Cardinal Newman and the influencers of his day – What would he think of Catholic YouTube?
“They simply do not know what they are talking about.”
Editors’ Notes
In the preface of his classic work, The Idea of a University, John Henry Newman explains how a proper, well-rounded education can help someone avoid becoming unstable, fickle and – his recurring and seemingly most grievous insult – unreal.
Towards the end of this preface, he discusses the dangers of this unreality and instability in those who try to provide instant ‘takes’ on every issue that occurs. His warnings were addressed at the writers of various periodicals of his day – he does not name and shame anyone, but perhaps it is possible that persons such as Orestes Brownson were in view here, who made several significant oscillations in his published ideas, even as a Catholic. Much later in both their lives, Newman expressed concern for Brownson’s situation, given that he was still having to write for a living, even as an old man.
But so much for Newman’s own context. His warnings and advice are even more applicable to those who have established themselves as professional YouTubers in the Catholic world.
It is to such men that we address this wise advice from Cardinal Newman.
We have also included an afterword on the problematic genre of “video theology” below.
From
The Idea of a University
Time to grow up
It were well if none remained boys all their lives; but what more common than the sight of grown men, talking on political or moral or religious subjects, in that offhand, idle way, which we signify by the word unreal?
“That they simply do not know what they are talking about” is the spontaneous silent remark of any man of sense who hears them.
Hence such persons have no difficulty in contradicting themselves in successive sentences, without being conscious of it.
Hence others, whose defect in intellectual training is more latent, have their most unfortunate crotchets, as they are called, or hobbies, which deprive them of the influence which their estimable qualities would otherwise secure. Hence others can never look straight before them, never see the point, and have no difficulties in the most difficult subjects.
Others are hopelessly obstinate and prejudiced, and, after they have been driven from their opinions, return to them the next moment without even an attempt to explain why. Others are so intemperate and intractable that there is no greater calamity for a good cause than that they should get hold of it.
It is very plain from the very particulars I have mentioned that, in this delineation of intellectual infirmities, I am drawing, not from Catholics, but from the world at large; I am referring to an evil which is forced upon us in every railway carriage, in every coffee-room or table-d’hôte, in every mixed company, an evil, however, to which Catholics are not less exposed than the rest of mankind.
Stability and instability
When the intellect has once been properly trained and formed to have a connected view or grasp of things, it will display its powers with more or less effect according to its particular quality and capacity in the individual. In the case of most men it makes itself felt in the good sense, sobriety of thought, reasonableness, candour, self-command, and steadiness of view, which characterize it.
In some it will have developed habits of business, power of influencing others, and sagacity. In others it will elicit the talent of philosophical speculation, and lead the mind forward to eminence in this or that intellectual department. In all it will be a faculty of entering with comparative ease into any subject of thought, and of taking up with aptitude any science or profession.
All this it will be and will do in a measure, even when the mental formation be made after a model but partially true; for, as far as effectiveness goes, even false views of things have more influence and inspire more respect than no views at all.
Men who fancy they see what is not are more energetic, and make their way better, than those who see nothing; and so the undoubting infidel, the fanatic, the heresiarch, are able to do much, while the mere hereditary Christian, who has never realized the truths which he holds, is unable to do any thing. But, if consistency of view can add so much strength even to error, what may it not be expected to furnish to the dignity, the energy, and the influence of Truth!
‘Viewiness’ – and its true antidote
Some one, however, will perhaps object that I am but advocating that spurious philosophism, which shows itself in what, for want of a word, I may call “viewiness,” when I speak so much of the formation, and consequent grasp, of the intellect.
It may be said that the theory of University Education, which I have been delineating, if acted upon, would teach youths nothing soundly or thoroughly, and would dismiss them with nothing better than brilliant general views about all things whatever.
This indeed, if well founded, would be a most serious objection to what I have advanced in this Volume, and would demand my immediate attention, had I any reason to think that I could not remove it at once, by a simple explanation of what I consider the true mode of educating, were this the place to do so.
But these Discourses are directed simply to the consideration of the aims and principles of Education. Suffice it, then, to say here, that I hold very strongly that the first step in intellectual training is to impress upon a boy’s mind the idea of science, method, order, principle, and system; of rule and exception, of richness and harmony.
This is commonly and excellently done by making him begin with Grammar; nor can too great accuracy, or minuteness and subtlety of teaching be used towards him, as his faculties expand, with this simple purpose. Hence it is that critical scholarship is so important a discipline for him when he is leaving school for the University.
A second science is the Mathematics: this should follow Grammar, still with the same object, viz., to give him a conception of development and arrangement from and around a common centre.
Hence it is that Chronology and Geography are so necessary for him, when he reads History, which is otherwise little better than a storybook.
Hence, too, Metrical Composition, when he reads Poetry; in order to stimulate his powers into action in every practicable way, and to prevent a merely passive reception of images and ideas which in that case are likely to pass out of the mind as soon as they have entered it.
Let him once gain this habit of method, of starting from fixed points, of making his ground good as he goes, of distinguishing what he knows from what he does not know, and I conceive he will be gradually initiated into the largest and truest philosophical views, and will feel nothing but impatience and disgust at the random theories and imposing sophistries and dashing paradoxes, which carry away half-formed and superficial intellects.
The dangers having a ‘take’ on everything
Such parti-coloured ingenuities are indeed one of the chief evils of the day, and men of real talent are not slow to minister to them.
An intellectual man, as the world now conceives of him, is one who is full of “views” on all subjects of philosophy, on all matters of the day.
It is almost thought a disgrace not to have a view at a moment’s notice on any question from the Personal Advent to the Cholera or Mesmerism.
This is owing in great measure to the necessities of periodical literature, now so much in request.
Every quarter of a year, every month, every day, there must be a supply, for the gratification of the public, of new and luminous theories on the subjects of religion, foreign politics, home politics, civil economy, finance, trade, agriculture, emigration, and the colonies. Slavery, the gold fields, German philosophy, the French Empire, Wellington, Peel, Ireland, must all be practised on, day after day, by what are called original thinkers.
As the great man’s guest must produce his good stories or songs at the evening banquet, as the platform orator exhibits his telling facts at mid-day, so the journalist lies under the stern obligation of extemporizing his lucid views, leading ideas, and nutshell truths for the breakfast table.
The very nature of periodical literature, broken into small wholes, and demanded punctually to an hour, involves the habit of this extempore philosophy.
“Almost all the Ramblers,” says Boswell of Johnson, “were written just as they were wanted for the press; he sent a certain portion of the copy of an essay, and wrote the remainder while the former part of it was printing.”
Few men have the gifts of Johnson, who to great vigour and resource of intellect, when it was fairly roused, united a rare common-sense and a conscientious regard for veracity, which preserved him from flippancy or extravagance in writing. Few men are Johnsons; yet how many men at this day are assailed by incessant demands on their mental powers, which only a productiveness like his could suitably supply!
There is a demand for a reckless originality of thought, and a sparkling plausibility of argument, which he would have despised, even if he could have displayed; a demand for crude theory and unsound philosophy, rather than none at all.
It is a sort of repetition of the “Quid novi?” of the Areopagus and it must have an answer. Men must be found who can treat, where it is necessary, like the Athenian sophist, de omni scibili,
“Grammaticus, Rhetor, Geometres, Pictor, Aliptes,
Augur, Schœnobates, Medicus, Magus, omnia novit.”[Grammarian, orator, geometrician, painter, masseur
Augur, rope-walker, physician, astrology – he knew everything – Juvenal, Satires]
Sympathy and warning for the influencers
I am speaking of such writers with a feeling of real sympathy for men who are under the rod of a cruel slavery.
I have never indeed been in such circumstances myself nor in the temptations which they involve; but most men who have had to do with composition must know the distress which at times it occasions them to have to write—a distress sometimes so keen and so specific that it resembles nothing else than bodily pain.
That pain is the token of the wear and tear of mind; and, if works done comparatively at leisure involve such mental fatigue and exhaustion, what must be the toil of those whose intellects are to be flaunted daily before the public in full dress, and that dress ever new and varied, and spun, like the silkworm’s, out of themselves!
Still, whatever true sympathy we may feel for the ministers of this dearly purchased luxury, and whatever sense we may have of the great intellectual power which the literature in question displays, we cannot honestly close our eyes to its direct evil.
Afterword – Video Theology
The WM Review
The very genre of YouTube video theology is a problematic phenomenon.
There are some notable and edifying exceptions, but those engaged in it often seem to lose a sense of proportion – both about themselves, and about their work.
For example, we see this in the strange spectacle of some laymen calling themselves “theologians” or even “thomists” in their Twitter bios – when (again, with exceptions) the totality of their knowledge often derived from piecemeal texts and modern authors and partial reading of St Thomas, haphazardly assembled in a DIY synthesis. In fact in most cases, the more theology one reads, the less likely someone is to assume such a title.
In addition, this seems to be a particular tendency of a certain type of convert. Such would be better advised to spend several years followings Newman's advice for their conduct, rather than setting themselves up as teachers so soon after becoming Catholic.
And what are we to make of the very strange rules of engagement governing those who use or consume such things? For example, online theological bickerings are deemed to be lost by default if one does not accept an opponent’s challenge to debate on his livestream. This move is treated by such men as if it were an instant win, and obviously so. For some, video and rhetoric have attained a premium over researched and referenced essays, and theology has become a type of entertainment.
Some of these YouTube influencers – should we call them televangelists? – even complain about the lack of engagement with their material on the part of their ideological opponents. This betrays, to use Newman’s word, an enormous amount of unreality.
First, few persons have the time to engage with anything lengthy. This includes books and even essays.
But in particular, very few persons have the time or inclination to sit through lengthy videos, especially when they are delivered with such unreality and often bitterness – or when they are basically reaction videos or streams of consciousness interrupted by super-chat donations. Even fewer persons have the time to search through an enormous, unindexed and unsearchable catalogue of such videos.
Similarly, such “influencers” may claim that they have treated a topic in detail, and then tell the world to watch their videos about it. This is like providing a footnote to a series of books without the relevant page number, or even the relevant volume number.
Calling such catalogues one’s “corpus” is unspeakably pretentious. “Corpulence” would be a more fitting term. In such situations, it really seems the only thing more bloated than such corpulence is the ego of the “influencer” himself.
The comparative burdens on creator and “consumer”
Such videos – especially reaction videos – place a disproportionate and incongruous burden on their audience.
For example, compare the less formal approach of livestreamed videos with the thinking, researching, drafting, referencing, re-writing, editing and proofreading required for an essay. This is not to suggest that such videos are easy or require no work, but the difference is clear.
Next, let’s consider the burden on the audience. The written form is not only superior in itself: it is also better for the recipient. Reading a formal and more focused essay takes much less time, and a higher degree of active and fruitful engagement than is required for watching an informal video with the same number of words.
Videos are not the only means of studying theology, and they often offer a lower reward than comes from the same time spent reading.
Finally, those who are most likely to engage seriously with the ideas are often the least likely to be aware of Catholic YouTube influencers, let alone to have the time or inclination to watch such videos.
In short, the problem is not length or lack of patience, but the medium. While videos may achieve many good fruits, if these infleuncers wish their ideas to receive serious engagement, then it would be better if they published them in a written form.
But even then, I think that Newman would be horrified by the situation in which many of these producers of daily “info-tainment” find themselves, whether on video or in writing.
Books
Newman – Letter to the Duke of Norfolk
Newman – An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine
Newman – The Idea of a University
Bishop E.T. O’Dwyer – Cardinal Newman and the Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis
Fr E.D. Benard – A Preface to Newman’s TheologyJohn Henry Newman, Anti-Modernist – Defending his name against the accusers
Part I
Part II
Part III
John Henry Newman, Anti-Ecumenist
Bishop and Cardinal (Part I) – Newman’s understanding of conscience
Bishop and Cardinal (Part II) – Conscience as voice of God and aboriginal vicar of Christ, and after-dinner toasts
Bishop and Cardinal (Part III) – Final thoughts on Newman’s supposedly ‘very friendly’ relationship with Baron Friedrich von Hügel
Newman on “The Eternal See”
Did Cardinal Newman want to “rethink” the papacy?
Bishop Ullathorne’s vindication of Newman’s writings on Our LadyNewman’s Views
Should converts set themselves up as teachers? Newman’s answer
HELP KEEP THE WM REVIEW ONLINE!
As we expand The WM Review we would like to keep providing free articles for everyone. If you have benefitted from our content please do consider supporting us financially.
A subscription from you helps ensure that we can keep writing and sharing free material for all.
Plus, you will get access to our exclusive members-only material!
Thank you!