authority of another mind, and his English Churchmanship meant that Newman had applied his best thought to these questions, and could not be mistaken in his positions. In points of history, in matters of fact, in questions of reason, he leaned on Newman, not on that candid and deliberate examination of vital subjects which every reasonable and gifted man is bound to make for himself. Dr. Jowett strikes the keynote of Ward's mental and spiritual position, and states it frankly, in the following remark: "I think that he was led to join the Roman Catholic Church chiefly for two reasons: (1) By a logical necessity, because such a step seemed to be the natural conclusion of premises which he had held for several years, and in favor of which he had always been arguing with himself. 2. But he had also another feeling. For the world, and especially for himself, there seemed to him to be a need of some authority to which they could resign themselves unreservedly." His unwillingness to take the trouble to verify his postulates for himself, which was constitutional, made it easy, when he lost confidence in Newman's mental soundness and leadership, to transfer to the Roman obedience that confidence which as an Anglican he had reposed in one or two individuals. The stress of the conflict, which Newman was compelled to write a book to overcome, was never felt by him. He wrote, indeed, "The Ideal of a Christian Church," to justify his going to Rome, but the book simply expressed a foregone conclusion, and aimed to show that the nearer the English Church approached the Roman the nearer it came to the ideal of what a Christian Church ought to be. Newman's book, "The Development of Christian Doctrine," was written to justify the existence of modern Roman teachings which were repugnant to him, and which had no witness to their exist ence in primitive antiquity. Newman had to give a reason to his conscience and his intellect before he could act; while Ward, already biased toward Rome, sought the unity of the two churches upon the basis of the conformity of the Anglican to the Roman obedience. His idea was, to let the whole body of the Movement party go freely forward and act for some years together, at the end of which time he held that the free and unchecked development of thought in individuals would be found to have brought the great bulk of them in far closer accord with Rome. It is easy to see why the then University of Oxford should meet this book with cold favor, and condemn its author by taking away his degree, which it did early in the year 1845, his reception into the Church of Rome following six months later, on the 14th

of September. When W. G. Ward was condemned, the Oxford Movement, to all outward appearance, came to an ignominious end. The old leaders were paralyzed, and the new directors had proved the quality of their service by advancing toward Rome as rapidly as their convictions could carry them.

It is not easy to analyze the Movement, either from the point of view of its promoters, or as the giving of emphasis to a special school of thought in the Church of England. What it seemed to those who were in it is one thing, and what it seems to those who now consider it as a whole is quite another. It has always been studied by partisans. Roman Catholics were thankful for it because it brought to them men who have given a new status to the Roman Church in England; and the best interpretations of the Movement have come from Cardinal Newman, Canon Oakeley, and Mr. Wilfrid Ward. The fundamental ideas which were behind it, so far as they find expression in philosophy and life, are gathered up in Cardinal Newman's "Grammar of Assent" and in Dr. W. G. Ward's "Philosophy of Theism," both of which are intended to supply a working principle to those who believe in God and in Christianity, and would justify that belief on grounds of reason. The field which Newman undertook to cover as a Tractarian and as a Catholic entitles him to rank among the profoundest religious teachers of the century. Without the keen logical powers of Dr. Ward, he had the power of brooding in the unseen realm of ideas, among the facts of consciousness which supply the grounds of human reasoning, and here his philosophy became rooted in the first principles of being; and it is here that he began to construct anew the processes of thought by which the belief in God and in Christianity could be brought home with certainty and power to the minds of men. Newman had the temptation to be an Agnostic, but through the imagination and reason the constructive element in him worked toward positive results. When you take up his writings that are outside of special questions of the Church, you always find him constructive, positive, incisive, inspiring, and interpreting truth to the whole nature of man. This is his enduring claim as an English thinker. Dr. Ward had not Newman's power to search out first principles, and to pioneer the way where others had failed, but, granted the lead of another mind, or the first principles of belief, he could work out with wonderful mastery of detail, and with the logical force of an intensely earnest and honest mind, the conclusions to which these principles led. His "Philosophy of Theism" is a faithful interpretation of

the theistic side of the thinking of the last fifty years, which began with Mill and Bentham and has found its latest expression in Herbert Spencer, and the germs of all this are found in his first book, entitled "The Ideal of a Christian Church." Mr. Wilfrid Ward makes a very accurate estimate of the work which Newman and his father accomplished, and has been the first to point out, which he does in the chapter of his book entitled "The Oxford School and Modern Religious Thought," what these two have contributed permanently to the philosophy of religious belief. Archbishop Whately contributed nothing beyond a suggestion and a method; Dr. Arnold was venturing into deep water, but died before he had thought through the questions which were coming up; Keble was too narrow to see things beyond a certain spiritual point; Pusey never had any large religious insight, and knew nothing of philosophy; men like Clough, Stanley, and Pattison never developed what their careers seemed to promise as religious thinkers; and when the substance of things is considered, the two men who have most helped in our time, among English thinkers and writers, to deepen and broaden our conceptions of God and Christianity are Cardinal Newman and Dr. W. G. Ward. Their writings are of permanent value; and though they worked chiefly to find their own way to the truth, they worked helpfully for all other fellow-searchers after the same truth. Dr. Ward has not the same distinction that belongs to Cardinal Newman, but, with all the limitations which the frankness and candor of his son reveal, he wrought within limits to show that we have faculties for knowing God which can be trusted, and that Christianity exhibits itself as the perfection of moral truth and of the natural law.

After the collapse of the Oxford Movement by the defection of Ward, Oakeley, and Newman to Rome, and the Romeward tendency had been clearly manifested, the Catholic party in the English Church was for a time quite demoralized. Dr. Pusey was the only one left who had sufficient prominence in the University of Oxford, and commanded largely enough the confidence of Churchmen as a loyal son of the Church of England, to take the reins in hand and assume the leadership. He had himself passed under the ban for his famous sermon on the Real Presence two years before, and had patiently abided the interdict of his bishop. So far as the English Church was concerned, it was a difficult matter to gather up the loose ends of things and make headway. The Catholic party had primarily been organized in 1833 to withstand the influence of liberals like Dr. Arnold and Archbishop

Whately, who in politics and religion were carrying everything before them. It was now a conglomerate mass of opinion, out of which it was difficult to tell what might come. Dr. Pusey, until the reaction toward Liberalism or Broad Church had reached its full expression in the "Essays and Reviews " of 1860, was the only man in the Church of England whose character, attainments, and thorough honesty of purpose combined to form a rallying point for the Catholic interests which had once been centred in Newman and Ward. What went on in the period from 1845 to 1860, during which Dr. Pusey was the head of the Catholic party, will not be known to the world until Canon Liddon's "Memoir of Dr. Pusey" is published; but it was during this period that the Church of England, beset by many difficulties which grow out of the relations of a national Church to the state, had a double life. The Catholic party slowly matured and concentrated its forces, not going forward toward Rome, not leaning too hard upon primitive antiquity, but vindicating Catholic positions against the doctrinal decisions of an ecclesiastical court controlled by the state, and working forward to the expression of Catholic doctrine in Christian worship, and the incorporation of Catholic methods in the religious life of the nation. No one can say that the Oxford Movement, thus working itself clear of Rome and acquiring a positive character and position, reached its full expression in the English Church after an ideal method, but with much misunderstanding, under the lead of men like Canon Carter and Dr. Littledale, for the verification of Catholic truth in Church doctrine, and under the direction of parish priests like Dean Hook, Charles Lowder, and A. H. Mackonochie, with the venerable Father Pusey behind them, for the realization of this truth in practice, the Catholic school of thought has worked itself into the very heart of the Anglican Church, and to-day at Oxford, and even at Cambridge, divides with the Broad Church school the allegiance of the best religious life in England.

It is possible to-day to take a large view of the position in which parties or schools of thought stand toward a corporate institution like the Church of England, and the Oxford Movement has better illustrated than perhaps anything else in English religious history, during the present century, the attitude in which a religious body with historic and Catholic antecedents stands toward modern religious life. The problem raised at the English Reformation, stated in terms of philosophy, was the possibility of the combination of Catholic authority with the freedom of the individual mind

and heart as controlled by the modern spirit. It was, how to retain the breadth, the continuity, the Catholicity, of the historical Church in all its essentials of organization, orders, sacraments, and methods, and incorporate into this permanent part of the Church the living spirit of the society of to-day. It is in the light of such a broad statement as this that the Oxford Movement is to be justly understood in its relation to the Church of England. The Roman Church since the Reformation has distinctly and constantly antagonized the principles that rule in civil society. It has not sought to inspire the new age with the permanent principles of the old life, but has required the suppression of the individual life to fit the mould of the ecclesiastical idea. It has failed to organize human life in freedom under the lead of institutions. It has made the institution everything and the individual nothing. In this way it has failed to control modern thought, or give the lead to society. The modern thinking world is outside the Roman Church, and is destined to remain there. The lines of connection between the two do not exist. On the other hand, the mission of the Church of England in modern society has been to impart to it the permanent or Catholic principles which have always ruled in the teaching of Christianity, and to vindicate these principles in a philosophical method by which they are verified to the human reason. It was here, as has been already intimated, that Newman and Ward worked constructively, and have placed all modern Christians under debt to them. At the same time, men representing the better lines of rationalism, such as are illustrated by following the historical and comparative methods in Biblical criticism and in the study of Church history, among whom may be named Dr. Jowett, Dean Stanley, Frederick Maurice, Canon Westcott, Bishop Lightfoot, and Dr. Edwin Hatch, have done a great deal, not so much to reaffirm ecclesiastical positions as to show that the permanent elements of Christianity are the perfection of moral truth and of natural law. Neither the Catholic nor the rational elements in the teaching of Christianity can be spared; and what the Oxford Movement illustrates in one direction, and the Broad Church Movement which has succeeded it illustrates in another, is that, where Christianity undertakes to deal constructively with the whole of human life in modern communities, the Catholic principles and the spiritual interpretation of life in conformity to the laws of right reason are equally important for the incorporation of Christianity in a large and free way into all that is vital in modern society.