The Oxford Movement Studies: Main Historiographical Problems and Trends* M
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
2019 ВЕСТНИК САНКТ-ПЕТЕРБУРГСКОГО УНИВЕРСИТЕТА Т. 35. Вып. 4 ФИЛОСОФИЯ И КОНФЛИКТОЛОГИЯ РЕЛИГИОВЕДЕНИЕ UDC 283(410.1) The Oxford movement studies: Main historiographical problems and trends* M. S. Stetckevich1, T. V. Chumakova1, S. Frolov2 1 St. Petersburg State University, 7–9, Universitetskaya nab., St. Petersburg, 199034, Russian Federation 2 Southern Methodist University, 6424 Robert S. Hyer Lane, Dallas, Texas, 75275, USA For citation: Stetckevich M. S., Chumakova T. V., Frolov S. The Oxford movement studies: Main his- toriographical problems and trends. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies, 2019, vol. 35, issue 4, pp. 662–673. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2019.411 The article analyzes the main trends in the historiography of the Oxford (Traсtarian) move- ment in the Church of England, which had a significant impact not only on its subsequent development, but also on the evolution of Anglicanism as a whole. The purpose of the article is to identify the key trends in the development of the historiography of the Oxford movement and to distinguish the range of problems studied by researchers, focusing on the most contro- versial issues. The article aims to analyze the works of the authors who reviewed the history of the Oxford movement in the context of the evolution of the Church of England (N. Gash, O. Chadwick, P. Avis, S. Brown), and researchers who focused on the phenomenon of Trac- tarianism itself (M. O’Connell, J. Griffin, J. Rowlands, P. Nockles, J. Pereiro, G. Herring). The authors of the article used problem-chronological and comparative methods, which allow for the presentation of the main historiographical achievements in their dynamic development. It can be concluded that the confessionalism expressed in the representation of the Tractar- ian leaders either as “saviors” of the Church of England, or as “traitors” who sought to bring it into the bosom of the Roman Catholic Church, has been completely overcome. A signifi- cant research consensus was reached on issues such as the date of the movement’s origin, its revolutionary nature and connection with the High Church tradition, and the importance of the influence of Tractarianism on the subsequent evolution of Anglicanism. Issues such as the relationship of Tractarianism with the Ritualists movement remains debatable. Further * This article was completed for the project 18-011-00241 of the Russian Foundation of Basic Research (RFBR) “From erastianism to tractarianism: the Church of England in the late XVIII — first half of the XIX century”. © Санкт-Петербургский государственный университет, 2019 662 https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2019.411 prospects for the study of the Oxford movement primarily concern the study of its perception by British society, and investigation of its international dimension (in particular, Russian). Keywords: The Oxford movement, Tractarianism, The Church of England, historiography, -An glicanism, religious studies. 1. Introduction The Oxford (Tractarian) movement, developed under the leadership of such divines as J. Keble (1792–1866), R. H. Froude (1803–1836), E. B. Pusey (1800–1882) and especially J. H. Newman (1801 — 1890), is recognized by the overwhelming majority of researchers as the largest phenomenon in the history of 19th century Anglicanism, and sometimes referred to as one of the most important events in the history of Western Christianity in the past two centuries. Started, according to the traditional opinion, in 1833, the Oxford movement significantly changed the face of the Church of England. Tractarianism raised a number of vital questions: what is Anglicanism, can the Church of England be considered Protestant and / or Сatholic, and what is its most important mission? The Oxford move- ment had a strong influence on the development of church architecture, liturgical forms, and visual arts, eliciting responses not only in various parts of the English-speaking world, but also beyond including Russia. The bibliography of the movement is enormous [1]. At the same time, the number of works specifically devoted to the problems of the movement’s historiography is relatively small. As a rule, they are limited to short historiographical essays. As an exception, we can mention the Ph.D. thesis of V. Santos Sotelo, and historiographic sections in the mono- graphs of P. Nockles and S. Skinner [2; 3, p. 1–43; 4, р. 2–17]. The objectives of the present article are as follows: to characterize the most important trends prevailing in the historiography of the Oxford movement, to highlight the most important issues discussed by historians of Tractarianism, to provide a critical analysis of the most significant works (primarily monographs) and to identify possible prospects for further research. 2. Confessional trend In the preface to his book, which until now has been considered the classic history of the movement, Dean of St. Paul’s Cathedral in London R. Church noted: “We are some- times told that enough has been written about the Oxford movement, and that the world is rather tired of the subject” [5, p. IX–X]. These lines, written in the 1880s, undoubtedly testify to the presence of considerable interest in Tractarianism in the educated circles of English society. The first works, which, in spite of their polemicity, can be viewed as histories of the Oxford movement, were the writings of the High churchman W. Palmer’s “Narrative of Events connected with the publication of the Tracts for the Times” (1843) and famous autobiography of J. H. Newman “Apologia Pro Vita Sua” (1864). In the first edition of his book Palmer, who was very close to the movement in the early 1830s, sought to show that the initial aspirations of its original participants were aimed only at restoring the Church of England as a sacral institution and did not suggest any convergence with Roman Ca- tholicism [6, р. V–X, 43–46]. In the second edition, published in 1883, Palmer empha- Вестник СПбГУ. Философия и конфликтология. 2019. Т. 35. Вып. 4 663 sized that the departure of Newman and some other members of the movement (W. Ward, F. Oakeley) to Rome (1845) is the incidental and unnatural product of Tractarianism [7, p. 239–241]. If Palmer’s work is a kind of apology for his participation in the Oxford movement, Newman’s autobiography is first and foremost an apology for his drift from Anglicanism to Roman Catholicism. Newman points out that he did not set himself the task of writing a history of the Oxford movement [8, p. 108]. At the same time, the history of the movement presented through Newman’s eyes is undoubtedly exist in the “Apology.” Tractarianism itself is viewed by Newman as the initial stage of his personal struggle against liberalism in its various manifestations [8, p. 146–149]. Also of note is the four-volume biography of E. B. Pusey, written by H. Liddon — a theologian, who shared the main Tractarian views. It contains, like the writings of Palmer and Newman, a huge amount of documentary material and is also both a research work and a source for the study of the Oxford movement [9]. For a long time “the Oxford Movement continued to be a “live” issue with the capacity to elicit strong reactions on either side for several generations after its first inception” [10, p. 605]. Up to the beginning of the 20th century, most researches were far from impartial and positioned themselves as supporters or opponents of Tractarianism. The abovemen- tioned R. Church, who was closely allied to the Tractarian movement, laid the foundation for the historiographic trend, according to which the Oxford movement was regarded as the only force that saved the Church of England from spiritual degradation and allowed it to renew and restore itself as a sacral institution. Church was also the first scholar who tried to define the chronological framework of the Oxford movement. Following Newman, he dated the start of the movement to July 14, 1833 [5, p. 82–84] — the day of the sermon “National Apostasy,” preached by J. Keble, in which he stated the existence of serious threats to the Church of England, primarily the distribution of the “unchristian temper,” and cautiously called for “remonstrance” against the current situation [11, p. 24–27]. Church relates the end of the movement to 1845 — the moment of Newman’s transition to Roman Catholicism. Church called this departure a “catastrophe” [5, p. 385]. The most striking manifestation of the tendency to depict Tractarians as the ‘saviors’ of the Church of England was the work of S. Ollard. Calling members of the Oxford move- ment “the most spiritual people who have ever lived in England” [12, p. 1], Ollard categori- cally rejects the assumption of the original pro-Roman orientation of Tractarianism [12, p. 11]. According to him, by 1833 the Church of England “appeared to be nearly spiritually dead” [12, p. 16], while the Oxford theologians promoted the revival of the heritage of the undivided Ancient Church. Unlike Church, Ollard does not consider 1845 as the conclu- sion of the movement. He sees a direct connection between Tractarianism and Ritualism, which appeared in the 1850s and concentrated on the restoration of pre-Reformation li- turgical practice [12, p. 95–203]. In parallel with the glorification of the Oxford movement, there was another histo- riographical tendency: to represent Tractarians as “enemies” who were trying to destroy the Church of England. This tendency is most fully expressed in the writings of W. Walsh [13; 14]. 664 Вестник СПбГУ. Философия и конфликтология. 2019. Т. 35. Вып. 4 From his point of view, all members of the Oxford movement initially sought to re- join Rome, and only masked their views [14, p.VII]. Walsh believes that the Oxford move- ment in fact originated in Rome, basing this conclusion on the fact of the meeting of Newman and Froude with Cardinal N.