was getting into position, and becoming known; and so his hesitation vanished, and he began to speak among his companions the things that were in his heart. And so it was that the Tractarian movement began. Not, indeed, that Dr. Newman can be spoken of as the sole author of it. The same causes were at work in. many minds, and many were moving in the same direction without knowledge of each other. In 1827, just as Newman was beginning to find his place, "The Christian Year," by John Keble, made its appearance. Newman revered Keble, and "The Christian Year" made a deep impression on him, among other things deepening his faith in the Sacramental system. Hurrell Froude was a pupil of Keble's, and became an intimate friend of Newman's, and did more than, perhaps, any other to draw him towards Rome. Froude had himself already gone far in the direction of Rome. 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 blessed Virgin its great pattern. He delighted in thinking of the saints; he had a keen appreciation of the idea of sanctity, its possibility and heights; and he was more than inclined to believe a large amount of miraculous interference as occurring

its

He

in the early and middle ages. embraced the principle of penance and mortification. He had a deep devotion to the Real Presence, in which he had a firm faith. He was powerfully drawn to the Mediæval Church, but not to the Primitive. Newman learned much from him, and among other things, to admire the Church of Rome, to dislike the Reformation, to cherish the idea of devotion to the Virgin, and to believe in the Real Presence.

As Dr. Newman drifted away from Liberalism he drew towards the Fathers, and by-and-bye came to accept as a principle, that antiquity is the true exponent of the doctrines of Scripture and the basis of the Church of England. Meanwhile, great changes were taking place around him, both at home and abroad. Liberalism, the thing that he hated and feared, was spreading on every side. There had been a revolution in France, and the Bourbons had been dismissed; a great scandal to one that like him believed in the Divine right of kings.. The Reform agitation at home was setting the country on fire. The Whigs had come into power. Lord Grey had told the Bishops to set their house in order, and some of the prelates had been insulted in the streets of London. Liberalism was creeping into the Church itself, and threatening to corrupt it. Many of the bishops and clergy were either aiding the evil, or were incompetent to deal with it; and it became, there fore, the imperative duty of the true friends of the Church to take means. to work a second reformation, that should undo the mischiefs of the first. Such were Dr. Newman's feelings when, being somewhat exhausted with

with Liberalism in the Church he felt himself called to deal, but his grief and indignation were of a wider character, as he reminds us when he grieves over the wickedness that could invade the Divine right of kings. Things seemed very dark, but it came into his mind that deliverance is not wrought by many, but by few. He began to think he had a mission. He fell ill, and was found by his nurse in tears, and when asked the reason, could only answer, "I have a work to do in England."

Ere Dr. Newman's return, several parties had begun to take counsel together concerning the measures required to rescue the Church from peril, but he saw that there was not, and that there could not be among them sufficient unity to make them a living power. He saw that any union

possible to them would be after the fashion of committees, and he had no faith in the power of committees to originate and guide a living movement. That, he believed, could be done only through personal influence and by personal daring; and, therefore, out of his own head, he began, partly as editor and partly as author, the now famous Tracts. He had now

found his work, and his pent-up zeal broke out in full tide. He wrote letters, he visited, he broke through. natural reserve, and sought out strangers, that he might win them to the good old faith of the good old times. With his task his health and spirits came flowing back upon him, and he went about his work jubilant in his own cause, and with a fierce contempt for his adversaries. He liked to lead men on as far as he could get them to go, and a little farther than they understood, and if they became alarmed and tried to get back, and stumbled into a ditch by the way, it was rather a satisfaction to him to stand by and see them floundering in the mud. He even hinted that if heretics and heresiarchs had their due, they would meet with little mercy. He told his opponents that he would ride over them as Othniel' prevailed Over Chusan-rishathaim, king of Mesopotamia. Blanco White says of the party at that time :-" It was an established doctrine among that set, when I left Oxford, that no Dissenter should be allowed to live within the English dominions, but that an Englishman should, of necessity, be a member of the Church of England."

It was a fierce assault the young party were making, but there was little coherence in their own system. Dr. Newman began to feel the necessity for a more thorough exposition and vindication of his principles and system. He had first of all to show that his principles were compatible with his position in the Church of England. He held many of the doctrines of the Church of Rome, yet he was a member of the Church of England, and had signed her Articles and Formularies; how could he re

He

concile his faith with his position, and, specially, how could he sign the Articles? His opponents, and even his own disciples, asked the question, and pressed for an answer. answered that the Church of England was a branch of the Catholic Church, and really held the doctrines of the Church of Rome. He explained that the doctrines of the Church of Rome must be looked at in different ways. There are certain doctrines that have been formally sanctioned by Rome, and these, in the main, are held by the Church of England. But there are erroneous doctrines popularly held among the members of the Roman communion which are only tolerated, and have never been sanctioned by the infallible authority. Against these popular and unsanctioned errors, which are commonly regarded as the true Roman doctrine, the Church of England continually protests. Dr. Newman further explained that, by the Church of England he did not mean the actual Church of England, for that actual Church he deemed far from Rome, and grossly defiled by Protestant excesses. He meant the Church of England as embodied in her creeds and formularies. That Church of the creeds was not far from Rome, and he hoped to see the day when the actual Church of England should be brought back to the creeds, and be purified from the abominations of private judgment, and all other Protestant excesses. He thus created for himself an ideal Church, and declared himself ready to defend it against all comers. But he must show that his paper Church was really in harmony with the formularies of the Church of England.

His chief difficulty lay in the Articles. It was constantly asked of him, How can you sign the Articles ? He answered that he could sign them because he thought they would bear a Catholic sense. To reconcile them to Catholicism, he called in the aid of two principles. First, that the intention of their compilers was not to oppose Catholic doctrine, and that therefore they intentionally framed the Articles in vague and indecisive language, tolerant of a Catholic sense. This view he supported by various arguments, but it did not open the door wide enough to let in Roman dogma, and he therefore called in another principle, "that the Articles are to be interpreted, not according to the meaning of the writers, but (as far as the wording will admit) according to the sense of the Catholic Church." These views were given to the world in Tract No. 90. How that tract was received every one knows. A universal storm of indignation fell upon it and its author. It was mildly described as an "evasion;" it was roughly condemned as downright dishonesty. Public faith in its author was rudely shaken, his public influence was gone, and he was driven into retirement, and there haunted by an incessant and indignant suspicion. Little had he anticipated the storm, and even now he cannot see that he was worse than his neighbours. Have not the Evangelical party dealt, he demands, with the Prayer Book as he did with the Articles ? Nay, more; the author of Tract 90 thinks if he has sinned, he has many fellows in transgression. "I am surprised," he says, "that men do not apply to the interpreters of Scripture generally the hard names they apply to the

author of Tract 90." The author of Tract 90 consciously puts upon the Articles a sense different from what their authors meant-does he believe that the interpreters of Scripture of all schools consciously put upon the Scriptures a sense different from what their authors meant? From unconscious bias no one is free, even Dr. Newman would claim freedom for no one save the infallible Head of the Church; but there is a world-wide difference between unconscious bias and deliberate intention, and it does little credit either to the judgment or the candour of our author to jumble them together.

and was

He was

But though England was not inclined to seek shelter in this ideal Church, which was Rome over again, with a few ugly excrescences pared away, it was a shelter to Dr. Ne vman himself for a season. He was, however, in a great strait. He had drifted into a place where two seas met, and there stuck fast rudely beaten by the waves. tossed by doubts between his ideal Church of England and the Church of Rome. His ideal Church preserved the pure faith of antiquity, which Rome had grievously overlaid; but then, on the other hand, the insular Church of England could not pretend to embrace Christendom, while Rome perhaps could. There was, therefore, for a little while, a balance between the Church of England, backed by antiquity, and Rome, supported by catholicity. A sentence from Augustine, however, upset the argument from antiquity in favour of his paper Church, and after all it was but a paper Church, a mere theory, not a living fact, and therefore not difficult to upset. Perhaps the gusts

of public indignation helped to blow it over. He was now well-nigh houseless, for though he had lost his faith in his mother Church, he had not quite gained faith in Rome. Rome had added to the faith, and was guilty of practical idolatry. Where could he find a shelter ? Well, perhaps, something might yet be said for the Church of England. Had she not the note of sanctity? Was she not possessed of a vigorous spiritual life? And had she not the means of ministering to that life? Surely she must be a true Church. That comfort lasted for a little while, but the reiterated charges against Tract 90, and the complicity of the bishops with Liberalism and with heretics, soon deprived him of that also. There was one last comfort left. The ten tribes who had broken away from Jewish law were yet recognised as a people by Divine mercy, and were provided with means of grace. Might not rebellious England be as Samaria ? The thought was the last comfort of a houseless wanderer, under which he will not take shelter any longer than he can help.

His

The end was approaching. old friends were falling from him, and were leaving him in the hands of a new and younger party bent for Rome. There was little now between him and Rome, except the worship of the Virgin and the saints, and that, too, now began to give way; for he now thought he discovered that the Church of Rome allows nothing to come between the soul and its Creator; that devotion to saints and angels, as taught by Rome, as little interferes with the incommunicable glory of the Eternal as does the love we bear to our friends and relatives. This,

This

however, did not quite meet all difficulties, for it was plain that in respect to the worship of images, as well as in other things, the Church of Rome had added to the ancient faith. difficulty led him to ponder more deeply a principle that had already taken root in his mind, the principle of development. According to that principle, the doctrine of Scripture is but the germ of Divine truth planted in the Church, there to develope through the growing life and experience of the Church. As the acorn contains the oak, so does Scripture contain the Romanism that is, and that is yet to be. This, doubtless, is a convenient theory to explain the additions to the faith made by Rome, but then it will equally explain the additions made by Rationalism. Extremes meet. Dr. Newman's principle of development is simply Rationalism in disguise. He claims for reason, as Rationalism does, authority to rise above and go beyond the word of God. His has been a singular history. He began in mortal fear of the imperious demands of proud human reason, and he has ended by sanctioning its claims to be placed above God's word. The mystery is soon explained. He can afford to give such licence to reason because he puts the curb of infallibility in its mouth. Dr. Newman is as marvellous in his faith as he is in his scepticism. He does not think that Scripture can subdue and guide proud human reason. God is working

in providence, but he does not see that Scripture and providence combined are equal to the task. The Spirit of God has dealings with the souls of men, but he does not see that all these together can do it. When, lo! effectual relief is at hand. The infallibility of the Head of the Church can at once give to reason the utmost licence, and hold it in profound subjection. It does not, indeed, appear that infallibility has ever had much to do. It stands by while ordinary people develope the truth, and while they apply it to the various uses of life, and only comes in occasionally to sanction some truth that has been got at with great pains, and that needs to be applied with equal care. It does not meddle with the real, rough work of life. But there is such magical power in its sanction, that although Scripture and providence, and the Divine Spirit, could not altogether rule proud reason, under the curb of infallibility it is gentle as a lamb. There is not, to meet any real human need, a more useless thing under the sun than this dogma of infallibility, and it is as baseless as it is useless; yet but for it the principle of development would be as like Rationalism as two peas are like each other. Dr. Newman may deem our opinion the rashness of private judgment; but we cannot help regarding this his last refuge as the most miserable of all his refuges, though the goal to which they naturally lead.