Newman’s Way by
Sean O’Faolain. Longmans
Green & Co., London,
1952.
This review was written on January 31st 2005
This book was a
gift from me to my mother at Christmas 1952. I had earlier read another
biography of Newman but I cannot recall the name of the author. What I had read
was about Newman himself and his long career but there was little about his
family and his family background and the social circumstances of his time.
O’Faolain’s book is very different. While John Newman remains the dominant
figure, he emerges from the strong background of his family and of the separate
lives and fortunes of his parents and his five siblings. I was not previously
aware that John Henry Newman, as the eldest boy, remained in touch with his
widowed mother and his sisters who were in later years virtually on the poverty
line, nor was I aware that he and his brother Frank gave them great moral and
financial support despite their own limited finances.
O’Faolain’s
biography is both interesting and absorbing. It provides a good background to
the social and religious life of mid-nineteenth century England. Newman’s
father had been a generous, warm-hearted and surprisingly irreligious man
within a family deeply committed to religion. He had good connections and
reasonably good opportunities, but he finished a poor man following
bankruptcies in 1816 after Waterloo and subsequent business failures. The young
John Newman had rather rigid evangelistic views which were shared by his
siblings and which were to dominate his early life in Oxford up to his
ordination in the Church of England.
Later, through the influence of others in Oxford and through his own
reading of the early history of the Christianity, he was to drift from the arid
liturgy of the Church of England to the high church movement and eventually to
Rome.
He struck one as
a lonely isolated figure in Oxford at the beginning of his career there.
Despite a slow start in the university where he had disappointing first
examinations, he eventually became a Fellow of Oriel College. He was much
given to self-analysis and not very comfortable at first in the company of the
Fellows of the College, although he became much more so in the company of his
intimates as his career progressed.
As a Fellow he
became actively involved in the work of the College where he was greatly
influenced by his contact with other distinguished and radical members. He soon
became an increasingly important figure in the academic world of Oxford and in
its religious institutions and he remained so until he was forced to resign his
Fellowship because of his perceived leanings towards Rome which were evident in
his many publications on the subject of religion and the origin of the
Christian faith. He was also suspect because of his association with other
radical thinkers. He was obviously a very sensitive and introspective person
with rigid and inflexible views although he was capable of changing these from
time to time. He was compassionate and considerate towards his family but could
be quite irritable and, according to O’Faolain, he admitted to having a temper
which he described as ‘with a devilish temper, and a passion so ungovernable as
to unman him and a tongue that could clip a hedge’. In his later years he had
obviously learned to control these overt and undesirable attributes.
It is interesting
that Newman first opposed Catholic Emancipation although his reasons were
rather academic and were almost certainly based on the prevailing prejudices of
Protestant England. It is quite clear from the author’s account that the Newman
family proved to be dysfunctional. The rather abnormal and inharmonious
relationship among the six children tended to worsen with the passage of time.
This circumstance could be attributed to the narrow, bitter and arid upbringing
which was a feature of the puritan ambience of mid-nineteenth century
protestant England, and perhaps to a lesser extent to the failure of his
father’s business ventures and the family’s impoverishment.
Newman’s long
drawn out and painful conversion to Rome is described in the penultimate
chapter of the book but little information is provided about his life following
his conversion nor is there much about his last few years before his conversion
and after his departure from Oxford. His Dublin period is not mentioned. The
origins and the evolution of the Oxford Movement, and the leading figures in
the Movement, are, of course, dealt with in some detail.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/bfce4/bfce42b1ccf3a7952949cdf6506203891cdea793" alt="" |
Cardinal Newman was beatified by Pope Benedict XVI in 2010 |
The book is
essentially an account of the family and of John Newman’s background, and the
tensions which existed within the Church of England during the mid-nineteenth
century. The tensions were aggravated by the secular aspects of the established
church, by its political associations, by its attenuated spirituality, and by
the conflict created by its more radical members who had leanings towards a
warmer and more passionate liturgy which inevitably was perceived as a leaning
towards Rome. Newman’s conversion to Catholicism and his ordination in Rome
took place after a few years of severe stress and isolation from the academic
world which he had been so attached to in Oxford. Nevertheless, his conversion
to Catholicism was inevitable as he gradually realised that only the Roman
Church could legitimately claim to represent the apostolic succession, and that
all breakaway and dissident churches, such as the Church of England, lacked
that essential link with Christ.
Newman’s
youngest sister died at an early age. After his conversion he virtually lost
all contact with his two brothers and another sister. Only one sister remained
in any way close to him afterwards. There is a poignant note at the end of the
book describing how Newman, when he was very old and infirm and an isolated and
lonely figure, decided to visit his youngest brother, Charles, whom he had not
seen for many years. Charles, who had a lifetime history of instability and
dependency, was living in reclusive poverty in a small port on the west coast
of Wales where he had been vegetating for twenty five years. When, after a tedious journey, John
arrived at his lodgings, Charles refused to see him. Charles died shortly after
this visit. His funeral expenses were paid by the Cardinal.
John’s brother
Frank was an eccentric, particularly in the field of religion. Frank, who held
an academic chair in Oxford, also lived to a good age and in later years during
his retirement began to visit John more frequently in Birmingham but they
apparently never discussed religion and confined their conversation to ‘neutral
subjects’. Newman died on 11 August 1890, in his ninetieth year. He died a
lonely man, the victim of his dysfunctional family circumstances and the
mindless divisions and prejudices of religion.
O’Faolain
describes Newman in appropriate terms in the last phrase of the introduction to
his book --- who can other than revere that brave, kind, solitary, gifted,
tormented angel
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/99254/99254553182f4702a3792716d1d0e5065b1daac8" alt="" |
The entrance to University Church |
Some months
before reading Seán O’Faolain’s biography, I had recorded the following note
after a visit to University Church in St. Stephen’s Green. This very beautiful
church in the Byzantine style was built by Newman when he was rector of the
Catholic University of Ireland. He described it as the most beautiful church in
the world.
I dropped into University Church one
day after an hour long tranquillising massage by Eileen Fitzsimons whose
apartment is beside the church. I
must have been in a contemplative mood after her ministrations. I found a
booklet about Newman and his association with Dublin among the publications at
the entrance. It lead to the following thoughts.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/13d66/13d66b183de3bc1a56fc8d7aa33aaabefb14ddea" alt="" |
Inside University Church |
Newman had done much to invigorate
and awaken the Anglican Church before he became involved in the Oxford Movement
and became a Catholic. He was
ordained in Rome in 1847. He subsequently was largely responsible for
popularising the Catholic Church in the late nineteenth century. Until then,
the Church was the object of the most bitter prejudice in predominantly
Protestant England as a result of which the Catholic leadership had a closed
and defensive mentality. As late as 1850, when the British Government first
allowed Catholics to establish a Hierarchy, this prejudice was evident by
violent protests, including the Gordon riots.
Newman was also much concerned with
the traditional hostility of the Catholic Church towards science and scientific
enquiry. He accepted that the discoveries and opinions of Darwin were not
inconsistent with biblical studies and that there was no conflict between the
findings of science and the truth of revelation. He supported research and the
freedom to do research.
His outspoken and courageous
reputation in defence of the Church and his ecumenical reputation were no doubt
responsible for the change in attitude of Protestant England to the Catholic
Church and the warm reception his cardinalate was to receive by his old alma
mater and enemy, Oxford, and people of all denominations in these islands. His
colleagues Cardinals Wiseman, Archbishop of Westminster, and Manning also
played a part in restoring the confidence of Catholics and the prestige of the
Church in Britain.
Nowadays, one feels that the English have a vague nostalgia
for the old religion and a quiet affection for the Catholic Church in their
country; for Catholics’ law abiding reputation, their patience at times of
adversity, their patriotism, and for the prestige of their modest aristocracy.
No comments:
Post a Comment