Liberalism and Newman:
The Anglican Vision and Response
A Doctoral Dissertation by Father John McCloskey
Chapter 2: A Vision Formed
This chapter will necessarily concern itself more with the years 1832-1834 for several reasons. The years 1832-1833 were crucial for during these two years Newman preached five of his University Sermons, followed by the key voyage and subsequently the founding of the Oxford Movement soon after his return from the continent. Thus above all in these early years of the decade we have a rich record in written material: sermons, letters, and diaries, etc. As these years are the turning point in his life they reflect his reaction to the ever-increasing Liberalism of the day. After 1834, Newman dedicates himself ever more increasingly to action through his work in the university and religious world.
In his sermon "Personal Influence, the Means of Propagating the Truth," preached early in January, Newman clearly identifies the enemy and foresees an inevitable reaction against the inroads of religious Liberalism. He does not reveal to us if he already has in mind the form of the Oxford Movement, but the need for an educational and formative apostolate is clearly seen. "Moreover, this great, though dangerous, faculty which evil employs as its instrument in the warfare against the truth, may stimulate all kinds of virtue, and thus becomes the rival of the true saints of God, whom it is opposing." 46 Later he goes on to refer to the difficulties which beset the propagation of the truth and proposes personal influence as the most effective means of changing society. This advice comes very naturally from a man who had a great gift for winning and maintaining friendship. By now Newman had locked in firmly on Liberalism as the adversary, he would waste little ammunition on Roman Catholicism and Evangelism from now on. "Liberalism was the enemy, in religion primarily but one spirit ran through it all, and this external activity was only a preliminary to the total triumph." 47
His pastoral ministry at St. Mary's was continuing with intensity. He preached perhaps more in this year 1832 than in any other in his life. At the same time he was deepening his friendship with Hurrell Froude and John Keble, the future co-founders with Newman of the Tractarians. In April he preached another sermon to the university on the theme "Justice as a Principle of Divine Governance" where again he jousts with the growing Liberal thought "we must never say that an individual is right, merely on the ground of his holding an opinion which happens to be true, unless he holds it in a particular manner." 48 Again he places the emphasis on the doctrinal principle, that God and his Church demand unconditional assent to the truth revealed and that a mere reasoned conclusion, even though correct, is not enough to assure salvation. Reason is fallible but the Holy Spirit is not.
He later points out the gradual distortion of what the true meaning is of being a Christian. The follower of Christ has gradually become desupernaturalized, the theological and cardinal virtues are replaced by merely human ones. The combination of Lutheran justification by faith alone and Calvinist predestination are becoming so ingrained perhaps unconsciously in the British character, that the Victorian bourgeois "Christian" is becoming a reality. Newman sees the beginnings already visible and foresees the debilitating consequences for society. "It is an especial fault of the present day to mistake the false security of the man of the world for the composure, cheer, and benevolence of the true Christian." 49 Later in his Catholic Occasional Sermons he will convincingly explain how wide-spread this self-deception regarding the true nature of the Christian life has become and how many souls are lost as a result of its deception. In his old age he would look back upon the century and muse upon the fact that he had lived through and witnessed the almost complete dechristianization of the English society. I cringe to think what would have been his reaction to England and the modern world in the twentieth century.
As he develops his thought in the sermons, he turns his attention to the topic of dogmatic authority by showing one example of its undermining in the heresy of Socianism or Unitarianism i.e. a belief in one God without any reference to the three Persons of the Holy Trinity. Newman often refers to the belief in the Trinity as the most important because it deals with the Godhead and is so clearly a complete mystery to the human mind. In fact, it is one of the first doctrines that a liberal will attack because he cannot see its "usefulness." Socians therefore are those who hold that "doctrinal opinions do not influence our characters or prosperity, nor deserve our serious attention." 50
Newman repeatedly mentions in his writings and most prominently in the first pages of the Apologia that when he was young, he was convinced that the invisible world was more real than the visible one. This somewhat Platonic viewpoint stayed with him for the rest of his life. Consequently, his deeply supernatural outlook recoiled before the suggestion that the Trinitarian dogma would not merit "serious attention." He attacks violently the notion of God as the Watchmaker of the Enlightenment thinking who only looks down upon the world with benevolence, never interfering or judging, a God whom it is impossible to offend. Naturally he saw that such thinking would lead to a complete abandonment of the need for penance and mortification as "medieval". If all are destined to eternal life there is no need for repentance. Thus, the true end of man becomes not the glory of God but rather the good of mankind. And according to the liberal utilitarian philosophy, man best pursues the good of mankind by pursuing his own self interest. How easy it then becomes for the young man of 1832 to ignore supernatural considerations and still be assured of salvation. Newman recognizes the danger from the very beginning and speaks clearly from the pulpit to warn his congregation to avoid contamination at the risk of their souls.
In May of 1832, Newman continues this series of sermons with another entitled "The Contest between Faith and Sight" where he gives a close analysis of how easily modern man falls into the abyss of liberal thought, an event which he had no doubt witnessed many times in the course of his university and pastoral work. At times the description of the process sounds eerily familiar to the twentieth century man. In a reference to Edward Gibbon the great historian and skeptic, the author of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, with which Newman was very familiar, he mentions "the masters of a new school of error which seems not yet to have accomplished its destinies." 51 Gibbon was a Catholic convert, later apostate, much influenced by Voltaire. He viewed the development of Christianity as a mere historical phenomenon bereft of any transcendent importance. He deeply influenced the first generations of the early nineteenth century in England by his thought.
In the same sermon, Newman reveals the mixed emotions with which the English gentleman approached Christianity.
Or shall he be led by a speculative turn of mind or a natural philanthropy to investigate the nature of man, or exert himself on plans for the amelioration of society, then his opinions become alternately impressed with the character of a more definitive unbelief. Sometimes he is conscious to himself that he is opposing Christianity, not indeed opposing it willfully but as he conceives, unavoidably, as finding it in his way. This is a state of mind into which benevolent men are in danger of falling at the present age. While they pursue objects tending, as they conceive, towards the good of mankind, it is by degrees forced upon their mind that Revealed Religion thwarts their proceedings and averse alike to relinquish their plans, and to offend the feelings of others they determine on letting matters take their course, and believing fully that Christianity must fall before the increasing illumination of the age, yet they wish to secure it against direct attacks, and to provide that it no otherwise falls than as it unavoidably must at one time or other, as every inflexible instrument crumbles under the hand of the great Innovator, who creates new influence for new emergencies, and recognizes no right divine in a tumultuous and shifting world. 52
The Englishman's ambivalent attitude towards the Church as a merely useful instrument for domestic peace becomes more and more evident as the State increases the use of its power over the supposed prerogatives of the Church. The dichotomy set up between the interior and active life in the Protestant Reformation becomes absolute. "Keeping the faith in the main, giving up the notion of its importance... They consent to abandon articles of faith as the basis of Christian fellowship... To distinguish between their public and private duties and judge them by separate rules." 53 Truth has lost its attraction, a false fraternity becomes the norm. So we see that the principles of false ecumenicism are by no means a product of the later twentieth century. We can recognize many of the tenets of atheistic French Enlightenment thinking contained in the skillful sketch of Newman.
As the year progresses, his diagnosis of the worsening crisis becomes more acute and one senses that Newman sees the urgent need for action but hesitates to "sound an uncertain trumpet," in the words of the later motto of the Tracts for the Times, as he still has not settled on the most effective means to combat the heresies of the day. The revolutionary events in France and the coming of the English Reform cause him to perceive that the capital sin at the root of these occurrences is Pride.
In a sermon preached in November of 1832, he attacks the concept of class conflict as unchristian "or when as lately the lower orders rise up against the powers that be, in direct opposition to the word of Scripture." 54 In his last sermon of 1832, he lays emphasis on "obedience and submission to a positive commandment" pointing out the "duty of Ecclesiastical unity" 55 and that "the sacraments, too, are of the same positive character." 56 The emphasis on Christian obedience and Church unity is continued further. "This is evident in the case of civil government, the forms and offices of which, when once established, are to be received for conscience-sake by those who find themselves under them." 57
In the later part of the sermon he examines the present state of Liberalism and the dangers fraught in it for the Christian. He describes Liberalism as "the principle of cleaving and breaking down all divine ordinances, instead of building up yet it should be recollected that very rarely have its members (The Church) escaped the infection of the age in which they lived." 58 This sermon brings Newman right up to the moment of his departure for the Mediterranean. By now he has isolated the Liberal virus, done a pathological analysis, and seen how it spreads its infection; soon will come the moment when he has to make the prescription that will create the antibodies necessary in the Anglican Church to effectively combat it.
Before embarking on Newman's reactions to his Mediterranean voyage and its effects on his vision of Liberalism, I will examine his first book, The Arians of the Fourth Century, whose writing encompasses the whole of this early period of the thirties. It provides unique insights into Newman's vision of Liberalism in that for the first time he relates the occurrences of his day with the events of the first centuries of Christianity, concretely with the struggle of the early Church with the Arian heresy and its variations. As Chesterton has said, there are no new ideas. The research and investigations done by Newman permitted him to see where liberal thought could lead if it was not correctly analyzed and corrected. It strengthened his resolve to rely on the foundations of the Church, Authority and Antiquity. In as much as he continued to identify the Anglican Church with the Church of the Apostles, he felt reassured that the Church could weather the present storm as it had done so many times in the past.
He points out that the dogmatic symbols as taught by the Church were the chief catechetical instruments. "But in that primitive age, the Apostolic tradition, that is the Creed, was practically the chief source of instruction especially considering the obscurities of Scripture, and being withdrawn from public view, it could not be subjected to the degradation of comparison on the part of inquirers and half-Christians, with those written documents which are vouchsafed to us from the same inspired authorities." 59 As a Christian Newman had a superiority complex i.e. the truths of God should not be subjected to mere rationalistic inquiry. He was already aware and apprehensive about "the cheapening of Religion and Truth through discussion and lack of reverence." 60
In examining the Arian heresy and its doctrinal consequences Newman sees the historical argument for dogmatic religion as a sure means of ascertaining the truth. This is not to say that he did not favor theological discussion, he did, but only under the watchful eye of a religious authority. "Arius began by throwing his question as a subject of debate for public consideration." 61 To Newman this was a clear example of the dangers of bringing dogmatic discussion into the newspapers, a clear case of throwing pearls before swine. Unless the discussion was authorized and supervised by the Church the conclusions were bound to be faulty, given the fallible nature of man's intellect. "Much as we may wish it, we cannot restrain the raving of the intellect, or silence its clamorous demand for a formal statement concerning the object of our worship." 62 He also realized that false opinions in history have often provoked needed doctrinal definition by the Church. "But false doctrines force us to analyze our own notions, in order to exclude it." 63 He certainly did not apply this thought positively to irreverent religious Liberalism, which was rather a concerted attempt to undermine the foundations of Christian doctrine and ethics.
Newman firmly gives us his opinion on the treatment of both heresy and heretics, an opinion not at all usual in the England of the 1830's.
Many a man would be deterred from out-stepping the truth could he see the end of his course from the beginning. The Arians felt this, and therefore resisted a detection, which would at once expose them to the condemnation of all serious men. In this lies the difference between the treatment due to an individual in heresy, and to one who is confident enough to publish the innovation which he has originated. The former claims from us the most affectionate sympathy and the most considerate attention. The latter should meet with no mercy, he assumes the office of tempter, and so far as the error goes must be dealt with by the competent authority, as if he were embodied Evil. To spare him a false and dangerous pity. It is to endanger the souls of thousands, and it is uncharitable towards himself. 64
Finally, Newman gives the reader his sketch of the type of men needed and produced in times of doctrinal upheaval. He refers to "Athanasius, type as he really was and instrument of that Apostolic Order which, whether or not united to the civil power, must to the end of time, divide the rule with Caesar as the minister of God." 65 Newman was searching, in vain, for a modern day Athanasius to rule, with an increasingly impertinent Caesar, the British State. After his Mediterranean trip, he evidently realizes that God may be calling him precisely for that role. At the same time on the opposition side these times of trial bring forth unscrupulous men who also leave their names to posterity and infamy. "But herein is the strength of audacious men, who gain what is unjust by asking what is extravagant." 66 Such men were Richard Whately and Thomas Arnold. They had to be opposed.
