Henry Longueville Mansel (1820–1871) was an important nineteenth-century Anglican theologian and philosopher. He has been misunderstood. Because Mansel has been misunderstood, he and his ideas have subsequently been overlooked. This is an injustice given his significant contributions to philosophy as well as to Anglican theology. Francesca Norman has authored her detailed and carefully written monograph to help readers understand Mansel in context and to clear the way for a wider reception and appreciation of his theology.

To this end, Norman first has to present and correct the varied misunderstandings of Mansel that have filtered down to the present through secondary literature on his life and ideas. But this is only preparatory work for the primary concern of this book, which is “providing a clear understanding of Mansel’s thinking, which was always, in root and leaf, theological” (xii). Thus, Norman’s “chief objective” is to “give a coherent account of [Mansel’s] philosophical theology and its consequences for Christian faith” (xii).

Norman successfully sifts through older (and sometimes contradictory) interpretations of Mansel to give a clear and “comprehensive new interpretation” to his “life and thought” (1). She does this in nine chapters, which pay special attention to the “historical and political context” (7) of Mansel’s life and thought while still recognizing that “an individual’s beliefs, thoughts, and actions, should not be reductively accounted for with reference to one’s historical, social, or material environment” (8).

The first chapter introduces the methodology and structure of the book, before, in chapter two, offering a biography of Mansel’s life and work. This sketch is an especially helpful introduction to Mansel, though it does require some knowledge of nineteenth-century theology, politics, and history. The third and fourth chapters outline some of the key points of Mansel’s philosophical theology, such as his acceptance of a kind of theistic personalism alongside negative theology. Norman is convincing here in her tracing Mansel’s negative theology, for instance, to mainstream orthodox Christianity, including sources such as Augustine of Hippo, Thomas Aquinas, Richard Hooker and Joseph Butler as opposed to Kantian philosophy, which is often assumed to be his source (73).

Chapter five dives into Mansel’s contemporary reception, including his welcome by Oxford Tories, John Henry Newman’s critical engagement with his work, and his critics who were, “in every case, Liberal or Radical in politics” (123). Chapter six situates Mansel in political context, which, as Norman makes clear throughout her book, was deeply connected with his Christian beliefs. There can be no neat separation between faith and politics in the nineteenth century, and this certainly holds true for Mansel.

Chapter seven describes the controversies between Mansel and F. D. Maurice surrounding the 1865 General Election. Chapter eight details the controversy between John Stuart Mill and Mansel surrounding the same 1865 election, a debate motivated by “partisan political allegiance” but also (and relatedly) significant religious differences (200). This is followed by a short concluding chapter which draws out an interesting theme that Norman alludes to briefly in other parts of the book, that Mansel anticipates and proves to be an Anglican forerunner of the theology later espoused by Karl Barth, such as “the freedom of God to reveal himself as Jesus Christ, calling others into free personal relationship with God” (203).

The book ends with a substantial (over thirty pages) and comprehensive review of the literature on Mansel up until Norman’s book.

One of the challenges with any work of scholarship is determining its audience. Is a book designed to be read by a small cadre of specialists to further the knowledge of a narrow field of study? Or does it, in addition to making a contribution to one’s discipline, have a bit of a broader reach and an appeal to interested readers – perhaps students, pastors, or generalists?

Norman’s book certainly has the feel of a text aimed to be useful primarily to specialists. It is impressive, steeped in the literature, politics, and history of the nineteenth century. She draws connections to events that have been overlooked (such as the unrequited love that Herbert Spenser had for Mansel’s sister Katherine) and points out theological sources for Mansel that have been obscured over the course of decades of inaccurate scholarship. In short, this is an excellent work of deep scholarship. At the same time, however, this depth will likely be a barrier for readers who may otherwise benefit from a “coherent account of [Mansel’s] philosophical theology” and who might be better able to see “its consequences for Christian faith” (xii).

Could this have been any different?

Perhaps Norman could have weighted the book less toward contextualizing Mansel and more toward exegeting and expanding upon his primary works. But to do this would risk edging out some of the corrective insights Norman has brought to bear on his thought. It may be that a second book is needed from Norman, a crossover book, one which bridges that scholarship on Mansel and brings it to bear more fully on contemporary theology and into conversation with Christian faith today.