History of My Religious Opinions from 1841 to 1845
Such fidelity, however, was taken in malam partem by the high
Anglican authorities; they thought it insidious. I happen still to have
a correspondence which took place in 1843, in which the chief
place is filled by one of the most eminent Bishops of the day, a
theologian and reader of the Fathers, a moderate man, who at one time
was talked of as likely on a vacancy to succeed to the Primacy.
A young clergyman in his diocese became a Catholic; the papers at once
reported on authority from "a very high quarter," that, after
his reception, "the Oxford men had been recommending him to retain
his living." I had reasons for thinking that the allusion was made to me, and I authorized the Editor of a Paper, who had
inquired of me on the point, to "give it, as far as I was
concerned, an unqualified contradiction;"—when from a motive of
delicacy he hesitated, I added "my direct and indignant
contradiction." "Whoever is the author of it," I
continued to the Editor, "no correspondence or intercourse of
any kind, direct or indirect, has passed between Mr. S. and myself, since his conforming to the
Church of Rome, {182} except my formally and merely acknowledging the receipt
of his letter, in which he informed me of the fact, without, as
far as I recollect, my expressing any opinion upon it. You may state
this as broadly as I have set it down." My denial was told to the
Bishop; what took place upon it is given in a letter from which I copy.
"My father showed the letter to the Bishop, who, as he laid it
down, said, 'Ah, those Oxford men are not ingenuous.' 'How do you mean?'
I asked my father. 'Why,' said the Bishop, 'they advised Mr. B. S. to
retain his living after he turned Catholic. I know that to be a fact,
because A. B. told me so.'" "The Bishop," continues the
letter, "who is perhaps the most influential man in reality on the
bench, evidently believes it to be the truth." Upon this
Dr. Pusey wrote on my behalf to the Bishop; and the Bishop
instantly beat a retreat. "I have the honour," he says in the
autograph which I transcribe, "to acknowledge the receipt of your
note, and to say in reply that it has not been stated by me, (though
such a statement has, I believe, appeared in some of the Public Prints,)
that Mr. Newman had advised Mr. B. S. to retain his living, after he had
forsaken our Church. But it has been stated to me, that Mr. Newman was
in close correspondence with Mr. B. S., and, being fully aware of his
state of opinions and feelings, yet advised him to continue in our
communion. Allow me to add," he says to Dr. Pusey, "that neither
your name, nor that of Mr. Keble, was mentioned to me in connexion with
that of Mr. B. S."
I was not going to let the Bishop off on this evasion, so I wrote to him myself. After quoting his Letter to Dr. Pusey, I continued, "I beg to trouble your Lordship with my own account of the two allegations" [close correspondence and fully aware, &c.] "which are contained in your statement, and which have led to your speaking of me in terms which I hope never to deserve. 1. Since Mr. B. S. {183} has been in your Lordship's diocese, I have seen him in Common rooms or private parties in Oxford two or three times, when I never (as far as I can recollect) had any conversation with him. During the same time I have, to the best of my memory, written to him three letters. One was lately, in acknowledgment of his informing me of his change of religion. Another was last summer, when I asked him (to no purpose) to come and stay with me in this place. The earliest of the three letters was written just a year since, as far as I recollect, and it certainly was on the subject of his joining the Church of Rome. I wrote this letter at the earnest wish of a friend of his. I cannot be sure that, on his replying, I did not send him a brief note in explanation of points in my letter which he had misapprehended. I cannot recollect any other correspondence between us.
"2. As to my knowledge of his opinions and feelings, as far as I remember, the only point of perplexity which I knew, the only point which to this hour I know, as pressing upon him, was that of the Pope's supremacy. He professed to be searching Antiquity whether the see of Rome had formerly that relation to the whole Church which Roman Catholics now assign to it. My letter was directed to the point, that it was his duty not to perplex himself with arguments on [such] a question,... and to put it altogether aside... It is hard that I am put upon my memory, without knowing the details of the statement made against me, considering the various correspondence in which I am from time to time unavoidably engaged... Be assured, my Lord, that there are very definite limits, beyond which persons like me would never urge another to retain preferment in the English Church, nor would retain it themselves; and that the censure which has been directed against them by so many of its Rulers has a very grave bearing upon those limits." The Bishop replied in {184} a civil letter, and sent my own letter to his original informant, who wrote to me the letter of a gentleman. It seems that an anxious lady had said something or other which had been misinterpreted, against her real meaning, into the calumny which was circulated, and so the report vanished into thin air. I closed the correspondence with the following Letter to the Bishop:—
"I hope your Lordship will believe me when I say, that statements about me, equally incorrect with that which has come to your Lordship's ears, are from time to time reported to me as credited and repeated by the highest authorities in our Church, though it is very seldom that I have the opportunity of denying them. I am obliged by your Lordship's letter to Dr. Pusey as giving me such an opportunity." Then I added, with a purpose, "Your Lordship will observe that in my Letter I had no occasion to proceed to the question, whether a person holding Roman Catholic opinions can in honesty remain in our Church. Lest then any misconception should arise from my silence, I here take the liberty of adding, that I see nothing wrong in such a person's continuing in communion with us, provided he holds no preferment or office, abstains from the management of ecclesiastical matters, and is bound by no subscription or oath to our doctrines."
Source: Apologia Pro Vita Sua (Newman Reader)