This sermon-study—a sequel to a previous study of Newman’s theology of the Immanent Trinity, 1829–1834 (NSJ 7/1: 73–86)—examines Newman’s theology of the Trinity in the economy of salvation. Viewing the mystery of the Incarnation as the Revelation of Theologia in Oikonomia, Newman developed a “theology of glorification” and a “theology of within-ness,” which in turn grounded a “theology of Rest and Peace.” Newman’s Trinitarian theology (1835–1841), which was deeply influenced by the Fathers of the Church, was simultaneously his response to the anti-dogmatic Liberalism that rejected Christ’s divinity and so denied the Trinity.

Among the most overlooked sources for studying Newman’s epistemology are his sermons, particularly his Parochial and Plain Sermons. This essay compares Newman’s sermon “Religious Faith Rational” (1829) and his discussion of “Simple Assent” in his Grammar of Assent (1870), both of which defend faith or assent in daily life; this comparison reveals both a strong influence of the sermons on the Grammar and a shift in Newman’s understanding of the term “faith.”

From the perspective of cognitive linguistics, metaphor is a way of thinking and understanding rather than an ornamental device used for aesthetic purposes.Conceptual metaphor constitutes a natural device for comprehending those areas of reality that exceed what is describable by literal terms, including especially the sphere of religious experiences. The purpose of this essay is to analyze the conceptual metaphors employed by John Henry Newman in the first volume of his Parochial and Plain Sermons (1834) as a way of explaining the transcendental character of the concept of Christian life.

Newman often argued like this in debate: “you do not accept this claim of mine because you think that it is exposed to certain objections; but this is unreasonable of you, because you make this other claim which is also, if you think it through, equally exposed to the same kind of objections; therefore, you should either withdraw your objections against me, or else give up that claim that you have been making.” Some contemporaries of Newman thought that he unwittingly lent support to unbelief by defending his views with this “kill-or-cure” argument, as he called it. This essay defends Newman’s argument against his critics in such a way as to contribute to an understanding of Newman’s rhetoric.

This essay examines the theological method employed by Newman in An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine by considering its objective content and subjective methodology. The objective content concerns the principles of authentic development of doctrine that culminated in his identification of Roman Catholicism as the true Apostolic Church. The subjective methodology consists of his heuristic application of the notes that guided him to the attainment of certitude. Newman’s Essay on Development thus resulted in his conviction in the overpowering vision of truth in the Roman claim in which ecclesial faith is experienced as simultaneously wholly objective and wholly personal.

After reflecting on his own undergraduate education, when the study of Newman’s The Idea of a University led to a transformation of his view of education and even life itself, Michael Krom discusses—in the contemplative spirit that Newman contended to be the purpose of education—how Newman’s Idea can be taught in a way so that today’s students are enlivened with the universal call to Truth and Holiness.

The first of John Henry Newman’s Oxford University Sermons is often neglected as an integral part of this collection. Yet Newman considered these individual sermons as a unit. There is an important theme that runs unchanged from the first to the last of these Sermons: the primacy of faith over human reason. The main burden of his first Sermon is the need for its hearers to return to their “early, religious training.” Although the worth of human reason is much amplified in his last Sermon, even there faith remains paramount. Newman depicted faith in his fifteenth Sermon as the chief form of human knowledge, as the bedrock and the guarantor of every other form of human knowledge: the one thing necessary is the childlike “obedience of Faith.”

Newman sought a via media—a middle ground—between “evidentialists,” who considered reason supreme and so disparaged faith, and “existentialists,” who wanted to create a fortress of faith impenetrable to reason. Examining the way people actually think, Newman identified three types of inference that lead people to make decisions. This inferential process, which is operative in the decisions of every day life, serves as a paradigm for understanding how the human mind—particularly the illative sense—operates in religious matters; accordingly, Newman presents faith as a personal and reasonable inference.

Both John Henry Newman and Vincent Gasser offered influential interpretations of the First Vatican Council’s teaching on infallibility. In contrast to many of theircontemporaries, Gasser and Newman placed papal infallibility alongside episcopal infallibility and the infallibility of the Catholic faithful. After exploring the views of Gasser and Newman, this essay compares their views to the Second Vatican Council’s teaching on infallibility in Lumen Gentium and concludes that even though Lumen Gentium cited Gasser, its theology is closer to Newman’s.

Both Ambrose St. John (1815–1875) and John Henry Newman (1801–1890), who were received into the Roman Catholic Church in 1845, became members of the Birmingham Oratory. Newman’s closest companion for over three decades, St. John’s death was extremely painful for Newman, not only because it was unexpected, but because of his devotion to Newman as well as his dedication to his spiritual duties. Along with presenting Newman’s narrative of the last few weeks of St. John’s life, this essay raises the question: why did Newman write this “account.”

In a well-known passage in his Apologia, Newman’s recognition of himself as a latter-day Monophysite marked a pivotal step towards his conversion. This recognition, however, was preceded by another painful anagnorisis: his realization, as a result of a stinging article by Nicholas Wiseman, that he was a latter-day Donatist. This essay examines how Wiseman’s article exposed Newman’s ecclesial ambivalence and highlights the role that St. Augustine’s writings played, not only in confirming Newman’s schismatic identity, but also in ultimately suggesting how to move beyond it.

Can Newman be classified as an “historian”? On the one hand, Newman did not adhere to, indeed cared very little for, modern scientific methods of empirical research; he detested the cold, clinical nature of German intellectualism of the mid-ninetheenth century. On the other hand, Newman’s historical investigation relied upon conservative methods of historical research: the use of original sources and the rules of historical criticism; his techniques were self-taught, but they were adequate to meet the historical standards of his times. Most importantly, Newman never conceived of himself purely and simply as an historian: he studied history in the service of religion and, for example, examined the fourth century in order to provide answers to the theological questions of the nineteenth.

Newman was a profoundly skilled communicator of Christian faith who provides a model for an efficacious elucidation of the doctrinal content and transformative power of Christianity. His exemplarity resides in his three-dimensional approach to theological communication: (1) the communicator’s personal investment in faith’s import; (2) faith’s threefold nature that includes its doctrinal content, its demand for personal involvement, and its reasonableness; and (3) the audience’s active contribution to the process of faith-transmission. Although repeated emphasis upon subjective commitment goes against the modern penchant for objectivity, it is precisely this subjective component, which requires open minds and open hearts, that plays a decisive role in the concomitant adherence to the objective reality and reliability of faith’s wisdom.

John Henry Newman (1801–1890) is well known for An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine (1845), while Charles Darwin (1809–1882) is famous for On the Origin of Species (1859). Although many Victorian theologians and ecclesiastics attacked Darwin’s theory of evolution, this essay shows that Newman considered evolution compatible with Christianity.

Why is a college or university called an alma mater? This essay looks to Newman for an answer, first by pointing out his love for Trinity College, Oxford, his undergraduate alma mater. The author, sharing his experience of Louvain as his alma mater, emphasizes that an alma mater is not a theoretical concept, but a matter of real apprehension. This essay then examines two sources where Newman discussed the Catholic University of Ireland as an alma mater: his inaugural university sermon, where he insisted that the university must be a mother to its students; and his first annual report to the Irish bishops, where he emphasized that the students’ resident life must provide a sense of community and a love for their alma mater. In sum, if a university is truly to be a “nourishing mother,” she must provide her students not only with an intellectual education, but also with moral discipline.

This essay, which traces the development of Newman’s thinking on the role of the laity in the Christian Church, is a sequel to an earlier study showing that the underlying image of his development of doctrine is his own personal development; accordingly, it is impossible to separate the events of Newman’s biography from his teaching on the role of the laity.

This essay examines Newman’s life-long campaign against the errors of liberal religion, particularly its “anti-holiness” principle that rejects the Christian commitment to the pursuit of sanctity. In both his Anglican and Roman Catholic writings, Newman attacked the “anti-holiness” principle’s underlying presuppositions, particularly (1) its naturalistic anthropology, (2) its “anthropocentric horizon of discourse,” (3) its rejection of ascetic discipline in religious formation, and (4) its tendency to accept uncritically what is intellectually novel.

This essay, originally a presentation at the annual conference of the Newman Association of America at St. Anselm’s College, Manchester, New Hampshire, in 2011, argues that The Idea of a University reflects a notion of university education that was already present in all its essentials in Newman’s thought by 1830. Newman’s experience as an undergraduate, his early years as a Fellow of Oriel College and his correspondence with Edward Hawkins during the Tutorship dispute indicate that Newman’s ideas about university education could only have originated in the Anglican Oxford of his time.