Eminent Victorians

In the meantime, a series of events was taking place in another part of England, which was to have a no less profound effect upon Manning’s history than the merciful removal of his wife.  In the same year in which he took up his Sussex curacy, the Tracts for the Times had begun to appear at Oxford.  The ‘Oxford Movement’, in fact, had started on its course.  The phrase is still familiar; but its meaning has become somewhat obscured both by the lapse of time and the intrinsic ambiguity of the subjects connected with it.  Let us borrow for a moment the wings of Historic Imagination, and, hovering lightly over the Oxford of the thirties, take a rapid bird’s-eye view.

For many generations the Church of England had slept the sleep of the…comfortable.  The sullen murmurings of dissent, the loud battle-cry of Revolution, had hardly disturbed her slumbers.  Portly divines subscribed with a sigh or a smile to the Thirty-nine Articles, sank quietly into easy living, rode gaily to hounds of a morning as gentlemen should, and, as gentlemen should, carried their two bottles of an evening.  To be in the Church was in fact simply to pursue one of those professions which Nature and Society had decided were proper to gentlemen and gentlemen alone.  The fervours of piety, the zeal of Apostolic charity, the enthusiasm of self-renunciation—­ these things were all very well in their way and in their place; but their place was certainly not the Church of England.  Gentlemen were neither fervid nor zealous, and above all they were not enthusiastic.  There were, it was true, occasionally to be found within the Church some strait-laced parsons of the high Tory school who looked back with regret to the days of Laud or talked of the Apostolical Succession; and there were groups of square-toed Evangelicals who were earnest over the Atonement, confessed to a personal love of Jesus Christ, and seemed to have arranged the whole of their lives, down to the minutest details of act and speech, with reference to Eternity.  But such extremes were the rare exceptions.  The great bulk of the clergy walked calmly along the smooth road of ordinary duty.  They kept an eye on the poor of the parish, and they conducted the Sunday Services in a becoming manner; for the rest, they differed neither outwardly nor inwardly from the great bulk of the laity, to whom the Church was a useful organisation for the maintenance of Religion, as by law established.

The awakening came at last, however, and it was a rude one.  The liberal principles of the French Revolution, checked at first in the terrors of reaction, began to make their way into England.  Rationalists lifted up their heads; Bentham and the Mills propounded Utilitarianism; the Reform Bill was passed; and there were rumours abroad of disestablishment.  Even Churchmen seemed to have caught the infection.  Dr. Whately was so bold as to assert that, in the interpretation of Scripture, different opinions might be permitted upon matters of doubt; and, Dr. Arnold drew up a disquieting scheme for allowing Dissenters into the Church, though it is true that he did not go quite so far as to contemplate the admission of Unitarians.

At this time, there was living in a country parish, a young clergyman of the name of John Keble.  He had gone to Oxford at the age of fifteen, where, after a successful academic career, he had been made a Fellow of Oriel.  He had then returned to his father’s parish and taken up the duties of a curate.  He had a thorough knowledge of the contents of the Prayer-book, the ways of a Common Room, the conjugations of the Greek Irregular Verbs, and the small jests of a country parsonage; and the defects of his experience in other directions were replaced by a zeal and a piety which were soon to prove themselves equal, and more than equal, to whatever calls might be made upon them.  The superabundance of his piety overflowed into verse; and the holy simplicity of the Christian Year carried his name into the remotest lodging-houses of England.

As for his zeal, however, it needed another outlet.  Looking forth upon the doings of his fellow-men through his rectory windows in Gloucestershire, Keble felt his whole soul shaken with loathing, anger, and dread.  Infidelity was stalking through the land; authority was laughed at; the hideous doctrines of Democracy were being openly preached.  Worse still, if possible, the Church herself was ignorant and lukewarm; she had forgotten the mysteries of the sacraments, she had lost faith in the Apostolical Succession; she was no longer interested in the Early Fathers; and she submitted herself to the control of a secular legislature, the members of which were not even bound to profess belief in the Atonement.  In the face of such enormities what could Keble do?  He was ready to do anything, but he was a simple and an unambitious man, and his wrath would in all probability have consumed itself unappeased within him had he not chanced to come into contact, at the critical moment, with a spirit more excitable and daring than his own.

Hurrell Froude, one of Keble’s pupils, was a clever young man to whom had fallen a rather larger share of self-assurance and intolerance than even clever young men usually possess.  What was singular about him, however, was not so much his temper as his tastes.  The sort of ardour which impels more normal youths to haunt Music Halls and fall in love with actresses took the form, in Froude’s case, of a romantic devotion to the Deity and an intense interest in the state of his own soul.  He was obsessed by the ideals of saintliness, and convinced of the supreme importance of not eating too much.  He kept a diary in which he recorded his delinquencies, and they were many.  ’I cannot say much for myself today,’ he writes on September 29th, 1826 (he was twenty-three years old).  ’I did not read the Psalms and Second Lesson after breakfast, which I had neglected to do before, though I had plenty of time on my hands.  Would have liked to be thought adventurous for a scramble I had at the Devil’s Bridge.  Looked with greediness to see if there was a goose on the table for dinner; and though what I ate was of the plainest sort, and I took no variety, yet even this was partly the effect of accident, and I certainly rather exceeded in quantity, as I was fuzzy and sleepy after dinner.’  ’I allowed myself to be disgusted, with —­ ‘s pomposity,’ he writes a little later, ’also smiled at an allusion in the Lessons to abstemiousness in eating.  I hope not from pride or vanity, but mistrust; it certainly was unintentional.’  And again, ’As to my meals, I can say that I was always careful to see that no one else would take a thing before I served myself; and I believe as to the kind of my food, a bit of cold endings of a dab at breakfast, and a scrap of mackerel at dinner, are the only things that diverged from the strict rule of simplicity.’  ‘I am obliged to confess,’ he notes, ’that in my intercourse with the Supreme Being, I am be come more and more sluggish.’  And then he exclaims:  ’Thine eye trieth my inward parts, and knoweth my thoughts ...  Oh that my ways were made so direct that I might keep Thy statutes.  I will walk in Thy Commandments when Thou hast set my heart at liberty.’

Such were the preoccupations of this young man.  Perhaps they would have been different, if he had had a little less of what Newman describes as his ’high severe idea of the intrinsic excellence of Virginity’; but it is useless to speculate.

Naturally enough the fierce and burning zeal of Keble had a profound effect upon his mind.  The two became intimate friends, and Froude, eagerly seizing upon the doctrines of the elder man, saw to it that they had as full a measure of controversial notoriety as an Oxford common room could afford.  He plunged the metaphysical mysteries of the Holy Catholic Church into the atmosphere of party politics.  Surprised Doctors of Divinity found themselves suddenly faced with strange questions which had never entered their heads before.  Was the Church of England, or was it not, a part of the Church Catholic?  If it was, were not the Reformers of the sixteenth century renegades?  Was not the participation of the Body and Blood of Christ essential to the maintenance of Christian life and hope in each individual?  Were Timothy and Titus Bishops?  Or were they not?  If they were, did it not follow that the power of administering the Holy Eucharist was the attribute of a sacred order founded by Christ Himself?  Did not the Fathers refer to the tradition of the Church as to something independent of the written word, and sufficient to refute heresy, even alone?  Was it not, therefore, God’s unwritten word?  And did it not demand the same reverence from us as the Scriptures, and for exactly the same reason—­because it was his word?  The Doctors of Divinity were aghast at such questions, which seemed to lead they hardly knew whither; and they found it difficult to think of very apposite answers.  But Hurrell Froude supplied the answers himself readily enough.  All Oxford, all England, should know the truth.  The time was out of joint, and he was only too delighted to have been born to set it right.

But, after all, something more was needed than even the excitement of Froude combined with the conviction of Keble to ruffle seriously the vast calm waters of Christian thought; and it so happened that that thing was not wanting:  it was the genius of John Henry Newman.  If Newman had never lived, or if his father, when the gig came round on the fatal morning, still undecided between the two Universities, had chanced to turn the horse’s head in the direction of Cambridge, who can doubt that the Oxford Movement would have flickered out its little flame unobserved in the Common Room of Oriel?  And how different, too, would have been the fate of Newman himself!  He was a child of the Romantic Revival, a creature of emotion and of memory, a dreamer whose secret spirit dwelt apart in delectable mountains, an artist whose subtle senses caught, like a shower in the sunshine, the impalpable rainbow of the immaterial world.  In other times, under other skies, his days would have been more fortunate.  He might have helped to weave the garland of Meleager, or to mix the lapis lazuli of Fra Angelico, or to chase the delicate truth in the shade of an Athenian palaestra, or his hands might have fashioned those ethereal faces that smile in the niches of Chartres.  Even in his own age he might, at Cambridge, whose cloisters have ever been consecrated to poetry and common sense, have followed quietly in Gray’s footsteps and brought into flower those seeds of inspiration which now lie embedded amid the faded devotion of the Lyra Apostolica.

At Oxford, he was doomed.  He could not withstand the last enchantment of the Middle Age.  It was in vain that he plunged into the pages of Gibbon or communed for long hours with Beethoven over his beloved violin.  The air was thick with clerical sanctity, heavy with the odours of tradition and the soft warmth of spiritual authority; his friendship with Hurrell Froude did the rest.  All that was weakest in him hurried him onward, and all that was strongest in him too.  His curious and vaulting imagination began to construct vast philosophical fabrics out of the writings of ancient monks, and to dally with visions of angelic visitations and the efficacy of the oil of St Walburga; his emotional nature became absorbed in the partisan passions of a University clique; and his subtle intellect concerned itself more and more exclusively with the dialectical splitting of dogmatical hairs.  His future course was marked out for him all too clearly; and yet by a singular chance the true nature of the man was to emerge triumphant in the end.  If Newman had died at the age of sixty, today he would have been already forgotten, save by a few ecclesiastical historians; but he lived to write his Apologia, and to reach immortality, neither as a thinker nor as a theologian, but as an artist who has embalmed the poignant history of an intensely human spirit in the magical spices of words.

When Froude succeeded in impregnating Newman with the ideas of Keble, the Oxford Movement began.  The original and remarkable characteristic of these three men was that they took the Christian Religion au pied de la lettre.  This had not been done in England for centuries.  When they declared every Sunday that they believed in the Holy Catholic Church, they meant it.  When they repeated the Athanasian Creed, they meant it.  Even, when they subscribed to the Thirty-nine Articles, they meant it-or at least they thought they did.  Now such a state of mind was dangerous—­more dangerous indeed—­ than they at first realised.  They had started with the innocent assumption that the Christian Religion was contained in the doctrines of the Church of England; but, the more they examined this matter, the more difficult and dubious it became.  The Church of England bore everywhere upon it the signs of human imperfection; it was the outcome of revolution and of compromise, of the exigencies of politicians and the caprices of princes, of the prejudices of theologians and the necessities of the State.  How had it happened that this piece of patchwork had become the receptacle for the august and infinite mysteries of the Christian Faith?  This was the problem with which Newman and his friends found themselves confronted.  Other men might, and apparently did, see nothing very strange in such a situation; but other men saw in Christianity itself scarcely more than a convenient and respectable appendage to existence, by which a sound system of morals was inculcated, and through which one might hope to attain to everlasting bliss.

To Newman and Keble it was otherwise.  They saw a transcendent manifestation of Divine power flowing down elaborate and immense through the ages; a consecrated priesthood, stretching back, through the mystic symbol of the laying on of hands, to the very Godhead; a whole universe of spiritual beings brought into communion with the Eternal by means of wafers; a great mass of metaphysical doctrines, at once incomprehensible and of incalculable import, laid down with infinite certitude; they saw the supernatural everywhere and at all times, a living force, floating invisible in angels, inspiring saints, and investing with miraculous properties the commonest material things.  No wonder that they found such a spectacle hard to bring into line with the institution which had been evolved from the divorce of Henry VIII, the intrigues of Elizabethan parliaments, and the Revolution of 1688.  They did, no doubt, soon satisfy themselves that they had succeeded in this apparently hopeless task; but, the conclusions which they came to in order to do so were decidedly startling.

The Church of England, they declared, was indeed the one true Church, but she had been under an eclipse since the Reformation; in fact, since she had begun to exist.  She had, it is true, escaped the corruptions of Rome; but she had become enslaved by the secular power, and degraded by the false doctrines of Protestantism.  The Christian Religion was still preserved intact by the English priesthood, but it was preserved, as it were, unconsciously—­a priceless deposit, handed down blindly from generation to generation, and subsisting less by the will of man than through the ordinance of God as expressed in the mysterious virtue of the Sacraments.  Christianity, in short, had become entangled in a series of unfortunate circumstances from which it was the plain duty of Newman and his friends to rescue it forthwith.  What was curious was that this task had been reserved, in so marked a manner, for them.  Some of the divines of the seventeenth century had, perhaps, been vouchsafed glimpses of the truth; but they were glimpses and nothing more.  No, the waters of the true Faith had dived underground at the Reformation, and they were waiting for the wand of Newman to strike the rock before they should burst forth once more into the light of day.  The whole matter, no doubt, was Providential—­what other explanation could there be?

The first step, it was clear, was to purge the Church of her shames and her errors.  The Reformers must be exposed; the yoke of the secular power must be thrown off; dogma must be reinstated in its old pre-eminence; and Christians must be reminded of what they had apparently forgotten—­the presence of the supernatural in daily life.  ‘It would be a gain to this country,’ Keble observed, ’were it vastly more superstitious, more bigoted, more gloomy, more fierce in its religion, than at present it shows itself to be.’  ‘The only good I know of Cranmer,’ said Hurrell Froude, ‘was that he burned well.’  Newman preached, and soon the new views began to spread.  Among the earliest of the converts was Dr Pusey, a man of wealth and learning, a professor, a canon of Christ Church, who had, it was rumoured, been to Germany.  Then the Tracts for the Times were started under Newman’s editorship, and the Movement was launched upon the world.

The Tracts were written ’with the hope of rousing members of our Church to comprehend her alarming position … as a man might give notice of a fire or inundation, to startle all who heard him’.  They may be said to have succeeded in their objective, for the sensation which they caused among clergymen throughout the country was extreme.  They dealt with a great variety of questions, but the underlying intention of all of them was to attack the accepted doctrines and practices of the Church of England.  Dr. Pusey wrote learnedly on Baptismal Regeneration; he also wrote on Fasting.  His treatment of the latter subject met with considerable disapproval, which surprised the Doctor.  ’I was not prepared,’ he said, ’for people questioning, even in the abstract, the duty of fasting; I thought serious-minded persons at least supposed they practised fasting in some way or other.  I assumed the duty to be acknowledged and thought it only undervalued.’  We live and learn, even though we have been to Germany.

Other tracts discussed the Holy Catholic Church, the Clergy, and the Liturgy.  One treated of the question ’whether a clergyman of the Church of England be now bound to have morning and evening prayers daily in his parish church?’ Another pointed out the ’Indications of a superintending Providence in the preservation of the Prayer-book and in the changes which it has undergone’.  Another consisted of a collection of ’Advent Sermons on Antichrist’.  Keble wrote a long and elaborate tract ’On the Mysticism attributed to the Early Fathers of the Church’, in which he expressed his opinions upon a large number of curious matters.  ‘According to men’s usual way of talking,’ he wrote, ’it would be called an accidental circumstance that there were five loaves, not more nor less, in the store of Our Lord and His disciples wherewith to provide the miraculous feast.  But the ancient interpreters treat it as designed and providential, in this surely not erring:  and their conjecture is that it represents the sacrifice of the whole world of sense, and especially of the OldDispensation, which, being outward and visible, might be called the dispensation of the senses, to the father of our lord Jesus Christ, to be a pledge and means of communion with Him according to the terms of the new or evangelical law.

They arrived at this idea by considering the number five, the number of the senses, as the mystical opponent of the visible and sensible universe—­ ta aistheta, as distinguished from ta noita.  Origen lays down the rule in express terms. ‘”The number five,”’ he says, ’”frequently, nay almost always, is taken for the five senses.”’ In another passage, Keble deals with an even more recondite question.  He quotes the teaching of St. Barnabas that ’Abraham, who first gave men circumcision, did thereby perform a spiritual and typical action, looking forward to the Son’.  St. Barnabas’s argument is as follows:  Abraham circumcised of his house men to the number Of 318.  Why 318?  Observe first the 18, then the300.  Of the two letters which stand for 18, 10 is represented by 1, 8 by H.  ‘Thou hast here,’ says St. Barnabas, ‘the word of Jesus.’  As for the 300, ’the Cross is represented by Tau, and the letter Tau represents that number’.

Unfortunately, however, St. Barnabas’s premise was of doubtful validity, as theRev. Mr. Maitland pointed out, in a pamphlet impugning the conclusions of the Tract.  ‘The simple fact is,’ he wrote, ’that when Abraham pursued Chedorlaomer “he armed his trained servants, born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen”.  When, more than thirteen (according to the common chronology, fifteen) years after, he circumcised “all the men of his house, born in the house, and bought with money of the stranger”, and, in fact, every male who was as much as eight days old, we are not told what the number amounted to.  Shall we suppose (just for the sake of the interpretation) that Abraham’s family had so dwindled in the interval as that now all the males of his household, trained men, slaves, and children, equalled only and exactly the number of his warriors fifteen years before?’ The question seems difficult to answer, but Keble had, as a matter of fact, forestalled the argument in the following passage, which had apparently escaped the notice of the Rev. Mr. Maitland:  ’Now whether the facts were really so or not (if it were, it was surely by special providence), that Abraham’s household at the time of the circumcision was exactly the same number as before; still the argument of St. Barnabas will stand.  As thus:  circumcision had from the beginning, a reference to our saviour, as in other respects, so in this; that the mystical number, which is the cipher of Jesus crucified, was the number of the first circumcised household in the strength of which Abraham prevailed against the powers of the world.  So St. Clement of Alexandria, as cited by Fell.’  And Keble supports his contention through ten pages of close print, with references to Aristeas, St. Augustine, St. Jerome, and Dr. Whitby.

Writings of this kind could not fail in their effect.  Pious youths in Oxford were carried away by them, and began to flock around the standard of Newman.  Newman himself became a party chief—­ encouraging, organising, persuading.  His long black figure, swiftly passing through the streets, was pointed at with awe; crowds flocked to his sermons; his words were repeated from mouth to mouth; ‘Credo in Newmannum’ became a common catchword.  Jokes were made about the Church of England, and practices, unknown for centuries, began to be revived.  Young men fasted and did penance, recited the hours of the Roman Breviary, and confessed their sins to Dr. Pusey.  Nor was the movement confined to Oxford; it spread in widening circles through the parishes of England; the dormant devotion of the country was suddenly aroused.  The new strange notion of taking Christianity literally was delightful to earnest minds; but it was also alarming.  Really to mean every word you said, when you repeated the Athanasian Creed!  How wonderful!  And what enticing and mysterious vistas burst upon the view!  But then, those vistas, where were they leading?  Supposing—­oh heavens!—­supposing after all they were to lead to—!