« PreviousContinue »
to guide and control it in its workings! but power was wanting.
We have never, in our study of the workings of the human mind, fallen upon any incidents more remarkable than those by which this noble and generous spirit was gradually swept aside from its original purpose. When first he adopted Milner's views in regard to the special outpourings of the Spirit on the Church, he regarded the Church of Rome, by which this doctrine is systematically taught, with unmitigated abhorrence. The more he considered the point, however, the less he felt inclined to cavil at the corollary which the Church of Rome draws from the doctrine. Why, if general effusions be real, should particular effusions be rejected? Why assert, dogmatically, that the gift of miracles may not be intended to accompany transcendent piety in all ages? He was in this state when his intimacy with Hurrell Froude began. From him he learned to think with less abhorrence of Rome - with less reverence for the leaders of the Reformation. The maxim that "The Bible, and the Bible only," is the religion of Protestants, ceased by degrees to have weight with him, and he accepted the opinion that Tradition is at least a main instrument of religious teaching. He took, then, to reading the Fathers, whom, however, he had but imperfectly studied, when, in 1830, Hugh Rose and Mr Lyal, late Dean of Canterbury, engaged him to co-operate with them in a great literary undertaking, by writing a History of the Principal Councils of the Church. Beginning with that of Nicæa, he got involved in difficulties through which the amount of his theological learning was insufficient to guide him. His old Berkeleyism-if we may so call it became confirmed and extended by what he accepted as the teaching of Clement and of Origen. Nature was a parable; Scripture was an allegory; pagan literature, philosophy, and mytho
logy, properly so understood, were but a preparation for the Gospel. "The process of change had been slow; it had been done, not rashly, but by rule and measure, at sundry times and in divers manners, first one disclosure, and then another, till the whole was brought into full manifestation. And thus room was made for the manifestation of further and deeper disclosures of truths still under the veil of the letter, and in their season to be revealed." No wonder that an intellect, so mystified by what it devoured without being able to digest, should become troubled by discovering a parallel between the position of the Arians in the early Church, and that of Anglicanism in the Church as it exists. Both stood apart from the teaching of the Church universal; both denied its authority and rejected its traditions; and though the errors of the latter might, to careless eyes, appear in some respects less deadly than those of the former, they were still of a nature seriously to shock and alarm one who, like Newman, believed in angels, not only as God's instruments for carrying on the economy of the Jewish and Christian dispensations, but as the causes of motion, light, and life—of those elementary principles of the physical universe which, when offered in their development to our senses, suggest to us the notions of cause and effect, and of what are called the laws of nature.
Such a belief in angels leads, almost necessarily, to a belief in their opposites-dauova, or inferior spirits; a middle race, neither of heaven nor of hell; capricious, wayward, benevolent, or malicious, as the case may be. These influence races, nations, and classes of men, separating them, as we see, into antagonisms in manners, religion, and policy. Newman accepted daiovia as realities, and came to the conclusion that he was justified in so doing, by the special mention made in Daniel of "the Prince of Persia."
He believed also that it was of intermediate beings of this sort that mention is made in the Apocalypse, under the head of "the Angels of the Seven Churches." Finally, he took his own view of the Church and nation of England, which, how ever, cannot fairly be stated except
in his own words :
"I made a further development of this doctrine. I said to my great friend, Samuel Francis Wood, in a letter which came into my hands on his death, 'I have an idea. The mass of the Fathers (Justin, Athenagoras, Irenæus, Clement, Tertullian, Origen, Lactantius, Sulpicius, Ambrose, Nazianzen) hold that, though Satan fell from the beginning, the angels fell before the deluge, falling in love with the daughters of men. This has lately come across me as a remarkable solution of a notion which I cannot help holding. Daniel speaks as if each nation had its guardian angel. I cannot but think that there are beings with a great deal of good in them, yet with great defects, who are the animating principles of certain institutions. Take England, with many high virtues and yet a low Catholicism. It seems to me that John Bull is a spirit neither of heaven nor hell.
Has not the Christian Church in its parts surrendered itself to one or other of these similations of the truth? How are we to avoid Seyl la and Charybdis, and go on straight to the very image of Christ?"
Newman was in this state of mind when the grave events befell, to which we referred not long ago, forcing every man in England who was capable of thought to think, and driving Newman himself, with the little band who accepted him as their leader, to enter upon a crusade, of which the success was, for a time, marvellous. But neither was Newman fitted by the constitution of his own mind, nor some of his collaborateurs by the amount of their learning, to conduct a great enterprise, however well begun, to a successful issue. They believed that they had discovered an ideal of the Church, to which the Church of England, as it had heretofore been received, never
came up. The object aimed at, therefore, was to bring Churchmen to accept this ideal, and so, in time, to raise the Church itself But there to its proper level. was in the Church a condition of things which, while it increased the difficulty of the undertaking a hundredfold, irritated more than it depressed the leaders in the enterprise. The Church was split into parties, the two most important of which were irreconcilably at variance on almost every point of doctrine and discipline. Newman had little in common with either. Upon the section to which in early life he belonged he looked now with sentiments as much of hostility as of contempt. He detested the timeserving worldliness of the so-called Evangelical school, holding their imperfect learning very cheap, and their utter lack of self-denial in abhorrence. And equally distasteful to him was the narrow-mindedness of the stiff, high and dry, orthodox clergy, whose perfect satisfaction with the state of things which the Revolution of 1688 had established filled him with wrath. He could make common cause with neither, but gradually built for himself a theology and church history of his own, to which both were invited to subscribe. By degrees he discovered that the reasoning, which appeared logical enough when first broached to convince others, had failed to convince himself.
The via media which he endeavoured to follow led nowhere; and there remained for him but the ghastly alternative of Rome on the one hand, and total infidelity on the other.
That better things might have come of Dr Newman's labours had the heads of the English Church known better how to utilise them, has often been asserted. It may be so; but it seems to us more probable that, whether the Jerusalem bishopric had been erected or not, and Tract 90 suffered to go uncensured, the results, so far as Dr
Newman is himself concerned, would have been pretty much what they were. He was in the full current of the stream, long before he himself appears to have been aware of it. The sermon which Mr Kingsley so unfortunately quoted was the thesis of a Protestant divine dissatisfied with the teaching of his own Church, yet by no means reconciled to the teaching of any other. And Tract 90 enunciates a theory which the writer had established for himself, while as yet he considered the Pope and the Papal system to be Antichrist. Are there marks of duplicity in these things? Quite otherwise. They make abundantly manifest the fact, that the mind which, in 1826, was at rest under certain convictions, had, in 1844, lost these convictions; but they establish against it no charge whatever of acting the part of a traitor towards its old convictions, far less of trying to mislead such minds as still felt themselves bound by these convictions.
Mr Kingsley, and persons of his calibre, cannot see this. They arrive at such convictions as control them, if convictions they may be called, without going through any process of flux and reflux. They repeat the same things over and over again, without ever stopping to ask for proofs of that certainty in which they rejoice. And hence it comes to pass that, when they find others teaching to-day that which they did not teach a year or two ago, they account for the phenomenon by raising a cry of traitors in the camp. Newman was no
more a traitor in 1844 than he had been in 1826. But if his perpetual drifting from one set of views to another affords proof enough that he was destitute of those special qualities which justify men in standing out as the guides to other men in their religious opinions, at least there was no lack of enthusiasm to dare the emprise. There was power enough also to command success up to a certain point, but beyond that
point all became misty and obscure, producing first distrust, and byand - by an instinct of repulsion from views which even he who undertook to enunciate them did not appear completely to understand.
Dr Newman, as has already been stated, found shelter from his own doubts and misgivings in the bosom of the Romish Church. It was his sole escape, and a desperate one, from utter infidelity. He carried with him to his new restingplace all his poetic belief in the ministration of angels and of demons; his persuasion that outward things are but the signs and tokens of unseen realities; his conviction that God exists, though man be unable to assign any certain ground for such conviction; and a perfect aptitude to receive as true any other mysteries which the Church may affirm, any miracles for the verity of which she shall vouch. A few, and only a few, of that large body of men to whom his word had once been law, went with him. Of the residue, many escaped a similar conclusion by running into its very opposite. He had taught them to speculate and refine, but pointed to no sure issue of their inquiries. They did not possess, as he did, a boundless capacity of faith; and, failing to discover in tradition the authority which he claimed for it, they started off like a broken bow, and became Liberals. This it was, and not a rebound from the Tractarian movement, which called into existence that school of rationalistic Christianity of which Mr Kingsley, we believe, professes to be a member. But as Mr Kingsley did not learn his philosophy at first hand from any great master, so he has shown himself altogether unworthy to be ranked with those who did. Maurice, Stanley, Jowett, and his own earnest Protestant Froude, however widely they may separate themselves from Dr Newman now,
will never charge him with being a liar and the wilful teacher of lies. They know how much he gave up to become what he is not the moral certainty of attaining to an English mitre alone, for that, in his eyes, would have been of small value, but a position the most exalted to which an ambitious mind could aspire the acknowledged headship of religious thought in this country, the championship of the Church of England and its traditions; whom multitudes of earnest men trusted and followed, and many more, even while they fought against him, felt themselves constrained to treat with delicacy and respect. It remained for a sciolist in the region of thought to throw his handful of mud upon a character which he could not understand. Be it so. "Fools rush in where angels fear to tread ;" and so the Cambridge Professor, while he has furnished to the object of his attention an opportunity of putting forth a confession of faith which will be read wherever the English language is understood, places himself in a position which even he, we should
think, must by this time feel to be ridiculous.
To sum up all. We rise from the study of this controversy, if controversy it deserve to be called, painfully alive to the fact that both disputants are in the wrong. Dr Newman is wrong, because his principles are indefensible ab initio, however perfectly they agree one with another. His error, however, is that of a great mind, which, like vaulting ambition, has "overleaped its sell, and fallen on the other side;" whereas Mr Kingsley is wrong, morally as well as logically. He makes charges which he cannot prove, and, too obstinate or too ill-advised frankly to withdraw them, he repeats them in a manner which offends the tastes even of his own admirers. We think, therefore, of the one with sorrow not unmixed with respect, as of a fallen angel, but an angel still; of the other, as a misguided clever man, who, having got beyond his depth, discovers that he cannot swim, and strikes out wildly, as those are apt to do who find themselves in danger of going to the bottom.
IF M'Caskey was actually startled by the vicinity in which he suddenly found himself to the persons within the room, he was even more struck by the tone of the voice which now met his ear. It was Norman Maitland who spoke, and he recognised him at once. Pacing the large room in its length, he passed before the windows quite close to where M'Caskey stood so close, indeed, that he could mark the agitation on his features, and note the convulsive twitchings that shook his cheek.
The other occupant of the room was a lady; but M'Caskey could only see the heavy folds of her dark velvet dress as she sat apart, and so distant that he could not hear her voice.
"So, then, it comes to this!" said Maitland, stopping in his walk and facing where she sat "I have made this wearisome journey for nothing! Would it not have been as easy to say he would not see me? It was no pleasure to me to travel some hundred miles and be told at the end of it I had come for nothing.'
She murmured something inaudible to M'Caskey, but to which Maitland quickly answered, "I know all that; but why not let me hear this from his own lips, and let him hear what I can reply to it? He will tell me of the vast sums I have squandered and the heavy debts I have contracted; and I would tell him that in following his rash counsels I have dissipated years that would have won me distinction in any land of Europe."
Again she spoke; but before she uttered many words he broke suddenly in with, “No, no, no! ten thousand times. No! I knew the monarchy was rotten
rotten to the very but I said, Better to die in the street à cheval than behind the arras on one's knees. Have it out with the scoundrels, and let the best man win-that was the advice I gave. Ask Caraffa, ask Filangieri, ask Acton, if I did not always say, 'If the King is not ready to do as much for his crown as the humblest peasant would for his cabin, let him abdicate at once."
She murmured something, and he interrupted her with, "Because I never did-never would-and never will trust to priestcraft. All the intrigues of the Jesuits, all the craft of the whole College of Cardinals, will not bring back confidence in the monarchy. But why do I talk of these things to you? Go back and ask him to see me. Say that I have many things to tell him; say"-and here the mockery of his voice became conspicuous"that I would wish much to have his advice on certain points.-And why not?" cried he aloud to something she said; "has my new nobility no charm for him? Well, then, I am ready to strike a bargain with him. I owe Caffarelli two hundred and eighty thousand francs, which I mean to pay, if I take to the highway to do it. Hush! don't interrupt me. I am not asking he should pay this for me-all I want is, that he will enable me to sell that villa which he gave me some years ago beyond Caserta. Yes, the 'Torricella;' I know all that it was a royal present. It never had the more value in my eyes for that; and perhaps the day is not very distant when the right to it may be disputed. him make out my title, such as it is, so that I can sell it. There are Jews who will surely take it at one-half