John Henry Newman.

Letters and correspondence of John Henry Newman during his life in the English church, with a brief autobiography ; (Volume 2) online

. (page 1 of 47)
Online LibraryJohn Henry NewmanLetters and correspondence of John Henry Newman during his life in the English church, with a brief autobiography ; (Volume 2) → online text (page 1 of 47)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


i ^.-sP^ ^§

'^^Aavaani^ ^<?Aavaan#'











■ so






<rji33Nvsoi^ "^/saaAiNflavw










^^DNVSOl'^ %a3AINI1-3V^^ %)JI1V3J0'^ %)jnV3J0^



'^JiUMSoi^ %a3AiNnmv




-,5^lUBRARYa<-^ ^t-UBRARYO^. ^ . ^.

tiirri iiinrt Il-^ci lor^l


^laONVSm'^ %H3AINfl-3\^^

. ^lOSANCEl^














<^IUBRARYQ^. ^^l




<I^]30NYS01^ %a3MNn-1V^'












iiirrl iL-<irg tor-f iir;

^ ?ii



VOL. 11.

















JOHN HENRY NEWMAN . . . . . Frontispiece

By permissio7i of H. E. Wilberforce, Esq., tlic owner of the original
picture by Richmond, and of J. McLean, Esq., owner of Copyright of
the Engraving.






In carrying on the correspondence of Mr. Newman and his
friends to a second volume, it may be well to remind the
reader of the progress the Movement had already made by a
few dates.

July 9, 1833, Mr. Newman arrived at his Mother's house
at Iffley, after his illness in Sicily.

July 14, Mr. Keble preached his celebrated Assize sermoii
on National Apostasy, which Mr. Newman ' ever considered
the beginning of the Movement.'

July 25, meeting of Churchmen at Mr. Eose's, at Hadlcigh.

Early in September the first tracts were published. The
reader will see that by the middle of December the number of
tracts and records of the Cliureh had together reached in ;ill
to twenty-eight.

A letter of James Mozley, dated September 3, KS33, says,
' ^Vith this letter you will receive a considerable number of
tracts, the first production of the Society estabHshed for the
dissemination of High Church principles. . . . Newman is
the writer of all the tracts I send you — Kc])le has written
two, but they are not printed.'



2 folin Henry Neunnan 18;5:i

Rev. J. II. Nkwman to Ebv. Hugh James Eose.

Decemhei' 15, 1833.

[Whctlicr this was sent I know not. Most probaLly ; at
least in substance. It is transcribed here as recording the
feeHngs, »."tc., of the writer at the time. As to Eose's letters,
after his death I was asked for them all, that John Miller
niij^ht have them, as he was to draw up a memoir of Eose,
which, as far as I know, never appeared. I was most unwilling
to give them up. Pusey forcil)ly persuaded me. I ought to
have asked for my own addressed to him instead. — J. H. N.]

Your letter cheered me very much ; for, as Froude is away,
I have no one on the spot whom I can get advice from, in
spite of the many good friends I have around, for which I ought
to be very grateful. Indeed I trust the right cause is making
progress here [Oxford]. Thank you for the kind things you
have said of me both in your Magazine and by letter.

I now write to you, after some talk with Keble, to acquaint
you how we stand, and to enable you to keep our movements
clear of your own. Turrill [Smith] wants us to form our
tracts into a periodical. I am against anything like a tract-
magazine on a ground which I think 3'ou have pointed out
yourself. It is highly desirable that each tract should be
separate ; we do not want regular troops, but sharpshooters.
However, to make the issue periodically, monthly, might
be a good thing, as leading persons to look for them.

The ' Eecord ' and (I am told) the ' Christian Observer ' have
advertised them for us in their own way, and we are gomg
to advertise them in consequence for ourselves. . . . The
trouble of making up parcels is already very great. Our only
fear is that of involving ourselves in expenses which we cannot
estimate. Smith says we must have 2,500 copies struck off of
each tract, which would be, I suppose, 12L a sheet, and it is
a speculation how long this outlay would be going on before
the sale would be equal to it. This is one cause of hesitation.

Another is lest we should be engaging in an employment
which would take up all our time. But this is, perhaps, a
needless alarm ; we do not pledge ourselves to continue it.

Ign.'j Letters and CorrespondeHcc 3

\ more serious difficulty with us is the chance of interfering
with the ' British Magazine ' — yet I cannot fancy we should.
What we pubhsh would be stray remarks, passages from
standard works, translations from the Fathers, kc. Nor
should we be withdrawing writers, even ourselves, from the
Magazine, as is evident. The style of writing would be quite
different. Accordhigl}' we fancy we might sail out in our little
boat without the chance of your running us down. However,
we wish to be guided in this matter entirely by you. The
Church owes so much to the ' British ]\[agazine,' as the first
publication which set up her standard when others shrank
from doing so, that you have a right to this deference.

If you think we may proceed, the question follows, should
the publication be weekly or monthly ? If it were weekly, we
might bring out a tract against any immediate atrocious
measure of the Legislature against the Church, and thus have
an advantage over the * British Magazine.' I have already
l)een taking measures to secure some lay assistance in that
way in contemplation of the English Bill. Hitherto we have
confined ourselves almost entirely to doctrinal and ecclesiastical
points, with one or two objects, to stimulate and inform the
clergy, to inform the higher classes, the poor population, &c. (of
course we have hardly done anj'thing yet, in any one of these
lines, but made beginnings). But when the proper moment
comes, perha])s you would find you could make use of us
for purposes of a more immediate practical kind — for getting
up a resistance to State interference, for the repeal of the
PneiiiKnirr, for the appointment of suffragans, &c.

On the other hand, would once a week be too frequent to
excite an interest '? Could matters be so arranged that they
should 1)0 published at odd times during the month and cinii-
Idfrjl through the country once a month?

Wo are sending a parcol of tracts to Dr. Spry at Canter-
bury, and shall consult him on the practicability of the scheme.
He is a good man of business, I am told.

The fohowing paper was written by Mr. Newman in the
autumn of 1H33 :

4 John Ilcnj-y Newman 1833

[Draft of instructions written by me (J. H. N.) in the
autumn of 1833 for the use of our Propagandists.]

Ohjcris of your Journey.

To form local associations.

To instruct the corresponding member.

To sound men on certain questions.

Our object is to get together immediately as large a body
as we can, in defence of the substance of our spiritual rights,
privileges, our Creeds, &c ; but we wish to avoid technicalities
and minutenesses as much as possible.

The posture of affairs will not allow of delay.

We wish to unite the clergy and create channels of corre-
spondence between them.

We have it in view to get up petitions on a sudden,
through the country, should any bold measure of the country
against the Church, be contemplated or other event require it.

We are of no party nor interfere with party questions.

We have no concern with politics.

We have nothing to do with maintaining the temporalities
of the Church, much as we deprecate any undue interference
with them by external authority.

Queries in Prospect.

1. Petitions against lax men about to be appointed
bishops, &c.

2. Alterations in Burial Service and in Baptismal.

3. On the competent authority to alter Liturgy.

4. On protests.

Beware of any intemperance of language. You may
mention facts illustrative of the present tyranny exercised
over the Church as much as you please, according to your

If men are afraid of Apostolical ground, then be cautious
of saying much about it. If desirous, then recommend pru-
dence and silence upon it at present.

Everything depends on calmness and temperance. Eecol-

1833 Letters and Corrcspondoicc 5

lect that we are supjxirtiiKj the Bishops ; enlarge on the un-
fah-ness of leaving them to bear the brunt of the battle.

The following letter is an example of the inquiries that
reached the first movers in the agitation :

Eev. H. Eichards to Eev. J. Keble.

[Near Bristol:'] December 1833.

One of our clergy has to day brought me a printed letter
sent him from London by the Eev. Mr. Norris recommending
the formation of Church of England Societies for the protec-
tion of the doctrines and Liturgy, iScc, of our Church, and
purporting to have originated in Oxford. It has struck me
that you must know something about it. There are many
more competent than I to bring the thing forward here ; but,
owing to my having originated the address last session against
the Irish Church Eeform, many have wished me to come for-
ward again on the subject. These are indeed troublesome
and stirring times.

J. H- Parker, Esq. (Oxford) to Eev. J, H. Newman.


I have been applied to this morning by Mr. Combe, of Leices-
ter, for a set of the tracts lately printed and circulated by a
Society of clergymen of which, I believe, you are an active
member. Mr. Combe states that they are for a clergyman
who is anxious to aid and abet the views of the Society so
far as he is able.

Eev. John Keble to Eev. J. H. Newmax.

December, 1833.
I really think it is quite necessary something sliould be
settled about the manner in which the address is to bo jire-
sented to the Archbishop and the signatures conveyed to liim.
Should not two or three Archdeacons wait on him to know his
pleasure ?

6 loJni Ilcnry Nezvman 18.'5;^>

I have heard tliis morning for certain that our Bishop
approves of ii.

Go on and })rosper, and let the * Record ' dry in its own ink.

Rev. J. H. Newman to Rev. R. H. Froude [at Barl)adoes].

Deccmhcr 15, 1833.

Everything is going on most prosperously ; the address is
signed everywhere, being understood as a rallying round the
Archbishop. Oxford is turning ; Symons, who was one of the
most vehement opponents, has subscribed it. Burton is on
the turn of the tide ; the Bishop of London has determined
that to do so is ' the lesser of two evils,' and has instructed
his Archdeacons to get signatures through his diocese, and
this after having sneered at us as ' Solemn League and
Covenant men,' and exerted his influence agamst the address.
He has gone so far as publicly to deny ' he has anything to
do with a ministerial liturgical reform.' Meanwhile the
reports of some sweeping Government measure, certainly
ecclesiastical if not liturgical, wax stronger and stronger.
The lay address is in preparation. Sir R. Liglis and Sir AV.
Heathcote being the leaders in it.

Now as to the tracts, if you knew the trouble I had bad
with Palmer, you would pity me. He is the best-tempered,
kindest fellow in the world, but we wellnigh quarrelled for a
while. He made a most vehement set at them, and not once
alone [at our proceedings], and even now, I regret to say, has
not got over it. The fact is, he promised Mr. Norris ' there
should be no tracts ' ; and, as you know, Mr. Norris wrote about
saying so. Then he came to persuade me, who was unpersuad-
able. But I was so fiery about it, that afterwards, in a fit of
weakness, I wrote to him to say that, though I Avould not give
up my tracts, I would waive my objections to an Association,
strong as they were. In a short time Harrison and others
bothered me to keep to my promise of disclaimmg an Associa-
tion. On the other hand, and others were so far advanced

in the formation of one that I did not like to damp them, so
I excogitated a paper condemning one great Association, but

1833 Letter's and Corresp07idence 7

advocating small local ones, which I thought would reconcile
all parties, and went to Palmer about it.

I found Palmer in a taking, having received furious
letters from Mr. isorris, who declared he would have nothing
to do with the address because it was so weak ; he {nota
Jk'hc and the Z's in London) having made it so. I advised
Palmer to keep with the Z's as long as he could, and when
they sank to leap into our little boat, and he consented.
Keble, WiUiams, Copeland, Christie, and I drew up the
proposed paper, when at the moment down came Edward
Churton from London, as a sort of ambassador from Norris
about the address (I cannot go into all the fuss of the address ;
it is not worth it). [N.B. — I was dining at Trinity when
Edward Churton was announced. Keble was there, and (I
suppose) Williams and Copeland. It must have been on
Wednesday [this is confirmed by Fragmentary Diary],
November 27. I recollect Keble could hardly help laughing,
and did laugh, and enjoy excessively afterwards, the diplomatic
look and bearing of Churton as he entered the room, greeted
us, and sat down.]

Accordingly, when the said paper was presented to Palmer,
he was more earnest and tragic against it than ever I could
have fancied. It seems he considered that mentioning tracts
at all with associations was interfering with his pledge to
Norris ; and he charged me with my (weak) agreement to
join his Association. I replied, which was the case, that
Norris himself was now more urgent against an Association
than I was. He was full of fears, even to be seriously annoyed.
We have not been right since.

Soon after I had a letter from Rose, who told me he had
not only rated at Palmer for the imbecility of the address,
but had remonstrated with him for thwarting the tracts,
^Yhich he said was the only good part of the scheme. How-
ever, Palmer is still dreaming of some grand union of Church-
men against the Government.

I had sent five? letters to the ' Record,' and they were well
received. INIy sixth stuclc. At lengtli appi'arcul a most
ominous leading article about the Society, the address, and

S John Heniy Neivman 1833

the tracts, with quotations of the Transubstantiation passages
(which have brought us into all sorts of trouble, liickarcis
has l)ullied me oaov aiirj-xavov) , but no opinion. Then came
a private letter to me declining No. 6, and sighing over the
tracts. I sent a civil answer and an anonymous letter through
Kyder, quoting to them Acts v. 38, 39. They evidently had
been puzzled how to act, but this letter came too late to
prevent an explosion, in which we were called heretics, papists,
c^c, and to-be apostates, &c. Next paper they softened, and said
they had spoken under excited feelings. Next paper still, the
cause ajipeared. Two letters from Evangelical correspondents
■were inserted, defending our doctrine, though they abused
our tracts ; and an article from the Editor accompanied it,
expostulating with the imprudence of his ' friends at Oxford,'
begging us to be more practical, and resolving magnanimously
to shut up the question and not admit ' the apple of discord
which had rolled into their columns from Oxford.' So these
people have just managed to give us a most flaming ad-
vertisement. Upon this I sent up to Turrill to advertise
the tracts in our own way in the ' Eecord ' and ' St. James's
Chronicle,' also in the ' British Magazine,' and it is probable
we shall soon put them on the footing of a periodical without
giving up the tract shape.

Our demand increases ; we have had new editions of
several. T. Keble, Harrison, Menzies, Perceval, and a more
important friend, who at present is nameless [N.B. — this
meant Pusey], have written for us ; J. Miller, Copeland, and
^Yilliams are also writing. I have coaxed Palmer into writmg
one. Several Ch. Ch. men [N.B. — Liddell, Thornton, Scott of
Balliol ?] have been translating ' Ignatius.' "We have twelve
numbers out of * Records of the Church,' and sixteen tracts
besides already. I have lateh' heard that the ' Christian
Observer ' has a furious attack on us, naj', upon Oriel, in this
last month. Can we have more favourable signs ? Men do
not cry out till they are frightened.

The following is the advertisement of the tracts : — Tracts
for the Times, pubhshed at Oxford. ' If the trumpet give an
uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle ? '

1833 Letters and Correspoudeiice 9

Yen. Archdeacon Froude to Rev. J. 11. Newman.

December 15, 1833.

... I have often told Hurrell he was gomg too fast ; he
alarms people by his speculations, and is incautious in talldng
to persons who cannot enter into the purit}- of his motives.
I dare say he laid himself completely open on his visit to
Archdeacon L3-elL

Eev. J. n. Newman to F. PiOgers, Esq.

Oriel College: December 19, 1833.

Your diplomatic powers are as admiral)le as my negligence
■was great in not detecting Turrill's hand. My parcel of
tracts must have passed his letters on the road. ... In a
short time we shall prol)al)ly publish them monthly, at present
we do not wish to commit ourselves so far. We hear more
and more of abuse directed against them, but the only thing
W'e have to fear is disregard. To abuse is next best, or rather
the necessary shadow of praise. ... I have a most admirable
tract from Pusey, but his name must not yet be mentioned,
nor Harrison's. The second part of ' Pichard Nelson ' is arrived,
and Palmer's tract is out. The Bishop of London is strongly
agitating through his Archdeacons for the address. Thej^
say the tracts retard its success in some places ; but this is but
temporary', doubtless.

As to Messrs. Eivington and your diplomacy, to which I
return, on consideration I think I return to the octavo form : '
the duodecimo form is used, I believe, for the sake of
reading in the pulpit. Now I have no wish to be spouted
over the kingdom. That 1,000 (octavo) is equivalent to
buying the copyright, antecedently speaking, I grant ; but so
with these very sermons, perhaps, in the first edition 1 2mo. I
suspect no volume of sermons (generally speaking) goes bej-ond
the first edition. If they used to do, yet Tyler's series have
created a glut in the market now. I do not expect mine will,

' For his sermons, of which Mr. Newman was about to publish the first

lO JoJin Henry Newman 18.';.".

and therefore think it more respectable, as it is also more
lucrative, to publish in octavo. If unexpectedly my sermons
take, as something out of the way, then there would be a
second edition, whether of octavo or duodecimo ; the only
difference will be one of time. I may not have expressed my
meaning clearly, yet I think I have a meanmg. . . .

Rev. J. H. Newman to Miss M. E. Giberne.

Oriel Collerje : December 22, 1833.

I was much pleased and encouraged by your letter, being
in the midst of worry and fidget. A person like myself hears
of nothing but his failures, or what others consider such.
Men do not flatter each other, and one's best friends act as
one's best friends ought — tell one of one's mistakes and
absurdities. I know it is a good thing thus to be dealt with ;
nor do I wish it otherwise. All things one tries to do must
be mixed with great imperfection, and it is part of one's trial
to be obliged to attempt things which involve incidental error
and give cause for blame. This is all very humbling, particu-
larly when a person has foretold to himself his own difficulties
and scrapes, and then is treated as if he was quite unconscious
of them, and thought himself a very fine fellow. But it is a
good discipline, and I will gladly accept it. Nevertheless it is
very pleasant to have accidentally such letters as yours to
encourage me, though I know well that it goes far beyond the
occasion, owing to your great kindness.

Mr. Terrington called on me yesterday. He was very
kind, and said he intended to sign the Address to the Arch-
bishop, and did not call me a Papist to my face, as some other
persons have. I really believe that, if Eidley or Hooker could be
published without their names, their works would be called

The following letters show the progress of affairs in
London, after five months' active work, of the movers in the
Movement :

1833 Letters and Correspondence ii

Eev. B. Harrison, Chaplain to the Archbishop,
TO Rev. J. H. Newman.

Clapham Comma n : C'Jirititiiias l>ay, 1833.

I had a long conversation yesterday with Dr. Dealtry
respecting the tracts, address, &c. The result of it was that
I fear the hope which we had in Oxford respecting the Bishop
of London and the London clergy, rests upon very slight
foundation. I forget what Pusey's letter exactly stated, but I
know the impression under which I left Oxford on Monday
was, that the Bishop of London's clergy now felt themselves
at liberty and were taking up the address. This, I fear, is not
the case. Dr. Dealtry tells me that when he came up from
Winchester he heard the same account, and immcdiatel}' set
himself to ascertain whether it was the case. He found it
was not, and as late as this day week he was with leading men
among them, and heard that the address was not signmg at
all. ]Jr. Dealtry is very anxious about it, very anxious that
it should be as generally signed as possible, and be a source
of union among the clergy. But he finds the diocesan
objection everything, especially among the Bishop of London's

He had just received a letter from a clergyman at Ponte-
fract, asking him with much anxiety what he ought to do about
it. The letter struck me very much, as it seized strongly the
main object of remonstrance against the interference of Parlia-
ment in spirituals, expressing a very strong opinion upon the
stand which at all hazards the clergy must make against such
an interference, and also as to the duty of not waiting till
Ministers of Parliament did something illegal, but preparing
against it and showing a bold front of opposition. The hesi-
tation seemed all to arise from the diocesan dillicult}'. He
had heard it said in several quarters that there was much
objection to passing over their own Bishop.

I told Dr. iX'altry that at Oxford tlicrc was a hope that ia
London, as well as in other dioceses, the address might be
transmitted througli diocesiins; lie st'enicd to catch at it as a
thing highly desirable, and the oidy mode now remaining of

12 John Henry Newman 18.3;^>

fretting rid of a serious objection. He thought it would give
the address every signature.

I heard from a very particular friend of the Bishop of
London [Blomfield], that he strongly disclaims having ever
had any intentions about the Liturgy, beyond an explanation
to be prelixed to the Athanasian Creed. Dr. Dealtry tells me
the same report had reached him from the Bishop of Chester
[J. B. Sumner], Lichfield [Byder], and [AVinchester] C. Sumner.
He tells me that, if Ministers designed anything, it has certainly
been without the knowledge of these Bishops. Thus, then, the
Bishops are all on our side ; at least they ought to be regarded
so ; but will they not continue to feel jealous of the address
appearing to pass them by (the letter from Pontefract mentions
the Bishop of Chester as reported to be unfavourable to the
address) ? Is not, then, your hope of getting the several Bishops
to present the address to be followed up by all means?

How, I leave to your full consideration ; but would it not
be most effectual and most utterly destructive of all jealousy

Online LibraryJohn Henry NewmanLetters and correspondence of John Henry Newman during his life in the English church, with a brief autobiography ; (Volume 2) → online text (page 1 of 47)