An Evangelical Adrift

In An Evangelical Adrift: The Making of John Henry Newman’s Theology, Geertjan Zuijdwegt tackles one of the central and most contested questions in Newman scholarship: To what extent does Newman’s depiction of his early religious development, presented in his philosophical autobiography Apologia pro vita sua (1865), match that of the early sources, such as his letters, journal entries, homilies, and religious papers? Newman presents a “continuity of views” narrative in the Apologia (3), but, as Zuijdwegt points out, the early sources do not demonstrate such a linear progression of philosophical development.

Later biographers have tended to neglect Newman’s pre-Tractarian years, or when they do narrate these years, the image of Newman’s religious development is that of “an adolescent religious prodigy whose conversion provided him with elements of thought and belief—sometimes embryonic, but often quite mature—which grew harmoniously, first into Tractarianism and then into Roman Catholicism” (4). Zuijdwegt challenges these tendencies, arguing that “the period between Newman’s teenage conversion to evangelicalism and the beginning of the Tractarian Movement . . . were the most formative of his life” (1) and that Newman’s intellectual development was not as linear, nor as harmonious, as Newman’s Apologia and later scholarship suggests. As Zuijdwegt puts it, “to learn, without much explanation, that someone is evangelical, and then is not, and tends to be a liberal, only to resist liberalism a few years later, should evoke curiosity aplenty” (4).

One of the most important aspects of this book—aside from providing much-needed context and analysis to one of the most important time periods of Newman’s religious development—is Zuijdwegt’s careful treatment of Frank Turner’s John Henry Newman: The Challenge to Evangelical Religion (Yale University Press, 2002) and the fiery reception of the book. As Zuijdwegt explains in his introduction, Turner’s volume is “consciously revisionist” and problematic in many ways, though the scholarship has done little more than point out that the volume is problematic, with little effort to explain exactly where Turner goes wrong in his historiography. Zuijdwegt “clears the field,” so –to speak, as he explains that any rebuttal of Turner should be done on historical footing. As Zuijdwegt puts it, “the advice to those troubled by Turner’s revisionist claims is simple: if you do not agree, stop complaining and do the research. And if you do agree, make sure you do not just take Turner’s word for it. The question, after all, is, or should be, one of ‘history verses history’” (6).

Zuijdwegt does just that, explaining, on historical grounds, where Turner went wrong in his account of Newman’s notion of evangelicalism and liberalism. The key issue with Turner’s mistaken claim that Newman’s “antiliberalism was a ruse for evangelicalism,” Zuijdwegt contends, “is not its crude psychologism, although this, too, is a problem, but the fact that Turner overlooked (or ignored) all the sources that do account for the shift” in Newman’s theological development (6). Zuijdwegt then takes the reader through ten beautifully written chronological chapters explaining precisely how Newman gets from point A to point B—evangelicalism in his teenage years to liberalism in his sixties.

The tight chronological narrative, attention to detail, and careful historical analysis make this book a rare gem. While the book is an “intellectual” biography, Zuijdwegt does not shy away from explaining relational aspects of Newman’s biography that naturally bear on the development of his thought. For example, chapter 2 is dedicated to Newman’s contentious relationship with his brother Charles, who “was an outspoken apostate, eager to discuss his views” (47). As Zuijdwegt rightly points out, it was Newman’s theological exchanges with Charles that forced him to clarify his own religious leanings. This is just one example of many of how the personal and the conceptual are investigated together to form this historically and theologically astute account of Newman’s early theological development.

Zuijdwegt should be commended for his efforts. This intellectual biography is timely, accessible, and will be a staple in the fields of Newman studies, Victorian studies, and British intellectual history for the foreseeable future.

Elizabeth A. Huddleston is head of research and publications at the National Institute for Newman Studies and research fellow in the Department of Catholic Studies at Duquesne University.

Elizabeth Huddleston

Date Of Review:

September 27, 2023