New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-06-21
NEWMAN AGAIN.
WITH SOME VIEWS OF HIM BY DIR. ABBOTT.
BY MRS. HUMPHREY WARD. AND BY
ARCHBISHOP TAFT.


about the great pervert from the English Church,
or about his memory, luminous halo, feeling
partly supersttious. partly afectionate mystical
also in some degree and diligently propagated oS
the Roman Cathohcs,-associated itself with new
mans name. He had become almost SAINT TIC
was invoked as an authority. lie was appeaeu 70
in awe-struck tones as if he were almost lniaihpie
he who had at enc time denied even the h'aih
bilIty of the Pope His beautiful character ana
his remarkable intellectual gifts seemed hReiy u
have a most mlschievous effect on the minos OF tne
generation Just opening TO spiritual influences
The tendency was so marked as to make pro-
test inevitable IL has come in several shapes
The one which has most provoked newman
friends. and the party engaged In this process OF
canonization. was a little book called "Philo-
mytbus. by Dr. Edwin A. Abbott. He gave IL
subtitle, AN Antdote Against Credulity, ana
what he did was to set himself TO critical as
scussion of Newman's Essay on Ecclesiastical
Miracles The proselytizing party rallied at
once They met DR.. Abbott with screams OF
anger as if he had laid hands on The Lord
Amounted lie was accused OF several sorts Oh
literary crimes, and OF some not literary, or not
exclusively literary; concealment, misrepresenta-
ton. insolence and many more. "lnsolenoe" 10
Newman sounds In the mouths of Mr. Ward ana
his coterie very like blasphemy-that and not
mere insult is the offence of which they wish the
world TO believe Or. Abbott guilty toward the
shade of the great Cardinal The author of Phi
lomythus" is far from being the meekest Of man.
kind, and he retorted with vigor. On both sides,
indeed, the correspondence took most vehement
tone.
Then came Mrs Humphry Ward with q re-
view of Philomythus" in the Nineteenth Cen
turvn Mrs. Humphry Ward has power, very
remarkable IN a woman, of approaching subject
promptings of mere impulse. She is not argumen-
tatively speaking feminine she Is almost judicial
and when she does not choose 10 be entirely judi
cial she has very considerable power of dlaectic
She is capable of surveying the whole held;
capacity of high value when handling topics with
reference to which most critics, male or female,
are wont 10 concentrate what vision they have on
single point; TO see thing intensely while all
the rest OF the field remains 70 them in the black
ness Of darkness.
She looks at Newman for example, with refer
ence to his time and his environment: the only
way in which Newman anybody else can be
studied with profit. She says: &" If Newman were
writing controversially now he would have differ
ept problems to attack and would be forced to the
use of different weapons if not. often TO the selec-
ton Of wholly different battlefield. This leaves
the literary and biographical value OF all he wrote
untouched The man Newman remains as inter
esting as ever. But the arguments for and against
miracles are no longer the same as when he dis
cussed them. The attitude of the religious mind
is not the same Much which passed for valid IN
his time passes longer The interest OF New
mans contributions to this department Of theolOgi-
cal poemics has become historical 1t seems to
the inquirer or critic of the present day no longer
worth while TO crlticise Newmans position or argu-
ments directly; while it is still abundantly worth
while 10 try to understand Newman as Of the
most striking illustrations In literature OF GER
tain tone and temper of mind perennial In human
life and taking different forms at different epochs
IT, is indeed worth while, and since Mrs. Hum
phry Ward wrote there has come TO light piece
OF testimony which she and all of US must regard
as valuable. Strictly sIealdng. it is an apprecia-
ton rather than piece OF evidence 1t Is the
opinion of the late Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr.
TAFT. and this is what he said so late 1877.
long after the stress and storm Of the Tractarian
controversy, more than forty years after; and
more than thirty years after Newman had gone
over to Rome
al have always regarded Newman as hav-
inc strange duality of mind. On the one
side is wonderfully strong and subtle rea-
soning faculty. on the other blind faith raised
almost entirely by his emotions 1t seems to me
that in all matters of belief he first acts on his
emotions, and then he brings the subtlety Of
his reason to bear. till he has ingeniously per-
suaded himself that ,he is logically right. The
result is condition in which he is practically
unable to distinguish between truth and false
hood"
There is not trace of bitterness. theological
or personal, in that estimate. and yet-or rather
because there is no such trace-how damaging 1t Is
to Newman or, at least TO what have called
the Newman myth TAFT was not great theo-
Logan. His was not mind Of any preternaturaI
subtlety, like Newmans. nor had he prominently
the literary gift of expression. He had good
sense and power of seeing things as they are,
and he saw the real truth about Newman. Mrs.
Wards estimate, or, for aught l know, DR.. Alb
bolts, may be open TO challenge. Mrs. Ward is
q woman Of deeply religious mind to whom re-
hgion is so much more than mere orthodoxy that
she passes with the more devout for sceptical or
for maintaining toward orthodox theology iii there
be such thing attitude more neutral than
passionate. The excellent people who shake their
heads over Robert Elsmere' must never
theless, be aware that no one def
Gent in the power Of religious emotion,
no one to whom spiritual problems were
other than vital, could have written that book,
or could even have conceived the plan OF IT, In
its pages the artist and the religious enthusiast
contend together continually, and il is not the
artist who comes off best; is the search after
truth ever postponed 70 purely literary require
mcnts or to a sense Of form. We shall not know
how great Mrs. HuWphry Wards literary power
really is till she can make up her mind to write
novel without purpose, religious or other.
There is much in DR.. Abbott which confirms
the Archbishop of Canterburys view Of Newman
and there is still more in Newman. 1 have
always wondered how IL was possible for any one
or for any one but pure enthusiast, TO read
Newman and 20 remain convinced that he cared
for truth IN the historical sense. In all that has
been written about him, from whatever pon,
of view, there is nothing which is truer than DR.
Tait's brief summary of the man. No criticism
has gone deeper, nor does any criticism evei
pierce more easily through the outer arnor OF
any thinker who has double life than that which