The one I bought for myself: Three Cardinals: Newman--Wiseman--Manning by E.E. Reynolds, originally published on January 1, 1958.
Cluny's blurb:
John Henry Newman. Nicholas Patrick Wiseman. Henry Edward Manning. These three men, Cardinals of the Roman Catholic Church, were the leading players in the development of the Church in England during the second half of the nineteenth century. Absent their distinctive and powerful contributions, the English Catholic Church would have been sorely impoverished, its growth stunted, its character encumbered by undue Anglican attachments. Comparing the personalities, achievements, and relationships of his subjects, E. E. Reynolds examines the efforts of Wiseman, first Cardinal Archbishop of England, to establish the Church as an integral part of the national life; the selfless work of Manning to channel the social doctrine of the Church into the educational and economic spheres; and the crowning achievements of Newman to revive, inspire, and sustain the Catholic faith in the hearts of the English people.
Yet there are different kinds of gifts, though it is the same Spirit who gives them, just as there are different kinds of service, though it is the same Lord we serve. (1 Corinthians 12:4, 5)
Praised at its publication in 1958 as an “excellent and readable account” of three outstanding princes of the modern Church, Three Cardinals: Newman, Wiseman, Manning endures as a twofold success in scholarship and literary sympathy.
And the author bio:
Ernest Edwin Reynolds (1894–1981) was an English–Welsh Catholic author and historian. Specializing in the Tudor period and the Protestant Reformation, he wrote over a dozen books, notable among which are his numerous works on Saint Thomas More, his biography of Saint John Fisher, and his Three Cardinals, a study of John Henry Newman, Nicholas Wiseman, and Henry Edward Manning.
Cluny also publishes Reynolds's works on Fisher and More, including a biography of Margaret More Roper. And Reynolds also wrote a survey, The Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales: a short history, which you may find reviewed here.
Of course, I know a great deal about the lives of these three men, especially Newman's. I bought the book to explore Reynolds's insights into their characters and their relationships, and I appreciated his intertwining of their lives and their contacts. You may see the table of contents on the publisher's website here.
Reynolds confirmed my views of Saint John Henry Newman; gave me more insight into Nicholas Wiseman's life and career, especially his success, after that disastrous first pastoral upon the Restoration of the Hierarchy in 1850, in making English men and women used to seeing a Catholic Cardinal Archbishop on the lecture circuit. Reynolds astutely analyses the great difficulties Wiseman faced in the many projects and programs of re-creating the infrastructure of the Catholic Church in England after centuries of destruction and persecution.
Reynolds definitely and sadly reinforced my dislike of Henry Manning, whose intransigence and lack of intellectual fortitude fostered his dislike, disagreement, and even condemnation of Newman once Manning was in power. He feared Newman and his influence, often blocking his way. Manning even enumerated to another person the heresies that he accused Newman of holding--yet he did nothing to confront Newman personally to urge him to greater orthodoxy which would be his duty--and Reynolds thoroughly recounts Manning's duplicity when Pope Leo XIII wanted to name Newman a Cardinal.
When Reynolds describes Bishop Ullathorne confronting Manning about these events, sparks nearly fly off the page (243). And when he recounts Manning's homily at Newman's funeral, he is perplexed by the effusion of love and veneration: "Such an expression must raise once again the problem of Manning's view of friendship. One can only shake one's head and pass on." (p. 254)
In the preface to his book, Reynolds makes an interesting comment about sources and footnotes: there aren't going to be many in the text. He explains that he's only using published sources and most readers will know what they are (like Newman's Apologia pro Vita Sua). He further states that he's read so many books and articles that he really can't remember which one inspired which idea or impression!
And I'll have to share this comment Reynolds makes when he discusses the relative lack of staying power of most of Cardinal Manning's works (which he certainly can't and doesn't say of Newman's!) with our local Chesterton group:
[Manning's] pen was used most effectively for immediate purposes; it is the fate of much writing of this kind, once it has served its generation, to lose it appeal when the particular need has passed. We can see this happening with the more controversial writings of an author of the literary quality of G.K. Chesterton; they are losing their point because the grounds of dispute have changed, but this is not to underestimate their worth when they were written." (p. 124)
I think our group would disagree entirely with this point of view. Many of Chesterton's controversial works about the family, contraception, education, social reform, etc., discuss problems we are still facing today in society and culture. Perhaps in 1958, Reynolds was wrong about the changing grounds of dispute.
Nevertheless, I found this an enjoyable and insightful book to read. Highly recommended for those who do have some knowledge of this history and these men--and might be able to recognize the sources Reynolds uses. There is a dated bibliography at the back of the book. No index and no illustrations.
Happy All Saints Day!
Saint John Henry Newman, pray for us!
