1. My Sermon on "The Apostolical Christian," being the 19th of "Sermons on Subjects of the Day"(Not reprinted in 1865.) {376} This writer says, "What Dr. Newman means by Christians ... he has not left in doubt;" and then, quoting a passage from this Sermon which speaks of "the humble monk and the holy nun" being "Christians after the very pattern given us in Scripture," he observes, "This is his definition of Christians."—p. 28. This is not the case. I have neither given a definition, nor implied one, nor intended one; nor could I, either now or in 1843-4, or at any time, allow of the particular definition he ascribes to me. As if all Christians must be monks or nuns! What I have said is, that monks and nuns are patterns of Christian perfection; and that Scripture itself supplies us with this pattern. Who can deny this? Who is bold enough to say that St. John Baptist, who, I suppose, is a Scripture Character, is not a pattern-monk; and that Mary, who "sat at our Lord's feet," was not a pattern-nun? and "Anna too, who served God with fastings and prayers night and day?" Again, what is meant but this by St. Paul's saying, "It is good for a man not to touch a woman?" and, when speaking of the father or guardian of a young girl, "He that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better?" And what does St. John mean but to praise virginity, when he says of the hundred forty and four thousand on Mount Sion, "These are they which were not defiled with women, for they are virgins?" And what else did our Lord mean, when He said, "There be eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it?" He ought to know his logic better: I have said that {377} "monks and
nuns find their pattern in Scripture:" he adds, Therefore I
hold all Christians are monks and nuns. Now then for Blot two. A second fault in logic. I said no more than that monks and nuns were perfect Christians: he adds, Therefore "monks and nuns are the only perfect Christians." Monks and nuns are not the only perfect Christians; I never thought so or said so, now or at any other time. P. 57. "In the Sermon ... monks and nuns are spoken of as the only true Bible Christians." This, again, is not the case. What I said is, that "monks and nuns are Bible Christians:" it does not follow, nor did I mean, that "all Bible Christians are monks and nuns." Bad logic again. Blot three.] Top | Appendix 1 | Contents | Biographies | Works | Home Newman Reader — Works of John Henry Newman |