Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:35:22.695Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘A Tangled Skein of Confusion’: The Administration of George Hilary Brown, Bishop of Liverpool 1850–1856

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2015

Peter Doyle
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

George Hilary Brown (1786–1856), Vicar Apostolic of the Lancashire District since its establishment in 1840, became the first bishop of the new diocese of Liverpool in 1850. He had been extremely reluctant to accept the vicariate, partly because of chronic ill-health and partly because of diffidence about his ability. From 1841 on Propaganda received a number of complaints about his absence from and neglect of his District, and when he was present he caused ill-feeling among his clergy: they thought he was a martinet and complained frequently to Rome about his decisions. For his part, Brown seemed to think he was fighting for episcopal rights against a recalcitrant clergy: in a later letter to Wiseman he claimed that all the bishops should be grateful to him because of his long battle against ‘Josephism and Pistoia’. This article examines two inter-connected quarrels he was involved in after 1850, one with his chapter, the other with his coadjutor. They illustrate some of the issues that arose from the restoration of the Hierarchy in 1850 as well as throwing light on the personality of the Bishop.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Catholic History , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , October 2000 , pp. 294 - 303
Copyright
Copyright © Catholic Record Society 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 On Brown see Brady, W. Mazière, The Episcopal Succession in England, Scotland & Ireland, 3 vols. 1877; repr. 1971, 3, pp. 416–8Google Scholar; Milburn, passim; Gillow, J., A Bibliographical Dictionary of English Catholics, 5 Vols. London 1885–1902, repr. 1999, 1, pp. 320–1Google Scholar. He had been vice-president of Ushaw, 1814–19 and in charge of the Lancaster mission 1819–40.

2 AAW, R91/9, 67a & b, Brown to Wiseman, 11 Oct. 1854.

3 The diocese stretched from the Mersey in the south to Coniston in the north and included a large rural area as well as a number of important towns—Preston, Lancaster, Wigan, Warrington—in addition to the major port of Liverpool. Clergy in the north feared that attention and resources would be swallowed up by the last named with its notorious social problems.

4 AAW, 116/1, Brown to Wiseman, 1 June 1852. It is not known who the ‘useless’ canon was. The troublemaker was Canon Thomas Newsham, who remained a canon until his death in 1868 and who continued to cause trouble and even scandal under Brown’s successor; but see also Burke, p. 80: Newsham was ‘a man of extraordinary energy and capacity, who left his mark on the … north end’ of the city.

5 AAW 130/1/140, Brown to Wiseman, 13 Nov. 1852, and W/32/92, Wiseman’s reply, 5 Aug. 1853.

6 AAW, R79/6, Goss to Wiseman, 25 Nov. 1853.

7 Quoted in Schiefen, R., Nicholas Wiseman and the Transformation of English Catholicism Shepherdstown, U.S.A. 1984, p. 149 Google Scholar; Gentili’s reports exaggerated the faults of the English clergy and need cautious reading.

8 AAL, Chapter Minutes, 1 Dec. 1853. Dr. James Sharpies was Coadjutor from 1843–1850, living in retirement because of ill-health from 1848. See Brady, op. cit., pp. 339–40, 350–52; B. Plumb, From Arundel to Zabi, 1987.

9 Burke, p. 79. For the ending of lay control, see Bossy, J., The English Catholic Community 1570–1850, 1975, pp. 349–54.Google Scholar

10 There was frantic activity to sort out these funds and trusts (and those belonging to the Jesuits and Benedictines) when new legislation in 1860 made it obligatory to register them with the Charity Commissioners.

11 It is impossible to arrive at an exact figure for the Catholic population of the new diocese; the figures given here are drawn from a number of sources, including Brown’s report to Propaganda for the year 1840, baptism and Mass attendance figures over a number of years, and the research of Lesourd, J. A., Les Catholiques Dans la Société Anglaise, 1765–1865, 2 vols., Lille/Paris 1978, esp. pp. 724, ff; 962.Google Scholar

12 AAL, Chapter Minutes, 31 Sept. 1854.

13 Ibidem, 1 Dec. 1853.

14 AAL, Additional Letters (Goss), p. 36, Goss to Brown 23 Nov. 1855—a rare occasion when Goss dropped his usual respectful tone; he apologised in his next letter.

15 The chapter’s letter is mentioned in Propaganda’s reply to Wiseman, AAW, 140/1, n.l, 9 Jan. 1856; for the £10, AAL, Additional Letters, p. 41, Goss to Brown, 5 Jan. 1856.

16 AAL, Chapter Minutes 25 Oct. 1854; Additional Letters, p. 32, Goss to Brown 9 Nov. 1855.

17 APF, S. R. Anglia, 13 (1852–54), nn. 1111–1113, 31 Dec. 1854; see also Brown to Wiseman, note 2 above.

18 AAW, W3/17, Newsham of Ushaw to Wiseman, 18 Oct. 1851.

19 Milburn, p. 210.

20 AAL, SI I, c/6, to Ullathorne, 19 Feb. 1852; for the letter to Wiseman, signed by 45 clergy, see Milburn, p. 210.

21 AAW, R79/6, Wiseman to Brown, 16 Feb. 1853.

22 Brown’s account of the quarrel is in APF, S.R. Anglia, 14 (1855–7), nn. 207–8; see also note 17 above. Goss’s letters to Propaganda of Mar—April 1855 are in RCLv 5/1 (inserted loosely at end); see also Ibidem, 28–31, Goss to Cornthwaite (the English bishops’ agent in Rome), 10 Nov. 1855.

23 APF, loc. cit., n.279, 27 April 1855. Wiseman suggested a way out of the difficulty: Goss should be moved to the diocese of Clifton to sort out matters there

24 AAL, Additional Letters; in his frequent letters to Brown in 1855 Goss asks the bishop to give a direct answer to a ‘simple question’—‘Has he faculties or not?’ ‘Will Brown support him financially or not?’

25 AAW, R79/6, Goss to Wiseman 25 Nov. 1853.

26 AAL, Pastoral Letters of Bishop Goss, ‘Proclamation … the Visitation of the Diocese of Liverpool’, 18 May 1855.

27 Questions Addressed to the Clergy … at the Visitation of 1855, Liverpool 1855. AAL, Additional Letters, p. 24, Goss to Brown 11 Sept. 1855; AAW R79/6, Brown to Wiseman 28/30 Nov. 1855.

28 RCLv, 5/1/26, Goss to Bishop Clifford 8 Nov. 1855.

29 APF, Lettere, vol.346 (1855), nn.49b, 50; 84; 213b; 359. AAW, Roman Letters, 140, Jan. 1855, urges Wiseman to put pressure on Brown, 165.

30 APF, loc. cit., n.310, to Goss 25 April 1855; n.321, to Brown 23 April 1855.

31 Ibidem, to Wiseman 18 May 1855; RCLv, 5/1, Goss to Fransoni, 26 April 1855.

32 RCLv 5/1/26, Goss to Cornthwaite, 10 Nov. 1855. But Goss later admitted the questions had at first ‘caused a sensation’, RCLv 5/3/26, Goss to Bp of Shrewsbury, 14 March 1859, and when he was bishop he had difficulty in getting them completed properly—his secretary’s letterbook for 1856 has numerous letters on the subject.

33 AAL, Additional Letters, p. 31, Goss to Brown 21 Oct. 1855; the accusation of jealousy is in Goss’ letter to Cornthwaite, see note 22 above.

34 AAW, R79/6, Brown to Wiseman, 28 Nov. 1855.

35 Milburn, pp. 213–4. Goss had spent about a year as a curate before his appointment to St. Edward’s in 1842.

36 APF, S.R. Anglia, vol.14 (1855–7), Fransoni to Wiseman, 7 Dec. 1855.

37 RCLv 5/1/53–4, Goss to Cornthwaite 15 Jan. 1856.

38 Ibidem, 5/1/112–3, Goss to Bp Turner 1 March 1856; 59–60, Goss to Cornthwaite 25 Jan. 1856.

39 The Religious were the Redemptorists, the Passionists, the Oblates of Mary, the Sisters of Mercy, the Sisters of Notre Dame and the Christian Brothers. For details of their work and other achievements of Brown’s years, see Burke, passim.

40 The phrase was Goss’; see RCLv5/l/152, Goss to Gibson 20 March 1856.