“Lord Acton” by Gertrude Himmelfarb

Himmelfarb stated that her goal was to write an intellectual biography. This was a difficult task for Acton, whose most notable claim to history is perhaps the greatest book never written, his “History of Liberty.” Nonetheless, Himmelfarb has combed through his extensive notes, lectures, periodical pieces, and letters to sketch a rough outline of the evolution of Acton’s thoughts. He was a voracious reader in four modern languages, as well as Latin and Greek, who moved in the most exalted circles both in England and on the Continent, yet he was not admitted to Cambridge because of his Catholicism. Ironically, he would end his days as a Professor of History there. Instead, Acton studied in Munich with their austere theologians, who would have a lasting impact on his life. He was a layman, who was admitted to the Vatican Council where he fought a rearguard battle to defeat the Papal claim of infallibility. To him, the Inquisition and the St. Bartholomew Massacre were atrocities and everlasting stains on the Catholic Church. Those who tried to sanctify infallibility were apologetics, as guilty as the original perpetrators of these crimes. Despite much acrimony, Acton escaped being excommunicated. This was no idle speculation in a period where many of his countrymen were struggling everyday with their own faith, some leaving the Church of England for deism or atheism and others “going over to Rome.” Both could be traumatic experiences, severing lifelong ties with family and friends, ending marriages, and cutting off inheritances. Throughout Acton's life, he tried to reconcile his faith with his belief in liberty, both political and religious tolerance, as well as with modern science, philosophy, and logic. He strode the balance, as a man of religion and a man of reason. Acton was a lifelong member of the Liberal Party, though he feared the mob and democratic tendencies. He favored organic institutions, the balancing of interests, and worried that the masses would express the will of the majority at the expense of minorities. Still, he supported the Reform Acts of 1867 and 1884 to enlarge the franchise. “It is easier to find people fit to govern themselves than people fit to govern others.”

“Past and Present” by Gertrude Himmelfarb

This is a collection of Himmelfarb’s essays, mostly written this century, but going as far back as 1951. The subjects span a wide range from Leo Strauss to Winston Churchill, but most remain within her wheelhouse of Victorian history. The essays are also mostly united by tying themes of the Victorian era to the politics and moralities of today. Some of the connections work better than others. Having been married to Irving Kristol and the mother of William Kristol, it is perhaps not surprising that many essays describe America’s current political decay and the disfunction of modern society at large. However, Himmelfarb has always shown great breath and depth in her moral commentary. She is not a superficial neoconservative shill. The parallels between Victorian England and America today are, at best, illuminating and insightful. Primarily, they show that the social debates and divided opinions of today have a longstanding tradition, that the dividing lines are often blurred, and that there are trenchant arguments possible for both sides. After all, if one side was so obviously right, the debates would have been settled a long time ago. Nonetheless, Himmelfarb leaves no doubt on what side her sympathies lie. One of her best essays is on Walter Bagehot’s comparison of the English and American Constitutions. Bagehot critiques the American system of separation of powers, while declaring that the heart of the English unwritten Constitution rests in the culture and temper of its people. He writes, “the most essential mental quality for a free people whose liberty is to be progressive, permanent, and on a large scale, is what I provocatively call stupidity…. Stupidity [is] the roundabout common sense and dull custom that steers the opinion of most men…. Nations, just as individuals, may be too clever to be practical, and not dull enough to be free. Dullness is the English line.” Another of Himmelfrab’s most thought provoking essays is on William James’ conception of religion. She contrasts his views with the modern militant atheists of our day, like Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins. In contrast, Himmelfarb describes James’ conception of once-born and twice-born believers. She concludes that, in the end, James’ belief beyond reason did not conflict with his scientific studies. She states that today’s moralistic atheistic evangelists cannot deny “the fact that something like a will to believe is the motivating force for many people who are distrustful of those [religious] institutions and skeptical of those dogmas and rituals but who nevertheless feel a spiritual need and seek a faith responsive to their personal needs and passions.” Other essays deal with Albert Einstein’s pacifism, Cardinal John Henry Newman’s ideas on a gentlemanly education, Richard Carlyle’s anti-materialist philosophy, and Benjamin Disraeli’s defense of Judaism in England. Himmelfarb’s skill is tying these men’s ideas to the modern era and making their thoughts relevant in the context of today.