After examining the ways in which Newman employed the tools of rhetoric in his Apologia pro Vita Sua in response to Charles Kingsley’s charges against him, this essay charts Newman’s use of his personal testimony to proclaim the Gospel and defend the Catholic Faith and concludes with an analysis of the strengths and potential weaknesses of his approach.

This essay—originally a presentation at the annual conference of the Newman Association of America at Saint Anselm College in July 2011—explores Newman’svision of the residential college as the place of formation in the process of education and claims that many of Newman’s ideas, far from being out-dated, have an important place in higher education today.

In his sermon—“Miracles no Remedy for Unbelief” (2 May 1830)—Newman warned his audience that the lack of miracles often serves as an excuse for the true cause of unbelief: hardening the heart against the grace of God. What his audience presumably did not know was that Newman’s sermon reiterated an extended disagreement with his brother, Charles Robert Newman. Both the sermon and the sibling struggle over faith versus unbelief still provide enduring lessons for contemporary readers.

Although Newman’s Fifteenth Oxford University Sermon is often considered a precursor to An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine (1845), the following essay views this Sermon as an expression of Newman’s personal struggle from 1839 to 1845: in the midst of confusion, he pondered; against the threat of liberal skepticism, he defended truth; in the face of doubt, he reaffirmed his relationship with God.

John Henry Newman’s educational ideas, which first became known in Japan before the Pacific War, continue to attract followers, especially as a result of the foundation of the Newman Society of Japan in 1983. However, this interest in Newman has had mixed results: on the one hand, some Japanese secular scholars who have tried to adopt Newman’s educational ideas to Japanese higher education do not seem interested in Catholicism. On the other hand, some post-war educational ideas of Japanese Catholics seem incompatible with Newman’s spirituality and thought.

This essay proposes that Newman’s developmental methodology, as presented in his Fifteenth Oxford University Sermon, has a contemporary relevance for advancing insights into revelation by encouraging believers to engage with the theo-Logos. Since the word of God is embodied in doctrine and understood through symbol and ritual, doctrinal propositions should be considered “living ideas” which become embodied in the believer and so deepen the believer’s relationship with Christ and the community of believers through a liturgical symbolic order.

Among the various descriptions of the Christian life in Newman’s Parochial and Plain Sermons (1834–1843), the metaphor of war is prominent. This essay examines Newman’s extensive use of the metaphor of war from the viewpoint of cognitive semantics, which assumes that transcendental reality can only be conceived of and described in language that uses such conceptual mechanisms as image schemata, metaphor, metonymy, and conceptual blending. Analyzing the conceptual phenomena inherent in the metaphor of war provides both a better understanding of Newman’s Parochial and Plain Sermons as well as a better appreciation of Newman’s understanding of the Christian life.

John Henry Newman (1801–1890) was deeply influenced by the British empiricist school of the eighteenth century, particularly by the philosophy of David Hume(1711–1776). Though frequently disputing Hume’s conclusions, Newman nevertheless worked to develop a theistic form of empiricism that integrated the developing scientific worldview with traditional Christian philosophy. In light of recently renewed interest in Hume, this essay first explores Newman’s empiricist leanings and then proposes that his distinctive philosophy can contribute to modern discussions about the relationship of science and religion.

This essay describes Newman’s adaptations of plays by Plautus (c. 254–184 BC) and Terence (195/185–159 BC) for performance at the Birmingham Oratory School. Because Newman believed in the value of Latin plays for students, he expended a great deal of energy on their adaptation and production while carefully editing the plays to omit any questionable content.

Newman was offered a preachership at Whitehall Chapel in London for the second part of December; he accepted the invitation, even though he anticipated that the task would be “a bore.” Unfortunately for Newman, his experience turned out to be more burdensome than he had expected; the result was a very frustrating Christmas.

Newman was keenly aware of the challenge posed to Christians by the development of historical biblical criticism in the nineteenth century. In several of his Anglican writings—most notably in no. 85 of Tracts for the Times, in unpublished notes and drafts dating from 1861–1863, and in two essays published in 1884—he attempted to resolve questions regarding the nature of biblical “inspiration,” the respective roles of the divine and human “authors,” and the nature of biblical “truth.” This article, originally a paper given at the 2012 conference of the Association française des Amis de Newman on Newman et la Bible, was first published in French in Études Newmaniennes no. 29 (2013).

In this article, I investigate Newman’s understanding of doctrinal development, specifically regarding the accumulation of doctrines over time. Through an analysis of Newman’s essay on development and a letter written by him in 1868, we can better understand the potential “advantage,” but not superiority, that comes from the everincreasing resources of tradition. Newman’s view of development is directed toward the present and abiding concern to maintain fidelity to the deposit of faith, or to what he understands to be a “sacred philosophy.”

Personalist philosopher Maurice Nédoncelle was known for his role in reintroducing John Henry Newman to the French public at a time when it was well needed. Nédoncelle’s merits consist mainly of presenting Newman as a religious philosopher and of drawing attention to Newman’s implicit philosophy. Nédoncelle’s interpretation of Newman is discussed here.