But, if too much is surrendered on one side, too much is taken back on

the other. The contention that the progress of knowledge has left the

traditional beliefs and cultus of Catholics untouched is untenable. It

is not too much to say that the whole edifice of supernaturalistic

dualism under which Catholic piety has sheltered itself for fifteen

hundred years has fallen in ruins to the ground. There is still enough

superstition left to win a certain vogue for miraculous cures at

Lourdes, and split hailstones at Remiremont. But that kind of religion

is doomed, and will not survive three generations of sound secular

education given equally to both sexes. The craving for signs and

wonders--that broad road which attracts so many converts and wins so

rapid a success--leads religion at last to its destruction, as Christ

seems to have warned His own disciples. Science has been the slowly

advancing Nemesis which has overtaken a barbarised and paganised

Christianity. She has come with a winnowing fan in her hand, and she

will not stop till she has thoroughly purged her floor. She has left us

the divine Christ, whatever may be the truth about certain mysterious

events in His human life. But assuredly she has not left us the right to

offer wheedling prayers to a mythical Queen of Heaven; she has not left

us the right to believe in such puerile stories as the Madonna-stamp on

hailstones, in order to induce a comfortably pious state of mind.

The dualism alleged to exist between faith and knowledge will not serve.

Man is one, and reality is one; there can no more be two 'orders of

reality' not affecting each other than there can be two faculties in the

human mind working independently of each other. The universe which is

interpreted to us by our understanding is not unreal, nor are its laws

pliant to our wills, as the pragmatists do vainly talk. It is a divinely

ordered system, which includes man, the roof and crown of things, and

Christ, in whom is revealed to us its inner character and meaning. It is

not the province of faith either to flout scientific knowledge, or to

contaminate the material on which science works by intercalating what M.

Le Roy calls 'transhistorical symbols'--myths in fact--which do not

become true by being recognised as false, as the new apologetic seems to

suggest. Faith is not the born storyteller of Modernist theology. Faith

is, on the practical side, just the resolution to stand or fall by the

noblest hypothesis; and, on the intellectual side, it is a progressive

initiation, by experiment which ends in experience, into the unity of

the good, the true, and the beautiful, founded on the inner assurance

that these three attributes of the divine nature have one source and

conduct to one goal.

The Modernists are right in finding the primary principle of faith in

the depths of our undivided personality. They are right in teaching that

faith develops and comes into its own only through the activity of the

whole man. They are right in denying the name of faith to correct

opinion, which may leave the character untouched. As Hartley Coleridge

says:

'Think not the faith by which the just shall live

Is a dead creed, a map correct of heaven,

Far less a feeling fond and fugitive,

A thoughtless gift, withdrawn as soon as given.

It is an affirmation and an act

That bids eternal truth be present fact.'

For all this we are grateful to them. But we maintain that the future of

Christianity is in the hands of those who insist that faith and

knowledge must be confronted with each other till they have made up

their quarrel. The crisis of faith cannot be dealt with by establishing

a _modus vivendi_ between scepticism and superstition. That is all that

Modernism offers us; and it will not do. Rather we will believe, with

Clement of Alexandria, that pistê hê gnhôsist, gnôsthê de hê phistist.

If this confidence in the reality of things hoped for and the

hopefulness of things real be well-founded, we must wait in patience for

the coming of the wise master-builders who will construct a more truly

Catholic Church out of the fragments of the old, with the help of the

material now being collected by philosophers, psychologists, historians,

and scientists of all creeds and countries. When the time comes for this

building to rise, the contributions of the Modernists will not be

described as wood, hay, or stubble. They have done valuable service to

biblical criticism, and in other branches, which will be always

recognised. But the building will not (we venture to prophesy) be

erected on their plan, nor by their Church. History shows few examples

of the rejuvenescence of decayed autocracies. Nor is our generation

likely to see much of the reconstruction. The churches, as institutions,

will continue for some time to show apparent weakness; and other

moralising and civilising agencies will do much of their work. But,

since there never has been a time when the character of Christ and the

ethics which he taught have been held in higher honour than the present,

there is every reason to expect that the next 'Age of Faith,' when it

comes, will be of a more genuinely Christian type than the last.

FOOTNOTES:

[50] Bishop Creighton always emphasised this view of Roman

Catholicism. 'The Roman Church,' he wrote, 'is the most

complete expression of Erastianism, for it is not a Church

at all, but a state in its organisation; and the worst form

of state--an autocracy.' (_Life and Letters_, ii. 375.)

[51] In contrast with 'henotheism' or 'monolatry,' such as

the worship of the early Hebrews.

[52] 'Nunc defecit certa successio in omnibus ecclesiis

apostolicis, praeterquam in Romana, et ideo ex testimonio

huius solius ecclesiae sumi potest certum argumentum ad

probandas apostolicas traditiones.' Bellarmine, _De Verbo

Dei scripto et non scripto_, IV, ix, 10.

[53] Bellarmine, _De Laicis_, III, xxi, 22.

[54]: Santayana, _Return in Religion_, p. 108.

[55] Tertullian, _De Virg. Vel_., 1.

[56] Encyclical of October 27, 1901.

[57] In _The Programme of Modernism_, and _Quello che

vogliamo_.

[58] _The Programme of Modernism_, p. 16.

[59] _The Programme of Modernism_, pp. 50-54.

[60] Loisy, _Simples Réflexions_, p. 168.

[61] _Ibid. L'Évangile et l'Église_, pp. 3-5.

[62] _Ibid. Les Évangiles Synoptiques_, p. 119.

[63] _Ibid_.

[64] _Ibid_. p. 143.

[65] _Ibid_. pp. 138, 139.

[66] _Ibid_. p. 104.

[67] Loisy, _Les Évangiles Synoptiques_, p. 166.

[68] _Ibid_. p. 169.

[69] _Ibid. Le Quatrième Évangile_, passim.

[70] Loisy, _Les Évangiles Synoptiques_, p. 214.

[71] _Ibid_. p. 218.

[72] Loisy, _Les Évangiles Synoptiques_, p. 223.

[73] _The Programme of Modernism_, pp. 82, 83.

[74] _Ibid_. p. 90.

[75] Loisy, _Simples Réflexions_, p. 211.

[76] Laberthonnière, _Le Réalisme Chrétien et l'Idéalisme

Grec,_ pp. 44, 45.

[77] _Malachi_, ii. 6.

[78] Le Roy, _Dogme et Critique_, p. 26.

[79] _Lex Orandi_, p. 165 (abridged).

[80] This is not carelessness on the part of the writer.

Paulsen also says (_Introduction to Philosophy_, p. 112), 4

It is impossible to separate feeling and willing from each

other.... Only in the highest stage of psychical life, in

man, does a partial separation of feeling from willing

occur.' But it is the highest stage of psychical life, the

human, with which we are alone concerned; and in this stage

it is both possible and necessary to distinguish between

feeling and willing. Some Voluntarists, hard pressed by

facts, try to make 'will' cover the whole of conscious and

subconscious life, with the exception of logical reasoning,

which is excluded as a sort of pariah!

[81] Mgr. Moyes, in _The Nineteenth Century_, December,

1907.

CARDINAL NEWMAN

(1912)

The life of Newman was divided into two nearly equal portions by his

change of religion in October 1845. For the earlier half of his career

we have long had his own narrative; and Newman is a prince of

autobiographers. It was his wish that the 'Apologia' should be the final

and authoritative account of his life in the Church of England, and of

the steps by which he was led to transfer his allegiance to another

communion. The voluminous literature of the Tractarian movement, which

includes large collections of Newman's own letters, has confirmed the

accuracy of his narrative, and has made any further description of that

strange episode in English University life superfluous. With the

'Apologia' and Dean Church's 'Oxford Movement' before him, the reader

needs no more. Mr. Wilfrid Ward has therefore been well advised to

adhere loyally to the Cardinal's wishes, by confining himself to the

last half of Newman's life, after a brief summary of his childhood,

youth, and middle age till 1845. Nevertheless, it is misleading to give

the title 'The Life of Cardinal Newman' to a work which is only, as it

were, the second volume of a biography. There are very few men, however

long-lived, who have not done much of their best work before the age of

forty-five, and Newman was certainly not one of the exceptions. From

every point of view, except that of the Roman Catholic ecclesiastical

historian, Newman's Anglican career was far more interesting and

important than his residence at Birmingham. He will live in history, not

as the recluse of Edgbaston, nor as the wearer of the Cardinal's hat

which fell to his lot, almost too late to save the credit of the

Vatican, when he had passed the normal limit of human life, but as the

real founder and leader of nineteenth century Anglo-Catholicism, the

movement which he created and then tried in vain to destroy. The

projects and failures and successes of his later life seem very pale and

almost petty when compared with the activities of the years while he was

making a chapter of English history. His greatest book, though it was

written many years after his secession, is the record of a drama which

ended in the interview with Father Dominic the Passionist. It is 'The

History of my Religious Opinions'; and after 1845 his religious opinions

had, as he says himself, no further history. The incomparable style

which will give him a permanent place among the masters of English prose

was the product of his life at Oxford, where he lived in a society of

highly cultivated men, whose writings show many of the same excellences

as his own. Newman's English is only the Oriel manner at its best. Such

an instrument could hardly have been forged at the Birmingham Oratory,

where his associates, who had followed him from Littlemore, were of such

an inferior type that Mark Pattison, who knew them, was surprised that

he could be satisfied with their company. His best sermons and his best

poetry belong to his Anglican period. 'The Dream of Gerontius,' with all

its tender grace, is far less virile than 'Lead, kindly Light,' and

other short poems of his youth. Moreover, his record as a Roman

ecclesiastic is one of almost unrelieved failure. If he had died

eighteen years after his secession, when he already looked upon himself

as an old man whose course was nearly run, he would have been regarded

as one who had sacrificed a great career in the Church of England for

neglect and obscurity. From the first he was distrusted by the 'Old

Catholics' (the old Roman Catholic families in England), and suspected

at the Vatican, where Talbot assiduously represented him as 'the most

dangerous man in England.' When Manning, Archdeacon of Chichester,

followed his example and joined the Roman Church, Newman was confronted

with a still more subtle and relentless opponent, whose hostility was

never relaxed till the accession of a Liberal Pope made it no longer

possible to resist the bestowal of tardy honours upon a feeble

octogenarian. The recognition came in time to soothe his decline, but

too late to enable him to leave his mark upon the administration of the

Roman Church.

The main events in a very uneventful career are narrated at length in

Mr. Ward's volumes. After his 'conversion' Newman first resided in a

small community at Maryvale (Oscott) but soon left it on a journey to

Rome, where he spent some time at the Collegio di Propaganda, and had a

foretaste of the distrust with which Pius IX and his advisers always

regarded him. His plan at this time was to found a theological seminary

at Maryvale; and in this scheme he had the support of Wiseman, the

ablest Roman ecclesiastic in the United Kingdom. But the 'Essay on

Development,' with its unscholastic language and unfamiliar line of

apologetic, seriously alarmed the theologians at Rome; and Newman,

accepting the first of many rebuffs, abandoned this project in favour of

another. He resolved to join the Oratorians, an order founded by St.

Philip Neri, and obtained permission to modify, in his projected

establishment, the rules of the Order, which, among other things,

prescribed frequent floggings in public. He visited Naples, and came

back a believer in the liquefaction of the saint's blood. The amazing

letter to Henry Wilberforce, writter from Santa Croce, shows that he was

the most docile and credulous of converts. Even the Holy House at Loreto

caused him no difficulty. 'He who floated the ark on the surges of a

world-wide sea, and inclosed in it all living things, who has hidden the

terrestrial paradise, who said that faith might remove mountains ...

could do this wonder also.' It 'may have been'; 'everybody believes it

in Rome'; therefore Newman 'has no doubt'!

The new Oratory was placed by Papal brief at Birmingham. The first

members of it were his friends who had left the English Church with him.

Recruits soon came in, and branch houses were talked of. But for many

years Newman had reason to complain of neglect and want of sympathy. He

even found empty churches when he preached in London. In conjunction

with Faber, he next started a series of 'Lives of the Saints,' in which

the most absurd 'miracles' were accepted without question as true. The

'Old Catholics,' who had no stomach for such food, protested; and

Newman, this time thoroughly irritated, had to admit another failure.

The Oratory, however, and its London offshoot under Faber were

prosperous, and the churches where Newman preached were not long empty.

In 1850 we find him in better spirits. He employed his energies in a

series of clever lectures on 'Anglican Difficulties,' in which he

ridiculed the Church of his earlier vows with all the refined cruelty of

which he was a master. But he was soon in trouble again. One Dr.

Giacinto Achilli, formerly a Dominican friar, gave lectures in London

upon the scandals of the Roman Inquisition, which had imprisoned him for

attacking the Catholic faith and fomenting sedition. The temper of the

British public at this time made it ready to believe anything to the

discredit of the Roman Church, and Achilli became a popular hero.

Wiseman published a libellous article upon him in the _Dublin Review_,

which passed unnoticed. But when Newman repeated the charges of

profligacy in a public lecture, Achilli brought an action for libel,

which in costs and expenses cost Newman £12,000. The money however was

paid, and much more than paid, by his co-religionists. This trial was

quickly followed by the inauguration of a scheme for founding a Catholic

University in Ireland, the avowed object of which was to withdraw young

Catholics from the liberalising influences of mixed education. This

scheme was sure to appeal strongly to Newman. Liberalism had come in

with a rush at Oxford, after the dissipation of the 'long nightmare' (as

Mark Pattison calls it) while the University was dominated by religious

medievalism. The Oxford of Newman had become the Oxford of Jowett. The

ablest of Newman's young friends and disciples, such as Mark Pattison

and J.A. Froude, were now in the opposite camp, full of anger and

disgust at the seductive influences from which they had just escaped.

Newman, as might be expected, was anxious to protect Catholic students

from similar dangers, and accepted the post of Rector of the proposed

Catholic University. He intended it to provide 'philosophical defences

of Catholicity and Revelation, and create a Catholic literature.' The

lectures in which he expounded his ideals at Dublin were a great

success, and he returned to England full of hope. With a curious

inability to read the character of one who was to be his worst enemy, he

offered Manning the post of Vice-Rector. Manning's refusal was followed

by his failure to obtain the support of Ward, Henry Wilberforce, and

others; and Catholic opinion in Ireland was much divided. For three or

four years Newman was engaged in ineffectual efforts to push his scheme

forward. At last, in 1855, he was installed as Rector, and began his

work at Dublin. A fine church was built at St. Stephen's Green with the

surplus of the Achilli subscriptions, and Newman produced some excellent

literary work in the form of University lectures and sermons. But the

whole movement was viewed with distrust by the Irish ecclesiastics, who,

as he said in a moment of impatience, 'regard any intellectual man as

being on the road to perdition.' There was a cloud over his work from

first to last. He had been promised a bishopric, without which he was

made to feel himself in an inferior position by the Irish prelates; but

the promise was not fulfilled. The Irish objected to one or two English

professors on his staff, because they were English. Dr. Cullen, the

ruling spirit in the Irish hierarchy, was a narrow conservative, who

wished to use Newman merely as an instrument against progressive

tendencies in Church and State. In 1857 he resigned an impossible task,

and returned to Birmingham.

New undertakings followed, no more successful than the abortive

university scheme. There was to be a new translation of the Bible, and a

new Catholic magazine called the _Rambler_. The former enterprise was

already well advanced when the general indifference of the Catholic

public caused it to be abandoned. The _Rambler_, the contributors to

which used a freedom of discussion unpalatable to Roman ecclesiastics,

struggled on amid a storm of criticism till 1859, when Newman, who was

then himself editor, resigned, and one more humiliating failure was

registered. The management of the magazine passed into other hands. The

Oratory School at Birmingham, a much less contentious undertaking, was

successfully launched in the same year.

In 1860 came the emancipation of the States of the Church by Cavour and

Victor Emmanuel. Newman referred to the Piedmontese as 'sacrilegious

robbers,' but his advocacy of the temporal power was not strong enough

to please the Vatican, while the strength of Manning's language left

nothing to be desired. Newman became more unpopular than ever. His

reputation suffered by his former connection with the _Rambler_ and his

supposed connection with the _Home and Foreign Review_, which Acton

intended to represent the views of progressive Catholics, till it also

was snuffed out by the hierarchy. The five years from 1859 to 1864 are

considered by Mr. Ward to have been the saddest in Newman's life. He

felt, truly enough, that the dominant party had no sympathy with his

aims, and that he was treated as 'some wild incomprehensible beast, a

spectacle for Dr. Wiseman to exhibit to strangers, as himself being the

hunter who captured it.' 'All through my life I have been plucked,' he

writes to an old Oxford friend. There was even in his mind at this time

a wistful yearning after the friends and the Church that he had left--a

feeling, doubtless transient, but significant, which his biographer has

allowed to show itself in a few pages of his book. After reminding

himself, in his diary, of the warning against those who, after putting

their hand to the plough, 'look back,' he proceeds to look back, because

he cannot help it.

'I live more and more in the past, and in hopes that the

past may revive in the future.... I think, as death comes

on, his cold breath is felt on soul as on body, and that,

viewed naturally, my soul is half dead now, whereas then [in

his Protestant days] it was in the freshness and fervour of

youth.... I say the same of my state of mind from 1834 to

1845, when I became a Catholic. It is a time past and

gone--it relates to a work done and over. "Quis mihi

tribuat, ut sim iuxta menses pristinos, secundum dies,

quibus Deus custodiebat me? Quando splendebat lucerna eius

super caput meum, et ad lumen eius ambulabam in tenebris?"

... I have no friend at Rome; I have laboured in England, to

be misrepresented, backbitten and scorned. I have laboured

in Ireland, with a door ever shut in my face....

Contemporaneously with this neglect on the part of those for

whom I laboured, there has been a drawing towards me on the

part of Protestants. Those very books and labours which

Catholics did not understand, Protestants did. I am under

the temptation of looking out for, if not courting,

Protestant praise.... What I wrote as a Protestant has had

far greater power, force, meaning, success, than my Catholic

works.'

Such reflections might seem to indicate a disposition to return to the

Anglican fold. But a man must have vanquished pride in its most

insidious form before he can leave the Church of Rome for any other. The

aristocratic _hauteur_ of the _civis Romanus_ among barbarians lives on

in the sentiment of the Roman Catholic towards Protestants. When Newman

was publicly charged with intending to return to Anglicanism, this

spirit broke out in a disagreeable and insulting manner.

The bitterness of these five years of neglect, in which he had been

eating his heart in silence, must be remembered in connexion with the

famous Kingsley controversy, which in 1864 roused him to put on his

armour and fight for his reputation. There had always been an element of

combativeness in Newman's disposition. '_Nescio quo pacto_, my spirits

most happily rise at the prospect of danger,' he wrote early in life.

And when he could persuade himself that not only his honour but that of

the Church was at stake, he could feel and show the true Catholic

ferocity, the cruellest spirit on earth. 'A heresiarch,' he had written

even in his Anglican days, 'should meet with no mercy. He must be dealt

with by the competent authority as if he were embodied evil. To spare

him is a false and dangerous pity. It is to endanger the souls of

thousands, and it is uncharitable towards himself'! This was the temper,

soured by defeat and not mellowed by age, which Charles Kingsley in an

evil moment for himself chose wantonly to provoke. At Christmas 1863

there appeared in _Macmillan's Magazine_ a review of Froude's 'History

of England,' in which Kingsley wrote 'Truth for its own sake has never

been a virtue with the Roman clergy. Father Newman informs us that it

need not be, and on the whole ought not to be--that cunning is the

weapon which Heaven has given to the saints wherewith to withstand the

brute male force of the wicked world.' This charge was in fact based on

a careless reading, or an imperfect recollection, of the twentieth

discourse in 'Sermons on Subjects of the Day.' The discourse in question

is a somewhat nauseous glorification of the servile temper, but it only

says that the meekness of the saints is (by Divine providence) so

successful that it is always mistaken for craft. The _imputation_ of

cunning is therefore a note of sanctity in its victim. Kingsley ought to

have read the sermon again, and withdrawn unreservedly from an untenable

position. But he thought that something less than a complete apology

would serve; and so gave Newman the opportunity of his life. When the

withdrawal which he offered was rejected, Kingsley made matters ten

times worse for himself by an ill-considered pamphlet called 'What then

does Dr. Newman mean?' In this effusion he vents all his scorn and

hatred for Catholicism--for its tortuous tactics, its monstrous

credulity and appetite for miracles, which must proceed, according to

him, either from infantile folly or from deliberate imposture.

Forgetting altogether that he has to defend himself against a specific

charge of slander, he offers his great opponent the choice between

writing himself down a knave or a fool--a knave if he pretends to

believe in the Holy Coat and the blood of St. Januarius, a fool if he

does believe in them.

The coarseness of this attack upon an elderly man of saintly character

and acknowledged intellectual eminence, who had to all appearance

blighted a great career by honestly obeying his conscience, offended the

British public, which was now fully disposed to give a respectful and

favourable hearing to whatever Newman might care to say in reply. In a

Catholic country it would have been useless for a Protestant, however

falsely attacked, to appeal to Catholic public opinion for justice; but

Newman understood the English character, and saw his splendid chance.

Outspoken Essays · 第 15 / 25 段