SOURCE: "The Oxford Movement," in John Henry Newman, Twayne Publishers, Inc., 1972, pp. 30-53.

[In the essay that follows, Lapati chronicles Newman's involvement in the Oxford Movement from 1833 until his conversion to Catholicism in 1845.]

When Newman returned to England in the summer of 1833, he found evidence justifying his fears for the future of the Anglican Church. The eminent Oxford professor, Thomas Arnold, had written: "The Church, as it now stands, no human power can save."¹ The liberal Whig party was now in power; for generations the Established Church had allied itself with the conservative Tory power. The Anglican bishops, as members of the House of Lords, had offended the common people by voting against the Reform Bill of 1832, which sought the extension of the franchise; the Irish sees had already been suppressed by Parliament; and a group known as the Erastians were attempting to influence the Whigs with the view of Thomas Hobbes that the state, not the church or the Bible, ought to be the final authority about religious belief. Disestablishment of the church was certainly passing from the realm of the possible to the probable.

The Anglican Church itself appeared ineffective in counteracting the tide running against her. Most of the intellectuals belonged to the liberal side. Its clergy "had become, for the most part, amiable and respectable gentlemen, who were satisfied to read Morning and Afternoon Service on a Sunday, and to dislike Dissenters."² The bishops, having been appointed by Tory prime ministers for many years, were regarded as agents of a defunct Tory government and were known for their practice of nepotism and political patronage.³ Moreover, the liberal cause was aided by the liberal spirit rampant on Continental Europe. The French Revolution had canonized liberal secularistic ideas, and the July Revolution of 1830 in France, which Newman regarded as "the triumph of irreligion,"⁴ had popularized the new watchwords of "progress," "reason," "disestablishment"; Auguste Comte's Positivism challenged the traditional methods of studying God, religion, and society; and German theologians were even employing a new historical methodology that startled everyone in their application of it to the Bible. The desire of workers to share the gains of the Industrial Revolution with capitalists made many more concerned with acquiring the riches of the earth rather than aiming at a heavenly goal. True, there were Romanticists in England who called for an emphasis upon man's spiritual depths instead of upon material satisfaction; but they were weak voices in the wilderness. Thomas Carlyle has aptly termed the period as one "destitute of faith and terrified at skepticism."⁵

I Beginnings of the Oxford Movement

On July 14, 1833, five days after Newman's return to England, John Keble preached at Oxford his famous Assis Sermon, published under the title of "National Apostasy." Keble condemned the liberalism of the age and feared that its triumph could divide greatly between one's duties toward the church and the state. He pleaded for "resignation" on the part of devoted members of the church. Although Newman and Froude preferred action, Newman regarded the day as the start of a religious movement.⁶ The clarion call was sounded; the Oxford Movement began. As a reform movement within the Church of England, it sought to demonstrate the continuity between the primitive church of the Fathers and the Anglican Church of the nineteenth century and to stem the tide of rationalism and liberalism which could undermine her doctrine and authority.

For the purpose of concerted action, a meeting was held from July 25 to 29. An Association of Friends of the Church was proposed, but only petitions to clergy and laity urging the support of the Established Church emerged. Froude attended the meeting, as did Hugh James Rose, a Cambridge man and editor of the British Magazine, which had published Newman's Mediterranean verses; but Newman did not attend, largely because he disliked the valuable time lost at meetings by too much talk and argument. "No great work was done by a system," he later commented on this decision, "whereas systems rise out of individual exertions."⁷ When differences as to courses of action arose at the meeting, Newman felt all the more justified in individual effort.

Newman began to make visits and to write letters to clergymen and friends. Whether these were members of the High Church or the Low Church did not matter; his main intent was to unite all who were opposed to the liberal cause. Most of these attempts appeared unsatisfactory to Newman, but he was assured that a trend of popular opinion was slowly turning toward the church. He also inaugurated a series of letters to a newspaper, The Record, in which he dealt primarily with church reform and discipline, as based on Scripture and as applied in the context of the day. The series terminated with the sixth letter, which dealt with temperance societies. The editor feared a possible controversy on the topic, which he felt undesirable; and so this other effort came to an end.⁸

Newman, who now saw the need for more deliberate action, issued on September 9, 1833, three tracts, the beginning of a series to which others, notably Froude and Pusey, also contributed and which was published as Tracts for the Times. Friends and expupils were enlisted to distribute these leaflets; even the shy Newman engaged in their hand-to-hand distribution; for he was "becoming perfectly ferocious in the cause."⁹ Tract 1, a four-page leaflet, was entitled "Thoughts on the Ministerial Commission" and was addressed to the clergy. Writing anonymously, Newman boldly warned: "Should the Government and the country so far forget their God as to cast off the Church, to deprive it of its temporal honours and substance, on what will you rest the claim of respect and attention which you make upon your flocks? Hitherto you have been upheld by your birth and education, your wealth, your connexions; should these secular advantages cease, on what must Christ's ministers depend?" Newman answered his own question: "Christ has not left His Church without claim of its own upon the attention of men…. Hard Master He cannot be, to bid us oppose the world, yet give us no credentials for so doing." And Newman emphasized the real ground of authority, too often neglected—"our apostolical descent."¹⁰

A total of ninety tracts were issued from September, 1833, to February, 1841, of which Newman wrote twenty-nine¹¹ Every aspect of religion and of the Anglican Church was examined in these leaflets: church government and administration, doctrine, moral teachings, worship, ecclesiastical history. Repeatedly emphasis was laid upon the doctrine of apostolic succession with its basis in Sacred Scripture and in the teachings of the Fathers of the Church. The tracts were always unsigned. With the exception of the "Tract on Baptism" to which Edward B. Pusey added his initials, thus causing the group to become known as the Puseyites. The name of Pusey added prestige to the

movement since he was a professor and canon of Christ Church, Oxford. The writers of the tracts were also referred to as Tractarians because of the manner in which they released their views.

Many of the ideas contained in John Keble's The Christian Year, published in 1827, were revived in the Tracts. Newman's friendship with Keble had begun in 1828, although he had known him as a student at Oriel and had always admired his reputation as an outstanding scholar. Keble had been the teacher of Froude, who was largely instrumental in having Newman and Keble discuss their common leanings in theology. Newman's belief in the importance of authority in religious matters, an appreciation of the sacramental system as "the doctrine that material phenomena are both types and the instruments of real things unseen," and his new insight into Butler's doctrine of probability as "living power of faith and love" are attributed to Keble's influence.¹²

In 1836, Newman began to edit an English translation of patristic writings to be known as the "Library of the Fathers." He also became editor of the British Critic, which became the official organ of the Oxford Movement. With Pusey, Newman led in that same year a successful fight against the appointment of Renn Dickson Hampden as a professor at Oxford. Hampden, a liberal, was appointed by the Whig government; but opposition was so great that a committee was formed to investigate Hampden. Newman and Pusey, assigned to the committee, convinced its members to reject the appointment of Hampden—a victory for the conservative Oxford group.

The power of the pulpit was also a powerful force that Newman employed during the Tractarian days. His famous four o'clock Sunday afternoon sermons at St. Mary's, Oxford, drew crowds. His sermons, not marked by elaborate argumentation, were "plain, direct, unornamented, clothed in English that was only pure and lucid, free from any faults of taste, strong in their flexibility and perfect command, … in their piercing and large insight into character."¹³ He did not repeat views in the Tracts but chose a wide range of topics: "The Individuality of the Soul," "The Invisible World," "The Ventures of Faith," "Warfare the Condition of Victory," "The Cross of Christ the Measure of the World," "The Church a Home for the Lonely." His appeal was primarily to the heart and not to the mind. "After hearing these sermons," observed a listener, "you might come away still not believing the tenets peculiar to the High Church system; but you would be harder than most men, if you did not feel more than ever ashamed of coarseness, selfishness, worldliness, if you did not feel the things of faith brought closer to the soul." As a result, even "those who by early education and conviction were kept aloof from the peculiar tenets of High Churchmen could not but acknowledge the moral quickening which resulted from the movement, and the marvelous character of him who was the soul of it."¹⁴ When published, these sermons "put all other sermons out of the market."¹⁵

II The Via Media

While Newman wrote his tracts, preached his sermons, and delved more thoroughly into the Church Fathers for a vision of the primitive church, he began the formulation of a theory called the Via Media. Opponents of the Oxford Movement charged it with "Popery" and declared that it would eventually lead to Roman Catholicism. To disavow such a leaning, Newman responded in lectures delivered at St. Mary's; and these he later recast for publication in 1837 as The Prophetical Office of the Church, Viewed Relatively to Romanism and Popular Protestantism;¹⁶ and in this work his Via Media theory first appeared. Since the title seemed negative, he felt it necessary to give definite shape and character to the content. Newman enumerated the many points of agreement between the Anglican Church and the Roman Church; indeed, he insisted that the Catholic Church in all lands had been one from the first for many centuries. But, in the course of time, Rome had made many superstitious additions to the original body of divine truths; Protestantism, on the other hand, had capriciously subtracted. The Anglican Church stood in the safe, middle way between these extreme positions; it had remained faithful to the original apostolic church; and its presentation of unblemished divine truth throughout the centuries made it the true church.

More specifically, in The Prophetical Office Newman dealt with the problem of religious authority. Roman Catholicism, he argued, went to one extreme in her doctrine of infallibility by often neglecting and even overriding the consent of the Fathers as necessary historical evidence for belief: "We have her own avowal that the Fathers ought to be followed, and again that she does not follow them."¹⁷ Furthermore, Newman also noted a contradiction in the notion of infallibility and the limitations of human knowledge. Protestantism went to the extreme of private judgment, which Newman characterized as an absurdity since man always needed to rely on some form of authority and rarely ever acted solely on private judgment.¹⁸ The Anglican Church, in opposition to these extremes, pursued a via media between authoritarianism and anarchic individualism, thereby conforming to the early church, which claimed authority but not infallibility. Thus, the Anglican Church promoted a spirit of intellectual freedom without encroachment upon the mind; yet it curbed that freedom when a tendency to lose restraint arose. Newman had not discarded his earlier view of the Pope as anti-Christ; however, despite many unacceptable doctrines, the Roman Church still maintained a connection with the ancient church. But he saw no hope as yet for his union with or submission to Rome.

Lectures on Justification, published in 1838, sought to find a middle way between Roman Catholics and Lutherans on the topic of worthiness for salvation.¹⁹ The Catholics emphasized a mingling of faith and love that resulted in "good works." The Lutherans held to justification by the power of faith alone; no form of good works or penance would be needed. Roman Catholics placed too much reliance on man's actions; Lutherans, on God. Newman upheld justification by baptism, which elevates man from a state of nature to a state of grace and which thereby opens to man a supernatural faith and gives him power to act meritoriously.²⁰

An article, "Prospects of the Anglican Church," in the British Critic of April, 1839, showed another development of Newman's Via Media.²¹ After presenting a résumé of the efforts of the Tractarians to 1839 and after classifying their movement more as a "spirit afloat" reacting to the dry and superficial character of religious teaching and literature and clamoring for a deeper religious philosophy, Newman presented his alternatives: either the Via Media of Anglicanism or Roman Catholicism. In his Lectures on Justification, he concluded that Luther had placed "Christians in bondage to their works and observances; released them by his doctrine of faith; and left them in bondage to their feelings."²² Now, he concluded, "The spirit of Luther is dead; but Hildebrand and Loyola are alive." With the extreme position of Protestatism rejected, Newman asked: "Would you rather have your sons and daughters members of the Church of England or the Church of Rome?"²³

While this question was still in his mind, Newman continued his study of the early church. His special topic was now the Monophysite or Eutychian heresy. Eutyches²⁴ had rejected the teaching of the Council of Chalcedon in 451 that Christ possessed both a divine and a human nature; he and his followers, called Monophysites, claimed only a divine nature for Christ and considered his humanity as only an appearance. In studying the different factions of this controversy over Christ's nature, Newman noted a similarity of the via media position of the Anglican Church in the nineteenth century to that of the Monophysites of the fifth century. Both argued from the Fathers of the Church and were supported by civil powers; and the via media of the fifth century was a heretical position. This led Newman to ponder: "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 the nineteenth centuries reflected. I saw my face in that mirror, and I was a Monophysite. The Church of the Via Media was in the position of the Oriental Communion, Rome was where she now is; and Protestants were the Eutychians."²⁵ The tenability of Anglicanism now came into doubt.

Before even concluding his study of the Monophysites, a friend, Robert Williams, drew Newman's attention to an article entitled "Anglican Claim" in the Dublin Review by Nicholas Wiseman, a Roman Catholic. Wiseman contended that the Donatists of the fourth century and the Anglicans maintained similar positions. Donatism fell into schism by refusing submission to the authority of the Pope. A quotation of St. Augustine as applied to the Donatists impressed Newman: Securus judicat orbis terrarum, "the whole world judges right." Donatism then and Anglicanism now stand against the whole church. "By those great words of the ancient Father, interpreting and summing up the long and varied course of ecclesiastical history," Newman later wrote, "the theory of the Via Media was absolutely pulverized."²⁶

III Indecision and Doubt

But Newman was still in no position to embrace the Church of Rome. In the British Critic of January, 1840, he conceded that Rome had the strong point of universality; the Church of England, however, had "primitiveness," since Rome had made many additions to the apostolic faith. "While Rome, though not deferring to the Fathers, recognizes them, and England, not deferring to the large body of the Church, recognizes it, both Rome and England have a point to clear up."²⁷ Later, he wrote more strongly: "If the Note of schism, on the one hand, lies against England, an antagonist disgrace lies upon Rome, the Note of idolatry." The duty of Anglicans, he felt, was to initiate ways of "how to comport themselves towards the Church of Rome, while she is what she is."²⁸

With an ardent concern to free the Anglican Church from the condemnation of schism and to demonstrate her unyielding loyalty to the original apostolic church, Newman threw himself into a study of the Thirty-nine Articles drawn up by the Church of England in the sixteenth century. He concentrated on what appeared to him as the all-conclusive problem: how can the Church of England win back its "Catholic" character? The answer to this question was found in "Remarks on Certain Passages in the Thirty-nine Articles" (Tract 90).

Many Anglicans conceded that their Creeds and Book of Common Prayer were capable of a Roman Catholic interpretation—but not the Articles, which were distinctly Protestant. Newman, who wished to extend a Roman Catholic interpretation to the Articles, argued that the Articles were not directed to the teachings of the early church and to the formal dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church as set forth in her general councils, including the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century, which had preceded the formulation of the Articles. But the Articles did condemn many popular beliefs and usages which steadily had crept in through the centuries and which Rome did sanction; these he termed "dominant errors." The Articles were also directed against the political supremacy of the Pope and not against the Church of Rome; and Newman found nothing in apostolic teaching which granted the Pope authority over the whole church. He did concede, however, that, although the Pope's supremacy was not a matter of faith, it was an expedient ecclesiastical arrangement and a long-standing custom. The Oath of Supremacy enjoined on Englishmen by Henry VIII prevented a foreign prelate from having jurisdiction on anyone in England. Anglicans, therefore, freed themselves only from the Pope's jurisdiction but not from the Church Catholic. "We find ourselves, as a Church, under the King now, and we obey him; we were under the Pope formerly, and we obeyed him."²⁹ Newman thus felt that he had absolved the Anglican Church of schism and had demonstrated her "Catholic" character.

Tract 90 had been issued on February 27, 1841. Without seeking any defense or explanation from Newman, protests and demonstrations were made in the halls and classrooms of Oxford and from the pulpits of the Anglican Church. Throughout England, Newman was denounced as a traitor to the Church of England and as an advocate of popery and Romanism. He betrayed his allegiance to the Articles which he had sworn to uphold when he had entered Oxford as a student and when he had been ordained to the Anglican ministry. Feelings of mistrust grew. Tract 90 was branded as "evasive hypocrisy," and one prominent churchman's remark was often quoted: "I should be sorry to trust the author of that Tract with my purse."³⁰ Newman had failed, therefore, to convince his fellow Anglicans; he was not able to have them follow the continuity of his own logic as it had been unfolding itself since the beginning of the Oxford Movement. In the eyes of many in England, he was "a subtleminded ecclesiastical hairsplitter and special pleader."³¹ Anglicans of the twentieth century, reflecting earlier opinion, have labeled Tract 90 as "a very melancholy document" with "a certain double dealing," showing "how a really great man can become little in a false and ambiguous situation,"³² and as a "culmination of sophistries" which "falsify history."³³

At first, Newman reacted quite calmly to the charges made against him, or almost as if he had anticipated the stir. In a letter to his friend Bowden, he wrote: "Do not think all this will pain me. You see no doctrine is censured, and my shoulders shall manage to bear the charge. If you knew all, or when you know, you will see that I have asserted a great principle, and I ought to suffer for it."³⁴ And to a former pupil, Frederick Rogers, he wrote: "I am now in my right place, which I have long wished to be in, which I did not know how to attain, and which has been brought about without my intention…. I cannot anticipate what will be the result of it in this place or elsewhere as regards myself. Somehow I do not fear for the cause."³⁵

Newman, however, underestimated the extent and the depth of opinion against his having written Tract 90. The bishops of the Anglican Church, alarmed by the many protesting letters they were receiving, urged Newman's ecclesiastical superior, Bishop Bagot, to take action. Bagot sought advice from the Archbishop of Canterbury, who deemed desirable the immediate discontinuance of the Tracts. But Newman was requested by Bagot not only to discontinue the Tracts but also to withdraw Tract 90. If Newman had heeded Bagot's decision, his acceptance would have implied that he had received an official censure and that he would have to sacrifice his principles. Newman, caught in an ecclesiastical web, told Pusey that "if it was condemned as to doctrine, I should feel I had no business in his diocese. I should not be signing the articles in the sense he meant them to be signed."³⁶ Bagot, who respected Newman's position, effected a compromise: Tract 90 would not be censured and could remain in print if Newman discontinued the Tracts and if he would no longer write about the Articles; furthermore, Newman was to send to his bishop a letter, to be made public, stating his repudiation of the Church of Rome.³⁷ Bishop Bagot accepted the letter as satisfactory since Newman had written: "I think that to belong to the Catholic Church is the first of all privileges here below, as involving in it heavenly privileges, and … I consider the Church over which you preside the Catholic Church in this country."³⁸ For the moment, at least, the turmoil subsided.

Since 1839, Newman had been contemplating the leaving of St. Mary's, Oxford, to live at Littlemore, several miles away, where he had built a church. A number of reasons led to this consideration: he doubted having any pastoral influence over his Oxford parishioners, with whom he admitted having no personal acquaintance; he felt guilty about using St. Mary's as a university office to give prestige to his ideas rather than for the performance of its intended parochial duties; and he also feared that his sermons were disposing the congregation towards Rome. At Keble's advice, however, he decided to continue at St. Mary's; but his trips to Littlemore became more frequent; and, on the publication of Tract 90 in February, 1841, he was taking steps toward his eventual withdrawal from St. Mary's, Oxford. He spent the summer of 1841 at Littlemore "without any harass or anxiety" on his mind, "determined to put aside controversy," and to translate St. Athanasius.³⁹

But anxiety and controversy were Newman's lot. The Anglican bishops, fully aware of the impact of Tract 90, began leveling charges at Newman. A determined movement to discredit him became evident when seven bishops had condemned him by the end of 1841 and twenty-four by 1844. At first, Newman planned a protest; but he felt tied by the cords of ecclesiastical obedience and gave up the thought in despair.⁴⁰ On theaffair of the Jerusalem bishopric, however, Newman did not give up. A Protestant English bishopric was to be set up in Jerusalem; the bishop was to be consecrated by the Anglican archbishop; and he would rule the Lutheran and Calvinist congregations of the East.

Newman, who considered this act as the granting of status to Protestantism in the East, wrote against the scheme in the July, 1841, issue of the British Critic; and he asserted that, while the Anglican Church was censuring him for avowing an approach to the Roman Church, "it actually was courting an intercommunion with Protestant Prussia and the heresy of the Orientals." He also denounced the move as a political stunt of cooperating with the Prussians to offset the influence in Jerusalem of France and Russia, which had established themselves as protectors of the Roman Catholics and of the Orthodox. On November 11, 1841, Newman formally protested to his own bishop and to the Archbishop of Canterbury, but without success; this episode brought Newman "on to the beginning of the end."⁴¹

In January, 1842, another disappointment followed when John Keble retired from Oxford and his position as Professor of Poetry became vacant. A follower of Newman, Isaac Williams, was considered by many to be the best qualified candidate; but Williams was defeated for the post, presumably on the grounds of his adherence to the Tractarian movement, although he clearly demonstrated no sympathy towards Rome. As an indication of loss of prestige and influence at Oxford, Newman established permanent residence at Littlemore on April 19, 1842. He would minister to his Littlemore parishioners, and his curate to the Oxford members of his congregation. Furthermore, he considered retirement from Oxford expedient in such a period of controversy.

The charges of the Anglican bishops persisted while Newman was at Littlemore. Newspapers circulated all sorts of rumors as to the purpose of his retreat to Littlemore; and "insidious," "sly," "dishonest" were used to describe him. He was even accused of "rearing … a nest of Papists."⁴² When his attention was called to the descriptions being circulated about Newman and his companions at Littlemore, Bishop Bagot regarded an inquiry necessary; and he requested from Newman an explanation of the reports that he had established an Anglo-Catholic monastery approaching the monastic orders of the Roman Catholic Church. When Newman replied to this and other topics of "incessant interpretation," he denied any erection of a monastery, but he upheld his right to devote himself to a life of greater religious regularity and to more intense personal prayer.⁴³

The year 1843 became an eventful one for Newman, for his formal retraction of all he had said against the Church of Rome was published in February in the Oxford Conservative Journal with the expected reaction on the part of his opponents; he was branded with the charge of duplicity. In May, Pusey preached a sermon on "The Holy Eucharist a Comfort to the Penitent." Despite Pusey's careful adherence to Anglican doctrine, Oxford's officials suspended him from preaching at the university. Pusey's previous defense of Tract 90 was a sufficient "guilt by association" in the minds of Oxford. In August, the occasion for resigning from St. Mary's took place when William Lockhart, a follower of Newman at Littlemore, joined the Roman Catholic Church and was admitted into one of her monastic orders. When newspapers publicized the conversion and critical letters poured into Littlemore, Newman, convinced that he could no longer maintain a position of leadership and influence while retaining his official post in the Anglican Church, presented his resignation on September 18 as Vicar of St. Mary's to Bishop Bagot.

On September 25, Newman delivered his last sermon as an Anglican, "The Parting of Friends." A hearer noted "the faltering voice, the long pauses, the perceptible and hardly successful efforts at restraining himself, together with the deep interest of the subject which were almost overpowering," as Newman bade farewell to friends, parishioners, and associates at St. Mary's and Oxford.⁴⁴ He expressed regret at leaving the church of his birth but, at the same time, found her wanting in adherence to divine truth. He urged everyone present to pray "that in all things he may know God's will, and at all times he may be ready to fulfill it."⁴⁵

Newman retired in quiet seclusion to live a quasimonastic discipline at Littlemore. Without his leadership, many of his followers became unrestrained in emphasizing the most Roman interpretation of the Oxford Movement; and, by 1845, their influence as a party of reform within the Anglican Church became minimal. Newman's retirement marked an end to any participation on his part in the Oxford Movement.⁴⁶ Instead, Newman began a period of intensive prayer and study. Many Anglicans were expecting an immediate announcement of his conversion to Roman Catholicism, but Newman was not yet ready for such a step; his mind was too unsettled. Many followers were looking to him for direction; but his own soul and mind became his only concern. "How could I in any sense," he deliberated, "direct others, who had to be guided in so momentous a matter myself?"⁴⁷

A few of Newman's followers had gone over to the Church of Rome. A year after resigning from the Anglican priesthood, Newman explained the unsettled state of his mind and the difficulty which confronted it in reference to choosing Roman Catholicism:

I had been deceived once; how could I be sure that I was not deceived a second time? I thought myself right then; how was I to be certain that I was now? How many years had I thought myself sure of what I now rejected? how could I ever again have confidence in myself? As in 1840 I listened to the rising doubt in favour of Rome, now I listened to the waning doubt in favour of the Anglican Church. To be certain is to know that one knows; what inward test had I, that I should not change again, after I had become a Catholic? I had still apprehension of this, although I thought a time would come, when it would depart.⁴⁸

Many factors contributed to Newman's hesitation in his acceptance of Roman Catholicism. He would have to forsake the church of his birth, which he had so staunchly defended against the liberals. Many friends and colleagues at Oxford, the associations of many years, would no longer be his. Members of his family, especially his sisters, noting a possible trend towards Rome, pleaded with him against taking such a drastic step. He knew what and whom he was to leave; he did not know what and whom he was to join. He had had little contact with members of the Roman Catholic clergy and faith. He had been brought up in a tradition of prejudice towards Roman Catholics, who, for many years in Great Britain, had been ostracized from political and social life. He had been to Rome on his Mediterranean trip and remembered her as a "city under a curse." Religious conversions require more than logic; reason too frequently finds itself entangled in emotions. Prayer and study were regarded all the more as necessary means to Newman's searching mind and soul.

IV Essay on Development

Towards the end of 1844, Newman resolved to write down the results of his study at Littlemore in a work that he entitled An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine. While reviewing the thoughts of his projected thesis, he was confronted by a dilemma of his own making. He had been an exponent of the static view of the church—a view which held that Christian truth was known completely by the church at its very beginning and that, therefore, antiquity was the chief note of the true church. But he had now become influenced by a more dynamic view which claimed that, although all truth had been given to the church upon its establishment, subsequent thought and reflection produces clarification and a better understanding of Christ's teachings. The fact of heresies, even in early Christianity, proved necessary the action of the church in issuing decrees of belief for the purpose of avoiding misinterpretation of Christian teaching. Delving farther into the Fathers of the Church and early Christianity demonstrated to Newman that the growth or development of Christian doctrine was an idea that clearly existed in theological thought and that St. Irenaeus, Origen, St. Basil, St. Jerome, and St. Gregory Nazianzen had subscribed at least implicitly to the view.⁴⁹

In his introduction to the Essay on Development, Newman insisted that Christianity had to be viewed as a historical fact and that throughout its eighteen hundred years of existence certain apparent inconsistencies and changes in doctrine and worship have occurred. He regarded any inquiry as to the mode and meaning of these apparent inconsistencies and charges as justified; and, since he himself had been beset by the problem, he directed the Essay toward its solution.⁵⁰ Concerning the doctrine and worship of Christianity, he mantained that the history of eighteen hundred years ought to make us consider

that the increase and expansion of the Christian Creed and Ritual, and the variations which have attended the process in the case of individual writers and Churches, are the necessary attendants on any philosophy or polity which takes possession of the intellect and heart, and has had any wide or extended dominion; that, from the nature of the human mind, time is necessary for the full comprehension and prefection of great ideas; and that the highest and most wonderful truths, though communicated to the world once for all by inspired teachers, could not be comprehended all at once by the recipients, but, as being received and transmitted by minds not inspired and through media which were human, have required only the longer time and deeper thought for their full elucidation. This may be called The Theory of Development of Doctrine.⁵¹

As Newman sought to substantiate his theory of development, he emphasized the natural function of the human mind as being always engaged in passing judgment on what it comes to know: "We allow nothing to stand by itself: we compare, contrast, abstract, generalize, connect, adjust, classify; and we view all our knowledge in the associations with which these processes have invested it."⁵² Such mental activity would not be peculiar to religious ideas alone: mathematical, physical, political, historical, ethical, metaphysical ideas would also be subject to the mind's scrutiny.⁵³ All ideas characterized as "living" have generated "a general agitation of thought, and an action of mind upon mind."⁵⁴ So has been the historical development of such doctrines as "the divine right of kings," "the rights of man," political constitutions, the philosophies of great men.

Since Christianity is a universal religion and is not bound to one locale or period of history, it must be able to accommodate itself towards the world in which it finds itself: its different persons and circumstances of any place or time. All Christian sects have appealed to Scripture, but with varying interpretations of the texts, and even as to the authority to interpret them. The unsystematic structure and figurative style of Scripture have required constant study and examination in the light of changing times—an argument for the development of Christian doctrine as based on Scripture. And Newman emphasized that, "in an age in which reason, as it is called, is the standard of truth and right, it is abundantly evident to any one … that, if things are left to themselves, every individual will have his own view of them, and take his own course."⁵⁵ To maintain unity and continuity in Christian doctrine throughout all periods of history postulates some supreme power to control the mind and to compel agreement.

By this reasoning Newman concluded in favor of the role of infallibility claimed by the Roman Catholic Church against private interpretation of the Scriptures as advocated by Protestantism: "If Christianity is both social and dogmatic, and intended for all ages, it must humanly speaking have an infallible expounder. Else you will secure unity of form at the loss of unity of doctrine, or unity of doctrine at the loss of form; you will have to choose between comprehension of opinions and a resolution into parties, between latitudinarian and sectarian error."⁵⁶ If St. Athanasius or St. Ambrose were to come to life, they would undoubtedly recognize the Roman Catholic Church, and not any other Christian denomination, as the expounder of Christ's doctrine today. Allowance would have to be made for changes of words to explain doctrine; emphasis in argumentation would have to be accommodated to existing circumstances—but these are of the essence of development of doctrine.

Newman had resolved the most pressing difficulty in his mind regarding the acceptance of the Church of Rome: had Rome adhered to or swayed from primitive Christianity? And he concluded that "of all existing systems, the present communion of Rome is the nearest approximation in fact to the Church of the Fathers."⁵⁷ Newman, moreover, presented not only a conclusion; he documented it with the results of his serious study in which he contrasted the teachings of Roman Catholicism in the nineteenth century with those of the early Christian Church.

He chose the following doctrines to illustrate a genuine development from earlier and simpler forms: the Canon of the New Testament, the doctrines of Original Sin and Infant Baptism, Communion in One Kind, the Divine Nature of Christ, the Incarnation, the dignity of the Blessed Virgin and the Saints, and Papal Supremacy. With proofs taken from the texts of Scripture, the opinions of Church Fathers, and the practice of the early church, he demonstrated how these doctrines had developed throughout the church's history into their form in the nineteenth-century Church of Rome.⁵⁸ Intimate connection and oneness of past and present in doctrine afforded Roman Catholicism, in Newman's mind, "undeniably the historical continuation of the religious system, which bore the name of Catholic in the eighteenth century, in the seventeenth, in the sixteenth, and so back in every preceding century, till we arrive at the first;—undeniably the successor, the representative, the heir of the religion of Cyprian, Basil, Ambrose, and Augustine…. Modern Catholicism is nothing else but simply the legitimate growth and complement, that is, the natural and necessary development, of the doctrine of the early Church, and that its divine authority is included in the divinity of Christianity."⁵⁹

But the fact and necessity of development comprise only a part of Newman's efforts in this treatise; for the process by which religious ideas genuinely develop forms an even greater section of his study. In the course of time, an idea may not become a development; it may become a corruption. Development denotes life; "corruption, on the contrary, is the breaking up of life, preparing to its termination."⁶⁰ Newman distinguishes seven "notes," or tests, to judge development or corruption of doctrine. Preservation of type is the first test offered, and it is based on the analogy of physical growth. Animals remain within their species throughout their lives. Birds do not become fish; the child does not generate into the brute. Continuity of species is maintained. Ideas also develop with subsequent thought and reflection; they take on new meaning in the crucible of experience. As Christians reflected upon and sought to apply Christ's doctrine to their everyday lives, their faith took on new dimensions without undergoing radical change.⁶¹ Newman details the history of the church in the first six centuries with all the problems attendant upon an organization seeking the fullest possible growth in order to fulfill the aims of its founder. Whether viewed "in its age" or "in its youth," the organization has maintained identity. In her growth and development, "such a religion [the Roman Catholic Church] is not unlike the Christianity of the fifth and sixth centuries."⁶²

Religious doctrines also evolve from principles. The sciences of mathematics and physics, by analogy, have developed basic permanent principles from which, in the course of study and experimentation, much new knowledge has been derived. Although principles are largely general and abstract, their application leads to the discovery of many new facts. As a second test, continuity of principles causes religious doctrine to grow and develop: Christ enunciated the basic permanent principles; His church enlarges upon them as they are applied to future generations.⁶³ And so the Church of Rome—faithful to Christ's principles, as the supremacy of faith over reason, the preference of the mystical to the literal interpretation of Scripture, the necessity to defend and to transmit defined doctrine—has stood firm, especially against heresies; has maintained the principles and has put them in vigorous operation.⁶⁴

For the third test, power of assimilation, Newman again makes use of the analogy of physical growth: life grows by absorbing or assimilating into its own substance external materials, as is done in the matter of food. In the intellectual order, many an ideas has resulted from a similar process.⁶⁵ In seeking to attract converts, yet desiring to have them feel "at home" in a newly adopted religious faith, the church has frequently employed many customs and usages of pagan rites, such as incense, candles, festival days. Rather than obliterate, the Church has "Christianized" them.⁶⁶

Logical sequence, the fourth test, occasions development simply by affirming any progress of the mind from one judgment to another. If the original teaching is correct, doctrines logically deduced from it represent logical conclusions.⁶⁷ To demonstrate this test in the church's history, Newman confines himself to examples of doctrine which consider sin after baptism. The necessity of remitting sin after baptism and of rendering possible reconciliation with God was given serious thought in the early church. In her desire to fulfill Christ's hope for the salvation of sinners and to carry out its authority of "binding and loosing," the church adopted systems of penances and satisfaction for sin.⁶⁸ The fifth test, anticipation of its future, considers that an idea that has life has the power to develop under favorable circumstances with the passage of time. The development of a doctrine, therefore, may be vague and slow; but the workings of logical minds will eventually bring a doctrine to its fullest development.⁶⁹ Such would be the case, Newman asserts, with doctrines relating to relics, to the cult of saints and angels, and to the Blessed Virgin.⁷⁰

The words of Christ, "I have come not to destroy, but to fulfill," provide the basis for the sixth test: conservative action upon its past. Although an idea may have developed with time, "a true development … may be described as one which is conservative of the course of antecedent developments being really those antecedents and something besides them: it is an addition which illustrates, not obscures, corroborates, not corrects, the body of thought from which it proceeds."⁷¹ Heresies, Newman points out, have made it necessary for the church to reaffirm previously declared doctrine, as, for example, in the Incarnation, the Trinity, and the Blessed Virgin; but it did so with the purpose of clarification and of placing proper emphasis of various aspects of the specific doctrines.⁷²

The seventh and final test is chronic vigour: duration or long standing characterizes the faithful development of an idea. Heresies or corruptions of doctrine are short-lived, as are the peculiarities of a country, the customs of a race, or the temporary response to the changing tides of opinion; they cannot maintain their vigor with the passage of time and with divergent cultures.⁷³ An examination of Roman Catholic doctrines in themselves and in comparison with other religious faiths leads Newman to conclude:

After violent exertion men are exhausted and fall asleep; they awake the same as before, refreshed by the temporary cessation of their activity; and such has been the slumber and such the restoration of the Church. She pauses in her course, and almost suspends her functions; she rises again, and she is herself once more; all things are in their place and ready for action. Doctrine is where it was, and usage, and precedence, and principle, and policy; there may be changes, but they are consolidations or adaptations; all is unequivocal and determinate, with an identity which there is no disputing.⁷⁴

Since Newman presented a developmental theory in 1845, both critics and friends have attributed his view to the influence of nineteenth-century thought.⁷⁵ Comte, Condorcet, and Kant viewed humanity as a developing organism; the French Revolution had called for the progressive improvement of mankind, and Hegel had popularized the notion of progress in his philosophy of history. Moreover, Spencer in the field of sociology emphasized the need of man to adjust to a constantly changing environment; indeed, crities have even associated Newman with Darwinian evolution: "We cannot but see on every page of the Development Darwin's advancing shadow."⁷⁶ Since Newman repeatedly employed the analogy of organic development, his doctrine has been interpreted in biological terms; one critic calls the process of development epigenesis; another refers to it as "homogeneous evolution."⁷⁷ But the Origin of the Species was not published until 1859; and, after its publication, Newman gave no indication of accepting Darwin's thesis in the physiological order, least of all in matters of revealed religion.⁷⁸

Newman had resolved to write the essay on doctrinal development with the purpose of clearing his own mind of the rising doubts in favor of the Roman Catholic Church. At the beginning of writing the essay he acknowledged, "If, at the end of it, my convictions in favour of the Roman Church were not weaker, of taking the necessary steps for admission into her fold."⁷⁹ As he progressed in its writing and as his difficulties were gradually resolved, he ceased to speak of "the Roman Catholics"; and he called them "Catholics." "Before I got to the end, I resolved to be received."⁸⁰

Although the essay on doctrine achieved for Newman a justification of the claims of Roman Catholicism, not all Roman Catholics accepted his thesis. Two Jesuit theologians in Rome admitted the principle of development, but they claimed that Newman had carried the principle too far.⁸¹ Newman's American friends wrote of the poor reception of the book by American bishops, who characterized it as "half Catholicism half infidelity."⁸² Orestes Brownson, himself a convert, charged Newman with lack of adequate understanding of the Catholic Church and declared that in the essay he reasoned as a Protestant: "This elaborate essay belongs to his past life; let it go with all that Protestantism he abjured before he was permitted to put on the livery of Christ. It belongs not to his Catholic life, and is only accidentally connected with it…. The essay he will write hereafter, out of thefulness of his Catholic heart, will breathe a different tone, and fetch another echo."⁸³ Brownson, who had a static view of Christianity, maintained that the original creed was complete: new definitions of doctrine represented not a subsequent "apprehension and understanding of the sacred deposit of faith committed to her charge" (as Newman asserted), but formulations occasioned by new heresies: "The Church has no natural history, for she is not in the order of nature, but of grace."⁸⁴

Catholic theologians, however, have also indicated that the idea of the development of dogma had existed long before Newman in the writings of the Fathers of the Church and in theological thought.⁸⁵ Newman may not have been the originator of the idea, but he has been its ablest expounder. Bishop John J. Wright of Pittsburgh, in speaking of Vatican Council H's role in the updating of Catholic doctrine, echoed Newman's thought: "New Testament verses are the seeds of doctrine. With each popping out of a branch, with each flowering of a leaf, you have a new branch and a new leaf. But each branch and each leaf is in the pattern of the original seed."⁸⁶

V Conversion

Convinced of the truth of Roman Catholicism, Newman's conversion was only a matter of time and circumstance. Two of his companions at Littlemore, Ambrose St. John and John D. Dalgairns, had already joined the Church of Rome. Father Dominic, a missionary in the Congregation of the Passion, planned to visit Dalgairns at Littlemore on October 8, 1845. Newman had submitted his letter of resignation as Fellow of Oriel on October 3, and two days later he noted in his diary that he was making immediate preparation for admittance to Roman Catholicism. With the knowledge of Father Dominic's impending visit, he wrote to Henry Wilberforce that he would ask the missionary priest to receive him into the Church of Rome.⁸⁷ On the evening of October 8, Newman was received, with two companions, Frederick Bowles and Richard Stanton.

Upon his conversion Newman's plans for the future were unsettled. Father Dominic suggested that he and his companions visit Bishop Nicholas Wiseman at Oscott and receive the sacrament of confirmation. Newman, who had already met Wiseman as rector of the English College in Rome in 1833, offered Wiseman a copy of his Essay on Development for approval. Wiseman felt that the book should be published unchanged or without theological censorship in the hope that it would present a more effective plea for Roman Catholicism. Knowing of the new converts' desire to remain together and also of their unsettled minds as to their next course of action, Wiseman proposed that they move to Old Oscott College in a "Littlemore continued." The converts accepted the offer, and Newman named their house Maryvale.

The secluded life of Littlemore was resumed at Maryvale. Newman declined an offer to write an account of his reasons for joining the Roman Church; he deemed it inopportune to engage in controversy. Moreover, he suggested that the Essay on Development had already made his position clear.⁸⁸ Instead, Newman preferred to delve into a more thorough study of the ways and traditions of his newly chosen faith and to help his associates prepare for the possible reception of Holy Orders. Although hesitant upon his conversion about being ordained a Roman Catholic priest, Newman decided to take the step. But what work was he to do, and should it be under a bishop of a diocese or in a religious congregation of priests? Father Dominic hoped that the converts would be preachers and missionaries. Bishop Wiseman considered the founding of a school of divinity for preparing future priests—a work for which Newman had had experience as a teacher at Oxford and for which he had demonstrated a wealth of theological knowledge and history in the Essay on Development. Since Newman could not make a decision, he expressed the desire to go to Rome and, as his companions felt, have Rome decide for him.⁸⁹

In September, 1846, Newman and St. John left for Rome. They first spent four or five weeks at Milan, where they admired the churches and the art of the city. After a similar study of Rome, they resided at the College of Propaganda, a seminary founded in the seventeenth century for training young men of every nationality for missionary work. When Newman discussed with many in Rome the possibilities of his future work,⁹⁰ the objections he heard expressed against his Essay on Development dissuaded him from founding any divinity school. Having a natural bent towards community life, but for one without too many monastic restrictions, Newman took a liking for the Oratorians, a congregation founded by St. Philip Neri in the sixteenth century.⁹¹ Pope Pius IX approved wholeheartedly of Newman's wishes; and, after Newman's required training period was completed in Rome, the Pope would concur with the hope of Newman and the converts to establish themselves as members of this congregation of priests in England.⁹² The Pope appointed the Oratorian Father Carlo Rossi to supervise their training and granted them the use of a wing of the Monastery of Santa Croce for their home in Rome. Newman was ordained a Roman Catholic priest on May 30, 1847.

While in Rome, Newman also found time to write. He directed his energies to a novel about religious conversion: Loss and Gain: the Story of a Convert, which was published in 1848 upon his return to England. Loss and Gain was occasioned by the success in England in the summer of 1847 of a novel, whose author was not identified, From Oxford to Rome, which pretended to portray the inside picture of the "defection" of the Oxford converts to Roman Catholicism. Newman considered the book as "wantonly and preposterously fanciful." Rather than honor the book by a formal critique of its contents, he deemed it more suitable to answer by writing his novel, one "drawn up with a stricter regard to truth and probability, and with at least some personal knowledge of Oxford, and some perception of the various aspects of the religious phenomenon, which the work in question handled so rudely and so unskilfully."⁹³

Newman claimed that Loss and Gain was an imaginary tale and that neither the principal characters nor the history of any individual mind among the converts was delineated: only "free use has been made of sayings and doings which were characteristic of the time and place in which the scene is laid."⁹⁴ Despite the unintended suggestion to the reader of real individuals, there is an obvious identification of the characters in the novel with Newman's own religious development and experiences at Oxford. Charles Reding, the main character, bears a striking resemblance to Newman. Reding, the son of an old-fashioned Anglican clergyman, is sent to Oxford, where he becomes confused as a result of the conflicting views expressed about religious matters. He begins to question the Thirty-nine Articles and even becomes interested in Roman Catholicism, to the displeasure of the university authorities. Excessive preoccupation with religious uncertainties causes his failure in his first attempt at examinations. However, since Reding has every desire to remain in the Anglican Church, he spends considerable time reading and studying more about his faith, while also seeking advice from learned Anglican theologians. But these efforts prove fruitless. To the sorrow of family and friends, Reding, who feels in conscience that he must leave the church of his birth, goes to London to be received into the Church of Rome by a Passionist priest.

Reding and Newman, moreover, possessed many of the same personality traits. Both were shy and sensitive, which led to their being misunderstood and to a feeling of isolation. Both were able to overcome their scholastic failure. They were lovers of music, not given over to socializing, and were inclined from youth to a life of celibacy. Both refrained from accepting Roman Catholicism until all reasonable doubt was cleared from their minds.

As a novelist, Newman lacks dramatic quality. The elements of conflict and suspense are superficial since the reader is never held in abeyance as to the next development of the action. In his evaluation of Loss and Gain, Baker points out how the novel "reflects merely intellectual steps along the way to conversion, not emotional reaction of man on man."⁹⁵ The characters in the novel are classified as "caricatures" and as "shadowy outlines"⁹⁶ and as hardly recognizable if met in real life.⁹⁷ Yet Newman's novels are still reprinted and read. Besides their historical and biographical value, they contain many humorous, eloquent, and satirical passages.

Newman spent the remainder of 1847 in Rome and in visiting Oratorian establishments and shrines in various cities of Italy. Several conferences with the Pope were used to determine his future work in England, for which Newman set sail on December 6.

Notes

¹ J. P. Stanley, Life of Thomas Arnold, D.D. (London, 1904), p. 278.

² S. L. Ollard, A Short History of the Oxford Movement (London, 1915), p. 17.

³ D. C. Somervell, English Thought in the Nineteenth Century (New York, 1929), p. 17.

⁴ A. Mozley, Letters [and Correspondence of John Henry Newman During His Life in the English Church, with a Brief Autobiography. (London, 1891)], I, 233.

⁵ See Thomas Carlyle's essay on "Sir Walter Scott," Collected Works, Vol. IV of Critical and Miscellaneous Essays (London, 1896-1899), p. 49.

⁶Apologia [pro Vite Sue (London, 1864)], p. 23.

⁷Ibid., pp. 27-28.

⁸Ibid., p. 28.

⁹ Meriol Trevor, Newman (New York, 1962), I, 148.

¹⁰Tracts for the Times (London, 1833-41), I, 1-2.

¹¹ Of the tracts, Newman was the author of nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 15, 19, 20, 21, 33, 34, 38, 40, 41, 45, 47, 71, 73, 75, 76, 79, 82, 83, 85, 88, and 90.

¹²Apologia, pp. 11-15. See also Sylvester P. Juergens, Newman on the Psychology of Faith in the Individual (New York, 1928), pp. 72, 167, 176.

¹³ R. W. Church, [The Oxford Movement (Hemden, Conn., 1966)], pp. 129-30.

¹⁴ Quoted from W. Ward, [The Life of John Henry Cardinal Newman (London, 1913)], I, 66.

¹⁵ Thomas Mozley, Reminiscences Chiefly of Oriel College and the Oxford Movement (London, 1882), I, 313.

¹⁶ This work was later published as the first volume of the Via Media (London, 1877).

¹⁷Via Media [(London, 1877)], I, 79.

¹⁸Ibid., 137.

¹⁹Lectures on Justification (London, 1838).

²⁰ Yngve Brilioth feels that these lectures "form perhaps the chief theological document of the Oxford Movement." See The Anglican Revival (London, 1933), p. 282.

²¹ See Apologia, pp. 62-69.

²²Justification, p. 340.

²³Apologia, p. 68.

²⁴ Eutyches was an abbot of an important monastery during the mid-400s in the outskirts of Constantinople; he is considered the father of Monophysitism.

²⁵Apologia, p. 76.

²⁶Ibid., p. 78.

²⁷Ibid., p. 74.

²⁸Ibid., p. 75.

²⁹Tracts, V, 79.

³⁰ Church, Oxford, pp. 298-99.

³¹ [C. F.] Harrold, [John Henry Newman (New York, 1945)], p. 43.

³² Brilioth, Revival, p. 155.

³³ E. A. Knox, The Tractarian Movement: 1833-1845 (New York, 1933), p. 255.

³⁴ Quoted from Trevor, Newman, I, 244.

³⁵Ibid., pp. 244-45.

³⁶Ibid., p. 246.

³⁷Via Media, II, 6.

³⁸ Trevor, Newman, I, 246.

³⁹Apologia, pp. 89-91.

⁴⁰Ibid., p. 93.

⁴¹Ibid., pp. 93-97.

⁴²Ibid., pp. 114-15.

⁴³Ibid., pp. 115-17.

⁴⁴ Quoted from Trevor, Newman, I, 303.

⁴⁵Ibid., p. 304.

⁴⁶ For further developments and the revival of the Oxford Movement, see Brilioth, Revival; Church, Oxford; L. E. Elliott-Binns, Religion in the Victorian Era (London, 1936); Knox, Tractarian; Shane Leslie, The Oxford Movement (Milwaukee, 1933); J. Lewis May, The Oxford Movement (London, 1933); J. H. Overton, The English Church in the Nineteenth Century (London, 1894); W. J. S. Simpson, The History of the Anglo-Catholic Revival from 1845 (London, 1932); Vernon F. Storr, The Development of English Theology in the Ninetenth Century: 1800-1860 (London, 1913); C. C. J. Webb, Religious Thought in the Oxford Movement (New York, 1928).

⁴⁷Apologia, p. 145.

⁴⁸Ibid., pp. 151-52.

⁴⁹ Juergens, Newman, p. 265.

⁵⁰ Newman first published the work in 1845, but the Essay in this study is examined from the 1878 edition, since this is the form in which Newman desired it to be judged. See Cross, Newman, p. 179. For a comparative study of the 1845 and 1878 editions, see Harrold, Newman, pp. 394-95.

⁵¹An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine (London, 1878), pp. 29-30.

⁵²Ibid., p. 33.

⁵³Ibid., pp. 41-53.

⁵⁴Ibid., p. 37.

⁵⁵Ibid., pp. 89-90.

⁵⁶Ibid., p. 90.

⁵⁷Ibid., p. 97.

⁵⁸Ibid., pp. 122-65.

⁵⁹Ibid., p. 169.

⁶⁰Ibid., p. 170.

⁶¹Ibid., pp. 171-78.

⁶²Ibid., p. 322.

⁶³Ibid., pp. 178-85.

⁶⁴Ibid., pp. 323-54.

⁶⁵Ibid., pp. 185-89.

⁶⁶Ibid., pp. 355-83.

⁶⁷Ibid., pp. 189-95.

⁶⁸Ibid., pp. 383-99.

⁶⁹Ibid., pp. 195-99.

⁷⁰Ibid., pp. 400-18.

⁷¹Ibid., p. 200.

⁷²Ibid., pp. 419-36.

⁷³Ibid., pp. 199-206.

⁷⁴Ibid., p. 444.

⁷⁵ Wilfrid Ward, Problems and Persons (London, 1903),p. 9; Guitton, Philosophie, pp. 54, 137-40.

⁷⁶ [William F.] Barry, Newman [(New York, 1905)], p.278.

⁷⁷Ibid., p. 280.

⁷⁸ R. Blennerhassett, "Some Recollections of Cardinal Newman," Living Age, XIII (1901), 796.

⁷⁹Apologia, p. 152.

⁸⁰Ibid., p. 156.

⁸¹ W. Ward, Newman, I, 161. While he was preparing for the Roman Catholic priesthood in Rome, Newman had the opportunity to discuss his theory on development with a number of outstanding theologians; see ibid., pp. 184-87.

⁸²Ibid., p. 160.

⁸³ Orestes A. Brownson, "Newman's Development of Christian Doctrine," Brownson's Works (Detroit, 1882-87), XIV, 27.

⁸⁴Ibid., p. 25.

⁸⁵ Juergens, Newman, p. 265; F. Marin-Sola, L'évolution homogène du dogme catholique (Paris, 1924), II, 127; Edmond D. Benard, A Preface to Newman's Theology (St. Louis, 1945), pp. 84, 96.

⁸⁶ Quoted from Lee E. Dirks, Religion in Action (Silver Spring, Md.), p. 13.

⁸⁷ Newman to Robert Wilberforce, October 7, 1845, in W. Ward, Newman, I, 92-93.

⁸⁸ Newman to Spencer Northcote, February, 1846, in ibid., pp. 121-22.

⁸⁹Ibid., pp. 125-26.

⁹⁰Ibid., pp. 157-69.

⁹¹ Newman to J. D. Dalgairns, January 15, 1847, in ibid., p. 176.

⁹² Ambrose St. John to J. D. Dalgairns and Newman to J. D. Dalgairns, February 24, 1847, in ibid., pp. 181-82.

⁹³Loss and Gain: the Story of a Convert (London, 1848), p. ix.

⁹⁴Ibid., p. vii.

⁹⁵ Joseph E. Baker, The Novel and the Oxford Movement (Princeton, N.J., 1932), pp. 62, 64.

⁹⁶ Harrold, Newman, p. 288.

⁹⁷ Joseph J. Reilly, Newman as a Man of Letters (New York, 1925), p. 95.