Acton-Creighton Correspondence

While The Whig Interpretation of History does not directly attack the Acton–Creighton Correspondence by name, it functions as a powerful critique of the moral-historical stance that Acton defended in that correspondence.

Acton and History serves as a scholarly critique of the moral philosophy expressed in the Acton–Creighton Correspondence. While the correspondence shows Acton demanding absolute moral judgment from historians, Acton and History analyzes and questions that demand — exploring its theological roots,…

Without History of the Papacy, the Acton-Creighton Correspondence would never have occurred. The correspondence is essentially Acton’s response to Creighton’s approach in that work — a critique of its perceived moral indifference to the corruption and abuses of papal power.

Acton chastises Creighton for treating corrupt Renaissance popes with too much leniency, writing that historians must judge moral evil even when committed by powerful figures. His guiding principle — “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely” — reflects the same conviction…

The podcast draws on the correspondence from Acton as a defining episode in his life — the moment where his ethical theory of history came into full view.

This article is intimately connected, because both center on Lord Acton’s moral philosophy — especially his belief that liberty and conscience are inseparable, and that power must always be judged by moral law.