TRUE MODE OF MEETING MR. KINGSLEY.101
and, for the most part, the last time I read them has been when I revised their (last) proof sheets.
Under these circumstances my sketch will of course be incomplete. I now for the first time contemplate my course as a whole ; it is a first essay, but it will contain, I trust, no serious or substantial mistake, and so far will answer the purpose for which I. write it. I purpose to set nothing down in it as certain, for which I have not a clear memory, or some written memorial, or the corroboration of some friend.
10 There are witnesses enough up and down the country to verify, or correct, or complete it ; and letters moreover of my own in abundance, unless they have been destroyed.
Moreover, I mean to be simply personal and historical
I am not expounding Catholic doctrine, I am doing no more than explaining myself, and my opinions and actions. I wish, as far as I am able, simply to state facts, whether they are ultimately determined to be for me or against me. Of course there will be room enough for contrariety of judgment among my readers, as to the necessity, or
ao appositeness, or value, or good taste, or religious prudence(,) of the details which I shall introduce. I may be accused of laying stress on little things, of being beside the mark, of going into impertinent or ridiculous details, of sounding my own praise, of giving scandal; but this is a case above all others, in which I am bound to follow my own lights and to speak out my own heart. It is not at all pleasant for me to be egotistical; nor to be criticized for being so. It is not pleasant to reveal to high and low, young and old, what has gone on within me from my early years. It is
so not pleasant to be giving to every shallow or flilzpant disputant the advantage over me of knowing my most private thoughts, I might even say the intercourse between myself and my Maker. But I do not like to be called to my face a liar and a knave: nor should I be doing my duty to my faith or to my name, if I were to suffer it. I know I have done nothing to deserve such an insult; and if I prove this, as I hope to do, I must not care for such incidental annoyances as are involved in the process.
(Here ends Part II of the 1864 and the Preface of the
' 1865 edition.)
HISTORY OF MY RELIGIOUS OPINIONS.
[Published as a Pamphlet, Thursday, May 5, 1864]
HISTORY OF MY RELIGIOUS OPINIONS (TO THE YEAR 1833).
IT may easily be conceived how great a trial it is to me to write the following history of myself; but I must not shrink from the task. The words, " Secretum meum mihi," keep ringing in my ears; but as men draw towards their end, they care less for disclosures. Nor is it the least part of my trial, to anticipate that [my friends may], upon first reading what I have written, (my friends may) consider much in it irrelevant to my purpose ; yet I cannot help thinking that, viewed as a whole, it will effect what I wish io it to do.
I was brought up from a child to take great delight in reading the Bible ; but I had no formed religious convictions till I was fifteen. Of course I had (a) perfect knowledge of my Catechism.
After I was grown up, I put on paper such recollections [as I had] of my thoughts and feelings on religious subjects, (which I had) at the time that I was a child and a boy(,‑such as had remained on my mind with sufficient prominence to make me then consider them, worth recording). Out of these (; written in the Long Vacation of 1820, and transcribed with additions in 1823,) I select two, which are at once the most definite among them, and also have. a bearing on my later convictions.
[In the paper to which I have referred, written either in the Long Vacation of 1820, or in October, 1823, the following notices of my school days were sufficiently prominent in my memory for me to consider them worth recording:‑] (1.) " I used to wish the Arabian Tale
Part III] Chapter I
10 wish it to do] propose to myself in giving it to the public
lb such] my
28 1. " I used to wish
16 my) the
This commenced a new paragraph in ISB6:'
106 HISTORY OF MY RELIGIOUS OPINIONS
were true: my imagination ran on unknown influences, on magical powers, and talismans . . . . . I thought life might be a dream, or I an Angel, and all this world a deception, my fellow‑angels by a playful device concealing themselves from me, and deceiving me with the semblance of a material world."
Again, " Reading in the Spring of 1816 a sentence from [Dr. Watts s] ` Remnants of Time,' entitled ` the Saints unknown to the world,' to the effect, that ` there is nothing in their figure or countenance to distinguish them,' 8cc. &c., io I supposed he spoke of Angels who lived in the world, as
it were disguised."
(2.J The other remark is this: " I was very superstitious, and for some time previous to my conversion " [when I was fifteen] " used constantly to cross myself on going into the dark.'
Of course I must have got this practice from some external source or other ; but I can make no sort of conjecture whence; and certainly no one had ever spoken to me on the subject of the Catholic religion, which I only zo knew by name. The French master was an emigre Priest, but he was simply made a butt, as French masters too commonly‑ were in that day, and spoke English very imperfectly. There was a Catholic family in the village, old maiden ladies we used to think, but I knew nothing but their name. I have of late years heard that there were one or two Catholic boys in the school ; but either we were carefully kept from knowing this, or the knowledge of it made simply no impression on our minds. My brother will bear witness how free the school was from Catholic ao ideas.
I had once been into Warwick Street Chapel, with my father, who; I believe, wanted to hear some piece of music; all that I bore away from it was the recollection of a pulpit and a preacher(,) and a boy swinging a censer.
When I was at Littlemore, I was looking over old copybooks of my school days, and I found among them my first Latin verse‑book; and in the first page of it[,J there was a device.which almost took my breath away with surprise.
lame] about them
(TO THE YEAR 1833.) 107
I have the book before me now, and have just been showing it to others. I have written in the first page, in my schoolboy hand, " John H. Newman, February 11th, 1811, Verse Book;" then follow my first Verses. Between " Verse " and " Book " I have drawn the figure of a solid cross upright, and next to it is, what may indeed be meant for a necklace, but what I cannot make out to be any thing else than a set of beads suspended, with a little cross attached. At this time I was not quite ten years old.
io I suppose I got the idea from some romance, Mrs. Radcliffe's or Miss Porter's ; or from some religious picture; but the strange thing is, how, among the thousand objects which meet a boy's eyes, these in particular should so have fixed themselves in my mind, that I made them thus practically my own. I am certain there was nothing in the churches I attended, or the prayer books I read, to suggest them. It must be recollected that (Anglican) churches and prayer books were not decorated in those days as I believe they are now.
zo When I was fourteen, I read Paine's Tracts against the Old Testament, and found pleasure in thinking of the objections which were contained in them. Also, I read some of Hume's Essays ; and perhaps that on Miracles. So at least I gave my father to understand; but perhaps it was a brag. Also, I recollect copying out some French verses, perhaps Voltaire's, against the immortality of the soul, and saying to myself something like " How dreadful, but how plausible ! "
When I was fifteen, (in the autumn of 1816,) a great ao change of thought took place in me. I fell under the influences of a definite Creed, and received into my intellectimpressions of dogma, which, through God's mercy, have never been effaced or obscured. Above and beyond the conversations and sermons of the excellent mail, long dead, (the Rev. Walter Mayers, of Pembroke College, Oxford,) who was the human means of this beginning of divinefaith in me, was the effect of the books which he put into, my hands, all of the school of Calvin. One of the first books I read[,] vas a 'work of‑Romaine's ; I neither recollect
108 HISTORY OF MY RELIGIOUS OPINIONS
the title nor the contents, except one doctrine, which of course I do not include among those which I believe to have come from a divine source, viz. the doctrine of final perseverance. I received it at once, and believed that the inward conversion of which I was conscious, (and of which I still am more certain than that I have hands and feet,) would last into the next life, and that I was elected to eternal glory. I have no consciousness that this belief had any tendency whatever to lead me to be careless about pleasing God. I retained it till the age of twenty‑one, to when it gradually faded away; but I believe that it had some influence on my opinions, in the direction of those childish imaginations which I have already . mentioned, viz. in isolating me from the objects which surrounded me, in confirming me in my mistrust of the reality of material phenomena, and making me rest in the thought of two and two only supreme and luminously self‑evident beings, myself and my Creator;‑for while I considered myself predestined to salvation, I thought others simply passed over, not predestined to eternal death. I only thought of 20 the mercy to myself.
The detestable doctrine last mentioned is simply denied and abjured, unless my memory strangely deceives me, by the writer who made a deeper impression on my mind than any other; arid to whom (humanly speaking) I almost owe my soul,‑Thomas Scott of Aston Sandford. I so admired and delighted in his writings, that, when I was an undergraduate, I thought of making a visit to his Parsonage, in order to see a man whom I 'so deeply revered. I hardly think I could have given up the idea of this expedition, ao even after I had taken my degree ; for the news of his death in 1821 came upon me as a disappointment as well as a sorrow. I hung upon.the lips of Daniel Wilson, afterwards Bishop of Calcutta, as in two sermons at St. John's Chapel he gave the history of Scott's life and death. I had been possessed of his ("Force of Truth" and) Essays‑ froxri x. boy; his Commentary I; bought when ,I was an .undergraduate. , ' . _
What, I suppose, will strike any reader of Scott's history
17 supreme] absolute 19 I thought others] my mind did not
dwell upon others, as fancying them
(TO THE YEAR 1833.)
and writings, is his bold unworldliness and vigorous independence of mind. He followed truth wherever it led him, beginning with Unitarianism, and ending in a zealous faith in the Holy Trinity. It was he who first planted deep in my mind that fundamental Truth of religion. With the assistance of Scott's Essays, and the admirable work of Jones ‑ of Nayland, I made a collection of Scripture texts in proof of the doctrine, with remarks (I think) of my own upon them, before I was sixteen;
io and a few months later I drew up a series of texts in support of each verse of the Athanasian Creed. These papers I have still.
Besides his unworldliness, what I also admired in Scott was his resolute opposition to Antinomianism, and the minutely practical character of his writings. They show him to be a true Englishman, and I deeply felt his influence ; and for.years I used almost as proverbs what I considered to be the scope and issue of his doctrine, " Holiness before peace," and " Growth [is] the only evidence of life."
ao Calvinists make a sharp separation between the elect and the world ; there is much in this that is parallel or cognate to the Catholic doctrine; but they go on to say, as I understand them, very differently from Catholicism,that the converted and the unconverted can, be discriminaced by man, that the justified are conscious of their state of justification, and that the regenerate cannot fall away. Catholics on the other hand shade and soften the awful antagonism between good and evil; which is one of their dogmas, by holding ,that there are different degrees of justification, that there is a great difference in point of gravity between sin and sin, that there is the possibility and the danger of falling away, and that there is no certain knowledge given to any one that he is simply in a state of grace; and much less that he is to persevere to the end :of the Calvinistic tenets the only one which took root in my mind was the fact of heaven and hell, divine favour and divine wrath, of the justified and the unjustified. The notion that the regenerate and the justified were one and the same, and that the regenerate, as such, had the gift
5 Truth] truth 18 before] rather than
21‑22 parallel or cognate] cognate or parallel
110 HISTORY OF MY RELIGIOUS OPINIONS
of perseverance, remained with me not many years, as I have said already.
This main Catholic doctrine of the warfare between. the city of God and the powers of darkness was also deeply impressed upon my mind by a work of a very opposite character (to Calvinism), Law's " Serious Call."
from this time I have given a full inward assent and belief [to] the doctrine of eternal punishment, as delivered by our Lord Himself, in as true a sense as I hold that of eternal happiness ; though I have tried in various ways io to make that truth less terrible to the reason.
Now I come to two other works, which produced a deep impression on me in the same autumn of 1816, when Z was fifteen years old, each contrary to each, and planting in me the seeds of an intellectual inconsistency which disabled me for a long course of years. I read Joseph Milner's Church History, and was nothing short of enamoured of the long extracts from St. Augustine (, St. Ambrose,) and the other Fathers which I found there. I read them as being the religion of the primitive Christians: but simul‑ 20 taneously with Milner I read Newton on the Prophecies, and in consequence became most firmly convinced that the Pope was the Antichrist predicted by Daniel, St. Paul, and St. John. My imagination was stained by .the effects of this doctrine up to the year 1843 ; it had been obliterated from my reason and judgment at an earlier date; but the thought remained upon me as a sort of false conscience. Hence came that conflict of mind, which so many have felt besides myself ; leading some men to make a compromise between two ideas, so inconsistent with each other,‑ ao driving others to beat out the one idea or the other from their minds,‑and ending in my own case, after many years of intellectual unrest,‑in the gradual decay and extinction of one of them, ‑1 do not say in its violent death, for why should I not have murdered it sooner, if I murdered it at all ?
I am obliged to mention, though I do it with great reluctance, another deep imagination, which at this time, the autumn of 1816, took possession of me,‑there can be 5 very opposite character] character very opposite
7 given] held with
11 reason] intellect
(TO THE YEAR 1833.)
no mistake about the fact;[‑] viz. that it was the will of God that I should lead a single life. This anticipation, which has held its ground almost continuously ever since,with the break of a month now and a month then, up to 1829, and, after that date, without any break at all,was more or less connected[,] in my mind[,] with the notion(,) that my calling in life would require such a sacrifice as celibacy involved ; as, for instance, missionary work among the heathen', to which I had a great drawing for
lo some years. It also strengthened my feeling of separation from the visible world, of which I have spoken above.
In 1822 I came under very different influences from those to which I had hitherto been subjected. At that time, Mr. Whately, as he was then, afterwards Archbishop of Dublin, for the few months he remained in Oxford, .wbich he was leaving for good, showed great kindness to me. `He renewed it in 1825, when he became Principal of Alban Hall, making me his Vice‑Principal and Tutor. Of Dr. Whately I will speak presently, for from 1822 to 1825 I saw
zo most of the present Provost of Oriel, Dr. Hawkins, at that time Vicar of St. Mary's; and, when I took orders in 1824 and had a curacy at Oxford, then, during the Long Vaca. Lions, I was especially thrown into his company. I can say, with a full heart that I love him, arid have never ceased to love him; and I thus preface what otherwise might sound rude, that in the course of the many years in which we were together afterwards, he provoked me very much from time to time, though I am perfectly certain that I have provoked him a great deal more. Moreover, in me such
ao provocation was unbecoming, both because he was the Head of my College, and because(,) in the first years that I knew him, he had been in many ways of great service to my mind.
He was the first who taught me to weigh my words, and to be cautious in my statements. He led me to that mode of limiting and clearing my sense in discussion and in controversy, and of distinguishing between cognate ideas, and of obviating mistakes by anticipation, which to my
1 was] would be
22 at] in
112 HISTORY OF MY RELIGIOUS OPINIONS
surprise has been since considered, even in quarters friendly to me, to savour of the polemics of Rome. He is a man of most exact mind himself, and he used to snub me severely, on reading, as he was kind enough to do, the first Sermons that I wrote, and other compositions which I was engaged upon.
Then as to doctrine, he was the means of great additions to my belief. As I have noticed elsewhere, he gave me the " Treatise on Apostolical Preaching," by Summer, afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury, from which I learned to io give up my remaining Calvinism, and to receive the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration. In many other ways too he was of use to me, on subjects semi‑religious and semi‑scholastic.
It was Dr. Hawkins too who taught me to anticipate that, before many years were over ,there would be an attack made upon the books and the canon of Scripture. I was brought to the same belief by the conversation of Mr. Blanco White, who also led me to have freer views on the subject of inspiration than were usual in the Church of England at so the time.
There is one other principle, which I gained from Dr. Hawkins, more directly bearing upon Catholicism, than any that I have mentioned; and that is the doctrine of Tradition. When I was an Undergraduate, I heard him preach in the University Pulpit his celebrated sermon on the subject, and recollect how long it appeared to me, though he was at that time a very striking preacher; but, when I read it and studied it as his gift, it made a most serious impression upon me. He does not go one step; 30 I think, beyond the high Anglican doctrine, nay he does not reach it; but he does his work thoroughly, and his view was (in him) original [with him], and his subject was a novel one at the time. He lays down a proposition, selfevident as soon as stated, to those who have at all examined the structure of Scripture, viz. that the sacred text was never intended to teach doctrine, but only to prove it, and that, if we would learn doctrine, we must have recourse to the formularies of the Church ; for instance to the
10 learned] was led
(TO THE YEAR 1833.)
Catechism, and to the Creeds. He considers, that, after learning from them the doctrines of Christianity, the inquirer must verify them by Scripture. This view, most true in its outline, most fruitful in its consequences, opened upon me a large field of thought. Dr. Whately held it too. One .of its effects was to strike at the root of the principle on which the Bible Society was set up. I belonged to its Oxford Association ; it became a matter of time when I should withdraw my name from its subscription‑list,
io though I did not do so at once.
It is with pleasure that I pay here a tribute to the memory of the Rev. William James, then Fellow of Oriel ; who, about the year 1823, taught me the doctrine of Apostolical Succession, in the course of a walk, I think, round Christ Church meadow: I recollect being somewhat impatient on the subject at the time.
It was at about this date, I suppose, that I read Bishop Butler's Analogy; the study of which has been to so many, as it was to me, an era in their religious opinions. Its
20 inculcation of a visible Church, the oracle of truth and a pattern of sanctity, of the duties of external religion, and of the historical character of Revelation, are characteristics of this great work which strike the reader at once ; for myself, if I may attempt to determine what I most gained from it, it lay in two points, which I shall have an opportunity of dwelling on in the sequel; they are the underlying principles of a great portion of my teaching. First, the very idea of an analogy between the separate works of God leads to the conclusion that the system which
ao is of less importance is economically or sacramentally connected with the more momentous system('), and of this conclusion the theory, to which I was inclined as a boy, viz. the unreality of material phenomena, is an ultimate resolution. At this time I did not make the distinction between matter itself and its phenomena, which is so necessary and so obvious in discussing the subject. Secondly, Butler's doctrine that Probability is the guide of life, led me, at least under the teaching to which a few years later I was introduced, to the question of the logical cogency of
16 on] of Footnote in 1866. (1 It is significant that
Butler begins his work with a quotation from Origen. )
114 HISTORY OF MY RELIGIOUS OPINIONS
Faith, on which I have written so much. Thus to Butler I trace those two principles of my teaching, which have led to a charge against me both of fancifulness and of scepticism.
And now as to Dr. Whately. I owe him a great deal. He was a man of generous and warm heart. He, was particularly loyal to his friends, and to use the common phrase, " all his geese were swans." While I was still awkward and timid in 1822, he took me by the hand, and acted (towards me) the part [to me] of a gentle and encour‑ io aging instructor. He, emphatically, opened my mind, and taught me to think and to use my reason. After being first. noticed by him in 1822, I became very intimate with him in 1825, when I was his Vice‑Principal at Alban Hall. I gave up that office in 1826, when I became Tutor of my College, and his hold upon me gradually relaxed. He had done his work towards me or nearly so, when he had taught me to see with my own eyes and to walk with my own feet. Not that I had not a good deal to learn from others still, but I influenced them as well as they me, and co‑operated zo rather than merely concurred with them. As to Dr. Whately, his mind was too different from mine for us to remain. long on one line. I recollect haw dissatisfied he was with an Article of mine in the London Review, which Blanco White, good‑humouredly, only called Platonic. When I was' diverging from him (in opinion) (which he did not like), I thought of dedicating my first book to him, in words to the effect that he had not only taught me to think, but to think for myself. He left Oxford in 1831 ; after that, as far as I can recollect, I never saw him but ao twice, when he visited the University; once in the street (in 1834), once in a room (in 1838). Rom the time that he left, I have always felt a real affection for what I must call his memory; for thenceforward he made himself dead to me. (He had practically indeed given me up from the time that he became Archbishop in 1831 ; but in 1834 a correspondence took place between us, which, though conducted in the most friendly language on both sides, was the expression of differences of opinion which acted as
34 thenceforward] ,at least from the year 1834,
(TO THE YEAR 1833.)
a final close to our intercourse.) My reason told me that it was impossible [that] we could have got on together longer (, had he stayed in Oxford); yet I loved him too much to bid him farewell without pain. After a few years had passed, I began to believe that his influence on me in a higher respect than intellectual advance, (I will not say through his fault,) had not been satisfactory. I believe that he has inserted sharp things in his later works about me. They have never come in my way, and I have not
lo thought it necessary to seek out what would pain me so much in the reading.
What he did for me in point of religious opinion, was (,) first (,) to teach me the existence of the Church, as a substantive body or corporation; next to fix in me those antiErastian views of Church polity, which were one of the most prominent features of the Tractarian movement. On this point, and, as far as I know, on this point alone, he and Hurrell Froude intimately sympathized, though Froude's development of opinion here was of a later
so date. In the year 1826, in the course of a walk (,) he said much to me about a work then just published, called " Letters on the Church by an Episcopalian." He said that it would make my blood boil. It was certainly a most powerful composition. One of our common friends told me, that, after reading it, he could not keep still, but went on walking up and down his room. It was ascribed at once to Whately ; I gave eager expression to the contrary opinion ; but I found the belief of Oxford in the affirmative to be too strong for me ; rightly or wrongly I yielded to
;o the general voice ; and I have never heard, then or since, of any disclaimer of authorship on the part of Dr. Whately.
The main positions of this able essay are these; first that Church and State should be independent of each other
‑he speaks of the duty of protesting " against the pro‑
fanation of Christ's kingdom, by that double usurpation,
the interference of the Church in temporals, of the State in spirituals," p. 191 ; and, secondly, that the Church may justly and by right retain its property, though separated from the State. " The clergy," he says p. 133, " though
though it has no right of interference in spiritual concerns, not only is justly entitled to support from the ministers of religion, and from all other Christians, but would, under the system I am recommending, obtain it much more effectually." The author of this work, whoever he may be; argues out both these points with great force and ingenuity, and with a .thorough‑going vehemence, which perhaps we may refer to the circumstance, that he wrote, not in prOpricE . persona (and as thereby answerable for every sentiment that he advanced,) but in the professed character lo of a Scotch Episcopalian. His work had a gradual, but a deep effect on my mind.
I am not aware of any other religious opinion which I owe to Dr. Whately For his special theological tenets I had no sympathy. In the next year, 1827, he told me he considered that I was Arianizing. The case‑was this though at that time I had not read Bishop Bull's Defensio nor the Fathers, I was just then very strong for that ante‑Nicene view of the Trinitarian doctrine, which some writers, both Catholic and non=Catholic, have accused of zo wearing a sort of Arian exterior. This is the meaning of a passage in Froude's Remains, in which he seems to accuse me of speaking against the Athanasian Creed. I had contrasted the two aspects of the Trinitarian doctrine, which are respectively presented by the Athanasian Creed and the Nicene. My criticisms were to the effect that some of the verses of the former Creed were unnecessarily scientific. This is a specimen of a certain disdain for antiquity which had been growing on me now for several years. It showed itself in some flippant language against the Fathers in the so Encyclopaedia Metropolitans, about whom I knew little at the time, except what I had learnt as a boy from Joseph Milner. In writing on the Scripture Miracles in 1825‑8, I had read Middleton on the Miracles of the early Church, and had imbibed a portion of his spirit.
The truth is, I was beginning to prefer intellectual excellence to moral; I was drifting in the direction of (the) liberalism (of the day i). I was rudely awakened from my
28 antiquity] Antiquity
Footnote in 1866. (1 Vide Note A, Liberalism, at the'end of the volume.)
PTO THE YEAR 1833.)
dream at the end of 1827 by two great blows‑illness and bereavement.
In the beginning of 1829, came the formal break between Dr. Whately and me; (the affair of) Mr. Peel's [attempted] re‑election was the occasion of it. I think in 1828 or 1827 I had voted in the minority, when the Petition to Parliament against the Catholic Claims was brought into Convocation. I did so mainly on the views suggested to, me by the theory of the Letters of an Episcopalian. Also I disliked
to the bigoted " two bottle orthodox," as they were invidiously called. (Accordingly) I took part against Mr. Peel, on a simple academical, not at all an ecclesiastical or a political ground ; and this I professed at the time. I considered that Mr. Peel had taken the University by surprise, that he had no right to call upon us to turn round on a sudden, and to expose ourselves to the imputation of time‑serving, and that a great University ought not to be bullied even by a great Duke of Wellington. Also by this time I was under the influence of Keble and Froude ; who, in addition
ao to the reasons I have given, disliked the Duke's chango of policy as dictated by liberalism.
Whately was considerably annoyed at me, and he took a humourous revenge, of which he had given me due notice beforehand. As head of a house, he had duties of hospitality to men of all parties ; he asked a set of the least intellectual men in Oxford to dinner, and men most fond of port; he made me one of the party; placed me between Provost This and Principal That, and then asked me if I was proud of my friends. However, he had a serious
so meaning in his act; he saw, more clearly than I could do, that I was separating from his own friends for good and all.
Dr. Whately attributed my leaving his clientele to a wish on my part to. be the head of a party myself. I do not think that it was deserved. My habitual feeling then and since has been, that it was not I who sought friends, but friends who sought me. Never man had kinder or more indulgent friends than I have had, but I expressed my own feeling as to the mode in which I gained them, in this very year 1829, in the course of a copy of verses. Speaking of
15 he] his friends 27 the] this
34 it] this charge
118 HISTORY OF MY RELIGIOUS OPINIONS
my blessings, I said, " Blessings of friends, which to my door, unasked, unhoped, have come." They have come, they have gone; they came to my great joy, they went to my great grief. He who gave, took away. Dr. Whately's impression about me, however, admits of this explanation
During the first years of my residence at Oriel, though proud of my College, I was not (quite) at home there. I was very. much alone, and I used often to take my daily walk by myself. I recollect once meeting Dr. Copleston, then Provost, with one of the Fellows. He turned round, to and with the kind courteousness which sat so well on him, made me a bow and said, " Nunquam minus Bolus, quam cum solus." At that time indeed (from 1823) I had the intimacy of my dear and true friend Dr. Pusey, and could not fail to admire and revere a soul so devoted to the cause of religion, so full of good works, so faithful in his affections; but he left residence when I was getting to know him well. As to Dr..Whately himself, he was too much my superior to allow of my being at my ease with him; and to no one in Oxford at this time did I open my zo heart fully and familiarly. But things changed in 1826. At that time I became one of the Tutors of my College, and this gave me position; besides, I had written one or two Essays which had been well received: I began to be known. I preached my first University Sermon. Next year I was one of the Public Examiners for the B.A, degree. (In 1828 T became Vicar of St. Mary's.) It was to me like the feeling of spring weather after winter; and, if I may so speak, I came out of my shell; I remained out of it till 1841.
The two persons who knew me best at that time are still so alive, benefited clergymen, no longer my friends. They could tell better than any one else what I was in those years. From this time my tongue wad, as it were, loosened, and I spoke spontaneously and without effort. (One of the two,) A shrewd man, [who knew me at this time,] said (of me, I have .been told), " Here is a man who, when he is silent, will never begun to speak; and when he once begins to speak, will never stop." It was at this time that I began
35 A shrewd man 1864, 18661 Her. Rickards edition subsequent to 1875 36 a man who] a fellow who
‑‑‑‑‑ ‑ ‑ ‑‑‑ ‑ ‑‑‑
(TO THE YEAR 1833.)
to have influence, which steadily increased for ‑a course of years. I gained upon my pupils, and was in particular intimate and affectionate with two of our probationer Fellows, Robert I(saae) Wilberforce (afterwards Archdeacon) and Richard Hurrell Froude. Whately then, an acute man, perhaps saw around me the signs of an incipient party(,) of which I was not conscious myself. And thus we discern the first elements of that movement afterwards called Tractarian.
io The true and primary author of it, however, as is usual with great motive‑powers, was out of sight. Having carried off as a mere boy the highest honours of the University, he had turned from the admiration which haunted his steps, and sought for a better and holier satisfaction in pastoral work in the country. Need I say that I am speaking of John Keble ? The first time that I was in a room with him was on occasion of my election to a fellowship at Oriel, when I was sent for into the Tower, to shake hands with the Provost and Fellows. How is that hour fixed in
ao my memory after the changes of forty‑two years, fortytwo this very day on which I write! I have lately had a letter in my hands, which I sent at the time to my great friend, John (William Bowden, with whom I passed almost exclusively my Undergraduate years. " I had to hasten to the Tower," I say to him, " to receive the congratulations of all the Fellows. I bore it till Keble took my hand, and then felt so abashed and unworthy of the honour done me, that I seemed desirous of quite sinking into the ground." His had been the first name which
so I had heard spoken of, with reverence rather than admiration, when I came up to Oxford. When one day I was walking in High Street with my dear earliest friend just mentioned, with what eagerness did he cry out, " There's Keble ! " and with what awe did I look at him! Then at another time I heard a Master of Arts of my college give an account how he had just then had occasion to introduce himself on some business to Keble, and how gentle, courteous, and unaffected Keble had been, so as almost to put him' out of countenance. Then too it was reported, truly or falsely, how a rising man of brilliant reputation, the present Dean of St. Paul's, Dr. Milman, admired and loved
HISTORY OF MY RELIGIOUS OPINIONS
him, adding, that somehow he was (strangely unlike any one else. However, at the time when I was elected Fellow of Oriel he was not in residence, and "he was shy of me for years in consequence of the marks which I bore upon me of the evangelical and liberal schools. At least so I have ever thought. Hurrell Froude brought us together about 1828 : it is one of the sayings preserved in his " Remains,"‑" Do you know the story of the murderer who had done one good thing in his life ? Well; if I was ever asked what good deed I had ever done, I should to say that I had brought Keble and Newman to understand
The Christian Year nude its appearance in 1827. It is not necessary, and scarcely becoming, to praise a book which has already become one of the classics of the language: When the general tone of religious literature was so nerveless and impotent; as it was at that time, Keble struck an original note and woke up in the hearts of thousands a new music, the music of a school, long unknown in England. Nor, can I pretend to analyze, in my own instance, the so effect of religious teaching so deep, so pure, so beautiful. I have never till now tried to do so ; yet I think I am. not wrong in saying, that the two main intellectual truths which it brought home to me, were the same two, which I had learned from Butler, though recast in the creative mind of my new master. The first of these was what may be called, in a large sense of the word, the Sacramental system; that is, the doctrine that material phenomena are both the types and the instruments of real things unseen,‑a doctrine, which embraces (in its fulness); not ao only what Anglicans, as well as Catholics, believe about Sacraments properly so called; but also the article of " the Communion of Saints " [in, its fulness]; and likewise the Mysteries of the faith. The connexion of this philosophy of religion with what is sometimes called " Berkeleyism "has been mentioned above; I knew little of Berkeley at this time except by name; nor have I ever studied him:
On the second intellectual principle which I gained from
Mr. Keble, I could say a great deal ; if this were the place 40 for it. It runs through very much that I have written,
‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑ ‑ ‑‑ ‑‑‑‑‑‑‑
(TO THE YEAR 1833.)
and has gained for me many hard names. Butler teaches us that probability is the guide of life. The danger of this doctrine, in the case of many minds, is, its tendency to destroy in them absolute certainty, leading them to consider every conclusion as doubtful, and resolving truth into an opinion, which it is safe (indeed) to obey or to profess, but not possible to embrace with full internal assent. If this were to be allowed, then the celebrated saying, " O God, if there be a God, save my soul, if I have
io a soul ! " would be the highest measure of devotion :‑but who can really pray to a Being, about whose existence he is seriously in doubt ?
I considered that Mr. Keble met this difficulty by ascribing the firmness of assent which we give to religious doctrine, not to the probabilities which introduced it, but to the living power of faith and love which accepted it. In matters of religion, he seemed to say, it is not merely probability which makes us intellectually certain, but probability as it is put to account by faith and love. It
zo is faith and love which give to probability a force which it has not in itself. Faith and love are directed towards an Object ; in the vision of that Object they live ; it is that Object, received in faith and love, which renders it reasonable to take probability as sufficient for internal conviction. thus the argument about Probability, in the matter of religion, became an argument from Personality, which in fact is one form of the argument from Authority.
In illustration, Mr. Keble used to quote the words of the Psalm: " I will guide thee with mine eye. Be ye not like to horse and mule, which have no understanding; whose mouths must be held with bit and bridle, lest they fall upon thee." This is the very difference, he used to say, between slaves, and friends or children. Friends do not ask for literal commands; but, from their knowledge of the speaker, they understand his half‑words; and from love of him they anticipate his wishes. Hence it is, that in his Poem for St. Bartholomew's Day, he speaks of the " Eye of God's word; " and in the note quotes Mr. Miller, of Worcester College, who remarks, in his Bampton Lectures,
25 about] from
122 HISTORY OF MY RELIGIOUS OPINIONS
on the special power of Scripture, as having " this Eye, like that of a portrait, uniformly fixed upon us, turn where we will." The view thus suggested by Mr. Keble, is brought
forward in one of the earliest of the " Tracts for the Times." In No. 8 I say, " The Gospel is a Law of Liberty. We are treated as sons, not as servants; not subjected to a code of formal commandments, but addressed as those who love God, and wish to please Him."
I did not at all dispute this view of the matter, for I made use of it myself ; but I was dissatisfied, because it did not to go to the root of the difficulty. It was beautiful and
religious, but it did not even profess to be logical; and accordingly I tried to complete it by considerations of my own, which are implied in my University Sermons, Essay
on Ecclesiastical Miracles, and Essay on Development of Doctrine. My argument is in outline as follows: that that
absolute certitude which we were able to possess, whether as to the truths of natural theology, or as to the fact of
a revelation; was the result of an assemblage of concurring and converging probabilities, and that, both according to so the constitution of the human mind and the will of its Maker ; that certitude was a habit of mind, that certainty was a quality of propositions; that probabilities which did not reach to logical certainty, might create a mental
certitude ; that the certitude thus created might equal in measure and strength the certitude which was created by the strictest scientific demonstration; and that to have
Moreover, that as there were probabilities which sufficed
to create certitude, so there were other probabilities which were legitimately, adapted to create opinion ; that it might be quite as much a matter of duty in given cases and to
given persons to have about a fact an opinion of a definite strength and consistency, as in the case of greater or of more numerous probabilities it was a duty to have a certitude ; that accordingly we were bound to be more or less
24 create] suffice for 27 have] possess
25 created] brought.about 32 to create] for
(TO THE YEAR 1833.) 123
sure, on a sort of (as it were) graduated scale of assent, viz. according as the probabilities attaching to a professed fact were brought home to us, and, as the case might be, to entertain about it a pious belief, or a pious opinion, or a religious conjecture, or at least, a tolerance of such belief, or opinion, or conjecture in. others ; that on the other hand, as it was a duty to have a belief, of more or less strong texture, in given cases, so in other cases it was a duty not to believe, not to opine, not to conjecture, not even to
io tolerate the notion that a professed fact was true, inasmuch as it would be credulity or superstition, or some other moral fault, to do so. This was the region of Private Judgment in religion ; that is, of a Private Judgment, not formed arbitrarily and according to one's fancy or liking, but conscientiously, and under a sense of duty.
Considerations such as these throw a new light on ‑the subject of Miracles, and they seem to have led me to re‑consider the view which I took of them in my Essay in 1825‑6. I do not know what was the date of this change
zo in me, nor of the train of ideas on which it was founded. That there had been already great miracles, as those of Scripture, as the Resurrection, was a fact establishing the principle that the laws of nature had sometimes been suspended by their Divine Author; and since what had happened once might happen again, a certain probability, at least no kind of improbability, was attached to the idea, taken in itself, of miraculous intervention in later times, and miraculous accounts were to be regarded in connexion with the verisimilitude, scope, instrument, character,
3o testimony, and circumstances, with which they presented themselves to us ; and, according to the final result of those various considerations, it was our duty to be sure, or to believe, or to opine, or to surmise, or to tolerate, or to reject, or to denounce. The main difference between my Essay on Miracles in 1826 and my Essay in 1842 is this: that in: 1826 I considered that miracles were sharply divided into two classes, those which were to be received, and those which were to be rejected ; whereas in 1842 I saw that they were to be regarded according to their greater or less 18 took] had taker
124 HISTORY OF MY RELIGIOUS OPINIONS
probability, which was in some cases sufficient to create certitude about them, in other cases only belief or opinion.
Moreover, the argument from Analogy, on which this view of the question was founded, suggested to me something besides, in recommendation of the Ecclesiastical Miracles. It fastened itself upon the theory of Church History which I had learned as a boy from Joseph Milner. It is Milner's doctrine, that upon the visible Church come down from above, from time to time, large and temporary io Effusions of divine grace. This is the leading idea of his work. He begins by speaking of the Day of Pentecost, as marking " the first of those Efficsions of the Spirit of God, which from age to age have visited the earth since the coming of Christ." Vol, i. p. 3. ‑ In a note he adds that " in the term ` Effusion ' there is not here included the idea of the miraculous or extraordinary operations of the Spirit of God; " but still it was natural for me, admitting Milner 's general theory, and applying to it the principle of analogy, not to stop short at his abrupt ipse dixit, but 20 boldly to pass forward to the conclusion, on other grounds plausible that, as miracles accompanied the first effusion of grace, so they might accompany the later. It is surely a natural and on the whole, a true anticipation (though of course there are exceptions in particular cases), that gifts and graces go together ; now, according to the ancient Catholic doctrine, the gift of miracles was viewed as the attendant and shadow of transcendent sanctity : and moreover, as such sanctity was not of every day's occurrence, nay further, as one period of Church history differed so widely from another, and, as Joseph Milner would say, there have been generations or centuries of degeneracy or disorder, and times of revival, and as one region might be in the mid‑day of religious fervour, and another in twilight or gloom, there was no force in the popular argument, that, because we did not see miracles with our own eyes, miracles had not happened in former times, or were not now at this very time taking place in distant places :‑but I must not
10 from time to time] at certain intervals 16 not] not
29, 30, 33 as] since
(TO THE YEAR 1833.)
dwell longer on a subject, to which in a few words it is impossible to do justice (1).
Hurrell Froude was a pupil of Keble's, formed by him, and in turn. reacting upon him. I knew him first in 1826, and was in the closest and most affectionate friendship
with him from about 1829 till his death in 1836: He was a man of the highest gifts,‑so truly many‑sided, that it would be, presumptuous m me to attempt to describe him,
except under those aspects[,] in which he came before me, io Nor have I here to speak of the gentleness and tenderness of nature, the playfulness, the free elastic force and graceful versatility of mind, and the patient winning considerateness in discussion, which endeared him to those to whom he opened his heart ; for I am all along engaged upon matters of belief and opinion, and am introducing others
into my narrative, not for their own sake, or because I love and have loved them, so much as because, and so far as,
they have influenced my theological views. In this respect then, I speak of Hurrell Froude,‑in his intellectual aspect,
$o ‑as a man of high genius, brimful and overflowing with ideas and views, in him original, which were too many and
strong even for his bodily strength, and which crowded and jostled against each other in their effort after distinct shape and expression And he had an intellect as critical
and logical as it was speculative and bold. Dying prematurely, as he did, and in the conflict and transitionstate of =ion, religious views never reached their ultimate conclusion, by the very reason of their multitude and their depth, His opinions arrested and influenced me,
ao even when they did not gain my assent. He professed openly his admiration of the Church of Rome, and his hatred of the Reformers. He delighted in the notion of an hierarchical system, of sacerdotal power and of full
ecclesiastical liberty. He felt scorn of the maxim, " The Bible and the Bible only is the religion of Protestants ; " and he gloried in accepting Tradition as a main instrument of religious teaching. He had a high severe idea of the intrinsic excellence of Virginity; and he considered the
Footnote an 1865. (1 Vide note B, Ecclesiastical