by Edward Short
59 William Oddie, “Cardinal Hume’s ‘Moment of Grace’ may have arrived,” Catholic Herald (30 October 2009), p. 12.
60 LD, 26:365, JHN to Miss Rowe (16 September 1873).
61 LD, 26:379, JHN to Miss Rowe (23 October 1873).
62 LD, 11:198, JHN to Manuel Johnson (8 July 1846).
63 Oxford Sermons, p. 170.
64 LD, 21:129, JHN to Henry James Coleridge (24 June 1864).
65 Correspondence of John Henry Newman with John Keble and others 1839–1845 (London, 1917), p. 297, Keble to JHN (22 January 1844).
Chapter 3 The Anglican Difficulties of Edward Pusey
1 LD, 20:459, JHN to Isaac Williams (7 June 1863).
2 LD, 12:59, JHN to Mrs. J. W. Bowden (7 March 1847).
3 Apologia, pp. 65–66.
4 H. P. Liddon, Life of Pusey (London, 1897), Vol. I, p. 3.
5 Ibid., p. 3.
6 Ibid., p. 7.
7 Ibid., p. 7.
8 LD, 28:352, JHN to Anne Mozley (28 April 1878).
9 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, p. 5.
10 David Forrester, Young Dr. Pusey: A Study in Development (London, 1989), p. 5.
11 Lytton Strachey, Eminent Victorians (Modern Library, 1918), pp. 204–05.
12 Russell, quoted in Stuart J. Reid, Lord John Russell (London, 1895), pp. 185–86.
13 William Tuckwell, Reminiscences of Oxford (London, 1900), p. 139.
14 Mark Pattison, Memoirs of an Oxford Don, Cassell Biographies (London, 1988), p. 102.
15 Pattison, Memoirs of an Oxford Don, p. 185.
16 See B. A. Smith, Dean Church: The Anglican Response to Newman (Oxford, 1958), p. 198.
17 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. 3, p. 297.
18 Pusey, quoted in Forrester, Young Dr. Pusey, p. 22.
19 Forrester, Young Dr. Pusey, p. 55.
20 See Joyce Sugg’s excellent little biography of Newman, Snapdragon in the Wall (London, 1965), p. 39. “Newman was always interested in soldier’s exploits. When the Duke of Wellington’s dispatches were published he said it made him burn to be a soldier.”
21 Forrester, Young Dr. Pusey, p. 56.
22 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, p. 23.
23 LD. Whately, once asked by one of his English friends if Puseyism was prevalent in Ireland, responded, “Not so prevalent as in England; but it exists. I was told that we should escape it—that, as we have the real thing, we should not adopt the copy—but I was sure that it would come. Ireland catches every disease after it has passed over England. Cholera came to us after you had it, so did the potato rot, so did Puseyism.” See Life and Correspondence of Richard Whately, D.D. Late Archbishop of Dublin, ed. Jane Whately (London, 1866), Vol. II, pp. 235–36.
24 Pusey, quoted by David Forrester in “Dr. Pusey’s Marriage,” in Pusey Rediscovered, ed. Perry Butler (London, 1983), p. 126.
25 Ibid., p. 126.
26 H. C. G. Matthew, “Edward Bouverie Pusey: From Scholar to Tractarian,” in The Journal of Theological Studies,” Volume XXXII (Oxford, 1981), p. 103.
27 In the Apologia, Newman remarks how “… a broad distinction had to be drawn between the actual state of belief and of usage in the countries which were in communion with the Roman Church, and her formal dogmas; the latter did not cover the former. Sensible pain, for instance, is not implied in the Tridentine decree upon Purgatory; but it was the tradition of the Latin Church, and I had seen the pictures of souls in flames in the streets of Naples. Bishop Lloyd had brought this distinction out strongly in an Article in the British Critic in 1825 …” (pp. 100–01) Lloyd’s article was “View of the Roman Catholic Doctrines,” in the October 1825 number of the British Critic. Martin Svaglic points out that “The distinction here made is prophetic of Tract 90 and Newman acknowledged the influence.” See ibid., p. 538. See also, Autobiography, pp. 69–72, for Newman’s estimate of the limitations of Lloyd’s influence on him.
28 Letter of Frank William Newman to Moncure Daniel Conway, undated, in Moncure Daniel Conway, Autobiography: Memories and Experiences, 2 vols (Boston, 1904), Vol. I, pp. 443–44.
29 See William J. Baker, Beyond Port and Prejudice: Charles Lloyd of Oxford 1784–1829 (Maine, 1981), p. 108.
30 Ibid., p. 109.
31 Ibid., p. 127.
32 Ibid.
33 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, p. 154.
34 Ibid., pp. 164–65.
35 Ibid., p. 153.
36 Forrester, Young Dr. Pusey, p. 37.
37 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, pp. 175–76.
38 Matthew, “Edward Bouverie Pusey: From Scholar to Tractarian,” p. 112.
39 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, p. 77.
40 Forrester, Young Dr. Pusey, p. 48.
41 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, p. 207.
42 Timothy Larsen, “E.B. Pusey and Holy Scripture,” in The Journal of Theological Studies, Vol. 60, Pt. 2 (October 2009), p. 513.
43 Ibid., p. 514.
44 See John Ruskin, Praeterita, introduced by Kenneth Clark (Oxford, 1978), p. 190.
45 LD, 3:114, JHN to EBP (12 November 1832).
46 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, p. 225.
47 Forrester, Young Dr. Pusey, p. 60.
48 Ibid.
49 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, p. 2.
50 Ibid., pp. 41–44.
51 Forrester, Young Dr. Pusey, p. 57.
52 Ibid., p. 57.
53 Ibid., pp. 57–58.
54 Ibid., pp. 59–60.
55 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, p. 228.
56 LD, 3:127, JHN to EBP (5 December 1832).
57 Apologia, p. 257.
58 Forrester, Young Dr. Pusey, p. 62.
59 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, p. 279.
60 See Tract 18.
61 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, p. 280. Newman also met with criticism for his defense of baptismal regeneration. “Mr. McGhee came up here twice last Sunday—he heard me preach on baptismal regeneration—Accordingly he 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 to propose a debate—I might as well propose a duet on the violin, for I am little able to controvert on a platform as, I suspect, he is to execute a concerto.” See LD, 8:514, JHN to John Keble (29 April 1842).
62 Apologia, pp. 64–65.
63 See Forrester, Young Dr. Pusey, p. 88: “Unlike Newman, who had set about reading the Fathers systematically as early as 1828, and on whom such Fathers as Clement and Origen of the Church of Alexandria had made a profound impression, Pusey seems to have studied the Early Church very little before he joined the Oxford Movement.”
64 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, p. 283.
65 Ibid., pp. 282–83.
66 Forrester, Young Dr. Pusey, pp. 82–83.
67 Apologia, p. 29.
68 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, p. 345.
69 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. II, p. 122.
70 From Tract 69, quoted in Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, p. 347.
71 LD, 4:228, JHN to John W. Bowden (1 April 1834).
72 LD, 5:145, JHN to Samuel Rickards (14 September 1835).
73 See Newman’s Advertisement to second volume of Tracts (1835), p. vi.
74 The Life of Frederick Denison Maurice, ed. Frederick Maurice (London, 1884), Vol. I, p. 186.
75 Tract 67, p. 12, quoted by Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, p. 349.
76 LD, 23:50, JHN to Unknown Correspondent (4 February 1867).
77 Peter Nockles, The Oxford Movement in Context: Anglican High Churchmanship 1760–1857 (Cambridge, 1994), p. 230.
78 Owen Chadwick, The Victorian Church (Oxford, 1966), Vol. I, p. 265.
79 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. III, pp. 240–41.
80 LD, 27:320, JHN to
Lord Blachford (16 June 1875).
81 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, p. 263.
82 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. II, p. 311.
83 Ibid., p. 313.
84 Ibid., p. 312.
85 Ibid., p. 317.
86 Ibid., p. 324.
87 Ibid., p. 329.
88 Ibid., p. 328.
89 Ibid., p. 337.
90 Ibid., p. 347.
91 Ibid., p. 348.
92 Ibid., p. 363.
93 LD, 9:357–58, JHN to Mrs. John Mozley (24 May 1843).
94 LD, 9:385, JHN to Henry Wilberforce (9 June 1843).
95 LD, 9:391, JHN to EBP (14 June 1843).
96 LD, 6:283, JHN to EBP (13 August 1838).
97 LD, 7:78, JHN to EBP (19 May 1839).
98 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. II, p. 97.
99 LD, 7:79, JHN to EBP (19 May 1839).
100 LD, 7:84, JHN to EBP (26 May 1839).
101 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. II, p. 101.
102 Ibid., p. 101.
103 Nathaniel Hawthorne confirmed this melancholy quirk in Pusey, when he recalled how “Mr. Parker told us that Dr. Pusey … would soon probably make his appearance in the quadrangle, on his way to chapel; so we walked to and fro waiting an opportunity to see him. A gouty old dignitary, in a white surplice, came hobbling along from one extremity of the court; and by-and-by, from the opposite corner, appeared Dr. Pusey, also in a white surplice, and with a lady by his side. We met him, and I stared fixedly at him, as I well might; for he looked on the ground, as if conscious that he would be stared at … He was talking with the lady, and smiled, but not jollily.” See Nathaniel Hawthorne. Our Old Home and English Note-books in The Complete Works of Nathaniel Hawthorne (Boston, 1884), V. 4, 352.
104 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. II, p. 103.
105 B. A. Smith, Dean Church: The Anglican Response to Newman (Oxford, 1958), p. 75.
106 William Tuckwell, Reminiscences of Oxford (London, 1900), pp. 136–37.
107 LD, 22:153, JHN to T. W. Allies (19 February 1866).
108 Pusey Rediscovered, ed. Perry Butler (London, 1982), p. 235.
109 LD, 10:412, JHN to H. E. Manning (16 November 1844).
110 LD, 10:476, JHN to John Keble (29 December 1844).
111 LD, 9:307–08, JHN to John Keble (15 April 1843).
112 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. II, p. 380.
113 LD, 10:126, JHN to EBP (19 February 1844).
114 LD, 10:135, EBP to JHN (23 February 1844).
115 LD, 10:136, JHN to EBP (23 February 1844).
116 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. II, pp. 382–83.
117 Ibid., p. 383.
118 LD, 10:215, EBP to JHN (22 April 1844).
119 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. II, p. 385.
120 Ibid., p. 385.
121 LD, 10:206, JHN to EBP (10 April 1844).
122 LD, 29:144, EBP to Father Belaney (20 May 1879).
123 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. II, p. 403.
124 LD, 10:315–16, JHN to EBP (18 August 1844).
125 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. II, p. 403.
126 Ibid., p. 406.
127 LD, 10:325, JHN to EBP (28 August 1844).
128 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. II, p. 407.
129 LD, 10:528, JHN to EBP (6 February 1845).
130 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. II, p. 430.
131 LD, 10:545, JHN to Charles Miller (11 February 1845).
132 LD, 10:623, JHN to Robert Francis Wilson (11 April 1845).
133 LD, 10:574, JHN to EBP (27 February 1845).
134 LD, 10:102, JHN to John Keble (23 January 1844).
135 Letter of Pusey dated 16 October 1845 from the English Churchman, quoted in Henry Parry Liddon, Life of Edward Bouverie Pusey (London, 1893), Vol. 11, p. 460.
136 Apologia, pp. 201–02.
137 See Pusey, quoted in LD, 9:592, note 4.
138 Pusey could have seen convincing testimony to the Fathers’ affirmation of papal primacy in the spiritual autobiography of Levi Silliman Ives, the Bishop of North Carolina who converted to Catholicism in 1852. In his autobiography, Ives confuted William Blackstone’s flippant assertion that “the ancient British Church, by whomever planted, was a stranger to the Bishop of Rome and his pretended authority” by observing that the British historian St. Gildas (c. 493–570), although he described the Christians of Britain “as having become, in his time, sadly deteriorated both in faith and morals,” still “he gave them credit … for orthodoxy in respect of the doctrine of the Trinity, the Incarnation of our Lord, and future rewards and punishments; and also stated that, among other Catholic truths and usages, they looked upon St. Peter as the Prince of the Apostles, and the source of all priestly authority in the Church.” See Ives, The Trials of a Mind in its Progress to Catholicism: A Letter to his Old Friends (Boston, 1854), pp. 215 and 221. For a more modern discussion of papal primacy in the Fathers, see Nicholas Afanassieff, “The Church which Presides in Love,” in The Primacy of Peter: Essays in Ecclesiology and the Early Church, ed. John Meyendorf (New York, 1992), pp. 125–26. Apropos the patristic evidence for papal primacy, Afanassieff observes: “We find the first direct evidence about the priority of the Roman Church in the writings of Ignatius of Antioch. Speaking of the Church of Rome, Ignatius uses the phrase ‘which presides’ in two passages … The Roman Church ‘presides’ in love, that is, in the concord based on love between all the local churches. The phrase ‘which presides’ needs no discussion; used in the masculine it means the bishop, for he, as head of the local church, sits in ‘the first place’ at the Eucharistic assembly, that is, in the central seat. He is truly the president of the church … Ignatius pictured the local churches grouped, as it were, in an Eucharistic assembly, with every church in its special place, and the church of Rome in the chair, sitting in the ‘first place.’ So, says Ignatius, the Church of Rome indeed has the priority in the whole company of churches united by concord … In his period no other church laid claim to the role, which belonged to the Church of Rome.”
139 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. II, p. 459.
140 LD, 11:9, JHN to Mrs. John Mozley (8 October 1845).
141 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. II, p. 464.
142 LD, 11:124, JHN to EBP (21 February 1846).
143 LD, 11:127–28, JHN to EBP (26 February 1846).
144 LD, 11:128, JHN to EBP (February 1846?).
145 See Mrs. Brookfield and her Circle, ed. Charles and Frances Brookfield (London, 1906), p. 91.
146 LD, 11:203, JHN to Ambrose St. John (11 July 1846).
147 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. II, p. 510.
148 Apologia, pp. 65–66.
149 Anglican Difficulties, p. 2.
150 Copleston, quoted in M. G. Brock, “The Oxford of Peel and Gladstone,” in The History of the University of Oxford: Nineteenth-Century Oxford: ed. Brock and Curthoys (Oxford, 1997), Vol. 6, Part 1, p. 11.
151 See Owen Chadwick, The Victorian Church (Oxford, 1966), Vol. 1, p. 289 and John Griffin, “Newman’s ‘Difficulties Felt by Anglicans:’ History or Propaganda?”, in The Catholic Historical Review, Vol. 69, No. 3 (July 1983), pp. 371–83.
152 Anglican Difficulties, p. 105.
153 Richard H. Hutton, Cardinal Newman (London, 1891), p. 207.
154 LD, 13:468, JHN to F. W. Faber (28 April 1850).
155 Meriol Trevor, Newman: The Pillar of the Crowd (London, 1962), p. 519.
156 Hutton, Cardinal Newman, pp. 207–08.
157 Anglican Difficulties, p. 145.
158 Ibid., p. 148.
159 Ibid., p. 150.
160 Ibid., p. 151.
161 Ibid., p. 152.
162 Ibid., pp. 152–53.
163 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. I, p. 420.
164 Anglican Difficulties, pp. 79–80.
165 Liddon, Life of Pusey, Vol. II, p. 460.
166 Anglican Difficulties, p. 79.
167 Ibid., pp. 79–80.
168 Ibid., p. 82.
169 Ibid., p. 88.
&nbs
p; 170 Ibid., p. 89.
171 Ibid., pp. 97–98.
172 Ibid., p. 96.
173 Ibid., pp. 97–98.
174 Ibid., p. 98.
175 Ibid., pp. 124–25. Apropos this matter, James Pereiro asks: “Did providence intend to restore the Anglican Church to its lost perfection, or to direct people to Rome?” What “lost perfection” Pereiro had in mind is unclear. Surely, there was little perfection in the Act of Supremacy (1534). Nevertheless, Newman does not join Pereiro in raising the question only to shirk it. For Newman, Providence directed Anglicans to Rome so that they could free themselves of the grave imperfections of the Anglican Church. See Pereiro, Ethos and the Oxford Movement (Oxford, 2008), p. 237.
176 See David J. DeLaura, “‘O Forgotten Voice:’ The Memory of Newman in the Nineteenth Century,” in Sources for Reinterpretation: The Use of Nineteenth-Century Literary Documents: Essays in Honor of C.L. Cline (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1975), pp. 23–25.
177 Anglican Difficulties, pp. 153–54.
178 For a succinct definition of the branch theory, see Colin Barr’s The European Culture Wars in Ireland: The Callan Schools Affair, 1868–81 (Dublin, 2010), pp. 127–28, where he remarks, “Gladstone’s understanding of the church was derived from E.B. Pusey’s notion of branches: thus the Church of England, German’s Old Catholics, Switzerland’s Christian Catholics, the eastern Orthodox churches and the Roman Catholic Church itself were all members of the ‘one holy catholic and apostolic Church’ of the Anglican version of the Nicene creed.”
179 The subtitle of Pusey’s Eirenicon was “The Church of England a Portion of Christ’s One Holy Catholic Church, and a Means of Restoring Visible Unity.”
180 Anglican Difficulties, p. 170.
181 Ibid., p. 171.
182 Ibid., p. 175.
183 Ibid., pp. 211–12.
184 Ibid., p. 212.
185 Ibid., pp. 226–27.
186 LD, 11:9, JHN to EBP (8 October 1845).
187 Anglican Difficulties, p. 227.
188 Richard Holt Hutton, Cardinal Newman (London, 1891), p. 207.
189 The Christian Reformer or Unitarian Magazine and Review (London, January–December 1851), Vol. VII, p. 626.
190 The British Quarterly Review (London, August and November, 1850), Vol. XII, p. 218.
191 Ibid., p. 219.
192 Ibid., p. 225.
193 See G. K. Chesterton. “The Victorian Age in Literature” (1913) in The Collected Works of G. K. Chesterton, (San Francisco, 1989), Vol. 15, p. 441.