I have the honour to remain, Rev. Sir, with the 
utmost respect, 

Your obt. servant, 

C. Russell. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. C. Russell 

Oriel College, April 13/41. 

Dear Sir, — Nothing can be kinder or more considerate 
than the tone of your letter, for which I sincerely thank 
you. It will relieve you to know that I do not accuse your 
communion of holding Transubstantiation in the shocking 
sense which we both repudiate, but I impute that idea of 
it to our Articles which, I conceive, condemn a certain 

^ The word used is not legible. 


extreme view of it which some persons or party [?] in your 
Church have put forward against the sense of the sounder 
portion of it I am quite aware of Bellarmine's explana- 
tions ; I am aware that well-informed R.C/s hold the 
spiritual presence in the Eucharist ; but should be very 
loth to think that our Article was regarding such a belief 
when it spoke of Transubstantiation. If I have not said 
so in the Tract, it was because my object in it was not to 
defend you, but to exonerate our Articles from what is 
traditionally imputed to them. And in doing so I was taking 
the line of your own writer Davenport, or a Sancta Clara, 
who, if I mistake not, commenting on this particular Article, 
says, ' Capharn ait arum haeresim procul dubio spectat/ 

I heartily wish that I could extend to all your received 
doctrines the admission I make concerning this — which is 
that you have adopted a word ' Transubstantiation ' con- 
veying a wrong idea, which practically you explain away.^ 
O that you would reform your worship, that you would 
disown the extreme honours paid to St. Mary and the Saints, 
your traditionary view of Indulgences, and the veneration 
paid in foreign countries to Images. And as to our own 
country, O that, abandoning your connection with a political 
party, you would, as a body, ' lead quiet and peaceable 
lives in all godliness and honesty.' It would do your religious 
interests as much good in our eyes, as it would tend to rid 
your religious system of those peculiarities which distinguish 
it from primitive Christianity. 

I will thankfully accept Veron's book at your hands, 
if there is any easy mode of conveyance for it. 

I am etc. 

Rev. C. Russell to J. H. Newman 

St. Patrick's College, Maynooth : 
Feast of St. Anselm (April 21 1814). 

My dear Sir, — I had left Dundalk on my way here, 
where I hold the chair of Humanity, before your letter 
arrived. The delight which it gives me has thus been 

* What did he mean by ' conveying a wrong idea ' ? 


delayed for some days. I cannot say how grateful I am for 
the kind and cordial spirit in which it is written, nor how 
much I am consoled by the information it contains. I 
wrote from impulse rather than from reflection. I had 
just returned from the affecting service of our Church on 
Holy Thursday. The striking passage from St. Augustine 
which we read in the Matins of that day was fresh upon 
my mind ; the mystery of the day itself filled me with deep 
sorrow that there should be any to misunderstand ; and, 
although I felt the boldness, and, perhaps, indelicacy, of 
addressing a stranger upon a topic so solemn, yet I trusted 
that I could not err much in yielding to the feelings which 
prompted me to write. Your kind letter completely re- 
assures me. I find that I have not erred in the estimate 
which your writings led me to form of you ; and I thank 
God for the consoling knowledge that full justice is at 
length rendered to a doctrine which, if it be permitted to 
distinguish, may well be termed the most striking evidence 
of His love for us. 

Believe me, my dear Sir, our other doctrines, and the 
practices which flow from them, will bear the same rigid 
examination, and it is only when searched in a Catholic 
spirit, like that with which God has singularly blessed you, 
that their full character is felt and appreciated. Leibnitz, 
the great antagonist of Bossuet, had seen and studied them 
in all their phases, and he is the only uncatholic writer (if I 
may indeed call him so) who has done them full justice. 
I am sure you will read his Sy sterna Theologicum (pp. 103, 201) 
with great pleasure. With how different feeling, for example, 
would you regard the religious honours of the adorable 
Eucharist from what you should have had before — ^if I 
be right in supposing such a time — you came to know with 
us * that which lieth hid within.' And be assured if you 
knew us well, oui doctrine on the Blessed Virgin and the other 
Saints, if you knew the correctness of the views entertained 
by our very rudest people on the value of Indulgences and 
the use of Sacred Images, your fears of our * traditionary 
system ' would disappear — you would feel that our worship 


needed no ' reform ' — you would be less disposed to regard 
our honour of the Saints as ' extreme/ or to be offended by 
our * traditionary view of Indulgences/ Where can the 
true spirit of our devotions be traced so surely as in the 
devotions themselves ? Examine these, and you will cease 
to fear them. Every Hymn has its doxology — every Litany 
begins with a prayer for mercy to the Blessed Trinity, 
and after asking the prayers of the Saint or Saints, closes 
with a supplication again for mercy to the Lamb of God ; 
every Prayer terminates by assigning the Merits of our 
Lord as the ground of its petitions, and the Rosary, which 
is considered the most offensive of all, is but a series of 
meditations on the Incarnation, Passion, and Glory of our 
Redeemer. If I had no other security that these tender 
and consoling devotions, far from defrauding the worship 
of God, on the contrary elevate it, and give it that stability 
which our weak and frail hearts require, I should find it 
in the fact that the holiest servants of God — ^those like St- 
Bernard, or, in later times, Francis Xavier, or Vincent of 
Paul, whose souls burnt on earth almost with a seraph's 
fervour, whose piety towards God was of the sublimest as 
weU as tenderest character — were also, in the same pro- 
portion, the most devoted clients of the Mother of God, and 
the humblest suitors for her intercession. 

But even though your views were correct in point of 
fact as to the dangerous tendency of what you conceive to 
be our * traditionary system,' how much greater the peril 
of salvation for an ordinary Christian in yoiu" own com- 
munion, where the blessed doctrines to which your dearest 
hopes, as well as mine, must cling, are barely (and, indeed, 
not even so,) tolerated, where all your learning and all 
your moderation can scarcely ensure even this for them, 
when the very attempt has raised a storm such as our days 
have never seen before ; and when, on the other hand, the 
uncatholic (and may I add almost unchristian) views 
were those of the mighty majority, and most probably 
remain so even still, when, according to yourself, there is 
no positive creed (but only articles of peace) upon many 


points which I cannot conceive how any one, once admitting, 
can regard as unessential, and when the public formularies 
do not exclude from the highest dignities, and, I believe, 
cannot, such men as^Hoadley, and jWatson, and Balguy. 

Pardonjme that I write thus freely. I trust you will 
believe it is due to no unworthy spirit. To you who have 
borne with me so patiently until now, I do not fear to avow 
the conviction, which I should scarcely venture to make 
public, that in the mysterious views of Providence, a great 
change is gradually coming upon us, even without ourselves. 
Every day, every new event, increases the confidence with 
which I put up my humble prayers that I may be permitted 
to see it fully accomplished — to see your Church once again 
in her ancient and honourable position, to have the happi- 
ness of knowing that you and your devoted friends are 
ministering to the same altar to which my own life is vowed. 
I have long regarded you all as brethren in spirit, separated 
only from us because we did not know each other ; and 
although I was often afflicted by the misconceptions and 
mis-statements which this want of knowledge occasioned, 
yet I could not help but forget and forgive it all for the sake 
of the Catholic germ ^ which lay beneath, and which was 
quickening even the cold and languid and [word illegible] 
forms into life and vegetation, and, under God's grace, 
was forcing its way through the stiff and unpromising soil 
upon which it had fallen. Oh I may you find your best 
reward in restoring to your beloved and revered Church 
the glory, which, alas, she has lost. Human means will never 
effect this change. Bossuet and Leibnitz failed of success. 
I do not myself see the means. But my hope is not there- 
fore the less strong. I believe, with all the fervour of my 
heart, that once again the ' weeks will be shortened upon 
our people, that transgression may be finished, and sin 
may have an end.' And I am equally persuaded that in 
the wondrous ways of God, you and your friends have 
been especially raised up, imbued with an especial spirit, 
and fitted with peculiar powers for its accomplishment. 

^ Word uncertain. 


Our political position is, indeed, an unhappy one ; but 
it is the result of circumstances which, as they created, 
may, and, I trust, will amend it. We have suffered much, 
and however it is to be deplored, one can hardly wonder 
at the violence of the reaction which long continued 
oppression has produced. Would that I could see my 
Catholic countrymen freed from a political connexion with 
those with whom they have not, and cannot have any com- 
munity of religious interest, and religious feeling ! 

But I am forgetting myself and overtaxing you. My 
heart, I believe, has outrun my judgment, and I have not 
cared to check it in the belief that you will not misconstrue 
my words nor misinterpret my motives. 

I shall be delighted to have ' Veron ' left at Messrs. 
Rivington's, who, I doubt not, will do me the favour to 
send it forward. The volume contains two other works, 
neither of great interest, with itself. Perhaps when you 
read it you may remember that it comes from one, who, 
though a stranger, feels and prays fervently for your best 
and highest interests. 

I remain, my dear Sir, 

Yours faithfully in our Lord, 

C. H. Russell. 

Newman's answer to this letter has not been found 
among his papers. But it seems very probable that it was 
the letter of April 26, 1841, quoted in the 'Apologia ' (p. 187). 

Rev. C. Russell to J. H. Newman 

May I, 1841. 

My dear Sir, — Knowing the numerous and pressing 
calls upon your time to which your present position 
necessarily exposes you, I should not think of prolonging a 
correspondence which, however gratifying and consoling to 
me, has been, I feel, an unwarrantable tax upon one so 
peculiarly engaged as you, were it not that I am anxious 
to assure you how heartily I unite in the concluding wish 
of your letter. I feel that it is only through that humihty 


and single mindedness — to be obtained by prayer alone — 
that we can ever hope for a great movement to which many 
human obstacles oppose themselves ; and I, with many 
warm and zealous friends, who think and feel with me, have 
long made this the object of earnest prayer, especially at 
the Holy Altar. I propose to myself a visit, during the 
summer months, to France, Rome, Austria, and Bavaria. 
In a first visit the rehgious settlements of these countries 
will be the principal objects of interest to me, and I trust 
I shall leave behind me, among the members of each, the 
same kind and charitable feeUng. My hopes, although 
later events have confirmed and exalted them, are not of 
recent origin. In a short review of a remarkable German 
work — Honinghaus' ' Wanderings through the Domain of 
Protestant Literature ' — which I wrote in the * Dublin 
Review ' a considerable time ago, (No. XIV. i) you may 
find the very same sentiments which I should write to-day 
— bating one or two little words from which I should now 
abstain. May He, who alone can grant that these hopes 
prove not too sanguine — may He, to use the words of your 
Ecclesiastical Almanac, which I have just examined with 
the greatest interest, ' hasten that union and make us worthy 
of entering into it.' You wiU remember that when I spoke 
of your Church, I contrasted it, not with Protestant Churches 
but with our own. I never dreamed of saying (God forbid !) 
that there are not many of her members at the present day 
who earnestly ' aim at being Catholic in heart and doctrine.' 
But I expressed my behef that this struggle must carry 
them beyond if not against the pubUc formularies of their 
faith, and that it required aU your learning to demonstrate 
that it was not so. And my idea in that contrast was this : 
that the position, in your communion, of an individual 
so disposed, was far more perilous than it would be in ours, 
even supposing that there were extremes among us ; because 
with us Catholicism is the rule, and these extremes, if they 
existed, would be but accidental exceptions ; while with 
you, until of late years even the shadow of Catholicism had 
been unknown for an entire century ; and now-a-days though 


the spirit is rapidly spreading, it is still, I fear, though I 
trust not [for] long, the exception — it is a stranger, as it 
were, among your institutions, which if they were not made 
against, certainly were not designed for it, and, if it could 
Hve at all should live in spite of them, instead, as with us, 
borrowing strength and vitality from their aid. In other 
words I wished to say that for an ordinary Christian (and 
it is for these the Church must best provide) the danger 
of lapsing from Anglicanism into Protestantism in its 
most naked forms, is fearfully greater than that of falling 
among us from the doctrines of the Council of Trent into 
superstition or idolatry. To my mind there is much 
significance in this contrast, remembering, as I must, how 
much we depend on external things and circumstances, 
not only for our actual thoughts, but for the habit and 
colour of our minds. 

* I pray daily,' he writes in the concluding portion of 
the letter, ' that you and your friends may be strengthened 
to dismiss all fears of that secondary and traditionary 
system among us, which seems to haunt you. Believe me, 
my dear Sir, it has no existence in fact. ... I am as 
confident as I can be of my own belief that had you the 
same sources (and God will give them to your prayers) of 
information, you would beheve with me that your fears 
are groundless.' 

Newman's answer to this letter, dated May 5, 1841, 
can be read in the ' Apologia.' 

J. H. Newman to Dr. Wiseman (rough draft) ^ 

April 3, 1841. 

Mr. Newman has just received the Bishop of Melipota- 
mus's published Letter and offers him his best acknowledg- 
ments of it. He assures the Bishop that in what he has 
said in his Letter to Dr. Jelf concerning the received system 
in the Church of Rome, he had no intention of assailing or 
insulting that communion, but merely wished to state what 

1 Acknowledging the receipt of a published Letter addressed to him. 



his own view of it was. He had been challenged to state 
his view of it, and he stated it as a fact. He may be wrong 
in it ; if so he is quite willing to be proved wrong ; and if 
he is ever convinced that he is wrong, he will say so. It has 
somewhat pained him to find that the Bishop considers 
that he is ' eager to seize on a prejudice existing against the 
Roman Catholics in the minds of his own Churchmen, as a 
shield to cast between himself and their attacks.' This is 
imputing a motive ; and the less expected by him because 
at this moment he is actually suffering from his own 
communion for his kind feelings towards the Church of 

Wiseman replied promising to suppress the words com- 
plained of in subsequent editions. But he on his side had 
something to complain of, in the way Newman had spoken 
of the ' authorised teaching ' of the Church. 

J. H. Newman to Dr. Wiseman 

Oriel, April 6, 1841. 

My dear Lord, — I thank you for yoiu" Lordship's note 
just received and the kindness it expresses. It gives me 
very great sorrow to pain members of your communion in 
what I write ; but is not this the state of Christendom, 
that we are all paining each other ? If the terms I have 
used pain Roman Catholics, must not I be pained, though 
I am not so unreasonable as to complain of it, at their hold- 
ing us to be heretics and schismatics, as they do ? is it not 
painful to be told that our Sacraments have imparted no 
grace to us ? that we are still in the flesh, that we worship 
Christ in His Sacraments but that He is not there ? Yet 
to hold this is part of their religious system — they cannot 
help it ; it is one of the necessities of their position. And 
it is part of our religious system, and we cannot help it, to 
think that they admit doctrines and practices of an idola- 
trous character into their communion. Such a belief is an 
essential element in our religious profession ; else why are 
we separate from so great a portion of the Catholic world ? 


have we placed ourselves in this miserable position for 
nothing ? 

I trust I never make accusations against Rome in the 
way of railing or insult. I have never meant to say, as you 
seem to think, that your Lordship's authoritative teaching 
is ' blasphemous.' I have not used the word except to 
disclaim the application of it by the English Church to the 
Mass. I have expressly said that the authoritative teaching 
was not such as to hinder other senses of the Decrees of 
Trent short of it, being ' now in point of fact held ' in the 
Roman communion, as considering that what is objection- 
able in the teaching in great measure Ues in its tone, the 
relative prominence of doctrines, and the practical impres- 
sion conveyed. And after all the phrase ' authoritative 
teaching ' is not mine, — but having it urged upon me by 
others, I say in my letter to Dr. Jelf, that in my own sense 
of it, which I explain, I can accept it. On the contrary I 
have quoted at the same time a passage from a work of 
mine in which I apply the word to the formal and recognised 
doctrine of the Church. I say, speaking of the Church of 
Rome, ' viewed in its formal principles and authoritative 
statements, it professes to be the champion of past times.' 

And as to the charge of ' idolatrous usages,' I expressly 
say that I use the word in such a sense as not to interfere 
with their advocates belonging to that Church from which 
it is said that * the idols shall be utterly abolished.' And 
without professing to be able to compare one error with 
another, I am ready to allow that we too have our idolatries, 
though of a different kind. Covetousness is called idolatry 
in Scripture, and I have hinted at other kinds of possible 
idolatry in a letter I have just written to the Bishop of 

I feel as much as any one the lamentable state of Christen- 
dom, and heartily wish that the communions of Rome and 
England could be one — but the best way of tending to this 
great end seems to me to be, in charity and meekness, to 
state our convictions, not to stifle them. 

Your Lordship's faithful servant, 

J. H. Newman. 


In Mr. Ward's ' Life of Cardinal Wiseman/ there is a 
letter to Mr. Phillipps in which Wiseman complains of ' a 
most distressing letter from Newman/ which had painfully 
dispirited him.i ' I had written him/ he says, ' a letter 
in consequence of one in the Tablet last week from Oxford, 
harsh against O'Connell, as I had some interesting particulars 
concerning O'Connell's conduct at the prehminary meeting 
of the Institute. On this point Newman's letter was satis- 
factory.' Wiseman's letter was preserved by Newman, 
and from it we learn that O'ConneU ' brought two very 
beautifully worded and conciliatory resolutions, respecting 
the state of feeling at Oxford.' After a heated discussion 
which lasted three hours, O'Connell, ' rather than have 
a public difference of opinion upon so delicate a matter 
withdrew his resolutions.' 

^ Vol. i. p. 372. 



' Alas ! I cannot deny that the outward notes of the Church are partly- 
gone from us, and partly going ' (see Sermons on Subjects of the Day, 
p. 335). 

The apparent termination of the affair of Tract 90 left 
Newman * without any harass or anxiety ' on his mind.i 
It was natm-al that he should feel an inward peace after 
the meekness with which he had borne the contumely 
with which he had been treated by the University, and the 
arduous act of obedience which he had rendered to his 
Bishop. Then the doubt which had assailed him in the 
autumn of 1839 seems to have been almost quiescent. 
Nevertheless he felt that retirement and self-effacement 
became him, and in consequence withdrew more and more 
to Littlemore, and occupied himself with his translations 
from St. Athanasius for the Library of the Fathers. 

His security did not last long. 

' I had,' he records in the * Apologia,' * determined to 
put aside all controversy, and I set myself down to my 
translation of St. Athanasius ; but between July and 
November, I received three blows which broke me. 

(i) ' I had got but a little way in my work when my 
trouble returned on me. The ghost had come a second 
time. In the " Arian History'' I found the very same 
phenomenon, in a far bolder shape, which I had found in 
the Monophysite. ... I saw clearly that in the history of 
Arianism, the pure Arians were the Protestants, the semi- 
Arians were the Anglicans, and that Rome now was what it 

1 Apologia, p. 139. He had been given to understand that his Letter 
to the Bishop of Oxford would, so far as the bishops were concerned, 
terminate the matter. But the ' understanding ' was not respected. 


was then. The truth lay, not with the " Via Media," but 
with what was called *' the extreme party/' . . . 

(2) * I was in the misery of this new unsettlement when 
. . . the bishops one after another began to charge against 
me. . . . They went on in this way, directing their charges 
against me, for three whole years. I recognised it as a 
condemnation ; it was the only one that was in their power. 
At first I intended to protest ; but I gave up the thought 
in despair. . . . 

(3) ' As if all this were not enough, there came the 
affair of the Jerusalem Bishopric. . . . Now here at the 
very time that the Anglican Bishops were directing their 
censure upon me for avowing an approach to the Catholic 
Church not closer than I believed the Anglican formularies 
would allow, they were on the other hand fraternising, by 
their act or by their sufferance, with Protestant bodies. . . .' * 

These were the three great blows, but there were other 
troubles besides, such as (i) the extremes into which the 
' ultras ' were rushing, (2) Keble's relations with his own 
Bishop, (3) the contest for the Poetry Professorship which 
was made a theological question. The obvious man for the 
post was Isaac Williams, but an opposition, which proved 
successful, was raised against him because he was a 
Tract arian. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Oriel : July 7, 1841. 

My dear Keble, — I have just returned to Oxford from 
Cholderton and find your kind note. When there I saw 
the British Critic which I had not seen before. I asked 
T. M. [Thomas Mozley] at once how he came to speak 
about ' apoplectic ' etc. — he declares he had no notion of 
Faussett's person whatever. He had seen him once in the 
pulpit ten years ago ; this will relieve you, but I am afraid it 
cannot be given out, for no one but a friend will believe it. 

The B.C. has been and is a matter of great anxiety to 
me. The difficulty is how to bring things home to T. M. 
without dispiriting him. I am quite sure that he writes 
in perfect simplicity and good humour, and that he thinks 

^ Apologia, pp. 139-142. 


that article good humoured. I bargained to see all his 
articles in proof, but hearing that this was upon No. 90, I 
thought I was too near a party to see it with propriety, 
and some one at my elbow, whom I asked, agreed. My 
sister made T. M. put in some softening things and was 
very anxious, and there is on all hands a great wish to avoid 
excesses, if one saw the best way of doing it. I suppose 
T. M. would have no objection whatever himself not to 
write except upon given subjects such as you might name, 
if he can get others to write for him. I think that one 
such excess will not do harm, though a train of them would. 
I have some satisfaction that the long Vacation has com- 
menced, it is like bed time at school, soothing and oblivious 
— people go and bathe in the sea, or drink waters, or travel, 
or rusticate, and annoyances are forgotten. 

I ought in honesty to say that I had been so anxious 
about the Article in question, that when I saw it in print 
and had the explanation about ' apoplectic ' I was agreeably 

Ever yours affecly, 
John H. Newman. 

Thomas Mozley had just taken over from Newman 
the editorship of the British Critic. Under his tolerant 
and genial auspices, this Review practically became the 
organ of the extreme men, such as Ward and Oakeley. His 
first number (July 1841) led off with a contribution for 
which Newman had declined to be responsible. This was 
Oakeley's famous article on Bishop Jewel, of which it is 
enough to say here that more than anything else it marked 
the parting of the ways between the old and new school of 
Tractarians. The editor's own contribution was a castiga- 
tion of Dr. Faussett, the Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity, 
for a blatant piece of rhetoric which he had just shot off 
against Tract 90. It was a castigation having the supreme 
felicity of being very witty and richly deserved. The 
victim, of course, could not have liked it, and Pusey, 
Keble, and Newman felt that it transgressed the bounds of 
charity. But nearly every one else seems thoroughly to 
have enjoyed it. The passage which it was such a relief to 


Newman to learn was not intended to be physically per- 
sonal, is as follows : 

' He [Dr. Faussett] confesses to a great difficulty in 
mere reading, not to speak of understanding what he reads. 
Two or three pages of quotation or argument he speaks of 
as a "long," "wearisome," ''tedious," "perplexing," 
" irksome task " ; "a prolixity well calculated to bewilder 
the reader and cause him to lose the thread of a disjointed 
argument " ; " an entangled web of sophistical reasoning." 
So often do such expressions recur, that one is painfully 
reminded at every other page of headache, plethora, drowsi- 
ness, vertigo, depression of spirits, and other apoplectic 
symptoms. Knowing therefore the extreme difficulty some 
people find in mental operations, we are willing to suppose 
the delay before publication was no more than the Professor's 
constitution required. But for his own avowals on this 
point, we might have thought some explanation necessary.' 

Dr. Faussett had discharged his piece just before the 
Long Vacation, thus making an effective reply difficult. 
He had done the same thing three years before ; but on 
that occasion Newman got his reply through the press 
within twenty-four hours. ^ 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

July 20, 1841. 

My dear Keble, — I am much concerned at your news 
about Young — I suppose this may be henceforth the case 
in some Dioceses, but I cannot understand its taking place 
on a large scale. 

As to T. M. [Thomas Mozley] will you please say more 
at length what you think best. The Review is Rivington's ; 
we cannot change about editors at our pleasure — nor can 
we force him to stop the Review. If we give it up, I suppose 
it will get into the hands of our opponents, but I assure you / 
have not the slightest personal wish to keep it in our hands. 
My only feeling would be that we were all rather hasty with 
T.M., but this is a thing which neither he (I am sure) nor I 

^ ' A Letter addressed to the Margaret Professor of Divinity.' Re- 
printed in Via Media, vol. ii. 


shall trouble about. I think it might be a good thing 
certainly for Wilson to put facts before him — but I can 
fancy him, though defending himself to W. throwing up 
the Review thereupon — which may be a good thing, but 
W. should know what he is doing. 

The question is whether it is not more possible to put 
T.M. under control than to extinguish the Review itself. 
But I assure you I have no opinion about it further than 
I say. Would you undertake a general control over it 
privately, which T.M. I am sure would gladly yield to you. 

Ever yours affectly, 

J. H. N. 

P.S. — On second thoughts I hardly like Wilson writing 
to T.M. I suspect he would not write in the most persuasive 
manner ; I do not speak at random.^ 

' The news about Young ' was that Keble^s curate, the 
Rev. Peter Young, had been refused Priest's Orders. When 
he presented himself for examination, a regular set was 
made at him by the Bishop and his chaplains. He was ques- 
tioned about how he interpreted the Thirty-nine Articles, and 
about his views on the Real Presence, and finally sent back 
unordained. This incident had a great effect on the sensitive 
conscience of Keble. He began to ask himself if a clergy- 
man whose views were antagonistic to those of his Bishop 
ought to hold preferment under him. The Bishop, as will 
appear later on, was somewhat taken aback by the possibility 
of such a result. It was one thing to bully a curate in 
deacon's orders, another to drive a man like Keble into 
resigning his living. 

J. H. Newman to E. L. Badeley, Esq. 

Oriel College : July 28, 1841. 

My dear Badeley, — I thank you very much for your 
friendly letter, sorry as I am for the cause of it. If I say 
very little in answer, impute this, first to the difficulty of 
conveying what I would say in a few words, and next to 

^ The Letter from Keble to which the above is an answer will be 
found in Mss Mozley's Letters and Corr. &c. ii. 313. 


my hand being very tired with much writing. I trust 
things will turn out better than you anticipate, and that 
our credit will not be affected by one of those misfortunes 
to which all parties are liable. 

Yours, My dear Badeley, very sincerely, 

J H. N. 

The following letter apparently refers to Keble's letter 
on ' Catholic Subscription.' ^ In consequence, it would 
seem, of Newman's remarks, Keble omitted the note in 
which in the case of clear heresy, disobedience to a National 
Synod was contemplated, and struck out ' famous ' before 
Cranmer's name. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Sept. 4, 1841. 

My dear Keble, — As to an appeal you seem (Letter p. 29) ^ 
to allow of continuing in ministration in the supposed case 
of clear heresy in the Diocesan. And in your note you seem 
to contemplate the case (viz. in the same case) of dis- 
obeying a National Synod also. But is there not this 
difficult question. What is heresy ? and again, considering 
in what deplorable ignorance the clergy, including the 
Bishops, are, of what Catholic doctrine is (for I suppose 
this is just the fact, though I do not mean to say we are 
not in some ignorance also) are you not hazarding all sorts 
of crude decisions, even if short of heresy, if you bring 
matters before an Episcopal Synod. 

I can understand that a Convocation would be more 
aggressive, but I declare I think an Episcopal Synod would 
be quite as uncatholic, or rather more so. We should 
be better represented, there would be far more intelhgence 
and power on our side in a Convocation than in an Episcopal 
Synod — yet do we not (rightly) deprecate a Convocation ? 
Is not appealing to a Synod bringing matters to a fearful 

^ * The case of Catholic Subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles con- 
sidered : With especial Reference to the Duties and Difficulties of Enghsh 
Catholics in the Present Crisis : In a Letter to the Hon. Mr. Justice 
Coleridge, etc. London, 1841, Not Pubhshed.' Pubhshed by Dr. Pusey 
in 1866 together with Tract 90. 

" P. 20 in Pusey 's Edition. 


issue ? There are many men who only want as much as 
some Synodical ac^aXfia to give up the EngHsh Church. 
I do not mean they know their position. Nay who can 
answer for himself what he would think of our Church 
with an heretical note upon it.i If the Church of Antioch 
or of Alexandria hath erred, at least it was in communion 
with other Churches, and orthodox persons might console 
themselves under an Arian Bishop that they also were 
part of the great Catholic body, but if our English Church 
makes itself heretical, we (individuals) actually are in 
communion with no part of the Catholic Church whatever. 
Is not an Independent in communion with the Church 
almost as truly as we should be ? This is what strikes 
me. And then, as I said, What is heresy ? is the Pro- 
testant doctrine of Justification ? is the denial of the 
Real Presence ? or the denial of Episcopal grace, or of 
the Catholic Church ? I really fear that the majority 
of our Bishops at the moment would be on the Protestant 
side on all these points. But anyhow heresy must be 
defined for practice. 

N.B. — Do you advisedly call Cranmer famous ? I only 
mean lest people should say you were canonizing. 

Ever your affectly, 

J. H. N. 

Newman's difiiculty in finding a definition of heresy 
which would include the doctrines of Protestantism arose 
from the fact that these doctrines had not, of course, been 
condemned by any General Council to which he as an 
Anglican could appeal. He had to meet the same difficulty 
a few weeks later when he wished to protest against the 
Jerusalem Bishopric. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Sept. 4, 1841. 

My dear K., — I have just received your parcel. As Pusey 
has returned, he shall read the letters before they go to 
your brother. I think you should say something (I have 

^ These were ominous words. Within a few weeks the Jerusalem 
bishopric scheme was to bring him face to face with this position. 


not read your paper yet) on the difference between one's 
own bishop and another's, and a Bishop as a doctor and a 
governor, e.g. my word to the Bishop of Oxford ' a Bishop's 
hghtest word is heavy ' apphes to my own Bishop not to 
the Bishop of Chester. . . . We have all been thinking 
of you and your trouble. One is glad that the Bishop is 
apparently drawing back, except that it is very hard upon 


Ever yours affecly, 

J. H. N. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Sept. 14, 1841. 

My dear Keble, — I cannot help hoping that things are 
better with you than you anticipate. This story has come 
to Oxford : Ridley advised his father-in-law, the Bishop, 
not to send back Young's papers to you, ' for,' said he, 
' when Keble sees how very mild his statements are he will 
give up his living.' The Bishop was much struck and 
astonished, and said, ' Then I shall not send them back.' 

Again [entre nous) from what we hear, though of course 
we must expect heterogeneous proceedings, it is not at all 
certain that Sir Robert Peel will not be taking men called 
Puseyites, as thinking them more suited for certain places. 

On the whole, as things have before now been at the 
worst as regards the clergy, so they now are as regards the 
Bishops, and they will improve I think. Recollect the 
clergy left off their wigs before the Bishops did. All in 
good time.^ 

I wish I could promise myself the pleasure of coming 
to see you when Archdeacon F[roude] does. But I do not 
know how. I am just getting Athanasius to press, which 
will be a very anxious matter — and, while one's thoughts 
get dissipated by leaving one's work, the printer will be 
sure to make it the excuse for indefinite irregularity. If 
there were a railroad between us I might come for a day — 

^ Up to this point the letter has already been published by Miss Mozley. 


but it seems hard to lose two days on the road. If I did 
the thing, I should go up to town by the railroad and get 
down to you early next morning, and leave you in middle 
of next day so as to get to Oxford late at night the same 
day. In this way I should only be two days from Oxford, 
and more than one day of it with you. 

As to the little Puseys, P. says they are better, but I do 
not know how to credit him. His mother ^ read me part of 
a letter from him, in which his sanguine tone was the worst 
part of it — as she seemed to feel. The facts were so serious. 
I mean the complaint seemed so deeply seated in Lucy and 
Philip. Mary is pretty well, e.g. he said that the medical 
men say that Philip will, they hope, be able to walk with 
a high shoe ; though he cannot escape a stiff knee, and that 
they do not see why he should not recover his hearing — 
meanwhile P. alone can make him hear. 

My sister,^ who is easily overset, has been fidgetted 
with doing too much, and her eyes have failed her. The 
doctor says, I think truly, all she wants is change of air ; 
but I am glad to say she is now much better, which I 
attribute to the R.'s coming. It is likely, among other 
things, that the British Critic has annoyed her. 

Ever yours affectly, 

J. H. N. 

P.S. — The printer promises (pie crust) six sheets a week. 
You are to have one — Keble one, Marriott three, I two. 

Newman records in his diary that on October 5 he 
received a letter from ' Walter.' One may fairly pre- 
sume that this was Mr. Walter of the Times, and that 
his letter contained the news concerning the Jerusalem 
Bishopric which is referred to in the following letter to 
Keble. The Times at this period was friendly to the 
Tractarians and took a strong line against the Bishopric 

^ Lady Lucy Pusey. It was she who when Mrs. Pusey died ' with the 
true instinct of a mother, knew what would best help her son, and. against 
his first wish, sent for Newman.' ' God,' wrote Pusey to Keble, ' has 
been very good to me. . . . He sent Newman to me (whom I saw at my 
mother's wish against my inclination ) in the first hour of sorrow; and 
it was like the visit of an angel.' Pusey 's Life, ii. lOO, loi. 

2 Mrs. Thomas Mozley. 


scheme. It may be worth recalHng in this connection 
that during the preceding February, ' while Mr. Newman 
was correcting the proofs of No. 90, he was also writing 
to the Times the famous letters of Catholicus ; a warning 
to eminent public men on the danger of declaiming on 
popular commonplaces without due examination of their 
worth.' 1 

These Letters were one of the earliest specimens Newman 
gave of his power as an unsparing hitter. They were 
provoked by an oration of Sir Robert Peel's on the occasion 
of the opening of a Reading Room at Tamworth in which 
he ' had spoken loosely, in the conventional and pompous 
way then fashionable of the all-sufficing and exclusive 
blessings of knowledge.' ^ Even Newman's friends did not 
know who Catholicus was. It is interesting to speculate 
what the feelings of the * Four Tutors ' and the * Heads ' 
would have been if the secret had come out ; and whether 
they would have appreciated their luck. They owed some- 
thing to the Catholic instinct of deference to authority. It 
had saved their backs from the stick with which the 
shoulders of good Sir Robert, and ' the arch sophist ' Lord 
Brougham, had been belaboured. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J . Keble 

October 5, 1841. 

Dear Keble, — I enclose what will be no consolation to 
you, but think you ought to see. It really does seem to 
me as if the Bishops were doing their best to uncatholicise 
us, and whether they will succeed before a rescue comes, 
who can say ? The Bishop of Jerusalem is to be conse- 
crated forthwith, perhaps in a few days. M. Bunsen is 
at the bottom of the whole business, who, I think I am 
right in saying considers the Nicene Council the first step 
in the corruption of the Church. . . 

Newman's authority for this last statement, though he 
seems to have forgotten it, was a letter he received from 
T. D. Acland written at Bologna, May 11, 1834 • ' Bunsen 

^ Church, Oxford Movement, p. 313. 

2 Ibid. The Letters are reprinted under the title of * The Tamworth 
Reading Room ' in Discussions and Arguments. 


took your book [' The Arians '] with him ; he was much struck 
with the beginning, and with the economy. I dont know 
whether you will succeed in shaking him in his strong 
Protestantism. He says the Council of Nice was the begin- 
ning of Popery, of adding an authority to Scripture,' &c.i 

Bunsen was for many years the Prussian Minister at 
Rome. He spoke English perfectly, and made the embassy 
a kind of social and intellectual centre much frequented 
by English visitors.^ Newman made his acquaintance 
in 1833, when he was in Rome. He seems to have become 
fairly intimate with him. He writes to his sister : ' We have 
encouraging accounts from M. Bunsen, who has received 
us very kindly. There is every reason for expecting that 
the Prussian communion will be applying to us for ordination 
in no long time.' ^ 

Bunsen came to England in the summer of 1841 to 
negotiate the Jerusalem Bishopric. An enchanting man 
he must have been, for he captured Pusey in the course of a 
single interview. The bait apparently was the conversion 
of the Jews and the setting up in Jerusalem of a Church of 
the Circumcision. To this was joined a characteristically 
sanguine hope on Pusey' s part that Prussian Protestants 
who placed themselves under the jurisdiction of the new 
Bishop ' would be absorbed into our Church to which they 
had united themselves, and gradually imbibe her spirit 
and be Catholicised.' It speaks much for Pusey 's optimism 
that, in the midst of the outcry against Tract 90, he should 
have thought the then prevailing spirit of the Church of 
England so contagiously Catholic. As for the Jews, he 
somehow inferred from his conversation with Bunsen that 
there was a considerable number of them in Jerusalem 
already converted and only awaiting a Bishop to be formed 

^ When Bunsen had finished reading The Arians he delivered a most 
outspoken judgment. ' M. Bunsen has pronounced upon our views, 
gathered from The Arians with singular vehemence. He says that, if we 
succeed, we shall be introducing Popery without authority, Protestantism 
without Uberty, Catholicism without universality, and Evangelism with- 
out spirituality.' Letter of Newman's to R. H. Froude (Mozley's Letters 
and Corr. ii. 128). One may take it for granted that if Bunsen later on 
became acquainted with the Parochial Sermons he must have reconsidered 
the last item of this wholesale condemnation. 

* The dialogue ' How to accomplish it ' (published in 1836, reprinted 
in Discussions and Arguments) opens on the staircase of the Prussian 
Embassy as if this was the most natural place in the world for two 
Englishmen to meet. 

^ Letters and Corr. i. 331 ; of. ibid. ii. 59. 


into a Church. Pusey's eyes, thanks to Mr. Hope and 
others, were soon opened to what he was letting himself 
in for, and he thoroughly agreed with Newman's Protest.^ 
Another conquest of Bunsen's, and this not an ephemeral 
one, was Samuel Wilberforce, then Archdeacon of Surrey. 
He wrote on August 21 to his brother Robert : 

' I have seen a great deal of Bunsen. What a noble 
fellow he is ! He is now, it seems, bringing to completion 
a truly noble plan by which, I trust, on a back current, 
Episcopacy will flow into Prussia. It is at present an 
entire secret, but he has made me privy to his councils.' 

And on October 30 he wrote to a lady : 

' I have of late got very intimate with Bunsen. . . He 
showed me numbers of the King's private letters, and 
detailed to me his conversations. The King's intention 
is most pure. He quite wishes to gain over his people to 
true Episcopacy : he longs to give up the keys of the Church, 
but says, ''No, thank you," to the Lutherans, who wish 
to take them from him, "because," he says, "God gave 
them me no doubt to keep till I could give them up to His 
Bishops, and then I will. . ." If time would serve I could 
tell you most interesting traits as to this Jewish Bishopric, 
and his right-minded simplicity of purpose,' &C.2 

On October 7 Newman heard from Mr. Hope. He 
replied in a tone of excitement unusual with him. 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq, 

Your account of the Jerusalem matter is fearful — the 
more I think of it the more I am dismayed. On me it falls 
very hard — here I am labouring with all my might to keep 
men from Rome, and as if I had not enough trouble, a new 
element of separation is introduced. I feel so strongly 

^ See Life of Pusey, ii. vii. passim. 

- Life of Bishop Wilberforce, i. 198 ff. This idea 'of Episcopacy on *a 
back current,' i.e. the conferring of Holy Orders on men too indifferent 
to them even to dechne them, was revolting to a layman like Mr. Hope. 
He called the whole scheme ' a Political Protectorate soldered together 
by a divine institution.' 


about it that when I once begin to pubHsh my ' Protest,' ^ 
I think I shall introduce it as a preface or appendix to every 
book and every edition of a book I print. If people are 
driving me quite against all my feelings out of the Church 
of England, they shall know that they are doing so. Is 
there no means of impeaching or indicting someone or 
other ? Lawyers can throw anything into form. Should 
Bishop Alexander commit any irregularity out in Palestine 
might not one bring him into Court in England ? I really 
can fancy our people giving an indirect sanction or 
connivance in the course of a few years to that dreadful 
scheme, which writers in the Record and elsewhere have 
put forth, of building the Jewish Temple for Jewish 

My reasons for thinking of an action (prospectively) 
against the Standard or the like was this — that till I was 
cross-examined on my oath people would not believe I 
had not some understanding with the Pope. 

Ever yours, 

John H. Newman. 

In a pamphlet ^ which he published two months later 
Hope justified Newman's trust in lawyers. He showed 
that Dr. Alexander, as a Bishop of the United Church of 
England and Ireland, could be called to account for any 
irregularities he might be guilty of out in Palestine. If he 
refused to * submit to the Court or its sentence, and the 
Turkish Government should decline to give effect to an 
EngHsh decree, he might not the less really and publicly be 
cut off from and rejected by our Church.' ^ If this happened 
the Church of England would, of course, cease to be com- 
promised by him, and he would lose the protection of the 
English Goverrmient. 

^ The ' Protest ' can be read in Miss Mozley's Letters and Corv. ii. 324, or 
the Apologia, p. 145. It was sent to the Archbishop of Canterbury and 
the Bishop of Oxford on November 11. 

^ The Bishopric of United Church of England and Ireland at Jerusalem 
considered in a Letter to a Friend, by James R. Hope, B.C.L., &c. London, 

3 Ibid. pp. 54, 55. In a footnote he added : ' The Porte has lately 
deposed a Greek Patriarch at the request of our Government ; surely it 
would not be less courteous in the case of an English Bishop.' 



On October lo Newman wrote as follows to his friend 
Samuel Wood : 

J. H. Newman to S. F. Wood, Esq. 

. I fear this weather has been against yoiu: taking much 
exercise. Pray do make yourself well. Why should you 
not remain in the country through the winter ? . . . Have 
you heard of this deplorable Jerusalem matter ? I do 
dread our Bishops will convert men to Rome, Dr. Wiseman 
sitting still. There is not a single Anglican at Jerusalem, 
but we are to place a Bishop (of the circumcision expressly) 
there, to collect a communion of Protestants, Jews, Druses, 
Monophysites, conforming under the influence of our war 
steamers, to counterbalance the Russian influence through 
Greeks, and the French through Latins. I have written 
it concisely, but, I assure you, not epigrammatically or 
with exaggeration, except that perhaps the Monophysites 
are to be with not under the Bishop. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

So far as concerned the English Government, the 
Jerusalem Bishopric was, as Newman in the letter just 
quoted described it, primarily a political move. France 
and Russia enj oyed great prestige in the East as the official 
protectors of the Catholic and the Greek or Orthodox 
communions respectively. The idea was to construct out 
of such stray Protestants as might be living in Palestine, 
converted Jews,^ and any minor Oriental sects which might 
be ready to fall in with the arrangement, a third great 
communion to be under the protection of England and 
Prussia. The plan was, on the whole, well received by the 
religious world in England. Great things were prophesied 
of it, and subscriptions came in.^ The fraternisation with 

^ Form by, who had lately been to Jerusalem, told Newman that 
there were no AngUcans and only about half a dozen converted Jews 
there. — Mozley, Letters and Corr. &c. ii. 316. 

^ The Society for Promoting Christianity among the Jews promised 
;^3ooo . The late Father William Neville used to tell a story of a fund started 
by some ladies towards the expense of ' the dear bishop's ' morning tub. 
Material for this would have to be brought on the heads of water-carriers, 


Prussian Lutherans and Calvinists gave a Protestant aspect 
to the scheme which dehghted the EvangeHcals. But 
perhaps what pleased them most was the prospect opened 
out of a great work among the Jews, whose return to 
Palestine and conversion, their favourite study of Prophecy 
led them eagerly to anticipate. Liberal Churchmen were 
naturally pleased with the sinking of theological differences 
which a coalition of sects necessarily implies. High Church- 
men such as Hook, Perceval, and Palmer of Worcester, 
the very men who had braved evil report in their defence 
of Tract 90, were pleased with the assertion of the principle 
of Episcopacy which the scheme involved. They were led 
to hope that it would prepare the way for the Prussian 
Church becoming episcopal. 

The following letter to Keble is one among many which 
show how distressed Newman was by the Bishops' charges 
and the Jerusalem scheme. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

October 24, 1841. 

Dear Keble, — ... I expect it was something which 
Pusey scribbled in a note to Jelf, and Jelf sent bodily to 
the Bishop of London, which is the light thing. (Perhaps 
it was a letter of mine to Mill. It was not light.) The 
truth is they cannot bear the plain truth to be spoken to 
them. I am too anxious for others, nay for myself, to say 
anything light about going to Rome. Our Church seems 
fast protestantising itself, and this I think it right to say 
everywhere — not using the word protestant — but not 
lightly. Have you seen the Bishop of Chester's Charge ? 
He seems to me, as far as in him lies, to have cut off Chester 
by it, from the Catholic Church. In such cases I only see 
the alternative of obeying or of calling the Bishop heretic. 
St. Ignatius' words about trifling with the Bishop invisible 

a picturesque Oriental detail which appealed to the imagination. The 
Bishop, who was a converted Jew, was evidently supposed to be as 
thoroughly Anghcised as he was Christianised. But very Ukely the story, 
together with a flippant commentary which was part of it, merely records 
the irreverence of some of the 3'ounger Tractarians. 


are so strong,^ I really see no alternative between den3^ng 
that he is in possession of his functions and obeying him. 
But perhaps, after my saying all this, you will be relieved 
at seeing the Charge, and think more mildly of it. 

As to the Jerusalem matter the simple case is this— 
our government wants a resident religious influence there, 
such as the Greek Church is to Russia and the Latin to 
France, and its power is so great that they say a Bishop 
would be at the head of a large communion in no time, 
though we have no members of our Church there at present. 
So we join with Protestant Prussia to found a sect, and 
put a Bishop over it. Really if one has any right to utter 
such a thing, considering Jerusalem is the spot, there is 
something almost awful in this. 

Ever yours affectly, 

J. H. N. 

P.S. — I am full of dismay lest a secession to the Church 
of Rome is in prospect (years hence perhaps) on the part 
of men who are least suspected. 

A. B. [the name is not legible] is going out to Malta to 
show Greeks and Latins what an English Bishop's wife 
can be like. 

On November i Newman wrote as follows to Mr. 
Walter of the Times : 

J. H. Newman to Mr. Walter 

Oriel College. 

My dear Walter, — I was most obliged by your attending 
to my hint about the Palestine Bishop, and hope, indeed 
I know, that the articles have done good service. 

What would you say to putting the accompanying 
letter into the columns of the Times ? I know it is fierce 
— or what people call bitter — but the Paper, if you thought 
necessary, might disown it. I assure you such acts on the 

* ' It is meet that ye should be obedient without dissimulation. For a 
man doth not so much deceive this bishop who is seen, as cheat the other 
who is invisible.' 


part of our authorities are doing great harm — are unsettHng 
persons* minds. Do you hear that Sibthorpe has con- 
formed to Rome ? this is quite a secret as yet, but will 
probably be known in a few days. The subject you suggest 
is a very favourite one of Rogers', and he caught at it. I 
think he will try to send you some papers on it. It seems 
to me a very important one, but just at this time I am too 
full of Athanasius. 

Yours very truly, 

John H. Newman. 

The Letter to the Times which accompanied this note 
was not published. The following is apparently the rough 
draft of it. 

Sir, — ^The appointment of a Bishop to Palestine on the 
part of the English Church is too grave a matter to be 
passed over in silence by those, who while they are opposed 
to it, do not take the ground against it which has been so 
ably supported in your columns. 

I beg your permission to state the circumstances of the 
case. A few of our Bishops, acting for the whole, without 
bringing the matter formally before the Episcopal College, 
but at most only happening to mention it to several of their 
brethren, perhaps one by one, at the late meeting of 
Convocation, (which was attended by but seven Bishops 
in all) and keeping close their intentions even from parties 
of high consideration staying at their palaces, and from 
their ordinary advisers, resolve on committing, or have 
committed our Church to a measure of a very novel 
character, momentous in point of precedent, and involving 
consequences which no one can at present foresee. 

They are for consecrating a Bishop for a country where 
at present there are no resident members of our Church. 
At Malta they are providing a Bishop for a flock which has 
none ; but in Palestine there is no flock. They send the 
Bishop to make a flock. They treat the country as heathen. 

Last Easter, I believe, there were thirty-five members 
of our Church at Jerusalem. They were travellers ; call 


them residents; call all the British officials Anglicans. 
Suppose these are a round fifty ; is this a number for a 
Bishop ? 

Wesleyan Methodists indeed there are in ' Syria/ Are 
we sending a Bishop to them ? 

But it is urged that there are converted Anglican Jews 
there, for whom a Bishop is needed. How many ? I am 
credibly informed that there are not half-a-dozen. 

Moreover by the late Act under which the consecration 
will take place, the Bishop may exercise within his limits 
' spiritual jurisdiction over the ministers of British congre- 
gations of the United Church of England and Ireland, and 
over such other Protestant Congregatio7is as may be desirous 
of placing themselves under his authority.' Now it is 
probable that all Protestants will be glad to avail themselves 
of this invitation, in consideration of the great temporal 
advantages which will attend it. All Christians, but Greeks 
and Latins, are in a state of persecution in the East. They 
are not recognised, they belong to no Power. Russia supports 
the Greeks, and France the Latins ; but the Protestants 
are almost like the Jews of the Middle Ages. Very desirable 
is it that they should have a Protector ; generous it may 
be in Great Britain to become that protector ; and joyfully 
will these parties hail the protection. But what has this 
to do with the English Church ? Why must the successors 
of Augustine and Anselm become superintendents of a 
mixed multitude of Protestants, and, what is more likely, 
of men of no Profession whatever ? What, for instance, is 
to hinder a congregation of RationaUsts or Socinians putting 
themselves under the ' spiritual jurisdiction ' of the Anglican 
Bishop ? and how is he to manage to dispossess them of 
their Socinianism ? What has a Bishop to do with the 
matter at all ? Why not make a consul instead ? Sanda 
Sanctis. Why profane religion to political purposes ? Why 
send out a Boy Bishop or an Abbot of Unreason, or Pope 
of fools, or Monk of Misrule, to mock the Greek and Latin 
functionaries, and to disgrace, defile, uncatholicize ourselves ? 
I mean no offence whatever to the individual himself on 


which the choice of our acting authorities is said to have 
fallen. The more respectable the person raised to that bad 
eminence, the more anti-Christian is the exhibition. He is 
said to be well versed in rabbinical learning ; this will not 
teach him the difference between Catholic and Protestant. 

Nor is this all. I see it is now professed that an under- 
standing is to exist between our Bishop and the Greek 
orthodox body. This was an afterthought. The main 
object was, and I believe is, to negociate with the heretical 
Monophysites especially of Mesopotamia. Mesopotamia is 
the way to the Euphrates ; the Euphrates is the way to 
India. It is desirable to consolidate our Empire. What 
is the Church worth if she is to be nice and mealy-mouthed 
when a piece of work is to be done for her good lord the 
State. Surely, surely, in such a case, some formula can be 
found for proving heresy to be orthodoxy and schism to be 

Our mouths, however, are stopped by a confidential 
whisper that this is to be the means of introducing Epis- 
copacy into Prussia. What is the worth of Episcopacy 
without orthodoxy ? What is it but a husk pretending 
to be what it is not ? Do the Prussians take the orthodox 
view of the Sacraments ? What respect is due to a Bishop 
who denies the grace of Baptism ? Surely it is an evil 
great enough to find Bishops heretics, without going on 
to make heretics Bishops. 

Is all this the way to keep certain of our members 

from Rome ? or is it on the whole desirable that they 

should go, and a good riddance ? 


The following lengthy letter was written by Newman 
to his sister, Mrs. J. Mozley, on a Sunday, on which day he 
probably left his ' St. Athanasius ' alone. It is a document 
of particular interest both on account of the careful survey 
it gives of the general situation, and the state of men's 
minds ; and also because of the personal information 
contained in it. The ten to twelve hours a day at * St. 
Athanasius/ in the midst of all his poignant anxieties, is a 


fine testimony to Newman's discipline of mind and strength 
of will, especially when one remembers that his work so 
far from being a distraction increased his troubles by 
reviving in an intenser form the doubts which had 
assailed him in 1839. In spite of all these drawbacks he 
achieved a work which 'must always be ranked among 
the richest treasures of English Patristic literature.' ^ 
The two volumes, ' Select Treatises of St. Athanasius in 
controversy with the Arians, translated with Notes and 
Indices/ were published in the * Library of the Fathers' 
during 1843 and 1844. Soon afterwards Newman set to 
work at his ' Essay on Development. ' A scholarly work 
Hke the ' St. Athanasius/ and a literary and philosophical 
landmark like the Development would have been plenty 
to show for four years of unbroken leisure and peace. Like 
many other people Newman seems to have done his best 
work under heavy pressure. 

To return to the letter to his sister. Five days pre- 
viously Newman had written another letter ^ to her, telling 
her not to credit newspaper reports of secessions to Rome. 
' Do not,' he continues, ' believe it. Not one will go. 
At the same time I cannot answer for years hence, if the 
present state of things is persevered in.' In the following 
letter he says, ' It is impossible to answer for what may 
happen any day.' Something must have taken place 
during the interval between the two letters to make him 
more despondent. 

J. H. Newman to Mrs. J. Mozley 

Oriel : Nov. 21, i84i_ 

My dear Jemima, — I am at present so overpowered 
with work that I have in vain wished to write to you for 
a long while past. For the last six or eight weeks I have 
been at the Athanasius for ten to twelve hours every day, 
merely in getting it through the press, and we have achieved 
in that time something like six sheets. The work will not 
show at all ; I had translated it in the early part of the 

^ Dr. Bright in Diet, of Christ. Biog. — ' The most important work 
pubHshed since Bull,' the eaitors of the Oxford Library of the Fathers 
called it, long after Newman had left them. Compare also Liddon, Life 
of Pusey, i. 436. 

- Printed in Miss Mozley 's Letters and Corr, ii. 325^ 


Long Vacation. My health, thank God, does not suffer a bit, 
and if I [it ?] did, I should stop. And I will add for Harriet's 
sake, who has kindly inquired (for I wish you to send this 
to T. and H. under strict secrecy — as to Derby I do not 
know what to say — it is unnatural John should not see — 
and Mrs. Mozley and Anne M. are so kind that I do not 
like secrets with them, but I do not know how to draw 
the line) that my sleep is better than it ever has been. 
It has been gradually improving for years, if it is right to 
boast — and now I sleep sound and am refreshed even 
though I go late to bed. I so dread want of sleep, that I 
should be on my guard against any symptoms of its approach. 
And perhaps it is well that I should be very busy, for 
though I am not apt to be downcast about prospects, 
having never been sanguine, and do not realise so vividly 
as to pain me the difficulties which are on every side, yet 
certainly there is enough to make me anxious, if anxious 
I am ever to be. Yet I am not. 

Our present great anxiety is the matter of Williams' elec- 
tion to the Poetry Professorship. I have been against his 
standing throughout, for a great dread of Convocation — 
but considering / am the cause of the opposition by Tract 90, 
it would have been ungenerous to press my objection, and 
I cannot complain of the difficulty though I foresaw it. 
I have a dread of Convocation exceedingly great — but 
now we hear that, if our opponents succeeded in this contest, 
which I fear they will, there is already a plan to proceed 
to measures which are to have the effect of ' driving us 
clean out of the University/ I suppose this means, when 
put soberly, something like a test about the sense in which 
the Articles are subscribed, which need not be retrospective. 
Now the effect of W.'s failure will be bad enough in itself ; 
and I am sorry to say, I fear some friends of mine, though 
they do not say so, would not be sorry for it. They feel 
the misery of the present state of the Church, without 
half the notes of the Church Catholic upon her — they look 
out for signs of God's providence one way or the other ; 
and since they despair of the Church actually righting. 


they look with some sort of relief, as the second best count, 
for signs of her retrograding and withdrawing her notes. 
And though the mere defeat of a person in a University 
Election is a little thing enough, yet if there is a movement 
of the Church as a whole in all its ranks to disown Catholic 
truth, in its Bishops, Societies, popular organs and the 
like, the fact of a series of disavowals on the part of the 
University is an important fact as part of a series or collection. 
And it cannot be denied, I suppose, that a series of such 
facts might happen amounting to a moral evidence that 
our Church was quite severed and distinct from the Church 
of the first ages. 

At first sight it does not appear that such a conclusion, 
however plausible, would at once lead persons to Rome — 
but it would, even in the way of reason. For they would 
say, since the Church must be somewhere and is not in 
England, it must be in the communion of Rome — and on the 
strength of this inference they would submit in faith to 
what they did not like in the Roman system. I say in 
the way of reason, for to this must be added the undeniable 
agreement of these persons in devotional spirit and practical 
view of things to what is inculcated (I do not say fulfilled) 
in the Roman Church, and again, the support, whatever 
it is, which Rome has in Antiquity. And there is a notion 
springing up that we should improve Rome by joining 
it, whereas we have protested for three centuries and effected 

I need hardly say that I steadily opposed whatever acts 
of intercourse have taken place between anyone here 
(they have been very slight and few) and the Roman Catholics. 
I should like very much to make them better only it is to 
my mind like running into temptation. But when men find 
sympathy there and none at home, and when they find in [their 
Church] private amiable and devout men whom the world 
does not hear of, it is a difiiculty altogether to prevent it. 

Things being in this state, and in a place like this, Catholic 
opinions being ever in course of communication from one 
person to another, it is impossible to answer for what may 
happen any day. At present the men who are most in 


danger here and elsewhere declare they will do nothing 
which I do not approve, and they do really try on the 
whole to act upon this resolve. 

And here by the bye I do not account it any mistake 
to have said that CathoHc opinions will strengthen the 
Church against Rome, when appearances are now vice versa. 
Those opinions are a powerful weapon — they have not 
come into the world for nothing. They must tell either 
for us or against us. If we will not use them others will. 
If a physician promises to cure a patient, it is on condition 
of his taking his medicine, not if he chucks it out of window. 
We have not, for eight years been encouraged by any one 
dignitary of the Church, I think I may say. What can 
you expect ? 

If testimonials are refused, or if any measure passes 
Convocation, such as I have hinted at, only consider the 
consequence ! You cannot destroy opinions — if our church 
does not admit [them] men will look out for a Church that 
does — not to insist on this very grave question, whether 
the denial of certain opinions does not involve a denial 
that we are a branch of the Church. 

Now what has been said is miserable enough — but as 
if it were not enough, a new difficulty, and most unexpected, 
has happened in this matter of the Jerusalem Bishoprick. 
The Church is actually changing her position, by forming 
a special league which she has never done before with 
foreign Protestants. I have reason to think that whether 
on the part of Bunsen or another, still a plan there is for 
organizing a large Protestant league throughout the world, 
and in order to this it is desired, or it will be involved, to 
put the Church of England on a more Protestant footing 
than it has hitherto acknowledged. The present measure 
has been done without advice of the body of Bishops — my 
own Bishop's letter in answer to my Protest is not only 
most kind in itself but most satisfactory on this point — he 
knows nothing at all about the matter except through the 
newspapers. Indeed it is as yet but an inchoate act, and 
I trust it will never be completed — but if it be, it will be 
the most fearful event for the Church of England since 


her separation from Rome. It is a formal recognition of 
the Protestants by communicating with them in a Church, 
without reconcihation on their part. In addition we are 
sending out a Bishop there who they boast is of ' the pure 
blood of Judah/ and his wife of ' the pure blood of Levi ' — 
as if this was not the very error of the Galatians, as if the 
Jewish Law had [not] been abolished once for all. Dr. 
Miirs great fear was our projected union with the Mono- 
phy sites, for one aspect of evil does not do justice to the 
measure — but now the Standard of a day or two since openly 
advocates our union with the Nestorians. I fear I must 
say that, if we go into communion with the Nestorians, 
our own communion will not be safe to remain in — but I do 
not believe we shall — and in order to do my part towards 
preventing it, I have sent the Protest you have heard me 
speak of to the Bishop of Oxford. Magdalen Palmer is 
sending out a Protest too — it will be criticized in point of 
style and manner, because they are his own — but it is most 
powerful and comes from his heart. It will be called mad, 
so will mine — but never mind if it does its work — if it does 
not, why then I can only wish it did. I had intended to 
publish it at once — but the kind way in which my Bishop 
takes it, makes me suspend my purpose. I enclose a copy, 
which send to T. and H./rom them it must come back to me. 

Now I have not mentioned what is doing as much harm 
as anything, the Episcopal charges. At this very moment 
the Bishop of Winchester's is the most pernicious, for he 
does not publish but delays — now Keble's resignation 
depends upon this charge — the consequence is that people 
are kept in a continual suspense, and no one knows what is 
to happen. You may fancy how young men are unsettled 
in consequence — till at length questions like these are 
breaking out, ' Would you go to Rome if K. and N. did ? ' 
While others say that they will go if I go. 

But now I have said more than enough — and so with 
kind love of my Aunt, and hoping A. M. has got well 

I am, my dear^ J. Ever yours affectly, 

John H. Newman. 


On November 24, Newman wrote a long letter to Mr. 
Hope, from which the following extract may be given.^ 

' Nor do I see that any one should be surprised at my 
resolving on such a course. I have been for a long while 
assuring persons that the EngHsh Church was a branch of 
the Catholic Church. If, then a measure is in progress 
which in my judgment tends to cut from under me the very 
ground on which I have been writing and talking, and to 
prove all I hold a mere theory and illusion — a paper theo- 
logy which facts contradict — who will not excuse it if I am 
deeply pained at such proceedings ? When friends who 
rely on my word come to me and say, " You told us 
the English Church was Catholic,'' what am I to say to this 
reproach ? ' 

On this same day, November 24, Mr. Hope was writing 
a long letter to Mr. Gladstone on the same topic. It is a 
letter which should be carefully read by all who are interested 
in the history of the time to which it belongs, though it is 
only possible to give here a couple of short extracts. ^ 

'The "common sense" or general tenor of questions 
is what alone the majority of men are guided by. . . . 
Look at the present state of Christendom, and you will 
see three great divisions — Catholicity, Protestantism, and 
Rationalism . . . the third existing amongst both the 
others, but chiefly in the second class, and by many thought 
to be a necessary development, or even privilege implied 
in its fundamental principles. Poised between the first 
two has hitherto stood the Church of England. ... At a 
moment like this, when to take a step which upon its 
general surface implies Protestantism, and which can be 
secured in its Catholicity only by theological distinctions, 
which (if tenable) are tenable only against theologians 
and upon arguments, is in the "common sense" of the 
day to determine the question at issue. Who will believe 
that distinctions which to your mind are so strong had 

* The whole letter can be read in Memoirs of J. R. Hope-Scott. The 
latter half was also printed in Miss Mozley's Letters and Corr. ii. 328 ff. 
- The whole letter will be found in Memoirs of J . R. Hopc-Scott, i. 323 ft. 


any weight with the hasty generahsers from whom this 
plan has emanated ? Who will be disposed to pause and 
weigh the particulars of communion when he sees that the 
parties engaged in estabhshing it hardly took time even to 
ascertain its general possibility and expedience ? Who 
can think that the Bishops of our church who have 
swallowed the Augsburgh confession, and dispensed with 
the Liturgy have attached any saving sense to the one 
particular of Orders — which was in fact a proposal on the 
Prussian side rather than a condition on ours ? ' 

And again : 

' Had Prussia come to us humbled and penitent, com- 
plaining that separation from the Catholic Church was too 
heavy any longer to be borne . . . then none more gladly 
than I would have prayed that, as far as higher duties 
would allow, she should become one with us. But, as it 
is, she comes jauntily, by a Royal Envoy, with a Royal 
Liturgy in her hand, and a new and comprehensive theory 
of religion on her lips, to propose joint endowment of 
Bishoprics, alternate nominations, mixed confessions of 
faith . . . and a Political Protectorate soldered together 
by a divine institution. . . . And, alas that it should be 
so, she has found amongst our Bishops men ready to grant, 
without a pause or a doubt, all that she desired.' 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

November 26, 1841. 

My dear Hope, — If you knew how busy I am with 
Athanasius (I have been at it from ten to twelve hours every 
day these six or eight weeks) you would pardon, what 
needs it, my sending you Mr. Formby's letter and making 
the mistake about Stapleton. I have written something 
on the general subject of your letters, and now to answer 
your details. 

You have seen I suppose the Prussian State Amiounce- 
nient of the arrangement, which has been in the Papers. 


As to Publishing my Protest, I shall leave that in the 
hands of others. . 

You may show my Protest to whom you like. 

We are doing well in the Professorship absolutely — ^but 
I fear not relatively. At least I hear of a great force coming 
up against us. I think the Wadham story is this— Mr. 
Allies, the Bishop of London's Chaplain (?) wrote to Trinity 
to give his vote to W. because the Wadham people who 
canvassed him had mentioned ulterior measures. But I 
have no right to state reasons ; so you must not repeat it 
thus formally. 

I fear few Colleges would have so united a set of fellows 
as to refuse the College seal to testimonials. It would 
seem to be spiting other men also. For myself, my battles 
have been passed many years. 

Supposing the Standard cannot prove its point about 
the ten men, yet mentioned names, might we not have an 
action against it ? I suspect by its manner it is afraid of 
one. This would be good fun. At first sight I do not 
dislike the idea. 

Ever yrs, 

John H. Newman. 
J. H. Newman to S. F. Wood, Esq. 

Oriel College : December 6, 1841. 

My dear Wood, — It seems unkind in me to have kept 
silence so long — but I am very busy. Oakeley told you 
what I thought generally — for he came to me with a message 
from you. I do not at all like forcing the mind — and I 
recommended that you should join in such services as were 
pleasant to you. He seemed to think that they would 
not wish to adopt any in which you woiild not wish to 
join, and I have not heard from him since he left the place. 

There is one thing very much needed as a law question — 
but I am not sure whether it comes in your range, or would 
be enough of a subject, to know the legal process &c., &c., 
for conducting an impeachment of heresy, e.g. against a 


dignitary. We are in so bad a way, that there seems no 
medium between taking very strong measures in time to 
come — or acknowledging we are not a Church. I wish 
there were some possible way of interfering in this Jerusalem 
matter. Is there no shape in which it could be thrown at 
present, or prospectively, in which the Presbytery could 
interfere ? Supposing the Bishop of Jerusalem, being a 
Bishop of the United Church of England and Ireland, were 
to communicate with a heretic, could one impeach him ? &c. 

As to my deed, I must have a talk with you before I do 
anything. I am in no hurry — and circumstances are so 
unsettled just now, that I hardly know what to settle 

I hope to have better and better accounts of your 

I wish we were out of our present most distressing 
struggle here — but I don't see how it is to be effected. We 
have a very fair chance of success — on the other hand 
retirement is defeat with nothing to show for it. 

Ever yrs. affectionately 

John H. Newman. 

P.S. — As to Bowyer, at any moment I could send up 
a letter — but he is rather acquainted with foreign, i.e. 
Canon Law, than English. 

J. H. Newman to S. F. Wood, Esq. 

Oriel: December 13, 1841. 

My dear Wood, — An account of a Sermon of mine has 
come round to me thro' Oakeley, you and R. Wilberforce, 
so very different from the fact that I write to you about 
it — especially as the last mentioned speaks to me of you. 
He would not like it mentioned, but in short he thinks 
I am turning R.C. — It makes one melancholy when 
friends are in so sensitive a state as he must be. What 
have you said to him to make him think so ? 

My dear W. in many ways I am anxious about you. 
I think that you are in a state of health, such, that it is 


wrong to burden yourself with many thoughts. I have 
intended for some time past to talk to you on this subject. 
As fulness of bread incapacitates one from sacred thoughts, 
so I conceive great weakness of body may make it a duty 
to intermit penitential ones. I give it as my clear judgment, 
and earnestly, from my love for you, that you are likely 
to be doing yourself harm. More than ' likely ' I cannot 
say without seeing more of you. 

R. W. makes me think that your mind is also getting 
unsettled on the subject of Rome. I think you will give 
me credit, Carissime, of not undervaluing the strength of 
the feelings which draw one that way — and yet I am 
(I trust) quite clear about my duty to remain where I am. 
Indeed much clearer than I was some time since. If it is 
not presumptuous to say, I trust I have been favoured with 
a much more definite view of the (promised) inward evidence 
of the Presence of Christ with us in the Sacraments, now 
that the outward notes of it are being removed. And I am 
content to be with Moses in the desert — or with Elijah 
excommunicated from the Temple. I say this, putting 
things at the strongest. But post time is come. Excuse 
an abrupt letter. 

Ever yr. affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

Oriel College : December 231(1/41. 

My dear Hope, — I guess the principal balance on my 
Book account is the trouble you have had about it. When 
you look into it, if really there is as much as £5 due to me, 
please to give it without my name to the Scotch College — 
if it is under £5 please to pay it to Stewart, and I will take 
out some books to the worth of it from him. 

You take the Canons of 1603 as legal authority, I see. 
This has been a bone in my throat. I wish them to show 
the animus of our Church, but directly you make them 
authority, the unhappy Ward is ipso facto excommunicate 



for having been to Oscott, until he repent of his wicked 
error. But there is no resisting law. 

Palmer's ' Aids to Reflection ' contain some very valuable 

What the Bishops are doing is most serious, as well as 
unjustifiable, as I think. Really one does not know but 
they may meet in council and bring out some tests which 
will have the effect forthwith of precipitating us, and 
leaving the Church clean Protestant. Pray, does a majority 
bind in such a council ? I mean in the way of canons. 
Can a majority determine the doctrine of the Church ? 
If so, we had need look out for cheap lodgings. Where 
am I to stow all my books ? 

I think Gladstone will have a hard matter to put an 
end to this contest. 

I am amused at old Mr. Hallam. He used to patronize 
me for some time, and express a wish to see me — when 
he thought it all moonshine — as a curious literary absurdity. 
There is the Bishop of Calcutta too, who says, ' If indeed 
they had given a hint as to some neglected point of ecclesi- 
astical discipline, their voice, as coming from learned 
divines in the seclusion of a University , would have been 
gratefully listened to.' But it is intolerable that fellows 
of College, who are notoriously out of the world, anything 
but men of the world, should presume to interfere with 
us who have been men of the world, practical men, hard- 
working pastors and eloquent preachers, all our days. 
I have taken up enough of your time with this talk. I shall 
rejoice to see your pamphlet. 

Ever jnrs, 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. W. Dodsworth 

Oriel College : The Feast of St. John, 1841. 

My dear Mr. Dodsworth, — I thank you much 
for your Sermon. Nothing will save us but such protests 
as your note in it contains. I believe a very general mis- 
giving is beginning to show itself about our Church's 


Catholicity — and that on the ground of those most painful 
things which some of the Bishops are saying and doing. 
Of course preaching the doctrine of the Holy Catholic 
Church will lead men to Rome, supposing our Bishops 
declare we are not part of the Catholic Church, or that 
we do not hold the Catholic doctrines. I have no confidence 
that the worst results will not take place, because I have 
no confidence that the worst of measures or avowals may 
not issue from authority. This is the beginning and the 
end of the matter. The Church doctrines were not sent 
into the world for nothing — if we will not use them, other 
communions will. 

With these feelings you may think how much I rejoiced 
to see you had spoken so plainly about the Bishop of Chester's 
charge. The Jerusalem matter, however, is what quite un- 
nerves me. It is so wanton an innovation. But I trust that 
Hope's pamphlet shows that we may weather the danger. 

I am sure that they are the worst friends of the Church 
who refuse to look dangers in the face. Her best friends 
are those who, instead of shutting their eyes, tell us when 
she is in danger. For centuries she has been wasting away, 
because persons have made the best of things and palliated 
serious faults. Of course directly one speaks out, one 
is accused of intending to Romanise — but I would speak 
out to prevent what silence would not tend a whit to prevent, 
but to excuse. 

As it is, I fear irremediable evil is done by the acts I 
allude to. Confidence is shaken — and when once a doubt 
of our Catholicity gets into the mind, it is like a seed — 
it lies for years to appearance dead — but alas, it has its 
hour of germinating or is ever threatening. 

It should ever be borne in mind that no serious move- 
ment towards Rome took place, in fact, till the year 1841, 
when the authorities of the Church had more or less declared 
themselves against Catholic truth. 

I have written to you very freely, but, I hope, not so 
that you can misunderstand my meaning. 

Yours very truly, 
JoH. H. Newman. 


J. H. Newman to Rev. W. Dodsworth 

Oriel : October lo, 1841. 

My dear Mr. Dodsworth, — I promised Parker here the 
Tract translation of Bishop Andrewes' Devotions for one 
of his Httle books — and he is going to put it to press at 
once. He had been waiting for the translation of the 
second part, but I fear it is not likely to be ready soon. 
I am sorry to have delayed my answer, but he was out of 
Oxford when your note came. 

Believe me. 

Very truly yours, 

John H. Newman. 

P.S. — (i) Will you kindly express to Mr. Burns my 
regret — and that else I should most readily have given 
him the Tract. 

(2) What do you say to this hideous business of the 
Jerusalem Bishoprick? Dr. Wiseman may sit still — Our 
Bishops will do his work. 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

December 2, 1841. 

My dear H., — I have not yet had time to read carefully 
your letter, but lest you should think I am turning Roman 
outright, I send you last Sunday's sermon — which let me 
have back (unread or read) at once — ^as people want it.^ 

I fully think that if this particular measure comes off, 
it will all but unchurch us. I cannot help facts — it is not 
my doing, it is an external fact. And if it takes place, I 
think it clear that, though one might remain where one 
was, oneself — ^yet we should have no argumejits to prevent 
others going to Rome. 

I am amused at your horror'^of our ultras — some of them 
are the very persons you would like, if you knew them. 

Ever your affectly, 

J.^H. N. 

* Apparently Sermon 21, Subjects of the Day. 


Foris pugnae : intus timores. 

The ' Apologia ' is divided into five chapters. The headings 
of the first four are : 

History of my Rehgious Opinions up to 1833. 
History of my Rehgious Opinions from 1833 to 1839. 
History of my Rehgious Opinions from 1839 ^^ 1841. 
History of my Rehgious Opinions from 1841 to 1845. 

The fifth chapter, which describes a fixed state, is entitled 
'Position of My Mind after 1845/ 

The first four chapters correspond with four markedly 
distinct stages in the history of the author's Anglican 
career. During the first, at least from the time when he 
came to Oxford, the ideas which inspired the Movement of 
1833 were being planted and were ripening in his mind. 
During the second they are in full vigour. During the 
third they are decaying. In the fourth they are practically 
dead. Not as a piece of cheap rhetoric, but as a service- 
able peg for the memory, one might liken these four stages 
to the four seasons of the year. 

The end of 1841 brings us' to the final stage. This 
must be subdivided into two equal periods. The first is 
from the autumn of 1841 to the autumn of 1843, when 
Newman resigned St. Mary's and preached his last Anglican 
sermon, ' The Parting of Friends.' The second ends in the 
autumn of 1845 when he was received into the Catholic 
Church, and appended to his unfinished ' Essay on Develop- 
ment ' the celebrated passage beginning, ' Such were the 
thoughts concerning the " Blessed Vision of Peace,'' of 
one whose long-continued petition had been that the 


most merciful would not despise the work of His own 
Hands/ &c. 

In the beginning of the fourth chapter of the ' Apologia/ 
Newman sums up his ' position in the view of duty/ 
from the autumn of 1841 to the autumn of 1843 under 
nine headings : 

' (i) I had given up my place in the Movement in my 
letter to the Bishop of Oxford in the spring of 1841 ; but 
(2) I could not give up my duties towards the many and 
various minds who had more or less been brought into it 
by me ; (3) I expected or intended gradually to face back 
into Lay Communion ; (4) I never contemplated leaving 
the Church of England ; (5) I could not hold ofhce in its 
service, if I were not allowed to hold the Catholic sense of 
the Articles ; (6) I could not go to Rome, while she suffered 
honours to be paid to the Blessed Virgin and the Saints 
which I thought in my conscience to be incompatible vnth 
the Supreme, Incommunicable Glory of the One Infinite 
and Eternal ; (7) I desired union with Rome under con- 
ditions. Church with Church ; (8) I called Littlemore my 
Torres Vedras, and thought that some day we might advance 
within the Anglican Church as we had been forced to retire ; 
(9) I kept back all persons who were disposed to go to 
Rome with all my might/ 

Some remarks may be offered on the third, fourth, and 
sixth of these heads. 

He did not retire into Lay Communion to the extent 
of putting off the clerical garb. One can be quite certain 
that he never even contemplated such a step till he was 
within a few weeks of becoming a Catholic. But after he 
had resigned St. Mary's he held no clerical preferment, 
and never preached again. 

He ' never contemplated leaving the Church of 
England ' ; on the contrary, as his letters show, he fought 
against the suggestions and premonitions which kept 
rising up in his mind that the claims of Rome might 
prove irresistible. He did not give a voluntary assent 
to these thoughts. He made up his mind that they 
might be temptations, and that till their character was 
manifest he ought to treat them as such ; giving himself 
up in the meanwhile more and more to prayer and self- 
discipline. It might safely be said that up till about the 


middle of 1843 he hardly recognised how things really 
were with him.^ 

To turn now to the sixth and most important of these 
headings. In his Letter to Dr. Jelf, Newman had said : 

* As to the present authoritative teaching of the Church 
of Rome, to judge by what we see in public, I think it 
goes very far indeed to substitute another Gospel for the 
true one. Instead of setting before the soul the Holy 
Trinity, and hell and heaven ; it does seem to me as a 
popular system, to preach the Blessed Virgin and the 
Saints, and Purgatory. If ever there was a system 
which required reformation, it is that of Rome at this 
day,' 2 &c. 

' It does seem to me as a popular system,' &c. It is 
worth noting that, at the time under consideration, 
Newman's difficulty was a practical, not a theoretical 
one. The lawfulness or unlawfulness of invocations 
addressed directly to the Saints was, in his eyes, an 
open question, and not one upon which the individual 
Christian ought to take the responsibility of deciding. 
In consequence so long as he was an Anglican he did not 
even in private use such invocations, and dissuaded others 
from using them. It was perilous to use them without 
the sanction of authority ; and this they certainly had not 
in the Enghsh Church. But he did not stop here. He was 
convinced that the cult of the Saints, as practised in the 
Catholic Church, did come perilously near to superseding 
the worship of God. 

If he had approached the subject from the historical 
point of view and argued that modern devotions to the 
Saints cannot be justified by the appeal to Antiquity, he 
would have been speaking as an expert, and, though experts 
are far from infallible, those who disagreed with him could 
not have questioned his right to his own opinion. But he 
was too careful, too well informed to take upon himself 
to pronounce that these devotions might not, in theory 
at least, be defended as legitimate developments of principles 

^ In his letter to Keble on May 4 (p. 217) he speaks of 'something 
which has at last been forced upon my full consciousness,' ' something 
about myself which is no longer a secret to me,' &c. 

2 Via Media, ii. 368-9. In the Apologia he omits to mention 
Purgatory. This may have been for the sake of brevity ; but it is more 
likely that on this point his feelings were nothing like so keen as they were 
in regard to the cult of the Saints. 


furnished by Antiquity. His cautiousness, however, forsook 
him when he gave judgment in his heart ^ upon a practical 
matter concerning a system with which he had no practi- 
cal acquaintance. The great Protestant tradition fairly over- 
powered him.2 He seems to have thought the facts too noto- 
rious to need investigation. Against the testimony of 
every Mass that is offered up, of every Sacrament that is 
administered and received, in opposition to the witness of 
all the catechisms that have ever been printed, he firmly 
believed that the honours rendered to the Blessed Virgin 
and the Saints, detract from ' the supreme Incommunicable 
Glory of the One Infinite and Eternal.' It would be 
almost as unreasonable and unreal to talk of the second 
Precept of Charity interfering with the first. 

His prejudice died hard. In fairness it must be re- 
membered that it had its root in a ' zeal for God.' Some 
misgivings as to his zeal being strictly * according to know- 
ledge ' seem to have effected an entrance into his mind 
towards the end of 1842 ; for in the November of that 
year he is found promising Dr. Russell of Maynooth, that 
if ever it was brought home to him that he was wrong, a 
public avowal of that conviction would only be a question 
of time with him. A volume of sermons by St. Alphonsus, 
sent him by Dr. Russell, had impressed him favourably. 
A short time afterwards he studied the Exercises of St. 
Ignatius. ' Sola cum Solo ' — the one object of these 
Exercises was to place the soul directly and immediately 
in the Presence of its Maker. Later on Dr. Russell sent 
him from Rome a bundle of penny and halfpenny Italian 
books of devotion. He read them and was astonished 
to find how different they were from what he had fancied. 
Nevertheless he was still unconvinced. In May 1843 he 
publicly retracted a number of his anti-Catholic statements. 
How eagerly Dr. Russell must have searched for the ' public 
avowal ' of which Newman had held out hopes ! But some 
time had still to elapse before he might have said with a 
good conscience : 

' This I know full well now, and did not know then, 

^ It was with great reluctance, after 1841, that he spoke out his mind 
upon this matter. 

2 One is reminded of another mighty tradition which has sprung up 
in our own days, and tampers not merely with history but contemporary 
events. German professors, German priests and Bishops seem to be 
honestly convinced that England sought for the present war. 


that the Catholic Church allows no image of any sort, 
material or immaterial, no dogmatic symbol, no rite, no 
sacrament, no saint, not even the Blessed Virgin herself, 
to come between the soul and its Creator. It is face to 
face, " solus cum solo," in all matters between man and his 
God. He alone creates. He alone has redeemed ; before 
His awful eyes we go in death ; in the vision of Him is our 
eternal beatitude/ 1 

The Bishops had obtained the discontinuance of the 
' Tracts for the Times ' ; they had got from Newman the Letter 
to the Bishop of Oxford in which he recorded, without pro- 
test, that in his Bishop's judgment Tract 90 was ' objection- 
able ' ; in return he had been given to understand that so 
far as the Bishops were concerned, the affair was terminated. ^ 
But this was not all. In April 1841 William Palmer (Wor- 
cester) having drawn up a Declaration, for which signatures 
were to be obtained, acknowledging the services which the 
writers of the Tracts had rendered the Church, was induced 
by the Bishop of Oxford to suppress it in the interests of 
peace, though it was, as the Bishop admitted, ' very mode- 
rate, and not a whit beyond the strictest justice due.' ^ 
In the same interests of peace the Archbishop of Canterbury 
refused to receive addresses from sympathisers with the 
Tracts because if he did so he would have to receive counter- 
addresses. Then there was a sudden change of policy. 
The Archbishop received and promised to give ' grave 
consideration ' to an address from some Evangelicals at 
Cheltenham, denouncing the ' Tracts for the Times, ' and asking 
for an authoritative condemnation of them by the Bishops. 
' Grave consideration ' might mean many things, and among 
them that the Archbishop was going to foUow in the wake 
of pubhc opinion. If this was the case, it would certainly 
be unwise to let the Evangelicals be the only people who 
made their opinions heard. Newman's friend, Mr. Bellasis, 
seems to have been the first to realise the situation, and on 
January i, 1842, he wrote to Newman suggesting an address 
from lawyers, entreating the Archbishop to take no action, 
and warning him of the danger of unsettling the minds of 
many persons who accepted the views put forward in the 
Tracts. The text of the proposed address (it was never 
presented) can be read in ' Memorials of Serjeant Bellasis/ 

PP- 57. 58- 

^ Apologia, p. 195. * 76 iV?. p. 90. ^ Life of Pusey, vol. ii. pp. 250 fE. 


Newman was favourable to the idea. * It seems to me/ 
he wrote to Pusey on January 2, enclosing Mr. Bellasis's 
letter, ' his project is a very desirable one, if it can be done 
as he hopes. The Archbishop, observe, is taking a new line. 
Last March he stifled addresses for the Tracts because they 
would ehcit counter addresses. Now he receives one against 
them, and that at such a moment ! As if there was not 
excitement enough ! As if not violence enough on the side 
he backs up ! ' To Mr. Bellasis he replied as follows : 

J. H. Newman to E. Bellasis, Esq. 

January 2, 1842. 

My dear Mr. Bellasis, — I thank you very much for your 
letter, which I will send on to Pusey begging him to write 
to you. Of course I can but give that general prima facie 
opinion which you ask me for. Persons like yourself alone, 
who are in London and lawyers, can decide on the feasibility 
of the measure. As far, however, as I have a right to give 
an opinion, I like the idea of it very much, and quite go 
along with your reasons. 

The Archbishop's answer has grown more and more 
ominous in my mind, since I read it. Perhaps I am 
exaggerating, yet there are some considerations I cannot 
satisfy myself about. First an answer to such an address 
is a very unusual thing. Then he makes it just at this 
moment, increasing the existing excitement, and suggesting 
hope to the very party that is violent — there is no trimming 
of the balance. And then it argues a change of policy. 
Last March he put down all addresses from the Clergy for 
the Tracts on the ground that otherwise he could not put 
down addresses against them. Now he almost takes the 
initiative and braves the discord which is likely to arise the 
consequence of it. I really do not think a more serious step 
has been taken all through, if viewed in the light which 
forces itself upon one. The words ' grave consideration,' 
unless used in the light mocking way of the hustings, must 
imply a great deal. 


I have no view at all what they mean. Whether he 
could effect a recognition of ' Protestantism/ or a denial 
of the possibility of a better understanding than exists 
between us and Rome, or a rejectio of the decrees of Trent — 
or to take less mighty objects, a repudiation in detail of 
any invocation of Saints, any &c., &c. It is not possible, 
I suppose, that he could rule anything about the Real 
Presence. Could he get a Queen's Injunction of Silence, 
after the precedent of George I ? But I am rambling into 
great speculations. My difficulty is how he can do any- 
thing with our divines, except, indeed, express hatred of 

And now excuse the superfluities of this last page, and 
with every friendly thought that the season suggests. 

Believe me to be 

Yours very sincerely 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

January 3, 1842. 

My dear Hope, — A happy new year to you and all of 
us — and, what is even more needed to the English Church. 
I am afraid of moving about Convocation. Not that we 
should not be in safer hands than in those of the Bishops, 
but, though it restrained their acts, it would abridge our 
liberty. Or it might formally recognise our Protestantism, 
What can we hope from a body, the best members of which, 
as Hook and Palmer [of Worcester Coll.], defend and 
subscribe to the Jerusalem Fund (by the bye I could not 
see Gladstone's name in the last advertisement of Trustees, 
but perhaps my eyes were in fault) and vote against, or not 
for Williams, as Manning and S. Wilberforce ? Therefore 
I do not like to be responsible for helping to call into 
existence a body which may embarrass us more than we are 
at present. 

I think your T67ro<; about the Augsburg Confession 


a very important one, and directly more men come back 
will set a friend to work upon it. 

I am almost in despair of keeping men together. The 
only possible way is a monastery. Men want an outlet 
for their devotional and penitential feelings, and if we do 
not grant it, to a dead certainty they will go where they can 
find it. This is the beginning and the end of the matter. 
Yet the clamour is so great, and will be so much greater, 
that if I persist, I expect (though I am not speaking from 
anything that has occurred) that I shall be stopped. Not 
that I have any intention of doing more at present than 
laying the foundation of what may be. 

Do you know that Keble is very much disgusted with 
Gladstone in re Williams ? I have done all I can to soothe 
him, but have not seen him, without which I shall not do 

Are we really to be beaten in this election (for the 
Poetry Professorship) ? I will tell you a secret (if you care 
to know it) which not above three or four persons know. 
We have 480 promises. Is it then hopeless ? . . . I don't 
think our enemies would beat 600 ; at least, it would be no 
triumph. Do not mention this unless (as a great secret) 
you think it would tend to our success. 

The Bishop of Exeter has for these eight years, ever 
since the commencement of the Ecclesiastical Commission, 
been biding his time, and the Duke of Wellington last 
spring disgusted him much. This both makes it likely that 
he will now move, and also diminishes the force of the very 
words you quote, for peradventure they are ordinary with 
him. I have good hopes that he will. 

Ever yours, 

John H. Newman. 

' Men want an outlet for their devotional and Penitential 
feelings.' The reader should note these words, for it is a 
fact which cannot be too much insisted upon, because it is 
so often ignored, that the Tractarian movement was a call 
to repentance, and that its spirit was a penitential one 
based upon a keen realisation of the fearful character of 


post-baptismal sin. Without going into the question 
whether this spirit was excessive or one-sided,^ a word of 
caution may not be out of place against labelling it Novatian, 
Jansenistic, or Calvinistic. The Novatians excluded the 
penitent sinner from Holy Communion, the Tractarians did 
not; The Jansenists discouraged, the Tractarians encour- 
aged frequent communion. Works of penance were re- 
pugnant to the Calvinistic system, they were an integral 
part of that of the Tractarians. But it is probably useless 
to protest against the misuse of these terms. If Newman 
had written the exercises of St. Ignatius, traces of his early 
Calvinism would have been discovered in them. 

J. H. Newman to E, Bellasis, Esq. 

January 5, 1842. 

Dear Mr. Bellasis, — It certainly seems best to leave 
out any opinion about the Tract — the effect would be quite 
the same without it. 

I suppose the Archbishop should be addressed as Primate, 
or as President of Convocation, or with some explanation 
which will remove appearance of admitting his jurisdiction 
in the Diocese of London — a consideration which is 
important at this time. 

Nor am I quite clear about the expedience of suggesting 
Convocation. If people in London feel the desirableness 
of its meeting, well and good. I only mean that the words 
should be used with a clear view of their importance. 

There is something awkward perhaps in the form of the 
Address, though I cannot quite describe what I mean. The 
clause about doing nothing in this time of excitement, 
though very much to the purpose, seems rather free. Hope 
is at Salisbury for ten days. 

Excuse these very abrupt remarks, and believe me to be, 

Very sincerely yours, 

John H. Newman. 

1 One would have to inquire into the views of the leaders about a 
covenanted pardon in the Sacrament of Penance for post-baptismal sin, 
and it would have to be remembered that their views were in process of 
formation: It is very likely that the result of such an inquiry would be 
that Pusey went ahead of Newman. ,^ 

J. H. Newman to S. F. Wood, Esq. 

Oriel College : January 8, 1842. 

My dear Wood, — I have been thinking over your leaving 
Margaret Street, and think you should not — that is, unless 
your continuing there grows very irksome to you. At the 
present time it is important for the sake of those who are, 
or who are likely to be, there, that a person with the peculiar 
views you hold, should be there. It ever will be a very 
rare thing for a person to despair of our external state 
as you do, and yet be content to remain in it. I think 
you can be of great use to other men in directing their 
thoughts to interior religion as a sufficient occupation, to 
say the least, for the present — and unless you seriously 
object to it on personal grounds, I would have you reflect 
whether it be not your duty at the present time ; that 
which Providence marks out for you. No one can tell 
how much there is in sympathy, over and above the influence 
one may have in withstanding. Many a man has latent 
wishes to remain quiet, which are overborne by temptation, 
but gather strength and become sovereign over his conduct, 
when he finds another is acting upon the like. This place 
is not your sphere — else I doubt not you would do much 
good here to some persons. Ward you will often see at 
Oakeley's — and though he is not a man to be carried away, 
yet I feel sure that you would do him good by developing 
his tendencies to quiet, in the way I have mentioned. 

Of course I know too little of what you find suits you 
and what not to say — I should say else, it might be a 
soothing and tranquillizing duty as regards yourself thus 
to employ yourself, without effort, but naturally. You are 
older than most of the persons who are likely to be there. 

Ever jnrs. affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to S. F. Wood, Esq. 

Oriel: January 17, 1842. 

My dear Wood, — I think I quite understand your 
ground. What I meant was the fact of a person of your 


views continuing in the English Church was an evidence 
that it was possible to stay in it with those views — and 
a grave suggestion to another whether it might not be his 
own duty. I am not unwilHng to view it as a personal 
matter — but what I should so fear in my own case, would 
be the turning of my back (if it be reverent so to express 
myself) on a Divine Presence.^ '^To whom shall we go ? ' did 
I leave what is given — how know I, I should ever find it 
again in another system, though that system might be in 
itself better ? I know of but two reasons for changing — 
(i) not having [word missing], (2) a divine intimation. 

By mysticism I meant simply a neglect of Church 
ordinances as such — and thinking to gain grace quite as 
well from private devotion. 

Let me ask you three questions, which I do very earnestly 
and not idly : 

1. Is G. Babington your medical man ? 

2. Do you think he understands you ? 

3. Have you taken any other advice ? 

Ever yrs affectionately 

J. H. N. 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

' Oriel : January 17, 1842. 

My dear Hope, — I have set a man to work at Melancthon. 

As to the Act of Henry VII L, it is known here as the 
Bishop of London's ground. Who ever heard of tacit Dis- 
pensations ? The simple question surely is, has the Arch- 
bishop acted under the Act ? The very act of declaring 
a dispensation vindicates the fact of the law, according to 
Exceptio probat regulam. Does the Pope give dispensations 
in his sleep, or are they registered ? 

Ever yrs., 

J. H. Newman. 

The present generation finds it difficult to understand 
the reverence in which the Reformers were held seventy 

^ The word is uncertain. In the transcript of the letter there is only 
a P. 


and eighty years ago. They were looked upon as mirrors 
of all virtue, and as teachers little short of inspired. Hurrell 
Froude, who was followed by Keble and Newman, began 
to pull them down from their pedestals. On this point 
Tractarian opinion was not united. Pusey and Manning, 
for example, judged them on the whole favourably.^ The 
following is the rough draft of a letter to an unknown cor- 
respondent who had apparently taken umbrage at some- 
thing which Newman was reported to have said against the 

J. H. Newman to an Unknown Correspondent 

January 18, 1842. 

Dear Sir, — I am sure your letter is dictated by kindly 
feelings, and am sorry you should have heard so incorrect 
a report of what I said in a late sermon as to ask : ' Is this 
a fitting statement for an Anglican clergyman ? is this 
a right instruction to give to his flock ? ' 

At this moment nothing that comes from me can be 
taken fairly and as I mean it. If I preach sermons 17 
years old, secret meanings are found in them. And, as to 
other sermons, minds at ease are ill judges of the needs 
of troubled ones. One man welcomes as a relief what another 
can do nothing but criticize ; not that he is unsettled by 
it, but he fancies that every one else wiU be. Such words 
as your informant has led you to address to me, should 
rather be addressed to my Bishop. You write warmly, as 
one who sees and feels for a certain portion of the religious 
community, and does not see another who [which] may 
perhaps be engaging the attention of the parties he blames. 
When you speak of my spoiling ' a good work,' you must 
let me say plainly that I never proposed to myself at starting 
to take another man's views of what is good and what is 
bad. Each man has his own views ; one man may criticize 
another's ; let us leave off this unprofitable labour, let 

^ Pusey was ready to subscribe to the Martyrs' Memorial. Newman 
was perfectly clear that, for his part, he could not and would not. The 
memorial was intended as a trap for the Tractarians — to show to the 
world at large how unfihal their dispositions were to men who, it is hardly 
an exaggeration to say, were at that time popularly reputed to be the 
founders of real English Christianity. 


us take each other's opinions as facts, when they are not 

counter to one common profession, and learn to bear each 

other. Have I nothing to bear when others praise the 

Reformers ? Be sure I shall not hesitate in turn on fitting 

occasions to express my own contrary judgment about 

them. And should you, as you intend, think it necessary 

to procure the Protest of a number of persons against me, 

I should count it as adding to the distractions of our Church. 

I make no apology for writing thus freely, both because 

I am persuaded I am addressing a fair and candid mind, and 

because I am invited to speak plainly by the example of 

your own letter. 

The following letter is of interest in connection with 
Newman's Letter on Dr. Pusey's Tract on Holy Baptism,^ 
and his Lectures on Justification. It has not been thought 
necessary to point out where he diverges in terminology, if 
in nothing further, from the teaching he was afterwards to 
receive from Father Perrone, S.J., and others at Rome. 

Letter to Rev. A. Tarbutt 

Oriel College : January 22, 1842. 

My dear Tarbutt, — I am very glad to answer, to the 
best of my knowledge, any questions you choose to ask 
me. As to the particular one about which you write I 
should say this : 

Grace is in Scripture a word confined to Christianity — 
other dispensations contain a grant or at least a presence 
of God's favor and aid, but the peculiar acceptance, and 
will, and power granted in the Gospel, high above all gifts 
of other covenants, is Grace. Thus St. John says, ' the Law 
was given by Moses, but grace and truth came ' etc. And St. 
Paul, ' Where sin abounded grace did much more abound.' 

I think then a State of Grace is that state ' in which we 
stand by faith,' by the mercy of God in Christ ; and that 
it was not vouchsafed to the world till Christ came ; and 
that all these words, grace, life, righteousness, truth, light 
etc. do not indeed mean the same thing, but all coincide in 
one and the same subject. I mean that there is one certain 

^ Reprinted in Via Media, vol. ii. 


state, and that it, viewed on different sides of it, is in one 
aspect grace, in another truth, in another salvation, etc. 
just as you would say that God is One, and in one view of 
Him Eternal, and in another Almighty etc., by which you 
do not mean to say that eternity is the same as omnipotence, 
but that the two coincide in one and the same subject. 

I think then that a person who falls from the state of 
Salvation, falls from the state of Grace, that state which 
' the glory of the Lamb enlightens,' whether for peace, 
acceptance, holiness, love etc., etc. But in saying that it 
is plain, I do not intend to say anything so extreme as that 
a person who falls from a state of Grace is therefore left 
without God's aids and providential leadings. How do men 
(adults) originally come for baptism ? they are not yet 
justified or in a state of Grace — they are heathen — but 
God, whose mercies are over all His works, draws them to 
a state of Grace by assistances which He gives apart from 
that state — thus when He called them He also justified, 
that is, a state in which a man is helped is prior to that 
which is the state of Grace. When a man falls from Grace, 
he relapses into some such state. 

If I understand you, the question turns on the meaning 
of the word ' grace ' — ^whether it stands for any divine 
help, or the help through the Spirit of Christ. Yet [Yes ?] ^ 
I do not think it an indifferent question — first because 
Sacrifice [Scripture ?] seems to confine ' grace ' to the 
Christian covenant — next because grace conveys the two 
ideas of acceptance and spiritual aid — whereas the deeds 
done by unjustified men, even through God's sacred aid, 
are not pleasing to God, on account of original corruption 
which is imputed to them, till they come within the Covenant. 

Yours very truly, 

John H. Newman. 

P.S.— As to your case of the Prodigal Son, I quite 
agree with what you say. He who has once been God's 
son, never can be such as he was before. His privileges 

^ This letter is copied from a transcript, not from the original. 


are not forfeited (except he commit the sin against the Holy 
Ghost about which we know nothing) but suspended. He 
falls out of Grace, but not into the same state as he was in 
before he came into it. The analogy of friendship will 
explain what I mean. A person whom we have loved and 
who has turned out ill and broken from us, is not o\x£ friend , 
but he is not what he was when he was a stranger. We 
have deep feelings about him — we are angry yet we love — 
feel resentment yet affection — or rather resentment because 
we feel affection. The Prodigal Son left the state of Grace 
when he left his father's house. The father's going out 
after him when a great way off means no more than what 
I said above, that God's love extends beyond the Home of 
His Saints and the Church of His Elect. He went out to 
recover, as originally Christ came to ' seek and to save that 
which was lost ' — to such then in order by bringing them 
into a state of Grace to save them. So the householder, 
as we have read this morning, went out to hire labourers 
and bring them into his Vineyard. 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

January 29, 1842. 

My dear Hope, — I am told Convocation meets in the 
Jerusalem Chambers next week to present an Address 
to the King of Prussia. Is anything bad likely to be 
done ? 

Would it do good or harm, irritate or retard them, to send 
my protest to both Houses ? and if so, formally or privately ? 
to their President and Prolocutor ? or to some individuals 
to show ? and if so, to whom ? The Bishop of Oxford has 
it in the Upper House ; but the Bishop of Exeter might, I 
suppose, have seen it, and be able to report it. And who 
in the Lower ? 

You have the means of knowing all this better than I. 
If you answer at once, I shall hear to-morrow morning. 

Ever yrs., 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

Oriel : January 31, 1842. 

My dear Hope, — Thanks for the trouble you have taken. 
I wrote in a very great hurry to save the post, or I would 
have told you that my authority was a member of Convoca- 
tion. Through Badeley's kind inquiries word has come 
to me which you know yourself now, that the meeting is 
on Friday next for an Address to the Queen on the birth 
of the P. of W. (I was told it would be the beginning of 
the week.) A clause may be smuggled in if no one is on 
the look out. Of course, if I could, I would avoid giving 
the Protest to any one — merely because it is very unpleasant 
to bring oneself forward. It may be laziness, but I am much 
inclined to let it alone. If, however, you think it any good, 
or best for safety sake, I should prefer the Dean of Chichester 
to Manning. 

My Luther and Melancthon man has made a failure, 
though he has taken a good deal of pains. I think I must 
see to it myself. It would not take me much time, if I had 
any. Tell me something about your controversial prospects. 
I have not seen Maurice yet. 

I hope you are not over-working yourself. You mind, 
I hope, all that medical men would have you do. Are you 
sure that you are not in too much excitement ? 

Ever yrs, 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to E. L. Badeley, Esq. 

Oriel College : January 31, 1842. 

My dear Badeley, — 1 am very much obliged to you 
both for your note, and your kind offer of letting me trouble 
you on any like occasion. In consequence of what you said 
to Mr. Bellasis, ' A member of Convocation,' who does 
not wish his name mentioned, has told Oakeley that the 
meeting of C. is on Friday and for the purpose of an address 
to the Queen upon the birth of the Prince of Wales. I like 
your idea of giving my Protest to the Dean of Chichester — 
but I do not know him — do you ? At the same time I fear 


it will make him think me gone mad. I have no objection 
to let you see it, over and above this, that you will think I 
have been frightened out of my proprieties. Hope has it — 
if he cannot lay his hand on it, I will send it to you. 

I am, my dear Badeley, 

Very sincerely yours, 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. W. Dodsworth 

Oriel College : February i, 1842. 

My dear Mr. Dodsworth, — The very morning your letter 
came I had mislaid my Prayer Book, and have only just 
now found it. On referring I find it reads, * The Sacrifice 
of Masses ' — but I have not the slightest doubt it is a mis- 
print. It is one of Reeve's dated London 1811. As to 
' Priests ' I think that is my Printer's fault, as the run of 
the sentence ' Priest did offer ' is so fixed in my memory. 
I am much obliged to you for the correction, and am glad 
the mistake is not one which tells against me. 

Your pamphlet pleased me very much, and promises 
to be useful, though you have not been led to dwell upon 
Sibthorpe's main argument. You have rightly expressed 
my own meaning in Tract 90, as far as you have had occasion 
to bring it out, — and I thank you for the kindness which 
led you to do so. 

Nothing, I trust, will come of the meeting of Convocation 
on Friday — but, considering the subject, one could easily 
fancy a clause smuggled in in favour of the King of Prussia. 
One does not like to speak against anything so pleasing 
in itself as the King of Prussia praying with the prisoners 
in Newgate, but surely considering that the officiating 
Minister was a Quaker and a woman, such an occurrence 
is quite enough to make us suspicious of the Prussian con- 
nection. Was the Ordinary present ? 

Yours very truly, 

John H. Newman. 

Feb. 2. P.S. — In what I have said above, of course 
I do not mean to enter into the question of my Tract as 
between you and Mr, Sihthorpe. 


J." H. Newman to E. L. Badeley, Esq. ' ' 

February lo, 1842. 

My dear Badeley, — Thank you for your very kind note, 
which I answer now, not as if I had anything particular 
to say, but lest I should seem unmindful of its friendship. 

As to the Lutherans, or rather Lutheranism, I consider 
that the ecclesiastical notes of an heresy are external, and 
in the Protest I had given two, ' rising late,' and ' dis- 
owned by East and West.' As the Church is known by 
its outward marks, so is heresy. There is the more reason 
to say this in this particular case, because I do not profess 
to know Lutheranism as a system, or to know its history 
sufficiently to undertake to define it. The main heresy, 
as it appears to me, is its doctrine of justification, which 
Melancthon could only defend by explaining away, but 
which in spite of Melancthon has succeeded in destroying 
belief in the ' Holy Church Catholic ' far and wide. Magd. 
Palmer considers the heresy to lie in its doctrine of Private 
judgment — which perhaps is another side of the same 
substantial error. I fear many more heresies might be 
mentioned as taught in Lutheranism, though it may be 
difficult to name the irpoirov -v/reOSo?. 

As to Melancthon, it is not uncommon in the case of 
great heresies to have a milder and a more virulent type. 
Such in Arianism were Eusebius on the one hand, Arius 
or Eunomius on the other. Such again Dioscorus or the 
Monophysites, and Eutyches. The milder form is generally 
an unreal doctrine, which happily keeps individuals from 
what is worse, but has no life in it and no general influence. 

I am, My dear Badeley, 

Very sincerely yours, 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

Littlemore : February 9, 1842. 

My dear Hope, — Your letters were very acceptable — 
and, since silence is the best of all news in some cases, 


I am well pleased I have heard not a whisper, from any 
quarter, of the result of the meeting of Convocation. 

The only news in Oxford is that the Heads are con- 
cocting a theological statute. Will it walk when made ? 
or will it be a Frankenstein, and walk too much ? the 
''Via Media ' is what is desirable — ^but how to effect it — 
that is the problem. 

As to Manning, about anyone I do not see, I will be 
guided quite willingly by your testimony. And in like 
manner about Gladstone. Thank you for your letter 
about him, and for the news of his withdrawing from the 
Jerusalem Trust, which I had supposed to be the case. 
Every one must admire a man like Gladstone, in spite of 
his Tylerizing. 

Forbes has returned and been unable to procure me 
any one book — which speaks well for your diligence. The 
only one I regret is the ' Stapleton.' As he has mislaid 
his papers, I cannot ascertain what was done about it. 
I fear I begin to covet a ' Stapleton.' 

Yours very sincerely, 

John H. Newman 

J. H. Newman to E. Bellasis, Esq. 

Littlemore : February lo, 1842, 

My dear Mr. Bellasis, — I quite understand what were 
the reasons which led to the delay in the document which 
you had projected. And I am more than disposed to think 
that you are right in delaying it. It is true that the want 
of sympathy is the trial of various persons up and down the 
country, and is in a certain sense preying on their minds 
and doing them harm — but it calls for nothing immediate, 
nor would be removed by one manifestation. You lawyers 
are far too powerful a gun not to be reserved for some 
great occasion — ^and, with much gratitude for the personal 
feeling which in the case of yourself and others is united 
to an interest in the principles in jeopardy, still I sincerely 
hope you may not have occasion to come forward. 


Meanwhile both parties, Ultra Protestants and R. 
Catholics, consider that the Government is leaguing with 
the Bishops to exterminate us ; being led by their wishes. 
I do not see how it is possible. 

I am, yours very truly, 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to E. Bellasis, Esq. 

Littlemore : February i6, 1842. 

My dear Mr. Bellasis, — Ward had sent me your letter 
and the drafts of the addresses. I am very much obliged 
by the kind consideration you show towards myself, and 
assure you I feel it much. I do not know that it makes me 
unhappy at all, because it somehow seems to be my lot, 
but certainly hardly anything is said to me or comes to 
me, even from friends, of a sympathetic character. The 
truth is, I suppose it is difficult for them to put themselves 
into my place. This only makes one more grateful to those 
who do. When I say that it is my lot, I mean that eight 
years ago just the same suspicion, coldness, nay blackness 
of face was shown towards me as now, though of course 
now there are in some quarters much more acrimonious 
feelings. However, this too perhaps had the effect of 
making me more callous than I should be. I mean, that, 
as it seemed I could not please people, I have been very 
little solicitous to do so. And yet in the case of individuals 
I have taken vast pains in vain, as, for instance, in the 
case of the Bishop of Chichester. But however habituated 
one may be to bear ice and snow as one's climate, I don't 
suppose it ceases to be the nature of things that sunshine 
and zephyrs are the more pleasant of the two ; and I thank 
you for the friendly words which have been wafted from 
Bedford Square. 

Pray excuse all this, which I am almost ashamed to 
have written. As to your proposal, I certainly agree with 
Dodsworth, that it is expedient to do nothing at present — 
Omne ignotum pro magnifico will tell more with the Bishop 


of London than signatures on paper. And again, though this 
perhaps is not so much with the laity, there is at this moment 
an irritation against us even among our friends, which in 
time will be succeeded by resignation and making the best 
of things— so that many persons if left to themselves would 
come round, who would start from, or be even more alienated 
by a declaration in our favour. If we are able quietly to 
keep our ground, there must be a re-action in our favour, and 
it is well perhaps quietly to wait for it. 

Yours most truly, 

John H. Newman. 

P.S. — What I have said of course does not apply to the 
Lawyers' Manifesto on an emergency. 

J. H. Newman to a Layman 

Littlemore : March 6, 1842. 

Dear Sir, — I willingly would say anything in my power 
to relieve your mind. Perhaps Dr. Pusey's Letter to the 
Archbishop, just published, will tend that way. 

When it is said that persons of Catholic principles are 
going or gone to Rome, I beg to ask how many persons of 
so-called Evangelical sentiments, especially of the lower 
classes have joined the Wesleyans or Dissenters. It is 
quite notorious that their principles are quite a school of 
dissent and make seceders by wholesale. They almost 
profess that there is no substantial difference between their 
own faith and that of the Wesleyans. It is really prepos- 
terous that they should cry out against a mote in their 
brother's eye with so great a beam in their own. 

Next I would say that of course Church principles will 
lead to Rome, if our Bishops repudiate them. Did our 
whole communion solemnly and formally enact that there 
was no Church, or that itself was not part of it, in so unequal 
a contest between the Creed and a human decree it is quite 
clear which would be worsted. ' On whomsoever it shall 
fall, it will grind him to powder.' And what would be 


awfully fulfilled by a formal act, is fulfilled in its measure 
by the act of individual bishops, or local parties of our 
Church. They are taking part against Christ when they 
speak against the Church, and will lose her children. I make 
no excuse then, I do but grieve while I say that many seces- 
sions will to a certainty take place, should our authorities 
infringe that Apostolic Creed which is the necessary condi- 
tion of their power, and warrant of their claim upon a Chris- 
tian's allegiance. It is my confident trust that so deplorable 
an event will not take place, but I say now, as I have always 
said, that, while I will pay unlimited obedience to the Bishop 
set over me while he comes in Christ's name, yet to one who 
comes in the name of man, in his own name, in the name of 
mere expedience, reason, national convenience and the like, 
to the neglect of that Creed which speaks of the Catholic 
Church, I should not be bound to pay him any at all. 

Church doctrines are a powerful weapon ; they were not 
sent into the world for nothing ; God's word does not return 
to Him void. If we will not use them, others will instead. 
If I have ever said, as I have, that the doctrines of the 
' Tracts for the Times ' would build up our Church and destroy 
parties, I meant, if they were used, not if they were denounced. 
Else they will be as powerful against us, as they might be 
powerful for us. 

As to Mr. Grant I never saw him but twice. Once in 
mixed society, once since his conversion. I understand 
he has Roman Catholic relations, and has been in corre- 
spondence with them a long while. 

You will observe that Sibthorpe traces his conversion 
to a study of Scripture, and expressly states that the * Tracts 
for the Times ' were the only anti-Roman works which kept 
him from Rome. Nor has Mr. Wackerbarth a Cambridge 
man, anything to do with us. 

The truth is Catholicism is, if I may so speak, in the air. 
It is being breathed. A wonderful power is abroad. The 
writers of the ' Tracts ' have desired that our Church should 
by acting up to its Catholic principles become a home for 
this Catholic Spirit. That Spirit is not quenched because 


we will not entertain it, and numbers are being moved quite 
independently of any hand or tongue so weak as ours. 

But over and above this, the general cry that the Church 
of Rome is spreading, makes young people curious, and 
incites them to take up with its doctrines and practices, 
though none of us had written a word. I speak of this as 
a fact. And, still to speak of myself, since you ask about 
me, if people who have a liking or value for another hear 
him called Roman Catholic, they will say, ' Then after all 
Romanism is no such bad thing.' The charge tells two 
ways — if it does not tell against him in the minds of hearers, 
it tells for Rome. I am writing you a very free and homely 
letter, but I do so because I feel very deeply that all these 
persons, who are working this cry are fulfilling their own 
prophecy. They are tending to its fulfilment in many ways : 
one way is this. If all the world agrees in telling a man he 
has no business in our Church, he will at length begin to 
think he has none. How easy it is to convince a man of 
anything when numbers affirm it — so great is the force of 
the imagination. Did every one who met you in the street 
look hard at you, you would think you were somehow at 
fault. This is especially the case v^hen friends have remon- 
strated with individuals as Romanizing. I do not know 
anything so irritating, so unsettling, especially in the case 
of young persons as they are going on calmly and uncon- 
sciously, obeying their own Church and following its 
divines, (I am speaking from facts) suddenly to their surprise 
to be conjured not to take a leap, of which they have not a 
dream and from which they are far removed. ^ 

And now will you allow me to conclude this very free 
letter with a still greater freedom ? viz., by observing what 
is almost superfluous to mention, that it is a comfort to 
be assured that those who, when in religious perplexity, 
quietly commit their souls to God in well-doing, who try 
to please Him, and pray for guidance, will gain, through 
His mercy, a spiritual judgment for 'trying the spirits,' and 

^ He first wrote and then scratched out * not to rush into an evil qi 
which they have not a dream and are not in any risk.' 


deciding between the claims of opposite arguments, quite 
sufficiently for their own peace, and their own salvation. 

I am, dear Sir, yours truly &c. 

J. H. N. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. W. Dodsworth 

Littlemore : March 14, 1842. 

My dear Mr. Dodsworth, — I just saw the pamphlet 
you have been kind enough to send me the other day at 
Oxford, and what I read of it quite bore out what I hear 
everyone says of it. It seems to give very great satis- 
faction to those for whom it seems principally written. 
I really think that, though there would be some, there 
would be very few conversions to the Church of Rome, if 
people did but speak with your moderation about her, and 
your sympathy towards those who are perplexed. 

I saw a letter from a person at a distance about Pusey's 

new publication the other day which illustrates what I 

mean. I quote it from memory, but nearly verbatim. 

' I have just seen Pusey's letter. It affected me much. 

Persons who are troubled about our (the Anglican) state 

are generally treated with nothing but roughness. I love 

him for it more than ever.' This was from a person who 

has had strong temptations to leave our Church, though I 

trust he is safe. I do not know who is safe, if our Bishops 

and Clergy disclaim Catholic principles — I do not know 

who is not safe, if they will but allow them. This is not 

much to ask. 

Yours very truly, 

John H. Newman. 

P.S. — I should not like the above extract mentioned, 
for though it is far enough from London, yet things get 
round so strangely. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. W. Dodsworth 

Littlemore : March 17, 1842. 

My dear Dodsworth, — The letter of your Bishop amused 
me very much. He of all men to think a Church could get 


on without a centre, an ecclesiastical Commission for 
instance, or a Metropolitan Board ! Let him reform 
Lambeth and give up his own precedence over other Bishops, 
nay more his substantial rule, and then he may with cleaner 
hands come into controversy. Why it has been a saying 
in people's mouths, owing to late proceedings whether 
at Lambeth or London House, whether in the Jerusalem 
matter, or in the Anti- Tract-Lay-Address matter, ' if we 
are to have a Pope, we will not go to Lambeth/ Does not 
organisation imply organs, and must not organs have a 

* Bramhall ' is to make its appearance (the first volume) 
in a few days — I wonder what people will think of his 
general doctrine. Your extract is most satisfactory. It 
is very unwise in your Bishop to quote authorities. Depend 
on it, his best way is to repeat the argument he is said to 
have used apropos of St. Ambrose to poor Mr. Wackerbarth, 
' Bishop Bramhall is not your Bishop but C. J. London.' 

I agree with you about Palmer ; and, if he means to 

effect anything by his pamphlets, his tone is not good. The 

first excellence of a composition is to do its work — what 

is the work he proposes ? Certainly he will not keep 

men from Rome. 

Yours very truly, 

John H. Newman 

P.S. — In answer to your question, of course it does not 
seem to me that you have gone too far at all — and I really 
so little see what the Bishop can reply, that I cannot 
anticipate new arguments for you. He will only say that 
in spite of Bishop Bramhall, he thinks the concession very 
dangerous. Rather Bramhall himself, totus, whole and 
bodily, is dangerous. 

J. H. Newman to E. Bellasis, Esq. 

Littlemore : March 23, 1842. 

My dear Bellasis, — Morris tells me that you have taken 
your degrees in the science of Arnott Stoves. I have got 


one on trial at a room of mine here [the stove occupies both 
sides of a page of ordinary sized notepaper and then the writer 
turns to matters of more general interest]. Since I wrote last, 
the storm from Lambeth seems blowing off, but I am out 
of the way of hearing news here — and perhaps am flattering 
myself unwarrantably. Or perhaps it is merely ' hushed 
in grim repose/ 

Mr. Bellasis replied : 

' The storm has apparently passed away as you say, 
but some think that if the Pilots who were some time since 
placed under hatches for endeavouring to change the moor- 
ings of the vessel, are not again allowed to look out and track 
the helm, there is great danger that she will go ashore, 
or. at least that more of the crew will lose confidence and 
try to make their escape/ 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

April 4, 1842. 

My dear Hope, — A man writes to me to say he is urged 
to change a district Chapel he has for some other preferment, 
but he fears to commit simony, i.e. Canonical simony. 
Have you, as a lawyer, anything to say on this subject ? 

Canj you^tell me the legal definition of residence ? by 
which I mean, does the formal cause of it lie in eating in 
a place, or sleeping, or doing the Sunday duty for the week, 
or what ? I mean how much may I be at Littlemore, and 
yet reside in Oriel, without going to the Bishop for a licence 
to reside at Littlemore, which I suppose he would give 
me ? 

You have got my copy of the Oriel Statutes, which 
I suppose you can't want by this time — not that I want 
it just now myself. 

There was something else I had to say, but forget. 

Tell me how you are. 

Ever yrs., 

John H. Newman. 


J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq.^ 

Dabam. e Domo S.M.V. apud Littlemore. 

April 22, 1842. 

My dear Hope, — Does not this portentous date promise 
to outweigh any negative I can give to your question in 
the mind of the inquirer ? for any one who could ask such 
a question would think such a dating equivalent to the 
answer. However, if I must answer in form, I believe it 
to be one great absurdity and untruth from beginning to 
end, though it is hard I must answer for every hundred men 
in the whole kingdom. Negatives are dangerous : all I can 
say, however, is that I don't believe, or suspect, or fear any 
such occurrence, and look upon it as neither probable nor 
improbable, but simply untrue. 

We are all much quieter and more resigned than we 
were, and are remarkably desirous of building up a position, 
and proving that the English theory is tenable, or rather, 
the English state of things. If the Bishops let us alone, 
the fever will subside. 

I hunted for your letter about my books, some time 
ago, and could not find it. I thought I had put it aside for 
the purpose of using it. As Stewart valued the books, could 
he not tell the prices ? but I really am very much ashamed 
of giving you so much trouble. I will look for the letter. 
I wish you would say how you are. 

Ever yrs., 

John H. Newman. 

There is a legend of Newman, having been challenged 
to a public theological debate, replying with a counter 
proposal of a duet on the violin. The following extract 
from a letter to Keble perhaps supplies the slender founda- 
tion of fact upon which this story was built. The rest of 
the letter can be read in ' Miss Mozley ' (vol. ii. p. 354). 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

April 29, 1842. 

Mr. McGhee came up here twice last Sunday— he heard 
me preach on Baptismal regeneration. Accordingly he 

1 Printed by Miss Mozley, and in Memoirs of J.R. Hope-Scott, 


sent me a remonstrance of three large sheets full, ending 
with a challenge, to select whom I pleased, e.g. Dr. Pusey 
as a friend, he would come with a friend — ' stenographists ' 
he must stipulate for ; we were to expound St. Paul's 
Epistle to the Romans alternately ; they were to take it 
down verbatim ; and it was to be published through the 
country. It was a piece of simplicity in the worthy man — 
/ might as well propose a duet on the violin, for I am as 
little able to controvert on a platform, as, I suspect, he is 
to execute a concerto. 

The following is the rough draft of his reply to Mr. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. Mr. McGhee 

Littlemore : April 28, 1842. 

Rev. Sir, — You will allow me, I am sure, to reply to your 
frank and kind letter, just received, with equal frankness, 
and with an equally kind intention. Be assured then. Dear 
Sir, that I am as persuaded of my own religious views as 
you can be of yours ; that I think you as wrong as you 
think me ; and that my feelings concerning protestantism 
are not at all less strong than your own concerning the 
Church of Rome. I have before now stood on your ground ; 
it was when I was a very young man. 

I am only surprised you should be so late in learning 
my sentiments, I have long known yours. You need not 
have told me that you considered me ignorant of the way 
of Salvation ; I knew you did before you said it. Such 
protests waste time. So would it to accept your challenge. 
You invite me to viva voce controversy with stenographists, 
an exercise for which my habits and powers unfit me. 
Meanwhile, no one has yet attempted a direct and manly 
encounter with the categorical statement and argument of 
the work I have published on Justification. Remonstrance, 
Protestation, Censure, warning, denunciation are an easier 
task. You will see. Dear Sir, that your trouble is lost upon 
me. Alas, there are others up and down the country 


whom you may be able to terrify, but your cause is a failing 
one. And surely you are too good a man to be ever taking 
on you, as at present, the heavy woe of being ' An accuser 
of the Brethren ' and ' making the heart of the righteous 
sad ' and speaking against the work of Divine Grace. May 
the Author of Grace at length open your eyes, since you 
' do it yourself ' and ' know not what you do.' I am, with 
sincere respect for your zeal. 

Yours faithfully, 

J. H. N. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. W. Dodsworth 

Oriel College : May ii, 1842. 

My dear Dodsworth, — I am a very bad person to consult 
in a case of casuistry — and still more so, when the answer 
is to be given at once. I can only say what I should do 
in my own case. 

It seems to me very cruel that the Bishops have flung 
all the responsibility on us — and I ever have been for 
returning it to them. I think /should be inclined to put 
it before my own Bishop and refuse to admit the parties 
either as sponsors or as communicants unless he recom- 
mended me. And I should tell him that I could not do it 
without his recommendation. I take it for granted, from 
what you say, that in the eye of the Church the marriage is 
incestuous. And I should tell the parties that I wotdd act 
otherwise on the Bishop's recommendation, but could not 

It is very easy to prescribe for another and I am ashamed 

almost to send this, both for that reason and because the 

advice is meagre and unsatisfactory. I can only say that 

I acted on it myself some years since, on one or two occasions 

— e.g. the burial of a suicide — and (as far as I could) the 

marriage of an unbaptized person. 

Yours very truly, 

John H. Newman. 


J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

Littlemore : August 28, 1842. 

My dear Hope, — Your Cook's place is vacant, and it is 
in the gift of the Warden. Norris, our Common Room 
man, has come to me and wants me to exert my influence 
with you to exert your influence with the Warden that his 
son may be the new one. Having said as much as this, 
I leave it to you to inquire more, supposing you see reason 
to do so. Norris is a very respectable man, and I should 
be very glad to find his son successful. 

But I am glad of this excuse to write to you. I want 
to know how you are, if you can spare five minutes — ^both 
in body and mind — whether you are more or less disgusted 
than you were at Whitsuntide at the state of things — 
whether you are hopeful or hopeless. Your Scotch Bishops 
are resolved (prudently enough) to put themselves simply 
under the direction of the Archbishop of Canterbury and 
the Bishop of London — and of another sort of authority 
too, for when Palmer pressed them the other day on some 
point, one answered * If I were to say so, I should lose half 
my flock,' an arrangement [query argument] which I do 
not find noticed in Lumper's ' Vitae Patrum ' or Schram's 
' Analysis ' — (but I suppose it is best not to mention this) 
but is a wholesome doctrine, necessary for these times. 

What do you think the Americans have done ? Their 
presiding Bishop, Greswold, has formally, and with an 
expression of general concurrence, admitted a Nestorian 
as a Nestorian to Holy Communion. I think I must screw 
up, not courage, but zeal, to write to some one in America 
about it. I wish you would turn it in your thoughts. I 
have seen no document or account in print yet. It struck 
me I might write to Dr. Jarvis, who threw out a feeler on 
the subject a year or two since, and sent me his sermon. 
I then wrote to him, deprecating such a course, but far too 
mildly. I do not see the good of writing to him in private 
though — yet if it were a thing to be published, people would 
say what business has an Englishman with us.^ The 

^ Palmer of Worcester is the man who is bound to take it up. 


question is full of difficulty ; since they and we have given 
up Church authority. To go into the controversy, con- 
sidering foreign and dead languages are concerned in it, 
would be interminable — yet how appeal to a sentence of 
a Council, considering the many we make no bones of ? 
It is straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel. We 
English, can fall back upon the act of Elizabeth — ^but our 
Sister Church has no such refuge. 

Ever yrs, 

John H. Newman. 

On September 12 Newman wrote a long letter to Keble 
which has been published by Miss Mozley with the omission 
of the two concluding paragraphs. Any reasons for with- 
holding the first of these which may have been felt in 1890 
have certainly lapsed by now. The second is merely one 
of the many touching proofs which we have of the writer's 
love for Pusey, and his anxious forebodings, too well justified 
in the event, about the health of the young Puseys. 

With you I have but subdued expectations of 
the Scotch Church — Copeland first broke one's hopes. 
There will be no good there or anywhere else, till the doctrine 
of post-baptismal sin is recognised. N.,N.,andthe Bishop 
of Exeter combine with the Cambridge Camden, in making 
a fair outside, while within are dead men's bones. We shall 
do nothing till we have a severer religion. 

Pusey is pretty well — looks better — but has had the 

influenza — children, he says, better on the whole. I don't 

believe it. He is sorely harassed by a Romanising case 

on which he has gone out of his way to waste his strength, 

and which seems interminable. 

Ever yours affectly, 

J. H. N. 

The following letter contains advice as much to the 
purpose to-day as it was in 1842. Any one who is in the 
habit of picking up second-hand copies of the ' Fathers ' will 
from time to time find himself on the traces of those who have 
begun to read the ' Fathers,' and then, presumably, come to 
the conclusion that they were wasting their time. A few 


pages cut, perhaps disfigured with pencil notes, and the rest 
of the book as good as new. Newman wrote from experience. 
In 1828, he tells us, ' I first began to read their writings 
with attention and on system. I busied myself much in 
analysing them, and in cataloguing their doctrines and 
principles,' but he came to the conclusion that there was 
' very httle in them. At the time I did not discover the 
reason of this result, though on the retrospect it was plain 
enough : I had read them simply on Protestant ideas, 
analysed them and catalogued them on Protestant principles 
of division, and hunted for Protestant doctrines and usages 
in them. My headings ran, " Justification by faith only," 
" Sanctification " and the like. I knew not what to look 
for in them ; I sought what was not there, I missed what 
was there ; I laboured through the night and caught 
nothing. '1 

J. H. Newman to Rev. T. W. Allies 

Oriel College : September 30, 1842. 

My dear Mr. Allies, — I had an opportunity yesterday of 
thanking you for the very kind expressions which you used 
about me in your letter, and I will now proceed to the 
question it contained. When I began to read the ' Fathers ' 
many years ago, I began at the Apostolical, and took a 
great deal of pains with them and Justin Martyr — all which 
I count now almost wasted — and that for this reason, that I 
did not understand what was in them, what I was to look for, 
what were the strong and important points, etc. 1 measured 
and systematized them by the Protestant doctrines and 
views, and by this sort of cross division I managed to spend 
a good deal of time on them and got nothing from them. 
The result was something like that described in the case 
of the unobservant boy in the story of * Eyes and No Eyes/ 

This has ever since made me averse to persons reading 
the * Fathers ' without first getting some acquaintance with 
divinity ; or at least letting the study of the two proceed 
together ; or again some acquaintance with Ecclesiastical 

^ ' But,' he continues, * I should make one important exception : I 
rose from their perusal with a vivid perception of the divine institution, 
the prerogatives, and the gifts of the Episcopate ; that is, with an implicit 
aversion to the Erastian principle.' — Diff. of Ang., i. 371-2. 


History. If a person's taste goes that way, Bull's ' Defensio 
F.N/ is an admirable introduction to the ' Fathers,' so 
I think is Hooker's ' Fifth Book ' ; or Wall on ' Infant 
Baptism.' It comes pretty much to the same thing to 
advise a person to get up a particular controversy in the 
' Fathers,' for that involves more or less his going to theo- 
logical works for information. E.g. the Donatist con- 
troversy will bring him across a great deal of history, and 
some very interesting Treatises of St. Augustine, as well 
as Optatus. If I must name one work, however, and that 
of an early Father, it must be ' Origen contra Celsum,' 
and then he might go on to ' Huet.* Or again, St. Cyprian's 
Epistles, getting up the dates etc. It is best to get a footing 
in some one place, and then to proceed as our particular 
taste or curiosity leads. Bishop Lloyd used to recommend 
beginning at the beginning — I have found this in my own 
case a failure. Burton pushed it too, and I cannot think 
his influence sufficient to alter my opinion. He is said to 
have read regularly on through four centuries — so I under- 
stood Lloyd ; but has learned little from the ' Fathers ' 
except that they were not Socinians. Bishop Kaye, to 
judge from his publications, has proceeded in the same 
orderly way — accordingly, since a man must have some 
system, he has natiu-ally taken his own with him, and 
transforms TertuUian into the Thirty-nine Articles one 
after another. I think TertuUian would be surprised to see 
himself in the Bishop's pages. 

The following document is described in the ' Apologia,' 
where a short extract from it is quoted, as ' Notes of a letter 
which I sent to Dr. Pusey.'^ The ' notes ' themselves 
seem to have been sent to Pusey, and were returned, or at 
least the portion of them now printed, by him with remarks 
at the end. They give a vivid picture of Newman's relations 
with the party of Oakeley and Ward, and the perplexity 
he was often in when plied with questions which he did not 
see clearly how to answer. ^ The ' Article on Rio ' spoken 
of was an historical article, in the October number of the 

^ Apologia, p. 171. ^ Cf. Apologia, pp. 163-171. 


' British Critic/ on Rio's La Petite Chouannerie ; ou Histoire 
d'un College Breton sous TEmpire. 

October i6, 1842. 

N.B. — It is most difficult to me to analyze the difference 
between you and Ward. I have always thought it consisted 
(i) in matters of history not of doctrine. (2) in questions 
of expedience, propriety, piety, considerateness, etc. (3) in 
the certainty or probability of certain developments. In 
all these matters I have great uncertainty myself, and 
I feel that much may be said on both sides ; I certainly 
should be willing to tolerate both sides, except that as 
regards the first head, I have no sympathy at all with the 
Reformation, its agents, and leading defenders. As to the 
second head I have been accustomed to say ' what is one 
man's meat is another man's poison.' 

As to the article on Rio, I thought it spoke of the Roman 
Church and the Pope historically without going into the 
question of doctrine. Surely Napoleon did fight with the 
Church, and the Pope was the head and representative of 
the Church as he fought with it. I did not consider that 
it need mean more than this — though as to the matter of 
doctrine, I certainly do think the Pope the Head of the 
Church. Nay I thought all churchmen so thought ; only 
they said that his doctrine, tyranny etc. suspended his just 
powers here. 

I did not express a wish that R. W. shd tell G. that union 
with Rome was the object of the more recent development 
of church principles — Such a statement implies something 
— something I wished to be done. Ward told me that G. 
had been in a puzzle what Oakeley was aiming at, and R. W., 
when he asked about it, seemed to be beating about the 
bush — and said he ought, if he wished to state what the 
difficulty was which was agitating so many minds, to have 
said, that it was the question of union with Rome — G. 
seemed in a maze why people could not be still — this would, 
with whatever pain, have put an end to his maze. I need 
not point out in how many particulars this account differs 
from Oakeley's. 


As to the approving of others doing what I do not do 
myself, this is hardly the case. In certain cases I have 
not ^^'sapproved it. I have liked the subject of Ward's 
articles — I have thought the substance remarkably good and 
true — I had no reason why it should not be said — but it is 
another matter whether I should have brought it into being, 
as it were, could I have seen it before it was done. When 
a thing is done, one must have a strong reason for advising 
it to be undone. I had no such strong reason. However, 
that I went so far as not to disapprove is plain from my 
having seen them before publication. I must add that 
I had never been myself pained at W.'s or O.'s writingSi 
which I know you have been. 

^As to my being entirely with Oakeley and Ward, I 
think my sympathies are entirely with them ; but really 
I cannot determine whether my opinions are. I do not 
know the limits of my opinions. If Ward says this or that 
is a development of what I have said, I cannot say yes or 
no — It is plausible ; it may be true — of course the fact that 
the Roman Church has so developed and maintained, adds 
great weight to the antecedent plausibility — I cannot assert 
that it is not true ; but I cannot with the keen perception 
which some people have, appropriate it. It is a nuisance 
to me to be forced beyond what I can fairly go. 

I have intended ever since the Bp. of Salisbury's charge 
to take the first public opportunity which occurred of saying 
that I agreed with the substance of Ward and Oakeley's 

I think either the whole of this or nothing should be 
told to Oakeley. 

G. and W. in the above must be Gladstone and Robert 
WilHams respectively. What Mr. Gladstone was told about 
Newman is not on record. But in July 1842 Mr. WiUiams 
gave him information about ' the general view of the 
ulterior section of the Oxford writers and their friends ' 
which astonished him. Oakeley and his friends, it seemed, 
looked forward to reunion with Rome, without, however, 

^ This paragraph is quoted in the Apologia, p. 171. 


having any definite plans to bring it about. They could 
remain in the Church of England, and render absolute 
obedience to their ecclesiastical superiors, so long as they 
did not think any Roman doctrine defined as de fide was 
dogmatically condemned by the Church of England. ' They 
expect to work on in perfect harmony with those who look 
mainly to the restoration of Cathohc ideas on the founda- 
tion laid by the Church of England as reformed, and who 
take a different view as to reunion with Rome in particular, 
though of course desiring the reunion of the whole body of 
Christ. All this,' commented Mr. Gladstone, ' is matter 
for serious consideration. In the meanwhile I am anxious 
to put it down while fresh.' ^ 

One cannot, of course, be sure that Mr. Wilhams would 
have fully endorsed Mr. Gladstone's account of what he 
told him ; or that Oakeley and his friends would have 
accepted eveiy word of Mr. Williams' description of their 
views. Opinions in process of formation are hardly capable 
of accurate description, and each person, as he reports 
them, will almost inevitably, though quite unconsciously, 
add something to them, to make them coherent and 
complete. In other words, he wiU develop them. But 
there is no reason to doubt the substantial accuracy of 
the information as supplied to Mr. Gladstone, and put 
down in writing by him. 

It is easy to understand Newman's perplexity, when 
eagerly plied with questions by men like Ward and Oakeley. 
Nothing is harder than to discover how far one agrees 
with men who approach a question from a point of view 
from which one does not oneself contemplate it. Newman 
may be represented as holding that England had much 
to learn, and Rome much to unlearn. The New School, 
on the other hand, simply regarded Rome as the living 
model of Catholicity to which the Church of England must 
adapt herself. Here, it may be said, was a fundamental 
difference of view which would lead to opposite conclusions. 
So it might have, if Newman's mind had been stationary, 
and if he had still held to the Via Media as a working theory. 
In ' Loss and Gain,' two young men are made to compare 
* Smith ' — in whom one may recognise a faint imago of 
Newman himself — and Dr. Pusey. 

' " Dr. Pusey," continued Charles, " is said always to be 

^ Morley's Life of Gladstone, vol. i. chap. xi. 


decisive. He says, ' This is Apostolic, that's in the Fathers ' ; 
St. Cyprian says this, St. Augustine denies that ; this is 
safe, that's wrong." 

' " But the Puseyites are not always so distinct," said 
Sheffield ; '' there's Smith — he never speaks decidedly on 
difficult questions." ' ^ 

Why could not Newman be as decisive as Dr. Pusey ? 
Because, having lost the Via Media, he had no definite theory 
upon which to go ; no general principle which he could 
apply to each question as it arose. Because he had begun 
to suspect that there was more in the Fathers than he had 
hitherto been able to see. Because the idea of development 
was now lodged in his mind. But he was moving slowly 
and cautiously. ' That Rome had so developed ' was 
to him a presumption, but not more than a presumption, 
that a particular development was a legitimate one. To 
the New School ' that Rome had so developed ' afforded 
more than a presumption. It was little short of an absolute 

^ Loss and Gain, p. 120. The dialogue, which has been very much 
curtailed, continues thus : ' "Then he won't have many followers, that's 
all," said Charles. " But he has more than Dr. Pusey," answered Sheffield. 
'' Well, I can't understand it," said Charles ; " he ought not ; perhaps they 
won't stay." ' 



Retractation of Anti-Catholic Statements — Newman Reveals his 
Doubts to Keble — Resigns St. Mary's 

' Miseremini mei, saltern vos, amici mei, quia manus Domini tetigit me. * 

The chief external events of which the reader of this 
chapter should be reminded are (i) Newman's public 
retractation of the fiercest of his anti-Catholic statements ; 
(2) his resignation of St. Mary's ; and (3) the suspension of 
Dr. Pusey. 

I. The Retractation of Anti-Catholic Statements, to 
give it the title it bears in the ' Via Media/ ^ where it has 
been reprinted, was published in the ' Conservative Journal ' 
during the month of February 1843. The writer had 
intended it to appear two months earlier, and dated it 
December 12. As a literary document it is probably quite 
unique in its style. It deals with the most personal matters 
and, except for the use of the first person, is most impersonal 
in form. The customary opening of a letter, ' Sir,' or 
' Dear Sir,' is omitted, and so is the conventional ending. 
It was merely headed To the Editor, and without a word of 
explanation or introduction starts off abruptly : ' It is true 
that I have at various times, in writing against the Roman 
system, used not merely arguments, about which I am not 
here speaking, but what reads like declamation.' Then 
follow a number of instances of such declamation, ranging 
from 1833 to 1837. The year of each is carefully noted, 
but references to where they were to be found, except in 
the case of one or two anonymous publications, are not 
given. The reader was left to find all this out for himself, 

^ At the end of vol. ii. 


if he chanced to remember the passages, and where he had 
come across them. The writer in order to aggravate his 
fault, and make his confession more humihating, gave 
many instances of vigorous rebukes addressed to him by 
an ' intimate friend/ ^ of which the following may serve as 
a specimen : ' I must enter another protest against your 
cursing and swearing . . . What good can it do ? I call it 
uncharitable to an excess.' And then, in words which seem 
almost instinct with a spirit of prophecy, * How mistaken 
we may ourselves be on many points which are only gradually 
opening to us.* 

Newman had intended, for the sake of his friends, that 
his retractation should steal upon the world unobserved, 
without creating a sensation, and only become generally 
known by the time it was ancient history. The editor of 
the * Conservative Journal ' did not fall in with this plan. 
It could hardly be expected that he should sacrifice a 
column and more of his space to closely printed matter 
which was not likely to attract the attention of one in a 
hundred of his readers. It was easy enough to turn an 
unobtrusive communication into a sensational disclosure 
by heading it Oxford and Rome and prefacing it thus : 
* The following letter has been forwarded to us for publica- 
tion. It is without signature ; but we dare say some of 
our Oxford readers will find no difficulty in fixing upon 
the name of the writer. For ourselves we give it without 
note or comment.' So far the editor. On February 20 
Mrs. J. Mozley wrote to her brother, ' We hear that that 
letter which appeared in the "Conservative Journal," which 
bears every mark of belonging to you, except your name, 
is making a great hubbub in the world." 

The extent and limits of the retractation are worth 
noting. The passages withdrawn could only be justified 
if the writer of them held that Rome had practically un- 
churched, not to say unchristianised, herself. They read 
like echoes of the Protestant tradition in which he had 
been nurtured, viz. that Rome was the Babylon of the 

But none of the less violent, yet still very fierce, things 
which had been said in Tract 90 and the Letters to Dr. Jelf 
and the Bishop of Oxford were withdrawn. Nor, how- 
ever, were they repeated. People would not be slow to 

^ Hurrell Froude. 


conclude from this silence that the writer did not see his 
way either to repeating or recanting them. Yet it may be 
doubted if, as a matter of fact, the writer at all intended 
this inference to be drawn. He was intent upon per- 
forming, in obedience to the dictates of his conscience, 
a solemn act of reparation and self-humiliation. To have 
unsaid some fierce things, and repeated others, even though 
these latter were in a minor key, would have been like 
driving a bargain with his conscience and letting himself 
down easily. But, be this as it may, the Retractation seems 
universally to have been regarded as a significant and 
ominous act. 

(2) The resignation of St. Mary's was a step which had 
been long contemplated, and calls for no remark. 

(3) The story of Dr. Pusey's suspension has been fully 
told in his ' Life,' where many facts which at the time were 
unknown, to all except those immediately concerned, have 
been brought to light. The offence was a sermon on the 
Holy Eucharist ; the tribunal a court consisting of the 
Vice-Chancellor and six Doctors of Divinity appointed by 
him as his assessors ; the penalty inflicted was suspension 
from preaching within the University for two years. The 
authorities refurbished ancient weapons of defence against 
false teaching, and amply proved that they were not fitted 
to handle them. Among other unfairnesses they bound 
their victim over to a promise of secrecy with regard to 
some altogether illusory negotiations which they held with 
him ; thus making it impossible for him to take the advice 
of his friends. 

The following letter is an acknowledgment of a present 
of books from Mr. Hope. It is the first allusion to the 
library which Newman was amassing out of the proceeds, 
so rumour said, from the sale of Tract 90. This library 
is a curious phenomenon. Newman went on adding to it 
almost up to the end of his Anglican career ; yet with the 
future growing more and more uncertain, it is difficult to 
understand how he had the heart to burden himself with 
a great collection of expensive books. Can he have felt it 
would be an act of secret disloyalty to the communion of 
which he was a member to take any precautions against the 
time when he might have to sever his connection with it ? 
Or was he till almost the end hoping against hope that he 
might see his way to remaining where he was ? 


J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

Oriel : February lo, 1843. 

Dear Hope, — Your splendid benefaction has arrived, 
and I hope we shall make due use of it, and profit by it. I 
do not quite understand about the cases going free— if 
you have paid please recollect that I am your debtor, for 
it does seem a shame that you should frank them down. 
But anyhow I must mention it, because the people have 
charged 14s. and it is not fit that they should be paid twice 
over. Will you let me know ? 

Ever yours, 

J. H. N. 

P.S. — I am going to take the liberty to send Roundell 
Palmer ^ my University Sermons, since they are the least 
theological book I have published. Will you just take off 
the abruptness of the present ? My chief doubt is that I 
have inflicted such a favour on him before — but I don't 
think it likely. 

J. H. Newman to an Unknown Correspondent 

Littlemore : March 4, 1843 

Dear Sir, — Though I have not a sufficiently vivid memory 
of the contents of the ' Tracts for the Times ' to be able to say 
whether this or that proposition is to be found in them, or 
can be deduced from them, at least I can and will readily 
give my own opinions, which, I suppose, will on the whole 
agree with those of the Tracts, as being parts of the same 
system of doctrine. As to the Tracts, they were not written 
on certain theses, but were the spontaneous development, 
as called for, of a certain view and system of religion, held 
by their authors who are various. How much of that 
system happened to be brought out into formal statement 
in them, perhaps the authors themselves could not tell — 
this is the case with every theological work. 

I. I do not object to bringing forward the Atonement 
explicitly and prominently in itself, but under ^ circum- 
stances, i.e. when people are unfit to receive it. I think 

^ Afterwards Lord Selborne. ^ This word is uncertain. 


i i 


it should be taught all baptized children — ^that it is the 
life of all true Christians — but that it is not the means of 
conversion (ordinarily speaking or in the divine appointment) 
of those who are not religious. I think it ought not to be 
preached to infidels, immoral men, backsliders, at first, but 
be reserved till they begin to feel the need of it. Conse- 
quently I object to the use of it so often made in our pulpits 
as the one doctrine to be addressed to all. It is but one out 
of others, and not adapted to all. There are various instru- 
ments of persuasion given in Scripture ; the most familiar 
distinction is that of the Law and the Gospel. I consider 
that at this time the mass of our congregations who have 
lapsed after baptism require the Law rather than the Gospel. 
They require to be brought to a sense of sin, and I do not 
think the preaching of the doctrine of the Atonement is 
intended to bring them to a sense of sin. Dr. Chalmers 
thinks otherwise — there then we stand at issue. Dr. 
Chalmers' Tron Sermons ^ are the best instance I can take of 
the mode of preaching theAtonement which I would exclude — 
it seems to me very irreverent. He would cast pearls before 
swine — he would excite the feelings rather than mend the 
heart ; that is, this is the result of his mode of preaching, 
for, of course, he would wish to renew the heart, though I 
think he takes the wrong way. I will add, first that in 
preaching the Law, I do not mean, of course, to exclude the 
preaching of Divine Love and Mercy — but the insisting 
specially on the Atonement. Secondly the Atonement is 
not the only doctrine which under circumstances I would 
withhold — the Incarnation is another. The Apostles in 
the Acts are almost silent both about the Divinity of Christ 
and the Atonement. I only wish to follow their example. 
St. Paul is said to preach the faith of Christ to Festus, where 
he but insists on righteousness, temperance, and judg- 
ment to come. Our Saviour Himself is said to preach the 
Gospel, yet even His death, and much more His Atone- 
ment, was a secret during His Ministry. 

1 [Sermons preached at Tron Church.] 


2. The ' Rule of Faith ' is an ambiguous expression, and 
I cannot answer your question till I know what you mean 
by it. It has been a received phrase for ' Scripture ' only 
during the last 150 years, as you will see drawn out in Tract 
90. Before that time it was sometimes applied to Scripture, 
sometimes to the creed, sometimes to both, sometimes to 
Tradition. In antiquity (as by Tertullian) it is the phrase 
for Tradition. I think that in Tract 90 I have said that it is 
best to avoid the phrase. The Tracts nowhere say that 
anything need be believed in order to salvation which is not 
contained in, or [cannot] be proved from Scripture. 

3. The promises of forgiveness of sin have as full an 
application after Baptism as before, but not in the same 
free instantaneous way. They are regained gradually, 
with fear and trembling — ^by repentance, prayer, depreca- 
tion, penance, patience. 

4. The Eucharist is a proper Sacrifice made by the Priest 
as Christ's representative, but only as such. 

5. Adherence to Episcopal ordination is the safest 
course for the security of the validity of the Sacraments, and 
of the existence of Church fellowship. 

6. There is nothing in Scripture against invocation of 
Saints. The practice is right or wrong according as the 
Church allows it or not — but where it is a Church ordinance, 
still it may be abused. 

7. Justification by Faith without the Sacraments ^ is 
the essence of sectarian and (modern) heretical doctrine. 

8. No other appointed means but baptism is revealed 
in Scripture for regeneration. 

I beg you will excuse my penmanship, but my hand is 
much tired by overwork. 

Yours faithfully, 

J. H. N. 

The process of conversion as commonly represented by 
the men whose style of preaching Newman disliked went 
through the preparatory stages of conviction of sin and 

^ It is not clear whether he meant to write Sacrament or Sacraments. 


terror, before the soul was ready for the tidings of the ' free 
and full salvation/ Why, then, were they so indignant 
at the idea of a preacher trying to bring his hearers through 
the preparatory stages, before he directed their thoughts 
to the Atonement ? 

In the following letter Newman consults Keble about 
resigning St. Mary's. He had already done so in October 
1840. The letter he then wrote can be read in the 
' Apologia/ pp. 132-135- 

All the letters that have been preserved, which passed 
between Newman and Keble from March 1843 to October 
1845, are printed in full, except for some erasures in those 
of the latter made by the Cardinal towards the end of his 
life, when he parted with them, and presented them to 
Keble College, Oxford. He explained these erasures in the 
following note.^ 

* In the letters which follow I have made erasures, 
which may seem strange and arbitrary, unless I say some- 
thing to account for them. 

' Let me observe, then, that dear John Keble's heart 
was too tender and his religious sense too keen, for him 
not to receive serious injury to his spirits and his mental 
equilibrium by the long succession of trials in which his 
place in the Oxford movement involved him. 

' The affair of No. 90, Williams' failure in his contest 
for the Poetry Professorship, the Jerusalem Bishoprick, 
Young's rejection when offering himself for Orders, Pusey's 
censure by the six Doctors, the promotion of Thirlwall and 
others, my own religious unsettlement and that of so many 
others, the charges and hostile attitude of the Bishops, 
the publication of Arnold's life and letters, and the prospect 
of the future thus opened upon him (not to dwell upon 
the serious illness of his wife and his brother), were too much 
for him, and threw him into a state of extreme depression, 
which showed itself to his intimate friends in the language 
of self -accusation and even of self -abhorrence. 

^ This note, together with considerable portions of Keble's letters, has 
already been published in Dr. Lock's Life of Keble. Some portions of 
the correspondence were also used by Miss Mozley. 


' This heart-rending trial, of which perhaps I saw more 
than any one, is remarked upon by Sir John Coleridge in his 
" Life of Keble " (p. 283 etc., ed. i), though he has not 
attempted any sufficient explanation of it. He seems to attri- 
bute what was a surprise to him to the intense self-disparage- 
ment which, however strange to the run of men, is natural to 
a mind so religious as Keble' s. Others have supposed it was 
a point of duty with Keble thus to speak and write, as 
being a proper form of introducing a religious sentiment, 
or what was called in a Bishop's charge some forty years 
ago, a sort of ' mystic humility ' — an imputation most 
untrue to Keble' s nature. It is more exact to say that the 
idea had grown upon him and vividly possessed him, that 
he had allowed himself for the last ten or twelve years to 
be engaged in deep religious questions, and in controversy 
rising out of them, without adequate preparation. He had 
set off in the company or at the head of many others, on 
a road which he had not explored, and as he might think, 
he had been " the blind leading the blind." And, in particular 
he considered himself at least indirectly, if not positively, 
the cause of my own abandonment of the Church of 

' This impression, however, unless he had been at the 
time so worried and broken in heart, as I have supposed, 
would not have been enough in itself to account for the 
obiter dicta, the ejaculations, the single words and half 
sentences, the language so shocking to one who knew and 
loved him so well as I did, in which he expressed his sense 
of the difficulties of the moment and his own responsibility 
in relation to them. 

' To me nothing is more painful than the contrast be- 
tween the cheerfulness and playfulness which runs through 
his early letters and the sadness of his later. This must 
remain anyhow ; it is founded on the successive circum- 
stances of his history ; it is part of his life ; nor could one 
expect it to be otherwise ; but I could not be so cruel to 
that meek, patient and affectionate soul, to that dearly, 
deeply beloved friend, as to leave to a future generation the 


exhibition of those imaginary thoughts about himself which 
tormented him, which grew out of grave troubles, which 
were very real, and which are sufficiently recorded for 
posterity, when they serve, as in a notice like this, to suggest 
to a reader the weight of those troubles.' 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : March 14, 1843. 

My dear Keble, — I am sorry to trouble you with my 
concerns, yet I want to write to you on a subject, which 
has before led me to apply to you, and which I hardly know 
how to bring out properly. It seems to me as if Lent were 
a fitting time, when one has more hope than at ordinary 
seasons of being guided amid perplexity. 

I wrote to you on the subject of St. Mary's two years 
and a half since — and my difficulty has not diminished in 
the interval. The question is, as you know, about my 
resigning the Living, but I am so bewildered that I don't 
know right from wrong, and have no confidence of being 
real in any thing I think or say. 

My abiding difficulty in holding St. Mary's is the circum- 
stance that the persons whom I am influencing are not my 
Parishioners, but the Undergraduates with whom I have 
no concern. It distresses me to think how little I am 
fitted for the charge of such a Parish, and how little I do — I 
dread to think the number of years I have been there, yet 
how unprofitably. On the other hand persons, who are 
not given me in charge, attend my Services and Sermons, 
and that certainly without, perhaps against, the wish of 
their proper guardians. If I felt this, as you know I did, 
before the No. 90 affair, how much more must I feel it 
since ! 

Another circumstance, which pressed on me painfully 
when I wrote to you before, was, that what influence I 
exert is simply and exactly, be it more or less, in the direction 
of the Church of Rome — and that whether I will or no. 
What men learn from me, who learn anything, is to lean 


towards doctrines and practices which our Church does 
not sanction. There was a time when I tried to balance 
this by strong statements against Rome, which I suppose 
to a certain extent effected my object. But now, when I 
feel I can do this no more, how greatly is the embarrassment 
of my position increased ! I am in danger of acting as a 
traitor to that system, to which I must profess attachment 
or I should not have the opportunity of acting at all. 

But what increases my difficulty most heavily is the 
gradual advance, which is making, to a unanimous con- 
demnation of No. 90 on the part of the Bishops. Here 
I stand on a different footing from all who agree to that 
Tract on the whole, even from you. No one but myself 
can be answerable for every word of it. The Bishops 
condemn it, without specifying what they condemn in it. 
This gives an opening to every reader who agrees with it 
on the whole, to escape the force of their censure. I alone 
cannot escape it. Two years have passed, and one Bishop 
after another has pronounced an unmitigated sentence 
against it. By October next the probability is, that hardly 
a single Bishop but will have given his voice against it ; 
that is, given his voice against that comment on the Articles 
on which alone I can hold my Living. How can I with 
any comfort, with any sense of propriety, retain it ? There 
is nothing said by them in mitigation of this sentence. My 
own Bishop says that by such expedients as the Tract 
exhibits I may make the Articles mean anything or nothing. 
The Bishop of Exeter I am told is quite violent in his 
language about me. The Bishop of St. David's, the most 
candid of all, says that the explanations which others have 
offered of the Tract just suifice to show that I need not be 
dishonest. And so on with the rest. I declare I wonder 
at myself that I have remained so long without moving. 
Now there are cases when a consciousness of being in thr? 
right suffices to outweigh the censure even of authority; 
but in this instance I cannot deny, first, that my interpre- 
tation has never been drawn out, to say the least, before — 
and I suspect our Catholic-minded Divines have rather 


had recourse to the expedient of looking on the Articles 
as Articles of Peace — and next I am conscious too, as I 
have said above, that I am not advocating, that I am not 
promoting, the Anglican system of doctrine, but one very 
much more resembling in matter of fact, the doctrine of 
the Roman Church. I have nothing to fall hack upon. 

Another reason may be added which, though of very 
inferior importance, at least tells as far as this, to diminish 
the dread that, in retiring, I should be recklessly tossing 
away influence which Providence has put into my hands — 
occupation is growing on me of a different kind, and which 
is likely to interfere with my duties at St. Mary's — I mean, 
that of directing (as I best may) the consciences of persons. 
I very much doubt, whether I should not, by relinquishing 
St. Mary's, have a great deal more work than at present 
of a pastoral kind, and moreover of a directly practical 
nature, not strictly speaking theological. 

The great objection to any such plan, (which I am 
not proposing even as an hypothesis before the Autumn), 
is lest it should seem to imply a great dissatisfaction with 
the Church of England ; though really any sensible person 
ought to see that my situation fiilly justifies, if not calls 
for it. Pusey suggested, and I had thought myself, if it 
were determined on, that I might manage to retain Little- 
more, which, I suppose, would be a sufficient answer to 
the suspicion. The College indeed, as you may recollect, 
refused to separate Littlemore from St. Mary's for such a 
purpose last October two years — but I think some arrange- 
ment of the kind might be managed. And then I might 
keep Littlemore on according to circumstances. I think 
my coming to live here, my occasional periods of absence 
from St. Mary's, which have now gone on for three years, 
and the continual rumours of my resigning it, have prepared 
people for such an event, over and above the Heads of 
Houses and the Bishops. 

I am very sorry so to trouble you — ^but will you kindly 
bear my anxiety in mind ? and the more that really I 
cannot say whether I feel a word of what I have written 


and whether it is not all pretence. Of course there is no 
hurry for your answer ; indeed from the nature of the 
case I do not wish a speedy one. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. W. Dodsworth 

Littlemore : March 23, 1843. 

I have been trying to make out, but in vain, whether the 
R. Catholics have a mission in the neighbourhood of Hong 
Kong. Probably not, as one generally hears of them about 

Yet it seems to me that this does not much alter the 
case, though it would make a better show in argument, 
if they had. I confess I must say, that I do not enter into 
this scheme of the Hong Kong mission ; and that, upon the 
broad ground which you put, and which if not possessed 
of formal ecclesiastical force is at least free from the charge 
of technicality, that considering what the Roman Church has 
done (after all drawbacks and faults) in China, and what 
it has suffered, even to martyrdom, it is most inexpedient, 
with a view to the religious amelioration of the country, 
to interfere with its work. This seems to me a serious 
religious ground. 

It is very unpleasant to be giving an opinion, which, as 
far as it goes, has a very much more practical bearing on 
you than on myself, since I do not expect our Bishop would 
be proposing any such measure as you expect in London, 
but, as my present opinion stands, I certainly could not 
myself take part in it — and therefore if he does propose it, 
I shall so far be in a worse position than you, that people 
would consider my declining to mean more. 

But, after aU, it is one of those perplexing matters, in 
which you may find yourself able ultimately to make up 
your mind to comply with the Bishop's wishes, even though 
they are not quite your own. 

I think with you, that things must come to a crisis — 


but do not see any symptoms of such a misfortune imme- 
diately. The Convocation, when it meets, will be a most 
anxious affair — and those Nestorian and Monophysite, 
not to say German, questions are full of hazard. By next 
autumn I suppose nearly all, or at least the great majority 
of the Bishops will have charged against No. 90. This is 
a serious matter to myself, but touches no one else. I 
wonder whether the Bishops think us made of squeezable 
materials (to use Mr. Hume's words) and that we have been 
using big words merely in terrorem. 

Yours very sincerely, 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to J. B. Dalgairns, Esq. 

Littlemore : April 26, 1843. 

Carissime, — The enclosed speaks for itself. I shall 
mention him in the ofhce till May 22nd, i.e., for thirty days, 
which I think is the ecclesiastical time. We have now 
two Littlemore patrons (for so I think they have a right to 
be termed) taken from us — Froude and Wood — seven years 
between them (keep the letter for me or send it me back). 

I have had to entertain a Durham man — a Mr. Skinner 
• — who is writing a Scotch Hierography or the like, and 
is to work for us. His account of Durham is wonderful. 
In spite of Mr. Faber, Mr. Townshend, the Bp. (Malt by), 
the Dean (Waddington), both extreme liberals, in spite 
of Mr. Gilby and of Jenkyns, who considers Bishops not 
necessary for a Church, the men who turn out from the 
University, he says, have taken but one, and that a High 
Church course. He says that Jenkyns is regularly puzzled 
and annoyed. He has been preaching against various 
excesses, i.e., fasting. This Lent the University authorities 
were obliged to put up a notice ordering the men to attend 
dinner in Hall on Fridays. Mr. S. says that throughout 
the North, where he knows the country, the younger men 
are uniformly taking the high church line. Such news 
as this shows how wrong it is to be impatient. It is quite 
impossible such persons can stop where they are, i.e., unless 


they marry, which reconciles one to any amount of in- 
tellectual inconsistency. 

Lockhart has decided on going away on Monday next. 
Bowles is returned. I have not yet got from him any 
particulars, except that Dr. Maye certainly means to put 
him on a more generous regimen. Stewart talks of getting 
a course of English Eccles. History for £35, but he did 
not know of Cressy, and he seems contented with the old 
edition of Dugdale. 

Miles has been in the Record for dancing at Malta. 
The Cistercian (or, as the Record says, the Sistercian) 
Bazaar has come off and fetched £800 to £1000. 

Coffin is returned, and came up to see us all yesterday — 
he found none but Lockhart. 

Mr. Mills has come back, and Henry is at a new novel 
for which he says Lockhart has furnished him with the 
scene and some striking points. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 

The following is Keble's answer to Newman's letter of 
March 14, and to another of later date which is missing. 
It is clear from Keble's reply that this latter one was about 
the ' Lives of the English Saints,' and contained a suggestion 
that Keble should write the Life of Bede. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

May 3, 1843. 

My dearest and kindest Friend, — How can I ever thank 
you as I ought for your charitable remembrance of me, 
and I going on so long in such ungracious silence ; 
and now I have to condole with you on another of your 
dearest friends being taken. ^ I hope you have not felt 
it too keenly : surely he was a person for whose departure 
it seems almost unkind to feel anything but thankful. 
Wilson teUs me he was less uneasy after he got into Yorkshire 
among his friends. The rest of home, I suppose, was a sort 
of ' taste and say ' ^ of the better Rest he was coming so 
near to. 

^ Samuel Wood, who died on April 22. 

2 The MS. has ' say '; probably, Dr. Lock suggests, intended as a 
provincialism for ' see.' 


Now as concerning your two letters. I have turned the 
subject of your connexion with St. Mary's every way in 
my mind as well as I can ; and it seems to me that the time 
is come when there will be nothing wrong in your retiring, 
if your own feelings prompt you to do so, as of course they 
must on many accounts. 

I am not sure that I should say this, if it involved your 
retiring from the exercise of the Ministry ; but, if you can 
manage to keep Littlemore, there will be no appearance 
of that kind, and you are yourself well able to judge whether 
the loss of your sermons from St. Mary's will not be com- 
pensated by your labours in giving private advice and 
hearing confessions. . . . 

Then, it does seem to me that there has been a most 
encouraging silence, far more than could have been expected, 
in respect of the sort of retractation you made of certain 
phrases some months ago. I should have looked for a 
storm of obloquy, but, as far as I have heard, very little 
notice has been taken of it. I cannot help trusting that 
people are restrained in this instance, themselves know not 
how, and it gives one good hope that you will be allowed to 
go on quietly in what you judge, on the whole, your duty. 

I am not sure that I ought not to follow your example, 
committed as I am to the very same principles ; only that 
I do not think so much of Bishops' words in their Charges 
as you do, and as I did myself, now that I have found out 
how they might act on them and do not, thereby proving 
themselves not in earnest. But without saying that it is 
your duty to retire, one may very well think that it is 
perfectly open to you to do so. Whichever way you resolve, 
I do not see that you can do very wrongly. . . . 

Touching the Lives of Saints, you know how glad I 
should be to be useful, and I will try it at any rate, if you 
recommend me, though I do not feel as if I was up to it 
in any way. But I really fear I must ask for more 
time, and a good deal more : for I am most disgracefully 
ignorant, and have no books at hand. Is not his History 
in Saxon ? I do not know a word of Saxon. 


I have been reading your Sermons, both Plain and 
University, and it is the next thing to talking with you at 
Littlemore and at Oxford. Is that Ward's Article in 
' British Critic ' about Confession ? it seemed to me a very 
good one. Perceval was here yesterday, and said that 
W. Palmer of Magdalen had been writing another (what 
he called) violent pamphlet about the Bishop of Jerusalem. 
I never can understand why people call his writings so 
violent : they seem to me particularly calm. ... I am 
seriously thinking of getting rid of the copyright of the 
' Christian Year ' ; do you see any objection ? would you 
alter certain passages first ? 

We are tolerably well here, and our woods are getting 
into high beauty. We kept Anfield Commemoration 
Friday week, and thought of you and others. Perceval 
told me he saw Pusey pretty well not long since ; except 
this, I have not heard of him for a very long time. All 
kind Easter wishes to yourself, to him, Copeland and 
Marriott and Church and all such friends. 

I am still sore about Arnold's memorial, but surely 
we were right. 

We had Archdeacon Froude here the other day, and 
it was delightful to see him so well and heart whole. 

Ever your grateful and affectionate, 

J. K. 

In the following letters Newman makes Keble acquainted 
with the change which was coming over his religious opinions. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : Thursday, May 4, 1843. 

My dear Keble, — On this very day, on which I have 
received your kind letter, giving me conditional leave of 
retiring from St. Mary's, I have been disappointed in my 
last expedient for keeping Littlemore by itself. This circum- 
stance, combined with the most kind tone of your letter. 


has strongly urged me to tell you something which has at 
last been forced upon my full consciousness. 

There is something about myself, which is no longer a 
secret to me — and if not to me, surely it ought not to be so 
to some one else ; and I think that other person should be 
you, whose advice I have always wished to follow. 

I have enough consciousness in me of insincerity and 
double dealing, which I know you abhor, to doubt about 
the correctness of what I shall tell you of myself. I really 
cannot say whether I am stating my existing feelings, 
motives, and views fairly, and whether my memory will not 
play me false. I cannot hope but I shall seem inconsistent 
to you — and whether I am or have been I cannot say. I 
will but observe that it is very difficult to realize one's own 
views in certain cases, at the time of acting, which is implied 
in culpable inconsistency ; and difficult again, when con- 
scious of them, to discriminate between passing thoughts and 
permanent impressions, particularly when they are unwel- 
come. Some thoughts are like hideous dreams, and we 
wake from them, and think they will never return ; and 
though they do return, we cannot be sure still that they are 
more than vague fancies ; and till one is so sure they are 
not, as to be afraid of concealing within what is at variance 
with one's professions, one does not like, or rather it is 
wrong, to mention them to another. 

I do trust that I am not trifling with myself now, nor 
am about to say what is beyond my own settled impressions. 
If I am, it is most cruel to you in many ways. Any how, 
you will be undergoing a most dreadful suffering at my 
hands, if you read the other paper. 

I do not feel distress at putting on you the necessity of 
advising ; because, so that you give your best judgment, 
it is all you can give, all that Divine Mercy expects from 
you or me ; and by acting honestly upon it, I shall, so be 
it, be pleasing Him, whatever comes of it ; but what shall 
I say for the pain I shall be causing you ? 

Ever yours affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 


Littlemore : May 4, 1843. 

Oh forgive me, my dear Keble, and be merciful to me in a 
matter, in which, if I have not your compassion, my faith 
is so weak and I have so little sense of my own uprightness, 
that I shall have no refuge in the testimony of my con- 
science, such as St. Paul felt, and shall be unable to appeal 
from you to a higher judgment seat. But if you do on 
deliberation accuse me of insincerity, still tell me, for I shall 
deserve to bear it, and your reproof will be profitable. 

In June and July 1839, near four years ago, I read the 
Monophysite Controversy, and it made a deep impression 
on me, which I was not able to shake off, that the Pope had 
a certain gift of infallibility, and that communion with the 
See of Rome was the divinely intended means of grace 
and illumination. I do not know how far I fully recognised 
this at the moment ; but towards the end of the same Long 
Vacation I considered attentively the Donatist history, and 
became quite excited. It broke upon me that we were in a 
state of schism. Since that, all history, particularly that 
of Arianism, has appeared to me in a new light ; confir- 
matory of the same doctrine. 

In order to conquer this feeling, I wrote my article on 
the Catholicity of the English Church, as I have written 
other things since. For a while my mind was quieted ; 
but from that time to this the impression, though fading 
and reviving, has been on the whole becoming stronger 
and deeper. 

At present, I fear, as far as I can realize my own convic- 
tions, I consider the Roman Catholic Communion the Church 
of the Apostles, and that what grace is among us (which, 
through God's mercy, is not little,) is extraordinary, and 
from the overflowings of His Dispensation. 

I am very far more sure that England is in schism, than 
that the Roman additions to the Primitive Creed may not 
be developments, arising out of a keen and vivid realizing 
of the Divine Depositum of faith. 

All this is so shocking to say, that I do not know whether 
to wish that I am exaggerating to you my feelings or not. 


You will now understand what gives edge to the Bishops' 
charges, without any undue sensitiveness on my part. They 
distress me in two ways ; i. as being in some sense protests 
and witnesses to my conscience against my secret unfaithful- 
ness to the English Church ; and 2. next, as being average 
samples of her teaching and tokens how very far she is from 
even aspiring to Catholicity. 

I must add that Rogers, who has known, perhaps better 
than any one, my opinions and their history, has for two 
years past peremptorily refused to give me any advice what- 
ever on Church matters, one way or the other ; and has 
within the last month told me his reason ; viz. that it would 
be treachery in him to the English Church, to assist one 
who is conducting a movement, tending to carry over her 
members to Rome. 

Of course the being unfaithful to a trust is my great subject 
of dread, as it has long been, as you know. Still there is 
another alternative, besides that of carrying members of 
our Church to Rome, viz. disposing herself that way, and so 
healing a schism instead of making one. Yet, all this being 
considered, it does seem to me safer to retire from a post, in 
which, whether I will or no, I may be employing a sacred 
authority committed to me against the giver. 

However, this is the point which I am submitting to your 
judgment. What ought I to do} 

Whatever pain I may have on many accounts in giving up 
Littlemore, and that to a person like Eden, and great as the 
loss of Copeland would be to the Parish, I hope that on the 
whole things would go on pretty much as usual. And I 
cannot wish to be without personal pain or inconvenience 
in taking a step of this kind. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 

It must have been a few days after the frank explanation 
alluded to in the previous letter that Rogers wrote as follows 
to Newman : 


Temple * April 3, 1843. 

iMy dear Newman, — I do not like meeting you again 
without having said, once for all, what I hope you will not 
think hollow or false. I cannot disguise from myself how 
very improbable — perhaps impossible — a recurrence to 
our former terms is. But I wish, before the time has past 
for such an acknowledgment, to have said how deeply and 
painfully I feel — and I may say have more or less felt for 
years — the greatness of what I am losing, and to thank you 
for all you have done and been to me. I know that it is 
in a great measure by my own act that I am losing this, and 
I cannot persuade myself that I am substantially wrong, 
or that I could long have avoided what has happened. But 
I do believe, if I may dare say so, that God would have found 
a way to preserve to me so great a blessing as your friendship 
if I had been less unworthy of it. I do feel most earnestly 
how much of anything which I may venture to be thankful 
for in what I am is of your forming — how more than kind — 
how tender you have always been to me, and how unlikely it 
is that I can ever again meet with anything approaching in 
value to the intimacy which you gave me ... I should 
have been pained at leaving all this unsaid. But I do not 
write it with an idea of forcing an answer from you — nor 
does it require one — and I shall not attach any meaning 
to your leaving it unanswered. 

Yours affectionately, 

Frederic Rogers. 

The hyper-sensitive Newman of fiction ought to have 
broken entirely with Rogers. The real Newman did nothing 
of the kind. And Mr. Rogers, on his side, had within less 
than two years the opportunity of giving public testimony to 
the fact that his love for Newman had not diminished one 
whit. It was on the occasion when in the beginning of 
1845 a gratuitous attempt was made to get Convocation to 
censure Tract 90. This is part of what he said : ' When they 
see the person whom they have been accustomed to revere 
as few men are revered, whose labours, whose greatness, 

^ This letter has already been published in the Letters of Lord Blackford 
(London, Murray, 1896), p. no, but the temptation to quote it is irresistible. 


whose tenderness, whose singleness of purpose, they have 
been permitted to know intimately . . . when they contrast 
his merits . . with the merits, the bearing, the fortunes of 
those who are doggedly pursuing him, it does become very 
difficult to speak without sullying what it is a kind of 
pleasure to feel is his cause by using hard words, or betraying 
it by not using them.' ^ 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : May lo, 1843. 

My dear Keble, — I named Bede first, thinking that it 
would be a work for which his own writings would be every- 
thing, since so little of him is otherwise known. And thus 
you would not need a public library. Perhaps I was wrong 
in mentioning Alcuin also — as the subject would be excursive. 
But do as you will. If you do not take Alcuin and the schools, 
I shall offer the subject to Brewer, or Haddan. 

Of course I could not but be long prepared for Wood's 
being taken from us. He has been failing for two years. 
He has been here several times — the last time in October. 
It was on his encouragement, or rather suggestion, that 
I took this building in hand, two years next Whitsuntide. 
Thank you for your kind anxiety. 

Ward has had a good deal to do with the article you 
speak of, but did not write it. The author, I don't know 
why, wishes to be secret. 

Bowden is in Oxford with his son and brother, and seems 
very well. 

Pusey is laid up with a sort of fever — he got up yesterday 
at 12, which was an improvement. I sat with him an 
hour on Sunday, he lying on the sofa. He seemed in 
very good spirits. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

May 14, 1843. 

Believe me, my very dear Newman, that any thought 

1 Quoted in Church's Oxford Movement, pp. 383-4. 


of wilful insincerity in you can find no place in my mind. 
You have been and are in a most difficult position, and 
I seem to myself in some degree able to enter into your 
difficulties : and, although one sees of course how an enemy 
might misrepresent your continuing in the English Priesthood 
with such an impression on your mind, I have no thought 
but of love and esteem and regard and gratitude for you in 
this as in everything. ... I can only just say what I feel, 
perfectly unequal as I know myself on every account to give 
you advice on this awful matter. My feeling is 

1. That your withdrawing from the English ministry 
under the present circumstances will be a very ' perilous 
step, not so much in itself, but because of its bringing you, 
as I fear it would, in every respect nearer what I must call 
the temptation of going over. 

2. That this latter would indeed be a grievous event, 
considering that for what is wrong without our fault in the 
place where God's Providence has set us, we are not our- 
selves answerable, but we are for what may be wrong in the 
position we choose for ourselves. 

3. That this difference in point of responsibility ought 
in a matter of practice to outweigh the difference you feel 
on the other side in the evidence for the claims of Rome and 
against her additions to the Creed. Especially as 

4. You seem to ground your impression chiefly on points 
of historical evidence : you speak of it as of a ' hideous dream,' 
from which you would gladly awake : it does not overpower 
you with a sort of intrinsical lustre, as many divine truths, 
I suppose, might. 

5. You speak in one part of your letter of our Church 
showing no signs of repentance, no yearning after Catholicity : 
but is not the time too short for any one to be acting on this 
impression ? Certainly there is a great yearning even after 
Rome in many parts of the Church, which seems to be 
accompanied with so much good, that one hopes, if it be 
right, it will be allowed to gain strength. But from Bishops 
one could hardly look at present for more than toleration, 
and that I consider myself to have from my Diocesan, 


much more you from yours. Are you sure that some of 
your feeling on this head is not owing to a natural reaction 
from having had too eager expectations at some time ? 

6. I am not sure how far it is right to talk of consequences, 
but I suppose, as far as we can judge of them, that no one 
thing would tend more entirely to throw us back and undo 
what little good may have been done of late. As to the 
question itself I am really too ignorant of the parts of history 
to which you refer to say a word : but can it be that the 
evidence seems so overpowering as to amount to moral 
certainty ? and if not, ought not but a small probability 
on the other side to weigh against it practically ? 

You see my deep feeling about yom: withdrawing from 
your ministerial place refers almost wholly to what I fear 
might come after : if I were seciure against such con- 
sequences, I cannot say that I should think it wrong, gieat 
as the alarm would perhaps be for a time, and the loss too 
in many respects. 

One thing occurs to me ; do you not think it possible 
that you may have over-estimated the claims of Rome in 
your later studies from a kind of feeling that your earlier 
expressions had done her wrong ? and now that you have 
retracted them, would it not be well to examine the 
matter over again, free as you would be from that par- 
ticular bias ? 

And now, my dearest Newman, I have one most earnest 
request to make of you, that you will not in the smallest 
degree depend on my advice or opinion in this matter, for 
you do not, you cannot ... in every respect but true 
love (I believe) towards you. It frightens me to think how 
rashly and with how small preparation I have been dealing 
with these great matters, and I have all manner of imagina- 
tions as to how my defects may have helped to unsettle 
people, and in particular to hinder you from finding peace. 
Yet do not suppose I would stop you from writing to me, 
if it is the least relief to you to do so. On the contrary not 
to hear from you would be a sad loss. All I want is that 
you should put no sort of implicit faith in me, but take up 


with what I say when you see anything in it that is reason- 
able and right, not otherwise. 

I still cling to the hope you taught me to entertain, that, 
in the present distress, where the Succession and the Creeds 
are, there is the Covenant, even without visible inter- 

God forgive and bless us, and choose our burthen for 
us, and help us to bear it : and, if it be His Will, may we 
too never be divided in Communion. 

Ever your most grateful and affectionate, 

J. Keble. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : May i8, 1843. 

My dear Keble, — Thank you for your speedy as well as 
compassionate letter. I feel it to be almost ungenerous 
to entangle you in my troubles ; at least it would be so, were 
it not a rule of the Gospel that Christians should not stand 
alone or depend on themselves. And, if so, to whom can 
I go, (for surely I may so speak without irreverence) but 
to you who have been an instrument of good to so many, 
myself inclusive ? To whom is it natural for me to go but 
to you whom I have tried to follow so long and on so many 
occasions ? to whom would Hurrell go, or wish me to go but 
to you ? And doubt not that, if such is the will of Provi- 
dence, you will in the main be able to do what is put on you. 

I feel no doubt that in consulting you I am doing God's 
will ; for, since I lay claim to no such infallible perception 
of His leadings, as may be granted to some, and as would 
oblige me to follow it, the alternative lies between selfwill 
and consulting you. 

Yet, after saying this, still I know that some questions 
in detail to which I am coming, are so very intricate, that 
it will not at all surprise me to find you dechne them. 
Only then answer as much as you like ; and I will take 
your answers as far as they go. 

But first, in answer to some suggestions you make, I 



will briefly say ; i. that by a ' hideous dream ' I meant, 
what surely is hideous, to begin to suspect oneself external 
to the CathoHc Church, having publicly, earnestly, 
frequently, insisted on the ordinary necessity of being 
within it. 2. I do not think I have ever been sanguine of 
success in my day or at all. The ' L3n:a,' and the beginning 
of my Letter to Faussett, will, I think, show that. It is 
true, however, that I have spoken very confidently about 
our being in no danger from Rome ; and I doubt not with 
much presumption and recklessness. But I had a full 
conviction, (and have still) of the independence of the 
Anglican view compared with the Roman, and the 
formidableness of the former to the latter, and I had great 
faith in our Divines, so as to take (I suppose) for granted, 
what I had not duly examined, the irrelevancy of the charge 
of schism as urged against us. If I have been very bold in 
nearing the Roman system, this has risen mainly from over- 
secure reliance on our position, and from a keen impression 
of our great need of what the Roman system contains. I 
have spoken strongly against that system itself, that I 
might use it without peril. 3. Re-actions are, I suppose, 
sudden ; strong opposite impulses occurring in immediate 
succession ; but my present feelings have arisen naturally 
and gradually, and have been resisted. It is true, that I 
have now laid down my arms rather suddenly. This was 
caused, I believe, by Rogers' note, which I opened a few 
hours after writing to you on Easter Eve, and by Eden's 
avowal to me the other day, that, were he Vicar of St. 
Mary's, he would not engage even to let me read daily prayers 
at Littlemore, though he did not provide any one else. But 
though I have been thrown upon telling you, I hardly know 
how, yet I do not think I have said anything to you beyond 
the fact ; and surely when a misery is of so long standing, 
anyhow you should know it. 

And now I come to the main subject of my letter. 

I would ask, whether I should not be sufficiently kept 
in order, as you desire, by retaining a Fellowship, and the 
Editorship of the ' Library of the Fathers/ though I had not 
a living. 


On the other hand, contemplate the great irritation of 
mind to which St. Mary's exposes me continually. 

I do not think I could take the Oath of Supremacy again, 
though I quite know that there are fair and almost 
authorized modes of undertaking ^ it in a Catholic sense ; 
but, considering my opinions and the opinions of the mass 
of Churchmen on the whole, I do not think it would be 
safe to do so. Now then, am not I exposing myself to a 
constant risk of detection, considering too the number of 
eyes, friendly and hostile, which are upon me ? (I take this 
Oath as a mere illustration of many things, which in fact 
would press more heavily upon a beneficed Clergyman 
than a Fellow.) A detection would be far more calamitous, 
than a quiet withdrawal while things were so tranquil. 
Might I not fairly assign the Bishops' Charges as the reason 
of it ? For siurely I should feel no anxiety at all about 
treachery to the Church, if they, as organs of prevailing 
opinion as well as Bishops, had one and all approved and 
recommended No. 90, instead of censuring it. 

My office or charge at St. Mary's is not a mere state 
(though that would be painful enough) but a continual 
energy. People assume, and exact, certain things of me 
in consequence. 

With what sort of sincerity can I obey the Bishop ? 
How am I to act in the frequent cases in which in one way 
or other the Church of Rome comes into consideration ? 
I have, to the utmost of my power and with some success, 
tried to keep persons from Rome, but even a year and a 
half since my arguments were of that nature, as, though 
efficacious with the men aimed at and they only, to infuse 
suspicions of me in the minds of lookers-on. 

By retaining St. Mary's, I am an offence and stumbling 
block. Persons are keen-sighted enough to make out what 
I think on certain points, and then they infer that such 
opinions are compatible with holding situations of trust 
in the Church. This is a very great evil in matter of fact. 
A number of younger men take the validity of their inter- 
pretation of the Articles etc. from me on faith. Is not my 

^ Al. * Understanding/ 





present position a cruelty to them, as well as a treachery 
towards the Church ? 

I do not see how I can either preach or publish again, 
while I hold St. Mary's, but consider the following difficulty 
in such a resolution, which I must state at some length. 

Last Long Vacation the idea suggested itself to me of 
publishing the ' Lives of the Saints,' and I had a conversation 
with Rivington about it. I thought that it would be useful, 
as employing the minds of persons who were in danger of 
running wild, and bringing them from doctrine to history, 
from speculation to fact ; again, as giving them an interest 
in the English soil and English Church, and keeping them 
from seeking sympathy in Rome as she is ; and further, as 
tending to promote the spread of right views. 

But within the last month it has come upon me, that, if 
the scheme go on, it will be a practical carrying out of No. 90, 
from the character of the usages and opinions of Ante- 
reformation times. 

It is easy to say ' Why will you be doing any thing ? (A 
note has suddenly come to me from Pusey which I will tran- 
scribe, though it will give you additional pain.) why won't 
you keep quiet and let things alone ? what business had you 
to think of any such plan at all ? ' But I cannot leave a 
number of poor fellows in the lurch ; I am bound to do the 
best for a great number of people both in Oxford and else- 
where. If I did not act, others would find means to do so. 
Again is Mr. Taylor, etc. to abuse the Saints, and no one 
to defend them ? But this is off the subject. 

Well, the plan has been taken up with great eagerness 
and interest. Many men are setting to work. I set down 
the names of men, who are most of them engaged, the rest 
half engaged or probable ; some writing. Bowden, Johnson 
(Observatory), Church, Haddan, Oakeley, Tickell (Univ.), 
Lewis, J. Mozley, Stanley (perhaps). Lake, Macmullen, 
Faber (Univ.) Brewer, Coffin, Dalgairns, Ashworth, T. 
Ryder, Pattison, A. Christie, Pritchard (Balliol) Ormsby 
(Lincoln) Bridges (Oriel) Lockhart (Exeter) Harris (Magda- 
len) Barrow (Queen's) Meyrick (CC.C), Chretien (Oriel), 
Murray (Ch. Ch.), CoUings (Ch. Ch.), etc. 


The plan has gone so far that it would create much sur- 
prise and talk, were it now suddenly given over. Church, 
whom I asked, agrees in this. Yet how is it compatible 
with my holding St. Mary's, being what I am ? On the other 
hand, is not such an engagement in itself a sort of guarantee 
in addition to the Editorship of the ' Library of the Fathers ' 
and my Fellowship, of my remaining quiet, though I did not 
retain St. Mary's for that purpose. 

I have had another plan of a series of Devotional Works, 
but of this I will speak at another time. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

My dear K, — I have in the midst of my writing received 
a note from Pusey which I transcribe, with his note to me. 

Alll know of it is, that P. after having had a fever for 
ten days and being nearly the whole of the time confined 
to his bed, preached a Sermon last Sunday, (which doubtless 
he had written before) on the Holy Eucharist as a means of 
remission of sins. This is all I have heard about it. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

P.S. — Keep it quite secret. 

The letter from Pusey was about the proceedings 
which were to be taken against him on account of his 
sermon on the Holy Eucharist. 

The incident alluded to in the following letter is thus 
described in the * Life of Pusey.' ^ ' On Ascension Day, 
May 25, the Rev. T. E. Morris, Student and Tutor of Christ 
Church, preached before the University by the Dean's 
appointment. In his sermon he had spoken of " Laud the 
martyred Archbishop who, let us trust, still intercedes for 
this Church." On the following day the Vice-Chancellor 
sent for the sermon " under the provisions of the Statute 
Tit. xvi, § II." 2 Mr. Morris sent the sermon together with 
extracts from Anglican divines illustrating his language. 
On the following Wednesday the Vice-Chancellor informed 
Mr. Morris that all the notice he had to take officially of the 
sermon was to require that Mr. Morris would ex animo 

^ II. 337. 

* The same Statute whicli was being put into force against Pusey. 


express his assent to the Twenty-second Article ; a request 
which was apparently based on the presumption that it is 
impossible to believe in the intercession of the Saints 
without invoking them. Mr. Morris of course had no 
dif&culty in complying with the Vice-Chancellor's desire ; 
he " did not see that what he had said involved Invocation 
[of the Saints] at all." ' Here the matter ended. This 
incident probably inspired the scene in Chap. X of * Loss 
and Gain,' where the hero Charles Reding makes the same 
distinction between Invocation and Intercession. But 
he does not get off so easily as Mr. Morris. He is accused 
of sheltering himself under ' a subtle distinction ' and is 
informed that the terms are ' correlative.' 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

May 29, 1843. 

My dear Keble, — T. Morris of Ch. Ch. has been taken 
to for his Sermon at Ch. Ch. on Ascension Day for the 
Dean. I inclose what will throw light on the state of the 
case. We think it a very bad move of the Heads. And the 
V.C. is getting frightened — and told Morris he was against 
it. Also he is veering round about Pusey. And he told M. he 
meant to be impartial, and receive charges on the other side. 

Sewell is cast off by the Quarterly, and appears holding 
out signals of distress and flags of truce to us. 

George Denison has been very urgent with us here 
to get up a Protest against the unecclesiastical clauses of 
the Factory Bill — a subject on which he is full of fury. 
I told him nothing would be done. 

A stranger has given us two antique red granite columns 
to make ornaments of for the altar screen and altar at 
Littlemore — and another (anonymous) person £200 for the 
same purpose. Also we are going to new bench the Chapels. 
And we have had a new (finger) organ built and given us by 
an Undergraduate. 

Ever yours affectionately 

J. H. 

P.S. — Lucy Pusey is getting well. Pusey is much 
better though hardly off his sofa. No news about his 
Sermon beyond what I have said above. 


Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

May 30, 1843. 

My dear Newman, — I have delayed writing too long, 
but I believe it was in the hope of being able to see our way 
more clearly and so being of more use to you. I fear I am 
not worthy to be so made useful ; but I will say as well 
as I can what seems best to me now. 

It seems to me that, supposing a person to have no 
doubt at all of the schismaticalness of the body he belongs 
to, (e.g. to be as sure of it as one is of Episcopacy) and that 
impression to continue after long, honest and self-denying 
endeavours to get rid of it, accompanied of course by con- 
scientiousness in other parts of duty — that he could not 
well go on exercising a trust committed to him by that body, 
every act of which would seem to imply that he does not 
consider itself in schism. 

But if he has still any doubt, I should then think he 
might go on, though in fear and trembling, yet without sin. 
I say, he might go on ; but whether he ought to do so is quite 
another question, to be determined (among other very 
many things) by the degree of temptation and offence, to 
which he finds himself exposed : and that again not simply, 
but as compared with what he may reasonably foresee will 
beset him on his change of position. 

I cannot yet bring myself to think that you are quite 
so clear as I have described above, in your view of our 
state ; and, that being so, I might imagine that you might go 
on as you are without sin ; but I really do think the position 
so very difficult a one, that I dare not press your retaining 
St. Mary's : it does seem to involve such constant peril 
of sin, and I feel that I should myself be quite unequal to it, 
and should perhaps be continually hable to be urged into 
some sudden step, by the sort of calls, often sudden ones, 
which the situation brings with it. 

You see therefore that on the whole my leaning is towards 
your retiring as quietly as you can. . . . 

I think those to whose opinion I should myself most 


defer would say that a person of such great mental activity 
as yours had of course need to be on his guard from the 
very circumstance of that activity. There is a tendency 
to be always going on to something further which may be 
abused, and one always waiting to abuse it : and in this 
sort of sense I dare say you do very often say to yourself, 
' Why can't you be quiet and let things alone ? ' but I do not 
see that this caution is inconsistent with such an undertaking 
as your ' Lives of the English Saints/ provided that it be 
bona fide made as practical as possible, and as dutiful to our 
present engagements. For my own part, as I still hope that 
we are not entirely cut off from the Church, and that such a 
plan tends to strengthen that which remains and is ready 
to die, I do not feel that I should be at all undutiful in 
acting with you in this or in any like plan, if I can but be 
up to it in other respects, especially as you yourself allow 
that, if the tone of the Bishops, etc. was favourable to 
No. 90 instead of adverse, you should not think yourself 
guilty of any breach of trust in remaining. And I am not 
prepared to give so much weight as you seem to do to the 
un-enacted leanings and tendencies of a particular genera- 
tion. Formal decisions are in my mind the providential 
indications for ordinary persons in such perplexities, and 
until such are produced, against me, I shall, as at present 
advised, uphold No. 90 as sufficiently Anglican. It is true I 
have strong and evident temptations to deceive myself in 
this matter, more than you and others ; and I do not pretend 
to say I am comfortable, what right have I to be so ? but one 
can but do as seems best, and say God forgive me. 

I shall be very anxious to hear how Pusey's matter goes 
on. If the statements I see in the Times of the tenor of his 
Sermon be correct, I think they will hardly dare to decide 
against him ; or, if they do, the clergy very generally will 
feel with him, as they did with P. Young. I fear Lucy is 
very ill ; should you write again will you mention her ? 

Ever your affectionate and thankful, 

J. K. 


*J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Saturday, June 3. 

My dear Keble, — They have suspended Pusey from 
preaching for two years. He is making a Protest, which will 
be in the Common Rooms to-day. His Sermon will be 
published in a day or two. 

Many thanks for your letter. I shall put aside the sub- 
ject now for some time. If any thing strikes you that it 
would be consistent in me to do, or not do, under such 
circumstances as to my behaviour, habits, etc., I wish you 
would tell me. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 
J. H. Newman to Rev. W. Dodsworth 

Sunday, June 4, 1843. 

My dear Dodsworth, — It is very desirable that there 
should be some demonstration in favour of Pusey ; if one 
thing after another is done against the holders of Catholic 
doctrines, without protest from any quarter, the imagina- 
tions of certain persons will be gradually affected with the 
notion that the Church of England does not hold them, 
and is not their place. And they will look for a place 
elsewhere. This, I have great cause to say, will be the 
effect of a series of such acts. 

I hope that there will be some protest in Oxford against 
the mode in which the present act has been done under 
the Statute, which will answer the purpose of a defence of 
the doctrine impugned by the six doctors. 

The difficulty of your doing anything in London is very 
great, considering any protest on Pusey's side would prob- 
ably elicit a stronger demonstration on the side of his 

I suppose the Bishop of London could not be induced 
to ask or to allow Pusey to preach in the London Diocese ? 
What a mistake it is in the Bishops to suppose that silence 
is neutrality ! If they do nothing, they side against hinu 


You will be glad to know that Pusey does not seem put 

out or annoyed by this matter. He has been treated most 

unworthily. His judges have made him correspond with 

them under a promise he will not tell what they say or he 

says. This is even going on now. He had four full pages 

from the Vice-Chancellor last night, of which he did not 

tell me even the receipt. They are already bringing the 

circumstances of this correspondence against his assertion 

that he has had no hearing — and his promise of secrecy 

hinders him explaining. 

Yours very truly, 

John H. Newman. 
P.S. — The Sermon is to appear forthwith. 

J. H. Newman to E. L. Badeley, Esq. 

June II, 1843. 

Dear Badeley, — I enclose you a note I had from Pusey. 
He has given me leave. I think it will let you into his feel- 
ings. Do you not think he should put himself entirely into 
the hands of his friends ? 

You lawyers in London will be best able to judge whether 
he is in any inconsistency. The very anxiety which persons 
like myself feel about it incapacitates us for doing so. Of 
course if his proposed explanation is obscure, (which I 
think it is) he can be applied to for further information. 

I have been thinking over what R. Palmer has just now 
said to me, and I think on the whole your meeting should 
be before not after the publication of the Sermon. Allow 
there are timid men who will attend, you are taking them 
at no disadvantage, nor will they retract afterwards. 
Seeing the Sermon has been condemned, to say nothing 
of Pusey's known tone of divinity, they must already have 
a suspicion it contains strong doctrine. 

I think Pusey's Sermon must come out — how long after 

your London meeting ? 

Yours most sincerely, 

John H. Newman. 


J. H. Newman to E. L. Badeley, Esq. 

Oriel College : June i8, 1843. 

My dear Badeley, — I fear it has seemed inconsiderate 
in me not writing to you, but at first I had nothing to say. 
Thank you much for the pains you took to write to me — 
and now I can hardly collect my wits. 

Pusey is much perplexed what to write, and it is very 
difficult to put his mind in the position in which you see 
things. He has shown me your last letter to him, in which 
you write on the subject of a second Protest [written above 
as an alternative word ' explanation ' ] which he has sent 
you ; and I like what you say very much. One other point 
I think he might bring out, viz., that all that went on in 
private was for the sake of making him recant , not explain. 

He wishes to get the Vice-Chancellor to agree with him 
in certain propositions which he may put out — such as that 
he had not a hearing — that he was not asked to explain etc. — 
but first I dread having more private dealings with the 
Vice Ch. — and next the Vice Ch. will say, ' I cannot unless 
you retract this or that part of your Protest.' And if he 
even did, those pamphlets and articles in newspapers, which 
have gone on those certain parts of his Protest, will not 
like to be left in the lurch. 

I really do not see how he can avoid the fullest details, 
when suspicion is once awakened, and the strength of his 
case, or rather the weakness of the Vice Ch.'s, lies in details 
— e.g. the very strong recommendation made him not to 
keep copies of his letters. However, this private account he 
cannot give without possessing the said letters — accordingly 
I have been urging him strongly to ask the Vice Ch. for them. 

He thinks you are against details. I do not profess to 
have a view, indeed I am not in the way of hearing what 
people say enough to have one, but I should have thought 
he must at once draw out boldly the main facts of the case 
which are in his favor, and also go into detail. 

As to the expressions in his Protest which seem not to 
agree with his further Explanation, he is so unwell, and has 


been so anxious, that I do not like to press him — but I suspect 
he conned over his protest before the Sentence was brought 
him, i.e., before the private communications — and then 
did see that it was in fact modified by those communica- 
tions — nay he does not feel it even now — he says that 
those communications were ' an utter nothing,' ' a mockery ' 
— and do not interfere with the substantial and real accuracy 
of the statements in his Protest. 

Persons here are getting your London Protest reprinted 
and sending it about the country. People call it milk and 
water, but you have said in it as much as you dare. 

Yours most sincerely, 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. Ambrose St. John 

Littlemore : June 20, 1843. 

My dear St. John, — I dare say you think I ought to feel 
ashamed for not answering your first kind letter — but if 
you knew me better (or when, as I hope I may say) you will 
pity my right wrist and fingers which through continual 
weariness, for some years have been degenerating my 
writing, never of very ambitious excellence, to the level of 
your worthy Rector's. 

I return the very pleasing letter you have permitted 
me to read. What a sad thing it is that it should be a plain 
duty to restrain one's sympathies, and to keep them from 
boiling over — but I suppose it is a matter of common 
prudence. I am very glad there is so good a chance of your 
hearing something about St. Simon.i 

The Library at Littlemore is very much obliged to you 
for the accession you propose to make it. But let us take 
charge of it, till you have a place for it somewhere yourself. 
If you send the volumes to Stewarts', King William Street, 
they will make their way hither some time or other. 

Things are very serious here, but I should not like you 
to say so, as it might do no good. The Authorities find 
that by the Statutes they have more than military power — 

^ Somebody, perhaps St. John, hsis added the ' Stock.' 


and the general impression seems to be that they intend to 
exert it and put down Catholicism at any risk. I believe 
that by the Statutes they can pretty well suspend a preacher 
as seditiosus, or causing dissension, without assigning their 
grounds in the particular cases — may banish him, or 
imprison him. If so all holders of preferment in the 
University should make as quiet an exit as they can. There 
is such exasperation on both sides at this moment, as I am 
told, than ever there was. And I fear some entanglement 
has taken place between Pusey and the Heads. An address 
is going about for which you should get as many signatures 
as you can — it is very important. 

The title of the French Book is ' OEuvres de Tronson, 
Examens Particuliers, Paris 1823.' I have the ' Memorial 
of a Christian Life . . . written in Spanish R. F. Lewis de 
Granada . . . translated The first Part — London 1688.' 
If what you have met with is distinct from this, it will be 
very welcome. It contains four of the seven books. 

The fraternity here, as you call us, unite in kind wishes 
to (may I use the word in its other sense ?) Fraternitati 
vestrae. Anderdon is coming here to-day to take your place 
in the Httle room. Mind, there is room for both of you at 
any time — for we have expanded. 

My kind remembrance to West. 

Yours very sincerely, 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. W. Dodsworth 

Littlemore : June 28, 1843. 

My dear Dodsworth, — Pusey has left Oxford for Pusey, 
and Dr. Wootten (I am told) thinks him better. I confess 
I have been very uneasy about him — but more in prospect 
than from anything I saw at present. I have not said all 
I felt to more than one person, and that at a distance, who 
wrote to me. 

He has had a low fever on him these eight weeks — and 


has made little or no progress. Now that was just the way 
his little boy was taken four years ago. The little fellow 
lay in bed a long while and no one could tell what was 
coming, when the complaint seemed to determine upon his 
lungs — then on other organs — and ended in the present 
sad breakage of his health. 

What has made me more anxious, however, in prospect 
is what I recollect of Pusey years ago. I think his life for 
9 or 10 years has lain in the excitement of an object, or in 
a sanguine imagination about the state of things, and I 
should very much dread a change to despondency. Ten 
or eleven years ago he was in such a state ; said his useful- 
ness was at an end, that he was near death etc. From this 
state he was roused by the movement, and his health 
improved strangely. Ever since his one characteristic, 
contrasted with almost everyone else, has been his sanguine 
view of things. 

He is now (Copeland tells me) as sanguine as ever. 
I see no sign of his becoming otherwise — ^but the prospect 
of such a change has made me very anxious. Hitherto he 
has all his life (I may say) been in authority — and at the 
head of a department, e.g. Hebrew. Now he is suddenly, 
or might feel himself to be, cast out of his position. Hither- 
to he has been to the bottom of his heart a conservative — 
but what would be his view of things when he found himself 
in opposition ? This is the sort of question I have been 
asking myself, and perhaps more from anxiety than good 

I hope change of air and scene will do everything for 
him that we can wish. His Sermon is now off his hands. 
I suppose it is very important that the Non-resident Address 
should be largely signed, about which I somewhat despair — 
but this is not in your way. I do not see what else can be 

I am, my dear Dodsworth, 

Very sincerely yours, 

John H. Newman. 


The following letter is of considerable interest, for it 
represents what was going on in many minds. In the early 
days of the Oxford Movement, Newman was fond of dwelling 
upon its spontaneous character. Catholic ideas were in the 
air, and seemed to spring up almost simultaneously in men's 
minds. In a word, the Movement was ' the result of causes 
far deeper than political or other visible agencies.' ^ Per- 
haps he exaggerated this feature of the original Movement, 
through his repugnance to think of himself as a leader. But 
the Movement within the Movement, the rise of the new 
school with its ' Romanising ' tendencies, seems unquestion- 
ably to have been a spontaneous growth. This is how one of 
its most prominent members described it in after years : 

' Of all popular errors on the subject of the Oxford con- 
troversy, none is more palpable than that which supposes 
a kind of confederacy, or premeditated union, among those 
who ultimately ended in becoming Catholics. We had one 
and all our individual peculiarities which, like so many sharp 
edges, stood in the way of anything like effectual combina- 
tion. Hence, on many important questions, we were found 
on different sides. We had all our separate occupations, 
interests, and sets ; and when the various persons who are 
popularly identified with Oxford opinions met together in 
company, there was an uncertainty of sympathy, and a dread 
of collision, which operated any wise rather than favourably 
upon intercoiu-se, and threw many of the sincerest friends 
of those opinions upon societies, in which if there were 
less scope for enthusiasm, there was also less danger of 
differences.' ^ 

The following letter from Ambrose St. John to Newman 
marks the beginning of the friendship immortalised in the 
concluding words of the ' Apologia.' It also illustrates the 
kind of isolation in which the men of the new school formed 
their views. The writer apparently owed his opinions to no 
one but himself. He was in advance of Newman before he 
came to know him, and went to Littlemore, not to be led 
forward, but to be held back. 

1 'Prospects of the Anglican Church,' p. 272 {Essays Crit. and Hist. 

vol. i.)- 

* Oakeley, Popular Lectures, ii. pp. 6, 7. 


Rev. Ambrose St. John to J. H. Newman 

July 13, 1843. 

My dear Newman, — I have never thanked you for your 
kind letter. ... I have already stayed here longer than I 
thought I should, and I believe I shall still be here a week 
or ten days more, as there are some candidates for 
Confirmation whom I have been endeavouring to prepare 
since I have been here, and West wishes me to continue them 
until the Bishop comes. Until lately, when my mind has 
been taken up with other things, I have been trying to see 
what I ought to do when I leave this temporary duty here. 
Of course one chief thing my mind runs upon is what I 
mentioned to you at Littlemore — whether my views of 
doctrine will permit me to sign the Articles. My feeling 
about them is, I believe, this. In words they do appear 
to condemr certain usages and modes of expressing doctrine 
which I fully and entirely believe to be permitted and sanc- 
tioned by God. I will instance two things, Transubstan- 
tiation and the Invocation of Saints, (i) As far as I can see, 
I believe the word Transubstantiation, as explained by 
the catechism of the council of Trent, to be the clear, 
perhaps the only way of expressing the doctrine of the Real 
Presence, and of avoiding erroneous views of consubstantia- 
tion or a presence in the believer alone and the like ; but 
I believe the Church of England, when it condemns the use 
of this word, means something quite different by the word 
' substance ' from what the Church of Rome means, and I 
have no difficulty in rejecting such a view of Transubstantia- 
tion as that of which I believe the Church of England speaks. 
(2) I do entirely believe that it is the will of God that we 
should ask the Saints for their prayers, especially the 
Blessed Virgin. This has come to me very strongly, and 
I cannot doubt it. Yet I can easily conceive that this 
should be dangerous to individuals, and I can also conceive 
that the Church of England when condemning Invocation 
of the Saints means something that is wrong and idolatrous. 
Still, as there is never a hint anywhere that I know of in 


any of our formularies that there is a right use of these 
words, Transubstantiation and Invocation, as well as a 
wrong one, I must, I think, look upon any direct unqualified 
condemnation of them as highly dangerous, and tending to 
keep men back from taking hold of the true doctrine of the 
Catholic Church. I fear that I am distressing you by 
speaking to you again on this subject, as I am aware you 
believe it your duty to say little upon them, but I do not 
mention my view with an intention of drawing forth an 
opinion from you as to the course a person is at liberty to 
take who holds such views, though I need not say how 
thankfully any advice or direction will be received. I men- 
tioned my difficulties to Wilberforce, and he was very kind, 
as he always is, in desiring me to do just as I wished in 
accompanying him to East Farleigh or not, adding that he 
did not at all mind going there by himself for three or four 
months ; but he expressed his unwillingness to enter upon 
the subject of the articles with me, as he felt his view of 
the Catholic Church to be different from mine. He thought 
what he should say would only perplex me. So my conclu- 
sion at present is to ask your permission to come to Little- 
more, and reside there for about three months, perhaps 
for a longer time, and you will let me do, I hope, as other 
men do about ra avayKota. I had very little time for 
study before I took orders, and in consequence I have read 
very little indeed, so that leisure for reading is quite neces- 
sary for me. And in more serious matters I have much 
need to recollect myself ... in the bustle of caring for 
others, preaching, and talking, all this is forgotten. One 
gains something perhaps from seeing the realities of life, 
but the impression is lost for want of time and inclination 
to meditate upon them. . . . Another thing I must ask 
you about, do you think a person feeling such perplexity 
about signing the Articles is at liberty to take temporary 
duty ? Mr. Dyson wishes me to help him when I go from 
here. I have given no direct answer yet. I told Wilber- 
force I thought I should like it, as it was a very quiet place 
and among very nice people. But it must not be for long 


— I trust you will not refuse to be troubled with my matters 
in addition to your other labours, 

Yours very faithfully, 

Ambrose St. John. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. Ambrose St. John 

Oriel College : July i6, 1843. 

My dear St. John, — I assure you that I feel with too 
much sympathy what you say. You need not be told that 
the whole subject of our position is a subject of anxiety to 
others besides yourself. It is no good my attempting to 
offer advice, when perhaps I might raise difficulties instead of 
removing them. It seems to me quite a case in which you 
should, as far as may be, make up your mind for yourself. 
Come to Littlemore by all means — we shall all rejoice in your 
company — and if quiet and retirement are able, as they very 
likely will be, to reconcile you to things as they are, you 
shall have your fill of them. How distressed poor Henry 
[Wilberforce] must be that he cannot offer to discuss with 
you ! Knowing how he values you, I feel for him — but 
alas ! he has his own position, and every one else has his 
own, and the misery of it is that no two of us have exactly 
the same. 

It is very kind of you to be so frank and open with me 
as you are. But this is a time which throws together 
persons who feel alike. 

May I without taking a liberty sign myself 

Yours affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

July 29, 1843. 

My dear Newman, — I have to-day got a long and kind 
letter from R. Palmer, in which, replying to a question of 
mine what he thought on the subject as a lawyer, he goes 
at length into the matter of what Pusey ought to do. I 


think it worth while to send it to you, and you may show it to 
Pusey or not, as you think best. I do not send it to him 
straight for fear of worrying him, as I apprehend he is not 
yet strong at all. I shall be glad to know when any thing 
is decided, as I am not a little anxious about the matter. 

You may well believe that I have been full of thoughts 
about you, the more in one sense that I feel so utterly 
helpless and unable to think of any thing which I can suggest 
as good for a person tried as you are, except what I am sure 
you have thought of long ago. Thus sometimes I think 
it would be good for one to withdraw as much as possible 
for a while from theological study and correspondence, and 
be as entirely taken up as ever you can with parochial 
concerns : but then I am met with the recollection that you 
may expect so soon to be separated from poor Littlemore. 

Again, I think unreserved confidence in a some really 
worthy Confessor might be a great help to you at times : 
I mean the sort of submission which would make you put by 
a subject, if he bid you, without his assigning any reason. 

And I suppose it may be well for one to watch and pray 
especially against the temptation of always being on the 
move, which I suppose is the portion of some minds. 

I have been looking for the second time at your * Essay 
on Ecclesiastical Miracles,' where you argue from the analogy 
of God's works, especially from the strangeness of certain 
animals, and it has occurred to me whether an objector 
might not plausibly say, ' We do not know how much of what 
shocks us in God's works may be owing to the intrusion of 
evil spirits since the fall, there being passages in Scripture 
which look that way ; and perhaps these Church Miracles 
may have the same origin.' Might not this be said ? and 
might it not properly have a distinct answer ? ^ Trusting 
to your constant remembrance, 

Ever your affectionate, 

J. K. 

1 (N.B. — But I have also referred to certain Scripture miracles, and 
certain histories as Samson's, as being in the same sense ' strange.' J.H.N. 
June 24, 1878.) 


J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

August 3, 1843. 

My dear K, — I have just received the enclosed from 
Palmer. I have asked his leave, should I doubt of any of 
his factSy to have recourse to your memory of the matters 
spoken of. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

P.S. — I will answer your letter and inclosure. Thank 
you for it. Bowden has just come here, on his way (I 
grieve to say) to the continent to get rid of a cough which 
hangs about him. Else he seems very well. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : August 20, 1843. 

My dear Keble, — Copeland has explained to you my 
silence hitherto ; but to-day I stay here, instead of going to 
Oxford, and therefore can write — ^not to say that I have 
outrun Baxter, and sent off the Plain Sermons to G. and R. 

You have been continually in my thoughts since your 
letters. As to the second, I wish I could say any thing to 
your purpose — and am very much afraid, from my unskilful- 
ness and inconsiderateness, of saying a word. I think I 
feel that you should not ordinarily be under the influence 
of those painful feelings which you express — nor are you, 
as I trust — they belonged to the moment when you wrote, 
and do not represent your habitual state of mind. O my 
dear Keble, you know far better and more deeply than I, 
that ' the time is short '^and that the highest blessings 
are not earthly — nay, the highest are commonly purchased by 
a privation of the earthly. So at least it has been with 
those whom God loves best. If so, surely we ought not to 
feel too acutely the absence of such blessings, in the case of 
those we love best, as are not commonly allotted to the 
Saints, instead of wishing for them those which the Saints 
have ever received. I know I am writing only commonplaces 
— and if I attempt to go beyond them, I may only be showing 


my ignorance and want of sympathy — and yet if I knew 
how, I think there is a way in which they might be made 
useful to you. You will so make them better than any one 
else, if they can be made. 

As to your former letter I am very grateful to you for it. 
On the receipt of it I began next morning to keep a very 
minute journal of myself, which would do to show any one 
in confession and give him a sort of an idea of my present 
state. But then whom was I to ask to see it ? I could think 
of no one but you — and I determined to ask you. So I went 
on till about the loth of August, i.e. 10 days — when your 
second letter came, and made me feel that you had enough 
of anxiety already without my increasing it. It also struck 
me that after all it would not assist any one in advising me — 
but of that perhaps I am no judge. 

I suppose you got your suggestion or guess about the 
advantage of stopping me short from time to time in what I 
might be doing, and making me change my employment 
arbitrarily, from reading my Sermon on Development, under 
the notion that I might be watching the progress of things 
or the like. I do not think this is the case. I am commonly 
very sluggish, and think it a simple bore or nuisance to 
have to move or to witness movements. My great fault 
is doing things in a mere literary way from the love of the 
work, without the thought of God's glory. But as to 
influencing people, making points, advancing and so on, 
I do not think these are matters which engross or engage 
or even interest me. Indeed considering how one is fettered 
by existing professions and by a sense of piety towards 
existing institutions, advance is, in itself, something very 

If I were to have any thing more directly practical 
it should be an hospital. I fear the more parochial duty 
I took, the more I should realise, and the greater temptation 
I should be under to give up, our present defective system, 
which seems to be without the capabilities of improvement. 
I do not say this from theory about myself, but think I 
feel this effect in me. 


If any thing strikes you to advise me, pray oblige me 
with it. I will send you the journal I spoke of, if you think 
it best. 

Pusey seems quite well. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 

P.S. — I forgot to add above that I am not at all my own 
master as to time, as it is. E.g. having to answer letters is 
an imperious external regulation of much of my time, break- 
ing off my reading etc. perforce. Such in a measure too have 
the Plain Sermons been this year. I do not think I am 
attached to one kind of work more than another. What 
I dislike is beginning any work — and what I like is having a 
swing of it, when in it, which I very seldom get, but not 
from any thing that is to come of it, but either from love 
of the occupation, or desire to get it over. 

I preached, going on for two years since, some Sermons 
on our position as a Church which had the effect of quieting 
some persons who felt unsettled as to Rome. Since that 
various men have asked for them to lend, and they have 
been useful in the same way. I have from the first been 
asked to publish them — but disliked to do so without taking 
time about them. I am inclined to do so now, making 
them part of a volume, to be called, not Parochial Sermons, 
but Sermons on subjects of the day, or the like title. Now 
I want to ask you in the first place, whether it would he 
consistent with my position to publish altogether ; if you 
see an antecedent objection to it I will not do so — if you do 
not, then I will send you (please) one or two sermons, to 
have your opinion on them. 

It has struck me that the fact of publishing Sermons just 
now would be a sort of guarantee to people that my resigning 
St. Mary's (to which I am more and more strongly drawn) 
did not involve an ulterior step — for no one could suppose 
that I should be publishing to-day, and leaving the Church 
to-morrow. (By the bye, though this is another question, 
something or other I must do in the way of assigning a 
reason for resigning, and I do not see any thing better than 


to give what I feel very much. What I have implied as a 
reason years ago by anticipation, and have laid the ground 
of, viz., the Bishops having declared themselves so strongly 
against me personally. This has been brought home to 
me, by the great startling the announcement gave to a 
lady I do not know, whom I was obliged to tell. I thought 
I might append to Tract 90 what the Bishops had said.) 

As to the Sermons, I believe the main reason with me 
for publishing, at least at present (I say at present because, 
as time goes, secondary reasons often become primary 
ones, and almost motives) is for the sake of those anti- 
Roman Sermons — but subordinately I suppose I wish 
(i) to commit to print a volume which I think will have 
good matter in it. (2) To receive the money which I shall 

get by it. 

J. H. N. 

August 21, 1843. 

The volume of sermons contemplated in the above letter 
was eventually published under the title of ' Sermons on 
Subjects of the Day.' The Sermons about which he 
especially consulted Keble are marked off from the rest 
of the volume by a note of warning : ' The following four 
Sermons, on the safety of continuance in our communion, 
are not addressed, i either to those who happily are with- 
out doubts on the subject, 2 or to those who have no right 
to be in doubt about it.' The former should read them ' with 
the caution exercised in opening the works of a Christian 
Apologist, who is obliged to state painful objections, or to 
make extreme admissions, in the process of refuting his 
opponents.' As regards the latter class, * Doubts are often 
the punishment of existing neglect of duty. Persons who 
make no effort after strictness of life,' who do not attempt 
' to know themselves, correct their faults ... to deny 
their wills, must not be surprised if they are unsettled and 
restless, and have no encouragement to seek an intellectual 
remedy for difficulties which may be assigned to grave 
moral deficiencies.' ^ 

1 Sermons on Subjects of the Day, p. 308 footnote. The titles of the 

four sermons are — (i) Invisible Presence of Christ; (2) Outward and 

Inward Notes of the Church; (3) Grounds for Steadfastness in our 
Religious Profession ; (4) Elijah the Prophet of the Latter Days. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

August 25, 1843. 

I should think on the whole, that, unless you feel very 
strongly drawn towards showing me your journal, I had 
better not see it : your own feelings in such a matter must 
be the only criterion. It is curious that I too had thought 
whether hospital work, or something equivalent, would not 
be a good sort of thing for you. But He will, I trust, guide 
us, who has us in His hands. 

The only objection to publishing, I suppose, would be, 
from a fear of being or seeming insincere ; and this again 
must depend on the nature of the Sermons. I can imagine 
them so contrived, as to tend towards obviating any possible 
risk of that kind ; and then it will be so much the more 
desirable for yourself and many others in various degrees 
to have them out. I am sure, I for one, should be very glad 
of them. 

It seems to me that the history of No. 90 gives quite a 
sufficient reason for your resigning St. Mary's, without any 
occasion for people to surmise more ; and indeed, I dare say, 
most persons in your place would have done it before now. 

I gather from a note of R. Palmer's this morning, that 
the Law proceedings will be embarrassed, as was feared, 
by Pusey's keeping no copy. 

Ever yours most affectionately, 

J. Keble. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Friday, August 25. 

My dear Keble, — I have just had a letter from Lockhart, 
one of my inmates, who has been away for three weeks, 
saying that he is on the point of joining the Church of Rome 
and is in retreat under Dr. Gentili of Loughborough. 

Would this be a good excuse for giving up St. Mary's — 
will you turn it in your mind ? 

You may fancy how sick this makes me. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 


Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

August 30, 1843. 

I am most truly grieved on many accounts at what your 
note, received on Sunday, tells me. Among other things I 
am much afraid there has been some underhand unkind 
behaviour towards you. If so, bad as it is for the individual, 
it must strengthen the feeling of those who most sincerely 
shrink from changes of this sort. 

I confess I do not quite see how it smoothes matters 
for your resignation. I should have thought the quieter 
things were at the moment, the better for that step ; and 
therefore that this, causing alarm, would rather defer it. On 
the other hand it must help all candid people to enter into 
the difficulty of your position. 

I only wish I could say, do, or write any thing that would 
do you half as much good, as you have done me. 

I have a long letter from Palmer of Worcester, urging 
the necessity, on the part of other people, of some such pro- 
test against the 'B(ritish) C(ritic) ' etc., as he is going to 
make himself. I shall very likely send it you before long 
with my answer (when I have written one) but I do not 
want to add to your trouble at present ; and there is no 
violent hurry, I think. 

Ever, dearest N., 

Your grateful and affectionate, 


J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : August 31, 

My dear Keble, — I have shillyshallied several days 
whether I should send you any sermons as specimens or not. 
This morning I determined not — since, several men, to whom 
I mentioned those which were against leaving our Church 
(and which they had heard or read), have been so urgent, 
that I send you two on different subjects. But unless you 
are very clear in favour of publishing, I shall think it safe 
not to do so. 


As to my Journal, I wish you honestly to say whether 
you think that you will be able to advise me better by 
seeing it. If so, I will send it. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 

P.S.— I have thought it no good going on seeing Palmer's 
pamphlet. 1 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : September i, 1843. 

My dear Keble, — I have just got your note. I am 
ready still to keep St. Mary's, if you think best — ^will you 
turn in your mind, however, 

1. that a noise will be made at my resigning, whenever 
I resign. It seems to me a dream to wait for a quiet time. 
Will not resignation become more difficult every quarter 
of a year ? 

2. that L.'s affair gives a reason for my resigning — 
as being a very great scandal — so great is it, that, though I 
do not feel myself responsible, I do not know how I can 
hold up my head again while I have St. Mary's. 

3. If it did for the moment alarm people, as if something 
were to come of my resigning which they did not know ; 
yet a very little time would undeceive them. 

Should you think it advisable for me to retain St. Mary's 
awhile, would you object to my trying to get some one to 
take my duty at Oxford entirely, i.e. sermons and all ? 

As to L. he was all but going over a year and a half ago, 
before I knew him. His friends got me to take him, by 
way of steadying him — and I made him promise, as a 
condition of his coming, that he would put aside all thought 
of change for three years. He has gone on very well — 
expressed himself several times as greatly rejoiced he had 
made the promise, though I saw in him no change of opinion ; 
and set himself earnestly to improving the weak points of his 

^ W. Palmer of Worcester was printing his Narrative of Events 
connected with the Publication of the Tracts for the Times. He had some 
correspondence with Newman on the subject. 


character. There could not be any one more in earnest and 
who under a strong system would work better or turn out 
better. He wanted something absolutely to take hold of 
him, and use him : he felt the Church of Rome could do 
this and nothing else. He had not any great ability ; and 
whether from that or other cause he never could see that 
going to Rome was a great change, a change of religion. 
He said ' my vocation is to be a brother of charity, etc. 
therefore my vocation is in the Church of Rome.' He had 
improved so much in general since he had been here, that 
people had remarked upon it. Whenever he went away, 
he had taken pains, not to go where he might have found 
temptation, or at least to keep a strict guard over himself. 
About a month since he went away on a holiday home. His 
mother moving about, he has been doing the same. We all 
think he had no intention at all of any move in religion 
when he left. He went to Dr. Gentili at Loughborough, on 
his way to Lincolnshire (I believe). And he was fascinated 
almost at once. Dr. G. did not make any overtures what- 
ever to him ; and only admitted him, when (as he thought) 
his duty obliged him. He does not seem to have told him 
of his promise ; and some how he quite put it aside, and 
he writes me word that he had a call so very strong that he 
felt he dare not disobey it. He has already engaged himself 
to enter on his Noviciate in the Order of Charity (Rosmin- 
ian) of which Dr. G. is the head in England. He is decidedly 
the greatest prize I have heard of their making. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : September i, 1843. 

My dear K., — I am acting the part of Job's messengers 
to you 7rri[jL eirl irrj^an but SO it is, and sorry as I am to 
pain you, I feel it must be so. 

A long journal or rather argument in the way of reflec- 
tions has just been sent me of a person more considerable 


than any who have hitherto gone over to Rome, and who 
has been unsettled for a considerable time — getting over 
his difficulties and then falling under them again. 

It is very well and powerfully written, and with a good 
deal of feeling and show of conscientiousness. 

The writer says that I have brought him to his present 
opinions, and therefore he wants me to stop him. He is 
disposed, and more than that, to obey me at this moment. 
There seems to me no doubt, however, he will ultimately 
secede. I state it, not to bias your judgement, but as 
evidence towards forming it, that my 4 sermons I think 
would be of use to him. He however, could borrow them. 

I must confess, as seriously as I can, that his paper has 
moved me — but that is neither here nor there. I write 
for another purpose. 

Viz. to show you that apparently I was right in saying 
this morning, that it is useless waiting for a quiet time. I 
really begin to think that unless I give up St. Mary's now, 
I shall never be able — i.e. without some great disturbance. 
Certainly if L.'s departure from us is a reason for remaining 
still at present, this man's departure would be ten times the 
reason. Not that he is very closely connected with me 

Ever yours affectionately, 
John H. Newman. 

P.S. — Palmer has written a kind note, saying that on 
my remonstrance he shall withdraw the private conversation 
introduced into his pamphlet. 

N.B. — Since I have gone so far in the resignation, is 
it well to go back and have it all over again ? e.g. I have 
got over or nearly so the pain at Derby. Am I fit to hold 
preferment ? 

J. H. Newman to Rev. F. W. Faber 

Littlemore : Sept. 2, 1843. 

My dear Faber, — I have seen your letter to your brother 
dated Bologna, Aug. 22, and while I am both surprised 


and put out at your very kind language about me, (of which 
it is but a plain truth to say that I am quite unworthy) 
yet I will not deny that I could not help being much 
pleased, more perhaps than is consistent with the con- 
sciousness of what I am, at being spoken of in such terms 
by you. 

I assure you, my dear Faber, as perhaps you can guess 
without my telling you, that I go very far with you in 
the matter of which your letter treats, much farther than 
I like : and that my heart leaps forward when I hear 
certain things said, so as to give me a good deal of anxiety. 

One thing, however, I feel very strongly — that a very 
great experiment, if the word may be used, is going on in 
our Church — going on, not over. Let us see it out. Is it 
not our happiness to follow God's Hand ? if He did not 
act, we should be forced to act for ourselves : but if He 
is working, if He is trying and testing the English Church, 
if He is proving whether it admits or not of being Catholi- 
cized, let us not anticipate His decision^: let us not be im- 
patient, but look on and follow. 

Have you heard of that remarkable ordination at 
New York, I mean Mr. Arthur Carey's ? surely we have 
no notion of what is coming. Here is a man ordained by 
the Bishop of the most prominent American Diocese, 
with the zealous co-operation of nearly all his Presbyters, 
on his avowal that the Roman Creed so little distresses him, 
that, if refused ordination in the Anglican Church, he will 
not say that he may not apply to the Roman. 

Is it not the ordinary way of Providence, both as a 
precept and a mercy, that men should not make great 
changes by themselves, or on private judgement, but 
should change with the body in which they find them- 
selves, or at least in company ? 

Ought not, moreover, a certain term of probation to 
be given to oneself, before so awful a change as that I 
am alluding to ? e.g. I have sometimes thought that, were 
I tempted to go to Rome, I should for three years pray, 
and get my friends to pray, that I might die rather than go. 


if going were wrong. Do not suppose I am recommending 
this to another : nay I am not sure it would not be pre- 
sumptuous in any case, but I put it down as an illustration. 
Excuse this rude letter, which may disturb and annoy 
you rather than anything else, though I hope not. Be sure 
you have been in my prayers, such as they are, sometime, 
and believe me, 

My dear Faber, with great sympathy, 

Most sincerely yours, 

John H. Newman. 

P.S, — I am led to add, what we once touched on in 
conversation, how forlorn one's state would be, if any 
reaction of mind came on after a change. Surely one 
ought to be three years in the one purpose of changing 
before venturing on it. 

The Sermon spoken of in the following letter is the first 
of the four enumerated a few pages back — the ' Invisible 
Presence of Christ.' It was on the text, ' The Kingdom of 
God Cometh not with observation ; neither shall they say, 
Lo here ! or Lo there ! for behold the Kingdom of God is 
within you.' It would be impossible to convey to the 
reader, in a few words, any idea of the marvellously pathetic 
beauty of this Sermon, but the following sentences culled 
from it will, perhaps, enable him to appreciate Keble's 
criticism of it. Outward tokens had failed the communion 
to which the preacher belonged, there was nothing left but 
to fall back upon inward experiences of Divine Grace. 

* " We see not our tokens." (Psalm 74, 10). . . . Who 
among us does not participate in this ancient trial ? for 
who would account that to be the Church of God in which, 
we are, if he went merely by sight ? Who has not cause 
to appeal, and who may not appeal, and who will not find 
an answer when he appeals, to the Notes of the Kingdom, 
which abides as it came "without observation" . . . which 
is " within us." Yes, I say, who among us may not, if he 
will, lead such a life as to have these secret and truer tokens 
to rest his faith on, so as to be sure, and certain, and con- 
vinced, that the Church which baptised us has still the 
Presence of Christ. ...?,... What are signs and tokens 


... but the way to Christ ? What need of them, should it 
so be, through His mercy, that we have found Him ? ' ^ 

In the ' Apologia ' Newman speaks of this line of argument 
as ' especially abhorrent both to my nature, and to my 
past professions.' Subjectivism and building upon religious 
experiences was one of the chief grounds of his quarrel with 
Evangelicalism ; yet now he had to fall back upon such 
experiences, not indeed for the whole of his religious faith, 
but to assure himself that he was a member of the Church 
of Christ. 2 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

September 4, 1843. 

I am ashamed to think, dearest N., that I should have 
left your notes, now three in number, any time unanswered. 
I wish I may not have caused you more suspense and dis- 
comfort than was necessary. You know partly why I dread 
writing on such subjects. However, I must now say what 
seems right for the time, and hope that it will be turned 
to good rather than ill. 

First as to St. Mary's, I cannot say any thing against 
such feelings and considerations as you allege ; and after aU, 
what right have we to expect to see our way clearly in 
respect of consequences ? You can but do what seems right 
for the time, taking care not to act from mere impulse, 
and there is Another to be trusted with the results. 

As to the Sermons, I am clearly for publishing them, 
with certain modifications (which I will mention presently) 
and it will be a relief to me to find that you are able to do so, 
some of your expressions have sounded so strong another 

The change I want is in that on the Kingdom of God 
being within us. I think that in what you say both of the 
inward and outward Notes of that Kingdom, you imply an 
expectation of rather more certainty than we have a right to 

^ Sermons on Subjects of the Day, pp. 318, 319. 

2 For the peril of relying on feelings and experiences see Ang. Diff. 
Lecture ni. 


look for as to our position ; and some of your phrases seem 
over bold in dispensing with the outward tokens. [Vtd. 
' Apolog./ p. 157, 2nd ed., J. H. N.] 

E.g. ' What are signs and tokens of any kind ' etc. 
This sounds to me a little too like what one has been used 
to blame in Knox or in John Valdesso. Under both these 
heads I should like something more of Bishop Butler's 
tone. You will say you are writing for people who have 
strong feelings and pressing wants, which Butler's tone 
will not satisfy ; but might they not be taught to subdue 
their feelings and wait for their wants to be supplied ? 
Perhaps, as Butler writes, this unsatisfied state may be the 
very education intended for them. Who can tell but there 
may be something of self in their longings, which the highest 
strain of piety would guide them to overcome ? I would 
instance even in this last case, (though I trust I have no 
harsh thoughts about it,) why did Mr. L. call on Gentili ? 
Was it not putting himself in a way to be unsettled ? and 
how came he to forget his promise, not even seeking to be 
released from it, before he committed himself ? These are 
obvious questions, though of course they may be answered 

I certainly should be glad to see recognised in this or 
some other part of your Sermons the duty of men's remaining 
where they are, not only as long as they have spiritual 
consolations, but even under any degree of distress and 
doubt. There should be at least a moral certainty, before 
people make such a move. Then ought not all people to 
suspect that it is at least as much their own fault as their 
Church's, if they do not find Christ's tokens there ? And, 
if there be danger of evil spirits seducing us either way, 
is not the danger less on the side of patience and 
acquiescence ? provided always, of course, that there be 
real self-denial. 

I shall try to send the Sermons back to-morrow. I 
can add no more now. 

Ever yours very affectionately, 

J. Keble. 


J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Basingstoke : September 5, 1843. 

My dear Keble, — I am indeed to you a Job's messenger. 
Here am I, having been summoned from Oxford yesterday 
on a very painful errand. Another person, still more 
important, as I should say, than the last mentioned has 
surprised me by telling me he must go over to Rome, and 
I really cannot tell whether I have succeeded in stopping 
him. At least I cannot get him to give me any promise. 

Really I cannot keep St. Mary's on — and what is so very 
uncomfortable, these efforts to stop others do me harm — 
for I feel that the collision which drives them from Rome 
drives me, as is natural, in the other direction. I know 
I cannot speak in a sufficient real way about it and did 
I feel ever so duly, my words would be cold upon paper, 
but I much fear to-day's conversation has done me a good 
deal of harm, that is, has increased my conviction of the 
false position we are in, if that is harm. 

I wish I felt more deeply than I do how I am paining 
you. But surely I must tell you how things are. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

September 5, 1843. 

I mean to send back your two Sermons to-day, and I 
must say a word or two more on that which I wrote about 
yesterday, though perhaps not much to the purpose. 

I have been looking at your Sermons in vol. 2, on the 
Invisible and Visible Church, and am not quite sure whether 
the views of the two are consistent ; I mean, that of this 
with those former ones ; and perhaps reviewing the one 
might correct the other, and preserve it from abuse. 

My own feeling is to dread depending on seeming ex- 
periences, and in a great degree on the goodness of others 
also (though I do indeed feel that to turn one's back on a 
Communion, while such a person as Pusey (e.g.) remains in it 


would be a great responsibility) ; but I was going to say that 
my leaning is to depend rather on the outward Notes of 
the Church which remain, however obscured, such as the 
Creeds, the Sacraments, and the Succession, and to hope that 
they might justify remaining, and constitute a real, though 
imperfect union. The parable of a Tree, or of a State, if 
carried out, will present things analogous to this. 

No doubt you have thought of all this, and perhaps you 
have written and published it long since, but I must say 
what comes into my mind, and you will bear with me. 

I have answered Palmer's letter, telling him that I know 
not how I could be a party to any such public disavowal of 
the 'B(ritish) C(ritic) ' etc. as he wishes, being really too un- 
versed in the controversy, and feeling that I had already said 
or seemed to say much more than my knowledge warranted. 

About my seeing your Journal, I know not what to say : 
only this : If you think it but possible that it may help 
me to be useful to you, do not keep it back under the notion 
of not paining me. For whom ought I cheerfully to bear 
a little annoyance, if not for you, who have been such a 
friend to me in my need, to say nothing of other claims. So 
Good-bye and believe me, 

Ever your very affectionate, 

J. K. 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

Basingstoke : September 5, 1843. 

I ought to write you a line to say that the movement 
is going so fast, that some of the wheels are catching fire. 
I am returning from an expedition in which I have done my 
utmost to set matters right, but I doubt whether I have 
succeeded even for a time. 

Of course all this is very secret. Perhaps you have 
heard the misfortune which has happened to me at Little- 
more. Poor Lockhart, an intimate friend of Mr. Grant 
of St. John's,! ^y^Yio went over a year and a half since), 

' The Rev. Ignatius Grant, S.J., M.A. Oxford. 


and who came to me on condition of making me a promise 
that he would remain quiet for three years, leaving me for a 
holiday of three weeks about a month since, wrote me word 
about 10 days ago that he was conforming to the Church of 
Rome. It has not got into the papers yet, I believe. He 
was quite overcome by the fascination of Dr. Gentili of 
Loughborough, and is going forthwith to enter the order of 
Charity (Rosminian). 

Unless something very extraordinary happens, I expect 
to resign St. Mary's in the course of a few weeks. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : September 6, 1843. 

My dear Keble, — I shall send you all four sermons, of 
which you have seen the first, and you shall say whether your 
objections apply still — meanwhile I will think over them. 
Somehow I cannot deny that some clear notes are promised 
in Scripture to the Christian Church — doubt in its most dis- 
tressing form, i.e. when there is nothing clear, is apparently 
excluded by the promise of a ' city set on a hill,' our * eyes 
seeing our teachers ' etc. The doubt to be borne is inci- 
dental, concomitant doubt, in spite of clear notes. If 
then we, as a Church, have not the outward notes, we must 
look for others. And moreover as to the duty of patience, 
on the other hand think of the duty of fleeing from the wrath 
to come. The feeling comes on men * Light has been given 
to me — / have had the suggestion, which others have not, 
that our Church wants the notes of the true Church. {Of 
course one should think of evil suggestions, but that is a 
ground, not for patience, but caution.) If I were to die, 
I should be in a state which others are not in.' This dis- 
tracting feeling comes on men not unfrequently. This is 
what I should Sd^y prima facie. 

I suppose the Catholic theory is, that creeds, sacraments, 
succession etc. are nothing without unity — vid. St. Cyprian 


of the Novatians, and St. Austin of the Donatists. The 
only way I have ever attempted to answer this, is by argu- 
ing that we really were, or in one sense were, in unity with 
the rest of the Church — ^but, as you know^ I never have been 
thoroughly satisfied with my arguments, and grew more and 
more to suspect them. 

Another thing I wish you would consider. I felt the 
argument of the Four Sermons when I wrote them — 1 
feel it now (tho* not so strongly, I suppose,^) — I think it is 
mainly (whether correctly analysed in them and drawn out, 
or not) what reconciles me to our position. But I don't 
feel confident, judging of myself by former changes, that 
I shall think it a good argument 5 years hence. Now, is 
it fair, I think it is, to put forward the argument under 
such circumstances ? I think it is fair to stop people in 
a headlong movement, (if it be possible) — to give them 
time to think — to give the English cause the advantage 
of this argument — and to see what comes of it, as to myself, 
so to others. A man only said to me to-day, ' You have 
not an idea of the effect of those Sermons when you preach 
them.' However, you shall judge whether it is trifling with 
so solemn a thing as truth. 

As to my journal, I will think over the matter at my 
leisure. I have been much hurried lately. Letters, many 
painful ones, to answer, and matters to settle. Perhaps 
one or other of us may have something to say about it in 
a little time. Meanwhile I will from time to time go on 
with the journal. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 

P.S. — You must bear in mind that, if I speak strongly 
in various places in the Sermons against the existing state 
of things, it is not wantonly, but to show I feel the difficuUies 
which certain minds are distressed with. 

^ These words were written over the Une — they were apparently 
an afterthought. 


Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

September 7, 1843. 

Your letters, as you may suppose, make me rather 
giddy, and put me out of breath ; but I wish I felt the 
distress more keenly than I do. For instance, I got your 
Basingstoke note in Winchester yesterday, and brooded 
over it during my walk home ; and yet I lost none of my 
night's rest by it ; whereas, if one felt it more, one might 
perhaps be able to say or do something that might be of 
use to you. 

Will you let me mention your case in general without 
name or description to one or two of the persons to whom 
I should most wish my own perplexities to be known for 
such a purpose, that they may do what they can to help 
you ? Their hearts are not hardened, as it were, against 
deep sympathy with the doubts of others, by a kind of blind 
feeling that themselves have too much reason to doubt 
whether they are as yet the sort of persons who can be in 
any Church at all, a feeling which I am sometimes afraid 
is at the bottom of my coldness. 

I suppose you say to yourself and others what often 
occurs to me, ' Let me imagine for a moment that I had 
made this change, should I be free from trouble of the same 
sort ? Surely, to mention no more, the necessity of pleading 
with others on the contrary side to that which is now laid 
upon me, would by itself keep me unsettled.' The collision 
would work then its natural effect, as it does now ; unless 
we suppose a kind of miraculous peace which it may be 
questioned whether we have a right to look for in this world, 

I quite thirst after some other counsellor for you. Now 
Pusey is better, had you not better impart somewhat at 
least of the case to him ? 

We are in much care about my brother, whose work 
seems clearly too much for him. 

Ever your most affectionate, 

J. K. 


Letter to the Bishop of Oxford Resigning 

St. Mary's 

September 7, 1843. 

My dear Lord, — I shall give your Lordship much pain 
I fear by the request which it is necessary for me to make of 
your Lordship before I proceed to act upon a resolution, 
on which I have made up my mind, for a considerable time 
to act. It is to ask your Lordship's permission to resign 
St. Mary's. If I intended such a step three years since, 
as I have said to your Lordship in print, it is not surprising 
that I should have determined on it now, when so many 
Bishops have said such things of me, and no one [has] 
undertaken my part in respect to that interpretation of 
the Articles under which alone I can subscribe them. I 
will not ask your Lordship to put yourself to the pain of 
replying to this request, but shall interpret your silence as 
an assent. 

Were I writing to any one but your Lordship it might 
be presumption to suppose I should be asked to reconsider 
the request which I have been making, but kindness like 
yours may lead you to suspend your permission. If so, 
I may be allowed to say in a matter on which I am able to 
speak, that I should much deplore such an impediment, as 
probably leading to results, which would more than disap- 
point your Lordship's intentions in interposing it. My 
resolution is already no secret to my friends and others. Let 
me heartily thank your Lordship for all your past acts of 
friendship and favour to one who has been quite unworthy of 
them, and believe me my Lord to be keenly alive to your 
anxieties about the state of the Church, and to feel great 
sorrow as far as I am the occasion of them. On the other 
hand I will say on my own behalf, that I have ever felt great 
love and devotion towards your Lordship, that I have ever 
wished to please you, that I have honestly tried to bear in 
mind that I was in a place of high trust in the Church, and 
have laboured hard to uphold and strengthen her, and to 
retain her members. I am not relaxing my zeal till it has 


been disowned by her rulers. I have not retired from her 
service till I have lost or forfeited her confidence. 

That your Lordship's many good words and works for 
her welfare may be a blessing in this life, and a full reward 
in the next is the prayer of your Lordship's 

Affectionate servant, 
J. H. Newman. 

The following letter contains Keble's criticism of the 
Four Sermons. The MS. which was submitted to him does 
not seem to have been preserved. Most of his suggestions, 
judging from the printed text, seem to have been adopted. 
Keble's references are, of course, to the pages of the MS. 
When it was possible the corresponding page in the Uniform 
Edition has been added. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

September i8, 1843. 

At last I return your Sermons. They have been kept 
too long, but I could not speak of them hastily, and I 
have also taken the liberty of showing them to one or two 
trustworthy persons, who might assist me to judge of their 
probable effect. 

The result is that I wish them certainly to be published, 
and shall be greatly disappointed and grieved if your subse- 
quent modification of opinion should have gone so far as to 
prevent this. From your letters I should judge that it had 
not, and also from your having advertised the Sermons ; but 
really of this point you yourself are alone competent to judge. 

1 must tell you in fairness that one person who has seen 
the sermons thought the first of them rather unsettling, as 
having the air of a person struggling against his own con- 
viction ; but from the middle of Sermon 3 and onwards the 
same person thought there was no such appearance. It has 
occurred to me that it might be well to have something in 
your Preface like some of Jeremy Taylor's introductions, 
warning persons not to take it in hand who either i. leading 
good lives are without painful scruples at present or 2. have 


cause to think that their restlessness is unhallowed. For 
I suppose you mean it strictly for those who are i. trying 
to be good and holy, 2. doubt whether this be a Church. 
Either in the Preface or quite early in the course it seems 
to me that there should be a distinct setting aside of the 
case of those persons whose scruples are not accompanied 
with settled strictness of life.^ 

Have baptised persons a right to enquire and judge about 
visible notes, till they have fairly and long tried to obtain the 
invisible ? 

Might it be well to insert about the 12th or 13th page 
of the first Sermon, where the restlessness of so many 
is described, a word of distinct caution, that most of it 
probably (it is hard to limit the quantity) comes of people's 
own fault ? E.g. if I could hear of some thoroughly good 
and obedient child of our Church, who had never heard or 
read of our controversies , yet permanently disquieted at the 
want of visible unity, I should think it a stronger witness 
than any case I have heard of yet. 

Then with respect to doubt and caution, surely if people 
cannot always expect to be comfortable even about such 
points as you mention in your Parochial Sermons, I. 272, 
doubt about the Church tokens may also consist with a 
state of salvation ; and the analogy of duty to earthly 
parents, and content with one's present state and home seems 
to indicate the course of conduct to be pursued while the 
doubt lasts ; and the same, with regard to the misgiving 
one feels, from what quarter the doubt or suggestion may 
come. And if we see enough to guide our practice, ought 
we to depend on more in the way of comfort ? especially 
considering how most of us have lived ? 

E.g. in p. 16 I should, I think, modify your expression 
as follows : — ' Who among us may not, if he will lead such 
a life, as to have those secret and truer tokens to rest his 
faith upon, so as to be sure etc' ^ 

^ This advice was carried out. See footnote p. 308 in Sermons 
on Subjects of the Day. 

* This suggestion was acted upon, p. 3 19. 


The case should be considered of those who have not yet 
these inward tokens in our Church. What are they to do ? 
Should not they somewhere be distinctly told to wait till 
they have them, (i.e. till they are better men and worthier 
communicants), before they judge against our Church ? 

In p. 66 I think the proposed defence by appeal to the 
Divines of the eighteenth century is imperfect,^ especially 
as we are used to blame that style of divinity so much. 
Perhaps it may suffice to accompany it with the prefatory 
caution above suggested. 

In p. 14, 15 2 ' well nigh deserted us ' ; would it not be 
well to specify the signs which seem to be going ? Those 
gone are, I believe, enumerated, at least exemplified after- 

P. 43.^ Is there not a secret shrinking from what we are 
invited to, which has part in the awful constraining force 
you speak of ? a feeling ' though this were not idolatry in 
others, it would be so in me ? ' and do not those persons who 
seem to have most right to guide one's judgment feel this 
most strongly ? 

In p. 19 4 you seem to speak of the corruption of religion 
as a token of the absence of Christ ; is it so simply, or of His 
Presence for Judgment ? What do people say of Italy now ? 

Might not some of the cautionary matter of the 3rd 
Sermon (e.g. p. 54) be usefully inserted or referred to before 
entering on the argument in p. 19 ? 

The top of p. 17 still sounds to me a little rationalistic. 

P. 25.^ Our Lord in XVI. St. John speaks to the secret 
thoughts of His disciples, does He not ? 

The view about Elijah strikes me particularly. I feel 
as if I had there got what I have been long feeling after 
myself. It seems to me curious, in reference to it that 
both our Collects about St. John Baptist (which you refer 
to) are of Anglican origin. 

In p. 72 you speak of the perishable nature of heresies, 

^ P. 356. This suggestion seems to have been acted upon. * p. 318. 

3 P. 339. This suggestion was not acted upon. Keble probably 
had in his mind invocations of the Saints. 
'^ P» 320. ^ P. 334- 


which have lasted from the 5th century ; and in p. 73 
(at bottom), I suppose a Presbyterian would deny your 

And now I think I have pretty well inflicted all my 
notes and marks upon you. I wish they may be of any use ; 
but, as I said, it is a case in which after all you must judge 
entirely for yourself. I the more wish the Sermons may 
be published from the manner in which your resignation, 
reported in the newspapers, is already being taken. I had a 
letter from a man this morning, who considers it as equiva- 
lent to the giving up of ' Catholic Anglicanism.* 

I cannot recollect that I have more to say at present. 
Arthur Perceval, who has been very ill, wants a curate for 
six months, and it has occurred to me that, if they can get 
a place to be in, it will be a nice refreshing change for my 
brother, and perhaps Copeland might now take Bisley. 
Will you mention it to him ? for I quite long to have some- 
thing settled for Tom's relief. 

We shall think of you very much, especially next week.^ 
Ever your grateful and affectionate, 

J. Keble. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : In fest. S. Mich., 1843. 

My dear Keble, — I am so cast down by various things, 
that I have hardly heart to think what I have to say to you. 
What chiefly presses on me is Bowden's illness. It is 
hardly right perhaps to say I despair of him. And he is 
all the while so kind and quiet and happy. 

I should be truly obliged and grateful if you got any 
persons to remember me in the way you proposed. 

As to the Sermons, it seems to me that, the more I feel 
dissatisfied with the Catholicity of our Church, the more I 
cannot help making much of and really accepting the view 
contained in theniy if I am content to remain in it — I think 
then that I may very honestly publish these, for they do 
contain my present judgment. 

1 p. 361. 

2 (When the anniversary of the consecration of Littlemore Chapel 
came round. — J. H. N.) 


The only thing I feel is, distrust in the permanence of 
that judgment, formed on the experience of the past. 
And further it seems a sort of private judgment in Scripture, 
which is unauthorized by any one ecclesiastical writer, as far 
as I know. But as to the latter of these objections, our 
position is our own, such as no writer can be expected to have 
anticipated — and as to the chance of future change, if this 
were an argument for not avowing what I now believe, it 
would be an argument surely for not acting upon it, i.e. for 
leaving the Church, which is absurd. If I have reasons for 
being content and thankful to be where I am, why may I 
not give them ? — (I dare say I may have to modify some 

Again, have I a right to suppress a view which has been 
influential with others, and may be intended to answer a 
good purpose ? 

And further, if the view did take a number of persons, 
and that permanently, it would have, and ought to have a 
great effect upon me — my only present misgiving relating 
to its holding water. Solvitur ambulando. 

On these grounds, if you do not think them unreal, I 
propose to publish. 

I think on the whole I shall send you the 10 days journal 
I spoke to you of. Of course I cannot tell, but I don't 
think it will over pain you — that is, I think you may perhaps 
be prepared for it, on the whole, if not in detail. 

Of course in detail, it is no correct specimen of me — no 
10 days account could be — but it gives a general idea. I 
have put down, not only infirmities, but temptations, even 
when I did not feel them to be more than external to me. 
Also, I have shown you how the day went — tho' of course 
every ten days varies much in this respect. E.g. the next 
ten days were very busy ones, in editing etc. 

I have, as you may suppose, been very much concerned 

about your brother. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 
P.S. — I trust Eden will take Copeland. 


The following fragment of a letter is of some importance, 
for it shows how far Newman was as yet from a final decision. 
In this way it serves as a corrective to the correspondence 
with Archdeacon Manning of a few days later. The im- 
pression which this correspondence, taken by itself, might 
leave on the mind of the reader is that Newman in the 
autumn of 1843 saw his way much more clearly than he 
actually did. 

' Keep Thou my feet : I do not ask to see 
The distant scene — one step enough for me.' 

These lines almost sum up the spirit in which Newman 
resigned St. Mary's. 

The conclusion of the letter is missing. The opening 
part is so full of erasures as to be quite unintelligible. 
Everything which might afford a clue to the name of the 
person to whom it was addressed was in later years carefully 
blotted out. 

John Henry Newman to an Unknown 

Sept. 29, 1843. 

. . . First I will say that A. B. had no right to tell 
what he told you about me, and I shall write to him to 
beg him not to do the like to others. Next, J. has not 
understood me, certainly has not quoted my words. 

I do so despair of the Church of England, I am so 
evidently cast off by her, and on the other hand I am so 
drawn to the Church of Rome, that I think it safer as a 
matter of honesty not to keep my living. 

This is a very different thing from having any intention 
of joining the Church of Rome. However, to avow generally 
as much as I have now said, would be wrong for ten thousand 
reasons, which I have not time to enter upon here, and I 
hardly think you will consider necessary. People cannot 
understand a state of doubt, of misgiving, of being unequal 
to responsibilities, etc., but they will conclude either that 
you have a clear view one way or the other. All I know 
is, that I could not without hypocrisy profess myself any 
longer a teacher in and champion of our Church. Very 


few persons know this — hardly one person (only one, I 
think) in Oxford — not any one in Oxford at present. I 
think it most cruel, most unkind, most unsettling to tell 
them . . . 

John Henry Newman to an Unknown 

Oct. 7, 1843, 

... I don't believe you when you talk [erasures] of 
your having had these opinions so long. I don't believe 
it. I think you never would have gone on [erasures, pre- 
sumably referring to some work undertaken by the person 
addressed] with the spirit and good heart you did, after 
my strong discouragement, unless at that time I had felt 
much less confidence in the Church of England than you. 
Now, I did not feel so little then as I do now, and you now 
feel less than I do now. 

Now as to yourself, surely the case of poor Sibthorpe 
should be taken as a warning to all of us against sudden 
moves. Our Lord tells us to count the cost, how can you 
tell whether it is His voice, or that of a deceiving spirit. 
It is a rule in spiritual matters to reject a suggestion at 
first to anything extraordinary, from the certainty that 
if it is from heaven it will return. 

I should say that you should put yourself on a pro- 
bation, and resolve not to move for three years — making 
this exception, if you feel it necessary, that in case of the 
imminent prospect of death you might conform at once, 
as the safest and best you could do tmder the circumstances. 
This is what we do, as to baptizing infants — administering 
private baptism in cases of danger. It is borne out too 
by the beliefs of the early Church about catechumens ; 
the intention of baptism being equivalent to baptism. 
And surely a delay which has for its sole object to ascertain 
God's will, is of the same kind. 

Then again, I think you should, as much as you can, 
put the question out of your head — being sure that con- 
viction will come in spite of that, if it is from God. You 


should certainly give yourself to some direct religious 
duties. You should observe what your state is in six 
months time, and if then, or at any intermediate time, 
you awoke out of your present feelings as out of a dream, 
then, if they returned, I think you should begin your three 
years again. Surely when we are told 'to try the spirits,' 
we cannot be wrong in thus acting. Magna est Veritas 
et prevalebit. And I cannot understand how one can have 
any fear lest it be resisting grace. 

Do not think I am saying this by way of getting you 
off the subject altogether. I feel confident that such 
rules will have no such tendency. Delay seems to me 
the path in which people are led forward — most haste, 
worst speed. And the older one is, the more time it takes 
to learn, and to ascertain that one has a irpoOea-i^, a 7rpoaipe(Ti<^. 
Young men may take a resolution, right or wrong, on 
impulse, and keep to it, for their minds are supple — but 
there is a grave retribution, when those who have some- 
thing of a fixed character act on a sudden idea, or in a 
novel frame of mind, for their habitual state of feeling 
returns upon them, and they feel that they have changed 
into an element in which they cannot live. I know the 
gift of faith will overcome this, when it is God's call, but 
only by waiting can a man either gain this gift, or be sure 
that he is called. 

I think you should be very much on your guard against 
self-will. You should not be avTovofio^, your own master. 
I have a right to say this, for I very seldom act of myself. 
Now you seem to me always to act of yourself, and not to 
mind others. This was your way when an undergraduate 
— I almost think that I have heard you say that it was 
your way at school. And certainly lately about [erasure] 
you have not minded what I said one word, though now 
you have come to do the very thing of yourself, which I 
have been so long advising you. Now if you ought in this 
matter to act for yourself, here is an additional reason 
for taking time. We can be critics on our own past selves, 
not on our present. If you allow yourself a year hence 


to judge of your feelings now, you approximate to taking 
the advice of another. 

I understand you in your last letter to say you will act 
deliberately, but I think it no harm to send you this. 

Ever yours affectly., 

J. H. N. 

The above should be compared with a letter to Pusey 
of July 22, 1845 (see p. 383). In proportion as Newman 
saw his own way more clearly, he was unable to recommend 
to others long probationary periods. 

Archdeacon Manning to J. H. Newman 

October 8, 1843. 

My dear Newman, — I had intended to come to Little- 
more yesterday to see you : but I was in so much pain from 
a cold in my face that I most unwillingly gave it up at the 
moment I was getting into a fly to come here, the Bishop 
of Oxford having asked me to spend Sunday at Cuddesdon. 

For the last month I have been travelling about, and 
have been as far as Bangor, and Hull, York and Durham, 
so that you may believe I have had little quiet. But you 
have been constantly in my thoughts : and all this made 
me wish more than ever to see you yesterday. And yet 
my chief reason for wishing to see you would be for the sake 
of old kindliness : for I do not feel that I ought to volunteer 
any unsought expressions on your late resignation of St. 
Mary's, for which ever since you talked to me 2 or 3 years 
ago I have been more or less prepared. ^ Also I feel that 
one ought to know and understand far more of the interior 
of each other's minds to be able to form any view of what 
is right and reasonable in each one's position. I believe 
the amount of all I should endeavour to express is an 
affectionate regard and a real participation in all that 
distresses you. I suppose it is next to impossible that 
employments so distant and different as ours, if I may 
venture to compare them, should not introduce differences of 

1 It was in October 1840 that Newman first consulted Keble about 
resigning St. Mary's. Apologia, pp. 132 fi. 


view and feeling : and I have always a desire to understand 
yours more clearly, and to be understood by you in turn. 

I hope this may be, for Charity and confidence are the 
true bonds of the Church. 

I shall hope to see you at the beginning of next month, 
as I shall, please God, be again in Oxford. Believe me, 

My dear Newman, 

Yours affecly, 

H. E. Manning. 

J. H. Newman to Archdeacon Manning i 

Oriel College : October 14, 1843. 

My dear Manning, — I thank you very warmly for your 
most kind letter — and would tell you in a few words why 
I have resigned St. Mary's, as you seem to wish, were it 
possible to do so. But it is most difficult to bring out in 
brief — or even in extenso — any just view of my feelings 
and reasons. 

The nearest approach I can give to a general account 
of them is to say that it has been caused by the general 
repudiation of the view contained in No. 90 on the part of 
the Church. I could not stand against such an unanimous 
expression of opinion from the Bishops, supported as it 
has been by the concurrence, or at least silence, of all classes 
in the Church lay and clerical. If there ever was a cause in 
which an individual teacher has been put aside, and virtu- 
ally put away by a community, mine is one. No decency 
has been observed in the attacks upon me from authority : 
no protests have appeared against them. It is felt, I am 
far from denying, justly felt, that I am a foreign material 
— and cannot assimilate with the Church of England 

Even my own Bishop has said that my very mode of 
interpreting the Articles makes them mean anything or 
nothing. When I heard this delivered I did not believe 
my ears. I denied to others that it was said. Pusey and 

^ This and the two next letters of Newman's were published in the 


I asked the Bishop and were satisfied by his answer — when 
out came the Charge^ and the words could not be mistaken. 
This astonished me the more, because I published that letter 
to him (how unwillingly you know) on the understanding 
that / was to deliver his judgment on No. 90 instead of him. 
A year elapses, and a second and heavier judgment came 
forth. I did not bargain for this. Nor did he, but the 
tide was too strong for him. 

I fear I must confess that in proportion as I think the 
English Church is showing herself intrinsically and radically 
alien from Catholic principles, so do I feel the difficulties 
in defending her claims to be a branch of the Catholic Church. 
It seems a dream to call a communion Catholic, when one 
can neither appeal to any clear statement of Catholic doctrine 
in its formularies, nor interpret ambiguous formularies 
by the received and living sense past or present. Men of 
Catholic views are too truly but a party in our Church. I 
cannot deny that other independent circumstances, which it 
is not worth while entering into, have led me to the same 
conclusion. I do not say all this to everybody, as you may 
suppose — ^but I do not like to make a secret of it to you. 

affectly 5a-s, 

John H. Newman. 

Manning forwarded Newman's letter to Mr. Gladstone, 
with a letter of his own which, unfortunately, has not yet 
been published. Gladstone replied on October 24.^ He 
was considerably alarmed by Newman's letter. He thought 
that Newman was unduly depressed by the strictures on 
Tract 90. 'I confess,' he said, * that his uneasiness at 
the time of the Jerusalem adventure appeared to me more 
intelhgible. But as you truly say, so far is the English 
Church, the subjective Enghsh Church, from showing 
herself by a series of progressive acts to be " intrinsically 
and radically ahen from Cathohc principles " that the 
progression is all the other way,' &c. 

1 The date is worth noting. Manning did not wait till he heard from 
Gladstone before writing his second letter to Newman. Gladstone's 
letter is printed in full in Lathbury's Correspondence on Church and Religion 
of W. E. Gladstone, vol. i. p. 281. 



Archdeacon Manning to J. H. Newman 

Lavington : October 23, 1843. 

My dear Newman, — I received your letter with very great 
interest and thank you sincerely for writing so fully to me. 

It seems to me hardly right for me to form any view 
on a case so complicated as yours. One ought to know so 
much more than any but one or two, or perhaps the principal 
alone can know. However your letter suggests to me some 
things which I should like just to say and leave them. 

Surely you cannot feel that the Church of England 
regards you as a foreign ingredient. With whose writings 
has it so strongly and widely sympathized ? For years, who 
has been more loved and revered ? Individuals have opposed 
you always, and latterly, since No. 90, ersons bearing 
office in the Church — but what has the Church as such — 
or any great mass of the Church expressed ? Without 
entering upon No. 90 in detail, could you expect the living 
generation to change the opinions, prejudices, and habits 
of a whole life in a few years at one bidding ? Has not God 
prospered you in the last ten years in a measure which 
makes it — may I venture to say — impatience something 
like Jonah's to ask or look for more ? Indeed, my dear 
Newman, I feel this strongly and am sure that the adversary 
both of the Church and of your self would compass his own 
ends in casting over you such an illusion as that you should 
believe yourself to be a foreign ingredient — You will not 
take it ill of me if I even go on to say that I cannot conceive 
any man under the conditions of our erring humanity to 
escape mixing into ten years of such work as yours matters 
which may be reasonably excepted against things ' quas 
aut incuria fudit etc' 

I entirely disbelieve the impression you have is true — 
and am persuaded that patience and quietness will reassure 
all that are to be reassured ; for some must always oppose 
themselves so long as the Church standeth. 

Another thing suggested by your letter is this. Surely if 
one compares the English Church now with what it was ten 


years back it cannot be said truly that it is showing itself 
intrinsically alien from Catholic principles. That the 
Church has passed under a fearful influence for 150 years 
is sadly true ; but surely the last ten years have dispelled 
much and brought the living church back again in a wonder- 
ful way — to be explained no otherwise than by a belief in 
God's mercy to us — to a preparation of heart for Catholicity 
when it can be seen and known as such. May we not be too 
hasty ? — patience and love of one another is what we want 
most. What may not be the state of the English Church 
ten years hence when the last century is passed, and a 
generation born and trained in better things has arisen ? 
Is not your painful feeling ' a judging before the time ' ? 

I feel almost unwilling to go on for it seems unfit in me 
to write to you in this way — But let me add one more thing. 
You feel that men of Catholic views are but a party in our 
church. Must we not say the same of every church in the 
world ? Is the popular belief in any part of Christendom of 
such a kind that Catholic minds are not esoteric everywhere, 
e.g. Can we say that minds possessed with the popular views 
prevalent in Roman CathoHc countries are ' Catholic ' in 
the sense we are now intending : and are not instructed 
Roman Catholics a school in their own communion ? Indeed 
must it not always be so : is it not the condition of the 
Church in all ages ? 

After all, even if Catholic minds are no more than a party 
in the English Church, it is plain that they have always 
existed in it, and therefore that they are not foreign ingre- 
dients, but such as the Church has ever retained, and fostered, 
and drawn large measures of blessing from. Indeed I would 
say they are her true sons faintly sustaining, and repre- 
senting her real character in the midst of the many who 
sink below her tone, and rule, and are foreign to her. 

As I have written all this I must send it, if only to express 
my regard, and thanks to you. You perhaps may think me 
too hopeful : but I am full of good hope arising out of living 
facts which I see daily : and I beheve a few years will 
ripen them into things you desire to see. I know there is 


such a thing as vain hopes, but there is also such a thing as 
hva-e\in<7Tia which sadly relaxes one's efforts and fulfils 
its own forebodings. 

Believe me, my dear Newman, 
Yours affectly, 

H. E. Manning. 

J. H. Newman to Archdeacon Manning 

Derby : October 25, 1843. 

My dear Manning, — Your letter is a most kind one, but 
you have engaged in a most dangerous correspondence. 
I am deeply sorry for the pain I must give you. 

I must tell you then frankly, unless I combat arguments 
which to me, alas, are shadows, that it is from no disappoint- 
ment, irritation, or impatience, that I have, whether rightly 
or wrongly, resigned St. Mary's — but because I think the 
Church of Rome the Catholic Church, and ours not a part 
of the Catholic Church, because not in communion with 
Rome, and I felt I could not honestly be a teacher in it any 

This conviction came upon me last summer four years. 
I mentioned it to two friends in the autumn of that year, 1839. 
And for a while I was in a state of excitement. 

It arose in the first instance from reading the Monophysite 
and Donatist controversies ; in the former of which I was 
engaged in that course of theological study to which I had 
given myself. 

This was at a time, when no Bishop, I believe, had 
declared against us, and when all was progress and hope. I 
do not think I have ever felt, certainly not then, disappoint- 
ment or impatience, or the like ; for I have never looked 
forward to the future, nor do I realize it now. 

My first effort was to write that article on the Catholicity 
of the English Church in the ' British Critic,' and for two 
years it quieted me. But since the summer of 1839 I have 
written nothing on modern controversy. My Lectures on 
Romanism and Justification were in 1836-38. My writings 


in the ' Tracts for the Times ' end with 1838, except Bishop 
Andrewes's Devotions and Tract 90, which was forced on me. 
You know how unwilhngly I wrote my letter to the Bishop 
of Oxford, in which (as the safest course under circum- 
stances) I committed myself again. My University Sermons 
were a course begun ; I did not finish them. The Sermon 
on Development was a subject intended for years. And I 
think its view quite necessary in justification of the Athana- 
sian Creed. 

The article I speak of quieted me till the end of 1841, 
over the affair of Tract 90, when that wretched Jerusalem 
Bishoprick affair, no personal matter, revived all my alarms. 
They have increased up to this moment. 

You see then, that the various ecclesiastical and quasi- 
ecclesiastical acts, which have taken place in the course of 
the last two years and a half, are not the cause of my state 
of opinion ; but are keen stimulants and weighty confir- 
mations of a conviction forced on me, while engaged in the 
course of duty, viz. the theological reading which I had given 
myself. And this last mentioned circumstance is a fact 
which has never, I think, come before me till now that I 
write to you. 

It is three years since, on account of my state of opinion, 
I urged the Provost in vain to let St. Mary's be separated 
from Littlemore, thinking I might with a safe conscience 
serve the latter, though I could not comfortably continue 
in so public a place as a University. This was before 
No. 90. 

Finally I have acted under advice and that not of my 
own choosing but which came to me in the way of duty, nor 
of those only who agree with me, but of new friends who 
differ from me. 

I have nothing to reproach myself with, as far as I see in 
the matter of importance, i.e. practically — or in conduct. 
And I trust that He who has kept me in the slow course 
of changes hitherto, may keep me still from hasty acts or 
resolves with a doubtful conscience. 

This I am sure of, that such interposition as yours 


kind as it is, only does what you would consider harm. It 
makes me realize my views to myself, it makes me see their 
consistency, it assures me of my own deliberateness — it 
suggests to me the traces of a Providential Hand. It takes 
away the pain of disclosures, it relieves me of a heavy secret. 
You may make what use of my letters you think right. 

Yours etc. 

J. H. N. 

The above letter was also sent to Gladstone. Gladstone 
replied on the 28th, and again on the 30th, in a state of 
great excitement. ' My first thought is, " I stagger to and 
fro, like a drunken man, and am at my wits' end.'' ' He 
jumped to the conclusion that when Newman spoke of the 
reluctance with which, in the Letter to the Bishop of Oxford, 
he had committed himself for a second time, he was practically 
avowing that he had said things which he did not believe. 
No doubt he could give a satisfactory explanation, but 
the world at large would not believe him. If his letters 
to Manning were divulged he would be a disgraced man, 
and the cause which he had advocated would be hopelessly 

Archdeacon Manning to J. H. Newman 

October 27, 1843. 

My dear Newman, — It is impossible for me to refrain from 
writing to you. If I were, you might misunderstand my 
not writing, but I have no intention of saying any thing 
more than that the kind and affectionate feelings of years 
seemed to come altogether as I read your letter. By what- 
soever path may we be led home to the rest where there is 
no more going out. 

Numberless things keep me from saying a word more 
than my thanks for your openness. 

^ See p. 18. The letter was written at the time when Newman's 
doubts were in abeyance, and when the obstacles to communion with 
Rome, which he brought forward in it, seemed to him insurmountable. 
What he kept back from the world was the doubts which had assailed 
him in 1839, and the haunting possibility that they might return. To 
have revealed this would have been ' scattering firebrands,' and an act 
of disloyalty to the convictions which at the time were predominant in 
his mind. 


Never think that I judged you in my last letter. But 
ignorant of the one master key of all I was led to shallow 
thoughts of the matter. May God ever bless and keep you, 
my dear Newman. You know all I feel, when I say that I 
am as ever 

Yours affectionately, 

H. E. Manning. 

It is well to add that your letter will be seen by only two, 
perhaps by only one person : but one or both they with 
myself will never be the channel through which your heavy 
secret shall be known. ^ 

H. E. M. 

J. H. Newman to Archdeacon Manning 

October 31, 1843. 

My dear Manning, — Your letter, which I got on my return 
here last night, has made my heart ache more and caused 
more and deeper sighs than any I have had a long while — 
tho' I assure you there is much on all sides of me to cause 
sighing and heart aches — on all sides ; I am quite hampered 
by the one dreadful whisper repeated from so many quarters 
and causing the keenest distress to friends. You know 
but a part of my present trial, in knowing that I am un- 
settled myself. 

Since the beginning of this year I have been obliged to tell 
the state of my mind to some others ; but never I think 
without being in a way obliged, as from friends writing to 
me as you did, or guessing how matters stood. No one in 
Oxford knows it or here, but one near friend whom I felt I 
could not help telling the other day. But I suppose many 
more suspect it. 

Though I am fully conscious of many sins which deserve 
any trouble, and fully think that this trouble is a direct 

1 Manning sent Newman's letters to Dr. Pusey, who wrote to Gladstone : 
' Knowing Newman intimately, I do not think that the portentous ex- 
pressions in his letters (forwarded to me by Manning) have a necessary 
or immediate bearing upon certain steps of outward conduct.' — Purcell's 
Life of Manning, vol. i. p. 352. 


punishment on definite sins, though not in the way of cause 
and effect, yet I do seem to find a comfort in the feeling that 
we didn't make our present circumstances. 

Ever yours affectly., 

J. H. N. 

Manning was now thoroughly alarmed. He had written 
to Pusey an extraordinarily vehement letter in which he 
announced that he was ' reduced to the painful, saddening, 
sickening necessity of saying what ' he ' felt about Rome.' i 
He did so in his celebrated 5th of November sermon. The 
next day he went to see Newman at Littlemore. This is 
how Froude described what happened : 

' When I was at Littlemore with Newman, Manning 
came up to Oxford to preach the 5th of November sermon. 
He preached in so Protestant a tone, that Newman said, 
** If Manning comes to Littlemore I shall not see him." 
Mark Pattison and I were sitting with Newman when he 
was told that Manning had come. Newman said to me, 
" You must go and tell him, Froude, that I will not see 
him." I went and told Manning, who was greatly dis- 
tressed, and I walked along the road some way with him, 
to give him what comfort I could.' ^ 

In the following letter Newman discusses the projected 
* Lives of the English Saints.' 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

Littlemore : November 2, 1843. 

I am led to write to you about several things. First, 
I find that Pusey has mentioned to you, what he had not an 
opportunity of saying to me, that the ' Lives of the Saints ' 
would cause a sensation. I wish I had something like a 

^ Purcell's Life of Manning, vol. i. pp. 251, 252. 

' Recollections of Dean Boyle, p. 238. The late Father William Neville 
used to tell the story rather differently. According to him, Newman 
was out when Manning called. He never professed to have got his in- 
formation from Newman himself, but even if he did, it would only prove 
that Newman's memory was at fault. For him the incident was over 
in a few seconds, and he may never have given it a thought afterwards. 
It was otherwise with Froude, who had come between the hammer and 
the anvil. His walk bareheaded along the road would fix every detail 
in his memory. 


view, what was best to do about them. However, you 
misunderstand him in thinking that the tone was, ' None 
can doubt so and so, etc., etc., but a mere Protestant,' 
etc. (How could you fancy I should allow this ?) No — 
the objection to the tone is liking for Rome. What P. 
has said has thrown me into great perplexity. I entered 
into the scheme, after the delay of months, for the sake of 
others ; and I have reason to fear that stopping it may in 
various ways tend to precipitate certain persons (readers, 
if you will) towards Rome. Yet it is plain what he feels, 
will be felt far more by others. 

I did not explain to you sufficiently the state of mind of 
those who are in danger, I only spoke of those who are 
convinced that our Church was external to the Church 
Catholic, though they felt it unsafe to trust their own 
private convictions. And you seemed to put the dilemma, 
* Either men are in doubt or not : if in doubt, they ought 
to be quiet ; if not in doubt, how is it that they stay with 
us ? ' But there are two other states of mind which might 
be mentioned, (i) Those who are unconsciously near 
Rome, and whose despair about our Chiu'ch, if anyhow 
caused, would at once develop into a state of conscious 
approximation and ^^(S^s^'-resolution to go over. (2) Those 
who feel they can with a safe conscience remain with us, 
while they are allowed to testify in behalf of Catholicism, 
and to promote its interests ; i e. as if by such acts they 
were putting our Church, or at least a portion of it, in which 
they are included, in the position of catechumens. They 
think they may stay, while they are moving themselves, 
others, nay, say the whole Church, towards Rome. Is not 
this an intelligible ground ? I should like your opinion of it. 

While I am writing, I will add a word about myself. 
You may come near a person or two, who, owing to circum- 
stances, know more exactly my state of feeling than you do, 
tho' they would not tell you. Now I do not like that you 
should not be aware of this, though I see no reason why you 
should know what they happen to know. Your wishing it 
otherwise would he a reason. 


To THE Same 

Littlemore : November 6, 1843. 

I do not mean to bore you, as you have quite enough to 
do without me ; but you shall answer me when you have 
time. I am drawing up my query in the manner of a case 
if I can manage it, for it was a curious point of casuistry, 
on which I am often in one shape or other called to give an 
opinion — but meantime I will speak about myself and the 

You have not gone to the bottom of the difficulty. It is 
very easy to say. Give facts without comment ; but in the 
first place, what can be so dry as mere facts ? the books won't 
sell, nor deserve to sell. It must be ethical ; but to be 
ethical is merely to colour a narrative with one's own mind, 
and to give a tone to it. Now this is the difficulty, altering 
this or that passage, leaving out this or that expression will 
not alter the case. I will not answer for being aware of 
the tone in myself. Pusey put his finger on passages 
which I had not thought about. Is he to be ever 
marking passages ? if so, he has the real trouble of being 
editor, not I. 

Naturam expellas furca, &c. Is the Pope's supremacy 
the only point on which no opinion is to be expressed ? if 
so, why ? It is not more against the Articles to desire 
it than to desire monachism. Will it offend more than 
others ? I will not limit certainly the degree of disgust 
which some people will feel towards it, but do they feel 
less towards the notion of monks, or, again, of miracles ? 
Now Church History is made up of these three elements — ■ 
miracles, monkery. Popery. If any sympathetic feeling is 
expressed on behalf of the persons and events of Church 
history, it is a feeling in favour of miracles, or monkery, 
or Popery, one or all. It is quite a theory to talk of being 
ethical, yet not concur in these elements of the narrative — 
unless, indeed, one adopts Milner's or Neander's device of 
dropping part of the history, praising what one has a 
fancy for, and thus putting a theory and dream in the 


place of facts. But it is bad enough to be eclectic in 

Next it must be recollected how very much depends 
on the disposition, relative prominence, &c., of facts, it is 
quite impossible that' a leaning to Rome, a strong offensive 
leaning should be hidden. 

And then still more it must be recollected that a vast 
number of questions, and most important ones, are decided 
this way or that on antecedent probabilities, according to a 
person's views, e.g. the question between St. Augustine and 
the British Bishops — of Easter — of King Lucius, &c., &c. 
Opinion comes in at every step of the history. 

From what I have said you will see that I consider it 
impossible to choose easy ' Lives ' for the first of the series ; 
there are none such, or if there be a few, when can I promise 
to have them ready ? I suppose Bede must be pretty easy. 
Keble has it. I do not expect him to send it to me for 
several years, with his engagements. Take missions, take 
Bishops, the Pope comes in everywhere. Go to Aldheim 
and his schools ; you have most strange miracles. Try to 
retire into the country, you do but meet with hermits. 
No ; miracles, monkery. Popery, are too much for you, if 
you have any stomach. 

It seems to me that this talk about * beginning easily ' 
(which Sir F. P. [Francis Palgrave ?] has been eager in) is just 
like the fuss made, when we began the ' Fathers,' of taking 
easy Fathers. Some wished to begin chronologically, &c. &c. 
If we had gone on any such theory, we should have done none 
at all. And so I say about these ' Lives,' you may indefinitely 
postpone them by such precautions — you may show that 
they ought not to come out at all by your objections — 
but if they are to be pubhshed, they will make a sensation. 

The Life P. looked at, St. Stephen's, was taken as having 
hardly, if at all, any miracle in it, and if he thinks it will 
give offence, doubtless the others will still more. 

You see, in saying all this, I am not deciding the question 
whether the work is to be done at all. On that point I 
have had great doubt since P.'s objection. Only to do it 


without offence, is impossible. And the more so, because, 
in part at least, it is likely to be a very taking work. 

At first I was more than desirous to rid myself of it 
altogether — and Rivington is looking over the sheets to 
decide whether he will take it or give it up. And I think 
he will give it up. But a number of intricate questions 
come in. 

Men have written, hoping for a fair emolument, and 
putting aside other means of gaining a livelihood. It seems 
very unfair to disappoint them. I know myself, when I was 
much younger, how very annoying such a disappointment 
is ; the more so, because it cannot be, or is not, hinted at. 

And then so many Lives are in progress or preparation, 
that it is most unlikely the work will be stopped ; others 
will conduct it instead of me who will go farther ; and 
though this is a bad reason for doing oneself what one feels 
a misgiving in doing, it is a good reason when one feels none 
at all. 

And then comes a question, whether, if I have no mis- 
giving, it is not a duty. What right have I to be quiet, 
having the means of making a protest, when there is so 
great an effort on the other side to put down the Pope ! 
May it not be our mission to do what we cannot choose our 
time for doing ? I have been quiet now for three years 
nearly, as being under authority, and with a Bishop's censure 
against me. Am I never to move ? 

These are the kind of questions which come across me. 
On the other hand there is a question whether it is not 
infra dig. to go to another publisher, Rivington rejecting — 
and whether well-wishers will not think I am losing myself 
in being party to any such publication. But other things 
might be mentioned in which they would consider I should 
be losing myself. 

You see by all things I am in perplexity — but I suppose 
a little time may make things clearer. 

If the plan is abandoned, the significant question will 
be, nay is already asked, — ' What then, cannot the Anglican 
Church bear the Lives of her Saints ! ' 


To THE Same 

Littlemore : November 26, 1843. 

I am very much obliged by your kind letter — and 
sincerely am I sorry to have kept you, as I find, in 

The truth is, I am so undecided, or was, what was best 
to do, that I began to write to you, and did not pursue it. 
And so far from your not having written to the purpose, 
you laid down one proposition, in which I quite acquiesce ; 
that the subject of the supremacy of Rome should be moved 
argumentatively if at all. I felt I had gained something 
here, and rested upon it and gave up answering you, as it 
turns out, selfishly. 

But now I must say that when I came again to look at 
what Pusey was frightened at, I could touch nothing. There 
was no insinuation, no allusion to supremacy at all. It 
related a plain historical fact that St. Stephen went to 
Rome, as was customary — and the two reasons assigned 
had nothing to do with supremacy : — ist. that the Coliseum 
was there ! quoting Bede's saying. 2. that Rome was our 
Mother Church. 

Yet, though I feel I could alter nothing, I am sure most 
people would say there was an insinuation. Why ? because 
people know our ^ wishes and then the mere stating a fact 
is approving of it. The only way to satisfy people would 
be a plain protest the other way — silence gives consent. 

This has been seen in the case of Rivington, who, between 
ourselves, has read, has condemned, has given up the under- 
taking — and now I am quite at sea with a quantity of matter 
part printed, part written, part preparing, part promised, — 
and though the pecuniary loss would be serious, if I stopped, 
that is the least part of the difficulty — and I do not see but 
I must go on — though I suppose there will be some delay. 
There is no doubt that Rivington is taking a line. Pass 
a few months, and we shall better be able to see how things 

^ In the transcript there is a mark of interrogation over the word 
' our ' as if it was not quite legible. 


stand — but I suppose we shall lose the season. Meanwhile 
we shall accumulate matter. 

I do not see, do all I can, but the work will have a strong 
Roman effect — the times were Roman — (nor can we be 
protesting) and I fear in some writers the tone will be such 
too, do what I will. Altering will but mar, not undo. Now 
will you give me your opinion — ^which I always value very 

As to myself, I don't like talking. When we meet, we 
shall see how we feel about it. 

P.S. — I am much concerned to hear you talk of indis- 

To THE Same 

Oriel College : December 5, 1843. 

I have just got your and Gladstone's letters, for which, 
and the promptitude which you and he have shown, I am 
very much obliged indeed. As to your very kind offer at 
the end, I cannot speak of it in such terms as I feel about 
it — but I do not think that the work can stop, nor do I indeed 
see what great advantage will come of much delay. 

Your remarks I shall truly be obliged by your giving 
me — and I send you back the sheets for that purpose. 
I am sure no intentional attack on things as they are ^^^as 
in the wish of the writer. 

G.'s remarks have shown me the hopelessness by delay, 
or any other means of escaping the disapprobation of a 
number of persons whom I very much respect. 

P.S. — May I keep G.'s letter ? I will not, unless you 
fully allow me. I am very much obliged to him. 

To THE Same 

Oriel College : December 11, 1843. 

I got your letter last night and proceeded at once to act 
upon it. I altered nearly all the passages, though I ac- 
quiesced far more in your ecclesiastical than your theological 
objections. It seemed to me, that, considering the tone of 


the whole composition, an alteration of the word (e.g.) 
' merit ' was like giving milk and water for a fit of the 
gout, while it destroyed its integrity, vigor, in a word 
its go. 

This feeling so grew upon me this morning, in conjunc- 
tion with what you reported of Gladstone's apprehensions, 
that I came to a resolve of abandoning the scheme in 
toto — and have acted upon it. I think I have a view, 
and have been happier than I have been about it for a 
long time. 

Now don't you be hasty, and think that this is a great 
sacrifice, and that I am knocking under to people in authority, 
or to such men as Gladstone ; no such thing. I can take 
no such credit to myself. I assure you, to find that the 
English Church cannot bear the Lives of her Saints (for so 
I will maintain, in spite of Gladstone, is the fact) does not 
tend to increase my faith and confidence in her. Nor am I 
abandoning publication because I abandon this particular 
measure. Rather, I consider I have been silent now for 
several years on subjects of the day, and need not fear now 
to speak. 

I mean to publish now such Lives as are in type, or are 
written, but as separate works. If these gradually mount 
up towards the fulness of such an idea as the ' Lives of the 
Saints ' contemplated, in progress of time, well and good. 
And now, as publishing them separately I have thought I 
might act more on my own judgement — and consequently, 
while I have thankfully kept the alterations on the point 
of ' exceptions ' and ' impropriations,' which you have led 
me to make, I have put back again ' merit ' &c. &c., altera- 
tions to which I submitted with a bad grace. I am con- 
vinced that those passages are not flying in persons' faces, 
but are parts of a whole, and express ideas which cannot 
otherwise be expressed. I have altered the first page about 
' hopes for the future.' 

Further I have serious thoughts of giving in to the idea 
which some people have, of setting up a review or something 
of the kind, and supporting it as well as I can. And I should 


not be loth to discuss in it such questions as the Pope's 

Now the question is, what you have to say generally 
to such a course. I should like to know how it strikes you. 
And could you give me any hint about publishers ? I 
suppose not. What strikes me at first, is to make overtures 
to some such man as Toovey, and bring him forward in our 
line. We want a man in our line. 

Thanks for all the trouble you have taken. 

To THE Same 

Oriel College : December i6, 1843. 

You have not understood me about Gladstone, doubtless 
through my own fault. The truth is, I am making a great 
concession — not to him, but to my respectful feelings towards 
him. I thought you could see it, and only feared you would 
think it greater than it really was. So I tried to put you 
on your guard. 

1. I withdrew my name from any plan. This is no slight 
thing. I have frequent letters from people I do not know 
on the subject of the Lives of Saints, and doubt not it is 
raising much talk and interest. A name always gives point 
to an undertaking — considering my connection with the 
'Tracts for the Times,' it would especially do this. You 
yourself and Badeley (whom please, thank, for some kind 
trouble he has been at about a book for me) said, ' Delay 
the plan, for you will be putting yourself at the head of the 
extreme party — the '' B(ritish) C(ritic) '' having stopped : ' 
now, I am more than delaying, I am withdrawing my name. 
I am sure this is a great thing, even though my initials 
occurred to this or that life. 

2. I have given up continuity, and that certain and 
promised. 128 pp. were to come out every month, and the 
work was to go on to the end, except as unforeseen accidents 
interfered (as they have). Now we know how difficult 
it is to keep people up to their work. The work is now left 
to the unpledged zeal of individuals. And there will be 


nothing methodical or periodical in it to force itself upon 

I do consider, then, I have given up a great deal. But 
what I have not given up is the wish that the work should 
be done ; only I have put it under great disadvantages — 
so great that I think it never will be done — at the utmost 
fragments will be done — and that without method, precision, 
unity, and a name. 

And why have I done this ? i. Sincerely because I 
thought both by heading it and by giving it system I should 
be administering a continual blister to the kind feelings 
toward me, and the conscientious views of persons I respect 
as I do G. I assure you it is no pleasant thing to me to 
lose their good opinion, though I can't expect much to keep 
it. 2. I fear to put up something the Bishops may aim at. 
I may be charged at, as the Tracts have been. Then I 
should be in a very false position. I must move forward 
or backward, and I dread compulsory moves. 3. What 
is the most immediate and practical point, I don't thiuk 
I could get a publisher to take on him the expenses of a 
series, but few people would dread the risk of a single life 
of one or two hundred pages. Accordingly, I thiak I shall 
publish the one of which you saw a bit, at once, to see 
whether it sells. That I shall to a certain extent be con- 
nected with it, and that I shall aim at making it a series, 
is certain ; and this, as I said, was my reason for warning 
you that I was not giving way to G. so fully as I appeared 
to be. 

I will add as to yourself, that my distinction between 
your ecclesiastical and theological remarks were not a 
principle, with which I started. It was a reflection which 
came upon me on making an induction after I had thought 
on your objections one by one. 

P.S.— I hope the danger of the ' Dublin ' is passing away. 

What set me most urgently on my present notice, was 

that / could not help it. Tho' I gave up the series, which 

I wished to do. Lives remained written or printed or promised, 

which would appear anyhow, or scarcely could not. ' 




To THE Same 

December 19, 1843. 

Do you know whether I have ever, that is, whether I 
have lately, for I suppose they are synonymous, taken the 
liberty of asking Gladstone's acceptance of any of my 
books ? If you know nothing, and I think you would know 
if I had, will you send the inclosed to Rivington, (being so 
kind as to seal it) and make some speech to Gladstone for 
me ? 

P.S. — I have written very badly. The inclosed is to 
tell Rivington to send G. a copy of my Sermons ' from the 

Archdeacon Manning to J. H. Newman 

Lavington : Feast of St. Thomas [December 21], 1843. 

My dear Newman, — Until an hour before I left London 
on Saturday I had intended to stay Monday in Oxford 
chiefly for the purpose of coming to Littlemore. I was 
obliged to go to London to meet a person whom I was 
preparing for confirmation the next day. 

I have been reading your last volume of Sermons. What 
I felt in reading the 21st to the end of the book, I will not 
try to say. There are only two things I will notice. The 
end of Sermon XXIV. p. 430 ^ is what I have been trying 
to say to others and to myself. You have said it in a way 
to which I can add nothing. If only this were ever kept 
alive I should feel that there is a hope of all good before us : 
whatever be the chastisements and humiliation through 
which we reach it. I send you the enclosed, though I 
know you will find much to censure, because I do not wish 
you to think me other than I am, and because your words 
referred to above are what I was trying to say at p. 15 at 
the bottom. I know that I have omitted the adverse and 
counter view of our state — as I did the other day : and I 
have done so designedly because it seemed to me that so 

^ Sermons on Subjects of the Day, p. 380. Uniform Edition. 


many were labouring that side, and so few of those who 
acknowledge, and feel the evils were even alluding to the 
other. Men seemed to me to be growing slack and soured 
from a feeling of hopelessness, and to be irritated rather 
than stirred up to work. The other thing is what you say 
of Orpah at the bottom of p. 455.1 x felt it bitterly from 
the thought that you might think my words the smooth 
words of one that would leave you for the world. I will 
use no professions of attachment to you, or of my own 
intentions and desires for myself. I had rather submit 
to any thoughts in your heart, or in others. You have a 
hard Hfe and an empty home before you, and so have I, 
and I trust we shall walk together long enough to trust the 
singleness of each other's eye and to love each other as 

What I have gone through since I received your last 
letter you will know better than I can tell you. I have 
been overthrown by all manner of feelings : among which 
the thought that you have been grieved at me, or dis- 
appointed by me has made me have the saddest days I 
have known a long time. 

My dear Newman, do not suspect me as an empty 
pretender if I say that the only thing that has kept me up 
in the last six years and more of trial, and the only thing 
I look for until death is to save the Church in which I was 
bom again. Doubtful thoughts about it are dreadful — 
and seem to take all things from me. 

I could not help writing this to you, for it has been in 
my mind day after day : and yet I have shrunk from 
doing it, until I read, your words about Orpah. And after 
all I feel that all this may seem to you no better than 
her kiss. 

May we be guided and kept from and against ourselves. 

Believe me, my dear Newman, 

Ever yours affectionately, 

H. E. Manning. 

1 Ibid.^-p.^402, 


The Sermons spoken of are ' Sermons Bearing on Subjects 
of the Day/ Sermon XXIV is entitled ' Ehjah the Prophet 
of the Latter Days.' The passage alluded to by Manning 
is the concluding paragraph. ' What want we then but 
faith in our church ? .... If we have a secret misgiving 
about her, all is lost. . . . Let it not be so with us . . . let 
us accept her as God's gift and our portion ; let us imitate 
him who, when he was " by the bank of Jordan " took 
the mantle of Elijah, that fell from him, and smote the 
waters, and said, " Where is the Lord God of Elijah ? " She 
is like the mantle of Elijah, a relic from Him who is gone 
up on high.' In the last phase of his Anglicanism 
Newman dwelt much on Elijah, the prophet sent to the 
schismatical kingdom of Israel (see ' Apologia,' pp. 152-154). 
In a visitation charge delivered the previous July Arch- 
deacon Manning had said, ' The first condition of our use- 
fulness at this day is this, — a steadfast and thorough faith 
in the life and truth of the Church of England,' &:c. 

J. H. Newman to Archdeacon Manning 

December 24, 1843. 

My dear Manning, — How can I thank you enough for 
your most kind letter received last night ? — and what can 
have led you to entertain the thought that I could ever be 
crossed by the idea which you consider may have been 
suggested to me by the name of Orpah ? Really, unless 
it were so sad a matter, I should smile ; the thought is as 
far from me as the Antipodes. Rather I am the person who 
to myself always seem, and reasonably, the criminal ; I 
cannot afford to have hard thoughts which can more 
plausibly be exercised against myself. And yet to speak 
of myself, how could I have done otherwise than I have 
done or better ? I own indeed to great presumption and 
recklessness in my work of writing on ecclesiastical subjects, 
on various occasions, yet still I have honestly trusted our 
Church and wished to defend her as she wishes to be 
defended. I wasn't surely wrong in defending her on that 
basis which our divines have ever built and on which alone 
they can pretend to build. And how could I foresee that 
when I examined that basis I should feel it to require a 


system different from hers and that the Fathers to which 
she led me would lead me from her ? I do not see then 
that I have been to blame ; yet it would be strange if I had 
heart to blame others who are honest in maintaining what 
I am abandoning. 

It is no pleasure to me to differ from friends — no comfort 
to be estranged from them — no satisfaction or boast to 
have said things which I must unsay. Surely I will remain 
where I am as long as I can. I think it right to do so. If 
my misgivings are from above, I shall be carried on in spite 
of my resistance. I cannot regret in time to come having 
struggled to remain where I found myself placed. And 
believe me, the circumstance of such men as yourself being 
contented to remain is the strongest argument in favour 
of my own remaining. It is my constant prayer, that if 
others are right I may be drawn back — that nothing may 
part us. 

Thank you for your charge and the passage you point 
out. I was pleased to see the coincidence between us. 

I am, my dear Manning, 

Ever yours affectionately, 
John H. Newman. 

This letter was also sent to Gladstone, who made the 
following suggestions in a letter to Manning dated Dec- 
ember 31.^ Could Manning by a discreet use of his know- 
ledge influence some of the Bishops in the direction of 
being more moderate in their charges ? ' Are there any 
Bishops — I think there must be many — who believe that 
the event we know to be possible would be, to the Church, 
an inexpressible calamity ? These are the men whom to 
contemplate in any practical measure.' Newman might 
be warned ' of the immense consequences that may hang 
upon his movements.' ' Cords of silk should one by one 
be thrown over him to bind him to the Church. Every 
manifestation of sympathy and confidence in him, as a 
man, must have some small effect.' This last suggestion 
shows that Gladstone had got rid of the unfavourable 
impression made upon his mind by his misunderstanding 
of the second of Newman's letters to Manning. 

^ Lathbury, Letters and Correspondence on Church and Religion of 
W, E. Gladstone, vol. i. pp. 290 fi. 



' I come, O mighty Mother ! I come, but I am far from home. Spare 
me a little ; I come with what speed I may, but I am slow of foot, and 
not as others, O mighty Mother ! ' 

During the year 1844 Newman was still busy with his St. 
Athanasius. The brief introductory note to the second 
volume of the ' Select Treatises ' &c., merely saying, ' The 
Preliminary Matter is unavoidably postponed/ is dated 
December 6. In regard to his doubts, he seems almost 
to have given up struggling against them, but he did nothing 
to bring them to an issue till the beginning of 1845, when he 
set to work upon his Essay on Development. He was 
contented to wait, looking on, it might almost be said like 
a passive spectator, at the workings of his own mind. 
Meanwhile he was glad that his state of unsettlement should 
gradually become known, for he did not wish that people 
should go on pinning their faith to him, or that there should 
be any panic and confusion if eventually he did leave the 
Church of England. In July a Bishop announced gleefully 
that ' The adherents of Mr. Newman are few in number. A 
short time will now sufhce to prove this fact. It is well known 
that he is preparing for secession ; and, when that event 
takes place, it will be seen how few will go with him.' Sumus 
homines mortales . . . lutea vasa portantes, quae faciunt 
invicem angustias. Sed si angustiantur vasa carnis, dila- 
tentur spatia caritatis — the spaces of charity in the Bishop's 
breast might have been widened had there been someone 
to tell him that if Mr. Newman's adherents were few in 
number, it was so by Mr. Newman's deliberate choice and 
act. The distress he was causing his friends, the discomfiture 
of those who had loyally stood by him in the matter of 
Tract 90, pierced Newman to the heart ; and he was not 
wholly insensible to a feeling of personal humiliation at 
having to admit that he had changed his opinions. But all 



this was nothing compared with the thought that he was 
doing the very thing which of all others he most hated — 
unsettling men's religious convictions. The theory of 
the Via Media elaborated in the Prophetical Office of the 
Church and others of his writiags, had satisfied , the reason 
and conscience of thousands who before were without 
much definite religious belief. Now he was telling them 
that it was untenable. Who could estimate the effect of 
such a shock upon their minds ? How many, their first 
great venture of faith having been brought to naught, must 
be led to despair of ever finding religious truth, and even 
though they made no change of profession would have their 
spiritual life numbed by uncertainty and doubt ? 

The reader will probably like to know how Newman's 
days were passed during these times of perplexity. Some 
interesting documents concerning his life at Littlemore 
have fortunately been preserved. One is a time-table 
jotted down on a half -sheet of notepaper in 1842 : 

5-64 Matins and Lauds ^ 

6J-7 Breakfast. 

']-']\ Prime. 

7J-10 Study, etc., with 

lo-ii Morning Prayers — 

1 1-2 Study, etc., with 

2-3 Recreation. 

3-3! Evening Prayers — 

Chapel. 2 
3I-4I Recreation. 
4J-6 Study, etc., with None. 
6-6 J Supper. 
^\~l\ Recreation. 
7^-9 J Study, etc. 
9^-10 Vespers. 
10-10 J Compline. 
10^5 Sleep, etc. 

No talking except between 2 and 7J. 



. \\ hrs 

Study . . . . 

. 9 


. I 


. . 2i 


, . 6| 


1 For the Divine Office the Roman Breviary was used ; but the Anti- 
phons of our Lady were conscientiously omitted as containing direct 
Invocation; which was not sanctioned by the Enghsh Church. 

3 I.e. the AngUcan Service at the pubhc chapel. 


This is how Lent was kept at Littlemore in 1844. It 
was ' lighter this year/ 

' I. We have eaten no flesh meat (including suet) on 
Sundays or week-days. 

' 2. We have not broken fast till 12. 

'3. At 12 we have taken a slice of bread. The full meal 
at 5 — ^but we had the choice (which perhaps we never used) 
of taking the full meal at 12, and the bread at 5. 

' 4. There was no restriction on tea at any hour early 
or late. 

* 5. Nor [at the full meal] on butter, sugar, salt, fish, etc. 
Wine on Sundays.' 

' I have not/ he added, * felt any rule so light since I 
have attempted anything. This I attribute to drinking 
very freely of tea, as early as 8 or 9 a.m. with sugar in it. 
I am told I do not look ill.' 

It must be remembered that Newman and his friends 
were reviving the discipline of fasting. They had to ascer- 
tain what was practicable by actual experience. 

They went into retreat twice a year, in Lent and in 
Advent, for seven days.^ Newman made notes of the various 
meditations, how he had got on with them, what thoughts 
and practical resolutions they suggested to him, &c. He 
kept his mind rigidly fixed on the subject of the meditation. 
Only once, and then it was quite in order, does the subject 
of his religious doubts come up. 'I renewed my surrender 
of myself in all things to God, to do with me what He 
would at any cost. Various great trials struck me.' He 
enumerated four, and added, ' I considered that God is 
used to accept offers, but, I trust, he will not exact such.' 
One of these ' great trials ' was ' having to join the Church 
of Rome.' ^ 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

January 22, 1844. 

My very dear Newman, — It is a longful time since we 
had any communication, and something within me tells 

1 They used the Exercises of St. Ignatius, or books based upon them. 

* The reader who is puzzled at the frame of mind which made such a 
prayer possible should study Sermons XXI-XXIV, in the volume Sermons 
on Subjects of the Day, especially the one entitled ' Elijah the Prophet of 
the Latter Days,' where much is made of the fact that the Prophet did not 
bid the ten schismatical tribes return to their allegiance to Judah, and 
worship God in Jerusalem. While he was still in perplexity, Newman 
seems almost unconsciously to have looked upon a call to join the Church 
as something like a special vocation. 


me, it is a heartless thing to let a Christmas and New Year 
come and go, and not say one word to you, to whom under 
God one is indebted for so very much of the comfort and 
hope which they have been allowed to bring with them. 
Whether one is deceiving one's self or not, who can tell ? 
. . . but, still, so it is, that, in spite of perplexities, I do 
not know when a year has passed over my head, on the 
whole, with so much of peace, as this last. May it only 
not prove a delusion ! 

And you, dear friend, in the meantime, what have 
you not been undergoing, and little have I felt for you in 
comparison of what you felt and did for me ; and even now 
I very much fear, from two or three sadly toned sentences 
in Pusey's last letters (though he neither names nor describes 
anyone) that your troubles are unassuaged. ... I think and 
think, it seems all to no purpose ; for when I come to set 
it down, it will be only telling you over again what you 
have yourself told me and others. These, however, are some 
of my impressions : — 

First, I feel more strongly with every month's, week's, 
day's experience, the danger of tempting God, and the deep 
responsibility I should have to bear, were I to forsake this 
communion ; and yet with the same lapse of time one seems 
to feel more and more the truth and beauty and majesty of 
so much which they have and we seem at least to have not. 

Secondly, one is at times very, very strongly impressed 
with the thought of the Evil One, how surely he would 
endeavour to ruin the good work, supposing it begun, in the 
English Church, by laying hold of any undiscerned weakness 
or ill tendency in the agents to entice or drive them out of it. 
Such tendencies one can imagine in your case ; among the 
rest a certain restlessness, a longing after something more, 
something analogous to a very exquisite ear in music, which 
would keep you, I should think, in spite of yourself, intel- 
lectually and morally dissatisfied wherever you were. If 
you were in a convent, you would be forced to subdue it, 
and, as it were, swallow it down ; may it not perhaps be 
your calling now to do the same, though under no such 
definite rule, for others' sake as well as your own ? May it 


not be your duty, according to your own line of argument 
just made public, to suppress your misgivings, nay what 
seem your intellectual convictions, as you would any other 
bad thoughts, making up your mind that the conclusion 
is undutiful, and therefore there must be some delusion in 
the premisses ? 

Another thought one has is of the utter confusion and 
perplexity, the astounding prostration of heart and mind, 
into which so many would be thrown, were their guide 
and comforter to forsake them all at once, in the very act, 
as it would seem to them, of giving them dii*ections which 
they most needed. I really suppose that it would be to 
thousands quite an indescribable shock, a trial almost too 
hard to be borne, making them sceptical about everything 
and everybody. 

Surely, when it is a person's duty (as St. Paul's) to take 
such a step as that, the tokens from above will be such (one 
naturally expects,) as no one could mistake ; and may we 
not piously believe, that, where it is the will of Divine 
Providence that such persons as Pusey (for example) should 
leave their present communion, something equivalent to 
the Voice will occur, such as an unequivocal act of heresy 
on the part of our Church, leaving no doubt on the mind ; 
and that, till such tokens are given, it is His will men 
should stay where they are. I am running on, I fear, not 
very wisely ; and I wish I may not be distressing you ; 
but, if I could express myself better, I believe I really 
mean what I have learned from yourself. 

And another thought, which has been much on my mind 
lately, and which I mentioned to Oakeley the other day in 
reference to his plan about St. Bernard, is, If the Medieval 
system is really the intended development of Primitive 
CathoHcity, is it not the most natural way for the EngHsh 
Church to recover it through Primitive CathoHcity, instead 
of being urged directly to it ; and therefore even on medieval 
principles are we not doing the best in confining ourselves 
for the present to those things in which the earher Church 
is unquestionably with us ? I do not know whether this is 


worth anything ; but I put down whatever occurs to me ; 
and as far as I see at present, this would be a safe and dutiful 
rule with regard to the Enghsh Church, yet ample and large 
enough for far more improvement than the most sanguine 
dare expect in our time. 

I am writing in great ignorance, and very Hkely quite 
beside the mark. If I pain or disturb you, forgive me. 
Somehow or other I was almost forced to write. You know 
I see you looking at me day after day, and I must speak to 
you now and then ; and, when I speak, I must say what is 
in my head. May it do no harm, if it does no good. I am 
sure my account is heavy enough without that. 

Wilson seems steadily better ; and I am in great hopes 
that he will be able to stay with us comfortably. Do not 
trouble yourself to write to me, except, when you can do it 
conveniently and without irksomeness, and do not speak 
of things which perhaps you had rather not. I wish you 
may be able to report well of your sister and of Bowden. 
My brother is better than he was — ^but yet I fear decidedly 
not quite well. 

Ever and ever I hope, 

Your affectionate and grateful, 

J. K. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : January 23, 1844. 

My dear Keble, — It is not for want of thinking of you 
and meaning to write to you that I keep silent, but I have so 
great a reluctance to take up my pen, though I have long 
owed you a letter — and I do not know how to talk about 
myself, even for fear of saying not [what ?] is not exact about 
my feehngs, of saying what is unreal and the hke. Yet I 
do owe you a letter and mean some time to pay it. 

More thanks to you than I can give, for your present most 
kind letter, which is just like you. Thanks for what you 
tell me about yourself, and thanks for your kind anxiety 
about me. 


I am in no distress of mind at present — that is, whatever 
is truth, and whatever is not, I do not feel called to do any- 
thing but go on where I am, and this must be peace and 
quietness — and whatever is before us, in this one may 
rej oice, and not take thought for the morrow. I fear I must 
say I have a steadily growing conviction about the Enghsh 
Church — you will understand what I mean — and this I 
think without any effort of mine. The early Church has 
all along been my Hne of study — and I am still occupied 
upon it. For some time, I suppose, I shall be upon ' the 
Arians ' and the second part of the volume of St. Athanasius. 
It is this hne of reading, and no other, which has led me 
Romeward. Not that I read it with that view. 

I wish to resist, as I always have — and think it a duty. 
I am sure, if it be right to go forward, I shall be forced 
on in spite of myself. Somehow I cannot feel the question 
of dutifulness so strongly as it is sometimes put. Was 
it undutifulness to the Mosaic Law, to be led on to the 
Gospel ? was not the Law from God ? How could a Jew, 
formerly or now, ever become a Christian, if he must at 
all hazards resist convictions and for ever ? How could 
a Nestorian or Monophysite join the Catholic Church but 
by a similar undutifulness ? 

What I wish is, not to go by my own judgment, but 
by something external, like the pillar of the cloud in the 
desert. Such is the united movement of many. The 
publishing those Sermons is like Gideon's fleece. If it 
were permanently to stop people, this would have a great 
influence on me. I should think there was something 
real in the view. What I fear is, that they are only inge- 
nious ; but the event alone can show this, and it seemed 
to me right to make the experiment, that is, rather, burying 
what might be a talent not to publish them [sic\. A simple- 
hearted and clever young woman, who had been per- 
plexed with doubts about Rome, on reading my University 
Sermons, suddenly rose from her chair and said * This 
is what I wanted, this satisfies me.' How they satisfied 
her I have no notion, or whether they will eventually. 


But still if this kind of effect did follow from what I had 
written, (or from what anyone else wrote) it would tend 
greatly to convince me that my duty was where I am. 
On the other hand I must not conceal, that letters, which 
I receive continually from persons whom I know and 
whom I know not, show me that a movement is going on 
in cases which are little suspected and in minds which 
are struggling against it. 

Ever3rthing is hid from us as to the effect of things. 
People are unsettled as it is. As years go on, they either 
will become settled, or they will be gradually more and 
more unsettled. If my thoughts had been led through 
the early Church to Rome, why should not others ? We 
know nothing of the effects of one's own hypothetical 
acts. There have been events ten thousand times more 
unsettling than the change of individuals now. St. Paul 
must have unsettled all the good and conscientious people 
in the Jewish Church. Unsettling may be a blessing, even 
where minds are not already unsettled. 

I hope I am not wrong, but I have lately been praying 
that ' if / am right, Pusey, Manning etc. may be brought 
forward ; but if Pusey, Manning etc. are right, I may 
be brought back — ^that nothing, if it be possible, may 
separate us.' 

One thing I will add — I sometimes have uncomfort- 
able feelings as if I should not like to die in the English 
Church. It seems to me that, while Providence gives one 
time, it is even a call upon one to make use of it in deliber- 
ateness and waiting — ^but that, did He cut short one's 
hours of grace, this would be a call to make up one's mind 
on what seemed most probable. 

I have written all this, as it occurred to me, only that 
you might see my state of mind — not in the way of argument. 

I wish I could sufficiently thank you for, or duly feel, 
the kindness of your letter. May God bless you for it. 

What you told me about Wilson was a great relief 
— Bowden, thank God, is certainly better. It looks as if 
a crisis were passed, but we must be cautious in speaking. 


1 wish my sister were really better, but her recovery will 
be very slow. 

Ever yours most affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

February 21, 1844. 

I must write one line to you this day, because it is 
the 2ist of February, 1 and who is more bound than I to 
remember you with all manner of good wishes ? May 
this Lent be blessed and peaceful to you, and to the many 
who more or less have been caused by Providence to 
depend on you. 

I have hardly time to say more ; but, as a second 
edition of your new Sermons is advertised, I will mention an 
erratum which my wife has observed ; in p. 150 line 16 
* The flood of God's grace keeps it level.' Should it not be 
' its level ' ? It is a little thing to be sure. 

Another thought which has come into my mind on 
reading your 15th Sermon ^ is about the application of the 
second commandment, which one would expect to be as 
literal as that of the fourth. And, if it be so, is it not a 
caution against the authorised practice of the greater 
part of Christendom ? And, if this be so, would it now 
be well to mention it somewhere in the Sermon or in a 
note ? 

Ever your thankful and affectionate, 

J. Keble. 
J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : Feb. 26/44. 

My dear Keble, — Thanks for your kind remembrance 
and thoughts of me on the 21st. 

The second Edition of my Sermons has been out some 

^ Newman's birthday. 

2 In Sermons on Subjects of the Day. 


time. I am vexed that the misprint you notice should be 
in two Editions. 

As to the second Commandment, with reference to 
Sermon 15, I have been accustomed to think that in the 
words ' Thou shalt not make to thyself ' the force of the 
sentence lies in * to thyself.' The sin was not in bowing 
down to a created emblem of the Creator, but to a self- 
devised emblem. In Exodus xxxiii. 10, the people fall 
down before the cloudy pillar as the token of the unseen 
God. They were told in like manner to look upon the 
Brazen Serpent in order that they might live. On the other 
hand that the fault lay in the ' making to themselves ' 
emblems is implied in Amos v. 26 (so also Acts vii. 43) where 
vid. St. Jerome's comment, and in Deut. iv. 15-18 the fault 
is making to themselves a likeness which they had no means 
divinely provided of making ; * Ye saw no similitude.' 
And so Jeroboam sacrificed ' unto the calves which he had 
made ' ' in the month which he had devised of his own heart.' 
The same emphasis occurs in Judges xviii. I should say 
then, if asked, that the sin denounced in the second Com- 
mandment is unauthorised worship. That Protestants are 
in many ways guilty of this sin is evident ; indeed they 
would confess that they act of their own minds, and would 
count it a part of their Christian freedom, liberty of con- 
science etc. to do so. Whether the Greek and Latin 
Churches are guilty of it or not, at least they deny it, and 
say that the Church has the divinely granted right of in- 
novating or adding in matters of ceremony and worship, 
(whether this is true or not). From what Palmer of Mag- 
dalen says, one should fear that the Russian lower classes 
do almost worship graven images. I suppose they are much 
lower and more ignorant than the R. Catholics — except 
indeed in places half heathen, as in South America. 

What has been argued above about the words ' to thy- 
self ' seems to fit in to what forms one main part of the 
Sermon in question ; the principle that Scripture prohibi- 
tions are not simple prohibitions but secundum quid. The 
Sabbath is done away, not simpliciter, but as a carnal 


ordinance. I recollect as long ago as 1834, long before 
I felt the force of the argument for Rome, being perplexed 
at seeing that the same distinction which enabled us to 
condemn circumcision as a carnal ordinance yet to maintain 
baptism, would avail for the cultus imaginum, as if it was 
forbidden to the Jews because the heathen images were 
carnal, likenesses of devils, etc. etc., which is not the case 
with the images of Saints. But enough of this. 

Ever yours very affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

February 29, 1844. 

I have had several letters lately from and to-day 

met him at Winchester at his request, and (this is in confid- 
ence) I fear it is too plain . . . that his mind is seriously 
affected. ... He is likely enough to be attacking you . . . 

... I dare say you are sufficiently pestered with 
remarks on your publications, but I will mention what 
occurs to me without scruple, because I know you will not 
be affronted at them, and I shall not be affronted, if you 
take no notice of them. 

I will just say then i. that I should like the passage to be 
a little more guarded, in which you speak of our Lord eating 
and drinking in appearance at least, p. 32,^ because it is a 
passage which sets persons thinking ' What possibly can 
he mean ? ' And some will think irreverently, some with a 
perplexed fear of irreverence ; while you, I dare say, with 
a word or two could make the whole matter comparatively 

Thank you for your reply to my question about the 
second Commandment. I should not doubt the correctness 
of the view, as being at least a great part of the meaning of 
the Commandment. Still, if we make it the meaning, will 
it not strike most persons as partaking very much of the 

^ p. 28 in Uniform Edition, where the clause ' in His own words ' is 
substituted to meet Keble's objection. 


same kind of subtlety which you complain of in some 
expositions of the fourth ? 

I think I ought to add, that I have had it remarked to 
me by one whose opinion on these matters I think you 
would value, that the tone of this your last volume is in 
general, from whatever cause, more positive and dogmatic 
than the former ones ; sometimes, it was hinted, quite 
startling, from the determinate way in which so and so 
is laid down to be the only possible sense of Scripture in 
such and such places. This was what I understood to be 
meant, and I thought it on the whole as well that you 
should know that such a thought came into the mind of a 
considerate person, and one greatly disposed to defer to 
every word of yours. ^ 

I am very sorry to understand from letters of Pusey^s, 
that he is greatly pained at the unreserved way in which some 
of our friends are going on to recommend the whole of the 
Roman devotional system, especially as regards St. Mary. 
Surely, they can hardly know how much he suffers by it : 
else, it is indeed a heavy responsibility they take on them. 

The thought will always recur that I have no right to 
write like this on these matters ; but, however, I have 
written, and you will kindly bear with me, I am sure of 
that. Therefore do not tax yourself to write any sooner 
than is quite convenient. There seems a chance of my 
coming up before long about this Divinity Statute. 

Ever your thankful and affectionate, 

J. Keble. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : March 2, 744 . 

My dear K., — Your remark about A. P. P. quite confirms 
what, alas, I guessed. I am truly grieved at it. 

Thank you for your question about my positiveness. 
It is meant for my own consideration, I know ; and I should 

1 In the copy which he made of Keble's letters before he parted with 
the originals, Newman wrote in the margin of this paragraph, ' Vid. letter 
of Sept. 4, 1843, about Knox.' 


not speak about it, except that I am so little conscious of it, 
and for other reasons think it so far from the case, that I 
wish you to get some instances specified which I may think 
about. I have observed, that whenever a reader agrees or 
is not startled, he sees nothing positive in what he would 
call positive, were it new to him or questionable. Not 
that I mean to say that I am not positive in this last volume 
— but I think I am positive in the others quite as much 
i.e. sententious. The ' other reason ' I allude to is this — • 
that the Sermons have been written at very different times 
in the course of the last twelve years, and have not much 
been altered for publication — one was written in 1832, 
two 1836, two in 1838, ten in 1840-41 — only seven out of 
twenty-six in 1843. And they were written among other 
sermons. I do not think then they are likely to be marked 
by any character of mind which does not attach to z}X mv 

Thank you also for what you say about p. 32. I have 
looked at it — but you must kindly state more definitely 
what you mean when you next write, since at present I do 
not get into your idea enough to alter the passage by it. 

If you allude to R. WiUiams and his Breviary plan 
as paining Pusey, I really know very Httle about it. I 
beheve he is content to wait any time, but does not Hke 
to pubhsh it with alterations or what he would call muti- 
lations — and that from reverence for the Breviary. Per- 
haps I ought to add, though it will pain you, that for 
myself I have no difficulty in the Breviary in toto, though 
you are the first person to whom I say so. 

It comes into my head you may mean Oakeley's plan 
of translating St. Bernard. I wish I had had any idea 
that P's feeling was what you represent, since I would not 
have subscribed to it. As it is, my name, I beheve, is in 
print. My opinion about the pubhcation was not asked — 
and since I saw the Prospectus, what I have said has been 
to throw cold water upon it. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 


P.S. — I am tempted to quote your own words about 
my p. 32 * What possibly can he mean ? ' I have not a 
dream of what you are alluding to or think I had in mind. 
By ' in appearance at least ' I mean our Lord's saying 
that He ' came eating and drinking/ or if not, yet this was 
what people thought of Him, as He did not come with St. 
John's visible austerity. I neither meant more than this, 
nor can I conceive what or why people should think I 
meant more. 

Sunday. — I have just seen the ' B. Mag.' which also alludes 
to these words. Nothing but the extreme sensitiveness 
and nervousness of people (which I cannot of course wonder 
at) could so extort a hidden meaning out of plain words. 
I suppose my best course in another edition is to leave 
out ' at least in outward appearance.' I put them in, 
as feehng it irreverent to say our Lord came ' eating and 
drinking ' as if it impHed that He was a ' wine-bibber.' 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

March 3, 1844. 

I shall not be able to reply to all your note this evening, 
but I will say a word or two. 

With regard to the words in p. 32, my saying people 
would say * What can he mean ? ' (which I am sorry for, 
fearing that it has pained you) I merely meant that they 
would be perplexed to know what the meaning was — not 
that they would put a bad meaning, as the ' B(ritish) M(aga- 
zine) ' probably has, and as another journal, first cousin 
to it, I know has. I myself put the same meaning to the 
words which you do, but I do not think this would strike 
every reader, because, the words which are qualified being 
our Saviour's own, it would not strike them that they 
needed quaUfication, and they would be looking out for 
some other meaning. 

Pusey is certainly perplexed by what R. Williams 
has lately written about the Breviary, because it seems 


to him and to me also not quite to agree with what he 
wrote to me before ; but I think his, R. Ws', feehng very 
natural and would not on any account press him against 
it. Pray tell P. this, if the subject is started between you, 
for I have just been writing to him and have not sufficiently 
expressed this. Of course Williams' drawing back is about 
as great a check to us as we could have, but it would be 
exceedingly painful, had he given way and repented after- 
wards. I don't think P. in what he wrote to me was think- 
ing either of him or of Oakeley's St. Bernard, but rather 
of a plan which he hears Mr. Christie (Albany) has of pub- 
hshing the ' Paradisus Animae ' entire (I conclude in EngHsh) 
as also the 'Horae Diumae.' 

For my own part, until I could be convinced that this 
Church has no authority, I seem to see my way clearly 
thus far, that I ought to lay myself out upon those additions 
to her system and ritual which I am sure are in Antiquity, 
such as Monasticism, Prayers for the Dead, etc., rather than 
upon those which by consent of all parties were not de- 
veloped till afterwards. 

I should have been pained, I dare say, at what you say 
of your feeling about the Breviary, had I not supposed 
from former letters that you had laid aside your objections. 
My grand swallow of pain on the subject was perhaps three 
quarters of a year ago, when I received a long letter of 
yours and retired into a deserted old chalk pit to read it. I 
cannot tell you with what sort of fancy I look at the place now. 

About the positiveness I cannot say much just now. 
The impression was that in the manner of quoting Scripture 
this sort of form occurred continually, ' Such a text cannot 
mean anything but so and so.' It had not struck the 
person before, and was not now connected with any par- 
ticular difference of opinion. I will apply for instances.* 

Ever your affectionate and grateful, 

J. K. 

* (I never got any — and don't think they were to be found. The 
instances ought to have gone originally with the charge. It illustrates 
how coloured from this time the views were of me, and my words and 
deeds.— J. H. N.) 


Newman was continually being asked to contradict 
reports that he had left the Church of England. 

; A Clergyman to J. H. Newman 

March ii, 1844. 

Reverend Sir, — A Revd. H. Stowell, perhaps unknown 
to you, ' President of the Manchester and Salford Protestant 
and Reformation Society,' has publicly and distinctly stated 
that ' Mr. Newman has been obliged to leave the Church of 
England and go over to Rome.' I enclose the extract from 
his speech. Would you be kind enough to say for your own 
sake, and for our satisfaction, whether this be so. Whether 
or not you hold the ' Cure of Souls ' at Littlemore in the 
Diocese of Oxford. This would be a sufficient answer. As 
the statement has been publicly made at the Annual Meeting 
of the Reformation Society, I trust, if it is untrue, you will 
allow me to give it a pubhc contradiction through the same 
medium in which it has been circulated. I know this may 
be painful to you, but the case requires such a procedure. 

Yours most respectfully, etc. 

' J. H. Newman to a Clergyman 

March 12/44. 

Dear Sir, — I beg to thank you for your note just received, 
and the extract enclosed in it from a speech ascribed to a 
clergyman who is President of the Manchester and Salford 
Protestant and Reformation Society. 

In answer to your question whether I do not * hold and 
serve the Cure of Souls at Littlemore in the Diocese of 
Oxford,' I have to inform you that I am not in the discharge 
of any duties whatsoever in the Church of England. 

And in answer to your request that I would publicly 
contradict the statement contained in the speech above 
referred to, that ' Mr. Newman has been obliged to leave the 
Church of England, and go over to Rome,' I observe that 
this statement has no foundation whatever in fact. 

Thanking you for the kindness which has prompted 
your note, 

I am, etc. 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

Littlemore : March 14th, 1844. 

My dear Hope, — I ought to have answered your question 
before now. As to our Guest Chamber, it is quite at your 
service — but your question has somewhat fidgetted me, 
lest you should expect more than you actually ask about. 
Pray do not fancy us in such a state that we can profess 
a retreat, or anyone here able to conduct one. It has 
been our object among ourselves to attempt something 
of the sort several times, but (what may make you smile 
from its absurdity) without a director because we did not 
know where to go for one. And as to Passion week, we 
were obliged to take it last year from circumstances, and 
found it not fitted for anything so exhausting as a series 
of meditations — i.e. we rather overdid matters. I cannot 
then promise anything but a room where you may be your 
own master and have no one interfering with you — ^but 
so much I will gladly promise. Or if you wish a lodging 
in Littlemore, as being more quiet than Oxford, that I can 
easily get you. 

I have nothing to tell you about my own concerns. 
St. Stephen is liked much, and thought moderate. The 
Family of St. Richard, our next, is somewhat stronger and 
not so interesting, but very practical. I am rather anxious 
about it. We have several good ones coming afterwards, 
none very strong, but I shall not know much about them, 
as time goes on. I am glad that Gladstone is pleased with 
what I did. I did all I could under my then engagements 
and promises. Had such opinions as his and Pusey's 
happened to come sooner, I should have given up the whole 
plan. At the same time I do not think I have more than 
thrown it back, and when it revives, of course it will be 
in less safe hands than mine. Also, G. ought to be aware, 
as I daresay he is, that a series of thwartings such as I have 
experienced, (I do not mean, creates, which logically they 
cannot do) but realizes, verifies, substantizes, a (pavrao-ua 
of the English Church very unfavourable to her Catholicity. 


If a person is deeply convinced in his reason that her claims 
to Catholicity are untenable, but fears to trust his reason, 
such events, when they come upon him again and again, 
seem to do just what is wanting, corroborate his reason 
experimentally. They force upon his imagination and 
familiarize his moral perception with the conclusions of 
his intellect. Propositions become facts. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. W. Dodsworth 

Littlemore : March i8, 1844. 

It is not easy to return an answer to your question. 
In matter of fact we are full here, but I suppose we might 
make more room — ^but under the circumstances great 
caution is necessary for the sake of all parties in forming 
such relations as you speak of with anyone. I say under 
the circiunstances, for I suppose, had we any right to be 
considered what we are aiming at, we should be wrong 
to consult personal feelings and likings, or to be guided by 
knowledge of individuals, &c. I suppose a religious house 
ought frankly to receive anyone who shows himself in earnest, 
without respect of persons. But this presupposes a state 
of things very different from that under which we find 
ourselves. The principle of obedience does not exist in our 
Church — i.e. (as regards a religious House) the principle of 
assimilation, or a digestive power. We have no head to 
whom obedience is due. We have no ecclesiastical autho- 
rity, no episcopal blessing. We have no vows, obliging 
persons to be resigned, when the spirit or flesh rebels. We 
have no sacramental services, compensating for hardships, 
relieving the dreariness or monotony (as some would find 
it) of a retreat. For all these reasons it seems allowable or 
necessary to pick and choose our associates, and to make 
personal attachment the principle of admission. Else the 
whole attempt would be overset. Nor am I speaking 
merely theoretically. You see then I can return no answer 
to your question. 


One thing, I think, we seem to be agreed upon — though 
I should not like it mentioned — to make sacramental con- 
fession a sine qua non among those who belong to us — and 
as there is more than one priest here, this does not involve 
any general subjection to one person. 

Perceval called on me here. He had sent me a letter 
in the beginning of February, from which I inferred too 
truly how it was with him. He since has asked for it back 
— so I suppose means to publish it. It will not strike others 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

Oriel : May 14th, 1844. 

Your change of intention surprised, and did not quite 
please me, I mean I could not help fearing it might in part 
be owing to something I told you about myself. 

Yet I do not know how I can repent of having spoken to 
you. To have kept silence for five years, is giving oneself 
a long probation. If my confidence in myself bore any 
proportion to the strength of my persuasion, I should not be 
where I am, but I know that, the more free I may be (if so) 
from the influence of ordinary wrong motives, so I may be 
warped without knowing it by some more subtle bias. 

I thought over the question you put to me, and the only 
additional remark I had to make, was one I should have 
mentioned to you the first time I wrote, though it did not 
alter my conclusion, viz. I thought there might be this 
danger in your accepting the offices you have declined : — 
It seems to me that your tendency is to view things as a 
great scheme or game, and that when you once were in 
it, the fact that you were engaged in a game would have 
exerted a bias to keep you in it, even when reason &c. 
spoke differently. 

And now, in mentioning this peculiarity which I think 
I partly see in you, you will ujiderstaud what I mean above 


by alluding to the possibility of unknown biases in myself, 
which, if they exist, I would fain detect. I am not conscious 
of the one I have just mentioned. 

Ever yours sincerely, 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to Mr. Serjeant Bellasis 

Littlemore : June 8, 1844. 

I am much provoked with myself that, when I saw you 
yesterday morning, I did not thank you for your kind note 
sometime since about the Life of St. Stephen. At this time 
I meant to have written to you — then, I resolved to thank 
you the first opportunity ; that opportunity having slipt 
me, I now write. Your letter was the first opinion I had 
had upon it, and very acceptable it was. The second edition 
is now almost running out — and there is appearance of a 
third being probable. 

Had I any leisure when I was in London, I should have 
attempted the pleasure of calling on you, but I went up on a 
sort of business, and was kept to my work, such as it was. 

Do not think me rude to direct to you ' Esqr.' — I do not 
know what the etiquette is. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : June 8, 744 . 

My dear Keble, — Pattison wishes me to tell you that 
friends of his, a lady and daughter, are going into your 
Parish. So far you must know — at least you know them, 
and have been civil to them already — ^but what you do not 
know, and he wishes you to know, is, that they have come 
to Hursley to be * under your superintendence.' I do not 
know what the phrase means, but when he and I had 
repeated it several times, and no light seemed thrown 
upon it, I dropped the subject. Perhaps he does not know 
either. If you wish, I can inquire. 

I ought to take this opportunity of writing to you a 


long letter, to which I have a great repugnance because it 
is about myself — not to say that writing intelligibly makes 
my hand ache. But you should know my state of mind — 
and though the disgust of writing, and the thought of the 
worry and worse that my letters give you, almost deter 
me, and I don't know how I shall get on, I will attempt 
to do it. 

I have thought much lately of the words in Bishop 
Andrewes' Morning Prayer — ' Despise not the work of Thine 
own hands ' — he repeats it in various forms, as addressed 
to Each of the Persons of the Most Holy Trinity. May I 
not take comfort in this plea which they contain ? ' Thine 
Hands have made me and fashioned me.' I look back to 
past years, or rather to all my years since I was a boy, 
and I say, ' Is it come to this ? has God forgotten to be 
gracious ? would He have led me on so far to cast me off ? 
what have I done to be given over, if it be such, to a spirit 
of delusion ? where is my fault ? which has been the false 
step, if such there be ? ' 

I know He taketh up and setteth down — and of course 
I know that I have done enough to provoke Him to give me 
over and to deserve all that is evil. But still such is not 
His way, and I cannot get myself to believe that He means 
evil towards me, yet month by month my convictions 
grow in one direction. 

When I was a boy of fifteen, and living a life of sin, with 
a very dark conscience and a very profane spirit, He merci- 
fully touched my heart ; and, with innumerable sins, yet 
I have not forsaken Him from that time, nor He me. He 
has upheld me to this hour, and I have called myself His 
servant. When I came up to reside at Trinity, this verse 
of the Psalms, which was most in my heart and on my lips, 
and it has brought tears into my eyes to think of it, was 
'Thou shalt guide me with Thy counsel,' etc. He then 
brought me through numberless trials safely and happily 
on the whole — and why should He now leave me to a blinded 
mind ? I know I have done enough to provoke Him ; but 
will He ? 


He led me forward by a series of Providences from the 
age of nineteen till twenty-seven. I was * the work of His 
hands/ for He repeatedly and variously chastised me and 
at last to win me from the world, He took from me a dear 
sister — and just at the same time He gave me kind friends 
to teach me His way more perfectly. 

Time went on, and various things happened by which 
He went on training me — ^but what most impresses itself 
upon me, is the strange feelings and convictions about His 
will towards me which came on me, when I was abroad. 
When I went down to Sicily by myself, I had a strong idea 
that He was going to effect some purpose by me. And 
from Rome I wrote to some one, I think Christie, saying 
I thought I was to be made something of in His Hands, 
* though, if not, the happier for me.' And when I was in 
Sicily by myself, it seemed as if some one were battling 
against me, and the idea has long been in my mind, though 
I cannot say when it came on, that my enemy was then 
attempting to destroy me. A number of sins were com- 
mitted ^ in the very act of my going down by myself — ^to say 
nothing else, I was wilful, and neglected warnings — from 
that time ever5d:hing went wrong. As I lay ill at Leonforte, 
before I got to Castro Giovanni, while I was laid up, I felt 
this strongly. My servant thought I was dying — ^but I 
expected to recover, and kept saying, as giving the reason, 
' I have not sinned against light.' I had the fullest per- 
suasion I should recover, and think I then gave as the reason, 
that some work was in store for me. But any how when I 
was getting up again, after it was over, this f eehng was strong 
upon me, I recoUect, when travelling down the country 
from Castro G. to Palermo, (the ecclesiastical year was on 
the same days as this year, and as the year of my get- 
ting in to Oriel, so that Rogers and I were both elected on 
the I2th of April) it must have been Whitsunday or Monday 
morning, sitting on my bed as I was dressing, and cr3dng 
profusely. My servant, who was obliged to help me from 
my great weakness (for I could not walk by myself) of course 

* ' Involved ' is written over ' committed.' 


could not think the meaning of it — and I could but say to 
him, what was quite as unintelligible as my tears, that I 
thought God had some work for me. And then when I 
got to England, the very first Sunday after my arrival 
(July 14) you preached your sermon on National Apostasy, 
which was the beginning of the movement. 

And now at the end of eleven years from that time, 
was [what] is my own state ? why, that for the last five years 
(almost) of it, I have had a strong feehng, often rising to an 
habitual conviction, though in the early portion of it after 
a while dormant, but very active now for two years and a 
half, and growing more urgent and imperative continually, 
that the Roman Communion is the only true Church. And 
this conviction came upon me while I was reading the 
Fathers and from the Fathers — and when I was reading them 
theologically, not ecclesiastically, in that particular line of 
study, that of the ancient heresies, to which circumstances, 
external to myself, had led me fourteen years ago, before 
the movement began. 

And when this trial came upon me, I told only two 
persons with whom I happened to be at the time — and 
set myself to resist the impression. As you know, I wrote 
against it, and I am not aware in what respect I have in- 
dulged it. And I have attempted to live a stricter life. 
Every Lent since it first came on me I have spent up here, 
except such necessary returns to Oxford in the course 
of the week as Oxford duties made necessary — and for the 
last two years I have been here almost entirely. And I have 
made great efforts to keep others from moving in the 
direction of Rome also. 

Of course there is no fear of your supposing me not to be 
conscious of innumerable weaknesses and errors in my heart 
and conduct — but I cannot help trusting they need not come 
into account here. Or, even though there has been at times 
sin more than ordinary, I trust it is not being laid to my 

Moreover I certainly think I may say, that in many 
respects my heart and conduct have improved in the course 


of this five years, and that in respects in which I have prayed 
for improvement. Then the question comes upon me, why 
should Providence have granted my prayers in these respects, 
and not when I have prayed for hght and guidance ? 

And then, as far as I see, all inducements and tempta- 
tions are for remaining quiet, and against moving. The 
loss of friends what a great evil is this ! the loss of position, 
of name, of esteem — such a stultification of myself — such a 
triumph to others. It is no proud thing to unsay what I 
have said, to pull down what I have attempted to build 
up. And again, what quite pierces me, the disturbance of 
mind which a change on my part would cause to so many 
— the casting adrift, to the loss both of rehgious stability 
and comfort — the temptation to which many would be 
exposed of scepticism, indifference, and even infidelity. 

These last considerations are so serious, in the standard 
of reason as well as in the way of inducement, that, if it 
were not for antagonist difficulties, I don't see how I could 
ever overcome them. But it does strike me on the other 
side, * What if you are the cause of souls dying out of the 
Commimion of Rome, who have had a call to join it, which 
you have repressed ? what, if this has happened already ? ' 
Surely time enough has been allowed me for wavering and 
preparation — I have fought against these feehngs in myself 
and others long enough. And then another terrible thought 
strikes me. We hear of physicians thinking they have 
cured a complaint, when they have but thrown their patient 
into a contrary one — and enough has happened to make 
me fear greatly lest a sort of latitudinarianism and liberalism 
may be the end of them (though forbid it !) whom I am 
keeping from Rome. I am quite sure there is this danger. 
I dread it in particular persons. The time may even come, 
when I shall beg them to j oin the Church of Rome and they 
wiU refuse. Indeed I sometimes feel uncomfortable about 
myself — a sceptical, unrealizing temper is far from unnatural 
to me — and I may be suffered to relapse into it as a judgment. 

What then is the will of Providence about me ? The 
time for argument is passed. I have been in one settled 


conviction for so long a time, which every new thought 
seems to strengthen. When I fall in with friends who think 
differently, the temptation to remain quiet becomes stronger, 
very strong — but I really do not think my conviction is 
a bit shaken. So then I end as I began — Am I in a delusion, 
given over to believe a lie ? Am I deceiving myself and 
thinking myself convinced when I am not ? Does any 
subtle feehng or temptation, which I cannot detect, govern 
me, and bias my judgment ? But is it possible that Divine 
Mercy should not wish me, if so, to discover and escape 
it ? Has He led me thus far to destroy me in the wilderness ? 

Really I dread what would be the consequence if any 
intimate friend of mine j oined the Church of Rome. Might 
I not feel it impossible to disobey what seemed a warning 
to me, whatever trial and pain of mind it involved ? 

How this letter will distress you ! I am ever thinking 
of you, My dear Keble. 

Yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman * 

June II, 1844. 

I have been saying for several days past, that, if I had 
not grown almost inconceivably callous, this pubHcation 
of Arnold's ' Remains ' would almost break my heart, so very 
distressing does it appear to me, when I think of it with my 
cool understanding ; and yet I go on as usual, though some- 
times wondering at myself — and now your letter has come, 
not unexpected, yet very much like a clap of thunder, 
which one has been waiting for ; and I did not lose my 
night's rest, though I keep saying to myself. What shall 
I and thousands more do ? And where shall we go ? 

You will readily understand what is the bitterest part 
of one's feehngs in the whole matter, both in respect of 
Arnold and of your change — not that I mean to compare 
the two subjects in the least degree in point of distressful- 


ness — but in both one has a sad depressing thought, that, 
if one were or had been other than one is, the anguish 
might have been averted or mitigated. To think that you 
remember me continually is indeed a most consohng thought 
— may it always be so, and may I be more worthy of it. 

So far as your letter may be considered as stating a 
case, I really hardly know what to say to it. I feel as if I 
had suggested on former occasions all that I could now say ; 
but I still shrink from the thought of committing myself 
to Rome, as it is. Had Providence committed me, the 
case were quite different ; and it is not for such a one as 
I am to determine how far the history of your own mind 
amounts to such a providential indication. I wish you 
knew enough of my old friend, John Miller, to lay the case 
before him, or, (which I suppose is impossible) that it 
could be laid before him, without his guessing the person. 
However, I hope you will not be deterred from writing to 
me by the uselessness of my rephes, so long as it is the least 
rehef to you to write on such things. 

In any case surely you will be guided, and, if others are 
guided differently, may not both in some sense be right ? 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. K. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

June 12, 1844. 

You will easily imagine how dissatisfied I am with 
every word I write to you, and will excuse one's fidgetting 
and continually adding 'more last words.' I want now to 
speak to you about two things. 

One, the idea which seems to pervade your letter, that, 
if after all you should be allowed to be erroneous in this 
your judgment, it is equivalent to judicial blindness or 
something of that sort. 

I do not exactly see why you should assume this, unless 
the error were supposed deadly or fundamental. I can 


imagine there might be providential purposes in allowing 
even a Saint to mistake the degree of harm in communi- 
cating or separating from a particular portion of Christ's 
people, or the necessity or sacredness of such and such 
an institution : so that, even if after a time he found him- 
self to have been in error, he need not of course assume 
that the error was judicial. If your present view is right, 
Pusey's I suppose is wrong : should one therefore infer that 
his prayers for light and guidance are not heard ? 

Do you not think it possible (I dare say I borrowed the 
view from yourself) that the whole Church may be so lowered 
by sin, as to hinder one's finding on earth anything which 
seems really to answer to the Church of the Scriptures ? 
and will it not be well to prepare yourself for disappointment, 
lest you fall into something like scepticism ? You know 
I have always fancied that perhaps you were over sanguine 
in making things square, and did not quite allow enough 
for Bishop Butler's notion of doubt and intellectual difficulty 
being some men's intended element and appropriate trial. 

The other thing I wanted to say to you, or rather to 
make you feel, was, that one of your friends at least, hopes 
(and he believes a great many would be of the same mind) 
that nothing which may happen will make any kind of 
separation or hinder confidence. It is so utterly different 
from a change in the other direction ; but of course one 
fears how it may be on yom' part ; I mean, what Duty 
may suggest to you. 

Ever dearest Friend, 

Your grateful and loving, 


P.S. — Of course you make allowance for the longing 
to be at rest as a secondary influence possible in your case. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Oriel College : June 13/44. 

My dear Keble, — If the pain I am causing you is fault 
of mine, and so far as it is my fault, how much I have to 


answer for, and how cruel am I ! And really I must feel 
without any hesitation or doubt that, unless I had in ways 
I could name offended Him in whose Hands are the direction 
as well as the issue of all events, this pain might in great 
measure or altogether have been spared you. It might 
have come on you gradually, or naturally, or in some way 
or other have been destroyed. I distinctly think that the 
course of events during these last years (I am not speaking 
of their termination which is still in the unknown future) 
has been complicated by offences of mine which I could 

However let me, almost in self-defence, beg and pray 
you not to be sorry that you can be cheerful. What should 
either you or I do, if things oppressed us as they might ? 
I hope it is not wrong to be cheerful, for I cannot help 
being so. Surely to keep in an equable frame of mind is 
the only way to be able to view things healthily and rightly, 
and to lose heart and spirits is the way to get excited, or in 
some way or other to lose the gift, or to hinder the bestowal 
of a ' right judgment in all things.' Do not lament that 
you do not lose your sleep. I think sleep is the greatest 
of our ordinary blessings. Nothing goes well with the 
mind without it ; it heals all trouble. 

As to Arnold's ' Remains,' I cannot put myself enough 
in your place to know the precise points which pain you 
so acutely — but for myself, there seems much to take 
comfort in things as they are. I do not think that the 
book will produce any great effect in a wrong direction. 
Of course there is a great deal in it to touch people — but 
there is so httle consistency in his intellectual basis, that 
I cannot think he will affect readers permanently. And 
then it is very pleasant to think that his work has been 
so good a one — the reformation of public schools — this 
seems to have been blessed and will survive him, and forms 
the principal or one of the two principal subjects of the 
book. And further, if it is right to speculate on such 
serious matters, there is something quite of comfort to be 
gathered from his removal from this scene of action, at 


the time it took place ; as if so good a man should not 
be suffered to commit himself cominus against truths, 
which he so little understood. I wish I was in a better 
humour for bringing out what I mean. 

Ever yours. My dear Keble, 

Most affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

P.S. — I should add that my own state is this, not as 
if I felt at this moment any strong distress at still remain- 
ing quiet, but that I cannot tell how soon my feelings 
may change, or external circumstances interpose. And 
it comes upon me that when persons are on the brink of 
serious actions and afraid to plunge into the stream. Pro- 
vidence in mercy takes them by surprise. 

Since I began this letter. Church came into the room, 
and began to talk on what he and others fear to be the case 
in Oxford, the growth of scepticism. He gave me instances. 
It seems to me certainly likely to be more and more a 
pressing evil. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : June 20/44. 

My dear Keble, — I don't think I can be wrong in sending 
you the enclosed. It missed me, and I went to Roehampton 
the day before yesterday, after wavering about, whether to 
go or wait. Johnson said B. was low — which, as it turns 
out, arose from the abscess. I stayed there the night, and 
came away yesterday. 

I found him very weak, but able to move about on a 
crutch, and to dine downstairs. He is most wonderfully 
calm and cheerful — ^you cannot understand it unless you 
saw him. It is difficult to believe he is so ill. As I sat by 
him, he could not help half laughing again and again, and 
could only say ' It is your face — ^it reminds me of old times.' 
His fidget, which he brings out again and again in the most 
simple manner, is that he can do nothing. He has been 


writing a memorandum of certain particulars of the building 
of Roehampton Chapel, and, if he comes to Oxford, as 
they propose in August, he wants to be reading in our 
Library here for St. Boniface's Life. He and she both 
realize entirely his very pitiful state — ^but when one sees him 
so placid and equable, it is hard to believe that he does. 

For myself, I have given up all hope since last October. 
People say in various ways that I am desponding — ^but the 
question, alas, is, whether I come right or not. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N, 

P.S. — Mrs. Harrington (of BN.C.) died suddenly on 
Tuesday morning. The Principal had been dining out the 
evening before. She had been in a very anxious state of 
health for half a year — and he seemed to think ill of her. 
She was Dean Smith's daughter ; she and he have been 
very attentive to me ever since they came to Oxford. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

June 23, 1844. 

I thank you again and again for sending me the account 
of Bowden. I have never ceased to think of him, and to 
be in care about his illness, since I first heard of it. 

I should fear the account of him was a very bad one 
in a temporal sense : but surely it is one in which one 
scarce dares grieve for the person's own sake ; though 
what to augur pubhcly and ecclesiastically from such 
bereavements one hardly knows. I am glad to see that 
you think Mrs. B. prepared. I should hardly have guessed 
it from her letter. 

You know not the good which your former note did me : 
though I am afraid I had made myself out a greater sufferer 
than I really was. But it never will do for me to be talking 
of myself. . . . 

It is true that J. Miller, years ago, when the Berens 
TOTTo^ was first started,^ expressed an opinion that the 

1 The allusion must be to some forgotten controversy. There was an 
Archdeacon Berens in the 'thirties. 


Creed of St. Athanasius would perhaps be better in the 
Church's Archives, instead of coming into the service. 
I had forgotten this, when I mentioned him to you. My 
reason for thinking of him, I beheve, was my recollecting 
that, as long ago as when the article came out on the 
Catholicity of the Enghsh Church, I had or saw a letter 
from him, in which he expressed his feeUng about the drift 
of that article in such a way as makes me now think that 
he had detected your state of mind in writing it. And 
this, I thought, might indicate a power of sympathizing 
with you, which might make him a good adviser, had cir- 
cumstances thrown him more in your way. I speak from 
memory, for I cannot now refer to the letter. 

I am very sorry for poor Dr. Harrington, whom I have 
respected ever since he was Principal for the hne I heard 
he was taking. 

You, I believe, as well as Pusey and Oakeley, have with- 
drawn from the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge- 
I am getting up a Memorial against the Bishop of Chester's 
Lutheranism, which I think will end in my withdrawing — ■ 
Moberly and Wordsworth have signed it : but I suppose it 
will be re-written before it goes up. 

I am now in hopes of getting something done in Hursley 
Church, which is really a scandal, and more so every year. 

I never thanked you for your kind letter when I sent you 
the Lectures. 

About Arnold perhaps I shall write again. There is 
certainly much comfort in what you say. 

Your ever affectionate, 

J. K. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Roehampton : July 3, 1844. 

My dear Keble, — You will like to hear about Bowden, 
though you must not expect any very cheerful account from 
me — so much so, that I should not like what I say repeated. 


Mrs. B. has been most kindly open to me to-day — and 
told me all she thinks and knows. My report last time about 
her was from Miss Swinburne. She has now spoken to me 
herself in a way which quite confirms what I then told you. 
The medical man here says that he did not expect B. to get 
through last winter. And his bad symptoms have in no 
respect yielded from that time. Every medicine has failed. 
It is quite cruel to see him lie inhaling medicated air — it 
seems such a mockery. Sir John S. told me that from the 
end of January his expectoration has been continual, daily 
— and the medical man says, which is worst of all, that 
though, if things take their course, the progress of the com- 
plaint will be very slow, yet he may easily break a vessel 
in coughing, which would be fatal. It is, as you may fancy, 
more than I can describe, to see Mrs. B. sitting by him in 
these fits of coughing, she knowing this. His calmness is 
most wonderful — and hers too. His Father was buried 
yesterday ; of course he could not attend. 

I am to administer the Holy Communion to him to- 
morrow morning — and reaUy I do hope I may be able to 
come here, to do the same, again and again, while they are 
here — but do not know how this will be. They leave in 
August, their lease being out, and talk of going to Malvern. 
To their great comfort no one thinks of his going abroad. 
As I write this in my room before going to bed, I hear him 
coughing — and know it went through all last night. 

Oxford news was gloomy when I left — or rather Oxford 
anticipations — yet I cannot fall into them. Ogilvie was 
with the Archbishop about Ward's book. Though he is 
Visitor of Balliol, he cannot interfere, it seems — because 
he must act in court of Master and three senior Fellows, one 
vote sufficing for a negative on proceedings. Yet people 
are in dread of some act from authority — but the Arch- 
bishop is said to be so very unwiUing to enter upon new 
measures, and to be so fond of delaying and evading great 
questions, that I cannot think he will refuse to Wardism 
what has before now been granted in our Church to 
Wesleyans, SabeUians, Socinians and Swedenborgians. 


The Master has been ill of his emotion, or what the 

Itahans, I believe call arrabiato. He sent for Wootten. 

He has sent down seven men who were to have read 

with their Tutor in Oxford during the Vacation— taking 

care to mention Coffin's Sermons as among the causes of 

their dismissal. 

I am so sleepy I can hardly hold a pen. As to my own 

matters, I should be much obhged by your telling John 

Miller my case, or any one else, who, you think, would be 

of service to me, mentioning my name or anything else 

you please. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

July 4, Morning. — That coughing last night was a bad 
discharge — but what it means we cannot tell till the doctor 

J. H. Newman to E. L. Badeley, Esq. 

Littlemore : Aug. 23, 1844. 

My dear Badeley, — Though I foresee this will not go 
till Sunday, I begin writing. It would please me very 
much to accept your hospitahty again in London, but I 
shall not go to Richmond for some while, as Wilberforce 
does not press. I should Hke to see you, not only for the 
pleasure, but because, seeing you and Hope seldom, I 
always have a feeling, which in part must be well founded, 
that I do not express my meaning and state of mind correctly 
to you. It always seems to me that I am talking in an 
unreal way — I can't master and bring out my real feehngs 
at a moment — and Hope on the other hand, though perhaps 
he is not aware of it, is not entirely at his ease and familiar, 
and therefore not in the way either perfectly to take in my 
meaning or to give me his own. And then, when, conscious 
of this, I attempt to explain myself, I only seem to myself 
to make matters worse. 

I do not know quite why I should say all this ; for con- 
sidering my own position now and henceforth, there does 


not seem any reason why I should wish you to know my 
meaning, when I am sure I can do no good to any Church 
cause — but it is a natural impatience — and a not unnatural 
wish to be not misimderstood by men Hke you and Hope. 
And all this prose has come of your asking about Richmond ; 
(Sunday, Aug. 25) yet it bears on what I would say, if I 
could, about Pusey's matter. 

As you know, I fully acquiesce in the conclusion to 
which even you have come now. I do not see how it 
could be avoided. Yet it is impossible to disguise from 
oneself the very serious consequences it involves. Here 
is a solemn University Act in condemnation of a sermon, 
which is an understatement of a doctrine which must 
be called CathoUc — and now, (as the distance since it 
took place obhges one to say) accepted by the silence of 
the Church and her Bishops. The only attempt at protest 
has had reference to the formahty of the Act. Bishops 
can charge against other errors, but even when they have 
that opportimity and call to speak, they can be silent 

No acts at this time of the day surely can unchurch 
us, if we have not been unchurched by the^ events of the 
Reformation — but they may bring out, they may force 
on the mind, the fact we are, that we long have been 
unchurched. The Jerusalem Bishoprick three years ago 
disturbed me in a way very few people know, inflicting 
on my imagination what my reason had been unable to 
withstand some years before that. And now comes this 
formidable transaction whispering the same thing into 
my ear, or rather to my heart. Every form of heresy is 
tolerated, but there is an instinctive irritation, or shudder, 
at anything too CathoHc. Six hundred clergymen can 
condense a legion of heresies into a manifesto, and the 
Bishops (one exception, if so, is not much) can be quite 
silent — and when a University has stigmatized a true 
doctrine, it is thought a great thing, if one Bishop, without 
committing himself, teUs this or that clergyman in private 
that he does not mean to initiate proceedings in his own 


Diocese — A clergyman of popular celebrity can in print 
deny a theological phrase which a General Council imposed, 
and not a word is said. Our leading religious Society 
recognises (I think) the heretical Churches in the East 
founded on its denial, and places £1000 into the hands 
of our Bishops for their benefit — and remonstrance is 
vain. What do such facts, (true in substance though 
perhaps I have not expressed myself accurately in detail,) 
what do they show, but that we are not ' built upon the 
foundation of the Apostles and Prophets ' ? These are 
very fearful thoughts, which have long, very long, crowded 
upon my mind, and oppressed it, and which really do 
seem Hkely one day to come to something, I feel I should 
[be] almost a hypocrite, if I went on much longer without 
giving utterance to them. I did not mean thus broadly 
to have expressed them when I began my letter last Friday, 
but they have come out. 

Excuse me, if I am taking a liberty, but I don't think 
you will think so. 

Yours very sincerely, 

J. H. N. 

The following letter probably refers to the opposition 
which was attempted against the election of Dr. Symons to 
the Vice-Chancellorship. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

My dear Keble, — The enclosed will explain them- 
selves. I have nothing to add. I determined to do just 
what Badeley, J. Mozley, Rogers etc. did — and I suppose 
the enclosed shows that they mean to take it up. 

I have a good account of your brother, which is com- 
fortable. Bowden is getting weaker and weaker. He 
is at CHfton. I have not seen him this three weeks. I 
go to him next week. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

Littlemore : Sep. 5 (1844). 


J. H. Newman to E. L. Badeley, Esq." 

Oriel : Sept. 9, 1844. 

Dear Badeley, — I have been too busy to answer you 
before now : and indeed I do not know that strictly speak- 
ing I have anything to say, but to thank you for the kind- 
ness which your letter showed. Convictions are things 
which cannot be transferred — one would not wish they 
could be. As well could persons change hands as opinions, 
which are worth anything. I never then like talking to 
another on matters of doctrine on principle ; what right 
has one to do so ? He is he, and I am I. It seems an 

Yet not to do so seems like reserve and unfriendliness — 
so I will say something. Yet not in the way of argument, 
but to let you into my own feelings on the subject in question. 
My own convictions about it are of very long standing. 
For years I have been engaged in overcoming them, under 
the idea that possibly they were unfounded. I have acted 
like persons who pinch themselves to be sure that they 
are not asleep and dreaming. That I had one and one 
only view was certain, but then was it a delusion ? Was 
it the accident of an excitement ? I cannot think I was 
wrong in repelling it, and trying to shake it off from me. 
Nor does it seem to be wrong after many years of patient 
waiting, to begin to listen to it. 

It is not this or that event which causes it ; they do 
but remind me of it. To show that they may possibly 
be otherwise explained, as you kindly do, is to my feelings 
like the conduct of a patient in a consumption and of 
his friends, who satisfactorily show that not one of his 
symptoms but may be referred to some cause short of 
the fatal malady, not one which involves the necessity 
of death. Yet a bystander or physician has a view, though 
he cannot out-argue ; and the event justifies it. We are 
naturally friends, for we are children, of this dying or dead 
system in which we have lived all our days. We cannot, 
we will not, believe what the real state of the case is. We 


cannot be persuaded to open our eyes. Every ominous 
fact admits of an explanation, and in it we take refuge. 
Consider the shock with which child, parent, or wife hears 
of the inevitable blow. It is like a dream. Nothing would 
convince but the actual sight of the calamity which cannot 
be explained away. No such positive, visible, tangible 
evidence is attainable in a moral matter. There is no 
bier and funeral of a Church. The fact then escapes un- 
willing minds : yet it may be as certain to others, as the 
prospective termination of a fatal malady is to the physician. 
I do not say I have that certainty, but I am approxi- 
mating to it. To judge from the course of my thoughts for 
five years, I am certain of reaching it some time or other. 
I cannot tell whether sooner or later. This is an abrupt 
odious letter — ^but it is on an odious subject. 

Yours most sincerely, 

J, H. N. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

September 13, 1844. 

I never have thanked you as I ought for sending me 
those accounts of Bowden. Besides the sweet calmness 
and resignation which they describe, it is a peculiar com- 
fort to such a one as I am to find himself remembered at 
such times and in such places. From something 1 accident- 
ally heard, I had fully expected to hear of his being taken 
from us before now. Who knows how much help his being 
so long spared under such circumstances may bring to 
many who need to learn calmness and resignation ? 

I return James Mozley's letters, for which I much thank 
you. It was in some degree a mistake about my wishing 
for this move. I argued the point with Jeffreys that there 
was nothing in it undutiful, but I greatly questioned the 
expediency of it, and do so still, and so I told Mozley in a 
letter which I wrote before I heard from you. But I shaU 
be guided by Marriott in the matter. If he still wishes it 
to proceed, I shall surely try and come up. I don't think 


Wilson will ; but Peter Young probably will. I have not 
seen Moberly, though I have tried. 

My brother is certainly better, thank you ; though 
still not quite as one could wish. We were all very much 
pleased to meet Dodsworth, whom we had never seen 
before. And there were other things also about our journey 
far more comfortable than one could have deserved or 
expected. I was very glad to meet Mr. Meyrick at Bisley. 

I did not think Isaac looking very well, and I wish 
I may not have made him lower than he was. But it is 
a part of what people like me bring on themselves, that, 
if they speak any truth, they sadden their friends, and, if 
they go on as if nothing was the matter, they feel like 
hypocrites. But enough of this and too much. 

Pray give my love to Copeland, and ask him when 
he is coming here ; and be sure, my dear N., that, if 
I seem uncomfortable, it is no more than is good for me, 
and, if it had not been for you, (under God) it might have 
been more. 

Always very affectionately yours, 

J. K. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : Sept. 14, 1844, 

My dear Keble, — I have been going to write to you for 
some days, to tell you what there was to be told about 
dear Bowden, and your letter has just come. 

I was at Clifton on Wednesday and Thursday last, 
not having seen him for a month. He was sadly altered. 
Fever has come on and perspirations. He certainly would 
not get from Clifton, except that he has in a way set his 
heart on waiting God's time at St. Leonard's, where he 
was all last winter and has a house now ready for him. 
It so happens he has no home, though he has just come 
into property by his father's death, Roehampton having 
gone out of his hands last month. Perhaps I may stay 


with him when he gets to St. Leonard's, for he seemed to 
wish it, I thought — ^but I shall hear more in a day or two. 

He gave me an account how he got through the day. 
Sept. 15. He does not like not to come down stairs while 
he can, though it is a great effort to him, particularly 
dressing. He lies on his sofa with Bible, Prayer Book, 
Breviary, and ' Paradisus Animae ' on a little desk before 
him; but his thoughts are so unsteady now, that he has 
wished much, but sought in vain in Bristol, some sacred 
emblem or picture which may meet his eyes without effort. 
I took him the ' Paradisus ' by accident for another purpose 
two months ago, and he has seized upon it with great 
delight, and says it is a great comfort to him. He made 
me read Compline, Terce and Sext with him. Besides 
that he manages to get through the Morning and Evening 
Prayer, I believe — and sometimes the Penitential Psalms 
in the Breviary. Morning is his best time for eating, and 
he takes his principal meal then. His worst time is between 
six and eight in the evening. He gets out, or did, but a 
day makes a change now, in a Bath Chair — ^but he cannot 
bear the beautiful scenery at Clifton — it tries him. At 
length the hours have passed away, and no more expedients 
are needed. Evening comes, and he seems to have some 
quiet sleep of a night which recruits him, and he lies very tran- 
quilly in bed. So he is lifted upstairs by his two servants, 
making a sort of low interjection, not of pain but of relief, 
* lo, lo, lo,' or the like, and says, as he told me, ' Well, 
another crest has been topped, another billow is over,' 
calling the days his billows, with an allusion to * Who would 
count the billows past ? ' He made me come and see 
what he called his ' procession ' — his wife first with the 
candle, then he in the arms of the two men. While going 
up, he turned about his head, to be sure I was looking. 

One forgets past feelings, else I would say that I had 
never had pain before like the present. I thought so 
yesterday, and said so ; but I suppose it is not so. Yet I 
am in very great distress, and do trust I shall be kept from 
gloom and ill temper. I have given him up since October 


last, yet have not realized his loss till now, if now. He 
is my oldest friend. I have been most intimate with him 
for above twenty-seven years. He was sent to call on me 
the day after I came into residence — he introduced me 
to College and University — he is the link between me and 
Oxford. I have ever known Oxford in him. In losing 
him I seem to lose Oxford. We used to live in each other's 
rooms as Undergraduates, and men used to mistake our 
names and call us by each other's. When he married, he 
used to make a similar mistake himself, and call me Elizabeth 
and her Newman. And now for several years past, though 
loving him with all my heart, I have shrunk from him, 
feeling that I had opinions that I dared not tell him, and 
that I must be constrained or almost hypocritical if I was 
with him. 

Lewis has come up to tell me the news that dear Bowden 
is gone — I suppose this morning. I am going off at once 
to Clifton. I have heard no particulars. But it distresses 
me to have parted so suddenly with him on Thursday when 
he wished me to stay and did not know I was going. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. Ambrose St. John 

17 Grosvenor Place, London : Sept. i6, 1844. 

...CM. (Charles Marriott) told me something from 
Lewis, which cleared up everything : viz. that dear J. W. B. 
died in London. Everything was plain then ; the physician 
had recommended his instant removal, and he had died 
on the way. 

So it proved to be, but nothing could be happier or more 
peaceful than all the circumstances. He sunk rapidly ever 
since I saw him. On the Wednesday he talked to me of 
going to St. Leonard's for a fortnight — on Thursday he 
talked of my coming to Chfton as on this day, that he 
might go off sooner [to London]. By Friday night he had 
limited his hopes to getting ^to his Father's house in London. 


Dr. Bernard thought that his desire ought to be granted, 
that he was sure of getting to London, that the change might 
even for a day or two retard the complaint — but that no time 
was to be lost, and that he could not last many days. This 
he said on Saturday morning at eleven, and said ' why not 
by the next train ? ' he offered to come up with them. They 
were off by twelve ; got to the station by a quarter past one 
— ^The train was just gone. He had to wait two or three 
hours in his carriage till the next. What a trial for her ! but 
he was most calm and happy, and showed not the slightest 
disappointment or trouble. He was peaceful all through the 
journey, and they put him to bed directly he got here. At 
four o'clock next morning (yesterday) he had a little cough- 
ing, could not get rid of the matter, gave over the struggle 
and was gone almost at once. She saw it directly. Nothing 
was to be done. I am full of wrong and miserable feelings, 
which it is useless to detail — so grudging and sullen when I 
should be so thankful. Of course when one sees so blessed an 
end, and that at the termination of so blameless a hfe, of 
one who really fed on our ordinances and got strength from 
them — and see the same continued in a whole family, the 
httle children finding quite a solace of their pain in the Daily 
Prayer, it is impossible not to feel more at ease in our Church, 
as at least a sort of Zoar, a place of refuge and temporary 
rest because of the steepness of the way. Only may we 
be kept from unlawful security, lest we have Moab and 
Ammon for our progeny, the enemies of Israel. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

17 Grosvenor Place : Sept. 17, 1844. 

My dear Keble, — As you saw, I was writing my note, 
and the unexpected news came. I did not know where it 
had taken place, and I left home, at Mrs. B's wish, not 
knowing where I was going. 

It seems that he died, I mast not say on his road to St. 
Leonard's, but at home at his Father's house here, where his 


Father had died not three months before. Indeed, he had 
given up the idea of getting to his winter quarters when he 
started. On Wednesday last he talked of moving in a 
fortnight — on Thursday morning in a week. On Friday 
when his brother came he talked of no more than getting to 
London. Dr. Bernard had a talk with Henry B. on Satur- 
day morning, and said he might last a week or fortnight, 
that moving could not hurt and might be of service to him, 
and that there was no reason for resisting his strong wish. 
But, he said, no time is to be lost — why not go to-day ? 
why not by the next train ? This was at eleven. They 
were off by twelve. Got to the station — were just too late 
for the train. Had to wait for two to three hours ; what a 
trial for her ! However, he was most calm and happy, and 
showed not any disappointment, which was very unlike 
his usual way — for on journeys he had always been over- 
punctual and eager. He sat in his carriage the whole 
time — and when she came to him for some reason, put his 
head out to her and said ' Wish not, dear friends, my pain 
away.' He was happy all through the journey — and made 
allusion to some things which had amused him some days 
previously. When he got here, he was put to bed at once, 
Dr. B. then thinking he would last a week. At four o'clock 
on Sunday morning, he had a little coughing, could not 
expectorate. She saw at once what was coming and it 
was over at once. (It is a great comfort to all parties that 
he is here and not at Clifton.) 

He died, and he lies, in a room I have known these 
twenty-four years — ^the principal drawing-room. So many 
persons have I seen there, so kind to me — they are all 
gore. The furniture is all the same — the ornaments on the 
mantelpiece — and there lies now my oldest friend, so dear 
to me — and I with so little of faith or hope, as dead as a 
stone, and detesting myself. 

I shall remain here over the funeral, but I suppose no 

They have a pictinre here I had not seen for a number of 
years by Hoppner — of J. W. B. a boy of four years and 


his younger sister. He was asked how he should like to 
be painted — and he said ' drawing a Church ' — so Fulham 
Church is in the background, and he with a pencil and 

Ever yours affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 

P.S. — Mrs. B. is quite an heroic person — her whole 
bearing is quite out of the way. It forces itself upon one 
at a time when one has not much heart to be thinking of 
such things. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

September 19, 1844. 

You are very kind to send me so many particulars — 
so many which, I hope and beheve, will soon begin and 
always continue to be a great comfort to you. Just now 
you are stunned with the blow, but, as to being hard-hearted, 
I have too sad and shameful experience how soft-hearted 
people who cry easily may soon let go the good thoughts 
which come to them from such death beds, and have their 
hearts hardened in another sort of manner. But really 
and truly may not one accept such a calm departure as this 
as a pledge of mercy and comfort in one's own cares and 
perplexities ? The gleam has gone behind the cloud, but 
we know it is still there, and are permitted and encouraged 
to hope for a sight of it again at no very long distance. 

This is a sort of sacred time to us, or at least ought to be 
so ; for my youngest sister was taken away from us the 20th 
of September 1826. And on the same day, I conjecture, this 
year, your dear Bowden will be buried. I hope Mrs. Bowden 
will not droop too much when that is over. It is a great thing 
having her children to think of, and also his most remark- 
able calmness will no doubt help her in memory almost as 
much as when he was in sight. 

Altogether, it seems very much to reahze George Her- 
bert's notion, of going from earth to paradise as from one 
room to another. . . . 


J. H. Newman to E. L. Badeley, Esq. 

Littlemore : Nov. i, 1844. 

My Dear Badeley, — Thank you very much for your 
answer about Formby, to which you gave me a great deal 
more time and consideration than I had any right, intention, 
or hope to gain from you. I hope he will be the better for it. 

Perhaps I ought to tell you all about the £100. My 
most dear friend Bowden wished me to lay it out in some 
memorial of him. So I have thought of books. I want 
them both handsome and useful — and I thought, since the 
binding cannot be the same, of putting his arms upon them, 
as a College does upon its prize books, unless this seemed 
very unreasonable. Doing so would also overcome a diffi- 
culty I have hitherto felt in getting books on two subjects — 
but anyhow I should prefer one subject. I have Muratori, 
Gavanti, &c., in the Liturgical hne, though only part of 
Catalini — and I have also a smaller sum of money to spend 
in a like way, which I think I shall give to books of that 
kind — so that on the whole I shall put the Liturgical line 

I thought of the Bollandists — but Southey's copy was 
£130. And common copies would not be handsome. I 
certainly do want handsome books, and this turned my 
thought to classics — especially as classics are cheaper than 
old EngHsh historians, and I want them more. 

I have Tanner, Dugdale, Browne Willis (in part), Hearne 
(in part), Twysden, ' Script ores post Bedam,' Alford, Cressy, 
Du Chesne's ' Script. Norm.,' the ' Gesta Dei per Francos,' Le 
Cointe, &c., I have not Gale, or Du Chesne's ' Script. Franc' 
But I doubt whether I could make up a set, and that is 
what I want — not to fill up gaps. 

I am very scanty in classics. There is a handsome set 
(not complete) of ' Variorum ' in Kerslake's last catalogue, 
in Russia, 119 vols., or thereabouts, for £36. This is cheap, 
but of the authors contained in it I have about forty volumes 
— and eighty volumes for £z^ is perhaps not cheap. Valpy's 
classics are said not to be handsome, except the large paper. 
Willis had lately a set complete (small paper) for I think 


£'^2 in calf. What I think I should prefer would be a hand- 
some set of all the Latin in Octo., and then certain Greek 
classics, such as those I mentioned to you which are with 
comments as Plutarch, Strabo &c., in folio and quarto. 
What is your opinion of this plan ? What is your opinion 
of going to men like Kerslake ? Payne and Foss are so 
extravagantly dear. How is Pickering ? 

And now don't let me be unreasonable in my demands 
upon your time. You see there is no hurry. I should 
value your advice very much, and any information you 
could get without trouble. 

Perhaps you have heard that on St. Simon and St. Jude's 
Day the Master stopped Ward ^ (without disturbance) 
from reading the epistle — and read it with such wonderful 
emphasis that every soul in the Chapel saw its meaning 
* crept in unawares ' * despise dominion and speak 'Evil ' 
(eeee-vil) 'of dignities,' &c. 

Then followed the Gospel which some persons thought 
told the other way, viz. about loving each other. He is 
said to intend to go on this principle (though his display 
as above does not seem like it) to forget or not to know 
Ward's existence as Fellow, and on this principle it is 
supposed he will act as regards Holy Communion — but I 
do think the whole University will feel so strongly against 
him that Ward need do nothing. I do not think going to 
the Visitor will do — that is rather the game of the other 
party — and I suppose they would be glad of Ward's doing 
so. Ward has the most intense feeling about the Visitor's 
unfairness on other occasions. 

All this is to be considered secret — and so is this (though 
I daresay you have heard it all by this time, for Ward is 
in London) that the Master has pitched upon a provision 
in the statutes which allows him in difficult cases to go to 
the Visitor proprio motu — and the Visitor or his deputy 
can punish with any degree of severity short of expulsion. 

^ For a full account of the scene see W. G. Ward and the Oxford 
Movement, p. 325. The heavy drops preceding the storm over Ward's 
* Ideal ' were beginning to fall. 


I fear the Fellows of Balliol will not stand by Ward — 
but this must not be mentioned — not on doctrinal grounds, 
but because his ill odour abroad hurts the College. 

Pater mi I Pater mi ! cur r us Israel et auriga ejiis. — 
Rumours and reports that Newman was to be lost to the 
Anglican communion were springing up everywhere. In 
consequence, letters came from different kinds of persons, 
some well, some not well expressed, but each in its way a 
cry of anguish. Some specimens of these letters will help 
to reanimate the past. 

A Friend to J. H. Newman 

Nov. 4, 1844. 

My dear Newman, — I have received information this 
morning, upon which I fear I must rely, which has pained 
and perplexed me to a degree that I could hardly express 
to you. The information was that you have intimated to 
your friends your intention of joining the Church of Rome. 

Now as to offering you any arguments, I am fully 
persuaded that I am not the person to do that. But if 
on the strength of old associations, and the unvarying kind- 
ness which you have shown me for so many years, I may 
make any suggestion to you, I do so most earnestly, and 
(allow me to say) most affectionately implore you to pause 
before you take this most fearful step. Not yourself alone, 
but many, many others will be involved in it. 

I have long prayed for you ; and. Providence permitting, 
I shall continue to do so. And whether you remain in our 
communion or not, you will always be remembered by me 
with unfeigned regard, and with a lively sense of the kind- 
ness which I have received from you. 

Do not trouble yourself to reply to this. Enough, 1 
feel persuaded, must be upon your mind, and your hands ; 
and it will be more than sufficient to me, if this has any 
effect towards making you suspend your intention. 

Should I have written without cause, you know how 


sincerely and amply I would apologise to you : but you 
also know that had I conceived there would be room for 
an apology, I had not written to you. 

J. H. Newman to E. L. Badeley, Esq. 

Littlemore : Nov. 5/44- 

My dear Badeley, — I sent your letter to Formby but 

not your name. It is hardly worth while sending you his 

answer, yet you may like to see it. 1 do not doubt you 

have done a service. Please burn it after you have read it. 

I see in Willis's catalogue just out Wyttenbach's ' Plutarch ' 

in Russia for £'^. This seems to me cheap. Also there is 

Dean Rennell's ' Montfaucon's Antiquite ' which I saw when 

I was in town — I mention these, first as coming into the 

question, is it well, if I determined on classics, to pick up 

books anywhere or buy them of one person ? and next 

by way of saying that the ' Plutarch ' does seem a bargain, 

and asking your opinion. But really I am almost frightened 

lest I should be rudely encroaching upon the time of a busy 

man like you. 

Yours very sincerely, 

John H. Newman. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : Nov. 6/44. 

My dear Keble, — I write you just a line in consequence 
of reports about me which are afloat, and which may make 
you anxious. They are altogether unfounded. The letter 
of Isaac [WilHams] is a mere myth — I have not been writing 
to him a Une. 

You should make Copeland give a volume to the ' Plain 
Sermons.' He has been preaching very nice Sermons for 
a long while. They want curtailing however. 

I went at last to take advice for my drowsiness and 
unsteadiness of handwriting — At first my medical friend. 


Mr. Babington, spoke very seriously — but when he saw me 
he relented. He says I ought to take tonics — but the 
difficulty is to give them me without throwing too much 
blood into my head. I am at St. Athanasius, which is 
very trying — but the translations wiU come to an end in a 
few weeks. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H.N. 
A Stranger (apparently) to J. H. Newman 

Nov. 7, 1844. 

Reverend Sir, — I sincerely trust that I may be pardoned 
the liberty of addressing you, but my extreme anxiety 
must plead for me. Your published Parochial Sermons 
have been, under God, the means of rousing me from spiritual 
sleep, and I have from them, and from their operation upon 
my mind, been led to regard your opinions with a reverence 
greater than I can express. From your Lectures on Roman- 
ism also I have been taught the errors which that system, 
if I may so express myself, contains. May I then venture 
to ask the truth or otherwise of the report, now in the news- 
papers, of your having quitted the communion of the 
Church of England — I can only repeat that my intense 
anxiety must plead in palliation of this apparently un- 
warrantable request, but I feel assured that your good and 
kind heart will pardon me and relieve me from the distress 
of suspense. 

An old Schoolfellow to J. H. Newman 

Nov. II, 1844. 

My dear Newman, — I turn from solemn scenes in which 
I have been engaged — the deathbed of a near relation, and 
the dangerous illness of a schoolfellow of us both — to put 
into execution what, I assure you, has been on my mind 
even in the midst of so much sorrow and anxiety. It is 
to send you a line of entreaty on the step that you are 


reported to have announced your intention of taking. 
O my very dear friend, to whom I am so deeply and eternally 
obliged, not so much for private acts of friendship, but for 
the reality and consistency which your writings with others 
have imparted to my religious views — can you think of 
leaving us, so many as we are that have benefited by your 
exertions ? I entreat you not to forsake us — ^we shall be 
left a scorn and derision to those that are round about us — 
already pointed at enough for endeavouring to restore 
Church principles in our own little sphere, we shall be made 
powerless altogether if a master of our Israel forsakes our 
communion. . . . There are so many that love you and 
revere your character, and have been formed by your works, 
who will be utterly cast down, if you take this step, who 
will not know where to turn, that I conjure you not to 
do it, unless conscience makes it altogether unavoidable. jMy 
dear friend Clarke, an Ealing boy, is perhaps d3rLng, and, 
if he is taken away, it will be an unspeakable loss to me, 
but that separation would be as nothing to my hearing that 
NewTQan, who rescued me from low views and such as now 
seem scarcely belie\dng \'iews, had ceased to call himself 
my brother, and declared me to be in heresy. Oh ! Ne^vman, 
do do stop with us — what shall we do without you ! 

On November lo a great friend of Newman's, the Rev. 
Edward Coleridge of Eton, sent him a letter from Seh^yn, 
the Bishop of New Zealand, and an extract from a letter 
of the Bishop of Newfoundland. They were to be sho\Mi 
to Pusey and Pusey only. He asked NewTiian to present 
Sehvyn and two other ' Antipodal Bishops ' with copies 
of ' Sermons on Subjects of the Day.' The letter concluded 
with earnest wishes that NewTnan might be ' kept with us 
and for us in the Anglican Branch of the Catholic Church.' 

J. H. New^ian to Rev. E. Coleridge 

Littlemore : Nov. 12th, 1844. 

I shall send 3^our most precious enclosures to Pusey to- 
morrow by a safe hand with yoin: directions about their 


return to you. How to thank you for the kindness and 
confidence which you have shown in sending them to me, I do 
not know. The Bishop certainly is a rare person — and his 
being where he is, is a singular mercy to that country and 
makes one muse about its future fortunes in the purposes 
of Providence. 

I had intended in answering you to have said a word on 
the subject, personal to me, with which you close your 
letter — indeed I began writing with this intention — but 
now when it comes to the point, it seems so miserable 
a return for your kindness, that I cannot get myself to do 
it. Nor do I know how to send the Volumes you speak of, 
I have no business to be sending volumes on such an errand. 

The pain I feel at the distress I am causing others, at 
the great unsettlement of mind I am causing, and the ties 
I am rending, is keener than I can say. On Saturday for 
some time my heart literally ached, and is still uneasy. 
And I have the griefs, not of one, but of so many upon me. 

And all this in addition to the original and principal 
trial itself, which has been a secret anxiety upon me for 
years. Everyone must see at a glance how many and strong 
natural feelings and motives I have against committing 
myself to such acts, as nevertheless seem likely to be urged 
on me as imperative to my salvation — but none can know 
the dismal thing it is to me to trouble and unsettle and 
wound so many quiet, kind, and happy minds. What is it 
I say to myself, short of duty, which propels me to the 
thought of such [an] act ? I cannot find anything. 

Pray accept my best thanks for your kind sympathy. 

J. H. Newman to E. L. Badeley, Esq. 

Littlemore : Nov, 13th, 1844. 

I actually have taken your hint and written to Leslie 
to enquire what he would give me for my Bollandists if 
I take his. It has grown upon me that such a set, while 
it is a whole, is more suitable as a memorial of B. than 


the Classics. And he had always a great liking for Southey. 
And then you report that it is a handsome copy which was 
my difficulty about medieval books in general. 

You may have heard the last Oxford news — that a 
Committee of Heads is appointed to consider what ought 
to be done, or if anything, about Ward's book. 

J. H. Newman to E. L. Badeley, Esq. 

Littlemore : Nov. 16/44. 

I told Pusey the other day that I did not think his 
succeeding in his suit would be worth the weight of a feather 
in retarding certain persons from Rome — and this, in answer 
to his saying that he wished to be ruled entirely by my feel- 
ing in the matter, and had no wish to move on his own 
account. Yet I think he will still cherish hopes that if he 
does succeed, he will be detaining men. I do heartily wish 
he were not so sanguine, unless indeed (which may be the 
case) such sanguineness carries him over all difficulties. 

I am unwilling to speak more strongly than I have, but 
I seem to be ruining his position, when he might right 
himself and be in the University and Church all he has 

A Committee certainly is vigorously at work on Ward. 
I hear the names of our Provost, Cramer and Gaisford 
(who is most fierce), but Harrington and Richards are not 
on it. They evidently mean to do something very strong 
— and are said to rely on Convocation, the prestige in our 
favor being broken in the last meeting. There is a report 
that St. Stephen is to be brought before them too. If they 
advance beyond J. H. N. i.e. the two first numbers, I suppose 
Toovey will have an action in law against them for Hbel. 
And all the pubhshers in London will be for him. 

Your report of the hundred and odd seceders is good. 
It is the first I have heard of it. I wonder where such 
portents are created — are they real births of the brain, or 
equivocal generations, or do they form in the air ? 


If it is not troubling you, I should be glad of your 
buying for me any Classics in the following Hst — accord- 
ing to your discretion. As to the ' Acta,' I am sorry to hear 
where it is gone, but I ought not to be sorry I lost it, for 
my delay was not shiUy shallying. 

P.S. — I find Hope has been heard of at Milan. 

• •' Edward Coleridge's reply to Newman's letter of the 
I2th was a long and earnest appeal to him not to leave the 
Church of England unless absolutely compelled by his 
conscience to do so. He entreated him to think of the 
effect his secession would have upon those who had relied 
upon him, and assured him that there were many persons, 
far more numerous than Newman's modesty would allow 
him to believe, who rested so implicitly upon his guidance 
that, go whither he would, they would follow him, actually 
' against their conscience.' 

J. H. Newman to Rev. E. Coleridge 

Littlemore : Nov. i6th, 1844. 

My Dear Coleridge, — What possible reason of mere 
' preference ' can I have for the Roman Church above our 
own ? I hardly ever, even abroad, was at any of their 
services. I was scarcely ever for an hour in the same room 
with a Roman Catholic in my life. I have had no corre- 
spondence with anyone. I know absolutely nothing of 
them except that external aspect that is so uninviting. In 
the ' Tablet ' and ' Dublin Review,' in radical combinations 
and liberal meetings, this is how I know them. My habits, 
tastes, feelings are as different as can well be conceived 
from theirs, as they show outwardly. 

No — as far as I know myself the one single over-powering 
feeling is that our Church is in schism — and that there is 
no salvation in it for one who is convinced of this. It is now 
more than five years since a consideration of the Mono- 
physite and Donatist controversies wrought in me a clear 
conviction that we were now, what those heretics were 
then. Two persons alone, whom I was with at the time, 


knew what had happened to me — and I instantly addressed 
myself to overcome the feeling. I think I was quite right 
in attempting it — I should have been wrong not to have 
done so. And I succeeded — for two years I was satisfied 
it was my duty to remain quiet, whatever change in actual 
opinion had taken place in me. I dwelt upon the Roman 
corruptions, as we consider them, and balanced them against 
our difficulties. But this time three years the conviction 
came on me again, and now for that long time it has been 
clear and unbroken under all change of circumstance, 
place, and spirits. Through this time my own question 
has been * Is it a delusion ? ' and I have waited, not because 
my conviction was not clear, but because I doubted whether 
it was a duty to trust it. I am still waiting on that con- 

That our Lord is present in our Eucharist, if we have 
the Apostolical succession, and the right form of consecration, 
is acknowledged even by Roman Catholics — and that the 
Gift is, not sealed up, but actually imparted, though our 
Church be in schism, to those who are in involuntary 
ignorance, this again is even acknowledged by them. And 
that in fact it is bountifully imparted I have proof on every 
side of me — but still, it is imparted to those who are in 
involuntary ignorance, not to those who are according to 
this mysterious Providence enlightened to discern what 
the real state of the Church is. If I once am absolutely 
convinced that our Church is in schism, there is, according 
to the doctrine (I believe) of every age, no safety for me 
in it. 

This, my dear Coleridge, though not intended argu- 
mentatively, but merely drawn out by your letter to show 
you my view of the matter, will, I know well, pain you much 
— but anyhow you must be pained ; and I can but trust 
that each minute of sorrow, as it passes, is so much gone 
and over, and is getting rid of what must be, and will be 
thus exhausted. 

As to the persons you speak of, I do earnestly trust, 
and think, that, when it comes to the point, they will be 


wiser and more sober, than to take a headlong step merely 
because another has moved before them. That I shall 
perplex and unsettle them, I know full well — that some 
may eventually be persuaded to take the same course is 
not improbable — but I do not fear that religious persons 
will be thrown off their balance — I trust them too well — 
I have a greater confidence in the love for them of Him 
who has made them what they are, to fear that He wilJ 
abandon them. 

John H. Newman. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

November i8, 1844. 

I ought to have thanked you sooner for your kindness 
in writing to me about that report. I had made up my 
mind that there was nothing in it, thinking it very unlikely 
that Isaac Williams should put a confidence in the Editor 
of the ' Morning Chronicle ' or his informant which he denies 
to my brother and to me : and feeling on other grounds 
sure that it could not be true. 

I wish I could hope that all my dear friends were in 
some way approximating more to each other on those 
awful subjects ; or rather I should say, I wish I could see 
this : for hope it I most assuredly do and shall do, as long 
as one sees on both sides such unquestionable endeavour 
to please God and practise a submissive mind in all things. 
I do not, and cannot expect to see my way in the controversy, 
as a controversy : but I seem more and more clearly to 
feel that the want of approximation in those whom we are 
bound to believe really good persons on both sides is a 
providential indication that such as I am at least should 
stay to be true penitents where they are. 

Pusey asks me for my impression as to the Hne which he 
should take about preaching, when his suspension expires. 
My impression is, that he should proceed nearly as if no- 
thing had happened, recapitulating the substance of his last 


Sermon, as he must do for clearness' sake in going on with 
his course. In so doing he will re-state the obnoxious 
points, and give occasion, though without any challenge, 
to the Heads to repeat their censure. If they do not, his 
point wiU be so far gained that the Eucharistic Sacrifice 
and the Real Presence may be preached at St. Mary's, and 
the doctrinal scandal caused by his suspension wiU be 
removed. If they censure him, the matter will be fairly 
mooted without any questionable forwardness on his part, 
and, having had warning, he will give them no such ad- 
vantage as he did last time. Do tell me, if you think that 
this course will be objectionable in respect of those who 
doubt the Catholicity of the Enghsh Church. 

I hope I shall not annoy you, if I copy out for you part 
of a letter which I had the other day from Judge Coleridge. 

' I am struck with part of a letter from . . . of . . . 
expressing a wish that Newman should know how warmly 
he was loved, honoured, and sympathized with by large 
numbers of Churchmen, so that he might not feel soUtary, 
or, as it were, cast out. What think you of a private address, 
carefully guarded against the appearance of making him 
the head of a party, but only assuring him of gratitude, 
veneration, and love, as one whose teaching had been 
eminently useful,' etc. etc. and he adds : ' It is my hasty 
thought of the moment.' 

I don't suppose this will come to anything : it seems to 
me a thing rather to be discouraged on some accounts, 
but I thought I would just let you understand how such a 
person as Coleridge feels, and I don't think he mistakes 
you. It seemed to me, from what he said when I was 
staying with him the other day, that he quite entered into 
your feelings, though he would not agree with you in aU 
opinions ; of course, he would not think himself capable 
of judging. Therefore, my dear Newman, do not in any 
case imagine, that you have not hundreds, not to say 
thousands, sympathizing with you and feeUng indeed that 
they owe their very selves to you. 

I can only speak for one, of certain knowledge. Your 


sermons put me in the way, and your healing ministration 
helped me beyond measure. This is certain knowledge of 
mine ; and here is Wilson sitting opposite with just the 
same feehngs ; and Yoimg next door, and Moberly at 
Winchester, and Ryder a few miles off, and EUison whom 
I saw the other day ; and in short, wherever I go, there 
is some one to whom you have been a channel of untold 
blessing. You must not be angry, for I feel as if I could 
not help saying it, and I am sure the very air of England 
around you would say the same, if it could be made vocal. 
They have had unspeakable help from you, and it is now 
their turn to help you with their prayers and good wishes, 
now that you seem to be called for a while to be patient in 
comparative silence and inactivity. 

We shall be anxious to hear about your health. How 
I wish it might agree with your plans to come here, if it 
were but for a day or two, and let us try if we could not mend 
your handwriting, in which art, as you see, we greatly excel. 

. . . Medley has been here to consult whether he shall 
accept the Bishoprick of New Brunswick. . . . 

This is a sad rigmarole — but you will forgive it, from 
yours ever very affectionately, 

J. K. 

I suppose that in the ' Christian Remembrancer ' about 
Arnold is James Mozley's. How beautiful the part about 
R. H. F. in some respects. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : Nov. 21, 1844. 

My dear Keble, — I feel Judge Coleridge's great kind- 
ness and consideration, but do not find myself able to 
come into his proposal, or rather the proposal he throws 
out. It is difficult perhaps to give my reasons. I am 
afraid of a vefxeau^. What I feel most at present as to 
the attacks made on me, or rather the only thing which 
I feel, is the charge of dishonesty. Really no one but 
O'Connell is called so distinctly and so ordinarily a liar. 


as I am. I think nothing tends to hurt my spirits but 
this. I am not treated merely as a gentleman, and that 
by educated people. Now as far as any such expression 
as Sir J. C.'s went to protest against this, I should value 
it much — but then it strikes me I should be removing 
a cross from me, and I might have a heavier one put on 
me. If there is a cross which is blessed from those who 
have borne it from our Lord's own time, it is this — and 
it is safest to be content with it. 

His letter went far beyond this, however — and such 
words as ' veneration, love ' etc. I really could not bear. 
I am not used to them. I never have heard them. I hope 
there is nothing wrong and ungrateful in shrinking from 
them. I am not sure there is not something of pride. 
But I really could not bear them. And though I say this, 
yet, inconsistent as it is, while I should be pained at them, 
I really do think I could be elated too — and, please, do keep 
me from this. 

And then I do think they would increase, not diminish, 
my greatest grief of all — which is the unsettlement of 
people's minds. For the more I realized that people 
sympathized in me, the more acutely I should feel the 
pain I was giving them. Is this selfish ? 

I am making too much of this, you wiU say — yet I 
will add one thing — I should fear that some persons at 
least, who took part in such an expression of kindness, 
would think that my present tendencies arose from the 
want of such expressions, and would hope to stop them 
by means of it. Now I have had extremely kind letters 
from Manning, Gladstone, Blowell ^ and others, but they 
have not operated ever so little in shaking the deep con- 
fidence I have at present that Christianity and the Roman 
Catholic system are convertible terms, or in reviving more 
hopeful or comfortable feelings about our present state. 

I hope you will not think I am writing a cold reasoning 
answer to your so very kind letter. I wrote one first 
of all thanking you etc. — and then it struck me that all 

^ Perhaps ' Browell.' 


this was unnecessary between us, so I have burnt it, and 
begun again. 

While I am on the subject of myself, 1 will say one or 
two things more. 

When I was first taught the doctrine of Baptismal 
Regeneration by Hawkins on my getting into Oriel, of 
' the Church ' by Whately in 1825, and of Apostolic Suc- 
cession by Hurrell seven years later in 1829 (alter James 
on ' Episcopacy ' in 1823), I began to profess them and 
commit myself by definite acts to the profession, with far 
less of intellectual conviction and feeling of certainty than 
I now have of Papal Supremacy and Catholic com- 
munion. I doubt whether I should ever have held those 
doctrines, if I had gone on in the shilly shally way in which 
I am going on (rightly or wrongly) about the last mentioned. 

I doubt whether I can have clearer conviction than 
I have without a miracle, if then. And Bishop Butler 
warns us against expecting too clear evidence in moral 

For three full years I have been in a state of unbroken 
certainty. Against this certainty I have acted, under the 
notion that it might be a dream, and that I might break it 
as a dream by acting — bat I cannot. 

In that time I have had no ups and downs — no strong 
temptations to move, and relapses again — though of course 
at particular moments the (if so be) truth has often flashed 
upon me with unusual force. 

I scarcely ever was present at a Roman service even 
abroad. I knew no Roman CathoHcs. I have no sym- 
pathies towards them as an existing body. (I should ob- 
serve, however, that I have certainly been touched by 
hearing some were praying for me.) I am setting my face 
absolutely towards the wilderness. 

I am not conscious to myself of being set upon moving. 
What I try to preserve is what divines call the state of 
' indifferentia/ Touched and grateful as one must be for 
the prayers of one's own friends, I have tried to make out 
whether there is any feehng of impatience on my mind, as 


if they were keeping me back — any fear of their prayers — 
any unwillingness to contemplate {Domine, si vis) my re- 
maining where I am. I cannot detect any. 

The only feehng I am at all suspicious of, is one which 
for an instant I have felt once or twice, but which has not 
remained to my consciousness on my mind, a feehng of 
intellectual contempt for the paralogisms of our ecclesiastical 
and theological theory. That I do think it full of paralo- 
gisms is quite certain — that I could, if I chose, indulge my- 
self in extreme contempt of it, I know ; — and that nothing 
passes in my mind of this consciously, I know also — and I 
trust I have no latent feehng of this kind, i.e. anything 
to bias, to influence me. What I have asked myself is, 
* Are you not perhaps ashamed to hold a system which is 
so inconsistent, so untenable ? ' I cannot deny I should be 
eishamed of having to profess it — yet I think the feehng, 
whatever be its strength, is not at all able to do so great a 
thing as to make me tear myself from my friends, from their 
good opinion, from my reputation for consistency, from my 
habitual associations, from all that is naturally dear to me. 

You must not suppose, I am fancying that I know why 
or on what, on what motive, I am acting. I cannot. I do 
not feel love, or faith. I feel myseK very unreal. I can 
only say negatively, what I think does not influence me. 
But I cannot analyse my mind, and, I suppose, should do 
no good if I tried. 

Now I earnestly trust, and think, I may be able to 
preserve my present position till I have something to deter- 
mine me, in spite of what I have said : but still one or two 
things must be said. 

Think of my age. Have I not, if any one, a right to 
judge and decide ? 

Then, it is near four years or much past them, since I 
have pubhshed either Tract or Review or other writing on 
ecclesiastical questions. 

My last two professions of opinion, I think, were in 1838, 
in my letter to Faussett — and (the constrained one) to the 
Bishop in the beginning of 1841. 


For more than five years I have been employed in retreat- 
ing from my position. 

I have been silent for a year past. 

My sole ascertainable reason for moving is a feeling of 
indefinite risk to my soul in staying. This, I seem to ascer- 
tain in the following manner. I don't think I could die 
in our Communion. Then the question comes upon one, is 
not death the test ? shall one bear to five, where die one 
cannot ? 

I am kept first from deference to my friends — next by 
the fear of some dreadful delusion being over me. 

A sorrowful and unthankful reply this to yours — ^which, 
I will but add, cheered me as far, as with such dreadful 
questions before me, I can be cheered. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

P.S. — Don't suppose I am asking for an answer — I 
don't think it can really add to your pain, but rather reheve 
it, to know just where I stand. 

The following letter will be read with interest for its own 
sake, and because of the allusions to a conversation which 
the writer had held with Newman a few days before. It 
also illustrates the strange mixture of famifiarity and 
reverence with which Newman was treated by his friends. 

A Layman to J. H. Newman 

21 November, 1844. 

My dear Newman, — ^The idea has been haunting me that 
in the course of our conversation on Saturday I may have 
said something improper, or which may have given you 
pain. If so I am very sorry for it, pray forgive me, and 
be assured that nothing could be further from my intention. 

The subject indeed was one of such intense interest, and 
overwhelming importance to my mind, that I may very 
possibly have been betrayed into saying things to you which 

2 A 


I should otherwise have shrunk from saying — indeed I now 
feel conscious to myself of having been somewhat too bold 
and presumptuous. And yet, inconsistent as it may appear, 
somehow or other I can scarcely bring myself to be sorry 
for what I said (except so far as it may have given you 
pain) for God is sometimes pleased to make use of the 
meanest and most contemptible instruments for the 
accomplishment of His inscrutable purposes. 

O that it might be so in this instance ! that any words 
of mine might have weight enough to assist in setting at 
rest the painful and agitating doubts with which your 
mind is harassed on this most absorbing question ! 

Yet how can I presume to entertain any such hope ? 
As if you had not most maturely and deeply weighed the 
matter over and over again in all its bearings. 

And yet it may be, as I ventured to hint to you before, 
that your peculiar position may render you less apt than 
some others to see the full extent of the consequences to 
be apprehended from such a step as you contemplate. 
I confess that to my mind they are so fearfully alarming 
both as regards the peace and welfare of individuals and 
of the Church at large that I cannot think of them without 
dismay. 1 

Here at home in our own communion, what confusion 
to our friends, what triumph to our enemies ! and to Rome 
what an argument to confirm her in her errors and abuses ! 
What hope, humanly speaking, can remain to our poor 
humbled Church, after such a blow ? And now that she 
is beginning to show signs of life and raise her drooping 
head, to find herself all at once despaired of and deserted 
by her best champion ; one who, under Providence, has 
been the chief instrument in raising her from her degraded 
state, and, as it were, breathing into her afresh the breath 
of life ! Surely the bare thought of this is enough to make 
the whole head sick, the whole heart faint. But I cannot, 
I will not believe that such a fearful calamity is in store 

1 [Everyone took it for granted that Newman did not realise how 
much people depended upon him.] 


for us. I take heart from your own words, from expressions 
in your own writings, which seem absolutely to forbid it, 
especially in your letter to the Bishop of Oxford (I think 
it is), where you say that till Rome moves towards us, it 
is quite impossible that we should move towards Rome. 

From this and many other passages of the same tendency 
coupled with your assiurance that nothing had occurred 
within the last three or four years materially to affect your 
sentiments on the question at issue ^ — from all this I cannot 
but gather much hope and comfort. I am encouraged 
too by the apprehension you expressed that your present 
doubts might arise from some delusion ; and that in such 
a state of things, and upon a matter of such unspeakable 
importance you might indulge a hope that God in His mercy 
would vouchsafe to you some more immediate and certain 
intimation of His will. And indeed, if I may presume to 
judge, this does seem to be a case, if ever there was one, 
in which such extraordinary direction might be humbly 
hoped for. 

I earnestly pray that God may be graciously pleased to 
grant you such light as may be needful to guide your steps 
in this dark and doubtful way ; that He may give you 
strength to wait in quietness and confidence to see what 
He will do for His Church — * O tarry thou the Lord's leisure, 
be strong and He shall comfort thine heart.' 

I can say no more, indeed I fear I may have said too 
much already ; if so pray forgive me, and Believe me, as 
much as ever, 

Your grateful and devoted friend, 


P.S. — I am tempted to cry out (indeed the words have 
been haunting me ever since I saw you last, and I must 
say them) 

Tu Patronus es, tu Parens, 
Si deseris tu, periimus. 

1 Newman had the greatest di£&culty in making his friends under- 
stand that it was not external events which were influencing him. 


On November 28 Faber, who had placed himself under 
Newman's guidance, wrote as follows : 

' I want you to revoke your prohibition, laid on me last 
October year, of invoking our Blessed Lady, the Saints, 
and angels. Really I do not know whether I ask this in a 
lower or less spiritual mood than usual, or whether the mere 
pain I feel in not speaking to the Blessed Mother of God 
drives me to it. . . . Oret has become almost intolerable/ 
He goes on to say that he will do what Newman bids him — 
' obedience will do me more good than invocation/ He 
then speaks of his state of mind ; he had recoiled from the 
idea of change more than before, yet he could give no good 
grounds for staying where he was.^ 

J. H. Newman to Rev. F. W. Faber 

Littlemore : Advent Sunday [Dec. i], 1844. 

My dear Faber, — I find it very difficult to answer you, 
both on your own account, and from diffidence which you 
will easily understand, in my own judgement. Perhaps 
it will be best for me to put some of my reasons before you, 
as far as I can. 

I can understand certainly that Oret may be intolerably 
cold. It does not strike me that you infringed your rule by 
using the Confiteor ; — ^but now as to direct and habitual 

Really I have a great repugnance at mixing religions or 
worships together, it is like sowing the field with mingled 
seed. A system is a whole ; one cannot tell the effect of 
one part disjoined from the rest. All this you know better 
than I can state it. Observances which may be very right 
in Saints, or in a Church which creates saints, in a communion 
in which the aids of grace are such and such, may be 
dangerous in a communion which has them not. I do not 
like decanting Rome into England ; the bottles may break. 
Indeed I look with much anxiety to what is doing now in 
many quarters — ^not the least to the inculcation of extra- 

1 The letter is printed in full in Bowden's Life and Letters of F. W 


ordinary degrees of asceticism ; extreme strictness about 
indifferent matters, heights of devotion and meditation, 
self-forgetfulness and self-abandonment, and the like. 
What is natural in Saints and in a saintly system, becomes 
a mere form in others. Of course the Invocations you 
write about would be no form in you, but others evils 
might come of them. 

Again, I am not sure there is not danger of presumption 
in taking what belongs to another system at will. Private 
judgement comes in, and eclecticism. There is an absence 
of submission to religion as a rule. And I am not satisfied 
that our Church has not a claim in such observances on the 
obedience of her members to her directions. And when a 
man is holding ofhce in the Church, so to speak, as you are, 
I think there is a still greater difficulty in the adoption of 
such observances. 

You will understand without a word of mine, that I am 
saying all this by way of showing you the grounds of my 
opinion, and not as forcing it upon you. I am far too much 
perplexed myself in various ways, to feel it pleasant to give 
advice at all — ^much more to suffer what I say to be taken 
as a decision on the point. I hope you will but use what 
I have said as suggestions for your guidance. 

I cannot think that Oakeley's arguments in the E. Ch. 
will stand, more than you, and I shall be surprised if the 
Bishop of L. likes to be told that O. considers that the Pope 
has a prior claim on his obedience. 

Ward has been had up — and Romanizing propositions 
submitted to him to deny. He has got till Tuesday to 

I hear people speak with great commendation of Sir 
Launcelot and hope soon to have time to read it. I hope 
you have recovered the fatigue of St. Wilfred. 

Yours most sincerely, 

John H. Newman. 

' I look with much anxiety to what is doing now in many 
quarters — not the least to the inculcation of extraordinary 


degrees of asceticism J &c. These words recall one of the 
most penetrating of Newman's sermons, * Dangers to the 
Penitent/ the fourth in ' Sermons on Subjects of the Day/ 
preached on October 30, 1842. That this sermon should 
have been called for is an amazing testimony to the depth 
and intensity of the religious spirit aroused by the Oxford 
Movement. A few passages from it, pieced together, may 
serve to recall it to the memory of those who have read it, 
and to stimulate the curiosity of those who have not.^ 

No state is more dreary than that of the repentant 
sinner. A man finds that he has a great work to do, and 
does not know how to do it, and his impatience and restless- 
ness are as great as his conscious ignorance. 

First Danger. — Repentant sinners are often impatient 
to put themselves upon some new line of action. Their 
heart yearns towards humiliation, and bums with a godly 
indignation against themselves, as if nothing were too bad 
for them ; they look about for some state of life to engage in, 
some task or servile office to engage in. But it commonly 
happens that God does not disclose His will to them at once, 
and for that will they ought to wait. * O tarry thou the 
Lord's leisure.' 

Second Danger. — Be on your guard against excess. 
Persons do not know what they can bear, and what they 
cannot, till they have tried it. It is a great fault to be am- 
bitious, and men may easily aim at praying more than they 
can, or at having a clearer faith and deeper humility than 
at present they can have. All things are done by degrees. 
Let them also remember that a slight penance, if long, is 
far more trying than a severe one, if short, for it outlasts 
their present agitated state of mind. 

Third Danger. — Rash vows or promises are to be avoided. 
If men desire to be of little account in the world, let them 
not at once make any engagement or profession to that 
effect. Instead, let them daily pray that they may never 
be rich, that their dwelling be ever lowly, their home 
solitary ; that others may have precedence over them, 
others speak while they are silent, others receive deference, 
and they neglect, others have handsome houses, pleasant 
gardens, etc. Will not such a prayer be a sort of recurrent 

1 The words of the preacher have been kept to, as far as possible, in 
what follows, but it has not been thought necessary to use inverted commas 
or marks of omission. 


vow, yet without that dangerous boldness which a private, 
self-devised resolution implies ? Who can go on day by 
day thus praying, yet not imbibe somewhat of the spirit 
for which he prays ? Yet, let no one rashly pray thus, lest, 
before he wish it, he gain his prayer. 

Fourth Danger. — Men should be careful not to act without 
advice. What an inconsistent age is this ! Every depart- 
ment of things that are, is pronounced to be capable of 
science, to rest upon principles, to require teaching, except 
self-discipline. This is left to take its chance. 

The sermon concludes with an appeal, made doubly 
effective by the coimsels of prudence which preceded it. 
' Let us excite each other to seek that good part which shall 
not be taken away from us. Let us labour to be really in 
earnest, and to view things in the way in which God views 
them. Then it will be but a little thing to give up the 
world ; only an easy thing to reconcile the mind to what 
it at first shrinks from. . . ..'All will in time become natural 
to us, which at present we do but own to be good and 
true. We shall covet what at present we do but admire.' 

The reader will have observed that the dangers of which 
the preacher speaks could only beset men who were eager 
for a hidden life of self-denial. There is not a word which 
suggests those outward manifestations of intemperate 
zeal which might have their source in hidden springs of 
self-love, as, for example, a hankering after notoriety, a 
secret wish to be thought well of, or even the desire to be 
identified with a great cause. What must have been the 
anguish of the man who had stirred up in others the yearning 
after holiness, which every line of this sermon implies, when 
he felt bound to dissipate the work of his hands ! He had 
no illusions as to the comparative fewness of those who 
would follow him ; and feared much for the stability of 
those who did not.^ 

The reader's attention may alSo be called to another 
sermon, the ninth in the same volume, which is equally 
an historical monument. Its title is * Indulgence in 
Religious Privileges,' and it is a warning to those who were 
attracted by the beauty of the Catholic ideal, as set forth 
by the Movement, but turned away from its severer side. 

^ In Loss and Gain at the end of chap. v. he makes Reding say : ' I 
fear so very much that all you who do not come forward will go back. 
You cannot stand where you are,' &c. 


The preacher almost speaks as if the Church of England 
was being transformed ! ' A more primitive, Catholic, 
devout, ardent spirit is abroad . . . the piercing, and 
thrilling, and kindling, and enrapturing glories of the 
Kingdom of Christ are felt in their degree by many. Men 
are beginning to understand that influence, which in the 
beginning made the philosopher leave his school, and the 
soldier beat his spear into a pruning-hook. They are 
beginning to understand that the Gospel is not a mere 
scheme or doctrine, but a reality and a life,' ^ &c. 

The end of the sermon is well worth attention. The 
preacher had evidently been brought face to face with 
the question, if our lives are to be shaped after the pattern 
of the Apostles and the first Christians, must all God's 
temporal blessings, ' all the beauty of nature . . . the 
advantages of civilised life, and the presence of friends and 
intimates,' be given up ? The reader must find out for 
himself how this question was answered. The best way 
of inducing him to read the sermon, is to stimulate without 
satisfying his curiosity. 

J, H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : December i6 744, 

My dear Keble, — You will like to know, if you do not, 
the state of dear Robert Williams. He is on the point of 
a severe operation, and is under a good deal of anxiety of 
mind — very much so — I am going to London to him to be 
with him during it. I shall stay but a short time. A 
tedious and disagreeable illness awaits him after it, I hear. 

For myself I am just recovering from a severe influenza, 
which wonderfully pulled me down — and I cannot properly 
stand and walk, as it is. The principal sjrmptom was 
extreme prostration of strength. 

How singular, as it appears to me, is the progress of 
things in Oxford, considering it is quite external to myself, 
and while concurring does but concur with my state of 
mind. I have had nothing to do with Ward's book. I 
objected at the time to many things in his articles and said 

^ Sermons on Subjects of the Day, p. 115, 


I did not see the good of them. I took no part of any kind 
in the publication of the Ideal itself, nor was asked to do 
so. And, since it came out, I have told him and others, 
that much as there was valuable in it, I would not entertain 
the main theory on which it is written that a man may hold 
all that the Church of Rome holds yet remain under sub- 
scription to our formularies, or (which is the same thing 
stated without reference to the particular case) that a 
Church could have the Sacraments without the doctrines of 
the gospel, or could impart grace yet not possess authority. 
And next I was against the move of October against the 
Vice Chancellor as its authors knew — though I took no 
active part against it, and followed where others followed. 
From these two facts, the provocation given by Ward's 
book and the hopes excited by the overwhelming majority 
for the Vice Chancellor, has arisen the proposition for a 
test which now lies before Convocation. It may indeed 
be rejected, — but at present it certainly does seem as if 
external events were taking matters into their own hands. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

December 27, 1844. 

St. John's Day. 

... I want very much to thank you for your two kind 
letters, and for thinking so much of me in all your per- 
plexities. . . . Certainly it is a sad unsettled world : the 
two lessons out of Isaiah for Christmas Eve struck me as 
a melancholy contrast between what this part of Christen- 
dom is and what it might be ; but is it better elsewhere ? 

As to the Heads I think it very likely that they were 
put up to this, as you say, by Ward's Book, and by their 
great majority for the V.C. but then I also think that the 
same things have emboldened them to ride their horse too 
hard, to propose a penalty which Law will set aside, and 
a test which will not be carried. 


In respect of Ward, I am quite resolved to vote against 
the censure, and almost to give some reasons which will 
entirely avoid the theological question ; as the doubtful- 
ness whether they have a right to degrade him, the unfair- 
ness of treating him so rigidly in respect of the Articles, 
while they let other people do as they like by the Prayer 
Book, the folly and irrelevance of most of their quotations, 
and of their reasoning upon them, the positive excellence 
of his book in general, and very particularly, the falsehood 
and uncharitableness of charging him with dishonesty, and 
that in a formal and abiding document. 

I suppose there is something in these reasons, as I hear 
people continually starting one or other of them. The 
Test seems to excite great disgust, I cannot help fearing 
that they will withdraw it and carry the other measure, 
which seems to me a most undesirable issue. 

I trust you continue better. The cold pinches my wife 
sadly. Wilson is tolerable. 

Am I right in thinking that Ward's view of the English 
Church is the same as yours in the ' Subjects for the Day,' 
only that you speak doubtfully, he more or less positively ? 

Forgive this very stupid letter. 

Ever yours very affectionate 

J. K. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

December 29, 1844. 

My dear Keble, — R. W. is going on well but with a 
great deal of pain and discomfort. How surprising that 
his long course of health and spirits should be thus reversed ! 
They expect he will not get out of doors till the end of 
February — his confinement began in the middle of November. 
A sad Christmas he has had — distressed by the state of 
Church matters as well as by his personal sufferings. It 
must be intended for some good end. 

W. Froude has been here to-day for a few hours, and 
confirms your account of the dissatisfaction which the 


Test creates. It will be a remarkable fact if it is rejected — 
for that will be an indirect assertion of No. 90. On this 
Ward rehes as an illustration of the expedience of his Hne 
of acting. He says that Convocation would to a certainty 
have condemned No. 90 four years ago, had it been sum- 
moned — i.e. to talk is to persuade. Say things, and 
people will get accustomed to them and admit them. I 
have always thought this, but I cannot go with Ward in 
his particular apphcation of the principle — because I do not 
think it ought to be admitted, even though it he admitted. 

I mean, I think it shocks common sense to say that 
the Articles are compatible with a maintenance of the 
whole circle of Roman doctrine. Again, it is a great para- 
dox to say that a Church has the gifts of grace yet no 
authority in teaching ; is priest, yet not prophet. And 
further, I think he would go beyond my * Sermons on the 
Day,' thus ; — that he would deny that we are at all part 
of the CathoHc Church. He has not said so, and I should 
not wish it repeated, but since you wish to know, I suspect 
he holds that we are simply external to the Church. Now, 
it is one thing to say (as I have said) that our Church has 
lost its external notes of Catholicity, another to say that 
she has no CathoHcity at all. I do not say he is always 
consistent in implying the view I am imputing to him — 
and for this reason, if for no other, it would be wrong to 
charge him with it. Yet if he holds it, I cannot but think 
it very dangerous. To remain knowingly out of the Church 
seems next door to maintaining some bad heresy. I mean, 
I should not wonder at a person so acting falling any day 
into any error. It is quite another thing to be in doubt. 

I have said all this, because you seem to contemplate 
writing in his defence, and therefore you should know, 
as you wish, what he holds. I do not know how to say 
I wish you to write, for it is bringing you into trouble ; 
yet certainly your writing would be very serviceable to 
him. I doubt however whether a pamphlet would not 
be of more use three weeks hence than now — and indeed 
probably you will not get out yours till the end of that 


time. I mean that, it may be a mere finesse, I cannot 
tell, but it seems to me as if our friends must begin, not by 
defending Ward, but by securing an opposition to the test. 
When this point is well worked, persons who have pledged 
to oppose the Test may be led on to what they would have 
shrunk from at first, the defence of Ward. W. F. reports 
that Pusey's Letter has done good — and I doubt whether 
it would, had he not confined himself to what was personal 
to himself. By waiting too, you will see what Ward is 
going to say — for he is at a pamphlet. 

All good Christmas wishes to you and Mrs. Keble 
I hope she is better for the change of weather — though 
W. F. says, contrary to my hopes, that we shall have 
some more cold. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 

P.S. — No one can have a more unfavourable view 
than I of the present state of the Roman CathoHcs — so 
much so, that any who join them would be Hke the Cister- 
cians of Fountains, hving under trees till their house was 
built. If I must account for it, I should say that the want 
of unity has injured both them and us. 

Dec. 30. — They suppose in Oxford to-day strongly 
that the Test will be rejected and Ward condemned. 



' Ad vesperum demorabitur fletus : et ad matutinum laetitia.' 

The chief topics upon which the letters in this last chapter 
touch, are (i) the * Essay on Development' ; (2) Mr. Ward's 
condemnation ; (3) the action brought against Mr. Oakeley 
by the Bishop of London. 

(i) Some interesting particulars concerning the writing 
of the ' Essay on Development ' will be found in the letters. 
They complete the account given of it in the 'Apologia/ 
In this last-named work Newman speaks of his object as an 
immediately personal one. * At the end of 1844/ ^^ says, 
* I came to the resolution of writing an essay on Doctrinal 
Development ; and then, if at the end of it, I found my 
convictions in favour of the Roman church were not weaker, 
of taking the necessary steps for admission into her fold.' ^ 
The results on his own mind were not, as he seems to have 
anticipated, merely negative. ' As I advanced,' he goes on 
to say, 'my difficulties so cleared away that I ceased to 
speak of the " Roman Catholics," and boldly called them 
Catholics. Before I got to the end I resolved to be received, 
and the book remains in the state in which it was then, 

unfinished.' ^ 

In his correspondence he speaks of another and perhaps 
more urgent motive, viz. the duty he felt that he owed to 
others of explaining the reasons for the great change which 
had come over his opinions. There were two ways in which 
this duty might be performed. The one was by putting 
forth something which would immediately excite interest*^ 

1 Apologia, p. 228. ^ Ibid. p. 234. 

8 If, for example, he had written something in the manner of his 
Lectures on Anglican Difficulties. It is a mistake to regard these lectures 
as a brilliant piece of impromptu work. Like the Essay on Development, 
they are full of the thoughts which had been seething in Newman's mind 
since the autumn of 1839, 


The other was by writing a severe philosophical treatise, 
which, instead of creating a sensation, would take time 
before it made its way. In his letters he gives his reasons 
for adopting the latter course. 

The writing of a book like the ' Development' in the space 
of nine months was an extraordinary achievement, and our 
wonder is increased when we learn from the author's corre- 
spondence how many of these months slipped by before he 
could be said to have got fairly under weigh. When he 
began to write, the exact form his work was to take had not 
as yet shaped itself in his mind. One thing in particular 
must strike all readers, who bear in mind the limited 
amount of time which from the first he intended to devote 
to the book, and that is the immense labour expended upon 
details. When a building is run up in a hurry, care may be 
taken to make it weather-proof and suitable for the purpose 
it is intended to serve, but upon details not strictly necessary 
time and labour will not be lavished. In the ' Essay on 
Development ' there are no such marks of parsimony of time 
and labour. To take an example almost at random. In 
the third section ^ of the fifth chapter of the original edition 
the author is discussing the use and the abuse of hypothesis 
and antecedent probabilities in historical inquiries. For 
purposes of illustration he first turns to Giesler's text-book 
of ecclesiastical history, and gives a number of instances 
where this author colours, distorts, and interprets facts by 
tacit assumptions of his own. He then dissects Gibbon's 
account of the Paulicians, and shows how the historian, with 
the air of one engaged in marshalling indisputable facts, 
constructs it on a somewhat slender likelihood. Next he 
turns to Thirlwall and Heeren, giving instances where 
they had to eke out scanty records with antecedent prob- 
abilities. He ends with a specimen of a covert assumption 
made by Mosheim. Congenial as this kind of work was 
to Newman, it must have taken up a good deal of time, 
and was not urgently necessary for the object which he 
had in view.^ 

(2) On February 13, 1845, the Hebdomadal Board at 
Oxford proposed three measures to Convocation. The 

^ Omitted in later editions. 

2 Compare chap. ix. s. 3 of the Grammar of Assent, where he 
handles in the same fashion some half-dozen works on Greek and Roman 

THE END 367 

first was a condemnation of IVl . Ward's ' Ideal ' ; this was 
passed by 777 votes to 386. The second was to deprive 
Mr. Ward of his University degrees ; this was carried by 
569 to 511 votes. The third was a censure on Tract 90. 
This was not put to the vote : ' the Proctors, and the senior 
Proctor, Mr. Guillemard of Trinity, stopped it in the words, 
Nobis Procuratoribus non placet.' ^ 

(3) Frederick Oakeley, who, besides being in charge of 
the Margaret Street Chapel, retained his Fellowship at 
Balliol, felt his position would be an unsatisfactory one 
if he did not give the University authorities an opportunity 
of taking proceedings against him, for his own views 
concerning the Thirty-nine Articles were the same as those 
of Mr. Ward. In consequence, he published a letter to 
the Vice-Chancellor defining his position. The challenge 
was not taken up ; but later on he published a pamphlet 
which gave the Bishop of London an opportunity for 
attacking him. The Bishop required him to resign the 
Margaret Street Chapel, and on his refusal instituted a 
suit against him in the Court of Arches. Oakeley had a 
powerful backing, for the congregation at Margaret Street 
was wealthy, influential, and enthusiastic. Among his 
most strenuous supporters were Hope, Bellasis, and Badeley. 
His prospects, according to the estimate of his advisers, 
were as follows. He might escape in the Court of Arches 
on technical grounds, but if the prosecution raised the 
doctrinal question, he was almost certain to be condemned. 
If this happened, they would advise him to appeal to the 
Privy Council, which would be very likely to upset the 
judgment of the Court of Arches. When Oakeley refused 
to resign the Margaret Street Chapel, his mind was not 
unsettled, but before the trial came off, it became clear 
to himself and others that, whether it went for or against 
him, he would sooner or later leave the Church of England. 
When Newman learned this, he was very urgent that Oakeley 

1 Church's Oxford Movement, p. 382. The second Proctor was Church 
himself. Nearly a quarter of a century later, Newman recalled the service 
he had then rendered him in the following words : ' I cannot forget, how, in 
February 1841, you suffered me day after day to open to you my anxieties, 
and plans, as events successively elicited them ; and much less can I lose 
memory of your great act of friendship, as well as of justice and courage, 
in the February of 1845, your Proctor's year, when you, with another 
now departed, shielded me from the ** civium ardor prava jubentium," by 
the interposition of a prerogative belonging to your academical position.' — 
Dedicatory Letter to new edition of the Oxford University Sermons, 


should place his resignation in the Bishop's hands. He 
wrote to this effect to two of Oakeley's advisers — Hope and 
Bellasis. The letter to the former will be found below. 
It has not seemed worth while to print the letter to Bellasis, 
which, by the way, was written at Oakeley's request^ for 
it adds little or nothing to the letter to Hope. 

Eventually Oakeley placed his resignation in the hands 
of the Bishop, but proceedings were not stayed. Judgment 
went by default, and the court gave sentence of perpetual 
suspension unless the defendant should retract his errors 
to the satisfaction of the Bishop. In later years he con- 
templated with some amusement the more lenient treat- 
ment meted out by the same court to one of the writers 
in ' Essays and Reviews ' who had tampered with some 
of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity. This gentle- 
man was sentenced to suspension for a year, and no recanta- 
tion was demanded. ' His Lordship thought it would be 
wrong to suspend the defendant until he retracted, as that 
judgment might cause a retractation which did not come 
from the heart.' ^ 

Among Cardinal Newman's papers is a packet of 
letters from Oakeley relating to his lawsuit. Unfortunately 
Newman's part in the correspondence has not been found. 
One point of some interest comes out casually in Oakeley 's 
letters. Like Newman, he did not anticipate that the break- 
up of 1845 would be followed by a great number of persons 
leaving the Church of England, but he did fear that many 
would discard or water down the principles of the Move- 
ment, and sink back to the low dogmatic level from which 
it had raised them. In 1865 he seems to have thought 
that his fears had been in a great measure realised.^ 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

" Jan. 5/45. 

My dear K., — I have been much hurt at seeing an article 
in the ' Quarterly ' against Ward, said to be Gladstone's. 

^ See Times of December 11, 1862, quoted in Oakeley 's Tractanan 
Movement, p. 97, 

* P. 113 in Historical Notes on the Tvactarian Movement, Longmans, 
Green, & Co., 1865. The ' Notes ' should not be confused with the Popular 
Lectures which were published in 1855. It is a great pity that both works 
are out of print. 

THE END 369 

Really the author seems to write to compass his degradation. 
I don't deny the force of his arguments, but think it (not only 
unfair as an ex 'parte account of the book), but cruel just 
now, when he has every one upon him, and when heretics, 
so that they be Protestant are unmolested by Bishop or 
Vice-Chancellor. No one can be expected to do any thing 
till W/s pamphlet appears — but it certainly strengthens my 
inclination that you should make a protest, if there be 
no other objection to it. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

All good wishes to you and yours for the New Year. 
I was much concerned to hear how ill Mrs. K. had been. 

When Gladstone heard that Newman disapproved of 
his article he wrote him a long letter in explanation.^ 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : January 10/45. 

My dear K., — I have little to say to your paper, except 
that I think it very good indeed, as far as you have drawn 
it out. I say ' as far ' — because you do not seem to have 
finished the third head. I should really hope that the 
various points you have mentioned will suggest profitable 
matter for Members of Convocation. They say Gladstone 
means to vote against the degradation — if so, I wish he had 
delayed his article three months. 

Perhaps it would not be a good rhetorical argument, 
but it strikes me forcibly how unjust it is to degrade Ward 
on the grounds specified, for this reason — hardly one or two 
persons agree with him — hardly one or two think all Roman 
doctrine compatible with the letter of the 39 Articles. If so, 
it is a mere wanton, meaningless, pointless attack almost on 
an individual. When Pusey was struck, at least he repre- 
sented a party — but whom does Ward represent ? is Con- 

1 It can be read in Letters on Church and Religion &c. vol. i. p, 312 ff. 

2 B 


vocation an ordinary judge, to come forward whenever any 
private member of Convocation does wrong, or an extra- 
ordinary for great occasions ? A great thing indeed will 
be done, if Ward is degraded ! hardly any one else is 
touched — ^no party is repressed — no principle is affirmed. 
The only excuse, if they condescended to think about 
excuses, which the Hebdomadal Board can make for not 
touching Sabellianisers is, that they are so few (I am not 
granting the fact). Milman again might escape because he 
is not dangerous. So painful a matter as a formal punish- 
ment is not to be inflicted except of necessity, for great 
evils — ^what is the great end in degrading Ward, etc., etc. 

I go on Tuesday to R. Williams, and on Thursday 
to H. Wilberforce in my way to Mrs. Bowden at St. Leonards. 
Lent falls so early, that my holiday will be very much 


Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 
Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

February lo, 1845. 

My very dear Newman, — It seems uncomfortable not to 
be speaking a word to you at such a time as this, when so 
many are thinking of you all day long with anxiety and 
even tenderness, whose words and thoughts, if they could be 
conveyed to you, would be a comfort to you indeed — and 
surely they will be conveyed to you in effect ; sooner or 
later, in one shape or another, the dew of Hermon will fall 
on the hill of Sion (I trust it is not wrong so to apply the 
words) . 

If you are more hardly used by some persons, and 
liberties taken with your name, such as you feel, I fear, but 
too keenly, yet do not doubt nor forget how dearly beyond 
common examples that name is cherished by very many 
others — ^to whom you have been made the instrument of 
good, partly perhaps with this very providential purpose, 
that so sore a trial might be tempered to you. I just wanted 

I . THE END ■ 371 

to say this much, for, though dangerous to dwell on in a 
common way, it seems to me just the sort of help which one's 
infirmity might need and thankfully receive when the sense 
of being calumniated comes over bitterly upon us. You 
will forgive it, should it be altogether out of place ; as, 
coming from me, it may very well be. 

This move of the Heads has caused me to review the 
argument of my letter to Coleridge, and I think I see clearly 
that the case I there contemplated will not really have 
occurred, let the voting on Thursday be what it may. For 
that argument went entirely on the hypothesis that the 
University is the imponens of Academical Subscription, the 
contrary of which seems now to be ruled. I suppose it, 
therefore, to be the special duty of each person whom they 
censure to show by retaining his place among them that 
he considers their censiure null and void. I have written 
a short letter to this effect, and sent it to R. Palmer, to be 
sent to the next ' English Churchman,' if P. thinks proper, 
because the ' E.C has been quoting that opinion of mine. 

God be with you in storm and in sunshine, and make 
me fitter to be 

Your very affectionate Friend, 

J. K. 

My wife is pretty well now. Wilson seems to me much 
more comfortable. How clever Ward's last pamphlet 
seems — but his rough, rude way makes him lose in rhetoric 
quite as much as he gains in logic. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

February 20, 1845. 

I have nothing to say to you, dearest Newman, that is 
at all to the purpose, and yet I want to say a word to you 
just to say that I remember your birthday, and long to be 
able to keep it as I ought ; but it is to be hoped there are 
others who will make up for one's deficiencies in that way- 
One thing I should like to do would be to choose out 


some one of the old days, when we most enjoyed ourselves 
together, either with dear H. F., or in thought and talk of 
him, and live over it again for an hour or two — if such in- 
dulgences are not unfit for this season : and to me they 
ought not to be altogether unfit, for surely they would 
bring with them bitter recollections of thoughts and fancies 
very unfit to have been where I was allowed to be. But 
I am not going to talk of myself. 

I was going to say that, if I might choose a pleasant day 
to think of, perhaps the day of [laying] the first stone at 
Littlemore might be it. Many places and times, it seems 
to me, may well have taken a sort of colouring from that 
day, and surely it brings with it sweet and hopeful thoughts, 
and many of them, and the past and the future, and the 
living and the departed, and times of faith and times of 
decay, seem blended, as one thinks of it, in a way which 
must (by His blessing, may we not forfeit it !) issue in 
comfort at last. 

I remember too another day, when we walked up with 
old Christie [J. F. C], and there was talk of how each 
word of our Lord's is, as it were, a sort of Church Canon, 
and Christie said the talk ought to be printed, this was long 
after the other, but I cannot exactly remember when. 

Will you bear with me in sending you this talk, which 
surely is worth very little ?— but it will not be quite worth- 
less, if it does but amuse you a little on your birthday. 

I should like to try my memory a little further, but the 
post-horn is announced, and this letter will not keep, what- 
ever another might do. 

So believe me always in all times. 
Your very affectionate and wishing-to-be-worthier 

J. Keble. 

I will not have you trouble yourself to answer effusions 
like this. 

THE END 373 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. Keble 

Littlemore : February 28, 1845. 

My dear Keble, — I must write to you a line on this day 
to thank you for your two letters— though I shall not do it 
as they claim or I should wish. How much has opinions, 
in nine years, yet how short a time it seems since we had 
dear R. H. F. with us. 

How came you to know my birthday ? and all you said 
was very kind and more than I deserve. 

This last affair did not annoy me at all. I took no sort 
of interest in it. I could not, with such real subjects of 
pain already on my mind. I rather looked on it with hope, 
as leading perhaps to something. 

Oakeley has been somewhat cast down by opinions, 
among others I suppose of yourself, against his Letter to 
the Bishop. I suppose no one but himself is a judge quite 
under his feelings and views, for they are so much his own. 
He is coming here, I believe, for a day or two's rest. He 
knows us all so well. 

Ever yours, My dear Keble, 

Most affectionately, 
J. H. Newman. 

P.S. — Mrs. Bowden has got over the measles — ^but 
Johnny Bowden is still an invalid. 

J. H. Newman to Rev. J. F. Christie 

Littlemore : April 8/45. 

My dear Christie, — When 1 reflect upon it, I ought 
not to be so much surprised at the report contained in your 
kind note just received, as I was on reading it. Generally 
1 am careless about reports, but I cannot let this pass 
without at once contradicting it. 

It is totally, utterly, false — I thank God so dreadful 
a calamity as you speak of is quite foreign to me. My 
mind is quite pure from it. I suppose indeed there are 


few persons of education to whom sceptical thoughts do 
not occur, that is from without, e.g. words of sceptical 
import present themselves to their eyes bodily in a printed 
book. But beyond that, I have no confession whatever 
to make. I never have felt the temptation for an instant 
from within. 

Very likely I have said to some persons, indeed I know 
I have, that I thought the English system was so incon- 
sistent, that a careful thinker would find himself obliged 
to believe more than it contains or less, and that if on 
perceiving this he did not go forward, he might, as a judg- 
ment, be left to fall behind. And perhaps I may have said 
that of course it was a matter of great anxiety to me lest 
such a judgment might come upon me unless I made right 
use of what light was given me. This is the only way in 
which so dreadful an anticipation has ever occurred to my 
mind. But to fear a temptation is not to feel it. 

I do not mind any one seeing this note who is anxious 
on the subject, but of course it should not be shown un- 

I do not forget I owe you a letter. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

John H. Newman. 

I said ' no ' about the Hospinian — ^but I shall be very 
glad to have it. 

The following letter, which has already been published 
in Mr. Lathbury's ' Letters on Church and Religion of 
W. E. Gladstone,' and Viscount Morley's ' Life of Glad- 
stone,' can hardly be spared from a collection of Newman 
Letters. Preoccupied as Newman was with his own diffi- 
culties and his ' Essay on Development,' he was able to 
take a keen interest in what was going on in the outside 
world, and recognised in anything but a state of hopeless 
and helpless despair that the ' old order ' was not only 
passing, but had passed.^ For the circumstances to which 

^ He gave a vivid account, nearly thirty years later, of the ' old order ' 
(' when I was young ' and ' the State had a conscience ') for Mr. Gladstone's 
benefit, in his letter to the Duke of Norfolk {Anglican Difficulties, vol. ii. 
pp. 264 ff.). 

THE END 375 

the letter refers, the reader must be referred to the pages 
of Mr. Gladstone's biographers. Stated very summarily, 
they amount to this. When Sir Robert Peel proposed to 
increase the grant made to Maynooth, Mr. Gladstone, 
who was a member of the Cabinet, resigned. After he had 
thus regained his liberty he voted for the measure. He 
was not able to support it as a Cabinet Minister, because 
it was against the principles with which he was identified 
by his book on * The State in its Relations with the Church.' 
Although he saw that these principles were for practical 
purposes obsolete, he could determine nothing till he was 
inwardly and outwardly in a position of perfect inde- 

J. H. Newman to Mr. Gladstone 

April 1 8, 1845. 

My dear Mr. Gladstone, — I should not venture to en- 
croach upon your time with this note of mine, but for your 
letters to me last autumn, which make me read with great 
interest, of course, everything which is in the papers about 
you, and encourage me to think that you will not think me 

As various persons ask me what I understand is your 
present position, I will put down what I conceive it to be ; 
and I will beg you to correct my account of it just as much 
or just as little as you please, and to determine, as you think 
best, whether I shall say I have your authority for any 
statements you may kindly make in your answer or not. 

Useless words always look cold and formal on paper. 
1 should not think of saying (what I really hope it will not 
even come into your passing thoughts to doubt) how great 
interest I feel in the line of thought which is at present 
engaging your mind, and how sure I am you will be con- 
ducted to right conclusions. Nor is there anything to 
startle or distress me in what you are reported to have said 
in the House. 

I say then : ' Mr. Gladstone has said the State ought 
to have a conscience — ^but it has not a conscience. Can he 
give it a conscience ? Is he to impose his own conscience 


on the State ? He would be very glad to do so, if it thereby 
would become the State's conscience. But that is absurd. 
He must deal with facts. It has a thousand consciences, as 
being in its legislative and executive capacities, the aggregate 
of a hundred minds — that is, it has no conscience. 

'You will say, ''Well, the obvious thing would be, if 
the State has not a conscience, that he should cease to be 
answerable for it." So he has — he has retired from the 
Ministry. While he thought he could believe it had a 
conscience — till he was forced to give up, what it was his 
duty to cherish as long as ever he could, the notion that the 
British Empire was a subject and servant of the Kingdom 
of Christ — ^he served the State. Now that he finds this to 
be a mere dream, much as it ought to be otherwise, much as 
it once was otherwise, he has said, '' I cannot serve such a 

* But really,' I continue, ' do you in your heart mean to 
say that he should absolutely and for ever give up the State 
and the country ? I hope not — I do not think he has so 
committed himself. That the conclusion he has come to is 
a very grave one, and not consistent with his going on 
blindl}^ in the din and hurry of business, without having 
principles to guide him, I admit ; and this I conceive is his 
reason for at once retiring from the Ministry, that he may 
contemplate the state of things calmly and from without. 
But I really cannot pronounce, nor can you, nor can he 
perhaps at once, what is a Christian's duty under these new 
circumstances — ^whether to remain in retirement from public 
affairs or not. Retirement, however, could not be done by 
halves. If he is absolutely to give up all management of 
public affairs, he must retire not only from the Ministry, 
but from Parliament. 

* I see another reason for his retiring from the Ministry. 
The public thought they had in his book a pledge that the 
Government would not take such a step with respect to 
Maynooth as is now before the country. Had he continued 
in the Ministry, he would, to a certain extent, have been 
misleading the country. 

THE END 377 

' You say, " He made some show of seeing his way in 
future, for he gave advice. He said it would be well for all 
parties to yield something. To see his way and to give 
advice is as if he had found some principle to go on." I 
did not so understand him. I thought he distinctly stated 
that he had not yet found a principle, but he gave that 
advice which facts, or what he called circumstances, made 
necessary, and which, if followed out, will, it is to be hoped, 
lead to some basis of principle which we do not see at 

This letter has run to a greater length than I had 

expected, but I thought I would do my best to bring out 

the impression which your speech has given me of your 


I am. My dear Mr. Gladstone, 

Very truly yours, 

John H. Newman. 

Mr. Gladstone replied in a letter nearly half as long 
again as Newman's. * I do not know,' he said, * that I 
should have the least difficulty in subscribing to your 
letter as it stands ; and I could much rather say ditto to 
you than do your work over again in my own language.' ^ 

J. H. Newman to Mrs. William Froude 

April 20, 1845. 

My dear Mrs. Froude — I have long been thinking of 
writing to you, both as wishing it, and thinking you might 
be anxious. 

It is a melancholy thing to report progress — ^melancholy, 
that is, to the hearers. Were it not for the pain I am giving, 
I seem to myself to be likely to have no pain. I do not 
know, but so it seems to me, as if I had no doubt or difficulty. 
My mind certainly is in a very different state from what 
it was this time [word illegible, possibly it is year]. It 
is so made up. . . . Do you recollect the instance of L[ock- 

1 Letters on Church and Religion , vol. i. p. 73. 


hart], one of our inmates here, who suddenly joined the 
Church of Rome, not in the best way ? It annoyed us 
all. He joined at once the Order of Charity, and has 
lately, after an absence of a year and a half, been to see his 
mother. She has sent a friend of mine a letter, of which 
I have got his leave to transcribe the following extract, 
which I think you may like to see. Of course it is very 

' The only mischief he may do is showing the advantage 
of being at rest, and nothing can be more so than he is — 
all his old natural cheerfulness is restored, and he is as 
merry as a boy, not at all like the melancholy notion gained 
from novels and tales of a gloomy monk ; and more 
interested in us and our doings than he has been for years, 
and loving us better than he ever did. I wish your mother 
could see him, and many more who are dreading, with so 
much misery and little faith, all I dreaded this time two 
years ago. He has never been so much to me in his life 
before.' With love to W. etc., 

J. H. N. 

J. H. Newman to Mrs. William Froude 

June I, 1845. 

My dear Mrs. Froude — Your very kind letter was most 
welcome. . . . Did I tell you I was preparing a book of 
some sort to advertise people how things stood with me ? 
I think I am bound to do this, if I can — ^but you may so 
suppose, how difficult a thing it is to do. And I have been 
for some time overworked — when I had finished the transla- 
tion and notes of ' St. Athanasius,' at the end of last year, 
I said I would give myself six months' rest, for really I 
required it. And then I found all of a sudden this new 
work come before me, and I could not deny its claim on 
me. 1 have been thinking about some work or other 
since last March year, and turning the subject in my mind 
at odd times. Yet in spite of that, I have lost, if that is 

THE END 379 

the word when it could not be helped, or rather consumed 
several months this spring upon it in ways which will not 
turn to any direct account. I have had to remodel my 
plan, and what it will be at last I cannot yet foretell. All 
I know is that body and mind are getting wearied together, 
and the book not yet written through for the first time. 

This then is my occupation at present, with many 
interruptions which hardly serve as reliefs. It will be a 
sort of obscure philosophical work, if I manage to do it, 
with little to interest, and much to disappoint. But I hate 
making a splash and, of course, I hate unsettling people ; 
if I could do so I would rather write something which 
would sink into their minds. . , . Thank you for what you 
say about my own comparative composure at present. 
Certainly I am not, except at times, in the state of distress 
I was last autumn. My mind is a great deal more made 
up. . . . 

J. H. Newman to J. R. Hope, Esq. 

May 14/45. 

My dear Hope, — I hope I have not been imprudent 
in not waiting for your letter, or that I have not committed 
you more than I ought. Last night I was led to have a 
talk with Oakeley — I could hardly help it. 

I said that I thought he ought to face the question 
whether he had not a moral conviction that he should 
join the Church of Rome — that, from what I had heard 
him say, I doubted whether there was the prospect of 
such an event when he let the suit begin, but that his state 
of mind seemed different now, and that it affected, as I 
thought, the question of the suit. 

He said that it was so certain that the suit would be 
decided in his favour on technicalities, that he did not 
think that it was a practical question. 

In reply I did not venture to urge, what you said, that 
you thought it would have a very bad effect on the Anglo- 


Catholic cause (I can't think of a better word) and be a 
disadvantage to it in public opinion, and with the Bishops, 
if he resigned or went over on acquittal, for I did not feel 
at home with it, and it was new to me, and I thought it 
would be new to him, and I did not think I could do justice 
to it, or could persuade him by it. That it would be an 
absurdity I quite see. 

So I said that it did not seem to me certain that his case 
would go on technicalities — that his lawyers sending down 
for passages from authors etc. looked as if they anticipated 
something more ; further that if the arguments did run into 
doctrine I thought his was a bad case to try it upon ; that 
his view was an extreme one. 

* Therefore,' I said, * since the continuance of the suit 
involves a risky in which many persons are involved, the 
question is, what is there that calls for that risk. If its 
favourable issue will have the effect of keeping you in the 
Church of England, this is a reason for it, but if it will 
produce no great effect one way or the other, whether you 
succeed or not, the risk is for nothing. You have then to 
make up your mind how you feel towards the Church of 
Rome,' etc. 

As far as I recollect this is what I said — and I put it 
down that you may correct anything I said wrong. I 
don't think I committed you except generally. 

P.S. — You are quite right in saying I do not take Ward 
and Oakeley's grounds that all Roman doctrine may be 
held in our Church and that as Roman. I have always and 
everywhere resisted it. 

J. H. Newman to Mrs. William Froude 

June lo, 1845. 

My dear Mrs. Froude, — If I write in a different tone at one 
time and another, it is not that I write in different frames of 
mind, but that it is difficult to bring out all one would say 
at once. The case with me, I think, is of this kind — I 

THE END 381 

am very much more made up both in steady conviction and 
preparation of my feeUngs, to change my place — ^but am 
suffering from fatigue of mind, partly from former distress, 
partly from other causes. (It is very uncomfortable to 
go on in this way about myself, but I suppose I must.) 
Last year was a very trying time to me. I lost my most 
intimate friend, whom you did not know, Mr. Bowden. 
Then in the autumn was all the anxiety of breaking this 
matter to people, and altogether it brought me so low that 
I have had a succession of attacks of influenza through the 
winter, and am not right even now. Then, to tell the truth, 
I have been so many years thinking and writing, that I 
am fairly tired. Three years ago my essay on Miracles 
nearly knocked me up. And last year my ' Notes on St. 
Athanasius * fairly did so. I always determined when they 
were done, to give myself a respite for some months, and a 
medical friend, on whom I have long relied, spoke very 
strong things on the necessity of it. Well, hardly was St. 
Athanasius over when it broke upon me that I must write 
a book on the subject I mentioned to you, and never has 
anything cost me (I think) so much hard thought and 
anxiety, though when I got to the end of my ' Arians ' 
thirteen years ago, I had no sleep for a week, and was 
fainting away or something like it, day after day. Then 
I went abroad and that set me up. At present I have been 
four months and more at my new work, and found I had 
vastly more materials than I knew how to employ. The 
difficulty was to bring them into shape, as well as to work 
out in my mind the principles on which they were to run. 
I spent two months in reading and writing which came to 
nothing, at least for my present purpose. I really have no 
hope that it will be finished before the autumn, if then. I 
have not written a sentence, I suppose, which will stand 
or hardly so. Perhaps one gets over-sensitive even about 
style, as one gets on in life. My utmost ambition in point 
of recreation, is to lay aside the actual writing for three 
weeks or so in the course of the time, and take to reading 
and hunting about. Our time is so divided here, that I have 


not above six or seven hours at it, and it is so exhausting, 
I doubt whether I could give more. I am now writing it 
for the first time, and have done three chapters out of four 
or five. Besides re-writing, every part has to be worked 
out and defined as in moulding a statue. I get on, as a 
person walks with a lame ankle, who does get on, and gets 
to his journey's end, but not comfortably. Now, after 
all this you will expect the work to be something out of the 
way — alack, that is the worst of it — it is much cry and little 
wool. However, I must do my best, and then leave it. 
As hitherto I have never taken to heart what people said 
of my writings, I trust I shall not on this occasion. I was 
much interested and obliged by what you said about reports 
and how they were taken. 

The following letter requires some explanation, and 
for this recourse must be had to Dr. Pusey's biographer. 
' When at last it was forced upon him [i.e. Pusey] that 
Newman would become a Roman Catholic, he endeavoured 
to reconcile his own unswerving love of and deference for 
Newman with his absolute faith in the Presence of Christ 
with the English Church, by the supposition that Newman 
was, at any rate for a time, the subject of a special call or 
dispensation, having for its object the promotion of some 
great blessing or improvement in the Roman Church ; 
and therefore that his secession was no more entitled to 
general imitation than was the mission of the Prophet 
Jonah to Nineveh. He could not bring himself to allow 
that Newman was doing wrong, though he held that it 
would have been wrong indeed in himself or any other 
member of the English Church to follow his example/ ^ 

Such a strong hold did this idea get on his mind that he 
came to think Newman must share it, and wrote to ask his 
advice about a lady who was, as he would have regarded it, 
tempted to join the Church of Rome. * Your case,' he said, 

1 Life of Pusey, vol. ii. p. 465. ' Such a position,' continues the 
biographer, * is open to obvious criticisms ; but the heart has a logic of 
its own, which is often, in point of courage and generosity, more than a 
match for that of the bare understandmg.' This logic of the heart enabled 
Pusey, seven days after Newman's conversion, to pubUsh in the English 
Churchman a letter which is a magnificent monument both of his love for 
Newman, and of his fortitude and generosity {ibid. pp. 400-403). 

THE END 383 

' if so it is to be, I look upon as a special dispensation. I 
suppose, of course, that, if it is so, Almighty God is pleased 
to draw you for some office which He has for you/ 

J. H. Newman to Rev. E. B. Pusey 

July 22, 1S45. 

My dear Pusey, — . . . As to the anxious matter which 
forms the second subject of your letter, perhaps I am a 
bad adviser for you — for one of my own tokens of firmness 
of conviction to myself has been the wish that others should 
do the same. Very unwilling indeed am I and distressed 
that they should act because I act, but if it is right for me, 
it is right for others. It is no special dispensation with me, 
certainly. One person is moved differently from another — 
some have been before me, others may be after me — in 
that sense every one is under a special dispensation — but in 
no other sense can I contemplate it as special. Were I in a 
system which I am not, and saw so clearly that it was salva- 
tion, and then foimd that another out of it were desirous to 
enter it, I should not ask if she had a warrant to enter, but 
whether there was anything against her entering, and I do 
not think I should consider any duty violated by her entering. 
At present, ' Physician, heal thyself,* is what sounds in my 
ears, and without going to longer questions, one is con- 
tented to give cautions against precipitancy, restlessness, 
etc., which indeed at no time can be out of place, but 
would be less prominent, did I see more than I can see 
just now. 

Really I am just the worst person you could ask — for 
though nothing can be more axiomatic than that where 
persons have confidence in our Church they are safe, I have 
the greatest perplexity about the estate of those who have 
not that confidence, and think they may wait indeed on 
many accounts, but have no right to put aside what may be, 
what probably is a call. 

You will see that I had better not answer your specific 
questions at all — and you may give easily as a reason that 


it would be inconsistent in a person in my case giving any 
advice. I wrote the like to a lady a day or two ago. 

The letter you send is a most impressive and distressing 
one to me. I dare not keep back my feeling about it, in 
spite of what I have said, and knowing too how it will pain 
you. I should really fear to be acting against the Truth 
in keeping her from what seems so to be intended for her. 
She gives a hint about rationalism — this perhaps is my weak 
point — but it frightens me. 

Miss Lenthall departed last evening — I have just heard 
it — it has affected me much — she is my last link with 
St. Mary's. 

Ever yours affectionately, 

J. H. N. 

Rev. J. Keble to J. H. Newman 

October 3, 1845, 

I feel as if I had something to say to you, although 
I don't very well know what it will be ; but Charlotte's 
illness having for the present at least abated, I find that I 
am better able than I have been for near a fortnight past 
to think and speak coherently of other things, and what 
can I think of so much as you, dear friend, and the dycovia 
which awaits us with regard to you : except, indeed, when 
my thoughts travel on to Bisley, to Tom's bedside, for there, 
as well as here, every thing almost seems to have been, 
perhaps to be, hanging by a thread. 

At such times one seems in a way to see deeper into 
realities, and I must own to you that the impression on my 
own mind of the reality of the things I have been brought 
up among, and of its being my own fault not theirs, wherein- 
soever I am foimd wanting, — this impression seems to deepen 
in me as Death draws nearer, and I find it harder and harder 
to imagine that persons such as I have seen and heard of 
lately should be permitted to live and die deceiving them- 
selves in such a point, as whether they are aliens to the grace 
of God's Sacraments or no. 

THE END 385 

October 11, midnight.^ I had written thus far about a 
week ago, and then left off for very weariness, and, now that 
I was thinking of going on with my writing, I find that the 
thunderbolt has actually fallen upon us, and you have 
actually taken the step which we greatly feared. 

I will not plague you, then, with what I might otherwise 
have set down — -something which passed directly relating 
to yourself in what fell from my dear wife on this day fort- 
night, when in perfect tranquillity and self-possession, 
having received the Holy Communion, she took leave of us 
all, expecting hourly to sink away. By God's great mercy 
she revived, and still continues among us, with, I trust, 
increasing hopes of recovery ; but the words which she 
spoke were such that I must always think of them as of the 
last words of a saint. Some of them I had thought of 
reporting to you, but this, at any rate, is not the time. 

Wilson has told me how kindly you have been remember- 
ing us in oiu: troubles ; it was very kind, when you must 
have so much upon your own mind. Who knows how much 
good your prayers and those of other absent friends may 
have done us both here and at Bisley ? For there too, as 
I dare say you know, has been a favourable change, and 
a more decided one, I imagine, than here — at least their 
doctor has told them they may make themselves comfort- 
able, which is far beyond anything that has yet been said to 
us. But his recovery is very, very slow. There too, as well 
as here, everything has fallen out so as to foster the delusion, 
if delusion it be, that we are not quite aliens, not living 
among unrealities. Yet you have no doubt the other way. 
It is very mysterious, very bewildering indeed ; but, being 
so, one's duty seems clearly pointed out : to abide where 
one is, till some new call come upon one. If this were 
merely my own reason or feeling, I should mistrust it 
altogether, knowing, alas ! that I am far indeed from the 
person to whom guidance is promised, but when I see the 
faith of others, such as I know them to be, and so very near 

1 After he had received the news that Newman had left the Anghcan 

2 c 


to me as God has set them, I am sure that it would be a 
kind of impiety but to dream of separating from them. 

Besides the deep grief of losing you for a guide and 
helper, and scarce knowing which way to look, (though I 
trust, thanks (in good part), to your kindness in many ways 
I am not in so wretched a condition as I was), you may guess 
what uncomfortable feelings haunt me, as if I, more than 
any one else, was answerable for whatever of distress and 
scandal may occur. I keep on thinking, ' If I had been 
different, perhaps N. would have been guided to see things 
differently, and we might have been spared so many broken 
hearts and bewildered spirits.' To be sure, that cold hard 
way of going on, which I have mentioned to you before, 
stands my friend at such times, and hinders me, I suppose, 
from being really distressed ; but this is how I feel that 
I ought to feel, and ... I tell you . . . and how I wish 
you to help me. That way of help, at any rate, is not 
forbidden you in respect of any one of us. 

My dearest Newman, you have been a kind and helpful 
friend to me in a way in which scarce any one else could have 
been, and you are so mixed up in my mind with old and 
dear and sacred thoughts, that I cannot well bear to part 
with you, most unworthy as I know myself to be ; and yet 
I cannot go along with you. I must cling to the belief 
that we are not really parted — you have taught me so, 
and I scarce think you can unteach me — and, having 
relieved my mind with this little word, I will only say God 
bless you and reward you a thousandfold all your help 
in every way to me unworthy, and to so many others. 
May you have peace where you are gone, and help us in 
some way to get peace ; but somehow I scarce think it 
will be in the way of controversy. And so, with somewhat 
of a feeling as if the Spring had been taken out of my year, 
I am, always, your affectionate and grateful, 

J. Keble. 

THE END 387 

J. H. Newman to Rev. E. B. Pusey 

My dear Pusey,— I have written to the Provost to-day 
to resign my fellowship. Anything may happen to me now 
any day< Anyhow, believe me, 

My dear Pusey, 
Yours most affectionately ever, 

J. H. N. 

The Provost, Dr. Hawkins, did not receive Newman's 
letter till the 6th, for he was away from Oxford. His 
reply was, as might be expected, kind and courteous. 
Professions of regret were out of the question. He had 
repeatedly shown in the most aggressive fashion that in 
his opinion Newman had no right to the position which he 
held.i But he managed delicately to suggest that there 
was still time for him to reconsider his resignation. 

Dr. Hawkins to J. H. Newman 

Stoke's Bay Cottage, 

Alverstoke, Hants, 

October 6, 1845. 

My dear Newman, — Your letter of the 3rd enclosing 
the Resignation of your Fellowship, and desiring me to 
withdraw your name, has only reached me this evening. 

The form of Resignation is quite correct ; and, if I hear 
nothing further from you to the contrary, I must of course 
comply with your desire and withdraw your name from our 
books upon my return to Oriel. 

You say nothing of your present position or intentions. 
Possibly you are thinking of retiring into Lay Communion ; 

^ The following is a piece of contemporary evidence which seems worth 
preserving. It is from a pamphlet entitled * A Short Appeal to Members of 
Convocation upon the proposed Censure of Tract 90. By Frederic Rogers, 
Fellow of Oriel (London, 1845).' ' Dr. Hawkins, one of the leading pro- 
moters of these measures, cannot object to my alluding to the fact that he 
certainly endeavours to render its [i.e. Tract 90] abjuration a condition of 
admission to Holy Orders — to Fellowships — to Preferments — to employ- 
ment in the University ; and this on the alleged ground of its condemnation 
by the Hebdomadal Board, and in Bishops' Charges. If the attempt is 
not always successful, it is, in some measure, from want of authority.' 


and against this, if you hold the opinions which I suppose, 
I could say nothing. But your letter is so strong a confirma- 
tion of the rumours I have heard of your intention to join 
the Church of Rome, that I venture to write to you as if 
it were so. And indeed in any other case, where I could 
speak officially or as a friend, I should do what I could to 
dissuade any member, much more any minister, of the 
Church of England, from what you know I cannot but 
regard as very grievous error. It is not from want of 
regard for you, if I forbear to say anything in your case, 
but only because I despair of doing any good, when you 
have been so long studying all questions of this kind ; and 
indeed much more, and more anxiously, no doubt, than I 
have myself. 

And yet I cannot forbear expressing the most earnest 
hope (in all sincerity and with feelings of real kindness), 
that whatever course you may have resolved upon, you 
may still at least be saved from some of the worst errors 
of the Church of Rome, such as praying to human Mediators 
or falling down before images — because in you, with all the 
great advantages with which God has blessed and tried 
you, I must believe such errors to be most deeply sinful. 
But may He protect you ! 

Believe me always. My dear Newman, 
Sincerely yours, 

Edwd. Hawkins. 

Newman always thought of Dr. Hawkins with affection 
and gratitude. He dwells in the ' Apologia ' upon his 
indebtedness to him. ' He was the first who taught me 
to weigh my words, and to be cautious in my statements ' ; 
and in a higher order, ' As to doctrine he was the means 
of great additions to my belief.' ' I can say with a full 
heart that I love him and have never ceased to love him.' ^ 

On Wednesday, October 8, Father Dominic came to 
Littlemore. On the following day, Newman entered in his 
journal : ' Father Dominic, Dalgairns, and St. John went 
to Oxford to mass — completed my confession— admitted 

^ Apologia, p, 8. 

THE END 389 

into the Catholic Church with Bowles and Stanton — [wrote] 
to J.,1 Mrs. Wood, H. B[owden], Woodgate, Badeley, E. 
Coleridge, I. Williams, Wilson, Dr. Russell, Faber, Belaney, 
F.,2 M. R. G.,3 AUies, Mrs. W. F[roude], Rogers, Rivington, 
Pusey, Anderdon, Manning, Barter, H. Wplberforce], 
Miss Parker, Dodsworth, Mrs. Bowden, Watts Russell, 
R. WiUiams, Church, Capes, Dear.' 

To the world at large his valedictory words, eloquent 
of the deep calm which had settled upon his mind, were the 
sentence appended to the uncompleted ' Essay on Develop- 
ment ' : 

' Such were the thoughts concerning the '' Blessed Vision 
of Peace/' of one whose long-continued petitionhad been that 
the Most Merciful would not despise the work of His own 
Hands, nor leave him to himself ; — while yet his eyes were 
dim, and his breast laden, and he could but employ Reason 
in the things of Faith. And now, dear Reader, time is 
short, eternity is long. Put not from you what you have 
here found ; regard it not as mere matter of present con- 
troversy ; set not out resolved to refute it, and looking out 
for the best way of doing so ; seduce not yourself with the 
imagination that it comes of disappointment, or disgust, 
or restlessness, or wounded feeling, or undue sensibility, or 
other weakness. Wrap not yourself round in the associa- 
tions of years past ; nor determine that to be truth which 
you wish to be so, nor make an idol of cherished anticipa- 
tions. Time is short, eternity is long. 

Nunc dimittis servum tuum, Domine, 
Secundum verbum tuum in pace ; 
Quia viderunt oculi mei salutare tuum.* 

And those whom Newman left, and who never followed 
him — gratitude and love seemed to overcome all sense of 
the injury he had done to their cause by abandoning it. 
The greater number of them, if they had survived him, 
would, we may be sure, have gladly subscribed to the noble 
and courageous tribute paid to his memory, immediately 
after his death, by the Guardian : 

' Cardinal Newman is dead, and we lose in him not only 
one of the very greatest masters of Enghsh style, not only a 
man of singular beauty and purity of character, not only an 

1 His sister, Mrs. J. Mozley (her Christian name was Jemima). 
* Probably his brother, Francis Newman. ^ Miss Gibeme. 


eminent example of personal sanctity, but the founder, we 
may almost say, of the Church of England as we see it. 
What the Church of England would have become without 
the Tractarian movement we can faintly guess, and of the 
Tractarian movement Newman was the hving soul and the 
inspiring genius. Great as his services have been to the 
communion in which he died, they are as nothing by the 
side of those he rendered to the communion in which the 
most eventful years of his life were spent. All that was best 
in Tractarianism came from him — its reaHty, its depth, its 
low estimate of externals, its keen sense of the importance 
of religion to the individual soul. The conclusions to which 
it led him were different from those to which it led his 
most devoted followers, but the premisses from which they 
started and the temper in which they worked were identical, 
and whatever solid success the High Church party have 
obtained since Cardinal Newman's departure has been due 
to their fidehty to his method and spirit. He will be mourned 
by many in the Roman Church, but their sorrow will be 
less than ours, because they have not the same paramount 
reason to be grateful to him.' ^ 

What was the source of the influence Newman had upon 
those who came in contact with him during his Oxford 
days ? This is the answer given by one who lived with 
him at Littlemore, the late Father WiUiam Lockhart. 
Unfortunately we cannot give his actual words, but only a 
report of them : ^ 

' To put into one sentence what struck him as the char- 
acter of Newman's whole teaching and influence, it was to 
make them use their reasoning powers, to seek after the 
last satisfactory reason one could reach of everything, and 
this led them to the last reason of all, and they formed a 
religious personal behef in God the Creator, our Lord and 
Master. This was the first thing that Newman did for 
those young men under his care. He rooted in their hearts 
and minds a personal conviction of the Hving God. And he 
for one could say he never had that feehng of God before 
he was brought into contact with Cardinal Newman. . . . 
It was when Newman read the Scriptures from the lectern 

^ The Guardian^ August 13, 1890. 

* Quoted from Cardinal Newman, a monograph, by John Oldcastle 
(London : John Simkins, n«d,). 

THE END 391 

in St. Mary's Church at Oxford that one felt more than ever 
that his words were those of a seer who saw God and the 
things of God. Many men were impressive readers, but 
they did not reach the soul. They played on the senses 
and imagination, they were good actors, they did not forget 
themselves, and one did not forget them. But Newman had 
the power of so impressing the soul as to efface himself ; 
you thought only of the majestic soul that saw God. It 
was God speaking to you as He speaks through creation ; 
but in a deeper way by the articulate voice of man made to 
the image of God and raised to His Hkeness by grace, com- 
municating to your intelligence and sense and imagination, 
by words which were the signs of ideas, a transcript of the 
work and private thoughts which were in God.' 


I (p. 8i) 

The greater part of the following letter, which is in Keble 
College Library, was pubHshed in the Guardian of December 7, 
191 6, by the Rev. Dr. Lock, Warden of Keble College. Through 
the kindness of Dr. Lock we are able to print the entire letter : 

My dear Perceval, — Many thanks for your kind note just 
received. I certainly am at this instant in a pretty considerable 
scrape, but am only surprised at the long run of luck we have 

The Tract was necessary to keep people either from Rome 
or schism or an uncomfortable conscience. It was necessary 
for my own peace so much as this, that I felt people did not 
know me, and were trusting me when otherwise they would not. 
I really cannot repent having done it. As to the newspapers, 
it is a curious coincidence — ^but all these things will turn to good. 
The Tract was in print, not to say published, before the papers 
opened the subject. 

I did not think it would have made a noise. I expected it 
to come in quietly — and it would, but for two things — ^first 
GoHghtly, who is the Fire -the -Faggot of the affair, and who 
would be pleased to know I felt him to be so — and secondly, 
Lord Morpeth's speech in the House the other night. 

Repeating my thanks, I am. 

My dear Perceval, 

Yrs. affectionately. 
Oriel : March 12/41. J. H. NEWMAN. 

p.S. — Mr. Pauli is a Christian and has been Pusey's 
assistant in Hebrew and takes Pupils here. He is well thought 
of, I believe. 

Palmer, I am glad to say, quite sanctions the Tract. 


There was no trace of Calvinistic teaching in Newman's home. 
We are able to make this statement on the authority of the 


Cardinal's nephew, Mr. J. B. Mozley, who has kindly allowed us 
to refer to him by name. ' You are at Hberty,' he writes, ' to 
refer to me as giving my mother's evidence that the teaching in 
the Cardinal's home was not either Calvinistic or Evangelical ; I 
think it was soon after the publication of the "Apologia" that she 
said this to me.' Mr. Mozley and his brother, Mr. Frank Mozley, 
have also given us the following statement made by Francis 
Newman to the latter, and noted down by him while it was fresh 
in his memory : 

'My father was somewhat free -thought ed, fond of seeing what 
different people had to say for their opinions. A reader and 
admirer of the works of Barclay the Quaker, he could not bear 
John Newton, in whose parish, St. Benet Fink,he lived, on account 
of his connection with the slave trade, and perhaps his Calvinism. 
He was a W^g, despised the city companies, and never cared 
to take up his freedom, though it might have done him some little 
good in his bank. He was of independent mind, and looked at 
things from his own point of view, but, having no political in- 
fluence, did not say much. My mother and grandmother (New- 
man) taught us simple piety, the non-controversial points of 
Christianity on which all agreed. They would never have taught 
Calvinism.' ^ 

There is also evidence in some private memoranda of the 
Cardinal's, written when his Evangelicalism was at its height, 
that his mother did not share his views. 

To Mr. Mozley we are also indebted for the following refer- 
ence to the first page of Francis Newman's ' Phases of Faith,' 
from which it would seem that (i) Mr. Mayers was an exception 
among the masters at Ealing, and that (2) the tone of the boys 
there was not markedly rehgious : 

' I first began to read rehgious books at school, and especially 
the Bible, when I was eleven years old ; * and almost immediately 
contracted a habit of secret prayer. But it was not until I was 
fourteen that I gained any definite idea of a " scheme of doctrine," 
or could have been called " a converted person " by one of the 

^ Compare the account given by the Cardinal in the Apologia of his 
home training : ' I was brought up from a child to take a great delight in 
reading the Bible. , , , Of course I had a perfect knowledge of my 

* Francis Newman was bom in June 1805 ; his brother, the future 
Cardinal, in February 1801. ' When I was fifteen (in the Autumn of 1816)/ 
writes the latter, ' a great change of thought took place in me. I fell 
under the influences of a definite creed ' {Apologia, p. 4). This would have 
been when his brother Francis was eleven. 


Evangelical school. My religion then certainly exerted a general 
influence over my conduct ; for I soon underwent various per- 
secutions from my schoolfellows on account of it. . . . An 
Evangelical clerg5anan at the school gained my affections, and 
from him I imbibed more and more distinctly the full creed 
which distinguishes that body of men.' 

It only remains to add that the conversion of individual 
members of a family to Evangelicalism, as happened in the 
case of the two Newmans, was not an unusual event in the early 
part of the last century. 


ACLAND, T. D., 142 

Alexander, Bishop, 145. 

Allies, Mr., 159, 196 

American Church : admission of 
Nestorians to communion, 23, 
194 ; Mr. Carey's ordination, 253 

Anderdon, 237 

Andrewes, Bishop, 164, 314 

Anglican Church : — 

Articles of reUgion — their un- 
catholic animus : the thesis 
of Tract XC, 72 ; critical 
principles of the tract sum- 
marised, 75 ; relation to the 
Via Media, 76 ; Newman main- 
tains legitimacy of his inter- 
pretation, 76 ; Pusey's sugges- 
tions to Newman, 82 ; New- 
man's note to Pusey's letter, 
85 ; Hook's letter to Newman, 
87 ; Newman's letter to the 
Times in 1863 repudiating Mr. 
Maurice's accusations, 109 ; 
Newman's correspondence with 
Keble on Catholic subscription, 
138 ; Rev. Ambrose St. John's 
correspondence with Newman, 
240 ; Newman's letter resign- 
ing St. Mary's, 262 ; corre- 
spondence with Manning, 272 ; 
incompatible with Roman 
doctrine : Newman's corre- 
spondence with Keble, 360 et 
seq. ; Newman on Ward's 
' Ideal,' 361 et seq. ", corre- 
spondence with J. R. Hope, 
380 ; test at Oxford, the pro- 
posed, see Oxford University — 
Catholicity — efiect of Newman's 
study of the Monophysite Con- 
troversy on his opinions, i et 
seq. ; his early contentions, 8 ; 
the reply to Dr. Wiseman, 15 ; 
his change of view, 21, 26 ; 
Tractarian position, 74 ; Dr. 

Russell's correspondence with 
Newman, 126, 128 ; effect of 
Newman's studies of Arian 
controversy, 133 ; his letter to 
Mrs. J. Mozley, 153 ; corre- 
spondence with Hope, 157 ; 
Hope's letter to Gladstone, 
157 ; Newman's letters to Rev. 
W. Dodsworth, 162, 188 ; the 
letter to a layman, 185 5 
correspondence with Keble on 
his changed opinions, 217, 222, 
225, 231, 242, 255, 259, 266 ; 
correspondence with Manning, 
271 et seq. ; correspondence 
with J. R. Hope, 281 ; Keble's 
suggestion re recovery through 
Primitive Catholicity, 298 ; 
Newman's letter to J. R. 
Hope : his experiences un- 
favourable to her Catholicity, 
310 ; letter to E. L. Badeley, 
326 ; Newman's correspond- 
ence with Keble on Ward's 
' Ideal,' 362 

Donatists, Dr. Wiseman's parallel 
with, 13, 26, 34-5, 38, 49 

Four theological schools, Tait's 
account of, 95 

Heretical character, 21, 26, 133 ; 
Newman's correspondence with 
Keble, 138 ; with E. L. 
Badeley, 327 ; with Rev. E. 
Coleridge, 345 

Rome, secessions to — fears con- 
cerning the Oxford Movement, 
30, 53 ; Newman's corre- 
spondence on the Oxford 
Movement, 147-8, 152 et seq. ; 
with J. R. Hope, 157, 164 ; 
with S. F. Wood, 161 ; with 
Rev. W. Dodsworth, 162, 188 ; 
letter to a layman, 185 ; cor- 
respondence with Keble re 
resignation of St. Mary's (refer- 
ences to his influence in direc- 




tion of Rome), 210, 216 ' on 
changed religious opinions, 217, 
222, 227, 231, 242 ; Rev. Am- 
brose St. John's correspondence 
with Newman, 240 ; Lockhart's 
and other secessions, 248, 250, 
252, 256, 257, 258 ; Newman's 
letter to Rev. F. W. Faber, 253 ; 
to an unknown correspondent, 
on his own position, 268 ; New- 
man's correspondence with 
J. R. Hope on the ' Lives 
of the English Saints,' 281 ; 
unsettlement of others by 
Newman's changing views, 

294-5. 317. 343, 346, 354, 359 ; 
correspondence with Keble, 
296 et seq., 316 et seq. ', effect 
of his sermons on a young 
lady, 300 ; Newman's corre- 
spondence with a clergyman : 
contradicts statement that he 
had gone over to Rome, 309 ; 
rumours of Newman's intended 
secession, 339 ; subsequent 
correspondence, 339 et seq. ; 
correspondence with Badeley, 
344 ; Lockhart's mother on 
her son's restful state, 378 ; 
Newman urges Oakeley to con- 
sider question : letter to J. R. 
Hope, 379 ; correspondence 
with Pusey on case of a young 
lady, 383 ; Keble's letter to 
Newman on learning of his 
secession, 384 ; Newman's 
diary references to his con- 
version, 388 

Tokens — Newman's correspon- 
dence with Keble on ' Sermons 
on Subjects of the Day,' 252, 
256, 257, 259, 264 
Anglican and Roman Churches, 
differences between — the root 
of divergence, 7, 11 ; motive 
of Tract XC discussed, 72 et 
seq. ; correspondence between 
Dr. Russell and Newman, 118- 
129; between Dr. Wiseman 
and Newman, 129-132 

Reunion — Ward and Oakeley *s 
aspirations : Newman's note 
to Pusey, 197 
Anglican Difficulties, Lectures on, 

Anglican theology — Newman on 

the objective view of Truth, 11 ; 

difficulty respecting the General 

Councils, 12-13 

Anglo -Catholics, 95 

Anti-Catholic statements, i ; re- 
tractation of, 202 

Anti-Christ — Newman and Dr. 
Todd's discourses, 49, 50 

Antinomianism, iii 

Antioch, Great Council of, 25 

' A.P.P.,' 305 

' Apologia ' — the five chapters of 
Newman's religious opinions, 165 

Apostolic succession, 27, 96, 351 

Arian controversy and Arianism, 
24, 133, 182, 219 

Arius, 182 

Arminianism — Thomas Scott ac- 
cused of. III 

Arnold, Dr., 22, 216, 318, 321, 324, 

Articles of religion, Anglican. 

See Anglican Church — Articles 
Asceticism, 356 
Ashworth, 228 
Atkinson, Mr., 52 
Atonement — Newman's letter to a 

correspondent, 205-7 
Augsburg Confession, 171 
Authority, 7-8, 11, 102, 162-3, 

194-5. See also Pope — Authority 

Babington, G., 175, 341 

Badeley, Edward Lowth (New- 
man's friend and legal adviser), 
68, 180, 288, 367 ; Newman's 
correspondence with, on the 
sermon on ' Implicit and Ex- 
plicit Reason,' 69 ; consoling 
him on recent misfortune, 138 ; 
on Convocation and the King 
of Prussia, 180 ; on Lutheranism 
and heresy, 182 ; Pusey's sermon 
and suspension, 234, 326 ; lenient 
attitude of Church authorities 
towards Low Churchmen, 327 ; 
Newman's religious convictions, 
329 ; requesting him to purchase 
books, 337, 340, 344; the 
Master's action against Ward, 

Bagot, Rt. Rev. Dr., Bishop of 
Oxford — correspondence with 
Newman on Mr. Bloxam's in- 
discretion, 42-47 ; on Tract XC, 
88-9 ; proposes cessation of the 
Tracts and suppression of Tract 
XC, 99 ; yields over Tract XC ; 
Newman undertakes to discon- 
tinue Tracts, 102 ; acknowledg- 
ment of Newman's letter, 103 ; 
Nswman'g letter resigning St. 



Mary's, 262 ; Newmsin's corre- 
spondence with Manning on his 
Charge, 272 

Balguy, 126 

Bandinel, 59 

Baptism, 83, 86, 93, 96 ; Pusey's 
Tract, 177; Newman on adult 
baptism, 178 ; McGhee and 
Newman's sermon, 191 ; bap- 
tismal regeneration, 191, 207, 


Barclay the Quaker, 394 

Barrow, 228 

Bath clergyman, a, on Tract XC, 

Bede — Newman's proposal that 
Keble should write his Ufe, 215, 
216, 222, 283 ; ' Rome the 
Mother Church,' 285 

Bellarmine, 120 

Bellasis, Serjeant Edward — 
memorandum reference to Robert 
WiUiams, 36 ; on Tract XC, 97 ; 
on the Evangehcal address 
against the Tracts, 169 et seq., 
173 ; the suggested legal action, 
183-5 ; the troubles at Lambeth, 
189 ; Newman thanks him for 
note on Life of St. Stephen, 313 ; 
supports Oakeley in Court of 
Arches, 367 

Berengarius, abjuration and re- 
tractation of, 120 

Berens, Archdeacon, 323 

Bernard, Dr., 334, 335 

Beveridge, Bishop — ' Private 

Thoughts,' 1 1 5-1 7 

Bishop, the invisible — St, Ignatius 
on, 147 

Bishops : — 

Authority — Newman's view of, 

Gifts of the episcopate — Newman 
on his studies of the Fathers, 
Grace, episcopal, 139 

Bishops, Anglican, and the 
Tractarians, 90 et seq., 138, 162, 
164, 171, 184 ; growing una- 
nimity against Tract XC, 211, 
214 ; Keble on their charges, 
216 ; Newman's reply, 227 ; 
Newman's correspondence with 
Manning, 272 ; Newman's fears 
concerning ' Lives of the English 
Saints,' 289 ; Gladstone's sug- 
gestions to Manning re New- 
man, 293 ; a bishop's claim that 
Newman's adherents are dwin- 

dling, 294 ; Newman's letter 
to Badeley on the condemnation 
of Pusey's sermon, 327 

Blomfield, Bishop of London, 52, 
90-1, 147, 184 ; correspondence 
with Hook on Tract XC, 90 ; 
and Pusey, 233 

Bio well, 350 

Bloxam, Mr. John Rouse, 40, 61 ; 
' Bloxam's escapade * : New- 
man's correspondence with Rev. 
W. Dodsworth and Bishop of 
Oxford, 40-47 ; Newman's ac- 
counts to Bowden, 47, 53 

Bossuet, 124, 126 

Bowden, Mr. J. W. — ill-health, 33, 
222, 244, 266, 299, 301 ; New- 
man's letters to, 36, 47, 51, 53, 
66 ; engaged on ' Lives of the 
English Saints,' 227 ; Newman's 
correspondence with Keble on 
his condition, 322, 324, 328, 
330, 331 ; death, 333 

Bowden, Mrs. 323, 325^- 332, 334, 

336, 370. 373 

Bowles, 215 

Bowyer, 160 

Bramhall, Bishop, 189 

Breviary, Roman — used at Little- 
more, 295; R. Williams' plan, 

Brewer, 222, 228 

Bridges, 228 

Bright, Dr. — tribute to Newman's 
work on St. Athanasius, 152 

British Critic — Thomas Mozley's 
editorship : Newman's corre- 
spondence with Keble, 134-7 ; 
R. Palmer's (of Worcester) pro- 
test, 249, 258 ; reference to it 
having stopped, 288 

British Magazine and the ' Sermons 
on Subjects of the Day,' 307 

Broad Churchmen. See Low 

Brougham, Lord, 142 

Buchanan — discovery of a Mono- 
physite creed anathematising 
Chalcedonians, 10 

Bull's ' Defensio F.N.,' 197 

Bunsen, M., 142 et seq. ; judgment 
on Newman's ' Arians,' 143 ; 
Jerusalem Bishopric scheme, 142 
et seq. 

Burnet, on the AngUcan Articles, 
72, 84 

Burns, Mr., 164 

Burton, 197 

Butler, Bishop, 256, 320, 351 



Calcutta, Bishop of — attitude 
towards Tractarians, 162 

Calvinism — ^no trace in Newman's 
home, 115, 393 ; position of 
Evangelicals, 115; Newman's 
later acknowledgment of ac- 
ceptance of its doctrine, 116 ; Cal- 
vinists and penances, 173 

Cambridgeshire clergyman, a — 
letter to Newman on Tract XC, 

' 104 

Camden Society, the Cambridge, 

Canons of 1603, 161 

Canterbury, Archbishop of — atti- 
tude towards Tractarians, 169 ; 
receives Evangelical address de- 

fiT nouncing ' Tracts for the Times,' 

b' 169 ; and Ward's ' Ideal,' 325 

' Caphamaite ' conception of the 
Eucharist, 121 

Cardwell, 37 

Carey, Mr. Arthur — Newman on 
his ordination, 253 

Carlyle, 96 

Catechism, Church — movement 
against compulsory teaching in 
National Schools, 37 

Catholic Church. See Roman 
Catholic Church, and Anglican 
Church — Catholicity 

' Catholicity of the Anglican 
Church,' 15, 219, 276, 324 

Catholic subscription to the Thirty- 
nine Articles. See under Angli- 
can Church — Articles of religion 

Catiiolicus — Newman's letters to 
The Times on Sir Robert Peel's 
Tamworth address, 142 

Celibacy, 29, 49, 65 

Chalcedon, Council of (a.d. 451), 
3 ; Newman on the definition 
of the Two Natures, 10 ; Angli- 
can Church and, 22 ; Newman's 
letter to a friend (April 5, 1844), 

Chalcedonians, 10, 24 

Chalmers, Dr. — the Tron sermons, 

Cheltenham EvangeUcals. See 

Chester, Bishop of — charge in 1841 : 
Newman's letter to Keble, 147 ; 
to Rev. W. Dodsworth, 163 ; 
Keble 's memorial against his 
Lutheranism, 324 

Chichester, Bishop of. See Shuttle- 
worth, Rt. Rev. P. N. 

Chichester, Dean of, 180 

China, work of Roman Church in, 

Chretien, 228 

Christ : — 

Real Presence, doctrine of. See 

under Eucharist 
Two natures, doctrine of the — 
Tome of St. Leo, 3 ; proceed- 
ings at Councils of Ephesus 
and Chalcedon, 3 ; the Mono- 
physite attitude, 6 ; Newman 
on the definition of the Council 
of Chalcedon, 10 

Christian faith — irreconcilable ideas 
of Anglican and Roman Churches, 
8, II ; Anglican notion of the 
objectiveness of Truth, 11 

' Christian Year,' 217 

Christie, 39, 53, 308, 315, 372 

Christie, Rev. J. F. — Newman's 
letter contradicting report as 
to scepticism, 373 

Church, Dean (R. W.), 77-80, 217, 
228, 322 ; on Newman's ser- 
mons at St. Mary's, 28 ; corre- 
spondence with Newman on 
Tract XC, 77-80 ; ' 
ment ' quoted, 367 

Church of England. 

Church of Rome. 
Catholic Church. 

' Church of the Fathers,' 49, 55 ; 
Newman's reply to a corre- 
spondent who took exception to 
certain passages, 63 

Churton, Mr. T. T. (one of the Four 
Senior Tutors), 93 

Churton, E., loi 

Cistercians of the Fountains, 364 

' Clergyman, A ' — correspondence 
with Newman on his position in 
Anglican Church, 309 

Close, Mr., 38, 52 

Cof6jQ, R. A., 215, 228 ; sermons, 326 

Coleridge, Rev. Edward — New- 
man's letter respecting Bishop 
of New Zealand and his own 
changed rehgious views, 342, 345 

Coleridge, Sir John — ' Life of Keble,' 
209 ; proposed address of grati- 
tude to Newman, 348-9 

Collings, 228 

Commandment, the Second — 
Newman's correspondence with 
Keble, 302-4 

Confession, 217 ; sacramentarcon- 
fession a sine qud non at Little- 
more, 312 

Oxford Move- 

See Anglican 

See Roman 



Conservative Journal, 202 
' Consubstantial,' the term, 25 
Conversion — Newman Eind the 
EvangeUstic view, 114; his 
letter to a correspondent on the 
Atonement, 205-7 
Convocation — Newman's attitude : 
letters to Keble, 138 ; to Mrs. J. 
Mozley, 153; to J. R. Hope, 
171 ; to Serjeant Bellasis, 173 ; 
apprehensions as to the address 
to the King of Prussia, 179, 183 
Copeland, Rev. W. J., 52, 54, 195, 
217, 220, 238, 244, 266-7, 331, 


Copleston, Reginald, 52 

Cork, Bishop of, 92 

Cornish, Rev. C. L., and Tract XC, 

Councils, the General — their author- 
ity, 12 ; Anglican Church and, 

Country clergyman, a — letters to 
Newman on Tract XC, 86, 107 

Covenant, the Christian, 178 

Covetousness, 131 

Cramer, 344 

Cranmer, 139 

Dalgairns, J. B., 214, 228, 388 

Daman, Rev. C, and Tract XC, 78, 
80, 102 

Davenport, 123 

Dayman, 79 

Denison, George, 230 

Development, the Essay on,"" 152, 
294 ; its origin and motives, 
365 et seq. ; writing it determines 
Newman to enter Roman Church, 
365 ; Newman's letters to Mrs. 
Froude, 377-8, 380 ; concluding 
passage quoted, 389 

Dioscorus, Patriarch of Alexandria, 
2 et seq., 15, 182 

Dispensations, 175 

Dissenters — Newman on Anglican 
defections, 185 

Doddridge's ' Rise and Progress,' 


Dodsworth, Rev. W., 40, 184, 331 ; 

Newman's correspondence with : 
on Bloxam's escapade, 40-1 ; 
misgivings concerning Anglican 
Catholicity, 162 ; controversy 
with Sibthorpe, 181 ; defections 
to Rome, 188 ; action of Dods- 
worth's Bishop, 189 ; marriage 
question, 193 ; Hong Kong mis- 

sion scheme, 213 ; Puscy's ser- 
mon and suspension, 233 ; 
Pusey's health, 237 ; the retreat 
at Littlemore, 311 

Dominic, Father, 388 

Donatists, 13, 25, 34-5, 38, 49, 54» 
219, 260, 276 

Doubt, religious (scepticism) — 
Newman's correspondence — ^with 
Keble on the Sermons, 259, 264 ; 
with an unknown correspondent, 
268 ; with J. R. Hope, 281 ; his 
fears as to effect of his changed 
views on others, 317 ; Keble's 
suggestion re Bishop Butler's 
notion, 320 ; growth of scepti- 
cism at Oxford, 322 ; Newman's 
letter to J. F. Christie, 373 

Down, Bishop of, 92 

Durham, Bishop of. See Malt by, 

Durham University — High Church 
tendencies, 214 

Dyson, Mr., 241 

Ealing School — religious atmo- 
sphere, 116 

Eden, 80, 220, 226, 267 

Egyptian bishops — refusal to ad- 
here to Tome of St. Leo at Council 
of Chalcedon, 4 

Elijah, 265 ; reference in ' Sermons 
on Subjects of the Day,' 292 

Elhott, Rev. E. B. — work on Pro- 
phecy influences Mr. Robert 
Williams, 36 

EUison, 349 

Elphin, Bishop of, 92 

England, Church of. See AngUcan 

Ephesus, Council of (449 a.d.), 3 

Episcopacy. See Bishops 

Epistola Dogmatica ad Flavianum. 
See Tome of St. Leo 

Estius, the quotation from, 81 

Eucharist : — 

Real Presence, doctrine of. See 

Real Presence, doctrine of 
Transubstantiation. See Tran- 

Eunomius, 182 

Eusebians, 25 

Eusebius, 182 

Eutyches, 2 et seq., 10, 182 

Eutychians. See Monophysite con- 

EvangeUcals, the — attitude on 
Baptismal Service, Visitation of 

2 D 



Sick, and Absolution, 93 ; Tait's 
views, 96 ; and the Oxford 
movement, 112 ; Newman op- 
posed to their system, 114 ; and 
Calvinism, 115 ; attitude to Jeru- 
salem Bishopric scheme, 147 ; 
Cheltenham address to Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury denouncing 
Tracts for the Times, 169 ; New- 
man on the defections to Non- 
conformists, 185 ; Newman on 
subjectivism in religion, 253 ; 
early position of John Henry and 
Francis Newman, 394 
Exeter, Bishop of, 172, 179, 195, 

Faber, Mr., 214 

Faber, Rev. F. W. — Newman's cor- 
respondence with : on secessions 
to Rome, 253 ; on Invocation, 


Faber of Magdalen, 39 

Faber of University CoUege, 227 

Faith, the Rule of, 207 

Faussett, Dr., Lady Margaret Pro- 
fessor of Divinity, 49, 134-7, 
226 ; Thomas Mozley's reply to 
his attack on Tract XC, 134-7 

Forbes, 183 

Forgiveness of sins, 29, 207 

Formby, Mr., 158, 337, 340 

Friend, a — letter to Newman on his 
reported intention of joining 
Roman Church, 339 

Froude — account of Newman's 
refusal to see Manning, 280 

Froude, Archdeacon, 140, 217 

Froude, James Anthony, 32 

Froude, R. Hurrell, 11, 49, 67, 176, 
203, 214, 224, 351, 372-3 

Froude, W., 362 

Froude, Mrs. William — correspon- 
dence with Newman : on letter 
to Bishop of Oxford agreeing 
to discontinue Tracts, 103 ; New- 
man's progress, Lockhart, and 
the Essay on Development, 377, 

Fundamentals, the doctrine of, 11 

Gaisford, 344 
Geddes, 22 

Gentili, Dr., 248, 250, 259 
Gibbon, 366 

Giesler's text-book of ecclesiastical 
history, 366 

Gilbert, 37 

Gil by, Mr., 214 

Gladstone, W. E., and the 
Jerusalem Bishopric, 157, 162, 
1 71-2, 183 ; and the Tractarian 
aspirations for reunion with 
Rome, 198 et seq. ; on New- 
man's correspondence with 
Manning, 273, 278 ; Newman's 
letters to J. R. Hope concern- 
ing the ' Lives of the English 
Saints,' 286, 288 et seq., 310 ; 
suggests influences should be 
exerted to keep Newman in 
the Anglican Church, 293 ; fails 
to shake Newman's convictions 
concerning Rome, 350 ; article 
in the Quarterly against Ward, 
368 ; attitude towards the grant 
to Maynooth : correspondence 
with Newman, 375 

Gloucestershire Rector, a, on Tract 
XC, and Newman's letter to 
Bishop of Oxford, 105 

GoUghtly, 79, 86, 393 

Gorham case, the, 68 

Government, the, and the Jerusa- 
lem Bishopric : league with 
Bishops against Tractarians, 184 ; 
Newman on State conscience, 375 

Grace — Newman's letter to Rev. 
A. Tarbutt, 177 

Grant, Rev. Ignatius, 186, 258-9 

Greswold, Bishop, 194 

Griffiths, Mr. (one of the Four 
Senior Tutors), 93 

Guardian, Newman's obituary notice 
in, 389 

Guillemard, Mr., 367 

Haddan, 222, 228 

Hallam, Mr., 162 

Harrington, Dr., 324, 344 

Harrington, Mrs., 323 

Harris, 228 

Hawkins, Dr., the Provost of Oriel, 
79, 351 ; letter to Newman on 
his resignation and secession to 
Roman Church, 387 ; F. Rogers 
on his attitude towards Tract 
XC, 387 

Hebdomadal Board, See under 
Oxford University 

Heeren, 366 

Henoticon of Zeno, the, 5 

Henry VIII, the Act of, 175 

Heresy — heretical character of 
Anglican Church. See Anglican 



Church — Heretical character. 
Newman's correspondence : with 
Keble on Catholic subscription, 
138; with Mrs. S. F. Wood, 
159 ; with Badeley on Luther- 
anism, 182 

Hermesianer, 97 

High Church party — attitude to- 
wards Jerusalem Bishopric 
scheme, 147 

Hoadley, 126 

Homilies^ the, Tract XC, and, 

Hong-Kong mission scheme, 213 

Honinghaus' ' Wanderings through 
the Domain of Protestant Liter- 
ature,' 128 

Hook, Dr. W. F., 30, 53, 81, 171 ; 
on Oxford Movement and the 
danger of defections to Rome, 
30 ; attitude towards Jersualem 
Bishopric, 147 ; Newman's cor- 
respondence with, on Tract XC, 
87, 90, 99 

Hooker's ' Fifth Book,' 197 

Hope, Mr. J. R., 56, 58-61, 67, 326, 
367; attitude on Jerusalem Bishop- 
ric scheme, 144 ; pamphlet, 145 ; 
letter to Gladstone, 157; New- 
man's correspondence with, on 
Magdalen Statutes, 58-61 ; 
Catholicity of AngUcan Church, 
157; Jerusalem bishopric, 161, 
183 ; Roman tendencies, 164 ; 
Convocation and the Poetry 
Professorship, 172 ; dispensa- 
tions, 175 ; address to King of 
Prussia, 179; residence, 190; 
position of Tractarians, 191 ; 
Scotch Church, American Church, 
and Nestorians, 194 ; Newman 
thanks him for sending books, 
204 ; secessions to Rome, 258 ; 
the ' Lives of the English Saints,' 
280 et seq., 311 ; doubts of 
Cathohcity of EngUsh Church, 
311 ; bias, 312 ; Newman's 
suggestion to Oakeley re Roman 
Church, 380 

' House ' or ' Hall,' the, 39 

Idolatrous usages. See Images 
Images and relics, honours and 
reverence to — Tract XC and, 
76, 123-4 r Hook's letter to 
Newman, 88 ; Newman's corre- 
spondence, with Dr. Russell, 

123-4 ' with Dr. Wiseman, 131 ; 
his admission in 1843, 169 ; 
correspondence with Keble on the 
Second Commandment, 303, 304 

Incumbents — responsibility to their 
bishop : Bishop of Oxford's 
correspondence with Newman on 
Mr. Bloxam's indiscretion, 45-7 

Indulgences, 76, 123-4 

Infidelity — Newman's fears as to 
effect of his changed views on 
others, 317 

Ireland, the Primate of, 92 

Jansenists, 173 

Jarvis, Dr., 194 

Jeffreys, H., 38, 52, 330 

Jelf, Dr., Newman's letter vin- 
dicating Tract XC, 71, 80, 86, 147, 
167 ; Pusey and, 82 ; the post- 
script, 90 ; attitude of Heads of 
Houses, 90 ; Newman's assur- 
ances to Dr. Wiseman, 129, 132 ; 
anti-Catholic statements re- 
tracted, 203 

Jenkyns, 214 

Jerusalem Bishopric scheme, 9, 70, 
133-164 ; Mr. Walter informs 
Newman of the project, 141 ; 
Newman's letter to Keble, 142 ; 
Pusey 's attitude, 143 ; Samuel 
Wilberforce's attitude, 144 ; New- 
man's correspondence, 142, 144 
et seq.y 151, 157, 158, 159, 163 ; 
attitude of British Government, 
146 ; attitude of Evangelicals and 
High Churchmen, 147 ; New- 
man's unpubhshed letter to The 
Times, 149; J. R. Hope's letter 
to Gladstone, 157 ; Convocation 
and the Address to the King of 
Prussia, 179, 183 ; Gladstone's 
withdrawal from the Trust, 183 ; 
W. Palmer and, 217 
Protest, Newman's, 144, 156, 
159, 179, 180 

Jewel, Bishop — Oakeley's article in 
the British Critic , 135 

Jewish Church — St. Paul's unsett- 
ling effect on, 301 

Jews, Conversion of — the Jerusalem 
Bishopric scheme, 143 

Johnson, 228 

Julius I, Pope, 25 

Justification, 116, 139, 177, 182, 
192, 196, 207 

Justin Martyr, 196 



Kaye, Bishop, 197 

Keble, John, 35, 49, 79, 176 ; re- 
lations with Bishop over Rev. P. 
Young, 134, 136-7, 140 ; position 
tn regard to Bishop of Winches- 
ter's charge, 156 ; disgusted with 
Gladstone over WilUams and 
the Poetry professorship, 172 ; 
Newman on his character, 209 ; — 
Newman's correspondence with : 
.>n Bishop, of Oxford's proposal to 
discontinue Tracts, 100 ; editor- 
ship of British Critic^ 134 ; Jeru- 
salem bishopric, 142, 147 ; Scotch 
Church and Pusey's family, 195 ; 
Newman's explanations of era- 
sures in Keble's letters, 208 ; 
)n Newman's proposed resig- 
nation from St. Mary's and 
Ids changing religious views, 
210, 215, 217, 222, 225, 231, 
242, 244, 248, 250, 252, 

254, 259-60 ; death of Wood, 
215 ; the secessions to Rome, 
237, 248-9, 250, 251 ; Sermons on 
Subjects of the Day, 246, 249, 

255, 257, 259, 263, 266, 301 et 
seq. ; on Newman's resignation 
from St. Mary's, 266 ; on New- 
man's doubts as to duty to con- 
tinue in Anglican communion, 
296 et seq., 313 et seq., 347 et 
seq. ; Bowden's ill -health, 322-31 
passim ; Bowden's death, 334 et 
seq. ; Newman contradicts rumour 
as to his intention to join Roman 
Church, 340 ; Keble's reply, 347 ; 
on Ward's ' Ideal ' and the action 
of the authorities, 361 et seq., 
368 et seq. ; birthday felicita- 
tions, 372 ; Keble's letter on 
learning of Newman's secession, 


' ' Catholic subscription to the 

Thirty-nine Articles," letter 

on — Newman's letter to him 

as to heresy, 138 

Keble, Mrs, John, 362, 364, 371, 

Keble, Thomas, 261, 266, 299, 

331. 384 
Kildare, Bishop of, 92 
Knox, 256 

Lake, 22 C 

Lambeth, tne troubles at (1842), 

189, 190 
Latrocinium. See Ephesus, Council 

of, 3 

Lauda St on, 118 

Law's ' Serious Call,' 115 

Layman, a — Newman's letter on 
the danger of Anglican defections 
to Rome, 185 ; letter to New- 
man on his religious doubts, 353 

Leibnitz, 117, 124, 126 

Lenthall, Miss, 384 

Lewis, Mr., 38, 228, 333 

Lisle, Phillipps de, 40, 132 

Littlemore — Newman reorganises 
school, 61 ; Newman's desire to 
retain Littlemore, 212, 216 ; ex- 
presses disappointment to Keble, 
217 ; gifts to the Church at, 230 ; 
Newman's life at : time table, 

295 ; observance o± Lent (1844), 

296 ; Newman's letter to J. R. 
Hope and Dodsworth on the re- 
treat, 310, 311 

' Lives of the English Saints,' 215, 
216, 228, 231 ; Pusey and, 280 ; 
Newman's correspondence with 
J. R. Hope, 280 et seq., 310 

Lloyd, Bishop, 197 

Lloyd, Mr., 91 

Lockhart, William (afterwards 
Father WiUiam Lockhart), 215, 
228 ; secession to Rome, 248, 
250, 256, 258 ; subsequent rest- 
ful state : mother's letter to 
Newman, 377-8 ; on Newman's 
influence at Oxford, 390 

London, Bishop of. See Blom- 
field. Bishop of London 

' Loss and Gain,' quoted, 200, 230, 

359 >^. 
Low Church party, Tait on, 96 ; 

defections to dissenting bodies, 

185 ; authorities and, 327, See 

also EvangeUcals 

Lushington, Dr. — judgment in 

Court of Arches on ' passing by,* 

Luther, 180 

Lutheranism, Newman on heresy of, 

Macdonald, 87 

McGhee, Mr. — Newman and his 
challenge to a public disputa- 
tion, 191 

MacMuUen, 228 ' 

Magdalen College — the contr versy 
over the Statutes, 56-61 

Maitland, Dean, 50 

Malta, the proposed bishopric at, 




Maltby, Rt. Rev, E., Bishop of 
Durham, 214 

Manchester and Salford Protestant 
Reformation Society, 309 

Manning, Archdeacon, 49, 85, 102, 
171, 176, 180, 183, 301, 350; 
correspondence with Newman, 
on the resignation of St. Mary's, 
271 et seq. ; on ' Sermons on 
Subjects of the Day,' 290 et seq. ; 
the sermon of Nov. 5, and New- 
man's refusal to see him, 280 

Marcian, Emperor, 3 

Marriage — mixed marriage question 
in Russia, 38 ; Newman's letter 
to Rev. W. Dodsworth, 193 

Marriott, Charles, 141, 217, 330, 333 

Martyrs' Memorial, the, 176 

Masses, the Sacrifice of, 181 

Matthison, 37 

Maurice, Mr. — Newman's letter to 
The Times repudiating accusa- 
tions concerning Tract XC, 109 

Maye, Dr., 215 

Mayers, Rev. Walter, 113, 394 ; his 
influence on Newman, 11^ et seq. 

Maynooth grant, the, 375 

Medley, 349 

Melancthon, 175, 180, 182 

Meyrick, 228, 331 

Miles, 215 

Mill, Dr., 147, 156 

Miller, John, 319, 323, 326 

Mills, Mr., 215 

Milman, 370 

Miracles, 243 ; the ' Essay on Ecclesi- 
astical Miracles," 243 ; Newman's 
correspondence with Hope, 282-3 

Moberly, Rev. G. (later Bishop 
of Salisbury), 80, 324, 349 ; 
letter to Rev. R. W. Church on 
Tract XC, 80 

Mohler, 97 

Monastery, Newman's suggestion 
for a, 172. See also Littlemore 

Monasticism, 308 

Monophysite controversy — New- 
man's studies in 1839, i, 9; the 
controversy outHned, 2 ; pro- 
ceedings at Ephesus and Chalce- 
don, 3 et seq. ; the two types 
of dissidents, Eutychians and 
Monophysites, 5 ; difficulty over 
the term Physis, 6 ; Newman 
recognises the difficulty of the 
Via Media, 9 ; his comment 
on the definition of Chalcedon, 
10, 24 ; the parallel 'to modem 
controversy, 13, 24 ; Newman 

admits effect of his studies on 
his views, 17-26, 276 ; Newman's 
references in letters on the 
Jerusalem Bishopric scheme, 151, 
156 ; on Lutheranism, 182 ; cor- 
respondence with Keble, 219 

Morpeth, Lord, 87, 393 

Morris, Mr., of Exeter — Newman 
on his extravagances at St. 
Mary's, 36-7, 39, 348 

Morris, Rev. T. E. — in the sermon 
referring to ' Laud, the martyred 
Archbishop,' 189, 229 i^a 

Mosheim, 366 " _ ,^^ 

Mozley, Mr. Frank, 394 

Mozley, Mr. J., 35, 52, 228, 330, 349 

Mozley, Mrs. J. — Newman's corre- 
spondence with : on discontinu- 
ance of Tracts, 108 ; the Jerusalem 
Bishopric scheme, 151 ; retracta- 
tion of anti-Catholic statements, 

Mozley, J. B., 39 ' 

Mozley, Mr. J. B. (Newman's 
nephew) on Newman's home 
teaching, 394 

Mozley, Thomas, 68 ; editorship of 
British Critic : the article casti- 
gating Faussett, 134 ; Newman's 
correspondence with Keble, 134-7 

Mozley, Mrs. Thomas (Newman's 
sister), 135, 141 

Mules, 80 

Murray, 228 

Mysticism, 30, 175 

' N ' — letter to Newman urging 
hesitation ere seceding to Rome, 

355 » 
Nestorians and Nestorian doctrine 

— the monk Theodosius' allega- 
tions, 5 ; the Monophysites and, 

6 ; Newman's references on Jeru- 
salem Bishopric project, 156 ; 
American Church and, 194 

Neville, Father William, 146, 280 ; 
account of Newman's refusal to 
see Manning, 280 
Newfoundland, Bishop of, 342 
Newman, John Henry — studies 
concerning Monophysite con- 
troversy : their effect on theory 
of Via Media, 1-9 ; recognises 
historical position of Roman 
Church and authority of Pope, 

7 ; contentions as to Cathohcity 
of English Church, 8 ; comment 



on the definition at Chalcedon, 
lo ; on Anglican theology and 
subjective view of truth, ii ; ex- 
plains his doubts to Rogers and 
H. Wilberforce, 14 ; reply to 
Dr. Wiseman and the ' Catho- 
licity of Enghsh Church,' 
15 ; change in rehgious views : 
explanatory memoranda, 16; 
draft letter to friend, 19 ; un- 
dated fragment tracing views 
during 1839-41, 23 ; letter to 
friend on Council of Chalcedon, 
24 ; effect of sermons at St. 
Mary's, 28 ; attitude of authori- 
ties towards his adherents, 31 ; 
correspondence with Rev. W. 
Dodsworth and Bishop of Oxford 
re Mr. Bloxam's indiscretion, 
41-7 ; the rise of the Tractarian 
movement, 27-69 ; the contro- 
versy over Tract XC, 70-110 ; 
Newman's obhgations to Dr. 
Russell and Rev. T. Scott, m ; 
to Rev. W. Mayers, 113 ; never 
experienced conventional Evan- 
gelical conversion, 114; early 
religious influences, 115, 393; 
comparison with St. Phihp Neri, 
117; correspondence with Dr. 
Russell re Tract XC and Roman 
doctrine, 118, 129; correspond- 
ence with Dr. Wiseman on 
Anglican and Romish differences, 
129-32 ; his three difficulties 
after termination of Tract XC 
affair, 133 ; correspondence with 
Keble on T. Mozley's editorship 
of British Critic, 134-7 '> ^^ 
Keble's difficulties over Rev. P. 
Young, 136-140 ; on Keble's 
letter on ' Catholic Subscription ' 
to the Articles, 138 ; Catholicus 
letters to The Times on Sir 
R. Peel's Tamworth address, 
142; controversy over the Jeru- 
salem bishopric, 141-64 ; unpub- 
hshed letter to The Times, 149 ; 
letter to S. F. Wood correcting 
an account of a sermon, 160 ; 
growing difficulties, 165-201 ; 
the five periods of religious devel- 
opment evidenced in Apologia, 
165; his position (1841-3), 166; 
fears claims of Rome may prove 
irresistible, 166; attitude towards 
Roman doctrine {1841-3), 166 et 
seq. ; retracts anti-Cathohc state- 
ments (1843), 168, 202 et seq. ; 

and the Martyrs' memorial, 176 ; 
contemplates resignation of St. 
Mary's, 204 ; correspondence 
with Keble (admits influence in 
direction of Rome and changing 
views), 208 et seq., 215, 217, 222, 
225, 234, 243, 244, 248, 255, 259, 
261 ; letter to unknown corre- 
spondent on his position as 
regards AngHcan and Roman 
Churches, 268 ; correspondence 
with Manning, 271 et seq. ; 
letters to Hope on ' Lives of Eng- 
lish Saints,' 280 et seq. ; fife at 
Littlemore (1844) : time table, 
294-5 ; position in 1844, 294 et 
seq . ; effect of his changed views on 
others, 294-5, 317, 343, 346, 354, 
359 ; one of his trials in Lent 1 844 ; 
the prospect of having to join 
Church of Rome, 296 ; corre- 
spondence with Keble as to his 
doubts, 296 et seq., 313 et seq., 
347 et seq. ; correspondence with 
a clergyman : contradicts report 
that he had gone over to Rome, 
309 ; his growing conviction that 
Roman communion is the true 
Church, 316; recalls experiencesin 
Sicily, 315 ; letter to E. L. Bade- 
ley, 329 ; rumours of his seces- 
sion to Rome, 339 et seq. ; a 
friend's letter, 339 ; letter to 
Keble contradicting rumours, 
340 ; letters from a stranger and 
an old schoolfellow, 341 ; cor- 
respondence with Rev. E. Cole- 
ridge, 342, 345 ; correspondence 
with E. L. Badeley, 344 ; his deep 
conviction that Christianity and 
the Roman system are convert- 
ible terms, 350 ; freedom from 
Roman influences, 345, 351 ; 
layman's letter urging hesitation 
ere seceding, 353 ; correspond- 
ence with Keble on Ward's 
* Ideal ' : Anglican articles in- 
compatible with Catholic doc- 
trine, 360 et seq. ; unfavourable 
view of present state of Roman 
Catholics, 364 ; determines on 
secession : effect of writing Essay 
on Development, 365 ; letters to 
Mrs. Froude, 378, 380 ; urges 
Oakeley to consider secession 
(letter to Keble), 379 ; Pusey and 
Newman's intended secession, 
382 ; Newman's letter to Pusey 
on the case of a young lady, 383 ; 



Keble's letter on learning of New- 
man's intention, 384 ; admission 
into Roman Catholic Church, 388 
Journal — proposal to show it to 

Keble, 245 et seq.j 258, 260, 

Letters— to Rev. T. W. Allies, 

196 ; to E. L. Badeley, 69, 137, 

180, 234, 326, 329, 337> 340, 343; 
Serjeant Bellasis, 170, 173, 183 
-4) 189, 313 ; J- W. Bowden, 
36, 47 et seq.y 66 ; Rev. J. 
F. Christie, 373 ; a Clergyman, 
309; Rev. E. Coleridge, 342, 
345; a Correspondent, 62 et 
seq. ; J. B Dalgaims, 213 ; 
Rev. W. Dodsworth, 41, 162, 

181, 188, 193, 213, 233, 237, 
311 ; Rev. F. W. Faber, 252, 
356 ; a Friend (rough draft), 
19 ; (extracts), 24 ; Mrs. W. 
Froude, 377, 380 ; W. E. Glad- 
stone, 375 ; Rev. W. F. Hook, 
90, 99; J. R- Hope, 58 et seq., 
144, 158, 161, 164, 171, 175, 
179, 182, 190, 205, 258, 280 
et seq., 310, 312, 379 ; Dr. 
Jelf, 84, 86, 167; Rev. J. 
Keble, 134, 138, 142, 147, 191, 
195, 208, 217, 222, 225, 244, 
257» 259, 266, 299, 313, 328, 
331, 334, 340, 349, 360, 368 ; a 
Layman, 185; Rev. Mr. Mc- 
Ghee, 192 ; Archdeacon Man- 
ning, 272, 292 ; Mrs. J. Mozley, 
152 ; Bishop of Oxford, 42 et 
seq., 262 ; Perceval, 393 ; 
Rev. E. B. Pusey, 383, 387 ; 
Rev, C. Russell, 122 ; Rev. A. 
St. John, 236, 242, 333 ; Rev. 
A. Tarbutt, 177 ; The Times, 
109, (unpublished, 149) ; un- 
known correspondents, 176, 
205, 268 et seq. ; Mr. Walter, 
148 ; Dr. Wiseman, 129 et seq. ; 
Mr. S. F. Wood, 33 et seq., 
38,61,67, 146, 158, 174 

Library, 204, 334, 340, 344 
Sermons — effect of sermons at 
St. Mary's on the Oxford Move- 
ment, 28 ; explanatory letter 
re ' Secret Faults,' 62 ; ' Paro- 
chial Sermons,' 69 ; on ' Im- 
plicit and Explicit Reason,' 69 ; 
on Development, 245, 277 ; 
' Subjects of the Day ' : cor- 
respondence with Keble, 246 
et seq., 263, 266, 302 et seq. ; 
extracts from the Sermon on the 

' Invisible Presence of Christ,' 
252-3 ; Keble's criticism, 263 ; 
Manning's correspondence with 
Newman, 290 ; effect on a 
young lady, 300 ; friend of 
Keble notes new dogmatic 
note, 305, 308 ; the reference 
to ' our Lord eating and drink- 
ing,' 304, 307 ; extracts from 
' Dangers to the Penitent,* 
358 ; • Indulgence in Religious 
Privileges,' 359 

Newman's father, 394 

Newman, Francis, 394 

Newton, Bishop, 51 

Newton, John, iii, 394 

New Zealand, Bishop of. See 
Selwyn, Rt. Rev. G. A. 

Nonconformists. See Dissenters 

Norris, the Common Room man, 

Novatians, 173, 260 

Oakeley, Mr. Frederick, 159, 160, 
174, 180, 197, 198, 227, 324, 357 ; 
on the precipitancy of the author- 
ities concerning Tract XC, 72 ; 
letter to Pusey, 85 ; article on 
Jewel, 135 ; Newman and his 
aspirations for reunion with 
Rome, 198-9 ; translation of St. 
Bernard, 298, 306, 308 ; Bishop of 
London's action and his resigna- 
tion, 365 et seq., 373, 379 ; New- 
man suggests he should consider 
question of entering Roman 
Church : correspondence with 
J. R. Hope, 379 

Oath of Supremacy, Newman and, 

O'Connell, 132, 350 

Ogilvie, 325 

Oldcastle. John — monograph on 
Newman quoted, 390 

Ordination, Episcopal, 207 

Oret, 356 

' Origen contra Celsum,' 197 

Ormsby, 228 

Orpah — reference in ' Sermons on 
Subjects of the Day ' : Manning 
and, 291-2 

Oxford, Bishop of. See Bagot, Dr. 

Oxford Movement, the — emergence 
of the new school of Tractarians, 
27 ; effect of Newman's sermons at 
St. Mary's, 28; attitude of authori- 
ties towards followers of Newman 
and Pusey. 31 ; the controversy 

40 8 


over Tract XC, 70-110 ; dis- 
continuance of the Tracts, 99- 
102 ; Dr. Wiseman's attitude, 
it8 ; correspondence between Dr. 
Russell and Newman, 118, 129; 
Oakeley's article on Jewel marks 
parting of old and new school 
of Tractarians, 135 ; Newman's 
fear of movement to expel 
Tractarians from University : 
letter to Mrs. Mozley, 153 ; the 
Archbishop of Canterbury and 
the Cheltenham Evangelicals' 
address denouncing the Tracts, 
169 et seq. ; penitential spirit 
of the movement, 172 ; alleged 
league of Government and Bishops 
against, 184 ; Newman's letter 
to Bellasis on his difficult position, 
184 ; letter to a layman on 
Catholic tendencies, 185 ; letter 
to Mr. J. R. Hope, 191 ; note to 
Pusey on Oakeley and Ward : 
the aspiration for reunion with 
Rome, 199 ; rise of the new 
school with Romanising ten- 
dencies, 239 et seq. ; the secessions 
to Rome, 248-9, 250, 257 ; a 
Bishop's claim respecting New- 
man's dwindling adherents, 294 ; 
intensity of religious spirit, 358 ; 
Oakeley's fears as result of 
break-up in 1845, 368 ; New- 
man's obituary in the Guardian 
quoted, 390 
AngUcan defections to Rome. 

See under Anglican Church. 
Evangelicals — difference in ''^] re- 
ligious spirit, 112 
Tait's views, 95-6 
Oxford University : — 

Chancellorship question, 60-1 
Hebdomadal Board — attitude to- 
wards Tract XC, 71 ; pro- 
posals concerning W. G. Ward's 
' Ideal of a Christian Church,* 


Poetry professorship, the election 

for, 134, 153, 159, 171 
Test, the proposed — The Heb- 
domadal Board's proposal, 94 ; 

Archibald Tait and, 94 et seq. ; 

Newman confesses fears to 

Mrs. J. Mozley, 153 
Theological Statute — Newman 

advises Mr. Hope of the 

drafting of, 183 
Vice-Chancellor. See Wynter, 


Palgrave, Sir Francis, 283 

Palmer, R. (of Magdalen), 50, 51, 
59, 81, 156, 189, 233, 242, 248 ; 
Protest against the Jerusalem 
Bishopric, 156 ; on Pusey's sus- 
pension, 242 

Palmer, Mr. Roundell. See Sel- 
bome. Lord 

Palmer, Rev. William (of Worcester) 
— Treatise on the Church, New- 
man's review of, 10 ; View of 
Faith and Unity, 12 ; appre- 
ciation of Tract XC, 76-7 ; 
proposed public Declaration, 105 ; 
and the Jerusalem Bishopric 
scheme, 147, 171, 217 ; and the 
services of the Tractarians, 169 ; 
pamphlet on the Tracte, 250, 

Parker, 164 

Pattison, Mark, 32, 39, 52, 228, 
280, 313 

Pauli, Mr., 393 

Peel, Sir Robert, 140 ; Newman's 
letters to The Times on the 
Tarn worth address, 142 ; the 
Maynooth grant, 375 

Penance, 172-3 

Perceval, Rev. A., 217, 266, 312 ; 
letter to Newman on Tract XC, 
81 ; and the Jerusalem Bishopric 
scheme, 147 ; Newman's letter 
on Tract XC, 393 

Perrone, Father, 177 

Petavius on Eutyches, 2 

Peter the Tanner, 5 

Phantasaists, 5 

Phillipps, Mr. See Lisle 

Physis, the term — attitude of tie 
Monophysites, 6 

Pope — authority, infallibility, and 
supremacy : effect of Newman's 
studies of the Early Church, 
7 ; not the point of divergence 
between England and Rome, 8, 
II ; reference in rough draft 
of letter to a friend, 22 ; New- 
man's note to Pusey, 198 ; 
letters to Keble, 218, 351 ; 
correspondence with Hope, 285, 
287 ; Newman's certainty on the 
supremacy question, 351 

Prayers for the dead, 22, 308 

Predestination, 115, 116 

Pritchard, 228 

Prodigal Son, the Parable of the, 178 

Prophetical office, the, 12 

Proterius, Patriarch, 5 

Protestants and Protestantism — 



Newman's views as a result of 
study of Monophysite contro- 
versy, I ; Dr. Russell on danger 
of lapsing from Anglicanism, 
129 ; references in Newman's 
letters on the Jerusalem 
Bishopric scheme, 145, 148, 150, 
155, 171 ; Mr. Hope's letter to 
Mr. Gladstone, 157 ; Tractarians 
and the Reformers, 175 et seq. ; 
Newman and Reformers, 177, 
198 ; his letters to Badeley, 182, 


Protestant league, supposed plan 
for universal, 155 

Prussia, King of — the proposed 
address, 179 et seq. ; prayers 
with Newgate prisoners, 181 

Prussian Church — question of re- 
lations with Anglican Church 
raised over Jerusalem Bishopric 
project, 143 et seq., 151, 158 

Purgatory, Tract XC and. 76 ; 
Pusey on, 83 ; Newman's letter 
to a correspondent explaining 
passage in sermon on ' Secret 
Faults,' 62 ; the letter to Dr. 
Jelf, 167 

Pusey, Edward Bouverie, 102, 135, 
139, 147, 170, 176, 195, 228, 
257, 271, 280, 297, 301, 320, 
324, 342, 369 ; authorities' 
attitude towards his disciples, 
32 ; note to Bishop of Oxford 
re Bloxam, 45 ; proposed in- 
stitution of Sisters of Mercy, 54 ; 
opposes Bishop of Salisbury for 
the Chancellorship, 61 ; criticises 
S. F. Wood's sketch, 67 ; on 
the precipitancy of the authorities 
regarding Tract XC, 71 ; letter 
to Dr. Wynter defending Tract 
XC, 81 ; letter to Newman on 
the letter to Dr. Jelf, 82 ; Bishop 
of Oxford's letter suggesting 
pubh cation of explanations, 88 ; 
Newman's letter to The Times 
in 1863, no ; Newman's letter to 
Keble on state of health of Pusey 's 
family, 141 ; attitude on the 
Jerusalem Bishopric, 143 ; con- 
sulted by Newman re Evangelical 
address denouncing the Tracts, 
170 ; and the Martyrs' Memorial, 
176 ; letter to the Archbishop, 
185, 188 ; Newman's love for, 
195 ; his note to Pusey on 
Oakeley and Ward's aspirations 
for reunion with Rome, 197-9 ; 

the reference in ' Loss and 
Gain,' 200 ; suggests Newman 
should retain Littlemore, 212 ; 
ill-health, 222, 229, 230, 237 ; 
Newman's account of his health 
to Rev. W. Dodsworth, 237 ; 
Keble advises Newman to con- 
sult him on changed opinions, 
261 ; letter to Gladstone on 
Newman's correspondence with 
Manning, 279 ; and the ' Lives 
of the Saints,' 280, 282 ; and the 
Roman devotional system, 306-- 
307 J Newman's letter to Badeley 
on the significance of Pusey 's 
suit, 344 ; view of Newman's 
intention to enter Roman Church, 
382 ; Newman's letters to 
Pusey on the case of a young 
lady disposed to join Roman 
Church, 383 ; announcing resig- 
nation of fellowship, 387 
Baptism, Tract on, Newman 

and, 177 
Suspension for the sermon on 
the Eucharist, 204, 208, 228-9, 
232 et seq., 242 ; Newman's 
letter to Badeley, 327 ; Keble's 
suggestion as to his conduct 
on expiry, 347 
Pusey, Mrs., ill-health, 33 
Pusey, Lady Lucy, 141 
Pusey, Lucy, 230, 232 


Rambler, the essay in the, 12 

Rationahsm, 150, 157 

Real Presence, doctrine of the, 
139, 171, 240, 348 

Reason and behef, 23 

Reding, Charles, the character in 
* Loss and Gain,' 29, 230 

Reformation and Reformers. See 
Protestants and Protestantism 

ReUgion, subject! veness in, New- 
man on, 112, 114, 253 

Rehgious privileges, indulgence in-— 
extracts from Newman's sermon, 


Repentance — -the sermon on dangers 
to the penitent, 358 

Residence — Newman's letter to Mr. 
J. R. Hope, 190 

Review, Newman proposes to estab- 
lish a, 287 



Richards, Dr., Rector of Exeter, and 
Tract XC, 78 

Ridley — advice to his father-in-law 
over Rev. P. Young, 140 

Rio's La Petite Chouanerie, the 
article on, 197 

Rivington, 228, 284-5, 290 

Rock, Dr., 40, 50 

Rogers, Frederic, 14, 34-5, 60, 220, 
315 ; correspondence with New- 
man over changed religious views, 
14, 220-1, 226 ; his defence of 
Newman in Convocation, 221 ; 
on Dr. Hawkins' attitude to- 
wards Tract XC, 387 

* Roman Catholic Church ' — New- 
man's recognition of its historical 
position, 6; Newman's correspond- 
ence with Keble : acknowledges 
Roman Church as the Church of 
the Apostles, 219 ; Keble 's reply, 
222 ; Newman explains his 
position to an unknown corre- 
spondent, 268 ; growing convic- 
tion that Roman communion 
is the true Church, 316 ; New- 
man's unfavourable view of 
present state of Roman CathoUcs, 


Anghcan Church, differences 

with. See Anglican and Roman 

Churches, differences between 

Anghcan secessions. See under 
Anglican Church 

Belief in her teaching as the 
teaching of God imperative — 
Newman's letter of Oct. 11, 

1879. 31 

Catholicity — Dr. Russell's cor- 
respondence with Newman, 
127 ; Manning's correspond- 
ence with Newman, 275 et seq. ; 
Newman's correspondence with 
J. R. Hope, 281 

China, work in, 213 

Devotions, Dr. Russell on, 125 

Doctrine — Tract XC and, 72 et 
seq. ; Pusey's suggestions to 
Newman respecting the letter 
to Dr. Jelf, 82 ; correspond- 
ence between Newman and 
Russell, 118-29; and Wise- 
man, 129-32 ; Newman's atti- 
tude in 1841-3, 166 et seq. 

Faith, alleged additions to the — 
Newman's accusation, 8 ; his 
doubts, 16, 21 ; Dr. Russell's 
correspondence with Newman, 
129 ; Newman's changed views: 

correspondence with Keble, 
219, 223 
Romish, the term — distinction from 

Tridentine, 73 
Rosary, Dr. Russell on the, 125 
Rule of Faith. See Faith, Rule of 
Russell, Dr. C, of Maynooth, 73, 
III, 117, 168 ; biographical note, 
117; and Tract XC, 73 ; cor- 
respondence with Newman re- 
specting reference to Transub- 
stantiation in Tract XC and 
Roman doctrine, 118-29 
Russia — ^mixed marriages question, 

Ryder, T., 228, 349 

Sabellianisers, 370 

Sacrament, the Blessed. See 

St. Aldhelm, 283 

St. Alphonsus, sermons of, 168 

St. Athanasius, 21, 22, 24, 25, 
26 ; Newman's work, 133, 140, 
151, 158, 294, 300, 341 

St. Augustine, 13, 21, 197, 260 

St. Augustine of Canterbury, 283 

St. Bernard, 125 ; Oakeley's work, 
298, 306, 308 

St. Cyprian, 21, 197, 260 

St. Cyril of Alexandria, Epistles of, 
4, 6, 24 

St. David's, Bishop of, 211 

St. Flavian, Patriarch of Constanti- 
nople, 2 

St. Francis Xavier, 125 

St. Gregory — the address to St. 
Basil, 65 

St. Hilary, 22 

St. Ignatius the Martyr, 21, 147 

St. Ignatius of Loyola, ' Exercises,* 
168, 296 

St. John — on Grace, 177 

St. John Baptist, 265 

St. John Chrysostom, extracts from, 

St. John, Rev. Ambrose — corre- 
spondence with Newman on his 
religious opinions, 236, 240 ; on 
death of Bowden, 334 ; and 
Newman's secession, 388 

St. Leo the Great, Pope, 2, 7, 14, 
21, 24 
Tome. See Tome of St. Leo 

St. Mary's, Oxford : — 

Newman contemplates resigna- 
tion, 204 ; correspondence 
with Keble, 208 et seq., 215, 



217, 222, 225, 231, 246, 248, 

250, 252, 255, 257 ; letter 
to Mr. J. R. Hope, 259 ; 
Newman's letter of resigna- 
tion, 262 ; subsequent corre- 
spondence with Keble, 266 ; 
correspondence with unknown 
correspondent, 268 ; with Man- 
ning, 271 et seq. 
St. Paul — on Grace, 177 ; unsettling 
effect on the Jewish Church, 301 
St. Phihp Neri, Newman compared 

to, 117 
St. Stephen, 283, 285 
St. Vincent of Paul, 125 
Saints, intercession and invocation 
of, 65, 123-4, 171, 207; Tract 
XC and, 76 ; Newman and, 167 ; 
Rev. T. E. Morris's sermon on 
Laud, 228 ; distinction between 
intercession and invocation, 229 ; 
Newman's correspondence with 
Rev. Ambrose St. John, 240 ; 
with Rev. F. W. Faber, 356 
SaUsbury, Bishop of — suggested for 
Chancellorship of Oxford Uni- 
versity, 60-1 ; charge, 199 
Sancta Clara, 123 
Scepticism. See Doubt. 
Schleiermacher, 96 
' Schoolfellow, an old ' — letter to 
Newman on his reported in- 
tention to jom Roman Church, 

Scotch Church, 194 et seq. 

Scott, Rev. Thomas, of Aston 
Sandford, 41 ; his influence on 
Newman, 111 et seq. 

' Securus judicat orbis terrarum,' 13, 

Selbome, Lord (Mr. Roundell 

Palmer), 105, 205 
Selwyn, Right Rev, G. A., Bishop of 

New Zealand, 342 
Sermons. See under Newman, 

John Henry 
Sewell, Mr., of Exeter, 79 
Sewell, Mr., of Magdalen, 55, 230 
Sewell — criticism in Dublin Review ^ 

Short, 80 

Shuttleworth, Right Rev. P. N., 
Bishop of Chichester, 68, 184 

Sibthorpe, 149, 181, 186, 269 ; 
Rev. W. Dodsworth's contro- 
versy with, 181 

Sicily — Newman recalls experiences 
during visit : letter to Keble, 


Simony, canonical, 190 

Sin — character, 29 ; post-baptismal, 
173, 206 ; forgiveness. See For- 
giveness of sin 

Skinner, Mr,, 214 

' Smith,* the character (' Loss and 
Gain *), 200 

Society for Promoting Christian 
Knowledge, 324 

Society for Promoting Christianity 
among the Jews, 146 

Socinianism, 150 

Spencer, Mr., the R.C. priest, 50, 

51, 55 
Spranger, 79 

Standard, The, Newman suggests 
action against, 145, 159 

Stanley, 228 

State conscience — Newman's letter 
to Gladstone 375 

Stewart, 215 

Stillingfleet, 22 

Stowell, Rev. H., 309 

' Stranger,' a — on Newman's re- 
ported secession to Roman 
Church, 341 

Symons.Dr, — attempted opposition 
to election as Vice -Chancellor, 

Synodites, 10 

Tait, Archibald (future Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury) — and Tract 
XC, 77, 94 ; one of the four 
Senior Tutors, 94 ; his attitude 
towards the proposed Test at 
Oxford, 94 

Tarbutt, Rev. A. — Newman's letter 
on Grace, 177 

Taylor, Bishop Jeremy, Dr. Russell 
on his references to Transub- 
stantiation, 120, 263 

Taylor, Mr., 49, 227 

Tertullian, 197 

Theodosius II, Emperor, 2, 3 

Theodosius, the monk, 5 

Thirlwall, Connop (Bishop of St. 
David's), 208, 366 

Thirty-nine Articles. See Anglican 
Church ; Articles of Rehgion 

Tickell, 228 

Times, The — and Tract XC, 80 ; 
Newman's letter (1863), 109 ; 
attitude towards the Tractarians, 
141 ; attitude towards Jerusalem 
bishopric, 141 ; Newman's im- 
published letter, 149 

Timothy the Cat, 5 



Todd, Dr. J. H. — Discourses on the 
Prophecy 'relating to anti-Christ, 
50 ; letter to Newman on Tract 

XC, 91 

Tome of St. Leo (Epistola Dog- 

matica ad Flavian um), 3, 4 
Toovey, 288, 344 
Townshend, Mr., 214 
Tracts — the doctrinal side of the 
Oxford movement, 28 ; table of 
sales in Newman's letter to 
Bowden, 67 ; discontinuance, 
99-102 ; spontaneous develop- 
ment ; Newman's letter to 
correspondent, 205 
LXXI — extract referring to the 
controversy with the Roman 
Catholics, 28 
XC, 2, 70-106 ; apprehensions 
of the four Senior Tutors, 70 ; 
Newman's letter to Dr. Jelf 
in vindication, 71, 82 ; pre- 
cipitate action of the author- 
ities, 71 ; thesis of the Tract, 
72 ; distinction between 
Romish and Tridentine, 73 ; 
relation to the idea of a CathoHc 
Church, 74 ; critical principles 
summarised, 75 ; objects, 76 ; 
the controversy over, 76 et seq. ; 
Pusey's suggestions, 82-4 ; 
Newman's note to Pusey's 
letter, 85 ; Dr. Hook's letter to 
Newman, 87 ; Bishop of Oxford 
suggests pubhcation of ex- 
planations, 88-9 ; suppression 
proposed, 99 ; Newman's cor- 
respondence with Dr. Hook, 
99 ; with Keble, 100 ; Newman's 
letter to Bishop of Oxford, 
102 ; letter to The Times in 
1863 repudiating Mr, Maurice's 
accusations, 109 ; correspond- 
ence with Dr. Russell, 118-29 ', 
Archbishop of Canterbury re- 
ceives Cheltenham Evangeli- 
cals' address denouncing, 169 ; 
the Retractation of anti-Catho- 
lic Statements, 203 ; unanimous 
condemnation by Bishops, 211, 
214 ; Keble upholds it as 
sufficiently AngUcan, 231 ; 
Newman's explanation to 
Manning concerning his resign- 
ation of St. Mary's, 272 ; 
Newman's correspondence with 
Keble on Ward's ' Ideal,' 362 
et seq. ; the proposed censure 
by Convocation, 367 ; F. 

Rogers on Dr. Hawkins' atti- 
tude, 387 ; Newman's letter 
to Perceval, 393 

Tractarians. See Oxford Movement 

Tradition, 207 

Transubstantiation, 25 ; reference 
in Tract XC : correspondence 
between Dr. Russell and New- 
man, 118-29; between Rev. 
Ambrose St. John and Newman, 

Trent, Council of — AngHcan ob- 
jections considered, 22 ; New- 
man's correspondence with Dr. 
Wiseman, 131 
Decrees, Tract XC and, 73 et seq. 

Tridentine, theterm — ^its distinction 
from Romish, 73 

Tridentines, 24 

Tutors, Four Senior — letter to New- 
man on Tract XC, 70, 76 ; 
identity, 93 

Unknown correspondents — New- 
man's correspondence with : on 
the Reformers, 176 ; his position 
as regards Anghcan and Roman 
Churches, 268 

Valdesso, John, 256 

Veron's ' Regula Fidei,' 120, 123, 

Vigilius of Thapsus, Bishop, on the 

Monophysites, 6, 9 
Virgin Mary, reverence to the, 

123, 124, 167 

Wackerbarth, Mr., 186, 189 
Waddington, Dean, 214 
Wall on ' Infant Baptism,' 197 
Walter, Mr., of The Times — 
correspondence with Newman on 
the Jerusalem Bishopric, 141, 148 
Ward, Mr. W. G., of BaUiol College, 
14, 57 ; and Tract XC, 77 ; and 
the British Critic, 135 ; and 
Canons of 1603, 161 ; Newman's 
letter to Wood, 174 ; Newman's 
relations with, 197 ; Newman's 
note to Pusey on differences 
with the extreme Tractarians, 
198 ; and the article on con- 
fession, 217, 222 
' Ideal of a Christian Church,' 
— proposals of Hebdomadal 



Board concerning, 94;' Tait 
and, 95; the authorities and, 
325, 338. 344. 357. 360; incident 
with the Master over reading 
the lessons, 338 ; Newman's 
correspondence with Keble, 

360 et seq., 368 et seq. ; the Test, 

361 et seq., 364-5 ; the * Ideal ' 
condemned and Ward deprived 
of University degrees, 367 ; 
Newman and Gladstone's 
article in the Quarterly, 

Ward, G. R. M., of Trinity College, 

55-57. 58 
Watson, 126 

Wellington, Duke of, 55, 172 

Wesleyans, Newman on Anglican 
defections to, 185 

Whately, 351 

Wilberforce, Henry, 14, 35, 59, 
241-2, 370; account of New- 
man's doubts in 1839, 14 ; and 
Ambrose St. John's difficulties, 

Wilberforce, Robert, 106, 144, 160 ; 
on Tract XC and Newman's 
letter to Bishop of Oxford, 106 

Wilberforce, Samuel, Archdeacon 
of Surrey — wife's death, 80 ; on 
Bunsen and the Jerusalem Bishop- 
ric scheme, 144, 171 

WiUiams, Isaac, 79, 331, 340 ; 
candidature for Poetry Pro- 
fessorship, 134, 153, 159, 171 

WiUiams, Robert, 34-5, 36, 38, 
67, 161, 198, 306, 307, 360, 362, 

WUson, 38, 137, 215, 299, 301, 
349. 371 » suggested collaboration 

with Mozley in editorship of 
British Critic, 137 

Wilson, Mr. (one of the FourjSenior 
Tutors), 93 

Winchester, Bishop of — charge, 156 

Wiseman, Dr. — Dublin Review, 
article drawing parallel between 
Anghcans and Donatists, 13, 
25 ; and Tract XC, 73 ; favour- 
able attitude towards Tractarians, 
118 ; correspondence with New- 
man on Anghcan and Roman 
difierences, 129-132 ; letter to 
Mr. Philhpps complaining of New- 
man's attitude towards O'Connell, 

Wood, Mr. S. F., 33 ; Newman's 
letters to, 33-4, 38, 61, 67 ; 
Pusey's criticism of his sketch, 
68 ; Newman's correspondence 
on the Jerusalem Bishopric 
scheme, 146, 159 ; correcting 
account of his sermon, and 
touching on the subject of Rome, 
160 ; advising him to remain in 
the Anghcan Church, 174-5 ; 
death, 215, 222 

Wootten, Dr., 237, 326 

Wordsworth, 324 

Wynter, Dr., Vice-Chancellor, 36, 
56, 71. 79, 81, 228, 234-5 

Young, Rev. Peter, 134 etseq., 231, 
331, 349 ; Keble 's difierences 
with Bishop over refusal of 
priest's orders, 134, 136-7, 140 

Zeno, the Emperor, 5