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 32 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 32 of 47)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


Clnistnuis 1841.

This comes with my Christmas wishes and a copy of the
Protest such as it has occurred to me ; on which I shall be glad
of your judgment. Hope said, Why not send it to Convocation '?
but I am much more inclined to my original plan, as being more
canonical, quieter and more respectful, and quite as likely to
prove clfectual. AVould it be at all better to put it into Latin '?
It would be quieter, but would it not destroy all or nearly all
chance of effect '?

I shall send it, I suppose, to Farnham first, enclosing with it



J



80 fohu Ifciiry Nci-jnian Lsn



a copy of Young's loyal statement. ... 1 tliouglit to have it
lithographed to send to the other Bishops.

Eev. J. H. Newman to Piev. J. Keele.

Prccmhcr 26, 1841.

Copeland and I have been studying your Protest [about
Young], which we like very much.

It seems to me exceedingly good. I am very pleased
indeed. In every way it is important. It brings together a
number of very strong grounds, nor is it the least valuable on
this ground, that it reminds our friends of the strong points
in favour of our Church's Catholicity. It will do much good
in this way. I long for a decision from Sir Herbert Jenner ;
it would quiet many distressed consciences by putting before
them a fact. It is not love of Piome that unsettles peoi)le,
but fear of heresy at home.

And your Protest is very important as a bold looking of
difficulties in the face. The Church of England has been ruined
by people shutting their eyes and making the best of things.

I dislike Convocation, and on first hearing was averse to
Hope's suggestion, but on second thoughts I incline that wa}'.
The question is how to do most good to the English Church.

I distrust the Bishops altogether ; c.fj. the Bishop of

told a person, from whom it comes to me, that when he
was appointed Bishop he had not read a word of theology,
but, since that, he had begun studying Scott's Bible. Convo-
cation is fairer to the Churcli, inasmuch as the clergy are
sounder than the Bishops. Again, it delays a decision, and
time is our friend ; every year (so be it !) will make us stronger.

P.S. — I own my feeling is that your Protest should go far
and wide — as far as the Bishop's act. How else shall we save
the Church from being committed ?

PiEv. J. Kerle to Eev. J. H. Newman.

Hiirsleji : December 2S, 1841.

I am very glad indeed that you think the Protest likely to
do good : nor have I the least objection to lay it before Con-



1H42 Letters and Corrcspomicucc 3S1

vocation if you think that better : only I do not hke the delay,
as I want to comniunicatc with our Bishop on the matter of
bis Charge besides, and I think it best on many accounts for
the two to go together. How would it be if I were to send
the copies to the members of Convocation singly instead of
waiting for their session ? I will attend to your suggestions
on some of the reasons, for which I am much obliged to yuu.

1\EV. J. H. Xkw-Man to Piiiv. J. Ki:i;li:.

JdiiKarij 3, 1S42.

I did not contemplate any delay in your act. When I
mentioned Convocation, I only spoke of delay in the decision
which Avould be the answer to it. I do not see why you
could not lodge your Protest with the Archbishop as Presi-
dent of the Convocation. So he was addressed, 1 believe, in
the 'Declaration' of 1833 at the beginnmg of matters. And
you might also send it round to the Bishops as members of
the Upper House.

All this is on the supjiosition that we must go to Convocation,
which is a great difficulty indeed. Convocation, though it
might restrain the acts of the Bishops, would also abridge our
liberty. It might alter Piubrics, and if Hook has subscribed
to the Jerusalem Fund, and Palmer [of "Worcester] defended,
and if Manning and Sam "Wilberforce are at least not for
Isaac "Williams, what can we expect from Convocation, of
which they are the best specimens ? One has no right to
anticipate evil, but I fear that Convocation would only perplex
the path of duty (perplexed enough already) by leaving it
more uncertain than now how far we were a Catholic Body.
Even Pusey, in Jiis first impulse, was ready enough to grant
the Archbishop the term ' Protestant,' who asked him to
allow it. I think he would if left to himself. Is there not a
great chance of Convocation, by way of saving other pcjints,
recognising our Protestantism ? which woubl be fearful.

All this being considered, I, on the wliole, come to your
opinion to leave Convocation alone, merely as not liking to
take the responsibility of a step which inaij ])C miserable. The



o



82 Jolui Henry Newman 1842



Bishops are a real and existing power ; the Convocation is
not. If it is to be called into existence, let others call it. At the
same time I do think we should he safer in the hands of Con-
vocation than in those of the Bishops ; that is, such extreme
things would not be done in Convocation as by the Bishops.
Yet what right have we to perplex our own line of duty for
ourselves by our own act ? Yet it may be selfish not.

You will see I am rather making suggestions to you, and
wishing your opinion, than saying things definitively.

The Archbishop, you observe, receives and answers the
Cheltenham lay address, at such a moment ! as if there was
not excitement enough, as if we had not persons enough
against us. * Grave considerations ' are strong ones. And,
besides, it marks a change of policy in him ; for last March he
stopped all addresses for the Tracts hccause there were sure
else to be addresses against them. They talk (but this is a
secret) of an address of Lawyers to him /or the Tracts.

They say that some of the Heads of Houses are getting
much frightened at the whirlwind i\\ey have let loose, and
that Hawkins and Gilbert are keeping them up to it. I can-
not help thinking you are rather hard upon Gladstone, but I
don't enter into what you mean enough to judge. Hope's
letter is admirable. I like what you mean to do about 3'our
Bishop ; but (though I know it is most difficult to express it)
I think you must imply that your reason for not swerving
from your pamphlet is that questions of heresy are coming on.

Things were beginning to press anxiously on ]\Ir. Newman's
sisters, as Mrs. J. Mozley's letters show. She watched events
intelligently and with trustful sympathy. His keen family
feeling, which especially needed this sympathy, was never
blunted by the x^^blic claims upon him. Her letters were
promptly answered, as the reader has seen, and always with
the endeavour to set her mind at ease by giving the cheerful
view — his hopes and general expectations — though not wholly
concealing, as time went on, the conflict that under dis-
couragement arose in his own.



1842 Liitcrs aiid Corrcspoudciicc '^^'^t^

Mrs. J. MozLFA- to Piev. J. H. Xewjiax.

January 3, 1842.
Perhaps you contrive not to see the papers, which I am
sure is the wisest plan if it does not involve an inconvenient
ignorance in important matters. I do not much care what such a
paper as the * Standard ' says in its fury, hut I am a good deal
annoyed by the Archbishop's answer to the lay petition from
Cheltenham. I am a very bad one to write to you, for, instead
of viewing things in a cheerful light, I rather call upon you
to dispel my alarms ; but I am really anxious to know how
far the hostile party are likely to proceed. I cannot conceive
what should induce the Archbishop and the Bishop of London
just now to pay such court to Prussia unless the Government
is in some way concerned in it, which perhaps may be, seeing
the King of Prussia is invited over to be a sponsor for the
Prince of "Wales.

F. PiOGERs, Esq., to Pev. J. H. Newman.

Jannary 4, 1842.

I hardly like troubling you about Williams's election, but
I think somebody in Oxford should know the state of the
case.

A proposal to withdraw both candidates, and letters of
the committee here, will come down to the President of
Trinity by this post. You will see the kind of thing it is. A
letter, however, which I received from Gladstone this morning,
made me call upon him, and T found him obviously set on getting
the matter ihiished qiio(im) vtodo, if not by the withdrawal
of both, by the withdrawal of one, and urging the signa-
tures of five out of seven J^ishops (members of Convocation),
the known sentiments of all, &c., as motives in conscience for
the withdrawal of one, even if the other refused. He seems
to have got them (especially the Bishop of Oxford) to sign, b}'
the notion (on tlnir j)arts) that their authority uould put an
end to the contest, Llandaff and Chichester (alone) refusing,
because they wished a stigma thrown upon "Williams. Ih>
insisted much on the Bishops' real wish tiiat ^^'illiams should



384 John //ciiry Xczi'iaasi 1S-J2

Avitlulraw, and, as far as 1 luidcrstood, wished to establish that
the presumption of this wish, arising from the mere fact of
their signatures, was sufficient to bind us eitlier to act on it
or to take measures to draw out a more distinct statement,
especially from the Bishop of Oxford.

I say all this, because else, it appears to me, you might
fancy things going differently from what they really are. I
could not get a clearer notion, because I did not wish to com-
mit myself, though I suppose this is clear enough.

Eev. J. H. New:man to Eev. J. Keble.

Janiiayjj 6, 1842.

I do not see that you can do better than send round your
Protest to the Bishops and Members of Convocation as you
propose. . . .

I do not agree with Gladstone, but I think he hopes that,
if no collision takes place. Catholic oi:)inions will gradually
gain the ascendency. Again, his great object is the religion -
ising of the State ; you must recollect this. He thinks that
even a division of opinion in the Church, though real, does not
hinder that up to a certain point.

Janitartj 12, 1842.

"Williams just writes me word that the Bishop of Oxford
has just put it upon him to retire. Surely he is in the hands
of his College, and must not act without them. Tlicy are
very jealous of such an assumption on the part of the
Bishop.

Next, I earnestl}^ entreat he may not be allowed to retire
without some public evidence that it is not Jtis act. I think
he should bargain for the Bishop's letter being published.
I see so much deep and unlimited evil arising out of it,
that I quite conjure "Williams not to have the responsibility
of it.

If we have, as it were, minute guns, to tell us that our
Angels are going from us, to a certainty we shall lose our
members too.



1842 Letters and Cori-espondcncc 3S5

PiEv. J. H. Newman to Mrs. J. Mozley.

Jannar}! 19, 1S42.

People in London have put on tlie Bishop of Oxford to
obhge WilHams to retire. "Why do thej' not lay their com-
mands on Garbett ? Because he will not obey.

I fear it is a prelude to some act on the part of the Arch-
bishoj:), who would have been embarrassed by a large minority,
apparently committed the other way. This was Mr. Cony-
beare's advice, as it appeared in the ' Standard.' I certainly
dread the Archbishop speaking. I can defend things as they
are ; but who can promise that he can defend a possible state
of things ? It is remarkable, indeed, that the Archbishop
should go on. Wliat have I done ! Last March I submitted,
and was told that therefore nothing would be done from
authority. AVhat has happened since ? I have been silent ;
lias anything happened but clamour '? Is it not, then, the
chimoiir which calls up the Archbishop "?

You may think that I have no intention of leaving St.
Mary's by the fact of my having taken a lease of the cottages
at Littlemore, and having laid out a large sum of money on
them ; but it is quite certain that an Archbishop's letter,
admitted by my own Bishop, might be of a nature to drive
me away. Yet they know so well that, had they ordered the
suppression of No. 90, I should have given up St. Mary's,
that they cannot possibly be acting in the dark in anything
they do now.

On the subject of ^fr. Keble's Protest Mr. Newman writes:

liEV. J. H. Newman to \\v.\. J. Kejjle.

Filjruarji i , 184.?.

1 don't quite understand whether you think it of ini})ort-
uncc to set the matter before all the Bishops as a matter of
jiKhpiiriif, or by way of arquaint'nni them of what was going
on. 1 think Badelcy's objection is of weight ; if we have
(providentially) safeguards, ought we ungratefully to put
them aside ? "Would it not be enough if you acquainted other

VOL. II. c c



386 John Ifcnry Newman 1842

Bishops of what you had done by sciidmg them the Protest ?
and, if so, is there no way of showing that this was your
meaning in sending it ? This would save Badeley's point,
which seems to me important without interfering with your
method of proceeding. . . .

I wish the Bishop had a Httle heart, only a little, hut I
hear he believes the most atrocious things of us, which is his
excuse. I think your letter to him a very successful one
indeed.

You should look at the article on Church matters in the
* British Magazine,' in which a member of Canterbury Con-
vocation takes Badeley's line. Hope thinks the Bishops will
do nothing ; but they wish to do something, and where there
is a will there is a w'ay.

Rev. J. H. Newman to Mes. J. Mozley.

February 6, 1842.

I am going up to Littlemore [i.e. for good] and my books
are all in motion — part gone ; the rest in a day or two. It
makes me very downcast ; it is such a nuisance taking steps.
But for years three lines of Horace have been in my ears :

Lusisti satis, edisti satis atque bibisti :
Tempus abire tibi est ; ne potuni largius a?quo
Eideat et pulset lasciva decentius setas.^

Of Tract No. 90, 12,500 copies have been sold, and a third
edition is printed. An American clergyman, who was here
lately, told me he saw it in every house.

PiEV. J. H. New5ian to Mrs. J. Mozley.

Littlemore: Fehriiarjj 15, 1842.

I am in Oxford only on Saturday evening and Sunday
morning. My books are all up, but not my bookcases. You
may think it makes me somewhat downcast, but I don't know
how I frightened you. For some years, as is natural, I have
felt that I am out of place at Oxford, as customs are. Every
one almost is my junior. And then, added to this, is the
' Hor. E2y. ii. 2. 214.



1842 Letters and Correspondence 3S7

hostility of the Heads, who are now taking measures to keep
the men from St. Mary's. But I think 1 have made up my
mind, unless something very much out of the way happens,
to anticipate them hy leaving off preaching at St. Mary's. 1
shall tell no one. My being up here is an excuse, and I can
at any time begin again. But 1 think my preaching is a cause
of irritation, and, for what I know, any moment they may do
something against me at St. Mary's, and I would ratlier
anticipate this. ... A year and a half since (as Harriett
knows) I wanted to retire from St. Clary's, keeping Littlcmore.
If I could do so at the cost of losing my Fellowship I think I
would. Perhaps the Provost would listen to so great a bribe.

There is a talk of taking Orders, coming into residence,

becoming tutor, c^-c. Now, if so, he Mill be tlie new Provost
on a vacancy. I have lonr/ given up all intention, if it were
in my option, of being Provost myself, but what keeps me

Fellow principally is the hope of voting for Marriott, l)ut

would cut him out.

PiEv. J. H. Newman to Piev. J. Keble.

Fchruarii 19, 1842.

I am very well pleased with your determination not to
send to all the Bishops, though 1 hope they will have means
of knowing of your Protest and seeing it. Pieally 1 cannot
repent of your letter in the spring. Your view of the Bishop's
office is the only one I can take ; I cannot take what is called
a constitutional view, though I can understand the Bishops
apportioning the rights of the one Episcopate anion;! thcmitclvcs,
which they hold dc solito, and giving part of their own powers,
as also part— na}', the greater part — of their Catholic territory
to other Bishops, and becoming Bishops by restraint, or limit
their jurisdiction, in point of function as well as of extent. At
the same time, if 1 think a Bishop is verging on heresy in any
of his decisions — since I am absolved so far from obedience
to him and may resist him — it seems nothing wrong, as St.
Paul appealed to Ciesar, so to appeal, as in our case, to the
Convocation, or to a lay judge in an ecclesiastical court [i.e.
Sir Herbert Jenner].



388 I oliu Henry Ncuniian 1842

Now, if I understand you, tins is very much your position
(though you add a second reason arising from your finding
that, according to the late Ecclesiastical Discipline Act, you
could be cited, did the Bishop think fit), and, if so, I do not
think you have brought out simply and clearly enough, though
it is a most delicate thing to do, that you oi)pose the Bishop,
instead of submitting, on the ground of a Catholic doctrine
being in jeopardy ; and that not as an afterthought but on a
principle, and indeed mentioned in your letter, but always
assumed by ever3'one who holds primitive views. However, I
may be fidgeting myself and be no fair judge.

The question being so very imj)ortant, do not for an instant
be sorry that you could not keep silent. I really think that
it is a point as favourable for us as it is important in itself,
and, with reference to your question in a foi*mer letter, cannot
name one in which we should have mfer ground in an ecclesi-
astical suit. On the other hand, it is the point on which
people are most especially in error. The Bishop of London
has been using to clergymen withhi the last week or two
language — though he has in a manner retracted it — which, if
repeated by other Bishops, would do as much as anything
to unsettle men's minds regarding our Catholicit}". Now
consider how vcrxj important it will Ije if things are working
for us towards a judicial issue of the question, and a silencing
of such Antichristian speeches. . . .

Eev. J. H. Newman to Mns. J. Mozlfa'.

Litth'ino)r : Fchniarji 21, 1842.

... I have several things that puzzle me about St. Mary's
pulpit. One special thing is this, which I have felt for 3-ears :
is it right to be preaching to those who are not, in any sense,
my charge, and whose legitimate guardians, the Heads of
Houses, wish them not to be preached to ? This seems to me
a vicif, to which others might be added, cogent also. But, as
you say, there are great difficulties on the other side. Of
course, I shall not pledge myself to anything for the future.



1842 Letters and Con'cspondeuce 389

P.EV. J. n. Newman to Miss H.

Fthniari/ 27, 1S42.

Will you let me turn your thoughts, if 1 have not done so
already, to the duty and, in one sense, task of cultivating
interior rdujiou, and, in doing so, of leaving all matters of
opinion for your Almighty Protector to determine for you in
His good time? So far is certain, whatever misgivings you
may have had about the Catholicity of the English Church,
that men may in it be far, far holier — may live far nearer to
God than most of us do. Let us beg Him to enable us to aim at
those inward perfections, which He certainly does vouchsafe in
our Communion. "We cannot be wrong here, we must be pleasing
Him in this proceeding ; we are in the safest way putting our-
selves under the shadow of His wings. Depend upon it, at
this day and in our present state, we are unequal to the great
work of judging Churches, and had better leave it alone.

PtEV. J. H. XEw:\r.vN to J. W. Bowden, Esq.

Littlonon' : Fcliniarif 2S, 1842.

Thank you for your most kind note, secundum niorem, on
occasion of this day week, which came to me here in due
course. I am very sorry indeed to hear that you still speak
of yourself as so delicate, but am glad that iimi speak of it,
because care and watchfulness are everything. . . .

I am out of the way here of seeing the papers, and so am
no judge, or I should say that tlie Tract [No. 90] ferment is
lulling again. The Bishops seem to have decided on doing
nothing ; and Golightly has happily so little taet as to have
disgusted his own friends by his ultra statements. The
Winton and Keblc casi' remains, and is an uncomfortable
one ; yet I think it nmst end in Keble's favour.

I have got my books nearly nil in their places, anil talk of
insuring them. Not, one would trust, that there is much
danger of lire, but I am somewhat given to fancy mischances,



390 [okn Henry Nezvman 1842

and when they a]\- insured I shall be dwelling on the chance
of their being destroyed, as Dr. Priestley's, by a mob shouting
' No Poiicry,' as in 1780 \i.e. in which case the insurance
would not hold]. The dwelling-rooms are still in a damp
state, waiting for the March winds to blow through them.

Some time or other I must come up to London for a day
or two, and then I shall joyfully accept your hospitality.
I always reproach myself that I come to you as a matter
of my own convenience, when I have business in London ;
and then, in one way or another, I tire m^yself through
the day, and then in the evening inflict my dulness on
you. . . .

I hope I shall not get to idolise my library ; but I assure
you, for its size, it is a very fine one. I regret I have no
observatory here for Charlie.

On the action of the Bishop of Winchester in refusing
priest's orders to his curate Mr. Young, Mr. Keble finally
made his public Protest, which goes over the whole ground of
the Bishop's objection to Mr, Young's answers. The Protest
is an important document, and, as his letters show, was felt
to be so bv Mr, Newman.



Eev. J. H. Newman to Piev, J. Keele.

Aiinl 7, 1842.

Y'our packet last night wns verj' welcome. I had been
anxious about what you were doing. Every one I hear speak
of 3'our Protest is much struck with it, and it cannot but do
good. It may prevent (so be it !) other acts such as have
happened in the case of Young, You do not say whether
you mean to prosecute matters further. Perhaps this Protest
may morall}' and virtually settle the matter without your
having further annoyance on the subject. Certainh^ it would
be more pleasant not to have the responsibility of taking the
initiative, though with the very strong case we have, and the
clear prospect of a decision in our favour.



1842 Letters and Correspondence 391

111 the ' Ajiologia ' ' Dr. Newman looks back to the curiosity
his move to Littlcmore excited. ' After Tract 90 the Protes-
tant world would not let me alone. They pursued mo in the
pul)lic journals to Littlcmore. Reports of all kinds were
circulated about me. Imprimis, why did I go to Littlcmore
at all ■? For no good purpose certainly ; I dared not tell
why. AVliy, to be sure it was hard that 1 should be obliged
to say to the editors of newspapers that 1 went up there to
say my prayers ; it was hard to have to tell the world in con-
fidence that I had a certain doubt about the Anglican system,
and could not at that moment resolve it, cr say what would
come of it ; it was hard to have to confess that I had thought
of giving up my living a year or two before, and that this was
the first step to it. It was hard to have to plead that, for
what I knew, my doubts would vanish if the newspapers
would 1)0 so good as to give mo timo and let mo alone.'

The Bishop of Oxfokd to liiiv. J. II. New.man.

Ajiril 12, 1842.

... So many of the charges against yourself and your friends
which I have seen in the public journals have been, within
my own knowledge, false and calumnious, that I am not apt to
pa}'' much attention to what is asserted with respect to you in
the newspapers.

In [a newspaper], however, of April 9 thoro appears a
paragraph in which it is asserted as a matter of notoriety,
that a so-called Anglo-Catholic Monastery is in process of
erection at Littlcmore, and that the cells of dormitories, the
chapel, the refectory, the cloisters all may be seen advancing
to perfection, under the eye of a parisli priest of the Diocese
of Oxford.

Now, as I have understood lh;il you really are possessed
of some tenements at Littlcmore, as it is generally believed
that they are destined for the purpose of study and devotion,

' Apologia pro Vila sua, ■}^. 171



392 J ohii llcnry Nciunian 1842

and as mucli suspicion and joaloiis}^ arc felt about the matter
I am anxious to afford you an opportunity of making me an
explanation on the subject. I know you too well not to be
aware that you are the last man living to attempt in my
Diocese a revival of the Monastic Orders (in anything approach-
ing to the Piomanist sense of the term) without previous
communication with me, or indeed that you should take upon



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 32 of 47)